Greetings

Have any of you met or been reading about

Raj Patel  or  Samael Aun Weor ?

Basically,
Patel fits a 1977 description/prophesy by a theosophical spin-off group that now believes they've discovered him to be their prophesied world spiritual leader. Patel says he isn't and that he's never heard of them. He is young but his attitudes and interests don't conflict with such a role.

Weor is older and has been teaching in the Gnostic/ Kaballahistic tradition. He's written many books and has internationally set up schools.

Your views will be appreciated, --  all the more so if you know anything about these individuals  :)

Bets

Betson:

I haven't heard of these teachers, but when it comes to Theosophy, perhaps it has some good things to say, but even with the limited exposure I have to it a number of red flags have come up.

Theosophy tried to turn Jiddu Krishnamurti into the world teacher and he didn't go for it.

Regarding the other guy, my feeling is that anybody who knows something wouldn't set his or herself up as some sort of international teacher. Numerous schools is not a good sign.

One of the problems with this world is that there are too many followers and not enough people who think for themselves. Do we really need another guy to follow and to tell us what to think?

So many unqualified people have set themselves up as an authority figure for others, I figure that somebody who knew something would strive very hard to separate his or herself from such a way.

Perhaps people who have something to say can do so with out handing out a bunch of chords of attachment.

recoverer wrote on Mar 18^th, 2010 at 12:35pm:

Betson: I haven't heard of these teachers, but when it comes to Theosophy, perhaps it has some good things to say, but even with the limited exposure I have to it a number of red flags have come up. Theosophy tried to turn Jiddu Krishnamurti into the world teacher and he didn't go for it. Regarding the other guy, my feeling is that anybody who knows something wouldn't set his or herself up as some sort of international teacher. Numerous schools is not a good sign. One of the problems with this world is that there are too many followers and not enough people who think for themselves. Do we really need another guy to follow and to tell us what to think? So many unqualified people have set themselves up as an authority figure for others, I figure that somebody who knew something would strive very hard to separate his or herself from such a way. Perhaps people who have something to say can do so with out handing out a bunch of chords of attachment.

WOW!  Recoverer, this post really speaks to me.  I couldn't agree more.  Having been a life-long seeker of truth, I wish I had a hug for every false guru I've given my money to.  I guess I had to learn the hard way.  Busying my mind with teachers and gurus and channelers and you-name-it was the route I took to keep myself from doing my own thinking.  Well it's been a ride, but as alluded to on "The Wizard of OZ" our answers have been right here within our own selves, all along.  Thanks for sharing.  :-*

betson wrote on Mar 18^th, 2010 at 11:02am:

Greetings Have any of you met or been reading about Raj Patel  or  Samael Aun Weor ? Basically, Patel fits a 1977 description/prophesy by a theosophical spin-off group that now believes they've discovered him to be their prophesied world spiritual leader. Patel says he isn't and that he's never heard of them. He is young but his attitudes and interests don't conflict with such a role. Weor is older and has been teaching in the Gnostic/ Kaballahistic tradition. He's written many books and has internationally set up schools. Your views will be appreciated, --  all the more so if you know anything about these individuals  :) Bets

Hi bets: Have you heard of the works of Dr. David Hawkins... he did a trilogy beginning with Power vs Force... the second is the I of the Eye well it turns out that the I of the Eye is the one you should start with and then go to pvsf... and finally, I/reality and subjectivity... anyway he picked up a litmus test concept that seems to be a powerful tool for testing truth... kinesthieology (??) properly conducted (you have to read the material to understand it)... remember Hawkins was (is) a world renound psycho-analyst/mystic... (read his bio very interesting obviously an incarntation in the west of an Indian Master... ) with amazing resources to conduct his research... so he has a massive data base and technical research organization... with resources... he had done what I am trying to do in this forum and Michael Sagansky is the other daily data stream along with mine in book club akg... anyway, if you learn his testing system and have a like minded partner you can really get some interesting answers to questions like these... or at least get a notion of an answer... post them.

S.

Albert-

You make good points.  These so-called gurus or "spiritual masters" almost always have other agendas.

Their objective is power and control.  And many of them use that control for non-spiritual objectives, including sexual seduction.

Unfortunately, they tend to prey on the young, the naive, and those with poor self esteem who are desperate for approval and acceptance.

R

SHSS: Thank you.

Rondelle: Right.

Betson: Hawkins is big into ACIM, and has this thing where he says how enlightened various people are on a percentage basis. He ranks himself very closely to Jesus.

I haven't read all of the details of his rating system, but it seems ridiculous to me. Charlatans sometimes look for their own unique spin when they try to hook people.

After one has learned what gurus are about, it doesn't take much to see what's going on. It's as if you develop a new kind of vision; a vision that will develop only if you allow it to develop.

I don't care if they have some good things to say after I find that they are fraudulent in some way. To me it makes no sense at all to allow a person who is purposely dishonest to be a source of information.

Bets

You are always on the search for interesting stuff!

I am curious as to why you are curious about these folks. I guess Patel is on the young side and not interested in political power(?) but the other one is? I try to judge systems by what they produce. But I don't trust world movements because I think they must be ego-based at some point. For instance I like studying ACIM or discussing it or hearing "testimonials" but I don't want to be associated with an ACIM group. Of course, with me, the same goes for Christianity.

So what do these groups have to offer in the way of ideas? Do they work for the people involved?

That is one reason I keep working with the reiki. I see getting a use-able result from using it is not easy. But it does produce a result.

But we are all on such different paths that I assume that for some, joining a group makes a positive change in their lives. Its just that for those who do that, they sometimes fail to realize that the change they experience is not universally applicable. Still groups are "scary" and have as much potential to disseminate false information as they do to evoke positive change.

(With all due respects to being open-minded to conservative commentators, I am thinking actually of the drive by opponents of health-care reform to convince people that the proposed legislation included a provision for death panels who might decide you could die rather than receive sustaining care, which is something that did not in fact appear in the legislation. But the "group" decided to distort the facts to manipulate certain vulnerable parts of the voting public. This was a political issue, but what happens when there is a kind of yellow journalism in spiritual matters?)

Of course, many people are more engaged when a person is attached to the ideas than when the ideas are examined separately from a personality.

So who is this Raj Patel person and how did he get accused of being a world savior (or a world devil?) Is he just an independent blogger who got targeted or did he do something to initiate this? And who are thesw people who need a savior or a devil to go on in the world?

Al of this feels like part of a bigger question to me, that is, what is my ego and why was it created and what am I to do with it, and it is my ego asking that question or is it some deeper part of me?

But when I stand back, I think that it must be an ego need for a savior or a devil.

Lucy wrote on Mar 20^th, 2010 at 9:15am:

Al of this feels like part of a bigger question to me, that is, what is my ego and why was it created and what am I to do with it, and it is my ego asking that question or is it some deeper part of me? But when I stand back, I think that it must be an ego need for a savior or a devil.

Hi Lucy: If you are intensely interested in this subject… I suggest the Dr. David Hawkins - trilogy… but, don’t start with Power vs. Force… start with I of the Eye, and possible go to the I/ reality and subjectivity then power vs. force…

Pay close attention to his bio… here is what I know about Hawkins, he is a psychoanalyst/mystic who has one of the largest practices in the country… spent a lifetime in research and development… Knighted by the King of Denmark… honors galore… given the highest honor that can be bestowed on an individual by the Korean Buddhist authority…

What some are regarding as self aggranddizement… is being misinterpreted… Hawkins has simply told his story… what you project on his story is your own problem… he describes in great detail his transcendental experience… which is what we all are ultimately attempting to achieve… whether to accept his story as true is your personal decision…

I am not sure what ACIM is but he is a proponent of kiniesthesiology (??sp) and I personally have minor problems with some of the conclusions… not because the system is not valid… but, because the testing may have not been as thorough as it could be…

For example: A reviewer pointed out that Pasteur rates higher than a contempory who in the opinion of the reviewer had more integrity than Pasteur and was more of a selfless humanitarian… she made her case to my satisfaction… but, it didn’t invalidate the Hawkins evaluation… on a summation of forces… scale… of course Pasteur was flawed but on average I decided he deserved his evaluation.

But, this does not destroy the system itself… it only means a caveat must be recognize in its use… (the evaluation is subject to further investigation and introduction of deeper or fuller knowledge).

S.

p.s.: Hawkins independently validates Bruce Moen's Heaven/Hell descriptions and conclusions... (as well as Swedenborg's)... I doubt either man has read each other before the writing of there books... Hawkins approaches them essentially in the same way by conclusions about them.

The only thing I've heard about Raj is that some people are saying he is Matreiya.

I don't consider people to teach me something only because they have a sort of "degree". In spiritual belongs, a degree is of course much more doubtable than in science. I could declare a society of the "Golden Whatever" to be the owner of the truth, and me myself to be the top guru. Everyone can do this. So Lucy and Recoverer have my sympathy for their critical way on this. For example, I feel drawn to Zen, but I don't want to join a group or got me a teacher.

Spooky

spooky2 wrote on Mar 20^th, 2010 at 9:16pm:

I don't consider people to teach me something only because they have a sort of "degree". In spiritual belongs, a degree is of course much more doubtable than in science. I could declare a society of the "Golden Whatever" to be the owner of the truth, and me myself to be the top guru. Everyone can do this. So Lucy and Recoverer have my sympathy for their critical way on this. For example, I feel drawn to Zen, but I don't want to join a group or got me a teacher. Spooky

Hi Spooky: how did you find Bruce Moen? How did you find Robert Monroe? You don't seem to have rejected either... I suspect you used common sense and instinct to chose to align with their teachings. Could you have made progress without either? The road is treacherous... the way is frougth with obstacles, miss direction... if you think you are going to negotiate this road to spiritual freedom alone you must be an avatar... because, there are some very daunting subtle things that we all need a guide to negotiate... I believe if you have a pure heart... true teachers and information will find you... you have free will... if you chose to reject it... then your path will be problematic... trust you gut... but avoid knee jerk rejection. Condemnation without investigation leads to ignorance.

S.

S-1 you are cracking me up!

Reading Moen's and Monroe's books and taking what they say and trying it out and discussing the books is far different from considering either one a high holy teacher. Perhaps I misunderstand something here? Having gone farther than average in the academic world, I find discussing stuff normal. I find arguing about ideas normal. If two attorneys were discussing the pros and cons of some decision and one agreed with what a judge had written, would you call him or her a follower of that judge? No! What's the difference here? I always find it amusing when Don B refers to folks who talk about either Seth's writings or ACIM as though they were devotees of the persons who did the writing. I suppose if I read Einstein's papers and froth about how brilliant he is, that makes me a devotee of Einstein?

As the saying goes, if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!

_______________________________

Re: Raj Patel
I always assume others do what I do...Google! There is a website by a Raj Patel that has a page that addresses this issue. It just doesn't explain how all this evolved. And on the web, what's real and what is not? And "Patel", I am told, is as common as "Smith". Is there another Raj Patel?

Lucy wrote on Mar 21^st, 2010 at 8:44am:

S-1 you are cracking me up!

Don’t quite get what this means… I hope it is good… LOL!!



Lucy wrote on Mar 21^st, 2010 at 8:44am:

Reading Moen's and Monroe's books and taking what they say and trying it out and discussing the books is far different from considering either one a high holy teacher.

Yes, neither has attempted to call themselves holy men... it is not part of the American or even the western tradition... Dr. Hawkins doesn't call himself a holy man... he calls himself a mystic... but others do hold him think of him in this regard... I think he is an incarnation of a very advance Indian mystic who may in that incarnation have been called a holy man as is custom in that culture.

Question have you done TMI?? Which cost in the area of $3000 dollars including travel etc..


Lucy wrote on Mar 21^st, 2010 at 8:44am:

Perhaps I misunderstand something here? Having gone farther than average in the academic world, I find discussing stuff normal. I find arguing about ideas normal. If two attorneys were discussing the pros and cons of some decision and one agreed with what a judge had written, would you call him or her a follower of that judge? No! What's the difference here? I always find it amusing when Don B refers to folks who talk about either Seth's writings or ACIM as though they were devotees of the persons who did the writing. I suppose if I read Einstein's papers and froth about how brilliant he is, that makes me a devotee of Einstein?

Agreed… in the legal world it is called having a meeting of the minds.


Lucy wrote on Mar 21^st, 2010 at 8:44am:

As the saying goes, if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!

What???!! Don’t get it… sorry I am dense.

S.

Seraphis1 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2010 at 2:54am:

Lucy wrote on Mar 21st, 2010 at 8:44am: S-1 you are cracking me up! Don’t quite get what this means… I hope it is good… LOL!! Lucy wrote on Mar 21st, 2010 at 8:44am: Reading Moen's and Monroe's books and taking what they say and trying it out and discussing the books is far different from considering either one a high holy teacher. Yes, neither has attempted to call themselves holy men... it is not part of the American or even the western tradition... Dr. Hawkins doesn't call himself a holy man... he calls himself a mystic... but others do hold him think of him in this regard... I think he is an incarnation of a very advance Indian mystic who may in that incarnation have been called a holy man as is custom in that culture. Question have you done TMI?? Which cost in the area of $3000 dollars including travel etc.. Have you done a Moen workshop which has a cost?? Lucy wrote on Mar 21st, 2010 at 8:44am: Perhaps I misunderstand something here? Having gone farther than average in the academic world, I find discussing stuff normal. I find arguing about ideas normal. If two attorneys were discussing the pros and cons of some decision and one agreed with what a judge had written, would you call him or her a follower of that judge? No! What's the difference here? I always find it amusing when Don B refers to folks who talk about either Seth's writings or ACIM as though they were devotees of the persons who did the writing. I suppose if I read Einstein's papers and froth about how brilliant he is, that makes me a devotee of Einstein? Agreed… in the legal world it is called having a meeting of the minds. Lucy wrote on Mar 21st, 2010 at 8:44am: As the saying goes, if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him! What???!! Don’t get it… sorry I am dense. S.

I have not been to TMI, though I have attended a weekend workshop that was given locally by a TMI outreach person.(let's see $200 vs $3000, easy choice).

I probably wouldn't go, not just becauseit is out of my price range but also because I find it dificult to sit still for extended periods of time and feel physically ill when I do. It does sound as though they save the best wine for the in-house party and the effects there are sometimes more intense. I have a set of tapes (yes cassettes) from years ago and they never cut it with me the way I hoped. I think resonant tuning sounds like the ghouls' chorus. But I think Bob Monroe was on to something.

I also think that one of the rules of being born here is that, just like everyone has to submit to gravity, everyone is born with clay feet.

Lucy wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2010 at 7:00am:

I have not been to TMI, though I have attended a weekend workshop that was given locally by a TMI outreach person.(let's see $200 vs $3000, easy choice). I probably wouldn't go, not just becauseit is out of my price range but also because I find it dificult to sit still for extended periods of time and feel physically ill when I do. It does sound as though they save the best wine for the in-house party and the effects there are sometimes more intense. I have a set of tapes (yes cassettes) from years ago and they never cut it with me the way I hoped. I think resonant tuning sounds like the ghouls' chorus. But I think Bob Monroe was on to something. I also think that one of the rules of being born here is that, just like everyone has to submit to gravity, everyone is born with clay feet.

