Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

Yeap. The funny thing is that some devotees joined just a month or so too late and did not get initiation from Prabhupada. "Second class" we say:-)

In reality of course being Prabhupadas DISCIPLE is something much more then just being initiated by him. The word historically is a christian concept for the inner circle of christs followers, usually twelve only. So we take six Goswamis to be disciples of Lord Caitanya.

One has to work hard to remain on the books as the "disciple". Most I know do not qualify, I do not quality, but I aspire to be called "Prabhupadas disciple" even I was not initiated by him. I think this aspiration to become a disciple is more then saying "here I am a disciple". Being a disciple is not automatic result of an initiation, Prabhupada would not consider all his godbrothers to be disciples of BSST, so...

There are people that somehow even cheat on having being initiated by Srila Prabhupada to partake of the adoration, honor etc that ensues.

This is normal, Kali-yuga stuff, the cheaters and the cheated.

The only cure is to respect everyone in the same level and extra respect and admiration when it is really due, that means when you experience the devotional qualities of a "Prabhupada man" by yourself.

In other words stop oneself being a "little Prabhu" as explained by Wilhem Reich in his book "Little men".

Cause little men are the reason why the rascals enjoy power.

Actually one who is krishna conscious is able to encourage and inspire us ,hence wet-her young or older devotee we should be non envious enough to see and appreciate everyones special devotional qualities.Even his disciples are repositories of wonderful devotional qualities.So we will remain servants of srila prabhupadas direct disciples ,and their disciples carrying on our common spiritual heritage and unique mood of serving sri chaitanya mahaprabhus sankirtan flavour.Actually the so called rascals enjoy power sanctioned by their unique karma or because krishna is allowing and blessing.Because we have not realised that we are indeed the problem many times,and especially our contaminated vision.jaya radhe.

Either way individual karma or the arrangement of krishna both need the supreme personality of godheads blessing to acheive anything...even to cheat you indeed need to be blessed by the supreme cheater krishna.

Heres an interesting little anecdote. Over the past few months Ive been in some debates with one of Srila Prabhupadas disciples. He became angry when I did not find his arguments convincing, and last week he posted two messages to the "Prabhupada Disciples" PAMHO conference. (The members of this conference can post directly to it, but since Im not a "Prabhupada Disciple" anything I send there has to go through the moderator.) The messages he posted to the conference had the subject lines of "Immature Bhakta Pandu" and "Bhakta Pandu Hypocrite," and the content was deragatory and misrepresentative. I obtained permission from the moderator to write something in my defense, and I drafted a short letter with the subject "cooperation instead of conflict," in which I was proposing a means for reducing Vaisnava aparadha and promoting cooperation for the sake of Srila Prabhupadas mission. The moderator rejected my letter, saying it would induce "unhealthy discussion." Go figure.

Heres my letter:
http://oppositerule.govindapeacefarm.com/?p=684

If anyone is a member of the conference, they have my permission to post it there, since I cannot.

If anyone says you can still be a disciple of Srila Prabhupada by following his instructions, even though you cant be his diksa disciple, go ahead and try ot become a member of the Prabhupada Disciples PAMHO conference. Youll see how much they really think youre his disciple.

Hare Krishna.

Just let it go and let Krsna handle it.

Or if you cant do that, then talk to your guru or aspiring guru, or another one of Prabhupadas immediate disciples that you know well and see if they can do something about it. If not...

Just continue on with what youre doing and let Krsna handle it.

my advice:
Stop wasting your time with people heavily tainted with the lower modes of nature.
They are no better than any other religious narrow minded fanatics even if they call themselves '93vaishnavas'94, dress as ones or hold important posts.
Its always like this, after the departure of the acarya, the spiritual movement becomes a religion, there is not a single example showing otherwise. ISKCON and ritviks are the same coin, fighting for power supremacy represented by intiation '93rights'94, something never ever even discussed by the pure devotees.
Has ocurred to you that you can preach independently? People who does so find tremendous relief and their efforts are worth and not blocked again and again. Find devotees that have your same experiences and get real sadhu sanga, away from mundane quarreling.

Im a Prabhupada disciple and youre not, nahnny nahnny nah nah ... too bad for you .... you lost out ... you missed the boat ... poor poor pitiful you ..... so envy me if you want ... its alright ... I would if I were you.

[quote][cite] Swarup Das:[/cite]Im a Prabhupada disciple and youre not, nahnny nahnny nah nah ... too bad for you .... you lost out ... you missed the boat ... poor poor pitiful you ..... so envy me if you want ... its alright ... I would if I were you.[/quote]

:)))))) ROTFL

Its about time someone said it.

Among my children (3 sons, a daughter, a (sannyasi) stepson and a stepdaughter), all were either babies or not born yet when Srila Prabhupada left in 1977. All of them, their spouses, as well as their children (my grandkids) are more advanced Vaisnavas than I ever was nor could ever hope to be in this lifetime.

When I see the enthusiasm, sincerity and advancement of all those who have become devotees over the past 32 years I am very happy and in each instance the legacy of Srila Prabhupada is further enhanced and validated.

For one of my godbrothers or godsisters to "play the Prabhupada disciple card" with the motivated intention of receiving some sort of profit, adoration and/or distinction --- that is about as low as a person can go in the name of God and Guru. Shame on them.

My dear Pandu das ,i have just read your comments and your well intentioned but purely sentimental letter which encorporates sadly the latest changes to have been propounded by those wishing to corrupt Srila Rupa goswami Prabhupadas devotional legacy.My freind and siksa guru tamala krishna goswami actually is one of those who signed that letter ,which the ritviks use to justify their humble attempts to turn iskcon into a christian facsimilie.However he was very adamant that srila prabhupada never intended to change the accepted vaisnava process and invent another mayavadi distortion .Co-operation has always been built on the solid foundations of sadhu and sastra,it would have been far more effective had you approached these senior vaisnavas with sastric quotes and glorification .What this mayavadi - ritvik inspired group fails to get is that there is infact no ritvik archarya in our line,except in the furtile minds of those envious devotees wanting to change our AC Bhaktivedanta swami srila prabhupadas legacy to satisfy their motive to become his direct disciples or to minimise those who were personally more empowered by their individual close sevice of srila prabhupada himself. .Hence the apparent resultant anger and your subsequent criticism ,was naturally seen by his disciples as relevant and indeed worthy.Why not just accept the fact that we are disciples of his disciples?As Madva Archarya comments ...the farther is always the farther...and the son is always the son.Not as the ritviks contend that the son can become also the farther.

Thanks for your input, Yuga Avatar Prabhu. What Tamal Krishna Goswami thought isnt a concern to me. Srila Prabhupada signed the letter based on his own understanding of what it meant, not Tamals.

"...invent another mayavadi distortion." Whats the use of throwing the "mayavadi" word around without showing how the word fits the situation?

"...there is infact no ritvik archarya in our line,except in the furtile minds of those envious devotees..."

Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when youre no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.
Prabhupada: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acaryas.
Tamala Krsna: Is that called rtvik-acarya?
Prabhupada: Rtvik, yes.
>>> Ref. VedaBase => GBC Meets with Srila Prabhupada -- May 28, 1977, Vrndavana

It would seem from this quote that "...there is infact no ritvik archarya in our line," because Srila Prabhupadas order was disregarded because envious and proud devotees thought they new better than their guru and wanted to replace him. The zonal acarya era is historical proof, and we only got to where we are today by going through that. My motive to become his direct disciple is to not be mislead by others with materially ambitious motives. There is no one since Srila Prabhupada in whom I have full confidence. These modern "gurus" would rather have me quit the Hare Krishna movement than see me chanting Hare Krishna without faith in them, otherwise they would not label rtvik supporters as "enemies of ISKCON" and spend so much time and money losing lawsuits against temples where Srila Prabhupadas July 9 order is accepted.

"...minimise those who were personally more empowered by their individual close sevice of srila prabhupada himself."
Are you saying that serving his bodily form is more important than serving his mission? Massaging his body is more important than distributing his books? I dont think serving his form is unimportant, not at all, but it doesnt make them better than devotees who are dedicated to serving his mission. This also reminds me of how Srila Prabhupada ordered that he wanted all of his disciples to come to Vrindavana in late-1977, but the disciples who got that order rejected it and kept the less "important" disciples away. Who "empowered" them to reject Srila Prabhupadas order?

"Why not just accept the fact that we are disciples of his disciples?"
If that is your faith, then fine for you. Personally I dont have full faith in any of his disciples. Why must I be forced to accept their version of things when I see Srila Prabhupadas order saying something else?

I dont want to turn this into another rtvik debate. I dont have time for it. My point here was that they say were Srila Prabhupadas disciples by following his orders, but when they want to distinguish themselves they say were not his disciples. There can be a devotee initiated by Srila Prabhupada who hasnt chanted 16 rounds a day since decades ago, but if he shows up at a rathayatra theyll sit him at the "Prabhupadas Disciples Table," but those who do as much as they can to follow his instructions but came after 1977 cant go there.

I was debating with a devotee about the rtvik subject, and he gave me the line, "You can be Prabhupadas disciple by following his instructions," and then a few weeks later he criticized me on the Prabhupadas Disciples PAMHO conference where I was unable to respond because of not being his initiated disciple. Im sick of seeing devotees making arguments that only mean what they say when they want them to support their version, but later when the same argument is used to show them their hypocrisy, its not accepted. How am I supposed to be inspired by hypocrisy and accept people like this as my guru?

Just a few remarks:

> Personally I dont have full faith in any of his disciples.

If you met all of them, its unfortunate. It suggests SP wasnt able to make even one sincere disciple... hmm.
Thats where the ritvik position leads to.

Sitting at SP discipless table is just a formal honor thing, not to be envied. Its not related to how much his disciples really follow and please Prabhupada, which is the real thing.

Hypocrisy is not per guru-sastra-sadhu, so it cant be accepted. Quite simple.

>If you met all of them, its unfortunate. It suggests SP wasnt able to make even one sincere disciple... hmm.
>Thats where the ritvik position leads to.

Veda Prabhu,very cleverly connects sincerity of these Gurus with potency of Srila Prabhupada. In other words he is trying to say that if these Gurus are not sincere, it means Srila Prabhupada was impotent.

Disciple means a womb, a hollow bamboo, which does not have any false ego in it, completely receptive, ready to receive the seed of Bhakti lata only then the hollow bamboo becomes the flute and song starts.

If Pandu Prabhu has not heard the song coming out of these Bamboos (gurus) it does not mean Prabhupada was impotent, it simply means that he did not find the hollow bamboos which could be turned into flutes. It simply means these bamboos were not hollow. Srila Prabhupada had and he still has the seed of Bhaktilata but it could be given to only those who are ready.

Those who really posses love of Godhead they not only love God but they live in a lovingly way. They love everything which exists around them. Once I praised Narayana Maharaja in front of an ISKCON Guru (I did not really mean that, I was just being naughty). The so called ISKCON Guru was furious and his two cents of love of Godhead which he was exhibiting few minutes before simply evaporated in the sky.

Hare Krsna.

Garudadhwaja Prabhu, were not in disagreement. Pandu Prabhu may not met anyone sincere but that doesnt mean theres none as ritviks want to suggest (so no one than SP can be a guru) which is offensive to those sincere ones. Therefore I say all of them and even one.

I cant say much about Narayana M. There are conflicting viewpoints and my own experience of him is very limited. I only know that NM followers try to advertise NM to ISKCON audience while ISKCON followers dont go to NM camp to do the same. Wonder if this goes on in other sampradayas. Im not surprised if someone dislikes it.

Thanks for your comment Veda Prabhu. In my experience, I have come across many devotees in ISKCON, who are not able to put their faith in any of ISKCON gurus rather than Srila Prabhupada. But they do not critcise or blasphame ISKCON gurus. Still they get kicked out of ISKCON temples. I think this type of devotees should be allowed to stay in ISKCON and practice their sadhana.

But at the bottom of the issue is fear. Our gurus are afraid that if they let some devotees (who are not able to put their faith in present Gurus) choose Srila Prabhupada as their Guru officially then other devotees might follow them. Who would want to take initiation from them if Srila Prabhupada is made available as Guru. Their Guruship will simply be finished, no more Vyasa Puja and feet bathing, devotees offering Arotis to them. Theyll be finished. Till the time this fear remains there, problems wont be solved.

As I can see from Pandu Prabhus experience ISKCON is already divided into two camps, Guruvadis and Ritviks. I call them SHIA ISKCON and SUNNI ISKCON. 1500 years ago, when Islam was born, those people use to settle their differences by fighting and killing each other. Now we live in advanced civilization so swords and killings have been replaced by courts and lawyers but the underlying feeling is the same, to destroy each other.

It does not look like our so called Gurus will be able to sort out this Ritvik problem in this lifetime. My guess is that they will make it worse and pass it on to future generations of ISKCON devotees. We will not be there, but I pray that these future generations of devotees will be more intelligent and will cooperate with each other and will sort out this problem and ISKCON wont go the Islamic way.

Hare Krsna.

I havent met all the gurus, nor am I saying that none of them are qualified. I dont know that. All Im saying is that in my 13 years of associating with ISKCON I havent found any guru who inspires my full confidence in his instructions. I accepted a harinam guru five years ago based on surrendering to the advice of some devotees and trying to have faith in what the GBC says, but that did not work out very well. Last year I started looking at the historical evidence available to me related to Srila Prabhupadas orders about initiation after his disappearance, and it looked to me that he called for deputies initiating on his behalf. I can also see how others may weigh the evidence differently and reach a different conclusion. Therefore I dont insist that others are wrong for accepting a modern initiating guru, only that it doesnt appear to be for me. Whatever helps a person to chant Hare Krishna is great, but personally it kills my enthusiasm to hear that I have to accept an intermediary to Srila Prabhupada. Accepting an initiating guru is a very personal thing, and I am very much attached to Srila Prabhupada, at least as far as my spiritual attachment goes. Srila Prabhupada saved me from immersion in mayavada philosophy by his Bhagavad-gita As It Is opening my eyes to Krishna for a few hours, and that changed everything for me. Maybe Ive misunderstood and am just not qualified to be a disciple, but I am very reluctant to artificially act as if I have full faith in someone when really I dont. Srila Prabhupada said that he didnt care for many stars, that he wanted one moon. Does anyone think he got that moon? He apparently didnt say so, and I havent seen anyone like that. If someone else has found that moon, then great for them, but I am not so fortunate or maybe Im not fooled, and Im not going to be convinced artificially by force.

A few comments in response to PurushaVyaghras remarks... "But they do not critcise or blasphame ISKCON gurus. Still they get kicked out..." I find that very disturbing, but fortunately I havent had that problem yet. I was practically kicked out for a few years when I questioned a contemporary gurus judgement once, but I was able to come back after apologizing. Since then Ive been doing my best to avoid making any disturbance in my local community.
"Who would want to take initiation from them if Srila Prabhupada is made available as Guru?" Well some devotees might feel more inspired by a contemporary guru. Some disciples came in by their preaching and feel more connected with the modern gurus. For me though it was not like that at all. I became convinced about Krishna before I ever met a devotee, simply through Bhagavad-gita As It Is that I found used in a bookstore after Id started a spiritual quest. It is very natural for me to think of Srila Prabhupada as my guru, and not through some other guru who steps in between after the fact.

Hare Krishna.

Thanks for clarification, Pandu Prabhu.

Historical evidence related to BSST shows that he did the same with deputies. Yet after his tirobhava there were regular gurus.

I also had a siksa guru who left ISKCON before initiating me and since that time I accept SP and his sisyas as siksa gurus, keeping diksa as an open future possibility. My conclusion based on g-s-s is that its better not to accept diksa than to partake in apasiddhanta.

> it kills my enthusiasm to hear that I have to accept an intermediary to Srila Prabhupada

Yet hes an intermediary to Krsna. As Krsna wants (devotee of My devotee is My devotee).

I consider Gour Govinda M. to be that moon, without meeting many other SPs sisyas.

> if Srila Prabhupada is made available as Guru

Not in any genuine sampradayas. So far I havent seen any precedence. With it ritvikvada would be already a norm.

>I find that very disturbing

Sorry to disturb you Pandu Prabhu but i know one brahamachari who joined Vrindavana temple. He never criticised or said anything bad about any of ISKCON gurus. But when devotees would ask "Who is your Guru?" He will answer Srila Prabhupada. So the word went to temple authorities and he was called in a meeting to give explanation. He was frank and told honestly that He considered Srila Prabhupada as his Guru. He was asked to take Diksha from one of the present ISKCON acharyas, which he refused to do. After that he was asked to leave temple.

They should have asked him first if he can show his initiation letter signed by SP. If he had none and openly supported ritvikvada, he was to be sent away.

[quote][cite] PurushaVyaghra:[/cite]>I find that very disturbing

Sorry to disturb you Pandu Prabhu but i know one brahamachari who joined Vrindavana temple. He never criticised or said anything bad about any of ISKCON gurus. But when devotees would ask "Who is your Guru?" He will answer Srila Prabhupada. So the word went to temple authorities and he was called in a meeting to give explanation. He was frank and told honestly that He considered Srila Prabhupada as his Guru. He was asked to take Diksha from one of the present ISKCON acharyas, which he refused to do. After that he was asked to leave temple.[/quote]

Since Im not in Vrndavana I cant say much about that, but perhaps there they think devotees are expendable. Around here devotees are few, and there is no outside preaching. An average Sunday program has about 15-30 devotees. My family and I count as seven, so if we go away the loss is noticed at least numerically. Since I do my best to be respectful, there seems to be no danger of expulsion. However if I were to get a rtvik initiation I think I would have to be prepared to be not welcome there.

[br /] [br /]
In the case above, it doesnt say the devotee considered himself an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Maybe he did, but its not specified here. I know at my harinam initiation, my guru told me that Srila Prabhupada is my "primary guru," and I also always thought of it like that. I accepted a secondary guru just to formally connect me with Srila Prabhupada, though I felt the relationship was already established informally.

[br /][br /} Many times when Ive discussed and debated initiation with devotees opposed to the notion of Srila Prabhupada continuing to give initiation, they say that its primarily a siksa sampradaya and that Srila Prabhupada is the primary guru of ISKCON, etc. However, when the question is asked, "Who is your guru?" we all know what that means. Although my harinam guru said Srila Prabhupada is my primary guru, that secondary guru eventually gave me orders that I did not feel were appropriate and could not in good conscience follow. Ive heard this called the "bait and switch," and that seems about right.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]They should have asked him first if he can show his initiation letter signed by SP. If he had none and openly supported ritvikvada, he was to be sent away.[/quote]

I guess it would not suffice to show the July 9 letter signed by SP.
[br /][br /]
I dont know much about these initiation letters signed by Srila Prabhupada. Obviously I dont have one of my own. But Srila Prabhupada did implement a rtvik system that was complete without his external participation. Eventually he did not want to even be asked about initiation, as is apparent to me in the 10/18/77 conversation. I would presume that the devotees initiated under this system would also not have an initiation letter signed by Srila Prabhupada. Based on this I would say the letter-test is not valid.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Thanks for clarification, Pandu Prabhu.

Historical evidence related to BSST shows that he did the same with deputies. Yet after his tirobhava there were regular gurus.

I also had a siksa guru who left ISKCON before initiating me and since that time I accept SP and his sisyas as siksa gurus, keeping diksa as an open future possibility. My conclusion based on g-s-s is that its better not to accept diksa than to partake in apasiddhanta.

> it kills my enthusiasm to hear that I have to accept an intermediary to Srila Prabhupada

Yet hes an intermediary to Krsna. As Krsna wants (devotee of My devotee is My devotee).[/quote]

Thats fine. Its a question of purity. Srila Prabhupadas purity is proven to me, but others are not.

[quote]I consider Gour Govinda M. to be that moon, without meeting many other SPs sisyas.[/quote]

But what is the effect of his preaching? I only heard of Gour Govinda Maharaj due to Srila Prabhupada, and that was after GGMs disappearance. Similarly I came to ISKCON only due to Srila Prabhupadas writing. "Would have" is always speculative, but it does not seem like I would have ever heard of any of the ISKCON gurus if not for Srila Prabhupadas great worldwide preaching. Im also very impressed by Srila Prabhupadas acarya predecessors, but even they would be unknown to me if not for Srila Prabhupadas preaching work. So for me the whole thing rests upon Srila Prabhupadas service. Gour Govinda Maharaj may have done something to increase Srila Prabhupadas fame, but from my perspective it seems to a relatively insignificant degree.

[quote]> if Srila Prabhupada is made available as Guru

Not in any genuine sampradayas. So far I havent seen any precedence. With it ritvikvada would be already a norm.[/quote]

Precedence has value but also its limits. For the sake of preaching, there are many firsts in the relatively recent past. For example, 200 years ago the sastras were all copied by hand. One could have argued that the mechanical printing of books was bogus, except that it was authorized by a big acarya. (Indeed GGM argued that the mechanical transmission of mantras via tape recordings was bogus, in contradiction to Srila Prabhupadas instructions and implementation.) Or one can say that there was no precedence for women brahmanas worshipping Deities on the altar. The arguemnt can be made that sastra prohibits the wearing of a shirt on the altar, yet its done now because Srila Prabhupada authorized it. There are many examples. As the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON, it is his perogative to establish the rules for perserving what he had created, but instead his disciples are placing limits on his authority according to their interpreation of sastra and precedence.

[br /][br /] When I debate the question of what Srila Prabhupada ordered for initiations after his disappearance, the opponents of the rtvik method always want to avoid looking at his actual orders and instead go to other sources basing their answer on their interpretation of sastra, parampara, etc. Srila Prabhupada was asked the question directly, and he gave an immediate, direct answer. This was followed by a written order saying the same. It is not our perogative to modify that order by looking to other indirect evidence which we interpret contrary to his direct response.

New Delhi[br]
2nd December, 1975[br]
[br]
My Dear Tusta Krishna Swami,[br]
[br]
Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 21 November, 1975. [b]Every student is expected to become Acarya.[/b] Acarya means one who knows the scriptural injunctions and follows them practically in life, and teaches them to his disciples. I have given you sannyasa with the great hope that in my absence you will preach the cult throughout the world and thus become recognized by Krishna as the most sincere servant of the Lord. So I'92m very pleased that you have not deviated from the principles I have taught, and thus with power of attorney go on preaching Krishna consciousness, that will make me very happy as it is confirmed in the Guru vastakam yasya prasadat bhagavata prasadah just by satisfying your Spiritual Master who is accepted as the bonafide representative of the Lord you satisfy Krishna immediately without any doubt.
[br]
[br]
I am very glad to inform you that Sudama Vipra Maharaja is also now following my principles. So I am very very happy to receive all this news. Thank you very very much.
[br]
[br]
[b]Keep trained up very rigidly and then you are bonafide Guru, and you can accept disciples on the same principle.[/b] But as a matter of etiquette it is the custom that [b]during the lifetime of your Spiritual master you bring the prospective disciples to him, and in his absence or disappearance you can accept disciples without any limitation.[/b] This is the [b]law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bonafide Spiritual Master and spread Krishna consciousness very widely, that will make me and Krishna very happy. [/b]
[br]
[br]
I hope this letter finds you well,
[br]
[br]
Your ever well wisher,
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

Kyros,

1. In the first paragraph, Srila Prabhupada defines his usage of "acarya" in that context as a siksa guru.

2. Youre presenting a private letter to an extrordinarily disloyal disciple as evidence that Srila Prabhupada authorized him to initiate disciples. This was a disciple who already had his own disciples from before he met Srila Prabhupada, which suggests that Srila Prabhupada was trying to restrict him rather than authorize him.

3. This private letter was not published until the mid-eighties. If it was supposed to justify stopping the rtvik system Srila Prabhupada instituted, it should have been presented in 1977 or early 1978.

4. Is there any evidence that Srila Prabhupada wanted this private letter to define ISKCONs policy on initiations? Why was it not sent to all the TPs and GBCs like the July 9 letter? Is it proper that an order given in a relatively public letter to the leaders be modified by an earlier private letter to a deviant disciple?

5. Its interesting that Tusta Krsna never became a diksa guru in ISKCON. Instead he left ISKCON.

Like I said before, I dont have time for to get into a big debate now, so I hope these points are sufficient to counter the presentation of Tusta Krsna letter to justify overriding the July 9 letter.

1. No he doesnt. It implies diksa guru.
[br][br]
"...Every student is expected to become Acarya. Acarya means one who knows the scriptural injunctions and follows them practically in life, and [b]teaches them to [i][u]his[/u][/i] disciples...[/b]
[br][br]
2. Speaking of restrictions...
[br][br]
"...in his (the gurus) absense or disappearance you can accept disciples [b]without any limitation[/b]. This is the law of disciplic succession..."
[br][br]
3. Why would they do that? As you yourself stated the sole purpose of this letter was used to argue against the rtvik system, and I believe the rtvik system came after 1977 and 1978, so there was no reason for this letter to be there.
[br][br]
4. "This is the law of disciplic succession."
[br][br]
5. Whats more interesting is that Srila Prabhupada authored this letter, and that people think that Srila Prabhupada only said these things but ultimately didnt mean them.
[br][br]
Also,
[br][br]
So we have got this message from Krsna, from Caitanya Mahaprabhu, from the six Gosvamis, later on Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura. And we are trying our bit also to distribute this knowledge. Now, tenth, eleventh, twelfth. . . My Guru Maharaja is tenth from Caitanya Mahaprabhu, I am eleventh, you are the twelfth. So distribute this knowledge.
'97Los Angeles arrival lecture, May 18, 1972
[br][br]
One who is now the disciple is the next spiritual master. --Srimad Bhagavatam 2.9.43, purport

>But as a matter of etiquette it is the custom that during the lifetime of your Spiritual master you bring the prospective disciples to him, and in his absence or >disappearance you can accept disciples without any limitation. This is the law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bonafide Spiritual Master >and spread Krishna consciousness very widely, that will make me and Krishna very happy.

Srila Prabhupada initiated 10,000 disciples. If you base your arguments only on this letter, then why we have only 100 Gurus, we should have 10,000Gurus why others are restricted. All the Matajis initiated by Srila Prabhupada should also be Gurus. They are equally as disciples of Srila Prabhupada as male devotees. What about Tamal Krsna and BhaktiTirtha. They are gone. Why their disciples are not allowed to become Gurus. Their Guru is gone. As per this rule they have right to become Gurus now. What about their parampara. Why no one is worried about parampara of TKG and BTS? Why parampara lovers dont care about TKG and BTS paramparas why they are worried only about parampara coming from Srila Prabhupada.

The reason is "Amar Ajnaya". Srila Prabhupadas last letter July9 gives specific instructions about how initiations should go on. In a matter of argument, last instruction is the most important. It overrides all the general rules. Like ISKCON gurus say during their preaching "Last instruction of B.Gita is most important which is "Manmana Bhava Madbhakto" so it is the most important out of all instructions. So last instruction is most important.

ISKCON ceased to exist November 15, 1977. The organization that has been using the name ISKCON for the past 30 plus years is so polluted, infected and screwed up that its too late to even attempt correcting it from within. Like a house that is so infested with termites and roaches it has to be torn down to its foundation --- the same goes for the so-called ISKCON that exists today.

Seminars, committees, ops improvement, marketing strategies, elections, court cases, retired gurus, retired sannyasis --- this adjustment, that strategy ---- its as if theyve all gone crazy? I dont get it. All of them -- my godbrothers -- who are continuing the charade -- are they blind? Is it a matter of apathy? Ambition? Institutionalization? They go on, year after year, maintaining the status quo while living in a house that is crumbling all around them.

Lets start with the obvious. Just as "we are not our bodies" is an elementary, integral part of our message and preaching .... so is the fact that a Vaisnava guru is NEVER appointed, selected or elected by an ecclesiastic council such as goes on in the Vatican when its time for a new Pope to replace the old one. If I had a dime for every time I explained that to somebody in the letters I wrote as ISKCON Secretary between 69 and 78, Id be a wealthy man today.

So what have they done? When the appointment absurdity was an obvious failure, they changed the process to elections (or as they call it, majority approval process or some such thing). It doesnt matter what they call it or how many adjustments and high level meetings they have in Mayapur -- they cant change the fact that two plus two equals four and not five.

Furthermore, the ritvik idea that Srila Prabhupada continues on as diksha guru after his departure is the other side of the craziness. They say that two plus two equals three and over the other side of the boat they go. Splish Splash! The only reason they have such a big following is because they are half right (in regard to what they refer to as the "guru hoax"). Theyre pretty much right on about what shouldnt be, but theyre way off about what should be. Sometimes being half right is worse than being all wrong.

Anyway ... anyhow and any port in a storm .... what then could have and should have taken place after Srila Prabhupada departed? Ill give you a hint with a quote from one of Prabhupadas letters -- and aside from that letter, he alluded to this idea so many times and in so many ways throughout the years (and yet he gave us enough rope to hang ourselves, which is often what Srila Prabhupada would do so that we would hopefully learn and grow up).

"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."

When Satsvarupa asked, "When we initiate somebody whose disciple would they be?" it was something like one of my sons asking me, "Dad, when I have a kid whose kid will he be?" Stupid questions, perfect answers. Next thing you know my beloved ISKCON -- my sanctuary -- my home -- my alma mater since I was a 17-year old kid joining the New York temple in 69 -- turned into the Mickey Mouse Club. Just about everybody left. In desperation so many went looking for inspiration and association and ended up in the camps of Sridhara Maharaja or Narayana Maharaja. Of course, just about everybody split. The atmosphere in our ISKCON became intolerable. Suddenly eleven knuckleheads were being worshiped on Vyasa asanas. Unbelievable. It was surreal. It was insane. I tried to speak out in the late 70s and early 80s against the craziness, to no avail. I was labeled a heretic and blacklisted.

Why was it so imperative that diksha initiations had to continue in some fashion after Srila Prabhupada left? Through his books and tapes (vani association) Prabhupada remains Siksha guru for one and all, forever and a day. As far as diksha initiations -- thats a transcendental process of the heart. By the mercy of Krishna one will eventually find his guru and by the mercy of the guru, one gets the seed of love of God planted in his heart. Srila Prabhupada wasnt initiated until years after he met his Guru Maharaja. What was the big rush to tightly wrap three strands of beads around every new recruit post-1977 and give them a new name? Were we running an assembly line? Such immaturity! Such short-sightedness. Such foolishness.

Pandu P.:

You can see initiation letters signed by Srila Prabhupada e.g. in Vedabase.

> But Srila Prabhupada did implement a rtvik system that was complete without his external participation.

Then the initiation letters would be signed by his ritviks but after his tirobhava these ritviks would have to turn into normal gurus. Otherwise its apasampradaya.

> Based on this I would say the letter-test is not valid.

Its valid to prove that there is some guru, not just an imagination. If I say Im a diksa disciple of Madhavacarya or anyone I like from the past, without proof Im a cheater. Like nowadays there are self-proclaimed members of ISKCON who create a bad name for ISKCON by their pseudobusiness, etc.

> Srila Prabhupadas purity is proven to me, but others are not.

Ok, your POV. Others may see purity in his disciples as well. But ritviks try their best to denigrate all his disciples and even if theyd be right in every other instance, I couldnt have possibly anything to do with aparadhis. It beats me how someone can be associated with such people. We have one staunch ritvikist here in CZ and he speaks and acts exactly like a Jehovas Witness. Im not at all surprised, just as whoever knows him closer.

The proposal that changes in some minor issues validate also the change in diksa is offbase, imho.
Even acarya cant change such a thing without being challenged to show also sastra and sadhu support.
And there is none. Ritviks tried hard to find any but failed.

Another reason why ritvik system isnt viable is that SP authorized only few of his disciples to initiate. After their tirohava the system would naturally end. What about the future?

For me the ritvik issue is a test of knowledge of g-s-s. Who can accept ritvikism is likely to accept also other apasiddhantas.

Kyros P.:

The rtvik idea appeared only in the middle of 80s.

PurushaVyaghra P.:

Agreed, all SP disciples and disciples of departed SP disciples can be gurus as per g-s-s. Its up to

their prospective disciples if they consider them qualified or not, following HBV prescriptions, etc.

Swarup P.:

> Sometimes being half right is worse than being all wrong.

Agree 108%.

>
> You can see initiation letters signed by Srila Prabhupada e.g. in
> Vedabase.
>

I looked this morning but couldnt find them there. Id appreciate a clue for where to look.

