8) "Are you saying that Srila Prabhupada created no pure devotees?"
No, all we are stating is that Srila Prabhupada did set up the ritvik system to allow initiations to continue. Whether or not Srila Prabhupada created pure devotees is not relevant to his clear and unequivocal final order. As disciples our duty is simply to follow the instructions of the guru. It is inappropriate to abandon the guru's instruction and instead speculate as to how many pure devotees there are now, or will be in the future.
Even taking a worst case scenario, that there are in fact no pure devotees at present, one should consider the situation that existed after the departure of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. After almost 40 years, Srila Prabhupada indicated that there was only one authorised initiating acarya produced from the Gaudiya Matha:
"Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya*. [...] instead of inspiring our students and disciple they may sometimes pollute them. [...] they are very competent to harm our natural progress." (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Rupanuga, 28/4/74)
*(Srila Prabhupada used the terms "acarya" and "guru" interchangeably):
"I shall choose some guru. I shall say, “Now you become acarya." [...] You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see our Gaudiya Matha. Everyone wanted to be guru. A small temple and "guru". What kind of guru?" (Srila Prabhupada Morning walk, 22/4/77)
This could be seen as a damning indictment of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's preaching work. However, it would be extremely unwise to argue that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was a "failure". Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is known to have said that if his mission only produced one pure devotee he would have considered it a success.
Furthermore, the implementation of a ritvik system does not rule out, a priori, the possible existence of pure devotees. There are various scenarios that could easily accommodate both ritviks and pure devotees, e.g.:
Srila Prabhupada may have created many pure devotees who have no desire to become diksa gurus. There is no evidence to suggest that the most advanced devotees in ISKCON must necessarily be those individuals who put themselves up for election each year. These pure devotees may simply wish to humbly assist Srila Prabhupada's mission. It is nowhere stated that it is mandatory for a pure devotee to become a diksa guru. Such persons would be delighted to work within the ritvik system if that was their guru's order.
Srila Prabhupada's desire may be for large numbers of instructing gurus, but not necessarily for more initiating ones. This would be consistent with the earlier quoted instruction for everyone to become a siksa guru, and Srila Prabhupada's caution not to take disciples. It would also be consistent with the fact that Srila Prabhupada had single-handedly already put in place the success of his mission:
Guest: Are you planning to choose a successor?
Srila Prabhupada: It is already successful.
Guest: But there must be somebody you know, needed to handle the thing.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes. That we are creating. We are creating these devotees who will handle.
Hanuman: One thing He's saying, this gentlemen, and I would like to know, is your successor named or your successor will...
Srila Prabhupada: My success is always there.
(Srila Prabhupada Room conversation, 12/2/75 Mexico)
"So there is nothing to be said new. Whatever I have to speak, I have spoken in my books. Now you try to understand it and continue your endeavour. Whether I am present or not present it doesn't matter." (Srila Prabhupada Arrival conversation, 17/5/77, Vrindavan)
Reporter: What will happen to the movement in the United States when you die?
Srila Prabhupada: I will never die
Devotees: Jaya! Haribol! (laughter)
Srila Prabhupada: I will live from my books and you will utilise.
(Srila Prabhupada Press Conference, 16/7/75, San Francisco)
Reporter: Are you training a successor?
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, my Guru Maharaja is there.
(Srila Prabhupada Press conference, 16/7/75, San Francisco)
"Only Lord Caitanya can take my place. He will take care of the Movement."
(Srila Prabhupada Room conversation - translated from Hindi, 2/11/77)
Interviewer: What happens when that inevitable time comes a successor is needed.
Ramesvara: He is asking about the future, who will guide the Movement in the future.
Srila Prabhupada: They will guide, I am training them.
Interviewer: Will there be one spiritual leader though?
Srila Prabhupada: No. I am training GBC, 18 all over the world.
(Srila Prabhupada Interview, 10/6/76, Los Angeles)
Reporter: Do you expect to name one person as your successor or have you already?
Srila Prabhupada: That I am not contemplating now. But there is no need of one person.
(Srila Prabhupada Interview, 4/6/76, Los Angeles)
Interviewer: I was wondering if he had a successor to do...Do you have a successor to take your place when you die?
Srila Prabhupada: Not yet settled up. Not yet settled up.
Interviewer: So what process? Would the Hare Krishnas...
Srila Prabhupada: We have got secretaries. They are managing.
(Srila Prabhupada Interview, 14/7/76, New York)
The fact that Srila Prabhupada did not authorise any of his disciples to act as diksa guru does not necessarily mean that none of them were pure devotees. A siksa guru can also be a liberated soul. It could just be that Krishna's plan did not require them to take up such a role. Nevertheless followers of Srila Prabhupada do have an important role to play, just as when he was physically present on the planet. That is to act as his assistants, not successor acaryas:
"The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing." (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Madhudvisa, 4/8/75)
"Sometimes a diksa guru is not present always. Therefore one can take learning, instruction, from an advanced devotee. That is called the siksa guru." (Srila Prabhupada Bg. Lecture, 4/7/74, Honolulu)
Thus the issue is not whether Srila Prabhupada created any pure devotees, but the fact that he did set up the ritvik system. Although the diksa guru at this time is not physically present, that does not mean he is not the diksa guru. In his absence we are expected to take instruction from bona fide siksa gurus, of which there may eventually be millions.
9) "As long as a guru is following strictly it does not matter how advanced he is, he will eventually become qualified and take his disciples back to Godhead."
As discussed previously, in order to act as a diksa guru one must first attain the highest platform of devotional service namely maha-bhagavata, and then be authorised to initiate by one's predecessor acarya. The above post-dated cheque guru-philosophy is an offensive speculation as the following quote illustrates:
"Although Prthu Maharaja was factually an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he rejected those praises because the qualities of the Supreme Person were not yet manifest in him. He wanted to stress that one who does not actually possess these qualities should not try to engage his followers and devotees in offering him glory for them, even though these qualities might be manifest in the future. If a man who does not factually possess the attributes of a great personality engages his followers in praising him with the expectation that such attributes will develop in the future, that sort of praise is actually an insult." (S.B. 4.15.23, purport)
Just as it would be an insult to address a blind man as "lotus eyed one", to address partially conditioned souls as being "as good as God" (GII, point 8, p.15) is similarly offensive; not only to the person being falsely flattered, but also to the pure disciplic succession of factually realised souls, on up to the Supreme Lord Himself.
To "strictly follow" is the process by which a disciple advances, not a qualification in and of itself. Devotees often confuse the process with the qualification, sometimes even preaching that they are one and the same. Just because someone is following strictly does not mean he is a maha-bhagavata, or that he has been asked to initiate by his own spiritual master; and if a disciple does start initiating before he is properly qualified and authorised , he is certainly not "strictly following" either.
Sometimes, devotees quote text 5 of The Nectar of Instruction (purport) to prove that "a neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples..." For some reason they do not notice that the rest of the sentence warns disciples of such gurus that "they cannot advance very well towards the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance." It then states:
"Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master."
Unqualified gurus are also warned:
"One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari." (The Nectar of Instruction, text 5, purport)
If a guru is only offering "insufficient guidance" he cannot, by definition, be a diksa guru, since this requires the transmission of full divya-jnana. "Insufficient" means - not enough. It is self-evident that initiating gurus who cannot help one "advance very well" are probably best avoided altogether.
10) "The ritvik system by definition means the end of the disciplic succession."
The disciplic succession, or guru parampara, is eternal; there is no question of it stopping. According to Srila Prabhupada, the Sankirtan Movement, (and hence ISKCON), will only exist for the next 9,500 years. Compared with eternity 9,500 years is nothing, a mere blip in cosmic time. This would appear to be the time period during which Srila Prabhupada shall remain the "current link" within ISKCON, unless he or Krishna countermands the July 9th order, or some external circumstance renders the order impossible to follow (such as total thermo-nuclear annihilation).
Previous acaryas have remained current for long periods of time, thousands (Srila Vyasadeva) or even millions of years (see quote below). We see no reason why the duration of Srila Prabhupada's reign as "current link", even if it extends right till the end of the Sankirtan Movement, should pose any particular problem.
