Question: I have been struggling with something for some time. I do not know how to trust someone to be my guru. I do not want to become cynical or fault-finding. How is a sincere seeker supposed to figure out whether they can trust another person?
Answer: There are really two risks and both need to be avoided. One risk is being habituated to suspicion. A person who regularly searches for faults in others will eventually find reasons to distrust almost anyone. The opposite risk is believing that we are required to trust without caution.
In this regard, a study of the Hitopadeśa story of the tiger and the traveller and Babaji’s commentary on it can be useful. In the story, the tiger has a golden bracelet and offers it to a passing traveler. Naturally, the traveler is suspicious. Why should anyone trust a tiger?
The tiger then impressively speaks about dharma. He explains how he has become detached in old age. He quotes verses from scripture. The traveler is persuaded. He enters the pond, becomes trapped in the mud, and only then realizes his mistake. The tiger approaches him while still pretending to be concerned: “You are stuck in the mud! Wait, I will help you.”
The story is simple, but the point it makes is anything but simple. The tiger’s deception succeeds because his words and actions are those of a dharmic person. He knows what a dharmic person is supposed to say and how he is supposed to behave. The traveler’s weakness is his greed for the bracelet. Despite his suspicions, he eventually ends up trusting the tiger because he wants the bracelet.
The brilliance of Hitopadeśa is that it is really a study in psychology. In the story of the tiger and the traveller, we find the following verse (Babaji’s translations):
na dharma-śāstraṁ paṭhatīti kāraṇaṁ na cāpi vedādhyayanaṁ durātmanaḥ|
svabhāva evātra tathātiricyate yathā prakṛtyā madhuraṁ gavāṁ payaḥ||
Just as cow’s milk by nature is always sweet, an evil person’s nature will dominate, though he studies the dharma-scriptures or even the Vedas.
The tiger’s example shows that a person may know śāstra and talk about virtue. However, knowledge of virtue is different from possession of virtue. Knowledge by itself is just a burden as the next verse states:
avaśendriya-cittānāṁ hasti-snānam iva kriyā
durbhagābharaṇa-prāyo jñānaṁ bhāraḥ kriyāṁ vināThe actions and scriptural study of a person of uncontrolled passion are like the bathing of an elephant. As ornaments worn by a widow are purposeless, similarly, knowledge possessed by one lacking good behavior is a mere burden.
Therefore, one must ascertain whether there is a persistent contradiction between what a person presents himself to be and how he actually behaves. Hitopadeśa gives us this priceless principle:
sarvasya hi parīkṣyante svabhāvā netare guṇāḥ
atītya hi guṇān sarvān svabhāvo mūrdhni vartateIn judging a person, one should especially examine his svabhāva. Other acquired qualities can be secondary because one’s underlying nature eventually manifests itself.
Studying someone’s svabhāva may seem to be very challenging. But Hitopadeśa also teaches us what to look for:
manasy anyad vacasy anyat karmaṇy anyad dūrātmānam|
manasy ekaṁ vacasy ekaṁ karmaṇy ekam mahātmanām||The wicked speak in one way, think in another, yet act differently; but the saintly say what they think, and do what they say.
So we must test if there is harmony between the person’s words, deeds and thoughts. This requires time as the idea is to assess the nature of a person, and not be satisfied with their words alone. This is not the same as fault-finding. Fault-finding begins with a negative conclusion and searches for evidence to support it. Here, we are observing a person with the goal of ascertaining whether they are someone we should trust.
Also, as mentioned above, the traveler in the Hitopadeśa did not make a mistake only because he trusted the tiger. We necessarily live by trust. We trust that the groceries we buy are safe. We trust that our boss at the workplace will continue to employ us the next day. If everything must be verified each time, living in any coherent way would be impossible.
The traveler’s mistake was his greed for the golden bracelet which drowned out his inner voice of caution. Thus, the story asks us to first examine ourselves. We may want something other than a spiritual goal – something quite ordinary like comfort or belonging. These desires are understandable, but they are powerful, and can put us into difficult situations. We can be misled by them, just like the traveler.
Thus, the same test of svabhāva that we apply to others should also be applied to ourselves. Why do we want to approach a guru?The purpose of bhakti is not to acquire the appearance or habits of spiritual life. It is not an excuse to shirk one’s responsibilities, to drop out of society, or to feel morally superior to others who may not be on the path of bhakti. The purpose of bhakti is to change our nature. If years of practice have made us more truthful, less exploitative, less controlled by anger and desire, more capable of acknowledging our faults, and, above all, more dedicated to bhakti for its own sake, then we have progressed. If we have become better at appearances and acquiring the moniker of ‘senior devotee,’ followers and influence, and the ability to quote verses, but none of the above qualities, we are deceiving ourselves and others.
To conclude, when choosing whom to trust, we should test character, and equally importantly, be aware of our own motives that spring from our own character.
I found this article very thought-provoking.
What especially stayed with me was the idea that trust and doubt need not be simple opposites. We can observe a person’s svabhava while also asking why we are inclined to trust that person.
This led me to another question: is trusting someone as a person quite the same as trusting that person as one’s guru?
Integrity, learning, or teaching ability may attract us to someone, but admiration for a particular quality is not yet the same as entrusting that person with the guidance of one’s bhakti. Bhagavad-gita 4.34 presents the relationship with those who see the truth through pranipata, sincere inquiry, and service. Thus discernment and trust both have their place.
I was reminded of an ordinary experience. I once sent a question to Dr. Satyanarayana Dasa Babaji, and his answer was conveyed through a staff member. This did not mean equating Babaji with the intermediary. It simply required reasonable trust that my correspondence would be handled appropriately and his answer conveyed faithfully. Without concrete reason, doubting every intermediary would make inquiry and learning difficult. What remained with me was gratitude.
The article’s use of Hitopadesa also brought to mind a related verse found in Pancatantra and later taken up by Rupa Gosvami in Upadesamrta 4:
dadati pratigrhnati
guhyam akhyati prcchati
bhunkte bhojayate caiva
sad-vidham priti-laksanam
Giving and receiving, confiding and inquiring, accepting food and offering food—these are six expressions of affection.
Rupa Gosvami places these exchanges within Vaisnava relationships; they are not a test of someone’s qualification as guru. Yet they show that relationships in bhakti deepen through genuine reciprocity.
Trust, then, seems to be neither blind acceptance nor endless suspicion. Perhaps we should ask not only whom we trust, but also what kind of relationship this is, what is being entrusted within it, and on what basis that trust rests.
Thank you for this thoughtful article.