first & second class jnanis

[Guest guest]

Message: 11

Sun, 27 Aug 2000 07:26:29 +0200

"Miguel Angel Carrasco" <macf12

first- and second-class jnanis

 

Dear F.Maiello,

 

Your post has made me a bit confused.

You seem to distinguish between first-class jnanis,

what you call "jagatgurus (world teachers) like ramana,

sankara, vedavyasa, vasishtha, jesus, buddha, etc." on

the one hand, and on the other the "so-called

neo-vedantins" like ramesh, nisargadatta, poonjaji,

gangaji, who "are not effective gurus".

 

This baffles me. I had thought that either one is

enlightened or not. Without degrees. And once

enlightenment happens, all false ideas are dropped, as

one's mind merges with the Self. Reading you I get the

impression that you don't recognise Ramesh and

Nisargadatta as true advaita gurus. Is this so? To me

they are the two clearest teachers I've found so far.

 

You seem to prefer jagatgurus like Jesus or Buddha. I

don't like either of them, least of all the first. Out

of respect for his followers (some of whom might be

among the members of the List), I won't say the aspects

of his doctrine I can't accept. Just this: he never

said any of the things which advaita holds. He never

said that we are not our bodies. He never said that

Consciousness is all there is. He never said that we

are That. He never said that the world is an illusion.

 

The same can be said of Buddha. He never said any of

these things which are precisely the reason why I

follow Advaita and not buddhism or christianity.

 

Yet, according to you, these two are jagatgurus, while

Nisargadatta is not.

 

You leave me perplexed.

 

Miguel-Angel

 

Miguel lately I have been so silent. Noisier Colette would have loved to

have told you how excited I was to read your quote from Ramesh. I found

Frank's need for comparison also niggly. I saw insight in Ramesh's

statement. I cannot say whether it is true or not, but something in it

struck a cord for me. On an individual level it is true I think.

 

It connected me with some research on Brahman which Ruben's past post

here mentioning Atma as Seer, & Brahman as Dreamer, dreaming Seer's

reality mentioned ...

 

I actually had one night of ya know when you get cootchie with silence

... :-) While the body sleeps, intuitions may come. I felt I was

silence. An image of a bear came. I connected how bear hibernates

(sleeps) with how Brahman is dreaming this world. I rather like Animal

Medicine too. It supplements my Vedic studies naturally.

 

It is said our higher Self sends insights in dream images. Now to me

Brahman is Bear :-) haha!

 

I am actually on the Net of Jewels list at which posts Ramesh

quotes daily. I must admit I find them for the most part encouraging

disembodied enlightenment. Shunning .. even hating the body & mind. I

don't believe this leads to any transcendence or unity, 'thinking' like

that. That fragments the whole too. I do believe there is a stage though

where we do transcend attachment to them.

 

I myself feel strongly about embodied Realisation. In fact I think it's

only half way if you shun your body. That is still resistance &

separation to me.

 

Looking forward to hearing more from you,

 

One of the ladies here :-)

 

Col

[Guest guest]

Colette,

 

I'm surprised that you've found the Ramesh quotes to be encouraging "hating

the body and mind". I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just that I've never

had any such reaction to Ramesh. He's always seemed very non-ascetic to me.

(I have other problems with him - he's often too clever and glib by half -

but that's another story.)

>I am actually on the Net of Jewels list at which posts Ramesh

>quotes daily. I must admit I find them for the most part encouraging

>disembodied enlightenment. Shunning .. even hating the body & mind. I

>don't believe this leads to any transcendence or unity, 'thinking' like

>that. That fragments the whole too. I do believe there is a stage though

>where we do transcend attachment to them.

>

>I myself feel strongly about embodied Realisation. In fact I think it's

>only half way if you shun your body. That is still resistance &

>separation to me.

 

Not to mention stupid. :-)

 

Warren

[Guest guest]

Hi everyone.

 

I hope dear Frankji will not leave the list. I would miss his light if he left.

 

Big hugs (((Frank)))!

 

"Warren E. Donley" wrote:

> Colette,

>

> I'm surprised that you've found the Ramesh quotes to be encouraging "hating

> the body and mind".

