Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

'Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link' is now available online

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

A cool article from the www.yedaveda.org site:

____________

 

"Guru" in the Singular and Clarity about "Fall Down"

 

We need a guru in whom we have absolute faith and whom we are willing to follow unconditionally in order to spiritually progress to the realm of pure devotion to Sri Krsna. This statement is made with reference to the point that each of us has many gurus, with "gurus" used in the sense of "teacher", or "person who inspires and guides us". We have many gurus, and it is understood that we generally don't consider these many gurus to be on the absolute platform. That is fine, realistic, to be expected. That said, we need one guru, or at least one guru, who is on that absolute platform and in whom our trust is implicit and absolute. Sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada agree that Srila Prabhupada exists on that absolute platform and is fully qualified as a shelter for the unconditional surrender of conditioned souls. As we assert in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, when a person contacts Srila Prabhupada's movement, that person has found a guru, in the sense of finding a Vaisnava who is completely worthy of their absolute faith. In that sense, the person no longer needs to seek a guru, because s/he has found one. Of course, that person will naturally have so many other devotees guide, instruct and mentor him/her during their spiritual lives. Although the person may consider one or more of these other devotees to be on the absolute platform, it is not necessary that s/he considers as such, or that those guides and mentors be on that platform, because Srila Prabhupada is perfectly serving in that capacity for the aspiring devotee. Thus, to reiterate, Srila Prabhupada flawlessly fills the role of guru, in the singular sense of the term, for all who contact his movement.

 

There is a game going on in the ISKCON organization. The game sounds something like "Now that you've been in the movement for six months, or twenty years, or whatever, you should find a guru." In the context of the presentation in the paragraph above, the absurdity of that game should be apparent. To justify the game the leadership of the ISKCON organization needs to dance in amusing ways. Essentially they seem to need to passively convince that Srila Prabhupada is not available to play that role. For example, they may say that one needs a living guru, implying that Srila Prabhupada is not living, despite so much evidence to the contrary. Or they may say that one needs a guru who is physically present on this planet, or something to that effect. Then one may wonder about the situation of those who received formal initiation from a devotee, such as Gaura Govinda Maharaja, who is no longer physically present on the planet. Do those initiates need to search for a guru, with "guru" used in the singular sense? If so, then supposing they find a guru in whom they have absolute faith, and that guru passes away the next day. Does the initiate then need to search for another guru, and then yet another when that one passes away? It may be asserted that the initiate doesn't need to search for another guru, because his guru who has physically departed continues to live in sound and instruction. Then, one may reflect that if this guru who has departed continues to live, inspire and serve as a guru, then it would seem that Srila Prabhupada could also do that. Thus, in looking for a guru in the absolute position, there seems to be no basis for searching for a Vaisnava other than Srila Prabhupada. Of course, at all stages of our devotional lives we seek devotees who will guide and inspire us, though, it seems to me, there is no reason, at any stage of our devotional lives after we've encountered Srila Prabhupada's vani, to search for a guru in the absolute position.

 

So, members of ISKCON leadership tend to obscure the issue by asserting things like "Srila Prabhupada can be the siksa guru, but not the diksa guru", and various similar statements. Essentially, they're attempting to assert that Srila Prabhupada is not available to be the guru in the absolute position. Herein we won't enter into the discussion of the meaning of "diksa". That is addressed to some extent, though by no means fully, in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link (PL). Even if we consider "diksa" in terms of the formal ceremony of initiation, as ISKCON leadership is often inclined to do, our parampara teaches that the guru in the absolute position, who is the reservoir of implicit faith for the disciple, is not intrinsically the devotee who conducts the ceremony of initiation. This is clearly evident from the list of the parampara found at the end of the BG Introduction. This is separate though related to the discussion about the essence of the process of diksa being in no way dependent on the formal ceremony of initiation.

 

From what I am able to perceive, the position of the ISKCON leadership is that Srila Prabhupada, for some reason that I've not yet comprehended, is not available to be that guru in the absolute position, and thus a person who contacts Srila Prabhupada's movement must search for a guru from amongst members of the list of gurus approved by ISKCON leadership. Apart from the difficulties of establishing Srila Prabhupada's unavailability, this stance also encounters serious problems in relation to the concept of "fall down".

