08/18/98 - 2034

Ameyatma's Response to the GBC Paper "Prabhupada's Order"

USA (VNN) - by Ameyatma das

{A note about an article by me that was recently published on VNN regarding Harikesh's situation I had entitled "This Madness Must Be Stopped". I want to clarify that my distraught mood was not directed toward Harikesh. I was expressing my feelings regarding the guru issue in general. With this article I will clarify what I am most upset about, and also submit to the international community of Vaishnav's my proposal on how the whole issue can be resolved.}

To my God Brothers on the GBC and all my God brothers and God sisters

This is my response to the article entitled, Prabhupad's Order.

Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupad.

My first comment is why did it take so long for the GBC to publish a formal response? The wave of Ritvikvadaism has spread like a wild fire in the absence of any quick and substantial response by the GBC.

Basically I agree with the premise and the theoretcial conclusions that you are making. I always have understood this to be what Srila Prabhupad taught.

BUT, I was also "totally disappointed" - as seems to have been the case for the past 21 years. This belated official GBC response only addresses a fractional part of the real issue and totally avoids the most pressing and vital facets of this topic that have totally fractionalized ISKCON all these years.

I do not see how this paper will help matters at all. I feel it will actually create more dissention.

Why? Because it offers 'nothing' new. It is the same story we have heard fed for 21 years. The Prabhupad Order does not address the fact that the system the GBC has put forth has resulted in so much wide spread continual destruction and disruption of Srila Prabhupad's movement.

You must judge a thing by it's results. Over the last 21 years there have been major fall down after major fall down by one of the GBC propped up gurus. And each time one of these bigger then life gurus fall so much chaos and destruction and disruption takes place that resounds for years and years. Hamsadutta, Ramesvar, Bhavananda, Kirtananda, Jayatirtha, Bhagavan and now, HariKesh. Each time one of them fell so much chaos and disruption to Srila Prabhupad's mission follows. So many newer devotees become totally bewildered, programs come to a stop, so many temples, 1,000's of devotees are flung into disarray. Who would think that any of this non-sense would be pleasing to Srila Prabhupad? What to speak of what happens after one of them fall down, while each of these men were in their big positions their policies often drove thousands of Prabhupad disciples out of ISKCON.

Such things are the result of the current guru system that the GBC has adamantly sought to implement and defend for the past 21 years in one form or another.

What does it take to make everyone clearly understand that, by the results, we can see something is drastically wrong here?

This year Rohini Kumar was 'exposed', Murlivadak was only weeks away from being ordained by the GBC to become guru only to be found out to have foundled small boys under his care, and now HariKesh's fall down is bringing in the dark clouds and resounding throughout his zone. You would think that the GBC would at least try to deal with the real issues.

Technically, I agree with most all the points made in the PO paper and I am not an adherent of the Ritvik camp, yet at the same time I am also upset with the whole GBC show and stoic position on this matter.

2 years ago I wrote an article and posted it on my web site entitled "Ritvik: Another Perspective". I still stand by the essecne of what I was saying in that article.

What is conspicuous by it's absence in this PO paper is that it does not address at all the total and utter failings of the system that have occured over the last 21 years and all the far reaching repercussions this has caused. It does not address why at least 7 out of 11 of the original appointed 'gurus' have had major fall downs which have each caused major disruptions to the preaching of this movement. It does not address how all these major disturbances caused by this system fit into the system that the GBC keeps defending. It (the PO artical and/or the GBC) does not admit to any failure, any inebrity, any short fall that psssibly the path they are so vehemtly defending may, in fact, not be totally correct. No sign of tolerance toward discussion of finding a more acceptable path can be found in this latest GBC stance. Again, with this paper the GBC is not showing any humble claim of responsibility for all the chaos and disruption that has occured and continues to occur both institutionally and to so many individuals each time a GBC voted in and propped up guru falls down. Instead of showing any humble sense of responsibility for these horrible events that have shaken and continue to shake ISKCON and fracture its foundation not once or twice, but time and time again, the GBC only defends the technical aspects of their position, but misses the real substance of the issue at hand. This madness must stop.

Is this how the GBC expects Srila Prabhupad's movement to go on for the next 10,000 years: To vote in and artificially prop up a 'guru', then rush in to mop up the calamity, destruction and disruption when they fall down? Time after time after time... after time. Does this at all sound like a sustainable, logical system that would be at all pleasing to Srila Prabhupad or the past acharyas of this glorious sampradaya?

Because 1,000's of newer devotees were encouarged by the GBC to see people like Harikesh as pure devotees, on the same or almost same, level as Srila Prabhupad, when these men fall, as they keep doing, one by one, it creates so much destruction and havoc in Srila Prabhupad's movement and in these individual's lives. Why does the GBC keep defending this madness ? ? ?

The new PO paper does not address any of these real issues. And it is these very same issues and others like it that is at the root of the discention amoung Srila Prabhupad's disciples. The GBC and now this Prabhupad's Order does not deal with the way the 'gurus' are presented, and how everyone, the guru's new disciples and Prabhupad's diciples should relate with them. It does not address how the new 'gurus' should be seen in relation to Srila Prabhupad. It does not address how Srila Prabhupad should be seen or presented in ISKCON by all of his followers. It does not address the true functions of these gurus and the scale of importance their diksha carries against the Siksha guidance of Srila Prabhupad. It does not clearly define or defend Srila Prabhupad's position as Founder-Acharya (it only defends the position oF the new gurus, not even really defines their position or role, and does not strengthen or much defend Srila Prabhupad position and role). It does not address so many similar related issues. Therefore I say the GBC are totally missing the whole point and this lattest paper stands as a shallow testimony to this unfortunate fact.

Above I have previously listed so many inebrities in the system as it has stood for 21 years, here is a small elaboration of several points. Over the last 21 years I have had personal dealings with many of the gurus who have fallen away, and with some of those who are still trying to hang on. At times some of their dealings were blatantly devious to say the least. Some were very offensive, and often I could see obvious materialistic motivation behind some of their actions. Such things that are improper for a Vaishnav. Because of this it is totallly unacceptable by me and many others that ISKCON and the GBC have this blanket policy that states that once one has been voted in as a guru, that person must now be seen and treated as a pure devotee, at least by their disciples. As this voted in guru gathers disciples that his disiples are supposed to see him as pure and spotless and fully self-realized personal associate of Radharani and the gopis, etc. I object to this strongly because most of those in the position of initiating guru do not have such a highly purified character of a genuine pure devotee. It is a farce. It is a masquerade party - only.

I cannot and will not point to any one as a truly and totally pure devotee except Srila Prabhupad and the previous acharyas. This is a sentiment shared by the vast majority of the senior members of ISKCON, the disciples of AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad. It is a major issue with the majority of us. This lattest paper completely ignores these sort of issues. It is practically useless.

What sort of gurus is your paper is defending? It is totally unacceptable by myself that the official GBC response does not deal with these real issues. Because non of the faults of the current (current for 21 years) system was admitted to or dealt with at all, only it has been defended. Then one has to assume that this paper is defending as bona-fied all the 'gurus' who have been a part of this system. Or, if you argue that when these gurus fall they are no longer bona-fied, then where is the line drawn that defines a fall down? Can a guru go on being offensive to his own God-brothers, is that not what is and what is not a fall down for a guru? Would acting offensively toward a God brother be an unacceptable fall down? My real point is that the GBC props up a system that artificially inflates these gurus to be more divine then their characters are currently capable of raising up to. Rather then rack our minds trying to define and draw the line as to what is a 'fallen' guru, I say there is an alternative to all this madness. One that abides by the technical premise of the Prabhupad's Order, yet one that addresses all these issues and yet delivers the essence of what the Ritvik camp are striving for.

I put this forth in my article 2 years ago and I stand by the essence of that conclusion.

What I propose is this: I accept the version of the Prabhupad's Order paper - as far as the historical account of events. However, what needs to be defined is how it is to be implemented. I say the way the GBC have gone about doing so thus far has been severely flawed. Here is the major premise that I shall again put forward:

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati had years ago produced a list of the previous Acharyas. In doing so he listed Srila Bhaktivinod as the guru of Srila Gaur Kishor das Babaji. This is interesting since Gaur Kishor Babaji never took diksha initiation from Bhaktivinode, but Srila Prabhupad does explain that Gaur Kishor accpeted Bhaktivinode as his perceptor-Siksha guru. For the guru of Srila Bhaktivinode we see listed only Jagannath das Babaji. However, again, Jagannath das Babaji is NOT the diksha guru of Bhaktivinod. In fact, Bhaktivinode Prabhu had another Diksha guru who is also Vaishnav. However, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati does not even mention his name. And doing a search of the Folio also did not reveal his name - meaning in Prabhupad's books and tapes and letters Srila Prabhupad never once uttered even the name of Bhaktivinod's Diksha guru. Only his Siksha guru, Jagannath das Babaji is mentioned. Only his and Gaur Kishor's siksha guru's appearance and disappearance days are observed. We do not even know the name of Bhaktivinods diksha (at least not from Srila Prabhupad).

