Comments On Satsvarupa Maharaj

Please comment on Satsvarupa Maharaj here. My editorial is HERE.

ADDED: Several people complained that they were out of the loop on this story. One can find most of the relevant information in the defensive statement, Official PR Statement Concerning Satsvarupa Maharaj. PADA's latest newsletter also goes on about things in his usual crass manner. I shall not post the original letter from "Hari Das" on these forums. It is now available on Audarya forums..

--o)0(o--

It just occurred to me that perhaps the reason sannyasis were advised not to take many disciples was precisely so they could experiment with their spiritual lives. Householders, being more bound by social regulations, would thus be more stable as guru figures.

What I mean is that there is a difference between the mystic and the priest. One who has the mystical temperament is an independent experimenter in spiritual life, who pushes the limits to discover new inner truths. I don't know whether Satsvarupa is a mystic of this sort, but there is certainly an affinity of the writer to the mystic.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 3 2004, 12:45 AM)

It just occurred to me that perhaps the reason sannyasis were advised not to take many disciples was precisely so they could experiment with their spiritual lives. Householders, being more bound by social regulations, would thus be more stable as guru figures.

What I mean is that there is a difference between the mystic and the priest. One who has the mystical temperament is an independent experimenter in spiritual life, who pushes the limits to discover new inner truths. I don't know whether Satsvarupa is a mystic of this sort, but there is certainly an affinity of the writer to the mystic.

Where can I read about the things being said about Satsvarupa Maharaj? I had only read something about him liking some saxophone music and calling it kirtan. The criticism seems parallel to when people thought he was nuts when he wrote a book about a mouse named Nimai.
I never heard anything of the Pranada incident. Where to go to get informed?

Did some of these Iskcon Gurus go insane as a result of being part of a Gaudiya branch that did not have diksha..?

I have often thought that the longer one stays in those Gaudiya missionary offshoots, the more one increases their chances of going bonkers..

I mean being a Guru in Iskcon is like driving a car without any oil ..sooner or later your gonna break down!

QUOTE(kalki @ May 2 2004, 10:51 PM)

Where to go to get informed?

"To get informed" I suggest that you go to the writings of the Goswamis and their faithful followers.

Once we are well-imbued with the positive standards and expectations that apply to devotional life, we will be well-inoculated against the sad-but-natural human interest in gossiping about another devotee's alleged (or real) faults, and we will be better able to discuss such matters in a proper Vaishnava way.

To the best of my knowledge, Satsvarupa dasa Goswami is not currently engaged in any campaign of slander against Vaishnavas. I am not aware that he is currently dismissing whole lineages within the authentic Caitanyaite tradition as sahajiya, and engaging in a pattern of wanton duplicity, as some other preachers in his tradition are now commonly doing. If I understand correctly, his present rejection of the authentic tradition is primarily a matter of his positive fidelity to his guru and his guru's institution; in fact, he may be one of the least slander-mongering of his peers. We may not agree with his approach, but we can at the very least respect it from a distance.

As a result, I urge that we all be careful. Certainly we may have read passages of his writing that make us cringe. Some of his earliest writings as an "institution man" may be particularly hard to stomach. But perhaps we have also read passages that have given encouragement and inspiration. Let us reflect maturely and with gratitude on what he has given us -- not in some adulatory "Wow! He's a perfect uttama-adhikari Vaishnava!" spirit of false praise, but in sincere recognition of his almost 40 years of devotional practice.

Even 30 years ago, many could see that Satsvarupa dasa Goswami was a bit of a "square peg in a round hole" in the ISKCON institution. He has struggled to harmonize his personal inclinations with the demands of service within that institution, and it has plainly caused him some grief. Has he always made the right decisions? Obviously not! But I believe we should wish him well and hope for the best rather than eagerly gobble up every piece of gossip that might bolster our personal feelings that "we are right and he is wrong" in institutional loyalty and choice of service.

Finally, if you are among those who believe that ISKCON diksha-mantras (including the sannyasa-mantra) are bogus, then let me suggest that even if Satsvarupa dasa Goswami has "fallen down" from his sannyasa, there was nothing to fall down from -- so there should be no surprise, and no scandal. Rather, we should feel sadness that this gentleman thought he was taking a vow of celibacy, and receiving the spiritual connection that could enrich and sustain that vow, but has instead spent decades trying to live a "vow" based on a false premise.

Jagatji, while giving my full respects to you, I'd like to say that if you introduce a topic like this you please give a short summary of the "facts", before expressing an opinion. I am one of those people here who have no idea what you are talking about. I do not read any Iskcon-pages, or half or fringe-iskcon or whatever, or GM, Tripurari or whatever pages. I am of no importance, and that news is also of no particular importance, except that it indicates one tragedy more come to light of the thousands of tragedies that have occurred and keep occurring due to this fanatic insane org that goes around in the name of Krsna and Gauranga.

Falldown or no falldown, even if he hadn't fallen down, what is the use of staying in a big bureaucratic institution which never offers any prospect of manjari bhava or rupanuga bhajan? I have a letter in my archives from another, unnamed Iskcon Guru dated October 1992, in which Satsvarupa is mentioned as one of the closet-readers of my translations. Shortly after that he went to hear Narayan Maharaja lecture on Ananda Gopal Gosvami's commentaries on Vilapa Kusumanjali in Mathura. That was the way forward. Somehow he decided that it was disloyal to his Guru and ended up with a therapist, music of Charlie Parker and My Funny Valentine............

Satsvarupa, who does not know his sat svarupa...

QUOTE(bangli @ May 3 2004, 05:09 AM)

Did some of these Iskcon Gurus go insane as a result of being part of a Gaudiya branch that did not have diksha..?

I have often thought that the longer one stays in those Gaudiya missionary offshoots, the more one increases their chances of going bonkers..

I mean being a Guru in Iskcon is like driving a car without any oil ..sooner or later your gonna break down!

What happens subjectively with sannyas first of all is that one gets increasingly disconnected with the body and one's emotions. An emotion is, as the word says, an ex-motion, a movement towards the outside, which means a feeling is getting expressed in specific muscles and other movements of parts of the body. The expressions may be ever so subtle, but they are there and form part of the interaction of the human being with others and the world of daily experience (german Lebenswelt). Life is reduced under circumstances of sannyas, is getting crippled increasingly. Expressions of life as well as experiences of life are affected. Mind and mind-control is taking over. One notices instances of reactions in one's body at particular thoughts, especially of an erotic kind, since that is forbidden, or labeled particularly dangerous. The whole being is starved of natural feed-back, and the status-quo is artificially maintained. A sort of experience of power arises then, as one thinks one is in charge of one's being. Since the mind keeps always being active, one experiences moments of mind-control through such artificial means as chanting wildly or continously, or fasting etc.

By sublimating the natural drives and urges and thinking of the whole exercise as a holy sacrifice, an outside-persona is being accepted, an additional layer of self-alienation is pulled on. The ups and downs of a maniac-depressive syndrome may arise. Depression is the consequence of repressing emotions of an out-going nature, among them the adrenalin flow of attack, of expressive joy etc. Depression allows one to hide one's own needs, it works as a "cloak of invisibility" (Tarnkappe) that camouflages one's being by making it subjectively unreal. A clear consequence of this silly "you-are-not-the-body" ideology! Inhuman, and anti-human instructions to others are easily understandable in such context. These people do not have feelings for themselves, how could they have feelings for others?

In the area of sexuality a repressed man notices how any thought, let alone sight of an attractive female person, activates the prostate to release a slight amount of transportation fluid. Each time a thought comes, a drop seems to drip. Naturally, any possible urge will be ignored. What is repressed, gains power by the energy invested in the repression. An increasing rigidity of the body movements happens. The worst is: there is no relaxation-opportunity which is normally experienced in hugging a partner, or being touched gently. This all adds to further shifts into depression, since natural needs require to be covered-up. Denial becomes habitual, a sacred duty. The ideology, the thought-stuff, is the saving grace of it all.

No wonder, such people become rigid in their ideology. Radical change is not possible under such psycho-physically sickening circumstances.

QUOTE

As a result, I urge that we all be careful. Certainly we may have read passages of his writing that make us cringe. Some of his earliest writings as an "institution man" may be particularly hard to stomach. But perhaps we have also read passages that have given encouragement and inspiration. Let us reflect maturely and with gratitude on what he has given us -- not in some adulatory "Wow! He's a perfect uttama-adhikari Vaishnava!" spirit of false praise, but in sincere recognition of his almost 40 years of devotional practice.

I just don't understand this. For almost as many a significant number of years as this man has dedicated to his "devotinal practice", I have seen that the disiciples have to be the mature ones, babysitting their gurus around, waiting for them to mature. We have deposited our faith one hundred per cent in these gurus, given our lives, our hearts, our belongins, everything to them. And what we get in return? An apology and a warning to be cautious against offending them? What about their offense towards thousands of disciples they knew they were cheating? I say, prosecute them all! I want my heart back. And my bloody money too!

Sannyas is to be taken when one is ready for it, not when the org needs an extra preacher (as in Iskcon) or when one is hungry and poor (as with some babajis), or when one is ambituous to be worshipped (pratisthasha, to be found in both clubs). When there are unnatural reasons for taking sannyas the culprit will have to suffer, mentally, physically and in terms of prestige. Now the man is 65, what will he do as an old man? Ass-backwards. Marry when you are 30, take sannyas at 65, not the other way around.

Several people complained that they were out of the loop on this story. One can find most of the relevant information in the defensive statement, Official PR Statement Concerning Satsvarupa Maharaj. PADA's latest newsletter also goes on about things in his usual crass manner. I shall not post the original letter from "Hari Das" on these forums. I am sure it will be made available somewhere sooner or later.

I have been intending to read a book that is in my possession for some time. It is called A History of Celibacy by Elizabeth Abbott (Harper, 1999). It is a sympathetic study, I believe, and supposedly sheds light on the positive aspects of the practice. It's a fairly large tome and so I have not yet dived in.

I was thinking about Ananda's comments about the disciple having to be mature in the place of the guru. I was wondering if that could not be seen as a kind of test, comparable to a mature child taking care of an aging parent.

One of my big problems with the guru-disciple relationship as it is currently seen by many is that it promotes a kind of institutionalized immaturity on the part of the disciple.

There are two kinds of maturity: A maturity of self-discipline and a maturity of love. In the first kind, we master our senses and that is our criterion for judging others. It is the language of achievement and an indispensable part of our personal evolution. The second is more accidental and relational, less judgmental and ultimately more demanding.

If Satsvarupa has successfully given to the point of being loved unconditionally by his disciples, then their love for him will be tested now that he is clearly the one in need.

Of course, Ananda is really right on: we go to the spiritual master for leadership and strength. But is it not a little self-centered if we abandon him in his hour of need because it does not suit our personal needs? Admittedly a difficult situation.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 3 2004, 07:00 AM)

But is it not a little self-centered if we abandon him in his hour of need because it does not suit our personal needs?

Agreed.

QUOTE(Advaitadas @ May 3 2004, 06:00 AM)

Sannyas is to be taken when one is ready for it, not when the org needs an extra preacher (as in Iskcon) or when one is hungry and poor (as with some babajis), or when one is ambituous to be worshipped (pratisthasha, to be found in both clubs). When there are unnatural reasons for taking sannyas the culprit will have to suffer, mentally, physically and in terms of prestige. Now the man is 65, what will he do as an old man? Ass-backwards. Marry when you are 30, take sannyas at 65, not the other way around.

Good point. In his Yati-dharma-prakAza, VAsudevAzrama gives a description of various types of detachment and explains what kind of renunciation each type makes a person eligible for. He explicitly states that detachment caused by the death of a dear one, loss of money or property, etc. (and I am sure that he would have included a moment of youthful zeal born from involvement with a fanatical organization in this category as well) qualifies a person for nothing! Such a person, while temporarily feeling detached, is simply not qualified for any type of renunciation.

There are lower types of renunciation available, types where the renouncer can stay close to his family, etc. Perhaps such types would have been better suited for ISKCON.

Sincerely,
Elpis

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 3 2004, 07:00 AM)

Of course, Ananda is really right on: we go to the spiritual master for leadership and strength. But is it not a little self-centered if we abandon him in his hour of need because it does not suit our personal needs? Admittedly a difficult situation.

I remember noting the human responses from the Danish disciples of Harikesa when he left. In the beginning everybody was shocked, but quickly a polarization into two camps arose. One camp consisted of bitter and angry devotees. Many of them "knew all along that something was wrong with this man." Only some weeks earlier they had praised him using the choicest adjectives and now they revealed how they had known for a long time that he was off. Funny that. The other camp consisted of those who still cared about Harikesa. One devotee told me that he had helped her so much and now, when he was sick, she could not just abandon him. These devotees still considered him their guru, prayed for him, sought to help him, etc. Friction between the two camps were inevitable. Controversy even arose because some devotees still kept pictures of Harikesa in their homes. What a circus!

A difficult situation indeed.

Sincerely,
Elpis

QUOTE

Of course, Ananda is really right on: we go to the spiritual master for leadership and strength. But is it not a little self-centered if we abandon him in his hour of need because it does not suit our personal needs? Admittedly a difficult situation.

I suppose you are right Jagat, at least ethically speaking. From my experience though, I have no way of verifying this. No guru I have had, ever wanted me around, anyways.

How can you give something to someone who doesn't want it?

In the case of Russian disciples of Harikesh, many of them considered his love affair as a kind of highly spiritual thing, and those wo did not share this view were considered "ignorant offenders and demons who dare to criticize such an uttama guru".

As for disciples taking care of the guru's physical body, this is absolutely proper when the guru is sick, old etc. But when it comes to spiritual life, it seems to be absurd to expect the disicples to guide and help their guru. In the morning you are praying "Oh Gurudeva, please save me", and in the afternoon you have to save him from depression, etc. How can you trust that person again? Guru means a self-realized soul. The fact that in Iskcon neophyte devotees happened to become the gurus of another neophyte devotees, I guess this is something unheard of before. This strategy brought about thousands of bitter, disappointed and abused persons. In my opinion this was the biggest mistake ACBS ever made: forbidding Iskcon members to take siksa outside the org, leaving them instead in the hands of a bunch of neophyte "gurus" who fall down one by one since his departure.

It would certainly change the nature of the relationship. Out of curiosity, what is happening with Harikesh now? Does he still have a following out of his former Iskcon disciples?

http://harimedia.com/commit.php

Yes, I have seen this site, but I don't find it particularly revealing or informative.

Jeez....

Obviously Iskcon never had the subject of guru tattva straight.

I am afraid many who have been affected by this lack of proper guidance might not recover easily. I have discussed these things with friends and I noticed there is a sad shared sense of suspicion hanging among neglegted disciples. Disciples have done their part in the deal. So many have dependend fully on the gurus. These gurus, however, all along knew they were not apt to the task but did not even have the charity to inform their followers of such. Gurus really did not want anything from the disciples individually. Maybe with a few selected ones, they reciprocated. For the great mass of initiates, it was like casting your best into emptiness and getting emptiness in return.

I believe there is a general need for education on the subject of guru tattva. A healthy and succeful contemporary example of guru disicple relationship would be helpful, I think.

In these orgs a culture of denial is reigning. Some fantasize their denial to be love and feel the corresponding feelings of love. In fact they feel only their own inner denial reflected in the person out there. So they act on it and call it sacrifice or whatever. And they do everything fantasizing it to be love and surrender and all. When the outer mirror of denial ceases to be (the guru drops away), one side of co-dependency is lost, and the other side, the disciple, falls into despair.

Why should the ones that projected their own lack of self-love, their denial, onto the person playing the guru-role, who was just as bereft of self-acceptance and love, be remunerated for their delusion of doing everything including wasting their life-times for such an agent? At least the guru-role-player had the strength to face his lack of self-acceptance, of love, see his sickness and start to work on it. At least he is giving his poor co-dependents a chance to face their own shit instead of draping it in fake spirituality and selling it as "surrender" and "advancement" and all this weird self-serving language. Okay, it is painful to face your own inner shit, to face life, to embrace the opportunity to grow and mature in real life, not in the disney-world of lifeless books with endless self-glorifying purports, but out in the gutter of life where the presence of God is really needed and really felt.

Il Bruno Italiano has turned his energy unto self-recovery from the sick co-dependency of his adult life. Praise be to his strength of standing up for himself. He is accessible nowadays, one can phone him up and talk to him, and he has become a caring person. As Harikesh he was just an American arrogant ass, inaccessible, aloof, sick from his 1982-desire-denial to get married.

Self-denial is one side. The other one is denial of the family, of the clan, of the descent. These G-orgs are in denial of their Gaudiya ancestors. By that denial they deny themselves also of their blessings, of the flow of love from them. If I think myself independent of my forefathers and foremothers 13 generations ago, who am I then? I am a rootless, loveless person. I am a withering tree, bearing some fruit still, but death-energy is flowing in my veins, instead of the fullness of life: Love.

Seen in that light, Satsvarup das is a light-house showing everyone remaining in that org what they are heading for. He certainly tried hard, did his best, but who is he, bereft of the blessing of his G-ancestors, bereft of the flow of love flowing through the universe, through all of creation? It is called guru-pranali not for nothing. We are living of the prana of our gurus' love, of their life-force.

Bruno Italiano has a chance to see the real flow of love, of guru-pranali, some time in his later life. Satsvarup das is still going deeper into his denial business, it seems. I wish him the courage to stand up and leave - to go and look at himself outside of the big womb of the org keeping him infantile, embryonic, in co-symbiosis. Then a fresh opportunity for the real life also opens up for him.

Joy Nitai, the Lord of the Love-Flow in the Universe and much more.

I have to step in here and say that I am very disppointed at the childish responses to very real questions raised by Jagat in a caring and responsible manner.

Why must his problems become the impetus to bash GM and it's off-shoots?

Anyway, I can't comment much on what is going on with him since I don't know the actual story. I will say that I think it is grossly inacurate to paint a picture of anyone who is involved in Iskcon in stereotypical fashion. Everyone in that organization is an individual and as such they have different approaches to life and will have different experiences.

There probably is some truth to the idea that devotees in that institution have become stiffled due to institutionalizing an idea of who and what A.C. Bhaktivedanta was and thereby missing the fullness he is capable of giving - but that is an over generalization and certainly not universally applicable.

I know that Satsvarupa Maharaja has had some serious health problems. But since I don't know the details of any of the issues that people are talking about, I don't have much to comment on. The real issue for all of us is where our hearts and minds are. Hopefully, Satsvarupa Maharaja's mind and heart are firmly fixed on Guru and Gauranga and whatever obstacles have come his way will help him to grow. The very idea that Guru is a fixed/finished position is ludicrous. Sridhara Maharaja has said that we are all students forever - so there must be progress for all of us, including Sri Guru.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

nabadip,
Can one really speak of love when one's sense of charity is imbalanced? Wasn't there love from disicples who gave everything to empty gurus? Haven't the disciples done the charity already? What more do you want from these. That they take the blame for it all? Can you, perhaps, be a little more charitable than that?

QUOTE

The very idea that Guru is a fixed/finished position is ludicrous. Sridhara Maharaja has said that we are all students forever - so there must be progress for all of us, including Sri Guru.

Guru is fixed, unmovable as a mountain. Or so we always heard. That Sri Guru is also a student does not mean he has a license to lie and conciously cheat. I find that these sentimental and biased definations of Guru circulating around have in fact greatly contributed for the cheapening of an otherwise pure and sacred relatinship.

Jags is this what you want ?

QUOTE

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to
Srila Prabhupada and his ISKCON.

I am writing this letter as a last ditch effort to
save someone that is dear to my soul. Before I have
written such a letter for publication on VNN I
approached HH Prahladanandana Swami as ISKCON's
Sanyassa Minister in hope of him helping correct this
situation. After finding that he, as well as a GBC
Godbrother, has failed to take me seriously I write
this letter with heavy heart.

I am very much concerned about something I have been
carrying within my heart over the last year. I have
prayed to our Srila Prabhupada and Sri Sri Radha
Govinda for a sign on how I should seek resolution to
the disturbance within my heart. I feel strongly that
their Lordships would be pleased if I reveal my mind
and pray that this situation be resolved by their
mercy.

A very important Vaisnava in my life has experienced
troubles that are obviously a concern of all ISKCON
devotees, Srila Prabhupada and Sri Sri Radha Govinda.
I pray that you can help me with this problem.

His Holiness Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami lived for a
long time in seclusion in Ireland. It was understood
by us all that his need for seclusion was due to his
very bad health. During his stay he was in the company
of devotees very rare and it was even requested that
no one write to him. It was known that Srila
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami was visited by some devotees
during this period from America including a married
God Sister of Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami's named
Pranada dasi Mataji. During this period he lost his
longtime servant Madhumangala prabhu as he was
disturbed with Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. It was a
shocking period for everyone.

Then a disciples and long time personal servant of
Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami's came to be his servant
named Baladeva Vidyabhusana dasa as well as an Inian
devotee Hari Bhaktivilasa dasa. During this time it
seemed that Maharaja got more distant from everyone in
Ireland. He was taking lots of different medications
and was always alone with his servants. Then Hari
Bhaktivilasa dasa left disturbed.

Then it was just Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami's and
Baladeva Vidyabhusana dasa who were both on medication
and acting very strange. It was at this time that
Pranada dasi Mataji continued to visit as a counselor
for Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. She came several
times and they would see each other alone when no one
else was ever allowed to see Srila Satsvarupa dasa
Goswami. It became rumored that they were having
sexual relations because they were meeting secretly
and alone many times. All of the while Srila
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami would not see anyone else and
continued to seem stranger in his behavior.

Then all of a sudden his servant Baladeva Vidyabhusana
dasa went mad from drugs and Srila Satsvarupa dasa
Goswami was rushed out of Ireland to some where in
America.

At this same time Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami's
longtime editor and closest disciple Kaisori Devi Dasi
Mataji rejected Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. In
confidence she related to several devotees that Srila
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami and Prananda dasi Mataji had
become attached and their relationship became sexual
and nature. She say that they could not have
intercourse because of Maharajas medication but that
they had a sexual relationship including kissing and
fondling with no clothes.

So I write because many here know that Srila
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami had sexual relations with
Pranada dasi Mataji, that he has developed a drug
habit and that he does not partake in any devotional
programs nor chant 16 rounds per day. He now does
artwork that is very strange and listens to black
music as a part of his devotional service while
remaining in hiding. I know that he continues to
initiate disciples for himself even with his
difficulties which is why I decided to write to your
good self. Maharaja needs help. He needs to stop being
Guru and Sanyassi and live in a Temple in the
association of the devotees while taking part in the
devotional programs and stopping the nonsense of
listening to crazy music and doing strange art. This
is not Srila Prabhupada's wish especially for
Sanyassis.

This is why I write to you. Please help urge ISKCON to
help this stalwart disciple and bring him back to
health pysichally, mentally and spiritually. Make sure
he no longer initiates and stops taking drugs and
living out of the association ISKCON. How can a
Sanyassi be allowed to live in isolation and not do
devotional service and preach? It seems like these
drugs have gone to his head. I wish you to contact
Pranada dasi Mataji and Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami
and ask them about their relations. Also ask many of
the devotees in the Irish yatra which will confirm
what I am saying. Please bring Srila Satsvarupa dasa
Goswami back to ISKCON and living with the devotees
while attending the devotional programs. I beg you.

I know Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami for many years
and if you are to tell him that you have heard their
was a problem between him and Pranada dasi Mataji of a
sexual nature I believe he would not lie as he is
honest at heart. You could talk to Srila Satsvarupa
dasa Goswami, Pranada dasi Mataji, Kaisori devi dasi
and Baladeva Vidyabhusana dasa and I am sure the truth
would come out. I believe them all to be sincere but
there was problems with drugs and a intimate
relationship between Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami and
Pranada dasi Mataji. I don't know many, including
myself, that would go public because Srila Satsvarupa
dasa Goswami is very powerful and has many disciples
who will give us all trouble. Also we want Srila
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami to
be better and take care of us but if we say something
he will no longer give us shelter.

In trying to help Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami it has
been demanded that I say my name, where I live and how
I cvan be contacted. I have been treated very rudely
by Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami's GBC Disciple,
Praghosa dasa, for even saying such a thing. He has
been demeaning and rude so what he will do when the
truth comes out? I have been through this before. I
was to take initiation from our Zonal Guru and was
saved by devotees who felt the obligation to speak up
about what he was doing that was wrong and that didn't
please Srila Prabhupada. that is why i am speaking up
because I was saved and I am afraid for all of those
that Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami now accepts as
disciples as he is not fit to continue on as Guru. He
needs to care for himself and those he has already
accepted. By taking more disciples he is continueing
the sins that can ruin so many lives. I hope you
understand.

I saw many lives ruined when Jayatirtha dasa left. It
ruined the disciples, the yet to be initiated like
myself and especially those who spoke out against him.
Even though they did the right thing no one forgave
them and they were left on their own with no
association and Krishna Consciousness. I dont want
this to happen to me. I dont want to lose my family.

Thank you very much and all glories to Srila
Prabhupada.

PS.I know my English is not so good so you may correct
where needed.

QUOTE(Audarya-lila dasa @ May 3 2004, 12:11 PM)

Why must his problems become the impetus to bash GM and it's off-shoots?

Considering that many of his problems seem to stem from the organization to which he has dedicated so much of his life to, it is not unreasonable that a discussion of his situation involve a critique of this organization as well.

QUOTE(Anand @ May 3 2004, 03:15 PM)

That Sri Guru is also a student does not mean he has a license to lie and conciously cheat.

I agree with this. Integrity is expected from all spiritual seekers, but especially from those acting as teachers and gurus.

QUOTE(Anand @ May 3 2004, 09:46 AM)

I believe there is a general need for education on the subject of guru tattva. A healthy and succeful contemporary example of guru disicple relationship would be helpful, I think.

It would indeed be nice to see such an example. In my experience with ISKCON and some splinter groups I never saw anything that struck me as being a successful example of a guru-ziSya relationship. At times I even wondered whether there ever was such examples, for how can we truly judge a guru-ziSya based on hagiography and history-turned-legend? I believe, however, that there probably are such examples, in ISKCON as well as elsewhere.

QUOTE(Elpis @ May 3 2004, 08:04 PM)

Considering that many of his problems seem to stem from the organization to which he has dedicated so much of his life to, it is not unreasonable that a discussion of his situation involve a critique of this organization as well.

Even if this conjecture on your part is correct, or even partly correct, it still doesn't justify the blatant bashing as opposed to discussing those organizational issues that someone may feel contributed to his problems.

It is really impossible to give a meaningful critique unless one has much more specific knowledge of the person and the circumstances.

I would also simply point out that taking someone's specific example and trying to apply it broadly to a larger population is not a very reasonable proposal.

I personally have no doubt that most individuals are not suited to live an ascetic life style. For most people a considerable amount of life experience and maturing has to take place before one can begin to approach a life of renunciation in a meaningful way. But that is a generality and doesn't apply to everyone by any means.

Regarding the celibacy issue - I attended a conference at Loyola Maramount University a little over a week ago. It was billed as a Catholic/Hindu dialogue on sacred celebacy. There were two Catholic speakers and two Hindus. One of the Hindus was Hrdayananda Maharaja. I didn't get to hear his talk. The other Hindu gave a very nice talk. She was speaking from the monist point of view, but she did an excellent job of outlining the basic features of celebacy and it's role in spiritual development. I only had the privledge of hearing one of the Catholic's speak. He is a franciscan monk/priest and is regarded as an expert in the field of sacred celebacy. His talk was really dynamic. He bashed the Catholic hierarchy considerably. The take home message from him was that in order for his, or anyones, celebacy to have positive meaning it had to be a conscious choice as opposed to being forced on the individual by the institution. He seemed to really appreciate the depth of the Hindu tradition and the details given in the scripture outlining positive and progressive sacred celebacy.

An interesting question was raised by one of the Catholics in attendance at the talk. He asked if sex was viewed as bad or negative in Hinduism. He had apparently come away with that impression from the talks that were given by the Hindu representatives. My wife asked me several questions on that topic after the discussions ended as well. What I told her was that any activity engaged in selfishly without keeping Krsna in the center is considered negative in the sense that it has a binding affect on the soul. In the context of 'holy matrimony' the Catholic position is that intimate sexual relations are sacred and there is no negativity associated with this. I pointed out to her that anything taken too far can be bad and that every genuine spiritual tradition seeks to gradually disentangle it's adherents from a sensual and material orientation to life to a devotional and spiritual one.

Anyway,

enough for now.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

Enough for now? How about enough forever?

Enough of this blabbing about how everything is ok as long as it happens to someone else.

Hrdayananda Maharaja is no authority whatsoever to represent Hinduism, what to speak of Vaisnavism, on the topic of celibacy. Such can only be seen as a culmination of hypocrisy. Anyone who gives a minute of his precious human life to such fraud is either a fool or a hypocrite himself.

Bashing the Catholic hierarchy is OK, but the pseudo representatives of the Vaisnava tradition must be heard and applauded for their dishonesty?

These bogus renunciates must be accountable for their choices. Not the institution. They are the institution, they perpetrate the crime.

QUOTE(Anand @ May 3 2004, 10:02 PM)

Enough for now? How about enough forever?

There is no reason for you to be rude - I am entitled to voice my opinions and observations as is anyone else here.

I mentioned the conference on sacred celibacy because I personally found the topic to be fascinating and I thought the speakers that I heard did an excellent job with their presentations.

I did not hear Hrdayananda Maharaja's talk but he did sit on the panel discussion at the end of the session. While I may not agree with everything the Maharaja says, he is certainly a very learned individual. He could learn to slow his speaking down and confine himself to conveying one or a few simple points with each sentence or paragraph - but that is an issue of style, not content.

I don't know much of Hrdayananda's history, but at least on the surface it would appear that he would be a good candidate to speak at such a conference since he has been a celebate monk for over 30 years. He also has fairly good academic credentials and he also certainly has a broad understanding of gaudiya vaishnavism in particular and hinduism in general.

May I ask you Anand why you are so angry?

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

I am angry because I was a disciple of Hrdayananda Maharaja and I know from solid sources that his claimed celibacy is, at least, questionable, although he denies such with astonishing cynicism.

Enough forever means, any form of perpetration of the mentality that has brought thousands of disenchanted aspiring devotees to the present impasse, should be, in my opinion, eradicated. At least from amongst those who truly seek a solution.

Everyone involved should not waste time anymore. That is my position.

I did not mean to be specifically rude towards you. Please accept my apologies.

Are there some substantial points we still need to talk about? If so, please state them concisely here so we can talk about them.

Yes Madhava, lets not incur in the discourtesy of calling anyone a liar.

Speaking in the capacity of a moderator, I am asking whether there are any substantial points in this thread that still need to be discussed, or whether we can just close it down.

I sent in an article to Chakra a month ago and it appeared there a few days before this Satsvarupa scandal erupted onto it's pages, And my conclusion to this mess is summed up in that article, [go to chakra and at bottom of page click past articles, mine is at the top right] where Satsvarupa is recorded being ordered by Prabhupada.

Essentially the chickens have come home to roost***, Due to ignoring their Guru's orders on changing ISKCON policy [ see my article ] from it's present day repressive stigmatizing culture that humiliates and forces monastic standards as the only credible or acceptable behavior for members: the reaction to this dishonest arrogance and refusal to implement specific changes has caught up to the most "saintly" among them as it has to many of the rest of the ISKCON leaders in the past, present and for the forseeable future.

This is what happens when they ignore the orders given to them, the continuing artificially imposed standards that Prabhupada originally installed in ISKCON were an emergency measure in order that ISKCON could rapidly grow, near the end of His mission on Earth Prabhupada ordered the ISKCON leaders to give up that standard and culture he created and implement within ISKCON a regular form of society, specifically he spoke about ending the standards that are expected to be followed by everyone if they are to be admitted as members in good standing, well now the chickens are continuing to come home to roost.

at copy and past section are parts 1 and 2 of my article

***origins of the phrase "the chickens have come home to roost"?

THE CHICKENS HAVE COME HOME TO ROOST -- Chickens scratch around in the barnyard, in the fields and woods during the day. But at night they come home to the hen-house to roost. This saying is comparing a person's evil or foolish deeds to chickens. If a person does wrong, the "payback" might not be immediate. But at some point, at the end of the day, those "chickens" will come home to roost. "One has to face the consequences of one's past actions. In English, the proverb goes back to Chaucer's 'Parson's Tale' (c 1390). It was also know to Terence (about 190-159 B.C.) First attested in the United States in the 'Life of Jefferson S. Batkins' (1871). The proverb is found in varying forms: Curses, like chickens, come home to roost; Sooner or later chickens, come home to roost..." From "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996).

QUOTE(Anand @ May 3 2004, 07:15 PM)

QUOTE

The very idea that Guru is a fixed/finished position is ludicrous. Sridhara Maharaja has said that we are all students forever - so there must be progress for all of us, including Sri Guru.

Guru is fixed, unmovable as a mountain. Or so we always heard. That Sri Guru is also a student does not mean he has a license to lie and conciously cheat. I find that these sentimental and biased definations of Guru circulating around have in fact greatly contributed for the cheapening of an otherwise pure and sacred relatinship.

Well since this is the ISKCON/GMath subforum and this issue is currently being discussed, I'll submit two quotes from Prabhupada that were posted just three months ago on a PAMHO conference that I belong to. I have good reason to believe that this and similar quotes are used within ISKCON to justify the idea of "neophytes" acting as gurus:

Replying to my question whether one has to be a pure devotee to make disciples, he said that one has to be strictly following the principles. That is the requirement. Then he can be considered to be on a pure platform.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => TD 1-9: Sri Dhama Mayapur

"Keep trained very rigidly, and then you are bona fide guru, and you can accept disciples on the same principle. But as a matter of etiquette it is the custom that during the lifetime of your spiritual master you bring the prospective disciples to him, and in his absence or disappearance you can accept disciples without any limitation. This is the law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bona fide spiritual master and spread Krsna consciousness very widely; that will make me and Krsna very happy."

>>> Ref. VedaBase => TD 1-2: Sri Vrndavana Dhama

QUOTE

This is the law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bona fide spiritual master and spread Krsna consciousness very widely; that will make me and Krsna very happy."

I want Kshamabuddhi to be my revered Guru Maharaj.

QUOTE(Madhava @ May 3 2004, 11:36 PM)

Speaking in the capacity of a moderator, I am asking whether there are any substantial points in this thread that still need to be discussed, or whether we can just close it down.

How about the opportunity, here in this little corner of GD, to express our raw pain? With respect, I think that is what many are doing here, each in their own way.

Satsvarupa Maharaj was an inspiration to us all at some point. He has written beautifully about Gaudiyism, he is a rare gentleman. To hear about his problems is painful. Almost like a death in the family. Perhaps we are grieving.

And for some of us this is a reminder of our own painful encounters with institutional impacts of 'guru-falldowns' over the past 20 years and more.

I hadn't read the letter from Haridas before, but I was extremely touched by it, especially the references to the chaos which surrounded the problems of Jayatirtha Das in 1982. Those who have been through such wrenching times still have raw wounds. Others may not understand.

But certainly let us all wish Sri Satsvarupa Maharaj, and all his dedicated followers, well.

QUOTE(betal_nut @ May 3 2004, 06:19 PM)

QUOTE

This is the law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bona fide spiritual master and spread Krsna consciousness very widely; that will make me and Krsna very happy."

I want Kshamabuddhi to be my revered Guru Maharaj.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

These are hard days… Some moments I find myself reflective and peaceful and others I find myself with a broken heart and doubtful spirit. Thus is the life we live.

During such times we generally find ourselves in great need of the shelter of the Vaisnavas. We know what is stated in sastra and it is within our reach; we always have access to the holy name; yet our need for the affection and compassion of the Vaisnavas is another critical element to our well being and growth. Afterall it is through the grace of the Vaisnavas that we are granted the shelter of Sri Mahaprahu and the service of our dear Srimati Radhika and her beloved Gopicandra. The shelter and affection of the Vaisnavas clears all hurdles and brings warmth and courage to ones heart.

During moments of crisis the heart is revealed and relationships comes to fruition. This is where I find myself today. To be honest what I find in the coming days, weeks and months will be critical to the survival of my heart. So I pray and beg for the compassion of the Vaisnavas.

In Sri Jaiva Dharma it is stated “The tenderness of the heart experienced toward Krsna is known os bhakti. All other jives are servants of Krsna. When one experiences tenderness of the heart towards them, it is known as daya, compassion. Therefore compassion is included within bhakti.” We cannot separate the need to develop compassion from our goal of bhakti. They don’t simply go hand in hand; as compassion is imperative to even the thought of ever developing bhakti. It is simply stated that ones only qualification for entering into the service of Sri Sri Radha Gopicandra is the blessings of the Vaisnavas. Without it there is no way that we will ever attain their service.

Compassion is a defining point in ones advancement and character. It is tested at times when we see others in difficulty. Do we find ourselves seeking out the faults or mistakes of others and gleefully broadcasting them? Do we find joy in conversing on and pointing out these faults? Do we pound our chests and state how we "saw it coming"?

This is our defining point. It measures the maturity and purity of our own hearts as well as highlight what makes us tick. Much can be learned when we see how others address difficulty in their lives and our ability to learn from their mistakes can save us one day. However just as the adage goes “It’s not what you do but why you do it”; our own spiritual progress will be evident during such periods and it will speak in volumes that cannot be denied.

Currently there is discussion over the situation surrounding Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. Many are praying for Maharaja’s physical and spiritual well being and reflecting on how it best to approach such situations and help others who encounter such issues. To those Vaisnavas I offer my respects and pray that they have compassion for all involved and bestow their mercy and prayers on us all. To name a few Jagat, Vamsidas, Audurya Lila and Adiyen have shared thoughtful posts in this regard.

At the same time some seem to be seeking the “nectar” of such a situation. They desire to know what is being said, true or not, and seem to have little concern for any of the individuals involved. It is something to joke of; for some it is even something to gloat over. For those that find themselves greedy to hear these stories, who find joy in such situations and comfort in being critical, without having any understanding as to "what happened", I humbly submit just a few things for you to consider:

1. Does entertaining such thoughts, and speculating on what may or may not have happened, enhance your bhajana and service to Sri Guru and the Vaisnavas? Does it bring you closer to the desired goal? To ones Guru?

2. How does finding any sense of comfort or happiness in such a situation reflect on your character, advancement, heart or, most importantly, on the advancement and teachings of your Guruji? Does it make ohers take notice and seek their association or cringe when they hear their name?

Daily we pray to Sri Guru, Mahapabhu and Sri Sri Radha Gopicandra for their compassion and mercy yet we don’t see how such a request is tied to our own ability to show compassion or mercy to others.

The way that we carry ourselves doesn’t just reflect on ourselves; it also speaks to the advancement, spiritual strength and teachings of our Guardians. When one prays for the well being of all aspiring sadhikas it is a glorious example of ones Guru and the compassionate and loving affection they shower upon their followers. When we find joy or pride in such situations it is symbolic of our inability to submit ourselves not just to their will, but also their instructions and teachings. Most importantly it reflects on ones own Guru. I would assume that most that make cutting, joking or prodeful comments in such situations know full well that in the presence of their Guru they would never make such a comment.

Some will submit their stories of days and times when they were not treated with this same respect and compassion and make the point that they are simply responding to the way that they were treated. In a court of 6 year old children this would be accepted with open arms. However we are not only adults but Vaisnavas and as Vaisnavas we understand that revenge and spite are not qualities we wish to cultivate, what to speak of encourage.

It is days like today when our character is tested. Everyone performs well in calm waters but today we learn if we sink or swim.

Please excuse me from further discussions on the situation of Srila Satsvarupa Maharaja. He has been, and will remain, not just a fixture in my spiritual life but a part of it’s lifeline. I humbly submit myself to the prayers and wishes of the Vaisnavas and pray that I pass this test and continue to help serve Srila Satsvarupa dasa Goswami in his desire to continue to serve his beloved Srila Prabhupada, the Vaisnavas, Sri Mahaprabhu and Sri Sri Radha Gopicandra.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja

QUOTE

I would assume that most that make cutting, joking or prodeful comments in such situations know full well that in the presence of their Guru they would never make such a comment.

Don't assume too much. Gurus with a sense of humor live longer.

QUOTE(Audarya-lila dasa @ May 3 2004, 08:54 PM)

Regarding the celibacy issue - I attended a conference at Loyola Maramount University a little over a week ago. It was billed as a Catholic/Hindu dialogue on sacred celebacy. There were two Catholic speakers and two Hindus. One of the Hindus was Hrdayananda Maharaja. I didn't get to hear his talk. The other Hindu gave a very nice talk. She was speaking from the monist point of view, but she did an excellent job of outlining the basic features of celebacy and it's role in spiritual development. I only had the privledge of hearing one of the Catholic's speak. He is a franciscan monk/priest and is regarded as an expert in the field of sacred celebacy. His talk was really dynamic. He bashed the Catholic hierarchy considerably. The take home message from him was that in order for his, or anyones, celebacy to have positive meaning it had to be a conscious choice as opposed to being forced on the individual by the institution. He seemed to really appreciate the depth of the Hindu tradition and the details given in the scripture outlining positive and progressive sacred celebacy.

Anyway,

enough for now.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

Hridayananda = Celibacy + Hindu ?

With respect,

QUOTE(adiyen @ May 4 2004, 03:33 AM)

QUOTE(Madhava @ May 3 2004, 11:36 PM)

Speaking in the capacity of a moderator, I am asking whether there are any substantial points in this thread that still need to be discussed, or whether we can just close it down.

How about the opportunity, here in this little corner of GD, to express our raw pain? With respect, I think that is what many are doing here, each in their own way.

All right. But please be sensitive with each other.

QUOTE(Audarya-lila dasa @ May 3 2004, 04:54 PM)

Even if this conjecture on your part is correct, or even partly correct, it still doesn't justify the blatant bashing as opposed to discussing those organizational issues that someone may feel contributed to his problems.

It is really impossible to give a meaningful critique unless one has much more specific knowledge of the person and the circumstances.

I would also simply point out that taking someone's specific example and trying to apply it broadly to a larger population is not a very reasonable proposal.

Since Satsvarupa spent most of his adult life in ISKCON it is not unreasonable that a discussion of his problems should involve a critique of how this fact may have shaped him. This is especially so given the fact that sannyAsins getting into problems is a recurring theme in that organization.

I agree that it is hard to give a meaningful critique without knowing more facts, but this does not mean that a discussion should not take place. Much can still be said.

Regarding applying a specific example broadly, then I do not think that this is what is being done here. As I pointed out, problems among sannyAsins is a recurring theme in ISKCON; there are plenty of other examples.

QUOTE(Audarya-lila dasa @ May 3 2004, 06:35 PM)

I don't know much of Hrdayananda's history, but at least on the surface it would appear that he would be a good candidate to speak at such a conference since he has been a celebate monk for over 30 years. He also has fairly good academic credentials and he also certainly has a broad understanding of gaudiya vaishnavism in particular and hinduism in general.

Hrdayananda would not be my first choice for such a speaker. However, he seems to have done well in his studies. "He was my best student," was what one academic told me when I was at Harvard last summer. However, it is also true that some academics refused to contribute to a book when it became known that Hrdayananda had been asked to contribute as well. I remember him visiting the Danish temple. To me it seemed that he deliberately gave a talk using a lot of Sanskrit terminology that the devotees present could not understand, perhaps to come across as a big, learned man. After the talk everybody looked at each other and nobody could think of anything to ask him. However, if one knew a bit of Sanskrit, as I did at the time, it became clear that his talk really was not very deep at all. He came across as pompous to me.

Tripurari once said about Hrdayananda that "he is intelligent, but let us leave it at that."

QUOTE

Regarding applying a specific example broadly, then I do not think that this is what is being done here. As I pointed out, problems among sannyAsins is a recurring theme in ISKCON; there are plenty of other examples.

I think there are two separated issues that on chance merged but that probably should be treated separately on this discussion: celibacy and guruship. Putting these two together has obviously being one of the causes of the mounting Iskcon nightmare, and probably added to the confusion in attempts to understand and treat such causes.

The points made by Rasaraja above are good ones but I fail to see what it has to do with the above comment which he quoted prior.

Anyway, I feel sympathetic towards anyone whose personal life is made public chewing for the whole world via internet or any other medium.

It's not that Indian Vaishnavas don't also have their scandals. However I think they are more expert at the art of secrecy. The culture demands that one develop such skills at an early age.

This is probably a situation which Maharaja himself would have come out and openly admitted in due course of time, even without all this prior publicity. If, indeed, there is anything to admit.

Perhaps nothing is really going on there but it just looks suspicious to some observers. Ultimately the only one who will ever know what really took place is Maharaja himself.

And, even if the allegations are true, perhaps the situation can serve to catapult him deeper into bhakti.

Dear Elipsis,

I understand your feelings about Hrdayananda - my experience is similar. He seemed to make the other panel members uneasy which I conjectured had less to do with the substance of what he was saying than it did with his style of presentation. Still, on the one occasion I spent a little time with him in an informal fashion I found him to be a very cordial and nice person generally. Although I personally am not inspired by his overall presentation, I know that some devotees are. Each of us grow at our own pace and each has different needs - as the saying goes - variety is the spice of life.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

QUOTE

Ultimately the only one who will ever know what really took place is Maharaja himself.

Suppose the above is the ultimate conclusion to arrive at in this discussion, then there is no point in the discussion in the first place. Who started this thread anyway? People should make up their minds. We discuss or we keep secrets. Very simple.

Or rather, I don't see any need to discuss this subject in the first place.

The interesting thing about this whole affair is that it has borne discussion regarding the viability of lifelong celibacy and the institution of sannyasa itself. Another factor connected with this is about how the early Western devotees prematurely took to a life of sannyasa and how they manage(d) to live life in such austere conditions.

I believe those are the real issues, rather than Satsvarupa Maharaja himself.

Hridayananda Maharaj is the incarnation of Srila Prabhupad's chutzpah. And you know, he would probably be proud to be called that.

These are sensitive issues, Anandaji, but look at what has been said. Various intelligent people have expressed strong opinions from their own respective points of view. This is what needs to be encouraged, because we are what we think.

Vowing to remain celibate for the duration of one's life is silly.
Why not just vow to develop bhakti?
Cessation of sexual conduct naturally occurs over time anyway.
Making public vows and taking on culturally symbolic roles in religious societies are self-defeating.

QUOTE(dirty hari @ May 3 2004, 07:52 PM)

I am writing this letter as a last ditch effort to
save someone that is dear to my soul. Before I have
written such a letter for publication on VNN I
approached HH Prahladanandana Swami as ISKCON's
Sanyassa Minister in hope of him helping correct this
situation. After finding that he, as well as a GBC
Godbrother, has failed to take me seriously I write
this letter with heavy heart...

Hey Dirty, is this the original article by 'Hari' that started the fire? Well of course, we never know who started the fire. It's the material world and fires just start, but when the guru is on fire and he's supposed to put out the fire what to do?

*******

Also because I couldn't do a normal post (cause I'm a newbie here and the reply buttons weren't working), here's some other thoughts on the SdG situation...

Well, he was always someone I respected and admired. His books always inspired me to think, to be introspective, to write, to improve my practice of Vaishnavism, etc. I am hoping like Jagat wrote that this situation brings him to a new level of openness in his writings and I would absolutely love to see another reform book.

Actually, I've felt that SdG was holding back over the past few years. Think about it, he was heavily involved as a GBC/guru/sannyasi in the years immediately following Prabhupada's departure. Therefore he knows of the secrets the GBC has been keeping hidden. He knows of scandals, and all that stuff that is usually kept from the lowly ISKCON members. Anyway...

I feel that SdG has a lot to say especially about reform. ISKCON needs it now as much as they ever have. I also think that SdG has feared GBC disproval if he was to really speak his mind about ISKCON and it's problems.

So I just hope that this really opens SdG up and he lets loose everything he's been holding in. I believe that if and when that happens, we will truely be reading some amazing material!

Ys,

QUOTE

Cessation of sexual conduct naturally occurs over time anyway.
Making public vows and taking on culturally symbolic roles in religious societies are self-defeating.

Humm, spoken like if from an insider...

chutzpah. That is generous. Overrating, but generous.

QUOTE(betal_nut @ May 4 2004, 01:55 PM)

The points made by Rasaraja above are good ones but I fail to see what it has to do with the above comment which he quoted prior.

Anyway, I feel sympathetic towards anyone whose personal life is made public chewing for the whole world via internet or any other medium.

It's not that Indian Vaishnavas don't also have their scandals. However I think they are more expert at the art of secrecy. The culture demands that one develop such skills at an early age.

This is probably a situation which Maharaja himself would have come out and openly admitted in due course of time, even without all this prior publicity. If, indeed, there is anything to admit.

Perhaps nothing is really going on there but it just looks suspicious to some observers. Ultimately the only one who will ever know what really took place is Maharaja himself.

And, even if the allegations are true, perhaps the situation can serve to catapult him deeper into bhakti.

Maharaja..?
Boy I missed out....this one even got edited by jagat himself...little too much hey?

QUOTE(Audarya-lila dasa @ May 4 2004, 10:02 AM)

I understand your feelings about Hrdayananda - my experience is similar. He seemed to make the other panel members uneasy which I conjectured had less to do with the substance of what he was saying than it did with his style of presentation. Still, on the one occasion I spent a little time with him in an informal fashion I found him to be a very cordial and nice person generally. Although I personally am not inspired by his overall presentation, I know that some devotees are. Each of us grow at our own pace and each has different needs - as the saying goes - variety is the spice of life.

I am not inspired by him either, but I did not mean to say that it is wrong if someone is. In my opinion, his presentation is not very deep despite his learning, but he may still be able to inspire and help some devotees.

QUOTE(betal_nut @ May 4 2004, 11:01 AM)

Vowing to remain celibate for the duration of one's life is silly.
Why not just vow to develop bhakti?

Some take a vow of celibacy as a means to develop bhakti.

QUOTE

Cessation of sexual conduct naturally occurs over time anyway.
Making public vows and taking on culturally symbolic roles in religious societies are self-defeating.

I follow what you are saying. A commitment to celibacy ought to be a personal and private decision, not something that one should flaunt in front of god and every man in order to gain prestige in society. Traditionally, sannyAsins do not stay among people and show off. They wander, and there are strict rules as for how long they can stay in a place. In fact, the sannyAsa of ISKCON has very little to do with what is traditionally considered to be sannyAsa.

Thumbs up to Elpis. Exactly what I was just going to say, no more no less.

QUOTE(Gaurasundara @ May 4 2004, 10:55 AM)

The interesting thing about this whole affair is that it has borne discussion regarding the viability of lifelong celibacy and the institution of sannyasa itself. Another factor connected with this is about how the early Western devotees prematurely took to a life of sannyasa and how they manage(d) to live life in such austere conditions.

I like to use the analogy of antibiotics to express my perspective on sexuality and celibacy.

As you know, antibiotics are wonderfully effective for treating certain kinds of illnesses. A patient is prescribed a course of antibiotics, to be taken over a predetermined length of time, in order to combat the illness successfully.

However, because antibiotics suppress the symptoms of illness very quickly, some patients stop taking the antibiotics before the course of treatment is over. They think the antibiotics are no longer necessary, and that the cure has occurred. But because they give up the cure too soon, the illness is not fully healed.

Think of marriage as a course of antibiotic treatment. Some don't need it at all, but others need to experience the full course of the treatment in order to achieve the desired health. The worst mistake is to take little bits of it, on your own terms, without a commitment to completing the full course.

I know some successful celibates who have been celibate for their whole lives. And I know some successful celibates who adopted celibacy after a long married life.

The "celibates" I know who seem to have the most problems are the ones who either had lots of premarital sex before embracing celibacy, or who abandoned a brief marriage in order to attempt celibacy.

Celibacy is a commitment. Marriage is a commitment. Pick one, and stick with it. If as a young adult you feel the need to "experiment" with premarital sex, you are clearly not a candidate for celibacy; better to get married and learn the lessons, and reap the benefits, that come with the commitments of marriage. On the other hand, there are a handful of people for whom lifelong celibacy "works" just fine; let's not disparage the usefulness of their endeavor just because many others fail at it.

QUOTE(Gaurasundara @ May 4 2004, 10:55 AM)

The interesting thing about this whole affair is that it has borne discussion regarding the viability of lifelong celibacy and the institution of sannyasa itself. Another factor connected with this is about how the early Western devotees prematurely took to a life of sannyasa and how they manage(d) to live life in such austere conditions.

I believe those are the real issues, rather than Satsvarupa Maharaja himself.

Yes, these are the real issues. The case of Satsvarupa and others before him in ISKCON simply serve to call attention to the fact that these issues are pertinent and need to be reevaluated.

The thing is that celibacy should not be seen as a sine qua non of bhakti. Celibacy on its own is not a positive or negative marker of bhakti. Indeed, a too-rigid renunciation of sexuality or anything else might be a negative marker of bhakti.

yaH kenApy atibhAgyena
jAta-zraddho’sya sevane
nAtisakto na vairAgya-bhAg
asyAm adhikAry asau

One is eligible for devotional service if his faith has awakened through some great good fortune, and is neither too materially attached nor too renounced. (BRS 1.2.14)

jJAna-vairAgyayor bhakti-pravezAyopayogitA
ISat prathamam eveti nAGgatvam ucitaM tayoH
yad ubhe citta-kAThinya-hetU prAyaH satAM mate
sukumAra-svabhAveyaM bhaktis tad-dhetur IritA

Knowledge and renunciation may have some small usefulness at the beginning when one enters the path of devotion, but [on their own] they are never considered an integral practice of devotion. The reason for this, in the opinion of the saints, is that both are causes for the heart's hardening. Bhakti is soft-hearted by nature and [the practices of] bhakti produce such softheartedness.(BRS 1.2.248-9)

Oddly enough, these last two verses are the context for the "anAsaktasya viSayAn" verse which appears at 1.2.255. So how can celibacy, which as Nabadip very thoroughly confirmed often causes hard-heartedness, be identified as a cause, symptom, or anything else, of devotion.

In someone's personal life it may be anukUla or pratikUla. But that is a somewhat different question. As such I am fully in agreement with Vamsidas, who has expressed himself very well. Marriage or sannyasa both fall into the category of "sva-dharma"; they are commitments. If one is unable to maintain a commitment, one makes adjustments. But following one's sva-dharma is the base position of religiosity and therefore bhakti. One should see one's svadharma as coming from Krishna and consider it his base position for prosecuting devotional service. Recognizing one's own capacities is virtue.

QUOTE

On the other hand, there are a handful of people for whom lifelong celibacy "works" just fine; let's not disparage the usefulness of their endeavor just because many others fail at it.

Is BSST a good example of celibacy life?

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 4 2004, 07:22 PM)

The thing is that celibacy should not be seen as a sine qua non of bhakti. Celibacy on its own is not a positive or negative marker of bhakti. Indeed, renunciation of sexuality or anything else might be a negative marker of bhakti.

yaH kenApy atibhAgyena
jAta-zraddho’sya sevane
nAtisakto na vairAgya-bhAg
asyAm adhikAry asau

One is eligible for devotional service if his faith has awakened through some great good fortune. One who is too materially attached or too renounced is not so eligible. (BRS 1.2.14)

jJAna-vairAgyayor bhakti-pravezAyopayogitA
ISat prathamam eveti nAGgatvam ucitaM tayoH
yad ubhe citta-kAThinya-hetU prAyaH satAM mate
sukumAra-svabhAveyaM bhaktis tad-dhetur IritA

Knowledge and renunciation may have some small usefulness at the beginning when one enters the path of devotion, but [on their own] they are never considered an integral practice of devotion. The reason for this, in the opinion of the saints, is that both are causes for the heart's hardening. Bhakti is soft-hearted by nature and [the practices of] bhakti produce such softheartedness.(BRS 1.2.248-9)

Oddly enough, these last two verses are the context for the "anAsaktasya viSayAn" verse which appears at 1.2.255. So how can celibacy, which as Nabadip very thoroughly confirmed often causes hard-heartedness, be identified as a cause, symptom, or anything else, of devotion.

In someone's personal life it may be anukUla or pratikUla. But that is a somewhat different question.

There is a story I heard long time ago about a prostitute and her neighbour a renounced brahmana (?) who were judged who is more qualified to attain Krishnas mercy? It came out, I dont remember all the details, the prostitute won. She always remembered Krishna and praid for forgiveness to earn her livelihood by selling her body to lusty men and the brahmana always thought about the prostitute how sinful she is to constantly have sex and didnt realize that he thought too often about the sinful activities of that woman instead of his brahminical responsibilities. On the other side if you also consider masturbation as sex there has to be a limit. Just like homosexuality is a psychological disease, certain types of sexual activity are vikarmic, killing the goal of human life.

Moreover, celibacy might even be considered a specific liability for madhura-rasa. BRS 3.5.2-->
nivRttAnupayogitvAd
durUhatvAd ayaM rasaH |
rahasyatvAc ca saMkSipya
vitatANgo vilikhyate ||

Though the erotic rasa is a vast subject with many aspects, we shall broach it only summarily here in the Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu because it is not a fitting matter for renunciates, is difficult to understand and is somewhat esoteric.

The commentaries say that the "nivRtta" means those who see this rasa as being on the same level as mundane sexuality. So this turns an idea we have often heard on its head: It is those who renounce sexuality who have a greater tendency to think of Radha and Krishna's love affairs as mundane sex. Therefore they are not invited to the feast.

Even though this is a side-track to the present earnest direction of posts esp by Jagatji, I'd like to place these few lines here. I have only just now read the letter by "Hari das" describing the situation around Satsvarup das, and it reminded me strongly of Hansadutta's development. Hansadutta had developed some medical condition, for which he started to take pharmaceutical drugs, which, as everyone knows, have many side-effects, which again are often counteracted with other drugs. Many drugs, including pain-killers, have a personality-altering effect, and they are addictive. If some alcohol, possibly of a pharmaceutical source too, is added, a dangerous cocktail of toxins is affecting the person.

Strange is also the incidence of getting into "black music", whatever that means. That is another similarity with Hansadutta. I am not into judging anyone here, I am just observing. A similar situation happened with Harikesh: disease, pharmaceutical drugs, addiction, release through Rock music, then female company, release through sex.

We do not know what was diagnosed, and it's also none of my business to know that. However, it can be seen that some renunciates tend to get seriously ill, - well, everyone else gets sick too, but it seems that disease may take a different course with renunciates who force their psycho-physcial vehicles into obedience unto their will, or decide to ignore their bodies. It is seen that meditators get cancers or other life-threatening diseases. Some great Buddhist teachers got cancer, Ramana Maharshi died of cancer, some recognised brahmavadi-person called Nityananda died of cancer. Cancers are seen as a separate organism within the organism; other diseases are like that too, even though less evidently so.

A Sadhu in Tamil Nadu who is said to be over 130 years old by now tells people: "A Sadhu (meaning renunciate) is born to be Sadhu, he cannot become one." I think there is truth in this. When renunciation is not denial, and comes easy, then it seems to be healthy. When it is artificial, the body is weakened to the assault of disease, physical, emotional, mental... with dire consequences. (Those who take this unnecessary burden on themselves, require our compassion, instead of being ostracized... ) Being guru in addition to that burden of artificial renunciation, certainly does not make things easier.

With traditional Gaudiyas a happily married person can be a guru. That is nice to witness, as a contrast too these unhappily forced situations.

Well, there is another unhappy sannyas-drama unfolding, as mentioned here

http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/index.ph...t=0&#entry14953

QUOTE(Hari Saran @ May 4 2004, 03:32 PM)

Is BSST a good example of celibacy life?

Who knows? If he maintained his self-created vow of sannyasa, then perhaps he gained the benefits typically attributed to celibacy, and can be seen as a good example in that regard. If he did not maintain those vows, then obviously he is not a good example.

As Jagat has wisely pointed out, though, celibacy by itself is not required (and for many may not even be optimal) for the development of bhakti. Surely it is more important to maintain one's legitimate vows -- whether vows of marriage or of celibacy. Sarva-dharman parityajya... is not a license to abandon a vow of marriage or of celibacy; it is a reminder that Mahaprabhu can bestow bhakti, without regard to one's external circumstances, to one who surrenders.

In the specific (and rare) case that someone receives a "sannyasa-mantra" to sustain a vow of lifelong celibacy, but later finds that this mantra lacks the parampara-connection to give it potency, I think we must forgive the "breaking" of a vow, since the vow was based on a false premise unknown to the renunciant when he accepted the vow. Such a "renunciant" should be able to marry honorably and continue his spiritual growth.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 4 2004, 04:01 PM)

Though the erotic rasa is a vast subject with many aspects, we shall broach it only summarily here in the Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu because it is not a fitting matter for renunciates, is difficult to understand and is somewhat esoteric.

And yet, wasn't that verse of BRS written by a renunciant?

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 4 2004, 08:01 PM)

The commentaries say that the "nivRtta" means those who see this rasa as being on the same level as mundane sexuality. So this turns an idea we have often heard on its head: It is those who renounce sexuality who have a greater tendency to think of Radha and Krishna's love affairs as mundane sex. Therefore they are not invited to the feast.

I'm not sure that I fully understand what you are saying here. How would you apply the above in the traditional Gaudiya context? On a broader level, this discussion is about the feasibility of renunciation. Some may opine that the tradition of tridanda-sannyasa is only present in a certain percentage of the Gaudiya tradition and thus cannot be reflective of the whole, so it is only "typical" that some sannyasis cannot maintain their vows. However traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism has a tradition of vairagis, so are those vairagis who renounce sexuality liable to fall into the trap of thinking of Radha and Krishna's love affairs as mundane sex?

A number of interpretations are possible. I'll have to look through all the commentaries, including UN 1.2.

QUOTE(Vamsidas)

And yet, wasn't that verse of BRS written by a renunciant?

QUOTE(Gaurasundara @ May 4 2004, 11:38 PM)

How would you apply the above in the traditional Gaudiya context? ... However traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism has a tradition of vairagis, so are those vairagis who renounce sexuality liable to fall into the trap of thinking of Radha and Krishna's love affairs as mundane sex?

I think we need to examine renunciation in two separate categories:

1) Renunciation as the outcome of a natural aspect of psycho-physical evolution, particularly one taking place through prolonged or intense exposure to acts of bhakti.

2) Renunciation as a separately cultivated aspect, an attempt to force oneself into a certain psycho-physical role without due consideration for the nature one has acquired by associating with the modes of nature, and by the principles of which one's being still functions.

The first one would not be an issue, while the second most probably would. If we look at the classical early ISKCON scenario, I believe renunciation was thought of as a means to an end, rather than the natural outcome of wholistic psycho-physio-spiritual evolution.

Does that make any sense?

I have a few comments, and I guess I'll take them in reverse order, more or less.(This is what happens when you have to wait a couple of days to post; it's the end of the semester, and I feel as if I have no life.)

Regarding prescription drugs, I've seen them wreak havoc in people's lives. That Limbaugh became a junkie because of pain. I believe Satasvarupa has been suffering from more-or-less constant migraine for 15 years or more. As a migraineur myself, I find that hard to imagine. Whenever I get one, even if it only lasts a day, I wonder whether I want to go on living. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Satasvarupa got into trouble with painkillers (although I haven't found anything that really relieves that pain).

I think the "black music" referred to by Hari das is jazz.

I think I mostly agree with the things said here by nabadip, Jagat, and vamsidas about renunciation. If the renunciation is a positive thing, the results should be salutory. If it's heart-hardening, the result may well not be salutory, as we see. If the burdens of renunciation, the responsibility of serving as guru, and managing an institution, especially one with the kinds of problems ISKCON has had, don't affect the health, that would be a surprise. We need love and fun. If we get our fun from chanting and discussing Hari katha, and get love from our like-minded devotee friends, or from our friends and families if we're married, our lives will be much healthier.

