Guru-tattva: Śikṣā, Dīkṣā and the Will of the Ācārya

This article sets out the understanding of the author of Vedaword. It rests on the scriptures, on the words of Śrīla Prabhupāda and on the work of the IRM (ISKCON Revival Movement), which has examined the question from the primary sources more thoroughly than anyone. The history of the dispute and the position of ISKCON's leadership are set out separately, with both sides, in the article After the Ācārya's Departure: The Gauḍīya Maṭha and ISKCON. Every quotation from Prabhupāda links to the full text in our document archive.

The word guru means "heavy", "weighty". The guru is the one whose word weighs most: he passes on knowledge that changes a life. Without a guru, the scriptures say, that knowledge does not open. But what exactly does the guru pass on? What happens at initiation? Can one be the disciple of someone who has already left this world? And who has the right to be called an ācārya?

These questions have been argued over for almost half a century. Below are the answers given by the scriptures themselves and by Śrīla Prabhupāda.

The guru is the one who passes on knowledge

The tradition distinguishes several kinds of guru:

• the vartma-pradarśaka-guru, who first shows the way;
• the śikṣā-guru, the instructing teacher, who teaches, explains and guides;
• the dīkṣā-guru, the initiating teacher.

Prabhupāda writes in his purport to the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (Ādi 1.34) that "anyone who gives spiritual instructions based on the revealed scriptures is accepted as a spiritual master", and that "the initiating and instructing spiritual masters are equal and identical manifestations of Kṛṣṇa, although they have different dealings". A disciple has one initiating teacher, but may have any number of instructing ones (Ādi 1.35).

So the essence of the guru lies in the knowledge he passes on. Everything else is secondary.

Śikṣā: instruction

Śikṣā is the teaching itself: hearing, explanation, example, living guidance. Through śikṣā the disciple comes to understand who he is, who Kṛṣṇa is and how to serve Him.

Prabhupāda stresses that one can serve the teacher through his instructions: "There is no difference between the spiritual master's instructions and the spiritual master himself" (Ādi 1.35). This is one of the central truths of guru-tattva, and we examine it in detail below.

When Prabhupāda urged his disciples to "become guru", this is above all what he meant: to preach, to pass on knowledge, to be instructors for others. This understanding is the key to everything else.

Dīkṣā: initiation is the transmission of knowledge

What is dīkṣā? The definition is given by Jīva Gosvāmī in the Bhakti-sandarbha (anuccheda 283):

divyaṁ jñānaṁ yato dadyāt kuryāt pāpasya saṅkṣayam tasmād dīkṣeti sā proktā deśikais tattva-kovidaiḥ

"Because it gives divine knowledge and destroys sin, the teachers who know the truth have called it dīkṣā."

Prabhupāda quotes it in his purport to Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya 15.108: "Dīkṣā is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activity."

The word itself tells us what is essential in initiation: divya-jñāna, divine knowledge — knowledge of God and of one's eternal relationship with Him. Initiation is not a ceremony for its own sake; it is receiving this knowledge from the guru and accepting it with all one's heart.

Prabhupāda said so plainly:

• "Initiation is formality. If you are serious, that is real initiation. So if you have understood the Kṛṣṇa philosophy, and if you have decided that you will take Kṛṣṇa consciousness seriously and preach the philosophy to others, that is your initiation. My touching is simply formality. It is your determination that is initiation" (conversation of 3 July 1972).
• "Well, initiation or no initiation, first thing is knowledge… Initiation is formality. Just like you go to a school for knowledge, and admission is formality. That is not very important thing" (interview of 16 October 1976).
• "Disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion" (letter of 31 October 1969).

The best example is Prabhupāda himself. He met his teacher, Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī, in 1922, and received formal initiation only in 1933. He described it like this: "I was initiated 1922. But officially, I was initiated in 1933" (lecture of 15 February 1971). The real initiation took place when he heard his teacher and accepted his word; the ceremony confirmed it eleven years later.

Dīkṣā-saṁskāra and upanayana: the rite and its meaning

Besides dīkṣā itself there is dīkṣā-saṁskāra, the rite of initiation: the fire sacrifice, the recitation of mantras, the giving of beads and a name, and at second initiation the sacred thread and the gāyatrī mantra.

Second initiation continues the ancient Vedic rite of upanayana. Upa-nayana means "leading [to the teacher]": in Vedic culture this was how a boy was taken to the guru to begin studying the Vedas. So by the very meaning of the word, upanayana is the start of study, the start of receiving knowledge, and the thread is only its sign.

The saṁskāra has its place: it sanctifies and confirms the initiation. But it is not the essence of dīkṣā, and it does not require the guru to be personally present. That is exactly how things were arranged in Prabhupāda's time:

• many disciples were initiated by letter, without ever meeting him: the name came by post, and senior disciples performed the ceremony;
• under the letter of 9 July 1977, the ṛtvik representatives gave a new disciple his name or thread on Prabhupāda's behalf, and after that the temple president performed the fire sacrifice "as was being done before" (the letter and its scan).

In other words, Prabhupāda entrusted the outward part of initiation to his representatives — priests who perform the rite on his behalf. The knowledge the disciple receives from Prabhupāda himself: through his books, his words, his instructions. This is logical and fully in keeping with Jīva Gosvāmī's definition of dīkṣā.

The line of succession: 32 names in five thousand years

In the introduction to Bhagavad-gītā As It Is Prabhupāda gives the line of disciplic succession through which this knowledge has come to us. It has 32 names, from "1. Kṛṣṇa" to "32. A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda". Between the first and the last lie some five thousand years.

Thirty-two people in five thousand years. Clearly this is not a chain in which each person personally initiated the next. Millennia passed between Vyāsa and Madhva; Mādhavendra Purī came from Madhva, in Prabhupāda's words, "not directly; through many other disciplic succession" (lecture of 31 January 1971). Prabhupāda himself explained: "Regarding parampara system: there is nothing to wonder for big gaps… We have to pick up the prominent acaryas, and follow from him" (letter of 12 April 1968).

So paramparā is above all a succession of knowledge. An ācārya who lived centuries ago passes on knowledge to whoever sincerely accepts his teaching, and that person becomes a link in the chain. It has always been so.

The guru is not limited to a body: the myth of the "living guru"

Since 1977 an argument has been heard in ISKCON's leadership and among its supporters that a disciple needs a "living", physically present guru, and that a teacher who has departed can no longer initiate. The argument rests on a single assumption: that the guru is above all a body, and that a relationship with him is possible only through personal meeting. Neither the Vedas nor Prabhupāda teach this. The guru is always alive — and here is why.

"There is no difference between the spiritual master's instructions and the spiritual master himself"

The decisive word belongs to Prabhupāda himself: "The service of the spiritual master is essential. If there is no chance to serve the spiritual master directly, a devotee should serve him by remembering his instructions. There is no difference between the spiritual master's instructions and the spiritual master himself. In his absence, therefore, his words of direction should be the pride of the disciple" (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi 1.35).

If the teacher's instructions and the teacher himself are one, then carrying out his instructions is serving him — as fully as serving him in person, in his body. The disciple's relationship with the guru rests not on physical closeness but on carrying out his word.

Prabhupāda explains the same in the Bhāgavatam: "However, the disciple and spiritual master are never separated because the spiritual master always keeps company with the disciple as long as the disciple follows strictly the instructions of the spiritual master. This is called the association of vāṇī (words). Physical presence is called vapuḥ. As long as the spiritual master is physically present, the disciple should serve the physical body of the spiritual master, and when the spiritual master is no longer physically existing, the disciple should serve the instructions of the spiritual master" (ŚB 4.28.47, purport). And further: one meets the Lord "in the instruction of the spiritual master. This is technically called vāṇī-sevā" (ŚB 4.28.51, purport).

