The Krishna Lovers

Where True Love Begins

The Bogi Yogi Series - Part one December 21, 2007

Pradyumna prabhu had a lengthy meeting with Srila Prabhupada this afternoon to finalize his reply to the Blitz article on Sai Baba. Pradyumna read from the opening paragraph of the article which was entitled “God is an Indian.” “‘His contemporary avatara rests in the

Trinity of Shirdi Baba, Sai Baba, and Prem Baba to come. So Satya Sai Baba, the second of the triple incarnation, asserted in the course of a marathon interview to add, ‘In my present avatara, I have come armed with the fullness of the power of the formless God to save humanity.’”

Srila Prabhupada dictated the outline of the letter to Pradyumna. “‘Dear Sai Baba, just recently in the Blitz paper, published on—give the date—we were surprised to find one article “God is an Indian.” And you have claimed to become an incarnation of God to save the human society. What is the ground of your claiming as incarnation? And what

you have done to save the human society? Will you explain for enlightenment of us, or many of us? We have got the list of incarnations recorded in the Vedic scriptures and their respective activities also. So where is that record in the Vedic scripture about your appearing as incarnation? Lord Krsna’s incarnation-ness is fully described in Srimad-Bhägavatam. Similarly, Lord Ramacandra’s incarnation-ness or Lord Buddha’s incarnation-ness, Lord Catena’s incarnation-ness, we have got full information in Vedic literatures. Where is your incarnation described? Will you kindly give the reference? Anyone can say like you, that one is incarnation, as it has become a fashion nowadays. But is that claim the only proof of one’s becoming incarnation? Some such unauthorized claim of becoming an incarnation is certainly ridiculous. Then you have claimed to take

form.’ What he has written?”

Pradyumna re-read Baba’s claim to being an avatara “armed with the fullness of the power of the formless God.” Prabhupada continued. “‘So you have claimed to take a form of the formless God. But we see in the Bhagavad-Gita that God is never formless.’” He had Pradyumna read out verse 7:24 from the Gita, and its purport. Telling Pradyumna to quote the verse in the letter, along with a quote from Yamunäcärya found in the purport, Prabhupada went on with his dictation: “‘Only the rascals and less intelligent class of men think that God is formless and when He incarnates, He takes a particular form…. So in this connection, the statement of Bhagavatam is especially important. Brahmeti paramätmeti bhagavän iti sabdyate. Brahman is impersonal, Paramätmä is localized, and Bhagavän is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’”

Voicing aloud Prabhupada statement as he wrote it down, Pradyumna repeated, “Brahman is the impersonal…” Prabhupada immediately corrected him. “‘Brahman is impersonal.’ Not the. ‘Paramätmä is localized, and Bhagavän is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’” Citing many verses from Bhagavad-Gita, Prabhupada made the point that

Krsna’s personality cannot be understood without His mercy. “‘So one has to accept the statement of Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, how He is originally the Purina or person,’” he said. “‘Impersonal Brahman is expansion of the rays of His personal body,

exactly like the sunshine is expansion of the rays of the sun-god Vivasvän. Vivasvän is a person in the sun globe and Krsna is also a person who spoke the philosophy of Bhagavad-Gita long, long years before He spoke the same to Arjuna. Therefore, the conclusion is that originally God is always a person.

Impersonal Brahman is emanation from the personal God. In other words, God, personal God, is not from impersonal Brahman; but impersonal Brahman is from the personal God. That is confirmed in the Bhagavad-Gita. Impersonal Brahman is resting on the personal God, exactly which illumination of light is resting on the electric bulb, not that the bulb is resting on the illuminated light.’”

Again quoting from the Gita Prabhupada came to a very pointed conclusion: “‘So Krsna, as a person, says to Arjuna that both of them existed in the past as person, and they’ll continue to remain person in the future. So without knowing all this knowledge, a mayavada accepts the incarnation of God as coming from impersonal. Under this heading you have proved yourself to become a mayavada. And how a mayavada or an ass can become the incarnation of God?’” Not content with that, Prabhupada asked Pradyumna to read the rest of the article to him.

Pradyumna squinted through his glasses at the paper and read out a declaration by the writer of his acceptance of what he called “the avatara concept which broadly means the descent of the divine principle into human affairs.” Reminding the reader of Lord Krsna’s

Descent to save humanity, the writer declared: “Solution and cure to world’s ills: To Baba’s devotees, the avatara has similarly come to provide both the solution and the cure to a world living in terror of a nuclear holocaust. The false dichotomies created by Western thought between God and man, purusa and deva, simply do not exist in the Indian scriptures, which prescribe the assimilation of God in man and man in God as the basis of religion.”

Prabhupada was disgusted. “This is another rascal Dom. God is always distinct from man.” Pradyumna said that Sai Baba made a similar quote himself, later in the piece. He read it out: “God is man and man is God. All of us have something of God, the divine spark, within us. All men are divine, like myself, with the spirit embodied in human flesh and bone. The only difference is that they are unaware of this Godhood.”Skipping to another section of the article, Pradyumna went on, “Here he says, ‘The mission of the present avatara is to make everybody realize that since the same God or divinity resides in everyone, people should respect, love, and …’” Prabhupada cut in. “No, no. If he resides in everyone, then why he has special claim?”

“Yes. Well, he says he has remembered.”

“He remembers?” Prabhupada asked. “How God can forget?”

“That he says here. He says that, ‘Take paddy or rice by way of an illustration. Every grain of rice is enclosed in a husk. You have to remove the husk to get the grain of rice. Now husk and rice both come from the same seed. Rice is the equivalent of God in man.’”

“But still husk is not rice,” Prabhupada said. “You cannot say husk is rice.”

