Srila Prabhupadas Letter to Pradyumna

Letter to Pradyumna
Saturday, February 17, 1968
Los Angeles, Calif.

My Dear Pradyumna,

Please accept my blessings. I have received the transliteration of Brahma Samhita and also your letter of February 14, 1968. I am very much pleased with the nice job you have done.

Presently I am using one copy of the Gita Press version of Srimad-Bhagavatam in connection with my translating work, but in due course I may send it to you and you may transliterate the second and third cantos at that time. So if you can do this transliteration we have enough assignments. You may work together with Gaurasundara in this connection.

I am always praying to Krishna for your advancement in Krishna Consciousness, all of you, sincere souls.

Hope you are all well.
Your ever well-wisher,
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

Open Letter to Hridayananda das Goswami Acaryadeva
by Urdhvaga das

Hridayananda

Dear Hridayananda das Goswami Acaryadeva (the god amongst the acaryas) [sic].

In your letter published on http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/04-09/editorials4340.htm you say: "never break a devotee", but why they kicked us all out the movement? Why we have been kicked out of our father's house?

Could it be of what you wrote in YOUR "Srimad Bhagavatam"?

You wrote in the Eleventh Canto of your bogus "Srimad Bhagavatam" that the two worst paedophile Iskcon gurus and child molesters [Bhavananda and Kirtanananda] are your examples of acaryas to worship as new "successor-gurus", thus perverting Iskcon and Srila Prabhupadas pure philosophy.

Srila Prabhupad appointed Pradyumna Prabhu to finish translating Cantos 10, 11 and 12 of Srimad Bhagavatam. But YOU Hridayananda das Goswami Acaryadeva (what an offensive title) have stolen this service from Pradyumna and helped to kick him out of Iskcon. Why did you break Pradyumna Prabhu and kicked him out?

Your unscrupulous usurpation of Pradyumna's sacred service marked only the start of your 33 year treachery GBC-teamwork trend of perverting Srila Prabhupada's books and kicking out devotees. You are the worst hypocrite amongst them all.

Urdhvaga das

BY BY TARUN KRSNA DAS

EDITORIAL, Aug 13 (VNN) — Dear sannyasis, prabhus, matajis & didis,

Sorry. Koti dandavat pranams out to you all. We wanted to keep part one as short & to the point as possible, figuring it would only affect those who possessed the BBT's 11th Canto perplexed version. But we received some feedback, email & phone calls from those that did NOT own the perplexed 11th Canto edition yet still wanted to know more, asking us to please fill in the actual verse & some perplexed purport portions. Thus, this.

Side by side, in every installment we shall show what Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami, Srila Bhaktiraksaka Sridhar, Srila Bhaktipramoda Puri, Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayan, Srila Bhaktivallabha Tirtha & Srila Gaur Govinda Mhrjs as well as many other bonafide gurus spoke & wrote concerning this very same sloka & philosophical point, Plurality of Guru.

The verse & purport in question.

In Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.9.31) it is stated:

na hy ekasmad guror jnanam
su-sthiram syat su-puskalam
brahmaitad advitiyam vai
giyate bahudharsibhih

The BBT has translated this verse as follows:

Although the Absolute Truth is one without a second, the sages have described Him in different ways. Therefore, one may not be able to acquire very firm or complete knowledge from one spiritual master.

This verse is so important. It literally separates the men from the boys. Or in Sanskrt terms, the madhyamas from the kanisthas, id est, those who can see guru everywhere vs. those can only see guru in one form.

Gita Press translates this verse as follows:
Stable & comprehensive knowledge cannot be acquired from one preceptor.

This Brahma, without a second, has been variously sung by the Rsis.

su-sthiram = very steady, stable
su-puskalam = very complete, comprehensive

'Na hi' literally means never certainly. Its an emphatic negation double-blow combination found throughout Bhagavad-gita & all other Vedic texts. If the avadhuta brahmana, Dattatreya had wanted to soften his knockout punch, this being his last verse of this particular chapter, He would never have used this one-two knockout combination: na hi. Indeed these 2 have combined to become the well-known emphatically strong one word negation in Sanskrt's principle daughter language Hindi: nahi, meaning emphatic negation.

In Sri Guru & His Grace, Srila Sridhardev translates this sloka thus: "One certainly cannot get complete knowledge from only one guru." Precisely faithful to Sri Dattatreya's words.

To weaken Sri Dattatreya's emphasis by changing 'certainly never' to 'may not' which is even weaker than Gita Press's 'cannot' is asati, an unchaste signal or flag. Dear Houndpack, next time, if you 'cannot comprehend' the level of Srila Sridhardev, at least rise to the level of Gita Press.

Yet another thought: because Dattatreya is the combination of the 3 principle Deities of what is nowadays called Hinduism or Vedic Culture, this BBT houndpack's misinterpretation of His words clearly shows that their combined consciousness has not yet even entered into or reached the level of general Vedic Hinduism, so what to speak of their ability to write suddha-sattva Krsna conscious vaisnav purports!

Within this BBT houndpack perplex there are 5 paragraphs containing so many mistakes that we'll have to divide it into perplexed installments.

In addition, the first 3 paragraphs are comprised of quotes from the tikas or commentaries of 3 extremely important acharyas ALL OF WHOM HAD 3 OR MORE GURUS THEMSELVES.

The BBT houndpack's 1st paragraph claims the following:

Srila Sridhar Svami comments on this verse as follows. "The statement that one requires many spiritual masters certainly needs explanation, since practically all great saintly persons of the past did not take shelter of many spiritual masters, but rather accepted one. The words giyate bahudharsibhih, 'the Absolute Truth is glorified in many ways by the sages, ' indicate the personal & impersonal understandings of the Absolute Truth. In other words, some sages describe only the Lord's impersonal effulgence, which is without spiritual variety, whereas others describe the Lord's manifest form as the Personality of Godhead.

Thus, merely by hearing from many different authorities, one cannot actually learn the highest perfection of life. The proliferation of differing spiritual authorities is useful only to counteract the living entities' tendency to be grossly materialistic. Different spiritual philosophers create faith in the exitence of the soul & may be accepted at that level. But as will be clarified in later verses, the spiritual master who ultimately gives perfect knowledge is one."

At a glance there are at least 23 mistakes in this first of 5 paragraphs which the houndpack claims to be a faithful quote from Srila Sridhar Svami.

Both bahudha & rsibhih have been misinterpreted as meaning personalists & impersonalists. That is only 2. In Sanskrt there is a dual form to distinguish 2 from 3 or more. Bahudha indicates 3 or more. In addition, rsibhih is also carrying the 3 or more instrumental bahu-vacanam prefix. Sorry hounds! Again, no match.

This primary perplexed paragraph could also have us believe that because Srila Prabhupad repeated the 4 regulative principles & 'we're not this body' in almost every lecture he gave, that would make him a less significant guru, in their words: "a spiritual authority useful only to counteract our tendency to be grossly materialistic..., who creates faith in the existence of the soul..., who may be accepted at that level..." but not necessarily "the one who ultimately gives perfect knowledge."

If anything at all in this first paragraph were balanced or true, ANYTHING AT ALL, why would our beloved Srila Prabhupad have said the following:

In Feb 1936, at the newly established Bombay Gaudiya Math, on the appearance day, avirbhav of his gurudev, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur & in his presence, face to face, Abhay Charan das Aravinda (Srila Prabhupad) offered aloud his famous 'Universal Teacher' speech within which we find these 4th paragraph words:

"Gentlemen, the offering of such an homage as has been arranged this evening is not a sectarian concern, for when we speak of the fundamental principle of gurudev & acharyadev, we speak of something that is of universal application. There does not arise any question of discriminating my guru from yours or anyone else's. There's only one guru who appears in an infinity of forms to teach you, me & all others."

