Ever had a Guru ?

[wil]

Jesus is my guru.

[citizenzen]

Earlier, I said life was mine, but apparently that doesn't qualify.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

It is inconceivable to me that even the most loyal of students wouldn't experience doubt regarding their guru.

Working through doubt, of one's self, one's teacher, and one's faith is part of the process of learning.

I could never see you having a guru anytime soon. You argue too much. To continue in doubt is not learning or growing, that is being afraid to learn or grow, When one thinks they already know more than the guru that they question them, then you don't have a guru...what you have is someone you doubt. Nothing wrong with that, but you still need to distinguish the difference.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by wil

Jesus is my guru.

You picked the best one. IMO - No need to doubt or question it either.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by path_of_one

The expansion of your line of reasoning makes sense. It was just without this expansion, it made it unclear as to discernment in choosing a teacher. Far too many people search to fill some void and are thus quite vulnerable; far too many others are manipulative and take advantage of people who are seekers.

I did not have to search, they came to me
But yah, searching to fill a void is not a good approach. That could get one into trouble.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

My mother is deceased.

"Monks, it's through his way of participating in a discussion that a person can be known as fit to talk with or unfit to talk with. If a person, when asked a question, doesn't give a categorical answer to a question deserving a categorical answer, doesn't give an analytical (qualified) answer to a question deserving an analytical answer, doesn't give a counter-question to a question deserving a counter-question, doesn't put aside a question deserving to be put aside, then — that being the case — he is a person unfit to talk with.

AN 3.67: Kathavatthu Sutta

No one said you can't ask the guru questions. It is questioning the gurus answers as valid or correct that makes them not your guru.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by Bandit

I could never see you having a guru anytime soon. You argue too much. To continue in doubt is not learning or growing, that is being afraid to learn or grow, When one thinks they already know more than the guru that they question them, then you don't have a guru...what you have is someone you doubt. Nothing wrong with that, but you still need to distinguish the difference.

Funny. I was told by my zen teacher that one must work through doubt to achieve enlightenment.

Maybe she was wrong.

Whoops! More doubt!

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Funny. I was told by my zen teacher that one must work through doubt to achieve enlightenment.

Maybe she was wrong.

Whoops! More doubt!

Your teacher is obviously not my teacher because I disagree. Go ahead & work through your doubt until the cows come home and then you might get enlightenment.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by Bandit

Your teacher is obviously not my teacher because I disagree. Go ahead & work through your doubt until the cows come home and then you might get enlightenment.

Peace and wisdom in your life as well.

(And you said I was argumentative.)

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by GlorytoGod

ever had one of those, what was it like ?

If I can be of further assistance in sharing my experience as I feel you are going through the same thing with your guru as I have, feel free to PM me. We might learn some things by sharing in a quiet place.

[Netti-Netti]

A good teacher makes someone uncomfortable....

In my own experience, a good teacher makes someone comfortable with their doubts to where they can study those doubts and get a better understanding of what they're about. Diffusing the doubts helps the person get better oriented and able to see the situation for what it is.

A teacher should not, in my opinion, resonate (not) because the person is what you want them to be, but rather because the person awakens potential and growth in you.

The difference becomes more understandable over time. Like other relationships, even a carefully planned student/teacher relationship will have a life of its own, shaped by unpredictable qualities arising from the personalities involved. Conscious decisions may actually not factor into it very much, especially for a student who is not clear on the goals to begin with (and for whom they may not be understandable for some time).

Deeply spiritual teachers may have a great deal of power, but they will have risen above the desire to throw it around or use it to control others, and they will not ask you to admire them as much as to investigate yourself.

Again, I suspect this becomes clear only in hindsight. It's hard to know whether someone's antics are self-serving or purposeful with respect to important goals.

A quick thought: Unless a present day teacher is a Vedic scholar and the interaction is focused on passing on the Vedas and learning the memory techniques, the relationship wouldn't even resemble a traditional Guru-shishya relationship by which the Vedic oral tradition was preserved for hundreds of years.

Anyone in the West who would call him/herself a "Guru" would need to be aware that by joking around with the title, they risk making it essentially meaningless by simply ignoring the origins in a very specific tradition. Same is true for anyone who calls a teacher "guru."

The Western idea of Guru is someone you sign up with in order to get a crash course in enlightenment -i.e., someone with occult or esoteric knowledge to impart. This strikes me as artificial.

It's very artificial. It's also out of touch with the historic tradition. The guruparampara lineage involves a transmission of Vedic knowledge from one guru to the next. That's how the original Guru-shishya relationship was intended. To be faithful to that concept, you'd study with a Guru if you were planning to become a Guru yourself, and then you'd be able to pass Veda on to someone one else.

