Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
theist

Guru's responsibilites

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Q.-What are the guru's responsibilities to the disciples he accepts?

 

Recently one "intiating guru" resigned and apparently just assumed his "disciples" would take some shelter of another guru or the GBC or whatever. He seemed to feel no personal responsibility towards them. I see this as disquised backdoor ritvik philosophy, although ISKCON claims to be ritvik free.

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

"I see this as disquised backdoor ritvik philosophy, although ISKCON claims to be ritvik free."

 

yes, sadly the worst enemy is at a few steps from victory,,,,,,,,,,, and your's is not the only example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HK

 

I used to think when people said SP is my spiritual master and I don't need anyone else, I thought they were being a bit sentimental, because you need a living Guru, but after having read about 'other' stuff, I can only say that Srila Prabhupada is alive through his book, tapes etc. But what gets me is how aspiring disciples can accept a siksha spiritual master so quickly, wouldnt it be better to be initiated into the Maha-Mantra through SP (diksha) and then wait for ? years and check out the 'competition'. After all a spiritual master is for life and not just for Christmas!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

How can anyone honestly critique the situaion descibed above without knowing the details? The obvious answer is that of course someone who takes on the function of guiding others has some obligation to them. Ever heard of dead beat dads? How about dead beat gurus? Every action we take comes with some consequence and some responsibility, but people often fail to live up to their responsibilities. What to do?

 

Those disciples who are serious about their spiritual life will obviously feel the need to find someone who is qualified to help them. Others may leave in disappointment. It depends on how great their own innner necessity is. If they truly want to be Krsna conscious - or if we truly want to be Krsna conscious - we will seek out good guidance and do the needful according to the circumstance we find ourselves in.

 

It is not about institutions or regulations or any such thing - it is about each individual's own inner desire for truth.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the guru's responsibilities revolve around giving them the best example and guidance he can. If he realizes at some point that he's not able to give disciples the help he needs, he should behave responsibly enough to see that they are in good hands. It's not enough to walk out of the house and tell the kids, "If I don't come back home, find some neighbors to take care of you."

 

Still, like Audarya, I think that judging a situation without actually knowing the details of the case is not likely to be very productive. If theist is talking about who I think he is, I saw years before that this man was not what he thought he was. He should have seen it, too, and made arrangements for his students as carefully as he did for his "property."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was really wondering in a more general way. We know the disciple is to serve the spiritual master ask relevant questions, be submissive and such.

 

What should the spiritual master feel personally towards the disciples he accepts? Are there even any specifics along these lines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Srila Sridhar Maharaja gave the example that in the presence of higher Vaishnavas, junior Vaishnavas should defer the candidates to the higher Vaishnava. He said that if a higher, better seed is available one should not sow the lower quality seeds.

 

Sometimes we find junior Vaishnavas actually competing with very much senior Vaishnavas rather than serving them. According to Sridhar Maharaja this is an offense. To become guru means to think that there is no higher Vaishnava available, that my seed is the highest. This is a very dangerous mindset and a dead giveaway of personally motivated ambition. In a situation like Prabhupada's he was a natural acharya, but in today's international Vaishnava society it is a different story. When senior Vaishnavas like Prabhupada's Godbrothers or senior sannyasis like Narayana Maharaja or Govinda Maharaja are available it seems like the right thing to do is defer new candidates to these greatly senior Vaishnavas. Just because we bring some new devotee to accept Krishna consciousenss, that does not really give us claim to them as our own disciples.

I brought a famous ISKCON artist to the temple at the time he became a devotee, but that does not give me the right to claim him as my disciple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guruvani: To become guru means to think that there is no higher Vaishnava available, that my seed is the highest.

 

I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. It may be that some prospective students find a particular devotee's example, mode of presentation, etc. more inspiring. That doesn't necessarily denigrate devotees who may be on a higher plane of realization. This is not the sort of thing that lends itself well to legislation, either formal or causal. In Jaiva Dharma, we see that when one babaji brought the sannayasi to his guru for instruction, the guru told the new man to associate with, hear from, and serve the devotee who brought him. If I remember correctly, the new guy eventually accepted initiation from his instructor guru, not the senior babaji.

 

In all cases, we need to allow what Sridhar Maharaja called the free flow of the devotees' faith. I understand why many would want to make a connection with Govinda Maharaj or Narayana Maharaj. However, I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with devotees who, while they respect these senior vaishnavas, find that the kind of faith necessary for ultimate surrender is inspired in them by another.

 

As I've said before, I think that also means that someone who feels more inspired by a devotee who accepts them only on Srila Prabhupada's behalf, room probably should be left for that, as well. And I think it should also leave room for those who, as Dyutidhara Swami did, realize that the guidance of someone such as Narayana Maharaja can give his students is superior to anything he can give. Ultimately (and I've made this point before, too), a qualified guru doesn't see that he has anything to give other than the opportunity to join him in serving guru and Gauranga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that angle. However, a brand new neophyte devotee has very little qualification for understanding how to make the best choice when accpeting a guru. In the beginning he might have some "crush" on a sannyasi to be his spiritual master, but later he might find out that there is a much more senior, perhaps elderly Bengali Vaishnava that he finds to be much more dear to his heart. Then, what to do? He prematurely accepted some American Swami as guru and then later came to appreciate an elderly Bengali Vaishnava much more than his so-called guru and then starts to feel like he does not want to be the disciple of the American Swami because be does not approve of some of his business practices or whatever.

 

The point is, a responsible preacher will give the new devotee the best advice and direct him to the higher, more experienced Vaishnava despite some sentiment on the part of the new devotee to become a disciple.

The new devotees should not be allowed to make a "guru" out of a junior Vaishnava when senior, more experienced Vaishnavas are available. New devotees should not be allowed to dictate the etiquette and culture of Vaishnavism. The system of respecting the senior Vaishnava should be taught to them and they should not be allowed to learn imperitinence and insubordination.

 

We actually have examples of this exact scenario, and the outcome was unfortunate for both the sannyasi and the disciple who wanted to transfer his service from an American sannyasi to Sridhar Maharaja. The situation became ugly, offenses were commited against Sridhar Maharaja and the whole mess was very unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"However, a brand new neophyte devotee has very little qualification for understanding how to make the best choice when accpeting a guru. "<<

 

Therefore he should not be pressured and pushed into making a choice at all. I would think the proper thing to do would be to direct him or her to the Lord in the heart for such direction. That, with proper study, will insure an appropriate choice is made at the proper time for that person. That is of course if we really believe there is a Lord in the heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with that, yet, if a preacher has no Vaishnava that he looks up to and reveres or admires, then he must feel that he himself is the best Vaishnava of all. If he does have some high regard for another senior Vaishnava then his natural tendency will be to express his high regard for the senior Vaishnava, give his endorsement and then let the new devotee take his time and make his own decision.

Some new devotees coming to the movement might not be aware that many sannyasis have gone down and gone away and created massive disturbances to the movement. They might be naive and gullible and easily taken advantage of. They should understand that accepting a spiritual master is not a fad or fashion even among devotees - that it is a very serious and eternal committment in sacred service.

The higher seed should be sown or there will eventually be some unfortunate situations when the naive new devotee gets more learned and experienced and his perspective matures and evolves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ksamabuddhi: The point is, a responsible preacher will give the new devotee the best advice and direct him to the higher, more experienced Vaishnava despite some sentiment on the part of the new devotee to become a disciple.

 

You betcha! And an important part of that advice would be to careful read the books carefully and discuss his or her misgivings with devotees in whom they have confidence, and not to be in a hurry. It may also be that they initially feel some infatuation for an elderly Bengali sannyasi but may find a disciple of Srila Prabhupada who has imbibed from him the broad, revolutionary vision of Krishna consciousness brought out by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. Srila Prabhupada told me personallythat devotees and devotional service cannot be stereotyped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't argue with that scenario and indeed I can see how such a viewpoint by new devotees has a lot of merit.

However, Vaishnavas are humble to a fault, to a pathetic degree and if a devotee genuinely feels himself inferior to another Vaishnava it will be practically impossible to get him to accept disciples in the presence of some higher, senior Vaishnava.

He would feel within himself that he would be cheating the disciple and even though the new devotee can't understand, he would continue to try and show him how the senior Vaishnava should be approached by the candidate.

Maybe, after years of persistence, he would accept the disciple if in the long run the relationship proved to be unbreakable and deeply serious.

To quickly initiate new devotees while they are so inexperienced and spiritually infantile is not a good sign of one's motive. This kind of guru-disciple relationship has a lot to do with the cheaters and the cheated and not much to do with proper humilty and Vaishnava behaviour.

 

A sannyasi should not be flattered by new devotees and overcome by sentiment. He should move very cautiously and deliberately to accept disciples and not with the reckless abandon we have seen since the passing of Srila Prabhupada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"This kind of guru-disciple relationship has a lot to do with the cheaters and the cheated and not much to do with proper humilty and Vaishnava behaviour."<<

 

Yes indeed. Like the example Living Entity brought up a couple days back. How a friend of hers, new to Krsna consciousness and newly initiated, had asked LE how many rounds she herself had vowed to chant.

 

Why the "Guru" didn't take the time to speak to her and explain these things before hand is beyond me. I think this level of neglect is actually a form of abuse. It ceratinly is tamasic.

 

Fulfilling religious requirements instead of building spiritual relationships is not personalism, Vaisnavism. Quite the opposite in my view.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the principles you have given.

 

On the other hand, we may see senior Indian sannyasis initiate anyone who walks into the room, sight unseen. And the new people, who don't even know why they are there, are so swept away by the emotion of the moment, augmented by the exhortations of other followers, that they go along. If such senior vaishnavs give such shelter to so many so easily, without taking personal responsibility for their training, it's hard to see the expression of humility, and it may be easy to perceive some neglect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from what I have heard it is not that easy to get initiation from an ISKCON guru nowadays and all the requirements must be met strictly.

your example of the Gaudiya Math type Vaishnavas initiating at the drop of a hat violates Prabhupada's standards and has nothing to do with "helping" Prabhupada or "serving" Prabhupada but has much to do with disturbing the movement and interfering with Prabhupada's mission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Babhru, I don't mean to single ISKCON out or anyone else. There is a danger of developing or proagating a brand of what some Christians do. Say a certain prayer once and you are saved. Go through the intiation ceremony and you are now safe and in the club. Then afterall the new bhakta becomes hit with doubts and their mind becomes disturbed and they end up doubting the process.

 

But I was really trying to get answers on what personal responsibilites a genuine guru has towards his genuine disciple, both during their time on earth together and after one or the other quits earth. Things along those lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

the problem is not the system.... is the master

 

if you know and believe that he's a pure devotee.. he sould not be criticized also if he spreads krsna consciousness in a way that we judge revolutionary

 

if he's not ... following all rules, regulations and cerimonies and choosing devotees with care, will not help in any way Him nor the disciples

 

so you have to take the responsibility to judge if, this master you have seen doing like that, is a pure devotee or not... if he's pure he can change every preaching rule

(like srila prabhupada has done)

 

it's funny that srila prabhupad was criticized in the same way by many kanista devotees of his time (rules, regulations, pronunciation of sanskrit by westerners, number of rounds, initiation to women etc.)

 

it seems to me that the true respect of a previous acharya is in expanding his preaching and the chanting of the holy name... even if it has to be done in a different way

 

an excessive concern for rules, regulations, external features of the devotees, regulating principles is typical in kanista adhikaris

 

you have to be more deep... and if things goes on like that (especially with this "ritvikization" going on), maybe IskCon will be no more IskCon and Srila Prabhupada will use some one else to preach krsna consciousness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

it is very funny that you, as a ritvik, are preaching for a "no guru" future od IskCon

 

what requirement can honestly be requested by one who vill be only an officiant in the initiation?

 

he will not give any guarantee of purity to the devotee (he is not initiating ... srila prabhupada is initiating.. i may be the last of rascal!!)

 

and he will not have the possibility to correct the "disciple" (who are you? my master is srila prabhupada, not you!!)

 

the problem is that some iskcon followers are starting to like the sound of your words without knowing that you are more, more, more dangerous for the movement than a 10.000 initiated not respecting any principle and chanting no rounds

 

as i have already said .... maybe the true iskcon will not be the current IskCon in the future, if we assume that krsna consciousness will increase in the time coming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

"He seemed to feel no personal responsibility towards them. I see this as disquised backdoor ritvik philosophy, although ISKCON claims to be ritvik free.

 

Thoughts? "

 

--------

My thoughts - This result has nothing to do with ritvik philosophy but the opposite. It has been ritviks who claim the current guru's are not qualified and therefore are not surprised when a guru falls down or behaves in irresponsible ways. That this latest 'guru' takes no responsibility for his disciples is included in what ritviks are trying to point out, but apparently the point keeps getting missed or turned around.

 

Someday the conspiracy will be fully revealed and all this "living guru" nonsense will be cleared away, as everyone finally understands Prabhupada never died and is living. But apparently Prabhupada's instruction on this has become less important than the shastra HE translated and explained to us mleccas its meaning. Now we think we understand them better than him. No more humility.

 

Although I suppose it is difficult for devotees who have already taken initiation from them,or believe in them, to admit they have surrendered to the wrong person. Until that realization comes on a large scale, be prepared for more and more 'guru's' to behave in irresponsible ways.

 

--- That's my thoughts.

