08/26/98 - 2074

The Book Bhagavat: A Competent Remedy

Editorial (VNN) - by Kailasa Chandra dasa

"This Shrimad-Bhagavatam is the literary incarnation of God, and it is compiled by Srila Vyasadeva, the incarnation of God. It is meant for the ultimate good of all people, and it is all-successful, all-blissful and all-perfect." . . . . . "This Bhagavata Purana is as brilliant as the sun, and it has arisen just after the departure of Lord Krishna to His own abode, accompanied by religion, knowledge, etc. Persons who have lost their vision due to the dense darkness of ignorance in the age of Kali shall get light from this Purana." SB 1.3.40,43

"Human reason fails to understand how by serving the devotee bhagavata OR THE BOOK BHAGAVAT one gets gradual promotion on the path of devotion. But, actually, these are facts . . ." S.B. 1.2.18 Purport

In the absence of a manifest diksa guru, bhagavad-vidhi initiation through the book bhagavat is a genuine alternative which links a sincere and serious devotee to the sampradaya. It is not a cheap affair, and it does not preclude the future appearance of either an uttama adhikari or a madhyam adhikari to take up the post of diksa guru. As such, it does not preclude the disciple (who has accepted this book bhagavat initiation) from receiving his pancaratriki-vidhi initiation from a genuine manifest guru at any time after having attained the bhagavad vidhi initiation.

Srila Prabhupada is the siksa guru for every devotee of the Krsna consciousness movement in his line, but only the diksa guru for disciples whom he initiated during his manifest, i.e., physical, presence. Connection to the sampradaya cannot exclude the mysteries of disciplic succession. These mysteries are viable whether they are understood, misunderstood, or totally neglected by conditioned souls.

Pancaratriki-vidhi initiation is not mandatory for either connection to the sampradaya or ultimate devotional realization. It is preferable, as long as it can be genuinely attained. A devotee who in fact attains to the madhyam adhikari platform is qualified to give pancaratriki-vidhi initiation and connect uninitiated disciples to the sampradaya. The postman and peon analogies often employed by Prabhupada refer to initiations given by madhyama adhikaris, although they (the analogies) are not entirely limited to this. (Please refer to our article ON SUFFICIENT GUIDANCE for more information on the qualifications of the genuine madhyama adhikari.)

The book bhagavat is the literary incarnation of God, and service to the book bhagavat by any devotee provides that devotee--whether he has received pancaratriki-vidhi initiation or not--with the opportunity for ultimate devotional realization.

The genuine guru gives both pancaratriki-vidhi and bhagavat-marga (bhagavat-vidhi) at the time of initiation. That initiation would be--in the tradition of Srila Prabhupada--at first initiation. This, of course, is the bhajana-kriya stage of advancement, as per the scientific stages given us by the Gosvamis (adau sraddha, sadhu-sanga, bhajana-kriya, etc.).

Bhajan refers to the pancaratriki side of it: the bhajan, the preliminaries in relation to the deity (which are only given in full at the time of brahminical diksa). Kriya refers to the bhagavat-marga (bhagavad-vidhi) side of it. This is non-different from service to the book bhagavat and the devotee bhagavat.

The devotee bhagavat authorizes a particular service for his initiated disciple. Service to his vapu by the disciple is also part of this kriya (activity or bhagavad-vidhi). Book distribution, incense sales, managing, etc.--all of these things are also bhagavad-vidhi. They all become fully channeled to Lord Krishna through the chain of pure devotees (sampradaya) via the transparent via medium of the bona fide spiritual master. The book bhagavat--its worship through the intelligence of its study--is also part of this kriya or bhagavad-vidhi.

Now, in the event of there being no manifest genuine guru, is the whole process for advancement completely closed? Some would declare that it is. Some would say that one cannot attain beyond shraddha and sadhu-sanga (through tapes and writings) if there is no manifest, realized devotee to initiate (the bhajana-kriya stage).

As far as the pancaratriki-vidhi part of initiation is concerned, this is so--one cannot avoid this conclusion. For pancaratriki, one must receive initiation from a genuine, manifest, guru. The new initiate then becomes recognized by the guru on the manifest plane and can take advantage of the means of production within the society of the guru's devotees--because they need to know that this new person has, in fact, been accepted. The deity worship, (on the public temple scale), will always be under the management of the guru's society of devotees. As such, the panacaratriki-vidhi requires these manifest verifications for advancement via the institutional means of production, specifically in relation to deity worship.

If that (pancaratriki-vidhi) stage is unauthorizedly activated previous to having received a genuine initiation, some really nasty warpings are sure to pollute the devotee who has jumped the gun. Obviously, the so-called guru will also have to share in those reactions.

But the Bhagavatam itself clearly states that the bhagavad-vidhi side of the equation is not limited like this. Let us quote both the verse and some of the purport in this connection. Before doing so, it should be noted that A VERY KEY WORD of the translation has been changed from the ORIGINAL BHAGAVATAM which Srila Prabhupada brought to America (and also distributed in India) in the early and mid-sixties. So, we are going to use the current translation, but, in relation to that key conjunction, we are going to use the ORIGINAL WORD instead of the new word. There is certainly no contradiction here, because the purport clearly verifies that the original conjunction was, and remains, the CORRECT WORD for the proper understanding of this verse:

By regular attendance in classes on the Bhagavatam OR by rendering of service to the pure devotee, all that is troublesome to the heart is almost completely destroyed, and loving service unto the Personality of Godhead, who is praised with transcendental songs, is established as an irrevocable fact. Shrimad-bhagavatam 1.2.18

Obviously, the Sanskrit does not limit the bhagavat-sevaya (as far as the book bhagavat is concerned) to "classes on" the bhagavatam. Any study of the bhagavatam is book bhagavat.

The establishment of loving service to the Lord is unequivocally the brahma-bhuta stage. The word naisthiki in the verse not only indicates this, but, in the contexts of both the previous and subsequent verses to this sloka, it is unquestionably clear that brahma-bhuta was and is being referred to. As such, that nistha stage is the stage of madhyama-adhikari. It is beyond anartha, it is beyond the neophyte stage, and it is well beyond the bhajana-kriya stage.

The purport says: "Here is the remedy . . ." Another word for remedy is panacea, and the book bhagavat is a panacea for so many difficulties confronting the more sincere section of newcomers to the Hare Krishna movement.

"BOTH THE BHAGAVATAS are competent remedies, and both of them OR EITHER OF THEM can be GOOD ENOUGH to ELIMINATE the obstacles."

This is big! The book bhagavat alone can take any devotee to the stage of anartha-nivritti, the elimination of the obstacles (anarthas). And it is "good enough" to do so. It is a "competent remedy." It alone ("either" of them) is a competent remedy and can give the devotee this result.

"Human reason fails to understand how by serving the devotee bhagavata OR THE BOOK BHAGAVAT one gets gradual promotion on the path of devotion. But, actually, these are facts . . ." (Human reason may get in the way due to such failure to understand, also.). . ."by such sincere association of the bhagavatas, one is sure to receive transcendental knowledge very easily, with the RESULT that one becomes FIXED in the devotional service of the Lord." (Nistha)

Now, opponents may argue that "bhagavatas" is in the plural. Indeed, this kind of mentality was behind the change of the conjunction in the translation itself. However, the answer to this challenge is quite simple: Prabhupada's extensive and enlightening purports are both non-different from the book bhagavat and the devotee bhagavat. Reading them is worship of BOTH the book bhagavat and the devotee bhagavat. The full and complete facility is thus clearly offered by him in his books--and that is why he so stressed book distribution.

The result is one will become FIXED. That's fixed as in brahma-bhuta. Nistha.

That's fixed as in madhyam. That's fixed as in loving service (as opposed to service with all kinds of resentments and anarthas bringing it down all of the time). Who needs any kind of pseudo-initiation or social (formal) initiation into a semi-devotional institution when the real formula and remedy is readily available through the book bhagavat?

Is a person who attains to the madhyam platform realization (and, having done so, will certainly be able to make further progress to God realization) is such a person initiated? He has to be. Obviously, it is not formal initiation, so the advantages of pancaratriki, in a society of devotees who have received pancaratriki, is limited. But that's not the end of the world! Such a person can still worship guru-gauranga at home. Or Lord Jagannatha. He can still chant. He can partake in kirtans. The Holy Name does not require pancaratriki in order to fully fructify, and this is clearly verified in the Chaitanya-caritamrita (Purport Madhya 15.108, Madhya 15.110). Prabhupada was prescient in giving us that information.

