Friday, March 23, 2012

Questions to Tripurari swami and the Sridhara Maharaja folks pt.2



Questions PT.2 





Srila Prabhupada told us in India (in 1971) that after 1936 some of the disciples of Srila Saraswati Thakura had "dissented" from promoting  Sridhara Maharaja and his new messiah "the successor acharya of the Gaudiya Matha -- Ananta Vasudeva." Some of these dissenters began to investigate the behavior of Ananta Vasudeva and they intercepted some "love letters" that Ananta Vasudeva was writing to a lover (a woman who was actually a prostitute).

Then, some of these post-1936 "dissenters" (ritviks?) began to publicly expose that Ananta Vasudeva was a false guru. After these dissenters began to expose the fact that the Bagh Bazaar and the "Sridhara and Ananta Vasudeva guru program" was bogus, a number of these "dissenters" were subsequently: beaten, had their faces pushed into dog stools, some had their skulls cracked with bricks, and some died from being beaten severely. This was the result of Sridhara Maharaja's promoting a false guru after 1936, i.e. Sridhara's program created a violent "personality cult" mood in the Gaudiya Matha. Perhaps this is why Srila Saraswati said "When our men will become sahajiya (imitation of the post of pure devotee), they will become more dangerous." And posing as an artificial acharya is the epitome of sahajiya-vada. And the danger is clear, innocent people can be murdered.

The violent atmosphere post-1936 was confirmed to me by Sudhir Krishna Maharaja (a Sridhara Maharaja follower) who told me that Sridhara Maharaja was once confronted by a guest about the Gaudiya Matha's beatings and murders problem, because that problem was being exposed in India's newspapers media. And according to Sudhir Krishna, Sridhara Maharaja responded to the guest by saying in effect -- do not be so surprised, killing goes on amongst devotees, just look at the Bhagavat Gita, there was a war.

In short, Sridhara Maharaja tried to justify his creating a bogus guru cult, which resulted in the vicious beatings and killings of the devotees of Krishna. This beating and killing of the vaishnavas program is justified by the Bhagavat Gita? It's all "approved" by Krishna? Does Krishna think its a good program to have His devotees beaten and killed because this is the whole idea of the Gita? Sorry, Sridhara Maharaja has not EVER had the authority to promote false gurus which results in the beatings and murders of Krishna's bhaktas and devotees. Which is why Srila Prabhupada says "Sridhara Maharaja acted without authority."

Lets not forget that in the Vedas the people who orchestrate having devotees beaten and killed are not seen as devotees themselves, they are seen as deviated from the Vedic path. The Bhagavad Gita is basically a story about the bona fide devotees (the Pandavas) who were being oppressed by non-devotees (the Kauravas). Krishna took the side of His devotees, the Pandavas, and He had the Kauravas killed for their offense of attacking His devotees.

The BHAGAVAD GITA is therefore not really a story about devotees v. devotees. Its a story about the usurpers of the property of the innocent devotees being killed by Krishna for that offense. Again, who authorized Sridhara Maharaja to have the property of the Gaudiya Matha usurped from the devotees so there would be a war with dead victims? Yes we agree, there was a war, but didn't Sridhara Maharaja start this war by empowering the usurpers? Srila Prabhupada says the false 1936 gurus were usurpers, and he says the Kauravas were ALSO usurpers, who authorized Sridhara to start this war by backing the usurpers?  

And isn't it wrong to use the Bhagavad Gita to cover up for our own mistakes? If we promote a false guru cult and vaishnavas are killed, why bring in Krishna's good name to protect and defend our own self-created mess? The devil made me do it? Krishna made me do it? No, Sridhara Maharaja created this environment and he has no authority to do so. That was Srila Prabhupada's point all along.  

The Gaudiya Matha's "dissenters" were apparently merely ordinary rank and file devotees just like us, they did not want to promote the worship of these deviants and they merely had wanted to continue the worship of their guru Srila Saraswati. Srila Prabhupada says Sridhara Maharaja "insisted on it" (promoting Ananta Vasudeva). The result was that dissenters were banned, beaten and killed for their "offense" of the desire -- to simply worship an actual pure devotee -- and not join Sridhara's bogus guru cult.

