? on diksa

[theist 1]

 

so, you think the books are not oral instructions?

where did they come from?

[Guest guest]

 

so, you think the books are not oral instructions?

where did they come from?

Yes, you are correct I mistakenly omitted referring to the books. Of course when the books and recorded oral instructions are being interpreted and debated that is a sign that we need living guidance.

[Guruvani 0]

Since this topic is about diksha, I wanted to post this very famous and memorable pronouncement of Srila Prabhupada that has been broadcast far and wide and very much sums up the mission of Mahaprabhu - the mission of Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

"Krishna consciousness is not an artificial imposition on the mind; this consciousness is the original energy of the living entity. When we hear the transcendental vibration, this consciousness is revived ...... This chanting of 'Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare / Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare' is directly enacted from the spiritual platform, and thus this sound vibration surpasses all lower strata of consciousness - namely sensual, mental, and intellectual ...... As such anyone can take part in the chanting without any previous qualification."

 

anyone can take part in the chanting without any previous qualification

The Maha-mantra is directly enacted from the spiritual platform.

There is no diksha, no rites, no ritual, no ceremony, no formality required.

this consciousness is the original energy of the living entity.

So, the question about diksha?

 

[Shakti-Fan 0]

 

So, the question about diksha?

 

Sridhar Maharaja would say, "did Mother Yasoda pull on beads?" In other words real devotional service is not a practice nor a sadhana it is spontaneous love of God, raga marga. But Srila Sridhar Maharaja would "pull" on his beads for hours at a time. He also took diksa, gave diksa and faithfully chanted his diksa mantras everyday. We are also told in sastra that the name of Krsna is so powerful that it is not dependent on diksa. If Sridhar Maharaja would have interpreted this verse the way you do, then he would not have given diksa. Then why do Gaudiya acaryas give diksa; whats the point? First you have to understand that the name of Krsna that is transcendent to any requirements such as formal diksa is what Sridhar Maharaja called "the name proper". "The name proper" is suddha nama, the pure name of Krsna chanted without any of the 10 offenses. Before I heard from and read Sridhar Maharaja I conceived that I chanted Krsna's name which is non-different from Krsna, but that my realization was covered by my nama aparadhas or offenses to the holy name. This is true from one aspect. But Sridhar Maharaja would say that we are actually chanting nama aparadha or nama bhasa, not suddha nama. This is the opposite point of view. But it shows why in the relativity of Absolute we are given the opportunity to advance towards the raga marga through formal practices which include a fixed number of rounds. So if your logic holds then it is not only diksa which can be abandoned,since we have discovered that certain diksa granters have fallen down, but we also may abandon the practices of chanting a fixed number of rounds on beads and so on. So the real issue is not diksa or no diksa or even ritvik or not. The issue is the relativity of our attempt at Krsna Consciousness in this world in relation to the Absolute principle. This vadi or that vadi, any sane, experienced devotee will admit that Srila Prabhupada wanted that if possible we should read his books in the company of devotees, if possible more advanced than ourselves. Parts of this has to do with observing the acara (really sadacara) or behaviour of real practitioners or sadhakas. And this is where the word acarya comes from. This is how we will learn how the precepts in the books are transformed into practical action in Krsna Consciousness. Your obsession with the issue of rtvik guru as Srila Prabhupada's desire has led you down the path of apasiddhanta which is quite blatant to most posters and guests on this "fellowship". The only way to discuss these issues with you would really be if you agreed to table the debate about Rtvik. As I have said repeatedly the books are so important that I don't have the ability to glorify them. So this is not the issue. If we can give up diksa then we can give up chanting on beads and reading the books. If we can give up associating with advanced devotees then we can also give up reading the books. Where would it logically stop? But in all these online debates the rtvik and books emphasis becomes pitted against the sadhu sanga and diksa emphasis. This is completely artificial and based on a relative situation in a particular time, a particular place and a particular set of circumstances. Siddhanta must be discussed in the light of eternity not time, place and circumstance.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Sridhar Maharaja would say, "did Mother Yasoda pull on beads?" In other words real devotional service is not a practice nor a sadhana it is spontaneous love of God, raga marga. But Srila Sridhar Maharaja would "pull" on his beads for hours at a time. He also took diksa, gave diksa and faithfully chanted his diksa mantras everyday. We are also told in sastra that the name of Krsna is so powerful that it is not dependent on diksa. If Sridhar Maharaja would have interpreted this verse the way you do, then he would not have given diksa. Then why do Gaudiya acaryas give diksa; whats the point? First you have to understand that the name of Krsna that is transcendent to any requirements such as formal diksa is what Sridhar Maharaja called "the name proper". "The name proper" is suddha nama, the pure name of Krsna chanted without any of the 10 offenses. Before I heard from and read Sridhar Maharaja I conceived that I chanted Krsna's name which is non-different from Krsna, but that my realization was covered by my nama aparadhas or offenses to the holy name. This is true from one aspect. But Sridhar Maharaja would say that we are actually chanting nama aparadha or nama bhasa, not suddha nama. This is the opposite point of view. But it shows why in the relativity of Absolute we are given the opportunity to advance towards the raga marga through formal practices which include a fixed number of rounds. So if your logic holds then it is not only diksa which can be abandoned,since we have discovered that certain diksa granters have fallen down, but we also may abandon the practices of chanting a fixed number of rounds on beads and so on. So the real issue is not diksa or no diksa or even ritvik or not. The issue is the relativity of our attempt at Krsna Consciousness in this world in relation to the Absolute principle. This vadi or that vadi, any sane, experienced devotee will admit that Srila Prabhupada wanted that if possible we should read his books in the company of devotees, if possible more advanced than ourselves. Parts of this has to do with observing the acara (really sadacara) or behaviour of real practitioners or sadhakas. And this is where the word acarya comes from. This is how we will learn how the precepts in the books are transformed into practical action in Krsna Consciousness. Your obsession with the issue of rtvik guru as Srila Prabhupada's desire has led you down the path of apasiddhanta which is quite blatant to most posters and guests on this "fellowship". The only way to discuss these issues with you would really be if you agreed to table the debate about Rtvik. As I have said repeatedly the books are so important that I don't have the ability to glorify them. So this is not the issue. If we can give up diksa then we can give up chanting on beads and reading the books. If we can give up associating with advanced devotees then we can also give up reading the books. Where would it logically stop? But in all these online debates the rtvik and books emphasis becomes pitted against the sadhu sanga and diksa emphasis. This is completely artificial and based on a relative situation in a particular time, a particular place and a particular set of circumstances. Siddhanta must be discussed in the light of eternity not time, place and circumstance.

 

Well, I wouldn't be so sure you have me or my thinking pinpointed.

 

Firstly, I am not a devotee or a disciple of any guru.

I am just an outsider looking at all you Hare Krishna people and making my own observations.

 

I just about went blind trying to read your post.

 

Try putting some spaces in between your thoughts so it doesn't look like you pontificated that whole piece in one breath.

 

I don't see how anyone with any brain matter at all could say that the GBC guru mill of churning out one fallen guru after another would at all be acceptable to Srila Prabhupada.

 

If you think that Srila Prabhupada would condone the GBC guru system and the long list of fallen ISKCON gurus, then I would have to say that you are just plain mad.

 

Ritvik is the only alternative.

It's not Narayana Maharaja.

 

That is my outsider's opinion.

 

I quit being Hare Krishna about 20 years ago.

 

Please excuse me if anyone got the impression that I was pretending to be a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, because I am nothing.

 

I am just an ordinary american working stiff.

But, I think Krishna consciousness should also be available to ordinary people all over the world.

 

I think it is a damn shame that you people are telling everyone they have to join the cult to become conscious of Krishna.

[Shakti-Fan 0]

Obviously there’s a huge problem with the guru system and how it’s practiced in ISKCON. But outrageous spiritual and religious abuse went on in that society in the name of the hierarchy long before Prabhupada left this world. Whether initiations are Rtvik or "traditional" in ISKCON there would still be diksa. But there's also a huge problem that 99.999% of all practitioners have with the holy name of Krsna - the ten nama aparadhas and the four nama bhasas. This nama bhasa is not the clearing stage that is another definition. If we should renounce diksa then why not renounce hare nama on beads? The Krpalu line did it about four or five hundred years ago. And yes they chant Hare Krsna even though they spell it Hare Krishn. There is also a huge problem in the western branch of the Krsna Consciousness Movement with illicit sex. There are many who have a problem with Prabhupada's stricture against illicit sex. For most it’s just too embarrassing to discuss. So what if you have a problem with a particular elderly swami from India? Creating controversy is a preaching tactic that many "acaryas" use. It polarizes but it moves the disciples closer while as a reaction pushes others away. As for no longer being a Hare Krsna, that's the situation for most of us, even the ones still living in "devotee communities". Most of us have merged back into mainstream western society. This forum is where devotees come to discuss devotional topics and siddhanta or devotional truths and conclusions. We all come from some perspective or in the parlance, "camp". Even that camp may be also a non-camp, it is still a perspective. Some of us have questions and some of us want to influence others and sometimes it’s a mix of both. At least occasionally, since many perspectives are represented here, we need to take a step back into a neutral position. Nobody here is a finished professor and there are things about Krsna Consciousness that we can all learn. Antisectarianism can become just as fanatical as sectarianism. Sridhar Maharaja liked Hegel's dialectic with its conception of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Historically in the world of spiritual thought one perspective led to an anti-perspective and their clash eventually led to a synthesized perspective. Therefore as Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur said in The Bhagawat Speech, "no thought is a bad thought".

[Shakti-Fan 0]

One thought is a road leading to another. Thus the reader will find that one thought which is the object today will be the means of a further object tomorrow. Thoughts will necessarily continue to be an endless series of means and objects in the progress of humanity. (The Bhagavata, p. 3)