another guru in trouble

[Guest guest]

On 18 Nov 1999, Bhagavata-purana das wrote:

 

> A short and heavy comment:

>

> Why a person who is himself a fallen sannyasi (Ramon Estrada = former

> Radha-krisna Swami) is so unkind with the ashrama problems of his

> Godbrother?

>

> Ys

> Bhagavata-Purana Dasa

 

 

Very curious, and then to use this alleged unfortunate situation to prop up a

philosophy that all Prabhupada's followers are unqualified.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

On 18 Nov 1999, Ramon Estrada wrote:

 

 

>

> 6. When I had "my problem" there were a lot of "unkind" remarks made. And

you know what? The people who made them were right.

>

> Your servant

> Radha Krsna dasa

> Mexico City

>

 

 

Certainly there is a time and place for unkind remarks, but simply accurately

directing unkind remarks does not quarentee philosphical infallibility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

On 18 Nov 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

 

> On 18 Nov 1999, Ramon Estrada wrote:

>

>

> >

> > 6. When I had "my problem" there were a lot of "unkind" remarks made. And

> you know what? The people who made them were right.

> >

> > Your servant

> > Radha Krsna dasa

> > Mexico City

> >

>

>

> Certainly there is a time and place for unkind remarks, but simply

accurately

> directing unkind remarks does not quarentee philosphical infallibility.

>

 

And, out of curiosity, what has happened to those who gave the unkind remarks?

Are you returning the favour? A second wrong? Do you have no idea how to

present "problems" without such venum?

 

And, out of curiosity again, you can say just "problems" about yourself, but

this Swami gets a whole diatribe, with facts and figures.

 

Sounds like a "problem".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

In text 2791411 from COM Bhagavata-purana Dasa wrote:

 

> You are not right. I know Bhakti-Abhay Charan prabhu since 1984 and he is

> not the kind of person you depicts. You have taken the worse possible

view.

> You advocate for Homer Simpson?s philosophy: "When you see neighbour

> Flanders falling on earth, kick him in the face to your complete pleasure

".

 

I didn't even remember who Homer Simpson is. Only a quick search in the

internet reminded me that he is a cartoon character!!!

 

I think that the whole problem lies in not understanding the role of the

media in society to preserve the system of checks and balances. The

Clinton-Lewinski case shows that seemingly unpalatable information actually

helps keep in check those in power who otherwise can control and manipulate

it at their leisure. ISKCON should be more like that. It is actually

becoming more like that due to internal and external pressure. This is

highly welcome.

 

YS RK Mex

[Guest guest]

In text 2791411 from COM Bhagavata-purana Dasa wrote:

 

> You are not right. I know Bhakti-Abhay Charan prabhu since 1984 and he is

> not the kind of person you depicts. You have taken the worse possible

view.

> You advocate for Homer Simpson?s philosophy: "When you see neighbour

> Flanders falling on earth, kick him in the face to your complete pleasure

".

 

I didn't even remember who Homer Simpson was. Only a quick search in the

internet reminded me that he is a cartoon character!!!

 

I think that the whole problem lies in not understanding the role of the

media in society to preserve the system of checks and balances. The

Clinton-Lewinski case shows that seemingly unpalatable information actually

helps keep in check those in power who otherwise can control and manipulate

it at their leisure. ISKCON should be more like that. It is actually

becoming more like that due to internal and external pressure. This is

highly welcomed. The recent case of abuse of cows in ISKCON is another i

nstance in which the media (COM, etc) brought awareness of the grave and

unpalatable problems within the Society. Then you have the BBT case last

year played mostly on VNN. Etc.

