Guruvani

Srila Prabhupada showed by example that one can become a disciple without physical connection to the guru (him). What else he showed is that association with devotees as in a society for Krishna consciousness is very important, though maybe not absolutely important, but practically for the most part essential. Direct association with the guru is not absolutely essential, but association with a sanga or society of devotees is practically indespensible for all practical purposes. Srila Prabhupada showed undeniably that he put more importance on association with the society of devotees than on physical association with the guru. He accepted many disciples that never had any physical connection to him, but that had joined the society and accepted the association of devotees. Many devotees are prone to the stereotyped conceptions of parampara that have been popular in India for centuries, but Srila Prabhupada undoubtedly showed that there are alternative methods of parampara aside from physical connection to the spiritual master. If we accept the authority of Srila Prabhupada as an acharya, and there are those who do not, then we have to accept that there are alternative conceptions of parampara than the traditional system of India. Srila Prabhupada broke the chains of the stereotyped guru/disciple relationship and accepted many disciples he never even met. So, some will say that he had no authority or right to do that, but for those who accept the authority of Srila Prabhupada they cannot deny that he departed from the ancient cultural traditions of India and implemented a modernized version of the parampara system. it's a fact. Srila Prabhupada broke the stereotype and established a new precedent. Then, after he left a bunch of fools thought that ISKCON had to return to the stone age and give up Srila Prabhupada's innovations. ISKCON was all about innovation and modernization, then after Prabhupada left some idiots decided that everything had to now follow "tradition". But, the tradition was NEVER about a gang of neophytes playing guru and defaming the sampradaya for the rest of time.

And Srila Prabhupada also understood the essence of siddhanta, unlike us, and he understood the spirit of ths siddhanta, unlike us and he showed the practical application of siddhanta. Many times people say that Srila Prabhupada cannot invent new siddhanta, but as the same time, he has the right to show new insights into the siddhanta, new light in the siddhanta and fresh ways of implementing the principles of siddhanta. Stereotyped concepts of guru parampara are open to new interpretations depending on time. place and circumstance. The stubborn attachment to ancient concepts is not a dynamic movement. Trying to maintain ancient cultural traditions and bring Krishna consciousness into the modern world can be an excercise in futility. There has to be some adjustments made when bringing Krishna consciousness out of India and into the western world. We can't just doggedly stick to old traditions as if they are some absolute necessity. They are not absolute. They are relative to the culture, the country and the traditions.

but, in the shastra it most oftens speaks in terms of "accepting a spiritual master", and no very much in terms of "the spiritual master must accept you". I believe that if you accept the spiritual master and follow his instructions that it's not as important that he must personally accept you in some formal initiation ceremony. I believe that the instructions of guru, sadhu and shastra are there for anyone to accept and follow and that being formally accepted by the spiritual master is not essential. The Paramatma is always there in the heart and he knows when a sincere soul is sincerly seeking to serve Krishna with love. Srila Prabhupada said several times that "if you are following my instructions initiation is already there". Every living entity has the constitutional nature to serve Krishna. It's his inborn right. Being officially accepted as a disciple is not as important as following the instructions of the bona fide spiritual master. I don't see any special magic in some neophyte devotee playing guru and initiating a "disciple". It's just a big fraud for the most part. If we are going to get real technical about the shastric injunction about approaching a spiritual master, then everyone has to be a brahmacary and hauling in a load of wood when we approach the spiritual master.

Well, I am just a hardcore veggie at heart. If I wanted to eat some meat I surely would because I don't hestitate to fulfill any other sense desire that crosses my mind. I am not going to expound on my faults and foibles which are many, but eating meat is just beyond my range of possibilities. If I did eat some meat it would have to be some fresh fish, but even that doesn't tempt me. Meat eating is not one of my tendencies. I have dreamed that I accidently ate meat and I woke up in tears. So, as long as there is some fresh fruit, veggies, grains and milk available - I will never resort to meat eating. The thought of eating meat terrifies me. But, that doesn't mean I couldn't open fire on an aggresive demon in self-defense and not lose a moments sleep over it.

