intiation's

[theist]

In SB Canto 1 Narada Muni is described as being initiated in the previous millenium by some sages he was serving as a young boy.

 

Can someone please describe the nature of his initiation?

[Guruvani]

Here's what gets me. A person gets a book from a Sankirtan devotee or sees a Sankirtan party, somehow comes to the temple, joins the kirtan, hears the mantra, chants the mantra, joins the temple, follows the principles and chants 16 rounds for 6 months and then the day comes when he get's so-called initiated into the Maha-mantra.

I mean, wasn't his real initiation into the mantra the first time he heard it from some disciple of Prabhupada or heard a bunch of them chanting kirtan? He got the mantra from an initiated devotee who spoke the mantra into his ear. That wasn't initiation into the mantra?

Then some day there is a fire sacrifice and he gets "initiated" by some ISKCON guru. What is the difference between the day another disciple of Prabhupada gave him the mantra and the day some so-called ISKCON guru gives him the mantra.

It just seems to me that initiation as is it known today is just a formality, and that the real initiation was actually when he first got the mantra from the first devotee he ever met.

Is there really some magic bullet that he gets at formal initiation that he didn't get from the first devotee that gave him the mantra to chant?

Is formal initiation really all about substance or about credentials that support ones right to perpetuate the parampara? Is it about helping to build faith or is it about something magical and mystical that happens at formal initiation?

[gHari]

The highlighted parts here in Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.9.43 explain Sri Narada's initiation by Lord Brahma:<blockquote><center>tuSTaM nizAmya pitaraM

lokAnAM prapitAmaham

devarSiH paripapraccha

bhavAn yan mAnupRcchati

</center>

tuSTam--satisfied; nizAmya--after seeing; pitaram--the father; lokAnAm--of the whole universe; prapitAmaham--the great-grandfather; devarSiH--the great sage NArada; paripapraccha--inquired; bhavAn--yourself; yat--as it is; mA--from me; anupRcchati--inquiring.

The great sage NArada also inquired in detail from his father, BrahmA, the great-grandfather of all the universe, after seeing him well satisfied.

 

PURPORT

The process of understanding spiritual or transcendental knowledge from the realized person is not exactly like asking an ordinary question from the schoolmaster. The schoolmasters in the modern days are paid agents for giving some information, but the spiritual master is not a paid agent. Nor can he impart instruction without being authorized. In the Bhagavad-gItA (4.34), the process of understanding transcendental knowledge is directed as follows:

<center>

tad viddhi praNipAtena

paripraznena sevayA

upadekSyanti te jJAnaM

jJAninas tattva-darzinaH

</center>

Arjuna was advised to receive transcendental knowledge from the realized person by surrender, questions and service. Receiving transcendental knowledge is not like exchanging dollars; such knowledge has to be received by service to the spiritual master. As BrahmAjI received the knowledge directly from the Lord by satisfying Him fully, similarly one has to receive the transcendental knowledge from the spiritual master by satisfying him. The spiritual master's satisfaction is the means of assimilating transcendental knowledge. One cannot understand transcendental knowledge simply by becoming a grammarian. The Vedas declare (SvetAzvatara UpaniSad 6.23):

<center>

yasya deve parA bhaktir

yathA deve tathA gurau

tasyaite kathitA hy arthAH

prakAzante mahAtmanaH

[sU 6.23]

</center>

"Only unto one who has unflinching devotion to the Lord and to the spiritual master does transcendental knowledge become automatically revealed." Such relationship between the disciple and the spiritual master is eternal. One who is now the disciple is the next spiritual master. And one cannot be a bona fide and authorized spiritual master unless one has been strictly obedient to his spiritual master. BrahmAjI, as a disciple of the Supreme Lord, received the real knowledge and imparted it to his dear disciple NArada, and similarly NArada, as spiritual master, handed over this knowledge to VyAsa and so on. Therefore the so-called formal spiritual master and disciple are not facsimiles of BrahmA and NArada or NArada and VyAsa. The relationship between BrahmA and NArada is reality, while the so-called formality is the relation between the cheater and cheated. It is clearly mentioned herewith that NArada is not only well behaved, meek and obedient, but also self-controlled. One who is not self-controlled, specifically in sex life, can become neither a disciple nor a spiritual master. One must have disciplinary training in controlling speaking, anger, the tongue, the mind, the belly and the genitals. One who has controlled the particular senses mentioned above is called a gosvAmI. Without becoming a gosvAmI one can become neither a disciple nor a spiritual master. The so-called spiritual master without sense control is certainly the cheater, and the disciple of such a so-called spiritual master is the cheated.

 

One should not think of BrahmAjI as a dead great-grandfather, as we have experience on this planet. He is the oldest great-grandfather, and he is still living, and NArada is also living. The age of the inhabitants of the Brahmaloka planet is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gItA. The inhabitants of this small planet earth can hardly calculate even the duration of one day of BrahmA.</blockquote>

[Guruvani]

Lord Brahma didn't have a living guru. He was not in the physical presence of his guru when he received diksha. He was millions of miles away from his Guru when he got initiated. However, he heard the voice of Sri Guru resonate within his own heart. He never received it through his ears, but through his heart.

[theist]

 

One should not think of BrahmAjI as a dead great-grandfather, as we have experience on this planet. He is the oldest great-grandfather, and he is still living, and NArada is also living.

 

 

Wowie that was a heavy one gHari. I'll just pick this one out in hopes that we can persuade those that refer to only presently enbodied teachers as "living gurus" to rethink their choice of words.

 

In Canto one Narada explains how he became enlightened in the previous kalpa. How he received instructions and blessings from his gurus. He served them humbly and submissively and they imparted transcendental knowledge unto him.

[gHari]

It is so wonderful. I was stunned reading it, and very enthused afterward. From the Lord in the Heart to Narada's vision of Syamasundara, it is all there.

 

Next to Adi One and maybe the Gita, I realize Canto One is my favorite book.

 

We are so very fortunate.

[Guest guest]

"Wowie that was a heavy one gHari. I'll just pick this one out in hopes that we can persuade those that refer to only presently enbodied teachers as "living gurus" to rethink their choice of words."

 

Actually, the quote by Srila Prabhupada would seem to support just the opposite. Lord Brahma is still presently embodied. He is the oldest living being within this Universe. He never "passed away" or "disappeared", hence he is still alive. Srila Prabhupada even says so: "He is the oldest great-grandfather, and he is still living, and NArada is also living. Srila Prabhupada uses the word "living" in reference to a great soul who is still embodied, so why can't we?

 

Vaishnavas never die, that is a fact. They disappear from our vision. It is a great loss when a pure Vaishnava leaves our vision. In our hearts, they are always with us. Still, it is a great loss when they leave our vision, otherwise why would Srila Narottama dasa Thakur sing "Where are my Raghunatha Bhatta and Gopala Bhatta, and where is Krsnadasa Kaviraja? Where did Lord Gauranga, the great dancer, suddenly go? I will smash my head against the rock and enter into the fire." In Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu asked Srila Raya Ramananda: "Of all kinds of distress, what is the most painful?" Sri Ramananda Raya replied, "Apart from separation from the devotee of Krsna, I know of no unbearable unhappiness." (Madhya 8.248) Recorded on tape, Srila Prabhupada weeped while giving Bhagavatam class on the Disappearance Day of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. Vaishnavas are personalists of the highest order. Their feelings of separation when a Vaishnava departs their vision is immeasurable, beyond our comprehension. As conditioned souls, perhaps we sometimes try to disguise our lack of devotion and lack of tears by rationalizing "Oh, I still have the books and the tapes, I have a murti, no loss, he reasons ill who says that Vaishnavas die." Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura said that "Vaishnavas die to live." Srila Sridhara Maharaja was fond of saying this as well.

 

Anyway, perhaps the terminology could be improved. I prefer to use words like "Disappearance" rather than "death.Appearance" rather than "birth.Physically manifest", rather than "living." However, I don't think any offense is being committed by saying "living guru." It is already understood that Vaishnavas never die. Still, when distinguishing between Vaishnavas who are physically manifest and those who are not, the word "living" is used. Ultimately there may be no word or phrase in the English language which would satisfy everyone in this regard. I have heard some devotees take offense with "physically manifest" and "physically unmanifest." And in one sense they are correct, being that pure Vaishnavas do not have physical bodies, their bodies are completely spiritual.

 

Just my own thoughts on the matter, for what it's worth.

 

Cheyenne

[theist]

Actually, the quote by Srila Prabhupada would seem to support just the opposite. Lord Brahma is still presently embodied. He is the oldest living being within this Universe. He never "passed away" or "disappeared", hence he is still alive. Srila Prabhupada even says so: "He is the oldest great-grandfather, and he is still living, and NArada is also living. <<

 

Yes, I see your point.

 

>>Srila Prabhupada uses the word "living" in reference to a great soul who is still embodied, so why can't we?<<

 

Of course you can. I don't recall anyone ever suggesting otherwise. Even we are living and always will be.

 

>>Vaishnavas never die, that is a fact. They disappear from our vision. It is a great loss when a pure Vaishnava leaves our vision. In our hearts, they are always with us. Still, it is a great loss when they leave our vision, otherwise why would Srila Narottama dasa Thakur sing "Where are my Raghunatha Bhatta and Gopala Bhatta, and where is Krsnadasa Kaviraja? Where did Lord Gauranga, the great dancer, suddenly go? I will smash my head against the rock and enter into the fire." In Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu asked Srila Raya Ramananda: "Of all kinds of distress, what is the most painful?" Sri Ramananda Raya replied, "Apart from separation from the devotee of Krsna, I know of no unbearable unhappiness." (Madhya 8.248) Recorded on tape, Srila Prabhupada weeped while giving Bhagavatam class on the Disappearance Day of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. Vaishnavas are personalists of the highest order. Their feelings of separation when a Vaishnava departs their vision is immeasurable, beyond our comprehension. As conditioned souls, perhaps we sometimes try to disguise our lack of devotion and lack of tears by rationalizing "Oh, I still have the books and the tapes, I have a murti, no loss, he reasons ill who says that Vaishnavas die." Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura said that "Vaishnavas die to live." Srila Sridhara Maharaja was fond of saying this as well.<<

 

Well, I can't speak to what Vaisnava's feel in separation. Except to say I believe that that level of separation also includes a form of union.

 

>>Anyway, perhaps the terminology could be improved. I prefer to use words like "Disappearance" rather than "death.Appearance" rather than "birth.Physically manifest", rather than "living." However, I don't think any offense is being committed by saying "living guru." It is already understood that Vaishnavas never die. Still, when distinguishing between Vaishnavas who are physically manifest and those who are not, the word "living" is used. Ultimately there may be no word or phrase in the English language which would satisfy everyone in this regard. I have heard some devotees take offense with "physically manifest" and "physically unmanifest." And in one sense they are correct, being that pure Vaishnavas do not have physical bodies, their bodies are completely spiritual.<<

 

Yes, material words are clumsy and not sufficent. But what can we do. the point of objection I have is that the way living is used as in "living guru" implies there is a dead guru. That is an offensive idea I believe. When such a thing came up in a conversation once Prabhupada objected.

 

I'll find it again.

 

 

[theist]

here is where His Divine Grace objected to the term "living spiritual master." Maybe phyically manifest is best, even with its imperfections.

 

 

 

Madhudviña: Is there any way for a Christian to, without the help of a spiritual master, to reach the spiritual sky through believing in the words of Jesus Christ and trying to follow his teachings?

 

Prabhupäda: I don’t follow.

 

Tamäla Kåñëa: Can a Christian in this age, without a spiritual master, but by reading the Bible and following Jesus’s words, reach the...

 

Prabhupäda: When you read Bible, you follow spiritual master. How can you say without? As soon as you read Bible, that means you are following the instruction of Lord Jesus Christ, that means you are following spiritual master. So where is the opportunity of being without spiritual master?

 

Madhudviña: I was referring to a living spiritual master.

 

Prabhupäda: Spiritual master is not the question of... Spiritual master is eternal. Spiritual master is eternal. So your question is without spiritual master. Without spiritual master you cannot be, at any stage of your life. You may accept this spiritual master or that spiritual master. That is a different thing. But you have to accept. As you say that “by reading Bible,” when you read Bible that means you are following the spiritual master represented by some priest or some clergyman in the line of Lord Jesus Christ. So any case, you have to follow a spiritual master. There cannot be the question without spiritual master. Is that clear?

 

Madhudviña: I mean like we couldn’t understand the teachings of the Bhagavad-gétä without your help, without your presentation.

 

Prabhupäda: Similarly, you have to understand Bible with the help of the priest in the church.

 

[Guest guest]

What do the terms prakat-lila and aprakat lila refer to ? And who is ellgible to witness them ?

[theist]

 

 

TRANSLATION SB 1.6.2

Sri Vyäsadeva said: What did you [Närada] do after the departure of the great sages who had instructed you in scientific transcendental knowledge before the beginning of your present birth?

 

PURPORT

Vyäsadeva himself was the disciple of Näradaji, and therefore it was natural to be anxious to hear what Närada did after initiation from the spiritual masters. He wanted to follow in Närada’s footsteps in order to attain to the same perfect stage of life. This desire to inquire from the spiritual master is an essential factor to the progressive path. This process is technically known as sad-dharma-påcchä.

 

TRANSLATION 3

O son of Brahmä, how did you pass your life after initiation, and how did you attain this body, having quit your old one in due course?

 

PURPORT

Sri Närada Muni in his previous life was just an ordinary maidservant’s son, so how he became so perfectly transformed into the spiritual body of eternal life, bliss and knowledge is certainly important. Sri Vyäsadeva desired him to disclose the facts for everyone’s satisfaction.

 

 

 

So from these verses and purports, and the rest of Narada's narration, it appears clear that Narada's intiation from his spiritual masterS came through receiving their instructions, which he was receptive to, as seen through his humble serving mentality. Narada received his intiation into bhakti-yoga via siksa.

 

Any objections?

[Guest guest]

right... we do not hear the voice of srila prabhupad in our hearts... we need a guru acting in this material world to make answers and receive answers

 

the first devotee who give us philosopy and harekrsna mantra is not diksa, neither siksa... he's vartma prakashaka... so he's not enough (if he does not became also siksa and diksa)

[theist]

Närada Muni: is inevitably associated with the narrations of the Puräëas. He is described in the Bhägavatam. In his previous life he was the son of a maidservant, but by good association with pure devotees he became enlightened in devotional service, and in the next life he became a perfect man comparable with himself only. In the Mahäbhärata his name is mentioned in many places. He is the principle devarñi, or the chief sage amongst the demigods. He is the son and disciple of Brahmäjé, and from him the disciplic succession in the line of Brahmä has been spread. He initiated Prahläda Mahäräja, Dhruva Mahäräja and many celebrated devotees of the Lord. He initiated even Vyäsadeva, the author of the Vedic literatures, and from Vyäsadeva, Madhväcärya was initiated, and thus the Madhva-sampradäya, in which the Gauòéya-sampradäya is also included, has spread all over the universe. Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu belonged to this Madhva-sampradäya; therefore, Brahmäjé, Närada, Vyäsa, down to Madhva, Caitanya and the Gosvämés all belonged to the same line of disciplic succession. Näradajé has instructed many kings from time immemorial. In the Bhägavatam we can see that he instructed Prahläda Mahäräja while he was in the womb of his mother, and he instructed Vasudeva, father of Kåñëa, as well as Mahäräja Yudhiñöhira.

 

Is SB 1.6, Converstaion between Narada and Vyasadeva, the intiiation of Vyasadeva by Narada?

[theist]

Sukadeva was intiated in the womb by Vyasadeva. Vyasadeva impressed upon Sukadeva the transcendental sound of Srimad Bhagavatam.

[Guruvani]

I don't know how ready I am to take instructions from someone who doesn't even know how to spell "vartma pradarshaka" guru. This term "vartma-pradarshaka" is not found in Prabhupada's books and I can't even remember where it is mentioned at all other than being tossed around in devotee discussions.

A sannyasi who has been rtvik power on behalf of Prabhupada did not get that authority without being a siksha guru. Anyone who gives instructions on the science of Krishna consciouseness is a siksha guru. A vartma-pradarshaka guru is not a real guru really. He is just some person who recommends you to become a devotee and his instructions stop after that. Even the prostitute who first inspired Bilvamangal Thakur to take to Krishna consciousness was considered a siksha guru and all she did was tell him that he should seek out Krishna, she gave no other relevant instructions.

Vartma pradarshaka is a very rare term in the books of the acharyas and right off the bat I can't even think of one reference to such anywhere in Prabhupada's books.

 

Rtviks are siksha gurus and that was their qualification for getting rtvik authority from Prabhupada.

Somebody who can't even spell vartma-pradarshaka is hardly in a postion to be giving intructions on whether rtvik is bona-fide or not.

[theist]

Suniti and Dhruva

[Guest guest]

siksa is a real guru, not an officiant

 

ritvik and guru are opposite... ritvik is doing a thing on behalf, in substitution etc... there's not personal responsibility

 

this is basic krsna consciousness

[Guruvani]

So, you are saying that anybody can be a rtvik official appointed by Prabhupada? You are saying that Prabhupada appointed unqualified men to be rtvik? Did Prabhupada appoint "officials" out of unfit, unqualified persons who could not give instructions on Krishna consciousness?

Prabhupada appointed the most senior and experienced disciples to be rtvik. They had been siksha gurus in ISKCON for years training new devotees and teaching them Krishna consciousness. But, once they get rtvik appointment they are no longer siksha guru anymore? There is no qualification to represent Prabhupada? Prabhupada said rtvik means "representative". Sridhar Maharaja said rtvik means "representative". You can say that a rtvik is just an official, but that is just your unqualified opinion which contradicts Prabhupada's description of what is a rtvik.

[Guest guest]

in our culture diksa and siksa are the same...

the master says that he is doing everything for his master's mercy he but gives directly the darshan of sri krsna...

 

guru does not represents another who gives krsna... he gives krsna and takes the responsability to bring himself people in krsna lila (that he is currently experiencing)

 

otherwise he's not guru

 

so in ritvik there's not guru.... the guru is only prabhupad

 

"i do not bring you in the spiritual world, i bring you to srila prabhupad", is an old refrain sung by bogus gurus..... preparing the advent of ritvik in IskCon

 

so you can stop to preach.... i am sorry to say that you have already won... IskCon will be yours in no time

[stonehearted]

Guruvani: This term "vartma-pradarshaka" is not found in Prabhupada's books and I can't even remember where it is mentioned at all other than being tossed around in devotee discussions.

 

Try Sri Chaitantya-charitamrita, Madhya-lila 8.128. In the purport Srila Prabhupada cites Srila Bhaktisiddhanta on this. It may even be mentioned early in Cc., where guru-tattva is discussed. Unfotunately, my Cc. is in my office at school and my VedaBase is on the computer my daughter is using.

 

And jumping on the spelling error is a really chickens**t way to "defeat" someone.

[livingentity]

I looked and only found it in the one verse of Cc, Madhya-lila 8.128. Sorry but I don't have time right now to put it on here.

 

I knew I had seen Prabhupada speak of vartma-pradarshaka guru.

 

hmmm...folio come in handy.... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[gHari]

Lots of good words in the Sri Caitanya-caritamrita Madhya 8.128:<blockquote><center><font color="red">kibA vipra, kibA nyAsI, zUdra kene naya

yei kRSNa-tattva-vettA, sei ‘guru' haya

</center>

kibA--whether; vipra--a brAhmaNa; kibA--whether; nyAsI--a sannyAsI; zUdra--a zUdra; kene--why; naya--not; yei--anyone who; kRSNa-tattva-vettA--a knower of the science of KRSNa; sei--that person; guru--the spiritual master; haya--is.

</font>

"Whether one is a brAhmaNa, a sannyAsI or a zUdra--regardless of what he is--he can become a spiritual master if he knows the science of KRSNa."

 

PURPORT

This verse is very important to the KRSNa consciousness movement. In his AmRta-pravAha-bhASya, SrIla Bhaktivinoda ThAkura explains that one should not think that because SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu was born a brAhmaNa and was situated in the topmost spiritual order as a sannyAsI, it was improper for Him to receive instructions from SrIla RAmAnanda RAya, who belonged to the zUdra caste. To clarify this matter, SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu informed RAmAnanda RAya that knowledge of KRSNa consciousness is more important than caste. In the system of varNAzrama-dharma there are various duties for the brAhmaNas, kSatriyas, vaizyas and zUdras. Actually the brAhmaNa is supposed to be the spiritual master of all other varNas, or classes, but as far as KRSNa consciousness is concerned, everyone is capable of becoming a spiritual master because knowledge in KRSNa consciousness is on the platform of the spirit soul. To spread KRSNa consciousness, one need only be cognizant of the science of the spirit soul. It does not matter whether one is a brAhmaNa, kSatriya, vaizya, zUdra, sannyAsI, gRhastha or whatever. If one simply understands this science, he can become a spiritual master.

 

It is stated in the Hari-bhakti-vilAsa that one should not accept initiation from a person who is not in the brahminical order if there is a fit person in the brahminical order present. This instruction is meant for those who are overly dependent on the mundane social order and is suitable for those who want to remain in mundane life. If one understands the truth of KRSNa consciousness and seriously desires to attain transcendental knowledge for the perfection of life, he can accept a spiritual master from any social status, provided the spiritual master is fully conversant with the science of KRSNa. SrIla BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI ThAkura also states that although one is situated as a brAhmaNa, kSatriya, vaizya, zUdra, brahmacArI, vAnaprastha, gRhastha or sannyAsI, if he is conversant in the science of KRSNa he can become a spiritual master as vartma-pradarzaka-guru, dIkSA-guru or zikSA-guru. The spiritual master who first gives information about spiritual life is called the vartma-pradarzaka-guru, the spiritual master who initiates according to the regulations of the zAstras is called the dIkSA-guru, and the spiritual master who gives instructions for elevation is called the zikSA-guru. Factually the qualifications of a spiritual master depend on his knowledge of the science of KRSNa. It does not matter whether he is a brAhmaNa, kSatriya, sannyAsI or zUdra. This injunction given by SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu is not at all against the injunctions of the zAstras. In the Padma PurANa it is said:

<center>

na zUdrA bhagavad-bhaktAs te 'pi bhAgavatottamAH

sarva-varNeSu te zUdrA ye na bhaktA janArdane

</center>

One who is actually advanced in spiritual knowledge of KRSNa is never a zUdra, even though he may have been born in a zUdra family. However, even if a vipra, or brAhmaNa, is very expert in the six brahminical activities (paThana, pAThana, yajana, yAjana, dAna, pratigraha) and is also well versed in the Vedic hymns, he cannot become a spiritual master unless he is a VaiSNava. But if one is born in the family of caNDAlas yet is well versed in KRSNa consciousness, he can become a guru. These are the zAstric injunctions, and strictly following these injunctions, SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu, as a gRhastha named SrI Vizvambhara, was initiated by a sannyAsI-guru named Izvara PurI. Similarly, SrI NityAnanda Prabhu was initiated by MAdhavendra PurI, a sannyAsI. According to others, however, He was initiated by LakSmIpati TIrtha. Advaita AcArya, although a gRhastha, was initiated by MAdhavendra PurI, and SrI RasikAnanda, although born in a brAhmaNa family, was initiated by SrI SyAmAnanda Prabhu, who was not born in a caste brAhmaNa family. There are many instances in which a born brAhmaNa took initiation from a person who was not born in a brAhmaNa family. The brahminical symptoms are explained in SrImad-BhAgavatam (7.11.35), wherein it is stated:

<center>

yasya yal-lakSaNaM proktaM puMso varNAbhivyaJjakam

yad anyatrApi dRzyeta tat tenaiva vinirdizet

</center>

If a person is born in a zUdra family but has all the qualities of a spiritual master, he should be accepted not only as a brAhmaNa but as a qualified spiritual master also. This is also the instruction of SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu. SrIla BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI ThAkura therefore introduced the sacred thread ceremony for all VaiSNavas according to the rules and regulations.

