Do Christians have Spiritual Masters? *DELETED*

[Govindaram 1]

Post deleted by Govindaram

[Guest guest]

Govindaram, your avatara needs work.

 

No, I'm not being nasty. But please fix your icon.

 

Guess Guest

[mryabotoetoyou 0]

I think they call them priest and saints or maybe just wise persons

[theist 1]

Madhudviña: Is there any way for a Christian to, without the help of a spiritual master, to reach the spiritual sky through believing in the words of Jesus Christ and trying to follow his teachings?

 

Prabhupäda: I don’t follow.

 

Tamäla Krsna: Can a Christian in this age, without a spiritual master, but by reading the Bible and following Jesus’s words, reach the...

 

Prabhupäda: When you read Bible, you follow spiritual master. How can you say without? As soon as you read Bible, that means you are following the instruction of Lord Jesus Christ, that means you are following spiritual master. So where is the opportunity of being without spiritual master?

 

Madhudviña: I was referring to a living spiritual master.

 

Prabhupäda: Spiritual master is not the question of... Spiritual master is eternal. Spiritual master is eternal. So your question is without spiritual master. Without spiritual master you cannot be, at any stage of your life. You may accept this spiritual master or that spiritual master. That is a different thing. But you have to accept. As you say that “by reading Bible,” when you read Bible that means you are following the spiritual master represented by some priest or some clergyman in the line of Lord Jesus Christ. So any case, you have to follow a spiritual master. There cannot be the question without spiritual master. Is that clear?

 

Madhudviña: I mean like we couldn’t understand the teachings of the Bhagavad-gétä without your help, without your presentation.

 

Prabhupäda: Similarly, you have to understand Bible with the help of the priest in the church.-lecture Seattle,Oct 2,1968

[gHari 0]

The ritviks will wanna take this one to the bank.

[theist 1]

It does appear to give weight to their argument. They do have some good points and they should be acknowledged.

 

I avoid them personally though because they have this habit of over formalizing this truth and in so doing feel justified in offending others who may be directed by Krsna to take on the role of guru. They seem stuck on the false notion that only through Iskcon (in some form) can one come to know Krsna.

[gHari 0]

It's something about institution consciousness that seems to destroy all devotion. Politics, politics, politics. Too much shop talk, and not enough makin' doughnuts. And I agree, when they try to ridicule the current ISKCON gurus, they lose me entirely. I just want to leave. In five years, I've only (knowingly) met one polite one.

[theist 1]

And not just Iskcon. They seem to have it out for all of Prabhuapda's Godbrothers as well as their own Godbrothers who are trying to do something outside of the fractured institution.

 

Sounds familar huh.

 

All distractions. Well we all seem to want some distractions, but I think its safer to go to the movies than risk offending the Vaisnava's.

[stonehearted 0]

Most of the ritviks I have met are polite, but so tenacious that it's hard even to get permission to take a bathroom break. I don't argue this issue with them for a few reasons. One is that the "ritvik camp" is not a monolith, or neccessarily even unified. There's a wide range of understandings among them. Another is that I'm sympathetic to many of their concerns regarding the institution, they haven't really made the case that Srila Prabhupada never intended his disciples to accept the responsibility of accepting disciples. One thing they seem to miss is that no real disciple does anything except on behalf of his or her spiritual master. Srila Prabhupada made it abundantly clear that this was his own vision. One impoertant thing many of those in ISKCON miss is that there should be no sense of proprietorship over one's disciples. Rather, the guru should feel responsible to them; that should make it easy for a guru to grant a disciple permission to asscociate with other advanced vaishnavas who imspire them. This does happen to some degree within ISKCON (one example, I think, is Sri Prahlad, who is initiated by Hridayananda but who seems to spend most of his time and energy with Indradyumna Maharaja's programs in Europe. Yet another is their propensity to just blast other devotees, as you say, within and outside ISKCON, including many of Srila Prabhupada's godbrothers whose advancement we can't even appreciate. And I think you're right about it being safer to go the movies than to offend vaishnavas. Mahaprabhu once declined to bless his own mother with Krishna prema (everyone else, He said, except His mother) because she seemed to harbor some resentment for Advaita Acharya. She was upset becuase Vishvarupa started hanging out at Advaita's house, then went off and took sannyasa; now Nimai was hanging out over there, too. Her only way out was to approach Advaita and take the dust from His lotus feet, which was only possible because Advaita fainted at the thought of Sachidevi touching His feet.