[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
'bhakta' - adj. divided into parts, separate, devoted, engrossed, attentive, attached, cooked, pious; n.mas. a votary, a devout person, a worshipper, a follower. Incidentally, I ommitted to mention that connecting my own database dictionary of Hindi Sanskrit words, I then use a specially evolved program to connect to MSaccess. The program is called 'HandiHindi Gizmo (TM)'. If this program were developed it could greatly assist translaters, and eventually might even be able to offer up some basic MT (machine translation). If, maybe, etc but as LB mentioned there is more than science to translation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. They may have fully prostrated themselves on the ground before him. Thats a devotee in my book. Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? Considering that MMY isn't a guru to us like Guru Dev was to him, I don't see the relevance in a TM context. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? **End** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. And thanks to him again. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? Considering that MMY isn't a guru to us like Guru Dev was to him, I don't see the relevance in a TM context. Excellent distinction! 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? **End** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. Gee, we just had a discussion about Guru Dev's views on who could and could not be a guru, and most here seemed to agree Guru Dev wasn't unimpeachable on that point at all. In any case, Paul seems to be very sensitive about folks assuming what his motivations are, so I thought it better to ask. Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. Kind of a shame to use Guru Dev for that purpose, I think. As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. And thanks to him again. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think its one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. Many TBs here might have taken his women cant be gurus admonition as gospel truth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. So they can have it both ways. Either hes right about everything, including it being OK to switch gurus, or those who believe in him are free to pick and choose among the things he said. Itll be interesting when LBs book comes out. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think it¹s one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. Many TB¹s here might have taken his ³women can¹t be gurus² admonition as gospel truth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. So they can¹ have it both ways. Either he¹s right about everything, including it being OK to switch gurus, or those who believe in him are free to pick and choose among the things he said. It¹ll be interesting when LB¹s book comes out. In Seelisberg, Mahesh quipped *if your guru isn't giving you what you want, get a different guru* -- I'm sure I've mentioned this before. I hadn't seen Paul's massage, so I'm just responding here, to you Rick. But despite the fact that Mahesh was probably being snide or sarcastic at the time, it makes sense. Only you, the person, know what you want and what is working for you. If it's TM and you can't get enough of what Mahesh has on offer, then, I suppose you're on the right path. -- But from the perspective of other Hindu and Buddhist teachings, it doesn't really look like Mahesh is teaching so much as selling. It's dubious whether one can *buy* awakening. But awakening depends upon the individual, for the most part; so if the individual has something that is really working, then awakening, equanimity, compassion and insight should arise. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: **Snip** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. Gee, we just had a discussion about Guru Dev's views on who could and could not be a guru, and most here seemed to agree Guru Dev wasn't unimpeachable on that point at all. In any case, Paul seems to be very sensitive about folks assuming what his motivations are, so I thought it better to ask. Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. Kind of a shame to use Guru Dev for that purpose, I think. As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. **Snip to end** Just a couple of things. First, although anyone can argue with the interpretation of what anyone has said, Guru Dev included, my point was that he, himself, was an unimpeachable authority. That having been said (and perhaps I'm wrong in making that initial assumption), certainly what he actually meant or didn't mean by any statements attributed to him is part of the purpose of forums like this one. If, however, he said it, then I feel it is fundamentally reasonable to post it here. As to whether or not Maharishi functions or functioned for anyone as a personal guru or not is specifically part of the discussion. Alex and a number of people legitimately believe that he did not and does not function in that role. Although I don't disagree with that assessment, nevertheless, I personally hold Maharishi as my guru and have since the first moment I saw him. That's not to say that I don't disagree with much of what I have seen and heard, not to say that I am not disappointed with much that I have seen and heard, not to say that I would be considered much of an ideal disciple (should that specific issue even come up). But I fell in love with him when I first saw him, was inspired by him when I first knew him, and remain indebted to him for what I know now. Can't help it, it's just the way it is for me. I have for a long time felt that what I knew of Maharishi at the time I knew him was the radiance of Guru Dev shining through him. In that respect he was the disciple, just like the master. I don't know more than that, but it is enough and the words of Guru Dev are important to me because I feel that I have been in his presence through this disciple of his. For me there's plenty of reason to post anything Guru Dev ever said and evaluate it through the lens of what I know and feel after so much time and experience. I don't question Paul's motives; his love for Guru Dev, if not for Maharishi, is enough to validate his intentions in my mind and in my heart. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru This is very important. Guru is in no way synonymous with only or absolute. Guru, if I remember my Sanskrit properly, is one who leads (you) from darkness (ignorance). It might take many teachers to do this, to help you, depending upon how you and the teacher mesh. Some teachers have abundant things to teach, but you might not have any of those things to learn, or only one or two of them that are necessary to you as an individual (and no one can escape his or her individual requirements). Some simpleton of a teacher might actually have the one important thing you need in order for some other teacher's teaching to come to fruition. It's really arrogant to assume you (whoever you is) are so enlightened to know which teacher is the greatest teacher who is just right for you. So, shopping around, while this has negative connotations, might be what you have to do. It seems to me that a good teacher is one who recognizes 'your' needs and 'his/her' abilities as well as limitations in regard to 'your' needs. If s/he isn't too self centred, if s/he is really a good teacher, then s/he is going to do his/her best to make sure you meet the teachers 'you' need. This is a really personalized thing ... not like TM mantras given out by age and/or sex because the course fee is more important than 'you' and the teacher hasn't been trained in the first place to have any idea what 'your' needs might be. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus on 9/4/06 3:36 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In Seelisberg, Mahesh quipped *if your guru isn't giving you what you want, get a different guru* -- I'm sure I've mentioned this before. I hadn't seen Paul's massage, so I'm just responding here, to you Rick. Ive heard of instances of MMY condoning someone going off to another guru if they were having no experiences with TM. I believe he did that with Myron Feld. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think it¹s one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. However, as Alex noted (see above), the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. In any case, I don't remember having heard anything about MMY having said it wasn't OK to switch teachers (to use a more general term). If MMY has said you should stick with your first teacher for the rest of your life, I'd be interested to know about it. I do recall something to the effect that it wasn't good to have one foot in each of two boats, which I understood to mean you shouldn't have two teachers at once. But Guru Dev doesn't say anything, at least in this quote, about its being OK to have two teachers at once. So on both these grounds, I don't see the relevance of the quote to this group. (Loyalty per se may be a completely different issue, depending.) Many TB¹s here might have taken his ³women can¹t be gurus² admonition as gospeltruth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. Many TBs here?? Just how many people on this group do you imagine are such fanatics that they'd do such a thing? Are you getting paranoid like Barry and seeing TBs under the bed? Has anybody here made such a comment, or is that just your fantasy? So they can¹ have it both ways. Either he¹s right about everything, including it being OK to switch gurus, or those who believe in him are free to pick and choose among the things he said. It¹ll be interesting when LB¹s book comes out. I don't know what believe in him could mean in this context. But the two alternatives you cite, that he's right about everything or that he's *not* right about everything, seem, um, a bit obvious. (Personally, I don't see why you can't be devoted to a teacher and still not think he or she is right about everything.) 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 9/4/06 3:36 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In Seelisberg, Mahesh quipped *if your guru isn't giving you what you want, get a different guru* -- I'm sure I've mentioned this before. I hadn't seen Paul's massage, so I'm just responding here, to you Rick. I¹ve heard of instances of MMY condoning someone going off to another guru if they were having no experiences with TM. I believe he did that with Myron Feld. In the first place, people who learn TM have not established a guru- disciple relationship with MMY, that's a completely different path, the one that MMY followed with Guru Dev. As far as MMY telling people if they were not satisfied with TM, that they should do something else, this was not in the nature of a reccommendation, but a brush- off to fools: at my TM teacher training course at Humboldt Aug 1970, a guy got up and insisted that TM was no good compared to LSD, so MMY said, fine, if you like LSD, by all means do that. Guru Dev did not argue with fools, either, in fact, he simply would not talk to them at all: after he was told the name of somebody waiting to see him, he would either give an OK for the person to come in and talk, or tell him to go away. There are lots of people who are simply not ready for sticking with the path of enlightenment through TM, it's a waste of time and effort to chase after them -- when they get tired of suffering, then they'll pick up the practice again later, so one would never want to push reluctant TMers into sticking with TM when they want to go elsewhere. Nature's carrot and stick approach eventually brings everybody to their home place, bliss consciousness, after they get tired of playing in the mud. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: **Snip** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. Gee, we just had a discussion about Guru Dev's views on who could and could not be a guru, and most here seemed to agree Guru Dev wasn't unimpeachable on that point at all. In any case, Paul seems to be very sensitive about folks assuming what his motivations are, so I thought it better to ask. Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. Kind of a shame to use Guru Dev for that purpose, I think. As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. **Snip to end** Just a couple of things. First, although anyone can argue with the interpretation of what anyone has said, Guru Dev included, my point was that he, himself, was an unimpeachable authority. That having been said (and perhaps I'm wrong in making that initial assumption), certainly what he actually meant or didn't mean by any statements attributed to him is part of the purpose of forums like this one. If, however, he said it, then I feel it is fundamentally reasonable to post it here. As to whether or not Maharishi functions or functioned for anyone as a personal guru or not is specifically part of the discussion. Alex and a number of people legitimately believe that he did not and does not function in that role. Although I don't disagree with that assessment, nevertheless, I personally hold Maharishi as my guru and have since the first moment I saw him. That's not to say that I don't disagree with much of what I have seen and heard, not to say that I am not disappointed with much that I have seen and heard, not to say that I would be considered much of an ideal disciple (should that specific issue even come up). (So you're in the pick-and-choose camp as regards MMY, per Rick's comment.) I'm not sure what definition of guru you're using, but I suspect Alex meant a teacher from whom you receive constant personal guidance. Is that your actual relationship with MMY? snip I have for a long time felt that what I knew of Maharishi at the time I knew him was the radiance of Guru Dev shining through him. In that respect he was the disciple, just like the master. I don't know more than that, but it is enough and the words of Guru Dev are important to me because I feel that I have been in his presence through this disciple of his. For me there's plenty of reason to post anything Guru Dev ever said and evaluate it through the lens of what I know and feel after so much time and experience. I don't question Paul's motives; his love for Guru Dev, if not for Maharishi, is enough to validate his intentions in my mind and in my heart. Well, as I said, I don't find it particularly respectful of Guru Dev to quote him repeatedly as a way of denigrating one of his prominent disciples, whatever Paul may think of that disciple (and Paul has been quite explicit about what he's doing in a number of cases). And from your earlier post, I had the distinct impression that's why you understood him to have posted the quote about switching gurus, so I'm a little confused here. That appears to be how Rick understood it as well. But perhaps I've misunderstood both of you. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gee, we just had a discussion about Guru Dev's views on who could and could not be a guru, and most here seemed to agree Guru Dev wasn't unimpeachable on that point at all. Out of all posters, and certainly readers, AFAIR few, if any, expressed a view that SBS was clearly wrong. Did anyone come to this conclusion? I may have missed some posts. Clearly wrong is my phrase, not yours. If you are making a wide distinction between wasn't unimpeachable and clearly wrong, ok then. However, then the argument would be that SBS is not seen as clearly wrong, but Or, if some conclude that he is clearly wrong on this point, does it follow that he may have been werong on other points? If no, why not? If so, how many and which other points? Which are valid points, which are not? As I recall, the main discussion was around what does he mean by guru. Some perhaps made themselves comfortable defining guru in a very rarified form -- and thus many mere teachers could be non-brahmans and women. That is a POV, not a definitive argument - withour much more digging into contemporary contextual material by fluent Hindi speakers. My sense of it, my POV, which is not a definitive argument, is that many common folk flocked to SBS for darshan, satsang, and instruction in techniques -- that he was Guru Dev to many thousands, not just the boys at the ashram. (Paul are you fluent in Hindi? Or are your translations dictionary look-ups, and then piecing together possible meanings?) In the same fashion, there were many teachers in India that were gurus to their flock. And SBS was commenting that some of such gurus did not meet the criteria of shastra. And there are lots of stuff in Shastra. Paul/others, are Laws of Manu considered Shastra? If so, and if it is being, or can be established that SBS was absolute about following Shastra, in public, and to less public audiences (at ashram), then it appears that some/many of us are in quite a quandry. ... Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. I have not come to such a conclusion -- of such a pattern -- from Paul's posts. I think he explained one of his motivations for posting several months ago -- that he saw a gap between what SBS wrote and TMO doctrine. And was perplexed about it. Wanted to get other's views. I find the posts useful. All other quotes are available on the web site. Paul is hardly withholding anything (which ofcourse you did not say, but, IMO, implied.) As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, Do you mean Paul knows that Alex, a non-Hindi speaker, has an opinion about the meaning of words Alex read (outside of full context, probably)? Hardly a compelling critique of Paul. Or do you mean Paul should know that MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. If the latter, I am not sure why Paul have drawn the same conclusion as Alex (and you). I certainly didn't. The translation (always open to more scrutiny and analysis) says The guru is gone to That sounds much more like the local everyday person (like us), who flocked to SBS for advice, particualrly as he traveled around the country, than a full time inner circle staff serving him 24/7 (like a Bevin), who was always around him. And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt. A guru follower. To me, that sounds like your typical meditator or at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus on 9/4/06 4:04 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think its one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. However, as Alex noted (see above), the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. What kind was he referring to? Tabla teachers and such. Indians refer to those as gurus too. In any case, I don't remember having heard anything about MMY having said it wasn't OK to switch teachers (to use a more general term). If MMY has said you should stick with your first teacher for the rest of your life, I'd be interested to know about it. I dont think he has, and can think of an instance or two where he said the opposite, but TMO policy doesnt reflect that. I do recall something to the effect that it wasn't good to have one foot in each of two boats, which I understood to mean you shouldn't have two teachers at once. But Guru Dev doesn't say anything, at least in this quote, about its being OK to have two teachers at once. Most gurus say similar things, but some dont feel threatened by their students visiting other saints/gurus and even send them to them. They dont consider this a 2nd boat. Just a little extracurricular enrichment. Many TBs here might have taken his women cant be gurus admonition as gospeltruth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. Many TBs here?? Just how many people on this group do you imagine are such fanatics that they'd do such a thing? Are you getting paranoid like Barry and seeing TBs under the bed? Has anybody here made such a comment, or is that just your fantasy? By here I meant Fairfield, not FFL. Visiting gurus is a contentious issue here (Personally, I don't see why you can't be devoted to a teacher and still not think he or she is right about everything.) I agree. I think fanatics see their teacher/guru/religious founder as an absolute authority on everything, but more spiritually mature people tend to realize that gurus are human beings who may often be expressing personal opinions based on upbringing, cultural conditioning, etc. Many people in FF and some on this list dont fit into the latter category. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In Seelisberg, Mahesh quipped *if your guru isn't giving you what you want, get a different guru* -- I'm sure I've mentioned this before. That appears consistent with the SBS quote The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. If one teacher has not provided what one needs, has not made one happy, has not brought one Bhagavad (note to Paul and LB, its not Bhagavan?), then one legitimately seeks a new teacher. What is puzzling is, refering to Ricks point, if one has a new teacher, why do theywant / seek / insist on being admitted back into the fold /practices/ ashram/aka domes of their former teacher? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru This is very important. Guru is in no way synonymous with only or absolute. Guru, if I remember my Sanskrit properly, is one who leads (you) from darkness (ignorance). It might take many teachers to do this, to help you, depending upon how you and the teacher mesh. Some teachers have abundant things to teach, but you might not have any of those things to learn, or only one or two of them that are necessary to you as an individual (and no one can escape his or her individual requirements). Some simpleton of a teacher might actually have the one important thing you need in order for some other teacher's teaching to come to fruition. It's really arrogant to assume you (whoever you is) are so enlightened to know which teacher is the greatest teacher who is just right for you. So, shopping around, which SBS clearly did. while this has negative connotations, might be what you have to do. It seems to me that a good teacher is one who recognizes 'your' needs and 'his/her' abilities as well as limitations in regard to 'your' needs. If s/he isn't too self centred, if s/he is really a good teacher, then s/he is going to do his/her best to make sure you meet the teachers 'you' need. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip All other quotes are available on the web site. Paul is hardly withholding anything (which ofcourse you did not say, but, IMO, implied.) You're quite mistaken on that point. How could he be withholding anything when he's posted the URL to the Web site over and over and over? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 9/4/06 4:04 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at jstein@ wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think it¹s one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. However, as Alex noted (see above), the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. What kind was he referring to? Tabla teachers and such. Indians refer to those as gurus too. Mmm, you really think he was including Tabla teachers? I assume he was referring to the kind of guru he himself was. In any case, I don't remember having heard anything about MMY having said it wasn't OK to switch teachers (to use a more general term). If MMY has said you should stick with your first teacher for the rest of your life, I'd be interested to know about it. I don¹t think he has, and can think of an instance or two where he said the opposite, but TMO policy doesn¹t reflect that. In what way does TMO policy not reflect it? I do recall something to the effect that it wasn't good to have one foot in each of two boats, which I understood to mean you shouldn't have two teachers at once. But Guru Dev doesn't say anything, at least in this quote, about its being OK to have two teachers at once. Most gurus say similar things, but some don¹t feel threatened by their students visiting other saints/gurus and even send them to them. They don¹t consider this a 2nd boat. Just a little extracurricular enrichment. Right. I'd say MMY feeling personally threatened (if he does) by TMers visiting other saints/gurus-- or thinking dispassionately that it wasn't a good idea, for that matter--is a different issue entirely, and not what Guru Dev was addressing. Many TB¹s here might have taken his ³women can¹t be gurus² admonition as gospeltruth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. Many TBs here?? Just how many people on this group do you imagine are such fanatics that they'd do such a thing? Are you getting paranoid like Barry and seeing TBs under the bed? Has anybody here made such a comment, or is that just your fantasy? By ³here² I meant Fairfield, not FFL. Visiting gurus is a contentious issue here Oh, sorry. I misread. (Personally, I don't see why you can't be devoted to a teacher and still not think he or she is right about everything.) I agree. I think fanatics see their teacher/guru/religious founder as an absolute authority on everything, but more spiritually mature people tend to realize that gurus are human beings who may often be expressing personal opinions based on upbringing, cultural conditioning, etc. Many people in FF and some on this list don¹t fit into the latter category. (And yet Barry rather vehemently put me in the fanatic category with his Eric Hoffer quotes.) 