"Regarding parampara system: there is nothing to wonder for big gaps [...] we find in the Bhagavad-gita that the Gita was taught to the sungod, some millions of years ago, but Krishna has mentioned only three names in this parampara system - namely, Vivasvan, Manu, and Iksvaku; and so these gaps do not hamper from understanding the parampara system. We have to pick up the prominent acaryas, and follow from him [...] We have to pick up from the authority of the acarya in whatever sampradaya we belong to." (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dayananda, 12/4/68)
The July 9th order is significant since it means that Srila Prabhupada shall be the prominent acarya, at least for members of ISKCON, for as long as the Society exists. Only the direct intervention of Srila Prabhupada or Krishna can revoke the final order (such intervention needing to be at least as clear and unequivocal as a signed directive sent to the entire Society). Thus until some counter-instruction is given, the science of devotional service shall continue to be transmitted directly by Srila Prabhupada to successive generations of his disciples. Since this is a common phenomenon in our disciplic succession, there is no cause for alarm. The succession can only be considered "ended" if this science of devotional service is lost. On such occasions, Lord Krishna Himself usually descends to re-establish the principles of religion. As long as Srila Prabhupada's books are in circulation, this "science" shall remain vigorously intact, and perfectly accessible.
11) "The ritvik system means an end to the guru-disciple relationship which has been the tradition for thousands of years."
The ritvik system involves linking potentially unlimited numbers of sincere disciples with the greatest acarya who ever blessed the earth, namely Srila Prabhupada. These disciples will have a relationship with Srila Prabhupada based on studying his books and serving him within his Society wherein there is ample opportunity for unlimited numbers of siksa guru-disciple relationships to exist. How is this ending the tradition of guru disciple relationships?
The details of how diksa guru-disciple relationships are formally bonded may be adapted by an acarya, according to time place and circumstance, but the principle remains the same:
"Srimad Viraraghava Acarya, an acarya in the disciplic succession of the Ramanuja-sampradaya, has remarked in his commentary that candalas, or conditioned souls who are born in lower than sudra families, can also be initiated according to circumstances. The formalities may be slightly changed here and there to make them Vaisnavas." (S.B. 4.8.54 purport)
Similarly this principle of accepting initiation from a bona fide spiritual master is in no way diminished or compromised by the ritvik system.
Some people point to traditional gurus living in villages in India as a model for ISKCON. Each guru has a few disciples who he personally trains. However cosy this may sound it has nothing remotely to do with the worldwide mission Lord Caitanya predicted, and Srila Prabhupada established. Within that mission Srila Prabhupada is the world acarya with thousands, and potentially millions, of disciples. Srila Prabhupada set up a world Movement through which anyone can "approach", "serve" and "inquire from" him anywhere in the world. Why should we want to introduce a village guru system into ISKCON, when it was not what Srila Prabhupada ordered or set up?
If everyone is meditating on hundreds of different gurus of differing viewpoints, opinions and levels of realisation, how can there be unity? Rather than this lucky-dip approach to spiritual life, as we have demonstrated, Srila Prabhupada gave us a tried and tested system that facilitated surrender directly to himself, who is one hundred percent guaranteed. We know he shall never let us down, and in this way ISKCON will remain united, not just in name, but in consciousness.
Some devotees feel that without a succession of living, physically present, initiating diksa gurus, the science of devotional service will be lost. However, this principle is never once stated by Srila Prabhupada, and thus cannot exist in our philosophy. As long as the ritvik system remains in force (once it is re-instituted of course), there will be a succession of living siksa gurus acting on behalf of a living, though not physically present, maha-bhagavata. As long as these siksa gurus do not change anything, invent philosophy, disobey important orders, and unauthorisedly pose themselves as diksa gurus, the science of devotional service shall remain perfectly intact. If such misbehaviour were to obstruct the imperishable science of bhakti, then Krishna would certainly intervene in some way, perhaps by sending again a resident of Goloka to establish a new bona fide Society. Let us work together to make sure this will not be necessary.
12) "Ritvik is not the regular way of conducting the disciplic succession. The proper way to do it is for the guru to teach the disciple everything he needs to know about Krishna while he is physically present. Once the guru leaves the planet it is the duty of all his strict disciples to immediately start initiating their own disciples, thus carrying on the disciplic succession. That is the "regular" way of doing things."
Leaving aside the two important pre-conditions to anyone initiating, it is clear that diksa activity within our parampara is enormously diverse. We have observed that violations of the so-called "regular" system fall into
Comments