PADA @ angel108b@yahoo.com
Camp: ISKCON Baroda
Dear Jayapataka Maharaj,
Yatibhyonamaha. Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
I read your very short letter. I can answer easily the points. But these are not relevant points my humble opinion. So we can agree to disagree.
The fact is that Śrīla Prabhupāda preached all over the world, he had female disciples, second initiation and giving the thread is not a big thing, they could give it.
*Letter to Vaikunthanatha, Saradia -- Bombay 4 April, 1971: *
*Even though you have had no gayatri mantra, still you are more than brahmana. I am enclosing herewith your sacred thread, duly chanted on by me. Gayatri mantra is as follows:*
*(TAKEN OUT)*
*Ask your wife to chant this mantra and you hear it and if possible hold a fire ceremony as you have seen during your marriage and get this sacred thread on your body. Saradia, or any twice-initiated devotee, may perform the ceremony.*
==============
Maharaj, is this the evidence that Srila Prabhupada desired Female Diksha Gurus?
Well, I - my subjective opinion - feel that that it is not. No way! What this shows that in the very early years of ISKCON, Srila Prabhupada adopted "time and circumstance" actions, but not that he desired women to be leaders of his society, which is what diksha gurus are.
[PADA: But the women as a group have been at the forefront, the de facto leaders, in protesting Jayapataka and Basu Ghosh's rampant child abuse / molesting guru regime. And their complaints were suppressed on the plea that women's voices are not significant.
So ISKCON men leaders -- like Jayapataka and Basu Ghosh -- have suppressed the voices of these anti-pedophile guru women, resulting in their GBC orchestrated mass child molesting empire to emerge in the ISKCON society. And now a group of women are AGAIN leading the charge against keeping another known pedophile like Lokanath as the guru of ISKCON, and the guru of the children of ISKCON.
And Lokanath is simply another one of the pro-pedophile acharya's club's leaders of the mass child molesting and abuse regime himself, which caused evidently thousands of molesting cases. So the founder fathers / promoters / backers / apologists / enablers of pedophile gurus, and the pedophile gurus themselves, should not be protested by women. What kind of message does than send to women, or to victims, or to children, or to anyone?
Thus women as a group are opposed to pedophiles, opposed to child molesting, and opposed to worshiping pedophiles as gurus. And as a matter of historical record, Jayapataka, Lokanath, Bhakti Vikas swami and Bashu Ghosh's ilk i.e. "the big men leaders of ISKCON" have been suppressing these women's voices -- which has lead to thousands of children reportedly being starved, beaten, abused, molested and worse in the ISKCON society. And victims have been committing suicide.
In addition to various children victims later committing suicide, thousands of these children are permanently alienated from ISKCON. That is the result of suppressing the voices of these women. And so we should continue on that path, and enable a CURRENT child molester acharya to be worshiped as the guru of ISKCON, never mind that policy causes women and children to leave the society en masse, causes the society to be potentially legally sued, gives the society a bad name in the media, and has caused some victims to kill themselves etc.
And! What difference does it make if people who are the leaders opposing a child molesting guru regime are men or women? Now Jayapataka and Basu Ghosh are once again neglecting the voices of the women by their trying to keep a pedophile like Lokanath in the post of acharya, when a large group of ladies are opposing.]
JPS: These indirect points are given of daivi varnasrama but neglecting to state that Śrīla Prabhupāda said that these are not ordinary women. This is a standard for women. But our women are Vaisnavis, they are something special. You fail to recognize this. Because we see that Vaisnavis have done some creditable services for the movement and that you are not recognizing them. You are trying to put them in may be in Tama or Rajo Guna. Maybe that is the standard for general women but our devotee women are something very special. And you are not able to recognize that.
===================
BG: Maharaj, is marrying again and again "something special"? Our God sister who Kalakanath Prabhu is promoting as a diksha guru has been through two or three husbands. One of our God sisters who was Srila Prabhupada's secretary - she used to visit us here at Baroda when the Vallabh Sampradaya "Goswamini" (caste goswami) Indirabetiji was alive (she has passed away) told me, "I've had five husbands".
