Can the Guru Make Mistakes?

[amanpeter]

Found this on article on Chakra which might be of some interest here.

 

 

Chakra.org

 

[Philosophy Page] [HOME]

 

 

Go to the “Philosophy Page”

 

Can the Guru Make Mistakes?

By Niscala devi dasi

 

There has been some discussion on the internet in regard to Srila Prabhupada's attitudes in his dealings

and whether they are related to our present mistaken attitudes, or if they are something different.

 

Or if they were appropriate then, but not now. A good example is his attitude towards women, which

seems a bit antiquated.

 

Some devotees had reactions which were a bit antiquated as well.

 

One reaction which tended towards the absurd was to put up quote after quote about equating the guru

as God, presumably to scare us into silence. I am amazed that this can come from a purported follower

of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. It's actually mayavada philosophy, as explained by Srila Prabhupada:

 

"Guru is exalted because he is very confidential servant of Krishna. " Here it is clear. Not that he is

respected as Krishna, therefore he has become Krishna. This is Mäyäväda: "He has become Krishna"

No. (Morning Walk, Los Angeles, December 15, 1973)

 

On the other hand, our friend quoted, with all the confidence he has in sastra:

 

Krishna enjoys His pastimes in the form of one's guru (Cc. , Adilila 1. 32).

 

One's guru is the form of Lord Caitanya, among five (Adi 1. 1).

 

One's guru is a "prakasha" expansion of Krishna; that is, a "full manifestation" (Adi 1. 1). "A

siksa-guru is none other than Krishna Himself" (Adi, 1. 47).

 

Because we cannot see the Supersoul, He appears as the liberated devotee (Adi, 1. 58).

 

Krishna says "the acarya is Myself,” and that he is "comprised of all the gods. " He is neither to be

thought of negatively ("navamanyeta karhicit") nor as if he were "a human being,” nor envied

(Bhagavata 11. 17. 27).

 

The list is not exhausted. There are other passages also that describe that the guru is not human, that

he is God and so on, but these, like the passages that describe the impersonal feature of the Absolute

Truth, should be taken in the full context.

 

Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy interprets these verses to mean that he is not like an ordinary human

whose world revolves on the struggle for existence or material enjoyment. That he is God inasmuch as

he carries the message which has the potency to change people's lives. Since God does the same when

He comes, guru is like God in that respect.

 

In sastra it is said that the liberated soul is free from four propensities, one of which is to make

mistakes and another is imperfect senses. Due to a misunderstanding of the full meaning of this, when

there arises evidence that Srila Prabhupada had both imperfect senses and made mistakes, the reaction

is to counteract it with quotes equating the guru with God, or alternatively to quite often condemn the

person who pointed out the evidence as offensive, of a hellish mentality and so forth. .

 

What does this verse mean? It seems to indicate that Srila Prabhupada or anyone who happens to

make a mistake cannot be liberated, but not necessarily so. There are many verses in the sastra which

seem to indicate that God is impersonal but taken in the right context, they actually describe only an

aspect of His nature.

 

Srila Prabhupada described the guru's perfection in terms of that the message is perfect, unadulterated

by material motives:

 

"Therefore, saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastrair uktas tatha bhavyata eva sadbhi. Guru is directly the

Supreme Personality of Godhead. Why? Because he is presenting the words of Supreme Personality of

Godhead without any deterioration. "

 

"This same man, he's guru, so long he gives the real knowledge of Krishna. And the same man, he's

ordinary man, as soon as he cannot give. "

 

"I am not perfect. None of us is perfect. But we are speaking the message unchanged. That much we

are perfect. "

 

If it is his speaking the message of Godhead that is perfect, then naturally when it is said that the

liberated soul is free from imperfect senses and making mistakes, it must logically refer to his

presentation of the philosophy, and not him as a person wholly. Imperfect senses means that his senses

are perfect in relation to his speaking the Absolute Truth. Not that he will never perceive something

wrongly, or make a wrong judgement. That would be projecting onto him omniscience. It would also

be projecting fantasy and has led to all sorts of accusations against those who look candidly at Srila

Prabhupada, and can see in him a very human feature.

 

It can also be observed that his message is not tainted by the dictates of the material senses, which

include the mind. He is not speaking to gain a following, be offered praise and a comfortable way of

life. Inasmuch as his message is untainted by the pushing of the imperfect senses, then it can be said

that he is free from the imperfect senses.

 

Similarly, in regard to him being free from mistakes. It is in relation to the message of Krishna which

he presents unadulterated, i. e. without mistake. This is not to be accepted blindly, but when we see

that time and time again he accurately uses sastra and logic to convince a person of the validity of

Krishna consciousness, then it can be said that he is free from the propensity to make mistakes.

 

With such an attitude we do not have to don blinkers whenever we see evidence that Srila Prabhupada

was mistaken in his judgment of women and other things. This is what it means to not follow blindly.

We do not need to convince ourselves that it is all a product of our fertile imagination, or that we have

imperfect senses that are handing us faulty information. We have full rights to doubt anyway, for it is

not that the previous acharya has the last word on everything. Bhaktivinoda Thakur said the same of

Vyasadeva in relation to the Bhagavatam, which I will put at the end of this article.

