More from the pioneering years of ISKCON's Zonal Acarya days (after 1977)

[Beggar]

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Antya 5.131

 

"yāha, bhāgavata paḍa vaiṣṇavera sthāne

ekānta āśraya kara caitanya-caraṇe

 

SYNONYMS

yāha — just go; bhāgavata paḍa — read Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam; vaiṣṇavera sthāne — from a self-realized Vaiṣṇava; ekānta āśraya kara — fully surrender; caitanya-caraṇe — at the lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"If you want to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam," he said, "you must approach a self-realized Vaiṣṇava and hear from him. You can do this when you have completely taken shelter of the lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu."

 

Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja:

 

Go and approach a vaisnava-gaura-priya, a dear devotee of Gauranga Mahaprabhu. Study and hear Bhagavata from him and completly take shelter at the lotus feet of Caitanya Mahaprabhu --- ekanta asaría kara caitanya-carane.(Cc Antya 5.131)

 

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja:

 

There are two kinds of bhagavatas. One is the transcendental book bhagavata, which was received by Vyasa in his trance, and in which all kinds of very powerful and sweet pastimes of Krsna have been given. It is under lock and key, however. It can be only opened by the highest class of

bhakta-bhagavata. These devotees have the key. Any ordinary bhakta, anyone who is in a stage lower than rati, cannot unlock it. Only one who has received suddha-sattva from an eternal parikara (associate) of Krsna, like Srila Rupa Gosvami, Srila Sanatana Gosvami and all the sad-Gosvamis, Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, and others up to Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Prabhupada, can open the lock.

[cbrahma]

 

I gotta admit that I would very much appreciate it if my choice is to read only or mainly the books of Prabhupada that I would not be defined as a "Prabhupada onlyite".

Actually Prabhupada himself would insist that you scrutinize and study carefully the teachings of any professed guru. If you find critical differences then it isn't a lovely democratic pluralism as Kulapavana likes to make out it is. Look at all the arguments over Prabhupada's purports that traditional Hindus have raised on this forum.

[Kulapavana]

 

Of course the more time passes, the easier it is to revise the history and the facts of that history. But those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. It would appear in the short term that the ones who want to minimize Prabhupada just as 'another' guru among many (the 'many' being them) will prevail.

 

We may look at the same history and learn different lessons. For me, the lessons from history of Iskcon are obviously different than yours. It does not bother me that you have different conclusions. We all start at different level, and we all progress at our own pace. Just keep on learning!

[cbrahma]

By Rocana Prabhu, the Editor in Chief of the Sampradya Sun (and my first temple president).

 

We expect that members of the many Gaudiya Matha communities will claim that their founders (Godbrothers of Srila Prabhupada) have an equal right to be placed in the number 32 spot and be considered a bonafide branch. Then there are all the diksa guru disciples of both the Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON diksa gurus who feel their guru should be placed as the last in line. And there lies the controversy.

 

All the previous acaryas in the disciplic succession are pure devotees or uttama-adhikaris. A new devotee should utilize his intelligence and accept a spiritual master on this same platform as acaryas such as Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who form the disciplic succession of acaryas.

 

The prerequisite qualification for all those making claim that they are situated in the “line of disciplic succession” is the accuracy of their realized recognition of the prominent Sampradaya Acarya. Due to frequent gaps between visible manifestations, it behooves those within the parampara constituency to demonstrate an appreciative and appropriate glorification, commitment and assistance to the mission of the latest Sampradaya Acarya.

 

 

The abbreviated definition of "initiation" is the admission of a neophyte disciple into the unadulterated philosophical and transcendental mysteries handed down by a succession of past Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya Acaryas. As Srila Prabhupada stated:

 

"Well initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge... knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing."

Srila Prabhupada Press Interview, 10-16-76, Chandigarh

 

 

The past Acaryas have established the principle that a sincere candidate can be connected to the Sampradaya via the advanced siksa guru. In fact, one of the distinguishing common features of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and Srila Prabhupada is that both emphasized and reinforced the concept and principle of siksa guru being as important as diksa.

