Great point Surya ji

[Guest guest]

Namaste and Blessing to All:

This is my first posting. But first allow me to offer my prostrations

and obeisances to Shree Maa and Swami Ji for blessing me to find them

during this lifetime. Furthermore, I'm grateful to be part of this

discussion group and share in all the feelings and frustrations

towards fulfilling our Divine journey.

I've been reading the posts for the last few days and didn't quite

know how to reply. Then, I started seeing a definite direction which

did not agree with me and it wasn't until this post from

Mahamuni(Surya ji) that I felt compfortable to reply.

You see, I'm what's known as a PIO(Person of Indian Origin). However,

I was born and raised in a small town in PA until moving out west just

4 years ago. So for me many life issues were always within the

"twilight" , always trying to find out where I belong and what

customs and traditions to follow. The bulk of my friends are

Catholic or another Christian based sect while commensurately my

household and extended family always followed traditional Hindu

rituals. So it was needless to say a very confusing upbringing

during many times in my life. It really wasnt' until I moved out

here that I began to return "Home" and finding out about my "self."

Ok, enough exposition...

I sometimes find that we all try to account for everything too much.

Growing up here, I tend to agree with the previous commentator that

we(westerners) have the constant urge to explain and account for

everything. Without a detailed explanatiion for every account can

cause certain people to display "agnostic" type characteristics

towards particular subjects. I think that St. Augustine summarized

it best when he said in relation to UNDERSTANDING God, (to paraphrase

from a book which I have a photostat of)

"If you have understood," he wrote, "then what you have understood is

not God." We can know God, we can love God, but we can never fully

understand God. In the Book of Job, Job longed to comprehend God's

actions. Finally, out of the whirlwind came the answer.. Only it

wasn't an answer at all: "Where were you when I laid the foundation

of the earth?... Who set its measurements, since you know?... Or who

laid it cornerstone when the morning stars sang together...?")[Job

38:4-7]

"Here, God's response was nothing more than questions, But now he

understood that God can't be reduced to pat responses. We all want

the answers.... We want a road map, but God hands us a musical score

instead."

"Do I get frustrated when I can't make sense of life? I am willing to

accept the fact that no all my questions will be answered."

On a totally seperate side note, Woody Allen once made up a comic of

being in a situation with a acquaintance whom he had nothing in

common with: It showed, a bunch of people cramming into a telephone

booth and then coming out. As they came out.. The friend said,

"Gee , I wonder How they get in there?!", Woody replies: "That's the

fundamental difference between us, I wonder Why?"

Sometimes, I feel that we have to ask why are we seeking particular

paths or seeking certain information. It's a painstaking process at

times. But trial and error are the best forms of learning and

applying. Whether one is a Jnana, Bkakti or Karma yogi, It should

still always boil down to finding one's own God Given path in the

smoothest and most natural way according to their circumstance.

Blessings,

Ree

-

mahamuni

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:03 AM

Re: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Jesse,

I too have used this word for decades. I have gone into a deeper

examination of these things in the last few years. These types of

words create all kinds of preconceptions for Westerners and modern

Easterners alike. Outside of Gurus that teach here in the West or

taught middle class and up Westerners in India, I have never heard a

traditional Indian sadhu use any term like this. Many times this

word is used in translation of what a Saint said, but that is not a

proper defense of its usage as translation brings in a host of

problems.

Also English absolutely does not come from Sanskrit. I don't know

where you are getting your etymology from. Similiar sounds and words

in seperate languages should not be approached in this type of format.

I did pose the question for Shree Maa and Swamiji. It is their answer

that I was seeking and this is again what I thought this forum was

for.

The problem is the West here has been a victim of import so to speak.

This is a very long subject for discussion so I won't really touch

upon it here. Westerners classify things. We are taught to do this

from early childhood in school. In the West, Science is God so to

speak and that is why we are always trying to explain phenonema

scientifically. We impose our Western Discourse onto the Eastern

Mystical Traditions. That is why there is so much talk of

enlightened Guru vs non enlightened Guru, and what state of

consciousness one resides in, etc, etc. This is a very big subject

matter that causes a Western born and trained mind great anguish to

face. It took me years to come to terms with this and many trips to

India to straighten it out. You should try reading some of Michel

Foucault. Start with The Order of Things and possibly The Primacy of

Perception.

I mean how many Westerners do you know that even bother to learn an

Indian language. Wouldn't a real disciple learn the Mother Tongue of

his/her Guru? Just out of respect, if nothing else? This is the

perfect example of the Western person's arrogance. We want to have

the darshan of a sadhu hiding away from the world like Bamakhepa or

Sombari Baba, but if they appeared to us what would we have to say?

What would be our reason for disturbing them? What would we hope to

gain? Would we arrogantly expect them to speak English to us? Do

you see what I am driving at?

Think about it.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Jesse Arana

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:34 PM

RE: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Namaste Surya,

I will do my best here...

The first part of the word, "En" - comes from the Sanskrit word

Antara, which means "Inner." English comes from Sanskrit, and so the

word "Enter" is a direct cognate of "Antara".

The second part of the word, "Light" - is from Old English loet... but

that is from Greek lukhnos, lamp. That is from Sanskrit, "lok" as a

verb, it is lokate, to look, view, contemplate; perceive, know.

That's also where we get the word, loka, or, "that which can be

seen," i.e., "world."

The last part, is from the Sanskrit root "Man" which means, think,

believe, imagine; consider. The Latin, mente, English, mind. Also

Sanskrit "Mantr" to advise. "Ment(e)" it has also been noted as

"frame of mind."

So, Illuminated Frame of Mind (Light Within Mind).

When we talk about enlightenment from the Hindu and Buddhist

perspective, the original word was Budh, the Sanskrit word, to know.

There is also the root, Jna, wisdom. The Greek word Gnosis, was

derived from that root.

I also cannot find usage of the English word enlightenment before the 1700s.

As to what "Enlightenment" means...why not ask Shree Maa?

Jesse Arana (Kailash)

www.meditationinfocus.com

mahamuni [mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net]

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:50 PMTo:

Subject: Re: Swamiji's

answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

This prompts a question:

What is "enlightenment"? Is it something that actually exists or a

term that has been thrown around here in the West starting with

Madame Blavatsky and Her Ascended Masters in the late 1800s and

followed by the Theophists. I can not find record of it before then.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Sarada

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:28 PM

Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

First please answer, was Jesus from the east or the west? Let's ask

the same question about Mohammed and the Bal Shem Tov. According to

our philosophy, there have been enlightened beings in eveery

tradition, in every country around the world. And they have all left

behind tools by which we can pursue our own enlightenment.To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ree (and all)

I am so glad you decided to post. Your straightforward honesty and

sweetness come through. I look forward to hearing more from you.

How did you find Shree Maa and Swamiji? I wandered into their

Martinez ashram in the spring of 1993 right before they moved the

Devi Mandir to Napa. I was with them every weekend and major holiday

from 1993-1997. Then they started touring and gradually I had less

and less time with them. Now I live in a tiny mountain town in

Southern California in beautiful solitude. I still do pujas and sing

along with Maa on her CD's. Life is good.

There is a wonderful Mitra in the Devi Mandir family. I don't know if

he is currently living at the ashram.

Blessings,

Ardis

"Reeshava Mitra" <reeshu (AT) worldnet (DOT) att.net>

Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:39:21 -0700

<>

Great point Surya ji

Namaste and Blessing to All:

This is my first posting. But first allow me to offer my prostrations

and obeisances to Shree Maa and Swami Ji for blessing me to find them

during this lifetime. Furthermore, I'm grateful to be part of this

discussion group and share in all the feelings and frustrations

towards fulfilling our Divine journey.

I've been reading the posts for the last few days and didn't quite

know how to reply. Then, I started seeing a definite direction which

did not agree with me and it wasn't until this post from

Mahamuni(Surya ji) that I felt compfortable to reply.

You see, I'm what's known as a PIO(Person of Indian Origin). However,

I was born and raised in a small town in PA until moving out west just

4 years ago. So for me many life issues were always within the

"twilight" , always trying to find out where I belong and what

customs and traditions to follow. The bulk of my friends are

Catholic or another Christian based sect while commensurately my

household and extended family always followed traditional Hindu

rituals. So it was needless to say a very confusing upbringing

during many times in my life. It really wasnt' until I moved out

here that I began to return "Home" and finding out about my "self."

Ok, enough exposition...

I sometimes find that we all try to account for everything too much.

Growing up here, I tend to agree with the previous commentator that

we(westerners) have the constant urge to explain and account for

everything. Without a detailed explanatiion for every account can

cause certain people to display "agnostic" type characteristics

towards particular subjects. I think that St. Augustine summarized

it best when he said in relation to UNDERSTANDING God, (to paraphrase

from a book which I have a photostat of)

"If you have understood," he wrote, "then what you have understood is

not God." We can know God, we can love God, but we can never fully

understand God. In the Book of Job, Job longed to comprehend God's

actions. Finally, out of the whirlwind came the answer.. Only it

wasn't an answer at all: "Where were you when I laid the foundation

of the earth?... Who set its measurements, since you know?... Or who

laid it cornerstone when the morning stars sang together...?")[Job

38:4-7]

"Here, God's response was nothing more than questions, But now he

understood that God can't be reduced to pat responses. We all want

the answers.... We want a road map, but God hands us a musical score

instead."

"Do I get frustrated when I can't make sense of life? I am willing to

accept the fact that no all my questions will be answered."

On a totally seperate side note, Woody Allen once made up a comic of

being in a situation with a acquaintance whom he had nothing in

common with: It showed, a bunch of people cramming into a telephone

booth and then coming out. As they came out.. The friend said,

"Gee , I wonder How they get in there?!", Woody replies: "That's the

fundamental difference between us, I wonder Why?"

Sometimes, I feel that we have to ask why are we seeking particular

paths or seeking certain information. It's a painstaking process at

times. But trial and error are the best forms of learning and

applying. Whether one is a Jnana, Bkakti or Karma yogi, It should

still always boil down to finding one's own God Given path in the

smoothest and most natural way according to their circumstance.

Blessings,

Ree

-

mahamuni <mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net>

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:03 AM

Re: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Jesse,

I too have used this word for decades. I have gone into a deeper

examination of these things in the last few years. These types of

words create all kinds of preconceptions for Westerners and modern

Easterners alike. Outside of Gurus that teach here in the West or

taught middle class and up Westerners in India, I have never heard a

traditional Indian sadhu use any term like this. Many times this

word is used in translation of what a Saint said, but that is not a

proper defense of its usage as translation brings in a host of

problems.

Also English absolutely does not come from Sanskrit. I don't know

where you are getting your etymology from. Similiar sounds and words

in seperate languages should not be approached in this type of format.

I did pose the question for Shree Maa and Swamiji. It is their answer

that I was seeking and this is again what I thought this forum was

for.

The problem is the West here has been a victim of import so to speak.

This is a very long subject for discussion so I won't really touch

upon it here. Westerners classify things. We are taught to do this

from early childhood in school. In the West, Science is God so to

speak and that is why we are always trying to explain phenonema

scientifically. We impose our Western Discourse onto the Eastern

Mystical Traditions. That is why there is so much talk of

enlightened Guru vs non enlightened Guru, and what state of

consciousness one resides in, etc, etc. This is a very big subject

matter that causes a Western born and trained mind great anguish to

face. It took me years to come to terms with this and many trips to

India to straighten it out. You should try reading some of Michel

Foucault. Start with The Order of Things and possibly The Primacy of

Perception.

I mean how many Westerners do you know that even bother to learn an

Indian language. Wouldn't a real disciple learn the Mother Tongue of

his/her Guru? Just out of respect, if nothing else? This is the

perfect example of the Western person's arrogance. We want to have

the darshan of a sadhu hiding away from the world like Bamakhepa or

Sombari Baba, but if they appeared to us what would we have to say?

What would be our reason for disturbing them? What would we hope to

gain? Would we arrogantly expect them to speak English to us? Do

you see what I am driving at?

Think about it.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Jesse Arana <jessearana (AT) comcast (DOT) net>

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:34 PM

RE: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Namaste Surya,

I will do my best here...

The first part of the word, "En" - comes from the Sanskrit word

Antara, which means "Inner." English comes from Sanskrit, and so the

word "Enter" is a direct cognate of "Antara".

The second part of the word, "Light" - is from Old English loet... but

that is from Greek lukhnos, lamp. That is from Sanskrit, "lok" as a

verb, it is lokate, to look, view, contemplate; perceive, know.

That's also where we get the word, loka, or, "that which can be

seen," i.e., "world."

The last part, is from the Sanskrit root "Man" which means, think,

believe, imagine; consider. The Latin, mente, English, mind. Also

Sanskrit "Mantr" to advise. "Ment(e)" it has also been noted as

"frame of mind."

So, Illuminated Frame of Mind (Light Within Mind).

When we talk about enlightenment from the Hindu and Buddhist

perspective, the original word was Budh, the Sanskrit word, to know.

There is also the root, Jna, wisdom. The Greek word Gnosis, was

derived from that root.

I also cannot find usage of the English word enlightenment before the 1700s.

As to what "Enlightenment" means...why not ask Shree Maa?

Jesse Arana (Kailash)

www.meditationinfocus.com <http://www.meditationinfocus.com>

 

mahamuni [mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net]

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:50 PM

Re: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

This prompts a question:

What is "enlightenment"? Is it something that actually exists or a

term that has been thrown around here in the West starting with

Madame Blavatsky and Her Ascended Masters in the late 1800s and

followed by the Theophists. I can not find record of it before then.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Sarada <sarada_saraswati >

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:28 PM

Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

First please answer, was Jesus from the east or the west? Let's ask

the

same question about Mohammed and the Bal Shem Tov.

According to our philosophy, there have been enlightened beings in

eveery tradition, in every country around the world. And they have

all left

behind tools by which we can pursue our own enlightenment.

 

Terms of Service

<> .

 

Terms of Service

<> .

 

Terms of Service

<> .

 

Terms of Service

<> .

Sponsor

 

Terms of Service

<> .

[Guest guest]

Thanks for your post. It was nice to read.

I thought a slight bit of elaboration might be in order. I hope this

is not out of the scope of this group and I will be quiet and still

after this.

All that I am about to state I have learned from my interactions with

Sadhus, especially the Nagas, and especially one very unique Naga

Sannyasi who is a Westerner and has been in India for most of the

last 36 years. He opened me up to a whole new way of seeing,

especially seeing myself and my own conditioning and discourse.

In the West we address the Esoteric Traditions of the East in the form

of text and technique. Our method of inquiry typically consists of

reading books and taking classes of different forms. Of course there

are exceptions, but generally there is no context by which these

"things" have a place and make sense. In the East, Oral Tradition

rules and everything is about becoming part of the Tradition and

about the Guru-Sishya relationship inside the Guru Parampara--True

Context by which what goes on inside the Tradition can truly be

applied, or makes sense, or has a background to find a place. The

individual is unimportant. Even how advanced the Guru is or may be

(how can we judge this in reality anyway--takes one to know one) is

absolutely secondary. In the West, we consume books on "Yoga" and

base our knowledge on what we read. We get caught up in many terms

and foreign words that we then impose our own way of classification

upon. We argue about this and that concept without having any depth

of understanding through proper experience. We might be horrified to

find out that much of what we have read might have been filtered for

Westerners or written in a way that is curtailed towards Western

constructs. Just look at the earliest US "imports" of Yoga and how

their organizations were set up here. Like churches. Also even more

frightening/appauling is that many times fiction is displayed as

supposed fact and at the very least embellished beyond recognition

without stating as much. This is especially true with so many books

about a westerner's relationship with a certain "enlightened" master.

Why is this the case? Because the day to day details of the

Guru-Disciple relationship are boring externally. They simply don't

make for good reads. In Indian traditions, a disciple serves his

Guru tirelessly, especially after initiation. The true learning

occurs thru osmosis of being with the Guru. This is how the disciple

become the Guru. The Grace and Guru or Lineage Shakti can't help but

flow to the disciple that pleases his/her Master. But reading about

how one washes the pots and pans and kamadalus and lotas every day

and cooks and sweeps and does the laundry just doesn't help to make

the NY Times Best Seller list. Usually one will serve for 12 years

before formally learning anything.

In the West, we focus on technique. Ask 9 out of 10 people what Yoga

is and they will tell you it is practicing various poses. Maybe a

few will add in breathing exercises and/or meditation. Is this Yoga?

