Thanks, Bulent. I hope to read some responses.
Unfortuantely, Jonx never has anything interesting to say. But you do. I think it would be much more entertaining to talk to you. You don't say where you stand personally, and that would be required, since a mutal talk with live persons is more productive than discussing book authors.
Anybody who accept guruism, the way that G.S. seems to, is presuming that there is something to teach and something to learn about life's mystery. I, on the other hand, have come to the conclusion that the mystery is to be neither taught nor learned and the entire enterplay of power between master and student is fraudulent, a waste of time at best and downright sick at worst.
Devotion to whom? That certainly is one of the questions I would want to ask a premie when discussing the topic of "the Experience." Devotion to the Christ as universal love or devotion to the Christ as supposedly personified by a human being? You quote G.S. as saying: "True teaching can be dangerous." I say that in the case of guruism, it is dangerous, yes, but it does not involve true teaching.
I believe that the experience of devotion to Maharaji is an emotional experience, founded on nothing more than a person's misconception. Hysterical. Likewise, devotion to God, as proudly demonstrated by the likes of St. Teresa of Avila, St. Francis of Assisi, or Paramahanse Yogananda to name just a few, is equally emotional, hysterical, unfounded, and curiously public. Certainly not to be trusted. Devotion to principle is more worthy, in my view, if less showy. Love, truth, beauty, compassion, these are the only things truly worthy of a heart-felt embrace. And anytime these principles are denigraded by human imagination and anthropomorphism, the results are the ones that we have seen time and again - human stupidity, ugliness, and misery.
I would be interested in Songster's take on your provocative post, but I'm afraid that Jonx's bitterness far outweighs his intelligence, rendering him worse than a bore.