But, maybe you like to forget this, but Srila Prabhupada empowered the GBC and then later the ritviks to give approval on his behalf. So, Srila Prabhupada transferred authority that the approval of the GBC or the approval of the ritvik was as good as his personal approval. Srila Prabhupada tooks his hands out of the personally approving process long before he stopped accepting disciples on the recommendation and approval of the GBC or the ritviks. So, if the acharya empowers, then even his personal approval is not required. He can empower someone to accept disciples on his behalf. So, maybe true that random hearing of the tape is not authorized. But, Srila Prabhupada transferred authority and power to the GBC and the ritviks and that is historical fact. Srila Prabhupada set up a system where the GBC would recommend or approve and then the tape would be played at the formal initiation. Even his will is not always required. If his empowered representatives approve then was acknowledged by Srila Prabhupada as his disciple.

But, I am confused how the diksha mantras on the tape of Srila prabhupada just automatically lost all potency and power upon his passing on. Srila Prabhupada acknowledged in his presence that mantras on tape can be just as effective and potent as mantras spoken directly. So, I don't accept the conclusions that somehow the Maha-mantra on tapes of Srila Prabhupada or Sridhar Maharaja have somehow become invalid simply because they left their mortal bodies. I think that getting Maha-mantra from the tape of Srila Prabhupada is potent at all times and in all situations. I am sure you don't agree with that.

At one time George Harrison was wanting initiation from Srila Prabhupada. Some of the devotees approached Srila Prabhupada and told him that George Harrsion wanted to be initiated. Srila Prabhupada replied to them that George Harrison didn't need formal diksha and that if he could just use his fame and influence to propagate the Holy Name of Krishna that this would be the best service for George.

Wipe the foam off the sides of your mouth and listen for once! The GBC and ISKCON guru position against Sridhar Maharaja was based on the fact that they saw him as a threat to their guru status and someone who might attract their potential disciples away from them. It was more politics than doctrinal differences. Maybe I can refresh your memory that the GBC officially sent a delegation to Sridhar Maharaja before he passed away to ask him for foregiveness for their mistakes and opposition to him. He graciously accepted their apology. Please show me where the GBC and ISKCON gurus ever undertook such repentence towards Narayana Maharaja? They never did and I predict that they NEVER will. The enmity in ISKCON towards Narayana Maharaja is unrelenting and insatiable. The fact is, he has spoken words that most ISKCON devotees will never forgive.

I was reading somewhere in the Bhagavatam the other day where Srila Prabhupada used "initiated" and "inspired" interchangeably. Spiritual diksha is more like being "inspired" by some Vaishnava. Formal diksha is just that........... a formality. The most important thing is to get inspiration from a Vaishnava to take up devotional service to Krishna. The formal thing is mostly just a formal way of confirming this connection and this inspiration that one gets with a representative of Krishna. This formal diksha being popularized as the latest fad by neophyte gurus has no special spiritual significance. If one has some form of connection to a pure devotee who inspires him to take up devotional service, then in essence he has been initiated into Krishna consciousness. Mahaprabhu and all his successors have authorized and empowered every living entity in the universe to chant Hare Krishna maha-mantra. Under the circumstances, no formal diksha is mandatory if one takes complete shelter of the Holy Name of Krishna. Diksha is already there if one get's inspired by a representative of Krishna to chant Hare Krishna.

Then please produce some evidence that Sridhar Maharaja ever preached like that. I don't think you can, because I don't think Sridhar Maharaja ever preached like that. Just because the GBC and ISKCON gurus were talking shit about Sridhar Maharaja that doesn't mean it was true. Whereas, we have documented evidence that Narayana Maharaja said what he said that so many find objectionable.

