Philosophy: [Closed] If one accepts Srila Prabhupad as his guru, is there a need of intiation(ritvik)

Yeah and he made this unusual innovation so confusing... did not put in his words and did not ensure it is implemented, did not mention it to his Godbrothers and gave the 'envious' godbrothers an advantage to initiate while there is no diksa-gurus in ISKCON and never will be... does not make it for me, knowing how well he enshrined every single innovation he did.

Sri Govinda Prabhu, imho you should report all this to the GBC Body.

Kula-pavana: Nobody stopped SP from initiating his own disciples, not even his supposedly 'envious Godbrothers', but somehow he is stopping his own disciples?

Instead of making unrelated comparisons, why can't you just accept what Srila Prabhupada said he wanted for after his disappearnce? "I shall recommend some of you to act as Officiating-Acaryas... Rtvik. Yes."

VEDA: Srila Prabhupada's proxy initiation was meant for his manifest presence, as a logistic solution. After his tirobhava it becomes bogus (so far without pramana and precedence in genuine sampradayas).
Misraji, didn't we put this ritvik stuff on ice several times here? It refuses to disappear.

As I recall, last time we talked about this, you provided three statements from sastra trying to contradict Srila Prabhupada's order for tirobhava initiations; but two of them just made me wonder why you presented them, and the other was a one line anecdote you wanted to use to speculate on the existence of a rule and then speculate on the application of the rule. I find it noteworthy that when "because I said so" doesn't fly, the anti-rtviks always want to stop the discussion.

sri_govinda_das:I am indeed sorry for you Pandu das, his divine grace Srila Prabhupada has left his physical body ......he is our ''siksa'' guru now.

He seems to me more like a figurehead in ISKCON, the bait to get aspiring devotees on the hook.

Also you did not answer wether you intend to submit to the authority of ISKCON.....or just start a new society.

I guess I didn't see that one. I don't claim to be an acarya. I'm just trying to follow Srila Prabhupada's teachings as much as I am able. I tried submitting to ISKCON's authority, but have been discouraged by it too many times. Over the years I've noticed that associating with ISKCON devotees has consistently drained my faith and enthusiasm, which improve when I am apart; but I'm still trying to find what inspiration I can from ISKCON devotees while rejecting what is detrimental to my enthusiasm for Krishna consciousness. I'm also getting some association from Srila Prabhupada's followers outside of ISKCON, which is really nice.

I only blame our overemphasis on diksa in the fact that ritiks are trying to push for this post samadhi theory. Overemphasis on it is painful and will be painful. Someone give me a date when BSST got diksa? Or do we celebrate the date BVT got his diksa? Do you know who is the diksa guru of Krisna dasa Kaviraja Goswami?

ccd:I only blame our overemphasis on diksa in the fact that ritiks are trying to push for this post samadhi theory.

This may be true to some degree. Perhaps Srila Prabhpuada understood this tendency and ordered "Officiating-Acaryas... Rtvik. Yes." to help stop it. I agree that siksa is far more important, but what I've found in ISKCON is that devotees primarily take the siksa of their diksa guru who sometimes preaches contrary to Srila Prabhupada. Thus we have devotees accepting instruction from gurus like Hrdayananda das Gosvami(?) who says Srila Prabhupada was sexist, racist, materially conditioned, and wrong on many subjects. He says we should not wear tilak, sikha, etc., and sets that example while he goes around getting his picture taken hugging young ladies. There are also disciples worshipping their guru Satsvarupa das Gosvami(?) who is a "retired sannyasi" after confessing to having obsessed lustfully over one of his female disciples for more than 2 decades and eventually trying to have sex with her.

On one hand I'm told we can't have tirobhava rtvik initiations because it's not a part of our tradition (although no one has ever shown me where Srila Prabhupada said that), but on the other hand having a retired sannyasi guru is just fine. Folks can't just make up the rules as we go along and expect everyone to be ok with it!

>ccd: Yeah and he made this unusual innovation so confusing.

Why would you blame Srila Prabhupada for this confusion. Recently, I read that there are many conversation tapes missing from the final days of Srila Prabhupada's lila where he might have elaborated much more on diksa system after his departure from this planet. So who has created confusion still remains a mystery.

Pandu das: On one hand I'm told we can't have tirobhava rtvik initiations because it's not a part of our tradition (although no one has ever shown me where Srila Prabhupada said that), but on the other hand having a retired sannyasi guru is just fine. Folks can't just make up the rules as we go along and expect everyone to be ok with it!

One type of nonse ('zonal acharya' concoction and general misbehavior of people Srila Prabhupada put in charge) created a different type of nonsense (ritvikvada) as in 'action and reaction'. Two wrongs do not make a right. You are correct, concocting new rules which fly in the face of the laws of our sampradaya breeds protest from devotees who have not lost their sense. Hridayananda is a social activist, not a GV sannyasi, but that does not make the ritvikvada a solution.

> anti-rtviks always want to stop the discussion.

There's no Vedic discussion without pramana. What you quote can be easier explained as the result of SP's mishearing, as I already mentioned.

> on the other hand having a retired sannyasi guru is just fine.

Says who? It's not fine but unfortunate. Yet still much better than to become an aparadhi by following ritvikism.

> Why are you afraid to talk about it?

It's the fear of aparadha by attributing the creation of apasampradaya to SP.

> our leaders are trying to avoid it

No, they are or should be done with it, as per GBC resolution.

sri_govinda_das:Dear ccd, the disciples were actually siddhaswarupa's personal disciples ....not srila Prabhupada's.

I remember talking with Mahamaya when she was making the database, it was not that clearcut - there was a date put on it...

The conclusion is that yes you need to take initiation, there is no need of formal diksa from Prabhupada to be his disciple.

HOW MUCH you actually accept a guru? How much you actually accept Prabhupada? Do you really...

ccd:However ritiviks are not disciples of Prabhupada. Nor are all people who took harinama-diksa from Prabhupada. Being trained by your guru is more important then diksa, but accepting a spiritual master is not a matter of an option. Just like being humble is not an option, but you can not force it on anyone. One need to be humble to accept a guru, and it is a training in humility "you are a fool". Not that you accept a guru who is great and the reason, well I have the greatest guru... lets put down anyone else.

You're a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, correct? How much did he train you?

Although I had a harinam initiation ceremony with Bhaktimarga Swami, he's given me almost no training. When I asked him for tapes, books, etc., he said to just take what Srila Prabhupada has given. At that time, I was listening to Srila Prabhupada's lectures normally a few hours a day and still do. So when an ISKCON authority asks me who is my guru, what name should I give?

Pandu das: Kula Pavana thinks Srila Prabhupada's answer was nonsense.

No, I think the ritvik understanding of that answer is nonsense.

>So they attempt to step on their heads,''the authentic Prabhupada disciples''.....to take their position artificially without any devotional credit..like theives in the night.

Just wait a little more and see, they might take not only the position but may be all the ISKCON might become ritvik.

>all the sankirtan devotees i was trained up by not one had even heard such nonsense....must indeed be from the USA....

You are right, ISKCON runs from USA not from NZ.

Kula-pavana:

Pandu das: Kula Pavana thinks Srila Prabhupada's answer was nonsense.

No, I think the ritvik understanding of that answer is nonsense.

The rtvik understanding of "PRABHUPADA: Rtvik. Yes."???

>So find a siksa guru ,but you must submit to his mood and superior understandings...

Its already found i.e. Srila Prabhupada. What's wrong with Srila Prabhupada? Why do you think SP is dead and one can not have a relationship with him? If your feelings, your juices don't flow towards Srila Prabhupada(maybe they flow towards someone else, no problem with that), why would you make a yardstick of your experience and measure all other devotees with that?

> Veda says Srila Prabhupada's answer is aparadha and wants me reported to the GBC and presumably banned from ISKCON for believing "Officiating Acaryas... Rtvik. Yes."

Again you're misinterpreting me. I said Prabhupada's answer is most probably the result of mishearing. Did it occur to you?
Otherwise he'd refute all his previous teachings. Clear?
The rest is your speculation, I never suggested that. You may believe whatever out of context stuff you love but don't call it Vaisnava siddhanta and don't ascribe it to Prabhupada.

> Although I had a harinam initiation ceremony with Bhaktimarga Swami, he's given me almost no training.

You didn't insist on it enough. It's his duty. Lectures are the minimum and you could get them from his other disciples.

> So I read up on the issue and found that their arguments were very strong.

So why you didn't present them so far? Beats me.

> There is already a conflict and I want to be on Srila Prabhupada's side. I know I'm not a great follower, but at least I want his teachings preserved,

You're against him without your realizing it. Quote from his teachings and prove ritvikism if you can. So far you didn't so you probably can't.

Your reasoning is about fallen and insufficiently acting gurus like yours, as if this is the reason to embrace apasiddhanta. No logic whatsoever.

VEDA: > Although I had a harinam initiation ceremony with Bhaktimarga Swami, he's given me almost no training.
>You didn't insist on it enough. It's his duty. Lectures are the minimum and you could get them from his other disciples.

I do not think you know Bhaktimarga swami well enough to know that for sure do you Veda? Pandu prabhu's is a personal case, I trust he is sincere, I trust he wants to be a Prabhupada man. But it is wrong to reject a guru or step over his head to do that. In fact even when Prabhupada was physically present, you would not normally approach him directly, but through the leaders he had. Prabhupada was very merciful to his leaders, for example when Brahmananda Swami had a fall in 1976 he forgave him, and let him remain a 'retired' sannyasi', actually just a sannyasi, but he was not involved in top level management after that. He had a forgiving nature, I am sure Bhaktimarga Swami has a forgiving nature too, I do not even think that he rejects you. You just have to be grateful to him, and yes establish your relationship with Prabhupada. Just stop putting down everyone and everything if it is not your position to do it, and please understand that there is more to the eye then just your own interpretation of Prabhupada's words, there is a whole history of diksa since BSST disappearance, that is something Prabhupada was addressing. He wanted it to be up to Krishna, but without appointing one successor, he clearly wanted all his disciples to become gurus and initiate. ysccd

>Are Europeans more intelligent?

Definitely intelligent. But better to be wise then intelligent:-)

> I do not think you know Bhaktimarga swami well enough to know that for sure do you Veda?

I don't know him at all, just reacting on what is written here.

Retired sannyasi is explained above (the case of Brahmananda Swami). I haven't seen such definition in sastra.

GBC had invented the retired sannyasi phrase. It is clearly a mistake, Prabhupada had a number of sannyasi disciples who could not maintain the vows, it is ironic that they invented it for the one who could and would even in the face of three seduction attempts by a female therapist, and later blackmail forcing him to get married, because of the emotional attachment. Prabhupada at no point rejected a sannyasi who had a fall down. In his practical dealings he knew well how hard it is for a Westerner to be a sannyasi, he kept Brahmananda Swami when he had an actual (not subtle) fall with a girl. In fact Prabhupada knew a lot more then you think about his disciples and kept encouraging them in their spiritual life. In the end he actually stopped giving sannyas, I am yet to get a confirmation on that, but clearly since end of 1976 he did not want it anymore for devotees to take. He even mentions it in his morning walk in 1977.

Difficulty is that we do not understand the sanskrit roots of things and we do not understand the context of what Prabhupada was doing, we argue about words. It is superficial unless you know the context.

For example from this morning walk when the issue of the fall of the sannyasi comes:

Prabhupada: Yes. This is not prayascitta. This is exemplary punishment. He was not liable to be punished, but they played that "This is the.... This should be done."
Guru-krpa: He did not kill himself immediately. He waited for a year.
Prabhupada: He was waiting if Caitanya Mahaprabhu would accept him again. But when he saw that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is not so lenient, he committed suicide. Vajrad api katora. Harder than the thunderbolt and softer than the rose. This is the position.
Tamala Krsna: But, Prabhupada, if you were as strict as.... If you were that strict...
Prabhupada: No, I am not Caitanya Prabhu. I am not.... Why you are comparing me? I am an ordinary man.
Guru-krpa: So in ISKCON, if someone falls down, it means that he should commit suicide?
Prabhupada: No.
Gurudasa: We wouldn't have much of a movement, then.
Pusta Krsna: We're too attached to our bodies anyway, Srila Prabhupada.

