721214 - Letter to Tusta Krsna written from Ahmedabad
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
December 14, 1972
"Hare Krishna Land," Gandhigram Road, Juhu, Bombay-54, India
My dear Tusta Krishna,
Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letters dated November 18, November 22, and December 3, 1972, and I have heard that you are having some difficulties, so I have sent Siddhaswarup there to help you. Now try to keep a cool head under all circumstances and always remember that Krishna will protect you in any case, you haven't to worry anything. I think that without you the New Zealand affair will not go on, but now you are leaving there to live on some farm in Australia. Of course, our serving Krishna is voluntary affair, so what can I say? If you think that is the best choice, I must agree, otherwise you might go away altogether. Anyway we shall discuss in detail if I come there in future.
Regarding your questions in the letter of November 18, 1972, you have asked me if the spiritual master is ultimately Krishna, so the answer must be that if you think that way then everyone is Krishna. So why we should think like this? Saktavesha Avatar. means a living entity, but he is specially empowered. Not that he is Krishna. But on account of his exalted position he is honoured as much as Krishna. Not that he is Krishna. That is Mayavadi. He acts in the position of Krishna, but he is not Krishna, he is very dear to Krishna. That is explained: (here the verse was quoted: yasya prasadat bhagavat prasadat..........) The spiritual master is acting in the position of Krishna because he is the most confidential servant of Krishna.
Your next question, after leaving this material realm does the devotee remain forever with his spiritual master? The answer is yes. But I think you have got the mistaken idea in this connection. (You speak of pure devotee, that he is saktavesha avatar, that we should obey him only--these things are the wrong idea.) If anyone thinks like that, that a pure devotee should be obeyed and no one else, that means he is a nonsense. We advise everyone to address one another as Prabhu. Prabhu means master, so how the master should be disobeyed? Others, they are also pure devotees. All of my disciples are pure devotees. Anyone sincerely serving the spiritual master is a pure devotee, it may be Siddhaswarup or others, a-Siddhaswarup. This must be very clearly stated. It is not only that your Siddhaswarup is a pure devotee and not others. Do not try to make a faction. Siddhaswarup is a good soul. But others should not be misled. Anyone who is surrendered to the spiritual master is a pure devotee, it doesn't matter if Siddhaswarup or non-Siddhaswarup. Amongst ourselves one should respect others as Prabhu, master, one another. As soon as we distinguish here is a pure devotee, here is a non-pure devotee, that means I am a nonsense. Why you only want to be in the spiritual sky with Siddhaswarup? Why not all? If Siddhaswarup can go, why not everyone? Siddhaswarup will go, you will go, Shyamsundar will go, all others will go. We will have another ISKCON there. Of course, Mr. Nair must stay.
And if somebody does not go, then I shall have to come back to take him there. One should remember this and every one of my disciples should act in such a way that they may go with me and may not have to come back to take another birth.
As for your next question, can only a few pure devotees deliver others, anyone, if he is a pure devotee he can deliver others, he can become spiritual master. But unless he is on that platform he should not attempt it. Then both of them will to go to hell, like blind men leading the blind.
Next you ask if I am present in my picture and form? Yes. In form as well as in teachings. To carry out the teachings of guru is more important than to worship the form, but none of them should be neglected. Form is called bopu and teachings is called vani. Both should be worshiped. Vani is more important than bopu.
Your next question is, should we love Krishna or love the spiritual master: You cannot go to Krishna directly, loving Him. It is common sense that if Krishna is the object of your love, His pet dog is also the object of your love. Friends meet friends and if the friend is with his dog the gentleman pats his dog first, is it not? So the man becomes automatically pleased, his dog being patted. I have seen it in your country. The conclusion is this: Without pleasing the spiritual master he cannot please Krishna. If anyone tries to please Krishna directly, he's fool number one.
Hoping this meets you and your good wife, Krishna Tulasi dasi, in good health and devotional mood.
Your ever well-wisher,
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
Tusta Krishna das Adhikary,(David Manele),
ISKCON Byron's Bay, NSW