Questioning the Guru

[Fireside_Hindu]

Namaste all!

So, for anyone who has known me through the forum for a while, you'll know that I'm a bit distrustful of Gurus. Not necessarily the concept of having a spiritual teacher - rather the idea of having one person you go to for all the answers/teachings/wisdom/guidance. I think we learn from everyone we engage with, so in effect any random stranger can be a Guru in a sense, reflecting what we need to learn or see about ourselves back to us. It's not an external, formal arrangement, but the universe places people in our path who we can choose to learn from or not.

I watch a lot of documentaries on cults, faith healers, and Godmen/women. I find them fascinating. Mostly because it boggles my mind how mature, consenting adults can give up their will to someone else to their own detriment. I realize that many of these cult leaders and supposed gurus feed on people's emotional and mental vulnerability. When people feel out of control in their lives it's easier to hand over control to someone else. So I kind of get that in a way, but it still freaks me out.

The result of my natural suspicion of pop-gurus plus this fascination with the psychology behind how cults form makes me dismiss all self prescribed gurus and anything they have to say fairly easily, regardless of how true it might be.

So my question for those of you who have Gurus - How do you know you have a healthy relationship with your Guru? How do you guard against potential manipulation, especially when you are feeling emotionally or spiritually vulnerable? How do you know a Guru is sincere?

If I could meet any of the big name gurus I would love to ask them this line of questions: "You were a child once, or an average joe and no one made a big deal out of you. Doesn't it feel odd to have thousands if not millions of people hang on your every word? Doesn't that make you uncomfortable? How do you keep that from going to your head?

But then, I'm coming from a place that assumes these people are human beings, like me. Capable of mistakes in judgement and susceptible to corruption. I know many people consider their Guru to be God-realized. But then my questions from above still hold.

I guess I am also a very bad Hindu, for not trusting gurus. Perhaps that trust waits for me in some future lifetime.

 

[George-ananda]

I think the traditional thinking about gurus comes from the older times in India when people lived with and studied under a guru in an ashram. I do not know what that looks like in modern western society.

I am influenced by multiple modern spiritual figures but I have no personal contact with any of them. For me, I'm good with that. Westerners like myself are taught to not relinquish control and to think for ourselves. Our media too likes to fill us with situations gone bad stories to make us even more wary.

 

[Vinayaka]

Namaste all!

So my question for those of you who have Gurus - How do you know you have a healthy relationship with your Guru? How do you guard against potential manipulation, especially when you are feeling emotionally or spiritually vulnerable? How do you know a Guru is sincere?

I guess I am also a very bad Hindu, for not trusting gurus. Perhaps that trust waits for me in some future lifetime.

You're certainly not a 'very bad Hindu'.

In my situation, there is no ordering, just suggesting, and organisational policy, but anyone and everyone is free to not accept it. There are tons of 'friends' of the organisation. But members are privy to special attention too, like personal meetings. I can give you a quick example. A person I know well expressed the thought that he/she didn't feel ready to do something further in sadhana practice. The Guru's analogy was "Just because a university offers a course doesn't mean you have to take it." So there is total freedom to leave, and a great deal of time spent proving oneself. There is no declaration, "I'm a follower of such and such."

Let's just say a tremendous amount of common sense prevails in the relationship, and it's not over little things, but more on grand scales. Questions get answered sensibly, and pace is left up to the devotee.

I certainly don't trust mass market gurus ... at all. Neo-advaitins even less. But given the opportunity, if a traditional guru (in ochre) shows up in these parts, I'll touch their feet out of respect, as per the custom. That's not the same as blind obedience, its little different than greeting you with a for real 'Namaste.'

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

You're certainly not a 'very bad Hindu'.

In my situation, there is no ordering, just suggesting, and organisational policy, but anyone and everyone is free to not accept it. There are tons of 'friends' of the organisation. But members are privy to special attention too, like personal meetings. I can give you a quick example. A person I know well expressed the thought that he/she didn't feel ready to do something further in sadhana practice. The Guru's analogy was "Just because a university offers a course doesn't mean you have to take it." So there is total freedom to leave, and a great deal of time spent proving oneself. There is no declaration, "I'm a follower of such and such."

Let's just say a tremendous amount of common sense prevails in the relationship, and it's not over little things, but more on grand scales. Questions get answered sensibly, and pace is left up to the devotee.

I certainly don't trust mass market gurus ... at all. Neo-advaitins even less. But given the opportunity, if a traditional guru (in ochre) shows up in these parts, I'll touch their feet out of respect, as per the custom. That's not the same as blind obedience, its little different than greeting you with a for real 'Namaste.'

If something your guru says should not quite jive with you and you don't feel ready to accept it right away, do you seek answers/advice from other teachers?

 

[Aupmanyav]

I certainly don't trust mass market gurus ... at all. Neo-advaitins even less. But given the opportunity, if a traditional guru (in ochre) shows up in these parts, I'll touch their feet out of respect, as per the custom. That's not the same as blind obedience, its little different than greeting you with a for real 'Namaste.'

I too would do that for some (for their wisdom), though I am an atheist Hindu. For example Sankaracharya Swami Swarupananda of Dwarika Peeth, Paramacharya Swami Chandrashekharananda of Kanchi Peeth, Vinayaka's Guru Satguru Bodhinatha Veylanswami of Kauai Hindu Monastery, Mahamandaleshwara Swami Avdheshananda of Juna Akhara, Swami Adgadananda (whose views matched with mine) or Kripalu Maharaj (whose views did not match with mine) - but I would be very selective.

If something your guru says should not quite jive with you and you don't feel ready to accept it right away, do you seek answers/advice from other teachers?

I do not have a living guru. My gurus (Buddha and Sankara) are long dead (and they have answered all my questions). But first, I will spar with my guru.

 

[Vinayaka]

If something your guru says should not quite jive with you and you don't feel ready to accept it right away, do you seek answers/advice from other teachers?

No. That would never work. What do you do if the 2 answers are in conflict? But then I don't know any other teachers well enough to ask them a personal question like that anyway.

I do remember once asking two of the older monks and getting two quite different answers, which was a bit confusing at the time, but once I went home and reflected on it, I realised, firstly, that the question wasn't all that important, and that secondly, they were in essence actually saying the same thing.

But one really big thing here, when its that close, is that its individualised. So two different people could ask the same question, and each get two different answers. The questions we ask are generally very personal ones, or asking for slight clarifications. The philosophical stuff is all answered in the books, which all member read through once a year anyway. So although it happens, most devotees wouldn't ask about something alreaduy in tyhe book, because its basically admitting you haven't been studying.

But, yes, in this lineage, it is different, the Guru is different, in that He's not behaving like a normal person ... sometimes not at all like a normal person. I've heard it described thus: "Capturing the essence of the Guru is like trying to capture wind in a paper bag." It's a really really deep relationship, a friend, a parent, a teacher, all in one, but on the level of 'no words' too.

 

[Vinayaka]

I too would do that for some (for their wisdom), though I am an atheist Hindu. For example Sankaracharya Swami Swarupananda of Dwarika Peeth, Paramacharya Swami Chandrashekharananda of Kanchi Peeth, Vinayaka's Guru Satguru Bodhinatha Veylanswami of Kauai Hindu Monastery, Mahamandaleshwara Swami Avdheshananda of Juna Akhara, Swami Adgadananda (whose views matched with mine) or Kripalu Maharaj (whose views did not match with mine) - but I would be very selective.

Nice list of very traditional Hindu Gurus there, Aup. Even in airports or temples if I see a Swami, I generally go touch their feet. There was one guy in Madurai temple who really wanted his guys to take pictures with Boss and me. Usually its all just fun. The only other traditional and more famous one I've met was Dayanada Saraswati of Arsha Vidya Gurukulam. It's respect for the tradition, like respecting any Hindu temple you walk by.

 

[Vinayaka]

If something your guru says should not quite jive with you and you don't feel ready to accept it right away, do you seek answers/advice from other teachers?

Different shorter answer ... If hubby cooks something for you, and you don't quite like it, do you cross the street and ask the neighbour to cook something for you?

(There is loyalty involved in the Guru/sishya relationship)

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

Different shorter answer ... If hubby cooks something for you, and you don't quite like it, do you cross the street and ask the neighbour to cook something for you?

(There is loyalty involved in the Guru/sishya relationship)

No, but I may enthusiastically insist on doing the cooking myself next time

 

[ShivaFan]

I can understand your view, FH. But also, mine is a bit different.

Having personally known Gurus - even renown - yes, the great ones mostly exhibit a presence of BHAKTI or it could be LOVE or even FUN ... yet the lingering ones that can powerfully be a partner in life are, should I say? ... dead.

Think about other religions as well that live in the spirit of "gathering". They also have these "Gurus". How can I explain? When you enter a room of such a Guru still alive - there is this spirit of "gathering". In the room are living souls - bhaktars if you will - and this overwhelming feeling of "gathering", we have gathered as if we even knew each other for a long, long time even if we never met. And the Living Guru is the loadstone. A magnet. Among this "gathering" it feels some are from a long time ago, even if not in a physical form.

And why gather?

Why, to SING of course!

But the most POWERFUL of them, continue on even after "leaving" - there are those that are dead even, yet it "still works".

For some, a dead Guru is the best. The dead Guru comes from faraway - having "left" a long time ago, yet... this Guru NEVER really exactly left.

In one way, there is even a more intimate relationship with the dead Guru. Because in part, with the dead Guru you are sort of also being your own Guru.

But with a true Guru who happens to be dead, do not think it is just you and the Guru. No. Such a Guru often brings a host of "gathering birds" of a feather. For some, a dead Guru is the best for them. They also bring a gathering. If you cannot find a Living Guru, sometimes better is a dead One.

But do not call that Guru "dead" to the Guru's face. Always say, "Living Master".

There used to be a song.

My Master is a Living Master
Who so kindly has shown us Light
Cold...
... was my heart.
Mind...
... in the dark.
World...
... falling ... apart ... yet,
My Master is a Perfect Master
Who so kindly has shown us Life
I ...
... feel it breath.
Every ...
... heartbeat ...
Time is short
But so much to speak...
It can be Perfect
And a Perfect Master
Perfect
My Perfect Master is Perfect
My Perfect Master is Heaven
Among the dead and the living
We are but takers from the Giving
And our Master has come
And our journey is Long
Now our Master has come
And our Master has come to take us back on the path of Devotion
Who has given us a place born in Light
Who has picked us off of the ground when we were Broken
And put back all of the pieces and made it Alright

 

[Aupmanyav]

Nice list of very traditional Hindu Gurus there, Aup.

Have I not said that I am a very traditional orthodox atheist advaitist Hindu?
For those whom I do not know, just a 'namaskaram' will have to do.

No, but I may enthusiastically insist on doing the cooking myself next time

That is the best thing to do. Nature (evolution) has give us the instrument. Why keep it lying in the box?

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

Ahhhhhhhhhh me, oh my. Guru bhakti is a thing unto itself. When one meets and stands before one's true guru in the flesh--not just a teacher, not just a swami, not just a revered saint, no, when Guru reveals guru to you and guru mirrors that shining Guru back to you--NOW you've been initiated by and with the Light. THAT Light is what is Guru, it's not a person. It's in THAT that you place your faithful trust believing in its infallibility, understanding that It manifests through Its instrument, the realized Master. This could be the ultimate leap of faith in something other than one's fallible small self: if I'm sincerely devoted to God and need a guru, would my Beloved send me a charlatan? Never!

Appearing for all intents and purposes human, the instrument of guru is unique and so is the relationship one has with him or her, like no other. One can say blithely that he married his spouse forever but deep down, it is known not to be true. But with one's guru, it's just the opposite. The bond is unbreakable and you KNOW it. You can argue, you can disagree, you can even want to quit and probably will at least once! but the certainty that this person is in your corner until you reach your goal of Self-realization goes to the very core of one's being. It is inviolable. The guru cannot abandon his duty, even should he want to. It's the Law. And I gave mine plenty of cause, believe me. But never worried that I could be so "bad" that I was lost to him forever. This is just like one's relationship with God. Exactly like, if you get the subtle undercurrent of my meaning. No matter, in the life you are awakened/ignited (again), henceforth, it's GAME ON!

The remnants of ego desires to remember and reconcile what it saw--Divinity seemingly encased in gossamer flesh--but it can't because what it saw is not of its realm at all. The former is Real, the latter not. As the love and wisdom of the Master is conveyed through his speech, his eyes, his touch, his manipulation of the Sounds of Creation--one experiences what one has read about all his or her life. Quite similar to the difference between reading about candy or getting to pop a chunk of dark chocolate into your mouth. It is these kinds of experiences with one's guru which lead to the realization that no matter how smart or wise or well read or realized we might think we are, we simply don't know what we don't know. But our gurus do and they busily get themselves about trying to cure that--with and only with our trusting consent. Trust in what? Trust in the Light and Love coursing through that realized Master, trust the One behind him, He who is running the Whole Show.