Just see. Prabhupad's conception of guru-tattva is so clear & pure.

Infinity as opposed to the houndpack's bahudha equaling 2.

Grammatically, mathematically & philosophically erroneous. A slight difference.

Kiba bahu-koti chandra jini vadana ujjvala... Bahu koti, not 2 million, but 3 million or more. But what's the use, this houndpack never shows up at sandhyaratrika anyway. Their too busy misinterpreting sastra.

Otherwise they'd know the meaning of bahu!!!

Please recall that this is the same Srila Sridhar Svami of the Visnu Svami Rudra-sampradaya over whose Srimad Bhagavatam commentary Sri Vallabhacarya & Sriman Mahaprabhu has a slight dispute causing the Latter, God Himself to declare: "I think anyone who rejects Svami is a prostitute."

The BBT houndpack must be misinterpreting Srila Sridhar Svami's purport, which we shall further prove in future installments, because their misconception of guru-tattva obviously differs from Prabhupad's, whose sannyas name just also happens to be Svami. So who is engaged in prostitution HERE?

Similarly, in Sri Guru & His Grace, chapter 11, entitled: The Land of Gurus, Srila Sridhardev explicates this very same sloka as follows:

"'One certainly cannot get complete knowledge from only one guru.' In the highest stage of devotion, we must see that guru is everywhere. In the land of Krsna, all are gurus; our transformation should be towards that. Everything in the spiritual world, the entire environment is our guru and we are servants. To enter into Vaikuntha or Goloka means that on all sides we must see guru & pay our respects. There is gradation of course, but all are guru."

"There are different classes of guru. All Vaisnavas are considered gurus. If the spiritual master gives even one letter to the disciple, what is contained there is infinite. The knowledge given by the spiritual master is infinite. To know & understand it fully, however different sources are necessary."

"In the highest position one can read devotion to Krsna from everywhere. If we can attain the proper vision, then everything will supply us inspiration toward the performance of our duties. Whenever Mahaprabhu saw a forest, he saw it as Vrndavan. Whenever He saw a river, he saw it as Yamuna. Whenever He saw a hill, He saw it as Govardhan. In that highest stage, wherever we cast our glance, it will remind us of/about our Lord. They will teach us, they will press us to engage ourselves in service to Krsna. That is the duty of guru.

Wherever we cast our glance, whatever we come in contact with will only excite us, 'Do your duty.' That is guru. Our guru is whoever helps give us impetus for the service of Krsna, whoever helps us to look toward the center. So, because every atom in Vaikuntha & Goloka will encourage us towards our duty, they are all our gurus. Gurus will be very amply supplied when we can raise ourselves to a higher level."

Srila Sridhardev goes on to say so many wonderful positive things about guru-tattva unlike our BBT perplexers. The difference is astounding, for those who are willing to be astounded. For the rest, remain kanistha as long as possible. Hold on. Hold out. Why advance?

ps Just as the acronym NASA used to mean National Aeronautics & Space Administration, but since 1986 has been changed to mean: N eed A nother S even A stronauts, similarly, since 1982, the meaning of BBT has been changed to: B aloney B ook T rust.

pps The BBT devotees have a chance to rectify themselves if they listen to at least SOME of Sripad Tripurari Svami's advice. And act accordingly. If.

ppps Sri Hrdayananda Mhrj is now offering help to Raghunath concerning the gurukula court case. Very nice. He also recently went to visit & speak with Srila Narayan Mhrj, who is one bonafide holder of the Bhaktivedanta title having received it even earlier from the same source Srila AC Bhaktivedanta Svami did: Srila Bhaktiprajnana Kesava Mhrj & Srila Bhaktiraksaka Sridhar Mhrj. If the BBT wants their 'Bhaktivedanta' title back, they know from whom to get it.

This story URL: http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9908/ET13-4493.html