Western Converts--Trophies for India Gurus

or...a wee lecture on Pizza Effect

(PS it is a lovely and wonderful cooincidence that one of the contributors to this thread is named 'pizzaslap'. C)

Desmond observed (previous page)

Quote

Most of these gurus parade their international disciples in their ashrams in India. Acceptance by the white man automatically translates to swelling number of devotees back home, and thus starts a vicious cycle.

Desmond, there is indeed a pattern in which an export guru (someone who would have no crediblity if he or she stayed in India, but who is easily accepted as a guru by Westerners who lack the background to tell a wanna be from a genuine teacher).


Folks, it is not just our money that Indian gurus want.

They want us. Because as Westerners, we are stage props for them. The more of us they can attract to them, the more prestige they get in India.

So...note the trick: get materialistic westerners to wear khadi, sit on the dirt floor of your camp or ashram, and use us as stage props to impress your wealthy Indian political cronies!

Westerners to gurus what fashion accessories are for Paris Hilton. We are bling in human form.

And if you are pale skinned or look to be from the upper classes, you are like a 50 carat diamond. If you are British and from the old upper classes---if you are from a family former sahibs or memsahib, you are going to be a high value collectors item for an Indian guru.

If you have money and social contacts, all the better. The Beatles were Maharishi's prize catch.

If you are a high status convert, you will be carefully insulated from the actual abuses suffered by lower ranking Westerners who are assigned peon jobs in the ashram. It thrills Indian gurus and their Indian admirers for the guru to have India's former rulers in the ashram working as servants, doing the sort of work only done by Indian lower castes or dalits.

The westerners think they are reducing their egos via selfless service/seva; what they do not know is that the Indians are laughing at us while regarding the guru as a brilliant chap who has tricked Westerners to eat shit and believe it is sugar Its almost a compensatory revenge for millions of Indians who still smart after 200 years of being ruled by a few thousand Brits.

Think of Roman generals parading in triumph with prisoners in chains behind their chariots. Except...in the case of the Roman triumph, the prisoners knew they were prisoners.

Aghehananda Bharati came up with a whimsical term called 'pizza effect'--something that has no prestige in its home country is re-imported from America and has a prestige it never had in its orginal form.

Quote


I am writing a high school reference book on Hinduism, and in my research I came upon an interesting reference to pizza. “Surely, you’ve heard about ‘The Pizza Effect’” The devotees hadn’t, and I found myself explaining it to them.

Originally, pizza was looked down upon in Italy as the poor man’s food: it was just simple unleavened bread with a little tomato sauce for taste. Then, accompanying the early emigrants, it made its way to America, where it was garnished with cheese, olives, peppers, various meats, and so on, totally transforming the original into a kind of delicacy. Years later, when it made its triumphant return to the land of its origin, it became a highly respected dish on the menu of even the most eminent restaurants. The new product was eagerly accepted and even given pride of place in Italian cuisine.

Similarly, when Hinduism was first conceived in the West as a monolithic religious tradition, around the turn of the twentieth century, the tradition that returned to India caught everyone’s attention, and Hinduism as a single religion caught on. Originally, in India, of course, no separate religion called Hinduism ever existed. Rather, there are numerous religious traditions, from Vaishnavism, which is the eternal function of the soul – the religion of transcendental principles brought West by Srila Prabhupada – to Shaivism, Shaktism, and a host of other sectarian religions. When invading British Imperialists lumped all these religions together for convenience, many indigenous “Hindus” embraced the idea as if it were something that existed there all along.

Lack of confidence in one’s own culture, combined with the blind acceptance of all things new and foreign, often results in a phenomenon that social scientists call the “Pizza Effect,” a phrase that was coined in as late as 1970 by an anthropologist named Agehananda Bharati.

(Then, referring to the Hare Krishna movement (it is a dualistic Bhakti movement with a philosophy quite different form the one verbally stated by Guru Jaggi. But the strategy he is using seems similar to the one attributed to Prabhubpada: Get prestige points for one's venture by taking it outside India, getting Western converts, then score prestige points in India!)

Quote

. Actually, Srila Prabhupada was trying to cast a Pizza Effect of his own. He had hoped that by successfully establishing Krishna consciousness in the western countries – a region whose activities are emulated in India even to this day – he might reinvigorate the Vaishnava tradition in his own country. I ran to get a copy of Srila Prabhupada’s biography, written by his early disciple, Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami, to clarify my point:

Prabhupada’s idea was that when Indians saw young Western people adopting the principles of Krsna Consciousness, the faith of the Indians in their own culture would increase.(boldface by Corboy)

Prabhupada explained to his disciples how formerly, during the time of Maharaja Yudhisthira*, India had been a Krishna conscious state. For the last thousand years, however, India had been under foreign subjugation, first under the Moguls and then under the British. As a result, the intelligentsia and, to a lesser degree, the masses of India had lost respect for their own culture. They were now pursuing the materialistic goals of the West, and they saw this as more productive and more practical than religion, which was only sentimental. . . . Westerners living as renounced Vaisnavas could, as Prabhupada was well aware, turn the heads and hearts of the Indians and help them regain faith in their own lost culture.

Prabhupada’s “Pizza effect” strategy has proven anything but half-baked.

The initial success of Krishna consciousness in the West has now been surpassed by its ever-widening acceptance in India, the land of its birth. The Vrindavan and Mayapura temples – central to the Krishna conscious tradition — continue to flourish, and projects in places as diverse as Mumbai and Chennai are increasing day-by-day. The major temple complex in New Delhi is magnificent in numerous ways

[209.85.173.132]

Quote

Nanda’s perspective recognizes that the lessons of science have yet to find universal acceptance. Indeed, there has been a cultural reaction to what has been labeled ‘positivism’ by conservative religious types (with the support of postmodernist activism and ecofeminism from the left) in India and around the world since the 19th century. She argues that India’s now dominant Bharatiya Janata Party or BJP, reflects the populist Hindutva assertion that Vedic science is “secular”. In this view, Vedic or scriptural truth is the basis of all reality including the sciences. Examples of Hindutva (Hindu-ness) propaganda appear within the teachings of Swami Bhaktivendanta in his Hare Krishna or ISKCON movement and in Maharishi Mahesh Yogi’s Transcendental Meditation or TM. The Hare Krishnas taught, for example, that the first moon landing was faked by American film studios because their Vedas say the “moon” is unreachable.[1] TM’s claim to ‘scientifically’ alter weather and crime through levitating during meditation or chanting a mantra is another example of pseudo-science based on scripture.[2] This parallels fundamentalist Christian Bible-based claims for Intelligent Design and with radical Muslims using the Koran as the basis for scientific truth both thus denying that Darwin’s evolutionary theory is true. “What is happening in India is not unique at all. Such reactionary modernism lies at the heart of radical Islam in most of the Middle East as well” (262).

