> Dear Gauranga Prema Prabhu
> > 72-02 "Psychiatrists are humbug, all humbug. They cannot help.
> > Best thing is to be engaged in continuously chanting and
> > hearing, sankirtana. That will cure anyone of mental
> > disease." (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Upendra,
> > February 18, 1972)
> > Have I committed any offenses,
> > taken any quotes out of context,
> > made any mistakes, and/or
> > done anything I shouldn't have?
> Since you have asked the question, I volunteer to give an answer: Yes,
> I think you have indeed made a mistake. Off the top of my head, I can
> think of 4.
> 1) You keep posting the same quote again and again, even though several
> devotees requested you to stop doing that. You are trying to please
> Krishna but you have annoyed a couple of devotees in the process.
BHAGAVAD-GITA 2.25
PURPORT
Repetition of something is necessary in order that we understand the matter thoroughly, without error.
THE SCIENCE OF SELF REALIZATION pg. 156, 159, 175, 310:
harer nama harer nama harer namaiva kevalam kalau nasty eva nasty eva nasty eva gatir anyathaSrimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 1, Ch. 2]
Text 18
nasta-prayesv abhadresu nityam bhagavata-sevaya bhagavaty uttama-sloke bhaktir bhavati naisthikiTRANSLATION
By regularly hearing the Bhagavatam and rendering service unto the pure devotee, all that is troublesome to the heart is practically destroyed, and loving service unto the glorious Lord, who is praised with transcendental songs, is established as an irrevocable fact.
PURPORT
Here is the remedy for eliminating all inauspicious things within the heart which are considered to be obstacles in the path of self-realization. The remedy is the association of the Bhagavatas. There are two types of Bhagavatas, namely the book Bhagavata and the devotee Bhagavata. Both the Bhagavatas are competent remedies, and both of them or either of them can be good enough to eliminate the obstacles. A devotee Bhagavata is as good as the book Bhagavata because the devotee Bhagavata leads his life in terms of the book Bhagavata, and the book Bhagavata is full of information about the Personality of Godhead and His pure devotees, who are also Bhagavatas. Bhagavata book and person are identical.
Srimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 1, Ch. 1]
TEXT 19
vayam tu na vitrpyama uttama-sloka-vikrame yac chrnvatam rasa-jnanam svadu svadu pade padeTRANSLATION
We never tire of hearing the transcendental pastimes of the Personality of Godhead who is glorified by hymns and prayers. Those who enjoy association with Him relish hearing of His pastimes at every moment.
PURPORT
There is a great difference between mundane stories, fiction, or history and the transcendental pastimes of the Lord. The histories of the whole universe contain references to the pastimes of the incarnations of the Lord. The Ramayana, Mahabharata, and the Puranas are histories of bygone ages recorded in connection with the pastimes of the incarnations of the Lord and therefore remain fresh even after repeated readings. For example, anyone may read Bhagavad-gita or the Srimad-Bhagavatam repeatedly throughout his whole life and yet find in them new light of information. Mundane news is static whereas transcendental news is dynamic, inasmuch as the spirit is dynamic and matter is static.
Transcendental literature is above the mode of darkness, and its light becomes more luminous with progressive reading and realization of the transcendental subject matter.
> 2) You have taken a statement which was directed to one particular
> individual to be unconditionally valid for all people, under all
> circumstances and at all times. But the instructions Prabhupada gave in
> personal letters or conversations are not necessarily applicable to all
> people at all times (though many of them are).
"Best thing is to be engaged in continuously chanting and
hearing, sankirtana. That will cure ANYONE of mental
disease." (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Upendra,
February 18, 1972)
THE SCIENCE OF SELF REALIZATION pg. 76:
Srila Prabhupada: Anyone can attain perfection within a second - providing he is willing.
> Here is an example: Prabhupad once told a sannyasi in Vrindavan that
> "you are a sannyasi you should stay here and manage" but the very same
> day he told another sannyasi that "as a renunciate, it is your duty to
> always travel and preach".
Srimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 1, Introduction]
The example of the conchshell and that of the cowdung given by the Lord are very much appropriate in this connection. If one argues that since cowdung is pure, the stool of a learned brahmana is still more pure, his argument will not be accepted. Cowdung is accepted, and the stool of a highly posted brahmana is rejected.
THE SCIENCE OF SELF REALIZATION pg. 228, 229, 230:
Srila Prabhupada: We accept such a statement without argument. That is the way of Vedic understanding.
