BY: GEORGE A. SMITH
Jan 18, 2013 — CALIFORNIA, USA —
Thanks for your last interesting article [Bhakta Geore]. You came up with some novel and effective ways to get all of us thinking about … thinking. Process thinking – something that many devotees are completely unfamiliar with. You are very fortunate to have the ability to think critically and apply solid logic. That, and your love for Srila Prabhupada, is what makes so many of your articles outstanding. I mean that, prabhu.
(Rocana dasa 12-19-2011)
Today upon Rocana dasa web site I found him in the below referenced article to be attempting to drain away two of my most loyal followers, Mahesh and Amar prabhus who along with Puranjana have been following me around since my e-mail was first posted up as a topic on another thread and I had written a response. While it is nice of Rocana dasa to point out what types of idiots make the most noise among the Rtviks I must protest that he did not also take away Putana dasa and Lady Chimp with so that then we might see some intelligent persons emerging into the discussion.
Within the following article posted up by Rocana dasa upon his website the Sampradaya Sun Rocana gives considerable press to what I have been talking about for the last several days and talking about them in relation to Rocana dasa own self.
A RITVIK SMOKESCREEN – Rocana dasa
Please refer to my Jan 12 & 13th postings on
http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=32440#comment-13165
Coincidence or I told you so?
To be fair to Rocana dasa he has never come out and directly told me that he intended to use the Sampradaya Sun as a means by which he could generate support and manipulate the GBC into giving him and honored place among them wherefrom he could begin initiating disciples upon his own behalf. Why would he have to state the obvious? Let him simply deny it now and he can change his mind later, or pay it no mind.
The point is that I would have no objection, except that it would have been nice of him to state his intentions to the contributors of his site on what he intended to dop witt the popularity and therefore power that his site generated as a person forum for his presentation of himself and his own philosophy.
That and one other thing.
Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations and ask them to be good enough to remind their prospective initiates of this before the deed is done, but in Rocana’s case I have an objection based upon his sectarian stance against the Rtviks and the fact that his own DOR avoids appraising the readers of the fact that Rocana has failed to support his major contention, which is that the Ritvik presentation is appasiddhantic:
Here is the last article that I submitted to the Sun which of course Rocana rejected.
TFO OR DOR, EITHER OR, OR ONE BUT NOT THE OTHER?
An indeterminate proposition can neither be verified nor refuted at the time that we initially encounter it, but there are very scientific processes by which it may be verified or refuted at some later date. This is the case with the proposition that the Rtviks have offered us. The problem that we are seeing upon either side of the issue is that those who are both arguing for or against its acceptance are too clouded by emotional issues to think clearly in regard to it.
Whether or not one is aware of the scientific methods by which such a proposition can be tested and chooses to employ them before accepting or rejecting what has been proposed to him or her is something that rarely comes up and understandably so. Thinking logically and reasoning clearly is not something that comes natural to us. I was all the way into my first year of college before I found a class that offered this science, something that must be learned and practiced as a discipline. The name of this class was Logic and it wasn’t even mandatory but was an elective.
When I entered the class on the first day I found it to be only half full and those who were there somewhat intimidated by what we were expecting, which in respect to the science of thinking clearly a complete unknown to us. We gave each other the Vulcan salute and then proceeded to go on to where none of us had gone before, to an endless frontier where every indeterminate proposition can be scientifically proven or rejected, but not at once of course.
Whether or not one will have the courage to admit to oneself that one has never even learned how to think correctly and clearly and that one may have accepted or rejected an indeterminate proposition such as the Rtviks have offered as being true or false before one could oneself actually employ the scientific processes by which such propositions can be proven or disproven, are difficult questions to ask of oneself especially but also of others, but yet if we are to be open and honest with each other and straightforward to those to whom we wish to present our cases to then we must admit that such questions strike to the matter of our seeming inability to discuss the matter and to prove our cases reasonably as brothers and sisters attempting to serve together at Srila Prabhupadas lotus feet rather than as sworn and bitter enemies.
Once this matter is settled the truth or falsity of the Rtvik proposition that Post Samadhi initiation is both bona fide and also something that Srila Prabhupada ordered us to accept into this Krsna consciousness movement following his physical disappearance can be examined and scrutinized by both sides of the issue working together.
Alright, maybe I am a dreamer but still from what the devotees tell me Srila Prabhupada said that the love of his disciples will be shown to him in how they work together cooperatively and there is no doubt in my mind that on both sides of this issue stand those who truly love Srila Prabhupada and thus it may not be such an impossible dream to dream at all.
Surprisingly though, what the Rtviks offer us is not a single proposition but one that has two parts, each of which may have a completely different answer. The first part of the proposition that the Rtviks have offered us concerns the type of initiatory system that they offer us itself, the type of initiatory system by which one can become a disciple of a spiritual master following his physical disappearance.
The second part of the proposition though based upon the acceptance of the first half of the propositions acceptance and its validity is independent of it, that second half being that even if such a system of post Samadhi is valid did Srila Prabhupada want for us to accept and incorporate it into our Krsna consciousness movement. Did he in fact order it?
Once the two halves of the proposition have been separated one can immediately examine them separately and by so doing one may immediately see that he need not even bother to go on to answer the second half of the proposition, that Srila Prabhupada ordered us to accept post Samadhi initiation if the first part of the proposition that post Samadhi initiation is valid has already been disproven for Srila Prabhupada would never ask us and would certainly never order us to accept a system of initiation that was completely bogus.
After reading both TFO by Krsnakant dasai and Rocana das’s DOR I have had to conclude that neither of the two opposing parties, that neither the Rtviks nor Rocana das have succeeded in proving or disproving whether or not Srila Prabhupada ordered the acceptance of Post Samadhi Initiation although at this time it seems to me that the argument still could go either way.
On the other hand since I first observed Srila Prabhupada’s validation of Christianity and its Rtvik like practice of post Samadhi initiation as being bona fide and productive of genuine disciples, in as much at least as the initiatory process itself was concerned with, I have never thought of post samadi initiation as being invalid.
In the light then of my acceptance of post Samadhi initiation as valid I am still open to the appearance of additional evidence in support of the Rtviks claims that Srila Prabhupada meant to incorporate this type of initiatory system into the Krsna consciousness movement.
On the other hand it is my opinion that Rocana das has absolutely failed to support his major contention, that which would invalidate the Rtvik proposition from the get go, before even having to raise the question as to whether or not Srila Prabhupada ordered us to accept post samadi initiation as part of Krsna consciousness.
Rocana das has completely failed to convince me in all the pages of DOR of the truth of his claim that post samadhi initiation is “asiddhantic” or bogus, and what completely astonished me was that it appeared to me that he didn’t even try, that he simply put forward this assertion expecting it to be able to ride in upon the coattails of his arguments against the Needless to sayacceptance of the second half of the Rtviks proposition.
George A. Smith
Rocana dasa DOR is a house of card, through his failure to substantiate his major contention that post samadhic initiation is apsiddhantic the whole thing collapses, regardless of whether or not TFO is as ever a good piece of rhetoric as anyone has ever come up with or not is irrelevant.
Rocana dasa has, to my mind deliberately tried to distract you from noticing this because he simply cannot substantiate his position that post samadhic initiation is apasisidhantic, he can’t because Srila Prabhupada accepted that it was viable and bona fide in respect to the Christians. It only takes a single exception to disprove an absolute assertion which is just what his claim that the Rtvik presentation is.
Unfortunately by presenting something that Srila Prabhupada considered to be valid as apsiddhantic Rocana now finds himself among those who are preaching against the acceptance of the validity of what Srila Prabhupada considered to be valid. In other words Rocana dasa himself has now become apsiddhantic.
Rocana dasa contention that the truth or falsity of the Rtviks position rests upon the rise or fall of TFO is a straw man article and even a consideration that the Rtviks have as not proven their case does not prove that what they believe in is false or can never be proven.
That is like saying that the absence of an elephant to your perceptual view proves that elephants don’t exist, and Srila Prabhupada has seen in Christianitys post samadhic initiatory system something that is very real. Rocana dasa position can then be compared to someone claiming that an elephant isn’t real because he has never seen one.
Personally I consider to be an adaptation to time, place and capacity, for here such elephants are not the exception but are indeed indigenous.
BY: GEORGE A. SMITH
Jan 18, 2013 — CALIFORNIA, USA
“An indeterminate proposition can neither be verified nor refuted at the time that we initially encounter it, but there are very scientific processes by which it may be verified or refuted at some later date. This is the case with the proposition that the Rtviks have offered us. The problem that we are seeing upon either side of the issue is that those who are both arguing for or against its acceptance are too clouded by emotional issues to think clearly in regard to it.”
Geoge A. Smith,
I wish to ask a couple of questions on ritvik. Would like you to take the role as a nonpartisan. Lets start from the beginning on a systematic manner with one question at a time. Are you up for it. If yes,
Question No.1
A little bit of history. Who is the person who first raised this issue of ritvik and claimed that Srila Prabhupada ordered ritvik initiation post samadi and the initiated becoming Srila Prabhupada disciple ?
HARE KRSNA
This may be of Interest:
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Mahesh Raja
To: “sheshadas@mail.ru”
Sent: Saturday, 19 January 2013, 15:01
Subject: Hare Krsna!
Dear Shesha das Prabhu
Hare Krsna!
I read your article in Sun Sampradaya. You have very negative image of us who do not accept the concocted bogus guru system in ISKCON. You think we did nothing for Russia. For Russian devotees I have personally contributed a BIG set of Srila Prabhupada conversations thru Visnu Murti prabhu (Bhaktivedanta Archives)Europe(Belgium) you can check it out. At that time it was a lot of money. Other times I posted various mailouts books etc. When the Government was presecuting Devotees I also signed petition and wrote so that devotees can be freed.
Now, Philosophy: Rocana das Prabhu has stopped accepting our articles because we accept the Ritvik system. Anyway – here is my reply:
Reply to Rocana Dasa on his COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of BOTH the Guru and Ritvik Issue
This is a REPLY to Rocana Prabhu on his COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of BOTH Guru AND Ritvik Issue:
LETTER: All G.B.C., All Temple Presidents
Geroge A Smith is a partisan and not unbiased? George still says Rocana is serving Srila Prabhupada nicely (Because Rocana supports the GBC’s guru program members like BVKS). And Rocana says all along that the idea of worship of a departed guru like Jesus or Prabhupada is bogus.
In fact, Rocana says we are like the Christians? Of course worship of people like Bhakti Vikas swami is fine for the Rocana project, and Rocana’s twin brother pal George says Rocana is doing nice work (by promoting the BVKS molester messiahs program).
In sum promoting BVKS program is good because — BVKS is voted in by the molester messiahs project. And George just loves Rocana, because he is still promoting the BVKS / child molester messiahs project, because how else will the GBC / Rocana / George regime have children mass molested, have us dissenters murdered and so on, unless they promote this odious regime?
They are unitedly promoting the leaders of the molester messiahs program like BVKS, who just said he is like Vyasadeva because he needs a Vyasapooja, all because BVKS is voted in by the recoronators of the molesters as messiahs program? And we are not promoted by George / Rocana because we say promoters of the worship of the homosexual and child molester acharyas program are evil.
Yep, anyone who is voted in by the recoronators of molester gurus program are bona fide. And anyone who is voted in by a program which has gurus who are having homosexual acts with taxi drivers in the holy dham are bona fide., And the BVKS program which is burying other homosexual molesters in the holy dham — ok as the BVKS program is doing, they are all bona fide in the Rocana and George program. They love the program that worships child molesters and deviants as messiahs, and they promote that program on the Rocana site. No wonder they do not like us, we are exposing them.
So look at the hypocrisy of George here, on the one hand, any can worship a departed person, and in the case of the George / Rocana / BVKS program they worship dead homosexual pedophiles in the holy dham, and that is fine for the Rocana / George program, but on the other hand, in the case of Srila Prabhupada, we cannot worship him? Only the program that worships dead pedophiles is allowed on the George / Rocana site?
George himself worships a departed woman guru from 500 years ago. He is against Srila Prabhupada being worshiped at the present time, but anyone else can be worshiped. In sum, George is a partisan who is simply against Srila Prabhupada and in favor of other gurus, including the Rocana / BVKS molester gurus. George does not even mention the name of his alleged guru from 500 years ago because he is not even promoting that guru either, he is basically promoting nobody, because worship of nobody is better than worship of Prabupada (which is Rocana’s idea also), that is, when they are not promoting the molester messiahs program of BVKS.
Apart from that, saying two contrary things at once is what everyone else calls “liars and hypocrites.” Which is of course why Jesus says, “Oh ye hypocrites, sons of vipers.” ys pd
SG. writes ; ” Question No.1
A little bit of history. Who is the person who first raised this issue of ritvik and claimed that Srila Prabhupada ordered ritvik initiation post samadi and the initiated becoming Srila Prabhupada disciple ? “.
SG. Prabhu, there is no question of raising this Ritivk Issue because this Ritivik program of Initiation has been in practice during the manifested Lila of Srila Prabhupada. Where is your problem to accept that ? Is that not TRUE ?
Being the Maha Bhagavat Srila Prabhupada is always in Samadhi. Is he NOT ? Why are you concocting and confusing yourself with the word pre or post Samadhi ? Why are you introducing such misleading / mundane words ?
Hope you answer these questions first before you go any further in this regard, SG. Prabhu.
Like Bhakta George has never answered the questions were put forward before him in his other post by various people and myself as well.
Hari BOL.
YS….. Amar Puri.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
George Smith wrote: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
Mark’s reply: I was immediately struck by how Mr Smith identifies the authorship of his thesis using the plural first person pronoun “We”. For anyone paying attention to his activities of late would note that “he” has gone about setting himself apart from all camps. So if “he” is wishing to create and direct yet another camp to justify his use of “we”, I am here to warn such supplicant’s that the cost of entry will be to jettison logic and reason.
This intuition was directly confirmed as the author refers to the following statement as a granting of permissions.
NOI 5 “A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance.”
I believe it was in 6th grade grammar where “we” were taught the difference between the auxiliary verbs “can” and “may”.
The auxiliary verb “may” does not necessarily acknowledge some ability or possibility of success, but is definitely used in an active sense to give “permission” to make the attempt at the activity.
One who “can” perform an activity is considered “able” to succeed in doing it. Referring to some action which one “can” do, is simply a passive declaration of a fact. The fact is ANYONE with ANY degree of qualification in ANY sphere of life’s activities (MATERIAL OR SPIRITUAL) “can” offer discipline to ANYBODY else according to what they actually know how to do. With or without the permission of a third party, as long as the one who assumes the student position accepts the discipline given.
Srila Prabhupada’s use of the word “can” in this instance is justified by the verb (accept) it modifies within the predicate of the sentence (accept disciples) which qualifies the subject’s (neophyte Vaisnava’s) activity. Simply put, IN REALITY, a person is ONLY capable of disciplining another according to what they actually know. And it is a fact that a neophyte is NOT CAPABLE of guiding someone beyond the neophyte level. Thus the reference to it being INSUFFICIENT GUIDANCE TO ATTAIN THE GOAL OF LIFE.
So Mr. Smith, in an act of sophistry, conflates Srila Prabhupada’s simple statement of fact (Neophytes can accept) as being a PERMISSION to do so. In other words, Srila Prabhupada, who came to guide us to the ultimate goal of life, is giving his audience permission to guide people short of that goal. Preposterous.
Next, he equates a Prohibitive injunction as being a mere recommendation based on the word “should”.
“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī.”
Granted, the word should is generally used to indicate advice as opposed to a strict order like MUST. Yet, if we consider the context of the preceeding statement indicating the inability to guide one to the goal, and the context of the hundreds of statements declaring what the qualifications of a spiritual master MUST be, it is sheer trickery to imply that in this case, should is a mere recommendation, which may be taken or left. Not to mention that to disregard the advice or recommendation of a Mahabhagavat is the sure sign of a true rascal.
Fortunately, I did not have to wade through Mr. Smith’s entire exercise in sophisticatd word jugglery to defeat the various strawmen constructed by the “great logician” in order to give himself a sense of accomplishment. The next sample allowed me to decimate his premise entirely.
George wrote: “Surprisingly though, what the Rtviks offer us is not a single proposition but one that has two parts, each of which may have a completely different answer. The first part of the proposition that the Rtviks have offered us concerns the type of initiatory system that they offer us itself, the type of initiatory system by which one can become a disciple of a spiritual master following his physical disappearance.
The second part of the proposition though based upon the acceptance of the first half of the propositions acceptance and its validity is independent of it, that second half being that even if such a system of post Samadhi is valid did Srila Prabhupada want for us to accept and incorporate it into our Krsna consciousness movement. Did he in fact order it?”
Mark: The ONLY factual propositional premise, from the beginning to the end, is that Srila Prabhupada put in place a ritvik system to manage formal initiations. The ritvik system was used for years to manage the formal acceptance and initiation of disciples on behalf of the Founder Acarya of the Society and its Asrama/temples. He never said to stop using the system, nor did he even hint that there was some time limit to the use of the system. And he is on record declaring there must be no change in management.
Logic dictates that for someone to question the validity of such a system, they would need to reference sastra. But NO ONE in the entire history of this debate has ever produced a single statement from Sastra PROHIBITING the use of representatives to initiate disciples on behalf of an Acarya who is not physically present. For years, not only was SP not physically present during initiation ceremonies, he was PHYSICALLY COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE ENTIRE PROCESS, FROM RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPTANCE TO PRELIMINARY PREPARATIONS TO THE INITIATION CEREMONY ITSELF.
Just because there are no ready examples of this activity in the Lila’s of the Lord and his entourage as recorded in sastra, does not mean it is not supported by sastra.
Unscrupulous persons have gone on to invent words to describe a variation of lack of physical presence. They refer to this variously as, post Samadhi, posthumous, post-disappearance, etc.
Yet, if there is no sastric prohibition, there is no limitation to in what manner Srila Prabhupada is not present. No one knows where Srila Prabhupada went after he left his body glowing in his Samadhi tomb. He could be preaching on Venus for all we know. He could be looking over my shoulder as I write this with a stern look on his face for all we know. He could be garlanding the Lord’s swinging seat in Goloka for we know. It is all irrelevant to LOGIC.
It is simple for the simple. There was an order. No one has produced a countermanding order. No one has shown in sastra where following such an order is prohibited UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.
Without such evidence, pretenders to the throne dare invoke logic and reason while assailing the assumed lack of such in those who are actually in possession of those faculties. They have been driven insane by their envy into self delusion.
To demonstrate how desperate some have become, the other day, one Bhakta Jarek produced a letter written to Srila Prabhupada to Hamsaduta in 1969 in which Srila Prabhupada said he was creating an academic framework to be put into place that he considered would educate his disciples so thoroughly in sastra that they would become advanced enough to “initiate disciples”.
Jarek cited this as proof that today SP’s disciples are both permitted and qualified to do so.
He failed to note that the academic curriculum was never instituted in Iskcon exactly as described.
He failed to note that eventually SP’s disciples were trained to conjointly execute every conceivable stage of initiating disciples yet with all the conditions that Srila Prabhupada instituted ALONG THE WAY, AND CODIFIED AND DOCUMENTED IN THE JULY 9TH DIRECTIVE for the FUTURE.
He failed to note that Srila Prabhupada described what it would be like for his disciples to initiate their OWN disciples, yet insisting that it be done ONLY BY HIS ORDER.
To this day no one has produced such an order. Not to mention the inability to produce the aforementioned conditions which would nullify the ritvik system today.
I will end this refutation by quoting sastra in a way which might just demonstrate how important it is to obey the order of the spiritual master when it comes to initiating (or not) one’s own disciples.
CC Antya 7.150: Vallabha Bhaṭṭa wanted to be initiated by Gadādhara Paṇḍita, but Gadādhara Paṇḍita refused, saying, “The work of acting as a spiritual master is not possible for me.
CC Antya 7.150: “I am completely dependent. My Lord is Gauracandra, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. I cannot do anything independently, without His order.
Go back to school Mr. Smith.
I like the essence of what George Prabhu is writing. Let us focus on making the 1st proposition very solid, irrefutable, siddhantic, based completely on Srila Prabhupada’s books, from many different points of views. The 2nd proposition becomes much more easy to accept then for most.
Otherwise for many devotees, July 9th letter appears to them to be “too simplistic”, – “how can this 1 letter change the whole tradition” they say. Something like for many people to accept that the chanting of the holy name of The Lord is completely sufficient in this age, even for devotees it appears to them as too simplistic. So it is simple for the simple and complicated for the more complicated.
So for those who want more siddhantic basis, and not all who do not accept that Srila Prabhupada can be diksha guru now are insincere, let us give it to them comprehensively and based completely on siddhanta, proven mainly by Srila Prabhupad’s books. For us all letters, conversations, everything is Absolute Truth, still the sidddhantic basis ought to be his books still as Srila Prabhupada says all answers are there in my books. Maybe it has already been done by those earlier books written by Yasodanandanan Prabhu, Puranjan Prabhu, Karnamrita Prabhu etc. I have to read them once again.
I wrote to Rocana that we are going to work on it. Whether he publishes or not is beyond the point. So many devotees even in my circle need it. Working on it for the last few days has been greatly enlivening and enlightening. I humbly invite all to come together to bring this about.
Many of the devotees here have been writing for many years, and I have greatly benefited from reading, hearing from all especially Yasodananda prabhu, Mahesh Prabhu, dama ghosh prabhu, puranjan prabhu, amar puri prabhu, George smith Prabhu, and many others. Yes, even from Rocana Prabhu too. If we put our energy together including what has been written and researched already, I am sure in a few months it can be put together, if it has not been done so already.
I propose that we call it ” Guru tattva & Siddhanta in ISKCON- the siddhantic basis of accepting Srila Prabhupada as Diksha Guru”. And I propose that we do not even use the July 9th letter or the May 28th conversation or even different letters or conversations. To base the siddhanta, the primary conclusions on only his books alone. While going this route, I am finding in the last just few days a wealth of understanding to be had and verses and statements that are sooooo perfectly given to build up to this Absolute Fact.
It ought to cover diksha, diksha guru, Siksha, Siksha guru, Bhakti Lata bija, divya Jnana, how diksha takes place, when, how formal helps, or not, how is that connected to real diksha, what is the difference if any for those who take formal and those who do not—–many many other topics all comprehensively and cohesively put together in a book. I am certain that it can be proven from Srila Prabhupada’s books alone that He is the only Diksha Guru till his books are there available and accessible. And as I am going along, I am finding that it can be.
Srila Prabhupada is not going to leave the Absolute Truth in the hands of Tamal Krishna & co. to distort or hide via missing conversation tapes or misinterpretation.
I need everyone’s mercy and help to either work on it together, to proof read it, to give critique, review, or help in research or send previously prepared articles. If not then just give blessings.
This is the current Introduction,1st draft. Pls feel free to review/critique. I would like to hear from the devotees.
INTRODUCTION
This book is intended to lay out the siddhantic conclusion based on which we accept His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada as our Diksha Guru.
This position is one step further than the current incomplete understanding among many devotees that Srila Prabhupada is only the Sampradaya Acharya and/or the Per-eminent Siksha Guru of his followers.
(Note: There may be a little difference in philosophical understanding of these 2 positions, and we will take them up later in this presentation. We have combined them together as essentially they together portray Srila Prabhupada as the main Siksha Guru, but not the Diksha Guru.)
Assumptions made in this Presentation:
1. Caitanya Caritamrita is the ultimate book of knowledge available to us.
(As, Phd., fine details are mentioned.) Hence using this book to establish siddhanta about initiations in ISKCON is appropriate.
2. We are going to limit this discussion only to Srila Prabhupada’s Vani.
3. We are going to quote the teachings of Srila Prabhupada in this order of weightage – Books (starting from Caitanya Caritamrita, then SB, then BG, then all other books of Srila Prabhupada), Articles, letters written to all GBCs/TPs, Lectures, Conversations, Letters.
Books are siddhantic. Lectures could also be sometimes based on the level of the audience. Conversations are more time place, letters more so. But all are Absolute Truth. Hence all would be gratefully used but we will be using only books for establishing siddhanta, and other teachings for subsidiary points or as added proof.
4. We do not use or analyze the July 9h letter, or the 28th May, 1977 conversation to establish this siddhantic presentation. We are assuming that when Srila Prabhupada says all answers are present in my books, then it is so.
The Part I establishes the siddhanta of various topics.
After setting up the siddhanta on each category of gurus, then in later Parts we take up the diff names, different philosophies etc. that are prevalent nowadays. We also take up different terminologies used by Srila Prabhupada and the other Sampradaya Acharyas and what they are referring to.
Part I
Siddhanta of Guru Tattva Explained.
Part II
Applying this siddhanta on various “gurus”, philosophies, terminologies etc.
Part III
Objections, Questions
Part I
Siddhanta of Guru-tattva
Our aim at the end of Part 1 is to be able to list the various conclusions i.e. siddhanta which constitutes the Guru-Tattva.
These conclusions(siddhanta) are universal, not changeable by time, place, circumstance or people. These are constituents of the Absolute Truth, always true, equally applicable but differently applied.
After establishing the Siddhanta in Part 1, we would take this siddhanta and apply it to various situations, philosophies and deviations in later Parts.
To understand Guru-tattva, we will be establishing the siddhanta for each of the following constituents:
1. Diksha
2. Diksa Guru
3. Siksha
4. Siksha Guru
5. bhakti-lata-bija
6. Divya Jnana
7. Hari Nam initiation
8. Brahmana Initiation
9. Gayatri Mantra vs Hare Krishna Maha Mantra
…….
SG. You are of course absolutely right with your question number 1. Kailasa prabhu in his Flaws of the ritvik concoction http://therealexplanation.org/article/flaws_concoct.html answers it perfectly, and thank you him for that!
Kailascandra prabhu:
“ARGUMENT: The Advisor established a rittvik system in his will before he left his body.
COUNTERPOINT: The Advisor also fertilized the ground for the zonal acharya seeds. Rittvik in the West emerged within a year of the Advisor’s will coming to light, and this is probably not a coincidence. Didn’t the Advisor back Ananta Vasudeva way back when, also? He seems to have a peculiar history of seeding innovations that prove to greatly disturb various Vaishnava missions. His mentioning rittvik in his will does not mean that it’s something Prabhupada’s disciples are obliged to follow.”
Any sane man, and this is certainly what SG talks about, will be immediately seriously warned by this simple introductory revokement of the history as it is.
y.s. bj
Nimai Pandit Das says: We from ISKCON, inc., do not consider ourselves ritviks or ritvikites…(http://groups.google.com/group/istagosthi/msg/f7c7bda92ec64b00)
Several years ago, the criminal ISKCON leaders gave us the name “ritviks” and tried to make Srila Prabhupada’s own terminology into a dirty word! However, we called their bluff and wore the ritvik label as a badge of honor!
Since their ploy has apparently backfired, it seems that now they have switched to calling us “ritvikites” instead. What’s the best way to deal with this new strategy?
Also, since the criminal ISKCON leaders don’t want to admit that the ritviks simply want the ISKCON leaders to start following Srila Prabhupada’s own prescription for future initiations within ISKCON, namely “ritvik henceforward,” as the ISKCON Bangalore devotees have been very successfully doing for years, they try to sidestep the issue with ad hominem attacks such as “dangerous philosophical deviation” (http://pratyatosa.com/GBCRES/GBCRES1999.htm) or more recently, “Ritvik tripe…appalling ideology” (http://harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/01-13/editorials9638.htm). These ad hominem attacks, with absolutely no evidence to back them up, only fool the foolish.
pamho agtACBSP, maha kumbha mela ki jai!
This is clear evidence of our kali-yuga sudra society where everyone is suffering but still unworthy gbc representatives of our beloved acharya are trying to be the master.
Therefore everyone needs to work on his own bhajan kutir to build the lost spiritual body by avoiding all these wretches who forgot who the real acharya of iskcon is.
We should not waste time with all this lower class of vedic culture, pretending to be masters without any uttama adikari qualification.
The Nectar of Instruction
by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
Of course it’s disgusting to see all the betrayers of our guru maharaj to keep going in the wrong direction without any shame regarding the huge disorder that they are causing, still in iskcon bbt founder acharya HDG ACBSP,anyway we just wait until all the usurpers of SRILA PRABHUPADA to disappear again who are in the waiting list of Dharmaraja.
Letter to: Bali-mardana
Tokyo
August 21, 1970
agtys ys
a.c. seva das
haribol
bhakta jarek says: … Kailascandra prabhu: “…The Advisor established a rittvik system…”
Kailascandra Dasa doesn’t even know how to spell the word “ritvik.” He’s copying Tamal Krishna’s erroneous spelling from 3 letters that TKG typed in post July 9th, 1977, when there was no Internet or VedaBase available to check the spelling. But he’s in such illusion that he probably thinks that he is superior because, “I’m spelling it correctly and everyone else is spelling it incorrectly!”
NPd: “…Srila Prabhupada is not going to leave the Absolute Truth in the hands of Tamal Krishna & co. to distort…”
You missed the biggest distorter, the BBT & His Holiness Jayadvaita Swami. Thus be advised to check any quotes with Prabhupada’s authorised books, rather than any on-line versions or the vedabase.
The authorised books are available here, free of distortions …. http://krishna.org/series/pdf-download/
Amar Puri says:
20. January 2013 at 6:19 pm
SG. writes ; ” Question No.1
A little bit of history. Who is the person who first raised this issue of ritvik and claimed that Srila Prabhupada ordered ritvik initiation post samadi and the initiated becoming Srila Prabhupada disciple ? “.
AP –SG. Prabhu, there is no question of raising this Ritivk Issue because this Ritivik program of Initiation has been in practice during the manifested Lila of Srila Prabhupada. Where is your problem to accept that ? Is that not TRUE ?
SG — Yes, agree with you up to a certain point. Initially, Srila Prabhupada was doing the initiation directly by presiding over the fire sacrifice ceremony chanting the beads and giving the names. Please tell us
when and why did he change this.
AP — Being the Maha Bhagavat Srila Prabhupada is always in Samadhi. Is he NOT ? Why are you concocting and confusing yourself with the word pre or post Samadhi ? Why are you introducing such misleading / mundane words ?
SG — Alright, please tell us what word or term should we use that is acceptable to you and the ritvik members to refer to this event ” after Srila Prabhupada departure.”
HARE KRSNA.
The advisor was Sridhara, he said ritvik is bogus? Kailash does not even know the history. ys pd
Here is my reply to your question, SG. Prabhu :
SG — Yes, agree with you up to a certain point. Initially, Srila Prabhupada was doing the initiation directly by presiding over the fire sacrifice ceremony chanting the beads and giving the names. Please tell us
when and why did he change this.
AP – SG. I can not read your mind up to which point you agree and to which point you disagree. Has Srila Prabhupada not taught all of US by example doing what he was doing and expected the same from all of us to do and follow his lead Instructions in execution of his mission ?. So, what and where is your problem to accept all the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada ?
SG — Alright, please tell us what word or term should we use that is acceptable to you and the ritvik members to refer to this event ” after Srila Prabhupada departure.”
AP – You simply have to follow the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada what he says while he was/ or is present or / absent. Did / or do we not follow his Instructions ? Where is the need to manufacture word or term to describe the VAPU’s presence or absence ?
Hope it meets you satisfactory.
Hari BOL.
YS…… Amar Puri.
The advisor was Sridhara, he said ritvik is bogus? Kailash does not even know the history. ys pd
Exactly, Sridhara instituted Ritvik initiations in his own Asrama as his final act.
Amar Prabhu wrote:
“So, what and where is your problem to accept all the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada ?”
His first problem is lack of faith.
From this proceeds vision clouded by material false ego. So he either desires to be free of impediments to make things up as he goes along, beholden to authority only when it fits his desires, OR he is a well pampered follower of another so called leader of the same mentality.
Therefore, his mind will rationalize in any way, for years on end, in order that his temporary material desires may be fulfilled.
We have been here on the internet using faithless persons like this for a decade. We don’t set out to use them, but since they aren’t interested in the truth, they must be countered, even though they will not accept losing a debate. The only reason to counter them is to sharpen our skills.
Any newcomers who are casual readers who in their heart want to be cheated and look forward to being pampered in a false guru syndicate and work their way up to kill guru and become guru, will ignore our points as well, no matter how well we execute our arguments.
Those newcomers who have some small but soft faith will benefit from hearing proper arguments, as they are still subject to being swayed by these materialistic rationalizations, as they are not free of anartha and can still be trapped if they are not careful and well tended by seniors who care about them.
Once their faith is firm, and their knowledge grows, they will be the ones defeating the atheists and extreme sahajiyas in devotee clothing.
In almost 10 years doing “internet preaching” I have not seen a single conversion among those of no faith who argued against following Srila Prabhupada’s plain and simple orders. And the more they realize there are infinite ways to rationalize “traditions” and “post samadhi Acaryas”, they become more and more brash and arrogant.
That has been my experience.
Hare Krsna
When the GBC’s 11 gurus were falling down right at the start after 1978, and Sridhara was told they are not gurus only some sort of proxies — because they are having these failures, yet Sridhara went on saying that they have to remain as “acharyas” to “keep the faith of the newcomers.”
Early on I was given a transcript of a conversation between the GBC and SM, where Sridhara had said “none should protest,” so I was told not to protest because Sridhara wanted that (and so I was kicked out of ISKCON because Sridhara did not want anyone protesting his program of worship of illicit sex, drugs, child molesting and criminal behaviors as his idea of acharyas).
Sridhara defended Ramesvara when he was failing, and Tamal and Hansadutta (during the Topanga talks era), and in fact he was still saying Hansadutta is a guru in 1985 even after Hansadutta was taking percodans and was sleeping 23 hours a day. So Sridhara really does not care what kind of person you are, you are the guru once he rubber stamps you as one, and that is why the GBC has adopted his idea that fallen people are gurus.
As for Kailash, he is simply a disciple of Sridhara. Sridhara says there has to be a living guru and so does Kailash. Kailash has surrendered to the Gaudiya Matha. Of course Kailash also attacks Jesus because 1 billion people have begun worship of God under Jesus in the past 35 years, whereas Kailash has not been able to get even one cock roach to worship God during the same period, in short, Kailasha is envious of Jesus, what else is there to conclude? At the end Sridhara tried to make a ritvik system for his own mission, because he knew the bogus guru idea would ruin his mission. He wanted other missions to be ruined and his to survive, thats all. ys pd
Simply have look guys what are you saying and writing is just kind of neurologically stimulated urges of your unrestrained urges of the tonge and krodha, try to calm down, do not offend elders devotees who are properly initiated and serious in their devotion to Sri Sri Guru and Gouranga.
from http://www.harekrsna.org/gbc/black/ritvik-sridhara.htm we may read:
Sermons of the Guardian of Devotion
Volume One
All Glories to Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga
Declaration of the Spiritual Succession of Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math
by His Divine Grace Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Dev-Goswami Maharaj Founder-Acarya of the Sri Caitanya Sarasvat Math
(Gaura-purnima, 26th March, 1986)
According to the desire of my Divine Master, I have been maintaining this disciplic succession but it is no longer possible for me, as I am now too old and invalid. You all know that from long ago I have chosen Sriman Bhakti Sundar Govinda Maharaja and I have given him sannyasa. All my Vaisnava Godbrothers are very affectionate towards him and it is also their desire to give him this position. I have previously given to him the charge of the Math and now I am giving him the full responsibility of giving Harinama, diksa, sannyasa, etc. as an Acarya of this Math on behalf of myself.
Srila Sridhara – Srila Prabhupada
Those who have any regard for me should give this respect and position to Govinda Maharaj as my successor. As much as you have faith in my sincerity, then with all sincerity I believe that he has got the capacity of rendering service in this way. With this I transfer these beads and from now he will initiate on my behalf as Rtvik. The Rtvik system is already involved both here and also in the foreign land. The Rtvik is the representative. So if you want to take from me, and you take by his hands, then it will be as well and as good as taking from me.
y.s bj
Puranjana said:
“The advisor was Sridhara, he said ritvik is bogus? Kailash does not even know the history. ys pd”
The funny thing is the link shows it is you guys ritviks page. More recolections of pada Puranjana under;
http://www.harekrsna.org/pada/documents/sridhara-exposed.htm
It is for you and your duped servants Puranjana.
y.s. bj
Yes, the page confirms what we said, Sridhara is not supposed to be consulted as an advisor because he tends to make fools into acharyas. Srihdara supported the bogus living guru idea, and so does his top disciples like the GBC. Kailash, Rocana etc. … which is why Rocana posts ALL these folks on his site. Kailish is simply quoting Sridhara, you need a living guru, he is a disciple of the Gaudiya Matha, and our citations prove that. ys pd
Letter: Rupanuga, April 28, 1974
BUT SRIDHARA MAHARAJA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DISOBEYING THIS ORDER OF GURU MAHARAJA, and he and others who are already dead, unnecessarily thought that there must be one acharya. If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acharya he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away, he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acharya. His idea was acharya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mission. So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self effulgent acharya would be automatically selected. So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acharya and later it proved a failure. The result is now everyone is claiming to be acharya even though they may be kanistha adhikari with no ability to preach. In some of the camps the acharya is being changed three times a year. Therefore we may not commit the same mistake in our ISKCON camp. Actually amongst my God brothers no one is qualified to become acharya. So it is better not to mix with my God brothers very intimately because instead of inspiring our students and disciples they may sometimes pollute them. This attempt was made previously by them, especially Madhava Maharaja and Tirtha Maharaja and Bon Maharaja but somehow or other I saved the situation. This is going on. We shall be very careful about them and not mix with them. This is my instruction to you all. They cannot help us in our movement, but they are very competent to harm our natural progress. So we must be very careful about them.
Sridhara only made a ritvik successor on his death bed? That proves he knew all along his living guru idea was bogus. Correct. ys pd
Surprise surprise. Jarek true to his past pattern, and inspired by Agent George Smith referring to us as slobbering primates, starts off by calling our writing a product of offensive unrestrained urges.
“Simply have look guys what are you saying and writing is just kind of neurologically stimulated urges of your unrestrained urges of the tonge and krodha, try to calm down, do not offend elders devotees who are properly initiated and serious in their devotion to Sri Sri Guru and Gouranga.”
Yet, in the next breath, Jarek cherry picks 2 paragraphs from a letter from Sridhara to make his point. SKILLFULLY EDITING OUT THE LAST PARAGRAPH WHICH DEFEATS HIS ARGUMENT.
Of course my only motive for pointing this out and producing the paragraph Jarek neglected is because I am a subhuman primate who cannot restrain his anger and tongue. LOL. That’s Ok, I will do it like that.
Paragraph 3: “In the Mahamandala, Sagar Maharaj and many others are also Rtvik of Swami Maharaj and also myself. They may do so, but in this Math and in any Math under this Math, he will be the representative. If anyone cannot accept this, he may leave the Math rather than stay here and disturb the peace of the Math. With all my sincerity and good feelings to Guru-Gauranga, to the Vaisnavas and the Acaryas, Mahaprabhu, Panca Tattva, Radha Govinda and Their Parsadas, with all my sincere prayers to Them, henceforth he will represent me in this affair beginning from today’s function.”
Ok Jarek. try to calmly restrain your anger and have a look here. The Mahamandala refers to MATHS OR asramas affiliated with Sridhara through his past preaching and guidance. Sridhara says that Sagar AND MANY OTHERS are Rtvik of Swami Maharaj AND ALSO MYSELF.
Proving that he was already conducting ritvik initiations through representatives before deciding that in HIS PERSONAL MATH (SCS), and those DIRECTLY UNDER THIS MATH, he would stop because of the reasons indicated.
Now, Jarek, please calmly reply that you were wrong, and that you are sorry that you didn’t include that paragraph since it makes you look deceptive. We all know a nice devotee like you is not trying to deceive anyone.
Oh, and by the way, for your further education, why not read this conversation Sridhara Maharaj was involved in over a year after writing his Ritvik order. He goes into detail about his understanding of what Ritvik is.
It is not to late to come to your senses Prabhu.
http://www.harekrsna.org/gbc/black/ritvik-sridhara.htm
Srila Sridhar Maharaj Further Discusses his Rtvik Position
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj
Discussions about Srila Govinda Maharaj as Rtvik Representative with Doctor Asthana
from a tape recording on 29 April, 1987
Dr Asthana: I am a little worried about Srila Govinda Maharaj’s position.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: I have given him, I have empowered him, to do all these things on my behlaf: Rtvik. I have appoited him to do all spiritual activity on my behalf.
Dr Asthana: But this “Rtvik” word is misinterpreted by many people.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: They may do so.
Dr Asthana: Some do not consider him as a direct successor; they consider him only as a Rtvik.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: More than Rtvik.
Dr Asthana: Eh?
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: More than Rtvik. Whatever it may be, I am giving power. Just as “yauva-raja”. When the King installs his son as King and retires himself, what will be the result? As Dasarath wanted to do with Ramchandra. The King gives all the authority of a king to the son and retires to go to the jungle although he is living with full power and glory.
Dr Asthana: Many people I have talked to do not consider the Rtvik to be the direct Guru. They say the Rtvik is Rtvik.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Rtvik is Rtvik, but if such transfer of power is done then what harm? For those that have got no sraddha, they may go away. They may not accept. I do not care. I don’t accept them.
Dr Asthana: Does Rtvik mean the direct successor?
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Rtvik means the representative. It may be temporary or it may be permanent. It may be partial or it may be full, as empowerment is there.
Dr Asthana: Is the empowerment to Govinda Maharaj now temporary or permanent?
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Permanent. Wholesale – both property and the function – transferred. If anyone has no recognition of this opinion of mine, I do not want them to live in the Mission. I drag them out.
Dr Asthana: But can they still operate from outside and still operate as part and parcel of you?
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: As a revolt. That is a revolt – without sanction – anyone can do. I have deserted them. But they may do anything and everything as they wish and reap the results far from the spiritual world, from God. Unlawful.
Power may be extended and withdrawn also – I want to withdraw myself from them. Those that won’t have faith in my decision. I withdraw from them. It is not a fashion but a question of faith. If they have no such faith in me, I withdraw myself from them.
Dr Asthana: Some devotees may consider, “That power (of Rtvik) was given to me in 1982 or ’84, and he got that power in ’86 so I am more senior.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: No position of seniority. No position of senior. That only seniority will be considered as the qualification – no.
Dr Asthana: I was thinking of sending all the senior devotees a letter trying to make this thing clear so that later on no complication like that comes up because at that time we will be very insecure when other types of interpretation start.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: According to their faith – what to think? What to say? Those that do not obey me after my departure means automatically they will be left by me. Only it is a transaction of faith. No right but faith. If no faith in my word, they are automatically rejected.
Dr Asthana: Some people have no particular obligation of faith to anyone. They go to many persons to gather something. They are just interested in knowledge and position.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: We have no concern with them. We hate them. We hate them: we don’t think that they have any religious line in life.
In a very crude position maybe there will be some collecting (of knowledge) here and there when one cannot understand who is who.
Dr Asthana: They are just like an encyclopaedia.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: They are not fit (to see) that God is coming to him (and) through whom. If I am sincere in my search for God then God also will come to me from His side, and where we meet, he should be considered the Guru. Guru means representative of God Himself.
Dr Asthana: Yes we all agree with it. There are many traps and loopholes in these types of things, Maharaj, and some will play on this their whole life. They will think out how to manipulate the situation.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: The importance of life – life-giving and (life)-taking is not so important to them.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Govinda Maharaj has told some of them, “No, you are a disciple of Guru Maharaj, and I am your Godbrother.”
Dr Asthana: He can leave that instruction and give new instruction. Or we can call the devotees here and ask you to tell them.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: You may classify them into two (my disciples and Govinda Maharaj’s disciples). There are my disciples also, and if what they do Govinda Maharaj does not accept, they will be rejected.
Dr Asthana: Although I have taken both initiations from you, under your instructions I am taking all instructions also from Govinda Maharaj. I am considering Govinda Maharaj as siksa-guru.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Yes, siksa-guru.
Dr Asthana: So, they (the new initiates) should all consider him as diksa-guru. But I know that some people can twist each matter to their convenience and ultimately put (down) Govinda Maharaj.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: The ambitious party and those who want name and fame rather than the substance itself.
Dr Asthana: I want to make it absolutely clear once again. They will not oppose you and it will be beneficial.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: I have told on many occasions, “If you cannot take from Govinda Maharaj and accept him as Guru, you are to go away.”
Dr Asthana: It is advisable to write letters to all the people saying that whoever has taken initiation from Srila Govinda Maharaj will be considered as a direct disciple of Srila Govinda Maharaj.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Not to create havoc now. What will be – after me.
[Srila Govinda Maharaj arrives and joins the conversation]
Srila Govinda Maharaj: They are respecting me, no doubt, but I am thinking that everyone is Srila Guru Maharaj’s disciple. And that is good for me. But what you are saying, that also has some right.
Dr Asthana: But Srila Guru Maharaj has made you the successor to run this Math.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: Yes, that is correct –
Dr Asthana: So, how will this Math run? Once Srila Guru Maharaj disappears they will go away, then what will you do alone? You will run the whole thing alone?
Srila Govinda Maharaj: Not alone.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Whoever will support him, he will run the Math with them.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: I am with my Godbrothers. I am not alone.
Dr Asthana: This is what I am saying, you have to have a certain number who you can consider now as your disciples.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: If anybody wants to take initiation from me, that is another thing, but everyone is coming from outside and they are asking for initiation from Srila Guru Maharaj and I am officiating by way of giving initiation on behalf of Srila Guru Maharaj. This is the position at present.
Dr Asthana: So how to stop this position?
Srila Govinda Maharaj: Yes, we can stop it immediately, that is no problem. The problem is that they have some special regard and respect for Srila Guru Maharaj.
Dr Asthana: I may have some special regard and respect for Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, but that does not mean that I can ask Srila Guru Maharaj to give me initiation on behalf of Bhaktivinode Thakur.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: That is not applicable in this case.
Dr Asthana: Yes. I may have some special regard for Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur, but it is not that I can come to Srila Guru Maharaj and say, “Give me initiation on behalf of Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur.”
Srila Govinda Maharaj: No. You are to think this: they have a special regard for Srila Guru Maharaj therefore they are coming here. They are not coming for me.
Dr Asthana: If they are not coming for you, they should not come here.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: That is your desire maybe.
Dr Asthana: I wish for Srila Guru Maharaj to express his desire. I feel that Srila Guru Maharaj should make this absolutely clear.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: Srila Guru Maharaj said that those who cannot respect Govinda Maharaj, they cannot stay in this Math.
If Srila Guru Maharaj will say, “If anyone wants to take initiation from me, then he must take initiation from Govinda Maharaj and that is enough for him (the devotee).” This statement is a correct statement as per your idea.
Dr Asthana: My idea is that Srila Guru Maharaj has stopped giving initiations and anyone who wants to accept the disciplic succession of Srila Guru Maharaj should now come to Srila Govinda Maharaj. And all the grace of Srila Sridhar Dev-Gosami Maharaj will come more if you worship Srila Govinda Maharaj than if you try to worship Srila Sridhar Maharaj directly. It is like one trying to worship Krishna directly and another trying to worship Krishna through Radharani. I do not have any confusion.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Now please stop.
Dr Asthana: There may be some chaos and confusion, so, Srila Guru Maharaj, please make this clear.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: We do not want any quantity (large numbers of disciples), but quality.
Dr Asthana: I am insisting upon this because I know what is going to happen later on.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: The seed of initiation is only sraddha. Sraddha is the only seed of initiation. They have sraddha to Guru Maharaj – full faith – then they are coming here. Therefore it is very difficult to transfer them to another person. Later we can settle. Now Srila Guru Maharaj wants to stop.
Dr Asthana: If they want to be Srila Sridhar Maharaj’s direct disciple, it is not good for them. Now they should go to Srila Govinda Maharaj. Therefore they should accept this decision.
Srila Govinda Maharaj: Srila Guru Maharaj told it before.
Dr Asthana: I have more mercy from Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur because I am a disciple of Srila Sridhar Maharaj. I have more mercy from him than a direct connection with Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur, because I have accepted his disciple as my Guru. It is the same way in your case, otherwise how will the disciplic succession run?
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: Parvati Devi asked Shiva, “Who is the highest Lord to be served” Shiva replied, “Narayana”. aradhananam sarvvesam visnor aradhanam param. Then Parvati Devi was a little mortified to think, “I am not serving Narayana”. tasmat parataram devi tadiyanam samarchchanam. – this next line came from Shiva, meaning, “Those who serve the servants of Narayana are greater devotees than those who serve Narayana directly.” This is because they serve both of them. Do you follow?
Dr Asthana: I don’t understand the Sanskrit.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: If anyone loves you, and if someone loves your son, the one who loves your son will be considered to love you more than those who love you directly and not your son. Do you follow that?
Dr Asthana: Yes, I follow.
Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj: It is like that. Shiva said, “aradhananam sarvvesam visnor aradhanam param” – Of all the worshippers, the worshippers of Vishnu are the highest.” “tasmat parataram devi tadiyanam samarchchanam” – And even it is the case that those who worship the servants of Vishnu, – they are higher worshippers of Vishnu.” Hearing this, Parvati Devi was very much satisfied to think, “I am serving the servant of Vishnu, my Lord, Shiva”.
“If you love me, love my dog.”
Mark you make me sad man. You are even more cunning denier than your liar master Puranjan. You are worst than cancer, however the initial fathers of the bhogus ritviks are the once 11 zonal acaryas, the “reformed” gurus of FISKCon and the GBC of West Bengal. Without them you would never come to be. Now, when the Pandora box got open we have to live with this tragedy, albeit grudgingly.
y.s.bj
I don’t think you have understood George prabhu and his comparison with primates. The clue of it was generally the principle of marking their territory as animalistic urge non possible to control for them, exactly as it is in your and your masters Puranjana case.
Question for Nimai Pandita Dasa
In your article “Advantages of being part of a Worldwide Society” you have quoted extensively, there is something which is conspicuous and raises the obvious question that is
you state:
3. Three kinds of association- senior, equal, junior. All are required for healthy development and to protect against anarthas.
“The gardener must defend the creeper by fencing it all around so that the powerful elephant of offenses may not enter.
PURPORT
While the bhakti-latā creeper is growing, the devotee must protect it by fencing it all around. The neophyte devotee must be protected by being surrounded by pure devotees. In this way he will not give the maddened elephant a chance to uproot his bhakti-latā creeper. When one associates with nondevotees, the maddened elephant is set loose. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said: asat-saṅga-tyāga,-eivaiṣṇava-ācāra. The first business of a Vaiṣṇava is to give up the company of nondevotees. A so-called mature devotee, however, commits a great offense by giving up the company of pure devotees. The living entity is a social animal, and if one gives up the society of pure devotees, he must associate with nondevotees (asat-saṅga). By contacting nondevotees and engaging in nondevotional activities, a so-called mature devotee will fall victim to the mad elephant offense. Whatever growth has taken place is quickly uprooted by such an offense. One should therefore be very careful to defend the creeper by fencing it in-that is, by following the regulative principles and associating with pure devotees. ”
(Cc. Madhya 19.157p)
Please explain why you have NOT quoted the other part of the purport since the next few lines say:
“If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master. However, unless one follows the spiritual master’s instructions and the regulative principles governing chanting and hearing the holy name of the Lord, one cannot become a pure devotee. By one’s mental concoctions, one falls down. By associating with nondevotees, one breaks the regulative principles and is thereby lost. In the Upadesämåta of Srila Rüpa Gosvämi, it is said:
atyähäraù prayäsaç ca
prajalpo niyamägrahaù
jana-saìgaç ca laulyaà ca
ñaòbhir bhaktir vinaçyati
“One’s devotional service is spoiled when he becomes too entangled in the following six activities: (1) eating more than necessary or collecting more funds than required, (2) overendeavoring for mundane things that are very difficult to attain, (3) talking unnecessarily about mundane subject matters, (4) practicing the scriptural rules and regulations only for the sake of following them and not for the sake of spiritual advancement, or rejecting the rules and regulations of the scriptures and working independently or whimsically, (5) associating with worldly-minded persons who are not interested in Kåñëa consciousness, and (6) being greedy for mundane achievements.”
PLEASE NIMAI PRABHU CLEARLY EXPLAIN WHY. Krsna Kant Desai has a similar problem he doesn’t quote this part, I guess it works against his “plans”
Waiting to hear from you.
Your Servant
Amar Puri
Can please some body perhaps Mark Prabhu help me how to post my article on the front page of this web site as well as on the Prabhupada blog spot of Gauranga Sundera dasa because I do not know how to do it. I am not very up to date in this IT system how it functions.
Thank you.
ys. amar puri
After Sridhara maharaja departed his mission was divided into three basic camps here locally, the Govinda Majaraja camp (Santa Cruz), the Sudhir maharaja camp (San Jose until he blooped out with a sports car and a woman), and Tripurari swami (Mendocino).
The Govinda Maharaja camp declared he was the ONLY successor because he had been appointed to that post, Sudhir said he was the BEST successor because he was doing most of the preaching here (and he was the main person here for awhile), and then Tripurari said he was the REAL successor because he was more advanced than these two because he had “preaching experience.”
At present, the Govinda camp is very small, they have only one small program and there has been some pot smoking problems. Tripurari is way is out there deep in the Mendocino woods, most of his disciples were gay and they got fed up and left him when he keep driving around with a young woman secretary. In any case, he has been abandoned by most followers and he is rarely seen since he is about 135 miles north of the city. Some of his best former followers are now working with us.
And in sum he has a very small following.
So this is very much the same thing as KAILASH CHANDRA, a few people beating the bushes in the country, and no one knows or cares about them. Birds of a feather, the Jedi Master wanna-be club. Meanwhile, we have been making many devotees of Krishna and Prabhupada and our idea is expanding, while these people flounder around going nowhere in a hurry, and they are less and less relevant to the world as every day passes. ys pd
Thanks Bh Jarek, so you state we have no longer to speculate / indulge in guesswork? You, SG, Bh George and Rocana (The Four Musketeers) have emerged as genuine bona fide sampradaya acaryas? And, the whole world is lining up to receive initiation from you and turn this planet into Vaikuntha?
So this is interesting and we will stay tuned watching live your perfomance! Start immediately travelling all over the world and meet global intelligentsia to instruct them what to do next.
Where can we follow online your videos of harinam sankirtan in London, Paris, New York, Berlin, Moscow, Singapore, Melbourne how people’s hearts get melted and their is a run of millions to touch your feet and turn into pure devotees?
Since kali-yuga is right now getting real nasty this is overdue! We need real Vaishnava acaryas who turn this chaos of unemployed overpopulation explosion into paramahamsa. No more hunger crisis!
So plz start your world tour right now, don’t wait any longer to restrain yourself from distributing pure love of God. When do you meet the Pope?
Start your initiation process with Barak Obama, Bill Gates, Prince Charles, Warren Buffett, Shakira, Bernard Arnault, Amancio Ortega, Larry Ellison, Angela Merkel, Stefan Persson, Li Ka-shing, Karl Albrecht. So we can know your influence. Thanks. Best to go live right now so we can watch your triumphal procession.
Don’t forget, India needs clean rivers. Install global cow protection soon! Thanks for coming forward!
Ah, don’t forget self-sufficient farm project, world wide!
Where is your time schedule?
Forbes Thought Of The Day
“When nature has work to be done, she creates a genius to do it.”
— Ralph Waldo Emerson
Rukmini Devi, thanks for the laugh, and I am sure you are not holding your breath for these would be Jagat Gurus to deliver the cosmic egg, but your exaggerated illustration matches their exaggerated hubris very nicely.
Amar, if I were you, I would contact Gaurangasundardasa@gmail.com and ask those questions of him for the best answer.
Jarek if you ever feel you can do more than simply spout another permutation of ad hominem attack and wish to address specific points in the debate that you dodged while taking refuge in those ad hominem attacks, I would be happy to continue writing to you. If not, you may as well not write to me anymore, and if you do, I will be forced to ignore what you say. Thanks and best wishes.
Hare Krsna!
ys
Mark
Amar Puri says:
21. January 2013 at 6:42 pm
AP — SG. I can not read your mind up to which point you agree and to which point you disagree. Has Srila Prabhupada not taught all of US by example doing what he was doing and expected the same from all of us to do and follow his lead Instructions in execution of his mission ?.
SG — In your first posting when you said ” this Ritvik program of Initiation has been in practice during the manifested Lila of Srila Prabhupada.” you give the impression that this process of initiation was in practice
since the beginning of Iskcon until his departure. To this i disagree. Initially Srila Prabhupada was conducting the initiation himself – accepting the devotee as disciple, giving the spiritual names, chanting on the beads and Brahmana treads and presiding/performing over the fire sacrifice. Some time during the later period Srila Prabhupada delegated the performing of the fire sacrifice to the local temple president. The rest he maintained doing it himself. Do you know when this change took place and why ?. Later after some time Srila Prabhupada delegated the chanting of the beads to the local senior disciples or temple presidents or both. Do you know when this took place and why? The rest Srila Prabhupada maintained doing himself until July 9th 1977. Further, my understanding is that throughout this period as and when possible, Srila Prabhupada would, whoever was near to him or where ever he was where initiation was required, conduct it directly.
“Ritivik program of Initiation” in Iskcon. This i disagree because the term “ritvik” related to initiation in Iskcon was only mentioned in July 1977 and was never before that. Not in his books, not in his letters,
not in his conversations, not in his classes/lectures etc.
What i agree with you is that Srila Prabhupada during his manifested Lila did conduct initiation by delegating certain process of the initiation procedure to his senior disciples/local temple presidents. Again, why did Srila Prabhupada do this ? This is an open question to anyone who know the reason behind it.
AP — Has Srila Prabhupada not taught all of US by example doing what he was doing and expected the same from all of us to do and follow his lead Instructions in execution of his mission ?.
SG — Yes, he has. As far as i know whatever Srila Prabhupada has said are in the form of instruction, advise or direction etc. So, what is lead instructions?
AP — So, what and where is your problem to accept all the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada ?
SG — There is no problem. Agree that one should accept all the instruction of Srila Prabhupada. Question is do you also accept all the instruction of Srila Prabhupada, word for word without any interpretation.
AP — You simply have to follow the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada what he says while he was/ or is present or / absent.
SG — Yes, agreed, word for word without any interpretation as it is. Do you?
AP — Did / or do we not follow his Instructions ?
SG — When you mean “we” are you referring to yourself and the ritviks??
AP — Where is the need to manufacture word or term to describe the VAPU’s presence or absence ?
SG — Then tell us what term or word do you want us to use to refer to ” VAPU’s presence or absence”?
HARE KRSNA
Nimai Pandit Das I have not as yet had the time to give your postings more than just a glance, but from what I have seen your ideas show promise and good intent and as soon as I can I wil give them a serios read and a point by point reply.
S.G. I am not interested in moderating any debate between the pros and the cons of the Rtvik issue although . I might consider facillitating such a debate and hosting it’s participants, but as far as I am myself personally concered, I have my own prejudices, which although they do not blind me due to my awareness of them make me far from objective. Thank you just the same.
George a. smith says:
23. January 2013 at 7:21 am
” S.G. I am not interested in moderating any debate between the pros and the cons of the Rtvik issue although . I might consider facillitating such a debate and hosting it’s participants, but as far as I am myself personally concered, I have my own prejudices, which although they do not blind me due to my awareness of them make me far from objective. Thank you just the same.”
You are welcome, Geoge A. Smith and thank you.
The debate has already been going on, we are saying deviants and debauchees are not gurus, whereas Rocana is promoting BVKS and the party that supports deviants as their messiahs, and they are losing the debate. Its simple really, there is no evidence to support their idea that deviants are, were, or could have been acharyas. None. ys pd
SG. Prabhu, I read that you have answered all of your questions in your own writings.
My humble suggestion to you is that please read and re-read all over and over again to get deeper understanding of the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada , and follow to obey all the Instructions in its entirety to make your life sublime.
Hope this meets you well.
Hari BOL.
YS….. Amar Puri.
Bhakta Mark, thank you for the email address of Gaurasunder Prabhu.
I shall post the question for Shriman Nimai Prabhu as well there. I hope, Nimai Prabhu reads this my questions posted here and answer it asap.
Hari BOL.
YS…. Amar Puri.
SG:”This i disagree because the term “ritvik” related to initiation in Iskcon was only mentioned in July 1977 and was never before that. Not in his books, not in his letters, not in his conversations, not in his classes/lectures etc.”
The May 28th conversation also equates officiating acarya with ritvik which is before July 9th.
Also the word ‘ritvik’ (meaning priest) and its derivatives actually have 32 separate references in Srila Prabhupada’s books, only slightly less than the word diksa and its derivatives, which has 41 separate references in Srila Prabhupada books. (All figures are from TFO 1996) Certainly, the use of ritvik priests to assist in initiation ceremonies is a concept fully sanctioned in Srila Prabhupada’s books.
That is what priests do.
Where in shastra, or in Prabhupada’s teachings is it stated that ritviks (priests) do not do initiation ceremonies?
SG wrote: SG — Initially Srila Prabhupada was conducting the initiation himself — accepting the devotee as disciple, giving the spiritual names, chanting on the beads and Brahmana treads and presiding/performing over the fire sacrifice. True
SG: Some time during the later period Srila Prabhupada delegated the performing of the fire sacrifice to the local temple president. The rest he maintained doing it himself. (True)
SG: Later after some time Srila Prabhupada delegated the chanting of the beads to the local senior disciples or temple presidents or both. (true.)
SG: The rest Srila Prabhupada maintained doing himself until July 9th 1977.
Absolutely wrong. By 1976 SP had introduced the process where his secretary was receiving recommendation letters from TP’s, choosing names for the new disciples and sending the name and sometimes beads to a local senior disciple/TP to chant on. He was still receiving recommendations personally in 76 and responding, but that was phasing out. In 1977 he only personally received and replied to 3 letters. In other words, he was mostly OUT OF THE LOOP. By late 76-77 Multiple regional GBC reps were coordinating with his personal secretary in this regard. His personal secretary was recording the names chosen in his book. He was OUT OF THE LOOP.
SG Further, my understanding is that throughout this period as and when possible, Srila Prabhupada would, whoever was near to him or where ever he was where initiation was required, conduct it directly.
This became rare in 1976 and almost unheard of in 1977. He would sometimes conduct a ceremony but all the legwork was done by the time he arrived to conduct the ceremony. For example in the following transcript from one of the few ceremonies he was present at in 1976, Pradyumna (his secretary at the time) had to inform Srila Prabhupada of the initiates spiritual name, and SP repeated after him.
http://prabhupadabooks.com/d.php?g=160373
SG: “Ritivik program of Initiation” in Iskcon. This i disagree because the term “ritvik” related to initiation in Iskcon was only mentioned in July 1977 and was never before that. Not in his books, not in his letters,
not in his conversations, not in his classes/lectures etc.
Again wrong, The word was first brought up in May of 1977 in a conversation. By Tamala Krsna. And a critical thinker would wonder where Tamal Krsna pulled that word from.
During a conversation about his impending departure on May 20th, Srila Prabhupada told Tamala in the presence of others that “The system of management will go on as it is now. There is no need of changing. ” Makes you wonder why Tamala and the other GBC thought they needed to approach Srila Prabhupada on the 28th and ask him how to manage initiations after his departure. Simple wasn’t good enough I suppose.
And during that May 28th conversation Tamala just happened to know that Srila Prabhupada was speaking of a Ritvik system, as Tamala was the one introducing the word into the conversation. We cannot find record of Srila Prabhupada using that word conversationally. He used variations of that word in the Bhagavatam to describe priests. Yet we know Tamala was no scholar at that point.
It is likely that SP must have brought it up with Tamala present at some point in the context of initiations. Not all conversations were properly recorded. And a funny thing….
Between March 1-3, 1977, Srila Prabhupada met with the GBC in Mayapura. The next recorded conversations found in the Folio from March are the 22nd. from Bombay. Yet we know from Srila Prabhupada’s letters that he was in Mayapura from at least til the 20th. So where are the tapes for that 3 week period? What was discussed then? We’ll never know.
SG: What i agree with you is that Srila Prabhupada during his manifested Lila did conduct initiation by delegating certain process of the initiation procedure to his senior disciples/local temple presidents. Again, why did Srila Prabhupada do this ? This is an open question to anyone who know the reason behind it.
Who can know the mind of the Acarya definitively or his reasons, unless he specifically tells you?
We only know what he did. It is plain as day. He took himself out of the loop of all management, and he considered that formality management, no doubt. By 1972 he was begging to be out of the loop of administrative affairs.
Letter to: Bhargava — Los Angeles 13 June, 1972 :
“I am feeling the tendency more and more to retire behind the scenes for translating work, and I want to turn over the management of everything to the GBC and other senior leaders amongst my disciples, so if you have in future any more matters for discussing you may assist me in training these leaders and managers by placing your questions before them.”
