That's not true.
There is no school of ritviks anywhere that say that.

That's just the false propaganda that the anti-ritviks have been making for a long time.
The problem is that it is not true.

Making such false accusations against the ritviks simply shows desperation and fear on the part of the anti-ritviks who have to resort to false propaganda to defend their position.

The ritviks do not deny that there will be other gurus from other camps.

They just claim that Srila Prabhupada established ritvik in ISKCON for ISKCON and that it only pertains to ISKCON.

Just what do you mean by other camps?

Hello matta, hello Pitta
Here I am at Camp ISKCONada
Camp is very entertaining
And they say we'll have some fun if it the Rtviks stop complaining.

Remember my Zonal guru, the one than preached in Urdu, The GBC just caught him breaking his curfew...

Other institutions, mathas, parivars etc.

There have been different camps of devotees for as long as their has been Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

Why should ISKCON have the finger pointed at them because they have their own acharya with his own specific teachings relevant to them?

There are as many "camps" as there are "gurus".

If there was no difference between them there we wouldn't need so many diffferent gurus.

What is this zonal acharya concept and what went wrong with it? Why was it started?

That was when the 11 ritviks that Srila Prabhupada appointed assumed that they were to be the official gurus of ISKCON after the passing of Srila Prabhupada and they divided up the world into their respective zones and starting initiation their own disciples.

The problem was that devotees started complaining that if they were gurus and not ritviks that there should not be zonal gurus because a guru is accepted on faith - not zonal authority.

So, after giving it some more thought, they decided that they had to eliminate the zonal guru concept for a faith based guru system where new devotees had to choose their own guru based on faith.

Even then, the zonal powers were hard to dislodge and the zonal guru system went on for the most part for several years till it gradually erroded down due to the freedom that devotees were given to accept a guru on faith and not the zonal authority.

Still, the zonal guru system has it's remnants intact because many of these gurus are well established in certain parts of the world and new devotees are coerced by the local disciples that they have to take initiation from the prominant guru of that zone.

That's why Danavir Maharaja is complaining about empty temples.

There are parts of the world where outside gurus are not welcomed by the followers of another guru and thus the movement is stymied by this impediment.

I believe just about every so-called "GM Guru", including Srila Sridhar Maharaj, has disassociated themselves from "Gaudiya Math".

Actually, I was one of the orginal persons to formally protest the zonal guru system.
I have several letters that were exchanged between myself and Satsvarupa Maharaja on the issue.

when I wrote him and complained that a guru has to be accepted on faith and NOT a zonal consideration, he wrote me back and said that he would present my complaint and my letter at the next GBC meeting.

That was what started the move to get away from the zonal guru system.

Satsvarupa Maharaja was behind the transition.

I still have the letters from Satsvarupa Maharaja to show that it was my letters to him that got him to seeing the wrongs of a zonal guru system.

KBdas

The camps are like different planets...

Technically Sridhar Maharaja was not Gaudiya Math but rather Sri Caitanya Saraswat Math. But this is only splitting hairs. Most people with ISKCON backgrounds generally split the Gaudiya world into ISKCON, Gaudiya Math and the Babajis.

Cool!

Sridhar Maharaja was never a GM (Gaudiya Matha) guru.

It is very bad practice to try and classify him as such.

Even after establishing his own Matha, Sridhar Maharaja was doubtful about accepting disciples. He only had a very few disciples.

Then, on an occasion of pilgrimage to Eka-chakra (birthplace of Nityananda prabhu), Lord Nityananda appeared to Sridhar Maharaja in a dream and told him not to be reluctant to accept disciples.

After that, Sridhar Maharaja was more open to accepting disciples into his Sri Caitanya Saraswata Matha.

Sridhar Maharaja was never a guru of the Gaudiya Matha institution.

There is no such thing as "Gaudiya Math" anymore. The original Gaudiya Math split into the Chaitanya Math and the Gaudiya Mission. There are individual maths which still use the name Gaudiya Math, such as the Bagh Bazar Gaudiya Math, but there is no overall institution of that name. Some of the other disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati created institutions with the words Gaudiya Math in them, like the Chaitanya Gaudiya Math, etc.

But, that is a very crude and remote view of the real situation.
It's the brainchild of a neophyte conglomerate of western devotees with very little actual insight and information about the history of the Gaudiya Matha.

When us masses of western devotees start to understand how little we actually know, then there is some hope for actual advancement.

When is the right time to go over to the Gaudiya Math? I suggest going over there during the Bramha Muhurta hour or just before. You might want to catch the boat at about 5:00 am.

Maybe they could go to the aparadha-bhanjan where Mahaprabhu forgave the offenses of Jagai and Madhai?

On that very spot is where Srila Sridhar Maharaja established Sri Caitanya Saraswata Matha.

the most merciful spot in the universe.

where Kripamoya (the full mercy) is distributed.

If "Gaudiya Math" is not a good collective term for lineages that grew from Bhaktisiddhanta's Gaudiya Math, what do you want us to call them? The Bhaktisiddhanta Bunch?

GM is the perfect term for everyone who follows Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, except Iskcon. No one took the simple name because everyone tacitly recognized that the Gaudiya Math, as such, no longer existed.

Well, considering that a couple of the main branches failed to even follow Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, then maybe we could just call them Hindus?

Why must there be a "collective" term?
There is a wide variety of opinions amongst them.

Why must we find ONE collective term to classify them?

The Gaudiya Matha was an institution under the direction of Srila Saraswati Goswami.
When that direction was lost, so was the Gaudiya Math.

Is ISKCON also Gaudiya Matha?

No?
Then why are the other institutions of the disciples of Saraswati Thakur lumped into one "collective" designation as "Gaudiya Matha"?

Trying to find one collective term to classify all the offshoots of the Gaudiya Matha is a cheapshot that wants to put them all on the same level with the same qualifications and realization.

That is a very narrow opinion.

In the books of Srila Prabhupada he gave us the term "Saraswata" as the collective term for the followers and disciples of Srila Saraswati Thakur.