This is a MOST Very Important precedence. I say that this is THE answer to the whole current dilemna in ISKCON. Srila Prabhupad wanted that diksha go on after his departure. That is the bonafied system. Yet, Srila Prabhupad stands Alone as ISKCON's Founder-Acharya. And we all accept that it is Srila Prabhupad's teachings, his books, his vani that is the foundation and law books for our society. Therefore, it is un deputed that Srila Prabhupad is the main, or superiour, or Param Siksha guru for all of ISKCON members.

All we must do is put these two things together. The precendence is already set in the lives of Gaur Kishor and Bhaktivinode and this was explained and presented by Bhaktisiddhanta and fully accepted and propogated by Bhaktivedanta that the Siksha guru is or can be the most important guru in one's spiritual life, and that the diksha guru need not be given very much importance.

In light of this, the policy that must be adopted by the GBC and members of ISKCON is to view the position and role of the diksha gurus as more like 'family' gurus in the sense that they are ISKCON's family gurus. What I mean to say is that they simply perform the formal task of executing the initiation, thus formally accepting the new devotee into the sampradaya. However, the emphasis is only given to Srila Prabhupad that he will be and remain the devotee's main spiritual master in his position of ISKCON's Parama Siksha guru, or the Founder-Acharya of ISKCON. Spiritual instruction is given by Srila Prabhupad in the form of his books tapes and letters. The new devotee should be not artificially pushed or encouaged to give the diksha guru any more respect then he gives all the senior devotees. Special respect can be given, but the Dakshin should be given to the Parama Siksha guru's movement. As in the case of Bhaktivinod, the new devotees should not be taught that they HAVE to worship their diksha guru, but some special respect has to be there, yet at the same time the newer devotees must be encouraged to develope high respect for all senior Vaishnavs.

What does this system do?: It fulfills and supports the technical premise that is presented in Prabhupad's Order in that it carries on with a Diksha system of initiations. However, it presents this in the light that Bhaktisiddhanta argued concerning Bhaktivinod's diksha and siksha gurus. That is it promotes the Siksha guru as the prominate guru. Therefore it supports and preserves nearly all of what the Ritviks want as well. It presents Srila Prabhupad as the main preceptor guru of all devotees of ISKCON. It removes the artifical system of propping up men to false positions of purity and higher levels of self-realization then they have actually achieved. It saves ISKCON from the chaos that explodes each time a big guru falls down.

It also preserves the special and unique position of all of Srila Prabhupad's directly initiated disciples (something that the Ritvik idea does not).

What it does not do is it does not promote the current system by which the current diksha gurus are held up to appear like something divine - far above their actual positions. It is an honest system and one which will again allow honesty to prevail.

It allows that the older senior devotees can again preach and bring in new devotees and not have to fear turning them over to someone who is not quaified to lead them. It means that we only need to point to Srila Prabhupad as the true pure devotee whose character we all must aspire to respect and aspire toward that level. We need no longer point to God Brothes whom we personally know are not genuinely pure and in whom we personally have no confidence in. It allows that we can openly and honestly again promote Srila Prabhupad as the main guru for all of us, the Parama Siksha guru.

I say that ONLY by adopting this system will ISKCON be saved. It is the Only system that will reunite all the parties upon which we can all share a common platform to glorify Srila Prabhupad and push forward with his mission.

However, since it does not falsy support an artificial system of glorification of false purity of the diksha guru, some who are currently in that position or who aspire for this, they may not be agreeable to such a system for it may appear to them they will have to give up their false positions. What they must do, however, is see what has been the result so far, how much destruction and disruption this system has caused in it's present form and ask themselves if they want to be responsible for continueing this madness or take credit to do what is right and save Srila Prabhupad's mission.

