Answer to Allegations Made Against H.H. Narayana Maharaja

[Guest guest]

On 5 Oct 1999, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

> > So the devotees did it and NM had to give them shelter. Why should he be

blamed for that?>>

>

> Isn't that a convenient explanation. Poor gurus; damned if they do and

damned if they don't.

 

It is not a "convenient" explanation; the unfortunate situation we find

ourselves in is an inevitable result from GBC policies. If we playback the

course of events, it was the GBC which has created the "crisis" through its

own misjudgment. By following GBC resolutions, ISKCON gurus become implicated,

much the same as anyone who participated in the GBC Zonal Acarya system also

propounded misunderstanding and offense -- not only the the zonal acaryas

themselves, but TPs and senior devotees (myself included).

 

The situation today where Narayan Maharaja is being systemtically defamed is

analogous the assembly of the Kauravas when Droupadi was being violated: none

of the great stalwarts present there objected to this reproachable act. Even

Bhismadeva, didn't say anything. Thus by siding with the Kurus, Bhismadeva was

implicated in the act and lost his "good-standing" with Lord Krsna, even

though he was a pure devotee. Because of his compromised position in siding

with irreligion, Krsna ordered Bhismadeva to be killed.

 

In the case of Bhisma, it was "lila*. I would be very cautious however, about

calling whatever mistakes the GBC perpetrates as *lila*. Rather it

is *tragic*. Not that we should "kill" anyone, but the point of the analogy

should be clear: we must speak out against the defamation of the Lord and His

devotees.

 

Back to the situation we have at hand, I am informed many senior devotees do

not agree with the present GBC's policies towards Narayan Marahaja. But

because they do not object, they must become implicated.

 

I was there in NY in 1974 when Prabhupada instructed us that the senior

devotees should know better and not tolerate nonsense from the GBC when they

deviate. At that time, I know did my best to "non-cooperate" with the GBC's

nonsense and still continue with my service.

 

The GBC is not infallible -- individually or collectively. At one point,

Prabhupada even disbanded the entire GBC when they got out of hand. The Zonal

Acarya phenomenon happened as soon as Prabhupada disappeared and continued for

10 years, courtesy of GBC resolutions. So this would not the first or even

second time the GBC has committed grand faux-pas's on a scale that requires

extensive correction if not reformation, as transpired in 1987.

 

Prabhupada states in Bg 4.34 that "blind following is condemned." We have to

follow with out eyes open. sastra caksusa. No one is exempt from following

sastra, GBC, guru or whomever. Othwerwise, we lose our "good-standing" in

devotional service, GBC resolutions nothwithstanding.

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

On 05 Oct 1999, Radha-Krishna das wrote:

 

 

>

> A Srila Prabhupada disciple here in Mexico City who had stopped chanting

his Gayatri approached HH Bhakti Pramode Puri Maharaja to hear the Gayatri

Mantra and start again chanting it regularly. Puri Maharaja agreed to do it

and this encouraged greatly our godbrother in his practice.

>

 

 

While it is enlivening to hear about a devotees recommiting themselves to

Krsna consciousness, I have to wonder, cynic that I am, why this devotee had

to be, practically, reinitiated to simply chant his gayatri mantra? Seems to

me one of the basic traditions of recieving the gayatri mantra is to hear it

from your spiritual master. I assume this devotee originally heard the gayatri

mantra from Srila Prabhupada, being he has been presented as a Prabhupada

disciple.

 

As far as I'm concerned, whatever proves to be an inspiration to practice

Krsna consciousness is beneficial. But these sort of dealings seem curious to

me on various levels.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

On 5 Oct 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

> While it is enlivening to hear about a devotees recommiting themselves to

Krsna consciousness, I have to wonder, cynic that I am, why this devotee had

to be, practically, reinitiated to simply chant his gayatri mantra? Seems to

me one of the basic traditions of recieving the gayatri mantra is to hear it

from your spiritual master. I assume this devotee originally heard the gayatri

mantra from Srila Prabhupada, being he has been presented as a Prabhupada

disciple.

 

The "tradition" in the Gaudiya Matha, established by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta

Sarasvati, is that when a devotee falls down from the brahminical platform, he

must have his gayatri *reinstated* not only by mantra but by fire yajna.

 

Prabhupada's giving of gayatri via tape recorder or rtvik was extraordinary,

not to be imitated. Additionally, it is essential that the mantra be given

with some explanation, sambandha-jnana, otherwise, the mantra will not be so

effective. What Prabhupada did in "Big ISKCON" days was due only to time,

place and circumstances. It was highly unusual and an emergency siutation.

 

After so many years, many devotees are feeling disconnected for lack of proper

advanced *siksa*. Approaching a qualified *siksa-guru* for instruction to

further one's progress is not only bona fide, but it is required.

 

chadiya vaisnava seva nistara payeche keba (Narottama dasa Thakura)

 

We cannot advance progressively without the guidance of more advanced

Vaisnavas. In CC, Caitanya Mahaprabhu instructed the devotees from Kulinagrama

that their service is to chant harninam and serve Vaisnavas. The Lord

subsequently described who is a Vaisnava -- 3rd class, 2nd class, and 1st

class. In his purport to those verses, Srila Prabhupada emphatically states

that a 3rd -- and even the 2nd class -- devotee *require* to take instruction

from the 1st class Vaisnava. Same instruction is given SB 1.2.12 & 1.1.18

purports.

 

Our need for pertinent instruction doesn't stop with Prabhupada's

disappearance. Scriptural knowledge alone is not enough; one must associate

with devotees to practically learn the transcendental science. All the

scriptures exclaim that it is the sign of the greatest fortune to associate

with a highly advanced Vaisnava.

 

Consequently, if a guru is a 2nd class (or lower), then how can he discourage

or deny his disciples the opportunity to associate with a more advanced

Vaisnava simply for ecclesiastical reasons (ie, GBC resolutions), no less? It

is against the "basic" principles of devotional service and the examples from

our previous acaryas.

> As far as I'm concerned, whatever proves to be an inspiration to practice

Krsna consciousness is beneficial. But these sort of dealings seem curious to

me on various levels.

 

Yes, we have to understand KC as it is from Prabhupada's BOOKS. Otherwise

there are so many contemporary dogmas and misunderstandings to bewilder us.

 

Throughout all of his books, Prabhupada stresses the need to find realized

souls for spiritual direction. We cannot understand Krsna consciousness

without higher guidance from more advanced devotees.

 

We should choose our leaders wisely.

 

Dasnanudasa,

 

Srila dasa