Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

azooo
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 11:57 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by azooo » Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:59 am

Quoting the interview posted above, this sentence really resonates here:
In our ignorance we are innocent, in our actions we are guilty
I also like this one from Maharaj:
I find that somehow, by shifting the focus of attention, I become the very thing I look at, and experience the kind of consciousness it has; I become the inner witness of the thing. I call this capacity of entering other focal points of consciousness, love; you may give it any name you like. Love says 'I am everything'. Wisdom says "I am nothing'. Between the two, my life flows

User avatar
rachMiel
Posts: 2483
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Pittsford

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by rachMiel » Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:30 pm

Love says 'I am everything'. Wisdom says "I am nothing'. Between the two, my life flows.
Nice. :-)
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...

goldieflower
Posts: 304
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by goldieflower » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:25 pm

"Pleasure depends on things, happiness does not. As long as we believe that we need things to make us happy, we shall also believe that in their absence we must be miserable. Mind always shapes itself according to its beliefs. Hence the importance of convincing oneself that one need not be prodded into happiness; that, on the contrary, pleasure is a distraction and a nuisance, for it merely increases the false conviction that one needs to have and do things to be happy, when in reality it is just the opposite. But why talk of happiness at all? You do not think of happiness except when you are unhappy. A man who says "Now I am happy" is between two sorrows, past and future. This happiness is mere excitement caused by relief from pain. Real happiness is utterly unselfconscious. It is best expressed negatively as: "There is nothing wrong with me, I have nothing to worry about."

goldieflower
Posts: 304
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by goldieflower » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:37 pm

"My intention to wake you up is the link [between our respective dreams]. My heart wants you awake. I see you suffer in your dream and I know that you must wake up to end your woes. When you see your dream as dream, you wake up. But in your dream itself I am not interested. Enough for me to know that you must wake up. You need not bring your dream to a definite conclusion, or make it noble, or happy, or beautiful; all you need is to realize that you are dreaming. Stop imagining, stop believing. See the contradictions, the incongruities, the falsehood and the sorrow of the human state, the need to go beyond. In dream you love some and not others. On waking up you find you are love itself, embracing all. Personal love, however intense and genuine, invariably binds; love in freedom is love of all."

goldieflower
Posts: 304
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by goldieflower » Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:23 pm

"Karma is only a store of unspent energies, of unfulfilled desires, and fears not understood. The store is being constantly replenished by new desires and fears. It need not be so for ever. Understand the root cause of your fears - estrangement from yourself; and of desires - the longing for the self, and your karma will dissolve like a dream."

azooo
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 11:57 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by azooo » Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:23 am

This one is for all new age hippies
The scriptures say that we have our ‘karma’ and our sin and that is why we are here, but this is for the ignorant masses. One who has realized the self-knowledge ‘I am’ for him these stories are of no use

goldieflower
Posts: 304
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by goldieflower » Tue Aug 14, 2012 1:24 pm

All will come as you go on. Take the first step first. All blessings come from within. Turn within. 'l am' you know. Be with it all the time you can spare, until you revert to it spontaneously. There is no simpler and easier way.

Try. One step at a time is easy. Energy flows from earnestness.

There can be progress in the preparation (sadhana). Realization is sudden. The fruit ripens slowly, but falls suddenly and without return.

In peace and silence, the skin of the "I" dissolves and the inner and the outer become one.

Keep the "I am" in the focus of awareness, remember that you are , watch yourself ceaselessly and the unconscious will flow into the conscious without any special effort on your part.

azooo
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 11:57 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by azooo » Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:21 pm

Weak desires can be removed by introspection and meditation, but strong, deep rooted ones must be fulfilled and their fruits, sweet or bitter, tasted.

User avatar
anewmirth
Posts: 665
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 1:38 am

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by anewmirth » Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:32 pm

azooo wrote:Weak desires can be removed by introspection and meditation, but strong, deep rooted ones must be fulfilled and their fruits, sweet or bitter, tasted.
I wrote: I've been trying to see if the quote resonates with me. I have respect for Nisargadatta Maharaj and have used one of his quotes before but he smoked (and sold) Indian beedi cigarettes until he died of throat cancer. Does anyone have a perspective on this quote in light of this that they'd like to share? I will continue to dwell on it to see if anything comes up though azooo. Azooo I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the quote. Maybe you could make a new thread on it?
azooo wrote:It resonated with me because somehow this was my direct experience that I realized recently. I will try to give a view on it based on examples.

If I would like to eat sushi now I can most likely sit down look at this desire and see that this is not really so. I can as well prepare a meal at home. There are many such "weak" desires that you can handle in this way.