 

Sometimes a VaiSNava who is a bhajanAnandI does not take the sAvitra-saMskAra (sacred thread initiation), but this does not mean that this system should be used for preaching work. There are two kinds of VaiSNavas--bhajanAnandI and goSThy-AnandI. A bhajanAnandI is not interested in preaching work, but a goSThy-AnandI is interested in spreading KRSNa consciousness to benefit the people and increase the number of VaiSNavas. A VaiSNava is understood to be above the position of a brAhmaNa. As a preacher, he should be recognized as a brAhmaNa; otherwise there may be a misunderstanding of his position as a VaiSNava. However, a VaiSNava brAhmaNa is not selected on the basis of his birth but according to his qualities. Unfortunately, those who are unintelligent do not know the difference between a brAhmaNa and a VaiSNava. They are under the impression that unless one is a brAhmaNa he cannot be a spiritual master. For this reason only, SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu makes the statement in this verse:

<center>

kibA vipra, kibA nyAsI, zUdra kene naya

yei kRSNa-tattva-vettA, sei ‘guru' haya

[Cc. Madhya 8.128]

</center>

If one becomes a guru, he is automatically a brAhmaNa. Sometimes a caste guru says that ye kRSNa-tattva-vettA, sei guru haya means that one who is not a brAhmaNa may become a zikSA-guru or a vartma-pradarzaka-guru but not an initiator guru. According to such caste gurus, birth and family ties are considered foremost. However, the hereditary consideration is not acceptable to VaiSNavas. The word guru is equally applicable to the vartma-pradarzaka-guru, zikSA-guru and dIkSA-guru. Unless we accept the principle enunciated by SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu, this KRSNa consciousness movement cannot spread all over the world. According to SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu's intentions, pRthivIte Ache yata nagarAdi-grAma sarvatra pracAra haibe mora nAma. SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu's cult must be preached all over the world. This does not mean that people should take to His teachings and remain zUdras or caNDAlas. As soon as one is trained as a pure VaiSNava, he must be accepted as a bona fide brAhmaNa. This is the essence of SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu's instructions in this verse.</blockquote>

 

gHari

[theist]

Narada intiated Vyasadeva through his instructions to Vyasadeva. At the time Narada was not what we would call a "resident" of Earth. By that I mean he had no birth mother here, no childhood history etc. In fact Narada was existing as his spiritual form at that time. Certainly he was present with Vyasadeva but not in the way we customarily think of it.

[theist]

Dhruva had a feeling of obligation to his mother, Sunéti. It was Sunéti who had given him the clue which had now enabled him to be personally carried to the Vaikuntha planet by the associates of Lord Visnu. He now remembered her and wanted to take her with him. Actually, Dhruva Mahäräja’s mother, Sunéti, was his patha-pradarçaka-guru. Patha-pradarsaka-guru means “the guru, or the spiritual master, who shows the way.” Such a guru is sometimes called siksa-guru. Although Närada Muni was his diksa-guru (initiating spiritual master), Sunéti, his mother, was the first who gave him instruction on how to achieve the favor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is the duty of the siksa-guru or siksa-guru to instruct the disciple in the right way, and it depends on the disciple to execute the process. According to çästric injunctions, there is no difference between siksa-guru and diksä-guru, and generally the siksa-guru later on becomes the diksä-guru. Sunéti, however, being a woman, and specifically his mother, could not become Dhruva Mahäräja’s diksä-guru. Still, he was not less obliged to Sunéti. There was no question of carrying Närada Muni to Vaikunthaloka, but Dhruva Mahäräja thought of his mother.