False Gurus Created by Yogamaya? 04 18 26

PADA: Guru Tattva like we never heard of before? Sorry, we have all heard of the Gaudiya Matha's false gurus, and Narayan Maharaja then saying Sridhar and the other founders of their 1937 bi-sexual deviant acharya program are also acharyas. 

I did not listen to the whole thing but did catch Mukunda mentioning 1986. OK that is when Narayan Maharaja was helping Satsvarupa write the "Guru Reform Notebook," where they were going to vote in more illicit sex with men, women and children deviants as acharyas, and keep the current ones in office. And they reinstated sex with taxi drivers in the dham as Vishnupada. Nothing "new" here, it is what false acharya programs have done in many examples. 

And simultanesously, the Satsvarupa "reformers" excommunicated Sulochana, to demonize us and make us targets. Sulochana was killed and I would have been without help from the FEDS. Then Mukunda mentions 1997, which is when we were writing about all the child abuse going on in Tamal's empire. Around the time Narayan Maharaja was in Texas boosting Tamal and saying we are bogus and poison ritviks. Around the time we were getting lined up for the $400M child abuse case.

There is nothing new here at all. It is the same recycled illicit sex with men, women and children messiah's program Narayan Maharaj supported the whole time. And look at the misconceptions of these folks, deviating acharyas were created by Yogamaya, God's internal energy. And the internal energy is personified as Radharani, Krishna's consort. And she is making false gurus? 

Say it ain't so folks! This is why the previous article from these folks said, we made a false acharya and it was like sticking our hands in stools. And now the smell is everywhere. OK smelly stools and Yogamaya are not in the same category, which unfortunately us mleccha-heads have to point out to these folks.

ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com

====

  

Shyam Das Babaji (Narayan Maharaja)

Deviation is Yogamaya (Radharani's domain)?  

𝐁𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐬 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝟒 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 “𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐓𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐤 (𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦) 𝐨𝐟 𝐌ā𝐲ā𝐝𝐞𝐯ī 𝐭𝐨 𝐓𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐅𝐚𝐥𝐥-𝐃𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐂𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐕𝐚ṁ𝐜𝐚𝐧ā-𝐦𝐚𝐲ī 𝐋ī𝐥ā.”

[𝐄𝐗𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐍𝐀𝐋 𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐈𝐂𝐋𝐄] - 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊-𝐔𝐏 𝐎𝐅 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐆𝐀𝐔𝐃𝐈𝐘𝐀 𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐀: 𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐖𝐀𝐒 𝐀𝐍𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐀 𝐕𝐀𝐒𝐔𝐃𝐄𝐕𝐀?

PADA: The followers of Sridhar Maharaja and Narayan Maharaja are now trying to say that promoting a false acharya after 1937 was "Yogamaya" or the desire of Krishna and / or the internal potency of Krishna (personified by Radharani). Nope. Krishna and His Yogamaya does not desire that people worship lusty dog predators, homosexuals, bi-sexuals and people who reject their guru and call Srila Saraswati a deviation. Nor is it the Yogamaya desire of Krishna that Sridhar and Narayan support the GBC's homosexual and pedophile messiah's club. 

Yogamaya is said to be controlled and operated by the personality of Srimati Radharani and is not subject to material contamination. The fact that these people assume Yogamaya creates contamination, indeed homosexual acharyas, means they have no idea that Yogamaya and Mahamaya are different energies.

An event that is not very well known, but can help us to better understand the reasons for the split of the Gaudiya Matha and also the many dangers we faced in the past and will face in the future

During the 1980s and 1990s, there was a sequence of scandals in our movement, with devotees in high positions falling down in troublesome circumstances. This was of course an eye-opener that made us understand that it is not so easy for someone to become a pure devotee with just a few years of practice, as well as a warning about the consequences of electing unqualified people for positions of leadership in spiritual organizations.

PADA: Correct. And who helped elect these unqualified people to the post of guru? We all know, Sridhar and Narayan have been among the biggest cheer leaders of making these false ISKCON GBC acharyas, and they were helping them write bogus position papers, giving them rasika classes and etc.

What many may not know was that half a century earlier devotees in the Gaudiya Matha suffered from a similar event, whose repercussions were even more serious. This is an event that is not very well known, but it can help us not only to better understand the reasons for the split of the Gaudiya Matha but also to better understand many dangers we faced in the past and that can appear again in the future. 

This is also an essential topic for understanding the challenges followers of Srila Prabhupada face when interacting with devotees from the different Gaudiya Mathas. Often things are not so black and white as they may seem at first as followers of different Gaudiya Mathas may be affected by different philosophies to different degrees.

In a conversation from 18/06/1976, Srila Prabhupada mentions:

"One of my Gauḍīya Maṭha Godbrothers, big, he became the head of this Bhag Bazaar Gauḍīya Maṭha. So his wife was debauched, and she was bringing new paramour, and the child protested. And the boy, he was ten years or twelve years old, he could understand: "Who is this man?" So he protested and said, "I shall tell all these things to my father." And he was killed"... "His wife was a regular prostitute, and she killed her child, and on this shock, he took poison and died"... "He became shocked, that "This is my family life—the wife is prostitute and son is killed. What is the value of my life?" This was his spiritual realization. Just see. And he was made the chief."

Here he is speaking about his godbrother Ananta Vasudeva, who was elected the acharya of the Gaudiya Math after the disappearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. Srila Prabhupada apparently didn't have good a consideration about him, since later in the same conversation he even accuses him of being "homosex and everything".

In his poem entitled "Viraha Astaka" composed in 1958 Srila Prabhupada is even more direct when addressing His spiritual master:

"Your so-called disciple, the jackal named Ananta Vasudeva, disobeyed your final instructions to keep the mission united, and thereby created a scandalous fiasco. The result of this philosophical deviation is evident to this day as imitative sahajiyas are being worshiped as gurus in your temples."

Srila Prabhupada spoke some harsh words to some of his godbrothers in certain circumstances, reacting to some of their actions, but nowhere do we see him directing such direct personal attacks on any of them, especially on a deceased person. Who was Ananta Vasudeva and what terrible thing did he do?

This story is described in a document entitled "The Sons of the Son: The Breakup of the Gaudiya Matha", written by Jalakara Prabhu, a disciple of Srila Prabhupada who collected a great volume of citations connected with these incidents. This is a document that can still be found online.

As described by him, Ananta Vasudeva was one of the most prominent disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, who used to call him "My Ganesh" because he helped him so much in his writing and in other aspects of his preaching. He also had the opportunity of associating with Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. 

He had an extremely sharp intelligence and was described as being able to remember everything he heard. Often other disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura would ask him to explain lectures of their spiritual master that they could not understand, and Ananta Vasudeva could remember and properly explain to them. 

Because of this gift, he became the chief editor for all the publications of the Gaudiya Math. From these descriptions, we can understand he was not an ordinary soul. His downfall shows thus how even very elevated devotees can fall later if they deviate from the path and start criticizing their spiritual master.

PADA: What it shows is that no one is authorized to imitate the acharya without being a pure devotee himself. Srila Prabhupada says imitating the acharya causes one to eventually become degraded, and we have seen that over and over. Just because a person can cite some shastras does not mean he has already realized and attained perfection. But even after knowing all this, Sridhar and Narayan Maharajas went ahead and endorsed the ISKCON GBC guru's program knowing these people are not qualified. And knowing the result is very odious, creates bad publicity, if not beatings and murders and so on.

The Gaudiya Math started as a revolutionary movement, and the devotees were well respected for maintaining strong sadhana and living austere lives. However, as time passed, money and properties started to accumulate, and devotees started to fight over material facilities. At some point, there was a fight over which rooms each would use, something that Srila Prabhupada also commented on occasion. 

In a famous lecture in Mayapur (06/10/1974), he said:

"My Guru Mahārāja said. Personally he said that "When we were living in a rented house, if we could collect two hundred, three hundred rupees... We were living very nicely at Ultadanga. And since then—Jayavidatta has given us this marble palace, Gauḍīya-Maṭha — there is friction between our men. 'Who will occupy this room? Who will occupy that room? Who will be proprietor of room?' Everyone is planning in different way. So Guru Mahārāja said"... "He was personally instructing me that "If I could sell this marble of this temple, and secure some money, and if I could print some books, that would have been better. That would have been better."

After Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura passed away in 1937, these conflicts came to the open. He had left instructions for the disciples to form a governing body to manage the mission (just like Srila Prabhupada later implemented in our Iskcon society), but this proved difficult to implement, and as a result, most of the leaders in the Gaudiya Math went back to the idea of having a single acharya managing the mission. 

This resulted in devotees dividing into two factions, one smaller, supporting Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana Prabhu (who later became Tirtha Maharaja) and another bigger, supporting Ananta Vasudeva (who later became Bhakti Prasad Puri Maharaja, and eventually Puri Das).

There are a lot of different details connected to these disputes, but the result was that the Gaudiya Math split into two factions, centered around these two leaders. Eventually, Ananta Vasudeva was voted as the acharya of the Gaudiya Math by most of his Godbrothers, leading to a decisive split between the two camps that started fighting over temples and other properties.