Then you have these (deep rooted) desires like wanting lots of money,success, fame, recognition, having a partner. And no matter how much you try to "reason" with them they still reoccur in some form or another.

So you have to "go out in the world" to "get them" and experience what it is like (taste their fruit). For some time its good and also some desires are pristine so the experience is nice (sweet fruit) but in the end you realize the desire just had to run itself out so that you experience the emptiness of the external world (bitter fruit).

Observing the world you see that almost everyone is still climbing this tree trying to grab as much fruits as possible.
runstrails wrote:Nisargdatta might also have been referring to 'vasana' (subconscious desires that mostly dictate our actions). Some vasanas are very deep rooted--even evolutionary and therefore will emerge, no matter what. In fact, given that there really is no 'ego' or 'small self', then vasanas are what make the world go round, so to speak. But in the end, since everything is non-dual, even vasana are only a reflection of your true self :D.

P.S. Also, in the 70's I don't think people were very aware of the negative health implication of smoking--even the in the western world. So the 'beedi' smoking and selling was probably done as business as usual.
azooo wrote:I suppose he didn't care about smoking. I am sure I've seen a question in "I Am that" when someone asks him why he is smoking if he is enligtened but I cant recall the answer. Besides, he owned a cigarette shop and family when he met his guru.
the key master wrote:
azooo wrote:I suppose he didn't care about smoking. I am sure I've seen a question in "I Am that" when someone asks him why he is smoking if he is enligtened but I cant recall the answer. Besides, he owned a cigarette shop and family when he met his guru.
I'm pretty sure he said, the body has picked up some habits, what of it...
runstrails that is very insightful and I totally get what you're saying. azooo I also understand where you are coming from and key master thanks for coming up with NM's answer. It's so funny how it's all about your perspective on things isn't it? I find it hard to write here sometimes because I try and cover an answer from all angles but then I just paint myself into a non-dual corner and I can't think of anything that I really want to write about it anymore. So I'll take a positionality in this case for the sake of an enjoyable argument. Please understand that I don't wish to offend anyone with my playful opinion.

I have read an account of one person's visit to NM which I found to be very interesting. He finds NM to be overly brash at times and has his own explanation for various "unusual" things about him which I find very common when people are seeking gurus. God manifests in anyway that is appropriate to that person and people seem to twist things so that they still fit and become a useful teaching for them. This guy gets shunned by NM for a question that he asks and gets told to leave and then he turns that into a useful teaching from NM. He describes how he feels a very powerful spiritual aura around NM which I'm not denying. I just find it much easier to listen to and look at teachers like Ramana Maharshi and ET who have given the same kind of wonderful spiritual teachings and experiences but without any crankiness, addiction to smoking, stained clothing and at times even telling devotees to worship him like Krishna.

I spent time in Sai Baba's ashram in India for 2 months and had some very spiritual experiences and loved many of his teachings but there are all kinds of terrible scandals surrounding him including sexual misconduct with young boys and suspicious murders which devotees explain away. How much of it is true? I have no idea. Maybe it all depends on who it is that is doing the looking as to what he may or may not have done within this illusion and dealing with such a multi-dimensional character? If everyone found him to be their One Guru then the ashram couldn't function. Most of the world would be there trying to touch him. There are many very rational people that I've met and read from who have experienced very real miracles around him. And then I have seen him use magician tricks when he is supposed to be manifesting things out of thin air. Is this a teaching for me? There could be all kinds of excuses for all of this. How much of my spiritual experience at the ashram was my direct experience with my own search for Oneness as I was expecting and open to it?

So my question is from the perspective of duality (as it's very hard to argue anything from the perspective of non-duality). When does a guru's behaviour become unacceptable and when is it alright to look upon it as a personal teaching? I'm not denying that NM is a great spiritual teacher and I don't want to upset anyone here, he has some wonderful quotes. But I like the beauty in the eyes of my teacher to match the beauty of their words (Ramana Maharshi being the greatest example of this for me). If NM is telling me that there are some desires that I just need to explore in order to see how they taste and get burned by when he died from chain smoking, then from the dual perspective maybe that's going to lead me down the spiral and to the need for many more incarnations. I can't imagine ET or RM suggesting that I should just dive on in to see how badly I get burned.

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3712
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by smiileyjen101 » Sun Nov 04, 2012 2:48 am

Weak desires can be removed by introspection and meditation, but strong, deep rooted ones must be fulfilled and their fruits, sweet or bitter, tasted.
I'm not sure why, my perspective and experiences most likely, this quote resonates for me like my Granny's 'What's for you won't go by you.' and one of the beautiful pictures in the other thread illustrated and said similar.. so it's 'familiar' in that vein, for me.

