Sri Guru Tattva Part1 7 by BVSM
Sri Guru Tattva Part1 7 by BVSM
Introduction
A Faithful Understanding
Srila Prabhupada, the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON, and the foremost exponent of the
science of Bhakti yoga of the modern age, at times, gave a broad definition of “guru” as
meaning “preacher”. However, the main thrust of his teachings on the subject of guru-
tattva is to emphasize the very exalted qualifications required of a bona-fide spiritual
master, or sad-guru. He must be a pure devotee, a self-realized, liberated soul. Ideally,
he should be an uttama-adhikari, a maha-bhagavata.
Let us read Krishna’s instruction in the Bhagavad-gita. “Just try to learn the truth by
approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively, and render service unto him.
The self realized soul can impart knowledge unto you, because he has seen the Truth.” (Bg
4.34)
There are currently different conceptions of guru, but in this verse, the proper
understanding of the qualifications of the bona-fide spiritual master is given. He must
be self-realized, and have seen the Truth, so that he can impart transcendental
knowledge to his disciple.
What is the Truth? Tattva-vastu Krishna ⎯ Krishna is the Absolute Truth. So a seer
of the Truth must have seen Krishna. If we take another angle of approach, the Tattva,
the Absolute Truth, the Advaya Jnana, the Nondual Substance, has three aspects;
Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan. (SB 1.2.11) Therefore, one must be at least a
Brahman-realized soul, which means on the liberated, or brahma-bhuta stage, in order
to be accepted as a bona-fide sad-guru. This comes at the nistha-bordering-ruci stage
of the madhyama-adhikara level.
“One has to raise himself at least to the stage of a second-class devotee, and thus become
eligible to know the Absolute Truth.” (SB 1.2.12) Srila Prabhupada repeatedly indicated
this stage to be the minimum concessional level to be achieved before one should
become an initiating spiritual master, or diksa guru.
We judge a thing by the results. Lack of proper qualification for diksa-guru status has
already been a cause of great difficulties, and even devastating disaster. This is echoed
everywhere in sastra, the revealed scriptures, and in the Vaisnava world. If someone does
not fit the sastric criteria of what is a guru, then he is at best a vartma-pradarshaka guru,
or one who shows the path, even if he prematurely gives initiation.
The three levels of devotees are first class (uttama), second class (madhyma), and third
class (kanistha) adkikaris. We have to base our understanding on the overall teachings of
Srila Prabhupada and the sastras he teaches from, which state that the diksa-guru
should undoubtedly be a pure devotee, a tattva-darsi, or one who has seen the Truth.
He should be a self-realized liberated soul, or uttama adhikari. Such an exalted devotee
comes down, or rather adjusts his vision, to the madhyama platform to preach Krsna
consciousness.
The madhyama adhikara level is a concession to be a guru and the kanistha adhikara
stage is not acceptable. It is stated in the Harinama Cintamani by Srila Bhaktivinode
Thakura that one must take diksa from a Vaisnava, but that the “madhyama stage
marks the beginning of Vaisnavism. A kanistha-adhikari is called vaisnava-abhasa, or
near Vaisnava”.
The Lord makes Himself known to us through the form of Sri Guru. It is said that,
”since we cannot see the Supersoul He appears as a liberated devotee.” (CC Adi 1.58) And
“Although I know my spiritual master as a devotee of the Lord, I also know him to be a
plenary manifestation of the Lord.”(CC Adi 1.44) That is guru, and that should be
learned. One shouldn’t read “diksa-guru” when Srila Prabhupada simply speaks of
preacher, and indulge in the fallacious logic, that since a diksa-guru is a preacher, all
preachers are therefore qualified as diksa-gurus, without considering their adhikara, or
eligibility as a guru.
The company of a pure devotee alone is conducive to cultivate pure bhakti, so the Lord
reveals his own tattva, the Truth about Himself, to those aspirant souls who have
surrendered themselves unconditionally at the feet of a niskincana bhagavat bhakta, a
completely surrendered soul. Krishna appears as Sri Gurudeva. “He must provide the
Transcendental Necessities.” (CC Madhya 24.330)
A less than liberated soul shouldn’t attempt the impossible task of trying to become the
eternal spiritual master of another conditioned soul. That will deprive both of them
from the real thing. If someone cannot deliver the necessities listed below and only
imagines he can, like the Christians who are only imagining that they can give Christ to
others, yet pretends he can deliver, he is actually cheating.
Absorption of Karma
What is diksa? The guru gives divya-jnana and takes the sinful reactions of the disciple:
Diyate, ksiyate, something is given, something is taken; that is diksa. According to
what? According to the guru’s capacity. But diksa is not dependent on formalities or a
ceremony. It is not a one-time affair. It is an on-going process. One is admitted in the
school of diksa. One is a real diksa-guru only if he can both give this divya-jnana and
How is the karma taken? Srila Prabhupada gave the example of a fan being switched
off, so the guru has to be a properly authorized agent of the Lord to be able to turn off
the switch, not someone who has become a guru on his own initiative (Nectar of
Devotion, p116) Krishna invests his pure devotees with the bhakti-shakti and kripa-
shakti, the mercy potency. By the strength of the empowered guru, the sincere disciple
is blessed. Then by practicing according to the divya-jnana received by the authorized
guru and by chanting, sinful reactions are vanquished. The disciple is protected by the
guru and that counteracts all sinful reactions. (SBhag 9.9.8)
Then there is the consideration of the disciple’s surrender. “Diksa tends to confer
spiritual enlightenment by abrogating sinfulness. Its actual effect depends on the degree of
willing cooperation on the part of the disciple and is therefore not the same in all cases... It
imparts an initial impulse, the nature of which varies in accordance with the condition of
the recipient.” (Srila Sarasvati Thakura)
When the disciple surrenders fully, he is relieved from his sinful reactions. Since the
surrender is usually partial, artificial, conditional, there’s only partial relief on the
disciple’s part. Real initiation is not therefore automatically on the spot of the fire-
yajna. It is considered complete upon achieving bhava-bhakti.
Srila Prabhupada mentions that one may even receive the seeds of material desires,
karma, fruitive action, and jnana, cultivation of knowledge aiming at liberation, instead
of the bhakti-lata bija, the seed of the plant of devotion, if the guru is not pleased: (see
CC Madhya 19.152) Srila Prabhupada explains in Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers:
Syamasundara das: One time you said that sometimes you feel sickness or pain due to
the sinful activities of your devotees. Can sometimes disease be due to that?
Srila Prabhupada: Krishna says: “I will deliver you from all sinful reaction. Do not fear.”
So Krishna is so powerful that He can immediately take up all the sins of others and
make them right. But when a living entity plays the part on behalf of Krishna, he also
takes the responsibility for the sinful activities of his devotees. Therefore to become a
guru is not an easy task. He has to take all the poisons and absorb them. So sometimes,
because he is not Krishna, there is some trouble. Therefore Caitanya Mahaprabhu has
forbidden: “Don’t make many disciples.” That’s a fact. The spiritual master has to take
the responsibility for all the sinful activities of his disciples. Therefore to make many
disciples is a risky job unless one is able to assimilate all the sins. That idea is also in the
Bible. Jesus Christ took all the sinful reactions of the people and sacrificed his life. That
is the responsibility of a spiritual master. Because Krishna is Krishna, he is apapa-
viddha. He cannot be attacked by sinful reactions. But a living entity is sometimes
subjected to their influence because he is so small. Big fire, small fire. If you put some
big thing in a small fire, the fire itself may be extinguished. But in a big fire, whatever
you put in is all right. When the spiritual master is in suffering, Krishna saves him.
Krishna thinks: ‘Oh, he has taken so much responsibility for delivering a fallen person.’ So
Krishna is there... because the spiritual master takes the risk on account of Krishna....
The pain is there sometimes so that the disciples may know, ‘Due to our sinful activities
Srila Prabhupada also says in a letter “He is not a liberated person. He cannot initiate one
in Krishna Consciousness. It requires special benediction from higher authorities.” (Letter
4.6) Who are the higher authorities? Guru and Krishna. “Self-appointed man cannot be
guru. He must be authorized by the bona fide guru, then he is guru. He must be authorized
by a superior, not be self-made.” (Lecture 10.31.72) “Nobody can become guru unless he
carries the order of the Supreme.”(Lecture 7.12.75)
Some say that a guru may fall down because he takes the disciple’s karma. But Srila
Prabhupada explains the fall downs of such “gurus” differently: “If one follows the order of
his guru, there’s no question of falling down. As soon as a foolish disciple tries to overtake
his guru and becomes anxious to occupy his post, then he immediately falls down.” (SB
5.12.14) and, “A bona fide guru will never become fallen.” (Nectar of Devotion). And,
“The contamination of material qualities can’t even touch them.” And, “There is no
possibility that a first class devotee will fall down even though he may be mixing with non-
devotees to preach.” (CC Madhya 22.71) And, “One shouldn’t imitate the behavior of the
uttama-adhikari for he will eventually become degraded.” (Upadesamrita 5)
One shouldn’t hope nor pretend that he can somehow of other eradicate the sins of
another conditioned soul when he is not yet pure himself.
Srila Narayana Maharaja also says that the karma is burned by the guru’s powerful
mercy and by the Holy Name.
Giving of Suddha-Nama
“Chanting doesn’t depend on initiation.” “One doesn’t have to undergo initiation, one has
simply to vibrate the Holy name.” These quotes from the Caitanya Caritamrta seem to
indicate that the personal level of the guru has no bearing on the mantra he gives. But
other quotes give further indications that this is not the case at all. The famous quote:
“sampradaya vihina ye...” clearly indicates that the mantra’s potency does have
something to do with the one who gives it. But the sahajiyas, or pseudo devotees, think
The point is that the Holy Name can take one up to at most liberation without
initiation, but it will not give prema. When it is said that by chanting once Hare
Krishna one can go back to Godhead, that refers to pure chanting. In Harinama-
Cintamani it is explained that namaparadha chanting will give dharma, religiosity; artha,
material wealth; and kama, sense pleasure. Namabhasa chanting will give mukti,
liberation from bondage, which means that it creates a platform for achieving
liberation, as in the case of Ajamila, but only Suddha-Nama will deliver prema, love,
the ultimate goal.
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu prays in his Siksastakam: “Oh, my Lord, You have made
approach to You easy through Your Holy Name.” That approach can be bridged only
through His pure and favored representative. So accordingly, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta
Sarasvati writes: “One must take shelter at the feet of a spiritual guide who has realized and
does see the form (Svarupa) of the Name. The mere letters forming the Name, namaksara,
may be had at any place and from anybody, but the profound and unknown Truth behind
those letters can only be exposed by the grace of a true guru, a pure devotee of Krishna. Only
such a guru’s grace can protect from the ten offenses, carry across from the early twilight of
Nama, namabhasa, to the pure light of Nama.” (Nama-Bhajan)
“Otherwise, simply the alphabets are coming out, but that’s not the Name: namaksara
bahir haya nama nahi haya.” (Conversation 2.25.77) Srila Prabhupada explains: “This
chanting, don’t make it cheap. It has got a science.... In the beginning you may be very
liberal, and I have done it. The thing is that some way or other if you’re near the fire you’ll
get some heat, but there is a process how to take heat. That you cannot reject: ‘Because I’m
getting little heat, it is sufficient.’ That is sahajiya.... And if it is done by a pure Vaisnava,
then they get the full benefit.” (Conversation 2.25.77) and, “The mantra must be received
through the proper channel otherwise it will not act.” (Letters Book, p 1)
The pure Name is the asset, the property of the pure Vaisnava guru only: The Holy
Name proper comes only through the agent authorized by the Absolute. From that
merciful saint’s heart it enters the ear, then comes to the heart. From the heart, after
proper cultivation of devotional sentiment under that saint’s guidance, with his blessings
it will appear on the tongue. The tongue cannot produce the Name (atah sri krishna
nama adi...), it comes itself from the heart (svayam eva sphuraty adah). The mantra
chanted with namaparadhas is not Krishna.
So, a guru who has not yet himself surpassed the level of namabhasa cannot give more
than mukti, what to speak of one who has not yet freed himself from namaparadhas.
Since the Holy Name can take one up to mukti without initiation, the question can be
raised: “Why should one accept initiation from one who cannot give you more anyway?”
Indeed, one should not give diksa but only siksa until one meets the standard. If the
prospective disciple has not met yet anyone who is fit, then he should wait.
Identification with the body and mind slackens at nistha, and real attraction to Krishna
begins. Nistha is the end of kanistha and the beginning of madhyama. They border on
each other, they overlap. So, nistha is clearly the barely minimum stage to initiate
At nistha, the stage of firm faith, there is no more oscillation of the mind, aviksepa-
satatyam, and pure nama-bhajan begins. Suddha-sattva begins to develop at nistha. One
cannot transmit Suddha-Nama if he doesn’t have the qualification (adhikara) to be a
guru. How can the Pure be received through the impure? The guru must be factually
non-different from Krishna. He must factually be guru. The disciple accepts the guru as
good as God, so the guru must be as good as God. Remember: “The chanting, however,
must be heard from the lips of a pure devotee of the Lord....” “Everyone should be given a
chance to hear the name chanted by a pure Vaisnava.” (CC Madhya 22.105) “Following in
the footsteps of liberated souls who are able to vibrate real transcendental sound can lead one
to the highest stage of devotion.” (CC Adi 2.117)
If one claims he can reach Srila Prabhupada, be with him and bring him one’s own
disciples, then that means he is able to enter in Krishna’s entourage, where Srila
Prabhupada is. When he was asked if one could associate with him after his physical
departure, Srila Prabhupada said that he would always be with us in his books, in his
vani. This is true, and every disciple has a privileged access to his guru, but Prabhupada
also answered, “Yes, if you’re very pure.” One shouldn’t misunderstand statements like, “If
one chants his rounds and follows the four regulative principles, he is guaranteed to make it
back to Godhead”, and assume he can make similar statements to his disciples without
deeper consideration. Yes, normally, if one practices faithfully there is a great chance
Whatever the acaryas and the sastras teach has to be understood in truth (tattva). But
neophyte devotees mostly only hover on the intellectual or mental plane, (apara-vicara).
lt is said that Lord Balarama’s plow is guru-vakya, the guru’s instructions, to cultivate
the barren field of the heart. Balarama, or Lord Nityananda, is the principle of guru;
the Gurudeva is the incarnation of Nityananda Rama’s mercy potency, so one must be a
qualified empowered representative of the Lord to fulfill that role, and be able to
cultivate the disciple’s heart and make it fertile for bhakti and real attraction to Krishna
to be planted and cultivated. One must oneself have that real attraction, ruci, to
transmit it. Before attraction, karsana, which is the root of the name Krishna, there
must be cultivation, akarsana.
