Pranama Madhukara, Thank you for your question. I don't perceive it as a challenge; I trust your intentions and inquiry as genuinely sincere. Regarding your question, my perspective (which I always try to base on śāstra) is as follows: You mentioned, "If the bhakti-latā-bīja is not inherent in the jīva and is solely bestowed by śrī guru..." To begin with, I would like to clarify that a jīva can acquire bhakti from sādhu-saṅga, not just once it receives dīkṣā from Śrī Guru. While it's true that during initiation, the disciple receives specific devotional impressions, it doesn't mean that the jīva didn't receive bhakti before dīkṣā or from Vaiṣṇavas other than their eventual guru. Moreover, according to our conception of the Bhāgavata-śikṣā-paramparā, one's main bhakti-saṁskāras may come from the dīkṣā-guru but can also come from other Vaiṣṇavas or śikṣā-gurus. Thus, receiving bhakti is not confined to the moment of dīkṣā. In many instances, bhakti received from other gurus may significantly influence a jīva’s spiritual trajectory more than the devotional impressions received from the dīkṣā-guru. Each journey´s unfolding is unique. Furthermore, I wouldn’t describe the "bonafideness" of a guru in absolute terms. For instance, if a guru is a mahā-bhāgavata, they are undoubtedly bona fide. However, a not so advanced Vaiṣṇava can be sincerely aligned with the divine current for a period, and through them, bhakti will flow and affect others. Sometimes, that person may later become disconnected for various reasons, and the bhakti-dhārā might not flow at that moment. Nonetheless, it doesn't negate the authenticity of the bhakti that once flowed through them. The current was present at one point, might not be at another, and could return in the future. From this I´m trying to add my personal experience in that regard, in conjunction with what scriptures declare. Finally, there are instances in śāstra where jīvas receive bhakti directly from Bhagavān, though these are exceptions rather than the general rule. But these examples also show that one´s receiving bhakti is not limited to one´s connection to dīkṣā or a particular dīkṣā-guru. In conclusion, I would say that no jīva is prevented from nurturing the bhakti-latā-bīja at any point in their journey if they are sincere. Whether or not they have a present connection with a qualified dīkṣā-guru, there is always the opportunity to further one's bhakti-saṁskāras through satsanga, which may eventually lead to receiving dīkṣā in this lifetime, or at some point in the future. Whatever the case, if one is sincerely engaged in bhakti, as śāstra repeatedly declares, there is no loss or diminution, all success is guaranteed, and one will never perish. To conclude and somehow summarize the above, I´d like to end with some beautiful and profoundly hopeful words from Srila B. R. Sridhara Deva Goswami in this regard: "Some may be eliminated; even a madhyama-adhikari guru may sometimes be eliminated when he falls down. It is not a happy thing, but it may even occur that my guru was going ahead, taking me forward and fell down. Then with fresh energy, invoking the help of the Lord, I shall have to go on. Even such a disaster may come in our journey. But still, we must not be cowed down. Sometimes alone and sometimes with company we must go on. First there must be sukriti, accumulated merit, and then sraddha, faith, will guide us. The quality of faith must be examined. Sraddha, faith, is a general term, but sraddha may be defined into different classes. A high form of faith will be our fare on the way back to Godhead. Sometimes we may find co-workers, and sometimes we may have to go alone. What of that? We cannot but go to the goal because we shall have the grace of so many unseen gurus." (Sri Guru & His Grace, ch. 11) I hope this helps. 🙏

@@SwamiPadmanabha Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed response. As you probably know, my understanding of what it means to "receive" the bhakti-lata-bija from the guru, based on what I've heard and read from our ācāryas and scriptures, differs from yours. But, that's fine. I appreciate gaining a better understanding of your perspective.

@@madhudas Yes, I know our understanding on this particular topic is different, but no problem for me, happy to share and even love each other despite differences...probably that´s always a greater challenge for most of us than getting it right siddhantically! 🙂 🙏

@@SwamiPadmanabha 🙏

Yes, Fr. Rohr teaches non-dualism. And Srila Prabhupada also teaches non-dualism, since Gaudiya Vaishnavism is a non-dual tradition, like every other Vaishnava tradition. Advaita Vedanta is Radical Non-dualism, while Vaishnava traditions present various forms of Nuanced Non-dualism. If you want, see the tenth chapter of my book Radical Personalism for more on this.

@@SwamiPadmanabha what about Dvaita Vedanta - thats a Vaisnava tradition too, no? I cannot purchase your book out of my objection to Fr Rohr who radically and criminally misrepresents the historic Christian tradition which asserts the eternal distinction between God and the individual soul.

@@IC-XC_NIKA Dvaita Vedanta, despite positing a strong emphasis on the difference between matter and spirit as well as God and the soul, nonetheless also highlights the interconnectedness of them all, and therefore it´s also a non-dual tradition. As I already mentioned, Richard Rohr does not cancel the eternal distinction between God and the soul. I know him personally and have read many of his books, and nowhere does he say such a thing. Again, non-dual doesn´t mean impersonal.

@@andreadesouza7044 this is not correct. We are not all the same.

My pleasure and thanks for your words. You can join us every Saturday in the following link, at 10 AM EDT time: us02web.zoom.us/j/82876233128?pwd=MHlUWUw4VmpMSENldHdKUndwSEpFUT09

Would love to!

An example of this could be Bhagavad-gita 4.11.

He spoke these things to me in person on several occasions. To be clear: he expressed the conviction that all paths may have some reality. He was not confirming that any of them do, in particular. He also was very clear that they had distinct goals (prayojana).

Quizás necesitamos dejar de usar la palabra "regla" y reemplazarla por otra que no nos genere tanto trauma detonado, como a menudo ocurre. :) Las reglas y regulaciones idealmente han de ser seguidas como un subproducto en nuestra conducta que demuestra nuestro amor por Dios, y no a la inversa. En otras palabras, en la medida en que tengo atracción, fe, y una experiencia directa e innegable, en esa medida las diversas "reglas" se vuelven una extensión natural de mi sentimiento interno.

​@@SwamiPadmanabhaMuchas gracias. Reverencias 🙏🏻

I wouldn´t say that Arjuna surrendered only after seeing Krishna´s universal form. In B. Gita 2.7 he expresses his surrender to Krishna. That said, surrender can be seen as a gradual process, and in that sense one could speak of various levels of surrender on Arjuna´s part, one of them involving the one you refer to.

Yes.

Thank you! Living in a forthright way to preserve our dignity, always comes with a cost. But the benefits of authenticity are great.