Ritvik

[Guest guest]

 

You're wasting your time Prabhu. These ritviks have had their intelligence stolen away. Nothing you say is going to make them understand. All the Vaisnava aparadha they commit will only make them more inane.

 

You CANNOT commit Vaisnava aparadha by speaking the TRUTH, because then truth-speaking would be aparadha - an absurd proposition. Vaisnava aparadha can only be committed by DISOBEYING Srila Prabhupada's instructions. If you want to know what Vaisnava aparadha is, here's a good place to start:

 

 

"FACT: ISKCON gurus have opposed, oppressed and driven out many sincere godbrothers and godsisters.

 

FACT: ISKCON gurus have usurped and misused money, and diverted other ISKCON resources for their own personal prestige and sense gratification.

 

FACT: ISKCON gurus have had illicit sexual intercourse with both women and men, and possibly children as well."

(Jayadvaita Swami, 'Where the People Ritvik Are Right', 1996)

[Guest guest]

 

'Keep trained up very rigidly and then you are bonafide Guru, and you can accept disciples on the same principle. But as a matter of etiquette it is the custom that during the lifetime of your Spiritual master you bring the prospective disciples to him and in his absence or disappearance you can accept disciples without any limitation. This is the law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bonafide Spiritual Master and spread Krishna consciousness very widely, that will make me and Krishna very happy.'

(Letter to Tusta Krsna, 2 Dec 75)

 

This letter simply outlines the PRINCIPLE of how an authorised spiritual master can accept disciples. Is SP really offering Tusta Krsna diksa guruship here? If he was, why was not a similar letter sent to other disciples? Perhaps SP was simply trying to keep Tusta Krsna in devotional service - see his deviant behaviour below:

 

"Do not try to make a faction." (Srila Prabhupada’s Letter to Tusta Krsna, 72-12-14)

 

"I have heard that you are having some difficulties [...] Of course, our serving Krishna is voluntary affair, so what can I say? If you think that is the best choice, I must agree, otherwise you might go away altogether." (Srila Prabhupada’s Letter to Tusta Krsna, 72-12-14)

 

"News has come to me that you want to sell our temple to somebody else which I cannot believe. Even that you have been in charge of the New Zealand centre, now you have taken it as your personal property and you have demanded from Madhudvisa Swami the price of the temple. This is all amazing to me. I do not know what is your decision. Tusta Krsna has already left and is in Hawaii with Siddha Svarupananda Maharaja. I never believed that again you would go back to your old habits, giving up the Krishna Consciousness Movement in a whimsical way. Please do not do this mistake [...] Now all of a sudden you have changed that program and taken to your original ways? I am so much aggrieved to receive all this news. For Krsna's sake, do not do these things. I request Tusta Krsna to go back to New Zealand and take charge of your duties. Please do not leave Krsna. You will not be happy. That is my request."

(Srila Prabhupada’s Letter to Tusta Krsna and Beharilal, 73-10-15)

 

"I may inform you that I have today sent the following cable to Tusta Krsna Maharaja: 'DO NOT SELL NEW ZEALAND TEMPLE TO OTHERS. IF YOU WANT MONEY I SHALL PAY TO YOU. REST ASSURED - BHAKTIVEDANTA SWAMI.' "

(Srila Prabhupada’s Letter to Madhudvisa, 73-10-22)

 

"I have not heard from Tusta Krsna or Siddha-Svarupa Goswamis nor do I know anything of their plans to return to New Zealand. Try to convince them to return to our Society and work co-operatively. That they have gone away is not good thing and it is a deviation from our line of parampara. Rather, avoiding faultfinding and anarchy, they should keep our standard and work maturely and not cause factions and splitting. I am not at all pleased at what they have done."

(Srila Prabhupada’s Letter to to Madhudvisa, 73-12-15)

[Kulapavana]

 

This letter simply outlines the PRINCIPLE of how an authorised spiritual master can accept disciples.