Letter to: Hamsaduta: — Mayapur 29 September, 1974
Personally I wish all the existing GBC may be trained up so perfectly that in the future in my absence they can manage the whole Society very nicely and strongly.
Letter to: All GBC Secretaries — Unknown Place 19 August, 1976
His Divine Grace : “I am trying to retire from management to translate but if these things come then how can I translate. I have set up the framework and everything should be done within the framework. Kindly see that this business is stopped at once.”
Srila Prabhupada’s arrangement of taking him out of the affair of initiations is directly in line with all his previous effort to give the entire management over.
And, in his final written directive on the matter in July 1977, he does not give any time limit on the system. He says henceforward. Don’t change my system of management. They will be my initiated disciples.
Can it get any more clear?
ys
Mark
“As we will demonstrate repeatedly over the course of our analysis, TFO’s characterization that an ”officiating acarya’ system was to be “instituted immediately, and run from that time onwards, or ‘henceforward'”, is simply a fabrication. In fact, the July 9th Letter says that now “Temple Presidents may henceforward send recommendation” “to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their temple”. It does not say that they MUST do so, or that they SHALL do so, or even that they SHOULD do so. It says that they MAY do so. In other words, it is an option. Like the auxiliary verb “can”, the auxiliary verb “may” indicates that one has the ability or option to do a thing. [5] ”
DOR by Rocana das
Since around the time of the Americana Civil War the verbs “can” and “may” have been used interchangably to indicate either a permission or an ability. One would think that Bhakta Mark with all of his education would be aware of this before he presumes to lecture us. What I thought when I read his bit of idiocy was “Oh great. Just what we need, another 6th grader thinking that he needs to correct Srila Prabhupadas grammar.”
The problem that the Rtviks have is that many persons (even from within their own ranks as is indicated on this thread) want something more and Rocana provides it by making it painfully evident that TFO is riddeled with errors and is thusly nothing that one should be clinging to.The Rtviks are unable to refute Rocana dasa argument for the exact reason that Rocana claims which is simply because they can’t, not with TFO.
That there is a dim or dawning realization of this and a desire to seek elsewhere for evidence that will actually support the Rtvik position that Srila Prabhupada can still accept disciples is shown in such things as Nimai Pandit Das’s disatisfaction and desire to go elsewhere to find support for their claims.
Bhakta Mark proposes that we devest ourselves of common sense and accept the mental speculations of conditioned souls such as himself and Krsna Kant, thus positioning himself in an untenable position like someone standing upon a tiny iseland of sand which the swelkling waters are eroding right out from under him.
An example of how they must engage in mental speculation to answer Rocana challenges is in how according to their system will they send names to Srila Prabhupada as had been instructed when he was physically present and which is something that according to them must remain unaltered as part of an already approved and operating Rtvik system.
They can only speculate and answer this with their speculation. This is but one of the many instances in which Rocana dasas DOR unmasks and challenges their nonsense.
In respect to Srila Prabhupadas use of the word “can” in respect to what disciples may initiate, the single word actually denotes both a permission and a assurance that the person can actually do what Srila Prabhupada says that he can do, but in this later instance they can only do so after the receipt of Srila Prabhupada’s permission. Bhakta Mark in his post equates matter and spirit, thinking that by Srila Prabhupada’s usage of the verb “can” that Srila Prabhupada is simply stating an obvious truism which is that the lower to middle class devotees “can” initiate, something that is both a material and spiritual thing.
While one can certainly go through the motions and perform the physical rite for any spiritual effect one must have the permission of the Sampradaya Acarya, without whose pleasure although one may go through the motions and utter the words there is actually no spiritual advancement and no spiritual initiation. Without the blessing (and permission) of the Sampradaya Acarya Srila Prabhupda one cannot advance.
Thanks Bh. George. There is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously projects an apparent reality upon a person who seems to typify a negative incident. In this case 35 years ISKCON history of failing diksha gurus.
Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate an undesirable development.
An example of this behavior might be blaming another for self failure.
Projection is a psychological defense mechanism whereby one “projects” one’s own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, and feelings onto someone else. In our case – “the bad Ritviks” are guilty of all and everything.
Any uninvolved observer immediately sees the obvious. The ritviks basically did nothing, it all happened within ISKCON’s repeatedly failing guru system. It is self-evident. Just like any mismanagement where wrong decision created chaos. Those who actually caused it look for a scapegoat.
This is of course easy to see through for any sane person. Anti-ritviks never mention that their idea is exactly that what ISKCON did for 35 years and having caused Prabhupada’s former movement for respiritualizing a misrouted humanity into presently a heavily strikken Hindu spin-off.
In sum more common sense, good judgement, sanity and reason required to understand that there should be time-out for pseudo gurus in order to not totally destroy what Prabhupada built up.
G A Smith: “In other words, it is an option.”
As such it is hardly a defeat, more of an endorsement.
So what is there to answer?
My reply to Rocana’s posts from BVKS: http://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2013/01/bhakti-vikas-mj-admits-he-violates.html
Amar Prabhu, To answer your question – As it was not relevant to the topic at hand, which is to rebuild the association of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples who are not “pseudo-devotees or nondevotees”.
The statement “If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master” is appropriate to be quoted to prove that what we did, to remain aloof from “pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society” and keeping “direct company with the spiritual master” is not un-bonafide and that it can keep the anarthas away too. We do not need to remain under them to advance.
But for most devotees, they need the association of other devotees of like minds to associate, who are not pseudo or non.
We have already passed that stage of disassociation–asat sanga tyaga, long time back. Now, the time is felt by many for sadhu sanga (with proper discrimination), and under Srila Prabhupada’s direction of organization, which is what my article was about. Hence….
I was not thinking of KK and his avoiding of quoting it as I had forgotten the preaching done to not disassociate, “that we will be able to reform ISKCON…”, It was too long ago and not there in my consciousness. For the last 12 years I have been only focused on building positive association, which Srila Prabhuapda’s books are talking about and talking about and talking about and talking about. Hence…
I hope this is satisfactory. Pls feel free to correct here, though I do not come here often.
your servant,
Nimai Pandit Das
We the conditioned Jivas interpret words according to what it suits best to our sense perception under the control of the three gunas.
The Spiritual Instructions given by the Maha Bhagavata Srila Prabhupada have to be understood as it is without any interpretation and the person has to be situated on the plat form of Satva Guna at least to know and understand the Spiritual Instructions of the Spiritual Master. Otherwise the chaos takes place. That is what we see all over amongst the followers of Srila Prabhupada.
First of all, let us stop interpreting with our conditioned mind the words in the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada and OBEY as it is what the mood in the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada intend us to lead towards the proper directions in order to serve the world wide mission of Srila Prabhupada SELFLESSLY ( free from material desire deep rooted for a Prathistha ) .
Bhakta George, here below is my reply to the objections of Rocana Prabhu raised in his recent email exchanges with me regarding this matter of your article which I hope it helps you.
Dear Rocana Dasa Prabhu,
PAMHO. AGTSP. Hare Krishna.
Here below is my reply ;
“Your entire Ritvik-vada is based upon the notion that the
July 9th Letter instructs a post-samadhi ritvik diksa system. I say that
it does not, therefore Ritvik-vada is false.” -Rocana
My reply ; False. Our entire “Ritvik-vada” is based upon the notion that the July 9th Letter officially implements a Ritvik system of initiations within ISKCON. This system was set up by Srila Prabhupada while He was physiclaly still present ofcourse, but that fact alone cannot automatically limit the system to being effective only during His physical presence.
“Srila Prabhupada’s July 9th Letter laid out a process in which he was to be a participant, living, in his body — send names TO HIM for his book.” -Rocana
My reply ; Please show me where in the July 9th Letter it says that the names should be sent to “Him”. Allow me please to refresh your memmory:
“The name of a newly initiated disciple should be sent by the representative who has accepted him or her to Srila Prabhupada, to be included in His Divine Grace”s “Initiated Disciples” book.” – Excerpt, July 9th Letter
Therefore, you have added to alter the meaning of the words “to Him, for His book” to best suit your agenda in your thesis DOR. Whereas the actual Letter only says “to be included in His book”. It never says plainly “to Him”. You will have to yet prove that adding names to His book required His physical presence. What kind of a misrepresentation is that, Prabhu ?
“No. The system he instructed in that letter was clearly NOT intended for after his departure. His own presence in the system proves that.” – Rocana
My reply ; This is based on your earlier statement that the names of the newly initiated disciples would be sent “to Him”, but as I have proved that the Letter said no such thing. Thus this is a strawman statement as it is based on a false pretense. I could not even imagine that a person of your status being a senior dedicated disciple of Srila Prabhupada would do such things.
“the pure devotee’s instructions in the letter cannot be followed when he is no longer present to participate in a system THAT HE DESIGNED TO INCLUDE HIMSELF AS AN ACTIVE PARTICIPATION.” – Rocana
My reply : Srila Prabhupada’s only involvement, according to you, was that the names of newly initiated disciples be sent to Him, but since the July 9th Letter said no such thing, we can discard the above statement of yours as well because you altered it to mislead the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada to make your point in order to simply cheat and misguide me. What a shame ? Why did you do that Prabhu ?
“So who gave you permission, Amar Puri, to decide that the system will be changed upon his departure so that names get sent to someone else? Or not sent? Or whatever?” – Rocana
My reply : We only argue that the names be sent exactly where the Letter orders them to be sent – to Srila Prabhupada’s Initiated Disciples book.
Thus, with all due respect, Rocana Prabhu, I would like to return your questions back to you: From where do you get your concocted theory, and Who gave you permission to change the specific, explicit instructions of the Pure Devotee. ?????
Looking forward to hear further from you. Hari BOL.
Yours insignificant servant,
Amar Puri.
Thank You George Prabhu and others. Last few days trying to update myself in reading what has been happening past few years in the “guru issue” debates. Very interesting.
Seems like the main misunderstanding of “formal diksha by “living” guru-vadis is revolving around
a. the definition as being understood of diksha as the transmission of transcendental sound form as its main component.
b. bhakti lata bija as being given at the time of formal initiation
c. disassociating ISKCON (As body of Srila Prabhupada) from the physical guru presence hence saying he is no more there
d. disassociating the giving of or authorizing or designing practical services from the diksha guru’s overall responsibility and its necessity in diksha.
(other misconceptions have been covered by others very well, more as I proceed. These are hanging in mind currently)
Hence making the actual giving of mantra as the essential function that they do hence their need.
From the “ritvik” side i think the main misunderstanding is about lack of emphasis in their explanations for Diksha Guru is the “Mantra” Guru as defined by Srila Krishna das Kaviraj Goswami right at the beginning of Cc.Adi 1.35. I may be wrong, but I do not think they have explained fully the Diksha Mantra concept while rightly explaining the informal/real diksha process. That the perfecting the diksha mantra is the process of devotional service under diksha Guru, and by his pleasure then by service the divya jnana is awakened by which chanting becomes progressively offenseless. I think there is also a tendency to over emphasize on “being initiated by reading the books” without the simultaneous understanding that actual initiation will happen if one is following the instructions of the Diksha Guru in the books and thus pleasing him. And that the process of initiation can stop or shrivel up if the hearing chanting is not continuously kept pure and chanting is not being done with the desire to chant offenselessley. All these makes the process of initiation look quite superficial and hence July 9th letter comes in the realm of debate. Or maybe I have not read enough till now.
My desire is to come to understand fully, if it is the Truth(I am keeping the possibility open that it may not be), and to explore the possibility that the process of Diksha is explained so comprehensively, THAT THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION TO ACCEPT THAT ONLY SRILA PRABHUPADA IS THAT DIKSHA GURU, OF ALL OURS. AND THAT AS A SIDE ISSUE JULY 9TH LETTER is of course, so natural. I think to try to prove/disaprove the July 9th letter from the angle of past “ritvik” practices is superficial and a play in logic by both sides.
To tell you the truth my heart revolts to hear HDG A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada being relegated to “only” pre-eminent siksha guru or sampradaya acharya or main guru, but I would like to prove it by siddhanta proof that he is more than that. He is the Mantra Guru, the initiator Guru that Krishna Das Kaviraja Goswami is talking about and he is working like that already, expanding divya jnana beyond these arguments, even amongst the “iskconites” and “ritvikites” as per their degree of surrender to his instructions. But I am not going to change the truth if while putting this together the statements and explanations of Srila Prabhupada prove me differently. Let us see. I want to understand Guru Tattva in Truth, and thereby progressively Panca Tattva and thereby please Srila Prabhupada. Debating on these issues is for more skilled operators than me.
Would like to hear your views. Especially on the beginning 4 assumptions that I would like to start with and also the above points.
I am still forming my understandings, so discussion from different viewpoints would be helpful.
Thank You for taking interest.
ys
Nimai Pandit Das
I went through several debates with the “GBC of West Bengal inc. so called ISKCON” followers, NM or GM, mainly here in Poland and my experience with them is in principle the same as with you ritviks(funny thing I was labelled by them to be a ritivik, the only one in here, and banned from all forums till now for that-me being a ritvik vadi, isn’t it funny, especially when you call me a follower of FisKcon? All of it just for being symphatetic with you, which in essence I am still so, of course apart from my being oppose to the formal diksha idea you invented so whimsically. Yes.). In fact all the groups mentioned above are the products of Kali, and they do “cover” the real science of KC. However you Primates like you bhakta Mark or Puranjana das, and many others here as well are distinguished from them (FisKcon, GM, NM) false acarya scam victims, and others by being much stronger though much subtler into mayavada, and thus you do mark your lines of demarcation even stronger than FISKCON for example. So, now is your 5 minutes time. Mark it well!
y.s. bj
P.S.Thanks dear bhakta George prabhu for another piece of pure nectar. Special thanks to SG and Nimai Pandit prabhu.
George, the self-proclaimed master of logic is back from the grave, but again is whistling past the graveyard.
To establish his premise, the first authority he cites is the interpretation of the definition and usage of the auxiliary verbs “can” and “may” provided by his ex-Spiritual Master, Rocana das.
To back this up, George cites an idea from his own mind “Since around the time of the Americana Civil War the verbs “can” and “may” have been used interchangably to indicate either a permission or an ability.”
If you can, you may wish to proceed to the CURRENT benchmark and arbiter of such disputes, the Mirriam Webster dictionary, which I quoted as my authority, not relying on either my nor another’s faulty interpretations as if they were some type of authority. Perhaps George is correct that the standard of using a term properly in context has declined since the Civil War. Would any reasonable person conclude that to be evidence that we should engage in such folly when attempting to define such important subject matters?
In brief, Rocana got one thing right in that the word “may” generally presupposes that the ability to do a thing is present. Otherwise, where is the basis to give permission? Permission is based on hierarchy and superior authorization. How can one with authority give permission to another to do a thing they are not incapable of doing? And if they do give such permissions, surely their authority is bogus.
The word “can” is simply an indication that the ability to do a thing is there. For instance, I know that George “can” create mental concoctions. I would never tell him that he “may” do so in a debate with me. I would like to say “you may NOT”, but as he doesn’t see me as having any authority over his choices, that would be a waste of my breath. He gives himself permission to concoct, and there is nothing I “can” do about it, until he tells me that I “may” direct him as I like.
And then George has the nerve to say the following.
Bhakta Mark proposes that we devest ourselves of common sense and accept the mental speculations of conditioned souls such as himself and Krsna Kant,
Isn’t that exactly what he has proved he expects of us? I would venture the terms, “Psychological projection”, and “hypocrisy” to describe what George is doing. If you “can”, you “may” wish to research the definitions and usage of these terms yourself if you have any doubts that I am applying them correctly.
Lets move on.
George: An example of how they must engage in mental speculation to answer Rocana challenges is in how according to their system will they send names to Srila Prabhupada as had been instructed when he was physically present and which is something that according to them must remain unaltered as part of an already approved and operating Rtvik system.
Mark: Common sense would indicate that as Srila Prabhupada’s secretary was keeping the book of disciples and choosing and recording the names in that book since 1976, and exclusively by april of 77, that upon Srila Prabhupada’s departure, the GBC could resolve to delegate that sacred duty to the GBC secretary, or anyone who they felt qualified. Its not rocket science. Not even close.
George: In respect to Srila Prabhupadas use of the word “can” in respect to what disciples may initiate, the single word actually denotes both a permission and a assurance that the person can actually do what Srila Prabhupada says that he can do, but in this later instance they can only do so after the receipt of Srila Prabhupada’s permission. Bhakta Mark in his post equates matter and spirit, thinking that by Srila Prabhupada’s usage of the verb “can” that Srila Prabhupada is simply stating an obvious truism which is that the lower to middle class devotees “can” initiate, something that is both a material and spiritual thing.
Mark: Again, this is speculation that is not backed up by any authorization. In the 6th grade I was taught that speculation with no authoritative basis is the definition of “concoction”. The FACT is that a devotee of any class spiritually initiates the beginning of transcendental knowledge in another when they share the maha mantra with them and tell them that such chanting will endear them in some way shape or form to the Supreme Person, Krsna. What comes next is different depending on their level of understanding.
The lowest level of neophyte devotee is considered a Material devotee, or Prakrta Bhakta. They have faith that the Deity in the temple represents God, but their idea of God is clouded by ignorance, they are unable to understand the Supersoul and how the Supersoul is present in others, and do not know how to treat others properly. Thus they are only capable of guiding those they might turn on to Krsna Consciousness to understand spiritual life according to their own, which is mostly material. And as we know, if a neophyte is not under the guidance of an advanced devotee, and guides those lower or equal to him, neither will make any advancement, and will they both will be taken away by Maya and become degraded.
It is difficult for some to understand that a person can be simultaneously spiritually informed, yet acting on the material platform. That is why we call such person’s neophytes, and take their ministrations lightly.
Which in itself is proof that Mirriam Webster is correct, that “can” indicates ability. And that Srila Prabhupada was right in pointing out that a Neophyte “can” “accept disciples”. Any devotee has the ability to give discipline to anyone else, whether they get formal permission or not, because their level of understanding of the spiritual science is inherent to their actual level of realization, not dependent on some formality. If I walk up to a person on the street and tell them they have permission to operate on brain tumors, they certainly won’t be able to do so very nicely unless they have been taught and practiced the science.
George: While one can certainly go through the motions and perform the physical rite for any spiritual effect one must have the permission of the Sampradaya Acarya, without whose pleasure although one may go through the motions and utter the words there is actually no spiritual advancement and no spiritual initiation. Without the blessing (and permission) of the Sampradaya Acarya Srila Prabhupda one cannot advance.
Mark: Here again we see the perspective of a Prakrta Bhakta. The physical rite is not the primary vehicle by which the initiation or beginning of one’s spiritual life takes place. The initiation occurs through Siksa or instruction. This instruction CAN be given by anyone who knows even the smallest thing about chanting and worshipping the Lord. And that person can go on to keep those they instruct on the lowest level of spiritual life, which is considered mostly material.
But covered by the dross of George’s last statement is a mountain of Gold. Such a neophyte may perform a formal rite as well, and George is correct that it will not provide any potency. He is also quite right that without the permission of a bonafide spiritual master (acarya) one cannot make any spiritual advancement. Which is why it is perplexing that someone who understands this fact could imagine that such an Acarya is giving blanket permission to any and all neophytes to “accept disciples” by saying that they “can” do so. Especially following this statement
“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī.”
And followed by the next statement.
“Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master.”
Interestingly enough, this passage from the nectar of instruction is not an absolute. In what way you might ask? Here is the first sentence.
“In this verse Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.”
Note the verb “advises” Also note the subsequent repeated use of the word “should” Thus we see Srila Prahbupada giving a meaning universally applicable to all Vaisnava societies in this purport. It is meant to advise us of all the facts, to illustrate the various degrees of ability to give spiritual guidance of different levels of devotees (what they “can” and “cannot” do), and make a suggestion of the best course of action for one’s spiritual well being. The word should actually has different levels of meaning, and in some cases it rises only to the level of a suggestion of good advice.
Whereas IN HIS SOCIETY, among HIS DISCIPLES, Srila Prabhupada’s use of the word should equates to a duty or obligation. If Srila Prabhupada says that you SHOULD do a thing, barring any other instruction which contradicts that or renders it a strong suggestion, you MUST do it, or you are in violation of the 3rd offense to the Holy Names, neglecting the Order of the Spiritual master.
If he says you May do something and thus gives permission, you MUST be certain that he had the authoritative knowledge that YOU WERE CAPABLE of doing that thing, otherwise, you SHOULD not consider yourself his disciple. You MAY still do so, but it will be your own undoing.
So, in the July 9th letter, his use of the word “should” is not to indicate an option.
And as for his use of “may” in this portion of the letter.
“In the past Temple Presidents have written to Srila Prabhupada recommending a particular devotee’s initiation. Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these representatives, Temple Presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and second initiation to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their temple.”
The option is now on the table that TP’s send recommendations to any of the 11 zonal secretaries, OR to Srila Prabhupada’s personal secretary. They have permission to do either, or. But the result will be the same. “The name of a newly initiated disciple should be sent by the representative who has accepted him or her to Srila Prabhupada, to be included in His Divine Grace’s “Initiated Disciples” book.”
In the case that a TP has sent the name to the personal secretary of SP, the name is chosen by that secretary, and they put it in the book they safekeep.
Dear Nimai,
You may use any and all of this research related to Diksa initiation as you like.
The Law of Disciplic Succession
http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/02/law-of-disciplic-succession/
Parampara Means to Accept The Prominent Acarya
http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/03/prominent-acarya/
Disciplic Succession occurs in the Ritvik System
http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/02/disciplic-succession/
The Initiator is Eternally Present
http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/03/eternally-present/
Proper Authorization Makes Anything Possible
http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/02/proper-authorization/
Hare Krsna
ys
Mark
Jarek prabhu: I went through several debates with the “GBC of West Bengal inc. so called ISKCON” followers, NM or GM, mainly here in Poland and my experience with them is in principle the same as with you ritviks (funny thing I was labelled by them to be a ritivik, the only one in here, and banned from all forums till now for that-me being a ritvik vadi, isn’t it funny, especially when you call me a follower of FisKcon?
[PADA: Right you are saying our idea of worship of the pure devotee Srila Prabhupada is bogus, that is what Fiskcon says, that is what Kailash says, yes — you are one of them, and thus you are also citing them.]
All of it just for being symphatetic with you, which in essence I am still so, of course apart from my being oppose to the formal diksha idea you invented so whimsically. Yes. In fact all the groups mentioned above are the products of Kali, and they do “cover” the real science of KC.
[PADA: So take your own advice, go to Moab Utah, where the mountain meets Mohammed, and take initiation from Kailash, since he needs more than the one servant he stole from us over the past 35 years, he needs some new person to blow his nose after he cries reading how we are making progress and nobody is going to Moab to see him. And now Utah has a big smog problem, Kailash went there to escape modern society, and Utah now has the worst air in the entire USA. He has not escaped from anything.]
However you Primates like you bhakta Mark or Puranjana das, and many others here as well are distinguished from them (FisKcon, GM, NM) false acarya scam victims, and others by being much stronger though much subtler into mayavada, and thus you do mark your lines of demarcation even stronger than FISKCON for example. So, now is your 5 minutes time. Mark it well!
y.s. bj
P.S.Thanks dear bhakta George prabhu for another piece of pure nectar. Special thanks to SG and Nimai Pandit prabhu.
[PADA: Srila Prabhupada says Kailash is a mayavada, i.e. anyone who does not name their guru is mayavada, that is your party. Kailash says there is always a living guru, but he forgot to take his alzheimers medications, so he forgot who his guru is? I worship, aaahhhh duhhhh, I fergits! Cannot remember who his guru is, and this is called mayavada. Maybe he should move back to California where our air is 2,000 percent cleaner, and get his head out of the fog? ys pd]
Nimai Pandit Das : My desire is to come to understand fully, if it is the Truth(I am keeping the possibility open that it may not be), and to explore the possibility that the process of Diksha is explained so comprehensively, THAT THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION TO ACCEPT THAT ONLY SRILA PRABHUPADA IS THAT DIKSHA GURU, OF ALL OURS. AND THAT AS A SIDE ISSUE JULY 9TH LETTER is of course, so natural. I think to try to prove/disaprove the July 9th letter from the angle of past “ritvik” practices is superficial and a play in logic by both sides.
Mahesh : VERY EASY. Lets consider the following facts:
1)WHY did Srila Prabhupada ARRANGE to have his OWN murti in ALL the temples in ISKCON for worshiping during Guru Puja UNLESS he was GIVER OF the DIVYA Jnana hrdaya prakasito HE GIVES DIVYA JNANA (DIKSA)
ONLY a MAHABHAGAVATA is accepted as Worshipable Diksa Guru as per Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 24.330. Srila Prabhuapada is THE ACARYA of ISKCON.
NOTE: It is ONLY ACARYA that can give DIKSA because even in NOD this is stated REGARDING ACCEPTING INITIATION from the spiritual master it refers to SB 11.17.27 which is ACARYA.
Nectar of Devotion 7 — Evidence Regarding Devotional Principles
REGARDING ACCEPTING INITIATION from the spiritual master, in the Eleventh Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, Seventeenth Chapter, verse 27, it is stated by Lord Krsna, “My dear Uddhava, the spiritual master must be accepted not only as My representative, but as My very self. He must never be considered on the same level with an ordinary human being. One should never be envious of the spiritual master, as one may be envious of an ordinary man. The spiritual master should always be seen as the representative of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and by serving the spiritual master one is able to serve all the demigods.”
Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.7.15 Purport — Indra Offends His Spiritual Master, Brhaspati:
“By the mercy of the spiritual master one is benedicted by the mercy of Krsna. Without the grace of the spiritual master, one cannot make any advancement.” A disciple should never be a hypocrite or be unfaithful to his spiritual master. In Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.17.27), THE SPIRITUAL MASTER IS ALSO CALLED ACARYA. Acaryam mam vijaniyan: the Supreme Personality of Godhead says that one should respect the spiritual master, accepting him as the Lord Himself. Navamanyeta karhicit: one should not disrespect the acarya at any time. Na martya-buddhyasuyeta: one should never think the acarya an ordinary person. Familiarity sometimes breeds contempt, but one should be very careful in one’s dealings with the acarya. Agadha-dhisanam dvijam: the acarya is a perfect brahmana and has unlimited intelligence in guiding the activities of his disciple.
2)Srila Prabhupada put it DELIBERATELY in all his books FOUNDER-ACARYA. Srila Prabhupada did NOT say he was only ISKCON founder. There is HYPHEN in between the words Founder AND Acarya which indicates HE IS ALSO ITS CURRENT ACARYA.
3|)There is ALSO the FACT that ONLY INITIATED DISCIPLE will be Director.
This means HE wanted to REMAIN the INITIATOR for the EXISTENCE of the society:
Other WILL Srila Prabhupada’s Will
The executive directors who have herein been designated are appointed for life. In the event of death or failure to act for any reason of any of the said directors, a successor director or directors may be appointed by the remaining directors, provided the new director is MY INITIATED DISCIPLE following strictly all the rules and regulations of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness as detailed in my books, and provided that there are never less than three (3) or more than five (5) exeutive directors acting at one time.
4) 75-08-04. Letter: Madhudvisa:
The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I AM IN THE INITIATOR GURU, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This I want.
680312iv.sf Conversations
Prabhupada: Yes, I AM the spiritual master of this institution, and ALL the members of the society, they’re supposed to be MY disciples. They follow the rules and regulations which I ask them to follow, and they are initiated by me spiritually. So therefore the spiritual master is called guru. That is Sanskrit language.
5) Disciple belongs to whoever gives DISCIPLINE TO him: In ISKCON we are ALL being DISCIPLINED by Srila Prabhupada (we receive instructions (DISCIPLINE) FROM Srila Prabhupada’s books. Even the most basic discipline, 16 rounds of Hare Krishna Mantra and four Regulative Principles are coming FROM Srila Prabhupada. Common sense — if you ARE being disciplined BY Srila Prabhupada then it follows you ARE Srila Prabhupada’s disciple. How can it be otherwise?
The MEANING of the word “disciple”
Srila Prabhupada’s Morning Walk, March 8, 1976 in Mayapur:
Prabhupada: “Discipline… Disciple means discipline. The word discipline comes from disciple, or disciple comes from discipline. So unless there is discipline, there is no question of disciple. This discipline must… That should be uniform. Otherwise, sisya… sisya, the word sisya, it comes from the root, verb, sas-dhatu. sas. sas means ruling. From this word, sasana. Sasana means government. sastra. sashtra means weapon, and sastra, scripture, and sisya… These things have come from the one root sas-dhatu. So sas-dhatu means ruling under discipline. There is another English word, that “Obedience is the first law of discipline,” or something. They say, “Obedience is the first law of discipline”? So I am right? “Obedience is…”? That is the…
Tamala Krsna: Yes, that’s more or less what it is.
Prabhupada: No, what is the word, exact. There is an English word. “Obedience is the first law of discipline.” So unless there is obedience, there cannot be any discipline. And unless there is discipline, there is no question of disciple. DISCIPLE MEANS ONE WHO FOLLOWS DISCIPLINE.”
Discipline comes from Srila Prabhupada. We are actually being disciplined by Srila Prabhupada. It is Srila Prabhupada who has given us the regulative principles of no meat, fish or eggs; no intoxication (including tea and coffee), no illicit sex, and no gambling. It is Srila Prabhupada who has made it a regulative principle for us to chant sixteen rounds on the beads HARE KRSNA HARE KRSNA KRSNA KRSNA HARE HARE /HARE RAMA HARE RAMA RAMA RAMA HARE HARE.
Srila Prabhupada’s books contain all the instructions, the guidance required for us to get ourselves out of the clutches of the modes of material nature. In fact, Srila Prabhupada is personally present as his books.
Caitanya-caritamra, Adi 1, Text 35:
“There is NO DIFFERENCE between the spiritual masters instructions and the spiritual master himself.”
Since the instructions of the spiritual master and the spiritual master are not different, one can be the disciple of Srila Prabhupada by following his discipline and can be considered Srila Prabhupada’s disciple. Another point is he can be considered both direct disciple and not direct simultaneously, because Srila Prabhupada is still present in his instruction form (his books). The following example will illustrate the point.
Srila Krsnadasa kaviraja is the example of both direct and not direct disciple simultaneously. (THE PHILOSOPHY OF SIMULTANEOUS ONENESS AND DIFFERENCE).
Caitanya-caritamra, Adi 1:
“A direct disciple of Srila Rupa Gosvami was Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami. The author of Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami, stands as the DIRECT DISCIPLE of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami. The direct disciple of Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami was Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, who accepted Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti as his servitor. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura accepted Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, who initiated Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who in turn initiated Srila Gaurakishore dasa Babaji, the spiritual master of Om Visnupada Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaja, the divine master of our humble self. Since we belong to this chain of disciplic succession from Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, this edition of Sri Caitanya-caritamrta will contain nothing newly manufactured by our tiny brains, but only remnants of food originally eaten by the Lord Himself.”
Caitanya-caritamra, Antya 19.102:
Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami was not actually a direct disciple of Srila Rupa Gosvami, but he FOLLOWED THE INSTRUCTIONS given by Srila Rupa Gosvami in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. He therefore ACTED ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTIONS of Rupa Gosvami and prayed in every chapter for his mercy.
6)Note: It is SUCCESSION MEANS to SUCCEED Srila Prabhupada is the LAST name in Disciplic Succession of ACARYAS:
SB 3.29.17 P Explanation of Devotional Service by Lord Kapila
In Bhagavad-gita, Thirteenth Chapter, it is clearly stated that one should execute devotional service and advance on the path of spiritual knowledge BY ACCEPTING THE ACARYA. Acaryopasanam: one should worship an acarya, a spiritual master who knows things as they are. THE SPIRITUAL MASTER MUST BE IN THE DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION FROM KRSNA. THE PREDECESSORS OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER ARE HIS SPIRITUAL MASTER, HIS GRAND SPIRITUAL MASTER, HIS GREAT-GRAND SPIRITUAL MASTER AND SO ON, WHO FORM THE DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION OF ACARYAS.
68-02-13. Letter: Upendra
My Guru Maharaja was in the 10th generation from Lord Caitanya. We are 11th from Lord Caitanya. The disciplic sucession is as follows: 1. Sri Krishna, 2. Brahma, 3. Narada, 4. Vyasa, 5. Madhva, 6. Padmanabha, 7. Nrihari, 8. Madhava, 9. Akshobhya, 10. Jayatirtha, 11. Jnanasindhu, 12. Purusottama, 13. Vidyanidhi, 14. Rajendra, 15. Jayadharma, 16. Purusottama, 17. Vyasatirtha, 18. Laksmipati, 19. Madhavendra Puri, 20. Isvara Puri (Advaita, Nityananda) 21. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, 22. (Svarupa, Sanatana) Rupa, 23.(Jiva) Raghunath, 24. Krishna dasa, 25. Narottama, 26. Visvanatha, 27. (Baladeva.) Jagannatha, 28. (Bhaktivinode) Gaura-kisora, 29. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, Sri Barshabhanavidayitadas, 30. SRI SRIMAD BHAKTIVEDANTA.
7)Note: It is ONLY Srila Prabhupada that fulfills the WORLD ACARYA position:
Madhya 25.9 How All the Residents of Varanasi Became Vaisnavas
“In Dvapara-yuga, devotees of Lord Visnu and Krsna rendered devotional service according to the principles of pancaratrika. In this Age of Kali, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is worshiped simply by the chanting of His holy names.» Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura then comments: “Without being empowered by the direct potency of Lord Krsna to fulfill His desire and without being specifically favored by the Lord, NO HUMAN BEING CAN BECOME THE SPIRITUAL MASTER OF THE WHOLE WORLD. He certainly cannot succeed by mental concoction, which is not meant for devotees or religious people. Only an empowered personality can distribute the holy name of the Lord and enjoin all fallen souls to worship Krsna. By distributing the holy name of the Lord, he cleanses the hearts of the most fallen people; therefore he extinguishes the blazing fire of the material world. Not only that, he broadcasts the shining brightness of Krsna’s effulgence throughout the world. Such an acarya, or spiritual master, should be considered nondifferent from Krsna-that is, he should be considered the incarnation of Lord Krsna’s potency. Such a personality is krsnalingita-vigraha-that is, he is always embraced by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna. Such a person is above the considerations of the varnasrama institution. HE IS THE GURU OR SPIRITUAL MASTER FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD, A DEVOTEE ON THE TOPMOST PLATFORM, THE MAHA-BHAGAVATA STAGE, AND A PARAMAHAMSA-THAKURA, A SPIRITUAL FORM ONLY FIT TO BE ADDRESSED AS PARAMAHAMSA OR THAKURA.”
8)Note: ONLY Srila Prabhupada will lay claim to be PROMINENT ACARYA to be FOLLOWED because of his books,cds,tapes, disciples, temples so extensive over the world for FUTURE generations OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS:
68-04-12. Letter: Dayananda
Regarding parampara system: THERE IS NOTHING TO WONDER FOR BIG GAPS. Just like we belong to the Brahma Sampradaya, so we accept it from Krishna to Brahma, Brahma to Narada, Narada to Vyasadeva, Vyasadeva to Madhva, and between Vyasadeva and Madhva there is a big gap. But it is sometimes said that Vyasadeva is still living, and Madhva was fortunate enough to meet him directly. In a similar way, we find in the Bhagavad-gita that the Gita was taught to the sungod, some millions of years ago, but Krishna has mentioned only three names in this parampara system–namely, Vivasvan, Manu, and Iksvaku; and SO THESE GAPS DO NOT HAMPER FROM UNDERSTANDING THE PARAMPARA SYSTEM. WE HAVE TO PICK UP THE PROMINENT ACARYAS, AND FOLLOW FROM HIM. There are many branches also from the parampara system, and it is not possible to record all the branches and sub-branches in the disciplic succession. WE HAVE TO PICK UP FROM THE AUTHORITY OF THE ACHARYA IN WHATEVER SAMPRADAYA WE BELONG TO.
9)Note: the Hare Krsna mantra is PURE DEVOTEE Srila Prabhupada’s Property to give and July 9th 1977 ORDER is simply discharge MANAGEMENT DUTY of giving conditioned souls Ritviks the privilege OF SERVICE to give Holy Name on BEHALF of PURE devotee Srila Prabhupada. The holy name is NOT conditioned souls property this is WHY it is given ON BEHALF of Srila Prabhupada:
SB 7.9.42 P Prahlada Pacifies Lord Nrsimhadeva with Prayers
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura also sings, tumi ta’ thakura, tomara kukura, baliya janaha more: “O my Lord, O Vaisnava, please consider me your dog.” One must become the dog of a Vaisnava, A PURE DEVOTEE, FOR A PURE DEVOTEE CAN DELIVER KRSNA WITHOUT DIFFICULTY. KRSNA SE TOMARA, KRSNA DITE PARA. KRSNA IS THE PROPERTY OF HIS PURE DEVOTEE, AND IF WE TAKE SHELTER OF A PURE DEVOTEE, HE CAN DELIVER KRSNA VERY EASILY.
10)Note: the Ritvik System is SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT so the issue of HOLY NAME to be given on BEHALF of Srila Prabhupada the PURE devotee MUST continue as per Srila Prabhupada’s ORDER:
Other WILL Srila Prabhupada’s Will
2. Each temple will be an ISKCON property and will be managed by three executive directors. THE SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT WILL CONTINUE AS IT IS NOW AND THERE IS NO NEED OF ANY CHANGE.
11)Note: ONE INITIATOR Srila Prabhupda.There may be many spiritual masters who instruct, but the initiator spiritual master is one. Holy Name is given ON BEHALF of Srila Prabhupada by Ritvik REPRESENTATIVES:
KB 80 The Meeting of Lord Krsna with Sudama Brahmana
Our next spiritual master is he who initiates us into transcendental knowledge, and he is to be worshiped as much as I am. The spiritual master may be more than one. The spiritual master who instructs the disciples about spiritual matters is called siksa-guru, and the spiritual master who initiates the disciple is called diksa-guru. Both of them are My representatives. THERE MAY BE MANY SPIRITUAL MASTERS WHO INSTRUCT, BUT THE INITIATOR SPIRITUAL MASTER IS ONE.
12)Note: ONLY the Mahabhagavata Srila Prabhupada is to be ACCEPTED as Diksa Guru otherwise it is 3rd OFFENSE in chanting:
NoD 8 Offenses to Be Avoided
The offenses against the chanting of the holy name are as follows: (3) TO DISOBEY THE ORDERS OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER.
Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
MAHA-BHAGAVATA-srestho
brahmano vai gurur nrnam
sarvesam eva lokanam
asau pujyo yatha harih
maha-kula-prasuto ‘pi
sarva-yajnesu diksitah
sahasra-sakhadhyayi ca
na guruh syad avaisnavah
((The guru MUST be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru MUST be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people. ….When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. ONLY SUCH A PERSON IS ELIGIBLE TO OCCUPY THE POST OF A GURU.))
Diksa Process:
13)Note: OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE is the Ritvik Representative as per July 9th 1977 Order Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
Similarly, a disciple’s qualifications must be observed by the spiritual master before he is accepted as a disciple. IN OUR KRSNA CONSCIOUSNESS MOVEMENT, THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT ONE MUST BE PREPARED TO GIVE UP THE FOUR PILLARS OF SINFUL LIFE-ILLICIT SEX, MEAT-EATING, INTOXICATION AND GAMBLING. IN WESTERN COUNTRIES ESPECIALLY, WE FIRST OBSERVE WHETHER A POTENTIAL DISCIPLE IS PREPARED TO FOLLOW THE REGULATIVE PRINCIPLES. THEN HE IS GIVEN THE NAME OF A VAISNAVA SERVANT AND INITIATED TO CHANT THE HARE KRSNA MAHA-MANTRA, AT LEAST SIXTEEN ROUNDS DAILY. In this way the disciple renders devotional service under the guidance of the spiritual master OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR. HE IS THEN RECOMMENDED FOR A SECOND INITIATION, DURING WHICH A SACRED THREAD IS OFFERED AND THE DISCIPLE IS ACCEPTED AS A BONA FIDE BRAHMANA.
14)770528me.vrn Conversations
Tamala Krsna: Of course, IF SOMEONE HAS A FALLDOWN, just like in the past some GBC men have fallen down…
Prabhupada: HE SHOULD BE REPLACED.
Tamala Krsna: Then he should be replaced. But that’s a serious falldown, not some minor discrepancy.
Prabhupada: THEY MUST BE ALL IDEAL ACARYA-LIKE. IN THE BEGINNING WE HAVE DONE FOR WORKING. Now we should be very cautious. ANYONE WHO IS DEVIATING, HE CAN BE REPLACED.
15)Note: the FORMALITY INITIATION of giving Holy Name on Behalf of Srila Prabhupada and fire sacrifice are just SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT issues: That is not very important thing
761016iv.cha Conversation Interviewer: What is the procedure of the movement? Do you initiate yourself all the disciples or do your other disciples also do that?
Prabhupada: Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge. (break) …knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing.
16)Srila Prabhupada gives Divya-jnana(DIKSA). Divya means TRANSCENDENTAL and Jnana means KNOWLEDGE Hrde means heart and Prokasito means revealed just as in prakasa – manifested Krsna becomes manifest in the heart of the Pure Devotee.
760711CC.NY Lectures
Prabhupada: Divya-jnana hrde prokasito. What is that divya-jnana? Divya-jnana is that we are all servant of Krsna, and our only business is to serve Krsna. Divya-jnana. This is divya-jnana. It is not difficult at all. Simply we have… We have become servant of so many things–servant of society, servant of community, servant of country, servant of wife, servant of children, servant of dog and so many. “Now let me become servant of Krsna.” This is divya-jnana. Diksa. Diksa means from this divya-jnana. That is di. And ksa means ksapayati, expands.
When at the stage of Madhyama Adhikari one is RECEPIENT of THAT Diksa in the HEART from SRILA PRABHUPADA he becomes a SERVANT OF KRSNA. He relishes a particular mellow (Rasa) of his relationship with Krsna. This point HE SEES KRSNA and HIS RELATIONSHIP (svarupa) is established. So it is not so CHEAP to be Diksa guru.
Madhya 8.83 Talks Between Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Ramananda Raya
The purport in presenting this verse necessitates explaining the comparative positions of the transcendental mellows known as santa, dasya, sakhya, vatsalya and madhurya. All these rasas, or mellows, are situated on the transcendental platform. Pure devotees take shelter of one of them and thus progress in spiritual life. Actually one can take shelter of such spiritual mellows only when one is completely uncontaminated by material attachment. When one is completely free from material attachment, the feelings of the transcendental mellows are awakened in the heart of the devotee. That is svarupa-siddhi, the perfection of one’s eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord. Svarupa-siddhi, the eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord, may be situated in one of the transcendental mellows.
Note: When Krsna is TRANSFERRED FROM Pure devotees HEART to another Pure devotee then there is DIKSA. Divya jnana revealtion of ones CONSTITUTIONAL positon Svarupa is UNDERSTOOD. This may take many many many births — NOT so cheap. This is why In Guru Puja to Srila Prabhupada we sing Janme janme prabhu sei:
760805BG.PAR Lectures
Prabhupada: Yes, that arrangement will be done, you go on with your business. We are singing this song daily. Why do you forget? Cakhu-dan dilo jei **janme janme prabhu sei**. ONE WHO HAS OPENED THE EYES, **HE’LL REMAIN MY MASTER LIFE AFTER LIFE**.
Note: Srila Prabhupada is WITH US TO GUIDE US through difficult journey of transmigration cycle to attaining Back to Godhead IF we follow him. Bilvamangal Thakura’s Spiritual master came thru a prostitute to deliver him so Srila Prabhupada is also SO POWERFUL to help us:
SB 3.15.24 P Description of the Kingdom of God
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO GO BACK TO GODHEAD IN ONE LIFE, but in the human form one should at least understand the goal of life and begin Krsna consciousness.
SB 10.2.18 P Prayers by the Demigods for Lord Krsna in the Womb
As indicated here by the word manastah, the Supreme Personality of Godhead was transferred from the core of Vasudeva’s mind or heart to the core of the heart of Devaki. We should note carefully that the Lord was transferred to Devaki not by the ordinary way for a human being, but by diksa, initiation. Thus the importance of initiation is mentioned here. UNLESS ONE IS INITIATED BY THE RIGHT PERSON, WHO ALWAYS CARRIES WITHIN HIS HEART THE SUPREME PERSONALITY OF GODHEAD, ONE CANNOT ACQUIRE THE POWER TO CARRY THE SUPREME GODHEAD WITHIN THE CORE OF ONE’S OWN HEART.
Adi 1.100 The Spiritual Masters
Through the actions of THESE TWO BHAGAVATAS THE LORD INSTILLS THE MELLOWS OF TRANSCENDENTAL LOVING SERVICE INTO THE HEART OF A LIVING BEING, and thus the Lord, in the heart of His devotee, comes under the control of the devotee’s love.
Note:Does it say VAPU is the requirement – NO! Vapuvadis have CONCOCTED you need VAPU for transmission of DIKSA
SB 1.7.22 P The Son of Drona Punished
The spiritual master, BY HIS WORDS, CAN PENETRATE INTO THE HEART OF THE SUFFERING PERSON AND INJECT KNOWLEDGE
TRANSCENDENTAL, which alone can extinguish the fire of material existence.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SPIRITUAL MASTER’S INSTRUCTIONS AND THE SPIRITUAL MASTER HIMSELF. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple.
690113LE.LA Lectures
Similarly, arcye sila-dhir gurusu na… Gurusu means those who are acaryas, to accept their body as ordinary man’s body, this is denied in the sastras. SO ALTHOUGH A PHYSICAL BODY IS NOT PRESENT, THE VIBRATION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AS THE PRESENCE OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER, VIBRATION. WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE SPIRITUAL MASTER, THAT IS LIVING.
Note: It is FACTUALLY Srila Prabhupada who CONSTANTLY INSTRUCTS us through his books , tapes, cds. “becomes his initiating spiritual master later on.” indicates the position of Srila Prabhupada as the INITIATOR.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
Generally a spiritual master who CONSTANTLY INSTRUCTS a disciple in spiritual science becomes his INITIATING SPIRITUAL MASTER LATER ON.
Note: Srila Prabhupada initiates at Madhyama Adhikari (spiritual initiation see NOI 5) stage your svarupa(constitutional position) is understood and karma is burned off:
Bg 4.37 P Transcendental Knowledge
Perfect knowledge of self and Superself and of their relationship is compared herein to fire. This fire not only burns up all reactions to impious activities, but also all reactions to pious activities, turning them to ashes. There are many stages of reaction: reaction in the making, reaction fructifying, reaction already achieved, and reaction a priori. BUT KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION OF THE LIVING ENTITY BURNS EVERYTHING TO ASHES. When one is in complete knowledge, all reactions, both a priori and a posteriori, are consumed. In the Vedas it is stated, ubhe uhaivaisa ete taraty amrtah sadhv-asadhuni: “One overcomes both the pious and impious interactions of work.”
Note: Transcendental knowledge your (constitutional position) svarupa is known reactions of Karma burned off:
Madhya 15.108 The Lord Accepts Prasada at the House of Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya
“DIKSA IS THE PROCESS BY WHICH ONE CAN AWAKEN HIS TRANSCENDENTAL KNOWLEDGE AND VANQUISH ALL REACTIONS CAUSED BY SINFUL ACTIVITY. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows this process as diksa.”
Antya 4.192 T Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
DIKSA-KALE bhakta kare atma-samarpana
sei-kale krsna tare kare atma-sama
Antya 4.192 Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
“At the time of initiation, when a devotee fully surrenders unto the service of the Lord, Krsna accepts him to be as good as Himself.
Antya 4.193 Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
“When the devotee’s body is thus transformed into spiritual existence, the devotee, in that transcendental body, renders service to the lotus feet of the Lord.
Antya 4.194 Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
” ‘The living entity who is subjected to birth and death, when he gives up all material activities dedicating his life to Me for executing My order, and thus acts according to My direction, at that time he reaches the platform of immortality, and becomes fit to enjoy the spiritual bliss of exchange of loving mellows with Me.’
Antya 4.194P Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
This is a quotation from Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.29.34). At the time of initiation, a devotee gives up all his material conceptions. Therefore, being in touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is situated on the transcendental platform. Thus having attained knowledge and the spiritual platform, he always engages in the service of the spiritual body of Krsna.
NoI 5
A madhyama-adhikari has received spiritual initiation from the spiritual master and has been fully engaged by him in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. The madhyama-adhikari should be considered to be situated midway in devotional service.
“We request you to chant HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA, KRISHNA KRISHNA HARE HARE, HARE RAMA HARE RAMA, RAMA RAMA HARE HARE, and your life will be sublime.”
July 9th 1977 Ritvik Order is a Direct ORDER OF Srila Prabhupada it HIS direction “his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple.” WHY Srila Prabhupada’s words should be the pride of the disciple? BECAUSE “THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SPIRITUAL MASTER’S INSTRUCTIONS AND THE SPIRITUAL MASTER HIMSELF”
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SPIRITUAL MASTER’S INSTRUCTIONS AND THE SPIRITUAL MASTER HIMSELF. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple.
So… July 9th 1977 Ritvik ORDER from Srila Prabhupada you can bite it, you can chew it, you can suck it, you can spit it, juggle your words at it, manipulate it, BUT as it IS Srila Prabhupada YOU will NEVER be able to DEFEAT IT.
The RITVIK Order STANDS AS IT IS!!!!!
ALL GLORIES TO SRILA PRABHUPADA: OUR ETERNAL BONAFIDE DIKSA GURU FOR ISKCON!!!!!
The CON men want to REPLACE Srila Prabhupada as Diksa Guru of ISKCON just see their AUDICITY!
Simply bunch of hypocrites posing as devotees.
Hare Krsna!
Simply reading in Srimad Bhagavatam by His Divine Grace all the purports containing the very term “guru” we will see how bhogus and dramatical this whole rittvik vadi dullnes is., but ;”… The guru, or the bona fide spiritual master, is competent to teach the disciple in the right path with reference to the context of all authentic Vedic literature. He does not attempt to juggle words to bewilder the student. The bona fide spiritual master, by his personal activities, teaches the disciple the principles of devotional service. Without personal service, one would go on speculating like the impersonalists and dry speculators life after life and would be unable to reach the final conclusion. By following the instructions of the bona fide spiritual master in conjunction with the principles of revealed scriptures, the student will rise to the plane of complete knowledge, which will be exhibited by development of detachment from the world of sense gratification…” (S.B. 2.9.37)
y.s.bj
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I have a theoretical question……Although we can see that many GBC gurus were bogus by their falldown from spiritual life, there are others gurus who are not so grossly bogus – ie, they are not seen falling down in the matter of sense control. It then becomes very difficult to judge their genuinety.. Many of these gurus get a large following of disciples,even, they are highly respected by many people…just like I mean some people like Bhakti Sundar Govinda Maharaj.So how can I know, by applying my minute intelligence about who is bogus,and who is not? How can we judge whether someone compares to Srila Prabhupada or not,just by some apparent contradictions in their speeches…..i mean they may not be contradictions, right. I mean to say that when there are some apparent contradictions in Srila Prabhupada’s book(ex.on the matter of initiation), we understand these apparent contradictions by considering the context in which Prabhupada spoke,the purports in his other books,etc. and then we come to a conclusion that there is no contradiction.But when some of these gurus(ie. who don’t grossly fall down and are also respected by many) make some apparent contradiction, how can we readily conclude that they are envious, or that they don’t know philosophy……..
Another question…is the disciple of a non-liberated person (like Sridhara Maharaj) always necessarily a conditioned soul?
I hope I have stated my doubts clearly. I do not mean to support any of these gurus,but only want to get the discerning intelligence to judge the genuine from the bogus…I will be very grateful if someone can answer my question.
Your servant,
Santosh
Another dircetly clear indication, in fact direct order to every serious follower, disciple or just a follower. “Prabhupada: If you are incapable of raising yourself to the standard of becoming spiritual master, that is not your spiritual master’s fault, that is your fault. He wants, just like Caitanya Mahaprabhu said, amara ajñaya guru haña [Cc. Madhya 7.128], By My order, every one of you become a guru. If one cannot carry out the order of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, then how he can become a guru? The first qualification is that he must be able to carry out the order of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Then he becomes guru. So that carrying out the order of Caitanya Mahaprabhu depends on one’s personal capacity. amara ajñaya guru haña. Acceptance of Caitanya Mahaprabhu as Krsna, that is there in the sastra, in the Upanisads, in Mahabharata, in Bhagavata.” (Room Converstaion June 29, 1972, San Diego)
Rejecting the order what we did?
I like to quote again excerpts from Kailasa candra prabhus Flaws in the Ritvik Concoction; “The rittvik-in-absentia acharya, however, becomes a surreptitious spiritual master, entering the façade of the house of guru through the back door. He says that he’s initiating you on Prabhupada’s behalf, but you need him to perform the fire sacrifice and to give you all another name.
DECEPTION PLUS DECEPTION EQUALS GREATER DECEPTION
On one side, you have the camp with cheap gurus and cheap disciples. On the other side, you have the faction that grants mass initiations on behalf of a non-manifest acharya, more or less automatically to anybody who wants one. On one side, you have gurus who are supposed to be Absolute when they are not, and, on the other side, you have initiations that are considered formalities carried out by a new Eastern version of priests. On one side, you have a manifest hierophant who is not self-realized but pretends to be. And, on the other side, you’re told that there are no more manifest gurus to be found and the non-manifest sampradaya-acharya initiates into perpetuity.”
y.s. bj
Thnak You Mahesh Prabhu. This is what we have been discussing today. Pls below…
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is none other than the combined form of Śrī Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. He is the life of those devotees who strictly follow in the footsteps of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī are the two principal followers of Śrīla Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī, who acted as the most confidential servitor of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu, known as Viśvambhara in His early life. A direct disciple of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī was Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī. The author of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Śrīla Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, stands as the direct disciple of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī.
(Cc. Adi Chapter 1, Intro)
Caitanya-caritamra, Antya 19.102:
Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami was not actually a direct disciple of Srila Rupa Gosvami, but he followed the instructions given by Srila Rupa Gosvami in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. He therefore acted according to the directions of Rupa Gosvami and prayed in every chapter for his mercy.
Cc. Adi Chapter 1
TEXT 36
TRANSLATION
The instructing spiritual masters are Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmī, Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī, Śrī Bhaṭṭa Raghunātha, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī, Śrī Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī and Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī.
TEXT 37
ei chaya guru–śikṣā-guru ye āmāra
tāṅ’-sabāra pāda-padme koṭi namaskāra
SYNONYMS
ei—these; chaya—six; guru—spiritual masters; śikṣā-guru—instructing spiritual masters; ye—who are; āmāra—my; tāṅ’-sabāra—of all of them; pāda-padme—unto the lotus feet; koṭi—ten million; namaskāra—respectful obeisances.
TRANSLATION
These six are my instructing spiritual masters, and therefore I offer millions of respectful obeisances unto their lotus feet.
TEXT 40
nityānanda-rāya–prabhura svarūpa-prakāśa
tāṅra pāda-padma vando yāṅra muñi dāsa
SYNONYMS
nityānanda-rāya—Lord Nityānanda; prabhura—of the Supreme Lord; sva-rūpa-prakāśa—personal manifestation; tāṅra—of Him; pāda-padma—unto the lotus feet; vando—I offer respectful obeisances; yāṅra—of whom; muñi—I am; dāsa—the servant.
TRANSLATION
Śrīla Nityānanda Rāma is the plenary manifestation of the Lord, and I have been initiated by Him. I therefore offer my respectful obeisances unto His lotus feet.
THE DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION
Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ. (Bhagavad-gīta, 4.2) This Bhagavad-gītā As It Is is received through this disciplic succession:
1) Kṛṣṇa, 2) Brahmā, 3) Nārada; 4) Vyāsa, 5) Madhva, 6) Padmanābha, 7) Nṛhari, 8) Mādhava, 9) Akṣobhya, 10) Jayatīrtha, 11) Jñānasindhu, 12) Dayānidhi, 13) Vidyānidhi, 14) Rājendra, 15) Jayadharma, 16) Puruṣottama, 17) Brahmaṇyatīrtha, 18) Vyāsatīrtha, 19) Lakṣmīpati, 20) Mādhavendra Purī, 21) Īśvara Purī, (Nityānanda, Advaita), 22) Lord Caitanya, 23) Rūpa (Svarūpa, Sanātana), 24) Raghunātha, Jīva, 25) Kṛṣṇadāsa, 26) Narottama, 27) Viśvanātha, 28) (Baladeva) Jagannātha, 29) Bhaktivinode, 30) Gaurakiśora, 31) Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī, 32) His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda.
IF NITYANANDA PRABHU IS THE DIKSHA GURU OF KRISHNADAS KAVIRAJA GOSWAMI, WHY IS HE LISTED AFTER HIS INSTRUCTING GURUS?
Srila Prabhupada is a Vaisnava, a pure devotee of God, he is never “non-manifest“, even though he passed away from our material vision in 1977. The permanency of the Vaisnava is expressed by the nineteenth-century teacher Bhaktivinoda Thakura on the tomb of the great saint Thakura Haridasa at Puri, India:
A bona fide spiritual master is always manifest because his instructions are eternal.
This is a flaw in the reasoning of Kailasa Candra and his disciples.
So far I know Kailasacandra prabhu has not disciples yet. He is not considering himself a guru, certainly not without the direct admission of His Sri Guru Srila Prabhupada, maybe I am wrong for now, since I haven’t contacted him now for more than 1.5 year ago. I would suggest to you bhakta Hugh before you spread such things in writing simply ask him. What has been changed in the guru tattva eternal truths since the very appearance or disapperance of Srila Prabhupada? I am not an expert, but I guess that nothing, however all those secrets are acintya or transcendental in nature and therefore the acintya energies are called acintya, or incomprehensible. It is not, that simply citing the spiritual master like eternal associate of the Lord like Sacitananda Bhaktivinod Thakur makes us automatically understand Him and His acintya thoughts. Obviously you ritiviks share the notion of being granted such ability because of your allegedly superior admittances to the guru tattva confidential insides since being a part or member of the so called ritvik movement / institution/ or should I rather say one of the ritivk multifarious sects?
y.s.bj
Jarek: So far I know Kailasacandra prabhu has not disciples yet.
[PD: Well he stole one of our people here when he visited Berkeley, and he re-initiated him with the name Riktaharsana dasa. Kailash also stole the money from the Berkeley farm by claiming he was going to take care of half the cows, those cows have since vanished along with the money.
He was living in an apartment shortly after that, no cows in sight. The person who took the other half bought some land and put the cows there and he takes care of them even today, hence Kailash is known around here as the cattle thief rustler.
He was also married to Jadurani and he treated her like an animal, he was talking to her like she was a dog, I saw that personally, he has a problem of feeling extreme dominance over women.]
JP: He is not considering himself a guru, certainly not without the direct admission of His Sri Guru Srila Prabhupada, maybe I am wrong for now, since I haven’t contacted him now for more than 1.5 year ago.
[PD: OK so if Prabhupada is not the guru, and Kailash is not the guru, then there is no guru in their system, that is what we said and now you admit. They are without any current diksha guru, which is called pasandi-vada in the Vedas, renegade offenders.]
JP: I would suggest to you bhakta Hugh before you spread such things in writing simply ask him.
[PD: I have already seen Kailasha’s writings, he says the ritvik idea is dangerous, in other words, he has extreme hatred for having Srila Prabhupada being worshiped, which is why Rocana promotes him.]
JP: What has been changed in the guru tattva eternal truths since the very appearance or disapperance of Srila Prabhupada?
[PD: Correct, worship of Kailash’s non-guru who has no name and no existence is bogus, and that is the Kailash idea. Of course Rocana promotes Jayadvaita’s book changers and BVKS, so Rocana promotes the bogus gurus and that is also why Kailash supports and loves this site. Kailash once wrote a paper for Trivrikrama swami to support the bogus GBC gurus, he is with them.]
JP: I am not an expert, but I guess that nothing, however all those secrets are acintya or transcendental in nature and therefore the acintya energies are called acintya, or incomprehensible.
[PD: Well yes, the name of Kailash’s living guru is incomprehensible, he says there is one, but there is none, so its like the Zen koan of — what does on hand clapping sound like? There is no answer, he is playing mind games with people.]
JP: It is not, that simply citing the spiritual master like eternal associate of the Lord like Sacitananda Bhaktivinod Thakur makes us automatically understand Him and His acintya thoughts. Obviously you ritiviks share the notion of being granted such ability because of your allegedly superior admittances to the guru tattva confidential insides since being a part or member of the so called ritvik movement / institution/ or should I rather say one of the ritivk multifarious sects? y.s.bj
[PD: All the ritviks worship Srila Prabhupada as their guru, so that is the main thing and we are all united on that platform. And Rocana, George Smith, Kailash are united in having no name for their current diksha guru, they are all atheists.
Kailash lives in Moab Utah which is 5,000 people in the middle of the Utah desert. Its a place where maybe almost all the population are Mormons, and for sure all the rest of them are in one camp or another of conservative Christians (ritviks). Yes, Kailash has taken shelter of the ritviks in Moab, all the people he associates with are ritviks, he cannot live one day without the ritviks, agreed. Kailash has taken shelter of the ritviks, he has surrendered to them fully out there in Moab Utah. He is the biggest ritvik lover on the planet while saying he is not, he is a hypocrite. ys pd]
Dear Nimai Pandit Prabhu, on:
http://prabhupadanugas.blogspot.com/2013/01/respected-hh-bhakti-vikasa-maharaja.html
…you start off by saying, We from ISKCON, inc., do not consider ourselves ritviks…
This statement by you is very troubling to me. It is an indication that the “official” ISKCON lawsuit that you are facing is intimidating you and putting you on the defensive. You are doing very nice work in your efforts to defeat the ritvik bashers, but I strongly disagree with the idea that we shouldn’t call ourselves “Ritviks.” This is the name given to us by the ISKCON demons. But it’s Srila Prabhupada’s own terminology. To be put on the defensive over it is an insult to Srila Prabhupada! We wear the label as a badge of honor! If someone doesn’t like it, then it’s his/her problem. We don’t care for such brainwashed zombies! Don’t let these rascals put you on the defensive!
Your servant, Pratyatosa Dasa
Nimai, sometimes the Diksa guru is not listed. I have found the most common thread in the names listed for the Disciplic Succession (parampara) is that the previous acarya (spiritual master) is the person who MOST INSPIRED the next person in line. As was the case between Srila Bhaktivinode and Srila Jagannatha das Babaji (who did not formally initiate Bhaktivinode). We know Bhaktivinode was not ultimately inspired by his Diksa guru, although he was respectful to him in general.
The one exception to that rule COULD be said to be Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Gaurakishore.
However, though Srila Bhaktisiddhanta’s relationship with Srila Gaurakishora was not as extensive and intimate over time as his with his father and Siksa Guru Srila Bhaktivinode, (who was also Srila Gaurakishore’s parampara link), we know for a fact that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was profoundly altered in his spiritual consciousness by his intense relationship with Srila Gaurakishor das Babaji.
When I discovered this theme, it made all things clear to me, and led me to write those articles for Prabhupada vision regarding Disciplic Succession. And why I can assert with confidence that anyone who claims that our parampara has one “traditional method” based on formal Diksa Gurus is missing the point. The tradition in our parampara is that a devotee aspiring to greater spiritual knowledge and realization from WHATEVER POINT THEY ARE AT, will find an Acarya to inspire them through instruction and possibly also formal initiation.
So unless one is an uttama Mahabhagavata, they cannot possibly be a link to inspire another to that level of consciousness. Srila Prabhupada is that link for anyone. Any one of us can turn someone on to Srila Prabhupada in full. If one is not an uttama Mahabhagavata and stands between Srila Prabhupada and new aspirants, they are only able to guide that aspirant to their level, as per NOI 5.
Since the Parampara list is made of Uttama Mahabhagavatas, it should never be added to with the name of anyone but. And ultimately, in the highest spiritual sense Diksa is by Siksa.
Which is why Ritvik is so profound. Srila Prabhupada gave complete Siksa, and a formal initiation for anyone who wanted it to help them progress.
Dear Santosh,
I think the reason why you need to qualify the falldowns of these so-called Gurus as “not gross” is the most telling factor. It is said that BOTH guru and disciple need to examine one another, and usually the time frame given is at least a year.
If you spend a year in intimate space with someone, there is no hiding your subtle nature from one another, and especially no hiding any gross discrepancies.
All you have to go on to judge these men is second hand talk, and a few public appearances.
Srila Prabhupada’s books are full of guidelines by which we are to judge another’s potential to be Guru. The more you know, the better off you are when you get the chance to examine someone closely over time.
