Mantra-diksa and Realization - The initiator's qualification

Here is a question I was asked in another forum.

---

QUOTE

Are those who are initiated into the Nityananda Parivar sure that everyone in that line attained full realization of the mantra?

How can there be certainty over things you cannot see or reason about? It is a matter of faith.

QUOTE

If one along the line wasn't, then wouldn't that be the end of the line, as the sound transmitted would not have been transcendental, and therefore all subsequent initiations would be of a lessor quality?

Guru-tattva manifests in two features: samasti-guru (Krishna as the aggregate guru) and vyasti-guru (localized guru, the sadhu we meet). Thus the dynamics of guru-tattva do not entirely rely on the localized guru we meet. The aggregate guru works through the localized guru, and whatever the localized guru lacks, the aggregate guru will provide either through the localized guru without his knowing it or directly to the heart of the sincere disciple. And on the other hand, if there is no sicerety in you, it does not make any tangible difference for you whether your guru is a maha-maha bhagavat or not.

QUOTE

Suppose one received the mantra from a realized soul and thus received pure spiritual vibration,does he have to wait until he is fully realized himself before initiating anyone?Otherwise wouldn't he be passing on something less than the real mantra?

Please refer to the answer above.

Sometimes devotees get into this "only from maha-maha bhagavat" preaching. Unfortunately it is very hard to recognize a maha-maha bhagavat. The external symptoms of bhavankura (sprout of bhava) are described in the kSAntir avyartha kAlatvaM verse, so it is a good idea to observe whether such symptoms are seen in the guru or not. Aside this, there is litte you can do to verify the inner depth of realization aside asking questions and listening to the guru.

And let me add that everyone wants to see such qualities in his guru even if they do not objectively exist there. For the faithful person those qualities become real. He is interacting with the vyasti-guru, a localized manifestation of the samasti-guru. Others may interact with a sadhu who has several defects. It is a matter of faith. Therefore one should find a guru in whom he has faith. For inquisitive persons it is important to clarify any controversies and misunderstandings prior to taking shelter of the sadhu to avoid the calamity of losing faith in him. Such loss of faith brings about the devastation of the relationship. However, if there is indeed ample causes for the loss of faith, there are circumstances when the disciple may reject the unqualified diksa- guru. This is delineated in the Bhakti Sandarbha.

---

Any further thoughts?

QUOTE(Madhava @ Oct. 05 2002,14:28)

Guru-tattva manifests in two features: samasti-guru (Krishna as the aggregate guru) and vyasti-guru (localized guru, the sadhu we meet). Thus the dynamics of guru-tattva do not entirely rely on the localized guru we meet. The aggregate guru works through the localized guru, and whatever the localized guru lacks, the aggregate guru will provide either through the localized guru without his knowing it or directly to the heart of the sincere disciple. And on the other hand, if there is no sicerety in you, it does not make any tangible difference for you whether your guru is a maha-maha bhagavat or not....

Any further thoughts?

Please accept my dandavat pranams.

The matter of samasti-guru and vyasti-guru, as taught by the orthodox parivars, has cleared so many doubts for me.  I believe that if the Sarasvata-parivar devotees understood this one point, it could help dispel much of the foolishness surrounding the "bhagavata-parampara" (sic) concept.

Bhaktivinode Thakur may well have accepted Jagannatha dasa Babaji as an agent of the samasti-guru, but he clearly in his writings never deviated from understanding that the samasti-guru's mercy was the direct result of his connection to the vyasti-guru (Bipin Bihari Goswami).

Similarly, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati may have had as his vyasti-guru the esteemed Vaishnava saint Gaurakisora dasa Babaji.  But this would not preclude the samasti-guru from allowing Bhaktisiddhanta's primary inspirations to come from so many other sources, including the writings and teachings of long-departed Vaishnavas.  As long as the vyasti-guru has given the diksha-mantras that connect the disciple to the divine service, the samasti-guru will ensure the proper provisions for the disciple.

THERE IS NO NEED FOR A "BHAGAVATA-PARAMPARA" (SIC) CONCOCTION when one realizes that samasti-guru will carry what the vyasti-guru lacks, and may provide inspiration from all sectors (even the prostitute section, if appropriate, viz. Bilvamangala, or from the teachings of departed Vaishnavas).

The "desired effect" of Bhaktisiddhanta's "bhagavata-parampara" (sic) is achieved by the workings of the samasti-guru.

Ironically, it appears that this is what present-day ISKCON teaches with regards to its current gurus.  The idea is that the current guru need not be a maha-maha-bhagavata, as long as that guru is connected in disciplic succession to Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami.

But what would ISKCON say if a devotee came along and called himself an initiated disciple of Bhaktivedanta Swami simply because he had heard Bhaktivedanta Swami chanting harinama? ISKCON would say that such a cheater, without a substantial connection via initiation, was not qualified to connect new disciples to the parampara.  

Thus the situation of Bhaktisiddhanta has been turned around 180 degrees.

Please tell me if I have misunderstood, but it appears that if one has received initiation from the vyasti-guru, the samasti-guru will then provide everything that the novel "bhagavata-parampara" (sic) teaching is said to provide.  Only if one lacks a proper connection to the vyasti-guru (and thus lacks the parampara link to the authorized agents of Mahaprabhu, through whom the divine service connection is established) is there a need to propose a self-contradictory novelty like the "bhagavata-parampara" (sic)

QUOTE

Ironically, it appears that this is what present-day ISKCON teaches with regards to its current gurus.  The idea is that the current guru need not be a maha-maha- bhagavata, as long as that guru is connected in disciplic succession to Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami.

The difference being that they have replaced the samasti-guru with Bhaktivedanta Swami. I once discussed the subject matter of samasti-guru and vyasti-guru with a friend who is from ISKCON, and I explained this very point to him. He then said, "Yes, this is how we see it also: Whatever the guru may be lacking, it will come from Prabhupada."

QUOTE

Please tell me if I have misunderstood, but it appears that if one has received initiation from the vyasti-guru, the samasti-guru will then provide everything that the novel "bhagavata-parampara" (sic) teaching is said to provide.

Very perceptive. Thank you. It appears that people experience a need to eliminate the samasti-guru. How interesting.

I personally think a large number of people get overly obsessesed with issues surrounding the doctrine of guru-ziSya dynamics, when they really should be much more concerned with their personal sAdhana and its quality and quantity.  It speaks of a loss of perspective that is essential to real advancement on the path of bhakti.  It is our understanding that the mahA-mantra in itself has the potency to accomplish everything, even in the absence of a guru.  Getting assistance in the form of guidance from a highly advanced guru is just that much more icing on the cake.  On the other hand, to feel that the holy names are somehow diminished in efficacy by not having the ideal guru is just a severe nAma-aparAdha.

QUOTE

It is our understanding that the mahA-mantra in itself has the potency to accomplish everything, even in the absence of a guru.  Getting assistance in the form of guidance from a highly advanced guru is just that much more icing on the cake.  On the other hand, to feel that the holy names are somehow diminished in efficacy by not having the ideal guru is just a severe nAma-aparAdha.

Which one of the nama-aparadhas would you classify it as?

Guror avajna, disregarding the guru, is certainly one of the nama-aparadhas. I would say that a person who thinks he has no need for a guru and independently pursues the path of sadhan bhajan is guilty of nama-aparadha and barred from tangible advancement. Yasya prasadan na gatih kuto 'pi.

QUOTE

Getting assistance in the form of guidance from a highly advanced guru is just that much more icing on the cake.

In the Caitanya Caritamrita (2.22.83):

kRSNa-bhakti-janma-mUla haya sAdhu-saGga
kRSNa-prema janme, teGho punaH mukhya aGga
"The root for the birth of Krishna-bhakti is sadhu-sanga. When Krishna-prema awakens, it still remains the principle aspect."

"Mukhya-anga" does not exactly translate to "icing on the cake".

Also in the Caitanya Caritamrita (2.22.54):

sAdhu-saGga, sAdhu-saGga, sarva-zAstre kaya
lava-mAtra sAdhu-saGge sarva-siddhi haya
"Sadhu-sanga, sadhu-sanga, all the scriptures say, for by a moment's association only, all perfection you'll gain."

Also in the Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu (1.2.91):

zrImad-bhAgavatArthAnAm AsvAdo rasikaiH saha
sajAtIyAzaye snigdhe sAdhau saGgaH svato vare
"To taste the meanings of the Srimad Bhagavata in the company of rasika-bhaktas, to associate with saints who are of the same disposition as oneself, who have affectionate hearts, and who are more advanced than oneself."

Thus Rupa describes two among the five most potent practices of devotion. Icing on the cake?

QUOTE

I personally think a large number of people get overly obsessesed with issues surrounding the doctrine of guru-ziSya dynamics, when they really should be much more concerned with their personal sAdhana and its quality and quantity.  It speaks of a loss of perspective that is essential to real advancement on the path of bhakti.

Would you agree that absorption in sadhana and an in-depth study of the doctrine of the dynamics of a guru-ziSya relationship are nevertheless not mutually exclusive?

Just to clarify my earlier post:

The people I was referring to have notions about the role of the guru in the bhakti tradition that are neither in accordance with zAstra nor the verdicts of the AcAryas.  That is the cause for the warped perspective I was describing.   If you think about it, my point is not the same as diminishing the importance of the guru.  The symptoms I was referring to  are those of excessive amounts of fanfare surrounding charismatic individuals in the role of gurus, while at the same time neglecting sAdhana.  This ties in directly with your article out on VNN about hiding one's guru.

Caitanyaite tradition does not put forth the doctrine that the mahA-mantra is something to be given by a guru in an initiation ceremony.  That (the so-called 'harinam diksha') is a recent heterodoxical invention.  (I know that most here already are fully aware of this fact, but it is worth repeating for the audience that has not yet grasped the reality of it.)  Therefore beginning sAdhana that leads up to actual initiation with gayatrI mantras by a guru, prior to actually having a guru, is totally valid and there is no reason it should not ultimately lead to prema.  The icing on the cake part is getting instruction from the guru about the ten offenses and how to avoid them.  I really do not think any practicing Vaishnava would ever advocate that it is better for someone to wait to begin chanting the mahA-mantra until they have received initiation upon finding a suitable guru and cementing a guru-ziSya relationship.  How many of us originally started chanting on beads that were not handed to us by our guru?

I would have to estimate that statistically more Americans and Europeans were first introduced to the mahA-mantra back in the 1960s and 70s directly or indirectly by the Beatles or Allen Ginsberg than coming into direct contact with an Indian Vaishnava guru, and they more than likely were completely unaware of the Vaishnava traditions in India from whence it originates.  Also, they more than likely first became aware of mantras in general from organizations like TM.  We should not underestimate the power of those types of connections that ultimately brought so many into the international Vaishnava community.  We all know that is the reason A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada so carefully cultivated a relationship with the late George Harrison.  It is perhaps worth noting that George did not go by a Sanskrit name (although it was rumored that he was given one by a Vaishnava guru from India), nor did he give initiations to people with gayatrI mantras.  Certainly it should not surprise anyone if he ends up mentioned in future books on the history of Caitanyaism as one of its foremost spokespersons.

QUOTE

I would have to estimate that statistically more Americans and Europeans were first introduced to the mahA-mantra back in the 1960s and 70s directly or indirectly by the Beatles or Allen Ginsberg than coming into direct contact with an Indian Vaishnava guru, and they more than likely were completely unaware of the Vaishnava traditions in India from whence it originates

First time I heard about maha mantra was through the Beatles and a hatha yoga meditation book.

