Back To Prabhupada, Issue 47, Spring 2015
ontinuing with our journey into ISKCON's war against reality, we offer more examples below. All emphases added.
When Srila Prabhupada used the phrase "on behalf" in connection with the act of giving initiation, it meant, as the term implies, that the initiation would lead to the persons initiated becoming disciples of the person on whose behalf the initiation was given:
"[...] so I think now you may be appointed by me to give first initiations to new disciples by chanting on their beads on my behalf. [...] They shall, of course, still be considered as my disciples, not that they shall become your disciples"
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, 4/1/73)
Similarly, shortly before his physical departure, Srila Prabhupada appointed representatives ("rtviks") to give a spiritual name on his behalf, and this led to the initiate becoming Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciple:
"these representatives may accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupad by giving a spiritual name"
(July 9th, 1977 Letter, signed by Srila Prabhupada)
Given this fact, whenever Srila Prabhupada conducted an initiation, he never stated that he was accepting the disciple, or giving them an initiated name, "on behalf" of his guru, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. Otherwise, as just seen, this would have meant that the initiate would have become the disciple of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, and not Srila Prabhupada. Therefore, when conducting initiation activities, acting on Srila Prabhupada's behalf means that the initiate will become the initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada, and not the disciple of the person who is carrying out the activity!
At ISKCON initiation ceremonies, it is being claimed that the initiators are acting "on behalf of Srila Prabhupada":
"And I am giving you initiation on behalf of ISKCON, on behalf of Prabhupada. [...] On behalf of Srila Prabhupada I give you your spiritual name, Parama Karuna Dasa".
(Bhakti Charu Swami, Initiation ceremony, 2/7/11)
"On behalf of His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada, I'm very happy to give you the name Saci Mayi Devi Dasi."
(Radhanath Swami, Initiation ceremony, 7/12/14)
Thus, according to the statements made by Srila Prabhupada in the previous section, the use of this language here would clearly mean that those initiated would become Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples, with those carrying out the initiation acting on Srila Prabhupada's behalf as his representatives or rtviks. But that is not what actually happens. Despite what is stated, those initiated are claimed to be the disciples of those who are carrying out the initiation ceremony.
However, assume that the initiators in question, HH Bhakti Charu Swami and HH Radhanath Swami, had actually done what they stated, and acted "on behalf of Srila Prabhupada" by initiating the initiates as Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples. Then, in that case, due to having truly acted on Srila Prabhupada's behalf, they would actually have been thrown out of ISKCON! Because to accept disciples on Srila Prabhupada's behalf (the position of the IRM) is considered by the GBC to be "rtvikism", and the GBC claims that this is a "dangerous philosophical deviation" (GBC Resolution 303, 1999).
We therefore have the following crazy situation:
a) If you pretend to falsely accept disciples "on behalf" of Srila Prabhupada, then this is considered bona fide.
b) If you actually accept disciples "on behalf" of Srila Prabhupada, then this is considered a great sin!
Thus, the reality of what is stated must be denied, and instead one must act in a manner that is false according to what one states.
The IRM's position, which the GBC refer to as "rtvikism", and a "dangerous philosophical deviation", as mentioned above, is the following:
a) Those persons who replaced Srila Prabhupada following his physical departure as successor diksa gurus are unauthorised. This is because Srila Prabhupada only authorised his disciples to act siksa (instructor) gurus, with himself remaining the diksa guru:
"The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am in the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing."
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, 4/8/75)
And Srila Prabhupada never changed this system by authorising his disciples to succeed him as diksa guru.
b) Therefore, such supposed successor diksa gurus should be rejected. One may, however, accept persons other than Srila Prabhupada as siksa gurus.
Krishna-kirti Dasa ("KKD") was the GBC's authorised spokesman in the official debate with the IRM which was published by Martin Luther University in Germany. Here is what he did:
a) In 2009, he rejected his ISKCON diksa guru, HH Hridayananda Dasa Goswami:
"my leaving him as a disciple in 2009, and declaration of such, was simply a formal recognition of his fallen condition".
(KKD announcement, 6/12/14)
b) He has now opted to follow the IRM's policy of "no diksa, siksa only" in regards to anyone other than Srila Prabhupada, for he has subsequently not taken another diksa guru and instead only accepted a siksa guru:
"His Holiness Bhakti Vikasa Swami very kindly accepted me as his shiksha disciple."
(KKD announcement, 6/12/14)
However, in the official GBC debate, as part of his attack on the IRM, KKD had stated that:
"Srila Prabhupada himself has said a physically present diksa-guru is necessary."
(KKD, Official GBC debate submission, p. 125)
Thus, through his actions, KKD is agreeing that this statement is not correct, as he himself has rejected "a physically present diksa-guru" and has not accepted another physically present diksa guru. Yet, an IRM supporter is considered by KKD (and His Holiness Bhakti Vikasa Swami) as not being correctly situated spiritually if he does not have a physically present diksa guru. Hence, since KKD is in the same position, he is rejecting the very reality he himself is living!
Every BTP issue is basically documenting how today's ISKCON engages in accepting that which is false at the expense of reality. These two pages merely give further examples of this. In BTP 35 we explained this concept as being a "parallel world" in which ISKCON lives. And, as Srila Prabhupada explained in the introduction on the previous page, this parallel world is one in which they "serve the illusion", while the rest of us exist in the real world, where we serve "the reality".
Return to IRM Homepage