 

The Bhakti Abhay Charan case shows another grave problem in the Society:

the guru problem. But I'll use Hari Sauri Prabhu's own words to describe

it. This is an excerpt from a message to the GBC titled "Abhirama Adopts

Rikvik" dated November 14, 1999:

 

"I might add that my gut feelings, based on other conversations I have

had with other senior devotees over the years, temple

presidents and the like, is that there are in fact many of them who

share similar feelings as Abhiram. They are sitting on the fence

on the issue of the fitness of our devotees for giving initiations. They

are loyal ISKCON people, but many find our track record

indefensible, so they go on with their service and don't get too

involved with the issue. But if they see leading members like

Abhiram moving positions, I think we had better watch out.

 

"When Hari Vilasa and myself tried to raise the so-called guru issue at

the last GBC meetings, we were uncermoniously informed

by our sergent-at-arms that it was a dead issue and there was nothing to

discuss. Sorry to say, but I don't believe this for an

instant. And I think Abhiram's move is proof of this."

 

And if you didn't know much about this new issue, please don't blame me for

bringing it up.

 

YS RK Mex

[Guest guest]

> 6. When I had "my problem" there were a lot of "unkind" remarks made. And

> you know what? The people who made them were right.

 

You are not right. I know Bhakti-Abhay Charan prabhu since 1984 and he is

not the kind of person you depicts. You have taken the worse possible view.

You advocate for Homer Simpson´s philosophy: "When you see neighbour

Flanders falling on earth, kick him in the face to your complete pleasure ".

 

Ys

Bhpud.

[Guest guest]

On November 19, 1999, Bhuta-bhavana Dasa wrote:

 

> > And if you didn't know much about this new issue, please don't blame me

for

> > bringing it up.

 

> A common tactic both in the material world and within ISKCON is to blame

(or

> shoot) the messenger. I want to thank you for bringing up this new

issue,

> otherwise most devotees would never have been kept informed.

 

I have received various notes requesting me to post the whole letter.

Please find it below. I hope, again, that no one thinks that I am a deviant

just for bringing these issues for the consideration of the community. In

no way am I presenting this to promote the rittvik ideology but, as with

the Bhakti Abhay Charan issue, to show how throughtout the Movement there

is concern over the current guru system and a need to discuss this and

other issues openly. The guru issue is basic for varnasrama development and

thus understanding honestly what is actually going on in ISKCON in this

regard, regardless of how crude it may be, is the first step in finding

real solutions.

 

Just a few days ago there was a celebration for the 10th anniversary of the

fall of the Berlin Wall. I happened to watch a documentary about the

movement that brought down the Wall. It simply was a question of

communication, overcoming fears and standing by principles when the

Communist Utopia wasn't making it anymore.

 

-------------------

 

Warning to the GBC

 

Hari-sauri dasa

14 Nov 1999

Time: 19:09:31

Remote Name: 208.22.176.42

 

Comments

 

Abhirama Adopts Ritvik

 

Dear GBC members,

 

Pamho. AGtSP.

 

I regret to inform the members of this conference that our gobrother,

Sriman Abhiram dasa, a leading member of the SMPDC,

and in-charge of the Mayapur City master plan development, is now an

adherent of the ritvik apasampradaya. He personally

informed me of this 2 days ago at the Calcutta rathayatra.

 

In a brief exchange he told me that he had just read "My Final Order" by

Krsna Kanta dasa and had found its contents brilliantly

written, lucid and persuasive. He said it made the GBC look foolish and

childish (or words to that effect).

 

I was quite surprised. I told him that I had read the ritvik's arguments

and I found the word jugglery and twisting employed in their

interpretation of the May 28 conversation to be worse than any Mayavadi

could come up with. That by use of the words "disciple

of my disciple", and "grand disciple" Prabhupada could not have meant

anything other than that he wanted his disciples to accept

disciples of their own. Avoiding discussion on this, he replied that the

July 9 letter clearly established the ritvik system by the word

"henceforward."

 

When I replied that the July 9 letter, in its opening paragraph clearly

states that it was a follow up to the May 28 conversation, he

could not accept it. He said he had just read it 2 hours before and it

didn't refer to the May 28 conversation at all.

 

I told him to read it again. That although it doesn't state directly

"May 28" or use the words "follow-up" it does nevertheless refer

back to previous discussions on the topic and frame the contents of the

letter within that context.