 

"Thakura Bhaktivinoda was not official Spiritual Master of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja. Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja was already renounced order, Paramahamsa, but Thakura Bhaktivinoda, while He was even playing the part of a householder, was treated by Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja as Preceptor, on account of His highly elevated spiritual understanding, and thus He was always treating Him as His Spiritual Master. The Spiritual Master is divided into two parts; namely, siksa guru and diksa guru. So officially Bhaktivinoda Thakura was like siksa guru of Gaura Kisora das Babaji Maharaja."

Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dayananda, 05-01-69:

[Beggar]

 

Actually Prabhupada himself would insist that you scrutinize and study carefully the teachings of any professed guru. If you find critical differences then it isn't a lovely democratic pluralism as Kulapavana likes to make out it is. Look at all the arguments over Prabhupada's purports that traditional Hindus have raised on this forum.

We are talking about accepting the guidance of those is in the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura who had an affectionate relationship with Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabupada and who are our well wishers.

One could hardly dismiss them as "traditional Hindus", unless one using this as an attempt to obfuscate the discussion.

[cbrahma]

 

We may look at the same history and learn different lessons. For me, the lessons from history of Iskcon are obviously different than yours. It does not bother me that you have different conclusions. We all start at different level, and we all progress at our own pace. Just keep on learning!

You have had so many arguments about the basic facts of the history - this claim is too disingenous. It is all driven by a need to minimize Prabhupada and establish the traditional religious Hindu system with its plethora of religious rites and diksa gurus. It is essentially the material dharma in the cycle of - dharma- artha -kama- moksa. Bhakti yoga transcends moksa. No doubt there are many material benefits to be had by the material dharma, not the least is the advantage of thinking oneself advanced and then initiating others under the pretext of one's being a guru.

(ignore Beggar):

[Beggar]

 

Thakura Bhaktivinoda was not official Spiritual Master of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja. Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja was already renounced order, Paramahamsa, but Thakura Bhaktivinoda, while He was even playing the part of a householder, was treated by Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja as Preceptor, on account of His highly elevated spiritual understanding, and thus He was always treating Him as His Spiritual Master. The Spiritual Master is divided into two parts; namely, siksa guru and diksa guru. So officially Bhaktivinoda Thakura was like siksa guru of Gaura Kisora das Babaji Maharaja."

Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dayananda, 05-01-69

Exactly - siksa guru parampara. But Bhaktivinoda Thakura was a contemporary of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja. Their relationship was face to face not only through a book. The books left by Srila Prabhupada are extremely important. But in those books the importance of a face to face relationship with a bonafide guru (siksa or diksa) is explained.

[Beggar]

 

You have had so many arguments about the basic facts of the history - this claim is too disingenous. It is all driven by a need to minimize Prabhupada and establish the traditional religious Hindu system with its plethora of religious rites and diksa gurus.

 

Here again we see evidence of the out of control projection of ego. cbrahma takes the opportunity to deeply insult Kulapavana that he is trying to "minimize Prabhupada" as if this relative neophyte is a maximizer of Prabhupada through his rejection of the different limbs of devotional service which he sees as burdensome, like "jumping through hoops."

[Kulapavana]

 

You have had so many arguments about the basic facts of the history - this claim is too disingenous. It is all driven by a need to minimize Prabhupada and establish the traditional religious Hindu system with its plethora of religious rites and diksa gurus. It is essentially the material dharma in the cycle of - dharma- artha -kama- moksa. Bhakti yoga transcends moksa. No doubt there are many material benefits to be had by the material dharma, not the least is the advantage of thinking oneself advanced and then initiating others under the pretext of one's being a guru.

 

it is hopeles to try to explain anything to you. read my post again. all I said was that two people may look at the same event and have completely different idea as to what the lesson is.

