Lakeman wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 9:27pm:I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there.
Would not disagree with the above, but maybe enlarge the view a little. I suspect that a number guru's and teachers probably started off with some good intent at the beginning, but became corrupted by power.
It's a hard, seductive trap to not fall into, the guru & power trap.
I have a lot of respect for RAM. Monroe (from what i know) was pretty consistently good about not falling into that trap in a general way, but to be fair, if his biographies (especially the latter) are to be believed, the man had fairly autocratic and controlling tendencies at times when it came to the people more close to him personally. True, it wasn't necessarily about belief systems, but ways of interacting socially, etc such as "I'm the boss and you WILL DO what i say, by my way, or it's the highway". This, in it's own ways is part of the Guru trap. Perhaps in the light of his many positive accomplishments and general good, this part of RAM wasn't seen so much by outsiders and more casual acquaintances.
But yes, he was good at, and should be lauded for avoiding the more obvious guru traps. Though sometimes i suspect his automatic "find out for yourself" was partially also about his being uncomfortable with responsibility in connection with others and a self defense mechanism. The simple truth is that we do influence each other, and we shouldn't seek to avoid this per se, but to do it only in the right ways with respect to other peoples freewill and their unique growth processes and needs. Take your average high level nonphysical guide type to see the kind of responsibility that i'm talking about, and how they go about influencing in the right ways.
For maybe it's like comparing apples and oranges, but i do note that there was a pretty big difference in example and lifetime patterns between Monroe and someone i respect even more so than him, Yeshua. The latter took on more responsibility for his influence on others, and maybe it was a case of he really knew deep down that he was fit for that role, and Bob knew that he was all to human to take on such a role? In that case, thank goodness for the wisdom and simple self honesty of RAM.
Home
Pages: 1 