Before moving on, I should say that what I have presented is not based on shastric quotss regarding the purity of position of a 'guru'. The highest standards of purity are there already in HDG Bhaktivedanta Prabhupad, and the system I propose will promote him as the main guru for all of us. As far as if this system, as I presented it, is 'bonafied' I will leave to the pandits to dicipher. However, it is a system that CAN Be sufficiently Justified as per the arguments that I have already given, in that we have the precedence set in our recent Sampradaya that Siksha guru is more important and that diksha guru need not be given so much emphasis (as in Bhaktivinod's personal life). Thus, it has bonafied precedence. As far as the details of how can someone give diksha who is not fully self-realized, I don't care to bother with such details right now because it will simply do nothing but continue to cloud an already miserable situation. I feel the precedence that I have sighted is sufficient to push forward such a system. To argue purity standards for a less important diksha position will only work to defeat this idea and it leaves only the current bickering that is deteriorating ISKCON. And to argue that it is wrong to diminish the Diksha guru's position will again only work to defeat this idea and leaves only the Ritvik idea as an alternative. The system I am putting forth is, however, based on precedence and upon the need to satisfy the present problems that face our society regarding this issue.

And, there are two 'extremely' important points to be noted that very much provide proof that this is an acceptable understanding. That this is what Srila Prabhupad wanted: 1) Is how Srila Prabhupad established his books as our ONLY instructive guide for ISKCON - since 1965 on out for the next 10,000 + years. Let me explain what I mean. When Srila Prabhupad arrived from India he brought with him a trunk load full of his own books, the first three volumes of Canto 1 of the Srimad Bhagavatam. He did NOT bring with him a trunk load full of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's books. And, as Srila Prabhupad established ISKCON he instructed us to ONLY read 'his' books. He did not encourage us to read even Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati's own books, or Bhaktivinod's. In fact, mostly he discouraged it. He told us Not to Jump over the head of our present guru. It isn't that he was saying Bhaktisiddhant's books were not good, not at all. But, he said we could not understand them. They were over our heads. Yet, to the stark contrast of his own example, Srila Prabhupad also instructed us that 'his' books will carry on as the Only teachings in ISKCON, our law books, from now onward.

Do you see the point? For us to read Bhaktisiddhanta's books was to jump over the head of our direct guru, but, when a new bhakta comes, for him to read Prabhupad's books is not jumping over his guru. Why? Because Srila Prabhupad IS still his Direct Preceptor Spiritual Master. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was NOT our direct Siksha Guru, but Srila Prabhupad set up ISKCON in such a way that HE would go on being our main Siksha guru for ever.

Actually, it isn't really any different. If Srila Prabhupad had come to America 'only' representing the Gaudiya Math - then he would have come with a trunk load of Bhaktisiddhanta's books and would have established Bhaktisiddhanta as our main Siksha guru. But, what Prabhupad did was he fully executed the order of his own guru. Bhaktisiddhanta wanted the Gaudiya Math set up to go on functioning similar to ISKCON today, but, it did not work out. Bhaktisiddhanta told Prabhupad to stay out of his ashrams because a fire (fighting amoung his diciples) would devour it. When Srila Prabhupad established ISKCON separate from the Gaudiya Math he was actually fulfilling the instructions of his guru maharaj.

ISKCON 'is' different. Prabhupad did not leave in disgust with his disciples (I do not accept that offensive idea). He left with the full idea that ISKCON will go on functioning without his direct input for milenium to come. He never said that the new diksha gurus were to write all of their own books and that their disciples should no longer read his (Prabhupad's) as that would be jumping over the head of their immediate guru, but on the contrary, he left his books as THE books to be read for 1,000's of years to come. It 'is' "different".

What this points to is that unlike with us, Bhaktisiddhanta was not presented to us as our main siksha guru, yet, in ISKCON Srila Prabhupad is to be presented to all new devotees from 1965 on out as the main siksha guru. And that means that those who come will have a direct guru-disciple relationship with Prabhupad, which we did not have with Bhaktisiddhanta. And this is proof and evidence that the current 'diksha' gurus are NOT to hold the same position of main guru to their disciples as Srila Prabhupad held that position to us. Rather, Srila Prabhupad retains that position for all new devotees as well.

2) The other evidence I would like to point out is that Srila Prabhupad was asked about who would be his successor guru. Several times he replied that he was training up his GBC men. He said they will manage the movement in his absence. Trainging them up. How? How was he training them to be guru? This is important, we need to understand this. How did he train them to be GBC managers? He gave them instruction, and gave them responsibilites AND he allowed them time to practice in real-life situations. That is, when he was present at times he simply stood to the side, focused on translating his books, and told his GBC men to manage without him. He gave them a break-in period, a trial period before he left. This is how he trained them. And he refers to training his GBC to be carry on with intitations after he departs. Why, or How, can we argue that he was training them any differently? He trained his GBC by giving them real-time trails to see how they did while he was still here. Similarily he told some of his GBC men to initiate on his behalf while he was here (meanting before samadhi - as we all know in vani he will never leave). As far as their GBC duties we know for a fact that he trained them and then expected them to carry on the same after he left. That is how he trained. That is why he trained them in that way. It only follows logically that as he traied them to be GBC he had also trained how to carry on with the initiations after he was gone. He never gave any other instruction that after his departure that the new diksha gurus are to start acting or be precieved any differently then they were while he was here with us.

Do you understand this point? Prabhupad told us he was training his GBC to manange and to initiate after his departure. He trained them as GBC by letting them manage while he was here. And he trained them how to initiate on his behalf while he was here. He never instructed that once I leave that the new gurus are to sit in Big Vyasasan's next to his. He never instructed they were to be worshipped by their own Guru Puja, he never said they were to be offered boga on behalf of Krishna, he never said their pictures are to be carried on the altar. He never said anyone must chant pranams to them. This IS "VERY" Important, because he did say he was training them to be gurus, and he did say he was training them as GBC to carry on. And we know how he trained. His technique was to give instruction and let them try out and see how they do. Why was their 'guru' position to be any different ? ? ? ?

Then who is concocting something? Rather, he had trained them before he left what they were supposed to do. That is, simply give diksha as they were doing before. No big change. Just carry on as they were doing before.

When I took brahman initiation there were so many devotees that the GBC felt it would be too hard to handle when Prabhupad arrived so they decided to give proxy initiations to some of us first. I was chosen as one. Prabhupad chanted on my brahman thread, but the ceremony was performed by Hrdayananda Maharaj and Srila Prabhupad was not there. I was never told I had to see Hrdayananda as a pure devotee or as my only shelter in spiritual life. That I had to see him as my guru and that I could only go to Prabhupad through him. Yet, on the other hand, I always felt that since he had performed the yajna I owed him a little extra respect. Not that I was told to, and not that I am saying I accept him in any way as my brahman-diksha guru, but he was my Ritvik guru, and so I felt there was some ettiqute involved. But, Srila Prabhupad never instructed that those who take initiation via a Ritvik need to show them any respect due the guru.

Instead, at the time, there was respect for them as a sannyasi, as a GBC and as a senior member of ISKCON and as an elder Vaishnav. So, respect is there. And personally I felt a small inclination to give him just a little more respect then that because he performed the fire yajna. This is how Srila Prabhupad trained them to give initiation. This is how he trained us to view them. Then where is the instruction that all of this was supposed to dramatically change when Prabhupad departed ? ? Where are those instructions ?

I know that sounds like the Ritvik argument, but I am not arguing for Ritvik, I am arguing the logic of how Srila Prabhupad trained - as GBC - and as Guru, I am arguing the logic of this. All we were supposed to add to this was that after he departed is that the GBC - gurus would now become diksha gurus. The whole matter comes down to is what did that really mean? How much of a change was supposed to have taken place? What justification is there, based on this paper the PO or his other instructions about the subject, that there were to be dramatic fundamental changes in initiations and how we are to precieve the gurus after he departed.

Often it is argued that those who are GBC should not become also guru. They argue this because a GBC is supposed to only implement and enforce Prabhupad's teachings, while a guru my give his own instructions to his disciples. But this is NOT what Prabhupad set up. All of the 11 'gurus' were all GBC. And when asked about who will be the next guru, Prabhupad pointed out that he was training his many GBC men. So, the GBC were to carry on, as they had been 'trained' by Srila Prabhupad.

My point is there was to be no changes, no differences, after he left. He had already trained them how to be GBC and gurus, everything was to go on as it was before. Only now they become diksha gurus, but Prabhupad remained the MAIN Siksha guru. No change.