Prof. Kotovsky: The difficulty is that our approach is that we do not believe in anything without argument. We can believe only things based on argument.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is allowed. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gita [4.34]. Tad viddhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya. Pariprasna, argument, is allowed - but not in the challenging spirit, but rather with the spirit to understand. Argument is not denied. But as far as Vedic statements are concerned, they are infallible, and the scholars of the Vedas accept them in that way. For example, cow dung is the stool of an animal. Now, the Vedic statement is that as soon as you touch the stool of any animal - even if you touch your own stool - you are impure and have to purify yourself by taking a bath. According to the Hindu system, after evacuating one has to take a bath.
Prof. Kotovsky: That is quite understandable hygienic knowledge.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes.
Prof. Kotovsky: Yes, that is right.
Srila Prabhupada: But in another place it is stated that cow dung, although the stool of an animal, is pure. Even if you apply it to an impure place, that place becomes purified. This is superficially contradictory. In one place it is said that the stool of an animal is impure and as soon as you touch it you have to be purified, and in another place it says that cow dung is pure. According to our knowledge, it is contradictory - but still it is accepted by those who are followers of the Vedas. And the fact is that if you analyze cow dung, you will find that it contains all antiseptic properties.
Prof. Kotovsky: This I don't know.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, one professor in a medical college analyzed it, and he found it full of antiseptic properties. So Vedic statements, even if found contradictory, if analyzed scrutinizingly will prove correct. There may be an exception. But it is accepted, and when scientifically analyzed and examined, it is found to be correct.
Prof. Kotovsky: Yes, if you analyze from the scientific point of view, that is right.
Srila Prabhupada: There are other instances - for example, the conchshell. The conchshell is the bone of an animal, and according to Vedic instruction if you touch the bone of an animal you become impure and have to take a bath. But this conchshell is kept in the Deity room, because it is accepted as pure by the Vedas. My point is that we accept Vedic laws without argument. That is the principle followed by scholars. If you can substantiate your statements by quotations from the Vedas, then they are accepted. You are not required to substantiate them in other ways. There are different kinds of pramanas, or evidences. Proof by Vedic quotation is called sruti-pramana. As in the legal court if you can give statements from the law book your statement is accepted, so all statements you give, if supported by sruti-pramanas, are accepted by scholars. I think you know the Vedas are known as srutis.
Prof. Kotovsky: Yes.
Srila Prabhupada:
sruti-smrti-puranadi-
pancaratra-vidhim vina
aikantiki harer bhaktir
utpatayaiva kalpate
[Brahma-yamala]
Any system we accept must be supported by evidences of sruti, smrti, the
Puranas, and Pancaratra. That which is not proved by these pramanas is a
disturbance.Prof. Kotovsky: Could I just say one thing? What is in the Vedas could also have been proved in a scientific way. Today, suppose there is a scientific laboratory. What is said by that lab is true. That is true you accept, without going into the propriety of it. Suppose you have a scientific workshop or institution; if this workshop or scientific institution says, "This is not good," the general body will take it for granted: "Yes. The scientific body has said so, so it is understood."
Srila Prabhupada: Similarly, Vedic authoritative statements are accepted by the acaryas [great teachers]. India is governed by the acaryas - Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Sankaracarya. They accept the Vedas, and their followers accept them. The benefit is that I do not waste my time to research whether cow dung is pure or impure; rather, because it is stated in the Vedas to be pure, I accept it. I save my time by accepting the sruti-pramana. In that way there are different statements in the Vedas for sociology and politics or anything, for veda means "knowledge."
sarvasya caham hrdi sannivisto
mattah smrtir jnanam apohanam ca
vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedanta-krd veda-vid eva caham
[Bg. 15.15]
> This is a good example of how sometimes seemingSrimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 2, Ch. 6 TEXT 34]
PURPORT
...sometimes the declaration of Govinda Himself may seem contradictory to mundane creatures, but the mundaner will never find any contradiction in the words of the Lord's devotees. The devotees are especially protected by the Lord so that they may remain infallible.
Srimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 1, Introduction]
"The Vedic injunctions are self authorized, and if some mundane creature adjusts the interpretations of the Vedas, he defies their authority. It is foolish to think of oneself as more intelligent than Srila Vyasadeva. He has already expressed himself in his sutras, and there is no need of help from personalities of lesser importance.
