Puranjana's new email
pada@neteze.com
Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!
1) NEWSBITES
2) QUESTIONS TO THE GAUDIYA MATHA UPDATE
3) ABOUT BHAKTIVEDANTA MANOR Ganapati & Prabhupadanugas
Dear folks,
PAMHO. AGTSP.
[PADA is an online newsletter
going out to over 1,000 devotees and Hindu's. Please let us know
if you have
comments, or if you are not interested. We try our best to keep
our mailing list in order. Jai Srila Prabhupada!]
Please
let us know if you wish to add other addresses or cancell your
subsrciption.
PADA also may or may
not endorse all of the statements found in our featured letters.
1) NEWSBITES
* More details of the GBC's court spokesman's molestation activities have
been reported. For more information contact: adri@cwcom.net.
* Vipramukhya apologized for making up stories about Ambarisha, a devotee
who committed suicide, aparently, because he was upset with Vipramukhya's
plot against him. If Vipramukhya has been going to such lengths to cover-up
that suicide, what really is going on here?
* Mahavegavati dd sent pada her entire set of letters addressed to
"Bhaktitirtha maharaja." Whew! His reply? She is a crack-pot, a crazy.
That
is how the KGB in Russia would also respond to critics, "they are are all
crazy." And that is why the GBC has become known as the K-GBC. This type
of
reply is typical of authoritarian regimes. Let us see a detailed, point for
point reply to her issues and questions?
* ISKCON REVIVAL MOVEMENT's new address is: 93 St. Mark's Place, New York,
10009-5141 212-979-0381 (or 979-1053).
* The BP Puri Maharaja video is available for $19.95 at 1-800-310-video.
Apparently, he says that Srila Prabhupada told him he had wanted a GBC/
ritvik system to continue his mission after his departure. According to
Naranarayana Visvakarma dasa, who viewed this video, BP Puri also says that
BV Narayana Maharaja was one of the ringleaders in the vicious harassment
attack on Srila Prabhupada by his envious God brothers in 1971.
PADA would like to know what statements are made on this video on this
point and what the exact text says?
* Tara is not on the mailing list? An Alachua devotee replied that Tara's
comments are not too serious since she is not listed on the temple's phone
number address list. OK, since when does it matter if you are on the
official temple mailing list before you can assess some problems? If some
of her complaints are valid, they should be looked into. Jane Wallace said
that the GBC was making children worship a pedophile in 1986, and she is a
CBS news-lady and not part of any temple. Constructive views should be
taken from wherever they come?
=====================
QUESTIONS TO THE GAUDIYA MATHA UPDATE
[FALLEN GURU?] THE ISKCON JOURNAL CONTINUES
(p.21): Narayana Maharaja: "After the demise of any prominent acharya,
the
link of guru parampara should be continued. But it may be there is danger
of (the link) becoming patita, fallen. Then for a certain period we can
watch, and pray to God that He may give us a guru."
[PADA COMMENT: This is of course the same idea of Sridhara Maharaja, "the
acharya link must be continued after the demise of the acharya, even with
persons who are not qualified and who are in danger of falling" (i.e. they
have anarthas). And moreover, Narayana Maharaja's so-called links, he
admits, might be patita and not patita pavana. Of course some of the people
he has formerly named as his "parampara acharyas," like Madhava Maharaja,
are envious of the actual acharya. So NM has validated "fallen links as
acharyas," if not people Srila Prabhupada calls envious, kanishtas and
sudras. And he has validated such systems in both the post-1930s and
post-1970s. Of course our Srila Prabhupada simply called all of these
Gaudiya Matha fallen acharya ideas "unauthorized cheating."
The Prabhupadanugas, and indeed followers of bona fide acharyas from time
immemorial, know that the their parampara guru is eternal and he is never
in any "danger" of falling and failure. And they see these "patita
links"
ideas as an insult to the bona fide acharyas, which Srila Prabhupada says
is: --gurusuh narah matih --narakah sah. Hellish.
It only appears that the parampara is patita (fallen) when cheaters like
the Gaudiya Matha and GBC false acharyas pose as its members. Of interest,
it seems that our many years of our posing these questions to NM has
finally worked. We kept asking him how is the parampara in danger of
failure, how is the parampara patita, and so on, and he seems to have
understood that he was in error with his above 1990 idea.
