Analysis wanted---two letters

[theist 1]

To me the meaning is very clear and straight forward. Others see it differently then I do. What are you thoughts on the letters below? I've posted both letters with the essential points for this doscussion in bold.

 

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

 

Letter to: Kirtanananda [letter one]

--

Los Angeles

25 January, 1969

69-01-25

 

(break)

 

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.

Regarding the problem with your father, it is not good to fight with one's father, but if he is not going to give you the money, it may be necessary to take legal steps. Since the money is to be used in Krishna's service, you should try to get it. (break)

Your ever well-wisher,

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

[theist 1]

Letter to: Dinesh [letter two]

--

Tittenhurst

31 October, 1969

69-10-31

 

My Dear Dinesh,

 

[break]

 

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.

 

[break]

Your ever well-wisher,

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

[Guest guest]

I like prabhupada's following words:

 

<<Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person.>>

 

one can be an indirect disciple.

 

<<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.>>

 

one can be a disciple and not initiated formally.

 

still, i believe, it is better to have a living guru (dierct or middle) in a parampara.

 

jai sri krishna!

 

[theist 1]

Prabhupada's words

 

"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."

 

 

[AncientMariner 0]

 

 

 

 

If you choose to surrender to Krishna you can skip over so many formalities and ceremonies etc. involved in religous ritualism. Rtvik this, rtvik that blah, blah, blah. Man Srila Prabhupada is the greatest. That's my two cents, my two cents is free.

[gHari 0]

Perhaps if nothing is bolded, you will obtain different analyses. Srila Prabhupada in each letter is responding to questions about the disciplic succession coming from Arjuna. What does he say about that?

<blockquote>THE DISCIPLIC SUCCESSION

 

EvaM paramparA-prAptam imaM rAjarSayo viduH (Bhagavad-gItA 4.2). This Bhagavad-gItA As It Is is received through this disciplic succession:<center><TABLE bgcolor=yellow border=9 cellpadding="8" cellspacing="8" width="80%"><TD width="50%">1. KRSNa

2. BrahmA

3. NArada

4. VyAsa

5. Madhva

6. PadmanAbha

7. NRhari

8. MAdhava

9. AkSobhya

10. Jaya TIrtha

11. JJAnasindhu

12. DayAnidhi

13. VidyAnidhi

14. RAjendra

15. Jayadharma

16. PuruSottama</td><TD width="50%">17. BrahmaNya TIrtha

18. VyAsa TIrtha

19. LakSmIpati

20. MAdhavendra PurI

21. Izvara PurI, (NityAnanda, Advaita)

22. Lord Caitanya

23. RUpa, (SvarUpa, SanAtana)

24. RaghunAtha, JIva

25. KRSNadAsa

26. Narottama

27. VizvanAtha

28. (Baladeva) JagannAtha

29. Bhaktivinoda

30. Gaurakizora

31. BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI

32. A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami PrabhupAda

</td></table></center></blockquote>

[theist 1]

gHari, thanks for the list. It's good to have a reference common for us all right there.

 

The bold was what I want to emphasize at this point. Others may wish to bring out other points in a similar way.

 

Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person.

 

Prabhupada says "another point" which to me points to a self-effulgent statement that stands on its own merits.

 

What do you think?

 

Haribol

[Guruvani 0]

If you look at the date on these letters you will see that they were written in the very early days of the movement. ISKCON went through incredible growth, development and progess from those very early days.

As ISKCON grew and transformed into a great international mission, Srila Prabhupada's ideas evolved as to how best ISKCON should continue after his departure

It is very dangerous to go back to 1969 to try and find Prabhupada's instructions as to how ISKCON would go on after his departure. Prabhupada himself expressed that he never imagined that ISKCON would grow into such a great international mission. The result of that phenomenal growth led Prabhupada to a particular view as to how the movement should continue on unobstructed by infighting and internal conflict and competition.

In the end, Prabhupada established a post-samadhi version of the rtvik system and order that it should continue after his departure.

It is very reckless and careless to reach for old letters Prabhupada wrote to a couple of disciples back in 1969 to find out what his final orders were for how the movement should continue in 1977.

We know what Prabhupada's FINAL ORDERS were for initiations in ISKCON after his departure and it was RITVIK doctrine.

They were written, signed and distributed to all the GBC and temple presidents in 1977.

These old letters that Prabhupada wrote to some disciples in the very early days of ISKCON have no relevance on how ISKCON should continue after his departure.

