Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

I guess you mean this site:
http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/

who said it is?

On behalf of Rocana dasa, myself, HareKrsna.com and the Sampradaya Sun, the answer is no, we are not a Rtvik site. Our position is clearly stated:

In Rocanas paper, "The Church of Rtvik":
http://www.harekrsna.com/vada/writings/church_of_rtvik.htm

In his "Sampradaya Acarya" paper:
http://www.harekrsna.com/vada/writings/sampradaya_acarya.htm

and is evidenced by our long-standing challenge to the West Coast Rtviks and their siddhantic leader, Yasodanandana dasa, who has consistently refused to debate Rocana and defend his Rtvik conclusion.

Who says we are Rtviks?

Many of those in the institution who dont like to be challenged philosophically, particularly on issues of guru-tattva, ISKCON initiation policies, institutional leadership and history, and Srila Prabhupadas exalted status as minimized in Lilamrta and as inherent to ISKCONs positions on initiation, the Gaudiya Matha, etc.

and

Those who cannot understand how/why the Sun would allow Rtviks to have a platform to express their position unless we ourselves were Rtviks.

Thanks for asking. Hare Krsna.

i wouldnt call the sampradaya sun ritivik. i remember reading those papers quoted by jahnavi mataji quite some time ago, and theyre not straight "ritvik theory," as put forward by yasodanandana, adridharana, TFO. i cant remember exactly what rocana pr.s siddhanta was (and the topic isnt important enough for me to read it all over again), but i remember it as something inbetween, giving more importance to SP, miniimizing the present gurus, but trying to leave the sastric guru-idea intact.

in the beginning i found the sampradaya sun quite interesting and read it regularly, even though i didnt agree with all the philosophical points made by rocan. recently, though, whenever i open it all that catches my eye are violent attacks on ISKCON, with and without any basis, but full of polemic and little useful information.

if rocan and jahnavi feel its their duty to offer a platform to all types of emotional and questionable opinions, thats their prerogative; but its mine not to read it anymore.

Is that Jahnavi or Jahnava?

One interesting thing is this: a commitment to free speech is not demonstrated by allowing things that you agree with, but by defending the right to speak of people that you disagree with.

I dont agree with what some people say, but yeah, Ill defend their right to say it (and my right to ignore or disagree with it), because if I wanted an atmosphere of intellectual intolerance and fanaticism, I would go to Afghanistan and join the Taliban. At least there you get to fire an AK-47. You havent been able to do that in ISKCON since the 80s.

I personally view Sampradaya Sun as the WWF of Vaisnava websites. Thats where you go for smackdown, and no I dont read it, although I did see something on there the other day when I googled my own name...

[quote]Is that Jahnavi or Jahnava?[/quote]
[p]sorry, its [i]jahnava[/i][/p]
[quote]One interesting thing is this: a commitment to free speech is not demonstrated by allowing things that you agree with, but by defending the right to speak of people that you disagree with.[/quote]
[p]oh, i dont propose to ban or close the sampradaya sun. all glories to free speech. but i dont have to like it. and if the same atmosphere i perceive at the sun was predominant here, i wouldnt be here, either.[/p]
[p]free speech is ok, but if you run a place (virtual or real) you try to create or encourage a certain atmosphere that people either like or dont like, and consequently theyll come to your place or they dont. [b]you[/b] are a proponent, if i remember correctly, of [b]not[/b] allowing aggressive druggies, punks, or dirty bums into the sunday feast together with the more "civilized" crowd. thats the same, IMO, as applying some filtering to the crowd that frequents your web site.[/p]

well hey, if WWF isnt your scene, then why not just say so? ;-)

[quote][cite] abhiram:[/cite]I guess you mean this site:
http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/

who said it is?[/quote]

http://www.pariprashnena.com/discussion/231/how-do-iskcon-devotees-become-ritviks/#Item_11

we do not "filter the crowd" in this site and devotees are responding nicely. We keep a sharp eye on correct behaviour, but everybody is allowed. And that is and will be (Krishna willing) our collective success.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite]Is that Jahnavi or Jahnava?

I would go to Afghanistan and join the Taliban. At least there you get to fire an AK-47. You havent been able to do that in ISKCON since the 80s.
[/quote]
:)
[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite]
I personally view Sampradaya Sun as the WWF of Vaisnava websites. Thats where you go for smackdown, and no I dont read it, although I did see something on there the other day when I googled my own name...[/quote]
it is an accurate description
http://www.nidhin.com/images/free/wwe-wwf-old-veterans-champions.jpg

I thought you were referring to this WWF:
http://www.panda.org/ :)

[quote]we do not "filter the crowd" in this site and devotees are responding nicely.[/quote]
[p] with "filtering" i didnt mean by banning people, or telling them how to behave or what (not) to say. [i]filtering[/i] here happens by the variety of devotees with different opinions who manage to deal nicely with each other and dont repsond in kind to aggressive posts.[/p]
[p]the predominant mood of the whole forum isnt conducive to flaming wars and shouting matches, thats the type of [i]filtering[/i] i mean. (probably not a good term; [i]influencing[/i] would be better.)[/p]
[p]i also think its important not to blast or ban devotees who have problems controlling their anger sometimes. a community should be strong enough to tolerate a little abusive behavior at times, trying to influence members in question with common sense and better arguments. as long as theres a positive balance, things can work.[/p]

the question is... why doesnt happen here and it does in the 99.9 percent of forums?r
And I answer myself :)
cause the focus is on civilized behaviour and openness. Then it filters itself, so to say.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite]Is that Jahnavi or Jahnava?

One interesting thing is this: a commitment to free speech is not demonstrated by allowing things that you agree with, but by defending the right to speak of people that you disagree with.

I dont agree with what some people say, but yeah, Ill defend their right to say it (and my right to ignore or disagree with it), because if I wanted an atmosphere of intellectual intolerance and fanaticism, I would go to Afghanistan and join the Taliban. At least there you get to fire an AK-47. You havent been able to do that in ISKCON since the 80s.

I personally view Sampradaya Sun as the WWF of Vaisnava websites. Thats where you go for smackdown, and no I dont read it, although I did see something on there the other day when I googled my own name...[/quote]

This whole post had me splitting with laughter. WWF - so true. AK-47s are for pansies though. check out [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_carbine#SOPMOD_Block_II] this bad boy[/url]. If I ever start a militant breakaway group Im issuing these with SOPMOD kits.

on the process of censorship ...

my advice is to encourage a format where people dont post anonymously using a net name and that they should post an actual picture of themselves.

We should see your face - especially if you have something provocative to say. (some exceptions could be allowed though in rare circumstances)

I dont like the big brother watching format where someone who doesnt agree with you can delete your posts and then leave the ones up that make you look like an idiot.

Since censorship would also stifle the very cool mood thus far established here I say we just pound abusers of this facility into shape. Organic justice system.

btw - Im just kidding about the miliitant breakaway group remark in the post above - dont want that one quoted 10 years down the road.

[quote][cite] ekendra:[/cite]
my advice is to encourage a format where people dont post anonymously using a net name and that they should post an actual picture of themselves.
We should see your face - especially if you have something provocative to say. (some exceptions could be allowed though in rare circumstances)
[/quote]

It will discourage some people from posting, and not only those who have something provocative to say... So far I have seen that only very mature and confident devotees post their own pictures and their real names, and many of them are "high profile" ones, whom everyone knows and whose views are known to everyone too. Some of them have their own websites, and most of them are experienced preachers and can put their ideas into words with ease. Personally I do not have the courage (and probably maturity) to post under my real name when such sharks (in Vedic sense :) are around. I become self-conscious; and I dont mean conscious of my real self... unfortunately...

I use my name but Im not posting my picture

Ive nothing to hide if you want to find me me you can

But Id rather make it a little difficult for a nut case to accost me in the street.

My photo is on the internet but only where I allow it, only one of them actually says who I am.

Oh an Sampradaya Sun appears not to be a Ritvik site

in some forums I have posted in you post is deleted if it is not on topic

For me it is more important [i]what[/i] is said than [i]who[/i] says it. And as you see ekendra, many people could be ruled out of the scene by putting strenuous rules.
I find that keeping mild wording and non personal provocation mood, while allowing freedom of speech, will suffice to keep the forum like it is now: a pleasurable and interesting venue for sadhu sanga.

i am using my real picture now... :)

http://rvc.edu/news/
SUN OR RAHU?
From Danavir Goswami
posted October 29, 2005
Several devotees have asked for my opinion about a news site named Sampradaya Sun (SS) which has recently begun to broadcast ISKCON-related topics on the internet. The website is puzzling because, on one hand it strives to appear "ISKCON-friendly" by displaying colorful photos of Krishna, devotional announcements, preaching reports and editorials, etc. while on the other hand it propounds ritvik theory, Vaisnava aparadha and condemnation of ISKCON. I find it like using Krishna as bait for a wicked hook.

On the whole, I think SS seriously breeches Vaisnava etiquette and undermines the faith of ISKCON devotees in the process of bhakti as given by Srila Prabhupada.

oh my, that sounds like a hodge-podge mish-mash "hang the dog" statement!.[p]
Mixing "condemnation of ISKCON" "vaishnava aparadha", "ritvik theory", "undermining faith", "vaishnava etiquette", please, please, one at a time.[p]
Demonstrate, [b]where[/b] the ritvik theory is propounded at S.Sun as per the question at this thread. [p]
I am as [i]curious[/i] as you are.

He he Abhiram. laugh out loud as they say on the internet

i dont really understand why youre blasting poor old KC sena like this. its not the first post where several topics have been mixed together.

he quotes HH danavir maharajas statement, and in some points i do agree with the maharaja.

so-called ritvik-theory isnt promoted by the editors of the sun, but they offer its proponents a platform to propagate the theory.

you also find posts which, at least to me, appear openly offensive to ISKCON devotees, which is against vaisnava etiquette.

as i said before, im not proposing to ban or close the sun, but its not a site i would recommend for new or not very experienced devotees to read, because it might undermine their faith in ISKCON.

perhaps my opinion is antiquated and not very fashionable at this time, but i think that faith in ISKCON is a good thing for devotees to have. not blind faith, mind you, but as ekendra prabhu said, theres a way to voice criticism properly, and many articles in the sun dont do it that way.

first obviously you cant close or ban the Sun from the internet (althought if you could... :)
second, we do offer here a free speech platform for discussion of ritvik, in a proper way.
third, faith sustained by ignorance of the total facts w/o all angles and views, it is antiquated, does not work and makes good brains wonder about our self-criticism capacity.
and last, to say that you agree with Maharaj on the whole, while he is making "offenses" to the Sun, calling them ritviks, etc etc puts you on an "offensive" category.
so, who is entitled to criticize without making offenses? the top elite leaders only? Are we "all others" going to the offensors pit as soon as we disagree with the established power?
Not good. Not fair.

[quote]to say that you agree with Maharaj on the whole, while he is making "offenses" to the Sun, calling them ritviks ...[/quote]
[p]excuse me please, thats not what i said. i agreed with maharja on some points, and said that the suns editors were not promoting ritvik theory. i dont call them a "ritvik site," and therefore pledge innocent to the accusation of being an offender to the sun.[/p]
[p]... at least according to the reasons you mentioned. i realize ill have to read the suns articles and editorials again and find out if my criticism re. offenses and promotion of ritvik apasiddhanta in others posts is still justified. i didnt read the whole [i]sun[/i] in quite some time, and before making these statements i should check if they are still true.[/p]

[quote]who is entitled to criticize without making offenses?[/quote]
[p]everybody is, as long as its constructive, i.e., with the intention to improve things.[/p]
[p]i dont think that rocana prabhu and jahnava mataji have bad intentions towards SP and his movement. i do believe, though, that they are getting carried away by offenses others, ISKCON leaders, have committed against them, and by mistakes being made by the leadership. instead of criticizing these in a way that i would find acceptable, they are offering a platform for anybody with a grudge against ISKCON, never mind if they promote apasiddhanta or offend devotees (up-to-date verification of these claims still pending ...).[/p]
[p]a couple of years earlier i found the [i]sun[/i] very much acceptable and read it regularly; i guess ill do that again, reading it, i mean. ill see if i find it acceptable or not. if i change my mind ill let you know.[/p]

[quote]faith sustained by ignorance of the total facts w/o all angles and views, it is antiquated, does not work and makes good brains wonder about our self-criticism capacity.[/quote]
[p]im happy that i didnt have to learn all the details about the zonal-acarya system and other aberrations during the time when i joined, in 1982. the madras temple was run by sober, honest SP disciples who didnt agree with what was happening, but didnt preach to their new bhaktas about ISKCON politics. if they had, i dont know if i would have stayed.[/p]
[p]for newcomers to KC its more important to learn about the basic principles of SPs teachings than to try to understand things even older devotees have a hard time to digest. this can be abused, of course, by indoctrinating new devotees into one or the other camp. i would suggest to leave them alone with these things until theyre ready to take initiation. by then they should know whats going on to be able to make an informed decision.[/p]

why dont you invite again the SS people and let them defend themselves from Davavir'b4s maharaj accusations?

ive just been reading the sampradaya sun again, more or less in its entirety, and must admit that my previous statement, that many articles are openly offensive towards devotees, isnt justified.

rocana prabhu, a disciple of srila prabhupada, can argue with and about his godbrothers in a more direct way than i would consider appropriate for myself. there is a predominanat atmosphere of finding fault with ISKCONs present leadership, but then there are faults, and in this way the sun provides a counterpoint to other sites style of reporting, which tends to ignore all faults, prefering to deal with these behind closed doors only.

nevertheless i maintain my opinion that, for devotees new to KC, reading the sun probably isnt a helpful exercise. much better to chant for some time, follow the regs, and do some service, getting to understand what KC is all about. i dont see how, for someone whos understanding is on a purely theoretical level, to engage in this type of discussion will be any help. discussing all the faults that are there in ISKCON today, plus some that arent, such a new devotee will probably develop an attitude that wont allow him to appreciate even those things and devotees who are trying to follow SPs instructions and example - and believe it or not, these can still be found.

> faults, prefering to deal with these behind closed doors only

ISKCON must be one of the most open groups since so many like to bring every fault of its leaders into public. Most other groups, companies, etc. try to fix problems at home. Really intriguing.

My understanding is that you lose far much much more "shielding" the new devotees these days.
There is a balance between hiding as "protection", backfiring so many times and criticism as main theme bringing hate into focus.
You will never lose anything explaining the open truth to an intelligent person. Others, we are not interested in convincing anyway.

[p]true, i dont think shielding can effectively be done nowadays - unless youre in some remote community w/o internet access. and youre right, attempted shielding by the GBC has often been cause for many devotees to be even more fried than they would have been otherwise.[/p]

[p]id just not recommend the sun as a useful resource for new devotees; if they go there anyway, nothing much to do about it.[/p]

[p]but i dont agree with your definition of desirable devotees, that were only interested in the intelligent ones. real intelligence means understanding that we are part & parcel & eternal servant of krsna, and acting on that understanding. it doesnt necessarily include the ability to follow complicated arguments or [s]detect crooked[/s] sophisticated discussion techniques.[/p]

did not say "desirable" I did say "not interested to convince them" I am a sankirtan devotee, Prabhu, everyday with the "fallen". Certainly not hating "them"
intelligent means brahmana, that can and wants to understand, For others prasadam, kirtan and ceremonies will do.

taking your last two posts, we are only interested in educating brahmanas? anybody else, just take some prasadam and chant during arotik? what happened to varna-asrama?

we are loping the loop, now I cant understand were we where...ah yes, sampradaya sun is not a rtvik site. Great.

......the Sampradaya Sun is not a ritvik site,period.Maybe a new question should be posted , What is the Sampradaya Suns basic editorial spin ?

If i was to begin propounding this ritvik idea and i was not mentioning the "Parpampra" concept/Path would i be or not be a ritvik preacher??(to whatever degree)
so as far as i may understand this website propounds ritvik so is as good as ritvik.
Hare Krsna

Little men that hate all that is not within their narrow view like to call names without reason and proof, what can we do?
It is all driven by fear of challenging the truth, but the truth only can be obtained by doubting. Vivid examples are the mass Jehova witnesses etc.
Sadly, we are not free from this people in our ranks.
Avoid them like the plague.

...Rocana Prabhu will gladly post ANY submmision by ANY GBC member,so isnt it a pro-gbc-freindly site ?

I believe Rocana Prabhu is on record as not being a part of the "only Srila Prabhupada can give diksa" group. In fact, hes challenged the leaders of that group to debate. I think hes honestly trying to run a web site for all aspiring devotees.

Theres a lot of history within a group like ISKCON and unfortunately some of it isnt very attractive. imho, the Sampradaya Sun attempts to give voice to it all for better or worse.

There is Parpampra and there is this new idea about creating an end to it in, IE: suggesting Swami Maharaja will from some point only initiate. Right? If i invent another idea that i may, at the same time promote both...... and declare myself bi-partisan perhaps I should begin with, learning the Sidhanta. Right? Maybe this question should capture better perspective by re-stating the web-sites definitions, like what is a Guru/Disciple in the Hare Krsna, Vaisnava teachings? Because what i understand is if someone creates something new like a post-vapu ritvik "program" It is not(as far as this "puppy brain" knows!) "Parpampra" or Sidhanta or Gaudya Vaisnava but actually debases the whole system. Therefore what is the use of this propaganda on websites like, "The Sun"... or perhaps i could better put it "Rahu"

Are you saying the Sun is ritvik because it challenges some of the present ISKCON gurus activities, writings or preaching style?.
Do you compare this to offend the parampara system? Oh boy.
If you think your present guru is uttama adhikari, that is your call (and risk) but do not try to pass this as a rule for everybody and an "offense" for the dissenters.

pandu said: "Kirtanananda was seen as a pure devotee by many devotees, and devotees involved presumably saw themselves as protecting him. Apparently Radhanatha thought Kirtanananda was pure, I guess, and I even recall seeing a picture of him dancing with or near Kirtanananda just a few years ago and read about him and another swami visiting Tirtha in prison. One may therefore argue that some of Radhanathas behavior is inconsistent with dharma (I accidentally wrote "charma" which seems more like it), so are Radhanathas supporters acting according to dharma or against it? I think its a judgment call."

veda responded:
"I cant say anything about Radhanatha M., since there is contradictory information."

vedaji, doesnt that imply that one set of information may be absolutely false, created by the lying party to tarnish the name of the other individual? it isnt like its a case of mistaken understanding of the same set of events, both parties were present and one side is lying. it wouldnt even take much "logic" to figure out which side that is. to remain "unclear" on the matter, one must, at some point, willlfully put on the official ISKCON issue "our gurus can do no wrong" blinders. havent you? if kirtanananda didnt order the sulocan murder plan in december 1985, then who did? whomever you come up with will be a power player in the ISKCON that emerged in the aftermath of kirtananandas expulsion from ISKCON, and the US government ordered replacement by someone acceptable to them. that personality was was richard slavin, AKA radhanath swami, and he initiated janet renos neice as "his disciple". may he take all her karma for eternity. she was a government covert opertaive that slept her way to the post of "spokesperson for NVC" and she gave specific instructions to the devotees, in the prasdam hall at the sunday feast, that anyone knowing anything about child abuse should keep their mouths shut when police investigators were canvassaing NVC for child abuse testimonies. this was done with radhanaths knowledge and blessings, and while these matters are all easily verifiable, denial requires even less output of concern on the part of the individual.

<<< >>>

veda further said:

"different doesnt mean automatically offensive. The tone and purpose count. A common sense.
While preaching online Im far from being sheltered. 8)
For me a website (its editors, obviously) is offensive when it allows an offense against a Vaisnava to be published, what to speak of repeatedly."

which raises the question, "is it offensive even if its true?", because apparently both situations can and do exist, this being such a case in point. that is, if some thing were both true and offensive at the same time, must it be a topic that cannot be discussed?

Having been a contributor to sun sampradaya for several months i was surprised and dismayed at the inherent bias and small minded nature of the editing staff.I at first thought that rocanna das was attempting to be progressive in dealing with many neophyte contributors........however he allows blaspheme of many senior vaisnavas such as tamala krishna goswami to go undefended ....this is extremely offensive .The regular writers and contributors all seem intent on grindind down the efforts and preaching mission of AC Bhactivedanta swami Prabhupada.

...No,it is not a ritvik " site,here we go again painting everyone with the "rirvik " brush.Rocana will print most anything,if you dont like it,dont go there.

Dear devotees, the latest comments are an interesting read. Srisaci, prabhu, we understand that youre angry at Ray Lanthier, and obviously angry at the Sun for printing his personal criticisms of you. Interesting that you should scoot over here to complain, rather than face your challenger in the forum where the original dispute went public.

If youre asking whether Rocana (or I) would stand before Srila Prabhupada and read to him all of the letters written by all Sun submitters, the answer is no. We would be embarrassed to do so, because some of them are so philosophically off, filled with mundane sentiment, or poor logic. Would we stand before him and report that we have given a venue for free speech, even to those who are still grappling with the philosophy, or their own sentimental tendencies? Yes, we would, and we think he would approve, given the circumstances we are seeking to right in his preaching mission, which is so under attack. Would we stand before him and read the things weve personally written? Yes, we certainly would, and we assume that weve already done so, the minute we put finger to keyboard and wrote them.

Yuga Avatar das, your most recent articles have been rejected because they were so poorly written. Youve made tons of comments, unsubstantiated, without sastric reference, without corroboration, without even complete explanations. Like a pro-GBC/Guru parrot, you have sometimes simply responded to whatever anyone else said in complaint, calling them aparadhis, non-devotees, crows, etc. On several occasions, we have written back to you, pointing out problems in your articles that need to be addressed/corrected/clarified. A few times youve come back with re-writes, which weve published. But more recently, you have simply not responded. So why blame us when your work doesnt get published?

Jai Pariprashnena!

Jahnava
Sampradaya Sun

Many devotees are confused about this. If you are not ritvik and you are not Iskcon guru friendly then please explain in very simple terms what you are? Help to dissolve this confusion.

I personally am not a ritvik and I am not "ISKCON guru friendly" as you put it. Rather than get into a long drawn out discussion -- the best way I can explain my position is directing your attention to the following quote from a letter written by Srila Prabhupada. Here he discloses the real intentions of his guru maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur, as far as the future of Gaudiya Math was concerned. Of course his instructions were not followed and we all know the history from that point on. So read carefully this excerpt and then you should understand that the situation is not limited to only two possibilities (ritvik or appointed/elected gurus).

".......If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acarya he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acarya. His idea was acarya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mission. So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self effulgent acarya would be automatically selected."

You might then wonder how would newcomers be initiated. Understand that initiation of a disciple by a bona fide guru is not a mechanical thing. We understand from Sastra that by the mercy of Krishna one eventually finds his guru and then by the mercy of the guru the seed of bhakti is planted within the heart of the sincere disciple. It is nothing automatic or ecclesiastic. Neither should one be in a big rush. Srila Prabhupada himself did not take initiation until many years went by after first meeting his guru maharaja. So after Srila Prabhupada disappeared -- in his vani form he remains siksa guru for everyone and for all time -- but as far as diksha --- all in good time. Right?

If you want to understand more you can write to me personally at Swoop108@yahoo.com

Your servant,
Swarup Das

Since i have been personally addressed by jhanava das or dasi representing the sun sampradaya staff,i would like to say that obviously your editorial staff have a perverted bias against senior devotees in ISKCON.Your major contributors like ray lanthier ,george a smith,mahavidya das seem intent on criticism,innuendo and sad commentry followed by an inept lacking of devotional training and lastly aparadhas usually directed at those jewish bodied in the ISKCON ranks.

Though these celebrated bhaktas seem your best hope of some sort of devotional redemption,especially since you would not interested in my humble attempts to safeguard my gurus reputation from your guttermusic -offensive diatribe.At least one is initiated,so you have attracted some one who has indeed bothered to get into possibly srila Prabhupadas team.Try going on sankirtan and preaching to the non envious...it may help to see real sadhus.Your servant yuga avatar das

yuga_avatar_das, sorry, but what is your problem?

I read Sun regularly, and I contributed some texts. Your view is so negative.... I really wonder what is your problem?

If you dont like articles by some authors, just skip them. You dont have to read EVERYTHING!!! I mean, there is plenty of nectar on Sun. Didnt you notice? Are you able to see good in attempts of devotees at Sun? It shouldnt be too hard to see good.

You criticize some authors on Sun for being criticizers. Do you think that criticizing those, who you decide to label as criticizers, makes you a good person?
If you preach against criticizm, shouldnt at least you be able to live up to your own expectations?

BTW, I dont agree with decision of Sun editrial to ban your posts. Id be interested to read your opinions. I hope Sun editors will reconsider their decision, and post your texts. But, hey, if they dont, really, what is the problem?

ys gnd

Its not a matter of banning some peoples writing, though that may occur in some extreme cases. Ive had about as many articles rejected as published there. The ones that were rejected were given specific reasons. I did not always agree, but their position was justifiable in each case. Actually, the two most recent articles I submitted that were not published were presenting a rtvik viewpoint, so I would definitely say theyre not a pro-rtvik site even though they publish articles discussing it from various angles.

Actually what the sun sampradaya is involved in is similar to tabloid news paper industry.They allow sensationalism of sex offending,ritvik-apa sampradaya nonsense,american -canadian yatras failures,their local racist -anti semetic dogma in connection with several past and present members of the GBC including several of my siksa guru.Dressed up and slanted in your sad westernfreedom of speechrhetoric while imposing many times inconsistent and plain offensive editorial standards.I am sorry that when i see this give a dog a bad name and hang it,being used on ISKCON ,and its transcendental leadership ,many of whom i personally have known for thirty or so years,i dont jump for joy.When the sun staff disagree with our devotional moods, especially when they have allowed spiritual abuse and blasphemeof my guru to be published without any defensive articles being allowed on their behalf it is indeed cruel and perverted.I am sorry for the many implicated kanistha bhaktas who look for their sad nourishment on sun sampradaya .

I have to personally thank yuga_avatar_das and all like him for supporting, permitting, enforcing and perpetuating the "wonderful" state of ISKCON nowadays. If not were by devotees like you I will still be in the illusion that something can be done in this respect and would be still wasting my time.

Prabhu yuga.... everything is gonna be all right. Do not cry. The Sun demons will be slashed, all devotees contrary to your perception are going to be showed a lesson, your gurus are going to be avenged and you will sleep sound again soon in the lap of the witch ma-ya (what is not).

Thank you Swarup prabhu for taking the time to answer but I should have been more specific - my question was directed towards Jahnava dasi.

Hari Bhakta Prabhu:

I knew that (you were basically addressing your quesiton to Jahnava Dasi) but your question was one that comes up very often. Most of the time the logic being used is that if one is not a ritvik then that automatically makes him a supporter of the ISKCON guru process and vice versa. Its kind of like assuming that either a person is heterosexual or homosexual without accepting that there exists an alternative option which is simply being celibate. In fact --- I know of one godbrother who is so adamant about the ritvik conclusion that if you dont agree with him not only does he immediately put you in the category of ISKCON guru supporter -- but he goes on to demonize you as being a member of what he calls the molester messiah cult. Its for these reasons I wanted to take the opportunity to make it clear that the answer to your question wasnt a multiple choice (either A or B) proposition.

As far as Sampradaya Sun is concerned -- I only discovered that website six months ago and since then Ive become a regular visitor there and have even contributed a few articles. If one were to read their editorials it would be obvious what their stand is on ritvikism. No, they are not ritviks.

Hare Krishna. All glories to Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga.

-- Swarup Das

molester messiah cult - never heard of anything like that happening in ISKCON in the last 20 years or so. That person really loves to live in the past.

Btw, free speech is unknown in Vedic society. Any adharmic speech is stopped, esp. by brahmanas (curses) and ksatriyas (weapons).

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]molester messiah cult - never heard of anything like that happening in ISKCON in the last 20 years or so. That person really loves to live in the past.

Btw, free speech is unknown in Vedic society. Any adharmic speech is stopped, esp. by brahmanas (curses) and ksatriyas (weapons).[/quote]

Talk about living in the past... What contemporary brahmana has the power to stop anyone by curses? "Shut the F- up!" is about the best they can do, but I doubt thats a Vedic mantra. LOL.

[br/][br/]
Of course, everyone considers his own view to be dharma. The Sampradaya Sun provides a place for various views to be discussed among devotees so that we can see which withstand scrutiny. Those who are opposed obviously dont have much confidence in their propaganda.
[br/][br/]

In the matter of ksatriyas shutting people up, was that an endorsement of the folks who blew Sulocanas face off with a few bullets at close range?[br/][br/]

[img]http://lh4.ggpht.com/_yEpsW7PjOI8/ScNhC-z53GI/AAAAAAAAAeE/rb6JFs_1ymg/s800/image3121.jpg[/img]
[br/][br/]
http://www.igor-film.org/gb.html

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]
Btw, free speech is unknown in Vedic society. Any adharmic speech is stopped, esp. by brahmanas (curses) and ksatriyas (weapons).[/quote]

Yes, ISKCON surely is full of experts on vedic society..... And on adharmic speech too.

First make vedic society happen, and then you can dream of banning free speech. By preventing people to expose rascals you dont create vedic society. ISKCON tried that for last 30 years, but it didn work out that well.... Of course, you could argue, that ISKCON failed in developing vedic society only due to free speech..... Free speech, and of course ritviks.

Now GBC just has to demonize all free speech, and sue to death all ritviks... and then the vedic society will rise.....

I wasnt aware that free speech wasnt allowed in Vedic culture.

&quot;Veda: Btw, free speech is unknown in Vedic society. Any adharmic speech is stopped, esp. by brahmanas (curses) and ksatriyas (weapons).&quot;

I dont think so its true. When Lord Ramchandra returned to Ayodhya from exile, people expressed their doubts about chastity of Mother Sita. They even criticized Lord Rama for keeping mother Sita and eventually Lord Rama has to give up Sita. No one was ever cursed or beheaded for saying their opinion. Is this not an example of free speech from Vedic society?

Pandu P., curses still work today, although not as efficiently as before.

> everyone considers his own view to be dharma.

Therefore POVs dont count as evidence, due to well-known four errors of baddha jivas.

No endorsement. Sulocana wasnt doing anything adharmic. Kirtanananda was.

Girinayaka P., all this is a strawman. I speak about Vedic society in old times.

Todays free speech means just whatever one thinks regardless of dharma/g-s-s. Even in religious forums like Beliefnet prevails prajalpa in the form of sentiment, wishful thinking and attacks on religion. Hardly anyone is able to talk acc to g-s-s.

>people expressed their doubts about chastity

Yes, but they didnt claim Shes unchaste without proof. Thats quite a difference.
If itd be nowadays wed see huge tabloid headlines: "Sita unchaste!" Thats a lie, i.e. adharma.

Doubts are not adharma but a function of buddhi. (SB 3.26.30) Still, doubts are best revealed humbly and in private (pranipatena pariprasnena), to not disturb others. Not in a challenging mood, what to speak of a public insinuation. Going public should be only the last step. Nowadays its often the first.

Veda Prabhu,

How do you separate anyone from their point of view? If we take the Vedas as the authority, still various people may reach different conclusions. Sankaracarya presented a mayavadi conclusion very expertly; I wouldnt have wanted to debate against him. One can say to follow a guru, but there are many so-called gurus who are imperfect in their philosophical teachings or their personal conduct, and many people are mislead by false gurus. Also people do not all have the same information and some may have analyzed points in ways that others have not considered.

In the matter of Sulocana, Kirtanananda, et. al., many if not all the persons involved in the murder probably thought they were acting according to dharma. For one reason or another, Kirtanananda was seen as a pure devotee by many devotees, and devotees involved presumably saw themselves as protecting him. Apparently Radhanatha thought Kirtanananda was pure, I guess, and I even recall seeing a picture of him dancing with or near Kirtanananda just a few years ago and read about him and another swami visiting Tirtha in prison. One may therefore argue that some of Radhanathas behavior is inconsistent with dharma (I accidentally wrote "charma" which seems more like it), so are Radhanathas supporters acting according to dharma or against it? I think its a judgment call.

As Krishna said in Mahabharata, "It is difficult to grasp the highest understanding [of morality]. One ascertains it by reasoning. Now there are many people who simply claim morality is scripture. Though I dont oppose that view, scriptures do not give rules for every case." (MB 8.49.48-49)

Sampradaya Sun is a place where devotees can share information and reasoning and discuss how to apply sastric principles to our present situations to determine what is dharma in our various circumstances. In many ways its similar to this forum. The rtvik subject is a significant topic discussed here, for and against, yet I dont think anyone would call this a rtvik site, nor should they.

These various conclusions should be within the range of dharma though. Thats important. Sankaracarya, interestingly, didnt debate with Vaisnavas, at least Im not aware of it.
Also, at the end of his Sariraka bhasya he accepts difference between liberated jiva and isvara, i.e. doesnt contend sutras. This is pretty revealing.

I cant say anything about Radhanatha M., since there is contradictory information.

Although dharmasastras dont give rules for every case, one who understands the general principle wont be confused in most cases.

So I try to stay away from aparadhas. When Chakra became offensive, I stopped reading it.
For the same reason I dont feel attracted to Sun or other similar sites.

I read the left column with a mind to understand the challenges ISKCON faces so that I can help address them.
The column on the right is usually very spiritually inspiring.

I like your attitude Pandu Prabhu, please keep sharing such good thoughts.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]
So I try to stay away from aparadhas. When Chakra became offensive, I stopped reading it.
For the same reason I dont feel attracted to Sun or other similar sites.[/quote]

So, for you VEDA, anything quoting a different perspective is "offensive" and you stop reading it?. A nice way to protect the tender devotional creeper. But at some point reading others perspectives and points becomes necessary to form ones own opinion. If you self shelter like that, 'bfhow are you going to mature?

I am talking here about others point of view like ritvik, etc, not about plain ranting, insult or abuse by words.

Also, it is interesting how you label a website "offensive". Websites aren'b4t offensive, people can be. I stopped reading Dandavats for only one reason, It is the same boring rosy picture and "pat my back" stuff. But any gentleman'b4s wrong point of view of the philosophy interests me, as I am myself in the process of ascertaining the truth.

Mishraji, no way, different doesnt mean automatically offensive. The tone and purpose count. A common sense.
While preaching online Im far from being sheltered. 8)
For me a website (its editors, obviously) is offensive when it allows an offense against a Vaisnava to be published, what to speak of repeatedly. Many devotees took aparadha lightly and theyre not anymore around.
Everyone reads acc to ones tendencies. And I read these news sites sparsely anyway.

So what is the difference between offensive fault finding and being alert for the wrong .... protecting and defending the teachings and legacy of ones spiritual master? I can recall a few different instances when some leader(s) went astray and after the dust settled and the situation rectified Srila Prabhupada was angry with his disciples who stood by silently and let it go on without questioning and protesting the wrongful and unauthorized behavior and/or teaching that was going on in Prabhupadas name.

One other point I wish to make is that its not always WHAT we say but HOW we say it that makes all the difference. In other words -- it is to discern the sincerity (or lack thereof) of intention on the part of the writer or speaker that counts.

So, here we come to the crux of the matter: Being offensive is publishing or allow to publish an offense against a Vaishnava.
Now, what is an offense? And what is a Vaishnava? and under which circumstances a vaishnava aparadha occurs? Big words, dont you think?

If you analyze this simple questions it will turn that 99,9 of vaishnava aparadhas are dissensions, insults, quarrel and havoc among conditioned souls, striving for perfection, not elevated vaishnavas anyway, but expert at throwing each other the ashtra of mad elephant offense as to destroy the others reputation.
And that trickles down to the general devotees that are busy cataloguing who is offensive and who is just exposing the truth.

Does the word vaishnava applies to pure vaishnavas only? If not, is there a difference between offense to a pure devotee and a sadhaka immersed in the modes of nature?

Humility does not mean being gullible nor stupid. Many people thinks the Pope is a saint, but is he?
How much of this papism is in ISKCON today?

The one that we are sure that is a pure devotee w/o a doubt is Srila Prabhupada.