According to Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, “If the guru is not deeply versed in
the sastras and is insufficiently skilled in explaining their inner meaning (tattva-vicara),
the doubts of the disciple will not be dissipated. The disciple will thus become dejected
and suffer assuredly a loss of faith. If the guru is not capable of direct spiritual
perception (aparoksa-anubhava), whatever mercy he bestows will not properly fructify”
(Commentary on the same verse, SB 11.3.21) Doubts are compared to demons in the
Gita, and Arjuna asked Krishna to kill these demon-like doubts. So one must be an
authorized representative of Krishna to do so.
A kanistha-adhikari may also accept disciples, but if it is said about the madhvam-
adhikari’s disciples that they cannot progress well due to insufficient guidance, then
what can be said about a kanistha guru’s disciples? Because Prabhupada gave so many
warnings, when we read in the Upadesamrita, purport to verse 5, that a kanistha may
also accept disciples, it can be understood that it indicates mostly siksa and not diksa.
That doesn’t mean that just to be able to continue a mission, gurus can be artificially
fabricated if we don’t have qualified ones, neither that we have to manufacture a new
philosophy.
A madhyma-adhikari can give the seed of bhakti; a kanistha-adhikari can only give
komala sraddha, very weak faith. Krishna se tomara krishna dite para, tomara sakati ache:
Because the guru does not have Krishna yet, the disciple should know that he does not
have the power to give Him. Such a guru should mercifully encourage his disciples to
look for a self-realized siksa-guru, thus giving them a chance to receive what they are
entitled to as members of this sampradaya. “A spiritual master unable to take his disciples
back to Godhead should responsibly advise them to take shelter under someone who can.
Actually, Srila Prabhupada advises that a person unable to take his disciples back home not
act as a guru.” (GBC “Guru-Ashraya” Paper) And, “According to sastra, the duty of the
guru is to take the disciple back to Godhead. If he is unable to do so, he shouldn’t be a
guru.” (SB.5.5.18)
Srila Prabhupada writes: “If one is not factually detached from material attachment but still
proclaims himself advanced in devotional service, he is cheating. No one will be happy to see
such behavior.” (CC Antya) One may think that it is his duty to initiate, that it is a risk
to be taken on behalf of Srila Prabhupada, one’s Society and Krishna, but “no-man is
an island.” One senior member taking a risk affects not only himself and his disciples
but the whole Society and the world, for which Prabhupada wanted to set a perfect
example. He was very concerned about that. The guru must give Krishna. The prema-
bhakti sutra (rope of pure love) is tied at Krishna’s lotus feet and handed over to the
disciple by the sad-guru. Unless one can hand it over, he should connect his disciples
with someone who can. One may argue that the above statements are not practical but
actually one must accept with full faith all that Srila Prabhupada taught, even if one
can’t figure out how it will be “practically” effected.
To refrain from initiating and to concentrate on training one’s disciples, which in the
case of a less qualified guru may mean to send them to a more advanced siksa-guru for
training, doesn’t diminish one’s position. It is actually adding to one’s glorious position
as a preacher to display such humility. In our Vaisnava disciplic line, we worship
humility, not pride.
Should every guru be worshipped by the singing of the Gurvastakam prayers? Faith
and worship are given according to the degree of worthiness of the recipient, not
according to ritualistic tradition. One may come up with so many pragmatic
arguments, but we shouldn’t adjust the philosophy. Nothing should take precedence
over the pure teachings of the Acaryas. Prabhupada’s books all say the same thing
about the qualifications of a bona fide guru. If one is properly educated and has
already taken initiation, there’s no reason to panic if there something he sees in his
guru which is not supposed to be there. It is not that in the name of the disciple’s
welfare he should be trained to see someone as absolute who is not on that
platform. Srila Prabhupada always spoke against blind faith. Don’t we say that
religion without philosophy is sentimental or fanatical? So, if one sees things in the
guru that he thinks are not supposed to be there, he is entitled to approach him,
with great humility, and express his heart, his doubts, and even, if necessary, ask his
permission to approach someone more advanced for siksa. There is no question
traditionally of rejecting a guru for a lack of knowledge or spiritual advancement.
The Vaisnava process is to approach a siksa-guru. Rejection is only applicable in
cases such as a fall down, or one’s guide being envious of higher Vaisnavas. If one
has been educated and warned then if, for instance, the so-called “guru” falls down,
the trauma is minimized. The disciple can reason: “I have to admit that when I
accepted him as guru I was a young fool, and I couldn’t properly distinguish. I also have
to admit that there’s no such thing as spiritual injustice. Somehow my karma, or lack of
sincerity, seriousness or sukrti has earned me this; now let me sincerely pray to the Lord
for sending me his true representative.”
It’s not so much a question of pointing out to the devotees who the qualified gurus
are, as it is of teaching what the sastras and Srila Prabhupada said are the
qualifications. Properly knowledgeable devotees will be able to make wise choices
and will less run the risk of making a mistake. A bona fide guru is not some cheap
commodity. How many were there during Srila Prabhupada’s time? A qualified
guru is one who is free from anarthas, self-realized, and able to take his disciples
back to Godhead. The term “bona fide guru” shouldn’t be misunderstood. The
spiritual master must be self-realized according to sastra. Unless one is at least fully
established on the platform of nistha he is not really a guru in the strict sense of the
term. He cannot and should not be seen as saksad-hari. And nistha, which many
incorrectly assume is the position of the rank-and-file fixed-up preacher, is not
cheap, if one considers that it is above the anartha-nivritti stage and if one studies
these anarthas in depth. It is by the Lord’s grace that one gets a bona fide guru. A
guru is an absolute necessity. He must be a pure, liberated devotee. Krishna will
make an arrangement in due time for the meeting of such a guru if one is very
One should also know that when many people speak of guru, they don’t know or
consider what is guru-tattva, and that there are spiritual masters on different levels.
What applies to a self-realized maha-bhagavat doesn’t necessarily apply to any
diksa-guru. On the other hand, we have to promote the faith if the guru is truly
qualified, not suppress it. Some disciples may become overzealous, but that can be
tolerated (mat guru, sei jagat guru: the famous disciples’ complex). Every disciple
thinks his guru is best and naturally tends to glorify him. It is up to the guru himself
to correct his disciples if in the name of glorifying their guru they offend others.
Initiation is not a light thing: There is no rush. Real initiation is in the heart, it’s not
just the formal yajna. First initiation in the Gaudiya Math is not taken as diksa per
se. It is considered an encouragement, an admission into the school. Real diksa is
considered initiation through gayatri mantras. Srila Prabhupada waited for eleven
years. The Hari-Bhakti-Vilasa recommends mutual study between guru and
aspiring sisya. Jiva Goswami advises not to accept a guru out of customary
convention. One should wait until he is 100% convinced, with full faith that the
guru is a pure representative of God who can deliver all the transcendental
necessities. If you don’t have such faith, don’t take initiation. Wait and watch. As
advised in the purport to Nectar of Instruction verse 5, don’t settle for less than the
best. Don’t follow the flock of sheep logic. By sastric knowledge one can have an
idea of who is qualified, but a new devotee has little such knowledge, so he must
wait and develop some knowledge and experience, not act out of blind faith or
sentiment and anxiety to have a name and be like the rest of his peers. Great care
and caution should be exercised. All the signs of a fully qualified guru should be
observed scrutinizingly. Great precaution should be taken before accepting
someone as guru. There are many sincere, dedicated preachers, but those qualities
don’t automatically qualify them as saksad-hari. If one takes premature vows, there
is the risk of loss of faith and of committing offenses. It’s reasonable to wait and be
somewhat mature before pronouncing vows that many have proved unable to
follow.
Faith here doesn’t mean belief. It is defined as the firm conviction that Krishna-
bhakti will fulfill all duties, needs and desires. Due to this conviction being there but
not absolute a kanistha-adhikari is advised not to become a diksa-guru lest he
develops faith in Maya’s subtle proposals of happiness through having followers.
Firm faith, or paramarthika sraddha, can only come after anarthas are gone, which
means on the nistha stage. Until nistha, one is a kanistha. Under the modes of
nature one identifies with the body and wants to enjoy what actually belongs to
Krishna. Unless one is liberated from the three gunas he is bound to be envious,
even if slightly so. Therefore, one shouldn’t become a guru unless one is liberated,
otherwise one will manifest this envy in the form of unconsciously identifying with
his position as spiritual guide and wanting to enjoy the position. Consequently he
will be somewhat attached to pratistha and want to enjoy the fame belonging to
Krishna or His bona fide representative. Attracted to name and fame, he will
assume the others are as well (atmavan many ate jagaf) and thus compete and risk
offending much more qualified Vaisnavas.
One symptom of a bona fide spiritual master is that he can destroy all your doubts.
One should learn what is a guru and simultaneously pray to Krishna to send His
representative. He may start by testing your determination and not send you one
right away. Then he may also test your depth of desire by sending you an ordinary
kind of guru. If you accept the first one without discrimination he may leave things
there. But if you cry: “Oh, no, Krishna, I want a real one, not just a good fixed-up
devotee. I want an ocean of mercy, a kalpa-vriksa, one like it says in the books!”, then
Krishna will send you a maha-bhagavata who is totally qualified, free from envy and
pratistha and who can deliver you the transcendental necessities. An uninitiated
devotee should wait until his faith is 100%. The newcomers or those in need of re-
initiation should not rush before accepting anyone as sad-guru, but build their faith.
This is not a light thing that one can rush, thinking he has a yardstick to measure
who is guru? “The current of thoughts prevalent in this world cannot assail Sri
Gurudeva, who is too heavy for them. He has been able to keep them at a distance of
innumerable crores of miles. He is guru, or the heaviest object, because his position is not
shifting.” (Srila Sarasvati Thakura)
“Before the student accepts a guru he should examine him for one year. Without
examination, the teacher-student relationship is only a disturbance.... The seriously
inquisitive student must approach a guru who has attained shelter and faith in the
Vedas and God, and surrender to him: tasmad gurum prapadyeta.” (PancaSamskara,
Bhaktivinoda Thakura) One should not take diksa unless he has complete faith that
his guru is able to take him to Krishna, that he has the qualifications required of a
sad-guru. Until that faith is there, he should take siksa, study Prabhupada’s books
and guru-tattva, and not sentimentally think that whatever he reads about the guru
automatically applies to his guru or just any guru. At the same time, as mentioned
above, one should be fully dependent upon Krishna to inspire him, not thinking
that by one’s own power one will recognize Sri Guru.
One should beg to receive service from the guru that will please Krishna. Service is
for the master’s pleasure, not the servant’s. Of course, if the master is pleased, the
servant will be pleased. One must not lack the faith that one’s best interest is
represented in his master. The servant who wants only his own happiness is not
crying for service. He qualifies himself for being cheated. It is not enough to have a
real guru. One must be a real disciple: Sad-guru, sad-sisya. One should be ready to
undergo all tribulations, to pass the tests, to prove that he is cured of the disease of
selfish enjoyment, then Krishna will hear his prayers and that disciple will receive
mercy.
So, guru anugati bhajan. One cannot render service whimsically. It has to be done
under the guru’s direction. One should develop a bond of strong affection for the
spiritual master. Krishna says that he is most pleased with one who is always
engaged in trying to serve his guru with affection and love. A real disciple thinks
that Krishna has mercifully placed him in the hands of His dear servant, who knows
what is best for him, who cares even more than himself about his real welfare. He
sees everything as paraphernalia for the service of guru and Krishna: “Everything is
my guru’s, Krishna’s. It is meant for their service, not mine, I should not develop lust
and greed for it.” He should think that he has no better friend in this world than his
guru. “I am his servant, He is my master. He is my dearmost friend, parent, relative. He
is my father, he is my mother. He is Krishna’s dear friend, he must be served life after
life.” Such a disciple can understand all tattvas, he gets all suspiciousness, all mercy,
by gradual installments up to final promotion to the highest perfection of love of
God. The lotus feet of a real sadhu-quru, a true representative of Krishna should be
served in this way. The dust of such a guru’s feet is so powerful that it goes up to the
spiritual world. Therefore we pray that we may become a speck of dust at the lotus
feet of a pure Vaisnava. You cannot be admitted in the school of Hari-bhajan,
devotional service to Krishna, if you don’t develop the qualities of the tmad api
sunicena verse. Mahaprabhu has given this formula. You will not translate diksa into
a life of bhajan without these qualities.
“The spiritual master appears in two plenary parts, called the diksa-guru and the
siksa-guru. They are identical because both of them are phenomenal manifestations
of the Absolute Truth.... Anyone who gives instructions based on the sastras is
And in the opening verses of his Kalyana Kalpataru, Srila Thakura Bhaktivinoda writes:
“The diksa-guru shows his causeless mercy by giving his disciples instructions in
chanting Harinama. By spiritual instructions he points the disciples in the direction
of the truths pertaining to Krishna. But I consider the numerous siksa gurus to be
more important, for they bestow mercy unlimitedly by training the neophytes in all
the essential aspects of practical sadhana bhakti.”
“After hearing about the Lord one may desire to serve Him. He who teaches how to
render that service, bhajan, is the siksa-guru.”
Prabhupada mentions that the siksa-guru often becomes the diksa-guru. He also
explains that there is no limit to the number of siksa-gurus one can accept. Since all
devotees, including gurus are disciples, siksa-guru-tattva is most relevant for all. Our
great Acaryas all approached siksa-gurus. “Even when one’s dormant love for Krishna
awakens, association with advanced devotees is still most essential.” (CC Madhya 22.83)
Association with advanced devotees mean to take siksa from them.
