IS GURU ON THE PLATFORM OF PREMA THE ONLY REAL GURU?

His Holiness Bhaktividyā Pūrṇa Svāmī Mahārāja: No, it becomes covered. So, unless you change your value system, then it won't be lost. It may be covered though, but by being covered for long enough then you may accept a new value system.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Hmm.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Well, that's if you want to establish that guru only means someone who they themselves by their realization is on the platform of prema. Then you could say, yes, he was never on the platform of prema, therefore he fell down. So you could say that. But otherwise, Bharata Mahārāja is not in the Bhāgavatam because he was a schmoe. And he was an uttama-adhikārī, and he fell down. So like it or not, then... Our principle is iron and fire. Because then you have to say that the jīva is internal potency, and the jīva even never is, never was, never will be. As Kṛṣṇa says, 'Never there was a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings.' Means, the jīva has always been there and he always will be, so they don't change. But we become absolute by being in the fire of the devotion of the internal potency, otherwise then we are like iron when we are in the association of the external potency. So, you can have that point, but then, you know, it's a nice point. But at the same time is, in reality then why is it the scriptures talk about second class and third class devotees as gurus? So then you have to just take his definition of guru, he is meaning someone who comes to the platform of nitya-siddha, because anything below nitya-siddha can fall down. That we know from scripture, that we have heard from Prabhupāda.

So that point is there, so the point is is, you can say that, but then... So he is meaning, a real Guru is one who has come to that platform, and we will agree, yeah, that is The Real Guru. But the point is is, anybody who is following in the footsteps of The Real Guru, if they as it is, they are a clear, transparent via media for the instruction of that Real Guru, then they become as good as the Real Guru. They may not be The Real Guru but they are as good as. Just like iron and fire is as good as fire, or when you run electricity through copper: copper is not electricity, it is metal, but it is as good as, as long as it is connected. As soon as it is not connected, you unplug the wire, there is no electricity. You take the iron out of the fire, it is no more fire. So the point is, we put in - out, in - out, like that. Does that make some sense? So that's the point, you just have to be, understand as what is the definitions. 

THE IMPORTANCE OF FOUNDER-ĀCĀRYA

So that's why in this age then they always use a Founder-Ācārya and other gurus. Because the Founder, what he says is perfect for his mission. Anybody who imbibes that, takes it, practices and gives it to others will be successful. They don't have to speculate and make up their own, they just follow what the Ācārya says. So in that way then they are gurus, but only as long as they follow that direction of that Founder, then it is worth, then they are as good as. They are the conduit, so they are as good as. So if you want to be technical, yes. It is just like bhakti - until you come to prema, you are not a devotee. Devotional service starts at prema, like that. It is pretty close at bhāva, but it is still not prema, because prema is defined as unalloyed, uninterrupted devotion - that's bhakti. Bhakti is eternal, so there never can be a point where it is not functioning. That means, the sādhaka, technically speaking, is not a devotee. Does that make sense? So, but is that the angle we take on it? Is that what we preach? Who would come forward if we made that statement? Right? So, therefore, it's a point, a technical point to understand, so that one doesn't become proud  as he advances. But at the same time is, anything in pursuance of devotion is counted as devotion, that's the verse just in that first Canto, fifth chapter, Nārada Muni is explaining that: what is in connection with bhakti is counted as bhakti. So that's Bhāgavatam, so that is our angle. But technically we know, by tattva, yes. So technically therefore only a nitya-siddha is guru. But anyone in pursuance of that is guru.

You name me in all the devotees in this movement, who was brought in off the street personally by Prabhupāda's preaching exclusively? And who was brought in off the street by the other devotees? And I think you might find the ones who were exclusively brought in by Prabhupāda, without the assistance of anybody else or the inspiration of anybody else, is a handful. And everybody else was brought in by maybe senior, but maybe even brand new devotee who only joined a week before. And probably a lot were even brought in just by prasāda. We were brought in directly by Kṛṣṇa Himself. [Laughter] The most elevated devotee, like that. 'The Prasādam Bhaktas.' You know what I am saying? So that's why in these one has to be very, very careful. Is that the point is well taken, but at the same time is, there must be seen the art of application because you have rasa and you have tattva. So when you apply it, then the elements of the personal point... Because the point is is, those devotees advanced, and if they weren't gurus, where did it come from? You know what I am saying? If they weren't devotees, if they weren't gurus, where did it come from? That has to be explained. So the next time you hear somebody say that, ask them then how did these people advance? If they say, 'Well, that's by Prabhupāda's mercy,' he says, yes, that's the only way it works by anybody. Anyone who claims to be a guru on their own, without Prabhupāda's mercy, is not in our line. Because that's how it works, in the Kali-yuga gurus don't stand on their own. They stand in the line of Ācāryas. You have a Founder, that's the way it works. The Madhvas, they all follow Madhvācārya, the Rāmānujas, they all follow him. Nimbārkas, Viṣṇusvāmī, Vallabhas, Śaṅkarites, even the Māyāvādīs follow this. So who is,  where are the bona fide lines that don't stand on a Founder? Tell me! Buddhists, they got Buddha. Jesus, they got him. Where is that line, a bonafide line? I don't see it, I haven't heard of it. So, therefore, everyone after that Founder is simply representing the Founder anyway. So it is still only by the mercy of the Founder. But at the same time, there is the mercy of the person who came and spent that time and energy to help you. Therefore they are called Guru.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, whoever connects you, gives you Pañcarātrika-dīkṣā, then that's your Guru, that's your line that you will do Deity worship. Your authorization to do Deity worship is through that person who gave you second initiation. You don't go through that person, the Deity doesn't accept your worship. It's said, to do that that's there, it doesn't say that... If they are bona fide practicing brāhmanas who received the mantra from their bona fide source, then you receiving that, then you have the authorization to do the worship, that's what it functions on. Within those persons that could give you that connection you always look for the highest. But the point is is, for us the highest means, is who follows Śrīla Prabhupāda nicely that we are able to relate to and understand and surrender to: that's our definition of the highest. Others may have their own definition, but that's their  life, not ours. You know, like Lord Caitanya told Sanātana Gosvāmī, when he goes to Vṛndāvana, He says, 'Don't move, don't mix very closely with the Vrajavāsīs: they are in their own category. So you are a sādhaka, you do your own thing. We have our line, they have theirs.' So in the same way, others can do whatever their like, we offer our respects and all that, but from a distance. They want to do, what do we care? No problem for us, but we have our Ācāryas, we have our line, we have our way it works, and we follow that - Kṛṣṇa will be pleased.

THE ORIGIN OF ṚTVIKS

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Hmm?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Ṛtvik system, means?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: The Ṛtviks? It's come from the principle of frustrated temple presidents and Godbrothers that want to be in exclusive control and charge of their independence, you know, to the exclusion of any Gurus. Because Prabhupāda is not there to come along to tell them what to do and take their devotees and move them around the temples - that's where it had come from. It has nothing to do with philosophy, nothing to do with culture, it is simply power politics, that's all. That's all it is. Because you  notice, the people who are the most strong about it are all very independent temple presidents who don't want to work under anybody's authority, and they have always been like that. This is my observation. You have one or two people who make a philosophy of it, but they are also people who are independent and just don't have any respect for anybody. But the point about it is is, it maintains your independence, but at the same time you could be an authority. Because the temple president, he technically becomes the Guru, though he clouds it, hides it behind, 'No, no, they are Prabhupāda's disciples.' But he is the one that tells them what Prabhupāda's purports and program, and everything means. So it's just that Gurus come along and take disciples out of their temple, or they get, you know, affections by the disciples, or disciples want to spend time with them or give them money, and the presidents don't like that. There should be some balance, of course, there has been excesses in the past, but the point is is, that's where the inspiration came from. Before there were, in the beginning, there was no concept. This came after Godbrothers saw that the Gurus were respected, but they weren't. They want to be respected also, you know, the temple presidents, they want the authority, that's where it comes from.

Because that way it's just managerially you become Guru, you don't have to have any spiritual qualification. Just by being the temple president then you are automatically Guru. Means, you are Guru anyway, but then you elevate yourself up to a higher platform. That's all, this is just politics, it has nothing to do with philosophy or culture. If you just present it like this, no one will buy it, but if you present it like it's some philosophy or culture, people apply some emotion, 'How many times can they go with Guru falling?' he says. Well, how many girlfriends you went through? How many boyfriends you went through, and still have faith in the system. Millions of people have tried it, no one has been satisfied in history, as long as it has ever happened, but still you got married. So how many times... What do you mean, how many times can you go through? Give us a break. So that's the principle.

THE SOLUTION IS SPIRITUAL CULTURE

HH BVPS Mahārāja: These are all problems that devotees are facing: lack of trust, lack of faith, lack of social interactive skills, lack of respect. I mean, what was the whole... The main problem that I saw that was the driving force behind  bringing down the Guru system in the 1980s was that the Godbrothers weren't respected. The Godbrothers should be respected. It was simply a matter of respect. But those Godbrothers weren't respecting who was above them, so how could they expect that they're going to get respect? So they got rid of the Gurus and from from 1986-87 there has been no respect for any authority in this movement ever since. You know, nowadays someone is a GBC, who cares? Someone is a temple president, who cares? Sannyāsī, who cares? Nobody cares. If Prabhupāda was there, who cares? Because the whole point was respect, but they are not willing to give respect, so how can they accept respect? So that's the whole point, is that if respect is the thing then keep respect for their superiors intact and introduce that they should be brought in that. In other words, the neophyte only sees Guru or only sees Kṛṣṇa, that's the neophyte view. A madhyama broadens that and sees Kṛṣṇa and his associates, Guru and his associates. So the solution is not get rid of Guru. The solution is get rid of the neophyte mentality. So, in other words, the solution has to be solved with the spiritual result, the culture has to be maintained. Because the culture was... Because through a lack of culture they tried to to correct the situation, you ended up with a culture-less situation. The solution has less respect than before. You know what I am saying? At least before, if the guru said, 'Respect this guy,' everyone would respect him. But now it doesn't matter, nobody cares at all.

So this is just an example of, is that it's only social problems, but the social problems have to be operated according to the Vedic standards, according to Guru, Sādhu and Śāstra. So the problem was, it wasn't being operated, it was too neophyte, it was too narrow. Guru was respected, nobody else was. The point is is, others should be respected, but that means Gurus are still respected. Then you introduce. But they think they will take that away and that will automatically drop it down. No. You go back when Prabhupāda was here: the second-initiated devotees got as good a treatment, if not better treatment than the Gurus get today, at least in the temples that I went through. Sannyāsīs definitely got better, temple president got better. Now Gurus, sannyāsīs can walk into big temples around our movement, no one will even notice them. If somebody happens to know them personally, then they might come up to them and say 'Haribol!', like this. Otherwise they can walk in, walk out, nobody cares. The second-initiated devotees, they were respected more. Why? Because that second-initiated devotee respected the temple president. Temple president respected the sannyāsīs and all that, and the GBC, and everybody respected Prabhupāda. So everyone respected whoever was above them. Therefore there was respect for everybody. But this idea is that, 'Okay, all the respect is going to the Gurus, remove the Gurus, now it will naturally come to us,' no it doesn't work. Respect is a principle. If you don't respect who is above you, it doesn't go beyond that. And then ultimately then no one respects Kṛṣṇa, no one respects Prabhupāda.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, because it is just natural: whatever the leaders are doing, that's what they are doing. If the leaders are just solving problems then the common devotee will just be solving his problems, it's just natural.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: The elder brother?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, it's good.

(..)

ENGAGEMENT IN SERVICE BRINGS REAL PURIFICATION

HH BVPS Mahārāja: But would you really think that Kṛṣṇa would ruin it for thousands of people because of eleven?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: No, but...

HH BVPS Mahārāja: That's there, but as of now, does anybody talk about respect? Is authority a conversation that you hear nowadays? In fact, it is a conversation you can't bring up. It's a forbidden conversation, along with, you know, brāhmana, kṣatriya, vaiśya and śūdra. These are just forbidden topics. But at the same time is, you see, there is a need because respect must be there, because it is ego. But it is a matter of, if you need respect, then at least you bring that respect in line with what is virtuous. Like that. Best is you bring it in the line with what is transcendental, so you don't worry about it. But if that need is there, bring it in line at least with what is virtuous, at least perform the activity and do the work.

So, therefore, even though the devotees may have been overly proud, but the point is is, they were doing the work. In those days they did the work. If someone would criticize another, Prabhupāda would say, 'First do what they are doing, then you talk.' So he wouldn't stand for someone criticizing someone else, that's the principle, it wouldn't be allowed. And the person who is making the criticism, they would have to be the ones to be introspective. Person who is doing the service, he will be purified by that. But the person who is criticizing, of what service is that? So Prabhupāda would always say, it was common. You ask any devotee in those days, it was 'Do what they do, then you talk.' Even though the person had so many faults, and it was obvious, but the point was is, they were wholeheartedly serving Kṛṣṇa. And you can it see today with many of those devotees, even though they... You look at them, they don't necessarily dress, look like devotee, act like devotee, talk like devotee, you mentioned Prabhupāda, tears come to their eyes. I mean, real tears. They can go on and on and on for hours and hours, glorifying Prabhupāda because they dedicated their life to that man. I don't see much of that dedication these days, you know. I don't see dedicated three-month devotee going out to a place he has never been, has no contacts, nobody, has no money, nothing, and is willing to go out there and just set up with something, or even stick the Prabhupāda's teachings. There is people that have to fight to keep other devotees from changing Prabhupāda's books to make them politically correct, as if it's a discussion that you could change Prabhupāda's books just because there might be a few intellectual women who won't appreciate some of the statements.

