Thursday, April 28, 2011

Karma

But the question is what duty has been assigned to human beings ?That can be our karma or "swabhav"?

In all the above one thread is common which is "the power of non-discrimination" i.e. none of them discriminate. Here by non-discrimination I mean "engaged in doing of the assigned duty irrespective of the result". This is an inherent quality of all animate and inanimate(including our body) things. In a sense this is the basic quality of the whole universe. Only the human mind has the quality of discrimination. Accordingly it implies that our karma(assigned duty) is not different from other units of the nature. Only thing has to happen is that a shift in attitude of mind i.e. from "discriminating to non-discriminating". Then we can be said to be established in our karma (swabhava). Beauty is that we are already established in that as there is no way out, but only thing is that we are not aware of that state . It means finally "Awareness" has to be there or "Awareness is the Key".

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

mind interested outside

Why the mind is interested in outside (including fiction/imagination) ?

Simply because it is made of outside stuff,hence it gets energy from its source(outside) to survive.

In "FACTS"(understood/clarity) it gets hardly some energy which is not sufficient for its luxurious survival.

Mind's interest

The mind is never interested in facts. It is always interested in something unknown and unknowable. In the unknown generally the scientists' (intelligent people) are interested so that a part of unknown can be brought under the purview of known. The rest (majority 99.99%) are interested in unknowable (fictions /imaginations) due to a no. factors continuously working. They will do so till awareness raises its head.

Karma Explained

Karma is neither a theory nor an unfounded concept. It is a concept representing the actual state of affairs felt/realised in a certain state of a human consciousness. That realisation is "EVERYTHING IS JUST HAPPENING."

Let me explain.

What is the karma of a tree?
What is the karma of the rock?
What is the karma of sun?
What is the karma of Earth?
What is the karma of other stellar bodies in the universe?
What is the karma of water?
What is the karma of fire?
What is the karma of space?
What is the karma of heart,kidney,lung,glands,etc. internal body parts?
What is the karma of soil?
What is the karma of chair,table,car,airplane,etc. all man made things?
What is the karma of all the creatures?
What is the karma of bacteria in our gut system and on our skin?
What is the karma of brain?
What is the karma of our motor organs?
What is the karma of mind,ego,desires and all related phenomenon?

Does the above list not cover whole of the universe except ""the awareness presence or our understanding""?

Can any one of them (whether man made or naturally occurring) go against their "nature or swabhav" (the duty assigned to them). Here nature means inherent qualities in relation to inside or outside of it and the word swabhav is true representative of the qualities. The duty assigned means the purpose for which they are made.

Is any of the above doing its assigned duty with a feeling of doership?

Hence Karma means the duty assigned and being done without a feeling of doership.

The above facts clearly show that karma, if at all it is construed as action, is a happening in which the question of expectation of fruits does not arise at all as there is no feeling of doership there in any of the case listed above.

If the above facts somehow is felt/realised/understood by just being """AWARE of what is happening""" does one not come to realise that "EVERYTHING IS JUST HAPPENING."

Why Watch and Roll Royces

Once Osho was asked why do you wear a watch worth Rs. 55 lakh and why do you have 93 Rolls Royes as such things do not match or are not in conformity with what is said about an enlightened soul or sage ? Osho in reply asked th...e questioner "Why and how have you come to this place, Pune ?" The visitor replied" I read your books and listened your discources. I felt I have found my Guru, therefore I am here." Then Osho said "Then why are you showing interest in watch and cars? This simply shows that your mind still has more attraction towards the object of desire compared to what I am saying. Why cannot you see that your mind is making you fool." The visitor was ashamed of his questions. Osho has beautifully explained all these things. He said " I don't need the watch as time is immaterial for me. I don't need so many cars or for that matter a single car( as the distance between his residence and the place where discources were held was hardly 2 minutes walk)." He has explained that by keeping such objects of desire with him he was able to screen unwanted persons coming and residing in the Ashram. He wanted his own people i.e those who were interested in what he was trying to share with them. He was interested in attracting intelligent people who could understand him i.e. people who were not interested in superficial behaviours like how he talks,what he speaks,what he eats, etc. Intelligent people, according to him, are those people who can "understand/imagine/conceive" the "background/context" from various angles of what he was sharing. Who can find out something positive even from something which appears to be negative on superficial level, for the benefit of his/her upliftment towards self-realisation. For all these qualities Osho has used term "Reading in between the word/lines". Nisargadatta Maharaj's all discources are simply firing one. He and his Guru used to smoke. We cannot understand the Masters' way of working as they are totally unpredictable, as they are true representative of life as such. Prediction can be made only in the case of dead thing. We should be interested in what we are looking for from that person, not in what other things he has in his possesion. This is the root cause why we generally fail is our approach. I don't find any contradiction in sayings of various Masters I have read.

U.G. Mystique Of Enlightenment

If books could teach people anything, the world would be a paradise.

Technical matters, yes -- how to fix a tape-recorder and so on -- but books on matters like this have no value.

I don't know whether there is any value in this conversation or dialogue.

But I want to make it very clear that there is no movement: you are not going to move from what you are.

You haven't even taken one step.

There is no need for you to take any step.



All questions are variations of the same question; they are not different questions.

How earnest are you? How serious are you? How badly do you want the answer to that question?
A question is born out of the answers that you already know.

You want to know what my state is and make it part of knowledge, your knowledge, i.e. the tradition; but knowledge must come to an end.

How can you understand this simple thing?

Your wanting to know only adds momentum to your knowledge.

It is not possible to know what this is, because knowledge is still there and is gathering momentum.

The continuity of knowledge is all you are interested in.


The search ends with the realization that there is no such thing as enlightenment. By searching, you want to be free from the self, but whatever you are doing to free yourself from the self is the self. How can I make you understand this simple thing? There is no 'how'. If I tell you that, it will only add more momentum to that (search), strengthen that momentum. That is the question of all questions: "How, how, how?"

The 'how' will remain as long as you think that the answers given by others or by me are the answers. "I have found the answer" -- they have found the answers for their questions. As long as you depend upon the answers of those people who you think are the ones to give you the answers to your questions, the questions will remain there permanently. They are not the answers; if they were, the questions would not be there. It has to be your answer.

And the answer must be found without any process. Any process takes you away from the question, waters down the question. The question becomes more and more intense in its own way. You don't want anything except the answer to that question. Nothing else. Nothing interests you any more except the answer for that question. Day in and day out, all the rest of your life, that is the only question for you -- "How?"

That 'how?' is related to the answers given by others, so you have to reject all those answers. The question has to burn itself out, and the question cannot burn itself out so long as you are waiting for an answer either from within or from without. When the question burns itself out, what is there begins to express itself. It is your answer, not anybody else's answer. You don't even have to find the answer, because the answer is already there and will somehow express itself. You don't have to be a scholar, you don't have to read books, you don't have to do anything; what is there begins to express itself.

So, do you want an answer to that question that badly?

You know, even those who spent their lives standing on their heads or hanging from the trees got nowhere -- ant-hills grew around them, and they got nowhere.

It is not that simple.

When this thing happened to me, I realized that all my search was in the wrong direction, and that this is not something religious, not something psychological, but a purely physiological functioning of the senses at their peak capacities.

That was the answer to my question.

Q: Sir, what will happen after death?



UG: All questions about death are meaningless -- and especially for a young person like you. You have not even lived your life. Why do you ask that silly question? Why are you interested in that? A person who is living has no time to ask such questions. Only a person who is not living asks "What will happen after my death?" You are not living. First live your life, and when the time comes.... Let us leave it like that. I am not interested in that kind of philosophy.

Nothing will happen. There is no such thing as death at all. What do you think will die? What? This body disintegrates into its constituent elements, so nothing is lost. If you burn it, the ashes enrich the soil and aid germination. If you bury it, the worms live on it. If you throw it into the river, it becomes food for the fishes. One form of life lives on another form of life, and so gives continuity to life. So life is immortal.


But that is not going to help anybody who is caught up in the fear of death. After all, 'death' is fear, the fear of something coming to an end. The 'you' as you know yourself, the 'you' as you experience yourself -- that 'you' does not want to come to an end. But it also knows that this body is going to drop dead as others do -- you experience the deaths of others -- so that is a frightening situation because you are not sure whether that (`you') will continue if this (body) goes. So then it projects (an afterlife). This becomes the most important thing -- to know whether there is an afterlife or not. Fear creates that, so when the fear is gone, the question of death is also gone.

You can't experience your own death. That is why I tell some of those people who are so much interested in moksha, liberation, that every one of you, all of you without exception, will attain moksha just before you die.

(Laughter) But you can be sure it is too late then: the body is in a prostrate condition and can't renew itself. That death can happen to you now -- it is a thing that happens now.

You have no way of knowing anything about your death, now or at the end of your so-called life. Unless knowledge, the continuity of knowledge, comes to an end, death cannot take place. You want to know something about death: you want to make that a part of your knowledge. But death is not something mysterious; the ending of that knowledge is death. What do you think will continue after death? What is there while you are living? Where is the entity there? There is nothing there -- no soul -- there is only this question about after death. The question has to die now to find the answer -- your answer; not my answer -- because the question is born out of the assumption, the belief, that there is something to continue after death.

Why the Theory of Karma is wrong(misunderstood) so far as time gap between the cause and effect is concerned.

A few days back I posted that somehow “’the misunderstanding of the Karma Theory”’ has happened at some point of time in past which we are still carrying considering as a valuable heavy gold chain. I also questioned “How is it possible that our past karmas affect our present birth?”


Let us try to understand collectively.

Some fundamentals will have to be considered first which will help us in understanding the matter.



1. The action/reaction is a verb and takes time so long as it’s happening goes on.

2. In contrast cause and effects are nouns and the question of time does not arise in their case.

3. Hence both(action/reaction and cause/effect) are entirely two things/phenomenon albeit always connected.

4. The action/reaction always acts as a connecting link between the cause and the effect.

5. Hence action/reaction can never be compared with cause and effect.

6. Hence the only time gap (which can be conceived of) between cause and effect is the time taken in performance/happening of action.

7. Therefore cause-action/reaction-effect exist only in continuum. This is an unbreakable natural(universal) law.

8. If the action is taken as verb then there is only action and therefore the question of existence of reaction does not arise. But in reality all actions are nothing but reactions happening in response to outer/inner stimuli. Hence the actions include the reactions and the reactions include the actions.



In the objective world ,where the feeling of separateness is the truth prevails, the only way is positive way to proceed in discovering something unknown(not unknowable).

In other words we have to look forward(sense organs have to focus outside, the body is also outside) when we try to find out something unknown(not unknowable) and go on verifying the results in reference to the established/known principles.

Therefore on the road map of discovering something in the world(including our own body) the cause (thoughts) comes first then the result connected with the required action i.e. there will be time gap between them(cause and effect) in which the process of the action happens (or time taken in happening of action).

This discovery is from subtle (which we are and not perceivable by sense organs) to the gross(perceivable by sense organs).

The pattern seen will be “cause-action-effect” .

Hence from this point of view there should not be any time gap between our cause(deeds) and the results(fruits).

Hence the prevalent understanding of Karma Theory somehow appears to be wrong.

The Effect Always Precedes Cause In Spiritualism

The Effect Always Precedes Cause In Spiritualism

But in spiritual journey where the direction on road-map gets reversed i.e. when we start from gross to subtle in order to “find out”( This is a tricky word which basically represents “forgetting of all which have been known till date” or “unfolding/de-conditioning/winding the film roll which was being shown on the screen”) ourselves, the positive laws/ principles/ methods/ practices being followed while moving in other direction, don’t come as any help to us .

That is why NETI-NETI of Upanishadic method becomes important.

Here, the pattern “cause-action-effect” which was seen earlier will be seen as totally reversed i.e. “effect will be visible first then the cause”.

And there will not be any time gap between them(effect and cause) due to “inaction(just witnessing presence)” and the pattern “effect-inaction-cause” will come into the picture.

Hence we have to go on discarding everything we have known till date by way of our effort/action .

In the end when nothing “remains/comes out/visible” to be discarded, what remains are we which is unknowable which not even subtle because the subtle and gross are two facets of the same coin.

This, “Who Am I ?”, method of questioning employed is the method propounded by Guru Vashishtha(to Ram –as per Yoga Vashishtha) and in modern world by Shri Ramana Maharshi.

In view of the above it can concluded that in fact result (effect) is already present before the so called action (basically inaction) happens.

The effect(outer state) is just a reflection of cause (inner state) which is already there. ""Hence effect precedes the cause"".

That is why it is said that "you can give only what you have or you cannot give what you don't have."

Example- If somebody's action creates unhappiness then understand that that person is already unhappy and he is just making/sharing his unhappiness with others.

Monday, April 25, 2011

Action-Reaction

As per natural law the action(cause) and reaction(effect) form a continuum. They can never be separated in time.

There cannot be any gap between happening of cause and its effect.

Then how is it possible that our past karmas affect our present birth?

Somehow I think the misunderstanding of the Kerma Theory ( the concept of "action and reaction or cause and effect" ) has happened total , otherwise the world would have been a beautiful place from the point of view of ignorants.

Satish Kumar

Satish Kumar
Truth is realisation...
When one become aware of body, Body is realised...
when one become aware of breath, breath is realised...
when one become aware of mind, mind is realised...
when one become aware of intellect, intellect is realised...
when one become aware of ego, ego is realised...
when one become aware of awareness, self is realised...
And truth of awareness is there in every stage of realisation...
Its the way of knowing or realising or directly tasting...

whereas "Belief" is believing something which one doesnot know and has not realised it...
"Belief" is like a paint on mirror, which doesnot let one realise its own relection...
Keep smiling...

HAIKU

Lonely is my way!
No one passes here but I,
late this autumn day.

Basho

Just visualize the late autumn day: soon the sunset, soon there will be multi-colors, psychedelic colors, on the horizon — a beautiful autumn day.

No one passes here but I. He is talking about his inside. No one passes here but I — lonely is my way.

Lonely is everybody’s way.

The master can only indicate, can point his finger to the moon, but you should look at the moon, not at the finger.

If you look at the finger, you miss the moon; you miss the master, his indication.

That’s what has happened to all so-called religions.

They are holding fingers: somebody the finger of Jesus, somebody the finger of Krishna, somebody the finger of Mohammed.

Nobody is looking at the moon.

And because these people themselves don’t understand, they are very joyful — “My finger is being caught by six hundred million Catholics!”

The pope is immensely happy: “Six hundred million Catholics holding my finger?”

But the question is not the finger; the question is the moon.

And the path is alone.

It is the moon within you.

The master can indicate.... I am doing it every day, indicating where to go, how to go, how much energy is needed to reach there, what kind of experiences will be happening on the path and what kind of experiences will be happening when you have reached the center of your being. I can only indicate, but you have to go.

If you don’t go, I am helpless.

Osho

Nisargadatta Maharaj

Start with the body.

From the body you get the knowledge ‘I am’.

In this process you become more and more subtle.

When you are in a position to witness the knowledge ‘I am’, you have reached the highest.

In this way you must try to understand, and the seeds of knowledge will sprout in you.

Q: What is meditation?

Q: What is meditation?

Kiran: See, the meditation is the most misunderstood concept.

When we ask this question, “What is meditation?” the question itself, when somebody asks, is coming from some answers that they already have.

Because they have heard about many kinds of meditations, like so many masters are asking people to do different kinds of meditations, different kinds of meditation’s techniques, like Maharashi Mahesh Yogi, teaches Transcendental Meditation ( T M ), Osho taught Dynamic Meditation, Kundalini Meditation, Nadabrahma Meditation and there are lots of meditations, in our ancient practices of meditation, they have 108 techniques of meditation.

So, people are asking from that understanding or, misunderstanding, the word meditation as a technique, as something to do.

And also the masters are also telling people to do something as a meditation.

So, that is why I am saying that this is the most misunderstood word or concept.

Doing meditation as a technique, is one thing and, meditation as a real sense, is another thing.

