By Krishnakant, Back to Prabhupada, Issue 18: We have reported previously on how the numerous guru falldowns in ISKCON usually follow the same “cover-up” pattern: First, the fall-down is kept hidden and swept under the carpet for as long as possible; then, when this is no longer completely possible, the news is “managed”; finally, when their hand is forced, the GBC has no choice but to reveal all, before it comes out anyway.
A recent egregious and most shocking example of this dynamic in action was the recent fall from grace of yet another of the GBC’s unauthorised gurus, as announced by the GBC in September 2007:
“The GBC Executive Committee, after much deliberation and consultation, has no alternative but to sadly report the deviations of and the abuses to devotees carried out by Balabhadra dasa (ACBSP), previously known as Bhakti Balabh Puri Goswami.”
(GBC Statement, September 17th, 2007)
(All subsequent quotes will be excerpted from this announcement).
Balabhadra das/ Bhakti Balabh Puri Goswami in his heydey
The falldown
“In the name of ‘helping’ two female disciples he performed many explicit sexual and voyeuristic acts by exploiting the obedience of his female disciples […] Balabhadra dasa has admitted that he thought of himself as a personal associate of Lord Caitanya and/or Krsna. In addition, his conception of guru was one in which he was the proprietor of his disciples, of ISKCON’s assets and especially of ISKCON Scotland’s monies.”
So the absolute worship that ISKCON gurus demand on a daily basis went straight to Balabhadra’s head. He indulged in an orgy of abuse as he lived off the hard labour of his disciples whilst lording it over everything and everyone around him. Srila Prabhupada has this to say about such a mentality:
“Anyone who is in the material world is certainly possessed of the impure propensity for lording it over material nature, or, in other words, for sense gratification. Such polluted propensities have to be cleared. Without doing so, through prescribed duties, one should never attempt to become a so-called transcendentalist, renouncing work and living at the cost of others.”
(Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 3.8 purport)
We knew he was off 25 years ago
So did all these “lording it over” traits suddenly manifest overnight, with the GBC immediately jumping in to rescue the hapless subordinates of this raving deviant?:
“Balabhadra dasa was always eccentric and even in the early 80’s showed a penchant for cars, cameras and handling money.”
So the GBC knew, for at least a quarter of a century, that this man was “eccentric” and highly materialistic, and yet still voted him in as a good-as-God guru for ISKCON.
It got worse, but we still kept quiet
“The death of his wife seemed to be a visible turning point in his life. His sadhana deteriorated, his bodily weight increased and he became increasingly involved in the lives of his female disciples, despite his having entered the renounced order. There was a “special” relationship with one female disciple, who was the person with whom he later, repeatedly fell down.”
Balabhadra’s wife died on December 28th, 1994. This means the GBC allowed a man they always knew was an eccentric materialist, and who was then observed deteriorating further for approximately thirteen years, to pose himself as a bona fide guru and personal associate of God Himself.
It got even worse
“Over three years ago Balabhadra dasa’s sexual abuse of his female disciple came to light and in investigating that abuse, a Pandora’s box of equally serious deviations gradually came to light, all of which were made known to the GBC Executive.”
The obvious question here is whether, once Balabhadra’s horrendous sexual abuse came fully to light, the GBC then finally woke up and did something to warn his disciples?
But luckily only one person knew
“Until this year, the only devotee in Scotland aware of all the deviations and subsequent restrictions on Balabhadra dasa was the temple president, Prabhupada Vani dasa. Others thought he had semi-retired for health reasons. In the beginning of the year news gradually leaked to other senior devotees and since that time we have had many meetings to inform and then help those disciples.”
So even after the GBC knew the full horror of what their voted in guru was doing, they were happy that only one disciple, Prabhupada Vani Das, knew the truth. All the other disciples and large congregation were kept completely in the dark. Why the reluctance to go public and bring Balabhadra to justice for his various illicit acts? That the members of the committee who dealt with him and compiled the report, Sivarama Swami and B.B. Govinda Maharaja, reportedly received substantial donations from Balabhadra Das for their projects, is of course purely coincidental!
