Madhava/Is Guru required?

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhava,

 

At 09:21 PM 11/10/99 +0300, you wrote:

>"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava

>

> Hari Om! After reading your "final words" e-mail, I am compelled to

>say a few words. I congratulate you for your gaining, that too with out a

>guru. I certainly do feel that you have every right to express it. Now, I

>would beg you to come down to the lower level, which is dvaita, and think of

>the less privileged mortals... The less privileged mortals, who do not know

>what to do --- how will they do it.

 

All I have 'gained' is some loss of ignorance, how much loss is unknown

here. All are equally privileged to take hold of the truth. None are more

or less privileged than others. All reap what they sow through the law of

karma, until they escape karma.

> Though the path of advaita is "alone to the alone all alone", many

>need guidance. Perhaps, letting them follow their gurus is better than

>giving out a statement --- you can do with out a guru. No offence intended,

>please, I am sure you may be right. Yet! let them go.

 

Please, I hope you haven't misunderstood. My point was only that a Guru is

not *required* (as per the topic of this thread), not whether a Guru can be

helpful or not. Of course, a Guru can be of great help to anyone, and some

cannot progress without one (except perhaps through hundreds or thousands

of lifetimes). The only argument I was making is that there is no

**absolute requirement** for a Guru, as some were suggesting -- I.E. some

may attain without the aid of a Guru. In no way was I insinuating that

those who feel they need the guidance of a Guru should go without -- quite

the contrary! In fact, a Guru is recommended for everyone. But not

everyone can find one (or can be 'found by' one), and not everyone is of

the disposition or nature to desire a Guru in human form.

 

Sometimes I speak too strongly, and perhaps my words are misunderstood. If

so, I humbly apologize for any misunderstanding. In no way was I

suggesting that someone who is already following a Guru with success should

give up that Guru. That would not make sense at all. But the argument was

very specific: Is a Guru *required* for success and eventual realization,

or is a Guru not required. My only point is that there is no universal law

set in stone that says "Without Guru, you will be guaranteed to fail."

Some have been hinting that this is the case, unless I've been

misunderstanding.

>Personally, some times I feel very sad, thinking of Jiddu

>Krishnamurty and few other saints, though realized, gave way for a greater

>misunderstanding, through their teachings. Only a few were really able to

>understand them, quite a few misunderstood them. Sad....

 

Yes, this is true, and it is sad. But of course the words of J.

Krishnamurti are not gone. All are still able to read them, and many of

his lectures were recorded as well. Perhaps over the course of a thousand

or a hundred thousand years, they will have their effect. Why think in

terms of a single human lifespan? It's quite possible that J. Krishnamurti

has indeed achieved his goal of "setting mankind totally free," only that

mankind does not know it yet. :-)

>You have a responsibility, a religious duty, you are a master.

 

Although I do have a responsibility, I am no master. I am in no way either

"above" or "below" anyone else, even a murderer. I am only Brahman, as

"everyone" shares the same Atman, and is Brahman. All are equal, exactly

equal. There is only the One.

 

Hari OM,

 

With Love,

 

Tim

 

-----

Visit "The Core" Website at http://coresite.cjb.net -

Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics.

Tim's other pages are at http://core.vdirect.net

[Guest guest]

Tim Gerchmez wrote:

>

> My point was only that a Guru is

> not *required* (as per the topic of this thread), not whether a Guru can be

> helpful or not. Of course, a Guru can be of great help to anyone, and some

> cannot progress without one (except perhaps through hundreds or thousands

> of lifetimes). The only argument I was making is that there is no

> **absolute requirement** for a Guru, as some were suggesting -- I.E. some

> may attain without the aid of a Guru. In no way was I insinuating that

> those who feel they need the guidance of a Guru should go without -- quite

> the contrary! In fact, a Guru is recommended for everyone. But not

> everyone can find one (or can be 'found by' one), and not everyone is of

> the disposition or nature to desire a Guru in human form.

>

> [...]

>

> ...the argument was

> very specific: Is a Guru *required* for success and eventual realization,

> or is a Guru not required. My only point is that there is no universal law

> set in stone that says "Without Guru, you will be guaranteed to fail."

> Some have been hinting that this is the case, unless I've been

> misunderstanding.

>

 

well said. and, yes, this was what was being

suggested, giving rise to the misunderstanding

on the List..

 

mention was also made that Bhagavan Ramana

specifically and exclusively recommended

the need of a guru. this is just not true.

he was very flexible in this regard, as well

as alluding to having a guru in absentia.

he also pointed out, and often, that guru

God and Self are one and the same. that

in fact, the bhakthibhavana is the important

component in the dynamic associated with the

surrenderance to the guru.

 

moreover, Bhagavan was sensitive to the matter

of the temperament and approach adopted by each

individual in question. there was even an

instance where one Yogi Mariah who happened to

be involved in the marga of hathayoga, that

Bhagavan encouraged him to continue in his

practice.

> >Personally, some times I feel very sad, thinking of Jiddu

> >Krishnamurty and few other saints, though realized, gave way for a greater

> >misunderstanding, through their teachings. Only a few were really able to

> >understand them, quite a few misunderstood them. Sad....

>

> Yes, this is true, and it is sad. But of course the words of J.

> Krishnamurti are not gone. All are still able to read them, and many of

> his lectures were recorded as well. Perhaps over the course of a thousand

> or a hundred thousand years, they will have their effect. Why think in

> terms of a single human lifespan? It's quite possible that J. Krishnamurti

> has indeed achieved his goal of "setting mankind totally free," only that

> mankind does not know it yet. :-)

>

 

Krishnamurti is a classic example of a jnani

who was an ineffective teacher. for example,

his recommendation that meditation be given

up..that no-one needs it, served to cause much

misunderstanding and even critical misguidance.

it's quite true that it should be given up in

its formal sense at the time when one is ripe

and ready to drop the idea of shifting between

states of meditation and non-meditation. yet

this shouldn't have been arbitararily prescribed

for everyone, obviously.

 

namaste

[Guest guest]

Hari Om:

 

Thanks Tim and Frank for clarifying the issues on a clearer terms. On

Conceptual terminology, I am willing to agree that "Self-realization" is

feasible without a "Guru." However, on practical terms, the

Guru is an integral part of Shankara's Advaita and he states the qualifications

for Guru and the Sadhaka (seeker) forcefully in Viveka choodamani. The

institutions (all the five Shankar Maths) established

by Shankara also preach and follow the same framework. Consequently, I would

say that "Self-realization" according to Shankara's advaita does emphasize the

role of the Guru. The Acharyars of these

institutions served the cause of Shankara's Advaitam and a large population of

Hindus known as Smartas strongly believe in this religious tradition. This may

explain why the question "Is Guru required?" will

never be resolved.

 

The statement, "Guru is not required" is too strong for those who have great

faith in the Guru-Sadhaka sampradhyam. An acceptance of this statement at the

extreme will imply that Shankara's establishements

should be dismantled. A more acceptable compromise is the following: Majority

of the common folks need the help of a personal Guru, some may need guidance

with more flexiblity (personal guru, books,

interrnet discussions, etc.) and very few may not need any external help. If

we carefully go through the discussions on this topic, we can observe many

agreements inspite of disagreeing on this issue!

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran