BY: SUNANDA DAS (ACBSP)
Jan 17, 2012 — USA (SUN) — I appreciated and agree with Mahasrnga prabhu’s points in his article, “The Real Problem in ISKCON is the Ambition of Wanting to be Guru“. Srila Prabhupada said on several occasions that a guru cannot fall down. Once questioned on this he replied that the very words “fallen” guru were antithesis to each other. There is simply no such thing. A guru is a liberated soul, so to be fallen from that position is a non-reality. Once liberated, always liberated.
However, in the case where a madhyam or even a kanishta-adhikari becomes guru, falldown is a possibility. In that case perhaps Srila Prabhupada’s statements were only with regards to a “real” guru, an uttama-adhikari guru who certainly can never fall down. In fact, aspiring bhaktas are directed in the Nectar of Instruction to avoid gurus on lesser platforms because their ability to elevate the consciousness of the conditioned soul is insufficient and, under the circumstances, they are still susceptible to material attraction and can fall down.
It is also clearly stated that until one reaches the stage of prema, falldown is possible, though not likely. So by definition, Srila Prabhupada’s definition, the shastric definition, a “real” guru must be a pure devotee and uttama-adhikari. There is no question of falldown for such a jivan mukta guru and maha-bhagavata devotee.
Under such above definitions, it is also a truism that if the guru cannot fall down then there is no question of re-initiation. The guru, being our eternal preceptor and guide, is the representative of God, the intimate associate of the Lord who brings us into His service. Where is the question of his falling and the disciple requiring to be re-initiated into the parampara? Unless, of course, he wasn’t sufficiently qualified to begin with.
Still, we find a different and apparently contradictory view in the Harinama Cintamani of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur (translated by Kushakratha das). Firstly, in Chapter Six, ‘Disregarding the Guru’, the third offence in chanting the Holy Names, the following is a description of the bonafide guru and how he must be viewed and regarded:
“The sambandha jnana or teachings are handed down in a sampradaya from the founder-acarya of the sampradaya. These original teachings and the founder-acarya of the sampradaya are to be worshiped with all respects. One should be loyal to his conclusions and instructions, not taking teachings from others. One should take as siksha or diksha guru only a person who is following faithfully the teachings of that founder-acarya……Thus guru, whether siksha or diksha guru, must be the servant of Krishna, an associate of the Lord eternally in Vrindavana, who has been especially empowered by Krishna. One should serve the guru with great devotion, knowing him to be directly empowered by Krishna, the dearmost servant of Krishna, and one’s own eternal spiritual guide.”
Later, the following is stated:
“If a guru takes unsuitable people for disciples, and if a disciple takes an unqualified guru, he will accordingly suffer. In order to avoid these misfortunes one should be cautious. On the other hand, as long as both guru and disciple are properly qualified, the relationship will continue. Ideally, this relationship is eternal; but if the disciple becomes bad, the guru must reject him, and if the guru becomes bad, the disciple must reject him. Otherwise, both may fall. Better one than both”.
And finally:
“When should a guru be rejected? It may happen that through asat sanga a guru may lose his qualifications. Starting as a big guru, by committing Nama aparadha he loses his knowledge. By offending other Vaishnavas he loses a taste for the Name and gradually falls under the control of wealth and women. Such a guru should be rejected. By the mercy of Krishna that disciple will obtain a new bona fide guru and take up pure chanting of the Name again.”
I’m in no position of realization to present a definite conclusion that will resolve the apparent contradiction we see here; the guru is to be regarded as the dearmost servant of Krishna, an eternal associate of the Lord in Vrindavana, directly empowered by Krishna, yet, he can lose his qualifications through asat sanga, etc. Thus, I hope to open up this dilemma to the other Vaishnavas on this forum for their comments so that we can churn this most controversial of siddhantic truths within the Vaishnava community further.
Prabhupada came to the West to establish Lord Caitanya’s Sankirtan movement for uplifting humanity. Reporters often asked, why another religion, we have so many already?
Prabhupada’s answer was that Krishna consciousness is not a new religion but is teaching us how to become better lovers of God.
“That is first-class religious system, if one develops his dormant love of God. That is religion. That is first- class, transcendental religion. And Bhagavata, in other place it is said, dharmah projjhita kaitava atra: all cheating religious system is rejected here.”
So to speak, the Sankirtan movement is a purely transcendental spiritual movement, totally above the four defects of material existence.
There is no such thing as error, mistake or falseness in Krishna’s parampara system.
To act without knowing the result of our work is not the spiritual platform of bhagavata-dharma, but under the modes of material nature. But this is what we have right now by appointing neophytes to officiate as full-fledged diksa-guru.
Prabhupada: “Therefore our proposition, to receive perfect knowledge from the authorities, that is perfect. As Krishna says, evam parampara-praptam. Krishna is perfect, and whatever knowledge He imparts, that is perfect. If we take knowledge from Krishna, then our knowledge is perfect.”
So there is no tinge of doubt or bewilderment in Lord Caitanya’s Sankirtan movement.
What we have right now with so many fallen “gurus” is a path of uncertainty as to what will be the result. In the beginning it might look promising, but nobody knows what will happen after a certain period of time. Among disciples it is a situation of anxiety, uncertainty.
First and foremost, a situation of unacceptability for new devotees to surrender their whole life and not knowing if their guru is realy firmly established on the spiritual platform.
At the same time to see it global and historical, after so much endeavour the Sankirtan movement finaly made it to the fallen Westerners and ends up with so many fallen “gurus”? What about creating faith, sraddha? After all, it says, every town and village, all will finally adobt the chanting of the Holy Name.
Any sincere Sankirtan devotee therefore says, we have to have compassion to save suffering humanity and not present a situation where people lose faith. Besides, this people have experienced enough, they don’t require Hare Krishnas who also fall down.