Even Srila Prabhupada himself told us in 1971 to post a guard at his door in Mayapura since his "envious God brothers" might try to have him killed. Who started this war? It was not Srila Prabhupada? The God brothers attacked him, that is plain and simple. Srila Prabhupada was another person who objected to their bogus gurus, so they wanted to kill him as well. And when we too objected to the same bogus guru process, we too could be killed by our bogus guru God brothers for challenging them?

The good news is that at least we are on the same page as Srila Prabhupada on this issue, all these bogus gurus do not like us, and all of these bogus gurus oppose our idea of continuing the worship of Srila Prabhupada. And after 1936 some of the rank and file dissented, and after 1977 some of us dissented, because there are some of us folks who want to worship the pure devotees and we were not going to compromise.  

Why was Sridhara Maharaja on the side of these deviants? Srila Prabhupada said Sridhara was good friends with Madhvava maharaja (one of the worst offenders in the Gaudiya Matha bunch, who in 1971 came to Mayapura to poke his finger in Srila Prabhupada's face and order him to quit using the title of Prabhupada). Meanwhile Sridhara was simultaneously "aloof" from associating with Srila Prabhupada. Why was Sridhara Maharaja pals with the blasphemers of Srila Prabhupada (they said he could not use the name of "Prabhupada"?), and Sridhara was not associating with Prabhupada instead? (see this conversation which we will post later, where Srila Prabhupada agrees Sridhara is associated with the bad elements of the Gaudiya Matha and he is "aloof" -- and not associated with -- Srila Prabhupada himself).

Why was Sridhara Maharaja friends with these false gurus of the Gaudiya Matha who viciously attacked Srila Prabhupada for: Allowing women in the temples; For allowing "mlecchas" to do deity worship; For using the title of Prabhupada etc. and whom Srila Prabhupada thought "might try to kill me"? And then later, Sridhara was friends with the 11 false GBC gurus of ISKCON while stepping down on us dissenters who -- just wanted to worship Srila Prabhupada?

I have never, ever, EVER seen any good explanation for why the Sridhara Maharaja's program was ever authorized to orchestrate all of this? Rather we find that Srila Prahbupada says Sridhara Maharaja "acted without authority" and his Bagh Bazaar program was "the severe offender" program. When are the followers of Sridhara Maharaja going to acknowledge that Sridhara's plan to make false gurus is not only bogus, it proved deadly for the innocent rank and file members of the Gaudiya Matha who were banned, beaten and some were assassinated? And even the guru Sridhara promoted committed suicide, so Sridhara is responsible for that problem as well since Ananta Vasudeva was coerced by Sridhara to take the post of acharya?

And the entire mission was basically ruined as a result of all these plans made by people like Sridhara Maharaja? Even Sridhara said his God brothers complained he was "a form breaker" -- because he broke down the Gaudiya mission. Why would we want that same policy for ISKCON?


Then after 1977, Sridhara Maharaja once again promoted the same identical false gurus deviation of 1936 by promoting the GBC and their 11 self-appointed gurus. Here is the main problem we see with the Sridhara Maharaja process of support for false gurus after 1977; Sridhara already knew that by his promoting false gurus this leads to contrived banning, beatings, violence and even murders. He knew this directly from his experience in the post-1936 Gaudiya Matha. Sridhara Maharaja knew this better than any of us ever could have known, because he was there during the whole "oppression and murders of the Gaudiya Matha's dissenters" era. Or was he asleep at the switch the whole time? Or did he not care that dissenters were treated severely? Or what?

Thus by 1977 Sridhara knew perhaps better than anyone else on the planet, that by this program of promoting unqualified persons as gurus the result could be, and probably would be, violence. Of course we all know about this process of violence stemming from false prophets, pure devotees, gurus and messiahs. Just look at the false messiah cults of Jim Jones, David Koresh, Charles Manson and countless others who promoted themselves as messiahs when they were not qualified, and the result was often beatings of dissenters if not worse. Why would Sridhara Maharaja continue promoting the false guru's process even after he knew full well that the results could be, and probably would be, indeed almost inevitably would be, violence for the dissenters?