 

In the organization "fall down" connotes an obvious deviance from the regulative principles. This understanding of the term possesses value in our dealings and relationships with each other. However, if we are speaking of a guru who is the primary link to the parampara for disciples, who is the reservoir of absolute trust, and who is the point of absolute surrender for the disciple, then "fall down" has a meaning more profound. In the 12th Chapter of Bhagavad-gita, for example, Sri Krsna describes one who is equipoised in honor and dishonor, and happiness and distress, and who is free from false ego, etc. From that perspective, "fall down" indicates any departure from pure goodness. That is the standard of "fall down" if we're speaking about primary, current, and direct links to the disciplic succession such as Srila Prabhupada, Srila Rupa Goswami, and Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur. When "guru fall downs" are spoken about in ISKCON, that tends to focus on the person being caught in blatant violations of regulative principles. But that is not the standard to be applied if we're discussing gurus in the absolute position.

 

Sometimes the dance takes the form of stating "Well, he/I is/am not claiming to be absolute or infallible. He/I/We is/am/are simply doing our best..." We need to recognize the smokescreen surrounding the humble-sounding tap dance. A person aspiring to advance in spiritual life needs a guru who is the direct link to the parampara who is qualified to receive unconditional surrender. For the disciples of ISKCON gurus let us ask "Who is that guru in the absolute position?" If it is the Vaisnava who performed the formal initiation ceremony, then let that be clearly stated. And if so, then that conductor of the ceremony should be held to the standard of "fall down" that is there for the pillars of the parampara such as Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, and Srila Prabhupada. If out of sincere or a show of humility they claim that they are not the direct link to the parampara who is the point of ultimate surrender, then let us ask, who is? Is it Srila Prabhupada? If so, then let's celebrate that and state it clearly. But they won't state it clearly, and least not consistently, or in writing, as far as my experience goes. Rather, the tendency of ISKCON leadership is to claim, albeit implicitly and with humble-sounding words, that the ISKCON gurus are the point of ultimate surrender for the disciple, while at the same time wanting to hold themselves to a shallow understanding of "fall down". If they are gurus in the sense that we each have so many gurus, then that conception of fall down has its place. If they are saying that they are the primary links to the parampara, as listed at the end of the Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is, then the standard of fall down is any deviation from pure goodness, including any personal ambition, any personally motivated thoughts or behavior, any tinge of attraction for profit, adoration, or distinction, etc. If they are saying that they are not the primary links, then let's openly ask who is the primary link, the guru in the absolute position, for the initiate.

 

At some level members of ISKCON leadership know that the standard for fall down for a guru at the level that they are claiming is the highest standard. For example, in the "Qualifications of the Candidate" section of a fairly recent nominating letter for someone to be an authorized ISKCON initiating guru, one of the qualifications is stated as:

 

"He is free from kamini-kancana, pratistha, nisiddhacara, kuti-nati, puja, and labha."

 

How such a thing is determined by the GBC is not clear for me. That such a statement is asserted indicates that they know, at some level, that they are claiming, despite humble-sounding smokescreens to the contrary, to be gurus at that absolute level.

 

