GuruSsaakshaat' Param' Brahm' — a different Perspective

17 Dec 2008

गुरुर्ब्रह्मा गुरुर्विष्णुः गुरुर्देवो महेश्वरः।
गुरुस्साक्षात परं ब्रह्म तस्मै श्री गुरवे नमः।।

GururBrahma GururVishnuh' GururDeo Maheshwarah',
GuruSsaakshaat' Param' Brahm' Tasmai Shri Gurave Namah'.
( t in GuruSsaakshaat is pronounced with soft tone as in Taiwan, Taliban, Taj Mahal, Tantr, Taoism, etc. )

Here, I have followed the English Phonetic Tradition while representing Sanskrit terms in English alphabet.

We know of English Phonetic Tradition that makes people pronounce English words with a long-a emphasis as in arm for tailing-a.

One may, however, argue that both-a in Bata are pronounced with long-a emphasis. But then I can hardly help it.

In comparison to this, Sanskrit has scientifically solid phonetic base.

Like every language, Sanskrit too has exceptions but then the beauty of Sanskrit is that it has laid down principles that govern the exceptions too.

English translation

"The Guru is none other than the creator, Lord Brahma; he verily is Lord Vishnu, the preserver, and he truly is Maheshwar, the destroyer. He is the supreme Brahman himself. To such a Guru I offer my salutations".

Translator

English translation of Sanskrit Shlok (verse) has been reproduced from Chants of India, and Dr. Nandakumara of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, London (England) has done the translation.

None other than 

17-18 Dec 2008 & 3 Jan 2009

This clarification has become necessary because vast majority of the Hindus tend to understand this Shlok very differently. They tend to believe that it has one and only one meaning, that is, Human Guru is Brahma, Human Guru is Vishnu, Human Guru is Maheshwar, and Human Guru is Param Brahm… (see footnote)

This line of thinking has been accentuated by Kabir's famous Doha (verse) which conveys that (Human) guru and Govind (Ishwar/God) are both standing in front of him and he is perplexed as to whom he should salute first (touch the feet).

So, you have one (human) guru, he has another, she has yet another.

Well, this thought process suits well all (Human) gurus.

This thought process has gained considerable momentum after advent of Islam and Christianity

Hindus have lived in close association with Muslims/Christians for centuries.

Many so-called reformers have mushroomed during past few centuries

Those who feel offended by these comments are welcome to stop reading here itself.

Dr. Nandakumara's translation, however, conveys us a different story

There is, however, yet another school of thought

Those taking pride in their accumulated spiritual knowledge may want to go on debating such matters of theory without any true and direct experience of Ishwar

Not so popular approach would be to subscribe to a thought process that does not (materialistically) benefit the vast majority and yet, it could be The Truth

Lest you harbor some wrong notion, I need to clarify that Guru-Shishya Parampara (tradition) has done immense good to Hindu society

 Let us try to understand this differently

God realized Souls

Destroyer

Think of it this way – what do you do when a building becomes too risky to live in?

It’s only a limited expression

No parity can be drawn between this concept and the Christian doctrine of Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Ghost) though some well known Gurus (ex: Paramahansa Yogananda) have attempted to do so as it has served them well.

2010-07-29 PM 6:00: These days, gurus who indirectly promote this concept have popularized yet another term called SadGuru whereby they tend to convey that I am the SadGuru superior to other gurus. If such gurus had attained the ultimate stage of union with the Param Brahm in Nirvikalp Samaadhi, they would have never made such mistake. These are the gurus whether they tend to pass on themselves as guru or Sadguru are essentially in the vocation of religious preaching (a concept that was popularized by Christian clergy) and all their knowledge is borrowed knowledge, that is, read from books, or heard from their respective gurus or others, or produced in the factory of their own minds. Christianity has corrupted the whole environment by making religion a product for marketing.   

Re: Late Dayaanand Saraswati of Arya Samaj we find a very apt note in BhagavadGita 2010 10 17

BhagavadGita Samatv'Yog समत्वयोग

Adhyaay 2 Shlok 42-43-44
Such people take pleasure in debates over Vedic discussions. They speak in attractive manner that there is no greater duty than this. Such desire-filled people consider Heaven as their goal. Lacking in true wisdom, such people speak in many appealing ways, of paths that lead to enjoyments and glories, resulting in the bondage of Karm, the cycle of birth(s) and death(s). People, who get impressed by such talks, remain attached to pleasures and glitters, lacking the true knowledge.
Adhyaay 2 Shlok 45-46
Vedic scriptures are populated with all three attributes, fundamental to this creation, Satva, Rajas, and Tamas. You need to go beyond them ... devoid of attachments, free of conflicts, not desirous of material things and their accumulation. After knowing the Sarv-Brahm (the Creator), the Vedic essence becomes automatically known.

Giving Dayaanand and his Arya Samaj the coveted position of Social Reformer was a big mistake. You would be shocked to know that the conspiracy was hatched and supported by none other than the ChristianBritish, which I have dealt with in detail in a small book written in Hindi 2007 कौन अपना कौन पराया  And, why everyone has failed to see this has can be easily understood if one has assimilated the core concepts of Christianity. What eludes you is the fact that Dayaanand was critique of Christianity but what you don't understand is what Christians were, and are, capable of.