oldchakra.com

The Ritvik Debate

[HOME]

 

 
  oldchakra.com
 HOME 
  Srila Prabhupada
 Prabhupada Page
 About Prabhupada
 Disciple Database
  Features
 
Advertisements  
 Appreciations 
 Calendar
 Debates
 Downloads
 Earlier Topics
 Gopal Jiu 
 In Memoriam
 Jokes
 Letters
 Other News 
 Personals
 Philosophy
 Resources
  Lifestyle
 
Cow Protection
 Education 
 Matchmaker
 Recipes 
 Vegetarianism
  Books 
 BBT
 Book Distribution
 Book Changes
  Websites
 CHAKRA 
 Links 
  Social Issues 
 Child Abuse
 Women
 Youth
 Charity
  Opinion
 Editorials 
 Narayan Mhrj
 Poison Issue  
 Ritvik
 VNN
  ISKCON
 
ISKCON Page
 ISKCON Reform
 GBC
 Temples
  Contributors
 Danavir dasa Gosw
 Indradyumna Sw
 Kavicandra Sw

 

Posthumous Initiation in ISKCON:
Is it sanctioned by Srila Prabhupada?
by Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

 

Hare Krishna 
Hare Krishna 
Krishna Krishna 
Hare Hare 
Hare Rama 
Hare Rama 
Rama Rama 
Hare Hare

Note: Only the summary is presented below. Click here to download the entire file. The file will be in zipped format. To unzip, just double click on the file. The unzipped file will be in RTF format, compatible with most word processors.

Summary of Contents

Evidence

Srila Prabhupada’s books are shown to be the foundation of all other instructions he issued outside of his published books. It is further shown that because these other instructions are based on his books, they are also authoritative. Claims that some letters written by Srila Prabhupada contain benevolent lies to placate ambitious disciples are shown to be false and based on partially quoted references.

Physical Presence

The key terms "physical presence" and "departure" are explained with regard to evidence in Srila Prabhupada’s books. This definition is then applied to various instructions wherein Srila Prabhupada uses the terms "absence" or "disappearance." This definition also explains how TFO’s attempt to annul the term "disappearance" is fallacious. "Interplanetary Diksa," a term coined by TFO’s authors, is shown to be based on a series of misquoted references.

....more


Some Thoughts on the Ritvik Controversy
by Babhru das 

The title of Mayesvara prabhu's recent article says it all. The real question regarding the so-called ritvik controversy is, "Where is the evidence that Srila Prabhupada ordered that ISKCON create a system of initiation based on what Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur called ultrametempsychosis?" As he has on so many previous occasions, Mayesvara takes much trouble to demonstrate yet again some reasons so many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples remain unconvinced by the case based on Bhakta Krishnakant Desai's essay, "The Final Order." Despite his cleverness, Mr. Desai never really makes the case he hopes to. 


Thanks and appreciation from oldchakra.com to our sponsor and host,

Did He Or Didn't He?
By Mayesvara dasa

There has been a lot of scriptural research, many papers written, spontaneous sidewalk conferences, e-mails sent, and meetings held in an attempt to determine what system for initiation Srila Prabhupada wanted his disciples to follow after his departure.  After 22 years of debate most devotees agree that the proper answer is found in one of  two systems.

This is really the question that has been placed into the court of devotee arbitration and it can be boiled down even further into the following succinct sutra; “Did he, or Didn’t he?”   That is the essence of the question before us…. nothing else.


Ritviks Preaching at Kumbha Mela
By Name withheld at the request of the author

Recently while staying at the Kumbha Mela festival in Allahabad I went over to visit the Ritvik camp as I had heard about their 15 metre high deities of Gaura Nitai. They were very impressive.

© CHAKRA 27 February 2001


VNN Report about incident in Malasia exaggerated
By Bhakta Siva

CHAKRA (Taiping, Malasia) -

By Bhakta Siva Taiping. 4/8/99

This report by me is to clarify the VNN report by Ravi Krsna dasa as regards to the incident involving Radha Prananatha dasa and Raja Krsna dasa recently at Taiping, Malaysia. Since I was present at the time and place of the incident, I wish to report the incident as accurately as I can remember.

My first comment is that Ravi Krishna dasa could not have written the report, as he is illiterate in English and did not even know the actual content of his report. This clearly shows that a third party using Ravi Krsna’s name wrote the report. It is full of exaggeration.

Ravi Krsna's report is a lie.

Based on my report it is clear that the so-called Ravi Krsna dasa's report overly exaggerated the incident so as to discredit HH Jayapataka Swami and ISKCON as a whole.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 15-Jan-2004


Ritvik Dissention in Calcutta
By Sridham das Brahmacari (Calcutta)

I do not want to leave this Calcutta temple in which I have served Sri Sri Radha Govinda for 10 years. I request all authorities concerned to direct Adri not to further abuse me physically or psychologically, or implicate me in any false case. I pray to Sri Sri Radha Govinda and Srila Prabhupada to give Adri some good conscience and detachment from the post of temple president.  
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 7-October-2000


Response to Allegations that Jayapataka Swami is on the Run
By Goloka Chandra das

If you have received recent mass mailings from the IRM or read their postings on public forums, and want to know what's really going on, then read this text which presents all the known facts of a case currently under investigation. 

1) There is no arrest order on Jayapataka Maharaja issued by the police anywhere in the world.

2) Since there is no warrant of arrest on him, he is not on the run. As a sannyasi, he is traveling and preaching as he has always been doing all these years on the direct order of his spiritual master, His Divine Grace AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada.  
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-September-2000


Adridharan Replies to Sad Bhuja
By Adridharan dasa

This is reply to the article on CHAKRA by Sad Bhuja Das, who has written claiming that one of our IRM (ISKCON Revival Movement) newsletters contained a number of errors. We have nothing to hide, and would be glad if Sad Bhuja Prabhu gave us an excuse under CHAKRA's policy of “right of reply” to get all the information out to the CHAKRA readers. It will document in more detail why Uttama Sloka left, and why he was right to have done so.  
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 18-July-2000


Ritviks Rant and Rave - Open Letter to Adridharan
By Sadbhuja dasa

I wish to point out a number of errors in the information you have provided your readers. As a man of integrity, I am sure that you will have no hesitation in publicly correcting them. Firstly, as you are aware since you and I have had a number of long conversations regarding this matter, the money that was supposedly taken from the Samadhi funds was never actually removed. That money was allocated as an advance payment to purchase a building to house all the devotees who do service in the Samadhi. 
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 9-July-2000


Let’s Stop the Banning
By Anudasa
Raghunatha

This banning and intolerance is the single most condemned behavior of the ISKCON authorities, for all other necessary reforms would have taken place if “protester” god-brothers had remained.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 09-Mar-2000


The Singapore Situation
A different view A Response to Bhakta Gansham Khialani’s Article
By Bhakta R. Jai Simman

We wish to present our reply to Bhakta Gansham Khialani. In that process, we would also like to present our case before the assembly of Vaishnavas on this forum.

We would like to thank Gansham Prabhu for his sufficient honesty in being indirectly grateful to the temple for his initial advancement in Krishna Consciousness. We would also like to thank him for the innumerable services that he has offered for the pleasure of Sri Sri Radha Madan Mohan.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 07-Mar-2000


An Opponent of Ritvik Doctrine Defends Dravinaksha
By Pancha Tattva dasa

I am writing to take strong exception to an editorial titled “Undying Ritvikism In Alachua,” which was published recently on the VNN Web site. The author, Bhakta dasa (Is this his real name?), writes very critically of the temple board of ISKCON New Raman Reti, Alachua, for allowing a devotee named Dravinaksha dasa to give Srimad Bhagavatam class.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 30-Jan-2000


Appreciating “Disciple of my Disciple”
By Bhakta Zac

We have just watched “Disciple of my disciple” here at Govindadwipa and it was impressive. I felt that it was a factual presentation and felt that this is a useful tool to keep members of ISKCON faithful and not prone to the devious doctrine expertly counteracted by it.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jan-2000


Ritvik & Poison addiction can be harmful to your health
By Iksvaku das

I just returned to ISKCON after a 6 year bout with maya so please understand how appreciative I am that ISKCON is still here to take shelter of. After being informed by several souls of the Ritvik and poison “evidence” I must say you had me believing it for a while. During that while my poison and ritvik consciousness blinded me to the real purpose of the movement Srila Prabhupada established for the next 10,000 years and I thought (being the sincere souls you are) you might be interested in hearing what effect these issues had on my mind.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jan-2000