 

Oh Warren hi. Perhaps I am projecting :-)

 

I know that I have heard someone on the net of jewels list talk of 'dumping'

their body &

asking how to do it & I know they believe that is the advice they are

interpreting from

advaitin teachers like Ramesh.

 

I really think we've got to be careful cause really one's own self judging self

& self abusive

thought patterns will find ways to project & latch onto wondrous advice & quotes

& even

absolute awareness ... Don't you think? What a test! Conditioned beings becoming

aware of

their absolute Nature have to face all their conditioning! Not fun! I guess it

makes for the

play. I know it cen be very exciting making breakthroughs.

 

We may have gorgeous wondrous experiences of our absolute Nature but then

afterward we will

be shown what negative beliefs lay hidden in the psyche that do adversely effect

maintaining,

or furthering union of the whole. I believe everyone has self judging belief

patterns, that

are actually quite self abusive.

> I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just that I've never

> had any such reaction to Ramesh. He's always seemed very non-ascetic to me.

> (I have other problems with him - he's often too clever and glib by half -

> but that's another story.)

 

:-) haha! Maybe he's good at catching all our projections! I must admit I find

him too

intellectual & impersonal.

 

Now I have this theory that God the absolute impersonal delights in His personal

play. Maybe

Ramesh can be quite interpersonal? but I haven't yet seen it.

 

I remember I used to feel 'angry' at Nisargadatta too .. finding him disociated

& way

impersonal .. but lately I have come across some whoppers of wondrous quotes

from Him, that

are way so wise, deep, & .. even .. personal .. I guess it just depends wherever

I am at.

 

I guess where we are at gets superimposed on whatever we read. Together we help

each other

move through clearing & loosing attachment to yukky blocks to free flow.

>

> >I am actually on the Net of Jewels list at which posts Ramesh

> >quotes daily. I must admit I find them for the most part encouraging

> >disembodied enlightenment. Shunning .. even hating the body & mind. I

> >don't believe this leads to any transcendence or unity, 'thinking' like

> >that. That fragments the whole too. I do believe there is a stage though

> >where we do transcend attachment to them.

> >

> >I myself feel strongly about embodied Realisation. In fact I think it's

> >only half way if you shun your body. That is still resistance &

> >separation to me.

>

> Not to mention stupid. :-)

>

> Warren

 

Well :-) yeah! But as this whole journey is so full of mystery & surprises isn't

it! It is a

touchy topic because yes it is true that we do need to find out we are not bound

to the body.

But it is to love it as well .. wholeness will be Self love or there's some part

left

unintegrated I believe.

 

Nice chatting,

 

Peace,

 

Col

[Guest guest]

Warren E. Donley wrote:

>

> Colette,

>

> I'm surprised that you've found the Ramesh quotes to be encouraging "hating

> the body and mind". I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just that I've never

> had any such reaction to Ramesh. He's always seemed very non-ascetic to me.

 

hi warren-

 

not according to the following quote, just

posted on the List (synchronistically)...

demonstrating what i was referring to as

selective vs world teachers..

(see also my follow-up remarks below re colette's

earlier post "we ARE God" by meister eckhart,

which bears directly on this.)

i should also emphasize that the matter of

considering the world an illusion or not,

or whether the jiva or isvara are real or not,

is clearly a matter within the vyavahara and

not paramartha, having thus no bearing on

whether someone is Self-realized or not.

i'm only trying to point out that the method

itself of advaita is the attitudinal approach

that sets up the nonduality (absolute monism)

of everything, manifest and unmanifest,

nirguna and saguna.

 

> August 29

>

>

> That man of understanding who has lost his identity as a separate

> individual remains identified with pure, infinite Consciousness

> while he continues to live out his life as an ordinary person in

> the world, knowing full well, however, that it is all an illusion.

 

___________

 

re colette's post of "we ARE God" by meister eckhart:

 

yes, colette, this conveys the very essence of

advaita; being the knowledge that everything is

ONE: God Transcendant *is* God Immanent.

