Guest guest Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 > Do you think even Mpd is interested in this anymore.NO! its just a sheild > for him, to not follow the GBC and authority of his Guru.Anyone who is > mislead by MPd is getting cheated because he/she wants to get cheated, > there is no bases to this whole issue. You also need not break your head > with it anymore unless you have some doubts. If you have some doubt then > please come over and we shall discuss and i shall try my best to clear > them. That's a good point. Ritvikism is just a smoke-screen Mpd uses to hide behind so he undisturbed can usurp ISKCON funds for his own purposes. And we are speaking crores of rupees here, that he has taken complete control over. The ritvik issue is not at all a philosophical issue. How can it be, when there is no evidence for it in guru, sadhu and sastra? The only ones who have blown it up to be so, was first Nityananda in his Vedic Village Review, who in his envy did it with the sole purpose of destroying the GBC, and now it is Mpd in Bangalore who adds fuel to the ritvik smolders, and keeps doing it, even long after they have died down. He is using he ritvik issue to divert the attention of the general mass of devotees away from the fact, that he is busy stealing ISKCON's property. Thus a lot of confused and uninformed devotees have been misled into thinking there is some kind of philosophical schism going on in ISKCON, or some use the ritvik issue (which is not an issue) simply to vent their own frustrations on the GBC. Many things may be wrong in ISKCON and the GBC, but do we really think we can help correct these wrongs by inventing bogus philosophies? That doesn't make any sense. And if one cannot understand that the ritvik idea is bogus and that TFO is a load of incoherent garbage, then there is not much that can be done. But lets at least relocate the ritvik issue to where it belongs - the garbage can. Hare Krishna ys, jdd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Dear MCD Prabhu PAMHO. AGTSP. >can someone also add Madhu Pandit Prabhu and Chanchalapati Prabhu from >ISKCON Blore and get them to also convince us on this philosophy? Also >please add Krishna Kant Prabhu, Sattvik Prabhu from Calcutta and other >Ritvik adherents to please enlighten us on this issue. The philosophy that Srila Prabhupada continues as the current spiritual master in ISKCON is comprehensively explained in "The Final Order" (TFO), as you well know. All you have to do is read it and in this way your desire to become enlightened about Srila Prabhupada's instructions on ritvik initiations will be fulfilled. Contrary to Jahnu Prabhu's uneducated critique of TFO that it is "incoherent garbage", ISKCON's own leading academic advisor Prof. Kim Knott stated in the Foreword to TFO: "It raises important theological questions concerning spiritual authority and its transmission, the relationship of the disciple and Krishna's representative, the guru, and the proper objects of devotional worship... the profound issues it raises demand consideration at all levels. Every devotee has a real stake in the matter." So if Jahnu would like to tell the academic community that they are so unprofessional as to recommend a work of "incoherent garbage", I'm sure they will heed this advice from such a recognised scholar as himself. It should also be noted that TFO, which was written **specifically in response** to the GBC paper "Gurus and Initiations in ISKCON" (GII), resulted last year in the GBC withdrawing its own GII paper, admitting in the process that it both "stretches the truth" and is full of "lies". That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for the GBC's philosophy on guru-tattva, does it? >also why is it that instead of discussing and convincing opposing >views....they believe in throwing people out physically ...and use force >rather than logic and arguement...is this what Srila Prabhupad taught >us.... This is a rather sad attempt to twist the facts. I seem to recall devotees being beaten and physically thrown out of Srila Prabhupada's temples by the GBC for simply advocating Srila Prabhupada's final signed directive of July 9th 1977. Yes, I'm sure I'm right... ---------- ASIAN AGE: April 28, 2001 "Seventy two ISKCON Mayapur devotees were arrested by the Shakespeare Sarani Police on charges of rowdyism on Saturday morning. They have been kept in Police custody. Sources say that more than 250 ISKCON Mayapur devotees barged into the ISKCON Revival Movement office on Albert Road on Friday evening and tried to assault IRM President Adridharana Das who, they claimed, is no more the president. Adridharana Das had filed a case against 70 ISKCON Mayapur Gurus who claimed they were the chief leaders of the ISKCON Movement. Das said ISKCON only had one leader - Srila Prabhupada. This has been the major bone of contention between the two factions. They assaulted the 15 IRM devotees who lived inside the temple and held them hostage for the entire night. They again assaulted the IRM devotees on Saturday night." THE TIMES OF INDIA: 15 October 2001 "Police arrested three persons from Iskcon temple in Mayapur and seized the attendence register, in relation to a blast near the Temple on Saturday which killed a man & injured two brothers. according to Police, Babu Ghose was making crude bombs near the temple compound when one of them went off accidentaly killing him on the spot & injuring two others. Initially, the temple authorities had denied any connection with the de-ceased or the injured but on Sunday admitted that Ghose was a group D staff." (other reports not included due to space limitations). >if a philosophy is right...then its practitioners will have exemplary >behaviour... Quite so. >..and did not physically assault or cause to assault Chand Kazi...he also >did not file cases against any devotee or non devotee to harass them.... Unfortunately, it is too late now for Suresvara Das, the Calcutta devotee who took his own life after being framed in what turned out to be a false rape allegation in which certain ISKCON members were implicated. >Let Truth Prevail..and let cowards and wrongdoers beware and keep away Well you can't have the truth by twisting facts, or by framing and beating devotees, or by promoting a philosophy which you later secretly admit was a pack of lies (GBC paper above-mentioned). So if MCD Prabhu, you would like to continue our philosophical discussion which you somewhat unceremoniously abandoned mid-stream in October 2004, I would be happy to continue. (Please note that I can physically only discuss with one person at a time, namely MCD if he wishes, and will therefore not be responding to any other posters on this Forum - unless MCD wishes to nominate someone else to take his place. Thank you). Your servant, Deepak _______________ It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Instead of being in a fighting mood we should simply all accept all the instructions of Srila Prabhupada. This will solve everything. We don't need anyone to redefine Srila Prabhupada's instructions because his books are crystal clear. Krishnapriya dd [Krishnapriya.dd (AT) pamho (DOT) net] Wednesday, January 05, 2005 7:25 AM Anukulya Keshava (das) JPS (Bangalore - IN); ashesha govinda das(iskcon blore); Deepak Vohra; Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS) (Mayapur - IN); K.S. Mahesh Cc: Bhanu Swami (Madras - IN); Kavicandra Swami (GBC Japan); Jasomatinandan (das) ACBSP (Gujarat - IN); Krsnadasa Kaviraja (das) ACBSP (Toronto - CA); Mukunda Datta (das) ACBSP (BBT Govardhan); Acintya Caitanya (das) JPS (Bangalore - IN); Dayaram (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN); Narahari (das) JPS (Bangalore - IN); Ratnavali (dd) JPS (JPS Office Mayapur - IN); Sarvajna Krishna(das)JPS(Chennai,Moscow Temple Project); Tusti Mohan Krsna (das) JPS (JPS Off. MYR-IN); Vaikuntha Pati (das) JPS (JPS Office Mayapur - IN); Vibhav Krishna (das) JPS (Bangalore - IN); Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN); Vishal Gauranga (das) JPS (Bangalore - IN); mantraguru9 ; gangreg ; ard (AT) iskconbangalore (DOT) org; vyasapuja (AT) iskconbangalore (DOT) org; Initiations in ISKCON can someone give sastric and sadhu validations for ritvikism <<<<And if one cannot understand that the ritvik idea is bogus and that TFO is a load of incoherent garbage, then there is not much that can be done. But lets at least relocate the ritvik issue to where it belongs - the garbage can.>>>>> >From Deepak's reply to MCD, which is also applicable to the above: *** The philosophy that Srila Prabhupada continues as the current spiritual master in ISKCON is comprehensively explained in "The Final Order" (TFO), as you well know. All you have to do is read it and in this way your desire to become enlightened about Srila Prabhupada's instructions on ritvik initiations will be fulfilled. Contrary to Jahnu Prabhu's uneducated critique of TFO that it is "incoherent garbage", ISKCON's own leading academic advisor Prof. Kim Knott stated in the Foreword to TFO: "It raises important theological questions concerning spiritual authority and its transmission, the relationship of the disciple and Krishna's representative, the guru, and the proper objects of devotional worship... the profound issues it raises demand consideration at all levels. Every devotee has a real stake in the matter." So if Jahnu would like to tell the academic community that they are so unprofessional as to recommend a work of "incoherent garbage", I'm sure they will heed this advice from such a recognised scholar as himself. It should also be noted that TFO, which was written **specifically in response** to the GBC paper "Gurus and Initiations in ISKCON" (GII), resulted last year in the GBC withdrawing its own GII paper, admitting in the process that it both "stretches the truth" and is full of "lies". That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for the GBC's philosophy on guru-tattva, does it?************ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Dear Deepak Prabhuji PAMHO As per SP 3 things are essential 1. Guru 2. Sadhu 3. Sastra Regarding the ritvik issue 1. Guru. - there is a divide on this. Some say SP said this others say he did not 2. Sadhu - no evidence given so far that i know of, to support ritvikism 3. Sastra -no evidence given so far that i know of, to support ritvikism Kindly give these. Also include Satvik Pr, Adhridarana Pr, Krishnakant Pr etc also. regarding other aspects in the mail below...pls find my comments below.. ys mcd Dear MCD Prabhu PAMHO. AGTSP. "It raises important theological questions concerning spiritual authority and its transmission, the relationship of the disciple and Krishna's representative, the guru, and the proper objects of devotional worship... the profound issues it raises demand consideration at all levels. Every devotee has a real stake in the matter." my(MCD's) comments: "he mentions consideration...does he endorse ritvikism and say its correct? does he recommend this as the way forward....we are in effect following his advise in this forum by taking it seriously and discussing it...since we all have a real stake in it." >also why is it that instead of discussing and convincing opposing >views....they believe in throwing people out physically ...and use force >rather than logic and arguement...is this what Srila Prabhupad taught >us.... This is a rather sad attempt to twist the facts. I seem to recall devotees being beaten and physically thrown out of Srila Prabhupada's temples by the GBC for simply advocating Srila Prabhupada's final signed directive of July 9th 1977. Yes, I'm sure I'm right... ---------- ASIAN AGE: April 28, 2001 "Seventy two ISKCON Mayapur devotees were arrested by the Shakespeare Sarani Police on charges of rowdyism on Saturday morning. They have been kept in Police custody. Sources say that more than 250 ISKCON Mayapur devotees barged into the ISKCON Revival Movement office on Albert Road on Friday evening and tried to assault IRM President Adridharana Das who, they claimed, is no more the president. Adridharana Das had filed a case against 70 ISKCON Mayapur Gurus who claimed they were the chief leaders of the ISKCON Movement. Das said ISKCON only had one leader - Srila Prabhupada. This has been the major bone of contention between the two factions. They assaulted the 15 IRM devotees who lived inside the temple and held them hostage for the entire night. They again assaulted the IRM devotees on Saturday night." THE TIMES OF INDIA: 15 October 2001 "Police arrested three persons from Iskcon temple in Mayapur and seized the attendence register, in relation to a blast near the Temple on Saturday which killed a man & injured two brothers. according to Police, Babu Ghose was making crude bombs near the temple compound when one of them went off accidentaly killing him on the spot & injuring two others. Initially, the temple authorities had denied any connection with the de-ceased or the injured but on Sunday admitted that Ghose was a group D staff." (other reports not included due to space limitations). ---------- -- my(MCD's) comments:" these newspaper reports indicate that 70 ISKCON Mayapur devotees assaulted 15 ISKCON Calcutta devotees...should i understand that only one side assaulted the other...or were the 15 strong enough physically to withstand assault and endure so many days of assault. neverthless Vaishnava aparad should be avoided at all costs...since ours is a peaceful movement.... >if a philosophy is right...then its practitioners will have exemplary >behaviour... Quite so. >..and did not physically assault or cause to assault Chand Kazi...he also >did not file cases against any devotee or non devotee to harass them.... Unfortunately, it is too late now for Suresvara Das, the Calcutta devotee who took his own life after being framed in what turned out to be a false rape allegation in which certain ISKCON members were implicated. my(MCD's) comments:" i am sorry i am unaware of Suresvara Prabhu...and the circumstances under