PLEASE NEVER ALLOW ME TO BECOME TEMPTED TO TRY TO

[Guest guest]

Dear Nayana Ranjana Prabhu,

 

Thank you very much for posting this extract. Simply wonderful.

 

If only I a granddisciple could develop a small fraction of an atom of the

sincerety, humbleness and submissivness of what these disciples of Srila

Prabhupada have to Srila Prabhupada towards my spiritual master in a million

lifetimes, I would immediately become very proud of that humbleness. Oh

Krishna please give me strength to follow in the foot steps of Acaryas like

Bhakti Caru Swami, and understand the following equation in its full gravity.

 

Srila Prabhupada : Srila Prabhupad's disciples :: Srila Prabhupad's disciples :

Srila Prabhupad's grand disciples.

 

PLEASE NEVER ALLOW ME TO BECOME TEMPTED TO TRY TO

OCCUPY SEAT OF ABSOLUTE GLORY.

 

I understand what ever mood HH Bhakti Caru Swami is displaying towards Srila

Prabhupaa, the granddisciples must display the same mood towards their gurus.

 

This is called paramapara system.

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Das.

[Guest guest]

> Why are we facing this defeat?

 

When demigods feel real danger from demons side they do not faith their own

power but pray to LOrd Visnu for protection. Maybe we should to Lord

Caitanya to send some general to lead Iskcon army?

[Guest guest]

Oh

> Krishna please give me strength to follow in the foot steps of

****Acaryas**** like

> Bhakti Caru Swami, and understand the following equation in its full

> gravity.

(*** stars added by Antardwip das)

 

Dear Bhadra Govinda prabhu,

I feel uncomfortable hearing devotees described as being acharyas. The term

"vartman acharya" was used to describe the eleven devotees who took disciples

on Srila Prabhupada's departure, indicating that Srila Prabhupada was the

founder-acharya, now they were the present-acharyas. Using the word "acharya"

to describe current spiritual masters is to place them in the same importance

in relation to ISKCON as Srila Prabhupada is. I think this is the attitude

Bhakti Caru Swami is countering when he comments:

 

 

> PLEASE NEVER ALLOW ME TO BECOME TEMPTED TO TRY TO

> OCCUPY SEAT OF ABSOLUTE GLORY.

>

> I understand what ever mood HH Bhakti Caru Swami is displaying towards Srila

> Prabhupaa, the granddisciples must display the same mood towards their gurus.

 

My impression is that HH Bhakti Caru Maharaj doesn't think so - did he not

cancel his Vyasa Puja book last year for this reason?

 

ys

Antardwip das

[Guest guest]

>

>> PLEASE NEVER ALLOW ME TO BECOME TEMPTED TO TRY TO

>> OCCUPY SEAT OF ABSOLUTE GLORY.

>>

>> I understand what ever mood HH Bhakti Caru Swami is displaying towards

>> Srila Prabhupaa, the granddisciples must display the same mood towards

>> their gurus.

>

>My impression is that HH Bhakti Caru Maharaj doesn't think so - did he not

>cancel his Vyasa Puja book last year for this reason?

 

not getting into speculating what HH BC Maharaj thought while writing this

but one thing is clear to me that there is absolutely nothing wrong if a

disciple writes a vyasapuja offering for his/her spiritual master thanking

him or glorifying him for whatever he feels obliged for.

 

some of ISKCON gurus have set good examples of being humble but

unfortunately it seems that the real meaning of a "humble guru" is

dangerously misunderstood by many, not only by disciples but also by gurus.

I am sorry to say this and saying this without pointing at any paricular

guru/s.

 

one of the simplest definitions of a humble guru is, a guru who understands

and accepts that he is simply his guru's servant. THis includes many things.

A servant means one who accepts all that the master orders. IF the guru

orders his disciples to *represent* him in future by becoming a guru, the

disciple HAS to, in totality, *represent* his guru when he himself becomes

guru. Becoming a guru also includes accepting the glorificatino offered to

him by his disciples. THIS IS A DUTY OF THE SPIRITUAL MASTER. IF A SPIRITUAL

MASTER PREVENTS HIS DISCIPLES FROM GLORIFYING HIM BECAUSE HE FEELS HIMSELF A

HUMBLE SERVANT OF HIS GURU THEN HE IS DOING INJUSTICE TO HIS DISCIPLES. A

guru can remain humble even after accepting lots of glorification from his

disciples because he doen't keep such glorifications for himself but offeres

to his guru.

 

DOES ANYONE OF YOU THINK THAT SRILA PRABHUPADA WAS NOT HUMBLE AND DIDN'T

THINK HE WAS AN INSIGNIFICANT SERVANT OF HIS SPIRITUAL MASTER? DO YOU THINK

HE LIKED TO BE WORSHIPED ON A BIG VYASASANA AND CALLED "SRILA PRABHUPDADA"

(for which many of his godbrothers criticised him) BECAUSE HE WAS NOT HUMBLE

AND HE THOUGHT HE WAS ON THE SAME LEVEL AS OF HIS SPIRITUAL MASTER? WHY DID

HE ACCEPT VYASAPUJA BOOKS, WHY DID HE ACCEPT OPULENT OFFERINGS BY HIS

DISCIPLES? WHY DID NOT STOP HIS DISCIPLES WHO RESPECTED HIM AS A TRUE

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SUPREME LORD? WHY? BECAUSE HE WAS PROUD?

 

NO!

 

(capitals are for highlighting, not for showing anger :-))

 

Dear devotees, Srila Prabhupada accepted all respects offered to him by his

disciples only because he was *representing* his spiritual master and he, in

fact, did so on behalf of his spiritual master. Also he knew very well that

by glorifying him his disciples will be purified becuase actually by

glorifying our gurus we are glorifying the Supreme Lord whose

representatives are all who act as spiritual masters. Hare Krishna!

 

ys, bb

[Guest guest]

Antardwip Prabhu wrote:

 

> I feel uncomfortable hearing devotees described as being acharyas. The

> term "vartman acharya" was used to describe the eleven devotees who took

> disciples on Srila Prabhupada's departure, indicating that Srila

> Prabhupada was the founder-acharya, now they were the present-acharyas.

> Using the word "acharya" to describe current spiritual masters is to place

> them in the same importance in relation to ISKCON as Srila Prabhupada is.

 

This seems right because of the following statements by Srila Prabhupada in

a Room Conversation, August 16, 1976, Bombay

 

"Why Guru Maharaja gave us instruction so many things, why he did not say

that this man should be acarya?" They wanted to create artificially somebody

acarya and everything failed. They did not consider even with common sense

that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acarya, why did he not

say? He said so many things, and this point he missed? The real point? And

they insist upon it. They declared some unfit person to become acarya. Then

another man came, then another, acarya, another acarya. So better remain a

foolish person perpetually to be directed by Guru Maharaja. That is

perfection. And as soon as he learns the Guru Maharaja is dead, "Now I am so

advanced that I can kill my guru and I become guru." Then he's finished."

 

If we analyse this statement we find that Prabhupada says that SBSST wanted

to create the GBC for Gaudiya Math because there was no acarya. That in turn

means that the members of the GBC of Gaudiya Math, if it would have been

created were not acaryas. Because according to Prabhupada, if there was an

acarya that SBSST would have pointed him out and perhaps there would not

have been a need for the GBC. Appointing the successor acarya is the normal

system in the Madhva & Ramanuja sampradaya.

 

This in turn now is applicable to the ISKCON GBC which Prabhupada

established. If there was an acarya, Prabhupada would have selected him. But

he established the GBC. Therefore it is implied that the members of the GBC

are not full-fledged acaryas, otherwise they would have been selecteed by

Prabhupada as the successor acaryas. And Prabhupada confirms this in the May

28 conversation, where he himself uses the word 'officiating acarayas'. This

means imho that they would be regular gurus & officiating acaryas now and

may go ahead to become full-fledged acaryas if they become automatically

selected, self-effulgent and display extraordinary preaching capabilities or

there may be a self-effulgent acarya who may manifest later from the ones

Prabhupada did not select.

