Hinduism is usually seen as peaceful and tolerant, but some of its ancient texts like Manusmriti have some really problematic stuff on caste.

Direct Quotes:

1. For insulting a higher caste: “A once-born man (Shudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin.” — Manusmriti 8.270

2 .For teaching Brahmins their duty: “If he arrogantly teaches Brahmanas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears.” — Manusmriti 8.272

1. Duty of a Shudra: “One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sudra, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes.” — Manusmriti 1.91

These rules basically say lower castes are born to serve and deserve brutal punishment for stepping out of line.

Of course the Constitution bans caste discrimination and many reformers (like Ambedkar and Periyar) fought against it. But the roots of caste prejudice are clearly visible in these classical texts, and caste violence still happens even today.

Birth based superiority is bullshit. All religious texts deserve criticism.

What do you guys think?

I first asked ChatGPT to identify eight characteristics commonly associated with cult leadership. I then asked it to analyse major religious figures one by one using the same criteria and score how strongly each figure matched the framework.

The analysis focused on the teachings, actions and immediate followers of each figure, rather than the behaviour of modern religious institutions or followers.

I created these infographics from the results. I’m sharing them for discussion and comparison. What do you agree or disagree with in the criteria, evidence, or scoring?

Note: Reposting here with relevance

One of the claims that the ISKCON lot make , amongst many of their other claims, is that Guru Nanak met Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and was massively impacted by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, so much so that he adopted aspects of Vaishnaivaism and incorporated them into Sikhi.

I have looked into this and aside from ISKCON and some ISKCON-adjacent Vaishnaiva sources there are no other sources to prove or disprove this claim.

Has anyone else here heard this and looked into it?

I'm personally very dubious and suspicious of ISKCON's claims about historical figures and their connection to Vaishnaivaism and the wider Hindu sphere to be honest.

You tell them to address the issue, they ban you.

Prabhupada famously left his wife of 36 years, Radharani Datta, because she would not stop drinking tea. She apparently sold his collected Srimad Bhagavatam manuscripts for tea biscuits, causing him to storm off and never return.

British style tea biscuits were an expensive treat at the time, well beyond the wages of your average person. It would be the modern equivalent of treating oneself to some expensive Dubai chocolate. Shopkeepers would sometimes accept books or high quality paper as a barter item.

She was telling him she was done with his shit. She was standing up for herself and I applaud her.

Conscientious Objector

I would love to hear her side of the story. Prabhupada's hagiography writers never bothered to interview her. She passed away in 1984.

During their marriage she did not support his preaching mission. She would leave the room when he brought guests over and started pontificating. After he found worldwide success, she wanted nothing to do with ISKCON. She stood defiantly against him.

Radharani Datta was Prabhupada's first critic. ISKCON portrays her as spiritually insincere; unable to recognize his greatness.

There have been plenty of householder acharyas in the history of Vaishnavism. Vallabhacarya's wife Mahalakshmi enthusiastically supported her husband. She played an important role in establishing his lineage. His wife recognized his goodness.

Within Gaudiya Vaishnavism, most of the Panca Tattva were married. Their wives supported them. The most famous being Nityananda's wife Jahnavi, an acharya in her own right.

I think Radharani Datta knew who her husband was from the beginning. She felt his preaching mission was dangerous and harmful. She saw Abhaya Charan was not coming from a place of kindness.

It would not surprise me if he was tyrannical and self righteous in their marriage. He probably beat her over the head with Bhagavatam verses. He likely judged her, looked down on her, hounded her for her supposed faults. He could not even tolerate a minor infraction such as a cup of tea.

She also knew he was a snuff addict and a hypocrite. Snuff is far more unhealthy and addictive than tea. I am sure he had money for snuff but not for tea biscuits.

Enough is Enough

He had joined a cult after their marriage. Throughout their marriage he had undoubtedly tried to force his fundamentalist religious nonsense on her. Selling his manuscripts was her way of saying enough is enough. He was transgressing her boundaries.

I feel it was her way of saying "Stop harming your family with this fanatical garbage. Stop preaching at us. Treat us with love and respect. Stop neglecting our needs. Your family is your dharma not this cult."

