American Acharya

[theist]

Better to be in some regular dress, drop the acarya game, go to school and make some tangible contribution as a Vaisnava scholar which I am sure he could as such an intelligent gentleman.

[Smiley]

 

I don't get it, maybe it's just me, but, how is teevee any different than movies, especially since most all movies end up on teevee eventually (especially on pay channels) I mean really, how is Dracula or 300 or Deep Impact more in line with the "Truth", than whats on teevee? I think you find a lot of good stuff on teevee these days, especially better than what you find in movies when it comes to comedies.

 

Hi Shiva, I would like to address part of your question (although I realize you may have meant it as rhetorical - if so, forgive me). I don't have a TV right now but I am a member of Netflix.com. This way, I have to give serious thought to what I watch and have to wait for the next video to arrive. During that wait, I get other things done. The problem with TV and especially with modern TV (cable or satellite) is that there are so many choices that it tended to monopolize my time, not to mention paying a big cable bill for the privilege.

[Ramadasa]

 

........ language="JavaScript">highlightInterests("ProfileMovies");.........>

 

Movies The Mission, The Lord of the Rings (Trilogy), Chronicles of Narnia, Kundun, Lost Horizon, The Matrix (only the first one).

T.V. Television is the antithesis of Truth.

 

<table id="Table2" align="center" bgcolor="#ffffff" border="0" bordercolor="#000000" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="3" width="300"><tbody><tr id="TelevisionRow"><td style="vertical-align: top;">

</td><td style="vertical-align: top;">

</td><td style="vertical-align: top;">

</td><td style="vertical-align: top;">

</td><td style="vertical-align: top;">

</td><td style="" id="ProfileTelevision" bgcolor="#d5e8fb" width="175">

</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

This is what I always saw when I looked at his Myspace. Directly from the site. And I've been a "friend" of his on there for about five months! I think someone is trying to pull a fast one on us just to engage in a little more creative guru-bashing.

 

I've never met the guy but he seems nice and decent to me. Just leave him alone. Let's try to be civil. it is supposed to be a Hindu forum afterall.

[theist]

Someone claiming to be a Vaisnava 'Acarya' or American Acarya should expect to be scrutinized.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Better to be in some regular dress, drop the acarya game, go to school and make some tangible contribution as a Vaisnava scholar which I am sure he could as such an intelligent gentleman.

 

I agree.

The "acharya" guru profile is way out of his league.

There are so many senior Vaishnavas on the planet that there is no need for a junior Vaishnava like Frank to be profiling as some acharya.

[cmohanc]

I think Bagwad Gita does'nt preach Hinduism.

I wonder is there any word mentioning Hindu in it.

I also think that it is not trying to explain Hinduism either.

 

Why don't all those religious( i mean all religions of world) leaders try to stop making money in the name of religion.

 

I feel Any one who demands any money or comfort cannot be termed as

follower of god.

he is serving himself.

I expect a hot debate on this.If possible in an online chat.

[theist]

One can be guru just by being honest with themselves and others about their true level of advancement and trying to help others by sharing what they have learned and pointing the way forward.

 

Such a person only becomes a joke when they climb up on a big chair, ("Vyasasana"), and pontificate from it while accepting worship and praise.

[Beggar]

 

Such a person only becomes a joke when they climb up on a big chair, ("Vyasasana"), and pontificate from it while accepting worship and praise.

One doesn't really have to climb on a big chair, they can just fly on the chair of their immense egos. It's interesting how the word chair is used. For instance, 'chairman of the board', chairperson or, "he was offered the chair of Distinguished Professor". In Anglo-American legal parlance the chair is called the bench. In U.S. Federal Courts the judges sit on very high benches (chairs) which is probably meant to flaunt the power of the U.S. Government.

Many Federal Judges who sit on these high benches are faced with trepidation by the attorneys that go before them. Speaking about becoming acarya of the Sri Caitanya Saraswat Math, Srila Govinda Maharaja, said, "guru maharaja insisted that I take this chair (the Vyasanana of the acaryaship), but I did not want to, but he insisted." So he referred to the Vyasana as the chair, and I found that quite interesting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[theist]

 

Speaking about becoming acarya of theSri Caitanya Saraswat Math, Srila Govinda Maharaja, said, "gurumaharaja insisted that I take this chair (the Vyasanana of theacaryaship), but I did not want to, but he insisted." So he referred tothe Vyasana as the chair, and I found that quite interesting.