 

which part of "This is the law of disciplic succession" you DO NOT understand?

[Guest guest]

You speak about the truth, yet you can't be honest yourself. So are you claiming that every single Guru in ISKCON committed the acts you mention below? If yes, then you're deluded.

 

If the answer is no, what gives you ritviks the authority to blaspheme ALL the Gurus in ISKCON?

 

I have yet to see one ritvik properly respect any of the senior devotees. You people are a deluded bunch, really.

 

 

You CANNOT commit Vaisnava aparadha by speaking the TRUTH, because then truth-speaking would be aparadha - an absurd proposition. Vaisnava aparadha can only be committed by DISOBEYING Srila Prabhupada's instructions. If you want to know what Vaisnava aparadha is, here's a good place to start:

 

 

"FACT: ISKCON gurus have opposed, oppressed and driven out many sincere godbrothers and godsisters.

 

FACT: ISKCON gurus have usurped and misused money, and diverted other ISKCON resources for their own personal prestige and sense gratification.

 

FACT: ISKCON gurus have had illicit sexual intercourse with both women and men, and possibly children as well."

(Jayadvaita Swami, 'Where the People Ritvik Are Right', 1996)

[theist]

Post #27 and the spirit behind it shows why I choose to avoid associating with the ritviks.

[Kulapavana]

 

Post #27 and the spirit behind it shows why I choose to avoid associating with the ritviks.

 

it is a common tactic nowadays to discredit "inconvenient" quotes from Srila Prabhupada's letters or conversations:

 

"oh... this devotee was in maya so Prabhupada gave him some second best advice to keep him going..."

 

what a load of garbage...

 

I have seen it used many times, and not only by the ritviks

[Guest guest]

 

which part of "This is the law of disciplic succession" you DO NOT understand?

 

The succession is NOT automatic there is the issue of qualification & authorization as mentioned in Srila Prabhupada's (law) books.

 

Also can we ask you which part of the following question do YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? (as from post #27)

 

Is SP really offering Tusta Krsna diksa guruship here?

 

The following has been posted on another thread so perhaps you can also tell us what part you have difficulty understanding?

 

Srila Prabhupada unequivocally stated that the diksa guru must be a maha-bhagavata (most advanced stage of God-realisation) and be specifically authorised by his own spiritual master. He had always strongly condemned the assumption of guruship by those who were not suitably qualified and authorised. We quote below from Srila Prabhupada's books where the qualifications of the diksa guru is stated.

 

Maha-bhagavata -srestho brahmano vai gurur nrnam

sarvesam eva lokanam asau pujyo yatha harih

maha-kula-prasuto' pi sarva-yajnesu diksitah

sahasra-sakhadhya yi ca na guruh syad avaisnavah

"The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be accepted from the topmost class." (C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport)

 

"When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshipped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru."

(C.c. Madhya, 24.330, purport)

Aside from the qualification, Srila Prabhupada also taught that specific authorisation from the predecessor acarya was also essential before anyone could act as a diksa guru:

 

"On the whole, you may know that he is not a liberated person, and therefore, he cannot initiate any person to Krsna Consciousness. It requires special spiritual benediction from higher authorities."

(SP Letter to Janardana, 26/4/68)

 

"One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master. This is called diksa -vidhana."

(S.B. 4.8.54, purport)

 

 

Indian man: When did you become spiritual the leader of Krsna Consciousness?

Srila Prabhupada: What is that?

Brahmananda: He is asking when did you become the spiritual leader of Krsna Consciousness?

Srila Prabhupada: When my Guru Maharaja ordered me. This is the guru parampara.

Indian man: Did it...

Srila Prabhupada: Try to understand. Don't go very speedily. A guru can become guru when he is ordered by his guru. That's all. Otherwise nobody can become guru.

