Ritvik

[Kulapavana]

PRABHUPADA: Yes, I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acharyas.

TKG: Is that called rittvik-acharya?

PRABHUPADA: Rittvik, yes.

SDG: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the . . .

PRABHUPADA: He's guru. He's guru.

SDG: But he does it on your behalf.

PRABHUPADA: Yes, that's a formality, because in my presence one should not become guru. So, on my behalf, on my order--amara ajnaya guru hana--be actually guru. But on my order.

PRABHUPADA: What is the use of producing some rascal guru?

TKG: Well, I have studied myself and all of your disciples, and it's a clear fact that we are all conditioned souls. So, we cannot be guru. Maybe one day it may be possible . . .

PRABHUPADA: Hmmm . . .

TKG: . . . but not now.

PRABHUPADA: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru: 'Now, you become acharya. You become authorized.' I am waiting for that. You become--all--acharya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete. (emphases added)

TKG: No rubber stamp.

PRABHUPADA: Then you'll not be effective. You can cheat, but it will not be effective.

SDG: So they may also be considered your disciples?

PRABHUPADA: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?

TKG: No. He's asking that, these rittvik acharyas, they're officiating, giving diksa. The people who they give diksa to, whose disciples are they?

PRABHUPADA: They're his disciples.

TKG: They're his disciples.

PRABHUPADA: Who is initiating. He is grand disciple.

SDG: Yes.

TKG: That's clear.

SDG: Then we have a question concerning . . .

PRABHUPADA: When I order 'You become guru,' he becomes regular guru, that's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple.

-----------------------

 

we obviously listen differently, Mark. all I see here is the way our sampradaya has been passed on for millenia.

[Guest guest]

 

PRABHUPADA: What is the use of producing some rascal guru?

 

It appears that Swamiji produced a bunch of rascal gurus.

 

The questions is, how much blame goes on him?

 

If he actually authorized a bunch of unfit disciples to become gurus and reek havoc on the parampara, then that is a very unfortunate.

 

If in fact Swamiji authorized all these fallen gurus, then he must take the blame for all this rascaldom.

[Guest guest]

I guess I misspoke when I said there really wasn't disagreement. I also disagree with Mark. You cannot legislate the descent of divinity and you can't stop the progress of bhakti in the vaishnava's heart.

 

No one can go back in time, but it seems quite obvious that the function of ritvik was not intended to be transformed into one of diksha Guru. Srila Prabhupada was clear that the disciple must be qualified. He was also clear that he would 'make' Guru's. The ritviks can't accept that - they call for documented proof from any of his disciples that they were personally instructed to act as Guru. This obviously can't happen since Srila Prabhupada is no longer physically present to prepare such documentation.

 

Iskcon was left in a quandry when Srila Prabhupada departed because there was no one in 'charge' to say who should function in what role. The leaders made of mess of things due to immaturity and false prestige. However, Srila Prabhupada did invest his shakti in his disciples and that is bearing fruit and spreading more seeds.

 

The ritvik fallacy is that due to Srila Prabhupada's disappearance he could not deliver on his promise to 'make' some Guru's and 'complete' the training for some of his sisyas. This is certainly not the case.

[Kulapavana]

PRABHUPADA: "Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru: 'Now, you become acharya. You become authorized.' I am waiting for that. You become--all--acharya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete."

 

this explicit authorization obviously applies to the time period when SP is still present physically (after that: "I retire completely"). after acharya departs, the succession continues based on merit and qualification, jus as it was with Srila Prabhupada.

[suchandra]

 

Iskcon was left in a quandry when Srila Prabhupada departed because there was no one in 'charge' to say who should function in what role. The leaders made of mess of things due to immaturity and false prestige. However, Srila Prabhupada did invest his shakti in his disciples and that is bearing fruit and spreading more seeds.

 

The ritvik fallacy is that due to Srila Prabhupada's disappearance he could not deliver on his promise to 'make' some Guru's and 'complete' the training for some of his sisyas. This is certainly not the case.

 

Well, doesnt that sound familiar with what happened when Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja left this world?

Can we say, yes, he didnt give the right infos, therefore there was chaos?

He didnt set up the right successor?

When we think superficially like that, observers of present Vaishnavism might argue rightly, may be thats the wrong religion for you.

