Hitting the Nail on the Head of the Guru Issue...
BY: PAYONIDHI DASA
Nov 18, MARYLAND, USA (SUN) — I was carefully reading Tamohara Prabhu's response. Actually all the problems in ISKCON lie in the Guru issue. First of all, I would like to bring attention to one of Srila Prabhupada's very important purports about Guru and disciple, from Nectar of Instruction, text 5, purport:
"When a person realizes himself to be an eternal servitor of Krsna, he loses interest in everything but Krsna's service. Always thinking of Krsna, devising means by which to spread the holy name of Krsna, he understands that his only business is in spreading the Krsna consciousness movement all over the world. Such a person is to be recognized as an uttama-adhikari, and his association should be immediately accepted according to the six processes (dadati pratigrhnati, etc.)
Indeed, the advanced uttama-adhikari Vaisnava devotee should be accepted as a spiritual master. Everything one possesses should be offered to him, for it is enjoined that one should deliver whatever he has to the spiritual master. The brahmacari in particular is supposed to beg alms from others and offer them to the spiritual master. However, one should not imitate the behavior of an advanced devotee or maha-bhagavata without being self-realized, for by such imitation one will eventually become degraded.
In this verse Srila Rupa Gosvami advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kanistha-adhikari, madhyama-adhikari and uttama-adhikari. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikari Vaisnava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaisnavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master."
Srila Prabhupada's instruction is very clear: "One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama adhikari", and "Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama adhikari as a spiritual master."
Srila Prabhupada also states: "Srila Rupa Goswami advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between kanistha adhikari, madhyama adhikari and uttama adhikari."
Personally, I had a madhyam/kanistha adhikari as my Guru when I joined ISKCON. For a long time he may have been madhyama/madhyama, and this has been an experience of many devotees, madhyam/madhyam, kanistha/madhyam.
Or simply kanishtha/kanistha/kanistha or asura/kanistha .Now the Ritvik persons are simply trying to keep focus on Srila Prabhupada and his teachings, and have maybe thrown the baby out with the bathwater. However Guru has to be there, but Srila Prabhupada said "uttama adhikari". How many uttama adhikaris are there in ISKCON? Does anyone dare to say? I will just give my humble opinion, and I hope I don't offend anyone. At present, none!
I know many see their Guru as an uttama adhikari and have lots of devotional faith, no harm, but the Guru may still not be an uttama adhikari just because the disciple thinks so, and after the Guru falls, then what? (I had one Godbrother that drowned himself )
I see Gaura Govinda Maharaja was an uttama adhikari, and next to Srila Prabhupada, I see no third. Kindly forgive me again, I am just offering my humble observation. But have we had many persons claiming to be uttama adhikaris? The answer is clearly a yes. Srila Prabhupada states: "The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform."
This is the cause of the idea of Ritvik vada, it is a kind of impersonalistic viewpoint of the parampara, because Krsna has clearly stated if there is a broken link, He Himself comes to re-establish it
BG 4.2: This supreme science was thus received through the chain of disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in course of time the succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to be lost."
This is why He spoke the Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna.
But we do not need to demonize those who are Ritviks, if they chant 16 rounds and follow 4 regs, etc. why should we reject them? Mostly these persons are simply fed up with the deviations in ISKCON. admittedly they are wrong about the Guru issue, but we can understand how they think and feel as they do, it is an idea created out of frustration due to a lack of uttama adhikari Gurus to guide ISKCON. Thus the idea to keep Srila Prabhupada in the center is not bad.
Actually H.H. Bhakti Caru Maharaja has nicely explained the position of the founder acarya in the past, and we see this in all sampradayas, like Sri Sampradaya, the teachings of Sri Ramanujacarya is the main focus for this sampradaya. Being Prabhupadanugas, this is the case here too. This issue has been discussed again and again and again, and I am just giving my understanding according to sastra and what I have heard from authorities like Srila Prabhupada's books. Now obviously a devotee that has been reinitiated 2-3 times and is a devotee for 20 some years or so need not keep going through this process of accepting and rejecting gurus again and again. At one point it becomes enough. Siksa is more important than diksa, and we have Srila Prabhupada's teachings. So instead of still presenting all Gurus as uttama adhikaris, which was the initial mistake before 1986, we should see devotees for what they are, and most of the ISKCON Gurus are madhyama/madhyama (in my humble opinion), so they can be Gurus.
But as Srila Prabhupada mentioned: "A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance."
And we have seen this again and again, this is the source of all problems. Recently I was asked by a sannyasi in ISKCON that I should take initiation again. I had one Guru that fell down, left ISKCON to find an uttama adhikari outside of ISKCON (big mistake, please forgive me), and now I should have one more Guru after 27 years? I believe this Maharaja really thought I would be his disciple (though I like him he is more like a friend, and joined 3-4 years before me). I said Maharaja I see no uttama adhikaris in ISKCON, plus my diksa Guru is in good standing (though not in ISKCON), and I would need someone that chants 64 minimum rounds a day, and knows and practices devotional service on an uttama adhikari level and can answer all my questions (if I have any). Response: 'Prabhu sorry, I did not know you had such a high standard for having someone as a Guru' or some subtle sarcastic remark
And then having child beating Gurus like Dhanurdhara Swami, who Gauri Prabhu may have taken inspiration from in this matter, thinking it was ok (as Tamohara Prabhu was pointing out also), then it becomes a parampara of kanistha adhikaris at best.
If I may bring something else to the attention of the devotees, Srila Prabhupada allowed all kinds of devotees -- male, female, child and everyone to live in the temple. And this is again only my opinion. I believe that temples are best for strict sannyasis and brahmacaries just like in Gaudiya math. Why? Because many times we have seen persons not properly situated in the grhastha ashram abuse their power for money and women, even dragged into it as if by force, due to lack of spiritual strength. And temples should not be used for grhasthas for their becoming wealthy at the expense of a temple. Now grhasthas can serve in the temples. Why not, Srila Prabhupada did not object to engage everyone, but the structure could be some temples can be for sannyasis and brahmacaries. Mainly it will prove very useful and that is, if done with the proper mood. This is just an idea I have discussed many times with different devotees.
This idea of matchmaking sannyasi Gurus is so bogus, it personally makes me throw up. Srila Prabhupada tried it and at the end said that he would not be responsible anymore for this.(as too many grhastha couples where not strict, married someone else, etc.)
I humbly suggest:
A) uttama adhikaris are needed in ISKCON
B) some temples should have brahmacaries and sannyasis only
C) emphasize preaching and book distribution with concern for people and not just a score. Regular Harinamas for all ISKCON centers and temples, and wide scale prasadam distribution
D) improved Vaisnava relationships
E) disallowing profit making in all ISKCON temples for all individuals (no personal bank accounts, they can be "ISKCON accounts", Guru daksinas etc. belong to ISKCON)
F) child beaters not allowed to assume positions in ISKCON, nor should child molesters be allowed to live on ISKCON property.
If A is followed, I believe all the other points will be taken care of, but I am not holding my breath for that
Regarding a petition, my experience with the GBC is they are intelligent and efficient, and if you make a complaint with merit, they listen. I complained many times over things like demigod worship, etc. They took it very seriously. I trust we can have faith in the GBC body. This is what Srila Prabhupada wanted anyway. Individually we may fail, but the GBC body is like the many small sticks, combined. Collective intelligence. I personally like the idea of electing GBC's. I think it will be worth it; even Temple Presidents (brahminical initiated devotees in good standing only) . But I never understood fully how much Srila Prabhupada asked this to be done or if it was just mentioned as an option. In that sense, democracy can be utilized in Krsna consciousness, but even that can be abused and there needs to be rules and checks.
I hope you will all forgive me if this is not pleasing to some
Your servant,
Payonidhi das
