|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
 Posted - Nov 03 2007 : 6:30:42 PM
|
Hi gang
On the rare occasions when I politely question or contradict a statement of Yogani's, the crowd invariably gets very quiet indeed. I've seen three or four previously busy discussions instantly freeze solid. Doh!
I'd like to invite all to consider that if we establish a climate where disagreement with Yogani is shunned, we will have created a guru atmosphere. And I believe Yogani to be sincere in declining the position of guru - i.e. he's not coyly winking at us, acting modest while actually basking in it!  But, ultimately, the reality of Yogani's role in all this will be determined by our actions, not by his disavowals!
Yogani amply deserves our respect, thanks, and support (and receives plenty of all three from me). But none of those things precludes disagreement. He's chosen the role of more-experienced fellow traveler rather than unimpeachable enlightened master. And since that is his preference, it seems disrespectful to treat him more like the latter than like the former.
So I have no compunction about (politely) disagreeing, and I'd encourage you all to do the same, if you're ever moved to (I'm not suggesting going out of your way to do so, of course!). One of the great things about AYP is it doesn't ask anyone to accept anything on faith. It is not (to my understanding) an absolutist system....in fact, quite the contrary!
Just some thoughts.... |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Nov 03 2007 6:32:30 PM |
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Nov 03 2007 : 7:15:26 PM
|
Well Jim, you probably know already that you have my support in your choice to present disagreement when you have it. Otherwise, your perspective is simply cut off and the forum loses.
There are very strong human tendencies towards guru-worship in its gross and subtle forms. And the yoga tradition in general has embraced them. So when you express disagreement with a guru-figure (whether the figure wants to be a guru figure or not) that will jar with some people. But I say, push on, because you're doing the right thing. The yoga culture has to change, it has to modernize, just like everything else. It has to move with the times. We aren't destroying a culture here, we're participating in the culture's own necessary adaptation. The baby can be kept; the bathwater must be thrown out.
|
 |
|
|
weaver
832 Posts |
Posted - Nov 03 2007 : 8:19:40 PM
|
| I agree completely. Yogani has said himself that he intends AYP to be an open-source system, where all participants contribute to the totality of its knowledge and experience. If the originator of the system could not be questioned or disagreed with, it could not be open-source to its full potential. |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Nov 04 2007 : 10:09:54 AM
|
Thing is....I just happen to agree too damned much with Yogani! So this forum (and my understanding of AYP) would be greatly enriched if others would freely air reservations (or even adament disagreements). I mean both re: specific issues in AYP as well as in Yogani's forum postings. All this stuff is much richer and juicier when it's probed and examined and tossed around. That's a lot of what yoga is: trying and evaluating different approaches! And a forum is ideal for all that. But we can't count on me to always be the counterpoint!
David, re: the guru-worship tradition, it's important to bear in mind what that is and where it comes from. There are two main sources:
1. the apprentice/mentor relationship in India is sacrosanct. Your teacher is your "guru", whether you're a spiritual adept or a trash collector. And trash collectors, et al, speak in rapt tones about the mythic achievements of their super-human gurus. Seeing this, it's easy to peel back some of the overlay on spiritual gurus.
2. yoga has encouraged guru worship because the adept must have a focus for her/his bhakti....a deity of some sort - any sort! - onto whom to dump one's baggage and subordinate one's ego. We dweebs caught in dualism can't just melt into What Is. That's too vague, and requires realization in order to realize! So we need a specific target to melt toward, a dualistic stepping stone, if you will. And it's undeniably easier to do this with a real, present, local deity than with a more abstract notion of deity. And since the yoga guru is (supposedly) egoless and utterly merged with the divine, and thus inseperable from the big Everything (silly, of course, because we're all That anyway...but that's a huge digression...), the guru is a logical choice to serve that role. The adept worships the guru as a lens for What Is, bhakti swells, ego dissolves, dualism drops away, and the adept realizes that the guru was just filling in as a stepping stone to a vast reality. Playing a role (which is of course dangerous to anyone not fully merged 24/7, as role-playing is a huge mind trap).
THAT'S why you worship the guru....the guru serves as your deity, because you need the stepping stone. It's not personal at all; the guruhood is entirely for you, not for the guru (of course, lots of gurus, not being quite as perfected as they purport, have made it very MUCH about them).
AYP doesn't follow this course. Yogani does mention here and there that it's important to have an object of worship (God, Jesus, The Flow, Cosmic Mother, whatever....even an undefinably "in-here/out-there/geez-Idunno-but-I-sure-feel-his/her-love"), but this system is intrinsically set up to eschew the notion of its founder's position as stepping stone. For example, you all may have noticed that Yogani has mentioned, oh, two or three or a hundred million times, that the guru is in YOU. But one might recall the Monty Python and the Holy Grail scene where the faux-messiah shouts to the crowd "You must think for YOURSELVES!" and they all chant back, in perfect unison "We will think for OURSELVES!".
It's a sticky wicket! |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Nov 04 2007 10:24:40 AM |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5201 Posts |
Posted - Nov 04 2007 : 12:03:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
...the faux-messiah shouts to the crowd "You must think for YOURSELVES!" and they all chant back, in perfect unison "We will think for OURSELVES!".
It's a sticky wicket!
Hi Jim and All:
Yes, it certainly is. Do hash it out. These forums are a good place for that.
The forums were originally set up for support, wide-ranging discussions, exploration of all spiritual practices, productive debate, and hopefully revelations leading to advancements in the field from the practical perspective of each individual's practices.
It's really got little to do with me. My role has been to put something out there based on my experience that is hopefully a reasonable starting point, and it is up to everyone to carry it forward from there in whatever form that works best. That means the ongoing evolution of applied knowledge. So, while I may be the guy who set the ball in motion hereabouts, it is up to everyone else to keep it in motion -- the never-ending process of separating wheat from chaff, which is the optimization of applied knowledge.
On the other hand, it is useful to keep a systematic approach preserved, particulalry for those who are starting from scratch -- the "state of the art" as it were, if there is such a thing in the spiritual arena. The forums are structured for that also. We can't really progress much in any applied science unless we launch from what has gone before. The wheel does not have to be reinvented by everyone who is starting out. That does not work very well in any field, including yoga. Progress will be assured if we take what has been found to work, and improve upon it. That has always been what it is about at AYP, and it has barely begun.
Well, so far, this post has been deliberately off topic. AYP has never been about guru/not guru, though it lurks in many minds. This will be transcended as we get on with the real task, which is the optimization of applied spiritual knowledge. So effective practices are what ought to be focused on.
I have a theory that the whole guru fixation thing is the product of inadequately applied spiritual knowledge. Find an entrenched guru, and there you will likely also find a group of followers who are not developing very fast. Effective applied knowledge on the individual level will eliminate this problem, making the entire situation much more fluid, because the principles of human spiritual transformation are readily available within everyone. They only need be activated by effective means.
It has been said that in the land of the blind, the person with one eye will be king. But what if everyone had one eye? Or, better yet, a surefire ability to grow two eyes? Where would the king (guru) be then? Sprouting up everywhere!
The guru is in you.
PS: Oh, and if anyone wants to disagree with anything I say, or any aspect of the AYP approach, feel free to do so. It happens just about every day somewhere in the forums, and I welcome it. If something better can be offered that can bring practical results to many people, I will be one of the first to come along. But do keep in mind that it is hard to cross a river with each foot in a different boat. That may be one reason why folks tend to hush up when alternatives are presented. No one likes to have their boat rocked. But a certain amount of rocking is necessary for progress. AYP itself is a boat-rocker. So carry on, with prudence. 
|
|
|
|
thomas
USA
22 Posts |
Posted - Nov 04 2007 : 4:03:58 PM
|
Thank you Jim for starting this topic. At times, it is important to be reminded and brought back on track so that the greatest benefit can be derived for all.
quote:
It's really got little to do with me. My role has been to put something out there based on my experience that is hopefully a reasonable starting point, and it is up to everyone to carry it forward from there in whatever form that works best. That means the ongoing evolution of applied knowledge. So, while I may be the guy who set the ball in motion hereabouts, it is up to everyone else to keep it in motion -- the never-ending process of separating wheat from chaff, which is the optimization of applied knowledge.
On the other hand, it is useful to keep a systematic approach preserved, particulalry for those who are starting from scratch -- the "state of the art" as it were, if there is such a thing in the spiritual arena. The forums are structured for that also. We can't really progress much in any applied science unless we launch from what has gone before. The wheel does not have to be reinvented by everyone who is starting out. That does not work very well in any field, including yoga. Progress will be assured if we take what has been found to work, and improve upon it. That has always been what it is about at AYP, and it has barely begun.
This is what makes this forum so powerful and effective. Yogani, it is not about you, or any of us, but it was your follow-through that made the AYP lessons and this forum available to everyone, worldwide, to learn, to apply, to practice, to come together and share. May we use it wisely as it is intended and in that way continue it forward for those both here now and those yet to come.
