Melody/taking a deeper look.....

[Guest guest]

Dear Melody,

 

Nisargadatta, " Melody " <melody@s...> wrote:

 

<snip> (sorry for carving so much out of the message...)

 

> > The focusing of attention on " I Am " is actually a demonstration of

> > futility. It tends to encourage seeking/striving momentum to come

> > to a stop.

>

> I understand. But why do we want the " seeking/striving momentum "

> to come to a stop??? Isn't that just veiled seeking????

 

*Wanting* the momentum to end would be veiled seeking. Seeking to

end seeking is still seeking, of course.

 

Just attending to Beingness without wanting to get anything out of it

isn't veiled seeking... provided no goal is sought.

 

That said, to my knowledge Nisargadatta didn't recommend a " formal "

practice. He recommended attending to attention, remaining with the

Beingness. If one does this, it can't be with a goal in mind.

 

In a sense, the attending to Beingness *is* the end of seeking. In

attending to Beingness, the momentum slows... stops. There's no need

to " seek to " do this... I don't seek or strive to sleep at night

after going to bed, it just happens as a result of lying down in the

dark.

 

> I guess my question, restated, would be: why does Maharaj

> tell his disciples to focus on " I Am " .... if not to 'fascilitate'

> awakening.....something Ramesh says can't be done?

 

He probably did this knowing that his teachings wouldn't be of

interest unless at least a semblance of a goal was introduced. He

did recommend a 'yoga' but very informally... and never outright

stated " if you do this for so and so period of time, you'll awaken. "

 

As for Ramesh, I've always felt he presents some strange ideas in a

kind of " one size fits all " way, and seems to take words far too

seriously. I'll go to his guru, thanks :-).

 

> Well...heck. Just as I write this, these thoughts come

> to mind: His telling disciples to focus on " I AM "

> will NOT *speed up* awakening.

 

'Awakening' couldn't possibly be sped up or slowed down, because

there couldn't be a " time before awakening " and a " time after

awakening. " Awakening transcends time altogether.

 

My preferred view is that 'Awakening' is prior to 'Awakening', and

that there is no Awakening (that could be seen as a goal). Seeing

very clearly that Awakening already is -- *is* Awakening.

 

I don't have a problem with the point of view that Awakening can be

an 'event', except that this point of view almost invariably creates

seeking. " To be Awake is absolutely the end of seeking, spiritual or

worldly. " It's just seeing clearly what always and already IS.

 

> More and more this 'body mind complex' of mine is

> 'relaxing into' this concept of non-doing. And by

> being exposed first to sandeep, then Osho, then

> Ramesh and Nisargadatta, Life is unfolding

> perfectly -

 

Namaste! Even being concerned with 'Awakening' can be problematic...

it always seems to create seeking, and seeking creates the idea of a

seeker, and the whole thing gets constipated right at that point.

 

> Thanks for the discussion, Tim. :-)

 

You're welcome, thank you too...

 

Namaste,

 

Tim