Nodding in agreement, Pradyumna read on. “He says, ‘Rice is the equivalent of God in man, while the husk can be compared to desire which reduces God to man.’”

Prabhupada sat shaking his head. “No, no.”

Pradyumna finished the quote: “Therefore life plus desire equals man. Life minus desire equals God.” Prabhupada dictated the concluding words of his letter: “You are desiring to become God. There cannot be no desire. But you unceremoniously desire to become God. Although there is no proof in the sästras. In the Bhagavad-Gita it is accepted that the living entities are sparks of, part and parcel, of God, Krsna. But part is never equal to the whole. So you can claim as a spark of God, as every living entity can claim, but you cannot claim as the Supreme Person with full power.

That is misleading. You can show a little magic, as other magicians also can show, but you cannot show the full magic, as Krsna displayed or Lord Rämacandra displayed. Therefore, your claim as a full power is completely false and blasphemous.”

Pradyumna stopped writing and looked up, raising a point of his own, “Now someone may bring up the one point, they say ‘Well, if an avatara comes if he must show all kinds of great opulence’s and powers.’ Then he says sometimes the incarnation shows this, but sometimes, like when Lord Caitanya appeared He didn’t show visvarüpa or…” Prabhupada replied. “But He [Lord Caitanya] never claimed that ‘I am avatara.’ But we understand from the sästric evidence. He never claimed. Rather, when He was addressed as Krsna He blocked His ears, ‘You don’t say like that.’ He never claimed. He fully displayed Himself as a devotee, not Bhagavän.

Prabhupada nodded. “In this way, find out the faulty statement and give him proof.” Leaving Prabhupada to chant quietly in the garden, Pradyumna typed the letter out and it was sent off to Satya Sai Baba.

 

8 Responses to “The Bogi Yogi Series - Part one”

  1. Krystian Says:

    Could somebody explain why Prabhupada considered Sai Baba a fraud because he wasn’t mentioned in the Scriptures and had no problems excepting Jesus although there was no mention whatsoever of Jesus??!!

  2. gopala Says:

    1. Jesus never proclaimed to be God

    2. He is mentioned in the brahmanada purananda purana as “isha putra” son of god. etc…

  3. Krystian Says:

    Any evidence this reffered to Jesus?

    And Jesus did claim to be God. He said “I and my father are one’ and said that he is the only path to “salvation”.

  4. Gopala Says:

    With Salivahana asking Jesus, “Who are you?” to which Jesus replies:

    isa-putram mam viddhi
    kumari-garbha sambhavam

    “I am the Son of God (isa-putra) and I am born of a virgin (kumari-garbha).”(19:23) Bhavisya purana.(and Many more texts)

    When Jesus Spoke those words you quoted,the context he said it in is very important.

    He is keeping in context with vedic teachings, where the common saying “like father like son’ comes into play,and though i am able to represent my father, i also may have his qualities, i will even be called bythe same name MrGopal, but i am not my own father. so in the context jesus was talking in line with qualities of his father.

    also being the ONLY salvation is also correct when following with the authorisation of the vedas and the parampara,for the christians he was the only bona fide guru, andtherefore the ONLY path of salvation for them, Jesus onlY preached love of God, and was therefore a guru. He Never Said “I am God”.

    Sastradoes not defeat Jesus, for he has done nothing to award himself a sastric battle,however, Sathya SAI can easily be defeated by sastra, because he is not GOD…

  5. Krystian Says:

    How are you sure that this refers to the Jesus from the Bible? The Bhavishya Purana was composed ages before the Christian era (I’m not sure but it’s quite likel). Read about the gruesome additions by Christina propagandists to the Bhavishya Purana in the book “The True History and Religion of India”. See also the website hamsa.org , especially the part with the interview with Ishwar Sharan. And answer the question: if Jesus were a Vaishnava Guru why doesn’t the Bible contain a single reference to him talking about the worship of Lord Krishna/Vishnu?

    The Shastras contain a prophecy of Kalki which can be reffered to Sathya Sai Baba. How do you answer that? His devotees also point to the conversation between Vishnu and Markandeya from the Mahabharata as reffering to Sai Baba. Today in India there are many great gurus who claim to be Avatars. Why don’t you battle them, only Sai Baba?

  6. gopala Says:

    jesus was not a VAisnava guru, he opnly preached love of god… bhavisya purana is of prophecies so naturally it would be older than its contents… also we have no reason not to accept jesus as opposed to satya sai… even his advaitist philosophy of “everyone is god” and “i am god” is unnacceptable, unlike jesus, “love of god” …. thats the piont… why dont you talk about why should we accept sai now?

  7. gopala Says:

    Vishnu and Markandeya from the Mahabharata as reffering to Sai Baba.?? show me this reference…

    also if you read up on kalki you will see that it cannot be sai, because they name the area he is born, the time, his purpose, his beaty, his parents names etc, which cannot be sai… especially the beauty part… lol…

    and about the other avatars? im getting more information about them, and also ho[pe to go visit them soon, so keep an eye out, one bogi yogi at a time, the biggest first…

  8. Krystian Says:

    “why dont you talk about why should we accept sai now?”

    Why don’t you answer my questions fully.

    “even his advaitist philosophy of “everyone is god” and “i am god””

    Not every Vaishnava is dualist like you, so please have some tolerance.

    I’ll give you the reference soon.

    Why do you attack all gurus outside ISKCON and all Hindu paths other than Gaudiya Vaishnavism while you accept Christianity and Islam?

    “im getting more information about them, and also ho[pe to go visit them soon, so keep an eye out, one bogi yogi at a time, the biggest first…”

    Do you mean to say that Sri Sri, Amma, Mother Meera, Yogananda etc. are all fake.

    Why did you quote a passage from the Brahmananda Purana allthough you believe it’s Rajaasic?

Leave a Reply