This was helpful to me in better understanding stream entry/identifying good teachers, thank you! Do you have any other suggestions on how non-enlightened individuals might distinguish good teachers from bad, other than your specific examples of meditation centers and Tweets?
I'm glad to be of help!
Explaining how to identify good teachers would take a whole top-level post, but I can give you a few general heuristics.
[Terminology note: "stream entry", "stream entrant", "insight", "awakening" and "awakened" are technical jargon defined in Cyberbuddhist Jargon 1.0.]
If you want to experience stream entry, the best thing you can do is find a good human teacher. Unfortunately, not all teachers are good. Even more problematically, it can be difficult for normal people to identify good teachers.
There are many things that make for a good teacher, but if you're aiming for stream entry then your teacher must be a stream entrant him/herself. This is the absolute minimum requirement. Anyone who isn't a stream entrant is obviously unqualified to teach how to get to stream entry.
Except, it's difficult for unawakened people to tell who is and isn't a stream entrant, because unawakened people have difficulty understanding what stream entry even is. On the other hand, awakened people can very easily tell who is and isn't awakened. To explain how awakened people can identify each other, I'm going to use a parable.
The same dynamic applies to awakening. People who have been to El Dorado for real can easily identify each other. People who haven't been to El Dorado argue about what stream entry is and how it works because most of them are working from imperfect maps. (El Dorado is unplottable, after all.) In addition, many people are employed in advertising for the gringo tourist trap El Dorado™.
After you hit stream entry, identifying real teachers is a solved problem. But if you want to experience stream entry, then that means you haven't experienced it, which can make finding competent teachers a difficult problem.
When I first started getting into Buddhism, I visited a local meditation center that will go unnamed. Inside, they had three photos high on the wall. The leader of the group explained that these three people were awakened, and that their photos were on the wall to inspire us that we could be awakened too.
This is, of course, insane. And not just because it's culty. The reason it's insane is because it implied that nobody in the room with me was awakened. If there was an awakened being there in the room then they wouldn't need the photos. Sure enough, the meditation they taught was completely ineffectual at achieving awakening.
At another meditation center, the Q&A happened after meditating. The teacher answered lots of questions about general morality, and then someone asked what stream entry was. The teacher answered "according to the sutras", stream entry has blah-blah-blah effect, implying a significant uncertainty. The fact the teacher couldn't answer this basic question implied that the teacher wasn't awakened, because if he was then he could have answered the question from personal experience with 100% certainty. This is particularly egregious for a meditation center with "insight" in the name, because insight meditation, done properly and in sufficient volume, causes stream entry.
At the other extreme are rando Sanskritposters on Twitter who are obviously awakened because they get the facts right while ignoring all the religion-based shibboleths.
If you've been to El Dorado, then it's obvious to you which parts of ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ's tweet are true, which are metaphorical, and to what sense even the concept of truth is left deliberately ambiguous. But if you haven't had sex with Shiva, then it may not even be clear to you why ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ is probably an awakened being.
The rest of the Shiva thread reads like if the avatars of Hindu gods were on AOL.
This comment is surprised and confused because ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ misread what krishnav malhotra wrote, not because there is a disagreement. The fact that the misreading caught ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ's attention is evidence that ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ is working from real, predictive beliefs. ↩︎