Saturday, October 14, 2017

Chandra Shekhara Swami (Chris Ostrowski) Defends Molester Messiah's Project

Is he helping Brooklyn NYC Temple Thieves?

Chandra Shekhara Swami: 

After 13+ years of legal battle, the court case in Long Island over the Freeport Temple has been decided in court in favor of ISKCON and the GBC. The Ritviks are being evicted. Judge Randi Sue Marber also concluded that, in matters pertaining to ownership and management, the legal court system of New York State defers to the GBC as the authority to decide over who does or does not have the right to properties and legal entities.

There is no such thing as the “Ritvik System”, at least in the Vedas or Srila Prabhupada’s books. If you search the Vedabase for the word “rtvik,” you will find about 36 hits or so. 

[PADA: Right! We need to follow the GBC! Who knew! 

OK great, and according to the GBC's spokespersons -- like Jayadvaita swami -- Chandra Shekhara swami's GBC "eternal guru program from Vaikuntha" contains "illicit sex with men, women and children." Where do we find that God's "diksha guru successors" are often illicit sex debauchees, either in the Vedas, or in any other bona fide religion? 

Why are the GBC / Chandra Shekhara swami folks teaching even little children that the path to God is -- to worship a "chain of gurus" that are often debauchees? Worship of a debauchee guru line takes one to God? And this is what they are teaching to five years old children, that these children have to worship a "guru chain from God" that contains severe criminals and / or sexual predators -- as the children's worshiped guru's lineage? 

One GBC guru defender told me "there are not too many" deviants, sexual predators, porno swamis, drunkards, pot heads, thieves, crooks etc. in their guru chain. Swell -- there are "not too many" dog's stools in the sweet rice! There are some good successors to God, and some rotten successors to God, but there are "not that many" rotten successors to God? There are "not that many" deviants in the pure chain of gurus from God. Where is this stated in the Vedas? Not too many dog's stools in the sweet rice, who is going to want that sweet rice? Is this the plan, to make the Krishna religion so odious the temples will be empty, then they can sell the buildings? 

Isn't the guru parampara an eternal chain of PURE and DIVINE saints, who are in direct contact with the Supreme GOD? Why can't the GBC find ANY evidence of this process in the Vedas? Or are they saying, persons in contact with God are often debauchees? And now, their folks rationalize, there are "not too many" debauchees in God's chain of successors? 

The chain of gurus starts with God / Krishna and as we go through the "eternal links" in the GBC's "chain of eternal saints that connects us to God" we will find:

Illicit sex; Smoking pot; Sexual predators of minors; Buying mini-skirts for female gurukula students as the messiah is "dating" her at the Mall; Going to the Star Wars movies; Shooting guns at occupied buildings and being arrested; Drinking beer, vodka and schnops; Being sent post cards from Reno for being a good customer; Porno swamis; Sahajiya "gopi rasika classes" groups formed with Narayana Maharaja; Police SWAT raids on various of these guru's properties; Being sued for $400,000,000 for a program of starving and abusing children; and so on -- ad infinitum. 

Did we forget to mention the GBC is saying Chandra Shekhara's NYC guru Romapada swami and his program -- are thieves who are stealing the Brooklyn building by starting a bogus off shoot charity named the Bharatiya Society, and they have transferred ISKCON's assets to their own charity? Are property thieves also messiahs?

Why is all this chain of deviants and their extensive deviations an eternal "pure chain of saints that descends from God"? Did we forget to mention, the acharya Srila Prabhupada himself complained of being poisoned from prominent members of this group? So Krishna is eternal, His guru successors are eternal, therefore, we need to worship a "chain of gurus" that contains debauchees as also -- eternal? Isn't that what Satan wants to declare, we need to worship debauchees, and not the pure saints? Is the worship of debauchees eternal, only in the Church of Satan? 

Doesn't Chandra Shekhara swami, Jayadvaita swami et al. know that deviants, criminals, molesters, sexual predators etc., and fallen down conditioned souls in general ARE NOT, WERE NOT and COULD NOT HAVE BEEN, eternal gurus in a chain from God? 

So we need to worship an illicit sex guru parampara, because the GBC says so? What happened to Krishna? When did He say the path back to Him, and back to Godhead, is to worship a debauchee filled guru lineage? Why don't these people know that Krishna is superior to the GBC, and He says we have to worship His pure devotees, not debauchees posing as His pure devotees? And moreover worship of debauchees as acharyas is forbidden, and takes one to hell?

Isn't Chandra Shekhara part of the temple thieves program in Brooklyn?

OK. There are allegedly 36 mention of ritviks, maybe so, but there is no mention that ISKCON has to worship Chandra Shekhara's GBC illicit sex with men, women and children, and maybe sex with goats -- messiahs, acharyas, parampara members etc. as "God's guru successors"? Where is this mentioned?

And worse, Chandra Shekhara swami apparently cannot hardly find any examples where people worship pure devotees in the Vedas? Ooops, don't we find that worship of pure devotees as our gurus is the main idea found in the Vedas, or even the sole and exclusive idea?

The bogus GBC's plan is, we have to worship their debauchee infiltered group of bogus messiahs as our gurus in order to attain God, and worse -- now Chandra Shekhara is apparently saying there are hardly any examples of where people worship pure devotees found in shastra? Where are people instructed to worship a debauchee guru line in the Vedas? Sorry, there are no examples of this idea.]  

In all of these, where the word is referenced in the word-for-word, the word “rtvik” simply means “priest” or a type of Brahmana. The notion of “proxy” is not a part of the definition of the word ritvik. If you look at the Sanskrit derivation, also the word is a compound of the “Rtu” (meaning season) and “Yuj” (meaning one who offers sacrifice). It is obviously true that, in our modern world, certainly the word has come to mean proxy, but that is not its original, Vedic meaning.

[PADA: Right, so the persons who are falling into illicit sex with men, women and children are called neophytes, proxies, priests or conditioned souls attempting to conduct ceremonies on behalf of the guru, they are themselves full blown diksha gurus, and as such they can absorb sins like Jesus? 

The people falling down are not proxies for the acharyas, they are themselves acharyas? Where does Srila Prabhupada say acharyas are falling down left, right and center? Sorry, neophyte devotees who try to represent the acharya are FALLIBLE proxy agents, preachers, priests, who are aspiring AGENTS of the acharyas. A fallible soul is a proxy of the acharya AT BEST, just like a priest is a fallible proxy agent of Jesus, he is not the guru successor to Jesus.]

This topic has gone round and round for close to 30 years and I do not expect those who are convinced of the “Ritvik System” to be swayed by any argument. Therefore, I will just present this information once. To those who have ears, let them hear. Otherwise this Facebook thread will simply become a flame war uselessly wasting time. I will not reply further to the same arguments over and over.

[PADA: The GBC are arguing for a guru line that has apparently more than fifty percent of the time gurus that are fallen down, because apparently fifty percent of their acharyas have been falling down. Gurus are often fallen? Where is this stated in the Vedas? And now the new wave of gurus was voted in by the first wave, the wave that has persons engaged in illicit sex?]

Suffice it to say that the word Ritvik has come, in our modern times to be associated with the notion of proxy. This is a modern overlay upon the word which just has a generic meaning, which is simply priest. If you want to read more into the word, then go ahead, but then do not associate that with Srila Prabhupada.

[PADA: Right, Srila Prabhupada did not appoint proxies, who are fallible and who can fall down, he appointed full blown diksha gurus. That means Chandrashekahra is saying acharyas cannot distinguish neophytes from acharyas, and so the acharyas appoint conditioned souls and neophytes as the guru successors to Krishna.] 

In that same discussion on May 28, Prabhupada makes the definition of “They are his disciple. Who is initiating. He is grand-disciple.” “He becomes disciple of my disciple.” “He becomes regular guru.” 

Those statements are about as clear as you can get. If Prabhupada’s direct words answering a direct question do not change your view, then nothing will. I am aware that Ritvik-System believers can twist those simple words, but do so at your own peril. I do not take the idea that Prabhupada used the word “his” to mean himself; speaking of himself in the third-person. I do not take the idea that Prabhupada took the idea that the word “Ritvik” implied “proxy.” If you do, then we really have nothing more to talk about.

I also do not take the July 9th letter to be a revocation of the May 28th discussion. The July 9th letter is simply an expansion of the July 8th conversation with Tamala Krishna Gosvami. Read the July 8th discussion. It clearly spells out the context of the July 9th letter. The context was not a revocation of the May 28th discussion, but rather a policy directive for initiations during Prabhupada’s own lifetime, but while he was too sick to travel. If you want to read more into it than that, go right ahead, again at your own peril. And again, if you do there is really nothing more we have to talk about.

This controversy has been argued ad-nausea and further embellished with other speculations. There will never be a resolution to it and there is no compromise with it. Any misread of Prabhupada’s direct words can never be accepted, when it directly contradicts his preaching for 11 years. Find any place in Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita or any of Prabhupada’s books where the proxy plan for initiation is mentioned, directly, and spelled out and I will be happy to take a look at it. That is why I say that there is no such thing as the “Ritvik-System.” Prabhupada did not create one out of the blue in his final months and then leave its structure and definition open. And no, Prabhupada did not let one or two disciples in on this sweeping Ritvik idea and expect them to convert the entire rest of the movement. Prabhupada did not do things that way.

Certainly Acharyas can take advantage of modern technology, but that is a very different thing from changing philosophical conclusions. If we call it "Absolute Truth" that means it never changes for anyone at any time or any place.

Certainly, relative truth does change. The pertinent question is what is absolute in our philosophy and what is relative or what is principle and what is detail.

I am not trying to be dogmatic, but just try to see the logic there. If Prabhupada taught us that everything is in Guru, Sadhu and Sastra, that means that what Prabhupada says is the same as Guru, Sadhu and Sastra. New iPhone or whatever has nothing to do with it.

And if Prabhupada supposedly created some "new" system, then why did not give any details about how that system was to be carried out?


[PADA:  Right, there is nothing new, so worship of pure devotees is always the process and worship of Chandra Shekhara's illicit sex with men, women and children messiahs is -- not EVER the process. His debauchee's guru line idea is not new at all, many illicit sex guru lines have appeared in the past and Srila Prabhupada says they are ALL packing off to the most obnoxious regions of the unvierse. 

Then again, taking sins without authority is taking down these false gurus already, no need to wait for the next life to experience hellish problems? Anyway, the court of public opinion is not in favor of these molester messiah's programs, they will never be accepted widely, plain and simple. ys pd]


Chandra Shekhara swami has apparently become the aid and abet assistant of Romapada swami in the theft of the Brookyn temple:


GBC "advisor" Sridhara Maharaja says that Krishna's successor acharyas may "go mad" after money, women and followers, and this has become the GBC's main standard bearing concept after 1977:

At least Narayana Maharaja admits he makes monkeys into his messiahs:

No comments:

Post a Comment

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