Posthumous
Initiation in ISKCON:
Is it sanctioned by
Srila Prabhupada?
by Krishna-kirti
das (HDG)
|
Hare Krishna
Hare Krishna
Krishna Krishna
Hare Hare
Hare Rama
Hare Rama
Rama Rama
Hare Hare |
|
Note: Only the summary is presented
below. Click
here to download the entire file.
The file will be in zipped format. To
unzip, just double click on the file.
The unzipped file will be in RTF format,
compatible with most word processors.
Summary of Contents
Evidence
Srila Prabhupada’s books are shown
to be the foundation of all other
instructions he issued outside of his
published books. It is further shown
that because these other instructions
are based on his books, they are also
authoritative. Claims that some letters
written by Srila Prabhupada contain
benevolent lies to placate ambitious
disciples are shown to be false and
based on partially quoted references.
Physical Presence
The key terms "physical
presence" and "departure"
are explained with regard to evidence in
Srila Prabhupada’s books. This
definition is then applied to various
instructions wherein Srila Prabhupada
uses the terms "absence" or
"disappearance." This
definition also explains how TFO’s
attempt to annul the term
"disappearance" is fallacious.
"Interplanetary Diksa," a term
coined by TFO’s authors, is shown to
be based on a series of misquoted
references.
....more
Some
Thoughts on the Ritvik Controversy
by
Babhru das
The title of Mayesvara
prabhu's recent article says it all.
The real question regarding the
so-called ritvik controversy is,
"Where is the evidence that Srila
Prabhupada ordered that ISKCON create a
system of initiation based on what Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur called
ultrametempsychosis?" As he has on
so many previous occasions, Mayesvara
takes much trouble to demonstrate yet
again some reasons so many of Srila
Prabhupada's disciples remain
unconvinced by the case based on Bhakta
Krishnakant Desai's essay, "The
Final Order." Despite his
cleverness, Mr. Desai never really makes
the case he hopes to.
| Thanks and
appreciation from
oldchakra.com to our sponsor and host,

|
Did
He Or Didn't He?
By Mayesvara dasa
There has been a
lot of scriptural research, many papers
written, spontaneous sidewalk
conferences, e-mails sent, and meetings
held in an attempt to determine what
system for initiation Srila Prabhupada
wanted his disciples to follow after his
departure. After
22 years of debate most devotees agree
that the proper answer is found in one
of
two systems.
This is really the
question that has been placed into the
court of devotee arbitration and it can
be boiled down even further into the
following succinct sutra; “Did
he, or Didn’t he?” That
is the essence of the question before us….
nothing else.
Ritviks
Preaching at Kumbha Mela
By Name
withheld at the request of the author
Recently
while staying at the Kumbha Mela
festival in Allahabad I went over to
visit the Ritvik camp as I had heard
about their 15 metre high deities of
Gaura Nitai. They were very impressive.

© CHAKRA 27 February 2001
VNN
Report about incident in Malasia
exaggerated
By
Bhakta Siva
CHAKRA (Taiping, Malasia) -
By Bhakta Siva
Taiping. 4/8/99
This report by
me is to clarify the VNN report by Ravi
Krsna dasa as regards to the incident
involving Radha Prananatha dasa and Raja
Krsna dasa recently at Taiping,
Malaysia. Since I was present at the
time and place of the incident, I wish
to report the incident as accurately as
I can remember.
My first
comment is that Ravi Krishna dasa could
not have written the report, as he is
illiterate in English and did not even
know the actual content of his report.
This clearly shows that a third party
using Ravi Krsna’s name wrote the
report. It is full of exaggeration.
Ravi Krsna's
report is a lie.
Based on my
report it is clear that the so-called
Ravi Krsna dasa's report overly
exaggerated the incident so as to
discredit HH Jayapataka Swami and ISKCON
as a whole.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA 15-Jan-2004
Ritvik Dissention in
Calcutta
By Sridham das Brahmacari
(Calcutta)
I do not want to leave this
Calcutta temple in which I have served
Sri Sri Radha Govinda for 10 years. I
request all authorities concerned to
direct Adri not to further abuse me
physically or psychologically, or
implicate me in any false case. I pray
to Sri Sri Radha Govinda and Srila
Prabhupada to give Adri some good
conscience and detachment from the post
of temple president.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
7-October-2000
Response to Allegations that
Jayapataka Swami is on the Run
By Goloka Chandra das
If you
have received recent mass mailings from
the IRM or read their postings on public
forums, and want to know what's really
going on, then read this text which
presents all the known facts of a case
currently under investigation.
1)
There is no arrest order on Jayapataka
Maharaja issued by the police anywhere
in the world.
2)
Since there is no warrant of arrest on
him, he is not on the run. As a
sannyasi, he is traveling and preaching
as he has always been doing all these
years on the direct order of his
spiritual master, His Divine Grace AC
Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
27-September-2000
Adridharan
Replies to Sad Bhuja
By
Adridharan dasa
This
is reply to the
article on CHAKRA
by Sad Bhuja Das, who has written
claiming that one of our IRM (ISKCON
Revival Movement) newsletters contained
a number of errors. We have nothing to
hide, and would be glad if Sad Bhuja
Prabhu gave us an excuse under CHAKRA's
policy of “right of reply” to get
all the information out to the CHAKRA
readers. It will document in more detail
why Uttama Sloka left, and why he was
right to have done so.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
18-July-2000
Ritviks Rant and Rave - Open
Letter to Adridharan
By
Sadbhuja dasa
I wish to point out a number of
errors in the information you have
provided your readers. As a man of
integrity, I am sure that you will have
no hesitation in publicly correcting
them.
Firstly, as you are aware since you and
I have had a number of long
conversations regarding this matter, the
money that was supposedly taken from the
Samadhi funds was never actually
removed. That money was allocated as an
advance payment to purchase a building
to house all the devotees who do service
in the Samadhi.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
9-July-2000
Let’s
Stop the Banning
By
Anudasa
Raghunatha
This
banning and intolerance is the single
most condemned behavior of the ISKCON
authorities, for all other necessary
reforms would have taken place if “protester”
god-brothers had remained.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
09-Mar-2000
The
Singapore Situation
A
different view A Response to Bhakta
Gansham Khialani’s Article
By
Bhakta R. Jai Simman
We
wish to present our reply to Bhakta
Gansham Khialani. In that process, we
would also like to present our case
before the assembly of Vaishnavas on
this forum.
We
would like to thank Gansham Prabhu for
his sufficient honesty in being
indirectly grateful to the temple for
his initial advancement in Krishna
Consciousness. We would also like to
thank him for the innumerable services
that he has offered for the pleasure of
Sri Sri Radha Madan Mohan.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
07-Mar-2000
An
Opponent of Ritvik Doctrine Defends
Dravinaksha
By
Pancha Tattva dasa
I
am writing to take strong exception to
an editorial titled “Undying Ritvikism
In Alachua,” which was published
recently on the VNN Web site. The
author, Bhakta dasa (Is this his real
name?), writes very critically of the
temple board of ISKCON New Raman Reti,
Alachua, for allowing a devotee named
Dravinaksha dasa to give Srimad
Bhagavatam class.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
30-Jan-2000
Appreciating
“Disciple of my Disciple”
By
Bhakta Zac
We
have just watched “Disciple of my
disciple” here at Govindadwipa and it
was impressive. I felt that it was a
factual presentation and felt that this
is a useful tool to keep members of
ISKCON faithful and not prone to the
devious doctrine expertly counteracted
by it.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
27-Jan-2000
Ritvik
& Poison addiction can be harmful to
your health
By
Iksvaku das
I
just returned to ISKCON after a 6 year
bout with maya so please understand how
appreciative I am that ISKCON is still
here to take shelter of. After being
informed by several souls of the Ritvik
and poison “evidence” I must say you
had me believing it for a while. During
that while my poison and ritvik
consciousness blinded me to the real
purpose of the movement Srila Prabhupada
established for the next 10,000 years
and I thought (being the sincere souls
you are) you might be interested in
hearing what effect these issues had on
my mind.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
27-Jan-2000
Letter
of grievance from ISKCON New York
The IRG has
seen fit to pursue their own agenda
through aggressive anti-ISKCON maneuvers
and behavior embarrassing to the
Society. We do not agree with the
philosophical veneer that coats their
actions. We accept, however, that
divergent interpretation has a
long-standing role in Vaisnava
tradition, and we would like to extend
an invitation to the IRG to meet with us
to explore more fully their position on
initiation and related matters. We are,
however, unable to extend such an
invitation as long as their
reprehensible mode of conduct continues.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
19-Oct-1999
Pandora's
Box (or: The 10% Solution)
By
Jalakara das
One
of the prevailing underlying themes of
the ritvik case is once Srila Prabhupada
is established as the eternal initiating
guru and thus placed firmly in the center of ISKCON life; all divisions
and quarrels will vanish. Don’t
be deluded by promises of a flowery
future, which only delivers years of
turbulence and strife. Don’t abandon
the parampara and truncate it because it
seemed like a good idea at the time.
