On Guru Tattva
BY: HASTI GOPALA DASA
http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/07-11/editorials7510.htm
July 19, TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA — “Let’s not forget that most of those fortunate souls who did receive diksa from Srila Prabhupada do not, to this day, appreciate that they have as their guru a Sampradaya Acarya, just as all the millions of soldiers on the Battlefield at Kuruksetra never realized that Arjuna’s chariot driver was the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Sri Krsna.”
Here Rochon does not include himself in this judgment. At the time that he wrote this as many as 5,000 of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples had been driven out of ISKCON by the GBC. He does not include that understanding and subjects “most” ( How many Rochon, how many, got a number? ) to the image of the reader that those “most” are ignorant of who Srila Prabhupada is. Rochon is not that ignorant of course and also compares Srila Prabhupada’s devotees to simple soldiers who fought in ignorance.
“Let’s not forget” that this is old Rochon, old and has been soundly defeated.
Hasti Gopala Dasa
Dear Vidura prabhu,
Hare Krsna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. PAMFO I hope your sadhana and bhajan are going well.
This correction: You wrote, “First of all, no matter how many other Diksa Guru’s were present during that time, they weren’t authorized in our particular lineage.”
This statement is not correct. Though the names of certain other Vaisnava (Diksa) Gurus do not appear in the list of 32 names for the Parampara, there were certainly more bona fide (authorized) Gaudiya Vaisnava Diksa Gurus. We don’t see Lokanath Goswami’s name listed in our Guru Parampara. (He was the Diksa Guru of Srila Narottama Das Thakur.) We also don’t see the names Gopal Bhatta Goswami, Syamananda Pandit, or Srinivas Acarya, all of Whom accepted disciples – all of them pure, uttama adhikaris. Hrday Caitanya’s name is not listed, though he was the Diksa Guru of Syamananda Pandit, nor that of Pundarika Vidyanidhi, who is Diksa Guru of Gadadhar Pandit. Jahnava Mata, Virabhadra, so many (bona fide, authorized) Diksa Gurus coming from Nityananda’s line, their names not mentioned. And so many more bona fide (authorized) Diksa Gurus, whose names are not listed. So the names of Acaryas listed in our Guru Parampara, does not mean that These are the only Pure Vaisnavas Who were bona fide, authorized Diksa Gurus.
Srila Prabhupada Himself explained that our Parampara line is mainly a Siksa line.
This is the ONLY point I’m addressing, that although we see 32 names presented in our Guru Parampara, there were other bona fide pure Vaisnavas on the Uttama adhikari platform Who were authorized, and giving Diksa.
ISKCON is one branch of the Caitanya tree. There are other bona fide Vaisnava Sampradayas, so although Srila Prabhupada is JAGAT Guru, Bhakta Senapati, and Mantra Upasaka, not everyone who will be coming to Krsna, (through other Vaisnava lines outside of ISKCON) is necessarily going to be receiving Diksa from His Divine Grace, Srila Prabhupada.
So what I’m writing above has nothing to do regarding Diksa within Srila Prabhupada’s ISKCON. I’m just addressing that one point made.
As far as today’s situation, we can see that different devotees have different understandings regarding Guru Tattva, in regard to receiving Diksa within ISKCON. This also includes the fact that different Prabhupadaugas have differences of understanding in terms of Srila Prabhupada’s position as ISKCON’s Diksa Guru for the next 10,000 years or whether another Acarya will appear, etc.
I’m not arguing this or that point: I’m simply pointing out that even amongst Prabhupadanugas, there is a difference of opinion regarding this siddhanta, we’re having seen this expressed, and discussed.
I hope all is going well.
May we be safely situated under the shelter of Srila Prabhupada’s Lotus Feet, Those of our Guru Varga, the Vaisnavas, and Sri Sri Radha and Krsna.
With love,
Your servant,
B. Radha-Govinda
Hare Krsna
B. Radha-Govinda said: We don’t see Lokanath Goswami’s name listed in our Guru Parampara. (He was the Diksa Guru of Srila Narottama Das Thakur.)
Comment:
Prabhupada: Lokanatha lokera jivana. Narottama dasa Thakura’s guru’s name was Lokanatha Gosvami.
(Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 20.105 — New York, July 11, 1976)
Srila Narottama dasa Thakura selected Lokanatha dasa Gosvami to be his spiritual master, and he was his only disciple.
(Madhya 18.49)
Note, that Prabhupada doesn’t specifically use the word diksa as you have. You may be correct but without a quote to verify your statement, it remains questionable.
B. Radha-Govinda said:
>We also don’t see the names Gopal Bhatta Goswami, Syamananda Pandit, or >Srinivas Acarya, all of Whom accepted disciples – all of them pure, uttama >adhikaris.
Comment:
Yes, but are they necessarily, “diksa” gurus as you claim?
B. Radha-Govinda said:
>Hrday Caitanya’s name is not listed, though he was the Diksa Guru of >Syamananda Pandit,
Comment:
Prabhupada doesn’t say this.
B. Radha-Govinda said:
>nor that of Pundarika Vidyanidhi, who is Diksa Guru of Gadadhar Pandit.
Comment:
Yes, this is correct.
“Pundarika Vidyanidhi initiated Gadadhara Pandita for the second time”
(Madhya 16.78)
B. Radha-Govinda said:
>Jahnava Mata, Virabhadra, so many (bona fide, authorized) Diksa Gurus coming > from Nityananda’s line, their names not mentioned. And so many more bona fide > (authorized) Diksa Gurus, whose names are not listed.
Comment:
Prabhupada doesn’t say this.