As each of us continue to learn and share this 'ongoing evolution of applied knowledge' will continue to develop and grow, subject to the direct verification and validation of others utilizing it. It will augment and refine itself to become even more effective. The environment we live in is changing rapidly in many wonderful ways to support the growth of the many. In part, this is because of the increasing number of individuals world-wide who are now gaining access to proven methods that work. My sincere thanks for this forum and Jim for re-affirmning what it is all about.
Thomas |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Nov 05 2007 : 2:37:09 PM
|
quote:
It's not personal at all; the guruhood is entirely for you, not for the guru.
Oh, beautiful, Jim! I had a such authority complex before, but this summer I realized that those who have cleaned their house a little more than I have just have less dust that covers the clarity in their lives. They are really good cleaners, and as such they work constantly as our servants, showing us how to clean our own houses. Humble cleaning staff, working for... itself.
Existence is like one whole body, humanity is like the hand on that body. If I perceive myself as a separate little finger and my view only permits me to see the fingertips of the other fingers I will believe we are divided and that that's all there is. When I clean my house my view spreads downwards and when I hit the palm I realize there's something more here, I see the roots of the fingers, I see them rooted in the same palm, then I directly understand the other fingers are also a part of me, because I see it. Clearly. If I, as a little finger used to look up to the thumb in admiration because it is so strong and useful and seems to always know the direction of the hands action, that admiration ceases immediately when the Oneness insight comes. The thumb served ME all the time with its actions. And I realize that the thumb just must have had a clearer view all the time, it has known what I now see, that we are all one, undivided and all parts are useful in their own ways. And then the other parts of the body, the rest of the arm, the legs, the belly, the head... It is all ONE, whether it is appearing as trees, water, glass, chemical pollution, animals, plants, trees, cars, rocks, sun, moon, stars, nebulas... It's just another part of that beautiful, huge body.
The "guru" or "fellow traveller more experienced" is a hell of a cleaner! Obsessed with tidyness and clarity on a mission getting that dust cleaned out. 
quote:
But one might recall the Monty Python and the Holy Grail scene where the faux-messiah shouts to the crowd "You must think for YOURSELVES!" and they all chant back, in perfect unison "We will think for OURSELVES!".
Ah, love that scene. Particularly the end of it
- You're all different!
- Yes, we're all different!................
- I'm not!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qANMjwLmo6Y
PS.. did I mention trees twice? God, I must love those trees...  |
Edited by - emc on Nov 05 2007 4:00:35 PM |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Nov 06 2007 : 1:06:06 PM
|
quote:
Yogani wrote:
I have a theory that the whole guru fixation thing is the product of inadequately applied spiritual knowledge.
I have a theory that at some points in time there actually have been gurus that mixed with us ordinary mortals, in whom you could place your complete trust and faith because they were superhuman, all knowing, totally ethical and perfected personalities(pretty common theory). They weren't wimpy guys spouting flowery philosophy or taking advantage of their devotees in some way. They were powerful egos, super charged by the divine, and you couldn't help but recognize it. Vivekananda is the closest to it that I can think of at the moment. Makes me wonder what what it was like to be around Ramakrishna. Possibly now there may be some. But they aren't mixing with us that I am aware of.
How can you know?
Right now it seems like there are a bunch of 4th and 5th graders, maybe some high school grads, who think or let us think they are completely evolved while in fact, they have a long way to go. From our kindergartener point of view they are all powerful like the big kids on the playground seem to be. But from an Ph.D point of view, 4th and 5th graders are, well, 4th and 5th graders. And very fallible.
So since somewhere along the way we have probably had some kind of contact with a Ph.D, or recognize the possibility within ourselves and others, we generalize and project this level on to others who who appear closer to it from our limited point of view, but don't really deserve it.
Best wishes to you all, yb. |
|
|
|
Eddie33
USA
120 Posts |
Posted - Nov 07 2007 : 11:40:23 AM
|
good post.. i was thinking about this latley. it's kind of lke a mini-form of a religion. no one wants there religion to be doubted or they get defensive or just be quiet and stuff. even here people tend to shun away from doubts like jim says. i suppose it's inevitable on the path. i don't trust anything and it's got me almost nowhere on the path. in my mind it feels lke there's so many different teachings and so many different perspectives that it seems like everyone is doomed. this train of thought can go on forever it seems.
So have faith guys! |
|
|
|
sadhak
India
604 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2007 : 05:06:40 AM
|
Hi Jim,
Yep, the onus is on the practitioner to recognise the guru, in themselves or any external.
