Only God is Jagadguru

[DeviChaaya]

Namaste, Jai Ma

Seems I've started quite a few threads in the last week. We go from me barely posting to me posting a lot! Clearly the way to get me posting is to irritate me until I can't keep silent!

The topic for this thread today is the idea I keep seeing pop up about a universal guru. How 'if you're not feeling a pull towards this person than something's wrong with you'. Perhaps I'm seeing more of this amongst white converts, or converts in general, who begin their practice after meeting their guru and, as I've said before, simply blindly accept anything the guru says as truth.

But I want to address this idea. Puranas, agamas etc, do any of these proclaim that there are universal gurus? While I can accept a deity as jagadguru (jagad meaning universal), many bear these names (primarily that I know of, Shiva, Hari and Ma although She is called Jagadamba) amongst their sahasranam. The real question I'm asking, I guess, is it really possible for a mortal person to be a jagadguru? Would that not imply that they must know all systems, all theosophical arguments? How can one person be all that? Even for a realised soul I find it hard to believe that they could really be privy to all that information as the human brain is finite and the systems, philosophies and approaches are infinite, one jug cannot hold the ocean, for example, so how can one mind hold all the knowledge?

 

[sayak83]

Namaste, Jai Ma

Seems I've started quite a few threads in the last week. We go from me barely posting to me posting a lot! Clearly the way to get me posting is to irritate me until I can't keep silent!

The topic for this thread today is the idea I keep seeing pop up about a universal guru. How 'if you're not feeling a pull towards this person than something's wrong with you'. Perhaps I'm seeing more of this amongst white converts, or converts in general, who begin their practice after meeting their guru and, as I've said before, simply blindly accept anything the guru says as truth.

But I want to address this idea. Puranas, agamas etc, do any of these proclaim that there are universal gurus? While I can accept a deity as jagadguru (jagad meaning universal), many bear these names (primarily that I know of, Shiva, Hari and Ma although She is called Jagadamba) amongst their sahasranam. The real question I'm asking, I guess, is it really possible for a mortal person to be a jagadguru? Would that not imply that they must know all systems, all theosophical arguments? How can one person be all that? Even for a realised soul I find it hard to believe that they could really be privy to all that information as the human brain is finite and the systems, philosophies and approaches are infinite, one jug cannot hold the ocean, for example, so how can one mind hold all the knowledge?

It's rhetoric of overly enthusiastic shishya-s. Also Sanskrit is a highly flowery language where 5 or 6 adjectives one after another actually sounds very aesthetic and normal. Not much significance is attached to them. It sounds ridiculous and overblown in English (like Miss Universe

 

[Terese]

To a devotee a guru of his is jagadguru

 

[DeviChaaya]

To a devotee a guru of his is jagadguru

But then to claim that their guru is the guru everyone else should pay their respects to? I am not a fan of Visnu (although I have a tugging feeling towards Vaishnavi Ma) so a guru saying to me 'worship this form of Visnu with your whole heart' isn't really going to work, is it? My attraction is for Devi. Okay, so the guru may say 'worship with Lakshmi with all your heart' but I am not attracted to Lakshmi, I prefer Parvati, Kali, Durga and those forms. So this potential guru either says 'well, my way is the only way, you have to do this' and I, the seeker, begin to resent them or they say 'nope. You're not going to be my sishya, I'm sending you on to so-and-so who will help you', that way they gain my appreciation and recommendation in the future if I encounter someone drawn strongly to Visnu. Isn't that better?

 

[DeviChaaya]

It's rhetoric of overly enthusiastic shishya-s. Also Sanskrit is a highly flowery language where 5 or 6 adjectives one after another actually sounds very aesthetic and normal. Not much significance is attached to them. It sounds ridiculous and overblown in English (like Miss Universe

Ay. Maybe not. But there are many gurus out there claiming to be the universal guru for everyone. Btw, Jagadhatri is a wonderful name. Miss Universe... maybe we should call it the Jagadhatri pageant?

 

[sayak83]

Ay. Maybe not. But there are many gurus out there claiming to be the universal guru for everyone. Btw, Jagadhatri is a wonderful name. Miss Universe... maybe we should call it the Jagadhatri pageant?

This will depend on Jagaddhatri's marital status.

 

[sayak83]

Ay. Maybe not. But there are many gurus out there claiming to be the universal guru for everyone. Btw, Jagadhatri is a wonderful name. Miss Universe... maybe we should call it the Jagadhatri pageant?

Where do you get so many Hindu Bhaktas annoying you? Didn't think Hinduism is that common in US.

 

[Terese]

But then to claim that their guru is the guru everyone else should pay their respects to? I am not a fan of Visnu (although I have a tugging feeling towards Vaishnavi Ma) so a guru saying to me 'worship this form of Visnu with your whole heart' isn't really going to work, is it? My attraction is for Devi. Okay, so the guru may say 'worship with Lakshmi with all your heart' but I am not attracted to Lakshmi, I prefer Parvati, Kali, Durga and those forms. So this potential guru either says 'well, my way is the only way, you have to do this' and I, the seeker, begin to resent them or they say 'nope. You're not going to be my sishya, I'm sending you on to so-and-so who will help you', that way they gain my appreciation and recommendation in the future if I encounter someone drawn strongly to Visnu. Isn't that better?

It's not that the devotee's guru will believe his way is the only way, but that the devotee himself believes his guruji can bring about prema of Krsna to anyone. I suppose you'd be more ticked off at the devotee, than the guru.

 

[Vinayaka]

It's rhetoric of overly enthusiastic shishya-s.

I agree with this. As Twain is famous for ... "better to keep quiet and have people think you're a fool than to open your mouth to remove all doubts."

It's silly, this peeing contest about 'My Guru'. Personally, I think it's partly remnants of Saviour Syndrome. What a lazy way out of doing hard sadhana.

 

[DeviChaaya]

Where do you get so many Hindu Bhaktas annoying you? Didn't think Hinduism is that common in US.

Nah, @sayak83, I'm just incredibly opinionated about a lot things. And I really don't respond well when people try to push their guru or their beliefs in this, that and the other and how my beliefs are inferior unless they agree... Which is why I'm on my high horse about Nithyananda at the moment.

Also, I'm in Australia! It's mostly white converts I've found to be very, very vocal about how their guru is the best. I'd probably ignore it if people weren't consistently trying to shove it down my throat. Even when I try to tell them I'm not interested!

 

[sayak83]

Nah, @sayak83, I'm just incredibly opinionated about a lot things. And I really don't respond well when people try to push their guru or their beliefs in this, that and the other and how my beliefs are inferior unless they agree... Which is why I'm on my high horse about Nithyananda at the moment.

Also, I'm in Australia! It's mostly white converts I've found to be very, very vocal about how their guru is the best. I'd probably ignore it if people weren't consistently trying to shove it down my throat. Even when I try to tell them I'm not interested!

Australia! Do you watch cricket. Aussie cricket team is in India now. Will be in my home city soon. Here is a funny ad

 

[Vinayaka]

Also, I'm in Australia! It's mostly white converts I've found to be very, very vocal about how their guru is the best.

That adds credence to my theory of Saviour Syndrome. Still the individual whom I encountered in my life that was the most obnoxious this way was an Indian Satya Sai devotee. He would string the Sai Baba name right in there with Siva, Vishnu, Allah, God. etc. Yes, that's your belief, but do you even realise how annoying you are telling everyone about it continually?

 

[Shantanu]

The real question I'm asking, I guess, is it really possible for a mortal person to be a jagadguru? Would that not imply that they must know all systems, all theosophical arguments? How can one person be all that? Even for a realised soul I find it hard to believe that they could really be privy to all that information as the human brain is finite and the systems, philosophies and approaches are infinite, one jug cannot hold the ocean, for example, so how can one mind hold all the knowledge?

The jagadguru is one who can deal with all his or her involvements perfectly, such is his or her knowledge. If one surrenders to God in ones mind He will teach the person all there is to know in order for the person to be called jagadguru. The requirement for a jagadguru is that the person must be able to respond positively to any question that is put to him. It requires a lot of studies as you have rightly alluded to. But it does not require all the information about everything. Only God is capable of that. A jagadguru is a man or a woman of this world who deals with issues in a way that exhausts the questioner. So there is a limit to what a jagadguru human being knows.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If it is Mother Vaishnavi, then she is Ms. If it is Mother Lakshmi or Mother Parvati, then they are Mrs. If it is Mother Durga, then she is none of these.

 

[Shantanu]

That adds credence to my theory of Saviour Syndrome. Still the individual whom I encountered in my life that was the most obnoxious this way was an Indian Satya Sai devotee. He would string the Sai Baba name right in there with Siva, Vishnu, Allah, God. etc. Yes, that's your belief, but do you even realise how annoying you are telling everyone about it continually?

There were two Sai Babas, one over a hundred years ago Shiridi Sai Baba who is treated like God and the other Satya Sai Baba who lived recently. Are you sure you are not mixing up the two?

 

[Vinayaka]

There were two Sai Babas, one over a hundred years ago Shiridi Sai Baba who is treated like God and the other Satya Sai Baba who lived recently. Are you sure you are not mixing up the two?

Yes, I'm quite aware of the two differing Sai Babas. It was just a comment really on how little I get out, and how individuals vary. This chap was just one of twenty or so Satya Sai devotees I've met over the years who was this way. The other people have all been fine, and perhaps he too has mellowed. Very angry man at the time. I've never met any Shirdi Sai devotees personally, yet there is a temple here.

 

[Shantanu]

Yes, I'm quite aware of the two differing Sai Babas. It was just a comment really on how little I get out, and how individuals vary. This chap was just one of twenty or so Satya Sai devotees I've met over the years who was this way. The other people have all been fine, and perhaps he too has mellowed. Very angry man at the time. I've never met any Shirdi Sai devotees personally, yet there is a temple here.

For me God lives frequently among people so I do not get upset when I hear people preach that certain individuals have acquired Godly-prominence in society. The question is why does this not happen as frequently outside India. Is it not that Hindus are just more aware of God influence over us than societies?

 

[Vinayaka]

For me God lives frequently among people so I do not get upset when I hear people preach that certain individuals have acquired Godly-prominence in society. The question is why does this not happen as frequently outside India. Is it not that Hindus are just more aware of God influence over us than societies?

We're of different schools in Hinduism. In orthodox Saivism (my school) God doesn't incarnate as in the avatara concept. Yes there are Self-realised souls and wise men. It's not the philosophy that bothers people, it's the preaching, the bragging. the pride, the conversion attempts. Even that isn't so much in the Gurus, but more in certain of their devotees. Best to just look at it dispassionately, in my opinion.

 

[Shantanu]

We're of different schools in Hinduism. In orthodox Saivism (my school) God doesn't incarnate as in the avatara concept. Yes there are Self-realised souls and wise men. It's not the philosophy that bothers people, it's the preaching, the bragging. the pride, the conversion attempts. Even that isn't so much in the Gurus, but more in certain of their devotees. Best to just look at it dispassionately, in my opinion.

I see the point you are raising. You do not see God within human beings, it would appear?

 

[Vinayaka]

I see the point you are raising. You do not see God within human beings, it would appear?

Within all humans, yes, God is everywhere, just not concentrated in one, like some followers of some Gurus think. The way some folks can go on about their Guru, the Guru's body would implode from all that supposed power.

God permeates everyone. Old souls are wiser than young souls. So a Guru in the traditional sense is an old soul, someone who is well qualified, and willing to pass His/Her knowledge onto others.

But schools vary.