 

We didn't get into an extended debate about it. I asked him direclty,

"So now you've become a ritvik?"

 

He nodded his head soberly and said, "Well, My Final Order is so lucid

that I have been won over."

 

He several times mentioned throughout the conversation that that the GBC

and gurus had by their behavior shown that they are

not fit to accept disciples and had made a farce of everything.

 

Again I didn't want to get into an extended discussion (we were stood on

the street at the Rath departure point waiting for the

parade to begin). I simply told him," Well, I don't care how well the

book is written, you'll never persuade me because Prabhupada

personally told me he wanted his disciples to accept disciples of their

own."

 

He asked me, "Prabhupada personally told you?"

 

"Yes," I replied. "In 1977 at the beginning of the GBC meetings, he told

all the GBC members that just as he had accepted 10,000

disciples, each one of them should accept 10,000 disciples and in this

way spread the movement. Of course one has to be qualified

to do it, but that was Prabhpuada's desire."

 

When Abhiram then commented that noone was qualified, again complaining

about the past behavior of our leaders, I told him,

"Prabhupada personally told me that the bottom line, the minimum

standard behavior for accepting disciples is chanting 16 rounds

and following the four regulative principles. If a person is doing this

he is to be considered pure and can accept disciples. Then," I

added, "depending on his level of realization, he can guide his

disciples better or worse." Abhiram expressed a little surprise and

asked me when this had occurred, and I told him it was a direct response

by Prabhupada to a question I had asked about Siddha

Svarupa in 1976 in Mayapur and his accepting a following.

 

Abhiram said, "Well, why haven't the GBC mentioned this? I have read

everything they put out and its not in writing."

 

I told him that it was written down, its in the first volume of my book,

A Transcendental Diary.

 

At this point our conversation stopped. I haven't seen him since to

discuss further with him. I did inform Jayapataka Swami, since

he is on the SMPDC, but he didn't have any time to be able to meet with

him. Now he is back in Bangalore (I think).

 

At no time in the conversation was he or I at odds, nor did he seem

fanatical or adamant. It is simply a conclusion he has come to

by comparing what is in My Final Order, and everything the GBC has

written on the subject. He just doesn't find the GBC papers

in any way convincing and feels they pale by comparison. And of course

the other factor (I think the underlying one), which

brought him to the point of accepting the ritvik bent on things, is the

track record of our leaders both past and present. He has

simply lost all faith in their fitness to be gurus and is thus

susceptible to a well-writtenargument.

 

I leave it to you all to figure out what to do. Its obvious what the

effect of such a leading figure in our society going over to this

apasampradya will have. And what it bodes for the current Mayapurscheme.

 

Someone needs to meet with him, and who ever it is, they had better know

all the arguments.

 

I might add that my gut feelings, based on other conversations I have

had with other senior devotees over the years, temple

presidents and the like, is that there are in fact many of them who

share similar feelings as Abhiram. They are sitting on the fence

on the issue of the fitness of our devotees for giving initiations. They

are loyal ISKCON people, but many find our track record

indefensible, so they go on with their service and don't get too

involved with the issue. But if they see leading members like

Abhiram moving positions, I think we had better watch out.

 

When Hari Vilasa and myself tried to raise the so-called guru issue at

the last GBC meetings, we were uncermoniously informed

by our sergent-at-arms that it was a dead issue and there was nothing to

discuss. Sorry to say, but I don't believe this for an

instant. And I think Abhiram's move is proof of this.

 

I beg to remain, your humble servant,

 

Hari-sauri dasa

[Guest guest]

> And if you didn't know much about this new issue, please don't blame me for

> bringing it up.

 

 

 

A common tactic both in the material world and within ISKCON is to blame (or

shoot) the messenger. I want to thank you for bringing up this new issue,

otherwise most devotees would never have been kept informed.

 

 

yfs,

bbd

[Guest guest]

On 19 Nov 1999, Bhuta-bhavana Dasa wrote:

 

> > And if you didn't know much about this new issue, please don't blame me

for

> > bringing it up.

>

>

>

> A common tactic both in the material world and within ISKCON is to blame (or

> shoot) the messenger.

 

A messenger delivers the message. RK dasa crams the message with his own

editorial comments and florid, sensationalistic language. I can editorialize

myself and assume the intent of the style of presentation (but not necessarily

the actual message) was intended to further degrade the faith of the readers

in the society and in their faith in their own gurus, including Srila

Prabhupada. For what purpose would that be? Have we to pull everything else

down along with us when we flame out?

 

Can anyone see the difference? Do you want your news emotionalized and skewed

by a Ritvik ideologue? I sure don't. I prefer clear-headed, insightful (not

incite-full), rational Vaisnavas. I haven't got that yet.

 

I'm not suggesting that one be an empty-headed clone accepting what the

"GBC/TP elite" may smilingly give us cult victims. Neither need it be the

polar extreme.

[Guest guest]

On 19 Nov 1999, Jiva Goswami wrote:

 

> Can anyone see the difference? Do you want your news emotionalized and

skewed

> by a Ritvik ideologue? I sure don't. I prefer clear-headed, insightful (not

> incite-full), rational Vaisnavas. I haven't got that yet.

 

 

 

 

Another tactic in bothe the material and ISKCON worlds is to give a dog a bad

name, then kick it. I wasn't aware that the author of the post was a "Ritvik

ideologue". Please enlighten us.

[Guest guest]

On 19 Nov 1999, Bhuta-bhavana Dasa wrote:

 

> On 19 Nov 1999, Jiva Goswami wrote:

>

> > Can anyone see the difference? Do you want your news emotionalized and

> skewed

> > by a Ritvik ideologue?

 

> Another tactic in bothe the material and ISKCON worlds is to give a dog a

bad

> name, then kick it. I wasn't aware that the author of the post was a

"Ritvik

> ideologue". Please enlighten us.

 

I'll let him do that himself. He is a couple of paragraphs from the original

post:

 

 

RK dasa writes:

 

The important revelation of Bhakti Abhay Charan's affair is, again, the

complete lack of qualification of the gurus under the current system, which is

simply the bastard offspring of the mother of all perversions, the original

Acarya system. Still more amazing is the determination of the GBC to support

this guru system at all costs by certifying the authenticity of individuals

who are actually a fountainhead of anarthas and who munch-off the institution

pretending to represent it in ways completly beyond their qualifications.

 

A devotee in Mexico just asked Bir Krsna Goswami what is the GBC doing to

regain the trust of so many discouraged devotees in ISKCON. His reply was that

it is a matter of letting the dust settle. But nothing will settle until two

issues are settled first, namely, 1) That the current guru system is a failure

because it is a lie, Bhakti Abhay Charan being the latest proof of it, and 2)

That the GBC has to be completly revamped, not from within like in previous

timid attempts at reform, but from a grassroots revival process in which the

new GBCs represent the interests of their congregations and are accountable to

them. I guess these could actually bring some confidence to the devotees.

[Guest guest]

I think the issue at hand regarding our two ex-swamis more has to do with

Homer Simpson tactics.

 

 

 

 

 

> > And if you didn't know much about this new issue, please don't blame me

for bringing it up.

>

>

>

> A common tactic both in the material world and within ISKCON is to blame (or

shoot) the messenger. I want to thank you for bringing up this new issue,

otherwise most devotees would never have been kept informed.

>

>

> yfs,

> bbd

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Another tactic in bothe the material and ISKCON worlds is to give a dog a

bad name, then kick it. I wasn't aware that the author of the post was a

"Ritvik ideologue". Please enlighten us.

 

 

I guess you need to read the postings -- the punch lines all appear to have a

strong ritvik flavor to them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

On 19 Nov 1999, Ramon Estrada wrote:

 

>

> I have received various notes requesting me to post the whole letter.