Tamal challenges Prabhupada "But, Prabhupada, if you were as strict as.... If you were that strict." -- he clearly refers to quite a few instances where Prabhupada was not strict. The fact is that Prabhupada is magnanimous to the highest degree.

But then Prabhupada makes sure his disciples WILL not fall:


Guru-krpa: So in ISKCON, if someone falls down, it means that he should commit suicide?
Prabhupada: No.
Gurudasa: We wouldn't have much of a movement, then.
Pusta Krsna: We're too attached to our bodies anyway, Srila Prabhupada.
Prabhupada: No, no, if he falls down, that is automatically suicide. If he falls down, that means it is suicide. He got the chance. If he falls down, that is suicide.
Guru-krpa: Spiritual suicide.
Prabhupada: Spiritual suicide. If one gets the chance of becoming eligible for going back to home, back to Godhead, and if he commits mistake and it is stopped, is it not suicide?
Guru-krpa: You once gave the example, Srila Prabhupada, of taking your plane off the ground and then bringing it back to land again.
Prabhupada: Eh?
Guru-krpa: You once gave the example that you take your plane to a destination, and you have to turn around and come back and start all over again, take off again.
Prabhupada: There are so many. Drdha-vrata. Bhajante mam drdha-vrata. So we should be very strong-minded and continue our devotional service very strongly.

Again you should take in a context. Some suggest that Visnujana Swami was referring to his own fall in this conversation. These are his last words to Prabhupada... but it is MUCH more likely that he wanted to know what was prabhupada thinking about RDTSKP methods of making brahmacaris join. It was one of them - tell brahmacaris that if you talk to matajis because they live in the temple, they are pouring water on their devotional cripper. Why was it relevant to Visnujana Swami? Well it was very relevant, because he trusted TKGs methods of getting more man for some year, and now he had a huge rebellion on his hands. He was faced with ALL temple presidents demanding that they stop his party. TKG was sent to China... and Visnujana Swami was... nobody knows that bit.

Now if you look at the start of the conversation about it you will see:

Visnujana: Srila Prabhupada, how did Chota Haridasa achieve perfection by killing himself after apparently pouring water on his devotional creeper by talking to a woman?

Prabhupada: His instance was that even an associate of Caitanya Mahaprabhu can fall down. And if one falls down, his punishment is that, suicide. There is no other punishment. He must commit suicide. This is Caitanya Mahaprabhu's instruc.... Otherwise he is Caitanya Mahaprabhu's personal servant. He cannot fall down. But Caitanya Mahaprabhu showed this instance that "Even one is My personal servant, he can fall down." And if anyone by any cause he falls down, his punishment is he must commit suicide. This is instruction.

Tamala Krsna: Very strict.

Prabhupada: Oh, yes. "You have fallen down? You must commit suicide. No more My association."

You can take the words of srila prabhupada out of context. And people do, but they do not represent Prabhupada. It seems that dear sri_govinda_das did just that and took it out of context and without understanding the conclusion. It sounded that Prabhupada wanted Visnujana to commit suicide, but clearly he did not... what sort of disciple of Prabhupada would suggest such a thing?

While initiation is a formality, surrender, determination to do devotional service even if in difficulty and humility to do so without expectation of honor is important. It is exactly the fact that it is a 'position' to be directly initiated by Prabhupada in ISKCON that makes ritivik argument strong. There is no 'position' in being directly initiated by SP, it is a demanding qualification. If you are up to it you can meet that qualification, and humility in accepting diksa from his follower is one of the elements of establishing that relationship.

thank you Nrsimha about your kind words about my initiating guru, you were always kind to him. I do find that my best and most solid realizations about Srila Prabhupada are due to his books and association. I honestly did not have it before meeting him, in my own gbc zone they would discourage every personal touch with Srila Prabhupada for some reason, it was some other 'pada' who was the center. But Prabhupada should be the center of our lives, can you do it without constantly putting down devotees he personally trained? That is probably the qualification I need to become his disciple in a proper sense of this word.