Is it not an offense changing his instructions? Is not an offense indirectly preaching that he is dead and we should carry on with new ideas and discard the old ones?
The real offenders to the pure devotee might be some of the ones we are paying obeisances to and many of the ones we are tossing in the offensive hellish pit might be those who really care.

Possible? Yes
Probable. Certainly
A fact? You judge.

several definitions of a Vaisnava:
http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/bhaktiyoga/vaisnavism.htm#7

Vaisnava aparadha:
http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/bhaktiyoga/bhaktiyoga-1.htm#2

> Does the word vaishnava applies to pure vaishnavas only?

No.

Btw, I also heard of pure kanistha, pure madhyama and pure uttama. Any references?

> If not, is there a difference between offense to a pure devotee and a sadhaka immersed in the modes of nature?

The strength of reaction. Plenty of examples in Vedic and GV history (Ramacandra Puri vs. Haridas Thakur, Ramacandra Khan vs. Sri Nityananda, etc. etc.).

The sole cause of the appearance of sraddha is the association of a devotee who has deep love for the narrations of Krsnas pastimes. When sraddha appears, one becomes a kanistha-adhikari. When one executes the limbs of sadhana-bhakti such as sravana, and when by the influence of sadhu-sanga one becomes free from anarthas and his sraddha becomes dense and transforms into nistha, one develops the madhyama- adhikara or intermediate qualification for suddha-bhakti. By the further pursuance of the activities of sadhana-bhakti such as sravanaand by the influence of associating with devotees who are more advanced than oneself, ones nistha intensifies and assumes the form of ruci. The sadhaka within whom such ruci has developed is called an uttama-adhikari. Only such an uttama-adhikari attains suddha-bhakti. This is the eternal process for the attainment of suddha-bhakti. But if during the execution of this gradual process of sadhana one keeps the bad association of those who are attached to sense pleasure or those attached to an impersonal conception of the absolute truth, or if one disrespects a pure devotee or commits any other offence to him, sraddha at the kanistha level as well as that at the madhyama level will dry up from its very root and the sadhaka will be unable to achieve suddha-bhakti. In such a condition the sadhaka is either entangled in chaya-bhakti-abhasa or, in the case of committing numerous offences, even glides down into pratibimba-bhakti-abhasa. Therefore, until one attains the stage of uttama-adhikara, the faithful and sincere sadhaka should remain extremely careful. Otherwise it will be very difficult to achieve suddha-bhakti which ultimately bears the fruit of prema.

Bhakti Tattva Viveka, 4, by BVT

Neophyte devotees (kanistha), intermediate devotees (madhyama), and advanced devotees (uttama) are the three kinds of persons who have turned their faces toward Lord Krsna. The neophytes who have turned their faces toward Lord Krsna have renounced the worship of the demigods and are engaged in the worship of Lord Krsna with the motive of fulfilling their own personal desires. However, these neophytes remain unaware of the true nature of themselves, Lord Krsna, and other devotees. Still, they are neither fools nor offenders. But they are interested in their own personal benefit. They are not not pure Vaisnavas (suddha-vaisnava). Rather, they are almost-Vaisnavas (vaisnava-praya). The intermeditae (madhayma) devotees have turned toward Lord Krsna, but it cannot be said that they are pure Vaisnavas (suddha-vaisnava), or very advanced and expert in devotional service. Still, the intermediate devotee is neutral and disinterested in material things, although he may not know much beyond the truth that Lord Krsna is not different from His holy name.

Sri Hari Nama Cintamani, 15, BVT

Purity of kanistha is in rejection of demigod worship, purity of madhyama is in avoiding bad association and serving pure devotees. Uttama bhakta is normally called suddha-bhakta (pure unalloyed devotee). Anyone on the path of pure bhakti can be called pure devotee:

Here is another quote that suggests that kanisthas have a tinge of pure devotion:

"Persons who are polluted by dvesa can never attain pure devotion . they do not possess even the slight tinge of pure devotion a kanistha - adhikari owns due to his deity worship"

Jaiva Dharma, 8 BVT

Pure kanistha, pure madyama and pure uttama may refer to 3 levels of uttama bhakta as in SB 11 and described in detail by Jiva Goswami.

Yes, SB 11.2.45-. Long and interesting purports. Thanks for refs.

Risking to offend someone by suggesting a truth is not an offense. Implication that by revelation of the truth the Vaisnava is actually not a Vaisnava is. It is the insinuations that are offensive, not the truth itself. Why would a Vaisnava be offended by truth? Anything will serve to help him to feel more humble, but your intent could be an offense (and could be a desire to help on contrary). I find some articles in SS to be far from trying to find a truth and are specifically only personal attacks, which is by definition is an offense. If you do not find it, we must be talking about two different SS.

Agreed, ccd.

> to remain "unclear" on the matter, one must, at some point, willlfully put on the official ISKCON issue "our gurus can do no wrong" blinders. havent you?

No and no. There are more positions than just outright pro- and outright anti-ISKCON.

> these matters are all easily verifiable

If one has access to gov files, sure. Any other way?

To tell the truth is not an offense. However, one has to be sure that its really a truth, i.e. do a thorough investigation. And one shouldnt be enthusiastic to tell others about someones (even non-Vaishnavas) faults. For some reason, this tendency seems to be prominent in and around ISKCON. I dont know of any organization with similar attitude.

Sun Tzu, author of the famous Art of War, lists 13 principles how to conquer an opponent without war which are widely used in modern society. See for yourself how many are used in ISKCON-related discourse.

1. Discredit everything good in opponents country. [modern media before war attacks]
2. Pull leaders and prominent members of leading society echelons of opponents country into criminality. [provocations]
3. Undermine their good name. At proper time expose them to a disdain of their countrymen. [character assassination, nowadays due to modern media more efficient than ever]
4. Get a cooperation of the most wicked and abominable persons. [criminals and modern media icons]
5. By all means disorganize the efficiency of opponents government. [or replace it by bureaucracies like EU]
6. Sow passions and disagreements among citizens of opponent state. [modern media and politics]
7. Pit youngsters against elders. [modern media and education system]
8. Ridicule traditions of your opponents. [modern media, current India is a great example]
9. By all means introduce a chaos into rear, logistics and armies of opponent. [sabotage, disinfo]
10. Weaken the will of opponents soldiers by sensuous songs and alcohol. [entertainment (bread and games), drugs]
11. Send prostitutes to complete the destructive work. [including STD]
12. Dont economize on promises and gifts to get information. Dont regret money because money so spent will return a hundred times. [huge amount of money goes into this agenda]
13. Infiltrate your spies everywhere. [cameras, satellites, etc.]

What pariprashnena(or you can say the people("Devotees") here on the forum) have done to me is, pushed me more into the ignorance of confusion. I thought it to be a website(as the name suggests) where all my questions would be answered but after going through this particular discussion I feel myself in a quagmire of doubt.

Thanks to those who answered my questions earlier.
Good bye, pariprashnena and team.

Hare Krishna.
Das

"Sun Tzu, author of the famous Art of War, lists 13 principles how to conquer an opponent without war which are widely used in modern society. See for yourself how many are used in ISKCON-related discourse.

1. Discredit everything good in opponents country. [modern media before war attacks]
2. Pull leaders and prominent members of leading society echelons of opponents country into criminality. [provocations]
3. Undermine their good name. At proper time expose them to a disdain of their countrymen. [character assassination, nowadays due to modern media more efficient than ever]
4. Get a cooperation of the most wicked and abominable persons. [criminals and modern media icons]
5. By all means disorganize the efficiency of opponents government. [or replace it by bureaucracies like EU]
6. Sow passions and disagreements among citizens of opponent state. [modern media and politics]
7. Pit youngsters against elders. [modern media and education system]
8. Ridicule traditions of your opponents. [modern media, current India is a great example]
9. By all means introduce a chaos into rear, logistics and armies of opponent. [sabotage, disinfo]
10. Weaken the will of opponents soldiers by sensuous songs and alcohol. [entertainment (bread and games), drugs]
11. Send prostitutes to complete the destructive work. [including STD]
12. Dont economize on promises and gifts to get information. Dont regret money because money so spent will return a hundred times. [huge amount of money goes into this agenda]
13. Infiltrate your spies everywhere. [cameras, satellites, etc.]"

???did you say "in ISKCON-related discourse" or did you mean "in ISKCON", or "by ISKCON"? these sound like the guidelines for establishing supremacy of your "guru" during the zonal acarya period.

raj108: Not sure what exactly made you confused. If you specify, Ill try to elaborate.

Janmastami P.: I purposely said "in ISKCON-related discourse". Dont personally remember ZA period but from what I know about it have no reason to disagree with you. Otoh, Ive identified ritvik strategy in points 1,2,3,5,6,8 and 9. These are all materialistic ways which should be absent among devotees.

VEDA prabhu (mataji?), I dont see where you get #9 from.

re: #9 -- Misinformation and preaching to the rear ranks of the devotees is a common tactic of the enemies of the movement. That includes -- taking quotes out of context, using misunderstanding to flame passions of resentment, suggestive implication that anyone who is a leader must be wrong, because of some other wrongs, making any mistake of leadership into a cause of failure instead of a pillar of success as Prabhupada wanted, etc. Is it right Veda Prabhu. (do you still wear glasses? have not seen you since 96:)

Kyros P.: Theres a recent example (2 weeks ago) from Prague. One lady, a rather fresh devotee, was talking on FB with another devotee who was first posing as if from ISKCON but then started preaching ritvikism to her, telling her how her guru is off, etc. She was pretty dismayed and confused, not coming into contact with ritviks before. This covert approach reminds me of JWs.

ccd: yep

[quote][cite] VEDA:Ive identified ritvik strategy in points 1,2,3,5,6,8 and 9. These are all materialistic ways which should be absent among devotees.[/quote]

Regarding these materialistic strategies, remember that most of them are taught, promoted and encouraged in the in the Manu-samhita and Mahabharata as bonafide and essential strategies in managing a kingdom, i.e. sowing dissension, sending spies, using gifts and bribery, ridiculing opponents. Note also that some of these strategies are used in spreading Krishna consciousness to preach against materialism; i.e discredit the opposition, undermine good name, ridicule leaders, gifts and bribery, ridicule traditions.

So in and of themselves the strategies are not bad. As always, its the motive behind the performer that counts.

Sure, motive counts. When used they must be solidly based on facts. Otherwise they wont work in a long run and will turn against us. Its like a walk on a blade.
I myself dont use ad hominem in the form of discrediting or ridiculing.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite] Theres a recent example (2 weeks ago) from Prague. One lady, a rather fresh devotee, was talking on FB with another devotee who was first posing as if from ISKCON but then started preaching ritvikism to her, telling her how her guru is off, etc. She was pretty dismayed and confused, not coming into contact with ritviks before. This covert approach reminds me of JWs.[/quote]
============

Veda, there are mistakes on all sides. Not hard to find mistakes. One should learn to see good in others. Devotee is like a bee.

Im sure, if you try a bit, you will be able to find good even in actions of those ISKCON devotees, who are being demonized by the label "ritvik".

BTW, your points from your list could be applied also to some actions of some GBCs. It is not that mistakes are copyright of ritviks, and GBC proponents are imune to making any mistakes.

Try to see good, become a bee, and your life will be a much happier one.

Giri-nayaka P., the talk is not about mistakes but patterns, tactics. Wolf in sheeps clothes mentioned above being just one of them.
I can see good in devotees who accepted ritvikism out of frustration and lack of information, i.e. became its victims. But I have no respect whatsoever for those running their agendas based on envy, hate and greed. The effect of aparadha is full-fledged in their case. Unfortunately, they dont seem to believe in it. Thats maya apahrta jnana.
Being like a bee doesnt apply in case of apasiddhanta and adharma in general. They have to be opposed by all means, otherwise one gets implicated.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Giri-nayaka P., the talk is not about mistakes but patterns, tactics. Wolf in sheeps clothes mentioned above being just one of them.
I can see good in devotees who accepted ritvikism out of frustration and lack of information, i.e. became its victims. But I have no respect whatsoever for those running their agendas based on envy, hate and greed. The effect of aparadha is full-fledged in their case. Unfortunately, they dont seem to believe in it. Thats maya apahrta jnana.
Being like a bee doesnt apply in case of apasiddhanta and adharma in general. They have to be opposed by all means, otherwise one gets implicated.[/quote]
==============

ok, ok.... I can see that you are full of determination to expose all those who are Wolf in sheeps clothes , their "patterns, tactics".... You say you have no respect whatsoever for those running their agendas based on envy, hate and greed, those full-fledged aparadhis. Although they dont consider themselves to be so. But, as you say, thats "maya apahrta jnana"... As you say, "Being like a bee doesnt apply in case of apasiddhanta and adharma in general." They have to be opposed by all means, I see what you mean.