The thieves finally part company
But what was the final straw that led to the GBC making public Balabhadra’s crimes?:
“… if he chose to do as he liked, his case would be made public in order to protect devotees of the Society from him. […] Since Balabhadra dasa is now his own man […] he will seek to raise funds from the international society of devotees who should be informed that supporting him is not supporting any ISKCON approved project or person.”
It is perfectly clear that Balabhadra had been doing “as he liked” for decades, and yet the GBC had never tried to “protect the devotees”. But the big difference was that now he would not be giving his GBC buddies a slice of whatever money he was able to sponge off the labour of others. Only once this became clear did the GBC decide to “protect the devotees” by throwing him out of ISKCON. In this way, they can simply install a new false Lord to carry on the money generating project that has helped sustain their bogus guru program.
IRM: One of the key points that we quote in the Final Order to show that any diksa Gurus in ISKCON would have had to been specifically authorised by Srila Prabhupada, is the following verse from the Srimad Bhagavatam:
“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)
The key part of this quotation is the ‘authorised by his predecessor spiritual master’, since this smashes their current bogus Guru program as it requires them to show specific authorisation from Srila Prabhupada.
They cannot palm us off with some vague notion that it is ‘automatic’, or that it is a ‘timeless order’ or that it is ‘tradition’ or any other such nonsense. They need to show authorisation from Srila Prabhupada directly.
And as we have shown repeatedly they cannot do so. So hard-pressed are they do this, that after 23 years they still can only trot out the same ‘appointment tape’ with its 5 different transcripts and 4 different official GBC interpretations – which have been used to justify different guru systems by the GBC.
* So what to do?
Simple. Get rid of this troublesome quote.
And that is exactly what Bhakti Caru Swami has done in his Bengali translation of the Srimad Bhagavatam. As the official BBT Bengali translator for the Bhagavatam, he has translated the above as:
“Manuser Kartabbo hoche guruparampara dharay sadguru kach theke diksa Grahan kara. Eka bale diksa-bidhan”.
“One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession. This is called diksa-vidhana.”
(S.B. 4.8.54, purport)
Yes, he has simply removed the troublesome phrase – the literary equivalent of ‘splicing’. This proves two things:
1. That the above quote does deliver a death-blow to the current ISKCON Guru system just as ‘The Final Order’ claims. Otherwise why take it out?
2. That Bhakti-Caru Maharaja, who of course is one the current illegitimate diksa Gurus in ISKCON, has shamefacedly engaged in this blatant cheating to try and save his Guruship. He has desecrated the teachings of Srila Prabhupada simply to keep his Guru ambitions afloat.
Never mind being a sannyasi and a Guru. Such an example of blatant dishonesty does not even qualify him to be a Brahmin.
* Do these people have no shame?
Having realised that the game is up they can only resort to the last refuge – cheating – to try and prop up their bogus temporary occupation of Srila Prabhupada’s seat.
Suprisingly so many cheated are available for the guru cheaters
from post 1980 ISKCON.
This BalaBhadra das Is shameless and puffed up
He ruined my possible marriage in 1987 in England.
Thats fact ,I dont hold a grudge,,,but so many of these devottes
were so full of false pride …it was considered Normal/Advanced then,,,
I was so shocked+hurt by his arrogance and pride and interference
with my personal life. I hope he well but frankly…………..
I got his number and its —-ZERO
From Jaya madhava das (acbsp) Moscow
Dear and respected Prabhus!
I wholeheartedly agree with the thesis of the article and of the comments which follow it up. I just think that all this bring not much reall changes to the world, though the great job done by the Prabhupadanugas around the World. Ok. there is one exception, ISKCON Bangalore. Why is that? I think that generally preaching to the so call “ISKCON” is mostly waste of time and energy. If we are serious than we should be able to deliver new people from the ever worse Kali Yuga all around us. If our gospel about Prabhupada being alive is within our hearts, then we can do wonderful things exactly like they were done by Prabhupada while He was “physically” here. Isn’t it? It seem though that there is still some reluctancy within us, and we spend our time quarrelling and preach rather to the nonbelivers from false GBC of the false “ISKCON”, and we let many people to go to hell without the Harinam Sankirtan on the streets of Europe at least. How mauch time and energy spend Srila Prabhupada to preach to GM Guru poisoners? Of course He did try hard to save them, but “meanwhile” He spread Krishna Consciousness all arond the World like anything! Still, I am not to criticize You respected Prabhus. For me You all Prabhupadanugas are Great Heros !