Is this even Hatha Yoga? I would say ABSOLUTELY NOT. These are some

habits, methods, etc primarily taken from a small sect of Sadhus

primarily known as the Naths (followers of Gorak Nath), but out of

context of that tradition. Then further altered in a variety of

ways. In the West we are so eclectic. We borrow a little bit from

everywhere and "forge our own Path". In the East, they try to follow

everything they learn from their Guru to the letter. In Sanskrit you

learn by memorizing both a pre-existing set of questions and answers.

The specific answers are already set. In the East, one does not take

up an eclectic Path so to speak. Sure they may learn different things

from multiple Gurus inside their tradition, but they do mix and match

as they see fit. They believe that in the beginning all was Perfect

and Full (in the Satya Yuga, the first age, if we are to use a term

or two) and then becomes more and more diluted and deconstructed as

time goes on. They try to imitate their Gurudeva exactly, though

they know they never can become as great as their Guru. At least all

true disciples think this way which is why the seat of their Guru is

always higher than their own. They may notice that their Guru does a

certain exercise or ritual after his morning bath and after an untold

length of time and observing this may one day ask Him/Her about it

and ask if maybe they should be doing that. Maybe the Guru will

reply, "oh you want to learn that? Okay". Then he will give

instruction or have an elder disciple do it, depending on the

situation. This is how the tradition generally goes.

Their rules are Descriptive rather than Prescriptive. They don't say

be celibate or you can't be a Yogi. they don't kick their disciple

out if they hear he had sex last night, nor do they usually ask such

a thing. Usually in India what happens behind closed doors stays

behind closed doors. They would say be celibate if you want to speed

up your acquisition of the goal you are trying to achieve thru a

certain sadhana.

You don't wake up at 4 AM specifically because it is the best time to

meditate. You get up at 4 AM (or usually earlier) because for one, it

is dark and since typically you go for a bowel movement first thing in

the morning before your bath so that you can be "pure" for your puja,

etc, this is one of the only times you can get a little privacy.

Secondly, your Guru will be waking up at 5 or so and you need to go

to the bathroom, brush your teeth, take your bath, etc, and take a

little time for yourself and your sadhana (whatever that may be at

the time) before He/She gets up and you need to start attending

Him/Her. Again, Descriptive rather than Prescriptive.

Not that it is my place to comment, but Shree Maa and Swamiji are

unique in this respect. They operate within a traditional framework

while making it very easy for those that come to get right into it,

so to speak. This is Pure Grace. We are so fortunate to have Them

and access to Them in this way. The tapes and books and web classes

and radio, etc, is Pure Grace and a Goddess Send, not to mention how

They are in person! What an inspiration They are and how tireless

They serve us. I only wish I could do more for Them.

That is enough. Please forgive if anything offends anyone. I just

figured a little elaboration was needed to not be rude. Back to

Silence where one can truly learn.

Jai Maa and Pranams to All,

Surya

-

Reeshava Mitra

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:39 PM

Great point Surya ji

Namaste and Blessing to All:

This is my first posting. But first allow me to offer my prostrations

and obeisances to Shree Maa and Swami Ji for blessing me to find them

during this lifetime. Furthermore, I'm grateful to be part of this

discussion group and share in all the feelings and frustrations

towards fulfilling our Divine journey.

I've been reading the posts for the last few days and didn't quite

know how to reply. Then, I started seeing a definite direction which

did not agree with me and it wasn't until this post from

Mahamuni(Surya ji) that I felt compfortable to reply.

You see, I'm what's known as a PIO(Person of Indian Origin). However,

I was born and raised in a small town in PA until moving out west just

4 years ago. So for me many life issues were always within the

"twilight" , always trying to find out where I belong and what

customs and traditions to follow. The bulk of my friends are

Catholic or another Christian based sect while commensurately my

household and extended family always followed traditional Hindu

rituals. So it was needless to say a very confusing upbringing

during many times in my life. It really wasnt' until I moved out

here that I began to return "Home" and finding out about my "self."

Ok, enough exposition...

I sometimes find that we all try to account for everything too much.

Growing up here, I tend to agree with the previous commentator that

we(westerners) have the constant urge to explain and account for

everything. Without a detailed explanatiion for every account can

cause certain people to display "agnostic" type characteristics

towards particular subjects. I think that St. Augustine summarized

it best when he said in relation to UNDERSTANDING God, (to paraphrase

from a book which I have a photostat of)

"If you have understood," he wrote, "then what you have understood is

not God." We can know God, we can love God, but we can never fully

understand God. In the Book of Job, Job longed to comprehend God's

actions. Finally, out of the whirlwind came the answer.. Only it

wasn't an answer at all: "Where were you when I laid the foundation

of the earth?... Who set its measurements, since you know?... Or who

laid it cornerstone when the morning stars sang together...?")[Job

38:4-7]

"Here, God's response was nothing more than questions, But now he

understood that God can't be reduced to pat responses. We all want

the answers.... We want a road map, but God hands us a musical score

instead."

"Do I get frustrated when I can't make sense of life? I am willing to

accept the fact that no all my questions will be answered."

On a totally seperate side note, Woody Allen once made up a comic of

being in a situation with a acquaintance whom he had nothing in

common with: It showed, a bunch of people cramming into a telephone

booth and then coming out. As they came out.. The friend said,

"Gee , I wonder How they get in there?!", Woody replies: "That's the

fundamental difference between us, I wonder Why?"

Sometimes, I feel that we have to ask why are we seeking particular

paths or seeking certain information. It's a painstaking process at

times. But trial and error are the best forms of learning and

applying. Whether one is a Jnana, Bkakti or Karma yogi, It should

still always boil down to finding one's own God Given path in the

smoothest and most natural way according to their circumstance.

Blessings,

Ree

-

mahamuni

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:03 AM

Re: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Jesse,

I too have used this word for decades. I have gone into a deeper

examination of these things in the last few years. These types of

words create all kinds of preconceptions for Westerners and modern

Easterners alike. Outside of Gurus that teach here in the West or

taught middle class and up Westerners in India, I have never heard a

traditional Indian sadhu use any term like this. Many times this

word is used in translation of what a Saint said, but that is not a

proper defense of its usage as translation brings in a host of

problems.

Also English absolutely does not come from Sanskrit. I don't know

where you are getting your etymology from. Similiar sounds and words

in seperate languages should not be approached in this type of format.

I did pose the question for Shree Maa and Swamiji. It is their answer

that I was seeking and this is again what I thought this forum was

for.

The problem is the West here has been a victim of import so to speak.

This is a very long subject for discussion so I won't really touch

upon it here. Westerners classify things. We are taught to do this

from early childhood in school. In the West, Science is God so to

speak and that is why we are always trying to explain phenonema

scientifically. We impose our Western Discourse onto the Eastern

Mystical Traditions. That is why there is so much talk of

enlightened Guru vs non enlightened Guru, and what state of

consciousness one resides in, etc, etc. This is a very big subject

matter that causes a Western born and trained mind great anguish to

face. It took me years to come to terms with this and many trips to

India to straighten it out. You should try reading some of Michel

Foucault. Start with The Order of Things and possibly The Primacy of

Perception.

I mean how many Westerners do you know that even bother to learn an

Indian language. Wouldn't a real disciple learn the Mother Tongue of

his/her Guru? Just out of respect, if nothing else? This is the

perfect example of the Western person's arrogance. We want to have

the darshan of a sadhu hiding away from the world like Bamakhepa or

Sombari Baba, but if they appeared to us what would we have to say?

What would be our reason for disturbing them? What would we hope to

gain? Would we arrogantly expect them to speak English to us? Do

you see what I am driving at?

Think about it.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Jesse Arana

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:34 PM

RE: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Namaste Surya,

I will do my best here...

The first part of the word, "En" - comes from the Sanskrit word

Antara, which means "Inner." English comes from Sanskrit, and so the

word "Enter" is a direct cognate of "Antara".

The second part of the word, "Light" - is from Old English loet... but

that is from Greek lukhnos, lamp. That is from Sanskrit, "lok" as a

verb, it is lokate, to look, view, contemplate; perceive, know.

That's also where we get the word, loka, or, "that which can be

seen," i.e., "world."

The last part, is from the Sanskrit root "Man" which means, think,

believe, imagine; consider. The Latin, mente, English, mind. Also

Sanskrit "Mantr" to advise. "Ment(e)" it has also been noted as

"frame of mind."

So, Illuminated Frame of Mind (Light Within Mind).

When we talk about enlightenment from the Hindu and Buddhist

perspective, the original word was Budh, the Sanskrit word, to know.

