n the last issue, in this very Interactive section, we answered a challenge from then GBC voted-in guru and sannyasi HH Trivikrama Swami ("TVS"), specifically about about "Why Gurus Fall".
a) TVS had claimed that the reason was because they "imitated" rather than "followed in the footsteps" of Srila Prabhupada.
b) We had quoted Srila Prabhupada to show that the real cause was because they were not authorised:
"The spiritual master must never be carried away by an accumulation of wealth or a large number of followers. A bona fide spiritual master will never become like that. But sometimes, if a spiritual master is not properly authorized, and only on his own initiative becomes a spiritual master, he may be carried away by an accumulation of wealth and large numbers of disciples."
(The Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 14)
c) Which also means that even those who do not visibly fall down are still unauthorised, due to all GBC gurus having taken up their guruship in the same unauthorised manner.
d) We even quoted TVS admitting Srila Prabhupada did not authorise any gurus!
e) In the same interview from which we were refuting his statements, TVS had also boasted regarding being a sannyasi:
"my life is getting better and better [...] So how can I give that up? For what? [...] what's the alternative? To get married? I'm going to marry at 82? [...] go looking for a bride?"
Ironically, all the points we made above in the last issue about TVS, have now stunningly been shown to be "prophetic", just like how our article from BTP 81 also became similarly prophetic, as shown on page 3 of this issue. Because, having given the real explanation to TVS for "Why Gurus Fall", TVS (now "Dasa") has himself recently announced in a resignation letter that he has now fallen down from being a guru due to having engaged in sexual relations with a female disciple, thereby showing his unauthorised status. And, according to Srila Prabhupada's quote above, it would also mean that TVS was never a bona fide guru. Even according to TVS's own words quoted above, it would mean that:
a) He fell down because he was not following Srila Prabhupada;
b) His life was not "getting better and better", since he decided to give up sannyasa.
 |
What is most interesting from a philosophical standpoint is that, in his resignation letter, even though he has admitted to his falldown and therefore stated that he has given up sannyasa and stopped initiating new disciples, his current disciples who wish "to maintain their relationships" with him "as disciples", are free to do so, but must simply "minimize publicly displaying their feelings of respect and reverence." And even that is only "until further notice", because his situation will be "reviewed" after "one year", when in theory he could even start initiating new disciples again. Thus, he can continue as a diksa guru. Therefore:
a) If you dare to accept Srila Prabhupada as your diksa guru, you will be ruthlessly hounded out of ISKCON for engaging in a "dangerous philosophical deviation" (GBC Resolution 301, 1999).
b) But if you wish to continue to accept someone who has sexually deviated as your diksa guru then you are free to do so, as long as you do not make too much of a public show about it.
c) This is ISKCON's "guru-tattva" – Srila Prabhupada's spiritual position is considered to be worse than sexual deviancy.
d) And to make it worse, the sexual deviancy does not even matter much. Just go away for a year, keep a low profile, and then you may be "good to go" again.
People marvel at how humiliating and embarrassing these guru falldowns are becoming. But, as just laid bare, it is the so-called guru-tattva justifying and propping up the guru hoax that is actually the biggest joke and embarrassment in this situation.
Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click Here
Return to "Fall Downs" Index
Return to Trivikrama Swami Index
Return to IRM Homepage
