Hanuman Croatia Addresses the Ritvik Idea

Hare Krishna prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances.

You are indeed doing greatest service to Prabhupada by exposing all nonsense in best possible manner. Recently I had a great debate with topnotch ritvik from HG Sundar Gopal Prabhu camp, I could not defeat him on the point in the Will document where Prabhupada got changed the words into my initiated disciples from initiated disciple.

If you know Prabhupada it said that new GBC commissioners will be my initiated disciple. They make it main ground that Prabhupada ordered to Prabhupada only Guru. Point is that Prabhupada had desired that his disciples should become guru, but because no body was qualified, so he did not appoint anybody as guru. They have released a document named IA77 to defeat all arguments of ISKCON. I will send you that IA 77 document. Please share your views about my initiated disciple in the will…

Sent from my Huawei Mobile

========================

HANUMAN DAS: My response:

Hare Krishna prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I see a double standard here, if we are talking about Srila Prabhupada will, where he says that only “my initiated disciples” can be directors of properties. The author of the text also emphasizes that the written decisions of Srila Prabhupada hold the greatest value. 

But then we come into a similar problem, we are talking about rtviks. Due course of time, all appointed rtviks will be dead. But in this case, author claims that it is not a problem because Tamala claims that Srila Prabhupada said: “others can be added”. But this is not written anywhere in the formal decisions.

So, when we need to appoint property directors, then we can’t add anybody except “my initiated disciples”, but when we speak about rtvik priests, then we can add others based on a hear-say conversation with Tamala Krishna.

Additionally, the author expects us to reject all other evidence about parampara, and accept only his version, ignoring all previous statements. And he backs up this idea that Sankara was preaching mayavada, and in the end, he gave the real truth “bhajo Govinda”. Really? Comparing Srila Prabhupada with Sankara? I don’t think that will really work. Srila Prabhupada preached Krishna consciousness directly from the very first day to the last, and it is not possible to compare him with Sankara in this regard.

ys Hanuman dasa

You can read the paper in question here

[PADA: It really does not matter what is "legally written" or is not written in matters of faith in the acharya? People should have faith that Srila Prabhupada is their acharya, and thus the followers are -- his property, and not the property of the local temple president or Governing Body Commision leaders. How can the buildings, assets and followers be the property of conditioned souls who are artificially posing as acharyas, and not be the property of the factual acharya? 

Who actually owns the followers of ISKCON? 

Apparently Hanuman thinks that these GBC conditioned souls are the proprietors of ISKCON, its assets and its followers, and not Srila Prabhupada. OK Srila Prabhupada is not the actual proprietor of ISKCON and its citizens, and that opens the flood gates for all sorts of wanna be new proprietors, as has happened. The Rocana / Kailash / Torben / Hanuman Croatia team and others are famous for saying we cannot have a posthumous, post samadhi, post mortem worshiped person. 

OK, so who is going to be the worshiped person instead? They never say? Someone else is going to be the proprietor of the assets and manpower, as long as its not Srila Prabhupada. And that is how they are creating an exodus of assets and manpower, by enabling false gurus to claim proprietorship. The acharya owns the followers, because the followers are the property of Krishna and the acharya is the representative of Krishna. 

Jayatirtha said "its my men, my money and my buildings" and we all know that when he "blooped" that process eventually caused a huge manpower drain from the UK yatra siphoning a mass of devotees over to "The Peace Krishnas" which almost bankrupted the zone. And in fact that zone has never recovered according to my UK friends, the temple populations were reduced and have not been replaced and come back to the old levels. 

What happens when the newly minted GBC / Hanuman Croatia guru "bloops" and he takes away manpower, assets or even buildings along with him, and nothing can be done because that person has been given the legal control over the assets and manpower as "the guru."   

And that happens because the GBC's conditioned souls gurus gradually take control legally. And then they remove the Prabhupada followers from the legal documents of the local temples, and replace them with their own fanatical followers as the legal directors of ISKCON. Then they can legally kick out the Prabhupada devotees because the temple and its followers are now "legal property of the GBC guru and his disciples." And they have done this type thing in many places. 

