sac - the prominent link

7/28/2019 SAC - The Prominent Link

1/24

The Prominent Link

Although some valid points and suggestions can be found in the booklet Srila Prabhupada: TheProminent Link (PL), we have discovered that a number of the premises and conclusions

presented there oppose not only Srila Prabhupadas instructions for ISKCON but also the basicprinciples of the Gaudiyasampradaya, Vaisnavism in general, and Vedic tradition.

A devotee may say that Srila Prabhupada is his prominent guru, and that he receives guidancefrom him in several ways. This claim needs to be tested, however, by the devotees willingness

to follow Srila Prabhupadas instructions, including instructions about the forms and formalities

of becoming a disciple and connecting with the Vaisnava parampara. Such following, in ahumble spirit, with willingness to be corrected, is the true mark of discipleship. When a devotee

has such a humble attitude, then he is a disciple not only of his own diksa- andsiksa-gurus but of

the whole disciplic succession.

To be fair, we should acknowledge that we found several useful ideas in thePL booklet. Some ofthese positive contributions are as follows: (1) The importance of devotees accepting

responsibility for the advancement of other devotees, especially those junior to themselves; (2)

The need to have a realistic appreciation of ones guru based how much the guru helps one

progress on the path of bhakti, not just on his institutional position. Despite the faults in itsarguments,PL points towards a realistic approach: Someone is factually aguru to the degree that

he properly functions as a guru; (3) The need for ISKCON leaders to make it known that all

devotees can be inspired by Srila Prabhupada and thus attain enlightenment and spiritualstrength; and (4) The advisability of having Srila Prabhupadas Vyasa-puja ceremony the

primary Vyasa-puja for all ISKCON members.

Nonetheless, the Sastric Advisory Council (SAC) found the PL booklet to be lacking inscriptural support and divergent from correct siddhanta on several important points. Forexample, its attempt at re-defining the word diksa is clearly unacceptable. Also, the suggestions

made in the booklet that devotees can forego all worship of theirdiksa-gurus contradict standard

teachings and practice. Such an innovation will not help anyone establish a better spiritualrelationship with Srila Prabhupada. To properly connect with Srila Prabhupada or any acarya in

ourguru-parampara, devotees should follow the directions of Srila Rupa Gosvami in his Bhakti-

rasamrta-sindhubeginning with the first step of taking shelter of the lotus feet of a bona fidegururather than following instead some artificially manufactured process. But be that as it

may, the SAC thanks Dhira Govinda Prabhu for his attempt in Srila Prabhupada: The

Prominent Link (PL) to search out ways to improve guru-disciple relationships in ISKCON,

although we cannot endorse the overall understanding expressed in the booklet and the means ofrectification its author recommends.

Introduction

As the years increase since Srila Prabhupadas departure and the number of devotees accepting

disciples also increases, as Srila Prabhupadas grand-disciples begin to accept disciples, as somegurus have fallen, and as ISKCONs devotees become more mature in their understanding of


2/24

Srila Prabhupadas position, Dhira Govinda Prabhu now has presented Srila Prabhupada: The

Prominent Link (PL). Surely the primary issue he raises is an important onethe question of

Prabhupadas position, influence, and responsibility in relation to each member of his Society.The GBC have given much attention to addressing philosophically and practically what it means

that Prabhupada is our founder-acarya. Dhira Govinda Prabhus questions and his attempt to

suggest solutions are therefore welcome.

And his questions are also raised among ISKCON leadership. For example, in his upcomingbook, H.H. Bhaktitirtha Svami writes, The disciple has an awesome task. How should we

understand our connection with the present day gurus when we have our founder-acarya? How

do we keep our founder-acarya in the center, understanding that his standard is topmost and thatwe should try to rise to this standard?

Although there is room for improvement and clarification in our present understanding of how

Srila Prabhupada is the founder-acarya for ISKCON and the foundational guru individually for

all its members, our understanding has to remain within the boundaries of Prabhupadas

teaching. How can we claim him to be our prominent guru if we disregard his instructions andre-define his teachings? But thePL booklet oversteps the bounds ofguru,sadhu, andsastra.

Srila Prabhupada wrote in a letter to Jayagovinda, Los Angeles July 4, 1969, You have inquired

why Caitanya Mahaprabhu has not mentioned anything about accepting a Spiritual Master in HisSiksastaka. But perhaps you have missed the point that He says amanina manadena kirtaniya

sada hari. This means one has to chant the Holy Names of Krsna, becoming humbler than the

straw, and more tolerant than the tree. So who can become humbler than the straw unless heaccepts a Spiritual Master? But if anyone becomes humbler than the grass and more tolerant

than the tree, it is understood that he has accepted a Spiritual Master.

Certainly we are all linked to Srila Prabhupada, either directly as his diksa disciples, or throughhis representatives in the ISKCON parampara. The mystery of Vaisnava parampara is thatwhile one goes through onesguru, one is also directly connected with the previousgurus and

with Krsna Himself. Prabhupada writes in his purport to Bhagavad-gita 18.75, Vyasa was the

spiritual master of Sanjaya, and Sanjaya admits that it was by Vyasas mercy that he couldunderstand the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This means that one has to understand Krsna

not directly but through the medium of the spiritual master. The spiritual master is the

transparent medium, although it is true that the experience is still direct. This is the mystery ofthe disciplic succession. When the spiritual master is bona fide, then one can hearBhagavad-gita

directly, as Arjuna heard it Narada is the direct disciple of Krsna and the spiritual master of

Vyasa. Therefore Vyasa is as bona fide as Arjuna because he comes in the disciplic succession,

and Sanjaya is the direct disciple of Vyasa. Therefore by the grace of Vyasa, Sanjayas senseswere purified, and he could see and hear Krsna directly. One who directly hears Krsna can

understand this confidential knowledge. If one does not come to the disciplic succession, he

cannot hear Krsna.

Yet one cannot correctly call Srila Prabhupada, or even Sri Krsna, the current link. We cannot

approach Krsna without a mediator as did Arjuna, though the Lord is present in our heart, as the

Deity, as His Holy names, and in every atom. The fact that Prabhupada lives in his books and


3/24

murtis does not mean devotees can avoid the authorized process of linking with him, which

includes, if one is not Prabhupadas direct diksa disciple, taking diksa from one of his followers.

At the same time, no matter who are ones diksa- and siksa-gurus, Prabhupadas instructionsremain the basis, the standard and foundation for all individual devotees and the Hare Krsna

Society as a whole. The GBC has already acknowledged the genuine desires and needs of many

devotees to have Prabhupada as their prominent guru, whether or not they are his direct diksadisciples, and the GBC should continue to reconfirm and better clarify this.

But as Dhira Govinda Prabhu asserts, not without good reason, there are many devotees,

including himself, who are not satisfied with only this much. They want to think of Srila

Prabhupada as their main guru, feeling that their inspiration and advancement come directlyfrom their relationship with Prabhupada anyway and so its just a matter of acknowledgement.

They dont want to be denied being considered Prabhupadas disciples.

These devotees run into practical difficulties because they believe that Srila Prabhupada is their

main guru. For example, ISKCON devotees generally consider the diksa-guru the guru and

expect the name of the diksa-guru when they ask, Who is yourguru? If someone whoconsiders Prabhupada as his prominent or only guru answers, Prabhupada when he hasnt

received diksa from him, he may be rejected as a rtvik proponent; his social and vocationalpositions may be jeopardized, or at least hell have to give an entire explanation.

