Keeping the Disciplic Succession Alive By Kamra Devi Dasi (ACBSP)

https://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2019/10/reply-to-keeping-disciplic-succession.html

Keeping the Disciplic Succession Alive

By Kamra Devi Dasi (ACBSP)

Ritvik or the Organization …. Is that the only choice?

We at Purely Prabhupada Inc have been asked if we are ritvik. We replied, "We are not of the ritvik camp. We do not, however, agree with the system of initiations as it currently exists within the organization of ISKCON. We recognize that the true guru / disciple relationship is deep, personal, and cannot be officialized, overseen or overridden by any managerial board." 

And still, there were questions, like, if you are not ritvik, then who is the guru of your group, or how can you be presenting only Srila Prabhupada if you are not ritvik, or can Srila Prabhupada accept initiations since he is no longer with us. It seemed to warrant more explanation. There is another choice besides ritvik or the way that the organization has things set up. It is so apparent that we have become blind to it.

Srila Prabhupada’s position is unique, not only that he is to be recognized as Founder-Acarya of the organization that he founded in order to spread Krsna Consciousness, but that he had to be vartma-pradarshika guru, diksa guru, and siksha guru. In other words, he had to fill every role, and he was the perfect personality to do so. 

He had an unprecedented position in the preaching lineage, taking Krsna Consciousness to foreign lands that were bereft of spiritual culture. He was on his own to work wonders in the hearts of the misguided souls of the western world. This unique position, this role, cannot be imitated, but it was, to great detriment.

His position was seen by neophyte, and even envious, followers, as just that, a position of power, rather than the expression of profound humility and surrender of the true acarya. The spiritual master-disciple relationship is one of deep friendship, a position of mutual reciprocation of service within the proper expression of etiquette and respect, not an official position of power. The spiritual master opens the door to the spiritual realm and serves his disciples by endeavoring to keep them on that path, and the disciple makes progress along that path by serving the instructions of the guru. 

To bring a spiritual aspirant to the perfectional stage is a collective endeavor, including active participation on the part of the disciple. It takes spiritually based community, and Srila Prabhupada had to be a one man show, by dint of circumstances.

Not every spiritual master is an acarya, but every bona fide spiritual master will point his or her disciples to the feet and teachings of the predecessor acaryas. In our case, the books of Srila Prabhupada are to be the guiding light for the next 10,000 years, providing that they do not become adulterated. He is the shining light, and lives forever in his instructions.

We have to be very astute in studying and analyzing what is real and what is not, in that so much that has been presented in the past regarding the spiritual master, the disciple, and the relationship, has not been properly understood. In fact, it has been grossly misunderstood. The truth is all there in Srila Prabhupada’s books, but it also must be realized. 

The Vaisnava culture presents the picture. It is there in Krsna Book, it is there in Caitanya Caritamrta, it is there in all the literatures, the culture, the etiquette, what is the role of the spiritual master, the disciple, the relationship. This can be studied and applied, and it will not be in the mood of deviating from Srila Prabhupada, because it is his teachings. Srila Prabhupada cannot be separated from his teachings, and thus, by following his teachings, we are connected to the greatest teacher.

We see practically in the literatures that the role of spiritual master was community oriented, that it was localized, that it was personal, that it was reciprocal. Historically, a person did not accept more disciples than he or she could properly sustain, considering the aggregate of factors. Srila Prabhupada wanted to see localized communities. He made big, big projects for big, big egos to engage those type persons, according to time and circumstance, but he stressed localized, sustainable, cooperative communities. He wanted varnasrama, and that included qualified brahmin teachers and spiritual guides. 

The brahmins were to initiate when that was called for, and the brahmins do not answer to a managerial class. They are qualified to have independence in their spiritual insights and decisions. In the early 1980s, I was looking at the “guru” system as it was introduced after the departure of His Divine Grace. I thought that my insights might be valued, but the powers that were thought them to be enough of a disturbance that I was physically brutalized. 

At the time, I recognized that the system was incorrect, that it was a system of imitation rather than of empowering and enthusing the devotees, and I suggested that if anything, the GBC was to simply be a record-keeper, filling a clerk role, of who initiated who, according to proper relationship on a small and personal scale, rather than a determiner of who was authorized to hold the position of diksa guru. 

No one at the time seemed to understand that it was not a matter of position, but of relationship, and it seemed that the goal of many of the organizational leaders was power, position, and control, rather than of authentic relationships and mentorship. It has become so ingrained as policy over time that the position of diksa guru is simply a formal role at the jurisdiction of the GBC, that it does not appear to be correctable any longer within the institution. 

This is at the crux of the problem.

After the passing of Srila Prabhupada, many of his disciples were purposely alienated and disempowered by the organizational management. Instead of having their years of service and advancement recognized and honored, they were minimized. There was some confusion or misdirection around the procedures for initiating newcomers, but the gist of it was that those who were already trained, a most important resource in the propagation of the mission, who could lead people in their quest for Krsna Consciousness due to their own experience, association with Srila Prabhupada, and spiritual advancement, were minimized and driven away. 

They were disempowered, and as would be expected in that situation, became disenchanted and uninspired. There is no need for a senior disciple of Srila Prabhupada to have to be scrutinized and approved to take disciples by a managerial board of less experienced and less advanced devotees who are often junior to them.

In a system where the role of diksa develops naturally, there is first the relationship, and it flourishes and develops on its own accord to the point of mutual examination and possible spiritual initiation. It is not that the position is there first, and the disciples follow, but rather, the relationship is there and it grows to the point of spiritual initiation. This relationship cannot be orchestrated by any outside body. 

[PADA: And if people want to accept Srila Prabhupada as their guru, no institution can check that either. In fact a number of people inside the institution write PADA and ask how they can become direct disciples of Srila Prabhupada because they do NOT accept the GBC gurus, and they only want Srila Prabhupada as their guru. And we encourage them to take shelter of Srila Prabhupada, and that is where their hearts are, thus it cannot be checked artificially.]

It develops on its own accord, and the responsibility for it is a mature evaluation on the part of both the potential guru and the disciple. It is a decision made by two educated and knowledgeable participants, each taking full responsibility for the decision and the outcome. Since this is not the current system within the organization, it may have to be developed outside of it. 

[PADA: Correct, many people want Srila Prabhupada as their guru because its developing on its own accord.]

However, it is one thing to give spiritual lectures to thousands of people and quite another to take responsibility for individual mentoring. Both are important, but the real making of devotees is in the personal interaction and guidance, and for that, the mentor must be prepared to give of him or herself quite extensively, over and over. It is not a lightweight thing. It has no material reward, but is pleasing to Krsna. This all has to be considered in taking on such a relationship.

As far as Srila Prabhupada continuing to take disciples after his passing, it is not the fact. This misconception is actually impersonalism. Srila Prabhupada took the recommendations of his organizational authorities for accepting potential initiates. The last word was always his, whether the person was to be initiated or not. 

Although there does not seem to be a record of any time that Srila Prabhupada refused such a recommendation, he always had that option. Ritvik initiations override Srila Prabhupada’s own independence in accepting or not accepting a disciple. He cannot be forced to accept anyone, nor is there any precedent in the vaisnava histories of this sort of initiation being valid. I have been challenged that this is the stupidest argument ever heard against ritvik initiations, but I stand by it as fact. 

[PADA: Well its the GBC's argument, you need to worship anyone as your guru, as long as its not Srila Prabhupada.]

Go marry Emilia Erhart, if you can find her…. Has she consented? 

[PADA: Wow, its the posthumous, post samadhi post mortem guru argument, no wonder so many people left ISKCON to find another guru. The ISKCON people are saying ISKCON is a post mortem morgue, then they wonder why people are fleeing in droves. The post mortem guru idea is how the Gaudiya Matha made their false gurus. Srila Prabhupada is a mundane person, like Amelia Erhart? Yes, go find another guru, at your peril ....]

There is a lot more to pay attention to in the ritvik discussion than simply the word “henceforward.” 

[PADA: What is wrong with the word henceforward? Its the word used by the acharya. We have to worship a phantom non-entity henceforward?]

As far as Srila Prabhupada himself appointing 11 ritviks to perform initiations on his behalf after his passing, I am of the opinion that the general mass of devotees were not given full information due to some other agenda, and are therefore trying to derive conclusions from incomplete resources. 

This would not be unheard of. This is very common, even in the world media, and the population gets into a frenzy over false or incomplete information. There are several known instances of this in the organization. One well known example is how Srila Prabhupada’s request to have all his disciples with him at the time of his passing was purposefully not relayed, and caused extreme heartbreak to the disciples when the truth came out. (I was told by a devotee who was with Srila Prabhupada in his room at that time that he looked around and asked “Where are they all?” 

What emotional devastation….) Another example is quite simple, seemingly benign, in that Srila Prabhupada answered a letter from a disciple regarding sleep, take 6-8 hours, whatever refreshed the body. This letter is nowhere to be found, as it did not serve the needs of the temple authorities who wanted the devotees to be out raising money. 

