His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
the Hare Krsna movement)
His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
the Hare Krsna movement)
"Whatever is produced of the complete whole is also complete by itself."
By Purujit Dāsa
Śrīla Prabhupāda says:
“You can eulogize your Guru Mahārāja, but you have to learn it and face the public and be strong to defend yourself. That is success. Not by praising your Guru Mahārāja. You'll praise your Guru Mahārāja. That is not very difficult. But be victorious to the opposing elements. Then you will praise your Guru Mahārāja nicely. At home, you can praise your Guru Mahārāja, and Guru Mahārāja be satisfied, "Oh, my disciples are praising me." That is not very.... That is good. Respectful. That is the qualification. But you have to fight. Then your Guru Mahārāja will be glorified?”
(Conversation on Roof -- December 26, 1975, Sanand)
What are the opposing elements to the spreading of Krsna consciousness movement at the moment? Corrupted managers, bogus gurus, hypocritical pretenders, politicians and mental speculators- the list is endless, but they can be all put under one unifying category, which can be understood from Śrīla Prabhupāda's praṇāṁ mantra:
namas te sārasvate deve gaura-vāṇī-pracāriṇe
“Our respectful obeisances are unto you, O spiritual master, servant of Sarasvatī Gosvāmī. You are kindly preaching the message of Lord Caitanyadeva and delivering the Western countries, which are filled with impersonalism and voidism.”
This is the sum and substance of Śrīla Prabhupāda's mission -to defeat the philosophy of impersonalism and voidism and establish the sublime philosophy of acintya abheda-bheda tattva of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahāprabhu. It is just like watering the root of a tree. If we are able to defeat the philosophy of impersonalism and voidism, then everything else will fit into place along with minor issues.
Voidists and impersonalists are both different version of Māyāvāda (impersonal) philosophy and the basis of the impersonalist philosophy is that although we are all God, we have come under the control of māyā. The proponents of such a doctrine fail to explain however how it is possible for God to be conquered by māyā.
“The last illusion, the last snare of māyā to trap the living entity, is the proposition that he is God. The living entity thinks that he is no longer a conditioned soul, but God. He is so unintelligent that he does not think that if he were God, then how could he be in doubt? That he does not consider. So that is the last snare of illusion.”
(Bg. 18.73 purp.)
Blind man thinks everyone else is blind. Māyāvādīs because they are conditioned therefore think that when Krsna comes into this world, He becomes subjected to the laws of material nature just like they do. The reality is however different. It is the conditioned soul’s vision of Krsna which is illusory, not Krsna Himself.
“Certainly the transcendental body of Śrī Kṛṣṇa is not perishable. He is just like the sun, and māyā is like the cloud. In the material world we can see that there is the sun and that there are clouds and different stars and planets. The clouds may cover all these in the sky temporarily, but this covering is only apparent to our limited vision. The sun, moon and stars are not actually covered. Similarly, māyā cannot cover the Supreme Lord. By His internal potency He is not manifest to the less intelligent class of men.”
(Bg 7.26 purp.)
Although the cloud is the energy of the sun and in one sense same with the sun in quality, there’s a quantitative difference in the sense of cloud covering only an insignificant portion of the sun, whereas the sun can evaporate the cloud at any moment. Actually, the cloud is not covering the sun at all. Simply our limited vision of the sun can be obstructed. Similarly, Krsna can never be covered by māyā. Only our vision of Krsna can be influenced by māyā.
“The energy emanated from the Supreme Personality of Godhead manifests in two ways—as an emanation from the Supreme Lord and as a covering of the Lord's face. In Bhagavad-gītā it is said that the whole world is illusioned by the three modes of material nature, and thus the common conditioned soul, being covered by such energy, cannot see the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The example of a cloud is very nicely given. All of a sudden there may appear a big cloud in the sky. This cloud is perceived in two ways. To the sun the cloud is a creation of its energy, but to the ordinary common man in the conditioned state, it is a covering to the eyes; because of the cloud, the sun cannot be seen. It is not that the sun is actually covered by the cloud; only the vision of the ordinary being is covered. Similarly, although māyā cannot cover the Supreme Lord, who is beyond māyā, the material energy covers the ordinary living entities. Those conditioned souls who are covered are individual living entities, and He from whose energy māyā is created is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
In another place in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in the First Canto, Seventh Chapter, it is stated that by his spiritual vision Vyāsadeva saw the Supreme Lord and the material energy standing behind Him. This indicates that material energy cannot cover the Lord, just as darkness cannot cover the sun. Darkness can cover a jurisdiction which is very insignificant in comparison to that of the sun. Darkness can cover a small cave, but not the open sky. Similarly, the covering capacity of the material energy is limited and cannot act on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is therefore called vibhu. As the appearance of a cloud is accepted by the sun, so the appearance of the material energy at a certain interval is accepted by the Lord. Although His material energy is utilized to create the material world, this does not mean that He is covered by that energy. Those who are covered by the material energy are called conditioned souls. The Lord accepts the material energy for His material pastimes in creation, maintenance and dissolution. But the conditioned soul is covered; he cannot understand that beyond this material energy there is the Supreme Personality of Godhead who is the cause of all causes, just as a less intelligent person cannot understand that beyond the covering of the clouds there is bright sunshine.”
(SB 3.26.4 purp.
What is true about Kṛṣṇa can be also applied to his pure devotee. A pure devotee cannot be influenced by material nature as he is under protection of Kṛṣṇa’s divine nature.
“O son of Pṛthā, those who are not deluded, the great souls, are under the protection of the divine nature. They are fully engaged in devotional service because they know Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, original and inexhaustible.”
“In this verse the description of mahātmā is clearly given. The first sign of the mahātmā is that he is already situated in the divine nature. He is not under the control of material nature. And how is this effected? That is explained in the Seventh Chapter: one who surrenders unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, at once becomes freed from the control of material nature. That is the qualification. One can become free from the control of material nature as soon as he surrenders his soul to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is the preliminary formula. Being marginal potency, as soon as the living entity is freed from the control of material nature, he is put under the guidance of the spiritual nature. The guidance of the spiritual nature is called daivīṁ prakṛtim, divine nature. So, when one is promoted in that way-by surrendering to the Supreme Personality of Godhead-one attains to the stage of great soul, mahātmā .”
“A pure devotee of the Lord does not live on any planet of the material sky, nor does he feel any contact with the material elements. His so-called material body does not exist, being surcharged with the spiritual current of the Lord's identical interest, and thus he is permanently freed from all contaminations of the sum total of the mahat-tattva.”
Just like conditioned souls think of Kṛṣṇa to be under the subjugation of material nature, similarly they think his pure devotee is under the control of material nature:
“Foolish people consider Kṛṣṇa a human being, and they consider Lord Kṛṣṇa 's pure devotee an ordinary human being also.”
(CC Madhya līlā purport 22.51)
Such mentality is considered by the Vedic literatures to be hellish (nārakī buddhi). Anyone who thinks that a pure devotee is under the control of material nature is fit to reside in hell. It is a very serious offense.
“Guru means bona fide guru, not pseudo guru. And according... What guru will advise? To be engaged in Kṛṣṇa's service. These two things will help him. Otherwise it is not possible. Guru-kṛṣṇa-kṛpāya: "By the mercy of guru and by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa." So both of them should be served. That is the process, not that "Now I have become advanced devotee. I don't require to serve guru." Neither, "Oh, I am serving my guru. I don't care for Kṛṣṇa," no. Parallel line. Not that "One line I can walk," no. Parallel line. Guru-kṛṣṇa-kṛpāya pāya bhakti-latā-bīja [CC Madhya 19.151]. Therefore in our temple, along with Deities, guru is also worshiped. Guruṣu nara-matiḥ, if one accepts guru—"Guru is guru, guru is guru"—as ordinary human being, then that is offense, nārakī buddhi.”
(Morning Walk -- April 20, 1974, Hyderabad)
If we study how the puffed up conception of one’s being God enters, we can see that the root is an offense to a Vaiṣṇava.
“Impersonalist Māyāvādīs, who have no relationship with Kṛṣṇa , who cannot take to devotional service, and who simply engage in material arguments to understand Brahman, regard devotional service to Kṛṣṇa as karma-kanda, or fruitive activities. According to them, devotional service to Kṛṣṇa is but another means for attaining dharma, ārtha, kāma and mokṣa. Therefore they criticize the devotees for engaging in material activities. They think that devotional service is māyā and that Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu is also māyā. Therefore they are called Māyāvādīs. Such a mentality awakens in a person who is an offender to Kṛṣṇa and His devotees."
