Guru's responsibilites

[stonehearted 0]

Thank you, Audarya-lila. And ditto for me.

[Guest guest]

We can continue on with shastric quotes, taking them out of quote but presenting them as "what Prabhupada wanted," or we can look at his last Will. Its clear there, no qualms. But do we WANT to hear the truth? Most will rationalize it away.

 

Surprised Guest

[stonehearted 0]

I've also read Srila Prabhupada's will carefully (I spent a couple of years as a paralegal in the '70s and took classes at UH law school). The ritvik advocates infer something from a section about proprety trustees, I think, for which I think we would need more explicit evidence. I don't think that's "rationalizing [anything] away," but the kind of caution that legal and academic training teach us. I find it an interesting argument, but less than compelling only because of the paucity of explicit evidence. The ritviks' case seems to me to be a concatenation of inferences. I don't think they're necessarily unreasonable inferences, but I beleive that Srila Prabhupada would have made something like this as explicit as four regulative principles and sixteen rounds, especially since he preached repeatedly that he wanted his disciples to become qualified as gurus, either vartmapradarsaka, siksa, or diksa. That's process of guru-parampara ("one after another") he taught, what we heard from him over and over again, especially if we had tapes of his lectures. Although he also gave us repeated warnings ("I am an old man: I may go at any time . . ."), most of us never conceived that we may have to carry things on in this particular way. (I know--some did, and were planning for it.)

 

As I've said before, I'm not really arguing against the ritvik position, but asking for clearer evidence. Since I lived in San Diego at the time, I attended the entire "Ritvik debate." I was fairly disgusted with both sides. Instead of disussing as devotees in search of the truth, both sides acted like a bunch of damned lawyers, listening only to find "holes" in the other side's case and "score points." Soem ritvik advocates scream about the tapes of the "debate" being suppressed, but I can't imagine how cirulating those tapes would help their case.

[Guruvani 0]

Prabhupada's will deals with properties and assets. His will is about legal matters concering the temples and properties of ISKCON. The will was made to conform to inheritance laws and all the legal aspects of transferral of titles etc.

Prabhupada's legal will, that was drawn up in consultation with lawyers is not the document we should be looking at to find Prabhupada's declaration of spiritual succession. Prabhupada's declaration of spiritual succession was the

rtvik appointments of July 9 1977. This was Prabhupada's last and final word on how initiation would go on in ISKCON after his departure. He signed this document and a copy was sent out to all the temples in the movement. The will was just a legal document regarding the properties and has nothing to do with the spiritual side of Prabhupada's declaration of spiritual succession.

 

Here again we have the "smoke and mirrors" game to try and ignore or conceal Prabhupada's July 9 declaration of spiritual succession for ISKCON - the rtvik appointments!

[Guruvani 0]

There are some very advanced Madhva sampradaya scholars who support the rtvik doctrine for ISKCON. It is not just some upstart disciples who promote rtvik. For your information I will present some material on this matter:

 

Madhva Sampradaya Scholars Support Ritvik

 

-----------------

BY ISKCON BANGALORE

 

BANGALORE, INDIA, Jan 28 (VNN) — When we (devotees at ISKCON Bangalore) came to know that HG Basugosh Prabhu, was arranging a conference of Madhvas & Srivaishnava Scholars to discuss the guru issue, we vehemently opposed. As we found no authorization from Srila Prabhupada for such an exercise.

 

We see HG Basugosh Prabhus' postings are misleading devotees around the world by his one sided presentation.

 

However, since the exercise has begun we find it only appropriate to present the response of these scholars what they actually say on this issue after objectively presenting the guru issue to them.

 

HG Vidvan Gauranga Das had written in one of the postings on Chakra about these scholars:

 

'Vidyavachaspati' Bannanje Govindachar: Disciple of Vidyamanya Tirtha Swami, Mathadhisa of Palimara Matha. He is a very prominent lecturer and scholar, recognized by the 8 mathas. Bannanje Govindachar, the Maadhva devotee-scholar was awarded the title: 'Vidyaa-vaachaspati' by one of the 8 Madhva-mathas.

 

(read the interview posted with Govindachar)

 

Sri Sri Rangapriya Swami Desikachar: A broad-minded Sri Vaishnava scholar and sannyasi. He was previously a professor in National College, Bangalore. He is a Sanskrit scholar. He has disciples who come from Smaarta, Sri Vaishnava and Maadhva backgrounds.

 

(for the information of the readers, these two above mentioned scholars were not invited to the conference by HG Basugosh Prabhu!)

 

The following was a short interview with HH Rangapriya Swami:

 

Question: According to Srila Prabhupada's letter of July 9th, 1977, if we accept Srila Prabhupada as the diksa guru and receive initiation from the ritviks, is this system in accordance to sastric principles, what is your holiness' opinion?

 

HH Rangapriya Swami: It appears from the system of initiation that Srila Prabhupada has proposed in his letter of July 9th 1977, that he wished to remain the diksha-acharya, vanquish sinful reactions of the disciples, take the responsibility of delivering his disciples and this way continue the parampara through the rtviks. This is a new system. Since such new systems have been created in the past by the acaryas, it appears that Srila Prabhupada desired such a system. This is our humble opinion and it is not in violation of any shastric principles.

 

Question: Do we have to fear that the Parampara will stop if we follow the ritvik system?

 

HH Rangapriya Swami: By this system we do not have to fear that the parampara may stop. The rtviks belong to his parampara. The new disciples also belong to his parampara. Who ever follows his instructions also belong to his parampara. His books will represent him; his peeta (the sacred seat) will represent him; his sandals will represent him; his murtis will represent him.

 

Question: If we ask the new disciples initiated by this system, 'Whose disciple are you?" what should they say?

 

HH Rangapriya Swami: They should say, 'Srila Prabhupada is my guru.' Others can be called ritviks and can be respected for their seniority.

 

Question: As long as ISKCON exists, can this system be followed?

 

HH Rangapriya Swami: Yes, there is no problem.

 

Copy of the letter given to ISKCON:

 

11.1.99

 

I have acquainted myself with the life and message of His Holiness Srila Prabhupada including his message in the letter of July 9th, 1977. I also understand there is some controversy going on among the disciples of the great guru regarding the positions of the diksha guru and officiating acharyas called rtvik acharyas who give diksha as deputees of the original acharya, even as Prince Bharata officiated as the ruler on behalf of Sri Rama's padukas.

 

In this connection, keeping in view the spirit of Srila Prabhupada and the continuation of the great tradition given by him, we recommend that the office of the rtvik acharyas should continue as intended by Srila Prabhupada.

 

Srila Prabhupada's system accords a unique position to the acarya by declaring that he should be a Master Yogin, who takes upon himself the spiritual responsibility of the disciples including the destruction of all their sins and deserves worship due to Bhagavan Himself.

 

The rtvik acharya continue the line of HH Srila Prabhupada, and he should be accorded reverence in accordance with his contributions. But he should not be considered as an object of meditation and worship. Nor should he be considered as infallible. He should be appointed by the governing council and give diksha as a deputee of Srila Prabhupada without violating the letter and spirit of his message.

 

The rtvik system propounded by Srila Prabhupada does not violate in anyway the shastras' injunctions.

 

Signed. Rangapriya Swami.

 

 

 

[stonehearted 0]

Guruvani: Prabhupada's will deals with properties and assets. His will is about legal matters concering the temples and properties of ISKCON. The will was made to conform to inheritance laws and all the legal aspects of transferral of titles etc.

Prabhupada's legal will, that was drawn up in consultation with lawyers is not the document we should be looking at to find Prabhupada's declaration of spiritual succession.