The idea that one is maybe not getting from his “officially approved” guru everything
one should get should be considered, as well as the obvious fact that there are gurus on
very different levels. The devotees will start to scrutinizingly study the qualifications of
a sad-guru and understand that ISKCON diksa-gurus are really nothing more than
good preachers, not qualified diksa-gurus, and that one needs to look elsewhere.
Covert rittvik-vada includes the idea that since Srila Prabhupada is the Founder-Acarya
of ISKCON, every member should focus on developing his relationship with
Prabhupada, and that whatever a diksa-guru cannot give to his disciples will come
magically from Prabhupada. But consider the following: Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is the
Founder-Acarya of the Gaudiya-Math. Did Prabhupada ever say that his god brothers
failed to connect their own disciples to the Founder-Acarya? Isn’t the Society called
ISKCON and not Gaudiya Math simply because of the narrow vision (at least at one
time) of some of Prabhupada’s godbrothers? Does the fact that Prabhupada registered
ISKCON as a separate society and not as a branch of the Gaudiya Math make it a new
sampradaya? Srila Prabhupada has never said anywhere that the guru’s duty is to connect
his disciples to his own guru. The main objective of a disciple of a genuinely qualified
guru is to develop devotion to his guru and through him to Krishna. That everything
goes through the parampara is a technicality. It’s not the disciple’s meditation. One
should learn to identify rittvik-vada wherever it appears, even in well-meaning
devotional sentiment towards Prabhupada.
But doesn’t Narottama das Thakura sing about Rupa Goswami? It can be understood
that Narottama das doesn’t approach Rupa Goswami as an ordinary siksa-guru. He
addresses him as Sri Rupa Manjari. That means he approaches him as the Rasa-Acarya
allowing one to enter the manjari-bhava of madhurya-rasa. One should also consider
the most exalted level of Narottama das Thakura.
For instance: “The devotee no longer has the opportunity to inquire from the spiritual
master or to receive from him guidance, correction and confirmation in his spiritual life.” It
speaks there of one whose “guru” fell down, but if you think about it, this point could
also be applied to Prabhupada’s disciples who can still of course receive guidance, but
not as easily correction and confirmation directly from His Divine Grace. Accordingly,
we find the following in the Guru-Ashraya Isthagosthi published in ISKCON Journal
#2: HH Jayadvaita Maharaja says, “It’s very painful to see in many places in our society so
many people who are like ghosts, who have no faith in anyone except themselves.’’ One
devotee comments on this statement by saying: “I don’t see that this is a problem only
among those initiated by fallen gurus.” Jayadvaita Maharaja, agreeing, answers, “Yes, this
is the problem every one of us has to deal with, and the way we’re trained to overcome this
problem is to serve the servant of the servant.” Then another prabhu quite accurately
remarks: “The instruction of guru-ashraya is needed not only by these devotees [who lost
their master] but by disciples of Prabhupada who may say thev have Prabhupada but don’t
have Prabhupada.... Everyone has to look for this shelter, otherwise people develop the
attitude that ‘I don’t need it.” This again is approved by HH Jayadvaita Swami, “That’s
really the essence of the whole thing.” Then HH Trivikrama Maharaja says in the same
Isthagosthi, “Srila Prabhupada said that just reading the Bhagavatam is not enough, even
with his purports, because who will explain what Srila Prabhupada means? I may say
what he said in the purport and you may say ‘No, no, Srila Prabhupada meant this.’” And
in his paper “Books are the basis but they are not the guru”, Maharaja quotes the writer
William Blake: “Both you and I read the Bible day and night, but you read black and I read
white.” The need for further guidance is confirmed by the Caitanya Caritamrta Antya
7.53, that Maharaja also quotes in his paper “If one wants to learn the meaning of Srimad
Bhagavatam, one must take lessons from a realized soul. One shouldn’t proudly think that
one can understand transcendental loving service simply by reading books. One must become
the servant of a Vaisnava.”
When one’s guru leaves, preferably one will inquire from an advanced Vaisnava siksa-
guru what Krishna specifically wants from him. Even if one has received precise direct
instructions from his guru, he can certainly benefit from further guidance. We have to
be careful of pride and realize that we are working on our master’s capital, his extended
grant, and we have nothing we can call ours (Tomara karuna-sara). And the Eleventh
Canto of the Bhagavatam confirms, ”na hy ekasmad guror jnanam su-sthiram yat:
Certainly not from one single master can one get complete knowledge.” It is not that one
master cannot give everything, but that one has to receive it from different perspective
viewpoints.
One should be humble enough to admit that he needs to approach a tattva-vit sadhu
who will reveal to him something that his own reading of all sastras won’t give him.
Such association is glorified through all sastras: mahatpada rajobhisekam. “To learn the
transcendental science it is imperative that one always seek the company of saints and sages
who are able to impart lessons of transcendental knowledge. The potent words of such
realized souls penetrate the heart.”(CC Adi 1.59)
Our whole Vaisnava tradition rests on this principle: Suddha-bhakta carana renu bhajana
anukula. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati said: “It is necessary to have the constant help of
a spiritual teacher to show us the way. It is necessary to be constantly advised regarding the
method of seeking the protection of the lotus feet of Sri Gurudeva... If the spiritual teacher
doesn’t constantly teach us all these matters, we’re bound to lose in no time even the treasure
that we may have received.” That clearly refers to a siksa-guru.
Only such a sadhu can make Krishna appear, as Krishna has no other business than to
fulfill his devotee’s desires. Then tattva-jnana will be revealed. Tattva-jnana doesn’t
mean general knowledge of our Vaisnava philosophy. It is a question of revelation.
Who can claim that by mere reading of books one can understand? Reading doesn’t
preclude the need for a siksa-guru who will help one to nurture one’s creeper of
devotion up to complete blossoming and production of the coveted fruit of love of
God. One can only benefit from that connection. And even if one is in illusion and
Srila Prabhupada’s vani, instructions, are available through his books, tapes, etc. This
however is in a passive sense. One can pray to Srila Prabhupada and may receive some
answer from his books or from the Supersoul. There is indeed a great correlation
between the guru and the Supersoul. Consider however that it can be called highly
subjective. One may misunderstand, so a confirmation is welcome. Therefore, “Since
one cannot visually experience the presence of the Supersoul, He appears before us as a
liberated devotee.” (CC Adi 1.58) The “passive” siksa-guru, the book, may help to
remind you of the reality of Prabhupada’s teachings, but if you misunderstand, or read
only on the surface (apara-vicara), the book will not become alive and come out to
speak to you to remove your misconception or reveal its inner meaning (tattva-vicara).
Kaviraja Goswami writes in the explanation of the atmarama verse that there are bhinna
artha, different meanings, ”There are gross meanings and subtle meanings, sthule and
suksme.”(CC Madhya 24.284). Also, “Srimad Bhagavatam is as good as Krishna. In each
and every verse and syllable there are various meanings.”(CC Madhya 24.318)
Therefore, in all Prabhupada’s books one finds the advice to associate with a living saint.
A living siksa-guru will point out and explain your misunderstandings. Sadhu and sastra
are necessary, but living sadhu, (the embodied scripture), is the principal. Of course,
without the embodied scripture, the bhagavata-bhakta, the “passive” scripture, the
bhagavata-sastra, is there to give you help. But of the two, more importance has been
ascribed to the sadhu. Prabhupada writes, “In this age, hearing is more important than
thinking, because one’s thinking may be disturbed by mental agitation, but if one
concentrates on hearing, he’ll be forced to associate with the sound vibration of Krishna.”
(SB 3.35.24)
Srila Prabhupada taught and groomed his disciples as much as he could and left it to
their sincerity to approach another embodied form of Sri Guru, in addition to his
loving care and blessings and availability through prayer, to be able to dive deeper into
his teachings and thereby keep on progressing on the path towards the ultimate goal.
He asked his friend and siksa-disciple Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja to help them,
us. His books are there, and one can always pray to him, but, as the example of the fire
given before, “Don’t make it cheap. It has got a science. ‘Because I’m getting a little heat, it’s
sufficient’. That is sahajiya.”
Sahajiya doesn’t mean automatically a pretender faking ecstasy. Sahaja means “easy”. It
refers to the tendency to complacently think one has it made, has no need to cultivate
laulyam, hankering for more. One should not develop the mentality that he is saved
because he is Prabhupada’s disciple or he is in ISKCON, or he’s doing so much service,
so much preaching. Prabhupada said that one should always teach but also always learn,
in a parallel process. So, more will be supplied to one who is crying for it, realizing he
needs all the help he can grab for, and one way help comes is by the agency of a siksa-
guru. And if one can approach a liberated siksa-guru, that’s all the best of course. “A
third-class devotee, therefore, has to receive the instructions of devotional service from the
authoritative sources of Bhagavata. The number one Bhagavata is the established
personality of devotee, and the other Bhagavatam is the message of Godhead. The third-
A little above, I have quoted Srila Prabhupada saying in a purport to the CC, Adi-lila,
that “one should know the siksa-guru as the personality of Krishna”. This obviously refers
to a liberated pure devotee.
Illusions cultivated and reinforced by the passing of time are hard to give up. Habit is a
second nature. So this idea of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples needing to take shelter of a
siksa-guru may make one feel uneasy and may be very difficult for many to accept,
especially if they had a lot of direct association with His Divine Grace. The reasons for
this are manifold: First, often when we think of siksa-guru we think of it in the casual
meaning of the term. We may thoughtlessly assume it is needed for Srila Prabhupada’s
grand-disciples who lost their “guru” before they find another one, or perhaps for
disciples of less-advanced gurus, or exceptionally for Prabhupada’s disciples who had
little or no contact with His Divine Grace. Second, we usually think that it means
accepting Srila Prabhupada himself as siksa-guru. Third, let’s face it, siksa-guru tattva is
not a well known nor well-researched topic. Here I am sharing the research I have made
as well as my understanding and realizations based on the fact that I happen to have had
the good fortune to have accepted saints as siksa-gurus for the last 24 years, and thus
have had some direct experience.
“We can’t understand the mysteries of the Lord by our mundane endeavors. They
are only revealed by His grace to the proper devotees. These mysteries are gradually
disclosed to the various grades of devotees in proportion to the gradual development
of their service attitude.” (CC Adi 1.52)
Humility is essential:
“Nistha, steady progression in devotional service, can be attained only in the association of
pure devotees.” (Nectar of Devotion p141) “Asakti can be invoked by association of pure
devotees.” (Nectar of Devotion p141) and, “Bhava is achieved by association of pure
devotees.” (Nectar of Devotion p132)
One should always consider and understand that he is in need of help. If someone
thinks he doesn’t need help from a superior living Vaisnava, he is going against the very
spirit of Vaisnavism. It shows that he may know the general philosophy of atma-jnana,
but he has not really entered the realm of Vaisnavism per se. No matter how much an
intellectual genius one may be, no matter how much an expert manager or leader of
men, the essential truths or tattvas of Vaisnavism can only be learned and realized by
humbly approaching a Vaisnava sadhu for guidance and deeper training. If one has
So, one should think about it and ask himself: “Who do you accept as a spiritual authority
in your life that you can turn to for spiritual instruction or at least confirmation of your
understanding?” That’s what siksa-guru is all about. One may say that he is going to his
god brothers, but one has to consider the level of whom he approaches. One may also
say that he is getting or will get instruction directly from Prabhupada or the Supersoul
within his heart, but the acaryas have said that only after one reaches the platform of
full nistha can one take direction from the caitya-guru, and even on that platform one
still needs to get confirmation from a realized soul. There are so many examples of
most exalted Vaisnava acaryas who repeatedly sought confirmation from other such
great personalities. They were never so proud that they relied only on their own spiritual
abilities. Even Bhakti-sakti-avesa Avatar Srila Prabhupada referred to his siksa-gurus.
This is acknowledged by all the Acaryas. In Caitanya Caritamrta, Antya 5.135, one
reads the injunction, “Yaha bhagavata-pada vaisnavera sthane: Approach a pure Vaisnava
and learn the Bhagavata-tattva from him.” Srila Prabhupada repeatedly stresses the
constant need for association with a pure living sadhu. One therefore must at all costs
find a valid and holy Vaisnava, confirm with him one’s understanding, and learn from
him.
Without Nitai’s mercy one cannot give up material enjoyment, gross or subtle. So we
need his mercy, a strong kick of Nitai through the pure sadhu, his authorized
representative. Without that merciful kick one is not really receiving mercy. He’ll only
get the kicks of Maha-Mava. Only the association of a pure sadhu can give prema. We
require this at every moment. We should search in our heart for that desire and nourish
it. Find a person bhagavata, cry to find one. A kanistha or madhyam guru shouldn’t be
This is a very deep topic. It was just touched earlier when it was mentioned that a new
devotee shouldn’t think that he can recognize Sri Guru. In the temple we come to
present ourselves before the Deities. We are praying to be bathed in their merciful
glance. We are begging them to reveal Themselves. Nayana patha gami bhava tume.
Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja explained that just as Krishna is Adhoksaja, beyond the
range of sense perception, similarly Sri Guru. One cannot see the guru. If one tries to
see him with his defective senses then he’ll be cheated. When one thinks that he is the
seer, then he commits a mistake. One is not the seer, he is the seen, just the opposite
thing. The sadhu-guru is the seer. Everyone is boasting of his eyes, but what has he
seen? When one thinks that he is the seer and that he will see, it means he wants to
measure the guru through his defective senses. So how can he be his guru? With lips
only one says he is seeing him as guru, but he hasn’t seen him really, and not accepted
him really as guru.
In a train, for instance, we see the trees running very fast backwards, and we are
attached to our vision. “Seeing is believing.” Trees are standing still, but we see them
running backwards, aren’t we? But we’re not prepared to admit that we have defective
vision, that we are blind. When one tries to see guru with these eyes, one will be
cheated. Sri Guru is the seer, not us. We are to be seen, but we do the opposite. This is
the conditioned nature. That defect lies with us, therefore by lips only we accept him as
guru, but we haven’t really accepted him, and we have never seen him, and we cannot
see the guru with this type of vision. How can we see the guru? If the guru will cast his
It is said that guru has these two things, vancana and kripa, cheating and mercy. One
who has kapatya, duplicity, outwardly poses as a great servitor of his guru, but he is
pretending, he’s serving himself, forwarding his own interest in the name of guru-seva,
not serving the guru. Duplicity is gradually removed by hearing, by striving to hear with
a simple heart. Our heart is like a stone. It needs the incessant rain of the mercy of a
Vaisnava sadhu. One must consciously try to uproot that duplicity from the heart,
otherwise one cannot hear, it doesn’t go down to the heart, only stays on the intellectual
or mental platform. So,one’s service is not bhakti, it is bhakti-unmukhi-sukriti. So it
may take many lives. Maharaja Bharata took three lives, and Prabhupada mentions that
part of the reason why is that he didn’t accept a siksa-guru. “Despite a very rigid life of
devotional service, Bharata Maharaja didn’t consult a spiritual master. He became overly
attached to the deer: Consequently he fell down.” (SB 5.12.14)
Lack of chastity?
The argument often given is that one is unchaste to one’s diksa-guru if one accepts
another siksa-guru. But where is this stated in sastra? It is said that one can only have
one diksa-guru, but unlimited siksa-gurus. We are warned not to see the guru in mortal
relativity (na mrityu buddha, gurusu nara matir). Again, one should deeply ponder on
guru-tattva. What is guru? The flesh and bone? So, if one deepens his understanding
and appreciation of what Sri Guru is, of what his Gurudeva gave him, won’t the
Gurudeva be satisfied? Where is the harm? Are you betraying your guru by approaching
Sri Guru in another form?
When one’s guru departs from this world, if one is not yet a paramahamsa ready to
initiate disciples or to give siksa to less advanced god brothers, he should pray to his
One should not just approach a sadhu for jnana, specific knowledge, but approach him
in the prescribed way: pranipat, pariprasna, and seva, and accept his discipline if one
wants at all to progress further. The search for knowledge means that one, albeit
unconsciously, thinks that Krishna is not unlimited and can be captured through
finding out everything about Him. One should approach the siksa-guru in search of
Krishna, not for knowledge of Krishna.
When Arjuna became despondent he was eager to receive enlightenment. He begged at
Krishna’s feet to stop the friendly talking and to accept him as sisya. Then Krishna
started his upadesh. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati wrote: “The real sadhu makes us
speak out what we keep concealed in our hearts. He then applies the knife. The sensuous
desires of men are like goats. The sadhu stands with the sacrificial knife in the form of
unpleasant language.... The only duty of the sadhus is to cut away all the accumulated
wicked propensities of every individual. This alone is the causeless natural desire of all the
sadhus.”
The problem is that many may have installed themselves in some kind of Krishna
consciousness with greater or lesser degrees of accommodation with maya, grossly or
subtly, a fact one may not easily admit, and find very unpalatable the idea of
undergoing further training. That is why Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura has insisted, sada-
sisya-taki, takiya sarvada, and guru anugati bhajan: One should always consider himself a
student, and service should always be under a guru’s guidance (whether diksa or siksa-
guru). Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati called himself a monitor, the leader of the
students. One should always consider himself a disciple in discipleship under a senior
Vaisnaya. Srila Gaura Kishora das Babaji has explained the need for discipleship as
follows:
“Those sadhus who speak sharp words to drive away the witch of illusory energy
are actually the only real devotees of Krishna and friends of the ‘living entities.... If
you want to perform devotional service properly, then you must accept the harsh
language of the sadhu as the medicine by which Maya can be given up. By this one
can obtain the necessary spiritual advancement to successfully chant the Holy
Name.”
If, in spite of lip service to trinad api sunicena and na dhanam na janam, one is too proud
and thinks that one doesn’t need any help, that one had so much personal association
and training with the Gurudeva, and that one is an advanced devotee, one may advance
in jnana and expertise, but one’s spiritual progress is checked. One stagnates. One can
maintain a certain level due to sadhana and preaching activities and gain some
recognition, but without the association of an uttama-adhikari Vaisnava, one cannot
make much further progress. “The second class devotee can gradually become a first class
The need for further training even of madhyam adhikaris is expressed by Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati: “It is the duty of the madhyam adhikari to extend himself as
right hand of the uttama-adhikari.” (Commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam 11.2) But,
typically, the kanisthas are reluctant. “A neophyte devotee has very little taste for hearing
from the authorities... but a sincere devotee must be prepared to hear.” (SB 1.2.12). So, one
can diagnose reluctance to approach someone for siksa as a mark of the kanistha-
adhikara. Since the functional platform of preaching in our Society is the madhyam-
adhikara platform, as Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu wrote many years ago in his paper
Ending the Fratricidal War: “We have maybe too conveniently concluded on these grounds
that we are madhyam adhikaris and have complacently taken for granted that we have
attained without much effort an advanced state of Krishna Consciousness.”
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati has defined sadhu-sanga in three ways: First, sadhu-
sanga means to associate with a devotee much higher than oneself. Second, how much
higher, and in which way should one associate? He should be a pure devotee, a
mahabhagavata. One should provide him with facilities for service to the Lord, practice
under his guidance, and learn from him the inner meaning of sastra. Third, sadhu-sanga
means that one must imbibe the mood of the sadhu; that means to accept his
instructions and practice them, without adding one’s speculation, consideration, etc. to
follow as it is. The priti-laksana, loving dealings, described in Upadesamrita apply
specifically to a sadhu: offer him raw new things, and accept his prasad, reveal your
mind to him, and inquire from him how to develop yourself as he did, serve him
prasadam and honor his remnants.
Preachers should give siksa until self-realized, then only should they give diksa. The
purports following the “amara ajnaya guru hanam” verse (CC Madhya 7.130) say: “One
has to learn humility and meekness.... One shouldn’t try to be an artificially advanced
devotee.... It is best not to accept any disciples....” One can be a guru in the sense of
teaching about Krishna, and should work on qualifying himself to develop the exalted
Just as the position of diksa-guru has been misunderstood, the understanding of siksa-
guru is also muddled. It is said in CC Adi 1.47 that the diksa- and siksa-gurus are of
equal status, and that it is offensive to consider them of different importance. But there
are two kinds of siksa-gurus: liberated and not liberated. When it says that there is no
difference between them, it only makes sense if both are of the same caliber, liberated.
You cannot equate a non-liberated guru with a liberated one, a kanistha and an uttama,
just because they are both called gurus. One may object to this by the argument that
Bilvamangala Thakura paid respects to all his gurus equally, but this was because, as we
just saw, it was his diksa-guru, Somagiri, who was speaking through the mouth of
Cintamani, the first person who turned his consciousness towards Krishna. He was very
grateful to her, who, in spite of her low condition had awakened his dormant God
consciousness.
It is not that one shouldn’t give great respect to a guru even of a lesser degree. We have
written about not giving full faith, worship and surrender to an unqualified person, but
this is not to imply that there should be any lack of respect. In Vedic culture, and one
can still see this in India, the children touch the feet of their parents as one does with a
guru. The natural superiors, such as elders, parents, brahmanas, teachers, are called guru-
janas. They are always to be respected. Only if they prove unworthy can one reject them
(Gita, 1st chapter), and that usually translates by avoiding rather than disrespecting.
Srila Gaura Kishora das Babaji also said that “Krishna doesn’t happily accept the service of
those who are not attached to serving the pure Vaisnavas, however pure they may try to be
themselves.” Hari-Bhakti-Sudhodaya: “By associating with a person, one develops his
One must remember that Sri Guru is not the body of the guru. When the Bhagavatam
compares to an animal one who identifies the body with the self (sa eva gokharah), it
doesn’t refer only to one who identifies himself with his body but also to a devotee who,
because he identifies with the body, fails to recognize the Mahabhagavata Vaisnava,
thinking he also moves in a body and is therefore in the same condition of bondage.
Without falling into impersonalism and seeing the guru as just a receptacle of an
impersonal principle of descending saving grace, one should look for the embodiment
of Sri Guru, for the same current of pure Gaudiya Vaisnavism that flowed through
Srila Prabhupada (or one’s own guru). Find someone who is going to teach you
practically what it means to cry for Krishna, as Prabhupada said we should.
Mahaprabhu taught this, so find a gaura-priya-jana, one dear devotee of Mahaprabhu,
someone who will push you, as Prabhupada (or your guru) did, to the point of full
surrender.
In the person of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, we had the
opportunity to observe the above qualities. Once His Divine Grace physically departed
from this world, the question of the continuation of the parampara arose: From whom
would one receive initiation in the line of devotion he had introduced to the whole
world?
A Little History
A few months before his physical departure, on May 28, 1977, leading members of the
ISKCON Society approached Srila Prabhupada with questions, among which: “Our
next question concerns initiations in the future, particularly at that time when you are no
longer with us.” This question, if you analyze it, contains actually two questions: The
first one was: What was to be done about initiation now (that Prabhupada was
physically very ill and incapacitated to perform his regular activities) and in the near
future until he would leave the world? His Divine Grace answered that he would name
some rittviks or priests to initiate on his behalf with full discretion to decide who could
take diksa, choose the person’s spiritual name and chant on his beads, that’s to say, full
power of attorney as he had never given so far. The second question, asked in the same
sentence than the first, was also pertaining to initiation, but after Prabhupada’s
disappearance. His Divine Grace answered that one could initiate when he would
receive his order “When I order ‘you become guru’, he becomes regular guru.”
Upon studying the transcription of the entire conversation, one can see that, although
very clear, it could indeed lend itself to many possible interpretations. Unfortunately, a
wrong interpretation was unanimously accepted. Knowing the heart of his leading
disciples, who didn’t really ask for any clarification, Srila Prabhupada didn’t elaborate, as
it is said “Just as sometimes in autumn water flows down from the hills and sometimes
doesn’t, similarly, great saintly persons sometimes distribute clear knowledge and sometimes
are silent.” (SB 10.20.36) There have been different ‘original versions’ of the tape, which
is strange...Another explanation is that this so-called ‘appointment tape ‘ has been
‘doctored’, as suggested by a professional analysis of it, but I am not going that way...
The next month, June 1977, Srila Prabhupada gave the list of those who could be the
rittviks. He said that any senior sannyasi, whoever was nearest, could perform that
function. Then he gave the actual list of names. This list was based on obvious
geographical distribution, for the sake of practicality only. Srila Prabhupada also said
that if necessary others could be added to that list of rittviks. But that list was mistaken
to be not only a list of rittviks but a list of gurus as well: The eleven rittviks wrongly
assumed that they were to automatically become gurus after Srila Prabhupada’s
departure.
Bhakti Caru Swami has admitted in private that he heard Srila Prabhupada order
Tamal Krishna Goswami to make a GBC meeting and decide who would initiate after
him. As TKG didn’t obey, Prabhupada asked him if he should suggest a couple of
names, and TKG admitted then to a third party that he was afraid it wouldn’t be him
but Kirtanananda prabhu and Satsvarupa prabhu. Then Prabhupada mentioned the two
names quoted a little above. But TKG, who would later on claimed he was the only
acarya, never obeyed the order...
One party installed their “acarya” and drove out the members of the other party. That
“acarya” later fell down; the other party came back and wanted to install their “acarya”;
litigation dragged on for years; it was finally settled by civil court judgment and the two
parties shared the Maths among themselves. “Both the Bhag Bazaar party and the
Mayapura party have unlawfully usurped the missionary institution of Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati.” (Conv 30.9.69) Srila Prabhupada had narrated that story to
his disciples and he had warned not to make the same mistake in his ISKCON
movement. Unfortunately, a similar thing happened, with eleven acaryas instead of one.
Srila Prabhupada had also said upon various occasions that Srila BR Sridhara Maharaja,
for whom he had both affection and respect, was one of the leading secretaries involved
in the mistake. Not knowing how to install themselves in their new position, the eleven
‘acaryas’ went to inquire from him, the very person whom Prabhupada had specifically
warned not to take advice on this particular point, the continuation of the disciplic
succession after the disappearance of the Acarya!
There are two versions of the story. One is that the eleven told Srila Sridhara Maharaja
that Prabhupada had appointed them as acaryas. The other is that they told him that
they had been appointed as rittviks only but that he said that rittvik is almost as good as
acarya. Whatever the case may have been, Srila BR Sridhar Maharaja then advised
them that the major temples should be kept neutral as places of worship for all the
members to come together, managed by non-initiating devotees, and that the new
gurus should go and open new temples. Thus each of them would have a place where
their relationship with their disciples could go on unchallenged, in the proper mood of
holiness needed for it to develop. He gave the example of a man who gets married and
who needs at least one room for his family. As this was not at all the mood prevailing in
ISKCON that they had always known, but the mood of the Gaudiya Matha that had
practically exploded in various branches, each with its exclusive acarya, after the order of
its founder had been disobeyed, the idea, as it was presented to them didn’t appeal to
the eleven at all. They kept the concept, though, but in a completely different
dimension: They divided the world among themselves, and the one room became a big
territory, a ‘guru-zone’.
No proper focus
There had been complaints right from the beginning against the phenomenon of
successor acaryas. As other devotees were seen to be a least as advanced or more than
the selected few, there were legitimate complaints that only the eleven could be gurus,
and not just gurus, but that they had become exclusive heirs of the mission of the
common father, Srila Prabhupada. The focus was on that point, and unfortunately not
on the actual qualifications required before one can assume the weighty responsibility of
becoming the representative of God and deliver his disciples. So, more gurus were
gradually added, but the basis on which they were added was only the comparison with
other devotees already in the position of guru. And the unlawful basis on which the
original eleven were in that position was never seriously reconsidered. The dissenters
that did challenge the system were unfortunately dismissed as envious faultfinders and
ostracized. Even during the “reform” of the mid-80s, the focus was still on a
comparative basis and not on the adhikara or eligibility according to qualifications. The
“guru reform” turned out to be only concerned with managerial issues: how individual
GBC members should improve, who should be added to the body. Even though much
of the fuel for reform came from concerns that the guru system was not at all proper,
when the long anticipated 50 Man Committee met, there was no discussion of the
qualifications of guru.
