Genuine Spiritual Teacher or Fake?

I have bumped into a few organisations and individuals on the Internet and in the course of my reading on spirituality. Some of these people make grandiose claims about being 'enlightened' masters, sages, etc. Some seem to be money oriented, and I am exceedingly skeptical of anyone or any group who has a slick website full of merchandise, books, tickets for speaking engagements and the like. Most are just in it for cash and ego. A small handful seem to be quite genuine. I think a good rule of thumb in discerning the few sheaths of wheat from the mountain of chaff is: if anything is asked of you, whether time, money, membership, belief, or anything else, steer clear. Real purveyors of the truth don't expect anything from you, especially blind, unreasonable belief or the compromise of your intellect. Belief is one thing, truth is another. We cannot but have beliefs - we cannot function in the world without them. When I get on a bus, I believe that the driver is competent, sober and sane. When I go to the dentist, I believe that he will not deliberately injure me. But these beliefs are reasonable, founded on my experience of the past. Christianity is often defined as a belief system, and on one level, so it is. But it is a reasonable belief. If anyone expects you to suspend your common sense and intellect and just 'believe,' then run a mile. I would recommend caution in the fundamentalist wings of Christianity. What I love about the Anglican church is that one is encouraged to think, to doubt, as part of one's faith. I often think that faith means an openness to the truth. Hinduism and Buddhism put more emphasis on experience than belief. The Buddha, for example, said that nobody should take what he said on faith but should go and test it out and if it was found useful, use it, and if not, don't. However, these Eastern religions have become more popular in recent decades due to increasing globalisation, and many, many groups offering spiritual progress, enlightenment, etc. for a western audience have sprung up related to them in some way. Often, these groups have leaders with a strong personality cult and one needs to be extremely careful in one's dealings with them. One only has to think of the NKT or Sathya Sai Baba to examples of cultish organisations which are derived from mainstream Eastern religions. Hinduism is an inherently Indian expression of spirituality, and the very idea of Hinduism adapted to a Western culture seems simply bizarre to me.

For me, the warning signs of charlatans are that

1. An individual claims to be enlightened, a master, a sage, etc. or such a claim made about an individual by an organisation. Warning bells should start to ring loud and clear whenever an individual is venerated or given honorific titles, or whenever claims are made that so-and-so is the reincarnation of God, Christ, Krishna, Vishnu, or whatever. Often, a cult of personality will be present, either directly instigated and maintained by the individual 'guru' or 'swami' or perpetuated indirectly by the organisation or followers (though often this will have been set up or encouraged by the so-called guru). It is one of my basic contentions that a guru is not necessary. We do not need intermediaries, swamis, gurus, masters and all the rest. A true teacher isn't a teacher at all: like Anthony De Mello, he's just dancing his dace, doing his thing, and if people benefit, fine! If they don't, fine! But never does he set himself up as a teacher. The whole concept of the guru and the guru-disciple relationship is entrenched in the Indian spiritual tradition. From what I've read, it's more often than not an abusive relationship based on a power differential and very likely to cause harm. When you see a guru, run as fast as you can! I think a spiritual director can be helpful, but not necessary. God comes to us and invited us into a direct relationship.

2. They make extensive use of complicated, technical language or foreign words and/or talk about initiation, secret knowledge and rituals, or circles of followers with progressively greater access and privilege. Usually, suspect organisations will borrow from established traditions but try to hide this fact by using complicated or obscure language. They may also try to hide their spiritual shallowness by claiming that only initiates have full access. Often, this access will come at a price. It is another contention that spirituality is totally practical and has everything to do with day-to-day life. There is no need for secret initiations, special knowledge.

3. They offer something for sale - this can be simple merchandising - books, meditation aids, cushions, pictures, prayer beads, etc. - which is relatively harmless but does, I feel, indicate a certain shallowness. More disturbingly, a price may be put on access to 'special' or secret teachings or access to the guru or swami or whatever. Another of my contentions is that the truth is free of charge. I believe we should be deeply suspicious of those who ask money in exchange for spiritual advancement. Even cost-covering bothers me. The worldwide Vipassana organisation, for example, would not be able to function without donations but is never asks participants to make these donations and, in fact, it will not accept donations from people who have not completed a 10 day course.

The term enlightenment is often used by so-called spiritual leaders. It seems to me that the term is essentially meaningless. Certainly, I believe that we are separated from the fullness of reality, and that we can glimpse the glory of the truth of God (whatever that means). But this is God's gift and the experience will be different for every individual, since we are all unique and the truth of God is infinitely diverse. Also, we are all at different stages on the path to God, so some will see God's glory more fully than others. I believe that we will spend eternity experiencing God in more and more sublime and wonderful ways. So to say that you are 'fully enlightened' is to say that you have experienced God in all His fullness, which is impossible, and to say that you are 'enlightened' is simply to say that you have experienced God to some extent, which can be said for anyone.

Links:

Mary Garden writes intelligently and informatively, from her own experience, on gurus: http://www.users.bigpond.com/marygarden/fin%20review.htm