dwai

I think this does a good job of refuting most of the allegations. If you claim to have talked to “victims” of Sai Baba, onus is on you to prove it. https://geraldjoemoreno.wordpress.com/2010/01/31/refuting-the-allegations-against-sathya-sai-baba-with-factual-information/ that said, I’m not a card carrying member of Sai Baba’s organization. Similar allegations have been made about many of the big ticket “Gurus”. Hardly any have ever been substantial enough to warrant going to court or getting prosecuted. If there is was sufficient evidence, surely action would have been taken, as in case of Osho, Bikram Choudhury and Nithyananda. PS - for @Nungali, you claim you’ve seen the damage done by Baba and his organization. I have seen quite the opposite — lot of good done, across many strata of society. While it is perfectly okay to have a personal opinion about someone or something, it only remains personal opinion. Like I’ve said before, everyone is entitled to their personal opinion. Abusing someone based on your personal opinion, is slander.

There’s a natural tendency to try and fit someone into one’s own perspective, limited as it might be by our mind and conceptions. It is as old a tendency as the one in which people always want to “do” things, even things that don’t need doing. Each has to navigate one’s karmic field, so there’s nothing wrong in the above. Enjoy the ride...

It was not my intention to outright reject body-oriented practices. Yes and those with overwhelming emphasis on the body without sufficient work on the mind/spirit. If you look at this from the yogic perspective, there are 3 essential Energetic properties and they bring with them certain mental (and physical) tendencies and attitudes. satva — spiritual clarity which leads to mental clarity and physical purification rajas — kinetic energy, and in excess it drives the mind and body toward kinetic action, stimulation, etc. tamas — inertia and in excess are it drives inertia of the mind and body. Body oriented practices are Rajasic in nature and therefore need to be balanced with satvic practices (diet, meditation, lifestyle etc). Without the balance of satva, the body-mind will resort to excessive activity and excitation (not conducive to spiritual practices).

Or maybe I'm just plain amused With big teachers like Baba, it helps to be careful before saying slanderous stuff. Of course, it won't stop people from doing it, but I like to take a stand when it comes to dissing teachers (Gurus/Sifus etc etc) when I know the allegations are unfounded. Is it possible for a spiritual teacher/leader to abuse their students? I've never rejected that possibility. Sure it is possible. There are creeps and charlatans who pass off as spiritual teachers to the unaware/ignorant people. My rules of thumb to avoid this are very simple -- How does the teacher live? You will seldom go wrong with traditional institutions such as Vedanta Society/Ramakrishna Missions etc (at least within the Hindu traditions) How do his/her top-level students live? When you are in their presence, what do you feel? This is a bit more complicated for neophytes to address, but can be addressed in the form of "Do you feel safe? Do you feel an increase in meditative abilities/amplification in your meditative abilities"? If the teacher's presence can boost your meditative abilities, then that's a pretty good sign. Do you feel greater clarity of the mind? When you are in a congregation of the teacher's students (seminar, etc) how does the collective 'vibe' feel? For instance, when I go to a Chinmaya Mission or Vedanta Society gathering, I feel very powerful uplifting energy -- almost like the space itself is shining with light. Some Do's and Don'ts -- First thing is to avoid is the "cult of the body" -- or e.g., Yoga teachers who teach a body-oriented Yoga practice. Whenever there is a body-oriented practice involved, there is bound to be sexual overtones or undertones (and therefore scandals). I've strongly advocated against "hot yoga/power yoga/bikram yoga" kind of stuff. It is a surefire way to get caught up in nastiness. I used to study with one such "Yogi" who had some yogic/psychic abilities, but also resorted to scandalous behavior, thereby I severed all ties with him. He has since left this world, so I won't name him. Develop a personal practice (so one doesn't get addicted to the group paradigm, and develop independent spiritual muscles) Find a group of fellow travelers (sat sangha) who have similar goals as you do and develop a strong bond (it can even be 2-3 people). Just like when you are out driving on the freeway, the onus for your personal safety first lies on you, similarly with anything else in life. But also, as is the case with celebrities, there are always people who are looking to make a fast buck by claiming abuse and then suing (and often settling out of court). And then there are the planted stories/conspiracies and dishonest journalism at play as well -- someone with an axe to grind.