> Actually such contradictions are not really
> contradictory rather they are simply injunctions
> which are meant for different people or for different
> times or for different circumstances. In that case we
> have to accept both versions as correct. It might not
> be readily understandable to our limited intellect,
> but I one of the symptoms of a truly intelligent
> person is that he can hold contradictory
> statements in his mind at the same time
> and not be disturbed. One simply has
> to accept that sometimes things are
> not black and white.
> All psychiatrists or therapists are not
> the same. They come in many shades.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta [Madhya-lila, Ch. 6]
TEXT 130
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu then revealed His mind, saying: "I can understand the meaning of each sutra very clearly, but your explanations have simply agitated My mind.
TEXT 131
"The meaning of the verses in the Vedanta-sutra contain clear purports in themselves, but other purports you presented simply covered the meaning of the sutra like a cloud.
TEXT 132
"You do not explain the direct meaning of the Brahma-sutras. Indeed, it appears that your business is to cover the real meaning."
TEXT 133
Caitanya Mahaprabhu continued: "Vedanta-sutra is the summary of all the Upanisads; therefore whatever direct meaning is there in the Upanisads is also recorded in the Vedanta-sutra or Vyasa-sutra.
TEXT 134
"For each verse the direct meaning must be accepted without interpretation. However, you simply abandon the direct meaning and proceed with your imaginative interpretation.
TEXT 135
"Although there is other evidence, the evidence given in the Vedic version must be taken as foremost. Vedic versions understood directly are first class evidence."
TEXT 136
Caitanya Mahaprabhu continued: "Conchshells and cow dung are nothing but the bones and the stool of some living entities, but according to the Vedic version they are both considered very pure.
PURPORT
Even though such statements appear contradictory, we still accept the fact that conchshells and cow dung are pure and sanctified on the basis of the Vedic version.
Back To Godhead, October 10, 1968, Seattle Washington:
Srila Prabhupada Speaks Out
There is no question of interpretation. Then the authority is gone. As soon as you interpret, there is no authority. And those who are interpreting unnecessarily, they should be rejected immediately. Immediately, without consideration.
Srimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 6, Ch. 16 TEXT 41]
PURPORT
Bhagavat-dharma has no contradictions.
Bhagavad-gita Introduction:
All Vedic knowledge is infallible, and Hindus accept Vedic knowledge to be complete and infallible. For example, cow dung is the stool of an animal, and according to smrti, or Vedic injunction, if one touches the stool of an animal he has to take a bath to purify himself. But in the Vedic scriptures cow dung is considered to be a purifying agent. One might consider this to be contradictory, but it is accepted because it is Vedic injunction, and indeed by accepting this, one will not commit a mistake; subsequently it has been proved by modern science that cow dung contains all antiseptic properties. So Vedic knowledge is complete because it is above all doubts and mistakes,
> Some are impersonalists (demoniac), some are pure sense
> enjoyers (rajas or tamas), but there are others who are
> surprisingly knowledgable and somewhat religous or pious
> (sattva) and some of them may even be Krishna conscious.
> In fact, by now, there are quite a few therapists, healers,
> counselors etc. who are initiated devotees and consulting
> them will not be dangerous or detrimental to your spiritual
> life. So, if a devotee has serious mental problems and could
> not be cured inspite of hearing and chanting for many years,
> I don't think it is such a terrible aparadha if he consults
> a specialist who is sattvic, pious or even Krishna conscious.
> Especially if the treatment works. I know of several devotees
> who have benefited by such treatment and it did not stop them
> from hearing and chanting. Whatever is favourable for Krishna
> cosnciouness should be accepted and whatever is unfavorable is
> to be rejected.
> This simple point has been presented to you with logic and reason by at
> least fifteen different devotees, but you have ignored all of their
> evidence. I am truly amazed at your insistence.
> 3) By ignoring the line of reasoning of so many devotees you are
> indicating that you understand Prabhupada's words better than anyone
> else, including the Prabhupada disciples who commented on your texts.
> But before I surrender to your lotosfeet and accept your version of the
> vedas, may I know your credentials?
I'm sorry Prabhu, I have none. I am no body. I simply wish to become the sincere servant of the servant.
> Who is your guru,
Who is not my guru?
> what is your ashrama,
I am not a brahmacari, grhasta, vanaprastha or sannyasa.
> what is your service
At present I am attempting to be engaged in continuously chanting and hearing, sankirtana.
> and for how many years have you been active in Krishna consciousness?
I am not presently a devotee. That is a very exalted position. I hope one day that I will become a devotee. As of yet I am still aspiring to be a sincere servant of the servant.
> How can we be really sure that your understanding of Prabhupada's words
> is the correct one, while all the devotees who replied to your texts
> are wrong?
Prabhu, I have no understanding or realizations, that I am aware of, therefore I simply try to repeat the words of the spiritual master like a suka (parrot).
> 4) You are repeating Prabhupada's words faithfully, but not necessarily
> with realization. Repeating the words of the spiritual master is
> laudable. There cannot be anything wrong in it. Prabhupad said that we
> should simply speak as he has done. But he also said that we should
> follow in his footsteps, not imitate him, and we should repeat his
> teachings with realization, not exactly like a parrot. And I am afraid
> that you are doing just that when you send the same quote again and
> again even though several devotees tried to prove that there are real
> life situations where a devotee with mental problems can be benefited
> by therapy or psychiatric treatment. Repeating like a parrot - that's
> how Jehova's witnesses preach. They stricly adhere to the letter of
> the bible and more often than not, they come across as narrow minded
> and naive fellows.
THE SCIENCE OF SELF REALIZATION pg. 61, 62:
The Vedas enjoin us to seek out a guru; actually, they say to seek out the guru, not just a guru. The guru is one because he comes in disciplic succession. What Vyasadeva and Krsna taught five thousand years ago is also being taught now. There is no difference between the two instructions. Although hundreds and thousands of acaryas have come and gone, the message is one. The real guru cannot be two, for the real guru does not speak differently from his predecessors.
Whatever Vyasadeva wrote was originally spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Srila Vyasadeva did not give his own opinion. Consequently, Srila Vyasadeva is a guru. He does not misinterpret the words of Krsna, but transmits them exactly as they were spoken. If we send a telegram, the person who delivers the telegram does not have to correct it, edit it, or add to it. He simply presents it. That is the guru's business. The guru may be this person or that, but the message is the same; therefore it is said that guru is one. In disciplic succession we simply find repetition of the same subject.
Srila Prabhupada Arrival Lecture, July 15, 1975, Berkeley California:
He [the spiritual master] simply repeats what Krsna has said, like a parrot.
> They have predicted the imminent arrival of doomsday
> more than once in the past, but the world is still going
> on. Are you determined to stick to your guns like Jehova's
> witnesses despite so much evidence to the contrary? Jehova's
> witnesses would rather let a mortally ill child die than allow
> a doctor to carry out a blood transfusion. If a devotee is
> suffering from a very serious mental imbalance and it did
> not go away even after chanting for many years, would you
> rather let him suffer or give it a try and see if a good
> psychiatrist can help him? Personally I would go for the
> latter and probably Prabhupad would not object, if the
> treatment does not stop the devotee patient from
> hearing and chanting. That is just plain common
> sense.
> ys Anantarupa
"PSYCHIATRISTS are humbug, all humbug. THEY cannot help."
THE SCIENCE OF SELF REALIZATION pg. 61, 62:
Some spiritual teachers say, "In my opinion you should do this," but this is not a guru. Such so-called gurus are simply rascals. The genuine guru has only one opinion, and that is the opinion expressed by Krsna, Vyasadeva, Narada, Arjuna, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and the Goswamis. Five thousand years ago Lord Sri Krsna spoke the Bhagavad-gita, and Vyasadeva recorded it. Srila Vyasadeva did not say, "This is my opinion."
The six Goswamis also transmitted the same message, and we are simply following in their footsteps. There is no difference. We do not interpret the words of Krsna by saying, "In my opinion, the Battlefield of Kuruksetra represents the human body." Such interpretations are set forth by rascals. In the world there are many rascal gurus who give their own opinion, but we can challenge any rascal.
> PS: There are three methods of realization: Sabda (hearing from
> authority), Anumana (inference or logic) and pratyaksha (direct
> perception). Hearing is the most important way of understanding the
> truth about a particular subject matter but the other two methods are
> also bona fide and everyone uses them all the time, including
> Prabhupada.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta [Madhya-lila, Ch. 6]
TEXT 137
svatah-pramana veda satya yei kaya 'laksana' karile svatah-pramanya-hani hayaSYNONYMS
svatah-pramana - self evidence; veda - Vedic literature; satya - truth; yei - whatever; kaya - say; laksana - interpretation; karile - by making; svatah-pramanya - self-evidential proof; hani - lost; haya - becomes.
