Dear DS: Are you responding to Rick Archer or to Ron (Hridaya)? The comments
below don't sound like Rick, and unless he sent you these questions privately,
it isn't him, because such a post from him does not appear on the forum. You
misconstrued me, Bronte Baxter, as being New Morning in an earlier post. Are
you mixing these other two people up now? Please try to be careful getting the
names right when you quote people. - Bronte
oneradiantbeing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please note. To save time, I am placing my responses in CAPS minus
the shouting. They easily distinguish my responses from the rest of
the text. Thank you for your understanding. David Spero
OK Rick,
Now asking in public so all can participate.
THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO ENTER THIS DISCUSSION.
I suspect that all of those that you know that you say are realized
have proclaimed this on their own without their Guru declaring this,
or they did not or currently do not have a guru, or they have their
own inner Guru- either in some form or otherwise.
It does seem that enlightenment is also possible without the guru but
I think it is very rare. Even Ramana, from which this idea that it is
possible, had a Guru (acording to my guru- I think the name was
Archula).
HERE IS WHAT RAMANA SAID: THE SELF, OR THE ATMAN, IS THE GURU. HE
ALSO SAYS THAT THE SELF - OR GRACE - MAY GUIDE THE SEEKER TO FIND AN
OUTER (LIVING) GURU.
I'VE NOT HEARD ABOUT RAMANA HAVING AN EXTERNAL GURU. PLEASE HAVE YOUR
GURU SEND YOU THE SOURCE OF HIS KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS GURU SO WE CAN
LEARN ABOUT HIM OR HER.
You pointed out that among other functions with the Guru is telling
one to continue even though they think they have arrived. This is the
key missing element for those self proclaiming as above because a Sat
Guru in living form can quiclky see if there is further to go once
they are with the people for some time. That is how it works in my
path.
AN APPOINTED GURU IS NO GUARANTEE OF AUTHENTICITY. ON THE CONTRARY,
SPIRITUAL LINEAGES AND MOVEMENTS OFTEN CARRY A LOT OF POLITICAL
BAGGAGE. AN APPOINTED, "BONA-FIDE" GURU - REALIZED OR NOT - IS JUST A
BODY WITH A REPUTATION ATTACHED TO IT.
My experience with it is I have been with and read about both those
self proclaiming as above and also those proclaimed enlightened by
their Guru who also were proclaimed enlightened by their Guru in a
chain continueing upwards. The Self procalimed fell apart every time
under scrutiny. I have seen a lot in the last two years like this-
maybe 20.
AND MANY APPOINTED GURUS HAVE ALSO BITTEN THE DUST IN PUBLIC
HUMILIATION AND DISGRACE.
THE PLAYING FIELD IS EVEN: NEITHER THE APPOINTED NOR THE SELF-
PROCLAIMED HOLD ANY ADVANTAGE OVER THE OTHER.
It is a subtle difference by quite clear to me, with the aide of my
guru pointing out the diffferences. There is a value to it- keeping
holy company is wise, so good to make sure the company one keeps is
100% holy sometimes.
HOLINESS IS MERELY APPEARANCE AND THERE ARE NO OUTER BEHAVIORIAL
CRITERIA TO JUDGE WHETHER SOMEONE IS ENLIGHTENED OR NOT.
Some of these people screw others up in various ways. Most amazing I
saw was one with all the perfect words describing themselves as
enlightened. What came out once there was an association with Sat
Guru was this person was depressed, angry. and with violent thoughts.
I'VE MET MANY PROFOUNDLY WOUNDED PEOPLE AFTER STUDYING UNDER HIGHLY
ACCLAIMED, APPOINTED GURUS.
I just recently saw in person a guru proclaiming his disciples
enlightened, however the guru himself is a self proclaimed
enlightened one, and this also looks flawed.
The topic is a tricky one.
YES, IT IS. SO PLEASE TRY NOT TO SOUND SO CERTAIN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT.
NAMASTE,
DS
Hridaya Puri
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.
