The evil consequences of following Guru-Guru-Guru

[Guest guest]

On 29 Jun 1999, Krishna Kirti wrote:

 

 

> Srila Narottama dasa Thakura says, sadhu-sastra-guru-vakya, cittete kariya

> aikya. One should accept a thing as genuine by studying the words of saintly

> people, the spiritual master and the sastra. The actual center is the

> sastra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak

> according to the revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if

> a saintly person does not speak according to the sastra, he is not a saintly

> person. The sastra is the center for all.

>

> --------------------End of Quote--

>

> Notice here that even above guru, shastra is given more importance by Srila

> Prabhupada.

 

 

Now this is an interesting interpretation. Srila Prabhupada doesn't say that

at all. From my perspective he is always saying guru, sadhu and sastra are all

equal. What he says is that if a "spiritual master" or "sadhu"

don't speak according to sastra they are not be accepted as spiritual master

or sadhu. True spiritual masters and sadhus ALWAYS speak according to sastra.

There are many pretentious sadhus and gurus in this material world, but they

are not Vaisnava gurus and sadhus; they are cheaters. Srila Prabhupada

describes their symptoms clearly throughout his perfect and complete books.

 

"The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service.

There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be accepted from the

topmost class.....When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata

(perfected devotee), he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like

Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the

post of guru."

(Madhya 24.330)

 

 

 

>How, then, can we only rely on "guru" for answers?

 

 

Because a true guru like Srila Prabhupada is always speaking the words of

sastra and sadhu. Never a different kind of word does he speak.

 

 

 

 

> It may be asked, "Prabhupada has also given sadhu and shastra, so why not

> rely exclusively on Srila Prabhupada?" The answer is that first of all,

> even if Srila Prabhupda quoted shastra and sadhu, we must still refer to it

> because it is his order.

 

 

His books are there for this. He said, "Everything is in my books." I believe

him.

 

 

 

> BUT, if there is some subject on which Srila

> Prabhupada has not quoted sadhu and shastra, or if certain instructions seem

> equivocal (in other words, can be interpreted variously), then we have to

> refer to Vedic literature that Srila Prabhupada did not translate, or we can

> continue to speculate.

 

 

Where did Srila prabhupada ever say this? He said "In my books the philosophy

of Krishna Consciousness is explained FULLY, so if there is anything which you

do not understand, then you simply have to read again and again. By reading

daily the knowledge will be revealed to you and by this process your spiritual

life will develop."

(Letter Baharupa 11/22/74)

 

 

Is there something equivocal about this?

 

 

 

> For example, Srila Prabhupada has said that it is

> forbidden for us to eat onion. There is no shastric injunction prohibiting

> the eating of onion in any of the books Srila Prabhupada translated, nor is

> such a shastric injunction quoted in any of his commentaries. Can Srila

> Prabhupada just make this up? However, if you look in Manu-samhita, the

> prohibition is there.

 

 

Why would anyone want to "check up" on Srila prabhupada to see if he was

really following sastra and go read Manu-samhita to test him? Especially about

something as tiny, tiny tiny as onions?

 

Srila Prabhupada said what he said about onions and thats it. Minor. Drop it.

Would he condemn a person who ate onions to hell or would he ask that person

to chant Hare Krsna and perform his duty according to varnasrama-dharma

knowing that THAT is the real medicine and that soon the "patient" will be

cured?

 

 

> The idea of understanding

> something exclusively on the basis of Guru (Guru-Guru-Guru instead of

> Guru-Sadhu-Shastra) was the object of criticism, because it has caused so

> much havoc in our society.

 

 

In the beginning of the movement we relied totally and exclusively on guru.

This is perfect - when he is as good as God. He presented the only sastra we

knew and he was the only sadhu we knew. The trouble only begins when we rely

on false gurus and false sadhus who create false sastra - then there is havoc.

 

 

 

> The problem is that many devotees are used to GGG, although it is bogus and

> in contravention of Prabhupada's own instructions on the matter.

 

 

This sounds like a new fabrication. If people were to rely exclusively on

Srila Prabhupada's books they would reach perfection. Everything that is

necessary is in the books. Other stuff is not very important if it is not in

the books. If people want to divert themselves to other books and sadhus that

is fine but this does not minimize the totality of Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

The plea

> of ONLY refering to Srila Prabhupada, because it has sentimental appeal, is

> actually a wolf in sheep's clothing. And we can practically see that there

> have been many innocent devotees who have had their spiritual lives ruined

> by bogus ideas like ritvik, which also fully utilizes various "Prabhupada

> saids . . ." that really have been things Srila Prabhupada has said.

 

 

One can find all the answers necessary for successful spiritual life in Srila

Prabhupada's books. "Ritvikism" may not be there, and I don't care if it is or

isn't because I don't need it, but then the current method of leadership of

ISKCON cannot be found or supported by Srila Prabhupada's books either. Srila

Prabhupada said to implement varnasrama-dharma in his movement 25 years ago.

This is guru-sadhu-and sastra speaking. Why haven't the leaders followed this?

 

Cow protection and child protection are clearly and unequivocally described

and ordered by guru, sadhu and sastra. What is our record on these?

[krsna]

"The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service.

There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be accepted from the

topmost class.....When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata

(perfected devotee), he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like

Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the

post of guru."

 

(Madhya 24.330)