Sadhana: What are the proper questions, and what is the proper way to ask them?

Greetings.


In terms of spiritual practice, what are the proper questions to ask, and what is the proper way to ask them?


Thank you for your replies.

...and don't forget the other half of the 4.34 equation: The proper person to ask from should be a realised soul who as seen the truth.

> VEDA:Proper questions are those asked in Upanisads, Bhagavad gita, Vedanta sutra, SB and sattvic Puranas. They're related to the nature of Krsna (brahma jijnasa) and related topics.

But if those questions are already asked and answered in those scriptures, then why ask them again - what is the reasoning behind asking questions that have already been asked and answered?


In comparison, for example, in Buddhism, they have the "twenty questions to ask a kalyanamitta", they go like this:
‘What is wholesome?’
‘What is unwholesome?’
‘What is blameworthy?’
‘What is free of blame?’
‘What must be associated with?’
‘What must be dissociated from?’
‘What must be developed?’
‘What must not be developed?’
‘What must be entered upon and dwelt in?’
‘What must not be entered upon and dwelt in?’
‘What must be given attention?’
‘What must not be given attention?’
‘How is there defilement?’
‘How is there purification?’
‘How is there progress?’
‘How is there regress?’
‘How is there bondage?’
‘How is there liberation?’
‘How is there an arising of personality?’
‘How is there a cessation of personality?’

The idea there is twofold: one, one should first learn the proper answers to these questions from scriptures and santly persons, and reflect on them oneself; and two, when assessing who would be appropriate to associate with, it is by asking the prospective friend these questions and examining their answers that one is supposed to judge whether that person is appropriate to be associated with or not.


Is there something similar in Gaudiya Vaishnavism?

> But if those questions are already asked and answered in those scriptures, then why ask them again - what is the reasoning behind asking questions that have already been asked and answered?

No reason. We should study what is available and ask only for clarification.

> Is there something similar in Gaudiya Vaishnavism?

Somehow close is Nectar of Instruction (Upadesamrta). And also Yaksa Prasna from Mahabharata (Yudhisthira talking with Dharmaraja in the form of a yaksa).

Dear Baker,

Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada's Divine Lotus Feet.

Q "But if those questions are already asked and answered in those scriptures, then why ask them again - what is the reasoning behind asking questions that have already been asked and answered?"

A We don't even know what questions to ask, we are such fools; we develop minds and bodies according to the questions we ask. All creatures are busy constantly asking and answering questions. "Srila Prabhupada: For example, the dog is busy for sense gratification: where is food, where is shelter, where is a female, where is defense?" quoted from The Science of Self-Realization by His Divine Grace AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada-a great question and answer book.

Our Acaryas provide thousands of questions and Buddhists provide 20 questions because we don't know what we should ask. Generally we ask questions based on the body, like the dog; about the price of rice, the latest media gossip, who is with who, where the best jobs are, etc. Its called gramya katha or village talk. Those 20 Buddhist questions deal with the mind and society and are far below the absolute spiritual questions and answers found in places "all over" Srila Pabhupada's and our Acarya's writings, as mentioned by Deena. A great source of Perfect Questions, Perfect answers, is the book Srila Prabhupada provided for us by the same name. Beyond that, you can read discussions of Srila Rupa Goswami, Srila Sanatan Goswami and Srila Ramananda Raya with Lord Caitanya in Sri Caitanya Caritamrta. The song/poem 'Vaisnava Ki' by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur and other songs by the Vaisnava Acaryas ask and answer so many perfect internal questions on our behalf. The Acaryas are not asking for themselves-they are asking for us, enabling us to ask the necessary questions and then learn. "The cognitive faculty of the individual soul can have no ground to stand upon unless the Divinity Himself condescends to be the legs as well as the ground on which he is to stand to function at all. " Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur.

