[Posted March 4, 2006]
Make Your Own
Field and Continue to be Rittvik
by Hansadutta das
16 September
1998
Comment
Send
this story to a friend
Dear Prabhu,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. All glories to Srila
Prabhupada.
Because you asked me to write VNN about the Rittvik matter, I thought I
would first pen you my thoughts on the issue along the lines of our
discussion a few days ago.
The discussions that took place on 28th May 1977 between Srila
Prabhupada and some GBC regarding initiations in the future were not
known to me till years after his disappearance. Srila Prabhupada would
say many things on many subjects, but unless a particular policy was
written in letter form, or some other legal document, such discussions
on different matters were not accepted as final. Prabhupada often said
you can say anything, but do not put it in writing. Writing makes it
legal.
A number of questions come to my mind when the controversy over the
rittvik-Guru issue comes up:
- The system of rittvik initiations was an ongoing practice
for years before Srila Prabhupada named eleven “Rittvik representatives
of the Acharya” in his letter of July 9, 1977. Why would Srila
Prabhupada make a special effort to write a letter appointing eleven of
his senior disciples as “Rittvik representatives of the Acharya” when
such rittvik initiations were already being performed on his behalf—not
only by the persons named in his July 9th Letter but by sannyasis,
GBCs, Temple Presidents, and others who happened to be at hand on the
occasion of such initiation ceremonies?
- Why did Srila Prabhupada decline the suggestion Of Tamal
Krishna Goswami to include Brahmananda Swami on the rittvik list? He
was a leading devotee and sannyasi.
- Why did Srila Prabhupada not simply say “All sannyasis,
GBCs, and Temple Presidents of ISKCON in good standing everywhere”
could act as “Rittvik representatives of the Acharya” and initiate new
disciples on his behalf whenever the need presented itself?
- How would creating “Rittvik representatives of the Acharya”
relieve Srila Prabhupada from the burden of taking on the Karma of
newly initiated disciples if the disciples thus initiated would still
be Srila Prabhupada’s disciples?
- Why did Srila Prabhupada reiterate the July 9th Letter
appointing “Rittvik representative of the Acharya” in three separate
letters (two to myself, and one to Kirtanananda Swami) and in several
conversations, but never once mention anything about appointing Gurus
or about rittviks becoming Gurus upon his anticipated disappearance
from the world?
I distinctly remember when I received the July 9, 1977, letter in Sri
Lanka that it was clear to me that this letter was Srila Prabhupada’s
arrangement for initiations for the future. I also remember feeling
some disappointment with the obvious conditional authority that the
“Rittvik representative of the Acharya” designation implied, because I
actually had a great desire to be a Guru like Srila Prabhupada, and I
think many of the leaders did have similar desires. Still, I understood
it was a very responsible and authoritative appointment. On July 10th I
received another letter from Srila Prabhupada written in response to a
letter I had sent him describing the preaching activities in Sri Lanka
at that time. In this letter he wrote as follows:
“You
are a suitable person and you can give initiation to those that are
ready for it. I have selected you among eleven men as “Rittvik”
representative of the Acharya, to give initiations, both first and
second initiation, on my behalf.” A newsletter is being sent to all
temple presidents and GBC in this regard, listing the eleven
representatives selected by His Divine Grace. Those who are initiated
are the disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and anyone who you deem fit and
initiate in this way, you should send their names to be included in
Srila Prabhupada’s “Initiated disciples” book.
I immediately
wrote a letter to Srila Prabhupada asking him why he had been so
merciful towards me by appointing me as his “Rittvik representative of
the Acharya” which I understood to be a very confidential and
responsible position. In other words, it was clear to me that this
letter appointing “Rittvik Representatives” to initiate new disciples
on Srila Prabhupada’s behalf was Srila Prabhupada’s final instructions
in anticipation of his disappearance from the world.
Srila Prabhupada replied my letter by paraphrasing my question and
answering in a letter dated July 31st 1977 as follows:
“You
have written to Srila Prabhupada saying you do not know why he has
chosen you to be a recipient of his Mercy. His Divine Grace immediately
replied, “It is because you are my sincere servant. You have given up
attachment to a beautiful and qualified wife and that is a great
benediction. You are a real preacher. Therefore I like you. (Then
Laughing). Sometimes you become obstinate, but that is true of any
intelligent man. Now you have got a very good field. Now organize it
and it will be a great credit. No one will disturb you there. MAKE YOUR
OWN FIELD AND CONTINUE TO BE RITTVIK AND ACT ON MY BEHALF”.
