To Guru or not to Guru that is the Question...Guru Gita -Mahahradanatha

[Guest guest]

OM NAMAH SIVAYA

 

as always i thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge it is

greatly appreciated. your post seems to indicate that you thought i

was inferring that a living Guru was not needed which was not my

intention. the intent was not to question whether or not "to Guru."

but rather in cases where there is not the presence of a living Guru

this does not necessarily mean there is no Guru present, as The Guru

is more than the physical body. The Guru being Divinity, is inherent

in everything. shouldn't one take solace in the fact that Divine

Mother is in charge and rest assured when such a time arises where we

require a living Guru She will provide? it seems it behooves one to

see life's experiences and our Love for Devi as The Guru. to guide us

to improve ourselves, to become worthy disciples, and to assist with

our Self enquiry of our own inherent Divinity. afterall absent the

living Guru what choice does one really have? to quote my Guru,

Ammachi, "We have nothing to lose by trusting the infinite power of

the Self, except the bondage of our own ignorance. Real gain is from

the Self alone. Only enquiry into the Self is of eternal value, and

that is what gives peace. We should know That as the true bliss."

 

JAI MA

 

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

>

> Hi,

> From what little i know, the traditional Interpretation of these

> Verses of the Guru Gita are different from your Interpretation.

>

> These verses of the Guru Gita are traditionally intended to mean

> that the knowledge of the Self and that the Knowledge of the devi

> does solely dependent on the grace of the living Guru, and that one

> can reach the self or the devi or both, quickly by worship of the

> Padukas of a human Guru, while your interpretation of the content of

> the verses is that since the Guru is the self and one with devi one

> may dispense with the physical Guru because there is always either

> the self or the devi present, who can this become so to say a

> subsitute for the physical presence of the Guru.

>

> Of course some people, especially adherents of the western neo-

> advaita philosophy belive. like you do, that the guru is better

> described as an abstract philosophic symbol of an inner guiding light

> the self.

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Eric

 

Like i wrote it was not at all my point to doubt that your ideas are

appropriate, and i hope i understood you right and respected your

point of view, and i belive it is entirely correct andin accordance

with your path.

It is only that it think the Guru Gita is the wrong scripture to

quote in support of your feelings and ideas, because i belive it is

part of a differnt tradition with a different approach, without a

commentary from a competent Guru of that tradition one can easily

misunderstand the passage.

I guess that is what Kartikji meant when he reminded you that one

should better not mix traditions.

Though Guru Gita is transmitted as part of skanda purana its content

is entirely tantric, and it is included in the Guru charitra of

Dattatreya Sampradaya.

 

Like always in tantric tradition emphasis is on the human being,

whether in Kumari Puja or Stri or Suvasini Puja Ksama Puja or Guru

Paduka-puja thats why the emphasis is here on a physical Guru not on

abstract self or devi, because they are considered secondary.

 

Thats why the Guru Gita in fact says the opposite : It says don´t try

to reach the self, don´t try to reach devi by different means like

fire puja etc. but instead become aware devi and self appear in

form of the guru.

One should not apply these verses to every tradition or every guru,

these verses are relevant only for a certain tradition.

It is like a handbook, a handbook and the appliance belong together,

you cannot use the handbook that comes with a dvd player to operate a

digital camera, it won´t work.

Guru Gita is a handbook for a Avadhoota Guru of Dattatreya

Sampradaya, or for a Kaul Guru, it won´t work with Amma

MahaHrada

 

 

, "ecjensen_us"

<ecjensen_us wrote:

>

> OM NAMAH SIVAYA

>

> as always i thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge it is

> greatly appreciated. your post seems to indicate that you thought i

> was inferring that a living Guru was not needed which was not my

> intention. the intent was not to question whether or not "to Guru."

> but rather in cases where there is not the presence of a living Guru

> this does not necessarily mean there is no Guru present, as The Guru

> is more than the physical body. The Guru being Divinity, is

>inherent

> in everything. shouldn't one take solace in the fact that Divine

> Mother is in charge and rest assured when such a time arises where

>we

> require a living Guru She will provide? it seems it behooves one to

> see life's experiences and our Love for Devi as The Guru. to guide

>us

> to improve ourselves, to become worthy disciples, and to assist with

> our Self enquiry of our own inherent Divinity. afterall absent the

> living Guru what choice does one really have? to quote my Guru,

> Ammachi, "We have nothing to lose by trusting the infinite power of

> the Self, except the bondage of our own ignorance. Real gain is

>from

> the Self alone. Only enquiry into the Self is of eternal value, and

> that is what gives peace. We should know That as the true bliss."

>

> JAI MA

>

> , "mahahradanatha"

> <mahahradanatha@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi,

> > From what little i know, the traditional Interpretation of these

> > Verses of the Guru Gita are different from your Interpretation.

> >

> > These verses of the Guru Gita are traditionally intended to mean

> > that the knowledge of the Self and that the Knowledge of the devi

> > does solely dependent on the grace of the living Guru, and that

one

> > can reach the self or the devi or both, quickly by worship of the

> > Padukas of a human Guru, while your interpretation of the

content of

> > the verses is that since the Guru is the self and one with devi

one

> > may dispense with the physical Guru because there is always either

> > the self or the devi present, who can this become so to say a

> > subsitute for the physical presence of the Guru.

> >

> > Of course some people, especially adherents of the western neo-

> > advaita philosophy belive. like you do, that the guru is better

> > described as an abstract philosophic symbol of an inner guiding

light

> > the self.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

OM NAMAH SIVAYA

 

Hi Mahahradanatha,

i really appreciate your taking the time to help me to understand.

all in all in spiritual philosophy i can honestly say i have really

only learned one thing, i had best not be too attached to what i am

thinking, as the opposite may also be true. i have a couple other

questions if you would be so kind to indulge me. first, sometimes the

history behind the different traditions of the East are difficult for

me to grasp, being from the West. as an outsider the different paths

and sects seems very mixed already. plus here in the US if something

occurs for more than a couple years in a row we consider it tradition.

and our culture is based on mixing of traditions. anyway while this

might seem like a stupid question, it certainly wouldn't be my first

so i will ask anyway, why is it not good to mix traditions?