Furthermore, although the GBC has said that Srila Prabhupada may be considered ones main

guru (assiksa-guru), placing the diksa-guru in a subordinate or peripheral role, still because the

resolutions use words such as can and may, the desires of devotees to have Prabhupada astheir mainguru may be viewed as deviant or at least as not very desirable.

There are also those who want only Prabhupada as theirguru, and do not want to identify the

others who gave them diksa and Siksa with the name guru. This tendency is notable in thePLbooklet, where the author consistently refers to a diksa-guru as the devotee who performs theformal initiation ceremony.

The author ofPL objects to what he perceives as a presumption prevalent in ISKCON that ones

diksa-guru is automatically ones prominentguru. He attempts to establish that ones diksa-guru

may have relatively much less influence than does Srila Prabhupada. This much we can agreewith. But he then proposes that Srila Prabhupada is every ISKCON devotees diksa-guru in the

transcendental sense, thus affirming the very assumption he sought to discredit.

Dhira Govinda Prabhus solution is to redefine diksa so that Prabhupada is his diksa-guru and

therefore not only his primary but his only guru. ISKCON devotees tend to identify only onesdiksa-guru as guru. So, with the help of The Prominent Links new definition of diksa such

devotees feelings and relationships will be acceptable according to ISKCON standards; These

devotees can keep only Prabhupadas pictures, worship only him, and so forth.

To solidify this position, Dhira Govinda Prabhu wishes the GBC to declare his understanding as

the standard, leaving those who define diksa in the traditional way and think of the guru who

gave them formal diksa as primary to be tolerated as abnormal. He couches this presentation in


4/24

inclusive and broad-minded terms, saying that many understandings ofguru are possible, while

he simultaneously posits his understanding and position as superior with others in need of

rectification. (seePL pamphlet pages 9, 17 and 39)

But we should not take the liberty of redefining diksa and diksa-guru, and we should avoid

understanding them too narrowly. To define diksa, as Srila Prabhupada sometimes does, as thetransmission of transcendental knowledge, does not mean that the formal aspects of diksa can be

completely neglected. We need to consider carefully what transcendental knowledge is and howit is transmitted. Such knowledge is not just information, or skills, or even values, as in ordinary

learning, though these are also taught in the course of diksa and Siksa. Rather, spiritual

knowledge is realization and wisdom. This knowledge comes primarily through chanting HareKrsna and the Gayatri mantras, coupled with following a way of life that supports the chanting.

As Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura wrote, The holy name will manifest in your heart as

you go on serving the holy name with body, mind, and words. Hearing and reciting Sastras helpsto confirm the realizations one attains by chanting the holy name. Later he writes, Initiation by

the spiritual master gives one enthusiasm and inspiration to chant the holy name. (excerpts from

Bengali letters, appearing in SrilaBhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, pub. Shree Gopinatha GaudiyaMath, trans. B.S. Damodara Maharaja)

There arent two kinds ofdiksa, one transcendental and the other a mere formality. Diksa is

simply transcendental, except when the rituals are followed simply for show, like a marriage

done to acquire a visa.

To solve the very real problems Dhira Govinda Prabhu addresses, we thus need a completeunderstanding of the principle ofdiksa. There are also practical steps to take that would help us,

including changing the wording of the GBC statement to eliminate the words can and may;

this step would establish that having Prabhupada as ones prominent guru is not only acceptable

but at least equally desirable to any other situation.

We also need practical guidelines for devotees who feel that Prabhupada is their prominent guru,

so they can answer in a bona fide and truthful way the question, Who is yourguru? There

should be guidelines for worship of Deities and guruspictures, and so on, for devotees whounderstand their primaryguru relationship to be with Srila Prabhupada as Siksa-guru. The GBC

has delineated a number of specifics in this regard, but often without explanations. It would be

helpful, for example, to explain why a devotee who accepts Prabhupada as his prominent gurushould have his diksa-gurus picture present when worshipping the Deity. And since the general

guidance for one whose diksa-guru has fallen is to simply worship Prabhupada, one whose

diksa-guru is in good standing but with whom he or she has little relationship may question why

he cant also worship Srila Prabhupada exclusively.

Certainly the leaders of ISKCON need to support the GBCs conclusions about relationships to

Srila Prabhupada and diksa and Siksa-gurus. At least verbally in public, what to speak of in print,

leaders should not denigrate existing policies, labeling them as demeaning to our diksa-gurus orto Srila Prabhupada. It is a fact that prominent members of the GBC as well as other leaders,

write and speak in public forums about the deficiencies in the GBC guru policy. It is not,

therefore, surprising, that ISKCON members are publishing calls for drastic reform.


5/24

Scripture, tradition, and ISKCON law indicate that guru-disciple relationships are individual and

cannot be mandated, as long as they fall within the boundary ofguru, sadhu, and Sastra. Whom

an individual considers as his prominent guru is a matter of the heart. It should not be dictated toa devotee what faith he must have in his diksa-guru simply on the basis of institutional status.

There is etiquette to be maintained, but faith is ultimately a private matter.

Dhira Govinda Prabhu, after extensive discussion, was unwilling to modify the position

he took in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, while claiming that his ideas wereexploratory, aimed only at sparking discussion, investigation, and understanding. We invited him

to author this paper with us, to work with our team step by step in order to arrive at conclusions

with which we all could agree. Sadly, he refused.

Responses to Excerpts ofSrila Prabhupada, The Prominent Link

Of central importance in this discussion is that Srila Prabhupada is, or at least is meant to be, the

primary spiritual master for all members of his movement. In realizing this it is important not to

become distracted by appellations such as diksa guru, initiator, and officiating acarya,although for communicative purposes such designations are sometimes necessary. (p. 2)

We cannot dispense with the distinction ofdiksa- and Siksa-guru without running into serious

difficulty. Many of ouracaryas have gone out of their way to explain this distinction, including

Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami in the first chapter of Caitanya-caritamrta and Srila JivaGosvami in his discussion ofguru-tattva in SriBhakti-sandarbha. Ones primary spiritual

master may sometimes be asiksa-guru rather than the Vaisnava who gave one initiation. Such is

the case for many devotees in ISKCON who didnt receive initiation from its founder- acarya.But still the role ofdiksa-guru is special. The diksa-guru accepts a special responsibility for his

disciples, and therefore his disciples owe him special gratitude, even if he is only a representative

of the primary spiritual master.

Just what kind and how much worship the diksa-guru should be given may be debatable, but atleast he should be allowed the honor of being considered ones guru. As Krsnadasa Kaviraja has

indicated in his mangalacarana verse vande gurun, I offer respect to my gurus,a devotee can

have more than one Vaisnavaguru, and he can and should worship them all. The diksa-guru may

be the last and maybe least link in the parampara,but isnt such indirect connection to Krsnathe very idea ofparampara? Krsna is eternally enjoying with His pure devotees and has nothing

to do with the suffering of this material world. We are here suffering only because we chose to

reject Krsna. We want to try to control and enjoy separate from Him, and Krsna respects thisdesire. He will never interfere with our misuse of free will. He will never force us to surrender to

Him. But His representatives take the risk of interfering, and so the only practical way to regain

our lost connection with Krsna is through the parampara. One who claims a direct connectionwith Krsna is most likely ignored by Him. But a humble devotee who follows Caitanya

Mahaprabhus example of considering Himself dasa-dasanudasa has the best chance of

attracting Krsnas attention. If ourdiksa-guru is a servant of Krsnas dearest devotee, we are allthe more fortunate to be connected through that additional link.


6/24

The diksa-guru is his disciples immediate link, the one who takes personal responsibility for

delivering his disciples to Krsna. He may be able to do this only on the strength of those he

represents, those who empower him, but still the personal responsibility is his. This is whatmakes diksa something more than just a formal ceremony. In the same way that a childs parents

are personally responsible in a way no one else is, not even the grandparents and more distant

forefathers, so also the diksa-guru takes special trouble and risk for his disciples. For thedisciples to not honor him for this is indecent.

Srila Jiva Gosvami writes in Bhakti-sandarbha (207) about the obligation of respect for ones

diksa-guru:

mantra-gurus tv eka evety aha,

labdhvanugraha acaryat

tena sandarsitagamah

maha-purusam abhyarcen

murtyabhimatayatmanah

anugraho mantra-diksa-rupah, agamo mantra-vidhi-sastram, asyaikatvam eka-vacanena

bodhyate.

bodhah kalusitas tena

dauratmyam prakati-krtam

gurur yena parityaktas

tena tyaktah pura harih

iti brahma-vaivartadau tat-tyaga-nisedhat. tad-aparitosenaivanyo guruh kriyate. tato neka-guru-karane purva-tyaga eva siddhah.


7/24

The mantra-guru, however, is only one, as is stated: Having obtained the mercy of his spiritual

master, who reveals to the disciple the injunctions of Vedic scriptures, the devotee should

worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the particular personal form of the Lord thedevotee finds most attractive. (Bhag. 11.3.48) This mercy is in the form of initiation into the

mantra. The agama is the scripture giving the regulations of chanting the mantra. That thisguru

is one can be understood from the use of the singular number [in the word acaryat]. Indeed, theBrahma-vaivarta and otherPuranas forbid rejecting him: One who rejects his guru must have

polluted intelligence. He reveals his own wickedness by this act. Even before this, he has already

rejected Lord Hari. Dissatisfied with his guru, he takes another one; his taking more than oneguru proves that he has previously rejected [Krsna].

Srila Prabhupada described initiation as a process, with the essence of this process being the

delivery ofdivya-jnana, or transcendental knowledge, from the spiritual master to the disciple.

(p. 3)

Initiation, as described above, is a process. Components of this process include receiving and

implementing the instructions to wearkanthimala and Vaisnava tilaka, and receiving a Vaisnavaname. The most essential aspect of initiation is receiving transcendental knowledge from a

realized spiritual master. (p. 5)

Dhira Govinda Prabhu is attempting here to identify the essence of initiation as the transmissionof spiritual knowledge rather than the mere ceremony of officially receiving ones mantra and

new name. He cites (without the Sanskrit) a verse that has been given as authoritative by Srila

Prabhupada, and indeed was cited by the Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas Sanatana Gosvami,Narahari Sarakara, and Jiva Gosvami in their foundational explanations ofdiksa:

divyam jnanam yato dadyat

kuryat papasya sanksayam

tasmad dikseti sa prokta

desikais tattva kovidaih

Diksa is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish allreactions caused by sinful activity. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows

this process as diksa. (Srila Prabhupadas translation from Caitanya-caritamrta). But does thisactually mean that the essential definition of initiation should be the transmitting oftranscendental knowledge? If that were so, then there really would be no difference between

siksa and diksa.

Maybe, however, we should look more closely at how our acaryas presented the statement of

this verse in context. This verse is cited by Srila Sanatana Gosvami inHari-bhakti-vilasa (secondvilasa),and Srila Jiva Gosvami in Bhakti-sandarbha (283), and Srila Prabhupada in his purport


8/24

ot Caitanya-caritamrtya, Madhya-lila 15.108. All three of these presentations incorporating the

verse are very similar. Lets examine one of them, the passage ofBhakti-sandarbha:

yady api sri-bhagavata-mate pancaratradi-vad arcana-margasyavasyakatvam nasti, tad vinapisaranapatty-adinam ekatarenapi purusartha-siddher abhihitatvat, tathapi sri-naradadi-

vartmanusaradbhih sri-bhagavata saha sambandha-visesam diksa-vidhanena sri-guru-carana-sampaditam cikirsadbhih krtayam diksayam arcanam avasyam kriyetaiva,

In the opinion ofSrimad-Bhagavatam there is no absolute necessity of following the process ofarcana, just as there is no need to follow the methods of the Pancaratra, since it is specifically

stated that one can achieve the full perfection of life even without them, just by practicing even

one of the methods ofSaranapatti and so on. But nonetheless if those who follow the paths ofsuch authorities as Sri Narada want their special relationship with the Personality of Godhead,

which is to be achieved at the feet of their divine spiritual master by his giving them diksa, they

must necessarily take diksa and then perform the process ofarcanam. This is as is stated in theAgama [Pancaratra]:

divyam jnanam yato dadyat

kuryat papasya sanksayam

tasmad dikseti sa prokta

deSikais tattva kovidaih

ato gurum pranamyaiva

sarva-svam vinivedya ca

grhniyad vaisnavam mantram

diksa-purvam vidhanatah

ity agamat. divyam jnanam hy atra Srimati mantre bhagavat-svarupa-jnanam, tena bhagavata

sambandha-viSesa-jnanam ca, yatha padmottara-khandadav asTaksaradikam adhikrtya vivrtamasti.

Diksa is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all

reactions caused by sinful activity. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows

this process as diksa.


9/24

Therefore one should first bow down to his guru, offer everything he possesses to him, and

should accept a Vaisnava mantra by properly carrying out the process ofdiksa.

Transcendental knowledge here means knowledge of the identity of the Personality ofGodhead within ones divine mantra, and also knowledge of ones individual relationship with

the Supreme Lord, as has been elaborately described in the Uttara-khanda of thePadma Purana,in the discussion of the eight-syllable and othermantras.

diksa yathagame,

dvijanam anupanitanam

sva-karmadhyayanadisu

yathadhikaro nastiha

syac copanayanad anu

tathatradiksitanam tu

mantra-devarcanadisu

nadhikaro sty atah kuryad

atmanam siva-samstutam

Diksa is as is described in the Agama: When they have not been initiated, brahmanas have no

authorization to engage in their prescribed duties of studying the Vedas and so on, but after

taking initiation they are authorized.

Similarly those who have not taken diksa are not authorized to perform such activities aschanting mantras and worshiping the Deity of the Lord. Therefore one should make oneself

auspicious and reputable [by accepting initiation].

[end of theBhakti-sandarbha section]


10/24

It should be obvious from having read this that

diksa is here being described as basically a process of receiving a Vaisnava mantra so that onecan begin the formal methods of Deity worship and mantra chanting, the standard practices of

Pancaratrika devotional service. The identification of diksa with the transmission oftranscendental knowledge is only mentioned in a secondary way, and as part of a two-verse

statement from an anonymousPancaratra that goes on to define diksa as the official receiving of

a Vaisnava mantra. There is no way it can be justified, therefore, in citing this verse out ofcontext as proof that the transmission of knowledge is the svarupa-laksana (essential definition)

ofdiksa. It is rather only a tatastha-laksana (secondary characteristic).

This is also shown in Srila Sanatana Gosvamis equivalent presentation in Hari-bhakti-vilasa. He

cites the same two verses beginning divyam jnanam, preceding them with the heading: atha

diksa-mahatmyam (Now the glories of diksa.) In other words, Srila Sanatana cites the twoverses to highlight the importance of diksa, not to give its essential definition. As Srila

Prabhupada also pointed out when he also cited and explained the first words of these verses inseveral different initiation lectures, the first two lines are giving a poetic analysis of the syllables

di-ksa. The syllable di alludes to divyam jnanam, and ksa figuratively indicates ksapayati (it

eliminates [ignorance]). Such poetic explanations, known in the Vedic tradition as artha-vada,are often given by scriptures and their commentators to evoke appreciation of facts that have

been already established by more scientific methods, but they are not meant to be taken as the

essential definition or literal proof of anything, even according to the strict rules of grammar.

The syllable di in diksa is not actually derived from the same root as divyam, nor is it necessarilyconnected with the nounjnanam, nor does the bare syllable ksa necessarily mean ksapayati, nor

is the object of that verb necessary ignorance.

Of course, the properly observed vows of initiation do lead to the gain of spiritual knowledge

and defeat of ignorance, but these are secondary characteristics. Properly speaking, diksa is aspecificPancaratrika method ofmantra initiation, which Srila Rupa Gosvami has stipulated as

one of the required elements ofvaidhi sadhana-bhakti.
http://gbc.iskcon.org/2012/01/26/the-prominent-link/%3Cem%3Ehttp:/gbc.iskcon.org%3C/em%3E/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/sp1.jpg


11/24

Srila Prabhupada is giving transcendental knowledge, and thus he is performing the most

important element of the process of initiation. He is the main Vaisnava doing this for members of

his movement. (p.6)

Yes, Srila Prabhupada is our prime source of transcendental knowledge. Whatever we may know

about Krsna consciousness, Vedic civilization, and anything else worth knowing we know onlyby his divine grace and in terms of his understanding and attitudes. So yes, he is our most

important link to the Gaudiya Vaisnava sampradaya, and without his blessings we will never beable to receive the full mercy of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu. But still there is the practical

distinction ofdiksa and siksa, which we cannot ignore without falling into confusion. Diksa is

not exactly the same assiksa. It is a specific function, which according to all knownsastras andpractice is always performed by a current representative of ones sampradaya. Srila Prabhupada

is the principlesiksa-guru for anyone who wants to accept him as such, but he is not the diksa-

guru of all of his followers, any more than he is their biological father. This fact does notdiminish his supremacy in ISKCON, nor should it be a reason for his representatives to foolishly

imitate him.

An authorized diksa-guru in ISKCON should be considered Srila Prabhupadas empowered

representative, and deserves the respect of his disciples. If we cannot believe that SrilaPrabhupada can empower his disciples despite their imperfections, then our faith in him is not as

strong as it should be.

Someone may assert If transcendental knowledge is given by someone other than the Vaisnava

who performs the initiation ceremony, then that transcendental knowledge can only be calledsiksa, not diksa. Therefore it cannot be rightly said that Srila Prabhupada is giving diksa. He is

givingsiksa. In the framework of The Prominent Link (PL), the essential focus is on the process

of initiation, which is founded on the transmission of transcendental knowledge. Terminology

and labeling is not a chief concern. Whomever is labeled siksa guru, initiator, or diksaguru, the heart of the PL understanding is that Srila Prabhupada is the primary Vaisnava

directly giving transcendental knowledge. For devotees who are receiving divya-jnana directlyfrom Srila Prabhupada, more than from any other Vaisnava, it can rightly be said that Srila

Prabhupada is their direct, current, and prominent link to the parampara, with direct, current,

and prominent link defined as the Vaisnava who directly gives transcendental knowledge more

than any other devotee. (p. 7)

We can agree without hesitation that Srila Prabhupada is the most prominent link to the

sampradaya for all of his followers, and that he is directly theirsiksa-guru, at least to the extent

that they are interested to hear from him . But he is not the last link in the chain for his grand-

disciples. He is alive in his instructions, in his murti, and in the living institution ISKCON. Weshouldnt be disappointed that his legacy can only be called siksa, since history will show how

that Siksa transformed the world. But, unfortunately for all of us, he is not physically present and

so is not giving diksa to anyone currently; instead he has taken the usual measure of authorizinghis disciples to initiate in the parampara. There is no definite evidence available that Srila

Prabhupada ever gave instructions to contravene this age-old tradition ofparampara. And in

accordance with the ancient tradition, the devotees currently serving as the representatives of the


12/24

founder-acarya in giving diksa are personally responsible for their disciples and have a special

spiritual relationship with them.

When someone first contacts ISKCON, at least in most parts of the organization, for a fewmonths he is encouraged to directly accept Srila Prabhupada as his guru. We suggest that once

someone has done this, as evidenced by accepting Srila Prabhupada in his heart as his spiritualmaster and following Srila Prabhupadas instructions, the newcomer does not need to search for

another Vaisnava to connect him with Srila Prabhupada. (p. 9)

Sorry, but this amounts to saying that newcomers to ISKCON do not need to take diksa, or else

that Srila Prabhupada is theirdiksa-guru. One who is wary about accepting any current ISKCON

guru is still preliminarily connected to Srila Prabhupada by whatever faith he has developed andby however he can follow Prabhupadas instructions, but if he wants to become a full member of

the sampradaya he needs to take diksa. Some may elect to avoid diksa, but still we should not

discourage newcomers from doing what Srila Rupa Gosvami asked them to do. It is certainly

appropriate for new bhaktas to worship Srila Prabhupada as theirguru, because of course he is

theirguru, and they should continue to do so, but that does not mean that they are never going totake diksa from one of his representatives.

The Vaisnava conducting the initiation ceremony does not become the connection between the

initiate and Srila Prabhupada. The direct link between the initiate and Srila Prabhupada alreadyexists. The connection does not become indirect at the time of the ceremony. (p. 10)

Is the Vaisnava conducting the ceremony his disciples guru or not? If so, then why not let him

be calledguru? If not, then the intended idea is that Srila Prabhupada must be the new disciplesone and onlyguru, because anyone else standing between the Prabhupada and the disciple would

degrade the connection. But the actual principle ofparamapara works in just the opposite way:

The more a devotee becomes servant of the servant of the servant, the more likely it is that theparampara and Krsna will recognize him.

Srila Prabhupada is transmitting transcendental knowledge, and we are confident that he will

continue to do so for many generations. In this transcendental sense, Srila Prabhupada is

initiating sincere followers. In fact, we propose that accepting divya-jnana, or initiation, from

Srila Prabhupada, and thereby directly connecting with him, is the qualification for one tobecome formally initiated in Srila Prabhupadas movement. Again, the official initiation

ceremony is a formal acknowledgement that the devotee has directly connected with Srila

Prabhupada. (p. 10)

Granted, without accepting Srila Prabhupada as ones guru, there is no meaning to thinkingoneself a devotee in ISKCON.Diksa, however, is not only a formality of acknowledging ones

already established connection with Srila Prabhupada. It is act of obeying Srila Prabhupada and

his predecessors by reposing ones faith in one of his representatives. We show the extent of ourtrust in Srila Prabhupada and his ability to empower others by entrusting ourselves to his

disciples.


13/24

Srila Prabhupadas followers who assist him in helping to connect a devotee directly to him, are

not the point of unconditional surrender. (p. 17)

When a devotee surrenders himself to any guru, that surrender is not unconditional. There areconditions, namely that the guru should be bona fide (literally, in good faith), a faithful

representative of the sampradaya. It is not because of a gurus own absolute status, because ofhis mystic powers, or erudition, or good looks or sweet voice, that one should surrender and

become his disciple. The main qualification of a guru is his surrender to his guru and to theparampara. In that sense, surrender does have its conditions. The main strength of ISKCON is

Srila Prabhupadas power to attract faith. That power, however, comes from above, and it is still

active even in Srila Prabhupadas physical absence. Those who could not take initiation directlyfrom Prabhupada can still become fortunate if they meet someone empowered by Prabhupada to

carry on the parampara. If there are no such qualified gurus in ISKCON, then ISKCON is

finished or will have to be dormant for some time, and declaring Srila Prabhupada to beeveryones initiator will not change the situation. But if there are qualified gurus, then the same

mercy is available as much as it was in Prabhupadas presence, without having to imagine that

Prabhupada is still giving diksa.

