Sent to pada
From: Shyamsundara dasa (SD)

Dear Isadasa (and PADA?),
All glories to the Lotus Feet of Srila Narayana Maharaja.
Is that better, or do you still want to argue instead of learning something of value. Are You a conditioned soul, is your interpretation of Srila Prabhupada your interpretation, or are you a liberated soul, do you think he only came here to instill a fighting spirit and mood of fanatacism in westerners?

[PADA: We are not saying that it was Narayana Maharaja or Sridhara Maharaja's "intent" to "cause fanaticism," but that has definately been the result of their idea to worship conditioned souls, or half-baked semi-recovered drug addicts, as bona fide Vaishnava acharyas. Indeed, you are still citing below your "guru is one" idea. Meaning what?, that the GBC's "gurus" like Tamal, whom both Narayan Maharaja and Sridhara Maharaja supported as gurus, are "one" with Srila Prabhupada?

And why hasn't Narayana Maharaja clarified that he was wrong to say that these GBC are gurus since there is no evidence they are qualified to be gurus? He has been cited in public documents supporting the GBC as gurus, and moreover he says that terms like GBC and ritvk are not found in shastra? And he became the GBC guru's biggest defender especially after 1986, just after they reinstated a known homosexual pedophile as a guru? Where is this found in shastra? Narayana Maharaja has supported a party which has even reinstated homosexual pedophiles as gurus, and now you say "guru is one"? One with what?

Or sometimes Narayana Maharaja will say there are different kinds of gurus, meaning what, sometimes gurus become pedophiles? Simultaneously, he has supported that these lesser gurus if not non-resolved homosexuals should be worshipped as acharyas? And he has not even made a public declaration that this is wrong? So NM should make up his mind, either guru is one, and Tamal is an uttama acharya, or gurus are different, i.e. some are only giving shiksa as kanisthas, or as GBCs, and as such they are not worshipped EVER as parampara members. One cannot blend together these two levels, kanishta GBC and uttama acharya as NM has done? And he has not clarified that the kanistha cannot EVER be worshipped as the uttama, as he has supported. When the kanishta is viewed as uttama, Srila Prabhupada says, this is sahajiya.

We would agree that the neophtye is also a type of limited shiksha "guru" in that he can teach, but he is not worshipped, he is not yet a diksha guru, parampara member etc.? He is maybe a GBC, that is all. Yet then Narayana Maharaja will say, GBC and ritvik are not found in shastra, therefore Tamal and his company are not mere GBC, i.e. lesser or shiksa gurus, but should be viewed as uttama diksha gurus? No. Tamal is not an uttma, not a diksha guru, and Sridhara and Narayana Maharajas have no authority to rubber stamp someone like Tamal as an uttama, diksha guru, etc. either, especially when it was ALREADY made very clear that they were only minor league shiksa teachers or GBC by Srila Prabhupada.

How can the GBC deviants posing as gurus (including homosexual pedophiles whom both Narayana and Sridhara maharaja supported as being worshipped as "diksha gurus") be "one" with a diksha guru like Srila Saraswati thakura as you are implying can now be done? No. "Guru is one" ONLY applies to pure gurus, not fools posing as gurus? A gold ring is "one" with a gold pendent, but it is not "one" with a tin and pewter bracelet? "Guru is one" means they are always equally qualified as fully pure and transcendental, and therefore the GBC are not "one" with guru.

These GBC people are not, were not and could not have been Vaishnava acharyas. So you should make up your mind, if gurus are different in quality, i.e. mixed up kanishta devotees, then yes, some of them are merely GBC giving shiksa. And if they are one, then we are speaking of another level: the acharya level. You cannot combine these two levels and worship them both as diksha gurus as SM and NM concocted.

Anyway agreed, Narayan Maharaja did not create this fanaticism for the West, it was already going on in India under Sridhara Maharaja's misguidance. The Papal system had the same fanatical result in Medieval times. We may recall that Sridhara Maharaja's 1930s "Vasudeva is the guru, he is one with Srila Saraswati Thakura" experiment ended up with banning, beating and murders of devotees in the Gaudiya Matha.

SM may not have wanted to get devotees beaten and killed, but his policies caused that, and by the way, the disintegration of the whole mission according to Srila Prabhupada. Sometimes a person does not want to hurt other people, but his plan is a deviation and so others get hurt anyway. So Sridhara Maharaja's policies caused extreme problems, including murders, and other scandals that were in the news in India. Guru scandals.