Is the person receiving this bhagavad-vidhi initiated by Prabhupada? Initiated by the Personality of the Book Bhagavatam? We cannot really speculate. HUMAN REASON, IN AND OF ITSELF, IS NOT CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING HOW AND BY WHOM SUCH A DEVOTEE IS INITIATED. HUMAN REASON, IN AND OF ITSELF, WILL FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THIS. The initiation may be made directly by the Supreme Personality of Godhead--it is certainly not impossible for Him.

Can one then go on to receive formal pancaratriki-vidhi if he contacts a manifest bona fide guru who agrees to give him that initiation and take him as a disciple? Of course.

Does this constitute the acceptance of two diksa gurus? Certainly not, because the bhagavad-vidhi aspect of the initiation from a manifest guru simply overlaps. It does not knock out what was already there (and developed). Since the bhagavad-vidhi initiation was not performed by a manifest guru, it was an internal initiation. The external manifestation of Godhead is simply giving Krishna, and the acceptance of two diksa gurus refers to the acceptance of two diksa gurus on the manifest plane. It is Krishna Who is the initiator of all of us. The guru simply initiates on behalf of the Lord.

And, let us not forget the admonition of Prabhupada in the purport: human reason fails to comprehend how the book bhagavat can deliver a devotee. Human reason, for that matter, also fails to fully comprehend how and why the initiating guru must be physically manifest, despite the fact that this is the Vaishnava tradition and system and injunction. Human reason fails to fully comprehend how all bones are untouchable except for the conchshell.

If any devotee attains to a stage of advancement beyond bhajana-kriya, that devotee has attained the stage of bhajan-kriya as a preliminary prerequisite. He is initiated into the sampradaya which the book bhagavatam represents: in this case, that would be the Gaudiya Vaisnava parampara.

As the reader can probably surmise, neither those involved in institutional delusion nor those who advocate initiation by a non-manifest guru will be very favorable toward this proposal. Perhaps one of the reasons will be that they will claim that the message can only be judged in terms of the messenger (covert argumentum ad hominum).

Perhaps another reason will be that they may claim that this idea is coming from the Sikh-sampradaya.

But this proposal has nothing to do with Sikhdom. In their teachings, Guru Gobind Singh declared himself the last manifest guru for the age. He similarly declared that, henceforward, the guru was the guru grantha sahib, i.e., their sacred book.

But we do not say this. We simply present what Prabhupada says in the abovementioned purport. We quote the verse (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 be no genuinely manifest spiritual masters in the future. Neither do we make such an assertion.

The book bhagavat proposal is not based upon the Sikh system, has not sprung from their teachings, and, in actuality, has no connection with them, their teachings, or their line whatsoever.

Institutionalists may claim that we are presenting a schismatic neo-rittvik proposal. The rittvik guru advocates might claim that formal initiation (granted in a fire sacrifice by a rittvik on behalf of a non-manifest guru), recognized by a society of devotees, is a must before a devotee can advance to the higher levels of devotional consciousness. Both camps would probably claim that the book bhagavat/bhagavad-vidhi proposal is impractical, iconoclastic, and far 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 self-realized (brahma-realized) or God-realized gurus (pure devotees) are currently available to an aspiring neophyte.

It's light years superior to accepting "initiation" from a neophyte. That is condemned by Prabhupada in numerous places. And, anyone who is entangled in any kind of anartha is certainly still a neophyte; it matters not what kind of glorious reputation he may have been able to amass over the years. The high-powered neophyte does not change his status simply by becoming a "responsible rittvik." That's just another upadhi. Such upadhis (distinctions) will sway the less intelligent, of course, but in essence they are non-different from the tactics used by the ruthless wild card "gurus." Make the pomp, power, glory, and distinction so great that it has to be true. The big lie. Who can have the audacity to question it?

"Responsible rittviks" won't be taking it anywhere near the audacity levels reached just after Prabhupada's disappearance, of course. Still, whether someone steals a cucumber or a diamond, stealing falls into the same category for both. Similarly, the essence of non-realized "initiators" remains the same: "I'm no longer a neophyte, because I have taken so much responsibility to train these new people." Such activity does not guarantee the status of anyone's consciousness or spiritual qualification. `The madhyam status is based upon qualification and realization--not 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?" But this is nothing more than an unscrupulous device.

