Diksha Outside the Sarasvata Parampara?

[Guruvani]

Did Srila Prabhupada ever recommend or approve of any other parampara aside from the Sarasvata Parampara?

 

Do the Sarasvatas really think they are "the chosen ones".

 

Well, here in this puport Srila Prabhupada mentions by name some of the more respectable and legitimate lineages of the Gaudiya Sampradaya apart from the Sarasvata line.

 

 

Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Adi 7.45

 

kasite lekhaka sudra-sricandrasekhara

tanra ghare rahila prabhu svatantra isvara

 

SYNONYMS

kasite -- in Varanasi; lekhaka -- writer; sudra -- born of a sudra family; sri-candrasekhara -- Candrasekhara; tanra ghare -- in his house; rahila -- remained; prabhu -- the Lord; svatantra -- independent; isvara -- the supreme controller.

 

 

TRANSLATION

This time Lord Caitanya stayed at the house of Candrasekhara, although he was regarded as a sudra or kayastha, for the Lord, as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is completely independent.

 

 

PURPORT

Lord Caitanya stayed at the house of Candrasekhara, a clerk, although a sannyasi is not supposed to reside in a sudra's house. Five hundred years ago, especially in Bengal, it was the system that persons who were born in the families of brahmanas were accepted as brahmanas, and all those who took birth in other families -- even the higher castes, namely, the ksatriyas and vaisyas -- were considered sudras non-brahmanas. Therefore although Sri Candrasekhara was a clerk from a kayastha family in upper India, he was considered a sudra. Similarly, vaisyas, especially those of the suvarna-vanik community, were accepted as sudras in Bengal, and even the vaidyas, who were generally physicians, were also considered sudras. Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, however, did not accept this artificial principle, which was introduced in society by self-interested men, and later the kayasthas, vaidyas and vaniks all began to accept the sacred thread, despite objections from the so-called brahmanas.

Before the time of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, the suvarna-vanik class was condemned by Ballal Sen, who was then the King of Bengal, due to a personal grudge. In Bengal the suvarna-vanik class are always very rich, for they are bankers and dealers in gold and silver. Therefore, Ballal Sen used to borrow money from a suvarna-vanik banker. Ballal Sen's bankruptcy later obliged the suvarna-vanik banker to stop advancing money to him, and thus Ballal Sen became angry and condemned the entire suvarna-vanik society as belonging to the sudra community. He tried to induce the brahmanas not to accept the suvarna-vaniks as followers of the instructions of the Vedas under the brahminical directions, but although some brahmanas approved of Ballal Sen's actions, others did not. Thus the brahmanas also became divided amongst themselves, and those who supported the suvarna-vanik class were rejected from the brahmana community. At the present day the same biases are still being followed.

There are many Vaisnava families in Bengal whose members, although not actually born brahmanas, act as acaryas by initiating disciples and offering the sacred thread as enjoined in the Vaisnava tantras. For example, in the families of Thakura Raghunandana Acarya, Thakura Krsnadasa, Navani Hodadeva (a disciple of Syamananda Prabhu), the sacred thread ceremony is performed, as it is for the caste Gosvamis, and this system has continued for the past three to four hundred years. Accepting disciples born in brahmana families, they are bona fide spiritual masters who have the facility to worship the salagrama-sila, which is worshiped with the Deity. As of this writing, salagrama-sila worship has not yet been introduced in our Krsna consciousness movement, but soon it will be introduced in all our temples as an essential function of arcana-marga and Rasikananda- (Deity worship).

 

[Guruvani]

I guess if there were devotees seeking formal diksha but not satisfied with the options available in ISKCON, the Gaudiya Matha, other Sarasvata camps or the babaji sects they might want to inquire into some of these traditional lines.

[krsna]

 

I guess if there were devotees seeking formal diksha but not satisfied with the options available in ISKCON, the Gaudiya Matha, other Sarasvata camps or the babaji sects they might want to inquire into some of these traditional lines.