[PADA: But a pedophile like Lokanath is a guru? And a pedophile like Kirtanananda deserves a samadhi in the dham. And a porno swami deserves a samadhi. And the people who orchestrated thousands and thousands of devotees being banned, beaten, molested, sued and assassinated -- are still gurus now? And the leaders in the regime which suppressed the complaints about the child molesting, like Jayapataka and Basu Ghosh, are still authorities now.
JPS: These indirect points are given of daivi varnasrama but neglecting to state that Śrīla Prabhupāda said that these are not ordinary women. This is a standard for women. But our women are Vaisnavis, they are something special. You fail to recognize this. Because we see that Vaisnavis have done some creditable services for the movement and that you are not recognizing them. You are trying to put them in may be in Tama or Rajo Guna. Maybe that is the standard for general women but our devotee women are something very special. And you are not able to recognize that.
===================
BG: Maharaj, is marrying again and again "something special"? Our God sister who Kalakanath Prabhu is promoting as a diksha guru has been through two or three husbands. One of our God sisters who was Srila Prabhupada's secretary - she used to visit us here at Baroda when the Vallabh Sampradaya "Goswamini" (caste goswami) Indirabetiji was alive (she has passed away) told me, "I've had five husbands".
[PADA: But a pedophile like Lokanath is a guru? And a pedophile like Kirtanananda deserves a samadhi in the dham. And a porno swami deserves a samadhi. And the people who orchestrated thousands and thousands of devotees being banned, beaten, molested, sued and assassinated -- are still gurus now? And the leaders in the regime which suppressed the complaints about the child molesting, like Jayapataka and Basu Ghosh, are still authorities now.
And Satsvarupa's books are sold all over ISKCON with statements like "I am the guru of pills" "The more I chant the drier it gets" "I have to battle constantly with doubts that Krishna is a myth" etc. But the statements of the women who oppose pedophile worship are -- not distributed -- because they are women?
And a lot of divorces in ISKCON has happened because of whip sawing pressures on marriages caused by -- Basu Ghosh's "gurus" including that these gurus sometimes ordered people to get divorced etc. Just look at the Sulochan situation as an example.]
BG: And one of the main proponents of FDGs - a GBC member "Mataji" - who
chastises one and all who address her as "Mataji", and tells them to address her as "prabhu", instead of Mataji, left ISKCON and was out for 10 years, and we have it that she did "A to Z" nonsense, breaking all principles of sadachar and sadhana - but that's not an issue since she is a "vaishnavi", I suppose?
But Lokanath Swami... has been sanctioned by the GBCs in the West, and only
after you all pleaded with the Western GBCs was he allowed to continue to
initiate only in India!
What did he do? From what I've read - put out by the GBC - his offense was to be alone in the room with a then 11 year old girl. Yes, inappropriate. Child molestation? He says "no" - I did not molest the girl. Her testimony upholds this view. But for this tiny thing, he's being tried, now of the third time, and Mataji's errant behavior for years is somehow a "non-factor"?
[PADA: From what ALL of us read, and from my personal contact with the victim and her relatives, and from public testimony from the victim and citing her family members, Lokanath is a pedophile. The victim's testimony does not hold the view that the molesting happened? What!
BG: And one of the main proponents of FDGs - a GBC member "Mataji" - who
chastises one and all who address her as "Mataji", and tells them to address her as "prabhu", instead of Mataji, left ISKCON and was out for 10 years, and we have it that she did "A to Z" nonsense, breaking all principles of sadachar and sadhana - but that's not an issue since she is a "vaishnavi", I suppose?
But Lokanath Swami... has been sanctioned by the GBCs in the West, and only
after you all pleaded with the Western GBCs was he allowed to continue to
initiate only in India!
What did he do? From what I've read - put out by the GBC - his offense was to be alone in the room with a then 11 year old girl. Yes, inappropriate. Child molestation? He says "no" - I did not molest the girl. Her testimony upholds this view. But for this tiny thing, he's being tried, now of the third time, and Mataji's errant behavior for years is somehow a "non-factor"?
[PADA: From what ALL of us read, and from my personal contact with the victim and her relatives, and from public testimony from the victim and citing her family members, Lokanath is a pedophile. The victim's testimony does not hold the view that the molesting happened? What!
And Lokanath does not say "no molesting occurred." He signed a letter of apology, and he was suspended, and persons involved with the initial case confirm there is molesting complaint and etc. This is simply another example of tossing victims of molesting complaints under the bus.
And Malati's errant behavior was the result of her leaving the society in the first place, because she could not tolerate the molester gurus program. Yes, she ran off to worship Satan with Prithu Putra, but that is superior to worship of pedophiles. And no one ever asks why Prithu Putra left ISKCON in disgust and he told his relatives -- ISKCON is finished -- they poisoned the founder. Why do people leave ISKCON in the first place?]
And, it was Srila Prabhupada -- not me -- who spoke that women are all in tamo and rajo guna. But maybe you don't want to hear what he said, or read the transcript. Here it is:
[PADA: Basu Ghosh's pedophile gurus are not even at tamo guna level of consciousness, they are below the standards of even the tamo guna karmis. Tamo guna karmis in prison beat the stuffing out of pedophiles there.
The gurus and messiahs in Basu Ghosh's sampradaya are not yet at the levels of tamo guna, and if they were in prison, they would be on the lowest rungs on the moral scale ladder even among violent and dangerous criminals. Child molesters are BELOW tamo guna. And people promoting child molesters as gurus -- like Jayapataka and Basu Ghosh -- are lower as well.
Women who know that pedophile worship is wrong are a MUCH HIGHER LEVEL than the entire ISKCON GBC as a group. And that is the reason women are not coming to ISKCON, not because other women are not also gurus. Women CANNOT TRUST having THEIR CHILDREN in a pedophile guru's program, especially when the leaders are saying molesting is a tiny issue.]
"Woman, they are generally equipped with the qualities of passion and ignorance. And man also may be, but man can be elevated to the platform of goodness. Woman cannot be. Woman cannot be. Therefore if the husband is nice and the woman follows---woman becomes faithful and chaste to the husband---then their both life becomes successful. There are three qualities of nature = sattva, raja, tama. So rajas-tama, generally, that is the quality of woman. And man can become to the platform of goodness. Therefore initiation, brahminical symbolic representation, is given to the man, not to the woman. This is the theory."
From Srila Prabhupada's lecture on SB 1.3.17 at Los Angeles (in the West!) on September 22, 1972.
In this lecture, in this quote, Prabhupada said that "initiation is given to the man, not to the woman"! This ALONE ought to be enough evidence to prove that FDG is just a concoction! Srila Prabhuapda and Srila Siddhanta Saraswati did NOT NOT NOT give the sacred thread to women! Therefore there IS IS IS a distinction, and women are generally not gurus, what to speak of diksha gurus, of whom one of the functions is giving the sacred thread! "Very few".
You and the GBC resolution, and the pro-FDG GBCs could not explain this! You wrote that "indirect points are given about daivi varnashram" in my letter, but the fact is that Srila Prabhupada - NOT MYSELF - told Satsvarupa that women should not go to the varnashram college, because it is for brahmanas, kshatriyas, and vaishyas, but NOT for shudras, and thus it is understand that he categorized women - vaishnvis included - as shudras, because he was talking about the ISKCON varnashram college!
[PADA: Satsvarupa wrote an article "A Tribute to a Pure Devotee," around the same time a woman CBS news lady told me that seeing Kirtanananda sitting on a big seat covered with the hands of dozens of boys is "pedophile heaven." Why are we quoting SDG, when he is less advanced than any hamburger eating woman walking down the street?
"Woman, they are generally equipped with the qualities of passion and ignorance. And man also may be, but man can be elevated to the platform of goodness. Woman cannot be. Woman cannot be. Therefore if the husband is nice and the woman follows---woman becomes faithful and chaste to the husband---then their both life becomes successful. There are three qualities of nature = sattva, raja, tama. So rajas-tama, generally, that is the quality of woman. And man can become to the platform of goodness. Therefore initiation, brahminical symbolic representation, is given to the man, not to the woman. This is the theory."
From Srila Prabhupada's lecture on SB 1.3.17 at Los Angeles (in the West!) on September 22, 1972.
In this lecture, in this quote, Prabhupada said that "initiation is given to the man, not to the woman"! This ALONE ought to be enough evidence to prove that FDG is just a concoction! Srila Prabhuapda and Srila Siddhanta Saraswati did NOT NOT NOT give the sacred thread to women! Therefore there IS IS IS a distinction, and women are generally not gurus, what to speak of diksha gurus, of whom one of the functions is giving the sacred thread! "Very few".
