No Enmity, Only Solution – Part 13

All glories to Śrī Śrī Guru-Gauranga

No Enmity, Only Solution – Part 13

By sampradāya-saṁrakṣaka Śrī Śyām Dās Babajī Mahārāj

Date: 24.07.2025

Fearful vaiṣṇava aparādha can never be tolerated (Part 2)

On the title ‘Śrīla Prabhupāda’ accepted by Śrīla Svami Mahārāja

Śrīla Svāmī Mahārāja invited all his godbrothers for the deity installation festival of the ISKCON Māyāpura Śrī Caitanya Candrodaya Mandira. At that event, my Guru Mahārāja expressed his concern about his adopting the title ‘Śrīla Prabhupāḍa.’ He inquired, “My dear Śrīpāda Svāmī Mahārāja, we godbrothers have a deep, unshakeable reverence for our Gurudeva, Śrīmad Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāṃī Ṭhākura, whom we affectionately call ‘Śrīla Prabhupāda.’ With all sincerity, we want to ask why you allow your disciples to call you by this title. It brings us, you’re loving godbrothers, great pain. Please kindly help us understand.”

Śrīla Svāmī Mahārāja replied, “Mahārāja-jī, my disciples once asked me about the formal designations used to respectfully address one’s Gurudeva. I simple-heartedly replied that one might use any number of respectful titles, such as ‘Viṣṇupāda,’ ‘Bhagavadpāda,’ ‘Śrīpāda’ or ‘Prabhupāda.’ I am unsure how or when, but they all jointly decided to call me ‘Prabhupāda.’”

Guru Mahārāja then asked, “Can you not forbid them from addressing you with this title? Just as Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas use the title ‘Mahāprabhu’ for Śrī Caitanyadeva only and members of Rāma-kṛṣṇa Mission use the title ‘Paramahaṁsa’ exclusively for Vivekānanda’s guru, Rāma-kṛṣṇa, we, the disciples of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, have been accustomed to hearing and using the title ‘Prabhupāda’ for our Gurudeva from the time he was physically present.”

Śrīla Svāmī Mahārāja replied, “I too am accustomed to using this title exclusively for our Guru-pāda-padma. But I have grown tired of repeatedly explaining this to each and every one of my disciples. Despite my exhausting efforts, I am unable to stop them from calling me ‘Śrīla Prabhupāda.’”

Even today, many years after Śrīla Svāmī Mahārāja’s disappearance, many people are confused when they read or hear the name ‘Śrīla Prabhupāda.’ They are unsure if it refers to Śrī Śrīmad Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī Ṭhākura or his disciple Śrī Śrīmad Bhaktivedānta Svāmī Mahārāja. A disciple must remain discerning when trying to understand the inner desires of his Gurudeva. Sometimes, even a simple act, though done innocently and with good intentions, can create difficulty for śrī guru.

(Taken from “My Beloved Masters” by Śrīla Bhakti Vijñāna Bhāratī Gosvāmī Mahārāja)

In this next letter excerpts, we can find illogical and untruthful remarks that were published under the signature of Śrīla Svami Mahārāja who used to be addressed as Prabhupada by his followers:

THEY HAVE ALL BECOME SUDRAS

Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Letter to Niranjana 5/21/73:

“Our big, big godbrothers in India, they could not preach Lord Gauranga’s name all over India. They are simply inclined to criticize me, that my students call me Prabhupāda. They could not do anything practical and tangible. They are satisfied with a temple and a few disciples begging alms for the maintenance of the temple."

“So, we can understand that they have all become śūdrās. How can they have interest in Bhagavad-gītā. Although some of them have been born in brāhmaṇa families, but by quality are all śūdrās.”

In the book “My Beloved Masters” written By Śrīla Bhakti Vigyan Bharati Gosvāmī Mahārāja we can never find any dirty remarks about Śrīla Svami Mahārāja. Let me humbly recount a divine incident for your reflection: Before Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaj took the renounced order, whilst suffering from tuberculosis, his family had refused to keep him in his own home because tuberculosis is contagious. Medical treatment was extremely costly and inaccessible. Yet, as soon as Srila Bhakti Dayita Madhava Goswami Maharaj learned of this, he brought him to his rented ashram on Rasbihari Avenue and cared for him for six months. Despite concerns raised by disciples about the medical expenses, Srila Madhava Maharaj declared: “If needed, I shall beg from door to door to serve my Godbrother.” This is the Gaudiya ideal. This is the mood of service to Vaishnavas that we must uphold and protect.