The qualification and realization of such pretenders was always that of a neophyte during the whole period of their big lie, as well as during the subsequent "reform" periods of the kinder and gentler lies. There are some devotees who wonder whether all of them even retained their neophyte status amidst all the vested deviations they pushed.

Previous to attaining a qualification and realization that may put them into a bona fide position to receive the order to give diksa, genuinely initiated devotees should identify themselves as siksa gurus. 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, one is still acting as siksa guru. Why contaminate that with a "responsible rittvik" upadhi?

And why minimize it by emphasizing something which has nothing to do with siksa? By this, we mean why do so many continue to always personalize everything in the bad way? Why do we keep falling into this pitfall of trying to shoot down the message we don't like by shooting the messenger? Authority is authority, and Truth is Truth--even if a prostitute speaks it.

Truth always has authority just as fire always has heat. There's no use even considering what someone else has to say if--in order for it to have any authority--the messenger must be utterly and completely pure himself. Heads I win, tails you lose: "Why aren't you preaching? Where's your preaching mood? What have you done for Srila Prabhupada? Oh, now YOU are preaching to others? Who are you to be saying anything with authority? Are you the authority? Why should anyone listen to you?"

How are we ever going to resolve anything without REALLY confronting the diksa guru issue. It simply has to be understood in truth. Disciples of Srila Prabhupada have not only wasted so much time, but we have also 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, big diksa gurus." In fact, the terms diksa guru and "big, big diksa gurus" are not synonymous. The uttama adhikari is the big diksa guru, not the madhyam. The madhyam is a regular guru, that's all.

Still, as long as he does not fall down, the madhyam is both rare and glorious, because he is transcendentally realized. He possesses all the qualifications, powers, and glories which such a rare attainment automatically carries in its wake. And, he's not going to cheat anybody, because he's free from such anarthas.

His consciousness is not yet free of abhadra (it is almost free at the lower stages of madhyam; at the asakti stage (of madhyam) it is so close to being free, that, for all practical purposes, it can be considered free). 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, and he's authorized to initiate, to make disciples (upadeshamrita, 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, our proposal is to emphasize the inquiry, the discovery, the logic and reason, the interfacing, the removal of contradictions, the establishment of the siddhanta, etc. during this awkward stage where--according to our perspective--no nistha bhakta has as yet emerged.

There are two very important reasons that this book bhagavat/bhagavad-vidhi proposal has the blessings of Srila Prabhupada. The first reason is that this is what he did, more or less, for a decade and a half previous to his arrival in America. Secondly, this is what he said to his godbrothers.

Where?

In the phalgun Krishna pancami, well before he left for America:

20. To resolve all the apparently contradictory statements is not the play of some incompetent fool.

21. If everyone simply sat down together and considered these things what nice preaching there could be.

22. What is your order also, that everyone, coming together, should merge in your message and preach it to the world.

23. If everyone just initiates then there will only be a contradictory result. As long as it goes on, there will be only failure.

24. Now even, my God brothers, you return here to the order of our master, and together we engage in his puja.

Notice the order of the emphases in verses 21 through 23. Prabhupada first wants all of his godbrothers to begin sitting down together in order to resolve all of the apparently contradictory statements (mentioned also in this prayer). On a walk with Hari-vilasa prabhu, Prabhupada told him that one difficult topic should be discussed and resolved "threadbare." So, we see the prayer and proposal in this light.

And the discussion cannot be even undertaken, what to speak of consummated, by "incompetent fools." The goal is to "come together" and, then, "merge in the message."

According to the order of these verses, after that, we are to "preach it to the world."

And, in relation to prematurely jumping the gun and performing unauthorized initiations: "If everyone just initiates, there will only be a contradictory result." (A neophyte initiating is "just initiating." A devotee performing an initiation fire yajna on behalf of a non-manifest guru is also "just initiating.")

This section of the prayer concludes: "As long (as unauthorized philosophy and process) goes on, THERE WILL ONLY BE FAILURE."

...."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." SB 1.1.2

Other writings of the Vaishnava Foundation

E-mail the author or the Vaishnava Foundation

Quotes from the books of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
are copyright by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust