Diksa initiation ,is it a magic wand?

[Rati]

Just a couple of comments:

 

If accepting the teachings of the paramparA are the true initiation, then why is that doctrine not among those teachings? I appreciate the sentiment, but it is clearly against the siddhAnta of the Gaudiya acharyas to understate the importance of getting mantras from an authorized source.

 

As far as whether or not Ed Dimock was a devotee, that is not so clear. He did let some remarks slip in class when we were going through Manjari Svarupa Nirupana that he might indeed have considered himself a Vaishnava.

 

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 05-08-2002).]

[raga]

Mahaprabhu himself took initiation from a non Gaudiya Vaisnava,do you think he was trying to make a point?

If we take it that "Gaudiya Vaishnava" means a follower of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, then of course Mahaprabhu didn't take diksa from His followers.

 

Otherwise, Ishvara Puri was certainly in the club, a very qualified shishya of Madhavendra Puri, who is said in the Caitanya Caritamrta to be the first one in whom the bhakti-kalpa-taru fructified. Ishvara Puri is said to be the next one in whom this prema-bhakti bore fruit. CC Adi 9.11 .

[Jagat]

It is fashionable to underestimate the importance of ritual. It's a kind of facile cheap shot.

 

"You don't need to chant a certain number of Harinam, just say the Holy Name once with feeling, that's enough."

 

"You don't need to read the shastras. Krishna will speak to you from within if you pray and meditate on Him."

 

"You don't need to worship the Deity. Krishna is present everywhere in all things."

 

There is truth in all these statements. Yet we do not to them as rules of conduct. Better you should say one Holy Name with feeling than none at all, but chant four rounds at least on a regular basis, 16 if you can, 64 if you can, 3 lakhs if you can.

 

Similarly, the internal acceptance of Krishna, no matter how life transforming a conversion, still requires a formal response in initiation.

<hr>

The "social fraternal" aspect of initiation was at the basis of the whole discussion, as we spoke about being "in" or "out", "legitimate" or "illegitimate."

 

Let me tell you, Shiva, how I perceive your refusal to share whether you are initiated or not. By deliberately saying "It doesn't matter," you were choosing to exclude yourself from the community. This was a deliberate affront with only one purpose: to show us your superior understanding of subtle siddhantas, as though we superficial devotees have not been able to understand such deep truths in all our futile years of associating with Krishna consciousness.

 

You may think it arrogant of anyone to ask. Indeed some traditions forbid the disciple to divulge the name of his spiritual master. We have many who use the name of the spiritual master as a means to profit, adoration and prestige. But your response was a counterchallenge: You say it does not matter. You are wrong.

<hr>

95% of disciples don't follow their vows 100%. Yet everyone who is initiated has received a significant and defining blessing in his life that cannot be erased except by consciously repudiating that initiation and substituting it with something that redefines him in another way.

 

Someone who is initiated but has fallen away fits into the "api cet suduracaro" verse. One is not supposed to be blind to the faults of someone who is fallen, but one who has gone as far as accepting initiation at some time is a blessed individual and that should be respected.

 

The point is not, "Is everybody who is initiated sincere?" But is everyone who is sincere initiated?" Sooner or later, the answer to the latter question has to be yes.

<hr>

Shiva talks about magic and says it does not count. What is kripa if it is not magic?

 

The shastra talks about initiation as kripa. See Jiva on 11.3.48, Bhakti-sandarbha 207. (labdhvAnugraha AcAryAt--anugraho mantra-dIkSA-rUpaH).

[Guest guest]

Still,he also took sanyasa not of the Gaudiya traditon.

This was meant to show that ceremonial initiation,is like joinig a club,it endears you to the members of that club.

After he took sanyasa he was accepted by the other mayavad sanyasis.

This did not mean, that he was all of a sudden a follower of the mayavad school.

Initiation,was a tool for a purpose,the purpose was to belong to the group,of the initiator.

The siksa,message,of the mayavad school,was not somehow imparted to Mahaprabhu.

This was my point,the real initiation,is the acceptance of the instructions,not simply the acceptance of a garb,or mantra.

[Guest guest]

 

I did not say diksa was unimportant.

I said it was not essential.

I said it is important for it gives one a bond with the society.

This is important,the society is important.

But not essential.

The essential thing,is the connection with the message.

This is absolutely necessary,without the message,we cannot become enlightened.

This is not the same with diksa,although it is definetly a benefit,it is not absolutely of necessity.