(SP Bg. Lecture, 28/10/75)

 

Thus, according to Srila Prabhupada, one can only become a diksa guru when both the qualification and authorisation are in place. Srila Prabhupada had not authorised any such gurus, nor had he stated that any of his disciples were qualified to initiate. Rather, just prior to July 9th, he agreed that they were still 'conditioned souls', and that vigilance was essential lest persons pose themselves as guru.

[Guest guest]

 

You speak about the truth, yet you can't be honest yourself. So are you claiming that every single Guru in ISKCON committed the acts you mention below? If yes, then you're deluded.

 

If the answer is no, what gives you ritviks the authority to blaspheme ALL the Gurus in ISKCON?

 

I have yet to see one ritvik properly respect any of the senior devotees. You people are a deluded bunch, really.

 

When are you going to wake-up dude?

 

The FACTS were posted by ...Jayadvaita Swami in 1996. So if you find them a bit unpalatable I humbly suggest to vent your rage in his direction.

[Kulapavana]

 

Thus, according to Srila Prabhupada, one can only become a diksa guru when both the qualification and authorisation are in place.

 

yes. in that quote it is obvious he authorized all his disciples who are appropriately qualified to be gurus. that is the standard of disciplic succession he is talking about. it is not about Tusta K.

 

and again my question: how was SP authorized by his guru?

[mahak]

Hare Krsna. It is rather amusing the total hypocracy involved. First they say "the latest instruction has more authority than earlier instructions". This is their authority for accepting letters and documents in late 1977 over the perfect and complete teachings on guru tattwa Srila Prabhupada gives thru his authoritive masterpiece literature.

 

The hypocracy is in their insistance on providing letters to Tusta Krsna and about tusta krsna that were written three years prior to the letter to tusta where Srila Prabhupada clearly explains the duty of disciple to carry out the mission of Lord Chaitanya.

 

What they do not mention is the extreme pleasure for both the guru and disciple to be involved in intimate instruction involving the masters duty to give discipline and the disciples extreme pleasure and bliss at being so corrected. Tusta Krsna, my dear late godbrother, mentor, and faultless and faithful disciple of both Siddhaswarupananda and Srila Prabhupada, with complete approval and acceptance by both, fully accepted the instruction of Srila Prabhupada, as did Siddhaswarupananda. Neither accepted formal disciples per instructions of the personal letter in late 1975. Siddhaswarupa never has done the unscrpulous act of re-initiating Srila Prabhupadas disciples after His disappearance.

 

So, why are many who espouse rtvik ideas engaged in such slandering of one not ever involved with their enemies from the GBC? Maybe it is just envy, maybe its elephant offense that makes them insanely attack asll who do not join their revisionist camp.

 

Oh, well, we all know how fanatics act, they dont care about consistancy in their ideas, they want us to reject books in favor of letters written by Tamal, now they say prabhupada hates his disciples because they make mistakes, even if the mistakes are amiably rectified. Maybe Krsna hates his uncle Akrura for plotting the theft of the Syamantaka Jewel. Maybe, Lord Chaitanya still wanted to kill Jagai and madai after Nityananda Prabhu made them a bonafide branch of the tree of devotional service. Revisionists, gotta love em.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[vijay]

What I dont understand about KK's ritvik doctrine is how do they make people disciples of prabhupada, according to them its the 11 that are suppose to be ritvik acaryas, but from what I know none of them initiated on prabhupadas behalf as ritviks so how do they now get people to be prabhupadas diciples????? I've heard they have a black book and use some former temple presidents as the ritvik acaryas. Is this not a concoction. Seems like they take selective stuff literally and easily point fingers at others for not following prabhupada but this system is definately not prabhupadas.

[vijay]

Its probably better to just take siksa from prabhupada as they say that this is the real initiation and stop going through such concoted lengths to get formal diksa which by their own accounts isnt the main thing.

[theist]

 

Its probably better to just take siksa from prabhupada as they say that this is the real initiation and stop going through such concoted lengths to get formal diksa which by their own accounts isnt the main thing.

