Need of Guru to understand Scriptures

[kallol]

As per my understanding goes, the Scriptures encourage the students of Sanatana Dharma to learn the knowledge under tutelage of Guru or Gurus. It is because the untrained mind with so much of spiritual immaturity would not be able to decipher the TRUE meaning of the texts.

The understanding of the texts needs organised way of studying under the right Gurus. That might include lots of scriptures including Srimad Bhagavatam, Vedanta, Vedas, Upanishads (including Gita), etc. this also needs Sadhanas and meditations (different levels). The path is through sravanam, mananam and nividdhasanam.

The topic being so abstract and holistic (beyond our imagination), that it includes all science (present and future) which will be generally impossible to behold in the mind.

Even for the rational & physical sciences, we go through from school to colleges and universities, then this subject is more abstract than those. It should need more profound Teachers and Spiritual scientists to take us to that level.

Apart from the training under Gurus, there might be a few exceptions of the brilliant minds who are already enlightened. They would be in a better position to rediscover the deeper essence of the texts. Even they would be needing guidance beyond a certain stage (we have plenty of examples).

In view of this do you think that by mere reading of books, we would be able to grasp the TRUE knowledge ? Even without guidance of Gurus ?

Love and best wishes

[wundermonk]

In view of this do you think that by mere reading of books, we would be able to grasp the TRUE knowledge ? Even without guidance of Gurus ?

IMO, it will be difficult to revive the old guru-shishya parampara. The world has changed, the economy has changed, the means of livelihood have changed, societal norms have changed, etc. For instance, I am a householder. I have a wife and a newborn. I pretty much have to work to put food on my family's table [although I love my job]. It is nigh impossible for me to quit all of this and go in search of gurus and spend exclusive time under his/her tutelage. Maybe after I have discharged my duties towards my family and my kid is old enough to take care of himself/herself and is no longer dependent on me, (I think I will be 60 by then), if the draw of spirituality and theology is really strong, I may go out in search of gurus. But until then, the web of "ordinary" living would continue.

This is not to say that I need to be completely out of touch with spiritual matters. I login to HDF when I can and go over the many beautiful posts. I consider this forum itself to be a sort of guru in this internet age. :) The role of a Guru is enlarge the students knowledge and challenge preconceived notions. HDF does an excellent job on both these fronts.

Books are a great help to me. I try to read as many commentaries on divergent view points as possible. For instance, as of now, I am reading the classic Visishtadvaitin's polemic against Advaita - Vedantadesika's Satadusani (English version by S.M.S. Chari). I have one commentary on the Gita (by Paramahmsa Yogananda). After this, I plan to educate myself on other commentaries of the Gita. After that, I am sure something else will interest me, ad infinitum...

So, I am currently not actively seeking the guidance of a human guru.

[kallol]

Dear Wundermonk,

I was not referring to the earlier Guru Sishya type only. It may be based on your need and reconfirmation of your understanding. That can be one off meeting or a irregular meetings or over phone. This can be achieved even with our life style.

But the importance of having a Guru to guide, control and bless us might be as important as having a Guide / Professor for doing PhD.

What is your opinion on this ?

Love and best wishes

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: I think it depends on what you consider a Guru. Loosely, the term just refers to any teacher. So in that sense a Guru might help you understand the scriptures. Many such Gurus have added their own interpretation and commentaries to scriptures, so one could just read those commentaries.

However, in the strictest sense, the real traditional Guru, or Satguru, is his own scripture. He doesn't need to use commentary. He understands the scriptures without even having read them. His knowledge comes from within through the process of direct cognition. When such a Guru speaks, it isn't by reading a scripture, and then making commentary; its just direct.

Since scripture is primarily an exercise of the intellect, you don't really need a Guru, in my opinion. However, the application of the knowledge within the scripture isn't intellectual, its got to do with will power, and actually cognizing. So perhaps a Guru could help with that process.

As a simple analogy for 'wisdom is the application of knowledge' I used to ask students to write on the blackboard: "Sentences end with periods" Occasionally a student would forget the period. and then we'd have this discussion about application.

One of the reasons I have this concept in me so strongly is from watching the contradictory actions of myself and others when it comes to putting scripture into practice. all too often I've seen the 'expert quoter of scripture' fail in actions.

Aum Namasivaya

[wundermonk]

But the importance of having a Guru to guide, control and bless us might be as important as having a Guide / Professor for doing PhD.

I agree with needing a guide /professor to do a PhD - no question about that. But there is a difference between that and a guide for spiritual matters, imo.

If I want to do a PhD, I can do many tests - is the school highly ranked, is the professor well-known within the field. More importantly does he have enough peer reviewed publications, was his university confident enough to bestow tenure to him, etc. The key here is intersubjective verifiability. Any of his papers would have passed through a rigourous process of evaluation against verifiable standards and only on meeting these objective measures, would a paper be accepted for publication.

Unfortunately, on matters of spirituality, there cannot be intersubjective verifiability. One has to do it on his own to experience it. No matter how famous a guru is, regardless of the fact that 100s before me have testified to his greatness, there just isnt a way for me to have 100% confidence in him. There is no way to tell a quack apart from a real enlightened person.

Thats why as of now, I am more or less in a "testing the water on my own" phase.

Also, in the case of a PhD, there is a well defined object - a famous unsolved problem, for instance. The professor and I are both subjects looking at the same object "outside" of us.

In matters of spirituality (at least of the Hindu variety), the object is one's own self. The subject is me and the object is also me. I dont know if that made sense to you.:)

[kallol]

That the different minds (matured at different levels) are able to grasp and interpret the scriptures in different ways - and many of the times they might take the literal meaning of the script and not the deep inner meaning. This might lead to certain beliefs which - until and unless validated by Gurus may lead to wrong way of life.

Satsangs can help prepare the mind but the knowledge development might require some guidance.

I have an example. I went through the discourses of Gita about 60-90 mins on each chapter. In some of the areas I had clashes in my mind. I then set up an appointment and met Swamiji. I elaborated by position and the clash. He then guided me to some more detailed discourses and also the particular upanishad.

The scriptures being interdependent and highly spreadout needs highly knowledgeble Gurus to guide the minds. Otherwise people will become great experts on scriptures but not on knowledge.

As for the right college and right guide, it was only an example. From the lower classes to the higher ones the Gurus get changed towards more proficient ones.

If books only can suffice the gaining of knowledge we would not be having colleges (leave out the schools - we might be too young then). But still we have colleges, universities and thereafter.

That is why scriptures point out to the need of Gurus (however part time or irregular it may be).

This forum is great pool of people with interest in scriptures (the basic aim was spirituality) but is this enough ? Does it help really towards the aim of moksha or are we fooling ourselves with a facade ?

Tough words but I feel we need introspection.

Love and best wishes