which he committed suicide...however it is wrong for one to commit suicide..it is violence...self violence is also wrong... one's body and soul belong to Krishna and taking one's life is wrong...and probably reflects maturity in KC and lack of understanding of these concepts....however i cannot fathom the conditions he was in ..and whether he was right in such situations...however i am quite confident many Vaishnavas have been through tough times.....its hard to imagine justifying suicide even then. so i guess blame is due to the one who commits suicide certainly...regarding false cases if any...i am unaware..and if one falsely troubles a vaishnava...it certainly is wrong" >Let Truth Prevail..and let cowards and wrongdoers beware and keep away Well you can't have the truth by twisting facts, or by framing and beating devotees, or by promoting a philosophy which you later secretly admit was a pack of lies (GBC paper above-mentioned). So if MCD Prabhu, you would like to continue our philosophical discussion which you somewhat unceremoniously abandoned mid-stream in October 2004, I would be happy to continue. (Please note that I can physically only discuss with one person at a time, namely MCD if he wishes, and will therefore not be responding to any other posters on this Forum - unless MCD wishes to nominate someone else to take his place. Thank you). my(MCD's) comments:" I am sorry for not being involved for sometime...i had the good fortune of doing some service during this time...which kept me busy... i have heard about cases of devotees being asked to leave ISKCON Blore because they had differing views with MPP...is this right...dont we allow Mayavadis and karmis to visit our temples..without security guards..why this bad behaviour to devotees...shouldn't the ritviks be showing exemplary Vaishnava behavior to the rest of ISKCON?? you have not touched on many of these issues at all? please answer these also. why have so many brahmacharis...i am told of the original 70 or so...only 4 or 5 still in ISKCON Bangalore...please give me the correct facts on this... i have heard that Varada Krishna Prabhu was beaten in ISKCON Blore..and some false case put on him also..pls clarify this also.. also i heard that if a person is disliked..then in the night...his luggage is placed out of the ashram and he is asked to leave.....just because he may have a contrary opinion....did SP throw devotees out of ISKCON like this?? did he encourage his TPs to remove people by force if they disagreed with them only verbally...though continuing service...without breaking any regulative principles...please give quotes to prove this.. suppose I am an inmate of the ritvik temple ISKCON Blore and I have a grievance against the TP or Management...say i dont agree with something..or i feel i am being badly treated etc...i am sure we have enough such instances during SP's time...where devotees used to approach SP for these things....and later the GBC.... in case of ISKCON Blore..whom can i approach....who has authority over MPP and his management...does he accept anybody else's authority....is there a body of individuals for such matters? Pls answer these doubts of mine also...pls dont forget to address them....also you have not replied or commented on many of the issues i raised in my previous letter..kindly read them and address these issues also.." ys mcd"" Your servant, Deepak _______________ It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2005 Report Share Posted January 6, 2005 Dear MCd Prabhuji PAMHO. AGTSP! >As per SP 3 things are essential >1. Guru >2. Sadhu >3. Sastra Agreed. And since SP is a fully authorized, bona fide spiritual master, whatever he instructs us to do is AUTOMATICALLY in line with sadhu and sastra: “Sadhu, sastra and guru. Guru means who follows the sastra and sadhu. SO THERE ARE THREE, THE SAME." (SP Lecture 30/11/76) “Sadhu sastra: saintly persons and scriptures, two things, and with spiritual master, three, three parallel lines, who accept the sadhu and the scripture. Sadhu confirms the scriptures and spiritual master accept the scripture. Simple process. SO THEY ARE NOT IN DISAGREEMENT...Saintly person means who confirms the Vedic injunction, who accepts. And scripture means what is accepted by the saintly person. And spiritual master means who follows the scriptures. SO THINGS EQUAL TO THE SAME THING ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER. THIS IS AXIOMATIC TRUTH.” (SP lecture, October 18, 1968) Please also note that the SASTRA you are supposed to read are the books of Srila Prabhupada, who is also the GURU (and indeed sadhu too). So whatever SP states in his books, letters, conversations and