There is also the root, Jna, wisdom. The Greek word Gnosis, was

derived from that root.

I also cannot find usage of the English word enlightenment before the 1700s.

As to what "Enlightenment" means...why not ask Shree Maa?

Jesse Arana (Kailash)

www.meditationinfocus.com

mahamuni [mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net]

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:50 PMTo:

Subject: Re: Swamiji's

answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

This prompts a question:

What is "enlightenment"? Is it something that actually exists or a

term that has been thrown around here in the West starting with

Madame Blavatsky and Her Ascended Masters in the late 1800s and

followed by the Theophists. I can not find record of it before then.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Sarada

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:28 PM

Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

First please answer, was Jesus from the east or the west? Let's ask

the same question about Mohammed and the Bal Shem Tov. According to

our philosophy, there have been enlightened beings in eveery

tradition, in every country around the world. And they have all left

behind tools by which we can pursue our own enlightenment.To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the

[Guest guest]

Surya, This is an excelent post, thanks for explaining it, I had ideas but never really understood.

Brianmahamuni Oct 15, 2003 11:44

PMSubject: Re: Great

point Surya ji

Thanks for your post. It was nice to read.

I thought a slight bit of elaboration might be in order. I hope this

is not out of the scope of this group and I will be quiet and still

after this.

All that I am about to state I have learned from my interactions with

Sadhus, especially the Nagas, and especially one very unique Naga

Sannyasi who is a Westerner and has been in India for most of the

last 36 years. He opened me up to a whole new way of seeing,

especially seeing myself and my own conditioning and discourse.

In the West we address the Esoteric Traditions of the East in the form

of text and technique. Our method of inquiry typically consists of

reading books and taking classes of different forms. Of course there

are exceptions, but generally there is no context by which these

"things" have a place and make sense. In the East, Oral Tradition

rules and everything is about becoming part of the Tradition and

about the Guru-Sishya relationship inside the Guru Parampara--True

Context by which what goes on inside the Tradition can truly be

applied, or makes sense, or has a background to find a place. The

individual is unimportant. Even how advanced the Guru is or may be

(how can we judge this in reality anyway--takes one to know one) is

absolutely secondary. In the West, we consume books on "Yoga" and

base our knowledge on what we read. We get caught up in many terms

and foreign words that we then impose our own way of classification

upon. We argue about this and that concept without having any depth

of understanding through proper experience. We might be horrified to

find out that much of what we have read might have been filtered for

Westerners or written in a way that is curtailed towards Western

constructs. Just look at the earliest US "imports" of Yoga and how

their organizations were set up here. Like churches. Also even more

frightening/appauling is that many times fiction is displayed as

supposed fact and at the very least embellished beyond recognition

without stating as much. This is especially true with so many books

about a westerner's relationship with a certain "enlightened" master.

Why is this the case? Because the day to day details of the

Guru-Disciple relationship are boring externally. They simply don't

make for good reads. In Indian traditions, a disciple serves his

Guru tirelessly, especially after initiation. The true learning

occurs thru osmosis of being with the Guru. This is how the disciple

become the Guru. The Grace and Guru or Lineage Shakti can't help but

flow to the disciple that pleases his/her Master. But reading about

how one washes the pots and pans and kamadalus and lotas every day

and cooks and sweeps and does the laundry just doesn't help to make

the NY Times Best Seller list. Usually one will serve for 12 years

before formally learning anything.

In the West, we focus on technique. Ask 9 out of 10 people what Yoga

is and they will tell you it is practicing various poses. Maybe a

few will add in breathing exercises and/or meditation. Is this Yoga?

Is this even Hatha Yoga? I would say ABSOLUTELY NOT. These are some

habits, methods, etc primarily taken from a small sect of Sadhus

primarily known as the Naths (followers of Gorak Nath), but out of

context of that tradition. Then further altered in a variety of

ways. In the West we are so eclectic. We borrow a little bit from

everywhere and "forge our own Path". In the East, they try to follow

everything they learn from their Guru to the letter. In Sanskrit you

learn by memorizing both a pre-existing set of questions and answers.

The specific answers are already set. In the East, one does not take

up an eclectic Path so to speak. Sure they may learn different things

from multiple Gurus inside their tradition, but they do mix and match

as they see fit. They believe that in the beginning all was Perfect

and Full (in the Satya Yuga, the first age, if we are to use a term

or two) and then becomes more and more diluted and deconstructed as

time goes on. They try to imitate their Gurudeva exactly, though

they know they never can become as great as their Guru. At least all

true disciples think this way which is why the seat of their Guru is

always higher than their own. They may notice that their Guru does a

certain exercise or ritual after his morning bath and after an untold

length of time and observing this may one day ask Him/Her about it

and ask if maybe they should be doing that. Maybe the Guru will

reply, "oh you want to learn that? Okay". Then he will give

instruction or have an elder disciple do it, depending on the

situation. This is how the tradition generally goes.

Their rules are Descriptive rather than Prescriptive. They don't say

be celibate or you can't be a Yogi. they don't kick their disciple

out if they hear he had sex last night, nor do they usually ask such

a thing. Usually in India what happens behind closed doors stays

behind closed doors. They would say be celibate if you want to speed

up your acquisition of the goal you are trying to achieve thru a

certain sadhana.

You don't wake up at 4 AM specifically because it is the best time to

meditate. You get up at 4 AM (or usually earlier) because for one, it

is dark and since typically you go for a bowel movement first thing in

the morning before your bath so that you can be "pure" for your puja,

etc, this is one of the only times you can get a little privacy.

Secondly, your Guru will be waking up at 5 or so and you need to go

to the bathroom, brush your teeth, take your bath, etc, and take a

little time for yourself and your sadhana (whatever that may be at

the time) before He/She gets up and you need to start attending

Him/Her. Again, Descriptive rather than Prescriptive.

Not that it is my place to comment, but Shree Maa and Swamiji are

unique in this respect. They operate within a traditional framework

while making it very easy for those that come to get right into it,

so to speak. This is Pure Grace. We are so fortunate to have Them

and access to Them in this way. The tapes and books and web classes

and radio, etc, is Pure Grace and a Goddess Send, not to mention how

They are in person! What an inspiration They are and how tireless

They serve us. I only wish I could do more for Them.

That is enough. Please forgive if anything offends anyone. I just

figured a little elaboration was needed to not be rude. Back to

Silence where one can truly learn.

Jai Maa and Pranams to All,

Surya

[Guest guest]

This is great research. I do think being with the Guru all the time

is very important and I appreciated your comment of "even how

advanced the Guru may be is absolutely secondary" I agree to this

whole heartedly, however I have been told before by professional

Swami's that if the Guru doesn't have Liberation how can he take the

student there? If he's reached Liberation he has to go down the rope

to pull the disciple up. My experience is that if I am around my

teachers, mentors, Guru's alot and I am learning and becoming more

intuitive, then Guru is coming thru whether he has Liberation or not.

What he is teaching me is to do it on my own with my own connection

to Guru, otherwise it's doomed to fail after the physcial Guru is

gone. If the disciple puts the faith in the physcial Guru he may go

thru major shock when Guru is not there. If I were a Guru, I would

not want to leave my disciples in that state and would prep them,

that Guru is God

beyond me.

My question in regards to your research... When the Guru passes on,

the disciple is required to keep the connection thru the sadhana and

what was transmitted from osmosis and the learning will still

continue. Do people in India then get creative or do they do what

the Guru said to do even if the disciple is evolving? There comes a

time when certain sadhana's may be transmitted to the disciple thru

the osmosis of Guru whether or not he is still around. Teachings

come thru intuition and dreams as well. Is it fair to assume being

with the Guru for the first 2/3rds of the relationship is sufficient

before the disciple becomes grounded in what Guru has taught?

Meaning, does the bird/disiple ever take flight from the

nest/physical Guru or is there always a dependance (meaning staying

there physically) in India? Here in the west when westerners find

Guru's whether american or otherwise, eventually I have been taught

you have to stand on

your own two feet and not be dependant on the physcial Guru. When the

Guru dies, often times the disciples are left feeling they can't do it

on their own without the physical master. My old teacher taught,

"Look at the birds in the nest. Eventually all the babies will have

to fly. If one is weak and is afraid or can't, the mother will kick

it out of the nest as the test of survival. It will fly or it wont.