Taking a label from Professor Agehananda Bharati, Nanda calls the pseudo-secularization in India a “pizza effect.” Bharati noted that “any traditional Indian idea, however obscure or irrational” gets honored as science if it barely or remotely resembles modern inventions like jet planes or research in quantum mechanics. During the Second World War the common pizza in Italian village homes found favor among American soldiers. The Pizza Pie soon developed in America as a popular restaurant item with a variety of garnishes subsequently emerging in Italy as ‘native’ haute cuisine. “Thus obscure references in the Vedas get reinterpreted as referring to nuclear physics…It was always claimed in India’s wisdom anyway” (72).

Despite democratization since 1948, the traditional values of caste and male chauvinism remain strong within the Hindutva culture. For this reason Nanda criticizes what she calls ecofeminism that tends to uphold traditional village life as an antidote to Eurocentric values. In the process of upholding the native culture, ecofeminism argues that a “Western” paradigm of science (citing Thomas Khun) is unsuited for Indian culture.

[home.dejazzd.com]

Quote

Stuart Sarbacker Monday, April 24th, 5:00pm - 7:00pm , University Hall Room 101
"A Slice of Life: Yoga and the 'Pizza Effect'"

The Anthropologist and Religionist Agehananda Bharati coined the expression "the pizza effect" to express a conception of the cyclical process of cultural flow, especially with respect to the traditions of India and their Euro-American counterparts. This concept is particularly well illustrated by the transformations and permutations of the theory and practice of yoga that emerge in the cultural exchange between India , Europe , and the United States in the 20th and 21st centuries.

[209.85.173.132]

Let me make it clear, I adore Indian food, snap my fingers to Bollywood music, dress in Indian clothes whenever I can. I avidly read Indian history, go online to read Times of India.

But I dont like the sexism, the oppression that is rationalized in the name of religion, and the worship of mere power rationalized as religion.

And I dont like it when human beings are used as objects, stage props, in some export gurus theatre of oppression.

I especially do not like it when they are citizens of participatory democracies and get their heads stuffed full ofgarbage that turns them into feudals while preserving their their modern income earning capabilities intact.

We are forbidden to look appraisingly at these gurus--critical thinking is an impediment to salvation. But...these same gurus look appraisingly at us, just like baniyas/merchants in the marketplace.

And as I indirectly subsidize export gurus because I am a secular tax payer and their
stuff is tax exempt, I have the right, thanks to the laws and constitution of my country to say all this.

Many gurus dont like democracy at all. They live as kings. Ish.
Not Isha---

Ish as in yuk, foul, comtemptible, spit on the ground.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2016 10:00AM by corboy.

dheenathayalan.sivam : My question to dheenathayalan.sivam...
As you are devotee of sadhguru to whom I had met once in a party of my family friends house here in US.
I would like to know is there any difference in Sadhguru compared with Asaram & narayan ?
I know asaram & narayan , i can offer minute details of their ashram as I know a family friend who lives in ashram & I have been there number of times. I haven't been to sadhguru ashram but i have met him as a friend not as guru. Asaram & narayan ashram create slaves in ashram and they kill slaves with salvation, bodies of all these slaves are inhumane, they are not allowed to leave ashram. Mind has been made to think only guru sewa, guru bhakti. When a family ask ashram people for their kins to be released from slavery ashram say's we have not chained your daughter/son, but ashram is preaching guru bhakti 3 hours/day in meditation and then do guru bhakti by working as salve in ashram for 16 horus/day. Mind is made busy and especially health of these insiders is so bad they can't even move 20kg weight as their own weight is less than 50kg. (It's not because of healthy diet it's because of salvation & starvation). Slaves in ashram have never given a spoon of milk although they sell ayurvedic medicines but when Dr recommends milk to a sadhak, he is thrown out and blamed as was in case of Mr Vaid Amrut Prajapati Ji of baroda, when he wanted to give glass of milk to a sadhak who was getting weak he was threatened and his video was made that he is guilty and was taken on a guilt trip. Does these kind of incidents happen in sadhguru ashram too ?

Sadhguru being a religious speaker in hindutva industry, I haven't seen sadhguru condemning inhumane acts done in asaram ashrams by sadhguru and other ashram people why ? Is slavery a normal routine in ashram and starvation murders of people who want to leave ashram a normal activity of all ashrams ? I know asaram & narayan ashram this is common but does this happens in sadhguru ashram too ? Sadhguru is closed to BJP top gun Arun jaitley , do they approve murders rapes, sexual exploitations of ashrams ? if not why they protected asaram. Witnesses are willing to testify in over 50 cases why CID is misused against victims itself? Is this normal in sadhguru ashram also when insider leaves then ashram threatens victims , file theft charges or declares them terrorist ? Is this is happening in sadhguru ashrams also ? Did sadhguru helped any of the victims /slaves who were emotionally tortured by asaram ashrams ? It's the same industry right ? Or Sadhguru has things to hide so he doesn't want to speak and is scared his own ashram might get exposed so let's defend asaram by not speaking against cruelty of inside ashrams. is there any Human Rights Organization in india which looks after human rights violations in India? If not then who is keeping track of these ashrams ? I would like to file complaints can you please provide me Human Rights organization in India ? how many cases have they handled of ashrams in last 10 years. How come there are thousands of ashrams numbers of murders in ashrams in India and not even one case is handled by any Human Rights Organizations ? how come all murder, rapes, slavery cases are shut, silenced or victims & victims families are murdered ? Only Dera Sacha Sauda did went till CBI, and they did found him guilty but even in his case thousands of people physically were present to support him ? did any human rights organization supported Victims of Dera sacha Sauda ?

How is Sadhguru different ? What is his stand on asaram ? can u please point me TV interview he gave against atrocities and tortures done in ashrams ?

These posts are quite interesting.
The mystic guru's non-religious organization is loaded with Hindu idols, old superstitions in new bottles, like the "solidified mercury linga in room temperature", which would be something alien to real science [ not the science of dhyanalinga]

[dhyanalinga.org]

This would be a good read,

[nonspiritual.net]

Excerpted with permission from

EXPOSING CULTS: WHEN THE SKEPTICAL MIND CONFRONTS THE MYSTICAL

David C. Lane
Garland Publishing, Inc. (1994)


Chapter Twelve

THE SPIRITUAL CRUCIBLE

A Critical Guide to America's Cultic Renaissance

The 1980's may be known in the future by spiritual aspirants as the decade of the fallen guru. Already a number of prominent and respected religious masters in India and elsewhere have had their secret, private lives exposed: hidden Swiss bank accounts; extensive cases of plagiarism; sexual misconduct; violent retaliations against detractors; egotistical power plays; drug trafficking and more.
It is no longer "in" or respectable to follow a guru. The New Age is growing old. The Aquarian Conspiracy is backfiring. The Golden Age of Enlightenment is rusting. What happened to the Consciousness Revolution?

Critical reasoning. Instead of a quantum leap into transformed dimensions of awareness, spiritual seekers have begun to develop a keen sense of discrimination. Since the Jonestown tragedy, it is no longer sensible, according to the general public, to forego one's rational mind in the hope of a transcendent paradise. Crucial questions arise: "If the teachings don't make logical sense on this plane, what is the assurance that they will come together in the higher astral worlds?" - "Why does my teacher have the privilege to rationalize away his/her worldly expressions of anger and lust, as part of his/her awakening method, when my same actions are always called vices to be conquered?" - "Is the thinking mind really the enemy that should be suppressed and fought?"

More and more questions such as these are being posed by serious religious practitioners who are no longer satisfied with purely dogmatic and fundamentalist perspectives on spiritual liberation. Indeed, they argue, if humans are truly striving for an enlightened state then all parts of their being should reflect that truth: the soul, the mind, and the body. To castrate one versus the other (as Descartes did with the mind and the body) is to allow for only a schizophrenic view of the universe. That is, the body is always evil; and the soul always good. God in the meantime ceases to be the Lord of all and becomes the Chosen God of the few. The end result? Politics replaces spirituality.

To overcome this tenacious dualism, certain sincere seekers are discovering ways in which reason helps and promotes spiritual practice. Ken Wilber, perhaps the most articulate spokesman of this emerging group, points out in his ground-breaking overview of human evolution, Up From Eden, that critical intelligence is not an obstacle in the soul's progression back to God, but a beneficial and necessary step. To disavow reasoning and its strengths, Wilber emphasizes, is not a progressive way towards Self-Realization, but a regression into mental infancy.

Genuine saints and gurus, though their number may be few, do not ask for blind obedience. Quite the contrary, they demand individual responsibility and maturation in the face of one's real and eternal condition. Unlike their charlatan counterparts, sincere masters invite critical thinking. As one teacher put it, "Question everything (even your guru's actions and teachings) until you satisfy your intellect. Even if you spend your whole lifetime in such an endeavor, it is not time lost, but time gained. You will be building a foundation on rock, not sand."

But, how does one know if his/her spiritual master is authentic or misguided? How can one distinguish between a legitimate and beneficial path and a self-serving and corrupt organization? No doubt these are difficult questions, but they can be answered. This article is an attempt to help clarify many of the muddled issues now facing the spiritual community. It does so by offering a unique crucible wherein a series of key questions are asked and examined. Each of these questions is designed to reveal the relative degree of legitimacy and authenticity of one's chosen master and path. For some it will be an awakening experience, while for others it will be an outward confirmation of what they already intuited. In either case the crucible will hopefully spark deeper investigation of all aspects of one's spiritual development.

Although guidelines have been proposed by several religious groups to help would-be seekers decide which path or guru is the highest, almost all of them suffer from a clear case of what sociologists and anthropologists now call ethnocentrism (the tendency to see other people, cultures, religions, solely in terms of one's own world view). Surely, no critical guide will be exempt from a certain amount of prejudice or bias, but it can be minimized if the template we employ to appraise masters and new movements is drawn from transcultural sources and is interdisciplinary in scope.

To accomplish this aim, the following test was complied from four distinct schools:1) Transpersonal Psychology (Ken Wilber, John Welwood, et al.); 2) Advaita Vedanta (Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, et al.); 3) Sant Mat (Sawan Singh, Julian P. Johnson, et al); and 4) Christianity (Mother Teresa,Nicholas of Cusa, et al.); 5) Naturally, not all of these schools are in exact agreement with each other, but taken together they do provide a substantial framework with which interested practitioners can measure the claims of their respective guru and path. Each of the headings will contain examples of individuals or groups who have either embodied the ideal principle or who have gone far astray from it. All of the examples cited are based upon documented research.

1. Does Your Guru/Path Charge Money For Membership?
"Real Masters never charge for their services, nor do they accept payment in any form or any sort of material benefits for their instructions. This is a universal law among Masters, and yet it is an amazing fact that thousands of eager seekers in America and elsewhere, go on paying large sums of money for "spiritual instruction.". Masters are always self-sustaining. They are never supported by their students or by public charity."
--Julian P. Johnson, The Path of the Masters (1939)--
Perhaps the easiest question to ask and have answered by a spiritual guru/path is whether or not their organization charges money for membership. If the answer is yes, it is a clear sign for the "buyer to beware," as almost all groups which assign a fee for their teachings are suspect. Although Self-Realization may entail many requirements, such as giving up ego, greed, lust, and so forth, offering up your wallet or life savings is not one of them.
In America there is a tendency to make a commodity out of anything, even spirituality. Not only is making salvation a marketable item absurd ("Sorry, you don't qualify for the highest, blissful heaven." - "Why not?" - "You forgot to pay last month's subscription dues for soul discourses"), but it allows for a number of unscrupulous individuals to make huge sums of money off naive seekers. Bhagwan Rajneesh, more than any other Indian guru in America, illustrated this fact with his excessive wealth and predilection for Rolls Royces (which amounted to ninety plus).

Although money is necessary to keep movements functioning (the publishing of books, etc.), there is a distinct line between obligatory payments -- even if they are disguised as "love offerings," and unsolicited donations; the latter has justifiable reasons behind it, whereas the former makes religion a business enterprise, with a very lucrative tax shelter.

Interestingly, there are comparatively few spiritual groups which do not charge money for membership. Thus, this first criterion is a rather simple way to ferret out the possibly genuine guru/path from the less valid ones. Check out the movement's financial situation closely, keeping a close eye on where and to whom most of the money collected is going. If the particular organization is resistant to giving out such monetary information, then it can be safely assumed that the guru/path in question is more concerned with fiscal matters than with upliftment of the mind and spirit.

2. Does Your Spiritual Teacher Have A High Standard Of Moral Conduct?

"Once I was coming to India from Bagdad on my annual leave. At Makina Camp, I was waiting for the ship for my homeward journey. As there was yet some time for the arrival of the ship I thought I would have some puffs of "huqqa" (tobacco). So I went to the kitchen of some labourers to collect fire from their place. The workmen had left for their earnings after finishing their meals. A four anna coin was lying near the fireplace. I looked all around (to confirm that nobody was seeing me,) and picked up the four anna coin, collected the necessary fire for my "huqqa" and returned to my bed. When I reached my place, I thought, "you receive 500Rs. per month. Why have you picked up this coin so stealthily?" I repented upon my foolish act and gave away that coin to someone. It is very easy to preach and sermonize others, but most difficult to be practical in one's life."
--Baba Faqir Chand, The Unknowing Sage--
A truly enlightened master is by virtue of his attainment a moral human being. For, unlike most of struggling humanity, the realized sage has transcended the ego and its limitations and become consciously aware of his real relationship as an indivisible part of God's Being. As such, an enlightened master would exhibit ethical qualities far beyond those manifested by even noble worldly souls. In light of this, it is particularly distressing to note that a large number of so-called gurus are quite unethical in their behavior. This ranges from improper business deals, to sexual misconduct, personal violence, and even criminal activity. As Julian P. Johnson correctly observes:
"If I were looking for a Master, I would first of all make the most critical inspection of the man's life to determine if he had any of the ordinary imperfections of character usually manifested by the average man. If I found him to be a perfect man, when studied as man, I would then begin my study of him as a Guru. But if he failed to pass inspection as a man, I would at once give up the search of him as Guru, or Master."
However, though some teachers have been known to engage in immoral actions, naive followers try to find ways to justify such behavior. The problem with attempting to give metaphysical explanations for what would otherwise be considered "ordinary" events is that it enables ambitious masters to bypass standard morality in the name of a "higher" authority. What is needed in appraising spiritual claims is a religious version of "Occam's Razor" (the scientific/philosophic rule which requires that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex, or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities), wherein seekers have a predisposition for the more logical, common sense interpretation of allegedly transcendent actions. Is it really necessary to "explain away" a guru's lust or misdirected practices as being motivated by the Holy Spirit, God, or Mother Shakti? Gurus don't hesitate to point out their devotees' weaknesses, nor should disciples be hesitant in criticizing their teacher's faults when they appear. Critical exchange is crucial and healthy for any type of relationship including teacher/student ones.
3. Does Your Master Make Claims About His/Her Spiritual Development, Powers, or Attainment?

"If any man claims to have attained the highest in spiritual development that claim of itself may be taken as conclusive proof that he has not attained so much."
--Julian P. Johnson, The Path of the Masters (1939)--
"Good masters might indeed be divine, but they are also human. Even Christ was said to be one person (Jesus) with two natures (human and divine). Further, the fact that a guru has been thoroughly educated in soul and spirit does not mean he or she has been thoroughly educated in body and mind. I have yet to see a guru run a four-minute mile with his "perfect body" or explain Einstein's special theory of relativity with his "perfect mind."
--Ken Wilber, Eye to Eye--

Almost all of the world's great religious scriptures universally acclaim that humility is one of the chief virtues of an enlightened human being. Yet, many of the most popular gurus today speak out quite stridently about their spiritual attainments. Some, like Sathya Sai Baba of South India, even claim to be God incarnated. Others, perhaps less absolutist but nevertheless confident, allege that they have access to the Supreme Being on a day to day basis. It is roughly estimated that there are over a million gurus in India, most of whom claim to have direct contact with the highest Reality and Truth. What is the seeker to do? Whose statements should he/she believe?
None of them. Spirituality, according to true mystics of all ages, is an experiential science, one which demands not blind faith and belief, but rigorous practice and application. ndeed, as Ken Wilber points out, authentic mysticism is a provable discipline since it enables a practitioner to see directly higher, transpersonal regions of consciousness. Therefore, the necessity for "belief" in a teacher's claims is uncalled for. Rather, what is needed is experimental verification of the path he/she advocates. All to often, religious seekers become armchair speculators versus actual practitioners, thereby basing their judgements on a mere intellectual appraisement of the master and not on direct interaction with his/her teachings.

If any guru demands belief in his/her status it is obvious that what they are teaching is not spirituality/mysticism but dogma and conversion. Truly, unless the would-be disciple is already God-Realized, how is he/she to know the spiritual capabilities of his/her master? Mere allegiance will not suffice, nor will any amount of propaganda about the guru's greatness, only daily spiritual practice will do.

Transculturally and throughout the ages, there have been a select number of saints who have embodied the very highest qualities of enlightenment which, contrary to our notions of "other worldliness," can be manifested in their everyday lives. "By their fruits, you will know them." Some beautiful examples in the 20th century are: Ramana Maharshi, Sawan Singh, and Mother Teresa, each of whom in their own way have expressed an aspect of the divine (knowledge, awareness, and love). Such rare individuals serve as reference points with which to measure the claims of emerging gurus in North America.

4. Does Your Guru/Group Proselytize Vigorously For New Converts?

"Any group "out to save the world" is potentially problematic, because it rests on an archaically narcissistic base that looks "altruistic" or "idealistic" but in fact is very egocentric, very primitive, and very capable of coming to primitive ends by primitive means."
--Ken Wilber, Eye to Eye, (1983)--
Regardless of how the proselytization is disguised, any guru/group which advocates a vigorous program of recruiting new converts acts as a dividing force in the society, cutting directly into family and relationships. Such conversionary emphasis has a tendency to create factions where none had existed before: "I am saved; you are still lost." - "I found it; you haven't", and so on. This kind of dualism has many forms, ranging from the blatantly obvious (as we find in fundmentalist Christian and Islamic sects) to the subtly hidden (Est:"Did you get It"; Scientology: "Are you clear" and certain esoteric groups which play on such notions as "initiated" versus "non-initiated", as determining factors of self-worth and social stratification).
Undoubtedly a certain amount of advertisement goes on in every religious movement, even the ones which are adamantly opposed to spreading their teachings publicly (e.g., Soami Bagh and Dayal Bagh in Agra, India). Just the publication of books, texts, and articles is itself a form of advertisement, albeit a limited avenue. The fine line, however is where giving out the message becomes consciously pushing the truth, as not only an alternative but as a required necessity. Wilber points out the danger of such a development:

"Such obsessive drivenness is always open to problematic occasions, not the least of which is the fact that if you have the way, then that end will justify virtually any means, up to and including holy war. And holy war, of course, isn't a sin, it isn't murder, because the people you are killing in order to save aren't really people they're infidels."
If the guru/path really does have a glimpse into the transcendental truth of the universe, then the concern will not be with "preaching" that insight but actually exemplifying it. As is well known in parental and teaching circles, the most accomplished parent/teacher is the one who says the most not with words but with actions. This simple truth, though used as a cliche, should be kept in mind whenever encountering a "new" revelation.
5. Who Appointed Your Teacher to Be a Master?