Translation
"The Vedic statements are self evident. Whatever is stated there must be accepted. If we interpret according to our own imagination, the authority of the Vedas is immediately lost."
PURPORT
Out of four main types of evidence - direct perception, hypothesis, historical reference and the Vedas - Vedic evidence is accepted as the foremost. If we want to interpret the Vedic version, we must imagine an interpretation according to what we want to do. First of all, we set forth such an interpretation as a suggestion or hypothesis. As such, it is not actually true, and the self-evident proof is lost. Srila Madhvacarya, commenting on the aphorism drsyate tu (Vedanta-sutra 2.1.6), quotes the Bhavisya Purana as follows:
rg-yajuh-samatharvas ca bharatam panca-ratrakam mula-ramayanam caiva veda ity eva sabditah puranani ca yaniha vaisnavani vido viduh svatah-pramanyam etesam natra kincid vicaryateThe Rg Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda, Atharva Veda, Mahabharata, Pancaratra and original Ramayana are all considered Vedic literature. The Puranas (such as the Brahma-vaivarta Purana, Naradiya Purana, Visnu Purana and Bhagavata Purana) are especially meant for Vaisnavas and are also Vedic literature. As such, whatever is stated within the Puranas, the Mahabharata and Ramayana is self evident. There is no need for interpretation. Bhagavad-gita is also within the Mahabharata; therefore all the statements of Bhagavad-gita are self evident. There is no need for interpretation, and if we do interpret, the entire authority of Vedic literature is lost.
TEXT 138
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu continued: "The Brahma-sutra, compiled by Srila Vyasadeva, is as radiant as the sun. One who tries to interpret its meaning simply covers that sunshine with a cloud."
> For instance, Prabhupada wanted his disciples to chant 64 rounds, then
> 32 and finally he went down to 16. When asked why he did so he said "I
> was experimenting". So if it is experimentally ascertained that in some
> cases psychiatric or therapeutic treatment is not dangerous or
> detrimental to spiritual life you will simply become laughing stock if
> you stubbornly stick to your conviction that "all psychiatrists are
> humbug".
"Psychiatrists are humbug, all humbug." (Srila Prabhupada Letter)
> Have I committed any mistake or any offense? If so, I am truely sorry.
BHAGAVAD-GITA INTRODUCTION:
Vedic knowledge is not a question of research. Our research work is imperfect because we are researching things with our imperfect senses. We have to accept perfect knowledge which comes down, as is stated in Bhagavad-gita, by the parampara (disciplic succession). We have to receive knowledge from the proper source in disciplic succession beginning with the supreme spiritual master, the Lord Himself, and handed down to a succession of spiritual masters. Arjuna, the student who took lessons from Lord Sri Krsna, accepts everything that He says without contradicting Him. One is not allowed to accept one portion of Bhagavad-gita and not another. No. We must accept Bhagavad-gita without interpretation, without deletion and without our own whimsical participation in the matter.
Sri Isopanisad Mantra 1, Copyright 1972:
PURPORT
The Vedic knowledge is infallible because it comes down through the perfect disciplic succession of spiritual masters beginning with the Lord Himself. The Vedic knowledge is received from the transcendental sources and the first word was spoken by the Lord Himself. The words spoken by the Lord are called apauruseya, not delivered by any person of the mundane world. A living being of the mundane world has four defects, which are 1. that he must commit mistakes. 2. he must sometimes be illusioned. 3. he must try to cheat others and 4. he is endowed with imperfect senses. With these four principles of imperfection one cannot deliver perfect information in the matter of all-pervading knowledge. The Vedas are not known like that. The Vedic knowledge was originally imparted into the heart of Brahma, the first created living being, and Brahma in his turn disseminated the knowledge to his sons and disciples, who have continued the process down through history.
> common sense
Srimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 2, Ch. 1 TEXT 30]
PURPORT
But there is no room for common sense in the injunctions of the sastras. . . . . Common sense is always imperfect, whereas description in the sastras is always perfect and complete.
"We are not doctor dasa, we are Krsna dasa."
http://web.tiscali.it/gopala/Prabhupada_Nectar/2.html
Srimad-Bhagavatam [Canto 2, Ch. 1 TEXT 17]
PURPORT
Even a mentally deranged man can be cured by treatment of transcendental sound.
http://www.geociites.com/Athens/Thebes/4830/Psychiatrists_are_humbug-B.htm