In order to understand what really happened, we come to the conclusion Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja didnt tell his disciples to take up the position of diksa-guru, but instead ordered to form a strong Governing body commission and expand the preaching. And, please remember, didnt he want his disciples to preach in the western hemisphere? Who followed?

So we cant actually teach to the world that the acaryas of our sampradaya made mistakes, we have to carefully study and then explain to the newcomers, no, our acaryas are not defective, those who were supposed to follow their orders were defective.

Presently the whole guru system is based upon, when a diksa guru doesnt fall down, he is bonafide.

What do you reply to that question: Isnt that very similiar with buying high risk stocks, you might lose it all?

[theist]

 

The ritvik fallacy is that due to Srila Prabhupada's disappearance he could not deliver on his promise to 'make' some Guru's and 'complete' the training for some of his sisyas. This is certainly not the case.-Audarya lila

 

It is a fallacy and a direct contradiction to other things they say. For instance they say one be accept intiation from Srila Prabhupada but then they deny that he can "make' some Guru's and 'complete' the training for some of his sisyas. "

They can receive blessing from Srila Prabhupada yet today but not an order to "become Guru."

 

Makes no sense to me.

[Kulapavana]

 

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.

 

if there is no "normal" system then why since the beginning of time gurus had disciples who in turn, in their own time, became gurus? that is the most basic principle of disciplic succession...

[Guest guest]

If Swamiji planned for a number of gurus in ISKCON, then why didn't he give any instructions as to how these gurus would relate with the GBC?

 

A genuine guru cannot be expected to submit to the authority of any bureaucratic committee.

 

If Swamiji actually planned for so many gurus in ISKCON, then he was very negligent to explain their role in relationship to the GBC.

 

ISKCON seemed to have been left in a vacuum with this ritvik concept looming in the air just begging for a chance to divide ISKCON and break-up the bortherhood of Prabhupada disciples.

 

Why didn't Swamiji simply tell everyone that the ritvik system could not continue after his departure?

 

Just one simple statement could have prevented volumes and volumes of conflict and strife amongst the followers of Swamiji.

 

Swamiji never spoke one word against the ritvik method continuing after his departure.

 

Now, his movement has been plundered for millions of dollars by fallen gurus who absconded.

[Guest guest]

 

Presently the whole guru system is based upon, when a diksa guru doesnt fall down, he is bonafide.

What do you reply to that question: Isnt that very similiar with buying high risk stocks, you might lose it all?

 

My reply is that no one can legislate matters of the heart. If Krsna is inspiring someone no amount of legislating by a political entity can stand in the way of that. My suggestion to anyone and everyone is to dive deeply into the chanting of the Holy name and to pray to him for guidance. How will you know your Guru when you meet him/her? The answer is only through internal inspiration. Look at the example of Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya - he was greatly learned and still he couldn't recognize who Lord Chaitanya was. His nephew, Gopinatha Acharya told him - I have Krsna's mercy and you don't. Sarvabhauma asked him, 'how can you say that? What is your proof?' Gopinatha's answer was, 'I recognize him and you don't'.

 

So my simple answer is that each sadhaka will have to be honest with themselves and develop a prayerful heart and genuinely and sincerely look for good guidance. Krsna will reveal a suitable guide when the sadhaka is ready and when he does there will be no question of external adjustment.

[Guest guest]

Dear Kulapavana,

 

You wrote,

 

 

PRABHUPADA: Yes, I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acharyas.

TKG: Is that called rittvik-acharya?

PRABHUPADA: Rittvik, yes.

SDG: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the . . .

PRABHUPADA: He's guru. He's guru.

SDG: But he does it on your behalf.

PRABHUPADA: Yes, that's a formality, because in my presence one should not become guru. So, on my behalf, on my order--amara ajnaya guru hana--be actually guru. But on my order.

PRABHUPADA: What is the use of producing some rascal guru?

TKG: Well, I have studied myself and all of your disciples, and it's a clear fact that we are all conditioned souls. So, we cannot be guru. Maybe one day it may be possible . . .

PRABHUPADA: Hmmm . . .

TKG: . . . but not now.

PRABHUPADA: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru: 'Now, you become acharya. You become authorized.' I am waiting for that. You become--all--acharya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete. (emphases added)

TKG: No rubber stamp.

PRABHUPADA: Then you'll not be effective. You can cheat, but it will not be effective.

SDG: So they may also be considered your disciples?

PRABHUPADA: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?