Well, it seems you are from Czech yatra. Why bothering with ritviks at all, they are few and confused anyway. BUT, your own GBCs group could be well approached with your determined approach. You would have plenty of work to do cleaning the Prague, for example, including Czech GBC representative. Ritviks are far and weak, why are you even bothering. Do the cleaning where it is really needed - in front of your own door. By demonizing ritviks left and right, the GBC courtyard will not get any cleaner.

Sorry, but I will not accept any biased fanatical statements from anybody, who is demanding purity from some, but is actually screaming out of his self inflicted repressed environment. You are well conditioned by GBC system (and especially the Czech version of it, which is a kind of weirdness in itself), and all your anti-ritvik ranting may as well be just result of your own feeling of repression within GBC system. Are you sure you are right? Are you sure you are not misled? I mean its not like you never made mistake before, is it?

Why not take a bit of distance from GBC system, and their numerous, numerous nonsense. Be fair judge. Put GBCs and ritviks side by side, and judge them from a bit of distance. You may be surprised about who is more into "apasiddhanta and adharma in general", "running their agendas based on envy, hate and greed", and who needs to be "opposed by all means, otherwise one gets implicated".

Veda: "I can see good in devotees who accepted ritvikism out of frustration and lack of information, i.e. became its victims."

Why say "victims?" I came to ISKCON totally fired-up based on what I read in Srila Prabhupadas books, in other words knowing the philosophy but not the mess that was made of it after Nov. 77. Then I saw how badly things went under the modern gurus rule (I moved to New Vrindavana in 1997 thinking it a "farm community" since it said so in the temple listing in the back of B.g.) and I left the movement feeling horrible and confused. After a while I embraced Srila Prabhupadas teachings again and tried a second time. Then I accepted an ISKCON guru and it quickly went downhill real bad and stayed that way for years. When I eventually looked at the rtvik side and saw that the evidence supports their view, I felt happier about Krishna consciousness than I had since I first stepped into a temple. Now Im practically certain Srila Prabhupada arranged to continue being the diksa guru for ISKCON, and Im doing very well considering my situation.

At least in my personal history, trusting the GBC has always hurt my Krishna consciousness, and trusting Srila Prabhupada has always helped it. So I dont see how I can be called a victim of rtvikism; more like a somewhat rescued victim of the GBC.

Veda: >>>One lady, a rather fresh devotee, was talking on FB with another devotee who was first posing as if from ISKCON>>>>

Veda Prabhu, Why do you think that devotee mentioned in this example does not belong to ISKCON. What makes us part of ISKCON, what is your definition of ISKCON?
Thank you.

Giri-nayaka P., youre shifting the debate. If you want to talk about GBC deviations, itd belong to another thread. However, I dont know how this fits the purpose of Pariprashnena. Seems like Pariprashnena recently went the same political way as many other devotee forums, despite its hopeful statement to avoid politics.

Lets differentiate between philosophical deviations from the norm and less than ideal practice of the norm. Otherwise well get to the old false argument Church is corrupt therefore religion is off.

Youve overlooked what I said above: There are more positions than just outright pro- and outright anti-ISKCON. Still, you label me without knowing me. Funny.

Pandu P., your approach is not philosophically-sastric but I take what I like. Then anything goes. Do you really trust Srila Prabhupada as you say? In his books, lectures or conversations theres no ritvikism. If thats not good enough, what can I do.

Alchemical: There may be more definitions of ISKCON depending on time, place and circumstances. In this case, the official rejection of post-samadhi ritvik doctrine in 1999 GBC resolution defines everyone related to it as out of ISKCON, the organization established by Srila Prabhupada.

I think for a lot of people it comes down to this: they know that Srila Prabhupada is never going to fall down, so they have faith in him. Any other living person they cannot be so sure about, so they are attracted to putting their faith principally in Srila Prabhupada. Present-day ISKCONs official stance on the role of Srila Prabhupada and the ritvik idea are very close. The idea is to "put Prabhupada in the center".

Turning it into an -ism introduces other dynamics.

Veda,

Thanks for summing your opinion of my approach. [/sarcasm] Its a nice trick when you cant defeat the arguments Ive made. You say that "I take what I like," but early in this discussion you admitted that the July 9 letter and Srila Prabhupadas Last Will both support the rtvik view as you were dismissing them.

"In his books, lectures or conversations theres no ritvikism." He appears to have made the decision in early 1977. At that point it was mostly conversations. There is evidence from statements much earlier in ISKCONs years that Srila Prabhupada optimistically hoped for a successor, but he never indicated that hed found one. He said he wanted one moon, not many stars, for example. Just as you say theres no record of him propounding rtvikism (if we conveniently disregard the July 9 letter and other evidence), there is also no record of him naming a successor. There is also no record of him describing the transition of rtviks to zonal acaryas would take place, and no record of him explaining how multiple diksa gurus would function under the authority of the GBC. Whatever one believes Srila Prabhupada intended, all this is missing.

That "missing" seems important. There is a surprising lack of tapes available from 1977. I have heard many devotees reference to tapes that have been locked away or destroyed, and heard from Srila Prabhupadas disciples saying numbers as high as 150 tapes are missing. We know for certain that at least some conversations on the rtvik subject are missing from recordings. For example, in the July 7 conversation they end up with 9 rtviks by the end, but the July 9 leter lists 11 names. Therefore there must have been another conversation in the interim whereby two more rtviks were named, but there is no recording of that available.

Beyond that, Satsvarupas _Lilamrta_ mentions a brahmacari fanning Srila Prabhupada during a conversation on July 7. (Im taking that date from memory now, but I think its correct.) Gauridas Prabhu was reportedly serving in that capacity at that time, and he says he was in fact the one described. He says he heard Srila Prabhupada say that he wanted to remain the diksa guru operating through rtviks, or something to that effect (my paraphrasing here). Similarly Bhaktiviabhava Puri Maharaj is quoted as saying that Srila Prabhupada told him, "I have not selected. Only rtviks to act in my place now."

Also, in the matter of rtvik supporters being "out of ISKCON," the 1999 resolution uses the term "in good standing." There are many ways a devotee may not be in good standing but not be considered "out of ISKCON." At what point would you say I became "out of ISKCON?" When I first looked at the rtvik issue with an open mind, when I began arguing on the rtvik side for the sake of finding out the best opposing arguments, or when I became relatively convinced to a certain degree? You may also note that the 1999 resolutions established an Executive Committee addressing this and applying certain steps of discipline and rectification. Are you on this committee? Was the devotee you referred to the subject of any action by this committee? If not, then you are out of place in describing him as out of ISKCON. Similarly I have not been notified of any action against me by this committee, and I continue to serve to my top capacity at my local ISKCON temple. So who do you think you are to say that someone is out of ISKCON based on your own whims? Perhaps youd like to call the local temple president and have him take away my service and ban me from the property.

Funny though that the same 1999 resolutions ban the overglorification of ISKCON gurus, but these rules are ignored. For example, last night I happened to see the Facebook fan page for Jayapataka Swami Acaryapada and the web page for Hrdayananda Swami www.acaryadev.com (whos "Understanding Srila Prabhupada Correctly" video blatantly criticizes Srila Prabhupada, but thats OK), both in violation of ISKCON Law 6.4.8.2. So I guess its OK to violate ISKCON law if one is a voted-in guru but not to favor Srila Prabhupada.

Actually that overglorification of gurus seems like a tangent at first, but in fact its important. It is an example of the power struggle between the GBC and the diksa gurus, which exists because Srila Prabhupada never explained how multiple gurus would share authority with the GBC or in fact never explained how multiple diksa gurus would function in ISKCON at all. Perhaps thats because it is not what he intended.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Giri-nayaka P., youre shifting the debate. If you want to talk about GBC deviations, itd belong to another thread. However, I dont know how this fits the purpose of Pariprashnena. Seems like Pariprashnena recently went the same political way as many other devotee forums, despite its hopeful statement to avoid politics.
.[/quote]
Could you please be more specific where you see our terms of service violated and we'b4ll do the needful.

[quote][cite] admin:[/cite][quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Giri-nayaka P., youre shifting the debate. If you want to talk about GBC deviations, itd belong to another thread. However, I dont know how this fits the purpose of Pariprashnena. Seems like Pariprashnena recently went the same political way as many other devotee forums, despite its hopeful statement to avoid politics.
.[/quote]
Could you please be more specific where you see our terms of service violated and we'b4ll do the needful.[/quote]

This is more like a debate than honest questioning. If nothing else each person could question to explore and understand the perspective of the others. Also, you could try advocating each others positions, rather than simply trying to impose your own. No-one is qualify to refute the position of another until they can present it to their opponents satisfaction - and that doesnt mean a sarcastic strawman, which is making a too frequent appearance here.

As my contribution:

The issue of how to structure a society based on Vedic principles within an existing society is not a cut-and-dried, black-and-white issue. Anything involving multiple people is always going to be complex, because people are individuals. Any society has a shifting center of balance as competing interests and needs vie for ascendancy. This is natural.

The disciplic succession, established by Krishna Himself, is not immune to the environmental factors of the material world. This is why in Bhagavad-gita He states that over time it is lost, and He must return to re-establish it.

To demonstrate some of the complexity of the situation, which is too often rendered down into two simple, opposing ideological positions, I would like to tell of one aspect.

Srila B.R. Sridhara is claimed as both a proponent of ritvikism and also as a proponent of the Zonal Acarya system (even "its architect") by different people.

In terms of claming him as a ritvik proponent, his words (quoted in the book "Sermons of the Guardian of Devotion") are cited:

"With this I transfer these beads; from now he [Govinda Maharaja] will do so on my behalf as ritvik. The ritvik system is already involved both here and in the foreign land. The ritvik is the representative, so if you want to take [initiation] from me and you take from his hand then it will be as well and as good as taking from me. In the maha mandal [earth] Sargar Maharaja [formerly Akshayananda Swami] and many others, they are also ritviks of Swami Maharaja [Srila Prabhupada] and also myself and they may do so. But in this Math he, Govinda Maharaja will be the representative. Henceforth he will represent me in this affair beginning from todays function.

Now I shall go from here, [depart the material world] he will do the necessary on my behalf. He will give Hari Nama diksa, sanyasa and everything."

As a counter point to this, the transcripts of the conversations between Srila Sridhara Maharaja and the ISKCON leaders who went to see him after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance (which can be found in Srila B.A. Paramadvaiti Swamis book "The Search for Purity") paint a fuller picture.

Srila Sridhara Maharaja tells how after the disappearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, all the disciples met to decide what to do. One disciple made an impassioned speech that no-one was fit to occupy the post of acarya after the disappearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta. He advocated some kind of ritvik system. After he finished speaking everyone looked to Srila Sridhara Maharaja, who said: "I agree with everything that you have said. I will add only one more thing: We are not Sikhs."

With this he was referring to the elevation of Guru Nanak to the position occupied by Jesus Christ in Christianity and Mohammed in Islam. It represents a transformation of the essential dynamic of transmission of Vedic knowledge and culture from guru to disciple.

There are faults in everything, and no matter which way you look at it there will be some discrepancy. But the clear message was: "Tradition, for all thy fault and our inability to do it perfectly, I still love thee. We have to uphold the tradition as best we can, because that is what we pass on to the next generation, as well as the knowledge that travels through this tradition."

When the ISKCON leaders approached Srila Sridhara Maharaja for advice after the disappearance of Srila Prabhupada, he attempted to advise them based on his experience of the post-Prabhupada Gaudiya Math.

Some of his advice was used to justify the Zonal Acarya System, and some of it, which could have ameliorated the excesses of that system, was ignored and suppressed.

