Philosophy: Does your guru have a material body?

Last week at the BG discussion in the temple I had run into another devotee suggesting that Prabhupada's body was material after all. I had to correct him. However the question "do you see it" spiritual? How do you do it?

About which guru are you talking about Dave?

We actually don't think it is 'marble' full stop.

"Even if you say that this is a marble statue, still Kåñëa is so powerful, omnipotent, that He can accept your service even through this marble. Actually, it is not marble."

Just to be sure - it is not marble (even if materialist sees it this way).

"In this connection the Padma Purana states, arcye visnau sila-dhir gurusu nara-matir vaisnave jati-buddhih . . yasya va naraki sah: "One who considers the arca-murti, the worshipable Deity of Lord Visnu, to be stone, the spiritual master to be an ordinary human being, and a Vaisnava to belong to a particular caste or creed is possessed of hellish intelligence." One who follows such conclusions is doomed."

"These rascals say patthar puje hari mile to me puju pahada. They think, he's such a rascal, he's thinking that the Deity is patthar or stone. But it is not like that."

"If anyone, the Deity in the temple, thinks, siladhih, stone and wood; vaisnave jati-buddhih, if anyone considers a Vaisnava under certain particular race or caste; gurusu nara-matih, if one considers guru as ordinary human being, then he is hellish. These are forbidden. We should know the arca-vigraha, the worshipable Deity, is Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself, present."

You are trying to apply anumana here, but you should take it as fact. (I know it is hard Dave, but this is required).

I would not take exact words of Hayagriva Swami to be exact words that Prabhupada have said, but it seems we would rather discuss deity arca-vigraha, then the "directly spiritual" body of a guru. (thank god we are not discussing jati-buddhih - so much spread out these days...)

ccd:Dave, we do not take spiritual masters body 'spiritualised' it is 'fully spiritual' as per sastra and Prabhupada. I do not like your tone, you did not even offer your obeisances... dangerous... (((:-)

The fact that we take spiritual master's body as fully spiritual is not to be confused with a pure devotee who has no material affection, due to his body's being spiritualized like a red-hot iron in contact with fire. It seems if you do not have a spiritual master you can not understand it. It does not work on 'previous' acharyas, it is a specific view of a current guru requirement. (I think I am hitting it rather close to the nerve with you, so I just wanted to touch it a bit more to see where is a root of your affliction...)

Svarupa in Caitanya lila may differ to svarupa in Krsna lila... but anyway can you just confirm whom are you talking about here (in your own case). I honestly do not know any spiritual master who has bodily symptoms, that you do not see... (or you see but do not tell us) - (you can send me the name in an email if you are afraid that your ritvik friends will laugh at you=P

ccd:Are you again talking abstract concepts? Try using your eyes of love..... I mean sastra-caksu... on an actual person. I am sure all devotees will have some bodily function, but have you accepted a devotee who has these functions, but for whom you not see them? (try not avoiding this question, you quite old already Dave, you are have been a devotee for like 15 years or more...=)

- Sure, we are talking about many gurus that you have? "Guru IS plural" (actually guruh is plural, guru is singular...) So let us list here, just to see if you are man of theory or of practice;-)
I have to be honest that I find Vedas initial comment very useful, but it seems you are just avoiding the real question for yourself, however painful it may be.

How are we defining spiritual here? As I understand it, spiritual means "for Krishna's pleasure." The spiritual master's body is spiritual because his bodily activities are meant for pleasing Krishna.

What is interesting about it?

I would expect him speak about how he feels that the body of Srila Hridayananda Goswami is spiritual or spiritualized (american spelling dude:) There is no point in discussing body of a 'nitya-lila-pravista' guru, obviously it is worshipable, question is how you see 'your' guru, the guru who answers your questions and chastises you, the guru who speaks the mantra in your ear and if you can not repeat right, correcting you, how you see his body? Is it made out of material elements or not? (obviously question is not to you Dave... and not about Narada Muni)

Well that could be an answer, if it's not composed of material elements, I will not insist that gurus body is his svarupa, but it well may be his/her svarupa in Caitanya lila, lots of jiva-tattva gurus, who got old are worshiped in their Caitanya lila svarupa forms.

