Back To Prabhupada, Issue 33, Autumn 2011
What do you do when the evidence is against you, and the conclusion is the opposite of what you require? Simple – you just blatantly cheat and hope that no one notices! And this is exactly what those representing the guru
hoax have done when attempting to answer the IRM’s position, as we detail below.
“As a final point we would like to give a new definition to the word ritvik or ritvik acarya. Not accepting a preconceived meaning of the word ritvik, but seeing it as an adjunct to the word acarya, and similar to the
meaning of the word officiating, I would propose that any guru, is an officiating acarya or ritvik acarya. That is because he is acting on behalf of his guru. Like all devotees do. That does not mean that the disciples are his
guru’s but as a Vaisnava he does it on the guru’s behalf. “
(HH Sivarama Swami, Continuing the Parampara, 1994, p. 21)
The above quote is from a paper written by a GBC member and GBC-elected guru hoaxer. Stuck with the stubborn fact that Srila Prabhupada appointed ritviks to conduct initiations on his behalf rather than successor diksa gurus,
he has simply redefined a ritvik priest to mean a successor diksa guru!
Satsvarupa: “So they may also be considered your disciples.”
Srila Prabhupada: “Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?”
(Room Conversation, 28/5/1977, emphasis added)
“ANALYSIS: Satsvarupa Maharaja again suggests the possibility of proxy initiation. Srila Prabhupada could say yes, but he does not. On the contrary, Srila Prabhupada suggests that the question does not make sense.”
(Disciple of My Disciple, GBC member Badrinarayana Das et. al., p. 7, emphasis added)
Another way to deal with evidence that one does not like is to simply pretend it does not exist! Above, Srila Prabhupada clearly answers “yes” to the question asked, but the above paper, written by a GBC member and other
GBC-elected guru hoaxers, simply pretends that Srila Prabhupada does not say “yes”!
Another way to deal with evidence that supports a conclusion that is the opposite of what is required, is to simply get rid of it! GBC-elected guru hoaxer His Holiness Bhakti Vikash Swami (“BVKS”) proposed eliminating an
unanswerable quote by claiming one word had been incorrectly transcribed:
“After all, Caitanya Mahaprabhu ordered all his followers to become guru. So the ritvik-vadis say that that means
you should become a siksa guru and not a diksa guru. And in Prabhupada’s purport to Madhya-lila verse 130, which
comes just after that famous verse amara ajnaya guru haya tara ei desa, “Become a guru and deliver this land”, there is a statement that “It is best not to accept any disciples” [...] I got the original transcript of this and there are mistakes in Prabhupada’s books [...] That should be, “It is best not to accept many disciples”, not “any disciples”
(BVKS, Lecture, 9/2/2009)
He claims that this needs to be done because there was a transcription error, but he presents no evidence for his claim.
The first ever official, circulated transcript of the room conversation of May 28th, 1977, was issued in 1985 as an appendix to the paper Under My Order, by His Grace Ravindra Svarupa Das (“RSD”). To ensure the accuracy of the transcript, RSD made certain to ensure it was independently “checked and corrected” (quote from paper), by none other than the person who had been entrusted at the time with “checking and correcting” Srila Prabhupada’s books,
His Holiness Jayadvaita Swami. So the GBC cannot quibble with the accuracy of the transcript presented. A key portion of the transcript thus presented was as follows:
Srila Prabhupada: “They’re his disciple.”
Tamal Krsna: “They’re his disciple.”
Srila Prabhupada: “Who is initiating. His grand-disciple.”
(Transcript of May 28th, 1977 Room Conversation, Under My Order, Ravindra Svarupa Das, 1985, emphasis added)
The term “His grand-disciple” proves conclusively that the “His” referred to for the initiator is Srila Prabhupada himself, and that Srila Prabhupada is referring to himself in the 3rd person, since only he could even theoretically
have a “grand-disciple”. And Srila Prabhupada then goes on to link the creation of such grand-disciples to him ordering gurus; an order he never gave.
This, however, completely contradicts what the GBC need the transcript to say, which is that the initiator referred to is one of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples, the ritviks. So no problem, they simply changed the above transcript in all future GBC papers (such as Prabhupada’s Order, 1998), to “He is grand-disciple”!
Having seen all of their previous attempts in offering “evidence” for their claims exposed as contradictory
gibberish by the IRM (see IRM replies to GBC papers on our website, www.iskconirm.com), the GBC finally decided to simply not bother even offering evidence! They simply stated what they believed without any attempt to offer
evidence supporting the same:
“The GBC officially accepts the following conclusions about continuing the disciplic succession [...] Srila Prabhupada said that his disciples would become “regular gurus” and that each of their disciples would thus be a “disciple of my disciple.” On the strength of our Vaisnava tradition and the statements of Srila Prabhupada, the GBC concludes that Srila Prabhupada intended his disciples to become “regular gurus” after he physically departed.”
(GBC Resolution 409, 2004)
This GBC resolution comes with no evidence or attempts to explain the claims made in the resolution.
1) First, the IRM showed that the GBC’s guru hoax was defeated by Srila Prabhupada in our various papers such as The Final Order.
2) Since they would not accept Srila Prabhupada’s authority, we then offered them an authority they simply could not refuse - themselves! – in various literatures such as BTP Special Issue 2, and they were shown to also be defeated by themselves.
3) We also demonstrated how the GBC defeat themselves in practise regarding the issue of authorisation of gurus, claiming, on one hand, that all of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples are automatically qualified to be successor diksa gurus, but on the other hand not accepting this in practice via strictly controlling who can become guru via its voting process.
Given such a catalogue of allround defeat, it’s no wonder they have no recourse left but to just blatantly cheat!