Jahnava Nitai Das

Everyone is accepted in the Krishna consciousness movement. Just go to the Sunday Feast. How many varieties of people do you see? Some really far out people show up, and none of them are barred. They can all chant, dance, and take prasadam. What is not allowed is changing Srila Prabhupada's instructions on religious and irreligious conduct. Anyone can come and take part, but don't try to justify their flaws by changing Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Let them come and chant. I'm don't ask anyone if their homosexual. I join them in the kirtan and bhajan. We only object when they come out and say, "Homosexuals are superior than others, their more detached, and their lifestyle is perfectly in accordance to religious principles." For some reason, when we object to these statements we are viewed as homophobes. Its an odd world. That probably belongs on the "I'm angry at Mr. X because..." thread. You are changing our statements. We are saying homosexuality was not sanctioned by the scriptures, not that it never existed. And remember, the Puranas are generally describing at least the age of Dvapara-yuga, when religious principles are strongly followed. We cannot compare our present degraded culture with theirs. Just because something exists today does not mean it was common then. We objected to the articel for a number of reasons, one of which is the fact that the word napumsaka does not mean "homosexual". It never has, and even today it doesn't. Neither does the word nartaka refer to homosexuals. It refers to a dancer. It always has. We do not accept these distortions. If you, or anyone else wants to prove that these words actually mean "homosexual", go ahead and proove it. But you can't because they factually don't. The article is a lie, plain and simple. Srila Prabhupada's direct instruction is, unless it is recorded, do not believe what 'Prabhupada said'. Why do you want to disobey this instructions? We are not arguing that there never was a time when a tape-recorder wasn't running! We are simply repeating Prabhupada's instruction on this matter. If it's not recorded, do not believe it. He himself said there are many people distorting his teachings, claiming that 'Prabhupada said'. One example is this secret unrecorded conversation where Prabhupada supposedly told his disciple to have a homosexual marriage. This is directly against every recorded statement Prabhupada said on the matter. It amazes me that you will argue in favour of such absurdities. Anyone may chant. But Srila Prabhupada has condemned homosexual marriages. He says they are a sign that the Church is irreligious. I agree with him. Any church represntative (or guru) that sanctions them is irreligious according to Srila Prabhupada. It is not a question of "view on shastra", it is one of language. Perhaps a further study of sanskrit and you will realize the words napumsaka, nartaka, and tritiya-prakriti never refered to homosexuals. If I say 'jalam' means water, and you say, "no, it actually means potatos!", what can I do? I cannot prove something so simple to you. Language is based on siksha, vyakarana and nirukti. That is something you must yourself know, otherwsie there is no proof I can offer. I can simply say, "You are incorrect, 'napumsaka' does not mean homosexual." I don't have a website named after bhaktivedanta. There is a website on Hinduism, by the name IndiaDivine. It is an online reference library on Hinduism and Vedic philosophy. In a library you will find references from all schools of philosophy. You have been taught that every thing must be used for "converting" people, but that isn't how I was taught. A library is meant to provide complete knowledge on a subject, not to convert people to a particular view. But I do not change the teachings of my gurus and say, "You eat beef? That's fine. It is actually superior to being vegetarian. In the ancient times the Rishis ate beef. And in a secret unrecorded conversation Srila Prabhupada told me to eat beaf." That is nonsense. A disciple must repeat the instructions of his spiritual master As It Is. At least thats the teachings of Srila Prabhupada, whom I follow. I agree, but not to the extent of saying homosexuality is not sinful. It is sinful, the scriptures say it is sinful, Srila Prabhupada says it is sinful, and nearly every world religion says it is sinful. Let them chant first and change themselves later through purification. But do not mislead them that their lifestyle is good. That was before or after the devotees who received sannyasa-diksha from Srila Prabhupada had their names changed? What did they call it? "Having their sanyassa blessed..." Srila Prabhupada didn't bless them? You repeatedly distort our stance. Everyone is welcome. Welcome means they can chant, dance, take prasadam, and worship Lord Krishna. Welcome does not mean they can change Srila Prabhupada's teachings, and now "homosex is not sinful", "homosex marriage is fine", etc. Why don't you see a difference between the two.

That's the answer that was given when people questioned Bhavananda, Kirtanananda and Hansaduta. Your a frog in the well and need to open your eyes. Those who change the teachings of the acharya are imposters. They will fall down, if they aren't already fallen and concealing it.

Here is Srila Prabhupada's own words, which you continuously refuse to accept, whether it be on homosexuality or anything else. Why must you deviate from your guru's instructions. You have become so intelligent that you now can see that certain instructions are only external and others are internal? Throw your pride aside and just be a disciple, a follower of Srila Prabhupada. The word Srila Prabhupada uses is "ajna", which means "order". The simple point becomes simpler. Srila Prabhupada tells us that he was "ordered" by his guru to preach in the western world. You refuse to accept the Acharya's words. You want to deviate and speculate and accept anything other than what he says. Do as you wish. Like I said, people like you are the cause of the problems in ISKCON. You stand outside and point fingers, while constantly deviating from the orders of the acharya.

The simple point is that our guru, Srila Prabhupada, says he was ordered, not suggested, by Bhaktisiddhanta to preach in the west. You want to use your mundane analysis to determine Bhaktisiddhanta's mind, whereas I want to accept the direct statement of Srila Prabhupada. This is a simple point that the readers will be able to understand.

After Srila Prabhupada's departure, there were so many deviations that crept withn the ISKCON movement, all in the guise of devotional service. So many in leadership positions simply stood by accepting these deviations without objection. These gutless leaders stood by as the homosexuals ran rampant, pretending to be gurus and acharyas. Other "senior gaudiya acharyas" certified these homosexuals as pure devotees and gurus. As a result many people, especially gurukulis, have left the Krishna consciousness movement, some even blaming Srila Prabhupada for the problems. What have the leaders done? Some have left and pretend they were never part of the problem. They point from a distance, saying, "Look at all those faults." They were themselves the problem. They are the one's who made the mess, both actively and pacively by allowing such things to go on. Now they are comfortably sitting from a distance trying to pretend they had nothing to do with the problems of ISKCON. We still remember the Swami Toms, Swami Dicks, and Swami Harry's. They may have left, but our memory remains. New people will be fooled, but we remember them for what they were - part of the problem of ISKCON. They were even worse than others, for they just ran off, forgetting about all the responsibilities they had. They took the easy way out; make a mess and run. What should we do? We could follow their shallow example, and run off ourselves, blaming everything on someone else. Maybe find a place in the forest and start an isolated ashram, while pointing fingers and blaming ISKCON for everything. Thats what others have done, but I won't do that. I for one am staying. We have a duty to our acharya, Srila Prabhupada, to fix the problem. The first step is a vigorous campaign to defend the integrity of Srila Prabhupada. Those who wish to blame these problems on him are<BR>in fact the creators of the problem. The second step is a vigorous defending of the philosophy. Do not change anything. There was a great attempt to minimize Srila Prabhupada after he left. Every Tom, Dick and Harry wanted to become a mini-Prabhupada, but they lacked the true spiritual qualification of the guru. Within the blink of an eye, these people suddenly became Swami Tom, Swami Dick and Swami Harry. They concocted their own teachings, deviating from Srila Prabhupada, and as a result began to fall down one by one. The so-called leaders stood by as these imposters stole Srila Prabhupada's legacy. The weakest of them ran off, after creating a good enough mess themselves, and pretended they had nothing to do with the problems. Nope, it didn't work. We saw you, we know what you did. We were watching the mess you were making. Now such people want to point fingers at the problems of ISKCON and pretend it wasn't caused by them. They want us to believe that if we change Srila Prabhupada's teachings to suit the modern times, everything will again be fine. That was where the problems started. As soon as they deviated from Srila Prabhupada there was chaos. I won't run off like some other shallow leaders. I will stand up and fix these problems, I won't let this morphing of philosophy continue. I've seen enough fraudulent self-proclaimed Gaudiya matha certified "acharyas" come and go. You've all stood by as Kirtananda and Bhavananda ran rampant as homosexual "acharyas" destroying ISKCON. Are you going to let this go on? Srila Prabhupada is our acharya, and we must follow him, not other self-appointed "acharyas". "Do not change anything", this is Srila Prabhupada's instruction. Do not accept homosexuality in any form as anything other than a weakness. Do not make up stories that there was a secret unrecorded conversation wherein he said his disciples could have homosexual marriages. Do not falsify the Vedic teachings as is going on in websites like Galva, and do not propagate these lies internally within ISKCON on sites like Chakra. Those who left have to stop pretending they weren't part of the problem. They deviated from Srila Prabhupada, and allowed other deviations to go on. Even today so many deviations are continuing. Its time for them to stand up and say, "I will be part of the solution, I will follow Srila Prabhupada's instruction As It Is." Is this too much to ask of a disciple? We don't need more gurus, we need more disciples. Devotees who will faithfully follow the orders of their spiritual master.

