Definition Of Diksha

[Beggar 0]

 

I didn't say the formal diska had no value.

But the bona fide spiritual master has not made such a categorical statement about the requirement of formal initiation. He has made just the opposite statements in many instances.

I put to you that it is the particularly religious and political obsession with the formal process that has torn apart both ISKCON and the Gaudiya Math with vicious battles about guru turf and ownership. If you think this is a spiritual phenomenon, it needs some serious explaining.

 

 

For a preaching movement there will always be the need for money, men (personnel) and materials. When the patients who are to eventually become doctors remain patients, its because our disease is still showing its symptoms.

So if the money, men and materials - big temple properties become a source of competitive tension, then what to do? "If you ever get money print books". "I would sell the marble in the temples and print books". Do we remember reading this somewhere? But what to you do when the temples have installed dieties and so, on? Anyway how could a spiritual movement proceed without a mature adviser, within or without? We have the books but everyone is squabbling about the interpretation - see the origin of the soul issue.

[bija 0]

Transcendence and Integration of Experience:

 

At some point we may reach a stage of transcendent consciousness. In this new awareness ritual and religion (and mundane aspects of spirituality) may no longer hold deep significance for our conscious living. It is as if the living entity now has her feet in two worlds - the transcendent and the mundane - (madhyama platform).

 

The devotee who now resides in these two worlds begins to gradually integrate all experiences, within and without her conscious awareness. Rather than tear down that which exists in the lower world, she integrates it; knowing well that ritual and religion serves its purpose for those who have not yet risen.

 

The danger for the newly arrived who exists in these two dimensions is a potential for a kind of psychosis - which is infact caused by the perverted reflection of spiritual substance; ie the living entities own conditioned experience of perverted truths (dogmatic religion) - which remain in the mind as scars.

 

In that immature stage of god consciousness on the madhyama platform (lack of integration of experience), the living entity will often attack all things that exist in the lower realm - which she sees as false spirituality (religion). The cause of this is simply, the inability of the living entity to integrate her minds experiences.

 

Religion has become for her the cause of madness. Such can be the existential crisis for the conscious entity who has found herself consciously aware in two worlds.

 

In another case, a neophyte can be harmful in behaviour. She falsely believes that her experience is transcendental. When infact all that is known is 'non self-realized knowledge' from books.

 

The neophyte needs to raise herself to the madhyama platform. And then by some good fortune may gradually integrate all things and become uttama in behaviour.

 

Just some thoughts.

[suchandra 1]

 

Personally I try not to be an obsessive fault finder, but I am about to call a spade and spade. This is a first hand experience that I have previously posted in an abbreviated form. When I was in Phoenix last month the Iskcon TP informed me that Hridayananda Maharaja was his GBC. I said, "Oh and how is that?" He replied, "It's like having a fringy as your GBC. Usually he comes to the temple wearing shorts and a t-shirt." Giving the benefit of the doubt I replied that, "maybe he's just not into formalities." Then the TP replied, "Yeah but I'm not sure if he even believes in the philosophy (of Krsna Consciousness) anymore. His classes are more like those of a college professor than of a devotee." Somehow I believe that aspiring devotees need more than that, for a guru. I guess its true that you get what you deserve, but it certainly is unfortunate.

Thanks Beggar, could be some truth to this but obviously Krsna is very pleased with such gurus - or otherwise He would have removed such persons from sitting on the vyasasana. And since there's presently no other system than the Lord Himself to adjust any irregularities when it come to acaryas sitting on the vyasasana - this all seems to go conform with the Supreme Will of the Lord.

Looks like we're prompted of becoming used to it that a real guru may sometimes go astray and then later return to the proper path. CC Madhya 16.77-80:

Pundarika Vidyanidhi initiated Gadadhara Pandita for the second time, and on the day of Odana-shashthi Pundarika Vidyanidhi saw the festival. When Pundarika Vidyanidhi saw that Lord Jagannatha was given a starched garment, he became a little hateful. In this way his mind was polluted.

That night the brothers Lord Jagannatha and Balarama came to Pundarika Vidyanidhi and, smiling, began to slap him.

 

Report from HH Hridayanada Goswami's temple - San Diego ISKCON by Prtha dd posted 05 June 2008:

 

"A godsister who visits San Diego has told me of some constant problems in the San Diego temple. She has been telling this to me for years, and I have kept it in. But enough is enough. Basically what has been going on is the Temple President, Mahat, does not want any more women living in the temple. He has been running all sorts of interference for years to the women there, and this seems like the last straw!

