Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

because
1: we assign seniority based on diksa, not siksa
2: zonal system was based on guru=diksa guru
3: GM system was based on acharya=diksa guru
4: its hard to control siksa relationships in institution where as diksa is easy to institutionalise.
5: Thus only official position of guru is diksa guru. GBCs were back and forth on this, but it did not change the essence. Now anyone can be siksa-guru (ie devotee does not need an official stamp to be one) but it means nothing, as anyone and everyone who is even a little bit of siksa guru is diksa guru in ISKCON.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]
5: Thus only official position of guru is diksa guru. GBCs were back and forth on this, but it did not change the essence. Now anyone can be siksa-guru (ie devotee does not need an official stamp to be one) but it means nothing, as anyone and everyone who is even a little bit of siksa guru is diksa guru in ISKCON.[/quote]

there are lots of siksha that get not to initiate, I do not understand your point.

ISKCON emphasizes diksa over siksa because it serves as a device to control the aspiring candidate and make him easier to manage. The siksha relationship offers no administrative control and thus is considered undesirable .

ISKCON leaders decide for the individual that the disksa guru is more prominent than the siksha guru. They also want to be able to "approve" the siksa guru. They decide who can be your diksa guru by only approving those candidates who are "safe", that is those who have demonstrated that their main priority is to support the GBC ploicies and uphold the status quo at all cost.

However, all this flies in the face of guru, shastra and sadhu. In Adi One, Chapter One Prabhupada quotes Jiva Gosvamis Bhakti Sandarbha to establish that guru should not be taken on the basis of ecclesiastical convention, family tradition etc.

Mahajana Bali Maharaja, by his rejection of Sukracarya, taught by example that it is up to the individual to decide whether his diksa or siksa guru is prominient in his heart. Bali had heard from Prahlada Maharaj (his siksa guru) about the glories of service to Vishnu and when Surkacarya (his diksa guru) ordered him to not serve Vamanadeva, Bali had to make a choice. In doing so he had to weigh which guru was most important to him and act accordingly. Bali chose his siksa guru; Bhaktivinoda Thakura (sadhu) also gave his siksa guru prominence over his diksa guru.

The point is that it is the right of the disciple to decide but because that makes the insitution very difficult if not impossible to manage, the GBC has usurped the right of the individual to decide who he can take diksha from and enforced policies that strive to make the diksa guru prominent in his heart by default.

Mishraji, you are astute enough to understand that these policies reveal that the leaders view their subjects as "things" or commodities. It indicates that they are willing to sacrifice the spiritual well-being and empowerment of the individual for the sake of "efficient: management. But of course, it has not worked.

No one can control you. You can only give control over to others voluntarily. Generally what happens is that people give up their liberty because they are promised safety.

Even Krishna appeals to this feeling: "Surrender to me and I will protect you, do not fear."

However, paradoxically, you have to be prepared to leave the safety mentality to find Krishna. Just like the gopis left their beds and their homes in the night to go to meet Krishna in the woods.

No-one came to ISKCON because it was rubber stamped by a higher authority. We all came following our inner calling and the strength of our convictions. We should not leave these at the door and become mindless clones once we get here. We have a responsibility to be accountable and to hold the organization accountable through our conscientious participation.

Part of that dynamic is the ability to disagree without being disrespectful. Thats how the Vedic civilization with its huge diversity is able to exist without degenerating into a holocaust of Holy Wars.

You take guidance from guru, sadhu, and sastra, and harmonize that within your heart, then with respect for others and differing viewpoints, you do what you understand to be right. No one can "control" or "manage" you unless you allow them to.

that is a nice explanation, but also wishful thinking in the sense that people in general DOES get controlled. The very nature of the souls is to follow and we are following something for sure.
You say, nobody can control you, in theory it is nice, in practice you are controlled by your wife, your parents, your children, your teachers etc etc
Controlled and influenced we are... the question is what control we allow ourselves to be under. Unfortunately, good judgement is scarce.
While we think we are free and nobody can control us, the reality is a crude and unmerciful.
As controlled and influenced we are gonna be, our only chance is to be controlled by spiritual authority. If that spiritual authority fails, that is most unfortunate.
Thinking that you cannot be controlled is another trick of Maya, while she is crumbling you under her feet.

*****I propose to move this last post and this humble reply to a new question..... is it OK, Sitapati Prabhu?

Whatever you wish prabhu.

I would just point out again that our spiritual authority is guru, sadhu, *and* sastra. The three are there to protect us if one fails. Guru cannot say something that contradicts sastra and sadhu, so he is not free to deviate and take us with him.

