Comment below: **
--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As always I am glad you weighed in Marek! I agree with what you said > up to a point. Certainly Guru Dev had such beliefs and may have > viewed his own experiences as proof of miracles. Since I am not > inclined to believe in River Goddesses giving monetary boons to > people, I still think there was some monkey business surrounding this > claim. It is either objectively true or not and he knew which it was. > > Yogananda with his movie star disciples is in the same Hindu > televangelist camp as MMY in my book. He was huckstering spirituality > in the West for cash. I have some pious Indian friends from Gujarat. > Their view of guys like MMY matches my own. I think there is a > legitimate distinction in most cultures between the guys marketing > spirituality with stories of magical powers, and the more traditional > conservative view. It believe that this distinction is important to > religious people the world over. I used to put Guru Dev in a > different category from MMY in this regard. Now I am not so sure. > > I get that my point means nothing to people who are inclined to take > Yoganandas claims of miracles as factually true and the same for Guru > Dev's miracles. My view may only have importance in how I am > constructing distinctions between different types of religious people. > It is a work in progress. So far I think that people making claims > of miracles to gain spiritual credibility are more suspect than those > who do not. It reflects the boundaries of my own thinking based on > seeing too many people claim stuff that just isn't true. I am opened > to any demonstration of miracles that includes professional magicians. > I would love to have seen some of the stuff Turq reports. But since > I have not, I am still skeptical till I see something substantial. So > with that starting point when I see a claim of miracles my antenna go > up. I am not inclined to believe that living alone for a long time > gave Guru Dev super powers. If he is claiming to have seen Krishna > like Yogananda did, I figure, so have I under long meditation > influence. But if he claims to have a box that gives cash, I view > this claim differently. It is another class of delusion or con. Once > the claim reaches an objective level, it gets the same treatment for > me that any physical claim gets. All subjective experiences are given > a total pass from me because I know how compelling they can be. As I > said, work in progress! > > This topic can be used in so many ways. It is a way to explore where > we are drawing our different lines. I need to dig up my "Whole Thing > Real Thing" book. I bought one from Dr. Varma years ago. > **snip to end** Curtis, I totally agree that the real discussion between us on this subject is just where we draw the lines in our understanding and belief of who these guys are and what they stand for. And like you, and for some time, I have distinguished in my mind Maharishi from Guru Dev precisely because I felt that Guru Dev lived a life consciously chosen to be (and apparently successfully lived) separate from the distractions and temptations that may have affected Maharishi's life decisions. Bottom line for me, however, is that there is something in the life of Guru Dev, as and to the degree I know it, that inspires me. In the video of the French Tibetan monk, when he comments near the beginning of his talk about when he first went to the Himalayas and met the Buddhist monks, he found that he didn't just want to learn what they knew, he wanted to *be* the way they were. He recognized some quality of consciousness in them that he wanted as well. When I first met Maharishi that's exactly what I felt. Whatever it was that he had, I wanted That, too. I wanted to *be* That. And besides that, I wanted to be a good man, a good person, a person of compassion and virtue. Nothing of what I have subsequently heard or read of Maharishi's possible failings as a man or a teacher have convinced me that he is not awake in pure consciousness, Awake in Brahman. However, he just isn't a role model for the other relative personal virtues that I esteem. But, based on everything I have heard or read about Guru Dev, I feel that his character and personality are totally worthy of emulation, reverence and respect. To me he is a Buddha and I revere him as such. Would it come to light, however, that he had personal failures as a human being that I have no inkling of now, of course I would be disappointed (just as I have been disappointed with some of Maharishi's personal characteristics), but the ideal, which to me he represents, would still be alive in me as an ideal to pursue and strive for. Guru Dev is a representation, in my consciousness, of exactly what I feel he should be, and as such, is perfect. Perfect Being, perfect being.