(CC Antya 8.27)
Because the Māyāvādī thinks the pure devotee spiritual master is under the subjugation of material energy, naturally his conclusion is that the pure devotee spiritual master is depending on various material circumstances to guide his disciples properly. In this way the Māyāvādī is able to mix in his materially concocted ideas into spiritual life. As soon as he establishes incompleteness of the spiritual master, he has a justification to fill up the gap with his own opinions.
“When disciples do not stick to the principle of accepting the order of their spiritual master, immediately there are two opinions. Any opinion different from the opinion of the spiritual master is useless. One cannot infiltrate materially concocted ideas into spiritual advancement. That is deviation. There is no scope for adjusting spiritual advancement to material ideas."
(CC Ādi 12.9)
To avoid such Māyāvādī confusion, we should more carefully study the nature of transcendence itself. The following verse is fundamental in this regards:
“The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete. And be-cause He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as a complete whole. Whatever is produced of the complete whole is also complete by itself. And because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.”
Because the spiritual master is the representative of the Lord, his nature is similar to God’s. He is not the Supreme Godhead, but because he acts on behalf of the Supreme Godhead, he should be respected on the same level with the Supreme Godhead.
“According to the deliberate opinion of all revealed scriptures, the spiritual master is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa. Lord Kṛṣṇa in the form of the spiritual master delivers His devotees.”
The relationship of a disciple with his spiritual master is as good as his relationship with the Supreme Lord. A spiritual master always represents himself as the humblest servitor of the Personality of Godhead, but the disciple must look upon him as the manifested representation of Godhead.
(CC Ādi 1.45)
There is another aspect in understanding the spiritual master. The spiritual master is the external manifestation of the Supersoul, so in one sense Kṛṣṇa Himself is acting through the spiritual master.
“Although I know that my spiritual master is a servitor of Śrī Caitanya, I know Him also as a plenary manifestation of the Lord.”
Every living entity is essentially a servant of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and the spiritual master is also His servant. Still, the spiritual master is a direct manifestation of the Lord. With this conviction, a disciple can advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The spiritual master is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa because he is a manifestation of Kṛṣṇa.
(CC Ādi 1.44)
Śrī Īśopaniṣad mentions:
1. The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete.
The spiritual master, who is the representative of the Personality of Godhead is therefore also perfect and complete. This is the difference between a bona fide spiritual master and an imposter.
Imposter’s knowledge is material and therefore incomplete and limited, whereas guru’s knowledge is eternal, complete and unlimited. It is for this reason that we do not necessarily need the physical presence of the spiritual master. The physical presence of the spiritual master is required when the spiritual master is unauthorized and who only on his own accord without being fully realized in transcendental science assumes the position:
“There is a type of spiritual master and disciple much advertised in this age of Kali. It is said that the master injects spiritual force into the disciple by an electrical current generated by the master, and the disciple begins to feel the shock. He becomes unconscious, and the master weeps for exhausting his store of so-called spiritual assets. Such bogus advertisement is going on in this age, and the poor common man is becoming the victim of such advertisement. We do not find such folk tales in the dealings of Śukadeva Gosvāmī and his great disciple Mahārāja Parīkṣit. The sage recited Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in devotion, and the great King heard him properly. The King did not feel any shock of electrical current from the master, nor did he become unconscious while receiving knowledge from the master. One should not, therefore, become a victim of these unauthorized advertisements made by some bogus representative of Vedic knowledge. The sages of Naimiṣāraṇya were very respectful in hearing about Mahārāja Parīkṣit because of his receiving knowledge from Śukadeva Gosvāmī by means of ardent hearing. Ardent hearing from the bona fide master is the only way to receive transcendental knowledge, and there is no need for medical performances or occult mysticism for miraculous effects. The process is simple, but only the sincere party can achieve the desired result.”
