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.
Neither is such a 'until departure' statement for ritviks found on the May 28th tape. On the contrary, the only time ritviks are mentioned on the tape, is for after departure:
| Srila Prabhupada: | Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acharyas. |
| Tamal Krsna: | Is that called ritvik-acharya? |
| Srila Prabhupada: | ritvik, yes. |
(May 28th Conversation)
And this has also been admitted by yourself:
| "On 28 May 77 Srila Prabhupada was specifically asked about initiations that would be performed by the ritvik priests after his departure." (Ajamila's Introduction) |
You have yourself helpfully added the emphasis so that it is clear that the ritviks priests are to act for after departure.
You then attempted to get round your own conclusion here by trying to say that Srila Prabhupada 'added acarya to the word ritvik', to try and show that Srila Prabhupada was not talking about normal ritvik priests, but actually 'ritvik-acaryas' or Diksha gurus. However we have already shown how this attempt to redefine the word ritvik into 'ritvik-acharya', failed miserably for the following 3 reasons:
- 'Prabhupada's Order', the 'definitive' GBC paper you glorified, stated that the term and concept of 'ritvik-acarya' does not actually exist in vedic culture!
- A look at the May 28 conversation above shows that Srila Prabhupada did not in any case add 'acarya' to the 'word ritvik'; it was actually only HH Tamala Krishna Maharaja who ever uses the term 'ritvik-acarya' - not Srila Prabhupada.
- In any case Srila Prabhupada equates the term 'officiating acarya' with the word 'ritvik' not 'ritvik-acarya', which as HH Hrdyananda Maharaja has helpfully told us in 'Prabhupada's Order', does not in any case actually exist in vedic culture.
Above in the May 28 conversation, we see Srila Prabhupada clearly agrees that the word 'officiating acarya' is non-different from 'ritvik': 'ritvik, yes'. Thus with the above 3 reasons, since your attempt at turning the ritvik into a 'ritvik-acarya' has clearly failed, you are actually left only with your original admission:
| "On 28 May 77 Srila Prabhupada was specifically asked about initiations that would be performed by the ritvik priests after his departure." (Ajamila's Introduction) |
An attempt to go the end of the tape will not help in locating this 'direct until departure ritvik priests meaning' for the July 9 letter either. The opening part of the tape refers to 'ritvik priests' not ritvik acharyas, and Srila Prabhupada agrees that 'officiating acaryas' are the same as 'ritviks' - 'ritvik, yes'; (as seen earlier). Therefore the 'regular gurus' spoken about at the end of the tape are clearly another entity. An entity that is produced by a specific order to that effect, and which results in grand-disciples being produced:
"When I order 'you become guru', he becomes regular guru. That's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple."
(May 28th tape) (A 'disciple of my disciple' simply being another word for 'grand-disciple'.)
An order which was not given in the July 9th letter or the tape, which as you have admitted speaks only of the ritvik priests acting after departure.
In conclusion we have seen that such a 'direct until departure ritvik priests meaning' of the July 9th letter is not stated in the letter itself, and now we see neither is it stated on the tape - on the contrary according to you the tape supports an 'after departure ritvik priests' meaning.
So I have 2 questions:
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.
b) You stated:
"I said Srila Prabhupada used the word ('ritvik-acarya') circumstantially, this is a fact you cannot deny."
Where does Srila Prabhupada use the word 'ritvik-acarya'?
We have seen that it is not on the tape. Please note that your whole interpretation of the tape rests on this unsubstantiated claim. If you can't produce this word 'ritvik-acarya' being stated by Srila Prabhupada, then your whole case collapses.
Thanking you in advance for the answers to my two questions.
Ys, Adri