Arsa-prayoga Is Not The Complete Picture
October 2015 by Vidura Mahatma das
As the inappropriateness of changing of Srila Prabhupada’s books is becoming clearer and clearer amongst devotees, we are seeing an increase of activity aimed at putting an end to these book changes. In the midst of this, there are some who oppose the changes being made to Srila Prabhupada’s books yet at the same time insist that Srila Prabhupada can only act as siksa guru (instructing spiritual master) for future generations of devotees in the Krishna consciousness movement.
Such a blunt contradiction is indicative of one who is still compromised with the “living guru” philosophy propagated by self-authorized/voted-in gurus, or perhaps a political agenda to assume (or re-assume?) the post of guru. Either way, the entire purpose and proper utilization of Srila Prabhupada’s books is being suppressed by these types of people, who outwardly express the desire to preserve this utilization.
“If you miss one point, there is a mistake in your calculation. Regardless of what you add or subtract after that, the mistake is already in the calculation, and everything that follows will also be faulty. We cannot simply accept that part of the scripture we like, and reject what we don’t like, and still expect to get theresult.” (The Science of Self Realization 4: Understanding Krsna and Christ)
Changing Srila Prabhupada’s books cannot be justified on the plea of [so-called] improvement. This is where the principle of Arsa-prayoga comes in, which states that even if there are some discrepancies in an authority’s writing or if they are irregularly composed, they should be accepted and are accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest (SB Preface / Letter 1-20-72). But in applying the principle of Arsa-prayoga one must also accommodate that changing Srila Prabhupada’s books breaks the authorized disciplic succession.
Srila Prabhupada’s books are nondifferent from himself in the deliverance of one who abides by the instructions prescribed in his books. In that way his books themselves are the current link in the disciplic succession (please see Srila Prabhupada’s Discipline). Under the circumstances, if one does not accommodate this, their use of the principle of Arsa-prayoga is incomplete; The entire calculation if off, having accepted one part of the scripture picture and not the other.
What is the real reason why Srila Prabhupada’s books should be preserved and unchanged? It is so that people can take full potent advantage of the books. Simply not changing them for the sake of respect and preservation for what has been presented as it is is very nice and a noble, dutiful task. But Srila Prabhupada’s books are even more than historical spiritual masterpieces deserving of preservation. Srila Prabhupada’s books are actually meant to guide society for many, many years to come. More specifically, Srila Prabhupada’s books will spiritually guide each and every devotee in the Krishna consciousness movement with transcendental knowledge (diksa). Full advantage of Srila Prabhupada’s books means adhering to the actual devotional principles prescribed in the books and thereby receiving transcendental knowledge from them – from Srila Prabhupada. This point has been examined in depth in our article A Spiritual Approach.
Proposing no changes to the books but rejecting their full diksa utilization holds the same effect as literally changing the books in that the full utility of Srila Prabhupada’s books is lost either way.
Srila Prabhupada did in fact order for initiations to continue to be done on his behalf – one of the many methods implemented in the movement for the sake of world-wide preaching – in perfect harmony with sastric principles. To argue that Srila Prabhupada’s books should not be changed while at the same time arguing that Srila Prabhupada’s status-quo as initiating spiritual master for the movement should have been changed (and was changed) is clearly just another phase of hypocrisy.
[PADA: The good news is that nowadays, almost no one in and around the ISKCON GBC circles wants to name "who" is their diksha guru, especially when debating with our Prabhupadanugas. Why? Because their GBC's diksha gurus are often tainted with: (A) Their own scandals, (B) Supporting or even reinstating "acharyas" who have been engaged in scandals, (C) Being "voted in" by persons engaged in scandals. "Yes as a matter of fact, the Alcatraz prison MAFIA members voted for me to be chairman of the Girl Scouts Cookie sale"! How swell is that?
Then again, how can a hospital janitor issue brain surgery certificates? So now we have a situation where for example Prahladananda is certified as the next messiah by folks like Hrdayananda, but Prahladananda has to banish Hrdayananda from ISKCON since he is a deviant. The person who certifies one as the next messiah, has to be banned from the post of messiah because he is a deviant? Then what is the value of one's certification?
