Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
  1.  
    Pandu das:
    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."???
    Prabhupada wanted his disciples to become regular gurus - he said so many times in his books and letters. He never had any intention of subverting the law of the disciplic succession which worked for him when he became a guru. Thus the word 'ritvik' supplied here by Satsvarupa must be understod in this context. When a guru departs, his disciples are free to take on their own disciples - anything else is nonsense, be it the system ritviks promote or the bogus guru approval process promoted by GBC.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    sri_govinda_das:My dear Pandu das,initiation is an encouragment...
    Sri Govinda Prabhu, A little less than two years after I started chanting Hare Krishna, I moved to New Vrindavana with my wife and our baby. It was 1997. All I knew about the Hare Krishna movement was what I had read in Srila Prabhupada's books, which of course did not include anything after 1977. I saw in the back of Bhagavad-gita that it was listed as a farm community, and I wanted to live in a Hare Krishna farm community. When I got there, the temple president asked me what I planned to do. I replied that I wanted to chant Hare Krishna and do farm work. He laughed and said I could work at the potpourri pie factory. I went there and discovered that it was not a devotee-owned business. It was lunchtime, and half the workers were smoking cigarettes and eating meat. It was not what I came there to do, so I ended up being a maintenance man for the temple community. There was no opportunity for farming.

    If I understand it correctly, I got there the day Tapah Punja got out of jail for his participation in Sulocana's murder. I heard him talking about it, but didn't understand what that was about. I figured he was just a guy who learned about the Hare Krishna movement in jail, and I was a little confused to realize that he was a sannyasi (but he got married to our neighbor shortly thereafter). I happened to meet some devotees, ex-gurukulis, etc., who were somewhat forthcoming about what the community had been through. From them I heard about multiple murders (one ex-gurukuli was still quite upset about the murder of one of his friends), rape of women and children, prostitution, drug dealing, fraud, etc. It seemed like there was no criminal activity that did not go on there. I learned that the whole NV community had been excommunicated from ISKCON, upon hearing the news when they were readmitted.

    I also had my own bad experiences. My daughter's first word was "cockroach," because the apartment was so infested. We would see hundreds every day. Our toothbrushes were kept in a basket hanging from a string attached to the ceiling in order to keep the roaches off them. We couldn't have second pieces of our kid's first birthday cake because it was swarmed with roaches within 10 minutes after it was cut, even though I tried to put it in a safe place. We had problems with the temple management. The apartment rent had tripled the previous year, but it was hard to earn money to pay for it because no one wanted to pay for any service. Once I did a job for the temple that took a week, and to finish it I just needed to apply a little paint, ten minutes of work. The color I needed was locked in a room that I couldn't access, and I couldn't pay my rent because I they wouldn't pay me anything because the job wasn't done. The same guy who needed to arrange for the room to be unlocked wouldn't pay me the money I needed to give back to him, but was instead berating me for not having my rent money. I did not go there to be distrusted. My wife began to get disillusioned before me, and several devotees told me that I should leave her and join the bhakta program. Finally we got so freaked out by this place that we left in a hurry one night.

    Our parents had been worried before we moved there, think this might be a bad cult, and I was embarrasses to have to admit they were right. Of course there are more stories to tell, but that was my first impression of living with devotees. There were also many good times, but overall the place did not seem safe, either materially or spiritually. It was hard to recover from the experience. If the community had been more like what I expected based on studying Srila Prabhupada's books, I'm sure things would have turned out better. Instead devotees had been fooled into thinking one of the rtviks Srila Prabhupada appointed was actually a guru and a pure devotee, when in fact many of his activities suggest he was quite deranged. After he got arrested, some of his chief followers inherited a large chunk of ISKCON. One of them is our local GBC. How can I possibly surrender to these people, or even think that would be a good thing?
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    VEDA:> Prabhupada hated criticism of Vaisnavas, even of the neophyte ones. But denigration is the main preaching tactic of ritviks.
    Over 500 devotee children sued ISKCON because of having to endure horrific molestations, beatings, and torture at the hands of ISKCON leaders. Are these leaders and those who have supported them what you call Vaisnavas?

    Srila Prabhupada: "Unfortunately, when the acarya disappears, rogues and non-devotees take advantage and immediately begin to introduce unauthorized principles in the name of so-called svamis, yogis, philanthropists, welfare workers and so on. […] The acarya, the authorized representative of the Supreme Lord, establishes these principles, but when he disappears, things once again become disordered. The perfect disciples of the acarya try to relieve the situation by sincerely following the instructions of the spiritual master."
    (Srimad-Bhagavatam, 4.28.48, purport)

    "Our business is to point out who is not a saint."
    (Srila Prabhupada Morning Walk, 10/4/1975)

    "If a man is a thief and if people are warned that he is a thief, that is truth. Although sometimes the truth is unpalatable, one should not refrain from speaking it. Truthfulness demands that the facts be presented as they are for the benefit of others. That is the definition of truth."
    (Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 10.4-5, purport)
    Cult members always object to criticism of their false gods, but I did not come to ISKCON to be a cult member. I came as a seeker of the truth. If what you call denigration are false statements, I want to hear what is right, but it seems that the objection is against true facts that are disturbing to hear.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Pandu das:
    sri_govinda_das:My dear Pandu das,initiation is an encouragment...
    Sri Govinda Prabhu, A little less than two years after I started chanting Hare Krishna, I moved to New Vrindavana with my wife and our baby. It was 1997. All I knew about the Hare Krishna movement was what I had read in Srila Prabhupada's books, which of course did not include anything after 1977. I saw in the back of Bhagavad-gita that it was listed as a farm community, and I wanted to live in a Hare Krishna farm community. When I got there, the temple president asked me what I planned to do. I replied that I wanted to chant Hare Krishna and do farm work. He laughed and said I could work at the potpourri pie factory. I went there and discovered that it was not a devotee-owned business. It was lunchtime, and half the workers were smoking cigarettes and eating meat. It was not what I came there to do, so I ended up being a maintenance man for the temple community. There was no opportunity for farming.

    If I understand it correctly, I got there the day Tapah Punja got out of jail for his participation in Sulocana's murder. I heard him talking about it, but didn't understand what that was about. I figured he was just a guy who learned about the Hare Krishna movement in jail, and I was a little confused to realize that he was a sannyasi (but he got married to our neighbor shortly thereafter). I happened to meet some devotees, ex-gurukulis, etc., who were somewhat forthcoming about what the community had been through. From them I heard about multiple murders (one ex-gurukuli was still quite upset about the murder of one of his friends), rape of women and children, prostitution, drug dealing, fraud, etc. It seemed like there was no criminal activity that did not go on there. I learned that the whole NV community had been excommunicated from ISKCON, upon hearing the news when they were readmitted.

