Bhaktisiddhanta & Theology

[Guest guest]

>>> Madhava:<<<I would like to ask how many Western followers of any Baba or

Gosvami do you know, what to speak of the Babas and Gosvamis themselves. How

many?>>MDd: Without mentioning any names, I know more than a few,

including the majority who are the most vocal in the West; I've also met

several of them in India. I've no inherent prejudice against anyone, but aside

from Srila Prabhupada's weighty and explicitly stated opinions casting doubt on

them, these babajis also look dubious because they are so often associated with

nonsense "disciples" who prove themselves quite capable of duracara; as you

should know by now, my objection is mainly with those who reject their bonafide

guru, for they thus give us every reason to believe that they don't take their

babajis any more seriously than they took their previous guru, Srila

Prabhupada. This is the character that is disturbingly prominent in these

people, as I've mentioned many, many times now. <<<

If you don't feel inclined to present any names in a public forum, perhaps you

may drop me a private letter mentioning the names of those people you are

acquainted with, and on whose character you base your views upon. That would

help me appreciate the views you are presenting.

 

As for the guru looking dubious because of his being associated with nonsense

disciples, it is needless to mention that in each flock there are black sheep

in the crowd, and they are often the ones to make the loudest baa. If we were

to judge Prabhupada on the basis of what his disciples accomplished after his

departure, including quite a few of the elite eleven, he wouldn't score too

high either. Also, if we were to judge Bhaktisiddhanta on the basis of how

Prabhupada saw the majority of his disciples, Prabhupada's godbrothers,

Bhaktisiddhanta wouldn't score very high either.

 

 

>>> MDd: It's better if we encourage rather than criticize. Please try to avoid

personal attacks on your previous acaryas too. <<<

 

Character assassination is a form of Vaishnava-ninda. I keep the discussions my

level best strictly doctrinal without commenting on the character or bodily

features of anyone. As we aspire to clarify matters of doctrine, only an

analysis of doctrine can prove to be productive. As far as I am concerned,

acara can be discussed as far as general patterns of conduct go. It is injust,

though, to question someone's character simply on the grounds of his

disagreeing with one's position. ("He must be envious because he doesn't

agree.")

 

 

Regards,

 

Madhava