“Caitanyaite tradition does not put forth the doctrine that the mahA-mantra is something to be given by a guru in an initiation ceremony. That (the so-called 'harinam diksha') is a recent heterodoxical invention. (I know that most here already are fully aware of this fact, but it is worth repeating for the audience that has not yet grasped the reality of it.)”

Is it so? There are 2 historical accounts of harinama being given as initiation to no one less than Svayam Sriman Mahaprabhu, by no one less than Advaita Prabhu, namely in Advaita Prakash and Advaita Mangal. That was 500 years ago.

“I would have to estimate that statistically more Americans and Europeans were first introduced to the mahA-mantra back in the 1960s and 70s directly or indirectly by the Beatles or Allen Ginsberg than coming into direct contact with an Indian Vaishnava guru....”

Credit goes where credit belongs: Allen Ginsberg was one of the first persons A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami preached to in New York in 1966, and he only turned on a handful of US intellectuals. George Harrison is a big fish, but he began his preaching of Mahamantra on mass scale record-distribution in 1969 only after elaborately meeting A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami; his records with the Mantra are recorded and sung by the London Iskcon devotees. Same for John Lennon’s ‘Give Peace a Chance’-hit in 1969. The Montreal Iskcon devotees were chanting along with him on the top record. Only few may have noticed the words ‘chanting Hare Krishna’ on Lennon’s ‘I am the Walrus’ from 1967, but even that may have been inspired by encounters with Iskcon, nor was it a big famous sing-along tophit.

QUOTE

This ties in directly with your article out on VNN about hiding one's guru.

It is not my article. That Madhavananda Das is a disciple of Gour Govinda Swami.

Well, Sri Ananta Das Babaji gives a separate harinam initiation to people who ask for it, who feel they are not ready for diksa yet, who haven't spent much time with him yet, or whom he doesn't consider qualified yet. And he is not the only one by any means. Also the late Nikunja Gopala Gosvami did this.

I know the word goes around in Gaudiya Math circles that Bhaktisiddhanta was the first one to do this, but this is rather far from the truth, yet another misinformed bit of history. People like Tripurari Swami say that harinama initiation was instituted by Advaita Acarya.

It is not commonly called "harinam diksa" anywhere though, not in the Gaudiya Math nor elsewhere. In fact, this one follower of Sridhar Maharaj with whom I had a dialogue was the first one I've ever met to suggest that giving of harinam is the actual diksa. Perhaps in ISKCON some individuals may think so, but I know is not a common presentation there either. Harinam is harinam and diksa is diksa. Some do loosely speak of harinam-diksa though.

Regardless of the history of the institution of guru-given harinama and japa-mala (as some consider Advaita Prakasa and Advaita Mangala later fabrications), it cannot be denied that it is indeed a useful institution in encouraging and engaging people in chanting the harinama maha-mantra under the guidance of a guru. Of course no-one should be denied from chanting the holy names prior to that. I do not recall hearing anything of the kind presented, either.

According to Vedic tradition and the Haribhakti Vilasa Diksa normally indeed means receiving mantras in the 4th, dative case, particularly the 10- or 18-syllable Gopal Mantra and 24½ syllable Kama Gayatri. Serious aspirants should surely not settle for just harinama. The custom of giving harinama first to aspirants and keeping it that way for those who are not very serious, is widespread. As far as I know, just about every Gaudiya acarya has been doing that all along. Giving a japa mala at harinama initiation is mostly an Iskcon custom, I have not seen this elsewhere. Regarding the booklets ‘Advaita Prakasa’ and ‘Advaita Mangal’, the latter is indeed considered dubious by all authorities I heard and read on it. The former, however, gets a much better review. The booklet is written by Ishan Nagar, who was adopted by Advaita Prabhu at age 5 and served Him at home throughout his life. A perfect eye-witness I would say. Critics of the booklet are mostly found in the corner of opponents of the caste-Gosvami lines, because the descriptions of Advaita’s endorsing this type of succession in the booklet does not suit them.

