Initiation vows, are they meant for all?
cos...@gmail.com
I am working with a team of devotees to prepare a course on vows,
focused primarily on initiation and asrama vows, and would love to get
your input. Specifically, it would be beneficial for participants to
learn what has helped you keep your vows. This could be a particular
devotional service or practice, an attitude, a state of mind, etc. or
anything else you wish to offer that would give deeper insight into
what has helped you keep your vows.
If you offer a particular service or practice as an example, it will
help to also explain what has enabled you to steadily perform that
service or practice.
If you ever had difficulty following your vows, knowing what caused
you to fall and how you overcame your problems would be valuable
knowledge to share. In this case, your name would be withheld.
This course is geared to both initiated and uninitiated devotees. I
feel it is important to offer this kind of training and support and am
confident your contribution will increase the value of the course. So,
if at all possible, please take the time to send even a short answer.
If you’d like more information on the course, please visit
http://www.bhagavatlife.com/
Continuing our discussion on vows, I would like your feedback about
the following dilemma.
If someone is initiated and doesn’t eventually follow, since they are
breaking their initiation vows it could be argued, based on statements
Prabhupada made that the initiation has lost it’s meaning and
therefore they are not connected (or to be a little softer we could
say maybe they not connected well, or perhaps they are really in limbo
until they reconnect by following their vows again).
Or if you want to take Prabhupada’s words at face value they are not
even devotees, neither are they even gentleman. It can also be argued
philosophically that if they don’t take initiation they are not
connected to the disciplic succession. If for the sake of argument we
accept this premise and the premise that if an initiate doesn’t follow
his or her vows their initiation has no meaning, then we could
conclude that most members of Iskcon are not connected to the
disciplic succession because they are either not initiated or they
don’t follow all their vows.
Of course, that sounds harsh. How can we say they are not connected?
Isn’t initiation just a formality? Aren’t we all connected? Well,
that’s a good question. And if we are all connected, why bother
risking a big failure by taking initiation? If it’s just to belong and
get a name, let’s give out names and three regs and 4 rounds -
something that most everyone can do instead of giving a standard that
most will never keep? Why set people up to fail?
And if we just give them 4 rounds and 3 principles, that will put them
on par with many initiated devotees. So why should we deny them
“connection to the disciplic succession” and give it to others who
only promised to chant 16 rounds and follow 4 principles, but who are
likely only following 3 principles
and chanting a few rounds (maybe we can think of them as minor league
disciples).
And shouldn’t there be a process of negotiation in which a disciple
goes to their guru and says I can only chant four rounds a day and I
can’t stop having sex with my wife so can we create a new standard and
thus I can promise to follow a lower standard. At least this way they
will be in good standing, won’t have guilt all over their lives, won’t
feel like failures, and will be following their vows. Won’t both gurus
and disciples will be better off?
Or will they? And that’s the big question. Will they be better off or
not? Or will they both go to hell?
Looking forward to your replies.
Your servant, Mahatma das
Yogindra dasa: Dear Mahatma prabhu,
>we could conclude that most members of Iskcon are
>not connected to the disciplic succession because they are either not
>initiated or they don’t follow all their vows.
What then does it mean to be a member of ISKCON? Please recall what
Srila Prabhupada wrote at the closure of the Bhagavad Gita Preface:
“Instead of satisfying his own personal material senses, he has to
satisfy the senses of the Lord. That is the highest perfection of
life. The Lord wants this, and He demands it. One has to understand
this central point of Bhagavad-gita. Our Krishna consciousness
movement is teaching the whole world this central point, and because
we are not polluting the theme of Bhagavad-gita As It Is, anyone
seriously interested in deriving benefit by studying the Bhagavad-gita
must take help from the Krishna consciousness movement for practical
understanding of Bhagavad-gita under the direct guidance of the Lord.
We hope, therefore, that people will derive the greatest benefit by
studying Bhagavad-gita As It Is as we have presented it here, and if
even one man becomes a pure devotee of the Lord, we shall consider our
attempt a success.” A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami 12 May, 1971 Sydney,
Australia
>Isn’t initiation just a formality? Aren’t we all connected?
