GURU & UPAGURU
IF the initiatic role of the guru or spiritual master is often spoken of (which of course does not mean that those who speak of it always understand it exactly), there is on the other hand another notion that is generally passed over in silence: what the Hindu tradition designates by the word upaguru. This term must be understood to signify every being, whatever it may be, with whom an encounter is for someone the occasion or starting-point of a spiritual development; and, in a general way, it is not at all necessary that this being itself be conscious of the role it plays. Moreover, if we speak here of a being, we could just as well speak also of a thing, or even of some circumstance that brings about the same effect, which finally comes back to what we have often said, namely that anything at all can, according to the case, act as an 'occasional cause' in this regard. It goes without saying that the latter is not a cause in the strict sense of the word, and that in reality the true cause is found in the very nature of the one upon whom this action is exercised, as is shown by the fact that what has such an effect upon him may very well have none at all upon another individual. And we might add that upagurus, thus understood, can naturally be multiple in the course of one and the same spiritual development, for each has only a transitory role and can act effectively only at a certain determinate moment, outside of which its intervention can have no more importance than do most of the things that occur to us at every instant and that we consider more or less indifferent.
The designation upaguru indicates that it has only an accessory and subordinate role, which can be regarded as that of an auxiliary
to the true guru; indeed, the latter must know how to make use of all circumstances favorable to the development of his disciples, in conformity with the particular possibilities and aptitudes of each, and if he is truly a spiritual master in the complete sense of the word he may even sometimes himself provoke such circumstances at a desired moment. One could therefore say that in a certain way the upagurus are only 'prolongations' of the guru in the same way that the instruments and various means used by a being to exercise or amplify its action are so many prolongations of itself; and consequently it is evident that his proper role is in no way diminished thereby but, quite to the contrary, that he finds in them the possibility of acting more completely and in a way that is better adapted to the nature of each disciple, the indefinite diversity of contingent circumstances always permitting him to find in them some correspondence with that of their individual natures.
What we have just said applies to cases that can be considered normal, or that at least ought to be so with respect to the initiatic process, namely, cases implying the effective presence of a human guru. And before passing on to considerations of another order, equally applicable to the more or less exceptional cases that can in fact exist apart from the normal, it is appropriate to make another observation. When initiation properly speaking is conferred by someone who does not possess the qualities required to fulfill the function of a spiritual master, and who therefore acts solely as a 'transmitter' of the influence attached to the rite that he accomplishes, such an initiator may also be properly assimilated to an upaguru, which as such has a very particular and as it were unique importance of its kind, since it is its intervention that really determines the 'second birth', this being so even if the initiation is to remain merely virtual. This is also the only case where the upaguru must necessarily be conscious of his role, at least to some degree; we add this restriction because, when it is a matter of more or less degenerate or diminished initiatic organizations, it may happen that the initiator is ignorant of the true nature of what he transmits and even has no idea of the efficacy inherent in rites, which, as we have explained on other occasions, in no way prevents the latter from being valid as long as they are accomplished regularly and under the
proper conditions. Only, it must be clearly understood that, lacking a guru, such an initiation runs a great risk of never becoming effective, except perhaps in certain exceptional cases that we may speak about at some other time; all that we will say for the moment is that, although theoretically there is no absolute impossibility in this, it is almost as rare in fact as is an initiatic affiliation obtained outside the ordinary means, so that it is hardly useful to consider it when limiting oneself to what is susceptible of the widest application.
Having said this, let us return to the consideration of upagurus in general, about which we must still clarify a more profound meaning than that we have indicated so far, for the human guru himself is basically only the exteriorized and as it were 'materialized' representation of the true 'inner guru', and need for him is due to the fact that the initiate, as long as he has not reached a certain degree of spiritual development, is incapable of entering directly into conscious communication with it. Whether or not there is a human guru, the inner guru is always present since it is one with the very 'Self'; and in the final analysis this is the point of view that one must adopt if one wishes to understand initiatic realities fully; moreover, in this respect there are no longer any exceptions like those to which we have just alluded, but only diverse modalities according to which this inner guru acts. Like the human guru, but to a lesser degree and more 'partially' so to speak, upagurus are its manifestations; as such they are, one could say, the appearances that it assumes in order to communicate in the measure possible with a being that cannot as yet relate to it directly, so that communication can only be effected by means of these 'exterior' supports. This allows us to understand why for example it is said that the old man, the sick man, the corpse, and the monk successively encountered by the future Buddha were forms taken by the Devas who wished to direct him toward illumination, these Devas themselves representing here only aspects of the inner guru; by this one need not necessarily understand that these were only 'apparitions', although assuredly these may also be possible in certain cases. The individual reality of the being that plays the role of an upaguru is in no way affected or destroyed thereby; if, however, it is in any way effaced before the reality of a higher order of which it is the occasional and momentary
'support', it is so only for the one to whom the 'message', of which consciously, or more often unconsciously, it has become the bearer, is especially addressed.
To prevent any misunderstanding, let us add that one must be very careful not to interpret what we have just said in the sense that the manifestations of the inner guru would only constitute something 'subjective'. This is not at all what we mean, and from our point of view 'subjectivity' is only the emptiest illusion. The higher reality of which we speak is situated well beyond the 'psychological' domain, at a level where the 'subjective' truly has no more meaning. Indeed, some may find this too evident to dwell upon, but we are only too familiar with the mentality of most of our contemporaries not to know that such precisions are far from being superfluous. Have we not encountered people who, when it is a question of the 'spiritual master', go so far as to render this term as 'director of conscience'?