 

This is the point. Who needs the ritviks? No one. The fact that they don't act on their own beliefs of Prabhupada's initiating through his vani even while they preach that very thing shows they don't really believe it themselves.

 

*Practice what you preach* rings true again.

 

Just because they may be right about the Iskcon system doesn't mean their system is correct.

 

Best we pray for the eyes to see the self-effulgent acarya when he appears. In vani or vapu form.

[theist]

 

What I dont understand about KK's ritvik doctrine is how do they make people disciples of prabhupada, according to them its the 11 that are suppose to be ritvik acaryas, but from what I know none of them initiated on prabhupadas behalf as ritviks so how do they now get people to be prabhupadas diciples?????

 

Yeah isn't that one just too much? Especially when they say, "and Prabhupada never change this order." So I guess the need is to hunt down the zoned out 11 and beg them or pay them to head up the ritvik clan.

 

But maya gives the alternative if we are adverse to the transcendental system.

[Guest guest]

The posted facts from 1996 may be right or wrong, that's besides the point. The question is ... why don't you lot stop this 'fix ISKCON' crusade you've started and simply engage in pure devotional service? It's what everyone should be doing, ritviks or not. Does that make sense?

 

 

When are you going to wake-up dude?

 

The FACTS were posted by ...Jayadvaita Swami in 1996. So if you find them a bit unpalatable I humbly suggest to vent your rage in his direction.

[vijay]

 

Yeah isn't that one just too much? Especially when they say, "and Prabhupada never change this order." So I guess the need is to hunt down the zoned out 11 and beg them or pay them to head up the ritvik clan.

 

But maya gives the alternative if we are adverse to the transcendental system.

 

Its all krishnas corrective facility called karma, we had people in personality cults previously, abuse of women, demonisation of gays, so to counter those forces we have ritviks and complete minimisation of gurus vapu form, feminism, and galva to balance the force. The best thing is to get it right the first time other wise we have one extrme to the other.

[theist]

Yes I get what you mean. The thing is all these attempts to find balance never work because in the material world what I consider balance someone else will consider to overweighted to one side and then attempt to balance the scale towards their conception which I will then view as being out of balance. lol

 

All the while Krsna remains the complete balance just like we were taught in the beginning of Sri Isopanishad.

[Guest guest]

 

yes. in that quote it is obvious he authorized all his disciples who are appropriately qualified to be gurus. that is the standard of disciplic succession he is talking about. it is not about Tusta K.

 

Can you explain from the "quote" how you have come to your conclusion? Like, which disciples is it obvious that he is authorizing, in the quote of course.

 

A guru can become guru when he is ordered by his guru. That's all. Otherwise nobody can become guru.

(SP Bg. Lecture, 28/10/75)

 

So when did Srila Prabhupada give the order for successor diksha gurus? Where? & How was this order given?

 

 

and again my question: how was SP authorized by his guru?

 

Srila Prabhupada was asked this same question but he never disclosed how. So do you doubt his word?

[Kulapavana]

 

Can you explain from the "quote" how you have come to your conclusion? Like, which disciples is it obvious that he is authorizing, in the quote of course.

 

"I want to see my disciples become bonafide Spiritual Master and spread Krishna consciousness very widely, that will make me and Krishna very happy."

(Letter to Tusta Krsna, 2 Dec 75)

 

 

So when did Srila Prabhupada give the order for successor diksha gurus? Where? & How was this order given?

 

the order is always there. as SP says, that is the law of disciplic succession, as in the quote above.

 

 

 

 

Srila Prabhupada was asked this same question but he never disclosed how. So do you doubt his word?

 

I dont doubt his word, but it is EXTREMELY relevant to note, how such order may be given. Did SB give SP an explicit order to become a diksa guru, and if so, how did it happen? you have no answer, and I keep telling you that such orders can be very subtle, as a communication in a dream (Prabhupada's sannyasa dream) or a general instruction such as: "go and preach in the West". that is how the sampradaya progresses, whether you ritviks like it or not.

[Guest guest]

 

"Originally Posted by Guest:

Can you explain from the "quote" how you have come to your conclusion? Like, which disciples is it obvious that he is authorizing, in the quote of course.

 

 

Kulapavana reply: "I want to see my disciples become bonafide Spiritual Master and spread Krishna consciousness very widely, that will make me and Krishna very happy." (Letter to Tusta Krsna, 2 Dec 75)

 

How the fact that Srila Prabhupada is stating that he desires to see his disciples BECOME Spiritual Masters, which we know will only happen when one of them BECOMES qualified, can be construed to be a blanket authorization is wrong for the following reason.

 

Each and every disciple of a Mahabhagavata Acharya like Srila Prabhupada who has received the seed of Devotional Service from him will (Eventually) become qualified to BE a Bonafide Spiritual Master by dint of the potency of the seed of Bhakti, and the Lord's assistance in the purification.

 

Since this is the case, there would be no need whatsoever for a separate scriptural injunction for the need for authorization from one's spiritual master. No need to be ordered.

 

Srila Prabhupada did not get to "See" all of his disciples become qualified. On the contrary, these days people would be hard pressed to point out more than a handful that became that qualified during his presence, and two of the most famous examples, Jayananda Prabhu, and Visnujana Swami, disappeared.

 

 

Originally Posted by Guest

So when did Srila Prabhupada give the order for successor diksha gurus? Where? & How was this order given?

 

 

Kulapavana: "the order is always there. as SP says, that is the law of disciplic succession, as in the quote above."

 

See my previous explanation.

 

 

Originally Posted by Guest

Srila Prabhupada was asked this same question but he never disclosed how. So do you doubt his word?

 

 

Kulapavana:

"I dont doubt his word, but it is EXTREMELY relevant to note, how such order may be given. Did SB give SP an explicit order to become a diksa guru, and if so, how did it happen? you have no answer, and I keep telling you that such orders can be very subtle, as a communication in a dream (Prabhupada's sannyasa dream) or a general instruction such as: "go and preach in the West". that is how the sampradaya progresses, whether you ritviks like it or not."

 

Did Srila Prabhupada equate the statement "Go and preach in the west" with being the authorization of his Spritual Master to accept disciples? Or is this your speculation?

 

Even if you are right, which I tend to agree may be the case as are discussing 2 NITYA-SIDDHAS in a transcendental relationship, how many times did Srila Prabhupada order someone to go preach somewhere?

 

How many of those have fallen to the lowest hellish place, without repentance until forced by circumstance, and then fell and fell again.

 

So according to your example, Srila Prabhupada authorized people personally and gave them an order to be an INITIATING Spiritual Master when they were not even qualified yet.

 

Respectfully, you are going to have to do better than this to convince anyone with intellegence of your position.

[Kulapavana]

 

So according to your example, Srila Prabhupada authorized people personally and gave them an order to be an INITIATING Spiritual Master when they were not even qualified yet.

 

yes, he did so out of neccessity, just like he personally initiated dozens of totally unqualified devotees into the sannyasa asrama. yes, such actions carried serious risks, and his Mission paid a very dear price for BOTH allowances, but I'm not sure there was a better solution.

[Guest guest]

I don't see that there really is any disagreement here. A devotee must be qualified to act as Guru. The sadhaka must be ordered to act in such a capacity. The parampara goes on. Saying a person must be ordered to act in such a capacity is not the same as saying show me the letter or physical evidence of such an order. I don't believe this is what is meant by this statement - I see it as a statement that is merely pointing out the necessity of acting in service and under authority rather than acting egoistically.

 

To be sure - many seeds that Srila Prabhupada planted are flourishing in the hearts of his sisyas and those devotees can help others.

