"Since Srila Prabhupada himself Coined the term "Ritvik", it is very
offensive to Srila Prabhupada, to denounce this term. The attempt of certain
persons to degrade the transcendental Vedic term "rtvijah" or "ritvik"
to a derogatory word is one more example of offenses that have entered iskcon due to our
neglect of Srila Prabhupada's advice."
USA, Dec 1 (VNN) -- As heard by Pita das
Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances at the feet of all the assembled
Vaishnava Devotees of the Lord who are just like desires trees fulfilling the desires of
everyone. All glories to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada. The
fact of the matter was Srila Prabhupada made himself very clear on how new devotees coming
into his movement were to be accepted into it after his disappearance. The word ritvik was
first heard by me from Srila Prabhupada's Lotus mouth and His Divine Grace used the term
many times during his last two weeks in Vrindaban. I remember this clearly because I
didn't know what a ritvik was.
Srila Prabhupada called this ritvik acharya transparent to the previous acharya. This is
the position His Divine Grace bestowed upon his 11 disciples who he said gave up the most
to serve him establishing ISKCON. Srila Prabhupada spoke many times about how these
devotees should carry on the movement after his departure, many times I was to hear him
say: "Is that clear do you understand?" Yes, Srila Prabhupada its all clear
Tamal Krishna Goswami would say, no questions, Srila Prabhupada, you have made everything
clear. All of this was recorded and heard by many devotees at the time.
Now what has happened to all these tape recordings was the responsibility of Srila
Prabhupada's secretary at the time. I saw a great amount of tapes from that period in his
tape ministry 1978. This is a fact and he knows this well regardless of what he may say
now.
After Srila Prabhupada's Mahasamadhi these 11 and others were very swift in establishing
their new ritvik acarya transparent to the previous acaryas position with no regard or
respect for the feelings of their god-brothers. But then they weren't calling themselves
as ritviks acaryas but gurus with big big Vyasasana, 6 months after Srila Prabhupada's
Mahasamadhi. Bhagavan was having his feet washed in milk. With some of his godbrothers
saying we are recording every word he says we aren't going to make a mistake with him like
we did with Srila Prabhupada. Bhagavan asked me in April of 1978 how do you like the
temples I have inherited? When I was sent to Southern Europe to collect for India BBT
library party. What they did and are still doing now for the last almost 22 yrs was to
place themselves in a position incapable for themselves to maintain.
We cannot jump over Srila Prabhupada's head. In China this is called crossing the bridge
and burning it. On one morning walk with devotees along a beach Bhavananda Prabhu used to
tell the story that they were all walking with Srila Prabhupada and they came to a log
thrown across the path, so Bhavananda extended his arm to assist Srila Prabhupada in
crossing. As soon as Srila Prabhupada crossed it safely he took Bhavananda's hand and
threw it down with anger and Bhavananda of course was very upset and uncertain what he had
done to make Srila Prabhupada so angry with him. Then Srila Prabhupada looked at him and
said: "This is the mood of the Mayavadi, I use the Guru until I cross and then I kick
him away.
Has this not happened in ISKCON? Disembodied entities blasphemous statements directly
stated towards His Divine Grace? About 3 to 4 days before His Divine Grace's departure
when many of the devotees were in Srila Prabhupada's room Srila Prabhupada told us: "Of
my disciples I see no one who has my qualities but if I look at this or that one, I see
some percentage of my qualities there, so I have some faith that this movement can go on."
"The test of your love for me will be shown at how well you work together." The
last part of this statement became almost a slogan in ISKCON after Srila Prabhupada's
departure. The first part I have only heard from Srila Prabhupada's Lotus mouth.
Where did this idea of Ritvik come from Prabhujis? From Srila Prabhupada and only from His
Divine Grace. Because this order was misunderstood and thousands of devotees are now
seeing themselves as the disciples of our godbrothers. It isn't that it wasn't correct -
Acinca beda beda tatva simultaniously one and different. Yes, they are ritvik gurus and if
they are transparent to the previous acarya they are directing the current of Spiritual
electricity - guru parampara. The problem has been though that we have imitated
Srila Prabhupada without having His Divine Graces qualities.
Once one creates something he is no longer transparent and the electricity will not flow
it is broken, thus no guru parampara connection. So it has been going on now for so long,
this imitation. We all have heard devotees then even trying to imitate Srila Prabhupada's
voice His Divine Grace way of speaking and like a transvestite we all know its a fake, the
transvestite knows clearest of all , so it simply needs to be corrected. All new devotees
should wait and not hurry for diksa from anyone for at least a year or more. Let us all
pray to Srila Prabhupada for guidance. More tapes may be discovered, more confessions may
unfold. Only when the truth returns can we trust each other again. Frankly speaking, I can
only trust a handful of my godbrother, but I love them all dearly because I have seen them
sincerely serve Srila Prabhupada.
They acted as ritvik to me and they helped me understand Srila Prabhupada, they brought
before Srila PRABHUPADA? Rabindra Swarupa gave me the flower and taught me to offer it to
Srila Prabhupada's Lotus feet - he is my guru bai (my first attendance of Gurupuja). Offer
this flower and bow down he told me. Tamal Krishna Goswami taught how to cook for Srila
Prabhupada (deity form) he is my guru bai. This subji is too salty. This one is too dry,
it needs to be more like...? I know all the tastes he would say. Vishnu Jana Swami got me
to join Srila Prabhupada's movement he is my guru-bai. Radha Krishna Radha Krishna in life
and death I have nothing but you! Teajas Prabhu showed me how to give up everything to
serve Srila Prabhupada he is my guru-bai. Teajas there is no food in the temple, Gour
Govinda Maharaja is eating goard vines and soaked tapioca. Don't bother me with your
material considerations!!! I'm busy and he really was. Kavichandra Swami took care of me
and helped me to get to Vrindaban to be with Srila Prabhupada he is my guru bai. Surabi
Prabhu showed how one can use all of their talents in serving Srila Prabhupada with every
last ounce of his strength he is my guru bai. Guru Kripa Prabhu shows me even now how
Srila Prabhupada is always with him he is my guru bai. Narahari gave me my first service
among the pots and pans of Miami he is my guru bai. Patit Udaran Prabhu taught me how to
survive in India he is my guru bai. Matanga Prabhu shows me what a real devotee should be
like, he is my guru bai.
Its now time for us all to lighten up but be grave at what the future of our movement is.
This movement is being directed by Lord Chaitanya Himself, but are we listening to Him? If
we listen the path will be made so clear and we can easily walk. As Srila Prabhupada would
often say the dogs may bark but the caravan will pass .
This story URL: http://vnn.org/world/WD9812/WD01-2597.html
Tamala Krsna:
Is that called ritvik-acarya?
Prabhupada: Ritvik,
yes.
[Note: Srila Prabhupada (Tamal) equates "officiating acarya" with "ritvik" which is the second direct repudiation of the successor diksa-guru senario in ISKCON.]
Readers would please note
the word 'ritvik' was introduced by a disciple, (Tamal Krishna) while Srila Prabhupada himself chose to call this
curious post "Officiating Acharya". Readers are also reminder that
"ritvik" was not an unknown term to Srila Prabhupada. The disciple (Tamal) who
introduced the term seems to have had rather fixed ideas associated with this term or
title.
We are not sure whether Srila Prabhupada subscribed to the same ideology (conveyed by this
terminology ritvik) as the said disciple. Sanskrit being a complicated language, with
words meaning vastly differing in varying contexts, plus Srila Prabhupada's preference to
use a self-coined terminology, 'officiating Acharya' and his irritation points to the fact
that he did not care for this term. Readers may discern that in fact both these terms (a)
Officiating Acharya (b) ritvik, conveyed two different ideas. Let us examine them. The
first one 'officiating Acharya' was Srila Prabhupada's, who combined two conflicting words
to coin this new term. Readers be cautioned, 'Officiating Acharya' may convey a new idea.
Perhaps on the line of "Achintya bada abada tattva". Simultaneously yes and no.
For what can be more negating that officiating and Acharya? While officiating conveys the
meaning of a clerk or priest, the other word, 'Acharya', conveys complete authority. Srila
Prabhupada perhaps had his reasons to come up with this new term. Disciples familiar with
his mood may readily agree. After all the most crucial decision was being made and
time-scale had ceased to be dependable.
The term 'ritvik' was introduced by a disciple (Tamal Krishna) as mentioned earlier. And
again it must be understood, this term conveyed to him and perhaps his group a specific
meaning. Where they derived their meaning is not known. Yet, just as distinctly as
'officiating Acharya' meant something to Srila Prabhupada so did 'ritvik' mean to the said
disciple and his group. It seems 'ritvik' to the disciple and his group meant 'priest' and
nothing else.
Thus officiating as a priest for Srila Prabhupada was what the disciples
interpreted. While Srila Prabhupada himself may have had something else on mind.
When pressed, Srila Prabhupada was mildly irritated and reluctantly agreed to the term
Ritvik being similar or same as Officiating Acharyas. It is not difficult to understand
why Srila Prabhupada gave in to this term. After all, he was still around to guide
personally, and sometimes it is just to difficult to push through an idea as subtle as
'officiating Acharya' through a whole mountain of crowding disciples.
In any case, the appointment letter conveys the term 'ritvik' and here the reason given
too may not be entirely Srila Prabhupada's. The letter mentions the fact that, what
formerly was carried out by the temple presidents, will now be done by the newly appointed
'ritviks'. In other words, the disciples understanding of the term 'ritvik' as a
officiating priest, was firmly established. It may not have been exactly What Srila
Prabhupada intended.
Okay, I can see I may be confusing people, so let me explain.
Srila Prabhupada intended to appoint Officiating Acharyas. Not ritviks.
(But Tamal equates officiating acaryas with ritviks) Let me explain the difference.
Ritviks specifically means priests. No power no potency. So does officiating. However,
'officiating Acharya' is mule! It conveys both. Perhaps a period of officiating, followed
by full and automatic transition to Acharyaship. In other words, a period of trial
followed by the real thing. Or mentoring. Or change of the guards. Appointing the heirs.
All over the world, outgoing rulers, CEO's often allow the heir apparent to take over the
reins fully. Yet, the outgoing ruler or authority continues to provide guidance from
behind and remains the titular head until the end.
In the case of a disciplic succession, matters are slightly more complicated as the new
appointee cannot become Acharyas as long as the current Acharya was alive. This is
Spiritual etiquette whether it involves Moses to Joshua, Elijah to Elisha or Siddhanta
Saraswati To Srila Prabhupada or Srila Prabhupada to Newly appointed eleven, 'not here not
there, officiating Acharyas'. This dilemma is age old. It seems futile to fight it. Thus,
it can be seen the term 'officiating Acharya' does convey a certain 'achintya bada abada
tattva! And, has to be recognized as vintage Srila Prabhupada. It is a pity he was muscled
into dropping it, by our editor in chief!
What complicated matters was the term 'ritviks' and the understood meaning of the word. An
appalling lack of intelligence seems unfortunately evident. For, the disciples
inadvertently, thought that they were mere priests, officiating for Srila Prabhupada. They
did not see themselves as heir appointees (at least the think tank did not).
What Srila Prabhupada intended was that they will commence initiate disciples, though
while he was still alive, the disciples thus initiated would be registered in his book as
his disciples, but eventually when he passes away, the officiating Acharyas would
automatically become Acharyas eligible to accept their own disciples. That was the
intended arrangement.
What actually happened was this. The 'ritvik' ideology did not permit this automatic
transition. A priest does not become an Acharya. He cannot officiate for someone who has
passed away. Readers, the mindset of the disciples involved has to be clearly understood
for these subtle mysteries to be understood. Yet, no other 'final order was forthcoming.
So, they quietly usurped the post of the Acharyas that all along actually belonged to
them! Of course, it involved minor deception, which is why the whole lot of them becomes
utterly miserable when so accused!
My advice is rise, the eleven chosen ones, put an end to this crippling infighting.
Your humble servant,
Jeevanmukta Dasa
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
nrjames@hotmail.com
P.S. The above 4 lines in blue color have been inserted into this letter for
history record, and are not part of Jeevanmukta Dasa
original article. Original Story URL: http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9901/ET18-2874.html
Srila Prabhupada's May 28, 1977 ISKCON
Governing Board Commission (GBC) meeting.
Notes enclosed in [ ]
Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you're 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.
[Srila Prabhupada clearly did not state "diksa-guru" nor "acarya" which is a direct repudiation of the successor diksa-guru accepting their own disciples senario in ISKCON.]
Tamala Krsna: Is that called ritvik-acarya?
Prabhupada: Ritvik, yes.
[Srila Prabhupada (Tamal) equates "officiating acarya" with "ritvik" which is the second direct repudiation of the successor diksa-guru senario in ISKCON.]
Satsvarupa: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the...
Prabhupada: He's guru. He's guru.
Satsvarupa: But he does it on your behalf.
Prabhupada: Yes. That is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order... Amara ajnaya guru haia. Be actually guru, but by my order.
[This is the third direct repudiation of Srila Prabhupada's disciples accepting their own disciples in ISKCON.]
Satsvarupa: So they may also be considered your disciples.
Prabhupada: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?
[This is the fourth direct repudiation of the successor diksa-guru senario in reply to Satsvarupa's question.]
Tamala Krsna: No, he's asking that these ritvik-acaryas, they're officiating, giving diksa. Their... The people who they give diksa to, whose disciple are they?
[Here Srila Prabhupada ends his conversation with Satvarupa and replies to Tamal's misunderstanding. Tamal's misunderstanding is clearly evident as he repeats Satvarupa's same question which was already clearly answered by Srila Prabhupada. Further, Tamal's misunderstanding is clear in his saying that ritviks and officiating acaryas give diksa which they clearly don't, as they merely are representing the uttama-adhikari diksa-guru. Tamal's misconception of "diksa" and "diksa-guru" is that both diksa-guru and disciple must be physically present for diksa which clearly contradicts Srila Prabhupada's teachings.]
Prabhupada: They're his disciple.
Tamala Krsna: They're his disciple.
Prabhupada: Who is initiating. He is grand disciple.
Satsvarupa: Yes.
Tamala Krsna: That's clear.
[Here Tamal draws his own conclusion and foolishly accepts only the sentence ("There're his disciple.") which he likes or understands. He ignores Srila Prabhupada's clear answers to Satvarupa's previous questions which repudiated the "disciples accepting their own disciples" senario in ISKCON four times and thus Tamal misses Prabhupada's concluding statement as follows.]
Satsvarupa: Then we have a question concer...
Prabhupada: When I order, "You become guru," he becomes regular guru. That's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple. That's it.
[Here Srila Prabhupada clearly concludes his reply to Tamal and says that his disciples can become regular guru and accept their own disciples only when he orders them to. This clearly indicates that he did not yet give the specific order for his disciples to become regular (diksa) gurus and accept their own disciples in ISKCON in this meeting. He already repeatedly confirmed this fact with his prior repudiation (four times) in reply to Satsvarupa's original question on what the GBC were to do for 1st and 2nd initiations "when you no longer are with us" as already pointed out. So it is inconceivable that he changes his mind in replying to what is essentially the same question from Tamal vis-a vis, "Whose disciples are they?". Tamal's misunderstanding of this crucial meeting was later confirmed in the 1980 Topanga Canyon guru meeting. Unfortunately as secretary, his deviation was also written into the minutes of the May 28, 1977 meeting.
Furthermore, if someone tells you, "When I order, you jump off the cliff" would you jump? OF COURSE NOT! Clearly, Srila Prabhupada's use of the word "when" indicates that he did not yet give that order. A month later in his July 9, 1977 worldwide communique he gave his final orders on future initiations for Iskcon wherein he named 11 disciples to act as "ritvik representatives of the acarya" to initiate future disciples on his behalf "henceforward".]
In his last will,
June 5, 1977 Srila Prabhupada states:
"The executive directors who have herein been designated are appointed for life. In
the event of death or failure to act for any reason of any of the said directors, a
successor director or directors may be appointed by the remaining directors, provided the
new director is my initiated disciple following strictly all the rules and regulations of
the International Society for Krishna Consciousness as detailed in my books, and provided
that there are never less than three (3) or more than five (5) exeutive directors acting
at one time."
(In order to carryout this section of Srila Prabhupada's will, there must be his initiated disciples present for as long as Iskcon exists, thus necessitating a ritvik system initiating new disciples on his behalf henceforward which was stated in his July 9, 1977 letter to all GBC and temple presidents. This will also confirms the no change status of the ritvik system for after his physical disappearance in his use of the word "henceforward" meaning from now on).
C. July 9, 1977 worldwide final order to all GBC and TP
Letter to: All G.B.C., All
Temple Presidents
Vrindaban
9 July, 1977
77-07-09
To All G.B.C., and Temple Presidents
Dear Maharajas and Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances at your feet. Recently when all of the GBC members were with His Divine Grace in Vrndavana, Srila Prabhupada indicated that soon He would appoint some of His senior disciples to act as ritvik - representative of the acarya, for the purpose of performing initiations, both first initiation and second initiation. His Divine Grace has so far given a list of eleven disciples who will act in that capacity:
His Holiness Kirtanananda Swami His Holiness Satsvarupa dasa Gosvami His Holiness Jayapataka Swami His Holiness Tamala Krsna Gosvami His Holiness Hrdayananda Gosvami His Holiness Bhavananda Gosvami His Holiness Hamsaduta Swami His Holiness Ramesvara Swami His Holiness Harikesa Swami His Grace Bhagavan dasa Adhikari His Grace Jayatirtha dasa Adhikari
In the past Temple Presidents have written to Srila Prabhupada recommending a
particular devotee's initiation. Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these
representatives, Temple Presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and
second initiation to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their temple.
After considering the recommendation, these representatives may accept the devotee as an
initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada by giving a spiritual name, or in the case of
second initiation, by chanting on the Gayatri thread, just as Srila Prabhupada has done.
The newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine
Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad, the above eleven senior devotees acting
as His representative. After the Temple President receives a letter from these
representatives giving the spiritual name or the thread, he can perform the fire yajna in
the temple as was being done before. The name of a newly initiated disciple should be
sent by the representative who has acceted him or her to Srila Prabhupada, to be included in His Divine Grace's "Initiated Disciples"
book.
Hoping this finds you all well.
Your servant, Tamala Krsna Gosvami
Secretary to Srila Prabhupada
Approved:(signed) A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
(Prabhupada signature appears on the original)
The above is the Original Letter Of July 9, 1977 of His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada, his originally signed and approved paper for appointing some of His senior disciples to act as
ritvik - representative of the acarya
(Note: There is a reference to the May 28, 1977 meeting in Vrindavan in which Srila
Prabhupada replied to a specific question from the GBC on what to do for iniitiations
after his physical disappearance. "After this is settled up, I shall
recommend some of you to act as officiating acharyas." This July 9,
1977 worldwide order sent to all GBCs and temples presidents IS that
order of recommendation. Also note Srila Prabhupada states three times that the
new initiates are his disciples and that there is no mention of any future contingency
that would modify, countermand or terminate this order whatsoever in any way. What was
stated is "henceforward" which means from now on. Further this is the only order
that actually names individual disciples to officiate the initiation ceremony, gives them
their title/tells who's disciples the initates are, and when they would begin their
service.
Srila Prabhupada's letters to his ritvik representatives up until his physical disappearance also do not indicate any change in this ritvik instruction. ("Now you have a very good field. Now organize it and it will be a great credit. No one will disturb you there. Make your own field and continue to become ritvik and act on my behalf." July 31, 1977). This July 9, 1977 worldwide order to all GBCs and temple presidents specifically on future initiations in ISKCON is the only one given by Srila Prabhupada. Thus it is rightfully called the final order.)
Letter from Tamal Krishna Goswami
(on Srila Prabhupada's behalf)
to Hansadutta, dated July 10th, 1977
My dear Hamsadutta Maharaja
Please accept my humble obeisances at your feet. Srila Prabhupada has received your letters dated July 4th and July 5th, 1977 respectively, and has instructed me to reply them.
Srila Prabhupada was very pleased to hear how you have
organized everything in Ceylon, and that so many people are now taking interest seriously
is proof of the effectiveness of your preaching.
His Divine Grace said, "You are a suitable
person and you can give initiation to those who are ready for it. I have selected you
among eleven men as "rittvik" or representative of the acharya, to give
initiations, both first and second initiation, on my behalf." (A newsletter
is being sent to all Temple Presidents and GBC in this regard, listing the eleven
representatives selected by His Divine Grace. Those who are initiated are the disciples of
Srila Prabhupada, and anyone who you deem fit and initiate in this way, you should send
their names to be included in Srila Prabhupada's " Initiated Disciples" book. In
this way the Temple Presidents will send their recommendations for initiation direct to
the nearest representative who will give a spiritual name or chant on the Gayatri thread
just as Srila Prabhupada has been doing.
Srila Prabhupada smiled very broadly when he heard of the successful program organized by the local people in which 2000 persons attended. When he heard that you have introduced a full feasting program on Sundays, he said, "You are a good cook, so teach others now how to cook just as I taught you."
Regarding the printing going slowly, His Divine Grace stated, "Never mind. Go surely. It doesn't matter slowly." I inquired from Pradyumna Prabhu about the Sinhalese translation which you mentioned. He said that "On Chanting Hare Krishna Mantra" was translated into Sinhalese, and that translation is in his trunk in Bombay. We will try to get it to you as soon as possible. I do not know if Gopal Krishna has any Tamil manuscript, but if he does, when I see him in about ten days, I will tell him to send it to you. You may also write him directly. Pradyumna says it will be faster just to get a new translation - it is only one page.
Srila Prabhupada was very glad to know that you would try to bring some Ceylonese devotees to Mayapur and said, "Oh, that is very good!" He did not know whether the story about Bhaktisiddhanta 's disciples seeing a man eating a rat was true or not. Regarding the exact position of Sri Lanka, this is the opinion of some people. Srila Prabhupada advised that we not discuss this matter publicly at this time. Prabhupada also recommended that from Hari Sauri you take ghee.. He said that you could have one fifth of whatever Hari Sari sends to India. Regarding whether you should use the name Swami or Goswami, Srila Prabhupada said, "Stick to one. Swami is better."
Your servant,
Tamal Krishna Goswami
Secretary to Srila Prabhupada
[Note: Signature appears on original]
Letter from Tamal Krishna Goswami
(on Srila Prabhupada's behalf)
to Hansadutta, dated July 31st, 1977, Vrindaban
My dear Hamsadutta Maharaja
Please accept my most humble obeisances at your feet. I have been instructed by His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada to thank you for your letter dated July 25th, 1977.
You have written to Srila Prabhupad saying you do not know why he has chosen you to be a recipient of His mercy. His Divine Grace immediately replied, "It is because you are my sincere servant. You have given up attachment to a beautiful and qualified wife and that is a great benediction. You are a real preacher. Therefore I like you. (then laughing) Sometimes you become obstinate, but that is true of any intelligent man. Now you have got a very good field. Now organize it and it will be a great credit. No one will disturb you there. Make your own field and continue to be rittvik and act on my behalf."
Srila Prabhupad listened with great enthusiasm as I read to him the newspaper article. His Divine Grace was very pleased: "This article will increase your prestige. It is very nice article. Therefore the newspaper has spared so much space to print it. It is very nice. It must be published in Back to Godhead. Now there is a column in the Back to Godhead called Prabhupad Speaks Out. Your article may be entitled, 'Prabhupad's Disciple Speaks Out.' Yes, we shall publish this article certainly. Let this rascal be fool before the public. I have enjoyed this article very much. I want my disciples to speak out...backed by complete reasoning. 'Brahma sutra sunisthita,' this is preaching. Be blessed. All my disciples go forward. You have given the challenge. They cannot answer. This Dr. Kovoor should be invited ... for Dr. Svarupa Damodar 's Convention on 'Life comes from Life.' He can learn something at this scientific conference."
Yes, you should certainly get some ISKCON Food Relief money. For your program American money collected and sent for food distribution. That is my proposal. Three hundred people coming is no joke. You mentioned so many nice preparations. I would like to eat, but I cannot. At simply hearing these names (of preparations) is satisfying. Just thinking this morning of you, and now you have written me.
(Last paragraph illegible)
Hoping this meet you well.
Your servant,
Tamal Krishna Gosvami
Secretary to Srila Prabhupad
[signature appears on original]
BY HANSADUTTA DAS -- January 7, 1999 VNN2806
EDITORIAL, Jan 7 (VNN) -- The discussions
that took place on 28th May 1977 between Srila Prabhupada and some GBC regarding
initiations in the future were not known to me till years after his disappearance. Srila
Prabhupada would say many things on many subjects, but unless a particular policy was
written in letter form, or some other legal document such discussions on different matters
were not accepted as final. Prabhupada often said you can say anything, but do not put it
in writing; writing makes it legal.
A number of questions come to my mind when the controversy over the Rittvik-Guru issue
comes up:
1) The system of rittvik initiations was an ongoing practice for years before Srila
Prabhupada named 11 "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" in his July 9th,
1977 letter. Why would Srila Prabhupada make a special effort to write a letter appointing
eleven of his senior disciples as "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" when
such rittvik initiations were already being performed on his behalf not only by the
persons named in his July 9th Letter, but by sannyasis, GBCs, Temple presidents, and
others who happened to be at hand on the occasion of such initiation ceremonies?
2) Why did Srila Prabhupada decline the suggestion of Tamal Krishna Goswami to include
Brahmananda Swami on the rittvik list? He was a leading devotee and sannyasi.
3) Why did Srila Prabhupada not simply say that all sannyasis, GBCs and Temple presidents
of ISKCON in good standing everywhere could act as "Rittvik representatives of the
Acharya" and initiate new disciples on his behalf whenever the need presented itself
?
4) How would creating "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" relieve Srila
Prabhupada from the burden of taking on the karma of newly initiated disciples if the
disciples thus initiated would still be Srila Prabhupada's disciples?
5) Why did Srila Prabhupada reiterate the July 9th Letter appointing "Rittvik
representative of the Acharya" in three separate letters (two to myself, and one to
Kirtanananda Swami) and in several conversations, but never once mention anything about
appointing Gurus or about rittviks becoming Gurus upon his anticipated disappearance from
the world?
I distinctly remember when I received the July 9th, 1977 letter in Sri Lanka that it was
clear to me that this letter was Srila Prabhupada's arrangement for initiations for the
future. I also remember feeling some disappointment with the obvious conditional authority
that the "Rittvik representative of the Acharya" designation implied, because I
actually had a great desire to be a Guru like Srila Prabhupada. I think many of the
leaders did have such desires. Still I understood it was a very responsible and
authoritative appointment. On July 10th I received another letter from Srila Prabhupada
written in response to a letter I had sent him describing the preaching activities in Sri
Lanka at that time. In this letter he wrote as follows:
"You are a suitable person and you can give initiation to those that are ready for
it. I have selected you among eleven men as 'Rittvik representative of the Acharya, to
give initiations, both first and second initiation, on my behalf.' A newsletter is being
sent to all temple presidents and GBC in this regard, listing the eleven representatives
selected by His Divine Grace. Those who are initiated are the disciples of Srila
Prabhupada, and anyone whom you deem fit and initiate in this way, you should send their
names to be included in Srila Prabhupada's 'Initiated disciples' book."
I immediately wrote a letter to Srila Prabhupada asking him why he had been so merciful
towards me by appointing me as his "Rittvik representative of the Acharya,"
which I understood to be a very confidential and responsible position. In other words it
was clear to me that this letter appointing "Rittvik Representatives" to
initiate new disciples on Srila Prabhupada's behalf was Srila Prabhupada's final
instructions in anticipation of his disappearance from the world. Srila Prabhupada replied
in a letter dated July 31st 1977 by paraphrasing my question and answering as follows:
"You have written to Srila Prabhupada saying you do not know why he has chosen you to
be a recipient of his Mercy. His Divine Grace immediately replied, 'It is because you are
my sincere servant. You have given up attachment to a beautiful and qualified wife and
that is a great benediction. You are a real preacher. Therefore I like you. (Then
laughing) Sometimes you become obstinate, but that is true of any intelligent man. Now you
have got a very good field. Now organize it and it will be a great credit. No one will
disturb you there. MAKE YOUR OWN FIELD AND CONTINUE TO BE RITTVIK AND ACT ON MY
BEHALF.'"
It was clear that Srila Prabhupada had officially introduced the concept of "Rittvik
representative of the Acharya" as the arrangement for initiations by his disciples
for the future of ISKCON. Had there been anything more to clarify certainly Srila
Prabhupada would have written another letter to amend what was already so clear. But he
never did, other than to reinforce what he had already written: "Continue to act as
rittvik representative of the Acharya."
These eleven men and many others had been initiating devotees on Srila Prabhupada's behalf
for years, so there was no need to make a formal declaration and name disciples who could
initiate on Srila Prabhupada's behalf simply to relieve Srila Prabhupada from the burden
of initiating due to his illness. It was already going on all over the world, for years.
However the July 9th letter gave authority and responsibility that was not allowed
previously. The eleven men selected as "Rittvik Representatives of the Acharya"
were given the freedom to initiate (first and second) and give the spiritual name without
first having to consult Srila Prabhupada by letter and have an appropriate name sent by
Srila Prabhupada. This was new. This in effect gave these eleven "Rittvik
representative of the Acharya" all the responsibilities and authority of a GURU, but
at the same time it was clear by their "Job Description" as "Rittvik
representative of the Acharya" that their authority was CONDITIONAL-it was not a
blank check-and that they were not mature, fully qualified spiritual masters. They were
apprentices of the spiritual master, "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya,"
and the disciples they would initiate would be the disciples of their spiritual master,
Srila Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acharya and Founder of ISKCON.
The emperor or king delegates power to a viceroy who thus has all the power of a king to
rule over a colony or state, yet it is understood that the viceroy is not the king, but
ruling as the king's representative. Such a viceroy would not automatically become a king
upon the death of the king; rather, he would continue to act as the viceroy until the next
emperor or king was installed on the throne. Similarly the "Rittvik
representative" does not automatically become a Guru or Acharya (as we assumed when
Srila Prabhupada disappeared), but the Rittvik continues to act as the representative of
the Acharya, Srila Prabhupada.
Although Srila Prabhupada spoke of all his disciples becoming Gurus, he never once ordered
any disciple to be a Guru; rather, he gave conditional authority and responsibility to
some leading disciples to "act as Rittvik representatives of the Acharya."
Having failed to carry out this responsibility and having assumed that automatically upon
Srila Prabhupada's disappearance the rittviks would become Gurus, we find everything has
gone off track, and the whole ISKCON movement is in shambles. Still it is better late than
never. Everything can be brought back into focus if we simply come back to the order of
the spiritual master and act as "Rittvik representative of the Acharya."
I don't think that my words will make any difference, but for my own clarification, and
purification I have written down these thoughts. Perhaps they will be of some help to
others.
