Using Philosophy as a Bogus Cover - 1


Back To Prabhupada, Issue 37, Autumn 2012

The preceding article detailed how philosophy has been falsely invoked to claim justification for usurping Srila Prabhupada's position as diksa guru. "Guru, sadhu and sastra" was put forward as an excuse for why Srila Prabhupada cannot be ISKCON's diksa guru, even though it is accepted that ISKCON's guru hoax does not in any case follow "guru, sadhu and sastra"! Clearly, therefore, such use of philosophy is merely a bogus cover to hide one's actual motives to take Srila Prabhupada's position. Over the next 2 pages we present further examples of such blatant cheating tactics, whereby high-minded, noble, philosophical reasons are offered as a bogus cover to hide the actual situation.

Empowered adjustment an insult

In his book, Suddha-bhakti-cintamani, ISKCON GBC and guru, HH Sivarama Swami states the following reasons for why Srila Prabhupada cannot possibly be the diksa guru for ISKCON:

"Rtviks agree that their understanding of initiation is not standard, but they say that their recommended process for connecting with the disciplic succession is acceptable due to Srila Prabhupada's extraordinarily empowered status. Yet the suggestion that Srila Prabhupada was empowered to act contrary to scripture and vaisnava tradition - or would use his empowerment to do so - is an insult rather than praise. [...] To suggest that Prabhupada was unchaste to his spiritual heritage - that he was an independent, absolute authority - is to attribute to him a status the kartabhaja sahajiyas attribute to their gurus."

Thus, having first assumed that Srila Prabhupada's acting as ISKCON's diksa guru is "not standard" and is against "Vaisnava tradition", Sivarama Swami makes it clear that, regardless of the level of one's empowerment, such empowerment would never be used to act against Vaisnava tradition. Indeed, to even suggest such a thing would be an "insult".

Empowered adjustment necessary

The quotations in the shaded boxes below (all emphases added) are from a podcast made on 25/8/2012 by Sivarama Swami. Sivarama Swami first sets out a "principle" that Srila Prabhupada taught:

"this is certainly a principle that Srila Prabhupada repeats himself over and over, that a disciple does not accept disciples in the physical presence of his spiritual master".

Sivarama Swami further claims that this principle taught by Srila Prabhupada is not in line with Vaisnava tradition:

"we see that vaisnava tradition also bears out that in the time of Mahaprabhu, thereafter, for instance in the book Jaiva Dharma, Bhaktivinoda Thakura shows how, gives the story of how a devotee takes an aspirant to his own spiritual master for blessings, and that devotee is acting as a diksa guru."

Sivarama Swami then states that such a principle does not need to be followed in ISKCON because Srila Prabhupada is empowered to change the rules of Gaudiya vaisnavism and, therefore, in the same way, the GBC is empowered to change the principles taught by Srila Prabhupada:

"So, yes, there are many rules in Gaudiya vaisnavism, but considering time and circumstance, sometimes some of those rules can be adapted or changed. It requires the proper authority to do so. Srila Prabhupada was an empowered Acarya, and although Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura wanted disciples to chant 64 rounds - Lord Caitanya would say that he would not accept food in the house of someone who does not chant 100,000 names of the Lord - Srila Prabhupada saw that that was not possible and therefore he made that adjustment. Similarly, we see that because that type of arrangement is also present in vaisnava culture and because ultimately the GBC is empowered to make such adjustment, so that was the case at that time. And we have others like Kadamba Kanana Maharaja who is Jayadvaita Maharaja's disciple who is initiating".

Philosophy depends on power

Thus, when justifying ISKCON's successor guru system, we have a GBC member claiming that:

a) Srila Prabhupada's teachings are not in line with Vaisnava tradition;
b) the GBC is empowered to change principles taught by Srila Prabhupada;
c) Srila Prabhupada is empowered to change Gaudiya Vaisnava rules;

having taken a different position when trying to justify why Srila Prabhupada cannot be the diksa guru!

So, for the GBC, whether or not tradition and principles can be adjusted by "empowerment" depends entirely on how the outcome will affect the GBC's project to usurp Srila Prabhupada's position!

Protecting Srila Prabhupada

In the following example, the need to protect Srila Prabhupada's position and standards is evoked as a bogus cover to actually protect ISKCON gurus from competition. The quotations in the following shaded boxes are from a statement issued by the North American GBC on 12/6/2012:

"Temple presidents and congregational leaders are directed to not promote or host Tripurari Swami."

[Tripurari Swami is an ex-member of ISKCON who has his own preaching mission separate to ISKCON.] The GBC offers the following reasons for the need to take this action:

"Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON boat are his standards, his mood of devotion, his instructions, and his system of organization. Thus, out of duty, to help assure that the elements set in place by Srila Prabhupada remain intact, […] protect Srila Prabhupada's position in and standards for his Society".

Srila Prabhupada unprotected for decades!

To justify Tripurari Swami's threat to "Srila Prabhupada's standards", Appendix A of the GBC statement presents evidence of Tripurari Swami having left ISKCON in 1984-85 to take siksa from Srila Prabhupada's Godbrother, with Appendix B presenting evidence from 1995 wherein Tripurari Swami elaborates on how he does not accept Srila Prabhupada as his sole authority. Thus, the GBC claim they only needed to protect Srila Prabhupada's position in 2012 due to information they had been aware of for between 17-27 years! Thus, by their own admission, the GBC felt no need to "protect" Srila Prabhupada's position for decades. However, the same document also offers one other reason for taking action against Tripurari Swami, which would explain why they have decided to do this only now. In Appendix E, they give examples of how Tripurari Swami has been "re-initiating" disciples of ISKCON gurus as his own, and this evidence is primarily from the last few years. So, the GBC is really taking action to stop Tripurari Swami "stealing" the disciples of ISKCON gurus, whom the gurus themselves stole from Srila Prabhupada in the first place!

Return to IRM Homepage

Please chant: Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna, Krishna, Hare, Hare, 
Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama, Rama, Hare, Hare.
And be Happy!