In this photo are Guru dasa, Hansadutta, Himavati, Shyamsundar, Dhananjaya, Revatinandan swami and others. The temple was built like this by Shyamsundar. We had the men's and women's ashrams upstairs. Some of us used to go and sleep on the roof in the summer. This was close to Oxford street, where we used to do harinamas. We put a lot of insulation on the first floor to stop the noise, but you could still hear the temple kirtanas several blocks away. Needless to say, the neighbors found our noise to be "a bit much." Hee hee! ys pd
GBC and Prabhupadanugas gradual agreement?
We are also not changing anything, the GBC itself just now wrote a paper on Dandavats (I gave you the link) saying that their gurus are (not spiritual masters at all but) conditioned souls who are prone to fall down. We did not write that, they did? People who are falling down into illicit sex, drugs, drinking, criminal actions and so on are not gurus, this is known to anyone over the age of ten.
Now the GBC are admitting to that themselves, in writing, their gurus are prone to illusion because, they were never out of illusion, they were always conditioned beings. Bhakti Vikas swami also wrote basically that same thing recently, he says -- many GBC gurus are still conditioned souls (subject to fail). Well that is what we said in 1978? That means we are gradually coming to an agreement, why not help that along?
Parampara guru means pure, and they themselves just wrote that their gurus are not pure, even the GBC is agreeing their gurus are not really gurus, they are not pure at all, they are prone to failure because, they are not on the level of a guru in the parampara. They wrote that, not us?
In fact even us nobody and nothing devotees are not falling into illicit sex with men, women and children, so even some of us who are barely kanistha are more advanced that they are. Their gurus are having all kinds of problems, including smoking pot, illicit sex, and I caught one of them eating chicken salad right here in Berkeley, and so on. So we are more advanced than them, that is clear, although that does not make us highly advanced, it means we are at least trying to keep some basic standards.
We are simply agreeing with them, they say their gurus are conditioned souls, who are prone to fall, and we agree with them. Why not applaud that they are finally coming to our side after all this time? They tried to say their gurus were pure, now they are saying, guess what, Puranjana was right all along, they are not pure, they are subject to fall down because -- they are not pure?
So that means they do not have spiritual "masters," they have conditioned souls subject to fail, which is what we said all along. Now that they are agreeing with us, you are trying to make that sound bad. Why? They also say that their gurus are subject to: voting in, voting out, censure, suspension, monitoring, removal, and all the things that apply to a priest and not a master, we are agreeing with --- them? Their gurus need all these priest like sanctions because, they are not gurus but more like priests? As for Kirtanananda being old news, no, he is being worshiped in Vrndavana now, today.
The solution is coming along nicely, the GBC has first of all tried to tell me their gurus are pure devotees in 1978. I said, no they are still conditioned souls who fail, and now they are writing papers saying, our gurus are still conditioned souls who are subject to fail, which is what I told them at the get go of all this. Why not applaud that we are coming to an agreement on this issue, so we can all move forward on their idea that neophytes fail? Neophytes who fails are not gurus, which again, is known to everyone over the age of ten? Why can't you applaud that gradual agreement is coming about? ys pd
DANDAVATS ADMITS THE GBC GURUS ARE PRONE TO FALLING DOWN:
Gurusuh narah matih, narakah sah, anyone who says gurus are ordinary men who fall down is a resident of narakah: http://www.dandavats.com/?p=11355