I have one last concern, and it is this idea I get from Krishna Kant's paper "The
Final Order" that the "Rittvik representative" is nothing more than a
priest who performs a ritual initiation, and afterwards is no more significant in the
spiritual life of a disciple than a clerk at an army recruiting station. The fact is that
Srila Prabhupada was very careful and deliberate about choosing his "Rittvik
representatives." We notice that all of them were distinguished by their enthusiasm
and success in the preaching field. So if there is going to be a reform and actual
adherence to the order of Srila Prabhupada to act as "Rittvik representatives of the
Acharya," then I think that anyone who is going to be designated as such should first
of all go out and show his capacity to represent Srila Prabhupada as his "Rittvik
representative" by opening some centers and recruiting 100 or 200 men (or families )
and training them up properly to preach and worship Srila Prabhupada as his disciples.
Otherwise what is the meaning of "Rittvik representative of the Acharya"?
Without this it will simply be another office job.
Rittvik is not a quick fix.
Just buying a telephone is not enough. One must actually open an account with the
telephone company and be connected to the telephone central; otherwise the telephone is
nothing but a dead weight. Similarly, to declare or accept the Rittvik conclusions
physically, mentally or intellectually is not enough. The Rittvik representative must
actually be connected to the Acharya; otherwise, he will be as much of a dead weight as
the unconnected telephone.
How do we know that a particular person is actually a qualified representative of the
Acharya? This is really the most important question. How do we know if a particular
telephone is dead or alive, whether connected to the telephone central or not connected?
Anyone can pick it up and by dialing the appropriate number be in communion with anyone
else who has a connection with the telephone central, even the President of the United
States.
The equation is "Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another." This
is the litmus test. If someone claims to be a Rittvik representative of the Acharya, then
"things (Rittvik representative) equal to the same thing (Srila Prabhupada, the
Sampradaya Acharya) are equal to one another (Rittvik representative). So there must be
actual love and trust amongst the Rittvik representatives and their supporters or
followers; otherwise there is something wrong. Love and trust is possible only if there is
actual love and trust for the Acharya, Srila Prabhupada, in the center. The spokes of a
wheel are not connected to one another directly, but connected to the hub of the wheel.
The leaves, flowers and fruits of a tree are all connected through the root of the tree.
Similarly, rittvik philosophy without actually being connected to Srila Prabhupada will be
nothing more than a mechanical or external adjustment, without the inner spiritual
substance which we find lacking in the present ISKCON Guru system.
You can't make someone love and trust Prabhupada--not by any mechanical or tactical,
logical or philosophical arrangement. Therefore, quarreling or fighting with those who are
not in agreement with Srila Prabhupada's order to "act as Rittvik representative of
the Acharya" is not the solution. The solution is to act as Rittvik representative of
the Acharya, and by demonstrating and by example, the sincere souls will naturally
gravitate towards and be truly connected to Srila Prabhupada, leaving the dead connections
(dead telephones) aside. If your telephone is connected, people will use it; if your
telephone is not connected, how can they use it?
So by quarreling, organizing and having meetings we may get some abstract idea of Rittvik
conception, but unless there is actual practical application in the field, we will remain
a dead body, like a telephone not actually connected to the telephone central.
Doctors differ, and still they are doctors. Similarly, devotees, rishis, sages, gurus,
holy men and Rittviks differ, but in the person of the Sampradaya Acharya, Srila
Prabhupada, all differences are resolved. When the sages, sadhus, rishis, etc. were called
together by Maharaja Pariksit, who wanted to be instructed in preparation for his
impending death, there were differences of opinion as to what the King should do. However,
when Sukhadeva arrived there, all the rishis, sadhus, yogis and even his own father, Srila
Vyasadeva, stood up to show him respect, and he was accepted as the most perfect devotee,
and all deferred to him, and thus the Bhagavatam was spoken. Similarly, in the arena of
differing sadhus, yogis, devotees, religionists, Srila Prabhupada appeared in this world.
He spoke Srimad Bhagavatam and other essential Vaishnava literatures, and all
spiritualists, at least all Vaishnavas, deferred to him, and that is why everyone,
regardless of how big or small a devotee, Guru, sadhu, yogi, rishi or Rittvik, must always
carry himself very deliberately, keeping Srila Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acharya, in the
center. Then real "unity in diversity" will actually work. Thus the arrangement
of Rittvik representative is completely in keeping with the principles of Guru parampara
and is in no way a concoction or somehow inferior arrangement for receiving initiation
into Krishna consciousness. In fact, we accept Srila Vyasadeva as still living on this
plane.
Therefore, every Guru, every Acharya would technically be a Rittvik representative of the
Great Acharya Srila Vyasadeva. The Vyasa-puja day is the day the representative of Vyasa
is honored by the disciples, and that representative, the Guru Acharya, sits on "the
seat of Vyasa." So under all circumstances, every devotee is a representative of the
Acharya, and thus our line is a Rittvik line. Specifically, one who accepts the
responsibility of initiating new disciples is therefore referred to as the "Rittvik
representative of the Acharya." He is definitely a guru, but his job description
"Rittvik representative of the Acharya" helps us to remember the actual
relationship and principle of the Guru parampara. Everything depends on transparency.
"Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another."
Letter to Kirtanananda
Singapore, 2. October 1993
Dear Kirtanananda Maharaj
Please accept my humble obeisances.
I thought now is the time to remind you of what you said to me upon
meeting you at New Vrindaban after my fall from Guru and Sannyas. Seeing
my condition, and anticipating the ensuing chaos and confusion amongst the new disciples,
you said, "This is why I suggested so strongly that ISKCON should adopt the
RITTVIK process of initiation for the new Gurus!!" It has been a long time
since then, but after all is said and done, I have personally realized the truth of this
statement. Rittvik representatives is all that PRABHUPADA ever sanctioned us to be
-not ACHARYAS or GURUS.
After years of anguish and confusion over this issue, I have by the mercy of Prabhupada,
come to take shelter in his instruction: "Act as Rittvik of the Acharya." I
think it is time for me to repay the debt I owe you for giving me shelter when I was so
broken and lost in my spiritual life.
I humbly suggest you consider the fact that Prabhupada never authorized us to be Gurus, but restrained our ambition by designating some men to act as his deputies, or Rittvik representatives. Better late than never. Give up the false posture of Guru Acharya and consider acting as the humble servant of the Acharya, as a Rittvik representative. That is the solution for you and all the ISKCON Gurus.
If you step back, resume your sadhana and service attitude towards Srila Prabhupada as his rittvik representative exactly as you used to do for him when he was still physically present, then most devotees will probably stand by you. Many will return to your guidance. You have nothing to lose by taking this humble position, except the false prestige of being a guru acharya, which is haunting you like a ghost.
New Vrindaban is a wonderful place, and it was built under your charge, but only because the devotees were empowered by Prabhupada, on account of their sincere desire to serve him (Srila Prabhupada). In other words, they enthusiastically accepted so much sacrifice, penance and austerity to help you build New Vrindaban, because they saw your sincere determination and desire to please Prabhupada.
Of all the godbrothers, you have accomplished the most monumental task by the building and development of New Vrindaban community. On the other hand, you now stand on the precipice of the total ruin of all you have accomplished, if you obstinately stick to your false posture as the acharya and guru. The godbrothers are waiting like vultures to devour you, New Vrindaban and all the devotees, because more or less all of them are haunted Prabhupada the same ghost of false prestige, thinking, "I am the guru, and all should serve my feet." has remarked the fast two pitfalls of maya are to think one's self as God and the other is to think one's self as guru.
By taking your proper position as Srila Prabhupada's menial servant, no better today than the day you first met him in New York, you will save yourself and possibly your example could save the whole ISKCON movement.
You said you want to save ISKCON, but that requires saving yourself first.
As your younger godbrother, I have taken the liberty to attempt to instruct you. Please excuse my impudence. Whatever I have written is my deep, heartfelt concern for you, all the devotees with you, the wonderful creation of Prabhupada's Palace of Gold and of course, Srila Prabhuada, our beloved spiritual master, by whose mercy we have all been awakened to the highest ideal of preaching love of Krishna to the whole world. As the first and foremost of Prabhupada's disciples, be the first to demonstrate yourself as his rittvik representative. I am prepared to help you in every way, if you do the right thing.
I sincerely hope you are well. I mean you no ill will. I always admire you, but at this time I feel compelled to give you this important advice.
Your humble servant,
Hansadutta dasa
Dear Veda Guhya Das Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Because you asked me to write VNN about the Rittvik matter, I thought I would first pen you my thoughts on the issue along the lines of our discussion a few days ago.
The discussions that took place on 28th May 1977 between Srila Prabhupada and some GBC regarding initiations in the future were not known to me till years after his disappearance. Srila Prabhupada would say many things on many subjects, but unless a particular policy was written in letter form, or some other legal document, such discussions on different matters were not accepted as final. Prabhupada often said you can say anything, but do not put it in writing. Writing makes it legal.
A number of questions come to my mind when the controversy over the rittvik-Guru issue comes up.
1) The system of rittvik initiations was an ongoing practice for years before Srila Prabhupada named eleven "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" in his letter of July 9, 1977. Why would Srila Prabhupada make a special effort to write a letter appointing eleven of his senior disciples as "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" when such rittvik initiations were already being performed on his behalf -- not only by the persons named in his July 9th Letter but by sannyasis, GBCs, Temple Presidents, and others who happened to be at hand on the occasion of such initiation ceremonies?
2) Why did Srila Prabhupada decline the suggestion Of Tamal Krishna Goswami to include Brahmananda Swami on the rittvik list? He was a leading devotee and sannyasi.
3) Why did Srila Prabhupada not simply say "All sannyasis, GBCs, and Temple Presidents of ISKCON in good standing everywhere" could act as "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" and initiate new disciples on his behalf whenever the need presented itself ?
4) How would creating "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" relieve Srila Prabhupada from the burden of taking on the Karma of newly initiated disciples if the disciples thus initiated would still be Srila Prabhupada's disciples?
5) Why did Srila Prabhupada reiterate the July 9th Letter appointing "Rittvik representative of the Acharya" in three separate letters (two to myself, and one to Kirtanananda Swami) and in several conversations, but never once mention anything about appointing Gurus or about rittviks becoming Gurus upon his anticipated disappearance from the world?
I distinctly remember when I received the July 9, 1977, letter in Sri Lanka that it was clear to me that this letter was Srila Prabhupada's arrangement for initiations for the future. I also remember feeling some disappointment with the obvious conditional authority that the "Rittvik representative of the Acharya" designation implied, because I actually had a great desire to be a Guru like Srila Prabhupada, and I think many of the leaders did have similar desires. Still, I understood it was a very responsible and authoritative appointment. On July 10th I received another letter from Srila Prabhupada written in response to a letter I had sent him describing the preaching activities in Sri Lanka at that time. In this letter he wrote as follows:
"You are a suitable person and you can give initiation to those that are ready for it. I have selected you among eleven men as "Rittvik" representative of the Acharya, to give initiations, both first and second initiation, on my behalf." A newsletter is being sent to all temple presidents and GBC in this regard, listing the eleven representatives selected by His Divine Grace. Those who are initiated are the disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and anyone who you deem fit and initiate in this way, you should send their names to be included in Srila Prabhupada's "Initiated disciples" book.
I immediately wrote a letter to Srila Prabhupada asking him why he had been so merciful towards me by appointing me as his "Rittvik representative of the Acharya" which I understood to be a very confidential and responsible position. In other words, it was clear to me that this letter appointing "Rittvik Representatives" to initiate new disciples on Srila Prabhupada's behalf was Srila Prabhupada's final instructions in anticipation of his disappearance from the world.
Srila Prabhupada replied my letter by paraphrasing my question and answering in a letter dated July 31st 1977 as follows:
"You have written to Srila Prabhupada saying you do not know why he has chosen you to be a recipient of his Mercy. His Divine Grace immediately replied, "It is because you are my sincere servant. You have given up attachment to a beautiful and qualified wife and that is a great benediction. You are a real preacher. Therefore I like you. (Then Laughing). Sometimes you become obstinate, but that is true of any intelligent man. Now you have got a very good field. Now organize it and it will be a great credit. No one will disturb you there. MAKE YOUR OWN FIELD AND CONTINUE TO BE RITTVIK AND ACT ON MY BEHALF".
It was clear that Srila Prabhupada had officially introduced the concept of "Rittvik representative of the Acharya" as the arrangement for initiations by his disciples for the future of ISKCON. Had there been anything more to clarify certainly Srila Prabhupada would have written another letter to amend what was already so clear. But he never did, other than reinforce what he had already written: "Continue to act as rittvik representative of the Acharya."
These eleven men and many others had been initiating devotees on Srila Prabhupada's behalf for years, so there was no need to make a formal declaration and name disciples who could initiate on Srila Prabhupada's behalf simply to relieve Srila Prabhupada from the burden of initiating due to his illness as it was already going on all over the world for years.
However, the July 9th letter gave authority and responsibility that was
not allowed previously. The eleven men selected as "Rittvik Representatives of the
Acharya" were given the freedom to initiate (first and second) and give the spiritual
name without first having to consult Srila Prabhupada by letter and have an appropriate
name sent by Srila Prabhupada. This was new. This system, in effect, gave these eleven
"Rittvik representative of the Acharya" all the responsibilities and authority
of a GURU, but at the same time it was clear by their "Job Description" as
"Rittvik representative of the Acharya" that their authority was CONDITIONAL --
it was not a blank check
- as they were not mature full qualified Spiritual Masters. They were apprentices of the
Spiritual Master -- "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" -- and, the
disciples they would initiate would be the disciples of their Spiritual Master, Srila
Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acharya, The Founder-Acarya of ISKCON.
The Emperor or King delegates power to a Viceroy who thus has all the power of a King to rule over a colony or state, yet it is understood that the Viceroy is not the King, but is ruling as the King's representative. Such a Viceroy would not automatically become a King upon the death of the King, rather he would continue to act as the Viceroy until the next Emperor or King was installed on the throne. Similarly the "Rittvik representative" does not automatically become a Guru or Acharya (as we assumed when Srila Prabhupada disappeared), but the Rittvik continues to act as the representative of the Acharya, Srila Prabhupada.
Although Srila Prabhupada spoke of all his disciples becoming Gurus, he never once ordered any disciple "To be a Guru", rather he gave conditional authority and responsibility to some leading disciples to "Act as Rittvik representatives of the Acharya". Having failed to carry out this responsibility by assuming that automatically upon Srila Prabhupada's disappearance the rittviks would become Gurus we find everything has gone off track, and the whole ISKCON movement is in shambles. Still, it is better late than never. Everything can be brought back into focus if we simply come back to the order of the Spiritual Master and act as "Rittvik representative of the Acharya."
I don't think that my words will make any difference -- but for my own clarification and purification I have written down these thoughts. Perhaps they will be of some help to you.
I have one last concern and it is this idea I get from Krishna Kant's paper "The Final Order" that the "Rittvik Representative" is nothing more than a priest who performs a ritual initiation, and then is no more significant in the spiritual life of a disciple than a clerk at an army recruiting station.
Yet, the fact is that Srila Prabhupada was very careful and deliberate about choosing his "Rittvik representatives" and we will notice all of them were distinguished by their enthusiasm and success in the preaching field. So if there is going to be a reform and actual adherence to the order of Srila Prabhupada to act as "Rittvik Representatives of the Acharya," then I think that anyone who is going to be designated as such should first of all go out and show their capacity to represent Srila Prabhupada as his "Rittvik Representative" by opening some centers and recruiting 100 or 200 devotees (or families) and train them up properly to preach and worship Srila Prabhupada as his disciples. Otherwise, what is the meaning of "Rittvik representative of the Acharya?" Without this it will simply be another office job.
I hope you and Janaki are well. Thanks for your hospitality. I hope we can meet again soon.
Your humble servant,
Hansadutta das
Letter to New Initiates
Dated: 8 October 1993
Dear Kaliya-Krishna dasa
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
.... My godbrothers have taken it FOR GRANTED that because they were acting
as rittviks in Prabhupada's presence, that it was therefore GRANTED to them to
assume the office of guru acharyas upon his disappearance. But it was NEVER GRANTED
by him. The GBCs and others took it FOR GRANTED, without authority. It has caused havoc. I
shall demonstrate that what Prabhupada wanted was for his deputed rittviks to
continue to be rittviks in his physical absence, which he specifically mentioned to
Tamal in conversation and per letter to me, dated July 10, 1977 and again in a letter to
Kirtanananda, dated July 11, 1977 and in numerous conversations with his disciples during
his last days.
When the rittvik matures and understands his everlasting subordination to his spiritual master, then he is seen as a full guru. But at that time more than ever he is fully conscious of his duties of initiating on behalf of his spiritual master and all the spiritual masters in the disciplic succession, all the way to Krishna.
At the present moment, everyone thinks in terms of "Is he my disciple, or is he Prabhupada's disciple?" Why this emphasis on the possession of the disciple, as opposed to emphasising the service performed for Prabhupada and the disciplic succession?? POSSESSIVENESS is the disease, the cloud covering the sun of Prabhupada' s brilliant and TRANSPARENT mercy.
Although rittvik initiation is an officiating ceremony, no one should think it is simply a show or a rubber-stamping someone to be a disciple of Prabhupada. No! When Prabhupada was present, the GBCs, temple presidents or sannyasis who initiated disciples for Prabhupada were accepted as representatives of Prabhupada, and their authority was very effective, because both the representative and newly initiated disciple had a TRANS-PARENT CONSCIOUSNESS of seeing Prabhupada as the source of spiritual life and the ultimate authority behind everything. So I am not the guru, but I am the guru's servant, his rittvik representative.
One may ask, "Then why rittvik?--It all comes down to the same principle of surrender, service and DISCIPLINE to the rittvik representative." The answer is that one is designated as rittvik because it is understood the person in question is still immature and subject to fall under the influence of the material nature. But he is being prepared or trained for perfection by giving him the office of deputy of the acharya, so he can gradually mature and become perfect. Perfect means fully PURIFIED of the tendency to enjoy wealth, woman and most of all PRESTIGE, or the lording-it-over tendency. Perfect means he perfectly understands that everything he does he does on behalf of his spiritual master and Krishna.
Thinking, "I am a guru" is the sure sign of MAYA, just as thinking "I am God" is the ultimate illusion.
If a person seen as a rittvik falls down due to losing control of his senses, there will be no RUPTURE in the life of the disciple, because he has from the beginning understood his relationship with Srila Prabhupada, the SAMPRADAYA ACHARYA. He can continue to progress in spiritual life under the guidance of another senior godbrother.
Under the present arrangement, where imperfect, conditioned souls have postured themselves as liberated, pure devotees, thereby misleading and misdirecting the delicate faith of new devotees, a DISASTER takes place when such illegitimate gurus fall down, or even if they exhibit doubtful behaviour, as it was in my case years ago.
All this can be and will be avoided if senior devotees simply follow the arrangement made by Prabhupada for initiation, namely act as rittvik representatives of the acharya, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. That is very joyful, because it is the authorised arrangement of the Sampradaya Acharya Srila Prabhupada for continuing the disciplic succession.
Even if someone is in the most exalted state of realisation, why would such a person insist on the pomp and posture of a great devotee? Even the Supreme Lord Chaitanya presented Himself as the most fallen, humble and meek servant of the servant thousands of times removed.
Actually, unless a person has been properly initiated by someone acting
strictly as the rittvik representative of the SAMPRADAYA ACHARYA, Srila Prabhupada,
his so-called initiation is more or less a kind of KIDNAPPING
THE DISCIPLE AWAY FROM THE SHELTER OF THE LOTUS FEET OF SRILA PRABHUPADA, THE SAMPRADAYA
ACHARYA, AND KRISHNA.
Such kidnapper gurus and their unfortunate disciples fall down
from the devotional path in due course of time, just as a tree that receives no water
loses its leaves (disciples), dries up and dies. We have seen this phenomenon repeat
itself again and again in a long list of so-called gurus, myself included.
However, such dead gurus and disciples can be brought back to life simply by
situating themselves properly in the rittvik initiating arrangement made by
Prabhupada. The current re-initiation syndrome practiced in ISKCON is trying to correct
one mistake by making another mistake.
Your humble servant,
Hansadutta das
P.S. With great emphasis, I want it clearly understood by all devotees there is to be no vyasasana for me, no vyasapuja, no pranamas, no Mercedes Benz, no pictures of me on any altar, etc. All such exhibition of regard and affection should be offered to Srila Prabhupada only, the deliverer of all fallen souls, Acharya of the Brahma Gaudiya Vaishnava Sampradaya, otherwise known as ISKCON.
P.S.S. I wish to offer my most humble apologies to the following persons, whom were initiated by me in the years 1978-1982 and do humbly suggest if they are so inspired that they maybe initiated properly by a rittvik representative.
Letter to a Devotee Friend
Hansadutta dasa,
June 17, 1993
In regards to gurus, Prabhupada left only one [written] document [letter of July 9, 1977] giving policy direction and individual names for initiation process, and it is clearly stated they will act as rittviks. Prabhupada left other policy documents, such as the BBT trust, the GBC direction of management, MVT, and he also recorded a last will and testament. But none of these formal policy documents says anything about acharyas or gurus initiating after his demise. The only document dealing with the issue of initiations is the letter of July 9, 1977.
As for tape recordings of conversations Prabhupada had with various GBCs prior to his departure, they cannot be accepted as evidence in regards to this issue, because Prabhupada would discuss a particular point with his disciples from many different angles. BUT WHEN MAKING MAJOR POLICY CHANGES OR INTRODUCTIONS, Prabhupada was very deliberate and careful to formulate such policies on paper with signatures. Prabhupada was very businesslike and did not do things whimsically or carelessly. Certainly the most IMPORTANT QUESTION in his mind and in the mind of his leading disciples at the time of his disappearance was who will initiate and under what circumstances such initiations will take place. The answer is plain and simple in his letter of July 9th, 1977. However, Prabhupada's disciples, being filled with ambition for more than merely continuing to act as his representatives (rittviks) or deputies, simply exaggerated their position and justified this ambitious fever by disregarding the letter dated 9th of July, 1977 and magnified some conversations which took place prior to the letter of July 9th, 1977.
But Prabhupada never gave instructions to his worldwide ISKCON movement through vague, hissing tapes. Prabhupada wrote letters (7,000 at least) and recorded trust documents, and ultimately he left a last will and testament. Why should we focus on a vague, hissing tape?
In 1979 or 1980, Topanga Canyon, California, I was present with Tamal Krishna Goswami when he admitted publicly before a large assembly of devotees:
Prabhupada never appointed any gurus. He did not appoint eleven gurus. He appointed eleven rittvik [officiating priests]. He never appointed them as gurus. Myself and the other GBC have done the greatest disservice to this movement for the last three years, because we interpreted the appointment of rittviks as the appointment of gurus....
Even in a court of law such evidence as tapes would not hold any weight in the presence of written documents. Prabhupada used to say, "You can say anything, but don't put it in writing."
So the conclusion is simple, if we simply agree to accept it. Prabhupada appointed 11 rittviks for initiating on his behalf. If anyone can produce a document or a letter stating otherwise, let it be seen. But putting so much merit on vague, hissing tape recordings in regards to such a serious issue as guru and acharya is completely out of order. Because rank and file devotees are innocent, they have unquestioningly accepted the overblown, exaggerated proposal made by their senior godbrothers, but judging a thing by its result, we can understand now after 16 years that it was the fever of pratistha which induced the senior godbrothers to overestimate and overstep the actual role that Prabhupada ordered them to play--namely as deputies, representatives, rittviks, or in other words monitors in the class in the absence of the teacher.
Any sane, humble devotee can see this, and all devotees can live and serve Prabhupada harmoniously under this management. But to have dozens of so-called acharya-gurus, each with their small band of fanatic, neophyte followers will result only in chaos, confusion and ULTIMATELY DISINTEGRATION of Prabhupada's preaching mission worldwide.
Actually, that has already happened in the USA. That has
been demonstrated full-blown. It is a matter of time only before the same disintegration
of the unified ISKCON preaching mission will take its toll in all the countries of the
world.
"YOU CAN BET YOUR BOTTOM DOLLAR ..."
In 1979-1980, one of the living gurus, Tamal Krishna Goswami, [now a dead
guru] had incensed the others by claiming that he possessed Prabhupada's exclusive
"guru shakti" or potency. The other gurus were thus considering how to
excommunicate this deviant guru brother. But in December 1980, at the Topanga Canyon Pyramid House Talks,
California, Tamal made a dramatic turnabout. He admitted that Srila Prabhupada had never
appointed any "living successor" gurus:
Tamal Krishna: "Actually, Prabhupada never appointed any gurus. He did not appoint eleven gurus. He appointed eleven ritvik (officiating priests). He never appointed them as gurus. Myself and the other G.B.C. have done the greatest disservice to this movement for the last three years, [29 years now, still not rectified] because we interpreted the appointment of ritviks as the appointment of gurus....
"(What Srila Prabhupada said was), "All right, I will appoint so many,' and he named them. He made it very clear that they (new members) were still to be his disciples. At that point it was very clear in my mind that they were his disciples....
"Now I understand that what he did was very clear. He was physically incapable of performing the function of initiating physically; therefore he appointed officiating priests to initiate on his behalf. He appointed eleven and he said very clearly, 'Whoever is nearest, he can initiate.'
"This is a very important point, because when it comes to initiating, it is not 'whoever is nearest.' It is wherever your heart goes_to whom you can repose your faith in.
"But when it is officiating, it's 'whoever is nearest,' and he was very clear.... 'Whoever is nearest will check you out. Then, on my behalf, they will initiate....'"
"If it had been more than that (officiating priests), you can bet your bottom dollar that Prabhupada would have spoken for days and hours and weeks on end about how to set up this thing with the gurus.... But he did not, because he already said it a million times. He said, 'My guru maharaja did not appoint anyone. It is by qualification.' We made a great mistake...."
"You cannot show me anything on tape or in writing where Prabhupada says, 'I appoint these eleven as gurus.' It does not exist, because He never appointed any gurus. This is a myth."
So here Tamal Krishna admits that there never was an appointment of regular gurus; Srila Prabhupada only appointed rtviks (officiating priests). However, he assumes that after Srila Prabhupada left, that it was "only natural" for those eleven rtviks and then more that would be added later, to become regular gurus, even though Srila Prabhupada never instructed such a thing.
Although there was no appointment of anything but ritviks, at Topanga Canyon Tamal thinks that regular gurus can be self-appointed. Of course, his future statements and writings contradict this thesis and themselves in a maze of confusing mumbo-jumbo.
Hansadutta: Being completely overwhelmed with the fever of pratistha (desire for name and fame), obsessed with the ambition to be a guru, in short to be the lord and master of the devotees, I consequently became completely blind to the order of Srila Prabhupada, which he clearly expressed in his letter to the GBC and Temple Presidents, dated July 9,1977. In that letter he named 11 devotees and made it clear that they are to act as his rittvik representatives (deputies) for initiating new disciples on behalf of the Founder Acharya A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada never sent any other directive, newsletter or written document thereafter indicating that any one of his disciples should be an acharya or guru in any way. His letter of July 9, 1977, naming 11 senior disciples or rittvik representatives stands alone as the only order Prabhupada ever issued before his disappearance (four months later) in November of that year, 1977.
Srila Prabhupada: "I am practically seeing that as soon as they, our students, begin to learn a little Sanskrit, they immediately feel they have become more than their guru. Then the policy is to kill their guru and become guru themselves". "As soon as he learns that Guru Maharaj is dead, now I am so advanced I can kill guru and become guru. Then he is finished." (Srila Prabhupada 1976).
GURU CHEATING NOT
EFFECTIVE (April 22.77).
Prabhupada: People complained against [a GBC for trying to appear as a guru]. ...You
become guru, but you must be QUALIFIED FIRST of all. THEN you become. ...What is the use
of producing some RASCAL GURU?
Tamala Krishna: Well, I
have studied myself and all of your disciples, and it's clear fact that we are ALL
CONDITIONED SOULS, so we CANNOT BE gurus. MAYBE
someday it may be possible....
Prabhupada: Hm. [agrees]
Tamala Krishna: ...but not now.
Prabhupada: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru, 'No you
become acharya. You become authorized.' I retire completely. But the training must be
COMPLETE.
Tamala Krishna: The process of purification must be there. ...No rubber stamp.
Prabhupada: You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see our Gaudiya
Matha. Everyone wanted to be guru. A small temple and "guru." What kind of guru?
Srila Prabhupada: We haven't got to
manufacture. To manufacture ideas is troublesome. Why should we take the trouble? And as
soon as you want to manufacture something to my...., that is DANGEROUS. ...That you are
singing every day, "what our guru has said, that is our life and soul." ...As
soon as this POISON will come -suppress guru and I become Brahman- everything FINISHED.
Spiritual life is finished. Gaudiya Matha finished, ...VIOLATED the orders of Guru
Maharaja.
...And as soon as you manufacture, fall down. This manufacturing idea is very, very
dangerous in spiritual life. ...Our mission is to serve bhakta visesa and live with
devotees. NOT THAT YOU TAKE THE PLACE OF GURU. THAT IS NONSENSE, VERY DANGEROUS. Then
everything will be spoiled. As soon as you become AMBITIOUS to TAKE THE PLACE of
GURU-gurusuh nara matih. That is MATERIAL DISEASE.
760628bj.nv
Prabhupada: So-called
gurus, they are so-called gurus. They are not gurus.
That is already explained. If one does not speak what Krsna speaks, he is not guru. If you
accept so-called guru, that is your misfortune. What can be done?
Pusta Krsna: Some of them will say some things that Krsna says, but
they'll take from other places also. What is the position of such persons?
Prabhupada: He's MOST DANGEROUS. He's MOST DANGEROUS. He is OPPORTUNIST.
HE'S FINDING OUT CUSTOMER, SOMETHING HERE... ACCORDING TO THE CUSTOMER HE IS GIVING
SOMETHING, AS THE CUSTOMERS WILL BE PLEASED. SO HE IS NOT GURU. He's a servant. He wants
to serve the so-called disciples so that he may be satisfied and pay him something. He's
servant. He's not guru. Guru is the master. You cannot disobey guru. But
if you become a servant, you want to please the disciple by flattering him to get his
money, then you are not guru, you are servant. Just like a servant pleases the master.
He's not guru. He's servant. So our position should be servant, yes, but servant of the
Supreme. So guru means heavy. You cannot utilize him for satisfying your whims.
That is not guru.
Srila Prabhupada: Don't be allured by cheap disciples. Go on steadfastly to render
service first. If you immediately become guru, then the service activities will be
stopped; and as there are so many cheap gurus and cheap disciples, without any substantial
knowledge, and manufacturing new sampradayas, and with service activities stopped, and all
spiritual progress choked up. (SPL (VI 1987) 68.8.17)
Srila Prabhupada: "This is the function of the
GBC, to see that one may not be taken away by maya. The GBC should all be the instructor
gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by
teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must
actually come to this platform. This is what I want." (to Madhudvisa 4 Aug, 1975)
Srila Prabhupada: "I am the Spiritual Master of this institution, and ALL
the members of the Society, they're supposed to be MY disciples. They follow the
rules and regulations which I ask them to follow, and they are INITIATED BY ME
spiritually" - (Srila Prabhupada Radio Interview, 12 March 1968, San Francisco)
Srila Prabhupada: "I wish that each and every branch shall keep
their separate identity and cooperate keeping the acharya in the center. On this
principle we can open any number of branches all over the world. The Rama Krishna mission
works on this principle and thus as an organization they have done wonderfully."