You and the GBC resolution, and the pro-FDG GBCs could not explain this! You wrote that "indirect points are given about daivi varnashram" in my letter, but the fact is that Srila Prabhupada - NOT MYSELF - told Satsvarupa that women should not go to the varnashram college, because it is for brahmanas, kshatriyas, and vaishyas, but NOT for shudras, and thus it is understand that he categorized women - vaishnvis included - as shudras, because he was talking about the ISKCON varnashram college!
[PADA: Satsvarupa wrote an article "A Tribute to a Pure Devotee," around the same time a woman CBS news lady told me that seeing Kirtanananda sitting on a big seat covered with the hands of dozens of boys is "pedophile heaven." Why are we quoting SDG, when he is less advanced than any hamburger eating woman walking down the street?
And why are women as a class condemned, when they are the ones who oppose Basu Ghosh's pedophile heaven, both devotee women and non-devotee women do not like to see children worshiping pedophiles. The shudras worship Jesus, and they would never dream of worshiping a pedophile as their messiah like the Basu Ghosh program has been doing since 1978. Nor would they worship the founder fathers / cover-ups / enablers / enforcers of pedophile worship like Jayapataka.
Pedophile worship is way below the standards of shudras, or even Satan Worshipers. Sulochan said he would trust the safety of his kids attending the Satan people's Church -- way more than the GBC's church.]
Satsvarūpa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, is this school for women also, or just for men?
Prabhupāda: For men. Women should automatically learn how to cook, how to
cleanse home.
Satsvarūpa: So they don't attend varṇāśrama college?
Prabhupāda: No, no. Varṇāśrama college especially meant for the brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya and vaiśya. Those who are not fit for education, they are śūdras. That's all. Or those who are reluctant to take education—śūdra must. That's all. They should assist the higher class.
[From Srila Prabhupada's morning walk at Vrindavan on March 14, 1974.]
So, what you have written is simply not true
Satsvarūpa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, is this school for women also, or just for men?
Prabhupāda: For men. Women should automatically learn how to cook, how to
cleanse home.
Satsvarūpa: So they don't attend varṇāśrama college?
Prabhupāda: No, no. Varṇāśrama college especially meant for the brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya and vaiśya. Those who are not fit for education, they are śūdras. That's all. Or those who are reluctant to take education—śūdra must. That's all. They should assist the higher class.
[From Srila Prabhupada's morning walk at Vrindavan on March 14, 1974.]
So, what you have written is simply not true
JPS: I like your point that it is a philosophical issue and must be debated.
I never wrote that it should be debated. It would be kind of you to write the truth. The truth is that my contention - in fact is was Dayaram Prabhu's suggestion - that scholars STUDY THE ISSUE - and not debate, but through study try to come to a consensus on the issue.
I never wrote that it should be debated. It would be kind of you to write the truth. The truth is that my contention - in fact is was Dayaram Prabhu's suggestion - that scholars STUDY THE ISSUE - and not debate, but through study try to come to a consensus on the issue.
[PADA: Dayaram told me he knows the GBC is promoting homosexuals as ISKCON's acharyas, he admits.]
> You can have your pandit team to debate with the SAC. But we should have a
> referee, a judge or a panel of judges. Not that you are not convinced,
> they are not convinced, this thing will go on for centuries.
> You can have your pandit team to debate with the SAC. But we should have a
> referee, a judge or a panel of judges. Not that you are not convinced,
> they are not convinced, this thing will go on for centuries.
[PADA: The devotees have already acted as referee. They voted with their feet and left ISKCON so they would not be contaminated with the pedophile messiahs program that has hi-jacked it.]
Well, each side can undertake their study, exchange papers, and then discuss
the papers. They as scholars - if they are honest - should come to mutual
agreement.
> So there should be some judge and then who wins a particular argument, are you willing to accept such a thing? Like SABHA etc. But anyway the presidents’
meeting was replaced by the SABHA.
My view of the Sabha is that it is a "political tool" being used by the egalitarian GBC members to push their egalitarian agenda onto the movement.
Why can't the TPs meetings be revived? We have video conferencing now
(Zoom, etc.). Why this group loaded with ideological liberals with Western
ethical views be seen as some sort of authority by us? I don't.
> And of course, the SABHA is supposed to be made of representatives of different RGBs and national committees.
Well, there are four reps from the "Vaishnavi ministry" - who hold feminist
and egalitarian views, for example.
> Maybe Indians should have more representation, they have more temples,
Yes, Maharaj, this would be fair.
Right now, India is almost 1/2 of ISKCON, in terms of congregation, major
temples, book distribution, resident brahmacharis, etc. ISKCON India is NOT represented proportionatly on the GBC at all, and hence we have a majority of those who are supporting egaltiarianism.
> maybe one for each DC, I don’t know. That can be something that can be
> discussed. But I would suggest that you have a more positive constructive
> discussion.
Sure, if it's at all possible. But all I see is politics and hegemony by the Western majority.
> This non-cooperation, etc. is a very political thing.
Well, what to do in the circumstances? They are expert in politics themselves!
> Your letter gives many philosophical points, as you requested previously that
there should be some panel. You can have the panel and deal with the SAC and have the discussion. And if you are able to put up the argument, they can bring it up to the GBC and then we can discuss it. But as Pancaratna p said in rare situations there were Vaisnavis who served as diksa gurus. We can see in a poster, a picture rather, of a lady sitting on a Vyasa asana and other Gaudiya sannyasis of the Sarasvata family.
Was that promoted by Srila Prabhupada and Srila Saraswati Thakur? I VERY
much doubt it!
We have the statement in Prabhupada's purport to SB 3.24.40 that a woman
cannot take sannyas, because of "no sanction in vedic literature". Have you
shown us the specifc sanction in vedic literature for an FDG?
No, I and most other devotees here - ISKCON leaders - just do not accept
this a valid example of such sanction. And we know that Narada Pancharatra, Bharadwaj Samhita, forbids a woman from giving diksha mantras:
na jatu mantra-da nari na sudro nantarodbhavah |
nabhisasto na patitah kama-kamo ’py akaminah ||1.42||
"Even then, a woman, a sudra and an antyaja can never act as initiating gurus, nor can anyone who is accused of a great sin or is fallen. And an aspiring disciple who is already accomplished in detachment (akami ) should never accept a guru who is infected with material desires."
striyah sudradayas caiva bodhayeyur hitahitam |
yatharham mananiyas ca narhanty acaryatam kvacit ||1.43||
"Women, sudras, etc., can give ethical and moral instructions and are also worthy of respect as per their qualifications and conditions but are not entitled to get the position of acharya."
kim apy atrabhijayante yoginah sarva-yonisu |
pratyaksitatma-nathanam naisam cintyam kuladikam ||1.44||
"But, because perfect yogis (or nitya-siddha devotees) who are on the stage of yoga-pratyaksa (i.e. are self-realized—seeing God face-to-face), pratyaksitatma-nathanam, may take birth in any family tradition, in such cases no consideration of kula, gender, etc. as mentioned earlier apply (they can become acaryas)." (Bharadwaj Samhita 1.42-44)
> Apparently there were more than one. Lord Caitanya said jei Krsna tattva
> vetta, sei guru hoi. Now how do you actually say who is a Krsna tattva
> vetta? Śrīla Prabhupāda said they should have a Bhakti Vedanta degree.
> Will that suffice? Bhakti Vedanta degree. At least that is some standard.
> The present standard of Bhakti Sastri is a joke. Śrīla Prabhupāda said
> that people taking second initiation should have Bhakti Sastri. I agree
> with Rasaraj prabhu that we should have a higher standard for the male
> diksa guru and automatically there will be very few women I don’t know.
> Qualification should be they should know the tattva of Krsna. Jei Krsna
> tattva vetta sei guru hoi. You are saying that a lady can never be a Krsna
> tattva? Several women like Jahnava Devi and others they knew but others
> can never know? So is that what you are saying? That Śrīla Prabhupāda he
> could not empower anyone to understand Krsna tattva vetta, to be a Krsna
> tattva vetta? That is the real question here.
As Srila Prabhupada told Prof. O'Connell at Toronto: "Yes. Jāhnavā devī was—Nityānanda’s wife. She became. If she is able to go to the highest perfection of life, why it is not possible to become guru? But, not so many. Actually one who has attained the perfection, she can become guru."
Can you guarantee that the FDGs that are coming our way thanks to the GBC
have "attained the perfection"?
