Vienas negatyvus pavyzdys yra Šrilos Bhaktivedantos Svamio Prabhupados buvęs mokinys Nitai das (Neal Delmonico), kuris 1976 metais pradėjo vis keisčiau ir neatsakingiau elgtis, pasisavino iš ISKCONo 4000 rupijų skirtų nupirkti knygų šventyklos bibliotekai, (kas tais laikais tikriausiai buvo nemaža pinigų suma), ir dingo. Po to pasirodė, kad jis apsistojo su babadžiais prie Radha-kundos.
Apie šį atvejį galima rasti aprašymų Hari Sauri das knygoje "Transcendental Diary", 4 tome, 5 skyriuje.
(September 4th, 1976)
There seems to be a major problem with Nitāi dāsa, Prabhupāda's former servant. He was supposed to be helping to establish the gurukula here as well as the Deity worship, but he has not been seen since visiting Prabhupāda in Bombay two weeks ago. Rūpa Vilāsa dāsa, who has been here about six months and is heading up the gurukula, came to see Prabhupāda in the evening to discuss what to do.
Śrīla Prabhupāda questioned Rūpa Vilāsa about Nitāi's propensities. His approach was that if Nitāi was not happy in his service then that could be adjusted to something that he liked to do.
Rūpa Vilāsa said that Nitāi was a good scholar; he liked to study languages and to write, but he was not an effective teacher.
Prabhupāda asked if he had written anything, and when Rūpa Vilāsa said he had done some Back to Godhead articles, Prabhupāda asked, "So why does he not write? If he has got a taste for something particular he can do that. But nobody knows where he is." He shook his head in disapproval and disappointment. "He's not fixed up. He wanted to take charge of the Deity worship, then he went away."
It was mentioned by Gopāla Kṛṣṇa and Harikeśa Maharāja that he left with 4,000 rupees and was said to be now living in Rādhā-kuṇḍa.
Prabhupāda was a little disgusted. "Just see."
One of the devotees added, "One boy came from Bombay, he told me [Nitāi said], 'If I leave, I have to go.'"
Prabhupāda shook his head. "Then he's [at] Rādhā-kuṇḍa. He has taken 4,000 rupees and gone to Rādhā-kuṇḍa. This is his taste. Sit idly, and become famous as very good scholar."
Rūpa Vilāsa said that Nitāi did not attend many classes, nor even teach very often.
Prabhupāda curled his lips a little in dissatisfaction. "Restless, that's all. Mind not fixed-up. Restless. Now what he'll do with that 4,000 rupees? It is very good program. If I get some thousands of rupees and sit down in Rādhā-kuṇḍa and eat, that is very good idea."
Gopāla Kṛṣṇa said he thought they could find him.
Prabhupāda, however, said it wasn't a question of finding him. "That is not difficult. But what is his mentality. Why he has gone to Rādhā-kuṇḍa if he was teaching here? You cannot rely upon him." Prabhupāda paused for a second and then said, "Rādhārāṇī's place, if anyone thinks that it is very easy to remain in Rādhā-kuṇḍa, the topmost place ... Rūpa Gosvāmī has spoken—he must speak about Rādhā-kuṇḍa. But what he has spoken about other things? Atyāhāraḥ prayāsaś ca prajalpo niyamāgrahaḥ / jana-saṅgaś ca laulyaṁ ca ṣaḍbhir bhaktir vinaśyati. So Rādhā-kuṇḍa, who will live Rādhā-kuṇḍa? One who is topmost devotee, and if he mixes with third-class devotee, how he is fit for living in Rādhā-kuṇḍa? There is no difference between Rādhā-kuṇḍa and Rādhārāṇī. So how you can jump over Rādhārāṇī?
Rādhā-kuṇḍa and Rādhārāṇī nondifferent. How you can enjoy Rādhā-kuṇḍa by swimming? You cannot touch with your feet even Rādhā-kuṇḍa. You can take little water and keep it on the head. That is respectful to Rādhā-kuṇḍa. Of course, things are going on like that, but strictly speaking, Rādhā-kuṇḍa should be respected as Rādhārāṇī herself. That is Rādhā-kuṇḍa consciousness. Highest Rādhā-kuṇḍa consciousness. And if you want to live in Rādhā-kuṇḍa, then why he has taken 4,000 rupees from Giriraja?"