[Kulapavana]

"So officially Bhaktivinoda Thakura was like siksa guru of Gaura Kisora das Babaji Maharaja." Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dayananda, 05-01-69

 

Actually, that relationship was even more complex and sublime, as Bhaktivinoda T. considered himself as taking siksa from Gaurakisora DB. He even accepted the babaji-vesa (dress of a babaji) from GDB, which is de facto accepting GDB as his babaji-guru.

[Vedesu]

 

I gotta admit that I would very much appreciate it if my choice is to read only or mainly the books of Prabhupada that I would not be defined as a "Prabhupada onlyite".

 

No, not at all. "Prabhupada onlyite" applies to those who not only believe Srila Prabhupada is the only way, but that all other gurus are bhogus, including Srila Prabhupada's Godbrothers and their disciples who are currently preaching and spreading the glories of the holy name all over the planet. The "Prabhupada onlyites" campaign against other bona fide Gurus and commit Vaishnava ninda and aparadha. You on the other hand, seem to be a kind, sincere, innocent devotee. If Srila Prabhupada's books inspire you, that is a wonderful thing, and I believe that any sincere Vaishnava would encourage you to continue. A "Prabhupada onlyite" generally feels the need to blaspheme other Sadhus in order to prove his loyalty and make a show of being devoted to Srila Prabhupada. As long as you are not involved in this, and I haven't seen any indication that you are, I have immense respect for you and consider you a sincere Vaishnava, as should any other devotee, regardless of their affiliation.

[Kulapavana]

 

No, not at all. "Prabhupada onlyite" applies to those who not only believe Srila Prabhupada is the only way, but that all other gurus are bhogus, including Srila Prabhupada's Godbrothers and their disciples who are currently preaching and spreading the glories of the holy name all over the planet. The "Prabhupada onlyites" campaign against other bona fide Gurus and commit Vaishnava ninda and aparadha. You on the other hand, seem to be a kind, sincere, innocent devotee. If Srila Prabhupada's books inspire you, that is a wonderful thing, and I believe that any sincere Vaishnava would encourage you to continue. A "Prabhupada onlyite" generally feels the need to blaspheme other Sadhus in order to prove his loyalty and make a show of being devoted to Srila Prabhupada. As long as you are not involved in this, and I haven't seen any indication that you are, I have immense respect for you and consider you a sincere Vaishnava, as should any other devotee, regardless of their affiliation.

 

I very much agree with that. There is no harm in seeing your guru to be as good as God, but there is a tremendous harm in seeing other Vaishnava gurus to be "less than a normal human being".

[cbrahma]

 

it is hopeles to try to explain anything to you. read my post again. all I said was that two people may look at the same event and have completely different idea as to what the lesson is.

You can't even agree on the events, let alone how to interpret them. Facts are not simply dismissable as matters of opinion.

[cbrahma]

 

No, not at all. "Prabhupada onlyite" applies to those who not only believe Srila Prabhupada is the only way, but that all other gurus are bhogus, including Srila Prabhupada's Godbrothers and their disciples who are currently preaching and spreading the glories of the holy name all over the planet. The "Prabhupada onlyites" campaign against other bona fide Gurus and commit Vaishnava ninda and aparadha. You on the other hand, seem to be a kind, sincere, innocent devotee. If Srila Prabhupada's books inspire you, that is a wonderful thing, and I believe that any sincere Vaishnava would encourage you to continue. A "Prabhupada onlyite" generally feels the need to blaspheme other Sadhus in order to prove his loyalty and make a show of being devoted to Srila Prabhupada. As long as you are not involved in this, and I haven't seen any indication that you are, I have immense respect for you and consider you a sincere Vaishnava, as should any other devotee, regardless of their affiliation.

The division of the gurus as GM vs Prabhupada already begs the question- especially when it comes to criticizing Prabhupada's vani with impunity. When the same is done on the GM side, especially with respect to their historical behavior, it's major apharada.

[cbrahma]

 

"So officially Bhaktivinoda Thakura was like siksa guru of Gaura Kisora das Babaji Maharaja." Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dayananda, 05-01-69

 

Actually, that relationship was even more complex and sublime, as Bhaktivinoda T. considered himself as taking siksa from Gaurakisora DB. He even accepted the babaji-vesa (dress of a babaji) from GDB, which is de facto accepting GDB as his babaji-guru.

