|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 1:16:17 GMT -5
Truth is the state beyond concepts
Niz: To exist as a separate individual constitutes the entire problem. And all these things, the various sense caterings, all reading, search for knowledge, for pleasure, everything is related to that. Once all that subsides, there is no more problem. Then the bliss you experience is true bliss. The foregoing, however, is not a ban on activities. Do whatever you want, but never forget the reality, never forget what you really are. You are not the body, you are not the food, you are not this vital air (prana). Whatever has appeared is a state, and as such it has to go.
So long as you are firmly convinced that you are the body, whatever I am telling you is not going to be of any use to you. Because whatever knowledge we take, we take it as body-mind, since it adds to our existing store of information. We then feel we have become more knowledgeable. The fact is, I cannot describe reality to you, I cannot explain it, because it is beyond expression. So from that, everything flows; but every time I say something, I am aware that it is to be negated, “not this, not this” (neti- neti)...that is my experience. We human beings have so many pet notions, preconceived ideas. Whenever we listen to somebody whose idea tallies with ours, we agree. Otherwise, we reject. Similarly, those jnanis who state they are established in the Absolute are actually in beingness. They are known as sages. They like certain ideas, certain concepts, and they want to propagate those. But they propagate only “ideas,” and an idea is not the truth. Truth is the state beyond concepts. But the fact is that you are going all over the place...to saints and ashrams and all that, collecting knowledge in your capacity of being an “individual.” Don’t do that. Go beyond. This amassing of knowledge is not going to help you, because it is in a dream. The Ultimate Medicine: Dialogues with a Realized Master, Chapter 1 I see this as linked to what I interpret of Adya and ZD's writing about "embodiment". Also, a common experience I've read and heard about elsewhere is when someone has a profoundly deep experience or realization but then eventually "loses it". It's not something I've read very often on this forum and I think that's because of how it would immediately brand the writer as low realization status. The way that I see it linking - and this is speaking from my personal, direct, experience - is that body/mind identification goes really deep. There are all sorts of very subtle movements of body/mind that reconfirm the basis of the existential error. Everyone's different, but I can say for sure that it's quite possible to have a very convincing realization as to the nature of the ephemeral, and even after a proper informing of mind: time, space and material can conspire to weave a dream curtain, all in the subconscious. So when Niz says "convinced" .. well, that's a rather tricky and loaded word.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 1:19:37 GMT -5
Yes, I see RK's point, but then again, danger is always a two-sided coin, and the perils of the bhakti trap should be obvious. There's no escape! No solution!  Yes, valid point. But at the same time I have my doubts that bhakti is for everyone. I think it's a personality thing, in the Myers Briggs sense. Based on their personality, I just can't imagine some folks going into bhakti mode, like let's say UG.  There's also very interesting history in the West, in terms of how there were centuries where bhakti was the only game in town that was safe to play. That's a generalization, of course, but seems to my imagination to have likely applied to many an average classical, medevil or even industrial-era schmoe. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 1:22:45 GMT -5
Who is asking the questions?
