The Rtvik Conception of Guru Parampara

[Guest guest]

More dishonest twisting and turning and I see;

 

Your latest blunder on top of your list of blunders was claiming that we say that Prabhupada is Physically Present;

 

"Originally Posted by BhaktaTom

We do NOT say that SP is physically present.

 

Lowborn:

YES YOU DO!"

 

I proved that was your own straw man as back in 1997 we said that Prabhupada is NOT physically present but that he was still a 'physical Guru'. If Prabhupada is NOT a physical guru as you claim right now, then what is he......a ghost? Indeed your offensive term 'postumous' implies this offensive idea. I suggest you use the term, post samhadhi, not postumous as it is offensive. Prabhupada is not dead!

 

To cover your mistake you again twist and turn and put up another smokescreen to cover yourself. This time trying to make an issue of our definition of what 'physical' actually means. The point is (even if our understanding of the term physical is wrong) our position which was made clear back in 1997 was that Prabhupada was NOT physically present, to which you foolishly replied....."YES YOU DO!"

 

No we dont, and never did.

 

Again we see more double standards and hypocrisy, you claim that it is typical for us 'Ritviks' to smear the character of devotees, including your own.

 

 

Your only response to that quote is to smear Tusta's character, a typical ritvik recourse as evident from your BTP gutter journalism. Now you try to do the same with me. Yet, neither mine, not Tusta Krsna's (who was a hundred times better devotee than me) character is relevant in this discussion, so please quit bringing it up.

 

So after ranting on about how it is so very bad to attack the character of devotee's and that poor Tusta Krishna does not deserve it (who is a hundred times better devotee then yourself), what you do..........

 

ATTACK THE CHARACTER OF BOTH HANSADUTTA AND TAMAL KRISHNA GOSWAMI!!!! EVEN REFERING TO HANSADUTTA IN A MOCKING TERM 'GUNSADUTTA' AND CALLING THEM BOTH 'CLUELESS'.

 

 

In 1980 both Gunsadutta and Tamal were just as clueless and manipulative as 3 years earlier.

 

 

This duplicity and hypocrisy does not help you at all, and I suggest you think LONG AND HARD before you type anything.

 

THE FINAL ORDER STILL STANDS, with no evidence to support for modifications a) or b);

 

a) The Ritvik system should teminate on Prabhupada's departure

 

B) That the named Ritviks should morph themselves into full Diksha guru's.

 

If you can produce such evidence, Jayadwaita Swami would gladly welcome it, problem is such evidence does not exist.

[Guest guest]

Prabhu ... H & G are adjacent to each other on the keyboard. I think it was just typing error in calling Hansaduta prabhu as Gunsaduta.

 

 

More dishonest twisting and turning and I see;

 

Your latest blunder on top of your list of blunders was claiming that we say that Prabhupada is Physically Present;

 

"Originally Posted by BhaktaTom

We do NOT say that SP is physically present.

 

Lowborn:

YES YOU DO!"

 

I proved that was your own straw man as back in 1997 we said that Prabhupada is NOT physically present but that he was still a 'physical Guru'. If Prabhupada is NOT a physical guru as you claim right now, then what is he......a ghost? Indeed your offensive term 'postumous' implies this offensive idea. I suggest you use the term, post samhadhi, not postumous as it is offensive. Prabhupada is not dead!

 

To cover your mistake you again twist and turn and put up another smokescreen to cover yourself. This time trying to make an issue of our definition of what 'physical' actually means. The point is (even if our understanding of the term physical is wrong) our position which was made clear back in 1997 was that Prabhupada was NOT physically present, to which you foolishly replied....."YES YOU DO!"

 

No we dont, and never did.

 

Again we see more double standards and hypocrisy, you claim that it is typical for us 'Ritviks' to smear the character of devotees, including your own.

 

 

 

So after ranting on about how it is so very bad to attack the character of devotee's and that poor Tusta Krishna does not deserve it (who is a hundred times better devotee then yourself), what you do..........

 

ATTACK THE CHARACTER OF BOTH HANSADUTTA AND TAMAL KRISHNA GOSWAMI!!!! EVEN REFERING TO HANSADUTTA IN A MOCKING TERM 'GUNSADUTTA' AND CALLING THEM BOTH 'CLUELESS'.

 

 

 

This duplicity and hypocrisy does not help you at all, and I suggest you think LONG AND HARD before you type anything.

