The "guru" is someone who claims special insight into how a person can become their "true self" or achieve fulfillment. The term could refer broadly to therapists, influencers, motivational speakers, life coaches, philosophers, or religious leaders, depending on the context.what many people call "God" is actually self-validation, and that morality or truth ultimately reduces to the authority of the individual self.This suggests that the guru claims privileged knowledge. The "hidden" thing is assumed to be the authentic self, enlightenment, purpose, or inner truth. Followers are expected to trust the guru's guidance. although the "religion of Self" claims to reject traditional religious authority, it develops its own doctrines and priesthood. Instead of priests interpreting God's will, gurus interpret the individual's "true self." Some become devoted followers, accepting the guru's authority and the other half is trying to steal the sacred fire from him." This alludes to the Greek myth of Prometheus, who stole fire from the gods and gave it to humanity. Here, "stealing the sacred fire" means aspiring to become the guru oneself—to possess the authority, insight, influence, or charisma that the guru claims. The idea is that rather than rejecting the system, many critics simply want to occupy the position of authority.

Beneath religion, ideology, or moral systems, people are really seeking confirmation that they are right or worthy.

"Self" is personified as the true object of worship—not necessarily a deity, but the individual's ego, desires, or identity.

1. Modern people reject external authorities (God, tradition, objective morality).
2. They elevate the self as the highest authority.
3. They still need guides to discover or affirm that self.
4. Those guides become a new priesthood ("gurus").
5. People either submit to these figures or compete to become them.

This is a recurring criticism in philosophy, religion, and cultural analysis: even societies that claim to have moved beyond religion often recreate religious structures—sacred values, prophets, heresies, rituals, and converts—but center them on different ultimate commitments.

Whether that diagnosis is persuasive depends on one's view of human nature and authority. Some would argue it accurately describes certain self-help and influencer cultures, while others would say it unfairly treats all forms of personal growth or psychological exploration as quasi-religious. The passage is therefore best understood as a polemical critique rather than a neutral description.