I am Guru and I Want to Die with the Title of Guru

[krsna]

I am Guru and I Want to Die with the Title of Guru

BY: GADADHARA DASA

 

Dec 28, DALLAS, TEXAS (SUN) — Let us examine the new word jugglery recently put out by the GBC and Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. The GBC statement says:

• "Satsvarupa dasa Goswami (SDG) will assume the status of retired sannyasi and retired disksa guru."

That is pure nonsense. There is no such thing as 'retired Sannyasi' and 'retired Guru'.

 

The GBC statement says:

• "This means SDG will no longer give initiation nor present himself as an initiating Guru."

SDG says: "YES SIR! Your Honor, Mighty GBC! I will no longer give initiation nor present myself as an initiating guru. --- BUT --- Those who wish to continue as my disciples can hear from me through my books and website, through personal correspondence, and whenever possible, in person."

 

In other words SDG says (and GBC agrees with): "Wait a minute, Listen folks, I am still Guru, as long as I live. I want to die as a soldier on the battlefield with the title of Guru. That is all, I am truly renounced now, no more disciples please, now you can associate with me freely without any pressure to make you my disciple. After all, I am still worth something. Like they say, a bird at hand is worth two in the bush. Actually the reverse is true in my case: my experience counts and my mistakes have made me stronger. I can help you a lot, a lot, a lot."

 

SDG writes:

• "In December of 2001, I was at a medical and spiritual low point in my life. I had wanted to tell Pranada Dasi, before I died of my old feelings for her because this was a part of my life. Naively I told her of my prior attachment to her. I did not anticipate the result of my confession, which was a revival of the old feelings."

Excuse Me Sir! Please stop shouting your excuses about your health and claiming to be naive. You are not naive, you were checking her out as to how she will respond. Please spare us from your continuing deceit. You are 68 years old and the end may be very near. It is time to face the truth and speak the truth "AS IS" without coloring it. Your own words say that you grabbed the opportunity as soon as you got little hint from your subject. Read it below:

• "Thus began an illicit and intimate romantic phone, e-mail, and letter exchange lasting over a year. During this year she also visited me three times in Ireland, and during one such visit, there was physical intimacy. "

And:

• "During this time I was diagnosed with anticipatory anxiety disorder. Pranada became involved with my care team since she has some expertise in handling this disorder. Of course, this was a formula for further falldown."

Excuse Me Sir! What was involved in "this formula for further falldown"? What intimacy took place and how many years and/or months it lasted? Open your heart and spell it out.

 

SDG writes:

• "…but in general I will remain retired from the forefront of ISKCON preaching. I will now voluntarily implement a peer review system for my publishing efforts-presently, I am continuing the series A Poor Man Reads the Bhagavatam, which should go on for the rest of my years."

Excuse Me Sir! Last 30 years you have been into SMARANAM of something else so dear to you. So effectively you retired and renounced preaching 30 years ago. Please stay in the dark as much as you wish, but stop pulling the wool over our eyes. Please give up this madness of writing books. The world knows how good a writer you are.

 

The GBC writes:

• "Closure: This case concerning SDG's relationship with Pranada is closed and not subject to reinterpretation or reopening as long as the monitor committee report indicates compliance with these agreed upon measures."

The Mighty GBC has the last word. Let us close this chapter quickly and move on. This affair was closed from 1978 to May 2004, that is for 26 years. Then the GBC and SDG had no choice but to say few words, and two letters were posted in May 2004.

 

Now, it seems that the GBC and SDG had no choice but to give a little more detail. We may not know the full truth, but the following paragraph may be one reason as to why this second letter came out to mollify few more people:

• "When I first wrote about my relationship with Pranada Dasi, I understated the length and seriousness of it. I was frightened and wanted to protect my reputation, Pranada's reputation, and not cause unnecessary damage to the faith of many devotees who counted on me to provide a proper example of Krsna consciousness. In retrospect this was a mistake, and I hope this letter serves to clarify matters."

Excuse Me Sir! Mind your own business. First protect your own reputation by honest thoughts, words, and deeds. Then you do not have to worry about protecting the reputation of any one else.

