AJAMILA SUPPORTS PEDOPHILE LINEAGE


Ajamila dasa analysis of the post-1977 ISKCON situation.

INTRODUCTION 

I.1) AJAMILA AVOIDS HISTORY
I.2) AJAMILA'S HOMOSEXUAL LINEAGE'S ROOTS
 
I.3) AJAMILA'S ANDY WARHOL LINEAGE CONNECTION

I.4) AJAMILA'S REAL MESSAGE: PEDOPHILE LINEAGE

1) AJAMILA AVOIDS HISTORY

Ajamila dasa (backed by the GBC body) has recently wrote a "position paper" which has avoided the major issues of contention within post-1977 ISKCON and he has essentially tried to re-write history. First of all, the "July 9th ritvik letter" issue has never been the primary or original complaint about the GBC guru system since 1978. Indeed, the first waves of "guru contentions" in ISKCON started as early as 1977, a full thirteen years before the so-called "ritvik letter" issue even evolved (and was debated in San Diego in 1990).

One of the original 1977 "contentious questions" was, for example: "Where is the specific evidence that eleven GBCs have been appointed as gurus"? We were told, quite vociferously and militantly at that time, that the eleven gurus had been appointed on May 28th, 1977. However, to date no one from the GBC has ever even shown where any gurus had ever been "appointed," nor has the GBC answered this question with a solid document of proof in twenty three years.

Instead, many GBCs and even some of the eleven so-called "appointed gurus" have subsequently admitted that the "May 28th appointment of eleven gurus" announcement in November 1977, was and is a fraud and a hoax. The GBC has thus never shown how "the eleven" were meant to to become recognized as gurus in the first place? In short, the original "appointment of gurus" formula was simply a "big lie." And worse, many other subsequent GBC lies have been discovered such as: that Sridhara Maharaja had been appointed as ISKCON's instructing guru, that the GBC was supposed to take shelter of the founder of the homosexual and dissident murdering mayhem of the Gaudiya Matha, and so on and so forth.

Of course, this history has never been explained either? Who authorized the GBC to go to the Gaudiya Matha starting in 1978 for "advice"? When did Srila Prabhupada say that the founder of the dissident murdering homosexual guru imbroglio, who is credited by Srila Prabhupada with destroying the Gaudiya Matha (Sridhara Maharaja), was now going to be catapulted forward as "ISKCON's Higher Authority"? And in so doing didn't the GBC officially link themselves to "guru contentions" such as; the previous bogus 1930s guru appointment imbroglio and: the idea that homosexuals and dissident murdering orchestrartors are or were Vaishnava acharyas?

The Gaudiya Matha's imbroglio is indeed itself a long and dark history, going back to what Srila Prabhupada says was their "kill guru and become guru" mentality from the 1930s --and dating back vast ages ago when false gurus first appeared. These links remain up till today, since the GBC's main 1978 papers were created by Sridhara Maharaja of the Gaudiya Matha, and to date these papers are still considered as bona fide parts and parcels of authoritative GBC documents.

To sum, the bogus guru appointment illegally consolidated the control of the assets of ISKCON. Therefore, the post-1977 leaders, most of whom were now officially advocates of the cult enforced ritualistic worship of child molesters, were able to legally remove most of the other rank and file followers to create their molester worship enterprise. This is also a MISUSE of the charity status of ISKCON, which has no provision to create the enforced cult ritualistic worship of homosexual pedophiles in its by-laws.

2) AJAMILA'S HOMOSEXUAL LINEAGE'S ROOTS

What is of interest then is that Ajamila's GBC made as their post-1977 "higher authority" and example of leadership: the 1930s Gaudiya Matha founder father of the deviated if not homosexual gurus. And then the GBC, by following this KNOWN deviated sector of the Gaudiya Matha, also evolved their own homosexual if not pedophile gurus. History repeats it seems, and when bad history is repeated, it deteriorates to a more abominable level.

In any event, in 1990 the GBC reconfirmed their 1930s homosexual guru founder alliance by stating that Tirtha (the person credited with killing his guru to become guru), Madhava (the person who co-founded the 1930s homosexual guru lineage and who insulted our Srila Prabhupada), and Sridhara Maharaja (founder father of the 1930s homosexual guru lineage) were (Narayan Mahraja's) and the GBC's examples of acharyas. Later (1999) the GBC added the names of Bon Maharaja's matha to their list of lineage pedigree supporters, and he was considered a black snake by Srila Prabhupada --and a homosexual according to reports. In sum, it is very easy to link the GBC to the "cult enforced worship of homosexuals as gurus" as evolved in the 1930s, and ample evidence of this can be found in their past and current documents. Indeed, in 1999 the GBC placed documents to support their IRG case with signatures from: the Gaudiya Matha temples!

3) AJAMILA'S ANDY WARHOL LINEAGE CONNECTION

We may recall that some of the GBC's biggest "gurus" were involved in the 1960s "homosexual liberation" scene. Kirtanananda, for example, was alleged to have been living on Mott Street in New York City with Umapati and others. Bhavananda was alleged to have been associated with Andy Warhol's homosexual, and apparently pedophile, entourage. Andy Warhol was a prominent leader in the "homosexual revolution." He was seen associating with young men, that is: he appeared to be a potential pedophile. Andy Warhol also applied to the city of New York for a permit to serve (aborted) human fetuses at his restaurant. It was said in ISKCON in the 1970s that Bhavananda was associated with this "jet set" crowd. Andy Warhol also made a very degraded movie about this time, called "Chelsea Girls," where the "girls" are actually homosexual men engaged in abominable activities.

In any event, it was from this scene that the homosexuals who entered ISKCON had associations, connections and influences. And that means there were influences such as: the homosexual liberation movement, the pro-abortion and fetus eating movement, and in general: illicit sex, drugs and rock and roll music. Hardly the preliminary qualifications for a pure devotee acharya like Jesus? In sum, there was and still is a very sinister homosexual, pedophile, fetus eating element "piggy-backing" along with the "hippy" movement --and into the Hare Krishna movement. And the GBC is so attached to promoting and defending their homosexual pedophile juxtaposition into the guru lineage, Hridayananda swami, a GBC ISKCON "guru," wrote in his Eleventh Canto of his (bogus) "Srimad Bhagavatam" that the two worst pedophile gurus are his examples of acharyas.

I.4) AJAMILA'S REAL MESSAGE: PEDOPHILE LINEAGE

To sum: 
--(1970s) Some GBC knew all along in the 1970s that some devotees like Kirtanananda and Bhavananda had homosexual proclivities.

--Some people were calling Kirtanananda "Queer-tan-ananda" in the early 1970s, and this should have been known by some of the GBC. So why did they say he was equal to Jesus in 1978? And the GBC stated that he actually was like Jesus in their January 1986 BTG article, in an attempt to get the author of this paper assassinated by making inflamed rhetoric?

--Some GBC knew that Kirtanananda was from a reputed homosexual "household" on Mott Street.

--(1970) A vicious takeover plot of ISKCON was exposed, where Srila Prabhupada had been locked up in a room in Los Angeles by some of his big "sannyasis."

--Srila Prabhupada said this incident was inspired by the Gaudiya Matha, and so we should avoid them (and they had had homosexual gurus).

--Alarming incidents of homosexuality were already starting to crop up in ISKCON in the 1970s, and the GBC certainly knew of these incidents.

--(1976) Some GBC knew that Bhavananda had a tendency to engage in anal sex with males by at least 1976.

--(1977) Srila Prabhupada appears to have been poisoned by a cabal. Those in his room when he said he was being poisoned were folks like: 

1) Tamal Krishna Goswami (who said that his best friend was the homosexual pedophile Bhavananada)

2) Satadhanaya (an alleged homosexual pedophile and post-1977 helper of the Mayapura homosexual nest building)

3) Jayapataka (one of the biggest supporters of Bhavananada, the homosexual pedophile)

4) Bhavananda (a homosexual pedophile)

5) Bhakti caru (left the room crying that Prabhupada had been poisoned, then went silent and collaborated with the poisoners and pedophile guru creators to be rubber stamped by them as guru)....

--(1978) The GBC went to the founder of a homosexual guru imbroglio to find their "higher authority" and his bogus 1978 documents are still part of the GBC's official papers.

--(1978 --) The GBC forced children to worship as gurus people they knew had homosexual if not pedophile tendencies.

