andy108

 

what Srila Prabhupada did in the spring of '77 and in that much-touted July 9 letter was to formalize the system he had been using, and by implication to give those he named the opportunity to lead the rest of us in becoming the gurus he indicated consistently he expected us to become.

Well put. Too bad noone took him up on his offer.

 

 

Most of us have long known he did not appoint any successor gurus.

How many are most anyway? I ask because I haven't heard much in the way of ANYONE challenging the nonsense in Iskcon temples, during class or otherwise. Why the media blackout? Speaking/Meal tickets are that important?

 

 

Despite all that has occurred since (and in some cases because of all that has occurred since), many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples, some inside ISKCON and some outside, seem to me to be qualified to guide others in their spiritual lives.

 

Many INSIDE ISKCON? Hello? the first qualification in guiding others in their spiritual lives is to speak the truth, and encourage them to do the same. If one is not allowed to speak the truth on an Iskcon property, it only stands to reason that no one can engage in Spiritual activity there. Wow, open up a Gita and get straight with it.

 

Sarangati begins with Surrender to the order of the Spiritual Master. One progresses no futher unless that is there. If one cannot speak the truth regarding the Spiritual Master's order, one is in very bad association.

 

Who suggested anything about imagining? You make light of what I said because you don't understand it.

 

Well, if you understood it, you would embody it, so this is a case of your imagination only. Do what I say (imagine), not what I do or have done.

It is a nice day dream, but that is all it is.

 

 

If you were so serious about this desire Krishna would have or will soon arrange it.

Serious enough to search to see if there are any others who actually have faith in Srila Prabhupada's program and haven't given up on it because a bunch of rascals weren't sincere or capable enough to do it justice. That seeking is part of Krsna arranging it I would say.

 

 

Perhaps you like being alone and feeling a little disgruntled, a feeling not unknown to myself.

Oh, yes being alone and feeling disappointed in my and others impotence is just what I enjoy. It is so yummy I don't even need desert.

 

 

You want to go behind playing mind games with others and that is good. But first we have to stop the mind games we play with ourselves.

 

"Go behind playing mind games?" Whatever that means. I can use my intellect to articulate and dissect the sophistry of offensive Acarya-wannabees and don't feel an ounce of guilt or shame about it. Keeps me sharp as I age.

 

Of course I beat my mind with imaginary shoes all the time, I guess that is some sort of game.

 

You want to start a program based around Srila Prabhupada. No problem. Just act constantly in some capacity and Krishna will arrange it. Have faith and Krishna will bring the increase.

 

I heard a story that is very illustrative in this way. True or not the lesson is there.

 

One very advanced individual who decided to work separately from Iskcon while maintaining his connection with Srila Prabhupada just left Iskcon Hawaii one day and went to another island. Once there he collected a coconut, opened it and offered it to Krishna and then distribted it to others as prasadam. Krishna has blessed him greatly with expanded service oppurtunities.

 

Not to mention the voyage of the Jaladhuta.

 

No I want to become part of a gathering of a group of older disciples who are faithful that it is best to come together and follow Srila Prabhupada's instructions for how to execute Harinama Sankirtana in an organized fashion through forming a transcendental institution according to his specific blueprint.

 

As opposed to imagining that I am personally going to sit under a tree in a New Jersey suburban park and offer leaves to Krsna and he will make me some kind of Krpa-Siddha Acarya.

 

Or that everyone who ever uttered the Holy Names should be considered a pure offenseless Shake and Bake Diksa Guru.

 

Or that I can go to "Swami" Tripurari, who left Srila Prabhupada's Siksa in the dust, and that he will help me fulfill Srila Prabhupada's specific Iskcon mission.

Anyway Prabhus, unfortunately even a blind sentimentalist like me can see that Kulapavana is a lost cause, and as I have knocked the stuffing out of him, he doesn't even make a good punching bag anymore. Been there done that.

 

It would be nice to use this Forum to discuss some serious ideas on how those who have Faith that Srila Prabhupada's instructions for organized Sankirtana/Sadhu Sanga can be practically implemented.

 

Of the few who post here that I believe might actually think this could be done, by some miracle, being behind the 8 ball, having lost all his properties, etc, I think I am junior by age.

 

So how about some propositions from some of the Seniors? Start a new thread maybe with your ideas?

 

In otherwords, I would invite you where I live now for Kirtana and Prasadam if I could. But I can't. I am living anonymously in a closet with no money, but hey free internet access, a tape player to listen to Srila Prabhupada, His Books and a Japa bag. All a growing Bhakta needs right?

 

Hare Krsna

 

That's good. Saints should be respected. Especially true of the above mentioned.

 

Respected? I nothing less than glorified him. That includes respect. Glad you approved though.

 

lies.....

 

No offense intended to those who love Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Maharaja.

 

He was not chosen to do the work that AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada did.

 

He was not the Founder-Acarya of the revival of the Krsna Consciousness Movement termed Iskcon by Srila Prabhupada.

 

Srila Prabhupada was chosen and empowered and created the paramaters for Sadhana for his mission, for those who would accept discipline under Him.

 

Srila Prabhupada claimed that of his Godbrothers that Sridhara Maharaja was the "best of the lot" despite condemning him for his fence sitting act in encouraging the creation of the Bagh Bazzar false Acarya group.

 

He said that none of his Godbrothers were capable of becoming Acarya, but he praised Sridhara Maharaja of at least strictly following the regulative principles.

 

So we can be sure that when Sridhara struck out on his own to preach, giving up his "inward looking" posture, that he took the step from Pure kanistha to Pure Madhyama.

 

All this said, if anyone claims they needed to, or that anyone should, go to Sridhara for clarification regarding Srila Prabhupada's instructions on how Sadhana was to run in Iskcon, they are simply creating a smokescreen for their lack of faith in Srila Prabhupada's plain, clear, and explicit instructions.

 

Going for such a second opinion is tantamount to Guru aparadha if that person still claims to represent AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and his Iskcon institution.

 

If that person was unsatisfied with ACBSP's Siksa and simply sought Siksa from Sridhara Maharaja, and then proceeds to preach based on that new Siksa, while honoring his Diksa guru by not usurping his intellectual or physical properties, or preaching contradictory sadhana instructions to his Diksa Guru's remaining Siksa disciples, that is fine and dandy.

 

A disciple of AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada is satisfied with the Instructions gained through His Siksa, and needs not seek clarification from anyone who is not a disciple of that Siksa.

 

Those 11 rascals really put Sridhara Maharaja on the spot, and such manipulations were just par for the course. How was Sridhara Maharaja to understand the way that Bhativedanta Swami was uniquely used by Lord Krsna to do what no-one had been able to do.

 

Sridhara Maharaja was very soft hearted and attempted to give them the best advice he could, but his inexperience and sentiment blinded him to the true purpose of these rascals, who would twist anything Sridhara Maharaja said in order to justify their attempt to rule the world by force.

 

And the rest as they say, is history.

 

Of course Sridhara Maharaja had the last laugh on them when after creating his own Preaching mission (Sri Caitanya Saraswat Matha) he appointed a Ritvik to initiate disciples on his behalf just before he disappeared from our mortal vision. Glorious.

 

I'm shaking in my kaupins...

 

That's a little more information than I needed.

 

Try some Valerian Root to calm your nerves.

 

Who are "those who can't be fooled" [as stated by andy108]?

 

If you have to ask, you aren't one of them, that is for sure.

 

If truly interested in the answer, try reading the Bhagavad Gita As it Is, 1972 MacMillan First edition, authored by HDG AC Bhaktivedanta Swami.

Here is another good one.

 

A "devotee" of Lord Krsna who still thinks the stool of a cow is somehow something dirty and worthy to be used as a derogatory symbol.

 

 

I am going to put your bullsh..t above to the road test:

 

I actually take it as a complement that what I write is compared to the stool of our sacred cow. The perfect Antiseptic to clean up the infected garbage your mind is spewing all over this forum.

 

I am going to put your bullsh..t above to the road test:

 

Tell me please, WHO among Srila Prabhupada's disciples is fit to be Guru in your opinion? I want A NAME, or NAMES! Otherwise I will consider you just another ritvik liar.

 

Bas. To anyone with a third grade education, it is obvious that I am testing you. And you fail. To divert from the fact that I am right about you putting words in my mouth, and you cannot go back into the past and defeat "that truth", you presume to test me.

 

Hah Hah Hah.

 

Like I would let a rascal like you have a name of such a glorious person.

 

Ritvik liar. That is a good one.

 

Don't forget, the third graders can read too. They know who is lying.

 

What a joke.

 

Is your beloved Sridhara Maharaja a ritvik liar also?

 

You are digging your grave so deep it will take you 10 kalpas to climb back out.

 

I do not give a flying hoot about what Andy or other ritviks think about my diksa. I know what is true and what is valid for me.

 

I don't give a flying hoot about what is "true" for Kulapavana. He can't back it up with actual proof from the person he claims is an Acarya, so what is the use of "his truth". I might as well get David Letterman's opinion on who is a Guru.

 

No, the old "true for me" stance is simply the kernel or core of the beginning of just another cult of personality based on what "truth" makes someone feel good about themselves.

 

 

William James discussion with Syamasundara.Śyāmasundara:</B> One thing that puzzles me is if what is practical for one person is not practical for another person, then what is the criterion of truth? Is truth relative? This is true for me but it is not true for you. This isn't true for him but it is...</B>

Prabhupāda:</B> Yes. There are relative truths. But for the Absolute Truth... There is Absolute Truth and relative truth. So first of all we have to see in which you are interested—Absolute Truth or relative truth. That is to be understood. There are two kinds of truth....

 

 

Prabhupāda:</B> That is another nonsense. That is another nonsense. Truth is true. Not that... I cannot fashion truth. This statement is nonsense. Truth is true. Fire is hot. That is true. If I imagine that fire is cold, is that philosophy? He does not prove. He does not know what is truth. One who does not know what is truth, therefore they imagine or manufacture truth. Just like Vivekananda, yata mata, Ramakrishna, yata mata tata patha, "You can manufacture your truth." That is going on. That is going on. The hippies, they are manufacturing their truth. So truth cannot be manufactured. Truth is truth. That is called absolute truth. Not relative truth, absolute truth. You can manufacture relative truth, but absolute truth is one

 

 

 

 

Śyāmasundara:</B> In other words, truth is relative, according to him.</B>

Prabhupāda:</B> No. Truth is not relative. Your position is relative. So long you are under the clutches of māyā, your understanding of God is relative. God is not relative. God is absolute. You cannot understand God. Your position is relative. Just like, I will give you a practical example: a man is deaf and he is calling wife, "Mrs. such and such, such and such." She is replying, "Yes. I am coming." But he himself is deaf. He cannot hear the wife is replying. So he is accusing his wife, "Mrs. such and such is very deaf; she cannot hear." She is hearing; she is replying. This rascal cannot hear; therefore she becomes deaf. This is an example.

 

So those who strictly stick with their Spiritual Master's exact words and consider that absolute are offensive, narrow minded, restricting their Spiritual Master's ability to create Gurus, neglecting the legacy of all those those who passed out his Books for their own selfish reasons and didn't take rules and regs seriously.

 

Conversely, those who would be more liberal with the truth are going to save the world because everyone will be able to fit in there somewhere, as long as they have the creative ability to decide what is true for them, Presto, Instant Diksa Guru, Saviors of Humanity and a fit vehicle for Sri Madana Mohan Vigraha.

 

Yawn.

 

</B>

 

My point is this: "Following the instructions of ŚrīCaitanyaMahāprabhu and His disciplic succession, one can become a spiritual master, for the process is very easy. One can go everywhere and anywhere to preach the instructions of Kṛṣṇa. " Srila Prabhupada

 

If none of Prabhupada's disciples are fit to be a guru after more than 3 decades of following his process, than his mission is a complete failure and he is lying about the process of becoming a spiritual master being very easy.

 

If you can't see that Hridayananda fits the requirements in the above sentence than I can't help you. You ritviks find every concievable excuse to discredit Prabhupada's disciples acting as gurus. Your quotes above are a perfect example of such efforts.

 

If you can't see that someone who disobeyed his Spiritual Master, criticizes his Spiritual Master, Contradicts his spiritual master, cannot possibly be chanting "offenselessly", then I pity you. You can't "help" me. I don't need your "help". You can't even help yourself.