> Then the initiation letters would be signed by his ritviks but after his
> tirobhava these ritviks would have to turn into normal gurus. Otherwise
> its apasampradaya.
>

According to you. Please show me where Srila Prabhupada said the rtviks he appointed would automatically become actual diksa gurus. I would expect to see that stated in the July 9 letter, but its not there. On the contrary, the July 9 letter references the May 28 conversation asking Srila Prabhupada about "initiations in the future, particularly at that time when youre no longer with us."

> > Based on this I would say the letter-test is not valid.
>
> Its valid to prove that there is some guru, not just an imagination....Like nowadays there are self-proclaimed
> members of ISKCON who create a bad name for ISKCON by their
> pseudobusiness, etc.
>

However, if this is really an issue, Id like to see the initiation letters for all the acaryas in our Sampradaya. Otherwise maybe someone was just making a joke or pretending. No, really... This is just stupid.

Shall we turn this around and conclude that Kirtananda didnt create a bad name for ISKCON because he had his initiation letter?

How does having an initiation letter define a disciples behavior?

I dont have an initiation letter from Bhaktimarga Swami. I guess you would say that means Im not his disciple. If only it were that easy.

> > Srila Prabhupadas purity is proven to me, but others are not.
>
> Ok, your POV. Others may see purity in his disciples as well. But ritviks
> try their best to denigrate all his disciples...
>

You cannot generalize the conduct of ritvik supporters. Just a few weeks ago I spent the day at the local temple literally serving the servant of the servants of the servants of an ISKCON guru whom I know to be very anti-rtvik. I continue to serve in ISKCON because of the positive service thats done there, and I try to minimize potential conflicts. I can also understand how the more inimical rtvik supporters feel, believing Srila Prabhupadas order was usurped and ISKCON hijacked, but I try to suppress that feeling in myself for the sake of cooperation.

I accept that others may see purity in Srila Prabhupadas disciples. Ive said that. However, I cannot rightly accept a guru for myself based on what others think. Im faced with capitulating on that point or getting out of ISKCON, both of which I consider a gross injustice. At this point Im leaning toward the latter, which makes me very sad.

> The proposal that changes in some minor issues validate also the change in
> diksa is offbase, imho.
> Even acarya cant change such a thing without being challenged to show
> also sastra and sadhu support.

Anyone can challenge anyway. The current ISKCON guru system is being challenged too. Why not challenge that women cannot worship Deities on the altar? The GBC changes what they want and keep what they want. Theyve even done that with the "Law of Disciplic Succession" quoted previously here. There is now a GBC resolution allowing disciples of current gurus to also become initiating gurus, and at least three have done that.

'93Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge. [break] ...knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing.'94
(SP Press Interview, October 16, 1976, Chandigarh)

>
> Another reason why ritvik system isnt viable is that SP authorized only
> few of his disciples to initiate. After their tirohava the system would
> naturally end. What about the future?

Rtviks are just priests. Do you think the GBC can authorized gurus but not priests?

>
> For me the ritvik issue is a test of knowledge of g-s-s. Who can accept
> ritvikism is likely to accept also other apasiddhantas.

Youre begging the question. You cannot assume "ritvikism" is an apasiddhanta in the face of evidence that Srila Prabhupada ordered it, unless you mean to challenge his authority.


> The rtvik idea appeared only in the middle of 80s.
>

That is not a coincidence. Srila Prabhupadas letters were not made available publicly until 1986 when Solocana obtained and released them. It hardly seems a coincidence that he was murdered shortly thereafter and that the end of the Zonal Acarya era followed soon after. I exchanged a few e-mails with Ameyatma Prabhu some months ago, and as I recall he said he didnt see the July 9 letter until the mid to late 90s.

Accusations cannot arise until the evidence is discovered.

Kyros,

> 1.
Youre suggesting that there is no such thing as a siksa disciple. Ill have to mention that to the devotees who say I can be Srila Prabhupadas siksa disciple by following his instructions.

Diksa guru can include siksa duties but also gives mantra initiation and formally accepts worship as Krishnas representative. The statement in question discusses the siksa role but makes no mention of giving mantra initiation or accepting worship.

> 2.
Must you ignore the context?

'93Do not try to make a faction.'94
(SPL to Tusta Krsna, 72-12-14)
'93I have heard that you are having some difficulties [...] Of course, our serving Krishna is voluntary affair, so what can I say? If you think that is the best choice, I must agree, otherwise you might go away altogether.'94
(SPL to Tusta Krsna, 72-12-14)
'93News has come to me that you want to sell our temple to somebody else which I cannot believe. ... I never believed
that again you would go back to your old habits, giving up the Krishna Consciousness Movement in a whimsical way. Please do not do this mistake [...] Now all of a sudden you have changed that program and taken
to your original ways? I am so much aggrieved to receive all this news. For Krsna'92s sake, do not do these things... Please do not leave Krsna."
(SPL to Tusta Krsna and Beharilal, 73-10-15)

Srila Prabhupada was obviously just trying to encourage Tusta Krsna to stay in ISKCON rather than leave with the disciples he had already initiated.

> 3.
Arguing against the rtvik system means in this context practically the same thing as trying to support their chosen system. Ive recently looked at the 1978 GBC position paper on initiations, and its interesting to see that they just skim over the issue of Srila Prabhupadas orders, putting everything in their own words and not even mentioning the July 9 letter.

> 4.
The only times this law is mentioned is in five letters concerning five of his most ambitious disciples, in clear attempts to get them to not initiate disciples in Srila Prabhupadas presence.

> 5.
He also said we only have to chant, dance, and take prasadam. Did he mean that, or do we also have to follow regulative principles, etc? Sometimes he said things for encouragement.

> we are trying our bit also to distribute this knowledge. Now, tenth,
> eleventh, twelfth. . . My Guru Maharaja is tenth from Caitanya Mahaprabhu,
> I am eleventh, you are the twelfth. So distribute this knowledge.
> '97Los Angeles arrival lecture, May 18, 1972

He says, "Distribute this knowledge...Distribute knowledge."
He does not say, "Initiate disciples into the chanting of this mantra and accept worship on behalf of Krishna."

He also says "You _ARE_ the twelfth," not "You _WILL BE_ the twelfth." In other words, according to the "Law of Disciplic Succession" that youre emphasizing, he must be talking about siksa gurus since Srila Prabhupada is using the present tense rather than future.

> One who is now the disciple is the next spiritual master. --Srimad
> Bhagavatam 2.9.43, purport

'93The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional
service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be
accepted from the topmost class... When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshipped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru.'94 (C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport)

Srila Prabhupada: '93What is the use of producing some rascal guru?'94.
Tamala Krsna: '93Well, I have studied myself and all of your disciples, and
it'92s a clear fact that we are all conditioned souls, so we
cannot be guru. Maybe one day it may be possible.'94
Srila Prabhupada: '93Hmm!'94
Tamala Krsna: '93...but not now.'94
Srila Prabhupada: '93Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru,
'91Now you become acarya. You become authorised.'92 I
am waiting for that. You become, all, acarya. I retire
completely. But the training must be complete.'94

That conversation was April 22, 1977, and in regard to having authorized someone, Srila Prabhupada said, "I am waiting for that." He has not yet done it. He says "But the training must be complete.'94 So, when did he say the training was completed? He did not say it. Instead he changed his mind and authorized only deputies.

As stated by HH Bhakti Vaibhava Puri Maharaj:
."..Previously I said, '91Maharaja, you have established some gurus but Guru must be one.'92 He said, '91I have not selected. Only rtviks to act in my place now.'92"
(Limited space here...whole quote: http://oppositerule.govindapeacefarm.com/?p=650)

> I looked this morning but couldnt find them there. Id appreciate a clue for where to look.

I dont have Vedabase installed on this computer, my first one is in service shop.
You can find them by searching for instruction to chant 16 rounds and follow 4 regs. Well, its
not very helpful in searching but... ;)

> Please show me where Srila Prabhupada said the rtviks he appointed would automatically become actual diksa gurus.

As I said, that hapened in GM after tirobhava of BSST. The standard way.

For me one letter and the last will (the only two pro-ritvik docs) cant outweigh numerous quotes in SPs books about "disciples of my disciples", the standard in all genuine sampradayas.

> However, if this is really an issue, Id like to see the initiation letters for all the acaryas in our Sampradaya. Otherwise maybe someone was just making a joke or pretending. No, really... This is just stupid.

Previously it was not done neither needed. Nowadays Kali yuga advanced that people do all kinds of nonsense, even pretending to be someone theyre not, and to stop them in a court case one needs proofs.

Initiation letter has nothing to do with later (mis)behavior of a discicple. That should be obvious. Everyone has a free will.

> I dont have an initiation letter from Bhaktimarga Swami. I guess you would say that means Im not his disciple. If only it were that easy.

There must be some record in his possession that he accepted you. SP also had his "Initiated disciples" book, mentioned in the Vedabase.

> You cannot generalize the conduct of ritvik supporters.

Right. What I said is based on what is on their websites and Back to Prabhupada mag, their main propaganda tools.

> Anyone can challenge anyway. The current ISKCON guru system is being challenged too. Why not challenge that women cannot worship Deities on the altar? The GBC changes what they want and keep what they want. Theyve even done that with the "Law of Disciplic Succession" quoted previously here. There is now a GBC resolution allowing disciples of current gurus to also become initiating gurus, and at least three have done that.

There were women pujaris in the beginning of ISKCON, afaik. There are also precedences to initiations while ones guru is still physically present. From my POV, these are minor things in comparison to the diksa system. ISKCON will go on with them this or that way but as apasampradaya its finished. New chance coming up in 8 billion years.

> '93Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge. [break] ...knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing.'94
(SP Press Interview, October 16, 1976, Chandigarh)

Formality, yet considered quite serious by g-s-s (HBV, etc.).

> Rtviks are just priests. Do you think the GBC can authorized gurus but not priests?

My understanding is that GBC cant and doesnt authorize gurus; it only gives a non-objection nod.
GBC as a body is not an initiator. And when itd authorize ritvikvada (Krsna forbid), Im out of ISKCON, to avoid the maha aparadha attached to it.

> Youre begging the question. You cannot assume "ritvikism" is an apasiddhanta in the face of evidence that Srila Prabhupada ordered it, unless you mean to challenge his authority.

Its not at all obvious he ordered it. There are only two proofs, to me not very convincing ones, and a huge contradicting evidence in his books, etc.

> That is not a coincidence. Srila Prabhupadas letters were not made available publicly until 1986 when Solocana obtained and released them. It hardly seems a coincidence that he was murdered shortly thereafter and that the end of the Zonal Acarya era followed soon after.

The Village Voice Review ritvik writings by Rupavilasa, Karnamrita and Nityananda appeared in 1989 and GBC rejected them in its 1990 Resolution. Itd mean it took them three years to invent ritvikism. But as per Ajamilas and Jahnus (link below) account the ritvikism was born even earlier, in the middle of 80s.

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/iskcon-internal/284238-where-do-ritviks-come.html

Sulocana was murdered in connection to New Vrindavan crimes he wanted to reveal, afaik.

> Accusations cannot arise until the evidence is discovered.

Accusation against apasiddhanta based on g-s-s is enough for Vaisnavas in general.

I dont see any need to spend more time on this.

Pandu das, Srila Prabhupada isnt the type of person to compromise something important as taking initiation to keep a "deviant devotee" like Tusta Krsna (or anybody else) around. That is not acceptable.

And please dont try to use grammatical reasons to argue Prabhupadas English. Everybody can tell that his English was definitely foreign and unpolished.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]
[br /]
> Please show me where Srila Prabhupada said the rtviks he appointed would automatically become actual diksa gurus.
[br /]
As I said, that hapened in GM after tirobhava of BSST. The standard way.[/quote]
[br /]
Standard it may have been, but Srila Prabhupada created a worldwide Vaisnava society out of whatever mlecchas came to the door. It was a new kind of institution, and it was Srila Prabhupadas perogative to protect it as he saw fit. My interest is simply: What did Srila Prabhupada order? For that Im looking primarily at his written and spoken words specifically addressing that issue. What BSST did with his society of disciples presumably drawn from almost entirely within Vaisnava culture within India is something else. They are vastly different circumstances, making it perfectly reasonable to have different arrangements.

[br /]
[quote]For me one letter and the last will (the only two pro-ritvik docs) cant outweigh numerous quotes in SPs books about "disciples of my disciples", the standard in all genuine sampradayas.[/quote]
[br /]
You can call it "one letter," but it happens to be one letter that is a direct order on what to do about the issue in question. Youre essentially saying that you dont accept that a direct order is more relevant than a general instruction, and I disagree. If Srila Prabhupada said a hundred times in his books, "I like milk," but directly asked you for a glass of water, would you give him milk or water?
[br /][br /]
Similarly, the Last Will and Testament isnt an insignificant document. Its a direct order.

[br /]
[quote]> However, if this is really an issue, Id like to see the initiation letters for all the acaryas in our Sampradaya. Otherwise maybe someone was just making a joke or pretending. No, really... This is just stupid.

Previously it was not done neither needed. Nowadays Kali yuga advanced that people do all kinds of nonsense, even pretending to be someone theyre not, and to stop them in a court case one needs proofs.[/quote]
[br /]
this is similar to my point above concerning tradition. Previously there had never been a worldwide Vaisnava society of devotees mostly drawn from mleccha families. Therefore Srila Prabhupada ordered a suitable system to protect his work. It is not at all unreasonable, and the direct evidence

[br /]
[quote]> You cannot generalize the conduct of ritvik supporters.
[br /]
Right. What I said is based on what is on their websites and Back to Prabhupada mag, their main propaganda tools.[/quote]
[br /]
The BTP editors are frequently challenged about their criticism of ISKCON leaders, and their standard response is that they are never accused of publishing anything untrue, only unflattering. Is it better that devotees should be ignorant about hypocritical conduct by religious leaders and thereby follow blindly?
[br /]
[quote]There were women pujaris in the beginning of ISKCON, afaik.[/quote]
[br /]
I dont personally have any objection to women on the altar. My point is that this was something that Srila Prabhupada instituted in ISKCON that was directly and indirectly contradicted in sastra. Yet it is not challenged presumably because of the obvious practical value.
[br /]
[quote]There are also precedences to initiations while ones guru is still physically present. From my POV, these are minor things in comparison to the diksa system. ISKCON will go on with them this or that way but as apasampradaya its finished. New chance coming up in 8 billion years.[/quote]
[br /]
Im interested in Srila Prabhupadas point of view. As I quoted above, Srila Prabhupada said, "Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing." There are many similar quotes. If a devotee considers Srila Prabhupada his diksa guru rather than picking from a contemporary guru, how would it destroy anything? It seems to me that it would protect rather than destory. You say it is apasampradaya, but Srila Prabhupada never said a guru cannot give initiation after leaving his body. There is no apparent reason why he cannot continue to initiate disciples at least until another big acarya appears. The only issue is getting it authorized in the temples he founded.
[br /]

[quote]> Rtviks are just priests. Do you think the GBC can authorized gurus but not priests?
[br /]
My understanding is that GBC cant and doesnt authorize gurus; it only gives a non-objection nod.
GBC as a body is not an initiator. And when itd authorize ritvikvada (Krsna forbid), Im out of ISKCON, to avoid the maha aparadha attached to it.[/quote]
[br /]
Ill be sorry to see you leave. Another point on the matter of authorizing priests is in the GBCs 1978 position paper on the guru issue: "He named eleven but said that the number could be increased in the future."
[br /]

[quote]Its not at all obvious he ordered it. There are only two proofs, to me not very convincing ones, and a huge contradicting evidence in his books, etc.[/quote]
[br /]
The two proofs you named are not only direct orders, theyre also chronologically following the books. Naturally a later direct order supercedes a preceeding general instruction.
[br /]

[quote]The Village Voice Review ritvik writings by Rupavilasa, Karnamrita and Nityananda appeared in 1989 and GBC rejected them in its 1990 Resolution. Itd mean it took them three years to invent ritvikism. But as per Ajamilas and Jahnus (link below) account the ritvikism was born even earlier, in the middle of 80s. http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/iskcon-internal/284238-where-do-ritviks-come.html
[/quote]
[br /]
It takes time to read and analyze everything and organize a position. Presumably there were other things goin on too. What is the time limit for understanding the acaryas order, after which it becomes irrelevant? (Ill look at your link next chance I get, but I cant at the moment.)
[br /]
[quote]Sulocana was murdered in connection to New Vrindavan crimes he wanted to reveal, afaik.[/quote]
[br /]
Yes, there were a lot of letters unfavorable to Kirtanananda, but considering that he was a zonal acarya whose authority would be undermined by the publication of the July 9 letter, along with the sequence of events, it seems reasonable that these events were related.
[br /]
[quote]> Accusations cannot arise until the evidence is discovered.
[br /]
Accusation against apasiddhanta based on g-s-s is enough for Vaisnavas in general.[/quote]
[br /]
Again youre begging the question. Its not proven to be apasiddhanta. Thats the issue in question. You say "based on g-s-s," but youre dismissing direct orders from the guru.
[br /]
[quote]I dont see any need to spend more time on this.[/quote]
Neither do I have the time, but I consider the time I spend on this as service to Srila Prabhupada. Hare Krishna.

it is all because of prabhupada disciple card - is it?

