Siksa as most important guru

[Guest guest]

On 19 May 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

> Diksa has more to do with institutional matters. Also very important

> and useful, but as a means, not an end.

 

 

There is also this:

 

"Diksa actually means initiating a disciple with transcendental knowledge by

which he becomes freed from all material contamination." CC Madya 4:11

 

 

This would seem to imply that the bonafide pure devotee siksa guru's

instructions can be the diksa for the disciple as well.

 

 

I feel that the following quote is very instructive:

 

"Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has given some practical hints to

the effect that an uttama-adhikari Vaisnava can be recognized

by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaisnavism.

One should not become a spiritual master unless he has

attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte

Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform

can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the

same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot

advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his

insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful

to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master." NOI

 

 

As I have stated previously, I will not be so presumptuous to say that there

are no uttama-adhikari's on the planet giving initiations. I simply do not

know. There are a lot of people born in India to good, Vaisnava brahmana

families in holy places who would seem prime candidates for such positions. Or

others possibly. But ISKCON has certainly had its share of "gurus" who fell

down for some reason or another. I do not believe an uttama-adhikari can fall

down. Can they? It does not mean that they cannot be devotees and godbrothers

who can give us very good advice and friendship - strengthening our spiritual

convictions.

 

The point, again, is if we have a fully qualified uttama-adhikari siksa guru,

available to all those seeking spiritual instruction (which IS diksa according

to the above quote from CC Madhya 4.11), in Srila Prabhupada, why try to

manufacture or rubber-stamp unqualified individuals as gurus, diksa or

otherwise, prematurely? We had only one guru when Srila Prabhupada was

"present" and everyone was receiving spiritual instruction/diksa from him even

if they never had a chance to see him or serve him directly/personally.

 

 

Distasteful but authorized corrective steps can be taken upon the unfortunate

circumstance of unqualified gurus:

 

" A devotee of Krsna, if need be, if he's unqualified guru .....Unqualified

guru means who does not know how to guide the disciple. Guru's duty is to

guide. So, such kind of guru can be at least rejected. That is Jiva

Gosvami's....Karya-karyam ajanatah. A guru who does not know what to do and

what not to do, but by mistake, by mistkenly I have accepted somebody as guru,

he can be rejected. By rejecting him, you can accept an actual bonafide guru.

So guru is not to be killed but he can be rejected. That is the injunction of

sastra."

(Bg. Lect. London Aug 5, 1973)