While another quote may help, I use it alot:

"One may argue that we may see a person who is spiritually engaged twenty-four hours a day but is still suffering from disease. In fact, however, he is neither suffering nor diseased; otherwise he could not be engaged twenty-four hours a day in spiritual activities. The example may be given in this connection that sometimes dirty foam or garbage is seen floating on the water of the Ganges. This is called néra-dharma, a function of the water. But one who goes to the Ganges does not mind the foam and dirty things floating in the water. With his hand, he pushes away such nasty things, bathes in the Ganges and gains the beneficial results. Therefore, one who is situated in the spiritual status of life is unaffected by foam and garbage-or any superficial dirty things."

And

"The spiritual master, or äcärya, is always situated in the spiritual status of life. Birth, death, old age and disease do not affect him. According to the Hari-bhakti-viläsa, therefore, after the disappearance of an äcärya, his body is never burnt to ashes, for it is a spiritual body. The spiritual body is always unaffected by material conditions."

Prabhupada wrote it just a few weeks before departing from this world.

maah!:kanistha gurus and madyama gurus do have material bodies.

Thanks for your understanding which is on topic. Which sastra is it from (or is it from your head?)??

In Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.12.1-2), Lord Krsna Himself explains:


na rodhayati mam yogo
na sankhyam dharma uddhava
na svadhyayas tapas tyago
nesta-purtam na daksina

vratani yajnas chandamsi
tirthani niyama yamah
yathavarundhe sat-sangah
sarva-sangapaho hi mam


"My dear Uddhava, neither through astanga-yoga (the mystic yoga to control the senses), nor through impersonal monism or an analytical study of the Absolute Truth, nor through study of the Vedas, nor through practice of austerities, nor through charity, nor through acceptance of sannyasa, nor through many pious deeds, nor through giving daksina, nor through following vows, nor through performing many yajnas, nor through chanting Vedic hymns, nor through visiting holy places, nor through controlling the senses can one bring Me under his control as much as one can by associating with saintly devotees. Their association frees one from the touch of matter."

In Srimad-Bhagavatam (5.12.12), Jada Bharata explains:


rahuganaitat tapasa na yati
na cejyaya nirvapanad grhad va
na cchandasa naiva jalagni-suryair
vina mahat-pada-rajo-'bhisekam


"My dear King Rahugana, unless one has the opportunity to smear his entire body with the dust of the lotus feet of great devotees, one cannot realize the Absolute Truth. One cannot realize the Absolute Truth simply by observing celibacy (brahmacarya), strictly following the rules and regulations of householder life, leaving home as vanaprastha, accepting sannyasa, or undergoing severe penances in winter by keeping oneself submerged in water or surrounding oneself in summer by fire and the scorching heat of the sun. There are many other processes to understand the Absolute Truth, but the Absolute Truth is only revealed to one who has attained the mercy of a great devotee."


atrāhuḥ-deśika-sat-prasaṅgasyāpīśa-hetukatvāt tad-anugraha eva mocako'stu | śubhādṛṣṭaṁ tu na tat-prasaṅga-hetuḥ | tasyāpi tad-dhetukatvāt | sarvā ca pravṛttir īśa-hetuketi, parāt tu tac-chruteḥ [ve.sū. 2.3.41] ity anena nirṇītam | tasmād deśikādy-anugrahasyāpi mukti-kāraṇatva-kalpanam ayuktam iti |

atrocyate-yadyapi deśikāder anugrahe'pīśa-hetukatvaṁ sambhāvyaṁ, tathāpi tebhyo dattāsti, atas teṣām eva tatra svātantryam | tair anugṛhīte tu jane so'pi tam anupravartayatīti sarvāṇi vākyāni sāspadāni syur vaiṣamyādy-apanayaś ceti

Here someone may object: The mercy of the spiritual master and the association of saintly devotees are both attained by the mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore the real cause of liberation is His mercy. even good fortune does not happen independently. That also is caused by the Lord's mercy. Indeed, all actions are caused by the Lord's mercy, as was explained in sūtra 2.3.39. Therefore it is not right to say that liberation is caused by the mercy of the spiritual master or by any cause other than the mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

