Is Guru Really Omniscient?

[theist]

Omniscent means he knows everything. Krsna is everything. Guru knows Krsna. Guru knows everything.

 

Then again Krsna says no one knows Him. To know everything about Krsna is not possible for any jiva.

 

One example. Krsna actually does know how many atoms are in the universe. Your guru does not. Guru is not omniscent in this useage of the word.

 

What a lame topic and it comes up again and again.

[Guruvani]

sarvajna means all-knowing.

that pertains to spiritual knowledge, not everything mundane.

 

knowledge of material things is not "knowledge"

 

jna comes from "jnana".

 

Jnana is not material knoweldge of mundane things.

it is knowledge of the spiritual.

 

sarvajna is all-knowing of the spiritual truth, not stupid material things.

[Guest guest]

 

 

The guru is not really omniscient, but Srila Narayana Maharaja is preaching in a way as to discourage neophytes from misbehaving when they are not around the guru.

 

 

Now your on to something: You get an A.

[Guest guest]

...But there's more the disciple must see Krsna behind the guru, i.e. he has Krsna 's backing. So if Krsna is behind the bona fide guru, then Krsna can let the guru know what ever He wants him to know. The aspect of Krsna in this regards is akhanda guru, Sri Nityananda Prabhu. This unseen guru, akhanda guru tattva is omniscient. Most persons have a hard time with this, so therefore its best just to say, the guru is omniscient, because the real guru - akhanda guru certainly is. Narayana Maharaja's group and most Gaudiya Vaisnava groups have a large number of non-Indian devotees. Many of the Indian devotees coming up have been exposed to Western influences. There is much disappointing and disruptive behavior going on in all these groups, all over the World.

[Guruvani]

 

Now your on to something: You get an A.

 

so, the check is in the mail?

[Guest guest]

 

 

Gurudev is not omniscient. Never was. Never will be.

 

The truth is Gurudev is not omniscient. Never was. Never will be. AND the truth is Gurudev is omniscient and always is and will be eternally. It depends on the angle of vision. Achintya bhedaa bheda tattva. Both truths exist simultaneously and they are both one and different.

[muralidhar_das]

<center>Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 7.

Knowledge of the Absolute</center>

 

TEXT 26

 

 

vedaham samatitani

vartamanani carjuna

bhavisyani ca bhutani

mam tu veda na kascana

 

 

SYNONYMS

 

veda--know; aham--I; sama--equally; a titani--past; vartamanani--present; ca--and; arjuna--O Arjuna; bhavisyani--future; ca--also; bhutani--living entities; mam--Me; tu--but; veda--knows; na--not; kascana--anyone.

 

TRANSLATION

 

O Arjuna, as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come. I also know all living entities; but Me no one knows.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

The truth is Gurudev is not omniscient. Never was. Never will be. AND the truth is Gurudev is omniscient and always is and will be eternally. It depends on the angle of vision. Achintya bhedaa bheda tattva. Both truths exist simultaneously and they are both one and different.

 

Lightbulb time!!

 

The Unknowable can reveal Himself to the infinitessimal.

[muralidhar_das]

Srila Gurudev may know things magically if the Lord reveals things to him. As when Srila Narottama Mahasaya was informed in a dream that the Deities of Nabadwipchandra and His consort Vishnupriya Devi were hidden in a rice godown infested with snakes that nobody could approach without being attacked.

 

But then in another case we see that a Guru of the same advanced stage of devotion as Narottama, Sri Srinivasa Acharya, didn't know where the books stolen by king Birhambir were being kept - so how can it be said that this exalted Guru Sri Srinivasa Acharya is omniscient? Such statements are meaningless.

[Shakti-Fan]

 

Actually, he knows that guru is not omniscient.

Just like Srila Prabhupada kinda tricked devotees with the "fall from Goloka" tale, Narayana Maharaja is saying that the guru is omniscient to discourage disciples from doing nasty things thinking that the guru doesn't know.

 

So, it is a preaching device to trick neophytes into thinking that the guru is always watching like some big EYE in the SKY.

 

om tad visnoh paramam padam sada pasyanti surayo diviva caksur-atatam

Visnu is like a big eye in the sky and the guru is Visnu's representative. To identify the guru with Visnu according to proper tattva is there for the general devotees. Who of us is beyond this stage?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Excellent examples, Murali-ji! Thanks for keeping it concrete.

 

With regards to Srila Gurudev himself, my perception is that he is seeing without coloration to his vision. Perhaps he physically sees with eyes like yours or mine, but, when he sees our faces, he sees what is there--what is being mirrored from our hearts.

 

When I see, I see mostly what I project onto the object of my vision with my heavy conditioning. I am nearly blind, so colored and distorted is my vision.

 

To some, it might seem like omnescience, but really it is that his eyes are truly open while ours are still squinting against the brilliance.

 

 

Srila Gurudev may know things magically if the Lord reveals things to him. As when Srila Narottama Mahasaya was informed in a dream that the Deities of Nabadwipchandra and His consort Vishnupriya Devi were hidden in a rice godown infested with snakes that nobody could approach without being attacked.

 

But then in another case we see that a Guru of the same advanced stage of devotion as Narottama, Sri Srinivasa Acharya, didn't know where the books stolen by king Birhambir were being kept - so how can it be said that this exalted Guru Sri Srinivasa Acharya is omniscient? Such statements are meaningless.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

“By knowing Him, everything is known; by getting

Him, everything is gained.” We have come to inquire

about Brahman, the biggest, the all-accommodating

principle by knowing which we can know anything

and everything. And it is possible; it is not impossible.

The Upanisads say, “If you want to know anything, then

know the whole. And what is the nature of the whole?

Everything is coming from Him, everything is being

maintained by Him, and again everything enters into

Him. That is Brahman; so try to know that. If you can

know that, everything will be known to you.”

 

From Search for Sri Krishna: Reality the Beautiful (pg. 75)

http://www.scsmath.com/books/Search_Sri_Krishna.pdf

[suchandra]

Should a disciple say, my guru is not omniscient?

There're rules how this world runs and when Krishna Himself appears in this world to perform His lilas, even He Himself sticks to the fact that living entities embodied in this material world dont know everything. "Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form." Fools deride Krishna because He behaves like one of us, not omniscient. Is Krishna not able to bahave as such that, fools wont deride Him? "With His peace mission rejected by Duryodhana, Krishna returned to Upaplavya to inform the Pandavas that there was now no alternative to war for the upholding of the principles of virtue and righteousness." Was Krishna not omniscient enough before going to Duryodhana to know that Duryodhana would say no? Fools say, yes, Krishna didnt know, therefore he went to Duryodhana to ask him and get a negative answer.

In sum, even Krishna never behaves like being omniscient when appearing in this world. However, our duty is to consider both, guru and Krishna as omnisicient.

[Yofu]

The idea that the Guru is omniscient is a pet ideal of Jadhurani dasi, who is now a follower of Srila BV Narayana Maharaja. She lectures incessanty on this central idea. She needs the guru to be omniscient for her to have faith in the guru or bhakti. So for Jadhurani, Srila Prabhupada and Srila BV Narayana Maharaja are both omniscient, and she feels safe in her beliefs.

 

Belief in guru omniscince is actually a childish belief and encourages personality cult worship. The western branch of gaudiyaism is riddled with personality cultism. Pick any group and you'll find personality cultism. We come across it here in these forums all the time. For further evidence, look at any Gaudiya site and see the amount of web pages about the acarya of the organisation. Sometimes there are more pages about the guru on the site than pages explaining our tradition.

 

The-my-guru-knows-everything belief is a sign of the immature disciple. It creates the idea of "superman-magical" gurus in which the guru can do everything. This idea, in my opinion, cheapens the idea of guru and is a form of idolatary.

