Parampara

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

> If the guru is bona-fide and you claim that Srila Prabhupada is. Then

> everything he states will also be bona-fide, is it not?

 

That is true. But there is no guarantee that you understand him correctly if

you just read his books.

 

> When did Srila Prabhupada EVER instruct his disciples to check if anything

> he had ever said or written was bona-fide?

 

"You have to corroborate whether guru, what guru is speaking, whether it is

there in the scripture; what scripture is speaking, whether that is in the

character of guru, or in the sadhu, saintly persons, or spiritual master. So

you have to always make comparison with three things: sadhu, sastra, guru."

(CC Madhya 20.119-121 lecture)

 

> > You did not do this when your read the July 9th letter,

>

> How do you know this? Such audacity to write such speculative non-sense?

 

If you did, then what was the result of the comparision of the July 9th

letter with sadhu and sastra?

 

> Where does Srila Prabhupada state that, "If you are NOT my disciple you

> will need a spiritual master other than me, to guide you, as to what my

> words actually mean."

 

SB 1.15.30 lecture, Los Angeles, December 8, 1973:

So if you want to understand Bhagavad-gita, then we must understand in the

same way as the person who directly heard from. This is called parampara

system. Suppose I have heard something from my spiritual master, so I speak

to you the same thing. So this is parampara system. You cannot imagine what

my spiritual master said. Or even if you read some books, you cannot

understand unless you understand it from me. This is called parampara

system. You cannot jump over to the superior guru, neglecting the next

acarya, immediate next acarya.

 

> If Srila Prabhupada's words are not understandable, unless of course one

> is a Prabhupada disciple, then what is the point of mass book distribution

> of Srila Prabhupada's books?

 

In these books it says that one has to approach a spiritual master and ask

him questions.

 

> What YOU are trying to say above is that unless I've had the fire ceremony

> and my name is in Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples book - then I am

> NOT an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Correct?

 

Yes. Otherwise why for example did Srila Prabhupada write the July 9th

letter, if the ceremony is not required?

 

Are you first or second initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada?

 

> The following is from www.dictionary.com. Please demonstrate from the

> following definitions of the word 'meet', which usage corresponds to YOUR

> own strictly private definition of the word 'meet'?

 

5]To come into the company or presence of, as for a conference.

13]To come together: Let's meet tonight.

 

Currently I am meeting with you through email although we do not see each

other and the distance between us is about 1000 km.

 

> The July 9th document was pinned up on some temple notice boards, at that

> point in time. Therefore it was in view for all. Neither does it state

> 'Confidential'.

 

Although the temple president may have published the letter, the devotees

learned its meaning through the temple president. He explained it to them.

That is parampara.

 

> So now you are saying that we can only understand Srila Prabhupada's

> instructions from the person or persons, he gave the instruction to.

 

Yes, that is parampara.

 

> Please give me a quote from Srila Prabhupada to prove this?

 

See the quote above (SB 1.15.30 lecture).

 

> Where is the authorization from Srila Prabhupada for the so-called diksa

> guru successors in ISKCON?

 

When Srila Prabhupada was challenged in a similar way, his answer was:

 

Indian man: When did he tell you to...?

Prabhupada: What is the business, when did he tell me?

And why shall I disclose to you? It is so very insignificant

thing that I have to explain to you?

Indian man: No, I am just curious when...

Prabhupada: You should be curious within your limit.

 

ys Ramakanta dasa