Everyone needs to start learning how to fly" Physical Guru's wont

always be around, so we need to know how to leave the nest. This is

in nature and so it would also apply to some degree to us, right? I

am asking your imput. You've done alot of research and posts do

create more questions, such is the nature of conversation.

When what happens behind closed doors stays behind closed doors, if

the Guru and disciple are connected, the Guru will know. Hopefully

the Guru won't judge, but many do here in the states. Yoga or Bhoga?

You can't have both is what they say. Good to know your experience

is that India is not puritianical in judging what is natural, however

most of what has been taught from more traditional lineages in the US,

is that it is about moral issue's and looking at sex as though it is

discusting- a judgement of bad good. Maybe it's that church paradigm

and trying to present to americans something they can understand or

accept? Things were very conservative 100 years ago when India came

to the west so it had to be churchy otherwise Sadhu's would not have

been listened to much.

Can I ask why it would take a disciple 12 years to receive

instruction? Why would it take a disciple that long to ask a

question? Are questions not permitted in their culture of serving

the leader?

If you don't want to reply and stay in silence I can respect that.

You've presented your knowledge in a way that leads me to assume you

are more impartial and have a well rounded view. It would be nice to

hear your answers and I can accept yours as well as Swami's if he

wants to comment, then I can ask more questions until I reach an

understanding if that is ok.

Thanks for your post. Namaste.

KellyBrian T McKee <brian (AT) soulspark (DOT) org> wrote:

Surya, This is an excelent post, thanks for explaining it, I had ideas but never really understood.

Brianmahamuni Oct 15, 2003 11:44

PMSubject: Re: Great

point Surya ji

Thanks for your post. It was nice to read.

I thought a slight bit of elaboration might be in order. I hope this

is not out of the scope of this group and I will be quiet and still

after this.

All that I am about to state I have learned from my interactions with

Sadhus, especially the Nagas, and especially one very unique Naga

Sannyasi who is a Westerner and has been in India for most of the

last 36 years. He opened me up to a whole new way of seeing,

especially seeing myself and my own conditioning and discourse.

In the West we address the Esoteric Traditions of the East in the form

of text and technique. Our method of inquiry typically consists of

reading books and taking classes of different forms. Of course there

are exceptions, but generally there is no context by which these

"things" have a place and make sense. In the East, Oral Tradition

rules and everything is about becoming part of the Tradition and

about the Guru-Sishya relationship inside the Guru Parampara--True

Context by which what goes on inside the Tradition can truly be

applied, or makes sense, or has a background to find a place. The

individual is unimportant. Even how advanced the Guru is or may be

(how can we judge this in reality anyway--takes one to know one) is

absolutely secondary. In the West, we consume books on "Yoga" and

base our knowledge on what we read. We get caught up in many terms

and foreign words that we then impose our own way of classification

upon. We

argue about this and that concept without having any depth of

understanding through proper experience. We might be horrified to

find out that much of what we have read might have been filtered for

Westerners or written in a way that is curtailed towards Western

constructs. Just look at the earliest US "imports" of Yoga and how

their organizations were set up here. Like churches. Also even more

frightening/appauling is that many times fiction is displayed as

supposed fact and at the very least embellished beyond recognition

without stating as much. This is especially true with so many books

about a westerner's relationship with a certain "enlightened" master.

Why is this the case? Because the day to day details of the

Guru-Disciple relationship are boring externally. They simply don't

make for good reads. In Indian traditions, a disciple serves his

Guru tirelessly, especially after initiation. The true learning

occurs thru

osmosis of being with the Guru. This is how the disciple become the

Guru. The Grace and Guru or Lineage Shakti can't help but flow to

the disciple that pleases his/her Master. But reading about how one

washes the pots and pans and kamadalus and lotas every day and cooks

and sweeps and does the laundry just doesn't help to make the NY

Times Best Seller list. Usually one will serve for 12 years before

formally learning anything.

In the West, we focus on technique. Ask 9 out of 10 people what Yoga

is and they will tell you it is practicing various poses. Maybe a

few will add in breathing exercises and/or meditation. Is this Yoga?

Is this even Hatha Yoga? I would say ABSOLUTELY NOT. These are some

habits, methods, etc primarily taken from a small sect of Sadhus

primarily known as the Naths (followers of Gorak Nath), but out of

context of that tradition. Then further altered in a variety of

ways. In the West we are so eclectic. We borrow a little bit from

everywhere and "forge our own Path". In the East, they try to follow

everything they learn from their Guru to the letter. In Sanskrit you

learn by memorizing both a pre-existing set of questions and answers.

The specific answers are already set. In the East, one does not take

up an eclectic Path so to speak. Sure they may learn

different things from multiple Gurus inside their tradition, but they

do mix and match as they see fit. They believe that in the beginning

all was Perfect and Full (in the Satya Yuga, the first age, if we are

to use a term or two) and then becomes more and more diluted and

deconstructed as time goes on. They try to imitate their Gurudeva

exactly, though they know they never can become as great as their

Guru. At least all true disciples think this way which is why the

seat of their Guru is always higher than their own. They may notice

that their Guru does a certain exercise or ritual after his morning

bath and after an untold length of time and observing this may one

day ask Him/Her about it and ask if maybe they should be doing that.

Maybe the Guru will reply, "oh you want to learn that? Okay". Then

he will give instruction or have an elder disciple do it, depending

on the situation. This is how the tradition generally goes.

Their rules are Descriptive rather than Prescriptive. They don't say

be celibate or you can't be a Yogi. they don't kick their disciple

out if they hear he had sex last night, nor do they usually ask such

a thing. Usually in India what happens behind closed doors stays

behind closed doors. They would say be celibate if you want to speed

up your acquisition of the goal you are trying to achieve thru a

certain sadhana.

You don't wake up at 4 AM specifically because it is the best time to

meditate. You get up at 4 AM (or usually earlier) because for one, it

is dark and since typically you go for a bowel movement first thing in

the morning before your bath so that you can be "pure" for your puja,

etc, this is one of the only times you can get a little privacy.

Secondly, your Guru will be waking up at 5 or so and you need to go

to the bathroom, brush your teeth, take your bath, etc, and take a

little time for yourself and your sadhana (whatever that may be at

the time) before He/She gets up and you need to start attending

Him/Her. Again, Descriptive rather than Prescriptive.

Not that it is my place to comment, but Shree Maa and Swamiji are

unique in this respect. They operate within a traditional framework

while making it very easy for those that come to get right into it,

so to speak. This is Pure Grace. We are so fortunate to have Them

and access to Them in this way. The tapes and books and web classes

and radio, etc, is Pure Grace and a Goddess Send, not to mention how

They are in person! What an inspiration They are and how tireless

They serve us. I only wish I could do more for Them.

That is enough. Please forgive if anything offends anyone. I just

figured a little elaboration was needed to not be rude. Back to

Silence where one can truly learn.

Jai Maa and Pranams to All,

Surya

To from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the

 

The New with improved product search

[Guest guest]

Namaste All:

I, too, need to clarify my original post. Firstly, I did not mean to

use anyone as a scapegoat in issuing my post. So, please forgive me

if I displayed that tone. Secondly, I by no means wanted to

categorize one group over another.

I perhaps rushed my reply a bit(a long time bad habit of mine which is

coming under control day by day) and did not fully listen to my "inner

Guru" in constructing the post.

The points still stand in relation to the whole and not any one particular group.

I wish to remain silent in regards to this matter and move forward.

Prostrations and Prayers at the lotus feet of Shree Maa and Swami ji

for showering their Divine blessings and grace on all of us to march

towrds self realization.

Blessings to all,

Ree

-

mahamuni

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 11:44 PM

Re: Great point Surya ji

Thanks for your post. It was nice to read.

I thought a slight bit of elaboration might be in order. I hope this

is not out of the scope of this group and I will be quiet and still

after this.

All that I am about to state I have learned from my interactions with

Sadhus, especially the Nagas, and especially one very unique Naga

Sannyasi who is a Westerner and has been in India for most of the

last 36 years. He opened me up to a whole new way of seeing,

especially seeing myself and my own conditioning and discourse.

