Guest guest Posted March 8, 1999 Report Share Posted March 8, 1999 Harsha: I saw the following message from Barry Kauler a while back and thought it made interesting reading. Many people on other lists might find it thought provoking so I am forwarding it without any comments. "Barry Kauler" <b.kauler A very interesting and fundamental point is raised in the posting, regarding reincarnation. Ramesh is a "disciple" of Sri Nissargadatta, the latter being famous for his book "I am That". I am extremely fond of that book, but later publications show changes in his oulook. Forgive me, but he almost seems to have become slightly senile in his old age. One of those changes is that reincarnation simply does not exist. Of course we have the Advaitin viewpoint that nothing really exists, but Nissargatta did not even assign a dream reality to reincarnation. I have studied his reasons for this with extreme attention, and believe them to be fallacious. Unfortunately, Ramesh is continuing with this. Ramana Maharshi would have to be "the" authority on non-dualism, and he stated, many times, that reincarnation is a fact, though he always emphasised that it is as real as our bodies are. Poonjaji, one of the greatest disciples of Ramana Maharshi, saw all of his past lives flash before him, covering thousands of lives, but he saw it all in a second. In his last life he was a bhakta, a devottee of Krishna. However, it's not just the testimony of so many realised beings and of the Hindu scriptures, and of many cases of ordinary people remembering past lives. I have a book of Nissargatta's that are talks given when he was very old, and I also have a book of Ramesh's. Both make statements about reincarnation, but do not answer the questions logically when challenged. They are evasive. It is not the evasiveness of trying to express profound concepts that cannot be expressed, rather it is simply evasiveness, because they cannot properly justify their viewpoint. Perhaps others will not have my scalpel-like intuition, to determine faults in these people. After all, Nissargatta is a realised being, right, to he must know all the answers? Wrong. I learnt this the hard way. I'm a Jnani, my Kundalini is alive, and intuition is very strong. Perhaps this will start a lively thread of discussion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 1999 Report Share Posted March 8, 1999 At 05:37 PM 3/8/99 -0500, you wrote: >A very interesting and fundamental point is raised in the posting, >regarding reincarnation. Ramesh is a "disciple" of Sri >Nissargadatta, the latter being famous for his book "I am That". >I am extremely fond of that book, but later publications show >changes in his oulook. Forgive me, but he almost seems to >have become slightly senile in his old age. One of those changes >is that reincarnation simply does not exist. >Of course we have the Advaitin viewpoint that nothing really exists, >but Nissargatta did not even assign a dream reality to reincarnation. >I have studied his reasons for this with extreme attention, and >believe them to be fallacious. U.G. Krishnamurti has an interesting explanation for this: "Reincarnation exists for those who believe it exists. Those who believe in it will reincarnate. Those who do not believe in it will not reincarnate." That's a more or less literal "translation" filtered through this mind of what he was saying. I offer no opinion whatsoever on U.G.'s outlook, other than perhaps that I don't care whether or not reincarnation exists, I care about what is happening to me at this Now. When I die, then I'll concern myself with it :-) I've personally gone through so many stages of getting "hung up on" different aspects of nonduality, such as the Eternal Now Moment... this concept originally caused me all kinds of suffering and mental agonizing because I felt that a true "Eternal Now" would be to stand OUTSIDE of time rather than to be on a moving timeline. Then I realized something - Who cares? What difference do these dogmatic aspects of nonduality make? What is, IS. If reincarnation exists, it exists. If it does not exist, it does not exist. I believe (through faith only) that it DOES exist, but I neither dwell on it, nor care about it. Why bother to care about what happens after death, while still living? If life is lived thusly, the NOW is missed. With Love, Tim ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 1999 Report Share Posted March 8, 1999 Tim Gerchmez wrote: > >[...] > > Then I realized something - Who cares? What difference do these dogmatic > aspects of nonduality make? What is, IS. If reincarnation exists, it > exists. If it does not exist, it does not exist. I believe (through faith > only) that it DOES exist, but I neither dwell on it, nor care about it. > Why bother to care about what happens after death, while still living? If > life is lived thusly, the NOW is missed. > excellent point. yes, within the relative world, it's logical that reincarnation is a fact, so long as ego is a fact. the quest for the source of this ego eventually resolves in the destruction of conceptuality itself, including even ideas like "eternal now,absolute non-duality," or "all pervasive brahman." for, except by way of speaking, they can often represent subtler/loftier obstacles to the jnana sthithi. namaste Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.