> Please find it below. I hope, again, that no one thinks that I am a deviant

just for bringing these issues for the consideration of the community. In no

way am I presenting this to promote the rittvik ideology but, as with the

Bhakti Abhay Charan issue, to show how throughtout the Movement there is

concern over the current guru system and a need to discuss this and other

issues openly. The guru issue is basic for varnasrama development and thus

understanding honestly what is actually going on in ISKCON in this regard,

regardless of how crude it may be, is the first step in finding real

solutions.

>

>

 

 

I think the original complaint had to do with an attitude reminiscent of a

currenlty popular cartoon character. Otherwise, devotees are certainly

entitled to come to their own conclusions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

> I didn't even remember who Homer Simpson was. Only a quick search in the

> internet reminded me that he is a cartoon character!!!

 

He is a cartoon character whose philosophy is to get advantage of his

neighbour´s disgrace or weakness to kick him on the face. Unkind and

mundane. Animal life.

 

> I think that the whole problem lies in not understanding the role of the

> media in society to preserve the system of checks and balances. The

> Clinton-Lewinski case shows that seemingly unpalatable information

> actually helps keep in check those in power who otherwise can control and

> manipulate it at their leisure. ISKCON should be more like that. It is

> actually becoming more like that due to internal and external pressure.

> This is highly welcomed. The recent case of abuse of cows in ISKCON is

> another i nstance in which the media (COM, etc) brought awareness of the

> grave and unpalatable problems within the Society. Then you have the BBT

> case last year played mostly on VNN. Etc.

 

I am also checking and balancing your posting. It is right BACS had had

difficulties with his ashrama, as yourself had also, so that he can not

deserve anymore the higher status you don´t deserve anymore also. But it is

up to his followers and friends to adjust his relationship with him. For

these cases, yours being only one more in the record of experience, GBC law

has stablished the procedure of supension. It is a delicate matter for the

people involved, disciples, friends, and BACS himself, and suspension is a

civilized manner of dealing with it. You seems to be advocating for lynch of

the boss and total revolution. I´m not able to catch the civilized proposal,

if any, behind your flaming out him. Are you saying that the suspension

procedure for gurus with difficulties is not right? Do you have a more

sensitive alternative?

 

Ys

Bhagavata-Purana Dasa

[Guest guest]

> > And if you didn't know much about this new issue, please don't blame me

> > for bringing it up.

>

 

> A common tactic both in the material world and within ISKCON is to blame

> (or shoot) the messenger. I want to thank you for bringing up this new

> issue, otherwise most devotees would never have been kept informed.

 

Hiding information to preserve the status-quo is also a common tactic, and I

agree with you that the GBC must be the first one in bringing this kind of

things to light, in order to avoid non sensitive presentations as that from

RK prabhu.

 

YS

-Bhpud.

[Guest guest]

In text 2793391 from COM Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

 

> I guess you need to read the postings -- the punch lines all appear to

have a

> strong ritvik flavor to them.

 

Just for the record, no one who knows me can classify me as a ritvik. The

statement "the punch lines all appear to have a strong ritvik flavor to

them," is just another way of giving a dog a bad name. But just because I

am not a militant ritvik (or a closet-ritvik for that matter) I should be

defending what I find indefensible simply for someone else's peace of mind.

 

YS RK Mex

[Guest guest]

In text 2793634 from COM Bhagavata-purana Dasa wrote:

 

> He is a cartoon character whose philosophy is to get advantage of his

> neighbour?s disgrace or weakness to kick him on the face. Unkind and

> mundane. Animal life.

 

Disgusting. That is why I never watch it. Though you seem to know a lot

about it.

 

> I am also checking and balancing your posting. It is right BACS had had

> difficulties with his ashrama, as yourself had also, so that he can not

> deserve anymore the higher status you don?t deserve anymore also.

 

You finally got my point, namely, to stop pretending being what one

actually isn't. Congratulations.