> I won't answer all your points. Let the committee the SAC team or whatever
> answer all the points. You have some interesting points. Let us see what
> their reply is. And we know that Krsna said in* Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, kirat,
> pulinda...* that even sinful people if they take shelter of a pure
> devotee, they can achieve Krsna the all-powerful and be purified. So we
> know that Lord Caitanya said, jei Krsna tattva vetta, sei guru hoi. So,
> this is not like rocket science. You bring up many indirect things not
> very sanguine.
The verses you quote say that lower born persons can become perfect. But that, in and of itself, is NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER for FDGs! I'm ending this here since the rest of what you wrote isn't relevant.
dasabhas,
Basu Ghosh Das
Well, each side can undertake their study, exchange papers, and then discuss
the papers. They as scholars - if they are honest - should come to mutual
agreement.
> So there should be some judge and then who wins a particular argument, are you willing to accept such a thing? Like SABHA etc. But anyway the presidents’
meeting was replaced by the SABHA.
My view of the Sabha is that it is a "political tool" being used by the egalitarian GBC members to push their egalitarian agenda onto the movement.
Why can't the TPs meetings be revived? We have video conferencing now
(Zoom, etc.). Why this group loaded with ideological liberals with Western
ethical views be seen as some sort of authority by us? I don't.
> And of course, the SABHA is supposed to be made of representatives of different RGBs and national committees.
Well, there are four reps from the "Vaishnavi ministry" - who hold feminist
and egalitarian views, for example.
> Maybe Indians should have more representation, they have more temples,
Yes, Maharaj, this would be fair.
Right now, India is almost 1/2 of ISKCON, in terms of congregation, major
temples, book distribution, resident brahmacharis, etc. ISKCON India is NOT represented proportionatly on the GBC at all, and hence we have a majority of those who are supporting egaltiarianism.
> maybe one for each DC, I don’t know. That can be something that can be
> discussed. But I would suggest that you have a more positive constructive
> discussion.
Sure, if it's at all possible. But all I see is politics and hegemony by the Western majority.
> This non-cooperation, etc. is a very political thing.
Well, what to do in the circumstances? They are expert in politics themselves!
> Your letter gives many philosophical points, as you requested previously that
there should be some panel. You can have the panel and deal with the SAC and have the discussion. And if you are able to put up the argument, they can bring it up to the GBC and then we can discuss it. But as Pancaratna p said in rare situations there were Vaisnavis who served as diksa gurus. We can see in a poster, a picture rather, of a lady sitting on a Vyasa asana and other Gaudiya sannyasis of the Sarasvata family.
Was that promoted by Srila Prabhupada and Srila Saraswati Thakur? I VERY
much doubt it!
We have the statement in Prabhupada's purport to SB 3.24.40 that a woman
cannot take sannyas, because of "no sanction in vedic literature". Have you
shown us the specifc sanction in vedic literature for an FDG?
No, I and most other devotees here - ISKCON leaders - just do not accept
this a valid example of such sanction. And we know that Narada Pancharatra, Bharadwaj Samhita, forbids a woman from giving diksha mantras:
na jatu mantra-da nari na sudro nantarodbhavah |
nabhisasto na patitah kama-kamo ’py akaminah ||1.42||
"Even then, a woman, a sudra and an antyaja can never act as initiating gurus, nor can anyone who is accused of a great sin or is fallen. And an aspiring disciple who is already accomplished in detachment (akami ) should never accept a guru who is infected with material desires."
striyah sudradayas caiva bodhayeyur hitahitam |
yatharham mananiyas ca narhanty acaryatam kvacit ||1.43||
"Women, sudras, etc., can give ethical and moral instructions and are also worthy of respect as per their qualifications and conditions but are not entitled to get the position of acharya."
kim apy atrabhijayante yoginah sarva-yonisu |
pratyaksitatma-nathanam naisam cintyam kuladikam ||1.44||
"But, because perfect yogis (or nitya-siddha devotees) who are on the stage of yoga-pratyaksa (i.e. are self-realized—seeing God face-to-face), pratyaksitatma-nathanam, may take birth in any family tradition, in such cases no consideration of kula, gender, etc. as mentioned earlier apply (they can become acaryas)." (Bharadwaj Samhita 1.42-44)
> Apparently there were more than one. Lord Caitanya said jei Krsna tattva
> vetta, sei guru hoi. Now how do you actually say who is a Krsna tattva
> vetta? Śrīla Prabhupāda said they should have a Bhakti Vedanta degree.
