Archive for November 14th, 2011

Date: 14 Nov 2011 23:37:51 -0000
From: “Bhavanath Rajpal”
To: am-global@earthlink.net
Subject: Not the First Time


“Toma’ke peyeo pa’i na keno…” (P.S. #2056)


Baba, I feel in my heart that You are along with me, but even then I do not feel satisfied. I want more and more of Your proximity and presence. So please come in my mind and heart. Please remain along with me in a very intimate way in all my works. Grace me so that I can feelyour eternal presence always– with more & more closeness and proximity.

Baba You know that my existence is because of You. My life is proceeding on by Your grace; my everything is based on You. Day and night I am deeply engaged in the work which You have allotted me.

I am divinely intoxicated in the ideation of the songs which I have made into a garland for You. So Baba please come closer and still more close. Indeed You know the language of my heart- my inner feeling & sentiments. O’ Baba, how much love I have for You.

Baba, please grace me and please do not play Your liila of hide and seek. Please do not remain inaccessible…


Yes, I read the note in the recent letter, “Booming Business of Nirmoha’nanda”:

Not long back there was an article written in the Bhakta Samaj magazine (of which Dada Santoshananda is the senior editor) that stated that Baba was powerful and dynamic because He was born under a certain configuration of stars. The point being that certain stars were controlling His fate etc. This is the dogmatic approach that was published in the Bhakta Samaj magazine.

Unfortunately, that is not the only stain on the track record of the Bhakta Samaj publication.

“Bhakta Samaj”, one of our AM periodicals in Hindi, has compromised our AM ideals and has instead been the mouthpiece of local Hindu dogma.

That is why many are signaling that it is time to reconsider the current publishers of “Bhakta Samaj”, as well as any others in our Publications Dept who fail to uphold the dharmic standard of AM.

BY reviewing the below examples we can see where the publication has erred as well as better understand what Baba’s true teachings really are.


Baba has graciously come to give a new set of teachings to the whole world. In that process, He has corrected the various misnomers and dogmas that crude Hindu priests created about Lord Krsna and Lord Shiva.

But the publishers of Bhakta Samaj magazine choose to disregard Baba’a guidelines and instead adhere here to all those old Hindu dogmas, thereby confusing the masses and making our Marga look like one other dogmatic Hindu sect.

Let’s review this unfortunate situation step by step. Remember, the goal here is only to uphold Baba’s teachings and not allow our Marga to fall into dogma.



Over the long history, for selfish reasons as well as out of just plain confusion, many dogmatic preists and religious opportunists have misrepresented the skin tone and physical appearance of Lord Krsna and Lord Shiva. Often they want to do this to promote their own clan as being related with Lord Shiva, and therefore show they are better than others. Baba has addressed this tactic and others like it in His series of discourses, “All Bask in the Glory of Shiva”.

About this particular misnomer, Baba has made the matter about Lord Shiva’s skin tone quite clear.

“Rajatagirinibha madhumaya durlabha”

Baba says, “Victory to the benevolent wielder of the thunderbolt, the one with white-complexioned body …” (NSS: Shivagiiti)

In the Shivagiiti song which Baba has Himself written, Baba distinctly states that Lord Shiva had a light complexion. And that same claim Baba makes in the below passage.

Baba says, “Born into a Mongolo-Aryan family, this great man had a high nose and fair complexion. He was a great Tantric – a great yogi. The name of this Maha’purus’a of the non-Aryan society was Shiva.” (NSS)

Likewise, Baba makes a similar statement about Lord Krsna.

Baba says, “The complexion of the historical Krs’n’a who lived in Dva’para Yuga was not black.” (DKG)

Thus, our Marga Publications should reflect this fact that both Krsna and Shiva were of fair complexion. Here the matter is not to promote any race but adhere to Baba’s teachings.

To demonstrate this fact about the color of the body of Lord Shiva, Baba Himself specifically guided artists about how to portray Lord Shiva when making the cover of the 1982 edition of Namah Shiva’ya Sha’nta’ya. On that cover, Lord Shiva is of a very fair complexion. That is the visual example that Baba has put forth.

Unfortunately, in recent publications of “Bhakta Samaj” [a] Year 6, Issue 10, [b] Year 7, Issue 3, and [c] Year 8, Issue 2, the publishers have portrayed both Lord Shiva and Lord Krsna as being totally dark-skinned by placing high-gloss pictures of their darkend tone on the cover.

We all know know that pictures play a large part in people’s understanding, or in this case misunderstanding. So when the publishers place a full-sized cover picture that wrongly depicts Lord Krsna and Lord Shiva, then that dogmatic portrayal will stick in the minds of the reader. And they will not get Baba’s teaching on this very point.

Again, it is not my personal desire or agenda that Shiva or Krsna should be of any part color. This is not a political essay or cultural platform. Our chief and only aim is that Baba’s’ ideals should be highlighted. And when He Himself has said that Lord Shiva was of fair complexion and when He Himself has personally designed a book cover to represent this, then we must not allow any of our publications, including “Bhakta Samaj” magazine, to go against Baba’s teaching by
spreading some dogmatic (mis)presentation.

Tragically, this is not the only problem. The Bhakta Samaj magazine is filled with misguided notions stemming from Hindu dogma. Why? Some say it is because the publisher does not have the requisite courage to promote AM, and instead falls prey to Hindu dogma.



As we know well, Baba has taken great care to properly present Lord Krsna’s personality. One of the main aspects Baba details is that of Lord Krsna on the battlefield and His role of Parasarathi. Because it was in this role that Krsna united the people and created one human society. To this end, Baba has delivered dozens of discourses and at minimum two books: Discourses on the Mahabharata, and Namami Krsnasundaram.

In contrast, in His many discourses, rarely, or even never, does Baba discuss or describe Krsna has an adorable, cute little child. In fact the main aspect of Krsna’s childhood that Baba does highlight is when Krsna killed the woman who was nursing him when she tried to poison him to death.

Baba says, “Putana attempted to suckle Krs’n’a after applying poison to her breast, but Krs’n’a bit her breast sharply, and the poison got into her bloodstream, and she died.” (NKS, Disc: 19)

So Baba has boldly highlighted Krsna’s dharmic qualities, even when describing Krsna as a baby.

In stark contrast, most of the dogmatic Hindus dislike Krsna’s role on the battlefield and His tactics of diplomacy. They do not like the many ways Krsna employed to do away with negative elements. They wrongly feel that this sends a bad or even dangerous message as these selfish priests do not want to encourage people to oppose dogmas. So they instead only
highlight Krsna as a soft, cuddly, chubby baby. All the dogmatic Hindu sects prefer to see Krsna in this manner.

But this is not the way Baba has chosen to present Lord Krsna.

Yet guess what our “Bhakta Samaj” magazine has done. They used an entire cover (Year 7, Issue 3) to highlight Krsna has one innocent child deity, just like all the Hindu sects do.

However this was never Baba’s approach. Always Baba was pointed on Lord Krsna’s role as true dharmika leading ahead on the battlefield of life – uniting people by crushing dogma and wrongdoers.

The dogmatic Hindu priests never appreciate this role of Krsna as Parthasarthi and they also feel that Krsna’s role as Vraja is controversial. That is why they mostly dogmatically portray Krsns has a chubby baby. And it is that dogma that graces the cover of Bhakta Samaj. That is the tragedy of how our magazine is succumbing to dogma.



Here is another key point.

Lord Shiva – the Father of Tantra – is the epitome of dharma. Yet crude Hindu priests commonly adorn Shiva with all kinds of dogmatic elements, including the omnkara symbol or letter.

Of course, on the ’82 edition of Namah Shiva’ya Sha’nta’ya, Baba’s portrayal of Lord Shiva is free from all such dogmatic notions.

But on the cover of the Year 6, Issue 10 edition of “Bhakt Samaj”, Shiva is shown wearing a omnkara symbol on his anahata cakra. So once again the magazine is falling prey to Hindu dogma and ignoring Baba’s dharmic guidelines.



Baba adamantly opposes the caste system and all the forms it takes. That is why Baba insists that before taking AM initiation, one must renounce their caste and do away with things like the brahmin tradition of wearing a sacred thread and sacred hair. These are just elements of brahmin supremacy.

That is why Baba never applies such symbols to any picture of Lord Shiva as Lord Shiva recognises the greatness of all, not one particular caste.

But once again, the editors and publishers of “Bhakta Samaj” fall prey to Hindu dogma and display Lord Shiva on the cover of the magazine wearing the sacred threat depicting caste supremacy.

By seeing this, any rational reader is bound to think that our Marga is just another dogmatic Hindu sect.

Such is the awful outcome of having a coward be the editor of an AM magazine.



Other dogmas that have been repeated again and again in the “Bhakta Samaj” magazine is the old, Hindu notion of the river pouring out of Shiva’s head as well as Shivalingua (phallic worship). Both of these dogmatic ideas have been shown on the cover of this magazine. That entire scene has been explained in greater detail in the endnotes of this letter.

The main idea is that our AM magazines are meant to be the media of AM dharma and not religious dogma. Yet at present, shockingly, there is no end in sight to the array of dogmas that are littering the “Bhakta Samaj” magazine.


One question that invariably that crops up in the mind is why is all this nonsense happening. Why is Dada Santoshananda, the publisher of “Bhakta Samaj”, allowing all this to happen?

Many report that the reason is that Santoshananda is money and status oriented so he does not want to disturb or ruffle the feathers of the ruling elite. In order to grab a few extra pennies from the ruling capitalists and dominant religious funders, Dada is willing to sacrifice and compromise AM ideas. That is his cowardly nature. He is unwilling to
bravely stand for the teachings of AM. Instead Dadaji is making a back-door deal with those top vaeshyas by selling out on AM ideology and Baba’s ideals.

That is the tragedy and here below is how Baba explains this phenomenon.

Baba says, “The vaeshyas’ financial power carries more weight…the vaeshyas have no trouble buying the vipras’ brains…they can easily buy them off. In a vaeshya state, poets, scientists, litterateurs and great heroes are awarded prizes, medals and titles for this very reason. By participating in all this, the vipras and the ks’attriyas surrender all their endowments at the feet of the vaeshyas for a little money or some name and fame; and at the same time feel they are fortunate. They fail to realize that they are digging their own graves.” (HS)

In this way Santoshananda has sold out to – both AM ideology and his own soul – to the vaeshyan elite by pinning Hindu dogma all over “Bhakta Samaj”.


By Baba’s grace He has corrected thousands of years of dogmas and given the proper depiction of the lives and teachings of Mahasambhuti Shiva and Krsna. So when the publisher of “Bhakta Samaj” is constantly going against Baba by making our AM magazine an agent of Hindu dogma, it is a serious matter. That is why many are telling that the cowardly ways of Santoshananda & others like him must go. They must be removed from the post and rectified or forced to leave if they cannot give up their dogma.

That is the strong stance we have to make and by this way AM dharma will be delivered to the hungry hearts and minds of the people.



As we know, it is a blatant misnomer and a false tale that the Ganges river is pouring from Lord Shiva’a head. Hindu priests invented this dogma because by this way they can befool the common people to go to the Ganges to purify themselves. And then those greedy Hindu priests will cheat lots of money from those innocent and naive worshippers. So with this crude idea in mind, avaricious priests supported this dogma of having the Gaunga flow from the top of Lord Shiva’s head.

But Baba opposes and exposes this dogma in numerous places. (Ref: AV-7, p.56-59; NSS Disc 4; etc; etc;) Baba outrightly rejects and nullifies this view that the Gaunga flows out from Shiva’s head.

In a colourful and unique way Baba tells the entire story behind this very dogma. Here reveals the whole thing of how the river Gaunga got wrongly latched on to Lord Shiva’s picture. (Reference NSS: Disc 4) And Baba’s detailed and pointed explanation has been included in Note 1 down below. But the essence of the story is that Shiva’s wife, Gaunga, was
unhappy because her son was not a strong sadhaka. Whereas the children of Shiva’s other wives were quite advanced spiritualists. So to console Gaunga and make her feel alright, Lord Shiva paid special attention to Gaunga. He treated her in a very pampered way in comparison to how HE dealt with His other spouses. So the common people got the wrong idea that Shiva loves Gaunga the most and that Gaunga was his favourite. So they created pictures of Gaunga sitting on Lord Shiva’s head. And then one misconception led to another until finally the river Gaunga (Ganges) ended up flowing out of Shiva’s head. Hence this is one classic example of the confusion that gets mettled up with religious dogma.

