HG Urmila nominated as a diksa guru

[yasodanandana]

"Never read anything where SP said once a qualified guru is found, that guru should not be part of iskcon but start their own mission with own disciples in that mission. can you give evidence of this? "

 

if you criticize so much the present iskcon, how can you find so strange that anyone can go away to start his mission?

 

iskcon is not good....... but everyone has to remain inside.... what is your goal in this discussion? "post samadhi"?

 

"Appointing, voting, agreeing, all same thing"

 

not in italian... neither in english... haribol

[Guest guest]

 

yes.. but who judge if one meets up these qualifications? you ? me? your committee ? my vatican? george bush?

 

 

and so my point is proven. no one knows anymore how to judge a guru, where to look up qualification in shastra, may places, then to compare and see if the guru meets up. because u do not know, does not mean i do not know, or others do not know. GBC knows you may say. i agree, and they avoid like the plague!

 

 

 

where's the jugglery?

 

 

in my last post, explained there.

 

[Guest guest]

 

"Appointing, voting, agreeing, all same thing"

 

not in italian... neither in english... haribol

 

 

But in GBC language, it is. Haribol

[theist]

Is it all really this simple?

 

By the grace of Krsna one gets guru, by the grace of guru one gets Krsna.

[yasodanandana]

"and so my point is proven. no one knows anymore how to judge a guru"

 

GBC or not GBC the problem is on personal basis, not on beaurocratic basis

 

guru is necessary, we have to pray krsna to be blessed by a pure devotee... ultimately it is up to us.. and krsna

 

the same for the disciples of urmila prabhu

[Kulapavana]

Theist: "By the grace of Krsna one gets guru, by the grace of guru one gets Krsna"

 

That is a nice statement. Ultimately it is a personal matter between guru and disciple. If you are sincere, you can learn from anybody.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Remember that the GBC who is approving this person is the same GBC that was going to vote to "suspend" Gour Govinda Maharaja from being a Guru.

 

In such matters their vote is irrelevant in my opinion.

 

[yasodanandana]

"If you are sincere, you can learn from anybody. "

 

yes.. but one of these "anybody" has to be a pure devotee of sri krsna, and we have also to take initiation and instructions from him

[theist]

it is simple but finding the sincerity to put it into practice is rare in this world.

 

I am in such ignorance that I can't tell a real self realized lover of Krsna devotee from one who has only taken on the external mannerisms of one, including extensive(but external) knowledge of the scriptures. I am deaf dumb and blind so what can I do?

 

Turning to Krsna in my heart is my only viable option.

 

Krsna knows who His real devotee is. We must acknowledge our helpless position before the Lord and beg His guidance. He will hook us up and point out His beloved devotee in a way that we will understand. If we are sincere He will strengthen our faith in His sincere devotee.

 

This simple direct truth seems to be missing in the current Iskcon scheme.

 

The GBC appears to be trying to take His role upon themselves. You see, it is Krsna's pleasure to play that role of matchmaker. For so many births and deaths Supersoul has been linking us up with the results of our past karma. The act of connecting disciple and guru is a spiritual act, not a karmic one. A spiritual act takes Krsna's pleasure only into account.

 

All such concocted schemes are really an attempt to try and continue usurping Krsna's pleasure and position. Building a maze that one must find their way through to get to Krsna. The guru maze. GBC: "here is guru" that guru falls down. GBC "well in that case, there is another guru over there"...Then that one leaves to start his own mission. GBC: "you can't go with him because you really belong to us"

 

Now the totally confused and burnt out student throws up his hands and says "I quit".

 

We have scene this scenario played out before or own eyes.

 

To avoid such problems one only needs to tell new people to continue to read Prabhupada's books while chanting Hare Krsna in the association of devotees AND PRAY TO KRNSA WITHIN HIS HEART TO LINK HIM UP WITH KRSNA'S TRUE DEVOTEE.

 

Or is it we don't really believe there is a personal God in everyone heart that will hear and answer?

 

All such voting, appointment scemes are just faithless and usless.

 

 

 

[stonehearted]

jndas:

Remember that the GBC who is approving this person is the same GBC that was going to vote to "suspend"

Gour Govinda Maharaja from being a Guru.

 

In such matters their vote is irrelevant in my opinion.

 

Well said. We don't even need to go into the list of those who have been approved but not lived up to the reponsibility they accepted.

 

I have for a long time (since the '80s) made clear my lack of confidence in such voting regarding gurus. This, however, remains their system. I suggest that those of you who object and are invlolved with ISKCON contact your GBC reppresentative and make your abjections known. Although I'm probably "in good standing" (because I haven't publicly vilified the GBC, declared my allegiance to a 'non-ISKCON' acharya, or any other aggressive act, and because I persist in my sadhana and meager preaching efforts), I feel I have no real standing to tryto effect changes on GBC policies. That's why I wrote earlier that this isn't my business.

[livingentity]

can be very touchy. I pissed them off once a long time ago by questioning something (it has been so long I do not remember what it was). I got a not too nice letter from them and I just let it go at that and never went to them directly again with any concerns.

 

I am glad that JNdas brought up the Gour Govida Maharaja incident. Things like that should be remembered.

 

It is the voting for guru thing that always causes me confusion. voting reminds me too much of a popularity contest.

[Guest guest]

Theist: "Now the totally confused and burnt out student throws up his hands and says "I quit"..."

 

Such students are not very sincere, and lack the basic understanding of guru/disciple relationship (which often is not really their fault as they are being fed misleading concepts). A sincere seeker will not give up the process of Krishna consciousness just because their guru ran into personal maya problems and no longer represents our sampradaya. The sampradaya is still there, so is Krishna... Once you are properly connected to the sampradaya and Krishna, when your diksa guru is no longer present you just turn to another guru in our sampradaya that inspires you the most and take guidance from him. Sometimes the guru position is turned into personality cult, and that is very dangerous...

 

[livingentity]

Just because someone gets frustrated with the ISKCON system and throws up their hands and walks out does not mean lack of sincerity. It also does not mean that they stop studying, chanting, praying to Krsna and Prabhupada etc.

[Kulapavana]

without going into: "define who is a pure devotee"...

 

I have learned much from devotees whose purity may be questioned by some..

 

and that post above (to theist) was mine, I was not logged in..

[yasodanandana]

"Or is it we don't really believe there is a personal God in everyone heart that will hear and answer?"

 

if we are not able to recognize pure devotees, that is a feature of madyam adhikari, how can we be able to currently communicate with paramatma that is a feature of uttama? how can we know if what comes from our heart is not coming from maya?

 

this is a problem of the anti gaudya math opposition by iskcon, many devotees, lost the faith in iskcon gurus, have no more faith also in the guru principle at all.. because not seeing devotees in and out they believe that with the disappearance of prabhupada all is ended

 

gaudya math is not only iskcon, pure devotees exist every where, if we have this faith, we will pray krsna and, if krsna sends, we will find them also in iskcon math... prabhupada gave the complete devotion, including to be a real and pure guru

 

if we have a little more wide vision, it is very clear that pure devotion exists

[Guest guest]

Clearly, most individuals are upset about the whole "voting-in" process of appointing gurus. I don't doubt that this is an important issue that is worth discussing. But I'm more concerned with something a little more concrete than the perceived qualifications (or lack thereof) of GBC officials or bhaktas seeking a guru.

 

Specifically, I want to know about the validity of women becoming diksha gurus. As per my understanding, this is unheard of in Vedic culture. Stonehearted mentioned that in ISKCON, the initiation system is based on a combination of bhAgavata and pancharAtra traditions. If this is so, then do we have any examples in the bhAgavatam of women giving out initiation (not just giving shiksha, but actual diksha)?

 

I mean no disrespect to Mother Urmila - I'm only concerned with the concept that ISKCON is bringing into being. Such ideas as "female gurus" and "female sannyAsis" will no doubt appeal to those who see our traditions as "backward" and "irrelevant" in this day and age. I'm sure that new-age Hinduism magazines like _Hinduism Today_ will praise this decision of ISKCON's as "progressive" and "innovative," for example (Hinduism Today, by the way, is published by a group of Shaivite mAyAvAdis who like just about everything that is "Hindu" regardless of how far removed from "Vedic" it is).

 

But I personally admire the ISKCON that Srila Prabhupada wanted, which seemed to eschew such meaningless innovations in favor of direct and straightforward preaching according to the traditions of Chaitanya and Vedic culture. The Bhagavad-GItA teaches us to be satisfied performing our own duties, even if imperfectly, as opposed to the duties of another (even when done perfectly). Is it not the case that different duties are prescribed to men and women? And if being a guru is generally for qualified males only, then isn't having a female guru a violation of the principal which Lord Krishna Himself gave to Arjuna?

 

To be honest, I have a lot of problems in the first place understanding the ISKCON concept of "guru," irrespective of the gender of that person. This may be another issue altogether, and by bringing it up now, I certainly don't mean to put Mother Urmila alone under the microscope. In fact these concerns are based on my experiences with a number of ISKCON gurus, all of whom are still, per my understanding, "in good standing." What I'm getting at is, I always thought a "guru" was referred to as such, because he is "heavy" with knowledge. In older days, this would be knowledge of the Vedas and vedAnta-sUtras. But since that is no longer practical today, one would think that, in keeping with the gaudIya tradition, at least knowledge of the bhAgavatam, bhagavad-gItA, chaitanya-charitamRta would have to be mastered in order to become guru. From BG 4.23 verse + purport I understand that a guru must be knowledgeable in the truth and able to remove the sincere disciple's doubts. But in ISKCON, it seems that one can become a guru if one has a certain seniority, years of service, steadiness, etc but in-depth knowledge of these important scriptures does not appear to be a prerequisite. Does anyone else get this impression? At least I often find that, from classes I have attended on BG/SB, the discussion does not seem very rooted in the verse or its context, and logical doubts that might arise from the verse or its translation rarely seem to get a very satisfying answer. On the contrary, everyone seems to emphasize that the guru is a "pure devotee" and is on such high levels of devotion, is a knower of past, present, future, etc. Like that, devotees in ISKCON seem to have all kinds of extremely exotic expectations of the guru - but the one practical thing which a guru should have (and which would seem to me, a necessary prerequisite to such advanced levels of bhakti), namely mastery of shrImad bhAgavatam, gets scarcely a second thought in "guru discussions."

 

I just don't know anymore if I have it all wrong. I would like a guru who is situated in Krishna-consciousness, and who can also think deeply and give answers based on shAstra (at least, the shAstras we GaudIyas are supposed to know as given by Srila Prabhupada). I would also like to belong to an association of devotees who practice, I mean really practice, "Vedic culture." I used to look up to ISKCON as the ideal paradigm in this regard, which could influence others (like my unqualified self) to take up the same good habits and culture, but each year just brings me face to face with more ISKCON "innovations" that have little if anything to do with a professed interest in "Vedic" or "Aryan" culture.

 

I apologize if any disrespect was perceived by this, as such is not my intention. I remember reading in Srila Rupa Gosvami's Nectar of Instruction that revealing one's mind in confidence is one of the six activities of devotees associating with each other. This is offered in that spirit only.

 

 

yours,

 

Rascal_Number_One

 

 

[yasodanandana]

"Such ideas as "female gurus" and "female sannyAsis" will no doubt appeal to those who see our traditions as "backward" and "irrelevant" in this day and age"

 

no, it is not so simple, maybe i can be wrong, but i do not think that this is good because we are getting out from some useless traditions.. and like me, it is the same for many western devotees who are literally in love with india

 

i think that only "post samadhi initiation followers" are heavily interested to cut with india, making IskCon a new religion, to avoid much as possible confrontation with orthodox gaudya math realities

 

..

 

for the rest of your article.... i am reading with interest...

[Guest guest]

I don't know if there are any examples of women giving diksa in the Srimad Bhagavatam. However, there have been Gaudiya Vaisnavis who have done so:

 

Jahnava devi (Lord Nityananda's wife)

Hemalata Thakurani (this is Srivas's daughter, I recall. I may have butchered her name)

Gangamata Gosvamini

 

and in the official diksa lineage of Bhaktivinode Thakura there are three women:

 

1. (Nityananda Prabhu) Jahnava Mata*

 

2. Ramacandra Gosvami

 

3. Rajavallabha Gosvami

 

4. Kesavacandra Gosvami

 

5. Rudresvara Gosvami

 

6. Dayarama Gosvami

 

7. Mahesvari Gosvamini*

 

8. Gunamanjari Gosvamini*

 

9. Ramamani Gosvamini*

 

10. Yajnesvara Gosvami

 

11. Vipina Vihari Gosvami

 

12. Bhaktivinoda Thakura

 

 

 

 

[stonehearted]

"Rascal": I want to know about the validity of women becoming diksha gurus. As per my understanding, this

is unheard of in Vedic culture. Stonehearted mentioned that in ISKCON, the initiation system is based on a

combination of bhAgavata and pancharAtra traditions. If this is so, then do we have any examples in the

bhAgavatam of women giving out initiation (not just giving shiksha, but actual diksha)?

In our line we have Jahanva-devi and Gangamata Gosvamini, at the least. I remember Srila Sridhar Maharaj mentioning something about possible others in Sri Guru and His Grace. If you really want to know, and if you have any faith in ISKCON, you may want to approach someone on the Shastric Advisory Council.

 

Regarding approaching GBC members or SAC members, those of you who want to participate in shping ISKCON (or protecting it) should be clever enough to find someone with whom you may be able to establish some rapport. LE mentioned that she's hesitant because sheonce pissed off the GBC, or some GBC's. And those who, like LE and I, don't live near an ISKCON center, or who don't have a good relationship with local GBC rep, could find someone else who may be more inclined to give you an ear. And remember two important principles in communication: audience and purpose. The person you're addressing is likely ot feel some sense of superiority by virtue of having that position. If you open up by dismissing or challenging that, you'll turn them off for sure. And know why you're contacting them. If it's just to vent, or just to get more information, or to hear their view, you maybe able to speak (or write) differently from the way you'd have to if you actually want to persuade them of your position.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

Remember that the GBC who is approving this person is the same GBC that was going to vote to "suspend" Gour Govinda Maharaja from being a Guru.

 

In such matters their vote is irrelevant in my opinion.

 

 

Fully agreed. That incident was shameful.

 

The real question is whether Urmila did is qualified to be a guru, never mind if she is a woman or a man.

 

As for voting, that is also agreed. This voting business is nonsensical when it comes to guruship.

[Vaishnava_das108]

This post is not necessarily in reply to Stonehearted, but I would just like to address some of the points he made.

 

 

In our line we have Jahanva-devi and Gangamata Gosvamini, at the least. I remember Srila Sridhar Maharaj mentioning something about possible others in Sri Guru and His Grace.

 

 

Do we really have Jahnava Mata and Gangamata Gosvamini in our line, directly? I don't think so. How is that possible.

 

Also it is true that Sridhara Maharaja predicted that thee would be female gurus in ISKCON. But to tell the truth, Srila Prabhupada himself said that it was a possibility. Visakha dd should know, she's been writing articles in BTG about it for years.

 

I just read that whole VNN article for the first time today, and I am now joining this discussion thread. Personally I am happy that ISKCON is finally moving on in regards to women, as well as opening minds and hearts. After all, a couple of posts ago showed how women have been gurus in Gaudiya Vaishnavism in the past, they are there in the present, so why not in ISKCON. Personally I would like to see this happen in the Gaudiya Matha as well. Has anyone wondered what Narayana Maharaja thinks about this issue? Or any of the other GM gurus?

 

Joining this discussion has its own advantages. Caught up in my happiness about ISKCON's "moving on," I failed to acknowledge another important point; the business of voting. Now that's just a strict no-no.

[Guest guest]

"Out of many millions of wandering entities, one who is very fortunate gets an opportunity to associate with a bona fide spiritual master by the grace of Krishna." -- Chaitanya Charitamrita, Madhya-lila 19.151

 

Krishna is within everyone's heart as the Paramatma and He will give guidance to those who want guidance. If a person is sincere, then by Krishna's grace that person gets a guru. It is not said that it is by guru's grace that one gets guru. It states in the shastra that it is by the grace of Krishna, who is within my heart and who speaks in shastra, that I come in contact with my guru and it is also by Krishna's grace that I am able to perceive his purity. Then by the grace of my guru I will get Krishna. He gives me Krishna by his instructions and I follow them. And by that path I come to love Krishna. It is not that by the grace of Krishna's representative I get Krishna's representative; in other words, by appointment. This denies Krishna. It is not a bona fide teaching

[stonehearted]

Vaishnava_das108: Do we really have Jahnava Mata and Gangamata Gosvamini in our line, directly? I don't think so.

 

Actually, you're correct. They're not literally in our line. I guess I meant that in a loose sense. They are in our sampradaya, our spiritual community.

[Guest guest]

town and village and subculture.

[Guest guest]

Did they vote?