Diksa guru as personal spiritual guide

[Guest guest]

>

> >

> > What I am opposed to is the "imposed" force of one-diksa-guru control of

> > a

> disciple. Temple Presidents who are supposed to act in the capacity of

> ksatriya for a community cannot administrate such disciples because they

> always look to their diksa guru as the final authority on so many things.

> >

>

> yes, I would agree this not a healthy social condition. The spiritual

> master in KC is meant to serve in a brahminical capacity, not simply

> becoming a religious tryant, a neo-ksatriya with no social self-control. I

> strongly believe that it is in these sort of situations that Varnasrama

> principles need to be studied and applied. A obsessive concern with

> 'labeling' as somehow instituting Varnasrama is simply a distraction from

> this real Varnasrama business, in my opinion.

>

>

 

 

While it is pretty obvious that there were "crude" examples of

this kind of not healthy social conditions (and that perhaps might

still be some, here and there), I would suggest that it would be

a bit unfair not to notice how there are *many* gurus in ISCKON

who do NOT take the stance of being their disciples' menagers and

the final authority "on so many things", but they leave it up to

the local temple management structure.

 

Even in the case of "big" gurus with the thousands of disciples,

this is what is practically happening - they CAN'T possibly do

all that micro-managment of their disciples, so they leave it to

TPs and other managers. The complaints that I have been often hearing

were of the kind, "What is this 'big' guru for, he can't possibly

find the time to personally take care of his numerous disciples,

but leaves them to TPs and others to engage and instruct them".

Now, the problem is that - "they are too much, they don't give

the opportunity to TPs to act". Again, turn the "coin" this

side or that side, they (ISCKON gurus) got to be blamed.

 

 

Anyway, a more accurate observance of the dynamics of the ISCKON

temple life would require more closer association with the same.

Some of us might have hardly "seen" an ISCKON temple since the

time of receiving the initiation...

 

 

 

ys mnd

[Guest guest]

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

> What I am opposed to is the "imposed" force of one-diksa-guru control of a

> disciple. Temple Presidents who are supposed to act in the capacity of

> ksatriya for a community cannot administrate such disciples because they

> always look to their diksa guru as the final authority on so many things.

>

Just as scary is the one-templepresident-control without the compassionate

nonenvious brahmanaadviser.

In real life the only one asking me to be cautious to send my small

6yearold to India was my gurumaharaja, and the only one who did not abandon

me, when he came home with a problem was him too.

Thus the conclusion is still Guru, sadhu and sastra. Or in other words

cooperation, not absolute power to anyone.

Your servant Gunamani d.d.

[Guest guest]

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

> What I am opposed to is the "imposed" force of one-diksa-guru control of a

> disciple. Temple Presidents who are supposed to act in the capacity of

> ksatriya for a community cannot administrate such disciples because they

> always look to their diksa guru as the final authority on so many things.

>

Just as scary is the one-templepresident-control without the compassionate

nonenvious brahmanaadviser.

In real life the only one asking me to be cautious to send my small

6yearold to India was my gurumaharaja, and the only one who did not abandon

me, when he came home with a problem was him too.

Thus the conclusion is still Guru, sadhu and sastra. Or in other words

cooperation, not absolute power to anyone.

Your servant Gunamani d.d.

[Guest guest]

>

> So when I suggested that Srila Prabhupadas disciples may need personal

> siksa, it is for this purpose, and in this vane. Is it so revolutionary?

> Is it to be condemned?

>

> Mahanidhi Prabhu. Beleive me, I dont have a personal agenda here. It just

> seems to me basic common sense, that when you are dealing with such deep

> topics, as entering into the personal service of the lord that you need a

> certain amount of personal help, from someone with experience. I am not

> suggesting, that we round up all of Srila Prabhupadas disciples, and force

> this down their throats, what good would that do?

 

I belive. I think the problem arose in the opening aproach to

the issue, where we strictly discussed the aplication of most

esencial principles in guru-disciple relationship, and then

gradually shifted to the particularity of individual needs.

But didn't get sychronized.

 

 

I agree with you here. I am also of the same opinion, that not

just some, but many disciples of Srila Prabupada (and even other

departed Acaryas like Bhaktisiddhanta) would need to get the

help of an onethr pure devotee in order to get their relationship

with Srila Prabhupada fully realized. So, if that happens not in

this life time, then will perhaps in the next, even without their

concius effort to find such help. Personally, that is the scenario

that I expect to happen to me as well. Though I would like this

to be my last death in this world, I really expect to have more

births till that occures. The real objections in this life time

for me would be - to die as a sane person.