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

Do you think one must live under the instruction of a Guru before achieving moksha? Certainly I'll be coming back for a while for many reasons, but is my active resistance to Gurus one of them?

For some reason, @ShivaFan comment about the value of the "dead guru" reminded me of my first archana.

I had been told I could not be a "real" Hindu because I had no gotram and could not take archana. I believed the last bit (not being able to take archana because I had no gotram) since the announcement of the gotram was a part of the ritual. So I would pay for archanas but never go up to participate when the priest announced sankalpam. I figured it was a donation anyway, and the Goddess knows.

Well, one day I was at temple and it was just me and the priest. I was there to pray and make offerings on my husband's birthday. The priest asked me if it was a special occasion and I told him. He then surprised me by asking me if I wanted to do archana. I fumbled a "yes", not quite sure how this was going to work. The priest began the ritual, and when it got the part where he announces the name of the gotram he said, "Sri Ram Gotram: (It was a Rama temple).

Afterward I was elated. ( I didn't realize that this was the common solution when someone does not know their gotram)

So much like a dead guru, the Devas are not standing in the flesh before us in a literal sense, but they are still gurus and we can be invited into their fold - no Indian birth certificate required.

 

[Jainarayan]

The priest began the ritual, and when it got the part where he announces the name of the gotram he said, "Sri Ram Gotram: (It was a Rama temple).

As a side note, I was told the same thing by people at temple. Because it's a Vishnu temple (technically Krishna: Sri Guruvayurappan is Krishna) my gotra would probably be a name of Vishnu or Krishna. It seems the custom is to take the name of the presiding deity as one's gotra (I do know my nakshatra though).

 

[Vinayaka]

Do you think one must live under the instruction of a Guru before achieving moksha? Certainly I'll be coming back for a while for many reasons, but is my active resistance to Gurus one of them?

For some reason, @ShivaFan comment about the value of the "dead guru" reminded me of my first archana.

I had been told I could not be a "real" Hindu because I had no gotram and could not take archana. I believed the last bit (not being able to take archana because I had no gotram) since the announcement of the gotram was a part of the ritual. So I would pay for archanas but never go up to participate when the priest announced sankalpam. I figured it was a donation anyway, and the Goddess knows.

Well, one day I was at temple and it was just me and the priest. I was there to pray and make offerings on my husband's birthday. The priest asked me if it was a special occasion and I told him. He then surprised me by asking me if I wanted to do archana. I fumbled a "yes", not quite sure how this was going to work. The priest began the ritual, and when it got the part where he announces the name of the gotram he said, "Sri Ram Gotram: (It was a Rama temple).

Afterward I was elated. ( I didn't realize that this was the common solution when someone does not know their gotram)

So much like a dead guru, the Devas are not standing in the flesh before us in a literal sense, but they are still gurus and we can be invited into their fold - no Indian birth certificate required.

Thanks for the story about archanas and gotras. I'd never heard of the first case, and always just seen the second case, and its for most people. Here, in my experience, generally only Brahmins know their gotras, and on the archana form used here, there is no place for it even. I write mine (Subramuniya) in separately.

As for 'dead' Gurus, I think there is a huge difference between a 'dead' Guru, and a 'deceased' Guru. In the second case there was once a relationship. So many of us have a relationship with a deceased Guru.

As for long since passed Gurus like Buddha, Ramakrishna, Sankara, etc., they, for some people are just really safe options. You can't ask them a question and have them disagree with you. (In some rare cases, perhaps there is an inner really mystical connection, and communication happens on the inner planes, but I personally believe this is rare.) But living Gurus will surprise you, not in you disagreeing with them, but in them disagreeing with you. So you can ask a question, expecting a certain answer, and then, you get something totally different, sort of out of the blue, and then you have to go and work within yourself to figure it out. That's the Guru's job ... to help you figure it all out on your own. Not to tell you, but to coach you.

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

Do you think one must live under the instruction of a Guru before achieving moksha? Certainly I'll be coming back for a while for many reasons, but is my active resistance to Gurus one of them?

Simply put, I believe the answer is 'yes.' It's not living with the guru which is needed. It's the transmission, literally, I mean LITERALLY transmission, of Light from one being to another (doesn't have to be human, either, although it usually is). It's an event. It happens. The one who transmits is guru, the one who receives is chela. (It also doesn't have to occur in the physical realm although that, too, is the norm. One can be initiated in a divine dream.) This event leaves zero doubt in its wake that something extraordinary happened. Extra- (beyond) -ordinary (realm of maya). It also forever will make you question all other events occurring on the stage of your life, as in hmmm, "Is this real? Or not?" Discrimination is kindled in the instant you experience Reality. The awareness that what one took for reality all this time, 99.999999% of the time, simply isn't. Remembering that is sadhana.

FH, coming from the West where we've been besieged by fakes looking to cash in on America's vulnerability and wealth, it's so understandable why you might be reluctant to embrace "the gurus." But when you meet yours? Oh, boy! Doubts will flee.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Wonderful posts. Appreciate them all. I disagree with my gurus but refuse to part from them (i.e., agree in part with them).

 

[निताइ dasa]

I love my Gurudeva, and I have great faith in his words, but that does not stop me from questioning. In-fact my Gurudeva has instructed us to always question and be inquisitive. A belief that is not well defended, either by scripture, or reason is not worth having at all. In the Upanisads, the true method of learning is by questioning the Guru, as stated by the Gita:

tad viddhi pranipatena
pariprasnena sevaya
upadeksyanti te jnanam
jnaninas tattva-darsinah

"Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth."

The thing that most attracted my to my Gurudeva is his humble nature. Unlike some other Gurus who elevate themselves to the status of God, and claim supreme authority, by Gurudeva has always proclaimed himself to be a humble servant of Lord Nitai, the Vaishnavs and his own disciples. Everything he has taught us, he has defended with evidence from scripture, and thus established that truth in our mind. He as given us the essence of scripture, and that is why I have great and deep Love for his lotus feet. Jaya Nitaai!

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

Oh dear me, Fireside. What an avalanche of praise- and truthful adjectives, adverbs and metaphors you have unleashed from my heart trying to describe guru and his/her value since I first read your OP! But, alas, one can't say what guru is. His/her value is inestimable, in the realm of the unspeakable. One is reduced to stammering comparisons--while laughing at the same time, mind you, as Creative Mind conjures up illustrations!

And to be clear, when I said doubts flee, that's not the same necessarily as questions flee. Although in my case, questions mostly did just... cease. Gita, Upanishad, etc., teachings from saints of all religions poured over and into us in satsang and guru's writings. Scripture sí, surmise no. Nitaidasaji is correct there. I did have one burning question, however, which I could not get satisfactorily answered... until I surrendered my insistent demand to have it. You see, I had reserved some portion of my self to myself. Nyet, won't work. (Poor Guruji, dumb me. It took 30 years, some of which elapsed after his mahasamadhi.) To confirm from my own experience what Sri Vinayakaji said, he's spot on when he intimates that the relationship with one's guru does not end just because the guru's body departs from this loka. Thank God.

Guru is: (see? Incorrigible! )

a flashLight illumining the Path
a minesweeper
a treasure chest
a fire which puts out fires....
​

Oh, I could go on and on!

​

 

[Spirit_Warrior]

So my question for those of you who have Gurus - How do you know you have a healthy relationship with your Guru? How do you guard against potential manipulation, especially when you are feeling emotionally or spiritually vulnerable? How do you know a Guru is sincere?

You get the Guru you deserve. If you are spiritually developed, you will not gravitate to gurus who are lower than you in spiritual development, but to those who are higher than you in spiritual development. Think of it like spiritual gravitation. The heavier body attracts the lighter body. Indeed, that is the etymology of the word Guru, meaning heavy from which we get the Sanskrit word for gravity Gurutva(same as the English for Gravitas)

How do you know? It will be an "inner feeling" you will know when you have met such a being. However, you might say "Well, everbody says that" well in that case there are certain signs and indicators you are looking for. If you are looking for just somebody to lead you. They don't necessarily have to be the highest Sadguru, they just have to be a bit more developed than you are. So see how well your guru compared to you in their intellect, understanding of scripture, virtues like self-control, tolerance, patience etc and abilities(siddhi) If they are better, but not perfect, still they can guide you as far as they have got, so accept them as a guru.

Once, you have accepted a Guru, you need to obey them. Throw doubt out of the window. Just do everything they say(as long as its legal) The stages for doubt was when you initially tested them to see if they really were more developed than you were. Now, that it has been established. You should trust this person to take you to the point where they are at.