Is a Guru/Master/etc needed?

[Sloppy Zhang]

have to agree with you here, most of us don't even have the good life (what buddha had) and we can't give even that away (how many of you are willing to become a hermit - possibly forever?). i find it extremely disrespectful, to say the least, that people think becoming a buddha or attaining enlightenment is some type of cakewalk. an increasing percentage of this community can not even control their tempers (myself included) but we think we deserve it all.

 

I mean nobody said it would be easy.

 

And just because something can be done doesn't mean we are going to do it. I mean any one person COULD give up their possessions and become a hermit for the rest of their lives and become a Buddha. Does that mean they are going to or that it will be easy?

 

No. It means they can do it.

 

All I'm saying is that it can be done. Not that it will be a cakewalk or that we deserve it all... but that it can be done. And you asked if that would be like comparing yourself to the Buddha, and my response was, well, if you follow the same method then yeah, I guess you could draw the comparison. I mean if you give up some worldly life to achieve enlightenment then how is that different from any other person who gave up a worldly life to pursue the spiritual?

 

And since when do you have to have "the good life" to throw away? I mean does it really make a difference if you give up your one small house or if you give up 10 huge mansions scattered across the countryside? If you only have one car to give up, then isn't that just as big of a sacrifice as giving up 10 useless cars? (heck, it may even be a BIGGER sacrifice because it's your only car!)

 

Sorry for saying this, but it seems that you are jumping at a lot of things that aren't there.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Sloppy Zhang

[ddilulo_06]

Needed? Nah.

Highly recommended? Absolutely.

[goldisheavy]

So, is listening to the 'inner guru' (intuition) an effective technique or am I just reinventing the wheel through experimentation from time to time within my daily practice?

 

You are asking us here. That likely means you still did not disempower the convention within your mind. That means no matter what anyone says, you have an external Guru already, since you really believe the world is external and Gurus are there to teach you things you didn't know.

 

I say "likely" because you might just be fooling around and not being serious.

 

Let me rephrase the question: is a person needed whom you will never question and whom you will never look at critically? Is such one needed? Not only is such one not needed, but such one can derail the spiritual progress you've made prior to meeting one.

 

Wisdom is the ultimate resolution of all concepts and therefore of all intentions. Intentions and concepts which ground those intentions cannot be resolved if you follow a formulaic step-by-step path. The resolution is a manner of familiarization that is acquired during a curious and constant interaction with the deepest levels of meanings. This interaction has to be done in utmost honesty with the highest aspirations, or it will not have the power to move you beyond the ordinary. The Guru blocks all that. You cannot be honest with the Guru, because the Guru demands respect. But what if you feel like disrespecting your Guru? Already there is a block on certain feelings there through convention. It's not that disrespecting the Guru is important, but the fact that your respect is not spontaneous, but it is there as a duty and a debt, you appear constrained, disempowered and worthless.

 

"Even a fool has his own mind for a teacher." --chuang tzu

 

This is a long term affair. If you want to speed things up, you have the wrong motivation. The motivation should be on honesty, truth, quality and never on how fast you get something done. Ordinary mind panics when hurt and wants the pain over fast. That's where the "fast" motivation comes from. But a mind that is beyond ordinary is not paniced by any sensation at all. Enlightenment is anti-fast by its very nature. Seeking a short-cut one becomes very far from it, and not seeking any short cut you become very near. Chasing fast results on a path where forbearance is a virtue is very deluded.

 

Another reason people seek Gurus is because they are afraid to make a mistake. If you fear mistakes, you are screwed before you even start. Embrace mistakes. Love your mistakes. Make many mistakes. Explore! How else are you to learn? Mistakes are where the wisdom is. If Guru cuts off mistakes, Guru cuts off wisdom as well. If you are not seeking to avoid mistake and if you are not seeking a shortcut, what you need is a spiritual friend, perhaps, and not Guru.

Edited October 28, 2008 by goldisheavy

[Stigweard]

What he said

 

You are asking us here. That likely means you still did not disempower the convention within your mind. That means no matter what anyone says, you have an external Guru already, since you really believe the world is external and Gurus are there to teach you things you didn't know.

 

I say "likely" because you might just be fooling around and not being serious.

 

Let me rephrase the question: is a person needed whom you will never question and whom you will never look at critically? Is such one needed? Not only is such one not needed, but such one can derail the spiritual progress you've made prior to meeting one.