--(1980) The GBC wrote a paper "The Mahajanas Have Difficulty" saying that great devotees fall down (and become pedophiles)? [NNd: And thus the 12 Mahajanas mentioned by the Supreme Lord Sri Krishna in Srimad Bhagavat Purana are not according to GBCs -- qualified to be REAL "Mahajans"!!!  WOW!]

--(1982) The GBC issued a paper "Purity Is The Force" saying that Srila Prabhupada never wanted us to take advice from Sridhara Maharaja, quoting a letter that they had forbidden anyone to circulate previously. (All the letters were hidden). Yet their idea of purity was the continued enforced cult ritualistic worship of homosexual pedophiles?

--(1982) We write to Mukunda Goswami a complaint that he is calling a homosexual pedophile "Vishnupada" in his official ISKCON publications. He did not reply.

--(1983) Mukunda Goswami says "So what, I've heard worse stories than that" when told about the homosexual molester guru issue.

--(March 1986) GBC reinstates a known homosexual pedophile's worship in India while children in their schools are being starved, beaten and molested.

--(1986) When Kirtanananda's homosexual activities were being exposed by Sulochana, the GBC increased their rhetoric that "Sulochana is a snake" and that "Kirtanananda is like Jesus" (January 1986 BTG), in order to foment hatred and possibly --the murder of Sulochana. It worked, their goons murdered Sulochana on May 22, 1986.

--(1986) Kirtanananda was viewed on CBS television by 23 million people being massaged by young boys, and Jane Wallace noted he was an obvious pedophile. (and so on and so forth)

--(1998) Los Angeles ISKCON leaders refuse to sign a paper that homosexual pedophiles are not members of the Hare Krishna guru lineage.

--(1999) The GBC still says that homosexual pedophiles are or were gurus.


The Ritvik's FAKED Final Order 
by Ajamila dasa

Where The Ritvik Controversy Begins

The controversy the ritvik people are virulently pushing is this:

On 9 July 1977, only months before his impending departure, Srila Prabhupada approved a letter addressed to all ISKCON leaders worldwide. In that letter, considering his rapidly deteriorating health and the hundreds of devotees eagerly awaiting initiation, Srila Prabhupada increased to eleven the number of ritvik priests initiating disciples on his behalf. Let us not forget that this ritvik initiation system was a 'temporary' method by which our immensely powerful Founder-Acarya could 'practically' cope with the fast-growing worldwide demand during his deteriorating health.

[PADA NOTE: The July 9th letter says "henceforward," not "temporarily." The point that Ajamila and the GBC avoid is that some of the eleven gurus haven't proven themselves to be qualified as gurus. Therefore they were not appointed as gurus, as they have lied that they had been, nor were they qualified to be viewed as gurus, nor did Srila Prabhupada ever say they were meant to be viewed as gurus.]

ADA: Otherwise, the ritvik system is not normally practised, as was the case in ISKCON's early days. The ritvik system Srila Prabhupada implemented was simply a temporary arrangement according to kala, desh, patra, time, place, and circumstances. And more importantly, such a ritvik system is never practised posthumously, i.e. one can never take diksa from a guru after his physical departure.

[PADA: Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur and Srila Prabhupada both said that they wanted a GBC system after their departures, not a "living guru" system for after their departures. Ajamila herein calls the bona fide acaryas bogus for not making guru successors. Also, one can still receive "divya jnanam" from Srila Prabhupada and have his sins destroyed (diksha) by following Srila Prabhupada's teaching even after his departure. Bhakti Caru swami recently said that he was going to emphasize Srila Prabhupada as the deliverer (from sins i.e. ksha in diskha), i.e. de facto ritvik.]

ADA: The ritvik people nevertheless argue vociferously that the GBC should not have stopped that 'temporary' system because Srila Prabhupada did not personally stop it. They insist that the temporary system should continue now as if Srila Prabhupada were still 'physically' present, and this is where the ritvik controversy begins.

The idea of ritvikism, however, audaciously ignores much unequivocal evidence. For example, six months before Srila Prabhupada's departure he instructed that the temporary ritvik system would automatically discontinue after his departure. This fact is verified herein.

[PADA: The GBC says: the "system" is that eleven GBC men were "appointed as guru successors." This has subsequently been admitted to be a lie by Hansadutta, Kirtanananda, Jayatirtha, Ramesvara and others, all of whom were part of the original eleven. If ALL of the eleven had been "unequivocally" ordered to be gurus after his departure, why are many of them disputing that now?]

