View source for Kirtanananda does not believe in parampara or in the necessity of scriptural authority. He seems to feel that this is a sort of tyranny. That means, after taking sannyasa and understanding the philosophy for more than a year, he has changed the whole view

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Kirtanananda does not believe in parampara or in the necessity of scriptural authority. He seems to feel that this is a sort of tyranny. That means, after taking sannyasa and understanding the philosophy for more than a year, he has changed the whole view"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|25Jul13}}
{{last|25Jul13}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=0|Let=1}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:We Do Not (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:Do Not Believe]]
[[Category:Our Belief (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:parampara]]
[[Category:Necessity]]
[[Category:Authoritative Scriptures]]
[[Category:We (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:Seem]]
[[Category:Our Feelings (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:Sort Of]]
[[Category:Tyranny]]
[[Category:That Means...]]
[[Category:Taking Sannyasa]]
[[Category:Sannyasi (Disciples of SP)]] 
[[Category:Understand Philosophy]]
[[Category:Our Understanding (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:More Than]]
[[Category:One Year]]
[[Category:We Have (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:Our Changing (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:whole]]
[[Category:view]]
</div>
<div id="Correspondence" class="section" sec_index="6" parent="compilation" text="Correspondence"><h2>Correspondence</h2>
</div>
<div id="1968_Correspondence" class="sub_section" sec_index="3" parent="Correspondence" text="1968 Correspondence"><h3>1968 Correspondence</h3>
</div>
<div id="LettertoHayagrivaLosAngeles15January1968_0" class="quote" parent="1968_Correspondence" book="Let" index="13" link="Letter to Hayagriva -- Los Angeles 15 January, 1968" link_text="Letter to Hayagriva -- Los Angeles 15 January, 1968">
<div class="heading">Now it is understood from the letter of Umapati that Kirtanananda does not believe in parampara or in the necessity of scriptural authority. He seems to feel that this is a sort of tyranny. That means, after taking sannyasa and understanding the philosophy for more than a year, he has changed the whole view, and I do not understand how you would like this recent doctrine.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Letter to Hayagriva -- Los Angeles 15 January, 1968|Letter to Hayagriva -- Los Angeles 15 January, 1968]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated January 10, 1968; it is very nice. I do not find any basical difference of philosophy. From the very beginning I have always preached that basically we have no difference between the Christians, the Mohammedans, the Hindus, or the Buddhists, the four principal religionists in the world. But there is a class, Impersonalists, whom we consider as atheists. The atheists directly say there is no God, and the Impersonalists say there may be God, but He has no form. It is indirectly saying that there is no God. I am very glad to read in your letter a nice line, "My main concern is seeing Him constantly in my daily life, that is, to constantly remember Him and not to forget Him." This is actually Krishna Consciousness. We can remember Krishna in every moment. We can remember Krishna while taking a glass of water because the taste of water is Krishna. We can remember Krishna as soon as we see the sunlight in the morning, because the sunlight is a reflection of Krishna's Bodily Effulgence. Similarly, as soon as we see moonlight in the evening we remember Krishna because moonlight is also reflection of sunlight. Similarly, when we hear any sound we can remember Krishna because sound is Krishna, and the most perfect sound, transcendental, is Hare Krishna, which we have to chant 24 hours. So there is no scope of forgetting Krishna at any moment of our life provided we practice in that way. The society for Krishna Consciousness is meant for preaching this philosophy throughout the world and I was very happy to receive your cooperation and I am still hopeful that the philosophy of Bhagavad-gita as Science of God can be preached by you and all your God-brothers.</p>
