Worth a read:

1. [www.reddit.com]
2. [www.reddit.com]
3. [www.reddit.com]
4. [www.reddit.com]
5. [www.reddit.com]
6. [www.reddit.com]
7. [www.reddit.com]
8. [www.reddit.com]
9. [www.reddit.com]
10. [www.reddit.com]
11. [www.reddit.com]
12. [www.reddit.com]
13. [www.reddit.com]

RUN

Forest, you are the number one debunker of the path.
You rain on the illusion parade.
You must have somw true divine protection.
I think they have no power over you.
If eternal servitude to the karma slave masters, is the goal of life, the universe must be one sick cosmic joke.


They make it sweet by throwing the word LOVE in your face 24/7.
Guru loves you unconditionally. He just made you chronically I’ll with abuse and sleepless nights. It is all out of love.
Krishna threw you out. It is free will. He loves you unconditionally.
A very deep Brainwashing. A highjack of the mind.

RUN_FOREST_RUN Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 11.
> [www.reddit.com]

Quote

The Forbidden Love Hypocrisy

A key feature of madhurya-rasa is that Radha-Krishna’s love is forbidden. Radha is married to another man, and the secret, transgressive nature of their love is what makes it more intense and valuable. Gaudiya theologians claim that breaking social boundaries makes love stronger and more meaningful.

But if that’s true, then who really takes the biggest risk in love today?

By Gaudiya logic, queer love should be the ultimate parakiya-rasa (forbidden love). Throughout history, LGBTQ people have faced social rejection, violence, legal punishment, and even death for their love. Compared to that, Radha’s little forest rendezvous seem almost safe. Yet Gaudiya Vaishnavism continues to frame divine love in strictly heterosexual terms, proving once again that it enjoys the idea of rebellion but only in ways that don’t fundamentally challenge tradition.

And yet, cracks are forming even within Gaudiya circles. LGBTQ devotee groups are gaining traction, searching for scriptural loopholes to justify their existence. Meanwhile, male monks continue to fantasize about being gopis, meditating as young maidens devoted to Krishna. If gender can be fluid in devotion, why is it still rigid in reality?

A more broadly treated topic is Radha being married, but where? In the earthly Vrindavan or Goloka Vrindavan. The earthly Vrindavan would still seem philosophically coherent - the participation of Brahma - the creator of one of the material universes in the actual wedding of Radha and Krishna on Earth. But Goloka Vrindavan would mean the intervention - in formalism - of the materially entangled Brahma. Goloka Vrindavan would not be the realities of pure satva (suddha satva). Another aspect is having an affair with someone else's wife - this is a bad example - inconsistency with the Bhagavad Gita - Krishna cannot set a bad example. Besides, why should forbidden love be higher? Maybe it is more intense because of separation, but isn't the everyday love higher? Without illusory imaginations? And this is still a classification of the realities of today's world that what is forbidden seems better because it is based on a lack of satisfaction with what is. It has a material character, looking at it in terms of this philosophy. Anthropomorphism.

Then Krishna stealing things from the gopis - ok, a thief. But the expectation of presenting oneself naked, while understandable for young boys as an element of teaching, carries with it some sexual tension for "those who are not yet liberated". So this has some pedophilia character.

Then Krishna surrounded by gopis. This has a narcissistic character. This sambandha-nuga seems spiritual. God Krishna is present in the community, beloved but has no narcissistic elements. Somewhere there he secretly meets Radha as Syama because it seems that Krishna is a child, and only Syama a youth (and Rama is even older) but he has no narcissism.

God of love, not narcissism.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2025 04:58PM by Culthusiast.

People have the freedom to see deities as they wish to.
There is no need to convince them that their views are not correct.
It is an individual relation. Based on personal experiences and perceptions.
I do not think there are words in the dictionary to call these deities. From what they have made me endure.
Leaving has been more hell than staying in the cult and dying gradually of fatigue and abuse.

I think you see butler as the Satan of the Catholics.
All is his fault, but god is perfect.
Let us sup it all on the back of the lunatic guru. How convenient.
You can hold on to that belief. It is your choice.
But I think you already know where we stand.
It is great that you hold on to the god of love. I truly believe it is the on,y way ine can stand this reality.

One cannot easily live in this so society without illusion.
It reminds me of an old movie where the character had X-ray vision and he was going more and more crazy.
We all need our coping mechanisms.
If you take the veil of illusion from your eyes, you will feel as though you have landed in an alternate reality.
A reality that is hidden from most.


I honestly advise against it.
I wish I had never gone so deep.
But there is a painful sense of freedom when you reach the end of the ocean.
This when you realize that you are running 10000000 programs.
And that nobody will ever get you. And you have to pass for crazy for the rest of your life in this reality.
Cutting the puppet strings makes the puppet fall apart. We have been way to used to be held by the strings.

Our relation to the divine and demonic forces are very unique.
And sometimes arguing about it, leads nowhere.
There are people in SoI who are very privileged.
Good looks, health, Karma, talented, charismatic, popular…
They have mostly experienced the positive side of reality.
They will always think butler is a sweet teddy bear and Krishna is the most attractive little blue boy.