 

I accept the guru knows his disciples' hearts and as such gives instructions befitting her spiritual progress.

 

For material advice I will consult material experts and for spiritual advice I will consult the Vaisnavsas, and for superheros I'll read comics....

[Guest guest]

 

The western branch of gaudiyaism is riddled with personality cultism. Pick any group and you'll find personality cultism. We come across it here in these forums all the time. For further evidence, look at any Gaudiya site and see the amount of web pages about the acarya of the organisation. Sometimes there are more pages about the guru on the site than pages explaining our tradition.....

 

Amen to that, brother. Guru-centrism and personality cults of some western GV organisations now closely resembles the Karta-bhaja apasampradaya of old. And quite likely it will bear a similar bitter fruit. Too bad this approach is largely based on the teachings of the acharyas of these institutions.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

GURU—HEAVIER THAN THE HIMALAYAS

Guru means “heavy.” Guru means “one who dispels

the darkness,” and “who is heavy, who cannot be

moved by any proposal.” He is so well-established in

the truth that no offer of alternative knowledge, or

any other proposal, can move him from his position.

He is firm there. He can help the laghu, the people

who are very light; those whom anyone can handle

like dolls of play. But the guru can never be moved

from his position. He will sit tight there, heavier than

the Himalayas, and face all fleeting conceptions of

knowledge, breaking them right and left, and establishing

the universal characteristic of absolute knowledge.

He will impart knowledge of the Absolute

Truth, Brahman, the supreme whole, dispelling all

misconceptions and establishing knowledge of the

KNOWLEDGE ABOVE MORTALITY 83

absolute upon the throne of the heart. This is the

conception of guru-kula, the Vedic system of education

of ancient India.

The Vedic system of education deals with knowledge

proper—not half-knowledge, but knowledge of the

whole, which can deliver us from all troubles and guide

us to the most desirable position. Nowadays, we can sell

knowledge, but this knowledge cannot be sold. Intellectual

knowledge can be taken into the market,

but this knowledge cannot be taken into the market, for

this is absolute knowledge. Vedic knowledge gives us our

fulfillment of life, attaining which we will no longer feel

the necessity to run here and there for any greater

knowledge.

 

From Search for Sri Krishna: Reality the Beautiful (Page 84):

http://www.scsmath.com/books/Search_Sri_Krishna.pdf

 

Having developed a taste for the works of the Bard, I took a class in Shakespeare while in college (despite being an Engineering major). The professor was a legend on campus--everybody talked about how brilliant he is.

 

I found most of his lectures inscrutable and incomprehensible (and wondered if I was alone). Early in the class, when I raised my hand to question the teacher's interpretations of "Troilus and Cressida", I was told to re-read the play (which I believed I had read quite intently).

 

Seeing as no discussion was possible, I settled into befuddled silence for the rest of the classes, marvelling at the professor's ability to BS a room full of my country's best and brightest.

 

*That* is a cult of personality.

 

Gurudev, on the other hand, is most certainly *not* relying on the weight of his opinion (however weighty that opinion may be) to steamroll over opposition.

 

As Param-Gurudev says, 'Guru means “one who dispels

the darkness"'. That is to say, the brilliance of Gurudev banishes the fog that surrounds us so that we may plainly SEE FOR OURSELVES something of the nature of Reality.

 

When I hear Gurudev speak, it is as if I am remembering something from a long-forgotten dream. All of that knowledge is already present in my heart-of-hearts, but it is covered over by many lifetimes worth of useless trivia.

 

All those voices in my head, which are usually tugging me this way or that way, cry out in unison, "YES!!! This is the nectar for which we have been searching for so desperately (and with such futility)!!"

 

Guru-centrism???? HECK YEAH!!!!

 

 

 

 

Amen to that, brother. Guru-centrism and personality cults of some western GV organisations now closely resembles the Karta-bhaja apasampradaya of old. And quite likely it will bear a similar bitter fruit. Too bad this approach is largely based on the teachings of the acharyas of these institutions.

[Guest guest]

 

 

Guru-centrism???? HECK YEAH!!!!

 

Guru-centrism comes mostly from naive disciples who are more like rock-and-roll grouppies than aspiring transcendentalists. They are even willing to twist shastras, truth, and tradition to prove their hero is always right, even when they have no clue as to what he is actually saying. And they always wage guru-wars, to prove that their hero is better than your hero (who most likely is a zero). Soon the focus on Krsna is lost and it is all about the glories of my guru, and thus also all about me.

 

Yes, the guru is heavy with meaning and knowledge, but it is precisely about the meaning and knowledge and not about the personality cult that has been built around the content. Can he really DISPELL all misconceptions? Or is it just something you have to take on faith? Is it really self-effulgence or the claims of his followers? Is your guru teaching you to think and to experience, or to merely follow him blindly?

 

There is a difference between a grouppie and a disciple, between deep respect and appreciation and a personality cult.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

There is a difference between a grouppie and a disciple, between deep respect and appreciation and a personality cult.

 

Those who are as advanced as you are can make such distinctions.

 

For the neophyte like me, such distinctions are in no way USEFUL. For whatever reason (even vanity), I must cling to the feet of Gurudev like a baby monkey clinging to the back of her mother.

 

Perhaps, in time, I will gain some appreciation of just who Gurudev is.

[suchandra]

 

Guru-centrism comes mostly from naive disciples who are more like rock-and-roll grouppies than aspiring transcendentalists. They are even willing to twist shastras, truth, and tradition to prove their hero is always right, even when they have no clue as to what he is actually saying. And they always wage guru-wars, to prove that their hero is better than your hero (who most likely is a zero). Soon the focus on Krsna is lost and it is all about the glories of my guru, and thus also all about me.

 

Yes, the guru is heavy with meaning and knowledge, but it is precisely about the meaning and knowledge and not about the personality cult that has been built around the content. Can he really DISPELL all misconceptions? Or is it just something you have to take on faith? Is it really self-effulgence or the claims of his followers? Is your guru teaching you to think and to experience, or to merely follow him blindly?

 

 

There is a difference between a grouppie and a disciple, between deep respect and appreciation and a personality cult.

Looks like nobody is able to successfully master this checklist. Another reason why Prabhupada rather did not appoint any diksa-gurus successors - who can know if this person sitting in front of me can "dispel all misconceptions"?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

When it's the real thing, you will just "know" that it is genuine.

 

 

Knowledge above mortality is knowledge proper.

Mundane knowledge has no value, for it does not

endure. We must inquire elsewhere for permanent

knowledge. Real knowledge is stable; it has a firm

foundation, and Vedic education deals with how to

acquire that knowledge. The meaning of the word veda

is “Know.” No rhyme or reason is shown why you should

know, and no explanation is given: simply “Know.”

Because doubt is absent in the spiritual plane, no

cheating is possible. It is a simple, direct transaction—

“Know.”

 

In that transcendental plane, everyone is a

confidential friend, and they are stainless in their conduct.

No cheating tendency is possible there, so there is

no suspicion. Here, we are in the plane of misunderstanding

and doubt, so we want to examine everything.

We are living in a vulnerable and vitiated plane, where

people cheat one another. We cannot rely on others, for

they may deceive us. But where cheating is unknown,

transactions are very simple and straightforward. So,

no reason is given for suggestions that come down from

that plane. Now, the question arises how to attain that

sort of true, comprehensive, and non-deceptive knowledge?

 

In the Bhagavad-Gita (4.34) Krishna says:

 

tad viddhi pranipatena

pariprasnena sevaya

upadeksyanti te jñana˜

jñaninas tattva-darsinau

 

“To learn knowledge above mortality you must

approach a self-realized soul, accept him as your spiritual

master and take initiation from him. Inquire submissively,

and render service unto him. Self-realized souls can

impart knowledge unto you, for they have seen the truth.”

