Oh oh, where did some of my servants go?
Yikes! To the material world.
I have to get them back here to My world,
somehow or other.
====
Monkey On A Stick Update
https://norimuster.com/writing/monkeyonastick.html
To: angel108b@yahoo.com
Hi Puranjana,
Hope you are doing well.
This morning I stumbled into your website on this page about me:
https://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2016/01/steve-gelberg-and-nori-muster-icsa.html?lr=1760110099584
I tried to post a comment, but am apparently not a member of your website. But I would like to post something there, and wondered how I could become a member.
Or you could posted it there in the comments with my name.
Thanks, and yay for Monkey on a Stick winning an award!
Nori
This is my comment:
Thank you for the summary of my time in ISKCON, and thank you for your kind words about my documenting the crimes of ISKCON. The eleven guru system was a farce, and after I read Monkey on a Stick (1988), I realized the crimes of ISKCON were systemic. Regarding Steve Gelberg (Subhananda), he was caught up in ISKCON for 17 years, and left a year before I left.
I tried to post a comment, but am apparently not a member of your website. But I would like to post something there, and wondered how I could become a member.
Or you could posted it there in the comments with my name.
Thanks, and yay for Monkey on a Stick winning an award!
Nori
This is my comment:
Thank you for the summary of my time in ISKCON, and thank you for your kind words about my documenting the crimes of ISKCON. The eleven guru system was a farce, and after I read Monkey on a Stick (1988), I realized the crimes of ISKCON were systemic. Regarding Steve Gelberg (Subhananda), he was caught up in ISKCON for 17 years, and left a year before I left.
Then we reconnected as ex-member friends. Steve has spoken out to expose the zonal gurus, and help people leave ISKCON without guilt. He also appears in the documentary Monkey on a Stick. Regarding Mukunda, he was conned into that job by the criminals in 1977, and we shut down the PR office in 1988. Mukunda moved to New Zealand, then Australia. He retired from the GBC and the Ministry of Public Affairs in 1992. Now my most important ISKCON friends and mentors live free, good lives, and I do too. But guess what happened in 1992? Anuttama picked up the torch and revived the PR cover-up, which we had abandoned out of shame. Why would anybody want a job like that?
PADA: Thanks for the comment. Yeah Subhananda (Gelberg) was a big cheer leader of Ramesvara at the beginning, and he was actually writing papers to support the 11 gurus, and that means -- he seems to have had no idea that conditioned souls cannot be worshiped as good as God. Ramesvara was subsequently "dating" a minor aged female student, which went on for a long time, and evidently the whole community knew about it, but nothing was ever done about it. Ever. That is because it has been truly dangerous to challenge "God's living representatives."
PADA: Thanks for the comment. Yeah Subhananda (Gelberg) was a big cheer leader of Ramesvara at the beginning, and he was actually writing papers to support the 11 gurus, and that means -- he seems to have had no idea that conditioned souls cannot be worshiped as good as God. Ramesvara was subsequently "dating" a minor aged female student, which went on for a long time, and evidently the whole community knew about it, but nothing was ever done about it. Ever. That is because it has been truly dangerous to challenge "God's living representatives."
I think the only reason Ramesvara left was, after the Sulochana murder he was worried he would be fingered as an accomplice. The problem has been, almost no one wanted to say -- the emperor has no clothes, to the peril of ISKCON, and to that female student -- who has tons of problems ever since, and still does now.
She never got any support from anywhere, and now she is now in a big financial mess, and meanwhile Ramesvara is being served as some sort of highly advanced / royalty / divine soul in Mayapur. Guys like Subhananda set all this into motion by their initially promoting these guys as messiahs. He could not put his bogus guru genie back into the bottle, but to his credit at least he tried something.
Sure, later on he realized he had been duped, but he seems to blame the religion instead of blaming himself, because he is the person who co-sponsored all these deviations, not the religion. A bad carpenter blames his tools. The religion never supports the idea that conditioned souls should be worshiped as messiahs, rather the religion condemns that process in spades. He never seems to mention that properly?
The Monkey On A Stick movie was a failure in my opinion because it allows people like Hrdayananda, Bhagavan and others to speak on behalf of the religion. Which is like asking David Koresh, Jim Jones, and Charles Manson to speak about the real purpose of Jesus' teachings. These are the main people who promoted deviating from the teachings. You mean to say Bhagavan, the main leader of the Croome Court chloroform used by child predators cover up -- represents the religion? Sorry, that is just nuts on steroids.
I was allowed a few 3 second sound bites here and there, which took all the rest of my comments out of context -- and created more dis-information than information. Everyone who watched the movie told me how botched it was, and how GBC friendly it was. It missed the whole point basically, these people were never appointed, and ended up mainly as another propaganda show for bad information. My point about how none of them were appointed as guru was not made clear whatsoever. In fact, I never got to make one clear idea in the whole movie, the speaking floor was almost all handed off to the long winded speaking of -- the leaders and their hand maidens.
Mukunda was conned into working for the 11. Well maybe, but at Nuremburg it was established that persons taking bad orders from bad people are still accountable. Worse, Mukunda was one of the people on the 1986 Justices Committee team working with me and Sulochana, and I could just tell he was giving us a line of BS the whole time. He was just playing with us.
Then he helped have us excommunicated -- ok maybe -- to set us up for assassination, which happened. Then after he co-creates a banning, beating, molesting, lawsuits and murder of devotee's program, he handily "resigns from being a GBC." Great, now no one can ask him what the hell he is doing with all this, he has copped out. I resigned from the Third Reich SS just before the war ended, that makes me free of reactions. Nope.
