Back To Prabhupada, Issue 80, 2024
In the previous article, we noted that those in ISKCON opposed to female diksa gurus ("FDG") had been forced to accept the IRM's position that Srila Prabhupada's many instructions to "become guru" do not refer to diksa gurus, but rather just to anyone who preaches. This has thus forced them to scramble around looking for other instructions that they can claim are a diksa guru order from Srila Prabhupada. In their desperation, the ISKCON India Scholars Board (ISKCON India's "brahminical" advisory body) has made a video presentation of the leading light of the anti-FDG movement, and vice chairman of ISKCON India's governing body, Basu Ghosh Dasa ("BGD"), speaking at length on one quote from Srila Prabhupada which they feel gives them their elusive "diksa guru order". The excerpts in the shaded boxes are taken from this presentation, which was published on 26/4/24. Emphases added.
The quote in question refers to the "law of disciplic succession", and states:
"This is the law of disciplic succession. I want to see my disciples become bona fide Spiritual Master..."
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, 2/12/75)
Srila Prabhupada says "my disciples", and earlier in the letter he refers to "every student". He does not say "my male disciples" or every "male student", which means that Srila Prabhupada is clearly referring to all his disciples, both male and female, in this letter. However, ISKCON India have already accepted that such quotes cannot be referring to diksa gurus if they also refer to females, due to their anti-FDG beliefs! This means that the presentation is defeated even before it has begun due to this FDG contradiction, and thus was just a complete waste of time. So they again need to go back to the drawing board and try to find another supposed "diksa guru order".
The quote also states:
"But as a matter of etiquette it is the custom that during the lifetime of your Spiritual master you bring the prospective disciples to him, and in his absence or disappearance you can accept disciples without any limitation. This is the law of disciplic succession."
1) The "law" states that one cannot accept disciples unless one's own spiritual master has first physically disappeared.
2) Recently deceased ISKCON guru, HH Gopala Krsna Goswami ("GKG"), had earlier ordered that this law not be followed, since his own disciple became a GBC diksa guru in his physical presence: HH Bhakti Ratnakara Ambarisa Swami (2022).
3) We noted in previous articles that ISKCON India have glorified all of GKG's "transcendental instructions", which would include his order that this "law" not be followed.
Thus, due to their support for GKG's order to his disciple to not follow the law, ISKCON India again have demonstrated that they do not even believe in this law. We already showed in the previous section that the presentation was already destroyed before it even began. But, just in case there was any chance it could still survive, this further contradiction ensures that it is definitely blown up and buried for good!
Referring to the "law", it is claimed:
"they ["rtviks" – Ed.] deny clear evidence that a guru doesn't continue to initiate after he leaves his body, after he disappears. [...] there's a law of disciplic succession, that the disciple will become a guru in the absence of his guru."
In order to claim that a guru "doesn't" initiate and the disciple "will become" a guru after his own guru disappears, the law would need to state:
a) The guru must stop initiating, or cannot or does not initiate after his disappearance;
b) and that his disciple will or must succeed him on his disappearance.
However, the law does not state any of the above. Indeed, the law makes no reference at all to the guru's ability to initiate after he disappears. It only states that after the guru disappears is when the disciple:
"can", not "will", accept disciples.
Thus, the false claim made about the law by the presentation refers to a certainty. The law however only states a possibility. Hence, the whole argument about how the "law" somehow establishes that Srila Prabhupada is not ISKCON's diksa guru is based on claiming something the law does not even state.
1) By definition, because the law only states the possibility of succession, one would still need a diksa guru succession order for the succession to actually take place. And a law that simply states this possibility cannot itself be the order for this succession.
2) Rather, in order for the law to be applied and a succession to occur, Srila Prabhupada would need to state that he was ceasing to initiate by appointing a successor to succeed him. But the presentation itself admits that Srila Prabhupada did not appoint a successor:
"So when Prabhupada, Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, disappeared on November 14th, 1977, he did not appoint a successor."
Indeed, there is no record of Srila Prabhupada ordering that his disciples must or will succeed him as diksa gurus when he physically departs. And thus, without such an order, Srila Prabhupada does not automatically cease to initiate and become forcibly succeeded just because he physically disappeared.
3) Rather, on July 9th, 1977, Srila Prabhupada established a "rtvik" initiation system for ISKCON that would mean he would continue to initiate rather than cease to initiate. Indeed, the system was specifically set up to allow Srila Prabhupada to continue to initiate without the need for his physical presence.
Thus, that a guru "can" be succeeded only becomes relevant if a succession is required due to the guru ceasing to initiate by ordering a successor – but this was never done.
1) We have been able to show how ISKCON India's whole presentation is self-defeated by the "law" of self-destruction, also known as "contradiction"! Thus, we do not need to refute the presentation since it has refuted itself.
2) The law of disciplic succession still requires a separate diksa guru succession order. But such an order was never given by Srila Prabhupada, who instead ordered that he continue to initiate in ISKCON. Indeed, making a whole presentation claiming that this one letter, which simply states the "law", is itself the diksa guru succession order, is evidence of the desperation that exists due to there being no diksa guru succession order which exists!
Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click Here
Return to Basu Ghosh Dasa Index
Return to Gopala Krsna Goswami Index
Return to ISKCON India Scholars Board Index
Return to "Order to Be Guru" Index
Return to "Succession" Index
Return to IRM Homepage