For example, he suggested, after some discussion, that rather than having the pranam mantra of a particular successor guru sung in kirtan in a temple, the non-sectarian "om ajnana" mantra could be used, followed by Srila Prabhuapdas pranam mantra. In this way the disciples of all successor gurus could think of their guru when they sung the mantra, and no-one would be overly discriminated against or for.

He also recommended that successor gurus should not occupy Srila Prabhupadas seat in his temples, but should always sit on a lower seat. They should open their own temples where they could demonstrate in practice their spiritual potency, and receive an appropriate reciprocal recognition and status. In this way unqualified persons riding on Srila Prabhupadas reputation and running the goodwill and momentum of ISKCON into the ground could be avoided.

This advice, and other advice like it, was discarded, and chosen parts of his advice were presented and implemented, and devotees forbidden to speak to him directly.

We are all aware of the problems of Zonal Acarya excess. By creating a system that embues more power into a single person that they are qualified to manage, the whole thing becomes perverted and a parody of real spirituality.

On the other hand, the excess of Ritvikism is the removal of a personal relationship between a teacher and a student, with the attendant accountability that comes from that.

Either one of these represents an unhealthy swing to an extreme.
Srila Sridharas advice and his approach, based on his experience, indicates a mature understanding of the situation - its fluid. There are competing concerns that need to be balanced, and there needs to be healthy discussion and consideration of those points and how to address them, rather than a recourse to pre-cooked absolute ideologies and religious fundamentalism. We are talking about complex situations involving individuals and the transition from one social structure to another.

The present idea in ISKCON is closer to Srila Sridharas original advice than the Zonal Acarya system. Position should be matched to qualification, and the system should support that. Practically speaking the ability to ascend to a higher position than warranted based on Srila Prabhupadas reputation has been severely curtailed as the good will and reputation of the organisation have been spent into the ground by previous persons.

There are still problems. The strength of the guru-disciple relationship and tradition of parampara is in the relationship of accountability between the guru and disciple. Flying around initiating disciples and then not taking care of them is like having children all over the place and not maintaining or raising them.

It "Ritvikism" an answer to this?

It depends on what you mean by "Ritvikism". If you mean a particular ideology or political rallying point, then the answer is no. Too often the ideas of ritvikism have been subordinate to a political struggle for power and influence within ISKCON.

If on the other hand you mean the idea that each initiating guru should think of himself as the humble servant of Srila Prabhupada and doing it on his behalf, then I think this will go a long way to helping. If you mean a system where we have support structures in place to help each initiated disciple to grow and progress in Krishna Consciousness after initiation, then sure.

However, I dont think that we need to call it "Ritvikism vs Zonal Acarya" - it seems to me to be just a case of "I am the doer and the enjoyer" vs "I am the humble servant and this is my service - let me do it properly". Either of those mentalities can manifest in any political system.

So again, I think the situation is more complex than a simple battle between "good and evil", "democracy and communism", "zonal acarya-ism and ritvikism". We need to drop the -isms and discuss the actual issues more, and search for real solutions which involve a reformation of internal consciousness, and not the top-down application of yet another political system or adoption of another ideological label as the silver bullet.

My 10c.

Why should anyone have to go outside of ISKCON for an answer for how to obey Srila Prabhupadas order for initiations? Satsvarupa, representing the GBC, asked him directly on May 28, 1977. Obviously the matter wasnt clear from his prior conversations, books, letters, etc., or there would have been no need to ask. So he was asked, but unfortunately the tape has been determined by the GBCs own professional analyst to be unreliable, showing signs of possible tampering. I dont know why they wont provide the original tape for forensics, but it suggests they have something to hide. In any case it does not matter because the subject of the May 28 conversation is undisputed -- how to conduct initiations after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance. The other fact that is indisputable is that the July 9 letter begins by referencing that conversation, and this can only mean that it is an official written promulgation answering the same question. I dont see how it can be any other way, and so far no one has even offered a challenge to this reasoning. Hare Krishna.

Pandu Prabhu, you said:

>>>>as high as 150 tapes are missing

>>>>>>>Similarly Bhaktiviabhava Puri Maharaj is quoted as saying that Srila Prabhupada told him, "I have not selected. Only rtviks to act in my place now."

>>>>>Satsvarupa, representing the GBC, asked him directly on May 28, 1977. Obviously the matter wasnt clear from his prior conversations, books, letters, etc., or there would have been no need to ask. So he was asked, but unfortunately the tape has been determined by the GBCs own professional analyst to be unreliable, showing signs of possible tampering. I dont know why they wont provide the original tape for forensics, but it suggests they have something to hide. In any case it does not matter because the subject of the May 28 conversation is undisputed -- how to conduct initiations after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance. The other fact that is indisputable is that the July 9 letter begins by referencing that conversation, and this can only mean that it is an official written promulgation answering the same question>>>>>>>>

Pandu Prabhu, Even if all this is true, and present Guru system is a lie, because it is not what Srila Prabhupada ordered. We need to understand that this lie has been spoken for last 30 years. 30 years is a long time and if a lie is spoken for 30 years, it becomes the truth. Who is going to listen now. Implementing Ritvik system in ISKCON means all the Gurus are out of their profession and that too when they are either in old age or approaching old age. This proposal can not sound sweet to their ears. Second, all Gurus and their disciples are nicely situated in this established system. Though there are some exceptions, some disciples who are not happy but majority of disciples are accustomed, used to this system.

If we will be having this discussion in 1977, it will make more sense. But now it is already 2009. Implementing ritvik system now will be disturbing the whole balance of society. First Ritviks do not have the required support of devotees, and even somehow they manage to gain the support of devotees, there are thousands of devotees who will have to give up their relationships with their gurus, revoke their diksha status. It can not be done practically. What has been done in last 30 years, it can not be undone now.

So what is the point in arguing about Ritvik system when we all know that it will never be implemented in present ISKCON.

Eventually, purity will be the deciding factor for the future. If Gurus will not follow the principles of purity, they will not be able to last for long just because they have the support of shastras. And same goes with the Ritviks, if they lift their spiritual standard rather than criticizing others, become the shining bright sun of purity, there is no reason why they will not be able to attract followers.

Veda Prabhu: >>>> Otoh, Ive identified ritvik strategy in points 1,2,3,5,6,8 and 9.>>>>>>

But if someone thinks because he is a Guru or leader, so he has got the license to condemn others and call all sort of bad names to others (whether Ritviks or followers of Narayana Maharaja),then they should not be complaining if others do the same to them.

Pandu P., I didnt notice any solid arguments of yours. No g-s-s, no practice in established sampradayas, only two docs meant to overthrow all the previous standard Vaishnava teachings of SP.

> There is evidence from statements much earlier in ISKCONs years that Srila Prabhupada optimistically hoped for a successor,

One of those much earlier statements: "Maybe by 1975, all of my disciples will be allowed to initiate and increase the numbers of the generations. That is my program." (Letter to Hamsaduta, LA Jan 3, 1969)

> one moon, not many stars

This simply means that one pure devotee is better than hundreds of neophytes. BSST also said it.

> There is also no record of him describing the transition of rtviks to zonal acaryas would take place, and no record of him explaining how multiple diksa gurus would function under the authority of the GBC. Whatever one believes Srila Prabhupada intended, all this is missing.

My understanding is that due to his ill health and inexperience of his disciples with legal matters the successorship issue was very much neglected.

Gauridass testimony was challenged. You can look up details.

Talk about missing tapes and their possible content is useless unless theyre found. Before that its only a conspiration theory.

> Similarly Bhaktiviabhava Puri Maharaj is quoted as saying that Srila Prabhupada told him, "I have not selected. Only rtviks to act in my place now."

"Now" = before tirobhava. So this "now" specifies "henceforward".

One who is not in "good standing" cant fulfil any official functions in ISKCON.
Membership in an organization means to accept its philosophy. If someone doesnt want that, why should he remain in? If you think ISKCON deviated from a proper path (ritvikism), why do you support it by your service? To me its a contradiction. Or?

> Similarly I have not been notified of any action against me by this committee

Then contact them to get their position in writing.

Overglorification of ISKCON gurus was greatly reduced in the last 20 years. Itd require some kind of police to search for guru fans all around the net and discipline them. Hope you see the infeasibility of this idea.

> Could you please be more specific where you see our terms of service violated and we'b4ll do the needful.

1. Keep the posts short.
2. Do not use the forum for endless debates, just post your contribution and let
everyone use it (or not).

These two are violated in "is sampradaya sun a ritvik site?", "If one accepts Srila Prabhupad as his guru, is there a need of intiation(ritvik)", "The "I am a Prabhupada disciple" card" threads.

Besides, your earlier requests are also not followed:

admin
Aug 25th 2007

Please use this forum as a humble question and answer facility (pariprashnena). No censorship on (related) themes or comments.

But, if we see someone using the forum as a way to advance or impose own agenda on others we will act. Same goes for personal evaluations that cover no purpose.

Thank you.

admin
Oct 10th 2007

Tulsiananda and govindas108, you are repeatedly hammering the same theme at any opportunity. If you have a cause to advance we recommend you open your own website and make your theme available to the world. Otherwise Pariprashnena becomes a political means, not a questions and answer medium. Your questions aimed at advancing your position will be deleted. Please stick to the rules and stop making this site your "preaching" field.

admin
Dec 27th 2007

Some users insist on "asking" questions to provoke a response to advance their mission whatever it may be.
When admins delete them they get upset and accuse us of narrow minded, biased or God knows what else.
Please understand we have delimited this site for questions that you do not know the answer in the spirit of pariprashnena.
Any effort to advance a mission is not condemned but has its own place on the net.
Hope this helps further clarify what is stated in the terms of service.

Alchemical: Let them follow Prabhupada who didnt condemn anyone but his deviant disciples, materialistic scientists, mayavadis and apasiddhantas. I dont recall him calling bad names anyone.

Veda,
[br/][br/]
Its obvious that Im wasting my time talking with you about this. Whats the point of repeating the same arguments again when youre obvoiusly set on keeping your predetermined conclusion. I suppose youd like to sit on the guru throne yourself one day.
[br/][br/]
[img]http://lh3.ggpht.com/_yEpsW7PjOI8/ScNlxW8yZSI/AAAAAAAABPY/s0f06dbLvkA/s800/image3361.jpg[/img]
[br/][br/]
As for why I continue to serve in ISKCON... [br/][br/]
Its funny, I was criticized by ISKCON devotees for failing to act as though the gurus have no fault even though a serious fault was apparent; and Im also criticized for trying to work with them to glorify Krishna despite any faults or disagreements. I guess I wont be accepted as a real devotee until I forget Srila Prabhupada and become a totally blind follower of a GBC-authorized guru.[br/][br/]
[img]http://lh3.ggpht.com/_yEpsW7PjOI8/ScNlzwpMtnI/AAAAAAAABPw/zlWgL2E1D0Y/s800/image4181.jpg[/img]
[br/][br/]Lol.

It is funny how tradition and sastra just does not stick to the western mindset (and combined with video mobile phones look funny as well). One can only smile on overemphasis of diksa -- Prabhupada did not care about diksa process so much - as we discovered... He stressed instructions of Krsna and following it. Why are we so much hung up on diksa? Are we some quasi-disciples of Sridhara Maharaja of Navadvipa (as Sitapati pr. suggests in a way). In any case - be one an impersonalist-like-ritvikvadi or thinking oneself to be a big-acharya, whatever pitfalls one gets into, there is a way out - devotee association and discussion of Bhagavatam and Gita together. Try it and you will give up taste for Sampredicament Sin and its spinoffs.[p]

So stop this obsession and resulting looped discussion with diksa roles and duties, it is not central. Bhakti process is, so avoid offenses to both camps and just associate with devotees without reservations and without projecting your own misunderstandings on others.[p]

Real enemies are:[p]

[img]http://www.himalayanacademy.com/taka/past/2004/July/July_28_2004/DSCN0010_1.jpg[/img][p]

[img]http://www.himalayanacademy.com/taka/past/2004/September/September_20_2004/01-bodhinatha-9-20.jpg[/img] [p]

[img]http://www.karunamayi.org/News/images/yantra%20puja%20Sep25_Pic07.JPG[/img] [p]

Pandu P.,

> Whats the point of repeating the same arguments again when youre obvoiusly set on keeping your predetermined conclusion.

np, please repeat any gss-based arguments anytime for our purification.