 

 

> I just cant escape but

> conclude, and this is my own personal opinion, that to go deeper in

> spiritual life, the help of an experienced Krsna Prema bhakta, is

> indespensible. As we are in any case personalists. The assistance of

> persons, the reciprocation, and tender dealings , would inspire us, and

> give us the confidence, to give up our false ego's and become pure lovers

> of Krsna.

 

 

Yes. In basics, that is the whole purpose of having "The International

Society For Krsna Consciousness" started by Srila Prabhupada. The

main "stumbling" stone in our current discussion was, however,

having not-uttama adhikaris for our gurus. The various quotes have

been pulled out and clanged one with other. But thinking about

what you have just said, not a "strict" particular quote comes to my

mind, but simply the injunctions that advised us how to form the

relationship among the fellow Vaisnavas (in whatever meaning this

world could be taken). In this society, we got to relate each to

others. The advice is there:

 

1. Among the peers it should be the sense of a friendship.

2. To the inferior ones one should show a compassion to and offer

the help.

3. And from those who are on the superior level of the spiritual

advancement than one's own, one should accept instruction and

guidance.

 

What leaves us with the practical reality of the life that not

only uttama-adhikaris may be acting as our (bona fide) siksa gurus

in our lives. Certainly, more they are advanced, that better for

everybody. My basic idea is to distinguish in between Krsna-prema

bhakta who can give us Krsna-prema, and siksa/diksa gurus who

may be able to lead us towards that goal, on the path of the

spiritual advancement (the *actual* one, if you mind me to say).

As the number of siksa gurus in one's life is not subjected to

restriction on "one only", it gives you possibility of accepting

the "first" Krsna-prema bhakta that happens to pass your way,

and that you happen to recognize as such. Or simply your "not-yet-

-perfect" siksa gurus make such advancement in their own spiritual

lives, so you just cling to it. The issue of diksa guru is, as

far as I am concerned, in the second plane, following after the

reconciliation of siksa-guru issue.

 

>

> Although I can appreciate that a person can go far simply by reading the

> books, and I cant deny that there may be some mystical process by which

> one can advance simply by reading. We do find in all the scriptures, and

> in the examples of the previous acaryas, and mahajanas, that personal

> service, hearing from persons, surrender etc. these kinds of very personal

> activites are central to the activity of approaching Godhead.

 

I think so also. Prabhupada used to say that one doesn't become

an expert and recognized physician simply by reading the medical

books.

 

 

> Advanced

> spiritual personalities, always appear when they are most needed. We are

> about personalism. I feel we have this knee jerk reaction against seeking

> the *personal* help of a pure devotee, simply becasue we have been burnt

> by so many people who posed as advanced.

 

 

See what my feeling is: that we have this knee jerk reaction

against seeking the personal help of a devotee *more advanced*

than us. I belive rather that this is the bigger problem for many

of us, than our possible repulsion in seeking the help of a pure

devotee. We really do not have that much practical problem with the

later, do we? I mean we basically agree that such nittya-sidhas are

not flooding ISCKON really, wondering around in hope that we

would get loosen in our repulsion to them.

 

 

 

>

> Sorry for starting up again.

>

 

I think we are getting into an another variation of it now.

 

 

> If you still think I am off the wall, I will not utter another word after

> this, and will definately leave it until I have heard from my Gurumaharaj.

> OK, I promise.

 

Ah, I thought that referred explicitly to the particular hypotheses

that could possibly lead to placing even your own Guru Maharaja

into the position of receiving the advice to better think about

securing rather sooner a pure devotee guru in order to get the

meaning of Prabhupada's books raveled to him, and to get delivered.

I just thought one could be extra cautious there.

 

But the issue is otherwise so broad. And it would be really

pity to have you "off the line". You might well be surprised

if I would tell you that I find myself well benefited by

having your various comments, reasonings, and opinions to read

and think over. But I am such a kripana - will not let you know.

 

 

 

ys mnd

[Guest guest]

>

> So when I suggested that Srila Prabhupadas disciples may need personal

> siksa, it is for this purpose, and in this vane. Is it so revolutionary?

> Is it to be condemned?

>

> Mahanidhi Prabhu. Beleive me, I dont have a personal agenda here. It just

> seems to me basic common sense, that when you are dealing with such deep

> topics, as entering into the personal service of the lord that you need a

> certain amount of personal help, from someone with experience. I am not

> suggesting, that we round up all of Srila Prabhupadas disciples, and force

> this down their throats, what good would that do?

 

I belive. I think the problem arose in the opening aproach to

the issue, where we strictly discussed the aplication of most

esencial principles in guru-disciple relationship, and then

gradually shifted to the particularity of individual needs.

But didn't get sychronized.

 

 

I agree with you here. I am also of the same opinion, that not

just some, but many disciples of Srila Prabupada (and even other

departed Acaryas like Bhaktisiddhanta) would need to get the

help of an onethr pure devotee in order to get their relationship

with Srila Prabhupada fully realized. So, if that happens not in

this life time, then will perhaps in the next, even without their

concius effort to find such help. Personally, that is the scenario

that I expect to happen to me as well. Though I would like this

to be my last death in this world, I really expect to have more

births till that occures. The real objections in this life time

for me would be - to die as a sane person.

 

 

> I just cant escape but

> conclude, and this is my own personal opinion, that to go deeper in

> spiritual life, the help of an experienced Krsna Prema bhakta, is

> indespensible. As we are in any case personalists. The assistance of

> persons, the reciprocation, and tender dealings , would inspire us, and

> give us the confidence, to give up our false ego's and become pure lovers

> of Krsna.

 

 

Yes. In basics, that is the whole purpose of having "The International

Society For Krsna Consciousness" started by Srila Prabhupada. The

main "stumbling" stone in our current discussion was, however,

having not-uttama adhikaris for our gurus. The various quotes have

been pulled out and clanged one with other. But thinking about

what you have just said, not a "strict" particular quote comes to my

mind, but simply the injunctions that advised us how to form the

relationship among the fellow Vaisnavas (in whatever meaning this

world could be taken). In this society, we got to relate each to

others. The advice is there:

 

1. Among the peers it should be the sense of a friendship.

2. To the inferior ones one should show a compassion to and offer

the help.

3. And from those who are on the superior level of the spiritual

advancement than one's own, one should accept instruction and

guidance.

 

What leaves us with the practical reality of the life that not

only uttama-adhikaris may be acting as our (bona fide) siksa gurus

in our lives. Certainly, more they are advanced, that better for

everybody. My basic idea is to distinguish in between Krsna-prema

bhakta who can give us Krsna-prema, and siksa/diksa gurus who

may be able to lead us towards that goal, on the path of the

spiritual advancement (the *actual* one, if you mind me to say).

As the number of siksa gurus in one's life is not subjected to

restriction on "one only", it gives you possibility of accepting

the "first" Krsna-prema bhakta that happens to pass your way,

and that you happen to recognize as such. Or simply your "not-yet-

-perfect" siksa gurus make such advancement in their own spiritual

lives, so you just cling to it. The issue of diksa guru is, as

far as I am concerned, in the second plane, following after the

reconciliation of siksa-guru issue.

 

>

> Although I can appreciate that a person can go far simply by reading the

> books, and I cant deny that there may be some mystical process by which

> one can advance simply by reading. We do find in all the scriptures, and

> in the examples of the previous acaryas, and mahajanas, that personal

> service, hearing from persons, surrender etc. these kinds of very personal

> activites are central to the activity of approaching Godhead.

 

I think so also. Prabhupada used to say that one doesn't become

an expert and recognized physician simply by reading the medical

books.

 

 

> Advanced

> spiritual personalities, always appear when they are most needed. We are

> about personalism. I feel we have this knee jerk reaction against seeking

> the *personal* help of a pure devotee, simply becasue we have been burnt

> by so many people who posed as advanced.

 

 

See what my feeling is: that we have this knee jerk reaction

against seeking the personal help of a devotee *more advanced*

than us. I belive rather that this is the bigger problem for many

of us, than our possible repulsion in seeking the help of a pure

devotee. We really do not have that much practical problem with the

later, do we? I mean we basically agree that such nittya-sidhas are

not flooding ISCKON really, wondering around in hope that we

would get loosen in our repulsion to them.

 

 

 

>

> Sorry for starting up again.

>

 

I think we are getting into an another variation of it now.