Well there you have it, Srila Prabhupada deviated from Vaishnava siddhanta.

[quote][cite] Kyros:[/cite]Well there you have it, Srila Prabhupada deviated from Vaishnava siddhanta.[/quote]

So your understanding of Vaisnava siddhanta is the standard by which Srila Prabhupada should be judged? Hasnt he proven himself enough for you to just accept what he said?

Pandu P.: I havent seen anything in SPs books that suggests he wanted to establish a light version of GV for mlecchas based on a virtual sampradaya. Thered be no future for such an org.

The letter and the Will seem to not consider the distant future. Thats much more natural explanation than that SP completely changed his mind at the end of his prakata lila. I dont know the details about how the Will was written and if any attorneys checked it. They should have pointed out this discrepancy (at least Indian attorneys who have some idea about parampara).

BTP editors are not appointed by anyone to publish derogatory things, contradicting Vaisnava ethics. Only guru can criticize and punish his disciple. Others who try to imitate that create aparadha.

Again, we need more than a direct order of a guru. We need also sastra and sadhu. Their pro-ritvik stances were not presented so far.

Hare Krsna

Kyros P.: Yeah, hed destroy the future of his lifes work in two docs... mind-boggling.

Veda Pr. says:
"Again, we need more than a direct order of a guru. We need also sastra and sadhu. Their pro-ritvik stances were not presented so far."

Scriptures are like a boat. Srila Prabhupada is the boatman. Without boatman boat is not of much significance. It can not take one to the other shore. Here by other shore I mean the spiritual world and this shore mean the material world. Srila Prabhupada is the boatman who could frequently travel between these two shores. He knows perfectly well about both worlds. Even if the boat gets broken, the expert boatman will find a way to take you to the other shore. Even if there is no boat, he will find some technique to transport you to the other shore. He is the expert one. And that boatman is Srila Prabhupada. Boat is not of much significance. Boatman can make alterations into the boat according to his passangers because he has the responsibility to transport them.

Here the fundamental difference is of the attitude. one group is trying to see scriptures through Prabhupada. other devotees are trying to see Prabhupada through scriptures. For me, what Prabhupada said that is scripture. That is Shastra. What Prabhupada said to follow specifically that is more important than any scripture, his words are sastras.

Those who claim that Srila Prabhupada is dead because he is physically not present, for them he was always dead. Even in 1970s when he was present on this planet, he was still dead for them. Those who dont consider him dead they can still feel his presence in his books, in his vani.

There is no word in English to translate the word guru because the relationship between guru and disciple is basically Eastern. No such relationship has ever existed in Western culture and tradition, so no one in the West can understand what a guru is. At the most they can understand what a teacher is. The guru must himself be enlightened, A teacher need not be self-realized, but a guru must be. A teacher can give secondhand information from scriptures or traditions.

So Srila Prabhupada is the enlightened Guru, the expert boatman and he can still be felt, realized through his books. If he is dead and his presence can not be felt then why do we worship him every morning. Why he established that tradition? It is against shastras. Which other Guru in Gaudiya tradition has ordered his disciples to worship him for next 10,000 years.

I apologise in advance if I have committed any offence to any Vaisnava.

Hari Bol.

> For me, what Prabhupada said that is scripture. That is Shastra. What Prabhupada said to follow specifically that is more important than any scripture, his words are sastras.

However, thats not Vedic. Gurus words are called guru vakya and theyre one of the three types of evidence, with sastra vakya and sadhu vakya. All must agree. Sadhu-sastra-guru-vakya cittete koriya aikya... Therefore Prabhupada didnt speak his mind but always quoted sastra since Krsna says yah sastra viddhim utsrjya...

> Those who claim that Srila Prabhupada is dead because he is physically not present, for them he was always dead. Even in 1970s when he was present on this planet, he was still dead for them. Those who dont consider him dead they can still feel his presence in his books, in his vani.

Vani doesnt depend on physical presence or absence. But vani is not an initiator, thats the erroneous part. SP said something like "Not that you can create a guru out of air..." (a well-known quote; dont have Vedabase now). Otherwise everyone could be initiated by Narada by reading his Bhaktisutras, by Vyasadev by reading his Mahabharata, etc. and no parampara would be needed.

[quote][cite] Pandu das:[/cite][quote][cite] Kyros:[/cite]Well there you have it, Srila Prabhupada deviated from Vaishnava siddhanta.[/quote]
[br][br]
So your understanding of Vaisnava siddhanta is the standard by which Srila Prabhupada should be judged?[/quote]
[br][br]
Yes, because my understanding is backed by guru, sadhu, and sastra.
[br][br]
[quote]Hasnt he proven himself enough for you to just accept what he said?[/quote]
[br][br]
Accept Prabhupada didnt say we should continue the rtvik style initiation after he leaves the material world.
[br][br]
The question asked was:
[br][br]
Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when [b]youre no longer with us.[/b] We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.
[br][br]
Literally, "no longer with us" doesnt mean "youve passed onto the next world." Especially to a literal man like Srila Prabhupada. Most, if not all Indians wouldnt even think of it like this. Hell, my dads been living here in America for over 20 years and he still has hard time understanding phrases like these.
[br][br]
This is not a difficult subject to understand.

[quote][cite] Kyros:[/cite]Well there you have it, Srila Prabhupada deviated from Vaishnava siddhanta.[/quote]

Let me take a step back. Can anyone provide proof from sastra that says an acarya cannot arrange to initiate disciples after his disappearance?

>by Vyasadev by reading his Mahabharata, etc. and no parampara would be needed.

Please do not forget that even though 5000 years have passed, whenever Guru celebrates his birthday its called Vyasa Puja. This word Vyasa Puja has some deep meaning in it. And when Gurus birthdate is not known his birthday is celebrated on Vyasa Purnima, which is birthday of Srila Vyasa deva. Because Guru is a representative of Vyasa deva. At least theoretically. Though Srila Vyasa deva did not order his disciples to worship him for next 10,000 years but Srila Prabhupada obviously did. He had a vision for ISKCON for next 100000 years. Srila Prabhupadas position is unique and can not be compared to Narada or Vyasadeva. Narada or Vyasadeva did not establish ISKCON, Srila Prabhupada did. We do not worship Narada or Vyasa deva in each temple of ISKCON every morning but we do worship Srila Prabhupada. And this all is done by his order. If he is gone forever and is not able to play any important part in our lives then what is the point in worshipping him every morning. We do not worship Narada or Vyasadeva each morning. We can put Srila Prabhupada also in that category and just worship him once a year on his appearance day or disappearance day.

When Srila Prabhupada established this system of worshipping him in Archa form in each ISKCON temple, what was his logic behind doing that. Why he wanted future generations of devotees to worship him and remember him every day? A Guru of the caliber of Srila Prabhupada, his words and orders weight much more than all sastras together. As by the definition of the word Guru. Guru means heavy "the gravitational force who pulls you like a magnet." And Srila Prabhupada obviously does.

PurushaVyaghra Prabhu, youre not reacting to my remark why its not possible to become a diksa disciple by reading a gurus book.

> A Guru of the caliber of Srila Prabhupada, his words and orders weight much more than all sastras together.

Your reference? I havent read him claiming this. Always only g-s-s.

We worship all gurus specifically during mangala arati. And every puja is done thru the guru parampara, Narada and Vyasadev included.

You can compare Srila Prabhupada to Ramanujacarya and Madhvacarya. Theyre still worshiped as their sampradayass founders yet there are their descendant diciples/gurus as well. Same in other Vaisnava sampradayas and also in Sankaracarya sampradaya, in both branches.

> proof from sastra that says an acarya cannot arrange to initiate disciples after his disappearance?

Sastra clearly speaks about gurus, disciples and parampara. Thats the Vedic system since the beginning of kalpa. So theres no need to forbid something else. Still, there are cases in our sampradaya related to this:

"Jayagopala was a kayastha from the village Kandra in Bengal. Having transgressed the mercy of his spiritual master, he was ostracized by Sri Virabhadra Gosvami from the Vaisnava society." (a description of Jayagopala from Gaudiya Vaisnava Abhidhana, khanda 3)

"In Radhadesa, there is a village named Kandra. Sri Mangala and Jnana dasa lived there. Jayagopala was born in a family of Kayasthas in that village. Out of false ego due to having obtained a high education, he became proud and evil-minded. His spiritual master was a pure devotee of the Lord but because he was illiterate, Jaya Gopala was ashamed of him. If someone inquired as to who his guru was, Jaya Gopala would say that his grand-spiritual master (parama-guru) was his guru. Srila Virabhadra Prabhu brought this up and ostracized him for having transgressed the mercy given to him." (Bhakti-ratnakara 14.180-183)

"Who does not cry on seeing the qualities of Sri Virabhadra Prabhu? He ostracized the sinful Jaya Gopala. Everyone came to know about this and no one would ever speak to him and so on." (Bhakti-ratnakara 14.190-191)

"One day Sri Madhavendra Puripada appeared to mother Sri Sita in a dream and told her with sweet words Listen, O Sita devi! My name is Madhavendra. Sri Advaita Candra took mantra from me. I will now give you the same siddha mantra that I have given to your husband and that attracts Krsna. Krsna does not eat grains offered to Him by an uninitiated person, and it is a great offence to act in a wayward manner.
"Sita-devi said: I am very fortunate that I met you. Please purify my heart and body with mantra initiation. Then Madhavendra Puripada gave Krsna-mantra initiation to Sita, after which he vanished.
"When Mother Sita awoke, she said: How amazing! Madhavendra Puripada gave me mantra diksa in a visionary dream! Sita devi told everything to Advaita Acarya, who said: You are very fortunate. All your bonds have been severed.
"Still, despite Sitas vision, He gave her initiation again, according to the rules, on an auspicious moment."
(The Glories of Advaita Acharya, translated by Advaita Dasa, published by Rasbiharilal and Sons, Loi Bazaar, Vrindavan. End of chapter Advaita Prabhus Marriage)

That one cannot take initiation from a departed guru is also clear from this episode from the life of Ramakrsna das Babaji (previously named Rampratap) recorded by Haridasa Dasa of Haribol kutir, Navadvipa, in his Gaudiya Vaisnava Jivani:

"During Ramprataps stay in the cave, Balwant Rao, the elder brother of Madhava Rao, the King of Gwalior, once came and expressed his loyalty to him. It was arranged that Balwant would take spiritual initiation from Krsnacaitanya dasa. But when Krsnacaitanya suddenly died, Balwant was initiated by Kesavdeva of Gopinathabag."

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]PurushaVyaghra Prabhu, youre not reacting to my remark why its not possible to become a diksa disciple by reading a gurus book.

> A Guru of the caliber of Srila Prabhupada, his words and orders weight much more than all sastras together.

Your reference? I havent read him claiming this. Always only g-s-s.[/quote]

Im listening to Srila Prabhupada right now, and he just said, "To accept guru means: Whatever you say, Ill accept." Unfortunately when I went to check the reference I accidentally lost my spot, but its CD 11, morning walk, either Hyderbad or Johannesburg.[br /][br /]
To me thats vastly different from hearing from the guru and then checking sastra to see if hes deviating. [br /][br /]
I know when I hear from anyone other than Srila Prabhupada, I compare it to what Srila Prabhupada said. I was supposedly initiated by a "living" guru, but I only judge him according to Srila Prabhupada as the standard. So whos really my guru?
[br][br][br]
I dont see the quotes about Jayagopala or Sri Sita as at all definitiive for settling the question of an acaryas ability to initiate after his disappearance. The quote regarding Balwant is more to the point, but still the circumstance is substantially different and were left to speculate on what exactly is the rule being applied and whether the presumed rule applies in the current circumstance. What is being asserted at present is that Srila Prabhupada purposely arranged a system for priests to give initiation on his behalf. Actually everyone knows he did that, but the question is whether he had the authority to continue it after his disappearance or whether his disciples had the authority to terminate Srila Prabhupadas order without his express approval and despite evidence that he intended for it to continue. Its not that Srila Prabhupada agreed to initiate somebody and then suddenly died. Were talking about whether an Founder-Acarya has the authority to make a planned arrangement for future initiations in his line.
[br][br]

As a matter of fact there is a GBC paper that says he did have that authority. The following is taken from a GBC paper entitled `ritvik Catechism'92 which was prepared by H.G. Badrinarayan Dasa, H.H. Umapati Maharaja and H.H. Giridhari Maharaja. These devotees were members of a special GBC sub-committee set up to address the ritvik issue. Their paper begins:

[br][br]

"Q. Could Prabhupada install a rtvic system?[br]
A. Of course he could. He told us that there are timingala fish, that the moon is fire covered with ice, that Bhu Mandala is a
flat plane. And we have accepted it. So it is not a question of our willingness or unwillingness to accept that Srila Prabhupada,
as the founder/acarya, could establish a new system of initiation. Rather it is a simple question of knowing and accepting
what Srila Prabhupada actually said..."

"If you accept somebody as guru, then you have to corroborate it whether sastra says that he is guru or any saintly person says that he is guru. This is the way. Similarly, when you take a scripture, you have to know it from the spiritual master, whether that is actually scripture, whether it is accepted by the saintly person. Sadhu. Similarly sadhu also, whether guru says, "Yes, he is sadhu." Whether sastra says, "Yes, he is sadhu." There are three things, sadhu-sastra-guru. So to accept one, you [b]have to[/b] take the [b]opinion of the other two[/b]. [b]Then youll get the right way."[/b] [Srimad-Bhagavatam 4:16:1 Purport]
[br][br]
Thats vastly different from just accepting guru says, and NOT checking sastra.
[br][br]
Its good that youre comparing what other people say to what Srila Prabhupada said; that would be the sadhu part, but you also have to understand that not everything they say will be exactly the same.
[br][br]
For instance, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Maharaja said that Lord Advaita was clean shaven, but Srila Prabhupada wanted a beard placed on him. It all depends on their own opinion. You said earlier that Gour Govinda Swami said that tapes and cds were bogus (or something similar), but Srila Prabhupada allowed it. Same instance, are you going to discredit Gour Govinda Swami for having a different opinion?
[br][br]
Rtvik initiation is found in the sastras, but it does not proceed on after the disappearance of the spiritual masters. The Sri Sampradaya has been doing it for ages, so its not new as the GBC paper says.

Kyros,
Thats an interesting quote but I dont think were reading it the same way. I dont see where it says that after accepting a person as guru, everything he says and does has to be corroborated with sastra. Sastra and sadhu verify that he is a guru, and based on that we can put faith in him. Personally I didnt get my faith in Srila Prabhupada that way though, but thats another story. Very briefly... I was studying brahmavadi and mayavadi philosophy and practicing raja yoga and kundalini yoga, when I left home to go meditate as a hermit in the forest. On the way I found Bhagavad-gita As It Is and became absorbed in reading it. While reading in the middle of the night, everything suddenly came together and I entered a trance and saw Krishna standing there. He spent much of the night with me and among His parting advice was, "If you want to learn more about Me, read Srila Prabhupadas books." Everything about my spiritual life is based on that night with Krishna. My faith is rooted in Srila Prabhupada because he revealed Krishna to me, even though only for a few hours; and Krishna certified him as His pure devotee. I eventually tried accepting someone else as my guru due to ISKCON pressure, but it was wrong and I cannot entertain it again. Anyone else can say whatever they like, but Im simply taking Srila Prabhupadas version and I trust how I understand him. I wish devotees would accept that, because I dont think Im going to change. Frankly it is completely stupid that devotees dont want me to say Srila Prabhupada is my guru. I sometimes wonder if they really believe in Krishna at all.

Thanks for your input Veda Prabhu. You said:

>PurushaVyaghra Prabhu, youre not reacting to my remark why its not possible to become a diksa disciple by reading a gurus book.

Guru is not synonymous to Diksha. It is a misconception. As mentioned before:

'93Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge. [break] ...knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing.'94
(SP Press Interview, October 16, 1976, Chandigarh)

Diksha is a formality, you can take the vow to follow reg. and chanting 16 rounds in front of GBC or Ritvik rep. or temple president or a pujari. It does not make much difference. Main thing is "Guru is the one who liberates us and with whom we are in deep love, faith and reverence." A guru is the one who gives a new birth to a seeker not only a diksha.

Those who cling to Diksha too much they like Guru to be responsible so that the Guru becomes answerable, so that the disciple can claim. If I am not redeemed you are responsible! This is a trick of the disciple to protect himself and to throw the responsibility on the Gurus head. And then he can go on living the way he wants to live. He has accepted diksha and now it is his responsibility of someone who has given Diksha to take him back to Godhead. What they fail to understand is they are responsible for their life, nobody else is responsible.

I am not rejecting Diksha process but as mentioned by Srila Prabhupada it is just a formality.

For devotees who loved Srila Prabhupada, he is still there. They still have the same feeling, when they go to Vrindavana, his place, his quarters where he lived, and when they sit near his samadhi, it still has the same freshness, the same presence, same radiance. And Srila Prabhupada still answers, instructs, still comes into their dreams, into their visions. For them there is no need to go anywhere; they have found their Guru.

There are others also who come to Srila Prabhupadas place '96 but he is no longer present there. They think that he is dead, they know that he is dead. It is only a graveyard now, an old temple, just relics. It does not matter they were initiated by Srila Prabhupada or not, It is good if they find some new Guru.They should find a new spiritual master.

In the end, I would say that each one has to decide for himself. Just listen to your own heart. If your heart is growing by following Srila Prabhupada, if it is blooming, new foliage is coming, new buds are opening, then he is your Guru. If it is not happening, then please do seek and search somewhere else with all my best wishes.

Hari Bol.

Pandu das Prabhu: Thats an amazing and wonderful story (entering a trance and seeing Krishna and then hearing those words from Him). It certainly illustrates the words from Caitanya Caritamrta: "guru-krsna-prasade paya bhakti-lata-bija."

Prabhus.

The only difference between ritvik and GBC is "WHO OWNS" a disciple. Everything else is the same. Siksa is the same, standards are the same, practices are the same....

All this creating separatism is nonsense. There is almost no difference, but they make it soooo important..... All this arguing for a minor point of "who is your diksa guru".

It is clear from Srila Prabhupada, that he didnt emphasize diksa like it is emphasized nowadays in ISKCON. Actually, diksa was never emphasized as it is today in ISKCON. Something went wrong, all this fighting for diksa is not a good sign.

Need I repeat that siksa is THE important thing? It is all about connection to Krsna through serving the Lotus Feet (instructions) of Sri Guru. Diksa is formality, which comes naturally through siksa relationship. It is no big deal by itself - it only gets purpose when backed up by strong siksa. Please dont forget, we are not "born again whatever",... Vaisnavism is an uninterupted flow of service to Krsna through sampradaya. Without constant Krsna Consciousness, diksa hardly matters anything.

Forget about all this diksa fighting. In modern ISKCON diksa is grossly mistreated and distorted, due to strong western influences. What matters is accepting instructions from Guru, and following them with your life and soul.

And, yes, diksa is very important, as we can see in HBV, just as there is thousands of others very important things, also revealed in HBV. No need to take diksa out of proportion, institutionalize it, then fight court cases on it, and destroy all who dont share your views - something is not right with this kind of approach. GBCs got their brain spoiled, they are going crazy, best to avoid them and their envious madness. It is sad, that they are forgetting that it is not important who holds diksa over another, but who instructs what to the other. They limit the wonderful disciplic succession to one casual showtime act of no-objection-ISKCON-diksa ceremony. How more laughable can a wannabe vaisnava branch get? It hardly gets more pathetic than this.

Please, dont limit your conception of Guru to limited views of those, who fight with each other for ownership of disciples. Dont seek help from those, who cannot help themselves.

Take understanding from Srila Prabhupada, and you will be just fine, dont worry. As a counterweight to ritvik/vs/GBC diksa-grabbing embarrassment, please see Srila Prabhupadas quotes below.

>>>Prahluc0u257 da Mahu257 ru257 ja is our guru, and Ku7771 u7779 u7751 a is our worshipable God.

>>>They asked, '93What is your idea of Jesus Christ?'94 I told them, '93He is our guru. He is preaching God consciousness, so he is our spiritual master.'94

>>>A guru, or spiritual master, can be anyone who is well conversant with the science of Ku7771 u7779 u7751 a. Therefore although Prahlu257 da Mahu257 ru257 ja was a gu7771 hastha ruling over the demons, he was a paramahau7745 sa, the best of human beings, and thus he is our guru.

>>>In the list of gurus, or authorities, Prahlu257 da Mahu257 ru257 ja'92s name is therefore mentioned:
svayambhu363 r nu257 radau7717 u347 ambhuu7717
kumu257 rau7717 kapilo manuu7717
prahlu257 do janako bhu299 u7779 mo
balir vaiyu257 sakir vayam

>>>We accept Ku7771 u7779 u7751 a as our guru. If He is perfect in knowledge, our knowledge is also perfect.

>>>The Sanu257 tana Gosvu257 mu299 , he was the finance minister in the government of Nawab Hussain Shah. So he is our guru in the disciplic succession.

>>>So try to follow the path chalked out by Prahlu257 da Mahu257 ru257 ja. He is one of the mahu257 janas. Out of the twelve mahu257 janas, he is also one of them. He is our guru. So try to follow Prahlu257 da Mahu257 ru257 jas instruction and behavior also. Just see his behavior, how he attained the stage of prema gradually.

>>>Therefore we have to go through guru. Ru363 pa Gosvu257 mu299 is our guru.

>>>We are not interested in all these magazines, because we are followers of Prahlu257 da Mahu257 ru257 ja. Hes our u257 cu257 rya. Hes guru. Prahlu257 da Mahu257 ru257 jas guru is Nu257 rada, and Nu257 rada is also our guru.

There is plenty more in Vedabase, (you can check yourself at http://prabhupadabooks.com/ ), but I think you get the point.

GBCs are very confused about guru-tattva, and so are ritviks. They are just two sides of the same confused coin. Dont take guidance from their confusion, or you will be confused just as they are. Take it directly from Srila Prabhupada, and be happy in Krsna Consciousness.

ys gnd

Pandu P., whats so difficult about it? Your siksa guru is SP, your diksa (if there was no rejection on either side) and siksa (if you accept it from him) guru is Bhaktimarga M.

Jayagopalas example shows that skipping beyond lesser-grade guru (ala SP disciples vs SP) is an avaisnava practice. Sitadevi had to be initiated acc to rules (of HBV, etc.). These are important lessons from our acaryas.

A case of ritvikism in Kartabhaja apasampradaya:

In Bangladesh, a new version of the Kartabhaja sect was founded some years back by one Anukul Chandra. He is now dead, but latter-day devotees can be directly initiated by him through preachers known as ritviks. New initiates must agree to follow the principles - be vegetarian once a week and worship no deity other than Anukul Chandras picture. (Suhotra Swami - Apasampradayas)

> Frankly it is completely stupid that devotees dont want me to say Srila Prabhupada is my guru. I sometimes wonder if they really believe in Krishna at all.

If you say siksa guru, no one can object. I dont see how its connected to believing in Krsna.

PurushaVyaghra P., your idea of diksa is very different from HBV. And the situation of blaming ones guru is a situation of a fallen disciple, not to be followed. You repeat something about SP being dead which no real disciple thinks. "Vaisnava lives still in sound..." Yet predecessor acaryas dont initiate. Really hard to understand for some.

The purpose of having a physically accesible guru is due to our inability to efficiently communicate with Paramatma/Krsna/departed guru. We need pariprasna, correction/chastisement and ideally also a personal onsite training. Otherwise our future is uncertain.

> Without constant Krsna Consciousness, diksa hardly matters anything.

Diksa is planting of the seed of KC. If the seed is not cultivated, the planting was useless.

[quote][cite] Pandu das:[/cite]Kyros,
I dont see where it says that after accepting a person as guru, everything he says and does has to be corroborated with sastra.[/quote]
[br][br]
Its the very first sentence.
[br][br]
"If you [b]accept[/b] somebody as guru, then you have to corroborate it whether sastra says that he is guru or any saintly person says that he is guru."
[br][br]
Heres another interesting quote.
[br][br]
""Sadhu-sastra-guru: one has to test all spiritual matters according to the instructions of saintly persons, scriptures and the spiritual master. The spiritual master is one who follows the instructions of his predecessors, namely the sadhus, or saintly persons. A bona fide spiritual master does not mention anything not mentioned in the authorized scriptures. Ordinary people have to follow the instructions of sadhu, sastra and guru. [b]Those statements made in the sastras and those made by the bona fide sadhu or guru [u][i]cannot[/i][/u] differ from one another."[/b] [Srimad-Bhagavatam 4:16:1 Purport]
[br][br]
And another
[br][br]
"A guru is a bona fide spiritual master who follows sadhu and sastra. [b]Guru means abiding by the injunction of the sastra.[/b] Guru is in the disciplic succession, one who is strictly following the footsteps of the sad-gosvamis and is speaking strictly on the basis of sastra.
[br][br]
So many unauthorized persons are presenting themselves as guru, but one must be very careful. Guru does not manufacture any rules and regulation. He refers to the sastra. In order to know who is a qualified spiritual master, corraborate with sadhu and sastra. Sadhu confirms the scriptures and guru accepts the scripture; [b]they are never in disagreement.[/b]"[Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 11-13-72, Vrindaban]

Back to Vedabase, found the quote:

Indian lady: How does one contact the spiritual master? Through a book can you contact the spiritual master?

Prabhup'e4da: No, you have to associate.

'c7y'e4masundara: "Can you associate through a book?" she asked.

Prabhup'e4da: Yes, through books, and also personal. Because when you make a spiritual master you have got personal touch. Not that in air you make a spiritual master. You make a spiritual master concrete. So as soon as you make a spiritual master, you should be inquisitive.

http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbw.cgi?Gw=%22Not+that+in+air+you+make+a+spiritual+master%22

It looks that a disciple is seen only as the person who was initiated by someone. So if someone was initiated by Prabhupada - he is "Prabhupada disciple", at least we use it like that in ISKCON. It leads to confusion - that to become Prabhupada disciple one needs to be initiated by him. History of ISKCON and splinter groups shows that the act of initiation has often little to do with actually becoming a disciple, statistically. The ritvik camp is only concerned with this initiation. Prabhupada on the other hand would see "his dsiciple" as one who is following him, regardless who gave him the formal initiation. This connection is solid and not in the air and there is no need of some apasampradaya forms of diksa such as ritvikism. We all in ISKCON are Prabhupada disciples, if only we can live up to it.

>Prabhupada on the other hand would see "his dsiciple" as one who is following him, regardless who gave him the formal initiation. This connection is solid and not in >the air and there is no need of some apasampradaya forms of diksa such as ritvikism. We all in ISKCON are Prabhupada disciples, if only we can live up to it.

CCD, I fully agree with you. Formal initiation is not of much importance, really important is living upto Srila Prabhupadas instructions as you said and that makes us his disciples.

Some devotees joined the movement in early days, and they have rendered more service to the mission of Srila Prabhupada. Naturally they are seniors and deserve respect. But when they try to replace Srila Prabhupada completely, and they claim that new devotees can not have any connection with Srila Prabhpada and it has to be via them only because they are physically present and Srila Prabhupada is physically absent, this does not feel very right. It seems they forgot that many of them, themselves have never met Srila Prabhupada.

Veda Prabhu, you said:

>>Diksa is planting of the seed of KC. If the seed is not cultivated, the planting was useless.>>

Absolutely right. But this planting does not happen just by sitting next to fire and throwing some grains in fire. It only happens when two hearts meet. It happens in Consciousness. Gurus vani makes an impact and a small awakening in soul arises. Then this small awakening (the seed of Bhakti lata) is need to be watered and nurtured for creeper to grow. Physical presence is no barrier. Throwing grains in fire in the physical presence is symbolic. Those who cling just to the fire ceremony, they miss the point.

A thing can be made. It is possible to make a table from wood, it is possible to make a statue from stone but it is not possible to make a person Krsna Consciousness by throwing grains in fire. It will be like reducing a person to a thing. It will be below human dignity.

Hari Bol.

ccd: Yes, this is siksa. And its prominent in our line, no one objects about it. This doesnt mean diksa should be given up. Theres no "either-or", both are there.

PurushaVyaghra:

>>there is no need of some apasampradaya forms of diksa such as ritvikism. We all in ISKCON are Prabhupada disciples, if only we can live up to it.

> CCD, I fully agree with you.

Fine that you agree that ritvikism as not needed.

> Formal initiation is not of much importance, really important is living upto Srila Prabhupadas instructions as you said and that makes us his disciples.

However, both are needed. Some of us are diksa+siksa disciples of SP, some are his siksa disciples. Both of us are expected to follow him and to please him. One thing he was very wary were "fratricidal wars".

> But when they try to replace Srila Prabhupada completely, and they claim that new devotees can not have any connection with Srila Prabhpada and it has to be via them only because they are physically present and Srila Prabhupada is physically absent, this does not feel very right.

Whom do you mean? I dont remember meeting any SP diksa disciple serving as initiating guru promoting this idea. They always put SP before them as far as siksa goes: "read Prabhupadas books". Even gurus who wrote their own books didnt forbid reading SPs books.

> But this planting does not happen just by sitting next to fire and throwing some grains in fire.

No one claims that fire yajna is an essential part of diksa. Its like a boost for diksa, so to say, a ceremonial vow engraving the diksa in the heart of the disciple (the function of samskara). BSST introduced it to show that we follow both bhagavata and pancaratrika paths.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]

> Formal initiation is not of much importance, really important is living upto Srila Prabhupadas instructions as you said and that makes us his disciples.[p]
However, both are needed. Some of us are diksa+siksa disciples of SP, some are his siksa disciples. Both of us are expected to follow him and to please him. One thing he was very wary were "fratricidal wars".[/quote] However I know of a few very qualified devotees, like for example Bh. Jan from CZ, who are long time not initiated. Nothing wrong with that, out of all titles Bhakta is probably the most desired by true devotees. I would prefer to be called Bhakta rather then Prabhu...ys ccdas

Veda:>>Yes, this is siksa. And its prominent in our line, no one objects about it.

It is not true. We have a system of hierarchy based on Diksha in ISKCON. If siksha would be really prominent as you claim we wouldnt have this wrestling in courts among Ritvik devotees and Gurus.

>But when they try to replace Srila Prabhupada completely, and they claim that new devotees can not have any connection with Srila Prabhpada and it has to be via them only because they are physically present and Srila Prabhupada is physically absent, this does not feel very right.
>>I dont remember meeting any SP diksa disciple serving as initiating guru promoting this idea.

Is it so hard to understand that this conflict is a struggle for identity. Ritviks have seen enough fall downs and scandals of Uttama Adhikari ISKCON Gurus. They want to be identified as related to Srila Prabhupada not as related to present Gurus. Whereas present Gurus are not ready to share this title of "Prabhupada Disciple" with them. You might say Shiksha is more prominent but that is only theoretically in practical life in ISKCON Prabupada disciple is only the person who was initiated by Srila Prabhupada before Nov. 1977.

Guru camp has collected some quotes from scriptures to support their idea and ritviks dont have much support from scriptures so they have got some letters written by Srila Prabhupada and some of his quotes so they can go on and on and on. There will be no end to it.

If they would be really following the principle of Shiksha, they wont be wrestling in the courts. It is true what CCD says: "We all in ISKCON are Prabhupada disciples, if only we can live up to it."

Hari Bol.

Prabhupada never used term siksa disciple or diksa disciple - disciple is a disciple.

One can have quite a few siksa gurus, but still you are just a dsciple (not diksa disciple, skisa disciple or vartma-pradarsaka disciple...disciple is a disciple). This caste system of Prabhupada disciples and others should be stopped and normal standard diksa system of parampara to continue, where disciple of a guru becomes a guru.

