Initiation (?)

[Guest guest]

> > My point is that I beleive Srila Prabhupada gave us everything, but that

> > we have minimised his teachings. I also beleive that we need pure souls

> > to enlighten us, and clear up the apparent contradictions in his works.

> >

>

> There is never an end. Then an another pure soul would be needed

> to enlighten us and clear up the apparent contradictions in

> the previous pure soul's clearing word, and then another, another.. So you

> got that what is called "The disciplic succession".

 

Your reply seems to indicate that there is something wrong with a pure soul?

Do you and I share the same understanding of what a pure soul is? Would we

not welcome hundreds of pure souls? Or are are you referring to some kind of

ISKCONised conception of a person posing to be a pure soul?

 

When you say the words 'pure soul' think six goswamis, or previous acaryas,

or Haridas Thakur, etc etc. In Caitanya Lila there were many, and they had

such wonderful nectarian relationships. What you seem to imply here sounds

almost like sour grapes philosophy. Because we were cheated by so many

people who we THOUGHT were pure souls, therefore there must not be any.

 

If Srila Prabhupada was here now, we would not need anyone to clear up what

he wrote because he would be here to do so. As he is not available for this

function, we need someone who is also a mahabhagavat to do so. While he is

here (or they) there is no need for anyone else. It is only when there is no

pure devotee that we need to find one. Otherwise we can go on 'ad infinitum'

posting this quote and that countering each other, hence the saying (that I

love so much) 'We read the Bible day and night, you read black and I read

white.'

>

> Are we already so bewildered with what Prabhupada meant in his books that

> we can't clear it up without assistance of another pure souls (that we are

> missing currently, apparently)?

> Sounds almost like "the broken chain of disciplic succession".

> Already so soon, right after Prabhupada's departure.

 

Prabhuji, what are you saying? You are so quick to jump to conclusions. It

is quite simple. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta makes it quite clear. Bhaktivinoda

Thakur had passed. He wrote and taught his disciples extensively, but he

made it clear in his teachings, as does Srila Prabhupada, that the

*principle* is to serve and hear from the LIPS of a living Bhagavata

devotee.

 

Bhaktisiddhanta says repeatedly that even though the folower may have got it

by heart, everything taught by Bhaktivinoda, unless he HEARS it from a pure

source, it wont be Sabdha Brahman, but simply so many alphabets.

Bhaktivinoda Thakur says the same thing himself in his own teachings, and

this is what Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is reminding the Thakur's followers. he

says that 'No honest man' can fail to recognise this.

 

Hearing and serving a pure devotee, is siddhantic. Its what a person is

supposed to do in order to get spiritual advancement. Spiritual advancement

cannot be gotten by any amount of study, it comes from mercy. Lord Krsna

himself taught this by going to the forest to collect firewood for Sandipani

muni. He could have manifested tons of firewood, but he taught us that

service to ones guru is the way.

 

> > Srila Prabhupada himself says this in a lecture in Rome, May 27th 1974:

> >

> > "Unless one is svanubhavam, SELF REALISED (emphasis mine) [unless his]

> > life is Bhagavat, he cannot preach Bhagavat. That will not be effective.

> > A gramaphone will not help (listening to tapes?). Therefore Caitanya

> > Mahaprabhu's secretary, Svarupa Damodara, reccomended, bhagavata pora

> > giya bhagavata sthane, that "if you want to read Srimad Bhagavatam, you

> > must approach a person who is life giving Bhagavata" Bhagavata pora giya

> > bhagavata sthana. Otherwise there is no question of BHagavata

> > realisation...

>

>

> But this does not really mean that unless one is svanubhavam, he

> cannot effectively present Srila Prabhupada's purports to Bhagavat slokas

> to the people, does it?

 

You can certainly alert the mass of people that there is such a thing as

spiritual life, and that they should aspire for it. Let them read Srila

Prabhupadas books as they are full of very practical instructions for

Varnasrama, which he explains is not spiritual in itself, but serves to

elevate one to the mode of goodness, where one can, as long as he has the

mercy, jump off into Suddha Sattva or pure goodness (pure devotion). There

is a wealth of preparatory information, especialy for those with no idea of

spirtual life. But to realy get into the MYSTERY of spritual life simply

jnana will not do. Service to an ACTUAL pure soul is absolutely needed.

 

That is what Bhaktisiddhanta is saying. If you want to actualy associate

with Krsna, in REAL loving service, talk with Him, serve Him personaly, in

this life, you can only get that from mercy. You can only understand the

subtle science of how to get there from the living LIPS of a pure devotee

who actualy has KRSNA. It is the exact same text, but heard from the right

source.

 

Bhaktisiddhanta says: The devotee is right even when he apprently

misquotes, the non devotee is wrong even when he quotes correctly the very

words chapter and verse of the scriptures.

 

Now if we judge his statement using many ISKCON devotees loose

interpretation of the actual definition of the words he uses we get one

understanding. (if bhakta joe or newly initatied Jnana das, speaks, it is

ok, but if the visiting plumber speaks dont listen cause he doesnt know).

 

Now consider that he means by the word devotee: pure devotee mahabhagavata,

as that is the standard for someone who is *actualy* a devotee, and not

someone who is aspiring for devotion. Ok we call each other devotees, but

how devoted are we, really?

 

Then consider what he means by non devotee: someone who tries to obtain

spiritual life by jnana (reading) as opposed to the service of a pure

devotee. He considers the jnani to be an 'empiric pedant', and therefore a

non devotee).

 

Someone who is actualy a devotee, is actualy fully devoted to lord Krsna.

Someone who is FULLY devoted to Lord Krsna is actualy a pure devotee. Pure

means fully, nothing added nothing missing. Anything less is not pure, it is

contaminated, and therefore not yet pure.

 

Beyond the preparatory information Srila Prabhupada also gives us the

advanced stuff, but you cant understand that by simply reading. It is a

living knowledge, not alphabets, and it must be heard from the right source,

as Srila Prabhupada himself says, in his own purports, as indeed all the

previous acaryas have. If this siddhanta were more widely known years ago,

we would not have all this Ritvik nonesense going on now.

>

> I thought that out of the very reason that Prabhupada is telling

> to us in the above quote, he took the intense work upon himself

> in order to give us the explanation of Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

As I mentioned above. Srila Prabhupadas purports are a wealth of information

regarding many many practicle ways in which a Krsna Conscious society can be

developed. He had to present the entire concept of spiritual life, who is

Lord Krsna, and the entire idea of the vedic viewpoint to people who had no

concept of it whatsoever. and he does it perfectly and excellently. In that

body of work the siddhanta of who is a pure devotee, and how you should

surrender to him, and serve him is adequately explained. All we have to do

is follow those instructions, and those of the previous acaryas in our

disciplic succesion, and we will have success.

 

Sd