|
|
| Did he have a guru? |
|
| |
|
| tubeseeker - 2007-08-13 4:37 PM
Did he have a guru?
St. John the Baptist? Plus he spent a great deal of his youth with various teachers, who aren't named, IIRC. Despite all the miraculous this and that, I believe he did have a pretty solid grounding in the teaching of the day. I also think that he was probably one of those difficult prodical students who are always showing up his teachers. Anyway, I'm sure somebody with a better grounding in Biblical studies can fill in the details for you. (ZB?) |
|
| |
|
| Only He and His Guru know the fact.
tubeseeker - 2007-08-13 4:37 PM
Did he have a guru? |
|
| |
|
| biblical canon doesn't really give much insight into whether or not jesus had a teacher and who that teacher may have been. but, jewish tradition is such that he did have teachers--if not in his home synagogue, then likely in other places (such as his 40 days in the desert, which is a symbolic number and refers not to days themselves, but to a time in monastic hermitage, which would include having a 'head abbot' or teacher, while at the temple around 12 years old since he was 'left there' though this might be a stretch), and so on.
but, there is a terminology issue here. is the term 'guru' being used to refer to a spiritual teacher/leader in a general way or is it used specificly as to whether or not jesus learned, studied, and practiced yoga from the vedic tradition, and whether he had a vedic guru to guide him.
to the second use of the term, there's nothing within the biblical canon that suggests that Jesus had such a guru, but there are those who interpret many ex-canonical texts to refer to such activities (asserting in one instance that jesus's "40 days" was not monastic in the jewish, desert hermitage sense, but rather a travel beyond the middle east to india to live in an ashram).
to the best of my knowledge, there is no certain evidence--within or without the canon--to suggest that Jesus travelled to india or that he had a guru in that sense.
but i think that it can be strongly asserted that he had many jewish teachers throughout his life, and that he was a deeply spiritual man (at the least), who was also quite intellegent and capable, and who became a "guru" to many in his day and following.
|
|
| |
|
| The islamic material I've been reading seems to imply he would have had spiritual teachers due to the Jewish method of schooling and his lineage. However, as Zoebird says, guru is a vedic term so probably not if you take the strict definition.
Fee
Edited by Orbilia 2007-08-14 11:31 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Oh Lord! |
|
| |
|
| Neel, please feel free to step in here, but I thought that guru was Sanskrit for teacher. |
|
| |
|
| guru is a term which implies an entiry, generally another person but not always, who definitely takes a spiritual seeker onto the path of liberation, Moksha, Nirvana, Realization, etc. Guru is not always a person, and in such a case, the Ishwar himself takes up that role for a devotee, but this happens very very rarely and even in such cases, mostly the Ishwara takes a form of a temporary human being who is seen only once or rarely by the spiritual seeker.
Guru appears only when the disciple is ready or ripe and gives the instruction which is appropriate for that disciple. However, there is no doubt that a disciple shall reach the goal by following this instruction. There is total certainty about this. In fact, the highest level guru can almost force the seeker to follow the instruction. But, that is same as disciple being ready.
Guru takes full responsibility of their disciple.
However, all the above amounts to saying that Guru himself is Realized and Liberated. Only a lit candle can light another candle, and it can only light candle like substance, not iron.
Guru term is used to mean an expert, teacher, etc. But, that is a later development.
In Yoga Sutras, the oldest guru is Ishwara:
sa puurveshaamapi guruH kaalenaanavacchedat.....Patanjali, Chapter 1.
Guru can not be searched by a devotee physically. It appears when disciple is ready. However, a disciple can pray for one. |
|
| |
|
| Oops. I forgot about writing about Jesus. Only incarnation of a God, which is full, does not have Guru. The incarnation is realized from the birth itself. The only known example of this is: Shree Krishna. All others have been partial incarnation. They all had gurus. And, even Shree Krishna went to Acharya Sandipani and considered him as Guru. But, Shree Sandipani declared that Shree Krishna already knows all things and has only increased the honor of Sandipani by accepting his studenthood.
Logically, Jesus was realized later in his life and therefore, he had a Guru, even if that means his Guru was God himself.
Also, incarnation born in human form sometimes follows human course of living, so it is not possible know the incarnation completely. So, this may apply to Jesus.
But, Jesus was NOT Christian! And, his devotees are Christian. And, there is no concept of Guru in Christianity. So, there is NO contradiction! |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 101
| You might be interested in this theory about "Prophet Issa":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Notovitch
If you dig a bit deeper, you might find that this is just one of many indirect indications that He not only had a guru, but also was very familiar with the "Eastern Philosophies".
Unfortunately, any direct physical evidence seems to be lost in the sands of time.
Is the answer to this question important for you?
Tw
Edited by tweeva 2007-08-16 5:19 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Upstate NY | Jesus is often referred to as Rabbi throughout the bible......... I would "assume" that as a rabbi he would of had spiritual instructions from another at one time |
|
| |
|
| no, the answer is not important to me, just wanted to put a thought out there, some interesting a vastly different replies which all seem to have merit |
|
| |
|
| neel:
it is interesting what you write about incarnations of God.
largely, christians believe that Jesus was a full and the only incarnation of God. they give evidence of the 12 yr old jesus in the temple as an example of his full understanding and awareness of him self as God incarnate. similarly, they note that both jesus and john the baptist recognized jesus as being a full incarnation since birth (or even prior), and yet jesus chose to be baptised anyway.
thus, applying the information via vedic tradition about fully realized individuals not having gurus, then jesus did not have a guru. though, jesus may have had teachers whom he admired, and called gurus, such as krishna did.
interesting.  |
|
| |
|
| I intentionally stayed away from this one, though I'd like to completely agree with ZB's last post.
|
|
| |
Jesus