And then you have those who have been crushed by the cult and treated like dirt, but also faced supernatural backlash.
Many do not even know they are under attack. They will just dump it on Karma or fate.
None of us will ever get each other.
Our experiences are ours and unique to us.
All religious paths and even dark paths, rewards the person via their beliefs, worship, obedience, offerings…
It is a transaction. Once you stop believing and giving, you are cut off.
If you stop paying for electricity, they will cut it off.
And they will tell you that your offenses made it happen.

Ultimately the soul must respect their own journey.
Nobody will ever be able to convince another person to go against their inner knowing.
To not trust what they feel inside.
For example some politicians are seen as lunatic dictators to half of the masses.
The other half sees them as god sent heroes.
They are loving grandpa and dad to some.
Same goes with butler and Krishna. There are no wrong or right perception.
Reality is subjective.
Many years ago, I saw butler as a savior. Now I see him as a false prophet who is influenced by some parasitic forces.
I am the same person, but my vision has shifted.

Truth wins Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ultimately the soul must respect their own
> journey.
> Nobody will ever be able to convince another
> person to go against their inner knowing.

Ultimately, the philosophical question must be asked - does Truth reveal itself? Will Truth reveal itself? Can Truth reveal itself? Is illusion - Maya - supposed to be philosophically stronger than Truth? And if absolute Truth does not reveal itself, then why should Maya - untruth - be stronger?

Then, asking a more precise question in the context of Vedic philosophy - if someone wants to know the truth honestly - what is supposed to separate him from this truth?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/15/2025 11:41PM by Culthusiast.

https://mountainx.com/arts/local-author-pens-memoir-about-his-life-as-a-hare-krishna/

This piece is basically a soft-focus whitewash, the kind of apologetic fluff you expect from someone still too attached to their own story to tell the truth. It’s full of pastoral nostalgia, vague spiritual talk, and carefully avoids any mention of systemic abuse. It reads more like a PR puff piece than a real memoir. Waterman goes on about milking cows and living off-grid like it was some Little House on the Vaishnava Prairie spiritual journey, but conveniently ignores the reality that New Vrindaban was a well-documented hub of abuse, fraud, coercion, and outright criminal behavior. That “tight little tribe” he’s so fond of included kids being beaten, women forced into arranged marriages, people sleep-deprived and worked to the bone under the banner of devotion. The off-grid lifestyle isn’t inherently virtuous, especially when it’s used to shield cult leaders from scrutiny and isolate members from legal protection or medical care.

He hides behind the “I just loved the lifestyle” defense, as if his personal enjoyment somehow cancels out the cultic hierarchy or the damage done to others. It’s the same self-centered narrative that always gets trotted out: it worked for me, so how bad could it be? That’s not objectivity. That’s denial. He claims to have written the book as objectively as possible, but he’s clearly invested in preserving the image of the movement. If he were being honest, he’d name names and call out the abuse openly instead of pretending like the bad stuff is just some fringe misunderstanding. And the classic cult apologetic slips in, too: “Anyone can leave anytime they want.” Please. That’s like saying abuse victims could just walk out if they didn’t like it. It completely ignores the emotional manipulation, the fear, the indoctrination, the guilt. Physical exit isn’t the same as psychological freedom.

Even the spiritual language he uses reeks of convenient vagueness. “Follow your heart and don’t be afraid” sounds nice until you realize it’s just a way to dress up indoctrination and submission in flowery terms. What’s worse is how the local media laps it up. The interviewer asks soft questions and lets him control the narrative completely. No challenge, no context, just a nice old man with a spiritual story to tell. Meanwhile, people who were actually broken by this system get erased or labeled as bitter outliers. What this guy is doing isn’t harmless. It’s sanitizing a cult experience to make himself feel better while perpetuating the same romantic myth that traps people in the first place. If anything, this kind of writing is more dangerous than outright propaganda because it looks so gentle and sincere. But make no mistake—this is gaslighting the historical record.

SIF is full of this history, as is evidenced by this long thread we still beat like a dead horse. Meanwhile, Butler sits in his tin-foil villa; his select minions continue to fund his lavish lifestyle while making a pretty penny themselves off, feeding people complete nonsense.

Any young devotees who read this forum or come upon it know this: You are in a cult. You were born a slave to a completely manufactured fake system—no different than Mormonism or Scientology. Hare Krishna, and especially Chris Butler's variant, is a complete mind-fuck cult that leaves its followers brain dead, unable to think for themselves and believing wholesale that their pale brittle guru living in his tin-foil mansion is going to elevate you to some sort of 'god consciousness" or grand "love of god."


RUN

Some cult apologists claim they were not harmed.

Their utter indifference to the welfare of their fellow devotees IMO demonstrates they were harmed.

Will there ever be any proper trial for the case of Caroline Sinavaiana-Gabbard and Papalii Sia Figiel? Who knows! Tulsi Gabbard knows. Butler knows. They know there will not. They also know the truth. Manipulation of justice and news is a crime, and that is what is being done 100% in the case of Caroline Sinavaiana-Gabbard and Papalii Sia Figiel.

RUN