Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Guru Patrol
()
Date: November 20, 2010 12:36AM
Only proceed with caution? - wow moderator - do I hear some room for the possibility that there are some genuine spiritual teachers/paths out there? That not everything is a cult?
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: November 20, 2010 12:51AM
Guru Patrol:
"I can sum it all up and save people money and time - there are many fakes and a few genune teachers."
Thanks for the tacit admission regarding "many fakes."
That's the point.
It seems like your "patrol" here is a relentless defense of "Guru Swami G."
Attempting to somehow personally attack people on this board that disagree with you is a cheap shot and against the rules you agreed to before posting here.
"I can sum it all up and save people money and time - there are many fakes and a few genune teachers."
Thanks for the tacit admission regarding "many fakes."
That's the point.
It seems like your "patrol" here is a relentless defense of "Guru Swami G."
Attempting to somehow personally attack people on this board that disagree with you is a cheap shot and against the rules you agreed to before posting here.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: November 20, 2010 01:17AM
A discussion on a yoga thread. The first post was by a former disciple trying hard to
be fair to Guru G, but troubled by her anger of which examples are quoted.
The person finished writing
On the discussion venue
[www.aypsite.org]
Another person wrote to the above poster:
and from Fairfield Life
be fair to Guru G, but troubled by her anger of which examples are quoted.
The person finished writing
Quote
To be fair to her, I did not find in her any greed for money or any interest in phenomena or miracles.
All her communications are open and truthful.
I am no longer in her ashram as she kicked me out for a period of one month because she said I was showing disrespect to her.
On the discussion venue
[www.aypsite.org]
Another person wrote to the above poster:
Quote
And just so you know, she's wrong about this:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the Guru washes their hands of you then none
may help you....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totally wrong. And SHE isn't the guru...she's got that wrong as well. If only the enlightened ones could be rational sometimes, it'd help a lot. But I think it's too late to discuss this with her and maybe see a change...she seems to be completely unconscious of herself. That's something she should've dealt with earlier on in the path, before she lost her sense of herself. Now if you bring it up, it'll make no sense to her.
But yeah, just know that you can move on and find a better teaching that points more towards the truth. It's your right as a human being...she has no power over that.
You are a child of the living God, and you are attempting to realize this for yourself, such is your desire. The race is long, it will most likely be exhausting perhaps--only those who hunger, and thirst as well, will be filled with righteousness!
Would this lady dare elevate her sight above yours? "One up, one down" is passe. Eyes at a level! Please, don't give your power away to another human being!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
I actually looked at her group some time ago and quite frankfully was dismayed at her attitude to others.She seems to be of the opinion that because she is 'enlightened' or 'the guru' that she should command respect and obedience.There's an old saying that we earn respect not that we have a right to it.
L&L
and from Fairfield Life
Quote
[FairfieldLife] Confused aboiut Swami-G (was Re: Guru Dev's deathbed instructions to Maharishi)
Ron
Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:02:08 -0700
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email]FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com[/email], "Ron" <sidha7001@> wrote:
> <snip>
> > TANMAY: I DONT KNOW IF YOU WATCHED THE VIDEOS OF SWAMI G UNDER
> > GURUSWAMIG IN YOUTUBE BUT IT WOULD EXPLAIN THINGS. SWAMI G DIDN'T
> > SEEK BEING A GURU, BUT RATHER PREFERED ENJOYING THE REALIZED STATE.
> > HER GURU COMMISSIONED HER TO BE A GURU AND THEN CHARGED HER WITH
> > THE THINGS TO DO
>
> Makes me wonder whether (what I perceive to be)
> the unpleasantness in her responses is a function
> of some resentment at being ordered to get busy
> and be a guru rather than just sitting back and
> enjoying her realization.
>
I can keep giving you my perceptions of it but it is startleing to me
in every way, including what took place with me once I met her. So
many times, I have told Swami G - I dont believe this, what is going
on. I suppose there is a range of being able to understand - anywhere
for zero for totally mundane minds - upwards.
Generally speaking, we look back in our lives and say I can't believe
I was into that- what ever it is. So as revelations appear in the
moment, it has this impact on the reflection of the past.