 

 

> If you still think I am off the wall, I will not utter another word after

> this, and will definately leave it until I have heard from my Gurumaharaj.

> OK, I promise.

 

Ah, I thought that referred explicitly to the particular hypotheses

that could possibly lead to placing even your own Guru Maharaja

into the position of receiving the advice to better think about

securing rather sooner a pure devotee guru in order to get the

meaning of Prabhupada's books raveled to him, and to get delivered.

I just thought one could be extra cautious there.

 

But the issue is otherwise so broad. And it would be really

pity to have you "off the line". You might well be surprised

if I would tell you that I find myself well benefited by

having your various comments, reasonings, and opinions to read

and think over. But I am such a kripana - will not let you know.

 

 

 

ys mnd

[Guest guest]

> What I am opposed to is the "imposed" force of one-diksa-guru control

> of a

> disciple. Temple Presidents who are supposed to act in the capacity of

>

> ksatriya for a community cannot administrate such disciples because

> they

> always look to their diksa guru as the final authority on so many

> things.

 

Guru as king. Bad.The big question therefore is what are the

qualifications necessary to become

 

> diksa guru? Obviously, blind followers love self-serving relationships

> with

> gurus who tell them what they want to hear while leading them down the

> path to

> bogusville. We have plenty of experience in ISKCON of that and that

> was with

> "diksa" gurus who were considered the tops in the movement.

 

Anyone seeking perfection in institutions is in illusion and sure to be

disappointed.

 

> The principle of this is great, I agree. But a cold shiver goes up my

> spine

> when I think of how seemingly blissful the followers of Bhavananda,

> KSwami and

> Ramesvara and some others were before they figured out how bogus these

> guys

> were, as far as being gurus anyway. What has changed to stop this same

> thing

> in the future? Can it be stopped?

 

I think the maturing demographics of ISKCON and greater ISKCON is

starting to provide a layer of elders who have experienced many things

so you are starting to have a corp of sadhus to balance the excesses of

immature gurus. At least we are getting in that direction.

[Guest guest]

> What I am opposed to is the "imposed" force of one-diksa-guru control

> of a

> disciple. Temple Presidents who are supposed to act in the capacity of

>

> ksatriya for a community cannot administrate such disciples because

> they

> always look to their diksa guru as the final authority on so many

> things.

 

Guru as king. Bad.The big question therefore is what are the

qualifications necessary to become

 

> diksa guru? Obviously, blind followers love self-serving relationships

> with

> gurus who tell them what they want to hear while leading them down the

> path to

> bogusville. We have plenty of experience in ISKCON of that and that

> was with

> "diksa" gurus who were considered the tops in the movement.

 

Anyone seeking perfection in institutions is in illusion and sure to be

disappointed.

 

> The principle of this is great, I agree. But a cold shiver goes up my

> spine

> when I think of how seemingly blissful the followers of Bhavananda,

> KSwami and

> Ramesvara and some others were before they figured out how bogus these

> guys

> were, as far as being gurus anyway. What has changed to stop this same

> thing

> in the future? Can it be stopped?

 

I think the maturing demographics of ISKCON and greater ISKCON is

starting to provide a layer of elders who have experienced many things

so you are starting to have a corp of sadhus to balance the excesses of

immature gurus. At least we are getting in that direction.

[Guest guest]

> > Best to train the ISKCON devotees to give their hearts to the process of

devotional service in Srila Prabhupada's line.

>

>

> Actually, I still agree with Srila Prabhupada, varna first, asrama later.

>

 

 

One can chant Hare Krsna and generally perform devotional service even if he

has a job. Knowing how to make a living and then dovetailing it so as to

enhance a spiritual society is significant, surely. If one is going to become

a member of the grhasta ashrama, various varna issues will need to be

addresssed, but I wonder how critical it is for life long brahmancaris,

vanaprasthas and sannyasis to meditate on how to make a living -- they are

supposed to be renouncing such things in favor of a more direct preaching

orientated lifestyle.

 

Both Lord Caitanya and Srila Prabhupada first taught the devotees to chant,

dance and take prasada. If things are as 'screwed up' as some claim, there

might be a case for focusing on the basics.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

> > Best to train the ISKCON devotees to give their hearts to the process of

devotional service in Srila Prabhupada's line.

>

>

> Actually, I still agree with Srila Prabhupada, varna first, asrama later.

