|
|
| It just dawned on me the other day and in discussion with a close spiritual friend that many great beings have been accused of sexually inappropriate behavour. Most guru's claim to live a celibate life and advocate maintaining your sexual fluids.
At the same time Mahershi Mahesh, Ghandi and my favourite Baba Mutkananda have all been accused to sexually exploiting women. I wonder the truth of these accusations or do they go hand in hand with being a great adhuvat? People may want to discredit these great beings. At the same time I dont want to be nieve and discount the possibilities that they to have sacummed to the power of sex.
How do you feel about this. | |
| | |
| Dear Ram: Very good question. Thank you. The only person whose words you should trust about such accussation about great people is the ONE who is accussed himself or herself. But, the probelm is that you must have trust in that accused person's words. And, unfortunately, that trust has to be more than the trust in the great being you quoted. And, you should never trust the words of foolish media who have nothing to do with spirituality. | |
| | |
| Are the words of these "great beings" useful to you right now? If so, what difference does it make what they did or did not do. You don't actually know them anyway. You only know them by their words. If these words are helpful to you on your path, great. If not, it really doesn't matter what the details of their lives are or were.
Great beings are "great" if their words help you find your self, right now. You can only actually know these "great beings" in your imagination, which is entirely self-generated. Your ideas about people that you don't know are something that you choose to make up, based on incomplete accounts of their lives from other people, each with a point of view and a positive or negative judgement.
If the message is godly, what difference does it make if the messenger was human?
Eat the meal, don't worship the menu!!! | |
| | |
| kulkarnn - 2008-03-03 11:43 AM
And, you should never trust the words of foolish media who have nothing to do with spirituality.
Ding ding ding.... We have a winner. The media in this country is controlled by about 5 corporations. They wield enormous amounts of power to put whatever spin they want upon every day events. So when some sort of scandal comes along, you should keep in mind that there's probably something more important you could be doing than worrying about things that are beyond your control.
As far as scandals in ashrams and the like go, it's true even the greatest among us are human, and are going to screw up from time to time, sometimes greatly. Unfortunately, the greater the person, the more potential for damage.
If you're really interested in this topic, I'd suggest reading "Yoga and the Quest for the True Self" by Stephen Cope. In addition to be a great book on yoga, he also deals with the issues around just this sort of controversy at an American ashram. | |
| | |
| kulkarnn - 2008-03-03 11:43 AM
Dear Ram: Very good question. Thank you.
The only person whose words you should trust about such accussation about great people is the ONE who is accussed himself or herself. But, the probelm is that you must have trust in that accused person's words. And, unfortunately, that trust has to be more than the trust in the great being you quoted.
And, you should never trust the words of foolish media who have nothing to do with spirituality.
.
No doubt about it. I dont trust anything in the media. I posed the question simply to see if others have contemplated this issue. I myself came to the conclusion that I can only validate my own experiences with the particular guru or practise (in this case Mutkananda and Siddha yoga). It has been nothing but a pure blessing and I have had nothing but positive experiences (and I mean real experiences that I cannot deny). | |
| | |
| jimg - 2008-03-03 2:32 PM
Are the words of these "great beings" useful to you right now? If so, what difference does it make what they did or did not do.QUOTE]
Actually it does make a difference what they do. Spoken words are one thing. But you have to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Their are many false guru's out there. In Siddha yoga, my practise, nobody ever tells you to blindly do anything. You must validate the authenticity of your spiritual master. If you feel it in your heart and your experiences then you can validate it. Ohterwise they are just empty words. Perhaps you misinterpreted what I meant when I posed the question. Most great beings come under attack. Its part of the world we live in. | |
| | |
| ram,
Don't confuse the message with the messenger. Great truths can be spoken by children and idiots. The truth is in the message. Your experiences are a result of the message, not the positive or negative things that people say about the messenger.