If I focus in on the "what is a Guru deal", then I have my perceptions
now and back then. Here goes again, but the Guru is light, ego is
darkness. Swami g's methodologies are that she is not there to be
friends, there is a heirarchy, and this way, the disciple can advance.
If it is friends, I dont think I have to explain why the disciple wont
listen on all levels in the same was as it is student /teacher.
Swami G herself in her own journey in the end was literally blasted by
her Guru who literally screamed in her face. This was when Swami G
thought she was enlightened because she knew it all and had siddhis ,
etc. He told he "YOU FOOL, YOU IDIOT, YOU KNOW NOTHING". At that
point, she litterally couldn't speak for days and really did not have
high regard for her Guru at that moment. Looking back, Swami G said
there is no doubt that if this had not taken place, she would still be
running on the hamster wheel of karma today.
One thing, by the way. Swami G 's enlightenment came about during open
eye meditation along the banks of the Gangies. She showed us the spot
where this took place. Swami G responded to a quesiton and said yes,
could be the Guru's use the methodologies that they themselves went
through which brought about their enlightenment. This is why I said
this path is extremely practical- and Swami G responded that it must
be practical- so the open eye meditation is on going all day.
This way, when the enlightenment comes about, it is stable, where as
if it is gained sitting in a cave, what happens to it when there is
interaction in the world ?
Anyway, in light of this, I once joked and said something like I would
never decalare I was advanced, for which we laughed. Swami G responded
to a question when asked how to get rid of ego so enlightenment
unfolds, the response was find a sat Guru that uses a velvet 2x4.
So, a Guru is looking for the spots that have to be blasted out
sometimes. Why would this be a pleasant job? and then the insults
directed at the Guru. This is something people really dont understand-
they think the Guru has no feelings and is a doormat that can be
walked all over for nothing can touch them.
My perceptions of it is that the sensitivity is even more than can be
imagined, and the smallest things touches them deeply- but what is it
touching and what is the result? They feel it deeply, I can;t say from
direct experience, but the attachement is gone as fast as a breath in
and breath out. this is why they can't hold on to past encouters, but
it doesnt mean it is not felt.
Being a Guru wears down on the body. If the Guru is doing the heart
felt job of being a Guru, then the karma of the disciples wears down
the body, - Swami G said this is a part of being a guru. It is not
surprising to see the body of a Guru go downhill quickly.
On one hand, they prolong the body because the disciples want this as
they need the guidance, they beg the guru to stick around. On the
other hand, the Guru while trying to oblige what the sadakas want in
this regard, are saturated with the silence and dont care about the
body, for they know 100% they are not the body and there is no
difference in their existence with or without it.
Again, I told Swami G that most people are not going to get past the
personality issue and tie in the persona with the Guru. Swami G
cautions the disciples not to think of the Guru as persona but
consciousness. Why did I say most people wont get past the personalty
and why is that I am saying I will?
Because the unimaginable happened- again, unimaginable means it can't
be imagined, it is like I got there, she touched me and poof, I go
into a lasting silence that is with me to this day. Without that
experience, it is only words. Not everyone will have this happen so
quicky, acording to Swami G.
Having my TM background, it would be interesting to see what others
with the same background has to say. actually, may as well spell out
the pertinant aspect of the TM background that i am talking about
here. I started TM at 19, was really high strung. Could even be that a
heart attack early in life may have been what was in the cards, so
could even be that without TM, the body wouldnt be here now. So, how
can I not honor TM?
I always made the time to be regular and give plenty of time and
attention to the practice. My meditaitons were deep, hard to compare
with anyone but they were deep, there was this degree where would call
it awareness of awareness was all that was there in meditation. then
the effects of it carried over into activity, everyone who has stuck
with it through the years would say that. But then in the last 5
years, this like significant bliss would be there for days at a time
in and out of meditation.
So, it would be interesting to hear from someone that had that sort of
background that then plunged into the path with Swami G. I am laughing
now because you can see the problem here with this senerio- why would
anyone with those comments about TM go anywhere?
Anyway, such is life, I didn't expect anyone here to be interested in
my path now even before I made the first post- there might be one-
remains to be seen, but certainly not having high expectations of
people lined up for Diksha from here.