There's a Bhagavatam verse (11.20.26) I've heard Bhaktivinoda liked:

sve sve 'dhikare ya nistha
sa gunah parikirtitah

Real piety comes from understanding our own position and behaving accordingly. Neglecting to do so results in sin.

And I do very much agree that compassion is the proper response to these problems.

I have more, but I'll have to post it later. I have students showing up for conferences.

QUOTE(vamsidas @ May 4 2004, 10:55 PM)

In the specific (and rare) case that someone receives a "sannyasa-mantra" to sustain a vow of lifelong celibacy, but later finds that this mantra lacks the parampara-connection to give it potency, I think we must forgive the "breaking" of a vow, since the vow was based on a false premise unknown to the renunciant when he accepted the vow. Such a "renunciant" should be able to marry honorably and continue his spiritual growth.

Vamsidas, thanks for the elaborated answer.

Indeed, the fact of being marriage after accepting the vow of a life-long celibacy is somewhat a shame. Nevertheless, as you said, “in this rare case”, of a frenetically-sannyasa-acceptance, I would think it to be reasonable to forgive those unprepared, fallen “soldiers,” who fail to defeat the powerful Lord’s energy, Maya.

QUOTE

Just like homosexuality is a psychological disease

Don't tell me you guys are going to let this ludicrous idea slip by here.....

Maybe it's your turn to bat, Betal Nut.

P'raps another thread would do for that.

QUOTE(betal_nut @ May 4 2004, 04:25 PM)

QUOTE

Just like homosexuality is a psychological disease

Don't tell me you guys are going to let this ludicrous idea slip by here.....

Actually, I didn't intend to let it go; I just hadn't gotten there yet, having been interrupted by my students. In fact, most of us are probably aware the the American Psychological Association has long abandoned any such designation for homosexuality. Betal?

I also think Madhava's two categories of renunciation make a lot of sense, and they distill some ideas I was hoping to do more with in my earlier post. I think those in the second category will often require quite a bit of support. By that I mean more than just shoring up their position. They need the company of advanced souls, as well as loving friendship of like-minded devotees. Renunciation (vairagya) should be a symptom of progressive detachment (vi-raga) from identification with the temporary body and mind and investment in sense objects to gain happiness. Even our Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada admonished us not to imitate Das Goswami.

I do think there may be some utility, perhaps limited, to commitment--either to vairagya or to one's marriage partner--by leaders of devotional communities as a way of encouraging others' spiritual progress. And I think happily married gurus would be an asset to the less-orthodox lines as well. I think ISKCON has a few long-time householders initiating disciples. I don't know enough about the Gaudiya Math institutions to even guess, but my experience is that they have sannyasis initiating.

I've lost the train of thought for other ideas I had. Maybe it'll come back around (though that's not likely at this time of the semester).

QUOTE(vamsidas @ May 4 2004, 11:01 PM)

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 4 2004, 04:01 PM)

Though the erotic rasa is a vast subject with many aspects, we shall broach it only summarily here in the Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu because it is not a fitting matter for renunciates, is difficult to understand and is somewhat esoteric.

And yet, wasn't that verse of BRS written by a renunciant?

Srila Ananda Gopal Gosvami, in his commentaries on Vilapa Kusumanjali, has equated the Gosvamis' vairagya with viraha, separation. When you miss your beloved you have naturally no more taste for sense enjoyment like eating sleeping and mating. It is not something that one talks oneself into or is talked into, far less a practical move (an org needing more preachers or a hungry, poor, low caste Bengali villager wanting food, money and status), it is a natural culmination of devotional transcendental love. Rupa Gosvami's teachings are for all GV sadhakas, his own conduct was beyond many of his own teachings. In the broader scope of Gaura lila we see that the overwhelming majority of Mahaprabhu's parshads were grihasthas, while only a minute group, like the Gosvamis, were vairagis. That is a prototype of how Vaishnava society naturally is. Even now the vairagis are a minute minority in Vaishnava society. This also converges with the fact that a sadhu is born, not created by ambition or the needs of an org.

QUOTE

However traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism has a tradition of vairagis, so are those vairagis who renounce sexuality liable to fall into the trap of thinking of Radha and Krishna's love affairs as mundane sex?

I have seen that happen several times.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 3 2004, 09:29 AM)

It would certainly change the nature of the relationship. Out of curiosity, what is happening with Harikesh now? Does he still have a following out of his former Iskcon disciples?

Have you seen this? It does not answer your questions regarding his following, but might still be of interest.

Spirituality apart from religion. This is an interesting question. Robert (no longer Hari, I see) wants to amputate religion from his experience of spirituality. Maybe we should split this topic.

QUOTE(Babhru @ May 5 2004, 12:13 AM)

Regarding prescription drugs, I've seen them wreak havoc in people's lives. That Limbaugh became a junkie because of pain. I believe Satasvarupa has been suffering from more-or-less constant migraine for 15 years or more. As a migraineur myself, I find that hard to imagine. Whenever I get one, even if it only lasts a day, I wonder whether I want to go on living. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Satasvarupa got into trouble with painkillers (although I haven't found anything that really relieves that pain).

According Edgar Cayce migraine is a warning that there is a temporary
blockage in the intestine. To not cure the root cause but take painkillers instead can cause intestine cancer. As a migraineur myself I suffered for years. Now for me the remedy is to eat a handful raw white cabbage and after one hour the headache is totally gone.

MODERATOR: Please use the QUOTE function judiciously.

QUOTE(jatayu @ May 5 2004, 12:36 PM)

As a migraineur myself I suffered for years. Now for me the remedy is to eat a handful raw white cabbage and after one hour the headache is totally gone.

As is everyone in the room!

Or is that the actual methodology of that remedy?

(Glad that you found relief in any case.)

Hi all.

I'm new to this forum and have been reading some of the posts. This one is slightly interesting to me simply because I was initiated by SDg some years ago.

I am no longer conected with ISKCON in any way and I see Vaishnavism in a very different way than I used to see it.

Anyway, I was thinking that most of the people talking about the alleged "fall down" describe it as just that, a "fall down", or in negative terms. They say things like "tragedy" and speak of SDG (or other former sanyasis) as having "gone away" and other similar terms. But I don't know if I really see it that way anymore. I mean the order of sanyasa in ISKCON (and the other "orders" too...) are, for the lack of a less overused term, dysfunctional. So perhaps if SDg has made some kind of life style change or failed to follow his sanyasa vows, perhaps its a positive thing. If a sanyasi becomes a sanyasi out of improper or immature motives, he is living in a non-genuine way, a lie. If he gives up this lie for a more honest position, how could that be anything but a positive change? I really don't know the details of SDg's alleged situation besides rumor. But if someone becomes more of a honest person and practices their spiritual life from their genuine "place" on the ladder so to speak, whats the big deal? Like I said I don't know what really happened with SDg, but if he has become lax or had a slip from his sanyasa vows, I think I would feel inspired if he wrote a book about that, a genuine spiritual experience or the struggles of a real person on the spiritual path. It's better than faking.

Peace,

Marigold.

I think that most of the people here think like you, Marigold. The term "falldown" is perhaps not the best one, but it is the one we are used to using. Nevertheless, I agree with you.

The trouble is, I think, with the private and public roles. If he adjusts his private position to a more honest one, that is no doubt the healthiest thing for him.

The trouble is that he has been functioning as a guide within very circumscribed parameters--pretending that he has achieved a particular ideal that fits with what was narrowly defined as perfection.

The questions now are the following:

Does he accept the ideal and simply acknowledge his failure at achieving it? Would this require him to abandon his students?
Does he reject the ideal and claim to have found a new one, retaining his spiritual leadership role?
Does he accept the ideal, but simply reinterpret it to allow room for his failures, also reinterpreted as adjustments?

Other alternatives?

Welcome to these forums, Marigold. They are meant for anyone who wants to better understand Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Faith and doubt are both allowed here. We will not fear doubt, because we like Sanskrit verses like the following--

na vai jano jAtu kathaJcanAvrajen
mukunda-sevy anyavad aGga saMsRitim
smaran mukundAGghry-upagUhanaM punar
vihAtum icchen na rasa-graho janaH

A servant of Mukunda will never tumble into the world of material entanglements like the others, for once he has tasted the embrace of Mukunda's lotus feet, he remembers it again and again, and does not ever truly wish to give it up. (Bhag. 1.5.19)

upagUhana = the embrace.

Some very thought-provoking contributions above, I'd like to add my two-cents worth:

I recognise Satsvarupaji's musical and artistic tastes because they overlap mine. They belong to the Beatnik, pre-Hippy era of the 1950's early 60's. For me, these are my roots, the start of my (current) life-journey, and also my reference point which I revisit when I feel I am losing my bearings. Is it presumptuous of me to to imagine that SD's reasons for revisiting the world of his formative years are the same as mine?

If not, then can I suggest some lessons from my experience of this?

It involves the experience of alienation.

I always loved ACBSP's motto ' Back home, back to Godhead'. It invokes what I've always been searching for - home, that place where we are never strangers (but see my signature). Not feeling that sense of belonging in my own culture, I sought it in an Indian religion. And there were times when I was certain I had found it there.

But equally there have been times when I did not recognise the place I found myself in as in any way resembling the goal I set out for. Times when 'my' new culture seemed extremely alien to me, and I a stranger in it.

A western-born woman who spent most of her life in China speaking and acting Chinese once described something similar to me, 'I feel now that I am neither eastern nor western, like I don't belong anywhere...'. In impulsive youth she had chosen to immerse herself in everything Chinese, but she was never able to become Chinese, for one thing because the Chinese always saw her as 'foreigner' no matter how many years or how deeply she was in their world (she now taught Chinese studies in a western university and believe me she knew more Chinese culture and language than most Chinese do).

At some point in my pursuit of Bhakti 2 decades ago, I felt I had gone too far and left my self behind. We were supposed to surrender our egos of course, but I saw that that could be dangerous, when some teachers manipulated their followers in awful ways. So I developed my own strategy for remaining centered.

When I feel alienated, I go back to my roots - the music and literature which first set me on a path for which Bhakti is the natural conclusion. Jazz music, classical, certain books, ultimately my religious roots in my early church experiences too.

If that's what SDji is doing, then I understand.

I find Existentialist philosophy describes what I have experienced.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Welcome to Marigold. If you would like specific information on SDG's situation feel free to e-mail you and I can send you all of the information. Maharaja will be sending out a letter to all disciples and well wishers in the coming days which I can also forward to you once I receive it. If you need anything just PM me.

As Jagat so eloquently stated in his post you will find a rather mixed group here with the common interest of better understanding all that our theology has to offer and what we can do to better prepare ourselves to take advantage of these opportunities.

As far as SDG's sojourn into the music of the past I would say it is similar to the feelings that Adiyen has expressed. All in all we need to assimilate our surroundings and all that we encounter in ways that best offer entrance into ones mind and heart and some times that is done through relating our spiritual experiences through things that are most comfortable for us. We can't leave ourselves behind but we can purify and refine ourselves and the "unwanted" aspects will leave with practice.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Yes, alienation / rent cloud.

This is why we are here on this strange meeting place. Looking for a place where we are not strangers. It may be the closest thing to home yet...

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 6 2004, 09:19 PM)

The questions now are the following:

Does he accept the ideal and simply acknowledge his failure at achieving it? Would this require him to abandon his students?
Does he reject the ideal and claim to have found a new one, retaining his spiritual leadership role?
Does he accept the ideal, but simply reinterpret it to allow room for his failures, also reinterpreted as adjustments?

Other alternatives?

I can think of one other alternative:

4. Does he reject the ideal and claim to have found a new one, renouncing his spiritual leadership role?

We do not know the man's mind. I could just as readily envision him approaching some siksa-guru as a student, free of disciples, as I could envision him "doing his own thing" and hoping enough loyal disciples would fund him in some new (even perhaps non-ISKCON) endeavor.

Most of us have the luxury of working through our issues and making our choices in relative privacy. Satsvarupa dasa Goswami doesn't have that luxury, and I hope that whatever decision he makes is one that benefits both the guru and his current disciples.

Hi all,

I read today the official statement about Satsvarupa Maharaja by his PR team, and after a short search on the internet found an open and decent discussion about it here on this forum.

I don't know SDG personally, but being an ex-disciple of Harikesha, my heart goes out to his disciples. Even if the events described in the anonymous letter are "distorted" and "out of context" according to his PR team (however they do not provide much context themselves), and even if we do not concern ourselves with the exact nature of his relationship with the female counselor, I find his situation very strange. Living in extreme isolation, being very sick for as long as I can remember, drawing embarrassing paintings and even making them public, being sheltered and babied by disciples.... If somebody needs to live this kind of unnatural life to be able to maintain a certain position -- it seems to me that he has long ago left his real self behind, as someone here put it so succinctly.

A couple of years ago, I passed through Abentheuer, Germany, and saw again the huge balcony which was built onto Harikesha's room, so that he can have his daily walk there alone and undisturbed. My goodness, how could we justify such a
misanthropy and even think it was spiritual?

I am afraid that if there will be more news about SDG, it won't be good news. It is obvious that he needs a profound change in his life, and however you may call it, it is an embarrassment and defeat to end up like this after four decades of spiritual quest. If it has come to an improper relationship with a female therapist, he has come to the point of no return. Can we even begin to imagine what it means emotionally for a man who has lived in celibacy for the past 30 + years to have ANY kind of close relationship with a woman, what to speak of an improper one?

(And this childish story last year about mundane jazz being spiritual and inspiring. Why not simply say, I like jazz and when I listen to it I feel good. Who needs this show of Krishna-izing mundane music? I personally love the Doors and will never stop listening to them. Their music is nava-nava rasa for me. But I am not going to say that they are spiritually inspiring, come on! When you listen to them, after two songs you feel like jumping from the nearest roof. Yet I also like Prabhupada's bhajans very much and can listen to them the whole day. And I see no more contradiction in my music preferences.)

And I don't believe that gurus and other high-profile ISKCON people are entitled exclusive privacy in times of personal crisis. These are people who have concerned themselves with hundreds of disciples' personal affairs and controlled their intimate lives by demanding initiation vows and giving damaging instructions. It is only fair that their personal lives are subjected to open scrutiny. Anything less would come across as a cover-up and further misleading of the rank and file.

And I do believe that disciples have the full right to complain or criticize as much as they deem it is necessary for them to be able to come to terms with what is happening to their guru. Those who have not lost a guru can't understand.

With respect,
Blue Sapphire

QUOTE(Indranila @ May 10 2004, 07:36 PM)

. Even if the events described in the anonymous letter are "distorted" and "out of context" according to his PR team (however they do not provide much context themselves),

I am not sure if by anonymous letter you mean the letter of Hari das that they refer to in the PR. If you haven't read that one, you can find it on www.istagosthi.com on the fourms under a thread called Satsvarupa Maharaj.

The PR makes more sense when you see what this disciple had written.

QUOTE

I am not sure if by anonymous letter you mean the letter of Hari das that they refer to in the PR. If you haven't read that one, you can find it on www.istagosthi.com on the fourms under a thread called Satsvarupa Maharaj.

I read the letter by Hari before I wrote my previous post. While I take it with a grain of salt, especially the accuracy of the events which he claims took place when SDG was alone with his servant or his counselor (how could Hari be so sure if there were no other witnesses), I won't be surprised if in the end most of it turns out to be true.

Blue Sapphire

There's now an official statement from the GBC at dipika.org.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 6 2004, 09:19 PM)

1. Does he accept the ideal and simply acknowledge his failure at achieving it? Would this require him to abandon his students?

Apparently, this is the answer.

Statement of GBC Executive Committee

QUOTE(vamsidas @ May 11 2004, 10:42 AM)

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 6 2004, 09:19 PM)

1. Does he accept the ideal and simply acknowledge his failure at achieving it? Would this require him to abandon his students?

Apparently, this is the answer.

