Abhaya Charanaravinda Dasi also commented on “The GBC is against RITVIK, so we should just follow the GBC and accept their position.”
ABHAYA CHARANARAVINDA DASI QUOTING FROM BACK TO PRABHUPADA MAGAZINE ( Issue 5, Page 11)
The Guru and Initiation Myth
BACK TO PRABHUPADA MAGAZINE, IRM ( Issue 5, Page 11) — 1) MYTH: “Diksa (spiritual initiation) can only take place when the spiritual master is present on the planet since he needs a physical body in order to absorb all the new disciple’s karma (sinful reactions).”
BUSTED: As interesting as the above restriction to the transcendental process of diksa sounds, it was never once mentioned by Srila Prabhupada, and since he is our ultimate authority we can only conclude it is speculation.
Furthermore: Srila Prabhupada taught that the spiritual master would sometimes suffer bad dreams or sickness when accepting a disciple’s karma, but never once did he say that without such physical manifestations diksa was not possible.
If it was essential for Srila Prabhupada to be physically present in order to absorb his disciple’s karma, then that would mean that any of his disciples who may have performed even one sinful act since he physically departed is doomed to remain in the material world.
Srila Prabhupada accepted that Lord Jesus Christ could give liberation to his followers: “Actually, one who is guided by Jesus Christ, he’ll get liberation, certainly.”
(Room Conversation, July 4th, 1972, recorded in Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers)
And yet Lord Jesus has not had a physical body in which to suffer such symptoms for over two thousand years. Ultimately it is Lord Krishna who absorbs all the sinful reactions, not the spiritual master: “The poor spiritual master is kind and merciful enough to accept a disciple and partially suffer for that disciple’s sinful activities, but Krishna, being merciful to His servant, neutralizes the reactions of sinful deeds for the servant who engages in preaching His glories.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam 9.9.5, purport)
2) Myth: BUSTED: Yet again the above “injunction” is never once mentioned in the entire, vast cannon of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, and can therefore be safely discarded.
If this were true, then thousands of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples were never properly initiated since he did not physically attend many of the initiation ceremonies, as the following letter proves: “At your recommendation I have consented to give second initiation to both Sriman Traidas and his wife Pramada. (…) First of all you must secure one tape of me reciting Gayatri(2) mantra. (…) Then you must hold a fire yajna for the two devotees as you have seen so many times before. Then let them each hear the tape through the right ear, privately and individually (…) Then you can get the thread on Traidas’s body.”
(Srila Prabhupada Letter to Danavir, Nairobi, 27th September, 1971)
(1) Devotional regulations required for Deity worship and initiation (2) Special mantra given at the time of second initiation 3) MYTH: “Pariksa (mutual testing and examination) between the Guru and disciple, an essential pre-initiation procedure, can only take place if they physically meet.”
BUSTED: Since Srila Prabhupada did not physically meet many thousands of his initiated disciples, this cannot be an essential aspect of the initiation process. In most cases Srila Prabhupada delegated this examination of the prospective disciple to his Temple Presidents or some other representative.
It was their responsibility to make sure new candidates for initiation were strictly following for a minimum of six months for first initiation. This approach is sanctioned in Srila Prabhupada’s books: “In our Krsna Consciousness Movement the requirement is that one must be prepared to give up the four pillars of sinful life […] In western countries especially we first observe whether a potential disciple is prepared to follow the regulative principles (…) In this way the disciple renders devotional service under the guidance of the spiritual master or his representative for at least six months to a year.” (Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila, 24.330, purport)
Generally the newcomer would examine Srila Prabhupada by studying his books. 4) MYTH: “We must hear the gayatri mantra, and spiritual knowledge in general, from the lips of the spiritual master. Therefore the Guru must be physically present in order to initiate disciples.”
BUSTED: This idea comes from quotes such as the following: “When one’s knowledge of mantras is received from the lips of the bona fide spiritual master, one’s mantra is considered pure…” (Hrdyananda dasa Goswami’s translation and purport, Srimad Bhagavatam 11.21)
As we saw Srila Prabhupada instruct above: “First of all you must secure one tape of me reciting Gayatri mantra.” So, whilst no one is denying that hearing directly from the lips of a pure devotee would be good, we can also conclude that listening to a tape must be sufficiently potent, or else why would Srila Prabhupada have sanctioned this as part of general initiation procedure within ISKCON?
Srila Prabhupada also placed great emphasis on the distribution of his books, and equated “reading” such books with “hearing” directly from the spiritual master: “Reading or hearing from the realized person there is no difference…” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Punjabi Premanand, 16th April, 1976)
“These are not ordinary books. It is recorded chanting. Anyone who reads, he is hearing.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Rupanuga Das, 19th October, 1974).”
Hare Krsna
Dear Abhaya Caranavinda devi dasi,
I enjoyed reading this article entitled “the GBc is against rittvik”.
After considering the content of your clear presentation i evaluated that it is not a pro-rittvik piece but rather an Initiation in Absence piece which is substantially different from the rittvik issue.
The rittvik issue is to have in place “rittvik” as representative of the Acharya and the disciple is initiated through the rittvik and is accepted in that way.
However the Initiation in Absentia issue is to accept Srila Prabhupada directly through his sound vibrational presence where there is no representative in between Srila Prabhupada and the Disciple.
I believe your article only presented the latter-Initiation in Absentia. The quote from Cc 24.330 illustrates that the disciple is practicing devotional service under the auspices of the spiritual master and /or his representative. The disciple is only receiving the process of Diksa from Srila Prabhupada not the representative. But the representative is physically present for the Disciple to be guided by as in the quote Cc 24.330.
The eternal spiritual presence of the spiritual master in sound vibrational form is evidenced from Elevation to Krsna Consciousness (Pages 57-58) – and in Sri Siksastaka stanza 2 by Lord Chaitanya “……O my Lord out of kindness You enable us to easliy approach You by Your Holy Names….”.
As the Spiritual master is considered equal to the Supreme Lord in transcendental sound vibrational form presence then we can easily understand that Srila Prabhupada is “easily” approached in the same way. You dont have to be advanced to approach in this way.
In Bhagavad-Gita 4.34 the same terminolgy is found which is one of approaching the spiritual master, rendering service is done through the guidance of the representative as you have quoted from Cc 24.330, and inquiring from and recieving knowledge is through the medium of Srila Prabhupad’s books.
The text from Bhagavad-Gita as quoted from Krsna Himself instructs all these things. Approaching the spiritual master, rendering devotional service unto Him, inquiring submissively and then receiving knowledge because He has seen the truth.
All these requirements can be satisfied by the prospective disciple directly to Srila Prabhupada in Absentia rather then through the rittvik process as was the case when Srila Prabhupada was physically present. The whole point of representation as illustrated in Cc 24.330 is because Srila Prabhupada is present in his vibrational form.
Where would the need be in the process of Diksa for the rittvik process when it is possible to access Srila Prabhupada directly and be guided by his representative?
Cc 24.330 is available to all disciples for all generations which implicitly requires the need for representation. It’s self-evidential, an axiomatic sastric instruction that is not debatable whereas we have seen the July 9th letter can be interpreted depending on points of view.
If we are to accept that the essence of Diksa is Siksa then there is no problem whatsoever in accepting Srila Prabhupada as Siksha Guru. And the Diksa comes automatically. 4.34: “One must be able to pass the test of the Spiritual master, and when he sees the genuine desire of the disciple, he automatically blesses the disciple with genuine spiritual understanding…..”.
The representative whom is physically present evaluates through guidance whether the disciple is able to pass the test of the spiritual master, the spiritual master is the representative of Krsna and so through this process of representation the disciple is accepted and Initiated.
But the most important aspect of the Diksa process is the Siksha, the transendental sound vibration that is transmitted by the bona fide spiritual master who is Srila Prabhupada in his feature as Shiksa Guru.
