RUN_FOREST_RUN Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [boingboing.net]


it's good that there are those who remember. Because watching the FB / Meta profile of Tulsi Gabbard, one has the impression that there is no shortage of amateurs of cheap lies and idiots.

[www.thequint.com]

RUN_FOREST_RUN Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bhaktivedanta always favored those who were giving
> the most money and making converts. The list goes
> on. All modern krishna cults center around the
> ability to start new temples, create more converts
> and give off the vibe of opulence. Because,
> Bhagavan, you know...

In general, when reading the comments to the Bhagavatam and other writings, one can feel a different spirit than reports from conversations with students, etc. Organizational, recruiting element. Translations and commentaries written in the Damodara temple. This 6th canto of the Bhagavatam mentions that a priest who undertakes preaching loses the effects of brahminical sacrifices or attainments. Which also contradicts the belief that it is teaching that raises or increases concentration. In turn, developing or referring to the theory of "gunas", one could comment that it would then depend on the subject and the level of teaching. Concentration on lower aspects would then be binding.

The relationship of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami to disciple Chris Butler in the context of tobacco is also paradoxical. Prabhupada used tobacco for medicinal purposes. And we have a manifestation of this path in the form of Chris Butler, who has an ambiguous attitude towards marijuana - another burnt plant.


> Bhaktisiddhanta's last words towards the end of
> his life warned of association with other groups
> besides his Gaudiya Math. He also claimed that
> "Bhagavan will not accept anything that is offered
> by a person who doesn't chant Harinam one-hundred
> thousand times daily (1 lakh of names)."... If
> that's the case I think we can comfortably say
> that no modern-day hare krishna devotee is
> performing real service. Or it's revealing of the
> level of fanatic religious idiocy of one man.

Quote

https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/4/11/

Bg. 4.11

Translation
As all surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.

Yes, this seems to contradict the above verse from the Bhagavad Gita, where every surrender, even a small one, is rewarded accordingly. Unless you consider that accepting the service - in a personal aspect - requires so much devotion.

In a different spirit.

Water, leaf, fruit - but with love and devotion. On the one hand, a high standard of acceptance of anything, on the other - it is not money.


> In fact the gaudiya tradition as a whole has a bad
> habit of claiming "scholarly" personages, from
> Chaitanya to Bhaktisiddhanta, with literally zero
> proof of any scholarly works available for study.
> Bhaktisiddhanta's most ambitious writing reeks so
> hard of self-riotous arrogance that it's hard to
> read even a few pages without stiffening up in
> discomfort. Bhaktivinode had to forcefully submit
> his Chaitanya biography to western universities to
> even be included in their repertoire of hindu
> studies texts. Many, if not all scholarly works on
> chaitabnya vaishnavism paint the same general
> picture: A faction sect/cult of chanting and
> dancing arose much around the same time in Bengal
> as Islamic devotional chanting cults. Chaitanya is
> written about in a mythological writing style in
> the only few books available about his so-called
> life.

For me, a puzzling aspect is the fact of promoting and emphasizing the congregational chanting of the Holy Name of the Lord, but as we know from history, Chaitanya was supposed to spend many years in the Jagannath temple.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2023 03:20PM by Culthusiast.

Culthusiast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RUN_FOREST_RUN Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> >
> [boingboing.net]
>
>
> it's good that there are those who remember.
> Because watching the FB / Meta profile of Tulsi
> Gabbard, one has the impression that there is no
> shortage of amateurs of cheap lies and idiots.


Culthusiast,

This is what all personality cults eventually attract. Cheap lies and idiots willing to keep up the act against all odds. This happened to Chaitanyas movement, it became a bunch of Bengal sahajiya dressing as gopis. It happened to Gaudiya math and ISKCON, and obviously SIF.

The formula is always the same. A cult leader (whoever, let's take Bhaktisiddhanta) starts a small following with a focus on a specific personality (Chaitanya saint, for example). The focus then becomes on building the "personality" of the core figures. Attention is put on deities and other external "visuals" like a yellow dhoti, shaved heads, saffron cloth, brahman threads, peacock feathers, flutes, etc. Once a "look" is established you have a "brand", it's easier to sell the idea when you can box it up into a neat little package.