[/quote]
[url]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:T99EGCJsWWgJ:http://www.mail-archive.com/fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com/msg94059.html+swami+guru+g&hl=en&ct=clnk[/url]
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: November 20, 2010 02:23AM
A conversation--so people thinking of getting involved will know what they are in for.
Make very sure to read through to the end.
For full text of this conversation go here
[www.mail-archive.com]
One can be an enlightened being and swear like a sailor--and excuse it as Crazy Wisdom.
Actually, there are more limits on what kind of language sailors can use (especially those who hold officer rank) than there are for gurus.
This skipper (female) was relieved of command after a 'reign of terror'
[www.navytimes.com]
This also discussed in the forum for the Navy Times online newpaper.
And...friends read the discussion. No one there is accusing people of being wimps
nor are they claiming that Graf's behavior was a sign of enlightened activity or that it was needed character training.
The persons concerned are mostly amazed that it took so long to remedy the problem!
[www.militarytimes.com]-‘cruelty’
So even in the Navy there are recognized limits to behavior on the part of a skipper.
But out in the spiritual scene, there are fewer ways to identify, name and correct an abusive situation than exist in US Navy.
And anyone who accuses sailors of being wimpy and unable to tolerate abuse or stand up to a challenge would be laughed down the street.
Make very sure to read through to the end.
For full text of this conversation go here
[www.mail-archive.com]
One can be an enlightened being and swear like a sailor--and excuse it as Crazy Wisdom.
Actually, there are more limits on what kind of language sailors can use (especially those who hold officer rank) than there are for gurus.
This skipper (female) was relieved of command after a 'reign of terror'
[www.navytimes.com]
This also discussed in the forum for the Navy Times online newpaper.
And...friends read the discussion. No one there is accusing people of being wimps
nor are they claiming that Graf's behavior was a sign of enlightened activity or that it was needed character training.
The persons concerned are mostly amazed that it took so long to remedy the problem!
[www.militarytimes.com]-‘cruelty’
So even in the Navy there are recognized limits to behavior on the part of a skipper.
But out in the spiritual scene, there are fewer ways to identify, name and correct an abusive situation than exist in US Navy.
And anyone who accuses sailors of being wimpy and unable to tolerate abuse or stand up to a challenge would be laughed down the street.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Guru Patrol
()
Date: November 20, 2010 04:41AM
Dear Mod:
Yes I entirely agree that many teachers are fakes. I just don't think this teacher is one of them.
Attempting to somehow personally attack people on this board that disagree with you is a cheap shot and against the rules you agreed to before posting here.
Please point out what I said is a personal attack and to whom?
If you think my comments constitute a personal attack worthy of being kicked out for - the clear implication of your comment above - have you taken a good look at this thread - or most of the threads on the entire forum - or the site as a whole? The bulk of the content is personal attacks (often vicious and baseless) isn't it - on teachers, institutions, students, eachother, spiritual people in general.
Why don't we see your mod warnings scattered all over the forum then?
Forgive me if it seems like selective policing.
Yes I entirely agree that many teachers are fakes. I just don't think this teacher is one of them.
Attempting to somehow personally attack people on this board that disagree with you is a cheap shot and against the rules you agreed to before posting here.
Please point out what I said is a personal attack and to whom?
If you think my comments constitute a personal attack worthy of being kicked out for - the clear implication of your comment above - have you taken a good look at this thread - or most of the threads on the entire forum - or the site as a whole? The bulk of the content is personal attacks (often vicious and baseless) isn't it - on teachers, institutions, students, eachother, spiritual people in general.
Why don't we see your mod warnings scattered all over the forum then?
Forgive me if it seems like selective policing.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: November 20, 2010 07:40AM
Guru Patrol:
That's fairly typical, "Many teachers are fakes. I just don't think [mine]...is one of them."
You said, it's usually the cynics/skeptics that go on the offensive, ...perhaps simply to comfort themselves in their unrelenting unwavering cynicism that brings nothing but angst and sadness and anger - and for what? For some empty intellectual gymnastics?"
That is a moving towards a personal attack.
