Hanuman's Croatia's ISKCON "Cat and Dog Fight" Guru Parampara

[PADA: Hanuman Croatia wants the devotees to "unite together" to help him protest and fight against various ISKCON GBC's "diksha guru" messiahs / acharyas. And Hanuman complains that not enough of the "moderate" GBC's acharyas are fighting with the more deviated GBC's acharyas. 

Wait a minute? The acharyas are supposed to be infighting with one another, and branding each other as fools and deviants? And now we find out there are "more moderate gurus," who fight with "more deviated gurus" in Krishna's guru parampara. Who knew? 

First of all! Why does Hanuman think Srila Prabhupada wanted all of these people to be worshiped as ISKCON's acharyas in any case? Would that not mean Srila Prabhupada could not judge what is an acharya -- and what is not, so he designated unqualified people to be Krishna's successors? Does that not mean Hanuman Croatia is attacking Srila Prabhupada as not being able to distinguish who should be worshiped as Krishna's successors, and who should not be? Oh and lets not forget, as soon as we say these GBC people are NOT diksha gurus, but AT BEST fallible priests, Hanuman attacks -- us, for saying his gurus are conditioned souls. 

And now, some GBC folks are saying all of the 5,000 devotees were meant to be diksha gurus. What! Why did they say there are only 11 then?

And! Srila Prabhupada wanted 5,000 Vyasa seats in each temple? 

And 5,000 photos on each altar? 

The main questions here are, when did Srila Prabhupada say he wanted ANY conditioned souls, either one, eleven or five thousand, to be worshiped as his successor acharyas? 

*** Or that he wanted the GBC to "2/3 show of hands" vote in more acharyas?

*** Or that he wanted people to chastise and protest Krishna's successor acharyas? 

*** Or that he wanted some acharyas to fight with other acharyas, and demand the removal of other acharyas for deviations -- and so on? 

Thus, the acharyas are considered as residents of Krishna loka and therefore, they are infighting like cats and dogs? And what if some of the so-called more moderate acharyas are -- voted in -- by some of the more deviated acharyas? And now Hanuman Croatia says the way to fix ISKCON is to teach everyone in the world that Lord Krishna's successors / diksha gurus / acharyas are generally: fools, deviants, debauchees, drunkards, sexual predators, and criminals -- who fight like cats and dogs? As such, acharyas are then in need of: censure, monitoring, chastisement, suspending, removal, and excommunication etc. Really?  

The residents of Krishna Loka are -- fighting like cats and dogs?

Why does Hanuman think the residents of Krishna loka / acharyas are fighting like cats and dogs? At all? Hanuman keeps saying he is only quoting Srila Prabhupada's books, ok and where is this idea found in the books -- that the acharyas are infighting like mundane politicians, or fighting like animals etc.? Then Hanuman says that we need to correct the GBC's gurus / acharyas / sannyasas "female secretaries" problem. Why does Hanuman think acharyas have a female secretaries problem in the first place? And why would other "acharyas" allow these deviations to take place in their acharya's lineage program? 

Yep! Why does Hanuman think acharyas are often fallen fools who need criticizing? And why does he think he is the person selected to be the critic of God's successors and acharyas? And why is Hanuman implying most acharyas are fools, because they won't criticize the deviations of other acharyas?

Wait! Srila Prabhupada says that anyone who thinks Krishna's gurus need to be chastised for wrong doing are pasandis and offenders. It is one of the ten offenses to the holy name to consider gurus are ordinary men (who need chastisement for deviations). Yet every single day, people like various GBC groupies / Sridhara Maharaja folks / Rocana ilk / Hanuman et al. wake up and start to chastise, criticize and verbally attack -- what the GBC says are -- Krishna's acharyas? Where is it stated that it is the duty of the neophytes to criticize the acharyas? 

Was it not Rocana and his 50 man committee which started this bogus idea that gurus are deviants who need to be "reformed" and corrected with their "Guru Reform School" program?

Hanuman says a sannyasa should follow certain rules. Ooops, these GBC are not saying they are minor league sannyasas or priests (ritviks)? They are saying they are Krishna's FULL BLOWN guru successors / messiahs / acharyas. Hanuman telescopes neophytes only in the post of ATTEMPTING to be a sannyasa -- with self realized gurus -- which has been the whole problem from day one, square one. 

Sorry, the ten year old children who are science class students, watching frog dissecting movies, are not yet ready to become brain surgeons?     

Notice that Hanuman still thinks that the GBC's illicit sex with men, women and children guru parampara -- which bans, beats, molests, sues and kills dissenters -- is not the REAL problem, its that some of them have female secretaries. What if they are gay and they have male secretaries? Heh heh heh! Anyway, a tyrant dictator that is creating banning, beating, jailing and killing of the citizens -- that is not the REAL problem -- its that he is having an affair with his secretary? That is the ACTUAL problem? Really? 

"ISKCON, which was supposed to free the world from false religions, itself became reduced into a cheap cult, an apa-samprada, and a real joke by discrediting Srila Prabhupada and all the Parampara." (BHAKTI VIKAS SWAMI, 23.08.2003, text Pamho 7160564).

More and more this sounds like ... there is no honor among thieves. When everything in the GBC's guru process was sort of moving along by exploiting the citizens, almost everyone was taking advantage. The big or little thieves were getting perks and benefits, maybe getting a managerial post, a salary, or maybe getting a wife (like Hanuman's wife who is allegedly a GBC guru disciple?). 

And as such, everything was peaches and cream fine. Then, the manure starting hitting the fan, and more and more of the GBC's gurus were getting more and more exposed, and more and more implicated in crimes and so on. Then all of a sudden the thieves started fighting, finger pointing and etc. 
  
OK, did not many of them notice, gurus do not fight like thieves over stolen bread? Hanuman says the way forward is to increase the internal cat and dog fighting among the GBC's acharyas. Really, the way forward is to say, the residents of Vaikuntha are behaving like animals, fighting like cats and dogs? And that will solve the problems of the entire human society, which has an epidemic of infighting thieves of this world? 

Hanuman says he does not think for sure that ISKCON might be fixed, ever. Well yes, it certainly won't be fixed by preaching that Lord Krishna's gurus / successors / acharyas are a pile of barking dogs, biting one another at the dog fight show? 

Of course Sulochana argued that people like Hanuman are not elevated enough to worship a dog as their guru. Why? Dogs are not having illicit sex with men, women and children. Dogs are not molesting their puppies, nor covering up for regimes that are molesting their puppies. Dogs are also not hunting Vaishnavas to have them killed -- like Hanuman's guru parampara has been doing. In short, Sulochana said people like Hanuman will have to wait for many future births before he is elevated enough to worship a dog as his guru.

And saying that God's successors are also like mundane cat and dog infighters will simply pull down the human society EVEN MORE. And to say Srila Prabhupada ordered these cats and dogs types to be worshiped as Krishna's successors is AN INSULT to him personally. Why doesn't Hanuman know that cat and dog fighting does not occur in Krishna's succession of gurus? 

So, clearly, Hanuman is right. The truth shall set us free. And the truth is that his illicit sex with men, women and children guru parampara, that bans, beats, molests, sues and kills vaishnavas is bogus, as is every single person "voted in" to same. None of this was ever authorized by the acharya. He said we neophytes have to act as his preachers, priests, agents, representatives etc. and not artificially act as his successors.

ys pd