Herein I am responding to a text from Narasimha das posted on https://prabhupadanugasworldwide.org/understanding-srila-prabhupadas-ritvik-order/. It is usable as a general argumentation against common IRM ideas about the role of rtvik. So far my knowledge goes the posthumous rtvik procedure is not supported by the authority of sastra, sadhu, guru, and acharya. I would describe their frustration about the sorry state of ISKCON, especially the fall-downs of gurus, as an attempt to beat up one falsehood with another one. Here go the quotes and my responses. I am not giving a solution to the "cracks on pavements" of ISKCON sad state. I have been writing on those in other texts.
A.) "Throughout Srila Prabhupada's books it is clearly enjoined that only a fully self-realized pure devotee who is specifically appointed by Krishna or the mahabhagavata acharya can become the bona fide spiritual master and impart diksha to new devotees. This was proven by the personal examples of many great devotees, such as Sri Gadadhara Pandit and Srila Gaura Kishora das Babaji, who did not agree to initiate their own disciples without a direct order from Lord Chaitanya or Lord Krishna."
This does not lead to a conclusion to create a posthumous rtvik process. Rather opposite. It calls for the personal empowerment of a devotee to act as a guru. It is self-defeating.
B.) When specifically asked how initiations would be continued after His disappearance, Srila Prabhupada replied, "I shall appoint some of you to act as representatives of the Acharya. Ritvik. Yes."
In Nyaya this is called chala, if you like to know. Chala means falsehood, to present something as truth while it is not. In English, it means a lie by outright or by mentioning only half of the truth - "Half-truth is worse than a lie."
Here goes the full conversation, May 28, 1977, Vṛndāvana:
Satsvarūpa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you're no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.
Prabhupāda: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating ācāryas.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Is that called ṛtvik-ācārya?
Prabhupāda: Ṛtvik, yes.
Satsvarūpa: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the...
Prabhupāda: He's guru. He's guru.
Satsvarūpa: But he does it on your behalf.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order... Āmāra ājñāya guru hañā [Cc. Madhya 7.128]. Be actually guru, but by my order.
Satsvarūpa: So they may also be considered your disciples.
Prabhupāda: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: No, he's asking that these ṛtvik-ācāryas, they're officiating, giving dīkṣā. Their... The people who they give dīkṣā to, whose disciple are they?
Prabhupāda: They're his disciple.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: They're his disciple.
Prabhupāda: Who is initiating. He is granddisciple.
Satsvarūpa: Yes.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: That's clear.
"They are his disciple," and not Prabhupada's as IRM claims.
C.) Srila Prabhupada gave many follow-up instructions, including an official signed document stating the same thing: ritvik initiations "henceforward."
There is nowhere mentioned that it ought to be done in a posthumous manner.
D.) The ritvik system was already functioning in ISKCON for many years prior. He simply sanctioned the GBC to manage it without His personal oversight. (Note: “Ritvik” is not a "vada" or philosophy. Rather it is a system of management and sadhana by which priests conduct Vedic rituals under the auspices of the self-realized Acharya.)
Correct. Yet somehow the posthumous process has been added up as if it is mentioned somewhere. Nowhere is. The rtvik system is in effect when the Acharya is present. Please look for the definition of the word rtvik.
E.) Srila Prabhupada repeatedly insisted that nothing in ISKCON management or sadhana be changed.
Exactly. In this regard, I would recommend not adding, subtracting, bending, or taking out of context, particularly.
Comments