Devotional service is not linear in the sense that when we surrender to a guru we are givingourselves up only to a single point. Initiation means joining the company of the sampradaya,

which includes the founder-acarya and his representatives. The diksa-guru is not the only point

of surrender, but he is the one closest point with whom his disciple makes immediate contact, atleast as far as the diksa process goes. Even if connection with that point is disrupted, however, a

devotees connection with hissiksa-gurus can still easily save him. In some cases a disciple may

receive little instruction from his diksa-guru and have more faith in a siksa-guru, but as long as

the diksa-guru is a faithful Vaisnava his disciple should always show him respect.

for all members of Srila Prabhupadas movement the worship of Srila Prabhupada issufficient. No one else needs to be worshiped as the link to the parampara, because Srila

Prabhupada completely fills this role, though of course he accepts assistance from his followers.(p. 19)

Is it actually sufficient, or more to the point, is the Supreme Lord satisfied, by ISKCON devotees

who worship Srila Prabhupada but do not want to worship theirdiksa-gurus? To answer this we

first have to decide what we mean by worship, which could mean anything from a minimal showof respect, of at very least acknowledging that ones guru is some sort ofguru, not just an totally

ordinary person, to the extreme fanaticism of being ready to reject Prabhupada and Krsna in the

name of following the guru. Starting at the one end of the scale, it is clear from Krsnas

instructions to Uddhava that He is not pleased by complete neglect of onesguru:

Some devotees may choose to worship a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, such as the Vaisnava who

performed the initiation ceremony, as the link to Srila Prabhupada, or in some other

philosophical capacity. The PL framework does not directly address this, though it does contend


14/24

that any member of Srila Prabhupadas movement who accepts Srila Prabhupada as the guru to

be worshiped as the current link to theparampara must be permitted to do so. (p. 19)

Given what we have discussed above, it is not advisable to recommend to devotees that theyignore their diksa-gurus, unless the gurus were never proper Vaisnavas or else have seriously

deviated from Vaisnava principles. Some ISKCON devotees may repose most of their faith onlyin Srila Prabhupada and little faith in their initiating gurus, but still to satisfy the parampara and

Krsna the prescribed etiquette should be maintained. The Pancaratrika methods of Deityworship prescribe that worship be offered with authorized mantras, and every item offered

should first be offered to the guru who gave the worshiper his mantras. The etiquette in formal

worship is that the disciple offers to his guru, and the guru asks the Lord being worshiped toaccept the offering (or rather, that theguru gives the offering to hisguru and it is passed up the

line). Because the guru is a dear devotee of the Lord, the Lord does not refuse the offerings of

imperfect disciples. Since this is the formal pancaratrika method, the guru who is given theoffering first is normally the pancaratrika diksa-guru. There may be exceptions; the guru-

parampara given to us by Srila Prabhupada for worship in ISKCON, for example, includes

Bhaktivinoda Thakurassiksa-guru, Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, rather than his diksa-guru. Butstill offering puja first to ones diksa-guru is the norm practiced in all sampradayas. Whatever

may have been the actual relationship between Srila Bhaktivinoda and his diksa-guru, and we

hear different stories about this from different sources, it is known that Srila Bhaktivinoda never

behaved disrespectfully toward him.

Many great Vaisnavas are not formally worshipped. Consider the case of Srila Sukadeva

Gosvami, the speaker of the Srimad-Bhagavatam. Undoubtedly he is our guru. Clearly he is

situated at the topmost platform of devotional service. We honor, glorify and revere him, though

we dont formally worship him. For example, we dont recite hispranam mantras when we enterthe temple room and his picture is not on the ISKCON altars. Are we minimizing the great saint

Srila Sukadeva Gosvami? No, because Srila Prabhupada instructed how to properly honor SrilaSukadeva Gosvami according to our particular circumstance, and this does not include formalworship as described above. Similarly, to not formally worship the devotee who performs the

initiating ceremony is not an inherent minimization of that devotee. The Prominent Link (PL)

model contends that worship of Srila Prabhupada as the direct connection to the disciplicsuccession, without worship of anyone else as the link to Srila Prabhupada, should be accepted

as a valid practice in Srila Prabhupadas movement, though the PL model does not maintain that

worship of others as the connection to Srila Prabhupada should be prohibited in the movement.(p. 22)

Sukadeva Gosvami is honored as gurum muninam, the spiritual master of the great sages. When

he spoke to Pariksit, Sukadevas own guru Vyasadeva and parama-guru Narada were happy to

sit in the audience and listen. It is commendable that ISKCON devotees sometimes worshipSukadeva Gosvami in their personal chanting and meditation. But we do not make formal

offerings to Sukadeva in our regularpuja because he is not in the line of initiators of the Brahma-

Madhva-Gaudiya sampradaya. The diksa-guru of a properly initiated devotee in ISKCON,

however, is the immediate link in the diksa-parampara for his disciple. If the disciple wants toparticipate in the devotional method of arcanam, which in our line is practiced according to

pancaratrika principles, he should offer at least a minimum of worship to his diksa-guru. In his


15/24

heart he may spend day and night worshiping only Srila Prabhupada, and he may spend hours

every day reading Prabhupadas books and speaking his glories, but still there are standards he

should follow in showing appropriate respect, including worship, to his diksa-guru.

Even if one conceives of the devotee who conducts the initiation ceremony to be in the absolute

position and the current link to the parampara, that devotee could legitimately instruct theinitiate to worship Srila Prabhupada rather than himself. For the sake of unity of the movement it

would seem that such directives from devotees who perform initiations would be warranted.Many observers have commented that overemphasis by the initiate on the Vaisnava performing

the initiation ceremony, in terms of worship, celebration of Vyasa-puja, and other practices, at

the expense of an appreciation of Srila Prabhupadas proper place in the life of the initiate, hascaused the movement to degrade to a matha mentality. (p. 23)

Fanaticguru worship does degrade ISKCON. It did in the past, when the Mayapura temple room

was encumbered by eleven extra vyasasanas during the Gaura-purnima festivals. It continues to

do so in defiance of ISKCON law in some places, including established ISKCON temples. But is

it an act of fanaticism to have a picture of the pujarisdiksa-guru temporarily on the altar, or toobserve the diksa-gurusVyasa-puja once a year? Does it have to be a question of worshiping

either Prabhupada or the diksa-guru, or can both be accommodated fairly? In a healthy guru-disciple relationship in ISKCON, the representative of Prabhupada (diksa-orsiksa-guru) would

constantly direct the disciple in serving Prabhupadas instructions and his mission. In exchange

for this, the disciple would naturally feel gratitude and want to express it. So the useful questionsto ask are: How much is this healthy norm established in ISKCON? Where it isntwhy? And

how to rectify the situation? We dont think that, on carefully examination of what is actually

going on in ISKCON, we will find the situation either all black or all white. And we dont think

we will find that the cause of all our evils is that disciples worship theirdiksa-gurus.

However, even if someone doesnt view Srila Prabhupada as the current link, whomever isregarded as the link can instruct the initiates to worship the same altar that Srila Prabhupada gave

us, to recite only Srila Prabhupadas pranam mantras, and to celebrate Srila PrabhupadasVyasa-puja ceremony as the primary Vyasa-puja ceremony.