    I also had my own bad experiences. My daughter's first word was "cockroach," because the apartment was so infested. We would see hundreds every day. Our toothbrushes were kept in a basket hanging from a string attached to the ceiling in order to keep the roaches off them. We couldn't have second pieces of our kid's first birthday cake because it was swarmed with roaches within 10 minutes after it was cut, even though I tried to put it in a safe place. We had problems with the temple management. The apartment rent had tripled the previous year, but it was hard to earn money to pay for it because no one wanted to pay for any service. Once I did a job for the temple that took a week, and to finish it I just needed to apply a little paint, ten minutes of work. The color I needed was locked in a room that I couldn't access, and I couldn't pay my rent because I they wouldn't pay me anything because the job wasn't done. The same guy who needed to arrange for the room to be unlocked wouldn't pay me the money I needed to give back to him, but was instead berating me for not having my rent money. I did not go there to be distrusted. My wife began to get disillusioned before me, and several devotees told me that I should leave her and join the bhakta program....
    Come on you got initiation recently and despite all the faults you saw. Something else must matter for you. It is not our job to know it, but we just want to point out that just because someone is "Ivan the terrible" we still have to follow scriptures and respect them, just as we would respect an ant, and if they chant Hare Krishna, moreover. There is no need to dig for all the file info that deprogrammers have to be a "true devotee"/ It is my humble opinion that if you end up with adhumanum argument, you philosophical argument must be wrong. ys
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    VEDA:> 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?
    So it couldn't be your misunderstanding? It had to be that Srila Prabhupada made a mistake at that critical time due to his imperfect senses, and due to his false pride he didn't asked Satsvarupa to repeat himself?

    What do you think he heard that sounds like "particularly at that time when you're no longer with us."?
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    Pandu das:
    VEDA:> 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?
    So it couldn't be your misunderstanding? It had to be that Srila Prabhupada made a mistake at that critical time due to his imperfect senses, and due to his false pride he didn't asked Satsvarupa to repeat himself?

    What do you think he heard that sounds like "particularly at that time when you're no longer with us."?
    Sorry if they would start calling themself Officiating Acharyas, that would be okay for you and you are ready to rejoin the cult of murderers and rapists, and follow thier authority without questioning and take your brahmana tread from Kirtanananda with a tape from Prabhupada? I do not believe that. Words do not change the substance, substance is following the authority, how you call your guru, Gurudeva or Maharaja does not matter, you do what he tells you, be he a GBC, TP, Initiating guru or officiating acharya. I just do not get that play of words, and do not trust that this is the actual reason. Actual reason is not wanting to follow the authority and senior devotees, and you gave sufficient reasons that tells us why. So...
  2.  
    Whatever spiritual realisations he has gained, whatever he has learnt in his journey towards spiritual goals comes from Srila Prabhupada. SP is his natural Guru. Iskcon authorities, your so called senior vaishnavas has given him misery only. He has not gained anything from them, has not learnt anything from them then why they would even claim to be his guru. Surrender to authority, serve authority, just demanding all the time and giving misery in return. All the spiritual nourishment is coming from Srila Prabhupada only, so Srila Prabhupada is the Guru.

    >you do what he tells you, be he a GBC, TP,

    sometimes they behave totally insane, and when they do that there is no need to follow them.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    > Over 500 devotee children sued ISKCON because of having to endure horrific molestations, beatings, and torture at the hands of ISKCON leaders. Are these leaders and those who have supported them what you call Vaisnavas?

    Definitely. The lowest level of Vaisnava is one who pronounces the holy name once. Api cet suduracaro... They'll get their reactions but their service won't be forgotten by Krsna.

    > "Our business is to point out who is not a saint."
    Cult members always object to criticism of their false gods, but I did not come to ISKCON to be a cult member. I came as a seeker of the truth. If what you call denigration are false statements, I want to hear what is right, but it seems that the objection is against true facts that are disturbing to hear.

    Our ritvik-cz guy also loves this 'not a saint' statement. The problem is who has a right to decide and label others. Ritviks think they have the right. How come? No answer.

    False gods = suduracari Vaisnavas? Now you again confirm you don't understand Vaisnava tattva.

    Denigration is already the BtP magazine's main idea 'look how this guy is fallen, he can't be a Vaisnava, let's show everyone', what to speak of actual verbal attacks.

    > What do you think he heard that sounds like "particularly at that time when you're no longer with us."?

    He simply concentrated on the first sentence, where 'future' = before his tirobhava, as ritviks; and after his tirobhava: ritviks >> regular gurus. Otherwise he'd be instituting apasampradaya, what else. But he didn't as is obvious from his words like "a regular guru", "disciple of my disciple" and "they're his grand disciples".

    I really don't understand this desperate need to squeeze apasiddhanta from a few words and parts of sentences of a mahabhagavata.
    Really a super perversion.
    • CommentAuthorKula-pavana
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    Pandu das:When I got there, the temple president asked me what I planned to do. I replied that I wanted to chant Hare Krishna and do farm work. He laughed and said I could work at the potpourri pie factory. I went there and discovered that it was not a devotee-owned business. It was lunchtime, and half the workers were smoking cigarettes and eating meat. It was not what I came there to do, so I ended up being a maintenance man for the temple community. There was no opportunity for farming.
    Prabhu, I went to see NV in the late '80s, after I have been in the movement for 10 years. I took a good look at that place (including a darsan with K-swami) and I knew this was a horrible, dangerous place. I could not wait to get out of there quick enough. We all get lessons we need. I am glad you have found solace in Prabhupada instructions and after what you have been through it is remarkable that you are still with us here. I may criticize ritvikvada but I have only respect for devotees who are sincere seekers of Truth. Dandavat pranams.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     
    Thanks, Prabhu. Jay Srila Prabhupada!
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009 edited
     
    VEDA:> Over 500 devotee children sued ISKCON because of having to endure horrific molestations, beatings, and torture at the hands of ISKCON leaders. Are these leaders and those who have supported them what you call Vaisnavas?

    Definitely. The lowest level of Vaisnava is one who pronounces the holy name once. Api cet suduracaro... They'll get their reactions but their service won't be forgotten by Krsna.
    Sisupala pronounced Krishna's name many times, but his liberation was when Krishna severed his head. The child-molester "devotees" may fit the lowest definition of a Vaisnava, but I don't know how they can be glorified. I once had the extraordinarily distasteful experience of sitting in a temple room where one such person was in an elevated seat along with several gurus and sannyasis. There is a picture in a summer 2005 BTG of him being worshipped with a peacock fan with over a hundred devotees sitting at their feet. Although unrepentant, he was still relatively benevolent compared what I've heard about many of the gurukula teachers.

    I just don't know how anyone can protect or glorify someone who has raped or tortured devotee children, just because they may have chanted something that sounded like the holy name. We're told the worst offense is to sin on the strength of chanting the holy name, but that's not sin; it's thoroughly demoniac vaisnava aparadha. I read in _Sri Harinam Citamani_ that due to meeting a Vaisnava one becomes attracted to the holy name (I don't have the quote handy now), but these so-called devotees so perverted the holy name in the minds of children that hearing Hare Krishna makes them ill. They brought infamy to the Holy Name and the devotees. More than five hundred Vaisnava children were horrifically abused in ISKCON schools; how many of the abusers went to prison? Does anyone know?

    The only time I ever heard of a devotee being ordered kicked out by Srila Prabhupada was one who had molested a child or children. (As I recall, devotees petitioned to Srila Prabhupada on his behalf, and he was allowed to come to the Sunday Feast only.) Now they keep the child abusers around, give them salaries and time on the Vyasaasana, and kick out the devotees who want Srila Prabhpada as their guru after seeing he said he wanted it that way.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
     
    I am surprised that you support the ritvik philosophy if you think that you should get rid of people of low behavior from a religious institution. Standard of being a guru is much higher then being just a ritivik, thus you will still have to bow to the authority of the likes of Kirtanananda, since they will not disqualify from being a ritvik, in fact the higher the standard for leaders the better it is. So imagine taking your japa mala from one?

