Namaste Ratikala ji,
I think Makaranda ji gave the one of the most widely accepted qualities of a Guru in śrotriyaṁ brahmaniṣṭham.
In Śri Madhva's tradition:
pratimoktalakṣaṇairyāvad yukta ācārya uttamaḥ | sarvavit tapasā yukta ājñāśakti yuto hareḥ ||
dvātriṁśallakṣaṇairyukto gururuttama ucyate | brahmaiva tādṛśastasya samo nānyoSsti kaścana ||
One having 32 qualities, a physique that radiates beneficence and is symmetric with each part in proportions as depicted in pratimāśāstra, one who is an Ācārya - practices and guides right practices in others, one who knows everything and engaged in tapas owing to the grace of Hari, is the best Guru. The ideal Guru who possesses all these is none but Brahma alone. We find Gurus of varying competencies and the progress of śiṣyas too varies according to the Guru. On encountering a better Guru it is correct to accept a new Guru. This is evidenced in the Upaniṣads as well - Janaka having received knowledge from six others, reaches Yajñavalkya who imparts higher knowledge and Janaka accepts him as Guru; so does Nārada on encountering Sanaka.
a) śrotriya is one well versed in the vaidika śāstras
ऋग्यजुः सामाथर्वांश्च भारतं पञ्चरात्रकम् । मूलरामायणं चैव शास्त्रमित्यभिधीयते । (From Skāndha Pu.)
The vedas, Bhārata, pancarātra, and mūlarāmāyaṇa are considered as śāstras. And as the purāṇas reflect the pancarātras they are accepted too.
The qualification for interpreting vedas is as follows:
त्रिभाषां यो न जानाति रीतीनां शतमेव च । व्यत्यासादीन् सप्तभेदान् वेदाद्यर्थं तथा वदेत् । …
One fully conversant with three levels of interpretation - samādhi, darśana, guhya bhāṣas, 100 methods, and 7 pedagogies - vyatyāsa, pratilomya, gomūtri, praghasa, ukṣaṇa, sudhura, and sādhu alone would be competent to coherently understand and teach the import of the vedas.
b) brahmaniṣṭha is one who has had aparokṣa.
This is discussed in the Brahmasūtra Adh. 3 Pāda 4
atīta-anāgata jñāni trailokyoddharaṇakṣamaḥ
There is no idea of jivanmukta in tattvavāda, an aparokṣa jñāni is one who has experienced his antaryāmi rūpa; the significators of such aparokṣa include trikālajñāna, comprehensive understanding of vaidik wisdom without doubts, not perceiving contradictions in veda vākyas, equanimity in the face of greatest of miseries, so on and so forth and is competent to guide sādhakas towards realization... and other petty siddhis of aṇimā+7 etc. However, aparokṣa jñānis too only get glimpses of antaryāmi in samādhi, sadā paśyanti is for muktas alone. Yet, etādṛśopi nācāram śrautam smārtam parityajet, an aparokṣa jñāni too is not supposed to relinquish śrauta and smārta practices. (Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya of Śri Madhva)
These aparokṣa jñānis will never advertise their competence nor will you ever come across their name in popular media, and when it does they have long shed their mortal coil. Since it is impossible for a sādhaka to identify a Guru, it is suggested that he sincerely pray to his/her iṣṭa devatā or antaryāmi to afford the grace of Guru. When a deserving candidate is ready Nārāyaṇa Himself sends the Guru, and i can tell from my own experience that this is true. The belief is that wherever one's śraddha is, one must remain true to it, and a deserving candidate is automatically directed towards the right path.
Śri Madhva states that without getting anxious about much else follow this:
smartavyaḥ satatam viṣṇur vismartavyo na jātu cit | sarve vidhiniṣedhāḥ syur etayoreva kiṁkarāh ||
Remember Viṣṇu incessantly, forget Him not for a moment, all dos and donts of the śāstras are but the servants of this.
In alignment with the entire philosophy that is based on Mahātātparya (Great Synthesis), bhakti, jñāna, and mokṣa are conceived thus:
भक्त्या ज्ञानं ततो भक्तिः ततो दृष्टिस्ततश्च सा । ततो मुक्तिस्ततो भक्तिः सैव स्यात् सुखरूपिणी ॥
From bhakti arises wisdom which augments bhakti resulting in dṛśṭi (aparokṣa) which establishes true bhakti. This is followed by mukti which enables (parā) bhakti which is the greatest bliss.
Well, I try and see that Hindu religion is not made a mockery of.
I feel, in the process, you are ending up doing just that
The dichotomy you are supposing between satya and bhagavān are imaginary, that between bhakti and jñāna is resolved in their being complementary to each other.
श्रीकृष्णार्पणमस्तु ।