By retaining the worship practices Srila Prabhupada established, no one in Srila Prabhupadas

movement will ever experience that the Vaisnava perceived and worshipped as the current link to

theparampara will experience difficulties in spiritual life. (p. 24)

Although elsewhere this paper claims that its model is not meant to be adopted as the onlyallowable viewpoint in ISKCON, here it is definitely implied that if a guru does not forbid his

disciples to worship himself, he is deviant. It is proposed that no pictures of any guru after

Prabhupada should be on ISKCON altars, and that disciples should not recite pranama-mantrasfor their diksa-gurus. These proposals, as already discussed, are against the principles of

pancaratrika worship and the practice of Vaisnavas and others in all sampradayas. There is

nothing wrong with the suggestion that the most important observance of Vyasa-puja should befor Srila Prabhupada, as long as disciples are not discouraged from also celebrating their diksa-gurusappearance days.


16/24

It is not a practical proposal that by retaining the eternal appearance of worship as it was in Srila

Prabhupadas presence the tragedy ofguru falldown will never again be experienced in

ISKCON. Naturally and unavoidably, new devotees will tend to place their trust in those whopersonally guide them, whether the guides are allowed to be calledgurus or not, and if the guides

deviate their followers will naturally suffer. Artificially elevating Srila Prabhupada to the

imaginary status of perpetual diksa-guru is no substitute for fulfilling the actual need of hisrepresentatives becoming purer in Krsna consciousness.

Using qualifying terms, such as preeminent siksa guru, to describe Srila Prabhupadas standing

in his movement and the role he plays in the life of the members of his movement, distracts from

Srila Prabhupadas status as the spiritual master, the guru who is referred to when we refer tothe singular spiritual master. (p. 26)

If there can only be one guru in ISKCON, and he cannot be categorized asguru in any specific

sense, then yes, we should choose Srila Prabhupada. And, accepting this premise, we should

furthermore correct his title to just acarya, instead of founder-acarya since this would clarify

that no others could ever be called an acarya. But the premise that ISKCON can only have oneguru is not correct. Rather, Prabhupada is the first among many gurus, which is one meaning of

the epithetprabhu-pada. He is pre-eminent, and he issiksa-guru for everyone who wants to hearfrom and follow him, and the fact that he can empower his disciples to also begurus only adds to

his glories.

In 1999, just after the GBC passed a resolution designating Srila Prabhupada with terms such as

the preeminent siksa guru for every member of the institution and the preeminent andcompulsory siksa-guru, the GBC body was discussing aspects of worship. The idea that Srila

Prabhupada would be the sole object of worship in ISKCON was mentioned and discussed. A

prominent GBC who conducts initiation ceremonies emphatically declared But disciples must

be able to worship their guru! They have to be allowed to worship their guru! Clear from hisstatement was that, despite the resolutions from moments before that all members of Srila

Prabhupadas movement must place their faith, trust and allegiance first and foremost in SrilaPrabhupada, who is the preeminent siksa guru for every member of the institution, the

conception that continued to be maintained by this GBC, and most of the leaders present, was

that the real guru, notwithstanding whatever official glorification may be afforded to Srila

Prabhupada in resolutions, is the Vaisnava who performs the formal initiation ceremony. Insupport of this minimization of Srila Prabhupadas role in his movement, one of the themes of a

keynote speech at the 1999 GBC meetings was specifically that Srila Prabhupada is not the direct

and current link to the disciplic succession for devotees who did not receive formal initiationfrom him. (p. 27)

Srila Prabhupada, his disciples who give initiation, and his many followers who give valuable

instruction, are all real gurus. Srila Prabhupada is the founding acarya of ISKCON, the original

light from which all other lights in ISKCON are lit, and of course he is the representative of theGaudiya sampradaya going back to Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Advising disciples to worship their

diksa-gurus does not diminish Srila Prabhupadas position but only glorifies it more, as long as

the diksa-gurus represent Prabhupada faithfully and direct their disciples to his teachings


17/24

Srila Prabhupada continues to accept disciples who sincerely dedicate their lives to following his

instructions and who willingly receive the transcendental knowledge that he imparts. Accepting

these disciples means that Srila Prabhupada takes responsibility to guide these souls back toGodhead. (p. 30)

This is a thinly veiled declaration of the rtvikdoctrine, that Srila Prabhupada is the current diksa-guru of ISKCON. The only way to make this statement agreeable to the our actual siddhanta is

to interpret it as meaning that Prabhupada is accepting disciples on behalf of the sampradayathrough the agency of his disciples, who are initiating on his behalf.

Suppose a book distributer gives a book to someone. When that person visits the temple the book

distributor, if he is in proper consciousness, will naturally be eager to serve the advancement ofthe newcomer in any way he can. Years later, when the former newcomer is now initiated and

situated in service within Srila Prabhupadas movement, and has accepted guidance from any

devotee mentors, the book distributor continues to be actively concerned about the progress of

the devotee to whom he distributed a book. A similar mentality should exist in the temple

president, the senior congregation member preached to the newcomer at the Sunday Feast, andthe Vaisnava selected by the new initiate to conduct the initiation ceremony. (p. 31)

This explanation equates the role of the diksa-guru with that of any preacher. In other words, it

denies that diksa is anything at all separate from siksa. But diksa is a separate, special functionaccording to our scriptures and acaryas. It involves the acceptance of vows, the giving of

mantras and the taking of special, personal responsibility that deserves special reciprocation from

its recipients.

For followers of Srila Prabhupada, for the duration of his movement, there is profound security

in knowing that the mahabhagavata A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada, a spiritual

master at the topmost stage of Krsna conscious realization, is taking responsibility for theirspiritual life, though this does not nullify the individual responsibility for ones advancement inKrsna consciousness. With this understanding of Srila Prabhupadas absolute position and the

relative position of other members of his movement, there will be less disturbance caused, on an

individual and institutional level, when devotees who serve as guides and mentors havedifficulty. (p. 33)

Here it is proposed that in ISKCON Srila Prabhupadas position is absolute and everyone elses

position is relative. But this is not exactly what ouracaryas teach us. Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja

says, ekale iSvara krsna, ara saba bhrtya: Lord Krsna alone is the supreme controller, and allothers are His servants. (Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi 5.142) Only the Supreme Lord is absolute.

Srila Prabhupadas position as the founder-acarya of ISKCON is relative, based on his

empowerment by his predecessoracaryas. To deny this is means to claim that Srila Prabhupadais God. The position of an empowered representative of Srila Prabhupada is relative in the same

way, even if the empowered disciple is nowhere near equal to Prabhupada. The diksa-guru takes

responsibility, and Prabhupada and his predecessors kindly share that responsibility.

In another scenario, devotee A mentors devotee B, and devotee B receives formal initiation fromdevotee A. Devotee B is truly dependent on devotee A for his spiritual life. Devotee B does not


18/24

have much direct understanding of Srila Prabhupadas instructions. His knowledge about Krsna

consciousness and Srila Prabhupada is almost entirely through devotee A.

Devotee A in the above scenario has brought devotee B to Krsna consciousness and is serving ashis main spiritual master. From the viewpoint of the PL model, devotee B is not yet initiated in

the essential, transcendental sense. He has not properly connected with the current link to theparampara,because he is not receiving most of his direct divya-jnana from Srila Prabhupada. (p.

35)

Look at the situation of Srila Prabhupadas disciples. They are grand disciples of Srila

Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, but received their basic understanding of Krsna consciousness from

Srila Prabhupada instead. Srila Prabhupada wanted it to be this way, and he wanted himself to bethe siksa-guru directly teaching future generations of ISKCON in a way in which Srila

Bhaktisiddhanta has not been a directly accessible main teacher for most of us.

But in the special case The Prominent Link presents above, devotee B apparently cannot

understand Srila Prabhupada directly, and gets his teachings indirectly through devotee A. Whendespite Srila Prabhupadas efforts to make his teachings universally understandable such a case

arises, the potency of theparampara can nonetheless convey itself fully intact. Srila Prabhupada

should be able to empower devotee A to pass on his teachings in devotee As own words. So

why cant devotee B be properly connected with the parampara and its links, current and past?He can receive the knowledge he needs, if not directly from Prabhupada, then indirectly from

Prabhupadas representative.

Sri Krsna and Srila Prabhupada could arrange for another Vaisnava to assume the role of thecurrent and direct link at some time. What is clear is that Srila Prabhupada is doing this at

present, and there is no need for others to aspire for this role. (p. 38)

This makes sense if we understand current and direct link to mean the universal, permanent

Siksa-guru of ISKCON. Just as our Srila Prabhupada is what his Bhaktisiddhanta SarasvatiPrabhupada was for the Gaudiya MaTha, and Srila Jiva Gosvami Prabhupada was for his

generation, so theoretically some one else might become the Prabhupada of a distant future.

There is certainly no need for anyone to aspire for that role yet within ISKCON

This paper describes devotees who genuinely experience Srila Prabhupada as the direct, current,and prominent link to the parampara, by dint of Srila Prabhupada being the primary Vaisnava

who gives direct transcendental knowledge. Of course this can be misused by someone claiming

Im directly connected with Srila Prabhupada, so I dont listen to anything anyone else says,

and as an excuse for arrogance. If someone is actually connected with Srila Prabhupada then hewont exhibit such behavior. (p. 45)

Fanaticism tends to be endemic among neophytes, and can be focused on any authority, not just

Srila Prabhupada. There are plenty of young devotees who take pride in their relationship withtheirguru and wont listen to what other Vaisnavas have to say. So maybe the problem is not

only neglect of Prabhupada, but also neglect of Vaisnavas in general in the name of guru

worship. How does declaring Srila Prabhupada the prominent link solve this problem? By


19/24

reducing the possible objects of fanaticism to just one? The proposition If someone is actually

connected with Srila Prabhupada then he wont exhibit such behavior is logically troublesome.

It implies that someone who exhibits fanaticism has no real connection with Srila Prabhupada,which isnt true. A devotee may be sincerely trying to dedicate his life to Prabhupadas service,

which must mean that he has some real spiritual connection with Prabhupada, but at the same

time he may still be immature. Its possible to be connected to Prabhupada but fanatic, or notproperly connected to Prabhupada and fanatic. Thus theres no causal relationship between being

connected and avoiding fanaticism.

We present this model as a valid way to conceive of Srila Prabhupadas position. Though we

dont contend that it is the only legitimate view of Srila Prabhupada, we request that the ideasand proposals described herein be accepted and implemented. This does not necessarily mean

supplanting other systems and conceptualizations, though it does mean that this model be

allowed to at least coexist with other methods and systems for conceiving of and implementingthe continuation of theparampara. (p. 51)

As members of the Gaudiyasampradaya, we have to represent thesampradayas siddhanta, andso cannot endorse the erroneous opinion that Srila Prabhupada is the one current initiating guru

of ISKCON. Srila Prabhupada himself did not favor the kind of pluralism The Prominent Linkpromotes. The Vaisnavasampradaya is not meant to be a forum for alternative systems of belief,

but rather the institution for preserving of the unchanging philosophy of the sampradayas

founder, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. This does not mean that there cannot be room for individualvariety in relationships. Historically, there has been a great deal of such individual expression in

oursampradaya, going back to the original associates of Lord Caitanya. A devotees choice of

spiritual guides is a matter of the heart, and should never be forced by legislation or intimidation.

To the extent that such force and intimidation exist today in ISKCON, they need to be identifiedand corrected. The author ofPL has made a sincere attempt to address these real problems, but

unfortunately he has proposed a philosophically unsound solution.

Conclusion

Dhira Govinda Prabhu last year asked the Governing Body Commission of ISKCON to considerthe proposals that he made in his booklet Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link. At its Mayapur

2002 meeting, the Governing Body Commission issued a preliminary statement and then

delegated the Sastric Advisory Council (SAC) to carefully evaluate Dhira Govinda Prabhusbooklet and proposals in light ofguru, sadhu and sastra. Although the SAC members were

aware of the negative preliminary statement by the GBC, they were not bound by it. Our

mandate was to search not only for any possible defects in Dhira Govinda Prabhus presentation

but also for any good points. Over the past year, the SAC members devoted hundreds of hours tofulfilling their obligation to considerSrila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, with due Vaisnava

respect for both the work and its author. To this end, Dhira Govinda Prabhu was made a party toSACs deliberations for several weeks, and had a chance to extensively discuss his views with

the SAC members.

All of the SAC members have a history of friendly relations with Dhira Govinda Prabhu and all

share a deep appreciation for his many contributions to our Society. We share many of his


20/24

concerns about the guru question in ISKCON. In the introduction to this paper, we have

mentioned some of the good points in PL. But after much careful study, we concluded that Dhira

Govinda Prabhus presentation of Srila Prabhupadas relationship to ISKCON members whotook initiation after his physical departure significantly contradicts the understandings given to

us by Srila Prabhupada and his predecessoracaryas.

A surface reading ofPL suggests that Dhira Govinda Prabhu is just saying lets put Srila

Prabhupada in the center, which is, of course, something everyone in ISKCON will support. Hetalks about Srila Prabhupada being the prominent link to the parampara. And that again is

something few will disagree with. Perhaps this is why some ISKCON members have wondered,

What is all the fuss about? Why are they on Dhira Govindas case? All he is saying is thatPrabhupada is everyones topmost guru, and the othergurus should adopt a lower profile. If

that were all he was saying, then, of course, few would object. After all, that is the meaning of

the title Prabhupadaamong all prabhus or masters (including spiritual masters), he is supreme,and these other masters, especially in his Society, exhibit their subordination to him by

remaining at his feet.

Unfortunately, that is not all that Dhira Govinda Prabhu is saying. This fact may not be apparent,

however, to those who do not read PL carefully. In our deliberations, we found that becauseDhira Govinda Prabhu consciously avoided using the standard siksa- and diksa-guru

terminology, a terminology given to us by Srila Prabhupada and the previous acaryas, it was

difficult to understand the full implications of his statements in PL. For example, by identifyingSrila Prabhupada as a link and todays diksa-gurus as those who perform initiation

ceremonies, it was not easy to see exactly what he was saying in terms of the traditional

Vaisnava understanding of actual guru-disciple relationships.

Many questions arose. But here is the main one. According to PL, are the devotees who are now

conducting initiation ceremonies the diksa-gurus of their disciples or not? Is Srila Prabhupadathe one diksa-guru of those getting their initiation ceremonies today or not? It took a great deal

of questioning of Dhira Govinda Prabhu to get a clear understanding of his intended meaning.

Dhira Govinda Prabhu himself is in the position of having received his initiations after SrilaPrabhupadas departure. When asked by a SAC member to identify his one diksa-guru, Dhira

Govinda Prabhu said that if he were to answer according to the PL understanding, he would have

to say that Srila Prabhupada was his one diksa-guru. We assume the same would be true for allISKCON members who received initiation after Prabhupadas departure and who agree with the

PL position.

Nowhere, however, is this conclusion prominently and clearly stated in PL. Occasionally, this

implicit conclusion does come close to being stated explicitly. It is there in statements such as,Srila Prabhupada continues to accept disciples who sincerely dedicate their lives to following

his instructions and who willingly receive the transcendental knowledge that he imparts. (PL, p.

30)

This conclusion can also be found in the practical proposal that Dhira Govinda Prabhu sent to theGBC in advance of its 2002 Mayapur meeting, wherein he suggests the GBC should endorse the


21/24


22/24

ksa, di-ksa. This is called diksa, diksa, the combination. So diksa means the initiation to begin

transcendental activities. That is called initiation. Therefore we take promise from the disciple

that You chant so many times, Yes, sir. You observe these rules and regulations, Yes,sir. That is initiation. He has to observe; he has to chant. Then everything comes automatically.

In the beginning he is faulty; then how he can make progress?

In terms of practical understandings spoken in connection with the practices he established, Srila

Prabhupada indicated that the formal agreement between guru and disciple ratified by theinitiation ceremony is the substance of diksa. By this formal acceptance one is linked to the

disciplic succession, one becomes qualified to get the full benefit of chanting the holy name, one

becomes qualified to receive the full benefit ofdivya-jnana, one gets a second birth, one is freedfrom previous sinful reactions, and one is accepted as a bona fide servant of Krsna. In short,

connecting the disciple properly with the disciplic succession is the distinguishing characteristic

ofdiksa and the diksa-guru.

The correct understanding of the diksa function as distinct from the Siksa function is given by

Srila Prabhupada in his purports to the Caitanya-caritamrta (Adi 1.47): Srila Sanatana Gosvamiis the ideal spiritual master [diksa-guru], for he delivers one the shelter of the lotus feet of

Madana-mohana. . . . Sri Govindaji acts exactly like thesiksa-guru [instructing spiritual master]by teaching Arjuna the Bhagavad-gita. He is the original preceptor, for He gives us instructions

and an opportunity to serve Him. The initiating spiritual master is a personal manifestation of

Srila Madana-mohana vigraha, whereas the instructing spiritual master is a personalrepresentative of Srila Govindadeva vigraha. Both of these Deities are worshiped at Vrndavana.

Srila Gopinatha is the ultimate attraction in spiritual realization.

So after one has through some initial faith attained the association of devotees, the next

important step in devotional life is to formally accept the shelter of Krsna. This happens in our

Society at the time of harinama-diksa. And the guru who gives us that formal shelter is thediksa-guru. The diksa-guru is here defined not as the one who over time gives us a certain

quantity or quality of transcendental knowledge relative to others, but as the one who on behalfof Krsna grants us His shelter, thus establishing our actual connection with Krsna, with His

service, and with the disciplic succession. Once this connection has been established, then the

disciple can properly receive, and benefit from, the transmission of instructions, i.e.

transcendental knowledge (siksa), about how to function as a servant of Krsna.

If we subtract from PL the incorrect doctrine that Srila Prabhupada is still giving diksa today,

what is left? The other principal point is the recommendation that no one except Srila

Prabhupada should receive any formal worship or respect asguru.

Of course, this recommendation contradicts the many statements in Srila Prabhupadas booksthat a disciple should offer worship to his gurus. Some will say that those statements do not

necessarily apply to Prabhupadas disciples who are functioning as gurus. But Srila Prabhupada

never said that his disciples should not accept any worship when the time would come for themto become gurus. In fact, he gave indications that he did expect that they would receive formal

worship. The topic comes up in the following exchange between Mr. Malhotra and Srila

Prabhupada (Room Conversation, December 22, 1976):


23/24

Prabhupada: These, my disciples they are part and parcel of me. Whole mission is going on with

their cooperation. But if he says that I am equal to my Guru Maharaja, then that is offense. . . .

They will never say that they have become equal to me. I have advanced to be my guru. Neversay. Just like this boy, he is offering obeisances. He may be expert in preaching more than me,

but he knows that I am subordinate. Otherwise how he shall offer obeisances? He can think,

Oh, now I am so learned. I am so advanced. Why shall I accept him as superior? No. Thatcontinues. Even after my death, after my disappearance, he will offer obeisances to my picture.

Mr. Malhotra: But amongst his disciples he will be worshiped

Prabhupada: Thats all right, but he remains a disciple of his guru. He will never say that Now I

have becomeguru, so I dont care for myguru. He will never say. Just like I am doing, but I amworshiping my guru still. So I remain subordinate to my guru, always. Even though I have

becomeguru, still I am subordinate to myguru.

So Srila Prabhupada expected that his disciples would someday be gurus and receive worship

from their disciples. But he also expected that all of these gurus would continue to remainsubordinate to him. It is up to the GBC to decide what levels of worship will maintain the two

things that Prabhupada expected: (1) that gurus would accept worship from their disciples and

(2) that simultaneously they would continue to worship him in such a way that their

subordination to him would be clear to both them and their disciples. If there is some furtheradjustment required in todays ISKCON practices, the GBC should give attention to that. But the

adjustment cannot be that todaysgurus should accept no worship from their disciples, as doing

this would violate Srila Prabhupadas expectation.

Once we have subtracted fromPL not only the incorrect idea that Srila Prabhupada should be the

one diksa-guru for all members of ISKCON but also the idea that no one except Prabhupada

should receive any worship or public recognition as guru, are there further points?

What remains is an appeal to the desires of devotees who wish to feel that somehow or otherSrila Prabhupada is theirguru, and that they have some connection with him. Is it acceptable for

a devotee not initiated by Prabhupada feel that Prabhupada is his or herguru? The answer is yes;

by disciplic connection such disciples do have a real connection with Srila Prabhupada. The

GBC has already recognized this fact. Srila Prabhupada himself characterized his relationshipwith such devotees by saying they are his grand-disciples. To be a grand-disciple of Srila

Prabhupada is no less a position than being a direct disciple. Grand-disciples have just as much

opportunity to receive the instructions, mercy, and love of Srila Prabhupada as any of his directlyinitiated disciples. But they also have an obligation to assist Srila Prabhupada in propagating the

disciplic succession by accepting diksa-gurus in the line coming from Srila Prabhupada and

giving proper respect to those gurus in harmony with the principles established in the Society hecreated.

In short, we conclude that:

(1) The proposal in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link that Srila Prabhupada is the one

diksa-guru for all members of ISKCON, including those who underwent initiation ceremonies


24/24

after his departure, is incorrect because (a) it is based on an incomplete definition ofdiksa, (b) it

confuses the distinct functions of diksa- and siksa-gurus, and (c) it contradicts the expressed

intention of Srila Prabhupada who, following Vedic tradition, generally expected that hisdisciples would in turn become initiating (diksa) gurus;

(2) The proposal in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link that no one except Srila Prabhupadareceive worship as guru is incorrect because it (a) goes against directions given by Lord

Caitanyas prominent followers such as Srila Jiva Gosvami in his Bhakti-sandarbha, and (b)contradicts Srila Prabhupadas expectation that his disciples would accept appropriate worship

when it became time for them to become gurus.

(3) It is legitimate for a disciple of a current ISKCONguru to also feel that he or she is a discipleof Srila Prabhupada, but only if this feeling is expressed in such a way that does not confuse the

function ofdiksa- andsiksa-gurus.

Finally, we feel that Dhira Govinda Prabhu was sincere when he placed his proposals to the

ISKCON world for consideration. We hope that he will consider the points we have made.

SAC Members: Gopiparanadhana Dasa, Drutakarma Dasa, Urmila Devi Dasi, Purnacandra Dasa,Krsna Ksetra Dasa and Mukunda DaTTa Dasa

sac - the prominent link

Documents