Letter from Urdhvaga das to Isha das
Subject: Is this a solution to the ritvik debate?
Letter from: notgbc@miamimemory.com
(Isha das 15.02.2000)

Hare Krishna Isha das. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada. I was shocked to receive your above letter for which I did not ask. Please take me off your mailing list. I am shocked because of your completely distorted understanding concerning the ritvik debate.

Srila Prabhupada's ritvik instruction, outlined in His letter of July 9, addressed to all devotees is self- explanatory and anyone can understand it whose brain substance is not contaminated by bogus philosophy preached by Iskcons false successor acaryas, self appointed faggots gurus worshiped in a homosexual paedophile guru lineage. Religious propagandist and pseudo-gurus disguised as devotees exploiting the members and assets of the society, demoniac Kali-yuga disciples.

Srila Prabhupada: "There are many jealous people in the dress of Vaishnavas in this Krishna Consciousness movement, and they should be completely neglected. A false acarya may try to override a vaishnava by a high-court decision, (2/3 hand vote) but Bhaktivinoda Thakura says that he is nothing but a disciple of Kali-yuga." (CC.Madhy., Ch.1, Text 218 / 220, purport)

"A devotee should have intelligence to know who is deviating. Surrender by your intelligence but don't surrender your intelligence." (SP to Bali Mardana, 1974)

Isha das: "I have always felt that Srila Prabhupada wanted those who He appointed Ritvik (as well as other qualified disciples) while he was with us to act as Guru on His departure."

[Comment: That is the whole mistake --that caused the mass molestation and other problems? Isha and his pals from the Gaudiya Matha thought that SDG, Tamal and company, including their homosexual pals Bhavananda and Kirtanananda, were "meant to be gurus after Srila Prabhupada's departure." No, they were not. And by worship of molesters "one becomes what one worships," so the whole society became infiltered. And instead of using the society's funds to care for the children, the money was used for lavish living etc. of "the gurus"? And it still is for that matter. And instead of having a controlled society that could keep track of child molesters, there were independent mad fool megalamanic guru cults, and all of this sprouted from this idea that "Srila Prabhupada wanted the GBC to be gurus right after his departure."]

Srila Prabhupada: Don't be allured by cheap disciples. Go on steadfastly to render service first. If you immediately become guru, then the service activities will be stopped; and as there are so many cheap gurus and cheap disciples, without any substantial knowledge, and manufacturing new sampradayas, and with service activities stopped, and all spiritual progress choked up. (SPL (VI 1987) 68.8.17)

Srila Prabhupada clearly says in his letter to Madhudvisa that the GBC should all be the instructor gurus whereas he will be the initiator guru.

Srila Prabhupada: "This is the function of the GBC, to see that one may not be taken away by maya. The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This is what I want." (to Madhudvisa 4 Aug, 1975)

Jahnu das writes:
"It is foolish beyond measure to impose the condition on Srila Prabhupada that he has to state 48 times that he wanted his disciples to become gurus. Where did Krishna Kant get that idea? Isn't it enough that Srila Prabhupada, as shown below consistently and explicitly expressed his desire for his disciples to succeed him as guru"

Reply to Jahnu's article -  "Krishna Kant - Master Of Evasion"
March 30, 1999, by Urdhvaga Das

Dear Jahnu das,
if anything is foolish beyond measure, then it is people like yourself, who are averse to Srila Prabhupada's continued position as diksa / siksa guru. Please do not think that Srila Prabhupada is dead. Certainly those reason ill who think so.

The problem with you people is that you rather like to follow self-appointed bogus Iskcon gurus (conditioned souls who fall down after some time) than to take shelter unto Srila Prabhupada. Why do you insist on worshiping false gurus? That is your problem.

I believe that the recent departure of your initiating guru Harikesa who, like a ordinary conditioned soul, is enjoying sex-life with Monika, has clouded somewhat your spiritual understanding. If the blind follows the blind, then both will fall into the ditch. So please do not become averse to Srila Prabhupada's worship and take shelter at his lotus feet.

Urdhvaga das: Of course Srila Prabhupada wanted his disciples to succeed him as guru. Definitely he wanted it, but, but, but, and here lies the big problem, he wanted qualified disciples, he wanted qualified gurus, not some show-bottle gurus, imitator gurus, self-appointed gurus, zonal-acarya gurus, woman-hater gurus, woman-lover gurus, homo-sex-gurus, harassing gurus, ex-communicating gurus, children-abusing gurus, murder-gurus, poison gurus, guru-killer gurus, disco gurus, cow-seller gurus, marijuana gurus, LSD gurus, gopi gurus, reformed gurus, no-mangala-arotik gurus, no-japa gurus, bunglow-sannyasi gurus, retreat gurus, Monika-varnasrama gurus, 3-regulative principles gurus, demon-crazy gurus, movie-mall-menaka gurus, 2/3 hand voted-in gurus, current-link gurus, etc, etc, etc.

Srila Prabhupada said: "First become qualified". We have nothing against any Iskcon gurus, but they first should aquire some qualification and not imitate.

Of course, a father likes to see his son to follow him. Of course a high-court judge likes to see his son to succeed him, but first the son has to qualify himself, otherwise he can not take the position of the father. If he tries without qualification to imitate the father, that means cheating, impostor, bogus.

Srila Prabhupada: "I am practically seeing that as soon as they, our students, begin to learn a little Sanskrit, they immediately feel they have become more than their guru. Then the policy is to kill their guru and become guru themselves". "As soon as he learns that Guru Maharaj is dead, now I am so advanced I can kill guru and become guru. Then he is finished." (Srila Prabhupada 1976).

We should not be fooled by all those 2/3 hand voted in, self-appointed bogus Isk con gurus, who like ordinary conditioned souls, are falling down after some time, and who are preaching bogus philosophy such as the "current link philosophy", in support of "voted in successor acaryas", with a "less then liberated guru thesis" and a "minimum qualification theory", for adapting their "homosexual pedophile guru lineage" of conditioned souls into the pure guru-parampara, excluding Srila Prabhupada as a non physical link. This "current link philosophy" (preached by Bhakti Charu and others) is completely nonsensical in any context and is not confirmed by shastra and is a negation of Srila Prabhupada's presence in his "vani". It is simply the same old bogus philosophy which has caused so much chaos in our movement.

It is heartbreaking to see how new disciples in Iskcon are forced to worship their "present day living survivor gurus" (who fall down after some time), being denied direct access to and through Srila Prabhupada. Iskcon devotees are forced to see their so called "current living links" on the same platform as Srila Prabhupada, infallible equal in all respect, with the same worship. Prabhupada is secondary because he is not a living guru. ???

MADHUDVISA: Is there any way for a Christian to, without the help of a Spiritual Master, to reach the spiritual sky through believing in the words of Jesus Christ and trying to follow his teachings?

SRILA PRABHUPADA: I don't follow.

TAMALA KRISHNA GOSWAMI: Can a Christian in this age, without a Spiritual Master, but by reading the Bible, and following Jesus's words, reach the ...

SRILA PRABHUPADA: When you read the Bible, you follow the Spiritual Master. How can you say without. As soon as you read the Bible, that means you are following the instruction of Lord Jesus Christ. That means that you are following the Spiritual Master. So where is the opportunity of being without Spiritual Master.

MADHUDVISA: I was referring to a living Spiritual Master.

SRILA PRABHUPADA: Spiritual Master is not question of ... Spiritual Master is eternal...so your question is 'without Spiritual Master'. Without Spiritual Master you cannot be at any stage of your life. You may accept this Spiritual master or that Spiritual master. That is a different thing. But you have to accept. As you say that "by reading Bible", when you read Bible that means you are following the Spiritual Master represented by some priest or some clergyman in the line of Lord Jesus Christ.

The "living guru" project of Bhakti Charu Swami maintains that Srila Prabhupada can no longer give us specific instructions or share loving exchanges with us, because he is dead, although Srila Prabhupada states the opposite, namely that he will personally guide us through his books.

750716pc.sf Conversations
Reporter (2): What will happen to the movement in the United States when you die?
Prabhupada: I WILL NEVER DIE.
Devotees: Jaya! Hari bol! (laughter)
Prabhupada: I SHALL LIVE From MY BOOKS, AND YOU WILL UTILIZE.
Reporter (2): Are you training a successor?
Prabhupada: Yes, my Guru Maharaja is there. Where is my photo of Guru Maharaja? I think... Here is.