classes is ALREADY sastric. This is just obvious, and is the case with all the bona fide members of our parampara: "The statements of Thakura Bhaktivinoda ARE AS GOOD AS SCRIPTURES because he is a liberated person." (Letter to Janaradan, 18/4/68) So moving on to your statement: >Regarding the ritvik issue >1. Guru. - there is a divide on this. Some say SP said this others say >he >did not I had already sent you, as you requested, Srila Prabhupada’s final signed directive of July 9th 1977, where he appointed ritviks to initiate disciples on his behalf. Do you accept that the July 9 letter is an authoritative order from SP – YES or NO? [Please note that a recent assertion on this forum that we cannot place any authority on the July 9th letter because SP did not write it is completely bogus, as HH Jayadvaita Swami would confirm: "Its authority is beyond question [...] Clearly, this letter establishes a ritvik-guru system." (JS, 'Where the ritvik People are Wrong' 1996) “A final concern about letters might be that some letters Srila Prabhupada personally wrote or dictated, others he signed after a secretary composed them, and still others a secretary wrote and signed and Srila Prabhupada countersigned as “approved.” Such a concern, however, should have little impact. ALL SUCH LETTERS HAVE AUTHORITY. SRILA PRABHUPÄDA'S SIGNATURE SHOWS HIS CLEAR ENDORSEMENT OF WHATEVER THE LETTER MIGHT SAY.” (Jayadvaita Swami, ‘Levels of Authority’, 2003)] So now, given that the words of SP are non-different from guru and sastra, most reasonable people would accept that this letter indeed establishes the ritvik system, and is therefore sastric. The only question then left for you to answer is whether this ritvik system should have been terminated on Srila Prabhupada’s departure, and replaced by two new systems, neither of which were authorized anywhere by SP (namely, the Zonal Acarya system, and the 2/3 majority vote multi-guru system). Since there is no mention in the letter itself that the ritvik system should be terminated, and then subsequently replaced by 2 different guru systems not once mentioned by SP, one naturally wonders WHY it was terminated. SP also gave many other institutional instructions to be carried out after his physical departure – such as chanting 16 rounds, performing sankirtan, offering him his yearly Vyasa Puja etc. – yet no one has argued that we should have stopped following these instructions because SP has physically departed. >my(MCD's) comments (about Prof. Kim Knott’s quote): "he mentions > >consideration...does he endorse ritvikism >and say its correct? does he recommend this as the way forward....we >are >in >effect following his advise in this forum by taking it seriously and >discussing it...since we all have a real stake in it." Well, some people are clearly NOT interested in seriously discussing SP’s instructions on ritvik as published in TFO, such as Jahnu, who thinks TFO is “incoherent garbage”; and who also thinks that any discussion on ritvik should be consigned to the garbage can. Regarding your comments on ISKCON Bangalore, since I have never been there, nor met Madhu Pandit nor any of the other Bangalore devotees, I cannot comment. But as far as devotees being thrown out of ISKCON temples, in the UK they are certainly being banned all the time by the temple authorities; and for good measure they are being beaten black and blue too (even a young girl has not been exempt from such treatment). So much for philosophical discussion. Your servant, Deepak _______________ Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2005 Report Share Posted January 6, 2005 Dear Deepak Prabhuji pamho agtgm agtsp Sp prided the fact that all that he said was as per sadhu and sastra...usually it was his practice to mention such quotes in his books... so we must look for such quotes from SP in his books to support ritvikism and also in the books of the other acharyas..since they are the sadhus who endorsed these... i discovered in one conversation..SP calls his disciples pure devotees..have you seen this one..kindly check for it in folio.. you have again not answered my doubts on how i can under this ritvik system settle issues in the Bangalore temple..and many other questions.. if HH Jayadvaita Maharaj..a sadhu accepts the letter ..as you mentioned below..i cannot obviously refute it..... kindly answer my other doubts..its two letters now..wherein my doubts are not cleared...things are just building up... if you cannot answer these questions then kindly say so..because then to me there are many areas which the ritvik system cannot address...and the current GBC system seems to have a mechanism to resolve issues in temples atleast.....so if the ritvik system cannot have a system to democratically resolve issues..then it turns into a dictatorship in each temple..is this what SP wanted? and as i said earleir and you accepted...if ritviks want to impress the rest of the community about the truth of their stance..then one good way is also by exemplary actions..and good vaishnava behavior... so isnt the onus on ritviks all over the world to also try and look into the affairs of the Bangalore temple...which i gather is the largest and most popular ritvik temple worldwide. ys mcd Dear MCd Prabhuji PAMHO. AGTSP! >As per SP 3 things are essential >1. Guru >2. Sadhu >3. Sastra Agreed. And since SP is a fully authorized, bona fide spiritual master, whatever he instructs us to do is AUTOMATICALLY in line with sadhu and sastra: “Sadhu, sastra and guru. Guru means who follows the sastra and sadhu. SO THERE ARE THREE, THE SAME." (SP Lecture 30/11/76) “Sadhu sastra: saintly persons and scriptures, two things, and with spiritual master, three, three parallel lines, who accept the sadhu and the scripture. Sadhu confirms the scriptures and spiritual master accept the scripture. Simple process. SO THEY ARE NOT IN DISAGREEMENT...Saintly person means who confirms the Vedic injunction, who accepts. And scripture means what is accepted by the saintly person. And spiritual master means who follows the scriptures. SO THINGS EQUAL TO THE SAME THING ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER. THIS IS AXIOMATIC TRUTH.” (SP lecture, October 18, 1968) Please also note that the SASTRA you are supposed to read are the books of Srila Prabhupada, who is also the GURU (and indeed sadhu too). So whatever SP states in his books, letters, conversations and classes is ALREADY sastric. This is just obvious, and is the case with all the bona fide members of our parampara: "The statements of Thakura Bhaktivinoda ARE AS GOOD AS SCRIPTURES because he is a liberated person." (Letter to Janaradan, 18/4/68) So moving on to your statement: >Regarding the ritvik issue >1. Guru. - there is a divide on this. Some say SP said this others say >he >did not I had already sent you, as you requested, Srila Prabhupada’s final signed directive of July 9th 1977, where he appointed ritviks to initiate disciples on his behalf. Do you accept that the July 9 letter is an authoritative order from SP – YES or NO? [Please note that a recent assertion on this forum that we cannot place any authority on the July 9th letter because SP did not write it is completely bogus, as HH Jayadvaita Swami would confirm: "Its authority is beyond question [...] Clearly, this letter establishes a ritvik-guru system." (JS, 'Where the ritvik People are Wrong' 1996) “A final concern about letters might be that some letters Srila Prabhupada personally wrote or dictated, others he signed after a secretary composed them, and still others a secretary wrote and signed and Srila Prabhupada countersigned as “approved.” Such a concern, however, should have little impact. ALL SUCH LETTERS HAVE AUTHORITY. SRILA PRABHUPÄDA'S SIGNATURE SHOWS HIS CLEAR ENDORSEMENT OF WHATEVER THE LETTER MIGHT SAY.” (Jayadvaita Swami, ‘Levels of Authority’, 2003)] So now, given that the words of SP are non-different from guru and sastra, most reasonable people would accept that this letter indeed establishes the ritvik system, and is therefore sastric. The only question then left for you to answer is whether this ritvik system should have been terminated on Srila Prabhupada’s departure, and replaced by two new systems, neither of which were authorized anywhere by SP (namely, the Zonal Acarya system, and the 2/3 majority vote multi-guru system). Since there is no mention in the letter itself that the ritvik system should be terminated, and then subsequently replaced by 2 different guru systems not once mentioned by SP, one naturally wonders WHY it was terminated. SP also gave many other institutional instructions to be carried out after his physical departure – such as chanting 16 rounds, performing sankirtan, offering him his yearly Vyasa Puja etc. – yet no one has argued that we should have stopped following these instructions because SP has physically departed. >my(MCD's) comments (about Prof. Kim Knott’s quote): "he mentions > >consideration...does he endorse ritvikism >and say its correct? does he recommend this as the way forward....we >are >in >effect following his advise in this forum by taking it seriously and >discussing it...since we all have a real stake in it." Well, some people are clearly NOT interested in seriously discussing SP’s instructions on ritvik as published in TFO, such as Jahnu, who thinks TFO is “incoherent garbage”; and who also thinks that any discussion on ritvik should be consigned to the garbage can. Regarding your comments on ISKCON Bangalore, since I have never been there, nor met Madhu Pandit nor any of the other Bangalore devotees, I cannot comment. But as far as devotees being thrown out of ISKCON temples, in the UK they are certainly being banned all the time by the temple authorities; and for good measure they are being beaten black and blue too (even a young girl has not been exempt from such treatment). So much for philosophical discussion. Your servant, Deepak _______________ Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2005 Report Share Posted January 6, 2005 > >if HH Jayadvaita Maharaj..a sadhu accepts the letter ..as you >mentioned below..i cannot obviously refute it..... For clarification: I accept that the July 9th letter is a letter Srila Prabhupdaa approved, as shown by his having initialed it. I reject that the letter is Srila Prabhupada's "final order" about how initiations should be conducted after his departure (a subject the letter never mentions). I feel abused by those who mention my "approval" of the July 9th letter as though it somehow indicates I support a doctrine they know I reject for being groundless, perverse, and insulting to what Srila Prabhupada taught. (Please note: I have not read the letter to which K.S. Mahesh is replying, so I am not trying to finger whoever wrote it. My comment above is meant for whomever the shoe fits.) To my knowledge, the last time Srila Prabhupada explicitly addressed the question of how initiations would go on after his physical departure was on May 28, 1977. To see what question the letter of July 9th was meant to answer, one may consult Srila Prabhupada's conversation with Tamal Krsna Goswami on July 7th, two days earlier. Hare Krsna. Hoping this finds you in good health, Your servant, Jayadvaita Swami ------------------- www.krishna.com/jas ------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2005 Report Share Posted January 6, 2005 Dear Jayadvaita Maharaja PAMHO. AGTSP. >I accept that the July 9th letter is a letter Srila Prabhupdaa >approved, as shown by his having initialed it. Which is all I was pointing out to Jahnu, who said that since Srila Prabhupada did not write or compose the July 9th letter, it therefore carries no authority. But clearly, you agree that since Srila Prabhupada's signature appears on the letter, then it DOES carry authority (or at least it did until November 14th/15th 1977, when it ceased to be applied in ISKCON). >I reject that the letter is Srila Prabhupada's "final order" about how >initiations should be conducted after his departure (a subject the >letter never mentions). Since the letter never mentions Srila Prabhupada's departure (but is only about initiations "henceforward"), then why was it terminated upon SP's departure? >I feel abused by those who mention my "approval" of the July 9th >letter as though it somehow indicates I support a doctrine they know I >reject for being groundless, perverse, and insulting to what Srila >Prabhupada taught. I think everyone knows how you feel about the doctrine that the July 9th directive is applicable for the lifetime of ISKCON; whereas you believe that it could only have been applicable between July 9th 1977 and November 14th/15th 1977 (a time period, which you agree, is not even mentioned in the letter). Your "approval" of the letter was only mentioned in the context of it being authorised by SP, a fact which Jahnu and others contest. Others would say that the doctrine of electing diksa gurus by a 2/3 voting majority is also "groundless, perverse, and insulting to what Srila Prabhupada taught" (just like the Zonal Acarya system, in which the 11 ritviks named were very happy to use the July 9th letter to metamorphose themselves into fully-fledged diksa gurus). Neither system is mentioned anywhere by SP. >To my knowledge, the last time Srila Prabhupada explicitly addressed >the question of how initiations would go on after his physical >departure was on May 28, 1977. This is the conversation where Satsvarupa M. asks SP: "Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you are no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation(s) would be conducted." To which SP replies: "Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up. I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acarya(s)...ritvik" This "recommendation" for "officiating acarya...ritvik", for the time period "in the future, particularly at that time when you are no longer with us" was then formalised in the July 9th 1977 letter. Your servant, Deepak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.