From His Divine Grace
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
The Right Of Discipline
I was born in the darkest ignorance, and my spiritual master opened my eyes with the torch of knowledge. I offer my respectful obeisance’s unto him. When will Srila Rupa Gosvami Prabhupada, who has established within this material world the mission to fulfill the desire of Lord Caitanya, give me shelter under his lotus feet?
From the Introduction to the 1972 edition of The Bhagavad Gita As It Is by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
The word discipline comes from disciple, or disciple comes from discipline. So unless there is discipline, there is no question of disciple.
The definition of truth by Srila Prabhupada.
“Satyam, truthfulness, means that the facts should be presented as they are for the benefit of others. Facts should not be misrepresented. According to social conventions, it is said that one can speak the truth only when it is palatable to others. But that is not truthfulness. The truth should be spoken in a straight and forward way, so that others will understand actually what the facts are. 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 1972 edition Chapter ten texts 4-5 from purport
Welcome To The Hare Krishna Movement
Hare Krsna is Non-sectarian
His Divine Grace A. C.
Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
..."ISKCON (the International Society of Krishna Consciousness) is a non-lucrative organization whose purpose is to promote the well-being of human society by drawing its attention to God. We are a non-sectarian society, and our members include people from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, as well as Hindu faiths. The aim of ISKCON is not to found a new religious sect but to invoke the living entity’s dormant love of God, and thus provide the human society of all faiths with a common platform of clear theistic knowledge and practice. Members of ISKCON may retain their own respective religious faiths, as ISKCON is meant to establish a clear, practical common formulation of the common ideal of all theists, and to defeat the unnecessary dogmatic wrangling that now divides and invalidates the theistic camp. This common theism is to develop love of God.—
Letter to Roland Michener, Governor-General of Canada. 24
August 1968.
The whole world has the right to take Srila Prabhupada as their Diksa guru, if they follow his teachings, just like Srila Prabhupada said anyone can also be a follower of Jesus if he follows his teachings. It’s all based upon acceptance.
Everyone has the Right of Discipline in direct relation to His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. If you have decided to become a disciple of Srila Prabhupada you must follow the four regulative principles strictly and chant 16 rounds of the maha mantra every day on your beads. Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare.
A list of representatives will be presented at the end of this paper. You may contact them personally via their web sites or by regular mail.
The purpose of this paper is to present the historical events regarding the original final directive given by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada regarding how first and second initiations were to take place after his physical departure. We present supporting understandings from authoritative sources and from the works of two of Srila Prabhupadas disciples to reinforce the understanding that taking formal Diksa from Srila Prabhupada is authorized by him and is directed by him. Those formal initiations as directed by Srila Prabhupada are still going on today.
My comments will be indicated with the letters HGD. Hasti Gopala Dasa in relation to any part of this paper. In the May 28th 1977 conversation below the Arial Black Bold are additions of mine.
First we present here the May 28th 1977 Conversation that took place in Vrndavana India between Srila Prabhupada and some of his GBC representatives.
Locanananda dasa: That day, there were nineteen full GBC members present in Vrndavana. Also in attendance at the meetings were one acting GBC man and two non-GBC members. To ask the most delicate questions, a six-man committee consisting of those GBC members who were on the original GBC formed in 1970 went before Srila Prabhupada.
The May 28th 1977 conversation:
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.
It is more than obvious that Satsvarupa is asking as are the GBC how first and second initiations will take place after Srila Prabhupada will no longer be physically present.
HGD
Prabhupada: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acaryas.
Tamal Krsna: Is that called Ritvik-acarya?
Prabhupada: Ritvik, yes.
Here we see for the first time the word “ritvik”. Tamal Krsna says the word “ritvik”.It is obvious that he understands what the word means in the context of the conversation. Srila Prabhupada agrees with his understanding.
HGD
Satsvarupa: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the…
The initiation is being given by Srila Prabhupada, directly as the ritvik acarya quoted above has been confirmed by Srila Prabhupada who will be the officiator.
Prabhupada: He’s guru. He’s guru.
(Srila Prabhupada is guru )
Satsvarupa: But he does it on your behalf.
Prabhupada. Yes, that is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf on my order…amara ajanaya guru hana Cc Madya 7.128 Be actually guru, but by my order. No order was ever given.
Satsvarupa: So they may also be considered your disciples?
Srila Prabhupada’s disciples.
Prabhupada: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?
Confirmed. Prabhupada’s disciples.
Srila Prabhupada is asking Satsvarupa why he is asking if they are Srila Prabhupada’s disciples. It is obvious they are from the understanding of the conversation.
HGD
Tamal Krsna: No, he’s asking that these ritvik-acaryas, they’re officiating, giving diksa. Their…The people who they give diksa to, whose disciples are they?
Prabhupada: They are his disciple.
MEANS THEY ARE THE DISCIPLES OF THE PERSON THEY ARE OFFICATING FOR, OTHERWISE WHY ARE THEY CALLED TO OFFICIATE..FOR WHO? SRILA PRABHUPADA.
Tamala Krsna: They are his disciples.
THE ONE BEING OFFICATED FOR
Prabhupada: Who is initiating he is grand disciple.
SRILA PRABHUPADAS IS INITIATING THEREFORE THE NEXT GENERATION ARE HIS DISCIPLES, GRAND DISCIPLES.
Satsvarupa: Yes.
Tamala Krsna: That’s clear. Clear.
So Tamal Krsna agrees to the direct understanding of the directive given to him by Srila Prabhupada. He and the GBC as we will see fully agree to and accept Srila Prabhupadas post samadhic directive. The word “ritvik” is basically a sanskrit word which means rtu or season, it is basically a vedic priest to assist the performer of vedic sacrifice or ceremony. Srila Prabhupada used it with the meaning of representative of the acarya. HGD
Now we will present the July 9th 1977 letter approved of by the whole of the GBC and Srila Prabhupada himself. You will read that ALL of the GBC members were in Vrndavna when Srila Prabhupada indicated that he would appoint some of his senior disciples to ACT AS ‘RITVIK-REPRESENTATIVES..
HGD
Vrindaban
9 July, 1977
To All G.B.C., and Temple Presidents
Dear Maharajas and Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisance’s at your feet. Recently when all of the GBC members were with His Divine Grace in Vrndavana, Srila Prabhupada indicated that soon He would appoint some of His senior disciples to act as “ritvik–representative of the acarya, for the purpose of performing initiations, both first initiation and second initiation. His Divine Grace has so far given a list of eleven disciples who will act in that capacity:
His Holiness Kirtanananda Swami
His Holiness Satsvarupa dasa Gosvami
His Holiness Jayapataka Swami
His Holiness Tamala Krsna Gosvami
His Holiness Hrdayananda Gosvami
His Holiness Bhavananda Gosvami
His Holiness Hamsaduta Swami
His Holiness Ramesvara Swami
His Holiness Harikesa Swami
His Grace Bhagavan dasa Adhikari
His Grace Jayatirtha dasa Adhikari
In the past Temple Presidents have written to Srila Prabhupada recommending a particular devotee’s initiation. Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these representatives, Temple Presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and second initiation to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their temple.
The meaning of “henceforward”.
“From this time forward; henceforth” HGD
After considering the recommendation, these representatives may accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada by giving a spiritual name, or in the case of second initiation, by chanting on the Gayatri thread, just as Srila Prabhupada has done.
The newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the above eleven senior devotees acting as His representative. After the Temple President receives a letter from these representatives giving the spiritual name or the thread, he can perform the fire yajna in the temple as was being done before.
So we see above that the system of “ritvik” as presented in Srila Prabhupadas July 9th 1977 letter ( directly connected to the May 28th 1977 conversation ) and approved by the GBC went into affect officially as of July 9th 1977. That is understood by the sentence: “After the Temple President receives a letter from these representatives giving the spiritual name or the thread, he can perform the fire yajna in the temple as was being done before.” Therefore the previous initiations were done as ritvik initiations. Srila Prabhupada deputed the temple presidents as the representative of the acharya for the time of the initiations. HGD
The name of a newly initiated disciple should be sent by the representative who has accepted him or her to Srila Prabhupada, to be included in His Divine Grace’s “Initiated Disciples” book.
Hoping this finds you all well.
Your servant,
Tamala Krsna Gosvami
Approved: A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
[Srila Prabhupada's signature appears on the original]
So there is a direct connection of the July 9th 1977 letter to the May 28th 1977 conversation between Srila Prabhupada and the GBC. The GBC want to know how initiations will take place in the future…”particularly at that time when you are no longer with us”
Srila Prabhupada answers…”Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acaryas.”