Vāṇī is more important than vapu

Prabhupāda said many times that of the two ways of associating with the teacher — through his word (vāṇī) and through his body (vapu) — the word is more important:

• "There are two ways of associating, by vani and by vapu… Physical presence is sometimes appreciable and sometimes not. Therefore we should take advantage of the vani, not the physical presence, because the vani continues to exist eternally. Bhagavad-gita for example is the vani of Lord Krishna. Although Krishna was personally present 5,000 years ago and is no longer present physically from the materialistic viewpoint, still Bhagavad-gita continues" (letter of 4 November 1975).
• "To carry out the teachings of guru is more important than to worship the form… Vani is more important than vapu" (letter of 14 December 1972).
• "Therefore vibration is more important than physical presence. When you feel separation from your spiritual master, you just try to remember His words of instruction; you'll not feel separation. You'll feel that He is with you… That is real association" (lecture of 18 August 1968).
• "Physical presence is immaterial; presence of the transcendental sound received from the spiritual master should be the guidance of life" (letter of 19 January 1967).
• When, a month before his departure, a disciple told him, "We're always feeling your presence very strongly, Śrīla Prabhupāda, simply by your teachings and your instructions," Prabhupāda answered: "Thank you. That is the real presence. Physical presence is not important" (conversation of 6 October 1977).

Prabhupāda's own example

The best proof is Prabhupāda's own life. "So far personal association with the Guru is concerned, I was only with my Guru Maharaja four or five times, but I have never left his association, not even for a moment. Because I am following his instructions, I have never felt any separation… Personal association is not so important as association through service" (letter of 20 February 1972).

His teacher departed in 1936. Prabhupāda began the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement in 1965 — thirty years later. How was he guided all those years? He answered this himself when disciples asked about those who have no chance to see him in person: "That he was speaking, vāṇī and vapuḥ. Even if you don't see his body, you take his word, vāṇī… My Guru Mahārāja passed in 1936, and I started this movement in 1965, thirty years after. Then? I am getting the mercy of guru. This is vāṇī. Even the guru is not physically present, if you follow the vāṇī, then you are getting help." A disciple asked: "So there's no question of ever separation as long as the disciple follows the instruction of guru." — "No" (morning walk of 21 July 1975). And on another occasion: "Just like my spiritual master is not physically present, but I am associating with him by his words" (lecture of 7 July 1972).

Jesus, the Bible and the Christians

Prabhupāda said this especially clearly about Christians. In 1968 his disciples asked whether a Christian could reach the spiritual world without a spiritual master, simply by reading the Bible and following Jesus's words. Prabhupāda answered:

"When you read Bible, you follow spiritual master. How can you say without? As soon as you read Bible, that means you are following the instruction of Lord Jesus Christ; that means you are following spiritual master. So where is the opportunity of being without spiritual master?"

The disciple pressed: "I was referring to a living spiritual master." And Prabhupāda answered: "Spiritual master is not the question of… Spiritual master is eternal. Spiritual master is eternal. … Without spiritual master you cannot be, at any stage of your life" (lecture of 2 October 1968).

Jesus left this world almost two thousand years ago, yet Prabhupāda calls him the guru of those who follow his words. The Christians' problem, in his words, is not that their teacher is not in a body but that they do not follow him:

• "Jesus Christ's guidance is open there, but nobody is caring for him" (conversation of 4 July 1972).
• "But if they follow Bible, that is religion, approved. But they do not follow. Bible says, 'Thou shall not kill.' They are killing" (morning walk of 29 January 1977).
• "So first of all you please Jesus Christ — that is reasonable — then he takes the responsibility. If you disobey Jesus Christ in every step, where is his responsibility?" (conversation of 12 December 1971).
• And of himself and his followers: "He is preaching God's consciousness, so he is our guru, spiritual master. That's a fact… We are the greatest Christian. We follow his instruction; we accept him as guru" (conversation of 3 February 1977).

It made no difference to him that Jesus left two thousand years ago. One thing matters: whether a person follows his word.

Kṛṣṇa, the Gītā and disciples across millennia

It is the same with Kṛṣṇa. "If you say, 'How can I take instruction from Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa is not present.' No, Kṛṣṇa is present by His instruction. The Bhagavad-gītā is there… So even though you think that Kṛṣṇa is not present, but He is present by His words, Bhagavad-gītā. He is absolute. Kṛṣṇa the person, and Kṛṣṇa's words, Bhagavad-gītā, there is no difference" (lecture of 19 May 1976).

That is why Prabhupāda said his followers stand in the succession of Arjuna, though five thousand years lie between them: "Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion… Because Vyasadeva and Arjuna are of equal status, being students of Krishna, therefore we are in the disciplic succession of Arjuna" (letter of 31 October 1969). And he taught: "You follow one ācārya, like Christians, they follow Christ, ācārya. The Muhammadans, they follow ācārya, Muhammad. That is good. You must follow some ācārya" (conversation of 20 May 1975).

Prabhupāda, the eternal teacher

Prabhupāda applied all this to himself as well:

• "He lives forever by his divine instructions and the follower lives with him" — so Prabhupāda wrote of his own teacher in the dedication of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (dedication).
• Asked by a reporter what would happen to the movement when he died: "I will never die… I shall live for my books, and you will utilize" (press conference of 16 July 1975).
• "So in my absence you read the books. What I talk, I have written in the books… But still, you can associate with me by reading my books" (morning walk of 7 August 1975).
• "I shall remain your personal guidance, physically present or not physically, as I am getting personal guidance from my Guru Mahārāja" (conversation of 14 July 1977).

Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura expressed the same truth in his poem on the samādhi of Haridāsa Ṭhākura (1871): "He reasons ill who tells that Vaishnavas die / When thou art living still in sound. / The Vaishnavas die to live and living try / To spread a holy life around!"

But what about "approach a guru"?

Those who argue for a "living guru" point to the Bhagavad-gītā (4.34): to learn the truth one must approach a spiritual master, and independent study of books alone does not bring spiritual progress (Prabhupāda's purport). But Prabhupāda himself explains how this is to be understood.

"Approaching the guru" does not necessarily mean meeting him in the body. It means accepting his word — and getting help from those who understand it. When Prabhupāda was asked whether one could become a devotee without personal association with him, just by reading his books, he answered: "No, it is not that you have to associate with the author. But one who knows, if you cannot understand, you have to take lesson from him. Not necessarily that you have to contact with the author always" (morning walk of 21 May 1975). And of the Christians he added that the Bible is to be understood "with the help of the priest in the church" (lecture of 2 October 1968) — yet the guru remains Jesus.

That is the exact relationship: the teacher is the ācārya whose word we accept; those who help us understand that word are śikṣā-gurus, instructors. "The spiritual master is the external manifestation of the caitya-guru, or the spiritual master sitting in everyone's heart" (ŚB 4.8.44, purport): Kṛṣṇa from within and His representative from without guide the sincere disciple, and neither votes nor new "living ācāryas" are needed for that.

Where the myth of the "living guru" came from

If the guru were only a body, then:

• no one in five thousand years could have become Kṛṣṇa's disciple through the Bhagavad-gītā;
• no Christian could follow Christ;
• Prabhupāda himself would have been without a guru for the thirty years after his teacher's departure;
• and his disciples whom he initiated by letter and never saw would not have been his disciples.

All this contradicts both the scriptures and Prabhupāda's direct words. The myth of the "living guru" serves only one purpose: to explain why, after Prabhupāda's departure, other people should take the place of the ācārya. But for that one would have to cancel the central truth of guru-tattva: the teacher's instructions are not different from the teacher himself, and the teacher lives in them forever.

When a guru leaves this world, he simply stops accepting disciples himself — if that is his will. But if he has expressed the will to go on accepting disciples through his representatives, nothing stands in his way: his knowledge, his books and his mercy are still here.

Prabhupāda's will: initiation on his behalf

What will did Prabhupāda express? Let us look at the documents of 1977.

• On 28 May 1977, asked by GBC members about initiations after his departure, Prabhupāda said: "I shall recommend some of you to act as officiating ācāryas" — that is, to perform initiation as the ācārya's representatives. "Is that called ṛtvik-ācārya?" — "Ṛtvik, yes." When it was put to him that the ṛtvik does it on his behalf, he said: "Yes. That is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order." And further: "When I order, 'You become guru,' he becomes regular guru" (conversation). No such order followed.
• On 7 July 1977 Tamāla Kṛṣṇa Gosvāmī summed up: "Anybody who gives initiation is doing so on your behalf." Prabhupāda answered: "Yes" (conversation).
• On 9 July 1977 a letter approved by Prabhupāda went out to the whole society: eleven disciples would perform initiations as his representatives, temple presidents "may henceforward send recommendation" to them, and "the newly initiated devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad" (the letter and its scan).
• On 18 October 1977, a month before his departure, Prabhupāda repeated: "So I have deputed some of you to initiate… Is it clear or not?" (conversation).

