--- In [email protected], "Irmeli Mattsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > t3rinity: > > Phew, you put it all in one basket don't you? 'Religion and holy man > > have a long and impressive track record of atrocities.' You are > > seriously mixing up political power with spirituality. No doubt, > > religion was often misused, but the way you deal with it you throw > out > > the baby with the bathwater. What about saints? Do they also have a > > long history of atrocities? > > Irmeli: Not the real saints. Rather beings who have claimed to be > saints or holy men and have had cravings for power. People should be > very cautious with people, who claim themselves to be saints and they > have needs to position of power inside an organization. > My intention was not to mix spirituality with religion and power. > Power in any organization is in no way different in quality from > political power.
Okay. But its hard to judge who is a real saint from outside, right? > > t3rinity: But who is going to exercise control over them and from > which level of > > truth are you going to do it? In India *before* you choose a Guru, > not > > after, you are supposed to do this scrutinizing. Once you have > > convinced yourself that a Guru is real, you should surrender. It's > not > > that judgment isn't there. And of course you can still leave a Guru, > > out of several reasons. But it's another thing to put dirt on him or > > insult him after you left. For eaxmple, there was a long discussion > > here about MMY's alledged sexlife. I cannot judge if what was said > is > > true or not, but it is also clear, that it doesn't touch the lives > of > > any here present. It fulfills some curiousity thats all, and most > > people don't care about it. Now what aut these artocities, does it > > have anything to do with it? No. > > > Irmeli:Yes the scrutinizing should be done mainly before you choose a > guru. But also after you have surrendered to the guru, although it > may not be easily done then. It is inevitable to have opinions, even if you are in a relationship. > MMY I cannot consider to be a real guru > expect for those who can live in a close personal contact with him. I fully agree with this. But some people have such a relationship with hime, and some had it. Recently a poster has posted his experience of MMY's direct personal impact on his Brahmacharya. It was easy to belive for me, as I have a close friend who had a similar experience directly from MMY, even though being in a big crowd. My friend had some doubts about the whole movement at the time. He wondered about the whole 'show'. At one point MMY from the stage looked directly into his eyes and opened the heart chakra for him, something that changed his whole life, and still lingers on. My friend was on Purusha like myself, and is now outside. He is definitely an independent thinker, but he also knows Guru Vada and the vedic tradition. > And I see it important to discuss the possible abuse of power of ANY > person. Yet I see that this discussion is fairly onesided. I hardly have ever seen that the positive things of Guruism are pointed out, like by myself here. Generally the 'dangers' the posibble 'abuse' is highlighted. > It can be prevented only that way. Exposing it everywhere, > where it might be hiding. That way people learn to discriminate those > things and are not so easily abused. See, what I don't get here is this: what you say is the opinion of the general public, let's say of 90% of the people, who have no idea of the religious context in which this happens, but simply project their own ego-image onto the Guru (i.e. the Guru wants only adoration, riches etc.) What is the need for stressing this so much, as this is general prejudice anyway? Tell me, I don't get it. You are warning without knowing the whole thing. > t3rinity: I think this is somewhat unrealistic. Of what kind of > setting do you > > speak? If somebody has a personal Guru, the this Guru can only > effect > > his ego, if he is given some power over it. Of course you can also > > learn something from him without that, like a technique of > meditation. > > In the end you have to decide what you go for: Are you in a Guru > > /desciple relationship, or not, its your decision. But if you are, > you > > have to give some power away from your ego. I am simply > acknowledging > > that this path exists, and acknowledge the mechanics connected with > > it. I guess most people here are not in such a relationship anyway, > > so how can they judge? > > Irmeli:I have some difficulties to discuss this topic at all, because > in this lifetime I have not felt need for a > guru and still been capable of evolving spiritually. But I would > think it to be possible to surrender your ego to a guru, without > losing your capacity to good judgement and discrimination and > rational, truthful clear thinking. But I didn't say this. Of course you don't loose your capacity for clear thinking, and you don't need to. But you won't put critics forward unless you think it's essential, for one. You don't share into gossip. > And what you find to be true deep inside your heart you should have > your first priority to follow, even if you have surrendered yourself > to a guru. I agree fully. In fact if you follow a true Guru, there will be no contradiction in this. In fact true surrender is automatic, it's not something you can do or decide for. It just happens. > If your following a guru is based on fear of consequences > of not following, what kind of relationship is that? No, I agree. But the injunction of the scripture that I cited is against outsiders who put your religion down. (They were spells actually against opponents of your religion.) To not encourage criticism is not the same as basing a relationship on fear. It can simply help a devotee to stay out of danger. If someone tells you that your partner is having sex with someone else it will effect you. If you cannot check upon it, you better be carefull as sombody may misguide you intentionally. Like any relationship the relationship of Guru and disciple is one of trust. > Irmeli: Threatening by the consequences of criticising of > them is a powerful method of manipulation which takes advantage of > people's fears. > > > t3rinity: Sure, but this is written in the scripture. Your approach > here is like > > Uncs a typically western approach, looking at it from a sort of > > sociological perspective, but ignoring the mystic component of such > a > > relationship. > > > > Irmeli:Yes I'm a westerner, and I have very difficult to relate to > the mystical component of a fear based relationship. This is a misconception. I am speaking of a mystical relationship, but its not fear based. I agree that if the realtionship is fearbased, one should leave it (and one can always do so!) Yet, to disgard this type of relationship, basically out of ignorance, is what I am objecting to. > My conceptual > framework is actually modern psychology. I have studied very little > of the eastern traditions. In the guru relationship I actually see > the child/parent relationship put on stage, to be able to as an adult > to go through the incomplete and stagnated individualization process > of a child. It has many components. The Bhagavatam counts nine different relationship to ones spritual preceptor, child/parent being one of them. It also can be friend, Lover, master, or even you are the parent and god is the child. Anandamayi Ma used to call herself 'your child'. Whatever it is, it needs to be deep in order to be transformative, and I doubt if western psychology is the ideal tool to determine it.You would judge it from a wrong and incomplete perspective, even though it may play its role sometimes. So, easily people get carried away, not really knowing or understanding the background of something, and condemning it therefore. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
