Definition Of Diksha

[krsna 3]

 

Actually, surrender as taught by our acharyas is under-emphasized. Perhaps what's over-emphasized is a misunderstanding of what surrender is. Actually, the essence of surrender is complete dependence on Krishna for everything. Bhaktivinoda Thakura's Saranagati prayers explore quite well what surrender is and what it may look like. Surrender is the gateway to bhakti, and, the Thakura says, Sri Nanda Kumar actually hears the prayers of those actively engaged in surrender.

 

I love 'surrender'; it makes me want to take shelter of KRSNA more and more. There is so much spiritual taste (rasa) in the un-alloyed surrender of the soul. I mean 'surrender' is the platform of pure devotion, is'nt it?

[Beggar 0]

In the Narayana Maharaja group, when they have a program and Srila Narayana Maharaja is there, sometimes he calls on a particular devotee to speak some Hari katha. The speakers always say something to the effect that, "Srila gurudeva has ordered me to speak", when they begin their talk.

Of course it is a formal situation and who knows what anyone has in their heart. But at least we can understand the principle. When Srila Prabhupada would come to a temple in the West he would always explain that he was preaching all over the world, especially in English, to fulfull the order of his guru. A sadhaka in the conditioned state must always perform devotional service under the guidance of a liberated spiritual master. Should we see Srila Prabhupada as a sadhaka? Of course not for he is a fully liberated soul, but he was setting the example for everyone to follow. Now as usual we will come to the point of wondering if one needs to work under a guru who is in physical form? The answer is that it depends what stage we are in. If we are in the beginning stages of Krsna bhakti (having not attained bhava), then the answer is a resounding yes. So the relationship is reciprocal. we may accept the spiritual master but how do we know if he accepts us? That transaction of gaining acceptance of the guru in built into the second or diksa initiation process. Of course one must always act in a way which is pleasing to the guru in order to be currently in his favor. The whole thing comes down to practical diksa, it is not just a theory as bhakti and empiric knowledge are categorically different.

[krsna 3]

So much to say about what is real diksa. As so many have thought to be given diksa but later realized that no real diksa took place as the guru was not authorized by KRSNA in parampara (to give diksa).

[mahak 0]

Haribol, Babhru, hope all is well witcha. Nice explanation of surrender. I may add that one cannot even think of surrender while wi8nning the war. Arjuna SURRENDERED and accepted a more FORMAL Krsna that the best friend and companion that their normal relationship (which we cannot even begin to understand, because it is nityasiddha). This formal surrender happened as arjuna was so defeated that he could no longer hold the gandiva not pull a shaft from his quiver. I like the story of the guru who held his disciples head under water for a long time, let him have a breath, then held him down again. Finally, when releasing him, he said "When you desire Krsna as much as you desire that breath of air you just took, then you have experianced surrender". Prabhupada describes surrender as a child calling for mother, helpless, yet knowing that the cries will be heard. This is how Srila Prabhupada wants us to feel when we chant, and this is clearly noted on his introductorey lecture recording upon his establishment of the Samkirtana Movement in the west.

 

Another point about diksa is recognition by the spiritual master of the disciple. No many revisionists will claim that surely prabhupada did not know everyone he offered the sacred thread to. But this is simply not true. When my friend Sudama Swami recommended me for initiation, he was drilled by Srila Prabhupada as to why I should be initiated. It was only after Sudama offered compelling info that was pleasing to Prabhupada that he agreed to convey just first (harinama) initiation. As mentioned, I did not take the brahmana thread, and this, too, was explained to Prabhupada, and this also pleased him, and I personally accept this pleasure in the same way I would have accepted second initiation.

 

Diksa initiation may be discredited as just a formality, but it is not. To think so is very offensive, because this is a very serious precept of sadhana bhakti. Sure, we can hit the search engine to glean quotes from the folio, but this kind of study is very lame and not scientific at all, and really shows the kali-yuga tendency of laziness and proneness to misguiding. Accepting diksa is, of course, secondary to his initial instruction to the whole world, but then again, so is following regulative principles, associating with devotees, living in a holy place, etc. The primary instruction is to chant hare krsna, and this is said to be the ONLY method of deliverance in this age. But when one accepts a formal diksa recognition by Srila Prabhupada and enters into the intimacy such reciprocal guru-disciple relationship that is entailed, this is not unlike the successive things described by Krsna as being very dear to him. To be a vegetarian is very pleasing to Krsna, but to be a vegetarian person who chants is more pleasing. And if one then decides to quiot intoxicating himself, even bettah, and then to hang with only devotees, to work on behalf of guru, even bettah.

 

Best is to become Parampara. One cannot claim to be in the disciplic succession if one does not accept the discipline of ones guru. To think otherwise is ludicrous. As silly as me trying to explain to US office of personnell management that my partner is my wife even though their is no formal connection. I am a fraud if I try, and those who think they can claim to be diksa disciples of Prabhupada without surrendering to his discipline, just on the strength of thinking that some magic can make him accept and recognize the relationship thirty years after he has disappeared, well, what can I say (that I havent already, many times)? And if one thinks that none of his disciples are qualified, then they are just as offensive because they are really saying that he was not a spiritual master at all, that he failed in his mission, that no one benefittede from his missionary work.

 

Anyway, definition. I like Babhrus ideas on surrender, I like my ideas of reciprocal relationship not unlike a formal marriage (in other words, SERIOUS, as opposed to convenient, temporary, a fad to be replaced by another fad when following the ol guy gets in the way of progress).

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Actually, surrender as taught by our acharyas is under-emphasized. Perhaps what's over-emphasized is a misunderstanding of what surrender is. Actually, the essence of surrender is complete dependence on Krishna for everything. Bhaktivinoda Thakura's Saranagati prayers explore quite well what surrender is and what it may look like. Surrender is the gateway to bhakti, and, the Thakura says, Sri Nanda Kumar actually hears the prayers of those actively engaged in surrender.

 

In Iskcon that surrender is replaced with a demand for blind, unquestioning acceptance of any official authority and party line, as well as parrot-like repetition of philosophy without any in depth understanding. A respect for the guru is replaced with a stalinist type personality cult where the role of Krsna as Sri Guru is completely marginalized and where rationality is labelled as 'offensive mentality'. That is not surrender but insanity. What truly surrendered Vaishnava would find fault in Sridhara Maharaja for example? Such behavior is a proof of insanity caused by surrendering to the wrong influence.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

So much to say about what is real diksa. As so many have thought to be given diksa but later realized that no real diksa took place as the guru was not authorized by KRSNA in parampara (to give diksa).

 

We are all just tools in Krsna's hands, even those we see as most unqualified. When a parcel is delivered to the recipient on Krsna's list, nobody cares that the mailman was drunk or had dirty underwear at the time of delivery.

 

Prabhupada knew some of his disciples were crooks, yet he still used them because he was hoping they will cheat less and less with time, with more and more actually going to the mission. All we can hope for is to be used by Krsna more and more often.

[stonehearted 0]

Thanks, mahak. I like the analogy of initiation with marriage. I've also used the same analogy for decades. The two make a binding, public commitment before God and society. When the guru accepts the disciple, it's tantamount to Krishna accepting him or her. In fact, Lord Chaitanya told Sanatan Goswami that at the time of initiation, when the sadhaka commits to a life of progressive atma-samarpana (dedication to Krishna's service), Krishna accepts that sadhaka to be as good as Himself. This is, as as been discussed here, not just some formality; rather, it is the reciprocal commitment between guru and disciple.

[♣♣♣ 0]

Ok Mahaks excellent post brought me back!

Thing is Srila Prabupada stressed over and over again the importance of Guru, Shastra, Sadhu. Meaning that whatever a Guru says must be supported by Shastra and Sadhu.

Not that one can take words here and there from the Guru during walks or letters that he may have very well said to someone yes, but that does not mean it was meant as a general instruction for the community of Vaishnavas at large.

