My bogus sadhu is better than yours. Honest!
That is why people tell me, they will promote
anyone and everyone as guru and sadhu,
as long as it is not Srila Prabhupada.
PADA: This is in relation to a festival held at the Narayan Maharaj temple. Evidently Paramadvaiti swami (?) was speaking there at a festival. And Swami Padmanabha is asking -- why are we listening to these lusty jokers posing as sadhus, now that we know the real story of this predator? And does this not make devotees look foolish for promoting these rascals?
And how does this help promote the lineage of Gaura and Nitai, when we have these bogus swamis running around. And worse, people are leaving the mission in disgust seeing this lack of discrimination.
Meanwhile someone was joking with me, the NM cow protection program people in Hawaii are saying -- NM never called me ill names, but the followers won't hesitate to call me ill names. Therefore, proving my original point, their group DOES call people ill names -- especially those who do not promote their pedophile acharyas program. They are arguing with their own shadow. We don't call people ill names! Honest officer! OK, unless they refuse to help us promote the worship of our pedophile acharya's hugging club. Yeesh! Anyway, this is all good, the cult meltdown continues!
ys pd
angel108b@yahoo.com
https://www.facebook.com/srigopinathbhavan/videos/1258635134993586
I NEED A NEW WORD BEYOND "PATHETIC"...
(versión al español aquí:http://bhaktiinthejiva.com/BAP/BAP-ESP.pdf )
The word pathetic has two central meanings:
The word pathetic has two central meanings:
a) A situation that generates pity and grief.
b) A situation of very low standard and behavior.
The situation that this photo of Paramadvaiti swami illustrates includes both meanings, but does so on such a level that I need a new word to go beyond "pathetic" — I need to invent a new term even more serious, more intense, and more illustrative for this situation. Help me with that, please.
This photo shows my ex-ex-guru, B.A. Paramadvaiti (I honestly haven't felt like calling him Swami for a long time), speaking among an assembly of Gaudiya Vaisnava sannyasis and delivering a speech a few days ago during the disappearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura in Gopinatha- bhavana, Vrindavana. I will explain the reason for my post below.
As most of you are aware, by the time it came to my knowledge that B.A. Paramadvaiti (hereinafter BAP) perpetrated various sexual abuses of more than 40 Vaisnavis (including minors, and these are only the cases that have become public knowledge, including 5 complaints in the Colombian prosecutor's office, 2 in Peru, 1 in Ecuador and 1 note to the FBI in the USA), I decided to distance myself from him and eventually shared a public letter announcing it. In addition to the abuses themselves, many other forms of abuse and deviations were carried out by BAP and his supporters over the years, but this post does not aim to describe all of them in detail, because they have already been described on many other sites.
In addition to the traumatic effects arising from the abuse itself, a further compounding occurred by BAP´s first having admitted to the abuse, at least to some extent, but then later absolutely denying all of the accusations — total denial of the truth. Above (or below) this and despite everything that has happened, BAP not only continues as sannyasi and guru, but dares to take a microphone in the midst of a celebration as wide, public and sacred as the tirobhava mahotsava of Sri Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta.
Now, if you think that this post and the word "pathetic" are the extent of this event, you would be very wrong. Although what has been described so far is pathetic in itself, what I will comment on next is even worse in some sense and, therefore, requires a word with farther reach than “pathetic” to properly describe the next layer of apathy.
Over the years, I have personally seen how BAP finds himself in a more and more dysfunctional condition on a mental, psychic and emotional level, so at this point nothing surprises me as to what he will do or say. What does not cease to amaze me, however, is the attitude of the Gaudiya Vaishnava community in relation to such a dysfunctional and abusive figure like BAP (and probably not only in relation to him), where instead of correcting him and taking the proper attitude towards such crimes — for his sake and the sake of his community — they have not only turned a blind eye, but have given him the microphone to deliver a speech on one of the most sacred occasions of our sampradaya, while various sannyasis listen passively without offering any opposition for almost 10 minutes.
And I have been informed that this has not been the only recent case where this same situation has occurred in Vraja with BAP. I repeat: the word "pathetic" is no longer adequate.
If this is not enough, BAP was introduced to the audience with the epithet "His Holiness Srila Bhakti Aloka Paramadvaiti Maharaja,” then invited to speak and be passively heard by everyone, but at the end of his exposition even a round of applause is offered to him. You can watch all this sequence in the following link (starting in 2 hours, 4 minutes, 30 seconds approx..):
As I mentioned in my class yesterday, a sin of commission occurs when someone commits something that you know is wrong. On the other hand, a sin of omission occurs when you let something bad happen when you could have done something to stop it. Although many consider the first type of sin to be more serious than the second, that is not necessarily always the case. And in this situation, we are witnessing a serious sin of omission, and even more so—not only Gaudiya leaders being evasive in the face of repeated crimes and abuses, but even giving voice and public position to one of the many figures who have perpetrated many of these abuses.
And after this photo has been made public, as far as I know, there has not been a single public mention by any Gaudiya Vaishnava authority protesting such a display of wanton disregard for truthful and honest living.
Some might feel justified by the classical argument, all too many times invoked as a way to gloss over one's lack of accepting responsible behavior, "better not criticize anyone as it will become an obstacle to your bhajana". Well, if you are a bhajananandi living in a cave, I may accept your argument, but if you are a sannyasi (or several sannyasis, in this case), a public figure who travels and publicly represents a tradition, such an argument is absolutely invalid, and that so-called reason of "not hindering your bhajana" will itself be a hindrance to your bhajana—a sin of omission.
And if someone then wants to argue saying, "but India is like that!” then India must change, I am sorry to have to say. We do not follow India—we follow Gaudiya Vaisnava siddhanta. If such a Hindu cultural stance "worked" in previous centuries, then it is time to acknowledge how many of the abuses of the past need to be recognized for what they are, and not disguised as something else.
If we don't do this, we run the risk of becoming an irrelevant, elusive cult, and an embarrassment to Sriman Mahaprabhu and his followers around the world.
I have received news from several devotees who, already affected by this type of attitude in the past, after seeing this photo have decided to abandon the process or are on the verge of it, contemplating the lack of integrity in those who are supposed to be leading the sampradaya in a holy and immaculate form.
I have received news from several devotees who, already affected by this type of attitude in the past, after seeing this photo have decided to abandon the process or are on the verge of it, contemplating the lack of integrity in those who are supposed to be leading the sampradaya in a holy and immaculate form.
I can only empathize with their pain and bewilderment, and as you well know, my recent cycle of talks seeks, to a large extent, to open the dialogue to many of these topics, which in many circles are still taboo — circles where critical thinking is prohibited under the threat of becoming an aparadhi, where acaryas impose their position through fear and psychological pressure, and other forms of manipulation and dictatorial spirit. While after seeing this photo, in addition to the many who choose to leave the Gaudiya sampradaya in silence, others will choose to "continue" in the sampradaya, also in silence. Personally, I choose a third alternative: to continue in the sampradaya, but not in silence. In fact, I cannot conceive of any other way for one to actually continue in the Gaudiya sampradaya.
What are these kinds of public devotional meetings turning into? Are they just social gatherings for the sake of formality and not out of a deep commitment to the truth? We celebrate such a revolutionary and authentic personality like Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta in what way? Being politically correct, saying the right things and inviting those we think are right, but without a true dynamic spirit of internal transformation? Sorry, but if that is the case, it is not sadhu-sanga. And on top of that we give the microphone to a sexual predator who poses as an acarya and sannyasi without having acknowledged his repeated abuse, we call him "His Holiness” and then we applaud him? How could this possibly please Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta?
Please don't get me wrong. I wish the best for each and every member of the sampradaya. I am not a vindictive person nor interested in "sending anyone to eternal hell” for atrocities committed, including BAP. But to "wish someone well" does not deny that such a person will have to experience certain things in order to become aware of his own mistakes, sincerely repent and only then be able to realistically continue advancement towards Krishna.
Invoking the idea of causeless mercy, that sadhus are independent and can do what they want without being affected, or quoting the verse "api cet suduracaro..." in a sentimental and non-committed way, will be another way of us becoming accomplices in these types of aberrations. If someone is dysfunctional and is nourished by the pratistha received from others, could it be that by giving him a microphone, I am actually helping him? Will giving an addict heroin save him? Is that real compassion, or just a dodge of responsibility for me to stay in my comfort zone and protect my status quo?
What is closer to aparadha: denouncing what is wrong with the intention that everything improves, or repeatedly keeping quiet and allowing various devotees to be abused?
Just as I am not interested in condemning anyone in a violent and spiteful way, I am also not interested in justifying the bad behavior of a devotee or absolutizing the relative side of the guru with the intention of justifying the unjustifiable in the name of saranagati, humility, or guru-nistha. Everything has its limits and parameters and in addition to sastra we must apply common sense to each of our decisions, since otherwise we enter the land of abuse—and all that in the name of surrender.
It seems that we, Gaudiyas, have not had enough lessons in the past, and we still need more blows for history to stop repeating itself in the present. By saying all of this, I am not interested in delving into my own recent personal situation, nor limiting my publication to the situation of BAP or what ISKCON devotees are suffering in recent times. These types of patterns have been present in the human psyche since time immemorial, and as Gaudiyas, it is our duty to recognize this and respond appropriately not only whenever it manifests itself, but to even act in such a way so that, as much as possible, we can prevent these catastrophes from happening again in the future.
Having said that, the present situation to which I am referring in this post is but another drop overflowing in the glass, although that glass has been overflowing for a long time now. The irony of this situation is startling—BAP being invited to speak during the day of honoring someone like Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta, who during his time openly and courageously denounced the various deviations that occurred in his own communityeven risking his own life—so that Sriman Mahaprabhu's message could be presented clearly, free from any deviation.
