Evidence for guru-related-problems during Lord Caitanya's times

[Guest guest]

On 20 Jun 1999, Vidvan Gauranga wrote:

 

> > A VAISNAVA GURU IN GOOD STANDING EARLIER CAN ALSO FALL DOWN - MORE PROOF

> > WITH ORIGINAL BENGALI FROM JAIVA DHARMA FROM DANAVIR MAHARAJ'S ARTICLE:

 

"COM: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)" wrote:

 

> Janesvara wrote:

 

> > I guess I am just not following this whole subject. Our guru, Srila

> > Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, never fell down. Why are we

> > questioning this? Is Srila Prabhupada no longer our guru? Do pure

devotees

> > die?

 

> Srila Prabhupada is certainly our foundational siksa guru. No doubt. >And

> whoever he initiated, he is their diksa guru as well. But he is not >the

> diksa guru for his grand-disciples since such an idea has no basis in >Guru

> and sadhu and sastra.

 

> One of the doctrines of the rtvikists is that a guru has to be one who >is

> beyond any chance of fall-down. The evidence provided showed that this

> concept was erroneous.

 

> I hope that clarifies.

 

> ys

> vgd

 

 

 

Thank you Vidvan Gauranga Prabhu. Namaste. Jaya Prabhupada!

 

I was pretty clear on this already. My question is why is there so much

emphasis put on the DISqualifications of a diksa guru? What are the

qualifications of diksa guru?

 

There is a pancharatrika distinction between diksa and siksa guru. We can

understand this from scripture. This distinction is certainly not emphasized

by our acarya in his books.

Indeed, one will not find one mention of the word "diksa" in his most

important publication, the Bhagavad-gita As It Is (or at least I have not

found one yet). So, we have been in

"need" of diksa gurus because the original diksa guru of ISKCON "left" us some

20+ years ago. We seem to be implying, from these discussions, that the diksa

guru can be

"inferior" to a siksa guru or a "pure devotee guru"? He can fall down at some

date but his work of initiating is still OK. This I can kind of understand,

practically speaking,

especially in this age. With this acceptance also comes the "baggage" of our

having to relentlessly defend those who have accepted the title of diksa guru

without good, strong,

mature qualifications. This I can also accept on practical terms, though I do

not "like" it. For want of performing a pancharatrika ritual, which I respect

in principle completely,

we force ourselves to push through a lower standard based upon relatively

obscure "excuses" from isolated examples in the past. Hardly ideal, which I

also realize is not always

practical, but nonetheless desirable. Admittance of such a fact is conspicuous

by its absence, and thus defensive postures are always at ready.

 

What would seem more practical, and fully acceptable according to our

parampara, would be to "relax" the formal pancharatrika programs until true

qualifications are obtained.

Srila Prabhupada was always very favorable to Pancha-tattva Deity worship

where the temple members and "brahmanas" were not of the highest

qualifications. The same result

of KC was promised, but the offenses were avoided. Same as salagrama-sila

worship for which only a very, very few ever proved qualified to worship.

 

Our parampara is clearly a siksa-oriented program. I hope we can all agree at

least on this. If so, a shift towards siksa emphasis throughout the movement

could be quite helpful

in avoiding endless ISKCON diksa vs. "ritvik" debates which I think most

everyone is sick of. Siksa includes primarily studying/discussing Srila

Prabhupada's books, but also

includes all good senior advanced instruction from those Vaisnavas present as

well as those not "present". Siksa clearly transcends "livingnon-living"

considerations and thus

proves its superiority. No one in ISKCON, including Srila Prabhupada, was all

that disturbed that salagrama-sila worship was not taking place in every

temple, but no one

forced it onto the temple altars without the proper qualifications either. It

is bonafide worship and very, very nice, but not "necessary" especially in an

unqualified form. Srila

Prabhupada said in Bhagavatam that his western disciples were anxious to start

salagrama-sila worship but that they were not qualified yet and he would

introduce it at a later

date when and if they were qualified. Chanting Hare Krsna, after all, is all

that is necessary (along with engagement in one's sva-dharma! I cannot leave

out a plug for

varnasrama-dharma :-) ).

 

Of course, the diksa initiating program must continually be worked on and in

that regard there must be some standards set to "cleanse" the current "dirt"

from the program in

ISKCON. We first have to admit that there were and, therefore, probably still

are some, many, most (take your pick) people who are not "qualified" to be

diksa gurus. That, of

course, depends upon the standards we are going to accept in ISKCON for our

diksa gurus. No one is going to stop us from accepting a low standard for

diksa, but do we

really want that legacy? Srila Prabhupada always stressed the highest

standards. If we couldn't follow those standards then the program was

temporarily postponed until

standards could be raised. Not that we just pretend to be able to follow the

standard and commit offenses (deity worship, etc.) Who are we trying to

impress other than Srila

Prabhupada and Sri Krsna-Caitanya? The Gaudiya Matha? The Hindus? Each other?

