Whether Devotees of ISKON are the best devotees

[Guruvani]

 

your posts are greatly improved, Ksyamabuddhi das, very nice. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

well, being the most hated person on the internet gets old after a while.

Actually, I am a very flexible person. More so than most people think.

 

sometimes I rattle the cages of other people, yet at the same time I also have to rattle my own cage to keep from getting stereotyped.

 

I try to be fluid and always open to growth and change.

In fact, I am very open minded, yet my mind has it's own filter of discrimination and discretion that I cannot deny.

 

I fancy myself as a very fluid person.

I think that there are other members here who should also be so fluid and flexible and willing to look beyond their own little box of mental conceptions.

 

Like Srila Sridhar Maharaja said "progress means acceptance and elimination".

 

If we aren't always accepting new insight and revelation and eliminating attachments and misconceptions then we get stuck in the muck of the mind and sentimental feelings.

[cbrahma]

 

ISKCON gurus voluntarily submit to the GBC authority.

 

They are installed as gurus. Of course they voluntarily submit. How would they get disciples otherwise? The GBC is the ultimate authority. There is even an oath of allegience everybody has to take.

[Guruvani]

 

They are installed as gurus. Of course they voluntarily submit. How would they get disciples otherwise? The GBC is the ultimate authority. There is even an oath of allegience everybody has to take.

Installed?

Like in installing a deity or murti?

 

I doubt that.

They are simply given GBC sanction to act as gurus in ISKCON.

 

There is no installation of gurus as far as I know.

 

The GBC doesn't sanction gurus.

They just sanction that the guru can be guru within the ISKCON institution.

 

There has to be some oversight or the whole things turns into a free-for-all.

 

In traditional Gaudiya society there was a similar sort of procedure that the leading devotees of the day nominated the senior and most respected devotee as the acharya.

 

so, ISKCON is something similar that the leading devotees of ISKCON give their approval that a senior member can act as guru and initiate disciples.

 

It is not all about corperate sanction but about the leading Vaishnavas giving recognition and respect to leading devotees in the society.

 

That system is actually quite in line with the Gaudiya tradition.

[cbrahma]

"Like in installing a deity or murti?"

No like hiring somebody for a post.

The process is exactly the same. In fact gurus have been de-commissioned or 'fired'.

 

The GBC doesn't sanction gurus.

They just sanction that the guru can be guru within the ISKCON institution.

Now that's word jugglery if I ever heard it.

 

"That system is actually quite in line with the Gaudiya tradition"

Proof please.

 

"There has to be some oversight or the whole things turns into a free-for-all."

If oversight is required at some totalitarian level, then there is something very wrong and immature about the judgment of the members. That is how can they be trusted without daddy telling them what to do? I for one am not going to be initiated by a guru that needs a watchdog(s).

[Guruvani]

 

"Like in installing a deity or murti?"

No like hiring somebody for a post.

The process is exactly the same. In fact gurus have been de-commissioned or 'fired'.

 

The GBC doesn't sanction gurus.

They just sanction that the guru can be guru within the ISKCON institution.

Now that's word jugglery if I ever heard it.

 

"That system is actually quite in line with the Gaudiya tradition"

Proof please.

 

"There has to be some oversight or the whole things turns into a free-for-all."

If oversight is required at some totalitarian level, then there is something very wrong and immature about the judgment of the members. That is how can they be trusted without daddy telling them what to do? I for one am not going to be initiated by a guru that needs a watchdog(s).

 

 

Proof please.

 

Study the history of the Gaudiya society after the disappearance of Mahaprabhu.

You will find that most all the leading acharyas only accepted acharyaship after the leading devotees of Vrindavan imposed the acharyaship on them.

 

I don't have a specific quote right now, but I remember hearing before about how the acharyas of Vrindavan attained that position by the approval and encouragement of the other leading devotees of the day.

 

In bygone days the acharya was more or less nominated by the leading devotees of Vraja.

 

One should always seek the sanction and approval of one's peers before coming forward to lead the devotee society.

 

 

If oversight is required at some totalitarian level, then there is something very wrong and immature about the judgment of the members. That is how can they be trusted without daddy telling them what to do? I for one am not going to be initiated by a guru that needs a watchdog(s).

 

If any guru gets impeached by the GBC then he has the option to go outside the peer group and do as he wishes.

 

Nobody is forcing them to stay in ISKCON.

 

Just because the GBC impeaches a guru that does not mean that he is not guru, just that he cannot be guru in ISKCON.

 

It's a better system than some rogue autocrat guru who is off the chain doing as he damn well pleases without any oversight by the leading devotees of the society.