In the Mahabharata, King Yudhistira was asked different questions by a Yaksa. One of
them was: “What is most amazing in this world?” To which he answered that although
one has seen so many people die before him, still he acts as if he was thinking that this
will never happen to him personally. So, how amazing it is, that although the Gaudiya
Math had tried to artificially create an acarya and Srila Prabhupada had warned against
the same thing happening in ISKCON, as soon as he disappeared the GBC Body
officially endorsed eleven devotees as acaryas! The Gaudiya Math had started with
making one “acarya” and we were “blessed” with eleven!
How amazing it is that, although Srila Prabhupada warned not to become a diksa-guru
prematurely, many devotees became diksa-gurus without any consideration of their
aptitude on the basis of sastric injunctions!
And how amazing that in spite of many “gurus” falling down, more kept on taking that
position, and others act as if they’re thinking it can’t happen to themselves!
Another question of the Yaksa was: “What is the path?” To which Yudhisthira
Maharaja gave the famous answer “Mahajano yena gatah sa panthah: The path of
dharma is to follow the Mahajanas.”
So, how amazing it is that although Srila Prabhupada Mahajana has spoken at length
and with an amazing wealth of detail on the topic of the spiritual master, still, in the
name of practicality, the path of diligently accepting ALL his instructions was not
strictly followed!
How amazing it is that, although from the very beginning of the institutionalization of
successor zonal acaryas there were legitimate protests against it, including in the
Pyramid House Talks in 1980, where the fallacies of the acarya-appointment and zonal
acarya theories were rightfully denounced, and this time by one of the eleven, we had to
go through 6 more years of the worse before it was officially abolished!
Misconception is poison
The first misconception surfaced as the so-called appointment of successor acaryas by
Srila Prabhupada. As all devotees knew that a conditioned soul cannot be a sad-guru, a
prerogative of the self-realized souls, the devotees were told that the eleven were very
The third misconception was that each of these so-called kripa-siddha acaryas had an
exclusive prabhu-datta-desa as their territory. As the devotees refused to follow blindly
and listened to the intelligence (guru-sastra-sadhu), protests came one after another,
countered by more misconceptions such as the Mahajanas themselves losing
occasionally sight of Krishna. When more and more devotees started to see the
situation for what it was and refused to listen any longer, they insisted on reform. But
the reform didn’t go deeply into the philosophy, and new misconceptions surfaced, such
as: A sad-guru doesn’t have to be a self-realized liberated pure lover of Krishna, or: Anyone
who is about on the same level than those already in place can also become a guru.
Any approved guru should be respected, whatever his level may be, as saksad-hari, etc.
But we have to understand that these are all adjustments. When Bhaktivinoda Thakura
says that spiritual life means constant adjustment, fine-tuning, he means adjusting oneself
to the philosophy, not adjusting the philosophy! The original standard for guruship has
been put aside; the obvious has become obscured, and the problems are patched up with
concocted adjustments. And, as all these misconceptions have, in the ultimate issue, only a
semblance of truth, they do not work.
What is the root cause of this poison? The misconception that one doesn’t need to be
under anyone, that one doesn’t need to approach a sadhu and accept him as siksa-guru,
oneself being advanced enough.
After the departure of a great acarya there usually is a cloudy period during which the
teachings become obscured, witness what happened to the Gaudiya Math after the
departure of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura.
“If one tries to establish the truth, so many lies will crop up in attempting to cover it. It is
the will of the Lord, for, without darkness, how will the light be appreciated? Without
opposition, how will the truth be glorified?”
Trying to see the bright side, let’s take it that this dark period of our history has simply
been Krishna’s plan to teach us valuable lessons, that this is all for the glory of pure
devotion, which is not a cheap thing, and of the pure devotees, which are rare, and not a
dime a dozen.
Everyone in 1978 still understood that the guru could only be on the topmost level, on
the basis of the tad viddhi pranipatena verse of the Gita. It was a strict teaching in
ISKCON that a guru is never subjected to the illusions of the common man. That is
why, when the eleven rittviks Srila Prabhupada had named to initiate on his behalf, and
this only for the remaining period of his physical presence with us, were presented as his
exclusive appointed successors, they had to be rubber-stamped as “pure devotees”,
“uttama-adhikaris”, “kripa-siddhas”, etc.
During the attempt for reform of the mid-eighties, this new idea that after all the guru
doesn’t have to be highly qualified surfaced again, this time in full force, to adjust to the
situation, instead of adjusting ourselves to the scriptures. Thus unfortunately this new
idea became officially accepted: the “Non-liberated Guru Theory”.
This “new philosophy” has different variations; therefore different devotees under this
misconception have distinctly different understandings of the philosophical basis of the
qualifications for guruship, unfortunately not based on sastra. The following five
categories, representing different variations of the same misconception, delineate the
most common understandings, and, while sometimes more than one of these theories
are held in combination, they are not all mutually compatible:
Although having some apparent validity with its seemingly practical solutions to the
problems of how to deal with reality in the post-zonal-acarya world, this theory, upon
close scrutiny, could be called “covered rittvik-vada”. The ISKCON leaders dutifully
hammered down the VVR and IRM brands of rittvik-vada, which erroneously claim
that Prabhupada being the only bona fide guru one can be sure of, is therefore the only
guru of ISKCON, and everyone giving diksa is just a priest. But the new philosophy
contains very similar ideas, such as the idea that the diksa-guru connects one with
Prabhupada, who is therefore the most important factor in the disciple’s ultimate
success, or the concept that one initiates on Prabhupada’s behalf, or on the GBC’s
behalf. However, Srila Prabhupada never taught any of these conceptions. He clearly
defined the guru’s qualifications, and not in these terms at all.
Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja told me that Prabhupada had asked him to “cooperate,
cooperate, tolerate, tolerate.” When I asked him in late 1995 when does it become
intolerable, he answered with sadness,
“When the Vaisnava siddhanta is baffled. This is the case now. Their view on jiva-
tattva is wrong as they say we fell from Krisna-lila out of envy, and the most holy
guru-tattva is reduced to “prachanna rittvik-vada”, covert rittvik-vada.”
The consequences:
Great damage, the spiritual ruination of the Society was made by the bogus Successor-
Acarya theory when a few devotees appointed themselves after a mere ten years of
sadhana bhakti to the lofty position of guru. Not only of gurus, but of exclusive
successors. Not only of exclusive successors, but of uttama adhikaris! They didn’t
consider that there could be other devotees as advanced or more advanced than
themselves in the Society or outside of it. They took prematurely the position of diksa-
gurus, instead of petitioning Krishna and Prabhupada for help and submitting
themselves for humble tutelage under a siksa-guru, and thereby failed to show a good
example. Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura teaches: ”sada-sisya-taki, always remain under
discipline.”
But wasn’t it right to fill the void after Srila Prabhupada left?
The void was there but it was to be taken advantage of by developing service-in-
separation and crying to Krishna to help us.
The guru is the most holy Vaisnava institution, said Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja.
Guru-tattva is one of the deepest tattvas. By keeping the issue of the actual position of
the guru unclear, by not giving later the necessary explanation that the original eleven
had become diksa-gurus out of a misunderstanding, and by eventually allowing so many
more devotees to take similar positions, the institution has become nearly
unrecognizable. A sad-guru is rare, but since there are so many gurus in ISKCON,
some explanation of this phenomenon had to be found. The words “pure devotee”,
“liberated”, and “guru” have been redefined by culling quotations from Srila
Prabhupada’s most broad statements on the subject, (and even that is shallow if these
so-called liberal quotes are thoroughly analyzed). In 1987, instead of going to the root,
the allopathic medicine path of dealing with symptoms was followed, not the ayurvedic
path of going for the root cause. And it was a question of time only before the
untreated cause produced new symptoms.
If ISKCON wants to really apply the sastric teachings and its own law, to be accepted
as a bona fide guru one must be free from all anarthas such as kamini, kancana,
nisiddhacara, puja, kutinati, lobha, and especially pratistha. The fact that 50% of their
diksa-gurus have fallen down (and that’s the official rate) speaks by itself...
Observations
Although there are indications that Srila Prabhupada envisioned his disciples initiating
after his departure even before having reached the required level of uttama adhikara,
still, he certainly gave stem warnings, such as: “Anyone, if he is a pure devotee, he can
deliver others, he can become spiritual master. But unless he is on that platform he should
not attempt it. Then both of them will go to hell, like blind men leading the blind.” (Letter
to Tusta Krishna) Pure devotional service, as it was developed in the Part I, truly begins
in the full nistha stage, or ruci.
There has been more than one hundred forty devotees initiating in ISKCON, and not
all were on the same level.
It is indeed rare to find a pure liberated guru, a lover of God, but it is always available
for a sincere seeker. It is most recommended and you should aspire for that and pray for
it.
Of course, there is always a class of devotees who will find some excuse for criticizing.
They actually don’t want to surrender. They take the pretext of wanting higher things,
but they are compared by Bhaktivinoda Thakura to someone who wants to get fruits
without making the necessary efforts to climb in a tree. Such a fellow jumps from the
ground, trying to grab some fruit. But all what he gets is sour or rotten fruits. Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura called them pukkur-curi wale, pond-thieves. You
cannot steal a pond. It’s a hole filled with water. How can you steal it? Similarly one
who thinks he can enter the higher realm of bhakti without having the adhikara or
eligibility is a self-deceiver.
“May we ever be ready to brush away from our hearts, by the rough application of
hundreds of pointed broomsticks, the wicked design of being honored above other
persons by the devotees of God. God will be merciful to us and we shall be blessed
with the gift of devotion to His Divine Feet the very day that we are delivered from
the evil desire of seeking advantages and honors from others. The ambition to lord it
over others, to be great, is brought about when we allow ourselves to fall a victim to
the temptations of the deluding energy of God. Those who aspire to be masters of
the devotees are indeed most culpably arrogant. The idea that one should be master
of God’s devotees leads to inferno. ‘Let the devotees serve me.’ If we don’t get
deliverance from that bad attitude, there will be no benefit to us. To follow the
devotees of God is the only path that leads to one’s real good. Let there be birth after
birth for us that we may walk in the path of the followers of Sri Rupa Goswami by
being the particles of dust at the feet of the devotees of God. We are nurturing a
desire to dedicate this good-for-nothing body in the Sankirtana sacrifice of Sri
Caitanya Mahaprabhu and his associates.”
⎯Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati
3) So who is guru?
The guru is where our inner demand and hankering can be fulfilled to the utmost.
In the form of guru, guru-rupe, Krishna bestows His mercy. Not just any guru:
krishna-kripa murti. One whose heart bleeds for the conditioned soul’s suffering,
who takes away that suffering, frees one from Maya’s fort, creates a mediation
between the jiva and Krishna; one who can make Krishna appear in the heart of the
disciple, who has that potency because he has made his heart like Vrindavana and
5) What type of faith should the disciple have towards the guru?
Real faith, not sentimental or blind faith. The disciple of a bona fide guru doesn’t
accept him simply out of sentiment, convention, or ecclesiastical order, but rather
because he is so. It is not that simply by faith a conditioned soul becomes his eternal
link with Krishna. It is not that because one has taken the position of guru he has all
exalted qualities extolled in sastras, but the other way around. So, as we said, faith
according to the worthiness of the recipient of that faith.
6) But isn’t the disciple supposed to see his guru as good as God?
If the guru is as good as God. Inasmuch as the guru can give Krishna he should be
seen as absolute. The disciple must find the best available guru to obtain Krishna.
Where is it said that no matter what level he is on, a guru must be seen as good as
God?
7) But isn’t it natural for a disciple to be fixed in the conclusion that his guru can
never be subject to criticism?
Therefore one should make sure he takes a 100% Krishna conscious guru. As
mentioned by Narahari Sarkar, one shouldn’t be a blind follower. Even a guru can
be approached, in the proper way, of course, if he shows signs that are incompatible
with his exalted position. And if a disciple hears something disturbing to his mind,
he should consult with trustworthy seniors.
11) But I have read in the Bhagavatam about a person not liberated being as good as
liberated by following.
That purport of SB 4.18.5 should be properly understood. It states: “Presently
people are so fallen that they cannot distinguish between a liberated soul and a
conditioned soul. A conditioned soul is hampered by four defects.” One should note that
the overall emphasis of the purport is on taking direction from liberated souls. The
very next sentence is: “Consequently we have to take direction from liberated persons.”
Those who are stated not to be able to distinguish are not neophyte devotees, but
rather materialistic persons, as Prabhupada states: “It has become fashionable to
disobey the unimpeachable directions given by the acaryas and liberated souls of the
past.... Materialistic men are not interested in taking directions from a liberated person,
but they are very much interested in their own concocted ideas, which make them
repeatedly fail in their attempts. Because the entire world is now following the imperfect
directions of conditioned souls, humanity is completely bewildered.”
12) There is also an early letter from Prabhupada to one Janardan dasa.
Yes, but again, the whole point of the letter is that the guru must be liberated. And
when Prabhupada says at the end that one who is less qualified or not liberated may
act as a guru by strictly following the disciplic succession, you have to consider again
that this strict following is only truly possible on the nistha platform, a little below
liberation. Again you have to see that it is an encouragement letter from
Prabhupada: “Don’t worry about perfection, just follow strictly and that is your
perfection. Don’t worry if you’re not a pure devotee yet, it’s not that one can become a
pure devotee overnight, but if you follow your guru strictly, then you’ll become
completely purified.”
Finally, you can give this letter and the Bhagavatam quote above a completely
different reading. It can be taken as Prabhupada speaking about himself out of
humility, nothing more, as he always humbly said that his only credit was that he
was strictly following his Guru Maharaja. Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja
personnally confirmed this point to me.
13) Some say that all the ISKCON gurus are liberated.
There are gurus on different levels. Not all gurus are equal. Why blur distinctions?
Why do the sastras speak of siksa-guru then? Just for some specific jnana?
