Bhaktivedanta Swami was not against polygamy at all. Of course, as always with such personalities, you can find 20 quotes for polygamy and 20 against—depending on who he was with or what it was pertaining. Prabhupada had no issues with polygamy as long as the wives were supported and treated well. Though, by "treated well" he meant they were submissive their their husbands and "served" them, whatever the hell that means. There is no shortage of prabhupada quotes supporting polygamy:

[prabhupadasaid.com]

In fact, you would be hard pressed too find any Vaishnava who is against polygamy. Krishna had 16108 wives and fooled around with 12 year old married girls according to their own scriptures. There is no shortage of Vedic tales and injunctions for marrying many women. It would be hypocritical for any Vaishnava to state they are against polygamy. It would also make for a tough religion to stomach when the very god you are being asked to worship showed by example that you can marry as many women as you like as long as you can take care fo the whole lot. Though it must make it a tad bit easier when you can endlessly expand yourself to keep everyone happy. How convenient! Why stop at 16108?

Reposting an earlier article-

The Tangled Tale of Tulsi Gabbard- Progressive Phony.
October 19, 2017


The giant circus that the 2016 election cycle became, and the second Dark Ages that has followed it, is a time that’s seen a great many attempts to effect the altering of the meaning of time- honored positives. Words like “Facts”, “Truth, and Justice” have all had their turn in the mud bath. However, when it comes to sheer brazen abuse of a term, “Progressive” may have taken the deepest dive of all- especially in the matter of the Hawaiian Representative, Tulsi Gabbard.

Hence, the old Sanders wing of the party is suddenly quite vocal about selecting as their champion Tulsi Gabbard, a politician who has come to embodify misguided attacks by so-called progressives on the so-called liberal elite. In point of fact, however, the evidence indicates quite otherwise. Tulsi Gabbard does not act like a progressive darling.

Her voting record, world view, and connections resemble much more closely a resume, tailor- made to be both barely acceptable to the leaders of the Democratic Party, and a perfect Libertarian plant. The organization Progressive Punch is a searchable database of Congressional voting records, from the perspective of the far left. They gave Bernie Sanders an A, for his lifetime support of progressive causes. Tulsi Gabbard got an F.

The tangled tale of Tulsi Gabbard makes most sense, if you consider the possibility she might really be a carefully cultivated mole, used to leak data to our enemies. It would be clear that she makes for a powerful pivotal point strategically. The far right has often been able to use her voice and power to manipulate the far left. Stirred up radicals often end up signing off on very bad ideas. Anytime they need their opposites to go along with some plot they’re cooking up, they give the job to Tulsi. Her views are often much more in line with the conservative end of our spectrum, as exemplified by her trip to Syria recently and her unending support of Assad.

Take the DNC mole. President Obama admitted that he had no intelligence on how Wikileaks got ahold of the Podesta emails whose release caused the supporters of Bernie Sanders to riot in the streets of Philadelphia. But a man named Chris Murray, a former British ambassador, had claimed that days earlier, a high ranking DNC member, said to be “disgusted” by the supposed favoring of Hillary Clinton by the DNC, had actually been the one to leak those emails, to him. At this time, Tulsi Gabbard held the position of Deputy DNC Chairman. She resigned in a huff.

Then, all of a sudden, the hacking started, and sensitive data ended up in the hands of the Russian-controlled WikiLeaks. She knew the access codes and she knew the setup. She had a clear motive for wanting material on Clinton leaked. She has had a long-standing love affair with Syrian president Assad and with Putin, and reviled Clinton’s Syria policy with all her might, but to oppose her flat out, as a Republican, would have been suicidal due to the political climate of her home state Hawaii. This must have made the endorsement of Bernie Sanders a cheap and lightweight solution.

Neither her policies nor her personnel suggest any affiliation with the ideology of Bernie Sanders- but by endorsing someone with whom she largely disagreed on policy (and didn’t have to worry about winning), she won the unyielding adulation of his followers. And by meeting with Donald Trump on her own initiative, mere weeks after his upset of Hillary Clinton, she assured herself the undying love of the #NeverHillary branch of the Sanders wing.


One angry supporter of Bernie Sanders wrote the following nonsense on 7/23/17, on a thread discovered on Facebook.
“No REAL progressive is gonna vote for more of the Clinton style, corporate special interest, Big Bank donor loving, false progressive garbage. Yet…here are the Democrats showing us early on that they haven’t changed. Ready for a repeat of 2016? Personally…I will work to expose and destroy the hopes of any candidate that the DNC tries to ram down our throats again by using Super Delegates and closed Primaries…and any candidate who remained silent against the DNC’s attack on our Democracy by rigging the election against Bernie Sanders. #Sanders/Gabbard2020 #Gabbard/Turner2020
This same man later went on to beg and plead for unity among the former supporters of Sanders- so that they will have greater success in attacking not Republicans, but Democrats. Mentioned at the spearhead of this assault on their fellows in the left, is always one name- Tulsi Gabbard.

Ironically, Gabbard is a member of the Democratic Party. She has been the United States Representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district since 2013. She was also a vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee until February 28, 2016, when she resigned to endorse Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary.


This primary was one of the most acrimonious and bitter races in history, and no one did more to make it so than did this Hawaiian representative. The real question, however, is why? What would make it so appealing to someone, to consistently act against the interests of their own party? Wouldn’t that mean they were acting against their own interests, too?


Merriam- Webster defines the term “political operative” as a person who does secret work for a government or political organization. And no one can deny that the resume of Ms. Gabbard would be ideal for one. Although her personality and policies are very much against the grain of the usual progressive agenda, there can be no doubt that on the surface, she is a diverse and fascinating candidate. She is the first American Samoan elected to Congress. She was the first elected Hindu (she took her oath of office on the Bhagavad- Gita) and one of two female combat veterans to join Congress in 2013. At that time, at age 31, she was also the youngest female member of the Congress.

So far, so good. And yet, for all these fantastic leftist qualifications, she gives the Democratic Party more trouble than does many a Republican. There are several reasons for this. Gabbard often sounds more like a hawkish Republican than a potential future Democratic leader. She repeatedly blasted Obama for failing to talk about “Islamic extremism”– a phrase very similar to the pet phrase of Donald Trump.

Perhaps we can find a clue into the peculiar politics of this enigmatic woman, by examining her father. Even upon taking the most cursory glance at him, Hawaii state Senator, former Republican and anti-gay activist Mike Gabbard is a man who has had to do a lot of reforming. The elder Gabbard has made a career out of evasion. With reporters, with constituents, and with pretty much everyone except his daughter and his old cronies from the days of Chris Butler’s (Jagad Guru Siddhaswarupananda Paramahamsa, also known as #SwamiSalami) Hare Krishna cult.

Of course, it’s predictable that he would be wary of the media. Even Googling “Mike Gabbard” will lead you to a seemingly endless series of negative stories. It seems clear there are many questions that he doesn’t want to answer. Specifically, he has been reticent on those queries concerning his ties to the aforementioned swami. The Butler cult has built a shadowy and global organization that according to some numbers in the tens of thousands, and the Gabbards are its most public and conspicuous members.

This splinter group has given rise to a number of political candidates over the past 30 years. And two of Tulsi’s most important campaign staffers came from her father’s organization’ . Those questions must be especially touchy during election seasons, when much of his political support and money comes from Christian conservatives.

No one should have to be held accountable for the political views of their parents. But Tulsi Gabbard’s political connections to her father go far beyond the family relationship. Despite her recent claims to socially-progressive views, the pattern established by examining her staffers and donors makes much more sense when viewed as a conservative family network than the product of more regular Democratic fundraising efforts.

