Is A Physically Present Spiritual Master Required?

[krsna]

Is A Physically Present Spiritual Master Required?

 

BY SHRILA B.S. TIRTHA MAHARAJ

 

EDITORIAL, May 4 (VNN) — Many seekers are confused in the matter of Initiation and of the role of the Spiritual Master in their devotional lives. Consequently, a lot of questions are asked on the meaning of the word INITIATION or DIKSHA and on how and from whom one should take initiation in order to progress in one's devotional life. A prominent question that has been doing the rounds for a fair number of days now is whether the physical presence of the Spiritual Master is really important or relevant as far as making progress on the devotional path is concerned. In the lines that follow, I am making a humble and honest attempt to eradicate the confusions that exist in the minds of would-be, fresh and existing devotees in relation to the above-mentioned questions.

 

First, let's try to decipher the meaning of the term DIKSHA as mentioned in the Vedic scriptures. The meaning of DIKSHA or Spiritual Initiation -

 

divyam jnanam yato dadyat

kuryat papasya sankshayam

tasmad dikseti sa prokta

desikais tattva-kovidaih

 

Translation: Learned scholars and seers of Truth call this process 'Initiation' because it imparts transcendental knowledge and eradicates gradually all sinful reactions.

 

'Di' means Divya jnanam, transcendental knowledge and 'Ksha' stands for sankshayam, to dissipate. Therefore the process of 'Diksha' enlightens one with spiritual knowledge and simultaneously dispels all reactions to past sins. This is the opinion of 'Desika', Vedic scholars qualified to instruct, direct and guide human society as well of 'Tattva-kovida', experts in the science of the Absolute Truth.

 

By Krishna's mercy when spiritual awakening takes place, the conditioned being must approach a spiritual teacher to take shelter of him by initiation for progressive march on the path of transcendence.

 

The Spiritual master in physical presence is required because he is a realized servant of Shri Hari. Only by humbly rendering service to him, we can gain perfect understanding of various spiritual pronouncements of revealed scriptures. Sometimes, we may not be able to comprehend the subtle nuances of statements in Vedic literatures even like Shrimad Bhagavatam because of our not being completely free from the infection of material nature which at times deludes one's intelligence.

 

One is normally heard arguing that it is "VANI" (advices and instructions of a spiritual teacher) rather than "VAPU" (his physical presence) that one should associate with in order to make spiritual advancement. This is, no doubt, true and valid but as long as one remains devotionally immature and has not achieved sufficient degree of realization which can ensure unimpeded progress to the point of highest perfection, one requires physical guidance of a spiritual teacher.

 

It is just like children, in their immature stage, require physical guidance by their parents even in petty matters whereas, as grown up adults they can carry on their life's activities by merely following the instructions of their parents.

 

Even in mundane situation, if one wants to obtain a graduation degree in science, commerce etc., he or she painstakingly learns the subject from a physically living teacher by going to school and college to regularly associate with him rather than merely relying on text books announced by Educational board authorities.

 

If learning through hearing subject matters explained by school/college teachers is considered essential, then what to speak of the inevitability of approaching physically present spiritual teachers for gaining transcendental knowledge? Generally speaking, it is the inherent obstreperous nature that often dissuades all conditional beings from accepting a living authority.

 

The Supreme Lords Krishna and Rama accepted Sandipani Muni and Vasishtha Rishi respectively as spiritual masters to set an example for us.

 

Shrila Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasadeva, the author of almost all Vedic literatures, himself once became perplexed and needed the guidance of his spiritual master Shrila Narada Muni who was physically present then to help detect the deficiency in his disciple and suggest a remedy which Shrila Vyasadeva followed diligently and attained highest perfection.

 

Elevated child devotees like Prahlada Maharaja and Dhruva Maharaja as well as the Emperor Chitraketu surrendered to Shrila Narada Muni who physically initiated them and imparted transcendental knowledge.

 

Although Shrila Shukadeva Goswami, the most eminent speaker of Shrimad Bhagavatam was transcendentally situated while he was in the womb of his mother, he nevertheless surrendered to his exalted father Shrila Vyasadeva and submissively learnt this sublime literature from him.

 

Both the Supreme Lords Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Nityananda Prabhu took shelter of Shrila ISHVARA PURI and Shrila Madhavendra Puri respectively to show us the method of spiritual progress.