Prabupada stressed the importance of a bone fide Gurus words being backed up by scripture and specifically in our line the conclusions of the Gosvamis.

Please consider the words of Rupa Gosvami:

(Upadeshamrita)

kRSNeti yasya giri taM manasAdriyeta

'Mentally honour those who just say ‘KRSNa'

And after that he says:

dIkSAsti cet praNatibhiH

'Bow down to those who do have dIkSA.'

 

 

[theist 1]

 

Accepting diksa is, of course, secondary to his initial instruction to the whole world, but then again, so is following regulative principles, associating with devotees, living in a holy place, etc. The primary instruction is to chant hare krsna, and this is said to be the ONLY method of deliverance in this age.

 

I accept this point in Mahak's post above anything else. Everything else besides the chanting is an adjunct to that chanting. because we have not developed taste for the name there are other things given such as circumambulating the temple. It is not that circumambulating the temple is the yuga-dharma and chanting is the adjunct.

 

Keeping the priorities straight is very important.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Srila Prabhupada repeatedly used school as an example. He often said that someone may read many medical books on his (or her) own, but they won't be accepted as a surgeon unless they've been admitted to a recognized medical school, submitted to qualified medical professors for instruction and been examined and certified by them.

I take that to signify the qualifications of an initiating guru.

He also said the formal diska was not so important. I have numerous quotations on this thread to that effect.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Haribol, Babhru, hope all is well witcha. Nice explanation of surrender. I may add that one cannot even think of surrender while wi8nning the war. Arjuna SURRENDERED and accepted a more FORMAL Krsna that the best friend and companion that their normal relationship (which we cannot even begin to understand, because it is nityasiddha). This formal surrender happened as arjuna was so defeated that he could no longer hold the gandiva not pull a shaft from his quiver. I like the story of the guru who held his disciples head under water for a long time, let him have a breath, then held him down again. Finally, when releasing him, he said "When you desire Krsna as much as you desire that breath of air you just took, then you have experianced surrender". Prabhupada describes surrender as a child calling for mother, helpless, yet knowing that the cries will be heard. This is how Srila Prabhupada wants us to feel when we chant, and this is clearly noted on his introductorey lecture recording upon his establishment of the Samkirtana Movement in the west.

 

Another point about diksa is recognition by the spiritual master of the disciple. No many revisionists will claim that surely prabhupada did not know everyone he offered the sacred thread to. But this is simply not true. When my friend Sudama Swami recommended me for initiation, he was drilled by Srila Prabhupada as to why I should be initiated. It was only after Sudama offered compelling info that was pleasing to Prabhupada that he agreed to convey just first (harinama) initiation. As mentioned, I did not take the brahmana thread, and this, too, was explained to Prabhupada, and this also pleased him, and I personally accept this pleasure in the same way I would have accepted second initiation.

 

Diksa initiation may be discredited as just a formality, but it is not. To think so is very offensive, because this is a very serious precept of sadhana bhakti. Sure, we can hit the search engine to glean quotes from the folio, but this kind of study is very lame and not scientific at all, and really shows the kali-yuga tendency of laziness and proneness to misguiding. Accepting diksa is, of course, secondary to his initial instruction to the whole world, but then again, so is following regulative principles, associating with devotees, living in a holy place, etc. The primary instruction is to chant hare krsna, and this is said to be the ONLY method of deliverance in this age. But when one accepts a formal diksa recognition by Srila Prabhupada and enters into the intimacy such reciprocal guru-disciple relationship that is entailed, this is not unlike the successive things described by Krsna as being very dear to him. To be a vegetarian is very pleasing to Krsna, but to be a vegetarian person who chants is more pleasing. And if one then decides to quiot intoxicating himself, even bettah, and then to hang with only devotees, to work on behalf of guru, even bettah.