They have a different understanding.

When we use this word meditation, meditation in a real meaning is a meditative state, which is our nature state.

That, which is our natural state cannot be brought through any technique or any effort, or anything that you do.

It is there already, but it has been hidden, or it has been suppressed because of something, and that something is the mind.

When there is a mind, we loose this meditative state, that natural state that we have. What is this natural state inside?

It is the harmony of the life force, which is flowing through us.

When it is in harmony with the life force, which is also flowing around us, when there is a harmony between the inside and the outside of the same life force, when it becomes one, when the tuning happens, that oneness state, when it happens, not through any doing, when it happens, when you are not doing to bring it about, but when you are relaxed, it happens.

When it happens, you are already into the meditative state, the state of oneness, within and without.

So, that state of oneness is a meditative state, which is our natural state.

What we understand as a meditation, or what we misunderstand as a meditation, is something that we can bring this oneness or this natural state, through some technique or through some effort.

And all the masters in the past and in the present, have tried to find out some technique or some method, where they think that, by doing these techniques, we will come to that state, which is our natural state, which is our meditative state.

Now, the problem is when we are doing something, the doer is the mind, and the oneness state happens when there is no mind, when there is no doer, when there is no effort, when there is no doing.

So, the state of non-doing – and I am not referring to any lazy state – the state of non-doing means the state without a doer, a state without a mind.

When it happens, then this natural state awakens by itself, it happens by itself.

That is why in Zen there is a saying that, sit silently, doing nothing, the spring comes and the grass grows by itself.

By itself means, without any effort and without doing anything, what means that there is no doer.

So, they say sit silently and do nothing.

Now this also is misunderstood as if you are trying to do nothing.

So, even when you are trying to do nothing, you are doing something.

How does we become free from doing?

You have to really understand what creates the doing, what creates the mind.

If you understand this what creates the doing, or what creates the doer, which is the mind, then you will understand how you can make this state, this meditative state, this state of oneness, this state of non-mind, happen.

Why do you do something? You tell me.

If you really look into this question, why do we do something?

Somewhere you are doing it with a purpose.

You create a purpose.

My Quotes

"Provocation" is the "best tool" ever to "awaken from slumber".

If you are feeling yourself "provoked" by any means immediately "bring your awareness" to that sacred moment and understand that an opportunity has been provided by the "UNKNOWN".

All cannot face the "nakedness" as it require "complete openness".


Today (in this moment) our family (Naked Truth) has become a family of 100 members. All are selected/uplifted/chosen/intelligent/not blind believers/totally open.

I find and you will also agree that the GOD is the poorest chap/word among all entities/words which can be used by anybody (without any qualification or intelligence), anytime, anywhere,etc. irrespective of "whether relevant or not". Although this word is revered as very "sacred" ,but in practice what is the situation you can watch yourself.


The truth affirmed by the Advaitins happens to be beyond the comprehension of the ordinary mind, but the mind of man is not the measure of reality.

- Dr.S.Radhakrishnan


One who decides to stop using the word "God", he will find himself 99.99% free from what he is trying to be free.

Confirmatiom of Enlightenment

I have read in one of the Master's sayings that

"whether the person is enlightened or not, can be confirmed by an enlightened person i.e. a real Master".

How far it (the above) is true?

I cannot even question/imagine "that" as I am not enlightened.


I am quoting exactly that he has said about confirmation of enlightenment.

""To accept our consciousness as it is without any effort to modify it,- is the correct understanding.

Such understanding is the correct understanding.

This is what is enlightenment.

This understanding is very simple.

But "'one must confirm with oneself that this is enlightenment.""

Anybody can get this confirmation with himself if he is simple and earnest.

""It can also be had from the other enlightened person.""

Anyhow it must be confirmed.

Once it is confirmed everything is over.

Then he becomes the nameless flow of life itself."""

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Your Thoughts---A Poem

Your Thoughts


With your thoughts you can open your eyes.

What you see in front of you is a function of the thoughts you nourish inside of you.

Have you ever thought about a person whom you haven't heard from in a long time, and then that person suddenly appears again in your life?

It may seem magical or supernatural but it's not.

For your thoughts did not magically cause that person to appear.

Instead, your thoughts opened you up to connect with that person who was there all the time.

There are vast expanses of reality that you have never even considered.

Your thoughts can open you up to experience all sorts of valuable and wondrous things.

Life becomes available to you to the extent that your thoughts allow.

And the quality of life that you experience is very closely connected to the quality of your thoughts.

Your thoughts are the filter through which you connect with the world where you live.

With your thoughts you can choose to experience the best of life's countless possibilities.

~Ralph Marston~

U.G. ON RAMAN MAHARSHI

U.G. ON RAMAN MAHARSHI

You see, the animal becomes a flower. That seems to be the purpose -- if at all there is any purpose in Nature, I don't know. You see, there are so many flowers there -- look at them! Each flower is unique in its own way.

Nature's purpose seems to be (I cannot make any definitive statement) to create flowers like that, human flowers like that.

We have only a handful of flowers, which you can count on your fingers: Ramana Maharshi in recent times, Sri Ramakrishna, some other people.

Not the claimants we have in our midst today, not the gurus -- I am not talking about them.

It is amazing -- that man who sat there at Tiruvannamalai -- his impact on the West is much more than all these gurus put together -- very strange, you understand?

He has had a tremendous impact on the totality of human consciousness -- that man living in one corner, you understand?