He has taken their money but not given them the proper care or even a few bucks, he has done so many things against women that the list is long. Is Mahat a member of the GHQ? Or is he just one of those fanatical devotees who blames their internal lust on the presence of women?

 

I do not know why he is trying to change Prabhupada's program yet brainwash himself into thinking he is not. That is usually the case, their own lust agitates them, so they try to get rid of the women and claim it is right, even wanting to send them to the forest in the past (Prabhupada did not agree to this!), yet want to tell themselves they are always right, when in fact they are changing Prabhupada's instructions on this. Srila Prabhupada made a home for the women as well as the men in the temple ashramas. I don't know why anyone would dare to think they have a right to change that.

 

And where are the ISKCON leaders? This is one of the few things they tend to fix... sometimes. Years ago when all the women had been forced to stand in the back during arotika instead of the side by side, due to various temple presidents all sharing this idea with each other at the time, ISKCON authorities finally came to the rescue and helped put a stop to that. Oh, wait a minute. That was the IWC (Iskcon Women Conference) that put a stop to it. "Then" Iskcon leaders stepped up to the plate... but only a little. And only cuz they got caught too. But here is a chance for them to do it right.

This Mahat has been mistreating the women in the San Diego temple for many years now. Its time leaders stepped up to the plate and make him own his false ego issues, as we as his own lust issues, and especially that leaders put an end to this nonsense treatment of women who have surrendered everything to the temple!

 

If anyone doubts what I'm saying is wrong, I can show plenty of letters, etc., from Srila Prabhupada as evidence of what is right. YS, Prtha dd"

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Kula could you share a little of what you mean by 'definitions'?

 

 

In any debate you have to first define the terms you are using. Obviously many people in Iskcon have a different definition of diksa than the one the rest of the Vaishnava world has.

[cbrahma 0]

The principles of ISKCON's guru-tattva were supported and laid out by the Gaudiya Math disciples they consulted in the eighties.

There is no such clean division as ISKCON vs. all other Vaisnavas.

[Beggar 0]

 

The principles of ISKCON's guru-tattva were supported and laid out by the Gaudiya Math disciples they consulted in the eighties.

There is no such clean division as ISKCON vs. all other Vaisnavas.

 

Corporal cbrahma refers to 5 star general, Srila Sridhar Maharaja, as private.

Puffed up, insolent, little *!

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Earlier I bought in a discussion of raganuga bhakti. Then, it seems it was perceived I was bringing in a leaning of vaidhi vs raga. This was not my intention. I am trying to paint a picture of the 'big picture'. From start to finish (if I can say start to finish - that is not quite right).

 

You say it so well here Mahak. Personally I have not taken brahmana initiation or 'harinaam initiation'. Why? Because of the desire to please my guru I am waiting. It would a great mistake if I was to accept a formality for show or honor, without the necessary realization in my heart of following gurus instructions for those initiations.

 

cbrahma gave the quote earlier that initiation does not depend on formality and another member gave the example of George Harrison. These two are great examples of initiation of the heart. When guru and disciple accept on the heart level...that is it! That is initiation! The disciple in his heart says...'this teaching is truth...I accept and desire to follow'. At some point then the formallization will possibly take place (not always). And the process begins...of external and internal meeting.

 

Why did I talk about raganuga bhakti, vaidhi bhakti, deity worship etc...(I forgot to mention love of God)! Our tradition covers a large scope, and the more we move into its depth, by reading, by chanting, by offering respects etc...we can see finer and finer elements of Sri Caitanya's teachings and esoteric life.

 

What concerns me is if we begin to say, 'this is not necessary, that is not necessary'....and eventually saying 'oh prissy pitesim, dead tradition, unecessary ritualistic practice etc etc!'. Then we may be discarding something very rich. Something the acarays have chosen to continue on, to pass down... because of the richness.

 

In the history of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, people came along and espoused paths of spontaneous flow only, and various other things. The acaryas wrote treatises to stop these thinkers teachings taking foothold (and most of their teachings died away). The acarayas used scriptural basis and deep realization of Sri Caitanya's bhakti to teach the public of the inadequacy of these divergent teachings.

 

The world has changed in the last five hundred years. Will all this tradition be necessary in the future? I question these things all the time. Many people these days see tradition as a bad word. I do not. But I am a 'progressive traditionalist'. Tradition is not a bad thing, many wonderful things have come from mankinds spiritual unfoldment over its history. Maybe it would be foolish to disregard everything of our past. But...if the past stops the flow of living in the present, in time, place, and circumstance...and begins to stifle the flow of service to Krsna, if the world changes very much...then we must consider what to let go of! Wisdom needs to be used. Those who are purely anti-tradition are limited in their vision in my opinion.