Srila Saraswati Thakura's devotees were also beaten with bricks, had their faces pushed into stools, and all this was caused by Sridhara Maharaja's ideas that this Vasudeva is the acharya. Sridhara Maharaja created this violent fanatical cult. Worse, he set lose this serpent to eat up the devotees and then he simply walked away from it and let is eat up the Gaudiya Matha. Oh well, these people are all getting eaten up by my policy, gee, good time to take a hike? This actually occured recently on a Greek Ocean liner, the ship started to sink and the captain and crew got into life boats and sped away, leaving the hapless passengers on the sinking boat.

And so both NM and SM supported the worship of GBC members as acharyas, and indeed this is a major contradiction in itself? How can the relativised "Governing Body" members of the Church (i.e. neophytes) be simultaneously worshipped as the absolute acharyas (i.e. pure devotees) like Jesus? The priest is a ritvik, thats it, he is not simultaneously: Jesus? This is ritvik-diculous. Yet both NM and SM said that if Srila Prabhupada had not made Tamal (and Bhavananada?) his successor gurus, and he had appointed them only in a lower capacity, he would have deviated from shastra? How so? And SM said the same thing in the 1930s, Vasudeva is appointed as the acharya, or Srila Saraswati would have deviated by not having a successor. No.

And if we think that Tamal is the successor to Srila Prabhupada, how can we claim we know Srila Prabhupada intimately? If I say that the town drunk is the successor to the San Francisco mayor, that is an insult to the mayor's post. And worse, now you are telling us: they are one?

So Narayana Maharaja's idea is maybe that "guru is one," which means (as he has supported): Tamal is a uttama diksha guru, and this has ended up causing the same fanatical ideas that ruined the Gaudiya Matha. And worse, Narayana Maharaja says that Sridhara is a bona fide guru, after SM created this same fanatical and dissident murdering homosexual diksha guru mess in both the 1930s and 1970s? No, Tamal is not "one with" the diksha acharyas, indeed many suspect him of supporting molesters as diksha gurus and so on.

So the whole idea of Narayana Maharaja and Sridhara Maharaja has been that the GBC, whom Srila Prabhupada said all along are fallible administrators, or at best fallible priests, are diksha acharyas. And as such, they should vote in more diksha guru acharyas, and vote out deviant (if not pedophile) acharyas while simultaneously voting in more acharyas, and so on and so forth -- AS OCCURED IN THE GAUDIYA MATHA. This whole "guru by rubber stamp" system is bogus.

Thus, if guru is one, SM and NM are not gurus since do not agree with the bona fide gurus, who never support such relativised and speculative systems. That means SM and NM do not understand the process of how an acharya is empowered. He is not voted in by 2/3 show if hands at pedophile recoronations and so on? So Srila Prabhupada says that religion without philosophy is fanaticism.]

SD: The concept of Sri guru is not mayavadi, so you have not as you so sarcastically say "established your a mayavadi-so what advice now?" Where did you learn to behave like this? Prabhupada states in S.S.R that when we speak of Sri guru it is not a sectarian concern, my guru, your guru, GURU IS ONE. Will you accept it, or will you interpretate and squeeze it into your own conception that you feel comfortable with?

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada can say "guru is one" because he is a guru himself. He can say that he is "one with the other gurus." "The presidents of the United States are all one." OK, but not every citizen is the president? Sridhara Maharaja says that the disciple must see the guru as a servant of Radharani, then he says, ....and the GBC are gurus. So he made the now infamous gaffe in 1977, that the GBC are assuming the position of nikunja yuno. No. You do not ASSUME you are a servant of the gopis! And when others assume you are on that level, you have the makings of a violent cult, as has occured. So, if the citizen says, "I am one with the president, where is my seat in the White House," he is arrested as a madman or a criminal.

In sum, we are not Srila Prabhupada and we are certainly not one with him in purity? We are talking about apples (a guru like Srila Prabhupada) and oranges (his followers) here. The followers have to identify their guru, and that is what Srila Prabhupada said when he told Bhavanananda that "all glories to Sri guru" is mayavadi. And that is why you are a mayavadi, since you are not a guru you should glorify your guru. That is the proper etiquette.

