08/30/98 - 2096

Sri Rama Dasa's Defense

USA (VNN) - by Premavicakshana dasa

Sri Rama dasa made a patently unjustified criticism in the columns of your web page that "the rtvks are Christianizing Lord Caitanya's parampara." Thankfully, Mr. Deepak Vohra promptly responded and pointed out correctly, citing quotes, that Srila Prabhupada approved of the Christians following Jesus as their one Acharya. Mr. Deepak Vohra amply proved that Srila Prabhupada did not criticize the Christians for following Jesus as their one Guru. Indeed, in the cited quotes, we rather saw Srila Prabhupada praising the Christians for following Jesus, and admonishing us to follow in their footsteps, by surrendering to one Acharya. With specific reference to ISKCON, therefore, if anything, our problem is that we have failed to Christianize Lord Caitanya's parampara, by failing to keep Srila Prabhupada as our one Acharya.

Nor did Srila Prabhupada EVER indicate that besides following Christ as their founder-acharya, every Christian should take another diksha guru. The onus is on Sri Rama dasa now to show quotes from Srila Prabhupada to that effect, to justify his rather vulgar hint that in following just Jesus, the Christians are somehow incomplete:

"For those Christians and others who carefully follow the original teachings of their acharyas, there will be benefits commensurate with their sincerity, purity, faith, sinlessness, etc.... "

Srila Prabhupada stated the opposite.

Srila Prabhupada: Actually, one who is guided by Jesus will certainly get liberation. (Perfect Questions Perfect Answers chapter 9)

It may be the case that their theology falls much short compared to the Vaishnava theology, but there is nothing to fault them as far as their principle of following one Acharya goes. That is what Srila Prabhupada is pointing out, as far as I can see.

I therefore regret that Sri Rama dasa chose to make his statement after reading Srila Prabhupada's above statement in Mr. Vohra's letter. In making his statement, Sri Rama dasa is wrong on two counts: first, for suggesting that Christians will get less than perfect result even if they carefully follow their Acharya. Second, for using the word Acharyas in the plural, in blatant defiance of Srila Prabhupada's point that they follow and need to follow, only one Acharya.

In other words, even after reading Mr. Vohra's letter, instead of simply admitting that he had made a major mistake, Sri Rama dasa chose to further amplify his original wrong statement in a reply, and in the process predictably made even more serious mistakes. Kindly permit me to point out some of them.

Sri Rama dasa states: "However, the Vaisnava siddhanta on disciplic succession is more rigorous and deeply based: Guru, sadhu, and shastra of the Vaisnavas all prescribe genuine relationships with both diksa and siksa gurus."

It has been now shown beyond a shadow of doubt that there is very little ëgenuine relationship' between diksha guru and disciple within ISKCON since Srila Prabhupada's Disappearance. It is because the new devotees are forced to cultivate a non-genuine relationship with the diksha-giver as his absolute guru that ISKCON is facing severe problems.

A parampara does not continue merely because someone is willing to give diksha, and some one is willing to receive it. Factual realization (as well as approval of his own guru) must be there on the part of the diksha-giving person before he can claim he is a guru, and true sincerity must be there on the part of the follower. Since Srila Prabhupada is such a self-realized Acharya, where is the need for searching out another person? Srila Prabhupada, we saw in the quotes given by Mr. Vohra, wants us to follow one Acharya.

Srila Prabhupada: You follow one Acharya, like Christians, they follow Christ, Acharya. The Mohammedan, they follow acarya, Mohammed. That is good. You must follow some acarya..Evam parampara-praptam." (Conv. Melbourne, May 20, 1975)

If we already have one Acharya, Srila Prabhupada, and he wants us to follow only one acharya, then why can't everyone in ISKCON follow Srila Prabhupada? Where is the necessity go searching for another Acharya wh will be diksha guru? Hundreds of Srila Prabhupada's followers who were initiated before 1977 never met with Srila Prabhupada even once. Were they properly initiated or not? Will they get full benefit by following Srila Prabhupada only? If yes, then what is the difficulty with the devotees who came after November, 1977 in following only Srila Prabhupada?

Until Sri Rama dasa understands what it means to follow ONE Acharya, his statements such as "No one is going to deny Srila Prabhupada will always our primary siksha guru and the Founder Acarya of the ISKCON, the Krishna Conscious Movement" are vacuous platitudes, of the kind that the GBC has been handing out for 21 years now. It is simply an attempt to do ëbusiness' using the name of Srila Prabhupada. It is an offense, and it will fail. It has already failed.