    I think we can make even a survey of devotees who got initiation from Prabhupada. If you make a statistical comparison of those who got hari nam japa directly from Prabhupada's hands, with those who got it through rikviks during his lifetime and Prabhupada did not chant on their beads, you will see the outcome -- much higher rate of stable devotees coming directly from Prabhupada. But then again, Prabhupada himself approved many of the devotees for sannyasa and even babaji initiation, but they latter took a humble grihastha dress. As one of them put it yesterday:

    Yes, we all know, myself included, the torture personally that takes place when leaving the sanyas ashram to become a householder. But, Srila Prabhupad encouraged this for me, for Rupanuga Prabhu, and for others. If you think that the external dress is so important, you will try to understand that Srila Prabhupad was concerned with saving the souls of his disciples…at any cost. Even if it “hurt” the movement, Srila Prabhupad placed the disciple’s soul above all of that. I have personal experience of this both for myself and for other sanyas godbrothers who valiently served Srila Prabhupad’s preaching mission in those early days, and later took up householder life, with Srila Prabhupad’s personal blessings, and encouragement, I might add. Are we vantasi’s (eaters of one’s own vomit) or servants of Srila Prabhupad who continue to serve in whatever capacity we may be able. And, prabhu, it is not “very bad for that person and for Srila Prabhupads movement.” Judge not, lest ye be judged….a word of advice from higher places. Varnashrama dharma is a form for society, while loving service to Sri Guru and Sri Krishna are the substance. Hare Krishna.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009 edited
     
    > Sisupala pronounced Krishna's name many times, but his liberation was when Krishna severed his head.

    Sisupala is an eternal member of Krsna lila so this comparison is not fitting.

    > The child-molester "devotees" may fit the lowest definition of a Vaisnava, but I don't know how they can be glorified.

    They shouldn't be glorified but respected from a distance, unless they repented and rectified. But they're not on the level of materialists committing the same misbehavior.

    > I read in _Sri Harinam Citamani_ that due to meeting a Vaisnava one becomes attracted to the holy name (I don't have the quote handy now), but these so-called devotees so perverted the holy name in the minds of children that hearing Hare Krishna makes them ill.

    This is quite understandable but still a misidentification. Holy Name is not affected.

    By this you prove that ritvikism is simply an utilitarian idea ('because of so much crime in ISKCON, nobody is qualified to initiate').
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
     
    ccd:I am surprised that you support the ritvik philosophy if you think that you should get rid of people of low behavior from a religious institution. Standard of being a guru is much higher then being just a ritivik, thus you will still have to bow to the authority of the likes of Kirtanananda, since they will not disqualify from being a ritvik, in fact the higher the standard for leaders the better it is. So imagine taking your japa mala from one? ... Hare Krishna.
    At least one would expect a rtvik to be following the regulative principles. If he was discovered to be molesting boys, as has been said, he should have been turned in to the police and hopefully sent to jail. How then would he be giving japa beads to anyone?

    VEDA:> Sisupala pronounced Krishna's name many times, but his liberation was when Krishna severed his head. Sisupala is an eternal member of Krsna lila so this comparison is not fitting.
    It becomes a little more difficult to establish what is proper if we can't make any comparisons between Krishna's pastimes and events in ISKCON. I know it's not a perfect analogy, but surely I'm not the first to do this.

    > The child-molester "devotees" may fit the lowest definition of a Vaisnava, but I don't know how they can be glorified. They shouldn't be glorified but respected from a distance, unless they repented and rectified. But they're not on the level of materialists committing the same misbehavior.
    I would say they're much worse. Someone posing as a devotee but doing abominable activities is committing namaparadha, causing harm to devotees everywhere, and undermining the whole preaching movement. The abuse of a devotee child is aparadha against the child, the parents, Srila Prabhupada, etc. If an ordinary person not trying to appear as a devotee abuses a devotee child, the reputation of the Hare Krishna movement is not harmed nearly as much. Or, if an ordinary man abuses an ordinary child, it is a sin, not aparadha.

    > I read in _Sri Harinam Citamani_ that due to meeting a Vaisnava one becomes attracted to the holy name (I don't have the quote handy now), but these so-called devotees so perverted the holy name in the minds of children that hearing Hare Krishna makes them ill. This is quite understandable but still a misidentification. Holy Name is not affected.
    Certainly the holy name is eternally pure, but the perception people have of the holy name is affected, and thus the preaching movement is harmed. It is more difficult for people to accept the chanting of holy names as a process for purification and spiritual realization when people who chant appear to be degraded even by ordinary standards. That is why, for example, stealing for Krishna is generally discouraged.

    By this you prove that ritvikism is simply an utilitarian idea ('because of so much crime in ISKCON, nobody is qualified to initiate').
    No, you cannot dismiss one argument because another argument is also made. Rtvikism was established in ISKCON by Srila Prabhupada. When asked how initiations were to be conducted after his disappearance, he replied, "officiating acarya... rtvik acarya." He never said to terminate the system or left any record saying that tirobhava initiations could not be done. There is also other positive evidence, such as his will, and negative evidence, such as so many missing tapes at the critical time and the lack of instruction on how diksa gurus would function under the GBC, which they still haven't figured out.

    The fact that so many gurus and other leaders in ISKCON have proven to be below a reasonable standard for guru is secondary evidence. The argument does not depend upon it at all. Even if there were many pure devotees in ISKCON who could function very nicely as diksa gurus, Srila Prabhupada could still not have authorized diksa gurus in ISKCON for whatever reason, according to his discretion as Founder-Acarya. I have yet to see anything proving he could not do it. So far it appears that the the side prohibiting the rtvik method depends upon presenting Srila Prabhupada as materially conditioned, which I cannot accept.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009 edited
     
    sri_govinda_das:iSKCON devotees who have followed the original vaisnava teachings of the'' law of disciplic succession'' have built a worldwide society,
    The "law of disciplic succession" only appears once in Srila Prabhupada's instructions, telling Tusta Krsna that he could not initiate in Srila Prabhupada's presence. That was the obvious point of the letter, stopping him from accepting disciples. It was also a private letter to one person, someone who Srila Prabhupada may have known would go off and do his own thing. It could not have been an instruction for guiding ISKCON because there was no guarantee it would ever be known to others; and indeed it was not revealed until many years after Srila Prabhupada's disappearance. In fact, ISKCON has disposed of this law by GBC resolution authorizing certain devotees to give initiation in the presence of their spiritual master. If the "law of disciplic succession" is so important to ISKCON, why have they taken only the part they like and discarded what they don't? That half-chicken can't fly.
    while the ritviks have not acheived any honest thing.....all they do is complain and steal our temples like Bangalore
    What do you mean "our" temples? Srila Prabhupada founded almost all the temples. I can't say much about Bangalore since I've never been there, though it does seem to be thriving under the rtvik system, and as I recall the court has found Bangalore management to be bona fide or something to that effect. I do know that at my local temple, Gita-nagari, Srila Prabhupada seems treated like a figurehead and not respected, honored, or worshiped like I would expect in one of his temples. I remember one of the last Vyasa Puja festivals for Bhakti Tirtha Swami before he passed away, it lasted for three days, and numerous ISKCON laws were broken regarding overglorification of gurus. On the other hand, Srila Prabhupada's Vyasa Puja festival that year was over at noon, just as it is every year. I didn't get out of the temple until about 12:30, and by then the prasad was practically all gone. I also remember hearing Radhanatha Swami saying that we should manage Gita-nagari according to Bhakti Tirtha's vision. I don't know what happened to Srila Prabhupada's vision, but it's definitely not being done here. Book distribution is almost nil. Public harinam sankirtan is infrequent and done only in the cities 50 miles away because the community has destroyed its reputation with the locals. It's a disaster. A lot of it is being written about in the Sampradaya Sun lately. Incidentally, I did not write any of those articles, nor do I know who did.