Srila Prabhupada wanted his students to become teachers. And to be of good character. The term for such a person is Guru and even Spiritual master. This might seem like a contradiction, but it is all in your sense of perspective to make the fine distinctions. Here are some quotes for Srila Prabhupada to give you a sense of what I mean.
** “There are two kinds of instructing spiritual masters. One is the liberated person fully absorbed in meditation in devotional service, and the other is he who invokes the disciple’s spiritual consciousness by means of relevant instructions.” (CC Adi 1.47 purport) **
Letter to: Sri Galim — Delhi 20 November, 1971 : 71-11-20 :
To answer your last point, one who teaches can be treated as Spiritual Master. It is not that after we become initiated we become perfect. No. It requires teaching. So if we take instruction from them, all senior godbrothers may be treated as guru, there is no harm. Actually, you have only one Spiritual Master, who initiates you, just as you have only one father. But every Vaisnava should be treated as prabhu, master, higher than me, and in this sense, if I learn from him, he may be regarded as guru. It is not that I disobey my real Spiritual Master and call someone else as Spiritual Master. That is wrong. It is only that I can call Spiritual Master someone who is teaching me purely what my initiating Spiritual Master has taught. Do you get the sense?
74-07-20
New Vrindaban
My Dear Satyabhama and Paramananda:
Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter undated and have noted the contents carefully. If Kirtanananda Maharaja speaks what I speak, then he can be taken a siksa guru. Guru sastra sadhu. The spiritual master is one, that is a fact. Kirtanananda Swami may be taken a sadhu not spiritual master, or as instructor guru. I don’t think he is saying anything against our principles, so what is the wrong?
You have written that the devotees here say that you cannot know me, but only Kirtanananda Maharaja can know me. But, if Kirtanananda is a disciple and he can know me, and you are also a disciple, why you cannot know me?
Prabhupada: So He accepted spiritual… Not spiritual master, but a sannyasa-guru. That is also master, but he’s not spiritual master. But he’s also considered as sannyasa-guru, spiritual master who offers him sannyasa. Just like myself, I took initiation from my Guru Maharaja, but I took sannyasa from a Godbrother who is a sannyasi. So my original guru is that spiritual master who initiated me, but he’s also a sik?a guru. Like that. Teacher. Discourse on Lord Caitanya Play Between Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva — April 5-6, 1967, San Francisco
That is Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s… So He says that “You become guru.” He says, amara ajñaya guru haña: [Cc. Madhya 7.128] “By My order.” Don’t become a so-called guru, manufactured guru. “You become guru by following My instruction.” Amara ajñaya guru haña.
Guru means who follows the predecessor, authorized predecessor. He is guru. Not that everyone is guru. So therefore we have to follow the superior order. Then we become guru, not that by cheating others we become guru. No. That is cheater. That is not teacher. Guru means who is following the superior order. The superior order is Krsna or His representative.
Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.25.32 — Bombay, December 2, 1974
Bhakta Jarek quotes S.B. 2.9.37 partially to demonstrate for the best result of his belief to misguide / mislead not only to himself but also to others.
Else where in the purport of SB. 2.9.37 also states ; ” ….. And the first step, therefore, in pursuance of the system of knowledge received by Brahma, is to approach a bona fide guru who is the representative of the Lord following the parampara system …….”
Bhakta Jarek can you reveal please who is your bona fide Living GURU you are referring to in your post ??????
Rendering service to the bona fide Spiritual Master means OBEYING the Instructions of the Spiritual Master as HDG. Srila Prabhupada did to his own Guru Maharaja Srila BSST.
Did Srila Prabhupada massage the feet, hand and head of his Guru Maharaja personally?
How did Srila Prabhupada render service to his Guru Maharaja?
The same way all of US must render service to HDG. Srila Prabhupada by following his Instructions as he did.
Hope it meets you well, Bhakta Jarek. By the way do not mislead by misquoting to make your point across. That is a cheating which will lead you to hell unnecessarily, Bhakta Jarek.
Hari BOL. AGTSP.
YS…. Amar Puri.
Oh, dear Amar Puri don’t worry, my Guru is of course Srila Prabhupada. However there is no such a thing like living or not living guru, and it never was. I only know that He disappeared on 14 November 1977 from my limited vision, and I will not usurp myself the right to invent new system of initiation into parampara while He is not here personally and visible present to correct that nonsense. However though human reason can’t understand it He is still present through His vani for example. Don’t you feel it would be nice to give us fools some more time so we can be guided by His vani and by the Lord inside our hearts before you guys damn everyone to push your fanatical and hateful concoctions?
y.s. bj
Dear Amar Puri and Puranjana das,
I wanted to share something with you. It was the last comment I wrote to Jarek days back.
“Jarek if you ever feel you can do more than simply spout another permutation of ad hominem attack and wish to address specific points in the debate that you dodged while taking refuge in those ad hominem attacks, I would be happy to continue writing to you. If not, you may as well not write to me anymore, and if you do, I will be forced to ignore what you say. Thanks and best wishes.”
I have done as I said since then, ignoring all the cheap shot attacks he makes at me over an over in his responses to you two.
But his vile condescending snobbery continues because you two are still engaging him, even though he does the same thing with you, namely exalting his whimsy, refusing to address your exact logical arguments, and thus committing offense after offense.
I am hoping that you might realize that although you have good intentions, giving him any attention only feeds his weeds to grow stronger, and emboldens him to continue to offend and spew garbage on this forum.
If you ignore him, he will have no one left to play with, and he will give up eventually and be forced to go off alone to play with himself, as is fitting.
Hare Krsna
ys
Mark
Oh, dear Amar Puri don’t worry, my Guru is of course Srila Prabhupada.
[PD: OF course! Except, no one else can have Srila Prabhupada as their guru because Jarek is one of the “chosen ones.” He is so special! Wow, this guy’s ego is exploding (again).]
JP: However there is no such a thing like living or not living guru, and it never was.
[PD: Right, so Kailash is full horse whacky when he talks about these things, agreed.]
JP: I only know that He disappeared on 14 November 1977 from my limited vision, and I will not usurp myself the right to invent new system of initiation into parampara while He is not here personally and visible present to correct that nonsense.
[PD: Correct, Kailash has surrendered to the ritviks. He lives in Moab Utah where every single person in town is a rtivk follower of Jesus, he is with the ritviks and no one else. He might try to concoct something else, but in real life, he is full time with us and the ritvik program.]
JP: However though human reason can’t understand it He is still present through His vani for example. Don’t you feel it would be nice to give us fools some more time so we can be guided by His vani and by the Lord inside our hearts before you guys damn everyone to push your fanatical and hateful concoctions?
y.s. bj
[PD: Correct, even if Kailash waited for 200 years, the people in Moab would still be rtivks of Jesus, they are not going to change their ideas because one nut case is living in their town who thinks California is sinking into the Pacific ocean, and Moab Utah is the new Pacific ocean’s coastline.
Incidently, where are the cows that Kailash stole, and where is the money he stole to take care of these cows? Our guess is that these cows ended up at Mc Donalds, they are not present and accounted for, and clearly Kailash is not taking care of them. He is a bluffer, plain and simple. And the people in Moab probably have that figured out already. I am however wearing my inflatable life jacket under my shirt just in case Kailash is right, so I will be able to start swimming to Moab when California sinks into the Pacific, otherwise I am not going there, ever. Its a dry desert there, and so is its top inhabitant, dry as a bone-ness Kailash. ys pd]
Nimai Pandit das wrote:
1) Kṛṣṇa, 2) Brahmā, 3) Nārada; 4) Vyāsa, 5) Madhva, 6) Padmanābha, 7) Nṛhari, 8) Mādhava, 9) Akṣobhya, 10) Jayatīrtha, 11) Jñānasindhu, 12) Dayānidhi, 13) Vidyānidhi, 14) Rājendra, 15) Jayadharma, 16) Puruṣottama, 17) Brahmaṇyatīrtha, 18) Vyāsatīrtha, 19) Lakṣmīpati, 20) Mādhavendra Purī, 21) Īśvara Purī, (Nityānanda, Advaita), 22) Lord Caitanya, 23) Rūpa (Svarūpa, Sanātana), 24) Raghunātha, Jīva, 25) Kṛṣṇadāsa, 26) Narottama, 27) Viśvanātha, 28) (Baladeva) Jagannātha, 29) Bhaktivinode, 30) Gaurakiśora, 31) Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī, 32) His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda.
IF NITYANANDA PRABHU IS THE DIKSHA GURU OF KRISHNADAS KAVIRAJA GOSWAMI, WHY IS HE LISTED AFTER HIS INSTRUCTING GURUS?
Mahesh: Rupa and Ragunatha are listed AFTER Nityananada from above. In any case – my understanding is PROMINENT ACARYA is always accepted first in line.
Bhakta Mark I agree with your wise remarks in your comments. However, as we know from the Sastras that one has to be lower than the blade of grass in order to chant the Maha Mantras effectively. Perhaps, Bhakta Jarek needs some time as he writes to see where he stands himself in cultivating Spiritual knowledge. That knowledge is only available in the Instructions – VANI of our Jagat Guru Srila Prabhupada. Who so ever follows sincerely and seriously without any personal motivation is sure to gain benefits proportionately in his/her performing of the devotional service (Bhakti).
Srila Prabhupada’s Instructions – VANI are perfect. No body can challenge to it. Who so ever is trying to do so out of their ego of hidden personal agenda of some sort shall meet with ultimate failures and frustrations. Those who follow them they will also be subject to the same outcome.
There are very few of us amongst the Prabhupadanugas committed for serving the mission of Srila Prabhupada as he intends. As long as we the followers of Srila Prabhupada do not bring forth our individual personal agenda of some sort and serve the mission of Srila Prabhupada SELFLESSLY without any material desire or motivation for any sort of Prathistha, then we can only succeed in helping the mission of Srila Prabhupada at Individual level and perhaps collective level as well.
OM TAT SAT.
Hari BOL. AGTSP.
YS…….. Amar Puri.
bhakta jarek says: I only know that He disappeared on 14 November 1977…
(http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/09/opportunistic-nuevo-iskcon/#comment-20576)
Mark: George, the self-proclaimed master of logic is back from the grave, but again is whistling past the
graveyard.
George: Sometimes the dead come back, but I doubt that they would do so for anything so trivial as to expose some devious egotist dressed up in devotee clothes unless that person was something less than inconsequential.
Bhakta Mark seems to think himself to be very important or else he would not think that anyone who is ignoring him for a few daysbecause he has more important matters to attend to, or whom Mark thinks his primate pugnacity and mastery of 5th grade gramma has freightened under the bed is dead.
I am sorry that I havn’t been able to give your comments the attention and your motivations the exposure that they deserve, please rest assured Bhakta Mark that I am not even through with your first very revealing bit of rhetoric yet.
Just a brief aside to anyone who is reading. Part of the strategies of such predators as Mark involves “cutting em out of the herd.” Human beings have an enormous need for consensus of perception. Making it seem to others that a particular person is so far off that he is totally at odds with consensus effectivly accomplishes this. Mark attempts this by interjecting the following in relation to my statements in regards to the two words uder discussion “can” and “may” and Marks objection to the way in which Srila Prabhupadas uses them:
“To establish his premise, the first authority he cites is the interpretation of the definition and usage of the auxiliary verbs “can” and “may” provided by his ex-Spiritual Master, Rocana das.
\”To back this up, George cites an idea from his own mind “Since around the time of the Americana Civil War the verbs “can” and “may” have been used interchangably to indicate either a permission or an ability.”
In the above Mark tries to make it appear that completly alone and insane. That it is my mind alone that is the sole source of my interpretation. Mark knows as well as I do that this is a lie but he is not telling you this. Anticipating some reply that will make public this fact later on down in his reply he hedges his bet by quoting “the standard”. By such a manipulation tactic he hopes that his future victims will not notice that I have disproved his claim that the source was my mind.
Here is an easy to find source that confirms my claims and which disproves Martks. Since the time of around the civil war, in popular usage (clue” that which communicates to the most people) in both verbal and written form, the verb can has been used in ways that some six grade students take exception to, especially later on in life when they seize upon such thing in the hopes that they will provide for them the weapons by which they can accomplish another persons undoing.
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/can-versus-may2.aspx
Today’s topic is “can” versus “may.”
A listener named Donna says that after familiarizing herself with the definitions and usages of “can” and “may,” she still isn’t sure which word to use in this sentence: “May we expect you tomorrow?” or “Can we expect you tomorrow?”
That’s a tough one! Guest-writer Bonnie Trenga, writes,
Ability or Permission?
Once upon a time in the land of strict grammar rules, “can” denoted physical or mental ability and “may” denoted permission or authorization (1). It wasn’t OK to use “can” if you were talking about permission. You could hear citizens of this land saying, “May I accompany you to the ball, Miss Fuzzywink?” and “Why of course you may, my dear.” This young lady perhaps would ask her suitor about his dancing ability: “Can you do the cha-cha?” and he would answer that he did have the ability: “Why of course I can, Miss Fuzzywink.”
“Can” Instead of Traditional “May”
Nowadays, the rules aren’t so cut and dried. Since the second half of the 19th century, “can” has been used in informal contexts to denote permission (2). You’ve probably heard someone ask, “Can I go to the party?” If we lived in strict-grammar land, the authorities would complain about this usage, but these days it is acceptable to use “can” in this manner if you’re speaking informally (3). If you’re a teacher of young children, you probably often hear “Can I go to the bathroom?” Parents probably hear their children whining, “Can I have a cell phone?” So are the kids to blame for using “can” instead of “may”? Well, they just repeat what grown-ups say, and grown-ups are apparently moving away from the sometimes prissy-sounding “may.”
“May” Is OK
Now, “may” does have its rare place. If formality and politeness are of utmost importance, you should use “may” to denote permission. So it would be better to say to the waiter at a fancy restaurant, “May I have more water, please?” than “Can I have more water, please?” If you’ve just knocked on a door, you should probably say, “May I come in?”
George, the self-proclaimed master of logic is back from the grave, but again is whistling past the graveyard.
To establish his premise, the first authority he cites is the interpretation of the definition and usage of the auxiliary verbs “can” and “may” provided by his ex-Spiritual Master, Rocana das.
To back this up, George cites an idea from his own mind “Since around the time of the Americana Civil War the verbs “can” and “may” have been used interchangably to indicate either a permission or an ability.”
Mark, I did not proclaim myself a master of logic, or of anything, I am a student. I am sorry that the praise of others towards myself or towards anyone else makes you jealous and so envious that you would wish them dead and I am sorry that you are stuck way back in your six grade English class.I myself moved on from there all the way up to teaching philosophy and comparative world religions in Jr college. The crown jewel of the presentation was an entire week dedicated exclusivly to Krsna consciousness. One of the greatest pains in my life and the cause of my retirement from that field of endeavor was not because by Srila Prabhupadas and Lord Krsnas mercy I could not convince the majority of the class to take to Krsna consciousness but because I had no place to send them after I did. The situation remains unchanged Mark and those of you who don’t give a damn about who that other barking dog Puranjana makes up lies about, who don’t give a damn about what Srila Prabhupada says when it’s inconveniant to you, etc., etc., etc. don’t seem to me to have much of a chance of changing that, but if while you try to single me out and bring me down I can draw you all away long enough for saner voices among you to prevail and some headway really made then I’m your huckleberry and your all my daisies.
Hare Krsna
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I have come across the article:”Guru-everyone is lying to you” on krishna.org.I request you to please read this article and give your opinion.After reading this article I feel that what Madhudvisa Prabhu is saying is right.
Please read this article on http://krishna.org/guru-everyone-is-lying-to-you/
Your servant,
Santosh
Santosh says: Please read this article on http://krishna.org/guru-everyone-is-lying-to-you/
Please read Madhudvisa Lies Again! (http://groups.google.com/group/istagosthi/msg/0ae123a6ffe80f65)
Pratyatosa Dasa (ACBSP) says:
26. January 2013 at 5:01 am
bhakta jarek says: I only know that He disappeared on 14 November 1977…
However bhakta jarek said something completely else than this what Pratyatosha thinks, so much else dear liars Poorjanas and Poorjnanis Church pushers!
I said:
bhakta jarek says:
25. January 2013 at 7:59 pm
Oh, dear Amar Puri don’t worry, my Guru is of course Srila Prabhupada. However there is no such a thing like living or not living guru, and it never was. I only know that He disappeared on 14 November 1977 from my limited vision, and I will not usurp myself the right to invent new system of initiation into parampara while He is not here personally and visible present to correct that nonsense. However though human reason can’t understand it He is still present through His vani for example. Don’t you feel it would be nice to give us fools some more time so we can be guided by His vani and by the Lord inside our hearts before you guys damn everyone to push your fanatical and hateful concoctions?
y.s. bj
“Better to be in illusion thinking one’s self a disciple of Srila Prabhupada than to be a disciple of someone in illusion”
Ys Hasti Gopala Dasa
Santosh Prabhu
Regards Madhudvisa Prabhu he calls everyone but himself a liar. I have debated with him and he just goes into hiding when he can not answer. Here is a COMMON-SENSE issue:
Srila Prabhupada very CLEARLY states WE HAVE TO PICK UP THE PROMINENT ACARYAS, AND FOLLOW FROM HIM.
Note: ONLY Srila Prabhupada will lay claim to be PROMINENT ACARYA to be FOLLOWED because of his books,cds,tapes, disciples, temples so extensive over the world for FUTURE generations OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS:
68-04-12. Letter: Dayananda
Santosh here is one devotee who replies to Madhudvisa prabhu:
Dear Prabhus
AGTSP
PAMHO
Here is another disciple (other than Krishna Kant Prabhu) who has set out the position very nicely:
http://www.harekrsna.org/pada/documents/guru-tattva.htm
Best wishes
xxxxx
________________________________________
From:xxxx.com
To: madhudvisa@findkrishna.com; mahesh_agtsp@yahoo.co.uk
CC: madhudvisa@gmail.com; xxxx@gmail.com
Subject: RE: Reply to Rocana Dasa on his COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of BOTH the Guru and Ritvik Issue
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:29:09 +0000
Dear Madhudvisa Prabhu
AGTSP
PAMHO
Please let me say that I know I am very inferior compared to you (and indeed Mahesh Prabhu and Madhusadana prabhu) in terms of following devotional principles.
But I would say a few things. Firstly I dont think Mahesh prabhu is a follower of Krishna Kant prabhu on the Guru and Ritvik issue. From my undertsnading Mahesh Prabhu already had these realisations (hard ritvik) before he met Krishna Kant prabhu.
Your points appear to me like a soft ritvik system within ISKCON. I have copied the relevant sections from the Final Order that address your points. I know you have already read these points. But I would kindly suggest to read them again.
For me the bottom line is that Srila Prabhupada did not put in writing that we should await the next diksa guru or next Acharya within ISKCON for further guidance or initiation. thats not to say pure devotees will not or have not emerged….but I really believe they will not try to be the next link in the parampara (while Srila Prabhupada is still so accessible).
Regarding the 10,000 years thing – I am sure that there are some quotes within Srila Prabhupada’s books which suggest this Krshna Consciounsess movement (ISKCON) will go on for 10,000 years. Even if he didn’t directly say “I am the diksa guru for ISKCON for 10,000 years”.
Yours humbly,
xxxxx
25) “As soon as one of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples reaches perfection, the ritvik system will have become redundant.”
Sometimes referred to as “soft ritvik”, the above injunction rests on the premise that the ritvik system was only put in place because at the time prior to Srila Prabhupada’s passing there were no qualified disciples.
However, this premise is speculation since it was never articulated by Srila Prabhupada. There is no evidence that the ritvik system was set up only as a reaction to a dearth of qualified people, and that once there is a qualified person we should stop following it. This notion has the unfortunate side effect of making the ritvik system seem only second best, or makeshift, when actually it is Krishna’s perfect plan. It also makes it possible for some future unscrupulous charismatic personality to stop the system through some false show of devotion.
In theory, even if there were qualified uttama adhikari disciples present now, they would still have to follow the ritvik system if they wanted to remain in ISKCON. There is no reason why a qualified person would not be more than happy to follow the order of Srila Prabhupada, as we have already stated.
One possible source of this misconception could be the instructions Srila Bhaktisiddhanta left the Gaudiya Matha. Srila Prabhupada told us that his Guru Maharaja had asked for there to be a GBC, and that in due course a self-effulgent acarya would emerge. As we know the Gaudiya Matha did not follow this, to catastrophic effect. Some devotees believe we must also be on the look out for a self-effulgent acarya; and that since he could come at any time the ritvik system is only a stop-gap measure.
The difficulty with this theory is that the instructions Srila Bhaktisiddhanta left his disciples, and the ones Srila Prabhupada left us, are different. Srila Prabhupada certainly left instructions that the GBC should continue managing his Society, but he said nothing anywhere about the emergence of a future self-effulgent acarya for ISKCON. Instead he set up a ritvik system whereby he would remain the acarya”henceforward”. Obviously as disciples we cannot jump over Srila Prabhupada and start following Srila Bhaktisiddhanta.
If Srila Prabhupada had been given some dictation from Krishna that his Society was shortly to be helmed by a new acarya, then he would have made some provision for this in his final instructions. Instead he ordered that only his books were to be distributed, and that they would be law for the next ten thousand years. What would a future acarya have left to do? Srila Prabhupada has already put in place the Movement that will fulfill every prophecy and purport of our disciplic succession for the remainder of the Sankirtan Movement.
How will it be possible for a new self-effulgent diksa guru to emerge within ISKCON, when the only person allowed to give diksa is Srila Prabhupada?
Some have argued that acaryas have the power to change things, and thus a new one could alter the ritvik system within ISKCON. But would an authorised acarya ever contradict the direct orders left by a previous acarya to his followers? To do so would surely undermine the authority of the previous acarya. It would certainly cause confusion and bewilderment for those followers faced with the tortuous choice of whose order to follow.
All such concerns melt away once we read the final order. There is simply no mention of the “soft” ritvik injunction. The letter just says “henceforward”. Thus to say it will end with the emergence of a new acarya, or perfected disciple, is superimposing one’s own speculation over a perfectly clear request. The letter only supports a “hard” ritvik understanding, i.e. that:
Srila Prabhupada will be the initiator within ISKCON for as long as the Society is extant.
This understanding is consistent with the idea that Srila Prabhupada had already single-handedly put into place the success of his mission:
8) “Are you saying that Srila Prabhupada created no pure devotees?”
No, all we are stating is that Srila Prabhupada did set up the ritvik system to allow initiations to continue. Whether or not Srila Prabhupada created pure devotees is not relevant to his clear and unequivocal final order. As disciples our duty is simply to follow the instructions of the guru. It is inappropriate to abandon the guru’s instruction and instead speculate as to how many pure devotees there are now, or will be in the future.
Even taking a worst case scenario, that there are in fact no pure devotees at present, one should consider the situation that existed after the departure of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. After almost 40 years, Srila Prabhupada indicated that there was only one authorised initiatingacarya produced from the Gaudiya Matha:
“Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya*. […] instead of inspiring our students and disciple they may sometimes pollute them. […] they are very competent to harm our natural progress.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Rupanuga, 28/4/74)
*(Srila Prabhupada used the terms “acarya” and “guru” interchangeably):
“I shall choose some guru. I shall say, “Now you become acarya.” […] You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see our Gaudiya Matha. Everyone wanted to be guru. A small temple and “guru”. What kind of guru?” (Srila Prabhupada Morning walk, 22/4/77)
This could be seen as a damning indictment of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta’s preaching work. However, it would be extremely unwise to argue that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was a “failure”. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is known to have said that if his mission only produced one pure devotee he would have considered it a success.
Furthermore, the implementation of a ritvik system does not rule out, a priori, the possible existence of pure devotees. There are various scenarios that could easily accommodate both ritviks and pure devotees, e.g.:
Srila Prabhupada may have created many pure devotees who have no desire to become diksa gurus. There is no evidence to suggest that the most advanced devotees in ISKCON must necessarily be those individuals who put themselves up for election each year. These pure devotees may simply wish to humbly assist Srila Prabhupada’s mission. It is nowhere stated that it is mandatory for a pure devotee to become a diksa guru. Such persons would be delighted to work within the ritvik system if that was their guru’s order.
Srila Prabhupada’s desire may be for large numbers of instructing gurus, but not necessarily for more initiating ones. This would be consistent with the earlier quoted instruction for everyone to become a siksa guru, and Srila Prabhupada’s caution not to take disciples. It would also be consistent with the fact that Srila Prabhupada had single-handedly already put in place the success of his mission:
Guest: Are you planning to choose a successor?
Srila Prabhupada: It is already successful.
Guest: But there must be somebody you know, needed to handle the thing.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes. That we are creating. We are creating these devotees who will handle.
Hanuman: One thing He’s saying, this gentlemen, and I would like to know, is your successor named or your successor will…
Srila Prabhupada: My success is always there.
(Srila Prabhupada Room conversation, 12/2/75 Mexico)
“So there is nothing to be said new. Whatever I have to speak, I have spoken in my books. Now you try to understand it and continue your endeavour. Whether I am present or not present it doesn’t matter.” (Srila Prabhupada Arrival conversation, 17/5/77, Vrindavan)
Reporter: What will happen to the movement in the United States when you die?
Srila Prabhupada: I will never die
Devotees: Jaya! Haribol! (laughter)
Srila Prabhupada: I will live from my books and you will utilise.
(Srila Prabhupada Press Conference, 16/7/75, San Francisco)
Reporter: Are you training a successor?
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, my Guru Maharaja is there.
(Srila Prabhupada Press conference, 16/7/75, San Francisco)
“Only Lord Caitanya can take my place. He will take care of the Movement.”
(Srila Prabhupada Room conversation – translated from Hindi, 2/11/77)
Interviewer: What happens when that inevitable time comes a successor is needed.
Ramesvara: He is asking about the future, who will guide the Movement in the future.
Srila Prabhupada: They will guide, I am training them.
Interviewer: Will there be one spiritual leader though?
Srila Prabhupada: No. I am training GBC, 18 all over the world.
(Srila Prabhupada Interview, 10/6/76, Los Angeles)
Reporter: Do you expect to name one person as your successor or have you already?
Srila Prabhupada: That I am not contemplating now. But there is no need of one person.
(Srila Prabhupada Interview, 4/6/76, Los Angeles)
Interviewer: I was wondering if he had a successor to do…Do you have a successor to take your place when you die?
Srila Prabhupada: Not yet settled up. Not yet settled up.
Interviewer: So what process? Would the Hare Krishnas…
Srila Prabhupada: We have got secretaries. They are managing.
(Srila Prabhupada Interview, 14/7/76, New York)
The fact that Srila Prabhupada did not authorise any of his disciples to act as diksa guru does not necessarily mean that none of them were pure devotees. A siksa guru can also be a liberated soul. It could just be that Krishna’s plan did not require them to take up such a role. Nevertheless followers of Srila Prabhupada do have an important role to play, just as when he was physically present on the planet. That is to act as his assistants, not successor acaryas:
“The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Madhudvisa, 4/8/75)
“Sometimes a diksa guru is not present always. Therefore one can take learning, instruction, from an advanced devotee. That is called the siksa guru.” (Srila Prabhupada Bg. Lecture, 4/7/74, Honolulu)
Thus the issue is not whether Srila Prabhupada created any pure devotees, but the fact that he did set up the ritvik system. Although thediksa guru at this time is not physically present, that does not mean he is not the diksa guru. In his absence we are expected to take instruction from bona fide siksa gurus, of which there may eventually be millions.
________________________________________
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:42:52 -0800
From: madhudvisa@findkrishna.com
To: mahesh_agtsp@yahoo.co.uk
CC: xxx.com; madhudvisa@gmail.com; xxxxgmail.com
Subject: Re: Reply to Rocana Dasa on his COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of BOTH the Guru and Ritvik Issue
Hare Krishna Mahesh Prabhu
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Yes, of course Prabhu you are absolutely correct. Realistically it is extremely rare for anyone to be qualified as a bona fide spiritual master. We have seen so many devotees in ISKCON try to become bona fide spiritual masters and fail. And it is not that they were all demons, many were quite sincere, but as you show from Srila Prabhupada’s books the qualification of a bona fide spiritual master is very rare.
But, at least in theory, it is not very difficult. And Prabhupada of course says in many places it is not difficult, and Lord Caitanya also says it is not very difficult. They say it is just a matter of hearing from Srila Prabhupada and surrendering to him and following all the instructions he gives us and repeating those instructions to others. That is the srotiyam part but there is also the brahma-nistham part which means he has to be ‘fixed on the platform of brahman’ which means liberated, means he is no longer in any way under the control of maya, the three modes of material nature. And, at least from my personal experience, this is not a very easy thing to achieve at all. I am completely under the control of the thee modes of material nature…
So you are correct of course Prabhu, the qualifications for a bona fide guru are very, very rarely found… You know, sa mahatma sudurlabha, “Such a great soul is very rare.” But it is not difficult to understand what the qualifications are and at least in theory they are not difficult qualifications but in practice it is very rare realistically for anyone reach this platform. But it is not impossible…
All glories to your service Prabhu.
Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
Your servant
Madhudvisa dasa
Santosh Prabhu here is some extra exchange with Madhudvisa Prabhu:
From: Mahesh Raja
To: “madhudvisa@findkrishna.com” ; xxxx.com>
Cc: Madhudvisa dasa ; xxxxxxgmail.com”>
Sent: Monday, 21 January 2013, 21:55
Subject: Re: Reply to Rocana Dasa on his COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of BOTH the Guru and Ritvik Issue
Madhudvisa :And Prabhu the reality is many people need to have a ‘living’ spiritual master
Mahesh:So Madhudvisa prabhu ALSO needs to have a ‘living’ spiritual master too?
Have YOU got a “living” spiritual master Madhudvisa Prabhu?
And if the “living” spiritual master dies you are going to replace him with another “living” one again and again?
Madhudvisa: A qualified diksa guru does not in any way minimize or ‘replace’ his spiritual master. He simply represents his spiritual master
Mahesh: Represent his spiritual master doing WHAT? AS LONG AS Srila Prabhupada’s BOOK are on the planet Srila Prabhupada gives DIKSA so what is this extra LIVING thing going to do?
SB 1.7.22 P The Son of Drona Punished
The spiritual master, BY HIS WORDS, CAN PENETRATE INTO THE HEART OF THE SUFFERING PERSON AND INJECT KNOWLEDGE TRANSCENDENTAL, which alone can extinguish the fire of material existence.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SPIRITUAL MASTER’S INSTRUCTIONS AND THE SPIRITUAL MASTER HIMSELF. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple.
690113LE.LA Lectures
Similarly, arcye sila-dhir gurusu na… Gurusu means those who are acaryas, to accept their body as ordinary man’s body, this is denied in the sastras. SO ALTHOUGH A PHYSICAL BODY IS NOT PRESENT, THE VIBRATION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AS THE PRESENCE OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER, VIBRATION. WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE SPIRITUAL MASTER, THAT IS LIVING.
Note: It is FACTUALLY Srila Prabhupada who CONSTANTLY INSTRUCTS us through his books , tapes, cds. “becomes his initiating spiritual master later on.” indicates the position of Srila Prabhupada as the INITIATOR.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
Generally a spiritual master who CONSTANTLY INSTRUCTS a disciple in spiritual science becomes his initiating spiritual master later on.
Madhudvisa: It is not really difficult to become a bona fide spiritual master and Prabhupada wants his disciples to become bona fide spiritual masters. This is Lord Caitanya’s mission [amara ajna guru…] and yes Prabhu. Lord Caitanya was talking about diksa gurus
Mahesh: Madhudvisa prabhu says NOT REALLY DIFFICULT? to become a MAHABHAGAVATA as per definition of BONAFIDE QUALIFED GURU: Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
MAHA-BHAGAVATA-srestho
brahmano vai gurur nrnam
sarvesam eva lokanam
asau pujyo yatha harih
maha-kula-prasuto ‘pi
sarva-yajnesu diksitah
sahasra-sakhadhyayi ca
na guruh syad avaisnavah
((The guru MUST be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru MUST be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people. ….When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. ONLY SUCH A PERSON IS ELIGIBLE TO OCCUPY THE POST OF A GURU.))
SB 4.12.11 P Dhruva Maharaja Goes Back to Godhead
IN SUMMARY, A MAHA-BHAGAVATA, A HIGHLY ELEVATED PURE DEVOTEE, SEES THE LORD EVERYWHERE, AS WELL AS WITHIN THE HEART OF EVERYONE. This is possible for devotees who have developed elevated devotional service to the Lord. As stated in the Brahma-samhita (5.38), premanjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena: only those who have smeared their eyes with the ointment of love of Godhead CAN SEE EVERYWHERE THE SUPREME LORD FACE TO FACE; it is not possible by imagination or so-called meditation.
SB 2.9.35 P Answers by Citing the Lord’ s Version
Therefore, although He is present in every atom, the Supreme Personality of Godhead may not be visible to the dry speculators; still the mystery is unfolded before the eyes of the pure devotees because their eyes are anointed with love of Godhead. And this love of Godhead can be attained only by the practice of transcendental loving service of the Lord, and nothing else. The vision of the devotees is not ordinary; it is purified by the process of devotional service. In other words, as the universal elements are both within and without, similarly the Lord’s name, form, quality, pastimes, entourage, etc., as they are described in the revealed scriptures or as performed in the Vaikunthalokas, far, far beyond the material cosmic manifestation, are FACTUALLY being TELEVISED IN THE HEART of the devotee. The man with a poor fund of knowledge cannot understand, although by material science one can see things far away by means of television. FACTUALLY, the spiritually developed person is able to have the television of the kingdom of God ALWAYS reflected within his heart. That is the mystery of knowledge of the Personality of Godhead.
Madhudvisa: A qualified diksa guru does not in any way minimize or ‘replace’ his spiritual master. He simply represents his spiritual master
Note: It is SUCCESSION MEANS to SUCCEED:
SB 3.29.17 P Explanation of Devotional Service by Lord Kapila
In Bhagavad-gita, Thirteenth Chapter, it is clearly stated that one should execute devotional service and advance on the path of spiritual knowledge by accepting the acarya. Acaryopasanam: one should worship an acarya, a spiritual master who knows things as they are. The spiritual master must be in the disciplic succession from Krsna. The predecessors of the spiritual master are his spiritual master, his grand spiritual master, his great-grand spiritual master and so on, who form the disciplic succession of acaryas.
ys mahesh
George, You give yourself way too much credit. I don’t care if and when you respond to me, you defeat yourself with your own words time and again. I don’t wish you dead, I am simply pointing out that you keep digging your own grave. And I would much rather you join the living, I am not cruel.
Grammar girl is now your authority? Let’s see if her wisdom can truly back up your latest elaborated claim.
Your original claim: “Since around the time of the Americana Civil War the verbs “can” and “may” have been used interchangeably to indicate either a permission or an ability.”
Your latest elaboration: “Here is an easy to find source that confirms my claims and which disproves Martks. Since the time of around the civil war, in popular usage (clue” that which communicates to the most people) in both verbal and written form”
Let’s revisit exactly what grammar girl has to say.
Since the second half of the 19th century, “can” has been used in informal contexts to denote permission (2). You’ve probably heard someone ask, “Can I go to the party?” If we lived in strict-grammar land, the authorities would complain about this usage, but these days it is acceptable to use “can” in this manner if you’re speaking informally (3). If you’re a teacher of young children, you probably often hear “Can I go to the bathroom?” Parents probably hear their children whining, “Can I have a cell phone?” So are the kids to blame for using “can” instead of “may”? Well, they just repeat what grown-ups say, and grown-ups are apparently moving away from the sometimes prissy-sounding “may.”
1. She makes a claim, and then backs it up with no evidence or anecdotes from any time period earlier than her recollection of the way her NON-Prissy self and her casually cool friends used to ask their parents if they could attend a party.
2. Who is she to state, unequivocally, that it is acceptable to use a word inappropriately. She is just a lazy fool who has fell for the “liberal” Marxist education program where you can do as you like. What is so grown up about abandoning one’s ability to make meaningful distinctions in one’s speech or writing?
All this does is create confusion. Why not just advocate abandoning that prissy habit of using proper words in the exact circumstance altogether.
Comment in a farce to manipulate brief can attempt me exit.
What’s wrong, I am just starting a new “popular” trend in grammar. In 20 years I will convince millions of people to abandon “formality” and we can all be slack jawed fools who take everything easy man, you know like why be so uptight about what is is?
Why don’t you and grammar girl get married if you luvs her so much and have a real nice time and enjoy life.
You just aren’t serious and feign interest in the truth. All that schooling ruined you. Glad I escaped that trap.
You may do as you like, because obviously you can, but one thing you can not do even if you would like, and that is fool me.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
The indeterminate proposition that the Rtviks have put forward that TFO proves their claims has been rebutted by Rocana das’s DOR while the indeterminate proposition that Rocana dasa puts forward, that the type of initiatory system that the Rtviks advocate is appasidhantic has been soundly rebutted by Srila Prabhupadas acceptance of Christianity with it’s Rtvik style of post Samadhi initiation as being a valid disciplic succession, so where does that leave us?
Obviously “Us” is a term that does not coincide with reality as we see that both the diehard advocates of TFO and Rocana das stubbornly remain in denial that either of the two propositions in question have been defeated. The diehard adherents of the final order still stubborn clinging to the fallacious reasoning’s of KK while Rocana dasa, apparently suffering from what has been referred to in circles of psychology as The Right Man Syndrome still has a problem admitting to a fact that even his own intelligence must present to him, the simple fact that his claim that the post Samadhi practice of initiation is appasidhantic. Whether or not it is an Absolute Truth of Guru Tattva that is suitable to the context in which it is being offered is another matter entirely.
Such persons as Rocana dasa and the diehard advocates of the TFO have as yet to overcome the stumbling blocks that their own obstinacy has placed in their path ways to perfection and it is thus left to us to carry on, pushing our way through the barriers and avoiding the traps and the snares the such backwards folk attempt to set up for us, whether out of a type of madness produced by excessive greed or egoism or fear. As the servants of Srila Prabhupada and Sri Krsna we must choose the path of progress and move forward always advancing until the whole of the entire earth again resounds with the chanting of Lord Krsnas Holy names and every single man, woman and child can find in our movement what Srila Prabhupada intended for us to be able to offer to them, a place within the house that Srila Prabhupada built for all the world to live in.
Some of the barriers and blocks that the persons who seek to block our progress set up for us take the form of arguments that sound very reasonable. Such arguments are usually intended to block our progress or turn us aside from our path, to stop us from recognizing some truth that were we to only see it would immediately reveal to us the emptiness and falsity of the persons claims who is presenting such arguments. Such barriers need to be removed or went around before we can go forward leaving aside or behind such ones as who attempt to turn us from the path of perfection by presenting us with such falseness.
One of Bhakta Marks earlier claims presents us with an example of such of a type of argument. That claim or argument contends that it is the responsibility of the anti-rtviks” to disprove the Rtviks claims by finding and presenting shastric evidence .
In his posting dated 20. January 2013 at 7:28 pm Bhakta Mark offers us his speculations along with a claim:
“Unscrupulous persons have gone on to invent words to describe a variation of lack of physical presence. They refer to this variously as, post Samadhi, posthumous, post-disappearance, etc.
Yet, if there is no sastric prohibition, there is no limitation to in what manner Srila Prabhupada is not present. No one knows where Srila Prabhupada went after he left his body glowing in his Samadhi tomb. He could be preaching on Venus for all we know. He could be looking over my shoulder as I write this with a stern look on his face for all we know. He could be garlanding the Lord’s swinging seat in Goloka for we know. It is all irrelevant to LOGIC.
It is simple for the simple. There was an order. No one has produced a countermanding order. No one has shown in sastra where following such an order is prohibited UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.
Without such evidence, pretenders to the throne dare invoke logic and reason while assailing the assumed lack of such in those who are actually in possession of those faculties. They have been driven insane by their envy into self delusion.”
BURDEN OF PROOF
Bhakta Mark makes a claim that is so ridiculous coming from a person of such obvious education that one must suspect that Mark is twisting things around deliberately in an attempt to block us from realizing that the truth is exactly the opposite of what Bhakta Mark is claiming that it is.
Mark makes the claim in the above that in order for anyone to disprove the Rtviks claims that they are required to present to us sastric evidence that disproves or offers contrary evidence to the Rtviks claims.
While the burden of proof in any court always rests upon the prosecution in the case of criminal prosecutions “One is innocent until proven guilty” , upon those who are presenting a claim for the court to decide upon must prove firstly their own claim. The Rtviks presently are in the later position. They are the ones presenting a claim and thus it falls upon them to provide the sastric evidence in support of that claim. This they haven’t done yet, a fact that Bhakta Mark and others wish to blind you to the fact of and to make it seem that the burden of proof rests instead upon the accuser who is just basically saying “Hey you Rtviks, where is your sastric evidence?”
Mark being aware of the fact that the Rtviks have as yet provided no sastric evidence attempts the old switch around in an attempt to make it appear that the Rtviks are the innocents being accused.
From Rational WIKI
“Burden of proof” is the obligation that somebody presenting a new or remarkable idea has to provide evidence to support it. In a scientific context evidence is experimental or empirical data (although in some branches, well thought out mathematics may suffice). Once some evidence has been presented, it is up to the opposing “side” to disprove the evidence presented or explain why it may not be adequate. For example, in identifying a chemical compound, an analyst may present a spectrum to support their hypothesis but a reviewer may point out that it is insufficient, explain why by offering an alternative interpretation and state more data is needed, usually suggesting specific data that would be required. This sort of procedure happens constantly in the scientific method, repeating until everyone is happy that the data and explanation match.””
Some of the Rtviks, those who have the most invested in in, understand that they have themselves failed to present any supporting shastric evidence in support of their claims but do not wish the rank and file to recognize this and thusly attempt to throw them off track with such bait and switch tactics as Bhakta Mark attempts here in his writings upon this thread.
That these Rtviks felt at least at one time that there was some need to prove their claims to at least the persons whom they wished to influence into joining them and accepting their claims resulted in their acceptance ultimately of TFO as proving of their claims. Such a flawed presentation could never however continue to remain unchallenged. Subjected to the scrutiny of close and critical examination by such persons as Rocana das, it’s major flaws became apparent and thusly so too that this offering by the Rtvik elite as proof positive of the truth of their claims fails to establish anything other than the fact that these selfsame Rtviks either do not even know what is required for the establishment of the truth or simply do not care and this is all about establishing themselves in positions that will grant to them social prestige and some type of profit through their declining years and after they are dead they don’t care.
. So sure they were of its arguments being reasonable and its offerings of evidence correctly interpreted by Krsnakant and their leadership that its lack of sastric evidence in support of the acceptance of Ritvik vada was placed upon the back-burner by the faithful adherents to this doctrine who naturally concluded that since what they had been convinced of was the absolute truth that the absolute truth in the form of sastric evidence would come along by and by to confirm them. A decade passed, another half and more and still no sastric evidence appeared to be supplied by the faithful who in the stead of it accepted the general animosity directed at them by ISKCON and Narayana Maharaja as evidence in support of their feelings that what they had accepted was indeed correct. They accepted this in the same was as one would accept that “Well, if ISKCON and Narayana Maharaja are both against us then we gotta be right.” This is another erroneous assumption or illogic, not that Bhakta Mark or any of the others who propose to lead or continue to lead you and who know this to be so are going to point this out to you.
The failure to support ones arguments with shastric evidence and the dismissed or relegation of such a need to the back burner , to be provided after the acceptance of the fact or as being non-essential or irrelevant would appear as a sure danger sign and ref flag of warning to any audience appreciative of just how importance the proof of shastra is and just how inconclusive is any argument (even a good one, which TFO isn’t) without the support of it. Fortunately for those Rtviks trying to push through the acceptance of theory arguments their Western audience wasn’t really that appreciative of it, otherwise they would have continued to look until in the millions of verses of the Vedas manifest through Lord Brahma they would have found it and presented it to us before claiming that they had proven that which would threaten to overturn a way of conducting initiations that could trace it’s time honored lineage all the way back to the very creation and to us from the very first man.
Rather than this the Rtviks point to a mere 30 year period in which the traditional practice was perverted and abused as being proof that we should abandon it. Thirty years vs millions of years and a traditional practice that Srila Prabhupada, his spiritual master, his, his, his and his all accepted and took their initiations from, and Bhakta Mark accuses me of being illogical.
In establishing the truth the ways in which the truth may be established must be understood and a lot more is required than the speculative interpretations of a conditioned soul about what Srila Prabhupada meant when Srila Prabhupada “said” is required. A “leap of faith” out of the frying pan of post Srila Prabhupada into the fire of an unsupported and unsubstantiated concoction is the act not of a sober or well informed person.
Anyway, time and tide…
Haribol
“1. She makes a claim, and then backs it up with no evidence or anecdotes from any time period earlier than her recollection of the way her NON-Prissy self and her casually cool friends used to ask their parents if they could attend a party.
2. Who is she to state, unequivocally, that it is acceptable to use a word inappropriately. She is just a lazy fool who has fell for the “liberal” Marxist education program where you can do as you like. What is so grown up about abandoning one’s ability to make meaningful distinctions in one’s speech or writing?”
Mark, this is all beside the point. Your claim was that the origin of my idea was in my own mind only. Your claim is disproven and it only took a quick google and not even an investigation beyond the first several finds on the first page to disprove your claim, I need not go beyond that to simply show that you were wrong. Now you want to waste my time further by attempting to make me find some beef eater other than the one that either you or I selected that disproves you simply due to some imagined superior status that your mind assigns to one but not the other? Perhaps as well as being wrong, an uncomfortable claim but one that an honest person at this point would admit you are also stupid too, despite your intellectual conceit.
You were wrong Mark and you tried to make it seem to theirs that I was insane, the only source of an opinion that originated from within only my own crazy brain…and you claim that you are not cruel? Claim that you are an idiot Mark, then perhaps somebody will believe you.
George wrote: “While the burden of proof in any court always rests upon the prosecution in the case of criminal prosecutions “One is innocent until proven guilty” , upon those who are presenting a claim for the court to decide upon must prove firstly their own claim. The Rtviks presently are in the later position. They are the ones presenting a claim and thus it falls upon them to provide the sastric evidence in support of that claim. This they haven’t done yet, a fact that Bhakta Mark and others wish to blind you to the fact of and to make it seem that the burden of proof rests instead upon the accuser who is just basically saying “Hey you Rtviks, where is your sastric evidence?”
You are confusing your standing and jurisdiction in this matter George, not to mention ignoring the spiritual dimension of the issue.
Certain disciples are continuing to follow the system that Srila Prabhupada personally introduced, maintained, and documented in detail. There is no one prosecuting these disciples who has any jurisdiction or ability to force them to cease and desist this practice. We don’t NEED to prove anything to the likes of you. The fact is that you have taken it upon yourself to accuse us of being wrong for continuing to use the system. Which means you have initiated a debate.
And now you finally specify the standard you wish to frame this debate in. It has nothing to do with us being able to prove that we are following the last order given by a transcendental Acarya.
Instead you hold us to a materialistic standard. By the standards of “Burden of proof” offered by your source “rational wiki”, my burden is that I am accused of being somebody “presenting a new or remarkable idea” and I am now obliged to provide evidence to support it.
Fine, lets work with that dimension since it is what you are limited to.
FACT: Srila Prabhupada was accepting disciples while still walking around in his body on planet earth without ever meeting them or even knowing their names. It was the official system, ordered and documented. Thus Divya Jnana was being successfully transmitted in (physical) absentia.
Many claimed then, as they do now, that very system he introduced while still ambulatory on earth was a new and remarkable idea. And generally it was in Gaudiya society. Did you challenge him? I doubt it.
He did not modify that order, or countermand it, and in fact said the system of management was to continue with no change. These are facts in the historical record.
So your challenge, should we choose to accept it, is to show evidence that this “new and remarkable Idea” has merit.
I submit that Srila Prabhupada had every right to introduce a system that reflected changes in the formalities of initiation, that were not previously utilized according to Gaudiya history. And I back that up with the following evidence.
“One has to consider the particular time, country and conveniences. What is convenient in India may not be convenient in the Western countries. Those who are not actually in the line of acaryas or who personally have no knowledge how to act in the role of acarya, unnecessarily criticize the activities of the ISKCON movement in countries outside of India. The fact is that such critics cannot do anything personally to spread Krishna Consciousness. If someone does go and preach, taking all risks and allowing all consideration for time and place, it might be that there are changes in the manner of worship, but that is not faulty according to the sastra” (SB 4.8.54 purport)
I submit that other sampradayas are on record using formal Ritvik diksa, and supporting it to this day, as circumstantial supporting evidence. Ramanuja and Madhva sampradayas. No reference, but google search is your friend.
I submit that the acarya’s orders are tantamount to sastra.
Here is a quote from Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur for you to chew on.
“He said, ‘Bhaktivinoda Thakura is Kamala Manjari, a personal associate of Radharani. He ordered me to establish daiva-varnasrama. I must obey his order. The acarya is not under the sastra. The acarya can make sastra. Bhaktivinoda Thakura, the acarya, has inspired me in various ways. By his mercy and that of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja and the previous acaryas we are going on, not caring for the precise technicalities of smartas.”
“Although this concept of bhagavata-parampara appears to be new, it is based on the essential understanding of the scriptures. Something new given by an acarya but based on sastra is called vaisistya (a special characteristic). Acaryas Ramanuja and Madhva both apparently introduced something new, but because their teachings were based on sastra they came to be accepted. Phalena pariciyate: ”
Excerpt from Bhakti Vikasa’s 3 volume “Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Vaibhava”
I submit that in the same light, we loyal disciples are simply continuing the general practice of accepting disciples on his behalf. We are not introducing a new and remarkable idea or practice in Gaudiya society. We are continuing to execute one already introduced by one fully authorized to do so.
Pray tell us George why suddenly the essence of Diksa is disturbed because Srila Prabhupada is now on a different planet. He gave Diksa in absentia for years, but now suddenly he is MORE absent? Is that REASONABLE? LOGICAL? RATIONAL?
i must remind you, he never issued a prohibition against anyone going off and starting their own society based on their ability to give empowerd Diksa by virtue of their advanced status. Have at it if you are so advanced. No body is stopping you. But I bet you can’t. You and your ilk need the Bhaktivedanta purports, need his properties, you need his legacy as leverage to act in the world, yet want to elevate yourself into the position of credit. BAS. Not in my gym.
Hare Krsna
By the way George, that civil war statement was from your own mind. You did not cite any reference. You stated it as fact.
THE POINT was that you made a claim without citing authority. Conversely I cited an authority.
Subsequently, you cited Grammar Girl as your authority. And reproduced her opinions at length on the subject, including her opinion that the majority of people are in agreement with you both, that the words no longer have a distinctive meaning, implying that we need can now only know the intended definition of a word used by the context it is used in. Which was the problem in the first place, and which is why I and a few others on the planet insist on accuracy of terms, regardless of what the herd is doing.
Speaking of the herd, you originally made that claim how for 150 years everyone other than me has been on the same page as to the “current usage” of the terms in question. Directly implying that I was apparently separate from “the herd” and all by my lonesome in my anachronistic and “prissy” formal usage.
Funny that you would later accuse me of that very motive in making my retort. But as I just showed, for the purposes of debate, your citation was backed by nothing but your say so, which was my only motive in pointing it out that it apparently came from your own mind. Unless someone else is writing your responses?
I identified your source’s puerile abdication of proper grammatical standards and impugned her excuse for doing so. I don’t care who decided, at what time in the past, to conflate the proper meanings of terms out of sheer laziness and ineptitude. I don’t care how many people consented to this practice that severed the abstract from its appropriate concrete manifestation. Such intellectual dishonesty promotes a consensus that only appeals to the baser instincts, and is a destructive force upon civilized society. Leaving us with a common denominator where communication is retarded from its potential to support understanding between individuals due to a nebulous and ultimately meaningless grammatical standard.
So are the ritviks. Whether you say yes or no they protest, “no!!!”, this is not “our yes!!!”, so it is “no”, or “no!!!, this is not our “no”, so “this is yes!!!”. Example, how the hell after the whole issue raised in the above article, which title already clearly indicates George prabhu is distancing himself from Rocana prabhu. Poorjnanis may accuse him constantly of being a disciple, servant or follower of Rocana prabhu? The same with Kailas prabhu being accused by the rascal liar Poorjana for crimes without a piece of any, no slightest evidence even. Check the stories, as I did, there is no truth in them, no justice, none has the right to accuse so blindly and irresponsibly a serious devotee of the Lord, or in fact anyone at all! The revengeful ritvik freaks can of course, since this is the way their minds and egos are checked by the illusory potency of the Lord. Dear Prabhus check them simply for simple truths, justice and morality, use common sense, vidya and avidya step by step, and you will see, their intelligence is lost and gone, they are dead or at best a sleep, a very deep one in deed. From lies nothing good ever comes.
y.s. bj
Discovering the truth in relation to any indeterminate proposition requires that we utilizer the proper methodology, that which will provide us with the evidences that will prove or disprove any assertions that we encounter. Unlike the methodology (or lack of it) that we in the West habitually take shelter of which bascically involves our blind faith acceptance of something before it has been sufficiently proven and a repression of any doubts in relation to the so called “truth” we have invested our belief in, our gurus in arguing for the acceptance of any claim do not only present us with many postulates (visaya) in favor of the acceptance of a particular point, but also many challenges (samsaya) to the acceptance of the same point of view. This would be comparable to us arguing with ourselves over the truth or falsity of the same thing rather than chosing one side of an issue to represent exclusively and then arguing with ones counterpart upon the opposite side of the issue, a practice that may end up involving a grerat many other things besides a so-called search for the truth, not the least of which being those portions of our psyche which are not in the least bit interested in such high minded things as the more exalted portions of our nature may otherwise be.
Not only is the methodology for making determinations in regards to the truth important but also the steps leading up to the reasons for attempting to make such determinations are also put forward:
“Similarly, reasons must be expressed (hetu), examples must be given in terms of various facts (udaharana), the theme must gradually be brought nearer for understanding (upanaya), and finally it must be supported by authoritative quotations from the Vedic sastras (nigamana).”
Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi lila 7:10
Not surprisingly we see such reasons leading up to the need for us to make such a determination in regards to how initiations are to be conducted, a concern which includes the Rtvik issue mirrored in our movement today. The reasons for making a determination in regards to the Rtvik issue reflect a need for a master disciple relationship that is genuine, if not strictly textbook, and the examples given as proof of such a reason are both ample and in many cases notorious. Gradually, over time we have found ourselves brought nearer to the theme through our personal involvement and the involvement of our friends and families with the Krsna consciousness movement, thus increasing of our need for some type of guru reform, if not a complete overhaul of the system as the Rtvik model and indeed Srila Prabhupadas own words may actually suggest, and finally we are coming to the dim awareness of the only way that any of our claims in regards to whatever truth we are expressive or in denial of can be conclusively proven or refuted.
Followinfg this the means by which we are to go about making such determinations must be studied and utilized in a process that is the epitome of Krsna consciousness in that it is very scientific. Srila Prabhupada tells us something about it here:
siddhānta baliyā citte nā kara alasa ihā ha-ite kṛṣṇe lāge sudṛḍha mānasa
SYNONYMS siddhānta—conclusion; baliyā—considering; citte—in the mind; nā kara—do not be; alasa—lazy; ihā—this; ha-ite—from; kṛṣṇe—in Lord Kṛṣṇa; lāge—becomes fixed; su-dṛḍha—very firm; mānasa—the mind.
TRANSLATION A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one’s mind becomes attached to Śrī Kṛṣṇa.
PURPORT There are many students who, in spite of reading the Bhagavad-gītā, misunderstand Kṛṣṇa because of imperfect knowledge and conclude Him to be an ordinary, historical personality. This one must not do. One should be particularly careful to understand the truth about Kṛṣṇa. If because of laziness one does not come to know Kṛṣṇa conclusively, one will be misguided about the cult of devotion, like those who declare themselves advanced devotees and imitate the transcendental symptoms sometimes observed in liberated souls. Although the use of thoughts and arguments is a most suitable process for inducing an uninitiated person to become a devotee, neophytes in devotional service must always alertly understand Kṛṣṇa through the vision of the revealed scriptures, the bona fide devotees and the spiritual master. Unless one hears about Śrī Kṛṣṇa from such authorities, one cannot make advancement in devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The revealed scriptures mention nine means of attaining devotional service, of which the first and foremost is hearing from authority. The seed of devotion cannot sprout unless watered by the process of hearing and chanting. One should submissively receive the transcendental messages from spiritually advanced sources and chant the very same messages for one’s own benefit as well as the benefit of one’s audience. When Brahmā described the situation of pure devotees freed from the culture of empiric philosophy and fruitive actions, he recommended the process of hearing from persons who are on the path of devotion. Following in the footsteps of such liberated souls, who are able to vibrate real transcendental sound, can lead one to the highest stage of devotion, and thus one can become a mahā-bhāgavata. From the teachings of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to Sanātana Gosvāmī (Cc. Madhya 22.65) we learn: śāstra-yuktye sunipuṇa, dṛḍha-śraddhā yāṅra
‘uttama-adhikārī’ sei tāraye saṁsāra “A person who is expert in understanding the conclusion of the revealed scriptures and who fully surrenders to the cause of the Lord is actually able to deliver others from the clutches of material existence.” Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, in his Upadeśāmṛta (3), advises that to make rapid advancement in the cult of devotional service one should be very active and should persevere in executing the duties specified in the revealed scriptures and confirmed by the spiritual master. Accepting the path of liberated souls and the association of pure devotees enriches such activities. Imitation devotees, who wish to advertise themselves as elevated Vaiṣṇavas and who therefore imitate the previous ācāryas but do not follow them in principle, are condemned in the words of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (2.3.24) as stone-hearted. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has commented on their stone-hearted condition as follows: bahir aśru-pulakayoḥ sator api yad dhṛdayaṁ na vikriyeta tad aśma-sāram iti kaniṣṭhādhikāriṇām eva aśru-pulakādi-mattve ‘pi aśma-sāra-hṛdayatayā nindaiṣā. “Those who shed tears by practice but whose hearts have not changed are to be known as stone-hearted devotees of the lowest grade. Their imitation crying, induced by artificial practice, is always condemned.” The desired change of heart referred to above is visible in reluctance to do anything not congenial to the devotional way. To create such a change of heart, conclusive discussion about Śrī Kṛṣṇa and His potencies is absolutely necessary. False devotees may think that simply shedding tears will lead one to the transcendental plane, even if one has not had a factual change in heart, but such a practice is useless if there is no transcendental realization. False devotees, lacking the conclusion of transcendental knowledge, think that artificially shedding tears will deliver them. Similarly, other false devotees think that studying books of the previous ācāryas is unadvisable, like studying dry empiric philosophies. But Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, following the previous ācāryas, has inculcated the conclusions of the scriptures in the six theses called the Ṣaṭ-sandarbhas. False devotees who have very little knowledge of such conclusions fail to achieve pure devotion for want of zeal in accepting the favorable directions for devotional service given by self-realized devotees. Such false devotees are like impersonalists, who also consider devotional service no better than ordinary fruitive actions.
Adi 2.117
The first step then that Srila Prabhupada advocates before even we can begin to procede towards the diuscovery of the truth is for us to obtain the knowledge that is needed in order to discover the truth from the wriutings of Sri Jiva Goswami and from his Sat-sandarbha most particularly.
Heretofore it has been suggested on this thread that knowledge of the absolute truth can be attained through the study of 6ith grade grammar, but Sri Jiva writings give very little prominence to such a theory.
This thread began with a reference to Rocana das so it is only rightful that we continue to include his as that which he is. Although more comfortable and in control upon his web site and thus much, much less prone to become a target of the senseless type of viscous slander and invectictive that make such places such a desolation and a pleasure to be in, still Rocana das though in absentee remains a very active participant in these discussions affecting the regards of many. Rocana das today finds himself in the unenviable position of taking the next step after that one introduces the many doubts in regards to his own (or in the case of us, where it is always another who is charged with providing the doubts that are in regard to those postulates, he finds himself in the position of strengthening or increasing those doubts – although Rocana das, I sam sure will claim at this point that he is way past that, that due to his DOR that Rtvik vada has been completely disproven and that thusly the threat of the Rtviks is over and any serious reputation that they may have at one time enjoyed is past and that for all intents and purposes the Rtviks are dead and buried and all that George Smith should be doing if he has some silly and sentimental attachment to them, is to be climbing up upon their tombstone and carving into it an eptitath or perhaps an ode to the great stupidity that killed them. To be continued
Mark
What part of around the time of the American Civil War and the later portion of the 19th century to you find to be less than harmonious?
Linguistic grids mold perception and constrain thought, they do not however constrain Krsnas pure devotees to which they are invariably either tools for communicating something superior to our a,b.c.s
You can try to correct Srila Prabhupadas English all you like but many people, including myself will think you to be a presumtuous fool for attempting to correct your spiritual masters speeh, but its your own transcendental funeral and all a friend can say is it was a shame. Pray for humility Mark.
P.S. You said that you were not cruel, I never made such a claim. TYhe God that I worship rips the guts outr of child molesters and wears them as garlands around His neck. A lot of people think thats cruel. I think its pretty.
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.
Dear Mahesh Prabhu,
Please read my comment on Madhudvisa lies again!
Please tell me whether or not I have written correctly
Your servant,
Santosh
Santosh Prabhu wrote:
If Prabhupada really always wanted that He should be diksa guru for next 10000 years,then why did He express His desire that His disciples should be qualified diksa gurus?Of course,I am not saying that ritvik system is not bonafide .It is true that finally,Prabhupada ordered ritvik system,so we must all follow it.(I do not support any living guru theology,I want to accept Srila prabhupada)Also it is not correct to take ritvik initiation from anywhere,since Prabhupada wanted ritvik initiations to be carried out by those who are authorised by the GBC,and not by anyone who claims to be a ritvik. Since now this formal initiation is very diificult(ISKCON now is against ritvik),so all one must do is sincerely read Prabhupada’s books,so that He will initiate us when He desires.I also see that Madhudvisa Prabhu always tells everyone to surernder to Prabhupada and not to some “living”bogus guru.
Mahesh:
1) The qualification of EVEN Kanistha Adhikari is VERY high QALIFIED BRAHMANA and what to speak of (DIKSA GURU) Maha –bhagavata stage which is a VERY RARE soul besides that ONLY a PROMINENT ACARYA is to be accepted . So if we look at HONEST conclusion we will find that Srila Prabhupada WILL REMAIN PROMINENT for THOUSANDS of years because of his BOOKS, temples, cds disciples spread extensive ALL over the world. Atleast for ISKCON Srila Prabhupada has stated his desire to REMAIN as Diksa guru:
2) 75-08-04. Letter: Madhudvisa:
The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I AM IN THE INITIATOR GURU, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This I want.
680312iv.sf Conversations
Prabhupada: Yes, I AM the spiritual master of this institution, and ALL the members of the society, they’re supposed to be MY disciples. They follow the rules and regulations which I ask them to follow, and they are initiated by me spiritually. So therefore the spiritual master is called guru. That is Sanskrit language.
Accepting ABOVE in ISKCON Srila Prabhupada’s wishes to remain as Diksa Guru. What happens OUTSIDE is NOT our concern if they can match Srila prabhupada’s Diksa Guru position of what he accomplished then we will see. Lets judge by the result – let them be SELF-EFFULGENT. For another Diksa Guru to appear can ALSO take a gap of MILLIONS of years AND only PROMINENT IS ACCEPTED:
68-04-12. Letter: Dayananda
Regarding parampara system: THERE IS NOTHING TO WONDER FOR BIG GAPS. Just like we belong to the Brahma Sampradaya, so we accept it from Krishna to Brahma, Brahma to Narada, Narada to Vyasadeva, Vyasadeva to Madhva, and between Vyasadeva and Madhva there is a big gap. But it is sometimes said that Vyasadeva is still living, and Madhva was fortunate enough to meet him directly. In a similar way, we find in the Bhagavad-gita that the Gita was taught to the sungod, some millions of years ago, but Krishna has mentioned only three names in this parampara system–namely, Vivasvan, Manu, and Iksvaku; and SO THESE GAPS DO NOT HAMPER FROM UNDERSTANDING THE PARAMPARA SYSTEM. WE HAVE TO PICK UP THE PROMINENT ACARYAS, AND FOLLOW FROM HIM. There are many branches also from the parampara system, and it is not possible to record all the branches and sub-branches in the disciplic succession. WE HAVE TO PICK UP FROM THE AUTHORITY OF THE ACHARYA IN WHATEVER SAMPRADAYA WE BELONG TO.
Here is some exchange note how Madhudvisa talks of “living” spiritual master you can draw your own conclusions:
From: Mahesh Raja
To: “madhudvisa@findkrishna.com” ; XXXXXXhotmail.com>
Cc: Madhudvisa dasa ; XXXXXX@gmail.com”
Sent: Monday, 21 January 2013, 21:55
Subject: Re: Reply to Rocana Dasa on his COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of BOTH the Guru and Ritvik Issue
Madhudvisa :And Prabhu the reality is many people need to have a ‘living’ spiritual master
Mahesh:So Madhudvisa prabhu ALSO needs to have a ‘living’ spiritual master too?
Have YOU got a “living” spiritual master Madhudvisa Prabhu?
And if the “living” spiritual master dies you are going to replace him with another “living” one again and again?
Madhudvisa: A qualified diksa guru does not in any way minimize or ‘replace’ his spiritual master. He simply represents his spiritual master
Mahesh: Represent his spiritual master doing WHAT? AS LONG AS Srila Prabhupada’s BOOK are on the planet Srila Prabhupada gives DIKSA so what is this extra LIVING thing going to do?
SB 1.7.22 P The Son of Drona Punished
The spiritual master, BY HIS WORDS, CAN PENETRATE INTO THE HEART OF THE SUFFERING PERSON AND INJECT KNOWLEDGE TRANSCENDENTAL, which alone can extinguish the fire of material existence.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SPIRITUAL MASTER’S INSTRUCTIONS AND THE SPIRITUAL MASTER HIMSELF. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple.
690113LE.LA Lectures
Similarly, arcye sila-dhir gurusu na… Gurusu means those who are acaryas, to accept their body as ordinary man’s body, this is denied in the sastras. SO ALTHOUGH A PHYSICAL BODY IS NOT PRESENT, THE VIBRATION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AS THE PRESENCE OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER, VIBRATION. WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE SPIRITUAL MASTER, THAT IS LIVING.
Note: It is FACTUALLY Srila Prabhupada who CONSTANTLY INSTRUCTS us through his books , tapes, cds. “becomes his initiating spiritual master later on.” indicates the position of Srila Prabhupada as the INITIATOR.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
Generally a spiritual master who CONSTANTLY INSTRUCTS a disciple in spiritual science becomes his initiating spiritual master later on.
Madhudvisa: It is not really difficult to become a bona fide spiritual master and Prabhupada wants his disciples to become bona fide spiritual masters. This is Lord Caitanya’s mission [amara ajna guru…] and yes Prabhu. Lord Caitanya was talking about diksa gurus
Mahesh: Madhudvisa prabhu says NOT REALLY DIFFICULT? to become a MAHABHAGAVATA as per definition of BONAFIDE QUALIFED GURU: Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
MAHA-BHAGAVATA-srestho
brahmano vai gurur nrnam
sarvesam eva lokanam
asau pujyo yatha harih
maha-kula-prasuto ‘pi
sarva-yajnesu diksitah
sahasra-sakhadhyayi ca
na guruh syad avaisnavah
((The guru MUST be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru MUST be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people. ….When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. ONLY SUCH A PERSON IS ELIGIBLE TO OCCUPY THE POST OF A GURU.))
SB 4.12.11 P Dhruva Maharaja Goes Back to Godhead
IN SUMMARY, A MAHA-BHAGAVATA, A HIGHLY ELEVATED PURE DEVOTEE, SEES THE LORD EVERYWHERE, AS WELL AS WITHIN THE HEART OF EVERYONE. This is possible for devotees who have developed elevated devotional service to the Lord. As stated in the Brahma-samhita (5.38), premanjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena: only those who have smeared their eyes with the ointment of love of Godhead CAN SEE EVERYWHERE THE SUPREME LORD FACE TO FACE; it is not possible by imagination or so-called meditation.
SB 2.9.35 P Answers by Citing the Lord’ s Version
Therefore, although He is present in every atom, the Supreme Personality of Godhead may not be visible to the dry speculators; still the mystery is unfolded before the eyes of the pure devotees because their eyes are anointed with love of Godhead. And this love of Godhead can be attained only by the practice of transcendental loving service of the Lord, and nothing else. The vision of the devotees is not ordinary; it is purified by the process of devotional service. In other words, as the universal elements are both within and without, similarly the Lord’s name, form, quality, pastimes, entourage, etc., as they are described in the revealed scriptures or as performed in the Vaikunthalokas, far, far beyond the material cosmic manifestation, are factually being televised in the heart of the devotee. The man with a poor fund of knowledge cannot understand, although by material science one can see things far away by means of television. Factually, the spiritually developed person is able to have the television of the kingdom of God always reflected within his heart. That is the mystery of knowledge of the Personality of Godhead.
Madhudvisa: A qualified diksa guru does not in any way minimize or ‘replace’ his spiritual master. He simply represents his spiritual master
Mahesh:
Note: It is SUCCESSION MEANS to SUCCEED:
SB 3.29.17 P Explanation of Devotional Service by Lord Kapila
In Bhagavad-gita, Thirteenth Chapter, it is clearly stated that one should execute devotional service and advance on the path of spiritual knowledge by accepting the acarya. Acaryopasanam: one should worship an acarya, a spiritual master who knows things as they are. THE SPIRITUAL MASTER MUST BE IN THE DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION FROM KRSNA. THE PREDECESSORS OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER ARE HIS SPIRITUAL MASTER, HIS GRAND SPIRITUAL MASTER, HIS GREAT-GRAND SPIRITUAL MASTER AND SO ON, WHO FORM THE DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION OF ACARYAS.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Santosh – use your common-sense:
So DID Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura DIKSA GURU of Srila Prabhupada give diksa at the SAME time as Srila Prabhupada OR did Srila Prabhupada SUCCEED him as PER DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION to give Diksa?
The LAST name in Disciplic Succession is:SRI SRIMAD BHAKTIVEDANTA
68-02-13. Letter: Upendra
My Guru Maharaja was in the 10th generation from Lord Caitanya. We are 11th from Lord Caitanya. The disciplic sucession is as follows: 1. Sri Krishna, 2. Brahma, 3. Narada, 4. Vyasa, 5. Madhva, 6. Padmanabha, 7. Nrihari, 8. Madhava, 9. Akshobhya, 10. Jayatirtha, 11. Jnanasindhu, 12. Purusottama, 13. Vidyanidhi, 14. Rajendra, 15. Jayadharma, 16. Purusottama, 17. Vyasatirtha, 18. Laksmipati, 19. Madhavendra Puri, 20. Isvara Puri (Advaita, Nityananda) 21. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, 22. (Svarupa, Sanatana) Rupa, 23.(Jiva) Raghunath, 24. Krishna dasa, 25. Narottama, 26. Visvanatha, 27. (Baladeva.) Jagannatha, 28. (Bhaktivinode) Gaura-kisora, 29. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, Sri Barshabhanavidayitadas, 30. SRI SRIMAD BHAKTIVEDANTA.
ys mahesh
George, you are a neophyte devotee of the Lord. You accused me of wishing you dead, which is a considered a offensive cruelty among devotees, not to mention the POPULAR CONCEPTION among Karmi’s of good will. You are not Hiranyakasipu, yet. If you reach such status, I may change my mind.
Srila Prabhupada was PROPERLY EDUCATED at an august institution in, among other things, classical grammar, logic, and rhetoric, before you were in diapers. An institution wherein the marxist paradigm of “whatever is true for you” had not yet taken root, as it had in many American public and private schools as early as the late 40’s.
As such, I was translating Srila Prabhupada’s statements according to the proper and classic usage in order to correct YOU and others who are misconstruing his orders on the authority of grammar girls who have gradually and whimsically obscured MEANINGFUL standards under the rubric of resisting “prissy formalities”. Their true goal being to insure that their audience will continue to mis understand and mis-communicate meaningful issues, creating an army of like minded fools to assist them in perpetuating their materialistic sloth. I resist. I will persist to resist such evil even if the rest of the world slides completely into Idiocracy and I am the last person standing who can speak clearly and definitively on a subject. You may do with that information what you will.
Hare Krsna
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Dear Prabhupadanugas,
I beg you to kindly consider what I’m writing now—It is certainly true that many of you are very senior devotees and have read Prabhupada’s books again and again.So it is true that all of you are very knowledgeable and experienced in the matter of devotional service.Some of you are directly initiated by Prabhupada,and it is my duty to respect you.
Srila Prabhupada wanted to create a society of devotees who are seriously deddeicated to pleasing Krsna.This can be done by following Prabhupada’s instructions that He has written in His books.The senior devotees must guide the junior devotees in developing their relationship with Prabhupada and Krsna.They are also required to bring the ignorant masses (of which I am am a member)to some point of faith in Krsna.If they do this service for plasing Prabhupada,then it will do a lot of good to this world…and there will be some God Consciousness prevailing in the world.But what has happened after Prabhupada’s departure from this world is that the senior disciples of Prabhupada have vent out their ambitious nature bytrying to become initiating spiritual masters in their own Guru’s institution.So there have been many falldowns and many sincere souls(who want to understand their relationship with God)have completely lost faith in Prabhupada and Krsna…this is such a pitiful condition.
But there are some sincere disciples of Prabhupada who have wanted to make available the real teachings of Prabhupada to the entire world so that they could prove that Srila Prabhupada has nothing to do with the corruption inISKCON and that actually Prabhupada wanted the ritvik system within the institution.
But even more pitiful is that the ritvik supporters are themselves quarelling among themselves.Even the direct disciples of Prabhupada,who are supposed to always glorify Prabhupada and happily spread Krsna Consciousness,are criticizing and finding fault with other devotees.
I feel really hurt when I see this situation.We see that it has been only 36 years since Prabhupada has departed from this planet…and the situation is so bad.If any innocent person(wanting to understand Krsna Consciousness)sees this quarelling and the use of bad language by experienced devotees,what faith can he develop in Prabhupada…..Where is the practical manifestation of the Golden Age of 10,000 years when the things are so bad now itself…How can I develop any faith when there is no guidance from senior devotees…..Whom should I trust?Initially I had faith in Madhudvisa Prabhu,and then extended to the Prabhupadanugas.Now you are accusing Madhudvisa Prabhu of being a liar….also there are many accusations about Madhu Pandit das Prabhu and his parivar,which you fail to explain…..In such a situation,whom to trust?Where is the practicality of Krsna Consciousness at this time when there are no sadhu-sanga?I agree that Prabhupada lives forever in His books,but without the association of His honest followers,wheere is the hope?
So my plea is to please answer in whom I should trust to follow Krsna Consciousness when all of you are simply fighting amongst yourselves.Also explain how this process is practicable,since I find that I am unable to appreciate Srila Prabhupada’s books
Santosh says: Some of you are directly initiated by Prabhupada, and it is my duty to respect you.
But you obviously don’t respect us, because even after I explained to you that, for example:
…is Mayavadi nonsense, and should be written:
…you still insist that you are right and I am wrong.
Hare Krsna Pratyatosa Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.Please forgive me for that”He”–I thought it could also be used for exalted acaryas…since I had seen it being used by some devotees.I could not finish my comment because there was an urgency….I beg you to understand what I have been trying to say–“Whom should I place my trust in,since there is so much quarelling and so many differing opinions…I am feeling that I can appreciate Prabhupada’s books only by seeing examples of people who form sadhu sanga,i.ethose who are honestly following Prabhupada’s teachings..”please forgive me for that mistake…I was not intending to sound like Prabhupada is God.Please read my previous comment and try to clear my confusion.
Begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Dear Santosh, Srila Prabhupada once told us that in the time of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura most of India had fallen into control of the mayavada smarta brahmins. And around Bengal the Vaishnava culture was mostly bogus sahajiya camps, which had various bogus ideas and no small amount of debauchery. Srila Bhaktivinode actually wrote about some of these sahajiya camps to identify them and their deviations.
Srila Prabhupada said that the whole culture of India at that time was so degraded that Srila Bhaktivinode “harldy knew where to start” to begin attacking all these multifarious deviations.
So the fact that the vaishnava culture sometimes deteriorates is nothing new, this means, worship of Krishna in KALI YUGA is very rare, and not so easy to attain due to all these cheaters entering in to spoil things. That means, you have to be very determined to attain success, because the opposition is very powerful. That also means its our collective karma to have a hard time attaining Krishna due to our past mis-deeds. So this is all a test from Krishna, to see if we are determined to attain Him or not. And the first test He wants to see is: If we are loyal to His pure devotee Srila Prabhupada. And if we are, then we will not be very much affected by all these various parties and other problems, because we will have a bona fide shelter.
We need to get ourselves fixed in the absolute platform first of all, that is the point Srila Prabhupada made to us many times, because all kinds of other troubles will surely come and we need to be steady ourselves. This is something like the Christians who say “Jesus is my rock,” that means Jesus is their solid shelter which they can grab onto in the storm of the material whirlpool. ys pd
Hare Krsna,
By the way Pratyatosa das Prabhu,Srila Prabhupada has used “Him” and”His” to refer to his Guru Maharaj.
Example:”This Bon Maharaja, perhaps you do not know, has been rejected by Guru Maharaja. So I cannot recommend him as siksa-guru. I think that he has no actual spiritual asset. For spiritual advancement of life, we must go to one who is actually practicing spiritual life; not to some head of a mundane institution, not to one who has offended his spiritual master in so many ways. I do not wish to go into all details here, but I must inform you that this Bon Maharaja may be considered as a black snake, and at the time of His Disappearance, my Guru Maharaja did not even wish to have him in His presence due to the character of this Bon Maharaja…” (Hrisikesha, 1/9/69)
This I have taken from Sulocana Prabhu’s Guru Business
Santosh says:
By the way Pratyatosa das Prabhu, Srila Prabhupada has used “Him” and ”His” to refer to his Guru Maharaj.
Example:”
(Hrisikesha, 1/9/69)
This I have taken from Sulocana Prabhu’s Guru Business
Sulocana Prabhu is not our authority on how to transcribe Srila Prabhupada’s spoken words. Here is that same quote from the VedaBase:
As I understand it as per British English, Him, His in Capital word first letter indicates an important personality whereas an American English, there is no such distinction prevails other than referring it to God, Himself. That is my inference.
Santosh Prabhu, it seems that you are an honest person. That is why you are here in this Prabhupadanuga site. No doubt, as you said that there are so many different Individual camp of the Ritviks. All of them are not on the same platform. Some are there for certain Prathistha, name, fame and status etc. and some are genuinely following and promoting the teachings of the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada as it is SELFLESSLY.
Now that you are in this Prabhupadanuga site where you are seeing all different Individual Ritviks expressing their concerns in regard to the level of knowledge they possess. Therefore, it is up to you to decide who you feel comfortable with and have your association so that you can achieve your desired goals in cultivating Krsna Consciousness. That is my humble suggestion to you.
At last but not the least, kindly I beg from you to please listen to Srila Prabhupada’s recorded messages, tape, lectures and read His Books. If you have any question, feel free to ask.
Hope it meets you well.
Hari BOL. AGTSP.
YS…….. Amar Puri.
Mark:”George, you are a neophyte devotee of the Lord”
BVNM: Anyone! He need not be from a specific sect, movement, group, or anything. Anyone who is doing that is accepted as an uttama-adhikari. I know I am not in that class. It may be that I am madhyama-kanistha, bas, not more than that. This I know. Sometimes I’m in the stage of kanistha and sometimes entering into madhyama, so madhyama- kanistha .
The Essence of All Advice B.V. Narayana Maharaja’
“Ah-hah!” I said to myself. I had him.
It had been a year since I had visited Narayana Maharaja for the first and only time that I had as yet seen him, a year since both my anger and suspicions had been kindled by him when first I heard him criticize the disciples of Srila Prabhupada, calling them poison. Rtvik or initiated during his physical presence, it made no difference to me for all of them, the ones that I had met were proceeding out of a sincere desire to serve Srila Prabhupada. Hearing him calling them poison was like a match to a powder keg.
Before those fateful moments Krsna have guided my hand, selecting for me two literatures from his table, one of them consisting of correspondences between Naryana Maharaja and Srila Prabhupada and the other one The Essence of All Advice, both were damning.
In the second literature Narayana Maharaja admitted to his disbelieving audience his actual level in devotional service. A level apparently low in the estimate of some but one that can be more dangerous than a poisonous serpent with a beautiful jewel shining from its forehead. I had no doubt of the truth of his admission and even understood his reason for making it, which was just in case anyone out there could actually see him, just in case Srila Prabhupadas Krsna Consciousness mission of ISKCON had indeed produced any number of persons who had become attained to the madhyama level for it is upon that level that one becomes gifted by Srila Prabhupadas mercy with spiritual vision.
Below the madhyama level the devotees have the eye of sastra in the form of Srila Prabhupadas translations, purports and other writings to guide them and Srila Prabhupadas stern instructions to look to a persons actions in order to judge their position in devotional service.
I had seen what Narayana Maharaja had been doing, both through my own eyes and others, but his attitude towards the Rtviks for a moment puzzled me until I understood that they were more loyal to Srila Prabhupada than ISKCON and would never accept Narayana Maharaj as Srila Prabjupadas replacement and that was why he was trying to foster a holocaust mentality towards them amongst both his disciples and in ISKCON, for only with the Rtviks safely out of the way could he ever be sure of holding ISKCON even if he succeeded in convincing the then current ISKCON leadership to accept him as that which he claimed to be, as the only legitimate heir of the house that Srila Prabhupada built for all thye world to live in.
When I had heard Narayana Maharaja call the Rtviks poison, i.e, the givers of poison thus relegating them to one of the types of aggressor that can be killed on sight withour accruing any sin I had just been angry and it had taken me some time to cool down and reflect, but finally after studying the books that I had taken home and listening to devotees I came to the position of understanding him. Still, being that such things are relative I had to put Narayana Maharajas admission to the test to determine, if I could, just how advanced he was, that and whether he was Mayavadi.
I arrived at the address in the Marina in L.A. down by Venice Beach and walked in to find Jadurani addressing a group of about 40 to 50 devotees. I sat down, offered my obeisances and then took in the situation. All of the devotees were politely and dutifully listenting to Jadurani and there was an aura of resignation about them as they listened to her. There wasn’t a drop of enthusiasm in the entire room and I knew why, so very quickly and to commence my series of tests I took the preserntation away from Jadurani. I enterrupted her and then interjected what her presentation had been missing, something that I had learned from the disiples of Srila Prabhupada many, many years before. I took the presentation away from her and then interjected into it the missing ingredient that the devotees had given me and that I had cherished, I interjected into it Srila Prabhupadas moods…and the dead came to life again, there were smiles and joy, great hope and enthusiasm and even cries of Jai! And then I gave the presentation back to her, she was a bit miffed and asked me my name. I gave it to her. “George” I replied. She didn’t know what to do with that as she had been ready instead to hear some devotees name so she just resumed her presentation and the devotees wen back to dutifully and respectfully listening and as Srila Prabhupadas mood went out of the presentation so also left with it joy and hope and great expectation and all enthusiasm faded from the room.
I had not expected to conduct the test that I had just conducted, just the one that was about to begin as suddenly there was a sound of commotion in the back of the room. I turned and looked, Narayana Maharaja was coming into the room, Brajanatha was with him arm and arm.
The English language to my knowledge doesn’t have any words by which I can describe precisely what was happening next in terms of esoteric science, so bear withy me please as I try to describe what happened next.
As Narayana mAhraja entered hanging upon Brajanatha I made it seem to him that his presentation was successful, more so than it was. To do this I amplified the level of enthusiasm that was apparent to him to a degree that made him feel very happy and satisfied that he was marketing things right. Then, once I knew that I was able to get him to accept a projected illusion as reality I dropped the illusion (which had been diffuse) and projected towards him a silent laugh of derision that any person who was as psychic as a madhyama level devotee would be would be aware of, informing him of what he had just been the subject of. As this last illusion had not been diffused but had been projected along a straight line from point a to point be likewise any person of psychic ability would be able to pinpoint its source. I counted to three and then got tired of waiting and returned to normal consciousness.
About 45 minutes later Narayana Maharaja became invisible to everyone in the room by acting in a way that they could not see. He started crawling and uttering in gutturals “ISKCON”, “ISKCON” in such a way that his hatred of it was clearly evident. This entire show was made for and to me and I saw it as that which it was, his attempt to recruit me through my own hatred of those who I am told murdered my master, robbed and raped my masters children and then threw them out to die like dogs in the street. It didn’t work. It didn’t work because it wasn’t real, he was only trying to trick me into thinking that he gave a damn about my master or my masters children.
Not a single word of what I have just recounted is my invention.
Mark:”George, you are a neophyte devotee of the Lord”
Absolutely! So tell me then Bhakta Mark, where exactly does that place me in the little primate pecking order than you and your fellow chimps keep trying to shove me into? Certainly somewhere below you, of course..
Since we’re talking about primates, another true story comes to mind about an actual gorilla that was dieing who came up to me just to hear Krsnas Holy names. I am nothing prabhu, but Krsna is the greatest.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
Hare Krsna Amar Puri Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.Thank you Amar Prabhu,for replying.It is true that some are simply for name and fame,and others are trying to please Srila Prabhupada.The only thing I want is the trust that yes,some people are in fact,sincerely following the teachings of Prabhupada and are inclined to carry forward the mission of Prabhupada.I think that when I have this faith, I can boldly follow Prabhupada’s instructions.Otherwise,I don’t find the strength to practice Krsna Consciousness,as the process looks impractical with no one to support me.
I am chanting 16 rounds,reading Bhagavad Gita for around 40 minutes,and hearing 1 class of Prabhupada everyday.Also since I’m am engineering student, I find it difficult to execute these activities without being made fun of by my peer group,because around me,everyone is materialistic….except two of my friends who chant but are ignorant of what happened to ISKCON after Prabhupada’s departure from this earth.
So,my only plea,is that you show me,by convincing arguments,that there are,at this presnt moment,people who are sincerely following Prabhupada.
Begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Dear Pratyatosa Prabhu,
I am sure you are fully aware that those above words were written words of Prabhupada, and not spoken words.And recently I saw the translations of Bhagavad-Gita verses in vedabase. I saw they were the changed ones by the BBT. So, how do you take as authority the vedabase? It might have even slightly edited Prabhupada’s written words.
Begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Dear George.
Funny you should focus on that. I suppose you couldn’t possibly have read all the times on the internet where I admit myself to the same platform of neophyte.
It may have been in doubt that I even considered you a devotee because of the contentions between us, and because I have pointed out that in my opinion you are misunderstanding and even flat out disobeying the Acarya. I wanted to make it clear that I consider you on the same platform as myself, but I consider you misguided by ambition. As you do me. Just to be clear.
But you couldn’t possibly intuit that, and chose to make a mountain out of a molehill. Another difference between you and me. You don’t know when to make a reasonable distinction such as the proper use of the words “Can” and “may” which make a world of difference when speaking of permission and orders given by an authority figure, yet you are quick to quibble over that which should be obvious in order to paint me as having a superiority complex.
And yes, I believe I have surpassed that particular stage of the neophyte realm, while I believe you have not. There is a supreme judge who knows the truth, I can only offer my opinion and point to why I believe it is the right one.
Dear Santosh Prabhu,
Hare Krishna. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
This Krsna Consciousness is Individual. Everyone of us has to cultivate according to one’s circumstances and situations. In this case, the best example is none other than our Jagat Guru Srila Prabhupada. Therefore, all of us have to follow the same Instructions that Srila Prabhupada has given to us.
Certainly we need the association of like minded that can help us further our cause to cultivate KC. That you have to look around as to what helps you to achieve your goal in the Saddhana as per Srila Prabhupada’s Instructions, and the one which distracts you have to discard it and stay away from it. It is that simple. There are so much out there going on who carry their own chair. You do not need to look up to them but Srila Prabhupada, BAS. The more you become inquisitive to understand and follow Srila Prabhupada, the better your understanding becomes which shall further reveal to you according to the proportion of your sincere and serious efforts of knowing the TRUTH. This way you can also share the same understanding with the like minded people to make not only your life sublime in KC. but also with others as well.
I am glad to know from you that you are already chanting, reading and hearing from Srila Prabhupada’s Books and Lectures. Bravo. Keep it up. That is how you will get the mercy from Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada’s mercy is available for everyone who so ever desires it. That is why Srila Prabhupada is also known as the Karuna Sindhu, full of mercy distributing freely the Holy Name of the Lord.
Should you have any particular questions, feel free to address it.
Hope it finds you satisfactory.
Hari BOL.
YS……. Amar Puri.
Right, the kindergarten teacher says, all of you “can or may become” brain surgeons, that does not mean: we give the kindergarten children a bunch of hack saws, black and decker sawzalls, and ask them to operate on people? Sheesh! ys pd
Bhakta Mark writes in his comments ; ” But you couldn’t possibly intuit that, and chose to make a mountain out of a molehill. Another difference between you and me. You don’t know when to make a reasonable distinction such as the proper use of the words “Can” and “may” which make a world of difference when speaking of permission and orders given by an authority figure, yet you are quick to quibble over that which should be obvious in order to paint me as having a superiority complex.
The proper usage of the words “may” and ” can ” is given in the following Srila Prabhupada’s conversation as well.
“So far designation is concerned, the spiritual master authorizes every one of his disciples. But it is up to the disciple to carry out the order, able to carry out or not. It is not that spiritual master is partial, he designates one and rejects other. He may do that. If the other is not qualified, he can do that. But actually his intention is not like that. He wants that each and every one of his disciple become as powerful as he is or more than that. That is his desire. Just like father wants every son to be as qualified or more qualified than the father. But it is up to the student or the son to raise himself to that standard.”
(Srila Prabhupada speaks to Atreya Rishi, June 29, 1972, San Diego)
Prabhupada “So far designation is concerned, the spiritual master authorizes every one of his disciples. But it is up to the disciple to carry out the order, able to carry out or not. It is not that spiritual master is partial, he designates one and rejects other. He may do that. If the other is not qualified, he can do that. But actually his intention is not like that. He wants that each and every one of his disciple become as powerful as he is or more than that. That is his desire. Just like father wants every son to be as qualified or more qualified than the father. But it is up to the student or the son to raise himself to that standard.”
Ātreya Ṛṣi: Yes, I understand.
Prabhupāda: If you are incapable of raising yourself to the standard of becoming spiritual master, that is not your spiritual master’s fault, that is your fault. He wants, just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, āmāra ājñāya guru hañā [Cc. Madhya 7.128], By My order, every one of you become a guru. If one cannot carry out the order of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, then how he can become a guru? The first qualification is that he must be able to carry out the order of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Then he becomes guru. So that carrying out the order of Caitanya Mahāprabhu depends on one’s personal capacity. Āmāra ājñāya guru hañā. Acceptance of Caitanya Mahāprabhu as Kṛṣṇa, that is there in the śāstra, in the Upaniṣads, in Mahābhārata, in Bhāgavata.
———————————————————
The relevant parts in this discussion are where Srila Prabhupada says,
1. “The spiritual master MAY do that.” (designate one, reject another). Meaning he has both permission and ability inherent in his authoritative position.
2. “If one is not qualified he CAN do it.” This is a case where the word “can” is being used to indicate under what conditions he “may” do that. (if one is not qualified”). The context of permission was introduced with the initial use of the word “may”. Srila Prahbupada is explaining why he might make such a designation.
Whereas in the section from NOI 5 relating to “accepting disciples”, there is no precedent or context of permission. George proposed: “we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada … initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction”
NOI 5: “The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform…
… One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī. A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master.”
All I see here is an admittance that a neophyte “can” (is capable of) accepting disciples and giving them insufficient guidance. This statement of fact is found in the context of 2 prohibitions saying this should not be done.
The acaryas intention is not that they wish to designate one disciple and not another. The acarya wants all to come to the standard. But he may designate. He can do it.
It appears that in the May 28th conversation that Srila Prabhupada designated the ritviks were to “actually” be gurus, but it was by his order which means the disciples were theirs LIMITED BY CONDITIONS, and simultaneously granddisciples of Srila Prabhupada’s.
The conditions of this discipleship is that in context of all other instructions, those ritviks would likely have very little regular participation in the lives of disciples in their region, if at all, and any instruction they might personally give would need to be strictly in line with the body of instructions framed by Srila Prabhupada himself for Iskcon.
So basically, Srila Prabhupada was stating the obvious, which is that any senior Bhakta involved with a junior is giving discipline and acting like a guru. He was forced to authorize neophytes to teach his new aspiring disciples, thus putting those neophytes in a position as siksa guru. Yet in context of Iskcon, no aspirant is ever exclusively the disciple of a Ritvik, nor even their local temple president, or any one person, because Srila Prabhupada’s instructions trump all others, and are easily available for comparison. Any teacher whether TP, or Ritvik, or GBC, or otherwise can and should be relieved of their teaching position and barred from teaching new people if they contradict the guidelines of the Founder Acarya.
Srila Prabhupada did not have such restrictions. He is the uttama spiritual master that all who approach Iskcon is meant to take shelter of as per NOI 5.
Any devotee of any level of advancement who wishes to teach within the halls of Iskcon is required to teach within the guidelines set forth by Srila Prabhupada. An advanced mahabhagavata would be the MOST STRICT in this regard in order to prevent confusion and chaos. And if he was guided by the Lord to do otherwise, such an advanced devotee would start a mission separate from Iskcon, unless anyone believes the Lord himself would wish to sew confusion and chaos within Iskcon. Any takers on that theory?
A neophyte accepting disciples to whom they give insufficient guidance is the case in Its-a-con today, precisely because these neophytes are under the illusion that they are fully liberated Acaryas (like Srila Prabhupada) and the new Bhaktas they are teaching are their exclusive disciples. They then relegate Srila Prabhupada to a formal position of “Param Siksa guru” (in name only) while making up new rules and standards contrary to Srila Prabhupada’s under the claim there is a new “time place and circumstance” and that they are competent to make the neeede adjustments because of a 2/3 vote of other neophytes.
Whereas with the Ritvik system of initiation, all neophyte or madhyam siksa gurus were to follow all the standards given by Srila Prahbupada TO THE LETTER, including telling new Bhaktas that they are indeed disciples of the Uttama Mahabhagavata Founder Acarya of Iskcon, and instructing them within the guidelines given by Srila Prabhupada. In other words, if they didn’t know the answer to a question, or what guidance to give in any circumstance they would not speculate and make something up believing they had divine license to do so, but instead would admit their deficit, and ask a senior, or look it up in one of Prabhupada’s reference literatures (a novel idea).
That guidance would be sufficient, and in that sense even a neophyte guru would be considered a pure devotee and a transparent via medium to his “disciples”.
Mark
In your second paragraph you say that we are upon the same level while in your last you opine that you have advanved beyond me. These are two different opinions in case you havn’t noticed. Talk about logical inconsistancy.
……and the latter also validates my consideration offered in my previous posting wherin I expressed my consideration that you were still playing you silly ass game of trying to place me somewhere on the food chain underneath you.
This reveals that your former claim in the last post was just a strategy of yours to make it seem that you were more humble than you actually are. Making it look tlike you consider us equals. That in the same posting you completly forget about this consideration and state that you believe yourself to be my superior just shows us how dishonest you are. It was a dishonest attempt to fool others into thinking that you are actually humble andsincere in your consideration of equality between us.
Mark, Even if I were the devil himself I would have to fall half a mile and leave a crater 500 feet down to equal in advancement some of those whose behavior goes right by your nose without comment. Similarly until you do then iI see you as nothing but an honorific and on account of the respect and love I have for Srila Prabhupada only I address you as if to me you were anything other than what you refer to as “karmis” and what my grandmothers people refer to as being “cowans”, either way I do not see you as you imagine yourself and yourselves to be but as something much more alarming. .
Mark, Belief and disbelief are but two sides of the same coin, the value of which is nothing for both are positions of ignorance. A man can believe anthing, that the earth is flat and has four corners that the moon is green and made of cheese, anything with absolutely no relation to the fact.
Sri Rupa advises us that we should be intelligegent enough to know our actual posityions positions.
You only see things in relation to yourself, a dreadful and childish habit that you should have grown out of before your voice changed., but this is Kali yuga and you are no exception to the rule., rather you are as predictable as Newtonian mathematics.
Unfortunately we share with our forest cousins a general inability to examine, much less criique our nuero semantic programs.
Since no one has asked me whether I did as I mentioned that I intended to do in my previous post and tested Narayana Maharaja to see if he was a Mayavadi and if I had then what was the result.
Many a rose has blloomed unseen to waste its fragrance on the deserts arid air and thus then we can only hope that some wind might carrty its fragrance along to posterity
Yes, I did test him, and thanks for asking”
During the course of the encounter I grew impatient, hardly any of the people were listenting to him that intently anyway so he was just doing the obligatory and going through the motions while the devotees just sat around and basked in his glory.
I gave him a silent command that constrained him from doing anything else until he answered me which immediately he did . Narayana Maharaja answered then that “Krsna has no form….
without Radhe,”
which to me meant that he wasn’t a Mayavadi.
But he wasn’t Srila Prabhupada either and though he admitted to those who could see what he was to those who could not, either through the light of Shastra and in line with Srila Prabhupadas purports or with the other eye that opens to see whats behind the curtain thats over the world, to these he was pretending to be what he wasn’t, Srila Prabhupadas successor and the only rightful heir to Srila Prabhupadas ISKCON.
It was only after that that he later crawled around and muttered ISKCON, ISKCON with great hatred under his breath in an effort to manipulate me through my vices.
BVNM: Anyone! He need not be from a specific sect, movement, group, or anything. Anyone who is doing that is accepted as an uttama-adhikari. I know I am not in that class. It may be that I am madhyama-kanistha, bas, not more than that. This I know. Sometimes I’m in the stage of kanistha and sometimes entering into madhyama, so madhyama- kanistha .
The Essence of All Advice B.V. Narayana Maharaja’
Sometimes he did however know what he was talking about .
Most of us live in s one dimensional model discrete (yes/no) universe. Few people can even tolerate maybe. How many people can tolerate a multi-factor interacting model? Non-sectarian Vaisnavism? Very few. It would require that they specify conditions of when, who, where and how, that they adjust things to time, capacity and place. This is to much for most people, their tolerance to existential pressure is to low, about three seconds of absolute terror being enough to drive them completely out ogf their skins according to my Vietnam vet counselor..
Politicians and advertisers (including both ISKCON and the Rtvik savants as well as Narayana Maharaja (or at keast ge did) rely on the fact that most people can only respond from a yes/no matrrix. As people become more complex they can look at something like the Rtviks propose (and what the Christians already do, albeit imperfectly and add a maybe. As they become more and more complex they are able to facxtor in more and more.
Nobody asked me about the gorilla either.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
Hare Krsna
P.S. Anyone in the L.A. area want to associate?
Hare Krsna Amar Puri Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.I am very happy to recieve your reply.But I have one question…How can we be sure of the genuinety of the association we are taking?Actually,before knowing about Prabhupadanugas and ritvik,I was in the association of devotees who were students of a preacher,who is a disciple of Romapada Maharaj(an ISKCON guru).I never could find anything bad about the association of these devotees and the character of their teacher(who has been also my spiritual preceptor)(This teacher of mine has been preaching outside ISKCON,in engineering colleges and he has made many devottes)I have always liked him because he glorified Prabhupada,and was very committed to spreading Krsna Consciousness.But one day, I was curious to find out about ISKCON and I was heartbroken to learn about ISKCON’s position.I was determined to find solution to my problem and then came across Sulocana Prabhu’s Guru Business book,krishna.org, and prabhupadanugas website.I then became determined to know what is actually the truth and to find out what Prabhupada actually wants.On one hand,I now like to hear from Prabhupada,and on the other hand do not find anything wrong with the character of my teacher.But I always stopped hearing from him(my teacher)because of the logical arguments presented b ythe Prabhupadanugas that Srila Prabhupada must be worshipped.
So my main doubt is—how do I know which association is coorect?
I beg you to address both my past and present situations and then clear my doubt.Honestly speaking prabhu,whenever I put forward a question in this site ,I am anxious till I get my doubt cleared and move forward comfortably.
Begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santoh
Dear Pratyatosa prabhu
I humbly request you to answer the previous comment that I wrote to you.Please tell me whether I am right or wrong,How do you accept vedabase as authority and also do you you know that those words were written words of Prabhupada?
begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Since no one has asked me whether I did as I mentioned that I intended to do in my previous post and tested Narayana Maharaja to see if he was a Mayavadi and if I had then what was the result.
[PD: This proves that George is a mayavadi. Narayana Maharaja says we all originate in the tatastha, and this is clearly atheistic mayavada. And it gets worse, George is also promoting the writings of NM and saying these are the writings of Srila Saraswati. This means George is not only promoting mayavada, but he is hi-jacking the writings of the mayavadins, claiming these are the writings of our personalist acharyas, to dis-prove our personalist acharyas. George is a mayavada, we do not originate in the tatastha, this proves what we thought all along, George is an atheist mayavada. I am glad he has finally admitted to this. ys pd]
My dear George, there are different degrees of neophyte.
I did the research on this issue and published some essays based on Srila Prabhupada’s teachings on the matter over on the HareKrsnaDhama@yahoogroups website.
To summarize,
A neophyte beginning their devotional life has soft faith and is considered a materialistic devotee or prakrta bhakta. This devotee has a belief that the Deity in the temple is Supreme over all things, but does not understand the Deities presence as supersoul IN all things. They have no conception of the 4 ways to engage in relationship with others as the Madhyam has.
If such a devotee has total faith in the orders of the spiritual master, and follows those orders cent per cent, they are considered a pure devotee “in the shower” so to speak. They are gradually educated by supersoul and the spiritual master and scripture to understand supersoul’s presence in all things, and how HIS activities produce 4 divisions of person who are to be related to in 4 different ways by a devotee. Their faith gradually becomes fixed and unshakable. They enter madhyama adikhari.
Srila Prabhupada referred to Lord Caitanya’s associates Candrasekara and Tapana Misra das as both neophytes and pure devotees.
Within the Prakrta Bhakta stage, there are various degrees of understanding and advancement, which can be tracked by a devotee who has succeeded in garnering those understandings, including a neophyte who has done so.
If a neophyte devotee rejects the orders of the spiritual master, they are still a neophyte devotee but are considered Prakrta sahajiya. This type of neophyte has fallen to old habits of speculation under the influence of false ego. They still chant and might even keep up many of the outer formalities of Vaisnava practice, but they are not so serious about purifying themselves because they are under the illusion that they have actually surpassed the neophyte stage.
Within the Prakrta Sahajiya stage, it appears, the degrees of transgression are infinite.
Santosh says:
Dear Pratyatosa prabhu
I humbly request you to answer the previous comment that I wrote to you.Please tell me whether I am right or wrong,How do you accept vedabase as authority and also do you you know that those words were written words of Prabhupada?
begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Srila Prabhupada, except for the very early days, did not write things or type things himself. He dictated letters to a secretary, spoke his books into a dictaphone, and his lectures/conversations were tape recorded. Then the recordings were later transcribed by his disciples.
Like I said before, for someone to capitalize pronouns referring to anyone other than God Himself is the result of Mayavadi contamination.
It’s obvious to me that nothing that I say is going to change your mind, so do what you want. I’m not going to discuss it with you further. You can have Sulocana Prabhu as your authority, but my authority on the matter is the VedaBase.
Dear Santosh Prabhu,
Hare Krishna. AGTSP. PAMHO.
Your question ; How can we be sure of the genuinety of the association we are taking?
A sincere person like yourself is generally guided by the Paramatma. As long as your sincerity in cultivating Krsna Consciousness develops seriously , the path of your association shall open up to you proportionately. This is a fact. I am sure you agree with it.
From your message it appears that you were not in agreement with your Teacher, perhaps, who have had his own personal agenda. Is my inference correct ?
To answer your further question ; ” So my main doubt is—how do I know which association is coorect?
As I advised you in my second last comment in the first paragraph which reads as ; ” This Krsna Consciousness is Individual. Everyone of us has to cultivate according to one’s circumstances and situations. In this case, the best example is none other than our Jagat Guru Srila Prabhupada. Therefore, all of us have to follow the same Instructions that Srila Prabhupada has given to us.”
Thus, we can associate with like mind people who are dedicated to serve the mission of Srila Prabhupada SELFLESSLY ( free from all material desires).
Hope it meets you satisfactory.
Hari BOL.
YS……. Amar Puri.
Santosh Prabhu
Hare Krsna!
Regarding the use of Capitals for His Divine Grace it is not mayavada as Pratyatosh would like to believe.
Saksad Hari tivena means the Guru is REPRESENTING God so when Srila Prabhupada was speaking Krsna was SPEAKING thru Him that make He the spiritual master is respected AS GOOD AS GOD in the sense He GIVES God DIRECTLY. TRANSPARENT VIA MEDIA :
8:JD 10 Reflections Recollections by Srila Prabhupada of his journey to America
This may be relevant to the upper case – lower case thread ….
This is the dedication refered to in the letter.
The standard in Prabhupada’s books, is even pure devotees get small “h”.
Bhakta Hugh says: This may be relevant to the upper case–lower case thread.
Great! Thank you Bhakta Hugh Prabhu. This evidence that you’ve uncovered should end the debate in fine style!
Poorjana said:
[PD: This proves that George is a mayavadi. Narayana Maharaja says we all originate in the tatastha, and this is clearly atheistic mayavada. And it gets worse, George is also promoting the writings of NM and saying these are the writings of Srila Saraswati. This means George is not only promoting mayavada, but he is hi-jacking the writings of the mayavadins, claiming these are the writings of our personalist acharyas, to dis-prove our personalist acharyas. George is a mayavada, we do not originate in the tatastha, this proves what we thought all along, George is an atheist mayavada. I am glad he has finally admitted to this. ys pd]
Which throughly proves Poorjana is completely nut’s and anyone who takes him serious is as mad as him, so the conclusion is that all the folk here who are disciples of Poorjana are Poorjnanis and are similarly mad and nut’s by accepting this nonsense liar and constant blunderer with his perverted logic.
y.s.bj
Whilst I appreciate Bhakta Hughs correct analysis from Srila Prabhupada’s books. However, what explanation do you give in ALL Srila Prabhupada’s books front cover where the address is His Divine Grace A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada .The capital H in His . The whole philosophy is simultaneous oneness and different.
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Pratyatosa Prabhu says-
“Like I said before, for someone to capitalize pronouns referring to anyone other than God Himself is the result of Mayavadi contamination.
It’s obvious to me that nothing that I say is going to change your mind, so do what you want. I’m not going to discuss it with you further. You can have Sulocana Prabhu as your authority, but my authority on the matter is the VedaBase.”
Prabhu,I beg here to say that I am not here to prove or disprove anything.I am only desirous to know the correct understanding from senior devotees like yourself.I do not know much and so I have many things to ask and if I am not convinced by a particular explanation,I ask it again.Please do not understand that I am not at willing to accept your answer and am strongly desiring to debate with you.I am not at all capable of debating anything on this site,since I have not yet all of Prabhupada’s books.
Asking for an apology,
Your servant,
Santosh
Mahesh Raja says: Whilst I appreciate Bhakta Hughs correct analysis from Srila Prabhupada’s books. However, what explanation do you give in ALL Srila Prabhupada’s books front cover where the address is His Divine Grace A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.The capital H in His.
1. The first word of a title is always capitalized, even if it’s “a” or “the.”
2. When a pronoun is part of the official title of an important person, it is always capitalized. For example, “Adapted from an address by His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal…” (http://www.sgiquarterly.org/feature2001Jly-3.html)
Santosh says: Asking for an apology,
If I am wrong about your never being willing to admit that you were wrong about the He/His vs. he/his issue, then I apologize. But first, admit it, okay?
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Dear Amar Puri Prabhu,
I have once again finished reading the second chapter of Bhagavad Gita,and I have many doubts.If you so desire,please clear them.
Text 37:niscayah-uncertainty.
Text 39:’Real sankhya philosophy is described by Lord Kapila in the Srimad Bhagavatam,but even that sankhya has nothing to do with the current topics.’……
‘Lord Krsna made an analytical description of the soul just to bring Arjuna to the point of buddhi-yoga or bhakti yoga. Therefore,Lord Krsna’s sankhya and Lord Kapila’s sankhya,as described in the Bhagavatam,are one and the same.’
If this sankhya has nothing to do with the current topics,how both sankhyas are the same?
Text 40: ‘Ajamila performed his duty in some percentage of Krsna consciousness,but the result he enjoyed at the end was a hundred percent,by the grace of the Lord.’
But in some other place, Prabhupada says that without fully understanding Krsna,one cannot go back to Godhead .
Text 41: ‘The highest perfection of Krsna consciousness is renunciation of the material conception of life.’
But,is the devotee not far far above material conception?
Texts 42-43: ‘In the karma-kanda section of the Vedas it is said that those who perform the four monthly penances become eligible to drink the somarasa beverages to become immortal and happy forever.’
What does immortal mean here?
Text 53: ‘To say that one is in samadhi is to say that one has fully realized Krsna consciousness’…….Compare with Bg 2.44 where ‘When the mind is fixed for understanding the self,it is called samadhi.’
Text 56: ‘Nasau munir yasya matam na binnam.’ 1983 version:’Nasau rsir yasya matam na bhinnam.’
Which is correct?And the context is of muni,right? What is the difference between rsi and muni?
Text 62: ‘In the material world everyone,including Lord Siva and Lord Brahma–to say nothing of other demigods in the heavenly planets–is subjected to the influence of sense objects,and the only method to get out of this puzzle of material existence is to become Krsna conscious.’
But Lord Siva and Lord Brahma are the best of the Vaisnavas,right?
Text 65: ‘For one who is so situated in the Divine consciousness,the threefold miseries of material existence exist no longer;in such a happy state,one’s intelligence soon becomes steady.’
But the person in Divine consciousness already has steady intelligence,right?
Text 70: ‘As long as one has the material body,the demands of the body for sense gratification will continue.The devotee,however,is not disturbed by such desires because of his fullness.’……..
‘The devotees of Krsna have no material desires and therefore,they are in perfect peace.’
These two sentences seem contradictory to me.
Yesterday,I heard a class on Bg.2.11 MEX750211,which I had downloaded from krishan.tv. There was a question and answer session by Prabhupada after his lecture. But there was no recording of the questions,and Prabhupada straightaway seemed to go to answer the questions.Were the questions not recorded or was the class edited?
I am very much comforted by all the replies you have given me.
Begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh.
Dear Jarek, sorry, we are not liars. (a) George A Smith says that NM is not a mayavadi, that means he supports NM’s jiva tattva, that we originate in the tatastha / brahmajyoti. (b) Srila Prabhupada does not agree with this jiva tattva, he says this is mayavada. (c) Are you saying Srila Prabhupada lied about jiva tattva, like the NM folks are saying (and George is agreeing with them)? Why are you supporting the mayavadis Jarek? That would make you one of them. And why are you supporting the people who openly defy the statements of Srila Prabhupada? I am quoting Srila Prabhupada, and you say that is a pack of lies, that means you are saying you are his higher authority, like NM says? Who made you and NM and George the higher authority than Srila Prabhupada? ys pd
Jadurani / NM attack Srila Prabhupada’s jiva tattva: http://youtu.be/hTaPnym7QZI
[PD: Srila Prabhupada says we come from “Krishna’s lila or sport.” But Jadurani and Narayana Maharaja says that statement from Srila Prabhupada is bogus. Narayana Maharaja says we originated in “Tatastha sakti.” Tatastha is not a place, it is a definition of how the jivas can move from one place to another.
NM says we started in the middle (brahmajyoti), and they can go to Krishna or Maya from there. This is bogus, we are with Krishna and we chose to defy His authority. Srila Prabhupada says we BECAME ENVIOUS of Krishna, and we fell. Narayana Maharaja says we came from brahman, he is a mayavada. NM also has no explanation for how we fell here? How could the people who do not know who Krishna is, reject Him? ys pd]
In the Caitanya Caritamrta/Madhya Lila Vol.3, Ch 9, Text 93-102, Pg 342, First Edition/1975 has a nice
narration given below of a humble and meek illiterate brahmana vaisnava whom Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu glorifies.
In the holy place of Sri Ranga-ksetra, a brahmana Vaisnava used to visit the temple daily and recite the
entire text of Bhagavad-gita. The brahmana regularly read the eighteen chapters of Bhagavad-gita in
great transcendental ecstasy, but because he could not pronounce the words correctly, people used to joke about him. Due to his incorrect pronunciation, people sometimes criticized him and laughed at him, but he did not care. He was full of ecstasy due to reading Bhagavad-gita and was personally very happy. While reading the book, the brahmana experienced transcendental bodily transformations. His hair stood on end, tears welled in his eyes, and his body trembled and perspired as he read. Seeing this, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu became very happy. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu asked the brahmana, “My dear sir, why are you in such ecstatic love? Which portion of Bhagavad-gita gives you such transcendental pleasure?” The brahmana replied , “I am illiterate and therefore do not know the meaning of the words. Sometimes I read Bhagavad-gita correctly and sometimes incorrectly, but in any case I am doing this in compliance with the orders of my spiritual master.” The brahmana continued, “Actually I only see a picture of Lord Krsna sitting on a chariot as Arjuna’s charioteer. Taking the reins in His hands, He appears very beautiful and
blackish . “When I see the picture of Lord Krsna sitting in a chariot and instructing Arjuna, I am filled with ecstatic happiness. “As long as I read Bhagavad-gita, I simply see the Lord’s beautiful features. It is for this reason that I am reading Bhagavad-gita, and my mind cannot be distracted from this!” Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu told the brahmana, “Indeed, you are an authority in the reading of Bhagavad-gita. Whatever you know constitutes the real purport of Bhagavad-gita.”
Srila Prabhupada comments on this incident –
Although the brahmana could not pronounce the words very well due to illiteracy, he still experienced
ecstatic symptoms while reading Bhagavad-gita. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was very pleased to observe these symptoms, and this indicates that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is pleased by devotion, not by ERUDITE SCHOLARSHIP. Even though the words were imperfectly pronounced, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Lord Krsna Himself, did not think this very serious. Rather, the Lord was pleased by the bhava (devotion). In Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.5.11) this is confirmed:
tad-vag-visargo janatagha-viplavo
yasmin prati-slokam abaddhavaty api
namany anantasya yaso ‘nkitani yat
srnvanti gayanti grnanti sadhavah
“On the other hand, that literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name,
fame, forms and pastimes of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world’s misdirected civilization.
Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.”
This is a good example of a person who had become so successful that he was able to capture the attention of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu even while reading Bhagavad-gita incorrectly. His spiritual activities did not depend on material things such as correct pronunciation. Rather, his success depended on strictly following the instructions of his spiritual master.
yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmana
“Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the
imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed.”(Svet. Up. 6.23). Actually the meaning of the words of
Bhagavad-gita or Srimad-Bhagavatam are revealed to one strictly following the orders of the spiritual master. They are also revealed to one who has equal faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In other words, being faithful to both Krsna and the spiritual master is the secret of success in spiritual life.
According to the sastras: bhaktya bhagavatam grahyam na buddhya na ca tikaya. One should understand
Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam by hearing them from a real devotee. One cannot understand them simply by ERUDITE SCHOLARSHIP or SHARP INTELLIGENCE. It is also said:
gitadhita ca yenapi
bhakti-bhavena cetasa
veda-sastra-puranani
tenadhitani sarvasah
To one who reads Bhagavad-gita with faith and devotion, the essence of Vedic knowledge is revealed. According to the Svetasvatara Upanisad (6.23):
yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmanah
All Vedic literatures are to be understood with faith and devotion, not by MUNDANE SCHOLARSHIP. We therefore present Bhagavad-gita As It Is. There are many so called scholars and philosophers who read Bhagavad-gita in a scholarly way. They simply waste their time and mislead those who read their commentaries.
HARE KRSNA.
Dear Amar Puri Prabhu,
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
One thing that I find very troubling is that I still doubt the genuinety of HG Madhu Pandit dasa.
Although ISKCON Bangalore has been accepted by GBC and all that,I still cannot help doubting the character of Madhu Pandit Prabhu.
I beg you to please explain what is given in the article
http://www.madhubandit.info/2009/03/07/is-madhu-pandit-dasa-a-gunda-among-the-sadhus/
and refute the accusations given in http://www.ISKCON-BDA.org .
I’m so far not convinced by the answer I got when I asked the same doubt last time. It makes my question everyone here because everyone here supports Madhu Pandit Prabhu.We have refuted Narayan Maharaj’s,etc.authority by suitable explanation, but you are not providing any answer to the numerous accusations against Madhu Pandit Prabhu.
I require your help for my further progress.
Begging for a reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Santosh,
I for one understand that you meant no disrespect to Pratyatosa das, and your explanation as to why you questioned further is completely reasonable. Just because a person gives an answer to clear a doubt does not mean that the answer necessarily addresses every angle of possibility.
One hallmark of a teacher is patience, especially when dealing with a respectful and like minded student.
Considering the amount of false interpretation propagated by the pseudo “teachers” of Iskcon, we loyalists should be prepared to answer dozens of questions that may be quite similar and seemingly redundant. This may be what is required to counter the seeds of doubt and discord sewn by the leaders and cheerleaders composing the “great sinister movement in our Iskcon society.”
excerpt from letter to Hamsaduta: Calcutta 2 September, 1970: “You are also one of the members of the GBC, so you can think over very deeply how to save the situation. It is a fact however that the great sinister movement is within our Society. I have not heard anything from Krsna das or Syamasundara., so all of you may try to save the Society from this dangerous position.”
Below is a link where you will find an expert response from Amar Puri to Santosh, on 12/31, pointing out the method of teachers on this forum approaching from many angles to resolve contradictions that were creating doubts in Santosh’s mind. http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=32215#comment-13355
And finally I will reproduce a post from Santosh later in that discussion which demonstrates the fruits of patience in dispelling the doubts of new Bhaktas. http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=32215#comment-13519
“Hearty thank to all the devotees who were very compasionate to clear my doubts, even though I am just a beginner and my doubts may be so silly. I am very inspired to continue chanting and read Srila Prabhupad’s books. If I am sincere, Krsna will arrange everything for me.
Your servant,
Santosh”
Dear Bhakta Jarek
It isn’t just Puranjana, he’s just the barking dog of Yasoda nandana who gives him enough leash to sate his appetite for eating his own stool and trying to get others to eat it too.
Rtvik seems to be rotting from the top down. Unfortunately since it thinks that it has such an obligation to the old timers that it must host their crazyness until they just go away of natural causes. Personally I think that they need to put people like Puranjana, etc.,, out of their misery or get them the professional help that they so obviously need.
Any responsible social organization needs to start policing their own and have the ability to give way to more sincere and reasonable voices as the need arises and that if they do not then that they may be mistaken in thinking that the Rtvik movement will outlast Putana dasa, etc.,
That these people obviously don’t give a damn about who Puranjana makes up lies about as long as its not them tells us alot about their level of spiritual advancement, like “Hello.” It doesn’t really exist. The Maya is really, really thick. Anyway prabhu, thanks for the supoort.
Hey Putana dasa, you never answered the question that I saw. After you stiff armed Srila Prabhupada and walked off from your service in New Dwarka dis Srila Prabhupada ever trust you enough again even enough to ask you to sharpen a pencil for him? Or did you just wait until you thought that he was dead and then sensing an opportunity move in and try to foist yourself off as being Srila Prabhupadas greatest defender?
Mark, did you really think that after reading your posts that I expected yo to accept “Grammar Girl?” I knew that with all your stuffiness that that would be like waving a red flag at you. You get off on game playing Mark, on thinking that your advanced because you can think and write better than some. My only thought is that you must be a very lonely man with not a whole lot going for him outside of his own fantasy life.
Grammar BoyMark doesn’t seem to like anyone that suggests his own common origin, linguistically speaking I’m thinking that that would be American Standard English, which is why he came out swinging. Now that he’s walked right into it lets see what he can do with something a bit heavier.
Braj B. Kachru the Noah Webster of Indian English seems to think differently than our own Grammar Boy Bhakta Mark has been telling us how it is. Mr Kachru seems to think that English is no longer something that either the Brits and much less the Americans can regard as their exclusive property. He differs with your Marks ideas on conformity, or that his Webster or any other Western source can still set the rules on how the English language is to be either written or spoken by everyone else in the world to happens to speak it, which includes more people in India than in both the U.S. anf Great Britian combined.
English is still a developing language and as new concepts and meanings are introduced into it, old words, even such simple verbs as “can” and “may” may be used in different way to communicate such things as a subjunctive mood, etc.
Mr. Kachru says that speakers of Indian English must ‘develop an identity with the local model of English without feeling that it is a “deficient” model.’ (Kachru, ‘Models’ 67-68). Thusly, whatever speakers of American standard and their upper crust cousins across the Atlantic might think, it is more important that the 350 million Indian speakers of English believe that they have a valid norm for the language. Using a relatively new language to express ancient meanings that are new to it requires adaptation. That Srila Prabhupada pronounced English to be the most important language in the world, can you tell us why, Mark? Or are you as empty of realizations as Bacon pronounced the Classicists to be of works in his Novum Organum?
“ Some modal auxiliaries have a past subjunctive form. For example, the indicative will as in He will come tomorrow has the subjunctive form would as in I wish that he would come tomorrow. Likewise, the indicative can as in He can do it now has the subjunctive form could as in I wish that he could do it now. And the indicative shall as in I shall go there has the subjunctive form should as in If I should go there,….”
I haven’t read your last two posts to me yet Mark. Have you finally left off your primate displacement exercise?
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.Yes,Pratyatosa dasa Prabhu,I admit that I was wrong.Please forgive me.
Dear Prabhupadanugas,
All thanks to you for being patient with complex minded person such as me.
I beg you to clear one very stubborn doubt of mine…i.e on the character of HG Madhu Pandit dasa that your previous replies could not clear.I will be very much at peace if you can properly takle the strong accusations against Madhu Pandit Prabhu that are given in
http://www.madhubandit.info/2009/03/07/is-madhu-pandit-dasa-a-gunda-among-the-sadhus/
and
http://www.ISKCON-BDA.org .
I am convinced by your arguments about the fallacy of Sridhara Maharaj,Narayan Maharaj.I also agree about Prabhupada finally ordering the ritvik system.Although ISKCON Bangalore has been approved by the GBC(you have already shown me the letter by Jayapataka Swami),I am still totally bewildered by the numerous accusations about HG Madhu Pandit dasa on the above mentioned sites(about his being a rogue,a hypocrite,etc.)
I beg you to once go through them and clear my confusion.SO far,in the absence of a convincing reply to this matter,I’m am still confused.
Begging for an answer,
Your servant,
Santosh
This is an article I have read recently.I beg you to please comment on it
Madhu Bandit News Blog
Everything you wanted to know about Madhu Pandit Dasa but were afraid to ask and media wont tell you.
« So what happens to Madhupandit Disney Land also known as “No Krishna only Leelaaaa Park”
Defeat of Ritvik-vada »
A Pub named Dwarakapuri
by Krsna Dasa
A few days ago I attended a marriage in ISKCON Hare Krishna hill in Bangalore. This was the marriage of a close friend of mine. I have been practicing Krishna consciousness and regulative principles since more than 4 years. I thought that I would not face much problems attending this marriage as the environment would be devotional and I would be served prasadam also. Even though I was well aware of the Ritvik apasampradaya and how great offenders these people are, still I had faith that at least they would preserve the basic regulative principles. With this faith I attended the marriage. The first thing I saw right in the center in the hall was a deity of Ganesha. Although Lord Ganesha is a great vaishnava, Prabhupada forbid the worship of demigods. So, to obey the orders of His Divine Grace we must not worship demigods.
We were taken first to the hall where we were served snacks. There was good upma and sweet. Along with it we were served coffee. I asked the server hesitantly if it was herbal coffee. I hesitated because it is an ISKCON temple and of course it will be herbal vedic coffee only, but let me for the sake of formality confirm the same. [Editor’s note: It is not an ISKCON temple yet, but it is only a matter of time.] He said “yes, yes, it is herbal”. Then with that faith I drank it. As we went to the marriage hall and were sitting there, we heard some music being played. On hearing with attention, I got to know that it was a film song that was being played. I came to know that it was a film song as I had watched those films before I came to Krishna consciousness and so memories of the past don’t go away so easily. But I was upset that in the organization that always claims that it is following Srila Prabhupada, film songs are played. We took dinner and went to sleep. The next day morning tea and coffee were kept on the table. I checked the tea there. It looked like ordinary tea. Just to confirm, I asked the person in charge who was senior to the person who served coffee the previous day. That person said it was ordinary tea that was served. I was relieved that I didn’t drink it. But my doubting mind started posing questions about the coffee that I drank the previous day. I asked, “what about the coffee?” He said that the coffee was also ordinary coffee. I started trembling in guilt at that point of time. The regulative principles that I followed for nearly 4 years and the promise I had given to my spiritual master before the fire at the time of initiation were all destroyed.
I felt like vomiting out the whole thing, but what all could I vomit. It had entered my consciousness and contaminated me, putting me back into the lap of maya. That was a wonderful gift I got at the Hare Krishna Hill. I had never ever in my dreams even imagined that tea and coffee will be served in an ISKCON temple. [Editor’s note: this is not an ISKCON temple. To best of my knowledge no ISKCON temple does this.] I was utterly disappointed. Some time later a friend of mine visited the marriage. He is a saffron dressed devotee in the same temple. I mentioned to him that I have done this mistake the previous day. Then, after some time I asked him “Is this not a sinful activity and is it not wrong to promote the breaking of regulative principles in the temple premises?” My friend replied, “Prabhupada permitted those staying in ISKCON guest houses to smoke”. I am not sure about this as I don’t have a reference for the same. So I can’t comment on it. I can accept it only if proper reference is provided. [Editor’s note: this is bogus, it is clearly stated in every room in the ISKCON guest houses that while on our premises the guests must follow the 4 regulative principles including no smoking, so there is no way that Srila Prabhupada allowed smoking in our guest houses. Of course if a person did it anyway, that is another matter, but not that Srila Prabhupada sanctioned it.] Secondly, even if Prabhupada permitted it, Prabhupada would definitely not have supplied cigarettes to those staying in the Guesthouse. Here, on Hare Krsna Hillthe temple is cooking and supplying tea and coffee to those who attend the marriage. With this they are accumulating all the karma. Second thing my friend told me is that since the marriage is conducted in temple premises, they will remember in future that the marriage was conducted in temple. That will give them sukriti. But I questioned against this argument.
I said “by supplying tea and coffee and by playing film songs, the residents of the temple are getting the bad karma. You can argue that you can engage in devotional service and the bad karma will be washed off. But next time, you will give the same hall again to someone else’s marriage where tea and coffee will be served again, film songs will be played again. Again you will say that devotion will wash this sin also. Again you will engage in the same sinful activity, saying that devotion will save us this time also. This is “namno balad yasya hi papa-buddhir” or committing sinful activities on the strength of the Holy Name of the Lord. Also, the whole process of giving the hall to non-devotees is itself faulty. Because, these non-devotees marry to enjoy sense gratification. By using contraceptives or engaging in abortion etc, they commit countless sinful activities throughout their lives, all of which accumulate karma. My friend asked me “does this happen in other ISKCON centers?” I said “I am not sure if it happens elsewhere or no, but wherever it happens I will be opposing it.” [Editor’s note: To best of my knowledge Srila Prabhupada did sanction using temple premises for performing Vivaha Samskara, which is totally a Vedik samskara. But he didn’t sanction playing of cinema songs or serving tea and coffee, these are obviously not Vaidika.] I was really upset at the sinful activities going on in the temple premises. My japa had gone for a toss for disobeying the orders of my spiritual master and drinking coffee. I did it unknowingly. But I can’t escape giving this excuse. I could have been very cautious also, double checking regarding the same. Seeing the cinema music and the intoxicants that were being served, I felt like I was in a pub. The same is the situation in a pub where people will be indulging in intoxication, enjoying filmi songs etc. Of course after marriage they will enjoy illicit sex also, the same way people enjoy illicit sex in a pub.
Now, we cannot be fanatic saying that deviations occur only in Hare Krishna Hill. [Editor’s note: The thing is that on Hare Krsna Hill they say that they are the only ones who are following Srila Prabhupada and that everyone else has deviated. But I do not know of any temples in ISKCON where tea and coffee are served on the premises. So it looks pretty much like Madhu and his Bandits are a bunch of hypocrites.] We can also not be fanatic Rtviks saying that if deviations occur, we must reject the whole system in society and claim that I will directly approach Prabhupada only and he will save me. I need no one else’s help. Many sincere devotees are protesting against the deviations that are going on in ISKCON today. I request the devotees to please participate in those protests and save the movement of Prabhupada. The following are the contents of a letter written by Prabhupada in his initial days in the US when he was struggling alone:
“I came here with a great mission to execute my Spiritual Master’s order, but my heart is stabbing me. Of course, I’m not afraid of Maya. I know Maya cannot touch me, but still if I die in this condition, my mission will remain unfulfilled. Please therefore pray to Prabhu Lord Chaitanya and Vrindaban Bihari, to rescue me this time. My mission is still not finished.”
