I can think of some TM teachers who are not gurus or not very good as TM teachers either. There are TM teachers and there are TM teachers. Some are really good at it. I still like this definitional cut off for practical reasons of simplification: “..a guru is "He [the person] who bestows that nature which transcend the qualities is said to be guru".
“..a guru is "He [the person] who bestows that nature which transcend the qualities is said to be guru". Dear FFL I would propose and make the motion that we use this higher value of “guru” as the interpretation of word, “Guru” for use on FFL and have anyone who disrespects and deviates from this higher value by an impugning a degradation of the word, “guru” and by such degrading of the word we direct our trustee FFL moderators to forthwith remove immediately and thus drop the membership of such perpetration as “out of order with the gospel” of usage on FFL. Jai Guru Dev, -Buck in the Dome Empty writes: "TM teachers are not gurus. However, as trained instructors in the lineage teachings and techniques, TM teachers are valid exponents and initiators." Thanks, I appreciate this is very carefully said. That is how Maharishi spoke of us too. Exponents of Reality and Initiators of TM. Seems most anyone who aspired to more than just that got cast out, by tradition too. However too, Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam is of a different scope. He is definitely guru material, by definition. -Buck emptybill writes: Guru-Shmuru blah blah blah. The word ‘Guru’ just signifies a spiritual mentor in Sanskrit based lineages. There are ways to qualify a traditional guru in Indian and Tibetan lineages (sampradaya-s) and training with a traditional spiritual mentor is an important part of that definition. This has become a significant topic of debate in the West since all types of New-Age, Neo-Vedanta and Neo-Buddhist “teachers/gurus/oh-so-enlightened facilitators” are plying their wares like “sales associates” at the auto plazas. Competency in knowing and elucidating scriptural knowledge is an essential component in identifying a traditional guru. Membership in a traditional lineage (sampradaya) is also essential because co-recognition by other legitimate inheritors is a crucial validating point. It confirms the legitimacy of the teachings. It also affirms that the fundamental criterion for lineage competency is fully evident, genuine and authentic. This is one reason why TM teachers are not gurus. However, as trained instructors in the lineage teachings and techniques, TM teachers are valid exponents and initiators. BTW … about them bijas. Proly some TM teachers may have tried out at least one of the "list mantras" but few seem to have meditated with three or four of them placed together with their original "received" meditation bija-mantra. Meditating with such a new and extended “multiple TM-bija-mantra” is the real revelation about the overwhelming maha-shakti of this lineage. (More direct than a zap of so-called guru-shakti). It is a eye-opener at every level and puts to shame the psycho-syndromes of the TM haters and obsessive deniers. No shikan taza/mo-chao/vipassana/kundalini spurt/NeoVedantic “presence” or new age yah-yah can even remotely approximate it. Read it and weep weep weep. .