--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Ron" <sidha7001@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Ron" <sidha7001@> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > TANMAY: I DONT KNOW IF YOU WATCHED THE VIDEOS OF SWAMI G UNDER > > > > GURUSWAMIG IN YOUTUBE BUT IT WOULD EXPLAIN THINGS. SWAMI G > DIDN'T > > > > SEEK BEING A GURU, BUT RATHER PREFERED ENJOYING THE REALIZED > STATE. > > > > HER GURU COMMISSIONED HER TO BE A GURU AND THEN CHARGED HER WITH > > > > THE THINGS TO DO > > > > > > Makes me wonder whether (what I perceive to be) > > > the unpleasantness in her responses is a function > > > of some resentment at being ordered to get busy > > > and be a guru rather than just sitting back and > > > enjoying her realization. > > > > > I can keep giving you my perceptions of it but it is startleing to > me > > in every way, including what took place with me once I met her. So > > many times, I have told Swami G - I dont believe this, what is going > > on. I suppose there is a range of being able to understand - > anywhere > > for zero for totally mundane minds - upwards. > > Yeah, well, I'm sure I have a totally mundane > mind, but still... > > <snip> > > So, a Guru is looking for the spots that have to be blasted out > > sometimes. Why would this be a pleasant job? and then the insults > > directed at the Guru. This is something people really dont > > understand-they think the Guru has no feelings and is a doormat > > that can be walked all over for nothing can touch them. > > All I can tell you is that her (what I perceive > to be) unpleasantness is unique in my (admittedly > limited) experience.
This is another source of confusion with her: In one way, she invites you to discuss, and in another way, she acts as a Guru. Now she maybe a Guru to Tanmay, but she certainly is not to us. Its not her job to blast our spots, ego etc, because we didn't invite her or ask her to do so. We may have other people who do this kind of thing for us or not, but these are the people we asked or trust. That is, a guru should be able to differentiate between a disciple, for whom he may do some ego-work, and somebody outside. And for all those outside, he should have a discussion on par, he should resort to logic and good manners just like anybody. With her I feel this constant switching between 'open discussion', but then when it doesn't go well for her, she switches to Guru mode, and says things like: 'you have only book-knowledge' (even though she doesn't obviously know what knowledge you have), 'instead do practise' (even though she doesn't know what practises you do, and what experiences you have) And the there is this funny CAPITAL LETTERS - ITS NOT SHOUTING BUT JUST TO DISTINGUISH FOR CLARITYS SAKE. BUT ITS HARDER TO READ AND STILL IMPOLITE AND EGOIC BECAUSE IT SUGGESTS THAT WHAT ONE SAYS IS SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN WHAT ANYONE ELSE SAYS. So stop it. STOP IT.