This is of course one reason why the GBC does not advertise the fact that Radhanath took sannyasa from Kirtanananda, it muddies his certification. Although, it does explain why Radhanath buried Kirtanananda in the holy dham with the approval of other GBC. Radhanath was certified by a known sexual predator and certified criminal -- as the next messiah of the jagat. And so -- to return the favor -- he buries the person who gave him a guru certification in the holy dham, despite almost everyone knows Kirtanananda is a deviant, and the rest of the GBC kowtows and acquiesces.
This is why we find for example our friends "Arsa-prayoga" folks, like Ajit Krishna and Torben Nielsen, always talking about how Rocana and Kailash Chandra are their "living" authorities, but these fellows are unable to put together any basic public preaching programs, nor can any of them name their actual current living guru. And no wonder, these guys claim to be against the book changes, while they support and favor the bogus guru line that is changing the books. They are promoting the same people who changed the books and who put illicit sex into Vyasa seats.
Then again, for all we know these guys worship the tooth fairy, Santa Claus or the Easter bunny since they know as soon as they name their guru we will link him to the books changers etc. Otherwise! Why do ALL of them refuse to tell us who their living guru is?
OK because they are ashamed to admit who he is! As soon as they admit they worship a compromiser with the book changers and illicit sex acharya's program, they lose their whole argument. This is why Ajit and Torben keep saying, we worship a living person, but he has no name, no photo, no books, no preaching, no nothing. So they worship basically a zero, a phantom person.
They are even preaching that to the public, you have to worship a living person, but we do not, we refuse to actually name anyone that we worship.
So they worship a phantasm, they have no living guru and yet they order others to accept one. And Rocana and Kailash do the same thing, we need to worship their live guru, but -- they cannot tell you who he is. That is actually GOOD, it means we have them pinned down, they cannot identify their living guru because we can link their live guru to the GBC's scandal ridden guru line.
First of all, Rocana lives pretty much isolated in Vancouver, and he has no public preaching programs. And Rocana's site's writer Kailash Chandra lives in the Moab Utah desert, and he ALSO has no public preaching programs. These guys are not making public programs, public temples and devotees, nor are they printing original books and so on and so forth. Why do Ajit and Torben say we need to accept these guys, when none of them has any living guru, and they are not even making public preaching projects?
Thus basically Ajit and Torben are saying we no longer need to preach to the public, we need to live like isolated survivalist's away from devotees and devotional programs. That is simply not going to work, and its not working. Apart from that, Srila Prabhupada says, persons who cannot identify their guru are mayavadas. Also, the devotees are supposed to be gosthi-anandas, or preachers, and not bhajan-anandas, or living alone in the woods.
At least some in mainstream ISKCON have enough fortitude to identify their living gurus, like Hrdayananda swami, but his credibility is slipping badly and so are the other GBC's for not correcting his situation. And the GBC gurus behind the "women guru's" voting program are also slipping, as are the other GBC's gurus for not addressing and correcting these deviations.
The real problem for some of these people is that they have no identified source of divyam jnanam which destroys sins (aka diksha). If there is no identified source of divyam jnanam which destroys sins, then its no wonder they have no public preaching, and besides -- no one is attracted to a program that has no identifiable actual guru? We worship, phantom-pada? Why does Torben and Ajit say we need to worship a non-existing phantom instead of the acharya Srila Prabhupada? Where does Srila Prabhupada say, worship no one and nobody, like Rocana / Kailash / Ajit and Torben are preaching?
We cannot preach on the basis that, we need to worship -- no one -- as our diksha guru? We have asked Ajit, Torben, Rocana and Kailash who is their current diksha guru, and they all answer, "We cannot say." OK, there is none. That is why the ritviks are winning more converts and they are not, because at least the ritviks can identify who their diksha guru is.
Even the worship of a ghost is more advanced than worship of nothing, Srila Prabhupada says, people who cannot name their guru, that is complete mayavada. Anyway, that is why we are winning, we have a guru, we have his books, we have his temples, we have his programs, we have at least something going on. There is simply no statement in the Vedas, "all glories to -- nobody." ys pd]
What is the real reason why Srila Prabhupada’s books should be preserved and unchanged? It is so that people can take full potent advantage of the books. Simply not changing them for the sake of respect and preservation for what has been presented as it is is very nice and a noble, dutiful task. But Srila Prabhupada’s books are even more than historical spiritual masterpieces deserving of preservation. Srila Prabhupada’s books are actually meant to guide society for many, many years to come. More specifically, Srila Prabhupada’s books will spiritually guide each and every devotee in the Krishna consciousness movement with transcendental knowledge (diksa). Full advantage of Srila Prabhupada’s books means adhering to the actual devotional principles prescribed in the books and thereby receiving transcendental knowledge from them – from Srila Prabhupada. This point has been examined in depth in our article A Spiritual Approach.
Proposing no changes to the books but rejecting their full diksa utilization holds the same effect as literally changing the books in that the full utility of Srila Prabhupada’s books is lost either way.
Srila Prabhupada did in fact order for initiations to continue to be done on his behalf – one of the many methods implemented in the movement for the sake of world-wide preaching – in perfect harmony with sastric principles. To argue that Srila Prabhupada’s books should not be changed while at the same time arguing that Srila Prabhupada’s status-quo as initiating spiritual master for the movement should have been changed (and was changed) is clearly just another phase of hypocrisy.
[PADA: The good news is that nowadays, almost no one in and around the ISKCON GBC circles wants to name "who" is their diksha guru, especially when debating with our Prabhupadanugas. Why? Because their GBC's diksha gurus are often tainted with: (A) Their own scandals, (B) Supporting or even reinstating "acharyas" who have been engaged in scandals, (C) Being "voted in" by persons engaged in scandals. "Yes as a matter of fact, the Alcatraz prison MAFIA members voted for me to be chairman of the Girl Scouts Cookie sale"! How swell is that?
Then again, how can a hospital janitor issue brain surgery certificates? So now we have a situation where for example Prahladananda is certified as the next messiah by folks like Hrdayananda, but Prahladananda has to banish Hrdayananda from ISKCON since he is a deviant. The person who certifies one as the next messiah, has to be banned from the post of messiah because he is a deviant? Then what is the value of one's certification?
This is of course one reason why the GBC does not advertise the fact that Radhanath took sannyasa from Kirtanananda, it muddies his certification. Although, it does explain why Radhanath buried Kirtanananda in the holy dham with the approval of other GBC. Radhanath was certified by a known sexual predator and certified criminal -- as the next messiah of the jagat. And so -- to return the favor -- he buries the person who gave him a guru certification in the holy dham, despite almost everyone knows Kirtanananda is a deviant, and the rest of the GBC kowtows and acquiesces.
This is why we find for example our friends "Arsa-prayoga" folks, like Ajit Krishna and Torben Nielsen, always talking about how Rocana and Kailash Chandra are their "living" authorities, but these fellows are unable to put together any basic public preaching programs, nor can any of them name their actual current living guru. And no wonder, these guys claim to be against the book changes, while they support and favor the bogus guru line that is changing the books. They are promoting the same people who changed the books and who put illicit sex into Vyasa seats.
Then again, for all we know these guys worship the tooth fairy, Santa Claus or the Easter bunny since they know as soon as they name their guru we will link him to the books changers etc. Otherwise! Why do ALL of them refuse to tell us who their living guru is?
OK because they are ashamed to admit who he is! As soon as they admit they worship a compromiser with the book changers and illicit sex acharya's program, they lose their whole argument. This is why Ajit and Torben keep saying, we worship a living person, but he has no name, no photo, no books, no preaching, no nothing. So they worship basically a zero, a phantom person.
They are even preaching that to the public, you have to worship a living person, but we do not, we refuse to actually name anyone that we worship.
So they worship a phantasm, they have no living guru and yet they order others to accept one. And Rocana and Kailash do the same thing, we need to worship their live guru, but -- they cannot tell you who he is. That is actually GOOD, it means we have them pinned down, they cannot identify their living guru because we can link their live guru to the GBC's scandal ridden guru line.
First of all, Rocana lives pretty much isolated in Vancouver, and he has no public preaching programs. And Rocana's site's writer Kailash Chandra lives in the Moab Utah desert, and he ALSO has no public preaching programs. These guys are not making public programs, public temples and devotees, nor are they printing original books and so on and so forth. Why do Ajit and Torben say we need to accept these guys, when none of them has any living guru, and they are not even making public preaching projects?
Thus basically Ajit and Torben are saying we no longer need to preach to the public, we need to live like isolated survivalist's away from devotees and devotional programs. That is simply not going to work, and its not working. Apart from that, Srila Prabhupada says, persons who cannot identify their guru are mayavadas. Also, the devotees are supposed to be gosthi-anandas, or preachers, and not bhajan-anandas, or living alone in the woods.
At least some in mainstream ISKCON have enough fortitude to identify their living gurus, like Hrdayananda swami, but his credibility is slipping badly and so are the other GBC's for not correcting his situation. And the GBC gurus behind the "women guru's" voting program are also slipping, as are the other GBC's gurus for not addressing and correcting these deviations.
The real problem for some of these people is that they have no identified source of divyam jnanam which destroys sins (aka diksha). If there is no identified source of divyam jnanam which destroys sins, then its no wonder they have no public preaching, and besides -- no one is attracted to a program that has no identifiable actual guru? We worship, phantom-pada? Why does Torben and Ajit say we need to worship a non-existing phantom instead of the acharya Srila Prabhupada? Where does Srila Prabhupada say, worship no one and nobody, like Rocana / Kailash / Ajit and Torben are preaching?
We cannot preach on the basis that, we need to worship -- no one -- as our diksha guru? We have asked Ajit, Torben, Rocana and Kailash who is their current diksha guru, and they all answer, "We cannot say." OK, there is none. That is why the ritviks are winning more converts and they are not, because at least the ritviks can identify who their diksha guru is.
Even the worship of a ghost is more advanced than worship of nothing, Srila Prabhupada says, people who cannot name their guru, that is complete mayavada. Anyway, that is why we are winning, we have a guru, we have his books, we have his temples, we have his programs, we have at least something going on. There is simply no statement in the Vedas, "all glories to -- nobody." ys pd]
No I am not kidding prabhu, Rocana / Kailash / Ajit / Torben have ALL told us FOR YEARS together, and repeatedly, we have to worship their phantom non-existing living person, and yes, they cannot identify this person for 35 years, and they never will identify this phantom person because their real aim is to STOP the worship of the pure devotee.
ReplyDeleteYes, that means they would rather have people worship NO ONE AT ALL rather than worship the pure devotee Srila Prabhupada. Does that mean they are envious of the pure devotee? Well you figure it out, they would rather have people worship no one and nothing, as the path back to God, that means they want to stop people from going to God, what else could it mean? You tell me! There is no such thing as the worship of no one and nothing found anywhere in the Vedas, they are making this up.
The Vedas say you need to worship the pure devotee, there is no other path back to Krishna. Why are they telling people to worship -- no one? Good question! ys pd
Yes prabhu, most likely that is correct,the GBC / Rocana / Torben / Ajit living guru program has in fact been promoting the worship of illicit sex as their messiahs, and so these folks cannot give the name of their living guru, since that would expose that Torben and Ajit are still promoting the GBC's worshiping an illicit sex guru lineage.
ReplyDeleteYes, Jayadvaita says the same thing, he also cannot name the actual guru who is bona fide, he also says you need to worship a living person, but he cannot name that person, Torben and Ajit are now his parrots.
That makes Ajit and Torben disciples of Jayadvaita, they say whatever he says. In any case, Torben and Ajit have been worshiping the Jayadvaita illicit sex guru program, and even any ten year old in the USA knows that worship of illicit sex is bogus and wrong, so these hidden GBC groupies are trying to hide the fact that they are still with the GBC and their worship of illicit sex as messiahs project. That is the real reason Torben and Ajit are not naming their guru, their guru is within the living illicit sex messiahs program, or why else would they not name him? Harikesha was the guru in Scandanavia, and he said gurus should wear condoms when they have illicit sex, hee hee hee, he was more advanced than the rest of them? So that is the real problem Ajit and Torben are still part of the condom pada messiahs project. You got it! ys pd
Toben now says that unless a GBC guru has a gross fall down, there is no way to tell if he is not bona fide. OK, a person who participates in an illicit sex guru lineage is already fallen? Torben's gurus are saying its common that acharyas are falling into illicit sex, left right and center, so they are all supporting the idea that messiahs are debauchees, that is already bogus from square one. Torben does not know that acharyas are not engaged in debauchee behavior, nor are other acharyas voted in by debauchees? Why does Torben say that the supporters of the worship of debauchees is no sign that a person is not bona fide? So this is the problem, Torben thinks the persons who are voted in by debauchees are pure devotees, he has no idea what is a pure devotee. He has never properly read the books, plain and simple, otherwise he would know that there is no such thing as fallen acharyas, voting by fallen acharyas, reinstating fallen acharyas, suspending fallen acharyas, all of this is fallen and bogus. When are he and Ajit going to actually read the quotes about acharyas and their qualifications? ys pd
ReplyDelete