    I have only been following the rtvik movement for about a year, and I've been trying to understand why it has been struggling to get on its feet. I've found there are many obstacles, but they are gradually being overcome. ISKCON did immense harm to Srila Prabhupada's mission by claiming that the 11 rtviks he appointed had become acaryas upon his disappearance. So many devotees were kicked out and scattered. The evidence that the rtvik system was supposed to continue was suppressed and hidden for many years, and we have no way of knowing what was on the numerous tapes that we have heard were destroyed. These are things that cannot be undone, and they have given the false gurus a big advantage on the material stage.

    Honestly, if the gurus were competent and did not change the philosophy, I doubt Srila Prabhupada would mind. Unfortunately that's not the case. I have seen numbers, which I don't have in front of me know, saying that currently there are about 75 gurus out of well over 200 that have been appointed by the GBC. About 2/3 have fallen. Many have still made a mockery of what it means to be a Vaisnava guru, and some still wear the badge and receive the worship. Some are getting many followers by preaching popular modern ideas like homosexuality and women's equality. It has become a farce.

    What is your practical preaching agenda Pandu das ?According to your ritvik group as to how you will save the conditioned souls?
    What is my preaching agenda? To preach what Srila Prabhupada taught. It's that simple. If anyone likes it, good; if not, well that's the material world. It's not up to me to save anyone. I'm just a servant trying to deliver Srila Prabhupada's message. Whether they accept it or not is between them and Krishna.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009 edited
     
    sri_govinda_das:srila Prabhupada's standard was in fact Guru,Sadhu and sastra.
    I've learned about Guru Sadhu and Sastra through Srila Prabhupada. Unlike some devotees, I have not been making an independent study of these to judge Srila Prabhupada's teachings and interpret them accordingly.

    Where are your ritvik guru's within our sampradaya or are you part of the Gaudiya matha line?
    Srila Prabhupada created the rtvik system. The GBC disbanded it and appointed gurus without authorization.

    What gbc members are in fact ritviks?
    The GBC in Bangalore are rtviks, elected as described in the DOM.

    The GBC that is now the GBC Society of West Bengal, or something like that (which Srila Prabhupada did not create), is supposed to be following Srila Prabhupada, but the rtviks he appointed wanted to be gurus instead, so they did what they wanted and abandoned his order, banning anyone who opposed their plan. By outlawing the rtvik view, they've made any rtvik-supporting presence on the GBC practically impossible.
    What sastric proof is there!
    Srila Prabhupada instituted the rtvik sytem personally. What sastric proof is there that it had to be terminated upon his disappearance, when he did not order that?????
    What famous devotees in the srimad bhagavatam preach ritvik siddhanta?
    If that's your standard, then I guess the GBC is bogus too, since there's no GBC mentioned in the Bhagavatam either, not even in Srila Prabhupada's purports. For that matter, nowhere in any of Srila Prabhupada's books does he mention the GBC of ISKCON; shall we get rid of that too? Perhaps you could tell me how Srila Prabhupada wanted the GBC to share authority with multiple diksa gurus, since Srila Prabhupada didn't talk about that at all, and they're still trying to figure it out (based on an article and discussion on Dandavats.com earlier this year, sorry I don't have the link handy at the moment).

    Furthermore, the rtvik system that Srila Prabhupada had in place during his manifest pastimes was apparently bogus too, by your criteria, since that's not in the Bhagavatam either. Whatever was his basis or authority for establishing that system, he never said it was to be terminated or had to be terminated, nor has anyone that I know of ever shown proof of any reason that it could not be continued.
    Ritvik Archarya's system within recent history is there any because i have been unable to find any?
    LOL!

    Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you're no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted. Prabhupada: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acaryas.
    Tamala Krsna: Is that called rtvik-acarya?
    Prabhupada: Rtvik, yes.
    >>> Ref. VedaBase => GBC Meets with Srila Prabhupada -- May 28, 1977, Vrndavana

    Tamala Krsna: Upendra and I could see it for the last... [break]
    Prabhupada: And nobody is going to disturb you there. Make your own field and continue to become rttvik and act on my charge.
    >>> Ref. VedaBase => Room Conversation -- July 19, 1977, Vrndavana

    "Make your own field and continue to become rttvik and act on my charge."
    He never said to stop. He told Tamal Krishna Gosvami to "continue to become rtvik." Obviously Tamal had his own ideas.

    "I can definitely say for myself, and for which I humbly beg forgiveness from everybody, that there was definitely some degree of trying to control(...) This is the conditioned nature, and it came out in the highest position of all, 'Guru, oh wonderful! Now I am guru, and there is only eleven of us'" - Tamal Krsna Gosvami, December 3, 1980.
  3.  
    >sri_govinda_das: i am sorry what is your name?before your unfortunate initiation....Bhakta ......so really you are not even part of our sampradaya ....are you! Hare krishna .

    Thou shalt use a computer in ways that show consideration and respect (from computer ethics institute, ten commandments)
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    > It becomes a little more difficult to establish what is proper if we can't make any comparisons between Krishna's pastimes and events in ISKCON. I know it's not a perfect analogy, but surely I'm not the first to do this.

    Sure. Imperfect analogies don't work.

    The chanting should be with faith as explained in CC 2.15.106. That was another difference between ISKCON devotees and Sisupala. Unless it can be proved that every molester was always an asura who cheated SP into giving him diksa in order to later molest children and commit other crimes.

    > I would say they're much worse. Someone posing as a devotee but doing abominable activities is committing namaparadha, causing harm to devotees everywhere, and undermining the whole preaching movement. The abuse of a devotee child is aparadha against the child, the parents, Srila Prabhupada, etc. If an ordinary person not trying to appear as a devotee abuses a devotee child, the reputation of the Hare Krishna movement is not harmed nearly as much. Or, if an ordinary man abuses an ordinary child, it is a sin, not aparadha.

    "Someone posing as a devotee but doing abominable activities is committing namaparadha" is contradicted by your own words. Either he _is_ a devotee and then commits aparadha or _is not_ and then commits papa.
    However, devotee commiting aparadha is not on the same level as materialist. Two differences:
    1. He _commits aparadha_ (> heavier karma) while karmi _commits papa_ (> lighter karma).
    2. He will be soon rectified (BG 9.30-31).
    Ritviks consistently refuse to consider the 2nd difference, either out of ignorance of Vaisnava tattva or out of enmity to Vaisnavas, or both and create more aparadhas against such Vaisnavas. This is asuric in nature. Since you close your eyes to this fact and prefer their apasiddhanta, be prepared for reactions. The fact that you stubbornly stick to it shows that mayayapahrta jnana factor is at work and you've reach a stage where you can't disentangle yourself anymore.

