Diksa initiation ,is it a magic wand?

[theist]

truth is = to truth is = to truth etc. despite which school it manifests from.

[raga]

Originally posted by theist:

truth is = to truth is = to truth etc. despite which school it manifests from.

True. Nevertheless, each tradition has its particular precepts, particularly when it comes to certain practices, which are true for this very tradition, and not for others.

 

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

I amsk what i am ,olivsk

Nice to meet you, qvuptsykok I am also equally too. ,comma yes.

 

What is your basis for judging what is superficial and what is deep and real? Would you allow others to have realizations which are different from yours? If so, would their realizations be less than yours?

 

 

[Guest guest]

Answ 1- been there done that

2-yes

3-maybe

 

[This message has been edited by shiva (edited 05-25-2002).]

[Jagat]

You see, Shiva is O.K. I don't mind his siddhanta. I don't like his punctuation, but when I get past form, most of the substance seems O.K.

 

Of course, devotees tend to be attached the forms of their religion. I personally tend to be attached to them.

 

But I would definitely say that the goal is to commune with God directly and not to be dependent on formal instruction. This is the Puru phenomenon, where cut and paste becomes the substitute for thought and investigation.

 

Anyway, Shiva, you can stop playing with us.. nowsk.

[Jagat]

I just realized that I thought this was my realization and I was just envious that anyone else could have it.

[vishal krishna das]

Although this topic seems dead, might I just state the extreme postmodernist position here which answers the topic question with a resounding 'yes!' but which Jagat, for reasons I cannot fathom opposes?

 

As Nietzsche proposed (is this 'sliced bread' Jagatji?) what if there is no innate, unchanging truth? No 'God' but many gods. To each her own.

 

Then sampradaya is ALL in ALL.

All knowledge is sampradayik.

Without initiation there is no truth!

For we have no common innate natures!

Thus Shiva is describing his own personal solipsistic unverse only, while arrogantly claiming to speak for all.

Of course if he could found his own sampradaya then he would be speaking truth to his followers.. .. .. ...---...

 

Yes, Diksha is a magic wand!

[theist]

This excerpt is from a Bhaktisiddhanta's disappearance day lecture given by Srila Prabhupada.

 

------

So anyway, from 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiated, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahäprabhu’s cult. That I was thinking. And that was the initiation by my Guru Mahäräja. Then officially I was initiated in 1933 because in 1923 I left Calcutta. I started my business at Allahabad. So I was always thinking of my Guru Mahäräja, that “I met a very nice sädhu.” Although I was doing business, I never forgot him. Then, in 1928, these Gauòéya Maöha people came to Allahabad during Kumbhamelä. As the Kumbhamelä is going to be held this year, a similar big Kumbhamelä was held in 1928. In those days they came to open their branch in Allahabad, and somebody recommended that “You go to...” At that time I was running on my big pharmacy and I was very well known man in Allahabad as the proprietor of the pharmacy. So somebody recommended them that “You go to Abhaya Babu. He is a very religious man. He’ll help you.” So when they entered my shop I was very much pleased that “These men I met in 1922, and now they have come.” In this way I became reconnected. And in 1933 I was officially initiated, and my only qualification was when I was introduced to my Guru Mahäräja for initiation, so Guru Mahäräja immediately said, “Yes, I shall initiate this boy. He is very nice. He hears me very patiently. He does not go away.” So that was my qualification. The high standard of philosophy which he was speaking at that time, practically I could not follow what was, he was speaking, but still, I liked to hear him. That was my hobby. Whenever... I was asking that “When Guru Mahäräja will speak?” So he took it very seriously.

-----------

 

So the impression to preach was Srila Prabhupada's initiation.Then something formal came later.How to describe an impression from that realm?Perhaps like trying to describe the movements of a certain breeze that just crossed your face.Where has it come from, what will be its future path.Hard to say.

[vishal krishna das]

Oh, I see why you aren't a postmodernist, Jagat.

 

Nonetheless, I think postmodernism is compatable with Gaudiya Vaishnava devotion.

 

The Gopis have no interest in God. Nor in Truth. Truth is whatever Sri Krishna deems it to be, and whatever He changes it to next.

 

aslisya va pada-ratam pinastu mam

adarsanam marma-hatam karotu va

yatha tatha va vidadhatu lampato

mat-prana-nathas tu sa eva naparah!