(SB 1972 1.12.3 purport)
“Therefore Īśopaniṣad informs us that pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam eva avaśiṣyate. If you take the whole energy of Kṛṣṇa from Kṛṣṇa, then still, the whole energy is there. But you will be surprised nowadays. Modern Gods... There are so many modern Gods; I do not wish to name. But one modern God, he gave his power to his disciple, and the, when he came into consciousness, then he was crying. The disciple inquired from the guru, "Why you are crying, sir?" "Now I have finished everything. I have given you everything. I have given you everything; therefore I am now finished." That is not spiritual. That is material.”
(Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 3.26.42 Bombay, January 17, 1975)
Just like in the example above the disciple wants some personal electrical shock sometimes, there’s a devotee who wants to receive some kind of personal instruction from the guru without which the relationship between guru and disciple according to him remains incomplete. This is however misunderstanding of a spiritual relationship:
“Regarding your question about instruction, spiritual life is different from material life. The instruction given in my books is supposed to be personal instruction. When we read the Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, it is understood that we are receiving personal instructions of Kṛṣṇa . No physical barrier is there in the case of spiritual affairs. It is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:
sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo
yato bhaktir adhokṣaje
"The supreme occupation (dharma) for all humanity is that by which men can attain to loving devotional service unto the transcendental Lord. Such devotional service must be unmotivated and uninterrupted in order to completely satisfy the self.''
(Letter to: Dhrstaketu - Bombay 14 October, 1973)
We may add that such pure devotional service besides being unchecked by material circumstances is non-different from Kṛṣṇa as it is His internal potency.
“The penance by which one can see the Personality of Godhead eye to eye is to be understood as devotional service to the Lord and nothing else because only by discharging devotional service in transcendental love can one approach the Lord. Such penance is the internal potency of the Lord and is nondifferent from Him.”
Therefore to say that devotional service can be checked by material circumstances is just like saying that Kṛṣṇa can be covered by māyā. Śrīla Prabhupāda gives an analysis of such adulterated devotional service in the purport of the ahaitukī verse from the SB 1.2.6:
“Material existence is temporary, illusory and full of miseries. There is no happiness at all. There is just the futile attempt to get rid of the miseries, and temporary cessation of misery is falsely called happiness. Therefore, the path of progressive material enjoyment, which is temporary, miserable and illusory, is inferior. But devotional service of the Supreme Lord, which leads one to eternal, blissful and all-cognizant life, is called the superior quality of occupation. This is sometimes polluted when mixed with the inferior quality. For example, adoption of devotional service for material gain is certainly an obstruction to the progressive path of renunciation. Renunciation or abnegation for ultimate good is certainly a better occupation than enjoyment in the diseased condition of life. Such enjoyment only aggravates the symptoms of disease and increases its duration.”
(SB 1972 1.2.6 purport)
Therefore, a so-called disciple who is hankering for so-called personal instruction is actually not approaching the guru to understand how to get out of the material clutches. His idea of a guru is that guru is a pet, or in other words an instrument to fulfill his sense gratification. This only aggravates his material disease. It is of no wonder that his so-called relationship of getting material benefits from the guru is checked when the spiritual master physically departs. They are not serving the guru, they are serving their material motive. That is why their service has to stop at a certain point. Just as anything material, such devotional service is temporary.
“There are three divisions of Kṛṣṇa conscious men. In the third class are those who have no faith. If they are engaged in devotional service officially, for some ulterior purpose, they cannot achieve the highest perfectional stage. Most probably they will slip, after some time. They may become engaged, but because they haven't complete conviction and faith, it is very difficult for them to continue in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We have practical experience in discharging our missionary activity that some people come and apply themselves to the Kṛṣṇa consciousness with some hidden motive, and as soon as they are economically a little well-situated, they give up this process and take to their old ways again.”
2. And be-cause He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as a complete whole.
(Śrī Īśopaniṣad Invo.)
And because the spiritual master is completely perfect, all emanations from him, such as his disciples or his organizations are perfectly equipped as a complete whole. Provided the members are following the instructions of the spiritual master, naturally his organizations are identical with Kṛṣṇa and therefore with spiritual master as well.
“So if we work sincerely, the Krishna Consciousness Movement is non-different from Krishna. As Krishna killed all the demons, we should also be able to kill all demons if we remain faithful in the discharge of our mission."