 

By your constant misrepresentation of orders set in stone in a letter that all the world has seen, (Considering those appointed to Initiate "ON HIS BEHALF" to be appointed "initiating Diksa Gurus who are manifestations of Sri Madana Mohan Vigraha" regardless of how offensive they are).

 

It is obvious that you think the average person on this forum..

 

1. Can't read.

 

2. Would accept unrepentant offensive rascals as having already completed the "easy process" of "Becoming a spiritual master", and to be pure representatives of the Lord.

 

3. Doesn't see through your sophomoric attempts at maintaining lies to keep your illusory self-image intact.

 

Your claim that because I and everyone else have recognized so many rascals that we believe that "none" of Srila Prabhupada's disciples are fit to be Guru, is another example of your own insane hyperbolic view of the world, which you then project on us, putting words into our mouths that were never spoken.

 

Let the example of Kulapavana be a cautionary tale for all.

 

If you are in denial of the truth, are attached to believing you are someone you are not, and unwilling to face the facts, you will twist and manipulate until your last breath hoping to keep your house of cards from collapsing.

 

The punch line is that it is actually EASIER to face the truth of one's fallen nature, call a spade a spade, listen to the current Acarya, and thus never be fooled again.

 

The alternative is to try and fool others, and when those who can't be fooled catch you in the act, its gonna hurt.

 

I'm not attacking your overall ideas in this post...but - yes, if Mahaprabhu is the Supreme Personality of Godhead then His WISH" is some kind of magic wand. It's just that He wishes to have suddha bhaktas represent Him, and those who claim to represent Him will be tested by Him for purity. And what I mean by represent here is to take the position of Krsna's (Mahaprabhu's) pure representative of His sampradaya.

Well, considering that semantic arguments are the first refuge of the MISREPRESENTATION ARTISTS, only a cheating sophist would not get the meaning behind my statements.

 

"Yes, BUT" always smells a little fishy to me and I wait for the other shoe to drop.

 

You toed the line. I agree his wish and desire is a magic wand in the sense that without that desire, none of us would have a chance of fulfilling it.

 

But too many use this desire to justify that they can do any old thing they please, because His Wish somehow negates the free will to resist, and thus any miscreance engaged in is His Fault or Sanctioned by Him. He waved His magic wand, I have become Guru, we are all guru, yippee, pat pat on the back.

 

From the same purport (Madhya 24.277):

 

It is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's wish that everyone should become a Vaiṣṇava and guru. Following the instructions of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and His disciplic succession, one can become a spiritual master, for the process is very easy. One can go everywhere and anywhere to preach the instructions of Kṛṣṇa. The Bhagavad-gītā is Kṛṣṇa's instructions; therefore the duty of every Vaiṣṇava is to travel and preach the Bhagavad-gītā, either in his country or a foreign country. This is the test of sparśa-maṇi, following in the footsteps of Nārada Muni.

 

Yeah, and your point is?

 

Hmmm let me prognosticate.

 

Since it was Mahaprabhu's wish that everyone BECOME guru...

 

Everything I posted is irrelevant. You don't need to recognize how you were wrong about your assertions. Because Mahaprabhu's "WISH" is some kind of magic wand.

 

Blaspheme the Acarya. Disobey His instructions. Criticize Him. No worries, you are automatically an Initiating Guru, because of this purport.

 

Kulapavana, you were just plain wrong. I gave proof. And you are so stubbornly hell-bent on your Instant Shake and Bake Guru theory, that you quote the Lord's desire as some kind of exemption that excludes the process of BECOMING. Like the Pope selling indulgences. All those nice Iskconers are all Gurus because they talk about Bhagavad Gita while they are abusing each other, don't you know?

 

Take your show on the road, it doesn't fly here.

 

The offenses that your psuedo-Bad-Guru Hurry Cash committed and never repented (he is an atheist now), have no bearing to you? Sorry. His chanting was not offenseless. He had not completed the process of "Becoming" offenseless. Thus he was and is not a Guru. And you certainly have no claim to having received formal Diksa into Gaudiya Vaisnavism through him. No more than "Krishna Kirti" has that claim through the self-confessed Acarya minimizing criticizer, Hridayananda.