> Will that suffice? Bhakti Vedanta degree. At least that is some standard.
> The present standard of Bhakti Sastri is a joke. Śrīla Prabhupāda said
> that people taking second initiation should have Bhakti Sastri. I agree
> with Rasaraj prabhu that we should have a higher standard for the male
> diksa guru and automatically there will be very few women I don’t know.
> Qualification should be they should know the tattva of Krsna. Jei Krsna
> tattva vetta sei guru hoi. You are saying that a lady can never be a Krsna
> tattva? Several women like Jahnava Devi and others they knew but others
> can never know? So is that what you are saying? That Śrīla Prabhupāda he
> could not empower anyone to understand Krsna tattva vetta, to be a Krsna
> tattva vetta? That is the real question here.
As Srila Prabhupada told Prof. O'Connell at Toronto: "Yes. Jāhnavā devī was—Nityānanda’s wife. She became. If she is able to go to the highest perfection of life, why it is not possible to become guru? But, not so many. Actually one who has attained the perfection, she can become guru."
Can you guarantee that the FDGs that are coming our way thanks to the GBC
have "attained the perfection"?
> I won't answer all your points. Let the committee the SAC team or whatever
> answer all the points. You have some interesting points. Let us see what
> their reply is. And we know that Krsna said in* Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, kirat,
> pulinda...* that even sinful people if they take shelter of a pure
> devotee, they can achieve Krsna the all-powerful and be purified. So we
> know that Lord Caitanya said, jei Krsna tattva vetta, sei guru hoi. So,
> this is not like rocket science. You bring up many indirect things not
> very sanguine.
The verses you quote say that lower born persons can become perfect. But that, in and of itself, is NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER for FDGs! I'm ending this here since the rest of what you wrote isn't relevant.
dasabhas,
Basu Ghosh Das
SUM IT UP:
1) Jayapataka is an acharya, therefore he is a fool who does not know the siddhanta.
2) Lokanath is a molester, but molesting is a teeny tiny problem for ISKCON. Nevermind it costs them a $400,000,000 lawsuit, they lost the second generation of children, and victims have been committing suicide. Teeny tiny problem!
3) Lokanath is a long time (life time?) supporter of the GBC's pedophile guru group that mass molested the children, and buries pedophiles in the dham, so he is co-responsible for these thousands of cases of molesting, and the $400M lawsuit, and he is a molester himself. He is an enabler of mass molesting, and he is a molester himself, and that is why -- he is a guru successor to God?
4) Women are foolish tamo guna because, they refuse to allow their kids to worship homosexuals, pedophiles, sexual predators and sex with taxi drivers guru paramparas?
5) And a devotee said that they killed ISKCON, and now they are carving up the dead body by fighting over who will control which pieces of the dead remains.
6) A kuli said, many of us suffer from trauma and PTSD and so on, and some of us committed suicide. To say this is a teeny tiny problem is simply more denial in a whole bombardment of denial.
Told ya! ys pd
PADA: Good question. Do most ISKCON members know they are going to be worshiping a pedophiles guru process as their kid's messiahs if they remain in the society? Yep! That is why they almost all left and abandoned ship. ys pd
=====================
"Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.
Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed – in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental.
In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous."
With regards Hare Krishna
Yasoda nandana dasa
The offenses against the chanting of the holy name are as follows: (3) To disobey the orders of the spiritual master. NoD 8 . Offenses to Be Avoided
The qualification of Diksa guru as per CC Madhya 24.330:Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
maha bhagavata srestho
brahmano vai gurur nrnam
sarvesam eva lokanam
asau pujyo yatha harih
maha-kula-prasuto 'pi
sarva-yajnesu diksitah
sahasra-sakhadhyayi ca
na guruh syad avaisnavah
(The guru MUST be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru MUST be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people. ....When one has attained the topmost position of Maha Bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru.)
Note: The word diksitah refers to diksa and only Maha Bhagavata is the one mentioned who give this by definition.