Also, you cannot say, 'All glories to the God" (or all glories to the guru) as the Hindus say. What God? Which God? Krishna? Rajneesh? Meher Baba? No, we say, Krishna is God. We give His name. And so for the non-guru sector, they have to identify their guru as a form of respect. That is also the basis of personalism and that is Srila Prabhupada's point. It is a point of Vaishnava etiquette, you must identify your guru especially if you are not yourself a guru.]

SD: Srila Narayana Maharaja does not preach bona fide guru's fall down. You are misinformed.

[PADA: You are misinformed. Narayana Maharaja was the GBC's star advisor, even gopi classes leader, starting in 1984, according to the writing of folks like Satsvarupa and other GBC papers. And his name is cited as supporting the "reinitiation" scam, for example, that gurus fall down. He also said that Tirtha, Sridhara and Madhava are gurus, whereas Srila Prabhupada says that Tirtha is an envious snake and a mundane man and Madhava practically threatened Srila Prabhupada. Narayana Maharaja has therefore supported not only that Tamal and co. are gurus, i.e. those who are the founding fathers of the pedophile guru lineage, but also he says that envious snakes are also his idea of gurus. So we say, the bogus cannot be gurus. That is where we differ with the maharaja.]

SD: But he does say that anyone who critisizes a vaisnava has not yet even become a kanishta adhikari.

[PADA: Exactly correct. To say that a lineage of homosexual pedophiles is part of the parampara is a criticism of the parampara. Srila Prabhupada also says that the imitators of the Goswamis are insulting the REAL Goswamis, and as such these imitators are destined for hell. So, if we support these imitators and tell them they are not ritviks but acharyas, give them so-called gopis classes, give them support for their documents and so on, this means we are mixing up these imitators with the real acharyas.

Srila Prabhupada: "Our mission is to serve, bhakta vishesha, and live with devotees. NOT THAT YOU TAKE THE PLACE OF GURU. That is all nonsense. Very DANGEROUS, then everything will be SPOILED. As soon as you become ambitious to take the place of guru-gurusu narah matih. That is material disease."

Then if we say, as you are, "guru is one," then what are we saying, that homosexual pedophile lineages, whom are going to hell as the above quote says, and as supported by SM and NM, are one with the real lineage? No. This is an insult to the real lineage and that is why we have asked, and asked and asked NM to make a public declaration that his support of the GBC as gurus is wrong and that he should quit saying that they were not relativised ritviks, and quit supporting that they are or were gurus, and help us clear this up. But no, he told our associate even recently that the GBC are not mere ritviks, that there is no such thing as ritviks. So he is sticking with his bogus claim that they are or were gurus, as he said from at least 1984 - 1994? In sum, NM is still trying to say that his idea that Tamal is a guru is right, yet few will ever accept this.

Narayana Maharaja had said we should not criticize Tamal and company in 1986 by saying we should agree that these deviants are gurus, just after they had reinstated a known homosexual pedophile as a guru. Therefore Narayana Maharaja helped cause continuation of the molestations to go on, and he helped support the violent mood that got Sulochana shot, and me almost shot in 1986. Worse, when the GBC were in the middle of being ghost busted in 1990, Narayana Maharaja went to bat for them AGAIN in the GBC's ISKCON Journal. How can the acharya be overcome by pedophilia, ghosts, etc.? To date, the maharaja has given us no explanation how acharyas become like this and why he supports such a bogus lineage still, by saying they were never GBC and ritviks?

Worse, NM says that the Gaudiya Matha's cockroaches are gurus:

Srila Prabhupada: That [extensively preaching] is the duty of a [guru] acharya. Not that three dozen [guru] acharyas in Mayapura. [The Gaudiya Matha] Each one has a temple and a few dozen-not few dozen-one dozen disciples. Collecting some money, taking [pilgrims] to the holy place. They [artificial gurus] say "whatever is in our capacity we are doing." That capacity means when they are speaking that "cockroach is as good a bird as Garuda. Cockroach is also a bird and Garuda is also a bird." How can the cockroach can say "I am also as good as Garuda?" Tamala Krishna: That is called insanity.]

SD: As for your third statement, speculation thats all speculation. Srila Prabhupada requested Srila Narayana Maharaja to help his disciples after Srila Prabhupadas dissapearance and now you know better than your guru.

[PADA: Well, help us then, and that means don't support homosexual pedophile ghostly haunted bogus fools as gurus. That does not help us? Both Narayana Maharaja and Sridhara Maharaja said that we have to support the GBC's (homosexual pedophile) guru lineage as bona fide "or else we will not be following shastra." Indeed, Narayana Maharaja and Sridhara Maharaja both said that the idea of GBC/ ritvik is not even found in shastra? So, they instead said that we have to worship these GBC as gurus, and so they supported the worship of a homosexual and pedophile guru lineage. So we say, they have not understood the shastra --at all. Worse, while the GBC is molesting, banning, beating and killing the devotees, Narayana Maharaja is teaching them --about the gopis --feeding their illusions and delusions of grandeur? And he has not even clarified why he supported the GBC as gurus, to those of us who were being crushed under the GBC jackboots while he was supporting them? Does he think we do not count because we are not "the big devotees"?]

SD: Srila Prabhupada had so much faith in the capability of Srila Narayana, and you are questioning your own beloved gurudeva's sense of judgement.

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada said that the Gaudiya Matha folks are also potentially very dangerous, and since they have supported the 1930s homosexual lineage and post-1970s pedophile guru lineage of the GBC, he is right.]

SD: What will you do & say next " Oh he said that because..... Oh he means this... Oh he means that.....", Will you think about these things or will it be just another automated response stemming from your absolute viewpoint.

[PADA: Nope, we are not automatic, we just ask the same questions and get no reply. Why have both Narayana Maharaja and Sridhara Maharaja supported the GBC's ghostly haunted homosexual pedophile guru lineage? And why did NM become their advisor just after they had reinstated a known homosexual pedophile to be worshipped as "Vishnupada," and they voted in 20 more gurus by bogus rubber stamp, and they murdered Sulochana? And why has he never made a public retraction of his public support for these fools --as gurus? And why won't NM admit that these people were only appointed as administrators, and instead he gets very angry with our associates and goes on insisting that the GBC were never appointed as mere representatives? And therefore his last public comments supports them as gurus?]

-------------

Below are some other quotes of interest on the Gaudiya Matha. By the way, since Narayana Maharaja has said that Sridhara Maharaja is an acharya, he might explain why there are such negative quotes about him as well?

78.02 SRIDHARA MAHARAJA FORWARDED. Simultaneously, the GBCs began militantly forwarding Sridhara Maharaja as ISKCON's "new authority," making it now even more difficult to clear up - or even discuss - Srila Prabhupada's original instructions. Clearly, this was intended to place Srila Prabhupada - and his instructions - on the back burner, and make the Gaudiya Matha ideas prominent. Thus, a massive wave of entirely new and foreign instructions now overwhelmed the picture. ...And so on and so forth.

Facing his sudden whirlwind of opposition, from the above and so many other forces, Srila Prabhupada's actual November, 1977 final instructions, wherein he had said that he would not appoint any successors or leaders, was lost in the dust.

ANOTHER SECRET INSTRUCTION? Satsvarupa Swami (and most of the GBC) was stating, at the time, that Srila Prabhupada had PRIVATELY "ordered the GBC to go visit Sridhara Maharaja for philosophical advice." When did Srila Prabhupada give this mysterious instruction? No tape, no tape transcription, no specific time, date, or named witnesses to this alleged instruction have ever been provided by the GBC.

Interestingly, the GBC later on admitted that Srila Prabhupada had NEVER ordered them to visit Sridhara Maharaja in 1982, but only after they had "milked him" for all the help they needed. At any rate, this is the next major betrayal of Srila Prabhupada, that he would have ORDERED his followers to adopt the philosophy that he had always openly loathed - the Gaudiya Matha's - and have their insidious ideas incorporated into his society.

78.03 GURU APPOINTMENT ARCHITECT. Yet the GBC's next "magic trick" began working. They started to spoon-feed all of ISKCON's members with all manner of the Gaudiya Matha "advisor's" ideas:

Gurus are appointed, "Your disciple you must appoint,"
[Srila Prabhupada ALWAYS condemned the guru by appointment idea];
Gurus are "added and eliminated" by annual GBC vote,
[persons like Jesus: rubber-stamped in - and excommunicated?];
Gurus may "fall down and become 'mad with authority,'"
[how can a person like Jesus become "mad with authority"?];
Gurus can become blasphemous demons (as Vasudeva did),
[yes, it's true, Jesus might actually be Satan?];
False gurus are advised to "deceive their disciples,"
[good advice: when all else fails, lie, cheat and bluff!];
"Wear the [guru] uniform and the uniform will show you what to do," (1978 GBC report and Sridhara Maharaja's SGG p. 84),
[try this logic on your friends! Tell them that you are now "wearing a brain surgeon's uniform, so are they now ready to get their brain surgery?"];
Meanwhile, while one practices the are of imitating the guru, "The position of acharya with his disciples must be ABSOLUTE." [Why? Because all of this does not work very well without a sub-violent, militantly fanatical, even
deadly, cult mood!]
And don't forget that one should artificially "assume the position of rati-keli siddha," a conjugal lover of Krishna!
[Some of the GBC's "conjugal lovers of God" were pedophiles.]