In fact, according to one list of major contributors to the Tulsi Gabbard campaign, published by DailyKos in 2012, Democratic donors were actually exceptions on this list. Many of these people have not donated to campaigns other than Mike Gabbard’s Congressional campaign, or Richard Reed’s Senate campaign, both as Republicans. Reed’s Senate campaign was allegedly connected to both the Gabbards’ and to Butler’s religious group.

The plot continues to thicken and grow stranger. A website called the Cult Education Institute has a thread on Tulsi Gabbard and her activities and connections with Chris Butler that is literally hundreds of pages long, and provides links to a stultifying wealth of articles and other information. It should be, and is, pointed out that much of it is unverifiable. However, a great deal of it is very verifiable. And the sheer amount of it alone is suggestive. One would be hard-pressed to find another politician anywhere on the nation’s entire political coastline with such a bewildering array of data arraigned against them. The process of vetting candidates means that if you’ve got 100 pages of cult websites detailing your activities, you’re not going to make it through.

So what does it all mean? Where are they going, with all of this? A look at the politics of Hawaii might be of use in this context. The Democratic Party has had a long reign in Hawaii. Some of it comes from the popularity of the labor movement there in the 20th century, and the efforts of the Hawaii Democratic Party to push for greater inclusivity of the electoral base have traditionally been venerated. These factors have combined to earn Democrats near-complete control of the state legislature. But such an extended period of dominance has been resulting in increased voter apathy and increased factionalism within the Democratic Party of Hawaii.

This apathy is what led Mike Gabbard to try and challenge Democratic incumbent Ed Case in 2004. The elder Gabbard, known for his virulent anti-gay crusade in the 1990s, was attempting to overturn the status quo and win as a Repulican the race to represent Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District. Unfortunately for him, that virtually no one could have won this way. At that time, a reporter for Honolulu Magazine requested an interview on the Chris Butler ties, which prompted the following rejoinder from Tulsi.
“I smell a skunk,” she emailed back. “It’s clear to me that you’re acting as a conduit for … homosexual extremist supporters of Ed Case!”

The Democrats held the day, in 2004, and the star of Mike Gabbard was soon to wane, but that of his daughter was on the rise. And by 2013, the situation was very different. A schism was forming in the larger Democratic Party of America that was similar to the one in Hawaii. In the absence of a super-villain like one of the Bushes, Democrats were starting to divide into the camps now roughly labeled “liberal” and “progressive”.
Around this same time, public awareness began growing toward an occuring trend that is still reshaping the entire scale of political spectrum. The far left began linking up with the far right, unbeknownst to nearly everyone, in a plot to manipulate the national dialectic into demanding a third party.

The left and the right have often historically converged when a common friend or foe suits both of their needs, usually for different reasons. This is known as the Horseshoe Theory, and as far as Congressional Democrats go, nobody seems to personify this more than Hawaii’s Tulsi Gabbard. We are in the middle of watching nothing less than a full-fledged attempt at a Libertarian revival.

On the Issues, a non-partisan informational website that rates and categorizes lawmakers and candidates, describes Tulsi Gabbard as a “Libertarian-Leaning Progressive” based on her voting record.

Progressives are not the only ones in love with Tulsi Gabbard, and the way she constantly does numbers on Democrats. The Hill reported that it was Steve Bannon who arranged the November meeting between the new president-elect and the Hawaiian congresswoman. “He loves Tulsi Gabbard. Loves her,” a source familiar with Bannon’s thinking told The Hill. “Wants to work with her on everything.”

Following their meeting, many speculated that Gabbard might receive an appointment in Trump’s cabinet, a move that appeared to excite many Trump supporters. It seems clear that this was rejected because of the toxic effect this would have had on Tulsi’s ability to get progressives to follow her blindly. That would have blown years of hard work.

Her political record viewed as a whole gives one the eerie impression that it was tailor-made to be borderline acceptable to the Democratic hierarchy, while actually placing her much more closely in line with the Koch brothers brand of libertarianism, an experiment that failed back in the 1980’s, but whose adherents have never really abandoned. Googling “tulsi gabbard libertarian” will lead you to an entire galaxy of Libertarian newspapers, each singing her praises more fervently then the last.