I just gave examples of how Sridhar Maharaja even had his own standards that seemed to be in opposition to some things that Srila Prabhupada allowed or did. So, that fact that Sridhar Maharaja and Narayana Maharaja had differences over Rathayatra in Navadvip, has nothing to do with my lack of love for Narayana Maharaja. It's Narayana Maharaja's rude and offensive preaching that he was giving something higher than Srila Prabhupada and that Srila Prabhupada short-changed his disciples is what totally turns me off to Narayana Maharaja. I just don't see how he can't understand that such preaching would create a firestorm of backlash against him by so many ISKCON devotees. I really don't know and I don't care what caused him to talk such crap as that, but one thing I know for sure is that I could never take siksha or sanga from him after having heard him speak such nonsense. I think there are several such examples that show that he was out of touch with the teachings of Srila Prabhupada and out of touch with the sentiments of ISKCON devotees and certainly unqualified to be awarded any kind of leadership of the Krishna consciousness movement. I think that the devotees who dragged him into ISKCON internal affairs probably deserve plenty of blame for all the offenses that have been commited by injecting Narayana Maharaja onto the world scene of the Krishna consciousness movement. Narayana Maharaja did not belong on the world scene of the KC movement.

It's not nice to abuse Sridhar Maharaja like that and try to present something as if he talked the same way Narayana Maharaja talked about Srila Prabhupada and his disciples. Sridhar Maharaja is describing how shastra comes in gradations. Srila Prabhupada certainly presented the Goswami siddhanta and the Gaudiya conclusions in his books. Maybe he didn't start a gopi-bhava club with his Bhagavad-gita, but that doesn't mean that in his graduate teachings and post-graduate teachings that he didn't expound on the proper conclusions of Mahaprabhu and his disciples. Sridhar Maharaja never talked so rudely so the ISKCON devotees. Sridhar Maharaja himself was extremely reserved in his preachings and he even objected to some things that Srila Prabhupada approved. Sridhar Maharaja objected to the rasa-lila being portayed in pictures. Sridhar Maharaja objected to swinging Radha-Krishna deities on swings. Sridhar Maharaja objected to Rathayatra being used a preaching device. Sridhar Maharaja objected to even certain chapters of Chaitanya Caritamrita being read by neophytes. Sridhar Maharaja certainly never started any gopi-bhava club and certainly showed the most conservative and reserved standards of any disciple of Srila Saraswati Goswami. So, to propose that Sridhar Maharaja was saying that he was giving more than Srila Prabhupada or that Srila Prabhupada didn't teach the full-fledged Gaudiya conception is an abuse of Sridhar Maharaja. I will never accept that Sridhar Maharaja ever made any such presentation to the devotees of the Krishna consciousness movement. I think it is preposterous to try and draw a parallel between Sridhar Maharaja and Narayana Maharaja and I think it is absurd. Sridhar Maharaja was even more conservative than Srila Prabhupada in many ways. He certainly never took the position that he was giving the higher thing that Srila Prabhupada did not give because his disciples could not accept it.

In case you might not know, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur had his own crop of liars, crooks and woman hunters. And that crop came from INDIA!!!!!!! What they hell do you people expect when a simple saint from India comes to American to deliver the dregs of society? Considering the kind of lowlifes and derelicts that Srila Prabhupada picked-up out of the gutter, he did real good and a few rottan apples in the barrel is guaranteed. Narayana Maharaja has his own growing crop of fall-aways, fall-downers and guru rejectors, so let's just accept that the mission to deliver the dregs of western society is going to be fraught with a fair share of failure and rejection.

The part of that propaganda that I think is bullshit is where he says Srila Prabhupada didn't get very deep into the explanations was because "he knew his disciples would not be able to understand". I think this kind of thinking clearly shows that Narayana Maharaja is out of touch with the facts. Srila Prabhupada presented his gita commentary to the western world, the non-devotees and Christian people of the western world. That he followed the Baladeva Vidyabhusana commentary was because of the fact that it was his basic preaching format for bringing in westerners to Sanatan Dharma. I don't think that Srila Prabhupada held back because as Narayana Maharaja said "his disciples could not understand", but because when you are preaching and canvassing to bring outsiders into the Sanatam Dharma it is only proper to start with the basics and then gradually bring them up to higher conceptions. I think Narayana Maharaja is being just plain rude and arrogant when he says things like "because he knew his disciples could not understand". I think it is bullshit, uncalled for and just begging to get your ass handed to you. Srila Prabhupada's Gita was a preaching mission for bringing in western people to Sanatan Dharma. Srila Prabhupada gave plenty of Goswami siddhanta in his graduate and post-graduate levels of instruction - Srimad Bhagavat and Sri Chaitanya Caritamrita. This is the kind of crap talk that has created all the opposition and ill feelings towards him. If he had any common sense, how in the hell could he talk that kind of shit without knowing that he would be offending so many followers of Srila Prabhupada? We know better. We were in ISKCON and we know that the vast majority of ISKCON devotees were totally receptive to the higher concepts of the Gaudiya philosophy. This kind of talk out of Narayana Maharaja is what has turned thousands of devotees against him as he has offended the finer sentiments of the vast majority of the followers of Srila Prabhupada. It just does'nt make any sense. That kind of talk is coming from someone who has a total disconnect with the mood of the original ISKCON devotees and shows quite nicely how unfit and unqualified he was to be making such ignorant statements about the ISKCON devotees that he didn't know jacksquat about. It's bullshit.

I was recently listening to a recent lecture of Govinda Maharaja on the SCSM website and he was explaining something about his work on the Gita translation. He explained that there are basically two schools of commentary on the Gita. One line follows Baladeva Vidyabhusana and the other line follows Vishvanatha Chakravarti Thakur. Srila Prabhupada dedicated his Gita translation to Baladeva Vidyabhusana and his Govinda-bhasya. I think Govinda Maharaja was describing how the version of Sridhar Maharaja is following more in the line of Vishvanatha Cakravarti Thakur and his rasik version. I think this basic distinction is what distinguishes the mood of Srila Prabhupada from the mood of many of his Godbrothers. I think the basic premise of Srila Prabhupada's preaching and translation was mostly akin to the Baladeva Vidyabhusana flavor and not so much pushing forward the Vishvanatha Chakravarti version. Narayana Maharaja definitely appears to be an extreme case of following the Vishvanatha Chakravarti mood with practically no traces of the Baladeva Vidyabhusana approach. I appreciate both moods and both styles of commentary, but I think that the Baladeva Vidyabhusana presentation on Vedanta philosophy is the best format for preaching Krishna consciousness all over the world as Srila Prabhupada did. Then within the inner chambers of the movement there is more a tendency towards the Vishvanatha Chakravarti mood. But, I am firm believer that this Baladeva Vidyabhusana style of presentation is the most proper form of presentation for the masses in a missionary effort. Then, for the insiders of the Krishna consciousness movement, the Vishvanatha Chakravarti conception is very appreciated. I think preaching to the masses should be on the basis of a Baladeva Vidyabhusana style. It appears Srila Prabhupada had that idea and so he dedicated his Bhagavad-gita to Baladeva Vidyabhusana and his Govinda-bhasya commentary on Vedanta philosophy. I think the tenor of his whole preaching mission was for the most part in the vein of a Baladeva Vidyabhusana quality. Internally, Srila Prabhupada was surely well familiar with the Vishvanatha Chakravarti version, but for his preaching mission he felt it proper to follow along the lines of Baladeva Vidybhusana style. The BhaktiVedanta title actually indicates Vedanta presented on the platform of Bhakti as opposed to karma or jnana.