 

Wisdom is the ultimate resolution of all concepts and therefore of all intentions. Intentions and concepts which ground those intentions cannot be resolved if you follow a formulaic step-by-step path. The resolution is a manner of familiarization that is acquired during a curious and constant interaction with the deepest levels of meanings. This interaction has to be done in utmost honesty with the highest aspirations, or it will not have the power to move you beyond the ordinary. The Guru blocks all that. You cannot be honest with the Guru, because the Guru demands respect. But what if you feel like disrespecting your Guru? Already there is a block on certain feelings there through convention. It's not that disrespecting the Guru is important, but the fact that your respect is not spontaneous, but it is there as a duty and a debt, you appear constrained, disempowered and worthless.

 

"Even a fool has his own mind for a teacher." --chuang tzu

 

This is a long term affair. If you want to speed things up, you have the wrong motivation. The motivation should be on honesty, truth, quality and never on how fast you get something done. Ordinary mind panics when hurt and wants the pain over fast. That's where the "fast" motivation comes from. But a mind that is beyond ordinary is not paniced by any sensation at all. Enlightenment is anti-fast by its very nature. Seeking a short-cut one becomes very far from it, and not seeking any short cut you become very near. Chasing fast results on a path where forbearance is a virtue is very deluded.

 

Another reason people seek Gurus is because they are afraid to make a mistake. If you fear mistakes, you are screwed before you even start. Embrace mistakes. Love your mistakes. Make many mistakes. Explore! How else are you to learn? Mistakes are where the wisdom is. If Guru cuts off mistakes, Guru cuts off wisdom as well. If you are not seeking to avoid mistake and if you are not seeking a shortcut, what you need is a spiritual friend, perhaps, and not Guru.

[dwai]

Buddha, Chang San-feng perhaps? There are many more, people who defined their art without guides or help.

 

But I agree with 'thelerner' in that we often need guidance in our practise to make sure we do not develop bad habits.

 

Wasn't Chang San-feng a taoist monk? So odds are that he had probably a very sound foundation in Taoist meditation and techniques.

 

Buddha (as in Siddhartha Gautama) was an Indian prince who had extensive training in both Classical Indian Metaphysics as well as the esoteric and exoteric teachings of his time. He didn't happen to suddenly become Buddha. Buddhism is nothing but a take on Advaita Vedanta (the finest of the Vedantic traditions of India).

 

 

 

You dont need a master in my opinion, just meditate.

 

How do you know when you have progressed vs when you start deluding yourself.

You need someone who has gone before you to show you the way.

 

It's like saying I will get from New York to San Francisco but with no map or asking no one for directions.

Sure, you might get there. But chances are that you might not. If you do get there, odds are you will take much longer than you would if you didn't see the map and/or ask someone for directions.

 

A good teacher is a reliable map and a source for valuable information and insight. That said, a true teacher will show up if the student is sincere and his/her desire to learn is real.

 

 

Why do you think this is a mistake? I agree if anyone follows anything haphazardly it is a waste of time. I mean why is it a mistake to get your information from a different source? I can read the Tao Te Ching from my laptop or a book but the words are the same.

 

Your odds of interpreting the Tao te Ching without the commentary by a true master is probably not even as good as understanding the The Theory of Relativity without being taught by an accomplished teacher what it means.

 

Deeper practice perhaps leads to deeper insights. But there needs to be a guide to show you right from wrong. There might be exceptions, but those are very very rare indeed. This is the reason why the Teacher is held in such high regards within Eastern Cultures (India, China, Japan, etc).

 

The Teacher-Disciple tradition calls for sincerity on both sides and devotion to each other. Like a Parent to his/her Child. And like the Child to his/her Parent. There has to be love, devotion, respect and faith.

[doc benway]

I think the need for a guru is a paradox.

On the one hand, a guru is generally needed to help guide us along a path for some period of time or shake up our ideas and point us in a direction.

On the other hand, it is up to each of us to go beyond where the guru can take us. He can take us to a threshold but we must cross it and continue totally alone.

One of the most profound thinkers I've studied is a man who emphatically claimed that there is no path or method to the truth and that there are no gurus. It is up to each of us to find our way (J Krishnamurti).

[YMWong]

If you want to be a buddha then do what buddha did. If you want to be Chang San Feng then do what he did.

 

Darin,

 

there is no Daoism without a teacher.

Daoism is a tradition orally transmitted from master to student. When a student is accepted into a specific lineage a ritual is performed in which the master *introduces* the student to the Daoist Pantheon and to the lines of masters he is going to belong to. A new name is also given.

That's the ONLY way for a common person, in Daoism, to be able to be 'known' by the "higher beings" (call them divinities, higher energies or whatever you like) that may guide the newcomer on the Path.

At the time of ordination the students vows are to the "Three Treasures" that are:

- Dao (itself)

- Master (and the line of transmission)

- Classics (the object of transmission

 

Zhang Sanfeng, by the way, was an ordained Daoist Monk in various lineages before creating his own school and had LOTS of masters.

 

YM

[Yuen Biao]

okay, we'll see if you accomplish what he did

 

in 20 lifetimes

 

peace

 

 

Hey, I'll give it a try. Thanks for your concern!

[Yoda]

Yogani says you can get the blessings you need without a teacher:

 

http://www.aypsite.org/146.html

 

 

But with Vajrasattva's skype class and other great workshops popping up all over the place, one might as well check that sort of thing out as it *really* helps imo.

[thelerner]

"There is no Taoism without a teacher"

 

Yet one of the great things about Taoism is that it encourages you to take nature as your teacher. See it, feel it, discover the macrocosm within the microcosm.

 

In my naive opinion, book learning is separate and lesser to that ability. I can see the neccesity to have a teacher/guru/master show you by example and training to do it.

 

 

Michael

 

I enjoy the dharma talks of Michael McAlistair (infinitesmile podcasts). He's quoted his teachers as saying, 'Enlightenment requires 10,000 hours of sitting'.

'Is there a short cut?'

'That is the short cut', he says

[styrofoamdog]

Darin,

 

there is no Daoism without a teacher.

Daoism is a tradition orally transmitted from master to student. When a student is accepted into a specific lineage a ritual is performed in which the master *introduces* the student to the Daoist Pantheon and to the lines of masters he is going to belong to. A new name is also given.

That's the ONLY way for a common person, in Daoism, to be able to be 'known' by the "higher beings" (call them divinities, higher energies or whatever you like) that may guide the newcomer on the Path.

At the time of ordination the students vows are to the "Three Treasures" that are:

- Dao (itself)

- Master (and the line of transmission)

- Classics (the object of transmission

 

Zhang Sanfeng, by the way, was an ordained Daoist Monk in various lineages before creating his own school and had LOTS of masters.

 

YM

There are some important Daoist texts who were written by masters who admittedly learned from books and had no teachers, such as the author of Anthology on the Cultivation of Realization. There are also many accounts of Daoists learning from books as well, and writing down their experiences in meditation cases. Additionally, there are classics (even written by Lu Dongbin), that state that what people need to know about cultivation to reach immortality is completely within the text. Treating Daoism as if it has never strayed outside of your own understanding isn't helpful or accurate, as there have been many different schools, traditions, and teachings over the years.

 

As for Zhang Sanfeng, there isn't a clear historical record of which century he was born in, much less that he was a monk and had many teachers. And the historical depictions and folk stories tend to portray him as a hermit rather than as a monk.

[Yoda]

'Enlightenment requires 10,000 hours of sitting'.

'Is there a short cut?'

'That is the short cut', he says

 

 

It's probably more like 100,000 for cats like me!

[mwight]

I think it really depends on you. If your a serious student there is a load of good material out there, take for example the spring forest qigong course, the tao of meditation, robert bruce's system. Also there is a ton of absolute BS out there.

 

If your determined you can teach yourself, at least to a certain point.

 

Then comes finding a legit a teacher and a lineage, thats a huge task in and of itself.

 

If I were an advanced teacher I would want students to come to me that had already mastered emptiness meditation and being able to stay in that state for at least 3-4 hours. Why bother to teach someone unless they are serious to begin with? I wouldn't.

[h.uriahr]

I am curious as to what other people's opinions are on finding a Guru/Master/Teacher for your spiritual practice. I have not had one to date and have used books, youTube, forums (like this one), etc. to learn practices which I then do and learn directly from those experiences.

 

I've also done some 'experimental' meditation - for example during meditation if i do something such as move my eyes upwards I feel a strong sense of energy. I later found out that this is a type of yoga meditation for the ajna chakra. This has happened on a half a dozen occasions where I did something that resonated only to find out that it is a formal meditation practice.

 

So, is listening to the 'inner guru' (intuition) an effective technique or am I just reinventing the wheel through experimentation from time to time within my daily practice?

 

It depends on your goals. Meditation techniques werent just from one person stumbling upon them, it took one guy to think about it and many others to practice it and refine it, often times taking many generations to do so. I'm sure that you will do fine on your own but then you need to ask yourself what the real goal is. I'm sure people have by accident stumbled upon certain techniques on their own, if I'm not mistaken Wif Hof was able to control his body heat without formal training but later refined it ( I could be wrong here) by learning actual tummo meditation, however, it's best to have someone school you for abit

[lienshan]

there is no Daoism without a teacher.

Daoism is a tradition orally transmitted from master to student.

Who was the teacher of the first daoist?