Actually, what it comes down to is that I fully believe the GBC version that Srila Prabhupad asked them to be diksha gurus. I do not accept the arguments of the Ritvik camp that there was a conspiracy, that Tamal was out to get Prabhupad, or any of that. But, I fully agree with many of the arguments and logic put forth by the Ritvik camp as well.

I say the two ideas come together in the system I am proposing. It really is sort of the Ritvik system, but it does accept the technical history regarding Prabhupad's Order. I don't refute the orders he gave, I refute the way they were interpretted and implemented.

That concludes the main purpose of this article and the proposal that I am making.


I now want to offer an analysis of how I see the history that has led to our current state of affairs.

I do not accept this idea that Srila Prabhupad was poisoned. I do not accept that Tamal Krishna was malicious in any way toward his spiritual master. Rather, I only know in my heart that he loves Srila Prabhupad and that what ever he did in caring for Srila Prabhupad at the time of Prabhupad's Samadhi was done out of his love for Prabhupad. I do not accept that there was a conspiracy to over throw Prabhupad or to falsify a list of new gurus. Here is my analysis of how much of this came about in the minds of the devotees:

When Srila Prabhupad phyiscially departed. I was in LA. First there was the complete and total devistating fact that Srila Prabhupad had in fact departed. That shock still reverberates in my heart. For days I think we were all in total shock and bewilderment.

As I said I was in LA. Ramesvar had come back from India and was in LA at the time Srila Prabhupad departed. Then, slowly, over the next few days to next few weeks or so, devotees who were fortunante to have gone to be with Prabhupad at the time of his samadhi started to come back from India. I was working at FATE and Baradraj Prabhu came back about a week or two latter.

We started to hear more details about what it was like at the time of Prabhupad's Samadhi. Then we heard something that was very troublesome to us. First from one, then another. What we heard was that in his final days Srila Prabhupad had personally requested that all of his disciples from all over the world all come to his bed side. He wanted us there at the time of his departure.

It was very disturbing. All I could do is cry in my heart and aks WHY? Why didn't the GBC tell me this? Why wasn't I given the chance to go? As Srila Prabhupad had grown more and more sick and weak the desire in my heart and others to go there and be with him, to see him at least one more time, to be with him, to help if I could in any way, that desire also grew very strong. I wanted to go. I, and many others, had asked that we be allowed to go. But, the argument by the GBC was made that it would cause too much disruption to Prabhupad's movement. Financially it would drain many budgets to send everyone, secondly who would maintain the temples if we all leave? No, only the 'important' devotees could go, or those who acted independently and had their own source of incoem. But, for us common little people who had surrendered our selves to the temple and did not want to act independently and had no other source of income, we could not go.

Then, we were told that Srila Prabhupad himself had asked the GBC that ALL of his disciples come to his bed side. I was horrified. All I could think of is that my heart wanted to be there with him. I had even cried about it before he departed. It was not a little thing. I wanted to see my Prabhupad one more time. I wanted to be there with him. And then I found out that he also had asked that we all come. Then why? WHY ? WHY wasn't this very important instruction delivered to us? Why didn't the temples and GBC make these arrangements and fulfill Srila Prabhupad's desire? In my heart there was absolutely no excuse for this.

Well, Ramesvar was here in LA when Prabhupad departed and so we asked about this. He admitted that Prabhupad gave this directive. He also admitted that the GBC, or several GBC, met and discussed this point and it was decided by them that this instruction by Srila Prabhupad was simply Not Practical ! ! ! Therefore 'they' decided that Ramesvar (and I think Satsvarup) come back to America and make sure that devotees do not hear this instuction and do not leave.

This was totally mind boggling. Not only did the GBC men decide that Prabhupad's instructions were impractical, not only did they think they could over ride what he said due to their puffed up idea they thought they knew better, but they even defied his personal dying request and instead of calling for everyone to come, they themselves sent (at least) one or more GBC back.

And what did Ramesvar do? He blatantly and out right lied about this whole thing. When devotees, such as myself, begged that he allow us to go to India to be with Prabhupad, he told us (out right lied to us) that Srila Prabhupad would not want such a thing.

This was totally unforgivable to most of us who learned this at the time.