So the point comes down, is that if you look at it, the point is is, everyone has to be introspective anyway, but you have to have some purity to be introspective. To a new devotee you don't have to say all this stuff. But if someone has been around three or four years, then it is time for them to actually think: are they turning their powers of observation on their own heart, or are they turning it on everybody else? That's the point: the devotional process is turn it on yourself, so the arrangements then weren't for the process of turning it on yourself. I mean, it may have had a little bit of the Chinese quality of standing up in front of everybody and saying, 'I am so much of a nonsense and a rascal,' and we have to cry and do all the right things. But as far as vaiṣṇava, it doesn't necessarily have that character to it.

THE "ANIMAL FARM" SYNDROME

So the result is is, where is authority? So authority is still needed and desired. So you see, devotees take, want to take, be authoritative, therefore committees, more and more committees are created, because a committee has authority. But the beauty of a committee is, it has no responsibility. Because as soon as you call up the committee on it, each one will say, 'Well, I didn't vote for it. I abstained.' One or two honest people will stand up and say, 'Yes, you know, this is the way it is.' But most, the committee is the easy thing you can hide behind. You have authority, you have a 'temple council of brāhmanas', it just means devotees who want to make a comment about the temple management, but don't want to take responsibility. The president has to do their work, so the president becomes their lackey. They sit around, pontificate, and then the president has to do what they say, then he is a nice guy. So they want that respect, but it is not coming from a virtuous platform, they are not doing the work. So that's the difference, when Prabhupāda was here, people did the work, they were respected. They may have had bad qualities, and the heart may not have been cleaned, but they were doing the work, so then they did deserve the respect. And if you leave it long enough, heart is purified. There is no other way. How else are you going to do it? The Western culture has a way to purify the heart? No, I have never heard of it. So, therefore, only by doing service, by full absorption, chanting the Holy Name, associating with devotees and absorbing yourself in the service that matches your nature, you are fully absorbed. Therefore, whatever crazy thing devotees would get into that they would be fully absorbed, Prabhupāda would support it because they were fully absorbed in Kṛṣṇa's service. And with time naturally it would be purified and then they will start using more and more gentle methods, more and more... It will come with time. So that's Prabhupāda - broad-minded.

So that's the thing, but now - now it's not the point, there is not a concept of 'people should be engaged according to their natures and be supported.' As soon as they do something wrong they are out. So it has gone from vaiṣṇavism into Christianity, you know, how you say? 'Once you have sinned, you are eternally damned.' So you don't have that in Vaiṣṇavism. The point is is, we may have done nonsense, okay, so that nonsense shouldn't be done now. Now let's move forward, like that. Because nonsense doesn't have that much value, devotional service does. But in the present scenario nonsense actually has more value than devotional service, it is considered of greater weight. Someone does something wrong - that's of greater significance than service. So that means, mundane morality is more important than bhakti, and that mundane morality is based on speculation, rather than on Guru, Sādhu and Śāstra. So it's a bit precarious.

So I personally wouldn't think that Kṛṣṇa arranged it like this. This is just called Māyā. Devotees, not really understanding what they are doing meddled with Prabhupāda's system. Prabhupāda said, the GBC is there for life. He did not say that 50 men can walk in and judge them and throw them out. He made no provision for that. So because of that, therefore this, in the society it has come in, it is Māyā. They used Māyā to try to correct it, and they got Māyā. So like that. And that has been observed, materialists have observed that.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Missed that point? You ever read 'Animal Farm'? Okay. It's the same business. I heard with my own ears devotees say that this crew needs to be changed, you know, 'the old boys club,' but that's exactly what this particular crew said about the previous one. The original GBC was 'old boys club', so then the new, you know, reformed GBC came in and stepped in, and was supposed to take the society to a new age. But I guess, the age, they didn't necessarily think that... observed that it might go backwards. And so, then devotees say the same thing about this new, reformed GBC, that we need to reform the GBC. Because the principle is, it is not respect, it is not a matter of seeing what anyone is doing, what responsibility they are taking, how hard they are trying. It's just if it doesn't come out the way we like it, then, you know, so many considerations are there. This is a bit simplistic, but the point is is, unless it follows the way Prabhupāda said, it is not going to work. Does it make sense?

So the point is is, if the authorities can be reduced down to just public prajalpa, then where is the question of there being any sense of authority or respect? You know what I am saying? I mean, it is just history, right? I mean, those who are history majors, then they have a saying, 'the only thing you learn from history is no one learns from history,' right? So you take any revolution, you take the French Revolution, you know, typical of all revolutions, basically. Bourgeois, means the second level, then complains they are not getting enough respect and facility. Sound familiar? Right? Concerned Godbrothers, right? Then they agitate with the nobility, this that, they don't get anywhere. Then they go to the public, they get the public on their side saying 'The nobility is bad,' right? They don't explain to it that there is only this particular aspect is bad, because it doesn't want to be presented that 'We want to be respected.' No, it's got to be that the nobility is bad. They are not going to go to the public, says 'Hey, we are the Bourgeois and, you know, we want to get wealthy also, and we want to enjoy like them, but they are not giving us facility and all that. So, hey, why don't you guys help us and let's get rid of the king, so we can be just like them?' I don't think it would politically fly. So you have to say that the aristocracy, means, the nobility is bad. Then, and you say that, 'Then you can enjoy. They are enjoying, why aren't you enjoying? Why are these...' and all this kind of stuff. Then you get it in there, then the people rise up, they have this revolution, you remove the nobility, and then they go, 'Okay, where is it?' and then they are dissatisfied, and then next thing, the next head that goes is Robespierre. So that's the point, those that started that, then they are the next ones on the block, it is just material energy, it's the way it works. So the Vedic system, we don't see that happening, it doesn't work like that. You go, you discuss and it is going that direction.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, yeah.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: But it is shattering on the platform of mleccha understanding. The point is is, that girl, even if her father did something that was abominable, still she would respect him as her father. The activity that he performed, that's not good, but him as a person and what he has done for her still stands: that's human life. So the point is is, we can't blame it just on 11 people because many of those 11 people also understood that this has to wind down. With time there is going to be more gurus, it's going to happen. How many Vyāsāsanas can you put in the temple? I heard Bhavānanda myself say that when there is more gurus we are taking out all these Vyāsāsanas. He says, 11 fit in there, but it says when it gets more we are taking them all out, everyone is just going to sit on mattresses. They were talking about having Prabhupāda's Vyāsāsana and one next to it that had a collage on it, you know. I mean, it was already going in that direction, it just naturally happens anyway. Because after a while they figure.

DEVOTIONAL SERVICE IS BEYOND MORALITY AND JUSTICE

But the point is is, how long can someone go on saying, 'Because this guru fell down...' or 'Because he was proud'? The point is is, you take some of these Gurus, they were so proud, but their zones were the most flourishing, opulent, biggest preaching places on the planet! Because the process of surrendering to Guru, following order of Guru and being fully absorbed in devotional service was going on. So that's the beauty of it: even if the guru is a madhyama or kaniṣṭha, you follow it, you go back to Godhead. He may or may not go back to Godhead, but you will go. You have to remember, Dhruva Mahārāja's mother went back to Godhead because of him. So all Dhruva Mahārāja's mother did was say, 'You got a problem, the only one who can help you is God. Where is God? I don't know. I think he must be in the forest because all the sages go out there and look for Him. So maybe He is out there.' That was it. Nothing more than that. So I think that those 11 people gave a bit more than that. And for that she went back to Godhead because he followed it perfectly, he went back to Godhead.

So, the devotional service is something beyond mundane morality and justice, that's the bottom line. And I don't think that Prabhupāda would accept that zones and places can sit down and say that because their Guru fell down... What is it now? This is four... 17 years ago, it's still, there is a problem in the movement. Especially when you see new zones open up today and they flourish like anything because they don't have those misconceptions. And as soon as they start getting those misconceptions, you know, some devotee from the Western world that has these conceptions goes in and preaches these to, so then you just see that the zone, the bottom falls right out of the zone. So it's just a matter, you follow Guru, Sādhu and Śāstra, it's successful. You don't, it's not, it doesn't matter.

I remember once one senior devotee from America went to Europe to see, why is this East block flourishing? And he came back and he gave a report to the North American GBC, it says, 'Much to my... I wouldn't want to say it, but it appears that because they all respect and follow Guru, they have respect for Guru, they surrender their life to Guru, therefore the zones are flourishing.' And in those same zones when you take out this respect for Guru, they go down. So that's the key, that's the connection. For one who has faith in Guru and Kṛṣṇa then all the imports of the Vedic knowledge are revealed. So that's where it starts. It doesn't start with some management or some, anything else. It that starts with this. So unless there is faith in Guru and Vaiṣṇavas, it can't function. Because fault is easy to find. Anyone can find fault in the moon, but no poet does that. Means, if someone sits around and criticizes the Moon, what cultured person will take that person seriously?

So if somebody has Kṛṣṇa, Who is everything, then the faults of material life - those are illusory, those are shadows. So only someone who values shadow and illusion will take that seriously. That's what it says: it throws back the person who finds a fault, that means they take the shadow and illusion as more important and more powerful than bhakti. The point is is, bhakti is real, it is substance. The whole universe of illusion is just illusion. That's why it says, one Holy Name can clear all the sin of the universe. How much sin? The sin is not the big thing. But nowadays sin is very strong, it is very important, very important. 'He has sinned. He is eternally damned,' right? 'He'll be kept on God's left hand side and eternally burn.' It's Christianity, that's all. And of Christianity it is Protestant, it is not even Catholicism, or East Orthodox, or any of those. I think they are a little bit more liberal, And it's definitely not Judaism because in the Old Testament everybody did something wrong. I mean, it's like, everybody made a major mistake, but they are still the Patriarchs. Moses didn't even get to go into because he didn't have faith in the Name. He had the faith in service, but not the Name. So he didn't get to go into Canaan. You don't get much bigger than Moses. The only one bigger than him, I think, is Abraham. They all did something wrong. So they don't mind. But Protestant, they don't tolerate anything wrong. And you find a thing about Protestantism, there is no culture, absolutely no culture, that's a thing, one of the things they did: they removed all culture, it's just bhāva. You have the mood of affection for God, that's enough. No ritual, no form, no... So that's the thing: no culture. So where does that come from?

So all it is is, just the transverse of conditional nature. You grow up in a system, in a culture that has no culture and that is against culture as a religious principle, it is against authority, so then naturally, like what you said, they are just going to have the point. But the point is is, how long can we go on saying it is those people's fault? As far as opulence goes... Because nowadays opulence is very much desired, but devotees just talk economics. I don't think there was more opulence since that was in those 80s, those early 80s.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Nothing. They had unlimited devotees, resources, everything. There is no question... It was just unlimited. And it's not a matter of, 'Okay, well, if they hadn't fallen down...' Even if they stayed, no, but even that didn't matter. I saw zones where the Guru fell down, the zone went on fine because they still had faith in the principle and they still respected their Guru that fell down. They didn't follow him, but they still had respect for him as a person, and that zone went on, kept on kept going. Australia, yeah, it went on. There wasn't any difference when Bhavānanda was there or wasn't there. In fact, they invited him over there. Because he was having problems, so 'You come over here, we will take care of you.' It went on. Bhavānanda left here, Māyāpura went on fine. Some zones, the guru left - in three weeks the whole zone evaporated, in three weeks. 

WE CAN'T BLAME OUR FAULTS ON OTHERS

So it's just on the training. It's just on the training, the culture, the background, like that. So, therefore, you can't blame it on them. External such as... It all comes back to the individual. The individual, they want to be Kṛṣṇa conscious, they can. But if not, then it is easy, Māyā, it's like this: if it's so easy that you take one man and have him fall down, and you can wipe out the devotional life of thousands of people, you don't think Māyā is going to go for that? So simple, so easy! One guy goes down, thousands disappear. So then, why that won't be the tactic? How long can we go on like that? You know, it's like 'The Gurus this, the sannyāsīs that, the GBC this, that...' But what about when you were a karmī? You know, the governments, the priests there, the religious leaders, the social leaders, the community leaders, I mean, what's so great there? You know, what was so fabulous there? The divorce rate is great outside, you know, the unemployment is fabulous, or it is so safe, you know, you can go out at noon time and have somebody hold you up, it's fabulous, right? So that's the whole point is, what is so good about it? So even the karmīs, that is the material world.

And we are a volunteer organization, if we went by who came forward that had the piety to go out looking, we might not have a whole lot of people in this movement. You might not have a whole lot of people. You see that up to, basically, Viśvanātha and Baladeva. But with Bhaktiviṇoda Ṭhākura, then they had to cross because the Western culture was already influencing the whole world. When they had their own culture, it is another thing, they go out and look. But then when the Western culture comes in, it just breaks down all inherent cultures. And so, then by doing that, then they had to be able the cross into that and make people aware of spiritual life and like that. And so, when you are doing that, it means everybody who is inside then has that same inherent fault. So then what is the need to criticize somebody else and blame our inherent fault on theirs? 'Oh, I have no faith because they are this bad,' no, you just don't have faith. Because you can't function without faith, so how you function? That means, you have faith in material energy, you have faith in your Independence, you have faith... You have faith. Just you have faith not in something that's necessarily sublime. So it is just an excuse. Otherwise, after 17 years? I mean, people join at 17, they have had enough of the material world. You know, they were, they found it to be sick in the material world, it's just the people are so superficial, nothing to offer, this and that. So how is it now after 17 years that they can't find some other alternative, they I can't move on? I think, Japan and Germany built up quicker than that. They were destroyed. They built up. If there is faith in the process then it just goes on. 

