Guruvani

Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has recommended Bhagavat Purana as the most important and the best of all Purana. so, I can't read all the Puranas. I focus on the best Purana as recommended by Sri Chaitanya Avatar. We have many teachings of Siva in the Gaudiya shastra. So, Gaudiya Vaishnava also worship Lord Siva in our own way - not the way of the Shaivites. we worship Siva as devotee of Krishna like we worship our guru. Siva is one of the gurus of the Gaudiya culture. We don't take Siva from Shaivites but from the Vaishnavas.

I learned that from the Engish translation of Bhagavat Purana by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami.

read everything on this website and then I will consider accepting you as a disciple..... http://www.atmatattva.com/

NEWSFLASH!! Srila Prabhupada spotted in physical form in Vrindavan in 2007!!!!

It's more important to have a spiritually present guru than a physically present guru. Srila Prabhupada is physically present in ISKCON anyway. I see him in many of the ISKCON temples setting on the Vyasasana. If that is not Srila Prabhupada, then why are the devotees worshiping him? Are they idol worshipers or Prabhupada worshipers? If that is not Srila Prabhupada in a physical form that they are doing puja to everyday, then what are they worshiping? Polyester resin?

see, there is no reason to push or cram diksha on anyone. if a person is inspired to take diksha from a spiritual master, then that is the only time one should take diksha. this formal diksha cult of cramming diksha down the throat of new devotees is actually against the principles of Krishna consciousness. when the time is right a person will try to find a qualified diksha guru. the frenzied neophytes running around the planet today preaching the necessity of formal diksha are enemies of the Krishna consciousness movement. they have a dogma that they think makes them better than other devotees, but actually that is just their false ego. it is not a spiritual truth.

Srila Prabhupada is the jagat guru and he came to deliver all the suffering souls of the world. We don't need to imitate the jagat-guru. If the vision of Srila Prabhupada to deliver all the fallen souls of the western world is to be realized then you people are going to have to get over your formal diksha fetish and get practical. You have obviously ignored the statements Srila Prabhupada has made that following his instructions is more important than formal initiation.

we aren't Sri Caitanya and he came to deliver all the living entities in the universe. I don't think he had formal diksha in mind for every living entity in the universe. If the vision of Mahaprabhu to deliver all the souls in the universe is to be realized, then you people are going to have to get over this formal diksha fetish and get practical.

can you please show us in shastra where the term "physically present guru" is required? I need some quotes for my research project.

I saw something on TV the other day and it showed some buddhist monks in their orange robes setting together smoking cigarettes. It's obvious that the buddhist sect has undergone some serious deterioration over that few decades.

I found that quote I was refering to. It comes from the introduction of Krishna Book.

Krishna comes once in a day of Brahma. In the other Dvapara yugas Lord Vishnu incarnates in place of Lord Krishna.

there are guidelines given in shastra on identifying the proper spiritual master. neophytes who don't know these shastric directions should not be taking diksha just because it is fashionable around the Hare Krishna temples. so, neophytes should first learn from authoritative shastra how to identify a spiritual master. there is no need to be hasty about accepting a spiritual master. Srila Prabhupada took initiation 11 years after he accepted Srila Saraswati Thakur as his spiritual master. so, what is they hurry? maybe that is a problem nowadays that too many neophytes are taking initiation without even knowing the shastric guidelines for accepting a spiritual master? for me, there was never any question. I knew Srila Prabhupada was my spiritual master and I didn't have to go through any shopping around for a guru phase. It should be that easy for devotees coming to the movement even today, but unfortunately the ISKCON GBC has adopted a policy that makes choosing a guru something like playing a game of dice. Spiritually, the diksha guru is the one who creates faith in Krishna in your heart. Formal gurus based on other considerations is a bad formula and will dog the Krishna consciousness movement like bad case of staph infection as long as this system is being promoted in ISKCON.

I was reading the other day and Srila Prabhupada was describing the different kinds of loving relationships that the devotee can have with Krishna. Srila Prabhupada described santa-rasa as "loving Krishna as the great unknown". That struct me as kinda funny how somebody can love "the great unknown" but that is what the Christian and the Muslim faith is about. That kind of religious faith is about loving "the great unknown". It's a form of santa-rasa, though it surely needs some refinement. Western religionists have evolved a theology over the last 2000 years and there is a transcendentalism to that theology. It is Biblically based, but in fact much of the faith of the modern Christian people really transcends the Bible. Love of the great unknown is a transcendental faith. We shouldn't let the Bible stories disqualify the transcendental faith of the Christians, nor should we let the cosmology of the Bhagavat disqualify the transcendental faith of the Vaishnavas.

Modern religionists, called Christians, believe in the almighty God, the ONE supreme person who created the world. They think Jesus was the incarnation of God. To them God is omnipotent and all powerful. They pray to God. That is good. I listened to Joel Osteen preaching a sermon on TV on Sunday and this guy blew me away. I heard the spiritual master talking through him. I know they are meat-eaters...yada...yada... yada... But, there is a lot of good heart in modern Christians and they do more humanitarian work all around the world than anybody. Really, they are worshiping Lord Vishnu, but they don't even know it. Their faith is cluttered with Biblical accounts, but their faith has some value and God hears their prayers that is for sure. When I saw that huge crowd of people all humbled in church and hearing the "word of God" I was touched....I got a little choked-up. All that old Biblical stuff doesn't really mean much. It's faith in God and a great appreciation for the value of human life that makes Christianity a positive force in the world. I have been good friends with a couple of devoted Christian men and they knew I followed the Hare Krishna faith. We got along like brothers and had very good dealings and with each other. They liked me a lot, even though I was a Hare Krishna, so I don't judge Christians harshly at all. I wish the Hare Krishna people were as simple and sincere as many of the Christians I have known. If the Hare Krishna movement had the sincerity and simpleness of the Christian people, the movement wouldn't be in the mess it is in today. I think there is a lot that the Hare Krishna movement could learn from the Christian church in the western world.

I guess it depends what ISKCON temple you are around. The New Raman Reti Temple in Alachua Florida is the largest settlement of devotees in the western hemisphere but is set up in a way that the GBC can't dictate around here. The devotees in the community here call the shots and manage this temple the way they like. Most ISKCON gurus wont come near the place. But, occasionally one of them pops in for a torture test. The mood around New Raman Reti is a lot different than the rest of the ISKCON temples. It's really about Srila Prabhupada at New Raman Reti, but there are assorted devotees of all types around. Most of ISKCON is a political mess, but anybody can show up at New Raman Reti and attend the program without getting harrassed by some temple goon. All the ISKCON ecclesiastical bureaucracy has virtually no influence at New Raman Reti. Unfortunately, the ISKCON bureaucrats meddle too much in most of the ISKCON temples around the world, but in Alachua Florida them goons have been put in check at the largest settlement of devotees in the USA.

68/12/16 London, Bhagavad-gita 2.46-62 listen

that is a nice quote, but it is undocumented (on tape) and unfortunately cannot be used as evidence. I don't doubt that Srila Prabhupada could have said that, but we cannot use hearsay as authoritative when debating opposing arguments. We need to use standard shastric and other such verifiable references in establishing conclusions. If Srila Prabhupada actually felt that way, then we can surely find some support for that somewhere in a documented source.

ISKCON has transformed into something, but I am not so sure you can even remotely compare it to the Catholic church. Where is the ISKCON Pope? ISKCON has a hundred gurus. How does that compare with the Catholic church having one Pope that speaks for God. ISKCON has become a bogged-down bureaucracy and the comparison with the Catholic church might have a nifty ring to it, but practically speaking ISKCON has almost nothing in common with the Catholic church other than a growing ecclesiastical doctrine. If it does, then please show how instead of making broad sweeping comparisons without any comparitive analysis. It is easy to make a charge. It is not so easy to demonstrate your theory.

I have never heard of any rites of exclusion in the Gaudiya culture. I don't know where you got that idea, but your tone smacks of an academic orientation and therefore puts you at a serious disadvantage in grasping the spiritual essence of the Gaudiya culture.

In Vaishnavism one doesn't take initiation from "priests" but from someone that you accept as your spiritual master. the Gaudiya culture has never been about priests, but about spiritual masters. You take diksha from someone you accept as worshipable as God. Because in Vaishnavism it is about the touchstone of the pure devotee transforming you into a Brahmana, not about taking diksha from a "priest". It has never been like that in Gaudiya culture. It has always been about taking diksha from self-realized masters - not from priests.

Sure. First thing is that when we say diksha we are not referring to Harinama but to the Upanayana Samskara - the sacred thread ceremony. As far as the Maha-mantra goes, I don't see that any formal initiation was ever required aside from hearing the Maha-mantra from a Vaishnava. As best I can recall I have been promoting ritvik for the purpose of Brahmnical initiation or what is called Upanayana Samskara. But, in ISKCON there was a formal initiation for Harinama Maha-mantra and the receiving of the Vaishnava name as dasa. I don't think the formality is essential in anyone having the right to chant the name and get the benefit. Still, in ISKCON there were formal initiations for both Harinama and Upanayana Samskara. As long as ISKCON continues that traditon then I think that both formal ceremonies should be conducted on behalf of Srila Prabhupada as ritvik. But, outside the formal structure I think there is plenty of evidence that anyone can chant the Holy Name following the regulative principles and get the benefit. Personally, I think that real initiation is the process of being indoctrinated into the science of Krishna consciousness which includes primarily the chanting of the Holy Name and the learning of the scriptures and understanding the basic concepts of Krishna conciousness. I don't think any formal ceremony is required for that. Still, we have to think about how ISKCON can go on in the fashion that Srila Prabhupada wanted. Outside of preserving the mission of Srila Prabhupada there is plenty of scope for becoming Krishna conscious. But, preserving the mission of Srila Prabhupada, ISKCON, is an issue unto itself which brings up the subject of ritvik. For those sannyasis who have left ISKCON, then they can either be ritvik or not, depending on what their own conscience dictates to them to do. Otherwise, aside from all the formalities, it has been said the a person who is Krishna conscious is already beyond sabda-brahma and all Vedic rituals. A person who is Krishna conscious is already beyond the level of Brahman. The initiation of Brahmans in the KC movement has always just been a way of demonstrating that a Krishna conscious person is already more than a brahmana. The diksha in the KC movement isn't so much the making of a Brahmana as it is the giving formal recognition that this person is already a Brahmana. I think that has been made quite clear in the writing of the acharyas. A Krishna conscious person is already beyond Brahmana - way beyond.

Siva is a plenary portion of Lord Vishnu and his body is eternal. Siva has his own spiritual world like Vaikuntha. The spiritual world of Lord Siva is known as Mahesh Dhama. Mahesha Dhama is below Vaikuntha and beyond the material worlds. Lord Siva is God of his own spiritual world Mahesh Dham in the same way that Narayana is the God of Vaikuntha and Krishna is the master of Goloka. He also has a planet within the universe and other abodes, but they are not eternal. His planet outside the universe is spiritual and eternal.

Even in 1958, before Srila Prabhupada even started ISKCON he was criticising his Godbrothers in the Gaudiya Math: What was "the Lion's food" that was being taken away by "the Jackal". Why was Srila Prabhupada referring to the successor gurus of the Gaudiya Matha as "imitative sahajiyas"? He mentioned in plural that there were "imitative sahajiyas" who had taken away "the Lion's food". It appears that Srila Prabhupada did not recognize these "successor gurus" of the Gaudiya Matha and characterized them as "imitative sahajiyas" who were taking away the Lion's food. What then are the little devotees of ISKCON compared to the high class devotees of the Gaudiya Matha who were a lot higher born than the mlecchas that became successor gurus in ISKCON? If the leading disciples of Srila Saraswati Thakur were "imitative sahajiyas," in the eyes of Srila Prabhupada, for assuming successor guru status in the Gaudiya Math, then what would be the new bhaktas of ISKCON that had been devotees for about 10 years before Srila Prabhupada passed away? Srila Prabhupada's idea of the central position of the acharya goes back long before he even started ISKCON, to at least 1958. Why should the successor gurus of the Gaudiya Matha be "imitative sahajiyas" and the successor gurus of ISKCON be Maha_Bhagavats? I think we can take a lesson from the way Srila Prabhupada judged the successors of the Gaudiya Matha and get an idea of what he wanted for ISKCON.

Well, if we look at the actual history of ISKCON we will remember than in fact Srila Prabhupada indeed accepted thousands of disciples through his representatives, so I think you are nit-picking a little here. Srila Prabhupada accepted disciples through representatives many, many times in ISKCON. So, if we take this instruction in the book and balance it up against the actual situation that Srila Prabhupada personally established in ISKCON, we can see that it is not any great leap to come the conclusion about what Srila Prabhupada was saying in the purport. We know what Srila Prabhupada was talking about in the purport because we know exactly how he operated in ISKCON. so, you can argue wording in the purport, but you can't argue the actual practices that Srila Prabhupada implemented in ISKCON. Still, he never ever mentioned one word that the gayatri tape should be recalled or that the ritvik system he had in place had to terminate on his passing. As I have said before, there is no authoritative statement from Srila Prabhupada that has ever been found that terminates his representative system of initiaton after his passing. No such instruction in fact exists. Nobody has the right to terminate that which Srila Prabhupada put in place. We see the nightmare that ISKCON turned into by disobeying the orders of Srila Prabhupada.