You can become enlightened without it.

Though the enlightened soul would desire to take diksa for the reason that the society of vaisnavas,is the transcendental sanga,and conducive to rasa,and helpfull for the benediction of the populace in general.

Not that we should think in terms of in,or out.

The person who has accepted the message,of the Guru,and endeavors to serve that message, he/she is in,all others are out,even if they have taken diksa.

[raga]

Originally posted by jndas:

I think the only disagreement that could exist is what constitutes surrender to the spiritual master and "initiation". Is it a mere ritual, or is it the implanting of divya-jnanam in the heart of the shishya? Arjuna is a disciple of Lord Krishna because he surrendered to the Lord and he received divya-jnanam. It was not a ritual. The same was the case with Ramanuja.

In the Gaudiya tradition, the concept "diksa" is inseparably connected with the transmission of a mantra from a guru to his disciple. Obviously the mere ritual will not do, but the ceremony of receiving mantra etc. must be there. As will be seen, the ceremony of receiving mantra is presented as the natural step after the shisya's decision to surrender unto the guru.

 

I would like to offer the following verses of Bhakti-sandarbha (Anuccheda 283) in this regard, which Jiva quotes from the Hari Bhakti Vilasa, commenting on some of them. Jiva binds the concept of diksa together with the reception of mantra, even in commenting on the famous definition of "diksa", which is often interpreted to be separate from the function of giving mantra.

<blockquote><center>divyaM jJAnaM yato dadyAt kuryAt pApasya saGkSayam |

tasmAd dIkSeti sA proktA dezikais tattva kovidaiH ||

ato guruM praNamyaivaM sarvasvaM vinivedya ca |

gRhNIyAd vaiSNavaM mantraM dIkSA pUrvaM vidhAnataH || [HBV 2.9-10]</center>

 

divyaM jJAnaM hy atra zrImati mantre bhagavat-svarUpa-jJAnaM, tena bhagavatA sambandha-vizeSa-jJAnaM ca.

 

"That in which divine knowledge is given and sins are destroyed is declared to be diksa by those who are expert in wisdom.

 

Thus one should offer obeisances unto the guru, surrender everything to him, and then accept from him diksa of a Vaishnava-mantra."

 

Divine knowledge here indicates knowledge of the nature of Bhagavan and knowledge of a specific relationship with Him in this mantra.

 

. . . . .

 

<center>dIkSA yathAgame --

 

dvijAnAm anupetAnAM sva-karmAdhyayanAdiSu |

yathAdhikAro nAstIha syAc copanayanAd anu ||

tathAtrAdIkSitAnAM tu mantra devArcanAdiSu |

nAdhikAro 'sty ataH kuryAd AtmAnaM ziva saMstutam || [HBV 2.3-4]</center>

 

Agamas speak of diksa:

 

"A twice-born is not eligible to perform his occupational duties or his study of scripture prior to undergoing the ceremony of the sacred thread. Similarly, one who has not received diksa has no eligibility for worshiping the Deity of the mantra and so on, and therefore there is no auspicious glorification for the soul."

</blockquote>

 

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

If accepting the teachings of the paramparA are the true initiation, then why is that doctrine not among those teachings?

It is... That's what guru-padashraya is.

 

The external ritual of initiation is just a symbol. The actual diksha is the planting of divya-jnanam in the heart of the disciple. What is jnanam? It is the instructions of the parampara, both personal and universal. The ritual has its relevance, but to confuse the ritual for the actual substance is going too far. And to dismiss one's arguments (regardless of how crazy they may or may not be) on the grounds that one didn't get the "ritual" is kind of cheap, and too common as well.

[Guest guest]

Raga,those descriptions of diksa,are really what we accept as siksa.

The message of the Guru,the mantra given,these are instructions and are not necessarily only given in a ceremonial manner,or even in person.

Srila Prabhupada is giving the Maha-mantra,and siddhanta in his books.

Accepting them would qualify as diksa according to what you quoted.

[Rati]

Shiva:

Your point is somewhat hazy, actually. The Vaishnava mantra initiation is not to be underestimated as an important step, just as instructions are important at all steps along the way. If you are maintaining that the instructions are the only really important component, then you are just setting forth your own concocted doctrine, which is not in line with the teachings of the Gaudiya acharyas. Besides, it is the paramparA that keeps the instructions going as a living, breathing tradition passed down through the centuries.

