suitable paths and teachers

[Guest guest]

hariH OM!namastevedic sruti states "all this, verily, is brahman." therefore,

we can make no mistake that the world that we see, experienced through the six

indriyas (senses) is in fact real; however, as we also know, there is an unreal

component within it, and this is where we have to apply viveka, to discriminate

and find out those aspects that are unreal. and such [unreal] components lie

*exclusively* within one's perception. therefore, it's how we SEE the world

that creates or not such unreal aspects.we have to bear in mind that *all*

nondual philosophies are applicable only to a point---their purpose basically

being to simplify the relative mind and its thought process [enabling one to

thus eventually become an apt receiving mechanism for the ineffable Absolute].

however, once [this certain point] is reached where the mind is sufficiently

purified, then these systems of [nondual] thinking tend to become an attachment

and therefore a trap, and this is what has to be understood at the *right*

moment in time. for there and then it needs to be released, because otherwise

the mind will continously focus on the methodology rather than the essence of

what it is attempting to "experientially" impart. and this is where the

metaphor of the finger pointing to the moon comes in, where the finger itself is

not the real but that which it is pointing to [i.e. the moon]. regarding

teachings and gurus, it's important to bear in mind that virtually *any* path is

appropriate regarding the the unique temperament of the individual in question.

where, for example, j krishnamurthi's idea that really no-one needs a guru

outside one's own Self within the Heart, needs to be respected and understood

for such individuals. this is also true of someone like u.g. krishnamurthi's

very radical approach [being appropriate for certain other personality types].

and this can be said about virtually any teacher and teaching method. from osho

to sai baba, to nisargadatta, poonjaji, gangaji, ramesh. (all of these

were/are, in my view, very effective teachers. and they all in fact are a

product of the lineage of bhagavan ramana, with the exception of osho and sai

baba [who both enthusiastically acknowledged sri ramana as well]. however, the

important thing is that we should withhold judgment of others, the path they

[evidently *must*] follow, as well as their teachers. in light of this, for

example, although itnever suited my personality type, i would never claim that

the traditional approach isn't appropriate...there are many who can truly

benefit from it. on the other hand, the unorthodox approach can also be just as

right for others. so to have judgments re the 'right' approach that [presumably

everyone] should adopt, is really delimiting and erroneous. judgments of

others, and even *more* significantly, judgments of oneself, cause unfathomable

bondage to the one harboring the judgment.that aspect of the axiom, 'mind is the

slayer of the real' especially has to do with this matter--not re discrimination

or even ideological criticism--but the reckless habit of judgment.all is

brahman's leela, perfect in its relative perfection/imperfection. realize this

and release the myriad egoic shards of contraction.in fact....don't realize this

at all!what is there to realize?Self-realization can neither be created nor

destroyed.tattvamasi!....[automatically].....

 

 

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Greg Goode <goode

>

> Why do you say that Nisargadatta and Ramesh are from

> the "lineage" of Ramana? Ramana left no successors

> in the formal way that lineages do...

 

hariH OM! gregji-

 

yes, technically i would say you're quite correct.

i couldn't think of a better word than 'lineage.'

i know it has a correspondence to parampara, whcih

has strict guidelines.

 

yes, and sri ramana couldn't have had a parampara

since he had no formal shishyas (since he thought

it irrelevant to be anyone's guru, and yet he *was*

just that!).

 

nevertheless....there were numerous individuals who

became effective advaita teachers, [including, from

what i know anayway, most of the people you cited, if

not indeed all]..

 

so, what i meant was that they were, including

nisargadatta and ramesh, significantly influenced by

ramana (even though nisargadatta was formally of the

tantric nath lineage, as you alluded to).

 

namaste,

frank

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.