(letter 11th Feb. 1967)
Srila Prabhupada: He [Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Maharaja] never recommended anyone to
be acharya of the Gaudiya Math.... If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was
qualified at that time to be acharya, he would have mentioned. Because on the night before
he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acharya. Therefore we may not commit the same
mistake in our ISKCON camp. (Srila
Prabhupada, letter to Rupanuga das, April 28, 1974)
"So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen
unauthorizedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure. THE RESULT IS NOW
EVERYONE IS CLAIMING TO BE ACARYA EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE KANISTHA ADHIKARI WITH NO
ABILITY TO PREACH. IN SOME OF THE CAMPS THE ACARYA IS BEING CHANGED THREE TIMES A YEAR. THEREFORE WE MAY NOT COMMIT THE SAME
MISTAKE IN OUR ISKCON CAMP. ACTUALLY AMONGST
MY GODBROTHERS NO ONE IS QUALIFIED TO BECOME ACARYA." (SPL 74-04-28 Rupanuga)
"All of my disciples will take the legacy. If
you want, you can also take it. Sacrifice everything. I--one--may soon pass away. But they
are hundreds, and this movement will increase. It's not that I'll give an order: "Here is the next leader." Anyone who follows the previous leadership is a leader... All
of my disciples are leaders, as much as they follow purely. If you want to
follow, you can also lead. But you don't want to follow. Leader means one who is a first
class disciple. Evam param parapraptam. One who follows is perfect." (SP BTG
Vol. 13, No. 1-2)
Urdhvaga das: Srila Prabhupada's ritvik
instruction, outlined in his
letter of July 9, addressed to all devotees
is self- explanatory and anyone can understand it whose brain substance is not
contaminated by bogus philosophy preached by Iskcons false successor acaryas, self appointed faggots gurus worshiped in a
homosexual paedophile guru lineage. Religious
propagandist and pseudo-gurus disguised as devotees exploiting the members and assets
of the society. -Demoniac Kali-yuga disciples-
Srila Prabhupada: "I am practically seeing that as soon as they, our students,
begin to learn a little Sanskrit, they immediately feel they have become more than their
guru. Then the policy is to kill their guru and become guru themselves".
"As soon as he learns that Guru Maharaj is dead, now I am so advanced I can kill guru and become guru. Then he is finished." (Srila Prabhupada 1976).
"There are many jealous people in the
dress of Vaishnavas in this Krishna Consciousness movement, and they
should be completely neglected. A false acarya may try to override a vaishnava by a
high-court decision, (2/3 hand vote) but Bhaktivinoda Thakura says that he is nothing but
a disciple of Kali-yuga." (CC.Madhy., Ch.1, Text 218 / 220, purport)
"A devotee should have intelligence to know who is deviating. Surrender by your
intelligence but don't surrender your intelligence." (SP to Bali Mardana, 1974)
Isha das: "I have always felt that Srila Prabhupada wanted those who He
appointed Ritvik (as well as other qualified disciples) while he was with us to act as
Guru on His departure."
Urdhvaga das: Of course Srila Prabhupada wanted his disciples to succeed him as guru. Definitely he wanted it, but, but, but, and here lies the big problem, he wanted qualified disciples, he wanted qualified gurus, not some show-bottle gurus, imitator gurus, self-appointed gurus, zonal-acarya gurus, woman-hater gurus, woman-lover gurus, homo-sex-gurus, harassing gurus, ex-communicating gurus, children-abusing gurus, murder-gurus, poison gurus, guru-killer gurus, disco gurus, cow-seller gurus, marijuana gurus, LSD gurus, gopi gurus, reformed gurus, no-mangala-arotik gurus, no-japa gurus, bunglow-sannyasi gurus, retreat gurus, Monika-varnasrama gurus, 3-regulative principles gurus, demon-crazy gurus, movie-mall-menaka gurus, 2/3 hand voted-in gurus, current-link gurus, etc, etc, etc.
Srila Prabhupada said: "First
become qualified". We have nothing against any Iskcon gurus, but they first
should aquire some qualification and not just imitate, they should not cheat.
Of course, a father likes to
see his son to follow him. Of course a
high-court judge likes to see his son to succeed him, but first the son has to qualify
himself, otherwise he can not take the position of the father. If he tries without
qualification to imitate the father, that means impostor, bogus, cheating.
Prabhupada: GURU CHEATING NOT
EFFECTIVE (April 22.77).
Prabhupada: People complained against [a GBC for trying to appear as a guru]. ...You
become guru, but you must be QUALIFIED FIRST of all. THEN you become. ...What is the use
of producing some RASCAL GURU?
Tamala Krishna: Well, I
have studied myself and all of your disciples, and it's clear fact that we are ALL
CONDITIONED SOULS, so we CANNOT BE gurus.
MAYBE someday it may be possible....
Prabhupada: Hm. [agrees]
Tamala Krishna: ...but not now.
Prabhupada: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru, 'No you
become acharya. You become authorized.' I retire completely. But the training must be
COMPLETE.
Tamala Krishna: The process of purification must be there. ...No rubber stamp.
Prabhupada: You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see
our Gaudiya Matha. Everyone wanted to be guru. A small temple and "guru." What
kind of guru?
Jahnu das: "It is foolish beyond
measure to impose the condition on Srila Prabhupada that he has to state 48 times that he
wanted his disciples to become gurus. Where did Krishna Kant get that idea? Isn't it
enough that Srila Prabhupada, as shown below consistently and explicitly expressed his
desire for his disciples to succeed him as guru"
Dear Jahnu das,
if anything is foolish beyond measure, then it is people like yourself, who are averse to
Srila Prabhupada's continued position as diksa / siksa guru. Please do not think that
Srila Prabhupada is dead. Certainly those reason ill who think so. The problem with you
people is that you rather like to follow self-appointed bogus Iskcon gurus
(conditioned souls who fall down after some time) then to take shelter unto Srila
Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada
clearly says in his letter to Madhudvisa
that the GBC should all be
the instructor gurus whereas he will be the initiator guru.
Srila Prabhupada: "This is the
function of the GBC, to see that one may not be taken away by maya. The GBC should all be
the instructor gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor
guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a
title, but you must actually come to this platform. This is what I want." (to
Madhudvisa 4 Aug, 1975)
Srila Prabhupada: "I am the Spiritual Master of this institution, and ALL the members
of the Society, they're supposed to be MY disciples. They follow the rules and
regulations which I ask them to follow, and they are INITIATED BY ME
spiritually" - (Srila Prabhupada Radio Interview, 12 March 1968, San Francisco)
Srila Prabhupada: "I wish that each and every branch shall keep
their separate identity and cooperate keeping the acharya in the center. On this
principle we can open any number of branches all over the world. The Rama Krishna mission
works on this principle and thus as an organization they have done wonderfully."
(letter 11th Feb. 1967)
Srila Prabhupada: He [Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Maharaja] never recommended anyone to
be acharya of the Gaudiya Math.... If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was
qualified at that time to be acharya, he would have mentioned. Because on the night before
he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acharya. Therefore we may not commit the same
mistake in our ISKCON camp. (Srila
Prabhupada, letter to Rupanuga das, April 28, 1974)
"So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one
acarya and later it proved a failure. THE RESULT IS NOW EVERYONE IS CLAIMING TO BE ACARYA
EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE KANISTHA ADHIKARI WITH NO ABILITY TO PREACH. IN SOME OF THE CAMPS
THE ACARYA IS BEING CHANGED THREE TIMES A YEAR. THEREFORE WE MAY NOT COMMIT THE SAME MISTAKE IN OUR ISKCON CAMP. ACTUALLY AMONGST MY GODBROTHERS NO ONE IS QUALIFIED TO BECOME
ACARYA." (SPL 74-04-28 Rupanuga)
"All of my disciples will take the legacy.
If you want, you can also take it. Sacrifice everything. I--one--may soon pass away. But
they are hundreds, and this movement will increase. It's not that I'll give an order: "Here is the next leader." Anyone who follows the previous leadership is a leader... All
of my disciples are leaders, as much as they follow purely. If you want to
follow, you can also lead. But you don't want to follow. Leader means one who is a first
class disciple. Evam param parapraptam. One who follows is perfect." (SP BTG
Vol. 13, No. 1-2)
February 16, 1999 VNN3070 See Related VNN Stories
Elementary, My Dear Watson
BY RADHA KRISHNA DASA
EDITORIAL, Feb 16 (VNN) -- Hare Krishna.
Despite the voluminous contentions and dissertations written, we contend that
the current Guru issue is very elementary, and it is ONE QUESTION, and one question
only.
We commend Jayapataka Maharaja for the civil tone in his paper, yet we suggest
that there are too many questions and points and objections being made, so that
the reader gets lost in the voluminous details. We contend that we only need to
satisfy JUST ONE QUESTION, and ONE QUESTION ONLY, and by doing that, all these
other objections and points will be transcendentally satisfied.
That question is this- DID HE (or did he not) order a system of initiation?, or
did Srila Prabhupada order a permanent ritvik system? We do not need to belabor
all the ramifications of Siddhanta and Parampara and everybody's opinions to come
to this conclusion. We need only examine the actual facts, of whether he did or
did not, in fact, make such an order. If he did not, then the discussion is over.
If he did, then all other considerations are null and void, because all power
and authority is contained within the order of the great acarya. His order is
beyond question.
We have very strong reasons to believe that HE DID, IN FACT, make such an order,
and there are several DOCUMENTED reasons below, SIX in number, to show why we
believe that he factually made such an order-
A. The July 9th document is a factual order. "Henceforward" has permanent connotation.
The definition of ritvik, and whose disciple is whose, is clearly defined in this
document. This is clearly an order for a ritvik system. This was recently confirmed
by several other authorities, namely Sri Bannanje Govindacharya, and HH Rangapriya
Swami, and Lakshmi Tatachar.
1. We reject the recent ploy of the secretary, in claiming that he, the secretary,
wrote the letter, by dint of the fact that he deflates his own veracity by his
prior statements in 1978, that it was Srila Prabhupada who dictated the letter
to him and had him "write the letter to all the GBC's and Temple President which
Srila Prabhupada also signed as approved on the 9th of July". After reading the
"colorful history" of said secretary, we do not accept his veracity in this desperate
ploy. Srila Prabhupada wanted a society of intelligent people, not a multitude
of gullible people for the next 10,000 years. This absurd claim will never attract
any intelligent people, because everybody knows that a secretary does not compose
such a letter of such a monumental decision. This ploy is laughable and absurd.
