[NondualitySalon] India return

[Guest guest]

> "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.

 

 

Nisargadatta was dying of cancer and still meeting with people and

giving talks. I know everybody thinks enlightened people are unaffected

by things. But it's cancer folks, combined with old age. Give the guy a

break. Also, in I Am That he talked about the I AM and rarely about what

lies beyond I Am. In later talks he spoke of what lies beyond I Am. That

would be out of respect for the growth of those who came to be with him.

Teachers change with the changing needs of their 'students'. Teachers

are only here for the needs of their students.

 

> 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.

 

>From some perspective they probably are fallacious.

 

 

> 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!

 

Nisargadatta could be wrong about everything he ever said. That being

the case -- and I hope it is -- we are left with ourselves, aren't we?

Which is where we need to be. Is that where the author is? Or is he hung

up on his intuition and Kundalini?

 

Jerry