Prabhupada: “Who is liberated? One who knows Krishna, in truth.” (Letter 69) “Mere
theoretical academic understanding that Krishna is everything doesn’t qualify one as a
first-class devotee. One must have actually developed love for Krishna.” (Visvanatha
Cakravarti Thakura) Prabhupada also mentions that some people imagine
themselves to be liberated. And if they’re liberated, how come so many fall down?
14) I heard someone say that “If one insists on finding an uttama-adhikari, he will end
up in Radha-kunda where jackals, wolves and hyenas are waiting to devour his
spiritual life.”
Then why did he stress in his teachings that uttama-adhikara is the standard?
15) I heard that Srila Prabhupada wrote in one letter that “if one discriminates that this
one is a pure devotee and that one is not a pure devotee, that means he is a
nonsense.”
Another point is that letters are highly personal stuff and therefore subjective, plus
dependent on time, place and circumstance. If you take Prabhupada’s statements
about the guru in a chronological order, as for varnasrama-dharma for instance, you
get a better perspective. He obviously wanted all his disciples to become gurus when
qualified to be so. He wanted to flood the world with Krishna consciousness and
many gurus are needed for that, granted, it’s just a question of keeping clear and not
blurring the issue.
16) In Easy Journey, there’s mention of monitor guru, and Srila Prabhupada writes
that one can take a limited number of disciples when he has completed the first
twelve steps.
Yes, but step eleven says specifically that there shouldn’t be any more namaparadhas.
So that means minimum nistha stage, namabhasa. And it also mentions a limited
number of disciples.
17) I heard that Srila Prabhupada said in 1968 that maybe by 1975 all his disciples could
initiate. What does that mean?
I understand that Srila Prabhupada didn’t expect to be still with us by that time. He
had such an immense faith in the purifying power of the Holy name and in
Mahaprabhu’s mercy. He thought that his disciples could advance very quickly. And
they did, given their background. In the same spirit he spoke at first denigratingly
of varnasrama-dharma, praised his disciples like anything, how they were pure
devotees, how they had become completely purified by the power of the name. But
after a few years of experience, he started, around 1974, to speak about varnasrama-
dharma in a completely different way; and when he was asked by a puzzled disciple,
“Isn’t it an offense to refer to a Vaisnava according to varna?” he replied, “If they’re
Vaisnavas; why are so many going? Vaisnava is not so cheap.” So he spoke in 1968 in
a particular way, but never spoke about it again. He had also said “maybe”.
18) I heard that Prabhupada wrote that in the absence of the guru you can accept
disciples without limitation, that it’s the law of the disciplic succession? Isn’t that
like an explicit right?
Yes, of course, but don’t omit the first part of that letter (Tusta-Krishna 12.2.75)
where Prabhupada first gives both the qualification and the process to become
qualified as a guru, and expresses his hope that he will qualify himself, as well as the
later part where he says: “Keep trained up very rigidly and then you can be a bona fide
19) Can we conclude that these few quotes of Srila Prabhupada that seemingly
authorize a liberal guru policy contradict the sastra?
Srila Prabhupada is an ideal acarya. He would never contradict the sastra. We say
that guru, sastra and sadhu are saying the same: That a guru may only be considered
as such if his teachings are confirmed by sadhu and sastra, and that a sadhu may
only be accepted as such if what he says is confirmed by guru and sastra; so the
answer must be “No.” Only a misinterpretation is at work here.
20) Some say that Prabhupada said that one should take risks for Krishna and that’s
how one becomes recognized.
The risk mentioned by Prabhupada is of a qualified guru taking the risk of
accepting an unqualified disciple, not the risk taken by becoming guru before being
qualified: “One who doesn’t like to take the risk [of accepting as a disciple someone who
is not qualified] he doesn’t take the risk of preaching. But one who takes the risk, he’s
recognized by Krishna immediately.... But he must know where to take risk and where
it is to act foolishly.” (Conversation 7.8.75)
25) Some say that we have to be practical, that, “Utility is the principle.”
Prabhupada was not practical? Practical means that one accepts the guru’s words
even though he may not have the vision of how it will happen. Practical doesn’t
mean to alter the process and jettison the siddhanta. It should be made clear that
Srila Prabhupada’s departure created an emergency and that in an emergency you
may do something wrong. To err is human. But once the error has been identified
why insist on making it? What was wrongly done in an emergency shouldn’t
become the standard. Practical adjustments contrary to the siddhanta are not bona
fide. Also, we have seen the result in the past. Zonal gurus seemed practical too.
Devotees were united around one single master and they had much association with
him, but it was not bona fide and it created a lot of difficulties for many devotees,
to say the least.
26) But it is said that even at ruci there are still anarthas, even up to prema.
Granted, but only a faint trace, like an odor. For instance, in Jaiva Dharma one
Vaisnava inquires what is his level or adhikara. He then describes that when he
chants the name, tears of ecstasy fill his eyes, and he is entranced, and rolls on the
ground, but that he likes when the Vaisnavas see him like that. So he is told, “You
are a madhyam-adhikari.” One may say, “See, he still has pratistha.” Yes, a faint
aroma of it. But he is crying out of ecstasy as soon as he chants! Granted,
Prabhupada didn’t do like that and, given the tendency for sahajiya-ism, he never
talked much about it for obvious reasons, but he wrote about it in the Caitanya
Caritamrta, which he called the postgraduate study.
29) Srila Prabhupada said not to be amazed who goes but to be amazed who stays.
So some say that those who have stayed have shown they are sincere and those who
have left have shown they were not sincere.
Srila Prabhupada was always concerned about those who had left. Even years after,
he was inquiring about them. He wanted them to come back. The guru is filled
with affection for his children-disciples. His heart is soft, not hard like ours, so
insensitive and prone to reject without considering what is our share of
responsibility for their departure from our ranks. It’s a little too simplistic to write
off those who leave us as too insincere or too attached to Maya. Some may have
become so. I don’t mean to be a lawyer for nonsense devotees. But we have to see
that many devotees left due to mistreatment, poor example, etc., and we have to be
willing to try to help them. If after treating them with kindness they prove to be
hopeless cases, then we may consider some other course of action. But only then.
30) How much should one accept the official version given by the authorities?
You may have a misunderstanding about who is a spiritual authority. The GBC
Body, for instance, was made the ultimate managerial authority by Srila
Prabhupada, not the ultimate spiritual authority. Its role was defined by Prabhupada
as making sure everything going on in his Society is on the basis of the triple
authority, guru-sastra-sadhu. Prabhupada called it the watchdog of ISKCON.
It is a fact that you have to confirm your understanding with your authorities, but
make sure you accept the right persons as authorities. Everyone is advised to study
the Vaisnava philosophy from all angles of vision. Srila Prabhupada said to
surrender with one’s intelligence, not to surrender one’s intelligence. He never
encouraged blind faith, blind following. Pariprasna, asking questions, is part of the
process of acceptance of authority. Philosophical debate is healthy. Srila
Prabhupada recommended it to strengthen one’s mind and faith, mature one’s
understanding, etc. To discuss guru-tattva is of paramount importance. Of course,
we have to try to do it in the most detached and dispassionate way possible, but if
31) Some say that as the guru advances, his disciples advance, and the disciples seem
healthy.
Of course they make advancement. But kanistha disciples making advancement
within kanistha is not necessarily an indication that the guru is bona fide or a
liberated soul. What about those who haven’t found a guru yet or whose ‘guru’ has
fallen down? They also advance. All our congregation members who are following
the path are also advancing. But it’s all relative: “Unless the guru is God-realized one
cannot make progress in the transcendental science of the Lord.” (SBhag.2.4.10) And
“Only a pure devotee can convert others to pure devotional service. It’s therefore
important for all the preachers in our movement to first become pure devotees.” (CC
Madhya 24.98) Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura says that disciples of gurus who are
not self-realized will ultimately become dejected and lose faith. It’s not so simple to
dismiss such statements because some devotees are doing nicely. How nicely and for
how long? And, as far as the guru is concerned, if one is not ready, it’s very risky to
take on a big load. It will be difficult to progress. It is mainly up to the disciple to
determine whether his guru is qualified or not, but the senior’s duty is to help him;
sastra advises to study the eligibility of the guru (and of the disciple). The disciple
shouldn’t be lazy and foolish, thinking that everything is fine, the guru advances and
so does he. And lower gurus need an uttama siksa guru to keep on advancing. That’s
the way it works.
32) What does it mean that Mahaprabhu has ordered everyone to become a guru?
How has Srila Prabhupada commented on this verse? The order is to preach to
everyone. To preach to everyone does not automatically mean to become their diksa
guru. “It is better not to accept any disciples.” It is said that in the presence of better
qualified gurus one should not venture to accept disciples. (Hari Bhakti Vilas) And
even when the order to become a guru is given, it doesn’t mean it must be
immediately taken up. Look at Srila Prabhupada’s example. Look at Srila Gour
Govinda Maharaja. It’s not an appointment; it’s an order to qualify oneself.
Develop the qualifications first: “One has to become purified by chanting.” So, if one
preaches, achieves the platform of offenseless chanting and liberation, he can then
be a diksa-guru. Not that because he preaches he is automatically a bona fide guru.
Mostly this means give siksa, like when Prabhupada quoted the amara ajnaya verse
during a sannyasa initiation lecture (3.16.76): “Present as it is Bhagavad Gita. Then
you become a guru. You can become a guru in your family... wherever you are.”
34) But are you sure that Prabhupada didn’t appoint gurus?
He didn’t. He said: “On my order. He is actually guru. But by my order.” And a little
further: “When I order ‘you become guru’ he becomes regular guru”. (May 77 tape) So,
when did he give that order? In July, right? Wrong. That’s the time he gave the list
of rittviks. The best proof of this conclusion is that when TKG asked him: “But
they are your disciples?”, Prabhupada answered “Yes.” and when he was giving the list
of names, when he was asked: “What about India?” Prabhupada incredulously
answered: “In India? I am here.” So he was obviously referring only to rittviks (and
only during his lifetime). A year before in an interview he had said: “I am training
each one of them as leader.” (7.14.76) Just like he had said one month earlier in April:
“Yes, I shall say who is guru, ‘Now you become acarya. You become authorized.’ I am
waiting for that. You become, ALL, acarya.... But the training must be complete.” You
see, he didn’t specify eleven people. He said “ALL”.
And when TKG said: “The process of purification must be there,” Prabhupada said,
“Oh yes, must be there. Caitanya Mahaprabhu wants that. Amara ajnaya guru hana.
You become guru. But be qualified. Little thing, (chuckles),’ strictly follower.” TKG:
“Not rubber stamp.” Srila Prabhupada, “Then you’ll not be effective. You can cheat, but
it will not be effective.” You see, again “strict follower”, indicating nistha.
Prabhupada chuckled because a sadhu can read the heart and he knew that many
wanted to be guru at that time. Some had been contemplating the idea for years.
So, in April he says this and the next month he appoints them as gurus? Just think!
Later on, in October, Srila Prabhupada was told that a Bengali gentleman came for
initiation, and Prabhupada said: “I have deputed some of you to initiate.... I have
stopped for the time being... this initiation. I have deputed my disciples. Is it clear or
not?... You have got list of names? And if by Krishna’s grace I recover from this
condition, then I shall begin again or I may not, but in this condition to initiate is not
good.” So, it is clear again he had only named rittviks, not gurus, and that it was just
because he was physically unable. He seemed not to remember exactly who was on
the list, proof that it was rittviks, nothing more, otherwise, as mentioned by TKG:
“You can bet your bottom dollar that if it had been more than that, Prabhupada would
have spoken for days and hours and weeks on end about how to set up this thing with
the gurus, but he didn’t because he already had said it a million times. He said ‘My
Guru Maharaja did not appoint anyone. It’s by qualification.” (Pyramid House Talks)
Prabhupada had also said: “It’s not that I’ll give an order, ‘Here is the next leader.’
Anyone who follows the previous leadership is a leader. All my disciples are leaders as
much as they follow purely. Leader means one who is a first class disciple. One who is
perfectly following.” (BTG Vol 1977)
So, one must be qualified, strict follower (nistha) minimum AND receive the
order. How is that order perceived? Prabhupada writes, “It requires special
benedictions from higher authorities.” and, “By His order only one should become a
spiritual master and cooperate with the Lord.” (SB 1.13.48) and, “One who is not
authorized by the Lord cannot become a spiritual master.” (SB 1.19.36) When one
achieves higher stages of realization, in madhyam adhikara, he may receive the
indication from his guru and Krishna to take that role. Until then he should work
on qualifying himself, and that is best done if one has the backing or an advanced
If Prabhupada had appointed diksa-gurus, then why did they fall down? Srila
Prabhupada lacked the spiritual intelligence to determine that the eleven were not
immune to fall-downs? The only possible conclusion is that some disciples
misunderstood and disobeyed his orders. Is it reasonable to think that Prabhupada
would order unqualified persons to lake up the duties of liberated souls, including a
couple of known homo-sexuals ? Why would Prabhupada suddenly contradict by an
appointment what he had said all these years? Those who still accept that dubious
theory have a problem in their relationship with him.
Another way to look at it is that Srila Prabhupada was well aware of the mentality
and intentions of some of his disciples. He manifested his compassion by not giving
a direct stem order, disobedience of which would be guru-avajna, big offense to his
lotus feet. He didn’t appoint any number of devotees as gurus, nor did he forbid
anyone. He had given profusely detailed information on the subject and had issued
severe warnings against imitation-guruship using terms such as “rascal”, “cheater”,
“hell-bound”, etc. He expected all his disciples to become gurus, but not by rubber
stamp.
35) It seems like you are saying that Srila Prabhupada was cheating some of his
ambitious disciples?
He said himself on different occasions that he was cheating. In Bombay, when the
devotees approached him complaining about being cheated by the Indians, Srila
Prabhupada first answered that he was also Indian; when the devotees protested that
he was not cheating them, he replied that he had actually cheated all of us because
we would have never come to that path if we had known what was in store. The
saintly persons cheat, but in that cheating transaction the cheated party still
benefits.
Srila Prabhupada said so many things people wanted to hear, and sometimes he
would speak in a way because they were not ready to hear more. But that doesn’t
mean that it was automatically the tattva or siddhanta on that subject. Sometimes,
for teaching or preaching, the siddhanta may not be completely or clearly given.
