Hare Krishna, you were always my favourite zonal guru, dandavats and hope you recover your purity at the most for you spiritual life...

Thank ' s to give has this Lila and also for the next genarations

I have been very inspired by HG Bhagavan prabhu, thank you

I have that big book of pictures behind him. All the art work in all of the books.Beautiful

This is my dad - I love him. ❤

Amazing times Bhagavan Prabhu went through. From the pioneering push to advanced management mayhem, he does observe nuances of both. A rarity for someone to be so discreetly honest in their opinion, I'm sure he could be much more expressive of some of the confusion and ignorance that seeped in... he was nice sharing and sticking with Srila Prabhupada's primary focuses. Thank You.

So many wonderful realizations.....I just wish he had this wisdom 40 years ago.....That was the time when I needed him to reveal to me this kind of knowledge....In any case I still appreciate his effort to become an "ideal man" for Srila Prabhupada. I'm also glad he got out from that madness of ambitious-authoritarian leadership....

now from Srila Bhagavan now back to Mouse ---punah mushi ka bhava

That is a rare opportunity, to know those that received Bhaktivedanta Swami. It's like to be present in 17 century Bengal and observe Caitanya direct followers

The weight of the sin on his shoulders made his mind confused. The false guruz have brought the greatest diservice to Srila Prabhupada. Forty years after, ruins of a short lived empire are still visible in Europe and in US of A. Living with the curse of so many devotees is certainely painful. 😭🔥🔥

Could you tell please, where I can find the intro song?

Prabhpad told Bhagavan das to go to medical school and become a doctor. He decided on his own not to follow his gurus instructions,. Yes, there is a female Shakti in Judaism.she is called Shekinah

Unfortunately , the sight of this man who betrayed Srila Prabhupad so demoniacly, prevents me from watching / listening to this episode.