>

 

 

One can chant Hare Krsna and generally perform devotional service even if he

has a job. Knowing how to make a living and then dovetailing it so as to

enhance a spiritual society is significant, surely. If one is going to become

a member of the grhasta ashrama, various varna issues will need to be

addresssed, but I wonder how critical it is for life long brahmancaris,

vanaprasthas and sannyasis to meditate on how to make a living -- they are

supposed to be renouncing such things in favor of a more direct preaching

orientated lifestyle.

 

Both Lord Caitanya and Srila Prabhupada first taught the devotees to chant,

dance and take prasada. If things are as 'screwed up' as some claim, there

might be a case for focusing on the basics.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

>

> OK they did do good service, and that cant be denied, but I wonder how much

the aparadhas counteracted that. We might have a different society now if they

had actualy tried to help each other, and prayed to the lord as vaisnavas do,

for guidance after Srila Prabhupada departed. They were bewildered, and

instead of taking the humble position, rather they siezed control. It seems

obvious in some cases that some of them were more into control and power, than

advancement in KC. They became Islands, and persecuted their godbrothers,

especialy the ones who knew where they were really at. What kind of behaviour

is that?

>

 

 

And they reaped the benefit of their 'good' service. No one is innocent, and

no one gets away with anything.

 

I think it might be worthwhile to note how they had very many willing

followers, and I am not just talking about their new disciples. To some

degree, I would suspect they have been made the scapegoats for a more

communical guilt of trying to enjoy the position of guru, either directly or

indirectly.

 

On one level, everyone did the best they could given the situation and their

realization. Those who are sincere enought to pay the price continued to

advance. KC is not a cheap commodity.

 

 

> What devotee will

> not aspire for higher siksa also? It is not as if they are to be forced, or

we are to legislate.

>

 

 

Ultimately such things are personal decision, a matter of the heart. But it

is always worthwhile to be somewhat conservative in the respect that just as

those gurus where convinced they were free from anarthas based on a little

sincerity, we too may convince ourselves we are qualified to enter a level of

service that is really beyond our present capacity. As you also suggested, I

would suspect humility is the key.

 

 

>When I suggest that maybe the siksa of an Uttama siksa guru is necesary, it

is to this end, and not some kind of thing that we should 'impose'.

>

 

 

That may be there for some, but again I would propose it is a very personal

decision not condusive to an ongoing public debate. If one actually has

entered deeply into a siksa relationship with an uttama guru, lets say for

instance someone like Srila Prabhupada, than such difficulties as being

overwhelmed by desires in the mode of passion of ignorance will not prevail.

Siksa is a relationship that is not in name only, which I would propose is one

of the more grevious flaws of the eternal rtvik presentation.

 

 

> So when I suggested that Srila Prabhupadas disciples may need personal

> siksa, it is for this purpose, and in this vane. Is it so revolutionary? Is

it to be condemned?

>

 

Again, such personal decisions are not meant to be forced upon others. For

myself, I feel confident with Prabhupada's presentation, and feel that

whatever other association Krsna sends me can be guided by guru, sadhu and the

sastra in his line. Who are we to suggest to senior men, or junior men, who we

believe they should give their hearts to?

 

 

> I am not

> suggesting, that we round up all of Srila Prabhupadas disciples, and force

this down their throats, what good would that do?

>

 

To even consider such things hypothetically in a conversation to me seems

silly, almost offensive. Let the senior devotees decide for themselves who

they want to accept as a siksa guru. I mean, we let the new bhaktas do that.

 

As has been debated on other conferences, the siksa relationship is not bound

by time and place. Srila Prabhupada's association as a siksa guru is not

limited by his physical departure.

 

 

>

> Although I can appreciate that a person can go far simply by reading the

books, and I cant deny that there may be some mystical process by which one

can advance simply by reading.

>

 

 

Yes, that mystical process is called 'Krsna'. He is a person who reciprocates

as He is pleased to see fit.

 

If someone feels comfortable with some senior respectable vaisnava as a siksa

guru, than certainly they can pursue that relationship as they feel inspired.

I don't see why they might feel they need a public endorsement, though it is

natural to seek out the blessings of the devotees.

 

ys,

 

Sthita-dhi

[Guest guest]

>

> OK they did do good service, and that cant be denied, but I wonder how much

the aparadhas counteracted that. We might have a different society now if they

had actualy tried to help each other, and prayed to the lord as vaisnavas do,

for guidance after Srila Prabhupada departed. They were bewildered, and

instead of taking the humble position, rather they siezed control. It seems

obvious in some cases that some of them were more into control and power, than

advancement in KC. They became Islands, and persecuted their godbrothers,

especialy the ones who knew where they were really at. What kind of behaviour

is that?

>

 

 

And they reaped the benefit of their 'good' service. No one is innocent, and

no one gets away with anything.

 

I think it might be worthwhile to note how they had very many willing

followers, and I am not just talking about their new disciples. To some

degree, I would suspect they have been made the scapegoats for a more

communical guilt of trying to enjoy the position of guru, either directly or

indirectly.

 

On one level, everyone did the best they could given the situation and their

realization. Those who are sincere enought to pay the price continued to

advance. KC is not a cheap commodity.

 

 

> What devotee will

> not aspire for higher siksa also? It is not as if they are to be forced, or

we are to legislate.

>

 

 

Ultimately such things are personal decision, a matter of the heart. But it

is always worthwhile to be somewhat conservative in the respect that just as

those gurus where convinced they were free from anarthas based on a little

sincerity, we too may convince ourselves we are qualified to enter a level of

service that is really beyond our present capacity. As you also suggested, I

would suspect humility is the key.

 

 

>When I suggest that maybe the siksa of an Uttama siksa guru is necesary, it

is to this end, and not some kind of thing that we should 'impose'.

>

 

 

That may be there for some, but again I would propose it is a very personal

decision not condusive to an ongoing public debate. If one actually has

entered deeply into a siksa relationship with an uttama guru, lets say for

instance someone like Srila Prabhupada, than such difficulties as being

overwhelmed by desires in the mode of passion of ignorance will not prevail.

Siksa is a relationship that is not in name only, which I would propose is one

of the more grevious flaws of the eternal rtvik presentation.

 

 

> So when I suggested that Srila Prabhupadas disciples may need personal

> siksa, it is for this purpose, and in this vane. Is it so revolutionary? Is

it to be condemned?

>

 

Again, such personal decisions are not meant to be forced upon others. For

myself, I feel confident with Prabhupada's presentation, and feel that

whatever other association Krsna sends me can be guided by guru, sadhu and the

sastra in his line. Who are we to suggest to senior men, or junior men, who we

believe they should give their hearts to?

 

 

> I am not

> suggesting, that we round up all of Srila Prabhupadas disciples, and force

this down their throats, what good would that do?

>

 

To even consider such things hypothetically in a conversation to me seems

silly, almost offensive. Let the senior devotees decide for themselves who

they want to accept as a siksa guru. I mean, we let the new bhaktas do that.

 

As has been debated on other conferences, the siksa relationship is not bound

by time and place. Srila Prabhupada's association as a siksa guru is not

limited by his physical departure.

 

 

>

> Although I can appreciate that a person can go far simply by reading the

books, and I cant deny that there may be some mystical process by which one

can advance simply by reading.

>

 

 

Yes, that mystical process is called 'Krsna'. He is a person who reciprocates

as He is pleased to see fit.

 

If someone feels comfortable with some senior respectable vaisnava as a siksa

guru, than certainly they can pursue that relationship as they feel inspired.

I don't see why they might feel they need a public endorsement, though it is

natural to seek out the blessings of the devotees.

 

ys,

 

Sthita-dhi

[Guest guest]

On 25 May 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

 

> While it is pretty obvious that there were "crude" examples of

> this kind of not healthy social conditions (and that perhaps might

> still be some, here and there), I would suggest that it would be

> a bit unfair not to notice how there are *many* gurus in ISCKON

> who do NOT take the stance of being their disciples' menagers and

> the final authority "on so many things", but they leave it up to

> the local temple management structure.

>

 

I would propose there are many positive examples of brahmanas who do know how

to engage followers in a way that is cooperative with the general interests of

those who are more preoccupied with managerial issues. It is not even

something escoteric, on one level, simply an issue of just plain good

management principles that are also often engaged in even more ordinary

affairs.

 

A KC guru wishes to help his disciple move deeper into his relationship with

Krsna. Whether or not a disciple washes the pots or goes on sankirtan on a

particular day may not be the deciding factor that needs to be the main focus

of a healthy guru/disciple relationship.

 

Part of the training of a disciple is to learn how to associate in a pleasing

manner within the society of devotees. This is an important lesson for those

of us who find ourselves struggling with our neophyte tendencies.

