BG shows physical presence is required

[Guest guest]

> Dear Ajamila prabhu,

>

> Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila

> Prabhupada. Thank you for the encouragement. It is good to

> hear that some devotees are being pulled back from what

> appears to me to be a spiritual abyss. I had not really

> wanted to engage in debate with the ritviks, as I know from

> previous experience that there will never be any agreement. I

> made a comment on a text posted by Hari Sauri prabhu, without

> realising that it would be picked up by the ritviks. I

> thought they were usually excluded from Com.

 

Some ISKCON devotees still don't know the facts nor understand

the philosophical wranglings and so they talk with Ritviks. That

must be the way your texts get to the Ritviks.

 

> It seems the ritviks have made their assumption that

> Prabhupada wanted the ritvik system to continue after his

> departure, and from this premise they interpret all other

> evidence.

 

Exactly to the point.

 

> I am not sure of their basis for this assumption Ñ

 

I don't think they are either.

 

> I must say I find it hard to believe their primary evidence is

> the July 9 letter. It is such a flimsy basis for so major an

> adjustment in the traditional way that initiations have always

> ocurred in our sampradaya. I can't believe that Srila

> Prabhupada, who was usually so meticulous and thorough in his

> dealings, would leave such an important matter open to so much

> doubt. You would have thought that he would have spelled it

> out in no uncertain terms. Called a meeting of the GBC or

> something. Of course, the ritviks think he made it clear, but

> the majority of devotees obviously don't agree.

 

We were just discussing this point in another conference. And

when Jayadvaita Swami first read TFO (The Faked Order) he

concluded that it is so stupid no one would fall for it. Many

years later he saw that he was wrong, devotees who we thought

would never buy it swallow it hook,line and sinker. We therefore

have to EDUCATE our deovtees in this respect to such an extent

that the Ritviks will all go back into the woodwork. We should

legislate that in order to take initation must prove he/she can

defeat a hard-core Ritvik. Solid education is the only long term

solution since the Ritviks it seems will always be there to one

extent or another. In every village there is always someone daft

enough to do something mad, devotee communities included.

 

> No doubt the arguments will rage on endlessly. 'Tarka

> apratistha'. I expect (and hope) the ritviks will eventually

> give up trying to convert everyone to their view, and just

> carry on with their own thing. However, I at least will not

> be joining them. Even if the arguments seem confusing, the

> results of adopting ritvik philosophy seem plain enough.

> During my time as TP I have seen a number of my congregation

> go the ritvik way. They rarely return - hence my labelling it

> an 'abyss'. It seems to be the first step towards spiritual

> disaster. Believing that no one is authorised or qualified to

> act as guru, they start questioning everything and everyone.

> Any attempts to reason with them are hopeless, as they begin

> to see any authority who differs from their view as some kind

> of conspiratorial demon, probably on a 'guru trip'. Their

> worldview becomes tainted with a vision of friends and

> enemies. In order to support their tenuous position they are

> forced to level serious criticism at senior devotees.

> Clouding our philosophy with obscure arguments, they become

> intractable, rejecting even those devotees who worked hard to

> bring them to Krishna consciousness.

 

Very well said.

 

> My experience is that younger devotees, usually the most

> vulnerable to ritvik doctrine, rarely recover from this

> position. They eventually abandon anything to do with Krishna

> consciousness. Surely this is the most damning indictment of

> the ritvik philosophy. If it were actually what Srila

> Prabhupada wanted, and therefore in line with Krishna's

> desire, we would expect it to enliven and inspire devotees in

> their spiritual life. Actually connecting to a bona-fide

> parampara is compared to taking hold of a live wire, the

> spiritual energy coming from Krishna flows through. But is

> this seen when devotees take to ritvik? Not in my experience.

> It is most often the very opposite. And if it were not, then

> why should anyone object? After all, even if we are trying to

> build an empire we need lots of inspired and enlivened

> devotees, don't we?

 

Judge by the results. And a more imortant point on that note is

that when a devotee turns ritvik without fail they become

monstrous guru & Vaisnava aparadhis.

 

Ritviks think they love Srila Prabhupada more than anyone else

but ritvikism itself accuses Prabhupada of BREAKING THE LAW of

dicipllic succession. Is this not a serious guru aparadha?

 

And Ritviks criticise every guru in ISKCON, is this not a very

servious Vaisnava aparadha?

 

We keep saying, consume ritvikism at your own peril.

 

> For me the effect of ritvik doctrine is experienced simply by

> reading their literature. It befuddles the brain and leaves

> the heart cold. In one sense I am not surprised they have

> gone to court - I always thought their documents read like

> legal briefs. I am left with the impression that the writers

> are intent on one thing only - winning a case. To me it seems

> that a very weak position is being couched in a kind of

> legalese in order to make it sound authoritative. While terms

> like 'siksha', 'diksha', 'guru', 'disciple', 'Back to

> Godhead', etc, are bandied about in an attempt to construct

> arguments, there seems to be little understanding of what they

> mean. I don't get the feeling that ritvik writers want to

> enlighten me, to share any deep realisations they may have

> about these profound spiritual concepts.

 

> Surely, though, this is the real issue. What is guru? What

> is the meaning of the guru disciple relationship? What does

> it mean to deliver a disciple back to Godhead? Sure, ritviks

> produce boundless quotes, but have they deeply thought about

> their actual meaning? Do they have any practical experience?

 

H.H. Bhakti Charu Swami was here recently enlivening his

disciples and others and the atmosphere was dynamic, something

the ritviks can never create.

 

> I get the feeling that the authors of ritvik papers have very

> little idea. If they do have any understanding they certainly

> fail to convey it to me. Rather than seeing the role of guru

> as a difficult and serious responsibility to which we should

> try to rise, they appear to think it is some kind of

> instititional post, to be desired by power-hungry seekers of

> name and fame. Hmmm.

>

> Anyway, for what it is worth that is the way I feel. I shall

> therefore ardently pray that their attempts to force ISKCON to

> accept ritvik doctrine fails, as I feel sure it will. I just

> hope that all the legal wrangling does not consume too much of

> our valuable resources.

>

> your servant

> Krishna Dharma das

 

Some legal details will emerge shortly. Yes it is

costing/wasting laxmi.

 

ys

 

ada