Indian Lady: ... is that spiritual master still guiding after death?
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, yes. Just like Krsna is guiding us, similarly spiritual master will guide us. (General lectures, 69/09/23)

Devotee: Srila Prabhupada when you're not present with us, how is it possible to receive instructions? For example in questions that may arise...

SRILA PRABHUPADA: Well the questions are answ... answers are there in my books.
(Morning Walk, Los Angeles, 13/5/73)

So utilise whatever time you find to make a thorough study of my books. Then all your questions will be answered. (Letter to Upendra, 7/1/76)

Every one of you must regularly read our books at least twice, in the morning and evening, and automatically all questions will be answered. ( Letter to Randhira, 24/01/70)

If I depart there is no cause for lamentation. I will always be with you through my books and orders. I will always remain with you in that way. (BTG 13:1-2, December 1977)

74-11-22 Letter: Bahurupa
In my books the philosophy of Krishna Consciousness is EXPLAINED FULLY so if there is anything which you do not understand, then you simply have to read again and again. By reading daily THE KNOWLEDGE WILL BE REVEALED TO YOU AND BY THIS PROCESS YOUR SPIRITUAL LIFE WILL DEVELOP.

Note: This clearly indicates that Srila Prabhupada's books are understood through their own potency, and that there is therefore no need for a physically present guru to understand the books. Our Srimad Bhagavatam is unique because the verses of the Bhagavatam are directly complemented with the purports of Srila Prabhupada, who is the bonafide maha-bhagavata ; therefore, the book Bhagavata and the person Bhagavata are combined in Srila Prabhupada's Srimad Bhagavatam. Therefore, there is no need for a third party, "the so called current Iskcon links" to (mis)interpret what Srila Prabhupada "really means to say". sic

Urdhvaga: We should not deceive ourselves into thinking that Iskcons conditioned souls are infallible gurus. We rather should take shelter with Srila Prabhupada, who is the perfect guru for all. He will never disappoint us. Srila Prabhupada is still available for anyone who is sincere in his heart, but if Prabhupad is substituted for ordinary souls posing as absolute gurus, then one certaily will be deceived and fall down.

It is such an impudence and arrogance of Iskcon kanistha-gurus to teach their disciples such bogus philosophy. New devotees are not even being allowed to accept Srila Prabhupada as their siksha-guru, or instructing spiritual master, what to speak of diksa-guru, although Srila Prabhupada says: "I'll always be with you in that way". Isk con gurus are claiming from their disciples both positions, to be their initiating as well as the instructing guru. So where does Srila Prabhupada comes in? Is he not needed anymore?. Because of Bhakti Charus nonsense "living link" philosophy: "Now that Srila Prabhupada is no longer physically present........" new devotees are forced to worship fallible gurus in a bogus current link sampradaya, excluding Srila Prabhupada in the chain of disciplic succession.

Bhakti Charu, why are you stopping devotees from accepting Srila Prabhupada as their shiksa-guru? Are you better then Srila Prabhupada? Why are you forcing devotees to accept self-appointed, bogus Iskcon gurus, who fall down after some time? Why can't they accept Srila Prabhupada, when he clearly says that he is always with us through his books? Or could it be, that devotees can't understand the books anymore because Jayadvaita changed them?

Of course, one has to understand the message of the Bhagavatam through the person Bhagavata. That is why Srila Prabhupada wrote his own purports. Our Srimad Bhagavatam is unique because the verses of the Bhagavatam are directly complemented with the purports of Srila Prabhupada, who is the bonafide maha-bhagavata ; therefore, the book Bhagavata and the person Bhagavata are combined in Srila Prabhupada's Srimad Bhagavatam. Therefore, there is no need for a third party, "the so called current Iskcon links" to (mis)interpret what Srila Prabhupada "really means to say."

All glories to Srila Prabhupada
Urdhvaga Das

Three different people have responded to my request to Rama Kesava Das to support his assumption that the word 'current link' means a physically present 'living guru' with evidence from Srila Prabhupada. They are Ananda Das, Robert Newman and Rama Kesava Das himself. Firstly Ananda Das wrote a lengthy article called "Hundredfold hairsplitting cannot save Rtvik theory". Ananda Prabhu however has helpfully summarised the contents of his article in an abstract. Extracts from this abstract are given enclosed in speech marks " " thus, with my response following underneath.