Letter of grievance from ISKCON New York

The IRG has seen fit to pursue their own agenda through aggressive anti-ISKCON maneuvers and behavior embarrassing to the Society. We do not agree with the philosophical veneer that coats their actions. We accept, however, that divergent interpretation has a long-standing role in Vaisnava tradition, and we would like to extend an invitation to the IRG to meet with us to explore more fully their position on initiation and related matters. We are, however, unable to extend such an invitation as long as their reprehensible mode of conduct continues.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 19-Oct-1999


Pandora's Box (or: The 10% Solution)
By Jalakara das

One of the prevailing underlying themes of the ritvik case is once Srila Prabhupada is established as the eternal initiating guru and thus placed firmly in the center of ISKCON life; all divisions and quarrels will vanish. Don’t be deluded by promises of a flowery future, which only delivers years of turbulence and strife. Don’t abandon the parampara and truncate it because it seemed like a good idea at the time. Cling to what has been tried and found successful before, even if you feel yourself faithless and lacking, for the path of Caitanya Mahaprabhu is valid and true. It is not required for us to tinker with it one little bit. If out of desperation some feel forced into that situation, then that is our sad failure, not their philosophical success. Just because many big leaders misapplied the philosophy, that doesn’t mean others have a license to misapply at will it as well.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 19-Oct-1999


Dayaram's mistake
By Adri Dharan dasa

In trying to falsely claim that Radhapada dasa was the only donor for the ISKCON property at 22, Gurusaday Road, Calcutta, Dayarama dasa has made many easily disprovable statements.The proof that Radhapada dasa was not the only donor comes from 5 different sources of evidence:  
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 30-Sep-1999


Response to Hari Sauri: recollections of the Calcutta Pandal issue
By Harivilasa dasa

CHAKRA (Seattle, WA, USA) - September 22, 1999: Adridharan remained polite and actually consented to a compromise knowing well that his other donors would be displeased. My personal experience with Radhapad has always been cordial and I have appreciated his sincere efforts to push on ISKCON’s missionary activities, however, like Mahaprabhu Prabhu, I was also very shocked by his unwarranted criticism of ISKCON leadership and his seemingly selfish demands to promote himself as the only donor at Gursaday Road. 
>Full Story

See also " We didn't burn down the Pandal" by Hari Sauri.

© CHAKRA 22-Sep-1999


UK "IRG" reports program success

CHAKRA (Bhaktivedanta Manor, UK) - September 14, 1999: A reporter claims that CHAKRA has resorted to “lying” to “discredit a successful program.” 

“CHAKRA claims that only 15 people attended, but our taped video evidence will show many more than 15 people there. Anyone is welcome to view this video, and see for themselves the pathetic levels that CHAKRA have now had to stoop to, simply telling straight forward lies, and hoping no one will notice.”
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 14-Sep-1999


Ritvik meeting in England a failure

CHAKRA (Bhaktivedanta Manor, UK ) - September 11, 1999: Adridharan and Madhu-Pandit had flown all the way from India for it.. Bhaja Hari and other ritvik theorists were also there. They were attending a “ritvik” get together in a village hall in local Letchmore Heath, right around the corner from Bhaktivedanta Manor the day after Srila Prabhupada’s Vyasapuja.

However, besides them, only about 15 other people showed up for the meeting. "It was a flop," reported one attendee.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 11-Sep-1999


We didn't burn down illegal Calcutta Pandal
By Hari-sauri dasa

CHAKRA (Mayapur, India) - It has come to my attention that some rather disparaging remarks have been aimed at me by Sriman Adridharana dasa, the Calcutta temple president, regarding the recent fire, which destroyed his illegal wedding pandal set up on ISKCON property at 22 Gurusaday Rd. In an article to VNN Adridharana has done his best to seed the minds of his readers with the idea that Sriman Dayaram dasa, my fellow Co-Director at Mayapur, and myself were somehow to blame for the fire. Although I have never logged onto VNN and very rarely to Chakra, I feel some clarifications are needed to set the readers of such vitriol to rest.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 29-Aug-1999


Not a ritvik - don't agree with Ajamila
By Subhadra-mayi devi dasi

CHAKRA  - 17-August, 1999

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,

A bit more listening and caring for devotees might bring a lot more people back to follow the present guru system, if that's what you want. To call them a bunch of nutters won't.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 17-Aug-1999


Challenge to Adridharana about Ritvik Debate Votes
by Ajamila dasa

Dear Adri,
PAMHO. AGTSP.

The votes as they stand now are 1,917 for ISKCON and 1,340 for the concocted ritvikism.

The ISKCON votes against the offensive concocted ritvikism are nearly all verifiable with names of real devotees and their living locations. I have compiled a database with all this verifiable information, a glimpse of which is shown on CHAKRA. These ISKCON verifiable votes are all real.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 31-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 10
by Hari dasa

Hare Krsna!

PAMHO, AGTSP!

First of all I would like to congratulate Chakra for becoming more open to the voice of all followers of Srila Prabhupada and Krsna and not just the GBC and ISKCON devotees. By hosting the ritvik debate, Chakra has really proved that they are not biased against the followers of Srila Prabhupada (even though at some point they were) who are often condemned by ISKCON devotees as demons and mayavadis.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 30-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 9
by Lalita dasi

Dear Madhusudani Radha dasi and Chakra,

Thank you so much for posting the debates. It certainly was a surprise to see such freedom of speech on your sight and my impression has changed for the better. Previously it seemed that VNN was the main site where anyone could post their real views. I will visit Chakra more often if this mood prevails, at least as often as VNN. It may even become more of a home for all of us if this continues so nicely.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 30-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 8
by Nitai Gaura dasa

Hare Krsna. Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I've been following this ritvik business for a while now, partly through Chakra, partly through overhearing my dad's conversations. Although I do not feel qualified to be debating this serious philosophy business, I've just had about enough and need to speak my mind. Please forgive me for my offenses or my wrong interpretations, but here goes.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 29-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 7
by Sadhusanga dasa

Dear Prabhus,

PAMHO. AGTSP. I think Adridharan dasa was the clear winner in the Ritvik debates.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 29-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 6
by Krsna Dharma dasa

Dear Prabhus,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Many of us have had more than enough of these ritvik debates. It seems to me that the arguments will never end. Both sides, coming from their respective assumptions, can produce many quotes from sastra to construct convincing arguments. Largely due to the famous letter of July 1977, and some surrounding conversations, the ritvik advocates are convinced that Srila Prabhupada wanted the system to continue after his departure. With this assumption in mind they view all other evidence, giving it an appropriate interpretation to support their position. On the other hand, opponents of ritvik have an entirely different understanding of the 1977 letter and conversations, saying that Prabhupada was obviously only intending the so called ritvik system to work during his presence, and from this assumption they give different interpretations even to the very same sastric statements offered by the ritvik proponents. It looks to me like a formula for argumentum ad nauseam.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 28-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 5:
Comments on the "Historic Debate"
from Bhajahari dasa

Dear Madhusudani Radha Prabhu,

Hare Krsna ! All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I am writing to express my opinion on the Ritvik Debate that you are currently hosting on Chakra. I have been a supporter of the IRG's position paper 'The Final Order', since I first read it. In fact I have been banned from visiting Bhaktivedanta Manor simply because I am. Further, my son Pancha Tattva das, who regularly took part in the plays produced by The Bhaktivedanta Players was told he was no longer wanted in the drama group.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 4:
The Basis of the Ritvik Theory
by Rasa Rasika dasa

The Ritvik philosophers are never going to accept the truth because it's their justification for undermining any authority in ISKCON, ultimately the Governing Body Commission.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jul-99


CHAKRA Rigging Poll?

CHAKRA - July 25, 1999: A recent article on VNN accuses CHAKRA of rigging its poll. The article quotes a letter from Pollit.com Support which claims that someone "from PP022.gator.net is repeatedly voting by changing their IP address by '1' after each vote."

“Although Pollit.com uses the most advanced methods of multiple vote prevention available today it is possible for skilled people with right equipment to vote more than once,” Pollit is quoted on VNN. “Unless every human contains a tracking device embedded into his/her body it will always be impossible to stop 100% of multiple votes.”
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 3
from Deepak Vohra

Dear Madhusudani Radha,
PAMHO. AGTSP.

I am responding to your invitation on CHAKRA to submit thoughts on the ritvik debate between Ajamila Prabhu and Adridharan Prabhu.

I would firstly like to congratulate CHAKRA for having the decency and courage to host a ritvik debate on its website. I believe a discussion of this nature has been long overdue - 9 years to be exact. If you remember, at the conclusion of the San Diego ritvik debate in 1990 the majority of devotees - senior ISKCON members - voted for the discussions to continue.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 21-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 2:
One Who is Accepting Discipline from Srila Prabhupada is Srila Prabhupada's Disciple
from Mahesh Raja

Note: we are ALL being DISCIPLINED by Srila Prabhupada (we receive instructions---(discipline) from Srila Prabhupada's books.

The MEANING of the word "disciple"
760308mw.may
Prabhupada: Discipline... Disciple means discipline. The word discipline comes from disciple, or disciple comes from discipline. So unless there is discipline, there is no question of disciple. This discipline must...
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 20-Jul-99


Ritvik Debate Response Letter Number 1:
Follower of His Example
from Antardwip dasa

Dear Adri and Madhu Pandit,

In contrast to you, we believe there is:

1: No failure on Srila Prabhupada's part to produce qualified vaishnava spiritual masters,
2: No self-contradiction in Srila Prabhupada's teaching on whether his disciples would initiate or not, because we accept his statements at face value and have an straightforward understanding of the word "henceforward".
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 20-Jul-99


Debate Conclusion
by Adridharana dasa

The question before the GBC supporter in this debate was very simple:

What is the Guru, sadhu and sastra evidence that Srila Prabhupada was to be replaced as the Diksa Guru for ISKCON institution?

This is a very simple request and Ajamila has had over 15,000 words to present this simple evidence. If he had presented this evidence the debate would have been over. Instead, over 15000 words later Ajamila has only:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 15-Jul-99


Debate Conclusion
by Ajamila dasa

Judges Rule Ritviks Lose Debate

Who are the judges anyway? Who will judge what Srila Prabhupada intended for ISKCON post-samadhi initiations? The judges with whom both debaters ‘agree’ are guru, sadhu, and sastra! And since both arguments are mutually exclusive only one can be right. So who is wrong?

Our judges’ position of ultimate authority is confirmed by our pre-eminent siksa-guru Srila Prabhupada in Caitanya-caritamrita Madhya 20.352 purport as follows:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 14-Jul-99


Concluding Statements from the Moderator of the Ritvik Debate
by Madhusudani Radha devi dasi

Dear Vaisnavis and Vaisnavas,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

We have now completed 6 rounds of the Chakra "ritvik debate" and all that remains is for our two debaters Adridharan prabhu and Ajamila prabhu to present their conclusions. As you all know, the debate rules called for a re-evaluation of the debate process following 6 rounds. We examined reader response and found that the number of Chakra visited increased during the debate and leveled off somewhere half way through. However, it did not decline. Based on this, we could either have continued or finished. Next, the participants were surveyed regarding their preferences. Adridharan prabhu stated that he would prefer to continue debating until readership actually dropped. However, Ajamila prabhu was equally clear that he did not have the time to continue this debate, primarily due to the fact that his son was returning home from gurukula and he wanted to spend time with him. We then assessed whether others would be interested in continuing arguing Ajamila's position instead. However, none of those approached were interested. So the debate is now officially over and all that remains are the concluding statements. These will be no more than 1200 words including quotes and should be posted tomorrow.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 13-Jul-99


Adridharan's Commentary on Ajamila's Third Answer

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
PAMHO, AGTSP.

The GBC said:

"We must assume that as Founder-Acarya, Srila Prabhupada had the vision to set down a law --a law suitable for that unique institution, a law we would transgress at our peril."
(Devotees Initiating Before Their Guru's Physical Departure - An Official GBC Paper, Part of 'Gurus and Initiation in ISKCON', GBC, 1995)
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 08-Jul-99


Ajamila's Answer to Adridharan's 3rd Question

Dear Adri,
PAMHO, AGTSP.

Srila Prabhupada's "REAL FINAL ORDER" was given only five months before his departure, he said: "That's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple. That's it."

That's all folks. Irrefutable!! DISCIPLE OF MY DISCIPLE. That's the REAL FINAL ORDER. Don't settle for any other faked final order, especially if your see the brand 'ritvik'.

Your faked final order relies solely on word jugglery and calculated interpretations, not on sastra. For example, in TFO p.31 you speculate, "It would appear that diksa is not affected by the physical distances between gurus and disciples." Your authority 'It would appear' is not guru, sadhu, or sastra it is downright speculation. Sastra says asat, speculation is useless.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 07-Jul-99


Adridharana's 3rd Question to Ajamila

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
PAMHO. AGTSP.