[Guest guest]

All of these hold some validity, but we see when Prabhupada was here, he himself held official initiation, so why do we think we should do something different? It would appear that he gave us the best, and the best for us. Most were mleccas and now we want to get privlege of those who dont need official initiation like some born in Holy Land of India. Agreed, not everyone must take it officially, but we really think we can decide this for oursleves? There needs to be someone more objective, that is where guru comes in.

 

Also do we want to skip formal initiation so we dont have to follow quite as strictly and dont have to quite answer up to anyone? How strictly are those advocating this teaching truthfully following? Curious.

 

Guest #108

[theist 1]

Ok I see your view. Disagree with it in general. Prabhupada is not just talking about iskcon he is talking about the disciplic succession. He streched back 5,000 years in his examples.

 

His letters are no longer of value to you because he wrote them a mere 8 years before his departure. He was writing books then also. Throw them away if you like. Your loss. By the way what is your cut off point? Are letters from 1973 0r 74 still OK?

 

Talk about foul editing prqactices. "Just throw them out they are too old." To me that translates to "throw them out they disagree what I believe."

 

Sorry I didn't finish the rest of your post. I noticed it quickly went off on the ritvik subject and I can't handle any more of that right now.

[I_love_krishna_ 0]

But who is the current "Guru" from the Disciplic succession in Iskon?

 

I want to know this just out of curiosity.

[theist 1]

 

Agreed, not everyone must take it officially, but we really think we can decide this for oursleves? There needs to be someone more objective, that is where guru comes in.

 

 

Your statement in bold is all I was after. Glad you can acknowledge that.

 

Yes, I think you must decide that for yourself with the guidance of the Lord in your heart.

 

The Lord in the heart is the most objective guru. If you don't hear His direction then why are you accepting somone as guru in the first place?

 

 

Also do we want to skip formal initiation so we dont have to follow quite as strictly and dont have to quite answer up to anyone? How strictly are those advocating this teaching truthfully following? Curious.

 

 

If you are following the regulative principles of freedom just because its the offical thing to do then you are on very weak and shaky ground.

 

We all have to answer up to God at the time of death. There is no question of not answering up.

 

Guru comes to give us Krsna and we take him for a baby sitter.

 

I am not advocating anything other than seeking the direction of the Lord in the Heart. I am not against offical intiation ceremonies. I just want to see them for what they are.

 

I am against the dogmatic way they are presented to new devotees. With all the pressure to conform and fit in I see that the practioners of these religious rites have cheapened them greatly in many cases.

 

I have never presented myself as a disiple. Never. I do recognize Prabhupada as Krsna's representative.

 

[theist 1]

"this does not deal with you postings..."

 

Then please start a new thread and ask the question there.

[Guest guest]

Very few can honestly hear the Lord in the heart direct them. It would be sahajiya to assume that, but not suggesting you are one. It is why guru is needed.

 

Srila Prabhupada did not present anydogma at all. It is those who read and misunderstand what he has said that present dogma. He gave formal initiation,it is not dogma. You see? That works both ways.

 

guest 108

[Guest guest]

>>Never. I do recognize Prabhupada as Krsna's representative.<<

 

 

Explain????

[theist 1]

>>Very few can honestly hear the Lord in the heart direct them. It would be sahajiya to assume that, but not suggesting you are one. It is why guru is needed.<<

 

Intially it is not about our hearing the Lord in the heart as in a voice speaking or something. The fact is the Lord hears us. He will direct us according to our desires. This is not unique. He is directing the wanderings of all conditioned souls. He is a factor in every action.He directs the saintly in how to save the world. He directs the demons on how to destroy the world. All according to their desires.

 

All I am saying is that he will direct the soul to their guru also. But according to the persons desires. So the emphasis should be on asking the Lord to grant us sincerity of purpose then take us to the proper guru.

 

It's either that or trust some committee to tell you who your guru is. It is said the first step is to accept a guru.That finding process doesn't mean just go hook up with the closest somebody that others are saying is guru. Ask Caitya-guru to direct you.

 

How to hear Caitya-guru? He will make Himself known. He will grant you sufficent hearing capacity. Through increased intelligence & intution, until we can learn to hear more directly.

 

Look at all the people that came to Iskcon and still got cheated. Prabhupada's own mission and they still got cheated. Why?

 

So yes guru is needed. I have never said otherwise. But how you find guru is the question. Offical ceremonies are not in and of themselves the completion of the search.

 

But there is much more to those two letters than this question.

 

Here is another question that gets raised. Is this parampara from Brahma one of a bodily chain of gurus and disciples or a siksa paraparam predominantly?