 

The GBC doesn't manufacture gurus.

They simply determine if he can be guru within the framework of the GBC governed ISKCON.

 

It is their duty and their right as the managing authority of ISKCON.

 

Anybody that doesn't agree is free to leave and do as they please.

 

there are only 2 options.

(1) the ritvik system

(2) the GBC guru system

 

Those who propose that some outside guru should be brought into ISKCON as the acharya are simply living in an hallucination.

We have to deal in the realm of possiblity, not in the realm of fantasy.

[cbrahma]

 

Study the history of the Gaudiya society after the disappearance of Mahaprabhu.

You will find that most all the leading acharyas only accepted acharyaship after the leading devotees of Vrindavan imposed the acharyaship on them.

 

I don't have a specific quote right now, but I remember hearing before about how the acharyas of Vrindavan attained that position by the approval and encouragement of the other leading devotees of the day.

 

In bygone days the acharya was more or less nominated by the leading devotees of Vraja.

 

One should always seek the sanction and approval of one's peers before coming forward to lead the devotee society.

 

 

 

If any guru gets impeached by the GBC then he has the option to go outside the peer group and do as he wishes.

 

Nobody is forcing them to stay in ISKCON.

 

Just because the GBC impeaches a guru that does not mean that he is not guru, just that he cannot be guru in ISKCON.

 

It's a better system than some rogue autocrat guru who is off the chain doing as he damn well pleases without any oversight by the leading devotees of the society.

 

The GBC doesn't manufacture gurus.

They simply determine if he can be guru within the framework of the GBC governed ISKCON.

 

It is their duty and their right as the managing authority of ISKCON.

 

Anybody that doesn't agree is free to leave and do as they please.

 

there are only 2 options.

(1) the ritvik system

(2) the GBC guru system

 

Those who propose that some outside guru should be brought into ISKCON as the acharya are simply living in an hallucination.

We have to deal in the realm of possiblity, not in the realm of fantasy.

I don't know what happened but I responded and the post just vanished.

Quite simply. Prabhupada was criticized by his godbrothers but he came to the West anyways. The idea that its' ritvik or the GBC contradicts everything I've read on Rocana prabhu's site hare-krishna.org, which BTW has the link to this blog. A guru is not a post to which one is appointed. The appointment system failed miserably in the zonal acarya fiasco. These acaryas WERE the GBC and they fell down. How did the new GBC reform? By election. NO. By self-appointment.

Everything you caution about gurus can be said about the GBC. Simply being a collective doesn't make you an authority. Resistance is not futile.

The GBC is taking on the role of acarya. That is not it's function.

The GBC is rogue. The GBC has taken over so much control it's turned ISKCON into a religious institution -which is definitely not bone fide.

The gurus are the ritviks of the GBC who have final jurisdictional authority.

Virtually one is initiated by them. Why bother with the gurus. Eliminate the middle man. Your rhetoric is unconvincing. And if it is so benign, why don't you join up?

[Guruvani]

 

And if it is so benign, why don't you join up?

LIke I said, there are only two options.

I think the ritvik system would have been the best path for ISKCON, but that didn't happen and that is NEVER going to happen.

So, the best they can do now is keep up the GBC guru system and hopefully things will get better someday.

 

Me join?

Not likely.

 

I hate bureaucracy.

It's not just the guru system of the GBC that I don't like.

I could almost tolerate that.

It's how the GBC have burdened ISKCON with an ecclesiastical load of rubbish that turns me off the most.

 

It's not necessarily the GBC guru sanctioning system that I dislike the most about the GBC.

 

For sure, I think the GBC has lead ISKCON astray into the wrong direction.

 

I personally like the model of Tripurari Swami and Jagat Guru Maharaja (Narasingha Maharaja).

I think they have got the right idea.

 

Abandon the bureaucracy and succeed on your own merits.

That is way it should be done.

 

In other words, its not the ISKCON gurus that I dislike so much.

It's the GBC that really turns my stomach.

 

I personally admire many of the ISKCON gurus.

I am sure many of them are just in the toleration mode with the GBC as well.

 

Without a ritvik system in place, the GBC is just a burdensome bureaucracy.

 

If the GBC doesn't implement a ritvik system, then I think they should be relegated to simple managers of the corperate technicalities and properties and keep their hands out of the guru business.

 

If someone chooses the wrong guru, then too bad for them.

You can't trash the guru-disciple faith system out of fear that somebody might accept an unqualified guru for initiation.

 

I think the damage from that system would be less harmful than the GBC interference with the divine relationship between guru and disciple.

[suchandra]

 

They simply give sanction that the person can act as guru within ISKCON.

