Is A Physically Present Spiritual Master Required?

[stonehearted 0]

 

It's interesting that preachers like Tripurari Maharaja never actually come forward to debate issues in a public forum and actually defeat other arguments openly. They sit behind a business desk surrounded by a handful of supporters dictating some pronouncement with absolute certainty, though they would never dare meet anyone in a public debate over these issues.

 

They sit on their big cushions and pontificate to their groupies, but never coming out to actually answer challenges and questions publicly and show how flimsy their positition actually is.

To start with, you won't find Tripurari Maharaja sitting behind a "business desk" or on a big cushion. His room at his place in NoCal is rather small, and the "desk" is a sort of a counter against a window, so there's no barrier between him and whoever he may be meeting with. And no big cushions, either. When he gives class, he sits on a mat on the floor, like everyone else. Well, maybe they give him two mats, with a grand total of about half an inch in thickness. And he has met and discussed these things in public. I know that he has been confronted by ritvik proponents when he has visited North Carolina.

 

If you disagree with his understanding and think you can help clarify things, why not write him yourself? Just go to swami.org and follow the links.

[Guruvani 0]

 

To start with, you won't find Tripurari Maharaja sitting behind a "business desk" or on a big cushion. His room at his place in NoCal is rather small, and the "desk" is a sort of a counter against a window, so there's no barrier between him and whoever he may be meeting with. And no big cushions, either. When he gives class, he sits on a mat on the floor, like everyone else. Well, maybe they give him two mats, with a grand total of about half an inch in thickness. And he has met and discussed these things in public. I know that he has been confronted by ritvik proponents when he has visited North Carolina.

 

If you disagree with his understanding and think you can help clarify things, why not write him yourself? Just go to swami.org and follow the links.

I don't have a problem with T. Swami being diksha guru.

I think it is quite ok.

 

But, when he comes out and speaks against the system or representative authority that Srila Prabhupada clearly set-up in ISKCON, then I would have to say that T. Swami is going too far.

 

Srila Prabhupada set in place a system of representative authority in his acharya sampradaya and never drew any line in the sand to separate one point from another.

 

Srila Prabhupada never gave even a hint that the ISKCON system of representative authority had to terminate with his passing.

 

Nobody else has the right to draw that line as far as I am concerned.

 

So, in defending his own choices T. Swami is stepping on the toes of Srila Prabhupada as far as I am concerned.

[theist 1]

TRANSLATION Gita 18.28

The worker who is always engaged in work against the injunctions of the scripture, who is materialistic, obstinate, cheating and expert in insulting others, and who is lazy, always morose and procrastinating is said to be a worker in the mode of ignorance.

 

PURPORT

In the scriptural injunctions we find what sort of work should be performed and what sort of work should not be performed. Those who do not care for those injunctions engage in work not to be done, and such persons are generally materialistic. They work according to the modes of nature, not according to the injunctions of the scripture. Such workers are not very gentle, and generally they are always cunning and expert in insulting others. They are very lazy; even though they have some duty, they do not do it properly, and they put it aside to be done later on. Therefore they appear to be morose. They procrastinate; anything which can be done in an hour they drag on for years. Such workers are situated in the mode of ignorance.

-------

 

I find it easy and natural to insult others. It comes with my acquired nature which is dominated by ignorance. Hopefully I will grow out of it before death.

 

Words generate effects on others. That generates karma for ourselves. Karma necessitates another material body.

[Guest guest]

 

Later, when Gopa Kumar was mature, he had a disciple named Jana Sharma. In Srila Sanatana Goswami's Brhat Bhagavatamrta it is Gopa Kumar narrating his journey through the different level of bhakti in order to enlighten his this disciple.

[Guest guest]

 

Later, when Gopa Kumar was mature, he had a disciple named Jana Sharma. In Srila Sanatana Goswami's Brhat Bhagavatamrta it is Gopa Kumar narrating his journey through the different level of bhakti in order to enlighten his this disciple.