Namaste,
jimg | |
| | |
| Instead of focusing on great beings and sex,
try focusing on being
and great sex. | |
| | |
| Good article related to putting gurus on a pedestal: http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1995/1/1995-1-06.shtml I don't remember where I found this link, so perhaps it has already been shared in these forums. If so I humbly apologize for repeating uncredited and thank you. If not, it may be somewhat dated (1995) but the message really spoke to me. When following a spiritual path (or any path I suppose) it is reassuring to have leaders to show the way. When those leaders don't match our expectations, what kind of doubt does it throw on their message? I've chosen to go the same route as Zoebird and others - focus on the message more than the messenger. | |
| | |
| Many times people make "non great" a "great" being. Who will decide whethwer a person is great or not? Most of the times followers of such person generate impression (or hype) around their Guru and start calling him "Self-realized" or something. The fact is that no one gets a certificate of being self-realized. This also underlines an important fact - Even when you make great spiritual progress there is always a danger of degredation. One should be very careful even if he is advanced practitioner. If someone is taking wrong benefits under the name of "Vajroli" that person doesn't understand the true essense of Yoga. Also, I feel some of them get a wrong impression that "God is working through them". Such a state is extremely rare and most of the times they are under some illusion.
When I read such examples I bow down again and again to souls such as Ramakrishna Paramahansa who was so modest and humble and always suggested to be free from "Kamini" and "Kanchana". Not only that through out his life he demonstrated these principles. He practiced Tantra and at one point when he was asked to sit in the lap of a Kumari for certain mystic rituala went straight into Samadhi chanting the name of his Mother.
Focussing on message is ok but it makes difference (at least to me) as to who is giving it. It is like that - once a scientist was giving lecture saying that Vitamin C cures cold. While delivering this lecture he himself was sneezing and suffering from heavy cold. No body took his lecture seriously 
Further, if message alone matters then there are ample scriptures available (Vedas, Upanishads, Gita, Yoga texts etc.) who give great message to mankind so why do we still need Gurus then.
Edited by gauri 2008-03-06 12:52 AM
| |
| | |
| Interesting link Jenifer, I really liked it. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
    
| That would be Jennifer. Jenifer is someone else.  | |
| | |
| jimg - 2008-03-03 3:12 PM
ram,
Don't confuse the message with the messenger. Great truths can be spoken by children and idiots. .
Namaste,
jimg
No doubt great truths can be spoken by "idiots" and children but I'm talking about realized beings that are currently walking this earth. Some are more formal teachers and others just blend into the world. It's a blessing to come across a authentic guru to guide us on the path. To think you can do it by yourself is a bit delusional.
The thread by the way is about great beings and accusations of sexual misconduct. Just thought I would put it out there for discussion.
Edited by Ram 2008-03-06 12:15 PM
| |
| | |
| gauri - 2008-03-05 9:47 PM
Further, if message alone matters then there are ample scriptures available (Vedas, Upanishads, Gita, Yoga texts etc.) who give great message to mankind so why do we still need Gurus then.
Very good question!!!
My answer:
The system of guru (teacher) and followers was developed in ancient times as a way of passing information to others. It was based on the absolute authoritarian political/power structure of king (raja) and subjects as well as master and apprentice in the trades and father and family in the home. Since there were no printed books, no internet, and most people lived in villages, the only way to learn something was to find a teacher. From ancient times until the modern era, the king, the teacher, and the father were absolute authorities. This type of authority frequently leads to abuse and corruption because the authority figure has no feedback and the follower has only one point of view available.
This system is now obsolete, as millions of printed books, the internet, and global travel are available to us. Since the relationship between follower and guru encourages dependency and exploitation, the only reason to follow a guru today is to give your responsibilities to another. We all need teachers, but we need various points of view and to think for ourselves to grow. Otherwise, we are like mistletoe growing on an oak tree. The mistletoe gets all its nourishment from the oak and eventually kills it and they both die.
The reason that you need a guru is because the guru told you so. You think that the guru has something and you want it too. If the guru actually has anything, he/she found it on their own and you must too.
| |
| | |
| People misundertand what a guru really is. The ego is so puffed up it will automatically reject the concept of a guru.Spiritual ego is huge and is no different then any other form of ego. The real truth is having a guru or spiritual master will help you become more independent and think for yourself. The truth is we are conditioned beings restricted by our negative emotions and the world we live in.
The scriptures speak of the "truth". But they are very difficult to interpret. They were written a long time ago and often are spoken in parables. Hence guru or spiritual master is valueble in teaching about the scriptures. Our minds benefit from an association with a human form representing our own consciousness. When people bow down to a guru they are not bowing to the human form of the person. They are bowing to the representation of their own consciousness. Doing so is humbling.
The key is finding an authentic guru. A true guru never asks for or uses car salesman techniques to bring in followers. Its up to each person to authenticate a guru or spiritual master.
Edited by Ram 2008-03-06 12:40 PM
| |
| | |
| Following a guru is egotistical. You are trying to GET something from another person for yourself. This is desire. Seeking enlightenment or self-realization for yourself is egotism and desire. This is not being humble, it is being greedy. Yes, we can all learn from others, but once you become a follower, you are no longer authentic, you become a superficial imitation. Growth comes from the inside, not the outside. Yes, many external factors influence that growth, but it is still internal.
There are great teachers everywhere. Once you follow a particular guru or path, you no longer see them. They can be a tree, a bird, a sunset, music or other people. Don't close yourself to the infinite that is all around you right now because of the egotistical desire to GET something that only exists in your imagination. | |
| | |
| Hey jimg: I already gave my input to answer the original question. Here I am only making a comment on what you wrote earlier.
While there is some truth in what you wrote, actually your statement is generally not true.
The Term Guru is used in two contexts. One is colloquial language including social aspects as well as knowledge in a secular way. Here the Guru means an exceptional teacher or accomplished teacher of a particular subject.
The second usage is in Spirituality. Of course, this applies to only those who trust in that path and are trying something on that path. This meaning has NOTHING TO do with expert in a secular learning such as music, etc.
What Ram is writing/asking about is the Second Type of Guru. It is not good to mix up the meanings, causing confusion.
| |
| | |
| jimg - 2008-03-06 1:05 PM
Following a guru is egotistical. You are trying to GET something from another person for yourself. This is desire. Seeking enlightenment or self-realization for yourself is egotism and desire. This is not being humble, it is being greedy. Yes, we can all learn from others, but once you become a follower, you are no longer authentic, you become a superficial imitation..
Seeking elightenment is egotistical? LOL that is funny.
When I went to college I studied under my professors to learn. I didnt pretend to know it all. Some were better then others but only after much study did I realize who was authentic and who wasnt. Its important again like I have stated that you authenticate yourself your spiritual master or teacher. Sometimes your ego is so big though you dont think you need any type of teachers. You prefer "idiots" or the internet. | |
| | |
| I am trying to differentiate between LEARNING from a teacher and FOLLOWING another individual. The difference is in your relationship to that person. Following another (whether spiritual or secular) leads to dependency and exploitation. Learning leads to knowledge.
A person who is learning is open to learning from sources everywhere. A person who is following has limited themself to a single source that may be more of a projection of that person's desires than anything else. Once a person becomes a follower, they no longer have any frame of reference from which to determine what is real or valid.
| |
| | |
| Ram - 2008-03-06 10:33 AM
Seeking elightenment is egotistical? LOL that is funny.
Who is seeking enlightenment? Who are they seeking it for? What is the difference between seeking and desire?
What does contentment (as in Patanjali eight limbs, Niyama-santosha) mean to you? To me, it means really enjoying what I have (joy) instead of lusting after what I don't have (desire), no matter how noble sounding that goal (enlightenment) may sound. If I cannot fully enjoy my current state, why do I think that I will be able to enjoy some imagined state in the future?
Is lusting after enlightenment better than lusting after sex or money (or even chocolate)? | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | jimg - 2008-03-06 1:50 PM
I am trying to differentiate between LEARNING from a teacher and FOLLOWING another individual. The difference is in your relationship to that person. Following another (whether spiritual or secular) leads to dependency and exploitation. Learning leads to knowledge.
A person who is learning is open to learning from sources everywhere. A person who is following has limited themself to a single source that may be more of a projection of that person's desires than anything else. Once a person becomes a follower, they no longer have any frame of reference from which to determine what is real or valid.