“guru padasraya, diksa, gurura sevana” CC Mad. lila Ch.22 text 115
pg395
There are many other similar instructions we all know. One may somehow
connect anyway but an essential element in one’s retaionship with Lord
Krishna is missing without diksa.
> so can we create a new standard and thus I can promise to
> follow a lower standard.
Since ISKCON no longer has a monopoly on Vaisnavism in the West,
ISKCON no longer has to (if it ever did) accomodate a variety of
standards. There are plenty of other groups for devotees seeking
compromises.
ISKCON’s unique function is to socialize those who are sincere and
serious to uphold the (relatively) high standard Srila Prabhupada
established concerning initiation vows, et al.
>won’t have guilt all over their lives, won’t feel like failures,
Not necessarily bad, depending on how one deals with it:
BG 3.31 purport
“In the beginning of Krishna consciousness, one may not fully
discharge the injunctions of the Lord, but because one is not
resentful of this principle and works sincerely without consideration
of defeat and hopelessness, he will surely be promoted to the stage of
pure Krishna consciousness.”
Your servant,
Yogindra dasa
Mukunda Datta das:
> Prabhus,
> Continuing our discussion on vows, I would like your feedback about the
> following dilemma.
Dandavats, Mahatma prabhu. Jaya Srila Prabhupada.
Thanks for your message.
In short, it seems like the best way to overcome such problems is to
encourage some of the advantageous corollary practices found in
sastra, practices Srila Prabhupada also recommended as favorable for
developing bhakti–under the guidance of more advanced devotees. I’ll
elaborate below.
> If someone is initiated and doesn’t eventually follow, since they are
> breaking their initiation vows it could be argued, based on statements
> Prabhupada made that the initiation has lost it’s meaning and therefore
> they are not connected (or to be a little softer we could say maybe they
> not connected well, or perhaps they are really in limbo until they
> reconnect by following their vows again) . Or if you want to take
> Prabhupada’s words at face value they are not even devotees, neither are
> they even gentleman.
Krishna also sets a pretty high standard when He says one can never
become a yogi unless he renounces the desire for sense gratification.
> It can also be argued philosophically that if they don’t take initiation
> they are not connected to the disciplic succession. If for the sake of
> argument we accept this premise and the premise that if an initiate doesn’t
>follow his or her vows their initiation has no meaning, then we could
> conclude that most members of Iskcon
Is this assumption based on some sort of scientific survey?
> are not connected to the disciplic
> succession because they are either not initiated or they don’t follow all
> their vows.
At least implicitly, Krishna accepts many different standards as some
sort of bhakti (cf., Gita, 12.8-12), which are objectively sponsored
by a bonafide guru. But we shouldn‘t exploit Krishna’s Divine grace,
nor are most of us in a position to reject others.
The word “hypocrite” indicates somebody whose behavior isn’t
consistent with his teachings. It does seem like many of us don’t
follow our teachings fully, for various reasons. Maybe we practice
bhakty-abhasa, by chanting namabhasa. But it’s understood from the
outset that most who take up spiritual life don’t make it all the way
back home–at least not immediately. Almost everyone in the modern
world is pretty disadvantaged–not only because that’s the nature of
Kaliyuga, but also because the civilization we now live in is
relatively a more pungent one.
Before sustaining mature bhakti, we embody characteristics ordinarily
gained through karma and jnana (results that bhakti also gives). In
their Gita commentaries, our acaryas have taken great care to explain
how the sacrifice/austerities inherent in dharmic action (i. e.,
karma) purify our intelligence enough to enable us to appropriately
process the atma-jnana we recieve from our gurus. In turn, such jnana
culminates in brahman realization–the substrate of real bhakti. This
is no small feat, and if most of us aren’t tempted by “the last snare
of maya,” it’s probably because we’re nowhere near having that much
adhikara. So in most cases, I believe, we need to purify our
*material* existence (Krishna calls this “sattva-samsuddhi”). In Srila
Prabhupada’s later years, he similarly stressed varnasrama–even
calling it the remaining 50% of his mission. It seems he saw that we
were having a lot of trouble. The entire passage of his oft-quoted
“varnasramacaravata” verse (Visnu Purana, 3.8.8) emphasizes the
importance of generic dharmas for developing pure bhakti.
Such preliminary disciplines should not be casually neglected, because
with proper guidance, they definitely help us to follow our process.
