Rasananda dasa, Though you recently published something of mine on your site and some have perhaps heard of me in relation to raths (the heavily researched manual I published years ago about them and how to build them), I and my qualification to speak on this weighty topic may not be known to many – so I will first introduce myself:
I joined the movement at the age of 26 in Montreal in the summer of 1969, after having completed eight years and getting two degrees (physiology and medicine) from McGill, in Montreal – one of the important universities of the world.
Srila Prabhupada commented about me early (letter to Jagadisa, 15 February, 1971) “This boy has understood the philosophy nicely.” Decades later one well known astrologer in India exclaimed about my analytic abilities. I learned something of human psychology and behaviour beginning in my childhood and youth, as my parents were both social work volunteers and my sister, who had degrees in psychology and social work, was a recognized and respected social worker in her state.
I served in North America for two years, mainly distributing books and BTGs, building altars and wiring temples for sound, before going to East Africa in 1971. In 1974 I came to India, where I have remained practically continuously ever since. I built practically all of the Society’s raths in India and adjacent countries. (They all continue to go out every year, some now for more than twenty-five years.)
When Srila Prabhupada, in seriously failing health returned to Vrindaban from Hrisikesh, I was serving in the Delhi (Lajpat Nagar) temple. The doctor said he was suffering from “dropsy”, an archaic medical term indicating swelling in the lower part of the body. The Vrindaban Temple President, Yasodanandana Swami, asked me what the term meant as far as the service they were rendering to Prabhupada’s vapu-body.
I explained and also offered to bring one very qualified ayurvedic doctor to see Prabhupada. Yasodanandana agreed. When I came to Vrindaban with the good doctor (who respectfully first bathed, dressed in fresh dhoti and put on tilok before going to see Srila Prabhupada) and wanted to accompany him into Prabhupada’s quarters, Prabhupada’s servant Tamal Krishna, refused me entry for no reason other than, as it was perceptible to me, that he was wanting to control all access to Srila Prabhupada by devotees.
I might have taken this as foreboding of what was to come when Prabhupada finally departed – that his instruction to Tamal to "call everybody" (that all disciples should be summoned to Vrindaban to be at his bedside in his final hours) was not revealed or acted upon by him. That is why Gurukripa’s recent testimony is so significant: Prabhupada’s final words were heard by very few.
Though I was just a short distance away (Chandigarh) when he departed, I – like the vast majority of the other devotees throughout the world – came to know of Srila Prabhupada’s passing away only after the fact. From Prabhupada’s departure until the Mayapur Gaur Purnima festival four months later, absolutely nothing was heard from any of the leaders concerning how further initiations were to be conducted… although in retrospect it should have been understood by us at least in principle, based on what Srila Prabhupada had for years taught and practiced, and what he had written in his books.
I and most devotees were devastated by Prabhupada’s departure and this silence on the part of the leaders certainly offered no relief at all to our distress. Later in 1978 I was impressed by a lecture by Bhakta Ananda Swarup Swami in Bombay, and went to the area he was managing, South India. It was there that Jayapataka Swami met me and remarked to Bhakta Ananda Swarup that I “used to be a good carpenter”, as a result of which I was soon embarked on what was to be a years-long career of designing and building raths.
This largely kept me away from direct involvement in the struggle that soon ensued between the self-styled “successor acaryas” (if you doubt the term, see some of the captions under their pictures in BTGs of the time) and those Prabhupada disciples that remained in the institution We, the God brothers of the newly anointed “acaryas” were required to queue up along with their new disciples every morning and offer obeisances and flowers at their “guru pujas”.
To hesitate or refuse meant ejection from the temple. I complied, pacifying my mind with the idea that it was all some sort of drama I had to take part in just as a child has to participate in school dramas. The prospect of being on the street without a penny (or rupee) and without friends or sufficient knowledge of the local language encouraged me to learn my role well. I met Gurukripa prabhu in Vrindaban around 1993, and he personally told me the same as what he recently said in his first account on the Sun, as posted by Bhakta das: that Srila Prabhupada’s “final order” in effect was “stop the expansion; concentrate on studying, deliberating upon and discussing the contents of my books”.
The same day, or the next, I met Giriraj Swami and asked him if he could confirm this instruction of Prabhupada. He did. Maybe those among the few who heard it directly from Srila Prabhupada at his bedside rationalized (as some may continue to do) that had these words of Prabhupada been acted upon, preaching to outsiders would have stopped and with no fresh intake to replace the movement would have soon collapsed due to the cumulative effect of predictable departures of devotees, as had happened even during Srila Prabhupada’s physical presence.
But I saw this as a false argument: Just by the continuation of the standard temple activities and Sankirtan, new people would continue to come, would be attracted to serve, and the movement would go on. By their personal ambitiousness and with that (false) claim that Srila Prabhupada’s desire was for more temples, more manpower, “more” of everything, the leaders locked themselves into a struggle for power and control over the existing manpower and facilities and into artificial, unreasonable efforts to increase them.
I say artificial because their real motive was not to guide people back to their constitutional position in relation to Krishna, but to increase their false reputation. If nothing else, what thirty-five years in India has done for me is to allow me to acquire practical realization of the meaning of the word mlecca. To be a guru one has to simply have the qualification that Srila Prabhupada indicates so many dozens or even hundreds of times in his teachings and in all the sastras: “yei krishna tattva vetta” – to know the science of Krishna… and to practice it (because to know something only in theory and teach while one’s behaviour indicates non-realization will be of little benefit either to the teacher or the audience).
There was a ‘nouvelle vague’ movie in the sixties “I, a woman”. I don’t remember if I actually saw it, but the title somehow stuck in my mind. Recently, substituting the word ‘mlecca’ for ‘woman’, it seemed to have meaning to me as a personal realization. Prabhupada so many times indicated the cultural disqualification of his disciples (not only western, but Indian too). The real acaryas were all either born in acarya families or high class brahmin families, with all the sanskaras performed… or like Thakur Haridas, were incarnations of great demigods (Lord Brahma in his case), Haridas being designated ‘Namacarya’ by Lord Caitanya.
Otherwise Srila Prabhupada clearly said that “acarya is not by appointment”. (That statement, though not perhaps in those exact words, is in a purport in Caitanya-caritamrita where he speaks about the history of the Gaudiya Math after the departure of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada… that some of his God brothers unlawfully appointed themselves “acaryas”). Although only a handful of his disciples were personally present with him in his room in Vrindaban in his last days among us, all the evidence apparent to myself and hundreds of others was that the same happened in ISKCON.
Srila Prabhupada wanted all of us to become gurus, but (as Tamal Krishna once complained to him), it would take another thirty years of personal purification work to qualify. The overemphasis of a few appointed gurus since Srila Prabhupada’s departure has been for the most part simply that – overemphasis… of artificially, unauthorizedly designated individuals. (That the eleven were named as ritviks were intended to become full diksa gurus in their own right after Srila Prabhupada’s departure is not at all clear.)
The real sastric principle of guru and disciple is that a qualified knower of the science of Krishna and a qualified candidate for the receipt of that knowledge accept each other as teacher and student. Initiation formalities can be of help in the matter of inspiring people to come forward, but if the teachers are not properly qualified, the mass of new candidates will simply drag the unqualified teachers down just as a weight around his neck will drag a swimmer down into the depths of the water. The present system of voting, vetting, approval, or what have you, of gurus and disciples is artificial and is condemned by the sastras (Srila Jiva Goswami’s Sat Sandharba – see Caitanya-caritamrta 1.35, purport).
