|
Nora In the Mahabratha, Arjuna went into battle with his own guru. And in the life of Sri Ramakrishna one of his disciple documented that several times Sri Ramakrishna disobey the advise of his guru. How do we explain this phenomenon? I would like to iterate our position here again with regards to GURU, I think we have come to an assume concensus that based on our posting on the issue of Guru that : 1. We agreed and never deny the need of a guru. Basically we are not anti-guru. Having said that, it also means for those with gurus' does not make them `special', `blessed' or `better' then those of us here who are guruless. Each and every one of us have our own definitions of the word `Guru'. For some it is a human form, for others it might no necessarily be a human. But person is entitled to their own opinion. We have to respect that. 2. But we must also be practical and face the fact that it is not easy to get a good or reliable guru. So what are we who are guruless suppose to do. We don't go around lamenting about our guruless status, but we go on [ like me ] with our sadhana. As omprem have remarked in his post : "But there is also the fake Guru who does seek to control you. That is why one should do as you and Devi Bhakta are doing and be in no particular hurry to find a Guru, focusing instead on developing one's spiritual qualities and abilities, purifying one's mind, intellect, pranamaya kosha and heart. " Omprem have summarise whatever there is need to be said about Guru.Weather a guru will comes eventually I am not going to think about it. Because eventually the sun will still shine the next day, theflowers will still blooms, the grass will still grow. Life goes on. Omprem in his post on "time with Guru' remarked : While a Guru is necessary for spiritual enlightenment, that enlightenment could take place quickly or it could require a long time spread over several lifetimes. It all depends on the state of the sadhak when the Guru is encountered. Rightly said. A real guru might even stay away from me, understanding that a guru-chela relationship is not within my dharma at present. So maybe my real guru might arrive once my daughter is grown up and onher own. And when my husband does not depend on me anymore, when I have fulfilled my duties a householder, only then it is appropriateto give myself totally to the spiritual world. 3. We don't mind having people coming here quoting their Guru. I am one of those who will read them , but if I post a question and ask "look I don't understand what your guru is trying to say, so could you please explain to me " and you cant, then it is a problem. Lets us put Sri Ramakrishna aside for a while and concentrate on the Mahabhraatata, after all the Mahabhraatata is a treatise containing the code of life, and it expounds the philosophy of social and ethical relations. My thanks to Adishakti16 who have laboriously try to answer this question. But if I am not mistake it was Drona who was the Guru of Arjuna and not Krishna. "Behold this mighty sons of Pandu, O Perceptor ! arrayed by the son of Drupada your clever pupil " Duryodhana to Drona. And during the war, when Arjuna is faced with the reality, he brokedown and remarked " these are my kinsmen, my guru !, I am suppose toworship them and not war against them …" Lets just hear what two members of this group have to say about this [ I have keep the name anonymous ] because they have already answered whatever there is to be answer, unless of course somebody have more to add. Please do not hesitate. This is a discussion forum and we are not here to belittle or riducule others. Member A : if necessary one has to fight with own's guru as well when there is no choice. N : In what instances? What are the guidelines. When one can do that? And how do we know that what we are doing is the right thing. Because when you are with a guru, the guru's words is GODs word. So how do we know? Member A : But if your Guru is on the other side during a war, whereis the choice? N : So for you to uphold Dharma, its okay then to go against your guru? Member A : If necessary, yes N : But its tough dont you think. If I am with my guru and I worship him/her can one actually see any faults in one own guru. Its like biting the hands that feed you. Following your guru's words too is part of dharma. Member A : Horns of dilemma are there. Very difficult choice to make, since Krishna was with him, Arjuna was emboldened to make that choice. An ordinary mortal could not have done that. Member B : Well, the answer is. None of this is real. He who thinks he kills, and he who thinks he dies, are both mistaken. The dharma of a warrior is to fight and defend against enemies and if the guru of your youth is now the ally of your enemy, then the duty of the Kshatriya/Warrior is more important than the duty to the Guru of your youth. N : So its the clash between individual respect and regard vs.societal duty. Dharma is social responsibility. The guru becomes the enemy once he sides with injustices