 

Yes this is how it works. The true acarya does not seek the chair but he is forced to take it for others benefit.

[theist]

This reminds me, whatever happened to the Ronald McDonald turned self appointed acarya up in Canada?

[Beggar]

 

This reminds me, whatever happened to the Ronald McDonald turned self appointed acarya up in Canada?

 

Here it is and quite interesting:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Giuliano

[suchandra]

very nice inspiring interview:

 

 

 

 

<embed src="

" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344">

[lokeshvara]

Namaste,

 

I am saddened by the behavior of some posters on this thread. If you don't know this person you should not make comments about his authenticity. On his website he doesn't claim succession from a particular guru. The person who started this thread came here with good intentions and out of devotion to her guru and instead of being welcomed as a member of the community, she has had a number of posts attacking her teacher.

 

Not every one is cut out for iskcon and i see this as a welcome alternative. of course this is simply my opinion based on my own experience and what i have read and seen from Acharyaji.

 

I don't presume to tell anyone else their guru is false or fallen or wrong and i would hope that others would extend that to new comers. then again this is the internet and arguing is what is done best on here.

 

Hari Om!

[stonehearted]

 

Here it is and quite interesting:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Giuliano

There's no end to his self promotion.

[stonehearted]

I remember corresponding a little with Pranakrishna some years ago. He seemed like a nice fellow. I'm not sure how he moved from Gaudiya Vaishnavism to Sri Vaishnavism, but he seems to be appreciated by the Hindu folks there. I'm not sure whether anyone could reasonably accuse him of maryada-vyatikrama. I find it a little hard to see how anyone could find any shelter other than Srila Sridhara Maharaja's appealing, but we're talking about faith, affairs of the heart. Waddya gonna do?

[theist]

 

very nice inspiring interview:

 

 

 

 

<embed src="

" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344">

 

 

He is a very good speaker. I got interuppted half way through. But acarya?

[Sonic Yogi]

 

He is a very good speaker. I got interuppted half way through. But acarya?

 

In a small pond it is easier to be the big fish.

What might be a big fish in the small pond might just be a minnow in the ocean.

[theist]

 

In a small pond it is easier to be the big fish.

What might be a big fish in the small pond might just be a minnow in the ocean.

 

 

That's true.

[Beggar]

 

I remember corresponding a little with Pranakrishna some years ago. He seemed like a nice fellow. I'm not sure how he moved from Gaudiya Vaishnavism to Sri Vaishnavism, but he seems to be appreciated by the Hindu folks there. I'm not sure whether anyone could reasonably accuse him of maryada-vyatikrama. I find it a little hard to see how anyone could find any shelter other than Srila Sridhara Maharaja's appealing, but we're talking about faith, affairs of the heart. Waddya gonna do?

 

Several years ago one ex-Iskcon Prabhupada disciple who is now a Sri Vaisnava came to the Badger Festival, headed up by Srila Narayana Maharaja. I cannot remember his name, he is a handsome fellow with a full head of hair, no discernible hair loss. At the time he was about 50 but looked younger. He got into a discussion with Prema Prayojana Prabhu who was a sanyassi at the time. Prema Prayojana really is like walking encyclopedia of Gaudiya Vaisnavism but evidently is not so expert at controlling his senses. He told Prema that he always wanted to know more about diety worship and the GBC in turn was looking for someone to do research on the subject. The GBC at the time, as now was suspicious of "The Gaudiya Math" so he said that since Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu had traveled South India the GBC sent him to South Indian Temples which just happened to be Sri Vaisnava. He then proceeded to bring up so many arguments to try to show the superiority of Sri Vaisnavism. Prema Prayojana was able to quote directly from what he had heard from Srila Narayana Maharaja, tapes of Srila Sridhar Maharaja and directly from texts like Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur's Jaiva Dharma. This fellow just kept saying, "Oh, I didn't know those answers were in Gaudiya Vaisnava literature!" and then later admitted that it was absurd for the so-called Gaudiyas of the Iskcon GBC to send him out of the sampradaya for information on diety worship and ultimately siddhanta. But is was a done deal and too late, he had been captured by Sri Vaisnavism and had fully given his heart to that side.

[raghu]

 

Dear Raghu,

 

Namaskar. I don't believe Sri Acharyaji is a "Sri Vaishnava" in the sectarian sense (at least he's never called himself that in my personal presence). Rather, he is inspired by the teachings of Ramanuja Acharya. He's a very unique combination of extremely orthodox Vaishnava-Hindu coupled with very cutting-edge approaches to preaching.