I have no idea why Sridhara Maharaja or his followers have considered themselves as authorized to foment these types of conditions where people like us will be targets of violence for opposing? As for the wonderful pure devotee ISKCON leaders that Sridhara Maharaja was promoting as gurus after 1977, did he not know Srila Prabhupada had been saying his leaders are "The Great Sinister Movement within my movement," "a great conspiracy," and "once before you wanted to do something centralizing with your G.B.C. meeting, and, if I did not interfere, the whole thing (ISKCON) would have been killed" -- ad infinitum?

Srila Prabhupada made these types of complaints against the leaders all the time. And he said things like: his failing sannyasas are breaking his heart, so suspend sannyasa. He said his leaders were mostly not chanting and following, and he said at least one of them is waiting for him to die so he could take his guru seat, and he said -- I cannot sleep at night because Tamal is ruining my ISKCON, lets send Tamal to China because he is destroying my ISKCON. Why would these types of people be considered as acharyas by Sridhara Maharaja? The very same people who wanted Srila Prabhupada's guru seat, the people who are destroying his mission, the people he said are fighting like cats and dogs, the people he said are not fit for sannyasa, the people he said are "plotting and scheming" (against him?) -- are gurus?

In sum, Srila Prabhupada felt that his leaders are not very trustworthy, what to speak of their being gurus? And why would he "centralize the whole thing" in the hands of the 1978 11 member "acharya board" -- after just saying this centralizing process is going to kill his whole movement (as it has)? See for some quotes on Srila Prabhupada's doubts over these leaders. How could "the great sinister movement" become "Krishna's successor acharyas" all of a sudden? Does this make any sense?

Then, when we expressed the same doubts Srila Prabhupada had expressed over these same leaders, Sridhara Maharaja was saying "none should protest," i.e. we need to promote and back-up these leaders as acharyas? Didn't he know that our protesting these false acharyas would be dangerous for us since that is what happened after 1936 -- with his previous false guru program? And sure enough, the Sridhara Maharaja people and the GBC program he was supporting started to call us vile names such as: aparadhis, attackers of ISKCON, cheaters, envious, demons, deviants, offenders, poison pens, ritvik poison, snakes, serpents with jewelled heads, and so on, ... giving us the feeling we could be targets of violence due to this rhetoric? We did not want to support the 11, so were were "offending the pure devotee Sridhara Maharaja who supports them." No, we did not want to promote the 11, that is all.  

Is this odious rhetoric problem not exactly what occurred to those who disagreed with the Sridhara guru program after 1936? Why would Sridhara duplicate the process of suppressing dissenters that he orchestrated after 1936? And by his support of the 11, now we are being chased with baseball bats after dissenters after 1936 had been chased with bricks? It seems we dissenters never get any mercy here? Did he not know this would cause of great distress to us dissenters, or even worse? Did he not care? Or what? Why is this never explained?

Sure enough, we did become targets for violence. Worse, even recently  a Sridhara Maharaja web site has been calling us aparadhis, dangerous, deviants and so on, the same style of rhetoric used by the GBC's gurus project, the same rhetoric we have heard being used by the Narayana Maharaja people against us, the same style rhetoric we get from the Gaura Govinda maharaja people etc. -- don't they know that demonizing others can get them killed? Don't they know this can rain down threats and maybe violence on us because we have been squalking about it since the murder of Sulochana in 1986, yet they continued that rhetoric until recently? Who authorized them to use this rhetoric, knowing from 1936 until the present time, this can get devotees beaten and killed? Or don't they pay any attention to how devotees get treated with this rhetoric? Or don't they care? Or what?

Hence, since the 1980s we have got direct threats of violence from the followers of both the GBC and Sridhara Maharaja folks due to this rhetoric. Who authorized Sridhara Maharaja and / or his dedicated followers to foment this aggressive mood against other vaishnavas? Why are they demonizing the worshippers of Srila Prabhupada as evil deviants (who can be killed)? Of course the followers of the GBC, Sridhara, Narayana maharaja process have also called us insane, mad, fools, and so on, therefore when we complained about things like child molesting, their discrediting us helped the problems along. Are we ever going to get an apology for all this? Again this raises the main question, (a) weren't we authorized to challenge these false gurus of 1977 -- which resulted in molesting and murder, or (b) was Sridhara authorized to promote them, and discredit and squash our protest, to the peril of us and the victims we were trying to save?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.