ISKCON GURU WARS – EXPOSE THE SCAM OF GURUS

ISKCON GURU WARS – EXPOSE THE SCAM OF GURUS
Gurus Gone Wild! (Video)

An interesting article by Krishnakant Prabhu, “Wars Between Gurus Expose the Scam of Gurus,” published in the journal Back to Prabhupada (No. 34, Winter 2011):

In the 17th issue of Back to Prabhupada, we quoted the following myth invented by the GBC, voiced by GBC member Badrinarayana dasa:

Srila Prabhupada started something revolutionary: a system of many gurus who serve under a governing council.
(Badrinarayan Das, GBC, “Report of the Committee on Parallel Leadership Lines”, 07.07.2007)

A year later, this false thesis was repeated by Anuttama das (a member of the GBC and head of the ISKCON Ministry of Public Affairs). We quoted him in the 23rd issue of Back to Prabhupada:

Srila Prabhupada gave a very clear structure specifically for ISKCON – a society with many gurus.
(Anuttama das, ISKCON Ministry of Public Affairs, quoted from ISKCON News Weekly, 25.10.2008)

[Additional. A similar myth is spread by FISKCON guru V. Tuneev (Bhaktigiyana Gosvami):

“We all know that the traditional role of the guru is absolute authority in the lives of his disciples, the direct representative of God in the lives of the disciples; there is no shortage of very strong beliefs on this subject in our writings. Krsna says in the 11th Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam: Acarya mam vijanyan navanm yeta karchit (17.27). “Know, then, that I am acarya or acarya is I. In no case should one refer to a guru or acarya as a mere mortal—one should accept his authority absolutely.” This is just one of those claims, and there are actually many of them. This absolute position of the guru, infallible in every respect, is very powerfully manifested in our writings. AND THIS MAKES A VERY BIG PROBLEM… But by the very definition of Srila Prabhupada created an organization where there are many gurus – and this already means that there is no Absolute. There can only be one absolute. And this relative guru, operating within [F]ISKCON, must understand his relative nature very well. At the same time, we cannot depart from the scriptures and act within the framework of the scriptures. And I will not even try to resolve this crisis – this is a very difficult topic. I wanted to emphasize the wisdom of Srila Prabhupada, who in the definition made the position of a guru in [F]ISKCON relative.”
From Bhakti Vigyana Gosvami’s lecture “Being a Guru in ISKCON”, Sochi, 18.06.2014 http://folio.goswami.ru/?p=5727 End of supplement.]

We argue that both of these statements are false, since Srila Prabhupada never authorized even one successor guru, let alone a “multiple guru society.” The irony is that this fact was recognized by the GBC when they agreed with the following statement of the EU Jayadvaita Swami (guru [F]ISKCON, approved by the vote of the GBC):

Is this an outright lie or not? The fact that Srila Prabhupada “personally determined in detail the procedure for increasing the number of initiating gurus”, we can only dream. Or falsely claim to the Society that he did so.” (EC Jayadvaita Swami, email to GBC members, 13.12.2003)

In this article, we will show that the very existence of a plurality of Guru-swindlers [in FISKCON] leads to the fact that they freely disclose their own deception [about the authority of the current system of gurus in FISKCON, allegedly authorized by Srila Prabhupada].

GURU ONE !

Srila Prabhupada explains that the guru is one because the message taught by spiritual teachers is the same:

“A guru may be that person or another, but the message is the same, so it is said that the guru is one.”
(“The Science of Self-Awareness,” section “Who is a Guru?”)

Therefore, if all the gurus of ISKCON were really imparting the same teaching—the teachings of Srila Prabhupada—then there would be no difference in theory between them. (It should be noted that even if they acted in agreement with each other, this would not necessarily mean that they are representatives of Srila Prabhupada, since they can nevertheless agree among themselves in their general deviation !)

GURU MANY !

HOWEVER, GURU OBSESSORS [in Fiskkon] show in practice that they cannot teach the same message, however it may be, because they contradict each other again and again and criticize their collegiate “guru”. In previous issues of the journal, we have cited many examples to prove this. See the details in the following issues of Back to Prabhupada:

No. 2: The EU of Bhakti Vikasha Swami and the EU of Bhakti Tirtha Swami are sharply critical of each other. [In Russian: https://www.iskconirm.com/ru/btp2_guruWars_ru.htm]
No. 5: The EU Shivarama Swami attacks the EU Jayapataka Swami. [In Russian: https://vk.com/wall-4018800_4581]
No. 5: The EU of Indradyumna Swami reports to the EU Jayapataka Swami. [In Russian: https://vk.com/wall-4018800_4581]
#6: Suhotra Swami’s EU criticises the GBC. [In English: https://www.iskconirm.com/docs/webpages/suh1.htm]
No 8: EU Danavir Goswami attacks EU Hridayananda dasa Goswami.
• First Special Review Number: Jayadvaita Swami’s EU Attacks Guru [F]ISKCON.
No. 10: Jayadvait Swami’s EU criticises the GBC. [In English: https://www.iskconirm.com/docs/webpages/js2.htm]
No. 14: The EU’s Prahladananda Swami has been derogatory to the GBC and the ISKCON guru. [In Russian: https://vk.com/wall-4018800_6585]
No. 16: EM Ravindra Swarupa das reported [F]ISKCON, GBC, sannyasi [F]ISKCON and guru [F]ISKCON.
No. 29: The EU’s Mahavishnu Swami criticized the [F]ISKCON, the GBC and the [F]ISKCON guru. [In English: https://www.iskconirm.com/docs/webpages/btp29_inside_..]
No. 30: EU Prahladananda Swami scolded sannyasi [F]ISKCON. [In English: https://www.iskconirm.com/docs/webpages/btp30_ISKCON_..]
No. 31: EM Kripamoya das and EU Bhakti Charu Swami contradict each other.
No. 31: EM Sankarshana das and the EU of Jayadvaita Swami contradict each other.
The book “100 contradictions”: EU Bhakti Charu contradicts GBC and other gurus [F]ISKCON.
100 Deviations: The EU of Shivaram Swami contradicts the GBC and other ISKCON gurus.

THE WAR BETWEEN GURUS CONTINUES

EU Danavir Goswami Attacks EU Shivarama Swami

EU Danavir Goswami: – “My complaint is that [the following rule is violated] the guru [F]ISKCON is obliged to participate fully in the morning temple program every day, otherwise he disqualifies himself as a guru. <…> However, if after a while a devotee who is now leading the disciples weakens his adherence to sadhana on the pretext that he is “elevated” or “occupied with preaching” or for some other reason, does this not turn out to be “a spoonful of tar in a barrel of honey”? <…> Such devotees may be able speakers, managers, etc., but they should not take the position of initiating gurus, since this requires following the instructions in practice in order to set an example to their shishyas [disciples]. If the guru is not able to attend the morning program every day, then it is probably time that he refrains from initiating new students until his recovery.”
(EU Danavir Goswami, article “Guru in the morning”, published on 19.11.2011)

EU Shivarama Swami: – “I can go back to following the morning program: attending the mangala-arati, repeating the japa with the devotees who lead the program in the temple hall during the japa, dressing up Radha-Shyama, reading the class and conducting the kirtan – that is, what I have practically not done in the last 2-2.5 years, except for festivals” (EU Shivarama Swami, podcast, 28.11.2011)

(Note. During this period the EU Shivarama Swami initiated new disciples as before.)