If .. if, if, if, :wink: we can think in terms of energy in motion 'weak' desires are not hard set and intense in impulse, 'strong, deep rooted ones' have more 'momentum'.

It also takes me to the ancient Chinese notion of Earthly branch.. what we do/perceive within our experiences / opportunities, and Heavenly stem... the flow of eternal energy in motion emerging and interacting with us, that regardless of our choices will still arise and present themselves in our pathway to be experienced when / if we are open to them.
Mirth said: I have respect for Nisargadatta Maharaj and have used one of his quotes before but he smoked (and sold) Indian beedi cigarettes until he died of throat cancer.

Does anyone have a perspective on this quote in light of this that they'd like to share?
What I do notice here Mirth is word (energy) application. Notice you used 'have respect', 'have used' then as a qualifier held those two things to scrutiny (judging / valuing / resistance & possibly negating the previous) by adding the 'but....'

Where there's a but, there is usually a personal perspective of 'should' or 'should not', which indicates resistance to what is. This has nothing to do with NM and everything to do with how you are processing the information into your perspective.

At the 'weak desire' level it may be one of trying to 'marry' the man and the actions, intermingled with whatever the perspective is about the 'act' - in this case smoking etc

At the 'strong, deep rooted desire' level it may be more about ... I'll have to ruminate from my perspective freely here...
may be about - desiring 'order' in what is 'good' and what is 'bad'
may be about - desiring 'safety' in knowing from personal pointers and perspectives what is 'good' and what is 'bad' and who can be believed to be telling the truth
may be about - desiring understanding of what is hypocrisy - and in analysing that, one realises they are possibly being hyper critical about expression of hypocrisy - which all turns itself on itself as well.

In essence that journey is not about NM at all, its a personal journey of exploration.

Some may try to 'rationalise' it.. all from different perspectives, the only 'real' perspective is the one 'doing'.
When does a guru's behaviour become unacceptable and when is it alright to look upon it as a personal teaching?
What is a guru?

Is it not a perspective of one towards another? If one holds another to a 'station' the one doing the holding will decide what and when anything is acceptable - they are already making value judgements.

Personal teaching... hmm... the acceptance or not is in the eye and ear of the receiver, not the sender.
Personal teaching is self contained in interaction with what is.

So in a sense, what's for you won't go by you.
What you 'do' with it, is absolutely up to you, in aware ness of where your and others' response ability splits in form.


I say all this having no idea 'who' NM is/was... if I see an inspiring 'thing' ... 'who' it comes through is likely the least important factor.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com

the key master
Posts: 2078
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:23 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by the key master » Sun Nov 04, 2012 9:27 am

mirth said,
runstrails that is very insightful and I totally get what you're saying. azooo I also understand where you are coming from and key master thanks for coming up with NM's answer. It's so funny how it's all about your perspective on things isn't it? I find it hard to write here sometimes because I try and cover an answer from all angles but then I just paint myself into a non-dual corner and I can't think of anything that I really want to write about it anymore. So I'll take a positionality in this case for the sake of an enjoyable argument. Please understand that I don't wish to offend anyone with my playful opinion.

