Spiritual Teacher

[IcyCosmic]

Hey everyone I feel a spiritual teacher is the only thing stopping me from taking more than very slow steps in increasing my quantum - i.e. knowledge of hinduism and how I should go about things; I've searched locally and such but I can't seem to find anyone qualified or willing to do the job! ):
Even some of the pundits in the temples seem to be lacking major knowledge of the religion, they know less than me!

Any advice on where else or how else I can find one?

[Jainarayan]

Namaste Icy.

I can't offer anything other than to say I am in the same boat as you about knowing how to find a guru. Now that I am worming my way into the temple community, I may broach the subject with someone. Perhaps with my new friend Radha, and/or the priest I am becoming friendly with. If he has taken as much of a liking to me, and interest in me as he appears to, I think he will be my "go to".

It's a no-brainer that the information here @ HDF is wonderful, and I freely and unabashedly admit I would not have learned a fraction of what I have without it. But imo no amount of reading and corresponding in writing (and this is like letter-writing) takes the place of one-on-one and face-to-face instruction between teacher and student.

What I can say, and it's just parroting what I've heard, is that you have to kiss a lot of toads (what is it today with me and the animal analogies? ) before you find a prince.

Good luck to all of us in the search.

[Shuddhasattva]

Namaste

Yes, this is the essence of it all, isn't it?

I will advise you however not to hold book learning as a criterion in finding/selecting your guru. Some pandits are extremely knowledgeable, and can recite scripture from memory, and expound upon its meaning - but often they have little to no experiential depth. I'm not saying that book learning is bad, or that book learning is contrary to experience - only that it in of itself is not sufficient to qualify one as a guru.

In my opinion, the point of the guru-sishya relationship lies in transmission of energy (shaktipat (technically 'descent,' as in descent of divine grace)). This is the really, really important thing in finding a guru - one qualified and capable of giving shaktipat. Only then is mantra and dhyan and, for that matter, all sadhana empowered.

Such true gurus are exceedingly rare. Are you able to travel at this point in your life?

Namaste

[Believer]

Namaste,

In my opinion, the point of the guru-sishya relationship lies in transmission of energy (shaktipat (technically 'descent,' as in descent of divine grace)). This is the really, really important thing in finding a guru - one qualified and capable of giving shaktipat. Only then is mantra and dhyan and, for that matter, all sadhana empowered. Such true gurus are exceedingly rare.

+1

One can become educated in the scriptures from a teacher or by doing self study from books (in their translated form). But, the guru-shishya relationship requires, as pointed out above, imparting spirituality, 'transmission of energy'. 'Guru' is a highly exalted title, far, far away from a mere 'teacher'.

I don't want to discourage the OP from his supposed 'Mastery of Mind,Soul,&Ego' aim, as stated below his forum name, but may I point out that we start with baby steps. Mastery is an outgrowth of small efforts made in our daily lives. It develops with more knowledge and practice thereof. Our effort should be to learn and to practice rather than pursuit of 'Mastery'. The pinnacle will come when the time is ripe and is not something to be looked at as the ultimate goal.

Pranam.

[Maya3]

Do you live near any Ashrams?

They usually have teachings regularly.

Maya

[IcyCosmic]

Namaste Icy.

I can't offer anything other than to say I am in the same boat as you about knowing how to find a guru. Now that I am worming my way into the temple community, I may broach the subject with someone. Perhaps with my new friend Radha, and/or the priest I am becoming friendly with. If he has taken as much of a liking to me, and interest in me as he appears to, I think he will be my "go to".

It's a no-brainer that the information here @ HDF is wonderful, and I freely and unabashedly admit I would not have learned a fraction of what I have without it. But imo no amount of reading and corresponding in writing (and this is like letter-writing) takes the place of one-on-one and face-to-face instruction between teacher and student.

What I can say, and it's just parroting what I've heard, is that you have to kiss a lot of toads (what is it today with me and the animal analogies? ) before you find a prince.

Good luck to all of us in the search.

I agree, good luck!

[IcyCosmic]

Namaste,
+1

One can become educated in the scriptures from a teacher or by doing self study from books (in their translated form). But, the guru-shishya relationship requires, as pointed out above, imparting spirituality, 'transmission of energy'. 'Guru' is a highly exalted title, far, far away from a mere 'teacher'.

I don't want to discourage the OP from his supposed 'Mastery of Mind,Soul,&Ego' aim, as stated below his forum name, but may I point out that we start with baby steps. Mastery is an outgrowth of small efforts made in our daily lives. It develops with more knowledge and practice thereof. Our effort should be to learn and to practice rather than pursuit of 'Mastery'. The pinnacle will come when the time is ripe and is not something to be looked at as the ultimate goal.

Pranam.

Not a discouragement at all Believer. I'm aware of that I just feel I would learn far better with a guide. The word Mastery is used merely to stroke my own ego so that all be it by illusion I stay motivated to learn, its just the way I personally work. Thanks for the advice.

[Seeker123]

Hey everyone I feel a spiritual teacher is the only thing stopping me from taking more than very slow steps in increasing my quantum - i.e. knowledge of hinduism and how I should go about things; I've searched locally and such but I can't seem to find anyone qualified or willing to do the job! ):
Even some of the pundits in the temples seem to be lacking major knowledge of the religion, they know less than me!

Any advice on where else or how else I can find one?

Adi Sankara explains the Guru qualifications here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita...sity_of_a_Guru

According to Śankara and others, anyone seeking to follow the philosophy of Advaita Vedānta must do so under the guidance of a Guru (teacher).[7] The Guru must have the following qualities (see Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.12):

1. Śrotriya � must be learned in the Vedic scriptures and Sampradaya
2. Brahmaniṣṭhā � literally meaning 'established in Brahman'; must have realised the oneness of Brahman in everything, and in himself/herself.

The seeker must serve the Guru, and submit questions with all humility in order to remove all doubts (see Bhagavad Gita 4.34). By doing so, Advaita says, the seeker will attain Moksha ('liberation from the cycle of births and deaths').
According to Adi Śankara, knowledge of Brahman springs from inquiry into the words of the Upanişads, and the knowledge of Brahman that Sruti provides cannot be obtained in any other way. It is the teacher who through exegesis of Sruti and skillful handling of words generates a hitherto unknown knowledge in the disciple. The teacher does not merely provide stimulus or suggestion.[8]

The second qualification is very hard to determine easily. So the best is to see if the Guru satisfies #1. He should be conducting lectures on Vedic scripures (Gita, Upanishads etc). Note that Adi Sankara is pretty clear that Moksha is through knowledge and not through touch or any other means etc. (I am not denying that when a qualified student meets a qualified Guru the Guru can help him see a vision of God or into Nirvikalpa Samadhi, i.e. some sort of God experience like the one Vivekananda had with Ramakrishna but Adi Sankara is pretty clear that should be not be the criterion). Also Moksha is not an experience either which comes and goes - it is well established knowledge like the knowledge that you have when you say fire is hot.
Also - Mundaka Upanishad classifies Gurus into 3 levels in descending order:
A. both 1+2 of above qualifications;
B. 1 only;
C. 2 only.
It puts #2 only at the C level because if a Guru is not teaching Vedic scriptures even though he may be self realized since his teaching does not follow a methodical way it will be confusing and hence hard to just rely on his teachings to attain Moksha.

Also temple priests job is not to be Guru. Their mine job is the Karma kanda of Vedas, i.e. doing rituals correctly so that you can attain Artha, Kama.

[IcyCosmic]

Do you live near any Ashrams?

They usually have teachings regularly.

Maya

Not near by, no.

[IcyCosmic]

Adi Sankara explains the Guru qualifications here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita...sity_of_a_Guru

According to Śankara and others, anyone seeking to follow the philosophy of Advaita Vedānta must do so under the guidance of a Guru (teacher).[7] The Guru must have the following qualities (see Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.12):

1. Śrotriya � must be learned in the Vedic scriptures and Sampradaya
2. Brahmaniṣṭhā � literally meaning 'established in Brahman'; must have realised the oneness of Brahman in everything, and in himself/herself.

The seeker must serve the Guru, and submit questions with all humility in order to remove all doubts (see Bhagavad Gita 4.34). By doing so, Advaita says, the seeker will attain Moksha ('liberation from the cycle of births and deaths').
According to Adi Śankara, knowledge of Brahman springs from inquiry into the words of the Upanişads, and the knowledge of Brahman that Sruti provides cannot be obtained in any other way. It is the teacher who through exegesis of Sruti and skillful handling of words generates a hitherto unknown knowledge in the disciple. The teacher does not merely provide stimulus or suggestion.[8]

The second qualification is very hard to determine easily. So the best is to see if the Guru satisfies #1. He should be conducting lectures on Vedic scripures (Gita, Upanishads etc). Note that Adi Sankara is pretty clear that Moksha is through knowledge and not through touch or any other means etc. (I am not denying that when a qualified student meets a qualified Guru the Guru can help him see a vision of God or into Nirvikalpa Samadhi, i.e. some sort of God experience like the one Vivekananda had with Ramakrishna but Adi Sankara is pretty clear that should be not be the criterion). Also Moksha is not an experience either which comes and goes - it is well established knowledge like the knowledge that you have when you say fire is hot.
Also - Mundaka Upanishad classifies Gurus into 3 levels in descending order:
A. both 1+2 of above qualifications;
B. 1 only;
C. 2 only.
It puts #2 only at the C level because if a Guru is not teaching Vedic scriptures even though he may be self realized since his teaching does not follow a methodical way it will be confusing and hence hard to just rely on his teachings to attain Moksha.

Also temple priests job is not to be Guru. Their mine job is the Karma kanda of Vedas, i.e. doing rituals correctly so that you can attain Artha, Kama.

Thankyou very much for this detailed post. This clears things up to a further degree, thats indeed very interesting. No one here is really qualified then....well no one I know....oh well
you need a guru to follow vedanta, correctly eh?