Death for bhakti

[Guest guest]

Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person.-letter to Kirtananda 69-01-25

 

... disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion. -letter to Dinesh 1969

 

Your signature before this one advised us to "become an essence seeker". "Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic "conclusion".

 

So what do these words indicate to you? How about, "...initiated officially"? Does it read NO initiation is necessary? I believe the meaning is that true initiation is evidenced by actual realization of the "disciplic conclusion".

 

Standing at the end of a pipeline [sampradaya] bathing in oil won't give much knowledge as to the nature of petroleum. We're told all gurus/acharyas are one, ie working together with a common purpose, establishing devotional service.

 

Appreciating Her involves an appreciation of all their contributions, extracting the essence, or essential purpose/meaning therein. What value is "service" without "devotion"? Who does Krsna really want, anyway? How can we please Him without Her?

 

Perhaps you could rein in the false-ego a little and seriously consider what is being offered on this thread...however rudely the presentation may appear. For that, my apologies, prabhu. How else could it be said though, personal insults not withstanding.

[theist 1]

My signatures seem to have become a topic in and of themselves. That is not a bad thing since they are composed of Prabhupada quotes alone.

 

All have clear meanings and certainly don't require my purport, or yours.

 

I suggest we all comtemplate them some more.

 

Here they come again for the enlightenment of all.

[Guest guest]

 

...rotten semitic religions...

 

 

Hope it's clear that there's more than one 'guest' here and while I may somewhat agree with the gist of his/her post, this one doesn't speak for me, not in those particular words anyway. None of this is about "religion", rotten or not. Absolute Truth and the Supreme Personality of Godhead transcend all that, indeed all differences.

[Guest guest]

"Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person.-letter to Kirtananda 69-01-25"

 

 

All have clear meanings and certainly don't require my purport, or yours.

 

 

I beg to dffer. There is a possiblity the above quote of Srila Prabhupada's, taken out of context as usual and from a private letter to one specific individual no less, could be misunderstood as indicating one need not become a disciple of anyone, in other words as a justification of your own position.

 

This is how quotations can so easily become misused, not that anyone on this forum would set out intentionally to do so, as Anadi seems to be accusing you of. Such is the age of "quarrel and hypocrisy' that everything/everyone becomes somewhat infected by it's atmosphere. How readily we recognize another's faults, yet adamantly defend our own, and on it goes...

 

Whether or not you see yourself as a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, I believe you are, and you DO have influence on this forum. Please just consider carefully, as previously suggested, and exercise your role as responsibly as possible under the circumstances. My respects, prabhu.

[Pankaja_Dasa 1]

 

 

Misquoting lets see how it works shall we?

 

Thiest I included you in this hehe:

 

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.

Letter to: Kirtanananda, Los Angeles, 25 January, 1969 {extract}

 

Particular person* means say Sri Arjuna. It means to follow disicplic succession. !

 

Lets have some fun misquoting: will you like this? Everybody?

 

 

 

Although the living entity is always being kicked by the stringent laws of material nature, still he thinks, “I am God” because of ignorance.

Bg.18.12 Purport {extract}

 

The above means we are all Gods but are in ignorance. Now thats a misquote, Mayavadi style. Some more?

 

 

 

Sometimes we understand that I am happy, I am mad, I am a woman, I am a dog, I am a cat: these are the knowers.

Bg.13.1-2 Purport {extract}

 

We are atcually the bodies. We are the deha bodies. {wwoooooooooooof}

 

Ok I can't be bothered anymore with quotes.

 

[Guest guest]

I'll see your "Bhaktivedantas" and raise you a "Bhaktivinode" -- no wait, make that a "Bhaktisidhanta"!

[theist 1]

I understand your concern. Please let me show another angle. Presently in ISKCON there is great pressure by other memebers on new people to pick one of the "authorized" gurus and get "initiated". Bg 4.34 quoted endlessly to them. Great pressure and I feel inappropriate pressure. Then when some new person goes along and picks one of these guys and puts his faith in them they end up blooping, falling down or something like that. This is a collosal crime against the new bhakta who is then left twisting in the wind. Criminal abuse.

 

I feel the thing to do is to instruct new bhaktas to start praying to the Supreme Lord in the heart to guide them to their guru. Then study the sastra to absord the conclusions of the sampradaya. If during this process the new bhakta develops a Gos inspired faith in someone who particulatily inspires him then they may develop a guru disciple realtionship UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF THE SUPREME LORD. otherwise people should mind their own business and concentrate on getting the conclusions straight.

 

This is simply my point. It really is that simple. It all must be consecrated under the Lord's supervision.

 

"By the grace of KRSNA one gets GURU, by the grace of GURU one gets KRSNA."

 

It starts with receiving Krsna's grace. not the previous spiritual master or the ecclesiastical body of GBC, or the election by the bishops etc.

 

Such great souls as Srila Bhaktivedanta and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada meet by "the order of the transcendental system."

 

It is amazing to me how complicated people insist on making this.

 

 

 

 

[Pankaja_Dasa 1]

 

 

Letter to Dinesh {extract}

 

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.

-

 

So it seems if your we are all same as Arjuna we can have direct initiation from Krishna. Mmmmm yes. Sure. Nps.

 

I want to add Arjuna said to Krishna I believe all that you have said and even before this ARJUNA ACCEPTED Krishna as His Guru. And ONLY then was imparted this knowledge. So in that case we NEED Guru to understand.

[theist 1]

Prabhupäda: Then so siksä and diksä-guru... A siksä-guru who instructs against the instruction of spiritual, he is not a siksä guru. He is a demon. Siksä-guru, diksä-guru means... Sometimes a diksä-guru is not present always. Therefore one can take learning, instruction, from an advanced devotee. That is called the Siksä-guru. Siksä-guru does not mean he is speaking something against the teachings of the diksä-guru. He is not a siksä-guru. He is a rascal.

 

All this pressure to take something called diksa or you have no guru is BOGUS.

[Pankaja_Dasa 1]

 

All this pressure to take something called diksa or you have no guru is BOGUS.

 

No bogus. Some people won't surrender so they make up things. Its natural tendency. We're all at different levels. You are very clever person. You know. right?

[theist 1]

When unsurrendered people make things up-that is called bogus.

[Pankaja_Dasa 1]

 

 

Surrendered to Himself. Not His Guru.

 

Krishna taught us this lesson. Yet you deny it.

 

You can choose to close your eyes Prabhuji. I don't see what benefit you will gain. Can't flout Gita can you?

 

You don't know 1st thing about Guru Paramapara anymore. I am not committing any offence by saying this. Its plain to see. Sorry.

[theist 1]

no offense is possible. You have claimed someone as your guru so you should be listening to that person as well as offering some service.

 

Hare Krsna

[Guest guest]

Haribol. I kinda quit listening to anadi because of his agressiveness. He tries to be above those he doesn't even know, which may be dangerous and IS certainly presumptuous. He fails to see if one may be more advanced, equal, or below his level, and he goes about acting like everyone should just shut up and let him drive his point accross.

 

However, he does cite an important teaching on the issue:

 

"If one thinks that he is above consulting anyone else, including a spiritual master, he is at once an offender at the lotus feet of the Lord. One should simply try to find a genuinely qualified spiritual master for actual advancement in spiritual understanding ." CC Adi 1.35 purport by Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami Prabhupada

 

We should never neglect the advanced vaisnava, however, we must be careful to not be misled. Being a disciple of a bonafide spiritual master is not a sport, a fad, a ritual. It is the heaviest responsibility, and there is no such thing as guru tattwa without a bonafide disciple.

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

 

[anadi 0]

Thank you for your critics. I really appreciate your lovingly denigrating anadi.

I'll take the blue out of the signature, because is so disturbing for you.

 

can you give evidence for this sentence:

 

"and there is no such thing as guru tattwa without a bonafide disciple."

 

 

 

Srila Jiva Gosvami says in Bhakti Sandarbha.

that there are two kinds of guru

SarAga – with material attachments – their influence is not enduring

NirAga – without material attachments .

 

Both are gurus.

So there is no harm if someone has a guru with material attachements.

According one's qualification, one gets the association one is prepared for.

But if that guru is pretending to be that what he is not, and tries to manipulate and restrict his advanced disciples to get a more elevated association, than he must be entirely given up.

 

Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami Prabhupada says

 

"One should always remember that a person who is reluctant to accept a spiritual master and be initiated is sure to be baffled in his endeavor to go back to Godhead. One who is not properly initiated may present himself as a great devotee, but in fact he is sure to encounter many stumbling blocks on his path of progress toward spiritual realization, with the result that he must continue his term of material existence without relief. Such a helpless person is compared to a ship without a rudder, for such a ship can never reach its destination. It is imperative, therefore, that one accept a spiritual master if he at all desires to gain the favor of the Lord. The service of the spiritual master is essential. If there is no chance to serve the spiritual master directly, a devotee should serve him by remembering his instructions. There is no difference between the spiritual master’s instructions and the spiritual master himself. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple. If one thinks that he is above consulting anyone else, including a spiritual master, he is at once an offender at the lotus feet of the Lord. Such an offender can never go back to Godhead. It is imperative that a serious person accept a bona fide spiritual master in terms of the SAstric injunctions. Sri Jiva GosvAmI advises that one not accept a spiritual master in terms of hereditary or customary social and ecclesiastical conventions. One should simply try to find a genuinely qualified spiritual master for actual advancement in spiritual understanding.

CC Adi 1.35 purport

[theist 1]

Consulting is not the same thing as a ritual initiation ceremony. Consulting the God realized is how one comes to reach the proper conclusion of the disciplic succession. This conclusion is not reached by simply undergoing a set of rituals anymore than a college education is not attained by simply formally enrolling and getting an offical student id card.

[anadi 0]

"One should always remember that a person who is reluctant to accept a spiritual master and be initiated is sure to be baffled in his endeavor to go back to Godhead. One who is not properly initiated may present himself as a great devotee, but in fact he is sure to encounter many stumbling blocks on his path of progress toward spiritual realization, with the result that he must continue his term of material existence without relief. Such a helpless person is compared to a ship without a rudder, for such a ship can never reach its destination. It is imperative, therefore, that one accept a spiritual master if he at all desires to gain the favor of the Lord."

 

What about this siddhantic statement which is in line with the Rupa and Jiva Gosvami?

[theist 1]

that I should allow myself to be the whipping boy for you anadi until you come to realize that you are really using me as a surragate for an aspect of some part of your own internal state that you feel troubled by.

 

Such things are often hard to face directly at first but eventually they must be.

 

I can only grow by accepting your criticisms. Thank you.

[theist 1]

Main Entry: 1con·sult

1 : to have regard to : CONSIDER

2 a : to ask the advice or opinion of <consult a doctor> b : to refer to <consult a dictionary>

intransitive senses

1 : to consult an individual

2 : to deliberate together : CONFER

3 : to serve as a consultant

- con·sult·er noun

 

One should also consult guru and any who are more advanced. That is natural for any field of endeavor.

[theist 1]

Main Entry: con·clu·sion

Pronunciation: k&n-'klü-zh&n

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin conclusion-, conclusio, from concludere

1 a : a reasoned judgment : INFERENCE b : the necessary consequence of two or more propositions taken as premises; especially : the inferred proposition of a syllogism

2 : the last part of something: as a : RESULT, OUTCOME b plural : trial of strength or skill -- used in the phrase try conclusions c : a final summation d : the final decision in a law case e : the final part of a pleading in law

3 : an act or instance of concluding

 

 

One should consult guru to come to understand the conclusion of his line of teaching. Not that one consults just to consult.

 

The conclusion is the goal.

 

"Among logicians I am the conclusive truth" -Gita

[anadi 0]

 

Main Entry: con·clu·sion

Pronunciation: k&n-'klü-zh&n

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin conclusion-, conclusio, from concludere

1 a : a reasoned judgment : INFERENCE b : the necessary consequence of two or more propositions taken as premises; especially : the inferred proposition of a syllogism

2 : the last part of something: as a : RESULT, OUTCOME b plural : trial of strength or skill -- used in the phrase try conclusions c : a final summation d : the final decision in a law case e : the final part of a pleading in law

3 : an act or instance of concluding

 

 

Apropo logic

1. you said

"Consulting guru is done every time we read a Prabhupada purport."

which is a ritvic, "prabhupadanuga" doctrine, not supported in our sampradaya or caru sampradaya at large, and I cosider it as previously deliniated demonic in nature, being agaist the life of bhakti which is guru devatatma, the deva and the atma of the disciple

2. you stress that official initiation is not always needed to belong the the disciplic succession.

Have a look again at the meaning of disciplic succession:

 

The guru's spiritual mood of service

THE INTERNAL MOOD OF SERVICE to Sri Radhika and Krsna

is conveyed to the disciple through the medium of MANTRA (yo mantra sa guruh sAkSat yo guru sa harih svayam ) ."

 

The internal mood of service is transcendental, why?

Because bhakti is a function of the svarupa shakti, not of the material senses.

And to convey the transcendental (bhakti) you need the transcendental carrier which is the transcendental sound MANTRA, which can be vibrated by the transcendental person.

 

Everything is given in seed from within the mantra.

 

In normal case if one does not receive the transcendental seed of bhakti seva vasana, the desire to serve the divine couple (as in our gaudya vaisnava line), how can one make his devotional creeper (bhakti lata) grow?

 

As we see dikSa is not only formality, when dikSa is performed by the transcendental guru personally.

Why personally? Because guru is the manifestation of Sri Hari.

&#8220;Guru is not an ordinary person. Guru is transcendental".

 

No conditioned person can give the transcendental mantras,

just because one acts in the name of a realized person, as &#8220;HarikeS Svami&#8221; used to say

&#8220;I give you sannyasa in the name of Srila Prabhaupada&#8221;. What is this? This is cheating, kuti-nati (deceitful behaviour).

 

The transcendental mantras can be uttered only by the tattva darSi,

the persons that realized the Absolut Truth.

The transcendental mantras can be received only from the mouth

of the pure devotees, by their very presence.

 

Who is your guru, who is your param guru, who is your param param guru?

Are you realy linked with the parampara?

If your guru is a pure devotee, than your are linked; he should have been qualified to give you the mantras, he should be the medium that link you with your param guru, with your param param guru up to Mahaprabhu, Radha and KRSNa.

 

The ritvik system is against parampara, against Sriman Mahaprabhu and against bhakti.

 

This is siddhanta, and everybody can apply it to persons or religious systems he wants to, taken into consideration the unavoidable conflicts that might ensue.

 

Some Christians proposed that I should be burnt , because they think this is against Jesus Christ, and somebody else said that I am an offender of Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami.

 

But without real guru and real disciple bhakti would die. This pair of real guru and real disciple are the only chance for us to come to bhakti.

 

[theist 1]

 

1. you said

"Consulting guru is done every time we read a Prabhupada purport."

which is a ritvic, "prabhupadanuga" doctrine, not supported in our sampradaya or caru sampradaya at large, and I cosider it as previously deliniated demonic in nature, being agaist the life of bhakti which is guru devatatma, the deva and the atma of the disciple

 

 

Consulting Prabhupada's purports is not consulting guru according to you, and is actually demoniac. Hmmm? Well i won't even try to deal with that. We have a huge difference of opinion. I'll leave it at that.

 

 

 

2. you stress that official initiation is not always needed to belong the the disciplic succession.

 

 

It is a Prabhupada quote and the context is not just for one person as can be plainly seen. It stresses the essence which is the conclusion.

 

You don't like it? So?

[anadi 0]

 

Consulting Prabhupada's purports is not consulting guru according to you, and is actually demoniac. Hmmm? Well i won't even try to deal with that. We have a huge difference of opinion. I'll leave it at that.

 

 

 

Oh, Krishna!

You are proficient in twisting words.

In german there is a saying "Der fuchs is schlau und stellt sich dumm, by theist ist es andersrum".

 

Demoniac is to think that reading shastra means consulting the guru. You pretend you don't understand and use the word Prabhupada to stir the others against me. And you did it anyway quite well. This is shameless of you.

 

This was your idea, and this is all ritvik idea, to substitute guru through sastra, including the idea that there is no need for dikSa.

 

I realy wonder if many really understand your point of view, you try to hide, or put it another way, as originaly put it, when I asked what is the meaning to consult guru.

 

"Consulting guru is done every time we read a Prabhupada purport."

This is consulting sastra, not guru. Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami Prabhupada, has never said he invented something new.

He did only repeat what the disciplic succession has already said, not alterating this knowledge at all.

 

The problem is that the neophyte devotees take one statement of his and start to speculate, speaking about the trees, but not seeing the forest, this is the way new doctrins start, like one does not need a guru, one does not need diksa, jiva falls from goloka.

 

[Pankaja_Dasa 1]

 

Not specifically teach about Gods acitivites, Vaishnava do this. Its just start. Krishna protects words of Guru in parampara. That is why diksa is not given.

[Guest guest]

Denigrating? If thats not calling the kettle black. Your attitude here is so condescending, violating vaisnava ettiquette, etc. Now you hit us always with your martyr complex. You have to be puru, you treat folks who chant like dirt because they dont surrender to you.

 

You ask:

 

"can you give evidence for this sentence:

 

"and there is no such thing as guru tattwa without a bonafide disciple."

 

It is rather simple. Sukadeva speaks, Pariksit hears, bhakti takes place. Srila Prabhupada often described guru disciple relationship, comparing it to husband and wife. If the husband is potent and the wife is fertile, pregnancy takes place. If one is insufficient, the other's qualification does not matter, nothing happens.

 

The guru and the disciple must be bonafide, this is guru tattwa. Two parties to the bhakti yoga exchange. No one is guru if the disciple is not bonafide, just nonsense. And, a disciple can follow all he wants, but if the so-called guru is bogus, the disciple effort is to no avail.

 

If guru has no connection (and I mean spiritual connection, not merely formal and external connection) to parampara, the disciple cannot be connected in any way, and lies on the side of the tree of life, a dead branch with no life force.

 

Anyway, Im sure you will give some pompous reply, but I dont write for your benefit.

 

haribol, mahaksadasa