This ploy is obvious sheer desperation, and it will not last.
2. Henceforward may be ambiguous to some, still the onus lies upon those who terminated
this order, to produce evidence to justify their authorization to terminate the
order. Only Srila Prabhupada has the authority to terminate the order, and there
is no evidence of that kind, in fact, all evidence is to the contrary, that its
permanence was to go on into the future. However, ambiguity is cleared up by the
next documented evidence.
B. The May 28th tape is a documented recording. Srila Prabhupada directly answers
the direct question of the Maharaja, and his unequivocal answer is a ritvik system,
"after he is no longer with us."
1. Srila Prabhupada's answer stands on its own. We reject the notion that the
second half of the tape modifies Srila Prabhupada's clear answer. This is because
the second half is from a different conversation, in a different context. This
is supported by 2 forensic lab experts who said the tape was doctored. We hear
the dubs and backgrounds changes. We contend that Srila Prabhupada could not have
first given a solid answer, and then contradict himself in the next paragraph.
This makes no sense. He makes no mistakes like that.
2. Even if we include the second half, still it proves nothing, as Srila Prabhupada
said, "WHEN I order," which means that he did not order them to be regular gurus
at that time. This is confirmed when Srila Prabhupada said later, in 3 letters,
"continue to be ritvik." He could not order full gurus on May 28th, and then later
say "continue to be ritvik." This is elementary, my dear Watson.
C. His last Will is documentation of not changing his order. Only his initiated
disciples are allowed to be directors in the future. That is only possible if
they are his disciples in the far future. Also the Will says "no change in management,"
which confirms the permanence of the ritvik managerial directive July 9th document.
D. We have the documented evidence of the diary of Yasodanandana das, with its
original entries made directly after conversations with the secretary and Gauridas.
1. This diary quotes the secretary to say, (after departure) "they'll be ritviks,
its all on tape." We accept the veracity of Yasoda's entry in this diary. This
evidence stands on its own, unless, of course, the secretary produces the tapes,
and demonstrates some error in the diary. By the mere fact that there are 150
missing tapes from 1977, we surmise that someone is hiding the evidence, namely,
that "they'll be ritviks, its all on tape." Again, its elementary, my dear Watson.
2. Another diary entry records how Gauridas heard Srila Prabhupada say, "Tomorrow
I will I will announce some ritvik acharyas who will initiate disciples on my
behalf when I leave the planet." Again, unless the secretary produces some of
the 150 missing tapes to say otherwise, until then, we honor this testimony.
E. We have the documented statements of other authorities on Sampradaya Siddhanta,
namely Sri Bannanje Govindacharya, and HH Rangapriya Swami, and Lakshmi Tatachar,
and all these authorities support Srila Prabhupada's decision for ritvik representatives.
They confirm that "this system can continue perpetually even in the physical absence
of HH Srila Prabhupadaji," they say its been done before and therefore Srila Prabhupada
chose this system, and there's nothing in the Vedas to veto such a decision.
F. We have numerous documented statements from Srila Prabhupada, which
confirm that he did not want many unauthorized Gurus, thus confirming
his decision for ritvik representatives.
1. Quotes from Srila Prabhupada - "Not that you take the place of guru. That is
all nonsense. Very DANGEROUS" (4/21/77) ** "Everyone wanted to be guru. A small
temple and "guru." What kind of Guru?" ** "That is the failure. They never thought,
'guru maharaja gave us instruction on so many things, why did he not say, "This
man should be the next acharya?"' They wanted to create somebody ARTIFICIALLY
as acharya and EVERYTHING FAILED. ** The result is that now everyone is claiming
to be [guru] acharya even though they may be kanistha adhikary [spiritual neophytes],
with no ability to preach. In some camps, the [guru] acharya is being changed
three times a year. Therefore, we may not commit the same MISTAKE in our ISKCON
camp." (4/28/74) ** "They did not even consider common sense - that if guru maharaja
had wanted to APPOINT somebody as acharya, why he did not say? He said so many
things and this point he missed? The main point? And they insisted on it. They
declared, 'Come on unfit persons to become acharya,' then another man comes, then
another, then another. So better to remain a foolish person perpetually to be
directed by guru maharaja. So that is perfection. And as soon as it was announced
that, 'Guru maharaja is dead, now I am so advanced that I can kill my guru and
become [guru]'." (CONV 8/15/76)
CONCLUSION: We accept all the above to be bona-fide documentation of Srila Prabhupada's
statements and directives, which factually establishes that Srila Prabhupada ordered
a permanent ritvik system. We humbly hope that those who have preached this system
as "deviant" should go to the murti of Srila Prabhupada and beg his forgiveness.
We hope we all decide to unite under the order of His Divine Grace, chant Hare
Krishna and all be happy. Jai Srila Prabhupada!
Your servant, Radha Krishna dasa
Original Story URL: http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9902/ET16-3070.html
DEEPAK KI JAI
3 different people have responded to my request to Rama Kesava Das to support
his assumption that the word 'current link' means a physically present 'living
guru' with evidence from Srila Prabhupada. They are Ananda Das, Robert Newman
and Rama Kesava Das himself. Firstly Ananda Das wrote a lengthy article called
"Hundredfold hairsplitting cannot save Rtvik theory". Ananda Prabhu
however has helpfully summarised the contents of his article in an abstract. Extracts
from this abstract are given enclosed in speech marks " " thus, with
my response following underneath.
"ABSTRACT: Deepak Vohra declared that, absent proof, he would not approach an accessible, living guru, but attempt a theoretical relationship with a departed guru." I declared no such thing. My article was only two paragraphs long, in which I simply asked Rama Kesava prabhu to substantiate his speculation that 'current' means 'living'. Ananda needs to read what I actually wrote, and respond to that, instead of responding to some imaginary 'ritvik theory' he thinks I am proposing.
"Ananda das suggests that, even without specific words from Prabhupada requiring aspirants to approach a living guru, such is the clear intent of past practice, as well as of Prabhupada's books and numerous lectures." This is a contradiction. How can a 'clear intent' come from Srila Prabhupada's books and lectures unless expressed in SPECIFIC WORDS? Srila Prabhupada only ever communicates using words, and in order for them to express an intent which is 'clear', they must be 'specific' and clear, not vague and unclear. Yet Ananda prabhu says that this 'clear intent' is evidenced 'even WITHOUT SPECIFIC WORDS'.
"Book-initiation is a meaningless pretense, he says; one must apprentice with a guru capable of administering correction." No one as far as I know has ever proposed 'book initiation.' Certainly not I. Initiation must always be from a spiritual master, not a book. And this idea of 'apprenticing with a guru capable of administering correction', was never practiced by Srila Prabhupada, since he never MET the majority of his disciples, and thus they were never administered 'correction' personally in the capacity of being an apprentice.
So just from the abstract, Ananda prabhu: Makes it clear that he will not be responding to what I actually said, but instead he will answering imaginary 'straw man' 'ritvik theory' arguments. Contradicts the basis of his whole thesis, which is to prove that Srila Prabhupada expressed a clear and specific intent, by saying he did so without needing to use specific words; yet Srila Prabhupada only ever commuinicated via 'specific words' to express a 'clear intent'. He definitely did not use vague words to express something 'clear', and he certainly did not use sign language.
He also proposes a Guru-disciple model that was not practiced by Srila Prabhupada. And since Srila Prabhupada is an acarya, which means he teaches by example, we also know that whatever he did not practice, he did not teach either. Since the abstract gives the substance of the article, we can be sure that the article will not contain any material which will be relevant to either what I said, or what Srila Prabhupada taught, and hence is of no relevance to this debate. Indeed having read the article, I can confirm that all the points which Ananda prabhu makes can actually be responded to by regurgitating the above 3 points. I will give but one example:
Ananda prabhu opens his article by saying:
"Mr. Vohra persists in attributing great importance to the term "current link", declares that it must, a priori and forever into the future, only refer to the ISKCON Founder-Acharya Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, then "challenges" us to find in the "Vedabase" a sentence he himself invented." I never said the term 'current link' must refer to Srila Prabhupada 'forever into the future'. I only asked that Rama Kesava Prabhu substantiate his assertion about what HE declared the term meant.
I also did not ask anyone to find a sentence I invented. I asked Rama Kesava prabhu to substantiate a concept which HE invented, which is that 'current means living'. Rama Kesava prabhu said that "The words 'current link' clearly mean that we must approach a living guru, .". I simply asked where Srila Prabhupada states this speculation, since it was Srila Prabhupada who used the term 'current link', and we can only ascribe to it a meaning that Srila Prabhupada himself gives.
In this way the whole article can be responded to by simply repeating the 3 points made above, with which I responded to his abstract. I therefore humbly suggest that Ananda prabhu re-writes his article so that it both addresses what I actually said, and what Srila Prabhupada specifically said, thus making it of value to this discussion.
Next we come to Robert Newman and Rama Kesava Das's attempts to respond to my request that Rama Kesava Prabhu provide support from Srila Prabhupada to support his speculation that the words "current link' clearly mean that we must approach a living guru".
The reply from Mr. Robert Newman, agrees that no such support can be found from Srila Prabhupada's teachings. However, he states that such support is not necessary since it is a matter of "common sense" that "current link" must mean someone who is physically present. Another reply from Rama Kesava Prabhu also agrees that no such support can be found from Srila Prabhupada's teachings. He also agrees with Mr Newman that no such support is necessary. He gives a different reason however. He states that we can interpret the word "current link" to mean 'physically present', since this is what historical practice would teach us - i.e. all Diksa Gurus previously have been physically present.
However, neither of these methods - "common sense" and "historical practice" - have been sanctioned by Srila Prabhupada as the method by which to understand his words. Without such sanction, everyone can propose his own method by which to understand what Srila Prabhupada's words 'really' mean. Some even say we should understand Srila Prabhupada's words by interpreting them in line with current scientific evidence, or by having them double-checked by Narayana Maharaja etc. Everyone will have his own method. We already have two here from two different individuals. There is no end. That is why we need AUTHORITY from Srila Prabhupada that we can understand his words by a method other than - his words. So before we consider the arguments put forward by Mr Newman and Rama Kesava Das, we first need a statement from Srila Prabhupada sanctioning that their arguments are even valid. Then we can examine the actual arguments in more detail.
Thank You
Your servant,
Deepak