Then the logical question arises that since the July 9th 1977 directive was not followed as Srila Prabhupada wished by the 11 officiating acharyas….Were they the only one’s allowed to officiate? If so, then has the directive been null and void since Srila Prabhupada’s physical departure? No it is not. This is confirmed below.
Excerpt from the Topanaga Canyon Conversations Dec. 3 1980
Tamala Krsna:
Before I got ready to type the letter, I asked him 2) “Srila Prabhupada, is this all or do you want to add more? He said, “As is necessary, others may be added”
What is referred to as the Topanga Canyon Conversation took place on December 3, 1980. It has been recorded and was transcribed many years ago. Those in the conversation section that we are referring to are Dhira-Krsna Swami, Tamal Krsna Swami and Hanasadutta Swami. It is very relevant at this point as it covers the above question and the point that one must be qualified to be an initiating guru.
Qualification comes from the information in Srila Prabhupada’s original books. Not by unauthorized and arbitrary appointment.
Arial Black used for emphasis below.
Topanaga canyon Conversation Dec. 3, 1980
Tamala Krsna Swami: Actually, Prabhupada never appointed any gurus. He didn’t appoint eleven gurus. He appointed eleven ritviks. He never appointed them gurus. Myself and the GBC have done the greatest disservice to this movement the last three years because we interpreted the appointment of the ritviks as the appointment of gurus.
Tamala Krsna Swami: What actually happened, I’ll explain. I explained it, but the interpretation is wrong. What actually happened was that Prabhupada mentioned that he might be appointing some ritviks, so the GBC met for various reasons and they went to Srila Prabhupada-five or six of us. We asked him, “Srila Prabhupada, after your departure, if we accept disciples, whose disciples will they be, your disciples or mine?”
Later on there was piled-up list for people to get initiated, and it was jammed-up.
I said, “Srila Prabhupada, you once mentioned about ritviks. I don’t know what to do. We don’t want to approach you, but there’s hundreds of devotees named, and I’m just holding all these letters. I don’t know what you want to do.”
So Prabhupada said, “All right. I will appoint so many…,” and he started to name them and he did name them. He made it very clear that they’re his disciples. At that point it was very clear in my mind that they were his disciples. Later on I asked him two questions: 1) What about Brahmananda Swami? I asked him this because I happened to have an affection for Brahmananda Swami. I don’t know, I asked him because somehow he’s…I asked him, whatever.
So Prabhupada said, “No, not unless he is qualified.” Before I got ready to type the letter, I asked him 2) “Srila Prabhupada, is this all or do you want to add more? He said, “As is necessary, others may be added” Now I understand that what he did was very clear. He was physically incapable of performing the function of initiation physically; therefore he appointed officiating priests to initiate on his behalf.
He appointed eleven and he said very clearly, “Whoever is nearest, he can initiate.” This is a very important point, because when it comes to initiating it isn’t whoever is nearest, and he was very clear. He named them. They were spread out all over the world, and he said “Who ever you’re nearest, you just approach that person, and they’ll check you out. Then on my behalf, they’ll initiate” It’s not a question that you repose your faith in that person – nothing.
That’s a function for the guru. “In order for me to manage this movement,” Prabhupada said, “I have to form a GBC, and I will appoint the following people. In order to continue the process of people joining our movement and getting initiated, I have to appoint some priests to help because just like I cannot physically manage everyone myself.” And that’s all that it was, and it was never any more than that. If it had been more than that, you can bet your bottom dollar that Prabhupada would have spoken for days and hours and weeks on end about how to set up this thing with the gurus, but he didn’t because he already had said it a million times. He said, “My guru maharaja did not appoint anyone. It is by qualification”
“According to sastra, the duty of the guru is to take the disciple back home, back to Godhead. If he is unable to do so and instead hinders the disciple in going back to Godhead, he should not be a guru.”
(Srimad Bhagavatam 8.20.1, purport)
Obvious and simply understood is the logical progression of events and the answers themselves. The GBC ask how initiations will go on after Srila Prabhupada is no longer physically present and he says he will recommend some to act as officiating acharyas. Then on July 9th 1977 he fulfills his promise.
