From: ASD (Russia)
To: angel108b@yahoo.com
Тема: Tatastha-vada apa-sampradaya
"I suggest fourth group should be added- those who left hijacked ISKCON, continued to somehow practice bhakti yoga but didn't join any math or are not followers of any Gaudiya Math guru. Instead they either became independent guru with his own group/organization or just stayed in dead end position of no guru (incredibly they sometimes continue to advocate living guru thesis being unable to point out who is that bona fide living guru now and keep telling this for years or decades).
Тема: Tatastha-vada apa-sampradaya
Hide original message
Dear Puranjana prabhu,
Please read the essay below. Your comments will be appreciated:
Myth: OK, something is wrong with diksa guru system in maya-ISKCON and in deviated Gaudiya mathas as well, but Srila Prabhupada still should not be accepted as one's guru anyway, as well as his instructions on ritvik initiations. One should accept or become an independent guru - this is the real solution for Srila Prabhupada's followers.
Myth: OK, something is wrong with diksa guru system in maya-ISKCON and in deviated Gaudiya mathas as well, but Srila Prabhupada still should not be accepted as one's guru anyway, as well as his instructions on ritvik initiations. One should accept or become an independent guru - this is the real solution for Srila Prabhupada's followers.
PADA: I get this a lot. Well sure -- the GBC system is faulty, therefore you should be a guru yourself. Wait a minute, the problem is premature gurus, so I should also drink from the same cup of toxic kool aid -- and get sick from the same poison? Same thing with the "Purely Prabhupada" -- Jvalamukhi's folks, you should take responsibility for the people you preach to (and take their karma). A neophyte cannot absorb the karma of another neophyte, nor can he present pure divyam jnanam and so on.
A follower of Indradyumna writes that his guru is suffering physically, and that may be from taking this disciple's karma. Well yep. He is not authorized to act as another Jesus and take karma.
And I should also join that program? A conditioned soul cannot liberate another conditioned soul. All conditioned souls require a connection to the liberated soul. Or they won't be liberated. And when a conditioned soul artificially takes the task of acharya, all sorts of problems crop up, and still are coming up in the GBC guru game all the time.
Truth: Ignoring Srila Prabhupada's orders regarding initiations on his behalf cannot be correct solution. This position leads to a dead end, to rejecting the bona fide guru and turning into another deviated apa-sampradaya.
The coup and takeover of ISKCON in the late 1970s and the further deviation of maya-ISKCON ultimately created quite a number of people who, to one degree or another, realize that fundamental negative changes have occurred to Srila Prabhupada's Society after his physical departure, the root of which being the new, false guru system. However, the degree of their awareness and the proposed solutions to the problem have given rise to various factions that preach that their group and vision are correct, and they often believe that others are mistaken. However, we must analyze whose position is thoroughly proven by documents, quotations, facts, deep honest research, sound logic, and whose ideas are based on shaky, false foundation.
1. Who creates a schism and becomes a renegade?
Srila Prabhupada's essay "Who is Crazy?" was published in the 'Back to Godhead' magazine (No. 66, June 1974). In this article, His Divine Grace responds to the challenge of materialists who declare religious people to be crazy. He writes:
"The whole world is divided into factions, and each accuses the others of being crazy. But if there are no criteria by which to judge sanity, then who can decide? [...] the spiritualists call the materialists crazy, and the materialists call the spiritualists crazy."
Srila Prabhupada further explains that an individual person, soul, is different from material body which is constantly changing, and if someone holds on to their bodily identification, then: "Is this not crazy? If a person identifies with something he is not, he is considered crazy. The conclusion is that one who identifies with the body cannot really be considered sane."
Then Srila Prabhupada adds: "Nonetheless, even when we have resolved to take to the path of self-realization, maya or illusion persists." Even a person who understands that the nature of his personality is non-material, can, for example, become an impersonalist. And that, Srila Prabhupada explains, would be crazy too. At the end His Divine Grace says:
"One can never be happy by identifying himself with the material body and engaging in all kinds of nonsensical activities. For happiness, there must be consciousness of Krishna; that is the difference between spiritualism and materialism. [...] By ardently following the instructions of Krishna in Bhagavad-gita and following in the footsteps of the great acaryas, teachers of Bhagavad-gita in the line of disciplic succession, we can spiritualize the earth and restore its inhabitants to sanity."
Similarly, followers of Gaudiya Vaisnavism in the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and Srila Prabhupada, unfortunately, have split into factions that accuse each other of having deviated, become schismatics, renegades, etc. But this should be judged by the criteria that are specified in the sastras and the instructions of acaryas, not on the basis of emotions and one's own attachments.
Truth: Ignoring Srila Prabhupada's orders regarding initiations on his behalf cannot be correct solution. This position leads to a dead end, to rejecting the bona fide guru and turning into another deviated apa-sampradaya.
