Hightlights for Saturday 02/14/01
- Q.1. What does Nisagardatta mean by ...
--- In NondualitySalon@y..., Jan <swork@a...> wrote:
> Beloved Tim,
> I can puzzle out what he means. So what are we going to do on this
> list? Exchange bad jokes or keep sending blank messages?
Whatever comes up, I guess... I'm certainly not the only one you
invited to answer the questions, and others did answer ...
It's just that... I read "I Am That," and found it most beneficial to
meditate on "What could he possibly be saying?" If someone had told
me outright (admittedly I didn't ask), the discovery would have
been "someone else's" and not "mine." So I'm simply saying that it
was more helpful 'for me' to figure it out, rather than get answers
the easy way.
Seeking to maintain a humility level is silly... you may eventually
discover that humility is still ego, and in some cases (I'm not
referring to you) it can be downright egotistical.
What appears as egotistical often isn't, and what appears as humility
is often masquerading as heavy-duty ego, from what I've found.
Perhaps you still feel a need for reassurance... but comes a time
when what is needed is not reassurance, but doubt and confusion, to
enter a 'cloud of unknowing'. In fact, doubt and confusion can be
far more 'beneficial' than reassurances.
> Or are you telling me that I am the only learner on this group?
Of course not. It just looked like the particular questions you were
asking aren't "rocket science." I could be wrong of course, everyone
sees things differently.
> Why did Ramana & Nisargadatta teach?
Choicelessly, out of love.
> Why was this group formed?
Jerry could explain it, it has something to do with another list
called 'IAM' starting to fall apart, so Jerry Katz (Umbada) decided
to organize a new one.
At 24.02.01-01:02 PM, you wrote:
>Of course not. It just looked like the particular questions you were
>asking aren't "rocket science." I could be wrong of course, everyone
>sees things differently.
Rocket science is easy. All that uses logic or builds on what already is
known is easy. However here I am in unknown territory where logic many times
is discarded. Here I don't even know who is speaking from experience and who
is a pretender. To quote:
"If one is not a holy person, one is not worthy to receive the real teaching.
Many people think that they have attained the final state of full and
They have fooled themselves,and they have fooled many other people,
But they have not fooled me.
A person in this state is like a fake coin.
It may look like the real thing.
It can be passed around and used by ignorant people
who use it to buy things with ..."
Yesterday I went over to spend some time with a friend, and he told me
a story relating to this. He said that you could have a conversation with
two people about climbing Mount Everest. One of them has actually made the
climb, the other has read all about in it books. The second person is very
knowledgable, may have climbed many other mountains, and can tell you in
words all about the mountain. The knowledge, however, is intellectual, not
Both can tell you pretty much the same story, but if your own
heart is open, if you are really listening, you will know 'who is speaking
from experience and who is a pretender'.
If you don't take words too seriously, and take them as "pointers"
only, the issue is over and done with. You will then be relying on
yourself instead of others. The ultimate key is to rely on your own
direct experience in all of this. Approach everything with
skepticism, explore it, if it doesn't "work for you" drop it
immediately and move on. It's the scientific approach.
Believe me, there is no "wrong way," as long as you don't let
yourself get stuck anywhere. As long as you don't pick one point of
view and decide it's "true" and you will stay with it "forever."
When I first got into this 'nonduality thing,' I was "into" Shankara,
then got interested in Vivekananda and the whole Neo-Vedanta thing,
then got interested in Buddhism, then dropped that for Nisargadatta,
then went through a Zen period... I've been through periods of seeing
the world as a dream, seeing the body as real, seeing the body as
unreal, have experienced various blissful states, painful states,
pleasant states, unpleasant states, bizarre states, normal states,
altered states, expansive states, contracted states...
You see what I mean? Go with the flow. None of this stuff
is "harmful" unless you attach to it and make it some sort of
absolute. Go with it, see where it leads. It's an adventure.
