"I want to be GURU but I don't want the karma of my disciples!" ?

[Bhakta Don Muntean 0]

Let's all forget about initation - who needs it?

 

We have Prabhupada's Vani and we all have each other - who really needs to be initiated to follow the vows?

 

This whole guru thing is a waste of precious time...

[Bhakta Don Muntean 0]

Quote:

 

hmmm....isn't being "guest" mayavadi? Yes, I do believe it is. The desire to blend together as one guest entity and lose all individualility merging into the effulgence of cyber space.

 

Reply:

 

Mind-blowing clarity in that one! Very nice...

[stonehearted 0]

BDM:

Let's all forget about initation - who needs it?

 

We have Prabhupada's Vani and we all have each other - who really needs to be initiated to follow the vows?

 

This whole guru thing is a waste of precious time...

 

 

The problem with your suggestion is that accepting initiation is an essential element of Prabhupada's vani, and of Mahaprabhu's as well. Of the elements of bhakti Lord Chaitanya taught to Sanatana Goswami, as recounted in the 22nd chapter of Madhya lila of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, the first five--the foundation of all the others--have to do with the spiritual master:"On the path of regulative devotional service, one must observe the following items: (1) One must accept a bona fide spiritual master. (2) One must accept initiation from him. (3) One must serve him. (4) One must receive instructions from the spiritual master and make inquiries in order to learn devotional service. (5) One must follow in the footsteps of the previous acaryas and follow the directions given by the spiritual master."

 

The instructions of the Supreme Lord are moot only for those who seek excuses to avoid them. The plain fact is that the Lord's mercy descends through the mercy of the spiritual master, the advanced devotees through whose heart Bhakti-devi makes herself available. Asserting that initiation is useless because it's somewhat troublesome (including the problems with which we are all too familiar) is akin to making the same assertion about marriage because it's to much trouble, and besides, more than half of the marriages in the US fail. Following that logic, men and women should just have sex with whoever pleases them and not worry about commitment. It's more honest and productive to just admit that we may not be ready for such a commitment (for whatever reason) than to make up a new process that you think is better than what's given by the Lord Himself.

[krsna 3]

Dear Babhru,

 

Hare Krsna

 

Thank you for defending the parampara teachings with regard to initiation. And exposing the underhanded thinking and cheating mentality.

 

krsna das

[stonehearted 0]

The teachings of Lord Chaitanya need only to be studied and assimilated. They certainly don't need me to defend them. And cheating is self evident to those who understand Mahaprabhu's teachings. I don't suggest that Bhakta Don is any kind of cheater, but that he examine carefully the motive behind the idea he presented, and, even more carefully, the process of devotional service as given by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Sri Krishna Chaitanya. Srila Prabhupada's vani is gauravani, the teachings of Lord Chaitanya, and nothing else. At least that's what he consistently claimed. Does anyone here know better?

[krsna 3]

 

 

 

 

 

"Initiation means receiving the pure knowledge of spiritual consciousness" (CC Madhya 9:63 Purport).

 

Srila Prabhupada stated, "From 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiated, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahaprabhu's cult. . . . And that was the initiation by my Guru Maharaja. Then officially I was initiated in 1933 . . ." (Lecture in Hyderabad, Dec. 10, 1970).

[krsna 3]

From Srila Bhaktisiddhanta:

 

The professors of pseudo-humility have reason to be afraid

 

of the preachings of the servants of Hari (those whose

duty it is to expose the enormous possibility of mischief

possessed by the many forms of so-called spirituality),

 

when they are taken to task for serving the untruth.

[krsna 3]

The first-class devotee does not at all see anyone who is not in the service of the Lord, but the second-class devotee makes distinctions between devotees and nondevotees. The second-class devotees are therefore meant for preaching work, they must loudly preach the glories of the Lord. The second-class devotee accepts disciples from the section of third-class devotees or nondevotees. Sometimes the first-class devotee also comes down to the category of the second-class devotee for preaching work. (Srimad Bhagavatam 2:3:21 purport.)

 

This is a general principle. However, A person who is liberated acharya and guru cannot commit any mistake, but there are persons who are less qualified or not liberated, but still can act as 'guru' and 'acharya' by strictly following the disciplic succession. (Lecture 26th April, 1968. New York)

[krsna 3]

The problem with your suggestion is that accepting initiation is an essential element of Prabhupada's vani, and of Mahaprabhu's as well. Of the elements of bhakti Lord Chaitanya taught to Sanatana Goswami, as recounted in the 22nd chapter of Madhya lila of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, the first five--the foundation of all the others--have to do with the spiritual master:"On the path of regulative devotional service, one must observe the following items: (1) One must accept a bona fide spiritual master. (2) One must accept initiation from him. (3) One must serve him. (4) One must receive instructions from the spiritual master and make inquiries in order to learn devotional service. (5) One must follow in the footsteps of the previous acaryas and follow the directions given by the spiritual master."

The instructions of the Supreme Lord are moot only for those who seek excuses to avoid them. The plain fact is that the Lord's mercy descends through the mercy of the spiritual master, the advanced devotees through whose heart Bhakti-devi makes herself available. Asserting that initiation is useless because it's somewhat troublesome (including the problems with which we are all too familiar) is akin to making the same assertion about marriage because it's to much trouble, and besides, more than half of the marriages in the US fail. Following that logic, men and women should just have sex with whoever pleases them and not worry about commitment. It's more honest and productive to just admit that we may not be ready for such a commitment (for whatever reason) than to make up a new process that you think is better than what's given by the Lord Himself.