Monday, January 9, 2017

A Discussion on Diksha vs Shiksha gurus

CG: Which one is too important, the Guru's words or his picture?

SPD: Both are very beneficial. However of the two hearing the words emanating from the lips of the Mahabhagavat self realized pure devotee are most important.

AC: Hare Krishna Prabhu! What about to listening to the Maha-Bhagavata's recorded voice?

SPD: Same as hearing from him directly. Srila Prabhupada gave Brahman initiation by tape recording.

AC: Jay!!! Thank you for your answer Prabhu. Haribol!

GSD: Association by vibration is more important than physical presence. We are so much enamoured by physical presence because we are so accustomed to the bodily concept of life. Of course this doesn't mean that the physical presence of the spiritual master should be neglected. Someone recently said, would you sit down and read a book when Srila Prabhupada was down in the temple room? 

This is of course a silly and even stupid comment. Of course not! When the pure devotee is physically with us we must serve him and his body by all means and when he is no longer with us physically we must take shelter of his instructions, the vibration from his lotus mouth. Common sense. 

The spiritual master is the principle, not the body.

BVW: "A pure devotee always engages in the service of the Lord, taking shelter of His lotus feet, and therefore he has a direct connection with the saffron mercy-particles that are strewn over the lotus feet of the Lord. Although when a pure devotee speaks the articulation of his voice may resemble the sound of this material sky, the voice is spiritually very powerful because it touches the particles of saffron dust on the lotus feet of the Lord. As soon as a sleeping living entity hears the powerful voice emanating from the mouth of a pure devotee, he immediately remembers his eternal relationship with the Lord, although up until that moment he had forgotten everything."
(4 th Canto , ch 20. Vs 25) 

I just remembered it, one of my favorites, because we often talked about the " saffron particles" when I was out distributing ... long time ago.

SPD: Perfect...

SD: This proves that Srila Prabhupada is The Diksha Guru.

Kim Moller: Nope, it proves that Srila Prabhupada's diksa giving disciples are bonafide "When probationer period is finished, then he is naturally, automatically, bona fide guru" It must be seen in context with what HDG previous have said in this connection.


PD: Jayadvaita swami says that the many of the GBC's gurus are falling into illicit sex, its worse than that, the rest of the GBC says its common for acharyas to be falling into these deviations. ys pd

SD: As of April 1977 Srila Prabhupada DID not see any disciples fit. The training was not complete then and certainly not now after disobeying his instruction of initiating on his behalf. No smoke screens Mr. Moller. There is no "naturally" here nor automatically. Only by order and the order NEVER came.

Kim Moller: It's pure rascaldom and not what we learn from guru sadhu and shastra, that if guru leaves and didn't give order, no one can give diksa? Don't be a fool like these proxy idiots. The order is always standing, all the way from Mahaprabhu, but in the association of physical present master you bring prospects to him, however when he leaves, you can give diksha provided you are qualified. That is Sampradaya and His Divine Grace, like He says Himself, never changed a thing.

SD: The only rascaldom I see here that we avoid the issue. Srila Prabhupada said the training was not complete and that he will say who can be guru and will order when the training was complete.

Prabhupada: 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.

SD: You are a rascal Kim Moller.

GSD: Kim Moller, 'all the way from Mahaprabhu' ... this was definitely a siksa order. This is accepted by everyone.

PD: Who is Kim Mollers' living guru? He never says? Its all bluff. ys pd

JJC: The bottom line of the [ISKCON guru] issue is whether or not any guru is subjected to the dictates and discipline of the GBC. The fact that Prabhupāda established the GBC as the Governing Authority for ISKCON rules out the possibility of any diksha gurus in ISKCON except him. 

Prabhupada ruled out the diksha guru system in ISKCON by saying that a bona-fide spiritual master is never subjected to the discipline or restrictions of a GBC or anyone else. The fact that the GBC is in the position of having to regulate and restrict the activities of the ISKCON gurus shows that indeed there can be no gurus in ISKCON except Prabhupāda. 

A real guru is never subjected to the control and discipline of any committee, Godbrother, disciple or anyone else. Śrī Guru is a free agent independent of committee regulation or control. ISKCON clearly has a whole set of rules and laws that regulate, discipline and restrict all the diksha gurus in ISKCON. This situation is clearly in violation of the teachings of Śrīla Prabhupāda. We find his instructions in the matter in the Nectar of Instruction text 6 purport:

"It is also an offense to consider an empowered Vaishnava an object of disciplinary action. It is offensive to try to give him advice or to correct him…The spiritual master must not be subjected to the advice of a disciple, nor should a spiritual master be obliged to take instructions from those who are not his disciples. This is the sum and substance of Śrīla Rūpa Goswami's advice in this sixth verse."

Śrīla Prabhupāda is saying here that in the Rūpānuga sampradāya a spiritual master should not be subjected to the discipline or regulations of any committee, individual or group of individuals. A real spiritual master is not subject to such regulation.

Therefore, by establishing the GBC as the managing authority of ISKCON, Śrīla Prabhupāda ruled out the possibility of a multiplicity of gurus in ISKCON by making the GBC the functioning authority over all ISKCON affairs. In ISKCON today there is a class of spiritual masters who are all subjected to the regulation and discipline of the GBC. This is totally incongruent with the concept of a traditional spiritual master who is above and beyond all such committee regulation.