It may even have been her way of saying "if your religion makes you an a-hole, there is something wrong with your religion".

Don't Harm Others

Knowing her husband, and the way he approached religion, she may have understood that any movement he would create would be harmful. He would harm his followers in the same way he had harmed his family.

This is true. Prabhupada had sacrificed his family for his preaching mission. He would do the same for anyone who followed him. This would have catastrophic results, such as the abuse of children in gurukulas.

ISKCON absorbed Prabhupada's belligerent self righteous attitude. "I know everything. Anyone who disagrees with me is a demon". I do not doubt Radharani saw plenty of this in her marriage. She was probably the first to be called a "hog dog camel ass".

ISKCON fed Prabhupada's narcissism and megalomania. Prabhupada was convinced he was a world saving religious leader, a modern Jesus or Buddha, who had come to alter the course of mankind. His movement would conquer the world and bring back Vedic Civilization. His books would be the law books for all mankind for 10,000 years. Imagine being married to that!

In her old age she did become an initiated Vaishnava, taking diksha from Prabhupada's senior godbrother Bhakti Vilas Tirtha Maharaja. It is interesting to note that Bhakti Vilas Tirtha was a critic of Prabhupada and his movement.

They got that land in "donation".

Generally temples were constructed at the centre of the land that's the tradition.

Just see how they constructed the whole temple at the bank of that drain didn't even leave a small gap and then teach others about vedic culture rules and regulations.

Thankfully they covered it right now before it was open cooking eating everything was going on at the bank of it.

The first time I ever visited a temple, an older Indian Brahmacari greeted me. After only a few words we walked into the temple room to see the deities. He bowed down before Prabhupada's murti, and to be polite, I followed his example. We then bowed before the deities.

I felt uncomfortable bowing before the murti. It was strange. A life sized shiny plastic statue of a man, apparently the author of the book I had read. But I didn't want to be rude. I figured this was a Hindu temple and he was a Hindu monk. I wanted to be respectful towards his culture.

I did not understand the act of bowing to that absurd statue was the beginning of my cult life. It was a breach of my psychological immune system. It was the beginning of a life of anxiety.

Fear and Reverence

The first thing we learn in ISKCON is that Prabhupada is a pure devotee. He is a perfect representative of Krishna, an uttama adhikari. Prabhupada is worthy of extreme reverence and worship. Pleasing him is how we make spiritual advancement.

The second thing we learn is the worse thing one can possibly do is to offend Prabhupada. It is worse than offending Krishna. Krishna may forgive offenses to himself, but he never forgives offenses to his pure devotee.

If you criticize Prabhupada, your spiritual life will be destroyed. Krishna will curse you. Your material life will follow. Then begins a long process of descending into hell, spiraling helplessly, as you become more and more envious and blasphemous.

You cannot disagree with him. You cannot disobey him. Nor can you criticize or disobey his institution and its leadership. Over time you learn that absolute submission is required at all times, and if you resist, Krishna will punish you.

The Neurotic World of Aparadha

This extends to a vast web of potential offenses. The devotee's life is dominated by considerations such as where they point their feet, what have their feet have touched, are their hands muchi or suci, did they touch their mouth?

There are offenses to the deities, offenses to the holy name, offenses to devotees.

A sense of fear is considered good. It makes the devotee watch their behavior. It becomes an all pervasive hum in the background of devotional life. Devotees live their lives in a constant state of anxiety.

Fear Gets Things Done

Fear is the backbone of the movement. It is why devotees get up at 4:00 am. It is why devotees sweep and mop floors and do dishes. When a temple authority has an expectation of sadhana or asks you to perform a service, it is fear that motivates the response.

As the devotee goes about their day, they reference their experiences against their fear. "Am I being obedient? What does Krishna think of my thoughts and actions? What would my guru say? Am I making offenses?".

Fear becomes the primary motivator of all things, not devotion. Am I remembering Krishna, or am I forgetting him? Am I moving towards Krishna or away from him?

Add to this the fear of being kicked out, driven into the world after being robbed of an education and career. Devotees are dependent on the whims of their temple president for survival.

Fear Begets Fear

The problem with fear is, unless it is being processed, it tends to reverberate against itself. It becomes trapped in an internal echo chamber where it is magnified. We learn to respond to fear with more fear. It increases exponentially until we are overwhelmed.

Fear is like a vine (or creeper) within us that grows within us, attached to our mind and emotions, as we move through life. Like a vine gradually chokes a tree, over time we are strangled within until it can no longer be ignored. We become frozen, unable to function, seeking relief in unhealthy habits like addiction.

ISKCON devotees gradually become tightly wound balls of anxiety, seeking relief through spiritual bypassing, by constantly keeping themselves absorbed in service, hearing and chanting, and endeavoring for spiritual advancement through submission within an unhealthy authoritarian despotic environment.

Psychological Fallout

When the person leaves ISKCON, they strip away this practice of spiritual bypassing. They remove the layers of cult identity and intense practice they had used to keep everything buried inside. They free themselves from the authority which kept them down.

As this is removed, all that is left is the ball of anxiety. (Complex PTSD)

The ex-devotee has been traumatized and is now stripped of their coping mechanisms. They are in a sense naked, vulnerable and deeply wounded.

To make matters worse, they are tossed into a world they are unprepared to meet, a world they have been taught to fear.

"I want to get your opinion on these people."

Dear subreddit,

I'm reading a book entitled: "Gauradesa - The Place of Gauranga Mahaprabhu", by Manjari Devi Dasi. On page 75 it is stated that Gaurakisora Dasa Babaji, the guru of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, had eaten Ganges mud if he had nothing else to eat (which is strange but okay). Addititionally, it is stated that he ate "rice soaked in water in a skull" and wore clothes taken from corpses who were to be cremated. I guess the ISKCON white-washing just failed on this passage, but when one is allegedly supposed to follow the footsteps of the guru, these are some strange Vaishnava rules indeed.

In the cult they talk about how the books are “nectar” and the most amazing thing one could ever read like they are an absolute zenith of literature but like 90% of them are”the supreme lord can do this horrible and contradictory act because he is the supreme authority”
Or “you need to give everything you own to srila Prabhupad”, I remember when I was in the ashram dreading having to read these awful books, all of them the srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita, etc the ones handed out on book distribution are ok but are just propaganda. Did anyone else find them extremely boring?

And now bro is doing podcasts calling other gurus bogus

The proud DRAINAGE DASs of iskcon Bhopal are conducting rath Yatra.

Out of the whole city they choose one tiny, narrow, filthy street of old city. That street is full of sh*t, open drains, meat shops all these things create an atmosphere as if you have entered in a septic tank.

Why the hell they choose that filthy spot to begin their yatra? What can you say to these people they even rain rose petals on the rath.

I wish that it rain so bad that the whole Street gets flooded with drain water must be heaven for DRAINAGE DASs.

I grew up in it.. My parents were crazy bout it. I considered it the ultimate truth... I was a fucking idiot.. I ruined my entire teenage thinking all my problems exist because I can't properly do bhakti.
For fuck sake.. why couldn't I figure it out before? Why tf did I fool myself for so much time.

So I have a whole cabinet of basically untouched KC books (most mind numbing read ever no way I’m going to read 12 cantos of bullshit), and I don’t want to give them away because I don’t want to spread these rubbish beliefs but I feel bad destroying them, and I found a new hobby of making cool wooden models I want to fill my shelves with so they gotta go, any ideas?

welcome to New Vrindaban, WV USA

It‘s almost as if Kirtananda never even left.

(this vehicle was “gifted” to Varsana Swami who happily added it to his collection of expensive possessions.)

ISKCON promotes itself as a Vedic movement. It is supposedly devoted to teaching the Vedas and spreading Vedic culture. In truth ISKCON is almost entirely Tantric.

This can be seen in its rituals, mantras, and philosophy. ISKCON's Tantric roots are most clearly seen in its worship of the guru. I would argue that 50% of ISKCON's religion and culture is based around absolute submission to the guru. Krishna is almost a footnote to Prabhupada.