EU Bhakti Vikasha Swami Criticizes EU Radhanatha Swami

“There is a book written by … probably the most popular [F]ISKCON leader of our time. As for the book, if it had been shown to Srila Prabhupada, he would not have been pleased with it. I can’t imagine his reaction otherwise, because the book has pictures of all these Mayavadi and worldly people… and not a single bad word is said about them. People about whom Prabhupada, if at all, spoke, then criticized them … At the end of the book, he says that now, having come to Prabhupada, I help people by opening hospitals, providing food for children and opening eye surgical points … So, as far as I can see, there are serious problems… If someone reads this book hundreds of thousands of times, they will never even get the idea that you are required to surrender to Krsna, that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Some erotic or almost erotic scenes… sannyasi is not proper to write about such things… I mean, I just can’t imagine what Prabhupada’s response would have been if he had seen this book, but our Movement has changed, and not for the better.” (EU Bhakti Vikasha Swami, lecture, 24.08.2011)

The book of Radhanatha Swami “Journey home”

CONCLUSION

By itself, this spectacle of the “gurus” fighting among themselves clearly shows that we do not have a society with many gurus, the number of which is increasing, starting from the Srila Prabhupada [and presumably with his consent and approval], and all the guru pass on his message. Instead, there is just a group of crooks who invent their own ideas, which in a natural way leads to multiple contradictions between them. (English tex)

SUPPLEMENT

The examples listed above mostly cover a period of less than 10 years, but similar skirmishes, criticisms, even prolonged feuds have been observed between the FISKCON pseudogurus since the very beginning – since 1978 (see Satsvarupa’s criticisms of his colleagues, whom he even at that time called “strange gurus”: https://vk.com/wall-4018800_8838).

It is curious that it was the enmity between the “gurus” that contributed to the disruption of the cover from their hoax. When Rameshwara, an opponent of Hamsaduta’s other “guru,” called that obscene word in Yiddish in mid-1979, Jadurani, who was also Jewish by birth, heard it and was shocked that one “acharya” called another in this way. As a result, Jadurani first managed to get Rameshwara to get an audio recording of the conversation on May 28, 1977, demanding evidence of their appointment by Srila Prabhupada as initiating gurus, which she began to doubt even more. Naturally, after listening to this audio recording, in which Srila Prabhupada said that he was going to appoint ritviks for the future, especially for the period when he “will no longer be with us”, Jadurani realized that there was no appointment of guru successors. After that, she along with other devotees wrote 5 publications (including “The Appointment That Wasn’t”) and promoted a sermon on the subject until she was kicked out of a temple in Los Angeles and beaten in New Vrindavan. Hamsadouta, in turn, held fire yagyas at a temple in Berkeley to protect himself from tantric curses from his fellow “gurus”, suspecting them of trying to “bring him down”. Such incidents were many, they can be listed endlessly. Of course, they also continued after 2011, for example, in September 2015, members of the regional governing council of FISKCON in Europe banned Hridayananda “Goswami” from visiting FISKCON centers in Europe, the fight against his deviations in sadhana and the creation of the Sahaja movement within FISKCON (Krishna West) intensified, in response to which Hridayananda wrote a whole book “Gbi-si ISKCON”, and so on.

As a conclusion, it is worth quoting the words of Bhaktiikasha Swami, which he wrote during his struggle with Bhakti Tirtha Swami. Of course, Bhaktivikasa Swami is also one of the products of the false guru system and strongly opposes Srila Prabhupada’s instructions to initiate on his behalf and commits other deviations, which have been repeatedly reported. However, one cannot but agree with the conclusion that the BVKS made following the debate on Bhakti Tirtha Swami and his preaching:

“Thus [F]ISKCON, who was to liberate the world from false religions, himself degraded into a cheap cult, Apasampradaya, and veritably derided Srila Prabhupada and all Parampara.” (Bhakti Vikash Swami, 23.08.2003, text of RAMNO 7160564) – Source: https://www.iskconirm.com/ru/btp2_guruWars_ru.htm

Is there a disaster worse than this in the entire universe? However, the real ISKCON of Srila Prabhupada will be revived, and FISKCON (false ISKCON and even anti-ISKCON, that is, the branch of ISKCON that is captured by the false guru and turned by them and their assistants into an “apa sampradaya and a laughing stock”) will continue to “degrade into a cheap cult.” And if someone still believes that the system of FISKCON gurus corresponds to the shastras and instructions of Srila Prabhupada, then such people need to get rid of these dangerous illusions as soon as possible.

ISK’CON FALSE GURUS HISTORY
Gurus Gone Wild! (Video)