Mukunda was their writer, along with guys like Jayadvaita, Ravindra and Satsvarupa, and Sulochana said they are the Joe Goebbels of ISKCON. But yeah, now Anuttama is doing the same snow job. In any case, I am sorry that people misunderstood Srila Prabhupada, he says conditioned souls cannot be gurus.
That point was never clearly understood by almost cent percent of his followers, and that caused all of these evil reactions. But you personally did what you could, and I give you a lot of credit for bravely speaking up, when 99% of the men were acquiescing in silence. You were much more brave than all of the "kshatriya men" put together. Bravo.
Making comments on blog post can be done by anyone, they just have to send me an email and tell me which article they are referring to. ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com
=========
CHAT GPT VS ISKCON
ISKCON Gurus: A Complex Debate on Purity, Karma, and Liberation
CHAT GPT VS ISKCON
ISKCON Gurus: A Complex Debate on Purity, Karma, and Liberation
A deeply contentious issue within and surrounding the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) is the spiritual standing of its current initiating gurus. The question of whether they are "pure devotees" capable of eradicating the karma of their disciples and guiding them to liberation from samsara (the cycle of birth and death) is a subject of ongoing debate, involving complex theological interpretations and differing views on the instructions of ISKCON's Founder-Acharya, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇
The Role of a "Pure Devotee" Guru:
In the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, of which ISKCON is a part, the guru holds a pivotal role. A "pure devotee" is understood to be a liberated soul, free from the three modes of material nature (goodness, passion, and ignorance) and having an unalloyed, selfless love for Krishna. According to the teachings, such a spiritual master has the potency to act as a transparent medium for Krishna's grace.
The destruction of a disciple's karma is not seen as the guru personally absorbing the sinful reactions in a vicarious manner. Rather, a qualified guru, through their own purity and connection to the disciplic succession (parampara), guides the disciple in the process of sadhana bhakti (devotional service). This practice, particularly the chanting of the Hare Krishna maha-mantra, is believed to purify the heart and burn away accumulated karma. The guru's grace is considered essential in empowering the disciple's efforts and ensuring their spiritual progress toward liberation.
◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇
ISKCON's Official Position
ISKCON's governing body, the Governing Body Commission (GBC), has established a system for authorizing initiating gurus. According to the GBC, these gurus are considered "bona fide representatives" of Srila Prabhupada and the parampara. The official stance is that as long as these gurus strictly adhere to the teachings and instructions of Srila Prabhupada, they are acting on the "liberated platform." This implies that their authority and ability to guide disciples are derived from their faithfulness to the Founder-Acharya.
ISKCON's official literature and leadership do not necessarily claim that all its current gurus are eternally liberated pure devotees in the highest sense of the term from the inception of their devotional life. Instead, the emphasis is on their role as dedicated servants who are following a prescribed spiritual path and have been entrusted with the responsibility of initiating and guiding new devotees. The process of becoming a guru in ISKCON involves a recommendation and voting process by the GBC, as well as mandatory training.
◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇
Criticisms and Alternative Perspectives
A significant segment of critics, including former members and reform movements like the ISKCON Revival Movement (IRM), strongly contest the legitimacy of the current guru system. Their primary arguments are:
1) The "Pure Devotee" Prerequisite: Critics argue that according to Srila Prabhupada's own teachings, a guru must be a pure devotee, a liberated soul. They point to instances of ISKCON gurus who have "fallen down" (deviated from the strict principles of Krishna consciousness) as evidence that they were never qualified to be gurus in the first place. The argument is that a "bound" soul cannot free another bound soul.
2) The Interpretation of Prabhupada's Instructions: A central point of contention is how Srila Prabhupada intended for initiations to continue after his physical departure in 1977. Critics, particularly the IRM, advocate for the "ritvik" system. They believe that Srila Prabhupada appointed representatives (ritviks) to initiate disciples on his behalf, and that he intended to remain the sole initiating guru for ISKCON. From this perspective, the current gurus have usurped a position that was not granted to them, and therefore their initiations are not valid.
3) The GBC's Authority: The practice of the GBC appointing gurus by committee is also criticized. The traditional view, as highlighted by critics, is that a true guru is self-effulgent and recognized by their spiritual qualities, not by a managerial vote.
◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇ ◇
The Question of Karmic Deliverance:
For those who adhere to the critical viewpoint, if the current gurus are not pure devotees, their ability to deliver their disciples from samsara is fundamentally compromised. The argument is that without the spiritual potency of a genuine guru, the initiation process is a mere formality and the guidance offered is that of a conditioned soul, incapable of severing the bonds of karma.
From ISKCON's official perspective, the spiritual deliverance of the disciple is contingent upon the sincere following of the guru's instructions, which are themselves a faithful representation of Srila Prabhupada's teachings. In the event of a guru's fall down, ISKCON's position is that the disciple's connection to the broader tradition and to Srila Prabhupada remains, and re-initiation is not necessarily required. However, this has led critics to question why a direct connection to Srila Prabhupada as the primary guru is not the standard practice from the outset.
In conclusion, there is no single, universally accepted answer to this question. For a faithful member of ISKCON, the current gurus are duly authorized and capable of guiding them to spiritual perfection, provided the disciple is sincere in their practice. For critics, the current system is a deviation from Srila Prabhupada's instructions, and the gurus, not being pure devotees, lack the spiritual authority to destroy karma and grant liberation. The issue remains one of profound theological and practical significance, shaping the spiritual lives of many within the Hare Krishna movement.