Yah real complex - not diska.

[Kulapavana]

 

Yah real complex - not diska.

 

There is no record as to who was the diksa guru of Gaurakisora Das Babaji. Baba was very tight lipped when it came to such matters. Yet he was both a babaji guru of Bhaktivinoda and (at least based on the Saraswata sources) someone who saw Bhaktivinoda as his guru. For me, that relationship is not your typical guru-sisya connection. Only devotees in the Saraswata sampradaya consider GDB a disciple of Bhaktivinoda.

[cbrahma]

 

There is no record as to who was the diksa guru of Gaurakisora Das Babaji. Baba was very tight lipped when it came to such matters. Yet he was both a babaji guru of Bhaktivinoda and (at least based on the Saraswata sources) someone who saw Bhaktivinoda as his guru. For me, that relationship is not your typical guru-sisya connection. Only devotees in the Saraswata sampradaya consider GDB a disciple of Bhaktivinoda.

The connection is disciplic in the Brahma sampradaya. That is sufficient. The diska status is not important. The siksa relationship is all that matters. That is the point.

[Sarva gattah]

 

 

Here are two stories of devotees trying to sincerely understand their past in ISKCON

 

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by Kulapavana

 

I can never forgive myself for not speaking out against a crooked and manipulative sannyasi many years ago.

 

He eventually kicked me out of ISKCON’s because he knew that I knew.

 

Later he destroyed the lives of many devotees. Some of these devotees told me that I had the responsibility to warn them, because I was the one who introduced them to Krsna Consciousness.

 

I did not speak out because I had no hard evidence to present to others, and I was afraid that perhaps I am seeing it from a wrong perspective.

 

I also did not want to shatter the tender faith of these new devotees.

He was a very clever man, too. He knew I had a strong sense of honor and he made me promise I will not "drag down others with my maya".

 

Later he tried to ruin my reputation by spreading vicious lies among the devotees who were shocked that I was kicked out. It was a mess...

 

He even tried to take away my service of translating Prabhupada's books.

 

Fortunately Harikesa did not listen to him on that account. I was living alone, working full time, following strict sadhana, and translating Bhagavatam for several hours every day.

I hope he has changed, because he is now a guru and a GBC in Iskcon

 

I am trying to encourage the new devotees to take inspiration from ANY and ALL of these great teachers.

All of these books are valuable and precious.

 

I do not care which camp they join, or not join, and whose line will be more prominent in the future, as long as Mahaprabhu's mission is growing.

 

The new generation joining now is much more open to that vision. I see it everywhere.

 

It is so painful to watch devotees who have been in the movement for several decades and still have this intense 'party spirit', to the point of deriding truly remarkable Vaishnavas for not fitting their narrow vision of what KC should be.

 

Like they have not grown above such petty designationsIt took a very long time to recover. Years.

 

Some of my devotee friends helped me a lot, by secretly visiting me or allowing me to visit the centers they maintained (I was banned from visiting temples).

 

Even today big puffed up leaders can make a lot of trouble for the common devotees, but back then it was a completely totalitarian system.

 

As to making things better for the future: IMO the key is education of rank and file devotees as to what the real KC should look like, and training them to think for themselves and trust their heart and gut instincts.

 

The top manipulators have the power only because the rank and file devotees LET THEM have that power.

 

Unless these people are stopped, there won't be a lesson for others to learn, in which case these atrocities will persist.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Maybe some of your answers of why those days were immature is found below

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by Unknown Author ACBSP

 

Back then in the 1980s, we had the 'frog in the well' mentality. All us Godbrothers were puffed up with the little knowledge we had, especially Ramai Swami, he thought he new everything, actually all of us thought that way in our enthusiasm. We thought 'we were Gods chosen people', so we must know EVERYTHING!!

 

But now we can see how blind and ignorant we all were back then, Ramai Swami, the most senior out of all my Australian Godbrothers, unfortunately, due to his juvenile immaturity and pride, had no idea how to lead and protect the lives of others under his nose.

<?xml:namespace prefix = u1 /><u1:p></u1:p>

<u1:p></u1:p>He did not know how to deal with or handle so many basic issues he new about, Ramai Swami new me better than I new myself at the time, but still had no idea how too deal with me or anyone else for that matter, he just let things go on and on and on.

 

Don't get me wrong, he was very dedicated, gave excellent classes and lead blissful kirtans, his innocent simplicity and convictions in the Krishna Consciousness movement, no doubt, did have only 'good intentions' in mind and within his heart, for all the devotees.

 

He did the best, like all the Godbrothers based on what wisdom they new, which unfortunately wasn't very much. Spiritually as the most senior Australian leader, he was like a young immature child pretending to be a leader among al man however, his child like puffed-up pride could not see how layback, childish and immature he really was in his attempt to imitate Srila Prabhupada. The fact is many of us were externally imitating Srila Prabhpada like a child imitates their 'superman' hero.

 

Yes, he had convinced himself he was trying to do the best he could to help myself and all others in their Krishna Consciousness. And he was. But unfortunately those 'sincere good intentions' where based on lack of wisdom, experience, ignorance, arrogance and immaturity.

 

He had absolutely no idea of what the serious consequences to many lives would be later, caused by his and others immature blind leadership. It is foolish for him to deny responsibility for the things he could of stopped, he new what was going on!! These so called 'good intentions' went on like this for years.

<u1:p></u1:p>

<u1:p></u1:p>In all fairness and honesty, he just did not have the 'mature vision' back then to properly lead and protect others from putting themselves and others in danger. He new all along what was happening behind the scenes with many devotees, yet did nothing do to stop it due to his immaturity as a leader.

<u1:p></u1:p><u1:p></u1:p>He just did not know how a REAL leader or teacher should act. This was due to his youthful naivety.

 

There was no plan on his behalf to cover-up anything or cheat anyone, there was no deceit, he was just too spiritually and materially immature to know what to do or how to lead and be a real sannyasi.

 

He certainly did not understand, just like cool, relaxed intoxicated Bhavananda, and many of the 'chosen' guru's, all 'glassy eyed' due to the high extravagant levels of worship. All of them obviously did not comprehend the serious consequences of their irresponsibility, and that with leadership of the fragile lives of others, comes enormous responsibility!!!

<U><u1:p></u1:p></U>

Ramai Swami was only 27 years old when he took sannyas at Mayapur in 1981, but like many others such as Bhavananda, who I'd admired, Ramai Swami also became unbearably proud and very arrogant with his false sense of spiritual security in being a Sannyasi, as the years dragged on through the 80s and 90s. He had therefore convinced himself he new everything, when he new nothing of the 'real' world of responsibility!

<u1:p></u1:p><u1:p></u1:p>

Due to such pride, to criticize him would only attract the wrath of him and his 'boys' to break your spirit with fear tactics, They would say -'you cannot find fault in such an advanced great devotee leader of the Lord like His Holiness Ramai Swami Maharaj, you offences will send you to hell', you should never criticize a sanyasi, no matter what!! And put you in back your place below their feet as a useless dependant soul!

 

Like Bhavananda, Ramai Swami became intoxicated by all the worship and began foolishly believing he was a great devotee who should NEVER be questioned and is still that way today. He becomes very offended by anyone who questions his authority and motives, then belittles you to other devotees for daring to question his authority.

<u1:p></u1:p>

<u1:p></u1:p>In this way my self esteem was so eroded, always being told, 'your out of it', 'your so far down there' that I was too insecure to not go along with it all, after all, ISKCON was my only family.

 

The point is clear here, he and other Godbrothers always new exactly how fallen I was and always told me so, but never really did nothing and just let things go on because of their innocents, simplicity and blindness due to ignorance.

<u1:p></u1:p><u1:p></u1:p>Paradoxically in this way, due to this default, I was so very fortunate to organise and manage the most successful Gurukuli project in Australian ISKCON history in 1986-7 - but that is a truly wonderful and sad story to be told at a later date.

It's amazing how sometimes failure, embarrassment and the feeling of being totally helpless becomes the pillar of commitment, determination and success, as it did with me in coming up with ideas to help the international effort to free the Soviet Hare Krishna's from persecution and imprisonment.

 

This was done with very sincere and helpless prayers to Lord Caitanya and Prabhupada in 1986, so they could one day soon attain their freedom to follow their Religion in the Soviet Union, and freely chant Hare Krishna in every town and village in Russia and all the surrounding states of the Union

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE width="100%"><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD>

 

in QuickList

 

 

Sri Prahlada and the Krishna Kids

 

Prahlada and his young Hare Krishna friends decide to do something about the persecution of Hare Krishna devotees in communist Russia under president Mihail Gorbachov.

 

They wrote and performed Prahlada and his young Hare Krishna friends decide to do something about the persecution of Hare Krishna devotees in communist Russia under president Mihail Gorbachov. They wrote and performed a song

www.gouranga.tv (more) (less)

 

 

 

 

 

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

Has anyone elso got any interesting honest experiences like these?

[cbrahma]

I don't know how interesting it is, but my experiences with devotees in those days (when Prabhaupda was in his body) were positive. I was at New Dwaraka and the devotees were personal, kind and friendly. I was suprised to learn after Prabhupada left his body that there had been child molestation in the Gurukula. I knew the grhasta whose wife taught there at the time. The cover up was from a high level. Rameshwara (Robert Grant) had done his best to keep it under wraps. But he was conductng his own scams with sankirtana and there was evidence that he was involved with the death of Sulocana. He was forced to resign when the scandal of his intimate association with a minor ( an adolescent girl) broke out.

[Kulapavana]

I joined in London, in 1979. My experiences were quite positive, but I was surprised as to how narrow minded and fanatical most of the devotees were. Then, preaching in Poland, with only minimal influence from Western devotees, it was pure bliss, despite so many physical austerities and difficulties. Later on Western devotees pretty much choked out all spontaneous joy and naturality with their demands of total surrender and blind following. It was an observation shared by many of my friends. Prabhupada came to give something natural and enjoyable and his disciples turned it into a religious cult and authoritarian machine geared to make more blind followers and collect more money.

[Svarupa]

Quote:

 

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>It's not just only the bad and weak minded devotees who have caused all the problems in ISKCON, the blame and responsibility must also be shared by all those good hard working dedicated devotees with good intentions with volumes of knowledge and wisdom (supposedly), who just stood by and did nothing, even when they KNEW wrong was being done, letting the bad things and bogus leadership happen to innocent devotees year after year after year and doing nothing about it!

 

It is only honest here to point out that Srila Sridhar Maharaj from the Gaudiya Math, not only supported the 11 Zonal Acaryas in ISKCON late in 1977, but also encouraged them all to be initiating Spiritual Masters in the mood of Srila Prabhupada. I witnessed this at his Gaudiya math Temple in 1978 when he glorified the new Zonal gurus in ISKCON.

Also Narayana Maharaj originally supported and encouraged the 11 gurus, regardless of what he says today. So as far as I am concerned, Narayana Maharaj is just as naive and Spiritually immature as us Godbrothers were back then, who also gave his blessings to the 11 guru's of ISKCON that is really just an imitation of Srila Prabhupada, just like a child imitates their hero.

In all fairness though, at least two of them have proven themselves as bonafide Spiritual Masters, Srila Jayapartaka Swami and Srila Hridayananda Swami in ISKCON, while Srila Narayana Maharaj has established his own Gaudiya matha branches separate from ISKCON, that I personally do not involve myself with due to philosophical differences. However regardless of that, they have all past the test of time.

The search for paragons is a natural phenomenon within human society, if we cannot find one a qualified Guru, then our naiveity and immaturity unfortunately builds those we admire around us to be something they are not qualified to be, just like we did after Prabhupada left us in 1977, we actually carried on the Guru worship as if Prabhupada had never left.