 

 

SUPERKNOWLEDGE

We have to approach the domain of knowledge with

self-surrender, honest inquiry, and a serving attitude.

We have to approach that plane with the mentality of

slavery. Higher knowledge will not serve a person of

lower status. If we want perfect knowledge at all, we

will have to serve the Supreme Lord. He will use us for

His own purpose; not that we will use Him. We may be

subjects in this mundane world, but we will have to

become objects to be handled by the superknowledge of

that plane. If we want to connect with that higher

knowledge, we must approach with this attitude.

The above quote is from Page 71:

http://www.scsmath.com/books/Search_Sri_Krishna.pdf

 

 

Looks like nobody is able to successfully master this checklist. Another reason why Prabhupada rather did not appoint any diksa-gurus successors - who can know if this person sitting in front of me can "dispel all misconceptions"?

[suchandra]

 

When it's the real thing, you will just "know" that it is genuine.

 

 

The above quote is from Page 71:

http://www.scsmath.com/books/Search_Sri_Krishna.pdf

 

Very nice explanation, in other words, that all those doubts and questions about who is bonafide are coming up is caused because the real thing isnt there.

[Guest guest]

 

Those who are as advanced as you are can make such distinctions.

 

For the neophyte like me, such distinctions are in no way USEFUL.

 

We all must make due with what we have. I am not trying to shake your faith in your Gurudeva. I am merely trying to broaden the discussion to include my own perspective which is certainly tradition based.

 

It would be naive to say that western Gaudiyas in general have a deep understanding of the guru-issues specific to our tradition. The painful history is there to teach us otherwise. Many heros turned out to be zeros and many loudly proclaimed theories turned out to be fake. Many were duped by both. Thus we all could use a little vedic common sense and solid traditional Vaishnava approach in this area.

 

The issue of omniscience is just a symptom of myths and misunderstandings permeating our society.

 

In India, there is an avatara in every county, and in the west people are not much less gullible - they just fall for a different fable.

[Guruvani]

 

Thus we all could use a little vedic common sense and solid traditional Vaishnava approach in this area.

 

 

you obviously don't know anything about the fundamental principles of the Saraswata parampara.

 

your "traditionalism" is just a pipe dream and a fantasy.

 

there is nothing traditional about the Saraswata parampara.

 

if you think there is, then you are obviously living in a bubble.

 

tradition................

the tradition...........

 

a buzzword that means nothing.....

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Very nice explanation, in other words, that all those doubts and questions about who is bonafide are coming up is caused because the real thing isnt there.

 

Bingo!!! When it's the real thing, there will be no doubts whatsoever!

 

 

Truth Hits Everybody Lyrics

Artist(Band):Sting & Police <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr valign="top"><td width="50%">

</td><td width="50%">

</td></tr></tbody></table>Sleep lay behind me like a broken ocean

Strange waking dreams before my eyes unfold

You lay there sleeping like an open doorway

I stepped outside myself and felt so cold

Take a look at my new toy

It'll blow your head in two, oh boy

 

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

 

I thought about it and my dream was broken

I clutch at images like dying breath

And I don't want to make a fuss about it

The only certain thing in life is death

Take a look at my new toy

It'll blow your head in two, oh boy

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

 

Where you want to be, won't you ever see?

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

Truth hits everybody, truth hits everyone

 

Ah....now!

 

Why do I get the feeling that Sting read the Bhagavad Gita he got from the devotee in the airport that time??

[theist]

 

Bingo!!! When it's the real thing, there will be no doubts whatsoever!

 

But is this true? How many recognize the real thing even when right before our eyes? It is said that many who saw Krsna thought of Him as an ordinary person or a demigod but rare was the person who recognized Him as the Supreme Lord.

 

I think it all depends on the desire of the individual and krsna in the heart who is fulfilling that desire. Most don't want to the real devotee and prefer to be cheated. Some of us only want a little peek now and then. Rare is the soul who is willing to see and acknowledge the devotee for who he actually is.