[Dharma]

Vishal Krishna Das,

I think that your post is very beautiful, ancient and expansive. What if.....

 

I agree definately it is like magic wand. But I perceive it very much like a seed-I suppose it was how my teacher explained it to me. Sometimes it takes root right away, sometimes it does not grow at all. Sometimes it lays dormant for many years. Like the entire Universe, it all depends.

 

I see sadhanas & sutras much like rain and sunlight and soil-helping the seed along.

 

I often wonder how much diksha relates to the term "lineage" in Buddhism. I suspect that is what determines lineage-dating back to a time when enlightenment was more common and was given through diksha from the guru. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

 

[This message has been edited by Dharma (edited 05-25-2002).]

[raga]

Wow I was already missing you Ji.

 

I guess the ancient scripture from the beginning of creation, Brahma Samhita, would not fit into what you view as "evidence"... Not? Well, here's something I grasped together over the last half fifteen minutes.

 

Srimad Bhagavata 11.31.8, 24 attributes an eternal nature to Dvaraka:

 

devAdayo brahma-mukhyA

na vizantaM sva-dhAmani

avijJAta-gatiM kRSNaM

dadRzuz cAti-vismitAH

 

"The demigods and others headed by Brahma could not see Him enter His own abode, since his movements are unknown. Those who saw him were very amazed."

 

nityaM sannihitas tatra

bhagavAn madhusUdanaH

smRtyAzeSAzubha-haraM

sarva-maGgala-maGgalam

 

"Bhagavan Madhusudana is eternally present there [Dvaraka, viz. 23]. By remembering this, all inauspiciousness is removed, and the most auspicious of all auspiciousness is obtained."

 

Srimad Bhagavata, 10.1.28, also gives Mathura the same eternal status:

 

rAjadhAnI tataH sAbhUt

sarva-yAdava-bhUbhujAm

mathurA bhagavAn yatra

nityaM sannihito hariH

 

"At that time, Mathura was the capital of the kings in the Yadu dynasty. There Bhagavan Hari dwells eternally."

 

It is a fact, though, that the Bhagavata does not specifically describe a planet called "Goloka". It describes the manifest pastimes of the Lord in this world.

 

In the Brahma Vaivarta Purana, canto four (Sri Krishna Janma Khanda), we find the fourth chapter entitled "Goloka-varnana", "description of Goloka". In this section, Vaikuntha is described, as well as Goloka Vrindavana, which is presented as the ultimate peak of reality.

 

In the same scripture, we also find Goloka mentioned in the famous story of the appearance of Tulasi.

 

The Patala Khanda of Padma Purana (chapter 83) relates the eternal eight-fold daily pastimes of Sri Krishna in Vrindavana.

 

The ninth skandha of Devi Bhagavata speaks of two eternal realms, namely Vaikuntha and Goloka.

 

According to Mahabharata, "Pandits say that Goloka is the upper lip, Brahmaloka, the lower lip, of Mahavisnu. (M.B. Santi Parva, Chapter 347, Sloka 52)"

 

Brahma said to her:-`Surabhi I .have made you a goddess. You are now above the three worlds-Heaven Earth and Hell. Your world, "Goloka" will become famous. All people will worship you and the cows who are your off spring."

 

In the 61st chapter of Brahmanda Purana, sage Jamadagni went to Goloka, the planet of Mother Surabhi.

 

Now, you may kindly spare me from pointing out how dubious the references above are, and how they were probably interpolated in the 16th century or later, if the scriptures themselves even existed prior to that. Frankly speaking, even if Goloka was "invented" on the 16th century, I would not mind. It does not remove the attraction which has arisen within me towards this divine realm and the eight-fold daily pastimes therein. Additionally, the existence of Goloka makes perfect sense. If you like, I can submit a sound logical presentation of why Goloka exists. The conception of Goloka is a theological masterpiece.

<small><font color=#fdfefe>

 

 

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 05-26-2002).]

[raga]

But please you go on and on about Goloka now...please inform all the new people listening the History of that Goloka you talk about so much....

The final answer about the primeval supreme nature of Goloka is provided in Shiva-samhita (4.623):

 

"Been there, seen that, realized."

 

 

[suryaz]

Originally posted by raga:

The final answer about the primeval supreme nature of Goloka is provided in Shiva-samhita (4.623):

 

"Been there, seen that, realized."

 

When was Shiva samhita written?

[theist]

raga said:

Additionally, the existence of Goloka makes perfect sense. If you like, I can submit a sound logical presentation of why Goloka exists. The conception of Goloka is a theological masterpiece.

I would like to hear your logical explanation raga.

 

For myself, although I have no solid faith in whatever specific conception of the transcendental realm my mind may presently hold, still variety in transcendence makes perfect sense logically.

 

And as far as there being different dimensions or divisions there, that also makes sense.

 

Different realms for different rasa.

 

Awe and reverance are incompatable with just wanting to play with your Friend.

 

theist

 

 

 

[raga]

Originally posted by suryaz:

When was Shiva samhita written?

The Shiva Samhita I have quoted is different from the classical astanga yoga text "Shiva Samhita".

 

This Shiva samhita is also known by the name "Shiva Sutra". It is a collection of concice truths deducted from the writings of Shiva. The sages are still working on it.

 

Another famous sutra was presented on page five, quoted from the Shiva Sutra (3.122):

 

"Hey, you either get it , or you don't."

 

Please note the proper location of the comma, which is quintessential in understanding the secret meaning of the sutra, which is actually very different from its literal meaning.

 

[jijaji]

Originally posted by raga:

Wow I was already missing you Ji.

 

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 05-26-2002).]

Raga,

 

You misunderstand me, I appreciate all the quotes you came up with, my intention in asking about Goloka was not to belittle any quotes anyone might come up with at all.

 

 

My question was directed towards Shiva...I wanted to see his responce as master of the shastras.

 

You can put your guns down sonny, you look for battle where there is none.!

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-26-2002).]

[Jagat]

Just two quick points:

 

(1) What is more important: the here and now or the next world? Both or neither?

 

(2) Krishna adjusts himself to the individual desires of his devotees. I imagine that if a horse devotee wanted Krishna to appear as Pushpadanta, he would.

[raga]

Originally posted by jijaji:

Raga,

 

You misunderstand me, I appreciate all the quotes you came up with, my intention in asking about Goloka was not to belittle any quotes anyone might come up with at all.

 

 

My question was directed towards Shiva...I wanted to see his responce as master of the shastras.

 

You can put your guns down sonny, you look for battle where there is none.!

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-26-2002).]

Sorry, I spoiled your teasing Shiva. But I impersonated him by quoting Shiva Sutra, the assumed gist of his insight, since I knew you wanted to hear what he says.

 

I just got excited over the idea, since I really never thought about this before, and took up a quick research on the matter.

 

Throw in another question for Shiva, and I'll promise to hold myself back. At least until his reply. OK?

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 05-26-2002).]

[raga]

Originally posted by Jagat:

Just two quick points:

 

(1) What is more important: the here and now or the next world? Both or neither?

 

(2) Krishna adjusts himself to the individual desires of his devotees. I imagine that if a horse devotee wanted Krishna to appear as Pushpadanta, he would.

1. We are now here and then there, right? If we got it together, we are here and at the same time there. Definitely we are going there, but whatever is the location of our going, that is here. Does that answer the quiz?

 

2. Do different rasas exist for horse devotees? If yes, why? If not, why not?

 

[vishal krishna das]

Hey Jagat,

 

They buried my quote from the postmodernist samhita, sliced-bead sutra, which was addressed to you:

 

and on its authority I say that There Is Only Sampradaya and Sampradaya is Truth.

 

but you must choose which Sampraday you shall enter

 

and Diksha, which is initiation into the knowledge of that Sampraday is the means by which we encounter Truth.

 

That is, postmodernist Bhakti.

 

Really, I wanted a comment.

[Guest guest]

 

evidently jijaji had some question..I cannot find it, was it edited out?

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

evidently jijaji had some question..I cannot find it, was it edited out?

Looks like it was deleted.

 

At any rate, he was asking if you could explain the existence of Goloka based on shastra.

 

 

[Jagat]

It seems to me, Vishal, that I said something very similar either on this or the siddha pranali thread.

 

Please excuse me as I am a bit time challenged these days and am cutting back on my involvement here.

 

Yours, Jagat