"Cult leaders are often self-styled prophets who have not studied with great teachers or undergone lengthy training or discipline themselves. . . Many of the most dangerous cultic figures of our times have no such stabilizing context of tradition, lineage or transmission, but are self-proclaimed gurus who sway their followers through their charismatic talents. . . ."
--John Welwood, On Spiritual Authority--
Successorship controversies are some of the most intricate and confusing issues that a spiritual seeker can face. A number of perplexing questions may arise: "Is my guru really enlightened?" - "Did my teacher truly receive the mantleship from his master?" - "Why is my movement's history disputed by outside scholars?" etc. The forthcoming answers are rarely simple and air-tight. There is always a strange twist, an odd fact, a peculiar story, which upturns even the most stalwart of followers.
The only remedy to doubt is not blind belief or dogma, but the ability to allow the mind to question and to embrace the paradoxical nature of the world. This kind of recourse enables the discriminating mind to exist alongside the devotion laden heart. However, certain requirements of historical legitimacy must be met before the seeker can relax into his/her practice with relative confidence. Most importantly the guru must have confirmation for his claim of mastership by outside sources. If this requirement is bypassed then the neophyte runs the risk of having only his teacher be able to validate his realizations. Such single source legitimacy, as Wilber terms it, is open to a series of problems, not the least of which is excessive narcissism on behalf of the guru, who becomes by virtue of his self-appointment the final and only authority for spiritual matters. Verification, therefore, is not only helpful in determining the master's real status, but is necessary in moving religious endeavors out of isolation, where excessed and ethical transgressions are more likely to occur. As John Welwood argues:

"Many of the world's great religious traditions have lines of spiritual transmission, i.e., a person's realization is tested by his teachers before he is allowed to represent himself as a master. This is especially true in all the (major) lineages of Buddhism as well as in other Asian traditions. The process of testing and transmission serves as a kind of "quality control" to insure that a given teacher does not distort the teachings for his own personal gain."
Yet, in the midst of this convoluted myth making, how is the unsuspecting seeker to know? Therefore, it is of particular importance that the historical antecedents of any guru/group be thoroughly investigated. Though the search may not be easy, it is a must if there is to be any intellectual integrity on the part of the disciple.
6. Are The Central Teachings Of The Guru/Movement Trans- Rational Or Pre-Rational?

"The aim and object of all religions and of all ancient seers has been to take the soul, by one means or another, back to its source. Perfect is he who, by practice and meditation, lifts his soul to its real abode, freeing it from all bonds, both internal and external, gross, subtle, causal, and thus detaches his mind from the world and its phenomena. The perfect sadhus, real gyanis, true lovers or devotees of the Lord, are those only who reach the last stage. They who only talk of the Perfect Ones, or read their teachings to others without reaching the stage or practicing towards that end are only intellectuals and theorists."
--Shiv Dayal Singh, Sar Bachan Prose--
Contrary to what most secular humanists believe, like Paul Kurtz and Issac Asimov, true religion is a transrational endeavor to achieve higher states of consciousness beyond the verbal mind. Genuine mystics are not concerned with pre-rational forms of behavior, such as mythic logic, group-think, dogma, obedience without insight, and so forth. These types of thinking work against rather than promote spiritual enlightenment. An authentic tradition centers its teachings on direct, personal contact with the Supreme Reality by engaging in day to day meditation, prayer, or zazen.
Nothing can substitute for the disciple's own effort and inward progress not vicarious atonement, not the burning of karmas by the guru, not God's grace, though all of these elements have their part. Individual action, though understood in relationship with the Lord's mercy and grace, is stressed above all else by genuine gurus/movements. No true mystic will ever ask a student to believe in him/her blindly or follow the teachings uncritically. Comments Tulsi Sahib, a renowned saint in the Sant Mat tradition who lived in the 19th century:

"When with my own eyes do I behold, then shall I accept what the Sat-Guru saith"
Adds Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, "Until with my own eyes do I see, the word of the Guru satisfieth me not...".
And finally writes Shiv Dayal Singh, "Know thou thyself by thyself; believe not at all what others say".
What are trans-rational practices? Disciplines which concentrate on higher, not lower, states of consciousness and which enable the student to master the lower tendencies of the mind. Hence, trans-rational engagements do not squelch critical thinking but actually help the reasoning process by allowing it to see more fully the vast potential of human life. As Wilber so clearly indicated, there is a fundamental difference between a sangat of meditating Zen monks and a clan of deluded Jim Jones devotees. The former is trans-rational because the monks take their intelligence with them into satori; whereas the latter is pre-rational because Jonestown members foresook their individuality for regressive magical-mythic belonging.
7. What Are The Day To Day Results Of Your Interaction With The Guru/Path?

Devotee: "How can one know whether a particular individual is competent to be a Guru?"
Ramana Maharshi: "By the peace of mind found in his presence and by the sense of respect you feel for him."
Questioner: "How can I make out whom to follow and whom to mistrust?"
Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj: "Mistrust all until you are convinced. The true guru will never humiliate you nor will he estrange you from yourself. He will constantly bring you back to the fact of your inherent perfection and encourage you to seek within. He knows you need nothing, not even him, and is never tired of reminding you..."

If the guru/movement is authentic they will help you to better understand yourself, your family, your relationships, and God. Such understanding, however, does not necessarily mean that your worldly life will improve accordingly. For instance, following a spiritual path does not insure one against losing money, facing natural catastrophies, and struggling with domestic problems; it only helps one in coping better with all the various aspects of human existence.
Obviously, the results of your interaction with the guru/path should be apparent to your close associates: more openness, kindness, compassion, selflessness, honesty, and loving devotion. If these qualities are not exhibited it can be due to two reasons: you are not practicing consistently what the guru/path advocates; or, you are following teachings which place more stress on selfish, prerational, and anti-social behavior. Interestingly, it is easier to determine a fraudulent message than it is to own up to your immaturity and lack of discipline.

The effect of the guru on your personal life should be clearly evident, especially if you feel that your teacher is God-realized. Thus, there is as much responsibility on the shoulders of a disciple as there is on a guru. Both must be willing to surrender to a reality higher than themselves; the devotee to his master's instructions; the master to the living presence of God, to whom he has liberated his being.

How To Score Your Answers On The Spiritual Crucible
If after taking the "spiritual crucible" you find out that your guru charges money for membership, lives an unethical lifestyle, self-proclaims his mastership, encourages proselytizing, alleges to be God-incarnated, emphasizes pre-rational practices, and demands total obedience, it can be assumed that you're on the wrong path and that your guru is a charlatan.

On the other hand, if your guru/path scores positively in all areas (such an accomplishment, by the way, is rare), then you are very fortunate to have been led to a beneficial and legitimate spiritual movement. The responsibility now shifts to your shoulders, as it is up to you to take advantage of the situation. Enlightenment is a two way process, the outcome of two interacting forces: God's grace and the disciple's effort.

Most of the results, however, will be a combination of positive and negative scores, with some guru/paths meeting the criterions in three or four sections but missing the marks in other parts. In this case, it is essential that the seeker fully weigh the pros and cons to his guru's mission. If one decides to stay in the movement, then it is necessary to discard those elements of the teachings which do not coincide with his/her best interests However, if one leaves the group, it does not mean that everything has to be forgotten. Rather, those features which are beneficial and helpful should be taken along as guidelines for the journey.