S.Bhagavatam 4.12.32.: “It is the duty of the siksha guru or diksa guru to instruct the disciple in the right way,and it depends on the disciple to execute the process.According to sastric injunctions, there is no difference between the siksha guru and diksa guru, and generally the siksha guru later on becomes the diksha guru.”
The overwhelming instruction is to accept the process of Diksa from the bona fide Spiritual Master who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master, who is the current link in disciplic succession, this is directly procured by the disciple approaching Srila Prabhupada directly in absentia and not through a representative.
The representative’s function is to guide the disciple not give diksa.
In the “rittvik” process of representation the process of diksa is through the “rittvik” because it requires the presence of a “rittvik” for the process to work, to function. Thats the achilles heal of the rittvik process. If there are no “rittviks” then the process is defunct, finished.
In the process of diksa in absentia through Shiksa, Srila Prabhupada is eternally present in his vibrational form just as Krsna is eternally present in His Holy name. The representative is not required in this process.
The representative of the spiritual master is only required to guide the disciple in devotional service as illustrated in Cc 24.330.
Looking forward to the debate on this one.
your servant dusyanta dasa.
dusyanta dasa on 20. July 2011 at 12:05 pm said:
“The rittvik issue is to have in place “rittvik” as representative of the Acharya and the disciple is initiated through the rittvik and is accepted in that way.”
Comment:
You are implying that the “rittvik” is some kind of link to Prabhupada and without this link no acceptance. However there is no such instruction from Prabhupada. The disciple is initiated through Prabhupada (not the ritvik) as he is the guru. The “rittvik” performs the ceremony and like any senior devotee give guidance if required. The following quote outlines the functions of the “rittvik”.
“… these representatives may accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada by giving a spiritual name, or in the case of second initiation, by chanting on the Gayatri thread, just as Srila Prabhupada has done. (July 9th, 1977)
There is no mention anywhere that, “if a devotee is not present to throw his banana in the fire in the presence of my “rittvik”, he is not accepted.”
The ceremony is a formalization of the initiation process.
“Initiation is a formality. If you are serious, that is real initiation. My touch is simply a formality. It is your determination, that is initiation.”
(BTG, Search for the Divine)
“So anyway, from 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiated, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s cult. That I was thinking. And that was the initiation by my Guru Maharaja.”
(SP Lecture, 10/12/76, Hyderabad)
“The chanting of Hare Krishna is our main business, that is real initiation. And as you are all following my instruction, in that matter, the initiator is already there.”
(SP Letter to Tamal Krishna, 19/8/68)
As I understand your “Initiation in Absentia,” suggestion. It is the same as “rittvik”, minus the ceremony as the “rittvik” is required for the formal functions, name giving, chanting on the beads, thread, fire sacrifice.
Hare Krsna July 9th.
Your comment was dealing with what you called my implication that you derived from a certain part of my comment that you put in inverted commas.
But if you read the july 9th letter carefully the letter is all about “rittik”-representative of the acharya.The word “representative” is mentioned 7 times.And the process outlined in july 9th letter is based on acceptance by the representative.
“After considering the recommendation,these representatives may accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada….”
The right to become Srila Prabhupada’s disciple is under consideration by the representative,its not a done deal,and then the acceptance of being Srila Prabhupada’s disciple is via the representative,the ritvik.The july 9th letter is not implicating a “link” to being Srila Prabhupada’s initiated disciple, its directing the process of how the rittvik is the link to be Srila Prabhupada’s initiated disciple.
The whole process of “rittik”-representative of the acharya is a via medium process for the performance of Initiation,thats exactly what the july 9th letter is stateing clearly.Of course Srila Prabhupada is the Diksa Guru giving the process of Diksa,we all know that a rittvik cant do that.But Diksa is not mentioned in the july 9th letter-its not dealing with the process of diksa so we must not be confused what the july 9th letter is actually stateing.
It is a via medium process for considering the recommendations by Temple presidents as to whether accepting devotees to be an Initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada.Its the rittvik’s decision plainly in the july 9th letter.
Anyone can follow and accept Srila Prabhupada’s instructions and Books and process of Diksa there’s no question about that but thats not what the july 9th letter is dealing with.
Your next point is also wrong.The rittvik does not perform the ceremony, in the july 9th letter that is not stated.
The Temple president performs the fire sacrifice after he has received the letter from the representatives(rittik),giving a spiritual name or the thread.As was being done before.
The next point concerning the “senior devotee giving guidance if required” is also not mentioned in July 9th letter..
No, Initiation in Absentia is not the same as “rittvik” minus the “rittvik”.requirement for formal functions.
The formal functions outlined in the july 9th letter are performed by the Temple president.The rittvik is considering the recommendation from the Temple presidents and may then accept that recommendation by giving a name or thread .The rittvik is not physically present at the fire sacrifice because the july 9th letter outlines clearly the process to be followed where the Temple president performs the fire sacrifice.
Its a good idea “july9th” to actually read the july9th letter to see what actually is being instructed.But i love your quotes,.although not really relevant to the july 9th letter.
Hare Krishna Dusyanta prabhu;
I have replied to your points by marking your post with >
My comments are below your statements.
>Hare Krsna July 9th.
>Your comment was dealing with what you called my implication that you derived >from a certain part of my comment that you put in inverted commas.
Yes.
>But if you read the july 9th letter carefully the letter is all about “rittik”->representative of the acharya.The word “representative” is mentioned 7 times.And >the process outlined in july 9th letter is based on acceptance by the >representative.
Yes, my point was that this part of the diksa process is ceremonial and related to the formalities. As you state in your post ” The formal functions outlined in the july 9th letter..”
The actual process begins with or without the “acceptance by the representative.” As the quote I posted states:
“The chanting of Hare Krishna is our main business, that is real initiation. And as you are all following my instruction, in that matter, the initiator is already there.”
(SP Letter to Tamal Krishna, 19/8/68)
So if the devotee is already chanting, following Prabhupada’s instructions, “that is real initiation.” The ritvik has no required say in this part of the process. This is between Prabhupada and the disciple.
>“After considering the recommendation,these representatives may accept the >devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada….”
>The right to become Srila Prabhupada’s disciple is under consideration by the >representative,its not a done deal,and then the acceptance of being Srila >Prabhupada’s disciple is via the representative,the ritvik.
Yes in the formal, “practical” sense.
“So anyway, from 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiated, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s cult. That I was thinking. And that was the initiation by my Guru Maharaja.”
(SP Lecture, 10/12/76, Hyderabad)
In this quote Prabhupada mentions that he never performed the ceremonial functions between 1922 to 1933 so in a formal sense he was not initiated. Although the process had begun by his heartfelt desire to preach which was initiated by his guru, Srila Bhaktisiddanta.
>The july 9th letter is not implicating a “link” to being Srila Prabhupada’s initiated >disciple,
I never said it did. Sorry if I was not coherant.
>its directing the process of how the rittvik is the link to be Srila Prabhupada’s >initiated disciple.
Here you are saying what I addressed in my previous post.
My point, as mentioned above with the quotes, is the process begins with chanting and following which the ritvik has NO jurisdiction over. NO LINK (via medium) TO PRABHUPADA IS REQUIRED FOR THE PROCESS TO BEGIN. (INITIATION).
>The whole process of “rittik”-representative of the acharya is a via medium >process for the performance of Initiation,thats exactly what the july 9th letter is >stateing clearly.
“rittik”-representative of the acharya, a via medium, where is this mentioned?
>Of course Srila Prabhupada is the Diksa Guru giving the process of Diksa,we all >know that a rittvik cant do that.
Yes.
>But Diksa is not mentioned in the july 9th letter-its not dealing with the process of >diksa so we must not be confused what the july 9th letter is actually stateing.
The word diksa is not mentioned in the document but this is, “for the purpose of performing initiations” Prabhupada translated the diksa process as the initiation process.
diksa — initiation; (SB 3.13.37)
Respectfully prabhu, I suggest that if anyone is confused, it is you.
>It is a via medium process for considering the recommendations by Temple >presidents as to whether accepting devotees to be an Initiated disciple of Srila >Prabhupada.
Yes, as mentioned the process has usually already begun prior to the TP’s recommendation.
“Initiation is a formality. If you are serious, that is real initiation. My touch is simply a formality. It is your determination, that is initiation.”
(BTG, Search for the Divine)
The TP is recommending the disciple to take the next step, of formalizing that “determination”.
>Its the rittvik’s decision plainly in the july 9th letter.
Yes.
>Anyone can follow and accept Srila Prabhupada’s instructions and Books and >process of Diksa there’s no question about that but thats not what the july 9th >letter is dealing with.
I never said it did.
>Your next point is also wrong.The rittvik does not perform the ceremony, in the july >9th letter that is not stated.
What is this saying then?
“rittik”-representative of the acarya, for the purpose of performing initiations, both first initiation and second initiation. His Divine Grace has so far given a list of eleven disciples who will act in that capacity:
Note: “for the purpose of performing initiations” (ceremony)
>The Temple president performs the fire sacrifice after he has received the letter >from the representatives(rittik),giving a spiritual name or the thread.As was being >done before.
If you look at the names on the document, most were TP’s.
>The next point concerning the “senior devotee giving guidance if required” is also >not mentioned in July 9th letter..
I never said it was.
>No, Initiation in Absentia is not the same as “rittvik” minus the “rittvik”.requirement >for formal functions.
Maybe. I am still not sure of your distinction.
>The formal functions outlined in the july 9th letter are performed by the Temple >president.
I’m happy you agree that the document is outlining these FORMALITIES which is what I am trying to point out.
>The rittvik is considering the recommendation from the Temple presidents and >may then accept that recommendation by giving a name or thread .The rittvik is >not physically present at the fire sacrifice because the july 9th letter outlines >clearly the process to be followed where the Temple president performs the fire >sacrifice.
Yes, but neither does the document ban the ritvik from being, “physically present at the fire sacrifice.” As mentioned most of the ritviks were TP’s anyway.
Jaya, all glories to Prabhupada.
Śri Caitanya-Caritamrta
Madhya-Lila 10.136
TRANSLATION
PURPORT BY SRILA PRABHUPADA
Both Kasisvara and Govinda were personal servants of Isvara Puri. After Isvara Puri’s demise, Kasisvara went to visit all the holy places of India. Following the orders of his spiritual master, Govinda immediately went to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu for shelter. Govinda came from a sudra family, but because he was initiated by Isvara Puri, he was certainly a brahmana. Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya here asked Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu why Isvara Puri accepted a disciple from a sudra family. According to the smrti-sastra, which gives directions for the management of the varnasrama institution, a brahmana cannot accept a disciple from the lower castes. In other words, a ksatriya, vaisya or sudra cannot be accepted as a servant. If a spiritual master accepts such a person, he is contaminated. Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya therefore asked why Isvara Puri accepted a servant or disciple born of a sudra family.
In answer to this question, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu replied that His spiritual master, Isvara Puri, was so empowered that he was as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As such, Isvara Puri was the spiritual master of the whole world. He was not a servant of any mundane rule or regulation. An empowered spiritual master like Isvara Puri can bestow his mercy upon anyone, irrespective of caste or creed. The conclusion is that a spiritual master who is authorized and empowered by Krsna and his own guru should be considered as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. That is the verdict of Visvanatha Cakravarti: saksad-dharitvenasa. An authorized spiritual master is as good as Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As Hari is free to act as He likes, the empowered spiritual master is also free. As Hari is not subject to mundane rules and regulations, the spiritual master empowered by Him is also not subject. According to the Caitanya-caritamrta (Antya-lila 7.11), krsna-sakti vina nahe tara pravartana. An authorized spiritual master empowered by Krsna can spread the glories of the holy name of the Lord, for he has power of attorney from the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In the mundane world, anyone possessing his master’s power of attorney can act on behalf of his master. Similarly, a spiritual master empowered by Krsna through his own bona fide spiritual master should be considered as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. That is the meaning of saksad-dharitvena. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu therefore describes the activities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the bona fide spiritual master as follows.
pamho agtACBSP
JESUS CHRIST left behind HIM a ritvik system which is still working through sincere followers and which was considered as bona fide by both, Srila Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja.
Just the goonda body commission invented their own acarya system in iskcon by disrespecting the bona fide spiritual master the genuine representative of LORD HARI who can take all the anarthas and sufferings away from the heart of the real devotees.
So far they are giving more unwanted things by increasing the suffering but still they keep going on cheating by refusing the ritvik system in iskcon which was ordered by Srila Prabhupada.
ys seva das haribol
pamho agtACBSP
the gbc who are against the ritvik system ordered by our beloved acharya in iskcon are worse then Judas who betrayed JESUS CHRIST. This unworthy disciple who sold his guru for money later on committed suicide.
JESUS and SRILA PRABHUPADA are still doing THEIR patita pavana activities through vani and THEY will stay on the altar of faithful devotees for another 9500 years of kali yuga to come because after that there will be no more Sankirtan movement.
Thank’s to all the prabhupadanugas all over the world for helping each other to clean up Iskcon and to reestablish our beloved acharya’s ritvik system.
ys seva das
haribol
Hari bol !
Drogi Seva Prabhu,
Dziękuję. Dzięki Tobie dotarło do mnie że:
W ruchu Jezusa Chrystusa, rozsądni chrześcijanie uczą się modlić poprzez Jezusa Chrystusa, o łaskę do Boga.
W ruchu Śri Caitanyi Mahaprabhu, rozsądni wielbiciele uczą się modlić poprzez Śrila Prabhupada, o łaskę do Śri Caitanyi Mahaprabhu.
Dzisiaj jest rocznica założenia przez Śrila Prabhupada ISKCON-u w Nowym Yorku.
Wszelka chwała dla Śrila Prabhupada.
ys Waldemar
Hari bol!
Dear Seva Prabhu,
Thank you. Thanks to you I realized that:
The movement of Jesus Christ, serious Christians learn to pray through Jesus Christ, the grace of God.
The movement of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, serious devotees learn to pray by Srila Prabhupada, for the grace to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
Today is the anniversary of Srila Prabhupada ISKCON in New York.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
ys Waldemar
Without Appointment there can NOT be any Diksa Guru
BY: VIDURA DAS
Haribol Madhudvisa Prabhu and Gadadhara Prabhu. I feel that the points made in my previous email were not properly addressed if addressed at all. If you want to claim that there can be another initiating Diksa Guru under the system that Srila Prabhupada has set up for Iskcon, then please address those points. I have pasted them again below.
If the claim that Srila Prabhupada authorized Diksa Guru’s cannot some how be proven but rather stated over and over emphatically then it is 100% sentiment and also speculation at that. It seems that the real fanatic preachers are those without proof from Srila Prabhupada of their claims that He authorized any Diksa Guru’s to begin with.
Srila Prabhupada cannot be put in the same category of just any pure devotee. The fact is that Srila Prabhupada is the Acarya of our time. There may be many pure devotee’s, there may be none. That is not to say that Srila Prabhupada wasn’t “strong” enough to make one. That’s like saying: “since I am the fool that I am, and since I come from Lord Krsna, He must lack some strength.” Certainly that argument is highly offensive especially when applied to Srila Prabhupada. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur made only one pure devotee that we know of (Srila Prabhupada). Is that to say His Divine Grace was some how lacking in “strength”? This is nonsense speculation.
A pure devotee can become an Acarya just as a man can become A judge. The man, before becoming a judge must first be qualified in quality by knowing the law books and possessing the knowledge and ability. Then, after all that, before the man can actually be known as a judge, he must be duly appointed by the law. To simply state that a man is a judge just because he has the qualification is not sufficient. One must be authorized by the predecessor spiritual master. This is the final step in the process. It cannot be skipped. I may possess all of the qualities of a judge, I may know the law books like the back of my hand, but still, I am not a judge without being appointed by the law.