 

It is like "pulling teeth" when it comes to finding out truth from the GBC. Now the GBC wants to close this SDG chapter again. For the last 30 years we have gotten a rotten deal -- instead of getting truly renounced leaders, we have gotten all kinds of demons as leaders. We have gotten so many Gundas, Bandits, and Crooks as GBCs. We have gotten so many Rouges, Thugs, and Rascals as Gurus pretending to be Rajarshis. Forty plus Gurus out of 100 or so appointed have been exposed as cheats and crooks.

The good thing is that the Serpent of Eternal Time is exposing and eating alive these deceiving crooks.

[suchandra]

 

It is like "pulling teeth" when it comes to finding out truth from the GBC. Now the GBC wants to close this SDG chapter again. For the last 30 years we have gotten a rotten deal -- instead of getting truly renounced leaders, we have gotten all kinds of demons as leaders. We have gotten so many Gundas, Bandits, and Crooks as GBCs. We have gotten so many Rouges, Thugs, and Rascals as Gurus pretending to be Rajarshis. Forty plus Gurus out of 100 or so appointed have been exposed as cheats and crooks.

The good thing is that the Serpent of Eternal Time is exposing and eating alive these deceiving crooks.

SDG is surely right now in that position to not only write an apology but to also actually do something for serving the Vaishnavas. The saying, “Words are cheap, actions speak,” is never more true than when applied to a deviation of this dimension. But since SDG carefully prearranged his outing, he deliberate concluded that this letter is enough. Let's see if Krishna considers this as wholehearted and sincere offer of an excuse. So far the response seems that SDG is not taken earnest and he's also not surprised about deprecative feedback. Almost looks that his outing serves some other purpose than rectifying his mistakes.

[mahak]

He taught others the system of retirement, can he do what he taught? Head North, bro, renounce truely everything. As Vidura said to Drtarastra, "Get out of here. What an embarassment to live getting hand fed by Bhimasena who killed every one of your 100 sons."

 

So, quit all, retire from your embarassment as well. You taught me, now I teach you, become avadhuta and live on nothing in the holy places. Dont drop by the temples for respect or handouts, be a phenop, living only on fruit you find on the ground. Grow your hair, quit painting (please).

 

mahak

[Beggar]

Say it ain't so Satsvarupa Prabhu, say it ain't so!

After the Black Sox Scandal of 1920s, a young fan seeing “Shoeless” Joe Jackson emerge from the courthouse, gave us the immortal line, “Say it ain’t so, Joe.”

[Kulapavana]

Establishing sannyasa asrama in the West was a big mistake IMO. There was no need for it and the risk was huge. Over 90% of sannyasis Prabhupada initiated fell down with disastrous consequences for the movement. The initial reason for reviving sannyasa in Gaudiya Sampradaya (commanding respect from general population) is not at all valid in the West. It would be much better to have PhDs and not sannyasis if we wanted to impress people. If you want to complain about "caste goswamis" then you should also complain about sannyasa in Iskcon. It brought a lot of shame to Gaudiya Vaishnavism and definitely damaged the mission. Lord Caitanya said: "kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya yei krsna-tattva-vetta sei 'guru' haya". And Gita says that you dont have to wear saffron to be a true sannyasi. That was the approach of traditional GV parivars, and they were 100% correct on that account.

[suchandra]

 

Establishing sannyasa asrama in the West was a big mistake IMO. There was no need for it and the risk was huge. Over 90% of sannyasis Prabhupada initiated fell down with disastrous consequences for the movement. The initial reason for reviving sannyasa in Gaudiya Sampradaya (commanding respect from general population) is not at all valid in the West. It would be much better to have PhDs and not sannyasis if we wanted to impress people. If you want to complain about "caste goswamis" then you should also complain about sannyasa in Iskcon. It brought a lot of shame to Gaudiya Vaishnavism and definitely damaged the mission. Lord Caitanya said: "kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya yei krsna-tattva-vetta sei 'guru' haya". And Gita says that you dont have to wear saffron to be a true sannyasi. That was the approach of traditional GV parivars, and they were 100% correct on that account.

"Guru does not canvass. Sādhu does not canvass. He automatically, by his qualities, he becomes accepted. Yes."

New York, December 26, 1966

 

Becoming accepted by one's qualities, and not because one has adopted the dress of a sannyasi and people are reminded to henceforth call you, "maharaja". They thought by ignoring this simple truth it will anyway do. Unfortunately it doesnt. ISKCON used to write on the invitation cards, "genuine spiritual master and sannyasi will be speaking".

