The Inner Guru and the SatGuru

[Miss Hepburn]

4. The Role of the Guru - by Sri Chinmoy

"Let us say that I am in London. I know that New York exists and that I have to go back there.
What do I need to get me there? An airplane and a pilot. In spite of the fact that I know that New York exists,
I cannot get there alone. Similarly, you know that God exists. You want to reach God, but someone has to take you there.
As the airplane takes me to New York, someone has to carry you to the Consciousness of God which is deep within you.
Someone has to show you how to enter into your own divinity, which is God.
A spiritual Master comes to you with a boat. He says, "Come! If you want to go to the Golden Shore, I will take you." -Excerpt.


Well, isn't this well said!
Is that true? Does someone have to show you how to enter into your own
divinity, which is God?
I don't know that for sure?
If so, fine....if not, fine...I'm not trying to start anything. Lol. I just dunno.

Speaking of NY, *wink, it IS much better to have a guide while there; steering you away
from distractions and 'trouble'.
I think a Guru is a great thing, btw! A wonderful thing, to be clear.

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by peteyzen

Sri Aurobindo, was a lovely, highly conscious, spiritual man and one destined to bring his Yoga to the fore in India and as a consequence of which, enhance many peoples lives. If I can be a little picky here- sorry but its an important distinction, Jyotir mentions above, that he achieved realisation whilst in Prison. Then describes him as a an `Avatar`. In this day and age this word is bandied around all too often and used as a title to describe many spiritual people. However, an Avatar is a being who descends (Avatar means descent) to Earth as a fully god conscious being, that is, the Avatar is essentially god on Earth in human form. An Avatar does not need to become realised, the Avatar is already beyond realisation when they are born. Sri Aurobindo, spiritual giant that he was, is a self-realised man- an Avadhutta, not an Avatar. The difference is a thousand times greater than the difference between an abacus and the internet. Sorry, I don`t mean to belittle the wonderful things Jyoti says, as I love Jyoti`s comments. Having spent a lifetime studying Avatars, I like to make clear the distinction between them and a realised person. Many people think the Buddha was an Avatar, in fact in some sects of Hinduism they describe him as an incarnation of Vishnu. But plainly, when we hear buddhas story, he wasn`t an Avatar, he, like Sri Aurobindo, was a self realised man. Interestingly, after Sri Aurobindo and his great friend and collaborator Sweet Mother passed over, An Avatar went to Pondicherry, in the form of a young Mother Meera.
Why make such a fuss over the name you might say? Well, in a section on the inner guru and the sat guru, it is important to understand the difference, as a guru can point the way and help enormously on your journey, but an Avatar as god, can take you there, that is their purpose- well one of them. It is for this reason that Avatars such as Krishna are so much worshipped.

I do understand Aurobindo pioneering efforts in the field of spirituality / integral yoga . And high respect and reverence for him is natural for any well meaning person (including me ). There can be no doubts on that.

However as explained well , avatar is born realized and his impact in terms of time and space is tremendous .We can roughly categorize founding masters of all religions on that pedestal of avatar. As explained nicely , this point is raised for increasing clarity of terms we use and NOT in any way to reduce the respect and regard for great person like Aurobindo. God never meets us personally and He uses great people like Aurobindo to convey his messages .

Buddha also was not an avatar as per traditional 10 Hindu Avatars . However it has been considered an incarnation of God by later day Hindus (most probably Shankaracharya) . Further extending the same many Hindus consider also Jesus and Muhammad Pygember also incarnation of God (interpreting the descriptions of Gita itself ) .

[BlueElephant]

Hi Hitesh and others !

3 things:
1. GOD does come to people personally ! This is a fact ! (not easily come by though).

2. I do not think Muhammad was a true descent of God - yes there are certain Angels who hang around their preachers that make their presence known and they have a great mystic tradition the Sufi, however: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad

3. Buddha was considered an Avatar by some traditions , but a special kind (and it makes total sense): He was a Shakti-avesh Avatar (of Visnu). He was a Jiva (bound person) who became Jivanmukta (Liberated) however in such a profound way as to be genuinely omniscient a la Jain tradition (knowing all individual things) Thus Visnu clothed Buddha with his own Divine Energy and thus he is The God's divine energy clothed omniscient One. Who made a huge difference in this world helping alieve suffering to billions on this planet.

However there are politics all through human history and so this is mixed in.

[peteyzen]

Originally Posted by BlueElephant

Hi Hitesh and others !

3 things:
1. GOD does come to people personally ! This is a fact ! (not easily come by though).

2. I do not think Muhammad was a true descent of God - yes there are certain Angels who hang around their preachers that make their presence known and they have a great mystic tradition the Sufi, however: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad

3. Buddha was considered an Avatar by some traditions , but a special kind (and it makes total sense): He was a Shakti-avesh Avatar (of Visnu). He was a Jiva (bound person) who became Jivanmukta (Liberated) however in such a profound way as to be genuinely omniscient a la Jain tradition (knowing all individual things) Thus Visnu clothed Buddha with his own Divine Energy and thus he is The God's divine energy clothed omniscient One. Who made a huge difference in this world helping alieve suffering to billions on this planet.

However there are politics all through human history and so this is mixed in.

Hi Blue,
I agree with your first two points and, as per my post, and disagree with your third for the reasons I clearly stated. But that`s okay, for your or my development, whoever is correct on the third point, it doesn`t matter.

[BlueElephant]

Thank you peteyzen....

The third point though is that " according to some traditions blah blah blah...." which is a true statement and then I explained how they looked at it. and so you can agree with it, the truth of what they say you can disagree on.

This is nice, I enjoy talking with you and others here.

[HITESH SHAH]

hi BE/peteyzen,

i understand n respect ur points.

All i can say is that topics such as this is very intricate n hence beyond the scope of forum discussion especially for me. Hence not adding anything further to avoid more confusion.

[BlueElephant]

Thank you H S.

Such a wonderful topic - more input....... yes?

Originally Posted by HITESH SHAH

hi BE/peteyzen,

i understand n respect ur points.

All i can say is that topics such as this is very intricate n hence beyond the scope of forum discussion especially for me. Hence not adding anything further to avoid more confusion.

And the Buddha specifically taught against labelling him-self as such.


"Monks, these two slander the Tathagata. Which two? He who explains what was not said or spoken by the Tathagata as said or spoken by the Tathagata. And he who explains what was said or spoken by the Tathagata as not said or spoken by the Tathagata. These are two who slander the Tathagata."

Abhasita Sutta
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipi....023.than.html

[BlueElephant]

Yes, it is important to follow the Teachings and transform our own mind, etc. The garden needs to grow.