RD: It is true that Acharyas should not ideally fall down…
[PD: Not “ideally” they do not fall, practically and factually they do not fall. Why are you saying the parampara from Krishna is: (a) practically and factually falling — as occurs left, right and center in ISKCON, but (b) ideally not falling? Where is this stated? There are 32 acharyas listed in our parampara, “ideally” they do not fail, but factually and practically they can and do fail?
When Nitai said that gurus fall down like an ordinary man, Srila Prabhupada kicked Nitai out of ISKCON and said he was a “black snake” who is not welcomed at any ISKCON centers. For Radhanatha to agree with Nitai’s idea means, RS is not part of ISKCON, rather he has accepted Nitai’s siddhanta? Or if Radhanatha does not agree with the Nitai idea — the idea of all of his other ISKCON gurus who ALSO say gurus fall down — where is his protest documented?]
** After Srila Prabhupada, there is no current Acharya.
[PD: “After” means you think acharyas are dead and gone? Krishna is not God currently, because He appeared 5,000 years ago? Srila Prabhupada said he would live on forever in his books, you say, he is not current and that means you disagree with Srila Prabhupada. My children are devotees of Srila Prabhupada, the Bangalore devotees are all his devotees, I am his devotee, thousands of us are his current devotees, we are all current, but he is not? How can he not be current when he has so many current followers? Srila Prabhupada said he would live on FOREVER in his books and followers — and he has done that. New people in Bangalore and other places are also just now finding out he is their guru, so he is their current guru. My daughter’s boyfriend just had a wonderful dream about Srila Prabhupada, hence he is the guru of these people CURRENTLY. Why are you claiming juristiction over all these people who are accepting him as their guru currently? Who authorized you to stop these people from being his disciples and followers currently?]
** The spiritual master and Acharya are different.
[PD: Lord Nityananda is the original spiritual master, why are you saying He is different from the acharyas?, — guru is shaksat hari tvena. No, the acharyas are saying what Lord Nityananda is saying? A spiritual master is a “master” of spirit, he is anya-abhilasita sunyam, he is free from all material designations and attachments, he is a representation of Lord Nityananda. He has mastered the topic, only he is fit to be given the PHD title of acharya. Srila Prabhupada used these terms intermingling: guru, acharya, spiritual master, parampara member, uttama adhikary, Vishnupada, paramahamsa, rati keli siddha, and so forth. The spiritual master is PHD level, he does not fall like us kindergarten kanistha children, he has mastered the topic fully. The kanistha kindergarten children are not PHD masters, and to mix kanistha and uttama is called sahajiya vada, very dangerous. This is amazing, you are saying that Lord Nityananda is not part of the acharya process because He is the original spiritual master? Where did you find this quote?]
** The current Spiritual masters are initiating on behalf of Srila Prabhupada.
[PD: OK good progress, that is our idea, that they are officiating acharyas (the ritvik idea). Yes, they are only officiating the ceremony, and when they fail: then the remaining ISKCON devotees should continue to worship the acharya Srila Prabhupada. Just like when the Christian priest fails, the Church continues to worship Jesus. So that means you agree they are basically priests (ritviks) and not self-standing acharyas. Good, you are mainly on board with our idea. Yet you are still saying the spiritual master is (a) a representative of Lord Nityananda but (b) subject to fail, that means you do not understand the term “master.” The six goswamis are known as “spiritual masters” of the material influences.
Their senses can not be overwhelmed because they are masters of the senses. Srila Prabhupada said in 1977 his followers are not fit for sannyasa, because they are not masters, they are barely even kindergarten kanisthas. Anyway, where have we seen in our PARAMPARA that the current spiritual master initiate on behalf of the previous master, how can one master be the officiating priest for another master? You are confuting yourself, sorry each acharya is self-standing, Srila Prabhupada is not the officiating priest of Srila Saraswati, he is an acharya himself?
No, the kanisthas, the lesser persons or priests officiates on behalf of the acharya, the priest is not himself an acharya. Srila Prabhupada says the dog of the king serves the king, but the dog is not the king?]
** It is true that due to strong conditionings of past some of them have fallen. But this does not mean that all are fallen.
[PD: The GBC made something like 230 gurus since 1977, most of them have fallen. At the same time, consider that almost all the others who remain were “voted in” by the SAME persons who engaged in illicit sex. Which previous acharyas were voted in as acharyas based on ecclessiastical votes from people engaged in illicit sex? Radhanatha was voted in as acharya when Bhavananada was re-instated, so the SAME people who voted for Radhanatha, they thought that a known homosexual was a Vishnupada acharya, how does that validate RS being voted in?
And why did Radhanatha allow this offense to the name of Vishnupada to occur, why did he not protest, homosexuals are NOT Vishnupada like we protested? If the fallen are voting for these masters, that means these masters are accepting the authority of the fallen, so they are not masters but servants of the fallen who voted them in.]
** Most of the people in this material world are fallen.
[PD: OK so now you are mixing up acharya, spiritual master, Lord Nityananda, and — fallen — Nitai’s idea. Gurusuh narah matih, narakah sah, anyone who thinks guru is ordinary and fallen is a resident of narakah.]
** However, this does not mean that no one can become a devotee.
[PD: OK, a devotee might be a drug addict, prostitute, or whatever, that does not mean we should mix the general and broad classification of devotee with acharyas and gurus. Even my daughter’s cat is a devotee of sorts because he listens to Hare Krishna all day long, but he is not an acharya?]
** No one should support a fallen Guru. Radhanath Swami had supported Kirtanananda in past not knowing his true nature.
[PD: There was Kirtanananda sitting on a big seat covered with the hands of fifty boys, everyone of us knew this was a pedophile man, and so did Jane Wallace of CBS news, she knew this man was a pedophile immediaetely, and then again there were so many crimes going on there, certainly — if we knew about all this in California, Radhanatha must have known what was going on at his doorway?]
** He was spending most of his time in India; hence he was not much aware of the facts.
[PD: No, he was at New Vrndavana most of the time in 1986, and he was engineering the wearing of Christian Robes, carrying Kirtanananda on a palanquin, paying people to do dirty work, paying people to get lawyers to harass my friends, he was there when Tirtha came to California to assassinate Sulochana, and he was there when Tirtha was arrested with a note in his pocket giving a description and licence plate of my car, since they were going to kill me next. The police saved me from Radhanatha, because after all Kirtanananda was in hospital at that time, Radhanatha was running the show.]
** Srila Prabhupada had ordered him to serve Kirtananada.
[PD: So when Kirtananda was having little boys in his cottage, motor home, on his seat when he drove his car, and all over him on his vyasa seat, basically little boys all day long, and assorted crimes were going on left, right and center, we should look the other way and promote him as the acharya?]
** So he was just loyal to this instructions. But once he realised that he was fallen, he stopped following him.
[PD: The GBC has produced a mass of documents saying Kirtanananda was their guru, they have never retracted these documents or explained how they were in so much illusion they thought Kirtananda was a guru in the first place? Now they are just saying “gurus become fallen” because that means, Kirtanananda was their guru, he just fell.
So Radhanatha is still saying Kirtanananda was a member of the parampara, he just fell. Radhanatha has never made a written clarification that he disagrees with these GBC statements and documents?]
** I am not saying that the Gurus may be necessarily pure devotees.
[PD: OK, that is exactly what Nitai said when he was kicked out of ISKCON by Srila Prabhupada, you are now officially a disciple of Nitai, he was booted out and called a snake for saying the guru does not need to be pure.]
** Srila Prabhupada was exceptional. But in the current situation, we have to accept someone who is better then us and take his help to guide us in our Krishnaprema.
[PD: Radhanatha’s gurus are having illicit sex with men, women and children, even an aborigine witch doctor is better than them?]
** The current leades are postmasters for Srila Prabhupada. Radhanath Swami is not supporting fallen gurus but still want to help them come back to Krishna consciousness – in whatever menial way he can. ..
[PD: Radhanatha is a supporter of the GBC, and countless GBC documents say that gurus fall down, Radhanatha is a supporter of these documents and the people who write these documents, he supports Nitai’s ideas. RS has never publicly recanted any of these views.]
** He supports GBC as per int ructions of Srila Prabhupada.
[PD: The GBC “manages” the acharyas, censures acharyas, assigns zones to the acharyas, where does Srila Prabhupada say that the GBC will manage the acharyas? The GBC said that Srila Prabhupada is their hired writer in a court case, why does Radhanatha support people who say Srila Prabhupada is their hired writer?]
** It is possible that there might be some more potential disasters likely to occur to some of the GBCs in future. In this material world it is not surprising if someone falls down. However, we with our humility accept them as leaders currently as they are at better consciousness then us. If someone does anything wrong – Krishna will correct him.
We have faith that Krishna is in control. Srila Prabupada is personally supervising them & will correct them if they make mistakes in their lives. Since, we have faith in Krishna, we should not always be judgemental. This also does not mean that we blindly follow the leaders. If anyone seems to be deviating, we should report and not follow him. Till that time we have to follow the GBCs. Banglore is great temple.
They are also reaching and doing prasadam distribution, especially to kids. However, they are not so advanced either that they should not have any authority. We should not label all the GBCs as illicit. This way we are risking our own Krishna consciousness. We do not become sentimental about our spiritual master but with knowledge understand that he is a postmaster. Our sentiments are for Kirhsna.
So it seems you do not have any direct charges against Radhanath Swami – just that he in past supported Kirtanananda till his exposed fall down. Because he supports the GBC is not worthy of false allegations.
[PD: There are many GBC documents which say gurus fall down, and Radhanatha is a member of that group. He thus supports these documents that say gurus fall and are engaged in illicit sex with men, women and children, maunam samyam raksati.
Moreover he has conjoined with two of the biggest promoters of the idea that gurus fall down, Jayapataka and Gopal Krishna, and they are suing the Bangalore devotees because they say, gurus are not engaged in illicit sex. As soon as anyone says gurus are not having sex with children, Radhanatha sues them. ys pd]
More Infos: http://blogs.myspace.com/52199499#ixzz0tCZ6FO4T
Speak Your Mind