 

ys,

 

Sthita-dhi

[Guest guest]

On 25 May 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

 

> While it is pretty obvious that there were "crude" examples of

> this kind of not healthy social conditions (and that perhaps might

> still be some, here and there), I would suggest that it would be

> a bit unfair not to notice how there are *many* gurus in ISCKON

> who do NOT take the stance of being their disciples' menagers and

> the final authority "on so many things", but they leave it up to

> the local temple management structure.

>

 

I would propose there are many positive examples of brahmanas who do know how

to engage followers in a way that is cooperative with the general interests of

those who are more preoccupied with managerial issues. It is not even

something escoteric, on one level, simply an issue of just plain good

management principles that are also often engaged in even more ordinary

affairs.

 

A KC guru wishes to help his disciple move deeper into his relationship with

Krsna. Whether or not a disciple washes the pots or goes on sankirtan on a

particular day may not be the deciding factor that needs to be the main focus

of a healthy guru/disciple relationship.

 

Part of the training of a disciple is to learn how to associate in a pleasing

manner within the society of devotees. This is an important lesson for those

of us who find ourselves struggling with our neophyte tendencies.

 

ys,

 

Sthita-dhi

[Guest guest]

On 25 May 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

> I think the maturing demographics of ISKCON and greater ISKCON is

> starting to provide a layer of elders who have experienced many things so

you are starting to have a corp of sadhus to balance the excesses of immature

gurus. At least we are getting in that direction.

>

 

Yes, I strongly agree. As for the early eighties, to a large degree we simply

had a bunch of back seat (and front line) quarterbacking with comparitively

little tangeable experience. Our problems were not just immature gurus.

 

As has been noted, even today we have problems, even if these problems are

only somewhat minimized by comparison. We will always have problems, that much

is gaurenteed. But with a culture of experienced sadhus, or elders, such

problems will continue to be minimized so those who are inexperienced do not

have to be unnecessarily in anxiety.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

On 25 May 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

> I think the maturing demographics of ISKCON and greater ISKCON is

> starting to provide a layer of elders who have experienced many things so

you are starting to have a corp of sadhus to balance the excesses of immature

gurus. At least we are getting in that direction.

>

 

Yes, I strongly agree. As for the early eighties, to a large degree we simply

had a bunch of back seat (and front line) quarterbacking with comparitively

little tangeable experience. Our problems were not just immature gurus.

 

As has been noted, even today we have problems, even if these problems are

only somewhat minimized by comparison. We will always have problems, that much

is gaurenteed. But with a culture of experienced sadhus, or elders, such

problems will continue to be minimized so those who are inexperienced do not

have to be unnecessarily in anxiety.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

> I think the maturing demographics of ISKCON and greater ISKCON is starting

> to provide a layer of elders who have experienced many things so you are

> starting to have a corp of sadhus to balance the excesses of immature

> gurus. At least we are getting in that direction.

 

Great point. I also feel this way.

[Guest guest]

> I think the maturing demographics of ISKCON and greater ISKCON is starting

> to provide a layer of elders who have experienced many things so you are

> starting to have a corp of sadhus to balance the excesses of immature

> gurus. At least we are getting in that direction.

 

Great point. I also feel this way.

[Guest guest]

> If someone feels comfortable with some senior respectable vaisnava as a

> siksa guru, than certainly they can pursue that relationship as they feel

> inspired. I don't see why they might feel they need a public endorsement,

> though it is natural to seek out the blessings of the devotees.

 

I agree with you completely on this issue. Siksa is a very personal thing.

My only poiont in bringing it up in discussion was that I perceived, that

some felt that personal siska was not necesary at all.

 

But you are completely right, these are affairs of the heart, and to suggest

that they can be leglislated, would be preposterous.

 

Ys Sd

[Guest guest]

> If someone feels comfortable with some senior respectable vaisnava as a

> siksa guru, than certainly they can pursue that relationship as they feel

> inspired. I don't see why they might feel they need a public endorsement,

> though it is natural to seek out the blessings of the devotees.

 

I agree with you completely on this issue. Siksa is a very personal thing.

My only poiont in bringing it up in discussion was that I perceived, that

some felt that personal siska was not necesary at all.

 

But you are completely right, these are affairs of the heart, and to suggest

that they can be leglislated, would be preposterous.

 

Ys Sd