Every single posting you open with how you are anchored in 'guru, sadhu and sastra', and yet the whole of your offering does not contain a single piece of 'guru, sadhu and sastra' evidence. Rather you simply recycle the same claims you have offered throughout the whole debate, but again no supporting 'guru, sadhu and sastra' evidence is quoted. Instead the only evidence you offer is the evidence of 'tradition', which as well as being fallacious, you have already yourself rejected, saying that major principles, and not tradition alone is evidence:

"There are things in Vedic tradition that can be changed and things that can't. Details of the past like skin colour and giving women gayatri will of course differ from the present but the major principles cannot change."

Yet again you say:

"I have proof that every acarya in our line took diksa from a living guru to set the example for us. Thus my position is supported by sastra. Now you show me proof from sastra to support your idea. Show me just one example in our line of disciplic succession of anyone taking diksa posthumously? You can't, because there is none. Thus you are defeated."
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 05-Jul-99


Ajamila's Commentary on Adridharana's Answer to Ajamila's 3rd Question

Dear Adridharan Prabhu,
PAMHO. AGTSP.

In Question Three I signaled ahead, "it would be hopelessly hypocritical of you to attempt to change your NCIP 'no-change' logic and add more ritvik priests" and yet that is precisely what you have done.

First you peddle your invented NCIP (GBC cannot change anything) as if it were sastra, but now that NCIP is defeated you want to change your 'no change'! Instead of honestly admitting NCIP's numerous absurdities you desperately plead for a 'no change' exemption to add more ritviks. Such a suicidal U turn in a one way street confirms you are completely unfit to debate.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 03-Jul-99


Adridharan's Answer to Ajamila's 3rd Question

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP.

As with all your postings to date, you begin with a lie and then construct the rest of your argument based on this lie. Once this lie is exposed, all your arguments and the 'questions' you submit collapse.

You claim we say:

"The GBC cannot change anything".

What we actually say is:

"In running ISKCON, the GBC:

1. Can only implement instructions directly issued by Srila Prabhupada:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 02-Jul-99


Adridharana's Commentary on Ajamila's Answer

Dear Ajamila prabhu,
PAMHO AGTSP

I asked you the following question:

"You have stated:

'I said Srila Prabhupada used the word ('ritvik-acarya') circumstantially, this is a fact you cannot deny.'

But HH Hridyananda Maharaja and the GBC have stated that the word nor concept of ritvik-acarya exists in vedic culture. Giving examples of Srila Prabhupada using (not agreeing with, but 'using' as you claim) this word, please explain why would Srila Prabhupada would use a word and concept that does not exist in vedic culture?"
>Full Article

© CHAKRA 01-Jul-99


Ajamila's Third Question to Adridharana

Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
PAMHO AGTSP

For post-samadhi initiations in ISKCON you propose N.C.I.P. (No change in ISKCON paradigm) referring to a temporary pre-samadhi system in the 9 July letter, yet in the same breath your proposal incorporates the most unauthorised change in the history of Vaisnavism.

Is this a contradiction or what? Under the name of "no change" you are dangerously misguiding your readers with a massive "bogus change" to disciplic law!
>Full Article

© CHAKRA 01-Jul-99


Ajamila's Answer to Adridharan's Second Question

Dear Adri, PAMHO AGTSP

Faking and breaking laws are the ritvik foundations
Structures made of straw-men and created insinuations
And with conspicuous absence of guru, sadhu, and sastra
A 'blunderful' ritvik house is a destiny of complete disaster.

(Well, at least this poem is not as boring as all your ritvik nonsense which unfortunately we are obliged to hear for just a little longer.)

Unless you support your answers with sastra they are asat, useless. By this criteria of sastra you have clearly lost this debate.

In your preamble you stated that I lied by saying you didn't answer my question. I asked for evidence from sastra but instead you only gave an interpretation, without sastra. So you did fail to answer my question 'with sastra' and I did not tell a lie. I would appreciate a Vaisnava apology.
>Full Article

© CHAKRA 30-Jun-99


Adridharana's 2nd Question

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,

PAMHO AGTSP

I have grouped the response to your lengthy paper as follows:

(Due to word restrictions, our full point for point reply is on the IRG web-site http://www.irg.zetnet.co.uk

 

Answer To Your Question

"You have avoided answering my following second question. You have not answered this question."

