Interpretation is at the heart of the ritvik controversy.

[Guest guest]

> we need to post this very quote again and again on this conference! it's

> so important for the whole ISKCON!

 

I completely agree with you that this quote is very very important. It

should be repeatedly read and also analysed line by line. I gives us deep

insight into Srila Prabhupada's thoughts.

 

Your servant,

Nayana-ranjana das

[Guest guest]

Also I find the management of RamanaReti compromising with their soft,

sentimental approach to aparadis,some of this ritiks are STILL giving out

poison propaganda, and very proudly walking with their chest swelling by ego,

thinking their are wining something with out perceiving the ax is coming

down, they are in worst Maya that any karmi actually I think is better to be

a karmi in ignorance that and offender to the present gurus sincere devotees

trying to serve SRILA PRABHUPADAS mission

Yours,

premananda goura

[Guest guest]

Dear Maharaj, please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila

Prabhupada.

 

>> > > > > > "In our vaisnava society, Vedic authority has been seriously

>> > > > > > compromised by an unshastric apotheosis of Srila Prabhupada.

>> > > > > > Most people in our society are willing to accept a conclusion

>> > > > > > based solely on Srila Prabhuapda's words without bothering to

>> > > > > > insist that the conclusion be supported by sastra or the words

>> > > > > > of previous acaryas.

>

>

>

>Krishna Kirti Prabhu uses the word "apotheosis", my dictionary defines that

>word as: 1)elevation to divine status; deification. 2)glorification of a

>thing; sublime example.

>

>Prabhu you really trying to tell us that the "apotheosis" of Srila

>Prabhupada is unshastric, and by doing so we seriously compromise Vedic

>authority?

>

>How about the verse from the Eleventh Canto where Lord Sri Krishna says:

>

> acaryam mam vijaniyan. . .

 

I often quote this verse myself in the course of discussions on this topic.

I said "unshastric apotheosis", which is different from "shastric

apotheosis". "Unshastric apotheosis" is elevating Srila Prabhupada's words

to the level of shastra, in violation of explicit definitions of what

qualifies as shastra. Srila Prabhupada's words are pure and representative

of the Absolute Truth (i.e. as good as shastra--representative of shastra),

yet they are not shastra.

 

ys KKdas

[Guest guest]

>> That is why we need a LIVING guru, LIVING saintly people, etc., to help

us

>> understand.

>

>But what if there is no LIVING guru or, or LIVING saintly person that is

>able to perfectly present what Srila Prabhupada or the sastra says without

>some influence of impure INTERPRETATION?

>

>I believe that this was situation that Srila Prabhupada faced before he

>departed, that there was no one of his disciples or Godbrothers who was

>without some tinge of personal desire, therefore he didn't select any one

>person as Acarya, but left us, in essence, an Acarya Board (ie the GBC).

>

If an impure person is not capable properly understanding, then many impure

people together will also be incapable of understanding because there is no

such thing as "group purity". If the acaryas are impure, then how are they

"acarya"? What to speak of having a board of them. . .

 

We could also ask why Srila Sarasvati Thakura did not appoint our Srila

Prabhupada as his successor. Does that mean Srila Prabhupada was

unqualified? Of course not. In other words, this argument is not relevant

because we see that in analogous situations even qualified people are not

appointed.

 

If we did not need a living person, either gurus or sadhus, to explain

points to us, then all who read Srila Prabhupada's books would come to the

same conclusions, because the understanding would be clear. But this is not

the case (or we would not be having this very discussion :-) The

understanding, inspite of Srila Prabhupada's books, is not always clear.

Thus the need for people to explain it.

 

ys KKdas

[Guest guest]

>When Satvarupa Maharaja asked Srila Prabhupada how initiations would be

>conducted after his dissapearence Srila Prabhupada responded that I will

>appoint some of you as "officiating acarayas". Did Prabhupada not know what

>he was saying? I believe he did want his disciples to be officiating gurus

>not the full fledged type that are mostly discribed in our literature.

 

 

The problem I have with this is we have yet to see a precedent for

officiating gurus in shastra. There are qualifications mentioned for gurus,

but what about for ritviks? Our interpretation of Srila Prabhupada's

directives cannot transgress shastra or previous acharyas. Srila Prabhupada

may clearly understand what he meant, but that does not mean we do. The

Vedas are vast, as are the commentaries of our previous acharyas. So if

there really is a precedent, it must exist somewhere. Can you show a

precedent for ritvik gurus from scripture?

 

Bottom line: I will NOT accept that Srila Prabhupada is introducing

something unauthorized by scripture.

 

>So in a sense he did want us to be Ritviks, but on behalf of who? Not on

>behalf of Srila Prabhupada as the Ritviks wrongly assume, but on behalf of

>the "Acarya Board" the GBC. This year the GBC in their meeting in Mayapur,

>without using the words that I have used here, have said basicly the same

>thing.

 

 

Too bad. Adridharan Prabhu also pointed this out as evidence to support his

points. To me, because the GBC resolutions were not accompanied by any

rigorous evidence (or even unrigorous evidence), the GBC resolutions with

regard to every devotee's having a personal relationship with Srila

Prabhupada seemed to be more like a method of political appeasement.

 

What is wrong with being servant of the servant of Srila Prabhupada? I will

never consider myself directly the servant of Srila Prabhupada, just as much

as I would never consider myself to be directly the servant of Krishna.

That is more in line with Lord Caitanya's philosophy of gopi bartuh pada

kamalayor dasadasa anudasa.

 

>Unfortunately it is probably too late to reach a compromise with our Ritvik

>friends, especially as they are so much influenced by this imposter KK

>Desai.

 

Even if the whole world goes ritvik, we should not compromise on following

sadhu-shastra-guru-vakya. If we concentrate on this, ritvik will

automatically go away.

 

ys KKdas