It is obvious that the whole reason for ritvik apasampradaya is because for some (not very clear to me) reason getting diksa from Prabhupada was (or still is) considered to be better then one who is initiated by his disciple. Explain to me why is it better? I do not accept it.

Prabhupada used his disciples to give mantra form 1972... and later got them to chant on beads... are these initiations are somehow less effective? Are those who got only first initiation from Prabhupada are less disciples of Prabhupada? Of course not, in the same way those who got diksa from Prabhupada disciples or prasisyas are not less in any way and have same chance to become Prabhupada disciples.

Unless you embrace this understanding there will be no way to stop ritvik apasampradaya -- replace Prabhupada disciple card with "good disciple". ysccd

CCD:>>
"Prabhupada never used term siksa disciple or diksa disciple - disciple is a disciple.
One can have quite a few siksa gurus, but still you are just a dsciple (not diksa disciple, skisa disciple or vartma-pradarsaka disciple...disciple is a disciple). This caste system of Prabhupada disciples and others should be stopped"

Yes, I really dont understand why people keep dividing disciplehood in between siksa and diksha. Devotees are reading Srila Prabhupadas books, trying to mould their lives according to his instructions. It is natural that they feel emotional towards Srila Prabhupada, there is nothing wrong in it but some people will never forget to tell these devotees that they are only siksha disciples.

CCD:>>
"It is obvious that the whole reason for ritvik apasampradaya is because for some (not very clear to me) reason getting diksa from Prabhupada was (or still is) considered to be better then one who is initiated by his disciple. Explain to me why is it better? I do not accept it."

I can not answer this question as I am not a ritvik yet however my guess is:

1) During Zonal Acharya system, Gurus were worshipped as good as God but later their scandals were revealed and there were many fall downs so Ritviks feel insulted in being a disciple of present Gurus, may be they consider them reliable. An anecdote:

Charlies wife died last night. All the neighbours came to his house in the morning. They were weeping and crying. Everyone was crying except for Charlie. Surprised neighbours asked "Charlie, your wife has died, why are you not crying?" She is a very big lier and can not be trusted, replied Charlie. If she will not get up after 3 days only then I will consider her dead, replied Charlie.

2) Once someone takes Diksha in ISKCON, it affects each and every aspect of disciples life. Guru governs each and every decision of disciples life. For example, to whom he or she will get married, what service he or she will do, in which city or temple he or she will live etc. etc. etc. Sometimes things get so complicated in these issues that disciples even return the initiation beads back to their Guru and gurus get rejected. Whereas Ritvikism offers more freedom and saves the disciple from all these hassles. However ISKCON authorities have understood this problem, and recently Anuttama Prabhu conducted Guru Seminars, some workshops in which he was training ISKCON gurus, how to handle this type of situations and how to become better Gurus. Detailed reports of these seminars are there on ISKCON news website.

CCD:>>
"It is obvious that the whole reason for ritvik apasampradaya is because for some (not very clear to me) reason getting diksa from Prabhupada was (or still is) considered to be better then one who is initiated by his disciple. Explain to me why is it better? I do not accept it."

When you use the word apasampradaya, I dont really know if your mentality is to condemn ritviks or not, but I have read that some Gurus condemn Ritviks very heavily. If they get so angry and excited it only shows that they are under the modes of passion and ignorance. How devotees can worship someone who is under the modes of passion, as good as God, as a Guru. When Gurus condemn Ritviks, they not only condemn Ritviks but they condemn themselves as well.

CCD:>>
Unless you embrace this understanding there will be no way to stop ritvik apasampradaya -- replace Prabhupada disciple card with "good disciple

I am grateful to you for this advice and will try my best to be a good disciple. But I am not in a position to decide if Ritviks are apasampradaya or not. I have not read their documents and havent studied this issue in detail. I tried once but I found this issue to be very time consuming because it is full of letters, historical evidences etc. and I never was able to spare that much time. What I understood was "there is a glass which is half full of water." One party is saying it is half full while other is saying that it is half empty." I dont think so they will ever come to a conclusion.

What I would like to see is that they should come to at least that much understanding, so that this wrestling which is going on in courts can be stopped. They have killed the Krsna Consciousness of all these people ( judges, lawyers etc) who were involved in this litigation. There is no hope for these people to become Krsna Conscious in this life time. And many other people as well who came to know through media, how devotees are fighting with each other. They are draining precious resources provided by krsna in this court cases. It is very disturbing to see what is going on.

Hari Bol.

"Wrestling" which is going on in court is only about the 60krores temple of Bangalore and control of it. It was designed and built by Madhupandit and he wants to keep control over it, a material element in bhakti obviously.

If you do not call ritvikvada an apasampradaya, then what is it? It is absolutely fine to exhibit anger or lower modes in regard of apasampradayas, that is how you purify yourself from the contact with such evil things.

There are no ISKCON gurus. There are just devotees who are gurus to other devotees, they all are not your gurus I take, unless you took shelter of all the c.74 devotees doing this service in ISKCON (GBC does not even know how many there are). I guess we keep calling them in plural ISKCON gurus because when only 11 or 12 were gurus, they were gurus for all devotees, mandatory, which is where the problem started. Guru-disciple relationship in ISKCON is a subjective thing, but every one member has this relationship with Prabhupada, thus we all share it with him only, equally I must add.
.

CCD:>> that is how you purify yourself from the contact with such evil things.

You call Ritvikism evil and so do many other ISKCON leaders and Gurus. They have been doing this for last 10 years. But ritvikism has not died rather it has become more popular. Dont you think so there is some fundamental flaw in this approach towards ritvikism. The more they criticise and condemn, it is getting more popular. I think unconsciously they themselves have helped the very cause of Ritvikism.

Further, I think you are prejudiced against ritvikism. It has never been tried, never been implemented not tested anywhere in ISKCON. The temples where it has been implemented like Bangalore, they have come out to be extremely successful. So what are your basis of calling it evil?I Please provide some evidence of the evil nature of Ritvikism.

If some systems deserves to be called evil, I think that can only be the present Guru system. There are hundred little ISKCONs within one ISKCON. I have changed several countries, whereever I went I found devotees covered by a strong shell of some Swami, it is very hard to break this shell and be a part of community because one is not their God-brother or God-sister. They have their private Vyasa-pujas and disciples of other gurus are not allowed there, they have their private retreats open only to a certain group of devotees. This really divides the community of devotees and can be called evil. I have lived it and I have experienced it.

On the other hand, just imagine Ritvik system, wherever you go there is only one Guru, no different groups with their politics and everyone is your relative, Godbrother or Godsister and one can become part of them. Like it was in those days when Srila Prabhupada was present. It actually feels to me a very good idea. I feel thrilled, when I close my eyes and imagine this situation that all boundaries have been broken, every devotee is related to me and I am related to devotees, there are no private vyasa pujas, no private retreats of different groups and I can be part of any group. It is so beautiful but alas it is just an imagination, just a dream. I feel Ritvikism is the only way this dream can become a reality.

I feel surprised when you call it evil. Dear CCD, please elaborate, as I am very confused why do you call it evil?

I am not 100% sure, if Srila Prabhupada ordered this Ritvik system or not, I havent dived deeply into this issue yet. But I would surely try to spend some time in researching more about the facts about it.

Thank you.

Hari Bol.

PurushaVyaghra P., you say you didnt study ritvikism but you use all its arguments. How come?

> I really dont understand why people keep dividing disciplehood in between siksa and diksha.

Since g-s-s make this difference. Otherwise the terms siksa and diksa would be unnecessary,
one term would be enough.

> some people will never forget to tell these devotees that they are only siksha disciples.

This is a wrong, proud attitude.

Micromanagement of a disciples life is not the duty of a guru. Guru teaches and trains disciple in siddhanta and practical devotional service.

> The more they criticise and condemn, it is getting more popular. I think unconsciously they themselves have helped the very cause of Ritvikism.

Only among those who dont care about g-s-s but prefer to be ruled by frustration and sentiment.

> It has never been tried, never been implemented not tested anywhere in ISKCON. The temples where it has been implemented like Bangalore, they have come out to be extremely successful. So what are your basis of calling it evil?I Please provide some evidence of the evil nature of Ritvikism.

Not only in ISKCON but in any genuine sampradaya. Since its deviant from g-s-s.
How to measure a success in the first place? In actions of Madhupandit I see material
motivations.

Evil means against g-s-s.

> There are hundred little ISKCONs within one ISKCON.

Thats a wrong approach, condemned by SP.

> On the other hand, just imagine Ritvik system

Christianity is basically a form of ritvikism. There are over 3000 competing groups, some quite inimical of others. So much for the unity. Therefore theres no warranty that your dream could be ever fulfiled.

You reminded me of this:

Imagine theres no heaven
Its easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

Imagine theres no countries
It isnt hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

You may say Im a dreamer
But Im not the only one
I hope someday youll join us
And the world will be as one

I wonder if you can point out where this differs from GV siddhanta...

But did you know that three out of every four people in the United States comprise seventy five percent of the population in America?

Veda:>>
Imagine theres no heaven
Its easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

You are carrying too much unnecessary luggage of false knowledge on your head. I dont know how much you are attached to it but my humble advice is that your journey towards back to Godhead could be much smoother if somehow you could throw this luggage away.

>>that is how you purify yourself from the contact with such evil things.
>>Evil means against g-s-s.

You have been taught how to hate others by those who claim to carry love of Godhead in their hearts. It is a strange phenomenon, never heard before, never seen before. No wonder you claim that it comes from g-s-s.

>>Christianity is basically a form of ritvikism. There are over 3000 competing groups, some quite inimical of others. So much for the unity.

We have tried different versions of Guruship by hierarchy based on Diksha for last 30 years and the end result is chaos. Srila Prabhupada ordered Ritvik system so we need to try it at least once and see the end result who knows it might work very well for our society. I do not see any point in being worried that if it hasnt worked for Christianity, it will not work for us as well. We have tried one and now we need to try Ritvik system and check the end result and keep the one which is better for society.

>>How to measure a success in the first place?
How do you measure health? When there is no disease in the body, it is healthy body. Same goes with the sociey. At present body of our ISKCON society is full of diseases, for example:

1) Dead Book distribution
2) Empty temples except for Sunday when Hindu devotees come for program.
3) In UK, ISKCON has officially declared itself as leader of Hindus and identifies itself with one group
4) Different camps of devotees

the list can go on.

Ritvik system keeps Srila Prabhupada and his teachings in the centre and these diseases can only be cured if Srila Prabhupada is kept in centre of our activities. Why some people are so much against it, I can understand the logic that they consider it against g-s-s, but when they call it evil and spread hate against devotees who are in favor of this idea, that makes me doubt "Are they really lovers of g-s-s or do they have some other motives?"

I am grateful to you for considering my opinion on this matter and in the end I pay my humble obeisances to Lord Sri Krsna who resides in everyones heart (whether Ritvik or Paramparavadi) as Lord Paramatama.

Hari Bol.

>On the other hand, just imagine Ritvik system, wherever you go there is only one Guru, no different groups with their politics and everyone is your relative, Godbrother or Godsister and one can become part of them.

Better wake up to the reality, the most diverse schism is ritvikism, there are 6 different groups (IRM, KK Desai, Hansadutta etc) that fight with each other, it is a fact there is more infighting in ritvik apasampradya then anywhere in iskcon. In fact the places where there many different gurus preach, hardly any fractions present, due to the fact that number of devotees who associate with one particular leader is proportionately small.

Absolutely with Veda - ritvikism just a movement that does not accept single authority and continues to split split and split again.

[quote][cite] PurushaVyaghra:[/cite]Veda:>>
Imagine theres no heaven
Its easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...
[br][br]
You are carrying too much unnecessary luggage of false knowledge on your head. I dont know how much you are attached to it but my humble advice is that your journey towards back to Godhead could be much smoother if somehow you could throw this luggage away.[/quote]
[br]
"Only one who can learn the process of nescience and that of transcendental knowledge side by side can transcend the influence of repeated birth and death and enjoy the full blessings of immortality." [Sri Isopanisad 11]
[br][br]
[quote]>>that is how you purify yourself from the contact with such evil things.
>>Evil means against g-s-s.
[br][br]
You have been taught how to hate others by those who claim to carry love of Godhead in their hearts. It is a strange phenomenon, never heard before, never seen before. No wonder you claim that it comes from g-s-s.[/quote]
[br]
Evil [b][i]things[/i][/b]

Thanks, ccd and Kyros, for your support.

PurusaVyaghra:

Since when is a simple request a sign of false knowledge...?

I have learned to hate the sin, not the sinner.

If someone has other motivations than sticking to g-s-s, its their problem.

You only judge from your ISKCON UK/US experience, extrapolating it to the whole world.

>>that is how you purify yourself from the contact with such evil things. >>Evil means against g-s-s.

>>You have been taught how to hate others by those who claim to carry love of Godhead in their hearts. It is a strange phenomenon, never heard before, never seen before. No wonder you claim that it comes from g-s-s.

Kyros :>>Evil things

Kyros Prabhu, Please do not bite my finger, rather try to look where my finger is pointing.

Just read todays news paper(Sampradaya Sun) and came to know about Judeo-Christian war going on in ISKCON. It is very very important to stop listening to those people who teach to hate others.

Veda:>>I have learned to hate the sin, not the sinner.

Dear Friend Veda Prabhu

I was here just to have some chit-chat with devotees. I am not trying to get any Victoria Cross by converting someone into something. However when I see statements like:
>>that is how you purify yourself from the contact with such evil things. >>Evil means against g-s-s.

elsewhere also I have come across similar statements, some by lour leaders. When I see these hate statements, I feel compelled to say something:

You are trying to be loving towards your Gurus, Srila Prabhupada and at the same time you want to keep hate towards Ritviks. It is not possible. If one is a loving person, he will be loving towards everyone, if he is hateful then he is hateful towards everyone. You can not be hateful towards a group of people and loving towards another group of people. This is not possible. The nature of hate is such that You can either keep it as a whole or either throw it as a whole. This is a small bit of advice from this friend of yours, if you like keep it otherwise feel free to throw it.

I can not digest the idea that Paramhamsas ask their followers to hate others. Those who are real Paramhamsas they are full of love and they are desperate to share it and when they share their love, they do not check the identity of people whether he is black or white or Ritvik or Paramparavadi. They just share it. As we can see in the lives of Jesus Christ, Srila Prabhupada.Srila Prabhupada saw a vision for ISKCON for next 10000 years. But with the amount of hate spreading around in ISKCON, how this will come true? Its only upto his followers to make it true.

I am grateful to everyone who spent their valuable time listening to me. I am grateful to all my friends and enemies who have helped me to make any type of advancement on spiritual path. In fact, I am more grateful to my enemies, they have helped immensely, they have found my faults, how would I come to know my faults without their help. Everyone has helped me in their own ways.

In the end, I offer my humble obeisances to Lord Sri Krsna who is seated in everyones heart as Antaryami Paramatama.

Hari Bol.

I dont read Sampradaya Sun, to me its "Sunprajalpa Sun."

I only want to read things relevant to my understanding, both material and metaphysical, and that website doesnt fulfill that. Though at times it does contain some information, but the amount of insults thrown back and forth is what drives me away.

Also, I dont think VEDA, ccd, nor me hate rtviks. What we do hate is when people twist around concepts and tradition without thinking them through. We dont hate the rtvik concept, because it is a bonafide way to initiate disciples. What we specifically dont like about this whole thing is that they want to push a post-humous rtvik system; thats it. I can understand why they would push for it, especially after all the falldowns and failures that have happened in the past 30-40 years, but that still doesnt make it right.

Im not making this up.

'93The very sound of the word '91mukti'92 immediately induces hate [ghRNA] and fear, but when we say the word '91bhakti,'92 we naturally feel transcendental bliss within the mind.'94 (CC Madhya 6.277)

Prabhupada: We cannot say, just like, in some hotels, that "Such and such persons are not admitted." No. We cannot. We admit everyone. Our mission is to elevate persons from down state of life to the highest state of life. So everyone is in down state. Lord Jesus Christ also said that "You do not hate the sinners, but hate sin." Is not that, Lord Jesus Christ said? So hippies may be sinners. We raise them to the pious life. But we say, "Dont do this. Dont do this sinful act. Dont take intoxication. Dont do this. Dont do this." We hate sin, not the sinners. Actually. If we hate sinners, then where is the possibility of preaching? (conversation 29 Apr 1969)

SP uses "hate the sin" in Path of Perfection 3 and BG lecture 6.6.-12 15 Feb 1969.