 

To say the mantra initiation is not essential is totally ludicrous, for without the mahA-mantra, where is the movement?

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 05-08-2002).]

[Rati]

We need to remember what the Srimad Bhagavata Purana has to say about sound vibration: That it is the most subtle of elements from which all other elements are created, and that it pierces through to Goloka in the form of the holy name (I am paraphrasing - anyone know the exact quotes?).

 

So, initiation by mantra is much more than a ritual, as there is some divine power therein.

 

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

Raga,those descriptions of diksa,are really what we accept as siksa.

The message of the Guru,the mantra given,these are instructions and are not necessarily only given in a ceremonial manner,or even in person.

Srila Prabhupada is giving the Maha-mantra,and siddhanta in his books.

Accepting them would qualify as diksa according to what you quoted.

If you read the second chapter of Hari Bhakti Vilasa, you'll see the context in which these words on diksa are given. It is very evident from this section that diksa is received from the guru in his personal presence.

 

First Gopala Bhatta Gosvamipada cites verses which stress the importance of receiving proper diksha:<blockquote><center>gRhIta viSNu dikSAko

viSNu-pUjA-paro naraH

vaiSNavo 'bhihito 'bhijJair

itaro 'smAd avaiSNavaH</center>

 

"One who has obtained Vishnu-diksa and is engaged in the worship of Vishnu is called a Vaishnava by those who know everything. Others are not Vaishnavas."

 

(Hari Bhakti Vilasa 1.55, quoted from the Padma Purana)

 

<center>adIkSitasya vAmoru kRtaM sarvaM nirarthakam

pazu-yonim avApnoti dIkSA-virahito janaH</center>

 

"One who has no diksa, all of his activities are devoid of value. Devoid of diksa, he will take birth from the womb of an animal."

 

(Hari Bhakti Vilasa 2.6, quoted from the Vishnu Yamala)</blockquote>

 

 

Then the process of giving diksa is presented:

 

<blockquote><center>paridhayansuke sisya acanto yaga mandape

gatva bhaktya gurum natva guror asita daksine</center>

 

"A disciple, after taking his bath, wearing very clean and nice clothes with a nice chadder, purifying himself by accepting acamana, with devotion to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, paying his long obeisances at the lotus feet of the spiritual master many times, should sit down with folded hands, facing his spiritual master."

 

<center>nyasya panitalam murdhin tasya karne ca daksine

rsyadi yuktam vidhivan mantram varatrayam vadet

dirgha mantram ca sisyasya yavadagrahanampathet

guru daivata mantraikyam sisyastam bhavayan pathet</center>

 

"Thereafter, holding the head of the disciple with both of his hands, the spiritual master should recite the mantras in the disciple's right ear systematically. Following the process of great sages, he should recite this mantra three times. If the mantra is very long and difficult, then he should carry on reciting it again and again until the disciple has practiced it. The disciple should at that moment think the spiritual master, demigods and the mantras which he is receiving are equally respectable."

 

(Hari Bhakti Vilasa, 2.127, 130-131)</blockquote>

 

This is called the giving of diksa. Also Swami AC Bhaktivedanta confirms that this is the meaning of diksa, when he explains the meaning of the concept "diksa-guru".

<blockquote>"The spiritual master who initiates according to the regulations of the sastras is called the diksa-guru, and the spiritual master who gives instructions for elevation is called the siksa-guru."

 

(Caitanya Caritamrta, Madhya-lila 8.128, purport)</blockquote>

 

As is evident from what was presented by Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, diksa is indeed obligatory.

 

Just so that there is will be doubt over the concept of "diksa" in what was practiced by Swami AC Bhaktivedanta, I'll conclude with a statement of his from the purport to Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.31.10. We may philosophize so many theories out of his statements, but here is his practice:<blockquote>"In our Krsna consciousness society, unless one is twice initiated -- first by chanting Hare Krsna and second by the Gayatri mantra -- he is not allowed to enter the kitchen or Deity room to execute duties."</blockquote>

[raga]

Originally posted by jndas:

The external ritual of initiation is just a symbol. The actual diksha is the planting of divya-jnanam in the heart of the disciple. What is jnanam? It is the instructions of the parampara, both personal and universal. The ritual has its relevance, but to confuse the ritual for the actual substance is going too far.

You may read the concept of Jiva Gosvamin on the meaning of giving "divyam jnanam" in the context of diksa. He states "divyam jnanam hy atra srimati mantre" -- the divine knowledge in this mantra which was given.

 

This divine knowledge which is to be realized from the mantra is the sum and substance of everything -- the svarupa of Bhagavan and our specific relationship with this feature of Bhagavan. Hence receiving diksa with a proper mantra is the seed of the initiate's sadhana bhajana, and it can not be said to be a ritual only.

 

 

And to dismiss one's arguments (regardless of how crazy they may or may not be) on the grounds that one didn't get the "ritual" is kind of cheap, and too common as well.

No, we are not dismissing the arguments of anyone per se because of a lack of diksa. We ask anyone to refer to the scriptures, and if anyone insists in his claim without backing it up with scriptural reference, this anyone is a rascal according to the definitive conclusion of Swami AC Bhaktivedanta, as was presented earlier at length by myself in the "Siddha Pranali" thread, page five.

 

<blockquote>"You should immediately, who has no reference to the sastra, immediately take him as a rascal number one. This is the conclusion."

 

============ REF. Bhagavad-gita 1.24-25 -- London, July 20, 1973</blockquote>

 

<font color=#cccccc>

 

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 05-08-2002).]

[Guest guest]

You guy's and your theories,what a country!

I didnt't say diksa was not a good thing,or that it was only instructions or mantras from books.

Come on,slow down you move to fast.

Think.

The instructions of Guru,sastra,and sadhu,these are essential things.

Why?

Because without them you are lost.

A formal ceremonial initiation is a beneficial thing,i never said it wasn't.

What i said was it is secondary.

You can take all the initiations you want,from a thousand bona fide Gurus.

If you do not accept the message of them,you will still be less realized,then someone who has never been initiated, and has never associated with sadhus,but has accepted the message of a single bonafide guru,and acted on it,sincerely.

Like Srila Sridhar Maharaj said "We are not a sampradaya of diksa,we are a sampradaya of siksa."

"Sometimes the truth is coming from here,then again it is coming down from a different place,the truth is flowing down in a crooked way."

 

[This message has been edited by shiva (edited 05-08-2002).]

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

You can take all the initiations you want,from a thousand bona fide Gurus.

If you do not accept the message of them,you will still be less realized,then someone who has never been initiated, and has never associated with sadhus,but has accepted the message of a single bonafide guru,and acted on it,sincerely.

If one was to accept their message, the natural outcome would be to surrender unto the lotus feet of such a guru and accept mantra-diksa from him. Rupa Gosvami: guru padasrayas tasmad krishna-diksadi siksanam | vishrambena guror seva sadhu vartmanugamanam || -- 1. Taking shelter of the lotus feet of a guru; 2. Accepting Krishna-diksa; 3. Accepting siksa; 4. Intimately serving the guru; 5. Following the path of the saints.

 

Here we see the natural progress on the path of devotion, as it appears in the Bhakti-Rasamrta-Sindhu.

 

 

Like Srila Sridhar Maharaj said "We are not a sampradaya of diksa,we are a sampradaya of siksa."

"Sometimes the truth is coming from here,then again it is coming down from a different place,the truth is flowing down in a crooked way."

Regardless of whether the sampradaya is one of diksa or siksa (perhaps both are there?), we may see that every recognized acarya within the tradition claims for having received diksa.

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

You guy's and your theories,what a country!

 

You don't like us countryside boys?

 

What about the theories of the Gosvamis? They were not "guys" though living on the countryside of Braj, and they had pretty good theories IMHO.

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Regardless of whether the sampradaya is one of diksa or siksa (perhaps both are there?), we may see that every recognized acarya within the tradition claims for having received diksa.

Again, the examples cited of Ramanuja and Arjuna. What mantras did they receive? Yet they were both initiated by the guru in a spontaneous manner.

 

Did their gurus follow the procedures mentioned in Hari-bhakti-vilasa (Whisperingi n the ear, etc.)? Of course the answer is no. Some people can only see what is written in the text, but it does not always tally with reality. The text is written as a general guideline, but who can limit the flow of divinity? Krishna can initiate one into His mantra by playing His flute. He can do the same through his nimita-matras if He desires. There is no limitation you can put on divinity.

 

Sometimes those who "have" the ritual want to specialize themselves from others. Thus they like to stress the importance of their ritual, or rather themselves.

[Jagat]

Excuse me, but what you are calling diksha is what we call siksha. You take siksha, then you take diksha. One diksha guru, many siksha gurus. Why? Because brahmaikam advitIyaM vai gIyate bahudha rSibhiH.