The letter of 9 July says nothing about this arrangement ending with Prabhupāda's departure. "Henceforward" has no time limit. And the will, signed a month earlier, requires the system to "continue as it is now", with "no need of any change" (the will).

From these words and documents, in the understanding of the IRM and of the author, Prabhupāda's will is clear: he wished to go on accepting disciples even after his physical departure — through his representatives, through his books and through the centres he opened all over the world.

The ācārya's will is the foundation of spiritual life

Why does this matter so much? Because carrying out the spiritual master's will is not one rule among others; it is the disciple's very life.

• "The order of the spiritual master is the active principle in spiritual life. Anyone who disobeys the order of the spiritual master immediately becomes useless" (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi 12.10).
• Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, explaining the Bhagavad-gītā verse vyavasāyātmikā buddhiḥ, teaches that the disciple must accept the spiritual master's word as his life and soul. Prabhupāda writes that he followed this very principle himself: "The secret of success in advancement in spiritual life is the firm faith of the disciple in the orders of his spiritual master" (Ādi 12.8).

The true guru is Kṛṣṇa's representative. His will is Kṛṣṇa's will, passed down through the line of succession. So Kṛṣṇa's mercy comes to one who carries out his teacher's will. And unwillingness to carry out the will of a true guru is unwillingness to carry out the will of Kṛṣṇa Himself. In essence, that is a fall, even if outwardly one remains in a high position.

An ācārya is not appointed by vote

An ācārya, or dīkṣā-guru, is not a post one can obtain by a committee's decision. Prabhupāda wrote so directly:

• "Mundane votes have no jurisdiction to elect a Vaiṣṇava ācārya. A Vaiṣṇava ācārya is self-effulgent, and there is no need for any court judgment" (Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya 1.220).
• "Don't become premature ācārya. First of all follow the orders of ācārya, and you become mature" (lecture of 6 April 1975).
• On the Gauḍīya Maṭha: "He never recommended anyone to be acarya… So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure" (letter of 28 April 1974).

Yet after 1977 ISKCON's leadership came to approve gurus precisely by vote:

• in 1983–1985 a candidate guru was approved by a GBC vote — in 1985 this required two thirds of the votes of the members present;
• from 1987–1989, by a "no objection" procedure: the local council approves the candidate, and if within three months three GBC members do not object in writing, he begins to initiate;
• since 2004 a candidate needs three quarters of the votes of a council made up of the GBC members of his region and senior devotees.

(The GBC resolutions of these years are published at gbc.iskcon.org: 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, 2004.)

Whatever the procedure, the substance is the same: gurus are appointed by a human vote — which Prabhupāda himself called impossible.

The author's view

This section is my personal view as the author of Vedaword.

I believe that the leaders of ISKCON became useless — asāra, as Prabhupāda says of those who disobeyed their teacher's order — because they refused to carry out Prabhupāda's will. And that will is quite clear: Prabhupāda wanted to go on bringing people to Kṛṣṇa after his physical departure — through his books and the centres he opened all over the world, accepting them as disciples through his representatives.

Instead of helping him in this, his disciples began to call themselves ācāryas, to change his books and to invent methods he had never given — down to appointing gurus by vote. The ācārya and the dīkṣā-guru are one and the same, and an ācārya cannot be appointed by a vote: Prabhupāda said and wrote this many times.

Practice has confirmed it. Whoever passes himself off as an ācārya and accepts worship as if he were God degrades. He loses higher spiritual experience, is cut off from God's internal energy — yoga-māyā — and begins to sink into perverted, animal pleasures, trying to fill the emptiness of soul that opens when a person is cut off from that energy. The history of the zonal ācāryas and their falls, set out from the documents in a separate article, is for me a clear confirmation of this.

What this means for a seeker today

Prabhupāda is still here — in his books, in his words, in the holy name he gave the world. Whoever sincerely seeks Kṛṣṇa can:

• read Prabhupāda's books and accept them as the word of his guru — this is receiving divine knowledge, the essence of dīkṣā;
• chant the holy names and follow his instructions;
• learn from devotees who themselves follow Prabhupāda — this is śikṣā, and one may have many such teachers;
• accept initiation on Prabhupāda's behalf where it is given as he directed in the letter of 9 July 1977.

The ācārya's will is clear. What remains is to carry it out.