 

Exactly correct, and even more to the point than my post. And as we all probably know, the July 9 letter, as provocative as it is, has a couple of problems. One is that it's Tamal Krishna's words (only relevant because the ritvik advocates often rely heavily on one word in that document); another is that the case the advocates say it makes depends on inference. It's just not explicit enough for many.

 

This issue will not be resolved easily or soon.

[Guruvani 0]

The argument that the July 9 declaration of rtvik succession is the words of Tamal Krishna Maharaja is not a valid argument because when Srila Prabhupada signed the document Prabhupada expressed his approval 100%. Prabhupada was no fool to sign something he did not personally instruct his disciples to write.

When Prabhupada put his signature on that document, those words became his words, his declaration and his direct order.

[Guest guest]

"When we (devotees at ISKCON Bangalore) came to know that HG Basugosh Prabhu, was arranging a conference of Madhvas & Srivaishnava Scholars to discuss the guru issue, we vehemently opposed. As we found no authorization from Srila Prabhupada for such an exercise."

 

 

very nice example of tolerance

 

you are against the people, but they became autorities when they say that you are right

 

in other posts you've said that ritvik is a new prabhupada's thing for westerners and that india and tradition have not to enter in the iskcon affairs... now they are nice

 

harekrsna

[stonehearted 0]

If the letter were to be taken as his words directly, Srila Prabhupada would have signed it as his personal directive, not countersigned it as an approval of the content. It would have been no more physically demandign for him to sign it directly than to countersign it.

[gHari 0]

Henceforward they should approach the nearest of the eleven, so clearly it could not mean henceforward-forever, since the eleven will eventually not be around. And that meaning is in agreement with the previous discussion with the GBC.

 

To fashion a schism, it is necessary to place cheating upon cheating upon cheating, and then aparadha upon aparadha upon aparadha. In short, they are being kicked away.

[Guruvani 0]

No, your theory is not correct because Prabhupada authorized the GBC to appoint more rtviks in the future as necessary. If he did not expect it to last for a long time, even after his departure, he would not have given the GBC authority to appoint more rtviks in the future.

The reference to the 11 was valid at the time, so they were mentioned. That does not mean that is was limited to them for all time, but for the time being they were the only rtviks that had been sanctioned.

[Guruvani 0]

At this point Mr. Stonehearted, I am starting to understand why you call yourself stonehearted. Signed or countersigned, it really doesn't matter. Prabhuapda's signed the document and I am sure he read it before he signed it. Prabhupada was not in the business of having his disciples tell him what to do.

Signed is signed. When prabhupada signed the document it means that the document represents his wishes and his declaration of spiritual succession.

At this point I think that you are just refusing to accept that you have been wrong about the rtvik issue for many years and can't accept the facts. Many scholars and neutral third parties have looked at the situation and concluded that Prabhupada wanted the rtvik system to succeed him after passing. The opinion of ISKCON gurus and their disciples is hardly an unbiased opinion. Neither is the opinion of Gaudiya Math sannyasis who serve to benefit out of the destruction of the rtvik system in ISKCON.

Neutral third parties can easily see that Prabhupada wanted the rtvik system to continue in ISKCON after his passing.

[theist 1]

grand-disciples?

[Guruvani 0]

Yes Prabhupada said "granddisciples" after Tamal said; "NO! Whos disicples will they be".

 

If you look at the conversation in full from the beginning you will see that Prabhupada answered the question "How will initiations go on after you are gone" by saying "I will appoint some of you to act as officiating acharya". Tamal then replied "is that called rtvik acharya" and Prabhupada said "yes,rtvik".

After expressing their confusion and actually disappointment with that answer, Prabhupada could see that they were not going to obey so he made some little concession under pressure and duress.

If they would have just accepted Prabhupada's answer without pressuring him and showing so much disatisfaction, the conversation would have ended with the rtvik statement.

The conversation continued as Tamal said "NO". In other words he just told Prabhupada that they were not going to accept the rtvik system and he kept bothering Prabhupada until he got a little something to satisfy his demands to become guru after Prabhupada was gone.

 

here's the conversation taken in it's parts:

 

Satsvarupa Goswami:

Then our next question concerns initiations in the future,

particularly at that time when you are no longer with us. We want to know how

first and second initiation(s) would be conducted?

Srila Prabhupada:

Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up

I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating acarya(s).

 

 

Tamal Krsna Goswami:

Is that called ritvik acarya?

Srila Prabhupada:

"ritvik. Yes".

 

-------------------------------

 

It is clear from the very beginning that Prabhuapda said that they would be rtviks. Isn't Prabhupada's intentions clear? What was the need to keep pushing the issue? They kept pushing the issue because they were trying to force Prabhupada into saying what they wanted to hear which is that they were going to be gurus.

 

Everything after this is just so much pressure and manipulation to try to lead the conversation to the point where they could confuse the issue enough to be able to screw out of this conversation what they wanted to get from it for their own purposes.

 

Prabhupada says;

Tamal Krsna Goswami:

They are his disciples (?)

 

 

Srila Prabhupada:

Who is initiating ... his grand-disciple .

------------------------

 

Prabhupada clearly says that they will be the grand-disciple of the initiator who is him.

 

This means that they are initiated by him and placed under the direct supervision and training of the rtviks and all senior ISKCON devotees. In this way they are also disciples of the rtviks, though not in a formal way as with Prabhupada as the initiator via the rtvik system of tapes and books.

[gHari 0]

Cheat yourself, but not me. You misquote. It is not "His granddisciple". You shamefully avoid the statements that prove you ridiculously wrong, and lie about other statements. Have you no integrity? That is the problem: you can't even be honest with yourself. The worst part is that you think you are worthy of understanding things like this, with all your fantasies about why who says what. You need help. This hate is consuming whatever was left of your devotional life.

 

This is the short conversation that has resulted in all such hubbub, schism, aparadha, etc:<blockquote>SatsvarUpa: By the votes of the present GBC. Then our next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you're no longer with us. We want to know how first and second initiation would be conducted.

 

PrabhupAda: Yes. I shall recommend some of you. After this is settled up, I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating AcAryas.

 

TamAla KRSNa: Is that called Rtvik-AcArya?

 

PrabhupAda: Rtvik, yes.

 

SatsvarUpa: Then what is the relationship of that person who gives the initiation and the...

 

PrabhupAda: He's guru. He's guru.

 

SatsvarUpa: But he does it on your behalf.

 

PrabhupAda: Yes. That is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order... AmAra AjJAya guru haJA. Be actually guru, but by my order.

 

SatsvarUpa: So they may also be considered your disciples.

 

PrabhupAda: Yes, they are disciples. Why consider? Who?

 

TamAla KRSNa: No, he's asking that these Rtvik-AcAryas, they're officiating, giving dIkSA. Their... The people who they give dIkSA to, whose disciple are they?

 

PrabhupAda: They're his disciple.

 

TamAla KRSNa: They're his disciple.

 

PrabhupAda: Who is initiating. He is granddisciple.

 

SatsvarUpa: Yes.

 

TamAla KRSNa: That's clear.

 

SatsvarUpa: Then we have a question concer...

 

PrabhupAda: When I order, "You become guru," he becomes regular guru. That's all. He becomes disciple of my disciple. That's it.

 

INDEED ALL TALK OF THE TOPIC JUST ENDS

EVERYONE SEEMS SATISFIED AND IN CONCERT

</blockquote>

[Guruvani 0]

Sorry Ghari, I know you have been on the wrong side of this issue for a long time and unwilling to admit you are wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence. I don't have any so-called guru who is actually an offender that i am trying to defend. You have nothing left to resort to except name calling and attacking my sincerity. I have nothing to lose or gain on this issue. I only speak on behalf of the truth and I have nothing at stake here. I am not out to defend or assault anyone. If anyone is offended by the truth then they have a real serious problem. I am a recluse. I seek no profit, prestige or following as a rtvik advocate. I only want that Prabhupada's real intentions be known. If so many foolish imitators are exposed in the process, then that is just their problem for imitating Prabhupada instead of following his instructions.