We are so fortunate that our Acaryas have not only told us which questions to ask but given the perfect answers. There is no speculation like those 20 Buddhist questions leave room for; so swiftly we will learn everything of highest spiritual value while pleasing Sri Guru, Sri Hari and Sri Vaisnavas, and that is the real goal of the soul. Getting the answers to questions is not the real goal. "Those who suppose they understand the meaning of his message without securing the guiding grace of the Acarya are disposed to unduly favour the methods of empiric study of his writings. There are persons who have got by heart almost everything that he wrote without being able to catch the least particle of his meaning. Such study cannot benefit those who are not prepared to act up to the instructions lucidly conveyed by his words." Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur.

To take Deena's last point a step further, Srila Prabhupada spent 12 years stressing that we are not the body. I once wondered when he would speak more about rasik or tasty topics. Fact is, we still think we are our bodies and minds and until we advance beyond that, we require to hear the things that relate to our level, over and over and over again--like a school-child having to attend the same grade he failed again and again. People i know who study Srila Prabhupada's books never tire of them, each read reveals a deeper or different truth and gives a more relishable experience, encouraging them forward in bhakti yoga. Bhagavad Gita As It Is, Original Edition is the most important book, full of questions and answers. Srila Prabhupada ki jai!

> no speculation like those 20 Buddhist questions leave room for

They can be also answered from the gss pov.

> Bhagavad Gita As It Is, Original Edition is the most important book, full of questions and answers.

1968 Collier is an abridged edition
1972 MacMillan is also full of errors introduced by inexperienced editors

So I definitely recommend 1983 edition. This issue was discussed here earlier. See also bbtedit.com

This is how a true disciple worships His Spiritual Masters words. By Bhagavat Das, quoted from Prabhupadanugas.com.eu

"After Srila Prabhupada’s departure there is a little known pastime, that will not remain so after this letter goes on your website, where Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj helped to reveal the unrivalled perfection of Srila Prabhupada’s masterful translation of Bhagavad Gita. Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj was given the service by Srila Prabhupada of translating all of His books into the Orissan language. Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj was a great scholar who could write and speak in five languages, Orissan, Hindi, Bengali, English, and Sanskrit. He got his degree in English from the University with a minor in Sanskrit. I lived with Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj in the same room for nearly 3 years. He translated Srila Prabhupadas Bhagavad Gita with the greatest love and devotion and attention for detail. Because of His vast command of languages He was able to notice little details that others may have overlooked. One thing that was a cause of great transcendental concern for Him was the fact that when Srila Prabhupada translated a word from Sanskrit to English it would not be the same if Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj translated the Sanskrit word directly to Oriya. In other words the English word that Srila Prbhupada used to explain the Sanskrit word had an entirely different meaning than the Oriya word that would normally be used as a translation of this same Sanskrit word. Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj was concerned that in translating the literal English into Oriya that many Pandits and Scholars would complain that this was not an accurate translation.

Since Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj did not want to change one single word of His beloved Spiritual Masters books but at the same time be able to defend the scholarships of His Guru Maharaj beyond the shadow of a doubt, He devised a plan for writing down all of the so called contradictions in a list until he completed the entire work. Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj then went to a little village to see the now retired Sanskrit professor who had taught Him Sanskrit in college. This man was considered one of the foremost authorities on the Sanskrit Language in India having one of the largest personal libraries on the subject, including one of the best collections of Sanskrit to English Dictionaries. Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj knew that this scholars grasp of Sanskrit to English translation would provide him with the evidence he needed to prove the authority of Srila Prabhupada’s work.

After about ten days Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj returned to the little mud hut that we lived in with the Sanskrit professor in tow. The Sanskrit professor introduced himself (I apologize but unfortunately I cannot remember his name) and began glorifying His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada’s masterful translation work. The Professor told me that he started studying Sanskrit when he was five years old, now in his late 70’s he had been studying the language for over 70 years. He told me how on the first review of his dictionaries he could not find the translations that Srila Prabhupada had made from Sanskrit to English, but he said that Srila Gour Govinda Maharaj kept encouraging him to keep looking, assuring him that he would find the translation if he looked long and hard enough. The professor said he would have given up if it were not for Srila Gour Govinda Maharajs insistence that His Guru Maharaj had been accurate and that if he looked hard enough he would find it. Then the professor told me that he found each and every translation that Srila Prbhupada had made. The professor told me that these translations that your Guru has made are the most obscure and brilliant explanations of these words from Sanskrit to English that he had ever seen. The professor admitted that with all of his education and training he could not have thought of these obscure and brilliant meanings that so perfectly expressed the inner truths of the mysteries of the Bhagavad Gita. The professor then said having seen this translation work of His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada he was convinced that Srila Prabhupada was the greatest Sanskrit scholar in the history of civilization and must have been directly enlightened by the Supreme Lord Krishna to accomplish this work."

maah! I have met devotees who also have felt the way you do about editing, up and until they actually did some good research. Please see a good deal of the videos on www.bbtedit.com. Perhaps you can comment specifically about each of the different videos.

Thakura Bhaktivinoda by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur...hope you'll read the entire article.


"Thakura Bhaktivinoda did not want us to go to the clever mechanical reciter of the mundane sound for obtaining access to the Transcendental Name of Krsna. Such a person may be fully equipped with all the written arguments in explanation of the nature of the Divine Name. But if we listen to all these arguments from the dead source the words will only increase our delusion. The very same words coming from the lips of the devotee will have the diametrically opposite effect. Our empiric judgment can never grasp the difference between the two performances. The devotee is always right. The non-devotee in the shape of the empiric pedant is always and necessarily wrong. In the one case there is always present the Substantive Truth and nothing but the Substantive Truth. In the other case there is present the apparent or misleading hypothesis and nothing but un-truth. The wording may have the same external appearance in both cases. The identical verses of the Scriptures may be recited by the devotee and the non-devotee, may be apparently misquoted by the non-devotee but the corresponding values of the two processes remain always categorically different. The devotee is right even when he apparently misquotes, the non-devotee is wrong even when he quotes correctly the very words, chapter and verse of the Scriptures."

Govinda dasi in Honolulu on Jan 26, 2003

Govinda dasi: When we had the meetings here [Honolulu Temple], one of the things that Jayadvaita Maharaja said was that they [the BBT trustees] did not ever prevent devotees from printing the books. But we had a letter from Dhanistha dasi, she’s an old book distributor. I don’t know her personally, but she wrote a letter saying that she had approached, she called Jayadvaita in 1996 or 95, to print the books, 5,000, she had the money to do it, and she approached in as simple and stupid a way as possible, just like “Please, just for sentiment,” and so forth, and she was refused.

There’s some reason going on, that they don’t want Srila Prabhupada’s books. You have these books available, but the BBT newsletter in the temple lobby states clearly that the temples cannot buy from Krishna Books Inc.

Devotee: They can buy them from the BBT, but at higher prices than the changed books. But just for the record, where there’s a will, there’s a way.

Govinda dasi: OK, I’ll just go over the notes from the meetings. As you know, we had a series of meetings with Jayadvaita Maharaja: two meetings, actually. And one of the things that we had to make very clear is that this is not a personal issue—that we don’t like Jayadvaita’s writing, or we don’t like his editing work. That really isn’t the issue at all. It’s not how the books were edited; it’s the fact that they were edited.

The issue is not—and of course, he took it a bit personally but I think he did understand eventually that that wasn’t our point—that we think he’s a great writer, and he should write and edit many books—but not Srila Prabhupada’s books. They should be left as they are. So that’s the main issue, actually, the main issue.

He feels that the 1972 edition is not in keeping with manuscript, which he only has access to, and is not available to anyone else that he knows about. And that’s just not the issue. The issue is that when you write something, even if you have an original manuscript—I’m a writer, and I may have three [versions] in the trash before I print something—but whatever I sign my name to and I print, that is the final edition. That’s what I approve for the world to see. And that’s really the issue here.

Srila Prabhupada approved of his Gita. He not only approved of it; he spent ten years lecturing from it. Every verse of the Bhagavad-gita, except for a few verses in the First Chapter, Srila Prabhupada spoke on over a period of ten years. He had ample opportunity to say, “Change this, change this, change this.” But he only requested a couple of changes. There was ‘cattle raising’ he wanted changed to ‘cow protection,’ and I believe there was one other, dhyana-yoga or something like that. Those were very small changes.