 

Simply if we see that something is in need of change, whether an attitude that Srila Prabhupada had, or

a judgment he made that was wrong, rather than spend our brains making such misuse of the

philosophy so as to accuse the observer, we can adjust our own attitude accordingly, and progress

from blind conformity and imitation, to responsible following.

 

The trouble is we are invested in a Prabhupada who is not. . Srila Prabhupada said he was not these

things we project onto him, i. e. perfect in all respects. If our faith is based on our projections rather

than on the criteria in sastra, it is blind. "In this respect, blind following is condemned". This is

precisely why there should not be blind following, but a necessity to present the essence unchanged,

and make adjustments to other things we may have been following out of sentiment.

 

Here Bhaktivinoda Thakura recommends such a dynamic attitude even in relation to Vyasadeva, and

in respect to Srimad Bhagavatam, the spotless Purana. His words speak for themselves. If anyone can

read it and still believe that Srila Prabhupada can make no mistakes, and that it is offensive to say so,

my hat off to them. They take the prize for irrational thinking:

 

"No book is without its errors. God's revelation is absolute truth, but it is scarcely received and

preserved in its natural purity. We have been advised in the 14th chapter of the 11th Skandha of the

Bhagavat to believe that truth when revealed is absolute, but it gets the tincture of the nature of the

receiver in course of time and is converted into error by continual exchange of hands from age to age.

New revelations, therefore are continually necessary in order to keep truth in its original purity. We

are thus warned to be careful in our study of old authors, however wise they are reputed to be.

 

Here we have full liberty to reject the wrong idea which is not sanctioned by peace of conscience.

Vyasa was not satisfied with what he collected in the Vedas, arranged in the Puranas and composed in

the Mahabharata. The peace of his conscience did not sanction his labours. It told him from within "No

Vyasa! You can't rest contented with the erroneous picture of truth which was necessarily presented to

you by the sages of bygone days. You must knock yourself at the door of the inexhaustable store of

truth from which the former sages drew their wealth. Go, go up the fountainhead of truth, where no

pilgrim meets with disappointment of any kind. "

 

Vyasa did it and obtained what he wanted. We have all been advised to do so. Liberty then is the

principle which we must consider the most valuable gift of God. We must not allow ourselves to be led

by those who lived and thought before us. We must think for ourselves and try to get further truths

which are still undiscovered. In the Bhagavata we have been advised to take the spirit of the sastras

and not the words. The Bhagavat is therefore a religion of liberty, unmixed truth and absolute love.

(from: The Bhagavat: Its Philosophy, Its Ethics, and Its Theology)

 

© CHAKRA 15-Aug-2001

[Tarun]

Which level of guru? I say yes. And no. Ha!

Par exemple, Baladev Prabhu, The Original Guru.

Did He make a mistake when he killed RomaharSan?

If not, why did He go on pilgrimage? Only to set a good example?

Only because He wanted to?

First time I met PrabhupAd at Henry St Brooklyn, His Divine Grace forgot a word which held up his own lecture for about 40-50 seconds.

Was it a mistake? Intentional? KRSNa's Mercy?

After the lecture, I was told "you should blame material nature, not gurudev."

I wasn't really blaming anyone. He just temporarily forgot.

It became a big deal for some who had this omniscient, encyclopedic, Karnak the Magnificent guru conception.

Not me.

[mahak]

Mistakes??

 

Again, as He is, He clearly states "I am an old man, I am not perfect, but the message I bring from Krsna through My Guru Maharaja IS perfect, and this is my perfection."

 

Hard to see reality if we try to make Gods out of Gurus, and after all the emphasis that Srila Prabhupada placed on this fact. All the gurus of His day were all saying or letting their disciples say that they are SUPREME. Srila Prabhupada decried all of this garbage and He4 stood out is such defiance of this "I aaaaaaam God" philosophy, but all the new Paulist Lord Prabhupadists are doing what was done to Lord Jesus Christ, artificial deification.

 

I sure thank my Guru Maharaja for standing alone in admitting non-divinity. He nicely explained that acintya bheda bheda tattwa afforded Him recognition as Divine Grace of God, not the Grantor of such Grace.

 

Haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

[Ajay Shah]

A bona-fide Guru never makes a mistake. Becuz his/her every endeavor & actions is and are too satisfy Lord Gopalas. In other words, Krsna's will is being directly carried out by the indirect direct representative. therefore, it is 100% productivity. So he never makes a mistake. Okkk?

BHAKTA'S GOPALA.

[This message has been edited thrice times by Ajay Shah (edited 08-16-2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by Ajay Shah (edited 08-16-2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by Ajay Shah (edited 08-16-2001).]

[talasiga]

Originally posted by Ajay Shah:

A bona-fide Guru never makes a mistake.

 

Such is the compassion of saints

They cultivate some faults

So we will turn from them

to God

.

.

.

 

faultless talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 08-16-2001).]