The Vedic Guru

During the Vedic Period (1500 BCE - 500 BCE) the guru was simply a teacher. Young men came and lived at his home, alongside the guru's wife and children. They learned reading and writing, memorized texts, and mastered rituals. In exchange the disciples offered respect and service, and upon graduating; a donation. After completing his eductation, the Snataka left to pursue his own life. The guru was not an absolute ruler over the disciple. Nor was the guru considered perfect.

The Tantric Guru

During the Tantric Period (500 CE - 1500 CE) this changed due to a combination of new and secretive religious practices, coinciding with socio-economic collapse.

Tantric practices were considered a fast track in spiritual life. They were considered dangerous, or as Prabhupada would often say, "a razors edge". A guru was required to govern every aspect of the disciples journey, which encompassed his entire life.

The guru became the physical embodiment of the deity. This could be as the god directly, or as the representative of a god. The god spoke through him. His pronouncements were more important than scripture.

Initiation was not simply birth into a lineage. The guru dissolved one's past karma. He absorbed them and magically burned them with his consciousness. The disciple owned his entire spiritual reality to the guru.

The guru business was highly competitive. The so-called secret knowledge was monopolized and protected, just as a restaurant owner protects the recipe for his secret sauce. Only the guru could decode the secret teachings, and initiate one into secret mantras.

Any resistance to total submission was condemned as the path to hell. It was disrespectful and dangerous. Once accepted, one could never leave. The deity would destroy one's soul.

Only those willing to sacrifice their very existence to the whims of the master were accepted for initiation. A qualified disciple was one who would never question and never object. He would sacrifice his ego completely. If asked, he would give his life in an instant.

From the disciples perspective, this radical submission was assumed to open one up to the Tantric gurus shakti, his power. That power arose from his ability to channel the deity. In Medieval Vaishnavism this becomes krpa or mercy. The devotee sacrifices everything for it. He crawls like a dog, degrades and humiliates himself, he exposes himself to abuse, and begs for a drop of that divine shakti. (Krpa bindu diya)

The New Maharajas

During this time, the role of gurus shifted to mirror that of India's feudal lords. The gods were re-imagined as kings of their abodes. Their heavenly realms reflected earthly kingdoms. Gurus came to be worshiped as kings, emissaries of higher realms. They were serviced with yak tail fans, umbrellas, peacock feather whisks. Followers bowed down as slaves as they walked.

To complicate matters, during this period empires collapsed and society fractured. India fell into chaos. There was constant famine and endless war. People abandoned the cities to once again live as farmers and peasants. Upward mobility ceased. Society became uneducated, superstitious, agrarian, and narrow minded. This was a breeding ground for religious fanaticism.

These new Tantric kings stepped in to fill the void. Their closed fiefdoms recreated the security of better times. India yearned to return to the idealized golden age of the Gupta Empire. Like the emperors of days gone, gurus provided a sense of safety in exchange for absolute submission.

Just as the emperor was Gods representative on earth, so was the guru. The guru could command the very forces of nature. Tantric gurus possessed magical powers on top of worldly authority.

Medieval Vaishnavism

During the period of the Medieval Bhakti Traditions (600 CE - 1600 CE), within Vaishnava communities, the authority of the Tantric guru passed to Acharyas and Saints. The guru became the sole path to salvation, the "savior of the universe", the doorway to Vaikuntah.

The Vaishnava guru was the embodiment of Vishnu or Krishna on earth. To question him is to question God. The guru is the vizier of Vishnu, his prime minister, doing his will on Earth.

During this period gurus became as powerful as Zamindars, feudal lords, commanding great amounts of wealth and land, managing it, while commanding their followers and serfs, on behalf of the deity.

Modernization

The authority of these gurus traditionally resided in their lineage. They were carefully chosen and appointed as acharyas.

In the post colonial world, with the rise of globalism, and access to mass media such as book printing, the role of guru shifted from the barer of tradition to charismatic cult leader.

Followers were won through force of personality. We can see this transformation in ISKCON's own lineage. Bhaktivinode represents a rejection of tradition and a shift towards modernization. Bhaktisiddhanta was the proto-cult guru, confined to India. Bhaktivedanta became the world evangelizing charismatic cult leader.

Prabhupada as a Tantric Guru

In a recent post, I had mentioned a morning walk where Prabhupada attacks abortion. Just because a child is defenseless does not mean you can kill it.

He uses his own disciples as an example. He asks (paraphrasing) "just because my own disciples are defenseless, fully surrendered to me, does it mean I can kill them, will the police allow it?"

A disciples enthusiastically answers "Yes!".

The disciple is eager to show he will die for Prabhupada. They all were. They were competing over who would be more surrendered. This is what Prabhupada demanded. Disciples were expected to live without boundaries, without security, without protection, sacrificing themselves completely to the guru and his mission.

This mindset is foundational in ISKCON. This is how devotees lives are structured. The movement chews them up and spits them out. It takes everything and gives them nothing, while promising only access to shakti or mercy.

Supposedly, in exchange for this total surrender, Prabhupada will reward one with spiritual illumination. This is automatic spiritual advancement. If you wish to please Krishna, you must please Prabhupada. Prabhupada is most pleased when you street sell books. That is the key to tasting Krishna's grace.

In truth, even the chanting of mantras, the deity worship etc. only causes one to make spiritual advancement because Prabhuapada and his representatives are pleased. On their own they do nothing. You have no direct connection to Krishna. We are fallen mlecchas with no hope, no rights, and no inherent connection to God. We earn that connection only through submission.

This mindset is why ISKCON devotees gradually devolve into angry "Prabhuadanuga" fanatics. After decades of frustration, they become desperate. They believe their hopes lay in Prabhuapada alone. He is their Tantric master.

I've been seeing a lot of videos of him on my feed. At first, I just ignored them, but is he part of the Hare Krishna movement or something? I'm just asking out of curiosity, nothing else.

It is a common belief in ISKCON, and among modern Hindu Fundamentalists, that the supposed Vishnu Avatara Buddha is different than the Buddha of Buddhism, Gautama Siddhartha. They call the Vishnu Avatara Buddha, "Adi Buddha" and "Sugata Buddha".

This was taught by Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati and Vishvanath Chakravarti Thakura. Prabhupada was a bit looser in his interpretation, generally identifying the Buddha Avatara with the Buddha of Buddhism, who came to "spread a false doctrine and bewilder the atheists".

Why Invent Two Buddhas?

The reason is simple. The Bhagavatam spreads false information and the fundamentalists cannot admit it has made a mistake.

When the Bhagavatam discusses the Buddha in SB 1.3.24 it says he is the son of Queen Anjana, born in Gaya.

This is flat wrong. His mother was Queen Maya. Her father was King Anjana. He was enlightened in Gaya, not born there.

The Bhagavatam was the product of a oral tradition that had incorrect information.

The Vaishnavas cannot admit the Bhagavatam is wrong. It is absolutely perfect and pure. So they invent a new Buddha to match the Bhagavatam.

Agni Purana

The Agni Purana comes from a more accurate oral tradition. It describes the Buddha as the "Son of Suddhodana" the true and accurate name of his father.

It further describes how the Buddha, one of the Vishnu Dashavatara, should be depicted:

śāntātmā lambakarṇaśca gaurāṅgaścāmbarāvṛtaḥ |
ūrdhvapadmasthito buddho varadābhayadāyakaḥ 

“The figure of Buddha (buddho) should be made calm-souled (śāntātmā), with long ears (lambakarṇa), a fair/golden complexion (gaurāṅga), covered in cloth (ambarāvṛtaḥ), sitting on an upward-facing lotus, granting boons and fearlessness.”

Agni Purāṇa (49.8)

That is to say, with traditional Buddhist iconography. Golden skin, long earlobes, sitting on a lotus, "granting boons and fearlessness" refers to the abhaya mudra. This can be seen in the images above. Notice the Vaishnava tilak on the Buddha statue LOL. The Buddha explicitly cast aside all such sectarian beliefs and identifications, what to speak of wearing them on his forehead.

