09/16/1998 - 2231

"Make Your Own Field And Continue To Be Rittvik"

USA (VNN) - Letter by Hansadutta das to Veda Guhya das regarding the Rittvik issue:

Dear Veda Guhya Das Prabhu,

Please accept my most humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.Because you asked me to write VNN about the Rittvik matter, I thought Iwould first pen you my thoughts on the issue along the lines of ourdiscussion a few days ago.

The discussions that took place on 28th May 1977 between Srila Prabhupadaand some GBC regarding initiations in the future were not known to me tillyears after his disappearance. Srila Prabhupada would say many things onmany subjects, but unless a particular policy was written in letter form, orsome other legal document, such discussions on different matters were notaccepted as final. Prabhupada often said you can say anything, but do notput it in writing. Writing makes it legal.

A number of questions come to my mind when the controversy over therittvik-Guru issue comes up.

1) The system of rittvik initiations was an ongoing practice for yearsbefore Srila Prabhupada named eleven "Rittvik representatives of theAcharya" in his letter of July 9, 1977. Why would Srila Prabhupada make aspecial effort to write a letter appointing elevenof his senior disciples as "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" whensuch rittvik initiations were already being performed on his behalf -- notonly by the persons named in his July 9th Letter but by sannyasis, GBCs,Temple Presidents, and others who happened to be at hand on the occasion ofsuch initiation ceremonies?

2) Why did Srila Prabhupada decline the suggestion Of Tamal Krishna Goswamito include Brahmananda Swami on the rittvik list? He was a leading devoteeand sannyasi.

3) Why did Srila Prabhupada not simply say "All sannyasis, GBCs, and TemplePresidents of ISKCON in good standing everywhere could act as "Rittvikrepresentatives of the Acharya" and initiate new disciples on his behalfwhenever the need presented itself ?

4) How would creating "Rittvik representatives of the Acharya" relieveSrila Prabhupada from the burden of taking on the Karma of newly initiateddisciples if the disciples thus initiated would still be Srila Prabhupada'sdisciples?

5) Why did Srila Prabhupada reiterate the July 9th Letter appointing"Rittvik representative of the Acharya" in three separate letters (two tomyself, and one to Kirtanananda Swami) and in several conversations, butnever once mention anything about appointing Gurus or about rittviksbecoming Gurus upon his anticipated disappearance from the world ?

I distinctly remember when I received the July 9, 1977, letter in Sri Lankathat it was clear to me that this letter was Srila Prabhupada's arrangementfor initiations for the future. I also remember feeling some disappointmentwith the obvious conditional authority that the "Rittvik representative ofthe Acharya" designation implied, because I actually had a great desire tobe a Guru like Srila Prabhupada, and I think many of the leaders did havesimilar desires. Still, I understood it was a very responsible andauthoritative appointment. On July 10th I received another letter from SrilaPrabhupada written in response to a letter I had sent him describing thepreaching activities in Sri Lanka at that time. In this letter he wrote asfollows:

"You are a suitable person and you can give initiation to those that areready for it. I have selected you among eleven men as "Rittvik"representative of the Acharya, to give initiations, both first and secondinitiation, on my behalf." A newsletter is being sent to all templepresidents and GBC in this regard, listing the eleven representativesselected by His Divine Grace. Those who are initiated are the disciples ofSrila Prabhupada, and anyone who you deem fit and initiate in this way, youshould send their names to be included in Srila Prabhupada's "Initiateddisciples" book.

I immediately wrote a letter to Srila Prabhupada asking him why he had beenso merciful towards me by appointing me as his "Rittvik representative ofthe Acharya" which I understood to be a very confidential and responsibleposition. In other words, it was clear to me that this letter appointing"Rittvik Representatives" to initiate new disciples on Srila Prabhupada'sbehalf was Srila Prabhupada's final instructions in anticipation of hisdisappearance from the world.

Srila Prabhupada replied my letter by paraphrasing my question andanswering in a letter dated July 31st 1977 as follows:

"You have written to Srila Prabhupada saying you do not know why he haschosen you to be a recipient of his Mercy. His Divine Grace immediatelyreplied, "It is because you are my sincere servant. You have given upattachment to a beautiful and qualified wife and that is a greatbenediction. You are a real preacher. Therefore I like you. (Then Laughing).Sometimes you become obstinate, but that is true of any intelligent man. Nowyou have got a very good field. Now organize it and it will be a greatcredit. No one will disturb you there. MAKE YOUR OWN FIELD AND CONTINUE TOBE RITTVIK AND ACT ON MY BEHALF".

It was clear that Srila Prabhupada had officially introduced the concept of"Rittvik representative of the Acharya" as the arrangement for initiationsby his disciples for the future of ISKCON. Had there been anything more toclarify certainly Srila Prabhupada would have written another letter toamend what was already so clear. But he never did, otherthan reinforce what he had already written: "Continue to act as rittvikrepresentative of the Acharya."

These eleven men and many others had been initiating devotees on SrilaPrabhupada's behalf for years, so there was no need to make a formaldeclaration and name disciples who could initiate on Srila Prabhupada'sbehalf simply to relieve Srila Prabhupada from the burden of initiating dueto his illness as it was already going on all over the world for years.

However, the July 9th letter gave authority and responsibility that was notallowed previously. The eleven men selected as" Rittvik Representatives ofthe Acharya "were given the freedom to initiate (first and second) and givethe spiritual name without first having to consult Srila Prabhupada byletter and have an appropriate name sent by Srila Prabhupada. This was new.This system, in effect, gave these eleven "Rittvik representative of theAcharya" all the responsibilities and authority of a GURU, but at the sametime it was clear by their "Job Description" as "Rittvik representative ofthe Acharya " that their authority was CONDITIONAL -- it was not a blankcheck - as they were not mature full qualified Spiritual Masters. They wereapprentices of the Spiritual Master -- "Rittvik representatives of theAcharya" -- and, the disciples they would initiate would be the disciples oftheir Spiritual Master, Srila Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acharya, TheFounder-Acarya of ISKCON.

The Emperor or King delegates power to a Viceroy who thus has all the powerof a King to rule over a colony or state, yet it is understood that theViceroy is not the King, but is ruling as the King's representative. Such aViceroy would not automatically become a King upon the death of the King,rather he would continue to act as the Viceroy until the nextEmperor or King was installed on the throne. Similarly the "Rittvikrepresentative" does not automatically become a Guru or Acharya (as weassumed when Srila Prabhupada disappeared), but the Rittvik continues to actas the representative of the Acharya, Srila Prabhupada.

Although Srila Prabhupada spoke of all his disciples becoming Gurus, henever once ordered any disciple "To be a Guru", rather he gave conditionalauthority and responsibility to some leading disciples to "Act as Rittvikrepresentatives of the Acharya". Having failed to carry out thisresponsibility by assuming that automatically upon Srila Prabhupada'sdisappearance the rittviks would become Gurus we find everything has goneoff track, and the whole ISKCON movement is in shambles. Still, it isbetter late than never. Everything can be brought back into focus if wesimply come back to the order of the Spiritual Master and act as "Rittvikrepresentative of the Acharya."

I don't think that my words will make any difference -- but for my ownclarification and purification I have written down these thoughts. Perhapsthey will be of some help to you.

I have one last concern and it is this idea I get from Krishna Kant's paper"The Final Order" that the "Rittvik Representative" is nothing more than apriest who performs a ritual initiation, and then is no more significant inthe spiritual life of a disciple than a clerk at an army recruiting station.

Yet, the fact is that Srila Prabhupada was very careful and deliberateabout choosing his "Rittvik representatives" and we will notice all of themwere distinguished by their enthusiasm and success in the preaching field.So if there is going to be a reform and actual adherence to the order ofSrila Prabhupada to act as "Rittvik Representatives of the Acharya," then Ithink that anyone who is going to be designated as such should first of allgo out and show their capacity to represent Srila Prabhupada as his "RittvikRepresentative" by opening some centers and recruiting 100 or 200 devotees(or families) and train them up properly to preach and worship SrilaPrabhupada as his disciples. Otherwise, what is the meaning of "Rittvikrepresentative of the Acharya?" Without this it will simply be anotheroffice job.

I hope you and Janaki are well. Thanks for your hospitality. I hope we canmeet again soon.

Your humble servant,

Hansadutta das