Gordon Grobelny, Loralin Tomlin, Krista Fisher, Mary Kaminski, Richard Spang
... these are just off the top of my head, people living within 15 miles of me.
matrixmonitor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--Let the buyer beware. It's our responsibility, which becomes
skilled in the light of additional direct experience: IMO the more
Gurus the better. This provides an insurance plan against getting
duped by any possible charlatans; but more important, in all
likelihood, the vast majority of Gurus (unless ouright phonies); have
SOMETHING to offer that might be of value; in which case it's our
responsibility to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Example: Once Baba Ram Dass (Dr. Richard Alpert) was on the radio in
the 70's commenting on MMY. His conclusion was that what MMY had to
offer was of no value because (in Ram Dass's opinion), he seemed to
be "attached" to money. So what, even if this were true (actually,
from a Spiritual perspective this would be impossible - a topic
covered recently; the outer exhibition is another story reserved for
later discussion). But what does this have to do with TM as a
technique?. So, in a relative sense nobody's perfect. See the
benefits in anything/everything, and discard what's useless.
So, you believe that people can get Enlightened without a Guru. OK,
name one such person. That's your challenge for today.
- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Bronte:
> My friend, what should I call you? I can't pronounce your web
name -- so, "friend": Thanks for this observation, and I agree:
learning to play an instrument is often easier with a teacher, but
not always. And teachers are not essential, although most gurus will
tell you that they are. It's one thing to say "I'm a great real
estate agent and will help you sell your house if you like" versus
saying "You will never sell your house without my help, you poor
miserable schlep." The latter being analogous to most gurus are
saying. And I'll continue to gripe about that kind of manipulation.
>
>
> --So which approach is easier, with, or without a teacher? (in
> generaly, don't talk about isolated exceptions). In advance, let's
take
> care of one exception: HWL Poonja. He states that in his last
> incarnation (prior to being "HWL Poonja"...died in the 90's), he
was an
> advanced Krishna-bhakti Yogi. Then as Poonja in the course of his
> travels as an engineer, he happens to get an urge to visit Ramana
> Maharshi in his cave. Poonja tells RM about his many visions of
> Krishna, and RM asks, "Are you having a vision right now?". Then
after
> a few more leading questions RM in essence tells Poonja
he's "already"
> Enlightened. Poonja "got it" and became Enlightened on the spot.
> But then, RM was a teacher, wasn't he?
>
> In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Bronte Baxter
<brontebaxter8@ ...>
> wrote:
> >
> > ---Sure, one can get Enlightened without a Guru; likewise, one
can
> > learn how to play the violin without a teacher. (as Borak would
> > say...."NOT" !).
> >
> >
> > Bronte:
> > Curious, I know lots of people who've taught themselves musical
> instruments.
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not
web links.
>
---------------------------------
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