The coup and takeover of ISKCON in the late 1970s and the further deviation of maya-ISKCON ultimately created quite a number of people who, to one degree or another, realize that fundamental negative changes have occurred to Srila Prabhupada's Society after his physical departure, the root of which being the new, false guru system. However, the degree of their awareness and the proposed solutions to the problem have given rise to various factions that preach that their group and vision are correct, and they often believe that others are mistaken. However, we must analyze whose position is thoroughly proven by documents, quotations, facts, deep honest research, sound logic, and whose ideas are based on shaky, false foundation.
1. Who creates a schism and becomes a renegade?
Srila Prabhupada's essay "Who is Crazy?" was published in the 'Back to Godhead' magazine (No. 66, June 1974). In this article, His Divine Grace responds to the challenge of materialists who declare religious people to be crazy. He writes:
"The whole world is divided into factions, and each accuses the others of being crazy. But if there are no criteria by which to judge sanity, then who can decide? [...] the spiritualists call the materialists crazy, and the materialists call the spiritualists crazy."
Srila Prabhupada further explains that an individual person, soul, is different from material body which is constantly changing, and if someone holds on to their bodily identification, then: "Is this not crazy? If a person identifies with something he is not, he is considered crazy. The conclusion is that one who identifies with the body cannot really be considered sane."
Then Srila Prabhupada adds: "Nonetheless, even when we have resolved to take to the path of self-realization, maya or illusion persists." Even a person who understands that the nature of his personality is non-material, can, for example, become an impersonalist. And that, Srila Prabhupada explains, would be crazy too. At the end His Divine Grace says:
"One can never be happy by identifying himself with the material body and engaging in all kinds of nonsensical activities. For happiness, there must be consciousness of Krishna; that is the difference between spiritualism and materialism. [...] By ardently following the instructions of Krishna in Bhagavad-gita and following in the footsteps of the great acaryas, teachers of Bhagavad-gita in the line of disciplic succession, we can spiritualize the earth and restore its inhabitants to sanity."
Similarly, followers of Gaudiya Vaisnavism in the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and Srila Prabhupada, unfortunately, have split into factions that accuse each other of having deviated, become schismatics, renegades, etc. But this should be judged by the criteria that are specified in the sastras and the instructions of acaryas, not on the basis of emotions and one's own attachments.
The schism is created by those who violate instructions of the spiritual master. When referring to the history of how Gaudiya matha mission disintegrated after the physical departure of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, Srila Prabhupada unequivocally states that there was a split because self-made "acaryas" took the guru position without proper authorization from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta. And he warned ISKCON against repeating this mistake. Alas, after Srila Prabhupada's physical departure, the history repeated itself.
PADA: Not only repeated, the ISKCON GBC fell at the feet of the architect of the 1936 false acharya program -- BR Sridhara Maharaja -- and anointed him as the GBC's "shastra advisor, senior authority, shiksha guru" etc.
2. What factions did followers of Srila Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta split into?
So the followers have now divided into four major groups. But who is right and who is wrong? Cc Adi, Chapter 12 states:
"The followers of Śrī Advaita Prabhu were of two kinds. Some were real followers, and the others were false. Rejecting the false followers, I offer my respectful obeisances to Śrī Advaita Ācārya's real followers, whose life and soul was Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu." (Adi, 12.1)
"Some of the disciples strictly accepted the orders of the ācārya, and others deviated, independently concocting their own opinions under the spell of daivī-māyā." (Adi, 12.9)
As Srila Prabhupada explains in this chapter, the reason for the schism is deviation from acarya's orders. Those who do this, they are the deviants. This is the criteria, otherwise each party will insist that others, not themselves, are deviants and renegades (like Bhakti Vikasa gave a lecture on "renegades" telling that pro-Prabhupada / pro-ritivks are renegades).
So who made schisms and turned into deviant apa-sampradayas with bogus gurus and sahajia on system level?
1) Pseudo-sarasvatas
Srila Prabhupada wrote:
"Sanātana Gosvāmī and Rūpa Gosvāmī belonged to the Bharadvāja-gotra, which indicates that they belonged either to the family or disciplic succession of Bharadvāja Muni. As members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement we belong to the family, or disciplic succession, of Sarasvatī Gosvāmī, and thus we are known as Sārasvatas.
PADA: Not only repeated, the ISKCON GBC fell at the feet of the architect of the 1936 false acharya program -- BR Sridhara Maharaja -- and anointed him as the GBC's "shastra advisor, senior authority, shiksha guru" etc.
