Teachings of Nisargdatta Maharaj

[Guest guest]

--- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik

wrote:

> Dear Sri Sankarraman-ji,

>

> advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman

> <shnkaran>

> wrote:

>

> >> > Apropos Chittaranjanji's kind reply to my mail,

may I he permitted to say something on the teachings

of Nisargdatta, and have the views of the respondents

elicited. Nisargdatta, according to the interpretation

of the very great scholar-saint Balsekar-What Balsekar

says finds substantiated in Mauris Frydman's work, 'I

am that',- posits a threefold approach towards the

understanding of the ultimate. Maharaj speaks of the

primordial Awareness which is not aware of itself, its

subsequent emanation being the Being, the Witness, the

sense of I Am, constituting the totality of the

manifest phenomena, and lastly the sense of

identification of the, 'I Am', with a psychosomatic

apparatus, the terminologies used by Maharaj being the

Avyakta, Vyakta and Vyakti, the last one being a

pseudo subject vis-à-vis the various objects. Maharaj

says that understanding consists in knowing the truth

that the 'I Am' is time-bound, spontaneously coming to

an end when food is denied to the body, the

individual consciousness of Knowledge reverting back

to the state of NO-Knowledge, there being no

autonomous entity having any volition to come upon the

so-called enlightenment. All one can do is to merely

abide in the state of Witness hood which is also not

the outcome of any volition. Maharaj also terms the

Witness as consciousness which is time-bound which is

the only capital available. Simultaneously, Maharaj

also says that consciousness is of food-essence, being

bereft of food consciousness coming to an end. Does

Maharaj mean by the term food-essence all the five

kosas, which are branded as unreal by Vedanta? Maharaj

seems to accept only the transcendental position, as

when anyone talks about enlightenment, karma or

rebirth, Maharaj dismisses all those ideas rather in a

feisty manner. Would any body be kind enough to

expatiate on the teachings of Maharaj which are

definitely highly profound.

With warm regards,

Sankarramn

 

 

 

 

 

FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.

http://farechase.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

> may I he permitted to say something on the teachings

> of Nisargdatta, and have the views of the respondents

> elicited...... Maharaj speaks of the

> primordial Awareness which is not aware of itself, its

> subsequent emanation being the Being, the Witness, the

> sense of I Am, constituting the totality of the

> manifest phenomena, and lastly the sense of

> identification of the, 'I Am', with a psychosomatic

> apparatus, the terminologies used by Maharaj being the

> Avyakta, Vyakta and Vyakti, the last one being a

> pseudo subject vis-à-vis the various objects. Maharaj

> says that understanding consists in knowing the truth

> that the 'I Am' is time-bound, spontaneously coming to

> an end when food is denied to the body, the

> individual consciousness of Knowledge reverting back

> to the state of NO-Knowledge, there being no

> autonomous entity having any volition to come upon the

> so-called enlightenment.

 

 

In the beginning all this was covered by Death, says the Brhdaranyaka

Upanishad. It was the undifferentiated. The undifferentiated is

avyakta. According to Shankaracharya, avyakta, the undifferentiated,

is the latent notion of duality. It is avidya and it is Death.

 

It was covered with Death. Then it thought..... the thinking is

differentiation. It is vyakta. As the differentiation of the duality

of the latent avyakta, the origin of vyakta is avyakta. It is another

form of Death.

 

It then thought 'I am' the primal thought before any other thought

came into being. The 'I am' is the differentiated thought and it

comes from vyakta, the differentiation. It is the vyakti, Death in

the guise of a witness. Posing as the witness of Death, it is Death

itself. It being there, one is said to have done Brahma hatya.

 

All the three, avyakta, vyakta and vyakti, are Death. They are

forever dying, and there is no fixity in them.

 

The vyakti is the witness of Death. It is a false witness as it is

Death and not Life. What is behind all three - avyakta, vyakta and

vyakti - is Life. In it there is no Death and therefore there is in

It no avyakta, vyakta and vyakti, which are all forms of Death.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan