Here are some questions from Arati in Mumbai about the role of a guru.
First she asks, "Is it necessary to have a guru?
Can't you get enlightened from spiritual experience instead?"
To answer this, we have to understand exactly what it means to be enlightened.
According to the rishis, the sages of ancient India, your true, inner nature, atma, is already
full and complete.
It's already an abode of perfect peace and contentment.
It's already limitless and divine.
The rishis made this point very clearly in their famous teaching, "tat tvam asi, you
are that."
They never said, "tat tvam bhavishyasi, you will become that someday."
The rishis discovered that - as long as your true self, atma, remains unknown, covered
by a so-called veil of ignorance, then you'll be subject to all kinds of suffering in life.
But when that veil ignorance is removed, you'll immediately recognize your true, divine nature,
and all suffering will come to an end.
So, to become enlightened, properly understood, is to remove the veil of ignorance covering
atma and recognize your true divine nature.
To remove that veil of ignorance, knowledge is required.
Logically speaking, knowledge alone removes ignorance, not experience.
Experience itself can't remove ignorance without the help of knowledge.
Let me explain why.
Suppose you attend a school reunion, twenty years after graduating, and you meet a fellow
student who asks, "Do you recognize me?"
Suppose you don't remember him at all.
Even though you experience him standing right in front of you, your experience isn't enough.
Recognition of your classmate depends on knowledge.
He has to tell you who he is.
The same holds true for recognition of your true nature.
Even the most powerful spiritual experiences can't remove ignorance about your true nature
unless they're accompanied by knowledge, knowledge of your true self, atma.
Yet, we've all heard amazing stories of people who meditated in remote mountain caves for
months or years and eventually emerged fully enlightened after having powerful spiritual
experiences.
How are we to explain that?
Well, consider their lives before they sat in those caves to meditate.
No doubt, they had already been following a spiritual path of some kind and would certainly
have heard the teachings of the ancient rishis, if only briefly.
Apparently, what they heard wasn't enough to make them enlightened, otherwise they wouldn't
have sought out those caves in the first place.
It's likely that their deep meditation helped them fully understand what they heard before,
leading them to gain knowledge of atma and become enlightened.
It's not unusual to hear something and understand it only later, like someone who hears a joke
and laughs a few seconds after everyone else does.
If those meditators had never been exposed to the wisdom of the rishis, they might still
be sitting in their caves, because mere experience can't remove the veil of ignorance that covers
atma, like merely seeing your classmate doesn't make you remember him.
Even though knowledge of atma is generally gained from a guru, the ancient rishis gained
this knowledge independently, without the help of a guru.
But they were remarkable people, blessed with a special capacity to discover what others
cannot.
If you happen to be as exceptional as the rishis, then you probably don't need a guru
either.
But if you're as ordinary as I am, a guru is definitely necessary.
Practically speaking, we need all the help we can get.
Regarding this, Arati asks another question, "Can the scriptures themselves serve as a
guru?"
That certainly seems reasonable.
After all, the scriptures were written by the rishis themselves.
But there are several problems to be considered here.
First of all, those scriptures are written in Sanskrit.
If you study a translation, you're reading the translator's interpretation, not the scripture
itself.
And, unless the translator was both highly skillful and enlightened, many errors may
have crept into the translation.
Even if the translator was enlightened and skillful, the Sanskrit language has an extraordinary
degree of precision and clarity that's unique among languages.
As a result, even the best translations are poor reproductions of the originals, like
black and white photocopies of beautiful color paintings.
Fortunately, a qualified guru can unfold the profound teachings of the scriptures for you
and help you access their lofty wisdom.
Of course, you could learn Sanskrit and read the scriptures for yourself.
It's a difficult language, yet it's not impossible to learn.
But even then, there's a problem.
Whenever you read something, you interpret it based on what you already know.
Unless you're already enlightened, you're likely to misinterpret what you read.
Also, when you have questions about something you've read, who will you go to for clarification?
For all these reasons, scriptures are generally studied with the help of a guru.
Besides, taking the help of a guru is largely a matter of common sense.
If you want to learn Sanskrit language or or how to play tennis, wouldn't it be far
easier with the help of a qualified teacher?
And that leads to Arati's last question, about who is a qualified teacher?
She asks, "How can you find a true guru.
How do you know if a guru is genuine and has first-hand knowledge of atma?"
Those are great questions.
Unless your guru is enlightened and has the skill to teach you, you're not likely to become
enlightened.
In our modern times, doctors, accountants, and even manicurists have to be tested and
certified before offering their services to the public.
But there's no similar process of testing and certification for gurus.
Nor could there be.
No psychological test or personality profile can determine whether or not a person is enlightened.
He or she alone knows.
Unfortunately, if you ask an unethical person who's posing as a guru if they're enlightened,
the answer is likely to be yes.
Ultimately, it's up to you to discern whether or not a guru is qualified.
Observing a guru's behavior can be helpful, though it's not a perfect indicator.
Someone who's truly enlightened will not be motivated by desire, by desires for money,
for luxuries, for status and recognition, or for praise and adoration.
If a guru seems highly driven by such desires, it might be best to run in the opposite direction.
But observations about a guru can sometimes be misleading.
A guru who's extraordinarily loving and compassionate may or may not be enlightened.
It's easy to pretend being loving and compassionate.
Fortunately, there are other criteria you can use to judge a guru's suitability.
A famous passage in the Katha Upanishad says, "sa gurum eva abhigacchet," one should approach
only that guru who is, shrotriyam," well-versed in the scriptures, and brahmanishtam, established
in brahman, in absolute truth."
It's essential for a guru to have already discovered the truth that you wish to discover.
And it's also essential for that guru to be well versed in the scriptures, because those
scriptures are like a road map that can lead you to discover what the guru has already
discovered.
Even though it's impossible to know for sure whether or not a guru has actually discovered
the truth, it's easier to judge for yourself whether or not a guru has access to the scriptural
roadmap.
First of all, does the guru know Sanskrit, the language of the scriptures?
A guru should have direct access to the wisdom of the ancient rishis.
Further, has the guru undergone a thorough and traditional study of the scriptures?
Who was the guru's guru?
This much you can probably determine with a little bit of research.
Also, it's possible for a guru to be brahmanishta, established in brahman, but not shrotriya,
well-versed in the scriptures.
Such gurus are enlightened mystics and spiritual geniuses.
They can certainly guide you and inspire you, but they can't teach you properly if they
themselves lack access to the scriptures that contain the wisdom of the rishis.
On the other hand, there are gurus who are the opposite of this; they're well-versed
in the scriptures, but they're not enlightened.
At the very least, they can teach you properly, even if they can't lead you all the way to
enlightenment.
That's why it's OK to have more than one guru.
There's no rule that says you can have only one guru.
In school, you had many teachers, and you learned different things from each one.
In the same way, you can have several gurus and gain different insights from each of them.
It's often said that when the student is ready, the guru appears.
Perhaps it's true, but maybe not in the way you think.
It's possible that the guru has already appeared, but the student hasn't yet understood the
need for a guru, and therefore makes no attempt to seek out that guru's guidance.
And, a true guru is not likely to seek after students.
A guru who's not motivated by desire won't engage in advertising or other kinds of self-promotion.
For both these reasons, finding a qualified guru is entirely up to the student.
This is the ninth in a series of videos that address questions from viewers.
If you have a question that would serve as a good topic for a video like this one, please
email me at this address, and be sure to indicate "video question" as the subject of the email.
I'll try to address your question in a future video.