Cling to what has been tried and found
successful before, even if you feel
yourself faithless and lacking, for the
path of Caitanya Mahaprabhu is valid and
true. It is not required for us to
tinker with it one little bit. If out of
desperation some feel forced into that
situation, then that is our sad failure,
not their philosophical success. Just
because many big leaders misapplied the
philosophy, that doesn’t mean others
have a license to misapply at will it as
well.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
19-Oct-1999
Dayaram's
mistake
By
Adri Dharan dasa
In trying to
falsely claim that Radhapada dasa was
the only donor for the ISKCON
property at 22, Gurusaday Road,
Calcutta, Dayarama dasa has made many
easily disprovable statements.The proof
that Radhapada dasa was not the only
donor comes from 5 different sources of
evidence:
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
30-Sep-1999
Response
to Hari Sauri: recollections of the
Calcutta Pandal issue
By
Harivilasa dasa
CHAKRA
(Seattle, WA, USA) - September 22, 1999:
Adridharan
remained polite and actually consented
to a compromise knowing well that his
other donors would be displeased. My
personal experience with Radhapad has
always been cordial and I have
appreciated his sincere efforts to push
on ISKCON’s missionary activities,
however, like Mahaprabhu Prabhu, I was
also very shocked by his unwarranted
criticism of ISKCON leadership and his
seemingly selfish demands to promote
himself as the only donor at Gursaday
Road.
>Full
Story
See
also "
We
didn't burn down the Pandal"
by Hari Sauri.
© CHAKRA
22-Sep-1999
UK
"IRG" reports program success
CHAKRA
(Bhaktivedanta Manor, UK) - September
14, 1999: A
reporter
claims that CHAKRA has resorted to “lying”
to “discredit a successful program.”
“CHAKRA
claims that only 15 people attended, but
our taped video evidence will show many
more than 15 people there. Anyone is
welcome to view this video, and see for
themselves the pathetic levels that
CHAKRA have now had to stoop to, simply
telling straight forward lies, and
hoping no one will notice.”
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
14-Sep-1999
Ritvik
meeting in England a failure
CHAKRA
(Bhaktivedanta Manor, UK ) - September
11, 1999: Adridharan
and Madhu-Pandit had flown all the way
from India for it.. Bhaja Hari and other
ritvik theorists were also there. They
were attending a “ritvik” get
together in a village hall in local
Letchmore Heath, right around the corner
from Bhaktivedanta Manor the day after
Srila Prabhupada’s Vyasapuja.
However,
besides them, only about 15 other people
showed up for the meeting. "It was
a flop," reported one attendee.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA
11-Sep-1999
We
didn't burn down illegal Calcutta Pandal
By
Hari-sauri dasa
CHAKRA
(Mayapur, India) - It has come
to my attention that some rather
disparaging remarks have been aimed at
me by Sriman Adridharana dasa, the
Calcutta temple president, regarding the
recent fire, which destroyed his illegal
wedding pandal set up on ISKCON property
at 22 Gurusaday Rd. In an article to VNN
Adridharana has done his best to seed
the minds of his readers with the idea
that Sriman Dayaram dasa, my fellow
Co-Director at Mayapur, and myself were
somehow to blame for the fire. Although
I have never logged onto VNN and very
rarely to Chakra, I feel some
clarifications are needed to set the
readers of such vitriol to rest.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA
29-Aug-1999
Not a
ritvik - don't agree with Ajamila
By
Subhadra-mayi devi dasi
CHAKRA
- 17-August,
1999:
Dear Ajamila
Prabhu,
A bit more
listening and caring for devotees might
bring a lot more people back to follow
the present guru system, if that's what
you want. To call them a bunch of
nutters won't.
>Full
Story
© CHAKRA
17-Aug-1999
Challenge
to Adridharana about Ritvik Debate Votes
by
Ajamila dasa
Dear Adri,
PAMHO. AGTSP.
The votes as they stand now are 1,917
for ISKCON and 1,340 for the concocted
ritvikism.
The ISKCON votes against the
offensive concocted ritvikism are nearly
all verifiable with names of real
devotees and their living locations. I
have compiled a database with all this
verifiable information, a glimpse of
which is shown on CHAKRA. These ISKCON
verifiable votes are all real.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 31-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 10
by
Hari dasa
Hare Krsna!
PAMHO, AGTSP!