Nice! Another one of us bites the dust (and it's a good thing too)

I don't know about Trungpa. I would expect that if there are people here who know about Trungpa and he's not what he has been accused of being, they will speak up. I can see how you can distort what I said in that way. I objected to the slander against Sai Baba because I know a lot about him. I would not complain if someone wrote stuff about Nithyananda or Bikram Choudhury, because I know the truth about them as well (culpability). There is a point when we have to speak out. Having profound experiences of transcendence doesn't' mean one should not call out something obviously objectionable. I thought all the paragons of virtue who've been name-calling specific members, ridiculing them, etc etc would be okay getting a microdose of their own medicine?

that’s a good question. I’m just pointing out that to claim that ‘Indian Gurus are bad’ based on alleged misconduct in a few cases is a broad generalization that needs to be challenged. I took exception to freeform slandering Sai Baba, and it snowballed from there. The original sub-sub-sub-discussion was about when someone has an “awakening” experience and then seems to “lose it”, is that inferior to something that is “full awakening”. In my experience, when someone has a genuine awakening and then seems to “lose it”, it is only a temporary phase during the awakening process, wherein the old habits of the mind (via acquired tendencies and karmic influences) arise and cloud the mind. Upon maturation, it becomes clear that awakening and veiling are both known in/by True Nature/Self/Clear Light of Awareness etc. To make a long story short, one who has “only had” an awakening experience is not really deluded about awakening (if one were giving medals for that stuff) but rather is in the process of waking up, just at a stage where the knowledge needs to mature.

Maybe freeform should speak for himself Yeah philanthropy can be of many forms and kinds with varying motivations. But we were discussing philanthropic work of ‘those terrible Gurus’ and their organizations. I can see how many of you might be very besotted by the idea of “no Guru is needed”, but I can assure you, you won’t get very far without a good teacher. Whether you call that person “guru” or “teacher” or “Sifu” doesn’t really matter. Guru is the word used for a teacher in India.

That’s just your opinion on the scenario. Don’t try to pass it off as a fact You using a classic logical fallacy to support your position — “I have seen this in the years I’ve spent in spiritual circles”. I too have spent decades in these circles. I’ve not experienced what you say. Who is right then? As far as I’m concerned you might have not even been to all these places you claim you have, and done all these things you claim to have done. Whereas what i presented is documented and investigated. It won’t be so hard to find with a few google searches As far as philanthropy goes, it is very easy to reject them by casting aspersions on their motive, but the proof is in the pudding. There are millions of poor people being helped everyday in selfless service by these organizations, mainly by volunteers. It is not so hard to see the authenticity therein, should one stop using ‘jaundiced’ eyes...

There is a distinction between two kinds of Buddhi (intelligence) in the Hindu traditions. One is called "teekshna buddhi" (or sharp intelligence) - this is our everyday intelligence -- used for the transactional world. The other is called "sukshma buddhi" (or subtle intelligence) -- this is what enables us to grasp the spiritual truths (or the essence of the spiritual teachings). Just because one has the sharp intelligence, doesn't mean they have the subtle intelligence. Sharp intelligence is usually a result of genetics. Subtle intelligence is a combination of karma and how much effort has been put into the spiritual path by the individual. The more focused and purified the mind, the stronger the subtle intelligence. Something that many seekers don't realize (especially those who use "Ha-Tha" (or stubbornness) in their practices) is that the "self- knowledge" is very subtle. In the traditional Hindu systems, there is a term called "Arundhati Darshana Nyaya", and it is often employed in Self-knowledge teachings. Arundhati Darshana Nyaya literally means the Laws for Seeing Arundhati. In Indian Astronomy and classical literation, Arundhati is a sage and the wife of the Sage Vashishta. Arundhati and Vashishta are also names of stellar constellations, and Arundhati is not easily visible via the naked eye. So, often Arundhati constellation is pointed out in relation to something else. Like the teacher might point out to the student -- Look at my index finger Now look at the tree branch the index finger is pointing towards Now look to the left of that tree branch. Do you see that bright star? Now look right below that bright star. Do you see it? It is a faint star. That is Arundhati. In the same way, the Self is pointed towards, via a series of indirections, precisely because directly pointing to it won't work for most people.

