A questioner asks Acharya Prashant about the necessity of having one living spiritual guru and the fear associated with complete surrender, especially given the current spiritual environment filled with organizations and propaganda. She explains her dilemma: complete surrender can help overcome the ego, but not surrendering can also be a game of the ego. She questions her authority to filter a guru's teachings. Acharya Prashant responds that this is a tricky thing. He states that the true guide must be one's own urge to live in freedom, without bondages, and not be a plaything of circumstances. This urge itself is the guru. He expresses skepticism about accepting any person as an absolute guide, recalling a poster from his old hostel: "The teacher is the voice of the Truth, not the man behind the voice." He clarifies that while the voice of Truth needs a carnal medium, meaning a person is necessary, that person is not the guru in the absolute sense but merely a medium. The person is valuable only as long as they act as a medium for the Truth. If the person's characteristics take precedence over what they stand for, it is time to quit. He contrasts a living guru with a text, noting that texts are safer as they lack malicious intentions, unlike people. A text is objective and cannot lure with pomp and show. However, a text is a one-way communication; it cannot read your face, embrace, or admonish you. Therefore, he advises beginners, who are often gullible, to start with books for safety. After gaining wisdom from books, one might find them insufficient, and that is the appropriate time to seek personal guidance. The books themselves will help in finding the right person. He also addresses the questioner's follow-up about cropping his name from shared quotes, stating that if it's done out of fear, it's not right, but if it's for a missionary purpose to help those allergic to the name, it is acceptable. Another questioner asks about reconciling different schools of thought like Vedanta and Yoga Sutras. Acharya Prashant clarifies that Vedanta is not a school of thought but a direct inquiry into "Who am I?". It is the mother of thought, not a product of it. He emphasizes that the central question is always about oneself: "What is happening to me?" All other causes and problems are secondary. One must identify the "mother cause" or the root of all problems. Using an analogy of brain cancer causing various symptoms, he explains that one must address the root cause, not just the symptoms. Similarly, all social problems stem from the fundamental problem of the self, and the question "Who am I?" is the mother question that addresses this root.