“One should not multiply entities unnecessarily, or make further assumptions than are needed, and in general that one should pursue the simplest hypothesis. The principle states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed. This principle is often called the principle of parsimony. Also called Ockham’s Razor”
Below is part of an article by Mahesh Raja Prabhu. We thank him for his kind contribution to this paper. HGD
Ritvik - **Representative**
BY: MAHESH RAJA
Oct 5, 2009 UK (SUN) — Ritvik - **representative** of the acarya, for the purpose of performing initiations, both first initiation and second initiation.
This is for the benefit of those who have ears to hear.
This July 9th 1977 letter was never revoked by Srila Prabhupada. This being the case, all the newly initiated devotees are disciples of his Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada for as long as ISKCON exists.
Exactly! There was never any official document from the GBC or from Srila Prabhupada revoking or amending the July 9th 1977 directive in any manner. Legally and morally the original July 9th 1977 directive still stands. HGD
Nor was there any change in the letters content or any objection from the GBC for the intervening 42 days until July 9th 1977. After some time the GBC decided to impose Resolution 304. Resolution 304 does not have any legal authority and is not backed up by Guru, Sadhu or Sastra. It is a denial of Srila Prabhupada as founder of ISKCON and it denies his final directive. HGD
History:
July 9th, 1977 - "Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these representatives, Temple Presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and second initiation to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their temple. After considering the recommendation, these representatives may accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada by giving a spiritual name, or in the case of second initiation, by chanting on the Gayatri thread, just as Srila Prabhupada has done. The newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the above eleven senior devotees acting as His representative."
(Srila Prabhupada’s final signed Directive describing the initiation system to be followed in ISKCON, sent to all GBC's and Temple Presidents)
July 11th, 1977 - "A letter has been sent to all the Temple Presidents and GBC which you should be receiving soon describing the process for initiation to be followed in the future. Srila Prabhupada has appointed thus far eleven representatives who will initiate new devotees on His behalf."
(Letter from Tamala Krishna Goswami to Kirtananda describing the above system) July 19th, 1977 - "Make your own field and continue to be Ritvik and act on my charge." (Room Conversation, above dictated by Srila Prabhupada to his secretary Tamala Krishna Goswami)
July 31st, 1977 - "Make your own field and continue to become ritvik and act on my behalf."
(Above dictation sent out to Hamsaduta Swami by Tamala Krishna Goswami in a letter) Nov 1977 - "The system of management will continue as it is now and there is no need of any change."
(Srila Prabhupada's Last Will and Testament, which now comes into force for the lifetime of ISKCON)
Nov 1977 - "In the event of death or failure to act for any reason of any of the said directors, a successor director or directors may be appointed by the remaining directors, provided the new director is my initiated disciple ..."
(Srila Prabhupada's Last Will and Testament, which now comes into force for the lifetime of ISKCON. The above system of selecting directors can only work if Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples exist throughout ISKCON's lifetime.)
Mahesh Raja Dasa
ISKCON has been and is now most certainly being managed by interlopers. “One that interferes with the affairs of others, often for selfish reasons; a meddler”. Sometime after Srila Prabhupada’s leaving his body the GBC decided that it was time to bring forth their infamous Resolution 304. It is a complete denial of their spiritual master as well as a denial for anyone in the future of the world to ever take the shelter as disciples of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Of course this is not possible but the GBC ISKCON mind set is like that.
GBC Resolution 304.
Long Island Trustees
[Action Order]
1. Whereas the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., a New York religious corporation, was established by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami (Srila Prabhupada) in New York City in 1966 as the first corporation of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON); and
2. Whereas the doctrine that Srila Prabhupada desired to continue to act as diksa-guru after his departure from this world, and did not desire any of his disciples to give diksa, or initiation, in succession after him is an errant philosophical deviation (known as ritvikism); and
3. Whereas ritvikism directly contradicts the principle of parampara itself (of successive diksa and siksa-gurus), which sustains the pure teachings and practices of Krsna consciousness; and 4. Whereas this principle has been established by Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself, and is upheld by all of the bona fide acaryas (teachers) in the Gaudiya Vaishnava religious tradition, as well as all followers of Vedic culture; and...
The above GBC Resolution 304 is a clear understanding by the GBC that the July 9th letter which is directly connected to their request for post samadhic instructions from Srila Prabhupada on May 28th 1977 is post samadhic. If the so called “errant philosophical deviation“ ( Resolution 304 ) from Srila Prabhupada regarding post samadhic initiations was such then why did the GBC not discuss this immeadiately with the members of ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada? HGD
The GBC Resolution 304 declares Srila Prabhupada’s own authorization of the July 9th 1977 letter as being an “errant philosophical deviation”. Section 2.
So the GBC directly defame Srila Prabhupada without directly naming him in their Resolution 304 by referring to the July 9th 1977 directive which they agreed to and actually followed.
Resolution 304 calls Srila Prabhupada’s directive an “errant philosophical deviation” The order being called as such means that the author is being called an “errant philosophical deviant”
See Errant: Deviation.
That declaration itself as well as its’ presence as a so called legal document has no basis in guru, sadhu, sastra.
In fact the GBC Resolution 304 reveals a prestuplyeniye, a transgression, a stepping---over deliberately, with open yeyes, with forthought, planning and conscious will---of lines that should never have been crossed!
Errant: straying from the right course or from accepted standards;
Deviation: The act of deviating; a wandering from the way; variation from the common way, from an established rule, etc.; departure, as from the right course or the path of duty.
So we see the GBC directly accusing Srila Prabhupada of disobeying Krsna and all previous bona fide acharyas as well as breaking Vaisnava tradition and going against Vedic culture itself. That also is directed at his disciples and future disciples who would, did and do accept his final directive. If the GBC disagreed about this truth then why did they not let Srila Prabhupada in on their concerns as soon as they received the instructions? Because they understood the instructions in toto, disagreed in secret and waited until he left his body to act independently on their own.
Devotee Mark McLaughlin writes.
For those who still claim Srila Prabhupada could not possibly have authorized his ritvik initiation system to continue after his departure, on account that it is not a sastricly bona-fide activity, they need to read the following statement by Srila Prabhupada's acarya. Devotee Mark Mclaughlin writes.
Excerpt from Bhakti Vikasa's 3 volume "Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Vaibhava"
"He said, 'Bhaktivinoda Thakura is Kamala Manjari, a personal associate of Radharani. He ordered me to establish daiva-varnasrama. I must obey his order. The acarya is not under the sastra. The acarya can make sastra. Bhaktivinoda Thakura, the acarya, has inspired me in various ways.
By his mercy and that of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja and the previous acaryas we are going on, not caring for the precise technicalities of smartas.”
Therefore whatever additions HDG A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada made to the formalities within Lord Caitanya's Sankirtana movement ARE SASTRA.
Below I will reprint the full context of the above quote from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta.
"In 1932 Visvambharananda dasa Babaji, on behalf of many babajis and caste Goswamis in Vrndavana, published a book opposing Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and his Mission, citing extensively from sastra to support his arguments. He challenged that the line of parampara traced from Jagannatha dasa Babaji through Bhaktivinoda Thakura to Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji and then to Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was unauthorized.
Visvambharananda claimed that although Sarasvati Thakura was supposed to be the disciple of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, he was disqualified in several ways. First, Sarasvati Thakura did not accept as bona fide the recognized lineage of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, whose guru was in the Advaita-parivara.
Furthermore, since Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji had never used a japa-mala, and had not given one to Sarasvati Thakura at the time of initiation but
had simply placed some Navadvipa dust into his hand, Visvambharananda
argued that such an initiation was not bona fide.
The implication was that Sarasvati Thakura had not actually received
pancaratrika-diksa from Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, so how could he confer
it upon others? Nor had Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji worn a brahmana thread, so on what authority did Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati wear one?
"Moreover, Visvambharananda argued, Sarasvati Thakura claimed to be a follower of Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who was initiated by the caste Goswami Bipina Bihari. Why then did Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati not accept guru-parampara by seminal descent? Bhaktivinoda Thakura had given him a Nrsimha mantra for worshiping the Deity, yet Sarasvati Thakura was giving a Radha-Krsna mantra for this purpose.
Wherefrom did he derive this mantra, and on whose authority did he
distribute it? Visvambharananda further objected that since Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was a sannyasi without a sannyasa guru, how could he give sannyasa to others?