Srila Prabhupada was ordered by Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati to preach in the western world. It was not a suggestion as some want us to believe. Why they say it was a suggestion? Because they want to minimize the prominece of Prabhupada, "Oh, Bhaktisiddhanta suggested to everyone to do this." No, Srila Prabhupada was ordered by his spiritual master to preach in the west. This is the direct statement of Srila Prabhupada:

Some people really respect prasadam. Here is a quote from the food relief report that shows the respect these peole had: I would like to briefly share with you some of the details of our most recent food distribution which was held in the village of Randiya in Orissa (photos accompany this article). We started the distribution around 11 am, and went on till the evening, when there was no longer enough light to continue. This particular village in Orissa is very poor, and the people there belong to the 'Adivaasi' community (tribals). The staple diet of these people is plain rice and salt. They never eat such things as vegetables, dhal, etc. In fact when we served them dhal, subji and chutney these people said they had never eaten these things in their life. They told us we were giving them "king's food" and that they had never tasted such a delicious meal. On that day over 1,000 people were fed, mostly young children (some of whom you can see in the photos). Since the distribution went on from late morning till night, many of these children returned for a second time in the evening. You would be amazed to see how much rice these small children were eating. Their leaf plates were piled so high that there was no place for us to serve the dhal, vegetables and chutney. After eating everything, they again filled their plates full to take home for other family members who had gone to the fields to work and were unable to attend. When we finished in the evening, not a single grain of rice was left over. If we had cooked twice this amount of food they would still have finished everything. Afterwards, the villagers helped us by assisting in cleaning the area and washing the pots. Everyone was eagerly asking, "When will you be doing this again in our village?" We promised them that we would return next month. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 09-07-2001).]

Thank you for your nice post, but a couple points I need to mention: The discussion revolves around the Galva article, which makes such claims that Homosexuals are actually superior to othes because they are free from attachments. And the article also says homosexuality is not sinful, that it was very common, and that it was accepted in Vedic culture as natural. We object to all of this. Your memory is a little short. This thread started here: http://www.indiadivine.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000588.html Please go back and have a look. I will give you a hint. One person claimed there was a secret unrecorded conversation where Prabhupada said it was alright for his disciples to have homosexual relationships. A few of us objected to this nonsense, as it is very offensive to Srila Prabhupada. Then they went on to say their guru's had sanctioned their homosexual relationship. To which we replied, such a guru is bogus. We agree, yet the Galva article tries to justify their weaknesses and claim their vices are actually virtues! Go back and reread the thread. Your memory is too short. And in the attempt to justify their vices, they distort the teachings of the shastras and spread intentional lies to mislead the devotee community. Now are you remembering things a little better?

The problem is that some people want to identify todays India with the India described in the Puranas. Thus they take their useless sex studies of Bombay's ghettos and try to apply it to the Dvapara-yuga descriptions of Mahabharata. Castration was not a practice of ancient India. It is a modern practice. I would suggest this person re-read Mahabharata. Arjuna never pretends to be a eunuch. He physically was transformed into a eunuch by a divine curse. The Puranic eunuch never equals homosexual. Whether or not todays false eunuchs (who are castrated by operation) are homosexual or not is irrelevant. Today's India has nothing to do with the Puranic India of Dvapara-yuga. To draw a comparison between the two is foolish. It is like saying the Puritans who came to America supported homosex, drug use, abortion and many other things since these things are today supported in America. Such logic is a great distortion, and unfortunately many such distortions are purposely being made to "educate" the devotees to accept homosexuality as natural and sanctioned by the scriptures.

This 7,200th post reminded me of the 72,000 nadis in the human body. This topic comes up in one of out next newsletters, so I thought I would post an excerpt on the topic. This week our newsletter will contain an article by a guest writer, Sri Atmatattva Das, and the topic is "Ayur-veda-vedanta - The vedanta of the Ayurveda". Here is a small excerpt from that article dealing with the 72,000 nadis:

From your writings you seem to have many misconceptions about the Vedic teachings. Your identifying with the externals of eyeliner and other such things are very childish arguments. Homosexuals have the same position as hunters, prostitute, etc. Their activities are sinful, and are not sanctioned by the scriptures - as has been shown above. This is not a popular view, but it is the factual view of the Vedic texts. This is a straw man argument. No one here has said they hate homosexuals. We are against the distortion of the Vedic teachings. To claim that homosexuality was accepted in Vedic culture is a lie. It was considered sinful. Those who judge Krishna materially will never know who he is: avajananti mam mudha manushim tanum ashritam param bhavam ajananto mama bhuta-maheshvara They fail to understand Krishna's param-bhavam and his position as maheshvara. Other's who try to imitate him externally and think they are representing him by make-up and jewelery are foolish. In the GLAVA article the author cites the example of Arjuna who lived as a eunuch for one year. We should note that Arjuna received the "benediction" or "curse" (whichever way we want to read the story) that his body would physically change to that of a eunuch so that he would not be noticed during the last year of his vana-vasa. Otherwise Arjuna was so famous that whereever he went everyone knew him by appearance alone, and if he had been seen he would have to continue his stay in the forest. Arjuna's body was physically changed by higher powers so that he could remain disguised for the last year of his exile. Arjuna was not a homosexual, as these people want us to believe. Arjuna could not have remained hidden simply by changing his sexual preference, or by putting on the wig of a women. His entire body was physically changed; he factually became a eunuch. I think it is relevant to note the references cited by the author of the article in regards to Mahabharata. He takes his authority from Kamala Subrahmaniam's "Mahabharata" which is simply a novelized form of the stories found in Mahabharata, full with materialistic distortions. In addition to this, he relies on Krishna Dharma's summary of Mahabharata, which is also a novelized version of an English translation of Mahabharata. Without having even referred to the actual Mahabharata, the author wants us to accept that his statements properly reflect the descriptions of the Vedic times described in the Mahabharata. Having read the Mahabharata, I for one will not accept such distortions silently. Again, the eunuch described in the Puranas is someone born without any sexual organ. It does not refer to a homosexual. Homosexuals are described in this verse: Again, in summary, no one is against homosexuals chanting, coming to temples, etc., just as we are not against promiscuous heterosexuals from coming to our temples and engaging in devotional service. We are against people distorting the Vedic teachings and claiming Homosexuality is harmonious with Vaishnavsim, and that it is in fact a supperior form of vaishnavism. Such distortions are rubbish. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 09-05-2001).]

I just noticed this thread now, here is something I wrote on another forum in response to this article. Even the VHP understands this point, but in ISKCON we wear harinama chadars hanging below the waste, t-shirts with Krishna and his name into the bathrooms, and bead bags with the mahamantra cut buy scisors so it can be stiched into a bag. I am familiar with one particular case, and that is the Guadiya Matha/ISKCON temple in Bhadrak, Orissa. It was originally a Gaudiya Matha, and later the "Acharya" donated it to ISKCON, while continuing as the resident sannyasi. There was a big problem there because of devotees wearing t-shirts with Krishna's picture in dirty places (there were other things, but this is what he complains about most often), and eventually the maharaja had banned western devotees from coming, and later took the temple back from ISKCON. After years of trying to sort things out, he again gave the temple to ISKCON (two years ago), though he still criticizes the westerners heavily and openly.

I think thats the point we need to understand.

[Note: The other thread is getting too long, so I thought I would start a fresh one.] This discussion seems to keep going around in circles. Just to make things clear, I am not against anyone for their weaknesses. What am I against? 1) Claiming a vice to be a virtue, and then trying to propagate it as harmonious and beneficial to Sri Chaitanya's path of pure devotion. 2) Claiming our spiritual master, Sri A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, in a secret unrecorded conversation, authorized some disciples to accept homosexual marriages. This is a great insult and offense to Srila Prabhupada. His position on this matter is not a secret. It is clearly established in his books, letters and conversations. I am sure some here would be willing to call him homophobic for his views as well. 3) Misrepresenting the Vedic teachings through various deceptive means to propagate that homosexuality was commonly accepted in ancient India. For example, they claim the word "napumsaka" means "homosexual" when in reality it does not mean anything even remotely similar. Even today this word is still in use in nearly all Indic languages, and it refers to one who is born with no sexual organs, it indicates one who has a physical deformaty. 4) That in the Srimad Bhagavatam, the word "nartaka" refers to homosexuals. The word is used throughout the Puranas to refer to "dancers". Anyone with the slightest knowledge of sanskrit understands this. Any claim that this word refers to homosexuals is an intentional distortion. Srila Prabhupada is the "real guru", or sad-guru in sanskrit. Anyone who follows him and represents him perfectly is also a guru. But if someone claims to be his disciple, and at the same time propagates teachings contradictory to Srila Prabhupada's, that person is a cheater or bogus guru. I am not accusing anyone in particular. This is a simple principle. Only 24 years has passed since Srila Prabhupada was personally present on this planet. He wanted his instructions to be the law books of man kind for the next 10,000 years. He didn't want Swami Tom, Swami Dick and Swami Harry coming along to change his instructions 24 years after he left. Perhaps someone's guru has taught something different than Prabhupada. As a disciple it is their duty to accept and follow it. But you should not expect me or anyone else who is following Srila Prabhupada to accept your guru's statements. We are not his disciple. We are free to reject whatever he says in contradiction to Srila Prabhupada, and in fact it is our duty to reject it. Srila Prabhupada is our samsthapaka-acharya. It is the duty of the samsthapaka-acharya to establish the rules, regulations and siddhanta of a sampradaya. He has the right and obligation to adjust external principles to suit time, place and circumstance. Others are only acharya in as much as they follow his standard. Let's not have another Kirtanananda, who claimed he was the "samsthapaka-acharya of New Vrindavana". There are no two samsthapaka-acharyas. The founder-acharya is one, and for our line it is Srila Prabhupada. Others who think they can adjust the teachings of the samsthapaka-acharya are nothing but pretenders; their authority is lost. Regarding the sinfulness of homosex: We are not speaking about any particular individual. We are speaking in regards to homosexual activities in general. They are sinful, and that is clearly what Prabhupada said. Some people want us to believe Srila Prabhupada was fallible and that his views were due to his imperfect knowledge and faulty senses. This is yet another offense to the spiritual master, who is sarva-jna and akshara. As far as the scriptures own view, let us look at a verse quoted in the GALVA article (which was intentionally mistranslated): "Those foolish men of evil conduct who engage in all forms of intercourse, taking advantage of improper wombs (viyoni), and forcing themselves upon other men (pumsaka), are born again without their organs as neuters." (Mahabharata 13.145.52) First, this confirms that the eunuch is born without a sexual organ of any type. It is not just a matter of sexual preference. Due to their evil conduct, they are born as eunuchs in their next life with a physical deformaty. What is that evil conduct that brings them this fate? The correct translation of viyoni is "without a female reproductive organ". So this verse actually reads: "Foolish and evil men engage in all forms of sexual intercourse without a female womb, forcing themselves upon other men." Their evil activity is that they are homosexual, and because of engaging in such a sinful activity they are born in the next life without their sexual organ, as a eunuch. By living as a homosexual in the present life, one becomes a eunuch (not homosexual) in the next life. This is the result of that sinful activity. The shastra's statement is clear. Those who don't want to accept this try to mistranslate texts of scripture to suit their own mental concotion. We are all born subjected to the polution of our karma-vasanas, the residual influences of our previous activities (which are generally sinful). Some are attracted to homosexuality, some are attracted to heterosexualty, some are attracted to meat eating, and some are attracted to intoxication. Spiritual life is meant to become free from these karma-vasanas, to purify ourselves, not to accept this polution as natural and continue on our downward path. Simply because something is coming from birth does not justify its acceptance. What ever comes from our present birth is due to the karma-vasanas. We have committed sinful activity in the previous life and that attachment continues to the present. Become free from that contamination. Someone is born with a taste for meat. We do not accept it as fine. We tell him to give it up by taking shelter of the Lord's holy name. Someone else is born with an attraction to women. We do not accept it and say it is fine. We tell himto purify himself by chanting, and give up that sinful attachment. Homosexuality is no different. It is due to one's karma-vasanas. We must become purified from it, not accept it as fine. Somethings in spiritual life are difficult. No one says it will be a walk in the park. You must be ready to sacrifice, otherwise there will be no fruit to one's sadhana.

This discussion seem to keep going around in circles. Just to make things clear, I am not against anyone for their weaknesses. What am I against? 1) Claiming a vice to be a virtue, and then trying to propagate it as harmonious and beneficial to Sri Chaitanya's path of pure devotion. 2) Claiming our spiritual master, Sri A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, in a secret unrecorded conversation, authorized some disciples to accept homosexual marriages. This is a great insult and offense to Srila Prabhupada. His position on this matter is not a secret. It is clearly established in his books, letters and conversations. I am sure some here would be willing to call him homophobic for his views as well. 3) Misrepresenting the Vedic teachings through various deceptive means to propagate that homosexuality was commonly accepted in ancient India. For example, they claim the word "napumsaka" means "homosexual" when in reality it does not mean anything even remotely similar. Even today this word is still in use in nearly all Indic languages, and it refers to one who is born with no sexual organs, it indicates one who has a physical deformaty. 4) That in the Srimad Bhagavatam, the word "nartaka" refers to homosexuals. The word is used throughout the Puranas to refer to "dancers". Anyone with the slightest knowledge of sanskrit understands this. Any claim that this word refers to homosexuals is an intentional distortion. Srila Prabhupada is the "real guru", or sad-guru in sanskrit. Anyone who follows him and represents him perfectly is also a guru. But if someone claims to be his disciple, and at the same time propagates teachings contradictory to Srila Prabhupada's, that person is a cheater or bogus guru. I am not accusing anyone in particular. This is a simple principle. Only 24 years has passed since Srila Prabhupada was personally present on this planet. He wanted his instructions to be the law books of man kind for the next 10,000 years. He didn't want Swami Tom, Swami Dick and Swami Harry coming along to change his instructions 24 years after he left. Perhaps someone's guru has taught something different than Prabhupada. As a disciple it is their duty to accept and follow it. But you should not expect me or anyone else who is following Srila Prabhupada to accept your guru's statements. We are not his disciple. We are free to reject whatever he says in contradiction to Srila Prabhupada, and in fact it is our duty to reject it. Srila Prabhupada is our samsthapaka-acharya. It is the duty of the samsthapaka-acharya to establish the rules, regulations and siddhanta of a sampradaya. He has the right and obligation to adjust external principles to suit time, place and circumstance. Others are only acharya in as much as they follow his standard. Let's not have another Kirtanananda, who claimed he was the "samsthapaka-acharya of New Vrindavana". There are no two samsthapaka-acharyas. The founder-acharya is one, and for our line it is Srila Prabhupada. Others who think they can adjust the teachings of the samsthapaka-acharya are nothing but pretenders; their authority is lost. Regarding the sinfulness of homosex: We are not speaking about any particular individual. We are speaking in regards to homosexual activities in general. They are sinful, and that is clearly what Prabhupada said. Some people want us to believe Srila Prabhupada was fallible and that his views were due to his imperfect knowledge and faulty senses. This is yet another offense to the spiritual master, who is sarva-jna and akshara. As far as the scriptures own view, let us look at a verse quoted in the GALVA article (which was intentionally mistranslated): "Those foolish men of evil conduct who engage in all forms of intercourse, taking advantage of improper wombs (viyoni), and forcing themselves upon other men (pumsaka), are born again without their organs as neuters." (Mahabharata 13.145.52) First, this confirms that the eunuch is born without a sexual organ of any type. It is not just a matter of sexual preference. Due to their evil conduct, they are born as eunuchs in their next life with a physical deformaty. What is that evil conduct that brings them this fate? The correct translation of viyoni is "without a female reproductive organ". So this verse actually reads: "Foolish and evil men engage in all forms of sexual intercourse without a female womb, forcing themselves upon other men." Their evil activity is that they are homosexual, and because of engaging in such a sinful activity they are born in the next life without their sexual organ, as a eunuch. By living as a homosexual in the present life, one becomes a eunuch (not homosexual) in the next life. This is the result of that sinful activity. The shastra's statement is clear. Those who don't want to accept this try to mistranslate texts of scripture to suit their own mental concotion.

Anyone who disagrees with their philosophy and their claims that Prabhupada had a secret unrecorded conversation wherein he said homosexualmarriage is alright is a small-minded bigot. It has been shown that their paper is full of lies without knowledge of language, culture or principles of religion. Why should we have to agree with it? It is posted publicly, so in the same manner we will denounce such distortions publicly. When you try to associate the name of my spiritual master with a sinful activity which he condemned, then I will speak up against it. If that makes me a close-minded bigot, a homophobe, or anything else, fine with me. It is the duty of the disciple to defend the name of his guru.

He is my samsthapaka-acharya, and anyone that is his disciple, as well as anyone associated with ISKCON as well. I don't know which line you are following, so he may not be your samsthapaka-acharya. But for his disciples, he insisted, "I am the founder-acharya." Founder-acharya is a technical word that has a definition, it does not refer to a "founder" and an "acharya", but to the compound "samsthapaka-acharya". Srila Prabhupada insisted that this title be printed on every official ISKCON literature along with his name. When the word ISKCON is printed, it must be followed by "Founder-Acharya A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada". For those who follow Srila Prabhupada, he is the samsthapaka acharya of our sampradaya. For others, they can say whatever they like. There is a definition for samsthapaka-acharya and it is Srila Prabhupada who perfectly matches this definition. For more details, read this: Srila Prabhupada - Founder-Acharya of the Golden Age http://www.indiadivine.com/bhaktivedanta-swami-prabhupada1.htm The samsthapaka-acharya does not establish the siddhanta. Siddhanta is eternal, just as Krishna is eternal.

The point is there is sex life according to religious principles. Those who want to live in celebate homosexual relationships risk fall down into sinful activity, as there is no religious manner for them to dovetail their weakness. Why take unnecessary risks?

Srila Prabhupada has warned us that butter brought near fire will melt. With this example he told us that we should avoid intimate association with those we are attracted to otherwise we will fall down. Those who want to have celibate homosexual marriages are going against this simple instruction of Srila Prabhupada's. Why try to keep the butter solid while keeping it next to a fire?

[Note: This message is not directed at the message immediately above this, but as a general principle.] Please no personal insults. I want to be a little strict otherwise this will degenerate into nothing but name calling. I have deleted a couple posts again. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 09-03-2001).]

There is no such thing in the material world. The closest one can get is the love a mother has for her child, but even that is tinted with the material contamination of lust in a very minute way.

