Text COM:2314310
From:      Ajamila (das) ACBSP (Goloka Books - GB) <ajamila.acbsp@com.bbt.se>
Date:      13-May-99 12:40
Cc:         Umapati Swami [9140]
Subject:   Adri cries wolf/lie again

ADRI: Dear Ajamila Prabhu, Please accept our humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.

AJA: Note here how Adri contradicts himself:

Adri uvaca today: "We never said he (Mayesvara) was a ritvik.
Adri uvaca yesterday: "Just thought everyone might be interested that Ajamila is promoting someone [Mayesvara] who wants a ritivk type system too within ISKCON."

ADRI: Thank you, as shown above we never said he was a ritvik, but that he wanted to INSERT something of the sort into ISKCON. This he called AIM, or Alternative Initiating Method.

AJA: In the context of Adri's entire letter, implying Mayesvara is a ritvik is the same as stating he is a ritvik, but in actual fact Mayesvara Prabhu is completely anti-ritvik.

ADRI: But we never said anything of the sort as the above proves. We merely stated a fact, that he said we should have both systems. So you did lie. We never ever said he was a ritvik.

AJA: even if I did lie nobody's gonna believe you. I stand by my words. I said you IMPLIED Mayesvara is a ritvik which is for all intensive purposes the same as stating it.

ADRI: You have falsely cried the wolf that lie so many times nobody believes anything you say.

AJA: Mayesvara Prabhu, as he states below, was toying with an idea to involve the ritviks peacefully, but concluded that it would not work. Mayesvara was looking for a peaceful solution.

ADRI: He was teaching that both systems be allowed to run simutaneously. You said he was very learned (without a hint of irony), so we must assume one of the following:

1) Ajamila must also agree that a ritvik type system be allowed into ISKCON since this has been the "learned esteemed advice" until now.
2) Ajamila does not agree with 1) and is therefore not learned since he goes against learned advice. Or
3) Ajamila foolishly recommended someone as learned without first checking the facts, and is therefore not learned.

Perhaps Ajamila prabhu would like to select which of the above best sums up the situation?

AJA: I stand by my words that Mayesvara is learned and the his attempt with AIM was that of a genuine peacemaker. And I stand by my words that you are possessed by Kali. Proof. Kali means quarrel. What do Adri & co like to do the most? Quarrel! Quarrel over nothing.

[PADA: Ajamila's GBC's "enforced cult ritualistic worship of homosexual pedophiles as good as Jesus" is not "nothing"!    It is the biggest deviation in the history of religion.]

ADRI: If it were not for the hope of protecting ISKCON and our devotees from your dangerous concoction I would not waste valuable time conversing with you.

AJA: You are quarrel personified, Kali personified. And mark my words, you will quarrel among yourselves and DESTROY yourselves. And for the sake of Srila Prabupada's ISKCON I pray to Lord Narasimhadeva that that happens sooner rather than later. So would Adri Dharan Prabhu please do the gentlemanly thing and withdraw your statement and apologize to the venerable Vaisnava Mayesvara Prabhu. We would really appreciate that.

ADRI: Even now it is not clear that he has abandoned the theory he has been vigorously promoting for many months. Even though it appears you had tried to get him to completely denounce AIM in order to save your own face, still Mayesvara says: "It is not a question of if I am willing to do a U-turn on AIM." We noticed you edited that bit out below, wonder why?

Mayesvara writes: Haribolo! Ajamila Dasa Prabhu, Please accept my respectful obeisances. All glories to Sri Guru & Sri Gauranga! All Glories To AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada! AIM was my original attempt to try and prevent the stand off that has occurred. It is not like I will go bananas if it doesn't ever come about. I tend to agree with you that there is so much hidden agenda and deceit going on with the RtViks that they can not be trusted.  In fact I think it is pretty obvious that the whole RtVik campaign is rooted in envy and the rebellious nature of the soul NOT philosophical validity. Originally ADRI personally "PROMISSED" he would shut down if AIM was introduced, but since then both he and Krishna Kanta have made it clear they would not settle for that.

ADRI: TFO makes provision for both systems to run side by side as an interim measure only, as a form of change management. If there ever was any understanding with Mayesvara it was that. Then Mayesvara started preaching that ritvik was bogus, but even still should be introduced. We pointed out several times to him that if ritvik is bogus why should it be inserted into ISKCON. How does that make sense? It seems now he is shifting away from that towards the MASS, but not yet completely, since it is hard for him to just drop a position he has fiercely defended for months. And this person Ajamila prabhu even still considers learned.

MAYESVARA: My original mood was somewhat like the Pandavas requesting Duroyadana for a small place to live. The difference is the Pandavas would have been very content and satisfied with just a small village. I was hoping ISKCON could just accommodate the few fraction groups under one umbrella which is how I conceived of AIM. But the idea could never work if the RtViks can't adopt the mood of the Pandavas. Now it has become obvious that they are far from that mood so the AIM offer doesn't appear to be a valid option. You make reference to the Viscous Stunts done by RtViks in England and that is the type of thing that has also turned me against their false campaign under the guise of Vaishnava Behavior. Frankly most of what they say, believe, preach about and the mood of how they speak makes me sick. They are pretty abhorrent.

Mayesvara Dasa

ADRI: Notice how Ajamila Prabhu has removed the sentence we quoted above that shows he had been trying to get Mayesvara to drop AIM altogether. It was presented in the last posting but then Ajamila Prabhu realised we would see how he had been trying to desperately save face. He will never admit his mistake. Just like when he contradicted the GBC, had it pointed out to him, then lied to everyone on com that he had not done so.

ys Adri & Madhu

AJA: This ranting proves Kali is in your body and trying desperately through you to cause the Vaisnavas to quarrel. You are boring the devotees with your quarrelsomeness and offensiveness. How much longer will they tolerate you? I quote the learned Mayesvara, "Frankly most of what they say, believe, preach about and the mood of how they speak makes me sick. They are pretty abhorrent."

Protecting Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON from your demoniac attack
Ada (Text COM:2314310)

Ajamila das' rascaldom continues:

Text COM:2314309
From:      Ajamila (das) ACBSP (Goloka Books - GB)
Date:      13-May-99 12:40
To:         ICC (Indian Continental Committee) [1850]
Cc:         Bir Krishna das Goswami [13347]
Cc:         Umapati Swami [9139]
For:        ISKCON India (news & discussion)
Subject:    Adri goes down again - not long to go
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Ajamila Prabhu, Please accept our humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.

AJA: Adri dangerously contradicts and speculates here that Sukadeva Goswami is talking about a family priest, but the text in the verse and purport clearly says TRANSCENDENTALISTS" and "SANNYASIS and other SPIRITUAL TEACHERS'.

ADRI: Oh dear you are off on another tangent again. As we explained, Madhu Pandit was reffering to ISKCON gurus falling down. According to the GBC paper 'Gurus and initiations in ISKCON', all ISKCON gurus are to be considered current links to the disciplic succession.

AJA: And according to you all current gurus in ISKCON are not current links to the disciplic succession?

ADRI: We all agree that  transcendentalists can fall down, we all agree that sanyasis can fall down and other spiritual teachers. We asked you to show where authorised members of the disciplic succession fall down? The quote you give does not mention such great personalities.

AJA: So you are saying that when Sukadeva Goswami mentions TRANSCENDENTALISTS, SANNYASIS and other SPIRITUAL TEACHERS having disciples that they are not authorised members of the disciplic succession? This is impossible. How can a transcendentalist have disciples and not be a member of an authorised disciplic succession? Adri, every time you open your mouth you either concoct, misinterpret, defy the Bhagavatam or blaspheme!! You are possessed by Kali.

ADRI: But there are other quotes that make it clear there is a catagory of guru that never fall down: "A bona fide spiritual master is in the disciplic succession from time eternal and he does not deviate at all from the instructions of the Supreme Lord." (Bg. 4.42, purport)

AJA: That is nothng new. Uttama can never fall but a madhyama can. And the main duty of a madhyama is to take on disciples. This is the type of guru you are telling us can fall down. Thus you are directly contradicting your own guru.

ADRI: If someone poses as a member of the disciplic succession and then falls, then they could never, by definition, have been members of the eternal disciplic succession. Rather, they were non-liberated, self-authorised family priest type persons posing as initiating acaryas. Bona fide members of the disciplic succession never deviate.

AJA: This is your concoction and disagrees with sastra SB 11.28.29

ADRI: The following points were given in TFO which I suggest you read before making any more false philosophical assertions: "God is always God, Guru is always Guru." (The Science of Self Realisation, chapter 2)

AJA: Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

ADRI: "Well if he is bad, how can he become a guru?" (The Science of Self Realisation, chapter 2)

AJA: Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

ADRI: "The pure devotee is always free from the clutches of Maya and her influence." (S.B. 5.3.14)

AJA: Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

ADRI: "There is no possibility that a first class devotee will fall down." (C.c. Madhya, 22.71) "A spiritual master is always liberated." (SP Letter to Tamal Krsna, 21/6/70)

AJA: Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

ADRI: "Narada Muni, Haridasa Thakura and similar acaryas especially empowered to broadcast the glories of the Lord cannot be brought down to the material platform." ( S.B. 7.7.14, purport)

AJA: Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

ADRI: There is not a single example in Srila Prabhupada's books of a formally authorised diksa guru, in our disciplic succession, ever deviating from the path of devotional service. The rejection of Sukracarya is sometimes used to validate the view that acaryas fall down, or can be rejected, but this example is highly misleading since he was never an authorised member of our disciplic succession.

AJA: SB 11.29.28 Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

ADRI: Lord Brahma's pastimes with his daughter are sometimes mentioned. Yet it is clearly stated in the Srimad-Bhagavatam that these incidents occurred before Lord Brahma became the head of our sampradaya. Indeed, when the disciple Nitai referred to the pastime as an example of an acarya falling down, Srila Prabhupada became most displeased. According to Srila Prabhupada only unauthorised gurus can be carried away by opulence and women.

"...sometimes a spiritual master is not properly authorised to initiate and only on his own initiative becomes a spiritual master, he may be carried away by an accumulation of wealth and a large number of disciples." (NOD p116)

AJA: Sastra says an uttama guru never falls but a madhyama guru can fall. You are quoting selectively to suit your agenda.

[NNd: 4 points to regulate AJAmila:
1) Why is AJA so insistent on imposing his falliable madhyama homo-pedo supporter lineage madhyamas on us while we have direct access to the Best Uttama who ever treded this land.
2) Why is AJA so attached to make sure his company never progresses beyond madhyama level as mentioned in page 58 of NOI?
3) Why is he imposing his "mediocrity" on the 10,000 year Golden Age proposed by the Lord Himself?
4) Why does AJA hate our dear Lord and His senapati bhakta so much?  We sincerely hope he has named one of his sons, "NARAYANA".]

ADRI: So if they fall then most likely they were never authorised.

AJA: Now you are saying MOST LIKELY?

ADRI: And it is the question of authorisation that lies at the heart of this whole issue. Remember all ISKCON gurus claim to be authorised by the same illusive order, so even if only one fell, that would show the order was misunderstood. We showed all the quotes where the ORDER is loud and clear but you are deaf. Please DISPROVE those quotes.

AJA: The fact is that someone can fall down even from bhava, the second highest stage, as did happen with Maharaja Bharata. Adri is simply dangerously CONCOCTING!!!

[PADA: Bharat is not listed as an acharya?]

ADRI: As you see above, we have never disputed that someone can fall down from anything but the topmost platform of devotional service. That is why only very rare souls can act as diksa guru in the disciplic succession. That is why Srila Prabhupada taught in the C.C, in a section dealing with initiation:

"The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be accepted from the topmost class." (C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport)

We agree with that but why have you left out the quote that talks about a madhyama adhikari initiating disciples? Are you trying to cheat us?

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada says that the acharyas must be an uttama in the Nectar Of Instruction and other places.]

"When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshipped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru." (C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport) This is why devotees should completely reject Ajamila as any type of spiritual authority, and just accept the sublime instructions of Srila Prabhupada.

AJA: Can Adri prove that such a maha-bhagavata does not exist among the current eighty or so gurus in ISKCON? He can't. He is simply obnoxiously speculating!!!

[PADA: Yes, they are all bogus since they go along with homosexual pedophile guru lineage ideas.]

AJA: The fact is that a maha-bhagavata will ALWAYS ACT on the madhyama level, so even if we do see a maha-bhagavata how would we ever know?

[PADA: No bonafide dog eater even would vote a known homosexual pedophile in as the acharya.] [NNd: Hold on... AJA would! So what if he is not a dog eater?]

AJA: Remember they will always act as a madhyama. Aside from that, looking at all the other instructions on the same subject, which Adri & co would love to bury, and they do try to do that, sastra says that the main duty of a madhyama adhikari is to preach and initiate disciples.

[PADA: And vote for pedophile gurus?]

And it is this sastra that Adri & co reject.

[PADA: And that is why so many molestations occured.] [NNd: It is sanity that AJA-MAYAsvara & co rejects]

ADRI: ONLY WHEN HE ORDERS. WHERE IS THE ORDER??

AJA: We've posted CLEAR-CUT ORDERS by Srila Prabhupada many, many times to you but you refuse to accept Srila Prabhupada's clear instructions. So what can we do?

[PADA: Where does Srila Prabhupada say he wants homosexual pedophiles to be worshipped as Vishnupada, Krishna's sucessors, or as the February BTG says, as Jesus, Haridasa Thakura and Prahlad, etc. as the GBC has militantly endorsed?]