2. What factions did followers of Srila Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta split into?
So the followers have now divided into four major groups. But who is right and who is wrong? Cc Adi, Chapter 12 states:
"The followers of Śrī Advaita Prabhu were of two kinds. Some were real followers, and the others were false. Rejecting the false followers, I offer my respectful obeisances to Śrī Advaita Ācārya's real followers, whose life and soul was Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu." (Adi, 12.1)
"Some of the disciples strictly accepted the orders of the ācārya, and others deviated, independently concocting their own opinions under the spell of daivī-māyā." (Adi, 12.9)
As Srila Prabhupada explains in this chapter, the reason for the schism is deviation from acarya's orders. Those who do this, they are the deviants. This is the criteria, otherwise each party will insist that others, not themselves, are deviants and renegades (like Bhakti Vikasa gave a lecture on "renegades" telling that pro-Prabhupada / pro-ritivks are renegades).
So who made schisms and turned into deviant apa-sampradayas with bogus gurus and sahajia on system level?
1) Pseudo-sarasvatas
Srila Prabhupada wrote:
"Sanātana Gosvāmī and Rūpa Gosvāmī belonged to the Bharadvāja-gotra, which indicates that they belonged either to the family or disciplic succession of Bharadvāja Muni. As members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement we belong to the family, or disciplic succession, of Sarasvatī Gosvāmī, and thus we are known as Sārasvatas.
Obeisances are therefore offered to the spiritual master as sārasvata-deva, or a member of the Sārasvata family (namas te sārasvate deve), whose mission is to broadcast the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu (gaura-vāṇī-pracāriṇe) and to fight with impersonalists and voidists (nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi-pāścātya-deśa-tāriṇe). This was also the occupational duty of Sanātana Gosvāmī, Rūpa Gosvāmī and Anupama Gosvāmī."
Some Gaudiya Math followers keep saying that ISKCON is just a branch from the original Gaudiya Mission, we are all Sarasvatas, one family of Mahaprabhu. No, Srila Prabhupada and his disciples are Sarasvatas at the present moment. Srila Prabhupada called his deviated guru Godbrothers "so called", "asara", unauthorized, unqualified as acarays, deviated, dead men, etc. Some quotes:
PADA: He also said Sridhara Maharaja's Bagh Bazaar party are "severe offenders."
Prabhupada: Our Godbrothers have deliberately disobeyed my Guru Maharaja.
Gaurasundara: Ha.
Prabhupāda: That is my charge against them. Deliberately. He never appointed an ācārya. First of all they appointed one ācārya, you see, and later on he proved to be a rascal.
Devotee: Now they have several different ācāryas.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That made the fracture, you see. [...] First of all they appointed one acarya, you see, and later on he proved to be a rascal. [...] The Sridhara Swami from Bengal Matha. He made a great blunder, he and Professor Sanyal and Kesava Maharaja. At that time he was, these three men supported, and he [Ananta Vasudeva/Puri Maharaja] proved later on to be false. Actually this Tirtha Maharaja, he wanted to be acarya. People did not like him, so they made another bad acarya. (Room Conversation – May 14, 1972, Honolulu)
"He [Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati] never said that Kunja Babu should be acarya. None, none of them were advised by Guru Maharaja to become acarya." (Room Conversation with American Banker — September 21, 1973, Bombay)
"So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure. The result is now everyone is claiming to be acarya even though they may be kanistha adhikari with no ability to preach. In some of the camps the acarya is being changed three times a year. Therefore we may not commit the same mistake in our ISKCON camp. Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya." (SPL to Rupanuga, April 28, 1974)
"Regarding the 92 section case against the Gaudiya Math, I don't think there is any possibility of compromise. But the Baghbazar party and Mayapur party have unlawfully usurped the missionary institution of Srila Prabhupada [Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati], and whenever they will talk of a compromise, it means another complication. (SP Letter to: Narayana Maharaja — Tittenhurst 30 September, 1969)
In 1968, Srila Prabhupada wrote about Bombay Gaudiya Math that "they deviated from the disciplic succession from Srila Prabhupada [Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati]." (SP Letter to: Jagannatham Prabhu — Montreal 22 June, 1968)
Prabhupāda: These sahajiyās will come out of so many devotees. What can be done? From my Guru Mahārāja's disciples, so many sahajiyās came. These are called sahajiyās. Very easily they capture thing. So my Guru Mahārāja used to say, "When my disciples will be sahajiyā, it will be more dangerous." He used to say like that. Take things very easily. You know that Puruṣottama, supposed to be my Godbrother?
[...]
Pṛthu-putra: Oh. Is it because we have the desire to come in contact with such persons that we contact them, like Nitāi contacting that Puruṣottama?
Prabhupāda: You may not desire, but if you are not strong, you'll be misled by these rascals. But if we follow this instruction, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, āra nā koriho mane āśā, oh, then you become strong. Then you remain strong. (Room Conversation — January 28, 1977, Bhuvaneśvara)
Therefore, strictly speaking, they and their followers are not real Sarasvatas, but are pseudo-sarasvatas. In 1937 first false acaryas of the Gaudiya Math mission were Ananta Vasudeva (later named as Puridas, who got 1/3 of original maths) and Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana (later named as BV Tirtha Swami) who got 2/3 of original Gaudiya maths.