Hare Krishna
Dear Devottees
AGTSP. PAMHO
Lord Sri Krishna says in Bg.18-55
“One can understand the Supreme Personality as He is only by devotional service. And when one is in full consciousness of the Supreme Lord by such devotion, he can enter into the kingdom of God.”
All these so called gurus of today are introducing “Krishna consciousness” as the objective. We are not devotees of Krishna consciousness. Krishna consciousness is just a consequence of bhakti (devotional service.) Removing the essence of bhakti then prasadan, kirtan, paintings of krishna, etc. are a stereotype of mundane affairs, to enjoy all these things without bhakti. This is just a mundane show.
A spiritual master should be a liberated soul. In the spiritual world every body is in the state of baba-bhakti and to reach the liberation we have to be at this state. Baba-bhakti is the graduated state of raganuga. The madhyama adhikari state of raganuga is reached with the development of ruci for the holy name. 16 rounds are enough to develop such ruci to chant Hare Krishna all the time.
The beginning of raganuga sadhana is described in Bhag. 3.25,25:
“In the association of pure devotees, discussion of the pastimes and activities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is very pleasing and satisfying to the ear and the heart. By cultivating such knowledge one gradually becomes advanced on the path of liberation, and thereafter he is freed, and his attraction becomes fixed. Then real devotion and devotional service begin.”
And with the acceptance of a siksa guru:
“A devotee who is actually advanced in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, who is constantly engaged in devotional service, should not manifest himself even though he has attained perfection. The idea is that he should always continue to act as a neophyte devotee as long as his material body is there. Activities in devotional service under regulative principles must be followed even by the pure devotee. But when he realizes his actual position in relationship with the Lord, he can, along with the discharging of regulative service, think within himself of the Lord, under the guidance of a particular associate of the Lord, and develop his transcendental sentiments in following that associate. NOD 16
Vaidhi bhakti is in the kanistha state of diksa guru. A spiritual master should be at least a madhyama adhikary devotee by which our sampradaya is of siksa disciples; the same Srila Vyasadeva was the siksa guru of Srila Madhva Acharya. Srila Jiva Goswami was the siksa guru of Narottama, Srinivas and Syamananda. Srila Jagannath Das was the siksa guru of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur the siksa guru of Srila Gaura Kisora Das and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati who was firstly the siksa and secondly the diksa guru of Srila Prabhupada A. C. Bhaktivedhanta Swami the jagat guru for everyone.
Srila Prabhupada ki jay!
What the article fails to mention is the huge donations Balabhadra handed out to senior members of the GBC for their pet projects, to Sivaram swami in particular.
Basically the GBC were quite happy to leave Balabhadra to his own devices as long as the money kept rolling in.
The GBC’s rubber stamping of gurus can not be trusted, the selection process is dubious and there are no follow up checks on “gurus”.
When it does go wrong and the GBC can no longer cover up, their last line of defence is to blame the sincere temple devotees who stupidly put their trust in Prabhupada’s movement. They distance themselves from the fallen guru (who they had been quite happy to receive large donations from without question) and accuse the temple devotees of stupidity for following an “off the wall” Iskcon rubber stamped guru.
There is no sense of accountability on the part of the GBC, they will blame everyone and anyone but their own judgement.
“By the mercy of the Guru even a dumb man can become a great speaker, and even a lame man can cross mountains.” – Srila Krsnadasa Kavirajah Goswami
“All my disciples will take the legacy. If you want, you can also take it. Sacrifice everything. I, one, may soon pass away. But they are hundreds, and this movement will increase. It is not that I give an order, ‘Here is the next leader.’ Anyone who follows the previous leadership is the leader…. All of my disciples are leaders, as much as they follow purely. If you want to follow, you can also lead. But you don’t want to follow. Leader means one who is a first class disciple. Evam param parapraptam. One who is following is perfect.”
(Srila Prabhupada, Back to Godhead magazine, Vol. 13, No. 1-2)
This clear instruction tells us that all are authorized as leaders, whether small or large, but one must actually become qualified and do the service. Just as the sun shines upon land and sea equally, without discrimination, so the full mercy is available to all who accept it.