Gopāla informed Prabhupāda that the money was given to Nitāi to buy books for the library in the new temple.
Prabhupāda, practical as always, asked, "So why should he take the responsibility for purchasing if he's interested in Rādhā-kuṇḍa?"
Gopāla added that Nitāi had also received a few hundred dollars recently from his wife in America.
Prabhupāda's focus wasn't on how much money Nitāi had; he was concerned about his consciousness. "That's all right. Money is not the strength for understanding Rādhārāṇī. If you have got some money, by the strength of money you'll understand Rādhārāṇī—that is another bogus thing."
Bhagatji said that Nitāi had been running around to hear from one big gosvāmī after another.
Śrīla Prabhupāda felt that this was the real point. "Here there are very big saints and gosvāmīs. But we have accepted a very simple and insignificant work, that, as Caitanya Mahāprabhu wants, pṛthivīte āche yata nagarādi grāma ... this is what we want. [CB Antya-khaṇḍa 4.126] We don't want to be big, big gosāi, we don't want to be famous. We want to be simply a menial servant of Caitanya Mahāprabhu and preach to others. Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that you chant the holy name—bas. We don't want to be very famous. This is our work."
His voice became stern. "All of them are my disciples. They have accepted me as their spiritual master and they should follow me and do as I am doing. We accept a guru, we should accept his order. Why he is going here and there? Why he is going to meet big, big gosāis?"
Bhagatji said that Nitāi had taken money from Bombay to buy books, but no one really knew where he was; the Vṛndāvana devotees thought he was in Bombay and the Bombay devotees thought he was in Vṛndāvana. "Meanwhile he is going to see these big gosāis."
"So where are the books?" Prabhupāda asked.
Gopāla said Girirāja was asking him for the books.
Prabhupāda shook his head. "Just see. The man who paid him, he was inquiring where are the books."
Prabhupāda said that Lord Caitanya had rejected Mukunda, a classmate of His, for going here and there to hear from non-devotee scholars. "Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not like this type of person. He said khaḍajāṭhiyā beṭā. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has given this title for this type of person, khaḍajāṭhiyā beta."
What does khaḍajāṭhiyā beṭā mean Śrīla Prabhupāda?" Gopāla Kṛṣṇa asked.
"Khaḍajāṭhiyā beṭā is an address. It means one who is rejected," Prabhupāda told him.
Someone mentioned that Nitāi had learned to write Bengali script. But Prabhupāda was not impressed. "He has learned Bengali. He cannot speak Bengali; what he has learned? What can he read? If he can read then he can speak. Writing, reading and speaking—then perfection comes. You say he can simply write. Only that person who can read, he can speak as well, then others can hear. Whatever we read, another person can hear. If he cannot read, speak, then how will others get the opportunity of hearing?"
He stressed that Lord Caitanya's mission was to go out and instruct others in the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. "Yāre dekha, tāre kaha 'kṛṣṇa'-upadeśa, This is the instruction of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. I did not tell anything else."
And in this regard he had a few words to say about the men that Nitāi was going to see. "Caitanya Mahāprabhu says on His order become a guru. How? Whoever you meet, tell them about Kṛṣṇa. Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself gave the order. He gave the order to everyone, not only us. Why haven't these Vṛndāvana-vāsīs done it? It is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's order to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world."
He looked over at Bhagatji. "They are big, big saints, gosāis, but why haven't they gone? Why not? Please tell me. Answer."
Bhagatji nodded. "Nobody did."
"Was it right to do it or not?" Prabhupāda asked. "Why did they not do before us? Caitanya Mahāprabhu gave the order 500 years ago. Why they did not preach? Can you answer? It was right to do it or not?"
He referred to his disciple as a 'sentimental paṇḍita' and asked, "What good are they?"
So now it seems Nitāi has actually fallen away due to his association with outside influences. Prabhupāda has been at such great pains to warn and protect us from this. Having lived here for so many years Śrīla Prabhupāda knows very well the mentality of the so-called bābājīs and their ability to poison one's understanding so that one becomes useless for any preaching.
(September 9th, 1976)
Complaints about Nitāi dāsa have been increasing daily. Apparently, he has been telling the devotees that it is not possible to go back to Godhead in this life unless one chants 100,000 names of Kṛṣṇa (about sixty-four rounds) every day. He has been claiming that if one only chants sixteen rounds, it will take many births. Many devotees are affected by this nonsense, which Nitāi got from some "advanced devotee" in Govardhana.
Prabhupāda said he has become a sahajiyā. He pointed out that at initiation we agree to chant not less than sixteen rounds. "We are not saying only sixteen rounds. You can chant more if you want—sixty-four. But actually we are not capable of chanting sixty-four, 100,000 names a day. This is not possible for you."
(September 14th, 1976)
Nitāi dāsa sent Śrīla Prabhupāda a letter today, explaining his reasons for leaving ISKCON. At first, Harikeśa Mahārāja didn't want to read the letter to Prabhupāda because it was so offensive. But when Hansadūta Mahārāja saw it, he insisted that it be shown so that we could hear Prabhupāda's rebuttals to the points. So this afternoon, after his nap, we went into his room and sat before him. Prabhupāda was grave as Harikeśa read out the letter. He responded point by point, not to dictate a reply as he normally does, but simply for our benefit.
Nitāi began by disclaiming the authenticity of our disciplic line. He cited Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābājī, a contemporary of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, who claimed that Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta was never initiated by Śrīla Gaura Kiśora. "It was well known that Gaura Kiśora never had any disciples."
Prabhupāda responded that Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābājī was a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī whom Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta had strongly criticized for advertising himself as a great preacher without his having any actual knowledge of the Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇava philosophy.
Nitāi went on to say that he now doubted ISKCON's teachings: "They are just the opposite to, or a misrepresentation of, what is actually in the śāstra." As an example he offered a quote from Caitanya-bhāgavata where Lord Caitanya says that one cannot become one of His associates unless one chants one lakh of names daily.
Prabhupāda's reply was practical. "If you take all of the so-called gosvāmīs, bābājīs and mahātmās in the whole of the Vṛndāvana area together, they have not advanced Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement one inch!"
Nitāi's next point was that Śrīla Haridāsa Ṭhākura was the nāma-ācārya. Since he chanted three lakhs of names a day, we either have to imitate that, or keep it as our goal. Nitāi asserted that if we chant at least one lakh of names daily, then "Kṛṣṇa will automatically give us premā."
But Prabhupāda disagreed. He said that Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta condemned the idea of sitting down and chanting in one place as merely a cheating process adopted by unscrupulous people desirous of obtaining name and fame as a so-called advanced devotee. He added that the idea that Kṛṣṇa will 'automatically give premā' is karma-mīmāṁsā philosophy. Kṛṣṇa is not obligated to give premā to anyone, he said, no matter how many rounds they chant.
Incredibly, at the end of Nitāi's letter, he had the audacity and hypocrisy to tell Prabhupāda that he was now going out to seek the shelter of some other great mahātmā "in whom I can place greater faith," and he asked for his blessings "so that I may advance more and more."
Śrīla Prabhupāda's response was very strong. "Yes. I bless you that you shall never advance!"
He then dictated a telegram to be sent to all the GBCs: "Please let it be known that Nitai has become a venomous serpent. Be careful of him. Your ever well-wisher, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami."
Tas pats Nitai das yra vienas pavienių vakariečių, kurie ir šiais laikais seka tariamais "tradiciniais" "babadžiais". Jis verčia "babadžių" knygas. Ir štai ką jis rašo (2009 metai, interneto forumai):
I have advocated for a long time the purging of Bhaktisiddhanta from Caitanya Vaisnavism. Unfortunately, it has become like a cancer and has wrapped its tumors so tightly around the organs of the body of Caitanya Vaisnavism that it is hard to remove them without damaging the host. But, remove them we must if the organism is to survive.
My Gurudev [mano pastaba: jo guru - Tinkadi Goswami, (1906-1984) ] felt no animosity or hatred towards towards anyone, what to speak of ISKCON / Gaudiya Math. Nevertheless, he did not regard the members of ISKCON / Gaudiya Math as initiated members of the Caitanya Vaisnava community. When I came to him, there was no doubt in his mind that I needed to be initiated, though I had received initiation from Bhaktivedanta, both Harinama and Mantra. So he put me on a program of purification similar to the purascarya or mantra purification described in shastra. He ordered me to do three lakhs of Harinama every day and I was not allowed to do any other seva. When we ate I was not allowed to sit with the others because I was not initiated. It is a great honor to be allowed to sit in line (pankti) with the other Vaisnavas and honor prasad with them. I was only allowed that honer after I had been given the mantras. Sometimes one's name is also changed, but who would change a name like Nitai Das?