We loved Srila Prabhupad more then our own parents. When my mother was dying, I wanted to be there with her. When my father died I had been there only hours before. My parents are one thing, but Srila Prabhupad was my whole life and soul. I wanted more than anything to be with him - to see him one more time. And all we were told is that Prabhupad would NOT want this, that it was impractical. To find out latter that actually Srila Prabhupad did also want us to be there with him... it was simply unforgivable. There was no excuse for this.

Ramesvar argued that the GBC decided that if devotees hear this and everyone leaves the temples, then the movement will totally fall apart. That was simply their own mental speculation. That is all. And it brought up the burning question as to what was their motive? Were they concerned for the future of Prabhupad's movement out of concern for Prabhupad, or were they concerned that when Prabhupad departs that if everyone went to India there would be no movement left for them to take over? It was a question many of us had in our minds.

They may have feared what would happend if this instruction leaked out to the devotees in general, they may have feared it would cause to much problems, so they tried to conceal it and lied about it. But, their idea totally back-fired. When devotees found the GBC had lied to them, had hidden this very important thing from them, it caused most serious long-term distruption.

This served as evidence that these men thought they knew better then Srila Prabhupad. Srila Prabhupad requested this, but they thought Prabhupad's request was impractical. So, they tried to HIDE this order that he gave from us. And, they Purposefuly and openly LIED to those of us who requested to go and be with Prabhupad in his last days.

Why am I writing such a long explanation of this one 'small' incident? Because it was not a small incident. It was a very major incident. As I said, even the son of an ordinary man who has love for his father wants to be at his father's bed side at the time he leaves this world. That desire is natural. We Loved Prabhupad more than 1,000 fathers. Our hearts were crying out to be with him, to be at his side, to see him one last time. We were denied this. And such a thing can never be made up for in any way. We were lied to - purposefully lied to about this. The truth was kept from us. It was a very MAJOR incident.

This was the very first major decision made by the GBC just as Prabhupad was departing, and it slammed a huge wedge in many devotee's hearts against the GBC. I saw this in LA personally. I saw many devotees immediately turn bitter toward the GBC and immediately, and JUSTIFIABLY, developed a total distrust and dislike for the GBC.

The GBC NEVER appologized for this. Never admitted it was wrong. All Ramesvar did was angrily defend the decision. The next major decision the GBC made was how to carry on with initiations. How to understand his instructions on the matter. With this wedge in many devotee's hearts it didn't matter what the GBC decided, they were bitter, they were hurt, they totally distrusted these men and they were sure they were being lied to again.

That is the atmosphere and mood many devotees were in at that time. This one incident set the mood for bitter conflict that has grown and festered for 21 years.

If the GBC had humbly come forward and admitted it was unforgivably wrong and asked us to try somehow to forgive them, maybe it would have made soem difference. The biggest thing is they just shouldn't have tried to hide an instruction from us thinking they knew better then Prabhupad.

This was the atmosphere that was created, at least I can say as far as in LA. And, just as we are trying to come to terms with Srila Prabhupad's departure and now trying to digest this new bitter news the GBC hide this from us, at this time the GBC started telling us that Srila Prabhupad has asked 11 of them to become gurus. This did not set well with a number of devotees. For many it was totally incredulous. They simply could not believe or accept this.

Some devotees took the truth that we knew, that we had just been lied to by these same men regarding a dying request that Prabhupad made, and now we are being told to accept these same men as being the new acharyas. Many felt something sounded really off here. Instead of out right accepting, they started searching for a smoking gun. They felt it was a conspiracy right from the start, just weeks or months after Prabhupad's departure. There were a few who were dead sure the same who just lied to us must have made all this up. They were sure it was a plot by them to take over Prabhupad's movement.

When analyzed carefully even the most incomprehensive events seem to take on some shape of logic.

I am trying to keep this short, because this letter has got too long, there were other factors, but I feel this was the biggest factor that caused all the bitterness and distrust by many devotees and why they simply could not believe that Prabhupad wanted these men to become gurus.

My point is that many of the devotees who have allowed their bitterness and distrust grow into envious spite toward the GBC, I think that we have to understand that many of them had justifiable reasons for their initial bitterness and lack of confidence in their GBC Godbrothers. It can be logically seen how they set out to find evidence of a conspiracy just weeks after Prabhupad departed.