This is a lie. I did answer it:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jun-99


Ajamila's Comments on Adridharana's Answer to Question No. 2

Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

You have avoided answering my second question which is:

"Please prove directly and unequivocally without any evasion tactic whatsoever that your proposed system of ritvikism, a system of posthumous initiation that you declare Srila Prabhupada supposedly wanted after his departure, does not put Srila Prabhupada in a bogus position of contravening guru, sadhu, and sastra by breaking the law of disciplic succession?"
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 27-Jun-99


Question No. 2
by Ajamila dasa

PREAMBLE

Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I’m sure you’ll agree that sastra says the conclusive rule when speaking on major principles of Vedic philosophy is that sadhus, gurus, and even founder acaryas must always strictly adhere to sastra.

This is profoundly verified as follows in Caitanya-caritamrita Madhya 20.352 purport:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 21-Jun-99


Comments on Ajamila's Second Question
by Adridharana dasa

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.

In your latest offering you:

1) Recycle arguments from your introduction that we do not even present.

2) Recycle arguments that have already been answered in 'The Final Order' in 1996.

3) Recycle assumptions without any supporting evidence, the very assumptions which you have to prove in order to support your case.

4) And finally you end up asking a 'question' that was also already answered in our reply to your introduction.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 20-Jun-99


Letter to Chakra Readers Regarding Ritvik Debate

Dear Chakra readers,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Ajamila Prabhu has indicated that he is finding it difficult to meet the Debate deadlines and that his second question is not yet ready for posting. Thus, we will take a 24-hour break before the next "round". Adridharan Prabhu will be given a similar extension, should he so desire.

We will keep you posted if there are any other changes.

Ys, Madhusudani dasi
Debate Moderator

© CHAKRA 20-Jun-99


Comments on Ajamila's Response to Adridharana's 1st Question

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

"a) Where does the 'direct until departure ritvik priests meaning of the 9 July letter' come from?"

You were asked for evidence to prove your above assumed 'direct' meaning. As it happens you were unable to provide any evidence - and instead tried to hide this lack of evidence by simply presenting more assumptions:

"On 9 July 1977 Srila Prabhupada was very ill and hundreds of devotees worldwide were eager to take initiation. To solve this impending problem Srila Prabhupada appointed more ritvik priests to perform the initiation ceremonies on his behalf, as he instructed in 9 July letter."
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 19-Jun-99


Ajamila's Response to Adridharan's 1st Question

Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

My answer to your first question is as follows:

"a) Where does the 'direct until departure ritvik priests meaning of the 9 July letter' come from?

Note the word 'direct' means your answer has to be literal i.e. it >should contain words such as 'until departure', and 'ritvik priests'. No extrapolation permitted. Otherwise you must withdraw your claim that there is a 'direct' meaning."
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 19-Jun-99


Questions for Ajamila
by Adridharana dasa

Dear Ajamila prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.

You alleged in your introduction that we tried to 'cover' the:

""direct until departure ritvik priests meaning of the 9 July letter"

But this meaning is not given anywhere in the letter itself, where there is no mention of 'until departure', direct or otherwise. So we wish to know from where you have mysteriously obtained this 'until departure' idea for ritvik priests, since it is not stated in the July 9th letter itself, as your statement above implies.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 17-Jun-99


Ajamila's Comment on Adridharana's Answer to Question No. 1

Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,

Please accept my most humble obeisances at your feet. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

You stated:

"The purpose of this debate, as agreed by everyone, is to discuss the system of initiation for ISKCON that Srila Prabhupada ordered. It is not, as rule 6 states, to discuss the personal actions of any individuals."

Following the ‘correct procedure’ in discussing the system of initiation in ISKCON is an inseparable part of that system. Your concern about me discussing your personal misbehaviour is unwarranted since I address only your illegitimate abandonment of the authorised ‘correct procedure’ which is directly connected to the debate.

"Yet this is exactly what you have attempted to do:

"‘This illegitimate action of yours is what I would like to call into question.’"
>Full Article

© CHAKRA 16-Jun-99



Adridharana's Answer to Question No. 1

Dear Ajamila Prabhu,

Please accept my most humble obeisances at your feet. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

The purpose of this debate, as agreed by everyone, is to discuss the system of initiation for ISKCON that Srila Prabhupada ordered. It is not, as rule 6 states,

"6. Chakra will only post philosophical arguments in this debate. References to the personal lives of the devotees involved in this issue, name-calling, insults and other personal attacks will be edited out. This includes references to any past or present law suits. All such statements will be seen as detracting from the focus of the debate, which is how Prabhupada wanted diksa initiations to continue in his absence."
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 16-Jun-99


Ajamila's Question No. 1

Dear Adri Dharan Prabhu,

Please accept my most humble obeisances at your feet. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

As an aspiring insignificant servant who wants more than anything to see Srila Prabhupada’s ISKCON not disgraced but glorified, I beg you to answer the following question with all honesty at your command.