    No one argues against the fact that abominable acts harm our preaching, etc. That's included in the aparadha.

    > Rtvikism was established in ISKCON by Srila Prabhupada. When asked how initiations were to be conducted after his disappearance, he replied, "officiating acarya... rtvik acarya."

    He established only pre tirobhava ritvikism. There isn't enough evidence for post tirobhava ritvikism to outweigh all his previous teaching, establishing apasampradaya. How many times this has to be repeated?

    > He never said to terminate the system or left any record saying that tirobhava initiations could not be done.

    The most obvious reason is that he expected his disciples to know the sastra followed in all genuine sampradayas where post-tirobhava ritvikism is absent.

    > There is also other positive evidence, such as his will,

    I mentioned that the 'my initiated disciples' sentence must have remained there due to an overlook by an attorney who was supposed to check it. The reason: a complete lack of any explanation why traditional parampara should be stopped.

    > and negative evidence, such as so many missing tapes at the critical time

    This is a conspiration theory. Provide names and places. Until then... missing evidence is no evidence.

    > and the lack of instruction on how diksa gurus would function under the GBC, which they still haven't figured out.

    Yes, this was neglected. But it doesn't prove that apasampradaya is the way to go.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    > Even if there were many pure devotees in ISKCON who could function very nicely as diksa gurus, Srila Prabhupada could still not have authorized diksa gurus in ISKCON for whatever reason, according to his discretion as Founder-Acarya. I have yet to see anything proving he could not do it.

    Isn't this somehow confused?

    > So far it appears that the the side prohibiting the rtvik method depends upon presenting Srila Prabhupada as materially conditioned, which I cannot accept.

    If rejecting the post tirobhava ritvikism means being materially conditioned, then why all previous Vaisnava acaryas didn't establish post tirobhava ritvikism? Due to their material conditioning as per your suggestion...? You won't even stop from offending previous acaryas??

    The reason is simple (yet unacceptable to post tirobhava ritviks): It's against the very principle of parampara ('one after another') so they wouldn't even think of it. Stopping parampara (e.g. by declaring one's disciples unqualified to be gurus, which itself disqualies the guru in the first place - a vicious circle) means the tattva will be lost and Krsna will have to come to establish it again. (BG 4.2-3, 8) When Krsna establishes sampradaya, who'd dare to stop it? Only His enemies. This is the position of post tirobhava ritviks, if you like it or not, and you stubbornly side with them.

    > What is my preaching agenda? To preach what Srila Prabhupada taught. It's that simple.

    Where did he teach post tirobhava ritvikism? Please don't hide it away from us anymore.
    Also quote from genuine sastras as Srila Prabhupada always did and taught himself, please.

    >> What famous devotees in the srimad bhagavatam preach ritvik siddhanta?

    > If that's your standard, then I guess the GBC is bogus too, since there's no GBC mentioned in the Bhagavatam either, not even in Srila Prabhupada's purports. For that matter, nowhere in any of Srila Prabhupada's books does he mention the GBC of ISKCON

    Sastra teaches principles, parampara being one of the prominent ones. GBC is not against parampara. You don't understand the difference between principles and adaptations by acaryas.

    In CC 1.12.8 p. he mentions the governing body of Gaudiya Math requested by BSST and how not following this request lead to GM's disintegration. This is good enough to show his position.

    > (Sri Govinda P.) Since you have rejected the teachings of your guru and him personally .....a disciplic succession advocate,you should not indeed use it .

    Exactly. If you consider your guru to be fake, why not your diksa? Don't use that name if you're honest. (Our ritvik-cz at least still signs as 'bhakta', not '... das'.)

    I'm quite sure that you won't admit your error but I write for the benefit of others.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    sri_govinda_das:Actually my dear Pandu das Is your name from SRILA Prabhupada's disciple a result of our Law of Disciplic succession system?Since you have rejected the teachings of your guru and him personally .....a disciplic succession advocate,you should not indeed use it .
    I prefer not to use it, but sometimes do so as a matter of convenience since it's how most devotees recognize who I am. My English name is Paul Howard. You can use that if you like. I'm not aware of a way to change one's username at sites like this.

    Since you are not part of Iskcon....But deem yourself a follower of ritvik vada
    I'm trying to follow Srila Prabhupada vada and he said Iskcon was to continue to perform initiations via "Officiating acarya... Rtvik." I have not renounced Iskcon, only want Iskcon to do what Srila Prabhupada ordered.

    ...approach your new siksa guru's and tell us if its indeed better....We would actual be very interested if you are more satisfied....Possibly you should take your siksa from Radharani while your at it ....after all she is infact the true leader of all the guru's in your new line.
    What new siksa guru? I'm hearing from Srila Prabhupada every day, reading his books, and doing my best to engage in devotional service according to his instructions. Who else do you think is the current acarya? Even Bhaktimarga Swami said at my initiation ceremony that Srila Prabhupada is my "primary guru." I naturally accept others' guidance if it is in line with Srila Prabhupada, but his teachings are the rule to me.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    sri_govinda_das:Where are all your sastric quotes ?Examples of guru Ritviks in our line?Even ritvik Archarya's?
    You've already made it clear that you don't accept Srila Prabhupada's judgement or his order. Why do you keep repeating this point? Srila Prabhupada initiations were to be conducted by officiating acarya, a.k.a. rtvik acarya after his disappearance. He already had this system in place. I previously answered your objections, but you don't want to hear it. You have your own idea of the disciplic succession that does not involve trusting what Srila Prabhupada said. Why do you need to look elsewhere when Srila Prabhupada directly answered the question about initiations after his disappearance?
    Hence you are just living another illusion of maya.You could speak about your own guru.....BUT you rejected him ....My siksa guru,his divine grace Tamala krishna goswami signed your ritvik- vada letter ...since he was srila Prabhupada's foremost disciple.....he never fell down .But now you want to be offensive to even my guru.By extrapolating his words for your own ends.....you are not even initiated ....you could not even please your own guru ....You are just .....a new bhakta.....hare krishna ....
    What does it matter that the secretary put his signature on the letter too? It's the boss's signature that is important. TKG confessed that he wanted to be guru, though he was not in fact appointed by Srila Prabhupada. Do you think he assumed the Zonal Acarya by accident? No doubt the many missing tapes are no accident either; but looking at the available record, it seems to me like a betrayal and a coup.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    sri_govinda_das:So with our blessing go to their concocted Bangalore ''Gbc''....it would really suit your motives ...i am sorry what is your name?before your unfortunate initiation....Bhakta ......so really you are not even part of our sampradaya ....are you! Hare krishna .
    Oh please, give it a rest. You sound like someone who's lost a debate and has nothing worthwhile left to say. I am living raising a family in the USA, cultivating Krishna consciousness where I am. I have a mortgage to pay, Deities, a nice Tulasi garden, a farm animal sanctuary, and no practical ability to travel. Srila Prabhupada did not come to the West to call people to India. He came to plant bhakti here, and this is where I'm serving him.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    VEDA:[/cite} > He never said to terminate the system or left any record saying that tirobhava initiations could not be done. The most obvious reason is that he expected his disciples to know the sastra followed in all genuine sampradayas where post-tirobhava ritvikism is absent.
    No, it's not obvious. In fact it's blatantly contradicted by the fact that Satsvarupa asked him on May 28, 1977, on behalf of the GBC, how initiations were to be conducted after his disappearance. Why would he ask if they already knew, and why would Srila Prabhupada assume they knew the answer to the question when they just asked him? That makes no sense at all.

