--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Premanand Paul Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here in context is the Guru Dev quotation about the supernatural > powers of the 'Indian law-giver': > > 'Today it is usual to be pleased at measuring the material weight of > the cow stock; but remember now of the subtler-than-the-subtlest of > material knowledge of cow stock of the excellent dharma and > usefulness, the very whereabouts may not [now] be connected with, > that was evident through supernatural powers to that Indian law- > giver. The greatness and holiness of cow stock, in you is the one > which is subtler-than-the-subtlest, the cause and form, the reason of > keenness of the elements, for their investigation and knowledge the > yantra (instrument) of modern material scientists will always remain > too crude. Right here is also the cause of the clever twentieth > century knowledge - the secret that in the hairs on the body of the > mother cow the gods are dwelling, and the dawn sighting of a cow, the > worship of the cow, the cow-god etc - remaining unsuccessful in the > understanding of the real truth. The universal feeling is held of the > holiness of the cow herds and that whether one bears the truth to > himself by way of intellect, attainable experience or confident in > the way of the shastra, not by physical instruments.'
I have *no* idea what he's saying here. It reads to me like a BabelFish translation. (My deficiency, I'm sure.) > I believe by advocating and living by the Shastras that Guru Dev > believed he was serving the best good to those he taught. I believe > too that MMY believed he served the best interest of westerners > when he de-Hinduised the teaching of meditation. But I don't > believe either of them were above believing as fact what many would > consider fiction. And this I find particularly curious, that > enlightenment can apparently occur without necessarilly disabusing > an indivual of the sometimes fictional content of inherited wisdom. It raises the question of exactly what kind of "knowledge" it is that becomes available to higher consciousness, that is supposedly "structured in consciousness." Similarly with "inherited wisdom." What part of it is that knowledge structured in consciousness, and if not all of it, how is the rest to be characterized? Does the latter influence the expression--i.e., the communication--of the former, or vice-versa, or both? Can they be distinguished at all? Can they be in conflict? How much does the individual personality affect what the enlightened person believes to be true? And does enlightenment guarantee knowing the answers to any of these questions? > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Premanand Paul Mason" > > <premanandpaul@> wrote: > > > > > > Yes, I have a similar take on this, > > > > But you said you thought Guru Dev's take was "entirely > > contrary" to that of MMY. I was suggesting it wasn't > > that different. I'm still curious about this. > > but have you looked at the > > > Shastras? Phew!!!! Also, Guru Dev extols not only the Shastras > but > > > their author, holding him to have supernatural sight. > > > > Did that view of the author also come from a book, > > or was it intuitive on Guru Dev's part, do you think? > > > > > > Well it might > > > interest FFLers to check the biographical profile of the author, > > but > > > really!! > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Premanand Paul Mason" > > > > <premanandpaul@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Well Rick, here is a stream-of thinking answer to your > > > suggestion. > > > > > It is apparent when reading Guru Dev's satsangs that he was > > > totally > > > > > sold on the idea of everyone living by the Shastras. So it > > might > > > be > > > > > interesting to take a raincheck on that area. He really was > > quite > > > > > adamantly against arbitrariness - caste was important as was > > > ritual. > > > > > > > > > > He was highly unimpressed with science. > > > > > He had a downer on Westerners. > > > > > He seemed to have absolute belief in fatalism. > > > > > He didn't seem to believe that just doing some worship or > > > > > meditation was enough, he believed that living by the > Shastras > > > was > > > > > totally necessary (sorry to come back to that first point - > but > > > it > > > > > is so recurrent as to be inescapable). > > > > > > > > > > Okay, where were we. Oh yes, he most certainly was completely > > > sold > > > > > into the idea of rebirth and all the rest of Hinduism's basic > > > > > beliefs, thus re-enforcing the idea that all things Hindu are > > > right > > > > > and fine and dandy. But often he makes it clear that he is > > > > > repeating accepted wisdom. > > > > > > > > > > BUT that is entirely contrary to what I understand MMY has > been > > > > > saying. He has encouraged people to believe that being > > > enlightened > > > > > will give up the answers. i.e. it is consciousness not books > > that > > > > > give the knowledge. > > > > > > > > Would Guru Dev have disagreed that consciousness is > > > > the ultimate source of knowledge? I have trouble > > > > believing that he would have. > > > > > > > > Perhaps what he was doing by emphasizing the shastras > > > > was giving his students/followers something to live > > > > by *until* they could depend on consciousness for > > > > knowledge. > > > > > > > > And if that's what he was telling them, he would have > > > > to live by the shastras' rules himself, would he not, > > > > to set an example? > > > > > > > > MMY actually does somewhat the same thing, by giving > > > > some general behavioral recommendations and then > > > > telling TMers to follow the scriptures of their religion, > > > > and/or the laws of the land, and/or the advice of their > > > > elders, if they are in doubt about the right thing to > > > > do. He doesn't specify a particular set of scriptures > > > > or laws because he wants to reach people of all religions > > > > (and no religion) and all nations. > > > > > > > > > It is likely Guru Dev lived an exhalted inner existence and > was > > > > > incredibly at peace with himself. It is implicit in > everything > > > MMY > > > > > says about his guru that we are to take it that he was > > > enlightened. > > > > > However, if one lives purely by rules, Shastras and > convention > > > and > > > > > never makes decisions for oneself, in any real sense, the > point > > > of > > > > > wanting enlightenment gets lost. People want to feel free of > > the > > > > > interminable rules and regulations, that's a big part of why > > they > > > > > take a dive into the peace to be found beyond thinking. > > > > > > > > On the other hand, I would suspect that once one > > > > attains complete inner freedom, having to follow > > > > external laws and rules isn't much of a pinch. > > > > > > > > Presumably we want to become enlightened not so we > > > > can be free of rules, but so rules can no longer > > > > impinge on our sense of freedom, which has become > > > > absolute and infinite. > > > > > > > > > > > > > There must be something there worth discussing, other than > the > > > > > confused way I have laid out the ideas. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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/
