Have been reworking the intro to the Guru Dev webpages, with added 
quotations http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/gurudev.htm
I'm hoping to get a better quality image of that photo I linked to.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Mason" 
> <premanandpaul@> wrote:
> >
> > You might be interested in this photo of Sattyanand in company of 
> two 
> > of his fellow-disciples at:-
> > http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/Shantanandji.htm#Narayanand
> 
> Thanks, Paul. I need to keep more abreast of your wonderful web 
site. 
> I met Shantanand at the Kumbha Mela in 1974 -- he seemed 
quite 'self-
> contained' although I am not exactly sure how to expand on that. I 
> gave him a mango and he cleverly flipped it back to me with a big 
> smile. It was nice. I got some books from him (well, one of his 
> disciples) and got to see/touch the claw-footed chair that Guru Dev 
> sat in. That seemed special. The chair and other things I have 
> forgotten were sitting in a very old van. I wonder who drove the 
van 
> in Guru Dev's day. Knowing the condition of Indian roads in that 
> region, it is difficult to imagine Guru Dev or anyone sitting in 
that 
> chair and being driven from place to place. Hopefully he had some 
> more comfortable means of getting from place to place.
> 
> From the reports I got from people I met who knew him, he was very 
> open and accessible to just ordinary folks. 
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Mason" 
> > <premanandpaul@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Gerbal, I'm not sure how long Sattyanand spent with Guru 
> > Dev, 
> > > it would be nice to get a better idea of where he fits in. I do 
> get 
> > > the idea he did talk about the past, I have heard stuff he is 
> > > supposed to have said which hasn't surfaced on any of the 
forums.
> > > He gave me an advanced technique in Rishikesh, unfortunately I 
> > never 
> > > thought to interview him.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <no_reply@> 
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Mason" 
> > > > <premanandpaul@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Turquoise, you name Sattyanand as being the source of the 
> quote 
> > > > about 
> > > > > MMY being told to go and meditate, and not to teach.
> > > > > Did you hear this from Sattyanand himself or from someone 
> else?
> > > > > Can you remember anything else that was said?
> > > > 
> > > > Paul, I know your post isn't directed at me, but I got to 
spend 
> > > some 
> > > > private time with Sattyanand in Canada and again at 
Rishikesh. 
> He 
> > > > went into great detail, once, about the various phases 
through 
> > > which 
> > > > the "night" technique had gone. While it was interesting, I 
> also, 
> > > > later, learned from Richard Scott's book (? Transcendental 
> > > > Misconceptions?, I'm no longer sure of Richard's title) that 
> the 
> > > > night technique he got from Sattyanand was different in some 
> > > respect 
> > > > from the one I got from Sattyanand. Richard and I were 
friends 
> > and 
> > > > got our night techniques on the same course, but at 
> > > > different "sittings". There were also many complaints about 
> > > > Sattyanand not knowing "The Teaching" as well as he should 
> have: 
> > > > which, I guess translates as "we big egoed Initiators know 
The 
> > > > Teching better than Sattyanand". -- Sattyanand had a very 
> casual 
> > > way 
> > > > of going about things as if, possibly, he had been told how 
to 
> > > teach 
> > > > or told what to teach but had never gone through the 
structured 
> > > > process other TM teachers had gone through. He kind of gave 
the 
> > > > impression of winging it.
> > > > 
> > > > I would not be at all surprised to discover that Turquoise B 
> had 
> > > very 
> > > > accurately quoted Sattyanand. -- I'm still searching for T's 
> > > response 
> > > > to your question, so I hope I haven't been repetitive or 
> > something 
> > > > here.
> > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB 
<no_reply@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As usual when I post an honest, heartfelt, and
> > > > > > *non*-putdown opinion of Maharishi, one of the
> > > > > > terribly attached TBs reacts to it as if it was
> > > > > > a putdown (not true), and as if she were feeling
> > > > > > terribly threatened by the opinion itself (true).
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Allow me to clarify, for those who are less anal
> > > > > > retentive about the things they believe.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > In the past on this forum, we have discussed 
> > > > > > whether it would really *matter* to people with
> > > > > > regard to the benefits they have received from
> > > > > > TM if Maharishi had, in fact, had sex with a 
> > > > > > bunch of his female students. The general 
> > > > > > consensus was No, it wouldn't matter.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why then are so many people so attached to the
> > > > > > idea that he is enlightened? 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Would it really *matter* if he wasn't? Would
> > > > > > the benefits they have received from practicing
> > > > > > TM be any less? By their actions -- overreacting
> > > > > > almost any time this subject comes up and getting
> > > > > > all defensive about their belief (and that is all
> > > > > > it is) that he is enlightened -- one really has 
> > > > > > to assume that it *would* really matter to them. 