Having come into ayp from a very strict guru tradition, my initial response was to skirt around sticky issues. I've been a questioning person and it took a couple of years to put that down, and then realise once here, that I could release that person again. So yes, I'll make it a point of putting my doubts and questions out here when the occasion arises, even if it goes contrary to ayp teachings and Yogani.
But of course, I'd do it to pursue a pertinent practice issue and not merely to make a point of questioning. Actually, I can't believe that I'm saying anything against questioning after all those years of trying to prove that what I was asking was not questioning the authority but driven by a valid need for information and understanding.
To begin the question that's niggling: Isn't the guru supposed to be anything: a person, a book, a stone, a thought, yourself, as long as you believe in it 100% ? I think the idea of a guru only as a person guiding you through dos and don'ts is a very recent and limited one. Unscientific as it might sound, (in which case, all of us could come up with 100s of strictly 'unscientific' things we are doing even within our own active practices) the 'guru' is more to do with subtle energy transferred/imbibed through the faith of the seeker rather than the prowess of the guru. Otherwise how can a stone be a good or bad guru  |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2007 : 1:48:43 PM
|
As I say above, you can say the guru is about finding some external target on which to dump your ego and to direct your worship (the two are just sides of the same coin). It can be a person or a cockroach or a stop sign...just so long as it's outside the perimeter you deem to delineate the boundary between you and the universe. In that sense, it doesn't matter what you choose. And it can all teach you everything, because it's all God.
Since everything outside that border is God, you can trust that you've placed everything in God's hands. In fact, if you've left all that stuff inside your perimter, that's fine, too, since everything inside the border (which is humungously irrational in the first place) is God as well. But if the idea is to melt that insanely arbitrary boundary, it helps to move bits of God from God over to God. Yeah, it's silly, but it's always nice to rearrange the furniture from time to time.
Where are the damned smilies so I can punctuate the loopy paradox? |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Nov 11 2007 1:52:39 PM |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2007 : 2:23:21 PM
|
<---- smiling smiley
And a warm hug to you, Jim! You are an absolutely wonderful being!
In fact, it's quite easy the whole thing...
I'm the guru that is within you! Isn't that a CHOCK!???!! It was me all the time!!!
Even more chocking: Yogani is WITHIN ME! And Adyashanti, Byron Katie and all the rest! And then I'm within you all!  That's what you'll find if you keep looking!
Who would have guessed?
(This is what could be called... an internal joke! Hahahahaaaa... hahahaaaa... hahahahaaaa...)
|
|
|
|
Eddie33
USA
120 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2007 : 5:03:40 PM
|
have faith in doubt and doubt in faith!!!!
oh and love is all you needd..
seeya
p.s. - don't regret anything because at that moment that's all you wanted
to do |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2007 : 9:48:39 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
It can be a person or a cockroach or a stop sign...just so long as it's outside the perimeter you deem to delineate the boundary between you and the universe. In that sense, it doesn't matter what you choose. And it can all teach you everything, because it's all God.
Hmm, I need to reconsider this. There are people who worship booze or drugs...the God outside one's perimeter that seems to fill the big void. In fact, that's what AA is about...recognizing that addiction supplants God....addiction is a variety of materialism, wherein a given outside thing becomes the personification of all that feels spiritually missing.
I'm not sure it's ever healthy or educational to look to, say, cocaine for that, even though it's outside one's sphere. At least gurus, unlike stop signs or cockroaches, can sometimes offer pleasant aphorisms and such. Though my observation is that even the most well-meaning gurus become an object of addiction for many accolytes.
Idunno, this stuff is like walking through a big vat of spiderwebs. God help me if I ever totally "figure it out". I think I'll go meditate... |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Nov 11 2007 9:49:37 PM |
|
|
|
sadhak
India
604 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2007 : 10:07:57 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
I'm not sure it's ever healthy or educational to look to, say, cocaine for that, even though it's outside one's sphere. At least gurus, unlike stop signs or cockroaches, can sometimes offer pleasant aphorisms and such. Though my observation is that even the most well-meaning gurus become an object of addiction for many accolytes.
Hi Jim,
If it is an inanimate/non-intelligent object it cannot be well-meaning or otherwise. Which means it is the internal process of the acolyte that is effectively in action. Does the very fact that each one of us will see a 'guru figure' differently demonstrate that it is always an internal process? Maybe sometimes interacting with an external one, but then such interactions are inevitable even when the guru is you. When do you start believing 100% that the guru is in you? Does the instruction always come from inside? Doesn't it always start from outside as now? And for how many do significant insights and direction come from only within?
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Guru/Not Guru?