(Letter to Yasomatinandana 1976)
When we speak of organization however it means disciples. The organization is simply to facilitate the preaching of the disciples. Without disciples, who repeat the words of the spiritual master, the organization is just an empty shell, which ceases to be non-different from the spiritual master. The spiritual master expands through his devotees into an organization because they follow his instructions and thus the movement expands.
“GBC means now they should tour very extensive. That is the first principle, the GBC. Not sit down (in) one place and pass resolution. No, they must be active. They must act like me. As I am old man, I am traveling all over the world. Now to give me relief, the GBC members... I shall expand into twelve more so that they can exactly work like me. Gradually they will be initiators. At least first initiation. You must make advance. That is my motive. So, in that way I want to divide it in twelve zones. And we have to make more propaganda throughout the whole world.”
(Conversation with the GBC -- May 25, 1972, Los Angeles)
“So one who is spreading kṛṣṇa-upadeśa, simply repeat what is said by Kṛṣṇa, then you become ācārya. Not difficult at all. Everything is stated there. We have to simply repeat like parrot. Not exactly parrot. Parrot does not understand the meaning; he simply vibrates. But you should understand the meaning also; otherwise how you can explain? So, so we want to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Simply prepare yourself how to repeat Kṛṣṇa's instructions very nicely, without any malinterpretation. Then, in future... Suppose you have got now ten thousand. We shall expand to hundred thousand. That is required. Then hundred thousand to million, and million to ten million.
(Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi-līlā 1.13 -- Māyāpur, April 6, 1975)
The disciples are also gurus by repeating strictly whatever they have heard from the spiritual master.
“To answer your last point, one who teaches can be treated as Spiritual Master. It is not that after we become initiated we become perfect. No. It requires teaching. So if we take instruction from them, all senior godbrothers may be treated as guru, there is no harm. Actually, you have only one Spiritual Master, who initiates you, just as you have only one father. But every Vaiṣṇava should be treated as prabhu, master, higher than me, and in this sense, if I learn from him, he may be regarded as guru. It is not that I disobey my real Spiritual Master and call someone else as Spiritual Master. That is wrong. It is only that I can call Spiritual Master someone who is teaching me purely what my initiating Spiritual Master has taught.”
(Letter to: Śrī Galim — Delhi 20 November, 1971)
If a child says this is a microphone and if an adult says this a microphone, there is no difference. This is called paramparā, it's about the conclusion, the instruction, not about the person who instructs.
“Nārada was the Spiritual Master of Vyāsadeva, and Arjuna was Vyāsadeva's disciple, not as initiated disciple but there was some blood relation between them. So there is connection in this way, and it is not possible to list all such relationships in the short description given in Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person. The conclusions which we have tried to explain in our Bhagavad-gītā As It Is is the same as those conclusions of Arjuna. Arjuna accepted Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and we also accept the same truth under the disciplic succession of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another. This is an axiomatic truth. So there is no difference of opinion of understanding Krishna between ourselves and Arjuna. Another example is that a tree has many branches, and you will find one leaf here and another leaf there. But if you take this leaf and the other leaf and you press them both, you will see that the taste is the same. The taste is the conclusion, and from the taste you can understand that both leaves are from the same tree.”
(Letter to: Kirtanananda — Los Angeles 25 January, 1969)
“So far as your second question, Ṭhākura Bhaktivinode was not official Spiritual Master of Gaura Kiśora dāsa Bābājī Mahārāja. Gaura Kiśora dāsa Bābājī Mahārāja was already renounced order, Paramahaṁsa, but Ṭhākura Bhaktivinode, while He was even playing the part of a householder, was treated by Gaura Kiśora dāsa Bābājī Mahārāja as Preceptor, on account of His highly elevated spiritual understanding, and thus He was always treating Him as His Spiritual Master. The Spiritual Master is divided into two parts; namely, śikṣā-guru and dīkṣā-guru. So officially Bhaktivinode Ṭhākura was like śikṣā-guru of Gaura Kiśora das Bābājī Mahārāja.”
(Letter to: Dayananda — Allston, Mass 1 May, 1969)
“I have heard how the new devotees are all executing their devotional services very enthusiastically and with sincerity and humility. Yes, I have asked them to take instruction from you, one of their elder Godsisters. Whatever you have learned—you are one of the old students—whatever you have gathered by experience, you must hand them over to the new students. This is called paramparā.”
(Letter to: Malati — Los Angeles 6 March, 1970)
Indian: Hare Kṛṣṇa. Your Divine Grace, in order to understand Śrī Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa, we have to take your help, as you said you have explained what are the words of Kṛṣṇa. And in order to understand yourself we have, or we had to take the help of so many other persons. You speak in English and Sanskrit or Hindi, and at college, and at school, so many teachers taught us Sanskrit, Hindi, and history, geography, because there are so many illustrations in your speech also. Then guru has been defined like this:
cakṣur unmīlitaṁ yena
tasmai śrī-gurave namaḥ
Ajñāna timirāndhasya. About jñāna, nothing has been said whether it is spiritual jñāna or material jñāna. So in order to understanding you and, through yourself, also Kṛṣṇa, all these so-called gurus, or, I may say, teachers, they have contributed towards understanding or developing Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Now, leaving aside these material teachers I am taking the, taking one spiritual guru who gave me Kṛṣṇa consciousness first and who taught me to worship God, Kṛṣṇa, and to maintain a temple at my own house and to learn the ślokas from Gītā or the Śrīmad-Bhāgavata. And I have learned by rote the grandness of adhyāyas of Bhāgavatam and the Gītā. But you see I could not understand anything. Now, after going through your literatures, complete literatures, now the whole light has come to me, and I have began to understand even that the guru who gave me such Kṛṣṇa consciousness. I don't challenge or question the other findings of their(?) gurus. Just like a boy who absent from class, not attending his class, there is no fault of the guru. Guru has been attending his lectures. But I am truant. I am not attending class. So you see I can't blame that guru. But now I have understood everything from Your Grace, and now that ajñāna has been removed. I have now become more Kṛṣṇa conscious than before. So should I give credit to all those gurus who have helped me to understand? Or should I now select, or should I exercise any choice that I should accept this guru or that guru only? So that doubt should be cleared.
Prabhupāda: Hmmm. Guru is only one. Guru means, as you explained,
cakṣur unmīlitaṁ yena
tasmai śrī-gurave namaḥ
One who eradicates the ajñāna, andhakāra, darkness. In the darkness, if somebody brings lamp, ajñāna-timirāndhasya jñānāñjana-śalākayā... The jñāna-rūpa, torchlight, he's guru. So maybe of different degrees, but anyone who opens the spiritual eyes, he's guru. So... But in the śāstra it is said, gurur api kāryākāryakam ajānataḥ. If I accept some guru, but if later on it appears that he did not know what is to be done, what is to be not to be done, then Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says that such guru: parityāgo vidhīyate. Such guru should be rejected. But it doesn't matter that degree. Actually, if the guru teaches Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then he may be in lesser degree, but he's accepted as guru. There is no question of rejection. Because Kṛṣṇa is actually jñāna. One who teaches Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, "One has to know Kṛṣṇa, one has to surrender to Kṛṣṇa," this kind of teaching is required. And if the guru says that "I am Kṛṣṇa. Everyone is Kṛṣṇa," then, "daridra-kṛṣṇa, daridra-nārāyaṇa," he is not a guru. He's not a guru. He's misguiding. Misguiding. Avaiṣṇavo gurur na syāt. This is the śāstric injunction. Ṣaṭ-karma-nipuṇo vipro mantra-tantra-viśāradaḥ. A... Generally, a qualified brāhmaṇa becomes guru. That is natural. Brāhmaṇa is the head of the society. So he is... And without becoming brāhmaṇa, nobody can become guru. That is also fact. Because brāhmaṇa means brahma jānātīti brāhmaṇaḥ, one who knows Brahman, Brahman. So guru must be a brāhmaṇa, mean a qualified brāhmaṇa, not born-brāhmaṇa, so-called brāhmaṇa. Qualified brāhmaṇa. So still, brāhmaṇa's qualification, ṣaṭ-karma, paṭhana pāṭhana yajana yājana dāna pratigraha. So śāstra says that ṣaṭ-karma-nipuṇo vipraḥ. If one vipra is quite expert in executing the six kinds of business, and mantra-tantra-viśāradaḥ, and very well known in the Vedic mantras and hymns and everything complete, but if he is avaiṣṇava, if he is not Vaiṣṇava, he does not know viṣṇu-tattva, or kṛṣṇa-tattva, then he cannot become spiritual master. Avaiṣṇavo gurur na syād vaiṣṇavaḥ śva-paco guruḥ. But if a Vaiṣṇava, one who knows viṣṇu-tattva, kṛṣṇa-tattva, even if he's born in the family of śva-paca, the dog-eaters, caṇḍāla, he can be accepted as guru. So the real test is whether the guru is a Vaiṣṇava, whether he know the science of Kṛṣṇa. That is also confirmed by Caitanya Mahāprabhu:
kibā vipra, kibā nyāsī, śūdra kene naya
ei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā sei 'guru' haya
[Cc. Madhya 8.128]
A... It doesn't matter what he is, whether he's a sannyāsī or a gṛhastha or a brāhmaṇa or a śū..., born in brāhmaṇa family or... It doesn't matter. Yei kṛṣṇa-tattva. Anyone who knows Kṛṣṇa, he can become guru, not others. So that is the statement of the śāstras. Avaiṣṇava cannot become guru.
(Bhagavad-gītā 7.1 -- Ahmedabad, December 13, 1972)
Therefore there’s no reason to minimize the position of bona fide disciples. They should be treated with respect and they can teach us also. To say that no one is guru, only Prabhupāda is guru is a māyāvāda tendency and it only reveals the motivation of such an individual to be a guru himself.
“You speak of pure devotee, that he is śaktyāvesa avatāra, that we should obey him only—these things are the wrong idea. If anyone thinks like that, that a pure devotee should be obeyed and no one else, that means he is a nonsense. We advise everyone to address one another as Prabhu. Prabhu means master, so how the master should be disobeyed? Others, they are also pure devotees. All of my disciples are pure devotees. Anyone sincerely serving the spiritual master is a pure devotee, it may be Siddhasvarūpa or others, a-Siddhasvarūpa. This must be very clearly stated. It is not only that your Siddhasvarūpa is a pure devotee and not others. Do not try to make a faction. Siddhasvarūpa is a good soul. But others should not be misled. Anyone who is surrendered to the spiritual master is a pure devotee, it doesn't matter if Siddhasvarūpa or non-Siddhasvarūpa.”
(Letter to: Tusta Kṛṣṇa — Ahmedabad 14 December, 1972)
Bhāgavata: He said, "You are your own guru," Śrīla Prabhupāda.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is...
Devotee: I have heard him.
Prabhupāda: You see? Kṛṣṇa says, tad vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet... [MU 1.2.12]. Tad viddhi praṇipātena [Bg. 4.34]. He says, "Everyone is guru." Just see. "Everyone is guru." Then why you are instructing? Why you are becoming guru?
Dr. Patel: He's not becoming guru of anybody.
Prabhupāda: No, no. Why does he say that "You do this"? That is guru. Guru means one who orders. That is guru. That means you reject all other gurus... That means... He means to say that "You reject all other gurus. Accept me guru." That's all.
(Morning Walk -- March 23, 1974, Bombay)
You have to accept guru this way or that way. You need guru for everything. We might not officially call them gurus, but there are so many people who gave us instructions in our life and we have benefited from them. There’s no such a thing as being without a spiritual master at any stage of our life. We simply have to consider who is the bona fide spiritual master, not whether we should accept someone or not.
“The government, the father, the guru, the teacher, or even husband of... Because we are guided, everyone is guided by somebody else. That is society. Not cats and dogs. Just like the cats and dogs, they give birth to the children and then they have no responsibility. The dogs are loitering in the street; nobody takes care. But human society should not be like that. There must be responsible guardians. The some of the responsible guardians are described here. First of all, guru. Either you take ordinary teacher in the school or colleges, they are also called guru, and the sublime guru is the spiritual master. Not only the spiritual master, but anyone who has taken the post of becoming guru to teach others, he must be very learned, very responsible, vipaścit, abhijñaḥ. Abhijñātaḥ, it is the qualification of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As it is said in the beginning of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, abhijñaḥ. Janmādy asya yataḥ 'nvayād itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ [SB 1.1.1]. The controller must be abhijñaḥ. The same thing is here. Of course, we cannot be as abhijñaḥ as God—that is not possible—but little quantity of that abhijñātaḥ must be there. Otherwise what is the use of becoming...?
