Dear Vaisnavas,

Please accept my respectful obeisances
All glories to the genuine Guru-paramparas
All glories to Sri Sri Gaura-Nityananda

I would like to comment on the article (VNN2554) by 
Monohar Das from November 25, 1998:
http://vnn.org/editorials/ET9811/ET25-2554.html


Swami B. G. Narasingha wrote: "Ritvik conception is 
in the apa-sampradaya category or the anti-party 
section. (...) It is a symptom of Kali-Yuga that many 
concocted methods of devotional service will emerge 
but these will not be accepted by the intelligent 
class of men." 

Monohar Das in his reply basically repeats again and 
again that there is no evidence against ritvikism 
anywhere and that ritvikism is not an apasampradaya. 

Although I would prefer to hear from the ritvik 
supporters which sastra supports their doctrine, not 
practiced in any genuine sampradaya, I hope to 
present evidence against ritvikism which to my 
knowledge did not appear in the ritvik debate yet.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura identifies thirteen 
apasampradayas that split away from the Brahma- 
Madhva-Gaudiya sampradaya after Lord Caitanya's 
disappearance: aula, baula, kartabhaja, neda, 
daravesa, sani, sahajiya, sakhibheki, smarta, 
jata-gosani, ativadi, cudadhari and gauranga-nagari.

Ritvikism is ideologically closest to Kartabhaja 
apasampradaya:

"In Bangladesh, a new version of the Kartabhaja sect 
was founded some years back by one Anukul Chandra. He 
is now dead, but latter-day devotees can be directly 
initiated by him through preachers known as ritviks. 
New initiates must agree to follow the principles - 
be vegetarian once a week and worship no deity other 
than Anukul Chandra's picture." (Suhotra Swami on 
apasampradayas, available at 
http://www.iskcon.org/main/twohk/philo/roots/apasam.htm)
 
>He simply assumes, and expects us to do
>the same, that the eternal parampara system is
>based on the physical contact of the guru with his
>disciple. Yet we see practically that Srila
>Prabhupada initiated many devotees without meeting
>them.

So did Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. Sri Jatisekhara 
Das, disciple of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, recounts his 
remembrances:

"It was only in 1931 or 1932 that another devotee 
bearing the same name, Puri Maharaja, who was 
visiting Berhampur, pushed him into taking harernama. 
He told him that he should get initiated because he 
was from a Vaisnava family, and even though he wasn't 
so much inclined he coerced him saying, "Next time I 
come I'll bring Sarasvati Thakura's japa-mala for 
you." The system they had if Sarasvati Thakura could 
not be physically present was that he would chant on 
the japa-mala, which would then be sent to the 
aspiring devotee, and in this way they would take 
harernama from him. When Puri Maharaja was given his 
japa-mala in this way his name wasn't changed. His 
name was Narasimha at the time so he became Narasimha 
Brahmacari." (from the collection of remembrances of 
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati by his disciples, by Bhakti 
Vikasa Swami)

So the system of initiation without personal presence 
of the guru is not something new. But it was 
discontinued after Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati's 
disappearance.

>No one has shown any scriptural reference
>indicating this ritvik practice is a deviation from
>siddhanta. In truth, the parampara message is
>transmitted and received via transcendental sound.
>It neither depends on the physical contact of the
>guru with the dicsiple nor upon a particular
>formality of initiation.

Sabda-brahma is certainly the real initiator. But it 
has to come through a guru of a genuine sampradaya:

Sriiman naaraayaano brahmaa
naarado vyaasa eva ca
Sriila madhvaH padmanaabho
nRharir maadhavas tathaa

puruSottamo brahmaanyo
vyaasa-tiirtha-munis tathaa
Sriimal lakSmii-patiH Sriimaan
maadhavendra-puris tathaa

sampradaaya vihiinaa ye
mantraaste niSphalaa mataaH
ataH kalau bhaviSyanti
catvaaraH sampradaayinaH
Srii-brahma-rudra-sanakaa
vaiSNavaaH kSiti-paavanaaH

(Padma Purana, quoted in Sabda-Kalpa-Druma 
Sanskrit-Sanskrit dictionary)

That one cannot take initiation from a guru who 
departed from the planet is clear from the following 
episode from the life of Ramakrsna das Babaji 
(previously named Rampratap):

"During Rampratap's stay in the cave, Balwant Rao, 
the elder bother of Madhava Rao, the King of Gwalior, 
once came and expressed his loyalty to him. It was 
arranged that Balwant would take spiritual initiation 
from Krsnacaitanya dasa. But when Krsna caitanya 
suddenly died, Balwant was initiated by Kesavdeva of 
Gopinathabag."


To disregard one's guru and claim oneself a disciple 
of one's param-guru is a serious offense. For this 
Sri Virabhadradeva, son of Sri Nityananda, expelled a 
devotee named Jayagopala from the Vaisnava community:

"Jayagopala was a kayastha from the village Kandra in 
Bengal. Having transgressed the mercy of his 
spiritual master, he was ostracized by Sri Virabhadra 
Gosvami from the Vaisnava society." (a description of 
Jayagopala from Gaudiya Vaisnava Abhidhana, khanda 3)

"In Radhadesa, there is a village named Kandra. Sri 
Mangala and Jnana dasa lived there. Jayagopala was 
born in a family of Kayasthas in that village. Out of 
false ego due to having obtained a high education, he 
became proud and evil-minded. His spiritual master 
was a pure devotee of the Lord but because he was 
illiterate, Jaya Gopala was ashamed of him. If 
someone inquired as to who his guru was, Jaya Gopala 
would say that his grand-spiritual master 
(parama-guru) was his guru. Srila Virabhadra Prabhu 
brought this up and ostracized him for having 
transgressed the mercy given to him." 
(Bhakti-ratnakara 14.180-183)

"Who does not cry on seeing the qualities of Sri 
Virabhadra Prabhu? He ostracized the sinful Jaya 
Gopala. Everyone came to know about this and no one 
would ever speak to him and so on." (Bhakti-ratnakara 
14.190-191)


Similar offense is to approach someone for 
reinitiation or to reinitiate someone:

"One day, Sri Gadadharadeva came to Mahaprabhu and 
told Him of some difficulty he was having concerning 
the mantra he received from his guru at the time of 
initiation. "As a result of telling this mantra to 
someone I am no longer able to meditate on it 
properly as I did before. Again You should give me 
the mantra and thus its clear expression will 
naturally be reawakened, and my mind can again become 
calm and happy."

"To this Mahaprabhu replied, "Gadadhara, take heed, 
you are treading on dangerous ground. As you have 
your guru, to accept the mantra from Me would be an 
offense to your Gurudeva. It is a fact that this 
mantra invigorates and sustains our soul, but as long 
as you have your gurudeva you cannot expect to solve 
this problem by transgressing his authority in this 
matter."

"However, Gadadhara implored Him, "But he is not here 
now. In his stead You can do the needful." Mahaprabhu 
replied, "Your guru is Sri Vidyanidhi. Why are you 
being unfaithful? Providence can very easily arrange 
that you meet him again soon." (Pundarika Vidyanidhi 
Vilasa, part 2)

> Most ritvik devotees simply say, "Because Srila
> Prabhupada ordered us to initiate on his behalf, we
> should do it that way, at least in ISKCON." What is
> fascinating about these false arguments are the
> extremes that guru-wanna-bees go to avoid this
> simple order from Srila Prabhupada, which conveys
> the real essence of guru parampara.

The words "at least in ISKCON" suggest that this 
practice is nonexistent in other genuine sampradayas 
listed in Padma Purana. Isn't it a great aparadha to 
think that an acarya of Srila Prabhupada's stature 
would introduce any deviant ideas? As for the real 
essence of guru-parampara, it is imbued in the 
"Guru-parampara" song by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati 
Thakura (which practically repeats the beginning of 
the Padma Purana quote above): it is the physical 
service to the guru (vapuh) and after his 
disappearance becoming a guru humbly serving his vani 
and thus becoming a transparent medium for the sabda.

>Srila Bhaktisiddhanta said, "One who thinks he is
>guru, is garu (or cow)." It is foolish for an
>immature devotee to claim that he is the best of
>Vaisnavas and thus worthy for the most exalted post
>of Spiritual Master.

Agreed, the humility is the essence of Vaishnavism, 
as someone said. This does not mean that one puts the 
parampara to an end by continuing or introducing the 
proxy initiation after the guru's physical 
disappearance. That would be a false humility and 
great disservice to guru-parampara. To the best of my 
knowledge no guru in any genuine sampradaya initiated 
anyone (nor appointed others to initiate anyone) as a 
disciple of a previous guru. If anyone knows of such 
example I would like to know it.

Guru doesn't have tell each of his disciples 
personally to become a guru after his (guru's) 
disappearance. It is an timeless order of Lord 
Caitanya (yare dekha tare kaha 'krsna'-upadesa, CC 
Madhya 7.128) as seen from the meeting of Sri 
Caitanya with Sarangadeva (Saranga dasa Thakura) 
recorded in Gaudiya Vaisnava Abhidhana:

"On one occasion, after reprimanding Devananda 
Pandita, Lord Gauranga was on His way home, 
accompanied by Srivasa Pandita, when he came across 
Sarangadeva. Lord Gauranga asked Sarangadeva why had 
never initiated any disciples. Sarangadeva replied 
that he had not found any suitable person. Lord 
Gauranga blessed him saying, "Whoever you shall 
choose as a disciple will be most suitable."

>It is also an offense to suggest the residents of 
>Vaikuntha Dham or Goloka Dham sometimes become 
>offenders and fall down. Such a suggestion is 
>directly opposed to the cultivation of pure devotion.

Then Sanatana Gosvami himself would oppose the 
cultivation of pure devotion because he wrote in his 
Brhat-bhagavatamrta (2.6.76) about a jiva (Gopa 
Kumara) who returned to Krishna:

"Having attained me [Sarupa], a friend more dear than 
life He had not seen for a long time, taking my hand 
in His lotus hand, asking me wonderful questions, 
bringing happiness to all the people of Vraja, and 
walking as gracefully as an elephant, the handsome 
Lord entered the village of Vraja."


As I try to see ISKCON's problems in a realistic way 
it is clear to me that many structural, managerial, 
moral and other issues must be rectified. This, 
however, does not constitute a reason to deviate from 
the eternal principle of guru-parampara.

As our predecessor acaryas, especially A.C. 
Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Bhaktisiddhanta 
Sarasvati Thakura and Bhaktivinoda Thakura, devoted 
much time and energy to oppose the spread of 
apasampradayas I felt compelled to write this article 
as an insignificant service to their lotus feet.


Begging to remain your servant,

bh. Jan