PADA: OK and most of our God brothers ALSO all went along with the illicit sex with men, women and children messiah's club. And many of them later ran off to the spin offs made by the GBC's "advisor" cheer leaders like Sridhar and Narayan. 

But what these deviated God brothers did not realize after 1937 and 1977 is: they have no authority to rubber stamp, select, elect, create, concoct and / or "vote in" Krishna's guru successors. The acharyas are descending from the higher plane, they are not ascending by the votes of mundane committees, and / or our God brothers who are barely getting weaned from eating at Mc Donalds.

This led to the fratricidal legal disputes that drained the funds of the mathas and resulted in a serious volume of offenses being committed on both sides. This politicized environment also seriously affected the preaching and especially the publication of transcendental literature. At this point, even the press opened by 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura was sold to pay for legal expenses.

PADA: And the GBC guru program spent millions on lawsuits, some Jayapataka people told me -- $100,000,000.  

Srila Prabhupada wrote his view on these events on his purport on CC Adi 12.8:

"In the beginning, during the presence of Oṁ Viṣṇupāda Paramahaṁsa Parivrājakācārya Aṣṭottara-śata Śrī Śrīmad Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda, all the disciples worked in agreement; but just after his disappearance, they disagreed. One party strictly followed the instructions of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, but another group created their own concoction about executing his desires. Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively. 

He did not instruct a particular man to become the next ācārya. But just after his passing away, his leading secretaries made plans, without authority, to occupy the post of ācārya, and they split into two factions over who the next ācārya would be"... "Despite the spiritual master’s order to form a governing body and execute the missionary activities of the Gauḍīya Maṭha, the two unauthorized factions began litigation that is still going on after forty years with no decision."

Apart from the legal disputes, there was another factor that caused a lot of confusion: the actions of Ananta Vasudeva, who gradually became critical towards Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's teachings and eventually left the sannyasa asrama, getting married to a society girl and becoming a Babaji in Vrindavana. Jalakara Prabhu quotes the following:

"He insisted that all his disciples cease preaching activity and study the Bhakti Sandarbha. He especially criticized the use of texts like Gaudiya Kantha Hara, which give scriptural quotations for various philosophical positions, but which do not present the arguments. He and Sundarananda Vidyavinoda eventually came to the conclusion that Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati's diksa was invalid, and he advised all his disciples to seek initiation elsewhere. 

"Many of them did, and some became leading Vaisnavas in Vrindavan. Puri Maharaj [Ananta Vasudeva] sealed his infamy in Gaudiya Math circles by getting married and moving himself to Braja."

The events connected with his marriage were also the source of a scandal. It is described in the document by Jalakara Prabhu that he had an affair with the sister-in-law of a rich devotee, who was later discovered because of the interception of a love letter. The scandal went on for several years, as Ananta Vasudeva (now Bhakti Prasad Puri Maharaja) tried to maintain his post. This affair, which later led him to leave the sannyasa asrama and become a grihastha Babaji (and later kill himself after discovering the betrayal of his wife) is confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in the first quote.

PADA: Yes, some post-1937 dissenters intercepted some of these love letters and exposed them. And thus some of them were beaten, had their faces pushed into dog stools, and some were killed for "dissenting." That means everyone knew that making the same fanatical false guru process in ISKCON could be dangerous for us dissenters. And it has been.   

The most serious problem however was not the sexual scandal, but his rejection of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's teachings. This is also quoted by Jalakara Prabhu:

"Now, every action has a gross cause and a subtle cause. One action is that he suffered a fall down from the brahmacari platform. The other is that he openly criticized and ultimately rejected his guru and rejected his initiation and line."

"Ananta Vasudeva and his close friend Sundarananda Vidyavinoda began to formulate criticisms of their guru, Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati. The were unhappy about the lack of siddha-pranali at initiation and felt that neither they nor their guru were linked to that vaishnava line by initiation, that the initiation as practiced by Sri Saraswati Thakur, both diksha and sannyasa, were invalid, eventually coming to the conclusion that only those born in certain families can be initiated, and can initiate. 

They also considered the wearing of saffron and Brahmin threads incorrect for those in the vaishnava line."

"In this way they began an active program of scholarly criticism of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta’s philosophy, abandoning the literature of their guru and concentrating on the original works of the Six Goswamis. Ananta Vasudeva therefore eventually rejected the initiation given by Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, and urged his disciples to take diksha from what he called accredited acharyas, thereby rejecting his guru. 

