Satya Vani / Astrology 10 30 25

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

SATYA VANI

Iskcon devotees are still convinced that the essence of the Gosvāmīs’ teachings lies within Bhaktivedanta’s books. Its ridiculous and it couldn’t be further from the truth. 

To impress ISKCON devotees with Gosvāmī-siddhānta doesn’t take much — otherwise, how could they read for 20 or 30 years the same dry, ABC-level books, full of apasiddhāntas, written by Bhaktivedanta? Four of our books have already been published. 

So why does nobody quote directly from them to disprove our statements or show a single “false accusation”? Most likely because they can’t — because everything we expose is true, known for decades by the way. 

Their confrontations are, spiritually speaking, the cries of a child — not the reasoning and composure of a mature person. And that is precisely the problem with ISKCON and the Gaudiya math: they follow their gurus sentimentally, not the śāstras. All their translations and ṭīkās come from within their own cult circle —
Thus they have little understanding of the authentic ācāryas’ works and the true Gauḍīya siddhānta.

They never analyze or compare what their so-called gurus have said with the teachings of the genuine Gauḍīya Ācāryas and the Vedas to see whether they truly align or comtradict. But we understand — such work requires time, knowledge, and discernment.

That’s why we’ve done this service for you in our books. And much more will come, as there is still a lot to repair and clarify.

========

PADA: Yeah, Jagadananda went over to their camp. Before that, Lalitaprasad initiated Subal as a Peacock, and another guy also got siddha deha. So when Subal came back we all went "caw caw, I am a peacock." Hee, hee, and Subal later told me he cannot even follow the principles and he is blooping. OK he should never have been told he is already Krishna's eternal peacock in Vaikuntha. Very ridiculous and misleading.

Srila Prabhupada told us this siddha deha process is premature, and dangerous, because it misleads conditioned souls to think they are liberated. Where have we had that problem in ISKCON, Gaudiya Matha and etc? 

As for these Jeeva Institute guys, they made many papers saying we do not originate with Krishna, we originate in brahman, which is called impersonalism. They preach an idea which is something like the church, some fortunate souls start out with God, some unfortunates ones do not, because God chooses who can fall and who cannot. God is not smart enough to make us all perfect in the first place and not allow us to fall. His bad, not mine? 

So this is called impersonalism, also, blaming God for our falling. Srila Prabhupada said, they are blaming God because "they hold a grudge." He also said the mayavadas are still envious of Krishna, so they misrepresent Him.

Meanwhile, the only reason these people are arguing with us AT ALL is, they never gave us Krishna in the first place, because a lot of them are racists and they do not accept that we Westerners can be Krishna's devotees. They think Krishna is racial profiling His population, not realizing they are souls, which is ignorance. 

Krishna has no concern for the bodily race of His bhaktas, He is the same God for all souls. So their misdirected Gaudiya siddhanta is very similar to the Church idea, some souls start with God, some do not. And those who do not -- then have to fall -- and suffer. So God is the efficient cause of suffering, not the renegade desires of the fallen jeevas. 

And it is also racist to say we Westerners cannot become Krishna bhaktas. And they are basically against us Westerners being bhaktas in the first place, because they think they, or their race, owns Krishna. They don't. 

Srila Bhaktivinode says brahman is worse than hell, because in hell you might hear about Krishna, but in brahman no one ever hears about Krishna. It is amazing that the Jeeva Institute folks think God places some of His children with Him in heaven, and other children in a place that is worse than hell. 

OK you could say, they do not like Krishna at all, they are painting Him as causing suffering to His children, and placing them in worse than hell in their original state. Some children belong in heaven, some belong in hell, sounds very diabolical IMHO. And making premature spiritual sky peacocks is another example of these guys problems. They do not understand the sidhanta. ys pd

SP: Right. Their ideas sound suspiciously like the Calvinist predestination doctrine. True ... also true ... they never gave us Krishna in the first place...

 

I Dasa: I wonder why Hrisikesa Prabhu you are entertaining this deviants.

Henry Doktorski III: Godbrother I Dasa, I like to see the discussion, my friend. We should not hide our heads in the sand like the ostrich, in my opinion. Actually, I think that's a myth, that the ostrich hides its head in the sand! 

BD: You have hit the nail on its head. Guru Nistha is firm faith that your Guru and teachings can delivery you to Krishna. Undermining and fragmenting Gaudiya Vaishnavism was not a difficult task for the authorities.
Gorby stated that the Feds were coming for Krishnas and they did.

