Sonic Yogi

Disciplic succession in the Gaudiya sampradaya has never been about a horde of neophytes all playing guru after the passing of the spiritual master. Traditionally, the seniormost respected Vaishnava is expected to assume the post of successor acharya. It's not that every so-called disciple of an acharya automatically get to become guru after the acharya passes away. ISKCON certainly does not reflect the history and tradition of the Gaudiya sampradaya. It is a totally modern fabricated free-for-all triggered by the passing of the acharya. Certainly, the idea of a GBC administrating over a class of gurus in a devotee community is a totally modern concept that was fabricated in ISKCON in the aftermath of the passing of Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada never breathed a word about the GBC governing a class of gurus in ISKCON. None of the senior men were about to bring up the issue before the passing of Srila Prabhupada as it was universally accepted in ISKCON in the last days that the ritvik system was expected to continue. If not, then surely somebody would have asked Srila Prabhupada how the GBC would deal with gurus and acharyas within the rank and file. Nobody was about to ask about that and get blasted by Srila Prabhupada.

Sridhar Maharaja referred to Sagar Maharaja and "many others" as ritviks of Srila Prabhupada some nine years after the passing of Srila Prabhupada.

OK, now i understand. You are a closet ritvik despite all your online ranting against the ritvik idea. You certainly want to have it both ways. You decry ritvik, yet still want to consider yourself a disciple of Prabhupada, Sridhar Maharaja and Narayana Maharaja yet you find no diksha guru on the planet that is worthy of your service. The Saraswata sampradaya is of course substantially a siksha-guru sampradaya, yet all of the Saraswata acharyas have practiced the diksha system and not one has failed to observe proper formal diskha.

Yes, you indicate it quite consistently by continuing to carry the name he gave you at the time of initiation. How can you reject Haricash and still keep the name he gave you? You seem to want it both ways. If you have rejected Harikesha then you should stop using the name he initiated you with. If you want a devotee name you should take a name from an authority you do respect.

My point is that Kulapavana seems to be of a mindset that Guru is of nominal importance and that he is more concerned with Krishna or Paramatma etc. The problem is that this kind of thinking is just totally bogus beyond anything within the Gaudiya siddhanta. To Kulapavana the guru is just an option because Krishna is the real deal. Well, what can we say? That kind of thinking is just totally non-Vaishnava. He can go on with his make believe guru who ripped of Srila Prabhupada for a millions of dollars. But, he ain't foolin' nobody but himself. He sure ain't fooling me. Srila Prabhupada Ki-jaya!!!!!

Happy birthday Mahaksha prabhu......

let's face it kids, we are trying to conceive the inconceivable and of course the inconceivable will always win. you can't put Krsna in a box and close the lid. You gotta think outta the box.........................

so you are suggesting that Rukmini and the other Queens of Krishna entered an empty funeral pyre that contained no body? The Sati rite is about entering the fire and embracing the dead body of the husband. If there were no body in the funeral pyre then what body did the Queens of Dwaraka embrace upon entering the furneral pyre of Lord Krsna? Are you saying that the Queens of Krsna just jumped into a bonfire that contained no body of their husband?

Is Srimad Bhagavatam authority enough?

Guru is not God but Guru controls God. http://krishna.org/audio/MP3/SB_1-08-45___Mayapur_1974-10-25___Krishna_Wants_to_Be_Controlled.mp3

Sri Guru and His Grace ch. 8 Srila Sridhar Maharaja:

SB 1.9.34 purport: There can be no injury or bleeding to the absolute form of Krishna. The bleeding and injuries were inflicted upon the material form of Krishna which was non-different than a spiritual form because it is accepted by the absolute Sri Krishna. Even if Krishna accepts a body of matter, that body acts spiritually and is non-different than the spiritual form of the Lord. To say that Krishna cannot accept a material body is also a conditioned mentality of trying to limit the options of the Lord. He can accept a material body and still be as spiritual as always.

SB 1. 14. 8 purport: Do your thing Kulapavana and challenge Srila Prabhupada like you do quite often.

December, 21 1968 Los Angeles, Calif. My Dear Harer Nama, (excerpt) http://www.prabhupada1968.com/2004_12_19_archive.html

CC Adi 7.14 purport

So, Krishna's body is all spiritual and transcendental, but when he comes to the material world he accepts a material aspect of the form so that even asuras and enemies can see what would ordinarily not be visible to their eyes. The so-called death of Krishna is simply his leaving behind the material outer covering of his spiritual form. But, he did not die as we die losing all recollection of our past lives and deeds. He simply shed his material form that he accepted to demonstrate his pastimes on Earth.