Ultimately, following a spiritual master or path requires a tremendous amount of maturity, self-control, and discrimination. To achieve God-Realization is not an overnight affair, or the outcome of feeble effort, it is the culmination of consistent day to day application of transcendent mystical teachings. In the end, the greatest obstacle of all is not the guru or the movement, it is the disciple.

Postscript
There is a fundamental problem with this essay which I suspect most readers will clearly see. It assumes that I have some idea of what enlightenment or ultimate truth is. Clearly I don't know. But what I do know is that most traditions which speak of truth or enlightenment set up criteria by which to adjudicate the relative claims of would-be masters. And when these traditions are taken as a whole we get some idea of what some of the major problems are that religious humans are trying to overcome. In a nutshell, such templates of moral living may not have a clue on what truth is, but they do suggest what it is not or, at the very least, what we find non-desirable in spiritual gurus. In this way, the preceding essay helps awaken naive seekers to the pitfalls that await them. This is not to suggest, however, that my template of good paths and good gurus is the only one possible or necessarily one which is correct; it is, rather, a goad, a prompt for one to inspect his or her religious delvings. It is as a prompt, I would suggest, that the essay is useful; outside of that, I should warn the reader that even though I may be a seasoned veteran of guru wars I really am quite unsure what lies beyond (or, for that matter, before) existence. In this regard, I find myself swimming in a sea of ignorance; thankfully, it appears that I have trillions of companions.

Some discussion about Jaggi the capitalist guru and former chicken feather-plucker here.

(Page 5 of a 5 page article)

[guruphiliac.lefora.com]

According to the dicussion on page 5 Banya-Jaggi is now selling products via the Isha Shoppe.

[www.ishashoppe.com]

I looked up the incense, as incense is usually the cheapest thing in a gift shop.

[www.ishashoppe.com]

Price is Rs.208.00--208 Indian Rupees

According to the currency exchange table this works out to $4.25

208.00 INR = 4.25152 USD

This folks is a lesson in why these guys (and gals) keep bringing guru theatre to the US.

One Euro or US Dollar works out to a staggering increase in purchasing power when coverted to rupees.

This site is a great way to see this in action.

[www.sciencemadesimple.net]

Common and Repetitive Teaching Stories Used by Gurus and Western Imitators of Such

If someone has been on the ashram circuit for awhile, they will have most likely heard these stories and quite often.

If they heard these stories during times when trance inducing chants and meditations were used, hearing or reading those stories in another context might possibly be a trigger.

Each of these stories seems unique when heard for the first time, but they are cliched and can be used to serve a multitude of functions.

These can be used by genuine and helpful teachers. And, unfortunately, they can be used by pseudo gurus who know just a few bits of Hinduism and can impose on audiences who lack the training to know they're getting a dumbed down version of Hinduism that serves as a money draw.

Worst of all some of the stories, especially the snake and rope story, can perhaps be abused as part of a strategy to trick the listener into distrusting his or her perceptions.

The Snake and Rope

[forum.culteducation.com]

and

[forum.culteducation.com]

The Clay and the Clay Pot

[forum.culteducation.com]

Flowers in a Vase

[forum.culteducation.com]

'This would be a good read,'
I followed the link to "nonspiritual.net" you gave above, ar, and found this breathtakingly logical dissection of Jaggi's discourses by Harmanjit Singh on his blog 'Spiritual and Disingenuous.'

spiritual and disingenuous

Mr Singh has done a sterling job of gently showing the inane emptiness of Jaggi's schtick and pointing out the way he leads the listener to surrender to Jaggi as god.

Another good read.

[harmanjit.blogspot.com]

Quote

Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Spiritual and Disingenuous
[harmanjit.blogspot.com]
It is hard for doting devotees of a spiritual teacher to see any fault in his sayings. And more often than not, what the teacher is doing is just talking nonsense, or building a dependence on himself in a subtle or crude way.

Take for example the following questions and responses from [www.ishafoundation.org] (a website of a spiritual teacher "Sadhguru" Jaggi Vasudev). The Q&A is first presented as-is from the website and then later it is presented with my annotations.

Q: How do I become aware? What support can I seek for this?

Sadhguru: "Unfortunately most people are still lame. They always need a stick to walk. Without a crutch they cannot walk. Support, once again, is at many different levels. If you are physically lame, you need a physical support. If you are psychologically weak, you need a psychological support. If emotionally imbalanced, you need emotional support. On a different level, if you are financially weak, you need financial support - if socially weak, social support. But these are different aspects. When I say support in relation to your growth spiritually, it was connected to all these things in a way.

Some people need psychological support; some people need a physical atmosphere support. When they come to a particular program, they meditate well, they do their Shakti Chalana Kriya well, but if they sit at home, alone, they can’t keep their eyes closed and do any sadhana even for ten minutes. They need support. Physical atmosphere is very important for them. Without support - outside support - for a lot of people, not only their way of being, their awareness, even their sadhana disappears.

Awareness is hard to keep. When I say hard, I am not saying it is difficult - I am only saying that it needs application, it needs awareness. It just needs awareness. When it isn’t there, to be aware or to make an attempt to be aware is hard. Now, awareness is not something that you have to learn or cultivate. The innermost core of your being is awareness. It is just that when people are living on the surface of their life, they are only experiencing the surface of what they are - just the body and the mind. Then awareness seems to be the most impossible thing, so difficult. But your innermost core is simply awareness. There is nothing to be done - whichever way you are, you are aware anyway."

========================

The question is pretty clear: "How do I become aware?" What it obviously means is how do I become aware of the various levels of my consciousness and become aware of the causal chains operating in me which lead me to remain as-I-am and unhappy.

How does the teacher approach this question?

"Unfortunately most people are still lame. They always need a stick to walk. Without a crutch they cannot walk."

"Support, once again, is at many different levels. If you are physically lame, you need a physical support. If you are psychologically weak, you need a psychological support. If emotionally imbalanced, you need emotional support."

The above is an elucidation of the word "support" as it is used in various contexts.

"On a different level, if you are financially weak, you need financial support - if socially weak, social support. But these are different aspects."

As above.

"When I say support in relation to your growth spiritually, it was connected to all these things in a way."

This probably refers to a talk of his after which this question was raised.

"Some people need psychological support; some people need a physical atmosphere support."

So, the teacher says: to become aware, "some people" need a conducive atmosphere.

"When they come to a particular program, they meditate well, they do their Shakti Chalana Kriya well, but if they sit at home, alone, they can’t keep their eyes closed and do any sadhana even for ten minutes."

So, the teacher says: at home people are unable to meditate or to do the "shakti chalana kriya" but they can do it well when participating in a program. At a program, typically the meditator is surrounded by like-minded meditators and the whole focus of the group and the atmosphere is on meditation. It is an elementary example of group psychology enhancing one's own motivation. Many people find it hard to jog alone, to watch a movie alone, to travel alone, to motivate themselves to do something creative on their own. They will do things if told to do so, or if part of a group. The mind needs an order or an authority figure to dictate to oneself.

"They need support. Physical atmosphere is very important for them. Without support - outside support - for a lot of people, not only their way of being, their awareness, even their sadhana disappears."

Because such people are unable to internalize the motivation. Their motivation comes from outside.

So what should one do?

"Awareness is hard to keep. When I say hard, I am not saying it is difficult - I am only saying that it needs application,"

Okay, so it is not difficult in the sense of being complicated, but it is difficult in the sense of being hard to persevere in.

So, once again, what does the teacher suggest? How to find out what is preventing one from being internally motivated?

"it needs awareness. It just needs awareness."

But that's begging the question. How to learn about and be aware of one's lethargy and the causes of one's un-creative, unhappy, unmotivated life?

"When it isn’t there, to be aware or to make an attempt to be aware is hard."

Of course, that is why the question is being asked. What is the way out? Why am I like this?

"Now, awareness is not something that you have to learn or cultivate."

So, the teacher says, awareness is not something that can be improved upon, since you cannot learn or cultivate it.

"The innermost core of your being is awareness."

You are awareness in essence, the teacher says. The punchline will come in the end.

"It is just that when people are living on the surface of their life, they are only experiencing the surface of what they are - just the body and the mind."

That begs the question: if my core is awareness, why am I living on the surface? Who is living on the surface? Is it the core? How can the core live at the surface? Is it not the core? But then what is it? How to deepen this experiencing?

"Then awareness seems to be the most impossible thing, so difficult. But your innermost core is simply awareness. There is nothing to be done - whichever way you are, you are aware anyway."

Bravo! I am sure the seeker is now clear about what to do.

Just do nothing. Just realize that you are awareness, and stop trying.

(the statement is obviously false because there is no awareness in a coma, state of unconsciousness or in deep sleep).

=======================================

Another example?

Q: Sadhguru, you have told us many times that if we have bitter experiences in our life, it is because of our past doings. What type of activities should we do today to avoid future bitterness?

Sadhguru: "Subbarao, the bitterness of any experience is not in what has happened. The bitterness of any experience is in terms of how you have received it. What is very bitter for one person could be a blessing for another person. Once, a grief stricken man threw himself on a grave and cried bitterly, hitting his head against it. “My life! Oh! How senseless it is! How worthless this carcass of mine is because you’re gone. If only you had lived! If only fate had not been so cruel as to take you from this world! How different everything would have been!” A clergyman, nearby, overheard him and said, “I assume this person lying beneath this mound of earth was someone of great importance to you.” “Importance? Yes, indeed,” wept the man, wailing even louder, “It was my wife’s first husband!” The bitterness is not in what is happening. It is in how you’re allowing yourself to experience it, how you are receiving it. Similarly, whatever the past activity or karma is, is also not in terms of action, but in terms of the volition with which it is done.

What is happening with you all, if you are a little open to me or to the teaching, is just that the volition is taken away, so you just do what is needed. That is what awareness means; there is no volition. Where there is no volition, there is no karma. You are simply doing what is needed; that is what acceptance means. That is what unbounded responsibility means, that you don’t have any volition about anything. In every given situation, simply whatever you see as needed, as per your awareness, as per your capability, you just do it. You build karma only with volition; whether it is good or bad, it does not matter. The strength of your volition is what builds karma.

People ask me, again and again, the same question, "What’s your mission?" When I tell them, "I have no mission; I’m just fooling around," they think I’m being frivolous. They don’t understand this is the deepest statement that I can make about living in the world, because there is no particular volition – just doing what is needed, that’s all. In this, there is no karma. Whatever you go through, there is no karma. Whatever you are doing is just happening, as it is needed. So karma is only in terms of your need to do something. When you have no need to do anything, and you simply do what is needed, there is no karmic attachment to it. It is neither good nor bad."

========================================

[ Now the annotation ]

"Q: Sadhguru, you have told us many times that if we have bitter experiences in our life, it is because of our past doings. What type of activities should we do today to avoid future bitterness?"

So, the student is asking: Since our suffering is due to our past actions, how can we stop doing actions in the present so that we do not suffer in the future.

The Sadhguru replies:

"Subbarao, the bitterness of any experience is not in what has happened. The bitterness of any experience is in terms of how you have received it."

Sadhguru says that the experiences are not bitter per se, but are perceived bitterly. I.e., it is all in your mind. One should ask the Sadhguru, is this the advice he would give to a child who is currently being raped by a sadistic father? "The experience is perfectly fine in itself, just don't take it in a bad way."

This attitude is the prime reason people with a solipsistic psyche do not want to improve anything, because they just stop feeling bad about it and that's the solution.

"What is very bitter for one person could be a blessing for another person."

True, most experiences can be evaluated in various ways, but there are experiences, for example, being painfully handicapped, suffering from hate and lust, being the victim of violence, being in a war-torn disease-ridden, experiences which are unequivocally physically and mentally stressful or damaging.

Psychological suffering (as opposed to bodily suffering), however, is indeed due to one's own instincts and conditioning and it is indeed upton oneself to be completely free of psychological suffering.

Let's define suffering as a state of mind or body which makes one unhappy and/or harmful.

Injury, illness, stress, hate, lust, greed, anger, etc., can be considered objective phenomena causing (or being) suffering in a particular individual.

The issue of responsibility is separate from the issue of categorizing an event. If we agree that living stressfully or unhealthily is not a sensible way to live life, then anybody who is living stressfully or unhealthily can be categorized as a suffering individual.

"Once, a grief stricken man threw himself on a grave and cried bitterly, hitting his head against it. “My life! Oh! How senseless it is! How worthless this carcass of mine is because you’re gone. If only you had lived! If only fate had not been so cruel as to take you from this world! How different everything would have been!” A clergyman, nearby, overheard him and said, “I assume this person lying beneath this mound of earth was someone of great importance to you.” “Importance? Yes, indeed,” wept the man, wailing even louder, “It was my wife’s first husband!”"

This joke illustrates only that the suffering can have a cause which is different from the cause perceived by others. The value of this joke in furthering our particular enquiry is zilch.

"The bitterness is not in what is happening. It is in how you’re allowing yourself to experience it, how you are receiving it."

Ok, so I am responsible for my suffering. Fair enough, so what should be done about it?

"Similarly, whatever the past activity or karma is, is also not in terms of action, but in terms of the volition with which it is done.""

Ok, so the karma (to use that word) is based on volitions, not on externally visible (so-to-say) events. E.g., to kill a person is not a "sin" if it is done with compassion (e.g., to ease that person's suffering during terminal illness). That is how karma is usually defined in spirituality.

"What is happening with you all, if you are a little open to me or to the teaching, is just that the volition is taken away, so you just do what is needed."

This is typically known as the surrendering of the will and is a common theme in spiritual circles. After the surrender, "what is needed" is dictated by external forces instead of one's own mind. Needless to say, the external force in this case is clearly spelt out as "me or my teaching".

"That is what awareness means; there is no volition. Where there is no volition, there is no karma."

So, in other words, "surrender your will to me, and stop worrying about any future punishment that you might get if you act on your own."

"You are simply doing what is needed; that is what acceptance means."

In other words, "you are simply doing what I tell you to do, that is what acceptance of me means."

"That is what unbounded responsibility means, that you don’t have any volition about anything."

It is beyond me how a surrender of one's own will can make one "unboundedly responsible." Reasonably speaking, if I surrender my will, I am not responsible for my actions. Only my master is responsible. And presumably, if he is "beyond karma", then he can be as volitional as he wants to be without accumulating any karma. In other words, God need not be worried about the consequences of his actions, but mortal humans should, as long as they haven't surrendered themselves to him.

"In every given situation, simply do whatever you see as needed, as per your awareness, as per your capability, you just do it."

This clarity of thought, where one acts without conflict, requires an extraordinary amount of self-awareness, enquiry and investigation. It is extremely hard, for a normal enough person, to act without any contradiction, confusion or malice.

Unless, of course, one has surrendered. This is the easy way out. Then one need not bother anymore. Just do what one is told to do, or what is required to achieve the ends which have been specified by the master. There is no confusion about the ends anymore. That is why the strange attraction of total surrender: it is the quickest way out of confusion ... and into ... subservience.

"You build karma only with volition; whether it is good or bad, it does not matter. The strength of your volition is what builds karma."

Clear enough.

So the exhortation is to surrender.

"People ask me, again and again, the same question, "What’s your mission?" When I tell them, "I have no mission; I’m just fooling around," they think I’m being frivolous."

In other words, I am God. I am not acting for furthering myself, I have no agenda of my own. This is all a leela (or play) for me.

"They don’t understand this is the deepest statement that I can make about living in the world, because there is no particular volition – just doing what is needed, that’s all."

This is what is called being dishonest about one's motives. If he wants to bring englightenment to the world, he should be forthright about it. Teachers before him have had the gumption to admit that they were world teachers. On one hand he assumes the title of a "sadhguru" (or the True Messiah), and then he says he is fooling around.

One should ask him: is he fooling around answering such questions? And if he says yes, and if people still keep asking him questions in all seriousness, then probably they deserve to surrender their will to him.

And, "just doing what is needed." Needed for what? Why the need for having a marketing website complete with an online shop, and worldwide tours and lectures, and hobnobbing with powerful politicians and having expensive retreats for the rich and the depressed and going to spiritual conferences with other spiritual leaders (or tricksters, such as Deepak Chopra)?

"In this, there is no karma."

"Whatever you go through, there is no karma. Whatever you are doing is just happening, as it is needed."

"So karma is only in terms of your need to do something. When you have no need to do anything, and you simply do what is needed, there is no karmic attachment to it. It is neither good nor bad."

In other words, I am God, and you surrender to me.

=================================
Posted by Harmanjit Singh at 3:22 PM

Tbe comments following Mr Singh's article are all great good fun to read.

Two stand out:

Quote

Anonymous said...
Dear Harmanjit,

Have you ever sat with Sadhguru and asked him a question yourself? If you get the chance, I would recommend it. Like the person who responded earlier as "snonymous," Sadhguru does answer the question for that one particular asking it. If you had the chance to challenge him on a question you would see that all the answers you're asking would come. Sometimes Sadhguru says things that are quite difficult to swallow. He can be brash and wittingly sarcastic, but never have I seen him way off the mark.
10:14 PM
harmanjit said...
I have personally confronted Sadhguru in a conference in New Delhi regarding his ideas about children being born innocent and the ideology that "I am not the body" and his remarks were merely designed to impress his devotees, not to simply and rationally explain his ideas to an enquirer.

He acts like a Guru, not like someone who is interested in clarifying a question for everybody.

The objective answer to a question has to stand on its own, no matter, who is reading that answer.

If children are indeed born innocent, for example, this statement cannot change from one answer to the other.

Unless of course, the prime motive of the discussion is not intellectual clarity (as intellect is usually disparaged in spiritual circles as being not just useless, but a hindrance) but surrender, in which case, a disparaging and tailored manipulative discussion by the lofty teacher (as was apparent in discussions by Krishnamurti, Rajneesh or as of today, Mr Jaggi Vasudev) seeks to bring humility into the student by leaving him to admit that he knows nothing and he CANNOT make the situation better except by surrender.

Quote

HOURS said...
FYI: I am very much aware and acquainted with the ISHA foundation as my in-laws are full time members, volunteers, yoga teachers and residents at the ISHA foundation near Coimbatore, TN.

I have observed the phenomenol growth of the organization since 1994, when they held their initiation classes in Chennai. In the early days from the outset the classes (at least from maketing point) focussed simply on teaching Yoga to treat any medical ailments. However, when I looked at the different stages that one has to go through before learning the actual exercises, it was clear that the focus is in roping followers.

Kudos to their marketing strategy, the corporate world could learn a lot from these folks.

Harmajit Singh happens to have a tough minded essay on spirituality and narcisissm.
You may not like or agree with what he says, but he is Indian, loves his country and cannot stand seeing it dragged through the mire by charlatans.

This essay has some very powerful repercussions for the American New Wage scene, as well.

[harmanjit.blogspot.com]

I remember the days when Sadhguru went out of the way to promote his movement as a "silent revolution" in that he does not advertise, or otherwise promote his organization. The organization grows due to word of mouth publicity and his "into" seminars. How far Isha and Sadhguru have come since then! Now he advertises everywhere! This month's India Today has him as one of the 50 (?) most influential people in India! This for someone who claims that he still has no agenda, does only what is "needed" and promises to take all his followers to enlightenment. His most important supporter is the Chief Minister of the State of Tamilnadu, who is known for his nepotism and looting of public coffers.

An Indian friend told be recently that these gurus are very popular with politicians for purposes of money laundering. Apparently according to Indian accounting rules ashrams are not only exempt from paying taxes, they do not even have to disclose their sources of income. Thus politicians funnel their ill gotten wealth into these ashrams, then take out a 'loan' from the said ashrams which they will never repay and do not ever have to pay tax on!