Hi Lucy: May I ask - what are your spiritual goals.

S.

Regarding what Seraphis wrote below:

Acceptance without investigation leads to cult members.

Before I say something about gurus, let me say something about making contact with one's higher self (in a disk sense) and spirit guidance. There are higher realms of being where spirits live completely according to love and good intentions. As long as you are certain you've made such a connection, you should be fine with the guidance you receive. You'll probably find that such guidance doesn't present you with a belief system to follow and doesn't take away your ability to think for yourself. Such guidance is more like having a friend that will point out when you're missing something, and will offer you perspectives you haven't considered. Such guidance understands that growth can be obtained when a person learns to figure things out "mainly" by his or herself, rather than being told what to believe.

Some people such as myself and apparently SHSS have really seen what the guru thing is about, and have come to understand that a responsible person who really understands something wouldn't present his or herself as a so-called enlightened being, because when one does so one basically claims that one has ultimate knowledge and what ones says is truer than other viewpoints.

When people conclude that another person is enlightened as he or she claims, then they often make the mistake of putting what this person says ahead their own experience, conscience, heart, intelligence and common sense. I've seen this happen to so many people. Until they get to the point where they stop giving another person so much power in determining what they believe, they won't be able to find out for themselves.

This being the case, any responsible person wouldn't make the mistake of setting themselves up as an authority figure other people won't question by claiming that he or she is enlightened or claiming he or she channels a being who has all of the answers; no need to look elsewhere or think differently.

Going by what I've seen, Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen don't fall into the above scenario, because neither of them were/are interested in being a guru who is put on a pedestal.

Regarding the pedestal, from a historical perspective, this is what the guru tradition is about. A disciple must surrender his or herself to the guru and turn the guru into an absolute authority figure that can't be questioned. A disciple must worship a guru as if he (or she) is god himself. Only a megalomaniacal self serving person would put his or herself in such a position. Only a dishonest (or deluded) person would claim that he or she holds the key to somebody else's spiritual welfare. Only an unethical, dishonest and heartless person would infringe upon another person's freedom and spiritual welfare to the degree guru's do.

We are all very small pieces of God to the same extent.

Therefore, I believe Spooky is wise to study Zen on his own, rather than believe he needs somebody else to tell him how to do so.





Seraphis1 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2010 at 12:25am:

spooky2 wrote on Mar 20th, 2010 at 9:16pm: I don't consider people to teach me something only because they have a sort of "degree". In spiritual belongs, a degree is of course much more doubtable than in science. I could declare a society of the "Golden Whatever" to be the owner of the truth, and me myself to be the top guru. Everyone can do this. So Lucy and Recoverer have my sympathy for their critical way on this. For example, I feel drawn to Zen, but I don't want to join a group or got me a teacher. Spooky Hi Spooky: how did you find Bruce Moen? How did you find Robert Monroe? You don't seem to have rejected either... I suspect you used common sense and instinct to chose to align with their teachings. Could you have made progress without either? The road is treacherous... the way is frougth with obstacles, miss direction... if you think you are going to negotiate this road to spiritual freedom alone you must be an avatar... because, there are some very daunting subtle things that we all need a guide to negotiate... I believe if you have a pure heart... true teachers and information will find you... you have free will... if you chose to reject it... then your path will be problematic... trust you gut... but avoid knee jerk rejection. Condemnation without investigation leads to ignorance. S.

Hi

I mislabeled this thread.  It should be called it by the names of those two individuals I was interested in hearing more about. Then we could have said "Nope, never heard of them" and be done with it.  I certainly didn't mean to bring up this guru discussion again as we've had it many times.

Lucy made a good point that we could first google topics we generally want to know about. I did go to some sites on these guys but was not getting the viewpoints this site (you all :) ) provide. Since I rarely hear the word Maitreya anywhere but here I thought here I could get some good cross-referencing.