Personal considerations should have been sacrificed for the sake of the mission. This
can be seen as a test of humility and dedication. To give up one’s false pride that “I
am a senior Srila Prabhupada disciple personally trained by His Divine Grace. I had so
much personal association with him. I’m a big preacher and I made so many devotees.
I’m a big GBC man and I control so many countries. I’m a big guru and I have so many
disciples.” or, “It can only be my Guru.”
Given the narrow, competitive and envious nature of the Westerners, Srila
Prabhupada had to devise a trick to give sannyasa to Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja:
He made him the priest of his own sannyasa ceremony! There was 2 dandas and sets
of sannyasa clothes, but only one candidate sitting at the yajna, Tripurari prabhu.
Prabhupada asked the sannyasa candidates to come forward. He did first and
The story could have been quite different if Srila Prabhupada’s instructions and
vision had only been understood. There should have been a waiting period, with the
GBC doing its regular job and the preaching going on. Without the whole
concoction about so-called appointments, those who would have reached the
qualification of perfect followers, full-nistha, would have emerged quite naturally
and would have quietly started to initiate without taking any specific position in our
Society. Not being weighed down by all the trappings surrounding their false
“acarya” position, the eleven could have more readily advanced, and some of those
who unfortunately left maybe would still be there. In such a non-envious
atmosphere of love and trust a self-effulgent Acarya would have easily been
accepted and recognized.
Srila Prabhupada explained us the mind of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and gave us a stem
warning not to try to create artificially gurus. It is a pity that it was not heeded: “If
Guru Maharaja would have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be
Acarya, he would have mentioned.... His idea was Acarya was not to be nominated
By telling us about his Guru Maharaja’s mind in this way, he was giving a hint that
this is what we were supposed to do ourselves. Vaisnavas are simple like a child, not
crooked. They don’t think themselves the controller. They feel like an instrument in
the Lord’s hand. Having danced as Krishna made them dance, they leave it up to
Him how He wants things to go on and whom He wants next to dance on the
stage. Srila Prabhupada said about Srila Bhaktisiddhanta: “His idea was ‘Let them
manage; then whoever will be qualified for becoming Acarya, he’ll manifest. Why should
I enforce it upon them?’ That was his plan. Let them manage by strong governing body,
as it is going on. Then Acarya will come by his qualifications.’ (Letter 21.9.73) The
completely pure devotee belongs to the intimate entourage of Srimati Radharani
(nikunjayuno ratikeli siddhyai). He doesn’t try to take Her position, but leaves it up
to Her to pick up whom She wants. She is in charge of the mercy-department, the
source of saving grace, svarupa-sakti.
42) Some say that we didn’t and don’t need an Acarya. We have Srila Prabhupada.
I don’t want to obscure Srila Prabhupada’s position in any way, especially for his
initiated disciples. Srila Prabhupada is always there in vani for those who follow him
strictly. His instructions on the guru are clear: take a living, bona fide guru. And he
clearly defined what he meant by that. So, “He lives forever and the follower lives
with him.” Yes, so now it’s time to study more closely his instructions. And go back
to following them as it is. If you don’t follow his instructions you cannot perceive
how he is always there.
44) What makes you think that there was necessarily someone qualified as Acarya?
Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu again: “Couldn’t Prabhupada have produced one such fit
disciple?” (ISKCON Journal) Virabahu Prabhu, in his book, “Are we saying that
Prabhupada was successful in everything, except in making even one disciple who could
represent the parampara?”
There are so many instructions in Prabhupada’s books, so how can one know which
one apply to his particular case and level of advancement? “The student must enquire
46) But didn’t Prabhupada say that there was no question of separation between the
guru and the disciple? Why then speak of a siksa-guru?
“There is no question of ever separation as long as the disciple follows the instruction of
guru.” (Conversation 7.21.75) That’s one thing. Next, a siksa-guru doesn’t conflict
with the diksa-guru. To take shelter and instruction from a siksa-guru will help even
his disciples increase their appreciation of Prabhupada’s wonderful qualities and
contributions.
47) Some say that the leaders had a lot of association with Srila Prabhupada.
Yes, but consider “Unless one is enlightened by the knowledge given by the spiritual
master, he cannot see things as they are, even though he remains constantly with the
guru.” (CC Madhya 18.99) Prabhupada’s limited physical association with his guru,
and Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja’s are proofs that physical association with the
guru is not the be-all.
50) Some say that the leaders are advanced devotees who are recipients of Srila
Prabhupada’s mercy.
Mercy comes by installment. And if one claims he has gotten it, he is. a self-
deceiver. All our acaryas have lamented that they couldn’t develop real devotion,
couldn’t receive mercy. Also Mercy, may come in different ways: “When childish
people think themselves mahabhagavatas and act in defiance of the Vaisnava guru, such
behavior simply holds them back from receiving the mercy of the Vaisnava guru.
Bewildered by false ego, such self-acclaimed devotees gradually become fit to be ignored
by pure devotees on the intermediate platform and are cheated of the mercy that comes
from the devotee’s satisfaction.... Pure devotees display indifference to those who falsely
imagine themselves to be visuddha-bhaktas or pure devotees. This indifference is an
excellent manifestation of their mercy.” (Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, quoted in SB 11.2)
52) Do the sastras mention about the possibility of a guru falling down?
Again, there’s no question of a bad guru. “Gurus” of a lower standard may fall down
but they are only gurus by name. In our tradition no one was so irresponsible to take
the position of guru without being qualified. It may have happened, but it is so rare
that the acaryas themselves don’t deal with it very extensively. It is not a topic that
comes up again and again. Also, falldown may not he gross sensual falldown. It may
mean remaining stuck on the platform of misra-bhakti and being denied access to
pure bhakti. Ramacandra Puri was considered fallen even though he didn’t grossly
fall down. Krishnadas Kaviraja Goswami also mentioned that his brother “fell
down” by disrespecting Lord Nityananda Prabhu.
54) Is there any benefit in serving under a guru who is not fully qualified?
Of course there is benefit. But also there’s a gradation; it may be sukriti, or it may
be more, it’s a matter of the heart. According to the demand of one’s heart one will
approach different types of gurus, and accordingly one will get different benefits.
57) 57. You said that one should be minimum a full nistha-bhakta to initiate, and that
it was not cheap since it means no more anarthas.
To be freed from the four sinful propensities is a feature of anartha-nivritti. But
nistha means complete freedom from all other material contamination. If one is a
nistha-bhakta, rajas and tamas gunas are absent and it shows by the absence of the
characteristics associated with these gunas. At full nistha one is more or less
liberated, at least from the lower modes. Initiation is a very serious matter. One
must have the power to transmit Krishna. He must have Krishna otherwise of what
value is his diksa? -You cannot give what you don’t have.
61) But Many of Srila Prabhupada’s godbrothers could not recognize him.
That is not because they were his godbrothers, but because some were neophytes
(kanisthas) and didn’t have the proper vision. Envy covered the eyes of some.
62) How many qualified gurus were there during Srila Bhaktisiddhanta’s or Srila
Prabhupada’s times?
I’ll answer ironically: “Oh, very few, they didn’t have the mercy. But now we’re so
advanced that we have more than our sampradaya has produced for centuries. We can
even afford to lose a few, we have so many.”
66) If the guru is on a lower platform of devotional service can he still plant the seed of
bhakti, or since he’s immature he cannot?
That seed will not have the same potency. A kanistha adhikari can only give weak
faith, komala sraddha. Srila BR Sridhar Maharaja, ”An ordinary guru may give the
same mantra to his disciple, but what is the potency within the sound? What quality of
conception or divine will is contained in that sound? That is all-important...Within the
mantra the important thing is the type of thought or sentiment which is imparted
through that sound...We have to follow the spirit; otherwise after Jahnava devi, the
wife of Lord Nityananda, up to Vipina Goswami, from whom Bhaktivinoda Thakura
took initiation, there are so many unknown lady gurus. Through them, the mantra
came to Vipina Goswami, and from him Bhaktivinoda Thakura received the mantra.
We accept Bhaktivinoda Thakura, but should we count all those ladies in our disciplic
succession? What was their realization?”
71) How does the guru accept prayers or offerings to his picture?
The guru and the Supersoul are intimately connected. Indeed, a bona fide guru is
the external manifestation of the Supersoul. When he accepts disciples, the guru
expands, as Krishna expands as the caitya-guru. That is how he is aware and accepts
prayers. He is a transparent via medium, so prayers properly offered through him go
to Krishna. He has to be an authorized agent, a bona fide spiritual master to be
empowered to do that. Guru is not cheap.
74) If someone is a guru and speaks very highly of the exalted qualities of guru, how
can one not think he speaks about himself?
You could level the same charge against Prabhupada, or any of our great acaryas. A
real guru never speaks about himself. He never considers himself a guru. He doesn’t
see his disciples as his. He sees them as an expansion of his own guru. He feels
himself as their servant. His service is to train them. He sees them as so many
masters. Of course, many will speak like that, but that’s a very high vision, the
vision of the mahabhagavata. But mabhagavata is the standard. And one thing: One
shouldn’t display his envy by trying to find fault in the language or presentation of a
pure vaisnava, for he is inspired by the Lord. The acts and expressions of the great
vaisnavas cannot be easily understood. Of course, on the other hand, someone may
not be qualified and speak about himself. In Kali-yuga hypocrites are rampant. And
so many kapatha-panthas are there, wrong paths based on false logic. That’s why
you have to be very knowledgeable, and pray to Krishna to guide you, to send you
His bona fide representative. But shouldn’t one, whether he is guru or not, present
guru-tattva according to the Vaisnava philosophy?
75) But why insist? Why stress so much the highest standard?
Because the guru is supposed to be most qualified. That’s the standard. Something
less should be clearly exposed as what it is, that is, second-best. No taboos, there has
been too much confusion and pain, too much excess on the other side. A disciple
77) What about the verse that says that one who knows the science of Krishna can be a
guru: Kiba vipra kiba nyasi...?
You can give this verse two readings. It can be taken to indicate one who knows the
theoretical science or one who has realized the object of the science. The word
tattva is used, yei krishna tattva vetta as in the Gita verse janma-karma ca me divyam
evam yo vetti tattvatah. Commenting on this verse, Prabhupada says that one who
knows Krishna in tattva is a perfect devotee: “As far as the perfect devotee is
concerned, the siddha, the Gita says that ‘After leaving this body he comes to Me.’ (CC
Madhya 20.397) He doesn’t say that about one who knows the theory. And what
level is that? Again minimum the full nistha stage; actually, the level where one
attains Bhagavata-tattva-vijnana is much higher.(SB 1.2.20) Also, “This is the
science of Krishna, this Gita. If anyone knows perfectly, then he becomes the guru.”
(Lecture 17.8.66) He must know the science of Krishna perfectly. One may still
argue that scholarship constitutes perfect understanding, but the Bhagavatam says:
“Mere acquisition and excellence of the superficial meaning of the sacred Vedic words
without being conscious of the inner essence of the teachings is as good as keeping a cow
without milking capacity.” (SB 11.11.18)
So the second reading of the verse is to be accepted. The first reading is based on
apara-vicara, apparent consideration, and the second on absolute consideration.
Moreover, Mahaprabhu has specifically spoken this verse because of the smarta
brahmanas’ predominant influence on society during His advent, to establish the
fact that a Vaisnava can be the guru of a brahmana, whatever his caste may be,
which was opposed by the smartas, and the fact that he doesn’t have to be a grhasta,
whereas they insisted he had to. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati’s purport on this
verse that, “One can thus become a guru, whether vartma-pradarshaka, siksa or diksa.”
is to be understood in this sense. He ascribes to the word vartma-pradarshaka
another meaning than the one commonly ascribed to in our society. For him, there
is no question of a guru being anything less than a pure, full-fledged self-realized
soul. For him “Sri Gurudeva is the eternal associated counterpart of Nanda-kumara
Krishna.”
“But the good preceptor claims our sincere and complete allegiance. He asks the
struggling soul to submit not to the laws of this world that will only rivet his chains
but to the higher laws of the spiritual realm. The good disciple makes a complete
surrender of himself at the feet-of the preceptor. It is by unreserved submission to a good
‘‘But the submission of the disciple is neither Irrational nor blind. It is complete on the
condition that the preceptor himself continues to be altogether good. The disciple retains
his right to renounce his allegiance the moment he realizes that the preceptor is a fallible
creature like himself.
“Nor does a good preceptor accept anyone as his disciple unless the latter is prepared to
submit himself freely.... Submission to the Absolute is not real unless it is also itself
absolute. When we reserve the right of choice to follow or not to follow the guru, we
actually follow ourselves, because even if we seem to agree to follow the guru, it is
because he appears to be in agreement with ourselves.”
In fact, even when it is apparently the disciple who gives something to the guru, it is
still the guru’s mercy, which manifests itself in his instruction that one should
preach. The six enemies headed by lust don’t desert the heart even if one is
externally away from bad association. The type of opportunity to give up the bad
association of these six enemies that comes by preaching and practicing in allegiance
to a Vaisnava is not to be had by any other method. And by preaching linked with
practice, not only one’s benefit is achieved, but others are benefitted also, and that
pleases the Lord.
83) Does the guru always know what the disciple think?
Srila Prabhupada: “Krishna knows your inner thoughts. Nothing is secret for him. Do
you think your guru cannot tell which disciple is cheating and which is not? How do
you think you can avoid Paramatma witnessing all your activities and thoughts?”
Don’t worry if your guru knows or doesn’t know everything about you, your
thoughts, your deeds; you are supposed to express them, reveal them. If you cannot
But only a surrendered disciple has the right to ask questions. Without surrendering
to the guru, Krishna-katha doesn’t really enter the ears. One cannot understand nor
get Krishna. No one gets direct mercy from Krishna. Only by full surrender, in full
faith to a worthy spiritual preceptor, can one receive mercy. It is undoubtedly
Krishna’s mercy: the mercy comes from Him. But that mercy is received through
the sad-guru. In the form of guru, Krishna bestows His mercy. Guru, sad-guru, not
imitation, self-made guru, is Krishna-kripa-murti, the very embodiment of
Krishna’s mercy. His mercy is very powerful. But one has to be very eager. One has
to cry in his heart, begging Krishna to appear as such a sadhu. One has to approach
in the proper way. Then he gets protection from Maya and receives the real benefit
of sadhu-sanga, which is Krishna sanga.