Another dilemma of the system being promoted by the ISKCON leadership is the fact that if there is any fall down of any sort then that is a clear indication that the system is not authorized. For example in Nectar of Devotion Srila Prabhupada writes "...if a spiritual master is not properly authorized and only on his own initiative becomes a spiritual master, he may be carried away by an accumulation of wealth and large numbers of disciples. His is not a very high grade of devotional service. If a person is carried away by such achievements, then his devotional service becomes slackened. One should therefore strictly adhere to the principles of disciplic succession." Because at some level they know this, fall downs of gurus, even blatant ones, are routinely covered up and denied, unless and until it becomes futile to do so. They know that the fact that any one of them has deviated, even slightly from pure goodness, what to speak of blatantly from even ordinary standards, indicates that the guru system they are promoting and following, and which serves them personally, is not authorized. In recent months this has been taken to a new level. Now, there are gurus whose fall downs are blatant and exposed. Still, they remain ISKCON gurus. The reasoning behind this, as far as I am able to perceive, is simply that declaring them no longer ISKCON gurus will cause too much damage to the organization. Thus, as in many other instances, so-called philosophy is determined based on supposed needs for organizational preservation. For the guru who has blatantly fallen and been exposed (I state this explicitly because many have blatantly fallen and have not yet been widely exposed), he is still holding that position which implies absoluteness. So, for the disciples of that guru, should they consider this person to be the point of ultimate surrender? Should they consider Srila Prabhupada to be that guru in the absolute position? If Srila Prabhupada is available to them in that capacity, or to anyone in that capacity, then it seems he is available to everyone in that capacity- at least everyone who sincerely devotes their life to him and his mission.

 

It is commonly known throughout the movement that many in the position of "absolute guru" are blatantly fallen, though this has not yet been revealed, and thus they continue in their posts as "ISKCON guru". And each of us can determine for ourselves what percentage of "ISKCON gurus" are fallen with reference to the standard of being free from any tinges of the modes of material nature. This presentation is not about finding fault in those who are assuming the position of "ISKCON gurus". Rather, I present this to generate deliberation about why someone who contacts Srila Prabhupada's movement should need in any way to take chances about the devotee they choose to be the guru who is the direct link to the parampara. It is 100% sure that Srila Prabhupada is qualified for this role. And, I and many others assert, he is fully available for that service. So, by connecting with Srila Prabhupada as the infallible guru, all members of Srila Prabhupada's movement for all generations are fully secure in their link to the disciplic succession. Even if there were some doubt that even one of the ISKCON gurus were influenced by some tinge of the lower modes, it would seem to me that it would not be responsible to set up a system where the potential initiate needs to take any chances whatsoever, considering that Srila Prabhupada is available to be the primary and current link to the parampara. Beyond that, and as described in PL, even if all who serve in the capacity of ISKCON initiating guru were to be mahabhagavatas, my conviction is that they would embrace the PL model. Srila Prabhupada is available to serve as the guru, in the singular sense. Therefore, why would anyone, especially an advanced Vaisnava, want to try to fill a position that is already filled by Srila Prabhupada?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVEN IN THE MATERIAL MODEL OF EDUCATION ITS NEED THE EXISTENCY AND ASSISTANCE OF LIVING "GURU", OTHERWISE ITS WOULD NEVER NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THE INSTITUTION OR LECTURER, TO FOLLOW THE RITVIC IDEA WHAT WE NEED IS ONLY A BOOK, ITS ONLY INCLOUDED ONE'S PARAMETER OF EDUCATION TERMINOLOGY. WHAT TO SPEAK ABOUT THE SPIRITUAL EDUCATION.

 

HARE KRISHNA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVEN IN THE MATERIAL MODEL OF EDUCATION ITS NEED THE EXISTENCY AND ASSISTANCE OF LIVING "GURU", OTHERWISE ITS WOULD NEVER NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THE INSTITUTION OR LECTURER, TO FOLLOW THE RITVIC IDEA WHAT WE NEED IS ONLY A BOOK, ITS ONLY INCLOUDED ONE'S PARAMETER OF EDUCATION TERMINOLOGY. WHAT TO SPEAK ABOUT THE SPIRITUAL EDUCATION.

 

HARE KRISHNA

 

To the above, what exactly are you saying? For the life of me, I can not understand you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Prabhu,

 

You wrote:

 

"EVEN IN THE MATERIAL MODEL OF EDUCATION ITS NEED THE EXISTENCY AND ASSISTANCE OF LIVING "GURU", OTHERWISE ITS WOULD NEVER NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THE INSTITUTION OR LECTURER, TO FOLLOW THE RITVIC IDEA WHAT WE NEED IS ONLY A BOOK, ITS ONLY INCLOUDED ONE'S PARAMETER OF EDUCATION TERMINOLOGY. WHAT TO SPEAK ABOUT THE SPIRITUAL EDUCATION."

 

If by the above you mean that we still need people to lecture from and teach Srila Prabhupada's books, and to provide practical guidance about the application of his instructions, then I feel that the following quote from the PL book is relevant:

 

"Q: In the PL model, how will the initiate know how to manage his devotional life?

 

A: Srila Prabhupada is his main guide, as his primary guru. Also, there are the sadhus in Srila Prabhupada’s movement from whom the initiate will naturally accept guidance. The initiate can choose where in Srila Prabhupada’s movement he wants to serve. He is then expected to cooperatively and submissively serve within the authority structure established by Srila Prabhupada.

 

Consider the situation in the mid-1970s, when Srila Prabhupada was physically present. A devotee who joined at that time accepted Srila Prabhupada as his spiritual master and link to the parampara, though he did not expect to receive personal training from Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada’s assistants personally guided and instructed the new devotee. Upon joining ISKCON the devotee chose where in Srila Prabhupada’s organization to serve. Once choosing, he was expected to cooperate with the authority structure that Srila Prabhupada set up in that particular temple and to appropriately respect and serve all the devotees with whom he associated. Many of these devotees actively assisted him in spiritual life. In a sense they were his gurus, though he understood that Srila Prabhupada was his connection to the paramparä and primary guru. Perhaps one of Srila Prabhupada’s assistants served as a primary assistant for the new devotee, though it was understood that Srila Prabhupada, and not the primary assistant, was the point of absolute surrender. In fact, the devotee may have had different primary assistants throughout his devotional career, though Srila Prabhupada as the main guru and primary deliverer of divya-jïäna was constant.

 

With the PL model the management would be handled as described above. Many devotees and groups of devotees have commented over the years how the present system, with the devotee who performs the initiation ceremony intrinsically involved in the managerial mix, has caused much disturbance. The PL model proposes that we return to the system of management that was in effect when Srila Prabhupada was physically present on the planet. A devotee will naturally consult senior devotees whom he respects when making important decisions such as which temple to serve in and what service to perform. In the PL model there is no managerial control explicitly or implicitly assumed by the Vaisnava conducting the initiation ceremony over the Vaisnava being formally initiated, though there may be a managerial relationship, depending on the volition of the involved parties.

 

The PL model encourages devotees to serve and accept guidance and shelter from Vaisnavas who are physically present. These Vaisnavas to whom the devotee subordinates himself, and with whom the devotee develops close relationships, are spiritual teachers, though none of them replace Srila Prabhupada as the most prominent direct link to the disciplic succession.

 

This paper describes devotees who genuinely experience Srila Prabhupada as the direct, current, and prominent link to the parampara, by dint of Srila Prabhupada being the primary Vaisnava who gives direct transcendental knowledge. Of course this can be misused by someone claiming "I'm directly connected with Srila Prabhupada, so I don't listen to anything anyone else says," and as an excuse for arrogance. If someone is actually connected with Srila Prabhupada then he won't exhibit such behavior. Srila Prabhupada wants us to serve submissively under the hierarchical structure that he created, in loving cooperation with his followers. This doesn't conflict with Srila Prabhupada being the direct link to the parampara for the members of his movement."

 

Your servant,

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haribol.

 

If anyone is interested, there is a for the discussion of ideas relating to the book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link. Here it is:

 

prominent_link/

 

Your servant,

 

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The system have been there and will always available, even the Veda Sakha system (family guru)adopt mostly by the traditional vedic follower since the compilling and codefication of vedict sriptures by Sri Vyasa Deva (its might before)...are still there and will contiueing going on, this system are exactly like the other side of a coin compare to the PARAMPARA system. If you observe to the Hindu family now, every thing of this side is very clear.

What we have in Brahma Madva..... is more liberal to be introduced, systematic, intensive, progressive and more sincere.

Lets be stick and simple, every thing is there.

 

svastyastu visvatah kalah prasidate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agasta Prabhu, you wrote:

 

"The system have been there and will always available, even the Veda Sakha system (family guru)adopt mostly by the traditional vedic follower since the compilling and codefication of vedict sriptures by Sri Vyasa Deva (its might before)...are still there and will contiueing going on, this system are exactly like the other side of a coin compare to the PARAMPARA system. If you observe to the Hindu family now, every thing of this side is very clear.

What we have in Brahma Madva..... is more liberal to be introduced, systematic, intensive, progressive and more sincere.

Lets be stick and simple, every thing is there."

 

I like the following excerpt from PL and find that it applies to what you have written above:

 

"In the mid-90s, I had a powerful experience while living near Udupi, South India, the seat of the Madhva-sampradaya. For centuries, gurus and disciples have been carrying on Madhva's teachings, and it was very clear to me that everyone there identifies himself--mainly, primarily, directly, and foundationally--as a Madhvaite. His commanding image, sitting in his famous çuddha-dvaita pose, is displayed and worshiped both inside and outside the temple, the seat from which he spoke is preserved in a sacred room and daily offered puja, and his life and teachings are continually recited by the sannyasis at "Shri Krishna Mutt."

 

Many of these sannyasis are "bala-sannyasis"; that is, based on strong sannyasa-yogas appearing in their horoscope, they were awarded sannyasa as boys and groomed to be spiritual leaders in the sampradaya as they grew up. In recent times, though, some of these bala-sannyasis have fallen from the standard and gotten married. Our ISKCON history, of course, has many similar examples with adult converts. But so powerful and pernicious is the influence of the modern age that even saintly persons born and bred in Vedic culture may sometimes come to disappoint their disciples. Yet because the disciples, Madhvaites in this case, are absolutely grounded in the life and teachings of their founder-acarya, they don't feel devastated and betrayed, their faith in guru and Krsna remains solid, and they don't sue their mathas for millions of dollars or write books like Betrayal of the Spirit.

 

Observing how absolute faith in the life and teachings of Madhva had kept the relationships between gurus and disciples vital, intimate, and dynamic, and kept that sampradaya cohesive and alive for some 800 years now, I couldn't help but think of our Society, struggling to understand and apply guru-tattva globally, and how to realize enough of Prabhupada's ideal of love and trust to continue as a united Hare Krsna movement. What Prabhupada inherited was timeless, but what he gave us was, in many ways, unprecedented. For example, where in Vedic history do we find the sacred and sovereign guru-disciple relationship deferring to a higher principle of cooperating within a worldwide spiritual movement? To become a servant of the servant in Prabhupada's ISKCON is possible when all gurus and disciples accept the founder-acarya as the prominent link to the parampara and cooperate to perpetuate his mission.

 

How do we accept His Divine Grace as our prominent link? When I first read Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, I thought Dhéra Govinda was dissembling when he asked that the thesis of his booklet-that our founder-acarya can be anyone's sole object of absolute surrender-be validated by the GBC and thereby allowed to comfortably coexist with other understandings and applications of guru-tattva. What he really wanted, it seemed to me, was to get his foot in the door, then gradually go for domination. One tyranny of thought would replace another-same old same old. But rereading Prabhupada's purport to CC Madhya 23.105, I've come to think that Dhéra Govinda understands very well our founder-äcärya's spirit of unity in diversity: "What is possible in one country may not be possible in another...A Vaisnava is immediately purified, provided he follows the rules and regulations of his bona fide spiritual master. It is not necessary that the rules and regulations in India be exactly the same as in Europe, America, and other Western countries. ...We should not follow regulative principles without an effect, nor should we fail to accept the regulative principles. What is required is a special technique according to country, time, and candidate."

 

For me, Dhira Govinda Prabhu's booklet, Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, is a direct descendant of Ravindra-svarüpa Prabhu's 1984 paper Ending the Fratricidal War, the landmark essay that precipitated the first wave of guru reform in ISKCON. A later forefather was Dhruva Mahäräja Prabhu's 1994 booklet siksa/diksa, a sweet breeze after the Vedic Village vitriol that showed up unsolicited in many of our mailboxes in the late 80s and early 90s. Yet there was some gold even in that filthy place, as acknowledged by Jayädvaita Maharaja in "Where the Ritvik People are Right."