First of all I would like to
congratulate Chakra for becoming more
open to the voice of all followers of
Srila Prabhupada and Krsna and not just
the GBC and ISKCON devotees. By hosting
the ritvik debate, Chakra has really
proved that they are not biased against
the followers of Srila Prabhupada (even
though at some point they were) who are
often condemned by ISKCON devotees as
demons and mayavadis.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 30-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 9
by
Lalita dasi
Dear Madhusudani Radha dasi and
Chakra,
Thank you so much for posting the
debates. It certainly was a surprise to
see such freedom of speech on your sight
and my impression has changed for the
better. Previously it seemed that VNN
was the main site where anyone could
post their real views. I will visit
Chakra more often if this mood prevails,
at least as often as VNN. It may even
become more of a home for all of us if
this continues so nicely.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 30-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 8
by
Nitai Gaura dasa
Hare Krsna. Please accept my humble
obeisances. All glories to Srila
Prabhupada.
I've been following this ritvik
business for a while now, partly through
Chakra, partly through overhearing my
dad's conversations. Although I do not
feel qualified to be debating this
serious philosophy business, I've just
had about enough and need to speak my
mind. Please forgive me for my offenses
or my wrong interpretations, but here
goes.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 29-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 7
by
Sadhusanga dasa
Dear Prabhus,
PAMHO. AGTSP. I think Adridharan dasa
was the clear winner in the Ritvik
debates.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 29-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 6
by
Krsna Dharma dasa
Dear Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Many of
us have had more than enough of these
ritvik debates. It seems to me that the
arguments will never end. Both sides,
coming from their respective
assumptions, can produce many quotes
from sastra to construct convincing
arguments. Largely due to the famous
letter of July 1977, and some
surrounding conversations, the ritvik
advocates are convinced that Srila
Prabhupada wanted the system to continue
after his departure. With this
assumption in mind they view all other
evidence, giving it an appropriate
interpretation to support their
position. On the other hand, opponents
of ritvik have an entirely different
understanding of the 1977 letter and
conversations, saying that Prabhupada
was obviously only intending the so
called ritvik system to work during his
presence, and from this assumption they
give different interpretations even to
the very same sastric statements offered
by the ritvik proponents. It looks to me
like a formula for argumentum ad
nauseam.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 28-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 5:
Comments on the "Historic
Debate"
from
Bhajahari dasa
Dear Madhusudani Radha Prabhu,
Hare Krsna ! All glories to Srila
Prabhupada.
I am writing to express my opinion on
the Ritvik Debate that you are currently
hosting on Chakra. I have been a
supporter of the IRG's position paper
'The Final Order', since I first read
it. In fact I have been banned from
visiting Bhaktivedanta Manor simply
because I am. Further, my son Pancha
Tattva das, who regularly took part in
the plays produced by The Bhaktivedanta
Players was told he was no longer wanted
in the drama group.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 27-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 4:
The Basis of the Ritvik Theory
by
Rasa Rasika dasa
The Ritvik philosophers are never
going to accept the truth because it's
their justification for undermining any
authority in ISKCON, ultimately the
Governing Body Commission.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 27-Jul-99
CHAKRA
Rigging Poll?
CHAKRA -
July 25, 1999: A recent article on VNN accuses
CHAKRA of rigging its poll. The article
quotes a letter from Pollit.com Support
which claims that someone "from
PP022.gator.net is repeatedly voting by
changing their IP address by '1' after
each vote."
“Although Pollit.com uses the
most advanced methods of multiple vote
prevention available today it is
possible for skilled people with right
equipment to vote more than once,”
Pollit is quoted on VNN. “Unless every
human contains a tracking device
embedded into his/her body it will
always be impossible to stop 100% of
multiple votes.”
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 27-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 3
from
Deepak Vohra
Dear Madhusudani Radha,
PAMHO. AGTSP.
I am responding to your invitation on
CHAKRA to submit thoughts on the ritvik
debate between Ajamila Prabhu and
Adridharan Prabhu.
I would firstly like to congratulate
CHAKRA for having the decency and
courage to host a ritvik debate on its
website. I believe a discussion of this
nature has been long overdue - 9 years
to be exact. If you remember, at the
conclusion of the San Diego ritvik
debate in 1990 the majority of devotees
- senior ISKCON members - voted for the
discussions to continue.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 21-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 2:
One Who is Accepting Discipline
from Srila Prabhupada is Srila
Prabhupada's Disciple
from
Mahesh Raja
Note: we are ALL being DISCIPLINED by
Srila Prabhupada (we receive
instructions---(discipline) from Srila
Prabhupada's books.
