Don't Break the Disciplic Succesion

[Guest guest]

Sankarshan Prabhu wrote:

 

> That the knower of the Krishna science can be an initiator guru is

> confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in the Teachings of Lord Caitanya as

> follows,

>

> "Whatever position one may have, if he is fully conversant with the

> science of Krishna, Krishna consciousness, he can become a bona fide

> spiritual master, initiator or teacher of the science." TLC, Chapter 31

 

Madhusudana Prabhu answered:

 

> Here again the key words are *he can become*.

>

> How is the instruction that something can happen the

> same as authorising that it must?

> ...

 

What about "is permitted to make disciples" (NOD, chapter 7)?

Would the ritvik followers accept this as an authorization?

 

ys Ramakanta dasa

[Guest guest]

My dear Madhusudhana prabhu,

 

You are speaking learned words but I challenge your

interpretation of the meaning.

 

 

> "One should take initiation from a bona fide

> spiritual master coming in the

> disciplic succession, who is authorised by his

> predecessor spiritual master.

> This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54,

> purport)

 

In this statement, I see that Srila Prabhupada is

saying that to be a bona fide spiritual master, one

must be coming in disciplic succession. This statement

is made because there are so many so-called gurus who

have no connection to any disciplic succession yet

they are claiming themselves as guru. Since the people

in general do not know the real credentials of a bona

fide guru, they think all gurus are the same or that

all paths lead to the same goal; yata mat tata pat. As

far as authorization is concerned, Srila Prabhupada is

further refining his definition of bonafide by stating

that the authority to initiate must be there from the

predecessor acharya. I interpret this to mean that no

one can be a bonafide guru unless he is the bonafide

servant. Full dependency on the instructions and

desires of one's guru are the necessary qualifications

for one to initiate or for that matter, to teach.

>

> The ISKCON movement is based on the teachings of

> Srila Prabhupada, and not

> the GBC. If one wants to drive a car, then this is

> possible for all, but

> only with

> *qualification* and *authorisation*. Ironically,

> these self-appointed gurus

> have no authorisation to act independently as

> initiating gurus. I can prove

> this, as there are no gurus in any bonafide

> sampradaya that have been voted

> into the position of a guru. I quote from Srila

> Prabhupada:

>

> "Guru cannot be self-made. No. There is no such

> single instance throughout

> the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many

> rascals, they are becoming

> guru without any authority. That is not guru. You

> must be authorised. Evam

> parampara-praptam imam ra... As soon as the

> parampara is...kalena yogo nasta

> parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual

> potency finished.

> You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big

> words, but it will never be

> effective." (Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 27th February

> 1977, Mayapur,

> India)

 

 

In this statement, Srila Prabhupada is simply

reiterating that a guru cannot be self made. He must

be coming in disciplic succession. There are many

Indian gurus who are not coming in any disciplic

succession. They have managed to fool the innocent

people with some magic tricks and convinced others

that I am god, you are god, we are all god. So

Prabhupada is challenging these rascals, that what is

their qualification? To have qualification, he says

they must be coming in disciplic succession; otherwise

their realizations are just mental speculation. So,

our ISKCON gurus are coming in disciplic succession.

This passage was not meant for disciples of Srila

Prabhupada.

 

" I can prove this, as there are no gurus in any

bonafide sampradaya that have been voted

into the position of a guru". Pretty broad and

unconfirmed statement you make. Most other

organizations do appoint a successor. But Srila

Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada did

not appoint any one successor. Both envisioned many of

their disciples becoming diksha gurus while having the

overall management of the Temples carried out through

the medium of a GBC and Temple president system. I

interpret the actions of our Prabhupadas to mean that

a single appointed successor is not the will of Lord

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Mahaprabhu states in CC, anyone

can be guru if he is familiar with the science of God.

So by not appointing one successor, Srila Prabhupada

is opening the door for all of his disciples to be

guru and spread Krsna Consciousness far and wide.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Mahashakti dasa

>

> So where is the authorisation for the present ISKCON

> (so-called) diksa-gurus?

 

 

 

>

>

> btw. I must compliment you on a rather astute

> observation - that IRM (Ritvik

> Philosophy) will be the death of the *MAYA* ISKCON

> which YOU steadfastly

> represent.

> However let me assure you that ISKCON WILL flourish

> for the next 9,500

> years, despite what certain demons try to do - to

> the contrary.

>

> ysmsd

>

>

>

>

> --- Sankarshan Das Adhikari

> <sda (AT) UltimateSelfRealization (DOT) com> wrote:

>

> > The ritvikvadis say that ye krsna-tattva-vetta,

> sei guru haya (One who

> > knows the science of Krishna can become a

> > guru) means

> > that one who knows the science of Krishna may

> become a siksa-guru or a

> > vartma-pradarsaka-guru but not an initiator guru.

> > According to

> > the ritvikvadis only Srila Prabhupada can be the

> initiator guru.

> > However, this interpretation is not acceptable to

> Vaisnavas because

> > according to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada,

> the word guru in this

> > verse spoken by Lord Caitanya applies to the

> vartma-pradarsaka guru,

> > the siksa guru, and the diksha (initiator) guru as

> well.

> >

> > This deviant ritvik philosophy is an attempt by

> the personality of

> > Kali to bring an end to the Brahma Sampradaya. If

> this is ritvik

> > philosophy is allowed to go unchecked it will

> bring about the complete

> > destruction of ISKCON. Therefore it must quickly

> and thoroughly

> > uprooted and defeated for the sake of Lord

> Caitanya's mission.

> > The ritvikvadis call themselves the ISKCON Revival

> Movement when in

> > fact they are the ISKCON Ruination Movement.

> >

> > That the knower of the Krishna science can be an

> initiator guru is

> > confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in the Teachings of

> Lord Caitanya as

> > follows,

> >

> > "Whatever position one may have, if he is fully

> conversant with the

> > science of Krishna, Krishna consciousness, he can

> become a bona fide

> > spiritual master, initiator or teacher of the

> science." TLC, Chapter

> > 31

> >

> >

> > Sankarshan Das Adhikari

> > 15 January 2005

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

-----------------------

> > To from this mailing list, send an

> email

> > to:

> > Initiations.in.ISKCON-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

> >

>

>

>

>

> Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam

> protection around

>

>

>

>

>

>

-----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email

> to:

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

http://info.mail./mail_250

[Guest guest]

My Dear Bhakta Eric,

Please accept my blessings.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Keeping Srila Prabhupada in the center means to follow

his instructions. The ritviks are kicking Srila Prabhupada

out of the center and putting themselves in the center by

telling us to disobey him and follow Krishna Kant Desai's

twisted philosophy instead.

 

Srila Prabhupada personally encouraged and guided me how

to become a spiritual master and these ritviks are trying to

stand in between me and Srila Prabhupada by telling me I cannot

do what Srila Prabhupada has ordered us to do.

 

Srila Prabhupada instructed us not to leave ISKCON. Those devotees

who do so are disobeying his instructions.

 

Hoping this meets you in good health and in a cheerful mood,

Your eternal well-wisher,

 

Sankarshan Das Adhikari

 

 

---CONTACT INFORMATION:

Email: sda (AT) UltimateSelfRealizaiton (DOT) Com

Telephone: 1-512-835-2121

Address: P.O. Box 143073,

Austin, Texas 78714-3073 USA

 

 

 

 

 

failure (AT) pamho (DOT) net [failure (AT) pamho (DOT) net] On Behalf Of

BhaktaErik (AT) cs (DOT) com

Sunday, January 16, 2005 7:23 PM

Sankarsana (das) ACBSP (Austin, Texas - USA)

Re: Don't Break the Disciplic Succesion

 

Hare Krsna,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

I do not understand how keeping Srila Prabhupada as the center in Iskcon

would break the disciplic succession.

 

This will not and can not stop a truly pure devotee from manifesting and

doing as Srila Prabhupada did.

 

There are some of Prabhupada's disciples who broke away and started their

own maths and are initiating disciples of their own. Isn't that the proper

method?

 

your servant,

Bhakta Erik

[Guest guest]

Dear Prabhus,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to

Srila Prabhupada.

 

We are discussing the validity of Srila Prabhupada

being terminated as the Diksa Guru of ISKCON, and

being replaced by up to 80 successor acaryas. This is

a historical event, which was engineered by the GBC.

Hence the GBC and these 80 Gurus need to explain and

document the authority for the actions they took. To

date the GBC have given at least 3 contradictory

position papers to explain their position, with their

primary position paper (which the TFO was written in

responce to) being withdrawn due the fact that it was

**"full of lies"** according to the GBC. So naturally

the burden of proof to justify their actions is on

those who have taken the actions - the GBC and the 80

Gurus - what was their authority to STOP Srila

Prabhupada initiating - and them taking up their posts

as successor Diksa Gurus?

 

Now turning to the quote that Ramakanta has provided

from the Nectar of Devotion, neither the GBC nor the

80 Gurus have offered that quote, which is actually

verse 1 from the Nectar of Instruction, as the reason

for their actions. Hence we need to discuss what has

happened, and see if it is right, and not a

theoretical reason which has never been invoked by

anyone to act as Diksa Guru.

 

The historical facts are as follows:

 

a) In 1978 11 men claimed that they had replaced Srila

Prabhupada as Diksa Gurus for ISKCON. The

justification they offered then, and still offer now,

is the May 28th conversation, coupled with the July

9th directive (since that is the only place where the

11 are actually named).

 

b) Every other Guru (except one - see later) operating

in ISKCON claims they got their authority by a

majority vote of the GBC.

 

THIS is what we are dealing with, and this is the

authorisation we need to examine, to see if it is

valid. If not, then the system we have in place in

ISKCON is incorrect and Srila Prabhupada remains as

the Diksa Guru for ISKCON. We can deal with possible

theoretical authorisations that some other theoretical

Guru offers, when and if that situation arises. Best

to deal with the reality we have now.

 

There is however ONE strange exception to the above

state of affairs. One of the 80 Gurus, Sankarshan Das,

claims that he was authorised to be Guru when he read

a sentence from the CC some time in the early 80s.

That's when and how he claims he was authorised to be

a Diksa Guru. However instead of following this

instruction from Srila Prabhupada, he instead decided

to deviate for the next 20 years and instead wait to

get authorised by the GBC, whom he claims were

deviating from Srila Prabhupada for not following

Srila Prabhupada's instructions in this regard and

allowing him to act as the powerful acarya he claims

he is. Still he took the course of deviant behaviour

of following a deviant body for the next 20 years.

 

However when this point of Sankershan's authorisation

was brought up for discussion, Sankershan decided to

run away claiming he suddenly had too much preaching

to do. From the archives, we can note, on 1/30/2004

Krishnakant posted his analysis of Sankershan prabhu's

'authorisation' to be Guru. Sankershan prabhu then did

not respond, but rather on the 15/2/2004, his next

posting in his debate with Krishnakant - which was via

a thread with the subject heading 'Showdown at the

Vaikuntha Corral' - states:

 

"Owing to time constraints from an ecstatically

tremendous burden of preaching work I am taking a

temporary leave of absence from active participation

in this conference. It's not that I'm taking a

sabbatical because I not able to refute Krishna Kant

and Sudama. I can certainly easily defeat all of their

endless stream of arguments. I really am extremely

busy with very important service for Srila

Prabhupada." (Sankershan Prabhu, 2/15/2004)

 

Note the words "I am not able to refute Krishna Kant"

and "I can certainly easily defeat". This means he had

**YET** to defeat Krishna Kant prabhu, but he however,

claims he could not stay around to actually do it

because he was busy.

 

Basically if none of the 80 Gurus can show their

credentials for being a Guru -i.e. stating when and

how they were authorised by Srila Prabhupada to become

Diksa Gurus in ISKCON - then they are all imposters

and Srila Prabhupada remains unchallenged as the Diksa

Guru for ISKCON.

 

Hence we need to first discuss the actual 80

authorisations that ACTUALLY exist in REALITY, and not

some possible authorisation that MAY be claimed in the

future by some theoretical Diksa Guru (maybe by

Ramakanta when and if he applies to be Guru??)

 

I guess therefore, on this conference, that means we

need for Sankarsana to at least explain how and when

he was authorised to be a Diksa Guru?

 

YS,

 

Madhusudana Dasa

 

 

 

 

--- "Ramakanta (das) HKS (PAMHO.NET SysOp) (Zurich -

CH)" <Ramakanta.HKS (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote:

 

> Sankarshan Prabhu wrote:

>

> > That the knower of the Krishna science can be an

> initiator guru is

> > confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in the Teachings of

> Lord Caitanya as

> > follows,

> >

> > "Whatever position one may have, if he is fully

> conversant with the

> > science of Krishna, Krishna consciousness, he can

> become a bona fide

> > spiritual master, initiator or teacher of the

> science." TLC, Chapter 31

>

> Madhusudana Prabhu answered:

>

> > Here again the key words are *he can become*.

> >

> > How is the instruction that something can happen

> the

> > same as authorising that it must?

> > ...

>

> What about "is permitted to make disciples" (NOD,

> chapter 7)?

> Would the ritvik followers accept this as an

> authorization?

>

> ys Ramakanta dasa

>

>

-----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email

> to:

> Initiations.in.ISKCON-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

All your favorites on one personal page – Try My

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Prabhu's

 

Please accept my humble obeisances.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Sankarshan prabhu asks....

"Does this mean that submissive spirit gives you the

ability to understand the Bhagavad-gita but not the

authorization to do so?"

 

If Sankarshan prabhu **can** demonstrate by reference

to Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Where it is stated

that authorisation is required to understand Bhagavad

- gita. Then I will know how to respond to this

challenge of his. Until that happens, quite frankly,

his challenge seems a bit off - topic, that is, of

course.