 

In that 1996 essay, which also pointed out where the ritviks were wrong, Maharaja wrote: "On the one hand the GBC encourages you to be initiated by a bona fide, authorized ISKCON guru and worship him like God. On the other, it has an elaborate system of laws to invoke from time to time when your ISKCON authorized guru falls down. One might perhaps be forgiven for thinking that for all the laws and resolutions the role of guru is still a perplexity even for the GBC. Some devotees have no problem with any of this. They have their guru. They trust him. They are making advancement. They are happy. But others can only lament the passing of the days when Srila Prabhupada was the only guru and the position of guru was sure. Merely to 'smash' the theories of the post-samadhi rttvik people, then, will not make such theories go away. We must honestly face the underlying issues. Who is a bona fide spiritual master? What qualifications must he have? Are the gurus in ISKCON factually qualified-all of them, some of them, or any of them? If all or any of them are less than fully fit, what implications does this have for their disciples and for ISKCON? In ISKCON today, how can one be sure that the spiritual master to whom one is surrendering is genuine and infallible? Above all, how can every member of ISKCON be connected with Srila Prabhupada as his disciple, his follower, in a true and legitimate sense? The spiritual leaders of ISKCON ought to recognize the importance of these questions and deal with them honestly, openly, sincerely, and deeply."

 

Bravo, Maharaja. Your challenge rings truer than ever. And bravo, Dhiraa Govinda Prabhu, for "honestly, openly, sincerely, and deeply" trying to help us meet that challenge.

 

The challenge of understanding ISKCON Founder-acarya Srila Prabhupada's relationship with everyone in his movement starts with looking deeply into our own heart. If the 25 years since Prabhupada's passing has taught me anything about my own relationship with His Divine Grace, it is this: that my core identity is not so much as his "initiated disciple" as it is his "instructed follower"; because "He lives forever by his divine instructions, and the follower lives with him." And that that core identity is and must be available to everyone in ISKCON, especially if we hope to find enough unity in diversity to sustain and invigorate the Hare Krishna movement in the generations, and millenia, to come. And finally, that the best advice I can offer to myself or any putative guru descending from Srila Prabhupada is this: "Ne'er a pretender nor a proxy be/All masters and disciples--seize his feet!"

 

As I write, it's been many months since you signed as contributors to the GBC's Preliminary Response to Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link. Perhaps your thoughts, like mine, have evolved over time regarding Dhira Govinda's presentation. I am aware that the GBC's Sastric Advisory Committee has been in dialogue with him about the ideas in Prominent Link and at least one of you is on that committee. You are all wise and sincere servants of Srila Prabhupada, as are the devotees who contributed the realizations presented in Prominent Link. I have every hope that we are at last ready to resolve the "mother of all issues" in ISKCON-or at least to celebrate our unity in diversity-for it is within the well-rounded saìga of faithful devotees that Srila Prabhupada's full mercy appears.

 

Hope you are all well and thank you for reading. Hare Krishna.

 

Yours in the service of Srila Prabhupada,

Suresvara dasa."

 

 

 

Your servant,

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We read and learn togather the history about Ratnakara, Mrigari, Sobari Muni etc. Alls They have followed the verities system offer in the vedic. Many of them passed the examination very well, but some are fail, but again they will start from those point--where its completly no loss.

 

Pass and fail its inclouded on the system, both who take lesson from what happened they will always encoursge for a better and advance.

 

Prabhupada will never replace by any one, rather his devotes will always put him on the centre as adiguru, as promonent link, as whatever the highest honorable he must and deserve to have altrough he never needs its.

 

Our parampara is original, autantic and autority, its eternal. To be better, all we need is to strugle to our best.

 

I am the one's of them since HG. Bavananda Prabhu. Now I am a diciple of Srila Prabhupada diciple.

 

LET'S BE ON THE TRACK TO REACH THE LESS.

 

my dandavat pranam and do beg for your vancakalpa...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...