TKG: No. He's asking that, these rittvik acharyas, they're officiating, giving diksa. The people who they give diksa to, whose disciples are they?

PRABHUPADA: They're his disciples.

TKG: They're his disciples.

PRABHUPADA: Who is initiating. He is grand disciple.

SDG: Yes.

TKG: That's clear.

SDG: Then we have a question concerning . . .

PRABHUPADA: When I order 'You become guru,' he becomes regular guru, that's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple.

-----------------------

 

we obviously listen differently, Mark. all I see here is the way our sampradaya has been passed on for millenia.

[Kulapavana]

Dear Mark,

 

obviously we hear the tape differently. I do not deny that it may have been tampered with. yet - as it is - it confirms to me the traditional transfer of authority in the sampradaya desired by Srila Prabhupada.

 

I dont think you need to put a spin on it.

 

 

 

So my question to you is,

 

Would this person Change Iskcon itself, knowing that there are other devotees still using Srila Prabhupada's nectarean instructions to advance, (which worked fine for that newly purified devotee I might add), and potentially confuse and slacken the process of thousands,

 

Or would that person create a new ashram?

 

 

Iskcon needed and still does need to change. It was a mess even when SP was with us. What we need is maturity in our understanding of what SP really wanted to accomplish, not perpetuation of a personality cult.

[Guest guest]

Dear Kulapavana,

 

The difference between your "spin" and my "spin" is that I embed mine in examples of what my Authority figure authorized/instructed/ordered as the system in Iskcon.

 

Where as you claim, without any support, that it "confirms" a "traditional transfer of authority" as desired by Srila Prabhupada.

 

Again, I state what he states.

 

You use words he never used. "Traditional transfer of authority".

 

If there were any signs of messyness in Iskcon when Srila Prabhuapada was on the planet, it was because of someone misinterpreting his instructions and acting on such an illusion. That is if one considers him to be a Bona Fide Acharya.

 

Any messyness today is the result of the same. Only magnified exponentially becaues he is not here to do what he repeatedly had to do, as evidenced by this May 28th tape you are so fond of referring to as proof of his desires, and that is to say NO that is NOT what I said. NO, why consder? On my order!! Why create rascal Guru?

 

Your scholarship is an example of what Srila Prabhupada warned against. There are lots of quotes in his purports in all of his books which can appear as instructions for anyone, and indeed may be.

 

But when it came to how his society was to be run, things were there in black and white. It was a divinely inspired institution based to some degree on Varnashrama Dharma which allowed his materially deadened disciples to engage in material occupation while gradually renouncing it by dovetailling.

 

Thus there were strict rules and regulations especially on the management level (ie. how formal ceremonies and priestly roles were to be carried out) about which he clearly warned, "there is no need for change".

 

If one does not have faith that following his Societies system will allow one to remain aligned with the Sruti or spiritual current that I say underlies it, then they should go else where, perhaps some more "traditional" lineage where someone can have a good pukka highly polished Smarta Goswami to give Diksa and maybe a nice certificate for the mantle.

 

Whatever is Clever. To each their own. I will not be an impedence to anyone who wants to do anything EXCEPT if they try to discredit Srila Prabhupada's System, or try to change it.

 

Hari Bol.

 

y.s.

 

Mark

[Guest guest]

It would appear that Swami Prabhupada departed from virtually all the traditional strictures of parampara.

He gave mantra diksha via tape recording and initiated disciples he had never met or observed.

Swami Prabhupada departed some 90% from the traditional rules of disciplic succession.

This current ritvik concept is only a small baby step beyond the giant quantum leap that Swami Prabhupada made during his lifetime and leadership of ISKCON.

 

If Swami Prabhupada departed so far from the traditional process of parampara and disciplic succession, then why should we be surprised that some of his followers are promoting this posthumous ritvik parampara?

[theist]

Same old refrainbeing sung, "Prabhupada never gave specific instructions on how the parampara was to continue." C'mon prabhus what do you think is in his books!!!!! Every page shows how transcendental knowledge is transmitted from the realized soul to the aspirant. THAT is how the parampara continues.

[Guest guest]

 

Same old refrainbeing sung, "Prabhupada never gave specific instructions on how the parampara was to continue." C'mon prabhus what do you think is in his books!!!!! Every page shows how transcendental knowledge is transmitted from the realized soul to the aspirant. THAT is how the parampara continues.