Prabhupāda said it is an offense to try and discipline or regulate a spiritual master. Therefore either the regulating of ISKCON spiritual masters by the GBC must stop or [the ISKCON] diksha guru system must stop. Refusing to do so results in offenses which will destroy devotional service and make [devotional service] fruitless and futile.

SD: Thank you prabhu for the clear understanding you have. Hope some will take this seriously.

GSD: This is an interesting and new perspective I never heard before and it makes sense. Thank you.

JJ: "In 1932 Visvambharananda dasa Babaji, on behalf of many babajis and caste Goswamis in Vrndavana, published a book opposing Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and his Mission, citing extensively from sastra to support his arguments. He challenged that the line of parampara traced from Jagannatha dasa Babaji through Bhaktivinoda Thakura to Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji and then to Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was unauthorized. 

Visvambharananda claimed that although Sarasvati Thakura was supposed to be the disciple of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, he was disqualified in several ways. First, Sarasvati Thakura did not accept as bona fide the recognized lineage of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, whose guru was in the Advaita-parivara.

Furthermore, since Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji had never used a japa-mala, and had not given one to Sarasvati Thakura at the time of initiation but 
had simply placed some Navadvipa dust into his hand, Visvambharananda 
argued that such an initiation was not bona fide. 

The implication was that Sarasvati Thakura had not actually received 
pancaratrika-diksa from Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, so how could he confer 
it upon others? Nor had Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji worn a brahmana thread, so on what authority did Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati wear one? 

"Moreover, Visvambharananda argued, Sarasvati Thakura claimed to be a follower of Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who was initiated by the caste Goswami Bipina Bihari. Why then did Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati not accept guru-parampara by seminal descent? Bhaktivinoda Thakura had given him a Nrsimha mantra for worshiping the Deity, yet Sarasvati Thakura was giving a Radha-Krsna mantra for this purpose.

Wherefrom did he derive this mantra, and on whose authority did he 
distribute it? Visvambharananda further objected that since Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was a sannyasi without a sannyasa guru, how could he give sannyasa to others? 

"Sarasvati Thakura responded by explaining the concept of bhagavata-parampara, or siksa-parampara. He maintained that the essence of parampara lies in the transmission of transcendental knowledge, not merely in a list of 
contiguous names. The life of the parampara is maintained by the 
maha-bhagavatas, who embody the essence of scriptural knowledge. 
Therefore, to trace the parampara through such maha-bhagavatas truly 
represents parampara. 

"He said, 'Bhaktivinoda Thakura is Kamala Manjari, a personal associate of 
Radharani. He ordered me to establish daiva-varnasrama. I must obey his 
order. The acarya is not under the sastra. The acarya can make sastra. 
Bhaktivinoda Thakura, the acarya, has inspired me in various ways. By 
his mercy and that of Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja and the previous 
acaryas we are going on, not caring for the precise technicalities of 

"'Although this concept of bhagavata-parampara appears to be new, it is based on the essential understanding of the scriptures. Something new given by an acarya but based on sastra is called vaisistya (a special characteristic). 

Acaryas Ramanuja and Madhva both apparently introduced something new, but because their teachings were based on sastra they came to be accepted. Phalena pariciyate: "

An action should be understood by its result." My commitment to devotional service and my preaching activities speak for themselves. Owl-like persons cannot see this, but those who are honest will accept it.'" End.

Collectively at the time and until now the GBC have rejected Srila Prabhupada as having anymore authority in their own lives and that of ISKCON. By their own admission the GBC did not recognize the July 9th letter as being valid at anytime AFTER it’s signing on July 9th 1977. 

For 4 months and 8 days at least they did not divulge their sentiments to anyone in ISKCON accept themselves. That is more than obvious. Therefore they are guilty of complicity.

The GBC were speaking directly to the obvious understanding of the July 9th 1977 directive as directed by Srila Prabhupada their spiritual master at the time. Which means again that they understood exactly what Srila Prabhupada directed.

“The agreement cannot be broken but with mutual consent” 

No mutual consent was ever discussed with all of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples regarding the GBC’s decision to ignore posthumously Srila Prabhupada’s July 9th 1977 letter which came about directly as a request from the GBC itself on May 28th 1977.

SD: So by their own ambitious plans, they planned to be guru by hook or crook!
Fooled no one really ,only their disciples.

SK: If I don't follow Ritvik view, will I go to hell? And ISKCON devotees go to hell? Will devotees from Narayan mj or Shridhar mj go to hell? It sounds like the preaching from Christian or Muslim fanatics who fight and argue among themselves insisting who is right and wrong. 

Why don't you argue with Christians and Jews and Muslims instead of arguing with closest family members ISKCON or gaudiya math. We call it in Japan "barking puppy dog". They bark at harmless people and run away from aggressive one. If I'm not ritvik and I go to hell, that's ok with me. I'm quite sick of hearing all such arguments. I personally believe Prabhupad doesn't see if you believe Ritvik or Iskcon or Gaudiya. Being right about your belief system will not guarantee at all if you advance spiritually. Rather it's your sincere heart and faith that is important. Sincere Christians and Muslims may be much more spiritually advanced than us.

RD: Please; Sk? do not speculate and read Srila Prabhupada's book's.

PD: SK says we need to have faith, faith in whom and what? He never says? ys pd

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.