AD: Over the past ten years the GBC have listened patiently and studied carefully all the arguments for ritvikism.

[PADA: False. They have never proven when they were "appointed as gurus" in the first place and would thus cease to be ritviks. Indeed, some of the "ex-gurus" themselves have admitted that the "eleven appointees" were liars and there never was any guru appointment. So, the GBC has not only never studied the issue, they have never explained their square one point of authority: the alleged guru appointment? Then they went to the Gaudiya Matha, then they voted in 20 more gurus at a pedophile guru's recoronation, and so on and so forth, and they have never explained any of these things either...]

AD: The GBC engaged ISKCON's best scholars to conduct a thorough research of Srila Prabhupada's relevant instructions. Subsequently the GBC 'unanimously' concluded in a definitive paper entitled 'Prabhupada's Order' (downloadable from CHAKRA) that ritvikism is a dangerous and devious concoction.

[PADA: And the GBC has made pedophiles into gurus, where is this found in shastra?]

AD: Having failed while working within Srila Prabhupada's system, the Ritviks now hope to impose their views on ISKCON through ruthless external means.

[PADA: The GBC has imposed their view that pedophiles are gurus upon small children, with the result that many children were molested. Now this story is all over the newspapers. In sum, even the karmis know that pedophiles and their reinstators are not, were not and could not have been gurus.]

AD: They hope to force ritvikism on ISKCON's 80-plus gurus, many thousands of their disciples, hundreds of other leaders and tens of thousands of congregational members.

[PADA: The GBC has militantly and violently forced pedophile guru worship on thousands of children, and so there were maybe a thousand molestations. Perhaps it would have been better to have continued to worship of Srila Prabhupada?]

AD: These ISKCON leaders and members are disinterested in ritvikism and disgusted by the Ritviks' misbehaviour which Srila Prabhupada strictly prohibited.

[PADA: And the whole world is disgusted with your pedophile guru lineage, as has been reported in the karmi media.]

AD: In spite of the fact that Srila Prabhupada said the GBC must be followed in 'all circumstances', and in spite of the fact that Srila Prabhupada said philosophical disputes must only be settled within ISKCON the Ritviks flagrantly disobey both these instructions.

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada never said that the GBC should be followed even when they deviate. This is bogus. Indeed, Srila Prabhupada chastised devotees for following GBCs who had deviated.]

AD: Not co-operating with the GBC on this issue when nearly the entire ISKCON reject ritvikism is indefensibly wrong as Srila Prabhupada instructed in a letter to Bali Mardan, 18 September, 1972 as follows: "The GBC authority must be accepted under all circumstances, not that there will be fighting amongst you. This fighting spirit will destroy everything."

[PADA: And when it was discovered that Bali Mardan was deviating, Srila Prabhupada chastised the people who went along still following him. Srila Prabhupada also disbanded the GBC in 1972 for deviations.]

AD: Given that Srila Prabhupada affirmatively said "all circumstances", are the Ritviks not guilty of defying Srila Prabhupada's direct instructions?

[PADA: No, Srila Prabhupada disbanded the GBC to show the devotees that the GBC was imperfect and prone to deviation, and thus the rank and file had to monitor the GBC if they got out of hand. Srila Prabhupada was still saying in 1977, "Will the GBC spoil everything after I depart," meaning he never had full confidence in the GBC.]

AD: Headed by Adridharan from Calcutta and Madhu Pandit from Bangalore, the Ritviks have now taken their push for ritvikism to a state of formal rebellion and rejection of the GBC. By the use of 'external' influences, the Ritviks may gain a slim chance of bulldozing their unwanted ideas on ISKCON.

[PADA: The GBC idea that homosexual pedophile lineages are bona fide is what is unwanted here folks.]

AD: Greater than the problem of Ritviks' rebellion, however, is the dangerous ritvik 'theory' itself. The biased selection and dismissal of evidence, the desperate juggle of words, the mayavada coverings of unwanted direct meanings with glossy 'purpose-made' indirect meanings, and defeating one's own mis-interpretations of sastra are some of the techniques that ornament a shallow theory. We provide some classic examples herein. We also attempt to study carefully Srila Prabhupada's relevant instructions in their entirety, in a completely unbiased way so that readers can make a properly informed decision about ritvikism.

