In everyday life, I've never heard of anyone described as being perfect. Makes sense.
For one thing, how could "perfect" even be defined as regards a person? For another, assuming it could be defined, how would a person's perfection be assessed?
In sports, perfect applies to something measurable. If a pitcher has a perfect game, no batter from the opposing team reached a base. A perfect game in bowling is 300 points, strikes in each of the first nine frames plus three in the tenth.
Otherwise, typically perfect means high quality. If a waiter asks a patron how they enjoyed their meal, a highly satisfied person might say, "It was perfect, absolutely perfect."
But in certain religious circles, a guru or other leader may be termed "perfect." Not for something they've done. For who they are. And that, in my present skeptical atheist mental state, is utterly unbelievable.
Not always for me, though. For 35 years I entertained the possibility that the guru who initiated me in 1971 into the Radha Soami Satsang Beas fold was a "perfect living master."
The guru's name was Charan Singh. After he died in 1990, and also while he was still living, I'd talk to him inside my head. Never got a discernible response, but the talking made me feel closer to him, especially when I needed a spiritual shoulder to lean on, even if it was imaginary.
If I was in an informal mood, I'd simply start off by saying, "Master.... ." If I was in a formal mood, wanting to address him with a lengthy honorific, I'd say, "Param Sant Satguru Hazur Maharaj Charan Singh Ji, Perfect Living Master of Beas, India... ."
Param Sant means highest saint. Satguru means true guru. Maharaj Ji is a title of deep respect, since in Sanskrit maharaja means great king.
However, all of those other titles pale in comparison to "Perfect Living Master."
That's how the gurus of Radha Soami Satsang Beas are regarded in the RSSB teachings. They are perfect. Not physically, obviously, but spiritually, for their soul consciousness supposedly has merged completely with the divine force that powers the cosmos, and may be called God.
It's a great story. With a glaring problem. It isn't true.
At least, there's no demonstrable evidence that any guru or religious leader is perfect in a divine sense. Without exception, everyone who is claimed to be perfect has obvious imperfections: moral flaws, poor judgment, prone to mistakes -- in short, everything that other imperfect human beings demonstrate, "perfect" gurus do also.
You might be thinking, okay, I agree, but so what? Where's the harm in putting someone up on a pedestal and looking upon them as a perfect being, even though that's an illusion?
Well, based on my lengthy experience with belonging to a religious organization founded on the notion of a perfect living master, there's several harms. The claim that the RSSB guru is perfect leads to an extreme dogmatism among devoted followers. Since it's believed that the guru makes no mistakes, every utterance, every command, is unquestioned.
This sort of fanaticism is dangerous. It can lead to bad behavior by devotees who consider that even if the guru is asking them to do something wrong by worldly standards, a perfect living master operates by rules known only to other satgurus, not to ordinary people.
Also, the egos of the guru's devotees become inflated by proximity to a supposedly perfect being. They come to see themselves as special in the eye of God. Members of other religious groups have imperfect leaders. But us lucky souls, we have won the divine lottery by being initiated by a perfect living master who guarantees that God-realization will be ours through his grace and guidance.
Which again isn't true, in my well-informed opinion. So the best thing to do is to give up on viewing any guru or religious leader as being perfect. They aren't. And you'll be happier in the long run by realizing this.
Surely, all gurus, masters teachers etc. are all human - with all the ensuing traits, desires and foibles that comprise being human. A perfect master is contrary to being human. Zen teachers are among those who celebrate their humanness -warts and all - and are not afraid of their shortcomings.
Actually, from a non-dualistic point of view, we are all perfect, perfect in the sense that what we are at this moment could not be otherwise. Which is not to say that certain negative habits and traits (with a little awareness) cannot be changed - but even in the process of changing things are just perfect as they are.
Perhaps the search for perfection (enlightenment etc.) is just a way of avoiding the fact of being what one is, or rather, trying to change the actual (what is) for the imagined. I suppose such evasions could take up a whole lifetime, never reaching the ideal that one believes (thinks) one should be.
Posted by: Ron E. | May 13, 2024 at 05:39 AM
TREASURE BEYOND MEASURE Belated Mother's Day Edition
"Oh, no one should lose their mother!" -- Charan Singh's lament to a friend about his grief on losing his mother.
It's completely understandable to me that anyone would experience grief when their mother dies. But bear in mind that Charan was the RSSB Guru and well into his 60s when his mother passed away.
Why does that matter? It matters because nearly every RSSB Satsang (like the one I attended yesterday) scolds satsangis for being "attached" to their family members. You're going to die soon and yet here you are thinking about your family when you should be meditating!
But when the guru can't follow the ideal he preaches, what then?
One could say Charan deserves praise for his human devotion to his mother. But we only learn about Charan's human feelings in a book published after he died. In other words, for 40 years Charan was preaching an ideal he personally didn't follow or attain.
I wonder about the effect this ideal of disdaining one's family may have had on the millions of devoted RSSB satsangis. Is it possible that many RSSB children grew up with "detached" parents and were the worst for it? Apologists for this religion will of course say no to that, and argue that the Masters are only teaching a "balanced perspective." To that, I'd only say we have the testimony of Charan himself on what it was like growing up with a father completely detached from his sons because Great Master told him it was necessary for his salvation.
Another ideal that RSSB preaches is that of being wholly self-supporting. "We must earn our own way in this life." Here again, it's an ideal that the Masters preach but don't personally follow. TREASURE BEYOND MEASURE included a eulogy for Charan by a noted Satsangi, who lauds Charan for being a self-supporting lawyer. No mention however that Charan completely gave up his law career when he became guru, and moreover never had a paying job for the next several decades. Where did Charan get the rupees to support himself and his family? From his larger family. (Related to this, Gurinder Singh is also supported by his family, apparently in some kind of indeterminate but far-ranging network that includes corporate CEOs, and that dispenses favors to relatives tied to shell corporations.)
Then there's the directive to meditate 2.5 hours a day, the hallmark of any and every RSSB satsang. "You're going to die soon slacker, why aren't you giving 10% of your day to meditation"?
Of this ideal as well, we learn in TBM that Charan fell short and struggled to give that 10%. That is, we learn about this after Charan passes away.
"Perfection is the enemy of the good," said Voltaire. That's often true. Nevertheless, I do feel there's a definite value in being faithful to positive ideals. And paradoxical as it may seem, I also feel that spiritual leaders provide value -- the evidence is strong that in many cases
But overall, I feel that spiritual leaders like Charan Gurinder and Rajinder must at least practice what they preach.
Posted by: sant64 | May 13, 2024 at 09:27 AM
@Sant64
Who is Rajinder?
Regards
Mohit
Posted by: Mohit Sharma | May 13, 2024 at 10:26 AM
It's a cult. Plain and simple. For better or worse.
Posted by: Neon | May 14, 2024 at 07:52 AM
In the 1980s, one of my Zen teachers told us, “Never treat your Master as if he was God Almighty……even if he is!”
Posted by: Todd | May 14, 2024 at 09:14 AM
Perfect living liar that's what Gurinder Singh Dhilion has been playing out
Radha soami is a perfect lie in the ways Gurinder Singh Dhilion portrays it as an absolute perfection of a path
The lies on stage have past they're sell by date
Gurinder does Q & A questions and Answers
And they always say , "no questions about Gurinders private life" now I wonder why? Is it because he will be caught out , because his private life is really an Exposed book for all to see that's if they want to see it.
It contains Land Stealing, Murder, money laundering, Stealing millions from his nephews,
Womanising and the list goes on and on
...
What's so perfect about this?
And little lying Baba deceiving all, just so he can play a fantasy out
Don't fall for this little prats game and live the life you deserve , ditch this False Baba
Posted by: Trez | May 18, 2024 at 11:47 AM
Every single QnA is the same. The same problems "I can't meditate, my mind isn't in my control, what should i do?" "Meditate", "Thank you plz take care of me n my fam". Every single video. No more questions about inner regions or four lives to get back to "g.o.d." Either the "satsangis" are getting more stupid, or RSSB has always been for the gullible.
Posted by: Neon | May 19, 2024 at 08:07 AM
Gurinder singh dhillon and Ram rahim should definitely form a comedy duo. Both are clueless, and have zero enlightenment and spiritual experience. How can any of these clowns have any real answer to any questions in Q&As. Ofcourse people can't meditate, because it is an enlightenment to kaal, the meditation leads to the snake jot niranjan. You get fully absorbed in a fake love feeling like a drug , but its kaal. You come back with zero knowledge or clarity of who you are, where you are, why your here, were you are going and how to navigate passed your obstacles kaal gurinder has put in your way. Gurinder Singh Dhillon is an agent of distraction and leads souls back to his master , lord , satan. Gurinder you are exposed as a fraud , a fake , a charlatan and karma will be served soon.
Posted by: Kranvir | May 19, 2024 at 01:27 PM
Have you come across a recent publication "Concepts and Illusions" by RSSB? Please go through it. This possible ego from the impression that one is 'attached' with a perfect living master has been addressed.
Posted by: Vibhor Verma | July 12, 2024 at 03:50 PM
@sant64 let me reply to your allegations one by one.
Firstly, you stated that the satsang "scolded" people of being attached to their families. Well, understand the difference between love and detachment. Getting initiated is not like pressing a memory reset button post which you forget the presence of your relations and the role they played in your life. If anything, meditation makes you calmer and with a calm mind you are able to recognize and feel grateful for the contributions different people have made in your life and when they leave, it is natural to feel the loss. I am in fact grateful to Huzur for he demonstrated that we should not shy away from expressing our most sincere emotions.
Secondly, you said Huzur's father was detached from his sons. I don't know what your impression of the word detached is. But, from what I have read, as a father, he fulfilled all his responsibilities towards his son and his family. I think you want to imply that he was an absentee father, which is clearly not the case and you must be delusional for thinking so. He was initiated by his own father, the great master and happily left his sons under the latter's guidance and protection. I don't need to state why. Moreover, at no point did Huzur or his brother express any resentment towards their father. So one is left to wonder where you are drawing your conclusions from. To this day, we are told in the satang to be responsible towards our families and be a good example for our kids. I feel sorry for you and wherever you are drawing your impressions from.
Thirdly, you are suggesting that Huzur lived off his extended family. And so does the present master, according to you. What exactly is it that you know of their income sources? I don't know where you hail from, but in India, after a point in life, children take care of their elders. And since you claim to have read TBM, I am surprised you skipped the part where it is told that Huzur's family owned sugar mill(s) and in his days, he helped running them before he was given the mastership.
Lastly, about the 2.5 hours requirement. We are not told to fulfill the requirement right from day one. If you have been initiated you would know that. We are told to be consistent with our practice, build our capabilities with time, and eventually increase the duration to 2,5 hours. Every initiate faces his share of struggle. Huzur has very humbly submitted that even he faced struggle himself at the time he was relatively new to the path. If a future master has faced struggle in his days, isn't he in a position to empathize with his disciples who face difficulties? I don't see double standards here. I do see your ignorance and the arrogance you have in the face of it, though.
In conclusion, I understand that you would get these questions and want to be absolutely sure if the master is genuine. But your doubts should have set you on a path of inquiry, reason and introspection, rather than some pent up resentment against a dignified spiritual lineage. May sense prevail.
Posted by: Vibhor Verma | July 12, 2024 at 04:30 PM