    > There is also other positive evidence, such as his will, I mentioned that the 'my initiated disciples' sentence must have remained there due to an overlook by an attorney who was supposed to check it. The reason: a complete lack of any explanation why traditional parampara should be stopped.
    Why don't you also say that Srila Prabhupada didn't look carefully at his will either?

    Have a look at how Jayapataka Swami handled this issue when confronted:
    http://www.vnn.org/world/WD9902/WD23-3143.html
    > and negative evidence, such as so many missing tapes at the critical time This is a conspiration theory. Provide names and places. Until then... missing evidence is no evidence.
    Of course it can be very difficult to prove when something has been destroyed (that's the point of doing it), but there are surprising gaps in the tape record. I'm not at home now and have very limited resources at the moment, but as I recall the number of rtviks rose by two just prior to July 9 despite no recording of the conversation, and there is a two-week gap with no tapes around August 1977, if I recall correctly. Tamal's question whether officiating acarya was the same as rtvik acarya suggests that they had discussed this before then. There are also devotees who claim first-hand knowledge of missing tapes, and one who has some written correspondence with the Bhaktivedanta Archives on the subject. I have seen a copy of that correspondence and hopefully can locate it. I am still trying to gather info on this.
    > and the lack of instruction on how diksa gurus would function under the GBC, which they still haven't figured out. Yes, this was neglected. But it doesn't prove that apasampradaya is the way to go.
    Why say it "was" neglected, rather than saying "Srila Prabhupada neglected this?" Was he characteristically neglectful, or could it be that he did not give instructions on this important subject because it was not a supposed to come about? Your calling it apasampradaya continues to beg the question. My understanding of the sampradaya and apasampradaya comes from what Srila Prabhupada has taught, and he has said no such thing. Your repeating apadampradaya apasampradaya apasampradaya does not make it true. The record shows that Srila Prabhupada established a rtvik system for conducting initiations and there is no evidence that he said it was to stop.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    VEDA: If rejecting the post tirobhava ritvikism means being materially conditioned, then why all previous Vaisnava acaryas didn't establish post tirobhava ritvikism? Due to their material conditioning as per your suggestion...? You won't even stop from offending previous acaryas??
    There was no need. Srila Prabhupada established a worldwide society, which had not been done before. As I recall, Tamal admitted in early 1977 that he was not aware of anyone in Iskcon qualified to accept their own disciples, and Srila Prabhupada did not disagree. Srila Prabhupada as the initiating guru would help to keep Iskcon united and prevent unqualified gurus from causing a disturbance. If anyone could be a guru in ISKCON, the instutution could be harmed by the activities of unqualified gurus; and Srila Prabhupada never instructed the GBC to decide who gets to be a guru and who not. From an institutional standpoint, having everyone a direct disciple of the Founder-Acarya makes a great deal of sense, and Srila Prabhupada made many practical decisions for the benefit of Krishna consciousness.

    Isn't it true that in Bhagavad-gita Krishna says He created the varnasrama system, and a woman could be considered a brahmana not on her own but by serving a brahmana as his wife? Yet Srila Prabhupada changed this principle for practical reasons. If we allow women to be initiated as brahmanas and to go on the altar (with their chest covered -- isn't one required to worship Deities bare chested?), apparently contrary to shastra, why there a double-standard in regard to initiations?
    The reason is simple (yet unacceptable to post tirobhava ritviks): It's against the very principle of parampara ('one after another') so they wouldn't even think of it. Stopping parampara (e.g. by declaring one's disciples unqualified to be gurus, which itself disqualies the guru in the first place - a vicious circle) means the tattva will be lost and Krsna will have to come to establish it again. (BG 4.2-3, 8) When Krsna establishes sampradaya, who'd dare to stop it? Only His enemies. This is the position of post tirobhava ritviks, if you like it or not, and you stubbornly side with them.
    Engagement in devotional service is always a matter of free will. Some devotees fell even from Lord Caitanya's direct association. It's often said that the sampradaya is primarily siksa, and presently the siksa is being changed by diksa gurus such as HDG who have even been publicly critical of Srila Prabhupada. If Srila Prabhupada continues to initiate within ISKCON, it does not stop the disciplic succession, because anyone can go outside and initiate as Srila Prabhupada did himself.
    Where did he teach post tirobhava ritvikism? Please don't hide it away from us anymore. Also quote from genuine sastras as Srila Prabhupada always did and taught himself, please.
    Must we repeat this over and over? I don't have time to waste. He established a rtvik system. I don't know where in sastra it says he could do that, nor have I seen anywhere it says that it could not continue. When asked about tirobhava initiations he said rtvik. If you think Srila Prabhupada made a mistake with that, I guess you trust yourself more than him. So much for the guru parampara.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    However the question is not about if post samadhi ritivkism is bona fide (it is clear for all). Question is If one already accepted Srila Prabhupads as his guru, is there an actual need of such initiation (ritvik)?
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    > No, it's not obvious. In fact it's blatantly contradicted by the fact that Satsvarupa asked him on May 28, 1977, on behalf of the GBC, how initiations were to be conducted after his disappearance. Why would he ask if they already knew, and why would Srila Prabhupada assume they knew the answer to the question when they just asked him? That makes no sense at all.

    They wanted to know details. This is pretty usual.

    > Why don't you also say that Srila Prabhupada didn't look carefully at his will either?

    If JPS read it to him once and he signed it, it's probable. But how was that possible is beyond me.

    > Have a look at how Jayapataka Swami handled this issue when confronted:

    No attorney is even mentioned. It shows the amateurish approach.

    Ritviks try to present 'superhuman guru' idea (kartabhaja apasampradaya) but it doesn't help at all. If Krsna directs SP's every move so he can't overlook, overhear, etc. then establishing of apasampradaya would be done by Krsna Himself. Why? His mission is just the opposite... Are you ready to suggest this at all?

    > Why say it "was" neglected, rather than saying "Srila Prabhupada neglected this?" Was he characteristically neglectful, or could it be that he did not give instructions on this important subject because it was not a supposed to come about?

    Not unless a major departure from Vedic standard was at hand.

    > Your calling it apasampradaya continues to beg the question.

    Not at all. It's 100% apasampradaya unless proven otherwise.

    > My understanding of the sampradaya and apasampradaya comes from what Srila Prabhupada has taught, and he has said no such thing.

    He always followed g-s-s but you try to eliminate sastra and sadhu. Therefore apasampadaya.

    > Your repeating apadampradaya apasampradaya apasampradaya does not make it true.

    Then prove your point by g-s-s.

    > The record shows that Srila Prabhupada established a rtvik system for conducting initiations and there is no evidence that he said it was to stop.

    I wrote: after his tirobhava: ritviks >> regular gurus. Otherwise he'd be instituting apasampradaya, what else. But he didn't as is obvious from his words like "a regular guru", "disciple of my disciple" and "they're his grand disciples".

