Balsekar on Nisargadatta

[Guest guest]

from: An Interview with Ramesh Balsekar

by Anne and Darrell Newberg

 

Q: Okay. When and under what circumstances did you first meet Nisargadatta

Maharaj?

 

RB: I see, this was in November, 1978. Actually, the reason that I went in

was that I read an article in the Mountain Path , that is the Ramanasramam

official magazine. There was an article in it on Maharaj written by a lady

called Jean Dunn. And she mentioned a book called I Am That, from which she

gave extensive extracts. So I read that article, then I went and saw

Maharaj. That was about November 1978, I think. So the background is this,

the article in the Mountain Path.

 

Q: What was your initial impression of Maharaj.

 

RB: My initial impression was of a very ordinary man in ordinary clothes.

And when we started, I was more and more impressed by what was happening. I

felt very glad that Maharaj was an ordinary person in ordinary clothes,

that he was not an impressive personality and that he did not dress himself

in exotic clothes. Because if he were, I would never have known whether I

was impressed more by his physical presence and the exotic clothes or by

what he said. So, I was glad he was an ordinary man in ordinary clothes.

 

Q: And did you feel anything special in his presence?

 

RB: Yes, certainly. Whether, again I repeat, whether it was his presence or

what he said to me it made no difference, but he made a tremendous

impression. I mean, I could see that what he said was true. There was never

any question whether what he said could be untrue. I accepted it

wholeheartedly the very first time. So, what he said was exactly something

which I seemed to be looking for and not having found before.

 

Q: Was there for you a period of seeking prior to meeting Maharaj or were

you interested in spiritual life before?

 

RB: No, the seeking had started subconsciously or consciously since I was

12 or 14 years old. I had always had this feeling that this obvious

manifestation, which is obvious to the senses, is not real. I had that

deepest conviction that all this is not really real and by the same token I

also had the firmest conviction that there is nothing I could do for me or

for anybody else. So the sense of personal doership was mellow even in the

beginning. So, these two things - I had the conviction since I was 12 or 14

years old and this was and about that time I read books on Ramana Maharshi.

So my earliest inspiration was Ramana Maharshi.

 

Q: I recently read an interview with Jean Dunn, and she said that Maharaj

insisted that you all do your homework. What homework did he ask you to do?

 

RB: Nothing, nothing. As far as I am concerned, Maharaj did not ask anybody

to do any homework. He repeatedly said all that is necessary is to

understand. Understanding is all that is necessary.

 

..............

 

Q: How did you begin to translate for him?

 

RB: After about 3 or 4 months I think, Maharaj asked me to translate.

 

Q: And were you happy to do this?

 

RB: I was very happy to do it, for two reasons - one, the most important,

is that showed that he had a certain confidence in what I had understood. I

mean, he felt confident enough that my translation would be reasonably

correct, you see. And two, I was glad to be asked to do something for

Maharaj. I mean, whatever Maharaj wanted I would have done or given him

freely. There is no question.

Q: What was there in Maharaj' s teaching that you find specially unique?

 

RB: The uniqueness is that he asks you to do nothing. In fact, if somebody

asks you to do something, there must be a 'you' to do something, is it not?

And Maharaj's whole basic teaching was, " Everything that happens is a

spontaneous functioning of Totality " . So, the 'you' really does not exist,

you see. But, nonetheless, since there is a 'you', the 'you' has to be

told, " You are That " . Ultimately the understanding would be that there is

no 'you' and there is no 'That', and there is no 'me' and there is no

'That'. So there is no 'me' to become 'That'. 'That' is all there is!

'That' being Consciousness or Totality or God or whatever you call it.

 

...................

 

Q: Why did Maharaj use terminology that was somewhat different from the

accepted terminology, such as his use of 'Consciousness', the 'I am' or 'I

amness', meant to represent the relative not the Absolute state of being?

 

RB: Why not? If everybody uses the same terminology, then that terminology

is not adequate. The answer to your question would simply be that Maharaj

did not consider the existing terminology adequate for his purpose.

Therefore he found it necessary to use his own terminology. Therefore, I

keep repeating, whether you call it Consciousness or Totality or God or

Supreme Power, it makes no difference to me. So long as you understand that

there is no individual free will. So, in fact it is terminology which

causes problems.

 

Q: Did Maharaj give you any specific teaching or guidance?

 

RB: No, the same thing happened with Ramana Maharshi. He repeatedly said,

" I do not give individual teachings " . He said, " There is no one who has

received anything more than what you have, even in a whole group " . So

Maharaj, to the best of my knowledge, didn't give anybody any individual

teaching. He just talked and whatever was said was received by each person

according to the way he's been programmed and destined.