> I suppose youd like to sit on the guru throne yourself one day.

You suppose wrongly. But if you think to be a guru means sitting on a throne then itd explain why you didnt provide any solid pramana so far.

> I was criticized by ISKCON devotees for failing to act as though the gurus have no fault even though a serious fault was apparent;

Theres a procedure for such cases in ISKCON Laws.

> and Im also criticized for trying to work with them to glorify Krishna despite any faults or disagreements.

By whom?

> I guess I wont be accepted as a real devotee until I forget Srila Prabhupada

Says who? Forgetting Srila Prabhupada is not an option. We cant repay him what he gave us.

> and become a totally blind follower of a GBC-authorized guru.

No. Blind followers fall into a ditch (SB 7.5.31, Mundaka Upanisad 1.2.8).

Why arguing against strawmen? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

And if you want to see an example of tu quoque fallacy, look at the last text of Giri-nayaka P. in this thread.

ccd: Agreed. Im suprised that Pariprashnena remained free from politics for almost two years. Would be nice to keep it as such for the benefit of all devotees.

As ccd so eloquently defined some extremes with "impersonalist-like-ritvikvadi" and "thinking oneself to be a big-acharya", in reality most devotees will fit somewhere in distance from these extremes. Extremes are for extremists.

Attempting to be Srila Prabhupadas followers, at least we should be able to see unity among different ISKCON groups. Kanistha separatism, although widespread in ISKCON groups from top to bottom, will not bring much good. Actually separatism is in itself a symptom of group of kanisthas, and as separatism increases, cooperation and preaching decreases. Kanisthas dont preach well. Individuals may try to present themselves as very advanced, holding big yajnas, vyasa-pujas, gorgeous deity worship, seminars on whatever, and so on, but when you put them in group with purpose to actually do something outside of kanistha box, you can see where they really are. And this stands for all, from small bhakta to big GBC/guru/sannyasi/whatever.

So respect is required, and understanding. Good time for unity in diversity. Cooperation is a good goal.
-

And since this thread is directed on Sampradaya Sun, let me add that it really shouldnt be too hard to appreciate endeavours of devotees, who maintain it. It is no easy job, and anyone who ever tried to maintain vaisnava web site based on open communication and free speech, will know what Im talking about. And even those who dont know what Im talking about, could easily show their open-mindedness through some appreciation, that shouldnt be too hard..

Clearly Sampradaya Sun is not a ritvik site, and those who cannot see this, may need to broaden their views a bit, or maybe just personally grow up a bit more. Same stands for those, who are not able to appreciate the impact that Sampradaya Sun has on development of ISKCON. Anybody with half a vision will be able to see importance of sites like Sampradaya Sun, and appreciate their place in ISKCON development, and general development of vaisnavism worldwide. So, dont blame it on Sampradaya Sun, blame it on your own fanatism, narrow-mindedness and lack of vision.

Veda,

Your g-s-s talk is a facade. The first thing is that the GBC wanted to cancel an order by the guru, and they did this by hiding it and other evidence from most of his disciples for several years. (When did YOU first see a transcript of the May 28 concersation and the July 9 letter?) They still use fear and intimidation to keep devotees from looking at the issue. It took me more than ten years to overcome the GBC intimidation and consider the evidence myself. Just yesterday one devotee told me that in some yatras he could be "reprimanded or excommunicated" for talking to me. And as Ibe previously mentioned, in a community meeting last year my GBC declared that rtviks are enemies of ISKCON. Thats works well for keeping cult leaders in control of the flock.

Then you look to sastra to cancel the gurus order and offer three quotes. Two have practically no relevence at all; I dont even know why they were offered. The other was a quote of an anecdote with a very slight resemblabce to the situation, where were given very little information to speculate on a supposed rule and then decide how to apply it. So your sastra claim is nothing.

As for sadhus, you can pick your sadhus, but what kind of sadhu supports such nonsense?

I almost forgot to address your quote from yesterday:
"Maybe by 1975, all of my disciples will be allowed to initiate and increase the numbers of the generations. That is my program." (Letter to Hamsaduta, LA Jan 3, 1969)

A quote beginning with "Maybe (sometime in the distant future)" isnt very good evidence from the start but still we can have a look. Considering the "Law of Disciplic Succession" saying it contradicts etiquette for a disciple to initiate in the presence of his guru, its notable that he didnt say something like "Maybe by 1975 Ill be dead and all of my disciples will automatically inherit my diksa power." I dont know of any plans of Srila Prabhupada to die by 1975 nor of any plans to allow his disciples to initiate their own disciples while he was visible walking among us (which would be contrary to the abovementioned Law), so he must have been talking about rtviks. Moreover, in retrospect we see that in 1975 Srila Prabhupada actually had his disciples initiating as rtviks acting on his behalf. Your speculation on what he meant is contradicted by what he did, so your quote does nothing to support your view beyond fooling devotees who are afraid to give it some thought.

> "Maybe by 1975, all of my disciples will be allowed to initiate and increase the numbers of the generations. That is my program." (Letter to Hamsaduta, LA Jan 3, 1969)

Already by 1972 quite a few were initiating. In 1977 the list was officially approved, but not all disciples would do it. Prabhupada pointed out a few cases where he wanted his disciples to initiative as regular gurus, their own disciples during his lifetime. Just as some BSST disciples were instructed to initiate their disciples during lifetime of the guru. It would be interesting to make a study on who out of current leaders were directly initiated by Prabhupada. Prabhupada did not care even to clarify why sometimes he would perform yajna and sometimes he would get some of his disciples do it. All clearly to deemphasis the Gaudiya maths obsession on diksa as being so critical. He would on contrary combine diksa and vivaha yajnas:-) a lot!

For years he managed in such a way that not a single devotee would complain about who performed his diksa, who chanted on his beads. He would take even disciples who were initiated outside of the sampradaya to be his disciples, like Mahavishnu Goswami (indian).

We love Prabhupada because he was much smarter then the rest of his godbrothers. On the other hand, we got infected by Gaudiya maths dilemmas after his departure, mainly because some devotees were imitating Prabhupada (for lack of other example I guess). He did not appoint an acharya and thus we are still one solid group (if only splinter groups and rtviks were a bit more respectful:o) Who is interested in politics around this issue? Prabhupada was not and is still displeased when it is made into a politician issue. We have second generation gurus, and soon will have third generation gurus initiating as regular gurus.

When a friend of mine went to Bangalore and asked how a regular devotee should take initiation, he was told, just approach any ISKCON guru, take initiation and then reject him as a guru, you will be officially Prabhupada disciples -- he realized that this is exact definition of Mayavadi. This is how Prabhupada defined Mayavadi - on who uses a guru for a purpose and then gives him up. In any case why do politics?

"Why is there this politics? This is not good. If politics come, then the preaching will be stopped. That is the difficulty. As soon as politics come, everthing is spoiled. In the Gaudiya Matha the politics is still going on. My Guru Maharja left in 1936, and now it is 1976, so after 40 years the litigation is still going on. Do not come to this." (Letter 30 September, 1975)

> Your g-s-s talk is a facade.

And I say your letters are even greater facade.

Really, I thought more of you.

> offer three quotes.

These quotes were about historical cases rejecting ritvikism or related practices. If you didnt (want to) understand them, its not my problem.

You could find many quotes about "disciple of my disciple", "granddisciple", etc. in Vedabase but you dont want. You prefer two docs which escaped cult leaders evidence elimination.

> what kind of sadhu supports such nonsense?

Parampara nonsense is supported by Sri Krsna, Sripad Ramanuja, Sripad Visnusvami, Sripad Nimbarka, and in our line by everyone from Sri Brahma up to Srila Prabhupada whom some strange people try to label as deviant claiming he allegedly rejected this age-old system for reasons unknown.

Pre-samadhi ritvik is not the subject of our talk. Its not a deviation.

ccd:

Bangalore is a good example. Madhu Pandit really illustrates the fruits of the tree of ritvikism for everyone to see. http://www.madhubandit.info/

> (Letter 30 September, 1975)

Yes, ritvikism serves well to stop preaching and focus on politics. Good old divide and conquer.

CCD:"When a friend of mine went to Bangalore and asked how a regular devotee should take initiation, he was told, just approach any ISKCON guru, take initiation and then reject him as a guru, you will be officially Prabhupada disciples -- he realized that this is exact definition of Mayavadi. This is how Prabhupada defined Mayavadi - on who uses a guru for a purpose and then gives him up."

I wont believe this story before listening to what other party has to say about it. You have not provided any evidence in support of this story. Anyone can say whatever they like but that does not mean it is necessarily true.

Veda: "Bangalore is a good example. Madhu Pandit really illustrates the fruits of the tree of ritvikism for everyone to see. http://www.madhubandit.info/"

I checked this link provided by you, it is full of blasphamy and offensive (third class) language. This website doesnot provide any evidence for what they claim. I am surprised that Veda Prabhu finds Sampradaya Sun to be offensive but is happily associated with this type of website. You mentioned 1 to 13 categories of warfare, so this behaviour falls into which category, I leave it for you to decide.

This is a website of devotees frustrated by actions of Madhu Pandit who expelled them, nonritviks, from the temple. So its hard to expect any pleasant feelings on their side. It was just an example, not that Im happily associated with it. Its all work of Kali, divide and conquer. That cant be denied.

"When a friend of mine went to Bangalore and asked how a regular devotee should take initiation, he was told, just approach any ISKCON guru, take initiation and then reject him as a guru, you will be officially Prabhupada disciples -- he realized that this is exact definition of Mayavadi. This is how Prabhupada defined Mayavadi - on who uses a guru for a purpose and then gives him up."

> I wont believe this story before listening to what other party has to say about it. You have not provided any evidence in support of this story. Anyone can say whatever they like but that does not mean it is necessarily true.

Interesting that that devotee was into being ritvik but completely gave up this idea after this conversation. I know of quite a few devotees who put this philosophy in practice, like our friend Pandu, who incidentaly was before joining a mayavadi. So the parts of the puzzle come together rather well for me. Of course it is possible that it is a reaction to too much worship of a guru in ISKCON, and I do not reject this whiplash suggestion, as the case could be with Madhupadits crew. BTW I also find the Madhubandits.info blog unattractive and offensive, but the fact it exists is something to consider (I guess they stopped when the case went up to the higher court).

CCD: "Interesting that that devotee was into being ritvik but completely gave up this idea after this conversation."
In my opinion, it was a wise decision. It does not make any sense to take initiation and then reject Guru. Even Mayavadis dont do that.(Take initiation and then reject Guru).

I was trying to find initiation process in Ritvik temple(Bangalore), this is what I have discovered:

In the meantime the devotees in Bangalore are being initiated by Srila Prabhupada personally. When the Temple President considers a devotee to be ready for initiation he writes a letter recommending the devotee to Srila Prabhupada. Then the devotee goes before Srila Prabhupada and prays: '93Dear Srila Prabhupada currently your ritvik representatives are not doing their service so I am asking you to please accept me as your disciple and inspire me to select a spiritual name.'94 So in this way the ISKCON Bangalore devotees are being initiated by Srila Prabhupada.

ISKCON Bangalore plans to increase the number of devotees waiting for formal initiation from Srila Prabhupada to one thousand. Then every year they will go to the Mayapur festival and have a grand kirtan and request the GBC to appoint a ritvik representative of Srila Prabhupada as Srila Prabhupada outlines in his July 9th, 1977 letter so the devotees can be formally initiated.

Source: http://krishna.org/iskcon-accepts-one-ritvik-temple-and-irm-disintegrates/

And I remember,few months ago(I read on Sampradaya Sun), before court awarded temple to Bangalore devotees, Madhu Pandit wrote a peace proposal to GBC to surrender Bangalore temple and all its braches, which was eventually refused.

That proposal is still there on SS:
http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/02-09/editorials4063.htm

Again few days agon on SS, I read that ISKCON Mumbai is finding it hard to continue feeding school children so they might discontinue that program soon. I find it really funny that on one side they criticize Bangalores midday meal programme calling it philanthrophy and on the other hand they imitate their program as well by trying to implement it in ISKCON.

Veda: "Its all work of Kali, divide and conquer. That cant be denied."
Division is not always bad. Sometimes it can be very good as well. If it is taken in the spirit of competition it is very healthy but if it is taken in the spirit of envy it can be very disastrous. There is very fine line between competition and enviousness.

It reminds me of a story. I apologise that I do not know the source of this story and neither I know if it is true or false. I just heard it from my elders. But the story is beautiful. Story is:

Once Narada Muni while travelling came to planet earth. Wandering on planet earth, he came across an old lady who happened to be a hunchback. Narada feeling very compassionate towards the lady said, "O mother, please come here, I am very pleased and I will straighten your back. Old lady replied,"Maharaja, if you are really pleased, do not straighten my back, rather give me a different boon. Preplexed Narada asked, "What other boon you want?" Rather than fixing my back, the lady who lives next door to me(my neighbour), please make her a hunchback, replied the old lady.

So this is enviousness. Competition is healthy, it does not ask bad for others. When someone is filled with spirit of competition, he wants his progress but does not want bad for others. On contrary when someone is filled with spirit of enviousness, he does not want his progress, he only wishes bad for others. So division is not necessarily bad, it depends in which spirit you take it. If Bangalore devotees have opened 15 new preaching centres in last 5 years, GBCs can have a competition with them that they have opened 15 so we shall open 20 in next 5 years. This spirit will benefit the society.

But if they take it in an envious spirit, decide that our back is broken so we shall break their back as well by court cases, it will do no good to society. And this is what they have been doing for last 10 years. These devotees, the amount of money and time, energy what they have wasted in courts for last 10 years, they could have another temple by now and both parties could have their own temple.

Ritvik is already used as a swear word in ISKCON, so I dont think so I need to say anything about them, but in the actions of our GBCs in handling this case, I do not see any signs of great wisdom either. By fighting with Ritviks in court over a property, they have proved only one thing that they are ordinary envious human beings, not the ones whom we shall beg to give us Krsna Prema. Knowledge is judged by the behaviour not by giving beautiful lecture only.

> So in this way the ISKCON Bangalore devotees are being initiated by Srila Prabhupada.

If this wouldnt be offensive, it could be a joke. Hows that different from Ekalavya, the self-proclaimed sisya of Drona?

> If Bangalore devotees have opened 15 new preaching centres in last 5 years, GBCs can have a competition with them that they have opened 15 so we shall open 20 in next 5 years. This spirit will benefit the society.

Spreading apasampradaya wont benefit anyone. Just a wishful thinking.

> By fighting with Ritviks in court over a property, they have proved only one thing that they are ordinary envious human beings, not the ones whom we shall beg to give us Krsna Prema.

So since Srila Prabhupada fought over Juhu temple property with Mr. Nair, he is also an ordinary envious human being...? Hope you see the problem with your argument.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> So in this way the ISKCON Bangalore devotees are being initiated by Srila Prabhupada.

If this wouldnt be offensive, it could be a joke. Hows that different from Ekalavya, the self-proclaimed sisya of Drona?[/quote]

It is different because Srila Prabhupada specified his criteria for accepting disciples, established a system whereby he would continue to accept disciples vowing to follow his rules, and ordered his disciples to give initiation on his behalf. He set up this system of managing initiations, and in his Will said the management should not change. He never said it should or must stop upon his disappearance; on the contrary, when asked about how initiations should be done after his disappearance he immediately said by "officiating acarya," a.k.a. "rtvik acarya," and clarified the matter with an letter sent to all of ISKCONs leaders. These rtvik acaryas decided to play as guru acaryas without qualification or authorization and the results were and continue to be a disaster.

To hear of devotees begging Srila Prabhupadas mercy to overcome the obstacles placed by his disobedient disciples is very touching.

The major difference here is that Drona had rejected Ekalavya as his disciple. Srila Prabhupada has not rejected us, but rather given a system for accepting us as disciples. The current problem is not aspiring devotees ambitious to become great by becoming disciples; it is ambitious disciples wanting to be honored as guru and putting down anyone who gets in their way.

The anti-rtviks say that becoming Srila Prabhupadas disciple now is impersonal because it denies him the option of rejecting; but they are denying him the option of accepting, the actual option he has already chosen.
Srila Prabhupada was not a guru in the rejecting mood. He accepted disciples whom he met once and had little interest, and he accepted disciples whom he never met at all. He accepted anyone who agreed to surrender whether they were serious or not. Now there are many serious devotees who want a bona fide guru and have their hearts set upon Srila Prabhupada. Anti-rtviks are so determined to make sure aspiring devotees are rejected by Srila Prabhupada that they totally disregard his actual mood, desire, and order.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> So in this way the ISKCON Bangalore devotees are being initiated by Srila Prabhupada.
[Br/][Br/]
If this wouldnt be offensive, it could be a joke. Hows that different from Ekalavya, the self-proclaimed sisya of Drona?[/quote]
[Br/][Br/]
It is different because Srila Prabhupada specified his criteria for accepting disciples, established a system whereby he would continue to accept disciples vowing to follow his rules, and ordered his disciples to give initiation on his behalf. He set up this system of managing initiations, and in his Will said the management should not change. He never said it should or must stop upon his disappearance; on the contrary, when asked about how initiations should be done after his disappearance he immediately said by "officiating acarya," a.k.a. "rtvik acarya," and clarified the matter with an letter sent to all of ISKCONs leaders. These rtvik acaryas decided to play as guru acaryas without qualification or authorization and the results were and continue to be a disaster.
[Br/][Br/]
To hear of devotees begging Srila Prabhupadas mercy to overcome the obstacles placed by his disobedient disciples is very touching.
[Br/][Br/]
The major difference here is that Drona had rejected Ekalavya as his disciple. Srila Prabhupada has not rejected us, but rather given a system for accepting us as disciples. The current problem is not aspiring devotees ambitious to become great by becoming disciples; it is ambitious disciples wanting to be honored as guru and putting down anyone who gets in their way.
[Br/][Br/]
The anti-rtviks say that becoming Srila Prabhupadas disciple now is impersonal because it denies him the option of rejecting; but they are denying him the option of accepting, the actual option he has already chosen.
Srila Prabhupada was not a guru in the rejecting mood. He accepted disciples whom he met once and had little interest, and he accepted disciples whom he never met at all. He accepted anyone who agreed to surrender whether they were serious or not. Now there are many serious devotees who want a bona fide guru and have their hearts set upon Srila Prabhupada. Anti-rtviks are so determined to make sure aspiring devotees are rejected by Srila Prabhupada that they totally disregard his actual mood, desire, and order.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> By fighting with Ritviks in court over a property, they have proved only one thing that they are ordinary envious human beings, not the ones whom we shall beg to give us Krsna Prema.

So since Srila Prabhupada fought over Juhu temple property with Mr. Nair, he is also an ordinary envious human being...? Hope you see the problem with your argument.[/quote]

Veda, you allow yourself to equate ISKCON devotees, who are labeled by GBC as "ritviks", with Mr. Nair. Not to comment on your other remarks.... Sorry, but you seem to have some serious issues. This thread is about Sampradaya Sun, and it was explained again and again that Sampradaya Sun is NOT ritvik site. But you keep ranting and ranting, promoting your disturbing fanatical politics, demonizing everyone who is not willing to buy your distorted views. Why are you promoting all this politics here on Pariprashnena? This subject matter is clearly out of your league. It is just your ego babbling on and on. I know, you are not used to be defeated, you are such a great scholar, very learned in the field of vedas. You always have answer to everything. Now, please, just forget all the nonsense you think you know, and just happily chant Hare Krsna in association of devotees. You will be fine eventually, youll see.

Mr. Nair was specifically blamed by Prabhupada for taking Krsnas property to be a mundane property and for taking it away from ISKCON. I think Veda is trying to make a parallel point. Howmuch Madhupandit does out of his own self-centered desire to control property, I guess to that degree he is like yourman Nair of the Bombay saga for the Juhu Temple. Is there an argument that SS is Rtvik site? There were articles on it that completely defeated all Rtvik notions, but there is a slant towards it on the site.

Anyone who is trying to take away something from Krsna rightful representatives of ISKCON is like Mr. Nair, to a degree. You just can not offer something to Krsna and then decide that you will want it for yourself. I am not sure MP is doing it, but it appears this way to a degree and by the fact that he went in court to take legal control of the property.

I think you guys forget that it was Madhupandit who took GBC to court...

Anyway - the description of the process of initiation in Bangalor temple sounds like a scam. It sounds like they try to take Prabhupada out of Samadhi and put him in a coma, if you get my drift.

This thread was committed to question: "is sampradaya sun a ritvik site?" And it was answered, that it is not.

Why not make another, separate thread for ritvik debate? We all know it is an endless debate, and everybody is 108% convinced in their own point of view.....

Could it be that those who hate Sampradaya Sun, intentionally continue to spam this thread with ritvik issue debate, just to raise a lot of dust and make it unpalatable reading for all who come to get a clear answer to question "is sampradaya sun a ritvik site?".

It is not fair to Sampradaya Sun, to connect all this garbage to thread about their identity, and make subconscious impression that Sampradaya Sun is connected to ritvik issue. Question regarding Sampradaya Sun was answered, and this endless discussion is unrelated to the topic. So, please, stop dumping all this ritvik vs. anti-ritvik political garbage into thread dealing with identity of Sampradaya Sun web site. This is my humble request. Just open another topic, "Are Ritviks Demons?" or "Are Ritviks Bandits?" or "Are Ritviks Mayavadis?" or "Are Ritviks even Devotees?" or "Are Ritviks even Human?" or whatever makes your heart sing, and we can go on there, chewing on ritvik bone forever and ever, increasing the ocean of ritvik vs. anti-ritvik nectar.

I hope I made myself clear in this request. Thank you for understanding.

Pandu P., youre evading the point I comment on - the sitting before SP murti, pronouncing some formula, choosing ones name and calling oneself a SP disciple.

> He never said it should or must stop upon his disappearance; on the contrary, when asked about how initiations should be done after his disappearance he immediately said by "officiating acarya," a.k.a. "rtvik acarya," and clarified the matter with an letter sent to all of ISKCONs leaders.

He never elaborated on your proposition either. And itd deserve a super elaboration, not just one letter, due to going against the age-old system. So I opt for his overhearing and refering to pre-tirobhava instead of making him a deviant.

> Srila Prabhupada has not rejected us

But he rejected some deviant disciples. Nitai das being one of them.

Therefore I asked you to ask him and Krsna about their opinion. Let us know please.

> The anti-rtviks say that becoming Srila Prabhupadas disciple now is impersonal because it denies him the option of rejecting; but they are denying him the option of accepting, the actual option he has already chosen.

The ritvikism brings more problems than that. Like: How the actual personal training goes? Questions/answers, personal instructions, chastisement? In a dream? Siksa - yes, diksa - no (the example of Sitadevi).
One may say that many of later disciples never got these either but theyre still an inherent part of discipleship. Those SP disciples only suffered from logistic problem, being many and SP one, like most current disciples of world-travelling gurus who get personal association of their guru only once in a while.

> it is ambitious disciples wanting to be honored as guru and putting down anyone who gets in their way.

I dont think anyone here votes for ahankara.

Giri-nayaka P.:

> Veda, you allow yourself to equate ISKCON devotees, who are labeled by GBC as "ritviks", with Mr. Nair.

The point was fighting over property = envious. Its besides the point with whom.

Mr. Nair only wanted material profit but ritviks want to subvert the whole parampara system, an extreme himsa to baddha jivas.

I didnt bring ritvikism here, I just reply to posts as brief as possible, sticking to gss. You may label me any way you want, I dont mind. But you cant prove me wrong by pramana otherwise youd already did it.

> You always have answer to everything.

Hehe, far from that. I just try to serve others by finding refs. Facts instead of personal likes or dislikes (manoratha). It takes a lot of time sometimes. Im not a computer.

This exchange is not at all my favorite type. But I cant avoid to show the nonsensical
nature of deviation by evidence and logic.

Im all for locking this thread if the site software allows it.

This question is being closed by general request.