 

Surprised Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I'm addressing any particular system here. And I know I don't intend to criticize any spiritual master. I have observed some problems caused by such easy initiation (not necessarily worse than any problems in ISKCON before or after 1977), but I have also seen some devotees eventually begin to make some progress. I have no doubt that these venerable vaishnavas far beyond the criticism of slugs like me. But I also have no doubt that some number of Srila Prabhupada's disciples have made real progress over the last 20-25 years. Not all have been living the comfy temple lives that so worry Ksamabuddhi, and certainly not all have become bureaucrats or politicians, which I have often complained about. Many have spent their lives undergoing austerities we may find hard to imaging, much less bear, in order to make this perfection available to suffering people around the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

It is no suprise by now to most that devotees fall. What is a surprise is that 'devotees' see that and respond by condemning all devotees due to their disappointment and then claim that there are no Gurus save and except A.C. Bhaktivedanta. This is clearly not something that he ever said or would have agreed with. A close look at his writings and history show quite the opposite.

 

This idea of living or dead is so misrepresented and charged with emotionalism. Anyone with even a very elementary understanding of KC philosophy knows that all souls are eternal - no points for philosophical understanding or eliciting an emotional response to those who try to pull the card of 'who said Srila Prabhupada is dead?' This is simply a smoke screen for misunderstanding the very basics of the philosophy.

 

What did Srila Prabhupada say? He said that the disciples are expected to carry on the tradition and accept disciples themselves in due course, but that proper ettiquette dictates that they don't do so while their Guru is still present. WHAT? What did he mean still present? Did Prabhupada mean to suggest that at some point the Guru would be dead? OH MY GOD! Just see the foolishness of such word jugglery.

 

When your Guru is no longer present means simply he/she has entered into samadhi - no longer physically present. No need to look for other meanings or misrepresent what is clear.

 

An honest disciple is indebted to his/her Guru and will be obliged to help others as he/she has been helped. There is no use in complaining about those who fall from the path - we should pray for their immediate recovery. If we happen to find ourselves in the unfortunate situation of being a disciple of such a devotee we should seek good company elsewhere and continue to pray for the quick recovery of the devotee. We should also be thankful for whatever that devotee has done to help us along the way and for giving us the inspiration to serve Krsna.

 

If you really want to serve and love Krsna, where will you find him? In the temple? In a book? In a prayer? In the Maha Mantra? Yes to all of these - but - here's the real catch - he is most present in his devotee's heart. When a superlative devotee agrees to share his/her heart with us we can be sure we are moving in the proper direction.

 

Is Srila Prabhupada sharing his heart with each of us through his books? You bet he is? Does that mean that's all we need? Of course not. Read the books!!! We all need to associate with advanced devotees - no getting around that - we need personal guidance. Disciple and Guru is a two way street. Can you imagine if some fellow thought that I shall not marry anyone except Marilyn Monroe? No woman is qualified as she is. He then has a priest perform the wedding and declares himself the husband of Marilyn Monroe. People would rightly consider the fellow to be 'disturbed' or less than sane.

 

Who are we seeking a connection with? If we are seeking to love and serve Krsna we cannot ignore his devotees. This will only lead to disaster. Vaishnavism means to worship Krsna's devotees. Lord Chaitanya himself declared that he is the servant of the servant of Krsna.

 

Krsna has now somehow become impotent such that he is no longer able to present himself in the form of Sri Guru? Srila Prabhupada was so unsuccessful as an acharya that no one who follows him can be elevated? He is incapable of gernerating offspring that have any potency?

 

Make no mistake about it - Srila Prabhupada was not interested in making disciples - his only interest is in making Gurus. Real disciple means Guru. It is rare - indeed it is - but if you think so highly of Srila Prabhupada it behooves you to seek him out in the form of his disciples.

 

What happened after Srila Prabhupada left? Do you think all of the disasters that happened in Iskcon would have happened if Srila Prabhupada was still present? Why do you think that a ritvik priest will represent Srila Prabhupada with a higher degree of fidelity than a GBC member of Iskcon Guru? Even the ritviks are divided as to what is what and how to do things. When Srila Prabhupada was present he had to stop so much nonsense that went on in the name of KC.

 

On whose order did Srila Prabhupada begin to function as Guru? Or Srila Bhaktisiddhanta? Srila Prabhupada said that his disciple becomes Guru on his order and now people want a certificate? There will never be one! So - what? - therefore no Gurus? This is nonsense. Srila Prabhupada is calling all of his sincere and dedicated disciples to take up the banner of Mahaprabhu and spread Krsna consciousness throughout the land. If we want to be connected to him we should find someone who is doing that and serve that person with all our heart.

 

Or, we can sit behind a keyboard and condemn everyone who is doing something and when someone runs into difficulty we can proudly declare that 'just see this person was bogus - and predict that 'many more will fall' - but where are we? What is our position?

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

the fact that some people is doing well is not a problem for others.... if anyone does vaishnava aparadha, there's no need to do another aparada to cancel the first one

 

of course who take initiation has the duty to behave as a vaishnava

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...