An Open Letter to Bhagavat Prabhu

 

BY: NAVA JAUVANA DASA

 

Jun 17, INDIA (SUN) — Dear Bhagavat Prabhu, Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Since you took my reference to you in my last article published in the Sun so personally and defensively, I'm responding in the form of a personal letter. We're old godbrothers, after all, and this kind of exchange on a lively subject such as sadhu sanga is healthy. We need not be like lawyers trying to defeat or diminish the other. Rather, we're both seeking progress on the path of bhakti that was so mercifully and in my case at least, undeservedly gifted to us by our spiritual father, Srila Prabhupada, who is our eternal siksa and diksa guru. I'm sure there's no disagreement on this point. So in the spirit of open and loving discussion, I would like to analyze where we agree and disagree.

 

First of all, I fully accept Srila Prabhupada's words that you quoted from Nectar of Devotion: "There are many societies and associations of pure devotees." Of course there are, but when Srila Prabhupada wrote those words in 1969, he was actively preaching and acting as founder-acarya of his own society. He wasn't encouraging us to join the Gaudiya Math at that time. He wanted us to associate with him in his society, Iskcon. It is to address the anomalies that have appeared in that same society, Iskcon, that I've been writing the recent articles that appear in the Sun. As a son has responsibilities and rights also from his father, after the father's physical departure, each one of us has a duty in regards to the condition of our father's house, Iskcon. For myself at least, it's important to express my humble insights about the enervation and corruption I see in the society that Prabhupada made so much sacrifice to create and maintain. And to lament the loss of sadhu sanga for myself and my godbrothers.

 

It may be that to save ourselves, as you say, we need to find another society of pure devotees. I also mention that in my article, Dilemma of Association: "we must search out some devotees or community where we feel welcome. Or start our own sanga and become the leader. But we must commit to sadhu sanga, for the purpose of trying to please Srila Prabhupada." So there is no disagreement there.

 

In my Crystal Clear article, the point I make in reference to you is that while you don't state it explicitly, the implication you make is that all of Prabhupada's disciples need to find a living siksa guru. In your quote from Srila Prabhupada he talks about "the influence of a pure devotee." So implicit in this is the acceptance of a sanga with a living acarya whom one accepts as a pure devotee and siksa guru. Now in theory, that's wonderful. But spiritual practice is about the heart, not just about theory. I would be delighted to find a sanga with a pure devotee who, in my own heart, satisfies me similar to the way Srila Prabhupada did and still does. But such a relationship is not common and it's never something to be dictated, even by sastra. It is not a question of "MUST ACCEPT" as you write. It is a matter of the heart.

 

There's another point. That somehow Srila Prabhupada's vani and his position as our siksa guru, has become insufficient for us, Prabhupada's direct disciples. In my Crystal Clear article, I quoted a random sampling of six letters Prabhupada wrote to his disciples in 1968, just to demonstrate how rich, how complete, and how extraordinary Srila Prabhupada was, and still is, as a siksa guru. In my humble opinion there has never been a siksa guru who has given his followers more clarity, more compassion and more practical guidance than Srila Prabhupada. This is not to diminish any other pure devotee. Our line is full of the greatest maha-bhagavat Vaisnavas, eternal associates of the Lord, and even today, everyone is welcome to look for such pure devotees. But I can never understand how Prabhupada's position as "siksa guru extraordinaire" is underestimated and under-appreciated by us, his own direct disciples. And we have one advantage no other group of disciples ever had before: Srila Prabhupada made sure that every word he spoke was recorded. So it's all there, online and on Mp3. A special gift left to us by our most merciful guru maharaja.

 

That doesn't mean that for some godbrothers, a living siksa guru is not important or necessary. Bhagavat prabhu, I saw you in Vrindavan dham last Kartik, and I know you are with the sanga of Srila Narayan Maharaj. I respect your choice. I have many friends in that sanga, including Bhudhara prabhu, Vaikhanas Maharaj, Sajjana Maharaj, Padmanabha Maharaj, Ashram Maharaj, Vrindavan Vilasini mataji, and many others. My own son, a gurukuli, is a disciple of Srila Narayan Maharaj, and in previous years I personally associated with this sanga.

 

So I'm not speaking from a sectarian or xenophobic perspective about other Vaisnava sangas. I've never disparaged or discouraged anyone from following their heart. But in my articles I address another issue: the dire situation in Iskcon, because that was Prabhupada's heart. I see it as our duty as disciples to discuss this. If more godbrothers became passionate about expressing their own understanding of Srila Prabhupada's vision for sadhu sanga, it might in some way, at least for future generations, shed some light on the misunderstandings and mistakes that have so damaged Iskcon.

 

The other topic I try to address in my recent articles is a critical issue for myself and my godbrothers: how to take shelter of Srila Prabhupada in all circumstances. I can quote tons of sastra to support this point, but I prefer to speak from my personal experience. When I forget Prabhupada I'm lost, no matter who I am associating with or what I'm doing. But when I remember him, try to follow his example and feel his mood within me, my spiritual life is progressive. I'm not saying it's easy, or that I'm successful, but for me, there's no shortcut.

 

This is our test. If we keep him in our hearts and in our actions during this life, there is every chance Prabhupada will be with us at the moment of our passing from this world, which is coming soon for all of us. And that's the moment that counts.

 

I wish you all success and inspiration, Bhagavat Prabhu, on your journey back to Godhead. I hope you wish me the same. Srila Prabhupada jayate!

Your servant,

nava jauvana das

 

Check out my blog: http://jauvana-navajauvana.blogspot.com Free song downloads: http://www.jauvana.com

 

[Guruvani]

Most often you see this quote from NOD "There are many societies and associations of pure devotees" used for the purpose of defending those ISKCON devotees who have left ISKCON to join the party of Narayana Maharaja or some other Matha or association of devotees in India.

 

However, I have tried to show with a reference from the actual books of Srila Prabhupada that Srila Prabhupada did in fact endorse some other parivars in India as being "bona fide spiritual masters".

 

who knows?

Maybe someday one or more of these other traditional Gaudiya parivars might become a very prominent and powerful parivar with an international following?

 

I think it is likely.

 

The options aren't limited to ISKCON, Gaudiya Matha, the babajis of Vrindavan etc.

 

There are other bona fide lineages in the Gaudiya sampradaya and it's very possible that some other parivar aside from western franchises we have today might rise to prominence in the decades and centuries to come.

 

If someone wants formal diksha from a recognized Gaudiya parivar other than what is currently available in the western world, then there are apparently other parivars there if someone can make that connection.

 

I don't know how that could be done, as I have not spent much time in India to research these things.

[Guest guest]

Bhagavat Prabhu is absolutely correct and has got it spot on. Living diksa guru is a necessity, not formalty. All glories to Bhagavat Prabhu's article!

 

 

An Open Letter to Bhagavat Prabhu

 

BY: NAVA JAUVANA DASA

 

Jun 17, INDIA (SUN) — Dear Bhagavat Prabhu, Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Since you took my reference to you in published in the Sun so personally and defensively, I'm responding in the form of a personal letter. We're old godbrothers, after all, and this kind of exchange on a lively subject such as sadhu sanga is healthy. We need not be like lawyers trying to defeat or diminish the other. Rather, we're both seeking progress on the path of bhakti that was so mercifully and in my case at least, undeservedly gifted to us by our spiritual father, Srila Prabhupada, who is our eternal siksa and diksa guru. I'm sure there's no disagreement on this point. So in the spirit of open and loving discussion, I would like to analyze where we agree and disagree.

 

First of all, I fully accept Srila Prabhupada's words that from Nectar of Devotion: "There are many societies and associations of pure devotees." Of course there are, but when Srila Prabhupada wrote those words in 1969, he was actively preaching and acting as founder-acarya of his own society. He wasn't encouraging us to join the Gaudiya Math at that time. He wanted us to associate with him in his society, Iskcon. It is to address the anomalies that have appeared in that same society, Iskcon, that I've been writing the recent articles that appear in the Sun. As a son has responsibilities and rights also from his father, after the father's physical departure, each one of us has a duty in regards to the condition of our father's house, Iskcon. For myself at least, it's important to express my humble insights about the enervation and corruption I see in the society that Prabhupada made so much sacrifice to create and maintain. And to lament the loss of sadhu sanga for myself and my godbrothers.

 

It may be that to save ourselves, as you say, we need to find another society of pure devotees. I also mention that in my article, Dilemma of Association: "we must search out some devotees or community where we feel welcome. Or start our own sanga and become the leader. But we must commit to sadhu sanga, for the purpose of trying to please Srila Prabhupada." So there is no disagreement there.

 

In my article, the point I make in reference to you is that while you don't state it explicitly, the implication you make is that all of Prabhupada's disciples need to find a living siksa guru. In your quote from Srila Prabhupada he talks about "the influence of a pure devotee." So implicit in this is the acceptance of a sanga with a living acarya whom one accepts as a pure devotee and siksa guru. Now in theory, that's wonderful. But spiritual practice is about the heart, not just about theory. I would be delighted to find a sanga with a pure devotee who, in my own heart, satisfies me similar to the way Srila Prabhupada did and still does. But such a relationship is not common and it's never something to be dictated, even by sastra. It is not a question of "MUST ACCEPT" as you write. It is a matter of the heart.

 

There's another point. That somehow Srila Prabhupada's vani and his position as our siksa guru, has become insufficient for us, Prabhupada's direct disciples. In my Crystal Clear article, I quoted a random sampling of six letters Prabhupada wrote to his disciples in 1968, just to demonstrate how rich, how complete, and how extraordinary Srila Prabhupada was, and still is, as a siksa guru. In my humble opinion there has never been a siksa guru who has given his followers more clarity, more compassion and more practical guidance than Srila Prabhupada. This is not to diminish any other pure devotee. Our line is full of the greatest maha-bhagavat Vaisnavas, eternal associates of the Lord, and even today, everyone is welcome to look for such pure devotees. But I can never understand how Prabhupada's position as "siksa guru extraordinaire" is underestimated and under-appreciated by us, his own direct disciples. And we have one advantage no other group of disciples ever had before: Srila Prabhupada made sure that every word he spoke was recorded. So it's all there, online and on Mp3. A special gift left to us by our most merciful guru maharaja.

 

That doesn't mean that for some godbrothers, a living siksa guru is not important or necessary. Bhagavat prabhu, I saw you in Vrindavan dham last Kartik, and I know you are with the sanga of Srila Narayan Maharaj. I respect your choice. I have many friends in that sanga, including Bhudhara prabhu, Vaikhanas Maharaj, Sajjana Maharaj, Padmanabha Maharaj, Ashram Maharaj, Vrindavan Vilasini mataji, and many others. My own son, a gurukuli, is a disciple of Srila Narayan Maharaj, and in previous years I personally associated with this sanga.

 

So I'm not speaking from a sectarian or xenophobic perspective about other Vaisnava sangas. I've never disparaged or discouraged anyone from following their heart. But in my articles I address another issue: the dire situation in Iskcon, because that was Prabhupada's heart. I see it as our duty as disciples to discuss this. If more godbrothers became passionate about expressing their own understanding of Srila Prabhupada's vision for sadhu sanga, it might in some way, at least for future generations, shed some light on the misunderstandings and mistakes that have so damaged Iskcon.

 

The other topic I try to address in my recent articles is a critical issue for myself and my godbrothers: how to take shelter of Srila Prabhupada in all circumstances. I can quote tons of sastra to support this point, but I prefer to speak from my personal experience. When I forget Prabhupada I'm lost, no matter who I am associating with or what I'm doing. But when I remember him, try to follow his example and feel his mood within me, my spiritual life is progressive. I'm not saying it's easy, or that I'm successful, but for me, there's no shortcut.

 

This is our test. If we keep him in our hearts and in our actions during this life, there is every chance Prabhupada will be with us at the moment of our passing from this world, which is coming soon for all of us. And that's the moment that counts.

 

I wish you all success and inspiration, Bhagavat Prabhu, on your journey back to Godhead. I hope you wish me the same. Srila Prabhupada jayate!

Your servant,

nava jauvana das

 

 

[Guruvani]

Srila Prabhupada authorized for ISKCON that disciples could be intiated by the representative of the spritual master.

He has every right and authority to do that and the opinion of some little sadhaka devotee cannot challenge the authority of Srila Prabhupada in ISKCON.

 

Why do people want to keep trying to tell the acharya what he can and cannot do?

 

Srila Prabhupada established quite soundly that he was accepting disciples through representatives in ISKCON.

 

Nobody can undo that with the opinion of some neophtye sadhaka who does know what he is talking about.

 

The orders of Srila Prabhupada are shastra as much as any sruti or smriti is shastra. There is absolutely no difference.

 

What Srila Prabhupada gave in his instructions are no less than anything given by the previous rishis and acharyas.

[Guruvani]

We also know that Srila Saraswati Thakur took sannyasa and the sannyasa mantra from a picture of his gurudeva.

 

So, some will argue that it was not "diksha", but it was in fact the taking of a mantra and sannyasa order from a picture of a deceased Vaishnava.

 

The taking of a mantra from the purvacharya was first shown by Srila Saraswati Thakur.

[Guruvani]

It's quite obvious that Srila Saraswati Thakur was an empowered acharya who established a parivar that broke from orthodox, traditional patterns and established a new precedent and a new standard for the parampara system that ultimately culimated in the ritvik system of Srila Prabhupada and Srila Sridhar Maharaja.

[Guest guest]

You have a point but lets not kid ourselves by thinking we are on the same level as Srila Saraswati Thakur.

 

It is best to just follow the system as recommended by the Acaryas and take initiation from a physically present guru and not a picture.

 

Those who choose a picture are destroying their spiritual life.

 

 

We also know that Srila Saraswati Thakur took sannyasa and the sannyasa mantra from a picture of his gurudeva.

 

So, some will argue that it was not "diksha", but it was in fact the taking of a mantra and sannyasa order from a picture of a deceased Vaishnava.

 

The taking of a mantra from the purvacharya was first shown by Srila Saraswati Thakur.

[Guruvani]

 

.

 

It is best to just follow the system as recommended by the Acaryas and take initiation from a physically present guru and not a picture.

 

 

 

can you please show us in shastra where the term "physically present guru" is required?

 

I need some quotes for my research project.

[Guest guest]

Here's a good subject for your research project ... "why Lord Caitanya, the Supreme Lord, took <B>formal Diksa initiation <B> from Sri Isvara Puri"

 

 

can you please show us in shastra where the term "physically present guru" is required?

 

I need some quotes for my research project.

[Guest guest]

Here's a good subject for your research project ... "why Lord Caitanya, the Supreme Lord, took <B>formal Diksa initiation <B> from Sri Isvara Puri, instead of just reading a book and claiming to be initiated!"

 

 

can you please show us in shastra where the term "physically present guru" is required?

 

I need some quotes for my research project.

[Guruvani]

 

Here's a good subject for your research project ... "why Lord Caitanya, the Supreme Lord, took formal Diksa initiation from Sri Isvara Puri, instead of just reading a book and claiming to be initiated!"

we aren't Sri Caitanya and he came to deliver all the living entities in the universe.

I don't think he had formal diksha in mind for every living entity in the universe.

If the vision of Mahaprabhu to deliver all the souls in the universe is to be realized, then you people are going to have to get over this formal diksha fetish and get practical.

[Guest guest]

Seems like you don't like that subject much.

 

So here, another interesting subject for your research ... "Why Srila Prabhupada took <B>formal diksa intitiation</B> from Srila Saraswati Thakur instead of simply reading Srila Saraswati Thakur's books and claiming to be initiated!"

 

 

we aren't Sri Caitanya and he came to deliver all the living entities in the universe.

I don't think he had formal diksha in mind for every living entity in the universe.

 

If the vision of Mahaprabhu to deliver all the souls in the universe is to be realized, then you people are going to have to get over this formal diksha fetish and get practical.

 

[Guruvani]

 

Seems like you don't like that subject much.

 

So here, another interesting subject for your research ... "Why Srila Prabhupada took formal diksa intitiation from Srila Saraswati Thakur instead of simply reading Srila Saraswati Thakur's books and claiming to be initiated!"

Srila Prabhupada is the jagat guru and he came to deliver all the suffering souls of the world.

We don't need to imitate the jagat-guru.

 

If the vision of Srila Prabhupada to deliver all the fallen souls of the western world is to be realized then you people are going to have to get over your formal diksha fetish and get practical.

 

You have obviously ignored the statements Srila Prabhupada has made that following his instructions is more important than formal initiation.

[Guruvani]

see, there is no reason to push or cram diksha on anyone.

 

if a person is inspired to take diksha from a spiritual master, then that is the only time one should take diksha.

 

this formal diksha cult of cramming diksha down the throat of new devotees is actually against the principles of Krishna consciousness.

 

when the time is right a person will try to find a qualified diksha guru.

 

the frenzied neophytes running around the planet today preaching the necessity of formal diksha are enemies of the Krishna consciousness movement.

 

they have a dogma that they think makes them better than other devotees, but actually that is just their false ego.

 

it is not a spiritual truth.

[stonehearted]

 

see, there is no reason to push or cram diksha on anyone.

 

if a person is inspired to take diksha from a spiritual master, then that is the only time one should take diksha.

. . .

 

when the time is right a person will try to find a qualified diksha guru.

Well said. Srila Prabhupada sometimes said that not everyone needs a spiritual master; only those serious about spritual inquiry need sad-guru. By the same token, only those whose faitih in the association, instruction, and service of a particular devotee has been raised to the point where, as Srila Sridhar Maharaja might say, he or she feels "I must take shelter here" needs to take initiation. And, as I've suggested before, that initiation may look different from what we might expect.

 

Moreover, if we understand initiation properly (and I know this has been said in different ways by different devotees here), we see that it's not just the moment of transmission of the mantra by the guru and promises of submissive inquiry and deep engagement in responsible service by the disciple. Diksa is the ongoing process of giving transcendental knowledge, and the moment of mutual commitment is just a highlight in that relationship.

 

One thing that happened recently in our family may help clarify what I mean. (Than again, it may be so mundane that it could just muddy things.) My older daughter and her husband have been in a progressively committed relationship for a couple of years. She was never in a hurry to "get married" and sometimes disparaged the notion of marriage, probably because she has seen so many failed marriages (and worse). But when he asked her last year to marry him, she immediately--and joyfully--agreed. They were married legally early this spring, and they came here to the Big Island to have a small, intimate, informal ceremony, over which I presided. That's when they put on their rings, and that's when she said she considered them married. But the relationship had been growing in many ways for some time before that, and will continue to grow over the next few decades (as has my own relationship with my wife). The "wedding" was just a highlight in that relationship, a day when, at Honaunau in Kona, they solidified and, yes, formalized that relationship by exchanging promises of love and support.

[stonehearted]

I have a question for the moderators. How is it that I'm designated as the starter of this thread? This is Guruvani's thread, and I only have one post. What gives?

[krsna]

 

Well said. Srila Prabhupada sometimes said that not everyone needs a spiritual master; only those serious about spritual inquiry need sad-guru. By the same token, only those whose faitih in the association, instruction, and service of a particular devotee has been raised to the point where, as Srila Sridhar Maharaja might say, he or she feels "I must take shelter here" needs to take initiation. And, as I've suggested before, that initiation may look different from what we might expect.

 

Moreover, if we understand initiation properly (and I know this has been said in different ways by different devotees here), we see that it's not just the moment of transmission of the mantra by the guru and promises of submissive inquiry and deep engagement in responsible service by the disciple. Diksa is the ongoing process of giving transcendental knowledge, and the moment of mutual commitment is just a highlight in that relationship.

 

One thing that happened recently in our family may help clarify what I mean. (Than again, it may be so mundane that it could just muddy things.) My older daughter and her husband have been in a progressively committed relationship for a couple of years. She was never in a hurry to "get married" and sometimes disparaged the notion of marriage, probably because she has seen so many failed marriages (and worse). But when he asked her last year to marry him, she immediately--and joyfully--agreed. They were married legally early this spring, and they came here to the Big Island to have a small, intimate, informal ceremony, over which I presided. That's when they put on their rings, and that's when she said she considered them married. But the relationship had been growing in many ways for some time before that, and will continue to grow over the next few decades (as has my own relationship with my wife). The "wedding" was just a highlight in that relationship, a day when, at Honaunau in Kona, they solidified and, yes, formalized that relationship by exchanging promises of love and support.

 

Nice example of commitment before the "marriage". I commit to the guru who can give me KRSNA and thus am married to him in service, inquiry and surrender.

[Admin5]

 

I have a question for the moderators. How is it that I'm designated as the starter of this thread? This is Guruvani's thread, and I only have one post. What gives?

We are not sure why it happened, but the correction has been made.

[Guruvani]

 

I have a question for the moderators. How is it that I'm designated as the starter of this thread? This is Guruvani's thread, and I only have one post. What gives?

don't feel so special Babhruji, I ended up with a thread that I didn't start as well a few days ago.

I couldn't understand why, but I just rolled with it.

 

the topic was "the dilemma of association".

 

It got locked anyway.

so, it doesn't really matter to me.

 

 

[moderator's note: we just corrected it.]

[Guruvani]

Srila Prabhupada wrote in Sri Caitanya Caritamrita something about his idea of the initiation system he wanted for ISKCON. No doubt this is a departure from orthodox standards, but then again it's obvious Srila Prabhupada had the power and authority to adapt and adjust things for bringing Krishna consciousness to the western world.

 

In Madhya 15, 108 purport he writes:

 

One should therefore be initiated properly according to revealed scriptures under the direction of a bona fide spiritual master.

 

Here Srila Prabhupada is explaining the principle with which many devotees in ISKCON were initiated - "under the direction of a bona fide spiritual master".

 

I don't see any timeline on that system that Srila Prabhupada established in ISKCON. Personally, I don't see why that system had to be stopped after his passing.

In the last days Srila Prabhupada instructed his leading mean several times that "don't change anything after I am gone".

 

So, to me, "don't change anything" includes the initiation system that he had set-up in ISKCON.

 

Srila Prabhupada broke from the "tradition" in more than one way.

 

Why after his departure these innovations were supposed to be reversed is just not acceptable to me.

 

Srila Prabhupada departed the traditional standard himself.

Why then after his departure is ISKCON supposed to now become "traditional"?

 

"Under the direction of a bona fide spiritual master"

 

This is how ISKCON was supposed to conduct initiations.

 

But, then it got changed to "directly by one of the hundred diksha gurus in ISKCON".

 

That was not the system Srila Prabhupada gave for ISKCON.

[krsna]

 

Srila Prabhupada wrote in Sri Caitanya Caritamrita something about his idea of the initiation system he wanted for ISKCON. No doubt this is a departure from orthodox standards, but then again it's obvious Srila Prabhupada had the power and authority to adapt and adjust things for bringing Krishna consciousness to the western world.

 

In Madhya 15, 108 purport he writes:

 

 

Here Srila Prabhupada is explaining the principle with which many devotees in ISKCON were initiated - "under the direction of a bona fide spiritual master".

 

I don't see any timeline on that system that Srila Prabhupada established in ISKCON. Personally, I don't see why that system had to be stopped after his passing.

In the last days Srila Prabhupada instructed his leading mean several times that "don't change anything after I am gone".

 

So, to me, "don't change anything" includes the initiation system that he had set-up in ISKCON.

 

Srila Prabhupada broke from the "tradition" in more than one way.

 

Why after his departure these innovations were supposed to be reversed is just not acceptable to me.

 

Srila Prabhupada departed the traditional standard himself.

Why then after his departure is ISKCON supposed to now become "traditional"?

 

"Under the direction of a bona fide spiritual master"

 

This is how ISKCON was supposed to conduct initiations.

 

But, then it got changed to "directly by one of the hundred diksha gurus in ISKCON".

 

That was not the system Srila Prabhupada gave for ISKCON.

#Good points from that small hut in Florida:

 

 

 

 

BY: KSHAMABUDDHI DASA

 

 

 

 

 

Oct 17, USA (SUN) —

In the article "Duties of GBC and Guru in

ISKCON

", Prahladananda Swami has shown a measure of concern and interest in the well-being and success of

ISKCON

. Unfortunately, he has pontificated an erroneous doctrine that has neither foundation in the dictums of Srila Prabhupada or the shastra.

 

 

In gist, he has advocated a concept and a system of authority that has neither basis in any teaching of Srila Prabhupada, the predecessor acharyas or the shastra.

 

 

Prahladananda Swami wrote:

 

• 
  
  "The initiating
  gurus
  in
  ISKCON
  derive their authority from the orders of the previous acharyas, as revealed by Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada clearly established
  ISKCON
  ’s system of management with Temple Presidents, Secretaries, and Treasurers, under the supervision of a GBC representative and ultimately the GBC Body. He gave no managerial position to the initiating
  gurus
  within
  ISKCON
  . Therefore, even after initiating disciples, they are subordinate to the managerial authorities established by Srila Prabhupada."
  
  

 

 

 

The proposal that

ISKCON

diksha

gurus

derive their authority from the previous acharyas is only partially correct. In essence, a

diksha

guru represents directly Lord Krishna as Madana-mohana vigraha. The initiating spiritual master as such is understood to be the prakasha-vigraha direct manifestation of Krishna.