 

I'm not really sure I understand what the above means. At best it sounds inconsistent. If he is a follower of Ramanuja then he is a Sri Vaishnava by definition. Are you saying that he is not formally initiated in the sampradaya of Ramanuja? Or are you saying that he only accepts some teachings and principles of Ramanuja's sampradaya but not all?

 

 

He has a very inclusive mood when it comes to giving women equal opportunities in devotional service.

 

Yes, I have noticed this.

 

 

He feels (as do many Hindu leaders and scholars, actually) that originally, in Vedic times, women were granted the thread just as men were and are today.

 

Feeling is one thing but knowing is quite another. Where is his evidence that women were given brahmana thread? Isn't it just possible that he is making this statement because it will appeal to the egalitarian sentiments of people in the West?

 

 

 

I'm not really in a position to explain Sri Acharyaji's teachings on this matter much more than this. But I know that he has written a small book on this matter called "The Shakti Principle: Encountering the Feminine Power of God" http://dharmacentral.com/dharmastore/acharyaji_books.php

 

 

I get a bit suspicious when I am directed to an online sales website when asking for evidence for something. Needless to say, I'd be a bit more encouraged to purchase a book and read it if I was convinced that the teachings within were more likely to be grounded in shastra and not merely "feeling."

 

regards,

Raghu

[suchandra]

 

He is a very good speaker. I got interuppted half way through. But acarya?

 

What can we do - we live in this age:

 

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

I wonder if the Hindus up there would have nominated him acharya if he didn't have the P.hD?

If he would have been a hiippie instead of a P.hD, would they still have elected him acharya?

 

I guess in today's world you need a P.HD to be guru?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[raghu]

 

 

I wonder if the Hindus up there would have nominated him acharya if he didn't have the P.hD?

 

If he would have been a hiippie instead of a P.hD, would they still have elected him acharya?

 

 

 

 

I guess in today's world you need a P.HD to be guru?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the real question is, would they have appointed him an acharya of the temple if he had actually started teaching about Vishnu-bhakti as the ultimate path to moksha. I can't help but notice that despite his supposedly Vaishnava background, the subject of Vishnu rarely, if ever, comes up in his sermons. But, I welcome correction as always.

[shiva]

 

Several years ago one ex-Iskcon Prabhupada disciple who is now a Sri Vaisnava came to the Badger Festival, headed up by Srila Narayana Maharaja. I cannot remember his name, he is a handsome fellow with a full head of hair, no discernible hair loss. At the time he was about 50 but looked younger. He got into a discussion with Prema Prayojana Prabhu who was a sanyassi at the time. Prema Prayojana really is like walking encyclopedia of Gaudiya Vaisnavism but evidently is not so expert at controlling his senses. He told Prema that he always wanted to know more about diety worship and the GBC in turn was looking for someone to do research on the subject. The GBC at the time, as now was suspicious of "The Gaudiya Math" so he said that since Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu had traveled South India the GBC sent him to South Indian Temples which just happened to be Sri Vaisnava. He then proceeded to bring up so many arguments to try to show the superiority of Sri Vaisnavism. Prema Prayojana was able to quote directly from what he had heard from Srila Narayana Maharaja, tapes of Srila Sridhar Maharaja and directly from texts like Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur's Jaiva Dharma. This fellow just kept saying, "Oh, I didn't know those answers were in Gaudiya Vaisnava literature!" and then later admitted that it was absurd for the so-called Gaudiyas of the Iskcon GBC to send him out of the sampradaya for information on diety worship and ultimately siddhanta. But is was a done deal and too late, he had been captured by Sri Vaisnavism and had fully given his heart to that side.

 

That was Gaura Keshava

[stonehearted]

 

I think the real question is, would they have appointed him an acharya of the temple if he had actually started teaching about Vishnu-bhakti as the ultimate path to moksha.

Even more to the point, would he have gotten the job if he taught that moksha is not at all desirable, at least when it's devoid of bhakti. Krishna das kaviraja considers the desire for moksha as a symptom of the cheating mentality the Bhagavatam rejects right off the bat.

 

I'm not aware of the circumstances that brought him to where he is now. Nor do I know anything of the nature of the initiation he gives. I think it's likely that it's not what many of us dyed-in-the-wool Gaudiya Vaishnavas probably have in mind. Whatever he's doing has little effect on most of us here.