 

 

Looks like for you this whole sanctioning to act as guru is something like a Las Vegas show ("..they simply..")- something with losers and winners and an agency investigating the entertainment factor. Prabhupada never spoke of "sanctioning a person to act as guru within ISKCON", this is your concoction to make it look like Prabhupada's own words.

Although Prabhupada said in a lecture, 18 July 73:

"Just like Jesus Christ. He is being crucified, and still he is merciful: “God, these people do not know what they are doing. Please excuse them.” This is sādhu. He is personally being disturbed by the demons, but still, he is merciful to the general people. They are suffering for want of Krishna consciousness. So even up to the point of death, he is trying to preach Krishna consciousness. “Let the people be benefited."

He even says, Jesus preached Krishna consciousness. However, this statement by Prabhupada above might somehow disturb a widely spread Alachua - High Springs proverb:

 

"One of the finest things ever done by the mob was the Crucifixion of Christ. Intellectually it was a splendid gesture. But trust the mob to bungle the job. If we would had charge of executing Christ, we would have handled it differently. You see, what we would have done was had him shipped to Rome and fed him to the lions. They could never have made a savior out of mincemeat!"

(Alachua proverb)

 

So, let's be merciful with the people in Florida: "God, these people do not know what they are doing."

[Guruvani]

 

Looks like for you this whole sanctioning to act as guru is something like a Las Vegas show -

Maybe so.

But, I am not going to trash some very sincere and advanced devotees in ISKCON just because the GBC is an out-of-control bureaucracy.

 

I think that there are certainly some advanced devotees in ISKCON who can function as diksha guru.

The new generation of devotees don't necessarily want some newly invented ritvik system initiation.

They want a traditional initiation via a living Vaishnava.

If that is their desire, then they should be accomodated.

 

I don't think that ISKCON gurus are the problem.

It's the GBC bureaucracy that is trashing ISKCON.

[ksbh]

Guruvani prabhu's posts are coming down like big hammers today! Please continue prabhu. The clarity and force of your posts is amazing!

 

 

That is a bit of an exaggeration.

ISKCON gurus aren't really appointed or voted in.

 

The GBC simply gives official approval that the person can act as guru within ISKCON.

They know that only Krishna can appoint his representative.

The GBC simply gives some basic sanction that the person can act as guru within ISKCON due to having maintained a respectable position in ISKCON within the Vaishnava community.

 

The GBC doesn't appoint gurus.

They simply give sanction that the person can act as guru within ISKCON.

 

Srila Prabhupada already empowered and authorized his disciples to become guru.

The GBC simply has the responsibility to make sure that ISKCON gurus meet some minimum standards expected from one who acts a guru.

 

The GBC has openly encouraged all the disciples of Srila Prabhupada to become qualified gurus.

If a member of ISKCON meets GBC approval, then he can act as guru within ISKCON.

They don't appoint gurus.

They only approve whether the person can function as guru within ISKCON.

 

After all, it should not be a free-for-all in ISKCON.

 

The GBC has the responsiblity to oversee that ISKCON does not become a haven for bogus gurus who don't meet the minimum requirements expected from a guru.

 

The allegation that they rubber stamp gurus is actually a false allegation.

They don't rubberstamp gurus.

They simply make a judgement as to whether or not the aspiring guru meets to scrutiny of the Vaishnava committee.

 

It's not really a bad system to have a rather large body of Vaishnavas making sure that a "guru" meets some basic standards of behaviour.

 

Any divinely inspired guru has the option to be guru outside ISKCON if the GBC does not approve of his qualifications.

[suchandra]

 

It's the GBC bureaucracy that is trashing ISKCON.

So then you would sign that a movement like present ISKCON has no warranty to act in the West as "genuine Gaudiya-Vaishnava Society" and is not necessarily required in Western societies - it should be rather banned like demanded by many concerned theologians to operate there where it started - in the Hindu society of India? Who needs a trashed ISKCON anyway? The hippies are healed.

[suchandra]

 

Maybe so.

But, I am not going to trash some very sincere and advanced devotees in ISKCON.

Sorry, yes, you surely mean the come back of Bhavananda prabhu and Kirtananda prabhu - yes, this is offensive to trash in such Vaishnavas. And Srila Satsvarupa Goswami and Srila Danurdhara Swami - We cant trash such sincere devotees in ISKCON. Agreed. Did I forgot anyone?

 

"some very sincere and advanced devotee" - not by words, but by actions.

[Guruvani]

 

Sorry, yes, you surely mean the come back of Bhavananda prabhu and Kirtananda prabhu - yes, this is offensive. And Srila Satsvarupa Goswami - We cant trash such sincere devotees in ISKCON. Agreed.