I don't believe either of these two are gurus. Patel seems to be a moral economist. I plan to read his latest book in that light, and as Lucy said, that won't make me a devotee.  ;)

Many thanks,
Bets

recoverer wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2010 at 1:12pm:

Regarding what Seraphis wrote below: Acceptance without investigation leads to cult members. Before I say something about gurus, let me say something about making contact with one's higher self (in a disk sense) and spirit guidance. There are higher realms of being where spirits live completely according to love and good intentions. As long as you are certain you've made such a connection, you should be fine with the guidance you receive. You'll probably find that such guidance doesn't present you with a belief system to follow and doesn't take away your ability to think for yourself. Such guidance is more like having a friend that will point out when you're missing something, and will offer you perspectives you haven't considered. Such guidance understands that growth can be obtained when a person learns to figure things out "mainly" by his or herself, rather than being told what to believe. Some people such as myself and apparently SHSS have really seen what the guru thing is about, and have come to understand that a responsible person who really understands something wouldn't present his or herself as a so-called enlightened being, because when one does so one basically claims that one has ultimate knowledge and what ones says is truer than other viewpoints. When people conclude that another person is enlightened as he or she claims, then they often make the mistake of putting what this person says ahead their own experience, conscience, heart, intelligence and common sense. I've seen this happen to so many people. Until they get to the point where they stop giving another person so much power in determining what they believe, they won't be able to find out for themselves. This being the case, any responsible person wouldn't make the mistake of setting themselves up as an authority figure other people won't question by claiming that he or she is enlightened or claiming he or she channels a being who has all of the answers; no need to look elsewhere or think differently. Going by what I've seen, Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen don't fall into the above scenario, because neither of them were/are interested in being a guru who is put on a pedestal. Regarding the pedestal, from a historical perspective, this is what the guru tradition is about. A disciple must surrender his or herself to the guru and turn the guru into an absolute authority figure that can't be questioned. A disciple must worship a guru as if he (or she) is god himself. Only a megalomaniacal self serving person would put his or herself in such a position. Only a dishonest (or deluded) person would claim that he or she holds the key to somebody else's spiritual welfare. Only an unethical, dishonest and heartless person would infringe upon another person's freedom and spiritual welfare to the degree guru's do. We are all very small pieces of God to the same extent. Therefore, I believe Spooky is wise to study Zen on his own, rather than believe he needs somebody else to tell him how to do so. Seraphis1 wrote on Mar 21st, 2010 at 12:25am: spooky2 wrote on Mar 20th, 2010 at 9:16pm: I don't consider people to teach me something only because they have a sort of "degree". In spiritual belongs, a degree is of course much more doubtable than in science. I could declare a society of the "Golden Whatever" to be the owner of the truth, and me myself to be the top guru. Everyone can do this. So Lucy and Recoverer have my sympathy for their critical way on this. For example, I feel drawn to Zen, but I don't want to join a group or got me a teacher. Spooky Hi Spooky: how did you find Bruce Moen? How did you find Robert Monroe? You don't seem to have rejected either... I suspect you used common sense and instinct to chose to align with their teachings. Could you have made progress without either? The road is treacherous... the way is frougth with obstacles, miss direction... if you think you are going to negotiate this road to spiritual freedom alone you must be an avatar... because, there are some very daunting subtle things that we all need a guide to negotiate... I believe if you have a pure heart... true teachers and information will find you... you have free will... if you chose to reject it... then your path will be problematic... trust you gut... but avoid knee jerk rejection. Condemnation without investigation leads to ignorance. S.

Hi: The problem I have with your observations is the name calling and personal attacks... it reduces your arguments to demogogery...

Life and especially the pursuit of enlightenment is an interaction of qualities. There is no necessity for personal involvement... all these teachers have established positionalities which are like computer programs... and not the Real Self... Truth just is... one either recognizes it or not... one can be fooled... one picks oneself up dusts oneself off and keep on truckin'.