 

Deity worship involves many rules and regulations, and not all will be attracted. Srila Prabhupada at one point encouraged his disciples to make Gaura-Nitai dolls and hand them out on the street. He said if people put these cloth dolls in their homes and sing to them, the Lord would be very happy! This is moving with the times isnt it! He called them 'the good luck happy dolls'.

 

Gaudiya Vaisnavism is a very broad science, that is why I mentioned some higher aspects of our tradition in this conversation....to try and show that it is not wise to leave out anything, when the goal is so rich...love of God in spontaneous mood.

 

But even the simplest practicioners like myself, who offer a little bhoga, chant the names, and read some....are not left out of the possibility of love of God. Jaya Sri Sri Nitaai-Gauranga! The whole depth of the tradition, all the rules and angas of bhakti, all the external clothes and sikhas, the siddha pranali....all these things may not be in my reach! But...if I chant the name, take prasadam, and read the books....and offer full respects and love to the total richness of our tradition as mentioned above, then maybe, just maybe...kripa begins to come down. That is my prayer!

 

For me that is a good approach to bhakti...rather than rejecting tradition (or criticizing it with poor fund of knowledge).

 

 

Those are good points even though I am not familiar with all your terminology. As the world continues to degrade however the simplest thing for people it seems to me is the maha mantra. People in general just are not going to be intelligent enough or spiritually pure enough to understand all the traditions you are talking about and I admit I don't understand them and I am frightened by excessive ritualism and generally associate excessive ritualism with religous phonieism, so I am guilty of some level of prejudice in this regard. Maybe I am wrong and these pure traditions that you speak of will become the dominant force in our civilization but it seems until that time the maha mantra is much more practical and merciful.

[cbrahma 0]

I don't perceive ritual piety and all its obligations as 'richness'. The beauty of spirituality is its simplicity. The bane of materiality is its unceasing complication, the unnerving attention we have to give to all the little conditions to stave off inauspiciousness.

What I am attracted to in a person of spiritual advancement is, in fact that person's simplicity. His/her ability to see God in everything, even the most mudane and unexceptional.

The form of Gopal the cowherd boy and His simple rustic pastimes suprasses in sweetness the form Dwarkadish and all his complex 'rich' opulence.

[AncientMariner 0]

 

I don't perceive ritual piety and all its obligations as 'richness'. The beauty of spirituality is its simplicity. The bane of materiality is its unceasing complication, the unnerving attention we have to give to all the little conditions to stave off inauspiciousness.

What I am attracted to in a person of spiritual advancement is, in fact that person's simplicity. His/her ability to see God in everything, even the most mudane and unexceptional.

The form of Gopal the cowherd boy and His simple rustic pastimes suprasses in sweetness the form Dwarkadish and all his complex 'rich' opulence.

 

 

I can appreciate that thought. If I were ever to pursue Krishna Consciousness seriously it would be to simplify things and try to recapture that childlike approach to life rather than the overcomplicated stress festival of material life.

[♣♣♣ 0]

"cbrahma gave the quote earlier that initiation does not depend on formality and another member gave the example of George Harrison. These two are great examples of initiation of the heart"

 

Thing is George never got close to any kind of nishta really, he was into many different things spititually, sometimes into Krishna other times into SRF and again TM and other things. He was like a good life member. Iskcon Devotees idealize him as some special devotee (almost demi-god) when in fact he was a celebrity who gave some support and brought attention to the devotees with his celebrity status. However, George was a bit naive about certain aspects of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Don't get me wrong, he was a very spiritual person, I loved him immensely, it was his songs and devotion that brought me to Gaudiya vaishnavism.

 

Perhaps because he never accepted proper diksha his bhajan never crystalized to the point of nistha?

 

♣♣♣

[cbrahma 0]

 

"cbrahma gave the quote earlier that initiation does not depend on formality and another member gave the example of George Harrison. These two are great examples of initiation of the heart"

 

Thing is George never got close to any kind of nishta really, he was into many different things spititually, sometimes into Krishna other times into SRF and again TM and other things. He was like a good life member. Iskcon Devotees idealize him as some special devotee (almost demi-god) when in fact he was a celebrity who gave some support and brought attention to the devotees with his celebrity status. However, George was a bit naive about certain aspects of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Don't get me wrong, he was a very spiritual person, I loved him immensely, it was his songs and devotion that brought me to Gaudiya vaishnavism.

