Guru + deva = Gurudeva

[Guest guest]

(Braja asked how our guru/guru-tattva relates to our ideology, after I

explained "vidya-vadhu-jivanam" as follows: "The key thing is that our

ideology is alive; it has no real value if we remove its manifestation as

a living, conscious, sentient, actor; this is why the bonafide guru is so

essential.")

 

> > The relation is

our attitude and behavior, towards his Divine

> > grace--who is Krsna incarnate in the form of His pure devotee (study this

> > ideology in Cc. Adilila 1.44-61). How can bhaktas see Krsna as everything

> > else (i.e., vasudevah sarvam iti, sarvam khalv idam brahma, etc.), but NOT

> > as their own guru? Unlike realization of mere jnana, pure devotion

> > involves real action :-), seva. All sevakas serve our sevya-bhagavan

> > through our sevaka-bhagavan. This is "nityam bhagavata-sevaya." Our

> > ideology is useless until it is applied, and our applied ideology is

> > normative in this respect (i.e., how to respect one's guru); it's already

> > well established. There are standard injunctions regulating worship of the

> > bonafide guru, whom we are enjoined to view and serve as our manifestation

> > of Bhagavan. Envious people become impersonalists because in bhakti such

> > things are just way *too clear* for comfort. Same goes for those who lack

> > faith.

> That was a really nice explanation - thank you.

 

Thank you, but just to emphasize that this isn't merely my own

whimsical interpretation of the abovementioned passage, nor just a

sectarian party policy or dogma of some sort, please allow me to quote

from a generic Gaudiya prayer book (_Nitya-pATha-guTakA_, VRndAvana: ZrI

HarinAmasaGkIrtana-maNDala, 1989), which contains various pranamas meant

for daily recitation. Basing my Sanskrit translations below on the

interpretations of that edition's Hindi translations, here are the mantras

included therein for Sri Guru (3-4):

 

DhyAna (meditation):

 

kRpA-makarandAvitaM pAda-paGkajaM

zvetAmbaraM gaura-ruciM sanAtanam |

zandaM su-mAlyAbharaNaM guNAlayaM

smarAmi sad-bhakti-mayaM guruM hariM ||

 

"I meditate on my spiritual master, Hari, as the embodiment of

pure devotion, the repository of all qualities, who wears a beautiful

garland and ornaments, who makes everything auspicious, who is eternal,

has a golden complexion, white garments, and lotus feet endowed with the

pollen of mercy."

 

PrArthanA (supplication):

 

trAyasva bho jagannAtha

guro saMsAra-vahninA |

dagdhaM mAM kALa-duSTaM ca

tvAm ahaM zaraNAgataH ||

 

"Deliver me, O my spiritual master, lord of the universe; I am

burnt by the blazing fire of material existence and bitten by the snake of

the time factor. I have come to your lotus feet for shelter."

 

(The praNAma itself is the well known one, "oM ajJAna timirAndhasya...")

 

I have seen that such "deification" of the bonafide guru is expressed

ubiquitously, throughout the authoritative literature of Gaudiya

Vaisnavas, though it is also standard elsewhere, as I well demonstrate

below.

Here is another example of the same thing from a medieval Ramanandi

(i.e., Ramanuja) text in Braja-bhasa, the Nabha-bhaktamala (mangalacarana 1):

 

bhakti bhakta bhagavanta guru, catura nama vapu eka |

ina ke pada bandana kiye, nasa-i vighana aneka ||

 

"Devotion, devotee, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and

guru--these are four in name only; in form (vapu), they are one. Offering

reverence unto their feet destroys myriad obstacles."

 

Similarly, Chitasvami, one of the leading eight poets ("astachapa")

of the Vallabha (i.e., Visnusvami) sampradaya, used to sign his many poems

with his following signature line, in which he often revered his guru

Vitthala (the son of Vallabhacarya) as Krsna too:

 

chita-svami giridharana sri vitthalesa-vapu-dhari

 

"Chitasvami, for whom Lord Giridhari has assumed the form of

Vitthalesa, (sings...)"

 

Those suffering from cult-membership-phobias may note that none of these

sources are ISKCON sources, just as none of them are mayavada either; all

of them represent ancient, well established (if diverse), and bonafide

Vaisnava communities, like ours.

 

It's thus appreciable that the respect given to guru as God is a

universal one in generic Vedic tradition, and without need for further

examples, I can also assert that it extends well beyond Vaisnavism too.

I think Srila Prabhupada's books should be understood recognizing this

broad, traditional context, and that we can benefit greatly from doing so.

 

MDd