I would also like to thank Mahesh Prabhu for providing a nice quote regarding this matter. Here it is again:
“Prabhupada: Yes. I shall choose some guru. I shall SAY, “Now you become ACARYA. You become authorized.” I am waiting for that. You become all acarya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete.“
Srila Prabhupada Room Conversation, Bombay, April 22, 1977
With that said, please show me proof where Srila Prabhupada appoints anyone to become Diksa Guru.
Ys, Vidura Das
HOW THE ISKCON VAPU VADIS COMMIT THE THIRD OFFENCE AT THE LOTUS FEET OF THE PURE DEVOTEE SRILA PRABHUPADA!
by Abhaya Charanaravinda Devi Dasi on Thursday, August 16, 2012 at 4:41pm ·
DIKSA GURU MUST BE ORDERED-
“Vallabha Bhatta wanted to be initiated by Gadadhara Pandita, but Gadadhara Pandita refused, saying, “The work of acting as a spiritual master is not possible for me. “I am completely dependent. My Lord is Gaur
acandra, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. I cannot do anything independently, without His order.” (CC, Antya 7:150-151)
“An actual guru always remains the servant of his own guru and the predecessor acaryas. Attempting to become a guru without one’s own guru’s order is a materialistic ambition. Accepting followers and circumventing one’s own guru is offensive.” >>> Ref. VedaBase => MGM 22-11: A Lost Son Visits Home
“On the whole, you may know that he is not a liberated person, and therefore, he cannot initiate any person to Krsna Consciousness. It requires special spiritual benediction from higher authorities.” (SP Letter to Janardana, 26/4/68)
“One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master. This is called diksa -vidhana.” (S.B. 4.8.54, purport)
“Indian man: When did you become spiritual the leader of Krsna Consciousness?
Srila Prabhupada: What is that?
Brahmananda: He is asking when did you become the spiritual leader of Krsna Consciousness?
Srila Prabhupada: When my Guru Maharaja ordered me. This is the guru parampara.
Indian man: Did it…
Srila Prabhupada: Try to understand. Don’t go very speedily. A guru can become guru when he is ordered by his guru. That’s all. Otherwise nobody can become guru. ”
(SP Bg. Lecture, 28/10/75)
“Guru cannot be self-made. No. There is no such single instance throughout the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many rascals, they are becoming guru without any authority. That is not guru. You must be authorised. Evam parampara-praptam imam ra… As soon as the parampara is…kalena yogo nasta parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual potency finished. You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big words, but it will never be effective.” (Lecture, February 27th 1977, Mayapur, India)
“Self-made guru cannot be guru. He must be authorized by the bona fide guru. Then he’s guru. This is the fact…Similarly, bona fide guru means he must be authorized by the superior guru.” (SP NOD Lecture, October 31. 1972)
“Therefore guru must be authorized person, not that bhumi-phala-guru. No. I am guru,” no. You cannot become guru unless you are agent to draw out the mercy water from the ocean of mercy of Krsna. That is guru. And therefore a guru is not an ordinary person. He is the representative, bona fide representative of Krsna.” (SB Lecture,November 30, 1976)
“The schoolmasters in the modern days are paid agents for giving some information, but the spiritual master is not a paid agent. Nor can he impart instruction without being authorized.” (SB:2.9.43, purport)
“A Guru can be Guru when he is ordered by his Guru. That’s all. Otherwise nobody can become Guru.” (SP Bg. Lecture, 28th October 1975)
Conversely, a student does not become spiritual master on his own initiative
The spiritual master must never be carried away by an accumulation of wealth or a large number of followers. A bona fide spiritual master will never become like that. But sometimes, if a spiritual master is not properly authorized and only on his own initiative becomes a spiritual master, he may be carried away by an accumulation of wealth and large numbers of disciples. >> Ref. VedaBase => NoD 14:
The reason why the GM failed is because they UNAUTHORISEDLY selected an Acarya to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta:
“Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively. He did not instruct a particular man to become the next acarya. But just after his passing away, his leading secretaries made plans, without authority, to occupy the post of acarya, and they split into two factions over who the next acarya would be. Consequently, both factions were asara, or useless, because they had no authority, having disobeyed the order of the spiritual master.” (Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila, 12.8, purport)
“Why this Gaudiya Matha failed? Because they tried to become more than guru. […] They declared some unfit person to become acarya. Then another man came, then another, acarya, another acarya.” (Srila Prabhupada Room Conversation, 16/8/76)
“SO SRILA PRABHUPDAS RITVIK SYSTEM WAS STOPPED WITHOUT HIS APPROVAL WHICH IS A SEVERE VIOLATION OF VEDIC LAW AND SO WHEN U HEAR THESE ISKCON VAPU VADIS HAVING A GO AT THE RITVIKS ASK THEM WHY THEY HAVE VIOLATED VEDIC LAW AND STOPPED SRILA P
RABHUPADAS RITVIK ORDER WITHOUT HIS ORDER!!”
“No order. No order. No order.”So where is the order? Bring proof.
Reward: $108,000Here is the challenge, published in 1993 in Srila Prabhupada, His Movement and You by Hansadutta, and as yet unanswered by anyone in ISKCON or outside:
“REWARD: $108,000.00: “$108,000.00 cash reward money for any ISKCON guruwho can show the Nam Hatta an original, signed document dated July 9, 1977 or later from Srila Prabhupada’s hand, naming any person or persons specifically appointed to the position of full guru-acharya, authorised to initiate disciples as his own after the disappearance of Srila Prabhupada. “Failure on the part of any gurumeans he must publicly give up his unauthorised guru title and return his disciples to the lotus feet of Srila Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acharya and founder of ISKCON.”
This is a real offer. It’s not a joke. There is no expiration date. Bhima das backs it up, so if any ISKCON guru wants money, all he has to do is bring proof and collect on it. So far no ISKCONguru has dared to come forward to answer it.Gour Govinda Maharaja disciples came to collect from Bhima in Singapore, insisting that their guruhad told them that he had received a letter from Srila Prabhupada himself to become the acharya. Bhima asked for the proof, but they had none. So a few months or so later, Gour Govinda Maharaja came to Singapore. Bhima went to the meeting, brought his cheque book, and after Gour Govinda Maharaja finished speaking his lecture, Bhima asked him, “So Maharaja, your disciples say that Srila Prabhupada personally gave you the order to become spiritual master. Can you please explain why you waited all those years until GBC appointed you to become guru? Why didn’t you immediately act on the order?” Gour Govinda Maharaja responded, “What is that? What is it?” So Bhima spoke up a little louder, “Maharaja, is there an order for you to become guru?” No reply. Again Bhima asked, “Did Srila Prabhupada give you the order to become guru?” Silence. Bhima raised his voice, “Is there an order?” Everyone in the room was shocked. Maharaja was visibly stunned, and momentarily speechless. There was an uncomfortable pause. He answered, “No order. No order. No order.” Three times. He was red-faced and couldn’t speak for 5 minutes afterwards.
Srila Prabhupada: “He, [Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, founder of the Gaudiya Matha] before passing away, he gave them all direction – and he NEVER said that this man should be the next [guru] acharya. But these people, just after he passed away, they began to fight, ‘Who shall be the next acharya? “That is the failure. They never thought, ‘guru maharaja gave us instruction on so many things, why did he not say, “This man should be the next acharya?”‘ They wanted to create somebody ARTIFICIALLY as acharya and EVERYTHING FAILED. “They did not even consider common sense – that if guru maharaja had wanted to APPOINT somebody as acharya, why he did not say? He said so many things and this point he missed? The main point? And they insisted on it. They declared, ‘Come on unfit persons to become acharya,’ then another man comes, then another, then another. So better to remain a foolish person perpetually to be directed by guru maharaja. So that is perfection. And as soon as it was announced that, ‘Guru maharaja is dead, now I am so advanced that I can kill my guru and become [guru]’.” (CONV 8/15/76)
“Therefore we may not commit the same mistake in our ISKCON camp.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter To Rupanuga, 28/4/74)
How the guru hoax works
Back To Prabhupada, Issue 29, Autumn 2010
Though The Great Guru Hoax is indeed a hoax of monumental proportions, we will show that it is executed via a technique that is so transparent and simple, that even an 8 year-old child would not fall for it. Yet, unfortunately, it seems that many have fallen for the proposals of the acting GBC.