 

Yes prabhu, I agree, there are his books and his letters, his tapes and his official documents for the ISKCON administration.

 

We must look at the totality of his teachings, his living example and his departing instructions before we go to make any judgements about his actual desires for the management of ISKCON.

 

The books alone are not the sum total of everything. There are letters to disciples, tapes and instructions for the ISKCON administration.

 

We have to balance all these resources together to make a final judgement as to what he actually wanted for the ISKCON society.

 

The books are general philosophy.

 

We cannot neglect his adminstrative directions to the ISKCON GBC as being irrelevant.

 

These instructions are pertinent and very real.

[Guest guest]

Who is following Srila Prabhupada? Mark wants everyone to believe what his ritvik guides tell him - they are the keepers of the faith and the true followers - no change - do what is there in black and white. Follow the letter of the law!

 

Acharya means who teaches by example. Krsna is dynamic, not static. Krsna consciousness and bhakti spreads by dynamic preaching.

 

Srila Prabhupada was an empowered preacher and he took the essence and constantly repackaged it to suit the times at hand. Is there anyone foolish enough given the history of Iskcon while he was present to suggest that everything would be static and not change if he were still present leading Iskcon? He was very fluid and changed course often according to circumstances. Srila Prabhupada invested his energy in his disciples and trained them in the art of seva. They will carry on the mission and spread it in a dynamic way that may look like something else to the uniformed. There were those in the Gaudiya Matha who didn't accept the dynamic preaching of Srila Prabhupada and cited his divergence from so many practices and policies instituted by his Guru Maharaja as the example for lodging their complaint. Those of us touched by Srila Prabhupada find no substance in such complaints and see them as small minded and petty at best.

 

Someone brought up the issue of Gaudiya Matha and what transpired when Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was no longer present to guide the mission. There was a suggestion that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta would remain the Acharya and the unqualified disciples would intiate on his behalf. Sound like the ritvik idea? Sridhara Maharaja said about this idea, 'we are not sikhs' referring to the system in place since Guru Nanak in that lineage. Srila Bhakti Pramode Puri Maharaja has said that the ritvik idea is synonymous with the death of the Sampradaya.

 

By the will of the vaishnava everything is accomplished. Srila Prabhupada wanted his disciples to become qualified and many of them are. It doesn't matter what the GBC says or IRM or any other political body - the internal inspiration and qualification is there for many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples and regardless of what anyone else thinks - that is Krsna's arrangement.

 

So the issue is still - who is following Srila Prabhupada? If you have faith in Srila Prabhupada then you will want to find those who embody his teachings and whose hearts have developed under his care and guidance. What is vaishnavism all about? How will you develop genuine love? In the end those of us who come in the generation after Srila Prabhupada will follow those sisyas of his who inspire us and in whom we see the ideal that Srila Prabhupada taught. When we find a vaishnava who is enlivened in Krsna consciousness and by his/her very presence and activities enlivens others we will want to be in that sanga. That is natural for any aspiring sadhaka.

[theist]

 

We must look at the totality of his teachings, his living example and his departing instructions before we go to make any judgements about his actual desires for the management of ISKCON.

 

I am not speaking of the management of Iskcon. I am talking about the continuation of the parampara.

[Guest guest]

Audarya-Lila says,

 

 

"Who is following Srila Prabhupada? Mark wants everyone to believe what his ritvik guides tell him - they are the keepers of the faith and the true followers - no change - do what is there in black and white. Follow the letter of the law!"

 

 

Nice of you to put words in my mouth, and quite exaggerate my position especially as I just gave my blessing that anyone can do anything they want!!

 

Not very magnanimous for one named Audarya.

 

You still haven't grasped that essential meaning of the following concepts.

 

Instruction. Rule. System. Author.

 

Like it or not, believe it or not, accept it or not, Srila Prabhupada was the Author of a System of rules given to his "Sadhaks" based on his Instructions.

 

He, being the Author of said system, had every latitude to be innovative in conceiving the system, and latitude to make changes within the system if he saw with his expert eye that it would benefit the ignorant sadhaks.

 

He even requested their input. He was no tyrant.

 

But you will notice, he never ever once chose and authorized a disciple to be a Diksa Guru within Iskcon, which would have placed that person as a CO-AUTHOR within that system. So they would have to confer and agree on any and all changes.