He goes on to blithely further state:

"So where does that leave us with diksa? There are some functions of the diksa guru which are essential for spiritual advancement. The diksha guru has responsibility to assign or approve the spiritual work of the disciple."

The GBC-enacted ISKCON laws expressly forbid the diksha guru from assigning or approving the spiritual work (i.e. devotional service) of the disciple. For Sri Rama dasa's kind information, here are some extracts from the ISKCON law book:

"The Temple President engages all the disciples of all spiritual masters in their day to day devotional service to guru and Krishna by allocating appropriate services to the devotees for the pleasure of their respective spiritual masters and Srila Prabhupada...The Temple President shall take into account any specific suggestions offered by the (initiating) spiritual masters in regard to guiding their disciples and assigning services. [But] The Temple President shall make the final decision on the services of the devotees based on considerations of effective management of the community."

Sri Rama dasa further states: "He acknowledges when it is time for brahminical initiation."

This is simpy wrong. In ISKCON, it is the temple president who acknowledges that it is time for brahminical initiation and recommends their name to the so-called diksha guru.

"He must guide the neophyte through the difficult barriers by showing the correct path."

More mistake. Many, many devotees do sincere service to ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada under temple authorities, far away from their so-called diksha guru, seeing this guru barely once a year. Yet, they make wonderful progress, in spite of, or perhaps because of, not having much contact with their "diksha guru".

It is high time we all wake up from our "fools paradise" and realize what the diksha system in ISKCON actually is. It is a devious concoction by which a few are trying to enjoy some rights (as guru) without having any responsibilities or qualifications. The GBCs instituted the diksha guru system, in flagrant defiance of the stark reality that it is Srila Prabhupada who is inspiring and sustaining all the devotees in ISKCON, so that they can, besides being the GBCs, also imitate the highest position given to the living entity (to be a Vaishnava guru) and misappropriate all the privileges due to this unique and absolute position. Yet, at the same time, recognizing that ISKCON cannot be a single movement if there are many, many individual absolutes, originally they divided the world into zones. When that failed, these same GBC-gurus turned around and formed (as GBCs) the above-quoted laws by means of which they can ëcontrol' the non-GBC gurus behind the curtains.

Why behind the curtains? The simple fact is that these ISKCON laws are NOT popularized. The laws are seldom shown to general devotees, nor are the principles behind such laws ever discussed openly in Bhagavatam classes. In the so-called initiation exam, sure enough, it is made sure the initiates know that the GBC is higher than the diksha guru. But these disciples are never told, either before or after the initiation that the temple president is their highest authority in matters of service, and that their the gurus cannot assign them service. {Even the GBCs can only change a temple president if he is improper, they are not expected to interfere in the day-to-day conduct of the temple by the TP].

Thus the ëdisciples' are kept in the dark, and the Sri Ramas of this world go on parroting to them (and to themselves) that the guru will engage the disciple, little realizing that this Guru who engages everyone in service, through his own ISKCON, is Srila Prabhupada!! Exploiting the fact that diksha is an essential part of their lives, these ëdisciples' are told, with a straight face and a dishonest heart, that the person who gives them the diksha is their spiritual master whom they should meditate on, seek approval from, and please. At the same time, behind the curtains the GBCs pass laws by which these fake-gurus' actual position is brought home to them so that as GBCs can control them and keep the movement together, artificially.

Perhaps Sri Rama dasa does not know these laws and practice within ISKCON in which case it is a shame and he should apologize for trotting out such blatant apa-siddhanta. The apa-siddhanta is the claim that the person who participates in the initiation ceremony and hands over the beads (much as a post man hands over a letter) is the one who will "assign and approve service". This is apa siddhanta by the standards Srila Prabhupada himself set for how ISKCON should function. It is apa-siddhanta by GBCs own established standards about how the diksha guru should behave. Furthermore, in trotting out such pure drivel in super-sanctimonious tones, Sri Rama das has revealed that he is oblivious to the actual reality of how the devotees get engaged in service within ISKCON.

If, on other hand, Sri Rama dasa wants to claim that he does know of the existence of these laws, then he stands as a person who is helping the GBC perpetuate their double-faced dealings, -- one face to the innocent followers telling them that the diksha-giver is their guru, and another face to the so-called diksha gurus themselves, behind the screen, severely restricting the scope of their activities and asking them effectively to keep off their disciples, knowing fully well Srila Prabhupada and his ISKCON are anyway taking care of all the devotees!!

Sri Rama dasa says "arguing the shortcomings of ISKCON is not within the scope of this short reply." Bringing home the short-comings of his own arguments is the purpose of this short reply.

Premavicakshana dasa
(in the movement for 12 years)