Properly initiated?

[theist]

weallshineon has this following quote as his signature.

 

__________________

“One who is not properly initiated may present himself as a great devotee, but in fact he is sure to encounter many stumbling blocks on his path to progress toward spiritual realization. Such a helpless person is compared to a ship without a rudder, for such a ship can never reach its destination.” Caitanya Caritamrita Adi 1.35, Purport.

 

 

Seems straight forward but there may be differing defintions for the term properly initiated.

[Virakrsna]

 

weallshineon has this following quote as his signature.

Seems straight forward but there may be differing defintions for the term properly initiated.

 

Krishna is in our hearts, our rudder is the Srimad Bhagavatam, the Bhagavat-Guru. Until someone I trust comes along, thats the way it will stay!! Lord Caitanya is our rudder

 

Hari Bol

[theist]

 

Krishna is in our hearts, our rudder is the Srimad Bhagavatam, the Bhagavat-Guru. Until someone I trust comes along, thats the way it will stay!! Lord Caitanya is our rudder

 

Hari Bol

 

I agree.

 

Then there is this statement from CC.

 

 

"If a devotee accepts Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as the universal guru and Lord Jagannatha as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Krsna, he is benefited by the combined mercy of Krsna and guru." - Madhya 13.18 purport

 

 

I know how I hear the term properly initiated but it may not be the way Prabhupada meant it.

[suchandra]

 

I agree.

 

Then there is this statement from CC.

 

 

 

I know how I hear the term properly initiated but it may not be the way Prabhupada meant it.

The Vedas say there're three ways to gather knowledge. When reading text below it seems like global Vaishnavas are presently fooled into pratyaksa, direct evidence, if it works, do it and anumana, inductive knowledge: "It may be like this". However it says, best is sabda, to listen from authority and act accordingly.

The conclusion that came out for present Vaishnavas is to follow pratyaksa/anumana, to make decisions that seem to work immediately and sound reasonable on the platform of direct experience and hypothesis, if it works, lets do it like this.

Prabhupada's books are taken into account but when it comes to questions like initiation, accepted with reservation.

Often we hear, we have to follow the tradition, what is the traditional situation in historical accounts of Vaishnavism. Don't know if this is sabda?

 

 

"There are three kinds of evidence: pratyaksa, anumana and sabda. Pratyaksa means "direct evidence." Direct evidence is not very good because our senses are not perfect. We are seeing the sun daily, and it appears to us just like a small disc, but it is actually far, far larger than many planets. Of what value is this seeing? Therefore we have to read books; then we can understand about the sun. So direct experience is not perfect. Then there is an anumana, inductive knowledge: "It may be like this"-hypothesis. For instance, Darwin's theory says it may be like this, it may be like that. But that is not science. That is a suggestion, and it is also not perfect. But if you receive the knowledge from the authoritative sources, that is perfect. If you receive a program guide from the radio station authorities, you accept it. You don't deny it; you don't have to make an experiment, because it is received from the authoritative sources.

 

Vedic knowledge is called sabda-pramana. An other name is sruti. Sruti means that this knowledge has to be received simply by aural reception. The Vedas instruct that in order to understand transcendental knowledge, we have to hear from the authority. Transcendental knowledge is knowledge from beyond this universe. Within this universe is material knowledge, and beyond this universe is transcendental knowledge. We cannot even go to the end of the universe, so how can we go to the spiritual world? Thus to acquire full knowledge is impossible."

 

Isopanisad, http://www.harekrishna.com/col/books/RP/ISO/tea-veda.html