There is no difference between the Lord's Self and the Lord's transcendental body. The expansions execute differential activities. When the Lord, however, appears in His person as Lord Sri Krsna, His other plenary portions also join in Him by His inconceivable potency called yogamaya, and thus the Lord Krsna of Vrndavana is different from the Lord Krsna of Mathura or the Lord Krsna of Dvaraka. The virat-rupa of Lord Krsna is also different from Him, by His inconceivable potency. The virat-rupa exhibited on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra is the material conception of His form. Therefore it should be understood that when Lord Krsna was apparently killed by the bow and arrow of the hunter, the Lord left His so-called material body in the material world. The Lord is kaivalya, and for Him there is no difference between matter and spirit because everything is created from Him. Therefore His quitting one sort of body or accepting another body does not mean that He is like the ordinary living being. All such activities are simultaneously one and different by His inconceivable potency. When Maharaja Yudhisthira was lamenting the possibility of His disappearance, it was just in pursuance of a custom of lamenting the disappearance of a great friend, but factually the Lord never quits His transcendental body, as is misconceived by less intelligent persons. Such less intelligent persons have been condemned by the Lord Himself in Bhagavad-gita, and they are known as the mudhas. That the Lord left His body means that He left again His plenary portions in the respective dhamas (transcendental abodes), as He left His virat-rupa in the material world.

Well, Narayana Maharaja was chosen by Srila Prabhupada to perform his funeral ceremony because none of the ISKCON "leaders" knew how to do it. So, Narayana Maharaja knows a lot more about rituals, rites and customs. Is there any wonder that he knows more about the formal aspects of vaidhi-bhakti and Gaudiya culture than the average ISKCON "leader"? There is nothing wrong with the KC movement learning more about the rites, rituals and formal aspects of the culture. We can all learn some nice cultural aspects and pancharatika principles from Narayana Maharaja. Bringing the devotees up to a higher and higher culture is certainly nothing to be ridiculed or criticized. Prabhupada made many compromises in bringing KC to the global scale. In the future there will certainly be higher and higher standards of cult and culture that can be accepted by the global Vaishnava community. Prabhupada gave enough that anyone can become a Mahatma by following his instructions. That however does not mean that he taught ISKCON all the traditional rites and practices according to the strict standards that were introduced by the Gaudiya acharyas of days gone by. If in the future the standard gets higher, there is certainly nothing wrong with that. That is not to say, the Narayana Maharaja is not capable of saying something the can be easily misunderstood and causing the wrong reaction around the ISKCON community. He means well. We should not doubt that. He exists in his own character which is of course no carbon copy of Srila Prabhupada. But, then again.....who is?

But Grasshopper, I have descended upon Earth to spread the gospel of Lord Gauranga. Your salvation is more important to me than my own. My own salvation means nothing if I do not share the mercy with all the fallen souls.

Meditate on Krishna for the best results.

Kulapavana loses credibility in my mind because he refuses to accept another spiritual master in light of the fact that his diksha guru was unfit for the position. He criticizes even Srila Prabhupada and yet presumes to somehow or other be cultivating and propagating Krishna consciousness. He just seems to be living in denial whilst still trying to presume that he can pass judgement on the actions of Srila Prabhupada without incurring the offense of acharya-aparadha. He lives in a limbo-land of cherry-picking the things that he likes about Srila Prabhuapda while on the other hand speaking ill of some of his judgements like "surrounded himself with scoundrels" etc. He is a real work for sure. He is anti-ritvik and has no bona-fide diksha guru. He seems to be a self-appointed authority able to get back to Godhead without a legitimate chaperone. Who is his spiritual master that will come to him at the time of death and take him back to Godhead? That is the mystery that even he doesn't know.

They never screwed me over. I wouldn't let 'em. Like P.T. Barnum said "there is a sucker born every minute". In the situation of the cheaters and the cheated, the sucker is the one who got cheated. I never surrendered my own instincts over to the GBC or any ISKCON leader. If I smelled a skunk, I just went the other direction. Too bad some people refused to think for themselves and got taken advantage of. It's never a good idea to not think for yourself.

It's a damn shame these people have to whine about their hardships in ISKCON. Their reward is so great they cannot imagine, but then they want to drop down to the mental platform and whine about all their lost material advancement that was wasted in service in ISKCON. I remember breaking ice off the top of the water barrel on the Tennessee farm to get water to bath standing outside in freezing temperature. Am I gonna whine about it? No. I accepted that austerity willingly because austerity was the wealth of the brahmana.