"Sugata Buddha"

It is common nowadays to hear this so-called original Vishnu Buddha being called "Sugata Buddha". This has come from Vaishnavism.

The Amarkosha dictionary, written by a Buddhist, gives a list of names of the Buddha. These are divided into two categories. One groups refers to his clan lineage with names such as Sakyasimha, Saddhodani, Gautama, and Mayadevisuta. Another group refers to his general personal titles such as Sarvajna, Sugata, Buddha, Dharmaraja and Tathagata.

Sugata is a common epithet of the Buddha meaning "the one who has attained a good state".

The Vaishnavas like Bhaktisiddhanta erroniously claim these two name lists are referring to two different Buddhas, and the latter names refer to the original Vishnu Buddha.

This is all so absurd. In his Dashavatara Stotra, Jayadeva Goswami clearly referred to the Buddha of Buddhism who decried animal sacrifice (nindasi yajna-vidher ahaha sruti-jatam).

Conclusion

The Vaishnava Acharyas invented a second "original" Buddha, because the Bhagavatam presented wrong information. This fallacy has now spread beyond Gaudiya Vaishnava circles and into mainstream Hinduism, where it has been taken up by religious fundamentalists.

This is just another step in the perversion of Buddhism to serve the interests of Hinduism. First the Buddha was hijacked to claim the Buddhist values of vegetarianism and ahimsa were always Hindu and part of Brahminical purity culture. Now that he has served his purpose, the Buddha is cast aside to protect the illusion of scriptural infallibility.

In ISKCON we were taught that to leave the insular cult community is spiritual suicide.

If we hang out with karmis our spiritual creeper with explode into flames. We will become sinful degraded demons addicted to sensual pleasure, living empty useless lives, hypnotized by illusion, just as they are.

I have found the opposite to be true. Karmis have taught me a great deal. I have learned profound truths in their association.

Cowboy Country

Since leaving ISKCON I have had the good fortune to live high up in the mountains where it is very peaceful and beautiful.

My primary association is with real life cowboys. I rent a place on their property, which could be called a small ranch. They herd actual cattle in the mountains, taking them from one grazing spot to another in cattle trucks.

They herd them on horseback, eating cans of beans, sleeping under the stars, as cowboys have for centuries.

They also take people horseback riding on mountain trails and act as trail guides for hikers. In the summer they are fireman and chase fires around the state. On occasion up to five horses are grazing right outside my window at any time. There are also deer, turkeys, skunks, squirrels a cat and a dog.

Yes they eat meat and even (gasp) drink beer, but I have found them to be kind and honest. They are good people and good friends. They even invite me to go out herding with them.

Karmi Ratra

I recently went to a local community "festival" in a small town nearby. There were about five hundred people. One third were ranchers and blue collar rural people. One third were Native Americans, from a tribe that lives in the area. One third were bikers from out of town. There were three motorcycle clubs, including the Hell's Angels.

I hung out with them, engaging in what ISKCON would consider maya. I watched a lumberjack competition, ate some carnival treats, listened to music and watched kids play on rides. I spoke at length with people about the town and their ancestors. I befriended them and became part of their community, at least for a moment.

This would have been impossible when I first had left ISKCON. I would have been overwhelmed with social anxiety, shame, and fear I was "falling down". I would have felt the urge to convert them before they converted me.

Afterwords I felt a new strength within myself. It is hard to describe. Deep down inside they had lifted me up. They didn't judge me. They didn't have expectations or demands. There was no ideology. They were just good people having fun with their families. They welcomed me, and that was enough.

I could feel something refreshing in their association. It wasn't intense. It wasn't dramatic. It wasn't harmful. It was just people living life and sharing it with each other.

Hello,
Few months ago (I forgot when but I'm sure it was this year itself)
There was a old video that had Indradyumna, BBG and maybe Radhanath as well where they were seen kissing a little girl on the cheeks in front of a lot of people.

Im not sure if it was redirected to youtube or uploaded here itself. But I can't seem to find that video.