Somehow things haven't changed, people still seem to not accept a Vaishnava as liberated soul, because it was printed on the invitation card.

 

So this is simply word jugglery so that if Pranada dd has subsequent damage from SDG's machinations and there should be compensation for consequential loss, then the leaders can say, well this was not our fault, we're exempted from liability because we "suspended" our guru. In sum they will say and do anything to keep up the guru show bottle program. No remorse, no actual change, then again they also suspended Jayatirtha way back in 1979, they also "supsended" their other "pure devotee" like Tamal, Hansadutta, Bhavananda and many others, this is all done simply to contract out of liability for all the done damage.

[sanatan]

 

Establishing sannyasa asrama in the West was a big mistake IMO. There was no need for it and the risk was huge. Over 90% of sannyasis Prabhupada initiated fell down with disastrous consequences for the movement. The initial reason for reviving sannyasa in Gaudiya Sampradaya (commanding respect from general population) is not at all valid in the West. It would be much better to have PhDs and not sannyasis if we wanted to impress people. If you want to complain about "caste goswamis" then you should also complain about sannyasa in Iskcon. It brought a lot of shame to Gaudiya Vaishnavism and definitely damaged the mission. Lord Caitanya said: "kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya yei krsna-tattva-vetta sei 'guru' haya". And Gita says that you dont have to wear saffron to be a true sannyasi. That was the approach of traditional GV parivars, and they were 100% correct on that account.

 

To take this a step further:

 

Requiring across-the-board complete celibacy for properly married men and women as a "principle" was and continues to be a huge mistake.

 

St. Paul, who can correctly be considered a guru in the line of Jesus Christ, had a strict-yet-reasonable approach to the matter nearly 2000 years ago, as discussed in 1 Corinthians, particularly verses 7, 8, and 9 (italics mine) :

 

7. For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

 

(In an ideal world, everyone could observe complete celibacy, as I do, but each person is an individual, with his/her God-given dharma.)

 

8. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.

 

(Yes, the ideal state for single people in spiritual life is celibacy.)

 

9. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

 

(However, I realize that not all single people can maintain celibacy, so it's best for them to get married and have a sexual outlet than to burn with frustrated natural urges.)

 

I love Srila Prabhupada, and will always give him the personal benefit of the doubt. In the case of strict celibacy, I think that his faith in Krishna in general, and the the traditional sadhana-bhakti process in particular, was so great that he had no doubt that the India-standard spiritual practices would enable all disciples to overcome personal obstacles...but, in his totally transcendental and pure faith, he over-estimated us Westerners.

[suchandra]

 

To take this a step further:

 

Requiring across-the-board complete celibacy for properly married men and women as a "principle" was and continues to be a huge mistake.

 

St. Paul, who can correctly be considered a guru in the line of Jesus Christ, had a strict-yet-reasonable approach to the matter nearly 2000 years ago, as discussed in 1 Corinthians, particularly verses 7, 8, and 9 (italics mine) :

 

7. For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

 

(In an ideal world, everyone could observe complete celibacy, as I do, but each person is an individual, with his/her God-given dharma.)

 

8. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.

 

(Yes, the ideal state for single people in spiritual life is celibacy.)

 

9. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

 

(However, I realize that not all single people can maintain celibacy, so it's best for them to get married and have a sexual outlet than to burn with frustrated natural urges.)

 

I love Srila Prabhupada, and will always give him the personal benefit of the doubt. In the case of strict celibacy, I think that his faith in Krishna in general, and the the traditional sadhana-bhakti process in particular, was so great that he had no doubt that the India-standard spiritual practices would enable all disciples to overcome personal obstacles...but, in his totally transcendental and pure faith, he over-estimated us Westerners.

 

Looks like that ISKCON devotees ask this question, what is a retired sannyasi?

Sita-pati dasa, AU : H.H. Satsvarupa dasa Goswami - "Retired Diksa Guru"

 

 

"This is sort of about Satsvarupa’s most recent letter about his fall down and about GBC’s punishments for that fall down. They claim that “Satsvarupa dasa Goswami (SDG) will assume the status of retired sannyasi and retired disksa guru.” If you’re not familiar with it, go here.

-

I have a friend who is a retired professor. He used to be a professor, but not anymore. He’s retired.

I guess this can apply to a retired diksa guru. He used to be a guru, but not anymore. He’s … retired. On second thought, that does sound weird. But I can at least wrap my head around it.

And while there are a bunch of ex-diksa gurus, as far as I know, only one retired diksa guru (SDG). I think there must be some important difference going on there, I’m just not sure what it is.

An ex-diksa guru’s disciples take shelter of another guru (or more than likely just leave). But a retired diksa guru’s disciples are still his disciples. They can take shelter of him as guru, even though he isn’t qualified to make more disciples. Sort of guru-lite, I guess.

This was all a little confusing until I tried to figure out what a “retired sannyasi” was. Then it got downright surreal.

Applying the same logic of “I used to be a sannyasi, but now I’m not… I’m retired” seems like it would work. There are many ex-sanyasis in ISKCON. But with SDG, he seems to still be a sannyasi (and thus not an ex-sannyasi). I guess I’m not really sure why or how or what they’re even trying to get at here.

What exactly does a “retired sannyasi” do? How does that work? Wouldn’t that just be… a householder… sort of? Typically, when a sannyasi falls down (and admits it), he either totally leaves Krishna consciousness, or (hopefully) sticks around, puts on white, gets married and becomes a normal and often fairly likable devotee.

But what the heck is going on here?

Is a retired sannyasi different from an ex-sannyasi? How? And more importantly, why? Is a retired sannyasi still to be called “maharaja”? Or do we call him “prabhu”? Do we bow down to him or just offer him the respects afforded any vaisnava? And if we are supposed to treat him like a sannyasi, what’s the point of being retired?

And another thing… concerning Satsvarupa das… Goswami/Prabhu (depending on the answers to my questions), what does this do to the validity of Srila Prabhupada Lilamrta? Will ISKCON still be recognizing this work as bona fide?

I remember when the devotee who wrote The Seventh Goswami (Biography on Bhaktivinoda Thakura) fell down (or left ISKCON, I can’t remember which). Immediately, we were urged to not read that book, even though, prior to the fall down/leaving, we were encouraged to read it. So, are we going to be urged not to read Lilamrta? Or is this fall down somehow not as bad as other fall downs?

I’m not trying to be snarky, these really are honest questions. I think some guidelines on what to do when popular devotees fall down is in order. Since Satsvarupa admits to behavior not fitting of a sannyasi since 1978, does this nix nearly all of his bibliography? Are we still allowed to read it? Should it still be considered bona fide?

And lastly, will someone please tell me how we are supposed to know when someone is pure. Yes, I know, sastra will tell us, Krishna will tell us. But we mostly what we do is rely upon the GBC to help us. And, no offense, but… their track record isn’t all that great in this respect. So, what should I do?

Oh, and just a statement. In Krishna consciousness, we have a lot of rules. Most of us don’t follow all of them. Is there any way we could just be honest about that for once? I think we’d all be a lot happier."

 

 

[sanatan]

Suchandra, I can see that many of us on this board are taking the steps into total honesty.

 

IMO, it's totally forgivable when someone with an obviously sincere background shows genuine anger and frustration with aspects of their ISKCON experience, and is seemingly-offensive...I'd term this "shadow offense"...it'll go away. These people aren't offensive personalities; the "leaders" who shafted or merely misled them are.

 

Regarding the Lilamrta, I collected the original books as they were published, and they are a treasured part of my library. I'm a little bemused when devotees squabble back and forth over the style of presentation or dispute the portrayal of Srila Prabhupada in a personal and human way. For me, these books have been a great substitute for never having known SP, and SDG did wonderful and irreplaceable service in writing them, no matter what else he did or didn't do.

 

I've read volume one, A Lifetime In Preparation, at least twenty times.

[mahak]

satswarupa did a good job on the book in my opinion.

 

Mistakes? Sure, but what is the motive? Just as sanatana said, to give opportunity for those who didnt know him to have a bio presentation.

 

The severe critics want everything to be perfect, and maybe this is because the guru trip of the eighties misled us into expecting that they were perfect. But when we take into consideration naradas instruction to vyasadeva, about errors made in describing transcendental activities of the Lord and his servants, maybe we should all chill out. The alternative is to become like PADA, and criticize everyone without cause most of the time.

 

Now the art? Well, we can critique this:eek4: , but even then, art is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Satsvarupa has made mistakes, but we must remember srila prabhupadas relationship with him. How can we hate such a beloved disciple of prabhupada. If he has gone wrong, lets pray for quick recovery, not like a fly plunge into his sores. Thanks for the reminder, sanatana.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[theist]

 

He taught others the system of retirement, can he do what he taught? Head North, bro, renounce truely everything. As Vidura said to Drtarastra, "Get out of here. What an embarassment to live getting hand fed by Bhimasena who killed every one of your 100 sons."

 

So, quit all, retire from your embarassment as well. You taught me, now I teach you, become avadhuta and live on nothing in the holy places. Dont drop by the temples for respect or handouts, be a phenop, living only on fruit you find on the ground. Grow your hair,quit painting (please).

mahak

LOL! Yes for sure. Also please quit referring to yourself as "Gosvami" Satsvarupa das.

I still remember you from the early seventies. You came by my local temple for a couple weeks. I remember thinking, "so this is what happens to one who stays with it in time." What a sweet devotee. How inspiring to have even been in the same kirtan with you. I will remember you from that period.

Please get away from anyone who bows to your feet and considers you their personal link to Krsna. Get away from all your croonie friends, your co-enablers It is unhealthy for you and all of them. Mahak said become avadhuta. Perfect advice. Can you renounce without looking like a renounciant? With only guru and Krsna knowing?

Yes that's the test for us all. 68 and you are living in an old man's body. Stop the games before the moment of death.

No real hope for me for many more lifetimes but I really feel you have a shot.

Godspeed

 

[krsna]

 

"Guru does not canvass. Sādhu does not canvass. He automatically, by his qualities, he becomes accepted. Yes."

New York, December 26, 1966

 

:pray: :pray:

[suchandra]

 

Suchandra, I can see that many of us on this board are taking the steps into total honesty.

 

IMO, it's totally forgivable when someone with an obviously sincere background shows genuine anger and frustration with aspects of their ISKCON experience, and is seemingly-offensive...I'd term this "shadow offense"...it'll go away. These people aren't offensive personalities; the "leaders" who shafted or merely misled them are.

 

Regarding the Lilamrta, I collected the original books as they were published, and they are a treasured part of my library. I'm a little bemused when devotees squabble back and forth over the style of presentation or dispute the portrayal of Srila Prabhupada in a personal and human way. For me, these books have been a great substitute for never having known SP, and SDG did wonderful and irreplaceable service in writing them, no matter what else he did or didn't do.

 

I've read volume one, A Lifetime In Preparation, at least twenty times.

Thanks for reminding Sanatan prabhu, yes, I also have six volumes of Lilamrita and other books like "Servant of the servant", by TKG or, "The Hare Krishna Explosion", by Hayagriva prabhu. This is of course right what you say but doesn't this belong to the internal situation but we also have the responsibility of presenting the teachings of Lord Caitanya to the world? Do people find it easy to adopt the path of chanting Hare Krishna - or do we create unneccessary insurmountable obstacles for people in general to develop faith in the path of bhakti-yoga?

Again, from our own subjective view, SDG might be a good buddy, but what about if people start to stop chanting, turn away from worshipping Krishna? You want to be hooked to this kind of guilt?

[Kulapavana]

 

I love Srila Prabhupada, and will always give him the personal benefit of the doubt. In the case of strict celibacy, I think that his faith in Krishna in general, and the the traditional sadhana-bhakti process in particular, was so great that he had no doubt that the India-standard spiritual practices would enable all disciples to overcome personal obstacles...but, in his totally transcendental and pure faith, he over-estimated us Westerners.

 

I agree. Sometimes it looked like a child-like naive innocence. But because his orders were taken very seriously these things tended to influence th movement in a profound way. Today this issue at least is not taken as a direct rule, but more like a lofty ideal. I know Iskcon gurus who privately tell their disciples not to torment themselves over this issue, but in public none of the bigshots dares to address that matter.

 

The sannyasa thing had one very serious consequence: it created an institutional ruling elite in Iskcon - the caste Swamis. It does not matter that you have proven yourself to be a total failure or an idiot who obediently served deviants like Kirtanananda for years - because you are a caste Swami you will be placed in position of power by the other caste Swamis. Because Iskcon is very poorly set up as an organization, there is no mechanism to change that. We can only wait for the extinction of this species.

[Bhaktavasya]

 

satswarupa did a good job on the book in my opinion.

 

 

The severe critics want everything to be perfect, and maybe this is because the guru trip of the eighties misled us into expecting that they were perfect. But when we take into consideration naradas instruction to vyasadeva, about errors made in describing transcendental activities of the Lord and his servants, maybe we should all chill out. The alternative is to become like PADA, and criticize everyone without cause most of the time.

 

Now the art? Well, we can critique this:eek4: , but even then, art is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

Mahaksa, this is a hot topic, and i like what you said here. I also like your advise to Satsvarup to ''head North, live the life of an avadhuta, travel to the holy places.'' In my opinion he would be better off away from the tight noose of the GBC, monitoring his every word and move.

 

It would be good if Satsvarup read some of the advise from his godsiblings over the internet...unless of course the GBC have forbidden him internet access!

[gHari]

That article is so shameful.

[mahak]

If we are not about compassion and forgiveness, then we have nothing at all.

 

Srila Prabhupada had many disciples go astray, and he rejected none of them. In fact, he personifies Lord Jesus story of the good shepherd. He looks for the lost one, leaving 99 to carry on. Ive had up front and personal experiance with this, as I was standing right there with sriman babhru when Srila Prabhupada, with ecstatic love in his eyes, asked govinda dasi of the welfare of his lost servant goursundara. To witness his relationship with this person while all his leaders just wanted to do away with him, well, I follow, him, not them.

 

While I have not necessarily withheld criticism against the excesses of my godbrudren over the years, I have always noted that our best response is to ask Krsna to make their "token" karma short and restore them asw He has always restored me. Ya see, I got this plank in my eye, and I cannot see that well to remove the speck from me bredrens eye. But I do have the ability to ask krsna to restore both of our visions.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[suchandra]

 

If we are not about compassion and forgiveness, then we have nothing at all.

 

Srila Prabhupada had many disciples go astray, and he rejected none of them. In fact, he personifies Lord Jesus story of the good shepherd. He looks for the lost one, leaving 99 to carry on. Ive had up front and personal experiance with this, as I was standing right there with sriman babhru when Srila Prabhupada, with ecstatic love in his eyes, asked govinda dasi of the welfare of his lost servant goursundara. To witness his relationship with this person while all his leaders just wanted to do away with him, well, I follow, him, not them.

 

While I have not necessarily withheld criticism against the excesses of my godbrudren over the years, I have always noted that our best response is to ask Krsna to make their "token" karma short and restore them asw He has always restored me. Ya see, I got this plank in my eye, and I cannot see that well to remove the speck from me bredrens eye. But I do have the ability to ask krsna to restore both of our visions.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

This is real Vaishnava, thanks, great post!

It was actually SDG who read this resolution to Prabhupada.

 

 

Prabhupāda: This is to give them chance. They are chanting. Some way or other, keep them alive.

Satsvarūpa: Resolution: An international life membership committee is formed headed by Brahmānanda Swami and Jayatīrtha, Gopāla Kṛṣṇa, and Ādi-keśava Swami. Each GBC man is responsible to try to recover devotees, blooped devotees, in his zone. That means fallen devotees. Say, if Puṣṭa Krishna has left, then wherever he is living in the world, that GBC man of that area should try to contact him, or Madhudviṣa, like that. They’re responsible for them, trying to recover them. Resolved: A committee to be formed to discuss the improvements in the Māyāpura festival and set programs. Advisory committee of Jayapatākā Swami, Rāmeśvara Mahārāja, Bhavānanda Swami, Gopāla Kṛṣṇa, Mahendra and Balavanta. This is an advisory committee which will plan for an action committee.

 

 

 

Room Conversation

with GBC members

March 2-3, 1977, Māyāpura

 

 

[mahak]

So important thsat I actually heard him say, "It is better for my disciples to bring back one disciple than to bring in ten new disciples."

 

Write him a letter, wish him well, remind him of his guru's special mercy, his position as patita pavana.

