 |
 |
|
|
Go to the “Philosophy Page”
|
|
“In my opinion, a Gaudiya-vaishnava guru should mainly guide the disciple in paramartha-prada.” —Vraja Kishor das |
EDITORS
NOTE:
The views expressed by the author are not necessarily the views of the CHAKRA
editorial team. However, as many devotees are struggling with guru issues, and
guru-reform is on the GBC agenda this year, we thought we would share with you
the following article.
Sadhana does not exist in a vacuum, it exists in the midst of our daily lives. The details of our daily lives therefore derive indirect spiritual importance, and a guru may thus sometimes need to advise a disciple regarding them. However, such topics pertain to the phenomenal world (artha-prada) and are therefore open to ordinary argument and modification. On the other hand, topics of an apurusheya nature (such as those of sadhana, bhava, prema, and rasa) are paramartha-prada, and therefore are not open to ordinary argument or modification.
In my opinion, a Gaudiya-vaishnava guru should mainly guide the disciple in paramartha-prada. Topics in the category of paramartha-prada are understood by the shabda-praman, which depends on “realization” (sahaj-samadhi - the direct spiritual pratyaksha and anuman of the jiva). Therefore, when guiding a disciple in such topics, I believe the guru should clearly and regularly state that he or she is explaining things to the best of his or her ability, according to the level of his or her current realization of shabda. To ensure the reliability of his or her realization, the guru’s main endeavor should be to achieve the utmost fidelity to the explicit documented guidance of Rupa Goswami and his followers. Thus, a guru should advise the disciple that there may well be a different understanding of shabda, and if the disciple develops or encounters such, he or she should present the matter to the guru for sincere discussion and mediation.
As expressed above, I believe that even in topics of paramartha-prada, the guru’s presentation, while not subject to common argument, is not 100% absolute and should not be labeled as such.
If this is true of paramartha-prada, so much more does it hold for topics pertaining to the phenomenal world (artha-prada), which require no mystic realization to perceive and comprehend. Since issues of daily life may affect the disciple’s sadhana, a guru may feel the need to advice the disciple in these phenomenal matters. I find nothing inherently wrong with this, provided the guru expressly states to the disciple that the topic is open for ordinary discussion and debate, as it is not an aprusheya matter - and that the disciples opinion may quite possibly be equally or more valid than his or her guru’s in regard to such topics.
I believe a healthy guru-disciple relationship is very difficult, if not impossible to have without these points being carefully understood and accepted by both participants.© CHAKRA 25-Feb-2000
Go to the “Philosophy Page”
© Copyright November, 2003 by oldchakra.com. All rights reserved.
For information
about this website or to report an
error, write to webmaster@oldchakra.com
You are here