Letter to Sri Krishna Pandit, June 1, 1967
Prabhupada struggled really hard to establish ISKCON. By indulging in mundane philanthropic activities, sinful activities like supplying intoxication etc ISKCON is deviating from the mission established by Prabhupada. [Editor’s not: ISKCON is not supplying intoxication and filmi songs, it is Madhu Pandit and Hare Krsna Hill.] We are recognized today as a member of a charity institution, that’s all. People say that the greatest contribution ISKCON has done to the society is that they are feeding poor children. [Editor’s note: sadly there is some truth in this statement, this started because some leaders of ISKCON started to imitate Madhu Pandit’s “Akshaya Patra” scam because he was percieved as getting money from their donors so they followed suit not having faith that Krsna would provide funds from other sources.] Is this a contribution? ISKCON’s greatest contribution is the preaching of Krishna consciousness all over the world and saving millions of souls and bringing to truth the prophecy of Lord Chaitanya. It is really heart breaking to know that ISKCON is not recognized by its real achievement. Karmis are called to promote and their opinions are taken as something greatly valuable and published saying “so and so person has certified our program to be great”. And that person in his real life may be a meat eater or a womanizer or gambler. What is the value of the opinion of such a sinful person? Even the Rtvik approach of rejecting all the faithful disciples of Prabhupada and directly approaching Prabhupada to take initiation will not work. Because, who will be there to pull your ear and tell you that opening a pub in temple premises is wrong? One must surrender to the lotus feet of a spiritual master who is faithfully serving the mission of Prabhupada and receive instructions. Seeing these deviations I felt happy that I am safe at the feet of my spiritual master. But I have done a mistake, for which I must definitely suffer. I pray at the lotus feet of my spiritual master to please save me.
See the related text Madhu Pandit serves meat and liquor to Gundas
[Editor’s note: we will be publishing more texts in the following days so please stay tuned in for the latest.]
Visit: http://www.ISKCON-BDA.org to find out more about the frauds of Madhu Pandit Dasa
This entry was posted on Saturday, August 4th, 2012 at 09:42 and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Madhu Bandit News Blog is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Hare Krishna Society and the Company They Keep
BY: SUN STAFF
Jun 07, 2012 — CANADA (SUN) — Over the years, a number of articles have appeared in the Sampradaya Sun regarding the activities of the Hare Krishna Society and its members. Better known as the ‘West Coast Rtviks’, this group of ISKCON dissidents led by Yasoda Nandana dasa has become the face of Ritvik-ism in North America.
The group was founded in California around 2002, when they launched their http://www.KrishnaConsciousnessMovement.com website. In late 2003, we ran a series of articles in HareKrsna.com about our challenge to debate Ritvik-vada with Yasoda Nandana dasa, his agreement to debate, and his subsequent reneging on that agreement. The correspondence we exchanged with HKS on the subject is archived here.
Along with Yasoda Nandana das, the founding members of HKS include Puranjana das, Damaghosa dasa, Narasimha das and Sri Mukunda dasa. The current roster of HKS members can be found here. Although HKS downplays Puranjana’s role in the organization (for obvious reasons), he is widely known to be an active participant.
Indications of HKS’s alliance with Puranjana, and their association with Madhu Pandit das and the Bangalore Rtviks, is easily found on the Net. For example, we note the keyword tags used on http://www.Prabhupadanugas.eu, a Bangalore-centric Ritvik site, in their article on the Sunnyvale Rtvik temple:
A.C. Bhativedanta swami, bangalore, ca, cancalpati, Chanchalapati, foundation, indian heritage, iskcon, ISKCON Sunnyvale Temple Tour Home of Sri Sri Krishna-Balarama ritvik, madhu pandit, Puranjana, rtvik temple, San Jose, Srila Prabhupada, Sunnyvale, Tim Lee, USA, yashoda nandana, Yasoda
Like their alliance with Puranjana, the HKS also tends to downplay their relationship with Jitarati das, a Rtvik devotee well known for his association with the Bhaktivedanta Investigative Force (BIF), which for years was actively pursuing the poisoning issue. BIF’s history as a break-away faction of Krishnakant’s IRM is described here.
Jitarati’s founding partner in BIF, Sakshi Gopal das was in the news last year, in a report by a group of concerned Prabhupada Disciples and Followers, entitled ” BIF, Sakshi Gopal das Blaspheme Lord Krishna, Srila Prabhupada, Bhagavad-gita”. The article describes Jitarati’s defense of Sakshi Gopal’s offensive denigration of Srila Prabhupada, the Vedas and the Lord Himself:
“Recently, Sakshi Gopal das’s close associate and chief right (wrong) hand man responsible for also handling the correspondences in BIF, and who is aiding and abetting Sakshi, justified Sakshi’s most abominable actions and treacherous betrayal statements to Srila Prabhupada. He did this by making the following misleading and diverting statement, writing: “It’s just that he’s (Sakshi) is not catering to the appetite of ISKCON devotees or ISKCON reformers; they are no longer BIF’s target audience.” Thus in his desperate attempt to justify Sakshi’s blasphemous statements, at least this person confirms the fact that Sakshi now has a new audience. One need not be a rocket scientist to understand that the new audience are indeed the above mentioned materialistic personalities. Yet any sane honest devotee/Vaisnava knows that there never has been a precedence in Vaisnava history that in order to NOT cater to the appetite of ISKCON devotees/Reformers, one can make all the direct blasphemous statements to spiritually exalted personalities and scriptures, just to compromise with and satisfy the whims of all kinds of materialistic people.”
The HKS continued to maintain a close relationship with Jitarati during the period when BIF was going off the rails, and to our knowledge, HKS offered no critical commentary on Jitarati’s defense of Sakshi Gopal, or criticism of Sakshi Gopal’s offensive diatribes, for that matter.
HKS’s relationship with Jitarati had also been called to question a year prior to the BIF blowout, when the arrest and incarceration of Tattva Darshan das was making news. Among the recap articles appearing in the Sun on this story were “Bhaktivedanta Eco Village’s Tattva Darshan dasa, Convicted Sex Offender” by Shyamasundara dasa (Australia), and “Tattva Darshan dasa and Pedophilia” by Mahananda dasa. In his article, Shyamasundara prabhu mentioned Tattva Darshan’s relationship with Jitarati who, along with Mahasrnga dasa, attended Tattva Darshan in Cambodia at the time of his arrest.
Today, the Tattva Darshan story has again landed on the Sun’s front page, this time in the context of his direct connections with the Hare Krishna Society. Earlier in this article, we mentioned Sri Mukunda dasa, the founding Secretary of HKS. You’ll note that some of the correspondence we exchanged with HKS on the reneged debate was with HKS’s secretary, Sri Mukunda, who was writing on behalf of Yasoda Nandana dasa.
Sri Mukunda dasa, who currently lives in Los Angeles, was “initiated” in a Ritvik ceremony conducted by Ritvik priest, Yasoda nandana dasa, in Downey California, 2003. After a decade of service as HKS’s Secretary, Sri Mukunda recently quit the organization in a bitter dispute over the subject of HKS’s protection of Tattva Darshan. He recently told his story to the Sun:
Child Molesters in Srila Prabhupada’s Movement:
“My name is Sri Mukunda dasa and I first came in contact with Hare Krishna devotees in 1992. Since then I have witnessed child molestations, beatings, and threats and intimidation for speaking out against child molesters. I never served in any official capacity within ISKCON although in my early days I did meet many nice Prabhupadanugas at the LA Temple. I have never surrendered to anyone other than Srila Prabhupada as my guru.
I met Yasodanandan Prabhu in Badger, CA through my good friend at the time, the late Radha-Kunda das, Around 1993. In 1996, I took my first trip to Vrindavana, India with Radha-Kunda dasa, Bir Laksman dasa and Krishna-Katha Mataji. In 1996 there was an incident at the LA temple involving my daughter, that I will not go into detail about. Afterwards, in 1997, my daughter Radharani and I rented a house and lived in Vrindavana for two months.
In 2001, Yasodanandan das asked me to be the Secretary of the newly formed Hare Krishna Society and assist with the publication of the “Srila Prabhupada Siddhanta Book”, which I did. I served Yasoda and the HKS for ten years, printing “Our Living Guru” t-shirts for HKS, and even traveling with Yasodanandan to Vrindavana in 2004 to distribute the SPS book and Our Living Guru t-shirts. In 2005 I returned to Vrindavana with more books and T-shirts, and stayed there for 6 weeks.
I continued to serve the HKS as Secretary as recently as 2011. In October of 2011, I found out that the Hare Krishna Society board members had traveled to India, met with, stayed with, and were now promoting and backing Tattva Darshana dasa, who was convicted in Cambodia of sex with underage children in 2008 and spent one year in jail.
When I tried to investigate Tattva Darshana and BEV, and their connection with HKS, I was met with arguments, lies and threats. When I discovered the truth about Tattva and HKS I immediately resigned. I was told by HKS leaders to accept their lies for Tattva, or I am an offender and a nutjob.
After resigning from HKS and my character being attacked by the HKS leaders, I went public with exactly why I resigned. Yasodanandan then called in his “hit man”, Puranjana, to discredit me on the Internet and silence me. Puranjana happily took up the job, as this is what he does best — lie and smear innocent devotees in public. Puranjana wasted no time in offending me, my daughter, and now my deceased wife, on the orders of Yasodanandana. This is Yasodanandan’s style. He attacks his “enemies” through his puppet Puranjana, so Yasoda can appear to be above all the dirty nonsense Puranjana says. And Puranjana can at the same time appear to be separate from Yasoda, but that is an illusion only.
After ten years with HKS, I know exactly how Yasoda operates with Puranjana. Yasoda gets on the phone with Puranjana and tells him who to attack and what to say, then he sits back and laughs while Puranjana goes to work. Then Yasoda can appear to be “saintly” and “advanced.”
I heard Puranjana say, while he was speaking to another devotee on speaker phone: “I cannot expose Tattva because he is helping with the poison issue.'”
The article about Tattva Darshan written by Shyamasundara dasa discusses Jitarati’s defense of Tattva Darshan’s sexual inclinations, and the fact that Jitarati has been a financial supporter of Tattva Darshan and a participant in the Bhaktivedanta Eco Village (BEV) project.
Just as the HKS continued to maintain a close relationship with Jitarati while he defended Sakshi Gopal’s blasphemy of Srila Prabhupada and Sri Krsna, they have likewise defended him and his business investment in BEV, by virtue of their defense of Tattva Darshan. This is the crux of Sri Mukunda recent falling out with HKS — Yasoda nandana, Puranjana, Damaghosa and company are defending a convicted sex offender because, as Puranjana reportedly stated, Tattva Darshan das ‘is helping with the poison issue’.
Meanwhile, Damaghosa das wrote a recent article in support of Tattva Darshan, demonizing Sri Mukunda as a fault-finding-aparadhi-non-devotee for daring to criticize Tattva Darshan. Following his glowing report on the BEV project in January 2010, Damaghosa recently penned his apologia, entitled “A Response by the Hare Krsna Society Against the False Stories Propagated on the Internet Against Many Sincere and Dedicate Prabhupadanuga Devotees”.
While Damaghosa das vehemently demonizes Sri Mukunda for criticizing Tattva Darshan and the HKS who supports and covers for him, Damaghosa fault-finds anyone who doesn’t believe the white-washed version of events as he lays them down. Never mind that Damaghosa wasn’t there in Cambodia, and that his version contradicts every official version on the record, from the local police, to the French NGO who was tracking Tattva Darshan’s activities, to the Court that convicted him. Surely they’re all wrong, and Damaghosa is right.
In his Sun article, Mahananda das reposted this report from a 2008 Chennai newspaper:
“Wayne has been in trouble with the Indian authorities in the past. By Chaithanya’s own admission, Wayne was detained for questioning by the police seven years ago after a complaint of child sex abuse from an Iskcon devotee. “It was a baseless allegation for which my father was questioned and nothing came of it,” Chaithanya said. However, Hari Sauri Das, head of ISKCON’s Child Protection Team, said, “Wayne had been removed from all official positions at ISKCON following similar child abuse charges in 2002.”
According to his website, Wayne has been travelling extensively. The president of the French NGO tracking him said, “We found Wayne’s movements suspicious and our interactions with children whom Wayne had been in touch with, added to our doubt.”
Media reports on Tattva Darshan are affirmed by the NGO child welfare agency, Asociación Protect, headquartered in Barcelona, Spain. This group is active worldwide, campaigning for children’s rights in places where their wellbeing is at risk due to the presence of foreign sex offenders. Asociación Protect was monitoring Tattva Darshan’s case as it moved through the Phnom Penh court system, and their report confirms that a Vietnamese child, 12 years of age, was involved.
Following is a collection of photographs of Tattva Darshan in prison, in transit from court, and with his helpmates during the time of his arrest.
While the Hare Krishna Society is busy protecting Tattva Darshan das, they are simultaneously evangelizing on behalf of the Bangalore Ritviks… on whose behalf Madhu Pandit is busy demonizing the ISKCON gurus for their sexual falldowns.
American citizen Tomas Rapanos, who founded a Krishna-faith-based organization in India, is held in a Cambodian jail on March 9, 2008, after being arrested for suspected sexual abuse of two Cambodian street girls aged 12 and 16 years. All three were found partially clothed in a guest house in the popular Phnom Penh backpacker area of Lakeside by police who were tipped off by investigators with the non-governmental organization APLE.
[Captioned photos copyright 2008 Tim Matsui, All Rights Reserved]
Two men, an Austrian, at left, and an American, at right, try to figure out what to do about their friend Thomas Rapanos, an American arrested and accused of debauchery by Cambodian authorities
Thomas Rapanos in a Cambodian police jail awaiting formal charges of debauchery
Thomas Rapanos is handcuffed to a police vehicle following a court appearance in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where he was charged with debauchery
Copyright: Asociación Protect
Homepage
| The Sun | News | Editorials | Features | Sun Blogs | Classifieds | Events | Recipes | PodCasts |
| About | Submit an Article | Contact Us | Advertise | HareKrsna.com |
Copyright 2005,2012, HareKrsna.com. All rights reserved.
I helplessly beg you to tell me whether this is true or not….Please tell me with all of this going on,how can anyone develop faith in Prabhupada?
Thanks Santosh from Bhubaneswar (Orissa )! So you George S, Rocana and SG take great pleasure in having neophyte gurus who every now and then make a false step and besmirch Lord Caitanya’s Sankirtan movement (yuga-dharma) in such a way that people in general consider your meanwhile 41 fallen gurus a clown circus and reject it. Very good intelligence!
Only problem, you more and more get under suspicion of being mislead by illusion?
In any case, since ISKCON is doing exactly what you are saying, go there and be happy. But this you won’t do either. Folks like you, George S, Rocana and SG obviously never distributed Prabhupada’s books or underwent any other endeavor to have the Holy Name spread all over the world? Better stop getting yourself more and more into embarrassment of promoting ISKCON’s present guru system of “nobody can know what will happen”. Sastra says, action without knowing its result is in the mode of tamas.
Right Santosh, we have a lot of enemies. Rocana’s and Sri Mukunda’s site of course supports Bhakti Vikas swami, so their site supports the molester guru program. ys pd
George I pride myself on being flexible or rigid as the case may warrant.
I admit that the word “can”, when used in the indicative form, might imply permission depending on the context.
Your suggestion that the NOI 5 paragraph contained permissions, is dead wrong. I defended this position in detail earlier, but you are admittedly skimming my posts looking for faulty fuel for your fire.
Again, the proof is in the context.
In this verse Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikārī Vaiṣṇava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaiṣṇavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī. A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master. NOI 5
The declarative sentences using the word “can” denoting abilities are bookended by statements addressing those abilities in a way to prohibit their occurrence. In that case, the word “can” is limited to its indicative function, acknowledging the ability of neophytes and madhyams to accept disciples and guide them short of the GOAL.
Your citation of the common sense approach of Dr Kachru to recognizing reasonable differences in regional usage of English is a strawman argument used in an attempt to paint me unable to recognize your invalid premise due to you some imagined fanatic rigidity on my part.
Do you stand by your assertion that Srila Prabhupada gave tacit permission to neophytes to guide new Bhaktas short of the ultimate goal of life? That might have been a rhetorical question, but given the circumstances, make it interrogatory.
As for Grammar Girl, she apparently prides herself on being rigid or flexible according to her need to feel superior and not necessarily in pursuance of the truth. Her essay on the use of “Begs the question” is an exemplar to this fact, especially after noting her diatribes against the “prissy” insistence of formal usage of the auxiliary modals “May and Can”. This is called hypocrisy. Unless your local slangbangers have another word for it.
It is always best to be precise when communicating to others in any format, which is why we prize etiquette. When there is ambiguity due to regional habits, reasonable people engage in discussion in order to find the common understanding.
Please forgive me any breaches of this trust.
ys
Mark
Santosh writes ; ” I helplessly beg you to tell me whether this is true or not….Please tell me with all of this going on,how can anyone develop faith in Prabhupada? ”
You are an intelligent person as it seems. With your analytical approach, you are in a position to make decision whether or not this is True what you are asking and why you are losing your faith in Srila Prabhupada ?
Do you think Srila Prabhupada encourage all this non-sense going on in the present Iskcon and other different camps ?
Ask yourself a question, what are the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada and what Srila Prabhupada stands for ? By simply contemplating about the manifested lila of Srila Prabhupada’s extra ordinary activities, when you begin to know and understand it, then, your faith in Srila Prabhupada’s Instructions shall never dwindle. So, please stop begging in your every post that you are losing faith in Srila Prabhupada and how can anyone develop faith in Srila Prabhupada. I find it very childish.
” According to your faith it is done to you ”
All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Hari BOL.
YS…… Amar Puri.
Santosh says: Yes, Pratyatosa dasa Prabhu, I admit that I was wrong. Please forgive me.
Santosh Prabhu, I forgive you for your excessive stubbornness. Please forgive me for accusing you of being too stubborn to ever admit when you are wrong.
That krsna das is an uninformed fanatic.
1: regarding worship of Ganesha
SB 7.5.23-24 : PURPORT
“In other places, the following offenses are listed… (o) to offer worship to the Deity without worshiping Vaikuntha Deities like Ganesa.”
In the NOD 8, Srila Prabhupada says.
One should begin the worship of the demigod Ganapati, who drives away all impediments in the execution of devotional service…. Therefore, all devotees should worship Ganapati.
2. Regarding his breaking of his vows, he says ” He said that the coffee was also ordinary coffee. I started trembling in guilt at that point of time. The regulative principles that I followed for nearly 4 years and the promise I had given to my spiritual master before the fire at the time of initiation were all destroyed.
I felt like vomiting out the whole thing, but what all could I vomit. It had entered my consciousness and contaminated me, putting me back into the lap of maya.”
He should be nominated for an award for that performance. To think that 4 years of chastity are “All destroyed” by an accident is not supported in our philosophy. There are dozens of references to how the Lord ignores accidental falldowns due to habit, and that is when we cannot resist and consciously do something we shouldn’t. So what to speak of being deceived!
Just look at the fanaticism that is inbred into Its a con devotees these days!
Yet I do agree that Bangalore temple placates their karmi congregation too strongly for my taste. The serving of coffee and tea in a temple, even if it is only in the hall, is offensive. It is a minor offense compared to the hellish things that go on in Its a con temples, but offensive none the less.
But this article by the extreme fanatic named Krsna dasa is just an example of how far these psychotic zealots will go to hypocritically demonize Bangalore temple.
Somehow I doubt this “Krsna das” spends any time criticizing the fact that Bhaktivedanta Manor provides weddings to NON-DEVOTEES for a fee, performs CAR PUJAS for a fee, the Seattle Iskcon temple under Hari Vilas offers Durga worship and donations via credit card machine, Radhanatha swami performing mundane music with a rock band while playing harmonium, etc.
He is just a hypocrite
george a. smith says:
“1. February 2013 at 8:25 am
Dear Bhakta Jarek
It isn’t just Puranjana, he’s just the barking dog of Yasoda nandana who gives him enough leash to sate his appetite for eating his own stool and trying to get others to eat it too…
That these people obviously don’t give a damn about who Puranjana makes up lies about as long as its not them tells us alot about their level of spiritual advancement, like “Hello.” It doesn’t really exist. The Maya is really, really thick. Anyway prabhu, thanks for the supoort…”
Hare Krishna! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
You welcome dear bhakta George prabhu, it is you and SG prabhu in support(would like to know rather the real name, SG is a little to short fort me) who are in line with the Highest Truth pursuit here, where some careless and rash souls thake the risk of another “isms” private and selfish extravagance. Thank you for the deep lesson of honesty and endurance prabhu.
y.s. bj
Dear Rukmini dd
You have obviously been misinformed about Rocana dasa as his and Mother Padjavalies Sankirtana party distributed hundreds of thousands of Srila Prabhupadas books.
Please in the future go to the trouble of checking your facts before denegrating a great book distributor and dedicated servant of Srila Prabhupada.
Rocana dasa has so far shown himself superior to you rtviks for insterad of returning “like for like”, instead of resorting to the dirty underhanded methods that you rtviks resort to in an effort to silence any sane voices raised in protest against your attempting to shove your unproven and speculative conclusions down everyones throat, Rocana dasa has in reality been very kind and helpful to the Rtvik movement, strengthening their minds through his educated analysis of TFO and your movement. There is an old saying that “What we survive makes us stronger.” The Rtviks will survive Rocanas analysis but through no thanks to you lady chimp, or to Puranjana, Yasoda Nandana, Madhu Pandit, etc. and thanks to Rocana dasa some several hundreds of years from now your future theologians won’t have several hundreds of years of speculations based upon a belief in the integrity of TFO to gid rid of before they do what the Christians did and create something that the historical Jesus himself would have viewed as an abomination, a concoction which we however must accept because both Srila Prabhupada and God himself have accepted it as presenting a valid disciplic succession.
,
Rukmini Ramana dd says:
1. February 2013 at 12:41 pm
Thanks Santosh from Bhubaneswar (Orissa )! So you George S, Rocana and SG take great pleasure in having neophyte gurus who every now and then make a false step and besmirch Lord Caitanya’s Sankirtan movement (yuga-dharma) in such a way that people in general consider your meanwhile 41 fallen gurus a clown circus and reject it. Very good intelligence!
Only problem, you more and more get under suspicion of being mislead by illusion?
In any case, since ISKCON is doing exactly what you are saying, go there and be happy. But this you won’t do either. Folks like you, George S, Rocana and SG obviously never distributed Prabhupada’s books or underwent any other endeavor to have the Holy Name spread all over the world? Better stop getting yourself more and more into embarrassment of promoting ISKCON’s present guru system of “nobody can know what will happen”. Sastra says, action without knowing its result is in the mode of tamas.
[Translate]
[Reply]
Mark
Mark, you have completely ignored that you have just been offered a new meaning for a word that several days ago you demonstrated to everyone that you thought that you knew everything in the world about it. All that you have shown to me is that the maintenance and enlargement of your puffed up ego is really the only thing that you care about.
It was actually you who focussed upon the verb can in Srila Prabhupadas words as as the vehicle offering permission whereas I simply accepted that the permission of the initiating potency of the tradition was implicit in Srila Prabhupadas acceptance that a kanista and madhyama level devotee could initiate, as without said permission or authorization then spiritually they would not be able to raise up their disciples one inch. Srila Prabhupada makes clear that such gurus can offer to their disciples at least some measure of spiritual advancement, not much but still it is real and a mesureable thing which could not be the case if no permission hd been given. Still, as this new meaning odf can suggests the verb itself in future usage may turn out to indicate not only an ability but an ability that is based upon a permissionm. So I am through arguing about it.
As to Srila Prabhupada being the source of the Sampradyas telling us that one may take initiation from less than an uttama adhikari, that is your speculation, Srila Prabhupada was not about to overturn something that has already been accepted as valid within the Sampradaya, he just fufils his responsibilities in this regard by recommending against it.
BTW, unlike what Lady Chimp and others seem to want to put over on folks I am even less of a supporter to the ISKCON system of rubber stamped gurus as I am a fan of the Rtvik and as proof of that I point to my name. One thing I am howe4ver curious about is why, since you are so passionatly committed to the Rtvik position why are you still Bhakta Mark?
Anyway here is the complete article again that shows the options available and which challenges the need for the Rtviks existence.
More Irresponsible Mad Men
first published on the Sampradaya Sun
BY: GEORGE A. SMITH
Dec 31, 2011 — CALIFORNIA, USA (SUN) — The Rtviks, like so many others before them, have invested their beliefs in a system that they have not bothered to subject to critical examination to the degree that it must be subjected to in order for any intelligent and rational person to accept it.
That they compound this error in judgment by treating anyone who poses intelligent questions to them, or challenges them to produce strong logical arguments and convincing proof in defense of their position, with anger and vicious attempts at character assassination suggests that we are dealing with both blind faith fanatics and with those who, although they have no actual belief in the Rtvik position themselves, adopt such a platform because it is expedient to the furtherance of their own private agendas.
Under these, of course, we have another class — the disenfranchised, the dispossessed, those who are simply sick of ISKCON and its other alternate. They see the Rtvik position as being the only other tenable position, it being Prabhupada centric (something that the Sampradaya Acarya position also is, and which is furthermore more in line with Srila Prabhupada’s wishes), and thus it attracts them to opt for the Rtvik position.
At that point, however, the similarities end between the Rtviks. While on the one hand the Rtviks would like you to simply accept a concoction that not even they are sure of, Rocana das asks you to do your own thinking and to accept only what has ever been accepted within our tradition — the words of Guru, Sadhu and Sastra as proof and evidence. The Rtviks simply demand that you accept their own interpretations of Srila Prabhupada’s words (and only the words they choose to hear), and to this day have been unable to supply any sastric evidence. Woe be it to any of their number or to anyone else who dares to challenge their assertions with good intelligence and common sense.
To illustrate the sheer hypocrisy of the Rtvik pundits, here is something I recently found in the “funny pages”, where Puranjana lies about and misrepresents everyone who disagrees with him. I came upon this posting of his, which had been made in reply to an article of mine, “Don’t Let ISKCON or the Rtviks Get the Better of You”:
[PADA: No, EVERYONE STILL needs to get initiated into the divyam jnanam which destroys sins (diksha) of the pure devotee, di means divyam jnanam, ok you do not need formal initiation, maybe not, but you do need to be getting genuine divyam jnanam from an uttama devotee, and that is being done by HIS books.]
(“Rocana and George A Smith ATTACK Srila Prabhupada …”)
In the above noted excerpt, which was posed as a reply to my article, Puranjana clearly expresses the fact that he does not really know for sure whether or whether not formal initiation, which includes formal initiation via the Rtvik process by the way, is even needed, even a requirement. So if the Rtviks aren’t even sure about whether or not they should be conducting formal initiations by the Rtvik process why then are they already doing it? Didn’t Srila Prabhupada say that the worst type of fool was the fool who did not know whether he should do something or not, but went ahead and did it anyway?
I rest my case.
In the article that Puranjana was hoping to sum up so nicely for the Rtvik camp, that they wouldn’t bother themselves to read, I presented evidence for the argument that I developed in it, which was that formal initiation is not required for one to make spiritual advancement up to at least the madhyama position.
The argument was so strong and convincing apparently, that it even had Puranjana himself wavering on the rtvik position and accepting my conclusions himself, expressing his own inner doubts which normally he keeps hidden. For after all, what idiot in their right mind is going to accept what you claim to be true once they discover that you yourself aren’t even that sure of its truthfulness? Puranjana writes quite a lot, and so occasionally he slips up and shows us his true colors, which are here expressive of the fact that even he is not convinced of the Rtvik position.
Here is that evidence again, with an additional strong argument developed from it.
“In this verse Srila Rupa Gosvami advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kanistha-adhikari, madhyama-adhikari and uttama-adhikari. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikari Vaisnava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaisnavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master.”
(The Nectar of Instruction, from Srila Prabhupada’s purport to Text 5)
In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from a pure devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are pure devotees of Krsna. Amazingly however, a permission is given that any level of devotee may initiate, just a caution is added and evidently the dynamics of such relationships are a bit different. It is enjoined that madhyama can only initiate other madhyama and kanistha can only initiate other kanistha. Evidently these types of guru/disciple relationships are more affairs among equals.
The point of all this is that these are the alternatives to being initiated by a pure devotee of Krsna, and that although we may not like them, that doesn’t give us permission to just put a line through them and introduce our own concoctions instead.
No other alternate is given, no other allowance, no other permission, and why should there be? Is this not an all inclusive arrangement for the initiation of everyone who wishes to become initiated? Were any of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples who are sincerely following left out?
Certainly there is no mention here that one can accept initiation of a spiritual master after his departure. But that’s the one that the Rtviks want you to accept.
Instead of accepting and promoting the bona fide allowances that Sri Rupa and Srila Prabhupada have made to carry on initiations, the Rtviks, being displeased with the words of Sri Rupa and Srila Prabhupada, prefer to introduce a concoction that they themselves are not even completely sure of. Maybe I am just over-reacting, but this seems to me to simply be the actions of more irresponsible mad men.
Ys
George Smith
Of course George A. Smith is a mayavada. He says the teachings of Narayana Maharaja are not mayavada, but NM says we originated in tatastha. Lord Chaitanya said that as soon as we see the face of a mayavada, we have to jump in the river and take a bath to purify ourselves from seeing such odious deviants, ummm, like George A. Smith. ys pd
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
The purpose of posting those articles was only so that you could logically defeat the contents in both articles,and not to make any enemies….I’m not interested in making enemies.I have had enough headache and heart breaking experience by reading about the fall down of the GBC Gurus and the nonsensical system they follow.So I’m not foolish enough to accept their system.
When I’m about to place my faith in the ritvik system,I have to examine it very closely,is it not?Just as I had done to be clear within myself about the bogus nature the GBC Guru system.Naturally,I have lots of questions to about about ritvik,and its prime supporters.In the absence of any willingness to properly tackle the articles I’ve posted,what is the conclusion I should come to?
And in the previous comment,I did not say that I have no faith in Prabhupada..I said that circumstances of this type will only prevent people coming to Krsna Consciousness,or make people(who are supporting either ritvik or GBC)lose faith and leave the shelter of Prabhupada..
Maybe it is better that I independently read Prabhupada’s books and hear from him without getting into supporting any group.I may not become perfect in this life,but by Krsna’s mercy,I can certainly make some advancement.
Please understand that I have no ill feeling towards any devotee here.I’m not interested in making enemies.
Your servant,
Santosh
George, Puranjana das does not speak for me. So you may as well cease attributing the conclusions from his writings to me, or even mentioning them and defeating them when speaking with me.
You wrote : “In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from a pure devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are pure devotees of Krsna.”
“Amazingly however, a permission is given that any level of devotee may initiate”
Nowhere did it mention the word “pure”. That is your addition. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I would guess you said that based on your theory that a neophyte accepting disciples is authorized. Because as you know, only a neophyte strictly following orders can be considered a pure devotee by any stretch of siddhanta.
But have you forgotten that this NOI 5 purport explicitly addresses the case of a neophyte who is not capable of giving sufficient guidance? How does such a situation come about. Does that sound like a pure devotee who would attempt such a thing? After all, what Spiritual master in their right mind would explicitly order a neophyte disciple to accept disciples in a manner where they would be giving insufficient guidance and bringing their disciples up short of the ultimate goal of life? Another good question that you didn’t compensate for, which I will address.
A neophyte might be on a very low level of prakrta bhakti. He may leave his Guru’s care and accept disciples without explicit authorization, yet according to you they have implicit permissions from Srila Rupa by virtue of being a neophyte of any level. You want to see it that way, fine, but that neophyte is NOT a pure devotee, though he can still accept disciples.
Again, that NOI 5 purport, in part, specifically addresses a neophyte who would give insufficient guidance. Regardless of his degree of neophyte advancement, his disciples will wind up just like him unless they have resort to SUFFICIENT GUIDANCE. If he is a sahajiya, the diksa mantra he gives will have the potency of a sahajiya giving a diksa mantra. His guidance will allow the new person into the dim beginnings of spiritual life and no further. They will be chanting a shadow maha mantra. But that is still a connection as long as they are not an impersonalist pretending to believe in the supreme person (“Vaisnavaparadhi”)
My original challenge to you was not based on your claim that this was a general permission. You directly implied that this was Srila Prabhupada giving permission to his disciples. How could it not have been? In your own words.
George: “Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations and ask them to be good enough to remind their prospective initiates of this before the deed is done”
To claim this is Srila Prabhupada giving general permission to his neophyte disciples is to ignore the larger context.
Srila Prabhupada was writing this purport with the understanding in mind that he was creating a canon for a society that was global, international, and would exist for many years. He also gave explicit instructions, in conversation and in the form of documented society wide directives as to; who he wanted to give discipline and initiations within his society; and how it was to be done.
So these neophyte disciples of Srila Prabhupada’s accepting disciples is not simply a case, as you wrote, of “ignoring recommendations”. If the only thing Srila Prabhupada ever said on the matter was in NOI 5 you would be correct. The only reason his neophyte disciples were able to transmit potent Diksa mantras were because he gave them permission and empowered them to conduct 1st and 2nd initiations without his presence. And that permission was further defined in the ritvik order. This was the formal method through which his permission was granted and through which in the future “when he was no longer with us” his neophyte or madhyam disciples could initiate and accept disciples of their own. They would be granddisciples of Srila Prabhupada. And “granddisciple” was not just a nominal designation. That meant that they were actual disciples of an uttama as long as the neophytes continued to instruct according to the framework of guidance left by Srila Prabhupada. This was the alchemy by which a neophyte paradoxically could be as potent as an uttama, due to that neophyte’s faith in the uttama’s eternal presence in his vani.
This was why a society was created. So that the Uttama’s guidance would have a better chance of being available after he was gone. This is why there was such a great emphasis placed on the representative system, the emphasis on assuring every newcomer that they were a GRAND disciple of Srila Prabhupada, and should expect their guru to adhere to his teachings strictly.
It is not foolproof, but it was an educational tool. A breakaway neophyte without permission of their Guru can still give Diksa mantra as per the GENERAL “CAN DO” “permissions” in NOI 5. Such initiation is given according to their level of realization and no more than that, but it is “something” as you pointed out.
A neophyte outside Iskcon with explicit permission from their Acarya (whoever that might be) and a ritvik neophyte within Iskcon can both give a Diksa mantra which is as potent as if an uttama gave it himself, and there will never be a reason to be re-initiated as long as the new disciple ultimately finds uttama level guidance to follow.
But in Srila Prabhupada’s Iskcon, his permission for neophytes to initiate was contingent on the ritvik system. Using the ritvik system does not hinder the transmisson of Divya Jnana anymore than the Diksa transmitted by a neophyte with permission to accept their own disciples outside the ritvik system would be hindered. The transmission of Divya Jnana is INITIALLY dependent on SOME LEVEL OF REALIZATION HOWEVER SMALL. From there it is a matter of guidance. The ritvik is at least in theory bound by the letter of the law to guide according to the Founder’s Siksa. The neophyte on their own, is, well, on their own, and less beholden to any guidelines.
The catch is that Srila Prabhupada and Krsna foresaw exactly what would happen if gross neophytes were NOT REQUIRED IN BLACK AND WHITE UNDER OATH TO REFERENCE THE ACARYA IN ALL THINGS. We are so gross in our kanistha adhikari that we were given the mandate to forever more be BOUND BY LAW TO EMPHASIZE TO EACH NEWCOMER THAT THEY ARE SRILA PRABHUPADA’S DISCIPLE FOREMOST AND THAT ANYTHING WE ORDER THEM TO DO MUST CONFORM TO SRILA PRABHUPADA’S GUIDANCE. And this guidance is easily available to anyone who can read or hear a tape.
The ritvik system is a formality. It is a one time thing. A blip in the radar of a lifetime. The rest of the process of spiritual sadhana over a lifetime is what counts. BUT THE RITVIK SYSTEM IS A GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING AS IT HAS BEEN FIRMLY ESTABLISHED that the new Bhakta is NOT GEORGE SMITHS EXCLUSIVE DISCIPLE. This fact can always be refreshed in the memory of new Bhaktas.
That way George Smith can at no time in the future get away with claiming the need to make radical changes within Iskcon due to “time place and cirucmstance” which do not comport with the Founder Acarya’s Siksa. Because if he does lose his head and take a trip down acarya lane, he will have guys like me ready to politely remind him that he is duty bound to represent Srila Prabhupada and I can point to the proof in BLACK AND WHITE. And that just might be enough to convince someone he plans to mislead to jump ship before it is to late. Maybe, maybe not, but at least the option is there.
Otherwise anyone could rightly challenge me and say, YOU CAN NOT PROVE that Srila Prabhupada did not authorize me to be the next acarya and make changes as I see fit. Shut up Bhakta Mark, you have NO evidence that he wanted such a thing. I can make changes in Iskcon because that is the tradition. Blah blah blah.
And this is why I can get away with calling all rascals to task. On a technicality. But a very important one. And hound these rascals all the way to the gates of hell, until they slam shut behind them. Buh bye.
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Dear Prabhupadanugas,
I request you to not take me as an enemy. I am more or less clear with the explanations you have given me about ritvik, but the most troubling factor is like the contents of the articles that I posted yesterday. Only if you are able to correctly explain them without diverting the issue and calling me enemy, etc. can I be sure that you are actually following Prabhupada and are not simply managing the show for name and fame. I am spending a lot of my energy in writing my comments and am always anxiously waiting for your thoughtful and broad-minded replies so that my understanding becomes clearer. If all you brand me an enemy and an offender (although my intention is not at all so), you are making me really heartbroken. I want to find the alternative the surrendering to the so called GBC Gurus. For this, I need your help.
Your servant,
Santosh
Santosh said: Maybe it is better that I independently read Prabhupada’s books and hear from him without getting into supporting any group. I may not become perfect in this life, but by Krsna’s mercy, I can certainly make some advancement.” DO IT DEAR PRABHU, DO IT!!! Krishna loves you Santosh, He and Prabhupada gave you just the right answer!!! And chant Hare Krishna all possible time!
y.s. bj
bhakta jarek says:
2. February 2013 at 1:59 am
Hare Krishna! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
You welcome dear bhakta George prabhu, it is you and SG prabhu in support (would like to know rather the real name, SG is a little to short for me) who are in line with the Highest Truth pursuit here, where some careless and rash souls thake the risk of another “isms” private and selfish extravagance. Thank you for the deep lesson of honesty and endurance prabhu.
y.s. bj
SG — Thank you, too, Bhakta Jarek. You are most kind.
Rocana Dasa Prabhu, one of the senior most disciple of Srila Prabhupada, begins to analyse critically the written Instructions of Srila Prabhupada with his conditioned mind under the control of the mixture of Rajo and Tamas gunas and offer the result of same to his Spiritual Master Srila Prabhupada for further blessings. This indicates that how sane man he is.
So many people who have the same motivations intend to follow his critical motivated work of the thesis DOR and thus many innocent people are misguided one after another by the supporter of that mundane theory challenging Srila Prabhupada’s system of the Instructions given to his followers to run His Mission.
Therefore, people like Bhakta George and so many others who chose to follow the same misleading path of mundane analytical also challenge and face the consequences as of those who refutes the system of the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada. It means simply that all of these people refuses to ACCEPT the system of Instructions given by Srila Prabhupada.
Thus, this debate goes on and on and on and it never ends because it is based on mundane platform as it appears. That which is Spiritual can not be challenged by the Material mundane Intelligence duly controlled under the three mode of material nature.
So Bhakta George and the associates, when you come to think about it, what is your POSITION in this regard ?
Do you accept and obey the Initiating system of Instructions of Srila Prabhupada as it is ?
Your simple answer of YES or NO shall suffice.
Thank you and look forward to your kind reply.
Hari BOL. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
YS……. Amar Puri.
February 1, 1977, Bhuvanesvara
Morning Walk
“There are crooked living entities; one who is snake, and one is man. So you can control the snake, but you cannot control this rascal crooked man.”
Dear Santosh, the people who wrote the articles against Madhu Pandit support the worship of illicit sex with men, women and children as acharyas. And lets say Madhu Pandit is a bad person with his finances, why is the GBC spending 15 million dollars suing him, when the GBC has rats running on the altars in some USA temples because they are not spending even a few thousand dollars of money to fix these temples? Another USA temple was written up for safety codes, because they are not spending a few thousand dollars to fix things, but they are spending millions on lawyers. Are you saying the supporters of the worship of illicit sex, who are having rats passing stools on the altars, and who are wasting 15,000,000 to buy new Mercedes for lawyers, are the better idea? I am not sure what your point is even?
As for Jarek, he is never going to move to Moab Utah to be with a living guru, in fact no one is moving there since it is cold as hell and in the middle of the desert and no one wants to go there to see Kailash’s mountain man beard. Some of us will go there when California falls into the ocean, we might float over there, other than that, no one is going to see Jarek’s master of the jagat. ys pd
How is it that someone can imagine that Srila Prabhupada created a contextual circumstance in which neophytes would accept disciples and give them insufficient guidance? Srila Prabhupada’s Iskcon temples were fully complete. His books, the instructions therein, and his body personal instructions was fully complete. Yet somehow newcomers would be forced by circumstance to accept a neophyte’s insufficient guidance and not reach the ultimate goal of life?
How is it possible to conclude from that purport that Srila Prabhupada was only recommending that disciples accept an uttama? That he was giving permission for neophytes in his Iskcon temples to accept disciples and give them insufficient guidance as long as they warned the newcomer that they weren’t going to reach the goal? How absurd!!
Srila Prabhupada was so powerful that when he was physically absent, by his prior permission, his neophyte disciples whispered Diksa mantras into the ears of newcomers, and those mantras were instantly transmuted to carry the potency of a Advanced Mahabhagavat Acarya and link those new disciples to that uttama. And those neophytes were able to give perfect guidance to those new Bhaktas by repeating the guidance given by the Uttama Acarya.
Yet somehow, now that Srila Prabhupada is “MORE ABSENT” (hmmmm), yes now that he is MORE ABSENT those diksa mantras are suddenly worthless when coming from a neophyte and that neophytes guidance is insufficient to bring newcomers to the ultimate goal. So much so that they need to warn the newcomer of that fact, that they are going to settle for not reaching the goal. Of course George Smith provides that these neophyte gurus have the option to “recommend” that these newcomers find an uttama to accept as a spiritual master. So where do they send them? Rocana das? Kailash Utah Chandra das?
The simple fact is that Srila Prabhupada and Krsna arranged for this circumstance from the very beginning, empowering Srila Prabhupada to accept and guide disciples WHEN PHYSICALLY ABSENT from their lives through specific processes given to his neophyte disciples.
These disciples were not vedic scholars. They were not experts on Gauidya “tradition”. They only really knew what they were told to do, and what they were trained to do. But suddenly in 1977 they become so expert as to throw out the system they were trained in wholesale and do something based on their speculation as to what was PROPER? How did that work out? Hmmmmmm?
And now that they have had 35 years to do a little research they have continued to speculate on how to fix what they broke in the first place. Instituting concocted permutations of their original bogus idea of trying to imitate a level of advancement they do not possess. Justifying each experiment based on their so called scholarship. Forgetting that Guru aparadha has rendered all their mental processes subject to illusion. Whereas those who simply repeat that we should never have abandoned the system that was working, that was ordered to continue, and that we should return to it, are somehow the villians. Pure insanity.
The fact is that every senior brahminical leader had disciples. Every parent had disciples. Every Ksatryia had disciples. And they were all formally disciples of Srila Prabhupada. If those brahmanas, ksyatriyas, and parents guided Srila Prabhupada’s disciples according to Srila Prabhupada’s guidelines, then the disciples could advance to the ultimate goal of life. There was no guarantee that these Gurus would follow Srila Prabhupada’s guidelines in instructing their disciples, but there were safeguards put into place to gently persuade them to toe that line. Especially prominent was the safeguard that it was well known and established that every one was ALSO AND FOREMOST a disciple of Srila Prabhupada and entitled to equal treatment under HIS LAWS.
With the abandoning of the ritvik system, we saw IMMEDIATELY the result was that anyone and everyone could claim exclusive acaryaship and instruct their disciples as they saw fit, and adhering to Srila Prabhupada’s guidelines was relegated to a mere “recommendation”, not a mandatory requirement.
And now we have the mess we are in, and the false egos of those who have built their “Guru” careers based on ignoring Srila Prabhupada’s guidelines show no promise of getting the hint. Ritviks are the most demonized devotees on the planet, and the speculative Gurus are good as God.
These are indisputable facts.
Hare Krsna
Prabhupada says throughout his books, that a spiritual master has to be qualified, realized, uttama, pure, situated in transcendence. “But the training must be complete.” (April 22, 1977, Bombay)
So there is no question that Prabhupada ever appointed some of his disciples on the basis of time will tell. Prabhupada already saw how his disciples were falling from sannyasa, even many brahmin initiated devotees were falling down. Prabhupada already saw how his godbrothers appointed unfit people to be diksha-guru what destroyed Gaudiya-matha.
(Honolulu, May 21, 1976)
Prabhupada knew he was about to leave and nobody would be there to correct. Who can ever believe Prabhupada would appoint unfit people many of them meanwhile even left the path of bhakti altogether?
There is an overlapping of seeing with our eyes a charismatic Vaishnava and at the same time we are told not to see, but to hear if this Vaishnava is a fully realized uttama-adikari.
However, in case of diksha-guru, he has to be directly ordered by his guru.
I do throughly agree with the quotes above so nicely collected by our psychiatric advisor mataji. However following your prooven here many times fanatical, sectarian and thus selfish initiations proposal following you we are challenging the acarya freedom and right to do order anyone he thinks is ready now to become a “regular guru”. Hardcore ritviks say say, no more guru in ISKCON, soft ritivks branch members something like, maybe later, what in fact must mean only after we ritviks do accept him to be such, perhaps like the clerks of the GBC of West Bengal inc. is doing in FISKcon. WHY is that? Since we are better than them, since we know by the virtue of our purity and devotion something the others don’t see, the henceforward crypto magic order, which makes us madhyams without care for anything else, especially logic or the principles of truth.
y.s. bj
Jarek: I do throughly agree with the quotes above so nicely collected by our psychiatric advisor mataji.
[PD: Jarek’s authority Kailash is in need of psychotic help, not us. Kailash says California is going into the ocean in two weeks, ooops that was in 1980, we are still afloat over here? He says we all need to move to Moab Utah, or die in the flood when we all sink into the Pacific! Well we are not dead at all, but Moab is pretty much a dead place to be, ok its desert. And then Kailash said he was going to take care of the cows, ooops, prest-chango, all the cows have since disappeared all at once, and so did the money meant for their care. Did these cows and money really disappear, or is Kailash making this up due to psychosis induced hallucinations? Very psychotic events?]
JP: However following your proven here many times fanatical, sectarian and thus selfish initiations proposal following you we are challenging the acarya freedom and right to do order anyone he thinks is ready now to become a “regular guru”.
[PD: Yep regular gurus regularly predict the end of California, regularly hijack cows and money, regularly are afraid of their own shadow and have to live on a mountain top in the middle of the desert due to extreme psychotic fear of the future.]
JP: Hardcore ritviks say say, no more guru in ISKCON, soft ritivks branch members something like, maybe later, what in fact must mean only after we ritviks do accept him to be such, perhaps like the clerks of the GBC of West Bengal inc. is doing in FISKcon.
[PD: Well at least we do not worship the fool on the hill, Jarek’s living mountain man out on the desert, Cattle rustler pada?]
JP: WHY is that?
[PD: Because your authority is a living guru advocate Kailash who posts his comments on the site of another living guru advocate named Rocana, except, they both forgot who their living guru is and never name him? Psychotic, or simply alzheimers?]
JP: Since we are better than them, since we know by the virtue of our purity and devotion something the others don’t see, the henceforward crypto magic order, which makes us madhyams without care for anything else, especially logic or the principles of truth.
[PD: Truth is that Kailash is despised locally for hi-jacking our cows and the money meant for the cows, he is known as a cattle rustler, period, and this cracker pot is Jarek’s authority, a psycho-babbling cow thief, who is living in fear of the end of the world like some crack pot cult leader. Jarek does not know this but crack pots are not regular gurus, they are not even regular karmis, the karmis have no fear of falling into the ocean, because — they are sane. ys pd]
y.s. bj
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.Thanks to Puranjana Prabhu for the answer.I am not saying I’m against the ritvik system,but if you can explain these two following articles,it will really help me and others who are still doubtful about Madhu Pandit Prabhu…If I can properly analyze all accusatons against him,I can come to conclusion
And please comment Puranjana Prabhu,on the last article(posted day before yesterday) that you were supporting Tattva Darshan Das who was put in jail for sex with underage girls…..I believe that since you are fighting against the unjust child molester gurus,you should also stop supporting such people within the ritvik movement.I hope you will reply without taking offense,since I admit that I don’t fully believe the articles that I’ve posted
Madhu Pandit Dasa’s dirty little secret
Over the last few days ever since we posted the text about Chitranga Caitanya where in it was discussed about the long time on going illicit connection between Madhu Pandit Dasa’s wife Bhakti Lata dd, aged about 51, and her so-called “adopted son” Jai Caitanya Dasa, aged about 43. (Does she tell him bed time stories at night?) We have been wondering why and how Madhu Pandit Dasa could tolerate such abusive and impudent behavior from his wife. We asked ourselves: Was he an impotent eunuch? Was he henpecked? Was it even true? It seemed implausible that anyone in his position would allow themselves to be cuckolded, but the accusations refused to go away.
What could possibly be the reason that Madhu Pandit Dasa would allow himself to be publicly subjected to this kind of shameless behavior by his wife and her “adopted son” right in front of his own nose for so long? Not only that, anyone who brought up the unsavory subject was forced to leave the temple. Then we remembered a statement made by Ananda Tirtha Dasa where he said the following:
“Jai Caitanya Dasa has a record of a very poor sadhana and is involved in an illicit affair with a congregation girl. With all this Jai Caitanya Dasa continues to go scot-free as he seems to be blackmailing MPD with something.”
“Enough attempts were made by me to bring transparency into the farm matters. The vice president Chanchalapati Dasa also has serious disagreement with the way the farm was being run and asked me to take up the farm responsibility and make a step-by-step proposal to clean up the system and he would present it to MPD. I agreed to take this major responsibility and made the proposal but nothing further happened as Jai Caitanya Dasa threatened he would not allow any one else to interfere and would take MPDs ‘secret matters’ to the GBC.”
Then it made sense. Madhu Pandit Dasa allowed Jai Caitanya Dasa to get away with stealing 40+ lakhs in 1996 and illicitly associating with his wife because Jai Caitanya Dasa was black mailing Madhu Pandit Dasa. But wait a minute, Jai Caitanya Dasa threatened to tell the GBC about Madhu Pandit Dasa’s secrets but Madhu Pandit Dasa has not been under the GBC for 10 years so why is he still allowing Jai Caitanya Dasa to suck money from the temple and continue his illicit relationship with his wife?
So now the question we are asking ourselves is what dirty little secret is Madhu Pandit Dasa hiding? He talks about the GBC having skeletons in their closets but their skeletons have been out of the closet for decades, while Madhu Pandit Dasa is hiding his. What did Madhu Pandit Dasa do that was so bad, what sins did he commit, that he allows Jai Caitanya Dasa to steal untold funds from the temple and to publicly carry on an illicit connection with his own wife out of fear of Jai Caitanya Dasa revealing his secrets?
Madhu Pandit Dasa should come clean and admit to whatever he has done wrong to end the blackmail so as to put a stop to the looting of temple funds and disgraceful behavior of senior female members of the temple. If he doesn’t want to reveal then he should a least have the decency to resign for the benefit of the temple to stop rascals like Jai Caitanya Dasa from plundering the temple assets and creating an unhealthy atmosphere.
Anyone with any factual information regarding what Madhu Pandit Dasa’s dirty little secret could be should contact us so that we can make further investigations.
Visit: http://www.ISKCON-BDA.org to find out more about the frauds of Madhu Pandit Dasa.
Home | Fraud of Madhu Pandit Dasa
Reply to Struggle for truth | About Us
ISKCON
Bangalore Devotee Association
Sevatula Dasa and Other Exiles
Purge: The act of purging; purgation; ridding of objectionable or hostile elements. In more recent use, the removal (from a political party, army, etc.) of persons regarded as undesirable. Oxford English Dictionary
Sevatulya Dasa: Joined as a full time brahmachari at the Hare Krishna Hill, ISKCON Bangalore temple in 1989. His main service in the temple was preaching, raising donations during the construction of temple, and as pujari for the deities. Later he was performing all the Vaisnavas yajnas at the temple.
In 1998 he along with other innocent devotees (listed below) was convinced by Madhu Pandit Dasa of the Rtvik system and he became a major proponent of Rtvik philosophy. But in 2001 he left the Bangalore temple along with Anandatirtha, Sitalanga and Kunjabihari Prabhus because they raised the issue of the illicit relations between Bhakti Lata dd (wife of Madhu Pandit Dasa) and Jai Chaitanya Dasa brahmacari as well as the illicit relations between Chameri dd (wife of Chanchalapathi Dasa the vice president) and Chitranga Chaitanya Dasa. Raising such questions about the chastity of the wives of the president and vice-president put them all into very precarious positions and they were pressured to leave and not allowed to return. With no where else to go he was finally given shelter at the Juhu, Mumbai temple of ISKCON (reg. Mumbai 1971) in spite of his having a Rtvik stance. At present he is holding the position of assistant head pujari of ISKCON (reg. Mumbai 1971), Sri-Sri Radha-Rasabihari Temple, Juhu , Mumbai.
Purged by Madhu Pandit Dasa
The many of the following devotees (many of whom later became Rtviks) were the ones who sacrificed ten years of their youth and worked hard to turn a bare stone hillock into the gleaming marble temple complex now found on Hare Krsna Hill. After the completion of the construction project, and when they were no longer needed they were purged by Madhu Pandit Dasa after they challenged his leadership by questioning him about the finances and temple management policies. They were either kicked out of the temple out right or made to feel so uncomfortable that they were forced to leave.
Madhu Pandit filled the places of these purged devotees with new people who knew nothing of the previous history and when the new devotees eventually begin to ask questions they are also purged. Though Madhu Pandit is not murderous or bloodthirsty like Stalin there is a distinct similarity in their tactical use of regular purges to maintain power:
When the “Old Bolsheviks” had been consigned to oblivion, their successors and replacements quickly followed them into the void: “The new generation of Stalinist careerists, who had adapted themselves completely to the new system, still found themselves arrested. … They were succeeded by younger but similar characters, who again often fell quickly.” Conquest, The Great Terror: A Reassessment, p. 224.
List of former inmates and congregational devotees of Hare Krsna Hill who were Purged by Madhu Pandit Dasa.
Pandava Sakha Dasa
Kunja Bihari Dasa
Sarvajna Krishna Dasa
Vaikuntha Gaur Dasa
Sitalanga Gauranga Dasa
Ananda Tirtha Dasa
Anand Maya Dasa
Anadi Krishna Dasa
Kanakabja Dasa
Srivas Gaura Dasa
Shanthi Parayan Dasa
Hari Namamrit Dasa
Gopal Gauranga Dasa
Vedavit Govind Dasa
Divya Chaitanya Dasa
Rohini Tanaya Dasa
Sundar Srinivas Dasa
Chaitanya Bhagavan Dasa
Pragosh Krishna Dasa
Sudhama Jeevan Dasa
Vrindavan Chandra Dasa
Jai Radhe Krishna Dasa
Srinidhi Sham Dasa
Anuttama – Tatva Dasa
Bhakta Anil Kumar
Bhakta Deepak
Mahatma Vidhura Dasa
Rupanuga Dasa
Krishna Chaitanya Dasa
Radha Sevak Dasa
Paratattva Dasa
Panduranga Dasa
Varada Krishna Dasa
Amrit Chaitanya Dasa
Ishwari Gopi Devi Dasi
Tirthapada Dasa
Mohan Chaitanya Dasa
Sarva Vyapi Dasa
Vedanta Chaitanya Dasa
Satya Gopinath Dasa
Ananda Gauranga Dasa
Contact us:
Madhu.Bandit.666 at gmail.com
Your servant,
Santosh
Now let me look at what Mark lately wrote to me, at his latest ….whatever it is that he thinks that he is about attempting to accomplish. Please bear with me for I am rapidly approaching my dotage and tend to forget stated intents though a persons purpose still seldom fails to escape me. Oh yes, now I remember,
Mark. You were all about “revealing me to the world” or to the um, you should be very careful on how you phrase this and should certainly stay clear of saying “ to the less intelligent” or even “to the less educated”. How bout you can simply say the “to the less sophisticated” and leave them guessing or you can just leave it blank and hope that they won’t go back and fill in the spaces later on. But yes, now that I recall, that was exactly what you were about , showing me up to all the world as being only a posture of reason and good intelligence – how is that going?.
So lets see what your latest trouble is.
Although I realize that however tempting that it might be to you that out of a sense of self preservation you are to cautious to accuse Srila Prabhupada directly of being mistaken and would much rather make a transference of his claim onto me so that you can then attack it with the utmost strength of your mentality, I did not initially understand that you had actual problems comprehending what was written.
Marks very last post addressed to me cleared that up and revealed that the simple problem was that Mark simply did not get what was immediately obvious to all of us little people who Mark feels himself to be the intellectual superior of.
Mark has problems when two different words are used as synonyms to indicate what words used as synonyms usually indicate which is the exact same thing or meaning. That the source of his confusion this time were not two verbs that dependent upon usage may or may not be used to express the meaning indicated to me by Srila Prabhupada was not this time a consideration so that did not blur the lines that this time were clearly marked as being the cause of Marks upset.
In this case, my use of the term “pure devotee” in place of “uttama-adhikari” as being synonymous, as most people understand them to be, had Mark confused. At first I thought this to strange because nobody else has had this problem understanding, that and because such is the impression that his writings convey that one would not normally think that Mark would have problems “getting” or understanding what most folks who do not possess his erudition get immediately or see as obvious, which is again that in my article that I was using the terms pure devotee of Krsna and uttama-adhikari to refer to the exact same level of devotee.
Whether Mark is able to pull some rabbit out of his hat at this time to save face or not the same holds true that he just didn’t get it.
I consider it to be somewhat ironic that the person who has the expressed intention of unmasking me as being but a posture and pretense of reason and understanding now seems himself to be in danger of being unmasked.
Mark, you wrote about me in your last:
[George] wrote : “In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from a pure devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are pure devotees of Krsna.”
“Amazingly however, a permission is given that any level of devotee may initiate”
Mark: Nowhere did it mention the word “pure”. That is your addition. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I would guess you said that based on your theory that a neophyte accepting disciples is authorized. Because as you know, only a neophyte strictly following orders can be considered a pure devotee by any stretch of siddhanta.
For some reason Mark was thinking that I meant to say that a kanistha or a madhyama adhikari were also pure devotees, something that I never thought or ever intended to indicate nor ever have been accused of doing before in the entire more than a year since the article first appeared upon The Sampradaya Sun website.
I still cannot how a reading of what I wrote could ever lead to someone to such a conclusion without his making a leap of faith in favor of supporting ones own own assumption in place of a more safer and common sense approach. No one else that I have talked to about the article had ever got an impression from my simply switching the term “pure devotee of Krsna” for “uttama-adhikari” that I meant to suggest that kanisthas or madhyamas were also pure devotees or uttama-adhikaris. Everyone else had understood exactly what I had meant, which was that only the uttama-adhikari or “pure devotee of Krsna” should initiate, even though it is permitted that a kanistha and madhyama level devotee can also accept disciples despite the fact that they are not pure devotees of Krsna or uttama adhikaris.
Had Mark actually “given me the benefit of the doubt” as he repeatedly claims to be doing , had he asked questions first before he came out shooting, we could have saved countless hours of arguing, but noooo, he had to pull that “I’m a bigger monkey than you are crap” with the result that now, here at the end, people are seeing that the great Mark with all his education is one really dumb s.o.b., who probably couldn’t even find his own….” Hand” in the dark if someone had used another word like “paw” or “mitt” to describe it.
YS B.G.
George, Puranjana das does not speak for me. So you may as well cease attributing the conclusions from his writings to me, or even mentioning them and defeating them when speaking with me.
Mark, it is very difficult to distinguish one crow from another simply by it’s cawing. You all sound rather alike except for those who are actively speaking out against such improprieties as Puranjana and some others among you are engaged in committing, otherwise you how are we expected to distinguish you from these malefactors, by your silence? You known by the company that you keep Mark.
Here however is a little something for you, a solution to how you may differentiate yourselves from such foul feeders upon carrion and show yourself to be more swanlike.
na sabham praviset prajnah
sabhya-dosan anusmaran
abruvan vibruvann ajno
narah kilbisam asnute
“A wise person should not enter an assembly if he knows the participants there are committing acts of impropriety, and if, having entered such an assembly, he fails to speak the truth, speaks falsely, or pleads ignorance, he will certainly incur sin.” (Srimad Bhagavatam 10.44.10)
That is what the shastra says and it is as clear as black and white.
Social responsibility is not something that one can so easily abdicate nor brush aside with as little ease as an “I gave at the office” or adequately compensate for the lack of with an occasional blurb to the effect that this or that person does not necessarily reflect either ours or the opinions of our sponsors.
Whether or not you agree with you agree with someone about their opinion is one thing, whether or not they or persecuted for voicing it is quite another. Puranjana doesn’t bother me Mark, nor does but allowing him and others to act in such ways sets the example of what others may expect should they dare to come here and voice their opinion.
You are a powerful individual Mark, independent and self-reliant, pretty much a match for anyone and anything that might be hurled against you, able to withstand the buffeting of the greatest storms.
But even the great solitary birds spanning the heavens with their wing tips, soaring above all the illusion of the world feel within their beating hearts such a love of the Lord and of His devotees that were it within their power they would adopt a more humbler form, one that means only to gather the sweetness together for offering poured out to upon the feet of the Lord. One that cannot lay a forest flat with one beat of its wings but which can teach by example how the devotees should defend themselves against such aggressors, should teach them how to swarm. Then they are no longer dependent upon any single individuals strength to champion their rights, but upon the strength of their devotion to Srila Prabhupada, each other and to the Lord.
When Srila Prabhupada was asked what should be done with child molesters and he replied that child molesters should be thrown out of the movement, but that first they should be hung, had our society then taken to heart that instruction there would not be a safer place in the world today in the eyes of any parent than our societies Guru-kulas with the inevitable result that every parent would be sending their kids to us for their protection and education. Just from following this simple instruction then all the world practically overnight or in the space of but one or two generations would take to Krsna consciousness through our good example and great education. Here then is another instruction that if it is followed will result in such a strong and powerful assembly that no evil will dare to intrude upon your assembly, but as always, it is your choice whether you will follow it or not.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
Heres to ya.
Hare Krsna
Ys Bhakta George
Dear Santosh, I really do not have any answer for the specific charges these people made because, they are not credible people. If the Madhu Bandit site folks have proof of crimes taking place, then why did they not take that to court and show the court the specific claims there? They have not done that. The MB site people have been in court since 1997, if they had solid proof of crimes, where is it? Is it not a crime to spend $15,000,000 millions dollars and waste that on court fees? If they had evidence of crimes they would have won in the court years ago, they never show anything in the court? Show us the proof of crimes in the courts, not on some bogus web site?
And if I am supporting molesters, where is the proof? Show me the written statements I have made as proof, then we can discuss that further, but you never show me any? Sorry, there is no proof. I have asked people for this before, and they never show me one iota of evidence.
We do however have evidence that Rocana’s site supports the Madhu Bandit site people like Bhakti Vikas, who have wasted 15 million in courts while they have rats passing stools on their altars. And they already had to spend 40 million because they did not listen to me about the molesting. Why are these people credible at all? ys pd
JP: Hardcore ritviks say say, no more guru in ISKCON, soft ritivks branch members something like, maybe later, what in fact must mean only after we ritviks do accept him to be such, perhaps like the clerks of the GBC of West Bengal inc. is doing in FISKcon.
[PD: Well at least we do not worship the fool on the hill, Jarek’s living mountain man out on the desert, Cattle rustler pada?]
What was that old saying “Two wrongs do not make a right?” We only rush to certitude when we are under existential pressure or when our prejudices have become involved. People under the existential pressure of thinking that they must accept formal initiation by either the traditional or the Rtvik process, that they must choose to either support one or the other oft times make their decisions based upon a poor fund of knowledge and upon such prejudices as both Puranjana and IKSCON attempt to create. What Puranjana means to do here besides humiliating BJ and attempting to make him feel stupid is to rush us my the realization that those who decide to throw in their lots with the Rtviks are in this way no different than those who choose to throw in their lots with ISKCON, to rush us by the realization that two wrongs do not make a right. “Wrong, is Wrong, period and the argument that one should accept the Rtviks because although they may be wrong that this or that other is even wronger suggests that both Lord Krsna and Srila Prabhupada left us in the position where it is impossible for us to actually determine and to select a course of action that is cent percent absolutely right. Now that suggestion to me isn’t just wrong or wronger, it is complete and utter bull ****.