SATYA VANI: Everything is explained in detail in our mISKCONceptions book — this is actually one of the topics we elaborate on the most, supported by numerous pramāṇas. Nowhere in śāstra is it stated that the jīva fell from the spiritual world. Every bhakta knows this. Only ISKCON and Gauḍīya Maṭha devotees remain ignorant of this fact — simply because they lack a true paramparā and read only translation of their own cult.

PADA: Well yup, everyone knows Krishna is biased and cruel with His children, so (A) He starts some of them in the spiritual Sky with Him, and (B) other children are made to be separated -- and in a position where they fall and suffer, and take repeated births and deaths on martya lokas (planets of death). 

God is thus the primary cause of suffering, because He forgot to start all of us out in our original state -- with Him. Basicaly what we learned in Christian church as a kid. Some important and blessed children of God start out as angels in heaven with God. But not you poor / lousy / lesser children shmucks! You get a smack down, for no apparent reason?

You didn't belong in heaven because God wanted to have you suffer and be separated from Him. God caused your suffering, not you. So this is why Srila Prabhupada says these people are envious of God, they blame God for creating suffering. This is not -- as they advertise -- a higher principle, this is painting God as evil and creating suffering because God is mean and cruel. 

These guys are not going back to God, since they openly do not like Him. But a bad carpenter blames his tools, and a bad Krishna devotee blames a bad God for the suffering of the fallen jeevas. This is pretty nasty view of God IMHO. 

But this really explains why the GBC promoted Sridhar, Narayan, Gaura Govinda swamis and others so heavily, because they preached this idea. They wanted to soften us up so when they brought in all the Hindus, we would already be partial to mayavada-ism. And it worked pretty good for them, many have been fooled.

 

ys pd angel108b@yahoo.co

=========

RN:

IS ASTROLOGY BONA FIDE?

Is a professional astrologer like the son of a prostitute? A shocking verdict from ancient scriptures.

In the world of spiritual seekers, astrology often coexists with Vedic knowledge. Many seek answers from the Brahmins who cast their horoscopes. But what do the primary sources themselves say about this? The answer is shocking.
In his treatise "Brahmana and Vaisnava," Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura provides a strict list of Brahmins to avoid, based on quotations from the dharma-sastras: Vishnu-smriti and Atri-smriti. Among them are professional astrologers who charge a fixed fee for their consultations (nakṣatra-jīvinah).

They are lumped in with:

· Hypocrites and deceivers.
· Professional physicians (who charge a fixed fee, turning medicine from a service to the people into a craft).
· The sons of unmarried women (anūdhā-putrān).
· Those who reject spiritual guidance and the Vedas.
"...professional astrologers... —these are considered the worst kinds of brāhmaṇas and are disgraces to their line. Learned persons should carefully reject these persons..."

But the most powerful blow comes in another verse, which states that even incredible learning does not atone for the sin of selling knowledge:

"Astrologers... these four kinds of brahmanas never become worshipable, even if they are as learned as Brhaspati."

Imagine: you possess the wisdom of a guru of the demigods, but by charging for a horoscope, you descend to the level of a prostitute's son in the eyes of the shastras. What is your fault?

The essence is not knowledge, but attitude. Knowledge of astrology (Jyotish) is part of the Vedas. But a Brahmin is a selfless bearer of knowledge, living on voluntary gifts. By turning knowledge of the laws of karma and the stars into a commodity, he profanes the sacred and becomes an ordinary businessman, exchanging the transcendent for the perishable.

This is not a condemnation of astrology, but a blow to the commercialization of spirituality. The Shastras remind us: a true Brahmin does not sell the truth. He lives by it.

Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the eminent disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, has a statement on this matter:

"No, no. They are not brāhmaṇas. Those who give education in exchange of money, they are not brāhmaṇas. Just like we are lecturing, educated, educating people. We don't say that "Give us salary." We simply ask them, "Please come." Therefore we are making food. I'll give you food. I'll give you good seat. Please come and hear. We are not asking money, that "First of all pay the fees. Then you come and learn Bhagavad-gītā." We never say so. So those, these so-called teachers, they first of all set up salary, "What salary you'll give me?" 

That is dog's business. That is not brāhmaṇa's business. Brāhmaṇa will never ask. Brāhmaṇa is eager to give lesson only. That's all. Brāhmaṇa is eager to see that people are educated. "Take free education and be educated. Be a human being." This is brāhmaṇa's business. I came here not to ask for any money. But I want to give lesson. This is brāhmaṇa's business." (Room Conversation - June 11, 1974, Paris).

=======

Because -- their manufacturing jobs are all in China?