Srila Prabhupada clearly instructed that the GBC always has the final say in ISKCON. This is a fact which you, being a protagonist for a posthumous ritvik system in ISKCON, have recently admitted. I remind you that on 1 May on COM you wrote:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 14-Jun-99


Commentary
by Ajamila dasa

Adri Dharan Prabhu’s conclusion is false and his concocted N.C.I.P. (No change in the ISKCON paradigm) directive portrays cognitive distortion of a kind never seen before.

The essence of Adri’s N.C.I.P. gimmick is the assumption that as per Prabhupada’s last will and testament nothing at all should change in ISKCON. Isn’t this rather silly? This ‘wild speculation’ covered with an array of phony disguises is an insult to a devotee’s intelligence. Here is Adri’s assertion:
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 12-Jun-99


Commentary
by Adridharana dasa

Ajamila’s introduction presents 3 main lines of argument: the May 28th Tape, The 'law of disciplic succession' and the 'Vaisnava tradition'. However in presenting these arguments Ajamila only succeeds in: - Contradicting Himself; Contradicting the GBC & eliminating his own evidence.

May 28th Tape - Ajamila Contradicts Himself and the GBC

Ajamila says:

"Srila Prabhupada added acarya to the word ritvik because during his presence they are ritviks and after his departure they are acaryas." (Ajamila's Introduction)
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 12-Jun-99


The Ritviks' FAKED Final Order
by Ajamila dasa

Where The Ritvik Controversy Begins

The controversy the ritvik people are virulently pushing is this:

On 9 July 1977, only months before his impending departure, Srila Prabhupada approved a letter addressed to all ISKCON leaders worldwide. In that letter, considering his rapidly deteriorating health and the hundreds of devotees eagerly awaiting initiation, Srila Prabhupada increased to eleven the number of ritvik priests initiating disciples on his behalf. Let us not forget that this ritvik initiation system was a 'temporary' method by which our immensely powerful Founder-Acarya could 'practically' cope with the fast-growing worldwide demand during his deteriorating health.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 10-Jun-99


The No Change in ISKCON Paradigm
by Adridharan dasa

During the period of his physical presence, Srila Prabhupada gave the blue-print for how ISKCON was to operate. He personally established and gave all the necessary standards, systems, processes, and teachings that were to govern how ISKCON would run for the rest of its existence. ISKCON was set up to run solely under the authority of Srila Prabhupada. There was no authorisation for any change to be made to the way he had instructed and set up ISKCON to run. Thus there was to be a continuity between the way ISKCON ran whilst he was physically present, and for the rest of ISKCON's duration. Any deviation from this principle would have needed express authority from Srila Prabhupada.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 10-Jun-99


Expose Regarding the Ritvik Temple in Bangalore
by Jaya Radha Krsna dasa

Adapted from a COM message by Jaya Radha Krsna dasa (former member of ISKCON Bangalore). Here Jaya Radha Krsna Prabhu comments on letters from Madhu Pandit dasa to Ajamila dasa and vice-versa.

I am Jaya Radha Krsna dasa, formerly in ISKCON Bangalore (1994-September 1998), now serving in Mayapur (September 1998-). Currently I am engaged in serving in the Nama Hatta preaching program.

Your correspondence with Madhu Pandit dasa came to my notice. I was shocked to see what Madhu Pandit dasa wrote to you. When I was in Bangalore, I had previously considered him with great reverence, since he was a very senior Godbrother. He was getting a lot of mercy from my Guru Maharaja. So I had respected him a lot. But it is really shocking to see what Madhu Pandit dasa has written to you since they are false. The Madhu Pandit dasa of today is very different from the Madhu Pandit dasa whom I had known earlier prior to him becoming a rtvik.
>Full Story

© CHAKRA 09-Jun-99

Click here for earlier articles

© Copyright January, 2004 by oldchakra.com. All rights reserved.

For information about this website or to report an error, write to webmaster@oldchakra.com