Initiation via the Book Bhagavat

Neither those involved in institutional delusion nor those who advocate initiation by a non-manifest guru will be very favorable toward initiation via the book bhagavat. There are many reasons for this, and we shall be presenting most of those in an upcoming article. We shall mention one possible reason for now: they may claim that this idea is coming from the Sikh-sampradaya.

But this book bhagavat proposal has nothing to do with the Sikhs. In their teachings, Guru Gobind Singh declared himself the last manifest guru for the age in relation to that line. He similarly is said to have declared that, for all of the foreseeable future, the only real guru was to be nothing more than the guru-grantha-sahib, their sacred book.

But we do not say this. We simply present what Prabhupada says in the above-mentioned purport. Prabhupada is the source. We quote the verse and purport (S.B. 1.2.18). The statements are self-evident. They come from Prabhupada, not the Sikh sampradaya. And nowhere do his statements say that there will not be any manifest spiritual masters in the future. Neither do we make such a crazy assertion.

The book bhagavat proposal is not based upon the Sikh system, has not sprung from its teachings, and has no connection whatsoever with them.

Corporate ISKCON, or the neo-Gaudiya matha for that matter, may claim that we are presenting a schismatic semi-rittvik proposal. The rittviks, on the other hand, might claim that formal initiation (supposedly granted in a fire sacrifice by a rittvik on behalf of a non-manifest guru) affords recognition within a society of devotees. All these factions may say that such recognition is a must before a devotee can advance to the higher levels of devotional consciousness.

Prabhupada’s books belie these contentions. His books will stand as the law-books of mankind for ninety-five more centuries. All of the above-mentioned factions will have very little (if any) influence during most of the Lord Caitanya’s Golden Age. Indeed, all of them may have been merged into oblivion within a century or less. The book bhagavat could catch on at the beginning of the 21st century. Then again, this may not transpire; it is completely dependent upon transcendental fortune and the free will of the devotees. If many devotees start to see its wisdom and feel its spiritual effect, opposing camps may claim that this system is impractical, iconoclastic, and too individualistic.

Despite these and other doubts and failures (of limited human reason working through the false ego), Prabhupada’s purport establishes the book bhagavata’s authenticity. It is not simply theoretically true-it’s an authorized and practical avenue in the event that no manifest and realized gurus are currently available to aspiring neophytes.

Rittvik is not verified in those law-books of the Golden Age. It will not stand, despite its current momentum. A high-powered neophyte does not change his status simply by becoming a “responsible rittvik.” That’s just another upadhi. Such upadhis (distinctions) can sway the less intelligent, of course, but in essence they are just material profiles.

Responsible rittviks” won’t be taking their movement anywhere near the audacity levels reached just after Prabhupada’s disappearance, of course. Nevertheless, whether someone steals a cucumber or a diamond, stealing falls into the same category for both. Similarly, the essence of non-realized anartha remains the same: “I’m no longer a neophyte, because I have taken so much responsibility in accepting all of these new people.” ‘

The madhyam status is based upon qualification and realization-not the illusion of deeds. Those who have manipulated themselves into high positions of institutional religion always go to “deeds” and challenge: “But what has he done for Prabhupada?” This unscrupulous device is nothing more than a diversion.

Devotees, previous to self-realization, should identify themselves as siksa gurus-but only when they act as peons and properly deliver the devotional message as it is. When one gives good instruction, good advice, when one repeats properly, and when one interprets correctly, then guru and gauranga are working through that person. After all, the siksa is always coming from either fully realized souls or directly from God Himself. While acting as viable instruments, even if one has not yet transcended the neophyte plane, the devotee is still acting like a siksa guru, a representative of caitya-guru.

The diksa issue must be confronted and has to be understood in truth. Many disciples of Srila Prabhupada have surcharged the atmosphere with so much opposition and faithlessness by the misuse of the diksa guru principle.

Nevertheless, Prabhupada said: “Regular guru. That’s all.” He didn’t order anyone to become big. The uttama adhikari is the big diksa guru; not the madhyam. The madhyam is a regular guru, that’s all. However, even he is glorious, special, and rare in this age. He will not cheat you. All bogus gurus, as well as all modern-day rittviks, WILL cheat you. But anyone who is actually free from anartha like the madhyam is special.

Accepting initiation from a genuine madhyam adhikari is a higher positive alternative. This alternative may not be viable at the current time. The madhyama’s consciousness is free from anartha, but it is not yet free of abhadra. Even though his consciousness still has some abhadra in it (and this is why he is still subject to falldown), as long as he remains nistha, fixed up, he never speaks or acts according to that abhadra. His motivation is never polluted by that abhadra. In effect, the abhadra has no real influence. He’s got control, he’s dhira, he’s authorized to initiate-to make disciples anywhere and everywhere (Upadesamrita, 1).

In the absence of such a devotee, we can still carry out the mission to some degree. We can set the stage. We can still preach and teach. We can create shelters and help devotees of lesser realization. We can create associations and corporations in order to do so. We can even institutionalize our arrangement. The preaching, as siksa, can go on-and should go on.

However, this book bhagavat emphasizes the inquiry, the discovery, the logic and reason, the interfacing, the removal of contradictions, the establishment of the siddhanta, etc. during an awkward stage where no nistha bhakta (what to speak of an uttama) has as yet emerged.

“This beautiful Bhagavatam, compiled by the great sage Vyasadeva [in his maturity], is sufficient in itself for God realization. What is the need of any other scripture? As soon as one attentively and submissively hears the message of Bhagavatam, by this culture of knowledge the Supreme Lord is established within his heart.”

Srimad Bhagavatam, 1.1.2

“By reading my books and chanting Hare Krishna, your life will be perfect.”

Letter (75-3-13/Mar. 14, 1975)


1 Nielsen { 12.26.12 at 14:48 }

Respected Kailash Candra prabhu. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

There may be those who will question how Deity-worship shall be maintained if no brahmanas are produced via diksa-initiation?

Shall we have brahmanas per discretion?

My understanding is that brahmanas have taken initiation from a diksa-guru.

your servant bhakta Torben.

2 Nielsen { 12.29.12 at 09:06 }

I think these questions simply arise from my minds unwillingness to understand the vastness of the cheating going on in “ISKCON”. If the “gurus” are corrupted, the “brahmanas” will also be corrupted and – what kind of deity-worship is thus going on?

3 Kailasa Candra das { 12.30.12 at 08:29 }

Brahminical initiation requires a bona fide guru. In “ISKCON,” since 1978, there have been no bona fide gurus. The initiations are imitation. “ISKCON” is an imitation school, i.e., there is the semblance of initiation. The ceremony goes on, and the rice and bananas are thrown in, but the brahminical initiation is not genuine.
So, it creates a quandary that requires critical thinking. Could I suggest a solution? Certainly, but I am not going to do so at this time. It is not my problem, and that it is a major (and catastrophic) problem is not recognized by the deviant cult.
I could go in-depth into the core of wherefrom your question(s) emanate, but your second one already indicates that you are doing so. The Lord is not affected. The installed Deity is not affected. Do not allow pragmatism to enter here. The nescience that is “ISKCON” is not made good simply because the cult puts up its own variety of “brahmins” to ring the bill and wave the incense stick.
Radical mean root, according to the Latin derivative of that English word. Continue using your intelligence in the radical way especially indicated by your follow-up comment. You should be able to rather easily come to the right conclusion by such a process. KCd.

Leave a Comment