> You can not be hateful towards a group of people and loving towards another group of people. This is not possible.

You promote monism - "no good and bad". But this distinction is there even in nitya-lila. (Ive just run into this while editing, NOD 30:)

Violence
When K'e5'f1'eba was fighting with the K'e4liya snake by dancing on his heads, K'e4liya bit K'e5'f1'eba on the leg. At that time Garu'f2a became infuriated and began to murmur, "K'e5'f1'eba is so powerful that simply by His thundering voice the wives of K'e4liya have had miscarriages. Because my Lord has been insulted by this snake, I wish to devour him immediately, but I cannot do so in the presence of my Lord, because He may become angry with me." This is an instance of eagerness to act in ecstatic love as a result of dishonor to K'e5'f1'eba.
When 'c7i'e7up'e4la objected to the worship of K'e5'f1'eba in the R'e4jas'fcya arena at a sacrifice organized by Mah'e4r'e4ja Yudhi'f1'f6hira, Sahadeva, the younger brother of Arjuna, said, "A person who cannot tolerate the worship of K'e5'f1'eba is my enemy and is possessed of a demoniac nature. Therefore I wish to strike my left foot upon his broad head, just to punish him more strongly than the wand of Yamar'e4ja!" Then Baladeva began to lament like this: "Oh, all auspiciousness to Lord K'e5'f1'eba! I am so surprised to see that the condemned descendants of the Kuru dynasty, who so unlawfully occupied the throne of the Kuru kingdom, are criticizing K'e5'f1'eba with diplomatic devices. Oh, this is intolerable!" This is another instance of eagerness caused by dishonor to K'e5'f1'eba.

>>>Also, I dont think VEDA, ccd, nor me hate rtviks>>>>

I am very pleased to know this. There are already enough sources of hate around. Religions hate each other, nations hate each other, political parties hate each other, then there are different classes of people black and white, they hate each other etc. etc. etc. Already so many sources of hate. Why to increase more, why is it so important to hate Ritviks, that was my whole point? And the very purpose of Krsna Consciousness movement is to spread love of God not hate.

>>>You promote monism - "no good and bad". But this distinction is there even in nitya-lila. (Ive just run into this while editing, NOD 30:)
Violence
When K'e5'f1'eba was fighting with the K'e4liya snake by dancing on his heads, K'e4liya bit K'e5'f1'eba on the leg. At that time Garu'f2a became infuriated and began to murmur, "K'e5'f1'eba is so powerful that simply by His thundering voice the wives of K'e4liya have had miscarriages. Because my Lord has been insulted by this snake, I wish to devour him immediately, but I cannot do so in the presence of my Lord, because He may become angry with me." This is an instance of eagerness to act in ecstatic love as a result of dishonor to K'e5'f1'eba.
When 'c7i'e7up'e4la objected to the worship of K'e5'f1'eba in the R'e4jas'fcya arena at a sacrifice organized by Mah'e4r'e4ja Yudhi'f1'f6hira, Sahadeva, the younger brother of Arjuna, said, "A person who cannot tolerate the worship of K'e5'f1'eba is my enemy and is possessed of a demoniac nature. Therefore I wish to strike my left foot upon his broad head, just to punish him more strongly than the wand of Yamar'e4ja!" Then Baladeva began to lament like this: "Oh, all auspiciousness to Lord K'e5'f1'eba! I am so surprised to see that the condemned descendants of the Kuru dynasty, who so unlawfully occupied the throne of the Kuru kingdom, are criticizing K'e5'f1'eba with diplomatic devices. Oh, this is intolerable!" This is another instance of eagerness caused by dishonor to K'e5'f1'eba.>>>>>>

Transcendental anger described here is beyond the mode of goodness an expression of pure love exhibited by pure devotees towards their beloved Lord. The hate we were discussing is below the level of mode of goodness and can not be compared with this expression of pure love.

When I say throw this hate away, I do not promote monism. The energy which is expressed in hate, same energy when purified, turns into love of Godhead. Sikshashtakam says: Cheto darpan marjanam, the cleansing of the mirror of consciousness. This is what I mean that this hate energy has to be cleaned and turned into love of Godhead. Passion when cleaned by the process of Shravanam, Kirtanam, it is the very same passion which turns into compassion and hate consciousness after being purified turns into love of God.

Love of Godhead is spiritual wealth. Principle of material economics does not apply on spiritual wealth. In material economics if you share your wealth, if you distribute, it decreases and a stage comes when a person might go bankrupt. But spiritual wealth (love of Godhead) the more one shares, it keeps increases. A vaishanava is like a well. Well keeps distributing water, the more it distributes the more it gets from underground springs. A vaishnava is a spiritual well, he goes on sharing his love and the more he shares the more his love for his Lord increases.

A true Vaishnava like Srila Haridas Thakur, when he shares this love of Krsna, he does not ask the identity of person whether he is a friend or a foe. Even his enemies when they beat him, he still does not hate. He simply can not hate, he is overflowing with love of Krsna. He is beyond the dualities of friend or enemies. I can not remember the verse no. but it is from Chaitanya Charitamrita:

Sthavar jangam dekhe, na dekhe tar murti, sarvatra hai nij Istadeva sphurti.

This is the symptom of that who has really obtained the love of Godhead. Plus please have a look at Srimad B.Gita Ch.12, text 18-19.

Again, I am grateful to you for spending your time, listening to me and I offer my humble obeisances to Lord Sri Krsna who is situated in your heart as Antaryami Parmatama.

Hari Bol.

The love of a madhyama devotee may also look like a hate if aimed against adharma. If he wouldnt love the person in the grip of adharma, he couldnt care less what the person does or believes. Therefore many of our acaryas defeated apasiddhantas. BSST even has this characteristic in his pranama mantra - rupanuga-viruddha apasiddhanta dhvanta harine. Hes the destroyer of darkness created by deviations from the path of Rupa Gosvami.

Hare Krsna

Veda:
>>>The love of a madhyama devotee may also look like a hate if aimed against adharma. If he wouldnt love the person in the grip of adharma, he couldnt care less what the person does or believes. Therefore many of our acaryas defeated apasiddhantas. BSST even has this characteristic in his pranama mantra - rupanuga-viruddha apasiddhanta dhvanta harine. Hes the destroyer of darkness created by deviations from the path of Rupa Gosvami.>>>>

You justify such statements of hate (Ritviks are evil, ritviks are enemies) with the example of BSST. You say:

Hes the destroyer of darkness created by deviations from the path of Rupa Gosvami.

I agree, he is the destroyer of darkness but the question is how? how he destroys the darkness? How to destroy the darkness?

The famous verse of C.C.

krsna surya sama maya haya andhakar.
jaha krsna tahan nahi mayar adhikar.

Maya is andhakar. Andhakar means darkness. How will you destroy darkness? You can go to a dark room, full of darkness with a stick, be hateful and start beating the darkness. Will the darkness go away? It will never go away. It will just laugh at you. But if you bring some light or a candle, darkness will go away. It can not say I am hundred year old darkness. I have been here for 100 years and I am not going to go away. Why is that?

Because darkness does not have any existence of its own. Its just absence of light. Once the light is there darkness can not remain there. Krsna Surya sama, Krsna is the sun and if Krsna is there, sunlight is there, Maya can not remain there. Maya does not have any of its existence. It is just absence of Krsna Consciousness. Bring Krsna Consciousness in the heart and maya can not remain there as if bring the sunlight and darkness can not remain there. Sunlight does not destroy the darkness, darkness is just absence of sunlight.

Ritviks are been condemned and hated for last 10 years, they are still there, I do not have exact statistics but according to my observation of ISKCON for last 10 years, it looks like that they have increased. It is same as beating the darkness with the stick and trying to remove it. It wont help. Srila Prabhupada said "Purity is the force". He did not say this just because he had to say something. When BSST destroys darkness, he brings with him a shining sun of purity and the knowledge of right path shown by Srila Rupa Goswami, dont think so that he destroys the darkness just by criticism only or by spreading hate.

You are eager to destroy the darkness, you do nothing to darkness, do something with the light.This vada and that vada they are there because of the absence of the sun of purity. Follow the rules of purity,Teach purity, preach purity and not the hate. Become Krsna Conscious as much as you can, and you need not to say million words, few words will do, if krsna consciousness is there you need not to teach people that others are evil and enemy, they will stay there and will not leave.

I remember 10 or 12 years ago when I travelled to India (my apologies, I can not remember the exact year) one Ritvik devotee was sent to jail on the allegations that he raped one Mataji who belonged to other group. This devotee committed suicide in jail and he wrote a note that he did this because he was falsely charged in this controversy and his character was destroyed and one Maharaja was responsible for that. And then that Maharaja could not go to India for several years because of fear of being arrested.

This is the ugly stuff, our dirty past, which I dont think so will be very much appreciated by BSST. If you still insist that this hate is good, then another question is that "WHERE WILL YOU DRAW YOUR LINE, HOW FAR WE CAN GO IN THIS HATE BUSINESS?" It is not clear from your comments.

Again, I am grateful to you for considering my opinion and I offer my humble obeisances to Lord Krsna seated in your heart as Antaryami Paramatama.

Hari Bol.

From the history of GV we see that apasiddhantas appeared already quite early after the tirobhava of Sri Caitanya. So its not the case of some mass degradation but few deviant persons here and there starting apasampradayas taking advantage of ignorant, frustated, sentimental etc. people. One could say - good, they are punished for their foolishness. But acaryas dont want anyone to suffer the consequences of falling into adharma and thus actively suppress those deviations by their strong preaching. Their hate is not aimed against people but against deviations and aparadhas stemming from them. The line is drawn by g-s-s, where else.

Hare Krsna

>>>Their hate is not aimed against people but against deviations and aparadhas stemming from them>>>>

When they make statements like Ritviks are evil and our enemies, it is obviously directed towards people and these are very dangerous statements. In fact, there is no such thing as ritvikism. This is only a word which exists on papers. In reality, you wont find any such thing as ritvikism. Whereever you will go, you will find people, individuals. If you go to ritvik temple there will be only individuals, people only.

>>>>>actively suppress those deviations by their strong preaching>>>>>
They are evil and our enemies, this type of statement you might call it an active preaching of an acharya, whereis I see this as statement of a person who is psychologically ill and need to be sent to a nursing home for treatment.

Veda Prabhu, I would like this discussion to come to an end now. I think we can go on and on and it will never come to an end. Some people might call me evil because of my above comment but my comment is not directed towards any particular individual, it is a general statement and applies for ritviks as well. There are many in Ritvik camp who also make statements like this and I can not agree with this type of statements. It has been seen that sinners turn into sages and sometimes sages turn into sinners. Dacoit Ratnakar can become Maharishi Valmiki.People are not be hated. It is just a matter of wise or stupid. Sometimes people act stupidly and sometimes they act wisely.

I am grateful to you and will be looking forward to have some more discussion with you on some other topic in near future. I offer my humlbe obeisances to Lord Sri Krsna who is seated in everyones heart as Lord Paramatama.

Hari Bol.

Ritvik idea is real and those who carry it and spread are called ritvikists. That cant be denied, sorry.

By strong preaching I mean esp. the writings and talks by BVT and BSST. Also SP is strongly against deviations and his disciples shouldnt give in to them. Otherwise the future is bleak.

At least I dont call anyone evil. Even Krsna says asura bhava asritah, persons taking shelter of asuric mentality, not asuras themselves.

I hope this exchange was of some help to someone. Hare Krsna.

I havent had time to write here lately but Ive skimmed over the posts, and what Im seeing is that the anti-rtvik folks are assuming theyve proven their point of view when in fact theyve done no such thing. What is the use of talking about "hate the sin but no the sinner" when you havent demonstrated that what you call a sin is that at all. Someone who says Srila Prabhupada wanted the rtivk system to continue after his disappearance is considering his efforts a service to Srila Prabhupada, to Krishna, to the devotees, and to the whole world; and you call that "sin." Your view is that Srila Prabhupada couldnt have ordered it because you say it is apasampradaya, but that only means you think you know more about the sampradaya than Srila Prabhupada and that you can therefore dismiss his written orders in favor of your own view of sastra and parampara.

The clear fact is that on May 28, 1977, Srila Prabhupada was asked how initiations were to be conducted after his diappearance, and he immediately replied by officiating acarya a.k.a rtvik acarya. The July 9 letter began by referencing this conversation with emphasis on the rtvik appointments, which undoubtedly means that it was an official proclamation addressing the same question. That is Srila Prabhupadas direct order, which some devotees want to evade by giving jumping over the acarya to make their own interpretation.

What is being called "sin" here is simply devotees urging the GBC to follow the direct order of ISKCONs Founder-Acarya instead of dismissing it and doing things according to their own ambition and over-intelligent interpretation. One has to follow the acaryas order. What could be more simple? Instead such faithful devotees are called enemies and driven away. No wonder ISKCON is in such a sorry state.

Madhudvisha: His question was that can you take
initiation by accepting the spiritual master in your
heart without actually taking...

Prabhupada: This is a bogus proposition. It has no
meaning. If you think within yourself, '93I am eating,'94 will
you be satisfied? If you starve and simply think, '93I have
eaten everything.'94 Is that a very practical proposal? You
must eat. We don'92t say all these bogus propositions.

'97 Lecture in Melbourne, on 21 May 1975

Arkanand Prabhu,

Thats an interesting quote, but what does it prove? Are you thinking it means that the rtvik system Srila Prabhupada created had to stop upon his disappearance? If so, why? There is major evidence that he intended and ordered the rtvik system to continue, and there is no instruction given by him saying it was to stop or had to stop. He never authorized it to stop, nor did he appoint any gurus, nor did he give instruction on how the GBC should authorize or acknowledge gurus. Or if anyone has clear evidence to the contrary, I havent seen it.

Beyond that, we dont even know the question Srila Prabhupada was answering because its incomplete. Was he expecting Madhudvisha to say "without actually taking initiation," or "without actually taking vows," or something else? Either way, getting initiated by Srila Prabhupada assisted by rtviks does not contradict anything Srila Prabhupada said in this quote or any other statement that I know of.

[img=http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1892_mad_smiley_banging_head_against_a_brick_wall.gif]

ccd: I surely didnt expect the exchange will be helpful to everyone. Thats life. But Ive done my part and hope Prabhupada is pleased.

Hare Krishna Pandu Prabhu

Just as you, I was fortunate to recieve the mercy of Srila Prabhupada through his books especially Bhagavad Gita As it is. An atheist that I was, Prabhupada was instrumental in turning my life around some 11 years back. Therefore I am committed and attached to Srila Prabhupada and his words.

From my studies of Guru, Sadhu, and Shastra based on SP books, I am 100% convinced that Srila Prabhupada did not intend an indefinite ritivk system to carry on within ISKCON for the next 10,000 years. If he wanted a ritivik system which is not ordinary course of action, I can bet he would have mentioned it clearly among the many rules and standards he set for ISKCON not at his death bed but way before. Srila Prabhupada mentions that this Krishna Con movement will go on for the next 10,000 years. We just have to cooperate and push on the movement. Having such a grand vision for ISKCON for 10,000 years, Srila Prabhupada did not exclusively and categorically mention about ritivik system for the next 10,000 years in his July 9 letter or any where else. The letter being a primary evidence for ritivik supporters does not without doubt establish ritivik initiations as standard operating procedure for the next 10,000 years within ISKCON. On the contrary, SP has so many times extolled the importance, value and primary necessity of taking shelter of a personal guru, getting initiated by him, and serving him in ardent submissivness through his books, and lectures. In fact, his whole life, his journey to the west, and his establisment of ISKCON is such an offering of Guru Dakshina thus establising the significance of Guru Parampara. The July 9 letter, therefore in my humble opinion, cannot be seen in an isolated way removing the personality or as a standard operating procedure that was intended for ISKCON for the next 10,000 years. It does not say that and is not clear.

While I say this, I also have to recognize and mention the colossal failure from the Guru system within ISKCON thus creating so much stress, anxiety and doubts among the loyal devotees of Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON. This is sad and depressing and that which requires serious enquiry. Enquiry not external but internal. Guru fall down, and so many other issues is simply a result of Vaishnava apradha stemming from immature and superficial performance of sadhana and adherance to Guru vakya this resulting in chaos in the lives of many. Taking shelter of ritivkism is not the solution. It is, in my opinion, another deviation closely imaging mayavadism. While it may sound and even feel correct as there is not personal accountability to a living guru, it sounds like the best fit solution to the ever existing problems within ISKCON. So the ritvik band wagon is convincing.