The world holds an endless array of positions that are arbitrary presumptions which may or may not be fallacious. One can observe them and respect how they are seen and valued by others without personally subscribing to them. One can appreciate how the world sees but not be entrapped by it or them.

A paraphrasing from the work of Dr. David Hawkins.

S.

Seraphis1 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2010 at 4:22pm:

recoverer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2010 at 1:12pm: Regarding what Seraphis wrote below: Acceptance without investigation leads to cult members. Before I say something about gurus, let me say something about making contact with one's higher self (in a disk sense) and spirit guidance. There are higher realms of being where spirits live completely according to love and good intentions. As long as you are certain you've made such a connection, you should be fine with the guidance you receive. You'll probably find that such guidance doesn't present you with a belief system to follow and doesn't take away your ability to think for yourself. Such guidance is more like having a friend that will point out when you're missing something, and will offer you perspectives you haven't considered. Such guidance understands that growth can be obtained when a person learns to figure things out "mainly" by his or herself, rather than being told what to believe. Some people such as myself and apparently SHSS have really seen what the guru thing is about, and have come to understand that a responsible person who really understands something wouldn't present his or herself as a so-called enlightened being, because when one does so one basically claims that one has ultimate knowledge and what ones says is truer than other viewpoints. When people conclude that another person is enlightened as he or she claims, then they often make the mistake of putting what this person says ahead their own experience, conscience, heart, intelligence and common sense. I've seen this happen to so many people. Until they get to the point where they stop giving another person so much power in determining what they believe, they won't be able to find out for themselves. This being the case, any responsible person wouldn't make the mistake of setting themselves up as an authority figure other people won't question by claiming that he or she is enlightened or claiming he or she channels a being who has all of the answers; no need to look elsewhere or think differently. Going by what I've seen, Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen don't fall into the above scenario, because neither of them were/are interested in being a guru who is put on a pedestal. Regarding the pedestal, from a historical perspective, this is what the guru tradition is about. A disciple must surrender his or herself to the guru and turn the guru into an absolute authority figure that can't be questioned. A disciple must worship a guru as if he (or she) is god himself. Only a megalomaniacal self serving person would put his or herself in such a position. Only a dishonest (or deluded) person would claim that he or she holds the key to somebody else's spiritual welfare. Only an unethical, dishonest and heartless person would infringe upon another person's freedom and spiritual welfare to the degree guru's do. We are all very small pieces of God to the same extent. Therefore, I believe Spooky is wise to study Zen on his own, rather than believe he needs somebody else to tell him how to do so. Seraphis1 wrote on Mar 21st, 2010 at 12:25am: spooky2 wrote on Mar 20th, 2010 at 9:16pm: I don't consider people to teach me something only because they have a sort of "degree". In spiritual belongs, a degree is of course much more doubtable than in science. I could declare a society of the "Golden Whatever" to be the owner of the truth, and me myself to be the top guru. Everyone can do this. So Lucy and Recoverer have my sympathy for their critical way on this. For example, I feel drawn to Zen, but I don't want to join a group or got me a teacher. Spooky Hi Spooky: how did you find Bruce Moen? How did you find Robert Monroe? You don't seem to have rejected either... I suspect you used common sense and instinct to chose to align with their teachings. Could you have made progress without either? The road is treacherous... the way is frougth with obstacles, miss direction... if you think you are going to negotiate this road to spiritual freedom alone you must be an avatar... because, there are some very daunting subtle things that we all need a guide to negotiate... I believe if you have a pure heart... true teachers and information will find you... you have free will... if you chose to reject it... then your path will be problematic... trust you gut... but avoid knee jerk rejection. Condemnation without investigation leads to ignorance. S. Hi: The problem I have with your observations is the name calling and personal attacks... it reduces your arguments to demogogery... Life and especially the pursuit of enlightenment is an interaction of qualities. There is no necessity for personal involvement... all these teachers have established positionalities which are like computer programs... and not the Real Self... Truth just is... one either recognizes it or not... one can be fooled... one picks oneself up dusts oneself off and keep on truckin'. The world holds an endless array of positions that are arbitrary presumptions which may or may not be fallacious. One can observe them and respect how they are seen and valued by others without personally subscribing to them. One can appreciate how the world sees but not be entrapped by it or them. A paraphrasing from the work of Dr. David Hawkins thru the process of a meeting of the minds. S.

