Guruvani

I have not been successful at preaching and making disciples so I need to take advantage of the ISKCON devotees and take some devotees away from there to support me and my little temple. Now, I have plenty of chappattis and dahl and a big throne to accept worship from even though I did not do anything myself to spread Krishna consciousness around the world. These western devotees are easy victims of us Indian Swamis. Ah yes, life is good.........thanks to Swamiji Bhaktivedanta.

Chief among the people who unleashed the power of the atom was J. Robert Oppenheimer, who oversaw the project from conception to completion. Upon witnessing the explosion, its creators had mixed reactions. Isidor Rabi felt that the equilibrium in nature had been upset -- as if humankind had become a threat to the world it inhabited. J. Robert Oppenheimer, though ecstatic about the success of the project, quoted a remembered fragment from the Bhagavad Gita. "I am become Death," he said, "the destroyer of worlds." Ken Bainbridge, the test director, told Oppenheimer, "Now we're all sons of bitches." Considering these remarks made by those who were behind the success of the atomic bomb we must have to conclude that they are not the controllers either, that not a blade of grass moves without the will of the supreme. Ultimately, the bomb could not have been created without the sanction of Krishna. Krishna is the cause of all causes and the cause of the atom bomb as well. It is Krishna in the form of the atom bomb that is threatening the destruction of the whole world if mankind continues down the path of war and international conflict.

So, you are preaching in this forum in your own way. Do you meet all the high qualifications given by Bhaktivinode? Who in this forum does meet these standards? If we apply strictly these standards then this forum should be silent and nobody should be saying anything - only asking and enquiring about spiritual matters from those who are qualified? What is good for one is good for all. If you do not meet the standards described by Bhaktivinode Thakur then how can you come forward to do your preaching? None of us meet these standards perfectly. Considering this maybe this forum should change it's format to only accepting questions to be answered by a perfectly qualified Vaishnava? Maybe all opinions and personal propaganda should be banned and only questions and answers between the qualified and unqualified should be allowed?

Are there any people that you know that make their money operating pirate studios in Italy that make illegal copies of copyrighted music and videos?

It seems to me that if a person is on the level of crying before Krishna he is already past initiation,so why would he be searching for a guru? Most devotees in the movement didn't "find" a guru, rather the guru found them through his missionary activities. Prabhupada said that when you are sincere to find God that Krishna will send the guru to you. If Krishna does not send the guru to save you, then you will never find a guru by "shopping around" the different gurus on the guru market.

I find the time after I come home from working a 1 to 9 shift at my job. Today is my day off, so I am loitering in the forums till I go out to take my kids swimming at the springs. It does appear that some posters here (maybe one in particular) is loitering around this forum at all hours of the day and that does bring into question as to how he makes a living if he has the ability to loiter on the internet all day long 7 days a week. I am a working class citizen. I do my 40 hours a week. I don't know how some of these people manage to linger in these forums all day long.

Actually, this issue in discussion by Dhira Govinda das and the BBT staff has nothing to do with ISKCON politics or what we consider tampering with Prabhupada's teachings to support GBC policy which violates Prabhupada's orders. Neither version of the parampara that has been presented in this discussion is properly correct. This is due to a linear concept of parampara by some disciples of Srila Prabhupada. They have taken the principle of parampara that they learned from Prabhupada and misinterpreted it in their own misconceived way. Here is the actual disciplic succession according to the strict interpretation of "diksha" as understood from an orthodox school: Krishna das Babaji was the spiritual master of Narottama das Thakur both as siksha and diksha guru. Narottama Das Thakur was the diksha guru of Vishvanatha Chakravarti. Vishvanatha Chakravarti was the diksha guru of Jagannatha das babaji Jaganntha das Babaji was the siksha guru of Bhaktivinode Thakur who took diksha from Vipina Bihari Goswami and then later took Babaji initiation from Jagannatha das babaji. Due to some rift between Bhaktivinode and Vipina Bihari Goswami there is no mention of their relationship given by Srila Prabhupada. However, even though Bhaktivinode had some controversial relationship with Vipini Bihari Goswami, it is never mentioned anywhere that he was re-initiated with formal diksha by anyone else including Jagannatha das Babaji who is only known to be the siksha and babaji guru of Bhaktivinode. Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami was initiated by Gaura Kishora Das Babaji who was known to have taken babaji initiation from Bhagavan das Babaji who took babaji initiation from Jagannatha das Babaji. The actual diksha guru of Gaura Kishora das Babaji is not mentioned or known very precisely, but his position in the parampara is listed as regards to his having taken babaji initiation from Bhagavan das Babaji who took babaji from Jaganntha das Babaji. Srila Prabhupada took formal diksha from Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami. We can also see from Prabhupada's presentation of the parampara line that he placed more emphasis on siksha as determining the parampara than formal diksha as he never ever mentioned the actual diksha guru of Bhaktivinode Thakur as being Vipina Bihari Goswami. The problem is that the BBT editors had some confusion and misunderstanding that the parampara follows a strict linear line. However, Gaura Kishora das Babaji was not the disciple of Bhaktivinode Thakur but was in the parampara as the disciple of Bhagavan das Babaji. (note here that Bhaktivinode Thakur never took "diksha" from Jaganntha das Babaji but accepted him as "siksha" guru and later took babaji initiation from him) I hope this explains something about this issue and clears up some of the misonceptions about how the parampara system works. Many devotees have a very linear approach to understanding the parampara, but the parampara has branches and sub-branches and we cannot always trace the parampara in a strict linear sequence.

I personally would prefer that only typos or serious grammatical errors should be corrected. I don't really see how the edited portions really contribute anything substantial to the overall understanding of the philosophy. I don't think that rewording statements is necessary. In all these changes the change is actually unnecessary if you ask me and doesn't really shed any more light on the subject. It is just the personal disagreements with the editor and the original version. However, these are some of the quarks that we might have to be willing to accept from a disciple of Srila Prabhupada who was assigned that service by Srila Prabhupada. In the process of performing his service he might get a little carried away in the pursuit of perfection, though perfection can be a subjective consideration.

There are two forms seniority. Srila Prabhupada expresses that in this statement he made about Sridhar Maharaja - Srila Prabhupada said about Sridhar Maharaja: "by age and experience he is senior to me" So, from the words of Srila Prabhupada we can see that both age and experience are a criterian for calculating seniority. We should see that those who are older than us and those who are more experienced that us are in some way senior to us. There is an ettiquete that is followed in the sampradaya and generally any devotee that becomes a disciple before us is to be considered as senior to us. Because we have no qualifications to know who is advanced or not, the proper ettiquete is to consider than those who became devotees or disciples before us should be considered senior to us. Otherwise we go to judge devotees based upon our own opinion rather than any genuine standard. In the profiles there could be information about one's history in the movement, but from what I have seen here it would not make any difference to most of the members here. They prefer to make their own judgements based upon opinions of who they like or don't like and I don't see that knowing one's seniority or history in the movement would make much difference to them.

How can one call a society of devotees a bureaucracy? In ISKCON today one accepts a spiritul master based upon his faith. No committee delegates who your spiritual master should be. The GBC has the responsibility to make sure that some standard be met by anyone who wants to function as a guru in ISKCON. That is not a bureaucracy. Is that what you learned from your Gaudiya Math guru; to insult and condemn the whole society of ISKCON? So, I guess your criticizing and demeaning all of ISKCON and the thousands of members is not offensive? It's easy to hide beind a computer and accuse someone else of not following principles and condescend arrogantly as if some showbottle external profile is how we judge each other. We don't have the qualifications to judge others based upon whether we think they are following or not. The shastra has stated that when one attains a spontaneuous attraction to Sri Krishna he is no longer bound by regulative principles. It is a very dangerous and offensive path to think we judge a devotee by his external features and behaviours. In the Bhagavad-gita, Lord Krishna warns very severly that we should not judge devotees even if they sometimes fall short of the standard. Judging devotees by what we can see with our own eyes is a very ignorant attitude. None of us are fit to be the judge of who is devotee and who is not. We have no real understanding of the degree of love they have for Krishna based upon what we think we know. If learning hatred and bitterness towards ISKCON is what you learned from your Gaudiya Math guru then you would have been better off without any guru at all. Is that what he teaches......hate of ISKCON? I thought a guru was supposed to teach love of God, not hate for ISCON?

One thing I have found out about homos and lesbians is that humbleness in their character is conspicuous by it's absence. They are generally very rude and insulting. They like to offend others by imposing their outragious sexual orientation on others and trying to force them to accept them for what they are. They go around telling everybody they are sexually perverted and practically begging somebody to be rude and insulting to them. Maybe us single guys should start a group called the Vaishnava Playboy Association - VPA. We could try to force all the devotees to accept that we can can be permiscuous loverboys of Playgirls and partygirls and still be proper persons worthy of the Vaishnava designation. Even if I was a Playboy and partyhound who consorted with loose women and party girls, I certainly would never try to force the movement to acknowledge me as being a proper Vaishnava. I certainly am not a proper Vaishnava at all and do not need affirmation from the movement that I am a Vaishnava. I don't consider myself a Vaishnava. I have some interest and attraction in the Vaishnava philosophy, but I certainly don't consider myself to be a proper Vaishnava at all. I am a lowly person suffering in illusion. I hope to be a Vaishnava someday or some lifetime in the future. I don't need confirmation or affirmation from the movement that I am a Vaishnava even though I fall short in many ways. I would not want to disgrace Vaishnavism by calling myself a Vaishnava. I might be some sort of aspiring devotee who had a few good years in ISKCON, but I don't need anyone to accept or approve me as a Vaishnava.