To this objection I reply: Even though they are themselves caused by the Lord Himself, still the spiritual master's mercy and the other causes like it are also causes of liberation in their own right. This was already explained in the passage beginning with sūtra 2.3.40. The truth is that the Supreme Personality of Godhead becomes conquered by His devotees and He gives them the power to grant His own mercy to others. In this way the devotees are independent agents who can deliver the Lord's mercy to others. When the devotees give their mercy to someone, then the Supreme Lord also gives His mercy to that person. In this way all seeming contradictions and the different passages of the scriptures are all resolved. (Baladeva' Govinda Bhasya -3.24/33.51)

In Smṛti-śāstra it is said:


guru-prasādo balavān
na tasmād balavattaram
tathāpi śravaṇādiś ca
kartavyo mokṣa-siddhaye


"The spiritual master's mercy is most important. Nothing is more important. Still, in order to attain liberation one should certainly hear the glories of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and serve Him in many ways."

bhavati vicintya viduṣā
niravakāra guru-paramaparā nityam
ekāntitvaṁ sidhyati yayod-
ayati yena hari-toṣam

A discriminating person pleases Lord Hari by remembering the succession of bona-fide spiritual masters, all of whom are transcendental, this enable one to attain the perfection of unalloyed devotional service.

I have just heard a recording of a lecture at Govardhana retreat with a nice explanation on how to resolve this question and see it - it is a subjective qualification of the disciple. The speaker quotes HBV by Sanatana Goswami:

avidya va savidya va gurureva janarddanah
marga-stho vapy amarga-stho gurur eva param gatih (sometimes they say satam gatih in the same sloka;-)

And describes it as a laksanam (qualification of the disciple) not guru-laksanam.

How can you say he is avidya or amarga-stho and still consider him as good as God? Because he is giving you Krsna.

"The Absolute alone may communicate His service to the separable constituents of Himself. This is the real nature of the function of the guru."
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura

(note this quote, Sacinandana Maharaja interrupted the speaker and asked him to repeat it so that he can write it down).

Nrsingha:Is there an exact reference availiable for HBV quote? Ysvt.

'Whether ignorant or learned, the guru is Janardana. Whether situated on the path or not, he is ever the goal. From Aditya-purana as quoted by Srila Sanatana Gosvami in Hari-bhakti-vilasa 4.359.

" mercy of *Hari*, the *spiritual master*, ***and*** *the Vaisnavas*"

A neophyte devotee does not serve Vaisnavas and an advanced devotee does not think that some persons are Vaisnavas and others are not.

Therefore it is only the intermediate devotees who honor and serve Vaisnavas.

An intermediate devotee must serve the three kinds of Vaisnavas: 1. he who once chants the holy name of Lord Krsna, 2. he who always chants the holy name of Lord Krsna, and 3. he who, simply by being seen, makes others chant the holy name of Lord Krsna.

Thus Vaisnavas should be served according to the degree of their advancement, whether they are a good Vaisnava, a better Vaisnava, or the best Vaisnava.

No one can judge who is a good Vaisnava and who is an intermediate Vaisnava. Only an advanced Vaisnava can understand that. If an intermediate (madhyama) Vaisnava tries to say this, he will commit an offense.

- Bhativinode Thakur, Jaiva Dharma - ch 8

*Uttama bhakta (and Bhakta Dave) ki jay!!!* [edited]

Personally we understand ourselves at this time to be Madhyama-adhikaris. We have taken intiation from a bona fide spiritual master and are engaged in worshiping the Deity. If we look at the last paragraph in Text Five of Upadesamrta Prabhupada explains that a Madhyama-adhikari can accept disciples but in the perspective of an Uttama-adhikari-guru. So, that is the kind of Diksa-guru we are. We give names, beads, promises on the authority of the Founder Acharya of ISKCON Srila Prabhupada. Everyone of our Disciples should accept Srila Prabhupada as a Guru.

Who is the Diksa-guru, you or Prabahupada?
Answer depends on what you mean by Diksa guru. If you mean the person who chants on the beads and gives the name and makes the promise with his own lips that by chanting your prescribed number of rounds you are guaranteed to advance to the highest platform of Uttama-adhikari, then we are the Diksa-guru. If you take Diksa-guru as that person who makes the contract with Krsna, then it is Prabhupada. Quoting what we’ve heard from Prabhupada if you engage in devotional service it will all be very clear. Its practically clear to us. We are trying to not eclipse Prabhupada, but we are also offer a facility on this authority.

What happens if a Disciple falls down?
Unless you are chanting 16-nice rounds, and that means Mangala-arati and Srimad Bhagavatam and Sankirtana and practical relation with ISKCON; and following the 4-principles strictly then we cannot function as your Diksa-guru, representative to Srila Prabhupada and the Guru-parampara. If you want we can certainly try to serve you as Vartmana-pradarshika-guru again and get you back on the path and then we can be Disksa guru again. Don’t cheat yourself.

Srila Prabhupada talks about Guru-tattwa again and again in his books, but the main thing is just our sincerity to serve Srila Prabhupada. We are following Srila Prabhupada and therefore we are going back to Godhead. Anybody who follows us, following Srila Prabhupada is also going back to Godhead, and the same is true for people following people following us.

You have to work out these these to a practical level to chant good rounds, follow the principles and engage in sankirtana and then gradually guru-tattwa will become clearer and clearer to you.

3. ISKCON Formalitys. You must chant 16 nice rounds and follow the four regulative principles strictly, rising by 1-1/2 hours before sunrise, mangala arati, kirtan, reading Prabhupada's books, practical relationship with ISKCON authorities and sankirtan for six months. Then with approval of your Temple President or other ISKCON authority you can become a Formal Aspirant. Six months more of the same thing and you can take initiation.

4. Guru Fallsdown. Question: Guru is described as a god, an absolute authority, but we see in ISKCON that many of our gurus falldown. How can we understand that? How can he be Absolute if he falls down?

HpS: As far as we understand he’s absolute because he told you that he might fall down. If he’s madhyama-adhikari then he most likely won’t fall down from devotional service but he might have some accidental falldown into bad activties. ”api cet suduracaro, bhajate mam ananya bhak” (BG): Even an “ananya bhak”, very fixed devotee can falldown, not just into “duracaro”, bad acts, but into “suduracaro”, abominable acts, but he may still “sadhur eva samantavyaha”, internally a sincere, saintly devotee. He may feel very, very bad about his accident.
Personally I tell people that this is my position. I am a madhayama-adhikari. For considerable time I an undeviating in chanting my rounds, following principles, mangala-arati, sankirtana etc. but considering the history of our Western Godbrothers its not a question of if I will falldown, it seems more likely that I will falldown. Maybe some special mercy for the most fallen we’ll be able to avoid that, God help us, but if we do then we plan to get back up in a wonderful way.
We Westerners come from abominable backgrounds so if there is accidental falldown into bad activities then it may not be too surprising. Just like a child, he loses control of his senses sometimes and crys, but nobody takes it too seriously. With a little help he gets back in line and is wonderful again.
Srila Prabhupada is our standard. We are trying to help him.

make the mind restless. One should focus more on his own standard. So, give the discussion a rest and work on your own advancement.

Hare Krishna!!

From Hanumat Presak swami

ccd: See elaboration in Govinda Bhasya 3.4.48-49

"A devotee who places full faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who makes friendship with the pure devotees, who shows favor to the innocent person, and who avoids those who are atheistic or are against devotional service--such a devotee is called a second-class pure devotee." - Teachings of Lord Chaitanya (Original Edition, Ch. 11)

ccd: My understanding from your last quoted sentence is that acarya can be in any asrama.

ccd:
There is also no instruction from Prabhupada suggesting that he is the end of production line, ie the last acharya or anything like that. Just yesterday I heard his address in CA, he clearly said "my guru maharaja was number 10, I am number 11 and you will be number 12." There are not excuses to change this.

You clearly heard that? Strangely enough, I couldn't find any such quote searching the Internet. What I instead found published in several places was this: "Now, tenth, eleventh, twelfth. My Guru Maharaja is tenth from Caitanya Mahaprabhu, I am eleventh, you are the twelfth. So distribute this knowledge.” (Srila Prabhupada Arrival Lecture, 18/5/72, Los Angeles). It would seem that you "clearly" heard what you wanted to hear, not what Srila Prabhupada said.

