Definition Of Diksha

[suchandra 1]

More and more the term deeksha, diksa, diksha appears on the internet - are people aware about the real meaning? We might be aware that things have become degraded and people becoming opportunists to expertly exploit terms like diksha. But still in order to not mislead human society there should be also a genuine presentation about the true meaning of diksha - to give divyam jnanam (di) and absorb sins (ksha). Whereas "absorb sins" is sometimes translated with "destroying sins".

 

"DI" = from "divyam jnanam", divine knowledge which means the nature of your specific relationship with which particular form of the Divinity; and

"KSHA" = from "papasya sankshayam", literally, "of all sins, destroys"; meaning taking all the aprarabda (unfructified) karmas (sins) of the disciple and freeing the disciple from the brunt of those reactions.

 

source: www.giriraja.org.au/downloads/bhaktichart.xls

 

[bija 0]

from Vishnu-yamala

 

divyam jnanam yato dadyat kuryat papasya sanksayam; tasmat dikseti sa prokta desikais tattva-kovidaih.

 

"Diksha is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activity by the causeless mercy of the living Spiritual Master. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows this process as Diksha."

[HST108 0]

I have come across poeple who claim to give dikshas to others after a 21 day course. Based on what you have explained here, dikshas are a much more serious business than what these people claim. What are your thoughts?

[theist 1]

 

I have come across poeple who claim to give dikshas to others after a 21 day course. Based on what you have explained here, dikshas are a much more serious business than what these people claim. What are your thoughts?

In essence diksha is becoming born into the world of spirit through transcendental knowledge and realization of that knowledge. In this way diksha can be seen as a process of total transformation of the consciousness, of one's very being.

 

This process may be symbolized by a religous ceremony like a fire sacrifice or water baptism for the Christians. Almost all groups have their brand of ceremony. But the ceremonies are one time outer events that help mark the inner intent of the pupil to submit to the ways of the inner kingdom of God.

 

The submission itself along with the continued process of transformation that follows is the real diksha.

 

Confusing the ceremony itself for the real diksha is something like mistaking the glass for the water.

[krsna 3]

 

In essence diksha is becoming born into the world of spirit through transcendental knowledge and realization of that knowledge. In this way diksha can be seen as a process of total transformation of the consciousness, of one's very being.

 

This process may be symbolized by a religous ceremony like a fire sacrifice or water baptism for the Christians. Almost all groups have their brand of ceremony. But the ceremonies are one time outer events that help mark the inner intent of the pupil to submit to the ways of the inner kingdom of God.

 

The submission itself along with the continued process of transformation that follows is the real diksha.

 

Confusing the ceremony itself for the real diksha is something like mistaking the glass for the water.

 

[suchandra 1]

Diksha guru is required?

Yes, it is a widely spread opinion in Vaishnavism that a living diksa-guru is required. In Christianity diksa is given by Jesus who is a very powerful son of God. Although preaching for only 3 years, he's being worshiped since 2000 years and he's still giving diksa. Vaishnavas have to be alive to give diksa, they're not as powerful like Jesus. At least that's what people in general believe.

[krsna 3]

 

Did Jesus give diksha to his 11 chosen disciples/ zonal acaryas at the Last Supper (who did not betray him)?

[cbrahma 0]

 

Yes, it is a widely spread opinion in Vaishnavism that a living diksa-guru is required. In Christianity diksa is given by Jesus who is a very powerful son of God. Although preaching for only 3 years, he's being worshiped since 2000 years and he's still giving diksa. Vaishnavas have to be alive to give diksa, they're not as powerful like Jesus. At least that's what people in general believe.

How is Jesus giving diksa and what is it required for?

[Kulapavana 0]

Instead of inventing new definitions of diksa, we should simply try to understanding the REAL MEANING of diksa (upanayana) as it is given in our tradition. Of course diksa is more than just the ceremony, but without that formal ceremony there is also no diksa.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Instead of inventing new definitions of diksa, we should simply try to understanding the REAL MEANING of diksa (upanayana) as it is given in our tradition. Of course diksa is more than just the ceremony, but without that formal ceremony there is also no diksa.

 

According to a leading Gaudiya Vaisnava guru HDG Srila Prabhupada

 

-The Illusion of Guru and Initiation -

 

"Initiation is a formality. If you are serious, that is real initiation. My touch is simply a formality. It is your determination. That is initiation."

(morning walk, Seattle, 02/10/68)

 

 

Well initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge... knowledge. Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing."

(Srila Prabhupada: Press Interview, Chandigarh, 10/16/76)

 

[krsna 3]

Chanting Without Diksha

 

 

 

 

I have one question:

 

What is the value if someone is chanting the Holy Name and he or she is not initiated (received mantra diksa)?

 

Some devotees say that the only benefit of such chanting is preparation for diksa, and that real connection and chanting is not possible if one do not receive mantra diksa?

