Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Wisdom of Balsekar

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

RamanaMaharshi, Alan Jacobs

<alanadamsjacobs> wrote:

>

> Dear Jim ,

>

> You write

> >

> > Accepting the teaching as just another thought is not a danger,

it's

> > part of the process by which the understanding may start out by

> > gathering information for the mind for many many years but end in

a

> > sudden, total FELT realization and conviction that (for one

thing)

> > you are not an ego/person as you took your self to be and that

the

> > ego/person is not even real but a fictional character that you

> > created way back in eary childhood to help you cope with your

> > surroundings while covering or burying you true/real self. When

all

> > that information culminates in the sudden felt conviction and

belief

> > that you are not a someone/person, etc. you magically become what

you

> > already are and were all along. Thanks to all that intellectual

> > information, you now realize without doubt what and who you are

and

> > always were/will be. Give yourself whatever label/title you

choose -

> > God, Self, All, Me, That, This, Brahman, Love, Tao, Joy, etc. if

it

> > satisfies someone's mind/intellect but you just know beyond words

and

> > concepts what you are as -

>

> I agree with you here.Ramesh says the first step is the

intellectual understanding of his basic

> concepts{Advaita]then they will percolate down to the heart om

their own without having to do

> anything special .Ramana also says on occaisions in Talks that a

clear intellectual study of the

> teachings is a primary step.-------!

> >

> >

> > > Now spiritual practice ,which Ramesh does not deny .I have

heard

> > him say in Mumbai "if it is the

> > > will of the Source you will do spiritual practice and nothing

can

> > stop you".

> >

> > It could be said that it is the will of impersonal Consciousness

that

> > personal consciousness will do spiritual practice and nothing can

> > stop impersonal consciousness. All there is is Consciousness

>

> yes, this how Ramesh puts it.you have his phraseology to a T

> >

> >

> >

> > He himself had a long

> > > search originally inspired by Ramana ,he had a Traditional

Guru ,

> > as a Brahman , he obeyed his

> > > Guru and did the necessary Sadhanas .When he met Nisagaddatta

> > through reading about him in the

> > > Mountain Path he was led after three years to the "ultimate

> > understanding"

> > >

> > > The point about the Sadhaka is that he follows practices

prescribed

> > by his Master[in our case

> > > Bhagavan] so that we are utterly convinced that there is no

Jim or

> > Alan and there is no trace of

> > > him left.

> >

> > LOL...there will be a trace of him left so long as one functions

in

> > the world but it won't be a significant or dominant trace - it

will

> > be a phantom in the background of your real life instead of the

cruel

> > master of you as this little trace used to be....LOL.

> > When you are utterly convinced and feel the total absence of a

> > personal self that you no longer believe in, take seriously or

> > acknowledge as even existing - accept in your imagination, you

will

> > have become yourself - alone. After that, you will no longer be

a

> > seeker, Sadhaka or whatever title you used to carry - unless you

take

> > such labels for practical/social purposes such as Bhagvan,

Master,

> > Your Honor, Officer, etc.

>

> Yes once the understanding happens and the sense of personal

doership goes that will be the case.

> >

> >

> >

> > That is what Atma Vichara is designed to do ,otherwise saying

there

> > is no

> > > Alan,Jim,Michael or Gabriel could be in many cases just words.

> >

> >

> > Yet just words in many cases is the prelude to the final, sudden

> > awakening, realization and conviction or transformation, etc. So

> > just words can be an important and useful part of the process

back to

> > one's self/being/reality.

>

> Yes , providing they are progressed by some study .in effect

Balsekar's teaching is a form of Self

> enquiry into the question of personal doership and his 'Acceptance'

is synonymous with surrender

> .He has his own language .

> >

>

> > Without folks like Ramesh, Poonja, Nisargadatta, etc. it might be

> > difficult to figure our what Ramana taught and one could take the

> > Atma Vichara to be just an intellectual/verbal/conceptual method

to

> > discover what can be said but maybe never felt or realized - that

you

> > are the Self/God etc.

>

> They do help a great many people initially who then move on to read

the source of the Renaissance

> of Advaita Vedanta in modern times , Ramana Maharshi .

> >

> > Quoteing from WHO CARES by Ramesh Balsekar:

> >

> > As long as you say "I am That," the persnal "I" is a separate one

> > from the Source, and what I am saying is, there is no "I" at all -

 

> > the "I" meaning the "me." The ego does not become one with the

> > Source. The ego disappears into the Source when there is the

total

> > unconditional acceptance that there never was the ego. It is

only a

> > direct withdrawl into impersonality that is more likely to bring

> > about the startling transformation known as metanoesis, whereby

there

> > is a sudden and immediate conviction that the identitfication

with a

> > separate individual entity never did really exist and was

essintially

> > nothing but an illusion.

> >

> > Thanks for sharing your knowledge of Ramesh and his teachings as

they

> > relate to Ramana.

>

> It may interest you to know that Watkins Publishing comissioned me

to compile an anthology of

> Ramesh's Teaching .

 

Alan, I am very impressed with your Ramesh involvment. Ramesh is the

mind-body that broke my belief in my limited self with this item that

I downloaded from the web:

 

"In Self-enquiry, "Who am I?" -or-Who is there to suffer? - or - Who

wants to know? - or...., the basis is not for the "me" to ask the

question and expect to get an answer, but to FEEL the absence of any

entity, any phenomenal entity which depends for its existence on

sentience or Consciousness, and thus has no independent existence of

its own."

 

I read this many times and one morning I read it again and suddenly,

in a way I can't exactly expain, I lost my belief in this little

egoic person I always was! My little self just seemed to be unreal,

non-existant which left only me - alone. No thunder or lightening -

no angels - no bright lights - just me - alone.