 

Best is to become Parampara. One cannot claim to be in the disciplic succession if one does not accept the discipline of ones guru. To think otherwise is ludicrous. As silly as me trying to explain to US office of personnell management that my partner is my wife even though their is no formal connection. I am a fraud if I try, and those who think they can claim to be diksa disciples of Prabhupada without surrendering to his discipline, just on the strength of thinking that some magic can make him accept and recognize the relationship thirty years after he has disappeared, well, what can I say (that I havent already, many times)? And if one thinks that none of his disciples are qualified, then they are just as offensive because they are really saying that he was not a spiritual master at all, that he failed in his mission, that no one benefittede from his missionary work.

 

Anyway, definition. I like Babhrus ideas on surrender, I like my ideas of reciprocal relationship not unlike a formal marriage (in other words, SERIOUS, as opposed to convenient, temporary, a fad to be replaced by another fad when following the ol guy gets in the way of progress).

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

So those who are too late to have Prabhupada accept them formally are not formal members of a parampara and therefore cannot be successful. This in spite of the fact that he has repeatedly been cited as saying that formal diska is not necessary as well as saying that not everybody has to become brahmana (the 'real diksa').

Here is another lazy quote

 

"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, 10-16-76, Chandigarh

So Prabhupada is being offensive?

 

Also regarding the church-y institutional membership idea

 

 

"The idea of an organized church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher."

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur

 

[Beggar 0]

 

So those who are too late to have Prabhupada accept them formally are not part of a parampara and therefore cannot be successful. This is spite of the fact that he has repeatedly been cited as saying that formal diska is not necessary.

The basic, primary assumption of this post is that the disciplic succession ended with Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada. The Rtviks assume this also but this poster has given us a new, idiosyncratic twist, no diksa - period. But beware the hidden motive here is not to prove his philosophical point but rather to bust your cajones. (golf balls)

[♣♣♣ 0]

All cbhrama is showing here is his complete lack of understanding regarding Gaudiya Siddhanta and that he has never really had any proper sadhu sanga. There are many qualified Gaudiya Vaishnava sadhus outside Iskcon he could benefit from having association with as either Siksha or Diksha Gurus. When Srila Prabupada left the, "Prabupada said Wars" started right away" one group clinging to certain statements and others clinging to something else.

 

Again this is why Srila Prabupada stressed Guru Shastra Sadhu so very often as well as taking association of advanced Vaishnavas.

[cbrahma 0]

 

All cbhrama is showing here is his complete lack of understanding regarding Gaudiya Siddhanta and that he has never really had any proper sadhu sanga. There are many qualified Gaudiya Vaishnava sadhus outside Iskcon he could benefit from having association with as either Siksha or Diksha Gurus. When Srila Prabupada left the, "Prabupada said Wars" started right away" one group clinging to certain statements and others clinging to something else.

 

Again this is why Srila Prabupada stressed Guru Shastra Sadhu so very often as well as taking association of advanced Vaishnavas.

You have a lot of nerve speculating what my sanga has been. I have had plenty of association with devotees which is why I know that formal diska is not the end all and be all and why I know you are a puffed up religionist. I don't need to cling to isolated statements since the statements Prabhupada has made both about vani being superior to vapu and the secondary importance of formal diksa are numerous. Reading Prabhupada's book is associating with the book bhagavata. You are even ignorant of that principle. In fact you reveal yourself ignorant of the fundamentals of spiritual knowledge, a wonderful demonstration of the inadequacy of formal diksa.

[♣♣♣ 0]

Talk about puffed up!

 

As I said your lack of understanding of Gaudiaya Siddhanta is so very obvious no matter how much you whine and squeal and offend Vaishnavas. And I say again you never had PROPER sadhu sanga, it's obvious by the crazy things you say. You really should get off your horse and try understanding a bit from those who do know a thing or two and stop this pretense, go to Braja Dham (I know it hurts your ego to admit you have never been, but it's obvious) it would do you a world of good and help you stop all this twisting of Srila Prabupadas words to fit your made up philosophy and ego.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Talk about puffed up!

 

As I said your lack of understanding of Gaudiaya Siddhanta is so very obvious no matter how much you whine and squeal and offend Vaishnavas. And I say again you never had PROPER sadhu sanga, it's obvious by the crazy things you say. You really should get off your horse and try understanding a bit from those who do know a thing or two and stop this pretense, go to Braja Dham (I know it hurts your ego to admit you have never been, but it's obvious) it would do you a world of good and help you stop all this twisting of Srila Prabupadas words to fit your made up philosophy and ego.

I don't need to pretend or twist. That is your wishful thinking. I have Prabhupada's very words pure and simple, which you keep evading providing no support at all from any source, except your own illustrious self.

Yes you are puffed up - making grandiose speculation about my sanga as an excuse for your religionism - and you call yourself a Vaisnava ? That's a good one.

[♣♣♣ 0]

Lol

 

[cbrahma 0]

 

Lol

 

Goodness, that's impressive. It's the fire ritual, I'm sure.

[cbrahma 0]

can't wait to find a guru who claims to be in a sampradaya so I can get my fire sacrifice. Then I can talk off the top of my head and make special knowledge claims to lord it over everybody who 's not a member. I don't even need the support of quoting authority - that's for lazies. There are so many in the market, I'm sure I can get one if the price is right.

[suchandra 1]

 

Actually, the essence of surrender is complete dependence on Krishna for everything. Bhaktivinoda Thakura's Saranagati prayers explore quite well what surrender is and what it may look like. Surrender is the gateway to bhakti, and, the Thakura says, Sri Nanda Kumar actually hears the prayers of those actively engaged in surrender.

Having internalized Prabhupada's teachings one would say, surrender means to fully, 100% abide by the orders of Krsna's representative, one's spiritual master.

It is interesting to note how members of ISKCON are so very determined to highlight that Prabhupada said without formal diksha one has to stay outside of the Vaishnava academy - remains something like an onlooker. However, when it comes, did Prabhupada actually appoint the amount of left leaders after a huge crowd of leaders and sannyasis having left and was fallen down, when it comes to where, when and how did Prabhupada appoint those 11 of which only 2 are still in "good standing" to become initiating spiritual masters and sitting on the vyasasana like full-fledged acaryas, ISKCONites usually look the other way.

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Haribol, Babhru, hope all is well witcha. Nice explanation of surrender. I may add that one cannot even think of surrender while wi8nning the war. Arjuna SURRENDERED and accepted a more FORMAL Krsna that the best friend and companion that their normal relationship (which we cannot even begin to understand, because it is nityasiddha). This formal surrender happened as arjuna was so defeated that he could no longer hold the gandiva not pull a shaft from his quiver. I like the story of the guru who held his disciples head under water for a long time, let him have a breath, then held him down again. Finally, when releasing him, he said "When you desire Krsna as much as you desire that breath of air you just took, then you have experianced surrender". Prabhupada describes surrender as a child calling for mother, helpless, yet knowing that the cries will be heard. This is how Srila Prabhupada wants us to feel when we chant, and this is clearly noted on his introductorey lecture recording upon his establishment of the Samkirtana Movement in the west.

 

Another point about diksa is recognition by the spiritual master of the disciple. No many revisionists will claim that surely prabhupada did not know everyone he offered the sacred thread to. But this is simply not true. When my friend Sudama Swami recommended me for initiation, he was drilled by Srila Prabhupada as to why I should be initiated. It was only after Sudama offered compelling info that was pleasing to Prabhupada that he agreed to convey just first (harinama) initiation. As mentioned, I did not take the brahmana thread, and this, too, was explained to Prabhupada, and this also pleased him, and I personally accept this pleasure in the same way I would have accepted second initiation.

 

Diksa initiation may be discredited as just a formality, but it is not. To think so is very offensive, because this is a very serious precept of sadhana bhakti. Sure, we can hit the search engine to glean quotes from the folio, but this kind of study is very lame and not scientific at all, and really shows the kali-yuga tendency of laziness and proneness to misguiding. Accepting diksa is, of course, secondary to his initial instruction to the whole world, but then again, so is following regulative principles, associating with devotees, living in a holy place, etc. The primary instruction is to chant hare krsna, and this is said to be the ONLY method of deliverance in this age. But when one accepts a formal diksa recognition by Srila Prabhupada and enters into the intimacy such reciprocal guru-disciple relationship that is entailed, this is not unlike the successive things described by Krsna as being very dear to him. To be a vegetarian is very pleasing to Krsna, but to be a vegetarian person who chants is more pleasing. And if one then decides to quiot intoxicating himself, even bettah, and then to hang with only devotees, to work on behalf of guru, even bettah.

 

Best is to become Parampara. One cannot claim to be in the disciplic succession if one does not accept the discipline of ones guru. To think otherwise is ludicrous. As silly as me trying to explain to US office of personnell management that my partner is my wife even though their is no formal connection. I am a fraud if I try, and those who think they can claim to be diksa disciples of Prabhupada without surrendering to his discipline, just on the strength of thinking that some magic can make him accept and recognize the relationship thirty years after he has disappeared, well, what can I say (that I havent already, many times)? And if one thinks that none of his disciples are qualified, then they are just as offensive because they are really saying that he was not a spiritual master at all, that he failed in his mission, that no one benefittede from his missionary work.

 

Anyway, definition. I like Babhrus ideas on surrender, I like my ideas of reciprocal relationship not unlike a formal marriage (in other words, SERIOUS, as opposed to convenient, temporary, a fad to be replaced by another fad when following the ol guy gets in the way of progress).

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

 

So whose discipline do you advocate people subject themselves to now that Prabhupada is gone and if the gurus that you advocate getting disciplined by say that what Prabhupada said in letters etc. is meaningless and not what he really meant etc. or if what they say contradicts Prabhupada how are you supposed to reconcile all that and take discipline from such gurus?

[suchandra 1]

 

So whose discipline do you advocate people subject themselves to know that Prabhupada is gone and if the gurus that you advocate getting disciplined by say that what Prabhupada said in letters etc. is meaningless and not what he really meant etc. or if what they say contradicts Prabhupada how are you supposed to reconcile all that and take discipline from such gurus?

Good points, when Mahak experienced the formality of first initiation he immediately decided to not get second initiation?

 

Diksa initiation may be discredited as just a formality, but it is not. To think so is very offensive, because this is a very serious precept of sadhana bhakti.

Mainly discussions like this go on because of the chaos happened with so many fallen gurus. One should rather call that very chaos as "so very offensive" and not those victims of ISKCON who say driving test is formality, more important is to first learn how to drive a car.

[Beggar 0]

 

I don't need to pretend or twist. That is your wishful thinking. I have Prabhupada's very words pure and simple, which you keep evading.

Yes you are puffed up - making grandiose speculation about my sanga as an excuse for your religionism.

 

 

...beware the hidden motive here is not to prove his philosophical point but rather to bust your cajones. (golf balls)

[krsna 3]

What is that rare, pure and unique experience called SURRENDER???

 

 

Posted by Mahak:

 

"When you desire Krsna as much as you desire that breath of air you just took, then you have experienced surrender."

[theist 1]

 

So whose discipline do you advocate people subject themselves to now that Prabhupada is gone and if the gurus that you advocate getting disciplined by say that what Prabhupada said in letters etc. is meaningless and not what he really meant etc. or if what they say contradicts Prabhupada how are you supposed to reconcile all that and take discipline from such gurus?

The discipline Prabhupada laid out is as clear as it ever was. Why pretend there is some mystery that one needs an embodied guru to explain it to you. There may be bone fide gurus in earth bodies now as we speak and their disciples will benefit. But if one is already taking advantage of Prabhupada's books there also is no absolute necessity to seek such a person out. Nor is there any reason to avoid such a person as long as he is consistent with what Prabhupada taught.

 

Srila Prabhupada used casset tapes to impart diksa as in gayatri mantra initiation to his students. let's see if NM's disciple here (and I mean 3 dot) thinks that is bonefide or not. What is NM's opinion about that? Many of us will consider NM's answer to such a question a reflection on his bone fides. Know the answer 3 dot? Let's hear it.

How about you Beggar, do you know?