But one must actually BE QUALIFIED to provide such services as diksa guru. ALL are qualified to act as siksa gurus in some capacity according to the degree we repeat Srila Prabhupada’s instructions without deviations. And, one who is actually an advanced self-realized pure devotee, he can act as diksa guru, but obviously not by occpying his spiritual master’s temple and stealing everything as his own, thus cheating all the Godbrothers and the ongoing initiates and attempting to cheat even the Spiritual Master. He must go out and form his own ashramas and sanga as auxiliary to his Guru’s mission, just as Srila Prabhupada did.
The GBC goonda boys erred, in that none was qualified to be diksa guru, but ambition is there, so like unknowing kanisthas, they rubber-stamped neophytes and poisoners and fools and abused real pure devotees. In reaction to this madness, the IRM etc went too far the other way, and now also abuse recent qualified devotees saying none are “authorized” ie where is the papers? But there ARE NO PAPERS!
Srila Prabhupada himself had no written authorization. He is the example setter. He had a general spoken authorization. So as IRM specificaly calls for some vague unprecedented written authorization, where is the precedent for that? I have never seen such a thing mentioned or called for anywhere in any of the Vaisnava literature, except someone’s recent imagination.
Did Srila Bhaktisiddhana Saraswati or Srila Gour Govinda or Srila Prabhupada or Srila Puri Maharajah or Swami Narayana Maharajah leave a written authorization for anyone? Not one of them did? So no one is qualified, or they made a mistake, or is that not the correct process? Is it as above; all are generally authorized, but some will actually, or perhaps even one, will step up to the plate in reality, and be seen to be clearly advanced devotee worthy of our services, like a small spark of Srila Prabhupada? Then he or she may have their own disciples and mission following Srila Prabhupada, just as our Srila Prabhupada actually did himself. Krsna will raise them up, as He did Srila Prabhupada.
And the fruits must be more renounced loving inclusive broad-minded pure devotees, not more fascist corporate fat cats, otherwise it is clear that the leader(s) and messages are bogus. To avoid that confusion and falldown of which we have now so many practical examples, the disenchanted say “no more gurus!” just Srila Prabhupada, and that works very well indeed within our society. Seeing this coming, Srila Prabhupada left us a nice ritvik system, as we always followed, as there were only neophytes in Iskcon in general at the time. We can follow that system eternally and there will be peace and surety.
But is this “written authroization” idea correct, or merely a convenient group institutional thinking ?
You should stop feeling hurt by this and that past friction with certain individuals and rejoin ISKCON! Basically they do exactly what you are stating. Everybody is guru and everybody tries to make this world a better place. Why for years and years waste time getting caught up in living on your own? Prabhupada ordered you to stay in the movement, whatever happens – stay.
So many poor souls lost their faith in Krishna and figure, He actually doesnt care. Why this godlessness?
If there is deviation, only Krishna can correct it. We have seen it so many times, again and again. Arjuna was told to fight, but Lord Caitanya is simply asking us to sing, dance, spread the Holy Name and accept His offer of freely giving us Krishna-prema.
Everything else is taken care of, we havent to worry about anything. Why people lost their faith? Simply reanimate your faith, rejoin, and live in your guru’s movement. Stop thinking so complicated, depend on Krishna’s mercy that He will protect you and provide everything we need to perform devotional service. Why so many disbelievers?
If you make the whole world God conscious in nobody’s head the questions arises, is he bona fide? Because everything you do is dictated from within by Krishna and therefore, perfect.
Prabhupada left GM because at that time there hardly was any preaching.
Now there are so many temples all over the world, surely you will find a place where to sing and dance and repeat Prabhupada’s teachings. Rest assured that all impediments meant for our bondage are gone when we simply try to please the Lord in the association of devotees.
How can somebody rejoin this group of fools who dare to change the most sacred literature in the three worlds? This is the worst kind of offense to our spiritual master, makes me sick just to think of that. Anyone who is in this so called iskcon and does not fight against this is simply an eunuch and aparadhi. It’s millions upon millions of times better to follow the principles and chant lacks of rounds daily than to follow this pederastas gundas, thiefs and charlatans – it is better and more honest to be a streetsweeper than to serve these kalichelas. If the leaders are corrupt all are corrupt or naive like you seem to be. Chant Hare Krishna and be happy. All glories to our divine master Srila Prabhupada.