The appointed gurus where not qualified on the level of Prabhupada, yet we would worship them anyway ON THAT LEVEL with the hope they would become qualified and be like Prabhupada, that's how innocent we were.

 

In this way we genuinely believed that in time, due to the purification process of Bhakti-yoga, they would become pure devotees under the test of time.

We all quoted Prabhupada to support this by saying that Prabhupada gave Brahmin initiating to devotees saying,

"Now that I have given you Brahmin initiation, now become Brahmana"

All of us Godbrothers put a new twist on Prabhupada's comment -

"Now that I have given you the authority to become initiating Guru, now become Guru"

 

The fact is if most of the gurus never fell down, it could have worked, IT WAS WORKING, AT LEAST IN AUSTRALIA. But that was destined to eventually not be, it was destined to fail because of the way they were glorified.

They were worshiped like Prabhupada, better than Prabhupada was. It therefore failed because clearly none of them were anything like Prabhupada.

As another old saying goes, "No lie can live forever?

 

In all fairness to all the original eleven 'chosen gurus', it was their Godbrothers, including myself, who saw them as a substitute 'Prabhupada' so to speak, and then treated them like Prabhupada to their disciples, building them up to be a 'Prabhupada' to all new devotees that we innocently yet ignorantly mislead, calling them names bogus names like 'Vishnupada, Bhaktipad etc'.

 

You know, It's not just only the bad and struggling devotees who have caused all the problems in ISKCON, the blame, responsibility and karma also must be shared by all those good hard working dedicated devotees with good intentions, who have stood by and did nothing, even when they KNEW wrong was being done, letting the bad things happen year after year after year and doing nothing about it!!!'.

 

See full-size image.

THE FUTURE OF ISKCON

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Unfortunately some devotees are still being threatened to keep their mouths shut and opionions to themselves by those who just want the past buried and forgotten about

[cbrahma]

Unfortunately any suggestion of conspiracy is called paranoia by those who would revise and/or repress the history, especially the GM disciples.

(ignore Beggar)

[Beggar]

 

In all fairness though, at least two of them have proven themselves as bonafide Spiritual Masters, Srila Jayapataka Swami and Srila Hridayananda Swami in ISKCON, while Srila Narayana Maharaj has established his own Gaudiya matha branches seperate from ISKCON, that I personally do not involve myself with due to philosophical differences. However regardless of that, they have all past the test of time.

When I was in Phoenix last month the temple president told me about Hridayananda Maharaja as GBC of his temple. He said "it's like having a "fringie" as your GBC." Maharaja is said to usually shows up in shorts and T-shirt and is totally casual. He said that Maharaja seems more influenced by his former college professors and academia than Srila Prabhupada and Gaudiya Vaisavism. He said that Maharaja's classes were "off" but the Hindus who attend the temple don't seem to notice or care. Really sounds like he's "proven the test of time!"

[realist]

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>

Personally, my realization is that as leaders we must bear responsibility for the impact our leadership actions have on the people we lead. A workman shouldn’t blame his tools, and a leader shouldn’t blame his followers, demanding that they just “grin and bear it and simply eat their halava”, as someone once put it.

Each of us has our sphere of influence and our sphere of concern, and within that sphere, conditioned or otherwise, we have our responsibility to act. It is our dharma to act according to our nature in that area.

 

For example, if mothers had spoken out more vigorously about the treatment of their children we might have avoided the tragedy that unfolded in our gurukulas. Philosophy was also employed at that time that obstructed that tragedy from been dealt with as it should have been.

your servant,

Sita-pati das

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[Kulapavana]

"Personally, my realization is that as leaders we must bear responsibility for the impact our leadership actions have on the people we lead. A workman shouldn’t blame his tools, and a leader shouldn’t blame his followers, demanding that they just “grin and bear it and simply eat their halava”, as someone once put it." Sita-pati das

 

Would that concept extend to all leaders, or just mere 'mortals'?