 

THE FINAL ORDER STILL STANDS, with no evidence to support for modifications a) or b);

 

a) The Ritvik system should teminate on Prabhupada's departure

 

B) That the named Ritviks should morph themselves into full Diksha guru's.

 

If you can produce such evidence, Jayadwaita Swami would gladly welcome it, problem is such evidence does not exist.

[Guest guest]

 

I proved that was your own straw man as back in 1997 we said that Prabhupada is NOT physically present but that he was still a 'physical Guru'. If Prabhupada is NOT a physical guru as you claim right now, then what is he......a ghost? Indeed your offensive term 'postumous' implies this offensive idea. I suggest you use the term, post samhadhi, not postumous as it is offensive. Prabhupada is not dead!

 

 

In your realm of ritvik logic Prabhupada is still a physical guru, but he is not physically present. In this realm Prabhupada both authorizes his disciples to be regular gurus after his disappearance when they become qualified, and he orders them to be ritviks forever. In this realm of twisted logic common words morph into fantastic creations, and normal and respectful words describing reality (like posthumous) become offensive...

 

Like I said: you can believe in whatever you like, but that belief has no bearing on reality. Ritviks are just another set of cult followers, oblivious to reality, reason, and logic.

[Guest guest]

 

ATTACK THE CHARACTER OF BOTH HANSADUTTA AND TAMAL KRISHNA GOSWAMI!!!! EVEN REFERING TO HANSADUTTA IN A MOCKING TERM 'GUNSADUTTA' AND CALLING THEM BOTH 'CLUELESS'.

 

 

LOL! What an outburst of emotion in defense of the Vaishnavas! When was the last time you read your own BTP magazine? You guys are absolute TOPS when it comes to character assassination!

 

Gunsadutta (no typo here) has a mile long record of extremely questionable behavior and if you like, I can give you plenty of examples. Now you ritviks like him because he joined your camp. Suit yourself. Most older devotees know his dark side very well. Perhaps you are just a new bhakta. Go and google something on him.

 

As to Tamal Goswami's character, you better check with your ritvik bosses before you start making him into a trustworthy pillar of truth. You ritviks like him about as much as people like hernia.

 

"Clueless" is actually a very mild term to describe the exploits of these two in the aforementioned time period.

[Guest guest]

Prabhu, there is no point engaging in any kind of debate with a person like yourself who cannot come clean about a clear list of errors, straw man arguements, character assasination, and above all blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy.

 

How is it at all possible to come to a conclusion if you use such trickery?

 

 

LOL! What an outburst of emotion in defense of the Vaishnavas! When was the last time you read your own BTP magazine? You guys are absolute TOPS when it comes to character assassination!

 

(Repeatedly banging my head againced the wall) Prabhu....please concentrate. My POINT was your duplicity. Please try and be attentive.........let me make some baby steps, so you can understand;

 

My POINT was.....it is the height of hypocisy to condemn us for certain behaviour.....THEN DO EXACTLY THE SAME THING YOURSELF.

 

Understand? Has the penny dropped?

 

You say BTP is TOPS when it comes to character assasination.......does that make it OK for you to do the same thing? Does two wrongs make a right. This is like talking to a child.

 

An honest person would admitt, 'Yes you are right, I critisized you for making character assasination on Tusta Krishna, then I went and did the same thing myself. This is duplicitous, and I should not have done it.'

 

But no you actually just carry on critisizing Tamal Krishna Goswami and Hansadutta because 'ritviks' critisize in BTP?

 

Very shameful.

 

 

As to Tamal Goswami's character, you better check with your ritvik bosses before you start making him into a trustworthy pillar of truth. You ritviks like him about as much as people like hernia.

 

"Clueless" is actually a very mild term to describe the exploits of these two in the aforementioned time period.

 

Your comments here again go to show your complete confusion when it comes to your own position. Tamal Krishna Goswami is accepted in Iskcon as being a bona fide spiritual master. Yet you call him clueless. He was authorised in the same way as every other Iskcon Guru, an authorisation which you have been defending as bona fide. Yet you call him clueless.

 

Just see the madness.

 

I no longer wish to have any further discussion with you on this as you have proven to all the assembled vaisnava's to be very dishonest in your dealings.