<p>Regarding the manuscript: It is very difficult for me to see it again, but I inquired from Brahmananda whether the manuscript is already delivered to MacMillan Company or not. If it is not delivered then I shall try to see it again. Your fear that the entire society will be in danger by Raymond's editing of the Gita is not very suitable remark. Rayarama may not be as qualified as you are, but his one qualification that he is fully surrendered to Krishna and his Spiritual Master is the first class recommendation for his editing any one of our literatures, because editing of Vedic literatures does not depend on academic education. It is clearly stated in the Upanisads that one who has implicit faith in God as well as in the Spiritual Master, to him only the import of Vedic literature is revealed. I think Rayarama is doing work in that spirit and his recent publication of several booklets and Back to Godhead and a calendar are all first class proof of his sincerity of service. Anyway, when I started Back to Godhead, it was my intention that your academic career and Rayarama's sincere service would be a good combination; unfortunately, I do not know why, you do not agree with one another. To me, English language is undoubtedly a foreign language, and I thought your combination of editorship will help me a great deal. Anyway, whatever is done is done. I wish that the misunderstanding created at the present moment may be mitigated by mutual cooperation and we can start fresh with renewed energy for service of the Supreme Lord. I think you will agree with me.</p>
<p>I am very much obliged to you when you write to say, to have some tasks to be done by you under my guidance. Perhaps you know that we have got to finish the Srimad-Bhagavatam in 60 parts, out of which we have published only 3 parts. Two parts are already in the press in India. So still we have to finish up 55 parts to complete the whole text of Srimad-Bhagavatam. I am now very much hopeful that it will be done with your good cooperation. To finish the whole Bhagavatam I require about $40,000, out of which I have got about $12,000 contributed by Brahmananda, Jayananda, and others.</p>
<p>Your statement "I took this job out in Wilkes-Barre with intention to make enough money to be able to join you in India, because, when you and Kirtanananda left for India, I thought that you might never return to this country, and I was hoping to join the both of you there." Yes, actually that was the program, but Kirtanananda made everything topsy-turvy. After we reached Vrindaban, Kirtanananda became too much eager to return back. He was daily insisting me for his return back and once I told him that I have no money, how you can return? In reply to this, he said that he would go to the American Embassy as American citizen and take money from there and he would return. Then I was obliged to arrange for his return passage money and because he changed his program the society practically lost $1200 for his going to India and coming back again without any purpose. I thought that part of this money could be recovered if he would return to New York, stopping a few days in London to see the prospect of opening a branch there. He agreed, and I gave him letter of introduction, and required money for immediate expenses, but he had no desire to stop at London and he directly reached you. He was also very eager to take sannyasa and I awarded him the sannyasa order; and I do not know, he wanted a certificate of his sannyasa. We never took any certificate of our Spiritual Master or anyone, but he told me that it was required for facility of preaching, so I gave him the certificate, but unfortunately the whole thing was smashed by different doctrine. Now it is understood from the letter of Umapati that Kirtanananda does not believe in parampara or in the necessity of scriptural authority. He seems to feel that this is a sort of tyranny. That means, after taking sannyasa and understanding the philosophy for more than a year, he has changed the whole view, and I do not understand how you would like this recent doctrine.</p>
<p>Anyway, I am very much hopeful that you are eager to go to India and accept voluntarily the task under my guidance. I am searching out a very good place in Vrindaban for the accommodation of my American students. Kirtanananda has seen the house known as Jaipur House. This house is in the hands of the Rajastan government and negotiation is still going on, and from the correspondence, it appears to be favorable. Now I am awaiting the final decision; as soon as I hear the decision I shall again return back to India with some other students. And I shall be so glad if you also come to India as originally envisaged. In Krishna Consciousness, if you stick to the principles of Bhagavad-gita, there is no question of disharmony; disharmony is created by some rascals of the Impersonalist class who try to comment upon the Gita differently. Doctor Radhakrishnan and company are of the same class. This class of men have no right to touch Bhagavad-gita because they do not come through the parampara system. I shall be glad to hear from you; if you are prepared, to go with me when I next return to India maybe within the next 4-6 months.</p>
<p>I shall be glad to hear from you how Kirtanananda is recovering from injuries of recent fall. And I hope you are well.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>