Quote
emntk
Hi Maui,
I find it interesting that you claim that Tamal and Kirtananda were not close disciples of Bhaktivedanta Swami when in June 1977 they ranked numbers 1 and 3 a mere 9 months before he departed ('passed away' in common language). So are you saying that these two were thrown out of ISKCON during this 9 month period for child abuse or other inappropriate behaviors?
Bhavanda whom you also claim was involved in child abuse was ranked no. 6 on this list and Jayatirtha dasa was a user of LSD. Kirtananda was accused of killing Sulocana das and Tamal has been accused of killing Bhaktivedanta.
You don't disagree with the unscrupulous behaviors of these disciples.
Here is this list:
1. Kirtanananda Swami 7. Harikesa Swami
2. Jayapataka Swami 8. Ramesvara Swami
3. Tamal Krsna Goswami 9. Hansadutta Swami
4. Satsvarupa Goswami 10. Bhagavan dasa
5. Hrdayananda Goswami 11. Jayatirtha dasa
6. Bhavananda Goswami
[www.gosai.com]
The above disciples were named by ACB as qualified to accept disciples of their own. So as a supposed external manifestation of the supersoul or holy spirit or Lord in the heart it seems that ACB was not able to see the hearts of his own disciples.
So would you like to explain since you Maui claim so strongly that these disciples were never close to ACB why they happen to be on the most important lists produced by the so-called pure devotee as successors to this most important role as Guru?
Quote
maui
That statement was written in 1978 and is no longer accepted by ISKCON. In the mid 1980's ISKCON underwent a "guru reform" period and they rejected their previous interpretation outlined in that paper. They called it a big mistake and they changed the system. That list is not in any type of order that is supposed to show closeness to ACBS, it wasn't written by ACBS anyways but by someone else. Kirtanananda was not close to ACBS after he was kicked out of ISKCON. But he had his own thing going on in west virginia and begged to be let back in ISKCON. Before ACBS even died he was like the guru of his kingdom there. Those 11 were people who were performing initiation ceremonies around the world for ACBS because ACBS was too sick to do them himself. They were close in the sense that they were managing the movement, but none of them were close in the sense of friends, they are all disciples and ACBS told them he was shutting down the GBC because he was disgusted with their mismanagment and fighting amongst themselves. I am not going to go into this topic any deper because it has been gone over ad nauseam in other places, just do a websearch for any info you like.
Quote
emntkQuote
maui
That statement was written in 1978 and is no longer accepted by ISKCON. In the mid 1980's ISKCON underwent a "guru reform" period and they rejected their previous interpretation outlined in that paper. They called it a big mistake and they changed the system. That list is not in any type of order that is supposed to show closeness to ACBS, it wasn't written by ACBS anyways but by someone else. Kirtanananda was not close to ACBS after he was kicked out of ISKCON. But he had his own thing going on in west virginia and begged to be let back in ISKCON. Before ACBS even died he was like the guru of his kingdom there. Those 11 were people who were performing initiation ceremonies around the world for ACBS because ACBS was too sick to do them himself. They were close in the sense that they were managing the movement, but none of them were close in the sense of friends, they are all disciples and ACBS told them he was shutting down the GBC because he was disgusted with their mismanagment and fighting amongst themselves. I am not going to go into this topic any deper because it has been gone over ad nauseam in other places, just do a websearch for any info you like.
Do you realise how silly the above paragraph sounds? These 11 people who were initiating disciples around the world were not close friends of ACBS in the sense of friendship yet how were they qualified to initiate disciples on behalf of ACBS? You claim that ACBS was too unwell to initiate disciples but he was not even involved in choosing the disciples to represent him?
The above statement you just made makes absolutely no sense. Your desire not to discuss this issue anymore seems rather fishy as well. The link you posted doesn't work.
Your question of my spiritual ego is ridiculous as well. No where on this forum have I ever claimed to be a spiritual person nor a follower of any particular spiritual path. It is an interest of mine and I wish to question those who have been portrayed to me as spiritual teachers yet engage in particular behaviors. Further I have made very few claims of anything as a matter of fact on this forum. I have never once made any statement about Bhaktivedanta except I question the authenticity of his title 'pure devotee'. Mostly though I have questioned those who seem to have a reason to disrupt the 'Krishna group in Hawaii' thread. Which you seem to do. Many of your claims are totally unsubstantiated which makes me suspicious of you.
I get the impression you are totally evasive on questions put to you. Which is also suspicious.
If you are going to make silly, humorous statements such as the above that make absolutely no sense then I will argue you on how much of a fool you are making yourself appear.
Quote
"A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.
A classic...is divisive and argumentative with need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth", flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people or provoking people to insult him. Troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.
While he tries to present himself as a skeptic looking for truth ... his messages usually sounds as if it is the responsibility of other forum members to provide evidence that what forum is all about is legitimate science."