Of course, we all know that Srila Prabhupada also said that sleep more than 6 hours is influenced by the mode of ignorance, and this quote was happily made widespread. Another example, which cannot be proven by hard evidence, but was “witnessed” by several psychics and remote viewers, and strongly suspected by Revatinandana, is that the death of Visnujana Swami was very likely not as recorded in the history of the organization. 

And Tamal is not available for input. There are many more examples. I am also quite confident, therefore, that the mass of devotees was not fully informed, or even purposely misinformed considering the magnitude of the moment, in the instance of the 11 originally appointed “ritviks” or other very pertinent information that Srila Prabhupada may have given in this regard. We may never know, but we do have what Srila Prabhupada gave in his books.

It is understandable that many people have come to the conclusion that ritvik is the proper approach, but it often stems from the observation that those who were “authorized” by the organization to take disciples were most often personally unqualified, or even disqualified, by personal behavior. So, quite understandable, but not philosophically sound. 

[PADA: Its not philosophically sound to worship the acharya?]

Srila Prabhupada’s books must be studied apart from organizational policies, and the truths will be revealed to the sincere seeker who is willing to put aside deeply ingrained mental constraints and paradigms. There will then be great revelations by hearing from the purest of pure devotees, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.

[PADA: Srila Prabhupada said to us that Jesus is still taking the sins of his sincere followers even now. That means a "departed" diksha guru is possible. Notice also that we are going to keep the disciplic succession alive, by not naming anyone as the current representative of the line? There is nothing that is "alive" unless there is a specific named person representing the living principle. Of course assuming that Srila Prabhupada is not alive has been the whole problem from square one.

Srila Prabhupada names only 32 people for a period of 5,000 year, that means there are often gaps in the system, and he says when such a gap appears we continue the worship of the last link (which would be him at this point). That is the "alive" process. There is no other process. 

And Srila Prabhupada also said that only an uttama can take sins because he has the sufficient BRAHMANA TEJYAS to burn off the sins, so he is not affected. It is the opinion of the PADA editor that no one else can take these sins, unless they are uttama themselves. And as we have seen in spades, people who take these sins without authority can get severely burned in the process, and they can burn down the institution along with themselves as they collapse in a heap.

And that is one reason why Srila Prabhupada says in the "Nectar of Instruction," the disciple must be careful to accept only an uttama guru. Because if the guru is not an uttama, the disciple will not have his sins absolved and resolved, and that will hold him back from making progress, which is also described in the NOD. I find it somewhat amazing that people make all sorts of analysis papers, without mentioning how they are going to remedy this issue, or even discuss this issue. 

That includes Rocana / Torben / Hanuman Croatia and so on and so forth. So we need to read the books of Srila Prabhupada, but not accept him as our guru. That does not even seem to make any sense either. So we must read his books, but we do not offer the bhogha and the disciples to him, we have to offer the bhogha and disciples to some unknown and untested person. How can we know if the bhogha and disciples are accepted? Well that is called faith. Faith cannot be proven officially one way or the other, we either believe Srila Prabhupada can accept bhogha and disciples being offered to him, or not. 

That we cannot make offerings to the acharya itself sounds very dangerous, what if offering the bhogha to people like Bhakti Vikas swami means, its not being accepted? Then people are eating bhogha. And same thing with the sins. If we worship someone like Bhakti Vikas swami as our guru, but he cannot absorb our sins, we are basically doomed to hold our sins going forward -- in this life and the next. 

I don't see how this is a practical idea, at all. There needs to be a central acharya where the bhogha, the disciples, the buildings, the money, the assets, the entire organization -- is under his direct worship. I have many Christian friends and they offer the newcomers as disciples of the Church of Jesus. They also say grace (make offerings) to Jesus. And they -- in all respects -- accept that Jesus is the proprietor of the congregation, the buildings, the assets and etc. And more to the point, only Jesus can absolve the sins of the followers. 

That is the correct understanding. Looking for someone else to fulfill that role is a fool's errand in our opinion, whether in the Church or in ISKCON. Notice also that Kamra and ilk do not mention who is going to keep the Disciplic Succession alive, that is impersonal right out of the gate. The disciplic succession will be kept alive, but by -- no named person? A phantom? A non-entity? How can we keep the disciplic line alive, by having some phantom person, an unnamed theoretical individual, as the successor? All glories to -- Srila Nobody-pada?

At least the ritviks know who is the person who is their link to the parampara, and that is how they keep the succession alive.

ys pd]