PASSING THE SPIRITUAL BATON

One will say tatasu to Swami Kriyananda’s concluding words in his article Passing The Spiritual Baton Of A Realised Guru (The Speaking Tree, The Times of India, Bangalore, March 2, 2007, p.16):

“If infused with the guru’s power, only they [human beings, not the guru’s writings or physical structures like ashrams] can transmit his actual power to others. In this way, high spiritual vibrations can be passed down through generations of disciples and create a spiritual legacy that may last for centuries.”

However, what Swamiji says at the beginning about ‘vibrations’—as if some special power is transmitted by the guru to the disciple—needs to be addressed properly. He says:

“People of spiritual sensitivity understand that true scripture contains holy vibrations, not only ideas. When I told my guru that his autobiography had affected me deeply, he replied, ‘That is because it contains my vibrations.’”

The ‘vibration’ that deeply affected Swamiji was not some kind of power infused in the guru’s words, but rather the proper understanding by the shishya (disciple), based on faith and the grace of the guru or God. The role of the guru is not merely to transmit vibrations, but also to help the disciple understand his teachings correctly. As Swamiji’s guru rightly said:

“No scripture can take the place of a true guru. If someone misunderstands a point, the scripture will be unable to correct his perception. The guru, on the other hand, can show him the way.”

Thus, the ‘spiritual baton’ that needs to be passed down through generations of disciples is a proper understanding of the guru’s teachings—not deviating due to misunderstanding or misinterpretation, but living according to the guru’s ideals. However, the role of scripture or the writings of the guru cannot easily be replaced by the generation of disciples alone. If we need the guru’s writings to uplift us, we also need them to guide us. The guidance that successive disciples can offer comes through their lives and by helping others understand the guru’s ideals recorded in the writings.

While we may agree with Swamiji’s emphasis on the guru parampara (lineage) to carry forward the guru’s ‘vibration,’ the role of scripture cannot be subordinated to this. Swamiji says, “Disciples, by attunement with their guru, will be able, depending on the degree of attunement, to explain mistakes in people’s understanding of the scriptures and his [guru’s] writings.” However, the disciples themselves need the scriptures and the guru’s writings to ensure that their interpretations and explanations (to correct misunderstandings) align with the guru’s teachings. Otherwise, as has happened with several Hindu scriptures, commentary traditions of various acharyas (teachers) might replace the scriptures and become their own authority.

Swamiji mentions twice that “While a book’s vibration may uplift, it cannot guide” and “It [scripture] may inspire, but it cannot guide. It cannot even teach.” To support this, he adds:

“Supposing everyone in that ashram were to fall from the guru’s ideals. (Such things have been known to happen.) In this case, while the vibrations would still inspire, the place itself would have no more power than a museum with sacred relics.”

But it is incorrect to compare scripture to a place or institution like an ashram, unless one firmly believes in the so-called lingering ‘vibrations’ of the guru at a particular location, as Swamiji suggests by quoting, “Paramhansa Yogananda, speaking of his headquarters, remarked, ‘I have meditated everywhere on these grounds.’ Indeed, any sensitive person can feel the moment he steps onto that property that its vibrations are sacred.”

Unless we believe in the infallibility of the disciples infused with the guru’s power, we need the scripture both to inspire, uplift, and guide us. What Swamiji says about institutions is valid,1 but applying the same logic to scriptures grants extra-scriptural authority to any disciple in successive generations, allowing them to misinterpret the guru’s teachings to promote their own ideals. While promoting one’s own ideals is not inherently wrong, doing so in the name of the guru requires adherence to the guru’s scripture and writings for accountability.

While I completely agree with Swamiji regarding institutions, I humbly disagree with him for equating the writings and scriptures with institutions and ashrams, based on this notion of ‘vibration.’

Dayanand Bharati. 

Mathigiri, March 4, 2007, 11:30 am.

—

Footnotes: 

1. The sincere seeker should ask these questions: Is the guru’s organization, assuming he left one behind, filled with divine devotion, harmony, and love? Do members seem eager to serve in God’s name? Or are they only interested in their own inner peace? Do they demonstrate the desire to share their guru’s message with others? Or do they merely promote their own ideals? Do they demonstrate devotion to truth above all? Or is their priority a mere institutional convenience? 

Organizations, in themselves, are only things and, therefore, inert. People alone can infuse life into them. People can also dull the vitality of an institution if they lose their devotion to the ideals. A common mistake is assuming that established structures have more power to uplift than “mere” fallible human beings. Yet human beings are alive. If infused with the guru’s power, only they can transmit his actual power to others. 

It is true that the writings of the guru and the ashrams he founded are endowments—primarily vehicles for his consciousness that must be kept alive by living disciples. Divine grace, after a master’s death, must be channeled primarily through his disciples. They alone can transmit the guru’s actual spiritual touch. It’s like passing the baton in a relay race.