Sentimentalism vs Sadhu's knife

[Guest guest]

Dear Samba Prabhu,

 

pamho. AgtSP!

 

Thanks for your extensive reply to my comments. You made some very nice

points for which I´m grateful to you.

 

> > Devotees don't fit into this category of bad karma-crippled people, we

> > are taken care of directly by the Lord, our eternal Father. And more

> > specifically, what former disciple of HKS is feeling now cheated by him?

> > Weren't his disciples able to make substancial advancement? I think that

> > many among them are indeed great great souls, not to be critiziced for

> > having committed the "grave mistake of accepting a non-bonafide guru".

>

> Prabhuji, I appreciate what you are saying, but you are mixing in things

> said by Srila Prabhu, which I do not necesarily agree with in toto.

 

Yes, that´s right, I want to apologize to you for that. I was indeed

convinced that you fully supported Srila Prabhu´s statement just quoted

above. It was a bit bewildering for me to read his "grave mistake" statement

and I thought you wanted to back it up with by the all-pervading

cheated-cheaters principle... sorry once again for the misunderstanding.

 

I really consider Srila Prabhu as a true Gentleman judging from his refined

language and expressed devotional sentiments. But therefore I don´t

understand his one-sided approach to the NM issue. How is it then that NM is

allowed to throw verbal dirt on the heads of all leading devotees of ISKCON

and is still to be considered as the transcendental, all-loving, universal

uttama adhikari. Sorry, my material intelligence can´t grasp this. Nor can

my devotional understanding digest his derogatory language he is applying

indiscriminatively towards all ISKCON devotees, preferrably the gurus and

sannyasis, of course. Personally, I would have no aversion agains NM, but it

hurts my heart badly when I read his lecture excerpts, because my Guru

Maharaja and many of his advanced Godbrothers happen to be also the targets

of his bad propaganda - why, please tell me, why is he doing this???

 

 

> What criteria do we use to judge a persons spiritual advancement, how can

> we tell how advanced someone is? What is 'substantial' advancement?

 

Hm, this is indeed a good question! To be honest, I mainly BELIEVE that many

- or to be more rational -, some are quite advanced due to their nice

Vaishnava behaviour that they exhibit, like their intense absorption in

devotional service, their firm faith in Krishna, their humility, their

realizations in devotional service, their enthusiasm in preaching, etc.

Perhaps you could add some more sastric criteria, Prabhu?

 

> HKS

> > WAS bonafide, is there any doubt about this from anyone out there? He

> > and his disciples were rendering so much devotional service for so long.

> > For example, where does all the money come from for Sri Mayapur Dham

> > project?

>

> Well I was very much part of Mayapur project for many years, and a lot of

> money was wasted unfortunately, not deliberately, but wasted due to

> certain persons being too overburdened with other responsibilities.

> Thankfully that is not now happening. I personaly knew Harikesa prabhu, on

> a level that many disiples could not, precisely because I was not one. I

> liked him very much. he was certainly an inspiring person. But what is a

> bonafide guru? Surely he has to be able to give you Krsna. And if he does

> not have Krsna, how can he give?

 

Excuse me, Prabhu, here I beg to disagree. I think that HKS was qualified as

a genuine guru from many different perspectives (his conduct, his belonging

to the parampara, etc). This is exactly the point where the Ritviks are

attacking ISKCON saying, "there are no bonafide spiritual masters in ISKCON

except Srila Prabhupada" and the followers of NM are cheerfully tuning in

"therefore turn to NM!"

 

So what are the symptoms of a bona fide guru? Perhaps we can gather together

some relevant quotes from sastra. I for myself found the following:

 

 

1) from Nectar of Devotion (the "lawbook" of ISKCON as SP called it):

 

a) "Eligibility of the candidate for accepting devotional service",

(Chap. 3):

 

"Devotees may be divided into three classes. The devotee in the

first or uppermost class is described as follows. He is very expert in the

study of relevant scriptures, and he is also expert in putting forward

arguments in terms of those scriptures. He can very nicely present

conclusions with perfect discretion and can consider the ways of devotional

service in a decisive way. He understands perfectly that the ultimate goal

of life is to attain to the transcendental loving service of Krsna, and he

knows that Krsna is the only object of worship and love. The first-class

devotee is one who has strictly followed the rules and regulations under the

training of a bona fide spiritual master and has strictly obeyed him in

accord with revealed scriptures. Thus, being fully trained to preach and

become a spiritual master himself, he is considered first class..."

 

 

b) "Evidence regarding Devotional Principles", (Chap.7):

 

"...The qualification of a spiritual master is that he must have

realized the conclusion of the scriptures by deliberation and arguments and

thus be able to convince others of these conclusions. Such great personali-

ties who have taken shelter of the Supreme Godhead, leaving aside all

material considerations, are to be understood as bona fide spiritual

masters..."

 

2) from the Nectar of Instruction, verse 6, last passage of purport:

 

"Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur has given us a few hints which all

accumulate in the idea that one can recognize an uttama-adhikari Vaishnava

by his ability to convert many fallen souls towards Vaishnavism. One should

not become spiritual master until one has reached the level of an uttama

adhikari. A Vaishnava neophyte or a Vaishnava at the intermediate level can

accept disciples as well, but those disciples must be situated on the same

platform, and one should understand that they won´t be able to make

substancial advancement under his insufficient guidance. A disciple should

be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as spiritual master."

(translated quickly from German to English - it´s not exactly SP´s wording)

 

This specific quote is not exactly supporting my claim, but for the sake of

balance I put it anyway.

 

 

3) from a lecture by Srila Prabhupada as provided just recently in the

Krsna-katha conference by Madana-mohan Prabhu (I hope he doesn´t mind me

quoting it?):

 

"Yes, whoever you tell the chant to, it is effective. You have heard it

from me and my disciples, similarly I have heard it from my Guru Maharaja,

and so on, and on. Because you have heard it from a pure devotee of the

Lord, therefore it is transmitted from you to another. Just as an aerial

message, is transmitted from one place to another, similarly, this Guru

parampara system is working. My disciples are my agents, my

representatives, so by hearing it from them, you are receiving it from me.

And because you are a sincere soul, those who are hearing the Mantra from

you are receiving it in disciplic succession, from Lord Caitanya and from

Lord Krishna."

-- letter to Andrea Temple,

Los Angeles, 6 March, 1968

 

 

4) from an interview with a reporter, printed in "The Science of

Self-Realization" (I have to translate it from a German edition):

 

Reporter: How can you judge if someone has got a genuine guru?

 

Srila Prabhupada: Can any of my disciples answer this question?

 

Disciple: I remember that John Lennon asked you once: "How do I know who is

the real guru?" And you answered: "Just try to find out the one, who is most

attached to Krsna. He is genuine."

 

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. The real guru is God´s representative, and he is

speaking of God and nothing else. The real guru is one who has no interest

in materialistic life. He is only interested in God and nothing else. This

is one of the tests for a genuine guru. brahma-nistham. In his thoughts he

is always dwelling on the Absolute Truth. In the Mukunda Upanisad it says:

srotriyam brahma-nistham. "The real guru is well-versed in the scriptures

and in vedic knowledge and is depending exclusively on Brahman". He should

know what is Brahman (the spiritual nature), and how one can become fixed in

Brahman. These characteristics are given in Vedic literature. As I said

before, the guru is God´s representative. He represents the Supreme Lord as

the Vice-King represents the King. The real guru will not concoct anything.

Everything he says is in accordance with the scriptures and the previous

acaryas. He will not sell a mantra and tell you, you will become God in six

months. That is not the duty of a guru. The duty of a real guru is to

request everyone to become a devotee of the Lord. This is in one sentence

the duty of a real guru. Yes, he has no other duty. Whomever he meets, he

requests: "Please, become God-conscious." If someone is preaching in this

way for God and is trying to induce everyone to become a devotee of God,

then he is a genuine guru.

 

Reporter: What about a christian priest?

 

Srila Prabhupada: Christian, Mohammedan, Hindu - this doesn´t matter. If

someone just speaks in the name of God, he is a guru. Jesus Christ is an

example. He was preaching to the people: "Just try to love God". Everyone -

no matter who he is, Hindu, Moslem or Christian - is a guru, if he convinces

the people to love God. The guru never says "I am God", or "I will make you

God". The real guru says, "I´m a servant of God and I will make you a

servant of God, too". It doesn´t matter how the guru is dressed. As Caitanya

Mahaprabhu had said: "Whoever is able to convey knowledge about Krsna, he is

a spiritual master." A genuine spiritual master just trys to induce people

to become devotees of Krsna or God. He has no other duty.

 

Reporter: But the bad gurus...

 

Srila Prabhupada: What is a "bad" guru?

 

Reporter: A bad guru only thinks of money or fame.

 

Srila Prabhupada: Well, if he is bad, how he can become a guru? (laughing)

How can iron become gold? Actually, a guru cannot be bad, because if he was

bad, he cannot be a guru. One cannot talk of a "bad guru". This is a

contradiction. Simply try to understand what a real guru is. The definition

of a real guru is that he is only talking about God - that´s all. If

somebody is talking some other nonsense, he is not a guru. A guru cannot be

bad. There cannot be a bad guru, as there cannot be a red guru or a white

guru. Guru means "real guru". We don´t have to know more than that the real

guru is always talking about God and that he is trying to induce people to

become devotees of God. If he is doing that, then he is genuine.

***************************************************************************

 

Sorry Prabhus, I didn´t intend to "kill you" with so many quotes, but I

thought it might be somewhat enlivening to hear Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

> > Where is it stated that the guru has to be an eternally liberated soul

> > uncapable of committing mistakes or even falling down? Syamasundara Pr.

> > mentioned last year in his astrology conference that there is evidence

> > that even in Vedic times guru fall-down was known of.

>

> Yes you can take a guru that might fall down, but it just means that you

> will have to wait a few births before you can go home. That is why it is

> reccomended to take an uttama guru. Of course there is no loss. It might

> be that we are not ready for full surrender in this life, and our desires

> betray that, so we might take a lesser advanced guru, and be with him/her

> for a few lives.

 

Again, I have my doubts about this statement of yours (the

"few-lives-waiting-list"). Could you please provide some (sastric) evidence

for this? What about the relevance of SIKSA guru(s) in this regard??

 

Thanks in advance,

 

your servant

Vedanta-krit dasa