The Spiritual Master
This is a fascinating account by Sriman Locanananda
Prabhu revealing his insights into the ‘guru issue’ in our ISKCON
society today, from his own personal understanding, and his realizations
of the instructions given by Srila Prabhupada shortly before his
untimely departure. Our obeisances to him for sharing his personal
recollections and realizations. [Note: some of the other comments
were edited out so as not to distract from Locanananda Prabhu's train
of thought. You can follow the entire stream of comments by going to Prabhupada News
...Because
the focus of every devotee's efforts is to please Srila Prabhupada
knowing him to be Krishna's pure representative, we can understand that
the officiating acarya's function is to formalize the disciple's
connection with Srila Prabhupada and the disciplic succession by the
giving of diksa.
... According to this correct
understanding, the officiating acarya is not particularly empowered to
take those he initiates back to Godhead. But if he is capable of acting
as the transparent via medium to the founder acarya, he is certainly to
be honored and shown great respect. However, so that Srila Prabhupada
remains the central figure and worshipable spiritual master within the
Hare Krishna movement, no other spiritual personality should become his
competitor by exacting worship from disciples. It is the responsibility
of the GBC to preserve this unique role as exclusively the position of
Srila Prabhupada.
Locanananda dasa
19. October 2012
Srila
Prabhupada was asked how initiations would be conducted when he would
no longer be present. The answer was: by officiating acaryas. This is
synonymous with ritvik acarya. Let's be careful not to drop the "acarya"
from "ritvik acarya." Acarya means guru. One who is giving diksa is
guru, and in ISKCON he who gives diksa is supposed to act as an
officiating acarya. If you think you are more than that and greater than
your godbrothers, because of your pride Krishna will eventually cut you
down. Everyone giving diksa in ISKCON should accept Srila Prabhupada's
nomenclature and stop expecting to be worshiped. Hasn't this
unauthorized worship gone on long enough?
[Reply]
Locanananda dasa
20. October 2012
I
wanted to clarify for readers here that what may be called the final
order was not the July 9th, 1977 letter but was rather the May 28th
directive spoken by His Divine Grace, that initiations given after his
worldly pastimes had ended would be conducted by officiating acaryas.
This would be the second phase of the ritvik initiation system. The
first phase was set forth in the July 9th letter which, by the way, did
not mention anything about that time when Srila Prabhupada would no
longer be with us.
In the July 9th letter, it was stated that
Srila Prabhupada had named eleven disciples who would immediately begin
to act as "rittik"-representatives of the acarya. This is not the same
as "ritvik acarya."
Srila Prabhupada had said on several occasions
that during the spiritual master's lifetime, the disciple should bring
others to the spiritual master to be initiated. It was mentioned again
on May 28th. When the ritvik acarya would give diksa after Srila
Prabhupada had entered samadhi, those initiated would be his disciples
and Srila Prabhupada's grand disciples. If Srila Prabhupada had some
other intention, he would have stated it clearly on that occasion when
asked:
TKG: These ritvik acaryas, they are officiating, giving diksa. The people who they give diksa to — whose disciples are they?
Did Srila Prabhupada answer, "They are MY disciples."? No. He said, "They are HIS disciples," referring to the ritvik acarya.
So
here Srila Prabhupada rebuts the misdirected understanding of his
ritvik system phase two which incorrectly holds that he would continue
to initiate disciples when he would no longer be physically present. In
fact, he never made such a statement at any time, nor is there any
precedent for doing so in our disciplic succession. To the contrary,
Srila Prabhupada said the spirit of the parampara system cannot be
changed.
Locanananda dasa
20. October 2012
The word "officiating" is used in the Srimad Bhagavatam. It is found in Canto One, Chapter 13, Verse 15:
"As
long as Vidura played the part of a sudra, being cursed by Manduka
Muni, Aryama officiated at the post of Yamaraja to punish those who
committed sinful acts."
So for one hundred years, Aryama, the
son of Kasyapa and Aditi, took charge of the office of Yamaraja, who is
one of the twelve Mahajanas.
One who acts as an officiating acarya
is authorized to give diksa, just as Aryama wasa authorized to do the
work of Yamaraja and punish the sinful. Because the focus of every
devotee's efforts is to please Srila Prabhupada knowing him to be
Krishna's pure representative, we can understand that the officiating
acarya's function is to formalize the disciple's connection with Srila
Prabhupada and the disciplic succession by the giving of diksa. Just as
we do not think of Aryama as the actual Lord of Death, similarly we do
not think of the officiating acarya as the deliverer of the devotee he
initiates. The expression devotees heard Srila Prabhupada use was
"ritvik acarya, transparent to the previous acarya."
According
to this correct understanding, the officiating acarya is not
particularly empowered to take those he initiates back to Godhead. But
if he is capable of acting as the transparent via medium to the founder
acarya, he is certainly to be honored and shown great respect. However,
so that Srila Prabhupada remains the central figure and worshipable
spiritual master within the Hare Krishna movement, no other spiritual
personality should become his competitor by exacting worship from
disciples. It is the responsibility of the GBC to preserve this unique
role as exclusively the position of Srila Prabhupada.
Locanananda dasa
20. October 2012
Dear Robin,
If I am repeating what Srila Prabhupada said, then what I write is not
a product of of my own logic and reason. On May 28th, 1977 Srila
Prabhupada said that when he would no longer be present, initiations
would be conducted by officiating acaryas. After introducing the term
"officiating acarya" he was asked,
"What is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation….?"
The
questionner wants to know what the relationship is between the
officiating acarya and the devotee he gives initiation to. Srila
Prabhupada replied,
"He's guru. He's guru."
So I ask
you, when Srila Prabhupada says "He's guru," who is he talking about?
The answer is simple: the oficiating acarya is guru and he is giving
initiation.
Later in the conversation, Srila Prabhupada is again
asked about the initiations performed by the officiating acarya (a/k/a
ritvik acarya):
Q: These ritvik acaryas, they are officiating, giving diksa. The people who they give diksa to — whose disciples are they?
They are his disciples.
Robin,
I think you have to ask yourself why you cannot accept these words of
the spiritual master. You sound like an intelligent, sincere devotee.
Srila Prabhupada is saying that when the ritvik acarya is giving diksa,
those who receive diksa from the ritvik acarya are disciples of the
ritvik acarya. He did not say, "They are MY disciples," which is what
you would like to believe. It just isn't so. The conversation continues:
Q: They are his disciples? (They are disciples of the ritvik acarya?)
SP: Who is initiating. (Of the ritvik acarya who has given
diksa.) He's grand disciple. (The new initiate is the disciple of my
disciple)
I am not defending the ISKCON initiation system. ISKCON
gurus never say they are officiating. Nor in thirty-five years has even
one of them ever referred to himself as an officiating acarya. Instead
of embracing Srila Prabhupada's recommendation to have officiating
acaryas perform initiations, the GBC introduced a system based on their
own ambitions. For all these years, the movement has been held back,
first, because of the conflict brought about by the non-parallel lines
of authority created by a concocted initiation system and, second,
because of the ever-present ambition of the leaders which have caused
them to neglect Srila Prabhupada's order, an ongoing offense to His
Divine Grace that has curtailed the spiritual advancement of these
leaders as well as that of their followers.
Locanananda dasa
21. October 2012
Thanks,
Robin, for your reply. We have all felt great disappointment with the
path taken by ISKCON's leadership. As for myself, I have been assaulted,
banned for thirteen years (and counting) from giving classes or leading
kirtana in my local zone (but not everywhere) — even had donations
returned to me on the order of the local GBC — just for explaining what
it was that Srila Prabhupada wanted implemented after his departure from
this world.
All I have said is taken from the May 28th, 1977
conversation in Vrndavana, India. Srila Prabhupada had called the entire
GBC body to convene there because there was a strong possibility that
he might be called back to Godhead by Lord Krishna. The meetings took
place from May 27-29. A select committee that consisted of the six GBC
members who were on the original GBC formed in 1970 went into Srila
Prabhupada's room to ask specific questions concerning how to manage
ISKCON when he would no longer be with us. They asked about future
translation work, about how long GBC members should serve, and about how
initiations would be conducted. A summary report of the outcome of the
meetings was sent to all temple presidents. I still have my copy, as
well as the July 9th letter I received in the mail in Amsterdam. In this
report, there was no mention of Srila Prabhupada's response to the
question concerning initiations. However, the answers he gave to all
other questions were reported to the temple presidents.
Why was
there no mention that Srila Prabhupada intended to have initiations
performed by officiating acaryas? The report skirted the issue by saying
that Srila Prabhupada would answer other questions in the future.
What Srila Prabhupada explained on that occasion had mainly to do
with management. For example, how would initiations be managed? Srila
Prabhupada certainly did not want to create a conflict with the existing
management structure and chain of command. His perfect and divinely
inspired recommendation was to have the most acarya-like (again, his
term) leaders officiate as ritvik acaryas, transparent to the founder
acarya.
Your question is a valid one, as to whether anyone in
today's ISKCON is qualified to act as an officiating acarya? Obviously,
those who reject the idea altogether are not qualified to act as
officiating acaryas, even though the concept was clearly stated by Srila
Prabhupada on May 28th, 1977. Personally, I would say that those who do
not fight to have the correct system of initiation implemented in
ISKCON are not sufficiently advanced to occupy that position.
At
one point in the conversation, Srila Prabhupada refers to the ritvik
acarya as a "regular guru." There is no other instance we know of where
this term was used by Srila Prabhupada. Arjuna is referred to as a
"regular disciple" in the Bhagavad-gita, but I could find no other
reference to "regular guru." The interesting thing is that Srila
Prabhupada says:
"When I order you become guru, he becomes regular guru. That's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple. Just see."
The
whole conversation is about the officiating acarya, also known as
ritvik acarya, giving diksa and acting as a regular guru. So what did
the GBC not like about it and why did the GBC keep this instruction
hidden for so many years? Have you figured it out yet? The reason is
because 1) There would be no worship connected with officiating at
initiations and therefore their absolute power over the life decisions
of the disciple was being denied, and 2) They could not see the
scriptural or historical precedent for such initiation protocols.
One
other thing I wanted to mention is that Srila Prabhupada has stated
that a strict follower is qualified to act as guru even though he has
not yet attained the highest platform of self-realization. I will try to
find the exact quote for you. Also, scripturally, it is indicated that
siksa guru and diksa guru are equal manifestations of the Supreme
Personality of Godhead. We are advised not to diminish the role of
either. Please note that understanding the May 28th conversation from
the perspective of management does not involve making a distinction
between siksa and diksa guru. In fact, those terms were used only on
very rare occasions in discussions between Srila Prabhupada and his
ISKCON leaders, and not at all on May 28th.
Rukmini Ramana DD
21. October 2012
Thanks for commenting on these important
points! It is of course correct to always refer to what is stated in all
documents/Vedabase.
However, there is also 35 years post samadhi
ISKCON history with 110 fallen sannyasis, 41 fallen diksa gurus, mass
exodus of thousands desperately disappointed devotees to join
Gaudiya-matha camps, gurukula scandal, bookchange scandal. Last but not
least, ISKCON's educational reputation from spiritual point of view
nowhere mentioned in any media.
In other words, intellectual
Westerners consider this movement at present moment to be destroyed from
within. So would it not be worthy to also include this present state of
emergency in any discussion? When Prabhupada left he would leave behind
a fully functional global Gaudiya Vaishnava Sankirtan movement. In
order to have this previous status again reinstated what should be done
next?
Locanananda dasa
21. October 2012
Dear Rukmini DD,
All
of the things you mentioned are painful reminders of what we have
endured over the past thirty-five years. I was reminded of a letter
Srila Prabhupada wrote to me in 1972, when I was attempting to open a
temple in Geneva, Switzerland. He used to say our movement was spreading
like wildfire, and in that particular letter he spoke of a Japanese
philosopher who predicted our movement would become the world religion
by 1982 if it continued to grow at the current rate. Srila Prabhupada
used to say, "The name of Krishna has become a household word,"
indicating the success of the Sankirtana movement, but where are we now
in terms of making the world Krishna conscious, and how are we going to
get things back on track?
I very much appreciate your pro-active
approach. I believe the first step is that devotees who are true
followers of Srila Prabhupada, and who are not willing to drink the GBC
kool-aid, should bond together to keep themselves spiritually strong.
Everyone should appreciate what others are doing to serve Srila
Prabhupada outside of the ISKCON mainstream. The same principle
activities of book distribution, prasadam distribution and Harinam
sankirtana can be performed by groups of devotees acting independently.
In New York City, we formed our own Harinam party in 1998 and still go
out every Saturday night to chant the Holy Name. You can get a glimpse
of the ecstasy of the devotees in our party by going to Youtube and
searching "Hare Krishna Explosion at Times Square," which has had more
than 100,000 hits.
Even if nothing changes for the better in
ISKCON, we will have successfully played a small part in spreading
Krishna consciousness by carrying out the order of the spiritual master
to the best of our ability. These efforts will not go unnoticed. The
sincere endeavor of the devotee never goes in vain, but instead attracts
the attention of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
My
impression is that the leaders of ISKCON have circled the wagons to
protect the domain they control from the influence of outsiders.
Presently, one sannyasi who by all accounts is a strict follower of the
regulative principles and of sannyasa dharma is being banned here and
there for strongly preaching against ISKCON's mission drift. He is
attempting to protect the legacy of Srila Prabhupada and the response is
to ban him and reprimand him into submission. Good spiritual leaders
would be very happy to discuss with him ways in which the direction of
the movement could be strengthened to coincide with the intentions and
priorities of the founder acarya, but it appears that ISKCON is devoid
of such visionary leaders at the present time.
Do not wait for the
next generation of devotees who are the children of devotees to rise up
and take charge. They have been too traumatized to want to run the
show. Nor are the current leaders making room for them to have
managerial responsibility. And do not expect members of the
predominantly Indian congregation to demand change. Their main interest
is to visit the temple and see how the Deity of Krishna is being
worshiped.
I used to think that the Lord in the heart would
enlighten the leaders and give them inner strength, especially if we all
prayed to Krishna to guide them, but now I realize that the leaders
themselves must offer that prayer collectively if they really want inner
guidance. We can be their well-wishers while we deal with them at arm's
length. To give you a hint why I feel this way, whenever I attend an
ISKCON function I chant prayers to Lord Nrsimhadeva for my protection.
Why? I have done that since being violently assaulted in front of the
Deities at the 2004 NY Rathayatra parade. After the incident I had to go
to the hospital to have x-rays of my back taken. I was not able to sit,
stand or lie down comfortably for two weeks. One good sign was that the
attacker finally apologized to me eight years later at this year's
Rathayatra festival.
I think what the GBC needs to do is open a
venue of communication with devotees who would like to make suggestions.
There should be GBC resolutions that revolve around healing these
wounds and bringing about unity within the family of devotees. And they
should stop passing resolutions that explain in detail how they intend
to punish dissenters.
This is just a starting point, and I would
like to hear what every devotee has to say in response to your last post
dated October 21, 2012.
Your servant,
Locanananda dasa
![Sri Sri Radha Vrindavana Chandra Darshan [Sri Krishna and Srimati Radha Rani] as on 14/May/2014](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5ij3dl6lO3Jkwg8fe7Tfzws_JTACPLEe7vQGY1hzQAIBYbloSV47iZBDlocsdT_P6yf-DkwJ2gmRR4z9NMmJl_zPan6gQ2Lirt2LX2KX7eKewfHBBNaKFyHlbEbY9UyHqcpmcPNdjq5s/s72-c/RVC2.jpg){kind=small}