 

...Gopa-kumara became self-realized and later shared his realization with his disciple, Jana Sarma. His disciple learned everything and became expert in all tattvas (established philosophic truths) by his mercy, but there was something lacking. He could not weep for Krsna and he had no realization.

 

...The boy wanted to weep and become a servant of Krsna, but he could not. Then the Guru, Gopa-kumara, who was now also sent by Radhika, placed his hand on his young disciple's head and blessed him to realize all the subject matters spoken by him - to realize transcendental moods. The disciple at once began to weep loudly, and to sing, and his heart melted. He suddenly disappeared from that place, appeared in Goloka Vrndavana, and there he saw Krsna herding the cows, singing, and playing on His flute. He ran to Krsna, overjoyed. They both fainted, and after that Krsna embraced him.

 

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja has explained that nowadays no one can do like this except for someone like Narada Muni. Yet the fact remains that this is what Srila Sanatana Goswami has written, therefore all the acaryas in our line take it as absolute truth. Just because something is imitated by a rascal such as "Guru Maharaji", the late Muktananda and others doesn't mean that it does not exist. At least according to Srila Sanatana Goswami.

 

Is this all true? Is it really in the Brhat Bhagavatamrta? In ISKCON we always preached that Krishna Consciousness was not transmitted just by a tap on the head and I'm sure that was coming from Prabhupada. Perhaps in some ways we really were spoon-fed in that certain information was kept from us, so as not to confuse the easily confusable.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Is this all true? Is it really in the Brhat Bhagavatamrta? In ISKCON we always preached that Krishna Consciousness was not transmitted just by a tap on the head and I'm sure that was coming from Prabhupada. Perhaps in some ways we really were spoon-fed in that certain information was kept from us, so as not to confuse the easily confusable.

 

nope, that is all it takes....jut a tap on the head.

 

no sacrifice, no surrender, no penance or austerity.

 

If Narayana Maharaja taps you on the head then bas.... you are good to go!!

[Guest guest]

 

nope, that is all it takes....jut a tap on the head.

 

no sacrifice, no surrender, no penance or austerity.

 

If Narayana Maharaja taps you on the head then bas.... you are good to go!!

I'm not asking about Narayana Maharaja's authority here. I don't have a copy of Brhat Bhagavatmrta and can't find the text online. I'm asking if what Narayana Maharaja is saying is really written by Sanatan Goavami or not. Is this translation of this passage open to some dispute? Or is this what it really says?

[muralidhar_das 0]

Sanatana Goswami:

 

 

 

Brhadbhagavatamrtam 2.7. 12

 

Sri Pariksit said: Seeing that the wealth of spiritual love had not yet appeared in the brahmana, Sarupa placed his hand on the brahmana's head.

 

Brhadbhagavatamrtam 2.7. 13

 

Then, by the mercy of that great soul, the brahmana could see in his heart everything that Sarupa had seen.

 

 

Sarupa is Gopa Kumara's other name.

[Guruvani 0]

 

I'm not asking about Narayana Maharaja's authority here. I don't have a copy of Brhat Bhagavatmrta and can't find the text online. I'm asking if what Narayana Maharaja is saying is really written by Sanatan Goavami or not. Is this translation of this passage open to some dispute? Or is this what it really says?

 

Ask Muralidhar,

he has a copy of the book.

[Guest guest]

 

Sanatana Goswami:

Brhadbhagavatamrtam 2.7. 12

 

 

Sri Pariksit said: Seeing that the wealth of spiritual love had not yet appeared in the brahmana, Sarupa placed his hand on the brahmana's head.

 

Brhadbhagavatamrtam 2.7. 13

 

Then, by the mercy of that great soul, the brahmana could see in his heart everything that Sarupa had seen.

 

 

 

Sarupa is Gopa Kumara's other name.

 

Thank you. Is the text of Brhadbhagavatamrtam available online?