I visited an industrialist in Paris. He is not at all interested in religious matters, much less in India; he is anti-Indian.

(Laughs) So, I saw his photo there -- "Why do you have this photo?"

He said "I like the face. I don't know anything about him. I'm not even interested in reading his books. I like the photo, so it's there. I'm not interested in anything about him."

Maybe such an individual can (I can't say 'can') help himself and help the world. Maybe.

A Coversation beween Me and One of my Friends Via Messages

A Coversation beween Me and One of my Friend Via Messages

Nisarga Raman

All the expressions of truth are not truth but are “about” truth and may be true for those who have known, but not for us who have not come to the knowing.

But the sad part is that we always cling to those expressions and go on repeating as if they are expressions of our knowing.

One can start only from where he is . It means if duality is his experience (which is true) at this moment, he should first accept this fact with conviction.

Then he should explore this duality (with the help of mind which is the only instrument available for any search) in small things being faced in day to day life.

He should try to find out whether this duality is true or not?

He should not start with finding the so called non-dual nature which is unknown to him.

Let not the belief or faith come into the way because they are hindrances in revelation of Truth which will be a happening.

Repetition of abstract quotations about truth is just a mental entertainment.

My friend’s Reply---

Without belief and faith, nothing is achievable-in either science or meta science. Faith is the ingredient of which each person is made of.

He cannot deny his own raw material.

The scientist has faith in his thought and idea which is yet unproved.

That's what makes him continue and prove it right in the long run!(or else he will not pursue it at all).

He somehow knows he is right. Who tells him that?

But anyway, here we are comparing apples and oranges. We cannot compare the subjective science with an objective science. We can't even compare two different objective sciences like health and hygiene and physics!

After seeing the everyday dualities, the mind asks questions- how can this ever changing finite things be real? Yesterday my house was, today it is not! Tsunami took it. I used to think my house is real! What happened?

That's what makes a man hunt for something within which is real as real can be.

Mental entertainment has to be exhausted before the truth seeps in deeply.

Don't we learn the tables by heart in class 2? We do not know the arithmetic behind it then. Later we understand what is meant by 2x8=16 !Same way, discussions on the nature of reality gradually weans away this mind into a higher state of introspection- because we have seen here it has nothing more to gain.

Same world, same each day, action reaction, pain pleasure. What's new?

Nothing.

Then why not discuss something which may lead us higher? Quite logical. Being in duality one can never experience non duality.

But since we already are in duality, there is no other means than contemplating, but ultimately has to be a divine grace to lift out.

No logic can be worked out, since we are dealing in a subject which is out of the purview of logic.

Why do we assume science and logic are right and others are wrong?

Aren't we limiting our own realization by doing this?

Science is also a by-product of this same mind thought which produces a piece of Mozart music. Just a different dimension.

Stuff is same- made of ignorance and relativity.

Why do we assume the reality has to confirm to our human sense of logic?

Who gave this us this idea?

We ourselves! Isn't this human conceit?

We could be wrong. Can a thief ever catch his own crime? Hari Om

Nisarga Raman

My friend’s statement

“’Without belief and faith, nothing is achievable-in either science or meta science. Faith is the ingredient of which each person is made of.”’

Reply---I agree that up to certain stage belief and faith is required but it must comes to end after confidence comes into picture, otherwise I think no progress can be made.

There are two types of belief . Working and problematic.

One should have beliefs but knowing fully well that these are beliefs only, this I say a working beliefs. Otherwise if beliefs are treated as truth then they are problematic ones.

This applies to both science and spirituality as both are nothing but discovery.

My friend’s statement

“---how can this ever changing finite things be real?”

Reply----Your definition of real is which is not subject to changes. From the point of view of changeability yes I agree. But this change is observable as long as body exists.

My friend’s statement

"""Discussions on the nature of reality gradually weans away this mind into a higher state of introspection""'---

Reply--- I fully agree with you that the "grip/clutch of thoughts on us"(EGO) of which logic is a content goes on decreasing with the increase in awareness towards non-duality. Everything starts appearing to be happening on its own and feeling of doership also goes on weakening.

My friend’s statement

“Same world, same each day, action reaction, pain pleasure. What's new? Nothing.”

Reply--- But where is the world. In the human mind only. When you are asleep where is the world. As soon as the mind starts functioning the world appears for that person.

What is same each day . Nothing. Everything is changing.

So far as pain and pleasure are concerned they can be very easily understood by anlysing various factors with the help of mind itself. This is not a problem at all. It only appears because we have not enquired.

My friend’s statement

"Ultimately has to be a divine grace to lift out"

Reply---Very true. It simply indicates that nothing is in our hand. Everything happens. It does never mean that somebody (divine) is sitting above existing outside of us and when time comes that will lift us.

Lifting happens when somehow total openness happens in the person concerned as it happened in the case of Ramakrishna after he met his Guru Totapuri. Before that he was a complete believer and that belief was creating the problem in happening of the "inexpressible" generally known as non-dual state.

My friend’s statement

""Being in duality one can never experience non duality"---

Reply--- The non-duality can never be experienced as that is not "something" which can be made an object of experience.

Non-dual simply indicates that the feeling/knowledge of separation(duality) is illusion/false when a person somehow finds himself established in that non-dual state.

My friend’s statement

""No logic can be worked out,since we are dealing in a subject which is out of the purview of logic. ""-----

Reply----Do you have any other instrument other than the mind?

The basic operating system of mind is logic.

So as long as mind exists logic has to be there in a sane person, albeit its grip(attachment) on our actions goes on decreasing as we progress in the field of spirituality i.e. towards knowing the fact that knowledge of separation(duality) is false.

It (logic) comes to not when the understanding down upon the person that "EVERYTHING IS HAPPENING ON ITS OWN. NOTHING IS IN OUR CONTROL."

But before this happening a minimum amount of logic was remaining there, as mind existed up to that point after which understanding downed upon.

Yes for this understanding requirement of logic is no more or you can say it becomes redundant as the person does not exist in the way as he had thought about himself, before the understanding happened.

My friend’s statement

"'Why do we assume science and logic are right and 'others are wrong?"'----

Reply--As we are in the state of duality in which everything is decided by the involvement of sense organs and mind where is the question of assumption?

The science and logic are facts. Nobody can deny their existence. How can we?

Is it possible to interact without the help of mind?

Is it not a fact that this facility of interaction has been invented by scientists or you can say through their body-mind mechanism such things welled up from unknown?

By saying science is right, does not necessarily mean others are wrong. It simply means whatever others are saying has not become our truth.

That was their truth who has said so.

This principle applies in day-to-day life also in relation to various sensual experiences, forget about the so called higher experiences.

My friend’s statement

"Aren't we limiting our own realization by doing this?"

Reply--- So long as the understanding as I referred earlier has not happened with us we have no option but to talk/say/discuss/interact in a way which reflects as limiting ourselves.

Even after happening of understanding the talks of the enlightened person appears to be same from the angle of others, as there is no way out if talk is to continue with the persons who have not "known".

My friend’s statement

"Stuff is same- made of ignorance and relativity"

Reply-----Ignorance simply means that the person is not aware of the fact that "NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING WHATSOEVER AS IDEA OF DOERSHIP IS FALSE. EVERYTHING IS HAPPENING ON ITS OWN".

There is nothing wrong with the person as awareness has not welled up. He cannot be held responsible for his ignorance so long as he is not made to understand.

Yes he can be poked in order to make him awakened about the reality (IDEA OF DOERSHIP IS FALSE) by an awakened person only.

If somebody who himself is not awakened yet and tries to do so, it will have no effect. You must have read the famous story ""The Sage and the Saweet". It is like that only.

By quoting/believing others by an ignorant person has no meaning at all.

It may be a good mental entertainment. That is all.

My friend’s statement

"We could be wrong."-

Reply--- Yes we are wrong, but from the angle of that person who has understood the reality. Not from our angle as we are ignorant only.

My Friend's Reply

Yes, I do understand and agree by what you say.

It's all from which point of view we are looking at the picture.

This idea of "I" gets thinned and the idea of Divine doer ship increases in direct proportion to that.

But that should not be construed as saying that whatever we do, kill murder or loot, is a divine act!

This argument has been used by several ignorant intellectuals, not realizing that that Karmic results depend upon the individuals inner consciousness of doership and not on a general theory under which he can take false shelter.

For example a person who hires another to kill cannot say that he did not kill, it was just his idea! He would have to undergo the entire consequence of that act

Nisarga Raman

My friend’s statement

""But that should not be construed as saying that whatever we do, kill murder or loot, is a divine act! This argument has been used by several ignorant intellectuals, not realizing that that Karmic results depend upon the individuals inner consciousness of doership and not on a general theory under which he can take false shelter.""

Reply- But from the angle of the enlightened one

"nothing has ever happened, nothing is happening and nothing will ever happen" or "whatever has happened, happened for good', 'whatever is happening, is happening for good' and 'whatever will happen will happen for good".

That is what has been said in Gita by Krishna during Mahabharata.

The above is logically true also because

"NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING WHATSOEVER, AS THE IDEA OF DOERSHIP ITSELF IS FALSE/ILLUSION.

EVERYTHING IS HAPPENING ON ITS OWN."

As nobody exists question of killer and killed does not arise.

My friend’s statement

"Karma and its fruits"-

Reply-- The general understanding in common parlance of this theory is meant for masses (ignorants). This understanding was propounded just to maintain the order in the society as this was linked to supernatural /superpower God (as giver of fruit) outside us which in reality not true as per enlightened one's understanding.

But if somebody kills taking shelter of the above statement, then the action of killing itself is the proof that he is suffering/unhappy otherwise how he can kill.

He is not going to reap the fruit in future.

The fruit is already there inside.

The act of killing is just reflection of his inner state.

There is no time gap between the action and its related reaction. There is always a continuity.

In fact result (effect) is already present before the so called action (basically reaction) happens whether externally or internally is immaterial.

The action (reaction) is just a reflection of inner state which is already there. ""Hence effect precedes the cause"".

That is why it is said that "you can give only what you have or you cannot give what you don't have."

Example- If somebody's action creates unhappiness then understand that that person is already unhappy and he is just making/sharing his unhappiness with others.

If a saint goes to hell, the hell will be converted into heaven and reverse is true in case of opposite personality.

Words---Logic and Rationality

There does not exist any thought expressed or unexpressed which cannot be brought under the purview of logic and rationality.




“Whatsoever has been expressed till date”,

“whatsoever is being expressed now” and

“whatsoever will be expressed in future”

“by way/in the form” of spoken or written words,

are all in the realm of mind as they are the expressions of thoughts expressed through brain/mind structure which is the only instrument available with us.

Hence all of them irrespective of field from which they belong are subject to logic and rationalization.