Srila Prabhupada did leave an authorization letter dated July 9th, 1977.
It authorized 11 disciples to initiate on his behalf. If there was a standing order, then what was the need of Srila Prabhupada’s letter of July 9th? What is the point of the July 9th letter, if, as you say, there is no need of any such letter? Are you saying Srila Prabhupada’s letter was unnecessary and irrelelvant? Since when is the Spiritual Master’s letter irrelevant and unnecessary?
There was no point. See Gurukrpa Swami’s historical letters in that regards; the letter was a conspiratorial concoction pushed by the big GBCs for their political propaganda needs. Also, again, there was no diksa guru authorization there, it had to do with greedy priests, so as said, there is still no precedent of written auhorizations for diksa guru etc but there is clear evidence of inclusive aurthorization of all who actually follow and are qualified. Finally, IRM’s interpretation of the SB verse is very forced and sketchy indeed.
First i have to accept your flimsy premise about the letter based on Gurukripa’s flimsy account. Is he someone I can base ANYTHING on? Come on. Your premise that the July 9th letter is irrelevant and has no point is based on nothing but your imagination. The letter stands as it is and says what it says. It does not need interpretation or explanation. It is very clear in plain English and signed by Srila Prabhupada. It makes sense and agrees with everything Srila Prabhupada has taught about guru-tattva.
http://youtu.be/w7kHPV8AFTY
http://www.youtube.com/v/w7kHPV8AFTY?
“Why did Gaudiya Matha fail? – Srila Prabhupada’s explanation” is the Youtube video title. This film can also be seen near bottom center of our front page at http://puredevoteeseva.ning.com/
Srila Prabhupada explains it all on this topic, in a short video. Thats alI I have to say on this. Go watch it yourself, please. AGTSP ! Pamho.
I’m sorry, i cant help but reply to Vamsuli Das, who sounds like a sweet devotee, and reply as if he spoke to me personally; Iskcon must rejoin US, not vise versa. Goonda boys Club is not Iskcon, Srila Prabhupada is. He said, ” Is it alright if I say that I am Iskcon? ” Yes, it is alright Srila Prabhupada.
Has no one ever heard of Justice? Hare Krishna.
So who follows Srila Prabhupada and who rejects his guidance, poisoned him, lied to all of us all, lie to us all still, and change his books and abuse their Godbrothers, centralize authority under a globalist corporation led by businessmen directly against Srila Prabhupada’s explicit written directions, call thousands of brahmanas ni–ers / ritviks, and using illegal means steal everything like greedy British-based illuminati-dupe dogs, and in so doing destroy and stunt and curtail much of the movement? Not us, and not the ritviks.
So who has deviated and no longer represents Srila Prabhupada? So who is actually the real ISKCON ? Say no more. Let the new generations see to it that, at last, things are put right.
Calling a nearly-dead GBC donkey a horse, is an illusion.
Obeisances, well-wishes, AGTSP.
Sri Mukunda Prabhu; Pamho. AGTSP ! If you study the history, Srila Prabhupada was more or less pressured into conceding to the demands of the ambitious rascals around him, who presented papers not dictated nor written nor desired by Srila Prabhupada, including a list of ritviks, which the ambitious conspiring rascals intended as a list of take-over usurpers, and demanded to know who was to hold what position in regards to their perceived need for power.
He also said more “ritviks” may be added “as needed”, did he not? So was this written or spoken? Spoken. Plus, over the year, the whole tradition of TPs etc recommending for initiations was long established, and Srila Prabhupada told us not to change things.
Gurukrpa Swami explained the situation nicely in his letters; how the Big Big scoundrels basically behind closed doors and without consulting Srila Prabhupada divided up and conquered the devotee world, but Gurukrpa said that no such letter was needed, that the instruction was to carry on as before, in which Temple Presidents etc recommended, and these all these ritvik priests were just functionaries, officials, not acaryas or gooroos per se.
One might as well ask why Srila Prabhupada allowed the conspirators to confine and kill his body with arsenic. Things were done at that time to steal and connive. Some letter about authorizing ritviks as priests certainly does not constitute written authorization or not of diksa gurus, so Mukunda Prabhu is incorrect.