 

We all express such high feelings when we hear of one dying of cancer. What about alzeimers or other mental illnesses. These, too are biological diseases, so when we see someone who has lost it to some degree, consider it another form of cancer, and have the same feelings of well wishing. Our books are full of wayward folks who have had devotees on their side.

[theist]

 

That article is so shameful.

I diasagree.What IS shameful is having sex with your godsister who is married to your godbrother while simultaneously calling your self SDGosvami, wearing the dress of a sannyasi, posing as a sinless saint and indeed a spiritual master and even accepting worship and offerings as such while conducting this scam.

 

I am not concerned with the acts of transgression that were commited between himself and this woman, that is none of my business but of the pretense of sitting on the vysasasana while this was going on. Calling charletons charletons for the benefit of the potential victims is everyone's duty.

[Kulapavana]

I have been following the guru debate within our Movement for quite a few years now. Since I am involved in a day to day contact with new and old devotees, as well as with people who are simply curious about our Movement, I would like to share a few observations related to this debate.

It seems to me that the tone, content, and form of the guru debate within our Movement are directly leading to an overall devaluation of the concept of guru in general, as well as to a marked decline in overall faith in the Krsna Consciousness process as presented to us by Srila Prabhupada.

Of course other events, such as the numerous fall downs of Iskcon gurus or their abuses of power, did not help in that regard. Still, the way we discuss the guru issue in our Movement has a lot to do with how people perceive the legitimacy of our Movement, as well as how such regrettable falldowns are understood.

Seems to me that here are four basic camps in this discussion. What are their "sins" in this debate? One camp (GBC) usually presents a patronizing attitude mixed with witholding relevant information, or an outright misrepresentation of the facts. The ritvik camp "sins" are personified by "Final Order thumpers" who basically call anybody involved in the current Iskcon power system a crook, traitor, liar, and pretender. These are the two main camps. Third camp consists of ex-Iskcon devotees who took shelter of Gaudiya Vaishnavas from post-Gaudiya Matha organizations or from traditional Gaudiya parivars. The fourth camp is rank and file devotees who are just confused about this issue.

The good news is that despite all the accusations, mud slinging, shoddy logic, out of context, twisted and/or contradictory quotations often used in these guru debates, people are still interested in hearing from a living spiritual authority.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

I'm glad to see you are able to rise above those of us with petty differences and axes to grind. This is a trenchant analysis.

 

 

I have been following the guru debate within our Movement for quite a few years now. Since I am involved in a day to day contact with new and old devotees, as well as with people who are simply curious about our Movement, I would like to share a few observations related to this debate.

It seems to me that the tone, content, and form of the guru debate within our Movement are directly leading to an overall devaluation of the concept of guru in general, as well as to a marked decline in overall faith in the Krsna Consciousness process as presented to us by Srila Prabhupada.

Of course other events, such as the numerous fall downs of Iskcon gurus or their abuses of power, did not help in that regard. Still, the way we discuss the guru issue in our Movement has a lot to do with how people perceive the legitimacy of our Movement, as well as how such regrettable falldowns are understood.

Seems to me that here are four basic camps in this discussion. What are their "sins" in this debate? One camp (GBC) usually presents a patronizing attitude mixed with witholding relevant information, or an outright misrepresentation of the facts. The ritvik camp "sins" are personified by "Final Order thumpers" who basically call anybody involved in the current Iskcon power system a crook, traitor, liar, and pretender. These are the two main camps. Third camp consists of ex-Iskcon devotees who took shelter of Gaudiya Vaishnavas from post-Gaudiya Matha organizations or from traditional Gaudiya parivars. The fourth camp is rank and file devotees who are just confused about this issue.

The good news is that despite all the accusations, mud slinging, shoddy logic, out of context, twisted and/or contradictory quotations often used in these guru debates, people are still interested in hearing from a living spiritual authority.

[suchandra]

 

I diasagree.What IS shameful is having sex with your godsister who is married to your godbrother while simultaneously calling your self SDGosvami, wearing the dress of a sannyasi, posing as a sinless saint and indeed a spiritual master and even accepting worship and offerings as such while conducting this scam.

 

I am not concerned with the acts of transgression that were commited between himself and this woman, that is none of my business but of the pretense of sitting on the vysasasana while this was going on. Calling charletons charletons for the benefit of the potential victims is everyone's duty.

Sannyasi or grihastha, looks like Vaishnavas are transcendental to both.

 

SDG 2007

 

from SDG online:

 

CHURNING THE MILK OCEAN

http://www.sdgonline.org/letter.html

I am personally grateful that this brings us closer to final closure and that the case will not be re-opened again. If you have any questions or concerns, you can contact the devotees listed below, the SDG sanga, myself, or devotees on the monitor committee. Thank you.

Yours in service to Srila Prabhupada,

Satsvarupa dasa Goswami

Yadunandana dasa: yadunandana.sdg@pamho.net

Hrdaya Caitanya dasa: hrdaya.caitanya.sdg@pamho.net

Jaya Govinda dasa: jaya.govinda.sdg@pamho.net

Baladeva dasa (Trinidad): Krsna@tstt.net.tt

Paramatma dasa (Guyana): paramatmadasa2001@

Haryasva dasa (Philadelphia): govindasvegetarian@gmail.com

Janmastami dasa (India): janmastami.sdg@pamho.net

Nitai dasa (Bangladesh): nitinarora108@

Narada Rsi dasa (New York): hrishikeshj@hotmail.com

Baladeva Vidyabhusana dasa (Delaware): bvd@sdgonline.org

Sastra dasa (Delaware): sastradas@comcast.net

Scott Wetherell (Boston): swetherell@promutualgroup.com

Narayana Kavaca dasa (Mexico): Michaelkelly108@hotmail.com

[osiris]

maybe it's in how one percieves sdg, and simply say, "Gee You Are You"

[Beggar]

This is from a discussion on ISKCON's "The Hare Krishna Network" on mixed marriages, that is devotees and karmis. Here it is revealed that there is a new invention in GBC ISKCON along the lines of "retired sannyasis", and it is called "pre-initiation". I'm wondering is this an invention of HH Jayapataka Swami or someone else?

<small> Permalink Reply by kalavati devi dasi Dec 27 2007

</small>

I think what you compromise on is all based on time, place and circumstance. You want to treat your partner respectfully. To artificially try to impose your suci standards on your wife may irritate her or make her angry if not approached diplomatically. Perhaps if you logically cite scripture and explain why things are meant to be suci, the next step is to set the example yourself and pray to Krsna and Srila Prabhupada that her heart softens and she begins to follow your example.

 

In terms of deity worship, I do not think it is a good idea to have Deities other than Gaura Nitai or Sri Pancattatva, because they do not take offense. To have silas, or Radha Krsna deities would probably be offensive since suci standards are not fully established in your household yet. Or since your wife is not of the same religion, she might not show the proper respect to the deities, and again only Gaura Nitai are completely merciful and would overlook this.

 

Srila Prabhupada says that divorce comes when the woman is weak or when sense gratification between the two partners is not reciprocal. The only comment I can make to expand on Srila Prabhupada’s statements is that respect between both parties is crucial to maintaining a good marriage. Without respect (which I think is also the same as the servant hood you describe), tender reciprocation and affection are unable to develop and both husband and wife feel alienated from one another.

 

What I have tried to do is chant, read, pray and worship on my own, and sometimes I will engage my husband in looking at deity photos from around the world or talk about the philosophy of Krsna Consciousness. I look for opportunities where I can naturally insert something about Krsna, or comment on what the Bhagavatam says about certain matters. I’ve done this with my daughter (who is 15 years old), because she is very headstrong and does the opposite of what anyone tells her to do. By gently and quietly giving her prasadam over the years, and mentioning Krsna every now and then, taking her to the Atlanta temple every now and then, she has gradually accepted Krsna Consciousness and took pre-initiation from HH Jayapataka Swami this past June at the New Panihati Festival in Atlanta. And get this; her boyfriend who came with us on the trip also took pre-initiation! It turns out he LOVES KC and kirtan, and he is encouraging her now in spiritual life.

 

Who knows what one’s previous karma is, or how many lifetimes one has been exposed to KC. It may be that your wife does not have many lifetimes of experience, but Krsna has somehow or other placed you together and she now benefiting so much by your association. You are helping her plant seeds of devotion in her heart, and although you may not see them fructifying now, do not fail to believe they are there, and waiting to blossom when the time is right.