Govinda dasi:

Srila Prabhupada came from Krsna-loka to “write some books.” He was happy with those books; he read and re-read them from cover to cover. His books were always kept within his reach in any room in which he stayed. When he received a new book from the press, he would sit and read it for hours, and when someone would enter the room, he would lift his eyes from the text, smile broadly and exclaim, “How wonderful these books are!”

Certainly, the few typos that slipped through needed Srila Prabhupada’s correction, but the scope of alterations in Jayadvaita Maharaja’s edited version is far broader. Jayadvaita Maharaja’s version of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita doesn’t just correct typos; it also succeeds in changing Srila Prabhupada’s mood, style and often, his meaning. Indeed, after Srila Prabhupada’s departure, the original Bhagavad-gita was rewritten to suit the taste of the editors, on the plea that it is closer to—in Jayadvaita Maharaja’s opinion—the ‘original manuscript.’ But Jayadvaita Maharaja stated in the second book changes meeting in Hawaii that there were many ‘original manuscripts’ of varying quality and content. There is no one ‘original manuscript.’

In this case, any changes are really unreasonable, when you consider that Srila Prabhupada had the original manuscripts in hand, but chose to sign off on the edited version. Why didn’t he just choose to print one of those manuscripts? Why did he, instead, spend hundreds of hours with Hayagriva, editing his manuscript to flow beautifully in the English language? Moreover, why would Srila Prabhupada sign it and gift it to the world, if he intended that future editors would dig up some so-called ‘original manuscripts’ and try to change it back to the ‘original.’ It is unreasonable to consider that Srila Prabhupada would intend to give up the results of two years of editing the book with Hayagriva and go backwards to the ‘original manuscripts.’

Srila Prabhupada’s books were transcendental when he wrote, edited and approved them, and they became the foundation of his International Society for Krishna Consciousness. So how can anyone say that they aren’t transcendental now? He spoke from the original 1972 edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is for over half a decade, giving hundreds of classes on nearly every verse and chapter. Srila Prabhupada infused his books with his pure bhakti. ‘Errors’ or no errors, they are, and continue to be, transcendental portals to the spiritual world. That is, unless someone views them with ‘mundane vision.’
adi-vani.org

Seeing into the future. How world will be effected by book changes:

Atreya Rsi: Hussain Prabhu says that his goal in life is to translate your Bhagavad-gita.
Prabhupada: Oh, very good.
Atreya Rsi: Yes, he's a very, very sincere boy.
Prabhupada: So do it immediately. Somebody, some Arabian student made some translation?
Atreya Rsi: Yes, there was some translations of Isopanisad.
Prabhupada: Where he is, that boy?
Atreya Rsi: Into Arabic. He's in Europe. He is a Palestinian boy.
Hussain is asking how should this translation be done, what is your recommendation, if you have any suggestion.
Prabhupada: Of course, I am not well versed in your language, but you simply, if you understand that English and translate it into Parsi, that will do. As it is, you translate. Don't make any change. Then it will be all right. And when there is difficulty, you can ask Atreya
Rsi. Harikesa.

So in this conversation Srila Prabhupada is telling this person to go ahead and translate his Bhagavad Gita into (Parsi) Arabic language simply using his already existing English translation published by the Macmillan Co. This is the same book that we distributed in the millions all over the world. But he warned him--"don’t make any changes and then it will be alright."

It is clear, that this BG that was published by Macmillan Co, and daily read by Srila Prabhupada,
was to be printed in as many languages as possible-but all without change!

This is NOT what we have today with Jaya Advaita, and Dravida's version.

Hare Krsna
Damaghosa das

All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

Yasoda-nandana: In the Gurukula we were teaching Isopanisad class to the children. So we took... (break) ...Prabhupada and the words which the recent edition of the press is wrong. Many changes were brought. They were trying to make better English, but sometimes, to make better English, I think they were making philosophical mistakes also. There is no so much need of making so much better English. Your English is sufficient. It is very clear, very simple. We have caught over 125 changes. They're changing so many things. We are wondering if this is necessary. I will show you today. I have kept the book.

