intiation, what is it

theist · February 15, 2003

From a letter to Kirtananda LA Jan 25 1969

----------

Regarding your question about the disciplic succession coming down from Arjuna, it is just like I have got my disciples, so in the future these many disciples may have many branches of disciplic succession. So in one line of disciples we may not see another name coming from a different line. But this does not mean that person whose name does not appear was not in the disciplic succession. Narada was the Spiritual Master of Vyasadeva, and Arjuna was Vyasadeva's disciple, not as initiated disciple but there was some blood relation between them. So there is connection in this way, and it is not possible to list all such relationships in the short description given in Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person. The conclusions which we have tried to explain in our Bhagavad-gita As It Is is the same as those conclusions of Arjuna. Arjuna accepted Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and we also accept the same truth under the disciplic succession of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another. This is an axiomatic truth. So there is no difference of opinion of understanding Krishna between ourselves and Arjuna. Another example is that a tree has many branches, and you will find one leaf here and another leaf there. But if you take this leaf and the other leaf and you press them both, you will see that the taste is the same. The taste is the conclusion, and from the taste you can understand that both leaves are from the same tree.

theist · February 15, 2003

My Dear Dinesh,

Please accept my blessings. I beg to thank you for your letter dated October 21, 1969 along with a contribution of $25. I have already acknowledged receipt of your new record. Regarding the disciplic succession coming from Arjuna, disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion. Arjuna was a disciple of Krishna and Brahma was also a disciple of Krishna. Thus there is no disagreement between the conclusions of Brahma and Arjuna. Vyasadeva is in the disciplic succession of Brahma. The teachings to Arjuna was recorded by Vyasadeva verbatim. So according to the axiomatic truth, things equal to one another are equal to each other. We are not exactly directly from Vyasadeva, but our Gurudeva is a representative of Vyasadeva. Because Vyasadeva and Arjuna are of equal status, being students of Krishna, therefore we are in the disciplic succession of Arjuna. Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another.

February 16, 2003

Sri Guru and His Grace (excerpts) by Srila Sridhara Maharaja

Diksa, or initiation is more or less a formal thing; the substantial thing is siksa, or spiritual instruction. And if our siksa and diksa gurus or instructing and initiating spiritual masters are congruent, then we are most fortunate. There are different gradations of spiritual masters.

In the scriptures, the symptoms of the guru and the symptoms of the disciple have been described: the guru must be qualified in so many ways, and the disciple must also be qualified. Then when they come in connection, the desired result will be produced.

What is Krsna consciousness? We must examine the standard of knowledge. The guru should try to impart to his disciple the capacity of reading what Krsna consciousness really is. Krsna consciousness is not a trade; it is not anyone's monopoly. The sincere souls must thank their lucky stars that they can appreciate what Krsna consciousness is, wherever it may be.

Devotee: How are we to understand that in the history of our disciplic succession, it appears that there are gaps where there was no initiating guru present to formally accept disciples?

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: We are not concerned with a material connection. The mediator is not this flesh and body as we generally think. In studying the development of scientific thought, we may connect Newton to Einstein, leaving aside many unimportant scientists.

We may trace the development of science fromGalileo to Newton, and then to Einstein, neglecting the middle points. If their contributions are taken into account, then the whole thing is taken into account, and lesser scientists may be omitted. When a long distance is to be surveyed, the nearest posts may be neglected.

Between one planet and another, the unit of measurement is the light year; distance is calculated in light years and not from mile to mile, or meter to meter. In the disciplic succession, only the great stalwarts in our line are considered important.

Devotee: There was one question still in my mind on guru parampara which was not clarified. Between Baladeva Vidyabhusana and Jagannatha Dasa Babaji is a gap of almost a hundred years. How is it that between the two of them no one is listed in our guru parampara ?

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: We have to forget material consideration when we consider the spiritual line. Here in this plane, the spiritual current is always being disturbed and interrupted by material obstructions.

Whenever truth is interrupted by a material flow and becomes mixed or tampered with, Krsna appears to again reinstate the truth in its former position of purity (yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati bharata ). That attempt is always being made by the Lord and his devotees.

Here in the material world, the material consideration is always tampering with the spiritual current; the purity of the truth is always being disturbed. So, sometimes Krsna has to come himself, and sometimes he sends his personal representative to again reestablish the truth in its former and pure state.

When the truth is sufficiently covered, disturbed, and mutilated by the influence of maya, the illusory energy, then an attempt is made by the devotees of the Lord, or by the Lord himself, to rejuvenate it and return it to the previous standard of purity. We cannot expect truth to continue here in this world of misunderstanding without any tampering or interruption. It is not possible.

The intelligent will understand how to apply these principles practically. Suppose we are writing a history: we will note the main figures in the history, set aside those who are not so qualified, and begin the dynasty in order of their importance. Those who are negligible will not be mentioned.

In a similar way, those who are really thirsty for spiritual truth like to see the line of pure spiritual heritage. They search out where it is to be found, connect the dynasty of stalwart teachers together, and say "This is our line."

The disciplic succession is not a bodily succession. Sometimes it is present, and sometimes it is lost and only appears again after two or three generations, just as with Prahlada Maharaja. He was a great devotee, but his son was a demon; then again his grandson was a devotee.

Even in the physical line we see such interruptions. In the spiritual line we also see the channel of truth affected by the influence of maya or misconception. So, the experts will seek out the important personages in the line.

Suppose a scientist researches some truth. After a few generations, another scientist comes and takes up that thread and continues his research. Then after a few more generations, another comes and takes up that thread and goes on. If we are to understand the real channel through which the particular research is progressing, we will have to study the important thinkers who helped bring it out.

We see that Copernicus has contributed something before Galileo began, then Newton came. Then there may be a gap for some time, and from Newton, we find that Einstein took it up. In this way, there may be a gap, but still that thread is continued. An intelligent man will see that it began with a particular person, and then it came to another, and then came here. That will be the proper line of research. So, in the spiritual line this also holds true.

Those who cannot understand this simple point are guided by physical considerations. They do not understand what is real spiritual truth. For them, the physical continuation is the guru parampara. But those who have their spiritual eyes awakened say, "No. What was there in the first acarya is not found in the second or the third. But again we find the same standard of purity in the fourth acarya. " The Gaudiya sampradaya of Mahaprabhu is one, and whoever contributes to that real line will be accepted.

Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's contribution to the sampradaya is no less important than that of the other great stalwarts in the line. He may be a member of another line, the Madhva sampradaya in the physical sense, but his contribution, especially in attracting people to Gaudiya Vaisnavism with his commentary on the Vedanta-sutra, cannot be neglected by the students of posterity. So, his contribution has been utilized by our acaryas, considering the degree, the essence and the purity of his thought in our spiritual line.

Sastra guru, siksa guru, diksa guru, and nama guru are all taken together; in this way, a real channel has been given to save us, to keep up the flow of the highest truth from that world to this world.

This policy has been adopted by the acaryas. Wherever we have found any contribution that is, by the will of Krsna, the highest contribution to the line, we have accepted . So, we accept sastra guru, siksa guru, diksa guru, mantra guru, nama guru--we accept them all as our guru .

We give respect to Ramanuja, who is the head of another school of Vaisnavas, but we do not give respect to a sahajiya, an imitationist who is in the line of Mahaprabhu only in the physical sense, but who is mutilating and tampering with the real teachings of Mahaprabhu. The imitationists are not considered.

Although in a physical sense, they are in the line of Mahaprabhu and Rupa and Sanatana, when we go to judge the very spirit of the line we see that they are nowhere. Their connection with Mahaprabhu is only a physical imitation.

On the other hand, we find that Ramanuja has made a substantial contribution to Vaisnavism, Madhvacarya has given a sufficient contribution to Vaisnavism, and Nimbarka has also made his contribution, so we accept them, according to our necessity. But we reject the physical so-called current-keepers because what is found there is all mutilated and tampered.

There is a proverb. "Which is more useful: the nose or the breath?" The intelligent will say that the breath is more essential than the nose. To sustain the life, the nose may be cut off, but if the breath continues, one may live. We consider the breath to have more importance than the nose. The physical form will misguide people to go away from the truth and follow a different direction.

We don't consider the body connection important in the acaryaship. It is a spiritual current, and not a body current. The disciple of a true devotee may even be a nondevotee. We admit that, because we see it, and the Lord Himself says in Bhagavad-gita, sa kaleneha mahata, yogo nastah parantapa:

"The current is damaged by the influence of this material world." In the line, some are affected, go astray, and may even become nondevotees. So, the continuation through the physical succession is not a safe criterion to be accepted. We must trace only the current of spiritual knowledge.

Wherever we can get that, we must accept it, even if it comes from the Ramanuja, Madhva, or Nimbarka sampradaya. As much as we get from them substantially, we accept, and we reject the so-called followers of our own tradition if they are mere imitationists. The son of a political leader may not be a political leader.

A political leader may also have a political succession, and his own son, although brought up in a favorable environment, may be rejected. A doctor's son may not be a doctor. In the disciplic order also, we admit the possibility that they may not all come up to the same standard. Those who do not, should be rejected.

And if the truth is found in a substantial way somewhere else, that should be accepted. Wherever there is devotion and the correct consideration about Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, our guru is there. Who is our guru? He is not to be found in the physical form; our guru is to be traced wherever we find the embodiment of the pure thought and understanding which Sri Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu irnparted to save us.

Baladeva Vidyabhusana was very akin to the Madhva sampradaya. But when he came in connection with Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, he showed great interest in Gaudiya Vaisnavism. He has also commented on the Srimad-Bhagavatam and Jiva Goswami's Sat Sandarbha. And that enlightened thought is a valuable contribution to our sampradaya. We cannot dismiss him. He is our guru.

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada has explained the siksa guru parampara in this way.

Wherever we find the extraordinary line of the flow of love of God, and support for the same, we must bow down. That line may appear in a zigzag way, but still, that is the line of my gurudeva. In this way it is accepted. We want the substance, not the form.