NM has subesquently told people he now agrees that his above comment is
incorrect, rather the Prabhupadanugas view is correct: i.e. the parampara
is not in danger of failure nor is it ever patita. That is the correct
view. He seems to be no longer endorsing his 1986-1993 views, that the GBC
are giving diksha, re-diksha and so on, because he now agrees with us: that
they are not and were not gurus, as he says in his more recent comment
below. And people keep saying pada is having no effect? Of course, we also
changed his mind on the poison issue as well. We commend the maharaja for
finally joining us on these important points.
He now says what Srila Prabhupada says, and he has apparently jettisoned
his former statements that matched Sridhara's. He now says that the actual
guru does not ever fall down and become paitita. This is what Srila
Prabhupada has said all along. (NM said recently) "We may think that, 'Oh,
all gurus are going to fall down. They are falling down, falling down.'
Actually they were not guru, those who are falling down."
Just see how he has changed from his falling down guru idea, GBC guru (?)
initiation and reinitiation idea, etc. from 1990? Good progress! He has
changed his former "the parampara links are in danger (?) of being patita
(?)" idea and instead he now repeats Srila Prabhupada's idea. It appears
that his former idea, that the GBC are giving initiation and re-initiation,
has been exposed by us so much so that he now agrees that we are correct.
Anyway, we asked him these questions in 1997 when he was still saying the
parampara links are in danger of being patita...]
Question: How can we say that either: any guru link, or the parampara
itself, is or can be, in danger of falling into illusion when, according to
hundreds of citations from Srila Prabhupada, he did not recognize that the
parampara system [or any individual members of the parampara] were "in
danger" of becoming "patita" or fallen?
Instead, doesn't Srila Prabhupada commonly gave us quotes such as this:
[NEVER DEVIATES] "The bona fide spiritual master never deviates at all
from
the instructions of the Supreme Lord." (BG 4.42. Srila Prabhupada's purport).
[ALWAYS TRANSCENDENTAL]. Srila Prabhupada says: "The spiritual master
is
ALWAYS considered either one of the confidential associates of Radharani or
a manifested representative of Srila Nityananda prabhu." [Cc Adi 1.46]
Question: The GBC itself says that parampara acharyas, who they say are to
be viewed and worshipped as full-fledged spiritual masters [Srimate
Radharani's associates] are, were, or might become, "patita" or be
"in
danger" of material illusion. How can we agree that they are correct?
Question: "Nityananda" means eternal bliss, how can his direct
representative be the subject of mundane attraction? Similarly, the acharya
is to be considered as the external representation of the Supersoul.
Question: Can we say that the direct manifestation of Supersoul is subject
to being fallen [patita]? Would not Srila Prabhupada consistently say: the
bona fide acharya [who is an eternal associate or servant of Radharani] is
not in "danger" of falling into illusion, rather it is the neophyte
[kanistha] devotee who--by imitation of the uttama--is the person who is
"in danger of falling into illusion?"
[HE'S A RASCAL] Srila Prabhupada: "So if the kanistha adhikary thinks
that
'I have become uttama adhikary,' then he's a rascal. He's a rascal. If he
wants to imitate the uttama adhikary, then he's a rascal." [Morning walk,
4
Feb. 1976]. Therefore, are not the "fallen guru parties" of both the
Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON deviated from the parampara and not part of the
actual parampara?
[IMITATION: DANGEROUS] Question: Doesn't Srila Prabhupada therefore say
that the "dangerous" situation occurs when there is deviation and
imitation? "We shall try to follow the footsteps of the big devotees, we
cannot [imitate] we shall try to follow.
Don't try to imitate, that is very DANGEROUS." [Lecture 25 Feb. 1977]
[THEN YOU'LL FALL] He also says: "But you cannot imitate them [the
acharyas]. Then you'll fall down." [Lecture, 1 May 1969] If we say the
acharya is pure but may also become impure, this also sends a very mixed
and confused message? We are then preaching to the mass of people: 1) seek
"safe and eternal shelter" [acharyopasana] in the guru, simultaneously,
we
are saying 2) that this alleged shelter may temporary, in illusion, and
might be a source of extreme danger? Is this what Srila Prabhupada preached?
