Gurus and Masters
 |
 |
 (The difference between the Eastern Guru Shisya tradition and Western Master Apprentice)*-Alakśendra Priya Vṛkarāja |
|
|
 he Guru Śiṣya relationship is a sacred tradition originating in India by which a student reverently devotes his life to the service and teachings of an enlightened teacher, who with respect and reverence teaches the student and guides him through all the necessary stages to prepare him for his own path toward enlightenment. The student lives, eats and plays with the teacher. The relationship between the teacher and the student is very close, keeping no secrets between the two, and the teacher consistently revealing the mysteries of life and spirituality to the student. The student remains ever alert and attentive toward the teacher, and is eager to fulfill any requests the teacher might as of him, knowing everything requested is in his best interest and somehow geared toward his path. The teacher also constantly reflects upon his own state and that of the student and dynamically creates a path for the student in accordance with the student's abilities and character. There are many dangers that can be encountered with this form of teaching, especially by those from societies not originating from India. Western society does not support or promote an environment where the Guru Śiṣya tradition can subsist. The nearest thing the West has is the Master Apprentice relationship as found in European cultures such as England, France, etc. This relationship is more coarse and specific. The Master Apprentice relationship involves someone who is a Master of an art or craft, who then imparts all the skills and knowledge necessary for a student to also become a Master and eventually perform that art or craft for their own survival and sustenance. The student performs the necessary duties which include mundane or simple tasks to allow the Master more time to perform his art or craft without all the tedious work. This is an exchange, something is done for something; it is materialistic and agreed that it should be so. The Apprentice often lives with and is fed by the Master, but this is also an exchange in which the apprentice pays for with his work. Close relationships do develop between the Master and Apprentice, but it is commonly known that once the Apprentice's work is up to par, he will open up his own practice. Although one could argue spirituality could be considered one of these arts, in this sense it cannot qualify. There is no sense is mixing the traditions of Guru Śiṣya with that of Master and Apprentice. The śiṣya is focused on devotion and service, with the Guru seen as God incarnate, and the Apprentice is focused on learning a skill from the Master, for a price or term of service. To the Guru and Śiṣya money, obligations, etc are not an issue. The Guru and śiṣya are both on the path to divine realization and what is done day by day is mundane, but done out of pure compassion and love for divinity. In the end, mundane life is meaningless. The Master has many mundane tasks that need to be done for his craft or art, and with an apprentice can have these done for an exchange of knowledge in his art of craft. The tasks include research, writing, preparing smaller material crafts for large projects, and others. Even the Master Clergymen teaches not so much the spiritual path to God, but the role and function of the Clergy, its rituals, rites, etc. These are taught to the śiṣya by the Guru as well, but the Master Clergyman is limited to where he can lead the Apprentice due to limitation and restriction of the Church. He cannot take the apprentice cleric to the beyond and back, nor is he required the ability to do so. The key difference here is right and rote, the Guru teaches what is right for the student, and knows its long term effect; the Master teaches by rote to the student and the long term effect is not as important. IF the apprentice learns he learns, if he doesn't, he fails and is unsuccessful. The Master need not understand the rote completely, but the Guru must know what is right absolutely. Sir John Woodroffe explains in his Introduction to Tantra Sastra, about the Guru Shsiya tradition: "Proper guidance and spiritual direction are necessary. A good guru, by reason of his own nature and spiritual attainment and disinterested wisdom, will mark out for the śiṣya[1] the path which is proper for him, and aid him to follow it by the infusion of the tejas[2] which is in the Guru[3] himself. Whilst sadhana is, as stated, a process for the stimulation of the sattva guna, it is evident that one form of it is not suitable to all. It must be adapted to the spiritual condition of the śiṣya, otherwise it will cause injury instead of good. Therefore it is that adoption of certain forms of sadhana by persons who are not competent (adhikari), may not only be fruitless of any good result, but may even lead to evils which sadhana as a general principle is designed to prevent. Therefore also it is said that it is better to follow one's own dharma than that, however exalted it be, of another. "[4] There is much harm that can be done by those who believe they have the right idea and experience, but teach with uncertain or disguised intent and traditional nonchalance. They are not prepared to teach, or are just "winging it" with half developed systems and unrefined material. In the west we tend to amalgamate concepts and teachings, and then expect each aspect to be upheld traditionally and just work. These teachers do not take into account the environmental, social, linguistic and myriad of other factors that can create barriers and in some cases, negative results that do nothing but detriment both the teacher and the student in very serious ways. Teaching then produces a vacuum which attracts negativity. Emotions such as fear can pressure a student into unbridled hatred toward those around him, including loved ones and the teacher himself. If the teacher does not know the effects of fear on the student, or the effect of the methods being implemented to bring the student toward realization of his own inner being, he can unintentionally harm him. If the Guru only uses his own experience and knowledge as reference to what should be done for each student, then the teacher is bound to his own material experience and cannot help everyone, creating extremely harsh and negative encounters with those who have a different psyche than the teacher. This damages both the teacher and the student. The student in the west cannot maintain the level of respect for a teacher as a student from the east can if there is suspicion. With the way that day to day life occurs in the life of the student and teacher, it is easy to arouse suspicion with inconsistencies in interaction with people. This is because the teacher is not isolated to his own Ashram as in India, and has many worldly matters to consider besides the teachings of his students and contemplation of the divine. His own physical survival is always at risk, especially as he devotes more and more time to his students. This is not mastery of one's world, nor indicative of enlightenment; it is rueful maintenance of one's worldly existence coupled with an obsession to be a spiritual power figure. The worst effect is when the student begins to question the teacher, finding a flaw in the system and only being told that one's own tenacity toward finding flaws is a personal flaw, avoiding systematic error entirely. This frees the teacher of any investigation into his flawed system but leaves the student distraught, terrorized, and confused. Few and far between are the teachers that can master and manipulate their own world, in relationship, financial stability, etc due to the circumstance of our capitalistic democracy and western way of life. In our current era, even in the East is this becoming less and less likely to support a tradition such as that of the Guru śiṣya. Because of the west's tendency to abuse privilege, teachers, genuine or not, are having a hard time finding students who can truly devote themselves to the higher cause. The solution to this is as Woodroffe clearly states: to follow one's own dharma. Care not for the proclaimed exalted nature of the social and spiritual elite. What does it matter who someone trained under when a Buddha can be met on the street corner? Spiritual power does not come from blind faith and devotion in people; it comes from blind faith and devotion into a principle, a personal principle of power that permeates ever fiber of ones being. That principle can be love, hate or anything as long as one fully and completely delivers oneself over to it. When one embraces that principle, and goes beyond it liberation comes. Freedom from suffering comes when one realizes the attachment toward that principle is the final step, the final release, and whence after it is gone, there is nothing but bliss, saccidananda, being, consciousness and bliss. Give yourself to Jesus, but not to your preacher. Give yourself to Buddha, or the Boddhisattva, but not to the monk or master. Unite yourself with that absolute Brahman, but do not attached yourself to the Brahmana, or the Sannyasi, or any Pandit, Master or Savior whose self proclaimed statements of power create nothing but Maya, an illusion to be overcome which veils that true reality.  [1] Devoted Student [2] Flame, Energy, Brilliance or Light. [3] Devoted Teacher [4] Woodroffe, Sir John, Introduction to Tantra Sastra, Ganesh & Company: Madras – 17, p. 23-24. |
|
|
|
* He has written many articles on Buddhism, Hinduism and Mysticism. He is currently completing his Master's thesis on the effects of Kashmir Shaivism on Adi Shankara's Advaita Vedanta. He has studied spirituality and mysticism in both its orthodox and unorthodox forms. |
|
|
| Copyrights © 2007 Shehjar online and KashmirGroup.com. Any content, including but not limited to text, software, music, sound, photographs, video, graphics or other material contained may not be modified, copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, or distributed in any form or context without written permission. Terms & Conditions. The views expressed are solely the author's and not necessarily the views of Shehjar or its owners. Content and posts from such authors are provided "AS IS", with no warranties, and confer no rights. The material and information provided iare for general information only and should not, in any respect, be relied on as professional advice. Neither Shehjar.kashmirgroup.com nor kashmirgroup.com represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other information displayed, uploaded, or distributed through the Service by any user, information provider or any other person or entity. You acknowledge that any reliance upon any such opinion, advice, statement, memorandum, or information shall be at your sole risk. |
Alakśendra Priya Vṛkarāja is an American Sanskrit student and Religious Studies Scholar at Florida International University in Miami, Florida.