[Guruvani 0]

 

Thank you. Is the text of Brhadbhagavatamrtam available online?

 

http://www.mandala.com.au/brhad/index.html

 

you owe me one....

[stonehearted 0]

Somehow this got posted twice, so I deleted one.

[stonehearted 0]

 

Is this all true? Is it really in the Brhat Bhagavatamrta? In ISKCON we always preached that Krishna Consciousness was not transmitted just by a tap on the head and I'm sure that was coming from Prabhupada. Perhaps in some ways we really were spoon-fed in that certain information was kept from us, so as not to confuse the easily confusable.

That's exactly what it says. But it's not that this brahmana had never performed any austerity or sadhana. Quite the opposite. For a very long time he was immersed in chanting very faithfully the ten-syllable Gopala mantra he had received as a result of his faithful worship of a local goddess. (He was from what is now known as Assam.) He did so ceaselessly sometimes, missing sleep and meals. But he didn't have much understanding of that he was doing. (Nevertheless, he saw the Lord Himself in his meditation on the mantra.) So he went on pilgrimage and heard from sages and sannyasis here and there, hoping to get some understanding of the import of the mantra he chanted and the identity of its Lord.

 

He ended up at Sarupa's feet and heard ardently the narration of Sarupa's own spiritual development due to chanting the Gopala mantra. (Hearing, sravana, is one of the main angas of bhakti.) At the end, Sarupa gave the brahamana his mercy by sharing his own prema. As we see in Bhaktirasamrita-sindhu, one may gain perfection either by sadhana or by kripa. This brahmana had both. And Srila Prabhupada exhorted us to act as if our progress depended entirely on our efforts but realize it depends completely on kripa.

 

Chankya Pandit says that, just as we get water from a well by digging, we get knowledge from the guru by service.

[Guruvani 0]

 

That's exactly what it says. But it's not that this brahmana had never performed any austerity or sadhana. Quite the opposite. For a very long time he was immersed in chanting very faithfully the ten-syllable Gopala mantra he had received as a result of his faithful worship of a local goddess. (He was from what is now known as Assam.) He did so ceaselessly sometimes, missing sleep and meals. But he didn't have much understanding of that he was doing. (Nevertheless, he saw the Lord Himself in his meditation on the mantra.) So he went on pilgrimage and heard from sages and sannyasis here and there, hoping to get some understanding of the import of the mantra he chanted and the identity of its Lord.

 

He ended up at Sarupa's feet and heard ardently the narration of Sarupa's own spiritual development due to chanting the Gopala mantra. (Hearing, sravana, is one of the main angas of bhakti.) At the end, Sarupa gave the brahamana his mercy by sharing his own prema. As we seen in Bhaktirasamrita-sindhu, one may gain perfection either by sadhana or by kripa. This brahmana had both. And Srila Prabhupada exhorted us to act as if our progress depended entirely on our efforts but realize it depends completely on kripa.

 

Chankya Pandit says that, just as we get water from a well by digging, we get knowledge from the guru by service.

 

If Babhru holds back anymore after this he will be guilty of heinous offenses of hoarding nectar from the Vaishnavas.

 

Here we are stuggling with issues and he is keeping all this nectar to himself.

 

God will punish you if keep hoarding all the nectar like you have been doing.

[stonehearted 0]

Me? Nectar? I was just answering a question. The nectar has been made readily available by the devotees.

 

It's a fact, though, that it's our duty as disciples to share whatever has been given to us by our gurus' mercy. I've heard this from Srila Prabhupada and from Srila Sridhar Maharaja. KB, you keep me honest--okay?

[muralidhar_das 0]

That was beautiful Babhru Prabhu.

[stonehearted 0]

Thanks. Yeah--isn't Sanatan Goswami cool?

[Laulyam 0]

Gaura Haribol!!!!!

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

Thanks. Yeah--isn't Sanatan Goswami cool?

Totally wonderful. Totally amazing.

[krsna 3]

 

That's exactly what it says. But it's not that this brahmana had never performed any austerity or sadhana. Quite the opposite. For a very long time he was immersed in chanting very faithfully the ten-syllable Gopala mantra he had received as a result of his faithful worship of a local goddess. (He was from what is now known as Assam.) He did so ceaselessly sometimes, missing sleep and meals. But he didn't have much understanding of that he was doing. (Nevertheless, he saw the Lord Himself in his meditation on the mantra.) So he went on pilgrimage and heard from sages and sannyasis here and there, hoping to get some understanding of the import of the mantra he chanted and the identity of its Lord.

 

He ended up at Sarupa's feet and heard ardently the narration of Sarupa's own spiritual development due to chanting the Gopala mantra. (Hearing, sravana, is one of the main angas of bhakti.) At the end, Sarupa gave the brahamana his mercy by sharing his own prema. As we see in Bhaktirasamrita-sindhu, one may gain perfection either by sadhana or by kripa. This brahmana had both. And Srila Prabhupada exhorted us to act as if our progress depended entirely on our efforts but realize it depends completely on kripa.

 

Chankya Pandit says that, just as we get water from a well by digging, we get knowledge from the guru by service.

 

Deep, well written and with some realisation for the welfare of all. :pray: :pray:

[Guruvani 0]

Do we have any other examples, apart from this one supposed example in Brihat Bhagavatmritam, of a devotee going into ecstacy or trance or realizing his siddha-deha simply by the touching of the guru or the Lord?

 

I know that Mahaprabhu embraced the leper Vasudeva and transformed him into a beautiful aprakrita body, but I am looking for more examples of this kind of magical touching.

 

Reminds me of a dream I had a long time ago.

I was setting in posture in front of a guru and listening to him speak Hari-katha (kinda looked like Srila Saraswati Thakur during Chaturmasya).

(yes, he had whiskers)

 

As I listened very attentively I was looking him in the eyes.

Then, as I locked in to his eyes, his eyes rolled back into his head and he went into samadhi trance and also took me with him.

 

Then, I remember seeing something like a Sankirtan party of devotees chanting and dancing around a central figure.

 

I never actually saw the central figure that the devotees were chanting and dancing around.

 

Then I woke up or something.

That is all I remember of the dream.

 

But, at the time, years ago, when I had the dream it was a very powerful experience and I was in tears when I woke up.

 

So, I am not totally unreceptive to the concept of magical touching, but I don't think we have many examples of it even in the life of Mahaprabhu or his most intimate disciples.

 

There was some magic back then, but not really that much that I can see in the books.

 

As far as disciples getting siddha-deha at the touch of the guru, that seems to be practically non-existant in any stories about the life and teachings of Mahaprabhu.

 

Anybody now something on this topic?

[Guruvani 0]

Tripurari Maharaja's opinion.....

 

 

Q. Can't the guru acarya be one who is not present on the planet, like Srila Prabhupada, but is accessed by his representatives?

A. No, this is not correct. We cannot connect ourselves to the sampradaya through a purvacarya such as Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada's instructions.....

Similarly, a disciple's qualifications must be observed by the spiritual master before he is accepted as a disciple. In our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, the requirement is that one must be prepared to give up the four pillars of sinful life — illicit sex, meat-eating, intoxication and gambling. In Western countries especially, we first observe whether a potential disciple is prepared to follow the regulative principles. Then he is given the name of a Vaiṣṇava servant and initiated to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, at least sixteen rounds daily. In this way the disciple renders devotional service under the guidance of the spiritual master or his representative for at least six months to a year. He is then recommended for a second initiation, during which a sacred thread is offered and the disciple is accepted as a bona fide brāhmaṇa. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura introduced the system of giving the sacred thread to a bona fide Vaiṣṇava, and we are following in his footsteps.

 

So, Srila Prabhupada writes in his books his permanent instructions that an aspiring devotee must follow the guidance of the spiritual master OR his representative.

Srila Prabhupada says that "In our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement" that is the ways things are done.

 

So, I would have to strongly disagree with the conclusion of Tripurari Maharaja that one cannot get diksha via the representative as Srila Prabhupada says in his books that one can get diksha from the representative of the spiritual master.

 

The purport above clearly gives a picture of a disciple getting Harinama and diksha through the representative of the spiritual master.

 

As far as ISKCON goes, any opinion contrary to this is apa-siddhanta from what Srila Prabhupada taught for the guidance of ISKCON devotees.

 

I am very diappointed that Tripurari Maharaja is speaking against what is clearly written in the books of Srila Prabhupada.

 

There was also no time line ever given by Srila Prabhupada when this representative system he put in place had to be terminated.

 

The time line was drawn by others, not by Srila Prabhupada.

[Guruvani 0]

As far as I know, we don't have a single statement from Srila Prabhupada that says that his system of representative authority had to terminate with his passing.

So, until I see proof that he did say it must terminate at his passing, then as far as I am concerned his instructions still stand.

 

In 30 years since the passing of Srila Prabhupada, nobody has shown any evidence in the orders of Srila Prabhupada that the representative system of authority that Srila Prabhupada set up in ISKCON had to terminate at his passing, so I don't think anyone can produce such orders now.

[stonehearted 0]

Well, in the passage you cite here, Srila Prabhupada doesn't say anything about a disciple being initiated by the guru or his representative. He only says that the disciple serves under the guru's guidance, or that of the guru's representative. And neither does Tripurari Maharaja directly ISKCON's system of initiation directly. When asked generally about the ideas propounded by ritvik proponents, he reponds with the conclusion everyone in our sampradaya accepted, at least until the late 1980s, which is when the ritvik idea was first suggested by members of ISKCON unhappy (and rightly so) with the leadership shown by those who had the position of guru in ISKCON back then. And none of he passages given from Srila Prabhupada's books to support the perpetual-ritvik idea in ISKCON do so any more directly than this one.

 

When we speak of formal initiation in this context, I'm sure different people mean different things. I know of at least one case in which Srila Prabhupada initiated someone by simply accepting them, chanting on their beads, asking if they'd chant 16 rounds and follow the rules, and giving them a spiritual name. No temple presidents were involved (she was recommended by her husband), no fire sacrifices, no bananas were harmed in the process.

 

Anyway, this is more involvement in this argument than I'm comfortable with. I prefer to comment only on how the issue is argued, rather than becoming directly involved myself, since I see no benefit to anyone. So please pardon me as I resume my position on the sidelines.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Well, in the passage you cite here, Srila Prabhupada doesn't say anything about a disciple being initiated by the guru or his representative. He only says that the disciple serves under the guru's guidance, or that of the guru's representative.

 

Well, if we look at the actual history of ISKCON we will remember than in fact Srila Prabhupada indeed accepted thousands of disciples through his representatives, so I think you are nit-picking a little here.

 

Srila Prabhupada accepted disciples through representatives many, many times in ISKCON.

 

So, if we take this instruction in the book and balance it up against the actual situation that Srila Prabhupada personally established in ISKCON, we can see that it is not any great leap to come the conclusion about what Srila Prabhupada was saying in the purport.

 

We know what Srila Prabhupada was talking about in the purport because we know exactly how he operated in ISKCON.

 

so, you can argue wording in the purport, but you can't argue the actual practices that Srila Prabhupada implemented in ISKCON.

 

Still, he never ever mentioned one word that the gayatri tape should be recalled or that the ritvik system he had in place had to terminate on his passing.

 

As I have said before, there is no authoritative statement from Srila Prabhupada that has ever been found that terminates his representative system of initiaton after his passing.

 

No such instruction in fact exists.

 

Nobody has the right to terminate that which Srila Prabhupada put in place.

 

We see the nightmare that ISKCON turned into by disobeying the orders of Srila Prabhupada.