© 1999 VNN
|
EDITORIAL June 8, 1999 VNN4059 See Related VNN Stories | Comment on this story Reply To Madhu Pandit Prabhu BY MAHAVEGAVATI DASI EDITORIAL, Jun 8 (VNN) — Hare Krsna. All Glories to His Divine Grace AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada, and all glories to the assembled Vaisnavas. Please accept my fallen obeisances. Reading over Madhu Pandit prabhu's article, I would like to comment: First: I do agree on the point of the hypocrisy with which the GBC works, accepting and rejecting - in this case, the Gaudiya Math and particular Vaisnavas within - to their convenience. On one hand they blaspheme great personalities such as Promode Puru Maharaj, Narayan Maharaj, and others; and yet on the other hand, they will use them to suit their own purposes. I think it is obvious to anyone with even half a brain, (or less - I'm in a woman's body; thus, as is accepted by so many, I have half a brain, and even less because some of it got smashed up), that many, if not all of our GBC leaders are more politicians than spiritual leaders. They will twist the philosophy and will accept and reject, to suit their own political agenda. The fact that they are USING the Gaudiya Math, (I say "using" in the sense of exploitation), to suit their own needs, and then at other times, when it suits their convenience, blaspheming these VERY SAME persons, (exalted, if not pure Vaisnavas at that); this is MOST reprehensible. Who can trust a hypocrite? Getting on to the subject of trust: I think it has become very obvious that the GBC is not a body to be trusted, presently and back in 1977, when they told us that Srila Prabhupada did not want his disciples to come to Vrndavan in Srila Prabhupada's last days with us, DESPITE SRILA PRABHUPADA'S EXPRESSED DESIRES. We also know that "somehow or other" there were so many less tapes produced during the last months. (Even now it is expressed that tapes were altered and tampered with.) Obviously our GBC leaders back then had an agenda, and it was NOT pure Krsna consciousness, but rather materially motivated - position, power, name, fame, and the rest. And they LIED to us to get it. I fell for it. (Simple hearted women do.) Others fell for it too. We thought that was what Srila Prabhupada wanted. And we were wrong. Going with the idea that the GBC may have gotten rid of more tapes, and possibly letters that Srila Prabhupada may have wanted devotees to have, it is also possible that Srila Prabhupada gave succinct instructions with regard to initiations and management of ISKCON for after his departure, which our beloved Godbrothers got rid of for their convenience. You are going on the July 9th letter as well as the May 28th conversation, (which I was told was a tampered with tape). You base your argument on the word, "henceforward", but not everyone accepts the same understanding of the meaning, (as you accept it to be of an "eternal" nature. Even that, there are different ritvik understandings - ie. henceforward, until another self-effulgent acarya manifests; henceforward, meaning that it is Srila Prabhupada FOREVER. Thus, even amongst yourselves there is disagreement as to the word "henceforward"). Other devotees, as well as me, accept "henceforward" in a different sense. For instance; I am the temple president and I say, "Henceforward from today, we will have a full temple cleanup with every devotee participating, starting at 6:00am until 7:00 and then Gurupuja will start." Then three weeks later I may announce, "Alright, henceforward, we will start the cleanup after Srimad Bhagavatam class, (which ends at 8:30 in my temple), and before breakfast." Thus, that "henceforward" is not of an "eternal" nature. Sadly, that letter of July 9th is interpreted differently by different people. Did anyone specifically ask Srila Prabhupada what HE meant by that "henceforward"? Even I was told that Tamal Krsna M drafted the letter, that they were his words rather than Srila Prabhupada. There is the story of "Sajahan". It is a book about Aurenzeb, but the author called it "Sajahan". Many people speculated as to why the author called his book as such, and what he "really" intended. So many people had so many different explanations, (speculations). Only when the author was approached, and did he give HIS meaning, could it be really understood what was his intention. So it is with that July 9th letter. I personally believe that Srila Prabhupada may have given us a lot more explicit instructions concerning initiation and general management of ISKCON after his departure, 1) knowing what happened in the Gaudiya Math after Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur Prabhupada's departure, (and those gentlemen were A LOT more practiced in the tenets of Vaisnavism then we were; let's NOT be SO puffed up to think we were better than they were), and 2) knowing how immature in general we ALL were, and 3) knowing the ambitious nature of his "leading" (GBC) disciples. EVEN IF SRILA PRABHUPADA DIDN'T LEAVE US WITH ANY EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS concerning these issues, IT IS VERY OBVIOUS from what Srila Prabhupada DID GIVE US IN HIS BOOKS, what was, and still is to be done. Our standard is Guru, Sadhu and Sastra. These are our guiding lights. Anyone who has some little knowledge of these three, KNOWS what is what. And according to these three, there is no evidence for a ritvik "parampara" EVERY scripture explains that one must seek out a bonafide guru, surrender to his lotus feet, and accept diksa from him, (or her). Can you give even ONE example from sastra that someone has taken initiation from a spiritual master who was not physically present? (I know there is the unusual example in CC of a spiritual master who found a dead body floating, brought the person to life and gave him diksa, but that is something different.) I do NOT discount Srila Prabhupada's personal presence, even though his physical body is not present; I personally am able to go on BECAUSE of the fact that I feel that Srila Prabhupada IS personally with me, (and I was one of those devotees who never got to see my Guru Maharaj while I was living in an ISKCON temple.) There is no scripture which supports your position, nor is there any Sadhu. You are working from the perspective of Guru, Srila Prabhupada, but not everyone is interpreting the same words that were in that letter as you do; thus we can not say for sure, that the understanding that you derive is correct. From the perspective of sadhu, sastra and previous guru, it is not. I do NOT deny your sincerity, and I do understand how, 1) from the words themselves, and 2) from the present situation within ISKCON, and the actions of so many of our "guru" Godbrothers, that you would accept this conclusion of ritvik "parampara", but I do not agree with your conclusion. Rather I accept that of Guru, sadhu and sastra. IF ISKCON had followed that, rather than the system our egomaniacal Godbrothers had set up, there would have been no major problems. (Granted there may have been some minor problems, but minor problems are not a big deal.) Spiritually speaking, (on the spiritual platform), there will be NO conflict between guru and "management". Guru is not necessarily involved in management, but if he is, and he is proper guru, his management will be based on spiritually motivated consciousness, NOT that of political motivation. Bonafide guru has no material motivation. Generally a disciple should take diksa from an uttama adhikari, but he can accept diksa from a madhyama adhikari. It is explained though, that unless he takes siksa from another more advanced devotee, he will not be able to progress beyond the level of his guru. I am convinced that one NEEDS the personal association of advanced and pure devotees. (sadhu sanga sadhu sanga sarva sastra haya lava matra sadhu sanga sarva siddhi haya) It is THAT simple. Although for YEARS I was faithfully performing my service, (as enough of my "authorities" indoctinated me that I should JUST render service, and I did not get ANY chance to get Srila Prabhupada's personal association, AND IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE - I could see that SO obviously simply by being in the personal presence, and hearing, (while seeing, and experiencing the personal presence), of Srila Narayan Maharaj. I KNOW if I had simply heard a tape of the same lecture, I would have heard it with my HEAD, but in his personal presence, I heard with my HEART. I cried every day, part of that crying being that I missed out on the PERSONAL association of my Father, Srila Prabhupada. I realized that if I could get this much from Srila Narayan Maharaj, then how much I could have gotten from my Father. (In one sense there is no difference between the pure devotees, but on the other hand, there is; acintya beda beda tattva. Even for the child, there is NO father like my own father.) Prabhu, other than your placing most of your argument on the July 9th letter, (and the other "proof" being the examples of digression of enough of our "guru" Godbrothers), there is NO other argument from the bonafide channels, Guru Sadhu and Sastra, to support your position. According to the scriptures, what is being accepted within the Gaudiya Math is bonafide. (I won't even ask you what criticisms you have for these great Vaisnavas that you have mentioned, because I am afraid that you may make some offenses. We have to be VERY careful with regard to Srila Prabhupada's Godbrothers, who are such senior and exaulted Vaisnavas.) I personally am "new" to all of this "stuff". I was in Africa for many years, and I had never heard of "ritvik" (other than the initial letter, when I heard something of it in 1977), nor did I know of devotees "going over", (accepting initiation), from Srila Prabhupada's disciples, or disciples of their disciples. (I was aware that some devotees had taken shelter of Sridhar Maharaj.) Thus, in one sense, I have only recently, approximately one and one-half years ago, become aware of all of this, so you please have to excuse me for being so "neophyte" to all of this. At any rate, I am more convinced by what Srila Prabhupada told us as being the standard for checking and balancing; we follow Guru, Sadhu and Sastra, and the examples set by these three does not confirm your conclusion. Please forgive me for any offenses made. I beg to remain your servant, Mahavegavati Dasi Hare Krsna Related VNN Stories | Comment on this story | Contact VNN about this story | Send this story to a friend
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