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at jstein@ wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think it¹s one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. However, as Alex noted (see above), the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. What kind of guru was SBS referring to? Do you know this definitively? In any case, I don't remember having heard anything about MMY having said it wasn't OK to switch teachers (to use a more general term). But he was always very big on, while doing TM, don't read or see other teachers. As early as 1968 he was strong on this. Probably much earlier. If MMY has said you should stick with your first teacher for the rest of your life, I'd be interested to know about it. It was strongly implied,IMO. MMY was not explicit on some subject.More the knowing wink approach. I do recall something to the effect that it wasn't good to have one foot in each of two boats, which I understood to mean you shouldn't have two teachers at once. But Guru Dev doesn't say anything, at least in this quote, about its being OK to have two teachers at once. Yes, a key distintion. One not addressed in Rick's adjacent post, ...blockbuster. If one has a new teacher, all good and fine. But why then are people asking, seeking, whining in some cases, to get back into the ashram/domes or their former teacher? So on both these grounds, I don't see the relevance of the quote to this group. Big non-sequitar in my opinion. For me it does have big relevance, though not perhaps the type Rick sees. (Loyalty per se may be a completely different issue, depending.) Many TB¹s here might have taken his ³women can¹t be gurus² admonition as gospeltruth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. Many TBs here?? Just how many people on this group do you imagine are such fanatics that they'd do such a thing? So what statments of SBS's do we take as truth and which do we take as false? (The convenient ones are true?) So they can¹ have it both ways. Either he¹s right about everything, [or not]. Yes. Quite a quandry for many of us. Either he¹s right about everything, or not right about anything? Or another alternative. He was right about somethings, and not about others. Like what many feel about MMY. What are the implications [of SBS being right only some of the time]? [if that is the case] Many had an infallibility aura they drew around MMY in the 60's and 70's. By the 90's infallability was fading. Have we / many transfered the cloak of infallibility from MMY to SBS? aka MMY may not have gotten it all right, and has flaws, but SBS is perfect in every way If SBS absolutely supports shastra, and if Laws of Manu are shastra, then it appears we absolutly support and live by Laws of Manu or we regard SBS as not perfect in every way. People can and have argued that SBS was of conservative age, things are different now. Oh My. Shastra, if its anything, it is eternal. Its hard for anyone to claim ancient and eternal shastra was totally relevant and true in 1940, but ancient and eternal shastra is not true and valid now. (Personally, I don't see why you can't be devoted to a teacher and still not think he or she is right about everything.) Yes. As some/many have evolved to/done with MMY. So can we,do we, do the same with SBS? Or is he infallible. If not infallible, which things are true? Which shastras are true and shouldbe followed, and which are not? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: snip All other quotes are available on the web site. Paul is hardly withholding anything (which ofcourse you did not say, but, IMO, implied.) You're quite mistaken on that point. How could he be withholding anything when he's posted the URL to the Web site over and over and over? OK. Apologies. I correctly inferred a meaning in your words that you did not imply. In recognizing my mistake -- I now see it as my internal but inappropriate attempt to make sense of your position. Having become innocent again, looking at your argument without my trying to use my own inner scafholding to make senseofthem, -- your original argument seems to me, and I am probably retarded, to go nowhere. Paul did not withhold anything, but commented on a few pieces of interest to him -- which he outlined a month or so previously. If people did not like his selection, or felt he was biased, he offers up the whole set of translations. I see no foul in this, no black dark motive here. Any comments on the substantive points I raised? I think they are important. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Any comments on the substantive points I raised? I think they are important. Nah, I'm not inclined to get into any detailed discussions with you; they never seem to me to go much of anywhere, sorry. Liked your post in innocence, though. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: snip All other quotes are available on the web site. Paul is hardly withholding anything (which ofcourse you did not say, but, IMO, implied.) You're quite mistaken on that point. How could he be withholding anything when he's posted the URL to the Web site over and over and over? OK. Apologies. I incorrectly inferred a meaning in your words that you did not imply. In recognizing my mistake -- I now see it as my internal but inappropriate attempt to make sense of your position. Having become innocent again, looking at your argument without my trying to use my own inner scafholding to make senseofthem, -- your original argument seems to me, and I am probably retarded, to go nowhere. Paul did not withhold anything, but commented on a few pieces of interest to him -- which he outlined a month or so previously. If people did not like his selection, or felt he was biased, he offers up the whole set of translations. I see no foul in this, no black dark motive here. Any comments on the substantive points I raised? I think they are important. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: snip Any comments on the substantive points I raised? I think they are important. Nah, I'm not inclined to get into any detailed discussions with you; they never seem to me to go much of anywhere, sorry. Liked your post in innocence, though. Thanks. On other points, in honesty, it was not so much an invitation. But I was parroting a good point you at times make of others, particularly barry, paraphrasing there were lots of substantive points in that post, and the best you can do is pick on some insubstantial side issue? And my comments to you post were simply to point out the weakness* of your arguments, not to get into what appears to me you your endless diversions at times. So we are both happy on that. *Such as holding up Alex as a mainstream or even definitive inerpretation of the quote. It was one guy, a non current meditator, a non-hindi speaker I presme, making a quick comment about one sentence he read -- apparently not in full context. It was a fine POV. But hardly a definitive argument or referrence. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
'Bhagavad' is the word used in the text (I just double-checked). But of course the transcriber could have misheard or indeed the typesetter might have mispelled the word. But either way, Bhagavan or Bhagavad, same really, means 'Lord' or 'God' or 'OMnipotent One'. I wouldn't describe myself as 'fluent', no, but on the other hand I do check every single word and the words I don't know I look up in one of my dictionaries, I use four different Hindi dictionaries (Allied, Oxford, National Bhargava's), and a M-W Sanskrit 'slab'. Any new definitions get added to a database, which enables me, with the help of MSaccess, to offer text and get a list of all available words related to the current translation. This can be really useful when Guru Dev uses obscure terms which he sometimes does. Although it would be preferable to be really fluent, the downside of a fluent speaker is that they are unlikely to look up commonly used words as a consequence can miss an obscure meaning. However, if anyone knows anyone who can help on this project I would be very happy to hear from them. I first came by two books of writings in 1975 (at Jyotir Math), got them both translated in India, (and an awful mess that turned out to be). Incidentally, has anyone tried the Guru Dev meditation technique, as outlined in the satsang a few days ago. I would be interested to hear of any observations. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 no_reply@ wrote: In Seelisberg, Mahesh quipped *if your guru isn't giving you what you want, get a different guru* -- I'm sure I've mentioned this before. That appears consistent with the SBS quote The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. If one teacher has not provided what one needs, has not made one happy, has not brought one Bhagavad (note to Paul and LB, its not Bhagavan?), then one legitimately seeks a new teacher. What is puzzling is, refering to Ricks point, if one has a new teacher, why do theywant / seek / insist on being admitted back into the fold /practices/ ashram/aka domes of their former teacher? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: snip Any comments on the substantive points I raised? I think they are important. Nah, I'm not inclined to get into any detailed discussions with you; In honesty, it was not so much an invitation. More a rhetorical point. I was parroting a good point you at times make of others, particularly barry, paraphrasing there were lots of substantive points in that post, and the best you can do is pick on some insubstantial side issue? [detailed discussions with you] they never seem to me to go much of anywhere, sorry. Hardly a view [many] others have of your extensively detailed journeys into minutia in some of your posts. [horse laugh] Liked your post in innocence, though. Thanks. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Bhagavad' is the word used in the text (I just double-checked). But of course the transcriber could have misheard or indeed the typesetter might have mispelled the word. But either way, Bhagavan or Bhagavad, same really, means 'Lord' or 'God' or 'OMnipotent One'. I wouldn't describe myself as 'fluent', no, but on the other hand I do check every single word and the words I don't know I look up in one of my dictionaries, I use four different Hindi dictionaries (Allied, Oxford, National Bhargava's), and a M-W Sanskrit 'slab'. Any new definitions get added to a database, which enables me, with the help of MSaccess, to offer text and get a list of all available words related to the current translation. This can be really useful when Guru Dev uses obscure terms which he sometimes does. Although it would be preferable to be really fluent, the downside of a fluent speaker is that they are unlikely to look up commonly used words as a consequence can miss an obscure meaning. Thanks. I laud yours and others, such as LB's, efforts. Its valuable to me. The more I read, some pretty fundamental quetions arise. See adjacent posts. However, my sense of your process,and that of LB's editing of his copy of the material (its the same source -- hindi manuscript -- for both of you,correct?), is that while its thorough and meticulous, it may be subject to the poetry effect of Bly and ? mentioned in posts a few days ago regarding arabic / sufi poetry. That is, do you you have a sense of what SBS must have meant, and the 2-20 meanings in the dictionary for each word are chosen to jibe with that must be area of meaning? What if your feeling is wrong? Then again, translators not having that must be feeling may produce disasters. And what about idioms, yogi slang :), and regional meanings of the words? If one is either not fluent in hindi, and/or not intimately current on the syntax and venacular of yogis and swamis 1920-1950, can some meanings be missed? These are simply observations/ questions. Not criticisms of your efforts. However, if anyone knows anyone who can help on this project I would be very happy to hear from them. I have a virtual foundation (that is, it is still an intent, a bubble (of bliss)) at this point, but it is making progress, sprouting nicely. My intent, among other things, is to support research like this, and work others do on swami / dundee traditions. And other things. Perhaps the virtual bubble blooms, perhaps not. Its a personal intent, but not so much in my hands. If it appeals to you, mentally, or on paper, articulate what you need, the costs, duration, and intended work product. Perhaps your pull will make my push flow into manifest form. By the way, Dana Sawyer, who has posted here a bit via Rick, is fluent in Hindi, is a professor of Asian Studies, and having interviewed hndreds of swamis and sadhus, must have a feel for their idioms/slang etc. He may be a great resource for your work. Rick could probably facilitate intros. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus on 9/4/06 4:39 PM, new.morning at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is puzzling is, refering to Ricks point, if one has a new teacher, why do theywant / seek / insist on being admitted back into the fold /practices/ ashram/aka domes of their former teacher? Thats a good question. I shouldnt think they would be attached to it. But many are, and feel its their right to be there, even though they have been very involved with other teachers and practices for a long time and not involved in the TMO. Some just like the vibes in the dome. Others who have moved on to other things came back out of curiosity or because some friend encouraged them or some employer paid them, and ended up feeling like a fish out of water. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And my response on a.m.t.: It's very rude to both the old and new guru to go back to the old one and pretend you dn't have a new one... 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? **End** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. And thanks to him again. And for those who see MMY as a guru and have moved on, and now have come back to participate in the peace assembly thing, it is obvious that going to one guru and coming back for a while while pretending to not have a new guru is just wrong. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: **Snip** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. Gee, we just had a discussion about Guru Dev's views on who could and could not be a guru, and most here seemed to agree Guru Dev wasn't unimpeachable on that point at all. In any case, Paul seems to be very sensitive about folks assuming what his motivations are, so I thought it better to ask. Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. Kind of a shame to use Guru Dev for that purpose, I think. As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. **Snip to end** Just a couple of things. First, although anyone can argue with the interpretation of what anyone has said, Guru Dev included, my point was that he, himself, was an unimpeachable authority. That having been said (and perhaps I'm wrong in making that initial assumption), certainly what he actually meant or didn't mean by any statements attributed to him is part of the purpose of forums like this one. If, however, he said it, then I feel it is fundamentally reasonable to post it here. As to whether or not Maharishi functions or functioned for anyone as a personal guru or not is specifically part of the discussion. Alex and a number of people legitimately believe that he did not and does not function in that role. Although I don't disagree with that assessment, nevertheless, I personally hold Maharishi as my guru and have since the first moment I saw him. That's not to say that I don't disagree with much of what I have seen and heard, not to say that I am not disappointed with much that I have seen and heard, not to say that I would be considered much of an ideal disciple (should that specific issue even come up). But I fell in love with him when I first saw him, was inspired by him when I first knew him, and remain indebted to him for what I know now. Can't help it, it's just the way it is for me. I have for a long time felt that what I knew of Maharishi at the time I knew him was the radiance of Guru Dev shining through him. In that respect he was the disciple, just like the master. I don't know more than that, but it is enough and the words of Guru Dev are important to me because I feel that I have been in his presence through this disciple of his. For me there's plenty of reason to post anything Guru Dev ever said and evaluate it through the lens of what I know and feel after so much time and experience. I don't question Paul's motives; his love for Guru Dev, if not for Maharishi, is enough to validate his intentions in my mind and in my heart. Swami Swaroopandanda was a disciple of Gurudev's for many years and he believs that MMY murdered Gurudev. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Hi, I am already acquainted with Dana Sawyer, thanks. He sent me a very interesting essay to read on his meetings around Rishikesh. I liked his no-nonsense style and his humour, I hope he gets around to publishing such stuff. As for his being fluent in Hindi, I wonder if this is correct? With regard to the source material. The few quotations I have offered lately are from 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita'. Last year(?) or the year before (?) I have read other translations of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' so yes, I am confident that I know what Guru Dev is saying. But I look forward to seeing more translations, as it will be interesting to compare, I am not in competition with anyone. I translated 'Amrit Kana', the book of quotations compiled by MMY, and published just after Guru Dev's meeting with Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan in December 1950. As yet though, I have ommitted to complete my translation of the introduction (by MMY), which is largely written in praise of Guru Dev, a quote from katha-upanishad, a tale from the Puranas (as I recall), and a description of the meeting with Radhakrishnan. Actually there was a speech in English too. I posted it before on the internet but why not put it out again? One of Radhakrishnan's associates, I think it was American Paul Schilp, had this to say about Guru Dev:- 'To-day we are here to do homage to his Holiness, Shri Jagatguru Shankaracharya Ananta Sri