It was clear
that Srila Prabhupada had officially introduced the concept of “Rittvik
representative of the Acharya” as the arrangement for initiations by
his disciples for the future of ISKCON. Had there been anything more to
clarify certainly Srila Prabhupada would have written another letter to
amend what was already so clear. But he never did, other than reinforce
what he had already written: “Continue to act as rittvik representative
of the Acharya.”
These eleven men and many others had been initiating devotees on Srila
Prabhupada’s behalf for years, so there was no need to make a formal
declaration and name disciples who could initiate on Srila Prabhupada’s
behalf simply to relieve Srila Prabhupada from the burden of initiating
due to his illness as it was already going on all over the world for
years.
However, the July 9th letter gave authority and responsibility that was
not allowed previously. The eleven men selected as “Rittvik
Representatives of the Acharya” were given the freedom to initiate
(first and second) and give the spiritual name without first having to
consult Srila Prabhupada by letter and have an appropriate name sent by
Srila Prabhupada. This was new. This system, in effect, gave these
eleven “Rittvik representative of the Acharya” all the responsibilities
and authority of a GURU, but at the same time it was clear by their
“Job Description” as “Rittvik representative of the Acharya” that their
authority was CONDITIONAL -- it was not a blank check
- as they were not mature full qualified Spiritual Masters. They were
apprentices of the Spiritual Master—“Rittvik representatives of the
Acharya”—and, the disciples they would initiate would be the disciples
of their Spiritual Master, Srila Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acharya,
The Founder-Acarya of ISKCON.
The Emperor or King delegates power to a Viceroy who thus has all the
power of a King to rule over a colony or state, yet it is understood
that the Viceroy is not the King, but is ruling as the King’s
representative. Such a Viceroy would not automatically become a King
upon the death of the King, rather he would continue to act as the
Viceroy until the next Emperor or King was installed on the throne.
Similarly the “Rittvik representative” does not automatically become a
Guru or Acharya (as we assumed when Srila Prabhupada disappeared), but
the Rittvik continues to act as the representative of the Acharya,
Srila Prabhupada.
Although Srila Prabhupada spoke of all his disciples becoming Gurus, he
never once ordered any disciple “To be a Guru”; rather, he gave
conditional authority and responsibility to some leading disciples to
“Act as Rittvik representatives of the Acharya”. Having failed to carry
out this responsibility by assuming that automatically upon Srila
Prabhupada’s disappearance the rittviks would become Gurus, we find
everything has gone off track, and the whole ISKCON movement is in
shambles. Still, it is better late than never. Everything can be
brought back into focus if we simply come back to the order of the
Spiritual Master and act as “Rittvik representative of the Acharya.”
I don’t think that my words will make any difference -- but for my own
clarification and purification I have written down these thoughts.
Perhaps they will be of some help to you.
I have one last concern and it is this idea I get from Krishna Kant’s
paper “The Final Order” that the “Rittvik Representative” is nothing
more than a priest who performs a ritual initiation, and then is no
more significant in the spiritual life of a disciple than a clerk at an
army recruiting station.
Yet, the fact is that Srila Prabhupada was very careful and deliberate
about choosing his “Rittvik representatives” and we will notice all of
them were distinguished by their enthusiasm and success in the
preaching field. So if there is going to be a reform and actual
adherence to the order of Srila Prabhupada to act as “Rittvik
Representatives of the Acharya,” then I think that anyone who is going
to be designated as such should first of all go out and show their
capacity to represent Srila Prabhupada as his “Rittvik Representative”
by opening some centers and recruiting 100 or 200 devotees (or
families) and train them up properly to preach and worship Srila
Prabhupada as his disciples. Otherwise, what is the meaning of “Rittvik
representative of the Acharya?” Without this it will simply be another
office job.
I hope you are well. Thanks for your hospitality. I hope we
can meet again soon.
Your humble servant,
Hansadutta das
© 2004 -
Hansadutta das
World Sankirtan
Party
Back to
Top |