Siksa guru as personal spiritual guide

[Guest guest]

On 13 Jul 1999, Srila Dasa wrote:

> On 09 Jul 1999, Vijay Pai wrote:

> > Prabhuji,

> > I find it ironic that you say the above while still upholding

> > Payonidhi prabhu as a terrific example of how someone saw the

> > light, accepted a shiksha guru guide, etc. In particular, Payonidhi

> > prabhu has _explicitly_ stated on the Krishna-Katha conference

> > that he believes that the jIva has fallen. He said this _after_

> > "accepting" Narayana Maharaja as a shiksha guru. What kind of

> > shiksha is this, that he feels fit to reject whenever he wants

> > to? Are you _sure_ that you want to uphold him as an example

> > for the rest of us to follow?

 

> The example to follow from Payonidhi Prabhu is the ability to be open-minded

> and learn from all Vaisnavas, irrespective of institutional affiliations,

and

> to take lessons from those who are by far our seniors.

 

Well, prabhu, there are two separate issues here:

 

1. the ability to be open-minded

2. the ability to learn

 

One who decides to reject a senior Vaishnava's teachings

on some issue while claiming that senior Vaishnava as a shiksha

guru seems to be deficient in #2 -- either the person cannot

learn or chooses not to learn.

 

Then all we're left with is being "open minded." There are numerous

such "open minded" people in any spiritual society. They come

to the programs and hear the lecture with a very open mind. In

particular, they keep both doors to the mind wide open and end up

not actually taking anything from the lecture. Then, when it comes

time for prasadam, they are again very open-minded (or at least

open-mouthed, and since the mouth reveals the mind...). However,

I hope you'd agree that this sort of open-mindedness does not

actually amount to very much. It's only open-mindedness combined

with the ability and motivation to _change_ something about

oneself (in practice or belief) that yields the sort of results

desired.

 

> The relationship

> with a siksa-guru is more as a friend, with greater space for differences of

> opinion. It depends upon the relationship.

 

I'd like to see some pramAna here. I've always heard that both

the "shiksha guru" and "diksha guru" are to be respected in

the same way. That's certainly what the Chaitanya Charitamrita

says. The friendly, differing-opinion guru seems to be more

like the "vartma-pradarshaka" guru who initially points one toward

greater realizations.

 

> Regarding GBC resolutions on the Fall, GBC "managers" have no business

> issuing *decrees* about philosophical questions. Only sadhus with sufficient

> adhikara have that right.

 

What is the pramAna for this second sentence? In particular,

even the guru and sAdhu must follow shastra, so only the shastra

can issue a "decree" about philosophical points.

 

> Similarly, without proper higher

> association (sadhu-sanga), devotion spoils into some deviant or lesser

> understanding. Choose your "wine" carefully!

 

Choose your "higher association" carefully as well.

 

Yours,

 

Vijay S. Pai