Some Gaudiya Math followers keep saying that ISKCON is just a branch from the original Gaudiya Mission, we are all Sarasvatas, one family of Mahaprabhu. No, Srila Prabhupada and his disciples are Sarasvatas at the present moment. Srila Prabhupada called his deviated guru Godbrothers "so called", "asara", unauthorized, unqualified as acarays, deviated, dead men, etc. Some quotes:
PADA: He also said Sridhara Maharaja's Bagh Bazaar party are "severe offenders."
Prabhupada: Our Godbrothers have deliberately disobeyed my Guru Maharaja.
Gaurasundara: Ha.
Prabhupāda: That is my charge against them. Deliberately. He never appointed an ācārya. First of all they appointed one ācārya, you see, and later on he proved to be a rascal.
Devotee: Now they have several different ācāryas.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That made the fracture, you see. [...] First of all they appointed one acarya, you see, and later on he proved to be a rascal. [...] The Sridhara Swami from Bengal Matha. He made a great blunder, he and Professor Sanyal and Kesava Maharaja. At that time he was, these three men supported, and he [Ananta Vasudeva/Puri Maharaja] proved later on to be false. Actually this Tirtha Maharaja, he wanted to be acarya. People did not like him, so they made another bad acarya. (Room Conversation – May 14, 1972, Honolulu)
"He [Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati] never said that Kunja Babu should be acarya. None, none of them were advised by Guru Maharaja to become acarya." (Room Conversation with American Banker — September 21, 1973, Bombay)
"So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure. The result is now everyone is claiming to be acarya even though they may be kanistha adhikari with no ability to preach. In some of the camps the acarya is being changed three times a year. Therefore we may not commit the same mistake in our ISKCON camp. Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya." (SPL to Rupanuga, April 28, 1974)
"Regarding the 92 section case against the Gaudiya Math, I don't think there is any possibility of compromise. But the Baghbazar party and Mayapur party have unlawfully usurped the missionary institution of Srila Prabhupada [Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati], and whenever they will talk of a compromise, it means another complication. (SP Letter to: Narayana Maharaja — Tittenhurst 30 September, 1969)
In 1968, Srila Prabhupada wrote about Bombay Gaudiya Math that "they deviated from the disciplic succession from Srila Prabhupada [Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati]." (SP Letter to: Jagannatham Prabhu — Montreal 22 June, 1968)
Prabhupāda: These sahajiyās will come out of so many devotees. What can be done? From my Guru Mahārāja's disciples, so many sahajiyās came. These are called sahajiyās. Very easily they capture thing. So my Guru Mahārāja used to say, "When my disciples will be sahajiyā, it will be more dangerous." He used to say like that. Take things very easily. You know that Puruṣottama, supposed to be my Godbrother?
[...]
Pṛthu-putra: Oh. Is it because we have the desire to come in contact with such persons that we contact them, like Nitāi contacting that Puruṣottama?
Prabhupāda: You may not desire, but if you are not strong, you'll be misled by these rascals. But if we follow this instruction, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, āra nā koriho mane āśā, oh, then you become strong. Then you remain strong. (Room Conversation — January 28, 1977, Bhuvaneśvara)
Therefore, strictly speaking, they and their followers are not real Sarasvatas, but are pseudo-sarasvatas. In 1937 first false acaryas of the Gaudiya Math mission were Ananta Vasudeva (later named as Puridas, who got 1/3 of original maths) and Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana (later named as BV Tirtha Swami) who got 2/3 of original Gaudiya maths.
Then some others left these maths and became bogus gurus and created their own societies, including Sri Caitanya Sarasvat Math, Sri Caitanya Gaudiya Math, Sri Gopinath Gaudiya Math, International Society for Pure Bhakti-yoga and its off-shoots, etc. All these groups are not real Sarasvatas, but are false, or pseudo-sarasvatas. Off course, Srila Prabhupada also had to leave and establish his own society, but he wasn't a bogus guru.
2) Hijacked deviated ISKCON (pseudo- or maya-ISKCON). Radically deviated and transformed branch of Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON that emerged after the criminal coup and gurujacking of ISKCON in 1977-78. Maya-ISKCON is headed by Mayapur so called GBC controlled by unauthorized bogus gurus.
3) Followers of various marginal philosophies (tatastha-vadis). Loose conglomerate of those who reject (to some degree) the authority of the Mayapur maya-ISKCON GBC and their gurus (all or some of them) and think there is need to reform and purify maya-ISKCON (with or without hopes for such a reform). They are usually not fixed in maya - ISKCON.
2) Hijacked deviated ISKCON (pseudo- or maya-ISKCON). Radically deviated and transformed branch of Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON that emerged after the criminal coup and gurujacking of ISKCON in 1977-78. Maya-ISKCON is headed by Mayapur so called GBC controlled by unauthorized bogus gurus.
