Saturday, December 9, 2017

Sridhara Maharaja's deviant acharyas: links of parampara?

Sri Guru Links to the Parampara



So far I have understood, the notion of Ritvik or even soft-Ritvik is being rejected by Srila Sridhar Swami, as he gives his authentic understanding of the position of Sri Guru.

[PADA: First of all, who is the "Sri Guru" link they want us to worship now? They never identify this alleged person? All glories to (the phantom) Sri Guru! 

Also amazing! 

First of all Sridhara Maharaja endorses a bi-sexual deviant as the acharya in 1936, and under his process dissenters are being systematically banned, beaten and killed. This is creating a huge purge of manpower, bad media publicity and a giant lawsuit that drains the finances of the matha in India in the 1940s. Then later on their "acharya" commits suicide after his scandals are being exposed. All this creates ghost towns out of the temples as the devotees flee the scene of Sridhara Maharaja's guru lineage's deviation scheme. 

And then later Sridhara Maharaja endorsed the GBC's false gurus after 1977. Again he co-authorized and co-generated the same process; Dissenters to his illicit sex gurus are once again being banned, beaten, and some are killed; Vulnerable citizens are being molested; Huge public media scandals and giant millions of dollars lawsuit ensue, and all this is the authentic idea of the guru parampara! 

Is there any wonder the GBC / Rocana / Torben / Ajit Krishna / Hanuman Croatia / etc do not want to name their current "authorized diksha guru" these days, since it will not take us long to link him to this odious heap of stinky mess? This is also what always amazes me about the exponents of Sridhara Maharaja like Sudhir Krishna, Tripurari swami, Panchadravida and others, the person who endorses deviants as acharyas is ... showing us the bona fide system of the parampara? 

And all the banning, beating, molesting, lawsuits, murders, bad publicity from the "gurus" that Sridhara Maharaja endorsed is part of the bona fide parampara system? Of course Narayana Maharaja also endorsed the GBC's gurus, and he too seemed quite oblivious to all these reactions? Worse, Narayana Maharaja says that Sridhara Maharaja is a bona fide acharya, because all of them endorsed his system of making deviants and criminals into their acharyas?]

It appears Sri Guru must be at least to the intermediate standard, having one foot in this word and one foot in the spiritual realm, he should not be struggling in his mind with sex or craving followers, or worship, He must dedicate himself totally to his Guru, he must take worship, but knowing it's his Guru who is worshiped, because without his Guru he would be nowhere. He should take all risks, and fully depend on the mercy of his Guru and Krishna to carry out the service.

[PADA: OK but if he has one foot here he is not a guru? How can a person who has one foot here act as a Jesus like messiah and absorb the sins of others?]

But it appears if he is linked correctly to the parampara then the parampara and Krishna will speak through him. It is not that we have soft Ritvik Guru, who can be of any standard, i.e., attracted to women, sex, money, fame, etc., and give the philosophy. Actually Srila Prabhupada is the real Guru, not me.

[PADA: A neophyte can easily become attracted to mundane things, that is why he is called a neophyte? How can a neophyte be a representative, well he can because all of us neophytes made ISKCON in the first place, but we did so by serving the acharya. Notice this person says actually Srila Prabhupada is the real guru, ok that is the ritvik system.]

If we are to imply that it leaves open the door of the family gurus who have no qualifications to be Sri Guru, this is something condemned by both Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Bhaktivinoda Thakur, and this philosophy will lead to no potency of progressive Krishna Consciousness within ISKCON, but further administration powers only.

[PADA: So why is the GBC and Rocana writing all sorts of administrative rules for their acharyas?]
Our society must hold to the faith that there are devotees who are sincere and dedicated and they are linked to the parampara, and that Krishna and the parampara can speak through them. 

[PADA: OK but you just said that these people will act as ritvik / representatives because Srila Prabhupada is the real guru, not me?]

They are taking a risk, they are putting themselves in high position for service to their Guru, Srila Prabhupada, or the disciples of Prabhupada, and they are dedicated and advancing, and do not involve their minds in mundane subjects of this world, but have the ability and devotion to keep their minds in the spiritual realms, and service to Sri Guru.

[PADA: A neophyte is told not to take the sins of others and act as a diksha guru, doing so is not bona fide taking risk, that is violating the order.]

Prospective disciples must know it is by the blessing of such a Guru that I hear and chant the glories of Krishna, and that I am on the spiritual path. Without him I would be nowhere. He is linking me by his blessings and his example I am following. It is not up to the institution to make this call, but the Guru is self-effulgent to the prospective disciple. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta says, it's up to prospective disciples to educate themselves and follow Guru, Sadhu and Sastra, and the inner feelings of their hearts.

In that consciousness, of course, all the parampara and their teachings and blessings are upon the disciples. The principle of Siksa both physically present gurus and those who are not, but are present in their teachings, is always in play, accordingly there is no difference between Diksa and Siksa.

[PADA: There is no difference between the neophyte siksha guru and the uttama diksha guru? There is no difference between Jesus and the church priest? OK! This guy is spinning (again). ys pd] 




No comments:

Post a Comment

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