Ultimately, though, only someone who transcendental to material
conditioning can really give definite and practical answers to the
kinds of questions you’ve raised here. Mahajano yena gatah sa pantha.
GBC legislation often encroaches into the areas traditionally arbited
by gurus and acaryas, but even GBC members themselves don’t follow GBC
laws; possibly this is because people intuit that such laws aren’t
unquestionably Divine revelations.
> Of course, that sounds harsh. How can we say they are not connected? Isn’t
> initiation just a formality? Aren’t we all connected? Well, that’s a good
> question. And if we are all connected, why bother risking a big failure by
> taking
> initiation? If it’s just to belong and get a name, let’s give out names and
> three regs and 4 rounds - something that most everyone can do instead of
> giving a standard that most will never keep? Why set people up to fail?
The nature of the diamond market is that very few can actually afford
to buy diamonds. Krishna says as much throughout Bhagavad-gita (e. g.,
7.3, 7.28, etc.). We’re aspiriing for something way beyond us, so
they’re possible only by Krishna’s Divine grace. But your above
questions suggest that we can propose our own solutions in a field
that requires Divine guidance; I think angels fear to tread there.
The standards of other faiths feel more natural to those who can’t
maintain sattva-guna, and they’re always more appealing–even for those
who can. Islam in particular tends to be more tamasika, most others
seem more rajasika. But they’re all like cubic zirconia; to the
untrained eye, they look just like real diamonds.
> And if we just give them 4 rounds and 3 principles, that will put them on
> par with many initiated devotees. So why should we deny them “connection to
> the disciplic succession” and give it to others who only promised to chant 16
> rounds and follow 4 principles, but who are likely only following 3
> principles and chanting a few rounds (maybe we can think of them as minor > >
league disciples).
This sounds like nama-hatta membership. Mundakopanisad says (1.2.12):
“Having surveyed all spheres, a broad-minded man fed up with karmic
endeavors thinks: ‘There’s nothing here that isn’t the cause or effect
of karma–so what’s the use in adding more karma?’ To realize absolute
truth, that man is willing to serve menially and must approach a guru
who is learned and fixed in spirit. ”
I don’t think we’re set up to fail as much as we just have to remember
how profound our chosen path is. Sometimes we just lose sight of our
initial attraction to spiritual life (usually by accepting lower
associations), then we take shelter of subtle or gross materialism.
When our faith eventually reflects our asat-sanga, we will break our
vows.
Of course, there is no such thing as “vikarma-yoga,” though many seem
to assume that there is–or should be. Sinful activity always destroys
one’s intelligence and strengthens one’s false ego. Fallen devotees
hoping to retain honor sometimes propose socio-religious standards for
others, as if the best defence were a good offence:
“First of all, the conditioned soul is cheated by so-called svamis,
yogis and incarnations when he approaches them to be relieved of
material miseries. When the conditioned soul is not satisfied with
them, he comes to devotees and pure brahmanas who try to elevate him
for final liberation from material bondage. However, the unscrupulous
conditioned soul cannot rigidly follow the principles prohibiting
illicit sex. intoxication, gambling and meat-eating. Thus he falls
down and takes shelter of people who are like monkeys. In the Kåñëa
consciousness movement these monkey disciples, being unable to follow
the strict regulative principles, sometimes fall down and try to form
societies based on sex. This is proof that such people are descendants
of monkeys, as confirmed by Darwin.” –purport, Srimad-Bhagavatam,
5.14.30
> And shouldn’t there be a process of negotiation in which a disciple goes to
> their guru and says I can only chant four rounds a day and I can’t stop
> having sex with my wife so can we create a new standard and thus I can
> promise to
> follow a lower standard. At least this way they will be in good standing,
> won’t have guilt all over their lives,
Guilt is second-cousin to conscience–one of the most powerful allies
we have in the struggle to steer our minds above all these bodily
misconceptions and temporal attractions. But again, we require good
guidance from a bonafide guru
(or more advanced devotees) to avoid many pitfalls associated with it.
Yogis call the conscience dharmendriya (the organ of virtue). It is
less susceptible to confusion than is the intelligence. B. K. S.
Iyengar gives the analogy that the subtle body is like a lens to the
soul; every lens has two sides. The front side of that lens (mind,
intelligence, and false ego) gets dusty by contacting the external
world via the senses. Conscience is like the back side of that lens,
which faces the soul. Being in direct proximity to the soul,
conscience only tells us one thing–the more difficult path (sreyas).
This hurts, since it always pulls us closer to our real self, and
toward Paramatma. Without such potential conflict, no one could ever
pull free of the tricks perpetrated by the mind through his friend,
the infected intelligence (avisuddha-buddhi). Thus conscience
underscores, practically, the inherent tension of being a spiritual
entity in a material world.
> won’t feel like failures, and will be
> following their vows. Won’t both gurus and disciples will be better off?
But people’s lives are at stake here. In US public education, they
continually lower the bar on academic achievement until those who
graduate with flyings colors remain functionally illiterate. This has
massive consequences. Personally, I don’t want such engineers
designing the bridges I drive over.
If there’s a place for everyone in Krishna consciousness, shouldn’t
there be some sort of initiation made available so that active
pedophiles feel included? The day is fast approaching when pedophiles
will also clamor for this, but I think the answer is clear. We love
and include everyone because it does take all kinds (cf. SB 11.28.1).
And we can always learn something from anyone. But we cannot learn
everything from just anyone. We have to distinguish between people in
sattva, rajas, and tamas–because one leads us higher, another carries
us sideways, and the third throws us down.
Discrimination is the keyword of madhyama-adhikara, and preaching
demands it.
> Or will they? And that’s the big question. Will they be better off or not?
> Or will they both go to hell?
Krishna advises that we decide what is or isn’t done on the basis of
what sastra enjoins, and He follows his own advice. In the mundane
realm, while accomodating everyone (in innumerable ways), sastra also
urges everyone towards more illumination through full awareness (e.
g., SB 11.13.6):
“Until one revives one’s direct knowledge of the spirit soul and
drives away the illusory identification with the material body and
mind caused by the three modes of nature, one must cultivate those
things in the mode of goodness. By increasing the mode of goodness,
one automatically can understand and practice religious principles,
and by such practice transcendental knowledge is awakened.”
If anyone isn’t able to accept this for some reasons, but also isn’t
forthright enough to say so, he or she will posibly destroy other
peoples’ faith by looking like a hypocrite–or as Prabhupada says, a
dvija-bandhu; unfortunately, in that case, it’s almost impossible to
not be pegged.
I think the best way to avoid this is to encourage those in question
to take advantage of the preliminary sastric practices Srila
Prabhupada recommended as favorable for developing bhakti–under the
guidance of pure devotees.
I hope this is helpful.
Your humble servant,
Mukunda Datta dasa
Trivikrama Swami: I appreciate this exchange initiated by Mahatma
Prabhu. Mukunda Datta Prabhu and Yogindra Prabhu make many nice
points. Here is something from a conversation with Srila Prabhupada
that seems relevant in some degree.
—————–
Prabhupada: At least the church people, the priests, they must follow
strictly the rules.
Richard Webster: Yes. But I mean the difference seems to be with the
Christian…
Prabhupada: Common man may not follow or cannot, but those who are
teachers or the priest or the leaders or the executive head, they must
follow. Otherwise they cannot remain pure and they cannot take the
position of teacher or head. Head must be clean. Other parts may be
unclean, but the head must be clean; otherwise the whole business will
be spoiled. Therefore, the strictures, rules and regulation, must be
followed by four persons. One person is the executive head like the
president or the king. And the other person is the religious preacher,
priest. And the other person is the public leader. So at least these
three, four heads of the men’s human society, they must be of ideal
character. Otherwise the whole society will be spoiled. People will
follow the heads.
[Bg. 3.21]
Rome, May 24′74.
—————–
So althought some in the congregation may not be able to follow, at
least those leading our Iskcon society like the GBC, Sannyasis, Temple
Presidents, Temple Board members etc., must be expected to follow all
four regulative principles and chant 16 rounds daily, or as Srila
Prabhupada warns, “the whole society will be spoiled”
Ys TS
Babhru das: To underline the quotation provided by Trivikrama
Maharaja, here’s something Srila Prabhupada said on a morning walk
here in Hawaii:
Jayatirtha: So the purpose of having the Society is to show the
devotees how they can always be twenty-four hours engaged according to
your instruction.
