ekaguru or aneka guru in kaula?
kulArNava says:
madhulubdho yathA brngaH puShpAt puShpAntaraM vrajet |
...
Just as the above verse seems to give a blanket sanction to the disciple to change his guru without sticking to one guru in his quest for knowledge, it also throws up numerous questions since, in the same breath, kulArNava also says,
"labdhvA kulagurum samyak na gurvantaramAshrayet"
i.e., after obtaining the kulaguru, one should not further seek another guru and stick to the kulaguru.
it also seems to contradict PKS Sutra No. 20 which says "ekagurUpAstirasamshayaH" meaning,
There is no scope for doubt in the worship of one guru. By implication this means multiple gurus are not permitted in shrIvidyA.
On one hand, while glorifying the attributes of a competent guru, the tantras bestow limitless freedom on the guru in the matter of choosing the disciple and on the other hand, it also gives limited freedom to the shiShya to change his guru under certain circumstances. Is it contradictory?
Is a shiShya whose true thirst for knowledge cannot be quenched by the guru then entitled to change his guru ? (when the guru is not competent enough to clear the genuine doubts of the shiShya)
When after initiation, the shiShya finds that the guru is a fake (it does happen sometimes, due to ignorance) can he change his guru and seek a competent one
What is the take of tantrashAstra in the matter?
kulArNava says:
madhulubdho yathA brngaH puShpAt puShpAntaraM vrajet |
...
jnAna lubdhastathA shiShyaH gurorgurvantaram shrayet ||
meaning,
Just as a honey bee out of greed for honey jumps from flower to flower, a disciple who is greedy for knowledge should seek one guru after another.
meaning,
Just as a honey bee out of greed for honey jumps from flower to flower, a disciple who is greedy for knowledge should seek one guru after another.
Just as the above verse seems to give a blanket sanction to the disciple to change his guru without sticking to one guru in his quest for knowledge, it also throws up numerous questions since, in the same breath, kulArNava also says,
"labdhvA kulagurum samyak na gurvantaramAshrayet"
i.e., after obtaining the kulaguru, one should not further seek another guru and stick to the kulaguru.
it also seems to contradict PKS Sutra No. 20 which says "ekagurUpAstirasamshayaH" meaning,
There is no scope for doubt in the worship of one guru. By implication this means multiple gurus are not permitted in shrIvidyA.
On one hand, while glorifying the attributes of a competent guru, the tantras bestow limitless freedom on the guru in the matter of choosing the disciple and on the other hand, it also gives limited freedom to the shiShya to change his guru under certain circumstances. Is it contradictory?
Is a shiShya whose true thirst for knowledge cannot be quenched by the guru then entitled to change his guru ? (when the guru is not competent enough to clear the genuine doubts of the shiShya)
When after initiation, the shiShya finds that the guru is a fake (it does happen sometimes, due to ignorance) can he change his guru and seek a competent one
What is the take of tantrashAstra in the matter?
No comments:
Post a Comment