|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 22, 2009 7:54:10 GMT -6
I have been reading several books on the Guru or on a specific guru. One such book is Christopher Isherwood's book My Guru and His Disciple. This is primarily an account of his long relationship with Swami Prabhavananda of the Ramakrishan Mission (RKM). It is really a sweet, sensitive and non-dogmatic view of the relationship between Isherwood and Prabhavananda. It contains just enough about Hinduism as it was lived in the USA in 1940s, 50s, and 60s, by smart and talented people that I decided to use it for my course on religion in the Spring. I especially like the way he ends it, with Isherwood rather dreading the possibility that Ramakrishna Loka may really exist and he may be stuck there for eternity. His only consolation is that his lover Don will show up before too long and make things easier for him. It is the doubt and the honesty that I most prize about it. Plus it is very well written.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 22, 2009 8:35:02 GMT -6
My second book in this line is My Father's Guru by Jeffrey Masson. It is a very different take on the guru, a rather negative one, that never the less has its points. Of course it is not as well written as Isherwood's, a little bit choppy for my tastes, but nevertheless an important point of view. His father's guru was Dr. Paul Brunton who wrote about spiritual life and India in the 1930s and 1940s. Paul Brunton (PB) still has a small following though he has been dead for some years. Jeff was placed in his care as a young boy and groomed to become the next great guru in the Brunton tradition, but instead becomes disillusioned and rejects him and the concept of the guru entirely. This disillusionment comes after he goes to Harvard to study Sanskrit. I am familiar with Masson's works on rasa and dhvani. He later gave up Sanskrit for psychoanalysis and then gave up that for his most recent work on studying the feelings of animals. He is now one of the most vocal opponents to cruelty to animals in the world. (I am also reading his book The Pig Who Sang to the Moon) It is about the feelings of farm animals and the horrible torments visited upon them on farms, especially corporate farms, today.
After reading him, I slowly find that I am coming to agree with buddysattva about the institution of the guru. Perhaps it like the form of government called kingship is really a thing of the past. As I say this I mean no disrespect to my guru or any other guru, but there is something about the institution itself that is flawed.
Here is what he says at the end of his book:
"To some extend, what PB (Paul Brunton) offered is offered by every guru. The implicit promises he made are made by all gurus, spiritual, psychoanalytic, or otherwise. PB offered wisdom, not knowledge, divine love, not human regard, visions, not insight, access to secret forces, not mediation, magic powers, not persuasion, mystery, secrecy, obfuscation, and paranoia. Every guru claims to know something you cannot know by yourself or through ordinary channels. All gurus promise access to a hidden reality if only you will follow their teaching, accept their authority, hand over your life to them. Every guru offers to read your past, or your future, or a past birth, or your hidden thoughts---and promises that you will develop the same ability. But you must always subordinate yourself to the guru. Certain questions are off limits. There are things you cannot know about the guru and the guru's personal life. To ask is at best impolite, at worst apostasy. Every doubt about the guru is a reflection of your own unworthiness, or the influence of some external evil force. You are not just expected to accept irrationally, you are to revel in it. The more obscure the action of the guru, the more likely it is to be right, to be cherished. Ultimately you cannot admire the guru, you must worship him. You must obey him, you must humble yourself, for the greater he is, the less you are---until you too reach the inner circle and can start abusing other people the way your guru abused you. All of this is in the very nature of being a guru.
Every guru inflicts tyranny upon his disciples, every guru exploits his chelas, every guru dominates the student. Abuse is part of the definition, whether it is financial, emotional, sexual, physical, or intellectual. Once in, there is no escape. The best way out is never to go in."
A pretty harsh condemnation. Is it true? Should we abandon the institution? His guru was Paul Brunton, clearly a charlatan. Perhaps this criticism should just apply to phony gurus. But maybe it is just too dangerous for the modern age. Real gurus are in decline, maybe even no longer existent.
Food for thought. Any other good, thoughtful books on the guru?
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on Oct 23, 2009 15:16:09 GMT -6
Irina Tweedie's Daughter of Fire. It's been some years since I read it but I remember that it made quite an impact on me. It is a little different in outlook in that it is an account of following a guru in the Sufi tradition, but there are some exciting similarities with the "Hindu" approach.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 24, 2009 7:16:12 GMT -6
Thanks, Ekantin. I will check it out. I am kind of interested in doing some reading on Krishnamurti, the guru-denying guru. I see that there are several biographies out on him. It is hard to tell which of them will give a balanced, unbiased view of him.
There is another couple of books I am thinking of reading. One is called The Guru Papers: Mask of Authority by Joel Kramer, which seems to take the approach of Masson in viewing the institution as an authoritarian, totalitarian, and harmful one. None of the libraries around here seem to carry it, at least none that I can borrow from. Don't want to buy because I will have to transport it back to the USA.
Another is Feet of Clay: Study of Gurus by Anthony Storr. One thing these books seem to have in common is that they go for the sensationalist gurus, those who are clearly fakes and showmen. One wonders what of the traditional guru-disciple relationship survives in them. Anyway, I will try to keep an open mind.
My question is: if the institution of the guru is no longer effective, no longer acceptable in the modern world, what can take its place as a training ground for the cultivation of bhakti?
Two other institutions, which I think we all condemn, strike me as very much like the guru institution: the caste system and monarchy. Is there anyone who wants to return to those clearly abusive systems. The caste system may have had its justification in days gone by when there was no good system of cultural and educational dissemination. Monarchy also had is uses in highly stratified societies. And one can argue for each that in the hands of a good group of brahmanas or a good king, each worked well. But there is nothing to keep brahmanas and kings good. No checks and balances. The guru system is just like this. I find it absolutely frightening when I envision it in the hands of potential monsters. It is harmful not only for the disciples but for the gurus as well.
Just some thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 25, 2009 7:21:00 GMT -6
Irina Tweedie's Daughter of Fire. It's been some years since I read it but I remember that it made quite an impact on me. It is a little different in outlook in that it is an account of following a guru in the Sufi tradition, but there are some exciting similarities with the "Hindu" approach. I looked this one up. It is a big book, some 800 pages. It looks interesting, though. I will try to get my hands on it either here or when I get back home. It might be useful as a text in one of my classes.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 25, 2009 7:39:47 GMT -6
I started reading the book by Shri Purohit Swami called An Indian Monk: his life and adventures. He was a friend of W.B. Yeats (and maybe his guru? It is hard to tell.). They did an Upanisad translation together that is very strange. Not sure how much of the real meaning of the Upanisads it contains, but it is a good work of English. Here is the first verse of the Isavasya Upanisad:
Whatever lives is full of the Lord (IzAvAsyam idaM sarvaM, yat kiJcij jagatyAM jagat) . Claim nothing (tena tyaktena); enjoy (bhuJjItha), do not covet His property (mA gRdhaH kasyasvid dhanam).
So far the life of the Swami is a tale of privileged and idyllic life in North India. It looks like it will get more interesting shortly.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 28, 2009 12:37:06 GMT -6
The more of the Purohit/Yeats translation I read, the more I like it. It is an interpretation of the Upanisads, but all are and this one is pleasant to read. Reading the Katha Upanisad at present and enjoying it. Highly recommend it.
The autobiography of Shri Purohit is a bit frustrating though. I don't see much value in it. It does make me think that Jeff Masson was not far off in his book called The Oceanic Feeling. He identifies following Freud I think the advaita experience with narcissism. Shri Purohit is certainly narcissistic and he loves his Brahman. I won't give up yet. But I am not getting much rasa out of it.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 28, 2009 12:48:28 GMT -6
In thinking about the guru I have been reminded of a delightful section of the conversation between Premananda Bharati and Boro Baba that I translated and included in an appendix of my edition of Bharati's Sri Krsna. He expands the idea of the guru a great deal and sees the guru as involved in every case of learning. Thus the guru is not seen so much as an authoritarian or totalitarian as a guide whose lessens succor and protect the student. That is the side of the guru institution that is missing from Masson's account in My Father's Guru. One might say that the guru operated in Masson's case to bring him to the realization that Paul Brunton was a fake. The guru in the form of Daniel Ingalls and others made him realize the difference between real knowledge of the cultural and philosophical discoveries of India and the shallow ones he imbibed from PB. His book, rather than constituting an argument against the institute of the guru, might be construed as presenting a good argument for the guru, in the broader sense envisioned by Boro Baba and other broadminded Vaisnavas (Rasikamohan, for instance). What is criticized is overly narrow and mindless constructions of what the guru really is.
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on Nov 5, 2009 18:40:34 GMT -6
In a recent article by Advaitadas on his blog, he seems to think that guru is the same distinct personality in every life after life: janme janme prabhu se. He bases his thoughts on a reading of Sri Sanatan Gosvami's Brhad-bhagavatamrta, placing an emphasis on the word nijam. I'm not sure I agree with his idea, but what does everyone else think?
|
|
|
Post by portnoy on Nov 8, 2009 12:16:48 GMT -6
It's kind of like saying --- hey, your father and my father are fathers!!! We must be related!!! When you take individuality out of the big picture you're left with a hodgepodge, amorphous, undifferentiated (and boring) scenario. Back to the old "simultaneously one and different" concept. Works for me. You'd think with the name Advaita he'd get that. Maybe he's referring to Guru with a big"G" and guru with a small "g." Then there's the guru who's an "old g."
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Nov 8, 2009 16:23:19 GMT -6
What does he mean when he says: the glories of the (one) guru? There is only one guru that deserves glory? Presumably his? We should not glorify another guru, only the (one) guru? We should not recognize our indebtedness to anyone else who has contributed to our advancement, who has taught us anything, who has protected us in any way or fashion? What a nut, if that is his claim! He is far worse than a Christian or Muslim fundamentalist fanatic. The position that he wants to push is precisely the opposite of the one I mentioned earlier as expressed from the lips of Bodo Baba. Bodo Baba even understands those who teach by showing the wrong way to do things as gurus. He suggests that they may even be greater gurus because they willingly undertake the suffering involved going astray so that the rest of us will learn from his mistakes. I see that as a genuine, humble and very generous vision of the role of the guru. Advaita seems not to have even the smallest degree of generosity in him.
The verse he cites from Sri Sanatana does not really support his position. Rajamanah purvavat means "appearing" like before and suggests that he takes that form for recognition's sake. It could just as well be the guru-tattva taking that form in order to teach him. Advaita will try to draw out whatever meaning he wants from the texts, no matter how ill they fit.
Moreover, Advaita ignores Sri Jiva's teaching on the two types of guru, the individual (vyasti) guru and the universal (samasti) guru.
I could go on to say that Advaita may be one of the worst things that has happened to CV, except that, heeding Bodo Baba's advice, I think instead I must honor him for the sacrifices he makes in teaching the rest of us so well how not to be Caitanya Vaisnavas.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2009 22:12:27 GMT -6
Jay Nitai,
My Siksha Guru Srimad Hridayananda Das Baba taught me Diksha Guru is like Father who has given us the birth in spiritual world by providing seed as diksha mantra and given us the identity as his child.
All other Vaishnava who worked towards our spiritual advancement by giving us spiritual shelter, advice, love, compassion and assurance of Krishna Prapti is like our Mother in spiritual world who raise us. This included Siksha Guru and any other kind Vaishnavas. They are all our mother.
All should be remembered as Guru Tattva. The same Sri Krishna ( Samasti Guru ) appeared before us as Diksha Guru/Siksha Guru ( Chaitta Guru ) and Parampara Guru ( Bysti guru ) . For our line Sri Radha Raman Charan Das Dev ( Bodo Baba ) is our parampara guru.
So there are three level of manifestation of Guru Tattava : Chaitta Guru (Diksha Guru / Siksha Guru/ Sravan guru / Advance Vaishnavas )-> Byasti Guru / Parampara Guru -> Samasti Guru ( Sri Krishna / Sri Nityananda ).
The same Nitaichand is appearing before us in mutli dimensional metrics of Guru Tattva. Any deficiency of Guru Tattva ( we should not see that as defect as it would be a Guru Aparadha ) is supported by the higher dimensional Guru Tattva. ( For e.g Chaitta Guru supported by Byasti/Parampara Guru and Parampara Guru Supported by Samasti Guru). The support comes automatically from same supreme Guru Tattva whenever there is need for the betterment of disciple. So that answers the misconception to have a sidhdha Guru for spiritual advancement, which is nice to have but not a must have.
For our line the Parampara Guru is Sri Radharaman Charan Das Dev. My own spiritual grand father namacharyya Sri Ram Das Babaji concluded in his akhar "
Ami Karur Guru Noi, Sobar Guru Sri Radha Raman Ami Kori Agya Palon
"
I am not anybodies Guru, The Original Guru is Sri Radharaman Dev ( Bodo baba ) , I just obey his instruction to give mantra to others ( initiation ).
Another Akhar of Babaji mahasaya which says Jagat Guru Nityananda goes beyond the marg barrier. In all the paths ( be it bhakti, yoga, or gyan ) Sri Nitai appears as Guru Tattva to deliver the sadhaka as per their own adhikar ( Bhakti , Yoga or Gyan ).
Jay Nitai Jay Gour
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2009 22:27:41 GMT -6
Jay Nitai,
This is for your reference Nitai das Ji. During my 2nd visit to Sri Sindarananda Das Vidyvinode house I got my personal copy for Guru Tattva. Which is from different world. I consider it is a blessings to me by Sri Sundarananda Das Vidyavinode Thakur. I thought we sent one copy to you.
Jay Nitai Jay Gour
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Nov 17, 2009 15:27:12 GMT -6
Yes, Subrataji, that is a great book. You and Sakhicaran dasji sent me a copy and I hope to present some translations from that book on this forum. Sundarananda Vidyavinoda has gathered together numerous Vaisnava texts to compose that work and it presents deep insights into the CV understanding and practice of finding shelter with a genuine guru.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Nov 24, 2009 7:39:33 GMT -6
I have been continuing to read books on the guru. My current reading is An Indian Monk by Shri Purohit Swami. It is not a particularly great book, but it occasionally has something of interest to say. Here is a paragraph on the guru or master:
The company of my master was a constant pleasure. Every little problem is important, and to solve each by oneself requires great expenditure of time, energy, and intellect. But he was ready to make the way easy for me. In their eagerness to realise, students of yoga imagine that they have attained a higher stage than in fact is the case, and need to be brought down time after time to the bottom of the ladder; hence the necessity of a guru. A guide is needed in order to attain proficiency in science; then why should we shrink back from choosing one for our spiritual studies. A guru is not a tyrant, neither is a disciple a slave. The master is also friend and guide, and the disciple is loved. If the disciple wants of his own accord to take up a humbler position, it is not the fault of the guru. The relation is voluntary; though there be no limit to the reverence that a disciple can give, there is none to the liberty that the master may allow. The psychological adjustment meets each particular case, and onlookers have rarely any ground to find fault. (p. 120-1)
This is the fellow who probably became the guru of William Butler Yeats in the 1930s.
|
|