Prabhupada: Yes, that is helping one another. If I am deficient, by
seeing your example I shall correct myself. This is the idea, not that
a fool’s paradise: all fools and join together. Not like that. There
should be ideal life, at least the leaders, the president, the GBC.
They will show the example, and they will follow. Then it is
beneficial. And all of them are fools? Then it is fool’s paradise. At
least, in the blind association, at least if one man has got eyes,
then he can lead all the blind men. But if all of them are blind, then
it is fool’s paradise. So somehow or other, we have got now a
position. People likes us. So we should not spoil by personal sense
gratification. That is my request. If we can maintain this institution
rigidly according to the order, then many people will be benefited. By
seeing our behavior, by character, they will become. Apani acari
prabhu jiveri siksaya. The leader should be ideal.
February 3, 1975, Hawaii
So the leaders’ example must be ideal: excellent sadhana, freedom from
the pursuit of sense gratification. Otherwise, we’re left with the
blind leading the blind in a fool’s paradise.
Yours in service, Babhru das
Mahatma das: I came across some letters in which Prabhupada said we
don’t want to make a lot of initiates. The gist of these letters was
that we want to get people in general to chant Hare Krsna, but those
who take initiation are meant to dedicate themselves fully to the
mission. So in this understanding, initiation involves more than
taking vows to chant and follow the principles, it means giving one’s
life to the spiritual master and his mission.
Your servant,
Mahatma das
Babhru das: Perhaps there could be a different standard for Harinama
(”first initiation”) and diksa (”second initiation”). I think this is
something like what some gurus in other missions practice. There are
several letters in which Srila Prabhupada says that second initiation
is the important initiation. (There are also a couple in which he says
that the first initiation is the important one, perhaps because there
is commitment between the spiritual master and the disciple.) I’m not
saying this should be the standard in ISKCON, as we know that Srila
Prabhupada asked that we commit to following four regulative
principles and chanting sixteen rounds daily for the rest of our
lives. I’m suggesting it for discussion. One reason I think this may
be useful to discuss is that when he gave me second initiation, Srila
Prabhupada asked me if I had been faithfully following the regulative
principles and chanting sixteen rounds. When I replied that I had for
several years, he asked me if I was happy. (I liked that question
quite well.)
One thing to keep in mind is that these commitments should be
understood by all parties as voluntary. I have never, in my memory,
told anyone that I can’t eat meat or drink. I have always said that I
don’t. When I asked for initiation, I asked Srila Prabhupada to engage
me in helping him spread Lord Chaitanya’s sankirtan movement for the
rest of my life. The life of a disciple should be one of helping the
guru in his service of propagating nama dharma.
Yours in service, Babhru das
Makhanlal das:
Babhruji, “Perhaps” is a risky word to use in relation to such an
important topic as initiation. Certainly there must be a distinction
between the weight of first and second initiation.
The bottom line: NOT ALL INITIATES ARE BRAHMINS! For second
initiation, they must be (1) temple cooks; (2) performing deity
worship, either regularly at home, or at the temple; (3) preachers–
either in schools, colleges, dedicated book distributors, etc. (4)
teachers of Krishna consciousness in a devotee school.
Any other compellingly brahminical activity would also qualify, if I
left something important off the list. In other words, 2nd initiation
must strictly be according to qualification, not even the number of
years in the movement. It is a great misconception that if a devotee
has been associated with ISKCON, in somewhat good standing, for two or
more years, that they should AUTOMATICALLY be granted 2nd initiation
as a matter of right, not privilege.
In all fairness, the movement has tried to tighten the standards for
2nd initiation by administering (in some temples, at least) a strict
test similar to Bhakti Shastri. However, the cheating propensity is
such that after 2nd initiation, many devotees, even if dressed in
saffron, relax, and consider that now they no longer have to follow
basic sadhana, for now they are an esteemed “senior devotee”. This is
especially a problem in India, where perhaps only ten out of 60
brachmacharis, at some major ISKCON centers, will come to Bhagavatam
class! But sure as day, when it comes time for breakfast, they are
there, on time. Thus we see, the real issue is that high standards, as
given by Srila Prabhupada, have to be enforced all the way around, or
everything will be lost with time.
YS, Makhanlal das