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

I thank you also for your thoughtful post, Audarya lila.

 

Tho this thread veered off into a 'ritvik rag' the topic of responsibility of guru, both instructing and initiating, has elicted some enlightening responses thus far.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[theist 1]

>>I only want that Prabhupada's real intentions be known. <<

 

Well his desire obviously is for everyone to come to a factual understanding of Krsna Consciousness and to love Krsna excluively with every fiber of their being.

 

In other words he wanted all his disciples to be REAL gurus themselves.

[stonehearted 0]

Ksamabuddhi: At this point Mr. Stonehearted, I am starting to understand why you call yourself stonehearted.

 

Babhru: I'm not sure what you mean by that remark. If it's meant as a personal insult of some sort, fine. Now we know where you're at, including the hypocrisy of your earlier admonition that juniors are supposed to show respect to seniors, or some such thing.

 

K: Signed or countersigned, it really doesn't matter.

 

B: Why didn't he just dictate it as a letter from himself and sign it, as usual. As far as I know, this is a unique document, and to dismiss the distinction so facilely may show some bias on your own part.

 

K: At this point I think that you are just refusing to accept that you have been wrong about the rtvik issue for many years and can't accept the facts.

 

B: It's nice to know what you think. And I suppose it would be just as easy for me to say the same about you. But my position is not as you've represented it. My position has long been that the facts are not as clear as the advocates on either side say they are. Actually, I've been more open on the issue than just about anyone I know. I'm willing to actually discuss and hear what others have to say--from either side. I'm always eager to grant the sincerity of the ritvik advocates as well as those who oppose the idea. Not only have I always been willing to admit when I'm wrong (ask anyone who has been here for a little while), but I've made it clear that I've never been an advocate for either side. My inclination is not to buy it, but only because it's drastically different from what Srila Prabhupada taught us for years. When I heard of the "appointments" of successor gurus, I thought, "That's weird--it's not what I would have expected based on what he taught us about this matter." After investigating it some, I saw that there were no such appointments. I thought the same when some devotees proposed that the appointments were for ritviks in perpetuity, I thought, "That's weird--it's not what I would have expected based on what he taught us about this matter." And I approached the matter as an easy candidate for convincing, since I had been an outspoken advocate for what had been called Judyism--the idea that the spiritual master should be on the highest platform of devotion, as good as the Lord Himself, based on Srila Prabhupada's books and lectures. Where I differed from the hard-line "pure-devotee" advocates was the conviction that such dealings more effectively dealt with by education than by legislation, whereas they wanted ISCKON laws to the effect that only an uttama-bhagavat would be allowed to initiate disciples.

 

K: Many scholars and neutral third parties have looked at the situation and concluded that Prabhupada wanted the rtvik system to succeed him after passing.

 

B: Well, you've cited one. That's hardly "many."

 

K: The opinion of ISKCON gurus and their disciples is hardly an unbiased opinion.

 

B: I'm less interested than you are in the opinions of ISKCON gurus.

 

K: Neutral third parties can easily see that Prabhupada wanted the rtvik system to continue in ISKCON after his passing.

 

B: That's easy to say but more difficult to establish as incontrovertible fact. I don't have a personal stake in the issue. I'm not in line to be a guru (I'm not even sure many on the GBC would consider me a member in good standing of ISKCON, since I live so far from an ISKCON community, and I could not--and would not--swear allegiance to the GBC as they require). My daughters are not moved enough by any of ISKCON's gurus to make the kind of commitment they have learned is the standard (largely from me). I'd love to be able to convince them that they can take initiation from Srila Prabhupada. If I were sure this were the case, I'd sure do so. And I've always dealt honestly with the few poor souls who have expressed some sentiment that I was their guru--I've always told them I'm not qualified according to my understanding and suggested that they be satisfied with their relationshsips with Srila Prabhupada until such time as they found someone who is. Frankly, I think your own bias with regard to this issue is responsible for your willfully misreading me. But I doubt that's of any interst to you, since I'm not at all sincere.

[Guruvani 0]

You can't be a real rtvik without being a real disciple. Being a real disciple makes one a guru. A real guru follows his gurus instructions - he does not imitate him!

A rtvik is also a guru. You cannot represent Srila Prabhupada without being a being a rtvik. Prabhupada said rtvik means "representative". I guess it is wrong to be a representative of Srila Prabhupada instead of representing ourselves?

 

I don't intend on being a rtvik or a guru. My wish is to someday be a sincere disciple, but I refuse to be rtvik or guru.

If you people think I am saying that I want to be a rtvik someday then you are so very wrong. I have not one iota of interest to function as rtvik for myself. I do support the Godbrothers who are sincere and want to function as rtvik.

[gHari 0]

How lame, psychotically thinking you are doing this for Prabhupada. One never has to lie or cheat to support Srila Prabhupada. You add question marks, exclamation marks, and change words just to support your fantasy. What kind of disciple is this?

 

One only needs to lie and cheat and fantasize and inflict aparadha when he opposes Srila Prabhupada.

 

Asked a direct question, Prabhupada answers it, yet for the concoction to work we need to defame two of Prabhupada's senior men, and paint Srila Prabhupada as a coward who was forced to lie. Would Prabhupada say: "They're his disciple" only because he feared the GBC? That is your fantasy, isn't it?

 

Is your Prabhupada a coward? Is your Sridhara also a coward?

[Guest guest]

son and grandson have two distinct and different meanings... you can play with words... but that's it

[Guruvani 0]

Well, when I have to decide whose opinion I am going to accept; the opinon of greatly learned sannyasis of the Madhva sampradaya or the opinion of disciples of ISKCON gurus or ISKCON renegade gurus, I will certainly take the opinion of the Madhva scholars that rtvik is legitimate.

The disciples or followers of unauthorized gurus will never be a good council to make a judgement on the rtvik system. Their opinion is inherently biased and prejudiced and unworthy of any serious credibility when it comes to making a judgement on the legitimacy of the rtvik system.

 

I prefer to hear the opinions of unbiased, uninvolved third parties who can look at the evidence and make a fair judgement. Scholars of the Madhva sampradaya have looked at this situation and concluded that Prabhupada wanted a rtvik system and that rtvik doctrine is not against the laws of the shastra.

 

The opinions of upstart ISKCON gurus and their followers is not a valid opinion. They have their positions and livelyhoods on the line and they cannot make a good judgement based on the facts alone. Their opinion is based on emotional fanaticism and party spirit.

 

When one cannot defeat rtvik doctrine with legitimate evidence they resort to name calling and character assasination. This kind of angry spew is a poor excuse for winning the debate.

[gHari 0]

Srila Sridhara Maharaja with the ISKCON GBC in 1978:<blockquote>[...] Srila Sridhara Maharaja: First guru, vartma pradarsaka guru is the first guru, who shows the way. He may leave, otherwise, the mantra guru, nama guru, if I am accepted by any nama guru, then as long as the nama guru is present, I am getting only one guru, and after his departure if sannyasa guru or mantra guru comes then I shall offer all my regards to him seeing the representative of the previous guru. Do you follow?

 

Assembly: Yes.

 

Jayapataka Maharaja: In the presence of the . . .

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Representative, only vartma pradarska may be present before the real guru.

 

TKG (background): He may remain.

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: And other gurus cannot be present, with the diksa guru. Nama guru or diksa guru, that will be one and the same.

 

Jayapataka Maharaja: Whoever the nama guru is, he should also consequently be...

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: <font color="blue">If nama guru is living, then he should be mantra guru, he should be sannyasa guru.</font>

 

Jayapataka Maharaja: Everything.

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Everything, everything. And the ritviks are but vartma pradarsaka guru. When he was living, he appointed so many ritviks, representatives, they are really, they are vartma pradarsaka. Do you follow?

 

Jayapataka Maharaja: Vartma pradarsaka.

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: That, they are showing, they are showing, indicating the way to the guru.

 

Jayapataka Maharaja: At which stage is the karma accepted by the guru?

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: When the guru first accepts the disciple, then he will take the charge. Diksa, Bhagavate. Diksa is nama diksa. Pancaratric diksa, mantra diksa, at the time of diksa, initiation, the guru accepts him as he is, accepting the charge to wash away the sins, by his instructions. santevas saucindate mana basangam itibi

 

Dev (background): Harinama?

 

TKG(aside): Both, the karma is accepted for both, because he washes and cleans at that time.

 

Dev (aside): At which time?

 

Tamal Krsna Maharaja: Both initiations.

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: And the guru, he also does the function by the help of his guru, in this way the chain goes to Krsna but, tada bhaktave, the medium is so transparent that is, no time can be guru parampara. It goes to Krsna, in no time. So the guru should be transparent. Who has wholey given himself to his own guru, he is guru. The cent percent servant of his guru is guru. This is the criterion. Who has wholey dedicated himself to guru, he is guru. Whatever comes to him he already reaches to his guru, this transparent medium.

 

[...]

 

Satsvarupa Maharaja: I had one question that Bhavananda Maharaja asked me to ask about the initiating gurus. He, on Gaura Purnima, he initiated some of the Bengali boys, second initiation. So, he is their diksa guru. He wanted to know what respect is required of the diksa guru. They have already taken Bhaktivedanta Swami as their Nama guru. Should they, when they see Bhavananda Maharaja make pranams or should they worship with picture or is that not required for the diksa guru? What is the proper worship of the diksa guru?

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: The disciples of Bhavananda Maharaja should see Nama guru also within him and he should be, when in arcana, he should be worhiped as guru, mantra guru in mantra words. Arcana is performed in this Pancaratric, it is tantric mantra, so diksa guru will be worshiped in the arcana function and Nama guru in bhajan-Nama bhajan. And in general case, both should be seen as far as possible in one, that he is in at present, he is present in him for me.

 

Satsvarupa Mj: But for sannyasa guru, that kind of worship is not required?

 

(Bengali)

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Sannyasa guru is not generally worshiped, but it is a form for propaganda we have to take. In sastra, of course, mantra guru has been given the preference, mantra guru. But nama guru is bhagavata diksa guru-that is more comprehensive, mantra to help the Nama bhajan.

 

Devotee: Mantra guru's portrait is worshiped also?

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Portrait worship. In portrait worship, mantra guru is the principle thing, that is, mantra, rather, local help. Nama is of eternal help. Harinama. After liberation, Nama will continue and mantra will disappear.

 

Mantra up to liberation, as long as I am in the world, the mental world, mantra will relieve me from the mental concoction, but Nama is always with me even after liberation.

 

Devotee: Kama Gayatri-Krsna mantra, it will not-only up to liberation.

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Kama Gayatri, Krsna mantra. It will be automatic at that time. It will be automatic. The desired result will be given by the mantra and the mantra will disappear. It is automatic at that time. [...]

</blockquote>

[Guest guest]

another tactic is to imagine who is the one speaking for you and to create a ficticious charachter that is not sincere (otherwise he will be of the same your idea)

 

i speak on what you say, not on what i imagine about you or identificating you with a group or a party

 

it sounds like "you are speaking like that because you're a nigger or an hebrew or something else"

 

surely you are the most kind and good person (and of course.... devotee !) in this world... but your way of discuss is little "racist"

 

this is the reason why i avoid to log with a name, if a say something about me, it will be used by you or others for a persecution

 

i like more to be judged (bad or good) for what i say