 

You may have received some real initiation through chanting the Maha-Mantra, the one thing Srila Prabhupada gave that these Gundas could not change by false translation. But your neophyte status is seriously tottering on the edge of the abyss called DENIAL. You are far from being able to removing anyone's darkness until you remove your own.

 

Wake up.

 

LOL@ 'liberated soul' kanisthas

 

WHAT are they liberated from?

They are conditioned by their impurities, plain and simple.

Fine, I will do your homework for you.

 

Generally the truth is as stated in this purport.

 

 

Madhya 24.277 : PURPORT Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī devotees cannot turn others into Vaiṣṇavas

The exception that you mentioned from Nectar of Devotion 5, the subject under discussion, is only possible under the condition the Kanistha is a pure devotee. And how are they pure? They, although kanistha, have come to the stage of offenseless chanting. Your "LOL" not withstanding, here are the relevant passages.

 

 

CC Adi 7.51

Although a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī also cannot tolerate such blasphemy, he is not competent to stop it by citing śāstric evidences. Therefore Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara are understood to be kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs because they could not refute the arguments of the sannyāsīs in Benares. They appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to take action, for they felt that they could not tolerate such criticism although they also could not stop it..

 

CC Adi 7.52 : PURPORT :

Because the blasphemy was cast against Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself, He did not feel sorry, and therefore He was smiling. This is ideal Vaiṣṇava behavior. One should not become angry upon hearing criticism of himself, but if other Vaiṣṇavas are criticized one must be prepared to act as previously suggested. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very compassionate for His pure devotees Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara; therefore by His grace this brāhmaṇa immediately came to Him. By His omnipotency the Lord created this situation for the happiness of His devotees.

Madhya 15.111 : PURPORT :

In his Upadeśāmṛta, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī states: kṛṣṇeti yasya giri taṁ manasādriyeta dīkṣāsti cet. An advanced devotee should respect a person who has been initiated by a bona fide spiritual master and who is situated on the transcendental platform, chanting the holy name with faith and obeisances and following the instructions of the spiritual master. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura comments that serving Vaiṣṇavas is most important for householders. Whether a Vaiṣṇava is properly initiated or not is not a subject for consideration. One may be initiated and yet contaminated by the Māyāvāda philosophy, but a person who chants the holy name of the Lord offenselessly will not be so contaminated. A properly initiated Vaiṣṇava may be imperfect, but one who chants the holy name of the Lord offenselessly is all-perfect. Although he may apparently be a neophyte, he still has to be considered a pure unalloyed Vaiṣṇava. It is the duty of the householder to offer respects to such an unalloyed Vaiṣṇava. This is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction.

 

 

 

 

LOL@ 'liberated soul' kanisthas

 

WHAT are they liberated from?

They are conditioned by their impurities, plain and simple.

Fine, I will do your homework for you.

 

Generally the truth is as stated in this purport.

 

 

Madhya 24.277 : PURPORT Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī devotees cannot turn others into Vaiṣṇavas

The exception that you mentioned from Nectar of Devotion 5, the subject under discussion, is only possible under the condition the Kanistha is a pure devotee. And how are they pure? They, although kanistha, have come to the stage of offenseless chanting. Your "LOL" not withstanding, here are the relevant passages.

 

 

CC Adi 7.51

Although a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī also cannot tolerate such blasphemy, he is not competent to stop it by citing śāstric evidences. Therefore Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara are understood to be kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs because they could not refute the arguments of the sannyāsīs in Benares. They appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to take action, for they felt that they could not tolerate such criticism although they also could not stop it..

 

CC Adi 7.52 : PURPORT :

Because the blasphemy was cast against Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself, He did not feel sorry, and therefore He was smiling. This is ideal Vaiṣṇava behavior. One should not become angry upon hearing criticism of himself, but if other Vaiṣṇavas are criticized one must be prepared to act as previously suggested. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very compassionate for His pure devotees Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara; therefore by His grace this brāhmaṇa immediately came to Him. By His omnipotency the Lord created this situation for the happiness of His devotees.

Madhya 15.111 : PURPORT :

In his Upadeśāmṛta, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī states: kṛṣṇeti yasya giri taṁ manasādriyeta dīkṣāsti cet. An advanced devotee should respect a person who has been initiated by a bona fide spiritual master and who is situated on the transcendental platform, chanting the holy name with faith and obeisances and following the instructions of the spiritual master. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura comments that serving Vaiṣṇavas is most important for householders. Whether a Vaiṣṇava is properly initiated or not is not a subject for consideration. One may be initiated and yet contaminated by the Māyāvāda philosophy, but a person who chants the holy name of the Lord offenselessly will not be so contaminated. A properly initiated Vaiṣṇava may be imperfect, but one who chants the holy name of the Lord offenselessly is all-perfect. Although he may apparently be a neophyte, he still has to be considered a pure unalloyed Vaiṣṇava. It is the duty of the householder to offer respects to such an unalloyed Vaiṣṇava. This is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction.

 

 

 

 

Prabhupada said in NOD that even a kanistha adhikari can be a guru. Kanisthas are certainly conditioned souls, yet a disciple should see them as a representative of God.

 

Christians claim that Jesus is God. Just google up "Jesus is God" and see what you find.

TRUE: "Prabhupada said in NOD that even a kanistha adhikari can be a guru"

 

FALSE: "Kanisthas are certainly conditioned souls."

There are pure neophytes. See Caitanya Caritamrta for examples.

 

Neophytes who disobey their Guru are not able to be a representative of Madana Mohana Vigraha and initiate others with Divya Jnana.

 

When they repent and become properly situated under the shelter of their Guru's instructions they become purified and can be considered a pure devotee. Like Candrasekara Prabhu is noted as being in CC.

 

Now in the case of the Kanistha Adhikari known as Hridayananda das, who took Diksa from Srila Prabhupada, just his assuming the position of initiating Guru to anyone is disobeying Srila Prabhupada's instructions on the matter. Not just his Ritvik instruction, but from his BOOKS. As a matter of fact from the very NOD purport you cite in his defense. Read it and understand. Especially the three bolded parts.

 

 

The Nectar of Instruction : NoI Texts : NoI 5 : PURPORT :

In this verse Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikārī Vaiṣṇava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaiṣṇavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī. A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master.

 

 

Facts

-Hridayananda is known to have disobeyed his Spiritual Master's instructions just after he disappeared.

 

-He has for 30+ years been guilty of imitating his Guru (a devotee situated on a higher platform), while simultaneously criticizing, minimizing, and contradicting his Guru in public.

 

-He has accepted disciples as if he was uttama which he is not.

 

How much more do you need. NO DIKSA. Sorry. And yes, this extends to your ex-Bad Guru HariKesh.

 

You are still formally uninitiated.

 

And apparently are still working on the Siksa part, kicking and screaming as you go.

 

He took diksa from him, he took the name Hridayananda gave him (and is still signing his letters with that name), but Andy thinks there is no link between these two Vaishnavas...

 

First you prove that a rascal who treats his Spiritual Master the way Hridya. did is somehow qualified to "give Diksa", somehow a personal manifestation of Srila Madana Mohana Vigraha.

 

 

CC Adi Lila, 1.47 Purport

 

The initiating spiritual master is a personal manifestation of Śrīla Madana-mohana vigraha, whereas the instructing spiritual master is a personal representative of Śrīla Govindadeva vigraha.

 

The only link between Hridaya. and KKdas is that they have been playing each other and all around them in a game of one-upsmanship from day one, never looking to repent their material tendencies.

 

That Narahari Sarkara Thakur quote you gave could have been translated by any old Joe Schmo looking to manipulate the masses.

 

I will go with what the Current link in the Gaudiya Line had to say on the issue.

 

There is no Bad Guru. There is no Fallen Master of Spirituality.

 

You are a Master of Spirituality or not a master of Spirituality.

 

If someone accepts another person as a Master, hoping to become Spiritual, and the person they accept has not mastered their own spiritual nature, they are sailing down $#!T$ Creek with no paddle. And were not fully or sincerely interested in becoming "Spiritual" to begin with.

 

Same for one who "surrenders" to an actual Spiritual Master in order to get some money, and then "unsurrenders". Spiritual transformation was never on their to do list to begin with.