"Sarasvati Thakura responded by explaining the concept of bhagavata-parampara, or siksa-parampara. He maintained that the essence of parampara lies in the transmission of transcendental knowledge, not merely in a list of
contiguous names. The life of the parampara is maintained by the
maha-bhagavatas, who embody the essence of scriptural knowledge.
Therefore, to trace the parampara through such maha-bhagavatas truly
represents parampara.
"He said, 'Bhaktivinoda Thakura is Kamala Manjari, a personal associate of
Radharani. He ordered me to establish daiva-varnasrama. I must obey his
order. The acarya is not under the sastra. The acarya can make sastra.
Bhaktivinoda Thakura, the acarya, has inspired me in various ways. By
his mercy and that of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja and the previous
acaryas we are going on, not caring for the precise technicalities of
smartas.
"'Although this concept of bhagavata-parampara appears to be new, it is based on the essential understanding of the scriptures. Something new given by an acarya but based on sastra is called vaisistya (a special
characteristic). Acaryas Ramanuja and Madhva both apparently introduced
something new, but because their teachings were based on sastra they
came to be accepted. Phalena pariciyate: "
An action should be understood by its result." My commitment to devotional service and my preaching activities speak for themselves. Owl-like persons cannot see this, but those who are honest will accept it.'" End.
Collectively at the time and until now the GBC have rejected Srila Prabhupada as having anymore authority in their own lives and that of ISKCON. By their own admission the GBC did not recognize the July 9th letter as being valid at anytime AFTER it’s signing on July 9th 1977.
For 4 months and 8 days at least they did not divulge their sentiments to anyone in ISKCON accept themselves. That is more than obvious. Therefore they are guilty of complicity.
The GBC were speaking directly to the obvious understanding of the July 9th 1977 directive as directed by Srila Prabhupada their spiritual master at the time. Which means again that they understood exactly what Srila Prabhupada directed.
“The agreement cannot be broken but with mutual consent”
No mutual consent was ever discussed with all of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples regarding the GBC’s decision to ignore posthumously Srila Prabhupada’s July 9th 1977 letter which came about directly as a request from the GBC itself on May 28th 1977.
Mutual consent is achieved by all those who have been included in the July 9th 1977 letter within ISKCON at the time. Removing consent from those mentioned as in the future and present context re the July 9th 1977 letter declares the GBC’s Resolution 304 as invalid.
Resolution means: a formal expression by a meeting; agreed to by a vote.
That the GBC took it upon themselves to vote against Srila Prabhupada’s legal directive signed by him is a criminal act as long as the ISKCON membership were not included or informed or allowed representation of this pending decision. Formal expression in this case means to include all members.
The GBC never had the right to declare the July 9th 1977 “an errant philosophical deviation” . They still do not. There are no legal precedents from Srila Prabhupada the founder of ISKCON giving the GBC the right to independently abrogate instructions approved by and signed by him pre or post samadhi.
The original July 9th 1977 letter composed by Tamala Krsna Swami and approved by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and signed by him is a bona fide legal document. The letter itself is directed to the world as a whole and not only to the disciples in his society. It involves the direct contact of everyone on the planet “henceforward” in relation to the person who signed it and directed its’ instructions, namely His Divine Grace A. C. Baktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
The GBC and ISKCON have been in legal contempt of the order of the founding acharya since Nov. 14th 1977
The GBC in Resolution 304 use the term “ritvikism”. That is their invention. No new "ism" was or has ever been established by the founding acharya. That suffix was never used by Srila Prabhupada to describe the Hare Krishna Movement or the Krishna Consciousness Movement or ISKCON. It was invented by the GBC as an attempt to separate Srila Prabhupadas present and future disciples as an opposing sect. We do not oppose as much as we expose. Those not following the July 9th 1977 directive are the opposing sect according to ISKCON. A suffix can be labeled on them....ISKCONism.
However, the GBC did follow the letters instructions by allowing initiations to take place as instructed by the July 9th 1977 letter thereby agreeing to its content instructions while Srila Prabhupada was physically present until November 14th 1977. More indication of simple duplicity.
Duplicity: Deliberate deceptiveness in behavior or speech.
An instance of deliberate deceptiveness; double-dealing.
The quality or state of being twofold or double.
“The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively, not by the false appearance things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice.”
Arthur Schopenhauer
Comments