"Guru patrol"?
Hardly.
More like a patrol to protect a personal guru.
That's fairly typical, "Many teachers are fakes. I just don't think [mine]...is one of them."
You said, it's usually the cynics/skeptics that go on the offensive, ...perhaps simply to comfort themselves in their unrelenting unwavering cynicism that brings nothing but angst and sadness and anger - and for what? For some empty intellectual gymnastics?"
That is a moving towards a personal attack.
"Guru patrol"?
Hardly.
More like a patrol to protect a personal guru.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
rese
()
Date: November 22, 2010 02:30AM
I just signed up to hopefully clarify the definition of *cult* for the participants of these forums, like the ongoing debate between Guru Patrol and others is trying to achieve.
Sceptics here need seriously to consider if all religion and spirituality is a cult or not. If authentic spiritual teachers exist, the criteria need clarification in order to be helpful.
If every whiner gets to name his/her latest attended class or retreat a cult, because some of his/her capriciousness was not met there or because there was some hint at discipline or commitment, then this is not helpful if the objective of these forums is to identify and reveal actual criminal abuses. By capriciousness I mean e.g. "proof of Kundalini" that Indiaspark demanded from Swami G. Seriously, do you demand proof of molecules from your chemistry teacher?
I have seen similar degenerated argumentation before. I have seen people deny reality of dreams because obviously nobody can materially show or prove one's own dreams to another. Let's hope this forum can stay mature, instead of blindly denialistic in the area of spirituality.
At each and every school there is a distinction of roles: the teacher speaks, the student listens. You accept it in public high schools, don't you? So why should it be any different with spiritual instructors? There is a reasonable balance somewhere and I hope you find it.
As to the actual topic at hand, it has been extremely gracious of Guru Swami G to have come here to meet the allegations thrown against her. I am not saying anything about her spiritual qualifications (though her posts clearly reveal their essence and level), but from the point of view of general didactics I see a genuinely compassionate and well-meaning personality. Her appearance here deserves much gratitude and appreciation and also indicates the importance of these forums among spiritual seekers.
Sceptics here need seriously to consider if all religion and spirituality is a cult or not. If authentic spiritual teachers exist, the criteria need clarification in order to be helpful.
If every whiner gets to name his/her latest attended class or retreat a cult, because some of his/her capriciousness was not met there or because there was some hint at discipline or commitment, then this is not helpful if the objective of these forums is to identify and reveal actual criminal abuses. By capriciousness I mean e.g. "proof of Kundalini" that Indiaspark demanded from Swami G. Seriously, do you demand proof of molecules from your chemistry teacher?
I have seen similar degenerated argumentation before. I have seen people deny reality of dreams because obviously nobody can materially show or prove one's own dreams to another. Let's hope this forum can stay mature, instead of blindly denialistic in the area of spirituality.
At each and every school there is a distinction of roles: the teacher speaks, the student listens. You accept it in public high schools, don't you? So why should it be any different with spiritual instructors? There is a reasonable balance somewhere and I hope you find it.
As to the actual topic at hand, it has been extremely gracious of Guru Swami G to have come here to meet the allegations thrown against her. I am not saying anything about her spiritual qualifications (though her posts clearly reveal their essence and level), but from the point of view of general didactics I see a genuinely compassionate and well-meaning personality. Her appearance here deserves much gratitude and appreciation and also indicates the importance of these forums among spiritual seekers.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Stoic
()
Date: November 22, 2010 07:05AM
'I have seen similar degenerated argumentation before.'
Yes, and we've seen apologists before.
'Her appearance here deserves much gratitude and appreciation'
Why? Because you're fooled into venerating her then everybody else should be fooled also?
[www.culteducation.com]
Yes, and we've seen apologists before.
'Her appearance here deserves much gratitude and appreciation'
Why? Because you're fooled into venerating her then everybody else should be fooled also?
[www.culteducation.com]
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Stoic
()
Date: November 22, 2010 07:11AM
Recruitment must be seriously down if she's sending out 2 apologists in as many days.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Stoic
()
Date: November 22, 2010 07:16AM
Do tell, rese, have you drunk the water from her sandals? What did it do for you?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.