More comments from Bhakta Mark

[Guest guest]

> > are these devotees such as Ramakanta, and Sankarsana, really expect us

> > to believe that they fit this above description?

>

> Srila Prabhupada's instruction is independent of what happened afterwards

> or what his disciples did afterwards. The argument "Srila Prabhupada

> introduced the permanent ritvik system because some years later some of

> his disciples left ISKCON" is silly.

 

That's right. It's completely silly.

 

Another point, my mind keeps coming back to, is the magazine put out by the

ritvikvadis called Back To Prabhupada. Now, during Mahaprabhu's time

Narahari Sarkara wrote a book (I forget its title) in which he advises

disciples what to do and how to react when their guru deviates or falls

down. That means that even during the time of Lord Chaitanya gurus were

falling down. Also in the Gaudiya-Math many gurus and sannyasis have fallen

down. But has it happened anywhere in the world of Vaishnava history that

anyone has produced a magazine in which all these scandals and fall-downs

have been systematically listed? I have never heard of it. The disciples of

Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur broke up in factions and became the most

bitter of enemies. Still, to my knowledge, they never published scandalous

magazines about each-other.

 

Even after being repeatedly attacked and ridiculed by ritvikvadis the GBC

never retaliated. They could easily have issued a magazine in which all the

faults of the ritviks were systematically listed. They could easily have

pointed out how the prominent ritviks like Nityananda, KK. Desai, Puranjana,

Adridharana and Madhupandit are all either common criminals, or money

grubbing thieves and swindlers, or demented, or like in the case of K.Kant a

lawyer and ideologist of the ritviks.

 

These are the people who claim to be the true followers of Prabhupada, yet

they behave in ways completely contrary to Vaishnava behavior.