I am not sure why Hanuman thinks this is the way forward, when it is failing on every level, including making temples into ghost towns and bankrupting the society? We need to empower conditioned souls to claim that the property, manpower and assets of ISKCON are their personal "guru's property," and not the property of the acharya. OK then they make deviants into gurus and there is little or nothing that can be legally done because Hanuman's program handed them the legal keys to the assets, property and manpower. 

Even Badrinarayan at one time said that we need to make the disciples the property of Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON, so when the guru bloops he cannot clean out the buildings of manpower. Why is that not a good idea? 

If a Priest tells his congregation that they are really HIS DISCIPLES and not disciples of Jesus, then how could the church continue on within the religion? It would be seen as a maverick church not recognized by the church council, because all the other churches agree that the followers, the property, the assets and everything withing the purview of the church belongs to Jesus, and not the local priest. 

And if the local priest tries to leave (bloop out) taking assets, manpower and maybe a female follower as his new mate, the Church Council will sue that priest for misappropriating assets, because the Church Council considers that the assets and manpower belong to the Church of Jesus, and do not belong to the individual priests -- who are subject to failing and "blooping."

Why does Jesus have to write a legal document saying he is the proprietor of the Church, the assets, and congregation of the Church? 

Shouldn't a follower of Jesus already know that Jesus is the proprietor of the Church. And thus the followers are the eternal followers of Jesus, and not necessarily followers of the conditioned soul priests, who only act as agents of Jesus. Why would Jesus have to write a legal document, you should worship me as the guru, and not worship the priest or local Governing Body person. Jesus has to write a legal document before we can understand the point of whom deserves to be worshiped and who does not?

Does Jesus have to make a legal written directive, everything in the church belongs to me and to God, and does NOT belong to the local priest or church Governing Body members? How can a religion remain unified if there are a hundred different people with different agendas all claiming to be the proprietors of the congregations, the buildings and assets etc. 

And is that not what has been happening all along? 

Many followers of Hansadutta, Jayatirtha, Harikesha, Kirtanananda, Bhagwan etc. did not accept the overall GBC body authority, because they thought they were the disciples of folks like Kirtanananda and as such there was no authority from the GBC to dictate to them. Tamal balked when the GBC ordered him to give up Narayan Maharaja. Gaura Govinda balked when the GBC said Srila Prabhupada's jeeva tattva is correct, and not the mayavada's idea. And so on!

Technically that is correct, a guru is above the authority of a Governing Council. So Hanuman's idea for making conditioned souls into acharyas is making independent maverick gurus who do not follow a Governing Council. Worse, his idea is handing off the property and manpower legally to foolish people who have no ability to manage that position. Worse, this means Hanuman Croatia thinks gurus are subordinated to foolish committees, like Bhakti Vikas swami is voted into the sex with taxi driver's guru parampara. 

Bhakti Vikas is the one GBC guru we know that Hanuman promotes, but BVKS also sometimes says the GBC is foolish and so forth, so he is another independent maverick acharya. Why do we need a written directive from Srila Prabhupada to know that a mass of independent maverick conditioned souls posing as acharyas is not a bona fide program? 

Then Bhakti vikas says, 11 people were appointed as acharyas, but he never shows any evidence of that. He just wants to siphon off the assets, manpower and buildings -- off shore -- to various deviants posing as gurus. Krishna wanted 11 conditioned souls to be worshiped as His successors? That make BVKS saying that Krishna is so foolish He wanted conditioned souls to be His successors. Is Krishna a fool, or is BVKS and his dedicated follower Hanuman Croatia the fools here? And Krishna wanted the bank robbers to rob the bank?

So Hanuman thinks we need to have the disciples of the Bhakti Vikas swami illicit sex with men, women and children guru parampara signing as directors on the properties, as the BVKS program has done. Yes, well how is their program working out? And meanwhile our programs are moving ahead because it makes sense to many folks -- that if we want to be liberated, we are the property of the acharya, and we are not the property of conditioned souls posing artificially as acharyas. As for Hanuman's saying "we need to follow the parampara," he forgets that the BVKS sex with taxi drivers guru parampara is not a bona fide parampara. Haribol. ys pd  

=======================

Srila Prabhupada: When you read the Bible, you follow Spiritual Master. How can you say without? As soon as you read the Bible, that means you are following the instruction of Lord Jesus Christ, that means that you are following Spiritual Master. So where is the opportunity of being without Spiritual Master?
=======================================