Anyways...Pandu prabhu, I can see you derive inspiration, and strength from direct association with Srila Prabhupada in his vani form. I salute you for that as you are a sincere soul and do not want to settle for anything less than pure. What value is there to intellectually prove our stance to everyone. Just as you are convinced, many are convinced to submit to a personal guru and serve them with SP books, instructions and guidance as the big picture. I do not think it is correct to measure up every living guru within ISKCON to Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada is a Vaikunta man...period...and all others especially the initiating Gurus (whoever is serious and sincere) are following in his footsteps. I do not see how they do not qualify as Gurus if their motivations, heart, words, actions and life is sincere, serious and without ulterior motives. I cannot speak for all Gurus but from my exposure, I am convinced some are really serious and do not have any ulterior motives and simply want to serve SP with all their heart and soul. Why should I not take shelter of them? They may not be beyond the modes of Material nature but surely they can help us connect us to SP in a sincere way...I am concinvced of this because they are sincere.

So the solution as I see it is to clean the sludge that has overflown within ISKCON by being the change agent ourselves and not bring an idea such as ritivik and think it will solve the problem. If we preach purity as the need of the hour, then we have to strive for purity ourselves. In my opinion, ISKCON as a whole is lacking such inspirational pure figures. There are some but not everyone is inspired.

It is one thing to be inspired by SP on a personal level and be attached to him and another to bring about systemic change within ISKCON when there is no categorical language supporting the same.

Prabhu, I did not write this to convince you but this is my position on this issue thus far.

Hare Krishna
Ananda Jagannath Das

Pandu das, I really dont know what to say.

You clearly dont understand, and youre not going to understand.

Good luck trying to push this rtvik system, just try not to piss off the Indians too much.

Ananda Jagannath Prabhu,

Hare Krishna. So youre 100% convinced one way, and Im approaching 100% convinced the other way. Im happy with cooperating but the GBC doesnt agree though Im not even challenging their right to initiate disciples (if someone wants to take their chance with them, what can I say?), only their right to stop Srila Prabhupada from initiating. They apparently dont even have an official position paper on the subject, having withdrawn theirs due to mistakes. Yet they wont allow devotees like me to remain ISKCON and follow what I understand to be Srila Prabhupadas order. I cannot discuss the issue with local devotees because I want my family to continue to be accepted as a part of the community. In a meeting last year, our GBC twice described rtvik supporters "enemies of ISKCON." Its a difficult situation. Im continuing to serve with disciples of ISKCON gurus, but its not at all satisfying compromising my integrity like this.

Srila Prabhupadas books are general instructions, but his July 9 letter was an order. Orders are to be followed even if they apparently contradict general instructions. If one considers the different categories of evidence, a dual-signed letter sent to all the TPs and GBCs near the end of his manifest pastimes beats practically anything. In the same category of evidence would be his Last Will, and that also supports the rtvik view. Funny I just realized that neither of these documents are subject to revision, unlike his books.

How initiations were to continue in ISKCON after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance are not specified in Srila Prabhupadas books; otherwise there would have been no need to question him about it on May 28, 1977. However they did ask him, and his immediate answer was officiating acarya a.k.a. rtvik acarya. The discussion that followed is ambiguous, and the tape has been forensically analyzed and found suspect, but I dont think anyone disputes the subject matter. The original question is clear: "Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when youre no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted." The July 9 letter followed as promulgation of an official order, and the fact that it begins by referencing the May 28 conversation indicates that it addresses the same subject, specifically, how initiations are to be conducted _after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance_.

Hare Krishna.

Hare Krishna Pandu prabhu

I have read your blogs and I see you as a sincere person wanting to serve the mission of Srila Prabhupada. I do not think I have even 5% of your sincerity. So I cannot say anything or comment anytihng on your positiion. I can see how you want an ideal state for ISKCON versus how it is currenty. We both agree there needs reformation...however, I disagree with the ritvik concept as the solution for I think ritvik is another version of mayavadi theory.

You consider July 9 letter as the final order for the next 10,000 years, I disagree there as well. I do not see it as the final order. You claim Srila Prabhupada books are general....but again that is your interpretation while I think there are general and specific instructions in his books (both are there). Prabhupada has said his books are the law books for the next 10,000 years which means law is specific but how we apply it in time and place requires intelligence (not material but spiritual). Therefore we have to cultivate that spiriual intelligence to apply the teachings of Srila Prabhupada. BG 10.10 tells us how.

Debating this issue over the internet will only give grief.

Hare Krishna

Arkanand Prabhu,

Hare Krishna. I see that many devotees say that the rtvik method cannot be applied after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance. I dont see where Srila Prabhupada said that or where satra says that. They say its about guru-sadhu-sastra, but theyre asserting something that neither sastra nor guru says. Its "me and my sadhu friends" say so. You say that rtvik is a kind of mayavada theory, and Ive heard others say that too, but Ive never heard anyone explain how continuing to honor the Founder-Acaryas order for ongoing rtvik-assisted initiations in his society is mayavada. Do you actually understand mayavada philosophy? I studied it for years before Krishna and Srila Prabhupada rescued me. It is the philosophy that I am God but have apparently put myself into illusion. Honoring the acaryas order is not mayavada. However, "because I said so" is mayavada. Several devotees have told me that the rtvik method is wrong, but they have been unable to show how it is wrong based on Srila Prabhupada as the authority.

I have never said that the July 9 letter is the final order for the next 10,000 years. Srila Prabhupada can give another order if it is Krishnas will. I gave up mayavada because Krishna appeared to me fully animated in a painting and gave instruction, and I do not see any reason why Srila Prabhupada cannot do something similar if he so chooses. There is a murti of Srila Prabhupada in each ISKCON temple. Do you think that is Srila Prabhupada sitting there, or is it a statue? If it is Srila Prabhupada, why can he not give initiation if a rtvik performs the ceremony under his order? Of course, if he wants he can come down off his asana and do it himself, but he has ordered for rtviks to do it. Accepting this is not mayavada. It is faith.

>...Krishna appeared to me fully animated in a painting and gave instruction, and I do not see any reason why Srila Prabhupada cannot do something similar if he so chooses.

Good. So Pandu P., if you dont accept the references given earlier, please ask Krishna and Prabhupada to reveal to you the truth about ritvikism. This seems to be the only way you can be convinced.

[quote][cite] Pandu das:[/cite]
Hare Krishna. I see that many devotees say that the rtvik method cannot be applied after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance. I dont see where Srila Prabhupada said that or where satra says that. [/quote]

-----------------

Pandu, eventually you will understand, that todays "ritviks" misunderstand Srila Prabhupadas instruction regarding officiating acaryas. True, Srila Prabhupada said: "Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acaryas. ... Rtvik, yes."

But, Srila Prabhupada never said, that officiating acaryas will initiate devotees into Srila Prabhupadas direct disciples. This is extrapolation invented by todays so-called "ritviks", and is wrong. Todays "ritviks" are not really ritviks, officiating-acaryas, that Srila Prabhupada envisioned; they wrongly claim to be something, they are really not.

While "ritviks" today claim, that they follow Srila Prabhupada without doubting and interpretation, unfortunatly they wilfully ignore the following Srila Prabhupadas instruction regarding ritvik, officiating-acarya system:
==========
Tam'e4la Krsna: No, hes asking that these rtvik-'e4c'e4ryas, theyre officiating, giving diks'e4. Their... The people who they give diks'e4 to, whose disciple are they?
Prabhup'e4da: Theyre his disciple.
Tam'e4la Krsna: Theyre his disciple.
Prabhup'e4da: Who is initiating. He is granddisciple.
==========

It is quite simple, once you let it sink in..... Ritvik system of officiating acaryas is set by Srila Prabhupada for all future, but, PLEASE NOTE, new disciples become disciples of ritvik initiator !!! Thats the meaning of "granddisciple". Todays so-called "ritviks" completely ignore Srila Prabhupada on this point, and thus they give bad name to the real ritvik system of officiating acaryas, as implemented by Srila Prabhupada

On the other hand, clearly, GBC system of gurus is wrong, because they try to make paramahamsas where there is none. Even if this is not officially admited by GBC, one can see from interactions between GBCs Gurus and their disciples, that GBCs-Guru post somehow promotes one to a "higher level" of whatever.... GBC system is attempting to artificially create gurus, as are in detail described in Srila Prabhupadas books, and in absence of really qualified persons, GBC creates illusion of qualification for their gurus, and as result, what we get are ISKCONs Rock-star gurus.

It is clear that Srila Prabhupada set ritvik system for ISKCON, which was to work in absence of really qualified gurus. But, Srila Prabhupada didnt plan that everybody will be his diksa disciples forever. Ritviks were to initiate, and devotees would become theirs (ritviks) disciples. And, naturally, when some ritvik guru (or other devotee) would become qualified as per description of guru in Srila Prabhupadas books, then he would naturally give more siksa to his disciples, and thus you would get more traditional guru-disciple relationship. But, in absence of qualified gurus, officiating-acarya system, as implemented by Srila Prabhupada, is perfect.

Nowadays "ritviks" are improperly implementing Srila Prabhupadas ritvik system of officiating-acaryas and their disciples. They seem to be a bit confused regarding diksa, and think in lines of diksa being all in all. Maybe some smarta contamination or something.... Whatever the reason, they are missing something, otherwise they would be able to understand, that disciple of ritvik becomes his (ritviks) disciple, and Srila Prabhupadas granddisciple.

It will get fixed eventually, and GBC-system and ritvik-system will nicely coexist in cooperation, and eventually become ONE future guru system in ISKCON. It just may take some time, before they both become able to admit their own misunderstanding, and learn to see good in others. Right now both GBC-system and ritvik-proponents-system are questionable, and can be considered as apasampradaya. But it will start getting cleared eventually, probably after this first generation of gurus (GBCs and "ritviks") moves on. Surely in the following few generations things will normalize.

Dont forget, ISKCON still has some 9500 years to go, which is a lot comparing to cca 2000 years of christianity. Plenty of time for qualified gurus to appear, and plenty of time to gain proper understandings. We just need to constantly expose ourselves to Srila Prabhupadas treatment, and we will be fine. :)

ys gnd

Here is entire section from conversation (GBC Meets with uc0u346 ru299 la Prabhupu257 da '97 May 28, 1977, Vu7771 ndu257 vana) :

==========
Satsvaru363 pa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when youre no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.
Prabhupu257 da: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating u257 cu257 ryas.
Tamu257 la Ku7771 u7779 u7751 a: Is that called u7771 tvik-u257 cu257 rya?
Prabhupu257 da: u7770 tvik, yes.
Satsvaru363 pa: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the...
Prabhupu257 da: Hes guru. Hes guru.
Satsvaru363 pa: But he does it on your behalf.
Prabhupu257 da: Yes. That is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order... u256 mu257 ra u257 j'f1u257 ya guru ha'f1u257 [Cc. Madhya 7.128]. Be actually guru, but by my order.
Satsvaru363 pa: So they may also be considered your disciples.
Prabhupu257 da: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?
Tamu257 la Ku7771 u7779 u7751 a: No, hes asking that these u7771 tvik-u257 cu257 ryas, theyre officiating, giving du299 ku7779 u257 . Their... The people who they give du299 ku7779 u257 to, whose disciple are they?
Prabhupu257 da: Theyre his disciple.
Tamu257 la Ku7771 u7779 u7751 a: Theyre his disciple.
Prabhupu257 da: Who is initiating. He is granddisciple.
==========

:gnd: > But, Srila Prabhupada never said, that officiating acaryas will initiate devotees into Srila Prabhupadas direct disciples.

Actually Prabhupada insisted a few times for new initiates to have guru-disciple relationship with devotees he deputed to be gurus. It is interesting that actually practically all devotees initiated in 1977 are not directly initiated by Prabhupada, yet they were given the Prabhupada disciple card (but not immediately, it happen only after a few years, they were actually serving their respective gurus for some years). It is at that point when some started to use the Prabhupada disciple card that the system established by Prabhupada started braking up. ??

Giri-nayaka Prabhu,

Ive read five different transcriptions of that conversation a total of several dozen times trying to make sense of it, but I dont find a consistent answer in it. It seems to me that its best explained as follows:

"...the GBC passed a resolution in 1997 to have the [May 28, 1977] tape investigated by a forensic examiner. This was done through a special committee set-up for this task, who engaged the services of world renowned forensic investigator, Norman Perle. On September 22nd, 1997, Mr Perle released a report of a preliminary analysis that was done on a COPY of the tape. A preliminary analysis is usually done to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for conducting a much costlier and more in-depth forensic investigation. Normally if the preliminary analysis, which only runs some basic checks, finds evidence that casts doubts on the reliability of the evidence, a full forensic examination is recommended by the investigator on the ORIGINAL version of the tape, to conclusively determine the nature and scope of any possible tampering. This is what the report concluded:

'93In conclusion, this recording exhibits strong signs suggestive of falsification. I do not believe that these deficiencies
might possibly be the product of some mechanical process or problem within the recording or duplication process and
I believe that they exist at what is considered to be a higher degree than that of a coincidence. I strongly recommend
that an independent Forensic Analysis be conducted the Master recording in order to determine the authenticity and
originality of the evidence. This analysis requires what is represented as the original recording and the original tape
recorder upon which this recording was represented to be made.'94
(N. Perle, GBC appointed forensic investigator, 22/9/97)

"The conclusion, in the words of the GBC'92s own appointed examiner, is that until such a forensic analysis is done on the ORIGINAL tape, we have no grounds for assuming the reliability and authenticity of the evidence. Thus until the investigation is
done the GBC effectively have no evidence on the table." (http://tinyurl.com/lkhr6r)

-----
Giri-nayaka: "PLEASE NOTE, new disciples become disciples of ritvik initiator !!!"

Pandu: Again I repeat my previous question: Why does the July 9 letter reference the May 28 conversation if the May 28 conversation is supposed to be addressing the question of initiations after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance? Please note that this letter says, "The newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad, the above eleven senior devotees acting as His representative." Nowhere in the letter does it say that it is only for when Srila Prabhupada was ill, nor is there any published conversation with Srila Prabhupada saying that. Instead it references a conversation that has been proven to be unreliable evidence but which everyone agrees is about initiations after Srila Prabhupadas disappearance.

Jaya sri krishna ,thank you pandu das and arkananda das prabhu for such interesting discussion and philosophical portrait of these different initiation conclusions and siddhantas.When srila Prabhupada was in australia and new zealand many years ago ,one devotee named siddhaswarupa ananda swami had started initiating devotees .Even though he had accepted srila Ac bhaktivedanta swami as his guru,he had infact jioned iskcon with disciples and though a powerful personality was motivated to initiate even in srila Prabhupadas presence.He clashed with the then authority Madhudwisa swami,and a meeting was arranged to please both teams .Iskcon and the haribols as they were known.Srila Prabhupada informed siddha swarupanandana swami that it was not the proper vaishnava etiquette to infact initiate in the presence of ones guru.He asked him to bring the disciples to him personally ,thus fulfilling the requirements as a disciple.

This was also the case ,which seems pertinent in the situation faced by srila Prabhupada as he made arrangements to leave his earthly pastimes.Surrounding himself with his most competent disciples,especially Tamala krishna goswami whom srila Prabhupada had developed the most intimate relationship with over many years.Jayapataka swami,bhakti caru swami,hrskesh maharaja,hauri sauri das to name a few.As is the vaishnava way his foremost disciples are there especially at the end.Not all disciples are equal in service or ability hence several were especially looked to,taking responsibility for the final chapters.These disciples being important because these unique disciples would be encouraged,driven,tempered to almost perfection in a last attempt to solidify srila Prabhupadas mission so that it might be impossible for it to flounder after his disappearance.Our unique line also has a history of guru surrounding themselves with their most competent servants especially towards the end ,just to allow the most intimate service,usually only reserved for the most genuine loving disciples .Hence the opinions of those disciples is of extreme importance.Tamala krishna goswami was not a ritvik,though my siksa guru he always accepted us warmly even though we had another diksa guru.Infact he saw this ritvik deviation in a similar light to the pastimes of the haribols,not to initiate in the presence of ones guru.Hence since we are in need of such senior devotees,please bless me with their siksa life after life.