Unfortunately human beings have a very low tolerance to existential pressure, a mere several seconds of absolute terror being sufficient to completly drive them out of their skins, so once it has been created and the level of stress kept up or increased then like as not they are going to jumped into making some choice before they have really learned enough about what they have selected. The result of this is that later on some person knowing more about what they have selected than they do can publicly deride and disarage and attempt to make them feel like idiots like you Rtviks let Puranjana get away with doing.
Once one has accepted something upon blind faith, especially some spiritual system, by this simple acceptance all of ones doubts about it vanish or are deeply buried, otherwise such an acceptance would not let the steam off so to speak or relieve the existential pressure that occaisioned one to accept something prematurely in the first place. Once one has elevated a generality up to the position of a Platonic Absolute one never has to even think about it again, all that one has to do is “keep” the faith,” or eternally repress ones own doubts as well as take up an adversarial stance against any others who doubt or challenge ones selection.
The reason that these damned things frequently get so hostile is not only because you have so many frauds attempting to see a product that they knew was faulty from the first place is also because any challenge or reminder from an outside source of ones own buried doubts, or any new bit of information that would have influenced one to make the opposite selection threatens to return one to that level of existential pressure and associated stress that ones blind faith acceptance relieved in the first place and such relief is frequently mistaken for proof that one has made the correct selection although this is hardly ever realized or articulated by the ones experiencing this.
That all these things are so is partly due to a conditioning process that we of the West experience in which the blind faith acceptance of this or that spiritual process is our only option and remains so until our death.
Krsna consciousness on the other hand is scientific and results oriented. One simply submits to the process and whether you believe in it or not is completly irrelevant, although it certainly helps to keep an open mind and avoid cynicism. Blind faith acceptance quickly vanishes as realizaqtion occurs and firm faith develops. Chant Hare Krsna, follow the regs and tell anyone trying to rush you into accepting either ISKCON or the Rtviks to go to Hell.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
P.S. Puranjana and others among the Rtviks are still trying to present Rtvikism as being the only possible selectioon because there are no living gurus out there. That however is an unproven claim and even goes against what Srila Prabhupada said, which was that there would be pure devotees appearing among his disciples childrens children. The fact that ISKGONES rubber stampting guru program is bs and that so many ISKCON gurus have fallen does not even imply that there are no loving gurus out there, that is simply a rhetorical trick and a logical fallacy that the rtviks emply to steer you towards accepting their line of hokum.
Ys George Smith
Hey PD, You never answered. After you stiff armed Srila Prabhupada because he stopped you from playing Gopis, and walked away from your service in theBBT did Srila Prabhupada ever even trust you to so much as to sharpen a pencil for him? Or did you simply wait until he was out of the way in order to come back and try to put yourself over as being Srila Prabhupadas greatest defender? Where is that letter accepting your apology from Srila Prabhupada that you said you had?
[PD: Well at least we do not worship the fool on the hill, Jarek’s living mountain man out on the desert, Cattle rustler pada?]
JP: WHY is that?
[PD: Because your authority is a living guru advocate Kailash who posts his comments on the site of another living guru advocate named Rocana, except, they both forgot who their living guru is and never name him? Psychotic, or simply alzheimers?]
Worship of Srila Prabhupa is wrong? Why? Just tell us George, and get it off your chest. BTW you pal Rocana wants to de-fund the archives now, great job, he wants to destroy the Srila Prabhupada legacy project. That is what we thought your pal was up to. ys pd
Right, things more and more get to the bottom line that in the whole world Rocana and his followers are the most aggressive opponents to have Srila Prabhupada in the center of his movement?
Although Rocana coined such terms like “Sampradaya Acarya” in praise of Srila Prabhupada, right now it seems that Rocana rather made this up as kind of gravestone inscription for a deceased mortal.
As soon someone suggests that Srila Prabhupada might be fully present in his teachings, in his books, some folks posing as Vaishnava are having a real problem with this.
Of course they also cannot explain why Lord Jesus Christ still can initiate – for them Lord Jesus is humbug fiction – what to speak of Prabhupada, for them he is dead and gone.
So obviously there is a new species of human-like primates who want to introduce a new religion of worshiping material bodies? Any idea?
Well, I just held my breath and skimmed through George the Grammar Girl’s latest diatribe and noticed that as usual the artful dodger has failed to address any of the points I made regarding siddhanta, and focused more on perfecting his art of condescending to me while projecting that fault upon myself.
Bye George.
Rukmini Ramana dd writes ; ” So obviously there is a species of human-like primates who want to introduce a new religion of worshiping material bodies? Any idea ?”
Very interesting point. Indeed there are 400,000 different species of human as per the Sastras. All of them are situated according to their Gunas and are working functionally either benefic or malefic for sense gratification. That is how we the conditioned Jivas conduct in this material universe under the influence of the Gunas.
To make long explanation short, there are Jivas who are desirous to be cheated. Therefore, there are Cheaters of all sorts every where be it a religion or business regardless.
Srila Prabhupada knew very well the selfish motive of his all leading disciples who WANNA BE A GURU no matter what. This had happened during the time of Srila BSST Goswami Maharaja in His Gaudiya Maths and the same has happened during the time of Srila Prabhupada in His present Iskcon.
Why did it happen ? My inference is that there are people who likes to get cheated. Therefore, there have to have some cheating leaders with full of motive and aspiration to cheat who so ever wishes to get cheated. These people are attracted towards those type of Leaders so called self made Gurus. That is why the Lord has granted their wishes accordingly.
That is why there is a species of human-like primates who want to introduce a new religion of worshipping material bodies regardless who they are. Imagine for a moment, if these people are not around and attracted to those cheaters, what type of a MESS we can expect in regard to the religion. There will be for more worst type of a disasters every where. It is already prevailing.
But for those of US who are sincere and serious to cultivate Spiritual knowledge, we also get the chance to cultivate the real knowledge of the Truth as established by the bona fide Guru who is none other His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada Ki Jaya.
Hope this answers, Rukmini Ramna dd.
Hari BOL.
YS…… Amar Puri.
Thanks Amar Puri pr, right, conditioned souls feel uncomfortable when being told they are not this body – and, panic, go on a shooting spree.
When former staunch sankirtan devotees like “Bhakta Jarek” fall back they experience their bodies are retrieving missed out sense gratification and thus consider Prabhupada’s regs to get off the bodily platform as unnatural oppression (material psychology of repression).
Of course they are also bewildered why ISKCON is having huge success in Russia, Asia, India?
An ISKCON leader recently told me that ISKCON jumped on the political bandwagon of using Russia’s still ongoing animosity against US imperialism, Europe’s capitalism. Therefore Russians are having no problem of ISKCON being destroyed in the West. There is zero response when they are informed about empty temples all over NA / Europe.
Same in India, they welcome any offender who escaped prosecution in US / Europe because like Africans, Indians consider western industry nations as exploiters. Therefore, red carpet for Kirtanananda, Radhanatha and others.
Of course at one point political maneuvers collapse, people look through whats happening and ISKCON’s present “mahabhagavat uttama acaryas” will be once again on the run.
Unfortunatelly I never was a staunch sankirtan devotee mataji (try not to make me into be part of your crazy stories, please), rather a kitchen help bhakta. However I knew and associated with many staunch, mainly german, sankirtan devotees, who I do miss very, very, very much!
y.s. bj
■Madhya 16.72
“krsna-nama nirantara yanhara vadane
sei vaisnava-srestha, bhaja tanhara carane
SYNONYMS
krsna-nama—the holy name of Lord Krsna; nirantara—incessantly; yanhara—whose; vadane—in the mouth; sei—such a person; vaisnava-srestha—a first-class Vaisnava; bhaja—worship; tanhara carane—his lotus feet.
TRANSLATION
“A person who is always chanting the holy name of the Lord is to be considered a first-class Vaisnava, and your duty is to serve his lotus feet.”
PURPORT
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura says that any Vaisnava who is constantly chanting the holy name of the Lord should be considered to have attained the second platform of Vaisnavism. Such a devotee is superior to a neophyte Vaisnava who has just learned to chant the holy name of the Lord.
A neophyte devotee simply tries to chant the holy name, whereas the advanced devotee is accustomed to chanting and takes pleasure in it. Such an advanced devotee is called madhyama-bhagavata, which indicates that he has attained the intermediate stage between the neophyte and the perfect devotee.
Generally a devotee in the intermediate stage becomes a preacher. A neophyte devotee or an ordinary person should worship the madhyama-bhagavata, who is a via medium.
In his Upadesamrta Srila Rupa Gosvami says: pranatibhis ca bhajantam isam. This means that madhyama-adhikari devotees should exchange obeisances between themselves.
The word nirantara, meaning “without cessation, continuously, constantly,” is very important in this verse. The word antara means “interval”. If one has desires other than a desire to perform devotional service-in other words, if one sometimes engages in devotional service and sometimes strives for sense gratification-his service will be interrupted. A pure devotee, therefore, should have no other desire than to serve Krsna. He should be above fruitive activity and speculative knowledge. In his Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, Srila Rupa Gosvami says:
This is the platform of pure devotional service. One should not be motivated by fruitive activity or mental speculation but should simply serve Krsna favorably. That is first-class devotion.
Another meaning of antara is “this body.” The body is an impediment to self-realization because it is always engaged in sense gratification. Similarly, antara means “money.” If money is not used in Krsna’s service, it is also an impediment. Antara also means janata, “people in general.” The association of ordinary persons may destroy the principles of devotional service. Similarly, antara may mean “greed,” greed to acquire more money or enjoy more sense gratification. Finally, the word antara may also mean “atheistic ideas” by which one considers the temple Deity to be made of stone, wood or gold.
All of these are impediments. The Deity in the temple is not material-He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. Similarly, considering the spiritual master an ordinary human being (gurusu nara-matih) is also an impediment. Nor should one consider a Vaisnava a member of a particular caste or nation. Nor should a Vaisnava be considered material. Caranamrta should not be considered ordinary drinking water, and the holy name of the Lord should not be considered an ordinary sound vibration.
Nor should one look on Lord Krsna as an ordinary human being, for He is the origin of all visnu-tattvas; nor should one regard the Supreme Lord as a demigod. Intermingling the spiritual with the material causes one to look on transcendence as material and the mundane as spiritual. This is all due to a poor fund of knowledge. One should not consider Lord Visnu and things related to him as being different. All this is offensive.
In the Bhakti-sandarbha (265), Srila Jiva Gosvami writes: namaikam yasya vaci smarana-patha-gatam ityadau deha-dravinadi-nimittaka-’pasanda’-sabdena ca dasa aparadha laksyante, pasandamayatvat tesam.
The Mayavadis look on Visnu and Vaisnavas imperfectly due to their poor fund of knowledge, and this is condemned. In Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.2.46), the intermediate Vaisnava is described as follows:
“The intermediate Vaisnava has to love God, make friends with the devotees, instruct the innocent and reject jealous people.” These are the four functions of the Vaisnava in the intermediate stage. In Caitanya-caritamrta (Madhya 22.64) Sri Sanatana Gosvami is taught:
“One who is faithful is a proper candidate for devotional service. In terms of one’s degree of faith in devotional service, one is a first-class, second-class or neophyte Vaisnava.”
“One who has attained the intermediate stage is not very advanced in sastric knowledge, but he has firm faith in the Lord. Such a person is very fortunate to be situated on the intermediate platform.” (Cc. Madhya 22.67)
“Attraction and love are the ultimate goal of devotional service. The degrees of such attraction and love for God distinguish the different stages of devotion-neophyte, intermediate and perfectional.” (Cc. Madhya 22.71) An intermediate devotee is greatly attracted to chanting the holy name, and by chanting he is elevated to the platform of love. If one chants the holy name of the Lord with great attachment, he can understand his position as an eternal servant of the spiritual master, other Vaisnavas and Krsna Himself.
Thus the intermediate Vaisnava considers himself krsna-dasa, Krsna’s servant. He therefore preaches Krsna consciousness to innocent neophytes and stresses the importance of chanting the Hare Krsna maha-mantra. An intermediate devotee can identify the nondevotee or motivated devotee. The motivated devotee or the nondevotee are on the material platform, and they are called prakrta.
The intermediate devotee does not mix with such materialistic people. However, he understands that the Supreme Personality of Godhead and everything related to Him are on the same transcendental platform. Actually none of them are mundane.
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Srila Prabhupada has certainly stressed the importance of honesty. I think if all of us are honest, this website will be very very conducive for aspirants to take to Krsna Consciousness. This simple honesty is a very basic quality without which one cannot claim to be a devotee.
Dear Puranjana Prabhu,
How can you expect me to produce any ‘proof” for anything? I am very inexperienced in gathering proof for various accusations. I plead with you to be honest. Please tell me ‘yes’ or ‘no’ for whether you are supporting molester Tattva Darshan or not? Please do not ask for proof.
Repeatedly asking for proof makes the whole thing seem as if you have done a crime and are trying to escape from it on the excuse of non availability of any proof. Even Radhanath Swami is still serving as ‘guru’ since there has not been solid proof exposed of his criminal activities. But I guess you are honest since you have told to us the fallacy of not surrendering to the GBC Gurus. So please tell me in a way that even I can understand.
One thing that disturbs me about your comments is that you see that if one does not support ritvik (like Bhakta Jarek), it automatically implies that they support GBC child-molester gurus. These are not the only two alternatives, right? You must be well aware of this fact. Even though Bhakta Jarek repeatedly says that he accepts Srila Prabhupada as guru and does NOT accept the bogus rascal ‘living gurus’, you repeatedly accuse him of suuporting them. This is not corrrect.
As for myself, I want to worship Prabhupada ONLY, and I want like minded persons. I want honest and non-prejudiced association.
So please reply to me considering what I have written just now. Please consider that I have no inimical feelings towards you. I am only interested in knowing the truth.
Looking for conducive assocaiation for worshipping Srila Prabhupada,
Your servant,
Santosh
Dear George, thanks for posting this nice encouraging excerpt of Caitanya Caritamrita Madhya 16.72!
This exactly is the reason why thousands of devotees struggled hard in order to stay in ISKCON.
So we have to follow Prabhupada’s example who would carefully examine how devotees would translate his instructions into their activities.
Not that Prabhupada would simply recite sastra. He would also study the symptoms if there is actual advancement taking place.
There are now 43 fallen ISKCON gurus (1,2 gurus every year since Prabhupada left), 110 fallen ISKCON sannyasis, number of fallen brahmana initiated Vaishnavas can hardly be counted.
Please answer this question, what do you believe – where does credibility of such a movement stand among people in general?
Why do you believe to simply go on as if nothing has happened?
Why do you believe that ritviks are apasiddhantic?
Where does ritvik produce fallen gurus? Where does ritvik produce multiple camps of competing gurus as we see it right in front of our eyes within ISKCON?
Dear Santosh, I am saying there is no written documentation of me supporting molesters because, there is no written documentation of me supporting molesters. It does not exist. No, I never wrote a letter saying I support any molesters, nor did I say that in private to anyone, ever. Nor would I put a crack pot like Tattva in charge of the poison issue.
This was Sri Mukunda’s attempt to dis-credit the poison case, he wanted me to put Tattva in charge of the case and when I refused he started to attack me. Sri Mukunda is the person who wanted to have Tattva in charge of the poison case, go back and read what he said, he said I wanted Tattva on the poison case, no — Sri Mukunda wanted me to do that, this was his idea, he said Tattva was in charge of the poison case, not me? He later exposed why, he hates Srila Prabhupada and that is why he wanted his poisoners to go free. And he still does, he still says Tattva is in charge of the poison case, because he wants the poisoners to go free.
As for Radhanatha, he is only able to promote himself in India because, most people in the USA connect him to the New Vrndavana crimes. He spends very little time here and has no actual center here that I know of at least. He is going where his criminal past is not known, so he is not really getting away with it, he is exploiting only a very small area of the world map.
No doubt a lot of people in India are gradually recognizing that he was the New Vrndavana henchman, so even there his past will eventually catch up to him. I will be doing a TV show here in America which will expose him here further, he is not making traction here, most people here do not believe he is not connected to the Kirtanananda regime, he is only going where he can exploit ignorance. That is not proof of anything, except that there are a lot of ignorant people out there. ys pd
Adi 7.51 : PURPORT :
This is a manifestation of real love for Kṛṣṇa and Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. There are three categories of Vaiṣṇavas: kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs, madhyama-adhikārīs and uttama-adhikārīs. The kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, or the devotee in the lowest stage of Vaiṣṇava life, has FIRM FAITH but is not familiar with the conclusions of the śāstras. The devotee in the second stage, the madhyama-adhikārī, is completely aware of the śāstric conclusion and has firm faith in his guru and the Lord. He, therefore, avoiding nondevotees, preaches to the innocent. However, the mahā-bhāgavata or uttama-adhikārī, the devotee in the highest stage of devotional life, does not see anyone as being against the Vaiṣṇava principles, for he regards everyone as a Vaiṣṇava but himself. This is the essence of Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s instruction that one be more tolerant than a tree and think oneself lower than the straw in the street (tṛṇād api su-nīcena taror iva sahiṣṇunā). However, even if a devotee is in the uttama-bhāgavata status he must come down to the second status of life, madhyama-adhikārī, to be a preacher, for a preacher should not tolerate blasphemy against another Vaiṣṇava. Although a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī also cannot tolerate such blasphemy, he is not competent to stop it by citing śāstric evidences. Therefore Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara are understood to be KANISTHA-ADHIKARIS because they could not refute the arguments of the sannyāsīs in Benares. They appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to take action, for they felt that they could not tolerate such criticism although they also could not stop it.
Adi 7.52 : PURPORT
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very compassionate for His PURE DEVOTEES Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara .
Santosh writes ; ” One thing that disturbs me about your comments is that you see that if one does not support ritvik (like Bhakta Jarek), it automatically implies that they support GBC child-molester gurus. These are not the only two alternatives, right? You must be well aware of this fact. Even though Bhakta Jarek repeatedly says that he accepts Srila Prabhupada as guru and does NOT accept the bogus rascal ‘living gurus’, you repeatedly accuse him of suuporting them. This is not corrrect. ”
Santosh do you know what do these people such as Bhakta Jarek, Bhakta George and their associates non-supporters of Ritvik System of Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada as well as non-supporter of GBC ruber stamped gurus in the present Iskcon actually support ????
Neither Bhakta Jarek nor Bhakta George have ever described what they support and believe in except both of them they say they believe in Srila Prabhupada and yet they disOBEY the Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada. What kind of a mysterious misleading is that ???
May be Santosh if you are unable to answer these two simple questions, perhaps, these two are in a position to answer the questions to which I look forward to hear the answer.
Thank you. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Hari BOL.
YS……. Amar Puri.
So I think Rocana’s cadre got a fair chance to have their questions answered.
Of course they are unteachable and jubilantly embrace a guru system (ISKCON guru system) where occasionally so called gurus are crushed by sinful reactions of their disciples. This gives Rocana&co a kick to snort the modes of material nature and remain attached to samsara?
Or, as Prabhupada highlights, elephants clean their body thoroughly but just after taking bath they will cover the whole body with dust.
It might be a good idea if Rocana’s executive team changes over to post their ideas at Rocana’s website. I mean to say all those fictions of having scandalous neophyte “gurus” to mislead innocent disciples, we cannot have this continously posted here. Thank you for your understanding.
So far we have heard enough and say them good-bye.
The point is not a guru issue here, the point is much more in the realm of sanity, common sense and first of all about the common factor of truth. Citing śastra back and forth we do discredit rather the highly spiritual topics being ourselves mostly on the levels below the civilised vedic standarts, struggling rather for becoming humans at first. I don’t believe many of us here are humans in the sense of being at easy, or easily able about controling the urges of senses, mind, anger and so on. It is irrelevant how we interpret sastra, since even best kanishtas may not understand the conclusions of sastra perfectly, we know we can’t do it properly, it has been quoted here, we can’t apply the proper meaning neither, therefore guru is a must, a must according to sastra. Krishna says it , sastra says it, Prabhupada says it, all the acaryas said it! The fact is whether there is any proof, simple and directly meant proof that Srila Prabhupada established ISKCON’s so called guru system, or so called ritvik system as allegedly per the july 9 letter as intepreted by the sect of the church of ritviks, or any other then described so elaborately in his divine books purports guru-disciple system. The answer is simple not, there is no such proof in any form, there are only basically two completely opposing and hostile camps of motivated individuals with their deluded followers claiming something that can’t be in fact shown or be proven unless one takes into their selfish and motivated view. That’s all about.
y.s. bj
Bhakta Jarek!
As you and George agree, many Prabhupadanugas waited till 1998. After 20 years (starting after Prabhupada left in 1977) it became evident that your living guru failure rate is too big. Your living gurus created thousands of betrayed disciples and kicked out those who were considered unfit for discipleship by those living gurus.
You yourself accepted such a guru (as recommended by GBC) and later on you found out that you were cheated, your life was spoiled. Your guru left with tons of temple money and girl friend.
Still you come here and attack those whose lives were similiarly destroyed by ISKCON’s guru system. When told to write your articles at Rocana’s website, you refuse. What do you want? What is your point? Spamming this website? If it becomes evident (and it almost is) that you simply come here to post spam you’re banned. Thank you for your understanding!
Hare Krsna,
Thank you Amar Puri Prabhu and Puranjana Prabhu for your replies.I feel that Puranjana Prabhu is honest,otherwise there is no hope in my life…I should be convinced that you are saying the truth.I really hope that you can clear my future questions and help me more aand more to follow Srila Prabhupada.I hope my questions on Bhagavad Gita are welcome.I will not have time to post my long comments now,since my college exams are drawing nearer.Certainly I will read Bhagavad Gita everyday and please tell me if I can post my doubts here.Please support me so that I develop my conviction in surrendering to Prabhupada.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Awaiting your reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Dear bhakta Michael I can’t be more clear than I am. If you are the one who can bann me here, and from the last post I guess you are, than what’s the problem? By the way I don’t make responsible others, neither FISKCon “gurus”, nor anyone else besides my very self for the choices I made, neither in the past nor now. However the “FisKcon bija” one aquires while joining a fake Vaishnavas association, and thinking it to be “bhakti lata bij”, remains underestimted in it’s destructive value, in fact is mostly if at all not even detected by most of the victims of FisKcon scam program, the very “IsKcon bija” than mutates into different forms and degenerates still playing its deceiving role very well in deed. More you can read here, before it is to late. http://returntosquareone.com/?p=151
y.s. bj
Rocana’s new plan is to destroy the Bhaktivedanta Archives project: http://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2013/02/rocanas-plan-to-destroy-prabhupadas.html
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Amar Puri Prabhu says,
“Santosh do you know what do these people such as Bhakta Jarek, Bhakta George and their associates non-supporters of Ritvik System of Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada as well as non-supporter of GBC rubber stamped gurus in the present Iskcon actually support ????
Neither Bhakta Jarek nor Bhakta George have ever described what they support and believe in except both of them they say they believe in Srila Prabhupada and yet they disOBEY the Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada. What kind of a mysterious misleading is that ???”
Dear Bhakta Jarek,
I want to know what is your stance on the whole thing. Are you in favour of worship of Prabhupada? Please tell me your views so that Amar Puri Prabhu’s question and also my curiosity gets cleared. According to you, can one make substantial advancement in spiritual life even today by reading Prabhupada’s books and hearing from him?
Awaiting your reply,
Your servant,
Santosh
Dear Atmavidya das
Thank you for your politeness. One gets tired of being attacked and falsely accused and your civility is something that I am sure that Srila Prabhupada would appreciate as being both conducive to a progressive discussion and also depictive of good Vaisnava behavior.
In answering your questions please permit me to so in several separate posts as I wish to give to each of them the thoughtfulness and consideration that they deserve.
Beginning with your first question first.
Why do you believe that ritviks are apasiddhantic?
I do not myself believe that Rtviks are apasidhantic in their belief that they can become the disciples of Srila Prabhupada after his physical disappearance, nor do I believe that those who make the claim that the Rtviks are apasidhantic have proven that claim, as Rocana dasa infers that he has in DOR but then makes no effort to do because he simply knows that he can’t. The anti Rtviks will never be able to prove it, simply because Srila Prabhupada, through his recognition of Christianity which also follows such a practice stands in their way and they would have to remove him in order to erase the Rtviks. That is my opinion, and it isn’t a popular one with the anti-rtviks, it is however what I see to be true, or “believe” and therefore I must stand by it.
Note that this doesn’t mean that I agree with everything that you believe or do.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
Ys,
George Smith
Bhakta George, let me ask you this very simple question ;
How dare you to opine to others when you do not have your own opinion in believing what you believe in ?
What you believe or disbelieve makes you or breaks you ? So what is your believe ?
As I posted in my comments and asked you and Bhakta Jarek and others, none of you have addressed it thus far, WHY ?
If you have no answer, then, please stop writing your opinion which is totally waste of time.
Hope it meets you well.
Hari BOL…..
YS…… Amar Puri.
Santosh, you can post your comments about Bhagavat Gita or any questions you need the answer for. I know that you posted already some of your questions and I shall try to address them asap.
My suggestion to you is that please read and re-read thoroughly so that you can get the answer yourself because most of your questions posted have the answers in the Bhagavat Gita. All you have to do is simply read and re-read it with rapt attention. Study 1 ro 2 verse daily for better absorption and then put it up for further discussion in case it is not clear to you. That is the best way for discussion and learning mutually.
Hope it meets you well.
Hari BOL…. AGTSP.
YS….. Amar Puri.
Dear Santosh,
Here are some of the answers of your previous questions posted above else where in this thread ;
Text 37:niscayah-uncertainty.
THE REPLY IS IN THE PURPORT ;
Even though there was no certainty of victory for Arjuna’s side, he still had to fight; for, even being killed there, he could be elevated into the heavenly planets.
NOTE ; UNCERTAINTY means no certainty of Victory for Arjunas’s side……. Read on……
Text 39:’Real sankhya philosophy is described by Lord Kapila in the Srimad Bhagavatam,but even that sankhya has nothing to do with the current topics.’……
‘Lord Krsna made an analytical description of the soul just to bring Arjuna to the point of buddhi-yoga or bhakti yoga. Therefore,Lord Krsna’s sankhya and Lord Kapila’s sankhya,as described in the Bhagavatam,are one and the same.’
If this sankhya has nothing to do with the current topics,how both sankhyas are the same?
NOTE ; PLEASE READ THE ANSWER CAREFULLY IN THE PURPORT ; “ This sankhya has nothing to do with the sankhya philosophy of the atheist Kapila. Long before the imposter Kapila’s sankhya, the sankhyaphilosophy was expounded in the Srimad-Bhagavatam by the true Lord Kapila, the incarnation of Lord Krsna, who explained it to His mother, Devahuti. It is clearly explained by Him that the Purusa, or the Supreme Lord, is active and that He creates by looking over the prakrti. This is accepted in the Vedas and in the Gita.
NOTE ; The difference is between the imposter Kapila’s sankhya, and the sankhyaphilosophy which was expounded in the Srimad-Bhagavatam by the true Lord Kapila, the incarnation of Lord Krsna, who explained it to His mother, Devahuti.
Text 40: ‘Ajamila performed his duty in some percentage of Krsna consciousness,but the result he enjoyed at the end was a hundred percent,by the grace of the Lord.’
But in some other place, Prabhupada says that without fully understanding Krsna,one cannot go back to Godhead .
NOTE ; Read the Purport again in which Srila Prabhupada explains very nicely that One percent done in Krsna consciousness bears permanent results, so that the next beginning is from the point of two percent; whereas, in material activity, without a hundred percent success, there is no profit. Ajamila performed his duty in some percentage of Krsna consciousness, but the result he enjoyed at the end was a hundred percent, by the grace of the Lord.
NOTE ; Ajamila performed his duty previously in some percentage of KC which was completed in that his life time. Another words, for an example Ajamila had perhaps attained 99.9 % KC in his previous birth but little left in completion. When he uttered the name of Lord Vishnu which happened to be the name of his son repeatedly that was his perfection at the time of his death. Thus he went back Home Back to Godhead.
Text 41: ‘The highest perfection of Krsna consciousness is renunciation of the material conception of life.’
But,is the devotee not far far above material conception?
NOTE ; THE DEVOTEE means who is situated on Brahma Bhutta Platform (free from all material desires). That is when the Devotional life of a Devotee begins and then that Devotee is far above material conception otherwise NOT. So becoming a Devotee is not a Cheap thing.
Hope it helps you. If you prefer you can email me privately at ; shriamarpuri@hotmail.com for any other questions you may have.
Hari BOL…. AGTSP.
YS…… Amar Puri.
Good enough George, I think this is a great position to take on your part, ritvik is authorized, bravo. ys pd
I would like to introduce here a small fragment of a treatise by Kailashcandra prabhu which I do find very much worth of considering despite whether we are pro or against the “rittvik” idea. PLease kindly read it and try not to discredit it by merely ugly blundering as usually Puranjana and others do here so arrogantly. I want to stay clearly once again I am not a disciple of Kailashcandra prabhu, however I do respect him for being honest and serious initiated brahmana and disciple of Srila Prabhupada. I hope that being a “rittvik” does not include to hate and disrespect disciples of Srila Prabhupada who “dare” to have different understanding than you. Here it is:
“..Let’s begin by analyzing the May room conversation. One thing requires immediate clarification: Prabhupada could have gone into much greater detail than he did in answering the questions posed that day–but he didn’t. He answered only in a general manner, and his answers were almost cryptic. Over the years, there has been an inordinate amount of quibbling and wrangling in connection to his responses that day. One reason why this has ensued is the obvious fact that Prabhupada was rather ambiguous in his answers. This may be an apparent contradiction, but a spiritual master of Prabhupada’s realization can be both truthful and ambiguous at the same time. Human reason can only partially comprehend this opulence of the mahabhagavat.
What was his reason for this ambiguity? Was it to allow the warring factions of today ample fodder for their arguments? Some rittviks allege that the tape has been tampered with and altered. Was it to leave the tape of this transcript open to alteration? Was it to give those who would later on use the tape for their own purposes enough rope with which to hang themselves?
Phalena-pariciyate. An uttama-adhikari knows the motives of anyone he contacts, particularly if they are his disciples. Here come two of his leading disciples, who, within less than a year, will join nine others in falsely claiming themselves to be mahabhagavats. In the process, they will create specific (concocted) divisions of the world in which they are absolute authorities and incredible enjoyers. Tri-kala-jna is a minor mystic power, as far as a real mahabhagavat is concerned.
A genuine guru can answer questions and deal with his disciples in any way in which he sees fit. He is even free to mislead someone, if that person’s question is tainted. He can choose to answer equivocally or ambiguously when uncomfortable with certain questions. If he does not want to be pinned down about something, no one can pin him down–although he is so expert that the questioner may conclude that the guru was indeed pinned down and forced to answer. The bona fide spiritual master need not tailor answers to nonsense questions in order to fit the matrix of someone’s personal ambitions. Yet, with transcendental genius, he can answer concisely, truthfully, ambiguously, and even open Pandora’s box–all at the same time during the same conversation..”
more under; http://therealexplanation.org/article/proof_tooth.html
y.s. bj
Bhakta Jarek, Bh.George and Rocana are ISKCON’s castoffs. Somehow they cannot figure how Prabhupada’s movement can go on without living initiating diksha-gurus.They conclude that when temple communities elect temple presidents and those temple presidents elect a terminable ritvik priest, such terminable ritvik priest will be corrupt and not trustworthy.
Thus Rocana and his like-minded followers arrive at the conclusion that to have temples run like it was established by Prabhupada – from 1966-1977 – will not work anymore – is outdated – and has to be rejected.
When a government is found guilty of being inefficient there is interim government. Interim government is meant to restore capacity to act and enable that things go on without further corruption.In our case, as Prabhupada states, “Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively”.
First of all, to have a bona fide GBC. Step by step (“don’t go very speedily”). Priority is to have all Vaishnava camps cooperate. Not that this campism gets out of hand as it happens right now.
When this goal is reached we can start with other topics like, what are the qualifications of a bona fide spiritual master. Any suggestions>?
Hare Krsna,
Please accept my most humble obeisances.All glories to Srila Prabhupada
Thanks to Amar Puri Prabhu for his very kind gesture to me! Even though I am all alone in practicing spiritual life under Prabhupada, I feel very happy…I am having to take a lot of trouble to come to visit this site..i.e; even my room mates, who chant and read Bhagavad Gita and hear from my spiritual preceptor are not in the least aware that I am hearing from Prabhupada, and that I am visiting this site almost everyday. If they come to know, they may feel that I am not following my teacher and violating his instructions. But I am very happy in their association, because they follow the regulative principles and are devotees; they also chant 16 rounds. They are also happy when I glorify Prabhupada.
Your servant,
Santosh.
None of these conversations were made available until the archives printed a limited edition in 1990? Kailash assumes there was ambiguity, no, the July 9th letter was barely circulated, and is still barely circulated. All of the 1977 conversations were hidden until 1990, and some are missing according to people where were there like Yasodananda and Gauridasa pandit. The May tape had to be kidnapped from the archives by Sulochana, who was immediately killed for doing that. Sulochan also kidnapped the letters and we were told we would be “dead meat on the hook” if we published, and we did publish, and the only reason I am alive today is that the FBI intercepted my assassin. I had to kidnap “the last will” from the Berkeley temple safe. There was no ambiguity, we simply did not have any of these documents and we had to face getting killed to get these documents. I also had to wait until 1997 to get the poison tapes, the November 1977 conversations were not made available ever, I had to get them translated myself. Kailash is now quoting the letters, which we had to get by risking our life, this means, he has no idea what is the history of these documents. ys pd
Tapanacarya das gives right from the beginning typical example of the ritvik line of thought. It is always loaded with anger against ISKCON. In fact the ritviks simply can’t get away with their counterpart, and no matter who they talk to, whenever such person is not agreeing with their extravagant and whimsical views such rascal must be from ISKCON according to their minds attached vision. However they can’t really see things as they are being covered by anger, which after all is certainly something more than just a mundane anger, all by the virtue of the very object of their inspiration, however because of their mental plane attachments and rejections respectively, being themselves mostly heavy inflicted with some type of FISKCON bijas they remain in the imitation garden of devotion taking it’s weeds for bhakti lata bij, which they are not, mostly never were in the past and most certainly never turn to be such in the future. The assigned work of buddhi yoga is not done here responsibly , and in result another scam occurs right before our very eyes.
y.s.bj
We are not covered by anger. You said Kailash thought the documents were ambiguous and not clear, but all the documents were hidden. If these documents were “not clear,” then — why were they hidden? And why did they kill our associates, and they would have killed me had the police not helped me, for our forwarding these documents? You are angry yourself, you have no logical reply just a lot of sentimental argumentum ad hominem blather.
And why is Kailash living in Moab being afraid of his own shadow? If we relied on people like him, hiding out in fear in Moab Utah, afraid of his own shadows, to get these documents, we never would have seen these documents. Ever. The documents were hidden for a reason, and the reason for starters is, these documents do not appoint 11 guru successors for ISKCON.
That is why the documents were suppressed, the letters, the will, the July 9th letter, the 1977 conversations, the poison tapes, all these documents were suppressed for a reason, and killing those of us bringing them out was also for a reason.
You just keep harping that we are angry and so on, well that is fine, but does not explain any of the above. And if our guru’s documents are being hidden, and fools on the hill like Kailash are not even helping us find these documents because he is hiding out in the mountains, why would we not be angry? Are you saying we should be doing the happy dance because our guru’s documents were suppressed with violence and murders? ys pd
Sorry for the delay in replying but I have been out hunting for a very elusive creature, one so rare that even great acaryas like Srila Prabhupada, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Bhaktivinode Thakur commented that there value was above that of any other creature . I had thought to have tracked it down but the creature had become very elusive and tested my perseverance most strenuously. Finally I cornered it, or perhaps it is its brother, although I am astonished that even the one that I had glimpsed so long ago might have such a thing as its twin considering the rarity of the species.
When aroused to anger the animal is so dangerous that even the demigods would scatter to the farthest away places in the universe to get away from it, but when it is approached with respect and senses that you mean to employ it in Srila Prabhupadas service it becomes as meek as a lamb.
Quickly I snatched it up and carefully tucking it away made my way back to the haunts of men where without further adeu I resume my place in all the world and taking off my hat reach into it to draw forth the mysterious creature that I have found for your (and mine also, for I cannot get over it) amazement.
Here it is.
“Viola!”
Mark’s rabbit.
“The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.” Madhya 15.106
Both Mark and Puranjana seemed to have been a little slumped over the permissions that NOI offer as alternatives to either accepting an uttama adhikarti or to taking shelter of the Rtvik initiatory system although Puranjana cut right to the heart of the matter when he asked:
“Worship of Srila Prabhupada [the pure devotee] is wrong? Why? Just tell us George, and get it off your chest.”
Actually it was under my hat.
Mark, despite the fact that his over weaning pride makes it impossible for him to see how strongly his prejudices influence his mental processes in the direction of strengthening his egoism (every time) who actually got me to thinking about it.
Even though Mark was completely oblivious to the obvious that I had been using the two terms “Uttama-adhikari” and “pure devotee of Krsna” synonymously, even when I was commented about how obtuse he was I felt my hair doing that weird thing it does when I feel like I am back in school writing something at my desk while the teacher walks up and down between the rows and then pauses to see what you are writing and then offers some correction or comment or bump on the head.
“Ow!”
Even though every other person aside from Mark who had ever read my article jumped to the same conclusion that I had, that the two terms that I was using were synonyms, Mark in his innocence had completely missed that I was using the terms in such a way. But just as I was writing Mark and telling him what I thought of him I got hit for my own conceit and arrogance and reminded of just what a big fool and rascal that I am.
Then I heard a little voice ask me “Did you challenge your own assumption?” Meaning did I challenge my own assumption that the two terms uttama-adhikari and “pure devotee of Krsna” were in fact synonymous?
I hadn’t!
It hadn’t been important to the point of that article. At that time it had been sufficient for me to show that a permission is granted by Srila Prabhupadas purport for people to accept either a kanistha or a madhyama devotee as a guru, whether Mark likes it or not.
Mark in his innocence and Puranjana, spot on for a change brought up an important point, why would anyone want to?
I had always assumed that the permission had been granted because although formal initiation is simply a formality it is a requirement, to keep up the social thing I imagine. This, in combination with the rarities of pure devotees of Krsna or uttama-adhikaris, made Srila Prabhupada’s permission to offer either the kanistha or madhyama as alternates something that sounded reasonable and logical.
Those things still seem reasonable and logical but it Mark was right. Why would Srila Prabhupada offer us anything that we would get gyped by accepting as Mark interpreted the acceptance of a kanistha or madhyama level devotee as a guru seemed to imply that he was thinking.
As to why anyone would do such a thing, to that I hadn’t a clue.
In search of one I checked my assumption and found out that the two terms that I had been using were not synonymous, even though I had hear them used that way,
The above noted purport however revealed that there are in fact pure devotees among both the kanistha and the madhyama classes, that would explain why anyone would accept them, they are as bright as the sun.
Bbut something else is implied in the sentence quoted from Srila Prabhupadas purport, which is that they may advance to the uttama-stage and no where does it say that they cannot do this while and when they are still acting as the spiritual master of anyone who has accepted them and who they have accepted, in fact since already they are pure devotees of Krsna an impetus in that direction is already a given.
I don’t think we’re dealing with something that is static but with a social and interpersonal dynamic that tends towards perfection in Krsna consciousness.
Just some thoughts, they don’t change my mind about accepting Rtvik to be bona-fide, but I don’t accept that we should throw out the baby with the bath water either, that 30 some odd years of abuse of tradition is sufficient cause to overturn how many hundreds and millions of years of it. I accept Rtvik to present and alternate, one more suitable to Westerners, not the one and only way that one may take initiation.
Puranjan said; “We are not covered by anger.” Don’t make me laugh away Puranjana das, please, especially you who are anger incarnated. However I can’t say nothing better about myself too, yes I am aware of this unhappy and highly unlucky condition of my lowly self. Still, therefore I try not to invent things, rather try hard to find out who is right here in this mess around us.
Than Tapanacarya Das says:
6. February 2013 at 1:29 pm
“Bhakta Jarek, Bh.George and Rocana are ISKCON’s castoffs.” Again funny piece. Who is not ISKCON castoff, Yaśodanandan, Damagosh, Pratyosha, Puranjana, enough? Or FISKCON castoffs like Madhu Pandit, or maybe Amar Puri, or RRdd de Psychic expert? People wake up, your drive is hate against something you don’t really like quite common thing and to say it is a truism. Merely hate for FisKcon does not make us devotees!
The same Tapanacarya (a ritvik ceremonie given name, or FisKcon blessed?, we don’t know who you folks are) said:”First of all, to have a bona fide GBC. Step by step (“don’t go very speedily”). Priority is to have all Vaishnava camps cooperate. Not that this campism gets out of hand as it happens right now.
When this goal is reached we can start with other topics like, what are the qualifications of a bona fide spiritual master. Any suggestions>?”
O yes! The first suggestion is (don’t go very speedily”) you are by the way a bunch of conditioned souls and any product of yours is nothing more but a product of 3,2, or maybe just 1 guna, guess which one i mean?
When I read Srila Prabhupada books everything is clear, though I do not understand many things right away, but still everything is clear in the sense of being a part of the true He knows perfectly well. When some rascal/s decide/s to become more than the Acarya they create a system where they can hide their ignorance by some display of so called higher realizations and introduce their speculation in the name of initiating the neophyte into their so called secret teachings. Thus a sect is formed and the blind, cheap follower gets covered by some form of fanatical believe. You never get united ritviks since you are victims of such lusty and separatist individuals who guide you right to hell for their own selfish purposes. Your faith will always be checked by maya, forcing you to constant speculation and changes in order to cover up your ignorance.
y.s. bj
Although ready for a promotion, Bhakta Jarek remained the pot washer of ISKCON Warsaw. Not only that, they sent him a letter of cancelation because working without payment 24/7 wasnt good enough. Now Bhakta Jarek sits at home and cries on his mother’s shoulder how much he would like to go back and work in the temple kitchen. But they won’t let him. It’s a tragedy.
ISKCON Warsaw figures, Bhakta Jarek is a ritvik. It’s a catastrophe.
So somebody has to phone up ISKCON Warsaw and tell them, hey you fools, Bhakta Jarek is clean, not a ritvik, invite him back. Then everything will be alright?
Since we are Vaishnava we see no difference, pot washer, pujari, temple president, sannyasi – all are equally engaged in pleasing Krishna and invited to join in a conversation.
However, there should be some quotes of sastra. Back up your claims by quoting from reliable source.
To simply say, ritviks are fools isn’t an intelligent idea?
Like Rocana using swearwords to make a point isn’t just realy convincing.
May be Bhakta Jarek could answer this, let’s say ISKCON Warsaw is switching to be a 100% Prabhupada ritvik temple, would he refuse to wash pots there?
Always remember, since they daily read Prabhupada’s books ISKCON Warsaw is already 80% ritvik.
It’s really funny Tapanacarya prabhu, completely ficticious funny thing about your way of thinking things to be truth. Now, look what is the use of quoting śastra back and forth when we do later on go our routine and arrogantly give them our own covered meanings, which is somehow offensive, don’t you think so prabhu? Therefore I rather use to study the avidya side on your website in search for one truthful person here, so far I found none, maybe except prabhu George who seems now devolving actually into some kind of some more sophisticated “refreshed” ritvik idea(?)
Thanks so much to the Prabhupadanugas.eu that you tolerate me here. Slowly, for some of you certainly too slow, I get to understand that it’s not the way we may become free from doubts, the work is hard and it must be done under strict rules and regulations as given by the ISKCON Founder and Acarya H.D.G. A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada, and under His guidance, the Person Bhagavat comments of the Book Bhagavat as per the S.B. 1.2.18. verse and the divine commentary to it.
Another sweet quotes in deed are those as well:
“This beautiful Bhagavatam, compiled by the great sage Vyasadeva [in his maturity], is sufficient in itself for God realization. What is the need of any other scripture? As soon as one attentively and submissively hears the message of Bhagavatam, by this culture of knowledge the Supreme Lord is established within his heart.”
Srimad Bhagavatam, 1.1.2
“By reading my books and chanting Hare Krishna, your life will be perfect.”
Letter (75-3-13/Mar. 14, 1975)
your servant b.j.
George A Smith: “The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.” Madhya 15.106 Viola! Says George A Smith, proves the pot washer is an uttama.
When devotees were showering flowers on Srila Prabhupada from the Los Angeles temple roof, he said, “they are all such pure devotees.” OK, all of us are pure devotees? Why is George challenging us since we are all pure devotees then?
And here is a good one, Srila Prabhupada said Ramesvara is the only intelligent devotee I have, so we should all go out and marry meat eating lawyers and start a real estate business? Or how about, Jayatirtha is my tirtha, so lets all take LSD and have illicit sex with wives of followers, and get our heads chopped off? George does not get it, we are all pure devotees is also used to encourage us, its not an actual sign that we have attained that level yet. The kindergarten teacher sometimes says, all of you are almost PHD professors, its a way of encouraging them, its not a full endorsement.
And when JAREK PRABHU gets over his anger, and quits crying like a lost child because he cannot reply to even on of our questions, he might actually answer: Why were all these documents hidden, why did we have to dig for them while risking our lives doing that; And why were the people bringing the documents forward being beaten and assassinated? Jarek is so angry, he cannot even say one word about this because, it shoots down the Kailash idea that these documents were vague. Yep, our blog is getting all kinds of hits (visitors) from Warsaw, other places in Poland, and many other places around the area, hee hee! ys pd
As usual, after reams of verbosity, George fails to make his point.
His first problem was that he did not read my replies, because if he did he would have noted that days ago I was the first one to present evidence that Neophytes can actually be pure devotees, from the purports to the CC. I did this when he got all silly about me proclaiming him to be a neophyte, and accused me of a superiority complex and hypocrisy when I admitted I was one too. I reproduced those purports, and gave other information to indicate there is quite a range of degrees of neophyte devotional service.
If anyone wants to search back to it, just CTRL F and search the term “Tapana misra”.
Anyhow, as I have recently pointed out, which George obviously missed as he was rummaging around in his mind instead of reading my posts, Srila Prabhupada did indeed order some of his neophyte disciples to become siksa gurus or “officiating acaryas”. This was actually permission. He first gave permission to 11 of them.
This is similar to the permission he gave all disciples over his 10 year manifest lila to teach students.
This permission is not a guarantee that these people are qualified in the sense that they won’t overstep their adhikari and fall down. But it was permission nonetheless, and to occupy the lofty post of ritvik representative of the Acarya, we are supposed to choose from among the most staunch and senior men, the same as choosing a president for a temple, or someone to teach our children.
But as we know, Srila Prabhupada NEVER gave permission to become Diksa Gurus. And though a person qualified to give Siksa may indeed be qualified to give Diksa, who are we to argue with this decision about the formal manangement of his Society.
I contend that this was a high profile safeguard. That in the future no one with a straight face could declare “you are my initiated disciple”, and use this as a basis to instruct in contradiction to some of Srila Prabhupada’s guidelines.
There may be alot more to why SP and Krsna instituted Ritvik. They did whatever they could to assure that newcomers would receive an uttama adhikari as a spiritual master. Being formally considered the initatied Diksa disciple of an uttama like SP isn’t enough, you need to have supervisors who will adhere to his guidelines. OR become so intimate with his vani that you can strike out on your own if need be.
But to use the purport of NOI 5 to claim that there were permissions for neophytes to accept ones own disciples in Iskcon is bogus. And George was not indicating Siksa only. His exact words were Permissions to accept disciples on one’s own behalf.
“Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above.”
Back to soul searching George.
The 11 Zonals pure devotees? Hansadutta who Srila Prabhupada said wanted him to die, Kirtanananda a crazy perverted homosexual pedophile, the list goes on. Is that what you are implying, that these monsters were pure devotees? Now who is being silly?
The permission given in NOI5 is not limited to a number, place or time nor even to the disciples of Srila Prabhupada. You are like a frog in a well, the instruction is for a movement that is going to be world wide.
P.S. Next time you do a “Prabhupada said” you might actual want to provide the quote and location for it, book, sloka and verse so others do not have to go looking for it.
Puranjana wrote:
“George A Smith: “The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.” Madhya 15.106 Viola! Says George A Smith, proves the pot washer is an uttama.
When devotees were showering flowers on Srila Prabhupada from the Los Angeles temple roof, he said, “they are all such pure devotees.” OK, all of us are pure devotees? Why is George challenging us since we are all pure devotees then?
And here is a good one, Srila Prabhupada said Ramesvara is the only intelligent devotee I have, so we should all go out and marry meat eating lawyers and start a real estate business? Or how about, Jayatirtha is my tirtha, so lets all take LSD and have illicit sex with wives of followers, and get our heads chopped off? George does not get it, we are all pure devotees is also used to encourage us, its not an actual sign that we have attained that level yet. The kindergarten teacher sometimes says, all of you are almost PHD professors, its a way of encouraging them, its not a full endorsement”
I remember visiting New Dwarka after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance, to ‘take stock’ of it’s new divine grace Rameswara. As I exited the temple room I saw Rameswara standing on one of the lower balconies of what was then the green apartment building across the street and Acyutananda dasa was standing on the other balcony acroos from him. I then determined that I should go up to Rameswara. I then walked down the temple steps and made a beeline straight towards Rameswara. There weren’t but a few devotees here and there so there wasn’t anything obstructing Rameswaras vision. Acyutananda saw me coming (he was chanting and ignoring Rameswara who was talking to him) and followed me with his gaze all the way until I was standing right in front of the balcony upon which Rameswara was standing, still talking to Acyutananda and completly oblivious to my presence. As I stood there observing and listening to this new divine grace I could hear what he was saying as he was speaking, whining rather and complaining loud to Acyutananda who was still chanting Hare Krsna and still ignoring Rameswara, although Rameswara appeared to be oblivious to that fact too or had gotten just so used to being ignored by his godbrothers and so egotistical that he either didn’t notice he was being ignored or was just so puffed up that he couldn’t admit to it.
I had come there to make an assessment, to confirm something that the soul inside of me already knew from its realization some years before when I had stood before Hansaduta and by Lord Krsna’s grace and Srila Prabhupadas mercy had been shown what they actually were.
As I stood there listening Rameswara kept bitching that it wasn’t fair, that it wasn’t fair that such an important person as himself had to do what this evidently important donor family wanted him to do, which was to offer some service at the funeral of their son, a U.S. Vetaran wounded in action who had finally succumbed to his injuries, as as I stood there listening to this Rameswara mocked them, mocked this grieving family who had just lost their son, mocked them in their pain…and I too was a U.S. veteran.
As I gathered myself for the leap that would take me up to wall and from there to the balcony upon which he stood something quite interesting occurred, something deep inside Rameswara became aware that death was very near and he began to tremble in fear, afraid, as before when I had stood before Hansadutta the veil was lifted and I could see what was beneath my contempt.
Lighten up Puranjana, I am just humoring the insane,and trying to see if Mark is capable of progressive thought or whether he is like Rome to all roads and thinking that everything simply leads back to him, to his own false ego. Where do you come up with these guys?
So far I have gotten him both a new meaning of a word and caught for him his own rabbit, and he hasn’t been able to do anything with either despite all my hints and suggestions. Lets just give him a little more of a chance before we squack about his dumb theories any louder..
Ys George
Thanks George prabhu, Yes its simply impossible that these 11 people, with all their self-evident flaws, what to speak of their grandiosity illusion issues, what to speak of their tendency to deviate and fall into scandals etc, would have been “appointed as the guru successors to Krishna.”
This would be like “appointing” my neighbor’s cat Mr. Snuffles to be the pilot of a Boeing 747. Its just not going to work no matter how much spin and waffling one tries to add to the mix. The plane will crash, its that simple.
Trivrikrama swami got Kailash Chandra to write a paper for the GBC many years ago, about the guru and the disciple, but even with all the flowery writings of Kailash, they still could not put their broken Humpty Dumpty guru program back together again.
These GBC leaders were not appointed as successors because, they are simply not qualified to be the successors. And neither are we appointed as the successors, so all any of can do is try to “preach on his behalf,” and hope we can have some teeny levels of success doing that. ys pd
George,
The first paragraph in my last response was strictly in response to your statement.
“The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.” Madhya 15.106
In other words, I was reminding you that I was the one who recently had to bring the fact of pure neophytes to your attention, as you were unaware of the phenomenon. There was no further meaning to be implied.
In my second paragraph, I stated that Srila Prabhupada ordered 11 neophytes to become officiating acaryas. I never said they were pure devotees.
For those still in the slow lane, Srila Prabhupada ordered his very low level and impure neophyte disciples to act in many capacities normally reserved for more mature and advanced devotees, simply due to the circumstances of his preaching mission.
And as far as this recent statement of yours.
“The permission given in NOI5 is not limited to a number, place or time nor even to the disciples of Srila Prabhupada. You are like a frog in a well, the instruction is for a movement that is going to be world wide.”
As I am forced again to remind you, your original premise from the DOR article of 1/18 was to apply the statements of NOI5 to Srila Prabhupada’s Iskcon.
GS: “Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. ”
So whether or not anyone unconnected to Iskcon should take note of the Bhaktivedanta Purports and act on them in some fashion is not germane to our discussion. This was just another example of you using sophistry in order to assign a straw man argument to me in order to defeat the straw man and try to smear me with his blood.
Sorry. Not gonna happen. Stick to the point. This purport to the NOI 5 is going to be read by Iskcon devotees for thousands of years. You are construing it to be the SINGLE direct general order for neophytes to initiate disciples on their own behalf in Iskcon.
You are now the one who insists that the NOI 5 purport was directed to all neophytes in Iskcon who happen to also be pure devotees, to initiate and accept disciples on their own behalf.
And you are implying that my mention of the 11 who SP ordered to initiate on his behalf is equivalent to SP ordering neophytes to initiate in the NOI 5 purport. Yet, you are the one saying that the NOI 5 purport implies pure neophytes. So what’s it going to be George? The logical extension of your thought process is that Srila Prabhupada would RATHER have pure neophytes initiating on their own behalf in Iskcon as opposed to mixed neophytes officiating on HIS behalf.
So why did Srila Prabhupada not just order his pure neophytes to initiate on their own behalf while he was there? You might answer that was against the “law of disciplic succession that says one should not accept disciples in the presence of their Spiritual master.” as indicated in a letter to Pusta Krsna.
But Srila Prabhupada broke with so many other formalities of Gaudiya tradition in order to get a good result. Why not in such an important situation as this? Why have impure neophytes initiating on His behalf and thinking they were God because they were involved in a ritual? So that doesn’t fly.
The other logical extension is that you implying there were NO pure neophytes to either initiate on SP’s behalf, nor on their own behalf before 1977.
.
If so, did SP give us any explicit criteria by which we can identify a PURE NEOPHYTE who might emerge after 1977, in order for the GBC to give him permission to initiate on his own behalf? Or are we supposed to just let EVERY NEOPHYTE initiate on their own behalf and just see what shakes out. OH WAIT, WE TRIED THAT ALREADY!
This following quote of yours is highly indicative of your misunderstandings.
“I had always assumed that the permission had been granted because although formal initiation is simply a formality it is a requirement, to keep up the social thing I imagine.”
Why imagine? “keep up the social thing?” Oh boy. Listen closely.
The upanayana samskara where the sacred thread is given to a twice born brings him closer to the spiritual master. The ceremony is also referred to as upaniti.
“The ceremony performed to initiate a disciple into the study of spiritual science is called upanīti, or the function that brings one nearer to the spiritual master. One who cannot be brought nearer to a spiritual master cannot have a sacred thread” Adi 1.46 : PURPORT
There are also the little fact of the Gayatri mantra and Gopal mantra are given, which assist one in purifying oneself so that they may chant the Maha Mantra with less and less offenses over time.
This is why there is NO permission for even a pure neophyte to initiate and accept disciples on his own behalf. A neophyte may be pure in his faith, but he does not have the realization to pass mantras potent to assist a disciple to realize any more than he has.
You inadvertently made some good points in the following statement.
“But something else is implied in the sentence quoted from Srila Prabhupadas purport, which is that they may advance to the uttama-stage and no where does it say that they cannot do this while and when they are still acting as the spiritual master of anyone who has accepted them and who they have accepted, in fact since already they are pure devotees of Krsna an impetus in that direction is already a given.
I don’t think we’re dealing with something that is static but with a social and interpersonal dynamic that tends towards perfection in Krsna consciousness.’
My reply.
A neophyte is only pure if he has full faith in the spiritual master’s orders. We know a disciple of any caliber must be ORDERED to become Guru. Srila Prabhupada often ordered his disciples to preach, instruct and teach. This was a general order to be Siksa Guru under strict conditions of the exact guidelines rules and regulations of HIS Iskcon asrama/society.
There are many reasons this order to be Siksa Guru cannot be equated with an order to be Diksa guru. The most prominent is that up until NOV 14 1977, the standing order was to initiate disciples on his behalf. If you can’t agree on that, there is no speaking with you further.
Now, his neophyte or madhyam disciples may or many not have been qualified by realization before 11/14/77 to initiate disciples on their own, but that is besides the point. Further more, after 11/14/77 those same disciples were ordered to not change anything. None of them had read the letter to Pusta Krsna, which was the only mention about the possibility of having unlimited disciples after the Spiritual Master departs.
Yet, it is true that his neophytes and madhyams of any degree were already allowed to initiate FORMALLY on HIS behalf. That was the order. Would following that order somehow prevent them from advancing to the uttama stage while acting as spiritual master of the Siksa guru variety? Is that advancement somehow contingent on their being able to say “I am your Initiating Spiritual Master.” “you are MY initiated disciple?”
Perhaps there was a REASON why Srila Prabhupada maintained the privilege of being known as the Initiating Spiritual master of his Society? You like to imagine. Imagine that! And if you can’t come up with a reason, does that mean you are authorized to declare his actions “unreasonable”?
Careful now, you are treading very dangerous ground.
Hare Krsna
Mark
While it is true that from your lack of understanding that I was using the terms “pure-devotee” and “uttama-adhikari” synonymously in my article, and was unaware that Srila Prabhupada sometimes referred to madhyama and kanista level disciples as “pure devotees” as a means of encouragement as Puranjana dasa was so kind to point out for us, it was you who first concluded otherwise, that this was not an actual case of Srila Prabhupada using hyperbole, or exaggeration for effect in order to encourage his disciples, but that it was somehow otherwise, or in other words that one could be a kanistha or madhyama level while simultaneously being a pure devotee in fact.
“If such a devotee has total faith in the orders of the spiritual master, and follows those orders cent per cent, they are considered a pure devotee “in the shower” so to speak. They are gradually educated by supersoul and the spiritual master and scripture to understand supersoul’s presence in all things, and how HIS activities produce 4 divisions of person who are to be related to in 4 different ways by a devotee. Their faith gradually becomes fixed and unshakable. They enter madhyama adikhari”
Mark jan 30-2012
That you introduced this concept without providing either direct shastric evidence or adequate explanation, your “they are considered to be a pure devotee “in the shower” so to speak indicated suggested to me that the title of pure devotee was being awarded, simply as Puranjana claims, by Srilla Prabhupada as a means of encouragement, or in other words that it was being awarded as honorific, much the same as Universities will award someone with a degree without their ever having taken a single class at that university.
Your lack of any actual shastric evidence or adequate explanation coupled with your obvious inability to catch that I was simply using the two terms synonomously in my article suggested that you were writhing beyond your realization, just “skimmimg” over the parts of Srila Prabhupadas purports in NOI 5 and elsewhere that you did not understand but wished to appear to be comprehensive about for reasons that are quite understandable and predictable in a devotee of your class.
For that reason I went “rabbit hunting” so to speak, for that reason and as I also mentioned because I had not myself bothered to challenge my own assumption that suggested that the two terms pure devotee and uttama adhikari could be used synonomously or that they indicated, at least in part, very different attainments.
In your latest reply you confirm to me that you are still attempting to masquerade yourself as being concersant about a siddhanta that you are actually clueless about when you refer to Srila Prabhupadas usage of the term “pure devotee” in the following not as hyperbole or exaggeration for effect but as a “phenomenon”
“In other words, I was reminding you that I was the one who recently had to bring the fact of pure neophytes to your attention, as you were unaware of the phenomenon. There was no further meaning to be implied.” In other words, I was reminding you that I was the one who recently had to bring the fact of pure neophytes to your attention, as you were unaware of the phenomenon. There was no further meaning to be implied.”
You have accused me before of being hypocritical, the same charge that I now level at you for your on the one hand telling us that it is always best to discuss things precisely while on the other hand your deliberate use of ambiguity just in order to conceal such facts as that in such areas as you wish to appear to be comprehensive in regards to that you simply do not know what you are talking about. To your credit though you may be an “indeliberate” hypocrite, i.e. you may not be consciously aware of what you are doing and considering your degree of intoxication with yourself that would not surprise us. We shall hold out for that hope until you convince us otherwise.
Ys
P.S. I have more from your post to comment on, so you might want to wait for something that you can actually defend against.
P.P.S Mark, from your initial attack my usage of “Us” does not refer to a group that is canvassing for members among you. “They” are only observers. I am actually the only “free agent” acting amoung you.
The question really comes down to, was there an official arrangement — (guru appointment) — for any of these neophyte leaders in ISKCON to actually take the post of pure devotee / acharya, and act as one of them, claiming to have the full ability to absorb sins like Jesus, as the GBC gurus often do, and which is how they explain their fall downs, they say they absorbed too many sins because they are like Jesus, absorbing sins? Where were they ordered to operate in the capacity of another Jesus? There is a generic order, all of you become pure, but that is not a specific order, you 11 are going to be taking the post of the pure. A general idea is given to the kindergarten children, you should all become pure brain surgeons, but that is not the same as giving them a hack saw and telling them to cut up brains. This is not the order for them yet at this point. There is no specific order, that is the reason they chased me down to hunt me like a dog, we were showing that with documents. ys pd
George. You just wrote:
“That you introduced this concept without providing either direct shastric evidence or adequate explanation, your “they are considered to be a pure devotee “in the shower” so to speak indicated suggested to me that the title of pure devotee was being awarded, simply as Puranjana claims, by Srilla Prabhupada as a means of encouragement, or in other words that it was being awarded as honorific, much the same as Universities will award someone with a degree without their ever having taken a single class at that university.
Your lack of any actual shastric evidence or adequate explanation…”
——————————————————————————————
In my comments from 1/30 I gave sastric evidence and my explanation was based on sastra, you failed to take me up on my offer of evidence. That is why On 2/8 I wrote:
(“His first problem was that he did not read my replies, because if he did he would have noted that days ago I was the first one to present evidence that Neophytes can actually be pure devotees, from the purports to the CC. I did this when he got all silly about me proclaiming him to be a neophyte, and accused me of a superiority complex and hypocrisy when I admitted I was one too. I reproduced those purports, and gave other information to indicate there is quite a range of degrees of neophyte devotional service.
If anyone wants to search back to it, just CTRL F and search the term “Tapana misra”.”)
I was expecting the search to bring you “days ago” to 2/4 where I gave my sastric evidence from CC.
February 2013 at 6:18 pm http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-14788
Although my comment from 1/30 that you were complaining about gave you plenty of search terms for an easy vedabase search, such as…
“Srila Prabhupada referred to Lord Caitanya’s associates Candrasekara and Tapana Misra das as both neophytes and pure devotees.”
And as far as my summary given on 1/30 about various degrees of neophytes, I IMMEDIATELY followed that saying:
“I did the research on this issue and published some essays based on Srila Prabhupada’s teachings on the matter over on the HareKrsnaDhama@yahoogroups website.”
So if you believed anything to be errant in my summary, you had access to my source research at the website noted (the research is footnoted or I wouldn’t have referred you there).
So as for the degrees of neophyte, If you disagree, look it up yourself. Its abc’s.
As far as my use of “in the shower so to speak” on 1/30, this refers to the FACT that neophytes can fall down and Madhyams cannot.
“The third-class person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness may fall down, but when one is in the second class or first class, he does not fall down. Bg 9.3 : PURPORT
“It should be understood that a madhyama-adhikārī, a second-class devotee, is fully convinced of Kṛṣṇa consciousness but cannot support his convictions with śāstric reference. A neophyte may fall down by associating with nondevotees because he is not firmly convinced and strongly situated.”
(CC Madhya 22.71)
“Prākṛta means on the material platform. Such devotee can fall down at any moment, because he’s on the prākṛta stage. And prākṛta means this guṇamayī, prakṛti. It is very strong.
So any devotee can fall down if he remains prākṛta-bhakta. So he has to raise himself above this in the madhyama-adhikāra.” (SB 1.2.33 — Vrndavana, November 12, 1972)
———————————–
In addition, I have heard devotees who have been around the movement since your time, LONG before I was there, refer to “in the shower” meaning the whole time you are in the shower, from the minute you step in and are still dirty, you are considered pure as long as you stay in the shower. I have heard it more than once, so I figured it was a common saying to refer to this phenomenon of being considered pure even when in the process of gradually becoming clean, like Prabhupada says in Bhagavad Gita.
“The question remains, then, how can a person engaged in abominable activities-either by accident or intention-be a pure devotee? This question may justly be raised. The miscreants, as stated in the Seventh Chapter, who never come to the devotional service of the Lord, have no good qualifications, as is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Generally, a devotee who is engaged in the nine kinds of devotional activities is engaged in the process of cleansing all material contamination from the heart. He puts the Supreme Personality of Godhead within his heart, and all sinful contaminations are naturally washed away. Continuous thinking of the Supreme Lord makes him pure by nature. According to the Vedas, there is a certain regulation that if one falls down from his exalted position, he has to undergo certain ritualistic processes to purify himself. But here there is no such condition because the purifying process is already there in the heart of the devotee, due to his remembering the Supreme Personality of Godhead constantly. Therefore, the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare should be continued without stoppage. This will protect a devotee from all accidental falldowns.
(Bg 9.31 : PURPORT)
“It is a fact that by chanting the holy name of the Lord one becomes washed clean of all sinful activities from his past life. But that does not mean that after being washed off, one should again begin sinful activities and expect to be washed again.
(NoD 9: Further Consideration of Devotional Principles : Submission)
“Why? Just to cleanse the heart. Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam. Nityaṁ bhāgavata-sevayā. Not that we are almost free from all the contamination, but even little washed away… It begins immediately. As soon as you begin hearing and chanting of these literatures or chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, immediately the cleansing method begins. And naṣṭa-prāyeṣu abhadreṣu. Almost cleansed, not that properly, cent percent clean.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.26.21 — Bombay, December 30, 1974)
————————————————————————————————————–
But my overall point was there are various degrees of neophyte, some more “clean” and thus competent than others, and their behavior differs GREATLY. And some actually step out of the shower and are considered actually sahajiya or fallen. Thus NOT pure. Although they can pick up where they left off as any devotee can.
Therefore, your latest accusations are all baseless. I did indeed provide references. And as far as providing actual quotes in my comments, I normally use as many or more than you do and that is a fact. In that 1/30 comment, I was discussing ABC’s of Kanistha adhikari, and wrongly assumed you would already being conversant in those, and only felt the need to refer you to another place where I had tediously footnoted those concepts already if you actually didn’t get those ABC’s or disagreed with them.
Or perhaps you are conversant, and were nitpicking as a deflection hoping I wouldn’t be able to defend my position? I noticed that you put off answering the major challenge I issued to you. No amount of time in the world will arm you with a proper explanation except for giving you to muster up the humility to say “I was wrong”. You WERE talking about Srila Prabhupada’s disciples, it is there in black and white, and then you changed your story. Ouch. So instead of issuing a Mea Culpa, you wasted your time shooting blanks at me hoping to make a lot of noise and create a fog of smoke. The noise has subsided and the smoke is clear. Now what?
Where does us leave us? In hopes still of diliverance from the darkness all around us. It is nice to see you attempting to see more from the light of Srila Prabhupadas writings, but you are still blind to the obvious
,What you propose to be evidence is no evidence at all towards disproviong my point that you simply did not recognize that I was using the two terms pure devotee and uttama-adhikari synonomously.
In the “proof that you provided there is this:
“However, the mahā-bhāgavata or uttama-adhikārī, the devotee in the highest stage of devotional life, does not see anyone as being against the Vaiṣṇava principles, for he regards everyone as a Vaiṣṇava but himself” From Adi 7.51
Which explains how Srila Prabhupada would be seeing the devotees on the kanistha and madhyama stage resulting in his following comment:
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very compassionate for His PURE DEVOTEES Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara .” From Adi 7.52 purport
What we see here are two different ways that Srila Prabhupada has of seeing a person,. Srila Prabhupada is not a normal man, he has two perspectives, one that is his own and one that is from the middle position. Have you ever been in a position in which you could observe the moders and witness their interactions, how people actually were like puppets on a string, It is a terrifying experience and I imagine that Srila Prabhupada, stepping into it, so top speak could see a lot more than that. I know that he could see me that one time when my faith was so weak that it could no longer stand it. I was in Seattle and he was in India. Did you know that the chiefmost heresy of material fundamentalist science isn’t precog, but Jungian syncronisity, or such a remarkable coincidence that evenb the existence of God and the mercy of the pure devotee can be proven by it. Through realization ones faith becomes stronger than adamatine, ones flesh may rip, one bones may shatter but there is no breaking that faith in ones spritual master..
Srila Prabhupada is not a normal man but because we are normal men even though we hear and repeat this phrase so many times since we know nothing else it is difficult for us to avoid thinking about him as if he is.
It appears that unlike normal men that the uttama-adhikari is in two world, one from which he never departs or falls down from and another in which he appears for the purpose of instructing us and for that purpose he must see us from a different perspective than that of his own perspective in which he sees each and every one of us as pure devotees of Krsna.
The perspective that he steps into when he comes into the madhyama platform for the purpose of preaching grants him the ability to discriminate between the different levels, this does not however erase his original consideration which is eternally present, thus sometimes you see it peeking through.
The madhyama stage which allows one to discriminate, to see ones actual level, where upon the uttama adhikari or actual pure devotee of Krsna sees everyone as perfectly situated and everyone besides themself as a pure devotee. That is at least how I understand it.
Therefore, to me Mark, your so called evidence neither disproved my claim that you simply were blind to the obvious nor did it prove what your writings suggested , which wasa that a kanistha adhikari could in fact be also a pure devotee. That is why I went looking for your rabbit, which when I discovered it, was far more convincing to me of your suggestion than your own so called evidence.
Thats all I have time for now, I am sorry. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Haribol!
Srila Prabhupada warned us in India not to let others touch our feet, because if we did, then we would be “acting as gurus” and we would be taking their karma. And then we would get sick, fall down, or both. He also told a devotee who was giving away chanting beads at Rock festivals to stop that activity because, giving the beads away is what a guru does and — you will be taking karma, and you will get sick, fall down or both. He said you have to sell the beads, then there is no karma.
I simply do not recall Srila Prabhupada saying the kanisthas can act as diksha gurus, which means they are taking the sins of others etc. OF COURSE, how did you guess, the GBC has run with this argument, they say their gurus are getting sick and falling down, because they took too much karma, problem is, they were never ordered to take this karma? Satvarupa for example has massive headaches, allegedly takes psychotropics to cure same, and he has at least one fall down which they say is from “taking too much karma,” which is fine except, where was he told it was his authority to take such karma?
This is the first problem we have with the kanistha guru process: we were repeatedly told that the kanisthas cannot act as a “sin absorbing Jesus” type personality, and if they attempt to do that, ok they will get sick, fall down, or as the Nectar Of Instructions says, they will eventually become degraded, and so on and so forth. In sum, “where” (???) is the order for the kanisthas to become diksha gurus?
I do not see that, rather I do see severe warnings against that process, never mind we see countless examples of where people took this karma thinking they were the next Jesus, and it drove them totally bonkers. Hence we started off as a backlash to their mad house, and that was and is our best argument, they are getting sick and falling down, and going bonkers, because, they are not on the platform of the next messiah. ys pd
George wrote: “What you propose to be evidence is no evidence at all towards disproviong my point that you simply did not recognize that I was using the two terms pure devotee and uttama-adhikari synonomously.”
Regarding this “point” that you say I was trying to disprove, you give a quote from a comment I made on FEB 4: http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-14788 . In that comment I pasted 2 purports that were related to a different contention within this discussion, which was regarding my opinion of our both being on the neophyte platform (that you called hypocritical) which led me to try and educate you that there were various degrees of neophyte including the POSSIBILITY of pure neophyte devotees.
But I addressed the above “point” of yours directly the very day you made it, and furthermore, this point of yours was not made as you contend it was.
The first time in this entire discussion where you even mentioned the word “pure devotee” was Feb.2, when you reprinted an article you wrote for the Sampradaya sun that included this snippet regarding the NOI 5 purport that has been the main focus of this debate.
2/2 George: “In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from a pure devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are pure devotees of Krsna.” Amazingly however, a permission is given that any level of devotee may initiate, just a caution is added and evidently the dynamics of such relationships are a bit different. It is enjoined that madhyama can only initiate other madhyama and kanistha can only initiate other kanistha. Evidently these types of guru/disciple relationships are more affairs among equals.
The point of all this is that these are the alternatives to being initiated by a pure devotee of Krsna, and that although we may not like them, that doesn’t give us permission to just put a line through them and introduce our own concoctions instead.”
I replied on Feb. 2 http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-14670
Mark: “George wrote : “In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from a pure devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are pure devotees of Krsna.”
“Amazingly however, a permission is given that any level of devotee may initiate”
My reply: “Nowhere did it mention the word “pure”. That is your addition. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I would guess you said that based on your theory that a neophyte accepting disciples is authorized. Because as you know, only a neophyte strictly following orders can be considered a pure devotee by any stretch of siddhanta.
But have you forgotten that this NOI 5 purport explicitly addresses the case of a neophyte who is not capable of giving sufficient guidance? How does such a situation come about. Does that sound like a pure devotee who would attempt such a thing? After all, what Spiritual master in their right mind would explicitly order a neophyte disciple to accept disciples in a manner where they would be giving insufficient guidance and bringing their disciples up short of the ultimate goal of life? Another good question that you didn’t compensate for, which I will address.”
—————————————————————————————
Now, if you were indeed implying, as you claim, that you were using the term pure devotee to be synonymous with uttama adhikari, then you fail. Because as is abundantly clear, there are pure devotees of every adhikari. What you appear to have WISHED to have said was…
“In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from an ADVANCED UTTAMA devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are ADVANCED UTTAMA devotees of Krsna.”
Because only then would it follow that one would be “amazed” that madhyams and kanisthas could also initiate.
As a matter of fact, on FEB 8, you begrudgingly challenged your own assumption. And you went on to expose your full misunderstanding in that one comment. http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-15015
(First of course you put us “haunted men” on notice that you, resident master of transcendence, is again condescending to enlighten us.)
GS: “Quickly I snatched it up and carefully tucking it away made my way back to the haunts of men where without further adeu I resume my place in all the world and taking off my hat reach into it to draw forth the mysterious creature that I have found for your (and mine also, for I cannot get over it) amazement.”
Next you conflate my argument with Puranjana das’
GS: “The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.” (Madhya 15.106)
Both Mark and Puranjana seemed to have been a little slumped over the permissions that NOI offer as alternatives to either accepting an uttama adhikarti or to taking shelter of the Rtvik initiatory system although Puranjana cut right to the heart of the matter when he asked: “Worship of Srila Prabhupada [the pure devotee] is wrong? Why? Just tell us George, and get it off your chest.”
———————————-
(MARK’S side note: my original contention was that NOI 5 did not give permissions for Srila Prabhupada’s neophyte or Madhyama disciples to initiate disciples on their own behalf within Iskcon, since by Srila Prabhupada’s ORDER they were only permitted to act as Ritvik and initiate newcomers on Srila Prabhupada’s behalf, accepting them as siksa disciples only using Srila Prabhupada’s Vani as a guide, thus fulfilling the NOI 5 recommenation to accept and Uttama as Spiritual master. BUT, to this moment, George still contends that he never said the permissions were for Srila Prabhupada’s disciple only that they were general permissions. Yet when I cut and paste showing where George said those “permissions” were for Srila Prabhupada’s disciples, he has not admitted his “mistake”, but continues to attack this “pure devotee/uttama” straw man as a diversion, which is why I am forced to write this long reply, because George is a cheater. I digressed for a purpose, back to the refutation.)
——————————–
George goes on to give more ad hominem and then forms his latest strawman:
GS: “Mark, despite the fact that his over weaning pride makes it impossible for him to see how strongly his prejudices influence his mental processes in the direction of strengthening his egoism (every time) who actually got me to thinking about it…
…Even though Mark was completely oblivious to the obvious that I had been using the two terms “Uttama-adhikari” and “pure devotee of Krsna.” (STRAW MAN FORMED)
GS: “Even though every other person aside from Mark who had ever read my article jumped to the same conclusion that I had, that the two terms that I was using were synonyms,”
M: (George of course conducted a scientific survey to come to the above conclusion)
GS: “Mark in his innocence had completely missed that I was using the terms in such a way. But just as I was writing Mark and telling him what I thought of him I got hit for my own conceit and arrogance and reminded of just what a big fool and rascal that I am.”
M: (I CANT ARGUE WITH THAT LAST PART)
GS: “Then I heard a little voice ask me “Did you challenge your own assumption?” Meaning did I challenge my own assumption that the two terms uttama-adhikari and “pure devotee of Krsna” were in fact synonymous? I hadn’t!”
(AMONG MANY GEORGE THE SPECULATOR HAS YET TO CHALLENGE)
GS: “It hadn’t been important to the point of that article. At that time it had been sufficient for me to show that a permission is granted by Srila Prabhupadas purport for people to accept either a kanistha or a madhyama devotee as a guru, whether Mark likes it or not.”
(MARK DIDN’T LIKE YOU SAYING IT WAS PERMISSION FOR HIS NEOPHYTE DISCIPLES TO INITIATE ON THEIR OWN BEHALF IN ISKCON)
GS: “Mark in his innocence and Puranjana, spot on for a change brought up an important point, why would anyone want to?” (MORE CONDESCENSION)
“I had always assumed that the permission had been granted because although formal initiation is simply a formality it is a requirement, to keep up the social thing I imagine…”
(FUNNY HOW THE GUY CONDESCENDING TO US IS FULL OF UNCHALLENGED ASSUMPTIONS, SPECULATIONS, AND IMAGINATIONS. Formal initiation is a little more than “keeping up the social thingy”, but lets go on to see what this master of the social thingy has to educate us about)
“…This, in combination with the rarities of pure devotees of Krsna or uttama-adhikaris, made Srila Prabhupada’s permission to offer either the kanistha or madhyama as alternates something that sounded reasonable and logical.
Those things still seem reasonable and logical but it Mark was right. Why would Srila Prabhupada offer us anything that we would get gyped by accepting as Mark interpreted the acceptance of a kanistha or madhyama level devotee as a guru seemed to imply that he was thinking.
As to why anyone would do such a thing, to that I hadn’t a clue.”
(YOU STILL DON’T HAVE A CLUE GEORGE)
GS: “In search of one I checked my assumption and found out that the two terms that I had been using were not synonymous, even though I had hear them used that way,
(AND IF YOU HAD BEEN READING MY COMMENTS BETWEEN 2/2 AND THIS PARTICULAR COMMENT ON 2/8, YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN REAMS OF EVIDENCE THAT YOUR ASSUMPTION WAS WRONG)
GS “The above noted purport however revealed that there are in fact pure devotees among both the kanistha and the madhyama classes, that would explain why anyone would accept them, they are as bright as the sun.
(HERE GEORGE IS REFERRING TO two purports. The “above noted” being Madhya 15.106 “The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.”, and “why anyone would accept them” referring to the purport to NOI 5 that mentions neophytes accepting disciples)
GS “But something else is implied in the sentence quoted from Srila Prabhupadas purport, which is that they may advance to the uttama-stage and no where does it say that they cannot do this while and when they are still acting as the spiritual master of anyone who has accepted them and who they have accepted, in fact since already they are pure devotees of Krsna an impetus in that direction is already a given.
I don’t think we’re dealing with something that is static but with a social and interpersonal dynamic that tends towards perfection in Krsna consciousness.
Just some thoughts, they don’t change my mind about accepting Rtvik to be bona-fide, but I don’t accept that we should throw out the baby with the bath water either, that 30 some odd years of abuse of tradition is sufficient cause to overturn how many hundreds and millions of years of it. I accept Rtvik to present and alternate, one more suitable to Westerners, not the one and only way that one may take initiation.”
George just defeated himself. Again. For while he is correct that neophytes and madhyams may advance to uttama while “acting as spiritual masters” (instructing others as Siksa gurus), they are only considered pure devotees in good standing if they are following the orders of their own Acarya.
George says he accepts the Rtivk system. Which means he accepts that Srila Prabhupada ordered ALL his disciples to initiate on his behalf. If they were neophytes or madhyams, the only way they could remain pure and in good standing is to follow SP’s orders. Thus they were to keep Srila Prabhupada as the Initiating Spiritual Master of Iskcon. They were to initiate new disciples on SP’s behalf. Then they were to act as Siksa Gurus, instructing those new persons strictly according to the particular guidelines and principles set by Srila Prabhupada. As a matter of fact, this is stated in the very purport that George is using to try and prove his point!
Madhya 15.106 : PURPORT :
“A person who has attained firm faith is a real candidate for advancing in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. According to the faith, there are first-class, second-class and neophyte devotees. One who has preliminary faith is called kaniṣṭha, or a neophyte. The neophyte, however, can become an advanced devotee IF HE STRICTLY FOLLOWS THE REGULATIVE PRINCIPLES SET DOWN BY THE SPIRITUAL MASTER.” The pure devotee whose faith advances becomes a madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī.” (Cc. Madhya 22.64,69-70)
Letter to: Satadari — Los Angeles 7 July, 1974 : 74-07-07 :
Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated July 13, 1974 and have noted the contents carefully. Yes, a shiksa guru is anyone who can give spiritual advancement. You take instruction from my books, and if you are unable to understand any portion of the books, then you can get it explained by any senior devotee, whether Madhukanta or anyone else. Any senior devotee can be an instructor in spiritual subject matters. If you like to take instruction from Madhukanta, there is no harm.
My Dear Satyabhama and Paramananda: Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter undated and have noted the contents carefully.If Kirtanananda Maharaja speaks what I speak, then he can be taken a siksa guru. Guru sastra sadhu. The spiritual master is one, that is a fact. Kirtanananda Swami may be taken a sadhu not spiritual master, or as instructor guru. I don’t think he is saying anything against our principles, so what is the wrong?
(74-07-20 New Vrindaban)
————————————————
IN THE ARTICLE AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE, GEORGE INSISTS that the purport from NOI 5 gives permission for SP’s disciples to INITIATE ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. Read what he said carefully.
GEORGE: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds INITIATING UPON THEIR OWN BEHALFS in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
————————-
I have gone to great lengths, wading through a battlefield now flowing with the blood of George’s army of strawmen, to prove that his original contention cannot possibly be the case.
George cannot have his cake and eat it too. If he accepts that Srila Prabhupada ordered his disciples to use the ritvik system, he cannot simultaneously accept that Srila Prabhupada left his disciples the option to IGNORE his ritvik system. That is a contradiction which even a sophist like George cannot defend.
Any neophyte disciple ignoring the order to continue formal initiations as stated by the Founder Acarya is no longer a pure devotee, and certainly has no inherent authority to initiate and accept disciples ON HIS OWN BEHALF, unless he goes OUTSIDE ISKCON where he “may” initiate and accept disciples with whatever little quasi spiritual potency his neophyte status affords, while giving them all the insufficient guidance he can muster.
And George may argue that the initiation is just a formality and that if a Neophyte or Madhayama is instructing according to the Founder’s vani, then what does it matter if they “formally” accept new disciples in their own name as opposed to Srila Prabhupada’s name?
The answer is, IT WAS AN ORDER! Why not just FOLLOW THE ORDER? If it makes “no difference” then why not call them initiated disciples of the Founder Acarya, as he wished?
And perhaps there is a reason that you and others who can’t see a reason just can’t comprehend? And until you can understand the mind of the acarya, just be a good peon and follow his orders please, then you are fit to accept disciples as a Siksa guru.
Sri Vyasa-puja — Hamburg, September 5, 1969 : 690905VP.HAM :
Now, this spiritual master’s succession is not very difficult. Of course, my students, they offer me so much respect, but all these respects are due to my spiritual master. I am nothing. I am just like peon. Just like peon delivers one letter. He is not responsible for what is written in that letter. He is not responsible for what is written in that letter. He simply delivers. But a peon’s duty is that he must sincerely carry out the order of the postmaster and deliver the letter to the proper person. That is their duty. Similarly, this paramparā system is like that. Every one of us should become a spiritual master because the world is in blazing fire. (aside:) You can give them prasādam. Now, of course, time is very high. So to understand the spiritual master… Spiritual master is not a new invention. It is simply following the orders of the spiritual master. So all my students present here who are feeling so much obliged… I am also obliged to them because they are helping me in this missionary work. At the same time, I shall request them all to become spiritual master. Every one of you should be spiritual master next. And what is their duty? Whatever you are hearing from me, whatever you are learning from me, you have to distribute the same in toto without any addition or alteration. Then all of you become the spiritual master. That is the science of becoming spiritual master.
Puranjana dasa, you are correct, but Srila Prabhupada isn’t just the founder acarya of ISKCON, he is the Sampradaya Acarya, as such he is also speaking beyond the narrow confines of ISKCON to the whole Sampradaya in which such practices or traditions have been going on since time immemorial and which still continue today among all the different branches of the Caitanya tree. He could deny his permit and thus cut them off from his mercy, but he is Srila Prabhupada and if all of the seas from all of the worlds in the material universe were poured together into one vast ocean, then still they would not equal a drop of Srila Prabhupadas mercy. One day all of the different branches will accept Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya acarya.
Bhakta George: “…the whole Sampradaya in which such practices or traditions have been going on since time immemorial and which still continue today among all the different branches of the Caitanya tree….”
This sounds quite like flowery language of the Vedas, however, what those different branches of the Caitanya tree have accomplished?
Srila Prabhupada: Before me, many swamis went to the Western countries. They also talked about Bhagavad-gita and other Vedic literature. But not a single person could be converted to Krsna consciousness, not a single person throughout the whole history, background. (Fiji, May 24, 1975)
According Prabhupada and for everybody with two eyes, zero, nothing was achieved by so called branches of the Caitanya tree. Caitanya tree means, spreading the yuga-dharma for this age, chanting of the holy name of God, in every town and village.
Conclusion is, besides Prabhupada nobody did this job. The only branch of the Caitanya tree which is alive is Srila Prabhupada’s work.
When we were in India Srila Prabhupada told us we should not read the books from other Vaishnava groups because their writings “are not authorized.” So, his books are the sole representation of the authorized branch, whereas other branches, are simply — not authorized. George, Rocana and similar clan always say: There is another branch of the Chaitanya tree somewhere.
OK fine, and meanwhile other speculators say there is a sunken Spanish ship full of Mayan gold somewhere at the bottom of the ocean. So lets see how this works in real life, George is going to go to the bank and ask for a loan of 10 million dollars, because perhaps, there is a Spanish ship full of gold “somewhere” which is his collateral for the loan. The bank will call for the men in little white suits to take Goerge to get back to taking his medications. ys pd
IN THE ARTICLE AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE, GEORGE INSISTS that the purport from NOI 5 gives permission for SP’s disciples to INITIATE ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. Read what he said carefully.
GEORGE: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds INITIATING UPON THEIR OWN BEHALFS in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
Now he claims the nature of the declarations in that NOI 5 purport were that they were generally addressed to the whole Sampradaya.
If that is true, then why would George apply it to the Iskcon branch of the Sampradaya? When he recently claimed that the Iskcon branch has a valid ritvik initiation system? In which case, if these statements about neophytes and madhyamas accepting disciples were “permissions” for Srila Prabhupada’s disciples to initiate on their own behalf, there would be a HUGE contradiction.
That was my point from the beginning. That purport indeed explained the general rule that neophyte and intermediate level devotees can accept disciples on their own level. But the qualifier that their disciples would be guided insufficiently and not reach the goal of life is crucial. Crucial because that statement elminates any possibility this could relate to Iskcon, since Srila Prabhupada gave completely sufficient instructions for his institution, that all his instructors were BOUND BY LAW to follow use to guide others to achieve the ultimate goal of life.
That fact alone indicates that statement about kanisthas and madhyamas accepting disciples could not apply to Iskcon. On its own, that statement meant those lower devotees would be accepting disciples outside the shelter of an uttama. Which meant they would be initiating those disciples on their own behalf as Diksa Guru and training them according to their own limited Siksa.
Whereas in Iskcon, neophytes and Madhyamas can only accept disciples in the sense of “students”, and since they are only allowed to repeat the Instructions of the Founder who is a perfect Uttama Maha bhagavata, their guidance will be sufficient to help new disciples reach the goal of life.
There are parts of that purport that relate to Srila Prabhupada’s disciples who are in Iskcon. And parts that do not.
The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform… (yes)
One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī. (yes)
A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. (NO)
Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master.” (yes)
Thanks Bhakta Mark! Am I right, you are saying that all Prabhupadanugas should rejoin ISKCON where they exactly do what you are stating: Every ISKCON guru initiates his disciples on Prabhupada’s behalf (ritvik), telling those disciples to do nothing else but to read Prabhupada’s books and putting Prabhupada’s instructions into practice (even more ritvik).
And, whenever such a ritvik guru falls this is some insignificant negligibility – nothing to worry about. Since there are nowadays many people anxious to be worshiped as good as God there will be lots of fresh supply of new gurus.
That nowadays ISKCON temples are empty all over NA and Europe will be solved soon when Bh Mark, Bh George, Rocana and Bh Jarek go there and perform harinam.
“If you simply chant your rounds daily as prescribed and stick strictly to the rules and regulations, all these questions will automatically be answered by Krsna as Supersoul.” (Letter to Sacisuta, 14 February, 1970)
Sorry Mataji, apparently you have your facts wrong on multiple accounts there. I highly doubt supersoul had any direct influence in you making so many mistakes, so perhaps you should just read a little more carefully.
Last I heard, Iskcon had not accepted ritvik. And as for the rest of your ranting misinterpretation of my presentations here, I am sorry you are having a tough go of it, but don’t think you are the only one. I wish I had something more substantial to offer you, but I am all talk no walk.
Maybe you should move to Bangalore and take shelter there, I hear they have guest houses. I was told they were only initiating Indians with college degrees, but hey that was 5 years ago, maybe things have changed, and you are already initiated so maybe they will be more inclined to give you shelter.
Otherwise, I don’t know what to suggest. Good luck.
Hare Krsna
Mark: Whereas in Iskcon, neophytes and Madhyamas can only accept disciples in the sense of “students”, and since they are only allowed to repeat the Instructions of the Founder who is a perfect Uttama Maha bhagavata, their guidance will be sufficient to help new disciples reach the goal of life.
Mahesh: Simply BOGUS!
http://harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/02-13/editorials9757.htm
Here Raksana das writes what Bhakti Vikasa has stated:
*Regarding the 6th verse of the Sri Sri Gurv-astaka prayers we sing every morning at mangala arati, Maharaja has stated that disciples can sing this in honor of a conditioned soul spiritual master to the degree that the disciple sees the qualities and nature of serving Krishna’s amorous pastimes manifest in the conditioned soul spiritual master.
Just see the nonsense Bhakti Vikasa speaks. Here is what Srila Prabhupada states:
740704BG.HON Lectures
Prabhupada: Then so siksa and diksa-guru… A SIKSA-GURU WHO INSTRUCTS AGAINST THE INSTRUCTION OF SPIRITUAL, HE IS NOT A SIKSA GURU. HE IS A DEMON. Siksa-guru, diksa-guru means… Sometimes a diksa-guru is not present always. Therefore one can take learning, instruction, from an advanced devotee. That is called the siksa-guru. SIKSA-GURU DOES NOT MEAN HE IS SPEAKING SOMETHING AGAINST THE TEACHINGS OF THE DIKSA-GURU. HE IS NOT A SIKSA-GURU. HE IS A RASCAL.
Mark Prabhu your forced concept of “siksa guru” down peoples throat has back-fired. Your over glamorised siksa guru Bhakti Vikas has no brains to accept the bona fide Ritvik System either.
Dear Mahesh.
when I wrote:
Mark: Whereas in Iskcon, neophytes and Madhyamas can only accept disciples in the sense of “students”, and since they are only allowed to repeat the Instructions of the Founder who is a perfect Uttama Maha bhagavata, their guidance will be sufficient to help new disciples reach the goal of life.
I meant that this is the way Iskcon is supposed to be, not how it is being run today. That should have been obvious to you, not just because its hard to believe you think I am that stupid after reading my criticisms of current day Iskcon for the last 10 years, but because I said the opposite in that very comment.
1. In the two paragraphs directly preceding the one you reprinted above, I was very clear about that…
Mark: “That was my point from the beginning. That purport indeed explained the general rule that neophyte and intermediate level devotees can accept disciples on their own level. But the qualifier that their disciples would be guided insufficiently and not reach the goal of life is crucial. Crucial because that statement ELIMINATES ANY POSSIBILITY THIS COULD RELATE TO ISKCON, since Srila Prabhupada gave completely sufficient instructions for his institution, that all his instructors were BOUND BY LAW to follow (and) use to guide others to achieve the ultimate goal of life.
That fact alone indicates that statement about kanisthas and madhyamas accepting disciples COULD NOT APPLY TO ISKCON. On its own, that statement meant those lower devotees would be accepting disciples outside the shelter of an uttama. WHICH MEANT THEY WOULD BE INITIATING THOSE DISCIPLES ON THEIR OWN BEHALF AS DIKSA GURU AND TRAINING THEM ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN LIMITED SIKSA.”
——————————-
So, as you can see, in this case I clearly equated “accepting disciples” with INITIATING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. Because that is what that purport is referring to.
2. I was refuting George’s claim that the NOI 5 statement about neophytes accepting disciples was permission for Srila Prabhupada’s disciples to accept disciples by INITIATING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. Which I CLEARLY stated at the very beginning of that comment…
Mark: “IN THE ARTICLE AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE, GEORGE INSISTS that the purport from NOI 5 gives permission for SP’s disciples to INITIATE ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. Read what he said carefully.
GEORGE wrote: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds INITIATING UPON THEIR OWN BEHALFS in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
—————————–
Therefore Mahesh, the quote that you criticized me about was MY OPINION that the NOI purport was referring to neophytes or madhayms accepting disciples by inititating them on their own behalf. And this is why I believe that part of the purport CANNOT apply to Srila Prabhupada’s disciples (true Iskcon) because (true) Iskcon is SUPPOSED TO be on the ritvik system.
MY OPINION, is that even if that purport was referring to neophytes and Madhyamas “accepting disciples” as Siksa disciples only, the purport would still not refer to Iskcon because in Iskcon those neophytes and Madhyamas who act as Siksa Gurus are meant to teach according to the Founder’s Vani, and thus would theoretically be incapable of giving insufficient guidance. The purport clearly states that those lower devotees would be giving insufficient guidance.
So in that sense, the only part of that purport that relates to Gaudiya Vaisnavas who take shelter of the Iskcon branch of Lord Caitanya’s tree of devotion, is the part recommending recommending that one only accept an uttama as a spiritual master (meaning Initiating spiritual master). Because the other injunctions in that purport is are redundant in that they are already covered by Iskcon laws. In that Iskcon already has an eternal initiating spiritual master in place, and neophytes and madhyamas may only accept Siksa disciples and are to be KICKED OUT if they try to give insufficient guidance that is not in line with Srila Prabhupada’s Siksa.
3. In my VERY LAST COMMENT TO RUKMINI, I wrote:
“Last I heard, Iskcon had not accepted ritvik.”
Sorry that I wasn’t more clear, I hope this was crystal.
ys
Mark
Bhakta Mark Jan 20,2012
A lot of times when people tell you that they are there to protect you and warn you about someone or something, the things that you should really be worried about is the person who is warning you and what they represent.
Lets’s look at Bhakta Mark’s attack on me again, this time from the logical perspective that Bhakta Mark and those who are possibly employing him are betting that you don’t have:
Mark’s reply: I was immediately struck by how Mr Smith identifies the authorship of his thesis using the plural first person pronoun “We”. For anyone paying attention to his activities of late would note that “he” has gone about setting himself apart from all camps. So if “he” is wishing to create and direct yet another camp to justify his use of “we”, I am here to warn such supplicant’s that the cost of entry will be to jettison logic and reason.
This intuition was directly confirmed as the author refers to the following statement as a granting of permissions.
NOI 5 “A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance.”
I believe it was in 6th grade grammar blah, blah, blah….”
Fr Bhakta Mark’s Jan 20th attack on Bhakta George
At first glance I could tell from Marks posting that he was either an exceptionally bad logician, or an exceptionally good one, only that in the later case, that if he were an exceptionally good logician that he was deliberately arguing fallaciously, that he was putting forward such logical fallacies as hasty generalizations, etc., in a rhetorical manner in order to convince an audience that he must be inclined to have believed was not educated enough to spot his deliberate attempt to dupe them.
The sheer sophistication of Marks attack made me disinclined to believe that it could be anything except the later, that Bhakta Mark was deliberately attempting to deceive his audience. For instance, the logical inference that a permission had been given for both kanistha and madhyama level devotees to accept disciples could be made from any one of several statement that Srila Prabhupada had made in his purport to NOI5, but Bhakta Mark had selected the only one of them that could be called into question, but then only from a grammatical, rather than a logical stance. Mark selected Srila Prabhupada’s usage of the word “can”. Mark had accepted the assumption that it was from this portion of Srila Prabhupada’s purport that I had drawn my logical inference and put it forward as being exactly that and in the process putting forward the logical fallacy known as a straw man argument in which a persons secure position is misrepresented as being one that is assailable. By knocking down this straw man one can therefore defeat ones opponent by knocking down the straw man or false position that one has attributed to him instead of to any actual position of his.
That Bhakta Mark was not strictly following regulative principles was something else that was apparent from this, his initial attack on me, for that Bhakta Mark was gambling. Bhakta Mark was gambling that neither his audience nor the person whom he was attacking, knew enough about logic to call him onto the carpet for his hypocrisy and deliberate attempt to deceive his audience.
To show my hand then at the moment would however Mark into the fact that I was not as blind as Bhakta Mark had hoped. This would thus run the risk of his taking a more guarded position from which it would be more difficult for me to ascertain certain things that were not clearly apparent, while adopting such as a demeanor as to encourage him to believe that his gamble had paid off would encourage him to run off with his head and in addition allow me to learn more of him from his unguarded postings as well as to enable me to come back later on, gather up the slack in the rope that he had let out for himself and to then hang him at my leisure.
Looking at the precise word that Bhakta Mark chose to hinge his attack upon, the word can recalled to mind how in ahankara or Sanskrit rhetoric how a word has an ornamental meaning, kicking the can rather than coming out full on with a reply that would disillusion Bhakta Mark as to the fact that he had actually lost his gamble would focus him on the sound of his empty can or straw man arguments own rattling thus further inclining him to be off of his guard.
In Bhakta Mark’s last post to me that I took any account up he encouraged me to adopt such a position of humility as would allow me to admit that I was wrong. Those who are on the side of Lord Krsna and his devotees are never wrong however, while those who attempt to deceive and delude the innocent in an effort to misguide them as Bhakta Mark was clearly showing me that he was intending to do from his initial post are always in error and I feel no humility in the face of such as they. In forthcoming posts I will be taking apart Bhakta Mark’s erroneous arguments as he has already presented them, after which the devotees may do their own thinking and decide for themselves who and what is more threatening to them.
Flashback to my post on Feb 2nd 2013,
http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-14670
“My original challenge to you was not based on your claim that this was a general permission. You directly implied that this was Srila Prabhupada giving permission to his disciples. How could it not have been? In your own words.
GEORGE wrote: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds INITIATING UPON THEIR OWN BEHALFS in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
———————————————
I went on to again carefully rebut George’s premise that the statements in that NOI 5 purport were permissions for Srila Prabhupada’s disciples to “accept” their own disciples (as in accepting by initiation, not just siksa).
He ignored that challenge, so on Nov 8, 2013 I had to repeat it.
http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-14670
“As usual, after reams of verbosity, George fails to make his point.
His first problem was that he did not read my replies, because if he did he would have noted that days ago I was the first one to present evidence that Neophytes can actually be pure devotees, from the purports to the CC…
…Anyhow, as I have recently pointed out, which George obviously missed as he was rummaging around in his mind instead of reading my posts, Srila Prabhupada did indeed order some of his neophyte disciples to become siksa gurus or “officiating acaryas”. This was actually permission. He first gave permission to 11 of them.
This is similar to the permission he gave all disciples over his 10 year manifest lila to teach students.
This permission is not a guarantee that these people are qualified in the sense that they won’t overstep their adhikari and fall down. But it was permission nonetheless, and to occupy the lofty post of ritvik representative of the Acarya, we are supposed to choose from among the most staunch and senior men, the same as choosing a president for a temple, or someone to teach our children.
But as we know, Srila Prabhupada NEVER gave permission to become Diksa Gurus. And though a person qualified to give Siksa may indeed be qualified to give Diksa, who are we to argue with this decision about the formal manangement of his Society…
…But to use the purport of NOI 5 to claim that there were permissions for neophytes to accept ones own disciples in Iskcon is bogus. And George was not indicating Siksa only. His exact words were Permissions to accept disciples on one’s own behalf.
“Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above.”
——————————————————-
George replied on Feb 9th with more diversion, not acknowledging the point I made, so I had to repeat it a third time.
2/13/2013 http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-15083
“And as far as this recent statement of yours.”
George: “The permission given in NOI5 is not limited to a number, place or time nor even to the disciples of Srila Prabhupada. You are like a frog in a well, the instruction is for a movement that is going to be world wide.”
BM: “As I am forced again to remind you, your original premise from the DOR article of 1/18 was to apply the statements of NOI5 to Srila Prabhupada’s Iskcon.
GS: “Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. ”
So whether or not anyone unconnected to Iskcon should take note of the Bhaktivedanta Purports and act on them in some fashion is not germane to our discussion. This was just another example of you using sophistry in order to assign a straw man argument to me in order to defeat the straw man and try to smear me with his blood.
Sorry. Not gonna happen. Stick to the point. This purport to the NOI 5 is going to be read by Iskcon devotees for thousands of years. You are construing it to be the SINGLE direct general order for neophytes to initiate disciples on their own behalf in Iskcon.
You are now the one who insists that the NOI 5 purport was directed to all neophytes in Iskcon who happen to also be pure devotees, to initiate and accept disciples on their own behalf.
———————————————————–
And then again, on FEB 11th, I had to address all of George’s ancillary straw man arugments and accusations, and again ask him to address the MAIN POINT.
Feb 11, 2013 http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-15208
“Therefore, your latest accusations are all baseless. I did indeed provide references. And as far as providing actual quotes in my comments, I normally use as many or more than you do and that is a fact. In that 1/30 comment, I was discussing ABC’s of Kanistha adhikari, and wrongly assumed you would already being conversant in those, and only felt the need to refer you to another place where I had tediously footnoted those concepts already if you actually didn’t get those ABC’s or disagreed with them.
Or perhaps you are conversant, and were nitpicking as a deflection hoping I wouldn’t be able to defend my position? I noticed that you put off answering the major challenge I issued to you. No amount of time in the world will arm you with a proper explanation except for giving you to muster up the humility to say “I was wrong”. You WERE talking about Srila Prabhupada’s disciples, it is there in black and white, and then you changed your story.”
————————————————————
AND AGAIN AFTER SPENDING HOURS CAREFULLY ADDRESSING ANOTHER SLEW OF DIVERSIONARY STRAWMAN ARGUMENTS, I ISSUED THE SAME UNANSWERED CHALLENGE ON THE 15TH OF FEB.
2/15/2013: http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=33002#comment-15404
“IN THE ARTICLE AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE, GEORGE INSISTS that the purport from NOI 5 gives permission for SP’s disciples to INITIATE ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. Read what he said carefully.
GEORGE: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds INITIATING UPON THEIR OWN BEHALFS in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
————————-
I have gone to great lengths, wading through a battlefield now flowing with the blood of George’s army of strawmen, to prove that his original contention cannot possibly be the case.
George cannot have his cake and eat it too. If he accepts that Srila Prabhupada ordered his disciples to use the ritvik system, he cannot simultaneously accept that Srila Prabhupada left his disciples the option to IGNORE his ritvik system. That is a contradiction which even a sophist like George cannot defend.”
—————————————————–
And here we are a MONTH later, and George peeks up his head to address something other than my original challenge.
Whatever. Enjoy your little talk with yourself George. Until you directly answer the challenge, I will not waste anymore time with you.
Hare Krsna
It seems like a lot of people tend to forget that in January of 1977, Srila Prabhupada was saying that his followers are not fit for sannyasa, so he said basically — suspended sannyasa, and get them married. He also said they are not following the basic brahmana standards, which he said is kanistha adhikary. All this discussion of kanistha guru is a little silly when he said they are not even following basic kanistha / brahmana platform. Never mind Madhyama platform, which is brahma nistha, giving up all bad habits and anarthas and etc. This guru talk is all quite premature, we are barely producing basic kanisthas at this point. He also said when kanisthas allow others to touch their feet, they are acting as gurus and they will fall down, get sick, or both, which is why we have an epidemic of both in contemporary iskcon. ys pd
Mark
This is not a debate or a discussion.
Please do not try to confuse issues by talking about an ‘original” challenge dated Feb 2 that was dated after the original attack Jan 20 Mark. Any person who attacks someone prior to challenging them is, in my book, a coward. So unless you want to add being a coward to what is going to become obvious to everyone that you are, I suggest that you keep your time line straight and don’t mistake this for a debate or discussion. A thief when apprehended proclaims the loudest their innocence. Your not innocent Mark and you know exactly what I am talking about and soon our readers will understand that too, after which I am afraid prabhu that whatever efforts you have gone to create for yourself some significance or reputation under your Bhakta Mark logo will have been wasted.
In your initial attack dated Jan 20 made before your original challenge dated Feb 2 you did:
1. Make and accept a choice or an assumption that was favorable to your desired intention and you then put forward that choice or assumption as being your opponents position.
A cogent argument makes only warranted assumptions, i.e., its assumptions are not questionable or false. So, fallacies of assumption make up one type of logical fallacy. One of the most common fallacies of assumption is called begging the question. Here the arguer assumes what he should be proving. You did not bother to even attempt to prove your choice or assumption because you felt that you did not need to, that your audience would look at the block that you posted up as evidence and accept your conclusion without challenge. Perception management and the power of suggestion are introduced. All this resulted in your posting up what could have neen and what was:
2. Straw man – an argument based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. I have already discussed how your selection of what choice you would make was determined by which, if any of the words or statements from Srila Prabhupadas NOI5 would suit your intention and that only by casting a doubt upon Srila Prabhupadas meaning when he used the word “can” could you possibly hope to present a misrepresentation of my position which seemed both credible and was assailable. It was at that point when I decided to “kick the can” in order to sponsor your delusion and to assure that you would continue to make the same types logical errors that you had made in your initial attack which would give me further opportunity to show to the devotees just what a deceitful hypocrite you are.
3. In your original attack you also utilized in a rhetorical fashion, or in a effort to convince your audience of the truth of your assetion that they would have to abandone logic and reason to join my group the logical fallacy of Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident) – basing a broad conclusion on a small sample. Even had I or my “group” committed some logical blunder in regards to this particular incedent that would hardly constitute a large enough sampling to prove your case that the abandonement of logical reasoning was the price of admission to it.
4. in which while claiming to be positioning yourself as some guard between the innocent and the masters of illogic you yourself resorted to hypocrisy by employing logical fallacies in a rhetorical fashion in your attempt to sway the opinions of the audience.
On January 20th you wrote:
20. January 2013 at 7:28 pm
George Smith wrote: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
Mark’s reply: I was immediately struck by how Mr Smith identifies the authorship of his thesis using the plural first person pronoun “We”. For anyone paying attention to his activities of late would note that “he” has gone about setting himself apart from all camps. So if “he” is wishing to create and direct yet another camp to justify his use of “we”, I am here to warn such supplicant’s that the cost of entry will be to jettison logic and reason.
This intuition was directly confirmed as the author refers to the following statement as a granting of permissions.
NOI 5 “A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance.”
I believe it was in 6th grade grammar where “we” were taught the difference between the auxiliary verbs “can” and “may”.
In order to make this attack you were first required to make an assumption from which portion or words of NOI5 and Srila Prabhupadas purport that I drew the logical inference that a permission had been given. Conjunction fallacy – assumption that an outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probable than an outcome satisfying a single one of them. You of course choose the assumption that you thought would enable you then accepted your assumption Correlation proves causation (cum hoc ergo propter hoc) – a faulty assumption that correlation between two variables implies that one causes the other.[15] Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident) – basing a broad conclusion on a small sample.
Here again is the single post in which you commit all of these offenses against good reason while at the same time proclaiming yourself to be a protector of the devotees from such as those who employ them.
20. January 2013 at 7:28 pm
All glories to Srila Prabhupada
George Smith wrote: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
Mark’s reply: I was immediately struck by how Mr Smith identifies the authorship of his thesis using the plural first person pronoun “We”. For anyone paying attention to his activities of late would note that “he” has gone about setting himself apart from all camps. So if “he” is wishing to create and direct yet another camp to justify his use of “we”, I am here to warn such supplicant’s that the cost of entry will be to jettison logic and reason.
This intuition was directly confirmed as the author refers to the following statement as a granting of permissions.
NOI 5 “A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance.”
I believe it was in 6th grade grammar where “we” were taught the difference between the auxiliary verbs “can” and “may”.
The auxiliary verb “may” does not necessarily acknowledge some ability or possibility of success, but is definitely used in an active sense to give “permission” to make the attempt at the activity.
“It seems like a lot of people tend to forget that in January of 1977, Srila Prabhupada was saying that his followers are not fit for sannyasa, so he said basically — suspended sannyasa, and get them married. He also said they are not following the basic brahmana standards, which he said is kanistha adhikary. All this discussion of kanistha guru is a little silly when he said they are not even following basic kanistha / brahmana platform. Never mind Madhyama platform, which is brahma nistha, giving up all bad habits and anarthas and etc. This guru talk is all quite premature, we are barely producing basic kanisthas at this point. He also said when kanisthas allow others to touch their feet, they are acting as gurus and they will fall down, get sick, or both, which is why we have an epidemic of both in contemporary iskcon. ys pd”
Puranjana
In the above Puranjana makes some excellent points, the analysis is however self referential – or related to ISKCON and to ISKCON as it was then and seems still to be and therefore cannot be construed as a prohibition aginst the permission given in Srila Prabhupadas purport for employing those permissions within a society in which the standads are kept up.
On the other hand since there is absolutely no permission in Srila Prabhupadas purport for those who are not up to even the standards of Kanistha to initiate the truth of Puranjanas claim is proven in respect to ISKCON as it was then and is still today/ Without anyone being even qualified to initiate via the broad permissions granted by Srila Prabhupada in his NOI purport the Rtvik alternative seems to me to be the only viable choice that one could make, but only then if it is something that is actually on the bargaining table, which Srila Prabhupadas words seem to me to indicate that it is.
Hare Krsna
The grammar and word usage lesson I gave on the 20th was simply to indicate why the Lord guided Srila Prabhupada to chose the words he did, because, ultimately, Iskcon was to be FREE OF ANY CLASS OF DEVOTEES INITIATING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF, but full of humble Siksa gurus chaste to the initiating spiritual master and prominent acarya of the asrama, and some would say the sampradaya.
Members of other branches of the Gaudiya Sampradaya might indeed refer to the purport to NOI 5 and decide that according to “modern” usage, the word CAN might be used to indicate permission without significant resistance.
From there they might decide that since a neophyte can accept disciples, that the rule in their branch will be that anyone who can perform a fire yajna and memorize Diksa mantras is permitted and even encouraged to “accept” disciples by “initiating” them on their own behalf. They might even turn each temple into a battleground of 4-5 neophytes vying for 2nd and 3rd string footwashers and laundry crew.
But you specifically mentioned disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and he gave no such permission for neophytes or madhyams or ANYONE to accept disciples “on their own behalfs” as you put it.
Sorry to cut to the chase and spoil your plans of exposing me, ruining my name, etc. etc. but you go ahead and knock yourself silly, toot your horn, beat your chest, get it all out, I’m your huckleberry. I will observe your tormented kriyas from a distance and pray they end soon and you find your way to the light at the end of the tunnel before you hurt yourself.
Take it easy.
ys
B.Mark
George Smith wrote: ”Normally we would have no problem with any disciple of Srila Prabhupada who is following the four regs and chanting his or her rounds initiating upon their own behalfs in accordance with the permissions in the Nectar of Instruction quoted in the various places noted above. We might want to remind such persons however that by so doing they are going against Srila Prabhupada’s recommendations”
PD: Why not just condense this all down to the actual point: A neophyte cannot act as a diksha guru and accept disciples, because for starters he cannot absorb the sins of others. And moreover, if he artificially attempts to take that post, he will get sick, fall down, or both (as we have seen in spades) and cause havoc (as we have seen in spades), and he will go to the lowest regions of the universe after his guru business is over, and although he might escape the laws of the mundane courts, he will never escape the laws of God. Any further questions? Why not just explain what is the actual position? ys pd
When Srila Prabhupada makes a management decision, such as that delineated in the July 9, 1977 letter, then we must follow. There is no room for the mental masturbations of the “intellectual class” rascals. Their useless speculations are simply a disservice to Srila Prabhupada by unnecessarily clouding the otherwise crystal-clear management directive for all future 1st and 2nd initiations within ISKCON: “ritvik henceforward!”
This is explained in more detail on http://rtvik.com/ .
Historic GBC meetings? You heard it first on the Prabhupadanuga Forum:
http://groups.google.com/group/istagosthi/msg/058cf84bb47ff104
George A Smith has no brains to understand even the basic simple logic or basic Philosophy on the subject of Initiation in ISKCON. The following has been ALREADY been discussed IN DETAIL:
Reply to Nimai Pandit Prabhu (PDF | 200 KB)
Generally speaking, It seems logical that when a kindergarten teacher says, “I wish that all of you children eventually become brain surgeons,” … this is not a license to give hack saws and electric power drills to the the kindergarten children — and tell them to start to perform surgeries now? I have no idea why Rocana cannot grasp this fact, especially after so many people died due to “terribly gone wrong” bad surgeries already? ys pd
mark says:
14. March 2013 at 1:22 am
Hare Krsna
The grammar and word usage lesson I gave on the 20th was simply to indicate why the Lord guided Srila Prabhupada to chose the words he did, because, ultimately, Iskcon was to be FREE OF ANY CLASS OF DEVOTEES INITIATING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF, but full of humble Siksa gurus chaste to the initiating spiritual master and prominent acarya of the asrama, and some would say the sampradaya.
Members of other branches of the Gaudiya Sampradaya might indeed refer to the purport to NOI 5 and decide that according to “modern” usage, the word CAN might be used to indicate permission without significant resistance.
From there they might decide that since a neophyte can accept disciples, that the rule in their branch will be that anyone who can perform a fire yajna and memorize Diksa mantras is permitted and even encouraged to “accept” disciples by “initiating” them on their own behalf. They might even turn each temple into a battleground of 4-5 neophytes vying for 2nd and 3rd string footwashers and laundry crew.
But you specifically mentioned disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and he gave no such permission for neophytes or madhyams or ANYONE to accept disciples “on their own behalfs” as you put it.
Sorry to cut to the chase and spoil your plans of exposing me, ruining my name, etc. etc. but you go ahead and knock yourself silly, toot your horn, beat your chest, get it all out, I’m your huckleberry. I will observe your tormented kriyas from a distance and pray they end soon and you find your way to the light at the end of the tunnel before you hurt yourself.
Take it easy.
I did not make you dishunest or a hypocrite Bhakta Mark. I did not go about claiming that I was going to protect the devotees from the abandonment of logic and sound reason while at the same time employing logical fallacies in a rhetorical style in order in a gambling attempt to deceoive them, you did, and anyone who goes to the trouble of bothering themselves can determine this for themselves, or rather they can corroborate what I say about you here.
What you and others are trying very hard to peddle is something that is referred to in logic as a “false dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more. You are trying very hard to make it seem that only two choices are available to those seeking initiation, something which you yourself have admittined to being just a formaility. The two only choices that you have been presenting are the ones that ISKCON and the Gaudiya Matha offer and the one that the Rtviks offer, with of course your claiming that the Rtviks are presenting the only valid choice.
That is the reason that Srila Prabhupadas purport to NOI5 bugs you so much, because it clearly offers multiple choices, only advising that one should take initiation from an uttama adhikari or “oure devotee”. That is what bothers you and one thing more, that if one accept Srila Prabhupadas words to be true than practically anyone who is actually keeping up the standards of kanistha or madhyama can perform this formailty which as a consequence means that they don’t need you, the Rtviks.
There ios an old saying that the only trouble with new books is that they stop you from reading new books, already I have more than enough of your crap to strangle you and I intend to. You have been trying very hard all along to make a name and reputation for yourself, seeing yourself, no doubt as one of the up and coming replacements for the old crue, those you see as the wash outs and embarressments. I am not the only one who sees this prabhu, but before I am through with you your reputation will be mud, and it will be easy prabhu, your own stupidity coupled with your contempt of others have ensured this.
Because I know something (not because I am liberal – not everyone likes the Christian type of initiatory system-it leaves to much open to misrepresentation and abuse – I accept Rtvik as merely offering another option to those offered by Srila Prabhupada, something that both Srila Prabhupadas acceptance of the Christian Initiatory system and his other words indicate – but do not indicate in NOI 5 and which is something that the Rtviks will have to prove -and not with that piece of **** The Final Order which Rocanas DOR clearly positions where it belongs – in the waste bin.
Proving what you are Bhakta Mark is easy. Lets see you find shastric evidence to conclude that Rtvik is even that option that you consider it to be out of your own desire to manipulate the system for material gain, let alone that it is the only option.
“PD: Why not just condense this all down to the actual point: A neophyte cannot act as a diksha guru and accept disciples, because for starters he cannot absorb the sins of others. And moreover, if he artificially attempts to take that post, he will get sick, fall down, or both (as we have seen in spades) and cause havoc (as we have seen in spades), and he will go to the lowest regions of the universe after his guru business is over, and although he might escape the laws of the mundane courts, he will never escape the laws of God. Any further questions? Why not just explain what is the actual position? ys pd”
Srila Prabhupada clearly states in NOI5’s purport
I am sorry Puranjana but you are stating just the opposite of what Srila Prabhupada is stating. You are stating that a neophyte cannot accept disciples but Srila Prabhupada is clearly saying just the opposite, that a neophyte can accept disciples:
A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master.
NoI 5 purport
What you are saying is certainly a consideration and would keep any neophyte intelligent who is intelligent from accepting many disciples but it does not mean that one cannot accept disciples as Srila Prabhupada clearly says otherwise Do you have any shastric evidence or something from Srila Prabhupada that supports your copntention that a neophyte cannot immolate to any degree a disciples karma as this runs counter to my life experience in which I have come across what are referred to among the Native tribes as Circuit walkers who regularly place curses and displacce the karmic reactions onto something or someone else. It stops them fromgetting sick or dieing but as to whether it really dissasociates them from the sinful reactions of their deeds I have always had me doubts.
Thanks
[Reply]
14. March 2013 at 11:20 am\
Mahesh muda says:
“George A Smith has no brains to understand even the basic simple logic or basic Philosophy on the subject of Initiation in ISKCON. The following has been ALREADY been discussed IN DETAIL:
Reply to Nimai Pandit Prabhu (PDF | 200 KB)”
I’m no Einstein Mahesh, but I’ll give it a shot.
Ah. I was looking for that, thank you Mahesh
:
“…we should learn this principle enunciated by Viśvanatha Cakravarti Ṭhakura:
yasya prasadad bhagavat-prasado
yasyaprasadan na gatiḥ kuto ’pi
“By the mercy of the spiritual master one is benedicted by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa. Without the grace of the spiritual master, one cannot make any advancement.” SB 6.7.15
“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master.” NOI5 purport
One cannot “advance very well”, but one can advance so that infers logically that Srila Prabhupada has given a little bit of his mercy, even to those who act against his recommendations and accept initiation from a kanistha or madhyama and therein is found Srila Prabhupada’s permission for without it they could not advance “any” Without Srila Prabhupada’s mercy and permission not any advancement.
But how much mercy has Srila Prabhupada granted to the Rtviks, to Tamel Krsna, to Satsvarupa, to Kirtanananda, how far have they advanced…or have they simply gone to Hell? And who will follow them?
GEORGE: I am sorry Puranjana but you are stating just the opposite of what Srila Prabhupada is stating. You are stating that a neophyte cannot accept disciples but Srila Prabhupada is clearly saying just the opposite, that a neophyte can accept disciples:
PD: No, Srila Prabhupada told us that if we [neophytes] allow others to touch our feet we will then be acting as diksha gurus, we will thus be absorbing other’s sins, and we will get sick, fall down, or both.
And in case you have not noticed, there has been a horrific epidemic of these bogus diksha guru folks getting sick, falling down and so forth. Yes, how often have we heard this sorry story, “Ohhhh booo freaking hooo, he — ‘accepted too much karma’ — and so now, he fell down.”
OK except, he was told not to act as a diksha guru and accept karma? Srila Prabhupada clearly said, we are not allowed to act as diksha gurus and thus absorb sins. Lots of women were touching our feet at those pandal programs in India, so he said — we have to touch their heads and give them back the karma, even if a woman touched us brahmacharis, he said, never mind, touch their heads back.
[We later built a wider walk way so they could not touch our feet.]
Sorry, a neophyte who thinks he can absorb sins like Jesus, will be walking with Beelzebub and not Jesus. Srila Prabhupada never indicated that we had the powers of Jesus to absorb the sins of others, just the opposite, he said we would be overwhelmed and doomed thereby. ys pd
mark says:
23. January 2013 at 6:25 pm “We only know what he did. It is plain as day. He took himself out of the loop of all management, and he considered that formality management, no doubt.”
Mahesh Jan 25 Prabhupada: Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge. (break) …knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing.
——————————————————
And to demonstrate that I understand the “grey” area alluded to by Srila Prabhupada when he did not deny its importance, but instead said it is not “very” important, I wrote the following.
Feb 9, 6:41 pm
Mark wrote:
“This following quote of yours is highly indicative of your misunderstandings.
GS: “I had always assumed that the permission had been granted because although formal initiation is simply a formality it is a requirement, to keep up the social thing I imagine.”
Why imagine? “keep up the social thing?” Oh boy. Listen closely.
The upanayana samskara where the sacred thread is given to a twice born brings him closer to the spiritual master. The ceremony is also referred to as upaniti.
“The ceremony performed to initiate a disciple into the study of spiritual science is called upanīti, or the function that brings one nearer to the spiritual master. One who cannot be brought nearer to a spiritual master cannot have a sacred thread” Adi 1.46 : PURPORT
There are also the little fact of the Gayatri mantra and Gopal mantra are given, which assist one in purifying oneself so that they may chant the Maha Mantra with less and less offenses over time…
(My quote from 2/9 is continued after the quotes below from Prabhupada giving proof of my statements above)
Prabhupāda: “Chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. Then, as he practices, becomes more purified, then second initiation. Gāyatrī. Gāyatrī-mantra. But the first initiation, according to Jīva Gosvāmī, that is sufficient. Chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, that is sufficient. But still, to purify them more, the second initiation, Gāyatrī, is given. So we are creating brāhmaṇas in the western countries.”
(Room Conversation with Sanskrit Professor — August 13, 1973, Paris)
“Yes, it is all right that you address me as Spiritual Father. As I have several times explained, when initiation is given, the Spiritual Master becomes the spiritual father and the gayatri mantra becomes the spiritual mother and thus second birth takes place. ”
(Letter to: Hrdayananda — Los Angeles 6 July, 1971)
“I am arranging how the Gayatri mantra should be given to the advanced students. You can simply let me know how many of our students are fit for this purpose. Unless one is strictly following the first initiation process and following the regulative principles, one should not be recommended for the Gayatri mantra.”
(Letter to: Yamuna, Gurudasa — Los Angeles 16 April, 1970)
Back to my quote from 2/9
…This is why there is NO permission for even a pure neophyte to initiate and accept disciples on his own behalf. A neophyte may be pure in his faith, but he does not have the realization to pass mantras potent to assist a disciple to realize any more than he has.”
Proof.
“As far as the time of dīkṣā (initiation) is concerned, everything depends on the position of the guru. As soon as a bona fide guru is received by chance or by a program, one should immediately take the opportunity to receive initiation.”
(Madhya 24.331 purport)
“Therefore, to approach a bona fide guru, or spiritual master, is essential. The bona fide spiritual master is he who has received the mercy of his guru, who in turn is bona fide because he has received the mercy of his guru. This is called the parampara system. Unless one follows this parampara system, the mantra one receives will be chanted for no purpose. Nowadays there are so many rascal gurus who manufacture their mantras as a process for material advancement, not spiritual advancement. Still, the mantra cannot be successful if it is manufactured. Mantras and the process of devotional service have special power, provided they are received from the authorized person. ”
(SB 8.16.24 : PURPORT)
Prabhupada: Well, first of all, thing is if the spiritual master is not bona fide, how his mantra can be bona fide? Your statement is contradictory. If you say the spiritual master is not bona fide, then how his mantra becomes bona fide? If he is bona fide, then his mantra is bona fide.
(Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.41-42 — Surat, December 23, 1970)
All mantras should be received through the authorized guru, and the disciple must satisfy the guru in all respects. (SB 6.8.42 purport)
Lord Siva voluntarily came to bless the sons of the King as well as do something beneficial for them. He personally chanted the mantra so that the mantra would be more powerful, and he advised that the mantra be chanted by the King’s sons (raja-putras). When a mantra is chanted by a great devotee, the mantra becomes more powerful. Although the Hare Krsna maha-mantra is powerful in itself, a disciple upon initiation receives the mantra from his spiritual master, for when the mantra is chanted by the spiritual master, it becomes more powerful. Lord Siva advised the sons of the King to hear him attentively, for inattentive hearing is offensive.
(SB: 4.24.32 purport)
Prabhupāda: “…So a mantra should be captured from the disciplic succession. According to Vedic injunction, sampradāya-vihīnā ye mantrās te nisphala mataḥ: “If the mantra does not come through disciplic succession, then it will not be active.” Viphala. Mantrās te viphalāḥ. Viphala means “will not produce result.”
(RC September 11, 1969, London, At Tittenhurst)
——————————————————————————-
So, again, you go ahead and initiate unlimited disciples on your own neophyte behalf based on the fact that you have free will to do it and therefore “CAN” do it, and expect to suffer the consequences as well as watch your disciples suffer as well. I don’t wish this burden on you, or curse you to it, I am just pointing out the facts
But if I hear you are doing so in an Iskcon temple or under the banner of Iskcon, I will stand up and call you a Bogi Yogi and great offender of the Founder Acarya of Iskcon. And if I am empowered to do so, I might just arrest your pompous ass.
Hare Krsna
Puranjana said: A neophyte cannot act as a diksha guru and accept disciples, because for starters he cannot absorb the sins of others. And moreover, if he artificially attempts to take that post, he will get sick, fall down, or both (as we have seen in spades) and cause havoc (as we have seen in spades),
George replied: I am sorry Puranjana but you are stating just the opposite of what Srila Prabhupada is stating. You are stating that a neophyte cannot accept disciples but Srila Prabhupada is clearly saying just the opposite, that a neophyte can accept disciples:
Mark and Srila Prabhuapda defend Puranjana: “First what Puranjana meant was that a neophyte cannot properly deal with the sins that he absorbs, because anyone who accepts a disciple takes absorbs the sinful reactions. Second and most importanlty, Puranjana said “DIKSA GURU”. There is a difference between accepting Siksa disciples (which anyone can do) and becoming someone’s Initiating Spiritual master. (Especially in an Asrama where the Initiating Spiritual Master has reserved the worship for himself.”
PROOF
A neophyte is not a preacher and is not powerful enough (empowered by the Lord) to deal with sins of others.
“Accepting an unlimited number of devotees or disciples is very risky for one who is not a preacher. According to Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, a preacher has to accept many disciples to expand the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. This is risky because when a spiritual master accepts a disciple, he naturally accepts the disciple’s sinful activities and their reactions. Unless he is very powerful, he cannot assimilate all the sinful reactions of his disciples. Thus if he is not powerful, he has to suffer the consequences, for one is forbidden to accept many disciples.”
(Madhya 22.118 : PURPORT)
“So Kṛṣṇa’s so powerful that He can immediately take up all the sins of others and immediately make it gone. But when a living entity plays the part on behalf of Kṛṣṇa, he also takes the responsibility of these sinful activities of his devotee. So to become a guru is not an easy task. You see? He has to take all the poisons and absorb. So sometimes, because he’s not Kṛṣṇa, so sometimes there is some trouble. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu forbidden that “Don’t make many śiṣyas, many disciples.” But for preaching work we have to accept many disciples, for expanding preaching. Never mind we suffer. But that’s a fact. The spiritual master has to take the responsibility of all the sinful activities of his disciples. So to make many disciple is a risky job unless he’s able to assimilate all the sins.