> > > > > > My question is, Why?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > My completely honest, no bullshit, pondered-over-
> > > > > > for-almost-40-years opinion is that Maharishi is
> > > > > > *not* enlightened, and never has been. In all the
> > > > > > time I spent in the TM movement, I never once 
> > > > > > heard him claim that he was, and based on reports
> > > > > > here, I don't think he ever has. And yet people
> > > > > > persist in believing that he is. Again, why, and
> > > > > > more important -- *what difference would it make?*"
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > My perception of Maharishi is of a well-meaning
> > > > > > ordinary guy who had the fortunate experience of
> > > > > > spending some time around someone who *was*
> > > > > > enlightened, was inspired by that experience, 
> > > > > > and who decided *on his own*, and against the
> > > > > > advice of that teacher, to try to spread the 
> > > > > > inspiration that he felt around, so that other
> > > > > > people could feel as inspired as he did.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This is *NOT* a putdown; it's a compliment. I 
> > > > > > *commend* Maharishi for his devotion to this 
> > > > > > desire to inspire. By contrast, I've worked with 
> > > > > > several other teachers who periodically threw 
> > > > > > tantrums and decided to *stop* teaching; Maharishi 
> > > > > > never has. That, in my book, makes Maharishi far 
> > > > > > more devoted to his desire to inspire others 
> > > > > > than the other teachers were.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I *do* believe that he went against the direct
> > > > > > advice of his own teacher in making this decision
> > > > > > to teach, and at his own peril. Spiritual teaching
> > > > > > is a perilous task; there are pitfalls and dangers
> > > > > > in it, especially for those who still have a strong
> > > > > > ego that would be easy prey for these pitfalls and
> > > > > > dangers. *That* is what I believe that Guru Dev 
> > > > > > had in mind when he told Maharishi not to teach,
> > > > > > and to follow his *own* example and spend his time
> > > > > > in meditation, far away from the teaching process.
> > > > > > (This information came from Sattyanand, many years
> > > > > > ago.) We are talking, after all, about a guy (Guru
> > > > > > Dev) who tried as hard as humanly possible to *avoid* 
> > > > > > being forced into the position of being a teacher 
> > > > > > himself. He *understood* the pitfalls and dangers.
> > > > > > When they tried to make him the Shankaracharya, he
> > > > > > literally disappeared for 21 days, hoping that they
> > > > > > would change their minds and choose someone else.
> > > > > > I think he had Maharishi's best interests in mind
> > > > > > when he made the suggestion that he *not* teach;
> > > > > > he must have known that Maharishi was not *ready*
> > > > > > to teach, and *would* fall victim to the pitfalls
> > > > > > and dangers that awaited him if he chose that path.
> > > > > > And I believe that Maharishi did, in fact, fall
> > > > > > prey to them. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > But that doesn't mean that I don't feel gratitude
> > > > > > to him for what he taught me. TM, as cobbled-together
> > > > > > and untested as it was, helped to start me on a 
> > > > > > spiritual path, and I am grateful to Maharishi for 
> > > > > > having made it available. But at the same time, unlike
> > > > > > most of the other TM teachers I have met, I have never 
> > > > > > really considered him enlightened, and still don't.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Many people would *like* Maharishi to be enlightened.
> > > > > > They have various reasons for why they believe that.
> > > > > > I have my own reasons for believing that he is not.
> > > > > > My reasons may be correct or they may not, but it 
> > > > > > doesn't really matter, because it wouldn't *matter*
> > > > > > to me whether he was enlightened or not. The benefit
> > > > > > for me was in learning a useful beginner's technique
> > > > > > of meditation, one that left me open to more inter-
> > > > > > esting experiences with other techniques and other
> > > > > > traditions. Maharishi didn't need to be enlightened 
> > > > > > to accomplish that. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Haven't you ever considered the possibility that 
> > > > > > Maharishi coined his "learning to read" analogy (you 
> > > > > > remember the one -- the kid goes to school and learns 
> > > > > > "A, B, C" and then goes home and teaches his younger 
> > > > > > brothers and sisters "A, B, C") to describe *himself*?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I guess my questions for the group as a whole are:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 1. *Is* it important to you to believe that Maharishi
> > > > > >    was/is enlightened?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 2. If so, *why*?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 3. What *difference* do you think that would have
> > > > > >    made in his ability to teach you what you have
> > > > > >    learned from him?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>







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/
 



Reply via email to