I just realized that not only a woman can't be a guru, a man can not be a guru either. So there.
> --- In [email protected], t3rinity > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], t3rinity > <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Paul > Mason" > <premanandpaul@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > 'There is no mention of women being gurus > anywhere in the > shastras. > > > > Women cannot be a guru. Gargim, Chudala, > Sulabha etc. were > women who > > > > had become yogis and possessed of > self-knowledge. But it is not > met > > > > with anywhere that they made their own > disciples.' > > > > Checking on the story of Chudala and her husband > Shikhidhvaja, I > came > > across this: > > > > Shikhidhvaja said: > > "Aha, I have truly been awakened by you, O sage. I > am freed of > > foolishness, You are MY GURU; I am YOUR DISCIPLE. > Pray instruct me > in > > what you know, knowing which one does not grieve." > > > > In the story of Yoga Vasishtha, King Shikhidhvaja > has given up the > > kingdom to become a recluse, turning over the > reigns to his Queen > > Chudala. Chudala by sheer grace did get awakened > on hearing the > truth > > of the scriptures about non-attachment. The king > is not able to > accept > > her advice at first, as she is his wife, a mere > woman. The queen > sees > > his plights in the forrest with her yogic eye and > appears to him as > a > > Brahman boy, to whom the King has addressed the > above. The Queen, in > > the disguise of the Brahman boy accepts his > discipleship, by saying: > > " I shall instruct you if you cherrish my words > and are in a > receptive > > mood" > > Yoga Vasishtha VI.87.42 > > > > This dierectly contradicts what Guru Dev says. > Indeed the whole > import > > of the story seems to be, that enlightenment is > independend of > social > > status. See the pun in the story, that She who is > enlightened does > > only get recognized to be so by her husband, after > she has adopted > the > > shape of a Brahmana. As she continues to instruct > the King who > finally > > realizes, and comes back to the kingdom. So it is > also about that > the > > enlightened is qualified to be the teacher > independend of social > > status. Besides that, both weren't Brahmanas, they > were of course > > Kshatriyas as was Krishna who instructed Arjuna. > > > > Maybe Guru Dev, who certainly knew the story, > which directly > > contradicts him, meant to say that women did not > accept other > > disciples or more disciples. He did so to make his > point, and > > obviously this question was around at his time, > otherwise no need to > > address it. I can imagine, that in old times, the > Sadhus were > > basically naked, just dressed with a lion cloth, > it would have been > > strange for a women to have male disciples. Other > way round too. So > > the whole thing was very much a male affair, > except when wifes were > > involved. These are totally outdated rules, but > orthodoxy tries to > > preserve them, and GD happened to be their main > representative. > > > > There have been many female teachers in India, > very famous > > e.g. Anandamayi Ma, whom Maharishi visited. I know > that MMY accepted > > Anandamayi as a teacher, because I once overheard, > how somebody > > suggested to him to call a certain person for a > project, and MMY > > declined saying that this person was now with > Anandamayi Ma, which > > shows, that he respected that this person had > adopted her as a Guru. > > > > If MMY was not a Guru, there would be no need to > refer to people > with > > 'other' 'Gurus', that being a reason for rejecting > dome attendance. > It > > would be enough then, if people practise TM and > Siddhis at the time > of > > the programme. So Maharishi seems to be Guru to at > least some. Also, > > traditionally, Mantra Diksha (Initiation) is > indicative of adopting > a > > Guru (in the case of MMY, he has delegated this > task to disciples). > In > > any case, it is clear that MMY broke with the > rigidity of this > > tradition, rightly as I think. This is not the > first time at all,but > > it just happened to be within this most orthodox > branch of the > > Dasanami Sampradaya. > > > > If you want to accuse MMY of that, do it. But > > then you show symphathy for the utmost orthodox > opinion within > > Hinduism, and prove your agreement to heritary > caste system. For > most > > people, with the possible exception of Paul, our > views and > > appreciation of Guru Dev stem solely from MMY. We > love him because > we > > see him through the eyes of MMY. Obviously GD was > a very powerfull > > yogi, full with the radiance of decades of > tapasya, but also with > very > > outdated and oldfashioned ideas. I doubt that > anybody here would be > > interested in him, if it wasn't for the > involvement with MMY and TM. > > If MMY would have been rejected to be a teacher > out of lack of > > qualification, I would understand it. But here its > all about caste > and > > sexism. I have a female guru (who doesn't call > herself guru btw.) > and > > so has Rick and many others. > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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/
