A Neophyte's Perspective of the Ritvik Issue

[leyh]

When I first began to utilize the Internet to explore Krsna Consciousness back in 1997, one recurring term that I kept encountering was “Ritvik”. I had never encountered the word in my reading of The Science of Self Realization which, at that time, was about the only Srila Prabhupada book that I had read. It seems to me that even as of this writing, there is a vast body of work on the Internet that is devoted to the Ritvik issue and other sectarian politics, which might not be something that Srila Prabhupada would have approved of.

 

My understanding of the Ritvik issue, laid out in simple language is this: In 1965, a great saintly personality who eventually became known to the world as His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada brought an ancient Bengali cult to America and succeeded in spreading it all over the world through a society known as The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). After Prabhupada departed from the world, eleven of his disciples became his “successors”. Some of them later did things that Prabhupada would not have approved of and “fell down”. Also, there eventually arose a controversy whether the Prabhupada had intended for them to take the responsibility of being Gurus or whether he had intended for them to be priests (Ritviks) to accept disciples on his behalf, ensuring that he would continue to remain the acarya of ISKCON.

 

Now much has been written about the Ritvik issue. Being a neophyte student of the Krsna Consciousness Movement, I cannot make any authoritative statement regarding the Ritvik issue. I do know that Prabhupada never intended the parampara to stop with himself, and that his ambition was for his disciples to become bona-fide spiritual masters. This is an incontestable fact.

 

I would like to raise a counter-factual question: What if the eleven disciples of Prabhupada had waited say, maybe ten or even twenty years after Prabhupada’s departure to assume the responsibility of Guru? Maybe they wouldn’t have been fall-downs as these disciples would have been more advanced and the movement would have become more mature or ready to accept gurus for the new generation of devotees?

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by leyh (edited 05-08-2002).]

[Guest guest]

Being a monday morning quarterback is easy,At the time the people involved had a different view.

The Ritvik issue was created by people who desired to not be led, by people they did not trust or see as fit as acaryas.

Also there may have been financial and jealous motivations,I cannot say.

Clearly though the propagaters of the ritvik theory,who say that no one should initiate disciples,because that was the actual instruction of Srila Prabhupada,are in the wrong.

The society of Vaisnavas is held closer together because of the relationship of Guru-disciple.Without it, who is to lead,who is to follow? There would be to many chiefs not enough indians,and chaos would surely reign supreme.

To say that the qualification of a bona fide guru, is that he be on the absolute highest level,is a fallacy.

The qualification is to accurately deliver the message of Mahaprabhu,then you are guru.

The mistaken beliefs of the ritvik people are not supported in any Vaisnava tradition.

They misconstrue Srila Prabhupadas words to suit their own agenda.

 

[karthik_v]

I am a little curious about one thing. Srila Prabhupad was meticulous and paid attention to details in virtually all instances. Then why is that he did not leave any detailed instructions about disciplic succession or who can initiate? Does any one have information?

[Rati]

The Rtvik idea was actually borrowed from outside the Gaudiya school - I believe the Shree Sampradaya. It had never been a practice before ISKCON. I guess one can sum it up as lack of faith both on the part of the god-brothers in the eleven and on the part of the guru in his disciples as a whole, that a successor was not named and the eleven were appointed as proxies while Prabhupada was still on the planet. It is also a curious fact that the disciples brought up the issue of succession, rather than simply waiting for the guru to state his wishes on the matter as part of his final will and testament. We have to also take into consideration that none of the disciples at that time were either elderly Indian persons or lifelong bhaktas, which created a number of problems in sorting out the most qualified candidates for the position.

 

Whether or not Prabhupada named each and every one of his disciples as successors is actually immaterial, as that is the teaching of the Gaudiya tradition, that the qualification to be a guru is to have taken initiation from an authorized guru oneself. I personally find it amazing that more people did not ascribe to that traditional view and instead gravitated to the proxy guru idea.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 05-08-2002).]

[Guest guest]

 

He did leave detailed instructions.

They are everywhere in his books.

The message in his books,is that anyone who initiates some one else,should themselves be ardent followers of their Guru.

This is the qualification.

Srila Prabhupada stated,"It is because of the mercy and desire of Srila Bhakti siddhanta,that I am able to give to you".

This is his message,you cannot vote for a Guru, " the Guru is self effulgent".

 

[Rati]

One being an ardent follower is not enough to qualify one as a dikSa guru giving Vaishnava dikSa mantras, however it could be applied to the giving of the mahA-mantra.

 

Being an ardent follower without having received actual initiation, while laudable, still falls short of the basic qualification as I have stated it in my above post.

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

A Ritvik is one of four priests partaking in a ritualistic homa. It's humorous how a completely new concept has been created around this word.

 

Srila Prabhupada didn't need to particularly identify a successor as the tradition already establishes the precedent. The guru-shishya relationship is spontaneous and natural. It does not require sanction from any material authority.

 

[Guest guest]

Exactly,the material considerations of those who would say "you are not qualified",is missing the point.

Guru is god,manifesting,flowing through the person who god desires.

We are not the judge.

[leyh]

Out of curosity...when did the ritvik philosophy came into existence?

 

[This message has been edited by leyh (edited 07-22-2002).]