To sum, a person in the Gaudiya Matha's "guru plan: Falsely states that he was appointed; unauthorizedly wears the real guru's uniform; becomes "mad with authority"; meanwhile, we simply sit back and "wait and see" while this takes place; not to worry! According to Sridhara Maharaja, "he will dig his own grave."

Question? And what about us, the "dissenters" who want to continue worshipping the bona fide guru, namely Srila Prabhupada? We become branded as "envious black snakes," are banned from temples, and we get death threats. Aren't we the persons who "will dig our own graves" if we try to worship the real devotee?

78.04 GURU MADNESS? A typical statement from Sridhara Maharaja: "The [pure guru] acharya faces two dangers. Partiality and deviation. ...The position of an acharya is dangerous. It is full of temptations. ...He [the infallible pure devotee?] WILL go down. He has become a [spiritual?] master and will think, 'I am the master of all I survey.' In a particular circle he is monarch. And monarchy can bring MADNESS. ...The ego of mastership which is found within all of us comes to attack the guru." (Sridhara Maharaja as quoted in his book "Sri Guru and His Grace)

In the same book, Sridhara Maharaja claims that persons like Jesus (acharyas) might become attracted to money, women and followers. He (and now the GBC under his direction) purposefully confuse the status of the "Jimmy Swaggart" bogus money and sex-monger Church priest, and personalities like Jesus. Actually, the Satanists preach openly like this, "Jesus was attracted to money and women." That is why Srila Prabhupada branded the founders of this Gaudiya Matha idea as "severe offenders."

The GBC is of course the real culprit here. Srila Prabhupada had already told them - repeatedly - to be respectful to the Gaudiya Matha leaders and Sridhara Maharaja, but avoid mixing with these Gaudiya Matha leaders. Srila Prabhupada taught that a Viashnava is respectful to one and all, but he ALWAYS keeps his philosophy separate. The GBC knew they were not supposed to adopt these ideas. Srila Prabhupada gave them hundreds of warnings.

78.05 MADNESS IN ACTION. The "mad guru theory applied" in practice; the GBC sometimes decides to emplace a person to be worshipped "as good as Jesus" who has a known tendency to be or to accumulate child molesters. That is not much of a problem. Why? Because the only thing actually worth saving is "the GBC's guru franchise business." As we have seen, repeatedly, people, even children, are expendable.

Another example. Jayapataka and Ramesvara were once ordered, by GBC mandate, to have their followers "check to see if they were chanting their regulated rounds." However, since the rule is that you can "deceive your followers," how will you get an accurate report from the followers?

Worse, why would "Jesus" even need to have one of his followers "check up on his devotional activities?" What does this say about the Gaudiya Matha and GBC's respect for the position of the Lord's pure devotee? To these thinkers, the pure devotee is like some foolish teenage boy, as soon as his parents are not watching him, he's reading his father's "Playboy" pornographic magazines? The follower has to oversee the master?

Another example. Ravindra Swarupa dasa (a GBC guru) drinks "near beer". No bona fide guru would ever drink this, but we are, once again, advised by the GBC to "wait and see." What are we waiting for? A six pack of regular beer a day? Or a bottle of Vodka everyday? Why do we have to 'wait and see" while "Jesus" goes progressively downhill? Would Jesus really become degraded anyway? No, of course not. Then why are we cheating others that a person of the stature of Jesus would? Because "deceive the followers," and insult persons like Jesus is the rule.

Another example. Hridayananda Swami has been caught repeatedly talking in private "in an overly familiar way with women." Many protests were made to the GBC. People even resigned from his zone in protest of his forbidden and illicit behavior. He was even caught being massaged by a woman. Meanwhile, he has been living in Beverly Hills, driving a Cadillac, and giving "private tutoring" to shapely young females classmates from his coed college.