ISKCON pre-1978
The situation in ISKCON, whilst Srila Prabhupada was physically present, was as follows:
a) As a result of reading Srila Prabhupada’s books, a devotee would join the movement. He would get all his knowledge from Srila Prabhupada, follow all of Srila Prabhupada’s disciplines and rules, and serve Srila Prabhupada by following the instructions Srila Prabhupada gave, and then get delivered spiritually by Srila Prabhupada.
b) Senior devotees, such as GBCs, temple presidents and ritviks, would simply help bring such persons to Srila Prabhupada’s lotus feet, by training them, initiating them as Srila Prabhupada’s disciples, giving classes, preaching, and engaging them in Srila Prabhupada’s service, while Srila Prabhupada would actually be engaging them in Krishna’s service and taking them to Krishna. Many devotees would never meet or even see Srila Prabhupada.
c) Most initiation ceremonies were conducted often by empowered representatives on behalf of Srila Prabhupada. At the ceremony the initiate is told that he is being initiated on behalf of Srila Prabhupada, by these empowered representatives.
ISKCON today
The situation today in ISKCON is the same as above, and we present the evidence for this below:
“ISKCON leaders shall teach that Srila Prabhupada’s books and teachings are the foundation of the spiritual lives of all ISKCON members.”
(Law 405 (F), GBC Resolutions, 1999)
“Therefore our responsibility is to mediate between you and Srila Prabhupada, and Srila Prabhupada will take you to Krsna.”
(HH Bhakti Charu Swami, Durban Disciples’ Meeting, 7/4/2006)
“our responsibility is to help you approach the lotus feet of Srila Prabhupada, and Srila Prabhupada, as the pre-eminent acharya, takes you to Krsna and engages you in His service.”
(HH Bhakti Charu Swami, Text PAMHO:13658994, 10/6/2007)
“if you are surrendering to me, formalizing your surrender, then what kind of responsibility do I have to you? It is to transmit your surrender to the institution of ISKCON. Generally the guru transmits this to Krsna, but here I am not directly representing Krsna. I am representing Krsna through the via medium of Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON.”
(HH Bhakti Charu Swami, Durban Disciples’ Meeting, 1/8/2007)
“Everyone’s spiritual life is actually anchored onto Srila Prabhupada […] to Srila Prabhupada’s mercy and Prabhupada is going to deliver them.”
(HH Bhakti Charu Swami, Toronto, 20/7/2003)
Further, it is routine in initiation ceremonies today for the initiate to be told he is being initiated “on behalf” of Srila Prabhupada, as the following report illustrates:
“fifty candidates received initiation from His Holiness Radhanath Swami, a spiritual teacher and travelling monk […] Radhanath Swami spoke to me as follows, “On behalf of Srila Prabhupada, I am honoured to give you the name Jagannath Sharan das.”
(http://iskconuk.com/?p=352)
Name-tag hoax
During the pre-1978 scenario, Srila Prabhupada was functioning as the diksha, or initiating, guru (and main siksha, or instructing, guru), with all others acting, at best, as assistant siksha gurus:
“The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am in the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform.”
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, August 4th, 1975)
Though the functions of Srila Prabhupada and his disciples today have remained the same, with his disciples simply “teaching and doing” what Srila Prabhupada taught and did, the GBC has decided to exchange name-tags. Those who are actually, at best, only assistant siksha gurus assisting the diksha guru, are now called diksha gurus, while Srila Prabhupada is now considered at best to be acting only as siksha guru. This name-change is the key to the whole hoax, because simply as a result of the change in title, but not activity or function, ISKCON’s followers have accepted:
a) Those who were actually at best assistant siksha gurus, have magically turned into diksha gurus.
b) Srila Prabhupada who is actually the diksha guru, is magically no longer the diksha guru.
c) Those calling themselves diksha gurus have now been conferred all the benefits, honour and worship that previously belonged to Srila Prabhupada.
So, essentially, a huge hoax, and the attendant grab of power and position has been based on something as simple and silly as changing name-tags.
Even a child can see
If the milkman and mailman decided to play a trick on a child, with the milkman claiming he is the mailman, and the mailman claiming he is the milkman, even an 8 year-old would not fall for such a stupid trick. Because he would see that the milkman, regardless of what he is calling himself, still delivers the milk, not the mail, and the mailman, regardless of what he is calling himself, still delivers the mail, not the milk. Similarly, today Srila Prabhupada alone is still delivering everyone in ISKCON, just as he did pre- 1978. Indeed, the situation is so absurd that it reminds one of the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, where everyone (apart from, ironically, a child) could see that the Emperor was wearing no clothes, but went along with the Emperor’s hoax, simply to please the Emperor. In ISKCON’s case, however, the situation is even more absurd, because the “Emperors” (ISKCON’s diksha gurus) actually admit they have no clothes (they do nothing different to what they did pre-1978), and still everyone falls for it!
Conclusion
The guru hoax is basically nothing more than “ritviks” (officiating priests) continuing as “ritviks”, with the ritviks simply deciding to call themselves “diksha gurus”. And through this simple device alone, they get treated and worshipped as such. Unfortunately, the words “brainwashed” and “gullible cult-members” immediately come to mind!
IRM: ISKCON’s current guru system is basically a big unauthorized hoax!
19. OCTOBER 2010 BY PRABHUPADA NEWS LEAVE A COMMENT
[Translate]
Music: “Gurudeva” by Gaurangi devi dasi
IRM: Disorder over the non-existent order
We review here the different claims given by the guru hoaxers historically to justify why they are entitled to replace Srila Prabhupada as the diksha guru of ISKCON, noting that over the years they have invented at least 5 types of different “orders” to try and justify their guru hoax.
1. The ritvik order
As we have documented extensively in previous issues, initially, following Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance in 1977, it was claimed that Srila Prabhupada had given a “ritvik guru” order, where 11 persons would become successor gurus, due to being appointed as ritviks. Subsequently, it was admitted by the GBC that the guru system which resulted from this “ritvik guru” order was a hoax, which we call “The Great Guru Hoax, Part 1:’
2. The general order
The GBC then switched tack, and launched “The Great Guru Hoax, Part 2″, by claiming that rather than an order given only for 11 persons to be successor gurus, Srila Prabhupada had actually authorised every single one of his disciples to become guru, simply by repeating Lord Chaitanya’s order to “become guru” from Caitanya caritamrta, Madhya Lila, 7:128(‘amara ajanya guru hana’). However, the guru hoaxers themselves have accepted the IRM’s position that this order does not actually authorise diksha guru successors:
“Instruct everyone to follow the orders of Lord Krishna as they are given in ehagavad Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam. in this way, become a spiritual master and try to liberate everyone in this land.” (Madhya Lila, 7:128). These statements by Srila Prabhupada and Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu certainly cannot be applied to the first meaning of acharya as given above. NEITHER CAN IT BE APPLIED TO THE THIRD MEANING (one who INITIATES), since Srila Prabhupada did in fact directly appoint 11 acharyas as will clearly be shown.”
(HH Tamal Krishna Goswami, late guru and GBC, Letter to Upananda Das,13/12/1978)
“Thus the “four cases” you mentioned (involving the “become guru” order) would not apply to such a primary gurudisciple relationship, on the level of siksha or diksha.” (HH Hridayananda Das Goswami, guru and GBC Emeritus, August 13th,1997. The full exchange can be viewed at: http://www.iskconirm.com/hrdayananda master of evasion.htm)
“Srila Prabhupada writes, “it is best not to accept any disciples:” (Cc. Madhya 7.130, purport). Based on this warning it could be assumed that the words “guru hana” means become a siksa guru. In the first line of Cc. Madhya 7.128, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu says whomever you meet; tell them about Krishna… this also refers to siksha.”
(His Holiness Partha Sarathi Das Goswami, ISKCON GBC voted in guru, http://www.psdgoswami.com/joss56.htm,archived February 23rd, 2010)
3. The”waiting”order
With the failure of the “general order” approach, some guru hoaxers have taken shelter in certain quotes, wherein they claim Srila Prabhupada is clearly speaking of authorising some diksha guru successors in the future. Below are some examples of these quotes:
“Don’t become premature acharya. First of all follow the orders of acharya, and you become mature. Then it is better to become. acharya. Because we are interested in preparing acharya, but the etiquette is at least for the period the period the guru is present, one should not become acharya.”
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture, April 6th, 1975)
“I shall choose some guru. I shall say, “Now you become acharya. You become authorized.” I am waiting for that. You become all acharya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete.”
(Srila Prabhupada Room Conversation, April 22nd,1977)
“When I order you become guru he becomes regular guru. That’s all. He becomes disciple of my disciple.” (Srila Prabhupada Room Conversation, May 28th,1977)
1) This approach completely contradicts the “general order” approach, for having told us that Srila Prabhupada had already authorised everyone to be diksha guru successor, we are told that actually Srila Prabhupada still needed to personally authorise such gurus.
2) More importantly, it can easily be tested if the above quotes are actually evidence of Srila Prabhupada stating he will be authorising diksha guru successors, by simply seeing if Srila Prabhupada actually did this! Yet, 33 years on, no one to date has presented the subsequent action of Srila Prabhupada authorising these diksha gurus, which he had supposedly announced earlier. As noted, initially, it was falsely claimed that the “ritvik guru” order was this subsequent diksha guru authorisation.
4.The secret order
With the failure of 3 previous approaches to justify guru succession, and with no “guru order” appearing out of the woodwork, some guru hoaxers, in desperation, have simply invented their own guru orders. Thus having happily participated with the original “hoax order” in 1978, and seen its failure, some hoaxers have mysteriously “remembered” many years later that Srila Prabhupada had actually personally odered them to be diksha guru successors! And further, this order was given in “secret” or “whispered’, and this is why no one else in ISKCON knew of the existence of these orders. Indeed, so secret were these orders, that as stated, even the recipients did not know of the existence of these orders until they were magically “unlocked” in their memories many years later!
5.The assumed order
Given the abject failure over 33 years to try to drum up a guru succession order from Srila Prabhupada, the GBC’s latest approach is to simply throw in the towel, and finally accept that such an explicit order does not actually exist. Rather, in lieu of such an order from Srila Prabhupada, as we documented in the BTP 17 article “GBC guru bombshell”, the GBC now simply assumes that Srila Piabhupada must have somehow “implicitly intended” diksha guru successors!
Conclusion
In addition to ISKCON’s current guru system not having any order from Srila Prabhupada to justify its existence, the GBC’s official “brain”; the “Sastric Advisory Council” (SAC), has said that the process by which it does authorise gurus, via voting them in, is not based on “guru, sadhu and sastra”:
“Our present system has institutionalized a process of senior devotees voting or offering no objection to prospective gurus. But we do not find that this institutionalized blessing-seeking process is mentioned by guru, sadhu or sastra as the way that one is authorized to become a guru.”
(Balancing the roles of the GBC and the disciple in Guru selection, SAC)
So from every angle, ISKCON’s current guru system is basically a big unauthorized hoax!
HOW WAS SRILA PRABHUPADAS RITVIK ORDER STOPPED WITHOUT HIS AUTHORIZATION? THAT IS A SEVERE VIOLATION OF VEDIC LAW!
by Abhaya Charanaravinda Devi Dasi on Monday, October 22, 2012 at 5:10pm ·
The biggest obstacle to achieving this change of heart is to usurp the position of the bona fide Guru, and instead desire to be worshipped unauthorisedly as a “Good as God/sum total of the demi-Gods” Guru oneself. The biggest self-delusion is to think that one can be a self-made guru without authorization from Srila Prabhupada:
“Guru cannot be self made. No. There is no such single instance throughout the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many rascals, they are becoming Guru without any authority. That is not Guru. You must be authorised. Evam parampara praptam imam ra… As soon as the parampara is…kalena yogo nasta parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual potency finished. You can dress like a Guru, you can talk big, big words, but it will never be effective.” (Srila Prabhupada’s Lecture, February 27th 1977, Mayapur, India)To establish Srila Prabhupada as the sole initiating spiritual master of iskcon. To expose worldwide the cheating bogus iskcon guru frauds who earn their livelihoods stealing vai the temple deities and make millions of dollars a year scamming innocent people.
1) Discarding the RITVIK system means “they” have free servants/slaves(disciples).
2) Discarding the RITVIK system means “they” have the satisfaction of worship of themselves replacing Srila Prabhupada as the Initiator.
3) Discarding the RITVIK system means “they” have the dakshina MONEY for
their own lusty desires. Free income from servant/slave (disciple).
4) Discarding the RITVIK system means “they” OWN properties, usurp temples.
5) Discarding the RITVIK system means “they” manipulate devotees.
6) Discarding the RITVIK system means “they” prevent Srila Prabhupada’s
ORIGINAL BOOKS from printing/ distributing in LARGE quantities.
7) Discarding the Ritvik system means “they” and KEY men, Temple Presidents,
etc., loot exploit the ISKCON society funds
GBC bombshell: ‘We have no guru order’
Autumn 2007
As stated in the BTP Special Issue (proof 6), the GBC had withdrawn their position paper on how they were authorised by Srila Prabhupada to act as diksa gurus, On My Order Understood, because they accepted it contained “lies”. It was this paper, that The Final Order, the IRM’s position paper, defeated, and the GBC officially withdrawing this paper, merely confirmed this defeat:
“RESOLVED: “On My Order-Understood” is replaced as official GBC policy by the following statement: The GBC officially accepts the following conclusions about continuing the disciplic succession: […] the GBC concludes that Srila Prabhupada intended his disciples to become “regular Gurus” after he physically departed.
[GBC Resolution 409, 2004]
The entire paper was replaced only with the paper’s conclusion, with all the evidence offered to support this conclusion (that Srila Prabhupada can be replaced as ISKCON’s diksa Guru) simply removed; evidence for which the paper had relied entirely on the May 28th, 1977 conversation. We have now discovered that the GBC were forced to withdraw the paper after agreeing with an analysis of the paper and the May 28th conversation given by HH Jayadvaita Swami (“JS”) in an e-mail dated December 13th, 2003. This analysis is reproduced in the tinted panels, with JS’s quotes from the paper itself prefixed by “>”.
Load of bull
>“Srila Prabhupada said he
> would give his ‘order’. . . “
Oh, bull! What Srila Prabhupada said was, “Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order… Amara ajnaya guru haya. Be actually guru, but by my order.”
How does that equal “I will give my order”?
So the GBC accept that Srila Prabhupada did not state he will give any order for diksa gurus, and it is “bull” to claim otherwise.
No order
>When Srila Prabhupada was
>asked who would initiate after
>his physical departure he
>stated he would “recommend”
>and give his “order” to some of
>his disciples who would
>initiate on his behalf during
>his lifetime and afterwards as
>“regular gurus,” whose
>disciples would be Srila
>Prabhupada’s grand-disciples.
Again, this is what we might reasonably conclude from what Srila Prabhupada stated. But it is not directly what he stated.”