[Guest guest]

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guest

So according to your example, Srila Prabhupada authorized people personally and gave them an order to be an INITIATING Spiritual Master when they were not even qualified yet.

 

 

yes, he did so out of neccessity, just like he personally initiated dozens of totally unqualified devotees into the sannyasa asrama. yes, such actions carried serious risks, and his Mission paid a very dear price for BOTH allowances, but I'm not sure there was a better solution.

 

First, the comparison you make between ordering someone to initiate and take disciples as a Diksa Guru who by definition their disciples look SOLELY to that person to make interpretive sense of the Scriptures as the previous Acharya's comments to some degree or another are not valid for the time place and circumstance, and comparing that to initiating into the sanyassa ashram is not similar at all.

 

Secondly, there is no risk that a Qualified Acharya, thus Diksa Guru, will fall down.

 

 

70-04-25. Letter: Jagadisa

Regarding your questions about how and from where did the conditioned souls fall, your first question if someone has a relationship with Lord Krsna on Krsnaloka, does he ever fall down? THE SOULS ARE ENDOWED WITH MINUTE INDEPENDENCE AS PART OF THEIR NATURE AND THIS MINUTE INDEPENDENCE MAY BE UTILIZED RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY AT ANY TIME, SO THERE IS ALWAYS THE CHANCE OF FALLING DOWN BY MISUSE OF ONE'S INDEPENDENCE BUT THOSE WHO ARE FIRMLY FIXED UP IN DEVOTIONAL SERVICE TO KRSNA ARE MAKING PROPER USE OF THEIR INDEPENDENCE AND SO THEY DO NOT FALL DOWN.

And third there was a "better solution" which is the actual one that Srila Prabhupada used for years before his departure and left in place as is when he left. He had been initiating new disciples of his without ever meeting them in Vapu form, by a process by which temple presidents evaluated the aspirant and sent recommendation to Srila Prabhupada, and later his Secretary, and Srila Prabhupada had already gone so far as to send tapes with Gayatri Mantra and other had disciples assist with other parts of facilitaing this process of formalizing his own Diksa relationship with all who came to his society, when one day, his leading disciples approached him about the future, thinking that when he left the planet, things might need to change, so unsure if they were speculating or not, they went to the source.

On May 28, 1977 in Vrndavana, Satsvarupa das Goswami asked Srila Prabhupada, " ...then our next question concerns initiations in the future when you are no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiations would be conducted? "

Srila Prabhupada replied, "Yes, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiated Acarya."

Tamal Krsna Goswami said, "Is that called Ritvik Acarya? " Srila Prabhupada replied, "Ritvik yes."

July 8, 1977 room conversation:

Tamal Krsna Goswami: "But all these persons are still your disciples. Anyone who gives initiation is doing so on your behalf. " Srila Prabhupada: "Yes."

July 9, 1977 letter to all GBC's and Temple Presidents by Tamal Krsna Goswami, signed and authorized by Srila Prabhupada,

"Recently when all the GBC members were with His Divine Grace in Vrindavana [May 28], Srila Prabhupada indicated that soon he would appoint some of his senior disciples to act as "ritvik" representatives (officiating acarya) of the acarya, for the purpose of performing initiations both first initiation and second initiation. Temple presidents may henceforward send recommendations for first and second initiations. These representatives may accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada. The newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. The above eleven senior devotees acting as his representative.

July 11, 1977 letter to Kirtanananda Swami by Tamal Krsna Goswami, "A letter has been sent to all the temple presidents and GBC which you should be receiving soon, describing the process for initiation to be followed in the future. Srila Prabhupada has appointed thus far, eleven representatives who will initiate on his behalf "

So he did what he did. It is there in black and white. All interpretations of this that contradict what he did, speak for themselves.