3) Followers of various marginal philosophies (tatastha-vadis). Loose conglomerate of those who reject (to some degree) the authority of the Mayapur maya-ISKCON GBC and their gurus (all or some of them) and think there is need to reform and purify maya-ISKCON (with or without hopes for such a reform). They are usually not fixed in maya - ISKCON.
They may or may not be independent gurus themselves, but they don't accept Srila Prabhupada as the current guru via ritvik system, although claim they are his followers (to some degree, sometimes they claim to be double adherents to Srila Prabhupada and some of his Godbrothers). They provide no profound basis and are unable to produce a strong movement with real solution to the current crisis.
All above mentioned groups are novel sahajiya apa-sampradaya variations, false followers of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and/or Srila Prabhupada. Many of them stick to so called 'living guru' doctrine and reject ritvik instructions of Srila Prabhupada (and/or other his standards as well), and so they can be called ritvik-prativadis. Srila Prabhupada wrote:
"vādīs and prativādīs — proponents and counterproponents." (SB 6.4.31, purport)
More or less, it's all varieties of anti-Prabhupada party that rejects His Divine Grace as the current guru and his instructions. Sincere devotees shouldn't support these ideologies.
4) Srila Prabhupada disciples (Prabhupadanugas, pro-ritviks, Srila Prabhupada's greater ISKCON that includes present Prabhupadanuga organizations). This position, at least, gives correct understanding of historical events that took place in the Gaudiya Math and ISKCON, real understanding of Srila Prabhupada's position as the only bona fide acarya (successor to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur) and current guru, and speaks of following and guarding all his standards.
All above mentioned groups are novel sahajiya apa-sampradaya variations, false followers of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and/or Srila Prabhupada. Many of them stick to so called 'living guru' doctrine and reject ritvik instructions of Srila Prabhupada (and/or other his standards as well), and so they can be called ritvik-prativadis. Srila Prabhupada wrote:
"vādīs and prativādīs — proponents and counterproponents." (SB 6.4.31, purport)
More or less, it's all varieties of anti-Prabhupada party that rejects His Divine Grace as the current guru and his instructions. Sincere devotees shouldn't support these ideologies.
4) Srila Prabhupada disciples (Prabhupadanugas, pro-ritviks, Srila Prabhupada's greater ISKCON that includes present Prabhupadanuga organizations). This position, at least, gives correct understanding of historical events that took place in the Gaudiya Math and ISKCON, real understanding of Srila Prabhupada's position as the only bona fide acarya (successor to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur) and current guru, and speaks of following and guarding all his standards.
So Prabhupadanugas have solid foundation, clear solution to the present system crisis in the Sarasvata family, and know who is bona fide representative of Lord Krishna to whom we should surrender. All they need is to fulfill this potential as much as possible. All three other factions are even ideologically and systematically neo-sahajiya apa-sampradayas that unfortunately deviated from Lord Caitanya's sampradaya. Nowadays all real Sarasvatas should be disciples of his successor His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
3. The dead end of tatastha-vada
Some people have long been forming a separate stratum that does not correspond to the pure philosophy of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. In his books, Srila Prabhupada translated the word tatastha as "marginal" (see: taṭastha — marginal Madhya 23.6, http://sanskritdictionary.org/tatastha). Therefore, they can be called tatastha-vadis (adherents of "marginal philosophy") — a diverse category of those who, to one degree or another, reject the authority of the deviated Mayapur GBC and maya-ISKCON "gurus" (all or significant part of them) and talk about the need for reform maya-ISKCON.
3. The dead end of tatastha-vada
Some people have long been forming a separate stratum that does not correspond to the pure philosophy of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. In his books, Srila Prabhupada translated the word tatastha as "marginal" (see: taṭastha — marginal Madhya 23.6, http://sanskritdictionary.org/tatastha). Therefore, they can be called tatastha-vadis (adherents of "marginal philosophy") — a diverse category of those who, to one degree or another, reject the authority of the deviated Mayapur GBC and maya-ISKCON "gurus" (all or significant part of them) and talk about the need for reform maya-ISKCON.
They may expose some of the "gurus" and leaders of maya-ISKCON (and at the same time such persons may themselves assume the position of independent gurus, or remain in non-guru position), but they do not accept Srila Prabhupada as their guru and his instructions (primarily on initiations), although they claim to be his followers.
As a rule, these people become disillusioned with maya-ISKCON and leave it, or they are not fixed in maya-ISKCON from the very beginning and have weak ties with it. They have a lot of misunderstandings about guru-tattva and other teachings of Srila Prabhupada, although they may ignorantly disregard Srila Prabhupada's position as current spiritual master and Prabhupadanugas as some deviated "ritviks" and think of themselves as those situated on the most correct path, but it's baseless make-belief.
PADA: Right, a bunch of people told me they joined Narayan Maharaja just to be against the GBC. Except he has been the GBC's main advisor, position paper ghost writer, hand maiden helper, and working with Satsvarupa on the Guru Reform, having gopi rasika classes with Tamal and co., and challenging PADA on just about everything etc. They did not actually make a valid counter movement.
PADA: Right, a bunch of people told me they joined Narayan Maharaja just to be against the GBC. Except he has been the GBC's main advisor, position paper ghost writer, hand maiden helper, and working with Satsvarupa on the Guru Reform, having gopi rasika classes with Tamal and co., and challenging PADA on just about everything etc. They did not actually make a valid counter movement.
A lot of them around here smoke pot and do not follow very strictly. Let us defeat the GBC, by surrendering to the main bucket boy assistant of the GBC. Let us get rid of Hitler, and worship his main writer Joeseph Goebbels.
In short, they are supporters of half-measures and do not seek to understand the origins of the present crisis in maya-ISKCON, to find out the history of the ISKCON coup in 1977-78, and they do not accept Srila Prabhupada as their current spiritual master and his instructions on ritvik initiations on his behalf. Many of these people underestimate how much their understanding has been distorted by maya-ISKCON, which is why, even after quitting this system, they still do not take Srila Prabhupada's instructions about maintaining his status as the current initiating guru with all due seriousness and, unfortunately, sometimes even become ardent anti-ritviks. Their own serious offences and personal ambitions may also be the reason of their misunderstandings:
"Even if one is a greatly learned scholar, if he commits an offense to the lotus feet of the Lord he will not be able to speak properly, in spite of his learning." (Cc. Adi 16.89 purport)
ei-mata advaitera kichu doṣa nāñi
bhāgyābhāgya bujhi’ vyākhyā kare sei ṭhāñi
In this way, Advaita Ācārya has no fault. People understood His explanations according to their own piety or impiety. (Caitanya-bhāgavata Madhya-khaṇḍa 10.144)
As a result, they build their activities on a false foundation, find themselves in a dead end and do not show other people the way out of this systemwide crisis generated by the coup in ISKCON. So this faction is quite heterogeneous and doesn't offer any real solution to the crisis condition of maya-ISKCON and Gaudiya-mathas.
One of the first tatastha-vadis were Srila Prabhupada's disciples Gaurasundara and Siddha-svarupananda Goswami.
Prabhupāda: What is the answer to this, their making some attempt to become guru?.. It is an immature attempt. And it is not the thing that by artificial attempt one becomes guru. Guru is accepted by etiquette, not by artificial attempt. [...] Hmm? You have to follow the paramparā system, order. That is guru. Not that I declare myself as guru. No. That is not guru. [...] So these attempts are being done, just like Gaurasundara told, that "Why should I live under the subjugation of these people? Let me go away, become a guru." Similarly Sudāmā. This attempt will not be successful, but there is some attempt like that.
Gopāla Kṛṣṇa: I think that everybody should resolve not to do it in any form at all. I have heard similar... I have heard this type of complaint from other places also, where some other devotees have tried to call themselves some type of a guru. Whenever I heard that, I have been very disturbed...
Gopāla Kṛṣṇa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, I am just trying to clarify—I don't want to offend anyone—but no disciple of yours should call himself dīkṣā-guru or śikṣā-guru. Am I right?
Prabhupāda: Well, everyone is engaged to become śikṣā-guru, but one should become perfect. The attempt is—what is called?—probationer... Āmāra ājñāya [Cc. Madhya 7.128], Caitanya Mahāprabhu said: "By My order." So all my disciples are expected to become śikṣā-guru on my order, not by his own order. That is meaning I am giving sannyāsa, I am sending you to different places, so this means that you have to carry out the order of the guru very strictly. (Room Conversation — May 30, 1976, Honolulu)
"Once, while we were alone, Prabhupada criticized his disciple, Gaurasundara. Gaurasundara opened the first temple in Hawaii, but later disappointed Prabhupada by falling down, selling the temple, and keeping the money.
In short, they are supporters of half-measures and do not seek to understand the origins of the present crisis in maya-ISKCON, to find out the history of the ISKCON coup in 1977-78, and they do not accept Srila Prabhupada as their current spiritual master and his instructions on ritvik initiations on his behalf. Many of these people underestimate how much their understanding has been distorted by maya-ISKCON, which is why, even after quitting this system, they still do not take Srila Prabhupada's instructions about maintaining his status as the current initiating guru with all due seriousness and, unfortunately, sometimes even become ardent anti-ritviks. Their own serious offences and personal ambitions may also be the reason of their misunderstandings:
"Even if one is a greatly learned scholar, if he commits an offense to the lotus feet of the Lord he will not be able to speak properly, in spite of his learning." (Cc. Adi 16.89 purport)
ei-mata advaitera kichu doṣa nāñi
bhāgyābhāgya bujhi’ vyākhyā kare sei ṭhāñi
In this way, Advaita Ācārya has no fault. People understood His explanations according to their own piety or impiety. (Caitanya-bhāgavata Madhya-khaṇḍa 10.144)
As a result, they build their activities on a false foundation, find themselves in a dead end and do not show other people the way out of this systemwide crisis generated by the coup in ISKCON. So this faction is quite heterogeneous and doesn't offer any real solution to the crisis condition of maya-ISKCON and Gaudiya-mathas.