85) What is the proper attitude should his “guru” fall down?
To see one’s guide going down is undoubtedly a big trial. As mentioned earlier, in
the section or the duty of the disciple, one must understand that there is no spiritual
injustice. A bad workman quarrels with his tools. One has to accept that one’s
karma has come to face him, and it cannot be avoided, or one’s lack of sukriti. It has
come from within oneself. One must do the proper thing, scrutinize oneself and
find out one’s status, how much one is hankering for the real thing. Then one must
cry to Krishna, beg Him to be accepted as His servant, petition Him for mercy, and
admit that one is blind and utterly dependent upon Him as one’s well-wishing,
eternal friend to make all arrangements for one’s deliverance. Then Krishna will
understand from one’s heart that one is crying for Him, that one wants to go back
to Him, so He will arrange for one to meet a genuine guru. Paramatma assumes a
body and appears as the guru who is therefore said to be His external manifestation.
Different temperaments, natures, moods, levels of sukriti are there, so the all-
knowing Krishna will send a guru accordingly. A simple, non-duplicitous person
who just wants to serve, who accepts what Krishna says without twisting it, without
87) What prevents one from full surrender to the guru’s feet?
Past sukriti enables one to surrender more fully; otherwise it takes longer, it’s more
gradual. But the sadhu creates sukriti. Prabhupada said he had created his disciple’s
good fortune or piety, By hearing from a sadhu, you earn sukriti, even if you didn’t
have much previously. Hearing, sravanam, is service. Then you can surrender more,
then you develop more faith, then more surrender, doubts are eradicated. One
doesn’t surrender because one clings to material attachments, which are deeply
rooted in the heart. Material desires are what keeps one from fully surrendering.
That’s duplicity, the deep-rooted desire to enjoy separately from Krishna. That
means one’s faith is still tender, komala sraddha, not very strong. So keep on hearing
the most potent medicine of Hari-katha from the right source.
88) Some say that it is not important whether the guru has seen or is seeing Krishna.
The Gita doesn’t say that: Tattva darshinah, he has seen the Truth, Krishna. The
sastra explains that the pure devotee sees Krishna everywhere, wherever he casts his
glance. The Brahma-samhita’s Premanjana curita verse says the same. And
Prabhupada answered very directly to that question: “Have you seen Krishna? Yes,
daily, every moment.” (Perfect questions, perfect answers).
90) Srila Prabhupada mentioned that Srila BR Sridhara Maharaja and two others were
responsible, as leading secretaries, for the downfall of the Gaudiya Math.
Srila Prabhupada said different things at different times. He spoke both words of
caution and words of praise. So it would be advisable not to needlessly strain our
brains trying to understand and interpret what Srila Prabhupada or, for that matter,
Srila BR Sridhara Maharaja, might or might not have said or meant, but rather
concentrate on the practice of the devotional path they both glorified. But one
should not neglect his guru’s warnings and therefore one may not take from
Maharaja certain ideas. The ISKCON leaders who were in charge at that time have
specifically a big responsibility because they went to Sridhara Maharaja to ask his
advice on the guru issue, whereas Prabhupada had specifically warned not to take
these ideas from him. We can’t blame devotees who took shelter at his feet when
their own brothers denied them one in their father’s house. He himself never
canvassed from ISKCON members. He spoke of “relief work”, meaning by this
that he didn’t want to interfere in our inner affairs but would only offer some help
to those who were leaving ISKCON hopelessly and were in danger of falling back
into the material world.
91) Some say it was all right to take some philosophical knowledge, but it was a lack of
chastity to leave ISKCON and go to his camp.
It was all right to go to Srila BR Sridhara Maharaja for philosophical advice, as
Prabhupada had indicated that one could approach him with such queries. In any
case, the situation was created by the leaders. And when the leaders rejected
Maharaja for political considerations, some devotees who had got attached to him
chose to stay with him, having lost faith in the leaders.
93) But didn’t Prabhupada warned against the Gaudiya Math’s influence?
Whatever Srila Prabhupada spoke about the Gaudiya Math was said more than
thirty years ago, and it had a lot to do with events happening more than half of a
century ago. His last statements were of a conciliatory nature, “The war is over.” He
even named some of his Godbrothers, that he had strongly addressed in no
uncertain terms, as members of the Bhaktivedanta Charity Trust. He apologized in
his last days for having used strong words against some of his Godbrothers to keep
his own disciples in the fire of preaching and not let complacency and easy-going
enter his mission. We shouldn’t think that our uncles, cousins or nephews have
stagnated for decades. Prabhupada’s concern was mainly for his very young disciples
when he said “If they say one thing different from me it will cause great confusion.” It is
true that he also said, “Don’t go to my Godbrothers, they cannot help us, rather they
are quite competent to harm us.” But that should also be qualified and not taken as a
blanket statement against associating with ALL of the Gaudiya Math. It was his
reaction to isolated acts of disrespect from some Godbrothers who opposed him, or
had reinitiated some of his disciples, or couldn’t understand why he had accepted
the title “Prabhupada” that all the sannyasis had agreed in a meeting (to which
Prabhupada wasn’t invited as he was then a householder), never to use themselves
and keep reserved for Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. He repeatedly tried to reunite
his godbrothers to strengthen the preaching.
94) What about the ISKCON gurus who went to Srila BV Narayana Maharaja in the
late eighties and until ninety five?
By going to him while Srila Gour Govinda Swami was still on the planet, the
ISKCON gurus who went sent two messages: One is that they didn’t really know
Krishna-tattva. The second is that they believed no one in ISKCON did. Other
ISKCON members could then reason, “Why should I take from someone who doesn’t
really know? Let me go to someone who knows. And since they go to this sadhu, he
obviously knows more than them. Yei krsna-tattva vetta sei guru haya, one who
knows the science of Krishna can be a guru. And if he doesn’t know, how can he be a
guru? Why should I take from him?”
When asked about this point, Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja answered by saying
that there were two considerations: He said that from the institutional point of view
it was not so good, because you need discipline to run a society; but that from the
transcendental point of view there was no problem as Maharaja is a mahabhagata.
95) Some of these ISKCON devotees apparently approached Srila Narayana Maharaja
as a raganuga-guru or rasa-guru?
By the way, if they went to Srila Maharaja and he was not bona fide, it means that
they could not discriminate who is who and are therefore not qualified as spiritual
guides. And since he is bona fide and they rejected him, it says the same. Catch 22!
96) Others say they just take siksa from Narayana Maharaja.
The principle of taking siksa is completely bona fide. Prabhupada specifically asked
Srila Narayana Maharaja just prior to leaving this world to help him by continue
training his disciples. The GBC later on concocted the idea that Prabhupada did say
that at that time, but if it was now he wouldn’t say it!!?? Lately they have tried to
minimize their transcendental relationship in a very unpalatable and offensive way...
97) In the quest for spiritual truth, one may join a religious mission to advance towards
the ultimate goal of life.
After some time, however, sectarian policies may appear to bar the path of
progress. He may see that within the society, pragmatic concerns take precedence
over spiritual ideals. If one feels the necessity to look elsewhere, his authorities
may tell him that there are no higher truths to be found. One may also be warned
that if he leaves the society, he will suffer serious repercussions. He may become
an outcast, branded as a heretic for pursuing what he sincerely feels to be the ideal
upon which the society was founded. Should he risk leaving the society, ignoring
the advice of his immediate authorities, or should he try to remain within the
society?
Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Progress means elimination and new acceptance. So,
when there is a clash between the relative and the absolute standpoint, the relative
must be left aside, and the absolute should be accepted...We must be sincere to our
own creed...The form is necessary to help me in a general way to maintain my
present position. At the same time, my conception of the higher ideal will always
goad me to advance, to go forward...Spiritual life is progressive, not stagnant...The
search for Sri Krsna is dynamic and living, so adjustment and readjustment is always
going on...Our most precious gem is our ideal...Krsna’s final instruction is sarva
99) What are the dangers in becoming a guru before being self-realized?
Srila Sridhara Maharaja says that one faces two dangers: “The first is partiality.
Partiality means full freedom with his disciples. This relationship is also more attractive
to him. The second danger is deviation. So, deviation and partiality - these two things
can take one down. These are the two enemies. And one who takes that position must be
particularly careful about these things...This position is dangerous. It is full of
temptations. Therefore, a strong, sincere indomitable desire for the upper aspirations of
Krsna consciousness is the indispensable necessity. Otherwise, he can’t maintain his
position. He will go down. He has become master and will think, “I am the master of all
I survey.” In a particular circle, he is monarch. And monarchy can bring madness. That
is a great temptation. If one is not sufficiently conscious of this fact, he will not be able to
maintain his position. For one who has monarchy over men and money, it is very
difficult to maintain a position as a servitor. The ego of mastership which is generally
found within all of us comes to attack him...Generally the symptoms of deviation fall
into three different classes: kanaka, kamini, and pratistha: money, women, and
reputation. First, a guru loses his attraction for his own guru and sastra-upadesa, the
advice of the sastra. Then, what he previously expressed, quoting the scriptures and the
words of his own guru, gradually becomes absent in him. His attraction for the higher
thing fades. That is pratistha, prestige. Kanaka, kamini, pratistha: money, women,
and name and fame - these are the three tests to be put everywhere to see whether one is
a sadhu or not, or what degree of sadhu he is. The first thing is deviation from his
higher gurus. That should be detected. That is pratistha, pride. Then, he will show
more tendency to amass money and not to spend it. Money may be collected, but that
must be distributed for the service of the sampradaya, for the service of the Vaisnavas.
But amassing money - this is the second sign of deviation. The third is attraction
towards the ladies.”
100) If one has received harinama from one guru and diksa from another one, how
should he deal with these two gurus?
Srila Sridhara Maharaja: “The first importance should be given to the nama guru, or
the guru who initiates one into the chanting of the holy name of Krsna, and second to
the guru who gives initiation into the gayatri mantra...Jiva Goswami has written that
the name of Krsna is the principle thing in the gayatri mantra...We accept the mantra
only to help the nama-bhajana, the worship of the holy name...The mantra helps us to
do away with the aparadhas, offenses, and the abhasa, or hazy conceptions in our
bhajana...An example is given of larger and smaller circles. The holy name of Krsna is
the larger circle. It extends from the highest to the lowest. The mantra circle is a smaller
circle within the larger circle. The mantra cannot reach to the lowest point. The holy
name can extend itself down to the lowest position. The mantra gives us entrance into
liberation, and then the name carries us further. This is the nature of our connection
with the mantra and the name. The name extends to the lowest position, to the
candalas and yavanas...
He must be self-realized:
“Unless one is under the shelter of a self-realized guru, his understanding of the
Supreme is simply foolishness.” (Teachings of Lord Caitanya, p.201)
“The qualification of the guru is that he must have realized the conclusion of the
scriptures.” (SB 11.3.21)
“To become Krishna conscious one must take shelter of a realized soul... a self-realized
spiritual master, a niskincana.” (SB 7.5.32)
“A serious devotee must first approach a spiritual master who is not only well versed in
the Vedic literature but is also a great devotee with factual realization of the Lord.” (SB
2.4.10)
“One must approach a self-realized Krishna conscious person and touch his feet.” (SB
4.26.20)
“Unless one is self-realized and knows what his relationship is with the Supersoul, he
cannot become a bona fide spiritual master.” (SB 3.28.2)
“The word ‘tattva-darshi’ refers to one has perfectly realized the Supreme Personality of
Godhead.” (SB 5.15.4)
He must be a pure devotee:
“No one can get out of this struggle for existence without accepting a pure devotee of the
Lord.” (SB 5.14.1)
“This confidential knowledge is extremely difficult to understand, yet it’s very easy if one
takes shelter of a pure devotee.” (SB 7.6.27)
“One cannot be in a transcendental position unless one serves very faithfully a pure
Vaisnava.” (CC Antya 7.53)
APPENDIX 2: ANARTHAS
In the Caitanya Caritamrita, Madhya Lila, we read: “Sometimes unwanted creepers, such
as the creepers of desires for material enjoyment and liberation from the material world,
grow along with the creeper of devotional service. The varieties of such unwanted creepers
are unlimited.” (158)
“Some unnecessary creepers growing with the bhakti creepers are the creepers of behavior
unacceptable for those trying to attain perfection, nisiddhacara, diplomatic behavior,
kutinati, unnecessarily killing animals or the soul, jihva-himsana, profiteering according to
material calculations, labha, mundane adoration, puja, and mundane importance, pratistha.
All these are unwanted creepers.” (159)
“Nisiddhacara: There’s a certain pattern of behavior prescribed for those actually trying
to become perfect. In our Krishna consciousness movement we advise our students not
to eat meat, not to gamble, not to engage in illicit sex and not to indulge in
intoxication. People who indulge in these activities can never become perfect.
“Kutinati: Diplomatic behavior cannot satisfy the soul. It cannot even, satisfy the body
or the mind. The culprit mind is always suspicious; therefore our dealings should always
be straightforward and approved by Vedic authorities. If we treat people diplomatically
or duplicitously, our spiritual advancement is obstructed.
“Jiva-himsana refers to the killing of animals or to envy of other living entities. The
killing of poor animals is undoubtedly due to envy of those animals. There are many
religious propagandists who do not know how the ultimate problems of life can be
solved, and they also try to educate people in a form of sense gratification. This is also
jiva-himsana. Real knowledge is not given, and religionists mislead the general
populace.
“Labha: As far as material profits are concerned, one should know that whatever
material profit one has must be abandoned at the time of death. Ignoring that there is
life after death, mundane people waste their time amassing material profit which has to
be left behind.
“Puja: Similarly, adoration by mundane people is valueless because after death one has
to accept another material body. Material adoration and title are decorations that
cannot be carried over to the next body. In the next life, everything is forgotten.