The ideal guru is the dead guru. You can just picture him in any way you want. Since he doesn’t affect you directly, you can just imagine him the way you want. He can’t contradict you, you can turn his words in any way you want. You can reference him as you like, as confirmation of your ideas. The worst that could happen is getting into an argument on whether he was right or wrong about that. Sort of a comfort zone. But what if the guru is still alive?

Then you might be in trouble. Might be. But that rarely occurs. I mean the trouble. There are so many ways to avoid getting in trouble. Eventually you can just walk away. But there is no need for that. The maximum you can get these days around those guys is boredom. So you walk away because of this.

On the other hand, here is my first axiom regarding the idea of a guru:

A person whose presence makes you feel uncomfortable.

I propose this to be your tool to test if it’s worthy to stay around him. It is hard to define exactly what this discomfort is like. The only thing you know is that you can’t explain it. I tend to be a non-believer when someone talks about feeling so good, so comforted around a guru. Whether that is the first time they’ve met or being around him for some time.

You might feel uncomfortable like this by simply reading something, or other indirect influence. But this axiom is valid only if you are affected by a living person, directly. All the rest pertains to the dead guru syndrome.

Search: