GBC Pure Devotees

[sudhaya]

 

Hare Krishna,

 

A pure devotee can see another pure devotee, perfectly.

 

So if the GBC are nominating these Gurus, then they must be bona-fide, temp fall-downs happen,

 

BUT...Can a pure devotee fall-down any other way except through gross Vaisnava-aparadha?

 

This world is so puerile, its influence vile, even Vaishnava's succumb to its duality?

 

Anybody know?

 

Ps. The Thread is not intended to be a GBC thread this and that, just nice bright comments please, leave the negativity at the door.

[Guest guest]

BUT...Can a pure devotee fall-down any other way except through gross Vaisnava-aparadha?

 

no... and a pure devotee, being not envious, does not commit vaishnava aparadha

[theist]

the GBC members can see another pure devotee then why seek a consenus? Either as "he is a guru" or "we have no objection." One voice should be enough. How could there be dissent since they are all on the same realized plane?

 

They are in a hard place it seems to me. If they don't excercise some form of control then there would be wannabe gurus poping up within their organization every other day causing great confusion.

 

It seems they recognize this and are trying this "no objection" idea as an attempt to deal with it.

 

The problem is "no objection" is taken as an affirmation that the candidate is bona fide. Surely there would be objections if any of us were proposed.

 

I wouldn't know what the solution is but the words that come into my mind are 'decentralize the instituitonal power'. This would take great faith that Krishna would act to expand the chanting movement. But then what is wrong with great faith?

[sudhaya]

 

You know my sense of humour..

 

You've seen Godfather right? Even they had a consere'eler(sp), thats a big bufoon establisment,

 

but kidding aside, sometimes it works ok {hey} sometimes not so good, what ya' gonna do? Chai {indian for tea}

 

Godfather is always in charge, but he has his minions, when the minions try to become Capa's, then they get 'taken care off' know what i'm saying?

 

So work nicly for the boss, he will give you reward when he feels like, np.

 

Just provide him with protection money, taken from the general public {i am talking about book distribution}, and he'll be happy,

 

jaya!

[vijay]

The gbc arent pure devotees well at least not all of them, and it isnt neccecary to be pure to be a guru it is the ideal but not neccesary. Prabhupada often says the ideal guru should be uttama, thus you can have madhyama and kanishta gurus and diciple.

 

Decentralisation is not what prabhupada wanted, he wanted co-operation organisation and intelligence, although problems will always oocur we have to learn using our intelligence

[Guest guest]

and it isnt neccecary to be pure to be a guru it is the ideal but not neccesary

---if you do not follow a pure master you will not reach the purest goal.. goloka vrindavan... this is the purpose of krsna consciousness, not others

 

Decentralisation is not what prabhupada wanted, he wanted co-operation organisation and intelligence,

---cooperation is decentralized subjects who, organized, cooperate with intelligence... gbc in itself is a decentralization, and the final instructions of prabhupada to reunite (as a federation?) with gaudya math are clear and clearly written

-----

simply if gbcs are admitting and approving gurus, they have to take the responsability to say us that they are pure ad to be ready to be criticized and delegitimated when they make a mistake

 

i have had two guru falling touching myself indirectly, i have ever heard the gbc representative coming to the temple and explaining that if we were cheated it was our fault and that they cannot guarantee etc. etc..

 

so where's their value as advisors and protectors if they approve but do not bear the responsability?

 

this is not honest, neither vaishnava, when prabhupada or other acharya gives an opinion on a devotee, they're able to say clearly if it is worth to take shelter from them

 

otherwise where's the advantage of asking to vaishnavas if they say: " we approve (on which basis???) but it is up to you, all on your head...." ?

[Kulapavana]

pure devotion considerations aside, GBC is simply trying to manage this difficult issue of guru qualifications and deal with obviously imperfect candidates and the effects of past mistakes in this field. lets try to be humble and give them some benefit of the doubt...

[sudhaya]

 

Hare Krsna,

 

A pure devotee can recognize another..

 

There is a complaint that Gurus are falling-down, so were they pure devotees before?

 

Did they fall because of Vaishnava aparadha?

 

Lets see, even a pure devotee is not immune to Vaishnava-aparadha, In the CC I read that Saci-mata offended Advaita and she begged for forgiveness, of-course she was, and she got love of KRSNA by Lord Caitanya Grace.

 

Also we are fallen from Goloka, Eternally liberated? Eternal conditioned? What's that?

 

Just because you are in position of Guru, you cannot exploit, Pure is Pure, and there is no question in my mind of breaking the regulations.... its Aparadha,

 

What's your opinion prabhu?

[Kulapavana]

"were they pure devotees before?"

 

pure devotion can be defined in several ways and I'm not in position to judge them. Some were initially very sincere and they represented our sampradaya properly and through the mercy of Prabhupada they were able to accomplish much good for our Mission. However, with time, some were corrupted by power, and some treated exalted Vaishnavas with contempt. as such, Prabhupada's mercy was withdrawn and they were on their own, and quickly fell down.

 

If one is very sincere, the light of our Sampradaya shines through them, eventhough they may not be completely pure in the highest sense. Thus they have power to take their disciples back to Godhead. Their power is not their own and can be taken away if they stray from the path of past Acharyas.

 

It is easy to condemn fallen gurus but their job was very perilous. if placed in similar situation I would have surely fallen down too, as well as probably all those who criticize them, blaming them for all that is wrong with our Movement.

[sudhaya]

 

Lets look at the positive, at the service devotees have rendered, Gita says KRSNA doesn't forget any service rendered to His devotee or Him.

 

So we should also not forget, the ONLY problem is and this is a great great one..

 

Is when a devotee has fallen, but still maintains he hasn't, that is so offensive to KRSNA, then I would say even Advanced devotees show their dismay, nothing worse than a fallen devotee trying to pass-off as a Uttama-adikari or lower.

 

What do you think?

 

Didn't Srila Prabhupada Guru Maharaja do something about this.. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[sudhaya]

 

http://www.swami.org/sanga/archives/pages/volume_two/m92.html

 

Q&A discussion with Swami B.V. Tripurari.

{Disciple of Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada}

 

Q. And how does all this relate to a madhyam initiating disciples? What about a kanistha adhikari initiating disciples? Is it acceptable in certain cases?

 

A. Other than these stages themselves, madhyama in general is marked by discrimination. To whatever extent one is involved in the necessary discrimination for making spiritual progress, he or she is under the madhyama influence. So there may be a kanistha (neophyte) who is sincerely desiring to progress, a madhyam kanistha, and one who is successful in this regard, an uttama (superlative) kanistha. Then one becomes a kanistha madhyama and so on.

The guru should come from the higher stages of madhyama or better. Many kanisthas do give initiation. The value of this type of initiation is not as great as initiation received from advanced devotees.

[Guest guest]

pure devotion considerations aside

--that speaking of guru are of essential importance..!

 

GBC is simply trying to manage this difficult issue of guru qualifications and deal with obviously imperfect candidates and the effects of past mistakes in this field

--so why they do not say: "we do not know, do as you want"?

 

lets try to be humble

--humble is one who surrender to a bonafide spiritual master

[Guest guest]

There is a complaint that Gurus are falling-down, so were they pure devotees before?

--no

Did they fall because of Vaishnava aparadha?

--a pure devotee does not commit aparadha

In the CC I read that Saci-mata offended Advaita and she begged for forgiveness, of-course she was, and she got love of KRSNA by Lord Caitanya Grace.

--sacimata does not act on material plane, she never falls... it is a lila

 

 

[Guest guest]

If one is very sincere, the light of our Sampradaya shines through them, eventhough they may not be completely pure in the highest sense.

--sicere means pure, truthful

Thus they have power to take their disciples back to Godhead. Their power is not their own and can be taken away if they stray from the path of past Acharyas.

--power comes from krsna, a guru is a shaktiavesha avatara, krsna's representative with shakti. A guru has to have the godhead's vision to give goidhead, and if one has this darshan he does not fall, because there's nothing more beautiful of krsna to fall for

 

so if one falls, he has never seen krsna, and how could he give krsna's vision?

 

 

It is easy to condemn fallen gurus but their job was very perilous

--there's no one to condemn, there's simply to choose real gurus and to hear advices on this matter only from people who can suggest really who is an uttama adhikari, real guru, or not

 

 

[sudhaya]

 

In the CC I read that Saci-mata offended Advaita and she begged for forgiveness, of-course she was, and she got love of KRSNA by Lord Caitanya Grace.

--sacimata does not act on material plane, she never falls... it is a lila

======

 

Lila yes, and why? Look at the purpose of it.

 

[Guest guest]

so what's the meaning, that all the fallen "gurus" were uttama adhikaris and they have made some offence?