 

Note that in the above quote Prabhupada makes it clear that if one is unfit

but tries to become acarya then he is becoming guru by killing his guru and

thus he will be finished. This is because as TS mentioned that if is unfit

but tries to pose as acarya then the position of the real acarya, Srila

Prabhupada is diminished or killed as Srila Prabhupada also points out. I

think the zonal acarya system is a repeat to some extent of the Gaudiya Math

mistakes after the disappeareance of SBSST. In Gaudiya math, there was a

fight that which individual is the acarya and in the zonal acarya system the

11 gurus proclaimed themselves as acaryas even though Prabhupada had used

the word 'officiating acaryas' and Prabhupada has established the GBC

because he had not selected the acarya. So I also feel that Bhakti Caru

Maharaj in his statement under discussion, was referring to this mistakes by

Gaudiya Math & the zonal acaryas of artificially assuming the position of

acarya.

 

Bhadra Govinda Prabhu wrote

 

> According to our ***Founder Acarya*** the word Acarya simply means a

> teacher, an ideal teacher who follows what he preaches.

> Please refer Bg 3.21 "yad yad acarati sresthas..." purport, where Srila

> Prabhupada explains in ideal circumstances even a king, a father, a school

> teacher must take up the role of an Acarya.

 

Now Srila Prabhupada says different things at different places about acarya.

Let us try to analyse these statements. Like he says that a cent per cent

follower of the acarya can also become acarya. At another place he says that

is not difficult to become acarya. One has to simply repeat Krsna's message

without adulteration. I will prove later with the help of a quote by Srila

Prabhupada that Prabhupada talks of two kind of acaryas: liberated acaryas &

non-liberated (which I think is the same as the word "officiating') acaryas.

If we accept this then all the contradictions can be reconciled. But I think

the final word of Srila Prabhupada on the position of liberated acarya is in

this extract from Cc Adi 1.46 purport which makes things very clear:

 

"Therefore in the dealings of an acarya there are no activities but those of

transcendental loving service to the Lord. He is the Supreme Personality of

Servitor Godhead. It is worthwhile to take shelter of such a steady devotee,

who is called asraya-vigraha, or the manifestation or form of the Lord of

whom one must take shelter.

 

If one poses himself as an acarya but does not have an attitude of

servitorship to the Lord, he must be considered an offender, and this

offensive attitude disqualifies him from being an acarya. The bona fide

spiritual master always engages in UNALLOYED devotional service to the

Supreme Personality of Godhead. By this test he is known to be a direct

manifestation of the Lord and a genuine representative of Sri Nityananda

Prabhu. Such a spiritual master is known as acaryadeva."

 

He goes on to explain how the guru should be accepted in terms of his

intimate & confidential relationship with Srimati Radharani or a

manifestation of Lord Nityananda. So this discussion obviously applies to

the 100% self-realized guru who is accepted as acarya. That is why Srila

Prabhupada says that one should not become a spiritual master unless one is

an uttama-adhikari otherwise he doesn't fit in these descriptions like

'nikunja yuno rati keli siddhyai' etc.

 

Now I would like to discuss here one statement of Srila Prabhupada in a

letter to Janardana, New York, 26 April, 1968:

 

"A person who is liberated acharya and guru cannot commit any mistake, but

there are persons who are less qualified or not liberated, but still can act

as guru and acharya by strictly following the disciplic succession. "

 

So first of all it is clear that a LIBERATED ACARYA CANNOT COMMIT ANY

MISTAKES. But there can be a 'not liberated acarya' also if he strictly

follows the disciplic succession. We can link this with the May 28

conversation and according to my opinion we get the answer, that this

non-liberated acarya which Prabhupada is mentioned here & elsewhere, is

being by Prabhupada as the 'officiating acarya' in the May 28th

conversation. In the light of this, all of Prabhupada's apparently

contradictory statements fall into place.

 

Bhadra Govinda Prabhu wrote:

 

> The problem is some grand disciples are trying to approach Srila

> Prabhupada directly and artificially elevating themselves to the level of

> disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and some confused disciples (confused???)

> of Srila Prabhupada are encouraging these granddisciples and creating

> chaos in the society.

 

Okay, accepted that this rtvikism is a severest kind of deviation but one

should not just put the entire blame on the rtviks. The ISKCON Guru System

also is partly responsible and the GBC has accepted this by trying to do

Guru Reform. Prabhupada being an uttama descended to the platform of

madhyama for acting as guru & acarya but the factual madhyamas gurus thought

that since Prabhupada said that 'act as I am doing', we also automatically

become acaryas. This is their mistake and this has led to a disastrous

revolt & deviation in the form of Rtvikism.