>]The acarya’s words can stand on their own, due to their spiritual advancement. Bhaktivinoda Thakur has some good quotes from Sri Tattra Sutram. He states:) --->

I find it amusing how far it goes, ironic. You are quoting words of an acharya to confirm that that because Prabhupada is an acharya he is not representing scriptures.

In doing this you think 1) That Bhaktivinoda quotes some sastra 2) You think that he is doing to confirm that scripture is inferior to the words of an acharya.

This completely false, while I blame it on the cut and paste.

The fact is that Bhaktivinda Thakura himself WROTE the Sri Tattva Surtas. Someone else made a long hand english interpretation of it and you quoted it as if it not words of Bhaktivinoda Thakura.

In doing so you also misses the point of what Srila Thakura Bhaktivinoda is saying and why he is saying it; lets look at the actual quote:

39 sastramaksamesu valiyo vivekinam naitattanmula prapteh

Rules and regulations are for regulating the ignorant conditioned souls; those who have attained their constitutional awareness are not limited by such conditions.

43. bhakteyna sastram tadvidherjnanavirodhitvat

Unnalloyed devotees of Sri Krsna are not to be limited by the conditions of scriptural rules because their activities are based on spontaneous attachment which is transcendental to rules and regulations.

In doing that you suggest that we MUST move past rules and regulations and introduce every single neophyte to the level of spontaneous devotion, bypassing all the key angas of that process as outlined by Sri Rupa Goswami in BRS, However that is contrary to both the mood of Prabhupada, his emphasis and contrary to the logic of the sutra, that simply states that a paramahamsa vaisnava is not bound by the rules of the scriptures. We know that, but he would not tell us not to follow the sastra as we are not at that level.

Now I do not want to be argumentative, but you (or your cut and paste guru) is obviously mistaken to use this quote in this context. In fact the sutra according to his own explanation is about not following rules of Varnasrama dharma for a Vaisnava who is above it.
See a bit more of TS with commentary:

bhakte na sastram tad-vidher jnanavirodhitvat

bhakte-for a devotee of the Lord; na-not; sastram-scripture; tad-vidheh-of those rules; jnana-transcendental knowledge; avirodhitvat-because of not contradicting.

The rules of these scriptures do not apply to a devotee of the Lord, for an enlightened devotee never acts against the spiritual truth.

Commentary by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura

After explaining that they who are enlightened with transcendental knowledge are free from the rules of scripture, the author of the sutras now affirms that the devotees are especially free from these rules. The duties and prohibitions of scripture do not apply to a person who is pure in heart, renounced, filled with transcendental knowledge and engaged in devotional service. This is so because the devotee's intent engagement in devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead does not in any way oppose the rules and regulations ordained by the scriptures. Here is the meaning: One attains the highest goal of life by following the rules and regulations of devotional service, not by following the rules and regulations of ordinary, non-devotional, materialistic piety. In the Sruti-sastra it is said:

kim aham punyam nakaravam kim aham papam akaravam tatra kah sosakah ko mohah

" `Why should I not perform pious deeds? Why should I sin?' For one who thinks in this way where is calamity? Where is illusion?"

In Bhagavad-gita (2.52), the Supreme Personality of Godhead explains:

yada te moha-kalilam
buddhir vyatitarisyati
tada gantasi nirvedam
srotavyasya srutasya ca

"When your intelligence has passed out of the dense forest of delusion, you shall become indifferent to all that has been heard and all that is to be heard."*

In the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.292-293) it is said:

natra sastram na yuktim ca
tal-lobhotpatti-laksanam
vaidha-bhakty-adhikari tu
bhavavirbhavanavadhi

atra sastram tatha tarkam
anukulam apeksate

"Therefore, in the beginning, everyone should strictly follow the regulative principles of devotional service, according to the injunctions of the scriptures and the spiritual master. Only after the stage of liberation from material contamination can one actually aspire to follow in the footsteps of the devotees in Vrndavana."*