I have read an account of one person's visit to NM which I found to be very interesting. He finds NM to be overly brash at times and has his own explanation for various "unusual" things about him which I find very common when people are seeking gurus. God manifests in anyway that is appropriate to that person and people seem to twist things so that they still fit and become a useful teaching for them. This guy gets shunned by NM for a question that he asks and gets told to leave and then he turns that into a useful teaching from NM. He describes how he feels a very powerful spiritual aura around NM which I'm not denying. I just find it much easier to listen to and look at teachers like Ramana Maharshi and ET who have given the same kind of wonderful spiritual teachings and experiences but without any crankiness, addiction to smoking, stained clothing and at times even telling devotees to worship him like Krishna.
I'm not sure if niz ever told anyone to worship him, although I do think he would sometimes recommend the path of devotion, which just so happened to be a path that worked for him. Niz kept a picture of his guru in his humble abode that he acknowledged on a daily basis, a ritual he at one point admitted was completely meaningless in the grander scheme of things. Is it possible Niz had an unconscious interest in recommending that particular path, I'd say yes, absolutely possible. Do I think the path of devotion is the right path for some? Yes, I'd say that too. After all, could any path not be right? Not everyone has an interest in plumbing the inner cavities of mind, and I think Niz had a knack for spotting earnest seekers as opposed to spiritual tourists. The perfection of creation runs far deeper than the appearance of any one creation, including Niz, ET, and Maharshi. They're all just dudes who say some deeply resonant things from time to time. The reason why something resonates is cuz its true that you are the living truth, and not because you're separate from who's ever saying it.
I spent time in Sai Baba's ashram in India for 2 months and had some very spiritual experiences and loved many of his teachings but there are all kinds of terrible scandals surrounding him including sexual misconduct with young boys and suspicious murders which devotees explain away. How much of it is true? I have no idea. Maybe it all depends on who it is that is doing the looking as to what he may or may not have done within this illusion and dealing with such a multi-dimensional character? If everyone found him to be their One Guru then the ashram couldn't function. Most of the world would be there trying to touch him. There are many very rational people that I've met and read from who have experienced very real miracles around him. And then I have seen him use magician tricks when he is supposed to be manifesting things out of thin air. Is this a teaching for me? There could be all kinds of excuses for all of this. How much of my spiritual experience at the ashram was my direct experience with my own search for Oneness as I was expecting and open to it?
To say that any individuated expression could shake you awake would be a misnomer, as there really is only one thing going on and there's really only ever been one thing going on. Guru's are characters by nature, as capable of being conflicted internally about their own experience as anyone else. When you throw in the tendency for devotees to project and elevate these characters as truth realized beings, whatever unconsciousness was lurking in the shadows will come to the surface in less than flattering ways from time to time in my humble abode-like opinion. A teaching is for you if you say its for you. If there is a value in exploring any one teaching, it is to notice the limitations of it, and move on.
So my question is from the perspective of duality (as it's very hard to argue anything from the perspective of non-duality). When does a guru's behaviour become unacceptable and when is it alright to look upon it as a personal teaching? I'm not denying that NM is a great spiritual teacher and I don't want to upset anyone here, he has some wonderful quotes. But I like the beauty in the eyes of my teacher to match the beauty of their words (Ramana Maharshi being the greatest example of this for me). If NM is telling me that there are some desires that I just need to explore in order to see how they taste and get burned by when he died from chain smoking, then from the dual perspective maybe that's going to lead me down the spiral and to the need for many more incarnations. I can't imagine ET or RM suggesting that I should just dive on in to see how badly I get burned.
Well Niz also said desirelessness is bliss. And ET said that on the level of form you'll never be whole. And Maharshi said without desire, you are dead. How can we reconcile all these seemingly contradictory statements? The answer is we don't have to, which does not prevent opening a discussion on context. Truth doesn't leave us with answers, it allows us to understand the limitations of questions, what the answers can give us, and perhaps maybe, the seeing of what can never be taken away from you. On the desire front, I would look at the tendency for mind to split itself. If you want to think along a certain line, you're going to think along that line. If you want to think along a certain line and not think along that line at the same time, then there is some sort of conflict being harbored internally, something that hasn't been noticed. In the presence of resolution, is the freedom to move, think, and feel however it is you're geared up to do so. I find in the absence of unconsciousness comes the presence of a deeper connection, a love that supports life and others, which sounds fluffy, but that's just my experience, how the One is manifesting 'over here'. I like what Niz said about love and focal points of consciousness, that points very close to it for me.

Niz said,
I find that somehow, by shifting the focus of attention, I become the very thing I look at, and experience the kind of consciousness it has; I become the inner witness of the thing. I call this capacity of entering other focal points of consciousness, love; you may give it any name you like. Love says 'I am everything'. Wisdom says "I am nothing'. Between the two, my life flows
I don't however conceptualize it as a shift of attention, but an absence of focus on myself, on 'me', the absence of delusion that an idea is what i am. There is no me, no other, and you've been what you're looking at all along. Tasty stuff.

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by karmarider » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:41 pm

the key master wrote:I'm not sure if niz ever told anyone to worship him, although I do think he would sometimes recommend the path of devotion, which just so happened to be a path that worked for him. Niz kept a picture of his guru in his humble abode that he acknowledged on a daily basis, a ritual he at one point admitted was completely meaningless in the grander scheme of things. Is it possible Niz had an unconscious interest in recommending that particular path, I'd say yes, absolutely possible. Do I think the path of devotion is the right path for some? Yes, I'd say that too. After all, could any path not be right? Not everyone has an interest in plumbing the inner cavities of mind, and I think Niz had a knack for spotting earnest seekers as opposed to spiritual tourists. The perfection of creation runs far deeper than the appearance of any one creation, including Niz, ET, and Maharshi. They're all just dudes who say some deeply resonant things from time to time. The reason why something resonates is cuz its true that you are the living truth, and not because you're separate from who's ever saying it.
That's pretty much the way I see it. I recognize the path of devotion can be very effective for some--it's not for me. And all the illustrious illuminaries are resonant at various times depending where we are in our evolution. And so it seems to me only wise to see that these people are around to give us ideas.

It's possible that Nisaragadutt did have an unconscious interest in recommending devotion. But I see it differently--I see that both NM and RM were trying hard to keep the focus on the practical technique of looking at you, and both got pulled into the more spiritual and mystical stuff they say because that's what spiritual people want.
To say that any individuated expression could shake you awake would be a misnomer, as there really is only one thing going on and there's really only ever been one thing going on. Guru's are characters by nature, as capable of being conflicted internally about their own experience as anyone else. When you throw in the tendency for devotees to project and elevate these characters as truth realized beings, whatever unconsciousness was lurking in the shadows will come to the surface in less than flattering ways from time to time in my humble abode-like opinion. A teaching is for you if you say its for you. If there is a value in exploring any one teaching, it is to notice the limitations of it, and move on.
Well said. Maybe what comes up in some people is they believe that the virtues of loyalty, reverence, devotion are required.
... I don't however conceptualize it as a shift of attention, but an absence of focus on myself, on 'me', the absence of delusion that an idea is what i am. There is no me, no other, and you've been what you're looking at all along. Tasty stuff.
Which is exactly the technique that Nisargadatta (sense of I am), Ramana (what am I) and John Sherman (look at the you-ness of you) suggest. They are effective, and I feel John Sherman is the clearest about it.
Last edited by karmarider on Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by karmarider » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:50 pm

anewmirth wrote: I spent time in Sai Baba's ashram in India for 2 months and had some very spiritual experiences and loved many of his teachings but there are all kinds of terrible scandals surrounding him including sexual misconduct with young boys and suspicious murders which devotees explain away. How much of it is true? I have no idea. Maybe it all depends on who it is that is doing the looking as to what he may or may not have done within this illusion and dealing with such a multi-dimensional character?
I took my aging parents to the ashram about three years ago because they wanted to go. I stayed outside the ashram, I didn't want to stay in it, I was not enjoying the energy of blind of devotion that I felt in the ashram. I tend to believe the accusations of sexual misconduct.

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by karmarider » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:43 pm

anewmirth wrote:...When does a guru's behaviour become unacceptable and when is it alright to look upon it as a personal teaching? I'm not denying that NM is a great spiritual teacher and I don't want to upset anyone here, he has some wonderful quotes. But I like the beauty in the eyes of my teacher to match the beauty of their words (Ramana Maharshi being the greatest example of this for me). If NM is telling me that there are some desires that I just need to explore in order to see how they taste and get burned by when he died from chain smoking, then from the dual perspective maybe that's going to lead me down the spiral and to the need for many more incarnations. I can't imagine ET or RM suggesting that I should just dive on in to see how badly I get burned.
I don't see the illustrated luminaries as any different from any other human being, except that they have found freedom, and so might be able to give me ideas along those lines. What they do is acceptable or unacceptable in the same way as it is acceptable or unacceptable in anyone else.

The conflict about NM's chain smoking might be similar to the conflict people sometimes mention about ET's account balance. Whereas I do have preferences, they have nothing to do with the efficacy of the ideas I might get from them.

Good stuff, anewmirth.

the key master
Posts: 2078
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:23 pm

Re: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Post by the key master » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:13 am

kr said,
It's possible that Nisaragadutt did have an unconscious interest in recommending devotion. But I see it differently--I see that both NM and RM were trying hard to keep the focus on the practical technique of looking at you, and both got pulled into the more spiritual and mystical stuff they say because that's what spiritual people want.
I see we both agree that its possible.

I don't know too much about techniques which involve looking at you. I talk about noticing delusions until there's nothing left to notice. I don't how you get more practical than that.
Maybe what comes up in some people is they believe that the virtues of loyalty, reverence, devotion are required.
Yea I think so. And we could say that truth at all costs is being devoted to, well, something. That's the earnestness variable that no one is in control of, as Niz would say.
Which is exactly the technique that Nisargadatta (sense of I am), Ramana (what am I) and John Sherman (look at the you-ness of you) suggest. They are effective, and I feel John Sherman is the clearest about it.
When Niz was talking about love and entering into other focal points in consciousness, this wasn't the result of some technique he was using, it was the result of seeing through something that was never there to begin with, the boundaries which made it seem like he was axooly separate. You don't love someone by using a technique or entering their focal point or doing anything at all, you love in the absence of belief that you are separate, which expresses itself in the experience in God knows what way...

Post Reply