I haven't seen anything "political" in these changes made by Jayadvaita Maharaja. They all appear to me to be a difference of grammar and nothing political at all. SHOW ME SOMETHING POLITICAL THAT JAYADVAITA MAHARAJA HAS WRITTEN IN PRABHUPADA'S BOOKS! so far you have only shown differences in grammar and word usage. there is nothing political in these changes made by Jayadvaita Maharaja. I think the charges of "political" are unfair and untrue about Jayadvaita Maharaja. Jayadvaita Maharaja is a naistika-brahmacary his whole life and a very pure soul. You should possibly reconsider your charges against him as he is a very sincere and dedicated disciple of Srila Prabhupada and he is doing his best to try and execute the service Srila Prabhupada gave him to edit his books.

I am not going to argue this issue with you prabhu. You already have your opinion about the rtvik method even though you have a very poor fund of knowledge about the rtvik system Prabhupada authorized in ISKCON. You are talking to me as if it is I who invented the system and introduced in in ISKCON. Sridhar Maharaja was asked this same question about how such extraordinary dealings could be introduced. His answer was that "by the will of the Vaishnava". There is only one thing necessary to make the rtvik system acceptable to Krishna and that thing is "the will of his pue devotee". It is the will of Prabhupada that makes rtvik genuine. Without his will, nobody can come to be guru. With his will a rtvik system could be authorized as he had the authority to empower disciples to initiate on his behalf as he already established himself in ISKCON. Prabhupada trained his disciples to train new devotees and therefore new devotee are getting the same training that Prabhupada gave. There is no difference in approaching ISKCON and approaching Srila Prabhupada. It is the same thing. The will of Srila Prabhupada is all it takes to make rtvik authorized and it was his will that the rtvik sytem be established in ISKCON and his will that it continue after his departure. I have no personal attachment to the rtvik system apart from my understanding that Prabhupada wanted it to continue after his departue. I previously thought that his disciples would go on to become initiating gurus after his departure and for a couple of years after his departure I thought the same thing. Then, I was told by a senior sannyasi that Prabhupada told the GBC not to change anything after his departure and after hearing that I immediatly felt that not changing anything in ISKCON meant not changing the rtvik system that Prabhupada established in ISKCON. Prabhupada said "dont change anything after I am gone". What then is open for change if Prabhuapda said "don't change anthing"? Despite it's many problems and mistakes, ISKCON is still the greatest force on Earth for spreading Krishna consciousness and distributing Prabhupada's books. These other obscure groups of Gaudiya Vaishnavas are making a very insignificant contribution to spreading Krishna consciousness all over the world.

The above post by Yasodanandan das is a good example of how ISKCON outsiders like new devotees and some of the Old school Godbrothers of Prabhupada and their disciples like Narayana Maharaja etc. misunderstand the rtvik system and make false, misleading propaganda against it. he says: quote "ritviks says that this system was created by Srila prabhupada in the last days of his mission on this planet" unquote This shows a very serious lack of knowledge about when and how the rtvik system was established in ISKCON by Srila Prabhupada. It was not created "in the last days of his mission on this planet". It was created at the same time the GBC was established in the early years of ISKCON before 1970 and the rtvik system was used in ISKCON for probably about 9 years or more. Many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples were initiated through this rtvik system and received the gayatri mantras from the tape Srila Prabhupada AUTHORIZED to be used for brahminical initiation. What Prabhupada did do in his last days was REVISE and reform the rtvik system somewhat by giving more authority to 11 disciples who would then have the power to approve rtvik initiations without needing to get final approval from the secretary of Srila Prabhupada. Prior to the appointment of the 11 new approving authorities there was only one person who could give ultimate approval to a rtvik initiation and that was the secretary of Srila Prabhupada who would just inform Prabhupada that some initiations were going to be performed and either Prabhupada would give them a name or the secretary also had the authority to assign them a spiritual name. Pradyumna had tahe duty of assigning names during much of the rtvik period in ISKCON. In the later years Prabhupada gave his secretary the power to approve initiations and assign names without even having to present the individual information to Srila Prabhupada. In his last days Prabhupada revised the system and appointed 11 disciples who had that authority and also gave the GBC the authority to appoint more rtviks after his passing. Now, if Prabhupada did not intend for the rtvik system to continue after his passing then why would he revise and reform the system just a few weeks before his departure? If the rtvik system was to be abandoned after his departure why did he bother to make these changes? The changes were made in preparation for his departure, so why was the rtvik system abandoned after his departure? If Prabhupada did not intend for the rtvik system to be continued after his departure there would have been no need to revise the system. It could have just been left alone because his departure was imminent, so why make changes if it it was only going to be useful for a few weeks? The post by Yasodanandan das is a good example of why new devotees should not be intruding into ISKCON affairs and making false propaganda about the rtvik system. He already said that his guru is a Godbrother of Prabhupada's and therefore he is not an ISKCON devotee and has no experience of ISKCON during the Prabhupada era. ISKCON affairs should be no concern of his. He is not a disciple of Srila Prabhupada and is making untrue propaganda about something he is ignorant about. ISKCON should best be left for the disciples of Srila Prabhupada to try and maintain and continue. Outsiders from the Gaudiya Matha and other such groups should keep out of ISKCON affairs because they have no good understanding or knoweldge about how Srila Prabhupada set-up ISKCON with a rtvik sytem that worked for about a decade. They can only speak orthodox dogma about diksha and have no good insight into the workings and affairs of ISKCON as it was established by Srila Prabhupada.

