Back To Prabhupada, Issue 72, Vol 1, 2022
Since The Final Order (TFO), the IRM's position paper, was presented to the GBC over a quarter of a century ago in 1996, numerous attempts have been made to answer it. That all have failed is epitomised by the fact that the GBC has felt the need to do yet another presentation against TFO, or what the GBC calls the "rtvik theory". GBC member and GBC voted-in guru HH Badrinarayan Swami ("BAD") explained in a lecture on 5/12/21 that there was a request in a "GBC discussion" for a "PowerPoint (slideshow) on this rtvik", and that the GBC asked him to do it. Hence, he and another GBC member and GBC voted-in guru, HH Bhakti Vaibhava Swami, have prepared a slideshow presentation titled "The Rtvik Theory", which has been circulated in ISKCON. However, as we shall show, the slideshow merely highlights why, after a quarter of a century, still no one has been able to refute TFO. The statements in the shaded boxes are taken directly from this slideshow.
"One of those questions the GBC asked of Srila Prabhupada was: ‘Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you're no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.'
Srila Prabhupada's answer:
Srila Prabhupada starts by explain [sic] the system to be practiced while he is still physically present:
Satsvarupa: "Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the..."
[...]
This is taken from the May 28th, 1977, conversation, and the question directly asks how initiations would be conducted "particularly at that time when you're no longer with us". Clearly, if Srila Prabhupada's answer to this is "rtvik", it completely destroys the GBC's guru hoax. And that is what Srila Prabhupada answers, for this is his immediate and actual answer to the question asked:
Srila Prabhupada: "Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acarya."
Tamal Krsna Goswami: "Is that called rtvik acarya?"
Srila Prabhupada: "Rtvik. Yes."
(May 28th, 1977, Conversation)
So, this does completely destroy the GBC's guru hoax as Srila Prabhupada's answer to how initiations would be conducted after he is ‘particularly no longer with us' is "rtvik". And the GBC also knows this, because the slideshow deliberately deletes this answer, and instead claims as shown above that Srila Prabhupada's answer is actually Satsvarupa asking another question! Thus, the slideshow deliberately deletes Srila Prabhupada's words in the hope that no one will bother to read anything other than the slideshow. This is the same approach of relying on the audience's ignorance which caused all the previous GBC attempts to answer the "rtvik theory", or TFO, to fail, and that is why this slideshow also similarly fails.
"Srila Prabhupada then states how initiations should go on when he was no longer physically present.
Tamala Krsna: "...The people who they give diksa to, whose disciple are they?"
Srila Prabhupada: "They're his disciple."
Tamala Krsna: "They're his disciple?"
Srila Prabhupada: "Who is initiating. He is grand-disciple. [...]"
Again, the above excerpt is taken from the May 28th, 1977, conversation.
Only, Srila Prabhupada does not say "He is" before the word "grand-disciple", because:
1) Srila Prabhupada only speaks one word before saying "grand-disciple", rather than two words.
2) That one word is "his".
One can listen for oneself to Srila Prabhupada speaking this one word rather than two words, by going to the audio clip here.
The significance of the GBC making this change was explained in the BTP 52 article "Zonal Acarya Hoax Revival Continues!", which can be read here.
As we saw in this and the previous section, when your case relies on needing to delete and change Srila Prabhupada's words, then it proves that you have no case. Otherwise, one could just be honest and present Srila Prabhupada's words truthfully: one would not need to cheat and doctor Srila Prabhupada's words.
We have just seen that the guru hoax is destroyed by Srila Prabhupada's "rtvik" answer, and that the GBC effectively admits this defeat by cheating and deliberately hiding that answer. Another example of self-defeat is the following claim:
"Q: Doesn't the July letter prove that Srila Prabhupada wanted a proxy system?
A: It proves that he wanted a proxy system for the remainder of the time he was physically on the planet, as everyone has agreed all along. It was intended as a time-bound system, put in place until Srila Prabhupada's physical disappearance."
a) Since the letter does not mention Srila Prabhupada's physical presence, there would be no way to tether the rtvik (proxy) system to only being "put in place until Srila Prabhupada's physical disappearance" unless it mentioned Srila Prabhupada's departure – otherwise there is no basis for the claim. One cannot just look at an instruction Srila Prabhupada gave and then invent how long it is supposed to be applicable for, without some mention of this!
b) However, the slideshow also helpfully informs us that –
"The July 9th letter does not mention Srila Prabhupada's departure..."
– thereby destroying its basis for claiming that the letter's instructions were to be terminated on Srila Prabhupada's departure!
"Rather the Vedic tradition is to accept a physically present spiritual master. This is a cornerstone of Vedic principles. This is one point that the impersonalists, personalists, shaktas, etc. all agree on."
1) Srila Prabhupada never states that one must "accept a physically present spiritual master", or that this is a "Vedic principle".
2) If an instruction is not stated by Srila Prabhupada, then we obviously cannot use this nonexistent instruction to stop following an instruction – the rtvik system of initiation given in the July 9th, 1977, letter – which it is not disputed Srila Prabhupada did give.
3) The fact that there is no evidence from Srila Prabhupada for this "physically present spiritual master" claim is shown by the desperation in choosing impersonalists and shaktas as authorities for the claim!
"However, one can ask: But why use the word my? Surely this means that all initiates in the future will be direct disciples of Srila Prabhupada.
But remember, at the time, everyone was a disciple of Srila Prabhupada. [...] As presented earlier, ultimately, all future initiated devotees are Srila Prabhupada disciples in that they are following him and connected to him via the guru-parampara system."
The question posed refers to Srila Prabhupada's Last Will and Testament stating that all future directors for permanent temple properties in India would always be "my initiated disciple", where the "my" refers to Srila Prabhupada. Which in turn would prove "that all initiates in the future will be direct disciples of Srila Prabhupada". In response, the slideshow then deliberately ignores this very question that they themselves have posed about Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples, and instead refers to those who are not initiated by Srila Prabhupada being able to become non-initiated disciples of Srila Prabhupada. Thus, the question specifically asks about Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples and the "answer" only refers to non-initiated disciples of Srila Prabhupada. If one wished to highlight one's complete inability to answer a question, this would be the way to do it: by answering the opposite of what is being asked!
"The rtvik theory claims that the disciplic succession should have ended with Srila Prabhupada."
1) Unable to answer what we do say, the presentation instead attributes to us what we don't say. Thus, we do not claim that the "disciplic succession should have ended with Srila Prabhupada". We simply state that he is the Acarya, which also means diksa guru, for his own Society, ISKCON. This point is proven by the GBC itself, as we show by quoting its statements verbatim in the book: Srila Prabhupada: The Founder-Acarya of ISKCON – Presenting the Conclusions of the GBC Foundational Document.
2) Ironically, as shown in the previous article, it is the GBC guru system which does not follow the system of disciplic succession!
3) Obviously, if one does not answer what the "rtvik theory" actually states, then one will not be able to answer it – period!
Above we have dealt with the key points that the slideshow presents. And we have been able to show that:
1) Srila Prabhupada ordered rtviks for when he was ‘particularly no longer with us'.
2) Srila Prabhupada's rtvik system was not terminated on his physical departure.
3) The slideshow does not answer TFO and the so-called "rtvik theory".
However, for completeness, we have also answered every point the slideshow makes, and this can be read here.
It is bad enough that the slideshow lies. But in the lecture which BAD gave on 5/12/21 to accompany this slideshow presentation, BAD goes further and adds more lies of his own while he is explaining what the slides state.
1) When referring to the July 9th, 1977, letter, BAD claims this about its contents:
"so he said, "we'll do it this way", and he named people to answer the letters, to give the names, and to initiate. But Prabhupada said, "But they are my disciples because I am still physically present", and their names were entered [...] as Prabhupada disciples."
But it is not stated in the July 9th, 1977, letter that they are Srila Prabhupada's disciples because he is "still physically present". The term "physically present" does not appear. This is just BAD's fabrication.
2) About Srila Prabhupada, BAD claims:
"he had been giving the order in his conversations, repeatedly he gave the same order, when you become qualified and become diksa guru"
Although Srila Prabhupada does state many times that one should "become guru", he has never ordered "become diksa guru". That phrase is never uttered by Srila Prabhupada. This is just BAD's fabrication.
3) Referring to what the IRM or the "rtvik theory" states, BAD claims:
"This is their presentation, ‘Sure, that was Prabhupada's plan, but at the last minute, in the last six months, he realized, ‘Oh, they are not qualified, this is not going to work. I've got to introduce a new system' '."
We have never claimed that Srila Prabhupada was always intending to order successor diksa gurus but then changed his mind at the last minute. This is just BAD's fabrication.
GBC voted-in guru HH Bhakti Vikasa Swami ("BVKS") gave the same slideshow presentation we have just covered, in a lecture that he gave on 26/2/22. However, like BAD, whilst commenting on the slideshow, he also could not help but make false statements.
While referring to the contents of the May 28th, 1977, conversation as mentioned above, BVKS claimed:
"Now we have people newly inducted into the rtvik system who are very well aware that Srila Prabhupada said ‘officiating acarya' in that conversation, but no one tells them, they don't know, that Srila Prabhupada also said, ‘grand disciple', ‘disciple of my disciple', ‘regular guru'. That's why the rtvik hoax, they're not telling you everything."
a) As we demonstrated, it is the slideshow that is deliberately "not telling you everything", as it does not mention that "Srila Prabhupada even said ‘officiating acarya' in that conversation"!
b) On the other hand, The Final Order (which BVKS calls "the rtvik Bible") mentions "grand-disciple", "disciple of my disciple", and "regular guru"; that is, it does tell you everything.
So there you have it. After a quarter of a century, the GBC is still unable to put a dent in The Final Order. And if the GBC has not been able to do it after so long, there is no reason it will be able to do it in another quarter of a century, or ever.
Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click Here
Return to Badrinarayan Swami Index
Return to Bhakti Vaibhava Swami Index
Return to GBC Index
Return to IRM Homepage