So what are you trying to say, then, Mukunda? That only these fallen rascals were authorized forever?? That we should start worshipping this set of proven-to-be-bogus gurus? You still haven’t answered; Srila Prabhupada said clearly that he is not authorizing any diksa guru, just like his spiritual master and as noted, like all the recent acaryas. There is no written authorization for diksa guru, as i stated; there never was such a thing, it is a concoction, is not required. IRM’s use of the Bhagavatam verse does nothing for me; they are squeezing a political interpretation out, whereas the words which I quoted are totally clear and specific, which I already quoted, and which you have not refuted; “All my disciples shall take the legacy…”
Begging your patience and thanks for the discussion. Haribol!
Prabhupada’s message is to always encourage his disciples to become situated on the Vaishnava platform of pure goodness. When it comes what he instructed about the continuation of diksa within ISKCON we refer to Prabhupada’s final order.
If the captain of the ship says “5° starboard” and the first mate replies, “But captain, before you told me ‘10° port’.,” then it can be understood that the first mate has gone insane.
Letter by Tamala Krsna Gosvami to all GBC’s and temple presidents, Vrindavana, India, July 9, 1977:
To All G.B.C. and Temple Presidents
Dear Maharajas and Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances at your feet. Recently when all of the GBC members were with His Divine Grace in Vrindavana, Srila Prabhupada indicated that soon He would appoint some of His senior disciples to act as ritvik – 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:
His Holiness Kirtanananda Swami
His Holiness Satsvarupa dasa Gosvami
His Holiness Jayapataka Swami
His Holiness Tamala Krsna Gosvami
His Holiness Hrdayananda Gosvami
His Holiness Bhavananda Gosvami
His Holiness Hamsaduta Swami
His Holiness Ramesvara Swami
His Holiness Harikesa Swami
His Grace Bhagavan dasa Adhikari
His Grace Jayatirtha dasa Adhikari
In the past Temple Presidents have written to Srila Prabhupada recommending a particular devotee’s initiation. Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these representatives, temple presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and second initiation to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their temple. After considering the recommendation, 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. The newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the above eleven senior devotees acting as his representative. After the temple president receives a letter from these representatives giving the spiritual name or the thread, he can perform the fire yajna in the temple as was being done before. The name of a newly initiated disciple should be sent by the representative who has accepted him or her to Srila Prabhupada, to be included in His Divine Grace’s “Initiated Disciples” book.
Approved: A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami [signed]
Please note that the above is the last formal instruction that Srila Prabhupada gave on initiations within his beloved ISKCON before his physical departure on November 14, 1977. If someone quotes Srila Prabhupada as having said, “My disciples should become gurus.,” then this obviously does not mean diksha (initiating) gurus within ISKCON, because his last instruction (See point #1 above) for ISKCON was to have ritviks (priests) initiate on his behalf “henceforward.” If you search the Vedabase for “henceforward,” you will see that Srila Prabhupada always meant “from this time forth; from now on,” which, according to the dictionary, is the only literal meaning that the word “henceforward” can have.
Please read again, Sixteen Points to Consider Regarding the Ritvik Issue | Pratyatosa Dasa (ACBSP)
http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/news/?p=24471
So you are now saying that Srila Prabhupada’s disciples coerced and forced Srila Prabhupada to sign the July 9th letter. give me a break.
Hare Krsna,
This is indeed a flimsy premise to make about july 9th letter and a flimsy account by sri mukunda prabhu.
If the letter were as he describes then how comes there is so much debate about this one letter?
It must be the most speculated and misinterpreted letter of all. In fact the word “henceforward”, just one word of the letter”, has been misconstrued to mean all sorts of things.
There is no point in being naieve sri mukunda dasa.
I can say this is what the july 9th letter says and you can say the opposite. I can base my explanation on what you say is plain english but you would say the opposite based on plain english, then who is right and wrong.?????
Thats why the july 9th letter is not as important as the “rittviks” say it is because it is emphasised by them to prove their points as evidence but they also dont include ALL the other evidence that proves the other conclusion.
Just like the letter Tamoharadasa provides consistently showing the legacy that Srila Prabhupada provides for ALL His disciples.
