Saturday, January 26, 2013

Bhakti Vikas mj is the acharya's "manager"?

Guru to be a Strict Follower


Jan 25, 2013 — INDIA

Regarding the contention "that Srila Prabhupada authorized all his disciples to initiate after his physical departure," my old friend Sattvic Prabhu has questioned,

1) Did Srila Prabhupada accept that his disciples were qualified?
2) Did he expect them to become qualified in due course of time?
Which leads to Sattvic Prabhu's next query:
"What is the qualification?"

The answer to this is given by Srila Prabhupada himself in the famous conversation of April 22, 1977:
"Caitanya Mahaprabhu wants that, amara ajnaya guru hana.' You become guru.' But be qualified. Little thing, strictly follower."

[PD: And in that same conversation Srila Prabhupada says his followers will become guru when he orders, yet there is no evidence Srila Prabhupada "ordered" any diksha gurus? "Strictly following the order," but there is no order for the neophytes of ISKCON to take the post of guru, and imitate the acharyas thereby? Of course, the concept of "not imitating the acharya" is true in almost any religion. For example, as soon as someone in the Christian religion begins to think he is the successor to Jesus, generally, there is chaos and all kinds of cult meltdowns. 

Of course recently the BVKS program is being criticized for burying a known homosexual pedophile in "a samadhi" the holy land of Vrndavana, because in the BVKS party they basically have the idea that just about any fool, clown, deviant and debauchee can become an acharya. This was never ordered by Srila Prabhupada, nor is this following strictly anything he ever said. Nor has there even been any example of known homosexual pedophiles being buried in samadhis and so on and so forth, in other words BVKS entire program is all based on NOT following strictly.  

Tamal also admits in Topanga in December 1980, the idea that gurus have been appointed in ISKCON is "a myth." Hansadutta dasa and others have confirmed this, there was never any order from Srila Prabhupada for ISKCON's leaders to become gurus. So the ISKCON gurus keep saying they are strictly following the order of Srila Prabhupada, and the order is to be an ISKCON guru, except, there is no order for such neophytes to become gurus? Rather the order is, do not imitate the post of guru (which oddly BVKS quotes below).

Moreover in January of 1977 Srila Prabhupada was saying ISKCON needs to suspend sannyasa because his followers are not even fit for the renounced order, so -- why would he appoint the very same exact "unfit" people as gurus a few months later (in May of 1977)? And why doesn't BVKS know that people who are not fit for sannyasa, or barely fit, are not fit to be acharyas?  

That Srila Prabhupada would have wanted, ordered or appointed conditioned souls and unqualified neophytes to the post of guru is simply saying that Srila Prabhupada makes mistakes. The entire BVKS program rests on the theory that Srila Prabhupada had wanted and ordered neophytes, or even less than neophytes, to take the post of acharyas aka "God's successor gurus." This is a direct attack on Srila Prabhupada's integrity. Then again, the Gaudiya Matha's folks said that Srila Saraswati had wanted and ordered neophytes to take the post of guru, BVKS is thus simply a disciple of these deviants.  

Also in the same 1977 conversation BVKS quotes above, it says that when these GBC and ISKCON leaders deviate, they will have to be replaced. How can people who deviate and need to be replaced be -- gurus? This is another major problem with BVKS, he thinks that the "successors to Krishna" aka acharyas are (or they become) fools who deviate. And then the BVKS program has devised all kinds of concocted tools to "fix and repair" their fools posing as messiahs. For example, the BVKS program says their gurus need to be -- reformed, censured, admonished, rectified, removed and replaced (and so on) -- by the overseers of the acharyas, namely BVKS and his moderating council, ... the same "GBC" council of which BVKS is a contributor and backer? 

How can a council of defective people dictate to, and in sum "fix and repair" the acharya? 

And since (according to the quotes below) it is Krishna who dictates to the acharyas, how can BVKS claim to have replaced Krishna -- and BVKS is now taking over the post of dictating to the acharyas? When someone says he has overtaken Krishna's position, is that not the seed element of how we all fell into the material world in the first place? So BVKS in effect says, "I am a very humble man, therefore I have taken over the post of God Almighty, and I have kicked Him down the street and I am now doing His job, because God is quite a lousy manager of His acharyas, so I had to take over His job." Is this humility, or is this ego on steroids, or is this just plain criminal madness?    

BVKS: Especially as Srila Prabhupada's statements about succession have been variously interpreted, we must be very careful to not introduce preconceptions or personal motivations when attempting to understand and explain the statements and intentions of our acarya. Yet the simple and clear understanding here, directly derived from Srila Prabhupada's own words, is that the qualification to be a guru is to be a strict follower.

[PD: Yet BVKS is always criticizing the other GBC gurus for not following strictly? So if the other gurus are not following strictly, how are they still gurus? This is called hypocrisy, which is why Jesus says "Oh ye hypocrites, sons of vipers."]

BVKS: Having said this, Srila Prabhupada continued, giving an idea of what constitutes strict following by citing an example of the opposite: "You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see our Gaudiya Matha. Everyone wanted to become guru, and a small temple and guru. What kind of guru? No publication, no preaching, simply bring some foodstuff... My Guru Maharaja used to say, 'Joint mess,' a place for eating and sleeping."

Notwithstanding various fantastic interpretations of this conversation, I venture to aver that the whole gist is that Srila Prabhupada wanted his disciples to be gurus and that he considered it quite possible that they could meet the qualification ("little thing, strictly follower"). In this conversation we also find Srila Prabhupada expressing doubt as to the level of readiness of his disciples. Still, Srila Prabhupada concluded (his discussion of this topic in this conversation) optimisticly, yet with a warning also:

"Stick to our principle, and see our GBC is very alert. Then everything will go on, even I am not present. Do that. That is my request. Whatever little I have taught you, follow that, and nobody will be aggrieved. No maya will touch you. Now Krsna has given us, and there will be no scarcity of money. You print book and sell. So everything is there. We have got good shelter all over the world. We have got income. You stick to our principles, follow the... Even if I die suddenly, you'll be able to manage. That's all. That I want. Manage nicely and let the movement go forward. Now arrange. Don't go backward. Be careful."

We cannot conclude from this conversation that Srila Prabhupada did not want his disciples to initiate. From Srila Prabhupada's words as quoted above, ISKCON's present travails can be explained as due to the GBC's unalertness regarding strict following and sticking to our principles.

To my understanding, this is the clear, straightforward understanding of these statements, that were never meant to cryptically indicate something else.

PD: This means BVKS has a mundane idea of the acharyas. He thinks the SUCCESSORS TO KRISHNA are under the control of of committee of defective people, whom he always has to admonish himself. And it is the "votes" of these faulty and defective neophytes which creates new acharyas by a Vatican type vote system. And in sum the acharyas are under the control of the dictates of people like BVKS and his GBC "acharya managers program." This is not the system ever found in Vaishnavism from time immemorial, rather the acharyas are always getting DIRECT dictation from Krishna, and not from defective people like the GBC and BVKS. (see quotes below in the regard). 

This is pretty amazing, this means BVKS is hi-jacking a post which is HIGHER than God Almighty because: Normally what happens is that -- God is always (eternally) dictating to the acharya, but BVKS defies the normal system of religion and he removes God from the equation. In short, BVKS over-rides Krishna's authority to dictate to the acharyas, because BVKS replaces Krishna's authority (dictation to the guru) with dictations from BVKS and his bogus GBC "guru managers" council, who are now the persons allegedly dictating to the acharyas. How did BVKS party take over the post of God?  

This is also what Sridhara Maharaja told the GBC: "Wait and see" -- as their acharyas deviate, because it is the job of the GBC to control their acharyas with some sort of "guru sanctions." That is what the followers of Narayana Maharaja are also NOW doing, they are trying to censure and control BV Tirtha swami, one of their "acharyas." In other words, Bhakti Vikas swami is backing the GBC idea that acharyas often are (or they often become) debauchees, and then they have to be replaced.]

NOTICE! That Bhakti Vikas Swami -- and Suddhadvaiti Swami of the NARAYAN MAHARAJA program -- are now promoting THE SAME IDENTICAL idea, that a defective committee of conditioned souls is in charge of: creating, controlling, advising, correcting and even removing the acharyas!

Suddhavaiti swami: Now this incident with TM is clearly telling us we do need some kind of an executive power to run the sanga and enforce resolutions. 

[PD: This is exactly what the BVKS program does, they made a bogus executive "acharya board" in 1978, which claimed it was going to monitor and control their acharyas through the GBC's "executive powers." That is not the mandate or duty of the GBC, -- to vote in, create, manage, control, censure and remove acharyas. BVKS keeps telling us that he is strictly following Srila Prabhupada, ok so where was BVKS told by Srila Prabhupada to create, manage, and remove acharyas, and take over the post of Krishna?]   

SS: As per today, and it's amazing, we don't. And that's why TM is able to continue doing as he pleases, still dressed as a swami. Our sannyasi council has demanded that he doesn't travel abroad and steps down as an initiating guru for a minimum of 5 years but we cannot force him. 

[PD: This is identical to what the BVKS program is doing. The GBC tells their messiahs to "step down for five years" (the GBC's censured and suspended gurus idea). In sum BVKS says (a) we have to order around the acharyas as our bucket boys, (b) because we were ordered to order around the acharyas -- by the acharya? This makes no sense at all, and is not done in Vedic culture. The acharyas are deviating into debauchery, and then a "managerial council" censures, removes, suspends these acharyas --- which were voted in as acharyas by the "managerial committee" in the first place!]

SS: Sounds insane, uh? Well it is true that in Iskcon now they are enforcing rules on fallen leaders. it was not always the case, though and the lst or one of the last , PV, had been falling for years until they rectified him, uh?

[PD: This means BVKS has fully quit ISKCON and he has joined with the Gaudiya Matha's insane relativised guru program. Yes, ask anyone on the street, can the BVKS committee "monitor and regulate" God's personal associate messiahs? They will say, this is insane. The whole idea that ISKCON or Suddhadvaiti can "enforce rules" upon the acharyas is -- insane? Notice that BVKS and Suddhadvati are saying the same IDENTICAL thing, we have to monitor and control the acharya, they think they are better than God almighty who is the actual manager of the acharyas, they are thinking God is a lousy manager, I am better than God. This is also what Kamsa was thinking.]