I don't think we should be so mean and cold to this person. We should talk sweetly, as Krishna is sweet and never says anything negative or hurtful. Let's not jump on this person like Piranha fish and devour her/him in a frenzy of meanness and pride of self-supremecy! chill-out.....it's all one baby!

I disagree with all this "no change" of the books bluster. Jayadavaita Maharaja is a jewel amongst the disciples of Srila Prabhupada and his only intention to to try and improve the books of Srila Prabhupada so that they will be less criticized and ridiculed by the intelligent class of men.(and women) Maybe uneducated, less intelligent devotees prefer to have Prabhupada's books riddled with errors and mistakes, but this is not acceptable to the intelligent, educated devotees who understand that Prabhuapda's books were published in haste and need much revision and editing. PRABHUPADA wanted these errors to be corrected in his books and his disciples like Jayadvaita Maharaja are doing a great servie by correcting the errors in Prabhupada's books. Only the dull and hateful would want to keep the errors in Prabhupada's books. I am glad that there are some disciples who have the wisdom and forethought to make sure that the corrections are made.

I don't think that you need to get too alarmed about this changing of Prabhupada's books issue. After all, Yashodanandan Prabhu (Maharaj), Hansadutta and some others have fought the BBT in court and won the rights to publish all the old, unedited versions of Prabhupada's books and they are doing so and these books are availabe and will continue to be available for those who want them. You can also download all the old, unedited versions for free by clicking on the banner at the bottom of every page of this website. If anybody wants the unedited version of Prabhupada's books, then they are easily available FOR FREE over the internet. What more could you ask for. I have all of Praphupada's books on a zip disk. You can get all of Prabhupada's books burned onto one DVD and duplicate it by the thousands if you want. All this bluster about changing Prabhupada's books is not necessary. If anybody wants the unedited versions then they are so easily to be attained.

This thread addresses a principle and I don't remember making claims to being a senior devotee or having any superiority to anyone. If you want to make accusations based upon your own speculations then that is your own imagination and nothing more.

The only thing I have ever heard about is that persons born in the dhama (Vrindavan/Mayapur) do not need initiation. But, we can see from the example of Srila Prabhupada that both he and his spiritual master were born in very pure Vaishnava families yet they were obliged to take formal diksha anyway. All the great acharyas whether they were born in the dhama or not have accepted diksha, so I guess we can see from their example that diksha is necessary if one wants to become a preacher and teacher of Krishna consciousness. I don't think that being born in a Hindu family in New York with some acquaintance with Krishna exempts one from taking diksha.

Is love a pandering to the false ego and misonceptions of a soul in illusion? Or, is love telling the truth though it may seem unpalatable to some? Love is not a sentimental, artificial pandering of the false ego. If someone is offended by the truth then they are not seeking the truth, rather some endorsement of their own misconceptions.

