--Ramana didn't have a physically embodied Guru prior to getting
Enlightened on 7-17-96; but he was born right next to a Shiva Temple
and as a youth, spent a lot of time in Shiva and Kali Temples, even
pouring water on a Shivalingam, then swimming in a nearby river.
Thus, there was a Spiritual Transmission through the Temple Shakti.
Around the same time, his Uncle met him at home, saying he had just
come from "Arunachala". Although Ramana had heard of this place in
the context of the Saivite mythos, he then realized it was an actual,
physical place.
The term Arunachala refers to a. Arunachala Shiva, b.
Arunachaleswarar Temple, c. the Arunachala Hill, and d. according to
Ramana, The Self.
- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "oneradiantbeing"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> DS: No, that was not written to Rick. I thought I was responding
> to "Hridaya Puri" or Ron (I believe they are the same person),
whose
> name appeared at the bottom of the post (see below). Please explain
> further, if necessary. Thanks, DS
>
______________________________________________________________________
> Bronte: DS, did you confuse Ron with Rick?/ re: DS responds to
> response to Rick Archer RE: Enlightenment
>
______________________________________________________________________
>
> Bronte: 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 <oneradiantbeing@> 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
>