    > There was no need. Srila Prabhupada established a worldwide society, which had not been done before. As I recall, Tamal admitted in early 1977 that he was not aware of anyone in Iskcon qualified to accept their own disciples, and Srila Prabhupada did not disagree. Srila Prabhupada as the initiating guru would help to keep Iskcon united and prevent unqualified gurus from causing a disturbance. If anyone could be a guru in ISKCON, the instutution could be harmed by the activities of unqualified gurus; and Srila Prabhupada never instructed the GBC to decide who gets to be a guru and who not. From an institutional standpoint, having everyone a direct disciple of the Founder-Acarya makes a great deal of sense, and Srila Prabhupada made many practical decisions for the benefit of Krishna consciousness.

    Basically you say that SP turned ISKCON into a big joke. We see from the behavior of ritviks how sadly it would end within few short years.

    The woman brahmana issue is not undermining any principle. There's place for such things under apad dharma.

    > If Srila Prabhupada continues to initiate within ISKCON

    How? In the dream? His 11 pre tirobhava ritviks aren't available or are unwiling and no one else could do it.

    > it does not stop the disciplic succession, because anyone can go outside and initiate as Srila Prabhupada did himself.

    Such ritvik initiation being nonvedic is useless. Aren't there're already many pseudovedic groups?

    > Must we repeat this over and over? I don't have time to waste. He established a rtvik system. I don't know where in sastra it says he could do that, nor have I seen anywhere it says that it could not continue. When asked about tirobhava initiations he said rtvik.

    We definitely must. It's very serious issue which can't be resolved positively in your favor without g-s-s support for ritvikism.

    > If you think Srila Prabhupada made a mistake with that, I guess you trust yourself more than him. So much for the guru parampara.

    I think (am convinced) it's your misintepretation of his. Very inauspicious. But you don't care, I know.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    Nrsingha:SP said that none of his Godbrothers were qualified to be Acarya so why was Post Samadhi Ritvic system not established by BSST or previous Acaryas. Indians can be just as 'unqualified' as westerners sometimes. Isn't it?
    Prabhupada along with his senior godbrothers voted for an acharya after the disappearance of BSST. And Ananta vasudeva was an acharya. However it became clear that devotees should have established GBC for management and not an acharya. Prabhupada since then was mainly concerned with management, not with guruship. It is obvious. Those who make guruship the center are soooo far from what Prabhupada considered the priority.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    This discussion is becoming pointless. I have no intention of surrendering to someone whom I do not trust, which I am being pressured to do against my better judgment. I tried a rubber-stamped guru on the advice of others, and it was a mistake. Or perhaps not a mistake because I learned something, which is not to trust just anyone with my spiritual life. My faith is in Srila Prabhupada, and sooner or later I will be initiated by him, whether this life or another. I've found convincing evidence that he intended to continue accepting disciples like me, and in my heart he is my guru even though I am not a very good disciple. I cannot imagine that he would abandon me. I find it terribly shameful that anyone would try to come between me and the guru in my heart for whatever reason, and I'm fed up with hearing this abusive "apasampradaya" bluff. ISKCON or no ISKCON, I'll take what Srila Prabhupada said, thank you very much.

    Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you're no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.
    Prabhupada: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acaryas.
    Tamala Krsna: Is that called rtvik-acarya?
    Prabhupada: Rtvik, yes.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    > why was Post Samadhi Ritvic system not established by BSST or previous Acaryas.

    Because the absence of physically present guru goes against sastra. Not just against parampara system but also against the system of accepting guru in HBV (like one year of mutual observing), etc.

    After tirobhava of BSST was post tirobhava ritvik system considered for about five minutes. Then it was noted that it's allowed nowhere in sastra and that was the end of it. (approximate cz>en translation, Ritvik mayavada sata dusani, intro-6)

    > The extremes at both end of spectrum could balance each other out maybe. Not that we try to go to war with either the liberal modernists or the conservative traditionalists.

    Seems like you don't understand that there's no middle ground here: either the guru parampara continues or not.
    If not, we're not anymore Vedic, with all ramifications it entails (beginning with no authority in India as a genuine group, thus completely undermining our preaching; sastra would become unimportant - 'if one principle can be changed why not others?', etc.). Iow, Pandora's box would be opened.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    > This discussion is becoming pointless.

    Sure, when one has no support for one's position...

    > I have no intention of surrendering to someone whom I do not trust, which I am being pressured to do against my better judgment.

    Neither this is allowed by g-s-s. The procedure is clearly established in HBV. So your main reason for accepting ritvikism is out.

    > I tried a rubber-stamped guru on the advice of others, and it was a mistake. Or perhaps not a mistake because I learned something, which is not to trust just anyone with my spiritual life.

    'Trusting anyone' is another nonsense idea, unsupported by g-s-s.

    > My faith is in Srila Prabhupada, and sooner or later I will be initiated by him, whether this life or another.

    In another life, in traditional way, it's ok.

    > I've found convincing evidence that he intended to continue accepting disciples like me, and in my heart he is my guru even though I am not a very good disciple.

    Everyone of us is his disciple, siksa, that is. He's in our heart without a need to accept nonvedic ideas.

    > I find it terribly shameful that anyone would try to come between me and the guru in my heart for whatever reason

    Then you should wait for diksa for the next life. But don't stop others by preaching ritvikism to accept "disciple of my disciple".

    > and I'm fed up with hearing this abusive "apasampradaya" bluff.

    'Bluff' which no ritvik can refute, establishing one's idea as sastric. We judge everything by g-s-s so why not ritvikism? By which reason should g-s-s become suspended in this case? Because of utility, or sentiment?

    > ISKCON or no ISKCON, I'll take what Srila Prabhupada said, thank you very much.

    No, you selectively avoid his words like "a regular guru", "disciple of my disciple" and "they're his grand disciples".
    This proves he's not establishing apasampradaya but follows sastra:

    According to Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, this is the way an incarnation should be accepted. Çréla Narottama däsa Öhäkura says, sädhu-çästra-guru-väkya, cittete kariyä aikya. One should accept a thing as genuine by studying the words of saintly people, the spiritual master and the çästra. >>>The actual center is the çästra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak according to the revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if a saintly person does not speak according to the çästra, he is not a saintly person.<<< The çästra is the center for all. Unfortunately, at the present moment, people do not refer to the çästras; therefore they accept rascals as incarnations, and consequently they have made incarnations into a very cheap thing. (CC 2.20.352, p.)
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009 edited
     
    VEDA:> This discussion is becoming pointless.

    Sure, when one has no support for one's position...
    When you're obviously not listening.

    ...One should accept a thing as genuine by studying the words of saintly people, the spiritual master and the çästra. >>>The actual center is the çästra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak according to the revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if a saintly person does not speak according to the çästra, he is not a saintly person.
    Does a "saintly" person know when to stfu? Because you sure don't.


    Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura:...What are the Scriptures? They are nothing but the record by the pure devotees of the Divine Message appearing on the lips of the pure devotees. The Message conveyed by the devotees is the same in all ages. The words of the devotees are ever identical with the Scriptures. Any meaning of the Scriptures that belittles the function of the devotee who is the original communicant of the Divine Message contradicts its own claim to be heard.
    When Srila Prabhupada says "Rtvik. Yes.", it's good enough for me.
  4.  
    >I have no intention of surrendering to someone whom I do not trust, which I am being pressured to do against my better judgment. I tried a rubber-stamped guru on the advice of others, and it was a mistake.