 

Do not think that your points regarding static inertias, and management entropy in the face of changing times are lost on me. But I am satisfied that the INTERNATIONAL Societal Structure based on the principles of Daivi Varnashrama Dharma, which he specifically mentioned quite often toward the last years as being mandatory to be implemented (quotes available upon request) and the fact that he said 50% of his mission was left to us indicates that the Overall Outline is there for us to work within.

 

It is Varnashrama Dharma for goodness sake!! Only this time not with Visnu as the receiver of sacrifice but Sri Gaura-Nitae and Sri Radha Krishna. Entire yugas existed under the influence of such a Transcendental system. Please understand this.

 

Or not, it doesn't really matter. You and yours go ahead and make up your own "New and Improved" and "innovative" Iskcon. Enjoy your week long star chamber "consensus building" councils of a million acharyas who spend laxmi on airfare and accommodations to come up with yet another contradictory "resolution" regarding a single issue.

 

I and others will simply follow Srila Prabhupada's system in BLACK AND WHITE and see where that takes us, until we become so liberated that the rules no longer need apply, and then I predict like our Spiritual Master, who chanted rounds of Japa and followed most all the rules and regs he prescribed, we will still honor them closely so as not to cause unnecessary upheaval and confusion.

 

Then we will see which Iskcon is glorious and produces the most kind-hearted and mature devotees on this planet.

 

I wish you good luck.

 

y.s.

 

Mark

[Guest guest]

An anonymous guest wrote the following I will intersperse my comments prefaced by Mark-

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by theist

I am not speaking of the management of Iskcon. I am talking about the continuation of the parampara.

 

 

Good idea!

But, then again, the continuation of the parampara is a serious issue facing the management of ISKCON.

ISKCON was very dear to Swami Prabhupada.

 

He left ISKCON in a bad situation with this ritvik concept that was guaranteed to create disruption amongst his followers, yet he never addressed the issue of posthumous ritvik practice.

 

Mark- What was guaranteed to create disruption amongst (SOME) of his followers was that SOME of his followers were always overly ambitious and took any chance to aggrandize themselves with whatever power their offices afforded, EVEN while Srila Prabhupada was present. They had free will. What could he do? He was so merciful.

 

And he did not need to address the ritvik practice any more, because it was already in place!!

 

For several years, almost since the inception of the GBC there were ritvik initiations in ISKCON.

 

These ritvik initiations were performed usually by the GBC man or sometimes the temple president. This went on for years before the "ritvik appointments".

 

Long before the May 28 1977 discussion about appointing officiating acharyas, long before the July 9 1977 directive appointing the officiating acharyas, there were ritvik initiations in ISKCON - though maybe not known so universally as ritvik diksha.

 

Before the July 9 directive, in the later years, the temple president would recommend a devotee for initiation, the GBC man would then send that to the secretary of Srila Prabhupada and then Pradyumna prabhu would pick a name and send it back to the temple president or GBC man.

 

Even before the ritvik appointments, Srila Prabhupada had given up all the responsibilites of approving initiations to the GBC and the choosing of names by Pradyumna prabhu. If the GBC man recommended, it was AUTOMATIC. Srila Prabhupada was not involved anymore in the approval process.

 

Even before the ritvik appointments, Srila Prabhupada had no PHYSICAL or personal involvement in approving initiations and choosing names.

 

The recommended devotee's name would be sent off to be entered into the book of disciples, Pradyumna would pick a name and then that would be sent back to the GBC man.

 

It was automatic. Srila Prabhupada had already taken his hands out of the whole initiation process and it was being done by the GBC and whomever was his personal secretary and then Pradyumna giving names.

 

Then as Srila Prabhupada was obviously in fragile health, and perhaps nearing the end of his physicla appearance, He was approached by the GBC and their representative SATSWARUPA asked the famous question

 

:

Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you are no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation(s) would be conducted?

 

And his answer:

 

 

Srila Prabhupada:

Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up

I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acarya(s)

 

So an initiation system that was running on AUTOMATIC since 1975 was then expanded and tweaked slightly by empowering 11 more people to take on the duties that the personal sec. and Pradyumna already doing. Giving it MORE CAPACITY but keeping the ESSENCE in tact.

 

More capacity for the future perhaps??

 

So he then appointed the officiating acharyas. Which he acknowledged could be called Ritviks. And as an insider back in the day pointed out regarding Tamal's question "is that Ritvik Acharya?"

