Initiation (?)

[Guest guest]

> > One thing more. Think about that Harikesa Maharaja (former)

> > was named by Srila Prabhupada, along with 10 others, to carry

> > on with initiating disciples after Prabhupada' soon departure.

>

> Those 11 were asked to perform ritvik initiations on Prabhupadas behalf

> while he was present. He never instructed them (the 11) specificaly to

> take their own disciples.

 

 

Yes. I stand corrected. There is no evidence that Prabhupada

explicitly instructed anybody to become an initiated guru.

I have rater taken Srila Prabhupada's way of acting as

the sign of his undoubtful intention in this regard.

 

Those 11 were obviously ones that Prabhupada chose to represent

him in the matters of initiating new ISCKON members. They had

full power of attorney to decide on their own over who was qualified

to get initiated. They were the men of Srila Prabhupada's trust

in most confidential matters.

 

So, the natural question would be, why would Srila Prabhupada

chose specifically some disciples among all others to get

into "business" of initiating (in his behalf) if he didn't

want them to go with the same practice after his departure?

Srila Prabhupada did nothing without some reason. For me,

to chose several of his disciples and get them practice

and train giving initiations makes Srila Prabhupada's

intention fully clear that some additional "b&w" confirmation

"You should continue giving initiations and accepting disciples

in your own name after my departure" was not needed. It was

 

 

Thus we got the rtvik-epidemy in ISCKON and the bloody

war going on. Because Srila Prabhupada missed to specifically

say that what was in that time clearly obvious to everybody

in ISCKON, and nobody even thought to be in need to ask it

specifically.

 

 

 

>

> > Thus your question "Was he ever bona fide" on that way

> > may just well turn into calling in question Prabhupada's

> > competency.

>

> Not at all, because they were only instructed by him to carry on

> initiations on his behalf while he was present, so they were simply

> priests.

 

 

Yes. And then they were expected to not continue. Srila Prabhupada

needed and wanted them only to be simply the priest. And after his

departure, these 11 are supposed to stop doing it. Would it be so?

 

As far as "explicit evidence" is concerned, it is only rtviks who

may get a "score" here.

 

 

 

> Incidentaly HH Satsvarupa Maharaja does not claim to be an

> uttama adhikary.

 

I don't know anybody in ISCKON maikin such claim for himself.

 

 

 

ys mnd