 

 

March 10, 1972, Vrndavana

Ācārya, guru, he is completely surrendered to Kṛṣṇa. He has taken the shelter of Kṛṣṇa, being completely freed from all material affection. Brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. Everything... Everyone has got some material desire to fulfill, but a guru or ācārya has no such business. That is the symptom of ācārya. He has no more any material business. Brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. He has finished all business of material satisfaction. That is the symptom of ācārya. And śābde pare ca niṣṇātam. And he has taken full bath in the ocean of transcendental (indistinct). Śābde pare ca niṣṇātaṁ brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta [sB 11.3.21], one should surrender to such spiritual master. Jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam, when he is actually serious about inquiring the transcendental subject matter. Otherwise there is no need of accepting guru or ācārya. He has no business. If one is not interested in the transcendental subject matter... Just like so many people come, they have no interest. Unnecessarily they talk and waste time. As soon as I asked that man that "If I say something, whether you will accept?" He said, "If I like it, then I shall accept." Then why come to waste my time to inquire from me?

 

The abortion industry wants abortions late term, even infanticide with live nine-month birth, because that is where they can get the organic matter that old republicans pay big bucks for.

 

How sick am I? that last line of Mahak's had me laughing. Gotta laugh or cry, sometimes both.

 

I am sure there are plenty of old DemocRATS who think stem cells harvested under the waxing moon from a still breathing fetus are their key to immortality, but your point is taken, both sides of the same coin, Hypocrisy all around.

 

Recap for Andy: Hridayananda Swami is a Vaishnava guru to a lot of devotees. That is a fact. He is not an acharya IMO. Srila Prabhupada is a genuine Vaishnava acharya IMO.

 

Read the excerpt from SRIKRISHNA BHAJANAMRTA I posted. (more here:

http://www.krishna-das.com/ksyberspace/docs/skb.txt )

 

Once you take diksa from a G. Vaishnava guru you need to follow the tradition as explained by Narahari Sarkara Thakura. Krsna Kirti did not follow these rules and thus his decision is maya.

 

Ok just to recap.

 

The person Kula claims he believes is an acarya, who by his own public record belives was fallible, made mistakes, and not able to give diksa now that he is dead and gone, has this to say.

 

 

Lectures : Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.25.28 -- Bombay, November 28, 1974

Not that I accept you guru just to know how much you are learned, how much you can talk with me, not with that spirit. (indistinct) ...that I surrender to you sir, śiṣyas te 'ham, I have become śiṣya. Śiṣya means voluntarily accepting his ruling. Whatever guru will say he will accept, that is called śiṣya. Śiṣya means ruling, who accept disciple, means disciplinary measure. Whatever guru says, one who accepts he becomes disciple. He, I don't care for my guru's order and still I am disciple, that is not accepting guru. Of course it has become a fashion like that, to have a guru but don't care for guru.

 

According to this person's own words, his so called disciple, Hridayananda, has not accepted him as Guru. No link.

 

Yet Kula claims Hridayananda is a Guru. Even though the one he doesn't actually believe is Acarya, but now claims is acarya, says this..

 

 

From SSR 2

"Well, if he is bad, how can he become a guru? [Laughter.] How can iron become gold? Actually, a guru cannot be bad, for if someone is bad, he cannot be a guru. You cannot say “bad guru.” That is a contradiction. What you have to do is simply try to understand what a genuine guru is. The definition of a genuine guru is that he is simply talking about God—that’s all. If he’s talking about some other nonsense, then he is not a guru. A guru cannot be bad. There is no question of a bad guru, any more than a red guru or a white guru. Guru means “genuine guru.”

 

 

Yet Kula insists that this Bad Guru who has disobeyed the orders of his Guru somehow is qualified anyway to give "Diksa" (Transcendental Knowledge of their Eternal Self in Relation to Guru and God), and should not be rejected.

 

Ok, now we are cookin.

 

Do not confuse a guru with an acharya.

Translation= AC Bhaktivedanta Swami was a confused old man who was susceptible to being conned by hippies, and made decisions that had poor results for the Krsna Consciousness Movement, and even though if not for his efforts I wouldn't know squat about Gaudiya Vaisnavism, he clearly was not an Acarya, but maybe a Guru, maybe not, scholars will debate that til the end of time (as long as I am there to cast doubt.)

 

But Hrydayananda, ACB Swami's disciple, who also has the same doubts about ACBS, is a Guru, not an acarya, although he encourages his disciples to call him ACARYADEVA.