or have grossly wrong, like doing evil and such. Member B : You love your Guru and he has helped you greatly, but the past is passed, and now he is your enemy -- so kill him. He has thrown over his relationship to you as guru, he has separated himself from you and Krishna said, "Do you think they will not kill you?" Your guru will kill you if given the chance, so it's your duty as a warrior to kill him first. To maintain social order - everything in mainstream hinduism is about maintaining social order. N : But in the war too Arjuna have done other mistakes. So who is in the right and who is wrong here. You say your guru is wrong when you yourself is commiting it. Member B : Right ! Arjuna is a hero -- but ultimately an imperfect human. Arjuna finds himself opposed and asks Krishna: How can I harm my guru and Krishna says: because it's your duty. Arjuna says: To hell with duty, then!. Krishna says: Think about it -you're mouring over that which is not worth mourning over. Nobody kills in Reality, and nobody dies we are all one Soul only the body that dies but the soul remains but while we are in human form you were born a warrior --so fight, and never mind that he was your guru. And that, when push comes to shove, you'd better talk directly to God. N : But as they say guru is the incarnation of GOD Member B : For the Gita, Krishna is Brahman incarnated to assist Arjuna, who represents the human being the war, is life itself, and the demands and compromises it demands of us the human being asks God for help in figuring out how to live his life and God gives him the answer. We are all One. Don't get lost in the guru issue, Arjuan -you're in human incarnation right now so act in accordance with your dharma. N : GOD have given you the reasoning mind. Member B : Modern example My guru tells me to donate half my salary to his ashram but that would harm my family and my Dharma is that of the householder -- I am married and have kids. According to Krishna, I should tell the guru to piss off, and take care of my worldly obligations. If the guru tells me to sit in pooja room for weeks at a time -- fine: So long as I can live morally within the human life I've been given but if it harms my family or livelihood, I am doing something wrong. Omprem OM Nora You say, "We don't mind having people coming here quoting their Guru. I am one of those who will read them , but if I post a question and ask "look I don't understand what your guru is trying to say,so could you please explain to me " and you cant, then it is a problem." If I am unable to do that, then the problem lies either with my inability to understand what they are saying and to explain it in a way that someone else understands or with that person's inability to grasp what is being said. The problem does not lie with the Guru. Jaya Guru vishwanthan Krishnamoorthy I would like to add, in the absence of a reliable guru one could pray to Surya or Brahma for guidance (there are enough precedence in the purnanas for this) However, one practical reason to learn rituals from a Guru is that there are a lot of nuances which are impossible to capture in books... an extreme example (please do not misconstrue it) you would not like to learn to drive a car on your own without an instructor, right? For bhakthi marga one's conscience itself is the greatest Guru , afterall even a newborn baby can recognize it's Mother, can we, however deluded not find Her on our own? My opinion is that when the time is right things will happen... Nora THE ADINATH SECT Adinatha means "Primal Lord". The name refers not only to an aspect of the god Siva, but also the divine transcendental Self which exists within each of us. Members of the Adinath sect attempt to manifest this principle by means of ceremonial magick. According to legend, the Adinaths were founded by Siva, who revealed his magickal system to the Adept Matsyendranath at the insistence of the goddess Bhairavi (another name of Kali, pictured above). To a Nath (literally a Lord or Master, but used in the same sense as Adept), all means of increasing one's comprehension are equally valid. The Naths were not slow to develop links with Garuda Gana are particularly concerned with the cross-over between the Nath and Golden Dawn systems, but other branches of the Adinath Sampradaya have interests in a wide variety of different magickal techniques. THE LEFT HAND PATH Some authors have identified the Tantric Varma Marga, or left-hand path, with "Black Magic". We Naths never attempt to justify our actions - we alone are the legitimate arbiters. If we choose, we are sometimes prepared to offer explanations. One cannot attain liberationform while one is still involuntarily bound by social customs and conditioned actions. The left hand path refers to a process of radical deconditioning, where the adept deliberately inverts normal social codes and practices, whatever they may be, in order to be free of them. For example the Tantric Sadhu, or seeker of magick powers, reverses the