With vedic Brahmanism and other more ambiguous philosophical systems like Taoism and Buddhism etc, you don;t really have a "personality", so it is more difficult to sell the idea. People like pictures and objects, so they are quick to focus on something when they can say, "Krishna is blue, wears a yellow dhoti and has a peacock feather, flute and a girlfriend!". For ISKCON you have their "prabhupadaism". They have in each temple a plastic creepy statue of Prabhupada and it all becomes more or less about the external personality of Prabhupada and less about just trying to be a good person and decent human. Even many preachers and old Prabhupada disciples adopted a faux indian accent in their preaching in an unconscious imitation of their founder. That's culty. Any way you slice it.

In SIF you have your 1980s Jagad Guru speaks "personality". They have Wailana and her yoga shit to use as a recruitment tool as well, again, personality worship.

And then finally you have Tulsi Gabbard and the like. She has her branded look and appeal and they push that to hook people into their brand of ideology. It takes a casual read through her comments that he core support network is comprised of fanatical butler-bots or the same level of intellect as followers of David Khoresh. "Go for Trumps VP! We need to crush those democaryic demons!!!" is an average comment. Now think back to Butler and his countless rants against homosexuals and Islam and whoever did not meet his approval and a beach full of his disciples laughing and nodding in approval of every dense, closed-minded hateful word he spewed. Butler has since recanted some of his statements in a "I'm not perfect, but god loves me anyway" style of apology. Yet, the proof is in the pudding of his disciples like Tulsi Gabbard who still parrot and evoke his ideology.

Ultimately these religions are perfect for this day and age where people can't think for themselves anymore and simply want spoon-fed answers to everything. And what better religion than one that creates a sense of division of "Us versus them"? This has been at the core of modern-day gaudiya leaders since the time of Bhaktisiddhanta who forbade his followers to listen or entertain anything else than his version of events. Why did him and his father spend so much time, energy and money to establish a new "Yoga-pith" birthplace of the chaitanya saint? Why was that even so important? Talk about external and mundane. especially because there was already an established and recognized yoga-pith among gaudiya vaisnavas. Why did he introduce the giving of a brahman thread and brahman (Gayatri initiation)? Again, it was to create division and try to establish his cult as a superior, new-and-improved, "true" version of Chaitanya Vaishnavism. Even though wearing brahman threads, carrying danda etc had NOTHING to do with Chaitanya Vaishnavism. Nothing. Zero. Just a made-up thing. Never mind his method for establishing many of these things was based entirely on his dreams, not on any scriptural verses or order of his guru, Gaurkishor. Even his so-called initiation by Gorakishor is highly subjective and likely did not ever occur based on the discrepancy of dates and many other factors. The efforts of some gaudiya groups n trying to bolster the Yoga-pitha location of Bhaktisiddhanta is also flawed since land records and historical accounts bluntly show the diversion of major rivers. The attempts made to quote Chaitanya Charitamrita as a verification method is also flawed since the only verses that state any specifics are completely generic in stating that there was some "Large tree here and a shiva temple there etc etc"... That's like establishing my birthplace 500 years later because a third party account states that I was born next to a 7-11 and a park with many trees... This is literally the level of verification that is sued by modern gaudiyas. Just the same as their naive claims of Rama setu and Dwarka being "real" because some shards of clay pots were found off the coast of India... All of sudden this is proof somehow of monkeys and Bears building a floating bridge and Krishna having a vast kingdom where he had kids with 16108 wives... The level of naivety is so deep that one cannot hold a meaningful and rational conversation with such people let alone trust a word they say afterward.

One has to consider the implications that if none of the above is true by any stretch, why would one cherry-pick, based on some fluke verse in one highly suspect scripture of a mention of chanting hare krishna mantra, that any of this is of any value? Any intelligent person who reads the Gita can plainly see it a last-gasp Brahminical amalgamation scripture. It parrots Upanashadic verses almost verbatim, has countless debunked non-scientific outlooks, and has been proven to be shoehorned into the Mahabharata text, almost out of context and chronology. Its composition dates to the exact time period as Buddhism, which had a strong hold on the public imagination and spread beyond India's borders. Brahmanism needed to find a way to re-insert itself into the public dialogue. Through the method of story-telling, proto-vedic and vedic top-tier gods were woven into the stories and demoted in favor of the "in-vogue" monotheism. Village deities that already had a plethora of fun world tales of heroic epic proportions, that had become popular in the public eye, evolved into the Krishna avatar. At first Krishna was added to the ever-expanding new "avatar" of vishnu, and eventually, in recent times, accented to a supreme divinity. Think about that. Krishna was not considered a top divinity (never mind radha did not even exists) until MAYBE the last 1500-2000 years max. Smaller cults existed that worshipped Vasudev and other variants of a proto-krishna god. Any philosophic structure and explanation of how krishna wove into the lager context of what is now considered "vedic" texts, is very very recent in human history. A bunch of people dressed in medieval robes or sitting in a ventilated meditation studio singing Hare Krishna or Gopala Govinda rama is not some "ancient" practice or belief system. It is very literally a 500 year old cult originating in Bengal and not even, within the lifetime of the so-called golden avatar, going beyond the reaches of Bengal. It lasted for some 30 years during the saints lifetime and then quickly devolved into a sahajiya sect of grown men dressing as gopis. For some reason, Bhaktivinode came under the influence and this cult. After a lifetime of working in government under the British raj and eating meat, he was enamored by the gaudiya vaishnava ideal of Gopi Bhava. Wouldn't be the first grown-ass man to fantasize about being a 12-year-old girl!

There are many philosophical systems, dogmas and ideologies. Some more profound and esoteric than others. But why do some get so wrapped up in personality worship and externals? I always found it odd that a philosophy based on "you are not your body" fixates so heavily on external physical aspects to really only do one thing: Create a constant sense of duality and division and hierarchy. a sanyasi carries a useless stick, a Brahman wears a thread across his chest and Butler's bots tattoo their body with narashingha tattoos in a "tough guy" fashion. All doing one thing: Reinforcing identification with your body and external reality.

In practice, most of Scientology, Mormonism, Hare Krishna/Vaishnavism and other garden variety religions like Islam and Christianity and their variants are not necessarily teaching anything ill-willed. Most of their practices are benign, community-building efforts of brotherhood: Hang out, believe in the same ideology, sing, dance, eat food, repeat. Again, on the surface, there is not much difference between any religions. Which begs the question: Why do these charismatic teachers pop up continually through the ages and do simply one thing: Creat division and a hierarchical method of control? What was so different about one philosophy or religious group's teachings than another, at its fundamental core, that a religious leader felt that they needed to start something "new"? The answer is simple. There is no one "path" or "way". All people, based on assorted life circumstances, believe and worship what comes naturally through their personal realization. If no religion was there, a child is not born to "believe" in any god, guru, scripture or dogma. These things get artificially imposed on people by those who feel they have the "answers".

Most of these traditions and religious cults teach the same basic thing. Yet, they are very keen on establishing their specific temples and churches, and organizations. Even within the very small and fringe "gaudiya" brand of viasnavas, there is no shortage of divisions and sub-groups who differ, disagree, and diverge on even the simplest siddhanta. There is little to no fluid agreement between "guru, sadhu, and sastra" yet it is used as a method of so-called authority and verification for information and core beliefs.

Even the name: Science of Identity. This is a lie. There is no real use of the scientific method in anything they teach. It is entirely based on the ideology of one man and his interpretation and version of the "truth". Which, when analyzed in any rational and meaningful way, is a hodgepodge of beliefs ranging from beliefs in debunked myths, a litany of fantastical gods and goddesses, exaggerated claims about saints and gurus, flawed science, dangerous rhetoric, and often limited and closed-minded faith in total bullshit. Its final offering is the notion of realizing one's "Siddha swarup" by virtue of singing/chanting (God forbid you lack a tongue, are mute or deaf). And what is this "highest" conception and flavor of love that one can realize and attain to? To imagine yourself living in a little village in the Indian subcontinent, dressed in medieval Indian clothes and surrounded by cattle (an animal no more special than a dinosaur or the aurochs it evolved from) as a 12 year old milk-maid who frolics at night with the sexy divine couple... I see. You have a brain, you have legs? Can we run now?

Ready? START!

Yes, you are right RUN FOREST RUN that the history of the Gaudiya movement is as controversial and debatable as history. I talked to the sanyasis and they admit that some elements are difficult to accept, difficult to prove factually, they are even contradictory and can only be treated symbolically.

Yes, these are the methods of building religious movements. Designations of a new religious group, a new party. A new party, a new hierarchy based on new designations. But it must offer a higher science, the exclusiveness of pure vision, the exclusiveness of salvation or liberation. The promise of exclusive salvation. Only in our group is the truth pure, complete. Only in our group will you achieve salvation. Only our guru for a complete clear vision. Only he fulfills the will of God.

Of course, religious mutations can originate in social processes. The clash of civilizations, settled cultures with nomads, attackers, Vandals, Mongols, their vassals, etc. Or politically motivated, for example, we will get rid of Asher, Yahweh's partner, because it resembles Astarte too much. We as a group need to stand out. Baal is not to be worshiped, although it may have once been Balarama. And so on.

Generally, the mood, folklore of a given culture, social mixture or moods change.

Let's say what can be described as relatively similar over the centuries is that it's easier to trade in cities, it's easier to meet different people because cities are bigger. In this sense, it can be agreed that the guna "rajas" has more influence here. Than in rural areas. Idyllic moods, etc. Or the influence of the mountains on the psychology of chiefs. Adolf Hilter was from Austria. mountainous Austria. Joseph Stalin - Georgian. A mountainous country.

New religions are also created at the meeting point or clash of cultures. Sikhs. Guru Nanak meditated and God was not as portrayed by Muslims or Hindus. And we have a new religion.

Or the clash of Greek and Hindu cults - Bactria.

When it comes to Krishna, it is more associated with a child. There are suspicions that the Atharvaveda was the first. Well, not Krishna, but Krishen, Kryszen - Slavic "kruszynka" - "delicate child". Radha? Radka. From the word "radzic" - "to give advice". Jasioda's neighbor. She gives advice. At night, she transforms from a rural neighbor into the divine lover Radha. K -> H. Who are you divine girl - "I am Radha". It's always easier to admit that the lie didn't go too far. Rukmini? Rukmina -> Ruknima. The lover "Kryszen" is fascinated by the princess who is not eager to work "because she has no hands" "ruk -ni-ma" - "hands -not-have". The village is disapointed - princess "no-hands" takes our sweet boy. Etc.

An interesting question is raised in this open letter:

An open letter to my parent’s guru

[medium.com]

Quote

But I see through your mask. I know the truth. You’re a fraud, a charlatan, a rogue, a scoundrel. You know it too. That’s why when the authorities came knocking on your door in 1995, you immediately rolled over and showed them your soft belly, crying that the world was poisoning you and you were too sick to be a threat. You’re ultimately a coward, doing your worst in the shadows away from prying eyes, and employing others to cover your tracks.

What event is Lalita writing about? What happened in 1995? What was the exact date?

Remnants of the Atharvaveda?

"Visoka je gora zelena" - high green mountain? The path of the heart chakra to God - green.

Relationship with a woman - the law of knowledge, the tree of good and evil. Eve tempted Adam with a sensual apple. The energy of the Garden of Eden is gone - they have focused on themselves in a sensual act and are leaving the Garden of Eden. Perhaps energy exchange, gene exchange, change. Symbolism.

Sarajevo - Sara & Eve. And so on.


[www.youtube.com]

Many slavic names are indoeuropean proto-slavic remnants. River "Drava".

[www.youtube.com]

"Zaspal Janko pod Jablankom"

[www.youtube.com]

Janko overslept under the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Fog of illusion. Three girls - three gunas.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2023 03:45AM by Culthusiast.

Brahma has four heads, we have foreheads. Vishnu has four arms, we have forearms. And krishna has blue balls. And so do you. So many coincidences it makes one want to chant 64 rounds and drink butler's foot water.

Everything is a remnant of something before it. A remix. An evolution.

Run comrade.

Click the link to read a short message for CB and the followers....