ADRI: You could start by not contradicting the GBC who you were supposed to be supporting with your wonderful evidence. That would be a start.

AJA: Prove it.

ADRI: First clean your ears and then go back and re-read what we have posted many, many times.

[NNd: AJA's Brain is too contaminated.    What he needs is a spot of BRAIN-WASHING.  Send him to me!    But first ask Raktambara to remove COM filters, so that we may wash the brains of other innocent ISKCON devotees who are now contaminated by the filthy association of the living-guru-falldown-successions parampara supporters AJA-MAYA and their pedophelic-300-rupees-genetial-sucking & mafia-honoring-GBC-reporting nitya-alila brigade of "madhyama gurus"]

AJA: How will cleaning our ears improve our eyesight? [NNd: "tat srunu"]

ADRI: Clean both then, do something.

AJA: "DISCIPLE OF MY DISCPLE" and "GRAND DISICIPLE thats it" said Srila Prabhpada. (?) That is the REAL FINAL ORDER.

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada never said that homosexual pedophiles could have disciples!] [NNd: GBC has so far given 5 different interpretations.  Do yourself a favor, kindly finalize on one!  And please stop conducting your not-so-dilightful ardha-kukkuti-nyaya.    Can we hear the first part (the non-doctored, non-controversial part) of the tape too?]

ADRI: How can it be if it is conditional? Srila Prabhupada never said 'I am now ordering you...etc' he said 'when I order ...on my order....but by my order' How can a statement of condition be simultaneously the removal of all condition?

AJA: This is word jugglery at its silliest. Srila Prabhpada answered/ordered when asked about initiations after his departure "DISCIPLE OF MY DISCPLE" and "GRAND DISICIPLE thats it" That is the REAL FINAL ORDER. Your FO is a FAKE.

ADRI: You must have the wrong end of the stick since Srila Prabhupada had already said at the beginning of the conversation that the ritviks were particularly for after his departure.

AJA: Wrong. Please refer to my previous answer to that point.

ADRI: Is this really so difficult to grasp prabhu? [NNd: I keep wondering, why is Adri prabhu giving this person who doesn't have a "living guru" and who is at present "not connected to guru-parampara" (by his own accord) so much time!  Vaisnavas indeed are very tolerant.]

AJA: If you are not a mayavadi, yes. Your so-called ritvik final order is a FAKE.

[NNd: AJA's "jahnu-ism" is getting too offensive here.  He really needs to get a son by name "NARAYANA", otherwise there simply is no hope since he dares contemplate a practicing vaisnava to be a "mayavadi"]

Ys, Adri & Madhu

AJA: Is Madhu really there or are you pretending he is there? [NNd: Is Aja really chanting his 16 rounds ATTENTIVELY and offenselessly?]

ADRI: That is not your main concern. You think members of the disciplic succession can fall down, and that is a most offensive philosophical deviation, easily akin to the mayavada you accuse us of. Members of the disciplic succession once departed and established can never fall down.

AJA: Members of the disciplic succession not departed and therefore not established, particularly madhyama adhikaris, can fall down.

[PADA: If they are not established, then why are they worshipped?]

AJA: Adri, it really is as simple as that. Why tie your brains in knots and make it all unnecessarily complicated? Or could it be you have another agenda?

ADRI: Could it be that Kali inside you has got you by the scruff of the neck and is forcing you to make things complicated?

AJA: Although we know Srila Prabhupada was infallible, he stated in all humility that he could fall down.

[NNd: Although the whole world knows current GBC and their "voted" "madhyama" "gurus" are falliable, yet in absolute arrogance they claim they cannot fall down!  Why else would they ask us to worship them with ghee lamps and wash their feet in the temple room in presence of Srila Prabhupada!]

AJA: And as Sukadeva Goswami states, a guru/transcendentalist with disciples while living can get dragged down.

[NNd: Yet we are supposed to put our whole lives at his feet and not at the feet of INFALLIABLE SRILA PRABHUPADA who while "living" also, never got "dragged down".  Not even for a fraction of second ever since his appearance!  And Srila Prabhupada still continues to "live".  AJA, Can you disprove it?  What's your problem AJA?  Why are you so envious?]

AJA: But you don't accept Srimad Bhagavatam, Srila Sukadeva Goswami, and the purport so this is your DISQUALIFICATION. I'm afraid you are a FAKE.

[PADA: Aja tries to link the pure devotees to potential falldowns such as anal sex with men. Yuck!]