[PADA: And when Jayatirtha was found to be engaged in oral sex with a female follower, and taking drugs of all types, we objected to his guru status. The GBC however, defended Jayatirtha's being worshipped as "Tirthapada," as a bona fide Vaishnava acharya, who is shaksat hari tvena, the sum total of the demigods, assisting the gopis, etc. So this shows that they had lost all discrimination by 1980. No sane man will accept that a sexual predator of his spiritual daughters and a drug addict is a bona fide acharya as pure as God Almighty. The entire GBC was off track by this time.]

The Heart of the Controversy

At the heart of this controversy/debate created by the Ritviks are a 28 May '77 discussion and a 9 July '77 letter, the latter being the Ritviks' main 'evidence'.

[PADA: No, the heart of the controversy is: why has the GBC made drug addicts; sex fiends; homosexuals; pedophiles; embezzlers; condom padas; blasphemers; gopi bhava fools; Gaudiya Matha puppets; pedophile cover-ups and reinstators; and don't forget murderers orchestrators of dissidents; and "gurus" who might be spreading AIDS to followers, perhaps even children (in the name of guru since one of their "Visnupada" gurus has been confirmed as using condoms on his girlfriends); and what to speak about poisoners of guru; and in sum: disciples of Andy Warhol's New York City Velvet Underground fetus eating child pedophile cult, ad infinitum, as their gurus? Where is your evidence that this is the behavior of bona fide acharyas?]

AD: The Ritviks are trying to convince everyone that their 9 July 'evidence' proves that Srila Prabhupada wanted to break the law of disciplic succession, he wanted to stop the parampara with him, and that he wanted to ignore the examples set by Lord Krishna, Lord Caitanya, and all the acaryas in our line by implementing a system of posthumous initiations for 'himself' after his departure.

[PADA: Krishna and Lord Caitanya are bona fide gurus: and they have --what-- to do with your illicit sex-con guru lineage? Wake up!]

AD: Are these not very serious unproven accusations that the Ritviks are inadvertently levying at Srila Prabhupada?

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada did not appoint homosexual pedophiles as gurus, as the GBC has said. The GBC are the ones making bogus accusations.]

AD: A system of posthumous diksa initiations is so outrageously controversial and radically different it is inconceivable that Srila Prabhupada would have introduced such a system and 'forgot' to explain why!

[PADA: He did not forget anything. He said: you become guru --when-- you are qualified. The means the illicit behavior exhibited by the GBC's gurus proves they were never qualified as gurus.]

AD: Surely, the Founder-Acarya of Lord Caitanya's brilliant-as-the-sun ISKCON would not have made such a mistake as the Ritviks would like us to believe. Had Srila Prabhupada actually wanted ritvikism he would have certainly left his disciples and future generations with a very detailed explanation. But the Ritviks in their recklessness imply that Srila Prabhupada on this issue acted irresponsibly! And they also insinuate that Srila Prabhupada 'didn't know' that a posthumous diksa system is not mentioned anywhere in the entire history of Vaisnavism .

[PADA: The ritvik system is part of the GBC system, which is mentioned everywhere.]

AD: It is obvious that had Srila Prabhupada actually wanted ritvikism he would have explained it in great detail.

[PADA: He did. He said there would be a GBC system, and the ritviks are a layer of the GBC system.]

AD: Srila Prabhupada's consistent meticulousness did not take leave of him even towards the end: He was still translating Srimad-Bhagavatam with perfect clarity after 9 July. Is it not therefore dangerously foolish of the Ritviks to disgrace Srila Prabhupada's name in the parampara with this 'unheard of' posthumous ritvikism? Is not ritvikism simply an 'invention' of Kali to cause quarrel among ISKCON Vaisnavas? Even Lord Krishna Himself and Lord Caitanya needlessly took diksa from a 'living guru' just to teach us by example not to concoct a posthumous system.

[PADA: But your living gurus have been having illicit sex with men, women and children? So, how are they gurus? Even dogs do not behave this badly?]

 

please also see: AJAMILA FLIPS OUT DEFENDING MAYESVARA'S AIM


pada email: pada@neteze.com

pada's poison-website: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/3933   

Puranjana's Homepage: http://tsa.ppp.ripco.net/padaweb/puranjan.html 

complaints: gbc1008@aol.com

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!

All glories to His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!