Anyway, that is the reality of the Vaisnava world I was introduced to after I left ISKCON.
Akivaizdu, kad šis Nitai das dėl savo "babadžių" įtakos ar dėl savo galvosenos labai priešiškai nusistatęs prieš Šrilą Bhaktisiddhantą Sarasvatį Thakurą ir apskritai jo misiją.
Perskaičiau knygą apie jo "babadži"-guru Tinkadi Gosvamį (Tinkadi Baba), kurią parašė Tinkadžio Gosvamio mokinys Binod Bihari das Babadži, ir kurią Nitai das išvertė: https://ia800802.us.archive.org/1/items/BiographySadhuSadhuLifeOfTinkadiBaba/√Biography%20-%20Sadhu%20Sadhu%20-%20Life%20Of%20Tinkadi%20Baba.pdf
Neradau ten nieko blogo, bet ir nieko kas rodytų aukštą dvasinį lygį. Atsižadėjimas, tikėjimas ir intensyvi praktika yra gerbtini dalykai, tas be abejonių.
Bet tas faktas, kad Tinkadis Gosvamis nelaikė Šrilos Bhaktivedantos Svamio Prabhupados mokinio inicijuotu, nors jis buvo inicijuotas, ir per naują jam davė savo iniciaciją, (o tai yra šiurkštus Gaudija vaišnavų principų pažeidimas, nes įšventinimas yra tik vienas, ir įšventinantis mokytojas yra tik vienas, jeigu viskas bona fide, o šikša guru gali būti daug, bet bona fide įšventinančio guru negalima atmesti) aiškiai rodo, kad Tinkadis Gosvamis visiškai nesuprato Šrilos Prabhupados dvasinio lygmens, taip pat ir Šrilos Bhaktisiddhantos Sarasvačio Thakuros dvasinio lygmens, tuo pačiu juos neigė.
Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvatis Thakura pradėjo įšventinti mokinius dar jo dikša gurudevui Šrilai Gaurakišorai das Babadžiui ir jo šikša-gurudevui Šrilai Bhaktivinodai Thakurai abiems esant šiame pasaulyje. Tai rodo, kad nebuvo jokių abejonių, kad Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvatis yra įšventintas Šrilos Gaurakišoros das Babadžio ir autoritetingas būti dvasiniu mokytoju kitiems žmonėms abiejų jų (Bhaktivinodos ir Gaurakišoros) akyse. Todėl oponentų kalbos, kad esą Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura neturi dikša linijos ir negali jos perduoti, skamba absurdiškai, kaip paprasčiausi piktybiški pletkai iš pavydo ir faktų nežinojimo. Tą pasako ir Šrila Prabhupada, cituoju iš Hari Sauri das knygos:
Viskas susiveda į tai, kad dėl Šrilos Bhaktisiddhantos Sarasvačio pamokslavimo prieš kastinių gosvamių ir tariamų "siddhų" ("tobulų") "babadžių" klaidingas praktikas ir idėjas, ką rodo anksčiau šioje temoje cituotas Bhaktisiddhantos laiškas, jie pradėjo jį neigti ir vis vien tęsė tas klaidingas praktikas. Ir iki šių dienų tai vyksta: išgalvoto "siddha-dehos" davimas, nei tariamam guru, nei tariamam mokiniui neturint kvalifikacijų ir tokio dvasinio lygmens, ir pan, ir Bhaktisiddhantos linijos neigimas. Viskas kaip aprašiau nuo temos pradžios.
"Nitai savo laišką pradėjo paneigdamas mūsų mokytojų sekos autentiškumą. Jis pacitavo Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābādžį, Šrilos Bhaktisiddhantos Sarasvačio Thakuros amžininką, kuris tvirtino kad Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta nebuvo inicijuotas Šrilos Gaura Kišoros: "Buvo gerai žinoma, kad Gaura Krišora neturėjo mokinių"
Prabhupada atsakė, kad Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābādžis buvo kaništha-adhikaris, kurį Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta stipriai sukritikavo už tai, kad tas skelbėsi didžiu pamokslautoju, nors neturėjo jokio tikro žinojimo apie Gaudija vaišnavų filosofiją.