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

In my own experience, a good teacher makes someone comfortable with their doubts to where they can study those doubts and get a better understanding of what they're about. Diffusing the doubts helps the person get better oriented and able to see the situation for what it is.

I can see that. But I also think that a good teacher sometimes pushes the buttons to cause doubt. We need doubt as a starting point in the process. Some people need more comfort and assurance so they can handle doubt they already have. Other people aren't even to the point where they've awakened to doubt yet.

I guess I'd say that a good teacher makes you feel safe, but that doesn't mean you're comfortable.

The difference becomes more understandable over time. Like other relationships, even a carefully planned student/teacher relationship will have a life of its own, shaped by unpredictable qualities arising from the personalities involved. Conscious decisions may actually not factor into it very much, especially for a student who is not clear on the goals to begin with (and for whom they may not be understandable for some time).

Yep.

Again, I suspect this becomes clear only in hindsight. It's hard to know whether someone's antics are self-serving or purposeful with respect to important goals.

I don't find it that difficult to discern the difference, but maybe that is just me. I sense these things. But in some cases, it seems very clear to anyone who is not already very gullible. If someone is demanding you to turn your back on your family and friends and turn over all the contents of your wallet... chances are the antics are self-serving. There's just a lot of spirituality in all religions in the US that boils down to a money-making machine for someone, often combined with making the leader feel powerful, special, or whatever. Reasonable financial support of someone for doing a good job at guiding people spiritually is, well, reasonable. But some are not so reasonable.

[wil]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

It's also out of touch with the historic tradition. The guruparampara lineage involves a transmission of Vedic knowledge from one guru to the next. That's how the original Guru-shishya relationship was intended. To be faithful to that concept, you'd study with a Guru if you were planning to become a Guru yourself, and then you'd be able to pass Veda on to someone one else.

Namaste NN,

According to the tradition above, does one guru only pass on information or develop any new insight?

Any thoughts on guru moments? ie. it seems occasionally I find a temporary guru, a momentary guru, when someone provides insiane connection of thought which assists me to connect the dots.

Which leads me to the quiestion, in truth is everyone a guru and is it us that need to see/hear/understand (those with ears)?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

In my own experience, a good teacher makes someone comfortable with their doubts to where they can study those doubts and get a better understanding of what they're about. Diffusing the doubts helps the person get better oriented and able to see the situation for what it is.

The difference becomes more understandable over time. Like other relationships, even a carefully planned student/teacher relationship will have a life of its own, shaped by unpredictable qualities arising from the personalities involved. Conscious decisions may actually not factor into it very much, especially for a student who is not clear on the goals to begin with (and for whom they may not be understandable for some time).

Again, I suspect this becomes clear only in hindsight. It's hard to know whether someone's antics are self-serving or purposeful with respect to important goals.

Regarding the use of antics: antics can have a multi-fold function:

• antics help to hold the attention of those who are not awakened, but are open. It can serve as a time-release mechanism to deliver the message when the person is ready to understand it. In this case, they will see it in hindsight.
• Antics will invite those who are more awakened to look more deeply for the lesson--which is a good habit to cultivate.
• The right antics can help to develop mudita, aka sympathetic joy, (one of the sublime states,) which is helpful in counteracting things like jealousy.
• antics can basically help to screen out idolators who are not willing to look deeply.
• antics can help to develop discernment
• antics help to develop acceptance of other views, including your own doubts.

See also 1 Corinthians 1

[Netti-Netti]

Wil,

Originally Posted by wil

According to the tradition above, does one guru only pass on information or develop any new insight?

The Vedas were mainly hymns and liturgical recitations for use at ceremonies. Not sure how much room there was to get creative. It's not totally clear since it was after all an oral tradition going back to 2000 BC. A lot of the later written texts that contained the original oral material were lost.

Any thoughts on guru moments? ie. it seems occasionally I find a temporary guru, a momentary guru, when someone provides insane connection of thought which assists me to connect the dots.

I'd say that's more of a illumination/spiritual guide function. The Vedas were handed down by the priestly class (Brahminic gurus) whose interaction with others was largely limited to ceremonial functions and administrative functions (as court officials who advised kings or as actual leaders). I've haven't seen much info about the extent they were a resource to help people out with spiritual matters or life questions.

Which leads me to the question, in truth is everyone a guru and is it us that need to see/hear/understand (those with ears)?

Someone suggested that if they were rejecting things the teacher was teaching, it was because it wasn't the right teacher. It sounds like you'd say the student isn't ready to learn. I can see that.

In OT Hebrew the same word is used for "hear" and "obey." Maybe we're not prepared to hear because we don't want to change our lives in a way that reflects a genuine acceptance/integration of the guidance received.