Srila Prabhupada did not order the ritviks (officiating priests) to become “regular gurus” and initiate their own disciples.
Never says it
Srila Prabhupada never quite comes out and says:
“I select some of you to take up the service of initiating new disciples,” does he? Yes, I agree it’s implicit.
Again, Srila Prabhupada authorising ritviks to turn into diksa gurus is at best “implicit”, meaning it is not Srila Prabhupada’s order but the GBC’s interpretation.
Jive talking
What he “recommended” some disciples to do was “to act as officiating acaryas.”
(TKG: “Is that called rtvik-acarya?”
SP: “Rtvik, yes.”) (from May 28th conversation).
Now, I agree that what His Divine Grace intended by this was that these rtviks, after his departure, would initiate disciples on their own and that this is implicit in the conversation. But then, say so, for crying out loud. Don’t try to jive me …
Again, Srila Prabhupada never stated that the ritviks would become diksa gurus, but rather it is assumed that it is “implicit” that this was what was “intended”.
Only named ritviks
> “After Srila Prabhupada named
> some disciples to initiate. . . ”
This is a finesse. To initiate whom? In context (events in July 1977), the only straightforward answer is “To initiate people who would then become Srila Prabhupada’s disciples.”
The only persons actually ordered were ritviks, and not gurus.
Wishful fabrication
>”Thus, by delegating that duty
>to the GBC, Srila Prabhupada
>personally detailed the
>procedure for increasing the
>number of initiating guru.
Is this an outright fabrication or not? That Srila Prabhupada “personally detailed the procedure for increasing the number of initiating guru[s]” is something we can only wish. Or falsely tell the Society he did.”
JS states that Srila Prabhupada never gave the GBC a procedure for increasing the number of initiating gurus, and to say otherwise is just a fabrication. (This, however, did not stop JS from relying on the GBC “increasing the number of initiating gurus” to become a GBC voted-in initiating guru himself, or from allowing his own disciple, HH Kadamba Kanana Swami, to also become a GBC voted-in guru!)
Playing games with the truth
“Again, what I object to is that the GBC resolution takes what it wishes us to conclude from the conversation, turns it into a crystal-clear statement, and then tells us that Srila Prabhupada made it.
This, to me, is “playing games with the truth.”
The GBC’s paper was simply pretending that Srila Prabhupada had said what the GBC wished he had said.
Conclusion
This is an amazing admission by the GBC, as their guru program is based on the ritviks appointed by Srila Prabhupada ceasing to act in this capacity because they were supposedly ordered in the May 28th conversation to transmogrify into diksa gurus (Modifications ‘A’ and ‘B’ of The Final Order). The GBC have now accepted JS’s arguments that the May 28th conversation contains no order to this effect, and that their abandonment of Srila Prabhupada’s ritvik system is based only on their mind-reading what Srila Prabhupada supposedly “implicitly intended”. Since the active principle in spiritual life is the order of the spiritual master (C.c. Adi-lila, 12:10), it follows from this GBC admission that their guru program is unauthorised, and thus the ritvik system it displaced must be immediately re-instituted in ISKCON.
The very fact that the GBC had withdrawn their position paper and offered no alternative detailing how Srila Prabhupada authorised them to be diksa gurus was in itself enough to render their position defeated. That the GBC now accept that this lack of a position is due entirely to a lack of evidence, ensures this defeat is now established as a permanent historical fact.
It is not a correct assumption that one who is fit to act as siksa guru may not be fit to act as diksa guru. According to sastra, these are equal manifestations of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. I have not seen such a statement in Srila Prabhupada’s teachings where he says specifically that someone who is fit to act as siksa guru may not be fit to act as diksa guru.
As far as Srila Prabhupada continuing to actively and directly initiate disciples after entering samadhi, he put that false notion to rest on May 28th, 1977 when he was asked about those who would later receive diksa from an officiating acarya — whose disciples would they be? If he had intended to continue to initiate, he would have said, “They are MY disciples.” Instead, he said, “They are HIS disciples,” referring to the officiating acarya (a/k/a the ritvik acarya). This direct statement by Srila Prabhupada supercedes any divergent conclusion drawn by a collective of non self-realized souls.
We are all aware of the gross deviations of those who were recommended to act as ritvik representatives,
beginning with their repudiation of Srila Prabhupada’s order to have ritvik acaryas give diksa when he would no longer be present. Because of the unlimited inebrieties they introduced into our movement through their disobedient mismanagement, it is my opinion that the whole GBC is implicated and therefore disqualified from serving as the transparent medium to the pure devotee for the purpose of giving diksa. I cannot in good conscience recommend that anyone seek initiation within ISKCON until such time as it is understood that those giving diksa are acting as officiating acaryas in accordance with Srila Prabhupada’s ultimatum. They must also accept that no special worship is derived from the act of officiating at initiations. All formal worship must go to the eternal spiritual master of past, present and future generations of ISKCON devotees, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
Hare Krsna,
Dear Praahupadanugas,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. Dusyanta dasa prabhu said we can have a direct relationship with Srila Prabhupada(as Siksha Guru) by reading His books.
Can you please explain me(I’m a little confused)-Can we not be initiated disciples of Srila Prabhupada.
There is a purport in Caitanya Caritamrta that goes as foolows:-
Madhya 1.208
“AFTER INITIATION, the disciple’s name must be changed to indicate that he is a servant of Lord Visnu. The disciple should also immediately begin marking his body with tilaka (urdhva-pundra), especially his forehead. These are spiritual marks, symptoms of a perfect Vaisnava.” This is a verse from the Padma Purana, Uttara-khanda. A MEMBER OF THE SAHAJIYA-SAMPRADAYA DOES NOT CHANGE HIS NAME; THEREFORE HE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS A GAUDIYA VAISNAVA. If a person does not change his name after initiation, it is to be understood that he will continue in his bodily conception of life.
Is it then authorised to apply tilaka without becoming an initiated disciple?
Then can we never become free from bodily conception,since we cannot recieve initiation from Srila Prabhupada?
Since you are saying that we cannot take initiation from Srila Prabhupada,from whom should we take.
Srila Prabhupada Himself says that if one is intelligent,he must take initiation from the totally liberated mahabhagavata devotees.But where is the Mahabhagavata devotee?
But it is also said that we must approach the current link in the disciplic succesion.But is there a bonafide acarya after Srila Prabhupada?If there is,then is it helpful to surrender to Prabhupada by reading His books and following His instructions?(if He is not the current link)?
If there is no bonafide successor of Srila Prabhupada,then why can’t we become His initiated disciples?
There is so much confusion in this world because different people give different opinions.I am utterly confused as to what is correct as is to be done.
Since I have seen many opinions from different people,I am myself confused whether Srila Prabhupada wanted future devotees(those who would come after His departure)to be His disciples,or disciples of His
disciples(the ISKCON gurus).Is the whole system of ritvik bogus?Then who is genuine?I am unable to understand anything.
I am in utter confusion and bewildement. Please, I beg you all Prabhus to clear all my doubts by presenting fully convincing and elaborate arguments.
If Srila Prabhupada had wanted these 11 people to act as future Diksha Gurus,then they should have been completely pure devotees(requirement for giving diksha)in Srila Prabhupada’s view,right?But this is not the case.These people have fallen down in the worst possible way.Tamal Krishna Gosvami confesses in 1980 that Prabhupada had acttually not appointed any gurus, but only 11 ritviks.
Please….Please reply to my comment.I beg for your attention.I am a poor ignorant person, unable to understand anything.
Your servant……Wanting to be an honest follower of Srila Prabhupada,
Santosh
It sounds completely no ritvik vada like, though the ritvik modus remains, the regular gurus are acting on the order of the Acarya, they are His representatives, whereas the divine status of the Acarya and His worship is the base of the whole system.