Prabhupada: I know that these rascals are doing. What can be done? How they can be relied on? It is starting. What can I do? These cannot... These rascals cannot be educated. Dangerous. Little learning, dangerous. So how to correct? The leader of these dangerous--Radha-vallabha... He's a dangerous, who maintains these rascal with this work. He'll always have questions and alteration. That is his business. That is American business. They take that always. What can I do? Ultimate, it goes for editorial. They make changes, such changes... But they are doing without any authority... It is very serious situation. Ramesvara is in direct...

Yasoda-nandana: What is it going to be in five years? It's going to be a different book.

Prabhupada: So you... What you are going... It is very serious situation. You write one letter that "Why you have made so many changes?" And whom to write? Who will care? All rascals are there. Write to Satsvarupa that "This is the position. They are doing anything and everything at their whim." The next printing should be again to the original way... So write them immediately that "The rascal editors, they are doing havoc, and they are being maintained by Ramesvara and party..." So they are doing very freely and dangerously. And this rascal is always after change, Radha-vallabha. He's a great rascal.

Maah, unfortunately you resort to selective quoting. The 'rascal editors' conversation supports Jayadvaita S., so you left that out...
Choosing what one likes is a symptom of heresy (from Greek hairein, to choose. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heresy).
You've lost your credit in my eyes.

> SP: The next printing should be again to the original way...

Done. (ie. as far original as possible, taking into account the way of production)

VEDA:Sorry, Maah, the above claims don't hold water. These devotees were outsiders to the book production. "SP spending many months with Hayagriva" can't be documented. He spend a lot of time with him in the beginning but then found it too time consuming. His schedule was different. "many versions of manuscripts": since many people in the beginning did the transcribing, whoever was available. (Told by Umapati Swami.) One can see how it looked like in scans. Naraim instead of Narayana, etc. "inaccessible manuscripts" fact: many devotees in the NE-BBT were working with their xerocopies, myself included. "Arabic translation from MacMillan" - sure, SP was in a hurry to make his books available with current facilities. Whoever wanted to help was welcome. That doesn't mean they were up to the mark and the errors shouldn't be fixed later. > ‘Errors’ or no errors, they are, and continue to be, transcendental portals to the spiritual world. That is, unless someone views them with ‘mundane vision.’ Since SP requested editing (by willing-to-help yet neophyte persons) it accuses him of mundane vision... Is that your view?

Witnessing this tension around the editing, there arises a doubt whether those books and the institution that published them can be trusted at all.

Also, (some) devotees put quite a bit of pressure on people to trust the books and the institution. "If you don't trust our books, you are a rascal."

Given this, what should a person put their trust in when studying those books and interacting with the devotees?

Baker: To put it simply, if I wouldn't trust BBT, I wouldn't serve in it. But for bystanders, the situation may look confusing. Therefore the bbtedit.com site was done, even though a bit late, imho. It should have been out 15 years ago, when the www started.

> Are a person's likes and dislikes irrelevant?

In dharma yes. E.g. I may like drinking alcohol, etc. but still get karma for it.

> If a person dislikes something, does that mean said thing is true and right?
If a person likes something, does that mean said thing is false and bad?

Only Krsna sets the standards. Not our mind or intelligence.

> My point is that sometimes, one gets criticized for not having accepted something that one did not understand nor found it doable. I don't think such criticism is fair.

Therefore a good explanation should be provided by superiors.

This I call invincible ignorance. Spamming included.

The interesting thing is that now that the BBTedit.com is out on the table none of the propagandist are speaking up. Because it is a solid site with solid explanations no is trying to specifically point out mistakes in the site. Only side track arguments.

The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust arguments are there in form of BBTedit.com but some, Maah! included, choose to keep their ears and eyes shut.

VEDA:Baker: To put it simply, if I wouldn't trust BBT, I wouldn't serve in it. But for bystanders, the situation may look confusing. Therefore the bbtedit.com site was done, even though a bit late, imho. It should have been out 15 years ago, when the www started.

It does look confusing, yes ... On the one hand, strongly maintaining that the scriptures are right, infallible, and on the other hand wondering what exactly the scriptures say to begin with.