But the GBC still thinks he is just as good as Jesus! Unfortunately, neither Sridhara Maharaja nor the GBC ever tell us how long we should "wait and see" until we actually declare that the bogus Jesus is really "in the grave"?

There are numerous other examples of how this mentality works, the worse being the GBC's "waiting and seeing" while over one thousand children were systematically molested in ISKCON. To cover for their horrific deeds, GBC authorities now simply repeat Sridhara Maharaja's idea: "It was the follower's (victim's) bad karma to get such a bad guru." Yes, when you accepted counterfeit money from a thief, "you just wanted to be cheated" they say. Very nice logic. No one, it seems, is responsible for these crimes, not even the architects of these ideas.

78.06 PARTY POLITICS. Therefore Srila Prabhupada says the following about Sridhara Maharaja's assistant in the 1930s Gaudiya Matha debacle: "Yes, our Godbrother Professor Sannyal, he was a very nice man. He was doing nicely as long as our [Gaudiya Matha] spiritual master was present. But just after his [the spiritual master's] departure, he became a PARTY man, and he created havoc. But our Guru Maharaja saved him, he died very shortly after beginning these [appointed successor guru] activities.

"There is this possibility. Because, in our mission, my spiritual master never designated anybody as the [guru] acharya. He left the advice that you should work together combinedly, and who is the [next guru] acharya, he will come out. But this man wanted to post one of his 'pet fellows' to the [guru] acharya post, and the result was that the whole missionary activities were disturbed. He [and Sridhara Maharaja] DID NOT FOLLOW the instructions, and there was HAVOC. That havoc is possible." (Lecture, 19 April 67)

In India, Srila Prabhupada commented that Professor Sannyal had "become a politician," (this would make the GBC "supreme politicians" because they follow Professor Sannyal's ideas knowing they are forbidden). Srila Prabhupada warned, "he died very mysteriously, actually Krishna killed him, Krishna saved him from committing further offense." (1971)

The GBC, knowing full well of the above history, still tries to glamorize its appointment dogma as divinely inspired. But according to Prabhupada, Krishna would rather see such persons die. Of course, one has to be sufficiently pious to be killed by Krishna. Others will go on living and committing more and more offense.

AVOID THEM ALL. "So I have issued orders that ALL of my disciples should avoid ALL of my Godbrothers. They should not have ANY dealings with them or even correspondence, nor should they give them any of my books or should they purchase any of their books, neither should you VISIT ANY of their temples. Please AVOID them." (SPL 9 November)

SRIDHARA MAHARAJA CLARIFICATION. Regarding Sridhara Maharaja Srila Prabhupada says, "Actually, amongst my Godbrothers, NO ONE IS QUALIFIED to be acharya (guru). So it is better NOT to mix with my Godbrothers very intimately because instead of inspiring our students, they may sometimes POLLUTE them.

... "We shall be very careful about them and not mix with them. This is my instruction to you all. They cannot help us in our movement, but they are very competent to harm OUR NATURAL PROGRESS. So we must be very careful not to mix with them.

"So SRIDHARA MAHARAJA and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acharya (guru) and later it proved to be a failure. The result is that now everyone is claiming to be acharya (guru) even though they may be kanistha adhikari (neophyte) with no ability to preach. In some camps, the guru (acharya) is being changed three times a year. Therefore we may not commit the same MISTAKE in our ISKCON camp." (SPL Rupanuga 28 April 1974) NOTE: Govinda Maharaja, Sridhara Maharaja's current "appointed successor" says, "I have no doubt that Srila Swami Maharaja [Srila Prabhupada] wanted to give the position of Acharyaship to Srila Guru Maharaja [Sridhara Maharaja]." (Divine Guidance p. 83)

Statements such as the above from Srila Prabhupada totally disagree with all of the Gaudiya Matha's erroneous ideas. Srila Prabhupada clearly said that NO ONE, which would definitely include Sridhara Maharaja, was qualified to be acharya.

Wile the GBC and Gaudiya Matha opine that demons can populate the parampara, Srila Prabhupada never agreed with this idea: "The answer to your istagosthi question is as follows: Unless one is a resident of Krishnaloka, one CANNOT be a spiritual master, and if he does become so, [as Sridhara Maharaja promoted in the Gaudiya Matha] then he will simply create a disturbance. ...actually a bona fide spiritual master is NEVER A CONDITIONED SOUL. ...A spiritual master MUST be liberated." (SPL Mukunda 6/10/69)

pada@neteze.com

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!