Idol Worship

[Guest guest]

The sum of the evangelical statements in the attached emails say that

the Satguru is the Lord in human form and the highest object of

worship, to whom the true devotee is a servant, happily bound to

making sacrifices of money and service, and that the devotee should

hold tightly to the dualistic notion that the Satguru is Lord only to

which the devotee is essentially and always a lesser than, who shows

his love through sacrifice to his or her Lord in human form.

Furthermore the devotee is merrily obligated to propagate the mission

of the guru.

 

There's no reason that you should care what I think, but since you've

made your devotions public, I'd comment that in my opinion certain

aspects of this philosophy could possibly ring true if considered in

the right context. Yet others are deeply troubling to me, and given

the crusading and perhaps fanatical overtones, overall it seems like

a perfect formula for abuse, especially in our devious era. On a

personal note, I believe that speaking in terms of fulfilling

grandiose spiritual missions often has it seeds in egoism and

arrogance buried behind a glossy veneer of false humility.

 

I have every respect for the Guru-Disciple relationship and in no way

wish to malign this sacred time honored tradition. Nevertheless, even

qualified and well meaning Gurus can be surrounded by sycophantic

devotees who would through their own misunderstanding turn good

teachings into bad. They create a cultish atmosphere as result of a

submitting to superstition, turning "without" rather than

turning "within" - indicative of superfluous understanding, and a

hidden agenda of self-glorification veiled by false surrender to the

master. If the guru not sincere, these darker tones of human nature

are played upon all the more so.

 

In any event, I think it's only fair to mention in regards to the

examples previously given that Hanuman also related to Lord Ram as

his personal friend, and towards voicing his higher understanding he

once replied to Lord Ram, in the essence of non-dual understanding,

that Hanuman and Lord Ram are ultimately one and the same without

difference. Also, I recall that Sri Hanuman was a student of the Sun,

from whom he learned Veda, Vedanta, and all the sciences, such that

while floating through the sky alongside his teacher, he absorbed all

the teachings and thus became a Jnani (there could be a metaphysical

meaning here about circling the prana around the atman in the heart

chakra).

 

As to propagating the Gospel of Jesus, it was St. Paul that primarily

and effectively spread the word of Christ to the non-Jewish

population of that geographical region. As you may know, unlike the

original apostles, St. Paul was not among the followers of Jesus

during his life on earth, though the evangelical church is largely

supported by his influence.

 

Swami Vivekananda was not an evangelist either, or a guru sycophant,

but by nature a bold social reformer who acted from his own

understanding and not from any missionary directives of Ramakrishna.

>From http://www.sriramakrishna.org/vvklife.htm

 

… "Naren (young Vivekananda) loved and admired Ramakrishna but never

surrendered his independence of judgment. Interestingly, Ramakrishna

himself did not demand it of him, or of any other of his disciples.

 

(Many years after Ramakrishna had departed this world) …"Swamiji

(Vivekananda) arrived in Madras, young people gathered round him

drawn by his bright and inspiring talks. They begged him to go to the

USA to attend the forthcoming Parliament of Religions in Chicago to

represent Hinduism. They even started raising funds for the purpose.

Swamiji was first reluctant but later felt some good might come of

his visit to the West, for if he could make some impression there,

his people back at home, who always judged a thing good or bad

according as the Western critics thought of it, would then give him a

respectful hearing (regarding his strong desire to initiate sweeping

social changes throughout India)".

 

Adi Sankaracharya did not drink molten lead for the purpose of

proving to his students that he was God and they were not. He

performed this feat to quench their illusions about having already

perfected themselves. That perfection would come later, as even

Sankara was at one time a disciple and not an equal to his own guru.

It is one thing to hear "Thou art That", and quite another to fully

absorb it.

 

Meerabai who lived in the 15th or 16th century, was obviously not a

contemporary of Sri Krishna in the physical sense, but rather a giant

of a devotee who expressed her worship through her dancing, singing,

and incessant remembrance of her lord Sri Krishna. She is remembered

principally for her longingly intense devotional hymns, and

secondarily for her abandonment of royalty for the hard life of a

wandering yogini. Her Guru was the cobbler Ravidas, who is often

remembered by his steadfast challenge to the caste system: "A family

that has true followers of the Lord is neither high caste, nor low

caste, lordly or poor". He is not known to have sent his pre-eminent

disciple on any kind of an evangelical mission. By her life's

example, and not through any willful crusade, she contributed to a

revival of Krishna bhakti in Northern India.

 

As to any relevance towards astrology that would justify this

conversation, it's my understanding that at one time (a perhaps even

today) the classical Satguru was also adept in vedanga, including

jyotish, which could be used to determine the best sadhana for the

disciple according to his or her inborn nature. Thus the Guru could

direct one according to their chart towards Karma, Bhakti, Raja,

Jnana, Hatha, Laya, Tantra, and so on, with any combination thereof.

I suppose examining the 9th house and its lord (as the house of

religion) and the 12th house and its lord (as the house of liberation

from the cycle of birth and death) would be two indicators of primary

concern, taken with consideration with the native's personality and

mental tendencies.

 

Service to the Lord comes in many forms, some of them obvious, others

mysterious, and some completely hidden from the eyes of world and

known only to God, Guru, and the devotee. I think that one needs to

work on oneself before proselytizing – if such crusading could indeed

be justified. On the other hand, true teachers are called upon, by

divine command, to propagate their superior knowledge, and certainly

this requires an investment of support by the devotees for its

greater achievement. The spiritual knowledge we possess comes to us

through the generosity of the great beings that have accepted the

responsibilities of adopting extended spiritual families, and largely

through the efforts of these family members to help propagate the

teachings, even after the master has left the body. It's a fine line

between the player and the pawn, the called and the self-called. I

suppose only one's good karma, life experience, and sincere efforts

in personal introspection designate the results. Others will

certainly hold to other opinions as this is a difficult and

emotionally charged subject.

 

Regards,

Preston

 

 

valist, "surya" <dattapr2000 wrote:

>

> The top most devotees who also turned out top most jnanis by

> achieving the top most laurels by pleasing the Lord are ....

>

> Hanuman, a topmost devotee identified Lord Rama and served Him and

> always said `I am servant to Lord Rama'. He even performed many

> miracles also and still he has given credit of them to Rama only.

> (Dasoham kosalendrasya.....) For such worship, Lord has given

future

> creator post to Hanuman.

>

> St. Peter, St. John, St. Luke... identified Lord Jesus by His

divine

> knowledge and participated in the propagation of divine knowledge.

>

> Gopikas identified and worshipped Lord Krishna, the then human

> incarnation only and got the highest fruit of top most Goloka.

>

> Swami Vivekananda participated in the mission of propagation of

> divine knowledge on the order of the then human incarnation Rama

> Krishna Paramahamsa.

>

> Likewise the disciples of Adi Sankara worshipped Him as lord and

> latter on participated in the propagation of divine knowledge.

> Meerabai also propagated Krishna Bhakti by composing hymns and

> propagated them.

>

> In all these the disciples identified the Lord in the human form

> during their time and participated in His mission as servants. So,

> first one should identify the Satguru and then learn divine

> knowledge from Him. These disciples worshipped their Satguru. At

His

> order, they participated in the propagation of divine knowledge as

> Service to Lord. Service only proves our real devotion, which

> consists of Karma phala tyaga (sacrifice of money) & karma sanyasa

> (physically participating in His mission).

>

> They were not in any illusion of Advaita. Sankara who propagated

> advaita (Non-dualism) showed to His disciples that 'you are all not

> Lord. I am only Lord' by drinking molten lead. The disciples could

> not drink it. So, only Sankara is Lord in human form and not

> disciples. If disciples themselves are not Lord, normal human

beings

> cannot even think of in their dreams also.

>

> If everybody is God, what is the meaning of spiritual effort? God

> needs Spiritual Effort to reach God? God created the universe

> consisting of animate and inanimate objects. He preaches divine

> knowledge and does miracles also, if required. If anybody claims to

> be Lord or God, he should be able to do all these things. Greatest

> devotees never claimed themselves as Lord, they always love to

serve

> the Lord in human form. Satguru (lord in human form) has to be

> identified by His divine knowledge and serve that Satguru only not

> any guru. Satguru only can clear all doubts of all disciples. Gurus

> are devotees having some divine knowledge. So they may sometimes

> clarify some doubts. Their knowledge is limited only. Only Satguru

> (lord in human form) will only have the infinite knowledge and

> clarifies all the doubts of all disciples.

>

> Like the studies in our materialistic life, one has to pass through

> elementary, higher, college and should finally enter university.

> After studies in University one will join job to serve the country.

> Like wise, one should serve Lord in human form.

>

> Self-analysis is the analysis of self with the help of Satguru who

> can only show your internal situation. Ex. a doctor can only see

the

> x-ray and diagnose the ailment and give you medicines. Reaching

Self

> is only an intermediate step in the spiritual journey towards the

> final goal of reaching Lord. Reaching self is not reaching Lord.

>

> In spiritual effort three important things are there. 1) knowing

> about self 2) Knowing the destination 3) the path to reach the

> destination. Regarding knowing about self, it is sufficient if you

> know that you are not the destination. Regarding knowing the

> destination, you should identify the Lord in human form and He is

> our destination. the identification is by His true infinite

> spiritual knowledge.

>

> Path is the most essential part of spiritual journey. The path

> leading to Lord is full of sacrifice only, which is only the real

> indication of our true love towards Him. That is why Jesus told the

> path leading to kingdom of Lord is very narrow filled with thorns.

> Because practical sacrifice nobody enjoys. Sacrificing words, mind

> and intelligence can be done without botheration as Lord has

already

> given them freely.

>

> at the lotus feet of shri datta swami

> surya

> www.universal-spirituality.org

>