"ABSTRACT: Deepak Vohra declared that, absent proof, he would not approach an accessible, living guru, but attempt a theoretical relationship with a departed guru." I declared no such thing. My article was only two paragraphs long, in which I simply asked Rama Kesava prabhu to substantiate his speculation that 'current' means 'living'. Ananda needs to read what I actually wrote, and respond to that, instead of responding to some imaginary 'ritvik theory' he thinks I am proposing.

"Ananda das suggests that, even without specific words from Prabhupada requiring aspirants to approach a living guru, such is the clear intent of past practice, as well as of Prabhupada's books and numerous lectures." This is a contradiction. How can a 'clear intent' come from Srila Prabhupada's books and lectures unless expressed in SPECIFIC WORDS? Srila Prabhupada only ever communicates using words, and in order for them to express an intent which is 'clear', they must be 'specific' and clear, not vague and unclear. Yet Ananda prabhu says that this 'clear intent' is evidenced 'even WITHOUT SPECIFIC WORDS'.

"Book-initiation is a meaningless pretense, he says; one must apprentice with a guru capable of administering correction." No one as far as I know has ever proposed 'book initiation.' Certainly not I. Initiation must always be from a spiritual master, not a book. And this idea of 'apprenticing with a guru capable of administering correction', was never practiced by Srila Prabhupada, since he never MET the majority of his disciples, and thus they were never administered 'correction' personally in the capacity of being an apprentice.

So just from the abstract, Ananda prabhu: Makes it clear that he will not be responding to what I actually said, but instead he will answering imaginary 'straw man' 'ritvik theory' arguments. Contradicts the basis of his whole thesis, which is to prove that Srila Prabhupada expressed a clear and specific intent, by saying he did so without needing to use specific words; yet Srila Prabhupada only ever commuinicated via 'specific words' to express a 'clear intent'. He definitely did not use vague words to express something 'clear', and he certainly did not use sign language.

He also proposes a Guru-disciple model that was not practiced by Srila Prabhupada. And since Srila Prabhupada is an acarya, which means he teaches by example, we also know that whatever he did not practice, he did not teach either. Since the abstract gives the substance of the article, we can be sure that the article will not contain any material which will be relevant to either what I said, or what Srila Prabhupada taught, and hence is of no relevance to this debate. Indeed having read the article, I can confirm that all the points which Ananda prabhu makes can actually be responded to by regurgitating the above 3 points. I will give but one example:

Ananda prabhu opens his article by saying:

"Mr. Vohra persists in attributing great importance to the term "current link", declares that it must, a priori and forever into the future, only refer to the ISKCON Founder-Acharya Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, then "challenges" us to find in the "Vedabase" a sentence he himself invented." I never said the term 'current link' must refer to Srila Prabhupada 'forever into the future'. I only asked that Rama Kesava Prabhu substantiate his assertion about what HE declared the term meant.

I also did not ask anyone to find a sentence I invented. I asked Rama Kesava prabhu to substantiate a concept which HE invented, which is that 'current means living'. Rama Kesava prabhu said that "The words 'current link' clearly mean that we must approach a living guru, .". I simply asked where Srila Prabhupada states this speculation, since it was Srila Prabhupada who used the term 'current link', and we can only ascribe to it a meaning that Srila Prabhupada himself gives.

In this way the whole article can be responded to by simply repeating the 3 points made above, with which I responded to his abstract. I therefore humbly suggest that Ananda prabhu re-writes his article so that it both addresses what I actually said, and what Srila Prabhupada specifically said, thus making it of value to this discussion.

Next we come to Robert Newman and Rama Kesava Das's attempts to respond to my request that Rama Kesava Prabhu provide support from Srila Prabhupada to support his speculation that the words "current link' clearly mean that we must approach a living guru".