Yeah, and none of it has ever been proven. That is a poison chalice such people have to drink from in order to spread their light in a world full of darkness. It's not really that a lot of "Indian Gurus" have been allegedly involved or convicted, but in the public imagination, such a big deal has been made out of it. How much of these allegations are actually true, vs how much has been made up is something to ponder over. Otherwise, it is just knee-jerk reactionism. That said, I'm not denying that there have been genuine cases too. One such notorious one being Bikram Choudhury. Others such as Muktananda and Osho had genuine siddhis and attainment. The biggest turn off for me when it comes to the big Gurus, is the coterie of fawning sycophants that accompany them. Usually, up to a certain point, they aren't a hurdle anymore, because the Gurus are accessible. When their following becomes really big, the very close/inner circle of disciples gets diluted by more and more sycophants and then access to the teacher becomes a way to exert power and control (petty tyranny). So I might go and visit Amma, or Sri Sri or Sadhguru, but I don't want to become their follower per se, as I know I'll never get a chance to directly interact with them in a meaningful manner to help me. I've taken courses from Sri Sri Ravishankar's Art of Living foundation and the Sudarshan Kriya is a very powerful technique. These teachers serve a very important purpose -- they make the spiritual knowledge accessible to the masses. They do outreach programs to uplift the poor, provide education via schools, colleges, heath-care via Hospitals and clinics, etc etc. Most of the work done is performed by volunteers. Usually an inner circle of their early students forms around them and this "inner circle" gets to benefit from their spiritual guidance very greatly. For the rest of their followers, it is a case of getting a taste of the medicine, so to speak. It is a planting of seeds that will sooner or later grow and eventually bear fruit if the individuals are sincere and work diligently towards the goal. There's far more Indians who are quite happy and successful in their spiritual path with "home-grown" Gurus. The problem is when generalizations are made without sufficient empirical data. How many data points are required to make a reasonable generalization? I would venture to say, that scandals related to Catholic Priests and young boys are far more prevalent than with Indian Gurus or Buddhist monks etc. I guess these topics will remain unresolved for the skeptical, along the same lines as "should a teacher charge payment to impart spiritual knowledge".

That's how these things go. The 'backsliding' was not really about spiritual leaders, but rather about individual seekers who might have "tasted ambrosia" (as a figure of speech) and then appear to "lose access to the wellspring". In reality, the "backsliding" is an intermediate phase after awakening, because the old habits still rise and hold sway. So it is not unusual for someone who has "woken up", to feel that the clarity and knowledge that was very clear and in the forefront during the "peak" of their experience has somehow disappeared. Then they end up feeling depressed, or chasing after that clarity, trying to understand how to "abide" in their "self nature" or "true nature" etc. This goes away when the realization rises that "ignorance" and "awakening" are both recognized/known by "true nature". It is a very subtle thing and takes a bit of time to be grasped. So it is premature to somehow call those who "awaken" and then seem to "lose it" to be something less than those who have "true awakening". It again boils down to the "effort vs no-effort/doing vs not-doing" debate. Because they're hypocrites and the Church is a corporation in essence. Also the main culprits are the evangelical denominations based out of the US, and not so much the roman catholic church these days. It might be interesting to you as a casual observer, like one might find a road accident interesting (in a spectacle kind of thing), but for those who live it, and have to endure it, it is a nightmare.

It might seem that way, but it is a fact (you and others are free to believe whatever you like of course). Usually people don’t believe it when they see it/hear it for the first time since it’s not on their radar, or affects them in any significant way. India has been on the receiving end of a cultural and religious onslaught for a long time now.

I've seen far more such arrogant westerners than 'Gurus' with genuine issues. Go to any "spiritual" forum and you'll see them on display.

Only he can tell what he was speaking about. But that kind of slander is typical from Sai Baba bashers I've encountered in the past. The fact is, that Sai Baba was, and various Indian Gurus are a big hurdle for Evangelical Christian organizations and their agents, therefore they have tended to draw the ire in mainstream media. India is the last bastion of the ancient world today, with Hinduism being the majority religion there (~ 1B people who practice it in some form). So, a systematic and systematized propaganda has been unleashed on people like Sai Baba, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, Sri Sri Ravishankar, Amma, Baba Ramdev, etc. The Evangelical Christian denominations have had their eyes on India for a "Harvest of Souls" for a long time, with insidious projects like The Joshua Project. Some folks might ask, "so what if these Christian organizations target the Hindus? There should be freedom of religion in a democratic world, right?" The problem with this type of predatory efforts is that people are deracinated, cut off from their social and cultural roots. The kind of propaganda against Gurus we see in media is usually a result of such predatory practices...campaigns to malign and discredit teachers such as those listed above, with millions of followers, because they become massive hurdles for the conversion campaigns.

