Are there any legit Gurus on ATS?

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe

May I ask why, having also studied comparative mythology and religion, you have chosen the Christian mystical tradition?

Sure, you can ask.

Their god, their Christ, their angels, their martyrs and saints, their myths, their rituals, their prayers and practices are all lifted and plagiarized from the people whom they conquered, enslaved, killed, and forced from their own holy homelands.

Tragic but irrelevant. Unless you think that metaphysics is all about ethics. Which I don't. There is a common misconception that religion is all about being ethical and chaste and behaving yourself. Not so. Religion is about uniting with God...and God transcends all pairs of opposites including good and evil. The way of the Tao can be brutal sometimes. Change can be harsh. Be in accord with the Tao anyway. Unconditional forgiveness and undifferentiated love is therefore called for. I am capable of that.

Are you?

'Neither he who thinks the living entity the slayer nor he who thinks it slain is in knowledge, for the self slays not nor is slain.' -Bhagavad Gita 2.19

In what way can you justify calling yourself enlightened—someone who has walked with the Divine, and understands the Akashic spirit behind all things, who has seen the many faces of the hero—choosing the Christian way as the right way, when it is so clearly operated from and for the wrong intentions?

A personal question, obviously, but one which no Christian mystic, Cabalist, or child of the Mystical Christ has ever been able to answer for me.

Mystics are not entirely in charge of the way that the archetypes of the collective unconscious present themselves to the conscious mind. If the archetype of rebirth 'wants' to present itself to someone in the symbolic form of Jesus, well there isn't much that can be done about it. So one might as well go with it. Be in accord with it. It's in the blood, in the culture, and Christianity has its place in the cosmic symphony of religions.

The cultural religion that the mystic is born into is to be assimilated and transcended and consecrated and purified and repaired and interpreted and connected in the heart and mind of the mystic and offered up to the collective unconscious, not thrown away because someone out there thinks religion is all about ethics and rules and dogma and rituals and such.

How do we know that this is actually true? I think 0% is the most spiritual actually; inanimate objects are also of the divine, and they can not have their own "desires" and therefore they are always in alignment with the divine order.

reply to post by arpgme


Yeah, this rating system is specifically tailored to the human experience. On a 0-100 scale, regardless of which you prefer to better represent enlightenment, the point is the rarity of some individuals ability to get to the better extreme.

Regardless of tabbing it 0 or 100, 10 or 90, as you get closer to the highest/lowest levels there is a lower rate of happening.

While all may be inherently equal at base levels, some sentient beings certainly obtain mentalities that are superior in the pragmatic sense of living the human life and transmitting a higher ethic.

reply to post by BlueMule


Well now, I'm just going to let this reply slide as my final reply... hopefully you haven't edited your own again by the time I post this, as I want my reply to correspond to yours, ha ha.

You bring up some very good points, but I think you confuse a few issues. I'm going to start with the second half of your post, because I think my response will make more sense this way.



When you say that the mystic does not control how the divine appears to him, I think you are wrong.

While it is true that many mystical emanations appear in various masks across the planet, like the goddess Inanna (Ishtar; Astarte; Qedesh; Ashtoreth) they do not all do this.

The Mystical Christ is a unique spiritual being now, evolved away from and beyond those mystical images it stole its identity from: Dumuzi, Osiris, Baal, Teshub, Attis, Adonis, Dionysus, Mithra, and so on.

If the mystic receives a vision of Christ, or a vision of Dumuzi (as mine was) it is very relevant that the mystic explore why that particular entity came to them.

Consider, as evidence, that Christ's teachings on "a single way to Heaven" do not correlate with Dumuzi's teachings concerning union with the divine feminine, and balancing work and duty as the road to paradise. How can you correlate these two, without saying one must have been wrong?

There is not only one God. The faces of the divine are truly many.

As such, it does fall on the mystic to "assimilate, transcend, consecrate, repair, interpret, and connect their heart and mind to the collective unconscious." This can only be done by understanding who, or what, the mystic is really in contact with. The practices of comparative mythology and religion greatly open the door for the mystic in this avenue, which is why I was so eager to ask you about your own studies there.

Knowing that Christ and His followers are responsible for the deaths of thousands of mystics and their mystical traditions, and for the corruption of a host of metaphysical concepts and constructs... doesn't it fall on you, the mystic in contact with Christ, to "assimilate, transcend, consecrate, and repair" this?

When Christ says the only way to Heaven is through him; you know this to be wrong, as every mystical and metaphysical system offers a way to Heaven. Why do you not feel it is your responsibility to correct this mistake?



Concerning ethics and the metaphysical... why do you think a conscience is not an element of the metaphysical?

I know that you approach Christianity from a Taoist perspective, which is interesting, but let me ask you this:

Would you allow a man to kill 6 billion people because he did not like how they acted? Why then would you allow a god to do the same thing?

Would you allow a man to keep 6 billion people from entering a country because they don't believe in him? Why then would you allow a god to do the same thing?