B. Radha-Govinda said:
>So the names of Acaryas listed in our Guru Parampara, does not mean that >These are the only Pure Vaisnavas Who were bona fide, authorized Diksa Gurus.
Comment:
Maybe. Where is the proof?
B. Radha-Govinda said:
>Srila Prabhupada Himself explained that our Parampara line is mainly a Siksa line.
Comment:
Prabhupada doesn’t say this either.
This is something he does say:
“When speaking in spiritual circles, one’s statements must be upheld by the scriptures. One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is saying.”
(Bg 17.15)
Our primary “scriptural authority” is Srila Prabhupada.
Hare Krsna Radha Govinda Mataji. Please accept my humble obeisances, All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Actually what I said was not so wrong. In my statement:
“First of all, no matter how many other Diksa Guru’s were present during that time, they weren’t authorized in our particular lineage.”
I am not saying that any Diksa Gurus not mentioned in our Parampara were not authorized. I did not say that. And I am not saying that any Diksa Guru outside of our lineage is not authorized.
All that statement says is that no matter how many Diksa Guru’s there were at that time, if they were not in our lineage, then, well, they were not in our lineage. Simple as that.
I actually clarify my above statement just after with:
“the most current link in the Parampara is the Acarya to be followed. If you wish to remain in Lord Caitanya’s movement, there is absolutely no choice in the matter.”
Back to my first statement, I am not narrowing down our lineage in my statement. I did not give any number – minimum or maximum – as to what our lineage is. Therefore I did not actually exclude anyone from our lineage other than those who actually weren’t in our lineage. I excluded anyone outside of our lineage. So even if there were 1,000 more Diksa Guru’s in our lineage that are not listed in our parampara, my statement still includes them.
For example, there may be an authorized Diksa Guru right now in another bonafide line, but that does not mean he is an authorized Diksa Guru in our line. My statement sort of actually becomes redundant in that sense.
Aside from that, I am sort of confused with one point you made in your response.
You said:
“ISKCON is one branch of the Caitanya tree.”
What other branch is there today, coming from Lord Caitanya?
Your Servant,
Vidura Das
I respect the point of view of the commentors above that basically no one really knows what Prabhupada was ordering those eleven regarding the continuation of initiation within his ISKCON movement. “Did he or did he not?”
However, I cannot believe that Prabhupada did what Rocana dasa is cementing since 30 years, that Prabhupada appointed conditioned souls who would fall down, bloop with money, run away with female disciples – to sit as full-fledged diksa-gurus, successor acarya, worshiped as good as God, on the seat of Srila Vyasadeva, the Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya sampradaya.
At least on this point I’m 100% sure, Prabhupada never ordered such kind of scenario. Why can I be so sure?
Prabhupada installed that system that new devotees should study and become convinced. What should they study, they should study that a spiritual master is someone who has mastered something. What did he master, he mastered to become established on the spiritual platform = spiritual master. What does this mean to be established on the spiritual platform, to never be under the clutches of the material energy again. Otherwise why the term “master” if he occasionally makes false step?
So this is what Prabhupada wanted new devotees to study, what is genuine liberation from the clutches of the material energy and what is humbug pseudo, cheating. Prabhupada did not want cheap followers, he wanted to train expert philosophers, learned preachers, those who can speak before an audience and actually convince people of vedic siddhanta.
For me to say, I don’t know what Prabhupada privately was telling those 11 as well as present system what is based upon the understanding what was told to the first 11, is, Prabhupada appointed those who would fall down and deviate after some time.
What sane person would believe what Rocana prabhu&co are teaching since 30 years that Prabhupada ordered folks like Harikes, Jayatirtha, Bhavananda etc etc to be the successor gurus of Lord Caitanya’s Sankirtan Movement? For me this is like either Prabhupada had no clue what will happen with them when they are grabbed by their disciples’ karma in a headlock, or, that Prabhupada was also a conditioned soul who figured that his conditioned disciples would somehow do the job as good as he did.
No! At least for me Prabhupada is a fully liberated paramahamsa, uttama adhikari and therefore he appointed only ritviks to act on his behalf.
Nonetheless, I wish all of you only the best, on your path back to Godhead! As we see, all have different oppinions, so let’s see what is Krishna’s plan to remove this bewilderment and once again have things as crystal clear as we used to have it when Prabhupada was physically with us.
If in future there will be genuine paramahamsas, uttama adhikari, is irrelevant, paramahamsa, uttama adhikari doesn’t has to be appointed and won’t tell you either but prove it by his action.
If at present there are some undetected paramahamsas, uttama adhikaris on this planet who are desirous to be voted in to sit on the guru seat, well, why don’t they act like that and make tons of devotees? Especially in the West, high school professors, Richard Dawkins&co, the world’s 946 billionaires….all are waiting to become convinced about how to develop genuine love of God. So please come forward, or do you need a red carpet?
To July 9th:
I didn’t make this post to Prabhupadanugas.Eu (of my email to Vidura prabhu), which was an emailed reply to ONE particular statement made by Vidura prabhu in one of his emails on a thread both of our email addresses were on.
My reply was specifically related to the fact that there were other Gaudiya Vaisnava (bona fide) Gurus, whose names were not listed amongst the 32 names given by Srila Prabhupada at the end of Srila Prabhupada’s “Introduction in Bhagavad Gita As It Is”
The fact that Lokanath Goswami’s name is NOT mentioned in this list, and your giving the references you have, PROVES my point.
And so there’s no confusion, as stated within my email to Vidura prabhu, my reply was ONLY in regards to a specific statement he made. I was not writing anything with reference to present-day ISKCON’s situation.
So thank you for proving my statements correct.
YS,
B. Radha-Govinda (specifically for you, as per prior exchanges), Swami
Hare Krsna