Siksa is the essence. He downplayed the Diksa Formality, as the essence of Diksa is transmitted by proper siksa, and the aspirant surrendering to FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS. Thus any and all of Srila Prabhupada's disciples yesterday, today and tomorrow can act as good as a Mahabhagavat Diksa Guru, and inspire Krishna Prema in neophytes as long as they agree to stick with Srila Prabhupada's program.

Even if we know the reason he did this, such as to negate the temptation of claiming oneself a Guru of Disciples before being qualified, thus building in safeguards against our ignorance, then great, we are intelligent now. Does that give us the right to disobey his DIRECT INSTRUCTIONS on how to proceed? Now THAT IS UNINTELLIGENT.

[Kulapavana]

 

First, the comparison you make between ordering someone to initiate and take disciples as a Diksa Guru who by definition their disciples look SOLELY to that person to make interpretive sense of the Scriptures...

 

 

I'm not sure what definitions you are talking about here but you seem to be downplaying the siksa guru role, while our sampradaya has a prominence of siksa over diksa. That is yet another concoction.

 

Our sampradaya continued for thousands of years via the normal Vedic system and there is no indication that SP intended to change it (letter to Tusta K. is a perfect example)

 

and btw. the quotes you use in the second part of your post are of the conveniently "abridged" ritvik version and they have been discussed here hundreds of times.

 

ritvik system makes sense only to some fanatical Prabhupada disciples and it will die out with them as yet another short lived apa-sampradaya. in the meantime living gurus will continue to initiate and inspire new devotees and direct them to the treasure trove of Prabhupada's books, as well as other Vaishnava classics.

 

the ritvik system adopted during SP manifested presence did not stop the abuses and there is no indication it would have stopped the abuses of power after SP's departure. the causes of such behavior cannot be removed by a mere adoption of a ritvik title vs. regular guru title.

[Guest guest]

Dear Kulapavana,

 

You admit that you believe that Srila Prabhupada gave Authorization for people to take their OWN disciples, when they were not yet qualified. (By saying YES as shown below) This without giving direct evidence that he did this, which is the only way to truly expect to convince anyone of anything in a reasonable discussion.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guest

So according to your example, Srila Prabhupada authorized people personally and gave them an order to be an INITIATING Spiritual Master when they were not even qualified yet.

 

Kulapavana reply:

yes, he did so out of neccessity, just like he personally initiated dozens of totally unqualified devotees into the sannyasa asrama. yes, such actions carried serious risks, and his Mission paid a very dear price for BOTH allowances, but I'm not sure there was a better solution.

 

You then speculate as to why he would do such a thing. I replied showing how equating the offering of Sanyassa intitation to a disciple, and Ordering a disciple to take disciples before they are qualified bear no resemblance.

 

Saying, "First, the comparison you make between ordering someone to initiate and take disciples as a Diksa Guru who by definition their disciples look SOLELY to that person to make interpretive sense of the Scriptures as the previous Acharya's comments to some degree or another are not valid for the time place and circumstance, and comparing that to initiating into the sanyassa ashram is not similar at all."

 

But instead of acknowleging this point, you question my definition of Diksa Guru by saying,

 

 

"I'm not sure what definitions you are talking about here but you seem to be downplaying the siksa guru role, while our sampradaya has a prominence of siksa over diksa. That is yet another concoction."

 

I find this a bit disingenous. Especially as I wrote at near the bottom of my post.

 

 

"Siksa is the essence. He downplayed the Diksa Formality, as the essence of Diksa is transmitted by proper siksa, and the aspirant surrendering to FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS.

 

Also, I find it hard to believe that you have not seen all of the scriptural descriptions of what a Diksa guru is. My stating that a disciple looks Solely to their Diksa Guru for SIKSA which I defined as

 

"to make interpretive sense of the Scriptures as the previous Acharya's comments to some degree or another are not valid for the time place and circumstance"

 

is describing the REAL Diksa guru, and not just one who gives a ceremony. Yes, they can be the same person. But only a Mahabhagavata whose Bhakti creeper has reached KrsnaLoka and born fruit of Love of God, can be that Diksa guru who can give Siksa as an Acharya according to time, place, and circumstance, especially instructions for sadhana practices which may differ completely from those of their own Spiritual Master. This is no concoction.