    H.H.Bhaktimarga swami may not be on the same level as Srila Prabhupada but he is renounced and dedicated to mission of Srila Prabhupada and hence a great Vaishnava though he might have made a mistake or two when he lied to you. Just imagine if he happens to read what you write here, how much it may hurt him or to his other disciples who are in good relationship with him.So how this relationship in which there is no faith, no surrender involved will benefit you, rather it is going into the direction of aparadhas.

    imho, it will be better for you to get out of this relationship. In ISKCON, I have seen disciples returning the beads to their guru. But then they leave ISKCON completely, I don't know if they did it voluntarily(leaving ISKCON) or they were kicked out. I know few devotees who took initiation without full understanding, then there were many problems later on. I don't know if there are any rules in place for such situations in ISKCON. Better will be to consult some senior devotees, maybe some GBC whom you trust, or maybe just talk frankly to H.H.Bhaktimarga Swami, honestly and humbly openup your heart with him, tell him everything what you feel. If you really really don't like this relationship, there might be some official way in ISKCON to dissolve this relationship.

    If you wait too long, and it continues like this 1)it will create more aparadhas 2) it will end up in a very ugly way taking you away from ISKCON forever. If it is possible maybe then just stay as an uninitiated devotee in ISKCON keeping Prabhupada in your heart and in your vision.

    dīkṣā-puraścaryā-vidhi apekṣā nā kare
    jihvā-sparśe ā-caṇḍāla sabāre uddhāre

    One does not have to undergo initiation or execute the activities required before initiation. One simply has to vibrate the holy name with his lips. Thus even a man in the lowest class [caṇḍāla] can be delivered.

    Vaisnava aparadha must be avoided at any cost.

    Your servant
    dweller-in-peace
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
     
    > When you're obviously not listening.

    I'm but keep waiting for pramana supporting your case. In vain.

    > Does a "saintly" person know when to stfu? Because you sure don't.

    I have no problem to accept I'm no saintly person. But you said just above "I'll take what Srila Prabhupada said" and now you're irritated by his words. Isn't it strange?
    (You can offend me as you like, I'm used to it from web forums. But as per debate customs you lost.)

    > Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura:...What are the Scriptures? They are nothing but the record by the pure devotees of the Divine Message appearing on the lips of the pure devotees. The Message conveyed by the devotees is the same in all ages. The words of the devotees are ever identical with the Scriptures. Any meaning of the Scriptures that belittles the function of the devotee who is the original communicant of the Divine Message contradicts its own claim to be heard.

    There's no contradiction. Contradictions are only imagined and ascribed to pure devotees to suit someone's agenda. Evidence? Words like "a regular guru", "disciple of my disciple" and "they're his grand disciples".

    > When Srila Prabhupada says "Rtvik. Yes.", it's good enough for me.

    SP answers here the question of Tamala Krsna: "Is that called rtvik-acarya?"

    position of officiating acarya: pre samadhi acceptable (though not ideal), post samadhi not
  5.  
    Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya Lila 15.108
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009
     
    dīkṣā-puraścaryā-vidhi apekṣā nā kare
    jihvā-sparśe ā-caṇḍāla sabāre uddhāre
    anuṣaṅga-phale kare saṁsārera kṣaya
    citta ākarṣiyā karāya kṛṣṇe premodaya

    “One does not have to undergo initiation or execute the activities required before initiation. One simply has to vibrate the holy name with his lips. Thus even a man in the lowest class [caṇḍāla] can be delivered.
    “By chanting the holy name of the Lord, one dissolves his entanglement in material activities. After this, one becomes very much attracted to Kṛṣṇa, and thus dormant love for Kṛṣṇa is awakened.

    (Chaitanya Charitāmṛta Madhya15.106-109)
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009
     
    other translation:

    dīkṣā puraścaryā vidhi apekṣā nā kare
    jihvā sparśe ācaṇḍāle sabāre uddhāre

    “All perfections come from the Holy Name. It does not require initiation or the observance of puraścaraṇa. As soon as it touches the tongue of even the lowest class of humankind, it immediately delivers them.”
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009 edited
     
    sri_govinda_das:So how is srila Prabhupada meant to personally accept me then?I have been his devotee for approximately thirty years....however unless i read Hauri-sauri's book my personal association is merely a dream. I cannot accept that i can have a better relationship with him than my superiors because i in fact never personally met him.
    Well that is not quite true. I am not a supporter of post samadhi ritik initiationd, and I am firm believer that it is a disservice to Prabhupada to stop the parampara in his ISKCON, but you CAN have a very intimate and personal relationship with Prabhupada over the years and be even more connected to him then when you had a direct contact. In a way service in separation is more direct then service in direct interaction. It is this longing that makes one a direct disciple, not initiation, that is a formality. Visvanatha Cakravarti is a direct disciple of Narottama das Thakura Mahasaya, but there are a few generations of gurus (diksa) between them. In the same way, relationship with Lord Caitanya for Narottama dasa was personal and intimate, but of course we relish all the things that link us up to Prabhupada, and that includes any and every possible biographical work or a memories of Prabhupada, and that includes our gurus in ISKCON. The only thing that stops us from having a direct relationship through parampara with Prabhupada is envy.
  6.  
    Pandu das: I have no intention of surrendering to someone whom I do not trust, which I am being pressured to do against my better judgment. I tried a rubber-stamped guru on the advice of others, and it was a mistake. Or perhaps not a mistake because I learned something, which is not to trust just anyone with my spiritual life. My faith is in Srila Prabhupada, and sooner or later I will be initiated by him, whether this life or another.
    You definitely should not surrender to someone you do not trust. That is not faith, that is insanity. While we learn from our mistakes we should not be repeating them. ---------- There is nothing wrong in seeing Prabhupada as the only guru you need. What is wrong is saying that everybody else should do the same. Diffrent things work for different people. I know scores of very nice devotees greatly inspired by Iskcon gurus and very happy in their spiritual life.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009
     
    Is Visvanatha direct disciple of Narottama? Is he a diksa disciple, no.

    Reciprocation is the key, direct can also mean "servant of my servant" - it is spiritually direct.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009
     
    sri_govinda_das:I am not the disciple of srila Prabhupada ccd....
    You better be his siksa disciple, or you are out of Iskcon... that is pretty basic. But whatever problem Pandu has, it is his problem, and I am sure he will resolve it somehow, but what we ask is to not commit vaisnava aparadhas both ways.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009
     
    VEDA: But as per debate customs you lost.
    If you're that desperate as to think you've won anything by claiming Srila Prabhupada made a mistake rather than yourself, and pushing an aspiring devotee further from ISKCON, then I hope your false ego is satisfied.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2009 edited
     
    > If you're that desperate as to think you've won anything

    Not at all. I've tried to help you for quite some time but you can't accept it. It's like with that horse at the river bank.

    > by claiming Srila Prabhupada made a mistake rather than yourself

    He didn't since he used words like "a regular guru", "disciple of my disciple" and "they're his grand disciples". Which you can't accept
    although you said "I'll take what Srila Prabhupada said".

    > pushing an aspiring devotee further from ISKCON,

    It's you who reject standard siddhanta and distancing yourself from ISKCON. However, in your condition you can't see this.

    > then I hope your false ego is satisfied.

    This'd be an useless effort, imho. Better to satisfy guru parampara, vaisnavas and Krsna.
 
Powered By ISKCON Tech