 

and my second question is how is it if the Guru Gita is a handbook for

Avadhoota Guru of Dattatreya Sampradaya that its interpretation is as

you say only on the human form of Guru? isn't Dattatreya the one who

when asked what Guru gave Him the his perfect wisdom said he had 24

different Gurus, the chief One being his own Self? thanks in advance.

 

JAI MA

 

 

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

>

> Dear Eric

>

> Like i wrote it was not at all my point to doubt that your ideas are

> appropriate, and i hope i understood you right and respected your

> point of view, and i belive it is entirely correct andin accordance

> with your path.

> It is only that it think the Guru Gita is the wrong scripture to

> quote in support of your feelings and ideas, because i belive it is

> part of a differnt tradition with a different approach, without a

> commentary from a competent Guru of that tradition one can easily

> misunderstand the passage.

> I guess that is what Kartikji meant when he reminded you that one

> should better not mix traditions.

> Though Guru Gita is transmitted as part of skanda purana its content

> is entirely tantric, and it is included in the Guru charitra of

> Dattatreya Sampradaya.

>

>

[Guest guest]

, "ecjensen_us"

<ecjensen_us wrote:

>

> OM NAMAH SIVAYA

>

> Hi Mahahradanatha,

> i really appreciate your taking the time to help me to understand.

> all in all in spiritual philosophy i can honestly say i have really

> only learned one thing, i had best not be too attached to what i am

> thinking, as the opposite may also be true. i have a couple other

> questions if you would be so kind to indulge me. first, sometimes

the

> history behind the different traditions of the East are difficult

for

> me to grasp, being from the West. as an outsider the different

paths

> and sects seems very mixed already. plus here in the US if

something

> occurs for more than a couple years in a row we consider it

tradition.

> and our culture is based on mixing of traditions. anyway while

this

> might seem like a stupid question, it certainly wouldn't bemy first

> so i will ask anyway, why is it not good to mix traditions?

 

 

Please let us apply this advice only to the case at hand or a

similar situation, the intellectual study of a philosophy, otherwise

it is to broad a generalisation.

Let me frist again make it clear that i do not intend to say that

any of your ideas where wrong, only that the Emphasis in this

tradition of the Guru Gita is differnt, the Emphasis is on Guru,

thats why it is a scripture held in esteem by dattatreya Sampraday

and Siddhas, while your ideas and therefore your interpretation is

closer to Ramana Maharishis ideas and to Bhakti Yoga where the

emphasis is on Self respectively Devi, i could show you with sample

verses that this emphasis on Self and Devi cannot be applied to this

text and the Emphasis on Guru is what is intended. But i guess you

can understand the alternate meaning yourself after having

assimilated that extra information, if not feel free to ask.

 

One class of the scriptures is accepted as of divine Authority by

all different Traditions, this class consists of the Vedas and

Upanishads, it is called shruti. Which means "that which is heard"

it is of divine origin, diffferent from this class is the smriti

that which is remembered it is not entirely of divine origin and

eternal value, this knowledge may periodically be veiled and

unveiled or taught in a different way according to the needs of the

time periods and mentality or it may consist of philosophy seen or

composed by sages in its entirety without divine intervention.

 

Some scriptures are therefore peculiar to one or two traditions only

and to gather an correct understanding it helps to know where the txt

comes from wher the tradition is situated(among the different

philosophys,and whether it is Shaiva, Shakta etc. whether its is

transmited as part of the puranic, vedic, tantric scriptures) ins

short what it´s basic philosophy and practice is. An educated

Teacher knows how his Tradition connects with others and what are the

differences, he can guide the student in his study accordingly.

But my recommendation is to study each Tradition separetely and

trying to understand it according to the commentarys of past masters

of that tradition this only applies if one is in a position to profit

from such studies, this is not always the case, if one is a more

devotional type of person like you maybe are, one does not need much

reasoning and maybe more harm is done by intellectualising this

emotional intuitive approach, which may yield correct results,

though they may differ from what the author intended, but nonetheless

contain the truth of his path.

 

But if one wnatsauthor wanted to convey one must adopt his thoughts

for awhile.

 

But if one decides to study scripture one should first get some idea

to what Tradition that scripture belongs because the same words can

have differnt meanings according to the differing context. And even

if th words have the same meaning in two traditions they may denote

something that is either

central to the tradition or only peripheral.

If one is not learned to interpret according to the tradition at hand

one can be easily misled by one´s own interpretations.

 

Lets take the case of Ramana Maharishis advaita and compare it to

Dattatreya sampradayas , in his teaching the philosophical idea of

self knowledge by Jnana is prominent, the idea of the importance of

a Guru Shisya parampara (chain of transmission from Guru to disciple)

is not relevant. Spontaneously acquring self knowledge by Jnana and

contemplation on the menaing of teaching is important here. Devotion

or transmission of a subtle power is secondary or not needed at all

though study with a a living Jnani to correct your errors is advised

 

Dattatreya Parampara exists in two flavours : Advaitan (non dualism),

Nath sampradaya style which is Dvaitadvaita (beyond dualism and

nondualism) which i of course favour because this is where my

parampara comes from and mixed, in all paths based on Parampara a

transmission of Knowledge-energy through a chain of human teachers

that reach back to the primal teacher, the rishi who usually

received the teaching from one of the devas is relevant here.

Melting in one with that unique transmitted -consciousness energy,

and becoming one with all the teachers by will action and devotion,

is important here, a living human teacher therefore a must.

It is said in Sri Datta Dhyaana Maalika (the rosary of meditation on

Datta:

Moolam svaroopam saranishcha rakshaa

Dharmasya nityasya ya eka eva

Dharma pravaaho guru shishya naalyaam

Yashcha svayam gurudatta meede

He is the basis of the Eternal Dharma. He is verily the embodiment of

Dharma. He is the path and He is the protector. He Himself is the

stream of Dharma which manifests in the channel of Guru-Shishya

tradition. I prostrate to that Lord Dattatreya.

 

The belief here is that Dattatreya and the Navnaths have broken the

sceptre of death and are still roaming the universe, that means they

are considered living in bodies that are not destructible not even

by the final conflagaration at the end of an Yuga. They appear in

every Yuga and are immortal. Dattatreya is the pivot of alll the

immortal Siddhas, he is the Guru of the whole world Viswaguru he has

knowledge of all the Vidyas and taught all of them to different

disciples.