The reply from Mr. Robert Newman, agrees that no such support can be found from Srila Prabhupada's teachings. However, he states that such support is not necessary since it is a matter of "common sense" that "current link" must mean someone who is physically present. Another reply from Rama Kesava Prabhu also agrees that no such support can be found from Srila Prabhupada's teachings. He also agrees with Mr Newman that no such support is necessary. He gives a different reason however. He states that we can interpret the word "current link" to mean 'physically present', since this is what historical practice would teach us - i.e. all Diksa Gurus previously have been physically present.

However, neither of these methods - "common sense" and "historical practice" - have been sanctioned by Srila Prabhupada as the method by which to understand his words. Without such sanction, everyone can propose his own method by which to understand what Srila Prabhupada's words 'really' mean. Some even say we should understand Srila Prabhupada's words by interpreting them in line with current scientific evidence, or by having them double-checked by Narayana Maharaja etc. Everyone will have his own method. We already have two here from two different individuals. There is no end. That is why we need AUTHORITY from Srila Prabhupada that we can understand his words by a method other than - his words. So before we consider the arguments put forward by Mr Newman and Rama Kesava Das, we first need a statement from Srila Prabhupada sanctioning that their arguments are even valid. Then we can examine the actual arguments in more detail. Thank You.

Your servant,
Deepak

Srila Prabhupada: "I am practically seeing that as soon as they, our students, begin to learn a little Sanskrit, they immediately feel they have become more than their guru. Then the policy is to kill their guru and become guru themselves". "As soon as he learns that Guru Maharaj is dead, now I am so advanced I can kill guru and become guru. Then he is finished." (Srila Prabhupada 1976).

GURU CHEATING NOT EFFECTIVE (April 22.77).  

Prabhupada: People complained against [a GBC for trying to appear as a guru]. ...You become guru, but you must be QUALIFIED FIRST of all. THEN you become. ...What is the use of producing some RASCAL GURU?
Tamala Krishna: Well, I have studied myself and all of your disciples, and it's clear fact that we are ALL CONDITIONED SOULS, so we CANNOT BE gurus. MAYBE someday it may be possible....
Prabhupada: Hm. [agrees]
Tamala Krishna: ...but not now.
Prabhupada: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru, 'No you become acharya. You become authorized.' I retire completely. But the training must be COMPLETE.
Tamala Krishna: The process of purification must be there. ...No rubber stamp.
Prabhupada: You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see our Gaudiya Matha. Everyone wanted to be guru. A small temple and "guru." What kind of guru?

Srila Prabhupada: We haven't got to manufacture. To manufacture ideas is troublesome. Why should we take the trouble? And as soon as you want to manufacture something to my...., that is DANGEROUS. ...That you are singing every day, "what our guru has said, that is our life and soul." ...As soon as this POISON will come -suppress guru and I become Brahman- everything FINISHED. Spiritual life is finished. Gaudiya Matha finished, ...VIOLATED the orders of Guru Maharaja.

...And as soon as you manufacture, fall down. This manufacturing idea is very, very dangerous in spiritual life. ...Our mission is to serve bhakta visesa and live with devotees. NOT THAT YOU TAKE THE PLACE OF GURU. THAT IS NONSENSE, VERY DANGEROUS. Then everything will be spoiled. As soon as you become AMBITIOUS to TAKE THE PLACE of GURU-gurusuh nara matih. That is MATERIAL DISEASE.  

Srila Prabhupada: Don't be allured by cheap disciples. Go on steadfastly to render service first. If you immediately become guru, then the service activities will be stopped; and as there are so many cheap gurus and cheap disciples, without any substantial knowledge, and manufacturing new sampradayas, and with service activities stopped, and all spiritual progress choked up. (SPL (VI 1987) 68.8.17)

Srila Prabhupada: "This is the function of the GBC, to see that one may not be taken away by maya. The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This is what I want." (to Madhudvisa 4 Aug, 1975)

Srila Prabhupada: "I am the Spiritual Master of this institution, and ALL the members of the Society, they're supposed to be MY disciples. They follow the rules and regulations which I ask them to follow, and they are INITIATED BY ME spiritually" - (Srila Prabhupada Radio Interview, 12 March 1968, San Francisco)

Srila Prabhupada: "I wish that each and every branch shall keep their separate identity and cooperate keeping the acharya in the center. On this principle we can open any number of branches all over the world. The Rama Krishna mission works on this principle and thus as an organization they have done wonderfully." (letter 11th Feb. 1967)