> Are a person's likes and dislikes irrelevant? In dharma yes. E.g. I may like drinking alcohol, etc. but still get karma for it.

But you may also like chanting and eating prasadam.
Religious people sometimes seem to come from the position that whatever a person likes, is irrelevant, wrong, bad. As if it would be completely impossible that someone could like spiritual activities, and as if spiritual life would be all about doing that which one would rather not do.
Just because someone goes by his likes, does not necessarily mean that he is doing something wrong, something adharmic.

Earlier, when I paralleled "shopping around for answers that they like" and "trying to find an answer they can understand, an instruction they find doable", my focus was on how pessimistic/optimistic one is in the way one describes and understands the actions of other people.
Someone with a negative, pessimistic, or critical outlook will much sooner assume the worst about people, and this will reflect in the way that person will describe other people's actions and how they will interpret their motivations. I think saying that devotees "shop around for answers that they like" is an example of such a negative outlook. Someone with a more positive outlook would describe the same behavior differently, perhaps with "trying to find an answer they can understand".

And surely you joined the Hare Krishna movement because you liked something about it, not because they managed to guilt trip you? :)

Narayana: So those disciples who don't have the opportunity to see you or speak with you...
Srila Prabhupada: That he was speaking, vani and vapuh. Even if you don't see his body, you take his words, vani.
Narayana: But how do they know that they're pleasing you?
Srila Prabhupada: If you actually follow the words of Guru, that means he is pleased. And if you do not follow, how can he be pleased?
Sudama: Not only that, but your mercy is spread everywhere, and if we take advantage, you told us once, then we will feel the result.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes.
Jayadvaita: And if we have faith in what the Guru says, then automatically we'll do that.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes. My Guru Maharaja passed away in 1936, and I started this movement in 1965, 30 years after. Then? I am getting mercy of Guru. This is vani. Even if Guru is not physically present, if you follow the vani, then you are getting help.
Sudama: So there is no question of ever separation as long as the disciple follows the instructions of Guru.
Srila Prabhupada: No. Cakhu-dano-dilo-jei. What is the next one?
Sudama: Cakhu-dano-dilo-jei, janme janme prabhu sei.
Srila Prabhupada: Janme janme prabhu sei. So where there is separation? Who has opened your eyes, he is birth after birth your prabhu.
(Room conversation, 21/7/75)

> wondering what exactly the scriptures say to begin with.

Therefore commentaries.

> But you may also like chanting and eating prasadam.

Sure. Personal preferences of various services are normal.

> Religious people sometimes seem to come from the position that whatever a person likes, is irrelevant, wrong, bad. As if it would be completely impossible that someone could like spiritual activities, and as if spiritual life would be all about doing that which one would rather not do.

That refers to the do's and don'ts level. If that's all a group or a tradition offers, it's surely not very attractive.

> Just because someone goes by his likes, does not necessarily mean that he is doing something wrong, something adharmic.

What's adharmic is specified.

The confusion is dispelled at a closer look. For editions of SP's books the background info is available at bbtedit.com.
BBT will sooner or later do textcritical edition of its major books. Otherwise it'll be done by someone else.

When dharma rules prescribe something and one chooses only a part of that it's a heretical approach. Eg. there's a 'no meat eating' rule. If someone starts to preach that certain meat at certain situation, etc. is ok, that's heresy.

If you think of a specific case where you think it doesn't apply, tell us.

Did you already go thru bbtedit.com? It gives really simple explanations of the book production history. You can simply refer others to that site. If you have any related questions, feel free to ask.

For a follower, the guru's order is more important than one's own likes and dislikes. And the order needs to be also in harmony with sastra and sadhu.

If what you (don't) do is also prescribed (forbidden) by dharma - which you may not know at the beginning - then everything is ok.
Problematic is when one knows what to do and still does (and esp. preaches) something else, impervious to logic and gss.

Only questions that has been asked before and answered before can be asked. If you ask any other question there is obviously something very very wrong with you and your question. There are doctors for these things you know.

Buffalo is bored with thing he does not understand.