 

My dictionary defines can as follows ...

can = Be able to, have the ability to

Is this acceptable?

 

ys

Madhusudana dasa

 

 

 

 

--- "Sankarsana (das) ACBSP (Austin, Texas - USA)"

<Sankarsana.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote:

 

> This "can doesn't mean can" argument is not valid.

> This Prabhu wants to bring in UK driving

> requirements

> to support his case. Just see. Instead of using

> raksasa

> so-called civilization to support our case we should

> revert

> to Srila Prabhupada.

>

> Here's how Srila Prabhupadas uses the word "can":

>

> "with that submissive spirit we can understand the

> Bhagavad-gita."

>

> Does this mean that submissive spirit gives you the

> ability to

> understand the Bhagavad-gita but not the

> authorization to do so?

>

> I challenge this Prabhu to show substantial cases

> from Srila Prabhupada's

> teachings in which his use of can means ability but

> no authorization.

>

> Guru Parampara ki jaya! May it continue unbroken

> for at least the

> next 10,000 years!

>

>

>

>

> failure (AT) pamho (DOT) net [failure (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

> On Behalf Of Madhusudana

> Dasa

> Saturday, January 15, 2005 5:22 PM

> Sankarshan Das Adhikari; Initiations in ISKCON

> Re: Ritvik Philosophy If left Unchecked

> Will be the Death of ISKCON

>

> In reply to Sankarshan prabhu:

> Who has quoted .....

>

> "Whatever position one may have, if he is fully

> conversant with the science

> of Krishna, Krishna consciousness, he can become a

> bona fide spiritual

> master, initiator or teacher of the science." TLC,

> Chapter 31

>

> My reply is the same as it was for the last quote

> you posted.....

>

> Here again the key words are *he can become*.

>

> How is the instruction that something can happen the

> same as authorising

> that it must? e.g. one can drive a car once one is

> 17 years old (in the UK).

> But separate qualification and then authorisation is

> also required.

> It is not automatic. Qualification and authorisation

> must also be there.

> Srila Prabhupada taught that specific authorisation

> from the predecessor

> acarya was essential before anyone could act as a

> diksa guru:

>

> "One should take initiation from a bona fide

> spiritual master coming in the

> disciplic succession, who is authorised by his

> predecessor spiritual master.

> This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54,

> purport)

>

> The ISKCON movement is based on the teachings of

> Srila Prabhupada, and not

> the GBC. If one wants to drive a car, then this is

> possible for all, but

> only with

> *qualification* and *authorisation*. Ironically,

> these self-appointed gurus

> have no authorisation to act independently as

> initiating gurus. I can prove

> this, as there are no gurus in any bonafide

> sampradaya that have been voted

> into the position of a guru. I quote from Srila

> Prabhupada:

>

> "Guru cannot be self-made. No. There is no such

> single instance throughout

> the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many

> rascals, they are becoming

> guru without any authority. That is not guru. You

> must be authorised. Evam

> parampara-praptam imam ra... As soon as the

> parampara is...kalena yogo nasta

> parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual

> potency finished.

> You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big

> words, but it will never be

> effective." (Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 27th February

> 1977, Mayapur,

> India)

>

> So where is the authorisation for the present ISKCON

> (so-called) diksa-gurus?

>

>

> btw. I must compliment you on a rather astute

> observation - that IRM (Ritvik

> Philosophy) will be the death of the *MAYA* ISKCON

> which YOU steadfastly

> represent.

> However let me assure you that ISKCON WILL flourish

> for the next 9,500

> years, despite what certain demons try to do - to

> the contrary.

>

> ysmsd

>

>

>

>

> --- Sankarshan Das Adhikari

> <sda (AT) UltimateSelfRealization (DOT) com> wrote:

>

> > The ritvikvadis say that ye krsna-tattva-vetta,

> sei guru haya (One who

> > knows the science of Krishna can become a

> > guru) means

> > that one who knows the science of Krishna may

> become a siksa-guru or a

> > vartma-pradarsaka-guru but not an initiator guru.

> > According to

> > the ritvikvadis only Srila Prabhupada can be the

> initiator guru.

> > However, this interpretation is not acceptable to

> Vaisnavas because

> > according to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada,

> the word guru in this

> > verse spoken by Lord Caitanya applies to the

> vartma-pradarsaka guru,

> > the siksa guru, and the diksha (initiator) guru as

> well.

> >

> > This deviant ritvik philosophy is an attempt by

> the personality of

> > Kali to bring an end to the Brahma Sampradaya. If

> this is ritvik

> > philosophy is allowed to go unchecked it will

> bring about the complete

> > destruction of ISKCON. Therefore it must quickly

> and thoroughly

> > uprooted and defeated for the sake of Lord

> Caitanya's mission.

> > The ritvikvadis call themselves the ISKCON Revival

> Movement when in

> > fact they are the ISKCON Ruination Movement.

> >

> > That the knower of the Krishna science can be an

> initiator guru is

> > confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in the Teachings of

> Lord Caitanya as

> > follows,

> >

> > "Whatever position one may have, if he is fully

> conversant with the

> > science of Krishna, Krishna consciousness, he can

> become a bona fide

> > spiritual master, initiator or teacher of the

> science." TLC, Chapter

> > 31

> >

> >

> > Sankarshan Das Adhikari

> > 15 January 2005

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

-----------------------

> > To from this mailing list, send an

> email

> > to:

> > Initiations.in.ISKCON-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

> >

>

>

>

>

> Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam

> protection around

>

>

>

>

>

>

-----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email

> to:

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - You care about security. So do we.

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Prabhu's

 

Please accept my humble obeisances.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Mahashakti prabhu writes ....

 

" ......I interpret this to mean that no one can be a

bonafide guru unless he is the bonafide servant......"

 

In reference to the following quote ...

 

"One should take initiation from a bona fide

spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession,

who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master.

This is called diksa -vidhana."(S.B. 4.8.54,purport)

 

Here is what Srila Prabhupada has to say about

interpretation.

 

"We are not concerned with this or that testament but

only with the words used in the commandments. If you

want to interpret these words, that is something else.

We understand the direct meaning. “Thou shalt not

kill” means, “The Christians should not kill.” You may

put forth interpretations in order to continue the

present way of action, but we understand very clearly

that there is no need for interpretation.

**Interpretation is necessary if things are not

clear**. But here the meaning is clear. “Thou shalt

not kill” is a clear instruction. Why should we

interpret it?" [sSR 4]

 

The relevant key words here are **"Interpretation is

necessary if things are not clear"**

So what is it **exactly** that is UNCLEAR in this

statement by Srila Prabhpada that requires an

interpretation by Mahashakti prabhu?

 

"One should take initiation from a bona fide

spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession,

who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master.

This is called diksa -vidhana."(S.B. 4.8.54,purport)

 

ys

Madhusudana dasa

 

 

 

 

--- Mahashakti dasa <mahashaktidasa > wrote:

 

>

>

> My dear Madhusudhana prabhu,

>

> You are speaking learned words but I challenge

> your

> interpretation of the meaning.

>

>

> > "One should take initiation from a bona fide

> > spiritual master coming in the

> > disciplic succession, who is authorised by his

> > predecessor spiritual master.

> > This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54,

> > purport)

>

> In this statement, I see that Srila Prabhupada is

> saying that to be a bona fide spiritual master, one

> must be coming in disciplic succession. This

> statement

> is made because there are so many so-called gurus

> who

> have no connection to any disciplic succession yet

> they are claiming themselves as guru. Since the

> people

> in general do not know the real credentials of a

> bona

> fide guru, they think all gurus are the same or that

> all paths lead to the same goal; yata mat tata pat.

> As

> far as authorization is concerned, Srila Prabhupada

> is

> further refining his definition of bonafide by

> stating

> that the authority to initiate must be there from

> the

> predecessor acharya. I interpret this to mean that

> no

> one can be a bonafide guru unless he is the bonafide

> servant. Full dependency on the instructions and

> desires of one's guru are the necessary

> qualifications

> for one to initiate or for that matter, to teach.

> >

> > The ISKCON movement is based on the teachings of

> > Srila Prabhupada, and not

> > the GBC. If one wants to drive a car, then this is

> > possible for all, but

> > only with

> > *qualification* and *authorisation*. Ironically,

> > these self-appointed gurus

> > have no authorisation to act independently as

> > initiating gurus. I can prove

> > this, as there are no gurus in any bonafide

> > sampradaya that have been voted

> > into the position of a guru. I quote from Srila

> > Prabhupada:

> >

> > "Guru cannot be self-made. No. There is no such

> > single instance throughout

> > the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many

> > rascals, they are becoming

> > guru without any authority. That is not guru. You

> > must be authorised. Evam

> > parampara-praptam imam ra... As soon as the

> > parampara is...kalena yogo nasta

> > parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual

> > potency finished.

> > You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big

> > words, but it will never be

> > effective." (Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 27th

> February

> > 1977, Mayapur,

> > India)

>

>

> In this statement, Srila Prabhupada is simply

> reiterating that a guru cannot be self made. He must

> be coming in disciplic succession. There are many

> Indian gurus who are not coming in any disciplic

> succession. They have managed to fool the innocent

> people with some magic tricks and convinced others

> that I am god, you are god, we are all god. So

> Prabhupada is challenging these rascals, that what

> is

> their qualification? To have qualification, he says

> they must be coming in disciplic succession;

> otherwise

> their realizations are just mental speculation. So,

> our ISKCON gurus are coming in disciplic succession.

> This passage was not meant for disciples of Srila

> Prabhupada.

>

> " I can prove this, as there are no gurus in any

> bonafide sampradaya that have been voted

> into the position of a guru". Pretty broad and

> unconfirmed statement you make. Most other

> organizations do appoint a successor. But Srila

> Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada did

> not appoint any one successor. Both envisioned many

> of

> their disciples becoming diksha gurus while having

> the

> overall management of the Temples carried out

> through

> the medium of a GBC and Temple president system. I

> interpret the actions of our Prabhupadas to mean

> that

> a single appointed successor is not the will of Lord

> Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Mahaprabhu states in CC,

> anyone

> can be guru if he is familiar with the science of

> God.

> So by not appointing one successor, Srila Prabhupada

> is opening the door for all of his disciples to be

> guru and spread Krsna Consciousness far and wide.

>

>

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Mahashakti dasa

> >

> > So where is the authorisation for the present

> ISKCON

> > (so-called) diksa-gurus?

>

>

>

> >

> >

> > btw. I must compliment you on a rather astute

> > observation - that IRM (Ritvik

> > Philosophy) will be the death of the *MAYA* ISKCON

> > which YOU steadfastly

> > represent.

> > However let me assure you that ISKCON WILL

> flourish

> > for the next 9,500

> > years, despite what certain demons try to do - to

> > the contrary.

> >

> > ysmsd

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > --- Sankarshan Das Adhikari

> > <sda (AT) UltimateSelfRealization (DOT) com> wrote:

> >

> > > The ritvikvadis say that ye krsna-tattva-vetta,

> > sei guru haya (One who

> > > knows the science of Krishna can become a

> > > guru) means

> > > that one who knows the science of Krishna may

> > become a siksa-guru or a

> > > vartma-pradarsaka-guru but not an initiator

> guru.

> > > According to

> > > the ritvikvadis only Srila Prabhupada can be the

> > initiator guru.

> > > However, this interpretation is not acceptable

> to

> > Vaisnavas because

> > > according to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada,

> > the word guru in this

> > > verse spoken by Lord Caitanya applies to the

> > vartma-pradarsaka guru,

> > > the siksa guru, and the diksha (initiator) guru

> as

> > well.

> > >

> > > This deviant ritvik philosophy is an attempt by

> > the personality of

> > > Kali to bring an end to the Brahma Sampradaya.

> If

> > this is ritvik

> > > philosophy is allowed to go unchecked it will

> > bring about the complete

> > > destruction of ISKCON. Therefore it must

> quickly

> > and thoroughly

> > > uprooted and defeated for the sake of Lord

> > Caitanya's mission.

> > > The ritvikvadis call themselves the ISKCON

> Revival

> > Movement when in

> > > fact they are the ISKCON Ruination Movement.

> > >

> > > That the knower of the Krishna science can be an

> > initiator guru is

> > > confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in the Teachings

> of

> > Lord Caitanya as

> > > follows,

> > >

> > > "Whatever position one may have, if he is fully

> > conversant with the

> > > science of Krishna, Krishna consciousness, he

> can

> > become a bona fide

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read only the mail you want - Mail SpamGuard.

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhusudana,

 

If you cared to see what I was responding to, it was

YOUR interpretation of the same statement. You quoted

two or three statements from Srila Prabhupada that

"proved" our gurus were not authorized to initiate. I

countered by saying Srila Prabhupada's statements were

aimed at so-called self appointed gurus who lacked the

credentials of a disciplic succession. Our gurus are

very nicely following in disciplic succession so your

use of Prabhupada's quote was poorly taken out of

context.

 

Do not think that your passionate attempts to

discredit our godbrother Sankarshan prabhu is going

anywhere. I have no respect for your nitpicking

mentality that malaligns and speaks condescendingly

towards Vaishnavas. If you want some respect, then

give some respect.

 

I suggest that before you enter the forum with the

hammer of Thor, consider what effect your speech will

have on others. Otherwise, your no different then the

other rtvikvadis and to that I say goodbye.

 

In the service of Guru and Gauranga,

 

Mahashakti dasa

 

 

--- Madhusudana Dasa <july9th_77 > wrote:

 

> Dear Prabhu's

>

> Please accept my humble obeisances.

> All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

>

> Mahashakti prabhu writes ....

>

> " ......I interpret this to mean that no one can be

> a

> bonafide guru unless he is the bonafide

> servant......"