The responsibility for situating ourselves safely within these three lies with us:

sadhu sastra guru vakya
cittete koriya aikya

So controlled we must be, and we should be controlled by two out of these three at least.

[quote][cite] mishra:

there are lots of siksha that get not to initiate, I do not understand your point.[/quote]

I actually was a bit mean when I said that everyone who at least a little bit of siksa is already diksa. I meant that its so easy to become diksa guru in iskcon for a devotee first initiated by Prabhupada, that makes siksa position irrelevant.
[quote][/quote]
I actually think that the system is quite wrong, its should be a duty of a disciple to move ones guru from his informal siksa guru position to more formal diksa guru position. Its not that someone can be first approved diksa guru and then become siksa to someone.
[quote][/quote]
BTW the practice when someone is called guru should be stopped. HH Suchandsuch Maharaja, initiating guru in ..., that is not right...
[quote][/quote]
One can be mine or yours guru, but he is not guru regardless of the particular guru-disciple relationship. Thus he/she should be considered just as everyone else, a devotee.
[quote][/quote]
Why would a humble devotee even consider oneself a guru?

"we should be controlled by two out of these three at least. "
Any shastra to sbstabtiate this? I always though the 3 must be in line.

"Even Krishna appeals to this feeling: "Surrender to me and I will protect you, do not fear."
It is funny how you treat Krishna as some kind of "con" promising protection for surrender.

It amazes me the unlimited permutation one can do with the shastras to suit our own mentality and needs. I am still laughing. :)

[quote][cite] mishra:[/cite]"we should be controlled by two out of these three at least. "
Any shastra to sbstabtiate this? I always though the 3 must be in line.

"Even Krishna appeals to this feeling: "Surrender to me and I will protect you, do not fear."
It is funny how you treat Krishna as some kind of "con" promising protection for surrender.

It amazes me the unlimited permutation one can do with the shastras to suit our own mentality and needs.[/quote]

The suggestion of three being in line means one that MAY become out of line (like sadhus busy witchhunting) is nor really in that category. In the same way, sastra CAN be adapted in interpretation according to ones needs or needs of time and place, that is the process of parampara.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite][quote][cite] mishra:[/cite]"we should be controlled by two out of these three at least. "
Any shastra to sbstabtiate this? I always though the 3 must be in line.

"Even Krishna appeals to this feeling: "Surrender to me and I will protect you, do not fear."
It is funny how you treat Krishna as some kind of "con" promising protection for surrender.

It amazes me the unlimited permutation one can do with the shastras to suit our own mentality and needs.[/quote]

The suggestion of three being in line means one that MAY become out of line (like sadhus busy witchhunting) is nor really in that category. In the same way, sastra CAN be adapted in interpretation according to ones needs or needs of time and place, that is the process of parampara.[/quote]

Who can adapt? anyone? Is the process of parampara changing things to suit your needs? I might be missing something this last 30 years...

[quote][cite] mishra:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite][quote][cite] mishra:[/cite]"we should be controlled by two out of these three at least. "
Any shastra to sbstabtiate this? I always though the 3 must be in line.

"Even Krishna appeals to this feeling: "Surrender to me and I will protect you, do not fear."
It is funny how you treat Krishna as some kind of "con" promising protection for surrender.

It amazes me the unlimited permutation one can do with the shastras to suit our own mentality and needs.[/quote]

The suggestion of three being in line means one that MAY become out of line (like sadhus busy witchhunting) is nor really in that category. In the same way, sastra CAN be adapted in interpretation according to ones needs or needs of time and place, that is the process of parampara.[/quote]

Who can adapt? anyone? Is the process of parampara changing things to suit your needs? I might be missing something this last 30 years...[/quote]
Not anyone... there is traning and realization required. But its possible to miss some things ESPECIALLY if you are about for exactly 30 years...

The reason I hear being constantly touted for diksa prominence is that the sampradaya needs to be perpetuated. -Without diksa gurus it will stop. Of course this is nonsense, since the sampradaya is a siksa tradition of spiritual teachings and practices - not an authoritarian succession.

Ecclesiastic establishments seem to promote systems, in which follower becomes somewhat owned by institution. And those who break out of system, are demonized, naturally. GBC is implementing their structure, and part of it is subordination of their gurus to GBC system. Some GBCs call this "institutional guru system". GBC is discussing parallel lines of authority, and last GBC meetings were about subordinating gurus to institution.

All this has nothing to do with parampara. It is just an attempt to organize vaisnavism, to organize men power and finances. And it attracts certain people, so some find shelter in such system. Obviously it has its place in the mission of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, but I doubt this is THE system. It is inspired by Krsna to attract certain people.