Maybe you can't get into the 'explorer' spirit? OK... I certainly
don't know what's right for you... some sages do recommend "dig a
deep well in one place rather than many shallow wells..." -- that
approach never worked for me.
However here I am in unknown territory where logic many
ºtimes is discarded.
You are not in an unknown territory: You can't be something else
but yourself. The re-discovery of "that" is independent of scriptures,
teachers or whatever. How else could nondualism ever have been established?
Alien visitors teaching humans? And who taught the aliens?:)
ºHere I don't even know who is speaking from experience
ºand who is a pretender. To quote:
º"If one is not a holy person, one is not worthy to receive the real
ºteaching. [ see above for whole statement]
That quote is Papaji's: that means, go there and ask a few questions:
1. The context of the quote?
2. What is a holy person and what is an unholy one?
(Frankly, I don't see a iota of difference between the "holiness" of the pope
and a lady from the red light district)
3. What is liberation? What is bondage?
(For me, concepts - in order to know intellectually, one has to stuff the
mind like a turkey - that is "bondage" :)
Beloved Jan B, Beloved List,
I think I am not making where I stand clear. You all are assuming that I
have already bought in to the idea of 'non-dualism' so I should dive
straight in without asking too many questions. I have to agree that at
present Ramana et al.'s ideas seemed to be the most attractive.
You have to remember my background. An agnostic for almost 30 years! After
the mystical experience [hardly two months ago] my heart has been on fire
[well to be honest the fire is getting smaller]. So I have to scrutinize all
teachings and ask some very silly questions in order to decide what my next
action should be.
I understand very well what most of you are hinting at. It has to be my own
self-discovery. It cannot be explained but has to be experienced. Different
people are pointing in similar yet differing directions. Ultimately it will
have to be decided by trial and error and perhaps in the direction my heart
is pointing at.
Sorry to keep boring you with my posts. The time for me to remain silent is
You are not boring Jan. Ask anything you want. Sri Ramana was asked all the
time and he almost always was happy to engage in a discussion and answer,
particularly in the last 40 years or so of his stay in Arunachala. As many
know Ramana was more or less silent in the beginning for some years but
gradually increased his interaction with his environment.
A friend of mine, a psychologist and a well known yogi visited India in the
1980s seeing many gurus and teachers. Once he went to see a very famous yogi
but the Swami was away. Someone at that Ashram told him to go and see this
other person. So my friend went to see Sri Nisargadatta and ended up staying
there for a week. Nisargadatta was not well know then. He said that
Nisargadatta would stand at the door and look at the line of people waiting
to see him. Sometimes Nisargadatta would actually pick people from the line
by pointing at them and let them come in. You! You! and You! Nisargadatta
would say pointing at those he wanted inside. Then he would be happy to talk
to them and answer any questions.
Don't be bothered by other people's opinions Jan. It is enough that you are
bothered by your own! :-). Sages, who see to the heart of the matter become
very gentle even with themselves.
> What does Nisagardatta mean by the following?
> "...the unconscious dissolves when brought into
> the conscious.
> The dissolution of the unconscious releases energy;
> the mind feels adequate and becomes quiet."
one brings all things to I AM
> and this?
> 16. "By elminating the intervals of inadvertance
> during the waking hours you will gradually eliminate
> the long interval of absent-mindedness,
> which you call sleep.
> You will be aware that you are asleep."
attending to I AM at all times, in time one will be only attending to I AM;
there will be no gap.
> and this?
> "Since it is awareness that makes
> consciousness possible, there is awareness in every
> state of consciousness. Therefore, the very
> consciousness of being conscious is already a
> movement in awareness. Interest in your stream of consciousness takes you
> to awareness..."
replace awareness with 'the absolute' and consciousness with 'I AM'.
Jerry on Papaji:
> "If one is not a holy person, one is not worthy to receive the real
show me one unholy thing.
> A person in this state is like a fake coin.
> It may look like the real thing.
> It can be passed around and used by ignorant people
> who use it to buy things with ..."
there cannot be real and fake coins. Papaji, for his own reasons, is speaking
from a certain point of view. All speakers speak from different aspects; no
one is all right or all wrong.
Feel free to ask as many questions as you want. It'll keep you busy while
waiting for the answer which no one give, but which you become. You --
everything -- becomes the answer.
Why do people do what they do? Teach or whatever? The doing is simply done.
They would say nothing is done, it only appears to you that something is done.
Guru Ratings List:
Is affirmation truly marvelous, or is it of the same "ilk" as denial?
My opinion is: :o) that affirmation makes both the giver and receiver feel
good...it is as rewarding to give praise to people and truly mean it, as it
is to get it, sort of a double gift, bringing people closer. Denial means
pain for both the receiver and the giver. Now...what if Sarlo had said just
the opposite...and meant it? Greg would feel bad, Sarlo would have already
felt bad to make the statement in the first place...ergo, separation and
So perhaps the concept of both is the same, but the results of both are
different...except: when the statement is made in sarcasm, or when the
receiver hates to be praised...and that is a 'nuther whole email.
Affirmation IS of the same ilk as denial, but the question of marvelous is
independent. Denial can be marvelous or not, as can affirmation. Sri Greg's
affirmation is noted as marvelous because his willingness to support others
on their chosen journeys is almost superhuman. Even when someone's chosen
path is on the face of it idiotic, Greg consistently demonstrates his faith
in the wisdom of All-That-Exists by supporting those upon whom he bestows his
benediction to Carry On, to trust their Inner Guidance, to listen to that
still small voice, though the hounds around are howling "Idiot!" Greg
understands profoundly the IAMness of all.
It is true what you say Sarlo-ji of Sri Greg-Ji. He is one of the rarest
gems one can come across. Words fail to do justice to his generosity and his
gifts and talents that he shares in abundance with all that he comes across.
It is truly our good fortune to know Greg-ji and be in his smiling and
radiant Presence which beams through his being as Being.
> Affirmation IS of the same ilk as denial, but the question of
> marvelous is independent. Denial can be marvelous or not, as can
Excellent point. I guess I was confused by the term 'marvelous
> Sri Greg's affirmation is noted as marvelous because his
> willingness to support others on their chosen journeys is almost
Perhaps because he recognizes that ultimately "the path chooses us,"
not the other way around.
> Even when someone's chosen path is on the face of it idiotic, Greg
> consistently demonstrates his faith in the wisdom of All-That-
> Exists by supporting those upon whom he bestows his benediction to
> Carry On,
This is something I usually miss, the 'consistent' behaviors of
others. Generally approaching every message like it was the first
I've ever read by them. I don't know why.
Can you guess who said this?
Can you guess who gave the following (excerpt from) a speech below? I'll
wait for a few guesses, then I'll reveal who the speaker is. Email me if
you're really curious (coresite@...).
Hint - it wasn't Gandhi.
I'm willing to bet someone will get it, or get close at least... :-)
A worn-out and obsolete world order will not be capable of saving humanity
and creating the natural conditions indispensable for a dignified and decent
life on the planet. Real equality of opportunity and genuine justice for all
human beings of every nation, ethnic group, culture and religion cannot
continue to be put off in any corner of the world. This is not an ideological
matter; it has become a matter of life and death for the human species.
(...) The first symptoms of crisis are already visible, and that crisis
will be even more profound to the extent that the real economy is
transformed into a speculative economy, encompassing most of the financial
operations taking place in the world every day.
The conflicts between centers of economic power will increase, and the fight
for markets will be fiercer. The usual objectives of any system of production
have been turned upside down: the economy does not function and grow to
create goods and services; goods and services are consumed to make the
economy function and grow.
Nevertheless, there is not the slightest indication that those who control
the bulk of the world’s power and resources are capable of understanding this
reality, and even if they did understand it, t