Guru-disciple-enlightenment topic

[egodust]

Ken wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:27:58 -0500, sadananda
> <sada at ANVIL.NRL.NAVY.MIL> wrote:
>
> [... many lines of mostly correct analysis deleted for brevity...]
>
> >Bottom line all these discussions about other peoples gurus and disciples
> >caliber is in my opinion is meaningless.
>
> Please excuse me, but I must point out that this statement does not
> follow from all the true, but essentially unrelated statements above
> it.
>
> I find that the clearest way to look at such points is to take them to
> extremes, that way it is clear what the statement is saying.
>
> So, to take the statement above to an extreme, what if Saddam Hussein
> announced he was an Advaita Vedanta Guru?
>
> Furthermore, what if he then said that the Upanishads were wrong, and
> that Shankara and Ramana Maharshi were both fools and charlatans?
>
> Is one's response to this "one cannot say whether someone else is a
> true guru or a false guru" ?
>

It *seems* hilarious to even ponder the apparent outrageousness of such a
question, but the answer is...YES!

Bhagavan even said that "for all we know, Hitler was a jnani!" [...]
"...working as an instrument in the hands of God."

Ramakrishna's quote about madmen, drunkards, etc. speaks to this also, in
compelling terms.  (The way of jivanmukthi is unfathomable, and doesn't
necessarily fit in with the relative scheme of things.)

Also: One jnani doesn't necessarily know another.  Not all are automatically
endowed with the siddhi of mental telepathy (or, in this case 'heart
telepathy').

Sadananda made excellent points...quote worthy!

peace.
namaste.