 

So maybe now you can see, the gravity of authorizing a person as a Diksa Guru who can take and initiate their own disciples, and all that comes with that, compared to initiating someone into Sanyassa ashram have very little similarity.

 

you then said.

 

 

Our sampradaya continued for thousands of years via the normal Vedic system and there is no indication that SP intended to change it

 

This is absolutely wrong. The sampradaya continues via the system that an Acharya offers to his disciples. There is no "normal system" as you allude which in your context would mean "not changing". The only thing that stays the same is that the Acharya is a master at changing the system to suit his disciples predicament without changing the essence of why they need a system to begin with. There were countless innovations made by Srila Prabhupada, never changing the essence.

 

 

and btw. the quotes you use in the second part of your post are of the conveniently "abridged" ritvik version and they have been discussed here hundreds of times.

 

Those quotes I offered were word for word verbatim from the original and not abridged one iota. They are not the "ritvik" version, they are the "reality" version.

 

And since they have been discussed here hundreds of times, then you would understand why I put them together as I did without reproducing the entire transcript or letter around each one, as each one makes perfect sense and is a complete thought on its own. And are all relevant to one another in succession. If there was any context surrouding those individual excerpts that was relevant, it would only be relevant to CONTRADICT the other, and as we are speaking of the instructions of a great Acharya, I believe the fact that these quotes consistently convey the same point is axiomatic.

 

then you write.

 

ritvik system makes sense only to some fanatical Prabhupada disciples and it will die out with them as yet another short lived apa-sampradaya. in the meantime living gurus will continue to initiate and inspire new devotees and direct them to the treasure trove of Prabhupada's books, as well as other Vaishnava classics.

 

If you consider it fanatic that one adheres strictly to the orders given by A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami in regards to how his Society was to operate, then I suggest that for you to try to convince anyone who is taking shelter of him that his instructions are this or that, you better have solid proof to negate what he actually said. And be prepared to be challenged. As a matter of fact, what Acharya are you following who instructed you to debate the validity of my Srila Prabhupada's actual words without ironclad proof. And to dismiss his Signature on a document he authorized. This seems fanatic to me. What good does this do you in your devotional service???

 

Lastly you say.

 

 

"the ritvik system adopted during SP manifested presence did not stop the abuses and there is no indication it would have stopped the abuses of power after SP's departure. the causes of such behavior cannot be removed by a mere adoption of a ritvik title vs. regular guru title."

 

You again show a lack of understanding of the issue.

 

No order or instruction of Srila Prabhupada's Or ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER has the power to stop any poor behavior of some other person.

 

Never will. Behavioral adjustment can only come by the free will of the disciple to accept and implement the order. NOT MAKE A SHOW OF ACCEPTING, BUT ACTING CONTRARY TO THE DUTIES OF THAT OFFICE.

 

But does that give you the right to change the instruction? To do away with the official position? Please I beg you to see the unreasonableness of such a proposition.

 

And furthermore, the title is irrelevant. It is the actual position which counts.

 

The position in Srila Prabhupada's society which he created and authorized was and "Officiating Acharya". The person who took on this role had the much the same responsibilities of a Ritvik Priest. This is why Srila Prabhupada uttered the words showing that he agreed that Ritvik could be used similarly. Other wise he would have said "NO that is not the same as Ritvik, quit concocting Tamal!!!"

 

So if you consider yourself qualified to be an Acharya and wish to devise a system of sadhana for some conditioned souls in your purview who are looking for mercy, go ahead and do it. Just leave A.C. Bhaktivedanta's System alone please. It is fine as it is.

 

y.s.

 

mark