Sentimentalism vs Sadhu's knife

[Guest guest]

>

> The facts should be known that Harikesa Maharaja was responsible for

> offending exalted souls like Srila BR Sridhara Maharaja and Narayan

> Maharaja as well as inducing his disciples to do likewise. I had personal

> experience of this while in HKS zone. At least in part, HKS fell down by

> the reaction of sadhu-ninda from his own disciples against Gaudiya saints.

>

How do you know this? I have been in his zone last 16 years and I didn't

have such an experience.

 

 

Not to single HKS out, since he was not as bad as some of the others who

> fell. There has also existed a general mood of bad-mouthing the Gaudiya

> Matha which has hung over ISKCON like a cloud of collective ignorance

> since Prabhupada's time.

>

> However, particular persons were responsible for promoting this ignorance,

> and many of them have unfortunately reaped the results of their offenses,

> as must happen to us all. It is not possible to fall away from devotional

> service in such a dramatic way as HKS, Bhagavan, Ramesvara, etc did except

> due to accumulated offenses at the feet of Vaisnavas -- including senior

> members of the Gaudiya Math as well as their own godbrothers and

> disciples.

>

In which way did HKS fall soooo dramaticaly from devotional service? I am

visiting him regularly and he is still chanting, talking about Krishna,

speaking Krishna consiuosness philosophy etc. I don't feel that he fell

dramatically from devotional service and he is still able to inspire me in

devotional service.

 

I don't understand how is it that you glorify so much Narayan Maharaj and at

the same time bad-mouth my spiritual master, specificaly if they happen to

speak almost the same thing, regarding ISKCON and the philosophy?

 

 

b> We should be clear about this and rectify ourselves.

>

> Aother point: A guru who needs to be "reformed" was never really a

> bonafide guru to begin with -- ie capable of delivering his disciples from

> illusion and dispelling their doubts? How can he? Because the disciples

> cannot truly have implicit faith in such a non-realized guru. Suc faith is

> not real.

>

Who gives you the right to defined if my spiritual master is bonafide or

not? It is my personal choice and I don't think that I have made a mistake.

Neither you nor the GBC made my guru to be my guru and neither you nor the

GBC has a right to decide that he CAN or CAN'T be my guru. It is my personal

relationship to my spiritual master which didn't start in this life time.

How is it that you have such a realization how qualified (or nonqualified)

is my spiritual master? What is YOUR qualification to make such an

evaluation?

What do you know about my spiritual masters relationship with Krishna? How

did you figure out that he isn't realized? How did you measure how much love

for Krishna Narayan Maharaj has and how much my spiritual master?

 

 

> Let's not become sentimental in the name of compassion.

>

> Sometimes, it's painful to cut out ignorance, and that is why a sadhu is

> known to speak in sharp words.

>

Giving a dog bad name and then hanging him is not exactly what sadhus are

supposed to do.

 

So far as sharp words, lets start here. As far as I am concerned dear Srila

Prabhu, you have in the last few weeks preached to us principles of

ANIMALISM and not the principles of VAISNAVISM.

 

I give you an example. Like when you have a streat dogs who are after

having sex with a bitch. They fight to get an enjoyment, and if one of them

gets wounded and becomes week, they finish him of. That's animalism.

In the same way in our ISKCON or any other so called spiritual institution

fight is going on for power and positions, because power is the subtle form

of sex life. If it happens that one of the leaders gets week, the rest of

the leaders finish him of. They make sure to informe everyone how bad he is,

how fallen he is, how dangereous he is, how never bona-fide he was. That's

ANIMALISM.

 

Now, the VAISNAVISM is trinad api sunicena taror avi sahisnuna.

Always give all respect to others and never expect any respect in return.

And if a person has a problem, you help. A humble person can learn from

anybody, from a tree, from a bee, from an ant.

But we can learn only from maha-bhagavata. Nobody else is qualified to teach

us anything.

 

 

Regarding the principles of ANIMALISM I would humble recomend to you to

read the book Animal farm from George Orwell. He is very nicely explaining

how this principles are working in an institution, regarding politics,

twisting the truth and exploiting the inocent and fullish. Unfortunatelly, I

had to admit to myself that this principles are nicely practiced not only in

the outside material world, but also in ISKCON, Gaudiya Math and some other

mats too.

 

Ys. Sraddha dd