Niz: The knowledge “I am” is the same in all sentient creatures, whether it be an insect, a worm or a human being, or even an avatar, the highest kind of being. I do not consider this basic consciousness in one form as being different in any way from the consciousness in another form. But in order to manifest itself, consciousness needs a base, a particular construct in which it can appear. That base can be anything, it may be any form, but the manifestation can last only so long as that particular form endures. And until that consciousness appears, there cannot be knowledge of any kind. In sum, knowledge depends on consciousness, and consciousness needs a physical matrix or form. When people first come here, I always tell them that they come with the purpose of showing off their knowledge or trying to draw me into an argument. So I am aware of that, but I am even more strongly aware of the fact that such people have not got the slightest idea what they are talking about. I call it pure ignorance. It is for this reason that I say, don’t ask any questions, don’t even start discussing, until you have listened to the talk for a while and absorbed at least some of its contents. Then you can begin asking questions. Intelligent people, extremely intelligent people, come here and ask me questions. And I answer them. So what happens? They don’t accept my replies. Why? Because they ask me from the point of view of identification with the body-mind. And I answer them from a point of view which is without such identification. So how can they understand me? How can the answers possibly tally with the questions? Who is asking the questions? It is the persons who see themselves as existing in time, with the birth of the physical body as their base point; therefore, they ask questions from that point of view. But that view is false; it is a figment of their imagination. They consider that as the truth; yet it is sheer ignorance, having no basis in reality at all. Since my talk will be beyond the scope of their understanding, some of the audience may become very upset and disturbed. They will say, it’s no use, we must finish him off. It is because of the command of my guru that I am doing this, participating in all these talks. When I go to that village, I will have to discourse about God and purity; I must take the devotional approach. But if I gave the kind of talk that I am giving here, they would not be able to understand it. I should talk on their level of understanding—God, purity, and devotion. The Ultimate Medicine: Dialogues with a Realized Master, Chapter 2 Hey, look, it's a Brown-Bear trap! |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 1:41:41 GMT -5
An advanced course in spirituality
Niz: What is that prarabdha, that destiny, you are talking about? I know of no prarabdha, no destiny. In the initial stages, in the kindergarten thinking of spirituality, I used to say that. To one who is receiving primary initiation into spirituality, for him these lessons are good enough. But not for my sadhana. For an advanced course in spirituality, I will not explain this. These concepts are rejected. If you don’t like my teachings, whatever I say, you may blame me and are free to leave here. Anybody coming here will be liquidated: he is not going to get anything. When you reach that state, the highest state, then only will you be realized, whether you are going to attain or discard. I assure you that you will attain nothing and you will realize that no attainment is required. Although consciousness is universal and the knowledge “you are,” and whatever knowledge there is, is all common, its expression through the body and the mind is individualistic; there everything is different. Therefore, the path expounded by each sage will be different; it is bound to be so. [All those several paths], they will lead to the same. Is it not that all paths lead to Delhi? The paths will be different, but the destination is the same. So you can’t compare the path or what I am expounding with somebody else’s. My guru told me, although you are realized, you will have to expound knowledge only. No siddhi powers for you. I was very eager...I thought, “I’ll get certain powers, do miracles, remove the sickness of people.” At first, I was thinking along those lines, as an initiate. But my guru told me, “Nothing of the sort for you. You have to expound knowledge only.” There were to be no powers for me. And then he also told me, “You must repeat all these bhajans three or four times a day. You have to do it.” He said, for the sake of all the ignorant people we have to do this. I do not want to take you by the traditional, conventional, tortuous ways. That is why my teachings are better liked by the foreigners, because none of this traditional, conventional thing is there. The Ultimate Medicine: Dialogues with a Realized Master, Chapter 3 This is pure gold, thanks for posting it. I wonder if people can recognize their own handwriting over the years that contradicts certain points of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2020 3:59:43 GMT -5
I see this as linked to what I interpret of Adya and ZD's writing about "embodiment". Also, a common experience I've read and heard about elsewhere is when someone has a profoundly deep experience or realization but then eventually "loses it". It's not something I've read very often on this forum and I think that's because of how it would immediately brand the writer as low realization status. The way that I see it linking - and this is speaking from my personal, direct, experience - is that body/mind identification goes really deep. There are all sorts of very subtle movements of body/mind that reconfirm the basis of the existential error. Everyone's different, but I can say for sure that it's quite possible to have a very convincing realization as to the nature of the ephemeral, and even after a proper informing of mind: time, space and material can conspire to weave a dream curtain, all in the subconscious. So when Niz says "convinced" .. well, that's a rather tricky and loaded word. While on the one hand SR is prior to mind and in that sense has nothing to do with psychology, SR doesn't happen in a vacuum either, which means there's always some kind of psychological component involved somehow. So, looking at different cases of SR, while what is realized is always exactly the same, the way it happens does seem to differ, especially when you look at the way the 'informing of mind' process unfolds. So, as Niz says, pre-SR it's not of much use, if any. Post-SR, however, that's where it can prove extremely useful, when people try to put what has happened into a conceptual framework that actually works so that they can continue to live their lives in society. I agree, what we call the SVP, goes really deep. It's not just the 'I'-thought or belief in separation. That's just the obvious, the tip of the iceberg. How deep that really goes, the integration process will show you. Unfortunately, the integration process is mostly ignored these days. To me, someone losing it (or getting lost in ego games) wouldn't automatically indicate a low realization status. That may or may not be the case. What it most likely does indicate, is a low integration status. But I think this is better explained with the concept of alignment. There are people who have had profound realizations but still get regularly lost in ego games and don't seem to be able to break that habit. And there are also people who have had no realization at all but who are basically done with any kind of ego games. The first group has resolved basic existential issues, but not yet basic psychological issues. The second group, while having not yet resolved any existential issues, has resolved most basic psychological issues. Now, which group is free from suffering? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2020 4:14:31 GMT -5
Yes, valid point. But at the same time I have my doubts that bhakti is for everyone. I think it's a personality thing, in the Myers Briggs sense. Based on their personality, I just can't imagine some folks going into bhakti mode, like let's say UG. There's also very interesting history in the West, in terms of how there were centuries where bhakti was the only game in town that was safe to play. That's a generalization, of course, but seems to my imagination to have likely applied to many an average classical, medevil or even industrial-era schmoe. I find Meister Eckhart interesting in that regard, because judging by the content of his sermons, he's basically a Jnani like Niz. But the circumstances of his time forced him to express it via bhakti means only. And it still got him into trouble. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2020 4:16:39 GMT -5
An advanced course in spirituality
Niz: What is that prarabdha, that destiny, you are talking about? I know of no prarabdha, no destiny. In the initial stages, in the kindergarten thinking of spirituality, I used to say that. To one who is receiving primary initiation into spirituality, for him these lessons are good enough. But not for my sadhana. For an advanced course in spirituality, I will not explain this. These concepts are rejected. If you don’t like my teachings, whatever I say, you may blame me and are free to leave here. Anybody coming here will be liquidated: he is not going to get anything. When you reach that state, the highest state, then only will you be realized, whether you are going to attain or discard. I assure you that you will attain nothing and you will realize that no attainment is required. Although consciousness is universal and the knowledge “you are,” and whatever knowledge there is, is all common, its expression through the body and the mind is individualistic; there everything is different. Therefore, the path expounded by each sage will be different; it is bound to be so. [All those several paths], they will lead to the same. Is it not that all paths lead to Delhi? The paths will be different, but the destination is the same. So you can’t compare the path or what I am expounding with somebody else’s. My guru told me, although you are realized, you will have to expound knowledge only. No siddhi powers for you. I was very eager...I thought, “I’ll get certain powers, do miracles, remove the sickness of people.” At first, I was thinking along those lines, as an initiate. But my guru told me, “Nothing of the sort for you. You have to expound knowledge only.” There were to be no powers for me. And then he also told me, “You must repeat all these bhajans three or four times a day. You have to do it.” He said, for the sake of all the ignorant people we have to do this. I do not want to take you by the traditional, conventional, tortuous ways. That is why my teachings are better liked by the foreigners, because none of this traditional, conventional thing is there. The Ultimate Medicine: Dialogues with a Realized Master, Chapter 3 This is pure gold, thanks for posting it. I wonder if people can recognize their own handwriting over the years that contradicts certain points of it. Yeah, really cool stuff. It does show Niz in a rather different light, doesn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2020 4:24:03 GMT -5
Parabrahman
Niz: The sweetness is the quality or nature of sugar; but that sweetness is there only so long as the sugar is present. Once the sugar has been consumed or thrown away, there is no more sweetness. So this knowledge “I am,” this consciousness, this feeling or sense of Being, is the quintessence of the body. And if that body essence is gone, this feeling, the sense of Being, will also have gone. This sense of Being cannot remain without the body, just as sweetness cannot remain without the material, which is sugar. What remains is the Original, which is unconditioned, without attributes, and without identity: that on which this temporary state of the consciousness and the three states and the three gunas have come and gone. It is called Parabrahman, the Absolute. This is my basic teaching.
Then, how does one know this, whatever remains? How does one know that there is something? Look at it this way: Now there are twenty people in this room. All twenty people leave. Then what remains is that, but someone who has left cannot understand what it is. So in that Parabrahman, which is unconditioned, without attributes, without identity—the identity comes only when there is the knowledge “I am”—so if that itself is not there, who is there to ask? This is to be understood, not by “someone” (with a body-mind identity), but it must be experienced, and in such a manner that the experiencer and the experience are one. Therefore, you become the experience. Only that way you can know, and it is not the mind that knows it; the very mind has come subsequently, after true consciousness.
If someone asks, “What is this Parabrahman like?” the answer is it is like Bombay. Don’t give me the geography of Bombay, don’t tell me about the atmosphere in Bombay, but tell me what is Bombay? Is it possible to say? You cannot. So also there is nothing you can say, this is Bombay, or this is Parabrahman. If I ask you: “Give me a handful of Bombay!” you cannot oblige. Similarly, there is no giving or taking of Parabrahman: you can only be that. In fact, the concept or the thought “I am” itself is not there. The question was: Is it like sleep? No. Sleep, as I told you, is an attribute of that which has been born. So find out, what is it that has been born. Before the birth, even the thought that I exist is not there. Go home, ponder on it. Because it is something that must unfold itself. You can’t use your brains or thought on it. The Absolute is not easy to get. All manifestation comes only from a speck of consciousness.
The Ultimate Medicine: Dialogues with a Realized Master, Chapter 3
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 14:02:42 GMT -5
There's also very interesting history in the West, in terms of how there were centuries where bhakti was the only game in town that was safe to play. That's a generalization, of course, but seems to my imagination to have likely applied to many an average classical, medevil or even industrial-era schmoe. I find Meister Eckhart interesting in that regard, because judging by the content of his sermons, he's basically a Jnani like Niz. But the circumstances of his time forced him to express it via bhakti means only. And it still got him into trouble. to read that stuff now. Thanks. ( i guess)  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 14:11:42 GMT -5
I see this as linked to what I interpret of Adya and ZD's writing about "embodiment". Also, a common experience I've read and heard about elsewhere is when someone has a profoundly deep experience or realization but then eventually "loses it". It's not something I've read very often on this forum and I think that's because of how it would immediately brand the writer as low realization status. The way that I see it linking - and this is speaking from my personal, direct, experience - is that body/mind identification goes really deep. There are all sorts of very subtle movements of body/mind that reconfirm the basis of the existential error. Everyone's different, but I can say for sure that it's quite possible to have a very convincing realization as to the nature of the ephemeral, and even after a proper informing of mind: time, space and material can conspire to weave a dream curtain, all in the subconscious. So when Niz says "convinced" .. well, that's a rather tricky and loaded word. While on the one hand SR is prior to mind and in that sense has nothing to do with psychology, SR doesn't happen in a vacuum either, which means there's always some kind of psychological component involved somehow. So, looking at different cases of SR, while what is realized is always exactly the same, the way it happens does seem to differ, especially when you look at the way the 'informing of mind' process unfolds. So, as Niz says, pre-SR it's not of much use, if any. Post-SR, however, that's where it can prove extremely useful, when people try to put what has happened into a conceptual framework that actually works so that they can continue to live their lives in society. I agree, what we call the SVP, goes really deep. It's not just the 'I'-thought or belief in separation. That's just the obvious, the tip of the iceberg. How deep that really goes, the integration process will show you. Unfortunately, the integration process is mostly ignored these days. To me, someone losing it (or getting lost in ego games) wouldn't automatically indicate a low realization status. That may or may not be the case. What it most likely does indicate, is a low integration status. But I think this is better explained with the concept of alignment. There are people who have had profound realizations but still get regularly lost in ego games and don't seem to be able to break that habit. And there are also people who have had no realization at all but who are basically done with any kind of ego games. The first group has resolved basic existential issues, but not yet basic psychological issues. The second group, while having not yet resolved any existential issues, has resolved most basic psychological issues. Now, which group is free from suffering? , on one hand, that goes directly to and is illustrated quite well by the point that SR isn't any sort of material gain. Just a modicum of self-honesty makes it obvious that there are a myriad of high-functioning SVP's that are able to achieve stuff that are out of my reach by way of their alignment. Just watch any politician speak, and think about what it would take to stand there and just talk for 20 minutes. About anything. On the other hand, suffering is ultimately subjective, and the way I put it is that pain is an inevitable aspect of life, but suffering, isn't. In objective terms, that distinction has limits that are obviously demonstrable by any one of a number of gruesome hypothetical's. But that limit, is only on the efficacy of the distinction to relate what it's pointing to. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 14:13:05 GMT -5
This is pure gold, thanks for posting it. I wonder if people can recognize their own handwriting over the years that contradicts certain points of it. Yeah, really cool stuff. It does show Niz in a rather different light, doesn't it? To be honest - and I'm genuinely not flexing here - not really.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2020 18:43:10 GMT -5
Yeah, really cool stuff. It does show Niz in a rather different light, doesn't it? To be honest - and I'm genuinely not flexing here - not really. “You must repeat all these bhajans three or four times a day. You have to do it.” ~ Was this of no surprise to you then? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2020 19:23:55 GMT -5
To be honest - and I'm genuinely not flexing here - not really. “You must repeat all these bhajans three or four times a day. You have to do it.” ~ Was this of no surprise to you then? What I'd read myself years ago in "I AM THAT" was a dialog where the questioner remarks on chanting rituals going on in his apartment. JLY posted a story a few weeks back about how Niz himself used to have a daily ritual of praying in front of and smudging photographs of saints. Niz talked about his guru and what his guru told him to do and how that effected him quite a bit, so, no, no surprise. His path had quite a bit of devotion in it, no doubt. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2020 19:27:02 GMT -5
“You must repeat all these bhajans three or four times a day. You have to do it.” ~ Was this of no surprise to you then? What I'd read myself years ago in "I AM THAT" was a dialog where the questioner remarks on chanting rituals going on in his apartment. JLY posted a story a few weeks back about how Niz himself used to have a daily ritual of praying in front of and smudging photographs of saints. Niz talked about his guru and what his guru told him to do and how that effected him quite a bit, so, no, no surprise. His path had quite a bit of devotion in it, no doubt. Ok, thanks. When you say smudging do you mean burning sage sticks? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2020 19:38:42 GMT -5
I see this as linked to what I interpret of Adya and ZD's writing about "embodiment". Also, a common experience I've read and heard about elsewhere is when someone has a profoundly deep experience or realization but then eventually "loses it". It's not something I've read very often on this forum and I think that's because of how it would immediately brand the writer as low realization status. The way that I see it linking - and this is speaking from my personal, direct, experience - is that body/mind identification goes really deep. There are all sorts of very subtle movements of body/mind that reconfirm the basis of the existential error. Everyone's different, but I can say for sure that it's quite possible to have a very convincing realization as to the nature of the ephemeral, and even after a proper informing of mind: time, space and material can conspire to weave a dream curtain, all in the subconscious. So when Niz says "convinced" .. well, that's a rather tricky and loaded word. While on the one hand SR is prior to mind and in that sense has nothing to do with psychology, SR doesn't happen in a vacuum either, which means there's always some kind of psychological component involved somehow. So, looking at different cases of SR, while what is realized is always exactly the same, the way it happens does seem to differ, especially when you look at the way the 'informing of mind' process unfolds. So, as Niz says, pre-SR it's not of much use, if any. Post-SR, however, that's where it can prove extremely useful, when people try to put what has happened into a conceptual framework that actually works so that they can continue to live their lives in society. I agree, what we call the SVP, goes really deep. It's not just the 'I'-thought or belief in separation. That's just the obvious, the tip of the iceberg. How deep that really goes, the integration process will show you. Unfortunately, the integration process is mostly ignored these days.To me, someone losing it (or getting lost in ego games) wouldn't automatically indicate a low realization status. That may or may not be the case. What it most likely does indicate, is a low integration status. But I think this is better explained with the concept of alignment. There are people who have had profound realizations but still get regularly lost in ego games and don't seem to be able to break that habit. And there are also people who have had no realization at all but who are basically done with any kind of ego games. The first group has resolved basic existential issues, but not yet basic psychological issues. The second group, while having not yet resolved any existential issues, has resolved most basic psychological issues. Now, which group is free from suffering? That may be just a temporary observation. |
|