 

Your servant,

Nayana-ranjana das

[Guest guest]

Dear Antardwip Prabhu,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada and

ISKCON.

 

> I feel uncomfortable hearing devotees described as being acharyas.

 

According to our ***Founder Acarya*** the word Acarya simply means a teacher,

an ideal teacher who follows what he preaches.

Please refer Bg 3.21 "yad yad acarati sresthas..." purport, where Srila

Prabhupada explains in ideal circumstances even a king, a father, a school

teacher must take up the role of an Acarya.

 

> > I understand what ever mood HH Bhakti Caru Swami is displaying towards

Srila

> > Prabhupaa, the granddisciples must display the same mood towards their

gurus.

 

The problem is some grand disciples are trying to approach Srila Prabhupada

directly and artificially elevating themselves to the level of disciples of

Srila Prabhupada, and some confused disciples (confused???) of Srila Prabhupada

are encouraging these granddisciples and creating chaos in the society.

 

We must not get carried away by these confused winds. We do not have anything

*personal* against these confused individuals. At the same time we must

strictly follow parampara system.

 

> My impression is that HH Bhakti Caru Maharaj doesn't think so - did he not

> cancel his Vyasa Puja book last year for this reason?

 

Yes Maharaj is such a humble soul. He must have his own good personal reasons

for cancelling his Vyasa Puja last year. But if you ask me personally we must

not allow Maharaj to get away like this next year.

 

> ys

> Antardwip das

 

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Das.

[Guest guest]

Some good points NR Prabhu and of course I agree that imitation is not

wanted. However, let's not swing from one extreme to the other. Before there

was "guru as superstar" which was unrealistic. Now let's be careful not to

throw out the baby with the bath water, like Hindus who accept initiation as

a formality from the family guru but have no relationship with him, no trust

and no guidance.

 

What is needed is to come to a position that is in line with guru, sadhu and

sastra, true to tradition, consonant with reality and favorable for

cultivation of and spreading of Krsna consciousness.

 

I suspect that as a movement we may be trying too much to define and

institutionalize guru roles, protocol and relationships. Given that all

gurus are individuals at different levels of advancement, with different

approaches to how they conduct their service as guru, and that different

disciples also look for and expect different things from their gurus, we may

be counter productive in trying to put a lable and a rule on everything.

 

This is an important discussion that I won't be taking further part in,

unless it's still continuing after a month when I return from interior

Russia, from where I won't be able to log in.

[Guest guest]

There are many generals and maharatis in iskcon army,we have to pray so we

can serve them

prema

[Guest guest]

Bhakti-vikasa Swami wrote:

 

> I suspect that as a movement we may be trying too much to

> define and institutionalize guru roles, protocol and

> relationships. Given that all gurus are individuals at

> different levels of advancement, with different approaches to

> how they conduct their service as guru, and that different

> disciples also look for and expect different things from their

> gurus, we may be counter productive in trying to put a lable

> and a rule on everything.

>

> This is an important discussion that I won't be taking further

> part in, unless it's still continuing after a month when I

> return from interior Russia, from where I won't be able to log

> in.

 

I found these points from you, Maharaja, very wise and uplifting.

I am sorry you won't be able to log on for a month.

 

Ys, Jahnu das

[Guest guest]

----------

> [Text 2673370 from COM]

 

Nayanaranjana Prabhu wrote:

>Prabhupada being an uttama descended to the platform of

> madhyama for acting as guru & acarya.

 

Agreed.

 

> but the factual madhyamas gurus thought

> that since Prabhupada said that 'act as I am doing', we also automatically

> become acaryas. This is their mistake and this has led to a disastrous

> revolt & deviation in the form of Rtvikism.

 

Please forgive me. . What is the basis of your above statement?

 

> Your servant,

> Nayana-ranjana das

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Das.

[Guest guest]

----------

> [Text 2673370 from COM]

 

Nayanaranjana Prabhu wrote:

>Prabhupada being an uttama descended to the platform of

> madhyama for acting as guru & acarya.

 

Agreed.

 

> but the factual madhyamas gurus thought

> that since Prabhupada said that 'act as I am doing', we also automatically

> become acaryas. This is their mistake and this has led to a disastrous

> revolt & deviation in the form of Rtvikism.

 

Please forgive me. . What is the basis of your above statement?

 

> Your servant,

> Nayana-ranjana das

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Das.