In the West we address the Esoteric Traditions of the East in the form

of text and technique. Our method of inquiry typically consists of

reading books and taking classes of different forms. Of course there

are exceptions, but generally there is no context by which these

"things" have a place and make sense. In the East, Oral Tradition

rules and everything is about becoming part of the Tradition and

about the Guru-Sishya relationship inside the Guru Parampara--True

Context by which what goes on inside the Tradition can truly be

applied, or makes sense, or has a background to find a place. The

individual is unimportant. Even how advanced the Guru is or may be

(how can we judge this in reality anyway--takes one to know one) is

absolutely secondary. In the West, we consume books on "Yoga" and

base our knowledge on what we read. We get caught up in many terms

and foreign words that we then impose our own way of classification

upon. We argue about this and that concept without having any depth

of understanding through proper experience. We might be horrified to

find out that much of what we have read might have been filtered for

Westerners or written in a way that is curtailed towards Western

constructs. Just look at the earliest US "imports" of Yoga and how

their organizations were set up here. Like churches. Also even more

frightening/appauling is that many times fiction is displayed as

supposed fact and at the very least embellished beyond recognition

without stating as much. This is especially true with so many books

about a westerner's relationship with a certain "enlightened" master.

Why is this the case? Because the day to day details of the

Guru-Disciple relationship are boring externally. They simply don't

make for good reads. In Indian traditions, a disciple serves his

Guru tirelessly, especially after initiation. The true learning

occurs thru osmosis of being with the Guru. This is how the disciple

become the Guru. The Grace and Guru or Lineage Shakti can't help but

flow to the disciple that pleases his/her Master. But reading about

how one washes the pots and pans and kamadalus and lotas every day

and cooks and sweeps and does the laundry just doesn't help to make

the NY Times Best Seller list. Usually one will serve for 12 years

before formally learning anything.

In the West, we focus on technique. Ask 9 out of 10 people what Yoga

is and they will tell you it is practicing various poses. Maybe a

few will add in breathing exercises and/or meditation. Is this Yoga?

Is this even Hatha Yoga? I would say ABSOLUTELY NOT. These are some

habits, methods, etc primarily taken from a small sect of Sadhus

primarily known as the Naths (followers of Gorak Nath), but out of

context of that tradition. Then further altered in a variety of

ways. In the West we are so eclectic. We borrow a little bit from

everywhere and "forge our own Path". In the East, they try to follow

everything they learn from their Guru to the letter. In Sanskrit you

learn by memorizing both a pre-existing set of questions and answers.

The specific answers are already set. In the East, one does not take

up an eclectic Path so to speak. Sure they may learn different things

from multiple Gurus inside their tradition, but they do mix and match

as they see fit. They believe that in the beginning all was Perfect

and Full (in the Satya Yuga, the first age, if we are to use a term

or two) and then becomes more and more diluted and deconstructed as

time goes on. They try to imitate their Gurudeva exactly, though

they know they never can become as great as their Guru. At least all

true disciples think this way which is why the seat of their Guru is

always higher than their own. They may notice that their Guru does a

certain exercise or ritual after his morning bath and after an untold

length of time and observing this may one day ask Him/Her about it

and ask if maybe they should be doing that. Maybe the Guru will

reply, "oh you want to learn that? Okay". Then he will give

instruction or have an elder disciple do it, depending on the

situation. This is how the tradition generally goes.

Their rules are Descriptive rather than Prescriptive. They don't say

be celibate or you can't be a Yogi. they don't kick their disciple

out if they hear he had sex last night, nor do they usually ask such

a thing. Usually in India what happens behind closed doors stays

behind closed doors. They would say be celibate if you want to speed

up your acquisition of the goal you are trying to achieve thru a

certain sadhana.

You don't wake up at 4 AM specifically because it is the best time to

meditate. You get up at 4 AM (or usually earlier) because for one, it

is dark and since typically you go for a bowel movement first thing in

the morning before your bath so that you can be "pure" for your puja,

etc, this is one of the only times you can get a little privacy.

Secondly, your Guru will be waking up at 5 or so and you need to go

to the bathroom, brush your teeth, take your bath, etc, and take a

little time for yourself and your sadhana (whatever that may be at

the time) before He/She gets up and you need to start attending

Him/Her. Again, Descriptive rather than Prescriptive.

Not that it is my place to comment, but Shree Maa and Swamiji are

unique in this respect. They operate within a traditional framework

while making it very easy for those that come to get right into it,

so to speak. This is Pure Grace. We are so fortunate to have Them

and access to Them in this way. The tapes and books and web classes

and radio, etc, is Pure Grace and a Goddess Send, not to mention how

They are in person! What an inspiration They are and how tireless

They serve us. I only wish I could do more for Them.

That is enough. Please forgive if anything offends anyone. I just

figured a little elaboration was needed to not be rude. Back to

Silence where one can truly learn.

Jai Maa and Pranams to All,

Surya

-

Reeshava Mitra

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:39 PM

Great point Surya ji

Namaste and Blessing to All:

This is my first posting. But first allow me to offer my prostrations

and obeisances to Shree Maa and Swami Ji for blessing me to find them

during this lifetime. Furthermore, I'm grateful to be part of this

discussion group and share in all the feelings and frustrations

towards fulfilling our Divine journey.

I've been reading the posts for the last few days and didn't quite

know how to reply. Then, I started seeing a definite direction which

did not agree with me and it wasn't until this post from

Mahamuni(Surya ji) that I felt compfortable to reply.

You see, I'm what's known as a PIO(Person of Indian Origin). However,

I was born and raised in a small town in PA until moving out west just

4 years ago. So for me many life issues were always within the

"twilight" , always trying to find out where I belong and what

customs and traditions to follow. The bulk of my friends are

Catholic or another Christian based sect while commensurately my

household and extended family always followed traditional Hindu

rituals. So it was needless to say a very confusing upbringing

during many times in my life. It really wasnt' until I moved out

here that I began to return "Home" and finding out about my "self."

Ok, enough exposition...

I sometimes find that we all try to account for everything too much.

Growing up here, I tend to agree with the previous commentator that

we(westerners) have the constant urge to explain and account for

everything. Without a detailed explanatiion for every account can

cause certain people to display "agnostic" type characteristics

towards particular subjects. I think that St. Augustine summarized

it best when he said in relation to UNDERSTANDING God, (to paraphrase

from a book which I have a photostat of)

"If you have understood," he wrote, "then what you have understood is

not God." We can know God, we can love God, but we can never fully

understand God. In the Book of Job, Job longed to comprehend God's

actions. Finally, out of the whirlwind came the answer.. Only it

wasn't an answer at all: "Where were you when I laid the foundation

of the earth?... Who set its measurements, since you know?... Or who

laid it cornerstone when the morning stars sang together...?")[Job

38:4-7]

"Here, God's response was nothing more than questions, But now he

understood that God can't be reduced to pat responses. We all want

the answers.... We want a road map, but God hands us a musical score

instead."

"Do I get frustrated when I can't make sense of life? I am willing to

accept the fact that no all my questions will be answered."

On a totally seperate side note, Woody Allen once made up a comic of

being in a situation with a acquaintance whom he had nothing in

common with: It showed, a bunch of people cramming into a telephone

booth and then coming out. As they came out.. The friend said,

"Gee , I wonder How they get in there?!", Woody replies: "That's the

fundamental difference between us, I wonder Why?"

Sometimes, I feel that we have to ask why are we seeking particular

paths or seeking certain information. It's a painstaking process at

times. But trial and error are the best forms of learning and

applying. Whether one is a Jnana, Bkakti or Karma yogi, It should

still always boil down to finding one's own God Given path in the

smoothest and most natural way according to their circumstance.

Blessings,

Ree

-

mahamuni

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:03 AM

Re: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Jesse,

I too have used this word for decades. I have gone into a deeper

examination of these things in the last few years. These types of

words create all kinds of preconceptions for Westerners and modern

Easterners alike. Outside of Gurus that teach here in the West or

taught middle class and up Westerners in India, I have never heard a

traditional Indian sadhu use any term like this. Many times this

word is used in translation of what a Saint said, but that is not a

proper defense of its usage as translation brings in a host of

problems.

Also English absolutely does not come from Sanskrit. I don't know

where you are getting your etymology from. Similiar sounds and words

in seperate languages should not be approached in this type of format.

I did pose the question for Shree Maa and Swamiji. It is their answer

that I was seeking and this is again what I thought this forum was

for.

The problem is the West here has been a victim of import so to speak.

This is a very long subject for discussion so I won't really touch

upon it here. Westerners classify things. We are taught to do this

from early childhood in school. In the West, Science is God so to

speak and that is why we are always trying to explain phenonema

scientifically. We impose our Western Discourse onto the Eastern

Mystical Traditions. That is why there is so much talk of

enlightened Guru vs non enlightened Guru, and what state of

consciousness one resides in, etc, etc. This is a very big subject

matter that causes a Western born and trained mind great anguish to

face. It took me years to come to terms with this and many trips to

India to straighten it out. You should try reading some of Michel

Foucault. Start with The Order of Things and possibly The Primacy of

Perception.

I mean how many Westerners do you know that even bother to learn an

Indian language. Wouldn't a real disciple learn the Mother Tongue of

his/her Guru? Just out of respect, if nothing else? This is the

perfect example of the Western person's arrogance. We want to have

the darshan of a sadhu hiding away from the world like Bamakhepa or

Sombari Baba, but if they appeared to us what would we have to say?

What would be our reason for disturbing them? What would we hope to

gain? Would we arrogantly expect them to speak English to us? Do

you see what I am driving at?

Think about it.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Jesse Arana

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:34 PM

RE: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Namaste Surya,

I will do my best here...

The first part of the word, "En" - comes from the Sanskrit word

Antara, which means "Inner." English comes from Sanskrit, and so the

word "Enter" is a direct cognate of "Antara".

The second part of the word, "Light" - is from Old English loet... but

that is from Greek lukhnos, lamp. That is from Sanskrit, "lok" as a

verb, it is lokate, to look, view, contemplate; perceive, know.

That's also where we get the word, loka, or, "that which can be

seen," i.e., "world."

The last part, is from the Sanskrit root "Man" which means, think,

believe, imagine; consider. The Latin, mente, English, mind. Also

Sanskrit "Mantr" to advise. "Ment(e)" it has also been noted as

"frame of mind."

So, Illuminated Frame of Mind (Light Within Mind).

When we talk about enlightenment from the Hindu and Buddhist

perspective, the original word was Budh, the Sanskrit word, to know.

There is also the root, Jna, wisdom. The Greek word Gnosis, was

derived from that root.

I also cannot find usage of the English word enlightenment before the 1700s.

As to what "Enlightenment" means...why not ask Shree Maa?

Jesse Arana (Kailash)

www.meditationinfocus.com

mahamuni [mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net]

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:50 PMTo:

Subject: Re: Swamiji's

answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

This prompts a question:

What is "enlightenment"? Is it something that actually exists or a

term that has been thrown around here in the West starting with

Madame Blavatsky and Her Ascended Masters in the late 1800s and

followed by the Theophists. I can not find record of it before then.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Sarada

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:28 PM

Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

First please answer, was Jesus from the east or the west? Let's ask

the same question about Mohammed and the Bal Shem Tov. According to

our philosophy, there have been enlightened beings in eveery

tradition, in every country around the world. And they have all left

behind tools by which we can pursue our own enlightenment.To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the

[Guest guest]

Your fine. I never heard any other intention in your post. I felt

your sincerity. There is no need to aplogize. How hard we are on

ourselves sometimes, I think you are doing fine. Please post more.

I have noticed myself when posting... I hurry and that makes me make

poor choices of word decisions. Mahamuni helped me reflect on that

one. I'm getting better:)

But really, I think we are all learning how to communicate, relate to

the divine and eachother. I see this as all good. Knowing God is

great, but we have to learn how to relate to eachother too and not be

too worried that we are going to hurt someone unintentionally or

destroy someone's faith by asking probing questions. That is apart

of life, sometimes we get hurt, but we learn to understand, forgive

and move on.

This satsang is a blessing because we get a chance to have safety

behind the laptop. Meaning, we most likely have more courage to say

what is on our mind, more so than if we were at a temple worried

about appearances. It's more real that way. I'm not into appearances

and enjoy all the fruitful discussion of passionate nature or calm

sattvic nature. It makes no difference to me, I'm learning along

with the rest here. Even if it gets political or passionate I feel

most are being real. There is no harm in asking questions that are

going to heal our relationship with God and create better

understanding.

Namaste,

KellyReeshava Mitra <reeshu (AT) worldnet (DOT) att.net> wrote:

Namaste All:

I, too, need to clarify my original post. Firstly, I did not mean to

use anyone as a scapegoat in issuing my post. So, please forgive me

if I displayed that tone. Secondly, I by no means wanted to

categorize one group over another.

I perhaps rushed my reply a bit(a long time bad habit of mine which is

coming under control day by day) and did not fully listen to my "inner

Guru" in constructing the post.

The points still stand in relation to the whole and not any one particular group.

I wish to remain silent in regards to this matter and move forward.

Prostrations and Prayers at the lotus feet of Shree Maa and Swami ji

for showering their Divine blessings and grace on all of us to march

towrds self realization.

Blessings to all,

Ree

-

mahamuni

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 11:44 PM

Re: Great point Surya ji

Thanks for your post. It was nice to read.

I thought a slight bit of elaboration might be in order. I hope this

is not out of the scope of this group and I will be quiet and still

after this.

All that I am about to state I have learned from my interactions with

Sadhus, especially the Nagas, and especially one very unique Naga

Sannyasi who is a Westerner and has been in India for most of the

last 36 years. He opened me up to a whole new way of seeing,

especially seeing myself and my own conditioning and discourse.

In the West we address the Esoteric Traditions of the East in the form

of text and technique. Our method of inquiry typically consists of

reading books and taking classes of different forms. Of course there

are exceptions, but generally there is no context by which these

"things" have a place and make sense. In the East, Oral Tradition

rules and everything is about becoming part of the Tradition and

about the Guru-Sishya relationship inside the Guru Parampara--True

Context by which what goes on inside the Tradition can truly be

applied, or makes sense, or has a background to find a place. The

individual is unimportant. Even how advanced the Guru is or may be

(how can we judge this in reality anyway--takes one to know one) is

absolutely secondary. In the West, we consume books on "Yoga" and

base our knowledge on what we read. We get caught up in many terms

and foreign words that we then impose our own way of classification

upon. We

argue about this and that concept without having any depth of

understanding through proper experience. We might be horrified to

find out that much of what we have read might have been filtered for

Westerners or written in a way that is curtailed towards Western

constructs. Just look at the earliest US "imports" of Yoga and how

their organizations were set up here. Like churches. Also even more

frightening/appauling is that many times fiction is displayed as

supposed fact and at the very least embellished beyond recognition

without stating as much. This is especially true with so many books

about a westerner's relationship with a certain "enlightened" master.

Why is this the case? Because the day to day details of the

Guru-Disciple relationship are boring externally. They simply don't

make for good reads. In Indian traditions, a disciple serves his

Guru tirelessly, especially after initiation. The true learning

occurs thru

osmosis of being with the Guru. This is how the disciple become the

Guru. The Grace and Guru or Lineage Shakti can't help but flow to

the disciple that pleases his/her Master. But reading about how one

washes the pots and pans and kamadalus and lotas every day and cooks

and sweeps and does the laundry just doesn't help to make the NY

Times Best Seller list. Usually one will serve for 12 years before

formally learning anything.

In the West, we focus on technique. Ask 9 out of 10 people what Yoga

is and they will tell you it is practicing various poses. Maybe a

few will add in breathing exercises and/or meditation. Is this Yoga?

Is this even Hatha Yoga? I would say ABSOLUTELY NOT. These are some

habits, methods, etc primarily taken from a small sect of Sadhus

primarily known as the Naths (followers of Gorak Nath), but out of

context of that tradition. Then further altered in a variety of

ways. In the West we are so eclectic. We borrow a little bit from

everywhere and "forge our own Path". In the East, they try to follow

everything they learn from their Guru to the letter. In Sanskrit you

learn by memorizing both a pre-existing set of questions and answers.

The specific answers are already set. In the East, one does not take

up an eclectic Path so to speak. Sure they may learn

different things from multiple Gurus inside their tradition, but they

do mix and match as they see fit. They believe that in the beginning

all was Perfect and Full (in the Satya Yuga, the first age, if we are

to use a term or two) and then becomes more and more diluted and

deconstructed as time goes on. They try to imitate their Gurudeva

exactly, though they know they never can become as great as their

Guru. At least all true disciples think this way which is why the

seat of their Guru is always higher than their own. They may notice

that their Guru does a certain exercise or ritual after his morning

bath and after an untold length of time and observing this may one

day ask Him/Her about it and ask if maybe they should be doing that.

Maybe the Guru will reply, "oh you want to learn that? Okay". Then

he will give instruction or have an elder disciple do it, depending

on the situation. This is how the tradition generally goes.