 

 

If a sannyasi choses to bless a gay couple that can certainly be seen as controversial, but a grounds for rejection as a diksa guru?

The great Acaryadeva Hridayananda, who according to his own public record has rejected the teachings, scriptural understandings, and instructions of his Diksa Guru, ACBSP on the grounds of the dictates of his mind's own need for pratistha is not very absurd, but....

 

He is actually a Sanyassi of the renounced order of life (renounced his Guru that is) and Krsna Kirti his ex disciple is looking for pratistha by rejecting him for breaking with the mood of ACBSP and past Acaryas, even though they weren't really acaryas, and is absurd.

 

Is everyone clear now?

 

Don't quit your day job Kula.

xxx

dhyayan stuvams tasya yasas trisandhyam

 

Paying obeisances by His Pranama Mantra are a method of meditating on his Lotus feet. That is what the Pranama Mantra is all about. At least 3 time a day. But this act in itself goes deeper.

 

stuvams = send forth a prayer.

 

What are we praying for?

 

yasya prasadad Bhagavat prasado.

 

That by Guru's mercy we become empowered to please him with our service, and receive Bhagavat Prasado. It is an intrinsic cycle.

 

By Guru's mercy we may please Guru and by extension get mercy from Bhagavan.

 

The act of paying obeisances and glorifying our Guru is pleasing to Bhagavan.

 

But I agree to extend that and pray for Guru's mercy that we may execute our daily service in a pleasing fashion, thus endearing us more to Krsna.

 

We Pray for mercy. His mercy enables us to please him. We receive Bhagavan's benediction. And the cycle continues.

 

My Relationship With HridayanandaBY: KRISHNA-KIRTI DAS

Feb 14, USA (SUN) — Dear Devotees, Hare Krishna and please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

(That is All Glories Except for all those mistakes he made that I used to routinely point out on my Iskcon Cultural Journal Website.)

 

 

As many of you know, for many years I have been an initiated disciple of Hridayananda Goswami.

(Can we consider someone who has so unrepentantly deviated from and disavowed the orders of Srila Prabhupada capable of initiating someone with transcendental knowledge? A Goswami? That KK was a disciple of Hriday is not in question, a chip off the old blockhead for sure.)

However, on account of recent news of his blessing of homosexual nuptials and his less-than-straightforward response to the devotee community about his involvement, I have formally ended my relationship with him as his disciple.

Translation: (After carefully analyzing the situation, there are enough people who are unsure of my ex-Acaryadeva that I feel it is safe to break ties with him and make a play for their attentions. Kill guru become guru)

 

That is all.

(Surely he jests. We haven't heard the last of Krsna Kirti. This is just the beginning of his public campaign.)

 

Yours in the service of Srila Prabhupada,

(Sorry KKdas, but until you accept Srila Prabhupada as your actual Srila Prabhupada, you do him only dis-service.)

 

Krishna Kirti Das

As he is. All sentiments aside.

 

So, everyone thinks that if Srila Prabhupada's vision was carried on after his departure perfectly 'to the letter' --then we would all be living in the temple as grihasta's or even as staunch monks?

 

I can't speak for "everyone", but it seems clear to this One that if His Instructions were carried on after his departure, without changing the letters of those instructions, then it would be His Vision, and by extension the Lord's, that would be carried on. Elementary logic to me and Common Sense. I mean who's vision do you think following His instructions would carry on?

 

You seem largely uneducated about His vision for Grhastas. Their living in temples was an emergency measure that He always discouraged if a suitable alternative could be arranged. There is an abundance of instruction on the matter. Temples = staunch monks (celibate students and older renunciates) for residents, that gels with his Vision for sure.

 

I noticed you had time to make a poor and transparent attempt on another thread to mischaracterize statements of mine, and try to paint me into a box labled "confused and hypocritical".

 

It would be more productive for you to take that time to learn what Srila Prabhupada's instructions actually were, and then an intelligent conversation might ensue. It is a matter of record, and as you point out, it was not so easy to get to the truth of these things while you were in the trenches due to the fogs of war obscuring his Vani.

 

Otherwise your reminiscing and take on the old days was quite interesting, thanks for sharing.