First of all, it is said about guru, anyone who takes care of his subordinate, he is guru. The first charge is that you should not become a guru unless you are completely in awareness how to save your dependent from the path of birth and death. That is the first question.”
(Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 5.5.18 Vrindavana, November 6, 1976)
Prabhupāda: So your question is without spiritual master. Without spiritual master you cannot be, at any stage of your life. You may accept this spiritual master or that spiritual master. That is a different thing. But you have to accept. As you say that "by reading Bible," when you read Bible that means you are following the spiritual master represented by some priest or some clergyman in the line of Lord Jesus Christ. So any case, you have to follow a spiritual master. There cannot be the question without spiritual master. Is that clear?
Madhudviṣa: I mean like we couldn't understand the teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā without your help, without your presentation.
Prabhupāda: Similarly, you have to understand Bible with the help of the priest in the church.
(Lecture -- Seattle, October 2, 1968)
Even if the śikṣā-gurus are not liberated, because they follow the instructions of the liberated, they should be accepted as spiritual masters.
“At the present moment it has become fashionable to disobey the unimpeachable directions given by the ācāryas and liberated souls of the past. Presently people are so fallen that they cannot distinguish between a liberated soul and a conditioned soul. A conditioned soul is hampered by four defects: he is sure to commit mistakes, he is sure to become illusioned, he has a tendency to cheat others, and his senses are imperfect. Consequently we have to take direction from liberated persons. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement directly receives instructions from the Supreme Personality of Godhead via persons who are strictly following His instructions. Although a follower may not be a liberated person, if he follows the supreme, liberated Personality of Godhead, his actions are naturally liberated from the contamination of the material nature. Lord Caitanya therefore says: "By My order you may become a spiritual master." One can immediately become a spiritual master by having full faith in the transcendental words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and by following His instructions. Materialistic men are not interested in taking directions from a liberated person, but they are very much interested in their own concocted ideas, which make them repeatedly fail in their attempts. Because the entire world is now following the imperfect directions of conditioned souls, humanity is completely bewildered.”
“The statements of Ṭhākura Bhaktivinode are as good as scriptures because he is liberated person. Generally the spiritual master comes from the group of such eternal associates of the Lord; but anyone who follows the principles of such ever liberated persons is as good as one in the above mentioned group. The gurus from nature's study are accepted as such on the principle that an elevated person in Krishna Consciousness does not accept anyone as disciple, but he accepts everyone as expansion of his guru. That is very high position, called Mahā-bhagavata. Just like Rādhārāṇī, sometimes thinks a subordinate of hers as her teacher, to understand devotion of Krishna. A person who is liberated ācārya and guru cannot commit any mistake, but there are persons who are less qualified or not liberated, but still can act as guru and ācārya by strictly following the disciplic succession. It is the injunction of the śāstras that anyone who sees the Deity in the Temple as made of wood or stone, or considers the ācāryas and gurus as ordinary common men, and discriminates Vaiṣṇavas or devotees as belonging to a certain group or caste, are called hellish.”
(Letter to: Janardana — New York 26 April, 1968)
Yet Prabhupāda remains the complete balance. Our Godbrothers can help us, but we do not necessarily depend on them. So it’s one and different. If I can benefit from someone’s association, why not? But that Godbrother is not my link to Prabhupāda. My relationship with Prabhupāda remains always complete. This is the meaning of the current link. The current is available for anyone and everyone.
“As already stated, Brahmā is the original spiritual master for the universe, and since he was initiated by the Lord Himself, the message of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is coming down by disciplic succession, and in order to receive the real message of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam one should approach the current link, or spiritual master, in the chain of disciplic succession.”
“If Kirtanananda Mahārāja speaks what I speak, then he can be taken a śikṣā guru. Guru śāstra sādhu. The spiritual master is one, that is a fact. Kirtanananda Swami may be taken a sādhu not spiritual master, or as instructor guru. I don't think he is saying anything against our principles, so what is the wrong?
You have written that the devotees here say that you cannot know me, but only Kirtanananda Mahārāja can know me. But, if Kirtanananda is a disciple and he can know me, and you are also a disciple, why you cannot know me.”
(Letter to: Satyabhama, Paramananda — New Vrindaban 20 July, 1974)