Thank You Locanandana prabhu, so far of all the known to me explanations of the July 9 letter this makes most sense remaining also in tact with the records of the 28 may conversation regarding future initiations.
y.s. bj
Hare Krsna.
In Srila Prabhupada’s Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.47 He writes ;
“As long as the Spiritual master is physically present , the disciple should serve the physical body of the Spiritual master, and when the spiritual master is no longer physically existing, the disciple should serve the instructions of the spiritual master.”
The two phases of presence are denoted within this purport. They are called vapuh, physical presence and vani vibrational presence. When the spiritual master is physically present He is present in both phases, Vapuh and Vani but when He is physically present Srila Prabhupada says the disciple should serve the physical body. But because the Vapuh, physical presence is temporary the disciple is instructed to serve the Vani when the Vapuh is no longer existing.
The July 9th letter explains in plain english that the “rittik”- representative of the Acharya is acting in a representative way making the “rittik” a via medium process. Therefore when the spiritual master is physically present the “rittik” is only representing the physical body of the spiritual master as instructed by Srila Prabhupada from His Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.47. Thats a fact. But when the spiritual master is no longer physically existing the disciple and the “rittik” representative are instructed to exclusively serve the vani of the spiritual master.
The representative “rittik” comes under the same principle as all disciples at the time after the spiritual master is no longer physically existing, that the “rittik” can only serve the vani of the spiritual master not the Vapuh any longer. The representative process of Initiation by serving the vapuh is finished. The Vani is a direct relationship and requires no representative process just as when the spiritual master is physically present . The vani relationship with the Spiritual master is not only direct and requires no representative but also is the Shiksa Guru in this principle.
“Sri Krsna teaches us as the Instructing Spiritual master (shiksa Guru) from within and without. From within He teaches as Paramatma , our constant companion, and from without he teaches from Bhagavad-Gita as the Instructing Spiritual master.” Cc Adi Lila 1.47.
Even Lord Krsna is the Shiksa Guru, Instructing Spiritual master in His form as Bhgavad-Gita and in His form as Shiksa Guru Srila Prabhupada is also in His form of His Books. Lord Krsna is not adressed as Diksa guru in the form of His Books and neither is Srila Prabhupada Diksa Guru in the form of His Books. This is the constant principle that is absolute oneness.
The Diksa Guru is never described in any of Srila Prabhupada’s Books in a Book form but described as Shiksa Guru. It is therefore not authentic to accept that one can receive Diksa, Initiation from Srila Prabhupada’s Books as Diksa Guru but one can accept His Instructions as Shiksa Guru from His Books after His physical presence has stopped existing.
The “rittik”- representative of the Acharya process is not applicable after Srila Prabhupada’s physical presence because the disciples are instructed to serve only the vani.
In the “Final Order” in the section entitled “Related Objections” number 14 called “In order to be current link you must be physically present” the writers have proved that the very purpose of approaching a “current link” can be fully satisfied by reading Srila prabhupada’s Books without an intervening (via)medium. Making the Vani relationship a direct relationship requiring no interveneing representative whatsoever.
“These definitions lend validity to a direct relationship with Srila Prabhupada without the need for intermediaries, again all regardless of physical presence/absence.” This is a direct quote from the “Final Order” which proves beyond debate that the relationship with Srila Prabhupada is a direct one needing no “rittik” -representative of the Acharya which is consistent with Srila Prabhupada’s teaching on the relationship with His Vani after the physical presence is not existing.
So the conclusion is yes Srila Prabhupada is the “current link” even in His absence but through His vani He is Shiksa Guru not Diksa Guru.That is the “Final Orders” and the Ritvik supporters massve mistake. In His vani Srila Prabhupada is Shiksa Guru as also is Lord Krsna in His Vani. (Adi Lila 1.47.)
So in this way of accepting Srila Prabhupada as Shiksa Guru then we can also apply the quote from S. Bhagatavtam 2.9.7 ” in order to receive the real message of Srimad Bhagavatam one should approach the current link, or spiritual master, in the chain of disciple succession.”
And then to reinforce this concept even more we can also quote from Srila Prabhupada’s Cc Antya Lila 2.1. from the famous verse “vande ham sri guroh sri yuta pada kamalam sri gurun vaisnavams ca….” in His word for word translation Srila Prabhupada crucially translates the word sri-guroh as “of my initiating spiritual master or instructing spiritual master”. But what makes this even more substantive is the word Sri Guroh is the singular guru- and the significance of this is that the singular guru may be either Shiksa or Diksa Guru not as sometimes assumed that it is the domain of the Diksa guru only as purported by the Ritvik supporters and the Gbc, they are both wrong. The Shiksa Guru is equally significant for the disciple.And the Shiksa guru can be the Sad Guru as much as the Diksa could be.
Dear Santosh prabhu,
Please try to remain calm. Your relationship with Srila Prabhupada is not in jeopardy in any way just because you have not been formally initiated. You have accepted Srila Prabhupada as your eternal spiritual master and he is already reciprocating with you. As long as you are steadfast in following his teachings — chanting Hare Krishna, encouraging others to chant the Holy Name, studying sastra, adhering to the four regulative principles as closely as possible, honoring the remnants of foodstuffs offered to the Lord, etc. — no one can interfere with or deny that you have an active relationship with the spiritual master.
Please remember that if you are sincerely serving Srila Prabhupada and helping him to execute his mission, you will attract Krishna’s blessings and make steady advancement in Krishna consciousness. If you can continue to serve Guru and Krishna in this way throughout your life, you will be fully qualified to go back to Godhead when the soul leaves this body. Formal initiation is a favorable breeze that can help you understand your relationship with Krishna, but if Krishna so desires, He can reveal that relationship to you at any moment without considering whether you have undergone all of the formalities of the purificatory process.
If you want to write to me, here is my email address: lfelda@aol.com
Hoping this finds you in the best of health and spirits, I beg to remain
Your servant,
Locanananda dasa
pamho agtACBSP, i agreed with HG Locanananda pr, the new generations of Hare Krsna devotees got brain washed by concocted conclusion on vani and vapuh seva of the real diksa guru of Iskcon HDG ACBSP.
In this way they forget to save themselves by increasing laulyam kalatvam as the only price to pay to go back to be perfect again as God originally has created us since time immemorial.
Get greedy to use time to first get the causeless mercy of SRI SRI GURU GAURANGA says SRILA RUPA GOSVAMI, don’t waste your time in punah punas carvita carvananam by arguing and fighting regarding GBC and ritviks because the truth is clear.
More and more those who are trying to take the position of our beloved acharya as diksa guru get their false ego smashed.
Just try to become a good unflickering servant of SRILA PRABHUPADA in this way the degraded influences of kali devi can’t touch you.
Actually this rascaldom enemity between GBC and ritviks is cause of slowing down the harinam sankirtan revolution movement of SRI SRI GURU GAURANGA. Therefore we need to hurry up to correct all these fake leaders who are just spaced out on the vani seva of our guru maharaj.
108 HDG ACBSP FOREVER KI JAI
agtys ys
haribol
Forty years ago today Srila Prabhupada wrote the following to Ekayani devi:
“I do not know why these things inventions are going on. That is our only business, to invent something new programme? We have already got our Vaisnava standard. That is sufficient for Madhvacarya, Ramanujacarya, it was sufficient for Lord Caitanya, six Gosvamis, for Bhaktivinode Thakura, for my Guru Maharaja Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, for me, for all big big saints and acaryas in our line—why it shall be inadequate for my disciples so they must manufacture something? That is not possible. Who has introduced these things, that women cannot have chanting japa in the temple, they cannot perform the arati and so many things? If they become agitated, then let the brahmacaris go to the forest, I have never introduced these things. The brahmacaris cannot remain in the presence of women in the temple, then they may go to the forest, not remaining in New York City, because in New York there are so many women, so how they can avoid seeing? Best thing is to go to the forest for not seeing any women, if they become so easily agitated, but then no one will either see them and how our preaching work will go on?”