I certainly hope you people aren't insinuating that i am disrespecting Lord Shiva because I am challenging bogus Shaivas who are in fact disrespecting Shiva, Vishnu and Krishna with their claims that Shiva is superior to Lord Vishnu. Lord Shiva would certainly never be pleased with anyone who minimizes his Lord Krishna and denies the supremecy of Lord Krishna. Lord Shiva is a devotee of Lord Krishna. Anyone who thinks they can please Lord Shiva by minimizing Lord Krishna is certainly very foolish and ignorant. Lord Shiva is not a Shaivite. The shastra soundly states that Lord Shiva is a Vaishnava. To minmize Lord Krishna or Lord Vishnu is a sure way to piss-off Lord Shiva. Respecting Lord Shiva requires proper respect for his master - Lord Krishna. I accept the Bhagavat conclusions on Lord Shiva. I don't accept some bogus claims made by ignorant Shaivas who ignore all the other Puranas except some Siva Purana. The Siva Gita is his prayers to Lord Vishnu. We have proof in the Puranas that Siva himself worships Lord Vishnu as supreme. To deny that is just typical ignorance that we would expect from bogus Shaivities who are in the mode of ignorance and ignoring the siddhanta of the sattvic Puranas like Bhagavat Purana, Padma Purana and Vishnu Purana etc. To accuse me of direspecting Shiva because I am challenging bogus siddhanta being made by bogus followers of Lord Shiva is ignorant and false allegations as well. Shiva is a form of Lord Krishna who has been transformed into a suitable deity for dealing with the material affairs of the material universe. But, this form of Lord Krishna cannot function as Lord Krishna and does not possess all the power and position of Lord Krishna. Sure, Lord Shiva is God. But, he is God in a limited form and serving a limited purpose. Shiva is a Vaishnava. He advocates Vaishnavism. He does not advocate nor did he create Shaivism. Most of his devotees are offenders to Shiva because they offend HIS Lord and master with their ignorant attitudes about Vishnu-tattva.

maybe the evil of the internet is that it encourages us to mingle with people of different perspectives that in normal circumstances we would never associate with? I think like-minded people should hang together and avoid conflicts with other camps that we have our differences with. the internet offers the facility to take shots at people that we would otherwise just avoid. My problem is that I really feel like I don't belong in any sect or camp anymore. I am just a loner who is for the most part a loner by choice and by design. I don't really see that I fit in with any group now, probably because I am not prepared for peer pressure and judgemental attitudes that I always found around temples and camps of devotees. Until then, I just bang it out here and speak my mind even though my opinion is not very palatable for practically anyone. I do speak it the way I see, though I know I am a little harsh. My life is a little harsh, so I guess I figure if I can take it I can dish it out.

nice..... then I offer you all respect and fatherly love as a second generation of the Krishna consciousness movement. I ran into Raghavendu at the New Ramanreti temple a few years ago here and it was really sweet to talk to him. He clued me in on some of the west coast goings on. I have to say that I really enjoyed talking to him and I was very sad to have to part company that afternoon. I know what you are talking about now in regards to someone getting his head blown off with a shotgun. What threw me was that I always thought Raghavendu killed that idiot with a pistol and not a shotgun. It's good he only had to do a few years in prison for that and got out really quick on a homicide conviction. You know when I get faced with real devotees whom I love and respect, all my politics and prejudice just fade away. In real life I never argue with anyone. I am a total pacifist, but not because I am a coward because really I am hardass socially. I understand that many devotees see Narayana Maharaja as a very advanced Indian guru and sannyasi and prefer him over western sannyasis with a spotted history. If I was in their situation I might very well see it the same way. What can I say. These old devotees that are your parents and step-parents are very dear to me and I would really hate to say anything that would insult them or hurt their feelings. Because I live in a virutal cave here in North Florida I get a little eccentric and aloof. In real life I could never say anything that would cause ill feelings in devotees that I admire and respect. Not because I am a coward, but because in personal dealings I really hate to hurt the feelings of other people........even non-devotees. So, most of the time I keep my opinions to myself knowing that I would rather be quiet than start an argument. The internet is a little impersonal and I have a tendency to let my inner child act out a little too much.

who got his head blown off? that one must have gotten past me.... There were puppets of the big guns, but they were nothing without the big guns. We know who there powerbrokers were. Tamal Kirtanananda Bhagavan Bhavananda Hansadutta.... even some of the "gurus" like Ramesvar and jayatirtha were along for the ride. Hridayananda was just along for the ride. The destruction of ISKCON rested in the hands of about 5 main men who weilded their weight to get what they wanted. the rest of them were just along for the ride.... Ramesvar orginally protested the zonal guru scheme but he was smashed by Tamal and the other leaders of the conspiracy.