In parallel to GBC church, there are other ISKCON systems like proponents of ritvik initiations and proponents of Prabhupada siksa following. There are some more options available outside of ISKCON. Thats how vaisnavism is taking over the west. Who knows what will be in 1000+ years.... In the end, who cares. People will be inspired to seek vaisnava association, and it will come in as many varieties as necessary.

I dont think ISKCON followers are still strongly emphasizing diksa over siksa. Things changed a lot in past 10 years.

[quote][cite] Giri-nayaka das:[/cite]Ecclesiastic establishments seem to promote systems, in which follower becomes somewhat owned by institution. And those who break out of system, are demonized, naturally. GBC is implementing their structure, and part of it is subordination of their gurus to GBC system. Some GBCs call this "institutional guru system". GBC is discussing parallel lines of authority, and last GBC meetings were about subordinating gurus to institution.

All this has nothing to do with parampara. It is just an attempt to organize vaisnavism, to organize men power and finances. And it attracts certain people, so some find shelter in such system. Obviously it has its place in the mission of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, but I doubt this is THE system. It is inspired by Krsna to attract certain people.

In parallel to GBC church, there are other ISKCON systems like proponents of ritvik initiations and proponents of Prabhupada siksa following. There are some more options available outside of ISKCON. Thats how vaisnavism is taking over the west. Who knows what will be in 1000+ years.... In the end, who cares. People will be inspired to seek vaisnava association, and it will come in as many varieties as necessary.

I dont think ISKCON followers are still strongly emphasizing diksa over siksa. Things changed a lot in past 10 years.[/quote]
Actually ISKCONites are insisting on diksa more than ever. I was told by a recently initiated brahmacari that there has to be something wrong with somebody who doesnt want to be initiated Isupposedly by an ISKCON guru).

the simple majority

internet philosophical guard dog sitapati prabhu, never at a loss for ideological profundities, has offered us another claim that may find little or no basis in bonafide Vaishnav circles. according to his latest theory, the concept of "sadhu, shastra and Guru" has now become a "best two out of three" type arrangement, where "the simple majority" of these three is adequate to prove the spiritual authority of any proposal. he has specifically stated:
"I would just point out again that our spiritual authority is guru, sadhu, *and* sastra. So controlled we must be, and we should be controlled by two out of these three at least.".

moreover, he also contends the following:
"The three are there to protect us if one fails". as usual, when leaving the realm of reality, he offers us no "ticket" of scriptural authority for such travel. these "ticketless travellers" who undertake such an arduous journey may hope to reach their destination of choice, but just like the unauthorized mailbox, it is doubtful that such a method will produce the desired result. of course, one on a train about to wreck is rarely aware of the impending doom of such an unfortunate set of choices. so it seems to be with this prabhu.

in all fairness, we wish to be enlightened as to where specifically he has found this understanding that "sadhu, shastra and Guru" is a "best two out of three" proposition. further, his concept that "The three are there to protect us if one fails", with its underlying false premiss that real "sadhu, shastra and Guru" are capable of "failing" is not something that has wide acceptance outside of the chaos of a "zone" that has experienced such "failures", and it certainly would not have a widespread fund of "scriptural" verification. but, then again, for "the simple majority", two out of three aint all that bad.

" There are those who would say you have left and chaos is pending, threatening to envelop us again. But that is not our perception here. Once you were asked, "What do you pray when you go before the Deities, Srila Prabhupada?" and you answered out of your sublime humility (and to teach us), "I am praying to Radharani that I will never fall down." In the same mood we are fervently praying that we will never forget you, because to forget you, or minimize your instructions, means to inevitably fall down." -- servants of Sri Sri Radha-Giridhari at New Govardhana 1982

Spiritual maturity is due to allowing krishnas will to manifest in its own time.ISKCON as a worldwide organisation will develop its siksa vision more and more as its devotees individually mature in their service to krishna.As a consequence of gurus passing ,secularism will fade from the society or the small mindedness presently evidenced by this diksa emphasis will cause that which is nor real to fade from vision.....while that which is nourished by krishnas will to grow and be maintained.Hence the supreme lord as kalasamvara ,the lord of time, will sanction or destroy all our activities.Though this is my personal vision ,few devotees know the diksa guru of bhaktivinoda takhura goswami was infact viphina bihari goswami....but most know Jaganatha das babaji his siksa guru.Hence the gaudiya line is and was a siksa line ....and in time it will indeed once again be a siksa line after the devotional caravan has travelled its intended path.