Here is the flowing and beautiful way in which Baba reveals how the pouring of the river Gaunga from Lord Shiva’s head is nothing but the concocted tales of a few priests.

Baba says, “Shiva had a third wife–Gaunga. She was a Mongolian girl with a yellow complexion, born in Tibet. I said a little while ago that [Shiva’s 1st wife] Gaorii had a son, Bhaerava, [and Shiva’s second wife] Kalii had a daughter, Bhaeravii, and Gaunga had a son, Karttikeya…”

“Bhaerava, the son of Parvatii, was an ardent spiritualist, a Tantrik sadhaka. Bhaeravii, the daughter of Kalka, was also an ardent spiritualist and a sincere practitioner of Tantra; but Gaunga’s son, Karttikeya, was of a different mould. Because of this she was very sad at heart; she was very unhappy with her only son. So to remove her mental unhappiness, Shiva used to treat her with the utmost courtesy. The people would complain that Shiva was not so soft and courteous in His dealings with Parvatii and Kalii as He was with Gaunga. He was pampering Gaunga too much–as if Shiva was dancing in joy, with Gaunga seated on His head.”

“On the basis of this saying, Shiva was depicted in the Paoranik Age with Gaunga tied to His matted locks of hair. Then a story was concocted in some Purana that the water discarded after washing the feet of Visnu, flowed down from heaven, and Shiva supported the flow on His head; then this flow became the river Gaunga. That is, Gaunga, the wife of Shiva became the river Gaunga. Actually this river Gaunga has no relation whatsoever to Shiva…These are mere tales of the Puranas.” (NSS, Disc 4)


Next, is that in this Bhakta Samaj magazine they are putting photos of the Shiva-liunga or phallic worships. But this is all just dogma from the primitive pre-historic where they were doing phallic worship in hopes of increasing the number of offspring and hence increase the size of their clan. But AM does not support this outlook negative phallic worship; here again Baba has exposed this dogma to its very core. Every Ananda Margii understands that we neither support nor practice phallic worship. But those Dadas put it in our Bhakta Samaj Magazine for the world to see.

In their twisted approach, dogmatic priests have crudely reduced the worship of Lord Shiva to nothing but Shiva-liunga, or phallic worship. Means around the entire globe world, in the name of worshipping Lord Shiva, only the misguided practice of phallic worship is going on (primarily). This situation is happening in not one but in thousands and thousands of Shiva’s temples. Yet Baba guides us that Lord Shiva is the Father of Tantra and that Shiva’s teachings have nothing to
Shiva-liunga, i.e phallic worship. Rather this phallic worship was introduced later on by dogmatic religious priests.

Baba says, “You should remember that there is no mention of the worship of Shiva-liunga in the dhyana mantra of Shiva. From that it is clear that the worship of Shiva-liunga was introduced much later.” (NSS, Disc 5)

So, as Baba points out, this Shiva-liunga or phallic worship has absolutely zero to do with the Father of Tantra– Lord Shiva. Rather this phallic worship picture is the misguided creation of those misguided Hindu priests. So this is nothing but one religious dogma. Yet tragically, it has made it onto the pages of “Bhakta Samaj”.

WT Conduct Rule: Dealings

Baba says, “Supervisory workers will have to take proper care of each of their supervised staff in all respects.” (Pt #2 of ‘Six Additional Rules’)

Note: This is a very significant rule but in today’s Wt culture supervisory bosses are more focused on emptying the pockets of their subordinates and using them for their groupist schemes. This is the only “care” they do. In future when standard of devotion in supervisory workers is higher, these rules are likely to be followed in which case the situation will be better.

Read Full Post »