Trusting the Guru: [was: Want to believe but how ...]

May 3, 2006

Just last night I was reading Cynthia Ann Humes' essay "Maharishi

Mahesh Yogi: Beyond the TM Technique" in _Gurus in America_.

Here's a quote:

"Maharishi's strategy, while appealing to some, is at the root of

many practitioners' dissatisfaction with the new and improved TM

Movement, for although there are philosophical warrants to support

such skillful application of teaching to meet the needs and

circumstances of each adherent, such and approach is fundamentally

at odds with a core American value: full and honest disclosure up

front."

Interesting parallel to your comment, Kirk!

BTW, in case it's not clear from the above snippet, the author isn't

making a value judgment about whether or not one should trust one's

(this, or any) guru.

She's pointing out that there is an inherent tension or conflict

between the private guru-disciple relationship ("skillful [...]

teaching to meet the needs and circumstances of each adherent") and

the role of a "public" guru or movement leader. Really an

interesting and valuable observation!

The author also points out that TM practitioners can suffer some

cognitive dissonance in a movement that isn't labelled or

necessarily presented as Hinduism (or even as a religion), but

arguably *is* both, or at least becomes "religious" for advanced

practitioners.

Although I suspect the "cognitive dissonance" may be a rather

striking feature of the (current) TM movement, I wouldn't think this

would be the only "Eastern export" where confusion and surprise crop

up. Westerners tend to be attracted to the universalized, to

(simplified) techniques, and to "tools." The larger philosophical,

traditional, and cultural context that the seeker/student eventually

encounters can come as a surprise. I remember a long-time Shakti

Sadhana member's astonishment at discovering that the SS e-group is

essentially a Hinduism discussion group. I wonder if she

felt "tricked"? It's an interesting, if rather unfortunate,

phenomenon. Again, interesting and perceptive observations on the

part of the above essayist. Kirk, I think you might enjoy the essay.

, "Llundrub" <llundrub

wrote:

>

> I think what may happen is that one only really needs to trust the

guru when they have a very unclear message and when they are merely

trying to hoodwink their followers. Otherwise, if the guru is well

known and hides nothing and is a source of goodness then one doesn't

need to trust anyone because instead one has faith in the message

and the medium. It's only shaky gurus nowadays who demand or need

trust.

>

> Let me put it a different way... Let's say I have a restaurant

with reputation. Then you don't have to always question each menu

item because you know they'll be good in general. On the other

hand, if the reputation is bad, or fifty/fifty then maybe one must

question every item. Okay.

>

> -

> sumantkb

>

> I also share the same concern as Puneet. There is certain trust in

> Guru since one is chanting but I do not understand "build a Trust

in

> your Guru". How can one build a trust? [....]

------------------------

May 3, 2006

Certainly agree. I was thrilled when I discovered the bhakti behind the shakti.

-

msbauju

Tuesday, May 02, 2006 3:06 PM