Vibhusita Swami Brahmananda Saraswati of Jyotirmath, Badarikasram - the Superman, the seer, the sage, who is one of the few rare individuals amongst the billions of the citizens of the world, whom we would unhesitatingly choose if and when we would be called upon to describe the spiritual and cultural capital of our nation, if and when the world would feel the need of evoking the part our nation can play in it, who is beyond any controversy, one of the rare few who have contributed and can still contribute something to universal peaceful progress, who have risen by their talent and genius above their fellow countrymen, above their fellowmen of the world and have thus gained a place for themselves at the head of humanity, at the extreme spearhead of civilization. Standing here at a time when everywhere in the world everybody feels not a little bewildered at an immense increase in the sense of human power, we can hardly exaggerate the necessity of teachers like his Holiness the Jagatguru. You will pardon me if I venture; at this assemblage of eminent philosophers, to refer to an aspect of our Hindu Philosophy which seems for the time being, to be too much belittled by the power- intoxicated world. Our Vedic philosophers The civilized world today is indeed in an age of spiritual chaos, intellectual doubt and political decadence. Civilized man today no doubt has acquired immense scientific and mechanical resources, but seems hopelessly to lack the wisdom to apply them to the best advantage. This is way we witness a growing sense of frustration seizing every mind almost everywhere. The whole world seems to be suffering from an epidemic of hysteria. We do not know which way the truth lies. Perhaps even here it will be true to say that every truth, however true in itself, yet taken apart from others, becomes only a snare. In reality, perhaps, each is one thread of a complex weft, and no thread can be taken apart from the weft. But this much seems to be certain that there is this paralysing fear and alarm almost everywhere in the world-everywhere even the most powerful mind have not succeeded in escaping it altogether. Everywhere humanity is beginning to feel that we are being betrayed by what is false within, - we are almost giving way to find ourselves spiritually paralysed. This indeed is a deadly malady. The patient here must first of all be brought to see that he is sick and to want to get well and to do of himself what is needed to get well. Perhaps something is away both with the heart and the brain. The world needs philosopher-teachers like His Holiness Shri Jagatguru Shankaracharya who can reveal the world of values and can make us realize that, that is the real world. The world badly needs guidance to a creed of values and ideals. The world needs a teacher who can dispel our fears and can remove all sense of frustration or least in so far as it is only an internal malady. We need a teacher who has succeeded in gaining for himself freedom to be along, who does not require any power, who can cure both heart and Brain. We are in an age in which the meeting of the traditionally alien cultures of the Orient and the Occident has become inevitable. We need a teacher with sufficient gift of intellectual imagination and divine inspiration who can help the smooth working of this meeting, the working out of this meeting in such a way
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru This is very important. Guru is in no way synonymous with only or absolute. Guru, if I remember my Sanskrit properly, is one who leads (you) from darkness (ignorance). It might take many teachers to do this, to help you, depending upon how you and the teacher mesh. Some teachers have abundant things to teach, but you might not have any of those things to learn, or only one or two of them that are necessary to you as an individual (and no one can escape his or her individual requirements). Some simpleton of a teacher might actually have the one important thing you need in order for some other teacher's teaching to come to fruition. It's really arrogant to assume you (whoever you is) are so enlightened to know which teacher is the greatest teacher who is just right for you. So, shopping around, while this has negative connotations, might be what you have to do. It seems to me that a good teacher is one who recognizes 'your' needs and 'his/her' abilities as well as limitations in regard to 'your' needs. If s/he isn't too self centred, if s/he is really a good teacher, then s/he is going to do his/her best to make sure you meet the teachers 'you' need. This is a really personalized thing ... not like TM mantras given out by age and/or sex because the course fee is more important than 'you' and the teacher hasn't been trained in the first place to have any idea what 'your' needs might be. This is one of many traditional ways to select mantras, IIRC. Why single it out as bad, or are you saying that all traditional ways to select mantras are wrong? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 9/4/06 2:26 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. I think it¹s one of the most significant things ever posted to FFL. The issue of other gurus and loyalty to MMY has been a hot one in FF for decades. A quote from GD condoning switching gurus is a real bombshell. Many TB¹s here might have taken his ³women can¹t be gurus² admonition as gospel truth, and might have used it to belittle the lady saints who come through. So they can¹ have it both ways. Either he¹s right about everything, including it being OK to switch gurus, or those who believe in him are free to pick and choose among the things he said. It¹ll be interesting when LB¹s book comes out. Except that TM teachers promise to be loyal to MMY in the context of teaching TM. There's no need to evoke a guru relationship to justify this promise and its implication... 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Some people say that having taken a guru you should not make another. But this doctrine is not of the shaastra, this is [just] mind's imagination. The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. So then we haven't seen any guru-bhakt (follower) always studying in the same 'class' of a guru out of fear. Actually it is natural to transfer 'class' and to transfer guru. It is not disrespectful to the former guru, actually the guru's dignity/respect has been done, but you will go beyond that study if you get the discipline of new gurus.' [exerpt of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' kaNa 69 of 108] translation - Paul Mason © 2006 http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm#changeguru And you're posting this excerpt because...? **End** Since everyone on this forum has dealt with the issue of where they (and others they may disagree with) stand regarding their relationship with Maharishi, whether as their guru, or teacher, or former-guru, or charlatan, or whatever; and since virtually everyone (if not everyone) acknowledges that Guru Dev is an umimpeachable authority on this and other subjects which this forum is expressly dedicated to, it is patently obvious why Paul has posted this. Gee, we just had a discussion about Guru Dev's views on who could and could not be a guru, and most here seemed to agree Guru Dev wasn't unimpeachable on that point at all. In any case, Paul seems to be very sensitive about folks assuming what his motivations are, so I thought it better to ask. Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. Kind of a shame to use Guru Dev for that purpose, I think. As Alex pointed out, though, the quote doesn't appear to be relevant to this group, since MMY is not the kind of personal guru that Guru Dev was referring to. I'm sure Paul knows this, so it remains unclear to me, at any rate, why he posted the quote. And thanks to him again. i think you know very well why he posted: Of course, he rarely posts anything from either Guru Dev or MMY that is not designed to make MMY look bad by comparison. Kind of a shame to use Guru Dev for that purpose, I think. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt. A guru follower. To me, that sounds like your typical meditator or at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 no_reply@ wrote: In Seelisberg, Mahesh quipped *if your guru isn't giving you what you want, get a different guru* -- I'm sure I've mentioned this before. That appears consistent with the SBS quote The guru is gone to for [ones own] happiness. Up until when bhagavad (God, Vishnu, Shiva) is gained, up until then you can go and change guru. If one teacher has not provided what one needs, has not made one happy, has not brought one Bhagavad (note to Paul and LB, its not Bhagavan?), then one legitimately seeks a new teacher. What is puzzling is, refering to Ricks point, if one has a new teacher, why do theywant / seek / insist on being admitted back into the fold /practices/ ashram/aka domes of their former teacher? Yep. And not telling about the new guru/etc in order to do so. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Resend - other copy incorrect Hi, I am already acquainted with Dana Sawyer, thanks. He sent me a very interesting essay to read on his meetings around Rishikesh. I liked his no-nonsense style and his humour, I hope he gets around to publishing such stuff. As for his being fluent in Hindi, I wonder if this is correct? With regard to the source material. The few quotations I have offered lately are from 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita'. I have read other translations of 'Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita' so yes, I am confident that I know what Guru Dev is saying. But I look forward to seeing more translations, as it will be interesting to compare, I am not in competition with anyone. Last year(?) or the year before (?) I translated 'Amrit Kana', the book of quotations compiled by MMY, and published just after Guru Dev's meeting with Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan in December 1950. As yet though, I have ommitted to complete my translation of the introduction (by MMY), which is largely written in praise of Guru Dev, a quote from katha-upanishad, a tale from the Puranas (as I recall), and a description of the meeting with Radhakrishnan. Actually there was a speech in English too. I posted it before on the internet but why not put it out again? One of Radhakrishnan's associates, I think it was American Professor Paul Schilp, had this to say about Guru Dev:- 'To-day we are here to do homage to his Holiness, Shri Jagatguru Shankaracharya Ananta Sri Vibhusita Swami Brahmananda Saraswati of Jyotirmath, Badarikasram - the Superman, the seer, the sage, who is one of the few rare individuals amongst the billions of the citizens of the world, whom we would unhesitatingly choose if and when we would be called upon to describe the spiritual and cultural capital of our nation, if and when the world would feel the need of evoking the part our nation can play in it, who is beyond any controversy, one of the rare few who have contributed and can still contribute something to universal peaceful progress, who have risen by their talent and genius above their fellow countrymen, above their fellowmen of the world and have thus gained a place for themselves at the head of humanity, at the extreme spearhead of civilization. Standing here at a time when everywhere in the world everybody feels not a little bewildered at an immense increase in the sense of human power, we can hardly exaggerate the necessity of teachers like his Holiness the Jagatguru. You will pardon me if I venture; at this assemblage of eminent philosophers, to refer to an aspect of our Hindu Philosophy which seems for the time being, to be too much belittled by the power- intoxicated world. Our Vedic philosophers The civilized world today is indeed in an age of spiritual chaos, intellectual doubt and political decadence. Civilized man today no doubt has acquired immense scientific and mechanical resources, but seems hopelessly to lack the wisdom to apply them to the best advantage. This is way we witness a growing sense of frustration seizing every mind almost everywhere. The whole world seems to be suffering from an epidemic of hysteria. We do not know which way the truth lies. Perhaps even here it will be true to say that every truth, however true in itself, yet taken apart from others, becomes only a snare. In reality, perhaps, each is one thread of a complex weft, and no thread can be taken apart from the weft. But this much seems to be certain that there is this paralysing fear and alarm almost everywhere in the world-everywhere even the most powerful mind have not succeeded in escaping it altogether. Everywhere humanity is beginning to feel that we are being betrayed by what is false within, - we are almost giving way to find ourselves spiritually paralysed. This indeed is a deadly malady. The patient here must first of all be brought to see that he is sick and to want to get well and to do of himself what is needed to get well. Perhaps something is away both with the heart and the brain. The world needs philosopher-teachers like His Holiness Shri Jagatguru Shankaracharya who can reveal the world of values and can make us realize that, that is the real world. The world badly needs guidance to a creed of values and ideals. The world needs a teacher who can dispel our fears and can remove all sense of frustration or least in so far as it is only an internal malady. We need a teacher who has succeeded in gaining for himself freedom to be along, who does not require any power, who can cure both heart and Brain. We are in an age in which the meeting of the traditionally alien cultures of the Orient and the Occident has become inevitable. We need a teacher with sufficient gift of intellectual imagination and divine inspiration who can help the smooth working of this meeting, the working out of this meeting in such a way that the values of each civilization complement and re-inforce rather than combat and destroy
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. Thats a devotee in my book.Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. They may have fully prostrated themselves on the ground before him. Thats a devotee in my book. Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. They may have fully prostrated themselves on the ground before him. Thats a devotee in my book. Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. But even given the above, most TMers and many/most TM teachers, are not in such a relationship with MMY or Gurudev. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Response below. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Bhagavad' is the word used in the text (I just double-checked). But of course the transcriber could have misheard or indeed the typesetter might have mispelled the word. But either way, Bhagavan or Bhagavad, same really, means 'Lord' or 'God' or 'OMnipotent One'. I wouldn't describe myself as 'fluent', no, but on the other hand I do check every single word and the words I don't know I look up in one of my dictionaries, I use four different Hindi dictionaries (Allied, Oxford, National Bhargava's), and a M-W Sanskrit 'slab'. Any new definitions get added to a database, which enables me, with the help of MSaccess, to offer text and get a list of all available words related to the current translation. This can be really useful when Guru Dev uses obscure terms which he sometimes does. Although it would be preferable to be really fluent, the downside of a fluent speaker is that they are unlikely to look up commonly used words as a consequence can miss an obscure meaning. Thanks. I laud yours and others, such as LB's, efforts. Its valuable to me. The more I read, some pretty fundamental quetions arise. See adjacent posts. However, my sense of your process,and that of LB's editing of his copy of the material (its the same source -- hindi manuscript -- for both of you,correct?), is that while its thorough and meticulous, it may be subject to the poetry effect of Bly and ? mentioned in posts a few days ago regarding arabic / sufi poetry. That is, do you you have a sense of what SBS must have meant, and the 2-20 meanings in the dictionary for each word are chosen to jibe with that must be area of meaning? What if your feeling is wrong? Then again, translators not having that must be feeling may produce disasters. When I first starting working on the translation, I sometimes went by the must have meant method. Early in the game I realized that was unsatisfactory. I realized that I could render a paragraph that would read OK to most readers, but which could be wrong. To that end, I aquired more professional help and outside consultants with subject matter expertise. (They will be credited in the book.) The goal of my work has been to render, insofar as possible without distortion or speculation, WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID. Nothing more, nothing less. And what about idioms, yogi slang :), and regional meanings of the words? If one is either not fluent in hindi, and/or not intimately current on the syntax and venacular of yogis and swamis 1920-1950, can some meanings be missed? Brahmanandaji spoke vernacular hindi with a slight flavor that the translators described as somewhat regional or antiquated, yet eloquent without being elegant. Although there are occasional obscure idioms (annoted in the text), for the most part his delivery is dirt simple. For some of the discourses I have had as many as 4 original translations to work from, and a minimum of 3 for the entire set. I have found little disagreement or variation. Some of my TM based readers have suggested alterations based on TM doctrine (we know what this word must really mean) but I have generally not found such alternations to be justified by the context. In cases where doubts arose, I made it my business to get second and third opinions. There is no such thing as a perfect translation, but the one I am offering has survived profound scrutiny, and I am confident that it reflects WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID. L B S 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
Thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, L B Shriver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Response below. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: 'Bhagavad' is the word used in the text (I just double-checked). But of course the transcriber could have misheard or indeed the typesetter might have mispelled the word. But either way, Bhagavan or Bhagavad, same really, means 'Lord' or 'God' or 'OMnipotent One'. I wouldn't describe myself as 'fluent', no, but on the other hand I do check every single word and the words I don't know I look up in one of my dictionaries, I use four different Hindi dictionaries (Allied, Oxford, National Bhargava's), and a M-W Sanskrit 'slab'. Any new definitions get added to a database, which enables me, with the help of MSaccess, to offer text and get a list of all available words related to the current translation. This can be really useful when Guru Dev uses obscure terms which he sometimes does. Although it would be preferable to be really fluent, the downside of a fluent speaker is that they are unlikely to look up commonly used words as a consequence can miss an obscure meaning. Thanks. I laud yours and others, such as LB's, efforts. Its valuable to me. The more I read, some pretty fundamental quetions arise. See adjacent posts. However, my sense of your process,and that of LB's editing of his copy of the material (its the same source -- hindi manuscript -- for both of you,correct?), is that while its thorough and meticulous, it may be subject to the poetry effect of Bly and ? mentioned in posts a few days ago regarding arabic / sufi poetry. That is, do you you have a sense of what SBS must have meant, and the 2-20 meanings in the dictionary for each word are chosen to jibe with that must be area of meaning? What if your feeling is wrong? Then again, translators not having that must be feeling may produce disasters. When I first starting working on the translation, I sometimes went by the must have meant method. Early in the game I realized that was unsatisfactory. I realized that I could render a paragraph that would read OK to most readers, but which could be wrong. To that end, I aquired more professional help and outside consultants with subject matter expertise. (They will be credited in the book.) The goal of my work has been to render, insofar as possible without distortion or speculation, WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID. Nothing more, nothing less. And what about idioms, yogi slang :), and regional meanings of the words? If one is either not fluent in hindi, and/or not intimately current on the syntax and venacular of yogis and swamis 1920-1950, can some meanings be missed? Brahmanandaji spoke vernacular hindi with a slight flavor that the translators described as somewhat regional or antiquated, yet eloquent without being elegant. Although there are occasional obscure idioms (annoted in the text), for the most part his delivery is dirt simple. For some of the discourses I have had as many as 4 original translations to work from, and a minimum of 3 for the entire set. I have found little disagreement or variation. Some of my TM based readers have suggested alterations based on TM doctrine (we know what this word must really mean) but I have generally not found such alternations to be justified by the context. In cases where doubts arose, I made it my business to get second and third opinions. There is no such thing as a perfect translation, but the one I am offering has survived profound scrutiny, and I am confident that it reflects WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID. L B S 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. They may have fully prostrated themselves on the ground before him. Thats a devotee in my book. Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. But even given the above, most TMers and many/most TM teachers, are not in such a relationship with MMY or Gurudev. I would suggest that tranlating such into a modern American / European context, many TM teachers, and some TMers (some real bhaktis and--seperate thought -- ninnies, there) are / were in such a relationship. However, if you do not grok such, from experience, or from the outlines of the suggestion, I am guessing that my making the detailed explicit case would not resonate with your experience or mind-set either. No foul. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. They may have fully prostrated themselves on the ground before him. Thats a devotee in my book. Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. But even given the above, most TMers and many/most TM teachers, are not in such a relationship with MMY or Gurudev. I would suggest that tranlating such into a modern American / European context, many TM teachers, and some TMers (some real bhaktis and--seperate thought -- ninnies, there) are / were in such a relationship. However, if you do not grok such, from experience, or from the outlines of the suggestion, I am guessing that my making the detailed explicit case would not resonate with your experience or mind-set either. No foul. I agree that some/many TM teachers and sme TMers were/are in such as relationship (at least in their own minds) with MMY, or even Gurudev. I thought you were claiming a majority had this belief/attitude/whatever. Perhaps at some point in their careers, most TM teachers felt that way, but certainly it wasn't a rank-and-file attidude for TMers and probably not even for TM-Sidhas. 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Re: Guru Dev on changing gurus --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [...] And the translation refers to the one who was going to the guru as a guru-bhakt at least TM teacher / gov. We do, or have, followed a teacher/guru. Bhakti means love/worship/etc. Many TM teachers, and most meditators/sidhas, are NOT in a guru-bhkti relationship with MMY, or so I believe. Unless, of course, the term bhakti changes radically when added to guru which doesn't seem likely. I was going by Paul's translation of guru-bhak, follower. Paul what was your reasoning/ basis for saying followeer and not devotee. It occured to me that a full-on bhakti relation might be implied. And it also occurred me that, in an indian 1940's context, many if not most of the regular householder folk, flocking to see SBS once or twice a year, would be considered guru-bhaks, followers,even devotees. Even, and perhaps specifically, the cooks, carpenters, shopkeepers, policmen etc who saw him infrequently, and many who never had a personal audience with him. They may have done guru puja to him every morning. They may have fully prostrated themselves on the ground before him. Thats a devotee in my book. Yet not a 24/7 staffer. I would look to translators, interpretors, cultural historians, and 80 year old hindus for clarification. Until then, you will have your read of it, I will have mine. But even given the above, most TMers and many/most TM teachers, are not in such a relationship with MMY or Gurudev. I would suggest that tranlating such into a modern American / European context, many TM teachers, and some TMers (some real bhaktis and--seperate thought -- ninnies, there) are / were in such a relationship. However, if you do not grok such, from experience, or from the outlines of the suggestion, I am guessing that my making the detailed explicit case would not resonate with your experience or mind-set either. No foul. I agree that some/many TM teachers and sme TMers were/are in such as relationship (at least in their own minds) with MMY, or even Gurudev. I thought you were claiming a majority had this belief/attitude/whatever. Perhaps at some point in their careers, most TM teachers felt that way, yes, that is my point. but certainly it wasn't a rank-and-file attidude for TMers and probably not even for TM-Sidhas. No it wasn't. I would guess it was, for at least some time, for 1% of TMers (but 20% of core volunteers around the center), and maybe 5% of sidhas. 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/