 

 

The proposal that the acharya – the

diksha

guru is subordinate to a governing body commission is to say that the acharya – the

diksha

guru must answer to majority vote of non-acharyas. Yet, there has never been any such system ever described or prescribed by the previous acharyas or the shastra. In fact, Srila Prabhupada specifically rejects this idea.

• 
  
  
  
  Nectar of Instruction text 6, purport –
  
  
  "The advanced Vaisnava is always situated as the spiritual master, and the neophyte is always considered his disciple. The spiritual master must not be subjected to the advice of a disciple, nor should a spiritual master be obliged to take instructions from those who are not his disciples."
  
  

 

 

 

A spiritual master is therefore not subject to the advice or discipline of any committee or governing body. The proposal of Prahladananda Swami that a genuine spiritual master is under the authority of a governing body defies the authority that shastra has attributed to the acharya. There is no way to check the authority of an acharya with bureaucratic committee or majority vote. It is an absurd proposition to profess such.

 

 

The attempt of the

ISKCON

GBC to claim authority over an acharya or

diksha

guru is an insult to the authority and power that an actual acharya or guru possesses.

 

 

Of course one could say that an acharya can voluntarily submit to the governing body commission and agree to be regulated and legislated by the committee, yet the voluntary relinquishing of authority by an acharya to a committee is in fact an admission that one does not possess the actual realization and knowledge that a genuine acharya must possess.

 

 

What Prahladananda Swami is proposing in a GBC dominated acharya class of devotee in

ISKCON

is an affront to the authority and power that a genuine acharya must be afforded and acknowledged.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada never mentioned or described any situation wherein

gurus

in

ISKCON

would be subordinate to the GBC. If Srila Prabhupada would have envisioned a situation in

ISKCON

where there would be an acharya class in conflict with GBC authority, he surely would have given some instructions on how the acharyas of

ISKCON

would relate to the GBC authority. The lack of instruction by Srila Prabhupada on how acharyas would be subordinate to the GBC in

ISKCON

, when he in fact said that acharyas are not subject to the advice or strictures of anyone, precludes such a scenario from the

ISKCON

society.

 

 

To have an acharya class of

gurus

in

ISKCON

undermines the GBC authority, as no committee of managers can ever claim to have authority over a guru or an acharya. There is no precedent either in shastra, the instructions of Srila Prabhupada or anything given by the previous acharyas that authorize any system of acharyas having to answer to a committee of majority vote. The system of majority vote has no place in a genuine spiritual order of acharyas.

 

 

Either the GBC must accept that acharyas in

ISKCON

are independent and empowered by Madana-mohana vigraha, or they must ban anyone claiming acharyaship in

ISKCON

successive to Srila Prabhupada. The system of acharyas being subordinate to a GBC is unprecedented, unauthorized and improper. To assume acharyaship in

ISKCON

is to supercede GBC authority. Srila Prabhupada established

ISKCON

under the managing authority of the GBC. The GBC has no right or authority over an acharya. Such a system of acharyas answering to a committee of democratic vote is a complete concoction and was never mentioned or alluded to by anything Srila Prabhupada had ever instructed.

 

 

ISKCON

must abide by the arrangements and instructions of Srila Prabhupada. Fabricating a false system of GBC dominated acharyas has no authority in anything Srila Prabhupada ever instructed. The attempt to subjugate an acharya class of devotee in

ISKCON

to the GBC is an insult to the power of an acharya and all the predecessor acharyas.

 

 

As such, the remedy that Prahladananda Swami prescribes for

ISKCON

’s woes is not the solution to the problem.

ISKCON

needs to follow the system established by Srila Prabhupada. The GBC has no authority to fabricate a false system of acharyas answering to majority vote of a committee of managers. Such a proposal is preposterous.

 

 

Prahladananda Swami wrote:

• 
  
  "Srila Prabhupada created the GBC Body to oversee that his teachings are properly implemented within
  ISKCON
  . These teachings direct that everyone in
  ISKCON
  , including initiating and instructing
  gurus
  , work cooperatively under Srila Prabhupada's authority system to spread Krishna consciousness.
  
  

 

 

This is false and a fabrication, as Srila Prabhupada never instructed anything about

diksha

gurus

or acharyas in

ISKCON

being subordinate to a committee. In fact, in his books he directly rejects such a proposal.