 

 

He was doing so because Srila Prabhupada had already explained before that those that were performing initiations on behalf of Srila Prabhupada were ritvik priests acting on his behalf.

 

Tamal was no Sanskrit scholar at ALL.

He was not coming up with something he knew from knowing Sanskrit.

Srila Prabhupada has already told before that these GBC men and TPs that were performing initiations on his behalf were acting as ritvik.

 

So we can see that the main difference between the time after the Ritvik appointments and the period just before that was that the personal secretary had to get a letter of recommendation first for initiations, then he would get the name from Pradyumna and enter the devotee in the book of disciples.

 

The Newly chosen 11 officiating "ritvik" acharyas had the authority to immediatly approve the initiations and give the devotee a name or have someone else choose a name for the devotee. Then the officiating acharya would send off the name to be entered in the book of disciples.

 

And by empowering the GBC to add Ritviks if necessary, this system could run for a long long time.

 

WHY BOTHER ADDING AN 11 FOLD INCREASE IN CAPACITY TO THE ALREADY SUFFICIENT PROXY INITIATION SYSTEM JUST MONTHS BEFORE HIS DEMISE IF HIS DISCIPLES WERE JUST TO START INITIATING THEIR OWN DISCIPLES UPON HIS DISSAPEARANCE?

 

TOO MANY PEOPLE TREAT SRILA PRABHUPADA AS IF HE WERE A COMPLETE IDIOT AND IT IS SADDENING THE TRUTH IS RIGHT BEFORE YOU

 

THERE COULD BE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY WITHIN HIS WONDERFUL SYSTEM FOR MATURE AND SINCERE DISCIPLES TO SHARE SIKSA AND GLORIFY THE LORD

 

i cannot even write anymore on this there is nothing left to say. argue if you will, the truth is the truth.

 

y.s.

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

One simple sentence could have prevented massive disruption amongst his followers.

 

why couldn't Swami Prabhupada have just said "this ritvik process that I have established in ISKCON must stop upon my demise"?

 

One sentence could have stopped this whole ritvik movement and gave total support to the GBC guru system.

 

It would have been so easy to prevent this whole fiasco.

 

Was Swami Prabhupada bereft of good sense and judgement in his final days?

 

He could have avoided this whole catastrophe with one simple statement.

 

He never made that statement.

 

Many disciples are suffering greatly from this oversight. (yes Srila Prabhupada was incompetent, his oversight was terrible, time to find another Guru Mr. Guest.)

[Guest guest]

 

time to find another Guru Mr. Guest

 

What makes you think that Swami Prabhupada is my guru?

did I make any such claim on this forum?

[Guest guest]

Anyway, my intention is NOT to criticise or fault find Swami Prabhupada, but to show the implications of claiming that he authorized so many unfit and unqualified disciples to become gurus who then ultimately pilfer his society for millions of dollars and abscond with female disciples.

 

My ways might be crooked, but my objective is straight forward..

 

Just think about how horrible it would be if Srila Prabhupada was actually responsible for all the heartbreak and chaos that the GBC guru system has caused on the vast majority of his disciples who have long since left ISKCON over the corruption and politics.

 

If he authorized this guru system, he is responsible.

 

I don't believe that we can really put the blame for this mess on him.

 

He made his best effort to prevent the mess that ISKCON is now in.

 

the blame goes on unfit and unqualified disciples who were lusty to be worshipped and adored.

 

waaaaaaaaaa-waaaaaaaaaaaaaa-waaaaaaaaaaaa

 

I wanna be guru!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest guest]

Dear Mr. Anonymous guest, aka Bench warmer.

 

I stand corrected, you never made that claim.

 

Strange how you could have intimate enough knowledge of A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada so that you could claim that Iskcon was very dear to him, and you would refer to him as "Srila (an affectionate honorific) Prabhupada" and "Swami (master of the senses) Prabhupada" yet be able to be so distanced as to say that he has provided you with no valuable Siksa.

 

Maybe not so strange, as by being such an instigator and provocateur, by advocating such blasphemy without qualification just to incite reaction, and claiming to be not only above considering Srila Prabhupada as possibly having Siksa to offer you, but alluding that you are so advanced that you can adopt the "crooked ways" of gaining your objectives, which are otherwise reserved to the Supreme Personality Sri Krsna who is the Original Autocrat Despot and Liar, you in reality exhibit quite the opinion of yourself, with little concern for others.