Whereas the following remarks by Śrīla Svami Mahārāja about Śrīla Bhakti Daitya Madhav Gosvāmī Mahārāja and other comments about our Gaudiya Guruvarga are going to put as into the ocean of painful feeling:

THEIR PROPOSAL FOR COOPERATION IS A MYTH

Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Letter to ACYUTANANDA 6/8/74:

“You should not write anything to Madhava Mahārāja’s camp. You may have talked many things with Mangala Niloy but why write him in black and white. The letter must not be sent. Their policy has been all along to suppress me and take credit for himself. Their proposal for cooperation is a myth. They haven’t done anything which is cooperative. You know in a recent article they managed to write in such a way that Madhava is doing the world movement and we are his subordinate. From the beginning that has been their mentality. So, there is no possibility of cooperation with them. Rather you should avoid strictly meeting with them. They are not after preaching but material gain and reputation and adoration. Otherwise, why they are non-cooperating with me? So, no cooperation is possible. Do not think or indulge in loose talks. Be careful always. Let us do the duty of propagation sincerely and seriously on our own principles. Kṛṣṇa and Śrīla Prabhupāda Bhakti Siddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura are our only hope and they and helping us. If anything, thing has to be done it is to be talked on the higher level between Madhava Mahārāja and myself, but I know his mentality is different and there is no possibility of cooperation.”

November 02, 1968

"My Dear Brahmananda,

Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your note of Oct. 28, 1968, along with a letter to you from Jaya Govinda. His letter appears not very clear and your remark on Acyutananda's attitude is also notable. You write to say "Rayarama will forward one letter from Parvat Mahārāja etc." I have not received any letter from Rayarama. I think both Acyutananda and Jaya Govinda have been poisoned by this Parvat and thus it is useless to request them to work for the society. Neither they have shown any capability till now. Under the circumstances, I think there is no hope of getting any service from these boys regarding our mission.

I wrote one letter jointly addressed to Acyutananda and Jaya Govinda but they have not replied the same. I think as Bon Mahārāja poisoned the mind of Hṛṣīkeśa, similarly these boys have been entrapped by Parvat. This Parvat is one of the disciples of my God-brother but he is so salient that he has not replied to my letters, but instead of replying my letter, he has the impudence of writing to Rayarama. Rayarama may not reply this letter until I have seen it. He appears to be as venomous as Bon Mahārāja. They are all envious of my activities here. As Jaya Govinda has not yet left for Bombay, there is no need of issuing indemnity letter in his favour. I do not understand why he has requested to address the indemnity letter to Parvat Mahārāja. These are very doubtful things. I do not know how to deal with these boys. Both of them are silent about my letter of Oct. 13, 1968 which I wrote them about utilizing the money from Hitsaran. I am really very sorry for them. I am enclosing the copy of the above-mentioned letter.

Hope you are well; I received the Bhagavad-gītā hardcover jacket.

Your ever well-wisher,

A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

P.S. I have not heard anything from Purusottama about the church centre. ACB"

From Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta ISKCON edition some untruthful remarks about Gauḍīya Maṭha and our Guruvarga:

"dhānya-rāśi māpe yaiche pātnā sahite

paścāte pātnā uḍāñā saṁskāra karite                 C.c. Ādi 12.12

Paddy is mixed with straw at first, and one must fan it to separate the paddy from the straw.

Synonyms

dhānya-rāśi — heaps of paddy; māpe — measures; yaiche — as it is; pātnā — useless straw; sahite — with; paścāte — later; pātnā — useless straw; uḍāñā — fanning; saṁskāra — purification; karite — to do.

Purport

This example given by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī is very appropriate. In the case of the Gauḍīya Maṭha members, one can apply a similar process. There are many disciples of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, but to judge who is actually his disciple, to divide the useful from the useless, one must measure the activities of such disciples in executing the will of the spiritual master. Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura tried his best to spread the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu to countries outside India. When he was present, he patronized the disciples to go outside India to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, but they were unsuccessful because within their minds they were not actually serious about preaching His cult in foreign countries; they simply wanted to take credit for having gone to foreign lands and utilize this recognition in India by advertising themselves as repatriated preachers. Many svāmīs have adopted this hypocritical means of preaching for the last eighty years or more, but no one could preach the real cult of Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world. They merely came back to India falsely advertising that they had converted all the foreigners to the ideas of Vedānta or Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and then they collected funds in India and lived satisfied lives of material comfort. As one fans paddy to separate the real paddy from useless straw, by accepting the criterion recommended by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī one can very easily understand who a genuine world-preacher is and who is useless."

To be continued…