"The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am in the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This I want.75-08-04. Letter: Madhudvisa"
brahmano vai gurur nrnam
sarvesam eva lokanam
asau pujyo yatha harih
maha-kula-prasuto 'pi
sarva-yajnesu diksitah
sahasra-sakhadhyayi ca
na guruh syad avaisnavah
(The guru MUST be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru MUST be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people. ....When one has attained the topmost position of Maha Bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru.)
Note: The word diksitah refers to diksa and only Maha Bhagavata is the one mentioned who give this by definition.
"The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am in the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This I want.75-08-04. Letter: Madhudvisa"
LW: Most of the Gaudiya Matha's problems came from their false gurus. Most of the ISKCON's problems came from their false gurus.
ReplyDeleteThat is not a teeny tiny size problem ... that is the 99.9 percent problem. The main problem is not the teeny tiny problem.
They always do this ... minimize the real problem and create an artificial show problem ... like women gurus. If we just make women gurus that will fix our pedophile male guru problem. No it won't fix anything.
The big elephant in the room problem is not the mosquito sized problem ... but they always discuss the mosquito sized problem and ignore the actual big size problem. It is called cheating.
And to say the molesting problem is the teeny tiny problem ... when most of the second generation is gone and some are suicide dead ... is very offensive. Insult to victims ... including Lokanath's victim. But all of the molesting in ISKCON is due to the whole group of bogus people ... like Lokanath ... supporting the whole false guru program ... which has been causing the entire molesting cabal.
Lokanath is up to his neck in his program of hundreds ... or thousands of molestings ... his is just one case example in the group he is part of. It is a pedophile ring and club.
The people who made the whole molesting problem are all responsible ... inlcuding Basu Ghosh. He supported them all along. When the FBI arrests one pedophile ... they usually find out he belongs to a ring or club with more members ... and they are all helping each other and giving tips and pointers how to behave like that ... and escape punishment ... and accountability.
It is a conspiracy against children ... and they are a big organized gang that coordinates together. They cover for each other ... support each other ... apologize for each others ... they are all in it together. And they have covered for many other predators all along ... it is what they are about the whole time.
Basu Ghosh has been their top legal eagle ... shastra defender ... and he has been for a long time. Even the worst gangsters have a legal defense department.
Hello Pada, It is very nice that you are maintaining this blog to the truth about the nonsense happening in the name of Guru business.
ReplyDeleteYou are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT 100% that these folks who are posing as Gurus including all the current GBC's have no qualifications. to be a diksha guru; what to talk about being a pure devotee!
But in the above article, where BG prabhu mentioned about Malati's errant behavior, your comment was the below:
"And Malati's errant behavior was the result of her leaving the society in the first place, because she could not tolerate the molester gurus program. Yes, she ran off to worship Satan with Prithu Putra, but that is... etc..
You are correct that the Malati may have left ISKCON due to the current GBC guru program which is resonable BUT to take to Satan worship and engage is multiple sexual relationships is part of her own anarthas!
Forget indian or vaishnava, any sane person in any country following any religion will not engage in multiple illicit sexual partners! So please continue to bring the nonsense happening about the Gurus but please also chastise Malati as well!. You shouldn't give her a free pass as unfortunately you did in or as it sounded in the words
Better run an article exposing her past as well!
Any man or woman in GBC or in a position of power but if their character is not good should be called out!
Thanks
[PADA: Agreed. Malati should have formed a senior devotee alliance to act as watch dogs on the GBC's bogus gurus, and acted as an information outlet to stop people from thinking deviants are Krishna's successors. True dat!
Instead she took shelter of heroin and Satan. I have already posted a number of articles about her and her past and it is well known at this stage that she failed to act properly. And now she is with the GBC, who says acharyas are engaged in illicit sex with men, women and children etc. So now she is supporting another deviation, after being in the Satan worship deviation.
My point here is that it is better to worship Satan than to say acharyas are deviants. Worshiping illicit sex acharyas is worse than worship of Satan. Sorry if I did not make that clear. Satan worship is honest, we worship the Lord of Evil. To worship Satanic people and claim they are God's successors is worse. Malati was at one point on the GBC monitor committee to make sure one of their gurus was chanting his rounds ... that is how foolish she is ... she thinks after worship of Satan she is now going to be in charge of supervising the successors to God.
And she is encouraging these fools to think they are as good as Jesus and they can absorb sins. Thus all of them are gliding to hell along with all the sins they are creating every second.
ys pd