Question: This idea: "the guru or the parampara is in danger of falling"
was not preached by Srila Prabhupada, rather he said that the real bona
fide guru does not fall down, instead: only the false guru, those who have
no real authority (as he says in the Nectar of Devotion p.117), they are
the "gurus" who are in danger of falling down. Is the GBC also not
making a
contradiction: to say that Srila Prabhupada had selected or ordered some
gurus, simultaneously, that they fell down?
Question: Therefore, why doesn't the above statement from "ISKCON Journal"
specify that the persons who are in "danger of falling" [from imitation]
are the neophytes, or especially those who are unauthorizedly and falsely
posing as an acharya, and not the real acharya proper? This is very
confusing.
[RE: "GURU DANGERS" and the NAVADVIP ADVISOR] Question: Isn't the
idea that
the acharya or the parampara is always in "danger" of falling a typical
statement from the Navadvip advisor? He says: "The [pure devotee guru?]
acharya faces two dangers. Partiality and deviation. ...The position of an
acharya is dangerous. It is full of temptations. ...He [the 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." ("Sri Guru and His Grace").
[RE: ADVOCATING WRONG SYSTEM] Question: Also, suppose that Krishna has
already given us His guru through Srila Prabhupada and His books and
instructions? If we say that Krishna has yet to send another guru, after he
has already provided Srila Prabhupada through His ritvik system, then
aren't we saying that Krishna is not acting according to OUR idea?
[MAD (elephant offense) GURU DISEASE?] Question: Is it not the reason Srila
Prabhupada wanted us to avoid the Gaudiya Matha. Because its members often
stated that the acharya or the parampara may become [dangerously] mad with
authority, women, followers and money? Srila Prabhupada never agreed with
these ideas: that the guru is a potential dangerous materialistic madman
who is in danger of falling prey to these illusions. Rather, Srila
Prabhupada said that the guru is a madman--for Krishna--not for material
life, and that mixing this mahamaya and yogamaya [the way that the Gaudiya
Matha has done] is sahajiya or mayavada.
[FAILURE NOT POSSIBLE] Question: Didn't Srila Prabhupada also state that it
is not possible for the acharya to fall into illusion: "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, Srila Prabhupada's purport)
[GURU RELIABILITY?] THE ISKCON JOURNAL continues: Ravindra Swarupa: By
"watch" you mean that no one takes diksha?
Narayana Maharaja: "Until we have full faith in the guru how can we be
initiated by him? And in the case of a fallen guru--when one has taken
diksha from a guru who falls down, and again he takes from a Bhavananda or
someone, and again he falls. In that case we should watch and see-see that
the guru is reliable. Guru should be reliable."
Question: So this is the obvious question: "Why has the post 1936 Gaudiya
Matha and the post 1977 ISKCON leaders openly promoted the unreliable
[kanistha] neophytes [or worse] as gurus in the first place?" Who
authorized them to do this? How could a fallen person have given diksha,
and how could another person with anarthas or who is on the verge of
falling give (re) diksha? And didn't Srila Prabhupada say that the Gaudiya
Matha in general had deviated by promoting exactly this: "unreliable
persons as guru" in the first place?
Wasn't the actual order from the bona fide acharya, namely Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, for his movement after 1936, to continue
to worship the fully reliable, namely: Srila Saraswati Thakura himself, by
a GBC Brahmana board [i.e. ritvik board] system, and not make a "living
guru" concoction? Srila Prabhupada told us that Srila Saraswati Thakura
Prabhupada had ordered this GBC [or brahmanical managerial board--i.e. the
ritvik system] and not a "living guru" system? Isn't this correct?
Why was
the acharya's order for this system never recommended or re-instituted?
Question: If someone is "unreliable," that means he has unwanted
material
leanings [anarthas], therefore how can he be a guru? Are we not then mixing
up pure transcendence with the neophyte and contaminated level? If we are
saying that any guru may be mixed up with unwanted anarthas, and therefore
any guru may be unreliable: therefore the parampara proper is or may be unreliable?