 

Diksha is about initiation into a particular sadhana. The "divyaM jJAnaM" verse has thrown you off into thinking that the transmission of siksha is diksha. It is not.

 

The word vidyA is often used to mean the mantra. Here something similar is meant: Jiva says divyaM jJAnaM hy atra zrImati mantre bhagavat-svarUpa-jJAnaM tena bhagavatA sambandha-vizeSa-jJAnaM ca , i.e. the knowledge spoken of here is not separate from the mantra that is being given at the time of initiation. To say otherwise is kaSTa-kalpanA.

 

This verse is misunderstood because of a poor understanding of vidheya and anuvAda. (See Cc Adi 2.7, 2.75, 2.81-82 for an explanation of these two terms). In this case, diksha is the anuvada, i.e., we already know what it is, i.e., the giving of a mantra. The vidheya, or predicate, is simply elaborating or clarifying what is already known. Just like Krishna is mentioned amongst the avatars, but then his name is extracted for further detailed information. If someone says, "The man is green," I cannot conclude that whatever is green is a man. Similarly, though siksha forms a part of diksha, you cannot conclude that all siksha is diksha.

 

Guru-padashraya and diksha are separate bhakti-angas, not one. If they were the same thing, why did Rupa Goswami mention them separately?

 

Anyway, that's all I have to say for today. I've gone way over my daily ration. But I still want to say one thing more to Shiva.

 

I hope you don't think I am being too hard on you, Shivaji. I am sure you are a very nice person, but these things sometimes happen on forums like this. So please forgive me if it sounds like I am picking on you. Having said that, I am going to say one last thing to you:

 

I jokingly made a few comments on the other thread about being your comma-yoga guru. It was done jokingly, because you had told us haughtily, "As we are able, we shall receive. If we can see with the vision of knowledge, the eyes of limitation are transformed into the eyes of absolute awareness. At that point, guru is manifested everywhere and in everything."

 

Though I was being humorous, my suggestion did have a serious side. I was making a valid and objectively verifiable point about the use of commas in English grammar. You are a neophyte in these forums, perhaps in all forums. You are likely a neophyte in bhakti yoga as well. I cannot challenge your sincerity in the bhakti yoga part, but I can definitely see that your vision of the guru "everywhere and in everything" is wishful thinking, because you have completely flaunted my excellent suggestion about commas.

 

This may seem trivial to you, but to me, it is typical neophyte behavior. On forums like this, just as in life, it's not just what you say, it's how you say it. If you wish us to take what you say seriously, take yourself a little more seriously. Tuck your shirt in, comb your hair, brush your teeth, and learn how to use commas.

 

And now, my friends, I leave you for at least 12 hours.

 

Your servant,

 

Jagadananda Das.

 

I see that in the time it took me to post this, several other responses have been given. So my absence will not be missed!<small><font color=#f7f7f7>

 

[This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 05-09-2002).]

[raga]

Originally posted by jndas:

Again, the examples cited of Ramanuja and Arjuna. What mantras did they receive? Yet they were both initiated by the guru in a spontaneous manner.

 

Did their gurus follow the procedures mentioned in Hari-bhakti-vilasa (Whisperingi n the ear, etc.)? Of course the answer is no. Some people can only see what is written in the text, but it does not always tally with reality. The text is written as a general guideline, but who can limit the flow of divinity? Krishna can initiate one into His mantra by playing His flute. He can do the same through his nimita-matras if He desires. There is no limitation you can put on divinity.

 

Sometimes those who "have" the ritual want to specialize themselves from others. Thus they like to stress the importance of their ritual, or rather themselves.

Of course anyone may follow the parampara of Ramanuja or Arjuna, I have no objection. In the disciplic succession of Ramanuja, to the best of my understanding, there is a succession of mantra-diksa, since Ramanuja himself established 74 simhasanadipathis to give mantra-diksha and thus initiate people into the Shri Vaishnava tradition.

 

In regards to the Gaudiya Sampradaya, which is the primary concern for myself, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu authorized and empowered the six Gosvamis to lay out the path of Gaudiya Vaishnava sadacara. It is evident that this particular methodology of giving diksa is to be embraced by His followers:

<blockquote><center>hari bhakti vilAsa grantha kailA vaiSNava-AcAra

vaiSNavera kartavya yAhAG pAiye pAra</center>

 

"He compiled a book called Hari Bhakti Vilasa which delineates the proper conduct of a Vaishnava, and from which the duties of Vaishnavas can be completely understood."

 

(Caitanya Caritamrta, Antya-lila, 4.221)

 

<center>guru-lakSaNa, ziSya-lakSaNa, doGhAra parIkSaNa

sevya bhagavAn, sarva-mantra-vicAraNa

mantra-adhikArI, mantra-siddhy-Adi-zodhana

dIkSA, prAtaH-smRti-kRtya, zauca, Acamana</center>

 

"[Mahaprabhu said: Your book should describe:] The qualities of a guru, the qualities of a disciple, their mutual testing, the object of worship, Bhagavan, and all considerations related to mantra, eligibility for receiving mantra, perfection of mantra and other such considerations of practice, diksa, daily duties, remembrance, cleanliness and acamana."

 

(Caitanya Caritamrta, Madhya-lila, 24.330-331)</blockquote>

It is thus evident that all Gaudiya Vaishnavas should adhere to these clear rules. The pramana of Gaudiya Vaishnava history certifies this, since these practices have been followed by Gaudiya acaryas since the times of Mahaprabhu. Should there be exceptions, it does not justify the breaking of an established rule.

 

Yes, there is no limit to the will of the Divine, but the Divine in the form of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has instructed His followers to observe certain rules.

 

Given the ecumenical nature of the IndiaDivine forums, where Hindus and Vaishnavas of all castes and creeds are present, let it be clearly stated that this does not diminish the value of the practices of the members of other spiritual lineages in the least. We are discussing a doctrinal issue within the scope of the Gaudiya sampradaya.

 

[raga]

Originally posted by Jagat:

And now, my friends, I leave you for at least 12 hours.

 

Your servant,

 

Jagadananda Das.

Miss you. I am also out for a while now.

 

Your servant,

 

Madhavananda Das

 

 

<font face="Georgia" size=2 color="brown"><center>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * </center>

"Hearing Lord Caitanya's words, Jagai and Madhai threw themselves down at the feet of all the Vaisnava devotees, and catching their feet, begged for their mercy. The devotees were moved by their humility and blessed them. Thus Jagai and Madhai became free from all desires to commit further sinful activities."

 

 

 

[Shashi]

Originally posted by jndas:

Everyone is free to have their own opinion. I may not agree with it, but that's not so relevant.

 

What I found amusing was the statement about learning from the "authorized disciplic succession". Except of course if it is a direct statement from Srila Prabhupada, who is just a recent teacher (refer "instead of plucking out references from the letters of a recent teacher...")

 

As far as Raga's multitude of quotes from Srila Prabhupada, yes, they tell us to approach a spiritual master, but do not say anything about undergoing an external ritual. Initiation is much more than the ritual.

 

I have nothing against rituals and initiations, but just for discussion I am making these points.

 

Now whether Mr. XYZ is "initiated" or not, and whether he was initiated in 1976 or 1975 really is meaningless. We should be able to address his statements directly and, if he is completely crazy, show the fallacies of his statements. The, "who is your guru" argument is really a childish answer, one that certainly won't carry any value outside of ritualist circles.

 

What is an initiation ritual and what is its weight? Just by having been initiated ritually, does that make us disciples of Swami ABC? Hypothetically, what if we change our minds later? Does the ritual override our state of mind? Or is it our conscious surrender to the guru that makes us disciples?

BILKUL 100% DasJi !!!

 

 

[gHari]

Perhaps the question should be asked of those who are initiated: what effect did initiation have? Was there an immediate transcendental influx of cit? Was there a blinding light? Did japa suddenly become ecstatic, offenseless? Were all material desires vanquished? Bliss? A complete loss of anxiety? Unbearable happiness? You became situated in the atma? You got a new name?

 

Perhaps the effect is different for everyone depending on their current level of delusion. After all, we have likely been trying for many lifetimes; and who knows who our last master was or to what level of realisation we were able to rise. Who knows what our next step is? Has our last guru returned? Does it matter, if guru is one?

 

The seer of the truth can cut the knots that bind us. Then let us seek his help to the best of our ability; now, before he leaves us, like Srila Prabhupada did.

[sha]

Originally posted by jndas:

Again, the examples cited of Ramanuja and Arjuna. What mantras did they receive? Yet they were both initiated by the guru in a spontaneous manner.