If your answer was that you would say the spiritual transcends our "morals," that God, or the gods, can do whatever they want because they are somehow more than us, then I could only say this: you are more Christian than you are mystic.

And that disheartens me.

~ Wandering Scribe

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe

When you say that the mystic does not control how the divine appears to him, I think you are wrong.

While it is true that many mystical emanations appear in various masks across the planet, like the goddess Inanna (Ishtar; Astarte; Qedesh; Ashtoreth) they do not all do this.

The Mystical Christ is a unique spiritual being now, evolved away from and beyond those mystical images it stole its identity from: Dumuzi, Osiris, Baal, Teshub, Attis, Adonis, Dionysus, Mithra, and so on.

If the mystic receives a vision of Christ, or a vision of Dumuzi (as mine was) it is very relevant that the mystic explore why that particular entity came to them.

I consider the symbolic form that archetypes take, be it the form of Jesus or Dumuzi, to be a secondary consideration. All forms are metaphors.

Consider, as evidence, that Christ's teachings on "a single way to Heaven" do not correlate with Dumuzi's teachings concerning union with the divine feminine, and balancing work and duty as the road to paradise. How can you correlate these two, without saying one must have been wrong?

I consider Christ to be a symbolic manifestation of the archetype of wholeness/Self. Every religion has equivalent symbolic forms for that archetype, because that archetype surfaces to the conscious mind in every culture and era in ways they can understand in that time and place.

So for Christ to say 'I am the way', he is saying that the ego-self must unite with the transpersonal archetype of the Self in whatever form it happens to take for a particular culture. The form varies. He identified with that transpersonal archetype, which is what we all must do.

There is not only one God. The faces of the divine are truly many.

The faces are just masks. At the end of the cosmic play, we take off our 'masks' to find that there was only one actor. Christians call that actor the Christ. Other religions have other names. Names and faces are just symbols. Symbols are just fingers pointing to the moon.

As such, it does fall on the mystic to "assimilate, transcend, consecrate, repair, interpret, and connect their heart and mind to the collective unconscious." This can only be done by understanding who, or what, the mystic is really in contact with. The practices of comparative mythology and religion greatly open the door for the mystic in this avenue, which is why I was so eager to ask you about your own studies there.

There is only so much that can be understood, and then it falls to transcending our individual identity. At that point, understanding can't be put into word or symbol just as a knife can't cut itself.

"That One which is beyond all thought is inconceivable by all thought." -Dionysius the Areopagite

Knowing that Christ and His followers are responsible for the deaths of thousands of mystics and their mystical traditions, and for the corruption of a host of metaphysical concepts and constructs... doesn't it fall on you, the mystic in contact with Christ, to "assimilate, transcend, consecrate, and repair" this?

What makes you think I didn't?

When Christ says the only way to Heaven is through him; you know this to be wrong, as every mystical and metaphysical system offers a way to Heaven. Why do you not feel it is your responsibility to correct this mistake?

It's not wrong. It's just not the way people think. Every mystical and metaphysical system offers a way to heaven because every mystical and metaphysical system can unite people with the transpersonal archetype that Christ represents to Christians.

People will come to that realization in the next age. This period of time is not about universal realization as if Aquarius pours it onto the Earth. Not quite yet. It's about the climax of the Piscean enantiodromia of Christ/anti-Christ.

Concerning ethics and the metaphysical... why do you think a conscience is not an element of the metaphysical?

I know that you approach Christianity from a Taoist perspective, which is interesting, but let me ask you this:

Would you allow a man to kill 6 billion people because he did not like how they acted? Why then would you allow a god to do the same thing?

Would you allow a man to keep 6 billion people from entering a country because they don't believe in him? Why then would you allow a god to do the same thing?

If your answer was that you would say the spiritual transcends our "morals," that God, or the gods, can do whatever they want because they are somehow more than us, then I could only say this: you are more Christian than you are mystic.

And that disheartens me.

~ Wandering Scribe

I don't play hypothetical games of ethics and conscience. People are fingers on the hand of God, our individuality is an illusion, a hoax, a hallucination. Humanity is one whether it is 6 people or 6 billion. Tat Tvam Asi.

'Our death is our wedding with eternity.
What is the secret? "God is One."
The sunlight splits when entering the windows of the house.
This multiplicity exists in the cluster of grapes;
It is not in the juice made from the grapes.'

-Rumi

reply to post by MassOccurs


And what is a "superior" way to be living human life? And exactly what "ethics" are we talking about? We can't even all agree on that.

But we can all agree that being 'healthy' and not 'harming others' is better right? Nope. Humans can't even agree on that. If their holy books says to start war, then it is the right thing to do - to them. If their holy book says to continue a tradition even if it is unhealthy - they'll do it....

So, we can't even agree on what morality is, and when we get to "don't harm others" there is usually many exceptions like "For God" or "War" or whatever...

