| Home | “Although Śrīla Prabhupāda spoke of all his disciples becoming Gurus, he never once ordered any disciple ‘To be a Guru’, rather he gave conditional authority and responsibility to some leading disciples to “Act as Rittvik representatives of the Ācārya.” ” |
Letter by Hansadutta Dāsa, one of the original 11 “appointed gurus,” regarding the ritvik issue:
*************** Begin copied text ***************
Dear Veda Guhya Dās Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. All glories to Śrīla Prabhupāda.
Because you asked me to write VNN about the Rittvik matter, I thought I would first pen you my thoughts on the issue along the lines of our discussion a few days ago.
The discussions that took place on 28th May 1977 between Śrīla Prabhupāda and some GBC regarding initiations in the future were not known to me till years after his disappearance. Śrīla Prabhupāda would say many things on many subjects, but unless a particular policy was written in letter form, or some other legal document, such discussions on different matters were not accepted as final. Prabhupāda often said you can say anything, but do not put it in writing. Writing makes it legal.
A number of questions come to my mind when the controversy over the rittvik-Guru issue comes up.
1) The system of rittvik initiations was an ongoing practice for years before Śrīla Prabhupāda named eleven “Rittvik representatives of the Ācārya” in his letter of July 9, 1977. Why would Śrīla Prabhupāda make a special effort to write a letter appointing eleven of his senior disciples as “Rittvik representatives of the Ācārya” when such rittvik initiations were already being performed on his behalf—not only by the persons named in his July 9th Letter but by sannyāsīs, GBCs, Temple Presidents, and others who happened to be at hand on the occasion of such initiation ceremonies?
2) Why did Śrīla Prabhupāda decline the suggestion Of Tamāla Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmī to include Brahmānanda Svāmī on the rittvik list? He was a leading devotee and sannyāsī.
3) Why did Śrīla Prabhupāda not simply say “All sannyāsīs, GBCs, and Temple Presidents of ISKCON in good standing everywhere” could act as “Rittvik representatives of the Ācārya” and initiate new disciples on his behalf whenever the need presented itself ?
4) How would creating “Rittvik representatives of the Ācārya” relieve Śrīla Prabhupāda from the burden of taking on the Karma of newly initiated disciples if the disciples thus initiated would still be Śrīla Prabhupāda’s disciples?
5) Why did Śrīla Prabhupāda reiterate the July 9th Letter appointing “Rittvik representative of the Ācārya” in three separate letters (two to myself, and one to Kīrtanānanda Svāmī) and in several conversations, but never once mention anything about appointing Gurus or about rittviks becoming Gurus upon his anticipated disappearance from the world?
I distinctly remember when I received the July 9, 1977, letter in Śrī Laṅkā that it was clear to me that this letter was Śrīla Prabhupāda’s arrangement for initiations for the future. I also remember feeling some disappointment with the obvious conditional authority that the “Rittvik representative of the Ācārya” designation implied, because I actually had a great desire to be a Guru like Śrīla Prabhupāda, and I think many of the leaders did have similar desires. Still, I understood it was a very responsible and authoritative appointment. On July 10th I received another letter from Śrīla Prabhupāda written in response to a letter I had sent him describing the preaching activities in Śrī Laṅkā at that time. In this letter he wrote as follows:
“You are a suitable person and you can give initiation to those that are ready for it. I have selected you among eleven men as “Rittvik” representative of the Ācārya, to give initiations, both first and second initiation, on my behalf.” A newsletter is being sent to all temple presidents and GBC in this regard, listing the eleven representatives selected by His Divine Grace. Those who are initiated are the disciples of Śrīla Prabhupāda, and anyone who you deem fit and initiate in this way, you should send their names to be included in Śrīla Prabhupāda’s “Initiated disciples” book.
I immediately wrote a letter to Śrīla Prabhupāda asking him why he had been so merciful towards me by appointing me as his “Rittvik representative of the Ācārya” which I understood to be a very confidential and responsible position. In other words, it was clear to me that this letter appointing “Rittvik Representatives” to initiate new disciples on Śrīla Prabhupāda’s behalf was Śrīla Prabhupāda’s final instructions in anticipation of his disappearance from the world.
Śrīla Prabhupāda replied my letter by paraphrasing my question and answering in a letter dated July 31st 1977 as follows:
“You have written to Śrīla Prabhupāda saying you do not know why he has chosen you to be a recipient of his Mercy. His Divine Grace immediately replied, “It is because you are my sincere servant. You have given up attachment to a beautiful and qualified wife and that is a great benediction. You are a real preacher. Therefore I like you. (Then Laughing). Sometimes you become obstinate, but that is true of any intelligent man. Now you have got a very good field. Now organize it and it will be a great credit. No one will disturb you there. MAKE YOUR OWN FIELD AND CONTINUE TO BE RITTVIK AND ACT ON MY BEHALF.”
It was clear that Śrīla Prabhupāda had officially introduced the concept of “Rittvik representative of the Ācārya” as the arrangement for initiations by his disciples for the future of ISKCON. Had there been anything more to clarify certainly Śrīla Prabhupāda would have written another letter to amend what was already so clear. But he never did, other than reinforce what he had already written: “Continue to act as rittvik representative of the Ācārya.”
These eleven men and many others had been initiating devotees on Śrīla Prabhupāda’s behalf for years, so there was no need to make a formal declaration and name disciples who could initiate on Śrīla Prabhupāda’s behalf simply to relieve Śrīla Prabhupāda from the burden of initiating due to 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 not allowed previously. The eleven men selected as
“Rittvik Representatives of the Ācārya” were given the freedom to
initiate (first and second) and give the spiritual name without
first having to consult Śrīla Prabhupāda by letter and have an
appropriate name sent by Śrīla Prabhupāda. This was new. This
system, in effect, gave these eleven “Rittvik representative of the
Ācārya” all the responsibilities and authority of a GURU, but at
the same time it was clear by their “Job Description” as “Rittvik
representative of the Ācārya” that their authority was
CONDITIONAL—it was not a blank check
- as they were not mature full qualified Spiritual Masters. They
were apprentices of the Spiritual Master—“Rittvik
representatives of the Ācārya”—and, the disciples they would
initiate would be the disciples of their Spiritual Master, Śrīla
Prabhupāda, the Sampradāya Ācārya, The Founder-Acarya of
ISKCON.
The Emperor or King delegates power to a Viceroy who thus has all the power of a King to rule over a colony or state, yet it is understood that the Viceroy is not the King, but is ruling as the King’s representative. Such a Viceroy would not automatically become a King upon the death of the King, rather he would continue to act as the Viceroy until the next Emperor or King was installed on the throne. Similarly the “Rittvik representative” does not automatically become a Guru or Ācārya (as we assumed when Śrīla Prabhupāda disappeared), but the Rittvik continues to act as the representative of the Ācārya, Śrīla Prabhupāda.
Although Śrīla Prabhupāda spoke of all his disciples becoming Gurus, he never once ordered any disciple “To be a Guru,” rather he gave conditional authority and responsibility to some leading disciples to “Act as Rittvik representatives of the Ācārya.” Having failed to carry out this responsibility by assuming that automatically upon Śrīla Prabhupāda’s disappearance the rittviks would become Gurus we find everything has gone off track, and the whole ISKCON movement is in shambles. Still, it is better late than never. Everything can be brought back into focus if we simply come back to the order of the Spiritual Master and act as “Rittvik representative of the Ācārya.”
I don’t think that my words will make any difference—but for my own clarification and purification I have written down these thoughts. Perhaps they will be of some help to you.
I have one last concern and it is this idea I get from Kṛṣṇa Kant’s paper “The Final Order” that the “Rittvik Representative” is nothing more than a priest who performs a ritual initiation, and then is no more significant in the spiritual life of a disciple than a clerk at an army recruiting station.
Yet, the fact is that Śrīla Prabhupāda was very careful and deliberate about choosing his “Rittvik representatives” and we will notice all of them were 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 of Śrīla Prabhupāda to act as “Rittvik Representatives of the Ācārya,” then I think that anyone who is going to be designated as such should first of all go out and show their capacity to represent Śrīla Prabhupāda as his “Rittvik Representative” by opening some centers and recruiting 100 or 200 devotees (or families) and train them up properly to preach and worship Śrīla Prabhupāda as his disciples. Otherwise, what is the meaning of “Rittvik representative of the Ācārya?” Without this it will simply be another office job.
I hope you and Jānakī are well. Thanks for your hospitality. I hope we can meet again soon.
Your humble servant,
Hansadutta dās
*************** End of copied text ***************
| Home | THIS WEB PAGE URL: http://pratyatosa.com/HansaduttaConfesses.htm |