 

Perhaps because he never accepted proper diksha his bhajan never crystalized to the point of nistha?

 

♣♣♣

Please. He inquired about following the process - living in the ashrama etc.. but Prabhupada said it was not advisable - not necessary. Precisely the word he used about formal diksa. And how many disciples formally initiated do I know who have from the time they were uninitiated bhaktas become arrogant fault-finding and attached to position and distinction?

In fact it is almost the rule rather than the exception.

[♣♣♣ 0]

 

Please. He inquired about following the process - living in the ashrama etc.. but Prabhupada said it was not advisable - not necessary. Precisely the word he used about formal diksa. And how many disciples formally initiated do I know who have from the time they were uninitiated bhaktas become arrogant fault-finding and attached to position and distinction?

In fact it is almost the rule rather than the exception.

 

How long have you been involved in Gaudiya Vaishnavism..?

[♣♣♣ 0]

"not necessary" was Prabupadas instruction for George Harrison, not you or people in general coming to Krishna Counsciousness at all.

 

Prabupada followed the system of Guru Parampara (and stressed it's importance over and over again) as is followed not only in Gaudiya Vaishnavism, but also in every other tradition in India be it Shiava, Vaishnava, Smarta etc.

 

Prabupada often quoted the famous verse from Padma purana:

 

sampradayavihina ye mantras te nisphala matah: "Mantras which are not received in sampradaya are considered fruitless.Unless one is initiated by a bona-fide spiritual master in the disciplic succession, the mantra he might have received is without any effect."

 

Now we know that chanting Hari nam without diksha will bring one to a certain point, give some taste indeed. But initiation from a proper preceptor is without doubt of the upmost importance and to minimize that is making up your own philosophy and against the teachings of the Gaudiya Sampradaya and certainly not in accordance with the teachings of the Gosvamis, in particular Sanatan Gosvami and Hari Bhakti vilasa.

 

 

♣♣♣

[cbrahma 0]

 

"not necessary" was Prabupadas instruction for George Harrison, not you or people in general coming to Krishna Counsciousness at all.

 

Prabupada followed the system of Guru Parampara (and stressed it's importance over and over again) as is followed not only in Gaudiya Vaishnavism, but also in every other tradition in India be it Shiava, Vaishnava, Smarta etc.

 

Prabupada often quoted the famous verse from Padma purana:

 

sampradayavihina ye mantras te nisphala matah: "Mantras which are not received in sampradaya are considered fruitless.Unless one is initiated by a bona-fide spiritual master in the disciplic succession, the mantra he might have received is without any effect."

 

Now we know that chanting Hari nam without diksha will bring one to a certain point, give some taste indeed. But initiation from a proper preceptor is without doubt of the upmost importance and to minimize that is making up your own philosophy and against the teachings of the Gaudiya Sampradaya and certainly not in accordance with the teachings of the Gosvamis, in particular Sanatan Gosvami and Hari Bhakti vilasa.

 

 

♣♣♣

You are touting Smarta Brahminical principles certainly. Prabhupada has said that taking up the chanting seriously under the direction of a bona fide spiritual master is initiation.

It is obvious to anybody who is conscious and attentive for more than a few minutes that Prabhupada was not about rigid Vedic tradition.

What has that tradition done to promote Lord Caitanya's mission? Zero.

Prabhupada broke with Vedic traditions that are too numerous to mention.

There are practices that are subject to time and circumstance and practices that are not - Prabhupada has said unambigously and definitely that formal diksa is unnecessary. Whether this conforms to your sense of exclusive tradition or Indian superiority is irrelevant.

[♣♣♣ 0]

You don't know what your taking about and I bet anything your somewhat of a newcomer and certainly have never spent time in India.

 

"Prabhupada has said unambigously and definitely that formal diksa is unnecessary"

 

That is completely 100% false, and my Guru Srila Prabupada, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, Bhaktivinode Thakur and the Gosvamis themselves disagree with you as well, the proof is in Prabupadas books over and over again as well as Hari Bhakti vilasa itself (maybe that means nothing to you).

 

You take a few statements Prabupada made to certain people and twist them and say they are applicable to people in general, very offensive really.

 

Again I ask you, how long have you been involved in Gaudiya Vaishnavism?

 

♣♣♣

[cbrahma 0]

 

You don't know what your taking about and I bet anything your somewhat of a newcomer and certainly have never spent time in India.