conventions of traditional mendicants, growing hair long instead of the usual shaven-headed renunciation of the world, practicing sexual yoga rather than celibacy and experimenting with drugs in place of a life of abstinence. The Varma Marga is a way of putting sufficient distance between conditioning and self to allow the formation of a genuine self, rather than a mere apology for slave-like obedience to inherited behaviour patterns. KILLING THE GURU The Naths have got themselves something of a bad press on India, amongst other things for thier long-lived tradition of killing the Guru. Amongst the myriad mystics of the Indian sub-continent, there is a nearly universal stress on obedience to one's Guru. The Guru/Shishya (pupil) relationship has resulted in many rich and powerful Gurus, and many stupid and unenlightened Shishyas. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that obediance to Guru is merely a means to an end, and must be disposed of when that end is no longer being served. Adinatha, the primal consciousness, exists as a potential within all of us, but is more manifest in a Saint. Instruction from such a Saint is therefore useful until one has contacted the Divine Particle within. At this point, one becomes a Nath, and the Guru/Shishya relationship is internalized. Obedience to an external Guru beyond this point becomes regressive, a denial of the new inner spirituality. The Shishya therefore leaves the Guru and becomes self-dependant, a process known as "Killing the Guru". http://www.compulink.co.uk/~garuda/ganas/adinath.htm omprem OM Nora Thanks for an interesting article. The most provocative part of it was "The Guru/Shishya (pupil) relationship has resulted in many rich and powerful Gurus, and many stupid and unenlightened Shishyas." There is no doubt that this is true although I question whether we can refer to those who grow rich and powerful as Gurus. They are more properly referred to businessmen/women. The debate on Gurus always hinges on the fact that there are selfish people who style themselves as Gurus and gullible people who are only too willing to allow themselves to be used and abused by these businessmen/women. These dramatic misrepresentations of the Guru/Shishya relationship are sure to make the news and grab our attention. But it is a mistake to generalize from them and so question the value of all Guru/Shishya relationships. The true Guru/Shishya relationship is less overtly dramatic and a lot more hard work. The true Guru doesn't feel the need to tell people that he or she is a Guru. That he or she is a Guru is obvious to the discerning aspirant. But it is not newsworthy that a Guru helps a specific person or group of people to attain spiritual enlightenment. How is that to be described and photographed in time for the publication deadline? It cannot be done, so these 'success' stories are ignored in favour of the stories of abuse. Also, I think that the idea of 'killing the Guru' is misleading. For one thing, it is usually the Guru that tells the Shishya that there is no longer a need for him/her to be physically near the Guru and that it is time for the Shishya to go out into the world and help others on their way to enlightenment. Second, the former Shishya will always have a reverence for the Guru. To not have such reverence means only that the Shishya has not learned enough. The Guru will always be God-incarnate and if the Shishya doesn't show reverence for the Guru, then he is not showing reverence for God and has lost contact with his own divinity. At the very least, maintaining a reverence for the Guru after leaving the ashram, is a good way for the Shishya to keep his/her own ego under control. I'll leave for a future time, debating the merits of the "process of radical deconditioning, where the adept deliberately inverts normal social codes and practices, whatever they may be, in order to be free of them. " Nora Thank you, omprem. Your reply as usual , always very illuminating and heartfelt. This is the passage I have been waiting to hear. "For one thing, it is usually the Guru that tells the Shishya that there is no longer a need for him/her to be physically near the Guru and that it is time for the Shishya to go out into the world and help others on their way to enlightenment." To me that is one of the trademark of a true guru. Thank you once again. Eve _69 Naths are far beyond need for guru as Siva was a student of original guru Dattatreya himself. Dattatreya tried to get rid of students by fornicating and drinking in front of them and only the desperate and diehard would remain. They would become students of Tripura Rahasya, Dattatreya's favorite teaching. If Siva himself the God of pure consciousness took teachings from Dattatreya and Datta himself tried to tell all to learn from everything rather than guru then what would that mean for the lesser mortal ungodly like us? Learn from everything. In unity or Brahman just one look through all of existance tells us just exactly what we are. |