Statement of GBC Executive Committee

QUOTE

I am profoundly sorry that I slipped and fell on the road this way, a 64-year-old sannyasi who had no other brush with a woman. I thought for sure I'd get through to the end with a perfect record. Krsna must have seen I was proud. I pray He allows me to remain in ISKCON and follow the rules and regulations to my dying day. I heard that Sridhara Swami told a Godbrother just before he passed away, "Be who you are and make a contribution." I think I have written this same sentence in my books. I fall at the feet of all devotees and ask their forgiveness.

http://www.dipika.org/2004/05/20/11_concer...raja/index.html

Could someone please translate this ...who had no other brush with a woman...?
Thanks!

Good advice: "Be who you are and make a contribution." I like that.

QUOTE(jatayu @ May 11 2004, 06:59 AM)

Could someone please translate this ...who had no other brush with a woman...?

I guess it is a funny expression. It means that as a sannyasi he had no other (improper) contact with a woman.

QUOTE(vamsidas @ May 11 2004, 10:42 AM)

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 6 2004, 09:19 PM)

1. Does he accept the ideal and simply acknowledge his failure at achieving it? Would this require him to abandon his students?

Apparently, this is the answer.

Statement of GBC Executive Committee

It doesn't look to me like the GBC expects him to give up disciples. They explicitly say:

QUOTE

His present disciples are encouraged to go on steadily in their devotional service to ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada, and he will continue to offer guidance and care as they so desire.

So it looks like it is the disciples discretion.

Does anyone know who is the Sannyas minister that is mentioned?

QUOTE

Does anyone know who is the Sannyas minister that is mentioned?

Prahladananda Swami? He has been the sannyasi minister since I think this position exists.

Poor SDG. I guess he has no other choice but to try to keep the status quo until the bitter end and hope that he can make it until he dies gloriously in ISKCON like Shridhar Maharaja. After all he is 64. Harikesha was luckier not only because he was 15 years younger when he left his sannyas and guruship but also because he got together a nice, intelligent and mature woman who was single at the time and deeply and exclusively attached to him.

Blue Sapphire

QUOTE(Indranila @ May 12 2004, 06:45 AM)

Prahladananda Swami? He has been the sannyasi minister since I think this position exists.

Thanks for the info.

I think it is too bad that SDG refers to having thought he would make it through with a perfect record. I thought our goal in practicing was not to die with a perfect record but to develop Krishna prema. I know that Iskcon tends to stress vaidhi as the highest platform. Their idea of who can be a guru involves something like " able to chant 16 rounds and attend mangal aratik for the past 10 years, able to get all the answers right on the bhakti sastri exam, more powerful than a locomotive and able to leap over tall piles of halava in a single bound.

There is obviously no qualification to take on disciples just becasue you've chanted a lot of rounds our memorized your slokas with correct answers if there is no realization behind it. And being able to stop a train on the tracks or leaping over halava is just more yogi tricks that any common Indian yogi can do anyway. No bhakti in that either.

It would make a lot more sense to me if they would promote all this vaidhi as necessary qualification for the devotee to maintain good standing as a reliable parrot of the philosophy and not make it seem like the person has definitely got realization. In tibetan buddhism, the guru is qualified to give refuge to the seeker if his or her intellectual grasp is considered complete and whether or not they are enlightened is another story. The guru can still transmit the teachings and it is still within the grasp of the disciple to develop realization through their own meditation.

This is similar to how Sridhar Maharaj comments about the nityananda parivar when he comments that there are so many gurus in the line but what is their realization? Some are small gurus, not the mahabhagavat but they can still pass the seed. I think they recognize this in Iskcon too when they say you can get intiated with one guru but may find siksha from another Iskcon guru that you are fond of and even may feel his is your sat guru. At least that is what they told me years ago. But they still as I remember tend to tell you that you should take intiation from the one you are sure is taking you back to Godhead. I think they should just accept the idea as the diksha being a good starting point and just let the disciple go freely to whomever they feel the best about and still honor their diksha formally.

Maybe they do that, i haven't been there in a while.

I am touched by the sincerity and simplicity of the words by Satasvarupa das, the straight-forwardness of his letter. Within the framework of his belief-system and organisational obligation he appears quite convincing. To ascertain the complex nature of his health problem I'd wish him contact with a truly holistically capable MD, preferably one who is familiar with the concepts of internist medicine but does not advocate allopathic pharmaceutical therapy except in extreme emergencies. Special attention should be given to the patient's dental situation, whether any metal is present in his mouth. Heavy-metal toxicity is the major cause of complex disease patterns in people that are incurable as long as the toxicity remains in the body. After dental removal the toxicity stored on tissue or even cellular levels can be removed relatively easily following the advice of an expert in the field. Later specific diseases can be addressed with natural means alone. (A pregnant mother with heavy-metal dental fillings passes the toxicity on to the child on a cellular level.)

QUOTE

His present disciples are encouraged to go on steadily in their devotional service to ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada, and he will continue to offer guidance and care as they so desire.

What does the "as they so desire" mean here? I find it a bit ambiguous. Is it "because they so desire" or "if they so desire"?

QUOTE(kalki @ May 12 2004, 07:20 AM)

I think it is too bad that SDG refers to having thought he would make it through with a perfect record. I thought our goal in practicing was not to die with a perfect record but to develop Krishna prema.

Why is it too bad that he recognizes having thought like that, given that he agrees that there is little merit to the idea? It is only too good that he acknowledges that.

QUOTE

Harikesha was luckier not only because he was 15 years younger when he left his sannyas and guruship but also because he got together a nice, intelligent and mature woman who was single at the time and deeply and exclusively attached to him.

He was lucky you say. I wonder how lucky SHE feels...

QUOTE

What does the "as they so desire" mean here? I find it a bit ambiguous. Is it "because they so desire" or "if they so desire"?

It probably means that if anybody other than Satsvarupa desires for him to continue giving guidance, he will. In which case there will be good chances the headaches will continue.

like in the army: "Beatings will continue until morale improves."

QUOTE(Madhava @ May 12 2004, 12:39 PM)

Why is it too bad that he recognizes having thought like that, given that he agrees that there is little merit to the idea? It is only too good that he acknowledges that.

He doesn't acknowledge that there is little merit to the idea. He says:

QUOTE

I thought for sure I'd get through to the end with a perfect record.

He doesn't say " and now I know its not about perfect records." He still thinks like the rest of the GBC that perfect record equals highest platform of realization. Or rather I don't know his mind so I should say he talks like that.

I just wish the language to describe the raganuga path would be a bit more sophisticated in Iskcon so it does seem so mathematical to reach the goal.

QUOTE

He was lucky you say. I wonder how lucky SHE feels...

I don't know how familiar you are with the story (not that it matters so much, but for the sake of your objection here). Initially Harikesha fell in love with and wanted to marry his Osho healer, a New Age lady with three children from three different men. Most likely this marriage wouldn't have ended well.

After the healer rejected his proposal and even his gift of a 1.5 million dollar villa in the South of France, he got together with a female disciple who was a much better option because, as I wrote, she is a reasonable and mature person and had been in love with him for a long time. She is something like 9 years younger than him, which is also quite OK. I wrote that he was lucky because he married a woman who knows him well and loves him. She has a strong personality and knows what she wants. And since she was the one who initiated their relationhip, I think she must consider herself lucky too. It was a dream come true for her.

So ultimately things turned out well for him, especially in comparison with other gurus like e.g. Jagadish who left ISKCON to marry a girl half of his age and not surprisingly a couple of years later she left him.

Blue Sapphire

Blue Saphire,

Thanks for all the information. It is all so personal stuff. Personally I know exactly what I would do with 1.5 million green, american dollars.

As an ex- SDG disciple,

a few thoughts

Why did Srila Prabhupada give sanyasa to SDG when he knew that SDG was not up to the standard?

Isn't liberation the minimum standard for sanyasa?

Why so much show (for preaching ?) and no substance(spiritual realisation)?

QUOTE

Initially Harikesha fell in love with and wanted to marry his Osho healer, a New Age lady with three children from three different men. Most likely this marriage wouldn't have ended well.

It could very well have ended up better than the present one. However, good, better, best, whatever the kind, marriage is not really the end of anybody's problems. Least of all a middle aged sannyasa.

I think this congratulatory mood towards (an increasing number of Iskcon) sannyasa gurus coming out of the celibacy closet is inconsiderate of the disciples left behind. It is one person's experience against the equally relevant experience of hundreds who have not been given an address of apology.

Disicples are not important (unless she happens to be the one turned wife), Srila Prabhupada's sense of responsibility is questioned, but the sannyasa gurus will receive a pretty ribbon.

QUOTE

I think this congratulatory mood towards (an increasing number of Iskcon) sannyasa gurus coming out of the celibacy closet is inconsiderate of the disciples left behind.

Why the disciples have to left behind at all? Why a Guru cannot be married? In the Vedic days a Guru was usually married.

QUOTE

In the Vedic days a Guru was usually married.

Thew vedic days are over.

But yes, you have touched the issue. Desiring to be married is not these gurus sin, it is the fact that they lied about it and continue to lie.

QUOTE

Thew vedic days are over.

Agreed, but ACBS' idea was to revive those days.

It was a good idea that obviously flopped because of some flaky swamis/householders (whatever it is that they can't keep up with).

QUOTE

I think this congratulatory mood towards (an increasing number of Iskcon) sannyasa gurus coming out of the celibacy closet is inconsiderate of the disciples left behind. It is one person's experience against the equally relevant experience of hundreds who have not been given an address of apology.

I agree, definitely! I was a good disciple and took my vows very seroiusly and just as seriously the promises of my guru. I am far from perfect but can honestly say that I did my part of the deal. I am still waiting for an apology, but I don't count on it. It took Bhagavan 13 years to apologize.

My point is that my guru was not only a perpetrator (no need to get into this now; I have moved on) but a victim as well. And I am glad that he has a decent life now. I don't need him to suffer a heartbreak or end up in jail so that I can feel some relief because he abandoned me together with 3000 other Godbrothers and sisters. He will get what he deserves. I am confident that Krishna will teach him a really good lesson when the time comes.

QUOTE

Disicples are not important (unless she happens to be the one turned wife), Srila Prabhupada's sense of responsibility is questioned, but the sannyasa gurus will receive a pretty ribbon.

I do question Prabhupada's sense of responsibility and with good reason. He is the founder of the movement and his policies have created gurus like Harikesha. What were Prabhupada's priorities? To do what is best for the devotees' spiritual lives or to strive for results?

Blue Sapphire

Srila Prabhupada's striving for results was his way of taking care of his dependents' spiritual lives. There is no conflict between the two ideas. There were and are misundertandings about his intentions, and misinterpretation of his words. It can be tangibly seen all over (printed) dialogues he had with senior, leading disciples, that they applied meanings other than the original to the words said, and that from this, Srila Prabhupada is being made into someone that he never was. Today he is either Jesus, the Saviour, or Jesus, the crucible.

Harikesa was not an innocent victim of Prabhupada's dubious priorities. I simply do not agree with such. Hearikesh took an opportunity to promote himself in some way but failed. The responsibility is mostly his. Others such as Kirtanananda, and many padas and nandas out there continue such farse. These are grown man, who had more access to the personality of the guru than any of those they took as disciples. I have seen that many disciples have figured out things on their own, with much less resources at hand, and have moved on in a more mature way than these gurus have, but even now, as they are being celebrated as matured and centered, these gurus still are missing the point or being dishonest. They advertise themselves still as leaders of some sort, or request privacy so to continue allegiance to something they don't believe in or that has ruined their lives, in the first place.

Being older and coming out of the closet hasn't made these gurus less prone to making mistakes. Old wine in fresh bottles. Who feels like celebrating?

But of course we wish them well. All the best.

QUOTE

Why the disciples have to left behind at all? Why a Guru cannot be married? In the Vedic days a Guru was usually married.

Nothing wrong with a married guru.
But a guru who you take as a sannyasi or vairagi (babaji or whatever), and then later he leaves that station and takes to marriage, well, there are consequences for that.
Therefore these vows of renunciation are better left to old age.

QUOTE(Indranila @ May 14 2004, 09:26 AM)

QUOTE

I think this congratulatory mood towards (an increasing number of Iskcon) sannyasa gurus coming out of the celibacy closet is inconsiderate of the disciples left behind. It is one person's experience against the equally relevant experience of hundreds who have not been given an address of apology.

I agree, definitely! I was a good disciple and took my vows very seroiusly and just as seriously the promises of my guru. I am far from perfect but can honestly say that I did my part of the deal.

These are nice points...but hopefully our years of subservience taught us that the traffic is one way, that the guru's needs, whims and feelings are primary.

Hmm. That was meant to be a little funny, despite the obvious cynicism, but perhaps it isn't.

By now we have all seen plenty of anger, shock and confusion when the ISKCON gurus depart or realign themselves. I joined in the midst of Bhavananda's departure as the local zonal acarya and saw, but could not understand, the multi-faceted responses from his disciples--some wanted to keep worshipping him, some wanted their lives back, some wanted their money back, and some just didn't know what to think. The net effect was that the temple became emptier and while some rebounded into relationships with new gurus or different missions, most were more reluctant to put themselves into the vulnerable position of discipleship again.

Indranila is right in stating that Krsna will work things out with the departed gurus--the responsibility is clear: guru na sa syat--but that at the same time they are also victims in some ways too. The 1st Canto has the amazing scene where Pariksit and Dharma discuss responsibility for suffering: where does the cause lie? In Dharma's case, he has been beaten by the sudra but he does not lay blame on the sudra, knowing the complexity of causes.

I take from this that no matter our personal hurt--and there is certainly no point in denying or hiding the natural feelings that arise--we have to see ourselves as participants* in whatever has happened and, more importantly, still feel that we are under the protection of Krsna. And if we can be introspective we might discover the tendencies within ourselves that played into those relationships, e.g. I wonder whether many of us have escapist or self-loathing tendencies whereby we too easily adopt a concept of spirituality based on the negation of our selves and the placing of faith in the spirituality of another. If so, the challenge is to realize that and still nagivate our way to the feet of Mahaprabhu, not becoming caught in an antithetical stance of cynicism or rugged individualism.

I recall a nice statement that Satsvarupa Maharaja once made to me, stating that he and other senior devotees should not demand faith, given all that I had seen.

Faith is our life blood and if faith is not being nourished on one front, we should turn to another, having first examined our own motives and taken shelter of sadhus to verify its authenticity as far as possible. Srila Prabhupada made a statement in CC along the lines of, "If one thinks there are many psuedo devotees in the Krsna conscoiusness movement, one can take direct shelter of the spiritual master"--and this is obviously something that many adherents of ritvik-vad take to heart. And there are also other avenues, such as sadhu and sastra, the two elements that are often neglected in the guru-centric presentation of ISKCON. Of course, sastra might be the best temporary revenge--one way traffic in the other direction, with the reader selecting where to delve and what to ignore.

*At the very least, we were in the same geographical area and shared some commonality with the guru in terms of birth and samskaras

From what I have seen and from what my Iskcon friends have told me, the guru in Iskcon functions more or less like a "counselor" to his disiciples. So it makes sense to me that Iskcon devottees should enter into a relationship with their guru from the beginning in the same manner they would enter into with a counselor/therapist. When one goes to a counselor/therapist they do not put all their undying faith in them but are going there basically to air out their "issues". The counselor/therapist is seen as an ordinary human being, not too much different from oneself. yet someone who has a degree in this particular field of human psychology or whatever. So, I feel Iskcon devottees should approach a guru beforehand ---- "I like you, I like your mood and presentation of 'KC'. You seem like someone I can relate to. Therefore I'd like to enter into a relationship with you based on equality and friendship and sharing of Krishna katha and experiences. I will not seen you as neccessarily my "superior" nor should you see me as neccessarily your "inferior", rather we will embark upon a personal journey together in which each of us will be the helper of the other."

This seems to be the only realistic way to approach a guru in Iskcon.

QUOTE

So it makes sense to me that Iskcon devottees should enter into a relationship with their guru from the beginning in the same manner they would enter into with a counselor/therapist.

Well Betal nut, it seems it is either too late or too soon for that one. Iskcon gurus are working on other solutions. Who needs a counselor when you can have a wife instead?

But don't be discouraged by my lack of faith. Why don't you go ahead and give it a nice try yourself? Iskcon could use a good example of healthy, wholesome guru-disciple relationship setting the standard.