 

Your blacklist is as follows

 

1. Making bogus statements which I proved are not in line with Prabhupada's clear orders.

 

2. Claiming authorisation was given when I proved it could not have been.

 

3. Making straw man arguements which I proved donnot represent our position.

 

4. Making ad hominem attacks.

 

5. Hypocritical duplicitous behaviour.

 

If anyone else want to carry on in my place, they are very welcome. I think that Lowborn has exposed himself enough to everyone observing. Anyone, sitting on both sides of the fence will be able to see clearly his cheating.

 

Hare Krishna

 

All glories to Prabhupada!

[Mahadyuti]

Yea right Lowborn poor old Tusta Krishna:crying2: dont say anything about him 'he's a hundred times better devotee then me', but when TKG and Gunsadutta say anything you dont like your like showing your fangs and spitting venom at them.

 

Your the king of double standards buddy.

 

 

 

 

LOL! What an outburst of emotion in defense of the Vaishnavas! When was the last time you read your own BTP magazine? You guys are absolute TOPS when it comes to character assassination!

 

Gunsadutta (no typo here) has a mile long record of extremely questionable behavior and if you like, I can give you plenty of examples. Now you ritviks like him because he joined your camp. Suit yourself. Most older devotees know his dark side very well. Perhaps you are just a new bhakta. Go and google something on him.

 

As to Tamal Goswami's character, you better check with your ritvik bosses before you start making him into a trustworthy pillar of truth. You ritviks like him about as much as people like hernia.

 

"Clueless" is actually a very mild term to describe the exploits of these two in the aforementioned time period.

[Mahadyuti]

 

Ritviks are just another set of cult followers, oblivious to reality, reason, and logic.

 

LOL we're the cult now????

 

Here's the scene, youve got Hansadutta with his firearm collection, Jayatirtha tripping on LSD getting his kead hacked off, Kirtanananda MURDERING Sulochana, Bhavanada raping poor gurukuli kids, and a bunch of sheep who follow them.

 

And were the cult? We just say Prabhupada's the Guru.

[Guest guest]

 

But no you actually just carry on critisizing Tamal Krishna Goswami and Hansadutta because 'ritviks' critisize in BTP?

Very shameful.

Your comments here again go to show your complete confusion when it comes to your own position. Tamal Krishna Goswami is accepted in Iskcon as being a bona fide spiritual master. Yet you call him clueless. He was authorised in the same way as every other Iskcon Guru, an authorisation which you have been defending as bona fide. Yet you call him clueless.

 

 

I criticize both TKG and Hansadutta for what they DID, not because you ritviks criticize in BTP.

 

While their authorization to initiate was bona fide, they both did things unbecoming of a Vaishnava guru out of their own free will and prior conditioning. They did not prove worthy of the position Prabhupada gave them, just like most others from the 11 hand picked by Srila Prabhupada.

 

I am not confused about my own position. You are.

 

I am defending the traditional way parampara is continued, not the crooks who made mockery out of the position given to them by Srila Prabhupada.

[suchandra]

 

I criticize both TKG and Hansadutta for what they DID, not because you ritviks criticize in BTP.

 

While their authorization to initiate was bona fide, they both did things unbecoming of a Vaishnava guru out of their own free will and prior conditioning. They did not prove worthy of the position Prabhupada gave them, just like most others from the 11 hand picked by Srila Prabhupada.

 

I am not confused about my own position. You are.

 

I am defending the traditional way parampara is continued, not the crooks who made mockery out of the position given to them by Srila Prabhupada.

 

This is more or less the same what I saw how the previous debates between present ISKCON and ritviks proceed - a never ending back and forth. "Defending the traditional parampara", at least in our part of the world there's hardly anything to defend because all the gurus left since 1977, leaving behind thousands of ex-disciples who mainly never want to have anything to do with institutionalized Vaishnavism. In sum your position is to appoint by vote initiating spiritual masters and only then when they are forcefully removed by Krishna Himself, as it happened in most cases, only then someone is proven of not being bonafide. As long these gurus are not removed by force they are bonafide? Wouldnt it be fair for new disciples to have something like a guru liability insurance in case of a falldown of their "guru" the damage of having one's live spoiled is being compensated? Or would you suggest that new disciples should see their guru as fallible and not completely surrender their whole lives? That they should hold something back because one never can know? Last week an ex-disciple wrote, my third guru also fell down......

[Guest guest]

 

In sum your position is to appoint by vote initiating spiritual masters and only then when they are forcefully removed by Krishna Himself, as it happened in most cases, only then someone is proven of not being bonafide. As long these gurus are not removed by force they are bonafide?

 

The voting system currently used by Iskcon is bogus. ALL qualified disciples of SP can become gurus. It is always a disciple's responsibility to make sure his guru is qualified.

 

The only insurance system parampara provides for the disciples is to make sure the guru follows the Vaishnava siddhanta as transmitted by that disciplic succession. If the guru's teachings are not following the siddhanta - he is to be rejected.

[Guest guest]

The reasons churches spring forth from actual spiritual movements is that so-called disciples take zero responsibility. The whole revisionism called rtvik has nothing to do with accepting help from an advanced disciple who is acting on behalf of Srila Prabhupada. That has been going on since 1966. The rtvik has interest in documents that are not really Srila Prabhupadas teachings to the world, (His masterpiece publications), rather a phony justification of taking the lazy way out. Just dump all your karma on a past acarya and call yourself saved.

 

The problem is that everyone is searching for a master, such persons are great prey of the cheater, "Ill be your master." However, the teachings of actual guru tattwa indicate that a sincere person wishing to receive help from those more advanced than themselves (ie diksa, siksa, etc) should seek out one full of a service attitude. Anyone proclaiming mastery is a fool, or line is a de4scending process where we find reality under the straw in the street, not on the elevated and falsely constructed political positionings.

 

Cheating and cheaters and cheated are all those searching for masters. A true guru according to shastra is one who is inspired by the lord to appear before the sincere soul to show how the service attitude can be perfected. If one thinks that sitting at the feet of guru is a prerequisite to becoming a master has missed the boat entirely. Sitting at the feet of a Vaisnava Guru such as Srila Prabhupada means that one is becoming more humble, more serving, less caring for belonging or respect.

 

Rtvik is about the desire to belong. If one is actual servant of Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga, why worry about membership, names, etc. This is not the example of the goswamis, haridas thakur, and the whole gamut of those whose pastimes are presented in the great volumes of vaisnavism.

 

haribol, mahaksadasa

[Guest guest]

As ever ... a beautifully written post Mahak Prabhu.

 

I can't find any reference in sastra to such a 'ritvik' system and the ritviks, though repeatedly asked, can't seem able to provide Sastric references. Therefore I must agree with your conclusion that this ritvik thing is concocted.

 

 

The reasons churches spring forth from actual spiritual movements is that so-called disciples take zero responsibility. The whole revisionism called rtvik has nothing to do with accepting help from an advanced disciple who is acting on behalf of Srila Prabhupada. That has been going on since 1966. The rtvik has interest in documents that are not really Srila Prabhupadas teachings to the world, (His masterpiece publications), rather a phony justification of taking the lazy way out. Just dump all your karma on a past acarya and call yourself saved.

 

The problem is that everyone is searching for a master, such persons are great prey of the cheater, "Ill be your master." However, the teachings of actual guru tattwa indicate that a sincere person wishing to receive help from those more advanced than themselves (ie diksa, siksa, etc) should seek out one full of a service attitude. Anyone proclaiming mastery is a fool, or line is a de4scending process where we find reality under the straw in the street, not on the elevated and falsely constructed political positionings.

 

Cheating and cheaters and cheated are all those searching for masters. A true guru according to shastra is one who is inspired by the lord to appear before the sincere soul to show how the service attitude can be perfected. If one thinks that sitting at the feet of guru is a prerequisite to becoming a master has missed the boat entirely. Sitting at the feet of a Vaisnava Guru such as Srila Prabhupada means that one is becoming more humble, more serving, less caring for belonging or respect.

 

Rtvik is about the desire to belong. If one is actual servant of Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga, why worry about membership, names, etc. This is not the example of the goswamis, haridas thakur, and the whole gamut of those whose pastimes are presented in the great volumes of vaisnavism.

 

haribol, mahaksadasa

[Guest guest]

Haribol. I had the misfortune to read yet another site whose main purpose is to vilify those who have tried to spread Krsna Consciousness. So I use this opportunity to completely sever anything to do with these flies who love the taste of garbage. Under pretense that they are somehow the saviors of Srila Prabhupada's legacy by creating a religion based on gossip mongering and true-crime rasa, they are mopst reprehensible. My past association with these so-called reformers has severely damaged my own threadlike connection to Srila Prabhupada, and all such association ends immediately. Because of this bad association, I must spend the final years (or days or hours) apologizing to the innocent servants of Sri sri Guru and Gauranga for even considering their bogus points of view.

 

I will accept theories that are founded in fact. I have no problem with even creating a church in memory of Srila Prabhupada. If one is a church proponant, then by all means, allow Krsna and Srila Prabhupada a role in such a church. In fact, I fully support a brother who is acting according to his realization as a delegated priest of Srila Prabhupada. What I speak of, what I am disgusted by, is those who claim to be rtviks, but are nothing more that right-wing fanatics whose only reason for being loudly rebellious is that those who they rebel against rejected them as the fools they are. Any real discussion that they may have concerning their eccliastic religion creation is easily defeated by anyone, not accepted by anyone other than others frustrated because of rejection by those they rebel against.

 

I reject all those who allow their websites to be vehicles for false accusations, blatant attacks on those vaisnavas not of their eccliastic ilk, and propaganda vehicles of cut-and-paste false doctrine. They love to name me as their enemy, so I will agree with them, I am their enemy.

 

If one wants any credibility concerning their mission being linked to Srila Prabhupadas mission, then I (the judge) must see them spreading this science, in the street performing samkirtana. Their preaching effort, especially with the newcomer, should be devoid of negative bickering and vaisnava bashing. If they cannot convince others by using the humble persuasion technique recommended by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, if they can only get listeners by casting doubt against others who are dedicating their lives to the service of Srila Prabhupada, then the have no convictions, period.

 

I have given the rtviks ten years to state their case. Even though they have utterly failed to answer simple questions concerning the absence of the teachings of any kind of "initiation system" in Srila Prabhupadas books and lectures, I still tried to figure out their revisionism. Their response to me has been their usual diatribe, but now I am part of their hate campaign, which is quite ludicrous. It is laughable that they link me in with the GBC and ISKCON hierarchy, when the fact is that no one knows me at all. The last temple I visited was in 1990, and the place was closed. Before that, my last connection to ISKCON was my attendence at the 1979 rathayatra festival in LA. I judged with my feet, I disassociated then because of the false worship of unqualified persons and bad treatment of older disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and very bad treatment of his daughters. But the rtviks are very fanatic, and they will sway anyone by saying those who dont accept them are favoring the criminal element of ISKCON.

 

I have no problem at all with those who are honestly trying to serve Srila Prabhupada, and this includes those who profess rtvik ideas. But if such ideas serve no purpose to spread this movement, to turn sleepers into bhakti yogis, such phiolsophy must be seen as useless and misrepresentative.

 

It is also noteworthy that the rtvik websites go nowhere at all. Though such such forums claim hundreds of members, there are only a couple of posters of such diatribe. The crime story website claims thousands of supporters, but he counts those he spams without regard to their desires as his congregation.

Another br5ags that there are more rtviks than GBC supporters, but I countered that there are more initiated disciples of Srila Prabhupada without any affiliation than all the rtviks and GBC supporters combined.

 

In closing, I reject rtvik as a very offensive group of people. The rtvik ideology may have some merit, and I tried to investigate, but it seems that those who claim to be rtvik have no idea what is meant by acting on behalf of Srila Prabhupada. iT IS ALSO NOTEWORTHY THAT MANY POPULAR SELF-INITIATED (not yelling, finger slipped) rtvik people had opportunity to be initiated by Srila Prabhupada, but couldnt walk the walk. They severely criticize anyone who even mentions disappearance, yet they only took initiation after Srila Prabhupada was certain to accept them (in their own minds). I also feel bad for the tone of this post, because, like I say, there are a few out there who are actually carrying on this preaching effort of Srila Prabhupada by a rtvik-type manner. But they are easy to find by the asbsense of the anti-vaisnava rhetoric.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Mahadyuti]

er...Mataji.....Mahak never actually said that Ritvik was bogus.

 

You say 'concocted' lol yea right......Prabhupada only set it up!

 

Its called the July 9th Directive:deal: read it, see what it says, thats not a concoction its a FACT and its signed by Prabhupada.

 

Zonal Acarya's are a concoction.

Voting in Guru system where Guru's can be disciplined is a concoction.