The july 9th letter is as important as any other letter by Srila Prabhupada, you cant emphasise one against the others or else you are seen as biased because it supports your cause. You have to be transparent in reading Srila Prabhupada’s Vani. Only when you take all His writings and words in balance can you understand them.
By the way because H H Tamala Krsna wrote the July 9th letter and was only approved by Srila Prabhupada there are mistakes in the july 9th letter literally and the english useage is quite poor.
But if you read it with “ritvik” eyes you dont see them but take your “ritvik” glasses off and then read it again.
Hare Krishna
Dear Dusyanta prabhu,
In your reply, you make assumptions. How can a letter signed by Srila Prabhupada not be clear? It was clear enough for him to sign it. it was clear enough when it was read to him and he signed it. there was no questions to him or from him about the word “henceforward.” The letter was written and read to Srila Prabhupada, and it was clear to him or he would not have signed it. If your points were valid, why weren’t they addressed by Srila Prabhupada before he signed his name to the letter? are you saying you can see something that Srila Prabhupada missed? so you know better than Srila Prabhupada? so your argument has two points:
1. the letter is not clear and Srila Prabhupada signed it anyway, which would be an error. Srila Prabhupada does not make errors. This argument is an offense to Srila Prabhupada.
2. The letter signed by Srila Prabhupada is “not important.” this is also an offense to Srila Prabhupada.
So your arguments are based on offenses to Srila Prabhupada.
your argument is basically, in a nutshell:
“The Letter is not clear and unimportant, so it is rejected.”
Well, my answer is this:
the letter is clear and important otherwise Srila Prabhupada would not have signed an unclear and unimportant letter.
now you can say Tamal coerced Srila Prabhupada into signing it, but i do not accept that Srila Prabhupada, the pure devotee representative of Krishna could be coerced by anyone to do anything. He is being directed by Krishna. now if you have proof or evidence that Tamal coerced Srila Prabhupada into signing something, let’s see it.
I hope you can overcome these offenses and rejoin Srila Prabhupada’s movement and mission.
ys
Sri Mukunda dasa
Hare Krsna Sri Mukunda Prabhu,
The sentences that include the word “henceforward” if taken as they are in plain english as you say, read like this.
“Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these representatives,Temple Presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and second initiation to whichever of these representatives are nearest their temple.”
1. Srila Prabhupada Himself has named the representatives-no-one else can do this naming.
2 He indicated that He would appoint some of His senior disciples……There is no authority in this letter for any other devotee to appoint or name representatives.
3 The Temple Presidents can only send recommendation to these representatives- these 11 named by Srila Prabhupada are the only representatives that any Temple President can send recommendation to.
4 These representatives have all fallen down along times ago,either leaving Iskcon, leaving devotional service or leaving their bodies.Therefore they are not representatives named by Srila Prabhupada.
The english language used is american and when read literally as you say in plain english language then the letter itself means the ritvik process is finished when these 11 leave.The letter itself restricts the useage of ritviks in time by its very use of the english language.The word “henceforward” used in this sentence actually terminates the process by emphasising the sending of recommendations to “these” representatives.In fact the word “these” used with the word “representatives” occurs several times in the letter which indicates the 11 named are the only ritviks available in the July 9th letter that are named and appointed by Srila Prabhupada.So the process as outlined in this letter is limited by the very prescription and description outlined here.
So no matter how you describe the “offence” to Srila Prabhupada it is just an imaginary one that does not exist because your conclusion does not line up with the letter itself.The “offence ” only exists in your mind but not in actuality because of the way you interprete the letter.
Apart from the obvious spelling mistakes and the actual composing of the letter, Srila Prabhupada signed the letter approved as far as we know.Even the word “approved ” could of been added after He signed it.But we dont know and will never know,but you just accept it because it serves your cause thats all.
The word “henceforward” as used in the context of the meaning of the sentence does not mean into the future as it stands because the word “henceforward” is referring to the recommendations being sent to these 11 representatives,thats what the sentence means in plain english.The word “henceforward” is an adverb which has to be attached to a verb which in this case is “send”.So what is continuing “henceforward”,the sending of recommendations to these 11 representatives is continuing henceforward.You have misconstrued the useage of the word and misapplied the meaning of the word to apply to something that does not exist in the sentence.So for you it is obviously not plain english and thats why the letter is what i said it was and its not an offence whatsoever.
I hope you understand the points i am making and dont interpret them as is often the case in these exchanges.
I am saying that the word “henceforward” only refers to the “sending” of recommendations to “these” representatives, in the July 9th letter.
Any other interpretation of the word “henceforward” in the context of the July9th letter is purely speculative.The word “henceforward” means “from now onwards”.
For me this is plain english and what it means.Thanks for your attention your servant dusyanta dasa.
The 11 were the first appointed ritviks. The following evidence makes it clear that this was an initial list:
“His Divine Grace has *so far* given a list of eleven disciples who will act in that capacity” (July 9 letter)
“A letter has been sent to all the Temple Presidents and GBC which you should be receiving soon describing the process for initiation to be followed in the future. Srila Prabhupada has appointed *thus far* eleven representatives who will initiate new devotees on His behalf.”
(July 11 letter)
“1) Srila Prabhupada’s final version of his last will, and 2) Srila Prabhupada’s *initial list* of disciples appointed to perform initiations for His Divine Grace. This *initial list* is also being sent to all centers.”
(July 21 letter)
Dusyanta states: “H H Tamala Krsna wrote the July 9th letter”. Therefore he would have to accept Tamala’s relating of the conversation he had with Srila Prabhupada when preparing to type the list of 11 ritviks, as recorded in the Topanga Canyon tape on 3 December 1980, where Srila Prabhupada states that other ritviks may be added “as necessary”:
Tamal Krishna: “Srila Prabhupada, is this all or do you want to add more?”
Srila Prabhupada: “As necessary, others may be added.”
(Pyramid House tape, ritvik appointments, Topanga Canyon, 3/12/80)
Deviation or death would obviously be “necessary” conditions for adding new ritviks to act as “representatives of the acarya”.
Hare Krsna Jaya.
Yes, you have made the same mistake by trying to match up evidence to prove your conclusion.
H H Tamala Krsna Maharaja did not just give one evidence concerning these subjects as you have given at Topanga Pyramid Temple conversations.
TKG spoke on many different occasions about this and he was also appointed as rittvik in July 9th letter. TKG changed his mind on all of this at least 18 different times and gave as many versions. So we can’t accept that evidence as truth from TKG because he changed his version so much but if you want to accept that version that is your prerogative.
Your understanding of english is also not up to scratch from what you have written by using the american phrases as “thus far” and “so far” which don’t occur in the english language. These phrases can be used in different ways as well depending on the context.
By writing that this is an “initial” list is your idea not Srila Prabhupada’s or TKG’s.
Your interpretations just support your conclusions and are not transparent.
The sentence you quote is:
“His Divine Grace has so far given a list of eleven disciples who will act in that capacity.”
The words “so far” does not mean that more names will be added in the future, but that a list of eleven disciples have been given to date. Your idea is that more will be added but that is not written in this evidence.
The other letter from TKG using the american phrase “thus far” also means exactly the same thing that Srila Prabhupada has appointed eleven disciples to date.
The next evidence that you bring to bear is the use of the word “initial” as in “initial list” as if there is another list which there was not. The phrase “initial list” could only be interpreted to mean that there will be another list after this first list if there was another list but the “initial list” stands on its own as the one and only list as the “initial list”, its the first and only list.
The next evidence where you provide a transcription of a conversation by TKG at Topanga Temple concerning another conversation that allegedly took place between Srila Prabhupada and TKG is not a serious evidence. We all know TKG made up so much stuff about this subject, that he changed his mind so many times about what did happen and what did not happen, about what he meant when he wrote the July 9th letter, that we cant take this at all seriously and i am surprised that you included this very weak evidence in your presentation. It’s not even direct evidence. So no i dont accept this as any evidence at all, i dont even know that TKG wrote the July 9th letter, i just believe he did. Same as you, unless you were there when he wrote it!! But the way the letter was written it looks very much like an American english, same as those other letters you have provided.
Hare Krsna
So Prabu, you continute to argue against Srila Prabhupada’s clear and important letter. So what was Srila Prabhupada’s specific instructions on initiations in ISKCON for after he was no longer with us, if the July 9th letter is unclear and unimportant?
Sri mukunda dasa