 

"Prabhupada has said unambigously and definitely that formal diksa is unnecessary"

 

That is completely 100% false, and my Guru Srila Prabupada, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, Bhaktivinode Thakur and the Gosvamis themselves disagree with you as well, the proof is in Prabupadas books over and over again as well as Hari Bhakti vilasa itself (maybe that means nothing to you).

 

You take a few statements Prabupada made to certain people and twist them and say they are applicable to people in general, very offensive really.

 

Again I ask you, how long have you been involved in Gaudiya Vaishnavism?

 

♣♣♣

No twisting required. You dont' know what I'm talking about obviously. I have quoted Prabhupada several times on this subject but for your much needed edification I will do so again.

 

 

 

• <SMALL></SMALL><SMALL>Srila Prabhupada Letter to Dinesh, 31/10/69:
  "...disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion. " </SMALL>
  <SMALL>
  </SMALL><SMALL>Srila Prabhupada Interview, 16/10/76, Chandigarh:
  "Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge..... Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing." </SMALL>
  <SMALL></SMALL>
  <SMALL>So anyway, from 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiated, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahaprabhu's cult. That I was thinking. And that was the initiation by my Guru Maharaja."
  (SP Lecture, 10/12/76, Hyderabad) <TABLE bgColor=#ffcccc border=1><TBODY><TR><TD>"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."
  (BTG, Search for the Divine)</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE bgColor=#ffcccc border=1><TBODY><TR><TD>"...disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion."
  (SP Letter to Dinesh, 31/10/69)</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE bgColor=#ffcccc border=1><TBODY><TR><TD>"The chanting of Hare Krsna is our main business, that is real initiation. And as you are all following my instruction, in that matter, the initiator is already there."
  (SP Letter to Tamal Krsna, 19/8/68)</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></SMALL>
  <SMALL></SMALL>

 

 

You will have to get over your religious elitism, I'm afraid, since you obviously don't even understand what the formal ritual means.

[♣♣♣ 0]

I was around when Prabupada was and know for certain what he taught us, people like you come along a decade or two later and take a few letters he sent to people and think that was his primary instruction.

 

If you have ever read his books you would know, Prabupada was part of an unbroken disciplic and supported that over and over again.

 

This is too funny, I won't waste my time with such a baffoon.

 

 

I'm sorry but your understanding of Gaudiya Vaishnavism is a complete fabrication.

[cbrahma 0]

 

I was around when Prabupada was and know for certain what he taught us, people like you come along a decade or two later and take a few letters he sent to people and think that was his primary instruction.

 

If you have ever read his books you would know, Prabupada was part of an unbroken disciplic and supported that over and over again.

 

This is too funny, I won't waste my time with such a baffoon.

 

 

I'm sorry but your understanding of Gaudiya Vaishnavism is a complete fabrication.

So was I around. I had Prabhupada darsana. I disagree with your purported claims to understanding. For formal diksa to mean anything - real diska has to occur - it is simply and external representation of an internal reality.

These quotes are not concoctions. You need to get over it - or should I say yourself.

[♣♣♣ 0]

I suppose Sanatan Gosvami didn't know what the formal ritual means, but you probably don't know who he was.

 

[♣♣♣ 0]

methinks YOU are the one who needs to get over your self and your fabricated false presentation of Prabupadas teachings.

 

[♣♣♣ 0]

"So was I around. I had Prabhupada darsana"

I know for certain you were not a disciple or ever lived in the temple full time, Prabupada always encourged his full time devotees to take formal intiation, you may have had darshan, but so did some reporters who knew nothing either.

 

You think you can convience his older disciples who lived with him this idiocy? HA!

 

[cbrahma 0]

 

"So was I around. I had Prabhupada darsana"

 

I know for certain you were not a disciple or ever lived in the temple full time, Prabupada always encourged his full time devotees to take formal intiation, you may have had darshan, but so did some reporters who knew nothing either.

 

 

Discipleship is one topic which you don't have a handle on since you don't accept the vani of the spiritual master. ISKCON was full of so-called disciples who brought criminal destruction down on Prabhupada's legacy.

Get over it.

[♣♣♣ 0]

Oh and the ones who never took diksaha LIKE YOU are the real disciples..

 

LOL

[cbrahma 0]

 

Oh and the ones who never took diksaha LIKE YOU are the real disciples..

 

LOL

Real diksa is not necessarily formal according to Prabhupada. But then you know better.

[♣♣♣ 0]

We Prabupada disciples are all so grateful you finally came along to set us straight.