 

Wow maya's really got inside Iskcon, you know that when guys are saying Prabhupada's orders are a concoction. Thats maya ....big time.

 

 

As ever ... a beautifully written post Mahak Prabhu.

 

I can't find any reference in sastra to such a 'ritvik' system and the ritviks, though repeatedly asked, can't seem able to provide Sastric references. Therefore I must agree with your conclusion that this ritvik thing is concocted.

[Guest guest]

No, he didn't. Where is it in the Sastra? Else, are you saying Srila Prabhupada introduced something not in the Sastra?!

 

As you folks like to accuse Lowborn prabhu of twisting everything, why don't you lead by example. Here, please give me a straightfioward answer, so we can see .... Where is such a ritvik system endorsed in the Sastra? Specific quotes & references, please.

 

 

You say 'concocted' lol yea right......Prabhupada only set it up!

[Guest guest]

 

No, he didn't. Where is it in the Sastra? Else, are you saying Srila Prabhupada introduced something not in the Sastra?!

 

As you folks like to accuse Lowborn prabhu of twisting everything, why don't you lead by example. Here, please give me a straightfioward answer, so we can see .... Where is such a ritvik system endorsed in the Sastra? Specific quotes & references, please.

 

Dear Ms. Pitts

 

1) Do you accept that Srila Prabhupada personally signed a document dated July 9th 1977, addressed to all GBCs and Temple Presidents, authorising ritvik initiations in ISKCON?

 

2) Assuming you do accept this, please tell us where such a system of ritvik initiations is found in sastra.

[Guest guest]

 

1) Do you accept that Srila Prabhupada personally signed a document dated July 9th 1977, addressed to all GBCs and Temple Presidents, authorising ritvik initiations in ISKCON?

 

Srila Prabhupada did not WRITE this letter - Tamal KG did. His signature is there, but we dont even know if he reviewed this letter for content. On top of that there is absolutely nothing in this letter that suggests he intended to extend ritvik initiations past his departure from this world. See for yourself:

 

Letter to: All G.B.C., All Temple Presidents

--

Vrindaban

9 July, 1977

 

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 accepted 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

 

Approved: A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

 

[srila Prabhupada's signature appears on the original]

 

-------

 

does that system conform to tradition? No, but AT THE TIME it was the practical way to ensure new bhaktas were initiated and our society kept the STATUS QUO. The only change between the initiation system from this letter and the previous "ritvik" system was that Prabhupada was not involved in approving the merits of the candidates.

[Mahadyuti]

lol this lady's funny.

 

The fact the Prabhupada set up a Ritvik system is accepted on BOTH sides of the arguement......and she's saying Prabhupada didn't set it up.

 

"Its authority is beyond question [...] Clearly, this letter establishes a ritvik-guru system."

(Jayadvaita Swami 'Where the ritvik People are Wrong' 1996)

 

Now our friend Lowborn is doupting Jayadvaita!!!! Can you guys even stick together on anything?

 

To be disbanded on departure or to go on post departure is the debate, Prabhupada setting the whole thing up is accepted by both sides.....apart from Deborah of course.

 

So a Ritvik system that goes on while Prabhupada is present is accepted by everyone, but where is it in Sastra........???????

 

So according to the Logic of Ms Pitts no one should have even followed the Ritvik system while Prabhupada was on the planet, as the system has no historical precedent.

 

Imagine the scene if Deborah was a Bhaktine in 1977, "Sorry Prabhupada I'm not following your bogus Ritvik system because its not in sastra."

 

Great....that falls into disobeying the order of the spiritual master to me.

 

 

No, he didn't. Where is it in the Sastra? Else, are you saying Srila Prabhupada introduced something not in the Sastra?!

 

As you folks like to accuse Lowborn prabhu of twisting everything, why don't you lead by example. Here, please give me a straightfioward answer, so we can see .... Where is such a ritvik system endorsed in the Sastra? Specific quotes & references, please.

[Guest guest]

Mahadyuti prabhu,

 

Please don't be offended by my saying this but being sarcastic and funny is alright but you should atleast have the decency to be properly informed while doing so.

 

Please read the pastimes of Shyamananda and you'll learn that indeed the 'ritvik' system while the Guru is still physically present isn't a new thing. IT IS in the Sastra!

 

 

So a Ritvik system that goes on while Prabhupada is present is accepted by everyone, but where is it in Sastra........???????