BeingLibertarian.com eagerly lists us off all the reasons why Gabbard 2020 is a shoo-in, with a headline saying “Democrat Tulsi Gabbard Will Likely Be Next President.

ALibertarianFuture.com also goes to great effort to laud Tulsi for her willingness to work against Democratic interests, in this article explaining that Libertarian hero Rand Paul introduced Tulsi Gabbard’s Stop Arming Terrorists Act in the Senate.

Libertarian Christians sing her praises even louder, with these next words being a direct quote from the article. “Thank you, Mrs. Gabbard, for having the courage to tell the truth. I don’t have to share your ideology to share your human conscience. You are seeing through the double-bind foreign policy trap of our bipartisan war policy: Satan casting out Satan.
In today’s world, people who consider the United States satanic tend to be receiving money from Russia. But even aside from that, it makes you wonder how such a high-powered chameleon ended up with a reputation for being an uncompromising progressive. An examination of her recent polling trends reveal she’s doing very nearly as well among people of both parties, and this is extremely troubling given the extreme and total decency gap existing between them. The Democrats gave us Obama. The Republicans gave us W. Bush and Trump.

Jacobin Magazine, long regarded as one of the most professional and serious left wing magazines out there, recently did an article on all this. They gave it the headline, “Why Tulsi Gabbard isn’t your Friend.” And there it all was. The whole tangled web. Tulsi Gabbard is the all-purpose fishing lure being trotted out by the people so carelessly trying to realign the national power structure in their interest. She’s got something for everyone, and all of it is dishonest.

source: [themillennialdemocrats.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2019 04:21AM by VoxVeritasVita Das.

IanKoviak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bhaktivedanta Swami was not against polygamy at
> all. Of course, as always with such personalities,
> you can find 20 quotes for polygamy and 20
> against—depending on who he was with or what it
> was pertaining. Prabhupada had no issues with
> polygamy as long as the wives were supported and
> treated well. Though, by "treated well" he meant
> they were submissive their their husbands and
> "served" them, whatever the hell that means. There
> is no shortage of prabhupada quotes supporting
> polygamy:
>
> [prabhupadasaid.com]

Records from conversations by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami are controversial in so far as the question of their authenticity is concerned. The material in the form of comments to printed books by him is already more reliable - early unmodified entries.

Vedic tradition - patriarchal culture - is one thing, the law in force in a given country is the second, and practical realities are the third. The reality is that with dominance of passion ("rajas") and ignorance ("tamas"), conflicts between 2 women wives or even 2 husbands of one woman are inevitable. It is hard for me to even imagine a great spiritual settlement that such a arrangement - a trio - would suit the parties. This is more associated with the triangle of marital infidelity. The law of a given country must be observed - it may also be related to the conditions of a given country, so there is no reason not to comply with that law.

Anyway, I remember A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami's comment on the wife of Lord Siva and he comments that this is a good example of one wife, who obviously has several hypostases.


> In fact, you would be hard pressed too find any
> Vaishnava who is against polygamy. Krishna had
> 16108 wives and fooled around with 12 year old
> married girls according to their own scriptures.
> There is no shortage of Vedic tales and
> injunctions for marrying many women.


This is true. Vaisnava culture accepts polygamy. Anyway the other way too. Five Pandavas had a wife - Draupadi. Either way, it is treated rather as an exceptional situation.

In accordance with the philosophy of 16 thousand Lord Krishna's wives are meant to be a manifestation of God's ability to have relationships with many beings simultaneously. This is the subject of criticism from, for example, Catholics and here Siddhaswarupananda is right, because at the same time some nuns are married to Jesus and such events have taken place in Poland in recent years.


> It would be
> hypocritical for any Vaishnava to state they are
> against polygamy. It would also make for a tough
> religion to stomach when the very god you are
> being asked to worship showed by example that you
> can marry as many women as you like as long as you
> can take care fo the whole lot. Though it must
> make it a tad bit easier when you can endlessly
> expand yourself to keep everyone happy. How
> convenient! Why stop at 16108?

And here Siddhaswarupananda cannot be accused of presenting it differently. He did not present it in this way as a hedonistic encouragement. That's how I see it. That's how I heard it.

The fact that in previous times, according to descriptions, liked the adoration of many women - is also significant - I was introduced to him as a strict teacher of mystic yoga and I will certainly treat it as a big lie if it was otherwise.

And that the practice was that Mr. Midget gently asked one of the initiated disciples not to have his nth wife - this is the pursuit of truth. Objectively.

Pay for the whims of many wives and lover? In Polish reality, the hero is the one who will support his wife and one lover. This expansion to 16,000 is rather impossible .... :)

Anyway, as far as I am concerned, I think that it is unfair and hypocritical to have a lover in relation to a life partner and the relationship with several people of the opposite sex is not natural and practically impossible for sensitive and deep people.

In the comments of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami points out that the yogi should avoid the force of passion and ignorance. The force of passion is the basis of a woman's and man's sexual relationship, so there is no incentive for mass sexual pleasure. Rather, the correctness of marital sex is described along with the risk and on "royal roads". Of course, this topic, as has been said above, has elements of conflicting information in the letters and verses/comments.

That's why I'm more interested in what I wrote in the right aspect:
- whether Siddhaswarupananda was massaged by female devotees,
- is there any written evidence where A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami prohibits Siddhaswarupananda Yoga-Nidra practice,
- did the boys in the Philippines have medical care and pocket money,
- was there activity of the IGG party after February 1977?
- What accusations did Sai Hainsen finally hear of causing Sri Shim to die?
- whether the recommendations for having several wives were for the highest ranked disciples and how the marriages ended.
- did Siddhaswarupananda's marriage to WaiLana precede the separation of WaiLana and Richard Bellord and how long was the separation

Such information will be very helpful in reaching the truth.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2019 04:47AM by DaWatcher.

"Do you remember any special phenomena in the SIF sanga around 2009? E.g. from July 2009 to December 2009? For example: deterioration of the atmosphere, attack of sadness, lack of energy, ghostly visions etc.?"

Is this serious? What does some bullshit Yoga Nidra or the death of satyananda have to do with Butler and SIF? Obviously they do not teach or practice yoga Nidra or worship satyananda. Never have, never will. If Butler practiced this crap in the 70s, that was the last time he did so. Butler is a follower of ACBS and the gaudiya lineage. That he has gone on his own and started his own flavor and style of gaudiya vaishnavism is nothing new. ALL the gaiuditya groups do this. Prabhupada did it, his guru did it, Bhaktivinode did it etc. Siddhanta Saraswati wore leather shoes, drove in cars and wore clothing that was sewn (all randomly things that were against Vaishnava injunctions to do). He adopted the brahmanas thread and system and even said he was willing to serve meat to karmis if it got them to listen to the holy names. ACBS gave his sanyasis non-traditional Gaudiya titles, made up non-traditional names for his deities, and had his disciples avoid the gaudiya math like the plague. It's the hallmark of these guys to flip flop on every stance and change their position and so forth if it furthers their agenda. Look at Tulsi, she learned well. Plauralism and lack of spine is the hallmark of the Gaudiya's. Anything to get people on board with the Yuga dharma of kirtan., Of course once you join it's quickly reviewed the that's just a small part of it. Now you have to get ready to swallow 200 other pills. The 4 regulative principles, 16 rounds a day, 10 offenses against you know who, don't question the stories, everything is literal, give money—the more the better and the more dear you will be to the guru. There is literally rules for everything if you want to get hard core about it: Hairstyle, tilak style and location, dress, sika, neck beads (three strands), brahmacari, householder, renunciate, or vanaprastha? Worship the deity like this: First the incense, then the lamp, then the flower, the water, the cloth, the fan, the conch etc etc. Devotees need to read the Gita first (even though it is a part of a larger work called the Mahabharata that is considered inferior to the Bhagavatam. Read this, don't read that. This you can read by yourself, this one you need a more advanced devotee to read. It can be a madyama or uttama adikari, but beware of those kanishtas. Only the uttama can give you the "real" holy name. The Jiva fell down. No, wait, the Jiva comes from the tatashta region. Well, there are two types of jivas. Some got the short end of the stick. No real reason. It's Krishnas Lila. Isn't that so mazing a beautiful? You don't like it? Maybe you don't have enough sukriti. Or maybe even worse—maybe you have committed a grave aparadha. Spiritual life is a razors edge. Relax. Just chant and be happy. Eat prashadam but don't enjoy your senses. Krishna like the guitar, but the Mrdanga really pleases him. Haridas Thakur is Lord Brahma. So is Jesus Christ. Your guru is a gopi in Vrindavana. Not that vrndavava. The other one. Goloka. Way way way above Vaikuntha. You can be a gopi, a Gopa, a mother or father in Braja. For eternity. Once you make it there is no going back. I can tell by how you chant and memorize Gita verses that you will most likely be a flute, grain of sand or a button on Krishnas trousers. It's all the same. Well, being a gopi is a little better, but it's just not your eternal form. Confused? Me too. We must be horrible maggots in stool. Gurudev said that all will be revealed by service and mercy. Better go wash some dishes at the tempe. Does gurudev know I am washing there dishes? I better write a really emotional vyasapuja offering this year so gurudev knows who I even am. I wonder why he has not given my wife Diksha yet? She must be making some offense...

This is the average mind garbage in the head of 99% of devotees out there.

Ian, too true!!!

"Quote- "
In fact, you would be hard pressed too find any Vaishnava who is against polygamy. Krishna had 16108 wives and fooled around with 12 year old married girls according to their own scriptures. There is no shortage of Vedic tales and injunctions for marrying many women. It would be hypocritical for any Vaishnava to state they are against polygamy. It would also make for a tough religion to stomach when the very god you are being asked to worship showed by example that you can marry as many women as you like as long as you can take care fo the whole lot. Though it must make it a tad bit easier when you can endlessly expand yourself to keep everyone happy. How convenient! Why stop at 16108?" End
quote.

If I had a dime for every time I heard bramacharis say they could have more than one wife, I would be wealthy indeed! In addition I do remember one female devotee who had 2 husbands. Do you remember that?

All I can add is, THIS cult, had many many affairs and divorces. We lost track of how many husbands Kathy Hoshijo had (Katiyani dasi). Or the great many-married sub-guru, Jivan Das (RIP) The track record of the marriages and subsequent break-ups and the numerous children involved would create quite a television series. Did you know that the Chinese character for insanity is 2 women under the same roof? Recipe for disaster. And it was.

Ian - asking for a friend - can you confirm that Tulsi Gabbard did indeed attend the Philippine cult school? Because in her "sanitized" biography she calls it a 'mission school' (*cough-hack hack*)

IanKoviak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is this serious? What does some bullshit Yoga
> Nidra or the death of satyananda have to do with
> Butler and SIF? Obviously they do not teach or
> practice yoga Nidra or worship satyananda.

They teach Yoga-Nidra:

[www.mantra.pl]

IanKoviak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Is this serious?

As serious as near-death experience worst kind.

IanKoviak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Do you remember any special phenomena in the SIF
> sanga around 2009? E.g. from July 2009 to December
> 2009? For example: deterioration of the
> atmosphere, attack of sadness, lack of energy,
> ghostly visions etc.?"
>
> Is this serious? What does some bullshit Yoga
> Nidra or the death of satyananda have to do with
> Butler and SIF? Obviously they do not teach or
> practice yoga Nidra or worship satyananda. Never
> have, never will. If Butler practiced this crap in
> the 70s, that was the last time he did so. Butler
> is a follower of ACBS and the gaudiya lineage.
> That he has gone on his own and started his own
> flavor and style of gaudiya vaishnavism is nothing
> new. ALL the gaiuditya groups do this. Prabhupada
> did it, his guru did it, Bhaktivinode did it etc.
> Siddhanta Saraswati wore leather shoes, drove in
> cars and wore clothing that was sewn (all randomly
> things that were against Vaishnava injunctions to
> do). He adopted the brahmanas thread and system
> and even said he was willing to serve meat to
> karmis if it got them to listen to the holy names.
> ACBS gave his sanyasis non-traditional Gaudiya
> titles, made up non-traditional names for his
> deities, and had his disciples avoid the gaudiya
> math like the plague. It's the hallmark of these
> guys to flip flop on every stance and change their
> position and so forth if it furthers their agenda.
> Look at Tulsi, she learned well. Plauralism and
> lack of spine is the hallmark of the Gaudiya's.
> Anything to get people on board with the Yuga
> dharma of kirtan., Of course once you join it's
> quickly reviewed the that's just a small part of
> it. Now you have to get ready to swallow 200 other
> pills. The 4 regulative principles, 16 rounds a
> day, 10 offenses against you know who, don't
> question the stories, everything is literal, give
> money—the more the better and the more dear you
> will be to the guru. There is literally rules for
> everything if you want to get hard core about it:
> Hairstyle, tilak style and location, dress, sika,
> neck beads (three strands), brahmacari,
> householder, renunciate, or vanaprastha? Worship
> the deity like this: First the incense, then the
> lamp, then the flower, the water, the cloth, the
> fan, the conch etc etc. Devotees need to read the
> Gita first (even though it is a part of a larger
> work called the Mahabharata that is considered
> inferior to the Bhagavatam. Read this, don't read
> that. This you can read by yourself, this one you
> need a more advanced devotee to read. It can be a
> madyama or uttama adikari, but beware of those
> kanishtas. Only the uttama can give you the "real"
> holy name. The Jiva fell down. No, wait, the Jiva
> comes from the tatashta region. Well, there are
> two types of jivas. Some got the short end of the
> stick. No real reason. It's Krishnas Lila. Isn't
> that so mazing a beautiful? You don't like it?
> Maybe you don't have enough sukriti. Or maybe even
> worse—maybe you have committed a grave aparadha.
> Spiritual life is a razors edge. Relax. Just chant
> and be happy. Eat prashadam but don't enjoy your
> senses. Krishna like the guitar, but the Mrdanga
> really pleases him. Haridas Thakur is Lord Brahma.
> So is Jesus Christ. Your guru is a gopi in
> Vrindavana. Not that vrndavava. The other one.
> Goloka. Way way way above Vaikuntha. You can be a
> gopi, a Gopa, a mother or father in Braja. For
> eternity. Once you make it there is no going back.
> I can tell by how you chant and memorize Gita
> verses that you will most likely be a flute, grain
> of sand or a button on Krishnas trousers. It's all
> the same. Well, being a gopi is a little better,
> but it's just not your eternal form. Confused? Me
> too. We must be horrible maggots in stool. Gurudev
> said that all will be revealed by service and
> mercy. Better go wash some dishes at the tempe.
> Does gurudev know I am washing there dishes? I
> better write a really emotional vyasapuja offering
> this year so gurudev knows who I even am. I wonder
> why he has not given my wife Diksha yet? She must
> be making some offense...
>
> This is the average mind garbage in the head of
> 99% of devotees out there.

I am impressed :)

VoxVeritasVita Das Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All I can add is, THIS cult, had many many affairs
> and divorces. We lost track of how many husbands
> Kathy Hoshijo had (Katiyani dasi). Or the great
> many-married sub-guru, Jivan Das (RIP) The track
> record of the marriages and subsequent break-ups
> and the numerous children involved would create
> quite a television series. Did you know that the
> Chinese character for insanity is 2 women under
> the same roof? Recipe for disaster. And it was.

Well, is good to count and present it. As a good "cult-example" of "spiritual love" that's going to flow out of Tulsi Gabbards beliefs ands instruction for the Whole World. Why not to use mathematics??

DeWatcher:

That's why I'm more interested in what I wrote in the right aspect:
- whether Siddhaswarupananda was massaged by female devotees,

No. He barely let women disciples offer him garlands and there is letters where he has asked that they do not offer him garlands.

- is there any written evidence where A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami prohibits Siddhaswarupananda Yoga-Nidra practice,

I'm not sure, nor is it relevant. He has never taught or practiced yoga Nidra as a Gaudiya Vaishnava.

- did the boys in the Philippines have medical care and pocket money,


Yes. If someone was sent extra money by parents or some portion of their tuition was allowed for buying some things in the market. If a boy was sick they were often quarantined upstairs and if it was really bad they may be taken to a doctor and given medication. But mostly we simply suffered through illnesses.

- was there activity of the IGG party after February 1977?

Nothing serious. It was a smallfanatigcal attempt to create a religious political party.

What accusations did Sai Hainsen finally hear of causing Sri Shim to die?


He was fined and not allowed to operate boat. And he has to live with the fact that he killed a man. I am sure Butler gave him a earful. He's definitely not going back to Krishna Loka this time around. Maybe not for another million lifetimes...

- whether the recommendations for having several wives were for the highest ranked disciples and how the marriages ended.


I don't think any siddhswarup devotees kept 2 wives, Marrying after you divorce or having to live with your ex-wife while dating someone else is not keeping 2 wives. Butler did not vouch for polygamy. His guru on the other hand did vouch for it on many many occasions. It's illegal to have multiple spouses in America as I am sure it is in most western countries. Indian culture allowed for it historically because marriage was less about love and attraction and more about Caste system. Hence people getting married off at 10 years of age. It was to secure dowry and shack up with the right caste. If people in ISKCOn and SIF did keep multiple wives or partners it was not in any legal formal way and it was never celebrate within the cult as a ceremony where a householder was taking a second or third wife. It just was not done. If it was it was obviously done on the sly and purely for sex which probably had less to do with religion and Vaishnava traditions and more with just good old fashioned desire for sex.

- did Siddhaswarupananda's marriage to WaiLana precede the separation of WaiLana and Richard Bellord and how long was the separation

I'm not understanding the nature of some of these questions. The man married a disciple of his. Wai Lanas kids were young, so it must have not been too long after she split from her ex. I have heard accounts that Butler was smitten with Wai Lana and actually kind acting like a regular guy wold about the prospect of getting to know her. She was already a successful yoga personality in Asia, so the move, aside from plain old sexual attraction, was also motivated by money. Butler is named on all of her videos production notes as "Bo Zhong Yan" from the earliest videos. The fact is that he gave up his Sanyasi order to marry. In the Gaudiya tradition this is considered like a dog eating it's own vomit. He claimed the reason is so he can preach to women devotees. There is NO scriptural injunction about sanyasis being unable to preach to women. Have sex, sit in a room with a woman alone, keep a woman servant, etc etc—sure, but to preach to woman devotees is no reason to throw in the towel. Richard Bellord had no qualms with the whole things nor did Wai Lana. Wai Lana was basically a glorified Geisha. She never spoke, walked slowly behind or next to Butler. She was quiet and was basically a cash cow for Butler. There was little to no visible affection between them. At best it felt like a woman servant of his. Butler would blast his disciples for not giving her special treatment and she was deemed to be a Uttama Adikari/pure devotee worthy of worship. Prior to marrying Butler she was a fringe devotee with a yoga TV program in Asia. So she was nothing short of a miracle and devotional sensation. It was like a devotional makeover.