[FairfieldLife] Re: Challenging the primary assumption
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This assumption forms the entire *basis* of guru yoga. You should do what the guru says because he's *right*; his perceptions are accurate, free from distortion, unclouded by the things that cloud our perceptions. The enlightened being's 'take' on things equates to Truth, because only in enlightenment can one begin to *perceive* Truth. And so on and so on. So who believes that this is true? Not in the way you describe it Barry. I think the way you describe it here is a thorough mis-representation of of what Guru Yoga is all about, and I am fully for it. Lets analyze 'You should do what the Guru says..' okay until this point, but everything from then on is an oversimplification which distorts truth and the merits of this path. In my view it is an energetic thing. For this energetic transmission to happen, there is what I would call a 'working agreement', which both the Guru and the disciple are aware of. The Guru knows that the disciple sees God in him/her, that he is a channel of this energy and will work on the disciples energy-body and ego. A 'mature' disciple would be able to distinguish between the relative persona of the Guru, his /her humanity, and that what lies beyond it, and it would be a grave mistake to mix the two up. Most Gurus I know about teach this in one way or the other: to not mix up the two, his realtive outside personality and the Divine essence behind. The disciple is asked to focus on he Divine essence, which is the same as in himself, therefore most traditions say that the Guru is within yourself. The Guru is also within the disciple not just in this abstract absolute way, but in an energetic and alchemical way, in his energy-field. For this to work there has to be a close interaction between Guru and disciple. The disciple has to live with the Guru and has to watch him/her in everyday interactions. I believe this is not the path for many people, but it certainly is a valid path many great saints have walked. A disciple has to be surrendered to the Guru, which he understands represents God to him in he relative field.It is a way to make the abstract concept of God grasp-able in a person. Now I am not saying that this concept cannot be misused, and that there cannot be false Gurus, that there can't be power trips of Gurus etc. But to take misuse as your measuring rod, you are likely to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Challenging the primary assumption
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So let's open the question up to the group. This *is* a really interesting group, full of strong spiritual seekers who have spent the better part of their lives pursuing enlightenment. So whaddyathink? When you realize your own enlightenment (or now that you have), will your perceptions be (or are your perceptions now) 100% accurate, unclouded by any stress or samskaras or anything that could render them less than objective truth, or Cosmic Truth? Just to answer this, as I had overseen this question the first time: No, I don't think there is 100% unclouded perception in the relative. I am not enlightened, at least not 100%, so I can't really judge 100% ;-) ... but then for me it is not important if something is 100% 'correct' .. it would also mean there is no evolution possible, which I don't believe. If I'm with an enlightened, I allow him to be human and err. OTOH I believe that everything that happens has a purpose, and that all our mistakes guide us in the right direction. There is no 'wrong' from an ultimate perspective, and especially not if you are sincere in your own pursuit.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Challenging the primary assumption
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So here's a question for the group. One of the most fundamental assumptions within the TMO, and in many paths that see enlightenment as the end product of their spiritual sadhana, is that *in* the state of enlightenment one's perceptions are accurate, a true reflection of reality. Gee, I've never heard this in the TM context, Barry. Is this one of those special teachings given only to teachers? snip So let's open the question up to the group. This *is* a really interesting group, full of strong spiritual seekers who have spent the better part of their lives pursuing enlightenment. So whaddyathink? When you realize your own enlightenment (or now that you have), will your perceptions be (or are your perceptions now) 100% accurate, unclouded by any stress or samskaras or anything that could render them less than objective truth, or Cosmic Truth? Haven't we discussed this umpty times already (here and on alt.m.t)? I know I've given my understanding of it many times. Very briefly: the enlightened person perceives what Nature wants him or her to perceive, for Nature's own inscrutable purposes (anthropomorphically speaking; it's much more abstract than that, but that's the gist of it). In other words: If Nature has a need for an enlightened person to perceive something incorrectly, that's how he or she will perceive it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Challenging the primary assumption
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: So here's a question for the group. One of the most fundamental assumptions within the TMO, and in many paths that see enlightenment as the end product of their spiritual sadhana, is that *in* the state of enlightenment one's perceptions are accurate, a true reflection of reality. Gee, I've never heard this in the TM context, Barry. Is this one of those special teachings given only to teachers? snip So let's open the question up to the group. This *is* a really interesting group, full of strong spiritual seekers who have spent the better part of their lives pursuing enlightenment. So whaddyathink? When you realize your own enlightenment (or now that you have), will your perceptions be (or are your perceptions now) 100% accurate, unclouded by any stress or samskaras or anything that could render them less than objective truth, or Cosmic Truth? Haven't we discussed this umpty times already (here and on alt.m.t)? I know I've given my understanding of it many times. Very briefly: the enlightened person perceives what Nature wants him or her to perceive, for Nature's own inscrutable purposes (anthropomorphically speaking; it's much more abstract than that, but that's the gist of it). In other words: If Nature has a need for an enlightened person to perceive something incorrectly, that's how he or she will perceive it. That's a pretty good way to put it. Whether we like it or not (lol) we become agents of the Divine. Its pretty funny actually, and no disrespect meant for those ignirant enough to imagine what I said means I am somehow better than they are (lol), which from my POV is both hilarious and absurd.:-)