Prabhupada's books should not be changed to conform to ISKCON politics and I totally agree. However, the changes that Prabhupada ordered to be made should be made. The editors who got those instructions from Prabhupada must do their duty to make the corrections Prabhupada ordered to be made. The error in the Gita like "cattle raising was an error made by the editors and Prabhupada originally translated it as "cow protection". This should be corrected. The only political contaminations that I have seen were in the finishing of the Bhagavatam by Hridayananda Swami and his purports. I have never owned a copy of the finished volumes of the Bhagavatam and never will. I don't care to hear anything from Hridayananda Swami and his slant on ISKCON. If you have found any political editing done by Jayadvaita Swami then I would like to see it. I don't think he has ever really been political in his editing of Prabhupada's books. He is a very pure and sincere devotee and I think it is unfare to call him political. However, the works of Hridayananda Swami and his purports to the finished volumes of Bhagavatam do contain some political views based on ISKCON politics and I wholesale reject his version of the Bhagavatam. Prabhupada authorized Pradyumna to finish the Bhagavatam and the GBC does not have the authority to authorize anyone to do what Prabhupada assigned to a specific disciple. Some changes should be made. Prabhupada ordered these changes. If you want to disobey Prabhupada and say that these changes should not be made then that is your mistake and offense.

It seems that Puri Maharaja is a real sadhu and a staunch pure devotee. It is interesting to note how the ISKCON guru conspiracy back-fired on the ISKCON gurus. They wrongfully rejected the rtvik system so that they could become gurus, but the result was that many devotees rejected them and went to these senior devotees from Gaudiya Math etc. If they would have kept the rtvik system in tact and taught new devotees that they were disciples of Srila Prabhupada there would have been no need to turn to these old Godbrothers or Narayana Maharaja. What is done is done, but the plan in ISKCON to become guru has been a grand failure and I don't blame new devotees for rejecting these unfit neophyte ISKCON gurus and going to these older Vaishnavas for siksha and diksha. However, the rtvik system should have been keep in tact in ISKCON as Prabhupada warned that if his Godbrothers said one thing different than him it would cause disturbance in the movement. We have seen plenty of that and for the reason Prabhupada stated.

Should persons who are uninitiated come foreward to give siksha in forums or other places? Sometimes we find uninitiated devotees chastising initiated devotees and speaking as though they are more learned or experienced in Krishna consciousness even though they have never seen the need for taking diksha. Should uninitiated devotees be attempting to give siksha to senior initiated devotees even though they themselves have never been initiated either through rtvik or direct diksha? Can one be guru if he himself has not been accepted by a guru of the Gaudiya Vaishnava sampradaya? Should not such devotees attempt to get initiated before they come foreward to act as siksha gurus and chastise initiated devotees who actually performed service to a spiritual master in a tangible way?

I prefer the "unchanged version" myself, but I don't think that the edited version is going to cause one to be misled or lose his Krishna conciousness. Many of the editorial corrections are justifiable, though maybe not so important. Prabhupada did authorize a number of corrections in his books before he passed. Those corrections should be made as they were approved by Srila Prabhupada himself. Some of the corrections were to correct the corrections. For example, in the gita, Hayagriva or whoever did the editing changed Prabhupada words in that one verse to "cattle raising" from "cow protection". In cases like this it is important to go back and "correct the corrections" that were made by the original editiors. They made their own share of mistakes and some of this editing of Prabhupada's books is for correcting the mistakes of the editors, not the mistakes of Srila Prabhupada.

The nail-in-coke experiment was supposed to take a whole school year to work. You can't dissolve a nail in coke in a few days or a few weeks. It is supposed to take months. I have heard from some older persons that they indeed participated in such experiments back in the 60's and that after the end of the school year the nail would be partially dissolved. As far as coke/pepsi and physical dangers, I can testify personally that Coke or Pepsi would always cause me to break out with pimples. I gave up Coke and Pepsi years ago and also stopped my pimple breakouts. However, rarely, I will drink a coke in a situation where I am offered it by someone in a business deal or workspace (just to be sociable) and even today at the age of 49 if I drink a coke or Pepsi I will get a pimple the next morning. Some people are more sensitive to phosphoric acid than others. I do keep lemon-lime soda in my fridge for the kids and me and never have any health problems associated with it. It is just made from natural citrus oils and corn syrup. Root Beer is also a good option to Coke as it does not have caffeine or phosphoric acid. Cream Soda does not have phosphoric acid or caffeine. I have never allowed my kids to drink any of the colas with caffeine or phosphoric acid. To me, I have person experience with the ill effects of phosphoric acid and I think it is very, very bad stuff. We do drink lots of 7up at my house though. This was Srila Prabhupada's soda of choice and I remember that his fridge in his room in L.A. had a good stock of it for his arrival there in 1975. The story I heard was that Prabhupada saw some child drinking a 7up and belching nicely and Prabhupada asked his assistant what the child was drinking and the assistant said "7up Srila Prabhupada" and Srila Prabhupada supposedly said "bring be some immediatly".