And, the ultimate cause, in my view, at least one of the major factors, was the totally wrong and offensive actions of the GBC at the time who made this horrible decision to purposefully hide a dying request / instruction by Srila Prabhupad from the rest of us, and to lie about it to us. That, to me, is what lays as the root cause of all the bitterness and mistrust.

Many devotees feel that GBC were wrong about the Final Order and type of guru they were to become. I do as well. But, I am firm in my conviction that there was no conspiracy. I accept the premise of this new paper, Prabhupad's Order. But, I disagree with the way the GBC have interpretted how that order was to be implemented.

Let me reiterate my proposal as to what is a revised and acceptable system: I say that Prabhupad did want that the senior advanced men to give diksha initiations. However, we must preserve Srila Prabhupad's supreme and unique position in ISKCON as the Founder-Acharya and as the Parama Siksha Guru. Therefore, in light of all the attrocities and disturbances and insanity that has grown out of the current system of artificially propped up guru, I say that we must take the example set by Srila Bhaktivinod, promoted by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and approved of by Srila Prabhupad, and not give very much emphasis to the diksha gurus. That we promote that the Parama Siksha guru, Srila Prabhupad, is the main and most important preceptor acharya for all members of ISKCON. All devotees have direct access to his teachings and his teachings are the central guiding instrument of this Sampradaya.

We have to realize how this differs from the way that Srila Prabhupad preached in regards to Bhaktisiddhanta's postion with us. Prabhupad taught that it would be jumping over out direct guru for us to study what Bhaktisiddhanta wrote. Bhaktisiddhanta was not our siksha guru, only Srila Prabhupad was both our diksha and siksha guru. Yet, Srila Prabhupad's books MUST be studied directly by all new devotees, which makes Srila Prabhupad everyone's direct and main preceptor instructor guru and spiritual guide. That is different. It means that we all must see Srila Prabhupad as our main guru. The diksha gurus should be presented to the new devotees much the same as they were when they performed ceremonies in the role of Ritvik while Prabhupad was with us. They should not be artificially propped up and their importance in the new devotees spiritual development must not be over stated articially.

One more point in this regard. I saw devotees who were originally intiated by Jayatirtha, then he fell down. The were re-initiated by Ramesvar or Bhagavan or Bhavananda, they fell down. But, throughout all this those devotees are still doing well, chanting, attending the programs. Why, because one thing that has remained steady throughout it that they have had the shelter and quidance of Prabhupad's books and teachings. That shows that their real and most important spiritual guide and shelter is Srila Prabhupad directly. The diksha gurus were only a formality. And one needs only ONE initiation into the Sampradaya, he doesn't need to reseek a new guru each time a diksha falls.

And what has been the cause of many of their fall downs? They were accepting false adoration far exceeding their qualifications. It gets to their heads, then they start creating offenses.

I humbly offer to all my Godbrothers and Godsisters, senior, equal and junior, that you carefully study this and accept this proposal and adopt it, because my heart is convinced it is the only proper system that will save the deteriorating situation in ISKCON.

I had completed a preliminary text on the evening just before Krsna Janmastami 1998. However, I had no time to finalize it until this evening, August 15th. The most auspicious appearance day of the light of our soul, Srila Prabhupad. I had wanted to send this out early this morning, but had no time to complete it until this evening. However, since I had not had time this year to maek a Vyas Puja offering to Srila Prabhupad, this humble writing must serve as my meek offering to my guru maharaj, my life, my soul, my savior, my preceptor and guide, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhatkivedanta Swami Prabhupad, on this the auspicious VyasaPuja day. This is my offering to you Srila Prabhupad. May you not be too harsh with such a fallen soul as I who am full of so many bad qualities.

Your worthless servant

Ameyatma das


(PS: I want to make some changes to my article on my web page, but the
essence remains the same, a few extra points were made here and some other
points are made in the artical located at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~kgrafx/SrilaPrabhupad/ritvik_another_perspective.html )

WEB site:
http://home.earthlink.net/~kgrafx

Now Posted: on my web site:
Vedic Training, How To Become A Krishna Conscious Wife, For ISKCON Brahmacarinis
Goto Dharma of Marriage Section - Varnashram Dharma book listings.

In Bhagavad Gita Sri Krishna says:
"The thoughts of my pure devotees dwell in Me, their minds are surrendered
to Me, and they derive great satisfaction and bliss enlightening one
another and conversing about Me." (BG 10.9)