Gurus

[Guest guest]

> After all, out of the eleven, how many do

> we have left? One? (I think this is correct, being Jayapataka Maharaja.)

 

No, prabhu, there are a few! Tamal Krishna Goswami, for one. I wasn't aware

that he'd left Satsvarupa Maharaj is another.

 

> I know many

> bhaktas who have said "oh, the guru system is so complicated - I don't

> know where to turn" - meaning ISKCON - complaining of over-bureaucratic

> institutionalisation, and of lack of a heart-felt mentality. It is true,

> guru-tattva seems as if it is being institutionalised...staid,

> unfeeling(?). It is hard for me to sum up, but with such rigidity it seems

> a little impersonal. Rather than finding Sri Guru from the heart, many

> bhaktas are confronted by a system where reputation - institutional

> reputation - seems to speak instead. It is definitely confusing...

 

Could you then perhaps explain to me what one's qualification is to

recognise guru 'from the heart'? There are thousands of 'gurus' wandering

the planet, but only Srila Prabhupada made "Krishna" a household word, and

made Him available to millions of people. They may not all have joined, but

certainly they've heard of Hare Krishna. Now, where would we all be if it

weren't for the 'staid, institutionalised rigidity' you speak of above?

Without it, how would we be having this discussion about 'guru tattva'? Your

impression of ISKCON being 'heartless' is simply that - your own impression.

I believe Srila Prabhupada is the heart of ISKCON, just as Sridhara Maharaj

is the heart of his matha, and BP Puri Maharaj is the heart of his math. I

wrote this to Babhru privately some weeks ago, but it's very important to

understand that the 'institution' you perceive to be ISKCON is simply the

mechanics of ISKCON - it is not the heart. The heart is Srila Prabhupada.

 

I'm sure there are those who believe ISKCON is heartless. But please

understand that there are also those of us who believe its heart is Srila

Prabhupada, and it is hurtful to have it reduced to a 'pile of bricks' or a

'bureaucratic' wrangle. It is much more.

>

> Another point - that actually confuses people too (and I found myself in

> this situation too)...is that after the reform of Guru-puja and the

> position of diksa-gurus within ISKCON it is quite hard for new bhaktas to

> find candidate gurus for them to see if they are Sri Guru. Maybe I'm

> picturing it wrong, but I feel some devotees may be afraid (wrong word, I

> know) to promote gurus - for falling foul of the mindset developing post

> '86.

 

In a sense, that is what I was referring to in my previous text - that the

intimidation of those who oppose guru worship against those whose genuine

gurus are still in good standing is as out of place as what they're

complaining about. Talk about hypocrisy....

 

> Sorry if this text is a bit too general, and unclear. I am trying to get

> my thoughts out, and hope someone gets what I am saying. I'd love

> comments, though. Braja, I know I'm lacking clarity - dreadfully! - but

> this is quite hard to articulate!

 

Yes, it is a very broad and deep subject, so perhaps one issue at a time is

a better path to clarity. Again, the tendency to generalise is confusing and

misleading, but I think we all know where we're coming from, so no offense

is taken in bringing up questions.

 

Ys

Braja Sevaki dd

>

> -Rama