It seems as though humanity can not agree on anything and it is definitely unnatural to live your life by a scale trying to judge yourself and others as "0%", "30%", "80%" ...

reply to post by MassOccurs


There are plenty of legit gurus on ATS, what would you like to know? Although I think the "search" function is the highest guru... ATS' God

No one can tell you who a guru is on ATS. If they did you would not believe them. Only the guru in you can recognize the guru in them.

You wont find a legit "GURU" on a conspiracy site as this site and because its purpose... are not recognized by any "legit" guru as being important.

Gurus "transcend" the irrelevant...such as this site. And if one responder tells you they ARE a guru...they are not.

I can enlighten you on easy South Dakota living. I can show you the ways of surviving the great plains with nothing but a hatchet, canteen, and a few other survival supplies. I can also show you how to enjoy yourself without losing your minds, and how to open up your mind to living in the middle of no where.


Other than that my knowledge of the world kind of slumps! I am working on Pacific Northwest Survival and entertainment without money.


Does that count? Maybe a little?

ALSO! This is a cool question and thread. I am extremely interested to see what unfolds! Hopefully, if a Guru does frequent the boards they are still an active member.

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
You wont find a legit "GURU" on a conspiracy site as this site and because its purpose... are not recognized by any "legit" guru as being important.

Gurus "transcend" the irrelevant...such as this site. And if one responder tells you they ARE a guru...they are not.

This does make a lot of sense...they would have more important things going on I would think. But maybe at 70% they are still open to surfing the web?

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
You wont find a legit "GURU" on a conspiracy site as this site and because its purpose... are not recognized by any "legit" guru as being important.

Gurus "transcend" the irrelevant...such as this site. And if one responder tells you they ARE a guru...they are not.

“Before enlightenment; chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment; chop wood, carry water.”

-Zen Proverb

That principle extends to many things... not just wood and water. Things someone out there might consider irrelevant. Release all gurus from the burden of your expectations and/or stereotypes and notions of legitimacy. Who are you to judge? Indeed, release all people from your expectations.

Growing up, my spiritual advisor was a fransiscan monk. Too bad there are no real gurus on ATS.

I'm probably in need of one.

Originally posted by beezzer

Too bad there are no real gurus on ATS.

Who are you to judge that?

Guru is a cultural term for an enlightened mystic. But enlightened mystics come from all cultures, all eras, all religions and so there are "gurus" everywhere. Even America. I say that I am an enlightened mystic and therefore equivalent to a "guru", to a "Buddha", to a "Jesus". Who are you to say otherwise?

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by beezzer

Too bad there are no real gurus on ATS.

Who are you to judge that?

Guru is a cultural term for an enlightened mystic. But enlightened mystics come from all cultures, all eras, all traditions and so there are "gurus" everywhere. Even America. I say that I am an enlightened mystic and therefore equivalent to a "guru", to a "Buddha", to a "Jesus". Who are you to say otherwise?

edit on 18-8-2012 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)

Then I apologise. Didn't mean to sound flippant, though I usually am.

I was serious though.

Originally posted by beezzer

Then I apologise. Didn't mean to sound flippant, though I usually am.

I was serious though.

It's not a lifestyle or a philosophy or a wardrobe or a haircut or a social / religious ordination that makes a guru a guru. It's transformative mystical experience. Such as that which is symbolized in The Matrix when Neo is liberated from the illusion. It's as profound as that.

It just so happens that I had had such experiences. There are many ways to have them...each mystical tradition has its own ways. But underneath the mythologization / models / institutionalization of such experiences, they are pretty much the same. Mystical traditions share a handful of common denominators that are obscured by culture and time.

What people should be after is how to have those experiences too.

if you think that you are so enlightened as to control another human beings path to enlightenment...then you are not a Guru.

It is a natural process...some progress faster than others yet we will all eventually end up at the same place...it might take years...it might take several lifetimes...the end is always the same....

If you think you are a guru....then there is something wrong with you....you are not. A Guru is a Guru by default...they are what they are and they cannot change that....it is a natural progression. If you think it is your place to direct folks in a particular direction....you are not a Guru....the Guru opens the door onto a world of multiple paths....if you think you can direct another person...you have missed the point...everyone is different...you cannot tell me what my ultimate goal is...

We are all free to choose our path....there is no right and wrong...there is only life....

reply to post by BlueMule
It's something that I'm missing. Or just realising that I'm missing something.

I know enough to know I am not a guru.

*slaps ego back in place*

reply to post by beezzer


Well, if someone is after liberation from The Matix then all a "guru" can do is point to the way he or she was liberated. It's up to you to decide if that way is do-able for you.

I would recommend that you focus on studying comparative mysticism, comparative religion, comparative mythology for a few years. I think it's the best way to really grok what mysticism is really about because it lifts you up above the cultural and temporal inflections that are everywhere so you can have a panoramic, objective, rational view.

Then one day you will grok mysticism, and your psyche will respond to that and a way out of The Matrix will open for you. That's how it happened for me and so all I can do is inform you thus.

I recommend starting with the works of Joseph Campbell, have you heard of the book The Hero with a Thousand Faces?

If anyone is one, then all are, whether they wake up to that or not.