Thus he justified on the basis of his understanding of the early writings of the followers of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Sundarananda Vidyavinode wrote an essay on the subject entitled “The Characteristics of the Guru According to Vaishnava Theology."

"Ananta Vasudeva and Sundarananda Vidyavinoda defected from his lineage and wrote books criticizing a number of Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati’s policies several years after he left the world"… "all opposition to Bhaktisiddhanta also includes the fact that he did not receive siddha pranali from Bhaktivinoda or Gaura Kishora. Some critics go so far as to question whether he was initiated at all.”

"Ananta Vasudeva / Bhakti Prasad Puri Maharaja then went to Vrindavan, married one of his disciples - although it is not clear if that was to the sister-in-law of Sri Jagatbandhu dasa - and lived out his life in a reclusive manner, calling himself Puri dasa, writing a number of books. His criticism and rejection of Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati has caused him to be viewed with repugnance by the Maths to this day. His supporters and defenders were left disillusioned."

"Many of his former disciples became renounced residents of Radha Kund. Puri dasa (Ananta Vasudeva) had promulgated a style of kirtan known as ‘Sri Krishna Chaitanya Gaura Gunadhama’, and that kirtan can be heard there to this day, although it is interesting to note that Puri dasa eventually believed that congregational chanting of the Hare Krishna mahamantra was unauthorized."

This succession of scandals led to the collapse of the camp led by him, although many of the Sannyasis continued preaching by opening their own mathas. The smaller faction, left by Tirtha Maharaja (previously Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana Prabhu) was able to continue as a unified mission, although plagued by politics. When Srila Prabhupada came to the United States he wrote to Tirtha Maharaja offering to cooperate with him, but after receiving a discouraging letter he proceeded to create his own organization in the form of our Iskcon society, counting just with the help of his first disciples.

Ananta Vasudeva spent his remaining days living in Vrindavana, writing books with his interpretations of the writings of the Goswamis under the name "Puri Dasa". These books were not accepted by most of his Godbrothers, since they openly disagreed with the teachings of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. However, they became popular amongst other babajis and some scholars and devotees associated with them.

Nowadays these books are seeing a resurgence, as devotees from Iskcon and different Gaudiya Mathas come to study them, assuming them to be authorized translations and commentaries of the works of the Goswamis, something they aren't. One important thing to keep in mind about translations is that translations, and especially commentaries of Sanskrit works, including works of our previous acaryas are strongly susceptible to interpretation. 

No translation is "clean" of interpretations, since it is practically impossible to keep the meaning of the text in a literal translation. When we read a " translation" of a Sanskrit work, we are thus actually reading an interpretation that conveys the beliefs of the author. A follower of Prabhupada will translate according to his conclusions, a Mayavadi will translate emphasizing the impersonal aspect, while a Babaji will translate according to their philosophy. 

One should thus consider carefully not just the qualification, but the philosophical understanding of the author. In general, only Vaishnavas who have a very clear philosophical understanding can write bonafide translations and commentaries of anything. Members of different apasampradayas, as well as Mayavadis and ordinary scholars, will always distort the texts.

Once, a disciple of Srila Prabhupada received an offer to exchange a collection of Srila Prabhupada's books for a set of the works of Ananta Vasudeva. Not knowing the whole story, he thought it was a good idea and accepted the exchange. When Srila Prabhupada knew about it he was very displeased and ordered him to immediately return the set books and get his books back. He didn't want anything to have with them.

It's also interesting to note that these same points raised by Ananta Vasudeva about Siddha-Pranali and other points continue to echo today amongst devotees who go to Vrindavana and get in contact with this literature or who come in contact with it indirectly. As a result, a huge number of otherwise innocent Iskcon and Gaudiya Matha devotees come in concept with these concepts, and due to an immature philosophical understanding accept them, without knowing they come from a line that is offensive to their own spiritual masters.

The fact is that there are lines in Vrindavana that are much older than the Gaudiya Math and had thus time to establish their ideas through numerous books. Many of these books are well written from a scholarly viewpoint, but their conclusions are incorrect, as exposed by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, and Srila Prabhupada, as well as Srila Jagannatha Das Babaji and Srila Gaura Kishor Das Babaji. 

The reason these five acaryas had to come and do their preaching was precisely to put the sankirtana movement back into its tracks after centuries of deviations introduced by caste goswamis and babajis.

Many contemporaneous Vaishnavas now get in contact with such books, but the demise of Ananta Vasudeva, who after all his actions ended up killing himself after discovering that his wife was not only betraying him but had killed their child, serves as an important eye-opener in this connection.