“Also the late Nikunja Gopala Gosvami did this.”
My Guru took the harinama initiation very seriously. When I came to him for diksa he was so kind to overestimate me and consider me a very serious candidate, so he started right away giving me mantra diksa, but afterwards he seemed to get 2nd thoughts and gave me harinama still, during the same initiation session. Later I learned that he considered those who just chant harinama without seriously planning to take harinama from a Guru offenders to the holy name, committing the 4th offense guror avajna, having disregard for the Guru. I found this idea back in Visvanatha Cakravarti’s famous commentary on S.B. 6.2.9-10.

That is the other extreme, and I have personally known at least one individual that was adamant about not needing to have initiation by a guru, even though that individual lived in Braj for many years.  That was due to his misunderstanding the underlying doctrines surrounding the tradition.

The above posts are very interesting in elucidating the role of the giving of the mahA-mantra by various acharyas in the line of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.  Our Baba knew that we already were given that mantra, as well as various gayatrIs in ISKCON, so he (at least not to me) refrained from giving instruction in that one, yet he did give the dIkSA mantras again, on account of the dubiousness of the Gaudiya Math paramparA.

QUOTE(Theist @ India,Divine)

For attaining this [suddha-nama], as we have already discussed, meditating on the diksa-mantras is essential."

Raga,

The sentence that I marked as bold is one I have a qustion on.I can understand the concept successive initiations into more and more intimate pastimes with Krsna.Formal or not I can see that happening even in Goloka.Those initiations being a drawing into a confidence by those already in that confidential position.Of course I may be expanding the definitions of intiation unnecessarily beyond what is being discussed.

But why consider diksa mantra's to be essential for attaining suddha-nama,apart from the Name, when the Name is the quintessential ingredient in the diksa-mantra?

I don't think this is twisting.

It is not twisting. It is a very intelligent question. The answer lies in a passage from Jiva's Bhakti Sandarbha I quoted earlier in this thread.

divyaM jJAnaM hy atra zrImati mantre bhagavat-svarUpa-jJAnaM, tena bhagavatA sambandha-vizeSa-jJAnaM ca |

"Divine knowledge means here knowledge of the true nature of the Lord in the mantra and, by that, knowledge of one's own special relationship with Him."

The guru-given mantra contains specific wisdom on the aspirant's special relationship with the Lord in His particular, special form. The very purpose of mantra-diksa is to eventually focus the awareness of the initiate to a particular form of the Lord and to establish him into a particular relationship with Him. These two essential inner ingredients substantially contribute to our attaining suddha-nama.

Let us now try to properly understand the concept of suddha-nama. Suddha-nama manifests on the tongue of a person who approaches the Lord with an appropriate intense feeling. If the aspirant is not established in proper awareness, there is no possibility of his attaining suddha-nama. Even if free from aparadha, his chanting will be nama-abhasa, a reflection of the holy name, since the chanting lacks the essential ingredient of visesa-sambandha, a particular relationship with appropriate feelings.

Then how is the diksa-mantra any different from Harinama itself? In a gayatri-mantra, such as the kama-gayatri, the names of the Lord are in the dative case (kRSNAya, "unto Krishna"), preceded by the kama-bija and surrounded by additional indicators, such as vidmahe, which focuses the initiate's awareness in a particular bhagavat-svarUpa, dhImahI, which plunges the initiate into meditation on the bhagavat-svarUpa, and finally pracodayat, which infuses sphUrti (manifestation) of the mantra-devata in the heart. The guru-given diksa-mantras are very powerful and particularly befitting for establishing the initiate into a particular mood of worship, being established in which he can then joyfully plunge himself into the nectarine waves of Harinama.

