A Guru (teacher) is needed at present to grow spirituality.
Now the question is, with the flourishing of science and technology, how important is the presence of a Guru in a society?
With the passage of time, science and technology have given us many tools and methods.
It is needed to understand a little bit: what can technology itself do in the fields of spirituality, elegance, and learning?
It can alter our modes of expression and communication, but knowledge, aesthetics, and learning can not exist in and of themselves.
After all, in spite of so many tools and techniques, why are we establishing some centers of the teacher?
Did his student tradition provide him with the knowledge of some special and rare forms and styles?
Are we restoring and establishing some art centers based on teacher and student tradition for many subjects?
Technology is not a substitute for knowledge and aesthetics. Its role now lies in expanding the fields of conservation, documentation, and expression.
Aesthetics and knowledge are very individual. It can't do anything. Just as talent cannot be created, it cannot be produced by practice alone with intensity.
Tradition needs to be understood in some dimensions. Other fields include technology, which plays a role in the expansion of communication and media in the field of art but cannot replace art itself.
Art creation is human uniqueness and uniqueness. It is talent and cultivation. It is the special ability of aesthetics and the skill of its expression. Till there is "uniqueness," the role of technology will be limited.
acceptance of a disciple as a guru (teacher).
The teacher must also have been a disciple once. When does the moment come in the process of training and knowledge acquisition when a disciple turns into a teacher or is accepted as a guru?
On this question, one has to be a disciple. Some exceptions are in the field of spiritual practice, where a perfect person had no guru tradition but a tradition started by him himself.
As far as the moment of a disciple's experience as a teacher is concerned, he has a special ability in his medium to express self-realization in spirituality and a complete beauty experience in elegance, but only when it comes to the experience of the seeker and the disciple.
Yes, a disciple becomes a teacher. As far as acceptance is concerned, acceptance as a teacher is a social question.
There were many capable gurus who got the recognition of a guru in a favorable situation at a very young age.
If a spiritual master should know the truth of his soul, he has come to know the whole. Then who cares about your social beliefs?
It does not matter whether society recognizes, respects, or insults them. Society lives in the past. Society does not have the eye to understand the possibilities.
It has predetermined beliefs and concepts, while there is no repetition in the tradition of knowledge.
If society wants someone to be a wise person, but until someone is not according to their belief, although knowledge is eternal, knowledge never repeats itself in the same form.
Every Guru and every great man's manifestation of knowledge is completely different and unique; greatness is never repetition and uniqueness.
Such an expression would never be possible before or after him.
One captures the form and manner of a knowledgeable person—that is what it should be, otherwise, there is a problem with recognition.
A real teacher makes us accept what we have accepted.
Picture https://pixabay.com/illustrations/buddha-pray-meditate-buddhism-1053130/