 

So according to the Logic of Ms Pitts no one should have even followed the Ritvik system while Prabhupada was on the planet, as the system has no historical precedent.

 

Imagine the scene if Deborah was a Bhaktine in 1977, "Sorry Prabhupada I'm not following your bogus Ritvik system because its not in sastra."

 

Great....that falls into disobeying the order of the spiritual master to me.

[Guest guest]

1. Yes, I do.

 

2. Please see above post (post 119)

 

 

Dear Ms. Pitts

 

1) Do you accept that Srila Prabhupada personally signed a document dated July 9th 1977, addressed to all GBCs and Temple Presidents, authorising ritvik initiations in ISKCON?

 

2) Assuming you do accept this, please tell us where such a system of ritvik initiations is found in sastra.

[Guest guest]

Bhatka Tom prabhu,

 

Please accept my apology ... my answer to question 1 above is "I accept that the letter was there but I don't accept that Srila Prabhupada personally signed it".

 

 

1. Yes, I do.

 

2. Please see above post (post 119)

[Guest guest]

 

"Its authority is beyond question [...] Clearly, this letter establishes a ritvik-guru system."

(Jayadvaita Swami 'Where the ritvik People are Wrong' 1996)

 

Now our friend Lowborn is doupting Jayadvaita!!!! Can you guys even stick together on anything?

 

Why should I NOT doubt Jayadvaita? Is he God or something? I still remember him praising big time deviants like Queertanananda, Bhavs, or Gunsadutta when there was plenty of reason to simply kick them out from the movement. Do you ritviks trust his judgements? Or do you trust him only when it is convenient for your pet theory? You doubt the authenticity or completeness of the appointment tape yet you blindly trust a letter from TKG? What is your standard for evidence? Whatever fits our theory is "rock solid" evidence, and whatever counters it is a "fake", "irrelevant information", "old thinking", etc.? LOL!

 

My attachment is to the siddhanta of our tradition not to a view of a particular person. Prabhupada was not a deviant from the traditional parampara method of descent - you are.

[Mahadyuti]

 

Why should I NOT doubt Jayadvaita? Is he God or something?

 

lol......no but he's a bona fide guru right, God's repressentative on this planet. Yes......no? This just gets more and more rediculous. Well is he or isnt he? Or do you pick and choose, a bit like a spiritual play your cards right?

 

You've got Sivarama calling Jayapataka a 'sick, duplicitous liar', youve got Bhakta Vikasha Swami calling Bhakta Tirtha Swami a 'demon'. You've got rank and file devotees like Lowborn picking and choosing which 'Bone Fide Acharya' is the real deal and who is bogus.

 

So you've got a situation where the Guru's and the disciples cant even work out the saints from the swindlers.

 

Get a position buddy, then we can debate.

[Guest guest]

 

So you've got a situation where the Guru's and the disciples cant even work out the saints from the swindlers.

 

Get a position buddy, then we can debate.

 

And what on earth is stopping them from figuring out who is a saint and who is a swindler for themselves? That is how it has always been.

 

What? You are going to sort that out for them? Why should they trust you? Iskcon will do that? And that is precisely who? GBC? They were wrong before on that very subject, why trust them now?

 

I give you my position in every post. Debate that if you like.

 

Is Jayapataka Maharaja qualified to accept disciples? Since his disciples obviously think so, why should that bother me? What business do I have placing myself between him and his disciples? If some guy thought you are a qualified guru, that would not bother me one bit either. But if they asked me whether you represent the siddhanta of Saraswata sampradaya I would have to tell them that you do not. That is a pretty simple system, tried and tested over the millenias.

[Mahadyuti]

 

I don't accept that Srila Prabhupada personally signed it".

 

Mataji....which part of 'Its authority is beyond question' dont you understand?

 

"Its authority is beyond question [...] Clearly, this letter establishes a ritvik-guru system."

(Jayadvaita Swami 'Where the ritvik People are Wrong' 1996)

 

Or have you also decided to challenge Jayadwaita, one of your 80 Bona Fide Guru's?

 

Remember Lowborns idea that Guru's can make mistakes, be disciplined, disagreed with is a concoction.

 

 

"As Hari is not subject to the criticism of mundane rules and regulations, the spiritual master empowered by Him is also not subjected."

(C.c. Madhya, 10.136, text and purport)