It is also offensive that in ISKCON, the Vedic word ‘ritvik’ has been misrepresented to mean something anathematic. Being a ritvik priest was an honourable position in Vedic civilization. After Srila Prabhupada’s departure, a small few ISKCON leaders, driven by strong personal ambitiousness and dissatisfied with the prospect of being “only” officiating gurus, under the influence of the lower modes of nature positioned themselves first as ‘successor acaryas’ and later, in the face of opposition from some God brothers, as ‘appointed’ gurus, or ‘GBC authorized’ gurus. In fact, any devotional position in the Sankirtan movement of Lord Caitanya as established by Srila Prabhupada, be it pot washer or sweeper, is a most exalted state.
Srila Prabhupada (I think quoting his Guru Maharaj) used to say that you “become great by serving the great”… not by donning the robes and paraphernalia of a great person. To think, “I must sit on a high seat like Prabhupada did to be counted as an important devotee” is nothing but material misconception. The importance of a devotee is not that he is acclaimed by the masses in this world, but that he is recognized by even one real devotee among the associates of Lord Krishna-Caitanya. Valmiki, Hanuman, Kunti, Sudhama Vipra, Haridas Thakur, Jagannath das Babaji, Gaura Kishore das Babaji, Jayananada Prabhu, and so many other great devotees worshippable by all were not ‘GBC Gurus’.
Let the GBC govern as humble servants instead of by declaration. Srila Prabhupada said “Resolution, revolution, no solution”. As far as discipleship and guruship – disciple means discipline. As we all follow the particular discipline promulgated by Srila Prabhupada: following the four regulative principles, chanting sixteen rounds and distributing his literature – anyone doing these things can claim to be his disciple. (Of course, the etiquette of senior and junior, with particular regard to those who were initiated during the physical presence of Prabhupada, should be observed. Also, I don’t know how many rounds the members of NM’s group or those of other Gaudiya Math-like groups chant, but if it is sixteen rounds and if they are accepting of Prabhupada’s books, they can be considered Srila Prabhupada’s disciples.
The real way of becoming a guru – which is the mandate of everyone who claims to be a follower of Lord Caitanya, indeed of everyone in the human form of life, but especially of those born in India – is, as stated in Nectar of Devotion, by “argument (i.e. speaking with reference to the sastras) and deliberation”: One simply has to hear the authoritative message, deliberate upon it, discuss it and teach it by example and word. Every human being is meant to first become civilized, and then, having learned the science of God, to teach it to whoever he comes in contact with. It is not an exclusive position …and it is certainly not one meant for accumulating wealth, power or mastery over others.
Until we come to that standard and learn to cooperate in a civilized, rational way, the system whereby officiating gurus act as menial servants of the acarya, as they confer initiation on his behalf, will satisfy the eternal Vedic system of initiation. Otherwise the real ISKCON will continue in the same way that the sages who assembled in the forest of Dandakaranya did not constitute a church, but were connected by the sense of community based on spiritual advancement — while another, church-like organization, rife with bureaucracy, advertising itself under the signboard ‘ISKCON’, will advertise to “win souls”. Hare Krishna
Srila Prabhupada commented about me early (letter to Jagadisa, 15 February, 1971) “This boy has understood the philosophy nicely.” Decades later one well known astrologer in India exclaimed about my analytic abilities. I learned something of human psychology and behaviour beginning in my childhood and youth, as my parents were both social work volunteers and my sister, who had degrees in psychology and social work, was a recognized and respected social worker in her state.
I served in North America for two years, mainly distributing books and BTGs, building altars and wiring temples for sound, before going to East Africa in 1971. In 1974 I came to India, where I have remained practically continuously ever since. I built practically all of the Society’s raths in India and adjacent countries. (They all continue to go out every year, some now for more than twenty-five years.)
When Srila Prabhupada, in seriously failing health returned to Vrindaban from Hrisikesh, I was serving in the Delhi (Lajpat Nagar) temple. The doctor said he was suffering from “dropsy”, an archaic medical term indicating swelling in the lower part of the body. The Vrindaban Temple President, Yasodanandana Swami, asked me what the term meant as far as the service they were rendering to Prabhupada’s vapu-body.
I explained and also offered to bring one very qualified ayurvedic doctor to see Prabhupada. Yasodanandana agreed. When I came to Vrindaban with the good doctor (who respectfully first bathed, dressed in fresh dhoti and put on tilok before going to see Srila Prabhupada) and wanted to accompany him into Prabhupada’s quarters, Prabhupada’s servant Tamal Krishna, refused me entry for no reason other than, as it was perceptible to me, that he was wanting to control all access to Srila Prabhupada by devotees.
I might have taken this as foreboding of what was to come when Prabhupada finally departed – that his instruction to Tamal to "call everybody" (that all disciples should be summoned to Vrindaban to be at his bedside in his final hours) was not revealed or acted upon by him. That is why Gurukripa’s recent testimony is so significant: Prabhupada’s final words were heard by very few.
Though I was just a short distance away (Chandigarh) when he departed, I – like the vast majority of the other devotees throughout the world – came to know of Srila Prabhupada’s passing away only after the fact. From Prabhupada’s departure until the Mayapur Gaur Purnima festival four months later, absolutely nothing was heard from any of the leaders concerning how further initiations were to be conducted… although in retrospect it should have been understood by us at least in principle, based on what Srila Prabhupada had for years taught and practiced, and what he had written in his books.
I and most devotees were devastated by Prabhupada’s departure and this silence on the part of the leaders certainly offered no relief at all to our distress. Later in 1978 I was impressed by a lecture by Bhakta Ananda Swarup Swami in Bombay, and went to the area he was managing, South India. It was there that Jayapataka Swami met me and remarked to Bhakta Ananda Swarup that I “used to be a good carpenter”, as a result of which I was soon embarked on what was to be a years-long career of designing and building raths.
This largely kept me away from direct involvement in the struggle that soon ensued between the self-styled “successor acaryas” (if you doubt the term, see some of the captions under their pictures in BTGs of the time) and those Prabhupada disciples that remained in the institution We, the God brothers of the newly anointed “acaryas” were required to queue up along with their new disciples every morning and offer obeisances and flowers at their “guru pujas”.
To hesitate or refuse meant ejection from the temple. I complied, pacifying my mind with the idea that it was all some sort of drama I had to take part in just as a child has to participate in school dramas. The prospect of being on the street without a penny (or rupee) and without friends or sufficient knowledge of the local language encouraged me to learn my role well. I met Gurukripa prabhu in Vrindaban around 1993, and he personally told me the same as what he recently said in his first account on the Sun, as posted by Bhakta das: that Srila Prabhupada’s “final order” in effect was “stop the expansion; concentrate on studying, deliberating upon and discussing the contents of my books”.
The same day, or the next, I met Giriraj Swami and asked him if he could confirm this instruction of Prabhupada. He did. Maybe those among the few who heard it directly from Srila Prabhupada at his bedside rationalized (as some may continue to do) that had these words of Prabhupada been acted upon, preaching to outsiders would have stopped and with no fresh intake to replace the movement would have soon collapsed due to the cumulative effect of predictable departures of devotees, as had happened even during Srila Prabhupada’s physical presence.
But I saw this as a false argument: Just by the continuation of the standard temple activities and Sankirtan, new people would continue to come, would be attracted to serve, and the movement would go on. By their personal ambitiousness and with that (false) claim that Srila Prabhupada’s desire was for more temples, more manpower, “more” of everything, the leaders locked themselves into a struggle for power and control over the existing manpower and facilities and into artificial, unreasonable efforts to increase them.
I say artificial because their real motive was not to guide people back to their constitutional position in relation to Krishna, but to increase their false reputation. If nothing else, what thirty-five years in India has done for me is to allow me to acquire practical realization of the meaning of the word mlecca. To be a guru one has to simply have the qualification that Srila Prabhupada indicates so many dozens or even hundreds of times in his teachings and in all the sastras: “yei krishna tattva vetta” – to know the science of Krishna… and to practice it (because to know something only in theory and teach while one’s behaviour indicates non-realization will be of little benefit either to the teacher or the audience).
There was a ‘nouvelle vague’ movie in the sixties “I, a woman”. I don’t remember if I actually saw it, but the title somehow stuck in my mind. Recently, substituting the word ‘mlecca’ for ‘woman’, it seemed to have meaning to me as a personal realization. Prabhupada so many times indicated the cultural disqualification of his disciples (not only western, but Indian too). The real acaryas were all either born in acarya families or high class brahmin families, with all the sanskaras performed… or like Thakur Haridas, were incarnations of great demigods (Lord Brahma in his case), Haridas being designated ‘Namacarya’ by Lord Caitanya.
Otherwise Srila Prabhupada clearly said that “acarya is not by appointment”. (That statement, though not perhaps in those exact words, is in a purport in Caitanya-caritamrita where he speaks about the history of the Gaudiya Math after the departure of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada… that some of his God brothers unlawfully appointed themselves “acaryas”). Although only a handful of his disciples were personally present with him in his room in Vrindaban in his last days among us, all the evidence apparent to myself and hundreds of others was that the same happened in ISKCON.
Srila Prabhupada wanted all of us to become gurus, but (as Tamal Krishna once complained to him), it would take another thirty years of personal purification work to qualify. The overemphasis of a few appointed gurus since Srila Prabhupada’s departure has been for the most part simply that – overemphasis… of artificially, unauthorizedly designated individuals. (That the eleven were named as ritviks were intended to become full diksa gurus in their own right after Srila Prabhupada’s departure is not at all clear.)
The real sastric principle of guru and disciple is that a qualified knower of the science of Krishna and a qualified candidate for the receipt of that knowledge accept each other as teacher and student. Initiation formalities can be of help in the matter of inspiring people to come forward, but if the teachers are not properly qualified, the mass of new candidates will simply drag the unqualified teachers down just as a weight around his neck will drag a swimmer down into the depths of the water. The present system of voting, vetting, approval, or what have you, of gurus and disciples is artificial and is condemned by the sastras (Srila Jiva Goswami’s Sat Sandharba – see Caitanya-caritamrta 1.35, purport).
It is also offensive that in ISKCON, the Vedic word ‘ritvik’ has been misrepresented to mean something anathematic. Being a ritvik priest was an honourable position in Vedic civilization. After Srila Prabhupada’s departure, a small few ISKCON leaders, driven by strong personal ambitiousness and dissatisfied with the prospect of being “only” officiating gurus, under the influence of the lower modes of nature positioned themselves first as ‘successor acaryas’ and later, in the face of opposition from some God brothers, as ‘appointed’ gurus, or ‘GBC authorized’ gurus. In fact, any devotional position in the Sankirtan movement of Lord Caitanya as established by Srila Prabhupada, be it pot washer or sweeper, is a most exalted state.
Srila Prabhupada (I think quoting his Guru Maharaj) used to say that you “become great by serving the great”… not by donning the robes and paraphernalia of a great person. To think, “I must sit on a high seat like Prabhupada did to be counted as an important devotee” is nothing but material misconception. The importance of a devotee is not that he is acclaimed by the masses in this world, but that he is recognized by even one real devotee among the associates of Lord Krishna-Caitanya. Valmiki, Hanuman, Kunti, Sudhama Vipra, Haridas Thakur, Jagannath das Babaji, Gaura Kishore das Babaji, Jayananada Prabhu, and so many other great devotees worshippable by all were not ‘GBC Gurus’.