Question: If the guru is as good as Krishna [acaryam mam vijnaniyam] and we
say he is, or might be, unreliable, then doesn't this mean that Krishna is,
or might also be, unreliable? Srila Prabhupada never preached about "fallen
gurus" like this.
Question: How could Bhavananda have been a guru EVER since it is well known
that he engaged in homosexual activities both before and even AFTER being
declared a Mahabhagavat acharya of ISKCON by the GBC?
Question: How can the other GBC's, those who knowingly made the above false
declarations of Mahabhagavata guruship regarding Bhavananda ---be gurus either?
First of all, Srila Prabhupada never said that the bona fide guru, one who
is fully qualitatively as good as God [shaksad hari tvena] may be
unreliable, he never says this, rather, he said the Mahabhagavat guru does
not fall down, he's as good as God, he's as 'reliable' as Krishna, so how
can we say he's maybe simultaneously unreliable?
Question: Therefore when did Srila Prabhupada say we could freely mix the
unreliable and contaminated soul [the kanistha] or less than kanisthas [the
homosexuals] by saying that they are, were, or could have been actual
diksha gurus in the first place?
Question: And if the contaminated souls could not have given initiation
[diksha] in the first place, how can we use the word "re-initiate"?
For
example, our Vaishnava Gaudiya Matha member, "H.H. BV Puri Maharaja,"
he
said that these GBC gurus have no [diskha] bija to give. So, if they have
no bija to give, how could they have given a diksha bija? We would say,
they could not have. Wouldn't you agree?
Question: Another example, the GBC [even recently] said that Bhavananda was
one of the gurus in our parampara, who had disciples, and they
simultaneously state that Srila Prabhupada was ALSO a guru in the parampara
who had disciples? In sum, should we ever allow others to mix the
descriptions of the pure and the odious or contaminated personalities freely?
So how could Bhavananda have "been a guru in the parampara"? Srila
Prabhupada would say that folks like Bhavananda: are not gurus; were not
gurus; and could not have been gurus. Thus: no initiation took place. Isn't
this "re-initiation" idea therefore endorsing and enforcing the idea
that
Bhavananda and others are, or were, or could have been, diksha gurus?
Moreover, there is not one single example contained in Srila Prabhupada's
list of bona fide acharyas, of any of them being unreliable and falling
down. The idea that the acharya is, or would, or could, fall down is
something Srila Prabhupada rather condemned, and he stated that this false
idea was the basic defect of some of the members of Gaudiya Matha. "Another
man comes to be guru, then another and another [to be guru]" Srila
Prabhupada said very sardonically of the Gaudiya Matha.
===================
3) ABOUT BHAKTIVEDANTA MANOR Ganapati & Prabhupadanugas
Haribol dear Puranjana Prabhu, paoho, agt Srila Prabhupada!
This unfortunate suicide of Ambarish das from B. Manor could come as the
result of him taking the sack-order of Vipramukhya-demon as "Krishna's
displeasure with Ambarish". This is what has happened many times in Iskcon,
some bogus "authority" throws non-complying sincere devotees out,
and they
take it as - Krishna's displeasure with themselves. Lacking the
informations about the real nature and crimes of gbc/their bogus "gurus",
these poor people serve the gangsters for years on end, and then when these
gangsters finally spit in their face, or devotees figure out who their
"gurus" really are (like Lokanatha "swami" - a child molester),
they can't
take it, so they lose their faith, some get back to low karmi-lifestyle, or
even sometimes, out of sheer disappointment - they kill themselves and
become - ghosts.
The truth is that no attempting devotees will actually make any advancement
at all by drinking poisonous feet-wash water and eating deadly "maha-maha"
from their bogus "gurus" such as Lokanatha. That's why Srila Prabhupada's
personality, message and orders remain the secret for naive worshippers of
bogus iskcon/gaudiya matha "gurus".
However, serious police investigation should be immediately started as to
find the actual reasons for Ambarish comitting such a desperate act like
suicide. We do believe that he might have expressed some Prabhupadanuga
feelings (ie: desire to worship only Srila Prabhupada), and that he may
have rejected bogus iskcon guru-fraud, which is the fastest way to be
called ill names (like Vipramukhya did with Ambarish) and thrown out of
Iskcon, as it exactly happened in Ambarisha's case. So, these threads
should be carefully traced out by local police, and connection to Srila
Prabhupada's poisoning and desperate "alibies" of His murderers also
checked out regarding the Manor/UK iskcon management.
