Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

[quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite]
So what is your contention Kula pavana -- the idea that somehow or other this all means that they were all kanishtas? I already addressed that comment from indomitablespirit now banned because he was really ND.

Not sure what you are implying when you emphasize that "not that forever GM is to be led by a group of people .." Who thinks like that? Somebody must have that misconception for you to take the time to correct them so Im just wondering.[/quote]

I do not in the slightest imply that disciples of BSST were all kanisthas... perish the thought! Some of them were without doubt uttama adhikaris, enabled by Krishna to see the eternal spiritual identity of their Gurudeva.

My other comment was about GBC being an INTERIM ONLY management entity by the intent of the founding acharya. IMO it was not a system designed to carry on like that forever. With time it was expected that a truly special and universally recognized person would take up the function of the institutions leader. Sort of like Pope in the Catholic church.

Our veiw is signifigantly different,however in general agreement with AC Bhaktivedanta Swami maharaja, ....ananta vasudeva prabhu,was the most intimate servant ..secretary to his Divine grace Srila Bhaktisiddanta saraswati takura Prabhupada.The intention was to form a GBC ,then possibly select an archarya.Which was encouraged by these words.
He commented In a lecture in Darjeeling it is said that Sarasvati Thakura stated;
"Whatever I have told, whatever I have not told, it will be explained by
Ananta Vasudeva and Sundarananda Vidyavinoda."
The prayers: "nama om vishnupadaya Krishna prestaya bhutale srimati
bhaktisiddhanta swamin iti namine...," and all the pranama-mantras for
Gaurikisora Das Babaji, Bhaktivinode Thakur and Jagannatha Das Babaji,
were all composed at one time by Ananta Vasudeva in 1929. The prayers
honouring Sarasvati Thakur were first recited at his Vyasa'95puja ceremony,
and then after they were accepted, all the devotees would recite them in
mangala'95arati, before kirtan.
When his Guru Maharaja was explaining the Bhagavata, Vasudeva would
assist , and at the time of his disappearance Sarasvati Thakur said,
"Whatever I have not explained Ananta Vasudeva will explain. The message
of Rupa Raghunatha is to be taught by him." Then he called for Vasudeva
and told him: "You will explain Rupa Raghunatha vani!" Thus, after
Sarasvati Thakuras disappearance everyone accepted Vasudeva as their
leader, but after some time a dispute broke out.
Then instantly there was the attempt by tirtha maharaj to accumulate temples....which was seen as a uniting principle,at least there was an anti -management mood against this fellow.This was the general consensus...fight this person.Since when others sent their sons to guru kula he sent to become lawyers.Seeing that eventually they could fight in the courts for bhag temple calcutta....he had seperate opportunist mentality,personal desire for position!
History now displays some personal desire and motivation tested those guru,servants and opportunists within the gaudiya matha.
However after his passing,[bhaktisiddanta prabhupada] disagreement was focused in this anti-party headed by tirtha maharaja.

From 1932 onwards, many kinds of people joined the mission, with the
majority of them being attracted by the opulence. To develop a big
organization many types of people are required to clean, to work in the
garden, etc.; so all different people were accepted and not so many of them
were very serious about spiritual life. Before Sarasvati Thakura left this
world, some sannyasis started to think that after their guru'95maharaja leaves
the planet they would have their own temples and disciples, and become big
gurus.
Sarasvati Thakura made no endeavour to discipline them because his
idea was that example is better than precept: As an acharya he set an ideal
example and he thought that if someone was not serious he should not
interfere with them, but if someone was serious then they would
automatically follow.....Jotisekharas prabhu...disciple of Bhaktisiddanta saraswati takura

Good point, brother. But could we say that an acharya CAN NOT do it? Is it forbidden?

No. I think we can not say that. The fact is Prabhupada spent his life training his disciples to eventually do it, but would not make the selection. What if he has selected Kirtanananda? I think it is very wise to leave it up to Krsna as far as single leader goes.

Yes, ccd is bringing up good points. It is Krsna who is in charge of the sampradaya, and He can surprise everyone with the way events unfold. In mid 70s everyone in our movement thought KC will take over the world in a very near future... instead, we were smashed and put in our place by Krsnas arrangement... we were found to be lacking in many important ways.

I do pray that a new and true acharya emerges in our movement, who can fix what is wrong and inspire devotees for the kind of efforts that are required to push Lord Caitanyas mission forward.

To suggest that (everyone) except for your acharya is a kanistha is a sure symptom of a kanistha (at best). At least one has to recognize the facts.

But the danger is that you may appoint someone who is a kanistha, actually nobody in our sampradaya (that I know) was appointed after Lord Caitanya, all acaryas are self effulgent.

So we can conclude that nominate someone is wrong?

Nope. You can nominate TPs,GBCs. You can not nominate the next acarya.

If an acarya ca not nominate an acharya who better can know who is an acharya?

That was the dispute between Srila Prabhupada and his god-brothers, he maintained that BSST and previous acaryas did not nominate the acharyas and did not want it. What would be the reason to do this? Is Krishna in charge of parampara or is it acharya who is in charge of it? According to Bg it is Krsna who maintains the parampara, not individual acaryas.

Oh -- got it! Sometimes its as if my brain needs glasses to focus. I think Ive reached the age where Im going through mentalpause.

According to Srila Prabhupada he didnt see anyone among his disciples qualified to be acarya.

Heres an excerpt from a letter Srila Prabhupada wrote to Rupanuga in April of 74:

"If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acarya he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acarya. His idea was acarya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mission. So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self effulgent acarya would be automatically selected."

Yes,Kanastha-Vaisnava.

A tradition of speculation must be a tradition lost....Since i have read recently how narayanna maharaja has introduced new foreign moods,which some of you contend are sahajiya,could i ask ....how can we take this person and his followers seriously?

Srila Bhakti Sundar Govinda Dev-Goswami Maharaja concurs:

Srila Saraswati Thakur was not only Acharya for cleansing the sampradaya but for establishing something also: Establishing the principle [of madhura rasa] and he has shown that in his character [asta-kaliya-lila smaranam]. But after he has shown it, it became polluted and Srila Guru Maharaja knows it very well. Therefore Srila Guru Maharaja has not shown it. Rather, who is showing, Srila SRIDHAR SWAMI ,Guru Maharaja hates him.

Srila Guru Maharaja has seen the result in Srila Saraswati Thakurs senior disciples and their followers '97 how they fell down '97 therefore Srila Guru Maharaja was even stricter: '91you may be qualified but still you cannot do that. That was Srila Guru Maharajas opinion....Even my siksa gurus concur....

Kanastha? Do you mean Kanishta? Kanashta sounds more like Canasta which is a card game that old Jewish ladies play in Miami Beach.

So what are you saying Mr. indomitable? You are implying that Srila Prabhupadas godbrothers were "kanishta vaisnavas?" Id be very careful if I were you when it comes to making such a dismissive and derogatory comment about disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. Even if Srila Prabhupada said it (and he never came right out and called them "kanishtas") it is not for any of us to repeat in such a casual and condescending manor. Were dealing with the Absolute Truth. Were dealing with the Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya. We are dealing with Krishna consciousness. Be careful. Be humble. Have some discretion. Most importantly --- NEVER NEVER NEVER misrepresent Srila Prabhupada. NEVER! In Kali Yuga were not so much responsible for what we think or even what we say -- but what we do -- and what we write -- we better be prepared to accept the consequences.

[quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite]According to Srila Prabhupada he didnt see anyone among his disciples qualified to be acarya.

Heres an excerpt from a letter Srila Prabhupada wrote to Rupanuga in April of 74:

"If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acarya he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acarya. His idea was acarya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mission. So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self effulgent acarya would be automatically selected."[/quote]

The way I understand it, AT THE TIME of his passing, there was nobody qualified to lead the entire GM. Not that somehow his disciples were unqualified, period, and thus can be seen as kanisthas or some other nonsense. SP clearly says: "So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self effulgent acarya would be automatically selected". Automatical selection means: all would accept this one person as acharya of GM. Not that: forever GM is to be led by a group of people... that is an important difference.

Right! Thats the way you understand it and thats the only way it could possibly be understood given the words of Srila Prabhupada in that letter. "At the time of his passing he didnt see .... who would come out successful and self effulgent would be automatically .... "

So what is your contention Kula pavana -- the idea that somehow or other this all means that they were all kanishtas? I already addressed that comment from indomitablespirit now banned because he was really ND.

Not sure what you are implying when you emphasize that "not that forever GM is to be led by a group of people .." Who thinks like that? Somebody must have that misconception for you to take the time to correct them so Im just wondering.

Thank you Kula Pavana. Actually we are not doing so bad.... (except for me personally, I need some of your mercy if you can spare some).

You are too kind, prabhu. My mercy is worthless but I pray to Krsna to keep you in His care for all the good things you do for others.