[mantis]

god

 

god -> adam

 

and so forth

[Unconditioned]

this is where i agree with william bodri, when he says that you cannot continue your ways and expect the tao to find you; it doesn't work that way, you have to put the sweat & tears in, imho.

 

I completely agree!! No one said that solitary practice was being half-hearted

 

Is it less sincere and less vigorous of a practice to put in the effort on one's own accord rather than to depend on another? Why does one need someone else to tell them right from wrong? Of course you can learn that way and there are many benefits where have been outlined here but I don't know that this is the way for everyone. The heart of the question is the word "need" and I have drawn my personal conclusion that it is not a need but it may be a longer, more difficult, or confusing way to go about without the help of a teacher.

 

To that point, I have scars on my body that have taught me those lessons and I cherish them much more deeply than if someone had told me and I put my faith in their words. From the spiritual side, I have made mistakes and I cherish them because they have taught me deep lessons as well.

 

One last point, reading a book and gaining knowledge is very different then practicing a method learned within a book and experiencing firsthand that which cannot be described within the books pages. The same with discourses on youTube from some modern masters (e.g., Paramahamsa Nithyananda a second generation disciple of Sri Ramana Maharishi).

 

Thank you all for the input! This has been very helpful to me at a minimum to explore deeply if the practice I am engaged in is 'enough' or if I am becoming attached to seeking, etc. etc. Raising questions has always aided me, thank you all again.

 

Edit: fixed grammar.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Unconditioned

[YMWong]

There are some important Daoist texts who were written by masters who admittedly learned from books and had no teachers, such as the author of Anthology on the Cultivation of Realization.

 

Can you quote the exact reference ?

 

There are also many accounts of Daoists learning from books as well, and writing down their experiences in meditation cases.

 

Same as above, thank you, and ... "many" ?

 

Additionally, there are classics (even written by Lu Dongbin), that state that what people need to know about cultivation to reach immortality is completely within the text.

]

 

Yes, of course, this is true in a way but that doesn't mean one does not need a teacher

 

As for Zhang Sanfeng, there isn't a clear historical record of which century he was born in, much less that he was a monk and had many teachers. And the historical depictions and folk stories tend to portray him as a hermit rather than as a monk.

 

ZSF was born 1247 and most of his biographies give precise details of his background and his teachers.

Besides, he was a blood descendants of Zhang Daoling of the Heavenly Masters Sect.

 

YM

[Mal]

[goldisheavy]

Edited October 29, 2008 by goldisheavy

[seadog]

I think it is pertinent to remind ourselves that certain qualified individuals are living vessels of great wisdom.

This is across the board, not just in terms of spiritual matters.

 

Should we not acknowledge master crafts people for their ability,dedication and the insight they have?

Such individuals should be treasured for the repository of hard earned exprience often gleaned over many centuries.

 

Perhaps as students it is more beneficial to see a Guru not so much as an infallable Human but as a representation of a higher possibility.

Edited October 29, 2008 by seadog

[Stigweard]

Also added to the mix is that great players don't necessarily make great coaches and great coaches aren't necessarily great players.

[sheng zhen]

Ive tried many times to write something about all the romantic ideas about teachers that are out there. But Im not so articulate today so Ill just write: there is so many romantic ideas about teachers(mostly because of all the premature gurus) out there and they cloud our way to finding our real teachers.

[Taoist81]

[dwai]

The problem with teachers is that they almost always exist within some rather inflexible tradition. They have some very definite ideas about what is good and what is not. They want to see certain things in their students and they have various beliefs about their own internal state. All of this gets in the way of wisdom.

 

What I suggest is that people find spiritual friends with teacher-like qualities, but don't think of them as teachers and definitely not Gurus, because a concept of a Guru has a slavishly devotional component to it, and there is definitely a suspension of one's own inner authority and one's own inner honesty in favor of Guru's word in the traditional Guru-disciple relationship. This is ultimately a very harmful thing to the spirit, because it breeds unhealthy dependencies of all kinds and hurts the "Guru" as much as it hurts the student (or more).

 

Hey, Gurus need some love too. They need friends who can tell them to stop taking all that Guru-persona business very seriously. Do these Gurus really think there are students that need to be enlightened? They don't think it's a play of the empty groundless senses? If not, they need to hang up their robe, and if yes, why are they lying to their students? If you see a Guru, just give him or her a hug. Toss them some money or a scarf, or whatever they want, and keep moving.

 

Your understanding of Guru is a typical semi-informed western one. Guru literally means "remover of ignorance" (in Sanskrit). You can love, respect your Guru. The concept of Slavishness as associated with the Guru-Chela/Shishya tradition because the feeling of slavishness exists in those minds.