They are doing something worse. They are misrepresenting the Vedic teachings and claiming homosexuality is sanctioned in the scriptures and in Vedic culture. Their entire article is based on lies and misrepresentations. They mis-translate words such as napumsaka, which have historically accepted meanings, and claim it refers to today's homosexuals. responses against the Galva article are not attacking the individuals for their imperfections, they are attacking the distortion and misrepresentation of the Vedic teachings. And when they add rumors of "Prabhupada said we can have homosexual marriages" it is an insult to our spiritual master who has directly instructed not to believe in "Prabhupada saids" unless it is in writing. All of his writings condemn hmosexuality as sinful. There isn't a single statement in favour of it. Why then spread these lies in the name of the Acharya. It is a great offenses, and it is natural his disciples and followers will be offended. I can imagine what other rumors of "Prabhupada said" will be circulating in their community in addition to this. Srila Prabhupada, the real guru, was clearly against church sanctioned gay relationships. He says it is proof that the church is against religious principles. Any so-called guru, claiming to follow Srila Prabhupada, who makes such distortions in the teachings is bogus. It only makes me doubt whether or not such a personality may himself be homosexual. Srila Prabhupada never compromised on spiritual principles. He told his disciples that they must strictly follow four regulative principles - no meat eating, non intoxication, no illicit sex and no gambling. What if someone was serious about devotional life but couldn't give up meat eating? Prabhupada would not initiate them. The fact is, if they aren't willing to change their life style to suit the gurus instructions then they are not serious about devotion. I found it interesting how these discussions started with mild calls for homosexuals to just be accepted as devotees, and slowly the true agenda came out - guru sanctioned non-celibate homosexual marriages, and "Prabhupada said it was alright". The problem is sinful activities fo not create a conducive atmosphere for Krishna consciousness. Sharanagati, or surrender to Lord Krishna, has six principles, two of which are most important: anukulyasya sankalpah pratikulyasya varjanam 1) Accepting everything favourable for the execution of devotional service. 2) Rejecting anything unfavourable for the execution of devotional service. Sinful activities belong in the second category, as do all forms of mental speculation. They are to be rejected as contaminations. They should not be propagated as harmonious to the path of krishna-bhakti. They are not better. They are also imperfect in their application of devotional principles. But they never try to propagate their faults as harmonious to devotional service. I find it a shame that some will misrepresent the teachings of the Vedic scriptures to suit their own imperfections. I also find it a shame that such people will try to mislead the devotee public through a well-organized program of dis-information [such as occured on chakra]. Srila Prabhupada never compromised on spiritual principles. He was the only guru from India who demanded discipline from his disciples. Others, such as Mahesh Yogi, Rajnesh, etc., accumulated countless followers and millions of dollars by adulterating the vedic teachings and removing all rules and regulations. If Prabhupada had done that, he could have been much more materially successful. But he presented the Vedic teachings as they were, without adulteration. He did not compromise on anything, and he made it clear that Krishna was the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such a stance was not popular, but it was the truth.

This book has no connection with ISKCON or Srila Prabhupada, so there is nothing we can do if they edited his conversation.

One was edited for popular publication and reading, the other is as it was spoken. Buy the cassette and see for yourself if you want, they are available to anyone.

Actually the true guru is infallible. He belongs to the spiritual realm, not the material world. In the Gita Lord Krishna describes this technical distinction as follows: dvav imau purusau loke ksaras caksara eva ca ksarah sarvani bhutani kuta-stho 'ksara ucyate "There are two classes of beings, the fallible and the infallible. In the material world every entity is fallible, and in the spiritual world every entity is called infallible." The eternal spiritual master (sad-guru) belongs to the spiritual world and is known technically as akshara, or infallible. The Lord on the other hand is known as uttama-purusha, or purushottama: uttamah purusas tv anyah paramatmety udahrtah yo loka-trayam avisya bibharty avyaya isvarah "Besides these two, there is the greatest living personality, the Lord Himself, who has entered into these worlds and is maintaining them." He is situated beyond both the fallible and the infallible. The infallible refers to the liberated jivas, not to the Lord. Srila Prabhupada was a liberated jiva, an eternal servant of the Lord in Vaikuntha. He was infallible. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 09-01-2001).]