There is no way out howsoever one may claim of being beyond logic.



If somebody thinks that some words/phrases/sentences (howsoever they holy/sacred may be)

said/written by/in

Masters/Guru/Gods/scriptures are beyond logic then

understand that the concerned person’s capacity to understand/comprehend is still below the threshold limit of understanding /comprehending, so far as those words/phrases/sentences are concerned.

Hence instead of resorting to rigidly believing in the those thoughts which are supposed to be beyond logic,

one should try to upgrade/uplift his own level of understanding up to the threshold limit so that after which those thoughts come into the field of logic and rationality.

All the Masters try to express the inexpressible (beyond the understanding /comprehension/perception of sense organs and mind) with the help of words (mostly metaphors/ pointers) in order to make us understand logically and rationally with the help of our mind which is fortunately or unfortunately the only tool available with us.

Hence all words are subject to logic and rationalization.


All the masters were human beings only and their minds were working just like us.

They all are expressing "about the truth" as per their own mind's conditioning (data/programmes or training of brain cells).

The only difference between their way of functioning and our way of functioning (as narrated by them only) is that in their case thoughts have lost their grip on their actions while we are in total grip/clutch of thoughts effects of which are reflected in our actions .

In other words they are detached from thoughts appearing on their screen while we are attached to them.

This is only because we are not aware about grip of thoughts while they are fully aware and due to that awareness only they have known/realized what they call freedom / salvation / moksha / kaivalya / realization / atmasakshatkar/ Gyana etc.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

OUR GREAT HERITAGE-----U.G.

OUR GREAT HERITAGE-----U.G.

Q: That doesn't mean that our heritage is false or that our values are false.

UG: What consolation is that to us? What good is that?

That's like saying "My grandfather was a very rich man, a multimillionaire: when I don't know where my next meal will come from. What is the good of telling myself all the time that my grandfather was a multimillionaire?

Likewise, India produced great saints, spiritual giants, and we don't have even one in our midst, you see -- so what is the good of repeating all the time that our heritage is so tremendous and so great, or telling ourselves, or talking about or praising the greatness of our heritage?

What good is that?

It must help this country.

So why don't you question that?

There may be something wrong with the whole business.

Why I say that is: in spite of the fact that the whole culture of India is supposed to be something extraordinary, a great culture, in spite of the fact that everybody talks of spirituality, dharma, this thing or the other, India has produced only a handful of great teachers, and they have not produced another teacher like them.

Show me another Ramanujacharya. Only one Ramanujacharya, only one Sankaracharya, and only one Madhavacharya, only one Buddha -- uh? -- only one Mahavira. They can all be counted on one's fingers.

We're not thinking in terms of these gurus, because these gurus are like the priests in the West.

India has this freedom, so everybody sets up his own tiny little shop and sells his own particular wares.

That is why you have so many gurus in India, just the way they have priests in the West.

In the West organized religion destroyed the possibility of individual growth, you see -- they destroyed every dissent, they destroyed every possibility of individuals blossoming into spiritual teachers as in India.

But luckily India had this kind of a freedom, and it threw up so many.

But in spite of all that, in spite of the fact that the whole atmosphere is religious (whatever that word means; to me the religious thing you are talking about is nothing but superstition; celebrating all these fasts, feasts, and festivals, and going to the temple is not religion, you see), those teachers have not produced another teacher.

There can't be another Buddha within the framework of Buddhism.

There can't be another Ramanujacharya within the framework of that school of thought.

They have left behind -- either they have left behind, or the followers have created -- these small, tiny, little colonies.

And so all those colonies are fighting all the time -- whether you should have the "U" nama or the "V" nama, fighting in the courts whether the elephants should have a "V" mark or a "U" mark.

The whole thing has degenerated and deteriorated into such a triviality nowadays.

So, "Is India able to produce an outstanding giant like those people?" is the question which everybody in this country should ask himself or herself -- that is number one.

Number two: Does this religion, the heritage that you are talking about, operate in the lives of the people?

And the third question is: Can it be of any help to solve the economic and political problems of this country?

My answer to all these is "No" -- to all these questions.

The Most Important (THE BASIC)

The Most Important (THE BASIC)

What came first- The body. Is there any doubt ?

The next came the training of sense organs alongwith the braincells and their synchronisation.

There is no alphabet/word/sentence as such. They are the sounds produced by the vocal cord as per training of sense organs and brain cells as mentioned above.

The alphabets/words/sentences are interpretations by the brain cells of various impulses being continuously involuntarily (nobody has control over that) fed to the brain cells.

These are all concepts used for none other than for communication purpose.

Hence whatsoever has been spoken or written on any subject till date are concepts only.

All experiences ,howsoever holy they may be , without any exception are interpretations of brain only.

Without the activities of brain cells neither anything can be experienced nor expressed as sound or written word or in any way.

Can any unconscious (brain not working normally as it should be) person express anything including the so called God-realisation / enlightenment etc. ?

The answer is Simply no.

Is it not obvious from the above facts that the normal/natural functioning of the body is the primary thing which requires our maximum attention ?

Are we doing that?

Is the body in any way interested in what has passed away or what is going to come i.e. past or future ?

Is it not living moment to moment i.e. HERE NOW ?

Does it not appear that all what we are discussing are only due to training imparted to the brain cells ?

Then who is responsible for the mess ?

Either everybody who lived in the past and gave all sorts of concepts or nobody.

Do We Really Listen ?-----U.G

Do We Really Listen ?-----U.G

Do you listen to anybody? You do not; you listen only to yourself.

When you leave the sense of hearing alone, all that is there is the vibration of the sound -- the words repeat themselves inside of you, as in an echo chamber.

This sense is functioning in just the same way with you, except that you think the words you are hearing come from outside of you.

Get this straight: You can never hear one word from anyone else, no matter how intimately you think you are in relationship with that person; you hear only your own translations, always.

They are all your words you are hearing.

All that the other person's words can possibly be to you is a noise, a vibration picked up by the ear-drum and transferred to the nerves which run to the brain. You are translating those vibrations all the time, trying to understand, because you want to get something out of what you are hearing.

That is all right for a relationship with someone on the level of "Here is some money; give me a half kilo of carrots" -- but that is the limit of your relationship, of your communication, with anybody.

When there is no translation, all languages sound the same whether or not your particular knowledge structure 'speaks' a particular language.

The only differences are in the spacing of the syllables and in the tune. Languages are melodic in different ways.

It is acquired taste that tells you that Beethoven's Ninth Symphony is more beautiful than a chorus of cats screaming; both produce equally valid sensations.

Of course some sounds can be damaging to the body, and noise levels above a certain number of decibels are hard on the nervous system and can cause deafness -- that is not what I am talking about.

But the appreciation of music, poetry and language is all culturally determined and is the product of thought.

WHY BHAKTI IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROPOSITION

WHY BHAKTI IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROPOSITION

Acting as Bhakta and being a Bhakta are two different things.

Generally what is seen is acting not being.

BHA=Bhagwan (a state of being) + akti= to be united ----means the Bhakta is one who has merged (united) with God.

After merger neither Bhakta as person nor God as an entity remains.

It is not that he does not know that there is no God separate from him. But just out of reverence towards his earlier “misunderstanding that God and he are separate”, he continues to show his love towards God, as in the first place because of “which (understanding of duality) only he knew the truth (non-dual). The story of enlightenment of Ramakrishna Paramhamsa in the presence of his Advaita guru, Totapuri is a glaring example of this state. This has also been very beautifully explained by Nisargadatta Mahraj when he was asked why he worships his Guru four times a day and on the other hand you say that it (worshiping) has no meaning.

Let two words TRUST and INNOCENCE be explained.

Trust- One has to start from having a slight bit of faith in someone or something. With the progress in sadhna a part of faith (full of doubt) gets converted into trust and this goes on decreasing and trust goes increasing. In the end faith come to an end and whatever remains is trust (without a bit of doubt). This happens because whatsoever were believed (imagined) now became his truth doe to experiences. In this state of trust the personality of Bhakta comes to an end due to merger (finding him already united) with the whole. He finds that he is in everything and everyone. The feeling of separation is no more.

Innocence---This is the original or inherent quality of nature. The body is already innocent. It cannot get out of its innocence. When mind comes into play then we say that the person is not innocent. It means loss of innocence is directly linked with the working of mind. If the mana-vachana-karma are in full synchronization in a person, he is called innocent. The starting point is the mana(thoughts) only. And the innocent person will always be open to anything. He will not follow a fixed path at all. His decision will be spontaneous.

See if the trust between the persons living as wife and husband staying together for even 50-60 years, cannot develop, do you think the trust will develop with so called imaginary God about whom you have no idea at all.

Then what to do?

The Bhakta wants to be loved by God but he does not know God.

Then how to approach the unknown God?

Here one concept will have to be brought in to understand.

The concept is “All the constituents of the creation are dear to God they are His creations."

These constituents are known to us.

Will it not be a better option to approach God through the constituents of creation only?

Yes this appears to be logical also.

Among all the constituents humans are very close to us.

Why not to start with humans?

Among humans our close relatives and others who are definitely very near to us like son, wife, husband, daughter, maid servant, servant, driver, washerman, etc.

So far as things are concerned many things are near to us which we use on daily basis. So why not to start with those thing which are in daily use like bed, cot, tooth brush, wash basin, utensils, food items, dining table, showcase, car, things in office/shops etc.

You have to simply give attention towards the animate and inanimates listed above.

This giving of attention is nothing but expressing love towards them.

What is expression of love?

This is nothing but focusing (giving attention) of consciousness (love) toward somebody/something.

This simple act of yours has tremendous inherent power(capacity) to uplift you and convert you into a true Bhakta.

All of your showering of love towards animate and inanimate pushes you towards your own Godhood nature.

Example-

1st situation-- If I express too much love towards you as we are very near to each other, but I don’t love your sons and daughters. Will you be able to love me? Will it be possible for us to remain close to each other?

2nd situation—I don’t express any love towards you, but I love your children too much. Will you stop yourself from showering your love towards me? Will you and I not come very near to each other?

In the same way if we give attention to the every constituent of the creation, which in turn makes our nature trusting irrespective of others and then we will automatically come near to God or our own Godhood/Buddhahood.

Hence the qualities of a true Bhakta are---

1) He must be of Trusting Nature irrespective of nature of the person trusted upon.

2) He must be “INNOCENT” as this is the inherent quality of UNIVRSE

3) He must be totally OPEN i.e. he must not be of discriminating nature. In other words he must be living in a state of acceptance mode. Ramakrishna Paramhamsa was a perfect example of staying in acceptance mode.

Where are these qualities visible in this scientific world ?

Now it is left to you to decide ?