Ritvik or Rittik
BY: DUSYANTA DASA
Jul 04, 2010 — WALES (SUN) — In Rocana prabhu's recent article dealing with his communication with Hasti Gopala prabhu he pointed out the word "ritvik" does not actually appear in the July 9th Letter, but the word "rittik" does. In the second sentence of the July 9th Letter we read thus:
"Recently when all of the GBC members were with His Divine Grace in Vrndavana, Srila Prabhupada indicated that soon He would appoint some of His senior disciples to act as "rittik"-representative of the Acharya, for the purpose of performing initiations, both first and second initiation"
Firstly, in this sentence we find reference to a time recently in the past when Srila Prabhupada indicated He would be appointing senior disciples to act as "rittik" representative of the acharya. This was a May 28th meeting wherein Srila Prabhupada was asked just one question concerning initiations in the future, particularly at the time when you (Srila Prabhupada) are no longer with us, how are first and second initiations to be conducted?
Srila Prabhupada replied that He would recommend some of you (senior disciples) to act as officiating acharya. Tamala Krisha Goswami asked Srila Prabhupada if that was called Rittvik Acharya (not rittik) to which Srila Prabhupada replied Rittvik.Yes. The rittvik in this conversation is what is being reported in the second sentence of the July 9th Letter. The reference in the July 9th Letter pertains to this conversation, to which all the GBC were present. The word "rittvik" becomes equal to the word "rittik" when we marry up all the evidence that is available to us. Either the person typing up the July 9th Letter made a human mistake or the words "ritvik" and rittik" are synonomous.
Another point that Rocana prabhu made in his article is over the word "henceforward". That the "rittvik" supporters focus on this word as an authority that the process was to continue after Srila Prabhupada's disappearance. Leaving out the word "henceforward" makes no difference whatsoever to the meaning and definition and application of this process. But the word is included in the original letter so we have to understand the letter with the word included. "Henceforward " just means "from now on" and does not mean for ever, but also does not mean for now. It's an open-ended word.
In the May 28th Conversation, the original question that the July 9th Letter refers to is concerning the future of initiations and how they were to be conducted in the absence of Srila Prabhupada. Whether we want to define and apply the word "henceforward "in this way of measuring the time factor is irrelevant when we consider the original question posed by the GBC on May 28th. The whole conversation point is considering the conducting of first and second initiations in Srila Prabhupada's absence. The "rittvik" or "rittik" becomes the object of focus for the application of the process, which is representation. This is also outlined very carefully in Caitanya-caritamrta Madhya-Lila Chapter 24, Text 330. This specifically refers to disciples in ISKCON.
"Similarly a disciples qualifications must be observed by the Spiritual Master before he is accepted as a disciple. In our Krsna conscious movement the requirement is that one must first be prepared to give up the four pillars of sinful life( ). In Western countries especially, we first observe whether a potential disciple is prepared to follow the regulative principles. Then he is given the name of a vaisnava servant and initiated to chant the Hare Krsna maha-mantra, at least sixteen rounds daily. In this way the disciple renders devotional service under the guidance of the Spiritual Master or His representative for at least six months…"
The representative process as outlined by Srila Prabhupada in the May 28th Conversation, the July 9th Letter and in Cc Madhya 24. 330 means that the Spiritual Master is absent. Represent means to speak or act on a third persons behalf who is absent. The representatives, "ritviks" or "rittiks" speak or act on Srila Prabhupada's behalf in His absentia.
In the May 28th Conversation, the actual question put forward that Srila Prabhupada is answering is pertinent. The question is how the initiations are to be "conducted". Therefore the answer is by acting on behalf of, in other words by representing Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada's usage of the word "act" in His answer to the original question on May28th and in the July 9th Letter indicates and emphasises the representative process in the "conducting" of initiation. And the usage of the word "appoint" in the July 9th Letter indicates that He has arranged or decided the post is an official choice for a job. The whole process is one of official representation. The representer is physically present to act on behalf of Srila Prabhupada, who is not physically present. As in the case of initiation, Srila Prabhupada is the Initiator, the disciple is the Initiated , and the "Rittvik" or "rittik" is the Representer. Representation is acting and/or speaking on behalf of another person who is absent.
The original question on May 28th concerning the "conducting" of first and second initiations is easily answered by Srila Prabhupada, and then is confirmed in writing by the July 9th Letter and subsequent letters after July 9th to other representatives of Srila Prabhupada that He named in the July 9th Letter.
The original question in the May 28th Conversation and the letter of July 9th both deal with the "conducting" of initiations and not with the process of Disciplic Succession. If the GBC were trying to establish the next link in Disciplic Succession they would not be using that type of language viz-a-viz the conducting of initiations. And if Srila Prabhupada was authorising the next link in Disciplic Succession, He would not be using terminology such as "acting as officiating acharyas" and "rittvik" and "appoint some of His senior disciples" and "a list of 11 disciples who will act in that capacity" and so on.
In Srimad Bhagavatam 4.8.54, Srila Prabhupada writes definitively:
"One should take initiation from a Bona Fide Spiritual master coming in Disciplic Succession who is authorised by His predecessor spiritual master......"
So if Srila Prabhupada was establishing the next link in Disciplic Succession, He would have made it perfectly clear for the next generation of devotees to follow this instruction from Srimad Bhagavatam. To be able to follow this perfect instruction from Srimad Bhagavatam, a devotee would either be initiated by link number 33 that is authorised clearly by Srila Prabhupada, or he would have to be initiated by Srila Prabhupada through the process of representation as outlined above.
Isn't the whole idea of "representative of the acharya" process applicable because Srila Prabhupada is absent??? And so the question of how to apply the word "henceforward" to the process of representation becomes redundant. In none of the relevant documents considering representation is there a critical time sensitivity. There is no restriction in the May28th conversation, none in the Srimad nor in Caitanya-caritamrta Mdhya lila 24,330, so why would we assume there is a time constraint on representation?
your servant,
Dusyanta dasa