Bhagavān Still Confused by Kṛṣṇakānt (Part 2 of 2) ... He (Bhagavān) says: I do not believe for a moment that Prabhupada ever intended to take on disciples after his disappearance, i.e., that the officiating ritvik acaryas would continue to increase the number of names in his "initiated disciple book". I do not believe he expected a guru pageant where ones spirituality got '10' for being an uttama, and could then initiate and have his or her "own" disciples. Who cares what Bhagavān ‘believes’ with all due respect? He has already admitted to the most appalling behavior, he is a committed felon, and even now insists on fabrication and distortion. Also who ever suggested the ‘guru pageant’ he alludes to above? Certainly not the IRM. He thus invents a totally ridiculous scenario in order to falsely discredit the correct scenario given by his own Spiritual Master. Bhagavān has the same types of misconceptions over Guru-tattva as the GBC: "As a new parent is expected to evolve to be able to liberate the child, as a new husband and wife are expected to evolve to liberate each other, as friends evolve to enlighten each other, so I believe Prabhupada expected the "new" gurus and their disciples to evolve together in Krishna Consciousness. The question arises, should one initiate disciples and should someone take a guru who is still doing internal work? This is a matter of intelligence and love. It is possible that both teacher and student grow higher and higher together and this I believe is what Prabhupada hoped would take place after his departure." The above is simply new-age nonsense and is never taught anywhere by Śrīla Prabhupāda. There is no question of a Dīkṣā-guru evolving or growing higher and higher into someone who can eventually give enlightenment. This ‘post-dated cheque’ Guru-tattva was completely rejected by Śrīla Prabhupāda. The Dīkṣā-guru must already be liberated before he occupies the post: "The Guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the Guru must be accepted from the topmost class." (C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport) "When one has attained the topmost position of Mahā-bhāgavata, he is to be accepted as a Guru and worshipped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a Guru." (C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport) Bhagavān needs to re-acquaint himself with Śrīla Prabhupāda's teachings before he writes anything else. He asks: "Is having a child any less of a responsibility than initiating one's own disciples?" That is why the parent is meant to put their children into ‘Gurukula’ (when they are run properly), so the bona fide Guru can instruct them. It is not that the parent himself must be a member of the disciplic succession, but he is responsible for giving his child access to the person who is. For us that person is Śrīla Prabhupāda. "In our line the siksa guru is held as most significant. Because Srila Prabhupada was and is the jagat guru and siksa guru for all time for the movement he founded, my understanding was that all initiates naturally claimed Prabhupada as their siksa guru and were his "grand disciples" as well." Above Bhagavān falls into the old Śikṣā/Dīkṣā trap. Clearly if a Guru can give Śikṣā, which means to impart Divya-jñāna (the main constituent of Dīkṣā) then why can he not give Dīkṣā? "How did the idea of zonal acarya develop? This idea first came from Prabhupada's plan that the those wanting to take initiation from him in his final days, should contact the officiating, ritvik acarya who was "nearby". (".........you divide, who is nearest.") From there, after his disappearance, the ritviks, who under GBC auspices could accept disciples, began by accepting initiates closest to them. The problem came when there was force rather than bhakti that directed who they should take initiation from, much the same as when a devotee was pressured to do a service s/he was not inclined to do." Bhagavān claims the zonal Ācārya system originated from ‘Prabhupāda's plan’. This is complete rubbish, nowhere did Śrīla Prabhupāda say anything about the 11 Ṛṭviks initiating their own disciples, this was ‘Bhagavān's plan’. Whether people were forced or not is irrelevant. The simple fact is they should not have been initiating at all, bas. "On the positive side, in the European and South African zone which I was responsible for, myself and many of the national secretaries, regional secretaries and temple presidents saw the zonal acarya system as a means to facilitate co-operation and comradery between disciples of diverse countries and cultures, much as Prabhupada did. My idea was to maintain and capture the enthusiasm that Srila Prabhupada began and so expertly channeled to expand ISKCON all over the world. I believe that we were successful in this regards as was apparent in the establishment of inspiring and impressive properties, the creation of thousands of devotees, and the free flow of manpower from one country to another to accomplish large projects." Above we see Bhagavān proudly basking in those glorious hazy zonal days. His unauthorised worship may have created a false burst of activity, but it was short-lived, and the damage done to the faith of thousands has never been repaired. Rajneesh also had much success, along with the Moonies and many other unauthorised cults and sects. Had he acted as a Ṛṭvik and achieved all those things then he might have something to feel good about. If a Ṛṭvik falls down the disciples are still left with their bona fide Spiritual Master, Śrīla Prabhupāda. When Bhagavān ran off with a woman and his ‘Dakṣiṇā’ all he left behind was chaos, confusion and disillusionment. Hardly something to boast about. "A serious gap in detailed information about how to assume the role of a guru within ISKCON was left open which has turned into a full on bible quoting Catholic-Protestant septic schism." Bhagavan admits that there are no instructions from Śrīla Prabhupāda on how to run a multiple Ācārya successor system. Yet, instead of realising the obvious point, that the reason there is no information is because there was never meant to be such a system, he instead implies that Śrīla Prabhupāda accidentally forgot to tell them what to do: "Having recently reread the Declaration of Will of June 4th, 1977 of which I signed as a witness and the Will codicil of November 5th, 1977, I stand amazed that more space, detail and clarity was given to issues of property and how 1,000 Rs ($75) was to be divided amongst potentially dissident family members than how to perform initiations and have multiple gurus in the face of a potentially large number of dissident members of the ISKCON family. How we allowed these final moments of his personal presence to slip by without milking more detailed answers to quintessential questions needed for the future peace of his spiritual corporation, will always haunt me." Instead of realising that Śrīla Prabhupāda did not need to rely on some young upstart to ‘remind’ him to explain how the movement would go on, Bhagavān insists that the lack of information is all some dreadful oversight. Yet, before he admitted that using representatives for initiation was the standard way initiations were done within ISKCON, and the only system left in place by Śrīla Prabhupāda simply carried on that which was standard practice. Thus it is clear Śrīla Prabhupāda left out nothing. He gave all the information we needed to continue initiations, and since, in effect, nothing was changing there was clearly no need to do any more than he did; which was to issue a clear directive to all his leaders. How is this not enough information? It is only the speculations of ambitious young men anxious to carve up the world for themselves that has obscured Śrīla Prabhupāda's clear instructions for so long. But hopefully not for much longer. Please chant: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare, Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. And be Happy! (End Part 2 of 2) Bhagavān Still Confused by Kṛṣṇakānt