The MEANING of the word
"disciple"
760308mw.may
Prabhupada: Discipline... Disciple means
discipline. The word discipline comes
from disciple, or disciple comes from
discipline. So unless there is
discipline, there is no question of
disciple. This discipline must...
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 20-Jul-99
Ritvik
Debate Response Letter Number 1:
Follower of His Example
from
Antardwip dasa
Dear Adri and Madhu Pandit,
In contrast to you, we believe there
is:
1: No failure on Srila Prabhupada's
part to produce qualified vaishnava
spiritual masters,
2: No self-contradiction in Srila
Prabhupada's teaching on whether his
disciples would initiate or not, because
we accept his statements at face value
and have an straightforward
understanding of the word
"henceforward".
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 20-Jul-99
Debate Conclusion
by
Adridharana dasa
The question before the GBC supporter
in this debate was very simple:
What is the Guru, sadhu and sastra
evidence that Srila Prabhupada was to be
replaced as the Diksa Guru for ISKCON
institution?
This is a very simple request and
Ajamila has had over 15,000 words to
present this simple evidence. If he had
presented this evidence the debate would
have been over. Instead, over 15000
words later Ajamila has only:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 15-Jul-99
Debate
Conclusion
by
Ajamila dasa
Judges Rule Ritviks Lose
Debate
Who are the judges anyway? Who will
judge what Srila Prabhupada intended for
ISKCON post-samadhi initiations? The
judges with whom both debaters ‘agree’
are guru, sadhu, and sastra! And since
both arguments are mutually exclusive
only one can be right. So who is wrong?
Our judges’ position of ultimate
authority is confirmed by our
pre-eminent siksa-guru Srila Prabhupada
in Caitanya-caritamrita Madhya 20.352
purport as follows:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 14-Jul-99
Concluding
Statements from the Moderator of the
Ritvik Debate
by
Madhusudani Radha devi dasi
Dear Vaisnavis and Vaisnavas,
Please accept my humble obeisances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
We have now completed 6 rounds of the
Chakra "ritvik debate" and all
that remains is for our two debaters
Adridharan prabhu and Ajamila prabhu to
present their conclusions. As you all
know, the debate rules called for a
re-evaluation of the debate process
following 6 rounds. We examined reader
response and found that the number of
Chakra visited increased during the
debate and leveled off somewhere half
way through. However, it did not
decline. Based on this, we could either
have continued or finished. Next, the
participants were surveyed regarding
their preferences. Adridharan prabhu
stated that he would prefer to continue
debating until readership actually
dropped. However, Ajamila prabhu was
equally clear that he did not have the
time to continue this debate, primarily
due to the fact that his son was
returning home from gurukula and he
wanted to spend time with him. We then
assessed whether others would be
interested in continuing arguing
Ajamila's position instead. However,
none of those approached were
interested. So the debate is now
officially over and all that remains are
the concluding statements. These will be
no more than 1200 words including quotes
and should be posted tomorrow.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 13-Jul-99
Adridharan's
Commentary on Ajamila's Third Answer
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
PAMHO, AGTSP.
The GBC said:
"We must assume that as
Founder-Acarya, Srila Prabhupada had the
vision to set down a law --a law
suitable for that unique institution, a
law we would transgress at our
peril."
(Devotees Initiating Before Their Guru's
Physical Departure - An Official GBC
Paper, Part of 'Gurus and Initiation in
ISKCON', GBC, 1995)
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 08-Jul-99
Ajamila's
Answer to Adridharan's 3rd Question
Dear Adri,
PAMHO, AGTSP.
Srila Prabhupada's "REAL FINAL
ORDER" was given only five months
before his departure, he said:
"That's all. He becomes disciple of
my disciple. That's it."
That's all folks. Irrefutable!!
DISCIPLE OF MY DISCIPLE. That's the REAL
FINAL ORDER. Don't settle for any other
faked final order, especially if your
see the brand 'ritvik'.
Your faked final order relies solely
on word jugglery and calculated
interpretations, not on sastra. For
example, in TFO p.31 you speculate,
"It would appear that diksa is not
affected by the physical distances
between gurus and disciples." Your
authority 'It would appear' is not guru,
sadhu, or sastra it is downright
speculation. Sastra says asat,
speculation is useless.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 07-Jul-99
Adridharana's
3rd Question to Ajamila
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
PAMHO. AGTSP.
Every single posting you open with
how you are anchored in 'guru, sadhu and
sastra', and yet the whole of your
offering does not contain a single piece
of 'guru, sadhu and sastra' evidence.
Rather you simply recycle the same
claims you have offered throughout the
whole debate, but again no supporting
'guru, sadhu and sastra' evidence is
quoted. Instead the only evidence you
offer is the evidence of 'tradition',
which as well as being fallacious, you
have already yourself rejected, saying
that major principles, and not tradition
alone is evidence:
"There are things in Vedic
tradition that can be changed and things
that can't. Details of the past like
skin colour and giving women gayatri
will of course differ from the present
but the major principles cannot
change."
Yet again you say:
"I have proof that every acarya
in our line took diksa from a living
guru to set the example for us. Thus my
position is supported by sastra. Now you
show me proof from sastra to support
your idea. Show me just one example in
our line of disciplic succession of
anyone taking diksa posthumously? You
can't, because there is none. Thus you
are defeated."
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 05-Jul-99
Ajamila's
Commentary on Adridharana's Answer to
Ajamila's 3rd Question
Dear Adridharan Prabhu,
PAMHO. AGTSP.
In Question Three I signaled ahead,
"it would be hopelessly
hypocritical of you to attempt to change
your NCIP 'no-change' logic and add more
ritvik priests" and yet that is
precisely what you have done.
First you peddle your invented NCIP
(GBC cannot change anything) as if it
were sastra, but now that NCIP is
defeated you want to change your 'no
change'! Instead of honestly admitting
NCIP's numerous absurdities you
desperately plead for a 'no change'
exemption to add more ritviks. Such a
suicidal U turn in a one way street
confirms you are completely unfit to
debate.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 03-Jul-99
Adridharan's
Answer to Ajamila's 3rd Question
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
PAMHO. AGTSP.
As with all your postings to date,
you begin with a lie and then construct
the rest of your argument based on this
lie. Once this lie is exposed, all your
arguments and the 'questions' you submit
collapse.
You claim we say:
"The GBC cannot change
anything".
What we actually say is:
"In running ISKCON, the GBC:
1. Can only implement instructions
directly issued by Srila Prabhupada:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 02-Jul-99
Adridharana's
Commentary on Ajamila's Answer
Dear Ajamila prabhu,
PAMHO AGTSP
I asked you the following
question:
"You have stated:
'I said Srila Prabhupada used
the word ('ritvik-acarya')
circumstantially, this is a fact you
cannot deny.'
But HH Hridyananda Maharaja
and the GBC have stated that the word
nor concept of ritvik-acarya exists in
vedic culture. Giving examples of Srila
Prabhupada using (not agreeing with, but
'using' as you claim) this word, please
explain why would Srila Prabhupada would
use a word and concept that does not
exist in vedic culture?"
>Full
Article
© CHAKRA 01-Jul-99
Ajamila's
Third Question to Adridharana
Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
PAMHO AGTSP
For post-samadhi
initiations in ISKCON you propose
N.C.I.P. (No change in ISKCON paradigm)
referring to a temporary pre-samadhi
system in the 9 July letter, yet in the
same breath your proposal incorporates
the most unauthorised change in the
history of Vaisnavism.
Is this a
contradiction or what? Under the name of
"no change" you are
dangerously misguiding your readers with
a massive "bogus change" to
disciplic law!
>Full Article
© CHAKRA 01-Jul-99
Ajamila's
Answer to Adridharan's Second Question
Dear Adri, PAMHO AGTSP
Faking and breaking laws
are the ritvik foundations
Structures made of straw-men and created
insinuations
And with conspicuous absence of guru,
sadhu, and sastra
A 'blunderful' ritvik house is a destiny
of complete disaster.
(Well, at least this poem is not as
boring as all your ritvik nonsense which
unfortunately we are obliged to hear for
just a little longer.)
Unless you support your answers with
sastra they are asat, useless. By this
criteria of sastra you have clearly lost
this debate.
In your preamble you stated that I
lied by saying you didn't answer my
question. I asked for evidence from
sastra but instead you only gave an
interpretation, without sastra. So you
did fail to answer my question 'with
sastra' and I did not tell a lie. I
would appreciate a Vaisnava apology.
>Full Article
© CHAKRA 30-Jun-99
Adridharana's
2nd Question
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
PAMHO AGTSP
I have grouped the response to your
lengthy paper as follows:
(Due to word restrictions, our full
point for point reply is on the IRG
web-site http://www.irg.zetnet.co.uk
Answer To Your Question
"You have avoided answering my
following second question. You have not
answered this question."
This is a lie. I did answer it:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 27-Jun-99
Ajamila's
Comments on Adridharana's Answer to
Question No. 2
Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
You have avoided answering my second
question which is:
"Please prove directly and
unequivocally without any evasion tactic
whatsoever that your proposed system of
ritvikism, a system of posthumous
initiation that you declare Srila
Prabhupada supposedly wanted after his
departure, does not put Srila Prabhupada
in a bogus position of contravening
guru, sadhu, and sastra by breaking the
law of disciplic succession?"
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 27-Jun-99
Question
No. 2
by
Ajamila dasa
PREAMBLE
Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I’m sure you’ll agree that sastra
says the conclusive rule when speaking
on major principles of Vedic philosophy
is that sadhus, gurus, and even founder
acaryas must always strictly adhere to
sastra.
This is profoundly verified as
follows in Caitanya-caritamrita Madhya
20.352 purport:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 21-Jun-99
Comments
on Ajamila's Second Question
by
Adridharana dasa
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances.
All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
In your latest offering you:
1) Recycle arguments from your
introduction that we do not even
present.
2) Recycle arguments that have
already been answered in 'The Final
Order' in 1996.
3) Recycle assumptions without any
supporting evidence, the very
assumptions which you have to prove in
order to support your case.
4) And finally you end up asking a
'question' that was also already
answered in our reply to your
introduction.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 20-Jun-99
Letter
to Chakra Readers Regarding Ritvik
Debate
Dear Chakra readers,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All
glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Ajamila Prabhu has indicated that he
is finding it difficult to meet the
Debate deadlines and that his second
question is not yet ready for posting.
Thus, we will take a 24-hour break
before the next "round".
Adridharan Prabhu will be given a
similar extension, should he so desire.
We will keep you posted if there are
any other changes.
Ys, Madhusudani dasi
Debate Moderator
© CHAKRA 20-Jun-99
Comments
on Ajamila's Response to Adridharana's
1st Question
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All
glories to Srila Prabhupada.
"a) Where does the
'direct until departure ritvik priests
meaning of the 9 July letter' come
from?"
You were asked for evidence to prove
your above assumed 'direct'
meaning. As it happens you were unable
to provide any evidence - and instead
tried to hide this lack of
evidence by simply presenting more
assumptions:
"On 9 July 1977 Srila Prabhupada
was very ill and hundreds of devotees
worldwide were eager to take initiation.
To solve this impending problem Srila
Prabhupada appointed more ritvik priests
to perform the initiation ceremonies on
his behalf, as he instructed in 9 July
letter."
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 19-Jun-99
Ajamila's
Response to Adridharan's 1st Question
Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All
glories to Srila Prabhupada.
My answer to your first question is
as follows:
"a) Where does the
'direct until departure ritvik priests
meaning of the 9 July letter' come from?
Note the word 'direct'
means your answer has to be literal
i.e. it >should contain words such as
'until departure', and 'ritvik priests'.
No extrapolation permitted. Otherwise
you must withdraw your claim that there
is a 'direct' meaning."
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 19-Jun-99
Questions
for Ajamila
by
Adridharana dasa
Dear Ajamila prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All
Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
You alleged in your introduction that
we tried to 'cover' the:
""direct until departure
ritvik priests meaning of the 9 July
letter"
But this meaning is not given
anywhere in the letter itself, where
there is no mention of 'until
departure', direct or otherwise. So we
wish to know from where you have
mysteriously obtained this 'until
departure' idea for ritvik priests,
since it is not stated in the
July 9th letter itself, as your
statement above implies.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 17-Jun-99
Ajamila's
Comment on Adridharana's Answer to
Question No. 1
Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble
obeisances at your feet. All glories to
Srila Prabhupada.
You stated:
"The purpose of this debate, as
agreed by everyone, is to discuss the
system of initiation for ISKCON that
Srila Prabhupada ordered. It is not, as
rule 6 states, to discuss the personal
actions of any individuals."
Following the ‘correct procedure’
in discussing the system of initiation
in ISKCON is an inseparable part of that
system. Your concern about me discussing
your personal misbehaviour is
unwarranted since I address only your
illegitimate abandonment of the
authorised ‘correct procedure’ which
is directly connected to the debate.
"Yet this is exactly what you
have attempted to do:
"‘This illegitimate action
of yours is what I would like to
call into question.’"
>Full Article
© CHAKRA 16-Jun-99
Adridharana's Answer to Question
No. 1
Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances
at your feet. All glories to Srila
Prabhupada.
The purpose of this debate, as agreed
by everyone, is to discuss the system of
initiation for ISKCON that Srila
Prabhupada ordered. It is not, as rule 6
states,
"6. Chakra will only post
philosophical arguments in this debate.
References to the personal lives of the
devotees involved in this issue,
name-calling, insults and other personal
attacks will be edited out. This
includes references to any past or
present law suits. All such statements
will be seen as detracting from the
focus of the debate, which is how
Prabhupada wanted diksa initiations to
continue in his absence."
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 16-Jun-99
Ajamila's
Question No. 1
Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble
obeisances at your feet. All glories to
Srila Prabhupada.
As an aspiring insignificant servant
who wants more than anything to see
Srila Prabhupada’s ISKCON not
disgraced but glorified, I beg you to
answer the following question with all
honesty at your command.
Srila Prabhupada clearly instructed
that the GBC always has the final
say in ISKCON. This is a fact which you,
being a protagonist for a posthumous
ritvik system in ISKCON, have recently
admitted. I remind you that on 1 May on
COM you wrote:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 14-Jun-99
Commentary
by
Ajamila dasa
Adri Dharan Prabhu’s conclusion is
false and his concocted N.C.I.P. (No
change in the ISKCON paradigm) directive
portrays cognitive distortion of a kind
never seen before.
The essence of Adri’s N.C.I.P.
gimmick is the assumption that as per
Prabhupada’s last will and testament
nothing at all should change in ISKCON.
Isn’t this rather silly? This ‘wild
speculation’ covered with an array of
phony disguises is an insult to a
devotee’s intelligence. Here is Adri’s
assertion:
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 12-Jun-99
Commentary
by
Adridharana dasa
Ajamila’s introduction presents 3
main lines of argument: the May 28th
Tape, The 'law of disciplic succession'
and the 'Vaisnava tradition'. However in
presenting these arguments Ajamila only
succeeds in: - Contradicting Himself;
Contradicting the GBC & eliminating
his own evidence.
May 28th Tape - Ajamila
Contradicts Himself and the GBC
Ajamila says:
"Srila Prabhupada added acarya
to the word ritvik because during his
presence they are ritviks and after his
departure they are acaryas."
(Ajamila's Introduction)
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 12-Jun-99
The
Ritviks' FAKED Final Order
by
Ajamila dasa
Where
The Ritvik Controversy Begins
The controversy the ritvik
people are virulently pushing is this:
On 9 July 1977, only months before
his impending departure, Srila
Prabhupada approved a letter addressed
to all ISKCON leaders worldwide. In that
letter, considering his rapidly
deteriorating health and the hundreds of
devotees eagerly awaiting initiation,
Srila Prabhupada increased to eleven the
number of ritvik priests
initiating disciples on his behalf. Let
us not forget that this ritvik
initiation system was a 'temporary'
method by which our immensely powerful
Founder-Acarya could 'practically' cope
with the fast-growing worldwide demand
during his deteriorating health.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 10-Jun-99
The
No Change in ISKCON Paradigm
by
Adridharan dasa
During the period of his physical
presence, Srila Prabhupada gave the
blue-print for how ISKCON was to
operate. He personally established and
gave all the necessary standards,
systems, processes, and teachings that
were to govern how ISKCON would run for
the rest of its existence. ISKCON was
set up to run solely under the authority
of Srila Prabhupada. There was no
authorisation for any change to be made
to the way he had instructed and set up
ISKCON to run. Thus there was to be a
continuity between the way ISKCON ran
whilst he was physically present, and
for the rest of ISKCON's duration. Any
deviation from this principle would have
needed express authority from Srila
Prabhupada.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 10-Jun-99
Expose
Regarding the Ritvik Temple in Bangalore
by
Jaya Radha Krsna dasa
Adapted from a COM message by
Jaya Radha Krsna dasa (former member of
ISKCON Bangalore). Here Jaya Radha Krsna
Prabhu comments on letters from Madhu
Pandit dasa to Ajamila dasa and
vice-versa.
I am Jaya Radha Krsna dasa, formerly
in ISKCON Bangalore (1994-September
1998), now serving in Mayapur (September
1998-). Currently I am engaged in
serving in the Nama Hatta preaching
program.
Your correspondence with Madhu Pandit
dasa came to my notice. I was shocked to
see what Madhu Pandit dasa wrote to you.
When I was in Bangalore, I had
previously considered him with great
reverence, since he was a very senior
Godbrother. He was getting a lot of
mercy from my Guru Maharaja. So I had
respected him a lot. But it is really
shocking to see what Madhu Pandit dasa
has written to you since they are false.
The Madhu Pandit dasa of today is very
different from the Madhu Pandit dasa
whom I had known earlier prior to him
becoming a rtvik.
>Full Story
© CHAKRA 09-Jun-99
|