TFO says this about Srila Prabhpuada's statement: "The first quote clearly mentions that Srila Prabhupada’s disciples are already the twelfth – 'you are the twelfth'. Thus this is not some authorisation for them to become diksa gurus in the future, but merely a statement that they are already carrying on the message of the parampara."

You have "refuted" their argument and imposed your preferred meaning by changing what Srila Prabhupada said. Very clever.

The TFO's view, that he was talking about siksa gurus, is supported not only by Srila Prabhupada's use of present tense in referring to his disciples as "the twelfth." He immediately follows that by saying "So distribute this knowledge." That is clearly an instruction pertaining to siksa, with no mention of diksa.

ccd:

Pandu das: siksa, with no mention of diksa.

Siksa is more important then diksa. Even diksa gurus do not have a material body, what to speak of siksa gurus!

That may be (presuming the siksa is pure); but then don't change the siksa to support rubber-stamped or unauthorized diksa gurus.

It makes me wonder... Did Satsvarupa try to have sex with his married (to someone else) disciple using his spiritual body? Did Param Gati Swami propose a homosexual encounter with his disciple with his spiritual body? etc. etc. etc.

What I get from this is that it is easier to deify a person for a neophyte if that person's appearance in the everyday's life of the disciple is minimized, if he is remote and does not do much that can be 'seen' as material. The facts must be ignored, like the fact that Prabhupada's wife had a child when she was 14yo. This has to be erased or overlooked, in order for a disciple to see the body of the spiritual master as fully spiritual.

It is exactly the siksa element, vani, that takes precedence, the instructions, not behavior, and even that is adjusted to emphasize the vani element.

While using the eyes of the scriptures, disciple can discount apparent inconsistencies on the strength of the fact, that Krsna is actually responsible for all and every action and there is absolutely nobody who can act independently of His will, directly as for a devotee or indirectly as in case of non-devotee. Even no blade of grass moves without the will of Krsna.

If representative of Krsna states that body of guru is 'fully spiritual' - I take it literary, can I accept it? On his and sastra's authority, not because I can prove it otherwise.

ccd:What I get from this is that it is easier to deify a person for a neophyte if that person's appearance in the everyday's life of the disciple is minimized, if he is remote and does not do much that can be 'seen' as material. The facts must be ignored, like the fact that Prabhupada's wife had a child when she was 14yo. This has to be erased or overlooked, in order for a disciple to see the body of the spiritual master as fully spiritual.

I am not suggeting here that His Divine Grace had ever been engaged in “duracaro”, bad acts, or “suduracaro”, abominable acts, rather that for a disciple some of it will be hard to take as purely spiritual. But it has to be. (Am I repeating myself?)

ccd:

ccd:What I get from this is that it is easier to deify a person for a neophyte if that person's appearance in the everyday's life of the disciple is minimized, if he is remote and does not do much that can be 'seen' as material. The facts must be ignored, like the fact that Prabhupada's wife had a child when she was 14yo. This has to be erased or overlooked, in order for a disciple to see the body of the spiritual master as fully spiritual.

I am not suggeting here that His Divine Grace had ever been engaged in “duracaro”, bad acts, or “suduracaro”, abominable acts, rather that for a disciple some of it will be hard to take as purely spiritual. But it has to be. (Am I repeating myself?)

Taken in isolation it looked like you were suggesting sinful behavior by Srila Prabhupada, but in the context it was clear you were not.

ccd:

While knowing this one should still see him as transcendental guru, how can you do that (if you were his direct disciple)? Would you want to be direct disciple when he was a family man?

It's much too hypothetical to answer. I can somewhat imagine what Srila Prabhupada was like then based on what little I know, but what would I have been like? That, I have no idea.

"They who prefer to bend, water down, compromise, or obscure the truth to suit various inveigling materially conceived managerial agenda on the plea of propagating the Krishna consciousness movement are not truthful Brahmins, what then of being paramahamsa Vaishnavas. It is disgraceful to remain a fallible neophyte. It is not enough that children pretend to be adults ad nauseum on the plea of perpetuating the sampradaya. Sand-box make-believe-world half-baked mud-pie “Krishna consciousness” will not do. Vaidhi bhakti, though useful to a limit, is like licking the outside of a jar of honey."