Source: https://www.ccdas.net/p/ananta-vasudeva

𝙀𝙉𝘿 𝙉𝙊𝙏𝙀:

Dandavat pranam dear devotees!

Although we are not followers of Svāmī Mahārāja, we acknowledge that he is respected and accepted by many. Therefore, we have presented his opinion regarding Ananta Vāsudeva for consideration.

We have shared this external article solely to highlight this particular point and to bring attention to the truth. While we do not agree with everything expressed there, we recognize that, in this instance regarding Ananta Vāsudeva, Svāmī Mahārāja has made a valid point.

At the same time, we do not endorse all of the article’s statements. For example, we do not accept the claim that the Gauḍīya Maṭha “broke up.” As is well understood, Gauḍīya Maṭha is an eternal reality—non-different from Vṛndāvana—and was manifested in this world by the endless mercy of Śrīla Prabhupāda Sarasvatī Ṭhākura.

Please find out a clarification on the matter of the "break-up" of Gauḍīya Maṭha in this Q&A (question n5):

𝐐𝐔𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝟓:

Material nature always holds complete power in this material world. What His Divine Grace said about the breakup of the Gauḍīya Maṭha — has not the same thing happened to ISKCON? If not worse…

𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐖𝐄𝐑 𝟓:
​
What Svāmī Mahārāja said about the breakup of the Gauḍīya Maṭha, mostly when he was already hostile towards his godbrothers, is not so important, because he was not actively participating in the life of the Maṭha, nor actively serving the mission of his Gurudeva. His information was that of an outsider (as a gṛhastha busy with his pharmaceutical business).

PADA: Srila Prabhupada did not know that their making a bi-sexual deviant as the acharya was wrong, because he was an Grihastha and an outsider? Srila Prabhupada said his bogus God brothers called him a "paccha Grihastha" (Rotten householder). 

Why are his complaints not important or not valid? Sorry, his complaint is 100% valid, making deviants into acharyas is not authorized. And the people who cheer lead false guru programs like Sridhar and Narayan are also not authorized.  

​

What happened in the Gauḍīya Maṭh after the disappearance of Śrīla Prabhupāda was arranged by Yoga-māyā. ​

PADA: Yogamaya is the internal shakti of Krishna, sometimes said to be managed by Srimati Radharani. And this shakti has nothing to do with material contamination, or the homosexual and pedophile gurus created by these contaminated and degraded beings.

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda left so many powerful qualified Gurus that they could not all stay together in one place like lion. They had to open different branches in order to serve the mission of their Guru to the maximum most level of their capacity and according to the sevā entrusted to them — it was a must.

PADA: Srila Prabhupada says, among my God brothers NO ONE is qualified to be acharya. 

What happens in societies managed by bonded souls is entirely the responsibility of Mahā-māyā and completely a separate issue.

PADA: OK sorry, when the Gaudiya Matha folks endorse homosexuals and deviants as acharyas, that is Maha maya and not Yogamaya. An acharya is a servant of Radharani direct, and is therefore not a deviant, pervert, predator, pedophile, criminal etc.

It is true that some renowned disciples of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda fell down due to offence — but this too is under the jurisdiction of Mahā-māyā, and it is a great warning for all of us that even very elevated personalities (even a jivan mukta) can commit mistakes and can fall down.

PADA: Some of them fell down and the rest of them did not fix the problem, make a Governing committee, and re-establish the mission. 

But if we accept Śrīla Bhakti Rakṣaka Śrīdhara Deva Gosvāmī Mahārāja, Śrīla Bhakti Dayita Mādhava Gosvāmī Mahārāja, Śrīla Bhakti Hṛdaya Vana Deva Gosvāmī Mahārāja, Śrīla Bhakti Vilāsa Tīrtha Gosvāmī Mahārāja (Kunjada), Śrīla Bhakti Pramoda Pūrī Gosvāmī Mahārāja, etc., as pure devotees or Prabhupāda-pārṣadas, then yāhāṅ Kṛṣṇa, tāhāṅ nāhi māyāra adhikāra — where there is Kṛṣṇa, there Māyā has no right to remain. So how could Mahā-māyā ever influence all those great personalities?

PADA: Mahamaya has had control of these people because they first made a false acharya and then when he fell, they declared themselves to be acharyas. And Srila Prabhupada said they never implemented a Governing Body, and instead they made many artificial gurus. 

"Another man comes to be guru, then another then another, and another and in some camps the guru is being changed three times a year." "Kill guru and become guru" is how Srila Prabhupada summed them up. Sorry, these folks were aiding and abetting false gurus in 1937 and they just started doing that again by promoting GBC gurus after 1977. ys pd