 

This leads us to the answer for your second question,for what reason

a human teacher is needed in the Siddha Traditions, it is because

in this tradition a consciousness-energy is preserved, for some

reason that consciousness-energy does need a form, like water cannot

exist without a cup or a flame without something that is consumend

by it (like oil for a light or a log of wood for fire) a body-mind

of a human being is needed to carry this flame and transmit it.

you write :" isn't Dattatreya the one who when asked what Guru gave

Him the his perfect wisdom said he had 24 different Gurus, the chief

One being his own Self? Yes he said that, but this has another reason

than you think. If he means to say that everybody can have the self

as a Guru he would have said so, but he didn´t, he talked about

himself.

 

By those that are devoted to him, Dattreya is something special

different from other Gurus, they belive that Dattatreya is the

primal Guru, (Adi Guru) he is the pivot of all the Gurus, though he

is higher than form and name, sometimes he is in the form of trimurti

not only Brahma but also Vishnu and Shiva, he has been alive for

several Kalpas , it is obvious that there is nobody in this

universe who could be Guru of this Dattatreya since he is Adi Guru,

there is no Guru without him, but since not even he can be without a

guru his Gurus are the 24 Principles (the whole world) but he is

eternal he is ever present in all the Yugas continously revealing

himself in different forms.

 

It is said in Sri Datta Dhyaana Maalikaa

Ye janmavantah kila teshu kashchit Keshaamchi darchyotha bahavet

kadaachit

Yo janma heeno janinaashakashcha

Dattam gurum tam kathamarchayishye

Among those who have taken birth, some become worthy of reverence for

sometime even when they are still alive. But Lord Guru Datta has no

birth at all. In addition, he makes those who take refuge in him,

also birthless. How should I worship such a Lord?

 

"The Supreme Brahman performed penance which was of the nature of

knowledge (jnana), and desiring to become many, assumed the form of

Dattatreya. From that form came out the three letters A, U, M; the

three mystical names Bhuh, Bhuvah and Svah; the three-lined Gayatri;

the three Vedas Rig, Yajur and Sama; the three Gods Brahma, Vishnu

and Maheswara; the three castes Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vysya; and

the three fires Gaarhapatya, Ashavaneeya and Dakshina."

 

"The lord is endowed with all wealth. He is all pervading and

resides in the hearts of all beings. He is the great Maayavi,

sporting with His own Maaya. He is Brahma. His Vishnu, He is Rudra.

He is Indra and He is also all the gods of heaven and all other

beings. He is East, He is West, He is North, He is South, He is below

and He is above. He is everything. This is the glory of the form of

Dattatreya."

Saandilya Upanishad

 

DA for Dattatreya: The Guna's of the Nakshatra that are directed into

the three categories of Deva (demi-gods), Manushya (Human) and

Rakshasa (demon). Once these three approached Lord Brahma for the

penultimate mantra to overcome their weaknesses. Lord Brahma uttered

the bija "da" and the Devas, Marushya and Rakshasha's left satisfied

with this great knowledge. For the Devas (demi-gods) who are

constantly engrossed in enjoyments `da' meant daMpatya or self

restraint from excessive enjoyments. For the Manushya (human) who are

possessed of greed and jealousy `da' meant `daata' or to give

selflessly . For the Rakshashas (demons) who are evil and harass

everyone, `da' meant `dayaa' or to be merciful towards one and all.

Thus, the monosyllable mantra `da' delivers all classes of people

(whether possessed of Satwa, Rajas or Tamas Guna) and imparts such

attributes that helps them to overcome weaknesses. It is the great

Guru Himself.

 

Hope this is helpful

MahaHrada

[Guest guest]

Did you write this. What a great devotional to Guru Datta. I must say!

 

When I was fourteen at a psychic fair I bumped into a young wandering Hindu

and he gave me Guru Datta mantra and some diksha, and I did it for about a

week but preferred silent TM to chanting then so stopped, but it shows that

one can make transmission even in Los Angeles circa 1980. Probably at any

time in history, and place somehow for those who are ready. Would be my

guess.

 

 

 

-

"mahahradanatha" <mahahradanatha >

<>

Tuesday, January 16, 2007 12:09 PM

Re: To Guru or not to Guru that is the

Question...Guru Gita -Mahahradanatha

 

 

, "ecjensen_us"

<ecjensen_us wrote:

>

> OM NAMAH SIVAYA

>

> Hi Mahahradanatha,

> i really appreciate your taking the time to help me to understand.

> all in all in spiritual philosophy i can honestly say i have really

> only learned one thing, i had best not be too attached to what i am

> thinking, as the opposite may also be true. i have a couple other

> questions if you would be so kind to indulge me. first, sometimes

the

> history behind the different traditions of the East are difficult

for

> me to grasp, being from the West. as an outsider the different

paths

> and sects seems very mixed already. plus here in the US if

something

> occurs for more than a couple years in a row we consider it

tradition.

> and our culture is based on mixing of traditions. anyway while

this

> might seem like a stupid question, it certainly wouldn't bemy first

> so i will ask anyway, why is it not good to mix traditions?

 

 

Please let us apply this advice only to the case at hand or a

similar situation, the intellectual study of a philosophy, otherwise

it is to broad a generalisation.

Let me frist again make it clear that i do not intend to say that

any of your ideas where wrong, only that the Emphasis in this

tradition of the Guru Gita is differnt, the Emphasis is on Guru,

thats why it is a scripture held in esteem by dattatreya Sampraday

and Siddhas, while your ideas and therefore your interpretation is

closer to Ramana Maharishis ideas and to Bhakti Yoga where the

emphasis is on Self respectively Devi, i could show you with sample

verses that this emphasis on Self and Devi cannot be applied to this

text and the Emphasis on Guru is what is intended. But i guess you

can understand the alternate meaning yourself after having

assimilated that extra information, if not feel free to ask.

 

One class of the scriptures is accepted as of divine Authority by

all different Traditions, this class consists of the Vedas and

Upanishads, it is called shruti. Which means "that which is heard"

it is of divine origin, diffferent from this class is the smriti

that which is remembered it is not entirely of divine origin and

eternal value, this knowledge may periodically be veiled and

unveiled or taught in a different way according to the needs of the

time periods and mentality or it may consist of philosophy seen or

composed by sages in its entirety without divine intervention.