Paradoxically, many of his own followers today engage in such deviations, others cover up for other people's deviations, and still others provide a microphone, praise, applause, and a public platform to those who engage in such deviations, listen to him, and glorify him at the end. Where did the courage and integrity of our previous acaryas go? Where is our commitment to, in Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta's words, akaitava-satya- katha, speaking the truth free from delusion and free from fear? Personally, I feel embarrassed to see how Gaudiya Vaishnavism is being represented in situations like these.
And perhaps even more ironic, is that it was Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta himself who re-established the sannyasa order due to various illicit activities that many so-called renouncers wearing the glorious clothing of a babaji were engaging in at the time. Seeing the unfortunate behavior of many sannyasis today, I wonder, if it is time to re-establish the order of babaji, in order to counteract the deviations committed by so many sannyasis during all these years?
Of course, this goes beyond a mere order or color, and these words apply to a type of mentality and not necessarily to each member of a particular asrama. Although my words do not deny the presence of genuine sadhus in each asrama and Vaisnava parivara, all of whom I deeply revere and respect, at the same time (and precisely because of the appreciation and affection we have for each of such sadhus) it is necessary to share these words.
It is time to be more introspective than ever and ask ourselves what are we doing with the Gaudiya sampradaya. How happy and proud would Mahaprabhu, Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta (or whoever represents this glorious lineage for each of us) be to see how we are conducting ourselves on their behalf? How much are we using the name and glories of these great personalities to cover up, justify and even promote all those values that are diametrically opposed to the original message of our sampradaya?
I am still looking for a word beyond "pathetic" that describes this current display of deviation. Please help me. And better yet, let us all help each other to make the Gaudiya sampradaya what it originally was, and still has the potential to be and continue to be—a beautiful mystical school of transformed hearts and deeply committed to the truth, no matter the price we have to pay for always choosing the truth over hypocrisy.
In this spirit, let me conclude with a few words from Sri Prabhupada
Bhaktisiddhanta about the need to always speak the truth honestly:
"At present it is fashionable to be cheated by those who in the name of dharma misguide people. Real devotees do not speak to satisfy their audiences. They do not cheat people. Rather, pure DEVOTEES REVEAL THE DEFECTS OF CHEATERS who love to compromise.” – Harmonist 25.230, March 1928.
/ "The material desires of men are like goats. The sadhu stands there to kill those desires by the merciful stroke of the sharpened sacrificial knife in the form of UNPLEASANT LANGUAGE. If the sadhu turns into my flatterer, then he does me harm; he becomes my enemy.” – Harmonist 287.264, February 1931.
/ "Without cheating anyone we should boldly proclaim the truth to everyone. If the truth is bitter or unpopular but bestows blessings on the living entities, we must speak it. UNLESS WE FEARLESSLY SPEAK THE TRUTH, ŚRĪ ŚRĪ GURU-GAURĀNGA WILL NOT BE PLEASED.” – Amṛta- vāṇī 308.
/ "THE AGGRESSIVE PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE CONCRETE TRUTH IS THE CRYING NECESSITY OF THE MOMENT, for silencing the aggressive propaganda of specific untruths that is being spread all over the world.” – Essay entitled #"hākura Bhaktivinoda,” Harmonist 29.167–73, December 1931.
/ "A chanter of hari-kīrtana is necessarily the uncompromising enemy of worldliness and hypocrisy. ...It is his BOUNDEN DUTY TO CLEARLY AND FRANKLY OPPOSE ANY PERSON WHO TRIES TO DECEIVE AND HARM HIMSELF AND OTHERS BY MISREPRESENTING THE TRUTH, whether due to malice or genuine misunderstanding. This will be possible if the chanter of kīrtana is always prepared to submit to being trodden upon by thoughtless people, if such discomfort will enable him to benefit his persecutors by CHANTING OF THE TRUTH IN THE MOST UNAMBIGUOUS MANNER.
If he is unwilling or afraid of considerations of self-respect or personal discomfort to chant kīrtana under all circumstances, he is unfit to be a preacher of the absolute truth. Humility implies perfect submission to the truth and no sympathy for untruth. Those who entertain any partiality for untruth are unfit to chant hari-kīrtana. Any clinging to untruth is opposed to the principle of humility born of absolute submission to the truth. ...The professors of pseudo-humility have reason to fear the preaching of Hari!s servant, one of whose duties is to EXPOSE THE ENORMOUS POSSIBILITY OF MISCHIEF INHERENT IN VARIOUS FORMS OF SO-CALLED SPIRITUAL CONDUCT when they are prostituted for serving the untruth.” – Harmonist 26.249, April 1929.
Satyam eva jayate.
Satyam eva jayate.
Is this called, the cat chasing its own tail?
When are all these people just going to
worship Srila Prabhupada,
and quit all these false programs?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.