THE MORTAL SIN OF BREAKING CONFIDENTIALITY

The point that is being shown by Kṛṣṇa is: it doesn't matter if you are a private or you are a five-star general, if you stick your head up when they are shooting, you get it blown off, that's all. So, therefore, pride will get anybody. So that's the whole point, so that therefore everybody under should be even more careful, to be more careful about their devotion, their sādhana, their respect. Like that. So that you could say. And I would say, even you wouldn't have lost so many if there was a better attitude. When Prabhupāda was here if someone fell down then they were supported, they were trying to be placed back in some service and tried to be supported. But the mood at that time was, 'No, they have sinned, so then they have to leave.' So many just disappeared. They just disappeared, they didn't want to go through it. After watching what Bhavānanda  went through, others weren't about to go through that. Of course, they had been deprived, but why would they be subjected to that? Guhyam ākhyāti pṛcchati: if you reveal your mind to somebody, you expect it is confidential. And then for the person to walk out of the door and announce it to everybody present - that's sinful. That is sinful. You know, in the name of truth, what truth? A truth that ends up destroying the life of somebody, by Manu is considered sin. It is equivalent to killing a brāhmana. Do that is not truth, that is sin. And not even normal sin, that is mortal sin, that means, the heaviest of sins - to break confidentiality, that's not...

Otherwise then, where is the devotional process? Ṣaḍ-vidhaṁ prīti-lakṣaṇam, six qualities, he doesn't say there is more. Eating together prasāda, discussing philosophy and revealing your mind. You have exchanging gifts and revealing the mind. So revealing the mind is out, nowadays, forget it, revealing the mind is out, you don't reveal your mind to nobody, it's a serious point. So if that's not there, then why would you want to give anybody a gift or eat with anybody? If you can't reveal your mind, then why give gifts and why eat with them? It comes down to that. There is no confidentiality, so therefore, so where is the devotional culture? Where is the opening for an exchange between devotees? So this concept of truth is a modern, sinful nonsense concept of truth, it is not Vedic. It is not reality, it is māyā, it is illusion, it is nonsense. That's not truth. You have to define what is truth. Fact is truth or Kṛṣṇa is truth? So if a fact is not connected to Kṛṣṇa, it is the greatest lie. So that's the point, that is what is being missed, that's the Christianity, that's the modern academician. So all it is is this, it is just our own previous nonsense background, it is just creeping in and we are thinking it's great and and glorifying it, and even justifying it. But it is just Māyā.

Otherwise, how do you have friends? You can't have friends. If you can't be confidential you can't have friends. Friend means someone who you can reveal your mind to. You can't reveal your mind, you have no friends.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: So that is my point, is that means a devotee, if he has problems he can't go to anybody. I know another Godbrother, he had problems, he was a sannyāsī, he had some problems, he went to another Godbrother to give some advice, and the next thing you know it's all out on the internet. So then from that time on that Godbrother never went to anybody, and a few years later he fell down. Because he could go to no one for help, because this sinful idea of 'truth', that everybody has got to know and I have the right to know, who said you have the right? Prabhupāda doesn't say you have a right. Mind your own business. It's not your business. This idea is just nonsense, and this on the cultural level it is destroying our society because there is no trust, so therefore... Because trust, you can't trust, how do you trust? You can't go to a leader and tell them, you know, something that is going wrong in your spiritual life and expect that they'll keep it quiet. Because they feel, 'Well, you are a public figure.' They have actually made the rules 'Sannyāsīs, gurus, they are public figures, so there is nothing about their life that can remain private. Everything has to be known by everybody.' That is sinful, that is a nonsense decision, that means they are not people, they are just public property, they are just used, exploited. 'But, you know, in the past...' So what? Correct the problem. Don't come up with a new fandangle idea that is nonsense. We have to stick to our culture, we have to stick to śāstra. Otherwise, what's the meaning? It has no meaning. It hasn't improved anything. I haven't seen any improvement. 96, right? 'Bring together Prabhupāda's family.' I have seen it just get worse and worse because there is no trust, so how, if there is no trust, how do you have relationships? You can't.

PRABHUPĀDA'S PROGRAM IS THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION

So that's the whole point, until you have relationships you don't have a social structure. Until you have a social structure, people are dissatisfied. If they are dissatisfied then they are going to look somewhere else. They are either going to internalize their bhajana or go out into material energy. So, that's a difficult thing. This Society doesn't have any philosophical problems. People will say it does, but you analyze it, it's not. Ṛtvik, that's a social problem: 'I don't like the gurus because they are puffed up.' that is a social problem, it is not a philosophical problem. So whatever you take it, it is just social. So that's the point, it's in the beginning Prabhupāda was just going to go by Bhāgavata culture or Pañcarātrika culture, you didn't need much more. But when when he saw devotees needed more and had to be more independent, more economic and all, then he said Varṇāśrama. Because those are your three social circles: Bhāgavata, Pañcarātrika or Vedic, or any combination. So pure Vedic we can't follow, without the Bhāgavata and the Pañcarātrika Vedic has no meaning in this age because we are not using it as a system of perfection, we are using it as an assistance to the Bhāgavata and the Pañcarātrika because we are having material needs. Yes?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, that is the whole thing, if we are pure, we perform our sādhana, we are, you know, our heart is, we have good will towards the devotees then it'll work because...