 

advaitam is the fusion of virtually all there is.

there is nothing outside of the domain of brahman.

the proclamation that this world is an illusion

is not what advaita is saying at all! just the

opposite in fact! the world is an illusion--or,

more technically accurate to say, *unreal*--under

very special circumstances, having to do strictly

and *exclusively* with perception: when [the world]

or anything within it is regarded as being *apart*

from its substratum source in brahman. that's it.

period. as a matter of fact, even this mistake in

perception is *itself* part of the ineffable totality

in brahman! in other words, the mistake itself is

there for an incomprehensible purpose...fitting in

with the program of the Play (leela) as it applies

to the parameters of evolution. being ultimately

inscrutable, it's a major component in the whole

of the Mystery in/of the nature of brahman. and

this is what should never be lost sight of!

 

this is why so many philosophical riddles exist and

will *permanently* defy resolution. the problem

against coming to terms with this is the fact that

the Mind's central thrust is to discover, organize

and decipher. however, if it ever succeeded--which

is impossible--we'd wind up stripped of beauty and

wonder, sterilized in boredom ruled by the death-

card of Reason! we *subconsciously* know better.

eventually we'll know it consciously too.

 

as many erroneously postulate that nirguna brahman

is the sole reality and the world an illusion, is

in fact dualism, and is *equally* upheld by all the

traditional religious interpretations; most notably

the christian tradition (or 'churchianity' doctrine--

an accurate name for it!), that talks about this world

and everything in it including the people are nothing,

and only God is real....completely divorcing awareness

in/of this world from the pure consciousness in/of the

Godhead. however, this is critically misleading and

in fact a grave mistake. whereas the vedic injunction:

"all this is brahman" should drive the point home

clearly and definitively.

 

virtually everything is ONE, *including* the negative

polarity in the relative world, such as emotionally

charged thought waves like revulsion, fear, tragedy,

violence, and even ignorance itself! these are all

*vital* components within the spectrum of Relativity,

which is in turn the Play or leela of brahman.

 

the fact that when moksha occurs the world continues

is incompatible with the attitude of branding [the

world] as illusion. if it were so, there would be

a continuous antagonism upheld in the midst of one's

being supposedly free. an antagonism toward this

world and everything in it. no such battle thrives

after moksha.

 

the oftenheard attitude of disgust toward the functions

of the body for example is really a very specialized

observation geared to those who are staunch materialists.

therefore they need to be shaken out of their exclusively

materialistic view. however, this observational attitude

is only temporary. later it has to be abandoned to make

way for the higher teaching.

 

i used to think it was strange how people would take

up advaita with such enthusiasm without knowing what

it really was. i learned this isn't any different

however from the enthusiasm felt amongst potentially

*anyone* involving in a new spiritual approach.

in this case, where for example many Westerners take

to Eastern religions such as vedanta, buddhism or

taoism, only the face is changed...whereas the core

understanding--or lack thereof--remains. nevertheless,

whatever approach they're adopting, with whatever

attending attitude, is *vital* for their growth at

the time; has important lessons in store for them,

as per their unique place in their spiritual journey.

 

the thing is, the substratum brahman is ALWAYS with us.

in fact, **It is who and what we are**. the problem is

that we're continuously diverted by matters in and of

this world, and the problem with that is that if and

when these things occur and make us forget our source,

therin lies the illusion...therein lies the problem

that has to be conquered. however, the proverbial

'baby' (the world) is not to be thrown away with the

'bathwater' (our common mistake in allowing the world

to rob our awareness of its as well as our own source

in brahman).

 

peace,

frank

[Guest guest]

colette wrote:

> I hope dear Frankji will not leave the list. I would miss his light if he

left.

>

> Big hugs (((Frank)))!

 

 

thanks coletteji!

 

hugs to you too!

 

i decided to stay as long as i can discipline

myself to minimize the postings. as you can

see i'm off to a good start. hahaha!

 

pulling an all-nighter...doesn't really

matter though...but my family suffers from it

too, unfortunately.

 

what to do? we're all really on auto-pilot,

regardless of what we think. soooo...

 

pranaam and OM shaanthi,

frank

[Guest guest]

Warren E. Donley wrote:

>

> Hi Frank,

>

> I see what you mean about the Ramesh quote (below). My own feeling, however,

> is that Ramesh's view of Advaita is essentially the same as the one you've

> been expressing here. A particular quote taken out of context can easily

> yield a false impression. I suggest that one could, if one chose, just as

> easily take a few quotes from Ramana Maharshi out of context and create the

> false impression that he's teaching a world-denying view.

