So we are now also imitating, because India is imitator. Since the Britishers came here, we have become first-class imitator. When the 1914, the war was going on, so it is understood that in high court, Calcutta high court, there is leisure hour, tiffin hour. So all the judges were sitting. So one English judge, he asked Sir Asutosh Mukherji, "Mr. Mukherji, now the Germans are coming, and if so, what you are going to do?" Mr. Mukherji, Sir Asutosh Mukherji, he replied, "Yes, as soon as the Germans will come, we shall offer our respect in this way, 'Come on, sir.' " "So you'll not counteract? Why?" "You have taught us to make like this, so we shall do that. Because you have simply taught us this, how to obey your orders. So anyone who will come, we shall do this." The idea is the slave mentality . . . The Englishmen, in an organized way, they taught the Indians how to become servant of the Englishmen. We have seen. It is Gandhi's movement that he dismantled this idea of white prestige. Otherwise, we were taught like that. So this imitation of Englishmen . . . Formerly, in our childhood, it was the advancement of civilization if one could imitate the English fashion. That was.
So we should not make that a fashion. Guru is not a fashion. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in Bhagavad-gītā, in all Vedic literature, who requires a guru, that is described. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam (SB 11.3.21). He requires a guru. Jijñāsuḥ. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. That is human life. One who is interested in inquiring about Brahman, he requires a guru. One who has no business for understanding Brahman, simply to make a fashion that "I have a guru," this is useless. It has no value. One must be very much inquisitive to understand the spiritual science. He requires a guru. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ. Jijñāsuḥ means inquisitive.
- catur-vidhā bhajante māṁ
- sukṛtino 'rjuna
- ārto arthārthī jijñāsur
- jñānī ca bharatarṣabha
- (BG 7.16)
Jñānī, jijñāsur, ārtaḥ, arthārthī. The gṛhasthas, they are ārta, distressed. So if he's pious, so in his distressed condition he approaches the Supreme Personality of Godhead, "My Lord, I am very much distressed. Kindly give me Your favor." "Give me." There is "give me." And jijñāsuḥ, jñānī, they do not want anything "Give me," but jijñāsuḥ: "Actually, what is God? What is the Absolute Truth?" That is the difference. One is going to God for asking something, and jijñāsuḥ, jñānī, is eulogized because they do not ask anything. To ask anything from God is not higher standard of bhakti. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, na dhanaṁ na janaṁ na sundarīṁ kavitāṁ vā jagadīśa kāmaye (CC Antya 20.29, Śikṣāṣṭaka 4). This is pure devotion.
People generally go to Kṛṣṇa, God, "O God, give us our daily bread." This is not bhakti, but it is piety because he goes to God. Therefore sukṛtina. He's not the sinful man. He's pious man. At least he has approached God. And those who are sinful, they do not approach even. They do not go even in the temple to ask something. They say, "What is this nonsense? We don't require. We shall work hard." Nowadays it is going on. "Why you go to temple? Why you give credit to God for your success? You work hard . . ." There is a philosophy, karma-mīmāṁsā. It is like that. "You work hard and you get the profit. Why you should give credit to God?" This is going on. They are duṣkṛtina. They do not know that without God's mercy you cannot get anything. Otherwise, simply by working hard, anyone could become a big man? No. That is not possible. Without Kṛṣṇa's desire, without sanction, it cannot be done. Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ (BG 3.27). Everyone is under the obligation of nature and karma. One cannot surpass. There are many instances in the śāstra.