 

For example, I am reading many vaisnava books and chanting the Holy Names, associating with devotees and following the regulative principles for more then a decade. My wife is also devotee and we are practicing chanting and reading together, but we are not initiated ( no diksa).

 

By Mahaprabhu's mercy I preached to many devotees in our area and some of them have become initiated within ISKCON and some in other Gaudiya organisations.

 

I see that this divine process is an eternal activity, but some devotees say to me, "What are you waiting for - you must hurry, you never know how long you will live and without diksa there is no real connection with Lord!"

 

I was (and still am) in contact with several spiritual masters and advanced devotees and getting inspiration (siksa) from them. I was never interesting in "institutional consciousness", but in finding a bona-fide devotee, in whatever institution or place he may belong. Could you please give me some advice on this matter of taking diksa?

 

[krsna 3]

 

Instead of inventing new definitions of diksa, we should simply try to understanding the REAL MEANING of diksa (upanayana) as it is given in our tradition. Of course diksa is more than just the ceremony, but without that formal ceremony there is also no diksa.

 

 

 

Become diksa-guru and have 10,000 disciples!!!

 

 

"You each be guru," he said. "As I have five thousand disciples or ten thousand, so you have ten thousand each. In this way, create branches and branches of the Caitanya tree."

 

(Srila Prabhupada, Mayapur GBC meetings 1976)

[Kulapavana 0]

I have neither the qualifications nor the desire to become anybody's guru

 

and taking on 10,000 disciples? Forget it! I do not believe in the mega-guru system. If a guru is unable to personally guide each and every one of his disciples he should stop initiating.

[suchandra 1]

 

How is Jesus giving diksa and what is it required for?

Somehow if we don't accept that Jesus is giving diksa to a follower who sincerely abides by his teachings we're in the bogus camp of heathens and pagans.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

According to a leading Gaudiya Vaisnava guru HDG Srila Prabhupada

 

Did he EVER consider anybody to be an INITIATED disciple without first undergoing a formal diksa?

 

if not (and that is precisely the case), than all such talk should be seen as merely emphasizing a deeper sense of diksa.

 

to make it simple:

 

without a formal diksa nobody should claim to be a diksa-initiated disciple of anyone.

[suchandra 1]

 

Did he EVER consider anybody to be an INITIATED disciple without first undergoing a formal diksa?

 

if not (and that is precisely the case), than all such talk should be seen as merely emphasizing a deeper sense of diksa.

 

to make it simple:

 

without a formal diksa nobody should claim to be a diksa-initiated disciple of anyone.

It is of course clear that without following one cannot become an initiated disciple.

 

Guest (3): Well, his Commandments are…. We believe that Christ gave them to Moses as a…

Prabhupāda: So what are the Commandments? You simply say, “It was given to him, it was given to him, it was given…”

Guest (3): The Ten Commandments?

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Guest (3): Those Commandments we follow? We believe Commandments of living the Sabbath Day, law of chastity…

Prabhupāda: So whether they are being followed?

Guest (3): Yes.

Prabhupāda: Chastity is being followed?

Guest (3): Yes. The church teaches it, and people who do not obey it are bringing condemnation upon themselves.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is my injunct…, that if…. The commandment is that women should be chaste.

Guest (3): Exactly.

Prabhupāda: And you should not kill. But all the Christians are killing.

Guest (3): Well…

Prabhupāda: And it is very hard to find out a woman chaste.

Guest (3): That’s true.

Prabhupāda: Then where is Christian?

Guest (3): Well, see, this is the great thing of the atonement. See, when Christ suffered the sins of the world on Gethsemane…

Prabhupāda: So why for your sin Christ should suffer?

Guest (3): Christ suffered for my sins.

Prabhupāda: Yes, why?

Guest (3): Well, because he loved us and he was the only begotten son of God.

Prabhupāda: That means you’ll go on committing sins and Christ will suffer?

Guest (3): No, see Christ only forgives when you repent. See what I mean? See, this is the thing I want to say…

Prabhupāda: But this has become a business, that I commit sin and repent. “We believe, I repent, and again I commit sin.” Do you think it is very good business?

Guest (3): Well, see this is the thing. Christianity has made it a business. So what we’re saying is we…

Prabhupāda: That means they are not Christians.

Guest (3): That’s right.

Prabhupāda: So then where is Christian?

Guest (3): Well, the Christian world that the majority of the people think is…

Prabhupāda: Majority is not the calculation. Minority. If one person carries out the order of Christ, then he is Christian.

Guest (3): Exactly.

Prabhupāda: Otherwise they are not Christians.

 

 

 

Room Conversation

with His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

April 23, 1976, Melbourne

[Kulapavana 0]

talking about diksa in the non-Vaishnava context is misleading IMO. they have an equivalent of some vedic samskaras, but not diksa. Diksa very specifically is RECEIVING THE VAISHNAVA MANTRA. Without receiving mantra there is no diksa. that Vaishnava mantra IS the divine knowledge.

 

There is no diksa in Christianity.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Did he EVER consider anybody to be an INITIATED disciple without first undergoing a formal diksa?

 

if not (and that is precisely the case), than all such talk should be seen as merely emphasizing a deeper sense of diksa.

 

to make it simple:

 

without a formal diksa nobody should claim to be a diksa-initiated disciple of anyone.

He called George Harrison his uninitiated disciple. Be that as it may, he said what he said-- his formal disciples are another matter.

The stress is on knowledge - whose formal guru you have is not as important as the siksa. The Gita doesn't mention diksa.

Why is this important - is it status - a credential that one can boast about - a gateway to God? It all smacks of mundane religiosity and I want none of it. Institutional control - absolute power of one human over another - look at the history of despotism in all of its varieties - an ugly picture indeed. But by all means - go for it.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Somehow if we don't accept that Jesus is giving diksa to a follower who sincerely abides by his teachings we're in the bogus camp of heathens and pagans.

If formal diksa is a requirement what constitutes formal diksa for a Christian? I know the answer - I just want to know if you do.

[Beggar 0]

 

The stress is on knowledge - whose formal guru you have is not as important as the siksa.

 

But despite being the siksa guru parampara, the Gaudiya Vaisnava line puts the stress on bhakti or devotion not knowledge or jnana. Transcendental knowledge means firstly sambandha jnana or knowing that we are the eternal servants of Krsna and then acting on that knowledge.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

The Gita doesn't mention diksa.

Why is this important - is it status - a credential that one can boast about - a gateway to God? It all smacks of mundane religiosity and I want none of it.

 

 

 

Ch.10 Text 25

maharsinam bhrgur aham

giram asmy ekam aksharam

yajnanam japa-yajno ’smi

sthavaranam himalayah

Translation

 

Of the great sages I am Bhrgu; of vibrations I am the transcendental om. Of sacrifices I am the chanting of the holy names [japa], and of immovable things I am the Himalayas.

--

 

there is no mantra-japa without diksa

 

 

Ch.10 Text 35

 

 

brihat-sama tatha samnam

gayatri chandasam aham

masanam marga-sirso ’ham

rtunam kusumakarah

 

"Of the hymns in the Sama Veda I am the Brihat-sama, and of poetry I am the Gayatri. Of months I am Margasirsa [November-December], and of seasons I am flower-bearing spring."

----

 

There is no Gayatri without diksa

[cbrahma 0]

 

 

Ch.10 Text 25

 

maharsinam bhrgur aham

giram asmy ekam aksharam

yajnanam japa-yajno ’smi

sthavaranam himalayah

Translation

 

Of the great sages I am Bhrgu; of vibrations I am the transcendental om. Of sacrifices I am the chanting of the holy names [japa], and of immovable things I am the Himalayas.

--

 

there is no mantra-japa without diksa

 

 

Ch.10 Text 35

 

 

brihat-sama tatha samnam

gayatri chandasam aham

masanam marga-sirso ’ham

rtunam kusumakarah

 

"Of the hymns in the Sama Veda I am the Brihat-sama, and of poetry I am the Gayatri. Of months I am Margasirsa [November-December], and of seasons I am flower-bearing spring."

----

 

There is no Gayatri without diksa

Where does it say that in the Gita.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Where does it say that in the Gita.

 

Gita is only a very small part of the Vedic scripture. Some things are merely indicated there without going into detail.

 

Based on the Vedic tradition MANTRA MUST BE RECEIVED FROM A GURU. You can not just take the mantra. You must receive it. That is the system in all Vedic schools, not just Vaishnavas.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Gita is only a very small part of the Vedic scripture. Some things are merely indicated there without going into detail.

 

Based on the Vedic tradition MANTRA MUST BE RECEIVED FROM A GURU. You can not just take the mantra. You must receive it. That is the system in all Vedic schools, not just Vaishnavas.

Is that the Kulapavana srutis? The Yuga-dharma, the chanting of the maha-mantra is meant to spread religious Hinduism all over the world? That's not how it's preached at all.

If the MahaMantra has no effect unless there is formal initiation, then the HariNama parties are wasting their time. Uninitated bhaktas are also wasting there time chanting...

however... the Vedas also say -

 

 

Living beings who are entangled in the complicated meshes of birth and death can be freed immediately by even unconsciously chanting the holy name of Krishna, which is feared by fear personified. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.1.14)

 

The religious rationalizations on this forum crack me up. LOL

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Gita is only a very small part of the Vedic scripture. Some things are merely indicated there without going into detail.

 

Based on the Vedic tradition MANTRA MUST BE RECEIVED FROM A GURU. You can not just take the mantra. You must receive it. That is the system in all Vedic schools, not just Vaishnavas.

 

 

If someone reads Prabhupada's books and starts chanting as a result is that considered as recieving the mantra from a guru?