then maybe you remember that I was Narada Muni in the play that time? You probably ate some of my cooking then....? that means I am somethings like a god to you? then who's brat are you? wow..... I loved that San Jose temple. It's damn shame I had to bloop because Sudhira Maharaja kept stepping on my toes as head cook and kitchen manager. Not only was I the head cook who set up that kitchen there, but I also was the first pujari to establish a regular program of deity worship and keep it up till I convinced my old friend Ramai to come and take over the deity worship so I could focus on the kitchen that was getting more and more demanding all the time. I am sure you don't remember me, Kshamabuddhi, the head cook and head pujari for the first two years there? did you ever try any of my special Hare Krishna Pizza?

I don't know who you are or where you were during the first few years after the passing of Srila Prabhupada, but I know for sure that the rank and file devotees were powerless to do anything about how the 11 ritviks bamboozled the GBC into becoming zonal gurus whilst the rank-and-file devotees stood by helpless and wathced ISKCON go down the toilet. I know better. The entire and complete responsibility rests on the 11 ritivks who strongarmed the GBC into endorsing then as zonal gurus. The ISKCON leadership is 100% liable for all the atrocities in ISKCON. I don't accept one iota of blame for how the GBC and the zonal gurus turned ISKCON into wasteland. I was there. I saw the whole nightmare unfold. Don't feed me this crap about all of us having the blame. The blame goes 100% on the 11 ritiviks who bullied the GBC into allowing them to be bogus zonal gurus. I know for sure, even the GBC is not as much to blame as these 11 ritviks who strongarmed the GBC into going along with their zonal guru nonsense. these 11 ritviks dominated the GBC and overpowered them. The most trusted and empowered disciples of Srila Prabhupada destroyed ISKCON and destroyed the lives of thousands of devotees.

Santu Cruz? Hey...... I was in Santa Cruz when you were just a sparkle in your Dad's eye. Well, I was there in the early eighties before the earthquake destroyed downtown and changed Santa Cruz forever. Don't get your panties all in a bunch now! I never got a college education as I decided to give up 6 years of college I had coming from my military service during the Vietnam war and give 8 years to the Krishna consciousness movement. But, now my son and I operate a computer repair and Network Administration business out of my home in beautiful North Florida. My son could dance circles around you as far as IT is concerned and he is self taught........ (I guess he gets his genius from his dad?) When you grow up and wise-up you maybe you will realize that California is for losers and move to sunny Florida where the ocean currents are warm and the Carribean is just a few hours away.... oooops................. maybe I am talking too much? You Hare Krishnas are crazy................

I see you have been watching the History Channel on TV. Me too. I love the History Channel. (well, not in the sense of "prema") I think Kali-yuga gurus are more of an issue than Kali-yuga householders. Bad leaders are more of an issue than bad congregationals. Bad leaders are the most serious issue facing the movement.

No doubt, there is plenty of nonsense mentality and activity going on in the name of sannyasa. Personally, I don't go for the stationary sannyasa who gets too cozy in a mandira and garnering too much prestige and position. But, if they live very austerely in a Matha or Mandir and actually tend to the spiritual needs of a community, then I don't object to that. Problem is that they get spoiled, arrogant and stuck in the neophtye platform when they get too cozy in a temple. No doubt, the ISKCON model needs a facelift and a makeover. ISKCON sannyasis are for the most part stifled in their self-realization with the pampering and prestige they enjoy as the "spiritual leader" of a temple community. My life is torture. I wish the leaders of ISKCON could experience the torture and turmoil they have inflicted upon the majority of devotess that have been alienated from ISKCON due to their personal ambitions and narrow vision. When I joined ISKCON I came with the idea that I was giving my whole life to ISKCON. The GBC and ISKCON gurus prevented me from doing that. The hatred an enmity around the Krishna consciousness movement is not an accident. Something went very wrong to create the mess that is ISKCON.