 

The most vivid example that none can fail to notice is that His Divine Grace A.C. Bhakti Vedanta Swami, Shrila Prabhupada got physically initiated by His Divine Grace Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakur, Shrila Prabhupada who himself accepted spiritual initiation physically from his spiritual master Shrila Gaur Kishore Das Babaji Maharaj.

 

All eminent Acharyas of the Vaishnava sampradaya like Shrila Madhva, Shrila Ramanuja, Shrila Nimbarka and Shrila Vishnu Swami as well as various others physically received spiritual initiations.

 

In conclusion, I must say that only in the rarest of the rare cases like that of GOPIS, the cowherd girls of Vrindavana, that we do not come across anywhere in the scriptures about their undergoing any ritualistic initiation although their achievement of the highest perfection in love of God remains unequalled or unexcelled till date. This is, of course, because they are all expansions of Shrimati Radha Rani.

 

[krsna]

[theist]

Was Dhruva's initiating guru physically present?

[Guest guest]

It was Narada, who asked him to repeat " Om Namoh Bhagavate Vasudevaya". Hence Narada is Druva's Guru who met him in a forest.

[theist]

So the question then becomes one of defining "pysically present" because Narada Muni came in his spiritual body to initiate Dhruva.

[Guest guest]

guru's body is a spiritual body

[stonehearted]

And Srila Prabhupada came in his spiritual body to initiate me and many others. I think what Maharaja and others mean by this is the commonsense meaning: someone whom we can actually approach to ask for mercy and who reciprocates.

 

The fire sacrifice is not the initiation. My sense has always been that the initiation is the mutual acceptance between guru and sisya. The fire yagna is a way of solemnizing that commitment. I have friends whose initiation did not include a fire sacrifice.

[theist]

But we know what people mean by physically present. They are referring to guru still having a physically manifest body. That is one that can be perceived by our organic senses.

 

Dhruva seems to be an exception to this. He may be the only one we know of.

 

Well there was Narada coming to instruct Vedavyasa to write the Bhagavatam. Would that count also?

[stonehearted]

What evidence is there that Narada's form could not be perceived through Dhruva's organic senses? Krishna's form could also be percieved through the organic senses of, say, Sisupala or Kamsa. How did Narada instruct his sisya in the processes of devotional service? By showing and explaining. How did he give him the sacred mantra to chant? By repeating it in his ear. My reading of the Bhagavatam (and I've read this a lot and carefully, since I wrote a children's version some years ago) is that Narada went to where Dhruva was and instructed him. He didn't appear in Dhruva's heart.

[theist]

What is to stop His Divine Grace appearing before someone today and giving him instruction.

 

Is there a difference between physically present and personally present?

 

ps I never said he appeared in his heart.

[theist]

To me Maharaja above makes a sound case for accepting siksa in one's life from those more advanced. No one has ever challenged that that I know of.

 

And he uses the example of Narada Muni coming to Vedavyasa and their relationship was one of siksa. Narada Muni was personally there but in his spiritual form.

[ancient_paztriot]

"Is there a difference between physically present and personally present?"

 

Well yeah, there is a difference.

 

Before I forget, one example of this is the nishadha from the Mahabharata who became an expert archer (self-taught that is) by devotion to his guru or deity… and the strength of his transcendental method. Poor dude. It's horrible what Drona did to 'em.

 

Anyway, if one has the devotion or feelings for the guru or Krsna, there is no separation… because it is that attitude that transcends circumstance. We feel connected to people through love and not the person sitting next to us on the plane.

 

However, the most important factor for just any relationship is proximity. Relationships tend not to bear the strain of long separations.

 

Just seeing Prabhupada (physically present) was enough to liberate people. There is no substitute for his personal physical presence.

 

You can pop of a question to Prabhupada now and the answer may not come. If he's here to answer it and SHOW us how, well that fortune can't be estimated.

 

But there's duality in everything. Simultaneous oneness and difference.

 

The love comes more naturally and readily between physical relationships… in my opinion.

 

The gopis were merged in love of God and the yoga of that connection. But they weren't satisfied with that. They want to see and touch God.

 

Who doesn't think Prabhupada's departure made all the difference in the world?

 

If we can follow properly, then we are safely situated. If not, then we need a guru holding our hand.

 

Anyway, I don't know too much about this. It is an elevated subject matter.

[theist]

But remember that hearing him speak something through a manifest form is no guaruntee it will be understood.It may be made clear in the pages of his books. Just take this issue for example. On practically every page of his books it is shown how to gain and impart transcendental knowledge and now 30 years later people are still questioning why he didn't instruct his disciples in how to carry on the parampara. People sit around and argue over the meaning of some last statements and a letter when maybe we just need to study the example of Sukadeva and Pariksit.