Let the GBC govern as humble servants instead of by declaration. Srila Prabhupada said “Resolution, revolution, no solution”. As far as discipleship and guruship – disciple means discipline. As we all follow the particular discipline promulgated by Srila Prabhupada: following the four regulative principles, chanting sixteen rounds and distributing his literature – anyone doing these things can claim to be his disciple. (Of course, the etiquette of senior and junior, with particular regard to those who were initiated during the physical presence of Prabhupada, should be observed. Also, I don’t know how many rounds the members of NM’s group or those of other Gaudiya Math-like groups chant, but if it is sixteen rounds and if they are accepting of Prabhupada’s books, they can be considered Srila Prabhupada’s disciples.
The real way of becoming a guru – which is the mandate of everyone who claims to be a follower of Lord Caitanya, indeed of everyone in the human form of life, but especially of those born in India – is, as stated in Nectar of Devotion, by “argument (i.e. speaking with reference to the sastras) and deliberation”: One simply has to hear the authoritative message, deliberate upon it, discuss it and teach it by example and word. Every human being is meant to first become civilized, and then, having learned the science of God, to teach it to whoever he comes in contact with. It is not an exclusive position …and it is certainly not one meant for accumulating wealth, power or mastery over others.
Until we come to that standard and learn to cooperate in a civilized, rational way, the system whereby officiating gurus act as menial servants of the acarya, as they confer initiation on his behalf, will satisfy the eternal Vedic system of initiation. Otherwise the real ISKCON will continue in the same way that the sages who assembled in the forest of Dandakaranya did not constitute a church, but were connected by the sense of community based on spiritual advancement — while another, church-like organization, rife with bureaucracy, advertising itself under the signboard ‘ISKCON’, will advertise to “win souls”. Hare Krishna
Thanks this article from 2009 shows yet another Prabhupada disciple who waited, and waited, and waited. In 2009 he must have been familiar with 45 ISKCON gurus having turned the western hemisphere of Prabhupada's movement into rubble and ash.
ReplyDeleteNow out of sudden Rasananda pr felt like he has to write above and present the "actual truth". Agreed, more or less he states that Prabhupada instructed ritvik. That Rocana published his article is remarkable. Normally Rocana censores such writings.
Finally Rasananda pr concludes: "...the sages who assembled in the forest of Dandakaranya did not constitute a church, but were connected by the sense of community based on spiritual advancement..."
This is of course total illusion. Present Vaishnavas never ever unite on the basis of sense of community. What we all realized is that all devotees are so much totally different types of personalities that there is no such thing as sense of community. This is absolute ridiculous.
What is reality is that starting from 1998 all devotees fight with each other like mad. Take any Vaishnava forum, VNN, istagosthi.org, India Divine, Bhaktiforums.net, facebook, etc etc. Basically all devotees don't agree with each other and mainly fight over millions of differences. It is fact.
Therefore Prabhupada's formula is to first of all install a bona fide elected GBC which is accepted by everybody because it was elected by all devotees.
Those devotees like Puranjana pr who reject election of GBC then also have to accept that there is a GBC, elected by the majority of devotees, and we are supposed to work under GBC, conduct missionary activities cooperatively.
In sum, agreed, ISKCON needs to become clean what is a bona fide spiritual master before it is too late. Meanwhile young devotees figure this whole reformation takes them too long they are gone, fishing in foreign ponds.
Unless there is bona fide management, bona fide GBC this whole reform movement is doomed.
"As we all follow the particular discipline promulgated by Srila Prabhupada: following the four regulative principles, chanting sixteen rounds and distributing his literature – anyone doing these things can claim to be his disciple" Wyatt - Did Srila Prabhupada simply accepted anyone who followed the four regulative principles, chanting sixteen rounds and distributing his literature automatically as his initiated disciple during his presence or was there a procedure that he set in place before accepting anyone as his initiated disciple?
ReplyDelete[PADA: Yes, we recommended people, and he accepted. For example I was co-president of Amsterdam temple and we sent Srila Prabhupada letters recommending people to be his disciples, and he accepted, And this was being done all over the world. That is the process, the senior devotees recommended, and he accepted.]