 

> GBC law has stablished the procedure of supension. It is a delicate

matter for the

> people involved, disciples, friends, and BACS himself, and suspension is

a

> civilized manner of dealing with it.

 

GBC law also established the Acarya system, so it is not a matter of what

the law is but what the law should be. GBC law established also a much

needed judicial system but, where is it? I rejected the procedure of

suspension offered to me because I found it to be a "civilized" lie.

 

> You seems to be advocating for lynch of the boss and total revolution.

I?m not able to catch the civilized > > proposal, if any, behind your

flaming out him.

 

The tone of the paper was just one more reaction to the network of

complicities and arrogance at the top. Some devotees felt that obscure

deals were being worked out in order to preserve a blissful ignorance of

what is really going on around here. And because any type of regional

councils have been discouraged to deal with issues like this, then you just

have a few jet-setting bosses pretending to make all the decisions and

looking down on everyone. The people voted, here is your paper. (It was a

group endeavour)

 

Your servant

Radha Krsna dasa

Mexico City

[Guest guest]

On 20 Nov 1999, Ramon Estrada wrote:

 

 

>

> Just for the record, no one who knows me can classify me as a ritvik. The

statement "the punch lines all appear to have a strong ritvik flavor to

them," is just another way of giving a dog a bad name. But just because I am

not a militant ritvik (or a closet-ritvik for that matter) I should be

defending what I find indefensible simply for someone else's peace of mind.

>

> YS RK Mex

>

 

 

 

In my opinion the punch lines have a strong ritvik flavor to them. Please

forgive me for expressing my opinion.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

On 20 Nov 1999, Ramon Estrada wrote:

 

> In text 2793634 from COM Bhagavata-purana Dasa wrote:

>

> > He is a cartoon character whose philosophy is to get advantage of his

> > neighbour's disgrace or weakness to kick him on the face. Unkind and

> > mundane. Animal life.

>

> Disgusting. That is why I never watch it. Though you seem to know a lot

> about it.

>

 

 

I guess he checked it out on the internet, just like you.

 

 

>

> You finally got my point, namely, to stop pretending being what one

> actually isn't. Congratulations.

>

 

 

We also hope others will stop pretending to act like Homer Simpson, assuming

they are pretending.

 

 

>

> GBC law also established the Acarya system, so it is not a matter of what

the law is but what the law should be. GBC law established also a much needed

judicial system but, where is it? I rejected the procedure of

> suspension offered to me because I found it to be a "civilized" lie.

>

 

 

Undoubtedly another saint in the long line of ISKCON martyrs.

 

 

 

> The tone of the paper was just one more reaction to the network of

> complicities and arrogance at the top. Some devotees felt that obscure

> deals were being worked out in order to preserve a blissful ignorance of

what is really going on around here. And because any type of regional

> councils have been discouraged to deal with issues like this, then you just

have a few jet-setting bosses pretending to make all the decisions and looking

down on everyone. The people voted, here is your paper. (It was a group

endeavour)

>

 

 

 

Fortunately we can rectify the situation by looking down on those who look

down on us. Its simple, really, when you take the time to think it all

through.

 

ys,

 

Sthita- 'just call me Simpson' dhi-muni

[Guest guest]

>

>

> We also hope others will stop pretending to act like Homer Simpson, assuming

> they are pretending.

 

Yes, Lisa is clearly the most Krsna conscious character on the show(she is a

vegetarian and quite socially aware) and the one best to emulate.

[Guest guest]

I've read "The Final Order," and, unlike Abhirama and others, remain

unimpressed. I'm more impressed by the more practical issues brought up

surrounding this issue, and not particularly impressed by the GBC's constant

dodging and weaving to justify whatever they call peir process for making

ISKCON gurus official. The main point here, though, is not whether the ritvik

camp or the GBC or "right" (whatever that may mean--and my own vote would go

for "neither"), but that the GBC delusion that the "guru issue" is done with

is patently foolish.

 

Your servant,

Babhru das