So I started a second thread because the previous one kind of got splayed out and after looking over some of the exchanges w GKD. I wanted to request some clarification here.
1)From HBV, "The process by which divine knowledge (divya jnana) is given and sins are destroyed is called diksa by highly learned scholars who are expert in spiritual affairs." Sri Jiva also states like this in BS in regards to diksa and divya jnana (seed of divya jnana). Are we to understand that these type of statements imply siksa that will be imparted by the guru in future and/or do they also imply some "sacred transmission" at the time of diksa initiation?
2)This is a statement by GKD, "Both sides want sastra for hearing the mantra again without re-initiation. I've said there isn't any and this has prompted the idea that because there isn't any in sastra then it cannot be opposed to sastra. I have pointed out that you cannot assume something not mentioned in sastra is approved by sastra."
I don't agree that anyone was suggesting that anything not stated in sastra is not opposed it. But it did cause me to think about whether this statement in sastra is a principle or a detail.
3) How can one assert or defend the principle of sastra yukti in these matters of philosophical disagreement?
4) GKD--"No one can doubt that the diksha mantras themselves are spiritual. They have in themselves intrinsic value. They are after all made completely of names of the Lord. But naturally the instructions that are given along with them are of supreme importance also."
Would someone clearly state what the actual intrinsic value is?
5) If one over emphasizes sastra and inordinately over guru and sadhu is that actually Gaudiya Vaisnavism? I'm not trying to be cheeky here. If one does not have faith in a living representative, how is that GV? Srila Puri Maharaja writes, "Because the spiritual master recognizes the capacity of the disciple to take up either vaidhi or raganuga paths, he is the knower of the science of Krsna, he is qualified to be a guru." He then quotes, "kiba vipra, kiba nyasi...". Without a living sadhu how are the details of bhajan, etc., imparted?
"1)From HBV, "The process by which divine knowledge (divya jnana) is given and sins are destroyed is called diksa by highly learned scholars who are expert in spiritual affairs." Sri Jiva also states like this in BS in regards to diksa and divya jnana (seed of divya jnana). Are we to understand that these type of statements imply siksa that will be imparted by the guru in future and/or do they also imply some "sacred transmission" at the time of diksa initiation?"
"If the devotee giving mercy has santa-bhakti, then the recipient obtains santa-bhakti. Dasya and other types of bhakti are also implied here." (From the tika of VCT on 6.14.5)
This is not about siksa. I this about a sacred transmission. Diksa is an act of mercy.
2)This is a statement by GKD, "Both sides want sastra for hearing the mantra again without re-initiation. I've said there isn't any and this has prompted the idea that because there isn't any in sastra then it cannot be opposed to sastra. I have pointed out that you cannot assume something not mentioned in sastra is approved by sastra."
I think some were talking about hearing the mantra in terms of a further explanation of it. But there are hundreds of statements about the qualification of the guru, all of which refer to the one who gives diksa. Thus one may be a Vaisnava and give the mantra but not be a Vaisnava guru. That is my opinion. In which case, one who received the mantra from such a Vaisnava has every reason to respect him or her as a Vaisnava while proceeding to hear the mantra again from a Vaisnava guru.
GKD appears very narrow in his interpretation of the sastra on this topic.
3) How can one assert or defend the principle of sastra yukti in these matters of philosophical disagreement?
My position has been to refer to how the acaryas have understood the statements from HBV that GKD emphasizes. Note that he disagrees with JG's interpretation of these statements found in Bhakti-sandarbha.
4) GKD--"No one can doubt that the diksha mantras themselves are spiritual. They have in themselves intrinsic value. They are after all made completely of names of the Lord. But naturally the instructions that are given along with them are of supreme importance also."
Would someone clearly state what the actual intrinsic value is?
Krsna nama has all power, but does Krsna namabhasa or namaparadha?
4) GKD--"No one can doubt that the diksha mantras themselves are spiritual. They have in themselves intrinsic value. They are after all made completely of names of the Lord. But naturally the instructions that are given along with them are of supreme importance also."
Would someone clearly state what the actual intrinsic value is?
Krsna nama has all power, but does Krsna namabhasa or namaparadha?
This is a really excellent point. Thank you.