 

 

you're quite correct! in fact you could do

so...in *many* places. a cardinal error

on my part, reaching a conclusion based on

a statement taken out of context.

 

and thanks warren for your kind words.

i just cant leave our List; it's become

a home away from home for me. it's a

very special place.

 

however i must limit my postings, appreciably.

especially for the sake of my wife, who suffers

when i suffer...or we appear to. :-) as we kmow

[by now], no abiding consequence..

 

OM shaanthi

 

namaskaar,

frank

[Guest guest]

Hi Frank,

 

I see what you mean about the Ramesh quote (below). My own feeling, however,

is that Ramesh's view of Advaita is essentially the same as the one you've

been expressing here. A particular quote taken out of context can easily

yield a false impression. I suggest that one could, if one chose, just as

easily take a few quotes from Ramana Maharshi out of context and create the

false impression that he's teaching a world-denying view.

 

Let me just chime in with Colette and say that your absence would be a

tremendous loss to the list, Frank. Your writings have been as responsible

as anything for helping me to reach a truer understanding of what Advaita is

all about, and I'm very, very grateful for that. It was also through your

webpage that I first discovered Nisargadatta (and indirectly, Ramesh).

"Thank you" doesn't seem sufficient, but it will have to do.

>hi warren-

>

>not according to the following quote, just

>posted on the List (synchronistically)...

>demonstrating what i was referring to as

>selective vs world teachers..

>(see also my follow-up remarks below re colette's

>earlier post "we ARE God" by meister eckhart,

>which bears directly on this.)

>i should also emphasize that the matter of

>considering the world an illusion or not,

>or whether the jiva or isvara are real or not,

>is clearly a matter within the vyavahara and

>not paramartha, having thus no bearing on

>whether someone is Self-realized or not.

>i'm only trying to point out that the method

>itself of advaita is the attitudinal approach

>that sets up the nonduality (absolute monism)

>of everything, manifest and unmanifest,

>nirguna and saguna.

>

>

>> August 29

>>

>>

>> That man of understanding who has lost his identity as a separate

>> individual remains identified with pure, infinite Consciousness

>> while he continues to live out his life as an ordinary person in

>> the world, knowing full well, however, that it is all an illusion.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Frank-ji,

 

You have reached the HOME of homes, and nothing can be away for

you. Anywhere you dwell, in body or in words, shows us the directions

to that HOME.

 

We hope our prayers will at least alleviate your suffering, and

cheer you up by seeing us march in the direction of that home.

 

Regards,

 

sunder

 

 

 

advaitin , "f. maiello" <egodust@d...> wrote:

> i just cant leave our List; it's become

> a home away from home for me. it's a

> very special place.

>

> however i must limit my postings, appreciably.

> especially for the sake of my wife, who suffers

> when i suffer...or we appear to. :-) as we kmow

> [by now], no abiding consequence..

>

> OM shaanthi

>

> namaskaar,

> frank

[Guest guest]

Blessed Shri Frank

 

Our prayers are with you and your dear wife.

 

With Love

Yasodha

[Guest guest]

hariH OM! sunderji-

 

so beautiful!

 

yes, this is the implication of the

anrita amsha component in manifestation

as sadaji shows in his postings. as such,

the tragedies in/of the world although real

aren't real as we commonly think since they

are not things *unto themselves* but the

vast whole of brahman!

 

who am i apart from thee?

who are we apart from brahman?

 

peace.peace.peace

 

ever with you

in OM!

frank

 

________________________________

 

sunder hattangadi wrote:

> Namaste Frank-ji,

>

> You have reached the HOME of homes, and nothing can be away for

> you. Anywhere you dwell, in body or in words, shows us the directions

> to that HOME.

>

> We hope our prayers will at least alleviate your suffering, and

> cheer you up by seeing us march in the direction of that home.

>

> Regards,

>

> sunder

[Guest guest]

Sundayaso wrote:

> Blessed Shri Frank

>

> Our prayers are with you and your dear wife.

>

> With Love

> Yasodha

>

 

hariH OM! yasodhaji-

 

dhanyavaad! as we are with you.

 

love ONE,

frank