One of the first tatastha-vadis were Srila Prabhupada's disciples Gaurasundara and Siddha-svarupananda Goswami.
Prabhupāda: What is the answer to this, their making some attempt to become guru?.. It is an immature attempt. And it is not the thing that by artificial attempt one becomes guru. Guru is accepted by etiquette, not by artificial attempt. [...] Hmm? You have to follow the paramparā system, order. That is guru. Not that I declare myself as guru. No. That is not guru. [...] So these attempts are being done, just like Gaurasundara told, that "Why should I live under the subjugation of these people? Let me go away, become a guru." Similarly Sudāmā. This attempt will not be successful, but there is some attempt like that.
Gopāla Kṛṣṇa: I think that everybody should resolve not to do it in any form at all. I have heard similar... I have heard this type of complaint from other places also, where some other devotees have tried to call themselves some type of a guru. Whenever I heard that, I have been very disturbed...
Gopāla Kṛṣṇa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, I am just trying to clarify—I don't want to offend anyone—but no disciple of yours should call himself dīkṣā-guru or śikṣā-guru. Am I right?
Prabhupāda: Well, everyone is engaged to become śikṣā-guru, but one should become perfect. The attempt is—what is called?—probationer... Āmāra ājñāya [Cc. Madhya 7.128], Caitanya Mahāprabhu said: "By My order." So all my disciples are expected to become śikṣā-guru on my order, not by his own order. That is meaning I am giving sannyāsa, I am sending you to different places, so this means that you have to carry out the order of the guru very strictly. (Room Conversation — May 30, 1976, Honolulu)
"Once, while we were alone, Prabhupada criticized his disciple, Gaurasundara. Gaurasundara opened the first temple in Hawaii, but later disappointed Prabhupada by falling down, selling the temple, and keeping the money.
Prabhupada's anger was as intense as the monsoon rains. "He wants to be guru, but he is not qualified. All of them, they want to be guru without qualification and they will fall victim to sex life." [...] In 1976, Gaurasundara visited Prabhupada for the first time in more than two years.
I was not in the room during Gaursundara's darsana with Prabhupada, but when Gaursundara came out of Prabhupada's room, his heavy brow seemed even heavier. I asked him what Prabhupada said. He answered, "Don't try to become guru prematurely. You should serve your guru."
Prabhupada had long ago analyzed Gaurasundara's problem. I remember him mentioning it to me in 1974 when we were together in Hong Kong. Prabhupada now had the opportunity to directly explain the same analysis to Gaurasundara: a premature, possibly lethal, desire to become guru. An actual guru always remains the servant of his own guru and the predecessor acaryas.
Attempting to become a guru without one's own guru's order is materialistic ambition. Accepting followers and circumventing one's own guru is offensive. Prabhupada implored Gaurasundara to rectify this serious fault in his Krsna consciousness and humbly return to the shelter of his spiritual master." (My Glorious Master, by Bhurijana das)
Back in the fall of 1977, after Srila Prabhupada's physical departure, Siddhasvarupa rejected the Mayapur GBC and 11 supposed "successors", left ISKCON, arbitrarily assumed the position of acarya (and even allowed himself to be called Jagat Guru and Prabhupada) and created his own organization. Subsequently, other unauthorized gurus left maya-ISKCON and created their own institutions. They didn't have proper authority from Srila Prabhupada. Other variations of tatastha-vadis started to appear. These were the early years of a new neo-sahajiya off-shoot from Srila Prabhupada's and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's pure line of Gaudiya sampradaya.
Recently, I wrote the following email:
Back in the fall of 1977, after Srila Prabhupada's physical departure, Siddhasvarupa rejected the Mayapur GBC and 11 supposed "successors", left ISKCON, arbitrarily assumed the position of acarya (and even allowed himself to be called Jagat Guru and Prabhupada) and created his own organization. Subsequently, other unauthorized gurus left maya-ISKCON and created their own institutions. They didn't have proper authority from Srila Prabhupada. Other variations of tatastha-vadis started to appear. These were the early years of a new neo-sahajiya off-shoot from Srila Prabhupada's and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's pure line of Gaudiya sampradaya.
Recently, I wrote the following email:
"I suggest fourth group should be added- those who left hijacked ISKCON, continued to somehow practice bhakti yoga but didn't join any math or are not followers of any Gaudiya Math guru. Instead they either became independent guru with his own group/organization or just stayed in dead end position of no guru (incredibly they sometimes continue to advocate living guru thesis being unable to point out who is that bona fide living guru now and keep telling this for years or decades).
