Guest guest Posted May 24, 1999 Report Share Posted May 24, 1999 > > Or am I too odd? > > Not at all odd. Good idea, lets drop it till then. Agree. Thank you for bearing with me. ys mnd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 24, 1999 Report Share Posted May 24, 1999 "WWW: Janesvara (Dasa) ACBSP (Syracuse - USA)" wrote: > [Text 2338649 from COM] > > On 22 May 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote: > > > Taking diksa from a departed guru has no precedence in the > > history of the Parampara, > > What is it that happened between Narottama dasa Thakur and Srila Visvanatha > Cakravarti Thakur? Narottama dasa Thakur was "departed" for 100 years but > Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur accepted him as his guru. This is in our > parampara. > > "Regarding parampara system: there is nothing to wonder for big gaps.[...] we > find in the Bhagavad-gita that the Gita was taught to the sungod, some > millions of years ago, but Krishna has mentioned only three names in this > parampara system--namely, Vivasvan, Manu, and Iksvaku; and so these gaps do > not hamper from understanding the parampara system. We have to pick up the > prominent acaryas, and follow from him.[...] We have to pick up from the > authority of the acharya in whatever sampradaya we belong to." > (Letter Dayananda 4/12/68) Stupendous. I cannot believe that you are deliberately misconstruing this. It seems quite clear that Narottama dasa Thakur was Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur's *siksa* guru. Where is the evidence that he was his *diksa* guru. Indeed, is not this whole recitation of parampara the source of our conclusion that "siksa is more important than diksa"? your servant, Hare Krsna dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 1999 Report Share Posted May 25, 1999 On 24 May 1999, Hare Krsna dasi wrote: > Stupendous. I cannot believe that you are deliberately misconstruing this. It > seems quite clear that Narottama dasa Thakur was Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti > Thakur's *siksa* guru. Where is the evidence that he was his *diksa* guru. Duh. That was my whole point. I never said Visvanatha Cakravarti took diksa from Narottama das Thakur, did I? Seems the relationship worked out just fine for Visvanatha Cakravarti. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 1999 Report Share Posted May 25, 1999 >> Stupendous. I cannot believe that you are deliberately misconstruing this. >It >> seems quite clear that Narottama dasa Thakur was Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti >> Thakur's *siksa* guru. Where is the evidence that he was his *diksa* guru. > > >Duh. That was my whole point. I never said Visvanatha Cakravarti took diksa >from Narottama das Thakur, did I? > >Seems the relationship worked out just fine for Visvanatha Cakravarti. OK, now I'm with you and can finally answer your question to me. Yes, of course I think Prabhupada can be the only guru to newcomers, who don't feel inspired by any of the current gurus. And yes, I believe that they can still make spiritual advancement, develop a relationship with him and ultimately go back Home. But only as siksa, not diksa guru. The fact that I hope they also do meet up with other gurus who inspire them (as diksa or siksa gurus) is a separate issue. Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.