 

I'd get used to pining on that bench, this is the big leagues, and if you think that Bhaktivedanta Swami left his branch of the Bhakti tree bereft of those who could clean up the mess and fend off the vultures, you have another lesson or two coming before you can swing a bat.

 

But the turn around in your last post shows you are quick on your feet, I just hope you have the sincerety to match.

 

All Glories to Sri Guru and Gauranga!

 

Y.s.

 

mark

[theist]

Please try to understand. What is the Bhagavad-gita if not a lesson in how transcendental knowledge is transmitted? Submissive questioning & hearing on Arjuna's part to the right source Sri Krsna.

 

The Srimad Bhagavatam is Maharaja Pariksit submissmively questioning and hearing from Sukadeva.

 

Transcendental knowledge is what the realized souls can impart to us because they have seen the truth. The process of questioning and hearing from the right source by the proper canidate IS the process of diksa. If we see diksa as a process then it all becomes quite clear.

[Guest guest]

Mark,

 

I have no idea what your talking about. Spending money on airfares and resolutions?

 

I haven't been associated with Iskcon in any capacity other than a friend to devotees for over 23 years.

 

What was clear to all devotees after Srila Prabhupada departed and what is clear to me and many others now is that Srila Prabhupada taught that the Guru enlightens the disciple - the Guru is in the business of making Gurus, not neophyte students who don't progress - in other words it was and is clear that Srila Prabhupada fully expected his disciples to carry forward the mission of Mahaprabhu. Those who became qualified by sincere practice and the mercy of Srila Prabhupada would carry on the mission by functioning as Gurus. There was absolutely no question about this by any follower of Srila Prabhupada until some of the unqualified pretenders started to become exposed for what they were. Those are historical facts actually. The whole ritvik idea came into vogue amonst some disenchanted disciples many years after Srila Prabhupada left.

 

No one is saying not to chant or follow the basic program layed out by Srila Prabhupada for advancement in Krsna consciousness. The issue many devotees have with the ritvik concept is that it is completely against everything Srila Prabhupada ever taught in all of his lectures and books, it is not what Srila Prabhupada practiced himself since he took diksha not from a departed vaishnava but from Srila Bhatisiddhanta Saraswati and recieved personal instructions from him that formed the basis of his spiritual life and it is not something that has any scriptural backing or backing from our Acharyas. It aslo goes against practical experience - students learn from an experienced practicioner in every field of human endeavor - how much more important to do so in a spiritual discipline.

[suchandra]

 

My reply is that no one can legislate matters of the heart. If Krsna is inspiring someone no amount of legislating by a political entity can stand in the way of that. My suggestion to anyone and everyone is to dive deeply into the chanting of the Holy name and to pray to him for guidance. How will you know your Guru when you meet him/her? The answer is only through internal inspiration. Look at the example of Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya - he was greatly learned and still he couldn't recognize who Lord Chaitanya was. His nephew, Gopinatha Acharya told him - I have Krsna's mercy and you don't. Sarvabhauma asked him, 'how can you say that? What is your proof?' Gopinatha's answer was, 'I recognize him and you don't'.

 

So my simple answer is that each sadhaka will have to be honest with themselves and develop a prayerful heart and genuinely and sincerely look for good guidance. Krsna will reveal a suitable guide when the sadhaka is ready and when he does there will be no question of external adjustment.

 

Thanks Audarya-lila dasa, who would ever try to confute your arguments/quotes?

But returning to square one, who actually started the whole debate? Almost 30 years have passed since Srila Prabhupada's departure and to this day, thirty so called genuine spiritual masters, diksa-gurus, fell down/resigned/left ISKCON.

In sum every year so many disciples felt, their internal inspiration didnt work properly was blocked/tied up by something.

In fact they felt exactly like kids who's internal inspiration says, yes, this ice is strong enough, let me walk to the middle of this frozen lake - after all, my internal inspiration says, do it! Is this what we need, readiness/willingness to take risks of being cheated when surrendering our lives to saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastrair, to worship someone in the same way we worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead Lord Sri Krishna?

Why not replace internal inspiration with knowledge of sastra, NOI/5:

 

"In this verse Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikārī Vaiṣṇava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaiṣṇavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikārī. A neophyte Vaiṣṇava or a Vaiṣṇava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikārī as a spiritual master."