Back To Prabhupada, Issue 49, Autumn 2015
new book entitled The Guru & Disciple Book, which no less than 17 GBC members and gurus "helped write" (according to its Acknowledgements section) was recently published. In the Foreword to this book, GBC member and guru HH Bhakti Vijnana Goswami ("BVG") claims it will address what is a "controversial" subject matter. Quotes in the shaded panels are from this book.
"it deals with many important issues, many of which are largely unresolved in the circles of the Krishna consciousness movement. Why do we need a living guru? Is it not enough to have Srila Prabhupada as the guru for all?"
(BVG, Foreword)
This is a stark admission. Whether Srila Prabhupada can continue to remain ISKCON's diksa guru "for all" or must be replaced with "living" (meaning henceforward "physically present") gurus is the key issue facing the movement. Yet, a GBC member confesses that this issue is "largely unresolved in the circles of the Krishna consciousness movement". However, at the same time, for the last almost 40 years the GBC has been running the ISKCON movement based on the assumptions that:
a) Srila Prabhupada is not the guru for everyone;
b) He must instead be replaced with gurus who are "living".
Yet, the rational course of action would be to:
i) First completely resolve an issue;
ii) Then act.
Instead, a back-to-front course of action has been taken:
i) First a "living guru" program is run;
ii) Then, almost 40 years later, a book is written which claims to resolve if such a course of action should even have been taken!
Such back-to-front, topsy-turvy actions are characteristic of the age of Kali (quarrel and hypocrisy) in which we live:
"Therefore, by the influence of the age of Kali, everywhere, politically, socially or religiously, everything is topsy-turvy, and therefore for the sane man it is all regrettable."
(Srimad-Bhagavatam, 1.16.22)
However, the Krishna consciousness movement is supposed to be combatting this influence of Kali, not manifesting it! Therefore, by not first fully resolving this issue before implementing it, the GBC has run the risk of running the wrong system for 40 years. And, as we shall show, that is exactly what they have been doing!
The following facts demonstrate that the issue is actually resolved:
a) Virtually the entire leadership of the Krishna consciousness movement has had no "living guru" for almost 40 years.
b) Many in this same group of devotees were relatively new devotees when Srila Prabhupada physically departed. Yet they claim that they were able many years later to miraculously transform themselves into the most spiritually advanced "good as God" gurus, without the need for any "living" guru! Rather, they only had the help of Srila Prabhupada as the guru.
One good example of this is the very author of this "Guru & Disciple" book, GBC-elected guru, Kripamoya Dasa ("KMD"). KMD had only been a devotee for 2 years when Srila Prabhupada physically departed, and admits that he had basically no physical association with Srila Prabhupada:
"you (Srila Prabhupada) replied "Jaya" [...] That was the only word you said to me directly [...] One word spoken thirty years previously".
(KMD, Vyasa-puja Offering to Srila Prabhupada, 2007)
Thus, by their own actions, these GBC gurus are effectively accepting that:
a) No "living" guru is required.
b) Srila Prabhupada is sufficient as the guru.
Hence, for these same GBC gurus to then demand that we accept them rather than Srila Prabhupada as the guru, on the plea that the guru must be "living", is just more "topsy-turvy" Kali-yuga madness.
Indeed, as we shall see, the book neither does, nor can, offer any evidence to claim that we must follow a "living" guru program that the GBC gurus themselves are not following.
All the book manages to achieve is confirmation of the IRM's position that Srila Prabhupada remains the diksa guru "for all" in ISKCON by having established a rtvik representative system of initiation. It does this by making 3 key admissions:
Step 1: Rtviks only
"In July 1977, he (Srila Prabhupada) lists eleven names of disciples [...] The letter does not appoint the eleven as gurus, it merely appoints them as continental representatives".
It is accepted that Srila Prabhupada appointed 11 disciples to act only as continental representatives (rtviks) who would help make initiated disciples for Srila Prabhupada.
Step 2: No gurus
"In May 1977, Srila Prabhupada said that he would select some of his disciples to act as guru, but by November the only selection that vaguely resembled anything like that was the choosing of eleven to act as continental representatives in the matter of initiation."
Regardless of the truth of the claim made here, that Srila Prabhupada would select some disciples to act as guru, it is conceded that no such selection ever took place. Rather, the only selection made was for rtviks, who were to make disciples for Srila Prabhupada. Thus, Srila Prabhupada did not authorise any gurus, but did authorise rtviks.
Step 3: Rtviks remain
"It was a simple assumption to make that Srila Prabhupada's passing automatically promoted those eleven into the role of guru."
Having already accepted that only rtviks, and not gurus, were authorised, it is conceded that these rtviks only stopped acting as rtviks because it was falsely assumed that the rtviks should be promoted to gurus. Thus, if we remove this assumption, the promotion is also removed, and the rtviks therefore remain as rtviks.
Thus, in summary:
1) Srila Prabhupada only selected rtviks.
2) He did not select gurus.
3) The rtviks should not have changed into gurus.
As is now customary, whenever the GBC and gurus make any attempt to defeat Srila Prabhupada's position as ISKCON's diksa guru, they only end up achieving the exact opposite! And this book is no different. It is not possible to defeat the truth, and therefore by continuing to attempt to do so, ISKCON's leaders simply continue to make fools of themselves.
Return to IRM Homepage