elcome to Issue 83 of Back To Prabhupada (BTP).
Almost 30 years ago, we defeated the GBC's guru hoax from every philosophical angle, such as:
1) Srila Prabhupada's orders: The Final Order.
2) Ontologically: "The Sastric Basis for Srila Prabhupada's Continued Diksa Status".
3) Paradigmatically: "The No Change in ISKCON Paradigm" ("NCIP").
4) Subsequently, we have also added the indisputable "argument killer" technique of proving the same through the statements of ISKCON's own leaders, in BTP's ISKCON Leaders Special Issue.
The paradigmatic defeat of the guru hoax – NCIP – establishes that whatever Srila Prabhupada instituted and ordered should be maintained, rather than changed. However, we will show it being ridiculously misused to justify the exact opposite – "change", rather than "no change".
a) If Srila Prabhupada had set up a GBC guru system, he would have given instructions for its operation. One does not establish a new system without giving even a hint about how it should be implemented. Rather, the lack of instructions for its implementation is a clear sign that it was not meant to be implemented!
b) ISKCON GBC guru HH Hridayananda Dasa Goswami ("HD") has written a new paper titled A Historical Review of ISKCON's Initiation System (henceforward "HR" throughout this issue), which was published in the current ISKCON Communications Journal, Volume 15. Quotes from HR will be in shaded boxes below. HD admits that, in regard to the GBC guru system:
"Prabhupada had not left a single detailed instruction regarding the honor to be accorded to a new guru". (All emphases in issue added)
As explained in point a), this lack of instruction from Srila Prabhupada for how the new GBC guru system should operate would mean that he had not actually given any instructions for a GBC guru system, period. Thus, to get around this, HD is forced to engage in the following mental gymnastics.
c) HD admits that this lack of instruction meant that the first GBC gurus were then forced to simply copy the honour given to Srila Prabhupada:
"his disciples accepted a standard of honor that followed – but was unequal to – the one previously offered to Prabhupada."
HD states that such copying was justified due to:
"Prabhupada's insistence that nothing he had introduced was to be changed".
HD appears to be referring to the following letter from Srila Prabhupada:
"Whatever I have introduced should remain. [...] Carefully manage things what I have established."
(Srila Prabhupada, Letter, 4/9/74)
HD thus accepts the "No Change" principle used by the IRM (NCIP), and taught by Srila Prabhupada, that whatever Srila Prabhupada "introduced" should not be changed. Only, HD uses "no change" to mean that the worship Srila Prabhupada introduced for himself should apply to successor diksa gurus!
d) But Srila Prabhupada first "introduced" the rtvik system, which was formalised on July 9th, 1977, to enable him to remain the diksa guru of ISKCON. Therefore, by HD's "no change" logic, this should not have been changed. But, if this was not changed, then successor gurus would not even exist. And thus the question of applying "no change" logic to the worship of successor diksa gurus cannot even arise, since the same "no change" logic would mean they would not exist to take worship in the first place! HD has therefore stunningly applied "no change" logic back to front, whereby "no change" is applied to facilitate the "change" to ISKCON's diksa guru, Srila Prabhupada, with successors, such as himself.
When the guru hoax has to rely on claiming "no change" means "change", it is just yet another sign that we are definitely dealing with a hoax rather than a philosophically and sastrically supported system. Otherwise, there would be no need for such illogical and twisted argumentation.
Thank you and Hare Krsna.
In Srila Prabhupada's service,
Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click Here
Return to HD Goswami Index
Return to IRM Homepage