[Kulapavana]

"nothing worse than a fallen devotee trying to pass-off as a Uttama-adikari"

 

yes, I agree. That was always my biggest problem with GBC in the past: they knew about different guru's bad behaviour and they pretty much did nothing to stop it. they would act only when situation got very public and they had no choice but to acknowledge it. I hope things are better now...

[Kulapavana]

prabhu, you seem to have a very idealized view of gurus in our tradition, a view which is also historicaly inaccurate. there were some Vaishnava gurus falling down in the past, and they will most likely be some falling down in the future. it is not just an ISKCON problem.

 

"there's simply to choose real gurus and to hear advices on this matter only from people who can suggest really who is an uttama adhikari, real guru, or not"

 

this is a pure statement of faith. I have heard it many times... often spoken by gurus who later fell down. but if it works for you: Hare Krishna!

 

and by the way: you might have more credibility if you chose not to hide as an anonymous guest.

[Guest guest]

it is not just an ISKCON problem.

--of course.. and it is not the main problem. The main problem is that an institution first approves a guru, then, in case that he falls the institution say "it was not our duty to recognize if he was authentic or not". My point is, let the devotees be free. But now you have to choosen between the authorized gurus, to avoid association with the unauthorized ones, but this authorization means nothing... and if your guru falls down you are the cheater who has choosen a cheater as guru.. they have no responsability

 

this is a pure statement of faith. I have heard it many times... often spoken by gurus who later fell down

--but also by acharyas and scriptures... the paradox is that you are putting the emergence at the place of the standard, if we are in a little island in pacific ocean, and there's nothing else available, one can listen also from me, but in a normal world one has to ask advices from pure people and take shelter and initiation from uttama adhikaris.. otherwise what's the use to chant every morning sri guruvastakam and sri guru vandanam, is it simply mythology or they have a significance in our life?

 

 

and by the way: you might have more credibility if you chose not to hide as an anonymous guest.

--all this because i have given a different opinion?

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Kulapavana]

"but in a normal world one has to ask advices from pure people and take shelter and initiation from uttama adhikaris"

 

and in your case: who determines their purity status? your faith. so in both cases it is based on faith.

 

lastly: the credibility of an opinion on a forum like this IS largely based on name recognition. you will find that most regular posters here pay little attention to people who prefer not to use a name when posting.

[Guest guest]

and in your case: who determines their purity status? your faith. so in both cases it is based on faith.

--so why gbc give advices if faith is the only parameter?... so do not give advices and autorizations

 

lastly: the credibility of an opinion on a forum like this IS largely based on name recognition

--the fact is that i, anonymous or not, have behaved with education and i have not used the anonimity to insult .. so what's the use to bring this subject? to disqualify one who has a different opinion?

[theist]

is for each individual to realize that there is no substitute for hearing from Supersoul as to whom He wants you to hear from. Faith and attention should be directed there right from day one.

 

Trying to come up with an 'easier" system or something that appears more practical for the 'masses' will never work.

 

This is the problem with trying to control a large organization like this. You end up with ecclesiastical gurus. Didn't Jiva Gosvami say something about that?

[ancient_paztriot]

Agreed. "Krsna's" have the best opportunity to succeed on their own because they have so much more information to choose from – their options should be better than just about anyone else.

 

If they feel they "have to" accept a spiritual master, then they may be vulnerable to desperation, thinking the ritual or formality is necessary.

 

There is absolutely no material impedimate that can stop devotional service. And you can advance in that relationship. What's stopping you? Some of these people need to cry to their deity.

 

Putting yourself first, guru or not, will not work.

 

Why do people want a guru? To "feed" of his energy like a bunch of leeches? To bask in the glow of his being? To uderstand?

 

How many have understood what Prabhupada said anyway… if knowledge is action?

 

Now I'm not down on gurus… but I do support the liberated standard. How many lessons does one need on this?

 

Anyone stuck on contemplating this world is trying to enjoy it… at someone else's expense!

[ancient_paztriot]

There is also this:

 

One practicing a thing - anything - will be more qualified to judge that in someone else.

 

If you can't tell, blame yourself.

[Kulapavana]

"--so why gbc give advices if faith is the only parameter?... "

 

you need to ask them this question. they manage an organization and have to set some MINIMAL standards. it is certainly not an ideal system but it could have been worse (actually, it WAS worse at one time)

 

and the issue of anonymity is an issue of culture. perhaps you can't see that. anonymity certainly does not disqualify the poster but the issue of credibility remains.