**Note- G = Swami Ganaga Puri ( my Guru), the asteric is a disciple of Christine Breese, who has videos up on your tube:
As for the real question about whether this is true, RAMANA contradicted his own teaching that the guru is necessary (and he would be tickled to see that this has come up!). After all, who was his teacher? He did not have one except sitting in meditation and bringing forth the wisdom from within. Is that not being one's own teacher? G FAR from being tickled Here is what Sri Ramana said on these subjects. My suggestion is that you buy some books on Ramana and research it for yourself. Ramana did not contradict his own teachings as you will see. G i also had some Guru's that weren't seen - and this has nothing to do with being your own guru. Here is what Ramana said about these subjects - Q; How did some great persons attain knowledge without a guru ? A: To a few *mature* persons the Lord shines as the formless light of knowledge and imparts Awareness to the Truth. (pg 93) G Ramana went on to say - i have never said that there is no need for a guru. Q: Sri Aurobindo and others refer to you as having had no guru. A: The Guru is Absolutely necessary. The Upanishads say that none but a Guru can take a man out of the jungle of intellect and sense perceptions. So there Must be a Guru. Q: I mean a human Guru - Maharishi didn't have one. A: I might have had one at one time or other. But did i not sing hymns to Arunachala ?(paraphrase as is long) When man leaves materialism aside and prays to know God then God appears to him in some forn or other, human or non human, to guide him to himself in answer to his prayers. Q. J Krishnamurti says no Guru is necessary. A. How did he know it ? One can say so *After* Realizing (Realization) and NOT before. Q is it absolutely necessary to have a Guru if one is seeking Self Realization ? A: So long as duality persists in you the Guru is necessary. Because you identify yourself with the body you think that the Guru is also a body. You are not the body and neither is the Guru. You are the Self and so is the Guru. This knowledge is gained by what you call Self Realization. G knowledge *gained* isn't talking about a conceptual understanding it is talking about a cannot be denied Reality that becomes ones Conscious Awareness in every moment of every day- * I'm Jenny and I maintain this site for University Of Metaphysical Sciences and Christine. Aaah, yes, there are quite a few people who believe a teacher is absolutely and undeniably necessary. However, Christine says a new paradigm makes it possible for people to awaken without the teacher moreso than ever before. Veils aren't so thick anymore. As for the contradiction (see Christine's talk on Paradox, Its All True), both are true. Some need the teacher, others don't. G many are starting to awaken - but starting to awaken is a far cry from not needing a Guru. What is She doing ? Being a Guru - Guru means dispeller of Darkness - (it doesn't mean one that has adoring fawning devotees) Any teacher that is attempting to bring Guidance in Spirituality is a Guru. They may not be a Sat Guru which is a Realized Actualized ONE - but they are attempting to break through the coverings to the Truth of Being. THIS IS A GURU - no matter how you want to spin it the Truth is they are acting as Guru's. A friend is someone you pal around with - hang out with- yaps endlessly with about each others troubles. And while people want to hear (as it is so ego affirming) i am Not a Guru i am your friend. Let's see how many of these Not Guru's will let their friends come on a moments notice just to hang out and shoot the breeze. i doubt that is going to happen. Try to call up Gangaji or Christine and say look i'm not interested in going to the retreat let's hang out and be friends - what do you think the response is going to be ? While a Guru on one hand may be your best *friend* as they are there to shed light on what you are not seeing clearly within your self or path , the Guru is not there to be your buddy and pal. * For those who believe they need the teacher, then yes, the teacher is necessary. For those who don't believe it, then no, the teacher is not necessary. Both are possible. In another talk Christine mentions to try not to think a single thought for 5 minutes. If you can pass that test, you are ready to start being your own teacher and bring out the transmission and wisdom from within that resides in the One Self that we all are, which is the same resource the teacher brings it from. G IF they need to HEAR that then they Need a Guide. Even IF one can have a quiet mind - and i had a quiet mind Many Many years before even halfway coming close to realization. And even with that was caught in delusion and it was only through the Compassion of my Guru (who i thought i didn't need because all of these wonderful phenomena was taking place - siddhis came - anything i wanted to know in the universe was simply there on the screen of consciousness) And i was fooling myself. - i was in and out of Samadhi states - the bliss etc. And i can say that without my Guru having been there at the crutial time i would Still be in suffering. G As Ramana said so say i - a Guru is Necessary - and no matter what Gangaji says or Christine says they are acting as Guru's to aide others in coming out of ignorance. They may not be giving Diksha or giving that One to One aide as in a Traditional Guru /chela relationship. But they are figureheads - and acting as guides. This is a Guru. What is wrong with Neo Advaita ? It sounds good - you are what you seek - you don't need a guru as you are a guru within. They don't realize that they are encouraging the one thing they think they are aiding others to be free from and that is bondage within their own minds and dramas. - this is why it is termed Maya. IF THAT which one IS was actualized there would be freedom the very fact that they remain in confusion and suffering Shows that the Inner Guru is still wearing blinders - Guru means "Weighty one," indicating an authority of great knowledge or skill. . According to the Advayataraka Upanishad (14 -- 18), guru means "dispeller (gu) of darkness (ru)." Part #2 As far as being equal All have the same One Essence - so what is the difference ? the Guru has Actualized and knows the way while the seeker is in bondage and pain and suffering. So while you think you are helping others in In what you are saying you are only aiding others to remain in ego - in suffering - in bondage - in the illusion. As if they Knew the way out they would already be there But obviously the lessons that life has to offer haven't been taken advantage of they Don't know the way to navigate Life to come to the Liberation which is ever present. i am greatly saddened when i hear such neo advaitic renderings - as you give nothing more to aide them to come out of where they are. Gangaji gives some practical advice - NOT to run from what comes up but to encounter it fully - whereas you are saying you are already that. Part #3 Well when one is suffering and clueless then this is not an Affirming thing to say. If one comes to a teacher with the idea of my ideas and concepts are just as valid as what a Teacher has to say then guess what, they are not open to hearing what may be liberating. While a Guru on one hand may be your best *friend* as they are there to shed light on what you are not seeing clearly within your self or path , the Guru is not there to be your buddy and pal. Maha Shanti OM
