Ritvik is Poison

[Guruvani 0]

Yes, it is like an herbacide that kills the weeds of material desire to artifically be guru and deceive innocent neophytes for the sake of a livelyhood as a professional saviour.

Ritvik is not heresy. All the elements of the Bhagavata-marga and Pancaratrika-vidhi are included in the Ritvik method.

[Guest guest]

you have to decide if srila prabhupad is a complete outsider or he has to do with gaudya math and tradition ( Bhagavata-marga and Pancaratrika-vidhi )...

 

the only way to justify post samadhi initiation is to say that prabhupada is something like sai baba or osho who say somewhat proudly that they do not belong to any tradition or sampradaya (IMHO)

 

you also have argumented more times speaking of a "non traditional" or "non hindu / non gaudya math" prabhupada

[Guruvani 0]

Srila Sridhar Maharaja recognized Srila Prabhupada as a

shaktya-vesha avatar. That means he was especially empowered for a special purpose. If he did everything exactly the same way that Gaudiya Math did, then what is special about him?

 

In making Krishna consciousness a practical idealogy in western society some adjustments had to be made. The rules of the Gaudiya Math are impossible to apply in a western context.

 

Trying to make the old school babaji tradition the model for Krishna consciousness in the western world is fantasy and foolishness.

 

Prabhupada came to make Krishna consciousness a practical, working ideal for people living in the modern space-age. He did not come to try and transplant the old traditions of the babaji cults into Christian oriented western society.

He wanted to make Krishna consciousness as practical and accessible as Christianity is to western society. In doing so he needed to make some adjustments. He many times applauded and confirmed the Christian and Muslim tradition of following the ONE great Saviour or Prophet through a system of priests, clerics and clergymen. He wanted to establish Krishna consciousness in ISKCON under a similar concept.

 

Using the old school Gaudiya tradition as a model for Krishna consciousness in modern western societies is ludicrous and actually impossible. Some adjustments have to be made unless Krishna consciousness is to remain as the monopoly of babaji cults in India.

 

Time will show that this attempt to make the old school model of so-called parampara the standard in western societies as a failure as guru after guru bites the dust, blemishes the system and discredits Vaishnavism as cheap, impracticle and unworkable. This has already happened time after time after time in ISKCON. How long must this charade go on in ISKCON before we wake up and realize that it is doing more harm than good?

 

 

As I have said before; TO HELL WITH YOUR SO-CALLED TRADITION!

[Guest guest]

guruvani: As I have said before; TO HELL WITH YOUR SO-CALLED TRADITION!

 

maybe the moderators are having a cold drink or a little nap

[theist 1]

he seems to be trying to make a case that time place and circumstantial considerations take precedent over tradion for traditions sake, which in principle I agree with.

 

I do see the danger in taking that position too far, and using it as a license for all brands of nonsense as we see happening presently with the homosexual's.

 

Where that line should be specifically drawn would make for an interesting and very timely discussion.

 

Sometimes the emotive approach is a good way to get a point across. Sometimes we just can't help ourselves. But if used constantly it will make us appear as fanatics' not willing to listen to the other point of view. I know from experience.

[Guest guest]

Guruvani continues his attack on all vaishnavas who are pushing on the movement of Lord Chaitanya calling them names and such. It is really unfortunate.

 

What is the meaning of Krsna consciousness if no one can actually represent it? No one is Krsna conscious? All are charlatans now? This is nonsense. Guru Parampara is continued on by those who are living examples of surrender. There is no meaning to preaching without practical example. For one to have any actual effect other then social-religious at best, one must actually practice and have some actual standing in Bhakti. How can someone give what they don't have? It is simply impossible. If someone is going to connect someone to Krsna - to parampara - they must be connected.

 

This idea that a ritvik can make the connection and be full of nonsense and fallen and that this is some improvement over the fiasco of Iskcon is wishful thinking at best. (BTW, I am not saying that all those who think they are functioning as Srila Prabhupada's ritvik representative are full of nonsense - but the very idea is questionable at best.) What is needed is someone who is Krsna conscious and that person can make the proper connection. This is the system. Why does Ksambuddhi think he can call this a 'so-called system'? Why does he riducle the Lord and his pure devotees? Does Ksamabuddhi not have enough good sense to understand the difference between external trappings which can and should be adjusted and eternal spiritual principles?

 

Enough already. When Srila Prabhupada's god brothers thought to institute a 'ritvik' system after the departure of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta (make no mistake about this - yes the Guru lives forever and is never considered 'dead' - but yes he/she also enters into samadhi and is no longer physically present), Sridhara Maharaja was asked to say something. No one felt empowered to stand up and say anyhing against the idea because it had been forcefully and expertly argued and tied to the concept of 'who is it that will claim to be as qualified as Guru Maharaja?'. So Sridhara Maharaja stood up and simply said, 'We are not sikhs.' Very simple and profound. Of course the disciple will always feel unqualified, but he/she is called to carry on the service. That is the actual principle.

 

The trap that the ritvik advocate falls into is that they believe that those who take up this service are offenders and are trying to ursurp the position of the acharya and they therefore become offenders to those devotees. I have seen it over and over again - the ritvik advocate speaking out against devotee X, Y and Z who are functioning as Gurus. It comes in all varieties but it is always very untasteful and against all principles of vaishnavism.

 

Please, Ksambuddhi - stop the madness. Krsna comes to the sincere sadhaka in the form of Sri Guru. This is his arrangement.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[Guest guest]

>he seems to be trying to make a case that time place and circumstantial considerations take precedent over tradion for traditions sake, which in principle I agree with.

 

I do see the danger in taking that position too far, and using it as a license for all brands of nonsense as we see happening presently with the >homosexual's.

 

Give me a break! Somepone who is actually inspiring people all over the owrl dto take to Krsna consciousness suggests that in consideration of time, place, and cisrcumstances it might be acceptable to encourage homosexuals who are devotees to regulate their sexuality by living in a relationship with another homosexual devotee rather than insisting that they remian celibate or enter a hetrosexual relationship in order to progress spiritually.

 

Another person, who inspires few if any devpotees or nondevotees and most likely has a questionable if any daily practice advocates doing away with "living gurus" and the entire conception of guru parampara becasue he feels his guru is "special," and interprets his words to support doing away with the the Gaudiya tradition.

 

In your quote above you call the first person's suggested preaching adjustments nonesense and give serious consideration to the second persons absolute nonsense.

 

You need a guru.

 

[Guest guest]

Theist says

 

>he seems to be trying to make a case that time place and circumstantial considerations take precedent over tradion for traditions sake, which in principle I agree with.

 

I do see the danger in taking that position too far, and using it as a license for all brands of nonsense as we see happening presently with the >homosexual's.

 

.................

 

Give me a break! Somepone who is actually inspiring people all over the owrl dto take to Krsna consciousness suggests that in consideration of time, place, and cisrcumstances it might be acceptable to encourage homosexuals who are devotees to regulate their sexuality by living in a relationship with another homosexual devotee rather than insisting that they remian celibate or enter a hetrosexual relationship in order to progress spiritually.

 

Another person, who inspires few if any devpotees or nondevotees and most likely has a questionable if any daily practice advocates doing away with "living gurus" and the entire conception of guru parampara becasue he feels his guru is "special," and interprets his words to support doing away with the the Gaudiya tradition.

 

In your quote above you call the first person's suggested preaching adjustments nonesense and give serious consideration to the second persons absolute nonsense.

 

You need a guru.

[Guruvani 0]

Prabhupada is not special to you.(that's very unfortunate for you)

 

I have never proposed doing away with Gaudiya tradition and the ritvik system contains every last element of the tradition in a system of representative authority.

 

What I do propose in doing away with is the bigoted, dogmatic version of the tradition that is being promoted nowadays.

 

The living ritvik system is just as unprecedented as is the post-samadhi ritvik system. Some fools are even so ignorant as to criticize and condemn the living ritivk system that was in place during the time of Prabhupada.

 

Prabhupada broke the tradition himself personally while he was here in many ways. Why should we now try to conform to the tradition that Prabhupada abandoned while he was here.

 

Giving gayatri by tape violates the tradition. Giving diksha by ritvik violates the tradition, women on the altar violates tradition, single women in the temples selling books with breast power violates the tradition.

 

Tradition? Prabhupada didn't seem to give a damn about the tradition while he was here, so why should we give a damn about it now?

[Guest guest]

>Prabhupada broke the tradition himself personally while he was here in many ways. Why should we now try to conform to the tradition that Prabhupada abandoned while he was here.

 

>Giving gayatri by tape violates the tradition. Giving diksha by ritvik violates the tradition, women on the altar violates tradition, single women in the temples selling books with breast power violates the tradition.

 

>Tradition? Prabhupada didn't seem to give a damn about the tradition while he was here, so why should we give a damn about it now?

......................

 

But if someone preaches dynamically now, and for example, suggests that homosexual devotees living together as partners might be an adjustment to the tradition worth considering in light of the fact that more and more such devotees are appearing on the scene in a world that is now much more accepting of them than it was the world when Prabhupada was here, you condemn him. The preacher (like Prabhupda and following in his dynamic footsteps) in an effort to encourage homosexual devotees in Krishna consciousness suggests this as opposed to insiting that they remain celibate or marry a heterosexual, but you consider him a deviant from the special acarya whose speciality involved the kind of ajustments to the tradition you cite, all of which were controversial and rejected by persons of your ilk in the previous generation, the people you lable (and they were) envious of Prabhupada.

 

In reply all you can say is that the preacher disciple of Prabhupada is not empowered, not advanced enough to make such adjustements (or even suggest them), and further that in order that he actually be considered a follower of Prabhupda he must not make any adjustments to the tradition or even utter a word that was not uttered by Prabhupada becasue Prabhupada was special. Indeed he was but you do not understand what it means to follow him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Add to this the fact that you yourself, an admittedly unempowered person, wants to make an adjustment to the tradition that involves doing away with the parampara. Of course it is not you who wants to make this adjustment, it is Prabhupada himself, and you are just here to point that out to us by your unempowered so called literal interpretation of his words. Thanks.

[Guruvani 0]

Srila Prabhupada has already dealt with the homosex marriage issue and he rejected it.

Several of his earliest disciples were homosexuals. Instead of marrying them to each other, Prabhupada married them off to women and tried to get them to act like civilized human beings instead of perverts.

 

Prabhupada has already made the adjustments of adapting Krishna consciousness to western society. He warned his disciples not to make any changes in the standards he established for ISKCON. He said "don't change anything after I am gone". This means; don't add - don't subtract. Just leave the movement alone the way Prabhupada wanted it.

 

Prabhupada said that marrige was meant for making Krishna conscious children. Sex is allowed only for the propagation of children. There can be no Krishna conscious children result from homosex. Therefore it can never be a religious principle to have homosex. It will always be a sinful act of sense gratifiaction.

 

Any so-called acharya who tries to make homosexual relationships into a holy marriage is offending religion itself by trying to make an inherintly sinful activity into a religious tradition.

 

Homosex has existed since the earliest days of history. There is nothing new about having homos in society and having homos become attracted to Krishna. What is new is the proposal by some so-called gurus that homosex be sanctioned in marriage. If it were something that the predecessor acharyas thought was feasible, it would have been established and implemented already.

 

Prabhupada instructed his homosexual disciples that they must immediatly give up homosex. He never agreed that they should regulate their homosex in marriage and it would help them advance in spiritual life.

 

If somebody wants to undermine Prabhupada's policy that homosex must be given up, by saying that homosex can be religious if regulated. Then that is just thier own undoing.

 

I doubt very seriously that the GBC will ever sanction homosex marriages in the ISKCON temples. If some so-called Swami wants to make a reputation for himself by marrying homos, then that would be quite hilarious and I would love to see him ruin his reputation and become the laughing stock of the movement by doing so. Is he ready for the curse that will come upon him for making such an offense?

 

Homosexual marriage is heresy. Prabhupada taught his disciples to not be heretic. It is offensive to all that is good and holy.

[Guest guest]

Bhaktisiddhanta made it clear that women were not to serve on the altar in the math, nor were they to "use their breasts" for preaching as you say Prabhupada allowed them to do. Bhaktisiddhanta's disciples could probably list numerous other things that he made clear that Prabhupada later changed. In thier opinion Prabhupada's changes are a deviation from the established standards of a nitya siddha guru. Sound familiar?

 

You say Prabhupada already made all the adjustments necessary for the west. Do you really expcet any sane person to belive this work is now complete and no adjustments are needed for 10,000 years or forever more? If so, good luck. According to you preachers no longer have to think. All time place and circumstance adjustements have been made. Of course you have added one, the ritvik detail. Your empowered insight.

 

Your take on homosexuality is steriotypical of homophobia, a well documented bias that is based on misinformation. You might want to read up on this and gain some balance from your Christian Right perspetive. As have been the debates on racism and womens' equality in the work place etc., the debate on homosexuality is one of the bigger issues in the modern world. Input like yours however--my guru says its bad and so does the Bible--will not be taken seriously. Thus neither will your guru, or at least not your representation of him.

 

By the way Prabhupda also said that the slavery of black people was good and that all women like to be raped. Although you may agree with him, Simply quoting him on these issues does not make his statements factual. He himself taught that one's words need to be supported by scripture. Can you please cite the exact scripturtal texts that explicity condemn homosexuality. I would assume that there were many of them if it is as sinful as you make it out to be.

 

Oh and Theist, take the essence.

[livingentity 0]

I pray that can express this properly and without offending anyone. I will make this brief.

 

Quite simply...

Prabhupada did not go into the math and force change on them. He came to the West and implemented His standards in ISKCON which He started.

 

The problem with the homosexual, women sannyas etc issues is that these people are trying to force change against Prabhupada's wishes and orders of how ISKCON was to be carried on during and after His physical presence.

 

If these people are so certain that they want to do these things then they need to just go start their own organizations and leave Prabhupada out of them and quit trying to force the issue against Prabhupada's wishes.

 

It is in black and white that Prabhupada was against these issues such as homosex.

 

Again, yes Prabhupada did some things differently than in the Math but He did it in His own organization - not theirs. He was a gentleman.

 

 

 

 

[Guruvani 0]

Slavery was a Vedic principle. Aborigines were taken out of the jungles and given positions in human society in the labor force. That is the kind of slavery that was Vedic. As blacks became civilized and educated into society their slavery became abolished.

 

Prabhupada gave sannyasa and brahmin thread to blacks so don't call him racist!

 

The kind of rape that Prabhupada is referring to is the aggressive behaviour of a man towards a woman. He is not referring to a woman jogging in the park and wanted to get raped and killed!

 

Women like men who are aggressive. I have heard that from many women themselves. Ask some if you don't believe Prabhupada. The Hindu concept of rape is very conservative. Any aggressive move on a woman is considered rape in the Hindu society. What they consider rape is what we consider just good old fashioned seduction. Seducing a women is considered rape in Hindu society, even if the women agrees to have sex.

 

I can see now that the slander of Prabhupada in the form of accusing him of supporting slavery and rape is not being censored in this forum and that is very unfortunate.

[Guest guest]

 

If these people are so certain that they want to do these things then they need to just go start their own organizations and leave Prabhupada out of them and quit trying to force the issue against Prabhupada's wishes.

 

It is in black and white that Prabhupada was against these issues such as homosex.

 

Again, yes Prabhupada did some things differently than in the Math but He did it in His own organization - not theirs. He was a gentleman.

 

 

I agree with you a hundred percent, but with all due respect to Tripurari Swami, he has, in fact, started his own organization. I have many disagreements with Tripurari Swami, but one thing I do appreciate about him, is that he has not taken any of Srila Prabhupada's temples and used them for his own field of preaching.

 

[yasodanandana 0]

prabhupada did not do anything really different.. he simply applied the principle of time, place and circumstance, considering guna and karma of the people who were approaching him

 

exactly like krsna with arjuna

 

in this way he was most respectiful of tradition and parampara

 

this is the real power of a pure spiritual master

 

the world "shaktiavesha" is commonly translated with "empowered for a particular task" but it has also the meaning of "empowered to act in that particular circumstance"

 

the issues that are arising, like these ones of post samadhi initiation or homosexual religious marriages and so on, could very easily answered and put aside if we approach pure devotees to ask....

 

the same things we see now, happened for the srila prabhupada mission ... some kanista adhikaris from hindu community or prabhupada godbrothers were criticizing him applying an integralist (if you know italian please translate IMBALSAMATO.. like in egypt with the dead bodies of the kings) idea of the preaching of srila bhaktisiddhanta, maybe with their version of our "citation out of context" disease ("folioitis") that we see here many times

 

the problem is that:

 

changes are to be made to mantain alive a sampradaya

 

but only pure devotees and acharyas can make changes

 

without these adaptation to circumstances a sampradaya dies or have only an apparent life

 

IMHO i can obviously say that, if my opinion counts an euro, there's no need to allow homesexual marriages within a gaudya math organization but all of us have to be more mercyful and less "body attached" when we approach people who are searching for krsna consciousness.......... many times i have seen people who, joining krsna consciousness, take this as a justification to revive a long list of fanaticisms and moralisms

 

we have to develop the same quality and quantity of the love who is in the heart of srila prabhupada before start to use the word rascal as his divine grace did sometimes

 

infinite apologies for my language

[Guest guest]

 

I can see now that the slander of Prabhupada in the form of accusing him of supporting slavery and rape is not being censored in this forum and that is very unfortunate.

 

 

I don't think that the administrators are constantly online to react immediately to every post in a thread. I also do not think they are mystics who have the ability to immediately sense some blasphemy, if they are not online and viewing that particular thread.

[livingentity 0]

 

prabhupada did not do anything really different.. he simply applied the principle of time, place and circumstance, considering guna and karma of the people who were approaching him

 

 

[Guest guest]

I am a woman and I do not like agreesive men or sex. However you want to explain it the fact is that ALL wokmen DO NOT like to be raped.

[yasodanandana 0]

yes ... in this way a pure devotee now maybe has to apply prabhupada siddhanta doing apparently something different

 

krnsa consciousness is not too easy (surely for me)

[yasodanandana 0]

the sense of srila prabhupada words are not chauvinist

 

if we see in the context of all prabhupada teachings the meaning is that if we have some misfortune this is not an injustice but it is due to bad karma

 

imho

[Guest guest]

All women do not like to be raped!

[Guruvani 0]

 

the issues that are arising, like these ones of post samadhi initiation or homosexual religious marriages and so on, could very easily answered and put aside if we approach pure devotees to ask....

 

 

If you are saying that we can go to Gaudiya Math sannyasis and ask them what Prabhupada was saying or doing in ISKCON, then I would have to disagree with you. Prabhupada established a post-samadhi ritvik authority a few weeks before he passed and he had this directive sent out to all the temples in the movement. His directions are perfectly clear. We don't need to go to any Gaudiya Math sannyasi to ask them what Prabhupada wanted for ISKCON. They don't have a clue about that.

 

You people need to quit telling Prabhupada disciples that they need to go to Gaudiya Math or Narayana Maharaaja to find out what Prabhupada wanted. They don't have the answers to that and they all criticized him while he was here, so their opinions mean nothing now.

[Guruvani 0]

Maybe you have got yourself deceived about this, but the Vedic scriptures speak otherwise. Until further notice I will accept the Vedic wisdom over kali-yugites who don't have a clue other than contempt and spite.