The experience of gurus in the last half-century since the seventies has been so dreadful beyond the veneer of antiquated super respect and reverence that perhaps the time has come to pass beyond the whole constellation. Modernity in nearly every case has staged a ‘reformation’ of inherited religions, e.g. the Protestant Reformation, nearly, but often that has precipitated a reaction into so-called new age substitutes, forgetting that Hinduism, Buddhism, etc, are just as antiquated as the admittedly forever deficient Christianity.
The problem goes both ways and the deterioration of ancient traditions in t he cultural mindset of modernist individualism has become nearly terminal. But that may in fact be a healthy development.
But the darker picture of guruism lurks in the background, mostly undiscovered by the naive seeker who moves in an invisible occult minefield.
The problem whether deliberately or unwittingly was exposed by Gurdjieff who presented from the start a shadowy aspect, and he has a number of equally dangerous successor/followers such as the malevolent E.J.Gold, a downright dangerous figure whose criminality is veiled behind a ‘sufi’ front.
The question of Maharsi in our title is outrageous, no doubt, but the problem is not with that now thoroughly modern classic but with the dangers of ‘dead gurus’ being coopted by ‘demonic’ surrogates. If you read Maharsi’s classic texts you find a modernists upgrade of a classic tradition eloquently stated, but the chances of availing of that are another matter. The advaita hides an invaluable invitation to demonic gurus to indulge in the personal destruction of unwitting individuals in the name of overcoming ego. Gurdjieff’s trogoautoegocrat.
to be continued ….
We have suggested in several books, e.g. Ravings of the Masts that the guru game is finished and a new avenue is needed. Not so simple to bring about.
But let us keep in mind that passive disciples never reach enlightened, turning slowly into fodder for vulture/gurus. Only individuals can achieve anything.