Their rules are Descriptive rather than Prescriptive. They don't say

be celibate or you can't be a Yogi. they don't kick their disciple

out if they hear he had sex last night, nor do they usually ask such

a thing. Usually in India what happens behind closed doors stays

behind closed doors. They would say be celibate if you want to speed

up your acquisition of the goal you are trying to achieve thru a

certain sadhana.

You don't wake up at 4 AM specifically because it is the best time to

meditate. You get up at 4 AM (or usually earlier) because for one, it

is dark and since typically you go for a bowel movement first thing in

the morning before your bath so that you can be "pure" for your puja,

etc, this is one of the only times you can get a little privacy.

Secondly, your Guru will be waking up at 5 or so and you need to go

to the bathroom, brush your teeth, take your bath, etc, and take a

little time for yourself and your sadhana (whatever that may be at

the time) before He/She gets up and you need to start attending

Him/Her. Again, Descriptive rather than Prescriptive.

Not that it is my place to comment, but Shree Maa and Swamiji are

unique in this respect. They operate within a traditional framework

while making it very easy for those that come to get right into it,

so to speak. This is Pure Grace. We are so fortunate to have Them

and access to Them in this way. The tapes and books and web classes

and radio, etc, is Pure Grace and a Goddess Send, not to mention how

They are in person! What an inspiration They are and how tireless

They serve us. I only wish I could do more for Them.

That is enough. Please forgive if anything offends anyone. I just

figured a little elaboration was needed to not be rude. Back to

Silence where one can truly learn.

Jai Maa and Pranams to All,

Surya

-

Reeshava Mitra

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:39 PM

Great point Surya ji

Namaste and Blessing to All:

This is my first posting. But first allow me to offer my prostrations

and obeisances to Shree Maa and Swami Ji for blessing me to find them

during this lifetime. Furthermore, I'm grateful to be part of this

discussion group and share in all the feelings and frustrations

towards fulfilling our Divine journey.

I've been reading the posts for the last few days and didn't quite

know how to reply. Then, I started seeing a definite direction which

did not agree with me and it wasn't until this post from

Mahamuni(Surya ji) that I felt compfortable to reply.

You see, I'm what's known as a PIO(Person of Indian Origin). However,

I was born and raised in a small town in PA until moving out west just

4 years ago. So for me many life issues were always within the

"twilight" , always trying to find out where I belong and what

customs and traditions to follow. The bulk of my friends are

Catholic or another Christian based sect while commensurately my

household and extended family always followed traditional Hindu

rituals. So it was needless to say a very confusing upbringing

during many times in my life. It really wasnt' until I moved out

here that I began to return "Home" and finding out about my "self."

Ok, enough exposition...

I sometimes find that we all try to account for everything too much.

Growing up here, I tend to agree with the previous commentator that

we(westerners) have the constant urge to explain and account for

everything. Without a detailed explanatiion for every account can

cause certain people to display "agnostic" type characteristics

towards particular subjects. I think that St. Augustine summarized

it best when he said in relation to UNDERSTANDING God, (to paraphrase

from a book which I have a photostat of)

"If you have understood," he wrote, "then what you have understood is

not God." We can know God, we can love God, but we can never fully

understand God. In the Book of Job, Job longed to comprehend God's

actions. Finally, out of the whirlwind came the answer.. Only it

wasn't an answer at all: "Where were you when I laid the foundation

of the earth?... Who set its measurements, since you know?... Or who

laid it cornerstone when the morning stars sang together...?")[Job

38:4-7]

"Here, God's response was nothing more than questions, But now he

understood that God can't be reduced to pat responses. We all want

the answers.... We want a road map, but God hands us a musical score

instead."

"Do I get frustrated when I can't make sense of life? I am willing to

accept the fact that no all my questions will be answered."

On a totally seperate side note, Woody Allen once made up a comic of

being in a situation with a acquaintance whom he had nothing in

common with: It showed, a bunch of people cramming into a telephone

booth and then coming out. As they came out.. The friend said,

"Gee , I wonder How they get in there?!", Woody replies: "That's the

fundamental difference between us, I wonder Why?"

Sometimes, I feel that we have to ask why are we seeking particular

paths or seeking certain information. It's a painstaking process at

times. But trial and error are the best forms of learning and

applying. Whether one is a Jnana, Bkakti or Karma yogi, It should

still always boil down to finding one's own God Given path in the

smoothest and most natural way according to their circumstance.

Blessings,

Ree

-

mahamuni

Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:03 AM

Re: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Jesse,

I too have used this word for decades. I have gone into a deeper

examination of these things in the last few years. These types of

words create all kinds of preconceptions for Westerners and modern

Easterners alike. Outside of Gurus that teach here in the West or

taught middle class and up Westerners in India, I have never heard a

traditional Indian sadhu use any term like this. Many times this

word is used in translation of what a Saint said, but that is not a

proper defense of its usage as translation brings in a host of

problems.

Also English absolutely does not come from Sanskrit. I don't know

where you are getting your etymology from. Similiar sounds and words

in seperate languages should not be approached in this type of format.

I did pose the question for Shree Maa and Swamiji. It is their answer

that I was seeking and this is again what I thought this forum was

for.

The problem is the West here has been a victim of import so to speak.

This is a very long subject for discussion so I won't really touch

upon it here. Westerners classify things. We are taught to do this

from early childhood in school. In the West, Science is God so to

speak and that is why we are always trying to explain phenonema

scientifically. We impose our Western Discourse onto the Eastern

Mystical Traditions. That is why there is so much talk of

enlightened Guru vs non enlightened Guru, and what state of

consciousness one resides in, etc, etc. This is a very big subject

matter that causes a Western born and trained mind great anguish to

face. It took me years to come to terms with this and many trips to

India to straighten it out. You should try reading some of Michel

Foucault. Start with The Order of Things and possibly The Primacy of

Perception.

I mean how many Westerners do you know that even bother to learn an

Indian language. Wouldn't a real disciple learn the Mother Tongue of

his/her Guru? Just out of respect, if nothing else? This is the

perfect example of the Western person's arrogance. We want to have

the darshan of a sadhu hiding away from the world like Bamakhepa or

Sombari Baba, but if they appeared to us what would we have to say?

What would be our reason for disturbing them? What would we hope to

gain? Would we arrogantly expect them to speak English to us? Do

you see what I am driving at?

Think about it.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Jesse Arana

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:34 PM

RE: Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

Namaste Surya,

I will do my best here...

The first part of the word, "En" - comes from the Sanskrit word

Antara, which means "Inner." English comes from Sanskrit, and so the

word "Enter" is a direct cognate of "Antara".

The second part of the word, "Light" - is from Old English loet... but

that is from Greek lukhnos, lamp. That is from Sanskrit, "lok" as a

verb, it is lokate, to look, view, contemplate; perceive, know.

That's also where we get the word, loka, or, "that which can be

seen," i.e., "world."

The last part, is from the Sanskrit root "Man" which means, think,

believe, imagine; consider. The Latin, mente, English, mind. Also

Sanskrit "Mantr" to advise. "Ment(e)" it has also been noted as

"frame of mind."

So, Illuminated Frame of Mind (Light Within Mind).

When we talk about enlightenment from the Hindu and Buddhist

perspective, the original word was Budh, the Sanskrit word, to know.

There is also the root, Jna, wisdom. The Greek word Gnosis, was

derived from that root.

I also cannot find usage of the English word enlightenment before the 1700s.

As to what "Enlightenment" means...why not ask Shree Maa?

Jesse Arana (Kailash)

www.meditationinfocus.com

mahamuni [mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net]

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:50 PMTo:

Subject: Re: Swamiji's

answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

This prompts a question:

What is "enlightenment"? Is it something that actually exists or a

term that has been thrown around here in the West starting with

Madame Blavatsky and Her Ascended Masters in the late 1800s and

followed by the Theophists. I can not find record of it before then.

Pranams,

Surya

-

Sarada

Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:28 PM

Swamiji's answer to Kelly's question about western enlightened beings

First please answer, was Jesus from the east or the west? Let's ask

the same question about Mohammed and the Bal Shem Tov. According to

our philosophy, there have been enlightened beings in eveery

tradition, in every country around the world. And they have all left

behind tools by which we can pursue our own enlightenment.To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of is

subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the To

from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the To from this

group, send an email to:Your

use of is subject to the

To from this group, send an email

to:Your use of

is subject to the

 

The New with improved product search