I totally agree with this Jim. I speak from a place of someone who has been a follower at times of my life. Only to end up back at square one. So...the day I started learning is the day my mind opened up and lo and behold.."I saw the light"...no pun intended of course,
As for the sex thing...sex is just an action that can be performed to assist someone or a couple doing the act, in obtaining a higher experience. Hence the practice...Kamasutra, the art of love making. It's a secret though and should not be discussed about. | |
| | |
| Don't worry Cyndi, I won't tell the secret part! | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Okay....but, darnit...it sure would be fun to discuss about it...anyone care to dare first,  Hey Fee?? BB?? what's ya'll's input on this?? I want to hear the great wise ones first,
Edited by Cyndi 2008-03-06 8:24 PM
| |
| | |
| jimg - 2008-03-06 7:18 PM
Ram - 2008-03-06 10:33 AM
Seeking elightenment is egotistical? LOL that is funny.
Who is seeking enlightenment? Who are they seeking it for? What is the difference between seeking and desire?
What does contentment (as in Patanjali eight limbs, Niyama-santosha ) mean to you? To me, it means really enjoying what I have (joy ) instead of lusting after what I don't have (desire ), no matter how noble sounding that goal (enlightenment ) may sound. If I cannot fully enjoy my current state, why do I think that I will be able to enjoy some imagined state in the future?
Is lusting after enlightenment better than lusting after sex or money (or even chocolate )?
Many times I have read the only desire you should have is the desire for enlightenment. Part of enjoying what I have or living in the moment is by burning my negative emotions in the fire of meditation. How can you possibly fully live in the moment without doing some work on the mind and engaging in spiritual practises. I guess its possible but not for me.
I think your very confused by what it means to experience your true divinity. You think its some sort of ego trip. Perhaps you have never had a spiritual experience? | |
| | |
| jimg - 2008-03-06 1:50 PM
I am trying to differentiate between LEARNING from a teacher and FOLLOWING another individual.
I like the budhist philosophy of unlearning. Empty the bucket instead of filling it with more and more. Dry learning will get you nowhere but have more things to brag about to your friends. (spiritual ego). | |
| | |
|
Ram-Many times I have read the only desire you should have is the desire for enlightenment.
jimg===> Does reading something many times make it true? Why does it matter what the object of that desire is? Isn't desire desire, just like anger is anger no matter what its object? What does the hypothetical "should have" to do with the reality "is"? What about the desires that you actually have?
Ram-Part of enjoying what I have or living in the moment is by burning my negative emotions in the fire of meditation.
jimg===> What are negative emotions? Why are they negative? Where do they come from? In what way are they seperate from you so that you can "burn" them? Do you want to hold on to your "positive" emotions and get rid of your "negative" emotions? Who decides which are which? Isn't it the same entity that has or actually IS those emotions? How are you, your body, your mind, your spirit and your emotions seperate? If they are seperate, who seperates them?
Ram-How can you possibly fully live in the moment without doing some work on the mind and engaging in spiritual practises. I guess its possible but not for me.
jimg===> Who is working on the mind? Are spiritual practices certain things that you do and get certain things in return for? Are you buying, earning or bartering for spiritual goodies? I will do this if you give me that? Who is the entity that will give you what you want? Isn't wanting the same as desire? Isn't working on the mind and engaging in spiritual practices the desire for a different reality than the one that you are actually experiencing? If you aren't "enlightened" or whatever right now, why do you think that you will be at some time in the future? What are you waiting for?
Ram-I think your very confused by what it means to experience your true divinity. You think its some sort of ego trip.
jimg===>Have you experienced your true divinity? If so, how do you know that it was your true divinity and not just your imagination? Did you read about something, think that it would be really cool if you could have it and then pretend that you were experiencing it? Did you have an experience that was blissful and now you are trying to get more of it? Are you trying to hold on to a past experience? Are you projecting your memory of that into the future? If you have experienced something blissful, wasn't it totally in the present moment? Have you ever noticed how things like love and creativity and bliss flow through you, that you cannot hold on to them or make them happen?
Ram-Perhaps you have never had a spiritual experience?
jimg===>What is a spiritual experience?
| |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Ram - 2008-03-07 11:32 AM
I like the budhist philosophy of unlearning. Empty the bucket instead of filling it with more and more. Dry learning will get you nowhere but have more things to brag about to your friends. (spiritual ego).
Actually, that is not really the Buddhist philosophy at all. That statement is totally misunderstood and represented here in the West. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | jimg - 2008-03-07 1:42 PM
Ram-Many times I have read the only desire you should have is the desire for enlightenment.
As a yoga aspirant, the goal is enlightment. To desire is to be human.
Example...I have a desire to go to Peru one day so that I can experience that incredible place. I have a desire to drink chai tomorrow morning while watching it snow outside. Then I will have a desire to throw a snowball at Yodha.
Anyway, desire is such an interesting word. We live in this world and we must be able to perform certain actions and duties which are propagated by our 'desires'. I'd like to think that some desires are more healthier than others. Like another example...the desire to commit murder, that would not be a very good desire. A desire that would cause harm to another person or living being...that would also not be good. A desire to help other fellow beings. In which case, it cannot be faulted or labeled as bad. Although, I will say the road to hell was paved with good intentions (aka desires). So, we have to bee extremely careful don't we???
Speaking of harming others...did ya'll hear about that golfer that shot down a Hawk in Florida because he was making too much noise during a movie filming? What an idiot. The wildlife people and animal cruelty police are really after this guy bigtime. I hope they nail his butt to the wall. The guy was upset because he couldn't hit the bird with his first rounds. Made comments like, I can't believe I can't hit this bird and yet I hit golf balls all the time, or something to that effect...talk about an EGO problem and a very bad desire!!! 
Edited by Cyndi 2008-03-07 2:30 PM
| |
| | |
| jimg - 2008-03-07 1:42 PM
Ram-Many times I have read the only desire you should have is the desire for enlightenment.
jimg===> Does reading something many times make it true? Why does it matter what the object of that desire is? Isn't desire desire, just like anger is anger no matter what its object? What does the hypothetical "should have" to do with the reality "is"? What about the desires that you actually have?
Ram-Part of enjoying what I have or living in the moment is by burning my negative emotions in the fire of meditation.
jimg===> What are negative emotions? Why are they negative? Where do they come from? In what way are they seperate from you so that you can "burn" them? Do you want to hold on to your "positive" emotions and get rid of your "negative" emotions? Who decides which are which? Isn't it the same entity that has or actually IS those emotions? How are you, your body, your mind, your spirit and your emotions seperate? If they are seperate, who seperates them?
Ram-How can you possibly fully live in the moment without doing some work on the mind and engaging in spiritual practises. I guess its possible but not for me.
jimg===> Who is working on the mind? Are spiritual practices certain things that you do and get certain things in return for? Are you buying, earning or bartering for spiritual goodies? I will do this if you give me that? Who is the entity that will give you what you want? Isn't wanting the same as desire? Isn't working on the mind and engaging in spiritual practices the desire for a different reality than the one that you are actually experiencing? If you aren't "enlightened" or whatever right now, why do you think that you will be at some time in the future? What are you waiting for?
Ram-I think your very confused by what it means to experience your true divinity. You think its some sort of ego trip.
jimg===>Have you experienced your true divinity? If so, how do you know that it was your true divinity and not just your imagination? Did you read about something, think that it would be really cool if you could have it and then pretend that you were experiencing it? Did you have an experience that was blissful and now you are trying to get more of it? Are you trying to hold on to a past experience? Are you projecting your memory of that into the future? If you have experienced something blissful, wasn't it totally in the present moment? Have you ever noticed how things like love and creativity and bliss flow through you, that you cannot hold on to them or make them happen?
Ram-Perhaps you have never had a spiritual experience?
jimg===>What is a spiritual experience?
Questions, Questions, Questions. A some point my friend you should slow the mind down and just be. | |
| | |
| I haven't made up my mind about the necessity of a Guru for my own personal practice. I definitely have teachers but not a conventional Yoga Guru. My nature is to be skeptical of slavish devotion and organized worship. My nature is also to believe that humans are naturally positive and well-meaning. In a loving and playful spirit, I would suggest that if you have a particular aversion to the concept of a Guru and a strong independant streak, that may indicate the next area of growth for you. For instance, let go and submit to a great teacher. And if you have a particular affinity for Gurus, and go through cycles of not trusting your own wisdom, but following another until they fall from their pedestal...when then that may indicate the next area of growth for you. For instance, let go and submit to your own divinity. | |
| | |
| Also on a light note, even though I believe all human beings are fallible and don't have a Guru, I do have two people that I admire greatly and would be really devasted if I thought they were hypocrites. The Dalai Lama (14) and Oprah. Yep, I said it. | |
| | |
| I thought I posted this but it seems lost in cyberspace - if it shows up twice, my apologies. On a lighter note, even though I don't have a personal Guru and I think I acknowledge that no one belongs on a pedestal... There are two people/world figures whom I greatly admire and I would be really pretty devasted if they turned out to be hypocrites. The Dalai Lama (14th) and Oprah. Yep, I said it. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Asananow,
I don't think you'll have to worry about HH Dalai Lama.
Oprah??? Why did you choose Oprah?? Not that its bad or anything, just interesting to say the least along side the HH Dalai Lama.
As for Oprah being authentic, yea, she is in her own right..especially where world figures are concerned. I like her new show "The Big Give" and her topics on her show...they certainly have made an impact on our society. I remember when she came to Cumming, Ga back in the 80's to discuss the issues with the KKK. Hosea Williams had done a march to Cumming in protest of the KKK. That show changed a lot of things and how people viewed the South and the entire KKK movement. I was totally impressed with her and glad that event took place.
Some of my world figures are but not limited to...are: Jacques Cousteau, John Denver, Mother Theresa, Robert Redford, Barbara Streisand, and then David Duchovny as Mulder...the X-files is such an incredible TV series that brought some thought provoking issues, and entertaining ones too, | |
| | |
| Oprah to me, walks the walk as well as talks the talk. Some of the commercial materialism and celebrity stuff on her show or in the magazine, I just tune out or roll my eyes. But as far as bringing concepts like charity, spirituality and mental and physical health to the mainstream, she just amazes me. Not too many folks can do what she does on such a high level and so consistently for so long... The public is very fickle and likes to tear down those they have built up. So it is so interesting that for, what, 20 years, she's just helped people and they've continued to respond. The DL just amazes me on so many levels. Amma too. I hope to see her when she comes to Boston next summer. Funny, I never paid my attention to Mother Theresa until recently, now I'm planning to read her book. She definitely led by example. | |
| | |
| asananow - 2008-03-07 8:16 PM
I haven't made up my mind about the necessity of a Guru for my own personal practice. I definitely have teachers but not a conventional Yoga Guru. My nature is to be skeptical of slavish devotion and organized worship. My nature is also to believe that humans are naturally positive and well-meaning. In a loving and playful spirit, I would suggest that if you have a particular aversion to the concept of a Guru and a strong independant streak, that may indicate the next area of growth for you. For instance, let go and submit to a great teacher. And if you have a particular affinity for Gurus, and go through cycles of not trusting your own wisdom, but following another until they fall from their pedestal...when then that may indicate the next area of growth for you. For instance, let go and submit to your own divinity.
Appreciate your fresh perspective.
We in the west are conditioned to believe that in order to have a guru you become a "follower" and he dictates how you live your life. Nothing could be further from the truth. The guru is merely your inner guide on your spiritual path. I too have a very independent nature and for the longest time had an aversion to the guru principle. But since allowing myself to examine one I feel like with guidance I have freed myself from a lot of restrictive negative emotions and actually have become more independent of conditioned society beliefs. Go figure.
As for the Oprah. I watch her from time to time but in no way do I consider her any type of teacher for me. She is merely about what's "in" right now. Whatever Oprah is dabbling in right now she wants to sell you on. | |
| | |
|
Questions, Questions, Questions. A some point my friend you should slow the mind down and just be.
Ram,
Thank you.
Namaste,
Jim
PS Sometimes I forget that, especially after visiting Starbucks! | |
| | |
| Historically most guru's have been all too human characters who have frequently abused the power they wield for their own ego and libido gratification. One should always be open to learn from anyone who has something to teach, but never relinquish your own powers of critical thinking and judgement. submission to a reputation means you take on their flaws too.
this is an interesting read on the subject.
http://www.strippingthegurus.com/
| |
| |
|
Great beings and sex