(Talk with Bob Cohen — February 27-29, 1972, Mayapura)
SRILA BHAKTISIDDHANTA DIDN’T EVEN WANT TO ABSORB THE SINS OF NEOPHYTES
“I was not very much interested in these matters because my Guru Maharaja liked very much publication of books than constructing big, big temples and creating some neophyte disciples. As soon as he saw that His neophyte disciples were increasing in number, He immediately decided to leave this world. To accept disciples means to take up the responsibility of absorbing the sinful reaction of life of the disciple.”
(Letter to: Satsvarupa, Uddhava — Los Angeles 27 July, 1970)
AND WHO IS THE OFFENSELESS AND SINLESS ONE WHO CAN GIVE DIVYA JNANAM AS A DIKSA GURU AND GIVE THE SIKSA TO GO WITH IT AND BE POWERFUL ENOUGH TO ABSORB AND ASSIMILATE SINS WITHOUT GOING MAD?
“One cannot be situated in the devotional service of the Lord unless one is free from sinful life. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.28): “Persons who have acted piously in previous lives and in this life and whose sinful actions are completely eradicated are freed from the duality of delusion, and they engage themselves in My service with determination.” A person who is already cleansed of all tinges of sinful life engages without deviation or duality of purpose in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. In this age, although people are greatly sinful, simply chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra can relieve them from the reactions of their sins…
…If one always chants the holy name Kṛṣṇa, gradually one is freed from all reactions of sinful life, provided he chants offenselessly and does not commit more sinful activities on the strength of chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. In this way one is purified, and his devotional service causes the arousal of his dormant love of God. Simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and not committing sinful activities and offenses, one’s life is purified, and thus one comes to the fifth stage of perfection, or engagement in the loving service of the Lord.”
(Adi 8.26 PURPORT)
Prabhupāda: Yes. (corrects a word ) You first accept these ten different methods. So explain that.
Pradyumna: Guru-pādāśrayaḥ. “First one must take shelter of the lotus feet of a spiritual master.” Tasmāt kṛṣṇa-dīkṣādi-śikṣaṇam. Tasmāt, “from him,” kṛṣṇa-dīkṣādi-śikṣaṇam, “one should take kṛṣṇa-dīkṣā, initiation, and śikṣā.”
Prabhupāda: Dīkṣā means divya-jñānaṁ kṣapayati iti dīkṣā.(?) Which explains the divya-jñāna, transcendental, that is dīkṣā. Di, divya, dīkṣāṇām. Dīkṣā. So divya-jñāna, transcendental knowledge… If you don’t accept a spiritual master, how you’ll get transcen… You’ll be taught here and there, here and there, and waste time. Waste time for the teacher and waste your valuable time. Therefore you have to be guided by an expert spiritual master. Read it.
Pradyumna: Kṛṣṇa-dīkṣādi-śikṣaṇam.
Prabhupāda: Śikṣaṇam. We have to learn. If you don’t learn, how you’ll make progress? Then?
(Room Conversation — January 27, 1977, Bhuvanesvara)
And for understanding that superior identity we require superior knowledge, not ordinary knowledge. Divya-jñāna hṛde prakāśito. So this is the duty of the guru, to awaken that divya-jñāna. Divya-jñāna. And because guru enlightens that divya-jñāna, he is worshiped. That is required…
…One who has got this divya-jñāna, vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā, that is mahātmā. But that is very, very rare. Otherwise, mahātmā LIKE ME, they are loitering in the street. That is. So you should always remember this word, divya-jñāna hṛde prakāśito. And because the spiritual master enlightens the divya-jñāna, one feels obliged to him. Yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādo yasya prasādān na gatiḥ kuto ‘pi **. **So this guru-pūjā essential.**
**As the Deity worship essential… It is not cheap adoration. It is the process of enlightening the divya-jñāna.**
(Lecture — Bombay, April 1, 1977)
“These forms are called arcā-mūrtis, or forms of the Lord which can be easily appreciated by the common man. The Lord is transcendental to our mundane senses. He cannot be seen with our present eyes, nor can He be heard with our present ears. To the degree that we have entered into the service of the Lord or to the proportion to which our lives are freed from sins, we can perceive the Lord. But even though we are not free from sins, the Lord is kind enough to allow us the facility of seeing Him in His arcā-mūrtis in the temple. The Lord is all-powerful, and therefore He is able to accept our service by presentation of His arcā form. No one, therefore, should foolishly think the arcā in the temple to be an idol. Such an arcā-mūrti is not an idol but the Lord Himself, and to the proportion to which one is free from sins, he is able to know the significance of the arcā-mūrti. The guidance of a pure devotee is therefore always required.”
SB 3.1.17 : PURPORT
So, George, are you ready to accept some Neophyte Guru Puja in front of Srila Prabhupada’s murti in your local Iskcon temple?
I DARE YOU.
GBC STATEMENT MARCH 9 2013
This is what Bhakta George is saying, neophyte gurus are not saksadhari – “as good as God” so to speak, but, have to be checked 24/7 by an inspecting authority. Or as the church has it for their priests, a consistory, advisory board, in order to sort out black sheep. Of course, this is the church’s procedure for priests.
Whereas in Vaishnavism we deal not with priests but with direct representatives of God, diksha-gurus, members of the parampara. GBC position paper is insofar surprisingly that it is hard to believe that this took them 35 years to find out that there their gurus can fall-down at any moment.
And, their level of realization is to carefully follow the rules and regulations and repeat Prabhupada’s teachings. In other words, just like a child who repeats a word is correct, although not understanding what is the meaning of this word.
In Vedabase we find this level of realization described as:
(NBS 1 – The Value Of Devotion)
In sum, above Srila Prabhupada highlights the position of a neophyte devotee where there is every possibility of his falling down.
Why and how the GBC arrives at this conclusion to call those neophytes, “SPIRITUAL MASTER” remains rather unreproducible.
The very term, spiritual master implicates expertly, masterly. If there is such a high rate of failures as Bhakta George repeatedly laments what has this to do with master?
Isn’t this rather apprentice, trainee, aspirant, claimant (= priest)?
“It is also an offense to consider an empowered Vaiṣṇava an object of disciplinary action. It is offensive to try to give him advice or to correct him. One can distinguish between a neophyte Vaiṣṇava and an advanced Vaiṣṇava by their activities. The advanced Vaiṣṇava is always situated as the spiritual master, and the neophyte is always considered his disciple. The spiritual master must not be subjected to the advice of a disciple, nor should a spiritual master be obliged to take instructions from those who are not his disciples. This is the sum and substance of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s advice in the sixth verse.” NOI 6
My dear Karandhara,
Please accept my blessings. I beg to thank you for your letter dated January 21st, 1976.
The photos of my murti are very nice. The murti of the Spiritual Master should be treated as good as the Deity. Saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastrair, uktas tatha bhavyata eva sadbhih/kintu prabhor yah priya eva tasya **, The guru should be treated as good as God. This is stated in all the sastras. The difference is that God is master-God and guru is servant-God. So the installation ceremony for such a murti should be similar to that done for other Deities. All Temples can have this Deity if they like. But Temples which have only Panca-tattva painting worship should not be given this Deity.
You should make a murti of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and then they may be worshiped together as is now being done in our Krishna Balarama Temple. They should be placed with Gaura Nitai—Guru Gauranga.
(Letter to: Karandhara — Mayapur 29 January, 1976)
Please accept my blessings. I have received your letter dated Jan. 3rd and have noted the contents. It is nice that you are enthusiastically engaged in New York. I have no objection to your worshiping my murti for Guru Puja. But for placing in the temple there must be a pair of murtis, (my Guru Maharaja must be there) as in Krsna-Balarama Mandir, and they must be permanently installed. This may be done in accord with the temple authorities. Or else you may worship one murti of myself privately in your room.
(Letter to: Sudama — Allahabad 13 January, 1977)
————————————————————————————————————–
Of course all of George’s neophyte Diksa gurus are within their sovereign liberated jurisdiction to scoff at any attempt by the GBC to influence their independent decisions whereby they whimsically order their disciples hither and tither, to “make adjustments” to whatever formal practices suit their fancy, after all, those disciples aren’t bowing at their Diksa Guru’s lotus feet and singing their glories in their pranama mantras for nothin.
Just order your new disciple to use his cellphone to snap a photo of your lotus eyed visage, produce a high res pic on your brand new laser printer, and slap that thing over the picture of Srila Prabhupada, and whamo, instant murti to be worshipped!
Oh JOY!
Actually the saying is “The trouble with new books is that they stop you from reading OLD books.” Sorry about that.
“So, again, you go ahead and initiate unlimited disciples on your own neophyte behalf based on the fact that you have free will to do it and therefore “CAN” do it, and expect to suffer the consequences as well as watch your disciples suffer as well. I don’t wish this burden on you, or curse you to it, I am just pointing out the facts
But if I hear you are doing so in an Iskcon temple or under the banner of Iskcon, I will stand up and call you a Bhogi Yogi and great offender of the Founder Acarya of Iskcon. And if I am empowered to do so, I might just arrest your pompous ass.”
Pot, kettle, black, yo momma Bhakta Mark.
This is another example of Bhakta Mark’s employment of logical fallacies in a rhetorical manner in an attempt to sway sentiments and form negative opinions about me. It is complete B.S. as neither Bhakta Mark nor anyone else has ever heard me even suggest that I had any desire or intention of gaining disciples. No, the only thing that I have following me is my ass and even getting that back home to Godhead is a challenge that I fear is far beyond my own capabilities. More than anything else I would like to accept Srila Prabhupada as my initiating guru, who wouldn’t? But I do not personally feel that it would be respectful to him or of his disciples for me to accept Rtvik initiation. That’s just my own personal feeling, not to be construed as an advice to anyone.
As far as your threats Bhakta Mark another. In this case he employs the classical straw man argument, misrepresenting me in such a way as to attempt to make you think that I am motivated by a desire to gain disciples.
First of all I have never, ever, anywhere on or off of the web.
Sorry Bhakta Mark but I have only one thing following me and that is my ass, and getting that back home to Godhead is more than enough of a challenge for me.
Besides, I am not even a member of your, or should I say the International Society of Krsna Consciousness and my days of dreaming that I could ever become a devotee were long, long ago.
OK George prabhu, you may not want to be a guru yourself, but your idea of neophytes being gurus is enabling and empowering many other fools to take that post. You are their co-dependent enabler. As Sulochana once said, “All bogus dictators have their speech writers.” Without support from the neophyte guru groupies, ok like Rocana, none of this mess would have EVER happened. He enabled them, and shouted us down for protesting, and he still is, and you are giving us no small amount of grief, because you are mainly with Rocana’s idea of enabling neophytes as messiahs. OK guess what, neophytes cannot absorb the sins of a flea, or even a microbe, they are not empowered to do that, they cannot even nullify their own sins, not to speak of another’s. ys pd
George A Smith: I’m no Einstein Mahesh, but I’ll give it a shot.
Mahesh: George you are in the mode of IGNORANCE so your “shot” is a waste of time:
740615rc.par Conversations
Yogesvara: “Is there some, any qualities, in the sense that some people have more receptivity towards the divine than other people?”
Prabhupada: Yes. That I explained, sattva-guna, rajo-guna, tamo-guna. Those who are in sattva-guna, they can understand easily. Those who are in rajo-guna, they have got difficulty. AND THOSE WHO ARE IN TAMO-GUNA, THEY CANNOT.
See if you can follow this:
Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
MAHA-BHAGAVATA-srestho
brahmano vai gurur nrnam
sarvesam eva lokanam
asau pujyo yatha harih
maha-kula-prasuto ‘pi
sarva-yajnesu DIKSITAH
sahasra-sakhadhyayi ca
na guruh syad avaisnavah
((The guru MUST be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru MUST be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people. ….When one has attained the topmost position of MAHA-BHAGAVATA, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru.))
Note: the word DIKSITAH refers to DIKSA. This means ONLY Mahabhagavata is capable to GIVE DIKSA. FORMALITY is of giving the holy name 1st and 2nd initiation is conducted by RITVIK on BEHALF of Srila Prabhupada THE DIKSA GURU.
761016iv.cha Conversations
Interviewer: What is the procedure of the movement? Do you initiate yourself all the disciples or do your other disciples also do that?
Prabhupada: Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge. (break) …knowledge. INITIATION IS FORMALITY. JUST LIKE YOU GO TO A SCHOOL FOR KNOWLEDGE, AND ADMISSION IS FORMALITY. THAT IS NOT VERY IMPORTANT THING.
Question: Why is DIKSA so important?
Answer: Diksa PROCESS entails the factor of REVEALATION of your RELATIONSHIP(SVARUP also called Constitutional position) with Krsna. Once you have have your relationship you have the freedom of IMMORTALITY. This means you do NOT transmigrate to other bodies. OTHERWISE by force of Karma you MUST accept another body. In simple terms – if you KNOW your SVARUPA your Karma is burned-off.
This is NOT easy – it can take MANY births.
Note: it is to be understood that he has BURNED UP THE REACTIONS of his work by perfect knowledge of his CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION AS THE ETERNAL SERVITOR of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Bg 4.19 P Transcendental Knowledge
Because the person in Krsna consciousness is devoid of all kinds of sense-gratificatory propensities, it is to be understood that he has burned up the reactions of his work by perfect knowledge of his constitutional position as the eternal servitor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
NoI 5
A madhyama-adhikari has received SPIRITUAL INITIATION from the spiritual master and has been FULLY ENGAGED BY HIM IN THE TRANSCENDENTAL LOVING SERVICE OF THE LORD.
Antya 4.192 T Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
DIKSA-KALE bhakta kare atma-samarpana
sei-kale krsna tare kare atma-sama
“AT THE TIME OF INITIATION, when a devotee fully surrenders unto the service of the Lord, Krsna accepts him to be as good as Himself.
Antya 4.193 Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
“When the devotee’s body is thus transformed into spiritual existence, the devotee, in that transcendental body, renders service to the lotus feet of the Lord.
Antya 4.194 Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
” ‘The living entity who is subjected to birth and death, when he gives up all material activities dedicating his life to Me for executing My order, and thus acts according to My direction, at that time he reaches the platform OF IMMORTALITY, AND BECOMES FIT TO ENJOY THE SPIRITUAL BLISS OF EXCHANGE OF LOVING MELLOWS WITH ME.’
Antya 4.194 Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
This is a quotation from Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.29.34). At the time of initiation, a devotee gives up all his material conceptions. THEREFORE, BEING IN TOUCH WITH THE SUPREME PERSONALITY OF GODHEAD, HE IS SITUATED ON THE TRANSCENDENTAL PLATFORM. THUS HAVING ATTAINED KNOWLEDGE AND THE SPIRITUAL PLATFORM, HE ALWAYS ENGAGES IN THE SERVICE OF THE SPIRITUAL BODY OF KRSNA. When one is freed from material connections in this way, his body immediately becomes spiritual, and Krsna accepts His service. However, Krsna does not accept anything from a person with a material conception of life.
Note: ONLY a Mahabhagavata CAN TRANSFER Krnsa in anothers heart: DIKSA
your constitutional position ETERNAL SERVITIOR (SVARUPA) IS REVEALED when YOU SEE Krsna.
When it is dark you can NOT see who YOU are but when SUN comes out YOU can SEE who YOU are.
SB 10.2.18 P Prayers by the Demigods for Lord Krsna in the Womb
As indicated here by the word manastah, the Supreme Personality of Godhead was TRANSFERRED from the core of Vasudeva’s mind or heart to the core of the heart of Devaki. We should note carefully that the Lord was transferred to Devaki not by the ordinary way for a human being, but by diksa, initiation. THUS THE IMPORTANCE OF INITIATION IS MENTIONED HERE. UNLESS ONE IS INITIATED BY THE RIGHT PERSON, WHO ALWAYS CARRIES WITHIN HIS HEART THE SUPREME PERSONALITY OF GODHEAD, ONE CANNOT ACQUIRE THE POWER TO CARRY THE SUPREME GODHEAD WITHIN THE CORE OF ONE’S OWN HEART.
SB 4.29.79 P Talks Between Narada and King Pracinabarhi
SELF-REALIZATION, UNDERSTANDING ONESELF AS BRAHMAN, OR SPIRIT SOUL, IS VERY DIFFICULT IN THE MATERIAL CONDITION. However, if we accept the devotional service of the Lord, the Lord will gradually reveal Himself. In this way the progressive devotee will gradually realize his spiritual position. We cannot see anything in the darkness of night, not even our own selves, but when there is sunshine we can see not only the sun but everything within the world as well.
740427BG.HYD Lectures
So actually, this is the problem of living entities. That knowledge can be acquired in the human form of life and it can be solved, not that simply we get the knowledge, but it can be solved. So therefore, real business of human life, to understand oneself, that is called self-realization, brahma-bhuta, and find out the remedy and act accordingly. That is the mission of human life. Not like to dance like cats and dogs with a nice dress. That is not human life. This is the subject matter of Bhagavad-gita, our whole Vedic instruction. Vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedyah. This is God consciousness, Krsna consciousness, or self-realization. SELF-REALIZATION MEANS EITHER YOU SEE YOURSELF OR SEE THE SUPREME LORD, EITHER WAY. BUT WITHOUT SEEING THE SUPREME LORD, YOU CANNOT SEE YOURSELF. Just like without seeing the sun in the darkness… Just like it is now night. There is no sun. So I cannot see also. In darkness I cannot see also myself. But when there is sun in the morning, I can see the sun and I can see myself also. This is the theory. So if we want to understand ourselves rightly, that “I am spirit soul,” aham brahmasmi, then we must take to Krsna consciousness.
69-01-22. Letter: Vilasavigraha
IN REGARD TO YOUR NEXT QUESTION, SELF REALIZATION MEANS GOD REALIZATION, AND GOD REALIZATION MEANS SELF REALIZATION. JUST LIKE TO SEE THE SUN MEANS TO SEE ONESELF, AND TO SEE ONESELF MEANS TO SEE THE SUN. SELF REALIZATION DEPENDS COMPLETELY UPON GOD REALIZATION, OR ELSE IT IS NOT COMPLETE. ONE MUST KNOW HIS RELATIONSHIP TO THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH TO FULLY KNOW HIS POSITION.
Note:Srila Prabhupada gives Divya-jnana(DIKSA). Divya means TRANSCENDENTAL and Jnana means KNOWLEDGE Hrde means heart and Prokasito means revealed just as in prakasa – manifested Krsna becomes manifest in the heart of the Pure Devotee.
760711CC.NY Lectures
Prabhupada: Divya-jnana hrde prokasito. What is that divya-jnana? Divya-jnana is that we are all SERVANT OF KRSNA, and our only business is to serve Krsna. Divya-jnana. This is divya-jnana. It is not difficult at all. Simply we have… We have become servant of so many things–servant of society, servant of community, servant of country, servant of wife, servant of children, servant of dog and so many. “Now let me become servant of Krsna.” This is divya-jnana. Diksa. Diksa means from this divya-jnana. That is di. And ksa means ksapayati, expands.
When at the stage of Madhyama Adhikari one is RECEPIENT of THAT Diksa in the HEART from SRILA PRABHUPADA he becomes a SERVANT OF KRSNA. He relishes a particular mellow (Rasa) of his relationship with Krsna. This point HE SEES KRSNA and HIS RELATIONSHIP (svarupa) is established. So it is not so CHEAP to be Diksa guru.
Madhya 8.83 Talks Between Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Ramananda Raya
The purport in presenting this verse necessitates explaining the comparative positions of the transcendental mellows known as santa, dasya, sakhya, vatsalya and madhurya. All these rasas, or mellows, are situated on the transcendental platform. Pure devotees take shelter of one of them and thus progress in spiritual life. ACTUALLY ONE CAN TAKE SHELTER OF SUCH SPIRITUAL MELLOWS ONLY WHEN ONE IS COMPLETELY UNCONTAMINATED BY MATERIAL ATTACHMENT. WHEN ONE IS COMPLETELY FREE FROM MATERIAL ATTACHMENT, THE FEELINGS OF THE TRANSCENDENTAL MELLOWS ARE AWAKENED IN THE HEART OF THE DEVOTEE. THAT IS SVARUPA-SIDDHI, THE PERFECTION OF ONE’S ETERNAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SUPREME LORD. Svarupa-siddhi, the eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord, may be situated in one of the transcendental mellows.
Note: ONE spiritual master who CAN transfer krsna in your heart is Maha Bhagavata kanistha is incapable and Madhyama is the RECIPIENT of Diksa.
KB 80 The Meeting of Lord Krsna with Sudama Brahmana
Our next spiritual master is he who initiates us into transcendental knowledge, and he is to be worshiped as much as I am. The spiritual master may be more than one. The spiritual master who instructs the disciples about spiritual matters is called siksa-guru, and the spiritual master who initiates the disciple is called diksa-guru. Both of them are My representatives. THERE MAY BE MANY SPIRITUAL MASTERS WHO INSTRUCT, BUT THE INITIATOR SPIRITUAL MASTER IS ONE.
760805BG.PAR Lectures
Prabhupada: Yes, that arrangement will be done, you go on with your business. We are singing this song daily. Why do you forget? Cakhu-dan dilo jei **janme janme prabhu sei**. ONE WHO HAS OPENED THE EYES, **HE’LL REMAIN MY MASTER LIFE AFTER LIFE**.
Note: Srila Prabhupada is WITH US TO GUIDE US through difficult journey of transmigration cycle to attaining Back to Godhead IF we follow him. Bilvamangal Thakura’s Spiritual master came thru a prostitute to deliver him so Srila Prabhupada is also SO POWERFUL to help us:
SB 3.15.24 P Description of the Kingdom of God
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO GO BACK TO GODHEAD IN ONE LIFE, but in the human form one should at least understand the goal of life and begin Krsna consciousness.
NOI 5
“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master.” (NOI5)
Some devotees are taking this above quote to mean that Kanistha can give Diksa. This is NOT what Srila Prabhupada says. There is NO mention of Diksa by kanistha. What it exactly says is about accepting DISCIPLES. Then suggests very strongly 2 points:
1)”..they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master.”
2)“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari.
The question is can a Kanistha give DIKSA from this quote? The answer is NO!
So how can we establish that Kanistha does NOT give diksa?
Kanistha is a QUALIFIED Brahmana. But even such a QUALIFIED Brahmana is in MATERIAL CONTAMINATION. And because he has MATERIAL CONTAMINATION he does NOT have Transcendental Knowledge. What you do NOT have you can NOT give. And it is Transcendental Knowledge that frees one from ALL MATERIAL CONTAMINATION.
Definition of Diksa:
Madhya 15.108 The Lord Accepts Prasada at the House of Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya
Srila Jiva Gosvami explains diksa in his Bhakti-sandarbha (283):
divyam jnanam yato dadyat
kuryat papasya sanksayam
tasmad dikseti sa prokta
desikais tattva-kovidaih
“Diksa is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activity. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows this process as diksa.”
Madhya 4.111 Sri Madhavendra Puri’ s Devotional Service
Diksa actually means initiating a disciple with transcendental knowledge by which he becomes freed from all material contamination.
So here we see from above definition of Diksa quotes:
1) Transcendental Knowledge awakened, initiated
2) becomes freed from all material contamination; vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activity
Now ask a simple question HOW can a Brahmana(Kanistha) who is NOT freed from MATERIAL CONTAMINATION GIVE DIKSA -BY WHICH- ONE BECOMES FREED FROM **ALL** MATERIAL CONTAMINATION?
Just take a look at how contradictory and stupid this looks:
Q1) HOW can a Brahmana (Kanistha) who is HIMSELF material contaminated free another person from **ALL** MATERIAL CONTAMINATION?
SB 9.19.25 P King Yayati Achieves Liberation
The word vidhuta, meaning “cleansed,” is very significant. Everyone in this material world is contaminated (karanam guna-sango ‘sya). Because we are in a material condition, we are contaminated either by sattva-guna, by rajo-guna or by tamo-guna. Even if one becomes a qualified brahmana in the mode of goodness (sattva-guna), he is still materially contaminated. One must come to the platform of suddha-sattva, transcending the sattva-guna. Then one is vidhuta-trilinga, cleansed of the contamination caused by the three modes of material nature.
Q2) If a Brahmana(Kanistha) had Transcendental Knowledge then why is contaminated by goodness(sattva-guna)?
Diksa is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activity.
Diksa actually means initiating a disciple with transcendental knowledge by which he becomes freed from all material contamination
Q3) So HOW can a Kanistha(Brahmana) who HIMSELF is material contaminated does NOT have Transcendental Knowledge give another person Transcendental Knowledge to free him?
Common-sense: What you do NOT have you CAN NOT give to others.
770214r2.may Conversations
Prabhupada: Vaisnava is not so easy. The varnasrama-dharma should be established to become a Vaisnava. It is not so easy to become Vaisnava.
Hari-sauri: No, it’s not a cheap thing.
Prabhupada: Yes. Therefore this should be made. Vaisnava, to become Vaisnava, is not so easy. If Vaisnava, to become Vaisnava is so easy, why so many fall down, fall down? It is not easy. The sannyasa is for the highest qualified brahmana. And simply by dressing like a Vaisnava, that is… fall down.
Hari-sauri: So the varnasrama system is like for the kanisthas, Kanistha-adhikari.
Prabhupada: Kanistha?
Hari-sauri: When one is only on the platform of neophyte.
Prabhupada: Yes. Yes. Kanistha-adhikari, yes.
Hari-sauri: Varnasrama system is beneficial.
Prabhupada: Kanistha-adhikari means he must be a brahmana. That is kanistha-adhikari. The spiritual life, kanistha-adhikari, means he must be a qualified brahmana. That is kanistha. What is esteemed as very high position in the material world, brahmana, that is kanistha-adhikari.
arcayam eva haraye
pujam yah sraddhayehate
na tad-bhaktesu canyesu
sa bhaktah prakrtah smrtah
The brahmana means from the material stage gradually he is elevated to the spiritual stage. And below the brahmana there is no question of Vaisnava.
Hari-sauri: No question of?
Prabhupada: Vaisnavism.
760206mw.may Conversations
Dayananda: But what about the persons who may be a little bit devoted but who have not achieved that unalloyed devotion?
Prabhupada: Kanistha-adhikari. They are not devotees, but they are called bhaktabhasa. There is some signs of bhakti. Actually they are not bhakta. Bhaktabhasa. Abhasa. Abhasa means a simple, a little light.
Hrdayananda: So devotee really means one who has love for Krsna.
Prabhupada: Yes, unalloyed, without any condition. Anyabhilasita-sunyam, zero, all other, that “I am this, I am that, I am jnani, I am yogi, I am karmi, I am minister, I am king”–all these are thinking like that, they’re all nonsense. “I am servant of Krsna”–that is greatness. Jivera svarupa haya nitya-krsna-dasa. That is self-realization, atma-tattvam.
Madhya 20.59 Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Instructs Sanatana Gosvami in the Science
PURPORT
This verse is spoken by Prahlada Maharaja in Srimad-Bhagavatam (7.9.10). A brahmana is supposed to be qualified with twelve qualities. As stated in the Mahabharata:
dharmas ca satyam ca damas tapas ca
amatsaryam hris titiksanasuya
yajnas ca danam ca dhrtih srutam ca
vratani vai dvadasa brahmanasya
“A brahmana must be perfectly religious. He must be truthful, and he must be able to control his senses. He must execute severe austerities, and he must be detached, humble and tolerant. He must not envy anyone, and he must be expert in performing sacrifices and giving whatever he has in charity. He must be fixed in devotional service and expert in the knowledge of the Vedas. These are the twelve qualifications for a brahmana.”
Bhagavad-gita describes the brahminical qualities in this way:
samo damas tapah saucam
ksantir arjavam eva ca
jnanam vijnanam astikyam
brahma-karma svabhava-jam
“Peacefulness, self-control, austerity, purity, tolerance, honesty, wisdom, knowledge, and religiousness–these are the qualities by which the brahmanas work.” (Bg. 18.42)
In the Muktaphala-tika, it is said:
samo damas tapah saucam
ksanty-arjava-virakta yah
jnana-vijnana-santosah
satyastikye dvisad gunah
“Mental equilibrium, sense control, austerity, cleanliness, tolerance, simplicity, detachment, theoretical and practical knowledge, satisfaction, truthfulness and firm faith in the Vedas are the twelve qualities of a brahmana.”
730828BG.LON Lectures
So first of all, we have to become brahmana. Then Vaisnava. Brahmana simply knows that “I am spirit soul,” aham brahmasmi. Brahma janati iti brahmana. Brahma-bhutah prasannatma. By such knowledge one becomes prasannatma. Means relieved. As you feel relief… When there is burden on your head, and the burden is taken away you feel relieved, similarly, this ignorance that “I am this body” is a great burden, a burden upon us. So when you get out of this burden, then you feel relieved. Brahma-bhutah prasannatma. Means when actually one understands that “I am not this body; I am soul,” then he has to work so hard for maintaining this body, so he gets relief that “Why I am working so hard for this lump of material things? Let me execute my real necessity of life, spiritual life.” That is great relief. That is great relief. Brahma-bhutah prasannatma na socati na kanksati. The relief means there is hankering, no more lamentation. These are the brahma-bhutah.
SB 1.2.20 P Divinity and Divine Service
The very same thing is confirmed herein in the above words. No ordinary man, or even one who has attained success in human life, can know scientifically or perfectly the Personality of Godhead. Perfection of human life is attained when one can understand that he is not the product of matter but is in fact spirit. And as soon as one understands that he has nothing to do with matter, he at once ceases his material hankerings and becomes enlivened as a spiritual being. This attainment of success is possible when one is above the modes of passion and ignorance, or, in other words, when one is actually a brahmana by qualification. A BRAHMANA IS THE SYMBOL OF SATTVA-GUNA, OR THE MODE OF GOODNESS. AND OTHERS, WHO ARE NOT IN THE MODE OF GOODNESS, ARE EITHER KSATRIYAS, VAISYAS, SUDRAS OR LESS THAN THE SUDRAS. THE BRAHMINICAL STAGE IS THE HIGHEST STAGE OF HUMAN LIFE BECAUSE OF ITS GOOD QUALITIES. SO ONE CANNOT BE A DEVOTEE UNLESS ONE AT LEAST QUALIFIES AS A BRAHMANA. The devotee is already a brahmana by action. But that is not the end of it. AS REFERRED TO ABOVE, SUCH A BRAHMANA HAS TO BECOME A VAISNAVA IN FACT TO BE ACTUALLY IN THE TRANSCENDENTAL STAGE. A PURE VAISNAVA IS A LIBERATED SOUL AND IS TRANSCENDENTAL EVEN TO THE POSITION OF A BRAHMANA. IN THE MATERIAL STAGE EVEN A BRAHMANA IS ALSO A CONDITIONED SOUL BECAUSE ALTHOUGH IN THE BRAHMINICAL STAGE THE CONCEPTION OF BRAHMAN OR TRANSCENDENCE IS REALIZED, SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUPREME LORD IS LACKING. ONE HAS TO SURPASS THE BRAHMINICAL STAGE AND REACH THE VASUDEVA STAGE TO UNDERSTAND THE PERSONALITY OF GODHEAD KRSNA.
Divya-jnana means : Divya TRANSCENDENTAL and Jnana means KNOWLEDGE
So UNLESS one is on TRANSCENDENTAL PLATFORM means Uttama Adhikari (Maha Bhagavata) there can NOT be any question of Transcendental Knowledge of ones CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION coming FROM him. THIS EFFECTIVLY DISQUALIFIES KANISTHA AND MADHYAM (MIDDLE STAGE) FROM GIVING DIKSA — AUTOMATICALLY.
Hrde means heart and Prokasito means revealed just as in prakasa – manifested Krsna becomes manifest in the heart of the Pure Devotee.
760711CC.NY Lectures
Prabhupada: Divya-jnana hrde prokasito. What is that divya-jnana? Divya-jnana is that we are all servant of Krsna, and our only business is to serve Krsna. Divya-jnana. This is divya-jnana. It is not difficult at all. Simply we have… We have become servant of so many things–servant of society, servant of community, servant of country, servant of wife, servant of children, servant of dog and so many. “Now let me become servant of Krsna.” This is divya-jnana. Diksa. Diksa means from this divya-jnana. That is di. And ksa means ksapayati, expands.
When at the stage of Madhyama Adhikari one is RECEPIENT of THAT Diksa in the HEART from SRILA PRABHUPADA he becomes a SERVANT OF KRSNA. He relishes a particular mellow (Rasa) of his relationship with Krsna. This point HE SEES KRSNA and HIS RELATIONSHIP (svarupa) is established. So it is not so CHEAP to be Diksa guru.
Sorry for all that hyperbole Bhakta George. Your advocating such a potential in Iskcon was bad enough, but when you refused to accept reams of Srila Prabhupada’s own Vani that shows otherwise, and a logical presentation to support it (outside of the admitted hyperbole and subtle ad hominem), I couldn’t help but think that there was the smallest itsy bitsy chance that you would one day act on this position that you seemed so attached to inspite of evidence to the contrary.
I am happy to hear your affirmation to the contrary.
As far as your “feeling” that accepting Srila Prabhupada as your Initiating Guru would be disrespectful to him, perhaps you could remember the story of Vasudeva Datta, and accept that Srila Prabhupada demonstrated a similar penchant for distributing the Lord’s mercy, and since the preponderance of the evidence shows that HE WANTED IT TO BE SO, maybe you should respect his desire to help you purify your chanting and devotional service by his offer.
I too am waiting patiently to be pure enough to receive a proper Ritvik initiation from a humble soul who I can also feel good about serving along side of and even taking some instruction from, and perhaps even get to know the Ritvik who authorized it.
The last thing I am going to do is to treat initiation as JUST A FORMALITY, and have some rascal whisper mantras into my ear, and support his neophyte crusade with my time and money, even for one day. Not gonna happen.
Anyhow, please accept my apologies for my sometimes harsh and brusque manner. I have a long way to go.
Hare Krsna
ys
B.Mark
This is unbelievable. Here is what Bhakta George A. Smith writes in his own comments about himself:
“….But I do not personally feel that it would be respectful to him or of his disciples for me to accept Rtvik initiation. That’s just my own personal feeling, not to be construed as an advice to anyone.”
Bhakta George lives in his own world of thinking, feeling and willing in a very subtly material ocean of his FREE WILL and yet he dares to write so much against the instructions of Srila Prabhupada whom he feels that it would not be respectful to him or his disciples for him to accept Ritvik initiation instructions of Srila Prabhupada.
I wonder whom Bhakta George is following? What is his purpose of writing so much which I find totally waste of not only his energy and time but also for every one of US.
May the blessing of our Jagat Guru Srila Prabhupada be upon us all.
Hari BOL.
YS……. Amar Puri.
George is a typical fence sitter. He is with the Prabhupadanugas, that is — when he is not against them. He agrees that Srila Prabhupada should be the guru, except when he says that the neophytes can be too. He is against Rocana, except when he is for Rocana’s ideas, and so on and so forth. All over the map. He is just trying to stir things up, also sometimes called bait and switch technique. The reason ISKCON is in such a giant muddle these days — is because it has many of these fence sitting — masters of contrary-ness — muddlers around. They are not really committed to anything. They could be on either side of any given issue at any given time, except they are all consistent at one thing, making trouble for the Prabhupadanugas. Its a diversion to keep the Prabhupadanugas engaged in senseless activity, because George does not even want to be convinced, he wants to simply harass, and he is expert at that, just like many similar of their ilk. I hate to say this but, he has been playing with us the whole time. ys pd
Pic above from a newspaper – people expect social gap in society should be overcome by building bridges. Gaudiya Vaishnavas don’t worry so much about poor or rich but still, bridges to be on a conciliatory path among Lord Caitanya’s followers aren’t so much beside the point?
Basically all members of meanwhile dozens of Vaishnava groups agree, they became devotees because of Prabhupada’s books, Prabhupada is a pure devotee and Prabhupada did a great job to spread Krishna-bhakti all over the world.
But there are a few points what caused Western Vaishnavism go to pieces.
1) ISKCON’s corrupt leadership and fail to do something (till present day)
2) Everybody should go out and sell books for the rest of life
3) People left ISKCON because they figured it is about pseudo celibacy
So far, after so many years present Vaishnava mentality is that all a very happy how it is right now. No attempt is being made to reconcile all those fractions and splinter groups. Of course, concerning spiritual projects for uplifting suffering humanity we don’t see very much in the West. Rather vice versa, past 30 years kali-yuga seems to be expanding rapidly has swept through all Vaishnava camps leaving them to live below the breadline.
What to speak of living Prabhupada’s spirit, bringing kali-yuga to its knees….
In sum, things have to get worse in order to have modern Vaishnavas to cooperate. As Srimad-Bhagavatam explains [SB 12.2.8] this will surely happen, we just have to be patient.
Puranjan Prabhu: George is a typical fence sitter. He is with the Prabhupadanugas, that is — when he is not against them. He agrees that Srila Prabhupada should be the guru, except when he says that the neophytes can be too.
Mahesh: that is a very good analysis of George. What I find is when they want to REPLACE Srila Prabhupada as Diksa guru we KNOW for DEFINITE that these are the ENVIOUS types who are FACTUALLY AGAINST Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada is the founder AND Acarya of ISKCON but they are ENVIOUS of this position and defy by wanting to REPLACE him as Diksa Guru:
761005SB.VRN Lectures
So guru, acarya, being representative of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he should be worshiped. Navamanyeta… Na martya-buddhyasuyeta. Never think of envying. AS SOON AS WE BECOME ENVIOUS OF THE ACARYA, THERE IS FALLDOWN, IMMEDIATELY. Yasyaprasadan na gatih kuto ‘pi. Yasya prasadad bhagavat-prasadah. This is the teaching of Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura. He’s also acarya. Acarya-parampara.
So, navamanyeta karhicit martya-buddhya. Acarya should not be considered as ordinary human being. Vaisnave jati-buddhir gurusu nara-matih, arcye visnau sila-dhir gurusu nara-matih. These are the injunction. NARAKI
750713SB.PHI Lectures
Prabhupada: Guru-mukha-padma-vakya, cittete koriya aikya. Don’t try to cheat guru. Then progress will be checked.
acaryam mam vijaniyan
navamanyeta karhicit
na martya-buddhyasuyeta
sarva-devamayo guruh
Acaryam mam vijaniyan. Krsna says, “Acarya means I am.” Navamanyeta karhicit: “Do not try to neglect.” Na martya-buddhyasuyeta: “Do not consider acarya, spiritual master, as ordinary human being and become envious.” These things are warned. Acaryam mam vijaniyan navamanyeta karhicit, na martya-buddhyasuyeta. Familiarity breeds contempt. That is not good. Similarly… BECAUSE BY THE MERCY OF ACARYA, BY THE MERCY OF GURU, YOU WILL GET KRSNA.
Adi 1.46 T The Spiritual Masters
acaryam mam vijaniyan
navamanyeta karhicit
na martya-buddhyasuyeta
sarva-deva-mayo guruh
SYNONYMS
acaryam–the spiritual master; mam–Myself; vijaniyat–one should know; na avamanyeta–one should never disrespect; karhicit–at any time; na–never; martya-buddhya–with the idea of his being an ordinary man; asuyeta–one should be envious; sarva-deva–of all demigods; mayah–representative; guruh–the spiritual master.
TRANSLATION
“One should know the acarya as Myself and never disrespect him in any way. ONE SHOULD NOT ENVY HIM, THINKING HIM AN ORDINARY MAN, for he is the representative of all the demigods.”
PURPORT
This is a verse from Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.17.27) spoken by Lord Krsna when He was questioned by Uddhava regarding the four social and spiritual orders of society. He was specifically instructing how a brahmacari should behave under the care of a spiritual master. A spiritual master is not an enjoyer of facilities offered by his disciples. He is like a parent. Without the attentive service of his parents, a child cannot grow to manhood; similarly, without the care of the spiritual master one cannot rise to the plane of transcendental service.
THE SPIRITUAL MASTER IS ALSO CALLED ACARYA, OR A TRANSCENDENTAL PROFESSOR OF SPIRITUAL SCIENCE. The Manu-samhita (2.140) explains the duties of an acarya, describing that a bona fide spiritual master accepts charge of disciples, teaches them the Vedic knowledge with all its intricacies, and gives them their second birth. The ceremony performed to initiate a disciple into the study of spiritual science is called upaniti, or the function that brings one nearer to the spiritual master. One who cannot be brought nearer to a spiritual master cannot have a sacred thread, and thus he is indicated to be a sudra. The sacred thread on the body of a brahmana, ksatriya or vaisya is a symbol of initiation by the spiritual master; it is worth nothing if worn merely to boast of high parentage. The duty of the spiritual master is to initiate a disciple with the sacred thread ceremony, and after this samskara, or purificatory process, the spiritual master actually begins to teach the disciple about the Vedas. A person born a sudra is not barred from such spiritual initiation, provided he is approved by the spiritual master, who is duly authorized to award a disciple the right to be a brahmana if he finds him perfectly qualified. In the Vayu Purana an acarya is defined as one who knows the import of all Vedic literature, explains the purpose of the Vedas, abides by their rules and regulations, and teaches his disciples to act in the same way.
Only out of His immense compassion does the Personality of Godhead reveal Himself as the spiritual master. Therefore in the dealings of an acarya there are no activities but those of transcendental loving service to the Lord. He is the Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead. It is worthwhile to take shelter of such a steady devotee, who is called asraya-vigraha, or the manifestation or form of the Lord of whom one must take shelter.
IF ONE POSES HIMSELF AS AN ACARYA BUT DOES NOT HAVE AN ATTITUDE OF SERVITORSHIP TO THE LORD, HE MUST BE CONSIDERED AN OFFENDER, AND THIS OFFENSIVE ATTITUDE DISQUALIFIES HIM FROM BEING AN ACARYA. The bona fide spiritual master always engages in unalloyed devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. By this test he is known to be a direct manifestation of the Lord and a genuine representative of Sri Nityananda Prabhu. Such a spiritual master is known as acaryadeva. Influenced by an envious temperament and dissatisfied because of an attitude of sense gratification, mundaners criticize a real acarya. In fact, however, a bona fide acarya is nondifferent from the Personality of Godhead, and therefore to envy such an acarya is to envy the Personality of Godhead Himself. This will produce an effect subversive of transcendental realization.
As mentioned previously, a disciple should always respect the spiritual master as a manifestation of Sri Krsna, but at the same time one should always remember that a spiritual master is never authorized to imitate the transcendental pastimes of the Lord. False spiritual masters pose themselves as identical with Sri Krsna in every respect to exploit the sentiments of their disciples, but such impersonalists can only mislead their disciples, for their ultimate aim is to become one with the Lord. This is against the principles of the devotional cult.
The real Vedic philosophy is acintya-bhedabheda-tattva, which establishes everything to be simultaneously one with and different from the Personality of Godhead. Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami confirms that this is the real position of a bona fide spiritual master and says that one should always think of the spiritual master in terms of his intimate relationship with Mukunda (Sri Krsna). Srila Jiva Gosvami, in his Bhakti-sandarbha (213), has clearly defined that a pure devotee’s observation of the spiritual master and Lord Siva as one with the Personality of Godhead exists in terms of their being very dear to the Lord, not identical with Him in all respects. Following in the footsteps of Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami and Srila Jiva Gosvami, later acaryas like Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura have confirmed the same truths. In his prayers to the spiritual master, Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura confirms that all the revealed scriptures accept the spiritual master to be identical with the Personality of Godhead because he is a very dear and confidential servant of the Lord. Gaudiya Vaisnavas therefore worship Srila Gurudeva (the spiritual master) in the light of his being the servitor of the Personality of Godhead. In all the ancient scriptures of devotional service and in the more recent songs of Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and other unalloyed Vaisnavas, THE SPIRITUAL MASTER IS ALWAYS CONSIDERED EITHER ONE OF THE CONFIDENTIAL ASSOCIATES OF SRIMATI RADHARANI OR A MANIFESTED REPRESENTATION OF SRILA NITYANANDA PRABHU.
There are Prabhupadanugas like myself who are just followers
of Srila Prabhupada and his directions. Then there are the ritviks
who also want to call themselves as Prabhupadanugas who perform
post samadhi ritvik initiation and claim themselves to be his initiated
disciples. Fakes.
The weird part is that there are also pre 1977 initiated disciples
of Srila Prabhupada claiming themselves to be ritviks.
Misguided fools.
The Prabhupadanugas like myself reject both the foolish ritvik’s
post samadhi ritvik initiation preached and Iskcon’s GBC elected
unqualified gurus.
HARE KRSNA
SG:There are Prabhupadanugas like myself who are just followers
of Srila Prabhupada and his directions.
Mahesh: Mr SG Sir, YOU are NOT a Prabhupadanuga. You have REJECTED Srila Prabhupada:
July 9th 1977 UNREVOKED ORDER OF RITVIK INITIATIONS represents Srila Prabhupada. And since “There is NO DIFFERENCE between the spiritual master’s instructions and the spiritual master himself” you have REJECTED Srila Prabhupada.
Adi 1.35 The Spiritual Masters
There is NO DIFFERENCE between the spiritual master’s instructions and the spiritual master himself. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple.
Hare Krsna!
SG is not a Prabhupadanuga.
He is a Dupe-a-nuga. Or Dope-a-nuga. Take your pick.
He relies on the fact that most people won’t search through the archives of the comments section of this website to see all the times he was unable to put forth logical arguments to prove his contentions above during debate, and wound up either redefining terms being used according to meaings concocted in his own empty head, or simply lashing out with name calling and denigrations, like the angry baboon he is.
In sum, he is yet another anonymous shit-stirring baboon who appears here every so often simply to stir controversy and waste the time of others.
I had a few minutes to waste on this fool, so no biggie.
SG. Prabhu, please do not bring your concocted mundane ( pre and/or post samadhi ) manufactured foreign words relating with the Ritivik Inititation Instructions of Srila Prabhupada into any discussion. Doing so simply leads the Spiritual Instructions of Srila Prabhupada towards a mundane discussion and endless debate.
As you said very nicely in your comments ; ” There are Prabhupadanugas like myself who are just followers of Srila Prabhupada and his directions. ”
Then, my humble suggestion to you is that please stick with the Srila Prabhupada Initiating Instructions as it is which were, are, and will be present always for his sincere and serious followers during his physical absence or presence IF and only IF you are a truly follower of the Instructions of Srila Prabhupada without any interpretation of adding / deleting any words.
Hope it meets you well.
All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Hari BOL.
YS….. Amar Puri.
SG is against the GBC guru idea, AND he is against our idea of worship of Prabhupada. The good news is, we can thus figure out what his REAL idea is: that means he has set himself up to be worshiped as the next messiah because he has cancelled out any other process, by neti neti, he alone stands as the authority. So he is at least, by the process of elimination, making himself the sole authority. The bad news is, he is not qualified to be the sole authority. ys pd
Hare krishna.
PAMHO AGTSP.
Is said that if one fails trying to be a successful guitarist, can become a guitar teacher, so if I failure to be devotee; can I become guru?
Dear Puranjana dasa, you are a senior devotee and an initiated disciple of
Srila Prabhupada. So, stop talking nonsense and your ‘tunnel vision’ thinking.
Cultivating bad habits can be bad for you at the time of death which for you
due to your old age is just around the corner. So, stop flogging dead old horses
again and again and again. Go and figure out what was that instruction your spiritual
master gave you and follow. Remember what your guru maharaj Srila Prabhupada said,
HARE KRSNA
SG says: Cultivating bad habits can be bad for you at the time of death which for you
due to your old age is just around the corner.
Those who try to puff themselves up by constantly criticizing both the ISKCONites and the Ritviks are the most offensive. They are even more offensive than ISKCON’s notorious ritvik-bashers. They criticize ISKCON’s current initiation system, but, unlike the Ritviks, provide no positive alternative, except possibly, “I am the next Acarya!” In other words, they are living in an egotistical dream world!
They are the ones who have the most to worry about at the time of death.
Promoting Srila Prabhupa as the guru is “flogging a dead horse.” What is wrong with you people? Yes, I am older now, and so now, all kinds of younger people are reading my stuff and agreeing, and even some of my contemporary other “old fogey God brothers / sisters” are coming out and saying, you were right all along. Is this what upsets you, that more people are agreeing with our idea, and Srila Prabhupada’s pre-eminent status is being revived? ys pd
Repost: (because nothing has changed)
SG is a fraud.
He relies on the fact that most people won’t search through the archives of the comments section of this website to see all the times he was unable to put forth logical arguments to prove his contentions during debate, and wound up either redefining terms being used according to meanings concocted in his own pea brain, or simply lashing out with name calling and denigrations, like the angry baboon he is.
In sum, he is yet another anonymous shit-stirring baboon who appears here every so often simply to stir controversy and waste the time of others.
Sometimes some devotees, they get caught up in themselves so much
that they forget why they became a devotee of the Supreme Lord
Sri Krsna in the first place. Me, I , my, I did this, I did that,
I am the first to – this are all associated with false ego. Sadhus
are supposed to be above this mood.
SB, Canto 4, Ch.11, Text 13 and 14. First print 1974.
” The Lord is very satisfied with His devotee when the devotee
greets other people with tolerance, mercy, friendship and equality.
One who actually satisfies the Supreme Personality of Godhead
during his lifetime becomes liberated from the gross and subtle
material conditions.Thus being freed from all material modes of
nature, he achieves unlimited spiritual bliss. ”
Srila Prabhupada explains :
” It is the duty of an advanced devotee in the second stage of devotional
perfection to act in accordance with this verse. There are three stages of
devotional life. In the lowest stage, a devotee is simply concerned with the
Deity in the temple, and he worships the Lord with great devotion, according
to rules and regulations. In the second stage the devotee is
cognizant of his relationship with the Lord, his relationship with fellow
devotees, his relationship with persons who are innocent and his relationship
with persons who are envious.
Sometimes devotees are ill-treated by envious persons. It is advised
that an advanced devotee should be tolerant; he should show complete
mercy to persons who are ignorant or innocent. A preacher-devotee is
meant to show mercy to innocent persons whom he can elevate to devotional
service. Everyone, by constitutional position, is an eternal servant of God.
Therefore, a devotee’s business is to awaken everyone’s Krsna consciousness.
That is his mercy. As for a devotee’s treatment of other devotees who are
his equals, he should maintain friendship with them. His general view should
be to see every living entity as part of the Supreme Lord. Different living
entities appear in different forms of dress, but according to the instruction
of the Bhagavad-gita, a learned person sees all living entities equally.
Such treatment by the devotee is very much appreciated by the Supreme Lord.
It is said, therefore, that a saintly person is always tolerant and merciful,
he is a friend for everyone, never an enemy to anyone, and is peaceful. These
are some of the good qualities of a devotee.
In the previous verse it has been explained that one should treat all
living entities with tolerance, mercy, friendship and equality. By such
behavior one satisfies the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and upon His
satisfaction the devotee immediately becomes free from all material conditions.
The Lord also confirms this in the Bhagavad-gita: “Anyone who
sincerely and seriously engages in My service immediately becomes situated
in the transcendental stage wherein he can enjoy unlimited spiritual bliss.”
Everyone in this material world is struggling hard in order to achieve
blissful life. Unfortunately, people do not know how to achieve it.
Atheists do not believe in God, and certainly they do not please Him.
Here it is clearly said that upon pleasing the Supreme Personality of
Godhead one immediately attains to the spiritual platform and enjoys
unlimited blissful life. To become free from material existence means to
become free from the influence of material nature.
The word samprasanne, which is used in this verse, means “being
satisfied.” A person should act in such a way that the Lord is satisfied by
the activity; it is not that he himself is to be satisfied. Of course, when the
Lord is satisfied, the devotee automatically becomes satisfied. This is the
secret of the process of bhakti-yoga. Outside of bhakti-yoga, everyone is
trying to satisfy himself. No one is trying to satisfy the Lord. Karmis
grossly try to satisfy their senses, but even those who are elevated on the
platform of knowledge also try to satisfy themselves, in a subtle form.
Karmis try to satisfy themselves by sense gratification, and jnanis try to
satisfy themselves by subtle activities or mental speculation and thinking
themselves to be God. Yogis also try to satisfy themselves by thinking
that they can achieve different mystic perfections. But only devotees try
to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The devotees’ process of
self-realization is completely different from the processes of the karmis,
jnanis and yogis. Everyone else is trying to satisfy himself, whereas the
devotee tries only to satisfy the Lord. The devotional process is completely
different from the others; by working to please the Lord by engaging his
senses in His loving service, the devotee is immediately situated on the
transcendental platform, and he enjoys unlimited blissful life.
HARE KRSNA
An ISKCON devotee invited all the ritviks to : meet me at Govinda’s! Nice, except if our people go there, they will be immediately banned, harassed, vilified, served with legal papers, and some of our people have been threatened with being arrested for trespassing etc. Some are threatened with beatings and some of them have in fact been beaten up. In sum, we are generally not allowed at the GBC’s establishments. And as soon as they find out we are getting nice prasadam distribution going, nice deity worship going, nice harinamas going and so on, they immediately spend $15,000,000 suing us so they can remove all these programs and kick out all the kirtaniyas, just like the did here in the USA. Their whole program for us is, as soon as they find nice harinama is going on, immediately, they call the police, call their lawyers, call in the enforcers to ban and remove the kirtana devotees. For example, one of our devotees is one of the biggest book distributors in the USA, he was recently kicked out of the Philadelphia temple. In other words, devotees who are preaching nicely are simply not allowed. We are as a group — not allowed to even enter their buildings, much less engage in kirtana there. We are CONSTANTLY being banned and forbidden, which is why we had to make our own independent temple here in Sunnyvale. And that is why their temple is empty and ours is full, we are not banning, harassing and suing — anyone, we are trying to attract people, and we are. So let them keep kicking people out, fine with us, we want these people, and we scoop them up all the time! I am getting nice new people involved all the time, they are not welcome there, fine, we will take them, became they are welcome here! ys pd
The definition of a “Fence Sitter” is one who takes a position of neutrality in regards to an issue, particularly one that is controversial. Since I have taken a stance of opposition towards those who wish to categorize the Rtviks as assidhanta and as “poison” , maintaining that they have, by leave of Srila Prabhupadas words, at least the permission to be regarded as offering at least a viable, if not the most desirable option of continuing the disciplic succession I cannot be accurately accused of fence sitting, just of adopting a different controversial position to the one that the Rtviks offer, which again presents us with the logical fallacy of a false dilemma.
Puranjanas thought that one must agree with the Rtviks or with Rocana or with any other conditioned souls interpretation of Srila Prabhupadas wishes is of course nonsense and his thought that one must agree with everything that such persons might think just because one may agree with them upon some particular is just another idiotic notion that Yasodanandana through his meat puppet Puranjana is attempting to see to you. I agree with Rocana on some things, I even agree with Puranjana on some things, I even agree that a stopped clock is correct twice a day. Puranjana wants you to think that this is a fault because he is trying to get you to accept something that is controversial before it has been proven that it should be accepted. People that try to rush you in to signing some contract or into purchasing something are not usually acting in accordance with your own best interests but rather out of a selfish motivation. Each of you considering as to whether or not you should accept initiation via the Rtvik or any other method want to make sure that whatever you decide will be the right choice, but let the buyer beware, take your time, do your own thinking and don’t let anybody rush you into a decision that you may regret or that may not facilitate your spiritual advancement.
As to myself and to the question as to “what” I follow, Srila Prabhupada is as good as God to me. I have been chanting Hare Krsna now for over forty years and have followed regulative principles for longer than most people have been alive. To my mind this is hardly exemplary of a lack of commitment or of a “fence sitting” disposition towards the essentials of our philosophy and if one considers Initiation or diksa to be the transference of divya-jnana or spiritual knowledge from guru to disciple then I am an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada, just not formally.
Why I would consider Rtvik initiation to be inappropriate for me has no relation to the controversy between the Rtviks and whoever but is a personal issue, unique to my circumstances and to my relationship with Srila Prabhupada and to my God.
Since Puranjana is the same guy who stiff armed Srila Prabhupada and walked off from his service to him never to apologize or return I really suggest that you wonder about his motivations rather than mine on the same principle that one should be very careful about taking the advice of those who are encouraging you from the crowd below to jump off of a high buildings ledge. They probably just want to watch you die and see you dead, perhaps they just want you to be dead like them. How bout it Puranjana. Is that how you feel since you stiff armed Srila Prabhupada and walked off from your guru hating and resenting him, all dead inside?
No Puranjana, I am not a fence sitter, I am whatever Srila Prabhupada accepts me to be, whether that is his disciple, or nothing, but that it us to him, following the discipline only, that is up to me. All the rest is just window dressing.
Haribol.
What type of a misleading and controversy personality are you, Bhakta george a. smith when you write in your comments as such ;
” As to myself and to the question as to “what” I follow, Srila Prabhupada is as good as God to me. I have been chanting Hare Krsna now for over forty years and have followed regulative principles for longer than most people have been alive. To my mind this is hardly exemplary of a lack of commitment or of a “fence sitting” disposition towards the essentials of our philosophy and if one considers Initiation or diksa to be the transference of divya-jnana or spiritual knowledge from guru to disciple then I am an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada, just not formally.”
Because you are not accepting and obeying the Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada gave in his written letter of July 09 how can you be a disciple of Srila Prabhupada when you are not formally Initiated by Him as you wrote in your comments above ?
What kind of a hypocrite are you, Bhakta george ?
It proves that you are a LIAR like these so called leaders / gurus in the present Iskcon including Rocana das. Is this not a FACT, Bhakta george ?
“Divya-jnana hrde prokasito.
What is that divya-jnana? […]
This is divya-jnana. Diksa. Diksa means from this divya-jnana.”
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture, July 11th, 1976)
“There are two words, divya-jnana.
Divya-jnana means transcendental, spiritual knowledge […]
that is di-ksa. This is called diksa, diksa, the combination. So diksa means the initiation to begin transcendental activities. That is called initiation.”
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture February 22, 1973)
Amar
You do not even appear to accept the meaning of initiation or diksa as Srila Prabhupadava conveyed it to us, so how is it that we can even entertain the notion that you understand by what process we are to be initiated by, let alone what Srila Prabhupada ordered. You are like so many others who wish to decide for Srila Prabhupada and for Krsna himself who is acceptable and who is to be rejected because you have a particular form of egoism associated with your head being positioned within another portion of your anatomy. Neither I nor anyone else is subject to your judgement and only a fool would listen to you.
To the rest “Initiation” is a word with several different meanings and thus it has become the subject of much confusion even among transcendentalists, that is until they have experienced to some degree ithe type of spiritual realization that Srila Prabhupada is talking about at which point one says “Ah-Hah!” and really get it.
Basically it is shadow boxing. These big, big supporters of having meanwhile created a pile of almost 50 false “as good as God representatives – God’s direct representatives” in the West are simply fighting with their own depression of having disgraced Lord Caitanya’s Sankirtan movement all over the world. Are traumatized of having put Prabhupada’s pure movement to public disgrace. And still insisting!
Of course their depression remains because it is harbinger of future terrible karmas. In that state of awaiting future punishment there is psychological act of desperation: using the ritviks to let off steam. Letting off steam may not help. They have to learn the sequence of insult, unconscious revenge and forgiveness.
Dogging the ritviks’ step, projecting that ritviks caused the whole diksha-guru debacle? Rocana&co want to turn tables having 35 years ISKCON history re-written: “It is the ritviks”.
Rocana, GBC and like-minded might fool themselves with deliberate confusion assigning guilt to ritviks. Desperate attempt of compurgation? What we read from Mr. G. Smith, Rocana, SG, Dusyanta, is not about saving suffering humanity nor glorifying Prabhupada. It is about to get out of a tight spot. Protect their own reputation, selfish motife. Complicity of having destroyed people’s faith in genuine spiritual life isn’t an easy karmic chain of stroke of fate.
Amar Prabhu what George A Smith can NOT deal with is that Srila Prabhupada is the PROMINENT ACARYA and ONLY the Prominent has to BE FOLLOWED. George, got you cornered. Your move.
Jumping over either way:
a) WHY should they JUMP OVER the PROMINENT ACARYA Srila Prabhupada bearing in mind GAPS in the Disciplic succession of ACARYAS are acceptable?
b) Nobody can Jump over PROMINENT ACARYA Srila Prabhupada to get diksa from Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura.
Srila Prabhupada’s Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam, December 8, 1973, Los Angeles:
“You cannot imagine what my spiritual master said. Or even if you read some books, you cannot understand UNLESS YOU UNDERSTAND IT FROM ME. This is called parampara system. YOU CANNOT JUMP OVER TO THE SUPERIOR GURU, NEGLECTING THE NEXT ACARYA, IMMEDIATE NEXT ACARYA.”
Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dayananda, April 12, 1968:
“Regarding parampara system: there is nothing to wonder for big gaps. Just like we belong to the Brahma Sampradaya, so we accept it from Krishna to Brahma, Brahma to Narada, Narada to Vyasadeva, Vyasadeva to Madhva, and between Vyasadeva and Madhva there is a big gap. But it is sometimes said that Vyasadeva is still living, and Madhva was fortunate enough to meet him directly. In a similar way, we find in the Bhagavad-gita that the Gita was taught to the sungod, some millions of years ago, but Krishna has mentioned only three names in this parampara system–namely, Vivasvan, Manu, and Iksvaku; and so these gaps do not hamper from understanding the parampara system. We have to pick up the prominent acaryas, and follow from him. There are many branches also from the parampara system, and it is not possible to record all the branches and sub-branches in the disciplic succession. We have to pick up from the authority of the acharya in whatever sampradaya we belong to.”
George as usual gives us a heap of hyperbole, but he does not explain what is diksha either? He just says its a confusing topic, even for the advanced, a smokescreen to indicate — he does not know what it is either.
Srila Prabhupada says that — (any and all) — people who read his books will be getting the “divyam jnanam” (the “di” in diksha) and this will destroy their sins (the ksha in diksha). That is called diksha. This is what we all understood when he was here, and this is how I myself became convinced to be a devotee of Krishna, I read one of his books.
What has changed since then? What is has changed is: that Rocana now says the books are all posthumous, post samadhi, and post mortem, because, he claims there is always a live person around and you need to “follow the tradition” of worship of a living body. And glory be to heaven, how handy is this, the only body around that Rocana recognizes as an authority is — his! He is the only living authority he recognizes, so he wants to make himself the living authority we all need to worship.
In other words Rocana actually thinks his stinky old fart body is what we all have to worship now because, there is no other living authority that he promotes except, himself. He actually thinks his stinky body is what we have to worship now. Sorry, the topic was always very simple, people who read the books and accepted the divyan jnanam contained therein, are getting the “spiritual knowledge which destroys sins” aka diksha. That is what we all knew in the 1970s, and Srila Prabhupada said constantly “do not change anything.” What has changed is that some fools wanted to change the simple process, because they are motivated for self glory. ys pd
Bhakata george, I have already asked you this following question else where in my previous posts, yes or no, but no answer from you thus far.
Bhakta george, do you accept and obey Srila Prabhupada’s Initiating Instructions as it is without any interpretation of any kind ?
If you do not give the answer in yes or no form, then, it means you are a LIAR, cheater like so many others.
Looking forward to hear your answer, Bhakata george.
All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Hari BOL.
YS……. Amar Puri.
Mahesh Prabhu writes ; ” Amar Prabhu what George A Smith can NOT deal with is that Srila Prabhupada is the PROMINENT ACARYA and ONLY the Prominent has to BE FOLLOWED. George, got you cornered. Your move. ”
No Mahesh Prabhu, he did not. Why, because, I have asked him the question else where before as well to which he never bothered to reply. And I have requested it to him again and await to hear from him.
Bhakta george, lies to himself as it appears from his own writings as I brought it out in the comments in my post for which Bhakta george is trying to refute it to save and defend his ego.
I am sure that the readers must have read and noticed Bhakta george’s comments I brought it out in which Bhakata george affirms that he accepts Srila Prabhupada as his Guru even though he has not been formally initiated by him. This simple acceptance from his part indicates that by following Srila Prabhupada’s Instructions he accepts Srila Prabhupada to be his Guru.
Yet he does truly disOBEY in reality the Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada as he tries to refute it which simply means he is a Cheater, Liar and Hypocrite like so many others and thus creates controversy to defend his own ego. It is that simple.
Now Bhakta george has no other choice but to accept the Initiating Instructions of Srila Prabhupada as it is for the rest of the time as long as Srila Prabhupada’s Initiating Instructions, in the Books, tapes and all other literature continues to exist on this planet EARTH.
IF he does not accept it, it means he is a LIAR, CHEATER which has been proven from his own comments. I am sure that the readers see my point.
Hope it finds satisfactory to the readers including Bhakta george.
All Glories to Srila Prabhupada Ki Jaya.
Hari BOL.
YS….. Amar Puri.