"I don’t know how many rounds the members of NM’s group or those of other Gaudiya Math-like groups chant, but if it is sixteen rounds and if they are accepting of Prabhupada’s books, they can be considered Srila Prabhupada’s disciples." Wyatt - Did Srila Prabhupada made this statement or is it the writer's own speculated statement?
[PADA: Right, the followers of NM are not to be considered as Srila Prabhupada's disciples, this is speculation.]
And Yes, in the article above, the writer is subtly trying to say that Srila Prabhupada
[PADA: You got cut off here. ys pd]
"Of course, the etiquette of senior and junior, with particular regard to those who were initiated during the physical presence of Prabhupada, should be observed." So says one who was particularly initiated during the physical presence of Prabhupada. But wait! Shouldn't he consider all the devotees that joined the movement before he did as senior then, while he is constantly reminded he is a junior to them? Or is this also a material consideration? Certainly Jayananda Prabhu was a senior devotee, whether he came after one of his godbrothers or not. Why then must the grand disciples of Srila Prabhupada be constantly reminded of their junior status when the devotees reminding them of how senior they are might be senior in one thing only, the date they joined the movement. They might not have followed the principles for very long at all during all their time in the movement, they might not have chanted their rounds at all, what to speak of attentively, but they will certainly remind you o
ReplyDelete[PADA: You got cut off here. Correct, senior means senior by following and understanding. Many of our newer people have a better idea of guru tattva than many of the original 1970s God brothers. That means these newer people are senior by rank of understanding the siddhanta, agreed. Most of the people now promoting Prabhupadanuga-ness are newer people, they have a better grasp of Vedic understanding than many of the alleged seniors, agreed. ys pd]
[PADA: Yes, we recommended people, and he accepted.]
ReplyDelete*** Maybe you do not know of any rejected disciples.
[PADA: Yes we do, the bogus 11 were formally initiated and they all deviated. Initiation means "the beginning." Just because a person "begins" in kindergarten does not mean he will reach PHD school. So yes, that is our whole point, many people got formal initiation and they deviated afterwards, we never said that does not happen, rather we were among the first to point out that does happen.]
*** And when I joined the movement we were told Prabhupada never rejected any disciples, but LATER I heard he did.
[PADA: Absolutely, all these 1978 bogus gurus and their lackeys, as well as many people who later fell down into illicit sex, drugs and who knows what else, all of them were initiated formally. That does not mean they are guaranteed to finish in the professor's school. That is what we said all along. And you are agreeing with what we said all along. The same thing happens every day in Christianity, people are baptised, they cry for God's mercy, they claim to accept Jesus, then they go and rob banks and kill people. Yes, it takes more than the initial stage, there has to be further progress. Agreed. We never said anything to the contrary, you are arguing with your own shadow.]
*** He kicked out at least three disciples who committed great aparadhas. Just because Prabhupada accepted all the devotees you recommended for initiation doesn't mean he said he would automatically accept whoever his tp's recommended after his demise, before he left the planet, or in the same way as Lord Jesus Christ. This is all bogus ritvik speculation.
[PADA: No, you are speculating. You are saying our people, who follow better than the formal initiates, are not being accepted by Krishna. Those who are following the actual process of Krishna's instructions, are not being accepted by Krishna? How do you know that? This is not only speculation, it makes no sense? Krishna says that the people who follow His process are with Him, and you say the people who follow His process are not with Him. And you know all about this because --??? You have thus far not explained why many of our people, despite not having formal intiations, are following Krishna better than many of the original 1970s God brothers, many of whom subsequently fell? You seem to have no idea that Krishna is beyond formal ceremonials, He accepts people who are sincere, its does not depend on ceremonials. The Vedic ceremonies are a vow to follow, whether its to follow the guru, or to be faithful to the spouse in marriage and so on, or many other ceremonies, these ceremonies are not a guarantee of anything, they are mean to help people solidify their determination, but they are not the end process itself, much more is required. ys pd