>

> In reference to the following quote ...

>

> "One should take initiation from a bona fide

> spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession,

> who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual

> master.

> This is called diksa -vidhana."(S.B. 4.8.54,purport)

>

>

> Here is what Srila Prabhupada has to say about

> interpretation.

>

> "We are not concerned with this or that testament

> but

> only with the words used in the commandments. If you

> want to interpret these words, that is something

> else.

> We understand the direct meaning. "Thou shalt not

> kill" means, "The Christians should not kill." You

> may

> put forth interpretations in order to continue the

> present way of action, but we understand very

> clearly

> that there is no need for interpretation.

> **Interpretation is necessary if things are not

> clear**. But here the meaning is clear. "Thou shalt

> not kill" is a clear instruction. Why should we

> interpret it?" [sSR 4]

>

> The relevant key words here are **"Interpretation is

> necessary if things are not clear"**

> So what is it **exactly** that is UNCLEAR in this

> statement by Srila Prabhpada that requires an

> interpretation by Mahashakti prabhu?

>

> "One should take initiation from a bona fide

> spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession,

> who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual

> master.

> This is called diksa -vidhana."(S.B. 4.8.54,purport)

>

> ys

> Madhusudana dasa

>

>

>

>

>

> --- Mahashakti dasa <mahashaktidasa >

> wrote:

>

> >

> >

> > My dear Madhusudhana prabhu,

> >

> > You are speaking learned words but I challenge

> > your

> > interpretation of the meaning.

> >

> >

> > > "One should take initiation from a bona fide

> > > spiritual master coming in the

> > > disciplic succession, who is authorised by his

> > > predecessor spiritual master.

> > > This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54,

> > > purport)

> >

> > In this statement, I see that Srila Prabhupada

> is

> > saying that to be a bona fide spiritual master,

> one

> > must be coming in disciplic succession. This

> > statement

> > is made because there are so many so-called gurus

> > who

> > have no connection to any disciplic succession yet

> > they are claiming themselves as guru. Since the

> > people

> > in general do not know the real credentials of a

> > bona

> > fide guru, they think all gurus are the same or

> that

> > all paths lead to the same goal; yata mat tata

> pat.

> > As

> > far as authorization is concerned, Srila

> Prabhupada

> > is

> > further refining his definition of bonafide by

> > stating

> > that the authority to initiate must be there from

> > the

> > predecessor acharya. I interpret this to mean that

> > no

> > one can be a bonafide guru unless he is the

> bonafide

> > servant. Full dependency on the instructions and

> > desires of one's guru are the necessary

> > qualifications

> > for one to initiate or for that matter, to teach.

> > >

> > > The ISKCON movement is based on the teachings of

> > > Srila Prabhupada, and not

> > > the GBC. If one wants to drive a car, then this

> is

> > > possible for all, but

> > > only with

> > > *qualification* and *authorisation*. Ironically,

> > > these self-appointed gurus

> > > have no authorisation to act independently as

> > > initiating gurus. I can prove

> > > this, as there are no gurus in any bonafide

> > > sampradaya that have been voted

> > > into the position of a guru. I quote from Srila

> > > Prabhupada:

> > >

> > > "Guru cannot be self-made. No. There is no such

> > > single instance throughout

> > > the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so

> many

> > > rascals, they are becoming

> > > guru without any authority. That is not guru.

> You

> > > must be authorised. Evam

> > > parampara-praptam imam ra... As soon as the

> > > parampara is...kalena yogo nasta

> > > parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual

> > > potency finished.

> > > You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big

> > > words, but it will never be

> > > effective." (Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 27th

> > February

> > > 1977, Mayapur,

> > > India)

> >

> >

> > In this statement, Srila Prabhupada is simply

> > reiterating that a guru cannot be self made. He

> must

> > be coming in disciplic succession. There are many

> > Indian gurus who are not coming in any disciplic

> > succession. They have managed to fool the innocent

> > people with some magic tricks and convinced others

> > that I am god, you are god, we are all god. So

> > Prabhupada is challenging these rascals, that what

> > is

> > their qualification? To have qualification, he

> says

> > they must be coming in disciplic succession;

> > otherwise

> > their realizations are just mental speculation.

> So,

> > our ISKCON gurus are coming in disciplic

> succession.

> > This passage was not meant for disciples of Srila

> > Prabhupada.

> >

> > " I can prove this, as there are no gurus in any

> > bonafide sampradaya that have been voted

> > into the position of a guru". Pretty broad and

> > unconfirmed statement you make. Most other

> > organizations do appoint a successor. But Srila

> > Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada

> did

> > not appoint any one successor. Both envisioned

> many

> > of

> > their disciples becoming diksha gurus while having

> > the

> > overall management of the Temples carried out

> > through

> > the medium of a GBC and Temple president system.

> I

> > interpret the actions of our Prabhupadas to mean

> > that

> > a single appointed successor is not the will of

> Lord

> > Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Mahaprabhu states in CC,

> > anyone

> > can be guru if he is familiar with the science of

> > God.

> > So by not appointing one successor, Srila

> Prabhupada

> > is opening the door for all of his disciples to be

> > guru and spread Krsna Consciousness far and wide.

>

> >

> >

> >

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meet the all-new My - Try it today!

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

If I understood you correctly, your argument is as follows:

 

"If it is not recorded that the guru authorized the disciple to become diksa

guru, and if the disciple does not say when and how he was authorized by his

guru, then he is not authorized".

 

If you apply this argument on Srila Prabhupada, you have proven that he was

not authorized to be diksa guru. Since that it probably not your intention,

please explain us what you would accept as an authorization, and then show

us that this authorization is there for Srila Prabhupada but for none of his

disciples.

 

ys Ramakanta dasa

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramakanata Prabhu,

 

PAMHO AGTSP

 

>If I understood you correctly, your argument is as

follows:

>"If it is not recorded that the guru authorized the

disciple to become

> >diksa guru, and if the disciple does not say when

and how he was authorized

>by his guru, then he is not authorized".

 

1) NO this is not my ARGUMENT.

 

2) My QUESTION is that, since there are currently 80

people who already claim they were authorised to be

Diksa Gurus, can they please simply STATE when and how

this authorisation order was given to them by Srila

Prabhupada.

 

3) The information in 2) relates to a historical

event, and is independent of what someone else may or

may not accept as an authorisation order, or whether

or not there exists anyone who even is challenging the

exisiting Guru system or not.

80 people and their governing body are both ALREADY

claiming they are authorised to act as Diksa Gurus -

it has nothing to do with 'ritviks' suddenly asking

this question. Their authorisation order supposedly

already EXISTS.

 

4) Thus they should simply STATE how and when it

happened, or admit they were not authorised. Its real

simple.

 

5) I am not trying to apply any argument or prove that

no one is authorised at this point. I am simply ASKING

A QUESTION regarding a historical event. 80 people and

their governing body claim that between 1978 till the

present day, that these 80 were ordered by Srila

Prabhupada to take up the role of Diksa Gurus. I am

simply asking, please then STATE, how and when this

happened.

What I think, or anyone else thinks or accepts, or

what happened with Srila Prabhupada, has no bearing

on, nor can it change, the answer these 80 individuals

should be able to give regarding the details of a

historical event which has already happened.

 

The very fact that anytime this question is asked, the

GBC and the Gurus instead of simply answering, try and

analyse Srila Prabhupada's authorisation, or try and

counter-ask those who are not even claiming to have

received a Diksa Guru authorisation order (DGAO), to

explain what it could be, makes one suspicious that

maybe they never received such an order, and hence are

trying to always evade answering.

 

But I am keeping an open mind - and heartily wait for

the when and how regarding these 80 DGAO's. Once we

have these DGAOs on the table it will be very clear

who was authorised to be a Diksa Guru in ISKCON, and

who was not.

 

YS

 

MSD

 

 

 

 

--- "Ramakanta (das) HKS (PAMHO.NET SysOp) (Zurich -

CH)" <Ramakanta.HKS (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote:

 

> Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

>

> If I understood you correctly, your argument is as

> follows:

>

> "If it is not recorded that the guru authorized the

> disciple to become diksa

> guru, and if the disciple does not say when and how

> he was authorized by his

> guru, then he is not authorized".

>

> If you apply this argument on Srila Prabhupada, you

> have proven that he was

> not authorized to be diksa guru. Since that it

> probably not your intention,

> please explain us what you would accept as an

> authorization, and then show

> us that this authorization is there for Srila

> Prabhupada but for none of his

> disciples.

>

> ys Ramakanta dasa

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Take Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

http://mobile./maildemo

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

> 1) NO this is not my ARGUMENT.

 

If a guru does not say when and how he was authorized by his guru, is he

then authorized or not?

 

> 2) My QUESTION is that, since there are currently 80

> people who already claim they were authorised to be

> Diksa Gurus, can they please simply STATE when and how

> this authorisation order was given to them by Srila

> Prabhupada.

 

Why are you asking this question? Are you just collecting some statistics?

 

If an ISKCON guru said "Yes I have been authorized", would you accept it?

If not, then please tell us what you would accept as an authorization.

 

> 5) I am not trying to apply any argument or prove that

> no one is authorised at this point. I am simply ASKING

> A QUESTION regarding a historical event. 80 people and

> their governing body claim that between 1978 till the

> present day, that these 80 were ordered by Srila

> Prabhupada to take up the role of Diksa Gurus. I am

> simply asking, please then STATE, how and when this

> happened.

 

You are asking this question in the wrong forum. Only two members of it are

initiating gurus and one already answered.

 

ys Ramakanta dasa

[Guest guest]

> The historical facts are as follows:

>

> a) In 1978 11 men claimed that they had replaced Srila

> Prabhupada as Diksa Gurus for ISKCON. The

> justification they offered then, and still offer now,

> is the May 28th conversation, coupled with the July

> 9th directive (since that is the only place where the

> 11 are actually named).

 

In the May 28 conversation Srila Prabhupada expresses clearly and

unequivocally how he wanted initiations to proceed in his absence.

 

Let's look at some other historical facts. As I described in another text

Ritvikvada was invented sometime in the mid 80s by Nityananda from the Vedic

Village project. Before he and Rupa Vilasa came up with the idea nobody had

ever thought about it. Nityananda had an axe to grind with the GBC and

ritvikvada was his attempt to instigate the devotees of ISKCON against the

GBC. From observing the history of Nityananda it is clear that he is not a

serious devotee who has given his life to Srila Prabhupada's mission. After

he came out of jail he continued his crusade against the GBC by instigating

the poison rumors. These are some historical facts about the one who

invented the ritvik idea.

 

Isn't there anyone else but me who finds it suspect that both ritvikvada and

the poison-rumors originate from the same person?

 

Furthermore, if, as the ritviks claim, ritvikvada is such a clear cut issue

why didn't anyone think about it until 10 years after Prabhupada's

departure? KK Desai didn't come out with TFO until some 13 years after his

departure. And he didn't even invent the idea, he just took it over from

Nityananda. These are some important historical facts about ritvikvada,

which shows that it is an unauthorized speculation.

 

<snip>

 

> I guess therefore, on this conference, that means we

> need for Sankarsana to at least explain how and when

> he was authorised to be a Diksa Guru?

 

Actually, Sankarsana doesn't have to prove anything to you. He is a bona

fide disciple of a bona fide guru. It is not stated anywhere in sastra that

a disciple needs the authorization or an explicit order from his guru to

become a guru himself. In the parampara system any bona fide disciple

automatically becomes the next guru. It is only when his own guru is present

that he needs the explicit order to accept disciples.

[Guest guest]

Dear Prabhu's

 

Please accept my humble obeisances.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

1) All the ISKCON Gurus are ALREADY claiming de facto

via their actions of taking disciples and posing as

bona fide Gurus that "Yes I have been authorised."

 

2) Now they can easily state HOW and WHEN this

happened, something which should be readily at hand

for them, since it is an actual historical event which

has happened 80 times.

 

3) This question is asked because since this is the

"Initiations in ISKCON" forum, it is most relevant to

ask HOW and WHY are initiations in ISKCON conducted

the way they are. That is when, why and how did these

80 persons suddenly see fit to prevent Srila

Prabhupada from initiating and instead begin

initiating themselves. The answer of course is for

them simply to state how and when they were given the

Diksa Guru authorisation order (DGAO) by Srila

Prabhupada.

 

4) It is of course theoretically possible that even if

they do not present this evidence, they could still be

authorised, just as I could really be President Bush

masquerading as "Madhusudana Das". Anything is

theoretically possible. In rational human and

vaisnava society however, it is settled via evidence.

 

5) The issue is not whether or not THIS is the right

forum. The issue is that a discussion regarding

"Initiation in ISKCON", the title of this forum,

cannot even BEGIN until the questions of the why, how

and when regarding initiations in ISKCON are answered.

Unless that happens, then this forum will have to

restrict itself to giving reasons as to why Srila

Prabhupada was stopped from initiating in ISKCON

(which was THE method for "Initiations in ISKCON" from

1966 onwards), which do not involve claiming anything

relating to how Srila Prabhupada's disciples were

ordered to initiate themselves.

 

To your credit, to a partial extent, Ramakanta, you

have tried your best to do that.

 

(And as was pointed out earlier with documented

archival evidence, one of the Gurus did NOT answer the

question fully, rather he gave some answer which, when

he was further questioned to explain, he refused to

answer and ran away.)

 

 

ys

Madhusudana dasa

 

 

 

 

--- "Ramakanta (das) HKS (PAMHO.NET SysOp) (Zurich -

CH)" <Ramakanta.HKS (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote:

 

> Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

>

> > 1) NO this is not my ARGUMENT.

>

> If a guru does not say when and how he was

> authorized by his guru, is he

> then authorized or not?

>

> > 2) My QUESTION is that, since there are currently

> 80

> > people who already claim they were authorised to

> be

> > Diksa Gurus, can they please simply STATE when and

> how

> > this authorisation order was given to them by

> Srila

> > Prabhupada.

>

> Why are you asking this question? Are you just

> collecting some statistics?

>

> If an ISKCON guru said "Yes I have been authorized",

> would you accept it?

> If not, then please tell us what you would accept as

> an authorization.

>

> > 5) I am not trying to apply any argument or prove

> that

> > no one is authorised at this point. I am simply

> ASKING

> > A QUESTION regarding a historical event. 80 people

> and

> > their governing body claim that between 1978 till

> the

> > present day, that these 80 were ordered by Srila

> > Prabhupada to take up the role of Diksa Gurus. I

> am

> > simply asking, please then STATE, how and when

> this

> > happened.

>

> You are asking this question in the wrong forum.

> Only two members of it are

> initiating gurus and one already answered.

>

> ys Ramakanta dasa

>

>

-----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email

> to:

> Initiations.in.ISKCON-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

> 2) My QUESTION is that, since there are currently 80

> people who already claim they were authorised to be

> Diksa Gurus, can they please simply STATE when and how

> this authorisation order was given to them by Srila

> Prabhupada.

 

Why are you asking this question although as you wrote the ISKCON gurus

already answered it?

Why are you asking this question although Srila Prabhupada said that you

should not ask such a question?

Why are you asking this question although Srila Prabhupada said that you

would not understand the answer?

Why are you asking this question although you are determined not to accept

any answer that does not fit into your list of acceptable answers?

 

Why are you not telling us what you would accept as an authorization?

 

I will continue this discussion with you only if you tell us what you would

accept as an authorization.

 

ys Ramakanta dasa

[Guest guest]

> I will continue this discussion with you only if you tell us what you

> would accept as an authorization.

>

> ys Ramakanta dasa

 

Good point. Let's hear it. What will you accept as authorization?

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

> 1) All the ISKCON Gurus are ALREADY claiming de facto

> via their actions of taking disciples and posing as

> bona fide Gurus that "Yes I have been authorised."

>

> 2) Now they can easily state HOW and WHEN this

> happened, something which should be readily at hand

> for them, since it is an actual historical event which

> has happened 80 times.

 

Please quote a reference that confirms your statement 2).

 

Remember, you just wrote me following:

 

> Merely stating a case does NOT constitute proof in its

> self. He is simply looking for fools, by this process

> he has adapted here.

>

> "When speaking in spiritual circles, one’s statements

> must be upheld by the scriptures. One should at once

> quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is

> saying." [bg 17.15p]

 

ys Ramakanta dasa

[Guest guest]

NOD 7]" The purport is that one should not accept as a

spiritual master someone who is fool number one, who

has no direction according to the scriptural

injunctions, whose character is doubtful, who does not

follow the principles of devotional service, or who

has not conquered the influence of the six

sense-gratifying agents. The six agents of sense

gratification are the tongue, the genitals, the belly,

anger, the mind and words. Anyone who has practiced

controlling these six is permitted to make disciples

all over the world. To accept such a spiritual master

is the crucial point for advancement in spiritual

life. One who is fortunate enough to come under the

shelter of a bona fide spiritual master is sure to

traverse the path of spiritual salvation without any ..."

 

 

 

i am sorry but you are not "permitted" to "make disciples" unless you have

conquered.........sense gratification etc. so pls dont selectively quote

prabhupada permitting anyone in that capacity. in fact there is plenty of

evidence that srila prabhupada didnt consider anyone of his disciples

qualified for permission in this field. and its admirably demonstrated that

no one has received permission from prabhupada otherwise how comes so many

of them fly away from the principles....viz clearly they have been

"permitted by the gbc clan

 

from Johnny

[Guest guest]

My dear devotee of the Lord.Srila Prabhupada gave many sannyasa

initiation,and some of them are not sannyasi any more.All what are u doing

is that u wont to disqualifide Srila Prabhupada by telling that he couldnt

make any qualifide diciples.Only someone Who love Srila prabhupada can

undersstand him otherwise we are doing a grait offences against him.Are u

all realy serious.

ys Tpd

[Guest guest]

> i am sorry but you are not "permitted" to "make disciples" unless you have

> conquered.........sense gratification etc. so pls dont selectively quote

> prabhupada permitting anyone in that capacity. in fact there is plenty of

> evidence that srila prabhupada didnt consider anyone of his disciples

> qualified for permission in this field.

 

There are also quotes such as:

 

vaco vegam manasah krodha-vegam jihva-vegam udaropastha-vegam etan

vegan yo visaheta dhirah sarvam apimam prthivim sa sisyat

 

"A sober person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the mind's

demands, the actions of anger and the urges of the tongue, belly and

genitals is qualified to make disciples all over the world." (Nectar

of Instruction 1)

 

sastra-yukty sunipuna drdha-sraddha yanra 'uttama-adhikari, sei

taraye samsara

 

"One who is expert in logic, argument and the revealed scriptures

and who has firm faith in Krsna is classified as a topmost devotee.

He can deliver the whole world." (Cc M.22.65)

 

"A person who is constantly engaged in devotional service by his

body, mind and words, or even a person who is not practically

engaged but is simply desiring to be so, is considered to be

liberated." (NOD Ch.11)

 

"The qualification of a spiritual master is that he must have

realized the conclusion of the scriptures by deliberation and

arguments and thus be able to convince others of these conclusions.

Such great personalities who have taken shelter of the Supreme

Godhead, leaving aside all material considerations, are to be

understood as bona fide spiritual masters." (SB 11.3.21 quoted in

NOD Ch.7)

 

"A person who is always chanting the holy name of the Lord is to be

considered a first-class Vaisnava, and your duty is to serve his

lotus feet." (Cc M.16.172)

 

Then we have these statements from Srila Prabhupada. In chapter 3 of

NOD he defines an uttama-adhikari:

 

"He is very expert in the study of relevant scriptures, and he is

also expert in putting forward arguments in terms of those

scriptures. He very nicely presents conclusions with perfect

discretion in considering the ways of devotional service in a

decisive way. He understands perfectly that the ultimate goal of

life is to attain the transcendental loving service of Krsna, and he

knows that Krsna is the only object of worship and love.

 

This first-class devotee is one who has strictly followed the rules

and regulations under the training of a bona fide spiritual master

and has sincerely obeyed him in accord with revealed scriptures.

Thus, being fully trained to preach and become a spiritual master

himself, he is considered first-class.

 

The first-class devotee never deviates from the principles of higher

authority, and he attains firm faith in the scripture by

understanding with all reason and arguments. When we speak of

arguments and reason, it means arguments and reason on the basis of

revealed scriptures."

 

"A conditioned soul is hampered by four defects: he is sure to

commit mistakes, he is sure to become illusioned, he has a tendency

to cheat others, and his senses are imperfect. Consequently we have

to take direction from liberated persons. This Krsna consciousness

movement directly receives instructions from the Supreme Personality

of Godhead via persons who are strictly following His instructions.

Although a follower may not be a liberated person, if he follows the

supreme liberated Personality of Godhead, his actions are naturally

liberated from the contamination of material nature. Lord Caitanya

therefore says: 'By My order you may become a spiritual master.' One

can immediately become a spiritual master by having full faith in

the transcendental words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and

by following His instructions." (SB 4.18.5p)

 

"Sanatana Gosvami clearly defines the bona fide spiritual master.

One must act according to the scriptural injunctions and at the same

time preach.One who does so is a bona fide spiritual master.

Haridasa Thakura was the ideal spiritual master because he regularly

chanted on his beads the prescribed number of times. Indeed, he was

chanting the holy name of the Lord three hundred thousand times a

day. Similarly, the members of the Krsna consciousness movement

chant the minimum number of sixteen rounds a day, which can be done

without difficulty, and at the same time they must preach the cult

of Caitanya Mahaprabhu according to the gospel of Bhagavad-gita As

It Is. One who does so is quite fit to become a spiritual master for

the entire world." (Cc Ant 4.103p)

 

"When a neophyte devotee is actually initiated and engaged in

devotional service by the orders of the spiritual master, he should

be accepted immediately as a bona fide Vaisnava, and obeisances

should be offered unto him. Out of many such Vaisnavas, one may be

found to be very seriously engaged in the service of the Lord and

strictly following all the regulative principles, chanting the

prescribed number of rounds on japa beads and always thinking of how

to spread the Krsna consciousness movement. Such a Vaisnava should

be accepted as an uttama-adhikari, highly advanced devotee, and his

association should always be sought." (NOI 5p)

 

"A first-class devotee does not at all see anyone who is not in the

service of the Lord, but the second-class devotee makes distinctions

between devotees and non-devotees. The second-class devotees are

therefore meant for preaching work, and as referred to in the above

verse, they must loudly preach the glories of the Lord. The

second-class devotee accepts disciplesfrom the section of

third-class devotees or non-devotees. Sometimes the first-class

devotee also comes down to the category of a second-class devotee

for preaching work." (SB 2.3.21p)

 

"When a person realizes himself to be an eternal servitor of Krsna,

he loses interest in everything but Krsna's service. Always thinking

of Krsna, devising means by which to spread the holy name of Krsna,

he understands that his only business is in spreading the Krsna

consciousness movement all over the world. Such a person is to be

recognized as an uttama-adhikari, and his association should be

immediately accepted. Indeed, the advanced uttama-adhikari Vaisnava

devotee should be accepted as a spiritual master. Everything one

possesses should be offered to him." (NOI 5p)

 

"The spiritual master's qualification is that he is brahma-nistham,

which means that he has given up all other activities and has

dedicated his life to working only for the Supreme Personality of

Godhead, Krsna. ... The prime symptom of one who has become a

spiritual master in disciplic succession is that he is one hundred

percent fixed in bhakti-yoga." (Krsna, The Supreme Personality of

Godhead)

 

"The madhyama-adhikari Vaisnava can awaken others to Krsna

consciousness and engage them in duties whereby they can advance."

(Cc M.16.74p)

 

"Everyone begins his devotional life in the neophyte stage, but if

one properly finishes chanting the prescribed number of rounds of

hari-nama, he is elevated step by step to the highest platform,

uttama-adhikari." (NOI 5p)

 

"The siksa- or diksa-guru who has a disciple who strongly executes

devotional service like Dhruva Maharaja can be carried by the

disciple even though the instructor is not as advanced. The Krsna

consciousness movement is spreading now all over the world, and

sometimes I think that even though I am crippled in many ways, if

one of my disciples becomes as strong as Dhruva Maharaja, then he

will be able to carry me with him to Vaikuntha." (SB 4.12.33p)

 

"Unless one is actually a devotee, he cannot see another devotee

perfectly. One should therefore avoid observing a pure devotee

externally, but should try to see the internal features and

understand how he is engaged in the transcendental loving service of

the Lord. In this way one can avoid seeing the pure devotee from a

material point of view, and thus one can gradually become a purified

devotee himself." (NOI 6p)

 

"Our system, parampara system, is that, for example, I am just a

disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. I don't say that I am

liberated, I am conditioned. But because I am following the

instruction of Bhaktisiddhanta, I'm liberated. This is the

distinction between conditioned and liberated. When one is under the

direction of a liberated person...The same thing: Electricity. The

copper is not electricity, but, when it is charged with electricity

if it is touched, that is electricity. And similarly, this parampara

system, the electricity is going. If you cut the parampara system,

then there is no electricity. Therefore it is stressed so much. Sa

kalena mahata yogo nastah parantapa [bg 4.2: 'In course of time the

succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to

be lost']. The electricity is lost." (Morning Walk, Bombay, 1/4/77)

 

"Yes, [those who follow] they're also pure devotees because they're

following my instruction. Just like a technician, he is expert, but

somebody is assisting him. So the assistants, because they are

following the instruction of the expert, therefore their work is

also complete. So it is not necessarily that one has to become pure

devotee immediately. Just like we are also following the instruction

our spiritual master. I don't claim that I am pure devotee or

perfect, but my only qualification is that I am trying to follow the

instruction of the perfect. Similarly... This is called disciplic

succession . Just like here it is stated that Krsna is the original

spiritual master and Arjuna is the original student."

 

"...If we follow Arjuna and Krsna, then we get the perfect

knowledge. We may not be cent percent perfect, but as far as

possible, if we follow the instruction as it is, that much perfect.,

In this way one will get perfection. So one has to follow. The same

example, try to understand, that a perfect, expert technologist or

technician or mechanic is working, and somebody is working under his

instruction. So this somebody, because he is strictly working under

the instruction of the expert, he's also expert. He may not be cent

percent expert, but his work is expert. Is that clear?

 

Because he is working under the expert. Do you follow? So if you

follow pure devotee, then you are also pure devotee. It may not be

one is cent percent pure. Because we are trying to raise ourself

from the conditional life. But if we strictly follow the pure

devotee, then we are also pure devotee. So far we do, that is pure.

So pure devotee does not mean one has to become immediately cent

percent pure. But if he sticks to the principle that 'we'll follow a

pure devotee,' then his actions are...he is as good as a pure

devotee. It is not I am explaining in my own way. It is the

explanation of the Bhagavat. Mahajano yena gatah sa panthah. we have

to follow the footprints of pure devotees."

 

(Lecture, Los Angeles, 11/25/68)

[Guest guest]

My dear devotee of the Lord. Srila Prabhupada gave many sannyasa

initiation,and some of them are not sannyasi any more. All what are you

doing is that you wont to disqualified Srila Prabhupada by telling that he

couldn't make any qualified disciples. Only someone Who love Srila

Prabhupada can understand him otherwise we are doing a great offences

against him. Are you all really serious.

ys Tpd