Never Leave ISKCON

[Guruvani]

 

The jugment has been made. He should be a diksa guru. Prabhupada recommended that only uttama adhkari should be initiating. So with that 'should' - he is a pure devotee.

 

It is not for any of us to judge.

If he feels that it is his duty to be diksha guru, then it is not my business to be the judge that he should not.

None of us can judge.

 

He certainly has the outward symbols of the Maha-Bhagavat with proper diksha, tilak, tulasi beads and his sadhana life.

 

So, if you follow the standard guidelines of judging the Maha-Bhagavat then he has that.

Internally, none of us can really know.

 

If he feels the call to be diksha guru then that is between him and Srila Prabhupada and is not for you or I to judge.

 

We should respect his decisions as a senior devotee and give him benefit of the doubt unless we have very strong evidence to prove otherwise.

[Guest guest]

I have no reason to leave ISKCON. I read Srila Prabhupada's books and try to follow and I associate with others in a humble mood. In this way I have no problem with anyone. I am not trying to impose my views on others just because I think them right. Srila Prabhupada is quoted as having said that if someone comes and says something contradictory then chaos will set in. Many people are very anxious to bring outside influences into ISKCON in the name of higher Bhakti. Tell me whether ISKCON gurus are allowed to give class in other none ISKCON groups. That fact that Srila Prabhupada is no longer with us does not mean that we should be jumping from group to group searching for so called advanced Bhakti. Tell me when Srila Bhaktisidhanta left to whom did his disciples go to become the gurus they became? When Vapu is no longer, Vani is sufficient. I have seen devotees going from ISKCON from group to group and finally to maya. This jumping from place to place is due to low image problem. What is needed is a psychiatrist and not so called higher Bhakti. In Iskcon I can go all over the world enjoying devotee association but this is not available to the fault finders. The fact that some people have been mistreated in ISkcon does not make her a demoniac organisation. It is a great fallacy and therefore an offense to think that all ISKCON devotees are neophytes and else where they are all advanced. In all groups there devotees and demons. I am more comfortable with a GBC tracking down deviant gurus and dealing with them even imperfectly than dealing with independent gurus who MIGHT BE DEMONS IN DISGUISE. The fact that a so called self proclaimed guru is doing his own thing without control does not make him perfect. I see that many devotees who left ISKCON long ago are still very bitter. This is a sign of attachment to ISKCON. It is the attitude of someone neglected by a loved one. This can be resolved by visiting ISKCON from time to time. The nice association you see that will help reduce your bitterness. Even devotees in ISKCON are growing, you know! To finish let me remind us of the teaching of the Gita which says we are the cause of our suffering and enjoyment in this world not others. Is it because we do not accept this GITA teaching that we are so anxious to blame others for distress which was due to our own ACTIVITIES?

 

Signed: RKD

[Murali_Mohan_das]

In the beginning stages, we *do* need to be a bit greedy (despite my earlier Kennedy comment).

 

We *do* need to be careful to avoid offending the Vaishnavas.

 

If someone cannot stay within ISKCON in the mood of humility that you have displayed, if they will be preoccupied with finding fault and making offense, then who can say that it is not best for that person to leave and find a more suitable environment.

 

Of course, as you observe, to simply go from camp to camp may not be in our best interest either.

 

In my own life, through the good influence of my Mother and Step-Father, I came in contact with Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math and it's Principal Servitor.

 

I was not camp-hopping at that time. When I first saw Gurudev, I was a smug, self-satisfied (and not in the sense of atmarama), prick of a college senior (well, not much has changed, but I'm no longer in college). When I saw him for the second time in 1996, I was depressed and suicidal.

 

I sought his shelter out of *desperation*, not with the sense that I'd test driven all the latest model gurus and found him to be the best guru for the money.

 

Each person's experience is unique. Some aspirants were certainly forcibly *driven* away from ISKCON. Some grew disgusted by what they saw and left. Some were disgusted by what they saw and stayed to try to help. Some saw beyond the mundane and realized that all of this is by and for the Ultimate Good.