Hindu congregation should be asked to cooperate and testify how much hussle
they have to stand daily by "iskcon-collectors" out there. Police
investigators should question Vipramukhya (before he runs back to Canada)
what he, as foreign citizen, does in UK, what are his REAL motivations for
'enforced managing' there, and what are his personal
connections to ban of many UK devotees, including scandalous deaths of
Jayatirtha and Ambarisha. Police certainly needs to figure out why UK
devotees need a foreigner with dirty slate like Vipramukhya to run
multi-million Hindu-extortion-fund operation, and why the communication
laws and freedom of public-speech are undoubtedly breached with
vipramukhya's moderated Chakra-net, and all that on the teritory of United
Kingdom, where he's just a - ordinary foreigner.
Police must see why Vipramukhya is allowed, and by whom is allowed, to
forcefully disempower, ban and throw out local, UK devotees from management
they should take care of, and how the foreigner suspected for the death
of Jayatirtha can operate all these suspicious activities on the teritory of
UK,
for years on end, when his activities are potentially - in direct opposition
of UK
government/ tax/ foreign-office laws?
Don't forget checking out another suspicious foreigner named Shivarama
"swami". Some devotees would like to know whether stabbing of
George
Harrison has something to do with his awakening to rude Iskcon reality and
his conscious 'disobedience' and resistance to bogus gbc Iskcon regime'
(UK) managers? There are so many "iskcon" fanatics out there, who
would
easily kill anyone who questions the purity of their (child molesters and
homosexual weirdo) "gurus".
Also, Manor should not carry the name of "Bhaktivedanta" any longer,
since
their activities are not the same Srila Prabhupada approved and established
the Manor for. George Harrison has all rights to retract his gift, because
the goals are diverted, original purpose is misused for nefarious
activities, and bad publicity for his name created, all under the false
banner of 'religiousness'. Better have no temples at all than
scandal-generating "temples". At least, until
main "goo-roo" players are
locked into life-sentence prisons, or executed on the electric chairs.
ys, Ganapati & Prabhupadanugas
===========================
SITES TO CHECK OUT:
*
http://mitglied.lycos.de/pada (Pada's Newsletter Archive)
*
http://www.krishna.org/ (S.P.
REAL AUDIO download)
* http://members.xoom.com/manvantar/index.htm (Sulochana's Homepage)
* http://www.vedabase.com/ (Vedabase)
* http://tsa.ppp.ripco.net/das/articles.htm (DAS)
* http://tsa.ppp.ripco.net/padaweb/puranjan.html (Puranjana's Site)
* POISON TAPE audio and pada newsletters:
* http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/3933
* POISON TRANSCRIPT
* http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/3933/19990519.htm
* http://www.winink.com/tkg/ (Tamal Krishna) NEW:
* http://mitglied.lycos.de/gbc (The GBC)
* gbc_108@hotmail.com (e-mail)
* http://pages.infinit.net/pragosh/home.html (FRENCH)
* http://www.unlimited-resources.com/anubhavananda.html
* http://www.irg.zetnet.co.uk/ (IRG)
* http://members.aol.com/gauridas (Gauridasa Pandita Dasa)
* http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/5708/ (SPANISH)
* http://www.com.org/hb/ptd/cyber_gurukula.htm) (Cyber
gurukula)
* http://www.islandnet.com/krsna/ (Rocana's site)
* http://www.islandnet.com/krsna/vada/poison/poison.htm (Poison issue)
* Vipramukhya and Jayadvaita's "illicit sex guru" rationalizations
* http://www.artnet.net/~yasoda/index.htm [appointment tape fraud]
* http://www.gaura-nitai.net Gaura-Nitais Homepage Deutsch
* http://www.vnn.org/ (VNN news)
* ISKCON WOMEN-PRABHUPADA'S
TIME (by Jyotirmayi Devi Dasi)
* Polygamy
In The Hare Krishna Movement (Pritha's Page)