All is fair and well, and still Srila Prabhupada did not give definitive instructions to change the ritvik procedure that He inaugurated. There is no order where he stated to change such a highly important issue, or what has become an issue. Surely, being such a momentous instruction of the most fundamental nature, (disciple/guru relationship), Srila Prabhupada would have made it perfectly clear, but it appears to us that he did not.
Henceforward, to myself, means to be continued until further notice. Bas. Until further notice. That He spoke with hope to initiate to a young Hindu man is not an instruction given to everyone. Were it intended for everyone, why Srila Prabhupada would not have given it?
The fact that the ensuing zonal guru set-up alienated over 80% of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples is indisputable, and shows beyond doubt that what the gurus and GBC’s (many were both) did after Srila Prabhupada left was highly incompetent and simply wrong. The evidence is blatant.
Whether Srila Prabhupada felt that He would actually recuperate enough to again begin more active initiations as He had done, is conjecture at best. Who can read Srila Prabhupada’s mind? As if he were an ordinary human being. Perhaps Srila Prabhupada, in that instance of seeing the young Hindu man, felt the need to be positive in that way with him? Who can say, there are so many nuances and varying conditions to every event in human interactions.
Srila Prabhupada said that if one has faith in the Bible, he is worshiping Lord Jesus. So if one is praying to Lord Jesus, who is he praying to? This idea of formal initiation in ISKCON has been abused repeatedly. Is that what Srila Prabhupada wanted?
Some of the ISKCON gurus are very responsible and advanced souls, so we should not slight them in anyway. We are discussing the point of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions on this initiation matter. They seem ambiguous or insufficient.
So many new young people are coming, where is the harm is saying that Srila Prabhupada’s instructions, books , conversations, etc, are now as your instructions? Was Srila Prabhupada only speaking to us, his initiated disciples? We know that is not the case. As he said in the case of Lord Jesus, if one reads the New Testament with faith then he is accepting Lord Jesus as his/her guru. That is fact. So the formality is there by much less God-realized souls than Srila Prabhupada. How nice and honourable to be authorized to initiate on Srila Prabhupada’s behalf.
But no, they must have the guru pujas, the samadhis, the adoration: they all say that is the way it is and has been done. But was it done in this way for conditioned souls? Or fully self-realized souls. Do you want a guru who is fully self-realized or simply perfected at sadhana bhakti? Or even perhaps in the spontaneous stage, but lacking full love of God as Srila Prabhupada exhibited? Looks like the choice is ours, as we are all evolving in these ways of devotional service.
Dear Achinta prabhu, You say that “The fact that the ensuing zonal guru set-up alienated over 80% of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples is indisputable and shows beyond doubt that what the gurus and GBC’s did was highly incompetent and simply wrong. The evidence is blatant”
Then further on you say “some of the ISKCON gurus are very responsible and advanced souls, so we should not slight them in any way”
I just do not understand what your reasoning is here and which of the ISKCON “gurus” you consider “responsible and advanced souls”? Perhaps you could elaborate a little here as it sounds a little too vague for me to comprehend. I would have thought that beying complicit in the “alienation” of 80% of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples would suggest that they are neither advanced nor responsible!
The important thing here is to follow the Acharya, so why is everybody going on about “initiation” like it is the Holy Grail or something? If the instructions on initiations seem as you say ambiguous or insufficient perhaps that is because Srila Prabhupada didn’t consider the issue very important otherwise there would be more clarity. But if on the other hand it is “clarity” that is the point here then why are GBC changing all of the words spoken (and signed off on) in Srila Prabhupada’s books? Do you think that after almost half a decade they are suddenly going to concede to your point of “reason” because you mistakenly believe that “some” of them are “responsible and advanced”? that my friend is fanciful in the extreme!
It isn’t any big mystery, the rascal mentality is to ALWAYS deviate from the Acharya no matter what he says, so the real goal of rascals and fools is to create the impression that there is NO clarity in regards to what Srila Prabhupada’s instructions are, and WHEN THAT DOESN’T WORK try to find fault with Srila Prabhupada himself!
Acintya Das. Who are these so called persons your referring to as “perfected at sadhana bhakti”?
Also your last statement “Looks like the choice is ours, as we are all evolving in these ways of devotional service.” What makes you think that those who are bogus gurus/ or those who follow bogus gurus are ‘evolving’? That is nonsense! Only those who sincerely follow Srila Prabhupada and previous Acharyas are evolving the rest who are envious, pretenders and fools are DEVOLVING! That’s the reality. You can’t manufacture you own gunda, bogus guru culture and get the same result, that’s nonsense!
All indications are that FISKCON is deteriorating more and more into all this mayavadi, hindu, sahajiya and “interfaith” bullshit, how is that “evolving?”
Very well stated Sudarsana prabhu…only thing is I call it “dog or hog” shit. Bull shit is actually very pure and auspicious. Maybe if all the rascal imposters smeared bull-cow manure over themselves it might start to cleanse them, but actually I feel the problem is too ‘systemic’ anyway.
Seek out the association that’s favorable for your devotional creeper and reject that which is not.
Yhs, Balaram das.