Ecclesiastical Guru! Reality or Illusion?
By Puru das adhikari
paramārtha-gurvāśrayo vyavahārika-gurvādi parityāgenāpi kartavyaḥ
One should not accept a spiritual master based on hereditary, social or ecclesiastical convention. Such a professional guru should be rejected. One must accept a qualified spiritual master, who can help one advance towards the ultimate goal of life, kṛṣṇa-prema. (Bhakti-sandarbha, annucheda 210)
Ecclesiastical committees cannot and do not establish who is a real guru. The words of self-realized souls, the examples of self-effulgent acaryas, and the revealed scriptures establish such standards. We must try to understand what is actually in our spiritual self-interest, and what may be a deception. We should try to understand Vaisnava aparadha, and how to avoid it at all cost. To do this we must first understand who is a Vaishnava and who is not.
To distinguish a diamond from a broken piece of glass you must have some personal qualification to discriminate the difference, or you will be cheated. Therefore, to get a clearer understanding of guru tattva you should study the Sri Cc. Adi lila, Volume One, and The Nectar of Instruction carefully. If you are not properly equipped to discriminate in this matter you can be deceived. Krsna says to Arjuna “Armed with yoga, O Bharata, stand and fight.” (Bg.4.42) Similarly, if we are armed with transcendental knowledge we can make clearer decisions concerning guru-tattva. . . ..
Religious Institutions do not necessarily generate real spiritual leadership. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura has written:
The church that has the best chance of survival in this damned world is that of atheism under the convenient guise of theism. The churches have always proved the staunchest upholders of the grossest form of worldliness from which even the worst of non-ecclesiastical criminals are found to recoil.
It is not from any deliberate opposition to the ordained clergy that these observations are made. The original purpose of the established churches of the world may not always be objectionable. But no stable religious arrangement for instructing the masses has yet been successful. The Supreme Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, in pursuance of the teachings of the scriptures enjoins all absence of conventionalism for the teachers of the eternal religion. It does not follow that the mechanical adoption of the unconventional life by any person will make him a fit teacher of religion. Regulation is necessary for controlling the inherent worldliness of conditional souls.
But no mechanical regulation has any value, even for such a purpose. The bona-fide teacher of religion is neither any product of nor the favourer of, any mechanical system. In his hands no system has likewise, the chance of degenerating into a lifeless arrangement. The mere pursuit of fixed doctrines and fixed liturgies cannot hold a person to the true spirit of doctrine or liturgy. Organised Religion
Srila Prabhupada’s vision was not bound by institutional considerations. Even though he established temples and communities he did not “Institutionalize” Vaisnavism. First of all there cannot be any spiritual life without a bonafide understanding of guru tattva. While His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada gave very clear explanations of guru-tattva during his lifetime. However since his departure some of his former secretaries and students (ISKCON GBC) have in their confusion and due to their lack of realization, flip-flopped on the issue (guru-tattva) several times. Since 1977 they have been twisting the Gaudiya siddhanta of guru-tattva like a pretzel. First they foisted zonal acarya, then in l988 misunderstood “re-initiation” and now have accepted a rubber stamp political appointment system for guru. Does such confusion indicate any real understanding of what Srila Prabhupada’s vision actually was? Simply read Nectar of Instruction to understand what His Divine Grace’s “personal vision” was. Srila Prabhupada shared the vision of Srila Rupa Gosvami, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. We should not try to separate Srila Prabhupada from the rest of our guru parampara. ISKCON is not meant to be an entity separate and apart from the rest of the Gaudiya Sampradaya philosophically, even if it is managed by its GBC.
The Vaishnava world is not limited to ISKCON, especially as it is guided by GBC ecclesiastical resolutions. The end result of their resolutions have simply been to deviate ISKCON from our Gaudiya line with regard to guru-tattva,jiva-tattva and their tolerance and active participation in Vaisnava aparadhas, since l977 and even before.They are also not very clear on nama-tattva, on any tattva for that matter. . ISKCON certainly used to have Srila Prabhupada’s personal stamp upon it, but his real mood of love and affection has long been erased by GBC bureaucracy and lack of anugatya (proper guidance) and higher association of self realized souls, since 1977.
. . . “The Supreme Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, in pursuance of the teachings of the scriptures enjoins all absence of conventionalism for the teachers of the eternal religion. It does not follow that the mechanical adoption of the unconventional life by any person will make him a fit teacher of religion. Regulation is necessary for controlling the inherent worldliness of conditional souls.
But no mechanical regulation has any value, even for such a purpose. The bona-fide teacher of religion is neither any product of nor the favorer of, any mechanical system. In his hands no system has likewise, the chance of degenerating into a lifeless arrangement. The mere pursuit of fixed doctrines and fixed liturgies cannot hold a person to the true spirit of doctrine or liturgy.
The idea of an organised church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher.” SBSST
Also in the purport to Cc. Adi lila Ch.12, Txt 73 we can read:
“In this connection, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, in his Amrta-pravaha-bhasya, gives this short note: “Sri Advaita Acarya is one of the important trunks of the bhakti-kalpataru, or desire tree of devotional service. Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, as a gardener, poured water on the root of the bhakti tree and thus nourished all its trunks and branches. But nevertheless, under the spell of maya, the most unfortunate condition of a living entity, some of the branches, not accepting the gardener who poured water on them, considered the trunk the only cause of the great bhakti-kalpataru. In other words, the branches or descendants of Advaita Acarya who considered Advaita Acarya the original cause of the devotional creeper, and who thus neglected or disobeyed the instructions of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, deprived themselves of the effect of being watered and thus dried up and died. It is further to be understood that not only the misguided descendants of Advaita Acarya but anyone who has no connection with Caitanya Mahaprabhu–even if he is independently a great sannyasi, learned scholar or ascetic–is like a dead branch of a tree.” ( HDGACBSP – Cc. Adi 12.73)
We can also discern who should accept disciples from the last paragraph of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada’s purport to verse 5 of Srila Rupa Gosvamis Sri Upadesamrta:
. . . In this verse Srila Rupa Gosvami advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kanistha-adhikari, madhyama-adhikari and uttama-adhikari. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikari Vaisnava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaisnavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master. ( Nectar of Instruction Purport Verse 5)
Anyone with sufficient discrimination and endowed by the grace of guru with sufficient paramartmikha sraddha, (faith in the revealed scriptures) can understand that no one can invent a new religion and call it Krsna consciousness. In Bg. 4.34 Lord Krsna gives a very clear direction to all jivas to seek out and approach a bona fide spiritual master. Srila Rupa Gosvami re-confirms the same principle in the first two angas (limbs) of bhakti in his book Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has elucidated on the same topic in his Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu-bindhu..
The depth of guru tattva is like the ocean and too vast to discuss completely in a short article. Suffice it to say, though, that a bona fide spiritual master is simply not established by the vote of a regional committee of conditioned souls This is a new idea that has nothing to do with the guru parampara coming from Lord Brahma and Srila Madhvacarya and even less to do with the actual instructions of ISKCONs founder-acarya, His Divine Grace Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
Srila Prabhupada has written in Cc. Adi lila 1.46 in his purport: Following in the footsteps of Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami and Srila Jiva Gosvami, later acaryas like Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura have confirmed the same truths. In his prayers to the spiritual master, Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura confirms that all the revealed scriptures accept the spiritual master to be identical with the Personality of Godhead because he is a very dear and confidential servant of the Lord. Gaudiya Vaisnavas therefore worship Srila Gurudeva (the spiritual master) in the light of his being the servitor of the Personality of Godhead. In all the ancient scriptures of devotional service and in the more recent songs of Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and other unalloyed Vaisnavas, the spiritual master is always considered either one of the confidential associates of Srimati Radharani or a manifested representation of Srila Nityananda Prabhu. (Cc. 1.46 purport)
Srila Prabhupada has written in Cc. Adi lila 1.47 as follows with regard to diksa and siksa gurus:
Srila Sanatana Gosvami is the ideal spiritual master, for he delivers one the shelter of the lotus feet of Madana-mohana. Even though one may be unable to travel on the field of Vrndavana due to forgetfulness of his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he can get an adequate opportunity to stay in Vrndavana and derive all spiritual benefits by the mercy of Sanatana Gosvami. Sri Govindaji acts exactly like the siksa-guru (instructing spiritual master) by teaching Arjuna the Bhagavad-gita. He is the original preceptor, for He gives us instructions and an opportunity to serve Him. The initiating spiritual master is a personal manifestation of Srila Madana-mohana vigraha, whereas the instructing spiritual master is a personal representative of Srila Govindadeva vigraha. Both of these Deities are worshiped at Vrndavana. Srila Gopinatha is the ultimate attraction in spiritual realization. (Cc. Adi 1.47 purport)
Who can be an acarya? What does initiation mean? That answer is found extensively throughout His Divine Grace’s books and lectures and is actually too vast a topic to discuss here in full. We can refer you however to:
Nectar of Instruction Text 1 & Purport
Nectar of Instruction Text 5 & Purport
Cc. Adi Lila 1.46-48 , Cc. Madhya lila Ch. 15.108
Cc. Madhya Ch. 24.330-331 – SB 1.5.32
http://www.harekrsna.de/artikel/who-is-guru.htm
http://www.harekrsna.org/gbc/themes/whoguru.htm
Speak Your Mind