QUOTE(Advaitadas @ May 14 2004, 06:34 AM)

Why the disciples have to left behind at all? Why a Guru cannot be married? In the Vedic days a Guru was usually married.

What type of guru, though? A spiritual master or just a classroom teacher? In the Vedic days 'guru' could mean anything, even now.

QUOTE(betal_nut @ May 14 2004, 02:55 PM)

You seem like someone I can relate to. Therefore I'd like to enter into a relationship with you based on equality and friendship and sharing of Krishna katha and experiences. I will not seen you as neccessarily my "superior" nor should you see me as neccessarily your "inferior", rather we will embark upon a personal journey together in which each of us will be the helper of the other."

This seems to be the only realistic way to approach a guru in Iskcon.

Away with ISKCON, there is a major problem with this concept of "equality."

See Bhagavad-gita 4.34 for details.

QUOTE

Away with ISKCON, there is a major problem with this concept of "equality."

This is well pointed out. "Equality" between guru and disciple seems to be a concept yet under construction even in ortodhox circles, what to speak of in West-marketed, two dimentional Iskcon.

I think Iskcon needs first grow up then maybe look into understanding equality. Whatever that means.

Several years ago I visited the Kripalu Center not far from where I live. It is an incredible facility, a former Jesuit monastery overlooking Tanglewood, the summer home of the Boston Symphony Orchestra. It was a dreary and wet midweek day and yet there were some 200-300 cars in the carpark. Inside the place was buzzing with staff, students, visitors, the store and vegetarian restaurant. The walls had large photo displays with captions and one in particular caught my attention. It explained how the group had been formed by Yogi Desai along traditonal guru-sisya lines but they had since modified this. (I think Yogi Desai had an illicit relation with his secretary). Here is how they word it on their site:

QUOTE

In 1994 Yogi Desai resigned as spiritual director of Kripalu. Kripalu is the first traditional yoga ashram founded on the guru-disciple model to transition to a new paradigm of spiritual education. This paradigm is designed to provide tools that help individuals access their inner wisdom and find support for their ongoing process of growth and spiritual development. Kripalu honors all traditional and contemporary spiritual teachings that support the individual's direct experience of Spirit.

Kripalu has restructured its organization and is now headed by a professional management team, several of whom are former ashram residents.

A similar transition can be seen in some of the Buddhist organizations, most notably the Suzuki Zen group, the first Zen organization in the US. In one sense, the GBC was probably meant to function as a "peer review" system and is therefore a new paradigm in some ways. However it seems that the tendency now is that most ISKCON elders choose to back away into their zones of influence, college or private projects, unable to remain open to the, er, peer review process of their god-brothers (and -sister) and the internet soothsayers and doomsdayers, such as myself.

QUOTE

There were and are misundertandings about his intentions, and misinterpretation of his words. It can be tangibly seen all over (printed) dialogues he had with senior, leading disciples, that they applied meanings other than the original to the words said, and that from this, Srila Prabhupada is being made into someone that he never was.

Anand, what are you saying, that ACBVS did not know how to express himself?

If somebody was to tell you that you have half a brain and are stupid, you would most probably think this person is very discourteous. However, if ACBVS said the same thing you say that is not what he meant. If George Wallace said that Black Americans should not have equal rights you would think he is racist, but if ACBVS said the same thing, then you would say "You don't understand his intentions."

Many people who have joined ISKCON post ACBVS departure from the world seem to think that there was a golden age during the 1970's when ACBVS was present. I joined when he was present in 1977. It was more achievement-oriented back then than it is today, I would say.

QUOTE

Harikesa was not an innocent victim of Prabhupada's dubious priorities. I simply do not agree with such. Hearikesh took an opportunity to promote himself in some way but failed.

I lived in India for about three years. I would encounter business men who would say, "That man there, he is a cheating man. He has a sweet tongue but he will rip out your pockets." What I learned fast was that when someone told me that then that was a flag that he is out to cheat you, not the one he is referring to. ACBVS promoted himself by saying how bad everyone was: his Godbrothers, the babajis, the caste Goswamis, the yogis, the scientist, the government leaders, everyone was bad, except him. Remember, ACBVS was a business man for a major portion of life and he used his skills and knowledge to promote himself and his institution.

QUOTE

Anand, what are you saying, that ACBVS did not know how to express himself?

Yes, by some standards, in some instances, he did not express himself clearly when using English.

QUOTE

Remember, ACBVS was a business man for a major portion of life and he used his skills and knowledge to promote himself and his institution.

Everyone is a business man or business woman. Why condemn him alone on this premise?

I rather not discuss this calling someone "stupid".

QUOTE(Radhapada @ May 14 2004, 12:48 PM)

I lived in India for about three years. I would encounter business men who would say, "That man there, he is a cheating man. He has a sweet tongue but he will rip out your pockets." What I learned fast was that when someone told me that then that was a flag that he is out to cheat you, not the one he is referring to. ACBVS promoted himself by saying how bad everyone was: his Godbrothers, the babajis, the caste Goswamis, the yogis, the scientist, the government leaders, everyone was bad, except him.

If we are to take this logic a step further then we'd have to also question your motives in pointing out apparent faults in ACBSP, no?

Personally, I believe that neither he nor you are "promoting" yourselves; you are merely expressing strongly held beliefs.

Just a very quick note to state the obvious. Communication is very complex and even when someone feels they have been very explicit in stating something it can easily be misunderstood or misinterpreted. I have noted myself over the past several years of posting on internet forums that what I have said and intended by what I said have often been interpreted quite differently from my intent. This is not due to my lack of skill in communication. I manage a group of seventeen scientists and a large part of what I do is based on clear and concise communication. The fact that someone is misunderstood, or what they say is misinterpreted, cannot be reduced to a simple equation of 'he is not educated enough to know how to express his thoughts meaningfully'. The fact of the matter is that each of us has our own peculiar conditioning based on our experiences and we receive information and process it differently due to our individuality.

It should be obvious to even the most casual observer that there are intelligent individuals who see the same words quite differently and each of those intelligent individuals has their own 'good reasoning' by which they have ascertained the meaning which they have drawn out of those words. I think Braja pointed out the obvious that we need good company, the company of sadhus, to make sense out of things and to resolve apparent contradictions or controversies. It is not a simple matter of intelligence. It is really a matter of genuine spiritual experience and being able to share that with others through the medium of written or spoken words. I think most of the forum participants will agree that there is much more to communication than the verbal component. Getting help from sadhus softens the heart and allows a person to properly adjust and orient themselves toward reaching their goals.

anyway - got to go for now.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

Yes. And I think what makes a discussion forum like this interesting is that we have been conditioned through our lives in Iskcon and afterward to certain ways of perceiving things--a religious language that we share. Clearly this is not the end of communication difficulties, but nevertheless, it is interesting to us because it seems that communicating certainly deeply-held beliefs and ways of seeing the world are possible for us.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 14 2004, 08:43 PM)

Yes. And I think what makes a discussion forum like this interesting is that we have been conditioned through our lives in Iskcon and afterward to certain ways of perceiving things--a religious language that we share. Clearly this is not the end of communication difficulties, but nevertheless, it is interesting to us because it seems that communicating certainly deeply-held beliefs and ways of seeing the world are possible for us.

'

' conditioned through our lives in Iskcon '

Yes,after reading your posts i really feel that I've been brainwashed in a pejorative sense.

My capacity for a genuine spiritual experience stiffled by the dictates of the institution.

Therefore I now place myself again as a very humble student who knows nothing and has a lot of unlearning to do.

All that scamming,cheating and lying in the ISKCON institution has made me a very confused soul.

Unfortunately negative things may be part of that experience. But there must be something that you are wanting to salvage, or you wouldn't be here at all, but on some other forum, like that Bombay Gay Country and Western In-Line Dancing Forum.

Betal Nut wrote:

QUOTE

So, I feel Iskcon devottees should approach a guru beforehand ---- "I like you, I like your mood and presentation of 'KC'. You seem like someone I can relate to. Therefore I'd like to enter into a relationship with you based on equality and friendship and sharing of Krishna katha and experiences. I will not seen you as neccessarily my "superior" nor should you see me as neccessarily your "inferior", rather we will embark upon a personal journey together in which each of us will be the helper of the other."

This seems to be the only realistic way to approach a guru in Iskcon.

This is a very good observation, and indeed things are moving in this direction, as far I can see with my limited contact with ISKCON nowadays. The gurus tend to become like priests -- folks not so much different than the rest of us -- and only Prabhupada remains the absolute, all-pure, superhuman figure, the Jesus of ISKCON. It is clearly a Westernization and perhaps you are right to say that it is the only realistic and viable way for ISKCON to go on, just like the Zen-buddhists and the Kripalu organization others mentioned here.

Blue Sapphire

QUOTE

Srila Prabhupada's striving for results was his way of taking care of his dependents' spiritual lives. There is no conflict between the two ideas. There were and are misundertandings about his intentions, and misinterpretation of his words. It can be tangibly seen all over (printed) dialogues he had with senior, leading disciples, that they applied meanings other than the original to the words said, and that from this, Srila Prabhupada is being made into someone that he never was.

I don't agree that Prabhupada's intentions have been misunderstood and misinterpreted by ambitious disciples who spoiled his otherwise noble plans. There may have been some misunderstandings here and there, but Prabhupada's priorities have been pretty clear and remained unchanged until the very end. His main epmhasis was on selling his books in large quantities and opening new temples at all costs. His leading men got this quite correctly and have continued to implement it very faithfully.

He didn't say that his dependents should not be cared for, but what did he do to make sure it happened? I don't agree that engaging his disciples in obtaining spectacular material results was the proper way of taking care of their spiritual and material lives. E.g., you must be familiar with the story of the Bombay temple. Do you think that there was anything spiritual in all the hardships (extreme poverty, rats, diseases, violence) that the disciples had to undergo to acquire this land and build the temple? I think it was sheer exploitation.

Prabhupada was an old man and he knew that he would not live long. Did he introduce policies for the welfare of the devotees, to make sure that they can live a decent life in ISKCON, educate their children and retire peacefully? No. All the money from the book sales should go for temple construction, while gurukula is to be paid by the grihasthas, after they have given 50 percent from their earnings to the temple. And Prabhupada kept starting new temple projects until the very end, I think the last one was the Bhubaneshwar temple in 1977 which was finally opened in the 90-ies with a lot of fanfare.

Re: Harikesha, he made many mistakes and ruined many people's lives and I do hold him responsible for his actions. I purposefully keep distance from him now because I believe in things like ethics and integrity and he didn't show much character when he left ISKCON. I won't go into that because you don't seem to know him well.

But I can understand that he has a grudge against Prabhupada and can't blame him for that. I wouldn't want to have been in his place. He went through the hell that was Bombay, got very sick at one point with malaria and was abandoned unconscious for 2 days in some tent. Later, in 1976 was sent by Prabhupada to preach in East Europe at great risk for his life. He also once asked Prabhupada to marry, but Prabhupada said no, this is not for you and gave him sannyas at 27. I heard from a Godbrother of Harikesha who was close to him in the early days that Harikesha could never fully accept that Prabhupada's instruction not to marry was right and his resentment against Prabhupada started already back then, although he tried to push it down and blamed himself for being a failure as a disciple.

So in Harikesha's case, can one say that Prabhupada's striving for expansion and external results was in the best interest of Harikesha's spiritual, mental and physical well-being (I believe that those three are interconnected)? Or did Prabhupada use him and many others to achieve the results he wanted without considering their long-term spiritual, mental and physical well-being?

If you apply your critical thinking to Prabhupada with the same openness with which you judge his leading men, the answer will be quite straight-forward.

Blue Sapphire

Indranila
Thank you for your frank, straighfoward and honest observations and experiences. It is well appreciated.

QUOTE(Jagat @ May 15 2004, 10:37 AM)

Unfortunately negative things may be part of that experience. But there must be something that you are wanting to salvage, or you wouldn't be here at all, but on some other forum, like that Bombay Gay Country and Western In-Line Dancing Forum.

Yes I want to salvage my soul from the soulessness of the ISKCON institution.

Yes I am here because I can relate to what you are saying in regards to spiritual life after the demise of ecclisiastical hegemony.

Krishna,Harinama and the Bhagavat are stil alive in my life .

One of the great self-annihilating measures with Iskcon was the depreciation and destruction of family, first the family of origin of the newcomer, then the family he/she might have founded or did found in the following years. Promoting complete renunciation as the ideal to be accepted by most everyone is a blow in the face of the flow of life which flows in the channels of the clan from grand-parents-to-parents-to-children to their own later children. Some of the Hippies may have been fatherless psychologically, but in the course of their lives they would have regained their appreciation for their real personal fathers and mothers. Instead this Indian Swami took over that role and alienated the kids from their parents, to the degree that some were probably disinherited. This scenario is unthinkable catastrophe in Indian terms. The parents are worshipped as holy ones. And that is right so to some extent, because that gives strength to the sons and daugthers. The Iskconites however got weakened, even castrated through that policy.

When you want to regain orientation and the force of life, those of you who subjected yourself to this regime of this life-threatening org, retreat to your hearts for some moments and bow to your parents the way you have done it to your gurus. Open yourself for the blessings of your own clan, of your ancestors standing behind you, whose blood is pulsing in your arteries. They gave you your life and made it possible for you to receive the gift of Bhakti from Sri Nitai-Gaur.

QUOTE

But I can understand that he has a grudge against Prabhupada and can't blame him for that.

I can understand that too. But to Harikesha's disciples he was their "Prabhupada", and to this fact, Harikesha, in his turn, did not pay attention or did but neglected his call to be there for his disciples. This much he should have been conscious of, that if he felt his guru was not being perfectly supportive of him, then he should have not carried the disease onto his dependants.
Each individual makes his own decisions. It might be agony to live without blaming others and circumstances for some of our misfortunes, but attempting to relieve such traumas by resorting to sentimentalism is just as perpetrating as sticking our heads in the sand.

This argument that ACBS was a mere businessman with possibly good intentions that nevertheless caved in; this argument does not fly as long as those arguing the case are people who took part in the events cited in favor of the argument. Even if slightly. Everyone involved with Iskcon is responsible for the failure of Iskcon. And if each individual takes his part in the blame I'll bet ACBS will be the one coming out the cleanest.

If you are going to argue for compassion towards the guru, why stop at Harikesh?

QUOTE

One of the great self-annihilating measures with Iskcon was the depreciation and destruction of family, first the family of origin of the newcomer, then the family he/she might have founded or did found in the following years. Promoting complete renunciation as the ideal to be accepted by most everyone is a blow in the face of the flow of life which flows in the channels of the clan from grand-parents-to-parents-to-children to their own later children. Some of the Hippies may have been fatherless psychologically, but in the course of their lives they would have regained their appreciation for their real personal fathers and mothers. Instead this Indian Swami took over that role and alienated the kids from their parents, to the degree that some were probably disinherited. This scenario is unthinkable catastrophe in Indian terms. The parents are worshipped as holy ones. And that is right so to some extent, because that gives strength to the sons and daugthers. The Iskconites however got weakened, even castrated through that policy.

When you want to regain orientation and the force of life, those of you who subjected yourself to this regime of this life-threatening org, retreat to your hearts for some moments and bow to your parents the way you have done it to your gurus. Open yourself for the blessings of your own clan, of your ancestors standing behind you, whose blood is pulsing in your arteries. They gave you your life and made it possible for you to receive the gift of Bhakti from Sri Nitai-Gaur.

What is this big deal about being desinherited? A father who desinherit his child because of the child seeking God does not deserve that child near him in the first place!

I am sorry nabadip but I find this post loaded with cheap sentimentalism. Have you not noticed how family relations out there, among people who have never even heard of Hare Krsnas, are so deeply stiffled with misery for lack of meaning? Must you speak like a deprogramer?

These last couple of posts seem to lack balance. In my 35 years of endeavor for Krishna consciousness, I find myself seeking a healthy balance between attitudes such as we see here, and sometimes a way to integrate my everyday, "real" life with the ideal for which I aspire. It's hard.

I agree with a lot of what Nabadip writes here. After a couple of years, I realized that many of my family members cared about me to some degree, regardless of my commitment to Krishna consciousness. Especially after I had my own children, I saw the value in family life centered on Krishna consciousness. As I opened myself back up to my family, I saw in them a gradually progressive appreciation for my ideals. My brother and sister have both spent time chanting Hare Krishna and have read some books about Krishna consciousness. My mother, who was an artist, tried a couple of portraits of Srila Prabhupada, one of which was offered to him as a gift. He expressed his appreciation for it, and a couple of years later it found its way back to me. Even my father, who is somewhere to the right of Rush Limbaugh and who long disparaged my involvement in spiritual life as a way to hurt him, has expressed his appreciation for prasadam we gave him and voluntarily offered small donations to temples where I served. Many of my cousins have asked my wife and me about our involvement in Krishna consciousness. Rather than preach to them about rejecting demoniac family members, we have told them openly about the things that have attracted us to spiritual life over three decades.

Several years ago, my older daughter, whose graduation from the University of Hawaii at Hilo we celebrated today, participated in a workshop at ISKCON Mayapur on community building. She told us that when the various breakout groups reported on their recommendations for building strong communities, every group's first priority was strong family life.

Srila Prabhupada presented a high ideal, and we responded to it as well as we could. The results have not always been salutory over a period of years, but I believe that in the long run the world will appreciate the benefits of his sacrifice. I don't claim to know much about what's up in ISKCON or any of the other "orgs" these days. I'm somewhat isolated from that sort of thing, although I do see a lot of influence of Narayan Maharaja's slice of the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti here on the Big Island. Some of that seems healthy to me Our community is strongly family centered), and some less healthy (usually proselytizing by visiting devotees when Maharaja comes here). However, I think that many of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami's disciples' understanding of how to practically apply what we have been given is maturing, and we are likely to see many of them more properly emulating his selfless attempt to share Krishna consciousness broadly.

At the same time, we should maintain and encourage deeper engagement in our own lives and of those around us, which will most likely naturally lead to a progressive sense of detachment from things not related to Krishna. (And our idea of what's not related to Krishna may shrink, making it clear to others that, as my guru-maharaja told me once, devotees and devotional service cannot be sterotyped.) I know that in my own poor life, even I feel more and more unhappy about the time and energy my work takes away from opportunities to try to present the teachings of Lord Chaitanya to others. As I said before, I have found balance--or integrity--a diffcult proposition at times. In the meantime, I strive to deepen my relationship with the holy names without worrying my wife and kids.

So I'm not sure it's fair to characterize Nabadip's remarks as cheap sentimentalism. He and I often don't agree on the value of the contributions of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and Bhaktivedanta Swami, but I think that many of us with considerable experience have to admit that our spiritual lives and the reputation of Mahaprabhu's movement are enhanced by respect for our families. Vairagya will arise naturally out of proper practice in good association. Forcing it does not help. I think it's well to remember that each of us has accepted the tenets and disciplines of bhakti yoga voluntarily.

Babhruji: I appreciate your remarks, and Anandji: I understand your criticism to some extent. The reproach of sentimentalism may be be the result of a misunderstanding which I did not prevent initially. When I say bow to your parents I do not say, go and huge them and love everything they say and do, I simply say bow to the parents as the givers of your life. That is not sentimental. That is real, that is much more real than what any Swami can do to you. I know I am provoking a confrontation with this statement; but this Swami-worship business: that is the sentimental affair. Without the love-making of your parents you would not even exist to meet some Swami in the first place. That is why to give honor to the parents has absolute priority. Does not matter who they are, or whether they are as "ideal" as Babhru's parents. Just honor your parents, you do not have to agree with them, but know that you are indebted to them in the first place, and only secondarily to some guru in your life.

If you do not do this, you will inevitably create havoc in your own life and the one of your children. "The sins of the parents are cast onto the children." If you take the role of being in charge to tell the parents what they should do and how wrong they are, you are not the receiving child, but the giving parent. You are reversing the role. You may know better alright, but you cannot impose that.

All of this is, generally, the natural course of events in traditional societies. When in India a person becomes a bhakta, he is not relinquishing his parents; there maybe disagreement who should be the guru etc, but the guru is distinguished from the parental father. When becoming a vairagi that may change also. But that basic giving of honor to the parents is important. See how parents are honored in the lives of the saints.

I personally have gone against my parents enough myself to know what it implies. A simple appreciation, an honoring of them as the givers of my life, reverses the unhappiness of the refusal to accept the blessing of life flowing through the whole of the family system. You do not have to do it, Anand. I am talking to those who gave their energy into a a life-absorbing system, and are now slowly waking up to their own needs, thinking of how to gain strength again. All of the bhakti-instructions are originally meant for Indian people, who are strongly nourished by their families. They are not the deserted, disrupted people we are.

The young disoriented people who joined this life-sucking org which promised to provide them with meaning and love and happiness for the rest of their lives, got into a system of co-dependency which is preventing rather than enabling. To step out of co-dependency requires a lot of strength. To honor one's own life properly by honoring those who gave it to us, is a strong beginning: you gain your proper position in the order of your family. You are the child of your parents as long as you live. You are the part and parcel of Krishna under all cicumstances, also when you honor your parents. You can only gain by seeing and honoring reality as it is. Sounds familiar? "As it is."

QUOTE

A simple appreciation, an honoring of them as the givers of my life, reverses the unhappiness of the refusal to accept the blessing of life flowing through the whole of the family system. You do not have to do it, Anand.

Why wouldn't I do it? It is in fact already done.

And why should we be so concerned about this Indian style of family cohesion?
I think Bhaktivedanta Swami's concern wasn't so much the "Indian" factor but the "bhakti" factor, which, contrary to your view, he saw as oriented to all humanity, not only to Indians.
The fact that we are here discussing bhakti, to me, is evidence that he was right and you might be mistaken.

He, for one thing, in his own example always honored his father, even though he was not a GM person and probably would have been unhappy with the orientation of his son.

My point is: what I am pointing to is common-sense in India. Indian bhaktas would be shocked to hear how parents are dishonored in the West.

In Swamiji's well-meant preaching attempts he created a lot of havoc, because of cultural assumptions and other reasons. I honor that he did what he did. What is is. There is nothing I can do about it as the recipient of it. But I am not his son, I do not have to love him unconditionally, nor do you. I am just sorry to hear how he destroyed the life of a Harikesh for instance. I did not know that about H's early wish to marry. I am fully on the side of what Radhapada said about the incongruities in ACBS's life, preaching water to others, but drinking wine himself.

QUOTE

Indian bhaktas would be shocked to hear how parents are dishonored in the West.

And then if they understood family relations in the West, they might not be so shocked after all. At least not on account of anyone's bhakti.

Cultural assumptions is what westerners are incuring in when making a parallel between good family relations in India and bhakti.

Bhaktivedanta Swami's father, we hear, was not an ordinary father.

There are many accounts in bhakti literatures of bhaktas who chose to pain their families so to go and persue love of God.

Dishonoring is what seems to be the question here. Who, by honestly trying to follow ones heart, has ever dishonored one's family?

QUOTE

This argument that ACBS was a mere businessman with possibly good intentions that nevertheless caved in; this argument does not fly as long as those arguing the case are people who took part in the events cited in favor of the argument. Even if slightly. Everyone involved with Iskcon is responsible for the failure of Iskcon. And if each individual takes his part in the blame I'll bet ACBS will be the one coming out the cleanest.

Spreading the teachings to chant Holy Name is always good, whether it is done purely or not. ACBVS was not the only western Guru who propaged chanting the holy names. Other yoga groups also chant maha mantra in the west. What was not good was the exploitation of human beings in the name of maintaining an institute for the purpose of propagating the chanting of the Holy Names. If individually I am sinner, but encourage people to take shelter of Krsna, what is the harm as in the case of Cintamani the prostitute. But, if I establish and run an organization wherein I am aware and encourage unethical behavior by my subordinates and this reflects on the public's view of the people who preach as brainwashed money-mongers then, my efforts to preach become counter-productive. People generally think that the Hare Krishna Movement is a brainwashing sect. Is that successful preaching, that people who represent Mahaprabhu are part of a mindless cult?

While we are in the topic of Satsvarupa: From what I knew, his parents disowned him since he decided join the Hare Krishnas. I was also a former disciple of Satsvarupa.

In regards to Navadwip's comments about the importance of family relations he is right on. Strong family sense of security nurishes children and that produces inteligent children, according to a recent scientific study done within the last couple of years. I was told when I was a 17 year bhakta in 1977 to run away from home and join the temple. I followed that advice from my bhakta leader. I had only 6 months till my high school graduation but I was not encouraged to finished. My mother almost committed suicide when I left. My parents were broken hearted, not that I became a devotee, but that I had left home and not finished high school. I joined because I enjoyed studying the scriptures and loved kirtan. The second day of my temple life I was shown the highest spiritual activity--sankirtan--or should I say--going around collecting money with a tiny American flag in freezing cold parking lots. A couple of weeks later I was given a Santa Claus suit, a white beard, boots and a paint can full of candy cane sweets to go out on Lexington Avenue in New York to collect money. SANKIRTAN YAJNA KI!

QUOTE

People generally think that the Hare Krishna Movement is a brainwashing sect. Is that successful preaching, that people who represent Mahaprabhu are part of a mindless cult?

This is a fact. And everyone involved in this movement, who even slightly contributed to that, should take resposibility. Even you did not question the Santa Claus suit and everything else. If your parents could not keep you home, whose fault is it?

Anand I do not think it is a question of blaming as much as it is just a question of taking an inventory, of looking at what is there and what is lacking. Whatever we do is also a lesson, sure, even where we failed or became guilty, but the fact of acknowledging that gives strength. Instead of gloryfying, sycophanting, and passing everyting as the wonderful lila of some divine person. Look at the facts, what is created, what leads to which result, gain insight into the mechanisms, accept responsibility of one's own part, and let it be. Anand, you tend to prefer the ever-justifying, glorifying mode. That has its merit too. Only: the inventory requires to be taken, and people are of different kinds, fortunately..

susan, I like your eloquent and thoughtful contribution. Radhapada, I admire the clarity of your vision to declare how it was for you, and your courage to take a clear stand in previous posts as well.

QUOTE

People generally think that the Hare Krishna Movement is a brainwashing sect.

Who would doubt it is just that? How to argue with someone who is brainwashed into believes? People who have thrown themselves daily for years at the feet of some plastic figure in the shape of the guru..., let alone if the person was present alive... someone called His Divine Grace by everyone...how to become human again after such intense ceremonial self-denial?

An inventory of observations helps.

QUOTE

how to become human again

If you are comfortable being human, that is your station.

I am a little suspicious of the idea of everything springing from such a condition.

QUOTE

susan, I like your eloquent and thoughtful contribution. Radhapada, I admire the clarity of your vision to declare how it was for you, and your courage to take a clear stand in previous posts as well.

Your prescription for me was very good too, doctor.

QUOTE

This is a fact. And everyone involved in this movement, who even slightly contributed to that, should take resposibility. Even you did not question the Santa Claus suit and everything else. If your parents could not keep you home, whose fault is it?

Indeed, everyday I do look back and think of some episode of my unconcious actions as a robot within ISKCON. I feel deep remorse and part of my rectification is in helping others see it as well, despite what other people may portray me as I do not care about being politicly accepted. I want the truth to be known for those who are genuinely honest and thoughtful.

Feeling remorse is conducive for receiving the Lord's mercy. If one does not feel remorse then the Lord's mercy does not descend.

QUOTE

I want the truth to be known for those who are genuinely honest and thoughtful.

The truth of your experience cannot be conceiled anymore than you wish it to. So there you have it: you have told your story and no one doubts that you have gone through it.

Whether those who come to know of your experience are honest and thoughtful is not for you to decide, I would guess.

Everyone has a story. Personally I think mine is more enganging than yours, but that is just my pespective.

After reading all of these posts I wonder what shape Bhakti would have taken in the west if ACBVS would have encouraged his disciples to stay with their families, stay in school and pursue higher education (college, etc), take on normal jobs/careers, raise their own families and do community service, while at the same time cultivating bhakti, or even as a means to spread bhakti. What reputation would Iskcon now have in the west as opposed to the one it actually has?

Also, I wonder what ACBVS would have done if any of his sons or daughters in the prime of their youths decided to leave him and his wife to join the commune/ashram of some Indian yogi-sadhu. How would he have reacted, as a traditional Indian father, to his 16 year old about to be married daughter, running off to become a "brahmacharini".

QUOTE

Also, I wonder what ACBVS would have done if any of his sons or daughters in the prime of their youths decided to leave him and his wife to join the commune/ashram of some Indian yogi-sadhu. How would he have reacted, as a traditional Indian father, to his 16 year old about to be married daughter, running off to become a "brahmacharini".

So you too don't like the swami. I wonder where your bitterness comes from?

Did I say anywhere above that I didn't "like" anyone?

Does anybody else here feel "bitterness" in my words?

I didn't see any bitterness at all in Betal's post nor do I understand why so many visitors here say or think that all ACBS critics are necessarily bitter?

I feel it big time catwoman. Maybe you could start instructing me on the subject of denial.

Ok, "Anand", please point out to me the specific area in my post where you feel a vibe of "bitterness".

You forgot to say please, but here it is:

The whole post is speculative. How would he feel if this if that. What if frogs flew?

You could have done the oposite, but chose to lean your post towards raising questions whether Swamiji was a man true to his principles and heart. This is pure speculation and serves no pratical purpose as far as reaching a solution. Nor such speculation speak of your own heart as being free of residues of going through an experience involving bitterness of your own. In other words, what is your concern with all of this, if it is not part of your past, or will be part of your future?

A critic has to remove himself from the subject. "What if", in this case, is a resource born from emotion over method.

First of all "Anand", my post was not to reach any "solution".
Nor do I have to remove myself from the subject, because I am not a critic to begin with.
I prefaced my post with "I wonder", therefore it is a given that what will follow is a speculation. Yes, I speculate "what if" sometimes.

Is this a big deal here to anyone else but you?

If you don't want to reach any solution, why should anybody waste time with your posts?

Unless of course in the end you can show everyone a good all-encompassing dance.

Are we all posting here to reach some kind of "solution"?
A solution to what?
Does beauty lie solely with answers or is there some merit to questions also?
I see posting as a way of self-expression. Not much more.

Watch this go up in to another poll:

Why do we post here?

Are solutions important?

Is there anything that needs a solution anyways?

Is everyone ok with betal nuts standard of beauty?

I do not find any bitterness in her post. Its tone was as neutral and unemotional as it can get. The one who is in denial is you Anand and that is why you project it on Betal Nut.

Regarding Betal Nuts hypothoesis of what if ACBVS would have created an organization that would have alligned itself with conventional methods of propaganda and not uproot people from society--I think it would have been way more successful than it is today. It probably would not have had as many shaved headed, saffron-claded monks, but it would have had a lot more responsible people with integrity and expertise at presenting the teachings of Gita to the west. I'm sure the organization would not suffer from the bad publicity world-wide as it does today. It would have had centers in wealthy countries like Japan and Singhapoor, places that ban ISKCON for obvious reasons. I'm sure there would not have been nortorious Gurukula boarding schools because there would have been no need to dump kids into them to have the parents go out on the pick and liberate themselves from tending to their miserable material attachments--children.

However, despite such a hypothetical organizational success, it still lacks a connection with a disciplic succession, unless its members get initiated within genuine diksa lines and in turn initiate members within the organization. That would work.

QUOTE

I do not find any bitterness in her post. Its tone was as neutral and unemotional as it can get. The one who is in denial is you Anand and that is why you project it on Betal Nut.

Then again you don't find bitterness in your posts either. Denial of what?

I don't deny that I feel cheated by ISKCON. Does that bother you? I am not a robot.

No. Does it bother you? I am not a robot either.

I believe this thread has come to the end of it's dignified life.

If someone has something of substantial interest to contrtibute -- something relevant to the topic at hand -- please PM one of the moderators to have it opened again.

Some further discussions may be found in this thread.

Comments On Satsvarupa Maharaj - Comments here.