PADA: Most of the people who were formerly promoting various GBC gurus had to later on admit that their "living guru" was bogus. Thus later on a lot of them just started saying "you need to find your own living guru" -- who cannot be named -- so they do not identify that guru, having been exposed promoting false gurus in the past. So now there is a guru -- out there somewhere -- maybe, somehow or other, but no one can be named.
Such marginal independent gurus and non-gurus are quite prominent phenomena since more and more people understand that something got wrong in ISKCON and leave it. We in Russia / CIS have several such marginal not fixed in ISKCON, non-math, non-Prabhupadanuga diksa-gurus (Murali Mohan Swami, Sasthivara Das, Arci D.D., etc.) and a number of other vocal opposition non-guru persons who advocate some partial reform in ISKCON (like book changes issue, BBT deviation issue, women / child abuse issue, direct / indirect preaching issue, or they call for removing only some maya-ISKCON gurus or managers, etc.), but they don't look properly into the roots of this system crisis that began since late 1970s coup and guru-jacking of ISKCON.
PADA: Even Ravindra Swarupa, Gaura Govinda swami, Kirtanananda, Hansadutta and many others would also say "ALL the other GBC and guru guys are bogus, but at least I am bona fide." Jayatirtha started the Peace Krishnas LSD cult and he got a lot of followers from other zones, convincing people their local GBC guru was bogus. There are a lot of people saying all the rest of the post-1977 gurus are bogus, but I am the only bona fide guru. In other words, there are second tier exploiters after the first tier started to collapse.
They don't accept Srila Prabhupada's instructions on ritvik initiations, some even are vehement critics of Prabhupadanugas. In the U.S. there are such persons, like Kailasa Candra, Rocana, Rupanuga, in Europe like late Hanuman Das in Croatia, Ajita Krishna Das in Denmark, etc.
PADA: Ajit Krishna told me Bhakti Vikas swami is bona fide, of course he is the sannyasa disciple of Jayapataka. BVKS has been a huge supporter of Jayapataka and the Mayapur molester messiah's camp. BVKS has also made very alarming statements about supporting some of the abusers like Bhakti Vidya Purna swami. Ajit Krishna had me kicked off the ISKCON History forum for my objecting to BVKS.
It is amazing that some of these "scholarly devotees" like Torben, Ajit Krishna and others -- do not even know that a person "2/3 show of hands" voted into a homosexual and pedophile messiah's club -- is not Krishna's representative. These guys also say "mistakes were made" -- by BVKS and others -- because they believe acharyas are making mistakes all the time -- like promoting homosexuals and pedophiles as their co-acharyas. Even the hamburger eating karmis never make the mistake of having homosexuals and pedophiles as their society's acharyas.
But some of them do have bona fide guru Srila Prabhupada, like Rocana and Rupanuga, but others are in worse position because they are not Srila Prabhupada's disciples.
PADA: Rocana and Rupanuga were part of the 1986 Guru Reform where they thought they could fix their broke down acharyas with a reform. They voted in another wave of gurus and excommunicated Sulochana, resulting in his being branded as an offender -- and being assassinated.
Some are followers of Gaura Govinda Swami, who do not accept any of his "successors" (like Murali Krishna Swami - another independent diksa-guru going between USA and Russia and who was officially ex-communicated from ISKCON).
PADA: Some of the alleged successors to Gaura Govinda swami are still inviting child abusers like Bhakti Vidya Purna to speak at their programs. Many of the Gaura Govinda swami people ran off to Narayan Maharaja. Overall the GGM program has been dismantled and there are only a few people still promoting him, with some of them promoting themselves as his "only successor."
GGM was voted into the GBC's guru process when they re-instated their oral sex with taxi drivers in the dham "Vishnupada." GGM has no idea that his program of making homosexuals, pedophiles and assorted deviants into acharyas is a free ride ticket to the darkest regions of hell. Later on GGM was given "special tulsi leaves" to eat at Mayapur, and he died shortly after eating them.
Some of his followers told me they thought there was some sort of poison on those leaves. Maybe so. I believe the GBC thought GGM was a threat to their authority and they might have to get rid of him because he was becoming the main or most respected GBC acharya, and he was taking over their program direct or indirect.
GGM was also getting more and more vocal about how bad the rest were, and that could not be tolerated. It seems like he was attacked by his own Frankenstein monster. The GBC makes acharyas, then monitors, suspends, censures and excommunicates its acharyas, which means they did no real research if this person was an acharya in the first place.
And maybe, they get rid of some of their acharyas by dastardly and heinous acts. Some say Tamal's death was not an accident, the truck driven in front of his car was planted there ... who knows, but many people do not trust the GBC in any case.
ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.