 

Foregiveness is a brahminical power that you obviously do not possess.

When you grow up and become a mature person maybe you will understand.

[suchandra]

 

Foregiveness is a brahmicinal power that you obviously do not possess.

When you grow up and become a mature person maybe you will understand.

Sorry - misunderstood, you mean mature like your neighbour Harikes prabhu, well, guess you're right, I first have to grow up to reach that level of sophisticated expertise.

You're like always - right!

[Guruvani]

 

So then you would sign that a movement like present ISKCON has no warranty to act in the West as "genuine Gaudiya-Vaishnava Society" and is not necessarily required in Western societies - it should be rather banned like demanded by many concerned theologians to operate there where it started - in the Hindu society of India? Who needs a trashed ISKCON anyway? The hippies are healed.

 

The fixed-up devotees are holding ISKCON together not the GBC.

If the nice devotees of ISKCON left, then the GBC would be nothing.

 

ISKCON is about the devotees not the GBC.

[Guruvani]

 

Sorry - misunderstood, you mean mature like your neighbour Harikes prabhu, well, guess you're right, I first have to grow up to reach that level of sophisticated expertise.

You're like always - right!

 

Why not?

If he comes back to the lotus feet of Srila Prabhupada then he is back on the right path.

[ksbh]

The more I read your posts, the more I am disappointed. I expected much more from you considering that you have been in the movement for decades.

 

Let me explain .... of all the wonderful things ISKCON has done, post after post, all you seem to be able to see are the faults and fall downs. A far cry from the ideal character of a Vaisnava. So many nice things have happened in our movement but all you can see is Kirtanananda Swami and Harikesh Swami. By the way, don't mind me asking but what are your contributions to this movement in relation to what Kirtanananda Maharaja & Harikesh Swami achieved?

 

Ever read about Srila Prabhupada's comparison between a honey bee and the common fly? If you're just looking for sores and rotten stuff, it's all you're likely to find.

 

 

Sorry - misunderstood, you mean mature like your neighbour Harikes prabhu, well, guess you're right, I first have to grow up to reach that level of sophisticated expertise.

You're like always - right!

[suchandra]

 

The more I read your posts, the more I am disappointed.

Disappointed - because of missing content. When you started to post, there was quite some hope that you will provide blissful, real fresh spiritual content to the forum. At least I had that hope. But you're right, I'm a nothing compared to Bhagavan prabhu, Ramesvara prabhu or the great service of Prithu prabhu. I only distributed 150,000 Bhagavad-gitas and donated my heirship (200,000 dollar) to the GBC this is of course nothing and an impudence even to mention, sorry, you're so right. Can't be compared with what Srila Hansadutta prabhu did. Just googled, here, here is where you find real wonderful things of real Vaishnavas, at the galleries 1 to 5 of http://www.iskcon.com/myIskcon/gallery5.htm

[Guruvani]

 

At least I had that hope. But you're right, I'm a nothing compared to Bhagavan prabhu, Ramesvara prabhu or the great service of Prithu prabhu.

Why do you have to always show the most extreme examples?

Can't you find any respectable devotees working within ISKCON today?

 

You always want to drag up the worst examples and use that for an excuse to totally discredit ISKCON.

 

I can set here and think of many very nice devotees in ISKCON who are sincerely trying to do some service to Srila Prabhupada.

 

What about Danavir Maharaja? Lokanatha Maharaja, Bhakti Caru Swami, Sivarama Swami? Mahanidhi Maharaja?

Jayadvaita Maharaja?

There are many nice devotees in ISKCON.

 

Digging up the worst examples to make an excuse to discredit ISKCON is a cheap shot.

 

You can do better than that.

[suchandra]

 

to discredit ISKCON is a cheap shot.

 

You're so right prabhu, simply on strength of limited observation who would ever dare to do such a thing? Although, as you bring in anumana, evidence by hypothesis and brush aside Prabhupada's words - all over Europe, all the ISKCON gurus since 1977 one by one, fell down. At least 6000 ex-disciples left ISKCON. Austria, all ISKCON temples closed since 1998. No more Sankirtan vans with books on Europe's roads. If you call plain facts, "discrediting", what you clearly do, one rather would suggest that a learned person like you means the discrediting of being appointed in 1980 by Tamal Krishna Goswami and Hansadutta prabhu who both declared to the assembled devotees including Jayadvaita Swami, that Srila Prabhupada had never desginated/appointed any diksha-gurus. This was at Nrsinghananda's hideout in Topanga California. Some of the others have admitted this too, no appointment/order by Prabhupada ever given, so where is your claim that there are any selected diksha-gurus after 1977, ordered by Prabhupada? And if the first ones were never ordered to function as diksha-gurus, how are any of the contemporary diksha-gurus ordered by Prabhupada?

[ksbh]

Prabhu ... Nobody appoints Diksa gurus.

 

 

You're so right prabhu, simply on strength of limited observation who would ever dare to do such a thing? Although, as you bring in anumana, evidence by hypothesis and brush aside Prabhupada's words - all over Europe, all the ISKCON gurus since 1977 one by one, fell down. At least 6000 ex-disciples left ISKCON. Austria, all ISKCON temples closed since 1998. No more Sankirtan vans with books on Europe's roads. If you call plain facts, "discrediting", what you clearly do, one rather would suggest that a learned person like you means the discrediting of being appointed in 1980 by Tamal Krishna Goswami and Hansadutta prabhu who both declared to the assembled devotees including Jayadvaita Swami, that Srila Prabhupada had never desginated/appointed any diksha-gurus. This was at Nrsinghananda's hideout in Topanga California. Some of the others have admitted this too, no appointment/order by Prabhupada ever given, so where is your claim that there are any selected diksha-gurus after 1977, ordered by Prabhupada? And if the first ones were never ordered to function as diksha-gurus, how are any of the contemporary diksha-gurus ordered by Prabhupada?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

At least 6000 ex-disciples left ISKCON. Austria, all ISKCON temples closed since 1998. No more Sankirtan vans with books on Europe's roads.

The baby birds need to leave the nest at *some* point, don't they?

 

I don't believe in such a beast as an "ex-disciple". As fed-up as some might have become with ISKCON, what they learned (or rediscovered) there is still in their hearts--regardless of their outward appearance and activities.

 

As I see it, the home of each of those 6,000 "ex-disciples" is now a temple. There are 6,000 more temples than there were before they "left".

 

Halellujah!!!! Praise the Lord!

[cbrahma]

 

LIke I said, there are only two options.

I think the ritvik system would have been the best path for ISKCON, but that didn't happen and that is NEVER going to happen.

So, the best they can do now is keep up the GBC guru system and hopefully things will get better someday.

 

Me join?

Not likely.

 

I hate bureaucracy.

It's not just the guru system of the GBC that I don't like.

I could almost tolerate that.

It's how the GBC have burdened ISKCON with an ecclesiastical load of rubbish that turns me off the most.

 

It's not necessarily the GBC guru sanctioning system that I dislike the most about the GBC.

 

For sure, I think the GBC has lead ISKCON astray into the wrong direction.

 

I personally like the model of Tripurari Swami and Jagat Guru Maharaja (Narasingha Maharaja).

I think they have got the right idea.

 

Abandon the bureaucracy and succeed on your own merits.

That is way it should be done.

 

In other words, its not the ISKCON gurus that I dislike so much.

It's the GBC that really turns my stomach.

 

I personally admire many of the ISKCON gurus.

I am sure many of them are just in the toleration mode with the GBC as well.

 

Without a ritvik system in place, the GBC is just a burdensome bureaucracy.

 

If the GBC doesn't implement a ritvik system, then I think they should be relegated to simple managers of the corperate technicalities and properties and keep their hands out of the guru business.

 

If someone chooses the wrong guru, then too bad for them.

You can't trash the guru-disciple faith system out of fear that somebody might accept an unqualified guru for initiation.

 

I think the damage from that system would be less harmful than the GBC interference with the divine relationship between guru and disciple.

 

This triage of gurus by an adjudication committee is quite ridiculous. It's like being processed by a government bureau. The ISKCON gurus are GBC gurus and as such are ritviks for the GBC. It is essentially the GBC that all ISKCON members account to and obey. Therefore it is GBC that is acarya. Therefore it is bogus. The Gurus are ritvik to a bogus collective acarya. What a mess! And you're piously defending this atrocity.

[theist]

 

"Problems? What Problems? I don't see any problems?"

 

Ordinary problems come with the territory and are not much to be concerned with. Ripping off and misdirecting the preaching mission of God's representative is an entirely different animal.

[cbrahma]

 

The baby birds need to leave the nest at *some* point, don't they?

 

I don't believe in such a beast as an "ex-disciple". As fed-up as some might have become with ISKCON, what they learned (or rediscovered) there is still in their hearts--regardless of their outward appearance and activities.

 

As I see it, the home of each of those 6,000 "ex-disciples" is now a temple. There are 6,000 more temples than there were before they "left".

 

Halellujah!!!! Praise the Lord!

When you wish upon a star....