Poll on initiations in ISKCON

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Please vote for the system you support. If you have another choice, post it and I will add it to the list.

[aashish108 0]

what about "ISKCON System, some Guru's are liberated souls" ? not saying the others are unqualified though, just that they may be on different stages of bhakti.

[Yegan 0]

I believe the above proposition by aashish108 deserves to be added in the poll list .

Also liberated souls can be interpreted in various ways, and in this regard what is the exact definition of liberated souls as per the scriptures?

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Slight modification:

 

ISKCON System, Gurus must be liberated souls

ISKCON System, Gurus do not need to be liberated souls

 

 

First case is if you agree with current ISKCON system, but believe one must be initiated by a liberated soul. Second case if you believe ISKCON system, but feel a conditioned soul can also act as guru.

 

Definition of liberated soul is in regards to Prabhupada's regular usage, mahabhagavata, etc.

 

Another point to consider is if you agree with the last option ("Initiation not essential, following Prabhupada is primary"), then what system did Prabhupada want followed after his departure? Because many people will agree with this, but still some system must have been intended by Prabhupada.

[vijay 0]

What about one titled free flow of faith or something like that. Which means that any system suited for the person will do. I.e someone can go back home through siksa from books, another may need personal guidance from a pure devotee. We have cases in sastra where dhruva maharaj was told to find krishna in the forests by his mother he went and did it and had darshan in 6 months, in other cases it was all the mercy of a pure devotee.

[Guest guest]

 

What about one titled free flow of faith or something like that. Which means that any system suited for the person will do. I.e someone can go back home through siksa from books, another may need personal guidance from a pure devotee. We have cases in sastra where dhruva maharaj was told to find krishna in the forests by his mother he went and did it and had darshan in 6 months, in other cases it was all the mercy of a pure devotee.

 

Even in the case of Dhruva Maharaja, Narada Muni gave the mantra to him and was his guru.

[vijay 0]

 

Even in the case of Dhruva Maharaja, Narada Muni gave the mantra to him and was his guru.

 

I agree, my point isnt that diksa is or isnt needed, but to get back home back to godhead the instructions can come from anyone and anything and this is the primary thing. Bhaktivinoda thakur accepted siksa form jagantha das babaji maharaj.

 

If ones diksa guru passes away in the first year who was their main siksa guru, the disciple can go back home by following his books and/or guidance from other siksa gurus. Prabhupada also points out that once we are cleansed enough even chaitya guru can guide us in many ways. Ritual diksha is over rated (although nessary just like a marriage cermony that makes our vows serious infornt of the lord and which we ask for help in our journey as well as other social and phycological factors that help us ).

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Some examples on disciples who didn't undergo ritual initiation are Arjuna (disciple of Krishna) and Parikshit (disciple of Shukadeva Goswami).

[bija 0]

quote by vijay"What about one titled free flow of faith or something like that. Which means that any system suited for the person will do. I.e someone can go back home through siksa from books, another may need personal guidance from a pure devotee."

 

Vijaya's above comment seems to be a middle way. As per quotes in similar threads lately, Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Lord Caitanya himself say formal initiation may not be necessary. If a jiva is advanced enough due to various reasons this is the case. But are such souls a common thing? Arjuna, Pariksit, Bhaktivinoda, and such are not common souls. If the jiva is advanced enough he will know if his position is in line with Bhaktivinoda's comments that formal initiation may not be necessary.

But it seems that if the position that, Srila Prabhupada's books are all that is needed and the formal initiation process is unecessary, is taken to the extremity, then the process of formal initiation can possibly be placed in a 'minimised light'. When in fact Srila Prabhupada teaches (formal diksha is taught in his books) with balance and implements the diksha ritual. Why have many bonafide acarya's taught and implemented the process of formal diksha. One reason I can think of is, mercy, mercy for the "fallen conditioned" souls.

 

What may be the case for one soul, may not be the case for another. And this is why I tend to want an option in the poll, similar to Vijaya's suggestion. If any approach is taken to the extreme without the overall picture taken into consideration, we can end up with division, extremism, and separation.

 

Also, AC Bhaktivedanta has recommended that in seeking out a spiritual master we should search for a Mahabhagavata. But he also does say that this is also not an absolute. So to choose one or the other of the "Iskcon options" in the poll is not such a simple issue.

 

Vijaya also makes an interesting point when he says, "Ritual diksha is overated." The ritual is not some magic pill. It is the essence within the ritual that holds the potency, not the formality itself. And I am grateful that some members on this forum have shed some light on this.

 

In essence, what I am saying is that if we tend to sway to extremities, balance will be lost. Balance can be found in the, instruction, implementation, and the way the acarya's followed the process themselves. As an example for us. Here can be found true sadhu sanga. True sadhu sanga being the process of following the acarya's or sadhu's divine example, and moulding our life by it to the best of our ability. Through the supersoul in the heart, each of us will know whose example we are best to follow.

 

These are just some thoughts I have had in my heart. My knowledge of scripture is limited, therefore I am no authority. But I have seen many times over in my spiritual journey that when people tend to lean overly to one particular theme, or words from scripture, their views can become unbalanced. Disregarding the overall purport, and even critical of practices that do not align with their particular stance.

[Guest guest]

JNDas, I'm a bit confused. Why isn't there an option along the lines of "Gaudiya Matha". When Srila Prabhupada received initiation from Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura there was a process that was followed. All the Gaudiya Mathas follow the same process for devotees taking initiation that Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura introduced. Some Gaudiya Matha groups quarrel with each other over different issues but they all have exactly the same understanding about the process of initiation. This website is primarily for ISKCON devotees, I suppose. Maybe that is why there is not option for doing things the way the Gaudiya Mathas do things.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

The poll was meant to focus on the system Prabhupada wanted for ISKCON, though it wasn't worded exactly in that manner.

[Guest guest]

Might it not be reasonable to include an option such as "The method of initiation that Prabhupada himself accepted from his Guru"

[Guest guest]

How about adding...

 

I do not support any ISKCON initiations but rather another Gaudiya Vaisnava parampara (such as, Gaudiya Math, Ananta Baba, Adi Kesava, etc.)

[mahak 0]

Initiation by a bonafide disciple of Srila Prabhupada, not necessarily ISKCON, following the traditional method (disciple of disciple, thus disciplic succession). Diksa should be performed by one who is fully conversant with the science of bhakti as taught by Srila Prabhupada, and practically following his teachings.

 

Not necessarily advanced to Srila Prabhupada's level, but representing him as he represented His Guru Maharaja, etc. Meaning giving everything he has received.

 

Commitment to disciple is the key, rtvik system doesnt, nor does elected and appointed GBC based guru systems. No "system" replaces the dynamics of acarya, this "system" stuff, rtvik or GBC, both have influences of eccliastic religiosity, where the foundation is guru, and the teacher or head of the foundation is mere figurehead, not intended to accept service required for disciple to make progress in sadhana bhakti as taught by Srila REupa Goswami.

 

To link to Srila Prabhupada, we do this thru his bonafide disciple. I voted with the Rocana das thesis, because my points above are addressed. I also very much appreciate the Prominant Acarya thesis by Dhira Govinda Prabhu.

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[SishirSaha 0]

When Srila Prabhupada approached Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur asking for initiation was his attitude that he was taking initiation from a madhyam adhikari or an uttama adhikari. From Srila Prabhupada's writings we see he regarded his Guru as an uttama adhikari. We should all follow in Srila Prabhupada's footsteps and take shelter at the feet of an uttama adhikari Guru. That is what Srila Prabhupada wanted us to do. <hr> A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master. NOI - Purport to verse 5

[Yegan 0]

I think the option "Non of the above" would be good.

May be also "Undecided"

[Guest guest]

I am considering switching to Sri sampradaya because that it was my grandparents followed, even though my parents are in Iskcon. I have trouble finding a guru who will at least be sincere about his practise.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

The poll is "what system of initiations for ISKCON", it has nothing to do with other sampradayas or Gaudiya Math. Not that they are any less, but that isn't the question.

[Bhava dasa 0]

Perhaps you could submit a post briefly defining each of the choices.

[aashish108 0]

well, it looks that the Ritvik system is not even in the lead! Well behind....

[Yegan 0]

 

well, it looks that the Ritvik system is not even in the lead! Well behind....

In this forum yes.

However we need to take note that this poll might not reflect the true statistics of the outside world. The sample used to conduct this poll is to my opinion NOT a random sample.

[theist 1]

I wonder why those that think the Iskcon system with liberated gurus is the way think that a liberated soul empowered by his/her guru and Krsna would ever seek out the rubber stamp of the GBC before ever accepting disciples? Afterall it is not expected that the GBC members are fully liberated souls.

 

Another question is I understand the GBC can strip a guru of his disciples? How could some religious committee ever have such power over a liberated guru?

 

Similar question is I also understand that if a guru wants to leave Iskcon he must leave his discples in Iskcon because afterall they belong to Iskcon, as if they are so much impersonal property or something. Does this make sense to anyone?

 

How could a fully liberated soul ever place himself and his relationsghip with his disciples under such a strange sytem?

 

This is just a poll thread I know but just thought I would post some food for thought.

 

If you want to challenge anything I wrote please start another thread.

[Yegan 0]

Propose a good thread name and we start off the discussion.

[gHari 0]

I'm too lazy to start a new thread, and really only have a little comment to make anyway. But ....

 

If I ever become liberated, [if I ever get initiated], and if ever I would be required as guru, the Bhagavata-parampara a hundred years from now would list me under His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada - no matter who my diksa guru will be. Therefore I must serve Krsna as guru in ISKCON, if only out of absolute indebtedness to its founder-acarya.

 

Of course this is all pie-in-sky speculation about events that seem today less likely than me threading a camel through the eye of a needle. But perhaps it has applied to liberated souls like Srila Goura Govinda Swami. I think Krsna's attitude is: if it's broken, fix it! Prabhupada would want that.

[aashish108 0]

 

I wonder why those that think the Iskcon system with liberated gurus is the way think that a liberated soul empowered by his/her guru and Krsna would ever seek out the rubber stamp of the GBC before ever accepting disciples? Afterall it is not expected that the GBC members are fully liberated souls.

 

Another question is I understand the GBC can strip a guru of his disciples? How could some religious committee ever have such power over a liberated guru?

 

Similar question is I also understand that if a guru wants to leave Iskcon he must leave his discples in Iskcon because afterall they belong to Iskcon, as if they are so much impersonal property or something. Does this make sense to anyone?

 

How could a fully liberated soul ever place himself and his relationsghip with his disciples under such a strange sytem?

 

 

During HH Radhanaths Swamis initiation of new disciples, he says that "I am initiating on behalf of Srila Prabhupada". Doesn't that sound like they are Srila Prabhupadas disciples?