[ancient_paztriot]

Agreed.

 

But if Prabhupada was personally present he could instruct according to time and circumstances by blasting his disciples, etc. The ignorance would be gone… for a great many.

 

Come on, Prabhupada had Krsna and Maya serving him. ISKCON was poised to conquer the world. It was all Prabhupada's prescence!

[theist]

>>If we can follow properly, then we are safely situated. If not, then we need a guru holding our hand.<<

 

You still have to follow properly. What more can he say? Everyone knows the basics 16 rounds 4 regs. rise early etc.

 

If you seriously have a question Supersoul will see that you get the needed answer.

 

This getting initiated and then thinking "Ah, now I am safely linked up" often gives a false sense of security.

 

[ancient_paztriot]

I don't disagree with you. We can throw out 30 year slogans… But it applies to us too.

 

Anyway, your points are valid. I'm not qualified to really debate the differences.

 

But consider this, it is stated that a guru is absolutely necessary for spiritual development. That obviously wasn't such a tough requirement when the societies of the past were more authentic.

 

That guru has to be liberated. There is the rub.

 

My last words on this… We learn how best to behave in society or anywhere by the behavior of others. We can study the customs of a place before going there, but we probably won't convince the locals. We fit in by living as they do… and that is best learned from them directly. It comes down to people… physical people. Imitation is the best way to learn.

 

They didn't even used to have books. It's a relatively new practice.

 

There are exceptions. But they are exceptions.

 

Krsna and Prabhupada didn't recommend books as a substitute. It is our misfortune IF there are no liberated gurus for us. It is Kali-yuga.

 

This is practical, not theory:

When the cats away, the mice will play.

[sudhaya]

 

Hare Krsna

 

Do you have diksa?

 

If you not want to answer for personal reasons of any kind, on an open forum {don't blame you} then please ignore this post, I will delete later on. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Just for arguments sake, we do have the example of Brahmaji who was initiated within the heart:

 

tene brahma hridaya adi-kavaye

 

And we have examples of people being initiated by Narada when he simply tells them to chant "death" over and over.

 

How the spiritual master chooses to initiate us is his choice. The ritual is not what counts.

[stonehearted]

As we see in the case of Dhruva, the business of initiation is arranged by Krishna, not by us. And there was no showbottle ritual in Dhruva's initiation, but some discussion, and when Narada was convinced of Dhruva's determination to see the Lord, instruction and mantra, followed by unflinching acceptance on the disciple's part.

[stonehearted]

And I think you know what I'm getting at, too.

 

theist: What is to stop His Divine Grace appearing before someone today and giving him instruction.

 

Bob: Nothing, if it's Krishna's desire. And Krishna becomes putty in the hands of His loving devotees. In fact, there's a Web site dedicated to discussing just such experiences.

 

t: ps I never said he appeared in his heart.

 

B: No, I know you didn't. But what would be the alternative to being present before the senses (especially considering that we're not discussing siddhas but those aspiring to proper sadhana)?

[krsna]

 

Quote :***********************************

the business of initiation is arranged by Krishna,

not by us. And there was no showbottle ritual in Dhruva's initiation, but some discussion,

and when Narada was convinced of Dhruva's determination to see the Lord,

instruction and mantra, followed by unflinching acceptance on the disciple's part.

 

***********************************************

[Guest guest]

 

Generally speaking, it is the inherent obstreperous nature that often dissuades all conditional beings from accepting a living authority.

 

 

 

With all due respect to Maharaj, the above may not necessarily be the reason for holding back. We see Dhruva was intent on some material gain for which he decided to worship Lord Vishnu. Even for that objective, The Lord arranged suitable conditions and spiritual master, when his desire was ripe enough. Remember the four kinds of pious men who approach Krishna - In Bhagavad Gita. Therefore, given a group of enlightened men who are more than capable to lead a soul to God, one may still find that his desires, as to how he may finally want to see God, do not sync exactly with what those enlightened men can provide him. Naturally a jiva having developed, somehow, a liking for Krishna and but being born in a Roman Catholic community may find some really enlightened souls who can lead him to Christ and his God, but does he really need that spiritual arrangement; should he just bow down to the argument of being "obstreperous" and give in to a catholic spiritual master on find a lack of a spiritual masters in consonance with his desires.

 

The better thing would be to understand that Krishna has not sent him to an appropriate spiritual master because he isn't ripe anough and pray.. and find..

 

How can serving a spiritual master come out spontaneously unless he sees in his master's heart, the same kind of fire that is buring in his heart.

[ancient_paztriot]

"there's a Web site dedicated to discussing just such experiences."

 

I'd like to check it out. Where is it?

[ancient_paztriot]

JNdas gives the example of Brahma, but he was the FIRST BEING in the universe. And Krsna was directly playing "role of guru."

 

Dhruva received personal instruction from his superiors - actually. His success was in following those orders.

 

So practically, scanning all of history has failed to provide a precedent for this individualistic upward mobility. Why? It obviously isn't the process. It is not the rule. The exceptions are practically non-existent. We should base our lives on the rule, not the exceptions.

 

This rugged individualism is the major fault of modern science and world diplomacy. It is actually killing the world.

 

Perhaps to ground this conversation a little, modern examples should be provided. Examples from the past are a far cry from what we know and how WE ARE CONSTITUTED… or what our options are. Imagine the people of those examples trying to repeat that success in this atmosphere.

 

You theory is correct inasmuch as devotional service can't be impeded, but can we really manifest that devotion without guru? Let's be practical… 30 years and counting… Talk is cheap. (no offense intended).

 

...............

I know you know this. These are your words (from the GBC pure devoteee thread)…

 

This is NOT bypassing guru. It is the ONLY way to insure accepting the genuine one.

 

Please try to understand this simple point.

...............

 

Doesn't it take a teacher or guru to evaluate the child's propensities and adjust his training accordingly? And it takes the teacher to know if the student knows.

 

Otherwise, anyone can read a book; become familiar with the language and principles… and then proceed to cheat people. Such is their inspiration! That has happened more times than I care to remember. This happens in the absence of qualified gurus.

 

But if we have to wait for guru according to circumstance or desire… then it's not our time. I agree with you. It should be liberated guru or nothing at all. That's probably true for alot of us here.

 

Still, some people are so far down, they'll get great benefit just by touching a book, what to speak of instruction.

 

So these topics are really between the individual, their guru (If they are so fortunate) and God. I think you've been saying this all along.

[theist]

 

But consider this, it is stated that a guru is absolutely necessary for spiritual development. That obviously wasn't such a tough requirement when the societies of the past were more authentic.

 

 

People always assume I am suggesting guru is not necessary. That is the exact opposite of what I am saying. Guru is indespensable. Without the original guru in this universe, Brahma, there would be no knowledge of the Supreme Person at all. I do not accept the term 'self made man' especially in relation to this subject matter. If you know something about Krsna in this life without an apparent guru then you had one in the previous life who told you or the Supersoul Himself taught you directly. The thing is I don't limit guru to someone living in a human form only.

 

Ultimate guru is Krsna. He appears to us or enlightens us in many ways. Through the example of the acarya. Through his teachings. Through shastras.Through commentaries. Through advanced sadhus and even those chanting for the first time. Through nature I believe God is speaking,that is through the sun, wind, ocean etc. Not figurativly but literally. Through common men I meet daily as well. In fact, I am coming to believe that Guru is omnipresent and the only thing that prevents my absorbing continuous siksa from Guru is my lack of interest and distraction by Maya.

 

As Christ said "Blessed are those with ears to hear".

 

So the idea that there is no guru present I feel is bogus. "No guru in sight so we have to come up with a reasonable facimile to keep the line going" is the teaching of the deaf dumb and blind who think the revelation of God depends on them.

 

Or I get accused of being a ritvik. Wrong again. From reading any of Prabhupada's teachings on the matter it is crystal clear he wanted his disciples to become qualified and accept disciples. In this way multipying and expanding ad infinitum.

 

It is the whimsical participation of conditioned souls in rubberstamping others as guru that I object to. It's Krsna's pleasure to be the transcendental matchmaker. He knows who His realize devotees are. He knows who are the truly sincere aspirants. He knows how to bring them together.He has the will to do it. If He allows it we can help in this process as our service but we aren't necessary.

 

That is why I say from day one new folks should be advised to pray to the Lord in the heart, along with reading shastras and consulting sadhus, to find their guru.

 

Not "here are you 30 choices, you may freely pick anyone of them...but if you pick any other than these thirty then you are an offender to Prabhupada... but its up to you"

 

Ecclesiastical considerations may have their place in the smooth running of any organization . In keeping order they may be critical. But not when deciding guru.