Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Date: September 21, 2019 07:12PM
The authority to teach comes from the guru. This is the guru-shishya relayionship. And there are many various factors involved. I will share some here:
1. Scripture says the teacher should be both srotriya and brahmananista. That is learned in scripture and have attained enlightenment.
However there are cavreats here. Someone can teach in manana, supervised, even if they have not attained enlightenment.
And in any event, anyone who teaches, it is the best way for manana for them. There is no such thing as fully cooked. And many place judgments on teachers as they assume once someone is enlightened, that is that. It ain't. It is only the starting point. KArma carries on, so there is always stuff to deal with. That is a blessing, as it should keep the enlightened being humble.
For teaching unsupervised, the person should be enlightened. This is termed a guru. If they are not, they are at best what is called 'upaguru'. Inspirational.
2. The permission to teach must come from the previous teacher. The parampara, lineage is an unbroken one.
This needs a caveat also. When JS was with SWami Chinmayananda, the average time to learn, as a swami, was around 8 or 9 years.
It is true that Swami Chinmayananda took the teachings down from the mountains. There was however a problem. In that the mountain training was not applicable exactly to urban life. Though I will set that aside for a moment.
Besides completing the actual training, there is a kind of blessing that is conferred onto students when you are sitting at the guru's feet. This can actually confer permission to teach it has been suggested. I spoke personally to swami about this, and I was told that it is a cultural thing.
there is another point that i know for a fact. Which clouds permission even more. Some Swami will be a bit more relaxed in all this. I've saw it. That permission to teach is freely gave.
4. It is important to see what permission if any was gave. I have to say, my own view is that if JS was sitting in front of Chinmayananda, then he would likely have received this blessings, but it is a generic type of thing. However, he may well have fallen foul of his guru, and there are strong indications of this his memoir. Permission cannot be took away to be honest, however that also depends on what permission was gave.
While it is one thing to try to look critically and see there was possibly this blessing gave, one has to look to the validity of what Shiningworld teach. And my own views in this topic have been robust. An interesting point to make, is that I watch the posting trends in SW, and they have been invariably making more souunder posts over the last week in areas that they have been tackled here. While I don't support them, I am not here to flame them. The truth is all that matters. Any way things are addressed now, comes from them as they are being challenged, and doesn't erase the past.
So what did JS learn in those two years? He could only have been taught what Swami Dayananda learned in TEN years there. Swami Dayananda did not attain enlightenment in those tean years. Even though he was viewed as the main student of Chinmayananda. If I can term it like that as a point. Swami Dayananda was to take over. Not carry an oxygen bottle.
What chances of JS attaining enlightenment then? This leads me to my own view of why Shiningworld have adopted this modern vedanta view of 'realization', then 'assimilation'. And 'tripti'. These various levels. One can be 'realized' in nididhyasana. self-realized.
Swami Dayananda says there is no such thing as 'self-rrealization'. There is moksha, enlightenment. As the starting point. And it carries on working from there.
There may well be some kinds of assimilation, breathroughs before enlightenment, however these are sometimes gave too much weight that they have, and this is perhaps down to what was taught. SWami Chinmayananda taught mystical vedanta. That enlightenment comes from samadhi, experiences.
It does not. It comes from jnanam. Knowledge. And only the vedanta pramana, the teachings, can provide that knowledge. Shankara says so.
It's my view that JS jad issues with Chimayanada. He actually did try to learn with SWami Dayananda, and was thrown out after two weeks. This was after Swami Dayananda sorted out what he was not being taught by Chinmayanada. He ws not being taught how to use vedanta. Which means neither was JS.
JS came back to US, not having been taught properly. And at best only having had some mystical experiences. This has no doubt been a problem. Without the clear guidance of a teacher, at this stage the person will place too much importance on experiences and they will by-pass stuff. They will be blind to so much. And they will have enlightenment sickness, to use JS own terms on himself.
At the very best, JS will have tried to learn as he goes along. However, scripture is clear on this, one cannot di it this way.
JS has placed too much important on a mere two years with Chinmayananda. And I want to make the point, as we can see from his lack of seriousness in his memoir, would he have been a good student? I doubt this.
The karma from JS's time there has without a doubt constantly repeated itself. He left both Chinmayanda and Dayananda, not in good terms. And as we can se this happens so much in Shiningworld. Anyone who gets close to him and Isabella, usually they get burned. It is always a matter of time.
I want to express this carefully here. the very first teacher that JS ever had. That guru students relationship was ruined, once Isabella and JS got together. She has been involved in virtually nearly ever issue. A teacher should not ever let something like physical attrraction or prema, romance, get in the way of the parampara lineage.
I am using precise sanskrit terms here, as I know that they are reading this. He is meant to know better about bhakti. Bhakti is not romantic love. While there is asome of it in it yes. The opening verses of the Narada Bhakti Sutra how that Kama/pleasure, is as different from prema/rommance as prema is different from Bhakti.
If JS is enlightened, he should be able to see the consistent pattern of how avarana shakti, the velining power of maya, has clouded him.
There is an interesting teaching in the Rigveda. An ancient Rishi, a very accomplished Yogi, was meditating underwater. He saw two fish mating. And got turned on. So he went to the local king, in order to get one of his 50 daughters to marry him.
The Rishi was an old man. Horrified the king said if one wants you that is fine. So the Rishi went away and use powers to make himself a lovely young man. Next day all 50 princesses wanted him. And he married them all.
Then the King says, they will all be jealous, living in the same house. So the Rishi magiced 50 castles for each of them. He had thousands of children, and lived for thousands of years.
One day he realized, that this sexual and romantic desire, had actually clouded him. And he warned us all. For it was only when he saw it for what it was, that he learned his mistake. While I am not equating JS to such an important Ancient Rishi, the scripture is that maya can and does cloud. He is always, every single time, taking his wifes side over the sanctity of the parampara. It's ridiculous it happens that regular. He says he is too old to even care. Then why teach. A teacher has a responsibility to their students.
Of course, JS and Isabella won't see this. This is because they have a curiuous teaching. 'Non-dual' love. HAha. What are they talking bhakti? There teaching is an oxymoron. Non-dual, implies all that is. While love is not applicable to all that is. Love, anything experienced, is prema, vishya ananda/object happiness. What you actually are cannot be experienced, nor cannot be known. For that would make what you are an object. Pure wishy, washy modern vedanta. they even come across when they promote this, as gangaji and eli. It's modern vedanta, pure crap.
We cant say that the wave is non dual. Well it can be said, but it confuses. It has a real danger of leading one to validate that which they are by romance. Which doesnt work. The relationship of James and Isabella SWarz, or anyone else, is not and cannot ever be a validation for what one actually is.
This is important as it is another example of not knowing how to use vedanta properly. And lumping in ones own ideas
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2019 07:14PM by earthquake.