 

Some scriptures are therefore peculiar to one or two traditions only

and to gather an correct understanding it helps to know where the txt

comes from wher the tradition is situated(among the different

philosophys,and whether it is Shaiva, Shakta etc. whether its is

transmited as part of the puranic, vedic, tantric scriptures) ins

short what it´s basic philosophy and practice is. An educated

Teacher knows how his Tradition connects with others and what are the

differences, he can guide the student in his study accordingly.

But my recommendation is to study each Tradition separetely and

trying to understand it according to the commentarys of past masters

of that tradition this only applies if one is in a position to profit

from such studies, this is not always the case, if one is a more

devotional type of person like you maybe are, one does not need much

reasoning and maybe more harm is done by intellectualising this

emotional intuitive approach, which may yield correct results,

though they may differ from what the author intended, but nonetheless

contain the truth of his path.

 

But if one wnatsauthor wanted to convey one must adopt his thoughts

for awhile.

 

But if one decides to study scripture one should first get some idea

to what Tradition that scripture belongs because the same words can

have differnt meanings according to the differing context. And even

if th words have the same meaning in two traditions they may denote

something that is either

central to the tradition or only peripheral.

If one is not learned to interpret according to the tradition at hand

one can be easily misled by one´s own interpretations.

 

Lets take the case of Ramana Maharishis advaita and compare it to

Dattatreya sampradayas , in his teaching the philosophical idea of

self knowledge by Jnana is prominent, the idea of the importance of

a Guru Shisya parampara (chain of transmission from Guru to disciple)

is not relevant. Spontaneously acquring self knowledge by Jnana and

contemplation on the menaing of teaching is important here. Devotion

or transmission of a subtle power is secondary or not needed at all

though study with a a living Jnani to correct your errors is advised

 

Dattatreya Parampara exists in two flavours : Advaitan (non dualism),

Nath sampradaya style which is Dvaitadvaita (beyond dualism and

nondualism) which i of course favour because this is where my

parampara comes from and mixed, in all paths based on Parampara a

transmission of Knowledge-energy through a chain of human teachers

that reach back to the primal teacher, the rishi who usually

received the teaching from one of the devas is relevant here.

Melting in one with that unique transmitted -consciousness energy,

and becoming one with all the teachers by will action and devotion,

is important here, a living human teacher therefore a must.

It is said in Sri Datta Dhyaana Maalika (the rosary of meditation on

Datta:

Moolam svaroopam saranishcha rakshaa

Dharmasya nityasya ya eka eva

Dharma pravaaho guru shishya naalyaam

Yashcha svayam gurudatta meede

He is the basis of the Eternal Dharma. He is verily the embodiment of

Dharma. He is the path and He is the protector. He Himself is the

stream of Dharma which manifests in the channel of Guru-Shishya

tradition. I prostrate to that Lord Dattatreya.

 

The belief here is that Dattatreya and the Navnaths have broken the

sceptre of death and are still roaming the universe, that means they

are considered living in bodies that are not destructible not even

by the final conflagaration at the end of an Yuga. They appear in

every Yuga and are immortal. Dattatreya is the pivot of alll the

immortal Siddhas, he is the Guru of the whole world Viswaguru he has

knowledge of all the Vidyas and taught all of them to different

disciples.

 

This leads us to the answer for your second question,for what reason

a human teacher is needed in the Siddha Traditions, it is because

in this tradition a consciousness-energy is preserved, for some

reason that consciousness-energy does need a form, like water cannot

exist without a cup or a flame without something that is consumend

by it (like oil for a light or a log of wood for fire) a body-mind

of a human being is needed to carry this flame and transmit it.

you write :" isn't Dattatreya the one who when asked what Guru gave

Him the his perfect wisdom said he had 24 different Gurus, the chief

One being his own Self? Yes he said that, but this has another reason

than you think. If he means to say that everybody can have the self

as a Guru he would have said so, but he didn´t, he talked about

himself.

 

By those that are devoted to him, Dattreya is something special

different from other Gurus, they belive that Dattatreya is the

primal Guru, (Adi Guru) he is the pivot of all the Gurus, though he

is higher than form and name, sometimes he is in the form of trimurti

not only Brahma but also Vishnu and Shiva, he has been alive for

several Kalpas , it is obvious that there is nobody in this

universe who could be Guru of this Dattatreya since he is Adi Guru,

there is no Guru without him, but since not even he can be without a

guru his Gurus are the 24 Principles (the whole world) but he is

eternal he is ever present in all the Yugas continously revealing

himself in different forms.

 

It is said in Sri Datta Dhyaana Maalikaa

Ye janmavantah kila teshu kashchit Keshaamchi darchyotha bahavet

kadaachit

Yo janma heeno janinaashakashcha

Dattam gurum tam kathamarchayishye

Among those who have taken birth, some become worthy of reverence for

sometime even when they are still alive. But Lord Guru Datta has no

birth at all. In addition, he makes those who take refuge in him,

also birthless. How should I worship such a Lord?

 

"The Supreme Brahman performed penance which was of the nature of

knowledge (jnana), and desiring to become many, assumed the form of

Dattatreya. From that form came out the three letters A, U, M; the

three mystical names Bhuh, Bhuvah and Svah; the three-lined Gayatri;

the three Vedas Rig, Yajur and Sama; the three Gods Brahma, Vishnu

and Maheswara; the three castes Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vysya; and

the three fires Gaarhapatya, Ashavaneeya and Dakshina."

 

"The lord is endowed with all wealth. He is all pervading and

resides in the hearts of all beings. He is the great Maayavi,

sporting with His own Maaya. He is Brahma. His Vishnu, He is Rudra.

He is Indra and He is also all the gods of heaven and all other

beings. He is East, He is West, He is North, He is South, He is below

and He is above. He is everything. This is the glory of the form of

Dattatreya."

Saandilya Upanishad

 

DA for Dattatreya: The Guna's of the Nakshatra that are directed into

the three categories of Deva (demi-gods), Manushya (Human) and

Rakshasa (demon). Once these three approached Lord Brahma for the

penultimate mantra to overcome their weaknesses. Lord Brahma uttered

the bija "da" and the Devas, Marushya and Rakshasha's left satisfied

with this great knowledge. For the Devas (demi-gods) who are

constantly engrossed in enjoyments `da' meant daMpatya or self

restraint from excessive enjoyments. For the Manushya (human) who are

possessed of greed and jealousy `da' meant `daata' or to give

selflessly . For the Rakshashas (demons) who are evil and harass

everyone, `da' meant `dayaa' or to be merciful towards one and all.

Thus, the monosyllable mantra `da' delivers all classes of people

(whether possessed of Satwa, Rajas or Tamas Guna) and imparts such

attributes that helps them to overcome weaknesses. It is the great

Guru Himself.

 

Hope this is helpful

MahaHrada

[Guest guest]

Alot of the point of guru is that the nature of the mind is the flow of

fullness or as Maharishi says = the A of the first word Agnim, of Rig Veda

is fullness, then second letter is 'G' which is the full closure of the mind

to a point. In final samadhi this awareness is of Guru Datta the avaduti or

blue bindu of parakalpa samadhi. Therefore the fullness, and point of mind

are fully elongated in the samadhi of Guru Datta, blue nbindu central

channel opening and escape route also Krishna and Shiva and Samanthabadra,

one for all and all for one. For this reason the guru point must be made

known since for all time AGNIM also contains 'NIM' which is body of

continuation, or the life as we know it this samsara, therefore advaita and

no quality may be attached to anything so it is finally of one taste callled

satchidanand. One good response hopefully deserves another. AGNIM fullness,

stop, reaction or body, continuation is all there ever will be.

 

For the Shaktas - since all that can be is summed up in the first reflection

of awareness in the parabola or yoni, therefore even Guru Datta makes

obeisance to Mahaparashakti

 

The yoni turned on its side is the lingam, and so the spiral is created of

hortizontal and vertical evolution and devolution, and the dance is born.

Peace out.

 

 

-

"mahahradanatha" <mahahradanatha >

<>

Tuesday, January 16, 2007 12:09 PM

Re: To Guru or not to Guru that is the

Question...Guru Gita -Mahahradanatha

 

 

, "ecjensen_us"

<ecjensen_us wrote:

>

> OM NAMAH SIVAYA

>

> Hi Mahahradanatha,

> i really appreciate your taking the time to help me to understand.

> all in all in spiritual philosophy i can honestly say i have really

> only learned one thing, i had best not be too attached to what i am

> thinking, as the opposite may also be true. i have a couple other

> questions if you would be so kind to indulge me. first, sometimes

the

> history behind the different traditions of the East are difficult

for

> me to grasp, being from the West. as an outsider the different

paths

> and sects seems very mixed already. plus here in the US if

something

> occurs for more than a couple years in a row we consider it

tradition.

> and our culture is based on mixing of traditions. anyway while

this

> might seem like a stupid question, it certainly wouldn't bemy first

> so i will ask anyway, why is it not good to mix traditions?

[Guest guest]

OM NAMAH SIVAYA

 

all this is much appreciated. thanks. i have questions but will sort

them out before i ask so as not to waste your time. yes, of course i

realized that many of the verses of the GG were referring to the human

Guru. i just never realized that many took the interpretation as an

either/or situation. as an outsider my first impression is both the

examples you cited seem very similar. in both cases the Guru seems so

much more than name or form. the main difference seems in one case

the Guru's Grace is placed within us and in the other it is uncovered.

and i think you are right my inclination is definitely as you

surmise. to me a true Guru in human form is a blessing beyond words.

yet Love and Faith along with effort also seem of paramount importance

in obtaining the Guru's Grace, no matter the Guru's form. and i firmly

am of the belief the outcome is largely determined as they say, not

the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.

 

for me in the end i guess its as Neem Karoli Baba said, "It is better

to see God in everything than to try to figure it out." thanks again.

 

JAI MA

 

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

 

> Please let us apply this advice only to the case at hand or a

> similar situation, the intellectual study of a philosophy, otherwise

> it is to broad a generalisation.

> Let me frist again make it clear that i do not intend to say that

> any of your ideas where wrong, only that the Emphasis in this

> tradition of the Guru Gita is differnt, the Emphasis is on Guru,

> thats why it is a scripture held in esteem by dattatreya Sampraday

> and Siddhas, while your ideas and therefore your interpretation is

> closer to Ramana Maharishis ideas and to Bhakti Yoga where the

> emphasis is on Self respectively Devi, i could show you with sample

> verses that this emphasis on Self and Devi cannot be applied to this

> text and the Emphasis on Guru is what is intended. But i guess you

> can understand the alternate meaning yourself after having

> assimilated that extra information, if not feel free to ask.

>

> One class of the scriptures is accepted as of divine Authority by

> all different Traditions, this class consists of the Vedas and

> Upanishads, it is called shruti. Which means "that which is heard"

> it is of divine origin, diffferent from this class is the smriti

> that which is remembered it is not entirely of divine origin and

> eternal value, this knowledge may periodically be veiled and

> unveiled or taught in a different way according to the needs of the

> time periods and mentality or it may consist of philosophy seen or

> composed by sages in its entirety without divine intervention.

>

> Some scriptures are therefore peculiar to one or two traditions only

> and to gather an correct understanding it helps to know where the txt

> comes from wher the tradition is situated(among the different

> philosophys,and whether it is Shaiva, Shakta etc. whether its is

> transmited as part of the puranic, vedic, tantric scriptures) ins

> short what it´s basic philosophy and practice is. An educated

> Teacher knows how his Tradition connects with others and what are the

> differences, he can guide the student in his study accordingly.

> But my recommendation is to study each Tradition separetely and

> trying to understand it according to the commentarys of past masters

> of that tradition this only applies if one is in a position to profit

> from such studies, this is not always the case, if one is a more

> devotional type of person like you maybe are, one does not need much

> reasoning and maybe more harm is done by intellectualising this

> emotional intuitive approach, which may yield correct results,

> though they may differ from what the author intended, but nonetheless

> contain the truth of his path.

>

> But if one wnatsauthor wanted to convey one must adopt his thoughts

> for awhile.

>

> But if one decides to study scripture one should first get some idea

> to what Tradition that scripture belongs because the same words can

> have differnt meanings according to the differing context. And even

> if th words have the same meaning in two traditions they may denote

> something that is either

> central to the tradition or only peripheral.

> If one is not learned to interpret according to the tradition at hand

> one can be easily misled by one´s own interpretations.

>

> Lets take the case of Ramana Maharishis advaita and compare it to

> Dattatreya sampradayas , in his teaching the philosophical idea of

> self knowledge by Jnana is prominent, the idea of the importance of

> a Guru Shisya parampara (chain of transmission from Guru to disciple)

> is not relevant. Spontaneously acquring self knowledge by Jnana and

> contemplation on the menaing of teaching is important here. Devotion

> or transmission of a subtle power is secondary or not needed at all

> though study with a a living Jnani to correct your errors is advised

>

> Dattatreya Parampara exists in two flavours : Advaitan (non dualism),

> Nath sampradaya style which is Dvaitadvaita (beyond dualism and

> nondualism) which i of course favour because this is where my

> parampara comes from and mixed, in all paths based on Parampara a

> transmission of Knowledge-energy through a chain of human teachers

> that reach back to the primal teacher, the rishi who usually

> received the teaching from one of the devas is relevant here.

> Melting in one with that unique transmitted -consciousness energy,

> and becoming one with all the teachers by will action and devotion,

> is important here, a living human teacher therefore a must.

> It is said in Sri Datta Dhyaana Maalika (the rosary of meditation on

> Datta:

> Moolam svaroopam saranishcha rakshaa

> Dharmasya nityasya ya eka eva

> Dharma pravaaho guru shishya naalyaam

> Yashcha svayam gurudatta meede

> He is the basis of the Eternal Dharma. He is verily the embodiment of

> Dharma. He is the path and He is the protector. He Himself is the

> stream of Dharma which manifests in the channel of Guru-Shishya

> tradition. I prostrate to that Lord Dattatreya.

>

> The belief here is that Dattatreya and the Navnaths have broken the

> sceptre of death and are still roaming the universe, that means they

> are considered living in bodies that are not destructible not even

> by the final conflagaration at the end of an Yuga. They appear in

> every Yuga and are immortal. Dattatreya is the pivot of alll the

> immortal Siddhas, he is the Guru of the whole world Viswaguru he has

> knowledge of all the Vidyas and taught all of them to different

> disciples.

>

> This leads us to the answer for your second question,for what reason

> a human teacher is needed in the Siddha Traditions, it is because

> in this tradition a consciousness-energy is preserved, for some

> reason that consciousness-energy does need a form, like water cannot

> exist without a cup or a flame without something that is consumend

> by it (like oil for a light or a log of wood for fire) a body-mind

> of a human being is needed to carry this flame and transmit it.

> you write :" isn't Dattatreya the one who when asked what Guru gave

> Him the his perfect wisdom said he had 24 different Gurus, the chief

> One being his own Self? Yes he said that, but this has another reason

> than you think. If he means to say that everybody can have the self

> as a Guru he would have said so, but he didn´t, he talked about

> himself.

>

> By those that are devoted to him, Dattreya is something special

> different from other Gurus, they belive that Dattatreya is the

> primal Guru, (Adi Guru) he is the pivot of all the Gurus, though he

> is higher than form and name, sometimes he is in the form of trimurti

> not only Brahma but also Vishnu and Shiva, he has been alive for

> several Kalpas , it is obvious that there is nobody in this

> universe who could be Guru of this Dattatreya since he is Adi Guru,

> there is no Guru without him, but since not even he can be without a

> guru his Gurus are the 24 Principles (the whole world) but he is

> eternal he is ever present in all the Yugas continously revealing

> himself in different forms.

>

> It is said in Sri Datta Dhyaana Maalikaa

> Ye janmavantah kila teshu kashchit Keshaamchi darchyotha bahavet

> kadaachit

> Yo janma heeno janinaashakashcha

> Dattam gurum tam kathamarchayishye

> Among those who have taken birth, some become worthy of reverence for

> sometime even when they are still alive. But Lord Guru Datta has no

> birth at all. In addition, he makes those who take refuge in him,

> also birthless. How should I worship such a Lord?

>

> "The Supreme Brahman performed penance which was of the nature of

> knowledge (jnana), and desiring to become many, assumed the form of

> Dattatreya. From that form came out the three letters A, U, M; the

> three mystical names Bhuh, Bhuvah and Svah; the three-lined Gayatri;

> the three Vedas Rig, Yajur and Sama; the three Gods Brahma, Vishnu

> and Maheswara; the three castes Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vysya; and

> the three fires Gaarhapatya, Ashavaneeya and Dakshina."

>

> "The lord is endowed with all wealth. He is all pervading and

> resides in the hearts of all beings. He is the great Maayavi,

> sporting with His own Maaya. He is Brahma. His Vishnu, He is Rudra.

> He is Indra and He is also all the gods of heaven and all other

> beings. He is East, He is West, He is North, He is South, He is below

> and He is above. He is everything. This is the glory of the form of

> Dattatreya."

> Saandilya Upanishad

>

> DA for Dattatreya: The Guna's of the Nakshatra that are directed into

> the three categories of Deva (demi-gods), Manushya (Human) and

> Rakshasa (demon). Once these three approached Lord Brahma for the

> penultimate mantra to overcome their weaknesses. Lord Brahma uttered

> the bija "da" and the Devas, Marushya and Rakshasha's left satisfied

> with this great knowledge. For the Devas (demi-gods) who are

> constantly engrossed in enjoyments `da' meant daMpatya or self

> restraint from excessive enjoyments. For the Manushya (human) who are

> possessed of greed and jealousy `da' meant `daata' or to give

> selflessly . For the Rakshashas (demons) who are evil and harass

> everyone, `da' meant `dayaa' or to be merciful towards one and all.

> Thus, the monosyllable mantra `da' delivers all classes of people

> (whether possessed of Satwa, Rajas or Tamas Guna) and imparts such

> attributes that helps them to overcome weaknesses. It is the great

> Guru Himself.

>

> Hope this is helpful

> MahaHrada

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Eric

I don´t think it is either/or it is only a matter of emphasis.

It is that Guru Paduka Puja is considered the highest, greater than

everything else. not a means to an end but the end itself by some

traditions.

 

And what you may think strange, it is not important whether the Guru

is enlightened or not, it is important that the Parampara is genuine

and reaches back to Adinath, Guru is the carrier of this force it is

that he is not worshipped for his personal attainment here (like

some saints people worship) but for embodying Adinath. If he has some

attainment so much the better but secondary, same as with Kumari or

suvasini puja they are not worshipped because of their attainment

but because they are the devi. Guru is worshipped because he is the

primal Guru Adinath/Dattatreya/Dakshinamurti one with the devi, not

becuase of his personal attainment.

 

 

 

MahaHrada

 

 

, "ecjensen_us"

<ecjensen_us wrote:

>

> OM NAMAH SIVAYA

>

> all this is much appreciated. thanks. i have questions but will sort

> them out before i ask so as not to waste your time. yes, of course i

> realized that many of the verses of the GG were referring to the

human

> Guru. i just never realized that many took the interpretation as an

> either/or situation.

as an outsider my first impression is both the

> examples you cited seem very similar. in both cases the Guru seems

so

> much more than name or form. the main difference seems in one case

> the Guru's Grace is placed within us and in the other it is

uncovered.

> and i think you are right my inclination is definitely as you

> surmise. to me a true Guru in human form is a blessing beyond

words.

> yet Love and Faith along with effort also seem of paramount

importance

> in obtaining the Guru's Grace, no matter the Guru's form. and i

firmly

> am of the belief the outcome is largely determined as they say, not

> the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the

dog.

>

> for me in the end i guess its as Neem Karoli Baba said, "It is

better

> to see God in everything than to try to figure it out." thanks

again.

>

> JAI MA

>

[Guest guest]

OM NAMAH SIVAYA

 

Hi Mahahradanatha

no not strange at all. this to me only further emphasizes the

similarities. i mean we could say everyone is the embodiment of Devi

or Adinath. so it seems logical to start with the Guru as the easiest

place to begin to see this Reality. but i understand to some it is

very different due to the importance of the energy of the lineage

correct? also worshipping the Guru's feet as the ultimate interests

me as that is the Manasa Puja i use to start any worship. which

brings me to another question i meant to ask before, earlier you wrote

the Guru Gita wouldn't work with someone like Amma, what did you mean?

 

 

If you have faith in the Guru's feet

If you have deep feeling for the Guru's feet,

If you imbibe the state of the Guru,

Then you don't have to look for God

God will come looking for you

- Bhakta Tukaram

 

JAI MA

 

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

>

> Hi Eric

> I don´t think it is either/or it is only a matter of emphasis.

> It is that Guru Paduka Puja is considered the highest, greater than

> everything else. not a means to an end but the end itself by some

> traditions.

>

> And what you may think strange, it is not important whether the Guru

> is enlightened or not, it is important that the Parampara is genuine

> and reaches back to Adinath, Guru is the carrier of this force it is

> that he is not worshipped for his personal attainment here (like

> some saints people worship) but for embodying Adinath. If he has some

> attainment so much the better but secondary, same as with Kumari or

> suvasini puja they are not worshipped because of their attainment

> but because they are the devi. Guru is worshipped because he is the

> primal Guru Adinath/Dattatreya/Dakshinamurti one with the devi, not

> becuase of his personal attainment.

>

>

>

> MahaHrada

>

>

> , "ecjensen_us"

> <ecjensen_us@> wrote:

> >

> > OM NAMAH SIVAYA

> >

> > all this is much appreciated. thanks. i have questions but will sort

> > them out before i ask so as not to waste your time. yes, of course i

> > realized that many of the verses of the GG were referring to the

> human

> > Guru. i just never realized that many took the interpretation as an

> > either/or situation.

> as an outsider my first impression is both the

> > examples you cited seem very similar. in both cases the Guru seems

> so

> > much more than name or form. the main difference seems in one case

> > the Guru's Grace is placed within us and in the other it is

> uncovered.

> > and i think you are right my inclination is definitely as you

> > surmise. to me a true Guru in human form is a blessing beyond

> words.

> > yet Love and Faith along with effort also seem of paramount

> importance

> > in obtaining the Guru's Grace, no matter the Guru's form. and i

> firmly

> > am of the belief the outcome is largely determined as they say, not

> > the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the

> dog.

> >

> > for me in the end i guess its as Neem Karoli Baba said, "It is

> better

> > to see God in everything than to try to figure it out." thanks

> again.

> >

> > JAI MA

> >

>

[Guest guest]

, "ecjensen_us"

<ecjensen_us wrote:

>

> OM NAMAH SIVAYA

>

> Hi Mahahradanatha

> no not strange at all. this to me only further emphasizes the

> similarities. i mean we could say everyone is the embodiment of

>Devi

> or Adinath.

 

Maybe, theoretical, but that is not what i meant, i meant that a Guru

is a Guru, at least in the way it is understood in Guru Gita, because

of the fact that karma entrusted him to be a custodian of a greater

power than he is or can ever become by himself.

This power is something that on a subtle level actually exists, not

some theory, it is like a cd or dvd or a program on a harddisk, it

contains information, knowledge etc. butcontains much more than fits

on any material storage system, and like a material object one does

either own it or not.

 

> so it seems logical to start with the Guru as the >easiest

> place to begin to see this Reality. but i understand to some it is

> very different due to the importance of the energy of the lineage

> correct?

 

Yes correct, without this power there is no reason to do this sort of

puja, you could right away start with any object that is a symbol of

the divine for you, but then there is not the need to use some exotic

visualization from a foreign culture.

 

also worshipping the Guru's feet as the ultimate interests

> me as that is the Manasa Puja i use to start any worship. which

> brings me to another question i meant to ask before, earlier you

wrote

> the Guru Gita wouldn't work with someone like Amma, what did you

mean?

 

I don´t think she is part of such a tradition where use of the Guru

Gita is recommend, like i said it is a scripture whose ideas are

more apt to a traditional Gurus shisya Parampara which Amma is not

transmitting.

 

MahaHrada

 

 

>

> If you have faith in the Guru's feet

> If you have deep feeling for the Guru's feet,

> If you imbibe the state of the Guru,

> Then you don't have to look for God

> God will come looking for you

> - Bhakta Tukaram

>

> JAI MA

>

> , "mahahradanatha"

> <mahahradanatha@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Eric

> > I don´t think it is either/or it is only a matter of emphasis.

> > It is that Guru Paduka Puja is considered the highest, greater

than

> > everything else. not a means to an end but the end itself by some

> > traditions.

> >

> > And what you may think strange, it is not important whether the

Guru

> > is enlightened or not, it is important that the Parampara is

genuine

> > and reaches back to Adinath, Guru is the carrier of this force it

is

> > that he is not worshipped for his personal attainment here (like

> > some saints people worship) but for embodying Adinath. If he has

some

> > attainment so much the better but secondary, same as with Kumari

or

> > suvasini puja they are not worshipped because of their

attainment

> > but because they are the devi. Guru is worshipped because he is

the

> > primal Guru Adinath/Dattatreya/Dakshinamurti one with the devi,

not

> > becuase of his personal attainment.

> >

> >

> >

> > MahaHrada

> >

> >

> > , "ecjensen_us"

> > <ecjensen_us@> wrote:

> > >

> > > OM NAMAH SIVAYA

> > >

> > > all this is much appreciated. thanks. i have questions but will

sort

> > > them out before i ask so as not to waste your time. yes, of

course i

> > > realized that many of the verses of the GG were referring to

the

> > human

> > > Guru. i just never realized that many took the interpretation

as an

> > > either/or situation.

> > as an outsider my first impression is both the

> > > examples you cited seem very similar. in both cases the Guru

seems

> > so

> > > much more than name or form. the main difference seems in one

case

> > > the Guru's Grace is placed within us and in the other it is

> > uncovered.

> > > and i think you are right my inclination is definitely as you

> > > surmise. to me a true Guru in human form is a blessing beyond

> > words.

> > > yet Love and Faith along with effort also seem of paramount

> > importance

> > > in obtaining the Guru's Grace, no matter the Guru's form. and i

> > firmly

> > > am of the belief the outcome is largely determined as they say,

not

> > > the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in

the

> > dog.

> > >

> > > for me in the end i guess its as Neem Karoli Baba said, "It is

> > better

> > > to see God in everything than to try to figure it out." thanks

> > again.

> > >

> > > JAI MA

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

OM NAMAH SIVAYA -i think i get it thanks for taking the time.- JAI MA!

 

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

>

> , "ecjensen_us"

> <ecjensen_us@> wrote:

> >

> > OM NAMAH SIVAYA

> >

> > Hi Mahahradanatha

> > no not strange at all. this to me only further emphasizes the

> > similarities. i mean we could say everyone is the embodiment of

> >Devi

> > or Adinath.

>

> Maybe, theoretical, but that is not what i meant, i meant that a Guru

> is a Guru, at least in the way it is understood in Guru Gita, because

> of the fact that karma entrusted him to be a custodian of a greater

> power than he is or can ever become by himself.

> This power is something that on a subtle level actually exists, not

> some theory, it is like a cd or dvd or a program on a harddisk, it

> contains information, knowledge etc. butcontains much more than fits

> on any material storage system, and like a material object one does

> either own it or not.

>

> > so it seems logical to start with the Guru as the >easiest

> > place to begin to see this Reality. but i understand to some it is

> > very different due to the importance of the energy of the lineage

> > correct?

>

> Yes correct, without this power there is no reason to do this sort of

> puja, you could right away start with any object that is a symbol of

> the divine for you, but then there is not the need to use some exotic

> visualization from a foreign culture.

>

> also worshipping the Guru's feet as the ultimate interests

> > me as that is the Manasa Puja i use to start any worship. which

> > brings me to another question i meant to ask before, earlier you

> wrote

> > the Guru Gita wouldn't work with someone like Amma, what did you

> mean?

>

> I don´t think she is part of such a tradition where use of the Guru

> Gita is recommend, like i said it is a scripture whose ideas are

> more apt to a traditional Gurus shisya Parampara which Amma is not

> transmitting.

>

> MahaHrada

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

>

> Hi Eric

> I don´t think it is either/or it is only a matter of emphasis.

> It is that Guru Paduka Puja is considered the highest, greater

than everything else. not a means to an end but the end itself by

some traditions.

>

And what you may think strange, it is not important whether the Guru

is enlightened or not, it is important that the Parampara is genuine

and reaches back to Adinath, Guru is the carrier of this force it is

that he is not worshipped for his personal attainment here (like

some saints people worship) but for embodying Adinath. If he has

some attainment so much the better but secondary, same as with

Kumari or suvasini puja they are not worshipped because of their

attainment but because they are the devi. Guru is worshipped because

he is the primal Guru Adinath/Dattatreya/Dakshinamurti one with the

devi, not becuase of his personal attainment.

>

MahaHrada

 

 

Always a pleasure seeing you here in the group. Thank you for this

Mahahradanatha.

[passionate-freak]

 

OM NAMAH SIVAYA

 

as always i thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge it is

greatly appreciated. your post seems to indicate that you thought i

was inferring that a living Guru was not needed which was not my

intention. the intent was not to question whether or not "to Guru."

but rather in cases where there is not the presence of a living Guru

this does not necessarily mean there is no Guru present, as The Guru

is more than the physical body. The Guru being Divinity, is inherent

in everything. shouldn't one take solace in the fact that Divine

Mother is in charge and rest assured when such a time arises where we

require a living Guru She will provide? it seems it behooves one to

see life's experiences and our Love for Devi as The Guru. to guide us

to improve ourselves, to become worthy disciples, and to assist with

our Self enquiry of our own inherent Divinity. afterall absent the

living Guru what choice does one really have? to quote my Guru,

Ammachi, "We have nothing to lose by trusting the infinite power of

the Self, except the bondage of our own ignorance. Real gain is from

the Self alone. Only enquiry into the Self is of eternal value, and

that is what gives peace. We should know That as the true bliss."

 

JAI MA

 

 

Sorry to having disturb your seclusion.

 

Yes, I agree with your views and I appreciate. Guru is not only the physical body but the Knowledge. Still la iving Guru is far more better to guide us whom we can relate anything, anytime. We need a living Guru. But it doesn't mean to go to anyone as there are whole bunches of Gurus are mushrooming. We need to find out the real one. If you were with some real Gurus in past lives, then he/she will lead you to her/himself without any prior notice. It's exactly what happened in my life too, after the turmoil of more more that a decade, I'm on my Giuru's holy feet. My Guru is not famous but the real one. And tell you people that, we the present humans are from the Lord Krishna's time. The Rishis from his time has re-incarnated in the Earth to fulfill another divine purpose.

regards

[manbangs]

nice info!

[passionate_freak]

What happened ???

No one's tellin nothin these days ???

Come on people let us discuss the Guru and come to the conclusion ...

It's not the matter of proving some particualar person good or bad but find out the real capable one who can relate us to the divinity.

[vedicyogi]

Hi mahahradanatha,

I would like to learn more about your practises. I just recenlty joined and cannot directly send a message to you may you contact me. Thanks

 

Blessings,