 

It is called the Wisdom of Balsekar and collates his teaching under

main

> headings from A to Z .It is only from his written works -not

transcripts -these are covered by

> others.The book has been finished .Ramesh has approved it .Wayne

has written the intro .Although

> it is advertised on Amazon , it will not be distributed until nect

Summer as the Publishers want

> time to pre-sell to book shops etc.

>

 

I'd really like to communicate with you at great length about

Balsekar's teachings. I visited Wayne one time down in Redondo. My

next move is to get some tapes/cds by Ramesh but not to make him a

god or master - just to get more deeply into the teaching that is

happening through the body-mind called Ramesh Balsekar (I just love

the way he presents the teachings!). I am wondering if you have also

seen through the non-existant litte self to become who/what you are?

 

 

Respectfully,

 

 

jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Jim, you write

>

> Ramesh is the

> mind-body that broke my belief in my limited self with this item that

> I downloaded from the web:

>

> "In Self-enquiry, "Who am I?" -or-Who is there to suffer? - or - Who

> wants to know? - or...., the basis is not for the "me" to ask the

> question and expect to get an answer, but to FEEL the absence of any

> entity, any phenomenal entity which depends for its existence on

> sentience or Consciousness, and thus has no independent existence of

> its own."

>

> I read this many times and one morning I read it again and suddenly,

> in a way I can't exactly expain, I lost my belief in this little

> egoic person I always was! My little self just seemed to be unreal,

> non-existant which left only me - alone. No thunder or lightening -

> no angels - no bright lights - just me - alone.

 

This is wonderful Grace indeed !The Source or the Self finds the appropriate

teacher for you at

the right time.

 

> I'd really like to communicate with you at great length about

> Balsekar's teachings. I visited Wayne one time down in Redondo.

 

Wayne is a very warm hearted loveable man .He is also a gifted poet ,admirer of

Hafiz and with a

marvellous,sometimes outrageous, sense of humour .He drives the Advaitic

concepts of Ramesh home

in a very emphatic and clear way .He is coming to London next week end to give

talks so I will see

him .Do you participate in discussions on his website Advaita Fellowship ?

 

 

My

> next move is to get some tapes/cds by Ramesh but not to make him a

> god or master - just to get more deeply into the teaching that is

> happening through the body-mind called Ramesh Balsekar (I just love

> the way he presents the teachings!).

 

Seems a good move

 

 

I am wondering if you have also

> seen through the non-existant litte self to become who/what you are?

 

Partially - I would not claim totally .but like you I have lost my belief in him

..But he is still

hanging around waiting hopefully to be annihilated .

>

Every best wish and regards , Alan

 

 

______________________

BT Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80

http://bt..co.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RamanaMaharshi, Alan Jacobs

<alanadamsjacobs> wrote:

>

> Dear Jim, you write

> >

> > Ramesh is the

> > mind-body that broke my belief in my limited self with this item

that

> > I downloaded from the web:

> >

> > "In Self-enquiry, "Who am I?" -or-Who is there to suffer? - or -

Who

> > wants to know? - or...., the basis is not for the "me" to ask the

> > question and expect to get an answer, but to FEEL the absence of

any

> > entity, any phenomenal entity which depends for its existence on

> > sentience or Consciousness, and thus has no independent existence

of

> > its own."

> >

> > I read this many times and one morning I read it again and

suddenly,

> > in a way I can't exactly expain, I lost my belief in this little

> > egoic person I always was! My little self just seemed to be

unreal,

> > non-existant which left only me - alone. No thunder or

lightening -

> > no angels - no bright lights - just me - alone.

>

> This is wonderful Grace indeed !The Source or the Self finds the

appropriate teacher for you at

> the right time.

>

> > I'd really like to communicate with you at great length about

> > Balsekar's teachings. I visited Wayne one time down in Redondo.

>

> Wayne is a very warm hearted loveable man .He is also a gifted

poet ,admirer of Hafiz and with a

> marvellous,sometimes outrageous, sense of humour .He drives the

Advaitic concepts of Ramesh home

> in a very emphatic and clear way .He is coming to London next week

end to give talks so I will see

> him .Do you participate in discussions on his website Advaita

Fellowship ?

 

I've been over there but have found nothing so far to engage

in...might look there again though.

 

 

>

>

> My

> > next move is to get some tapes/cds by Ramesh but not to make him

a

> > god or master - just to get more deeply into the teaching that is

> > happening through the body-mind called Ramesh Balsekar (I just

love

> > the way he presents the teachings!).

>

> Seems a good move

>

>

> I am wondering if you have also

> > seen through the non-existant litte self to become who/what you

are?

>

> Partially - I would not claim totally .but like you I have lost my

belief in him .But he is still

> hanging around waiting hopefully to be annihilated .

 

I find that mine "hangs around" when I habitually or unwittingly re-

enter it. The ego, IMO, is only a seeming fact if and when I enter

it or re-animate it out of habit/unawareness. There is no ego when I

leave it or cease believing in it since the ego is and was nothing

other than me going into or becoming something I was not and am not.

To give the ego power, intelligence, motives, thinking abilities,

talents, or other faculties and features is a big mistake, IMO. It

is just us as a mistaken identity and we unconsciously give this

imagined phantom it's powers, talents and skills and then treat our

little projection as if it's real and a big trouble-maker when all

the while we are the ego! When folks say "my ego is out to get me!"

it's not true...the person mistakenly acting like an ego is out to

get themself...there is no separate ego out to get anyone...we are

the ego...LOL!

 

> >

> Every best wish and regards , Alan

>

>

My best regards to you, Alan.....

 

jim

____________________

__

> BT Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and

save £80 http://bt..co.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...