We have lost focus. Simplicity and happiness has fled. Propagation of plain

old Krsna consciousness has been interfered with.

 

 

If we are going to have diksa gurus we should develop a list of qualifications

from scripture. If we are going to differentiate between a

formal-ritual-diksa-guru (because we feel a need and necessity to perform

pancharatrika vidhi now) and a pure-devotee-siksa-spiritual master then the

list would have to be somehow different than ones we are all aware of now.

 

We must admit that some oversight was made on many occasions in previous

evaluations of diksa gurus in ISKCON. This is regrettable but nonetheless

factual. We MUST not continue to make the same mistakes. Better to scrap the

whole idea if we cannot correct it. It is NOT imperative that we perform diksa

initiations RIGHT NOW. I like being diksa initiated by Srila Prabhupada, I

admit this. It is a wonderfully secure feeling. I know he will never fall

down. I want others to feel the same security with their diksa gurus also. But

we cannot just pretend.

Srila Prabhupada never said a word to me personally. My association with him

right now is almost exactly the same as it was when he was "present" on this

planet. For all I know, he is just around the corner on a planet close to

earth. This is not much different than when he was in India and yet still

became my diksa guru somehow. The ritual was performed and my diksa was

confirmed. Now I just have to try to fulfill my duties! The siksa was always

the emphasis anyway and his books are always present. I would have waited a

hundred years or a hundred lifetimes for diksa so long as I had his siksa

association.

 

Anyway, somehow we have to develop some diksa guru standards. We cannot

question that Srila Prabhupada stated the following:

 

 

"One should approach a bonafide guru to inquire about the highest benefit of

life. Such a guru is described as follows... Such a guru does not manufacture

gold or juggle words.

He is well versed in the conclusions of Vedic knowledge. He is freed from all

material contamination and is fully engaged in Krishna's service." S.B.

5.14.13.

 

 

If we have some diksa gurus who are "freed from all material contamination" we

should all be made aware of this fact publically and their names should be

spread far and wide for everyone to take advantage of.

 

 

"...the conclusion is that a spiritual master who is one hundred percent Krsna

conscious is the bonafide spiritual master, for he can solve the problems of

life." Bhagavad-gita 2.8

 

 

Same thing, if we have some diksa spiritual masters who are "100% Krsna

conscious" we would all want and deserve to know this.

 

 

"Sometimes doubts arise in the minds of neophytes about whether or not the

spiritual master is liberated... If someone is one hundred percent engaged in

the service of the Lord,

he is to be understood as liberated. One must understand whether or not he is

liberated by his activities in devotional service, not by other symptoms."

S.B. 3.33.10.

 

 

Are there some diksa gurus who are liberated right now? If so, who are they?

Please do not just say "all of them". This does not matter that much to me

because I have a liberated diksa guru which hardly anyone would argue. But

those that have suffered at the hands and lips of unqualified "diksa" gurus in

the past deserve a better answer than this, don't you agree? Has there been

new standards developed and distributed widely in writing for every

prospective candidate? Are they posted on Chakra, VNN, etc., for everyone to

see?

 

 

 

"... one cannot become a spiritual master unless he is a pure devotee of the

Lord." S.B. 4.29.51.

 

 

These are strong words from our founder acarya. They surely can't be taken

lightly or with some wild interpretation which would again lead us to such

things as zonal acaryas, child abuse, etc., can they?

 

These quotes which I have provided are not meant to disqualify every single

current diksa guru in ISKCON. Though they might if we ALL agree on the

standards given in scripture, Srila Prabhupada's books. I am not interested in

any other books, personally, because Srila Prabhupada said clearly,

"everything is there in my books."

 

I believe him.

 

 

I beg the intelligent devotees of ISKCON to consider this request to develop

an agreeable set of standards for diksa guru. In my humble opinion, those

qualifications for a pancharatrika diksa ritual officiating guru can and

obviously must be different than those given above for a guru on the standard

of my guru maharaja. But I take it personally when those without the above

qualifications assume titles for which they have no claim. They are devotees

and godbrothers but, without the qualifications while accepting such titles,

they are sinful pretenders and only serve to minimize my guru's excellence. If

we want someone to perform rituals they still need training and standards.

Let's get it in writing for ALL to agree upon. If some current diksa gurus do

not fulfill the qualifications, we MUST be mature enough and compassionate

enough, on them and their "disciples", to re-engage them in meaningful and

honest occupations in accordance with the daiva varnasrama-dharma institution

(which is another whole story).

 

 

Ys,

 

jd