Swami Tripurari: Understanding the Role and Relationship of the Guru

Revelation offers a solution to the problem. A comprehensive way of knowing. A perfect way of knowing. How shall imperfection know perfection? If perfection wants itself to be known, something like that. It's not a dead thing, perfection. Faith in revelation, this is what gives us eligibility to tread the path. And so the guru...will answer the questions, the doubts, with reference to them. Not just some rote memory, but in an insightful way, employing spiritual logic, reasoning as to their implications, in different time and circumstance and so on and so forth.This is called sastra-yukti. 

Kevala-yukti, that will not help us...Logic unhinged from revelation, that will not be helpful to us...The sutras say...'For this kind of reasoning you never get anywhere. You never get any standing. There is always some other kind of reasoning that will come.'...He or she, the guru, reasons on the basis on the implications of the sacred texts and thereby answers our questions. So this is the basis of the relationship. We have come to the point where we realized, 'I'm bankrupt here', in terms of making a comprehensive solution. 'There's nothing I can do on my own strength to make a solution to the problem. But I have sense that the Godhead can make a solution, a supplication to him in the form  of the guru who represents by way of answering the questions and clearing the doubt' And the doubt will soon be cleared if you have faith in sastra. If you don't have the faith, then I quote the sastra and you say, 'Well, anyway'. Then that's your problem. And that's an unfortunate problem. 

So, we have to understand what is the task, if you will, of the guru. Of course she has to be acquainted with the text and acquainted in a substantial way. Now, as I say, not by mere memory but realization and experience. And sometimes, therefore, just experience itself, experiencing the experience, if you will-by sitting with the guru, we will have no questions... Some might think, 'Time for questions, I don't have any.' That might not be a problem. 

So to do Krsna bhakti, guru bhakti, take shelter of the guru, hear from him, and as the doubts are cleared our suspension, so to speak, that comes from our suspicions, is relaxed and we become animated. Our animation is no longer suspended. We are all moving according to some faith, obviously, faith in the mode of goodness, passion or ignorance. But here is an opportunity for faith beyond the modes of nature. And that gives us the ability to move in that arena. And so, hear from the guru, receive diksa, receive siksa-that supports the diksa-the imparting of the mantra and so forth. Rendering service affectionately to the guru. Serving the vaisnavas, and all these things are mentioned by Rupa Goswami in the context of Krsna-bhakti so they are very important. 

If we understand, this is important, the role of the guru, then if we don't we may think, "I've been abused or something, by the guru'. He may handle us roughly, that's possible...The story is Rupa Goswami was writing Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu, and one sadhu...disagreed with something Rupa Goswami had written. And so Jiva Goswami went and kind of called him out, so to speak, and said, 'You've actually misunderstood the verse. Here's what my Gurudev actually meant here.' Rupa Goswami has described the desires for karma and jnana as witches, like ghosts that haunt the heart. Make it like a haunted house. The disagreement was, 'You are calling karma and jnana witches', and these things are articulated in the scriptures. Jiva Goswami says, 'No, not that they are but the desires for them, they are.'

 And so, the story goes that he defeated that scholar and news of that came to Rupa Goswami. Rupa Goswami was very angry with Jiva Goswami for that. He might think, 'Well, you know, I didn't do anything wrong Gurudev. I told them what this verse actually meant. I defended you and explained it and he accepted the defeat.' Anyway, Rupa Goswami was upset with it. He wanted to teach something else. The humility of the vaisnava and the principle that argumentation may not always be necessary, helpful. It certainly plays out when the disciples argue with one another about how best to serve the guru...over relative issues. 

At any rate, the point is that Jiva Goswami was banned by Rupa Goswami...He could have said, 'I've been abused here. My intentions were good. My preaching was correct, and so forth, and Gurudev is upset with me.' ...There are many examples of this, so, we need to be careful about such and really try to put ourselves in the hands of the Absolute and as Mahaprabhu says, "He may embrace me, he may trample me.' That may be the case. See how Ram dealt with Sita. It'll break your heart, how could he do that? Of course the gopis complained about that themselves. But, at any rate, if we understand the relationship and so forth then there won't be much scope foe making offense by way of thinking, 'I've been abused by the guru.'

We want a guru who will pat us on the back and praise us. See how eager the great devotees are to be chastised by their guru. How Prabhupada took so much joy in the fact that he was singled out on one occasion, by Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur, and chastized by him, thinking, 'He cares for me." And Prabhupada wasn't even doing anything wrong, it was the other guy. There was a setting, many devotees, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur was speaking, and one other devotee was pulling on Prabhupada's ear, trying to talk to him while the talk was going on. And rather than criticize that fellow, Bhaktisiddhanta criticized Prabhupada. 'So, you know so much, you think you can sit here.' And Prabhupada was like, 'He cares about me so much. I wasn't do anything wrong.' He didn't go, 'Gurudev, I wasn't doing anything wrong. You were wrong.' No, not like that. So...if we better understand what the relationship is about; Guru is there for explaining to us the scripture, it's significance, its import, and setting an example of being absorbed in that himself, or herself.

Otherwise we also know from Rupa Goswami's teaching that sometimes great persons they may have some physical and bodily defect. They may be deformed. They may have a limp. Or this may extend to the subtle body. They may have some disposition that's not entirely pc or they may be a little bit psychologically out of balance, or something. You listen to the stories of Gaura Kishore and how he dealt with people and we might be a little shocked how he wasn't kind and loving. And he was cynical at times and dismissed people and so on. So, these types of things are to be overlooked in light of his or her real and genuine absorption in Krsna consciousness, if we see that.  Then the  other thing should be seen in light of that. The example is given that the Ganges is pure, many things float in it. Those things aren't pure, but the Ganges is.

Excerpt is from a lecture by Swami Tripurari, titled, "Q&A:The Fire of Guru-bhakti"