SS: Anyway, I don't want to enter the ring of debate and fuel another big controversy on this thread, prabhu. Now, some of the Western sannyasis are speaking about creating a kind of GBC, which is needed. 

[PD: The idea that the Lord's messiahs need to be managed is "a controversy"? No, its a foolish idea from square one and they do not want to discuss it in public because, it exposes BVKS and Suddhadvaiti as fools for thinking they can manage the acharyas in the first place. Acharyam mam vijnaniyam, Krishna says the acharya is as good as my very self, He does not say the acharya is as good as the committee selects and manages?]

SS: I , for myself, have resigned from the sannyasi council because I don't like to be a powerless authority figure, nor pass as someone covering scandals up in 'a good ol' boy club', as some have insinuated. I also envision that this attempt at creating a leadership with executive power, after so many years with Srila Narayana Maharaja doing without it, is going to meet with all kinds of opposition from a 20% "anarchists", even though I guess that 80% of the devotees want a shelter and are looking up to us for that."

[PD: Oh swell, we should monitor our rubber stamped gurus but we cannot since, they are anarchists. How is this going to work then? The guru will say, I am a guru, you are the committee, I am above you. BVKS is creating anarchy, and resulting murders, molesting and mayhem. BVKS is the person creating the anarchy in ISKCON by making false gurus, which their guru rubber stamper program admits themselves, are anarchists. ys pd]

[PD: A few quotes to consider:

Must be uttama-adhikari who can never fall down
“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari .” (The Nectar of Instruction, text 5, purport)

“There is no possibility that a first-class devotee will fall down, even though he may mix with non-devotees to preach. Conviction and faith gradually increase to make one an uttama-adhikari, a first-class devotee.” (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 22.71, purport)

Must be mahabhagavata
“When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshipped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru.” (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 24.330, purport)

Must be liberated soul
“It is to be understood that the conditioned soul is tightly tied by the ropes of illusion. [...] Because the bound cannot help the bound, the rescuer must be liberated. Therefore, only Lord Krishna, or His bona fide representative the spiritual master, can release the conditioned soul.” (Bhagavad-gita As It Is 7.14, purport, 1972 ed.)

Does not deviate at all
“A bona fide spiritual master is in the disciplic succession from time eternal, and he does not deviate at all from the instructions of the Supreme Lord [...]”
(Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 4.42, purport)

Receives direct dictation from Lord Krishna
“A spiritually advanced person who acts with authority, as the spiritual master, speaks as the Supreme Personality of Godhead dictates from within. Thus it is not he that is personally speaking. When a pure devotee or spiritual master speaks, what he says should be accepted as having been directly spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the parampara system.”
(Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya-lila 5.71, purport)

“You are correct when you say that when the Spiritual Master speaks it should be taken that Krishna is speaking. That is a fact. A Spiritual Master must be liberated.”
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, June 10th, 1969)

Prabhupada: “Yes, because a devotee always consults Krishna and He gives order.”
Interviewer: “It’s a more direct communication.”
Prabhupada: “Yes. And He gives order [...] Krishna will tell directly. A devotee always consults Krishna and Krishna tells him, “do like this.” Not figuratively [...] a devotee does not do anything without consulting Krishna.” (Interview, July 14th, 1976)

Always embraced by Krishna
“[...] Such an acarya, or spiritual master, should be considered nondifferent from Krishna—that is, he should be considered the incarnation of Lord Krishna’s potency. Such a personality is krsnalingita-vigraha—that is, he is always embraced by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krishna [...] 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.” (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 25.9, purport)

Resident of the spiritual world
“Unless one is a resident of Krishna Loka, one cannot be a Spiritual Master. That is the first proposition. A layman cannot be a Spiritual Master, and if he becomes so then he will simply create disturbance [...] So to summarize the whole thing, it is to be understood that a bona fide Spiritual Master is a resident of Krishna Loka.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter, June 10th, 1969)

Identified with God Himself
“`One should understand the Spiritual Master to be as good as I am,’ said the Blessed Lord [...] `the Spiritual Master is the sum total of all demigods.’ That is, the acarya has been identified with God Himself.” (Srila Prabhupada Lecture, February 1936)

Body is completely spiritual
“The spiritual master, or acarya, is always situated in the spiritual status of life. Birth, death, old age and disease do not affect him [...] therefore, after the disappearance of an acarya, his body is never burnt to ashes, for it is a spiritual body. The spiritual body is always unaffected by material conditions.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.4.20, purport)

Empowered to act as he likes
“The conclusion is that a spiritual master who is authorized and empowered by Krishna and his own guru should be considered as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. That is the verdict of Visvanatha Cakravarti: saksad-dharitvenasa. [...] As Hari is free to act as He likes, the empowered spiritual master is also free. As Hari is not subject to mundane rules and regulations, the spiritual master empowered by Him is also not subject.” (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 10.136, purport)

No comments:

Post a Comment

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