Srila Prabhupada: He [Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Maharaja] never recommended anyone to be acharya of the Gaudiya Math.... If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acharya, he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acharya. Therefore we may not commit the same mistake in our ISKCON camp. (Srila Prabhupada, letter to Rupanuga das, April 28, 1974)

"So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure. THE RESULT IS NOW EVERYONE IS CLAIMING TO BE ACARYA EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE KANISTHA ADHIKARI WITH NO ABILITY TO PREACH. IN SOME OF THE CAMPS THE ACARYA IS BEING CHANGED THREE TIMES A YEAR. THEREFORE WE MAY NOT COMMIT THE SAME MISTAKE IN OUR ISKCON CAMP. ACTUALLY AMONGST MY GODBROTHERS NO ONE IS QUALIFIED TO BECOME ACARYA." (SPL 74-04-28 Rupanuga)

"All of my disciples will take the legacy. If you want, you can also take it. Sacrifice everything. I--one--may soon pass away. But they are hundreds, and this movement will increase. It's not that I'll give an order: "Here is the next leader." Anyone who follows the previous leadership is a leader... All of my disciples are leaders, as much as they follow purely. If you want to follow, you can also lead. But you don't want to follow. Leader means one who is a first class disciple. Evam param parapraptam. One who follows is perfect." (SP BTG Vol. 13, No. 1-2)

"YOU CAN BET YOUR BOTTOM DOLLAR ..."

In 1979-1980, one of the living gurus [Tamal Krishna] (now a dead guru) had incensed the others by claiming that he possessed Prabhupada's exclusive "guru shakti" or potency. The other gurus were thus considering how to excommunicate this deviant guru brother. But in December 1980, at the Topanga Canyon Pyramid House Talks, California, Tamal made a dramatic turnabout. He admitted that Srila Prabhupada had never appointed any "living successor" gurus:

Tamal Krishna: "Actually, Prabhupada never appointed any gurus. He did not appoint eleven gurus. He appointed eleven ritvik (officiating priests). He never appointed them as gurus. Myself and the other G.B.C. have done the greatest disservice to this movement for the last three years, because we interpreted the appointment of ritviks as the appointment of gurus....

"(What Srila Prabhupada said was), "All right, I will appoint so many,' and he named them. He made it very clear that they (new members) were still to be his disciples. At that point it was very clear in my mind that they were his disciples....

"Now I understand that what he did was very clear. He was physically incapable of performing the function of initiating physically; therefore he appointed officiating priests to initiate on his behalf. He appointed eleven and he said very clearly, 'Whoever is nearest, he can initiate.'

"This is a very important point, because when it comes to initiating, it is not 'whoever is nearest.' It is wherever your heart goes_to whom you can repose your faith in.

"But when it is officiating, it's 'whoever is nearest,' and he was very clear.... 'Whoever is nearest will check you out. Then, on my behalf, they will initiate....'"

"If it had been more than that (officiating priests), you can bet your bottom dollar that Prabhupada would have spoken for days and hours and weeks on end about how to set up this thing with the gurus.... But he did not, because he already said it a million times. He said, 'My guru maharaja did not appoint anyone. It is by qualification.' We made a great mistake...."

"You cannot show me anything on tape or in writing where Prabhupada says, 'I appoint these eleven as gurus.' It does not exist, because He never appointed any gurus. This is a myth."

So here Tamal Krishna admits that there never was an appointment of regular gurus; Srila Prabhupada only appointed rtviks (officiating priests). However, he assumes that after Srila Prabhupada left, that it was "only natural" for those eleven rtviks and then more that would be added later, to become regular gurus, even though Srila Prabhupada never instructed such a thing.

Although there was no appointment of anything but ritviks, at Topanga Canyon Tamal thinks that regular gurus can be self-appointed. Of course, his future statements and writings contradict this thesis and themselves in a maze of confusing mumbo-jumbo.

Srila Prabhupada: "This is the function of the GBC, to see that one may not be taken away by maya. The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am the initiator guru, and you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this platform. This is what I want." (Letter to Madhudvisa 4 Aug, 1975)