 

Did their gurus follow the procedures mentioned in Hari-bhakti-vilasa (Whisperingi n the ear, etc.)? Of course the answer is no. Some people can only see what is written in the text, but it does not always tally with reality. The text is written as a general guideline, but who can limit the flow of divinity? Krishna can initiate one into His mantra by playing His flute. He can do the same through his nimita-matras if He desires. There is no limitation you can put on divinity.

 

Sometimes those who "have" the ritual want to specialize themselves from others. Thus they like to stress the importance of their ritual, or rather themselves.

Well said! I like this understanding.

 

[Audarya lila]

Just thought I would add a quick word to this interesting discussion.

 

I think that the siddhanta has been adequately presented by Jagadananda and Madhavanada prabhus and that they have done an excellent job presenting the relevant scripture to back their position.

 

My input will therefore be more on a personal basis. I have been involved in Bhakti yoga since the late seventies and have had many up's and down's along the way. What I have found to be indispensible in my own spiritual life is service to vaishnavas. In my particular case several years ago I realized that reading books and attending occasional programs at temples or other places was not helping me advance properly. I don't want to get into a testimonial, but I will say that I finally realized that vaishnavism is all about relationships and that Krsna makes himself available through his devotees.

 

For me, initiation is not at all about ritual or belonging to a society (that is not to say that one does not feel a bond to all other vaishnavas). This could not be further from the truth of the matter. Initiation is about a personal relationship between Guru and disciple. There is of course the external ritual side of the affair, but the substance is one of dedication and commitment. It is a most natural outcome of inquiry and submissive service.

 

Initiation means that the Guru agrees to take charge of the sisyas life and guide him/her in their progress toward divinity. This is one aspect of the great substance behind the formal ritual. The other side of it is the willingness of the disciple to accept the disipline and instruction of the Guru as his life and soul.

 

Paul talked about marriage and his vows and commitment. Some say that marriage is a formality and that the love that two people share is the important thing. While this is true, marriage does formalize the bond and declare it to others in society so that they know the intentions of the couple as well. It also puts the couples 'money where their mouth is' so to speak.

 

Anyway, that's about all I have to say - I hope it is helpful to someone. My own personal experience is that I have to approach Krsna through his devotees. If anyone is serious about progressing in devotional service they should seriously search out a devotee who inspires them and then try their best to be of some service to them. That is my humble opinion.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

[paul108]

My point about vows was that a vow has to be kept, not just when it's convenient, or when one feels strong, but always. I can't help but wonder how many initiated devotees have kept their vows every day and will continue to do so forever. I'm sure there are some, but right now I think it is probably a small minority. Jagat said (paraphrased) that a guru's mercy follows even an ungrateful disciple. I think that is true, but what kind of disciple uses his spiritual master that way? Maybe I could cheat some guru like that, but actually I couldn't because it's just too perverted.

 

I have heard that bhakti-yoga begins at liberation. Initiation also means beginning, and it naturally follows that initiation is meant for liberated persons. I am conditioned by material nature, sometimes a little but usually a lot, and so I am not qualified for initiation, no matter how much I may think it would be to my benefit. I can chant 16 rounds and follow the 4 regs nicely for a year or more without fail, but sooner or later I always seem to fall, maybe just for a day or two, or maybe more. Because I know I have that tendency, and I can't seem to shake it, I can't take those vows. At most I can make practice, pretend vows to myself, but again, they end up broken sooner or later.

 

It is usually said that a guru is Krishna's representative to the disciple, but it is also true that a disciple is the guru's representative to the world. If I were to take initiation now, and not keep my vows perfectly, I would be dragging my spiritual master's name through the mud. I know there are so many disciples of Srila Prabhupada and other gurus who are always glorifying their gurus by their actions, but I also know of many who give their gurus a very bad name. Just consider the ISKCON child molesters and some other so called disciples who have done tremendous harm to Srila Prabhupada's reputation and life work. The vows don't say "I will TRY" to do these things; they say "I will do" them. Although in one sense it's none of my business who keeps their vows every day, but an anonymous poll on the topic would be very interesting. I think it would reveal a lot about why Krishna's fame does not seem to be increasing in the world right now, why so many temples are facing bankrupcy, etc.

 

Hari bol

 

 

[paul108]

Originally posted by paul108:

Jagat said (paraphrased) that a guru's mercy follows even an ungrateful disciple.

I'm not sure, but I may have misunderstood what Jagat said about that. Maybe because I'm tired. Time for bed now.

 

Hari bol