My Guru told his mantra sisyas that the diksa mantra is in the dative case because it is meant for puja (dative
is an offering case, I offer unto......), and thus a private, confidential practise (gopayen nija mantra, HBV)
whereas the mahamantra is in the vocative case because it is crying out for the Lord 'Hare! Krishna!'
Thus this is meant for public practise. Besides, if mantra would be non-different from nama, then why would
they be practised separately and given separately by the Acaryas, and why would they have been mentioned
in Haribhakti Vilasa and other authoritative scriptures?

I vaguely remembering reading in a Bhaktivedanta purport that Jiva Goswami has mentioned about a purificatory stage one goes through before the aspirant gets diksa. Is this so?

Dandavats to all Vaishnavas

Sri Advaitadas Ji,

I have met one Sri Kandarpa Gopal Goswami at the Shyam Vinodini Kunja in Sridham Nabadwip.
I am planning to visit him again in a couple of weeks. But I have forgotten the address. Could you please give some directions?

Humbly,

Stefan

Amazing. How and where did you meet him? He is the oldest nephew of my Gurudeva. I visited him there once in 1983, but I can unfortunately not remember anymore where it was exactly, quite far from our ashram I remember.

Dear Advaitadas Ji,

I met Sri Kandarpa Gopal Goswami at Shyam-Vinodini Kunja in Nabadwip town, I think it was near the Devananda Gaudiya Math, about a hundred meters down one of the side roads from the main road (don´t know its name). I remember the rickshaw driver turned left, as we were coming from the town centre going towards DG Math.
It was in the evening when I arrived. I remember there was a very large and beautiful painting of Sri Advaita Acharya in a dancing pose, without beard and looking very youthful, in the temple room.
This happened in 1995 or 1996.

Are there other temples/families in your guru´s lineage in Nabadwip?

Humbly,

Stefan

QUOTE

I vaguely remembering reading in a Bhaktivedanta purport that Jiva Goswami has mentioned about a purificatory stage one goes through before the aspirant gets diksa. Is this so?

That would be in his commentary on Caitanya Caritamrita, Madhya-lila, 15.107. He quotes several verses from Bhakti Sandarbha and Hari Bhakti Vilasa, including an incredible mistranslation in support of the brahmana philosophy in their tradition. Actually it is not Bhaktivedanta who is quoting, most of the scholarly passages in his Caitanya Caritamrita commentary are rather directly drawn from Bhaktivinoda's Amrita Pravaha Bhasya and Bhaktisiddhanta's Anubhasya. The text you are thinking about is from the Hari Bhakti Vilasa (17.11-12) and reads as follows:

pUjA traikAlikI nityaM japas tarpaNam eva ca
homo brAhmaNa-bhuktiz ca purazcaraNam ucyate
guror labdhasya mantrasya prasAdena yathA-vidhi
paJcAGgopAsanA siddhyai puraz caitad vidhIyate
“Regularly worshiping during the three phases of the day [morning, noon and evening], engaging in japa, offering oblations, performing homa [fire-sacrifice] and feeding the brahmanas are known as purascarana [preparatory acts]. For attaining perfection in the mantra given by the guru, this method of five kinds of upasana should be first adopted and performed.”

Bhaktivedanta translates the verses as follows: “In the morning, afternoon and evening one should worship the Deity, chant the Hare Krsna mantra, offer oblations, perform a fire sacrifice and feed the brahmanas. These five activities constitute purascarya. To attain full success when taking initiation from the spiritual master, one should first perform these purascarya processes.”

I have my reservations about the preciseness of his translation, considering the fact that Deity worship (puja) is performed only after receiving diksa, since it is to be done along with the chanting of the guru-given mantras. It is not a preparatory rite for mantra-diksa.

He interprets the purascarana here as something which is to be engaged in prior to receiving mantra-diksa. I would rather understand it as something which is done after receiving mantra-diksa to perfect the japa of the diksa-mantra and attain mantra-siddhi, in other words, purascarana is something to be undertaken prior to attaining mantra-siddhi, thus puraH carya, preceding practice.

Unfortunately I do not have a complete edition of the Hari Bhakti Vilasa for checking the surrounding verses for the context, but the opinion I present indeed seems to be confirmed by verses 4, 5 and 7 which Bhaktivedanta quotes later in his commentary from the same Vilasa. They read as follows:

vinA yena na siddhaH syAn mantro varSa-zatair api
kRtena yena labhate sAdhako vAJchitaM phalam
purazcaraNa-sampanno mantro hi phala-dhAyakaH
ataH puraSkriyAM kuryAt mantra-vit siddhi-kaGkSayA
puraSkriyA hi mantrANAM pradhAnaM vIryam ucyate
vIrya-hIno yathA dehI sarva-karmasu na kSamaH
purazcaraNa-hIno hi tathA mantraH prakIrtitaH
“Without it, one cannot attain mantra-siddhi even in hundreds of years. The sadhaka who performs it will attain his desired fruit. One who accomplishes purascarana will come to possess the fruit of the mantra. One who performs the preparatory deeds becomes a knower of the mantra and attains the desired siddhi. The preparatory deeds are said to be an essential power in chanting the mantra. Without strength, all activities of the body are in vain, and so this is for mantra without purascarana, thus it is proclaimed.”

Thus the purascarana described in the 17th Vilasa is not something to be undertaken prior to diksa, but rather it is something to be undertaken after mantra-diksa for attaining mantra-siddhi. Practically everyone who receives mantra-diksa is engaged in daily worship, japa and feeding brahmanas and Vaishnavas. I am not certain about the elements of homa and tarpana though. Particularly the aspect of tarpana is unclear to me. The word is often used for the offering of oblations to forefathers and so. I do not know its relevance in this regard. Does Gopala Bhatta elaborate on its meaning later on? Perhaps someone with the complete 17th Vilasa could look it up?

Dear Stefan ji, I learned that the address of Kandarpa Gopal Gosvami is Maharaja Manindra Nandi Road in Navadvip. The house of Ananda Gopal Gosvami is in the center of Navadvip [dont know the name of the street]; it is called Nilakanta Kunja. This is also the birthplace of my Guru and his two brothers. None of the nephews are living there, though. My Guru's ashram is in Pracin Mayapur, the last turn to the left before the Bhajan Ashram, way back in Ramachandrapur. The son of Govinda Gopal Gosvami, Mukunda Gosvami, is living in Vrindavan, also next to the bhajan Ashram in the neighborhood called Patthar Pura, at the end of the Gopinath Bazar, close to the Govinda Mandir.

In the puja paddhati I received from my Guru, Tarpana is offered both to Krishna [before the puja]
and to the forefathers [with Krishna's caranamrita, at the end]. Monier Williams says of tarpana:
Ë satiating , refreshing (esp. of gods and deceased persons by presenting to them libations of water
Ë a particular ceremony performed with a magical Mantra Sarvad.
Ë gladdening (ifc.) BhP. iii , 1 , 27
Ë refreshment , food AV. ix , 6 , 6 MBh. xviii , 269 and 275 Car. P‚². 2-3 , 14 K‚½. Hcat. (ifc. f. ‚)
Ë fuel L.
Ë (satiating , i.e.) filling the eyes (with oil &c.) Su½r.
Ë (‹) , f. N. of a plant L.

That's interesting. What about homa?

Hare Krishna,

So what about Kandarpa Gopal Goswami, does he give diksha? Does he have disciples?
Or is he just a householder, maintaining the temple?

"So what about Kandarpa Gopal Goswami, does he give diksha? Does he have disciples?
Or is he just a householder, maintaining the temple?"
Since he is the oldest son of the oldest son of Ananda Gopal Goswami, I suppose the answer to all these questions is 'yes', though I am not 100% sure. You must ask him.

"That's interesting. What about homa?"

Being a brahmin, my Guru performed a small homa in a corner of the ashram, once a month. We, his disciples, do not have it in our paddhati, so I suppose this is only for brahmins.