[theist 1]

here's my statement:

 

I have never presented myself as a disiple. Never. I do recognize Prabhupada as Krsna's representative.

 

I can't figure out what you don't understand from that.

 

[Guest guest]

Hari Bol Theist,

 

Our lineage (Bhaktivinoda Parivara) represented by the Parampara kindly provided by GHari Prabhu is a siksha lineage. What that means is that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta revolutionized the thinking and established the idea that the substance is what we are after and not the form. In the case of the lineage he has placed those who are particularly influencial and shed significant light on Sri Krsna such that we can find our way. We also have the examples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Bhaktivinoda, that while they did take diksha, the connection with their siksha gurus was more significant in terms of their spiritual development.

 

But it is very dangerous to start to think that one is in the lineage through siksha without having any personal contact with an advanced vaishnava who can serve to guide the approaching sadhaka. In some cases a person may take diksha from one Guru and find more significant inspiration coming from another. Who is the most important Guru? Sridhara Maharaja gave a very simple answer to this inquiry - the one who helps you the most.

 

Diksha or siksha is not about some formality - not at all. Just as getting married is not about the formality involved - it is about a relationship. Diksha when accompanied with a fire sacrifice and such is a public display of a relationship bond that both Guru and disciple are already involved in and will continue to be involved in. But no one should think it is a mere formality - there is great substance to such a commitment.

 

What each one of us should pray for daily is good company - the company of an advanced vaishnava who will help us in our march toward Krsna. That is the need of all of us at all times - good company.

 

Just as a quick side note to the ritvik idea I would like to say that the idea is certainly has some merit in that many devotees feel the most indebted to Srila Prabhpupada for having any connection whatsoever to Krsna. I was told by one devotee at one time that I should consider myself Srila Prabhupada's disciple - and while I certainly appreciated the sentiment in that it is only through Srila Prabhupada's books that I came to be interested in Krsna consciousness and I definitely am eternally indebted to him - my feeling is, and was, that I need to connect with Srila Prabhupada through his disciples. The other personality who has had a great influence on my thinking and in my approach to Krsna consciousness is Sridhara Maharaja. I suppose to a large extent that is why I am dedicated to a devotee who is influenced by both of them himself and has been greatly blessed by both of these great vaishnava acharyas.

 

p.s. Theist - are you going to be at the S.F. ratha yatra this year? If so I would very much like to meet you in person. Let me know how to identify you.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[Guest guest]

When is Rathayatra in S.F., and who puts it on by the way?

[Guest guest]

I just mentioned the festival in passing since I know that Theist resides in the bay area. Here you can find all the information you need about the festival:

http://www.garrywilliams.com/iskcon/ratha_yatra.pdf

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[theist 1]

Audarya, I will be going and hope to see you there. I'm the guy who looks like an old Alfred E. Newman. Big ears, small smirky smile. The only difference is my hair is long and grey. Not hippie/Gandolph long though.

 

How would I recognize your body?

[gHari 0]

If we can determine what he is trying to say, then perhaps we can see what these statements mean in relation to the message about Arjuna's succession. It may be invalid to read any more into the statements than fits into the Arjuna explanation.

 

Is it because Arjuna was not (officially) initiated that this question of Arjuna's disciplic succession came up? Or is it that Arjuna was not initiated by someone in the Gaudiya line as given in the Bhagavad-gita As It Is above?

 

It appears to me that the letter explains why Arjuna's name is not in the parampara list given in the Gita Intro shown above, yet Srila Prabhupada still considers Arjuna and himself to be teaching the same disciplic conclusion.

 

Arjuna was not "officially initiated" by any "particular person" in the Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya-sampradaya, but because he directly accepted Lord Krsna's message and was associated also with Vyasadeva (a disciple of Narada Muni who himself was initiated by Lord Brahma) then Arjuna has therefore accepted the same "disciplic conclusions" coming from Sri Krsna through Brahma to the Gaudiya acaryas.

 

I don't think anything is being said about whether Arjuna needed to be initiated or not, officially or not - only about his official connection to our sampradaya.

 

Of course, the greater interpretation of the statements may be valid, but I'm not sure I can reach that conclusion from this context.

 

gHari

[Guruvani 0]

I'm the guy who looks like an old Alfred E. Newman. Big ears, small smirky smile.

 

[theist 1]

Did my mother give you that picture? LOL That's my body except for the hair. Ahh, reminds me of the days of my youth. What a charmer I was.

[livingentity 0]

posting the picture! Now Audarya can easily find Theist at the festival!