That is totally uncalled for. How much do you know about Sai Baba anyway? He is still very active today, even though he gave up his body several years ago. I certainly didn’t expect this kind of slanderous stuff from you. Also, I don’t expect westerners to really understand the Guru-Shishya tradition, and often seen pompous, entitled (undeservedly so) westerners claim they don’t need a Guru or slander their teachers once they learnt what they had to from them! The Guru-shishya tradition is a sacred thing, the Guru is the spiritual parent. One has to be careful in choosing their Guru, as much as the guru has to be careful in choosing their disciple. It might seem very cool to “Guru Bash”, but it displays ignorance and a deep and entrenched cultural bias...

It was my personal opinion entirely...

These are pretty much par for the course for real Yogis/Tantriks in the various Indian traditions too. When Paramahamsa Yogananda left his body, his physical body didn't show signs of decay for an extended period of time. Or as in the case of Haridas, who spent 40 days, buried underground (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhu_Haridas) In the 1970s, Swami Rama of the Himalayan institute demonstrated in laboratory studies abilities to stop his heart for extended periods of time, make tumors appear and disappear on his body, and many seemingly "super human feats" (and details are published in the book "Beyond Bio-Feedback"). His collaboration led to the entire bio-feedback field of science. These don't guarantee that the person is enlightened though (I'm not saying these individuals I referred to weren't though). There are five pranas (or vayus) per Yogic tradition that govern various functions of the body and mind. Of them, the one responsible for skin, hair, nails etc is called Vyana Vayu. Typically with people who've high degree of yogic development, the vyana vayu retains the body for extended periods of time after the body is discarded.

The title is usually the title of the thread. I found another link...so updated OP.

This discussion might be a good way to understand the position of the indic traditions.

I'd never heard of Christian Scientists before. Thanks for sharing. I'll look them up.

Not you. Communicating on essentially a tone-deaf medium is hard. I was just making a point about a significant portion of the gen-pop (was simply making some general points/like the Top 10 Greatest Hits sort of thing)... I certainly don't consider it a pigeonhole, though I'm not dismissing your perspective at all. I've been down this path before, and I think there's considerable value to it, up to a point. I think I've run into far more deluded, power-seeking people than genuine practitioners on this path though (and we've seen enough such luminaries on this very forum even, FWIW). The allure of power and siddhis is genuinely a dangerous thing.

Actually that is just an intermediate phase of the practice. I could say that without knowing one's true nature, one can't truly be human. And it begs the question, "What does being human entail?" That "dropping one's humanity" is actually one of the greatest misunderstanding non-practitioners react with. They put it in different words though...some will say, "escapism", some will say, "nihilism", etc etc. To understand who/what we are, we have to first find out who/what we are not, as "mother culture" is constantly whispering in our ears, telling us who/what we are -- layers upon layers of stories... The second phase of the practice, which most people don't see or recognize, the world, etc are all brought back into play again. But this time, it is with playfulness and joy, as our own being. I think I get what you're pointing to. I just happen to think that it is a strawman. Yes, and they rightly should be. Like I pointed out, you've not seen the complete picture when it comes to the Indic traditions. I couldn't care two hoots about the European ones though, personally...and I think "Indo-European" is as much of a strawman as any others out there. What passes off as European is really of west Asian origin anyway. If the Europeans had held on to their pagan ways, they'd be much better off, imho.

Experience brings about confidence. I didn't mean to be disrespectful towards you at all... You were perhaps a bit premature in your reading of the Bhagavad Gita at 10 yrs of age. Try again...maybe it will be different this time. Interesting on the Americanized version of the Bhagavad Gita. Can you share more? I'm genuinely interested.

I'd recommend you start by reading the Bhagavad Gita (and you too shall understand Karma)