 

 

I have no reason to leave ISKCON. I read Srila Prabhupada's books and try to follow and I associate with others in a humble mood. In this way I have no problem with anyone. I am not trying to impose my views on others just because I think them right. Srila Prabhupada is quoted as having said that if someone comes and says something contradictory then chaos will set in. Many people are very anxious to bring outside influences into ISKCON in the name of higher Bhakti. Tell me whether ISKCON gurus are allowed to give class in other none ISKCON groups. That fact that Srila Prabhupada is no longer with us does not mean that we should be jumping from group to group searching for so called advanced Bhakti. Tell me when Srila Bhaktisidhanta left to whom did his disciples go to become the gurus they became? When Vapu is no longer, Vani is sufficient. I have seen devotees going from ISKCON from group to group and finally to maya. This jumping from place to place is due to low image problem. What is needed is a psychiatrist and not so called higher Bhakti. In Iskcon I can go all over the world enjoying devotee association but this is not available to the fault finders. The fact that some people have been mistreated in ISkcon does not make her a demoniac organisation. It is a great fallacy and therefore an offense to think that all ISKCON devotees are neophytes and else where they are all advanced. In all groups there devotees and demons. I am more comfortable with a GBC tracking down deviant gurus and dealing with them even imperfectly than dealing with independent gurus who MIGHT BE DEMONS IN DISGUISE. The fact that a so called self proclaimed guru is doing his own thing without control does not make him perfect. I see that many devotees who left ISKCON long ago are still very bitter. This is a sign of attachment to ISKCON. It is the attitude of someone neglected by a loved one. This can be resolved by visiting ISKCON from time to time. The nice association you see that will help reduce your bitterness. Even devotees in ISKCON are growing, you know! To finish let me remind us of the teaching of the Gita which says we are the cause of our suffering and enjoyment in this world not others. Is it because we do not accept this GITA teaching that we are so anxious to blame others for distress which was due to our own ACTIVITIES?

 

Signed: RKD

[Guest guest]

 

It is not for any of us to judge.

If he feels that it is his duty to be diksha guru, then it is not my business to be the judge that he should not.

None of us can judge.

 

 

 

If he feels the call to be diksha guru then that is between him and Srila Prabhupada and is not for you or I to judge.

 

 

We better judge, otherwise we are fools. Prabhupada exhorts us to examine the guru carefully using sastra and intelligence. Blind faith is dangerous.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

We better judge, otherwise we are fools. Prabhupada exhorts us to examine the guru carefully using sastra and intelligence. Blind faith is dangerous.

 

The only need to evaluate the sincerity of the Guru is for the aspiring servant. The only reason you'd need to scrutinize any guru that closely is if you are considering asking for their shelter.

 

Other than that, perhaps something might be said about somebody like Sai Baba for the sake of preaching, but even there it's better to let Gurudev make any such pronouncements that to presume to make them ourselves.

[Guest guest]

 

The only need to evaluate the sincerity of the Guru is for the aspiring servant. The only reason you'd need to scrutinize any guru that closely is if you are considering asking for their shelter.

 

Other than that, perhaps something might be said about somebody like Sai Baba for the sake of preaching, but even there it's better to let Gurudev make any such pronouncements that to presume to make them ourselves.

Sentimental nonsense. If sincerity made us pure - then what need is there of sadhana -bhakti.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Sentimental nonsense. If sincerity made us pure - then what need is there of sadhana -bhakti.

 

In what way does passing judgement on other Vaishnavas' sincerity help purify us?

[Guest guest]

 

In what way does passing judgement on other Vaishnavas' sincerity help purify us?

I didnt' make the judgment. I'm asking for definitions. Criteria so they can be applied. Getting sappy about judging is not the point. Vaisnavism is not a sentimental path.

[Guruvani]

 

We better judge, otherwise we are fools. Prabhupada exhorts us to examine the guru carefully using sastra and intelligence. Blind faith is dangerous.

I have already been initiated by the system Srila Prabhupada established in ISKCON. I am officially an initiate of Srila Prabhupada, though I certainly can't claim to be a disciple.

 

So, my judgement has already been made.

I accepted Srila Prabhupada.

 

It is now NOT my problem to judge whom others accept as their diksha guru.

It is none of OUR business.

 

So, I don't need to judge all the others, that is for their disciples to judge.

 

It's not an issue I have to be concerned with.

 

The rest of us shouldn't be deciding who the next generation of devotees accept for their diksha guru.

 

It is their concern not ours.

 

If they wanted ritvik diksha, then I think the ISKCON authority should have offered a ritvik initiation for those that wanted it.

 

Otherwise, it is not my position to decide who is guru and who is not.

I only decide who is my guru, not who is the guru of others.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

I didnt' make the judgment. I'm asking for definitions. Criteria so they can be applied. Getting sappy about judging is not the point. Vaisnavism is not a sentimental path.

 

No, now you're back-tracking and evading.

 

You seem to imply that we ought to be judging (or "measuring" if you prefer) the sincerity of any and all gurus, not just the ones to which we are considering offering ourselves.

 

I'm asking you how judging (or measuring) the sincerity of Vaishnavas we have never met, are unlikely to meet, and with whom we generally have no interractions is in any way beneficial to or part of our sadhana-bhakti?

[Guest guest]

 

No, now you're back-tracking and evading.

 

You seem to imply that we ought to be judging (or "measuring" if you prefer) the sincerity of any and all gurus, not just the ones to which we are considering offering ourselves.

 

I'm asking you how judging (or measuring) the sincerity of Vaishnavas we have never met, are unlikely to meet, and with whom we generally have no interractions is in any way beneficial to or part of our sadhana-bhakti?

I'm not asking anybody to judge the sincerity. I'm asking how the judgment that a particular Vaisnava is a pure devotee was arrived at? To whine that is judgmental is backtracking.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

I'm not asking anybody to judge the sincerity. I'm asking how the judgment that a particular Vaisnava is a pure devotee was arrived at? To whine that is judgmental is backtracking.

 

I can only speak from my own experience and repeat what I've heard/read.

 

All of these issues come back to faith, ultimately. Reason can only take us so far.

 

As much as folks would like to believe the term "bona fide" means "divinely ordained from God", it literally means "good faith".

 

To the best of our abilities, we scrutinize the words and deeds of Guru. Then we accept them on "good faith". From that point on, to the degree we have faith, we will derive benefit.

 

Sri Krishna assures us that our sincere faith will never be misplaced, and, if our faith is strong and is placed in the Divine Realm, no mundane happenings will shake our certainty in His Good Will.

[Guest guest]

 

I can only speak from my own experience and repeat what I've heard/read.

 

All of these issues come back to faith, ultimately. Reason can only take us so far.

 

As much as folks would like to believe the term "bona fide" means "divinely ordained from God", it literally means "good faith".

 

To the best of our abilities, we scrutinize the words and deeds of Guru. Then we accept them on "good faith". From that point on, to the degree we have faith, we will derive benefit.

 

Sri Krishna assures us that our sincere faith will never be misplaced, and, if our faith is strong and is placed in the Divine Realm, no mundane happenings will shake our certainty in His Good Will.

 

Might it be that the evidence is self-manifesting? Self-effulgent as it were.

Like the sun rising and illuminating everything - as opposed to an official election by a governing committee.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Might it be that the evidence is self-manifesting? Self-effulgent as it were.

Like the sun rising and illuminating everything - as opposed to an official election by a governing committee.

 

Well, if, as Guru-Varga has said, Sri Krishna can reveal Himself to the tripper *IN SPITE OF* the tripper's intoxicated state, why can't Sri Krishna mercifully come to us as an elected Guru?

 

Too much fun! I'm off for a quick walk--when I return, I will try to get some fruitive work done.

[Guest guest]

 

Well, if, as Guru-Varga has said, Sri Krishna can reveal Himself to the tripper *IN SPITE OF* the tripper's intoxicated state, why can't Sri Krishna mercifully come to us as an elected Guru?

 

Too much fun! I'm off for a quick walk--when I return, I will try to get some fruitive work done.

It's up to you to choose which of the elect is the one, however.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

It's up to you to choose which of the elect is the one, however.

 

Hmmmm...this could make for some excellent reality television!!!

 

I'm out the door, now...really I am!!

[Guest guest]

 

Hmmmm...this could make for some excellent reality television!!!

 

I'm out the door, now...really I am!!

Reality TV - what a contradiction in terms.

[Guruvani]

 

Reality TV - what a contradiction in terms.

so, the "real world" is everything except what we see on TV?

 

What is reality?

 

If we see a video of the acharya on the TV is that illusion too?

 

Is what we see with our peacock feather eyeballs reality?

 

Not according to the rishis and acharyas.

[Guest guest]

 

so, the "real world" is everything except what we see on TV?

 

What is reality?

 

If we see a video of the acharya on the TV is that illusion too?

 

Is what we see with our peacock feather eyeballs reality?

 

Not according to the rishis and acharyas.

If you're dealing with the Absolute then image = reality - otherwise no.

So most of the time TV is not reality. It is a flickering reproduction of some aspect of the material word - maya. So its a copy of an illusion- Darn tooting it ain't reality.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

The reality TV show would be called "Good as God".

 

Contestants for the role of jagat-guru would have to currently be on a reality TV show or be alumni of one.

 

In today's installment, Gene Simmons takes on Ozzy Osbourne in head-to-head competition for the title "World Heavy Metal Guru".

 

Work!! Time to work!! Before they fire me and I have to move to Vrindavan!

 

 

If you're dealing with the Absolute then image = reality - otherwise no.

So most of the time TV is not reality. It is a flickering reproduction of some aspect of the material word - maya. So its a copy of an illusion- Darn tooting it ain't reality.