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Oh yeah, the program? Oh, I see, by following the program it just makes it work?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, yeah. No, that's  the beauty of it, it's that Prabhupāda analyzed the whole modern situation and therefore created the temple program because it is a perfect program. The Bhāgavata platform, then you are chanting the whole time, the whole morning program from Maṅgala āratika up to prasāda you are, it is all glorification of Kṛṣṇa. The whole morning program up through prasāda is Pañcarātrika, and also it has all the elements of the Vedic. So it is a perfect system. Means, if one actually analyzes and knows these other systems... Bhāgavata will always take it, but Pañcarātrika, you don't find a better Pañcarātrika program, it is the essence of the Pañcarātrika program because everything that there is in the whole Pañcarātrika system is all accomplished by the time you finish prasāda in the morning. You know, you have gotten up to the temple, you have arranged paraphernalia for the worship, worship is being done, you have studied the scriptures... Means, there is seven things: take care of guests, devotees, reading the scriptures, chanting the Holy Name... That's what is four, then Nāma, Dhāma-sevā is done, Tulasī-sevā is done, all those are done, they are all worked into the program. So the full pañcānga-pūjā, everything is already done by time you finish breakfast, because prasāda-sevā is one of them. Distributing prasāda, so caranāmṛta is distributed, flowers are distributed, the lamps are distributed. Guru-pūjā is there, to do Pañcarātrika worship you have to worship Guru, so then that's worked into the program, right? So Bhāgavatam is there, Tulasī is there. From the Bhāgavata platform, then chanting the Holy Name, associating with devotees, Bhāgavatam, worshiping the Deities and living, doing service to the Dhāma, because you clean the temple, you go out, it's all there. So the Bhāgavata is perfectly in, and the Pañcarātrika is perfectly in, and the Vedic: you get up in the Brāhma-muhūrta, you offer your prayers, chant the Gāyatrī, perform sacrifice. So Harināma Saṅkīrtana is the sacrifice. You eat remnants of foodstuff, it's done, right? Paṭhana, pāṭhana, yajana, yājana, dāna and pratigraha. Studying - teaching; so we study Bhāgavatam, we teach Bhāgavatam. We perform pūjā, we do it for others, right? There is those who are doing the pūjā, others are watching. Accepting charity, giving charity. So we are distributing the Holy Name or distributing prasāda, so it's all the duties are done. There is no more perfect system than this program. Like that. That's what Prabhupāda said, if he had to do it over again, he would do it exactly the same, he wouldn't change anything. So if we follow that then we'll get the most benefit because it is the most powerful program. You do that, chant your 16 rounds, follow the regulative principles, you can't get a more powerful spiritual situation.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: No, no, it just stays.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yeah, yeah, it stays strong. You just, you find a little bit more devotee sit around the edges, talk to somebody, do whatever. But other than, no, it stays, because it is transcendental. So that's the wonderful thing, is when all is said and done, then if we just stick to these things that Prabhupāda has given us... He says, he has given the structure, now fill it it in. So the structure has to remain. If we change the structure then what do you fill in? But if the structure remains, then you fill it in, and it's perfect. So that's why...

Means, in other words, only to create thought, to create a matter of seriously looking at what's around us, then we make these points stronger. But the point is is, the solution is very positive and easy, we just have to follow Prabhupāda's program. If you do that it is nice. Is there anything else?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Yes, please.

HH BVPS Mahārāja: What is your purpose? You want to... No, but you want to remain uninitiated?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: Okay, so then what is the problem?

HH BVPS Mahārāja: It is there, it is bhakti-sukṛti, it all goes. Means, if your purpose is to take up devotional service and through the process come to prema then it all counts as part of the same process. That point is being made because there are people who figure they will remain independent and not take initiation and just on their own they'll do, and they are intelligent enough to do things themselves. So that statement is to guard against that misunderstanding. But for someone who is sincere about following the process, then it is all seen as one process. Does that make sense? It's just a matter, it's just to keep people from stopping at that point, that's the point. Okay? Jaya!

Oṁ Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Hare Hare Hare Rāma Hare Rāma Rāma Rāma Hare Hare