I doubt anyone would regret going to TMI for Gateway. Worth every cent. Life changing. Spiritually uplifting. Fulfilling. 

Seraphis1 said: "Hi: The problem I have with your observations is the name calling and personal attacks... it reduces your arguments to demogogery...

Recoverer responds: "Name calling and personal attacks? I simply states the facts of what many gurus are about, and you reduce what I say to name calling and personal attacks?

How in tarnation can a person have a reasonable conversation about what gurus are about, if he or she can't say anything about them that isn't positive?

If a person won't allow his (or herself) to see when a guru does something negative, I don't see how he can discriminate what's going on.

Defending people without discrimination serves no positive purpose whatsover. All it does is enable the "many" people who seek to take advantage of others while claiming to be a valid source of information to get away with doing so.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree if you expect people on this forum to get involved with some sort of guru, because they are wise enough to find what they need without doing so.

I figure the gurus of this world can learn a thing or two from the people on this forum. I'd take advice from most of the people on this forum before I'd take it from a guru. Ulterior motives and believing you are superior in some way don't go along with giving advice to others (or in the case of gurus, being somebody's so-called spiritual master).

Hawkeye:

When you were at TMI did anybody tell you to bow to them, kiss their feet, drink their bath water, that they hold the key to your spiritual growth? I doubt it.

David Hawkins speaks about how enlightened, on a percentage basis, people who do the above, are. If he understood about them he would measure them according to megalomania rather than how enlightened they supposedly are.

Read the Guru Gita and you'll see what the guru game is about.


hawkeye wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2010 at 4:33pm:

I doubt anyone would regret going to TMI for Gateway. Worth every cent. Life changing. Spiritually uplifting. Fulfilling.

recoverer,

You've written some good and some excellent observations on gurus in this thread. For me this a sort of a pyramid structure, which can be found as a backbone structure all over the place on earth. What are your thoughts on god/jesus in a guru context? - I'm not interested in a discussion about this specific aspect, but curious about your thought process in this regard, if that is something you want to write about.

Volu:

I can't say with any certainty what Jesus was all about. I don't know to what extent the gospels accurately represent his life and what he said. I don't believe he was a guru.

Perhaps he knew a thing or two about the afterlife and let people know. This is why he spoke in terms of as you sow so you reap. Not because God punishes you, but because your overall state of mind determines where you go after you die.

Perhaps he understood about the importance of living according to love and the golden rule.

I doubt that he wanted to be worshiped, or that he believed that fear, oppression and spirituality are a good mix.



Volu wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2010 at 12:35pm:

recoverer, You've written some good and some excellent observations on gurus in this thread. For me this a sort of a pyramid structure, which can be found as a backbone structure all over the place on earth. What are your thoughts on god/jesus in a guru context? - I'm not interested in a discussion about this specific aspect, but curious about your thought process in this regard, if that is something you want to write about.

Recoverer, No. Never at TMI. It was more about finding your own truth. No bowing, kissing feet, drinking bath water, or anything else like that. In fact Monroe, although developing the program and having a patent on Hemi Sync, really wasn't a big part of the week. It was very clear that we were to find out for our selves. That he didn't have our answers for us. There was this feeling of an immense amount of love that everone seemed to be picking up on.   

That's what I figured Hawkeye.

When I watch Robert Monroe on youtube he seems like a humble man who wasn't interested in having a bunch of followers.