AI chat about Krishnamurti (and Advaita) and some insights into why it works for some and not others

 

I'm measured in how I use AI and take what it says with a grain of salt, noting it has limitations and is basically a piece of software that is using a limited data set.

However, sometimes it does come up with neat little summary points, and I thought this one about Krishnamurti, and why he lands/doesn't land with people at different times, was a good one. I would also add Nisargadatta into this (in place of JK) for exactly the same reasons.. and probably most Advaita teachers/teachings, especially the more contemporary types that skip the traditional preparation stages.

AI output:

Why Jiddu Krishnamurti works for some

It works only when a few conditions are already in place:

1. High native awareness
   Some people can actually observe without immediately analysing, fixing, or dissociating. For them, his pointing lands instantly.

2. Low need for psychological safety
   Krishnamurti offers zero reassurance. If you don’t need comfort, guidance, or progress markers, you can stay present with the raw fact.

3. Disillusionment with paths and techniques
   People burned out on methods, teachers, and spiritual ambition often have a clean “drop” when they hear him.

4. Strong nervous-system capacity
   Choiceless awareness means no escape from fear, pain, contradiction. If your system can tolerate intensity, insight can cut through fast.

When it works, it’s surgical. Immediate clarity. No buildup. No ladder.

---

Why it fails for most people (including very sincere ones)

This is the uncomfortable truth.

1. People mistake passivity for awareness
   They stop effort, but awareness never comes online. Result: subtle dissociation, stagnation, or spiritual bypassing.

2. Attention is too weak
   Krishnamurti assumes an ability to stay with perception. Most people can’t. So they intellectualise instead.

3. Unresolved trauma hijacks the process
   “Don’t escape fear” sounds noble — until the body floods. Without grounding, insight collapses into overwhelm.

4. The mind turns his words into ideology
   Ironically, people follow Krishnamurti by repeating “no method, no path,” which becomes another belief.

5. No developmental scaffolding
   He removes the controller before it’s functional. For many, that leads to confusion, not freedom.

---

The hard line (this matters)

Krishnamurti is not a training system.
He is a final pointing.

• If you’re not ready → nothing happens

• If you’re half-ready → frustration

• If you’re ready → collapse of illusion

No middle ground.

---

Practical truth most teachers won’t say

Most humans need capacity-building first:

• attention

• emotional regulation

• somatic stability

That’s why people often do better starting with:

• mindfulness

• somatic work

• structured inquiry

…and then Krishnamurti detonates what’s left.

---

One-sentence verdict

Krishnamurti works only when the mind is already quiet enough to hear the truth — otherwise it becomes either philosophy or paralysis.

Contemplative Comparison: ACIM Reviews & Advaita Vedanta's Path to Realization

Contemplative Comparison: ACIM Reviews & Advaita Vedanta's Path to Realization

For students of A Course in Miracles, the Review sections are vital. They're not just about rote memorisation; they're an invitation to deepen our understanding and experience. This process bears a striking resemblance to the ancient Advaita Vedanta tradition's three-fold path to self-realization: Sravana, Manana, and Nididhyasana (commonly used in Shankara-based traditions).

Sravana (Listening/Hearing): In Advaita, this is the initial exposure to the sacred texts and teachings from a qualified teacher. In ACIM's Review Section 1, we are asked to review the previously learned ideas, often doing so slowly and thoughtfully. This is our "hearing" of the truth, often for the first time in a way that truly resonates.

Manana (Reflection/Contemplation): After hearing, Advaita emphasizes deep reflection and intellectual assimilation to remove doubts. Similarly, ACIM's Review encourages us to "think about" each idea, allowing it to "sink in" and challenging any resistance or confusion that may arise. It's about letting the mind wrestle with the concept until clarity emerges and intellectual conviction takes root.

Nididhyasana (Meditation/Abiding): This is the experiential phase in Advaita, where one meditates deeply on the truths, transcending intellectual understanding to direct realization. ACIM mirrors this perfectly by instructing us to "close your eyes and practice" the ideas, allowing them to settle into our experience. It's not enough to simply understand; we are invited to be with the truth, to abide in it, allowing it to transform our perception and ultimately, our reality.

Both traditions, though culturally distinct, point to the same fundamental process: a systematic journey from initial exposure to profound, liberating realization. The ACIM Review, like Sravana, Manana, and Nididhyasana, is designed to move us beyond mere intellectual assent to an experience of the truth, guiding us home to the peace that is our natural inheritance.

📖👂⛅

'My mind is part of God’s. I am very holy.' - ACIM Lesson 35 and Self-enquiry.

 

Unveiling the True Self: ACIM Lesson 35 & the Path of Self-Enquiry

"My mind is part of God's. I am holy." This powerful affirmation from A Course in Miracles (Lesson 35) strikes a profound chord with the ancient wisdom of Advaita Vedanta, particularly the practice of self-enquiry. This lesson (35) is actually one of the closest exercises in self-enquiry that ACIM includes in the entire Workbook/Course.

Both paths (ACIM & Advaita), though seemingly different in their language and origin, converge on a fundamental truth: our suffering stems from misidentifying with a false self – the ego, the body, the ever-changing thoughts and perceptions. ACIM Lesson 35 guides us to remember our inherent 'holiness', our inseparable connection to God (or Ultimate Reality). It's a call to look beyond the ephemeral and recognize our true, eternal nature. It directs us to look both at the image we've made and use in our daily dualistic experience, and then contrast that to our timeless, eternal, unchanging natural state of Being.

Similarly, self-enquiry, as taught by sages like Ramana Maharshi, and also in some of the more direct schools on inquiry such as Zen Buddhism, encourages us to relentlessly ask "Who am I?" by turning our attention inward and disidentifying from all that we are not (the mind, the emotions, the roles we play); we gradually peel back the layers of illusion. What remains is the pure, unconditioned Self – the "I AM" that is ever-present and truly holy.

Both ACIM and Advaita offer a powerful antidote to the ego's incessant need to define itself through external validation and fleeting experiences. This is what the Course terms "image making". It also notes here that images can't see or have vision in and of themselves. Both paths invite us to sort through the clutter of the false self, to let go of the imagined image we project, and to rest in the unwavering truth of our divine essence. In this remembering, lies true peace and liberation from the ego-made self that we take ourselves to be.

📑🔖🕮

Workbook lesson official text:

 (https://acim.org/acim/en/s/437 | W-35)

Notes on Michael Langford's teachings on Awareness. Awareness watching awareness. The Most Direct Means.

 

I had been recommended Michael Langford's awareness teachings last year. I actually went though Michael Langford's awareness teachings, books, and methods probably about 15 years ago now, and credit him (and his book "The Most Direct Means to Eternal Bliss") with actually starting me on the nondual path after years on the progressive path.

So I thought to revisit ML's teachings once again, and really do a deep dive into those teachings, methods, and approaches related to awareness and ML's version of the direct path / awareness teachings. His main claim to fame on the Internet at least is the BLISS book, and the Awareness watching Awareness method. This is quoted by some aspirants of paths such as Zen, Advaita, and certain pockets of followers of Nisargadatta and/or Ramana Maharshi.

I'm just going to list down some Plus/Delta or in other words some pros and cons of Michael Langford's teachings according to MY experience. This is not to say there's anything wrong with ML's teachings or approach- in fact, there's a lot of GOOD points in his approach. However, for me personally, there's a couple of red flags that caused obstacles for me following his approach, and ultimately led to me moving on at some point due to various factors, which I will list below. If you feel led to give ML's approach to awareness teachings a try, by all means, go for it, and most of the resources are online for free (to ML's credit).

Pros

• Emphasis on practice, practical means, direct practical instructions in an easy to follow manner. Not at all interested in philosophy or theoretical distractions.
• Clean, concise, easy to understand language
• Repetitive ideas and instructions that lend themselves to hammering home the point that ML is making, such as the importance of practice over thinking, and the importance of having a burning desire for liberation
• Overall, a tried and tested approach to attaining I AM awareness, or the identification with awareness and disidentification with the false self or ego
• Good starting point for getting into the awareness and nondual teachings. Many pointers and references for classic teachers such as NM and RM etc., that can be used by the aspirant to go away and study or take up
• Author's own experience is used. ML isn't afraid of detailing his own experiences and failures and successes
• Great analysis of the ego, false self, and the strategies and tricks that the ego uses to maintain its own validity and illusory existence

Despite the issues that I personally had with ML's approach, I would still advise one so interested or attracted to this approach to "have a go" at the Awareness watching awareness method, read "The Most Direct Means to Eternal Bliss" and possibly some other books by Michael Langford and related. If anything, just for the experience of how challenging it can be to do nothing except attempt to 'watch awareness' for minutes, hours, days on end. There is a concessional practice given, which involves letting go of effort, and thought. There is also an emotional acceptance practice detailed called The Loving-All Method, which is worth a look and test run.

Random meeting and teaching with Mark West (Nisargadatta) @ QVB 17-5-24

 Random meeting and teaching with Mark West (Nisargadatta) @ QVB 17-5-24

I had one of those random encounters yesterday with Mark West (a direct student of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj in the 1970s, who resides in Sydney). I consider Mark to be one of my teachers, and I attended some one-on-one teachings around 2015 or so at his residence in Kings Cross, Sydney. During that time, I had been able to enable some sort of energetic connection with both Mark, and also the whole lineage of Sri Nisargadatta, which become very devotional and yielded a lot of 'results' on the spiritual plane in general and with progress on the "I am" understanding and experience.

Since then, and perhaps from the first time I met Mark (also randomly) around 2013-2014, I had randomly experienced seeing or meeting Mark spontaneously around the Sydney CBD, where I worked in Town Hall precinct, and in other spots around the Sydney CBD. Sometimes we just have those unusual connections with others and for the time being, or during our lives, we seem to meet that person over and over in a completely unplanned and spontaneous way. A similar thing used to happen with a Tai Chi teacher that I had in the 1990s, Peter Yu, who was a master of Yang and Chen tai chi systems, and whom I trained with in the 90s learning Yang style tai chi. I would randomly see or find Peter walking around the city, and we would have brief chats outside training. This kept occurring until his death in the 2000s, where unfortunately I was not present or aware of this, and just stopped seeing Peter around until I did find out that he had left this plane.

Back to Mark West..

I hadn't seen Mark for several years, though I did seem him very briefly from afar this year or last year, but didn't approach him at that time, since I was busy and he was a bit far off.

I had been having the recurring feeling though that I SHOULD strike up conversation with him, as he looks to be getting on now, as he's in his late 70s, and doesn't look the best health wise. He's lost a fair bit of weight, and seems to have aged considerably due to health issues-- which he later told me he was having. Besides, having the blessing of a connection with someone who has a DIRECT lineage or connection with one of the Advaita "greats" isn't something you find every day.. so I did want to pursue my connection and relation with Mark. I endevaoured to strike up some convo if and when I next bumped into him.

Lo and behold, yesterday I was walking down QVB walk, under George Street, on the way over to my mail box, and I see Mark West walking slowly in front of me, down the escalators, carrying some old bags, an umbrella, and shuffling along. I followed him for a bit, and then when next to him said "Hi Mark.. how are you going, Mr West?"

Right away he was friendly, and asked "How do I know you?", I said "We did some one-on-one teachings a few years ago at your place.. I'm Dean.".. "Ah yes, I remember now..", he said, then he literally launched off into Nonduality speak and delivered a full blown conversation and teaching on nonduality, awareness, consciousness etc., while walking in the busy underground arcade.

We ended up near Pitt Street mall, and I broke in, asking where he was headed, and he said up near George Street CBA.. so I steered him up that way, and I offered to get him a coffee while we continue the 'teaching' conversation, which he agreed. We ended up at the cafe in QVB, near the Northern end, and sat there for a good hour to hour and a half. 

He took out an old worn copy of Sailor Bob Adamson's "Beyond Words, Beyond Mind", which is likely out of print now. He spoke a bit of Nisargadatta, which he can still quote from memory.. and also emphasised a convo he had where he mentioned to Maharaj that "Maharaj had failed because he (Mark) still didn't have the realization..", to which Maharaj replied words to the effect of 'Don't worry about his, Mark, I have planted the seed, and it WILL sprout in due course'. Mark then mentioned to me that the same thing had been done, ie Mark had planted the seed and this would sprout in due course if it hadn't done so already. We spoke of different topics:

- Nisargadatta Maharaj and his approach

- Emptiness in the Mahayana Buddhist teachings

- Douglas Harding's pointers to awareness and self

And then he read a large chunk from Sailor Bob Adamson's book, which is quite compact and points to the nature of awareness, consciousness and presence as the underlying reality of self.

After this, he read a few pages from "Nan Yar", which he also had in his old bag there, and especially around the theme of desire for happiness, and the having to let go of all teachings, books and texts eventually as the main aim is realization of the self, rather than book learning.

I understood at this time (rather than back in 2015 or so), that the whole point of this meeting, and these teaching sessions or nondual pointing sessions, was to actually imbibe the energy of the teaching/teacher, and let the pointing do it's work during that time, so as to establish some sort of abidence in/as pure awareness or as one's nature -- rather than worrying about the content of the delivery or what was actually being said. Let's face it, having heard or read material related to Advaita Vedanta, Mahayana Buddhism, the three greats of Advaita in the 20th Century (ie Nisargadatta, Ramana Maharshi, Atmananda), or nonduality in general.. over a period of years or decades, then generally you've heard pretty much every single pointer, concept, or teaching device already. It's not the content or any new content or pointing that will bring about an understanding or realisation of Self, but rather time spent contemplating and USING that content to undo obstructions or blocks to knowledge of Self (or Not-self).

The meeting ended with me having to get back to 'the office', and Mark having to get back to where he was headed in the city. We did exchange details again, since Mark's website was no longer around now (as he is retired and didn't have the time or money to maintain it.. besides, Mark was never a highly publicised teacher with a following, unlike contemporaries such as Sailor Bob, that have always had a solid following and need for material-- which Mark has reservations about, in terms of dependence on a guru or messenger for years on end.. but that's another story).

I'll let things run their course for now, as I've not made any immediate arrangements to meet again, but will be open to the prompting or possibility of doing this in the months ahead.

---

(Gleanings from Nisargadatta - Mark West (notes from meetings with Nisargadatta in the 1970s)

Barry Long - 4 - Final notes in the Myth of Life series - Habits, Thought, Life, Karma, Death, Love, Relationship, Prayer, Consciousness, I-am.

 

The Law of Life - Karma

This recording deals with:

• Honesty, and radical self-honesty of one's inner state and emotional state. An evolution of consciousness (in terms of maturity of understanding and being aware of one's inner state) is talked about, and how that initiates a direct understanding of how life and the law of karma works. 
• There is some talk towards the end of the recording about the mechanics of "reincarnation", which is rather unique with BL's teaching, and equates to a continuance of ignorance only versus the dying to the moment in the now by understanding the truth of one's being. 
• The idea of individuals being free rather than a mass awakening is discussed. This idea also appeared in Gurdjieff's teaching, and BL may have developed this idea from there. By "individual", BL also refers to the beingness itself, as opposed to the person, personality and body, which cease at death.
• The main takeaways here are to cultivate a radical self-honesty, know when one is being true to one's inner state and life situation, rather than covering up the truth and living a life based on automatism and habit for the sake of safety and egoic comfort. The rewards for doing so are a deeper understanding of the "law of life" and a dissolving of ignorance that perpetuates itself in time and existence.

Seeing through Death

This recording deals with:

• The truth of death, misunderstandings about death, "death is a dead body" and the errors of equating life and the individual with a body only, and the consequences of society's choice in removing death and dead bodies from daily life and people's experience.
• The main takeaways here are the differentiation between the body, mind, and life itself (which does not die), and correcting the errors in beliefs around death, dying and the emotional pain of grief.
• Love is also mentioned, and the act of cultivating love between parties well before death arrives, so that we are able to understand and deal with death both personally and around us when the time inevitably arrives.

How to Stop Thinking

This recording follows on from the Meditation recording and should be listened to after that recording. It deals with:

• The consequences of the unquestioned habit of thinking, continual thought, and its source, which is an entity consisting of past experience, pain and conditioning but endowed with life that has given it the ability to take over conscious living.
• Lessons in stopping the habitual action of thinking. There are 10 lessons, that range from becoming more aware of when and how the 'thinker' entity takes control of the mind/situation, to understanding how emotion and pain lead directly to thinking and bypassing.
• The best part of this recording is that by listening and practicing along with the recording in terms of attending, feeling inside, and not thinking, then the listener actually experiences what it is like to stop thinking and maintain an aware, mindful state of being (at least for the duration of the recording, which should carry over after the recording is finished, and deepen on repetition).

Making love

This recording follows on from the Living Joyously (Being Behind The Mask) recording and should be listened to after that recording. It would work best with those who are already in a sexual relationship, since the topics and issues it deals with directly relate to this. It won't be so helpful for those who are single, celibate by choice, or have no interest in sexuality. Personally, I see it as an optional 'module' in Barry's teachings, although it should be noted that many or most of Barry's students were in relationships and were interested in this aspect of his teaching, hence his frequent focus on it. This recording deals with:

Barry's creative ideas and philosophy around how men and women began in creation and how "love making" fits in with the means to awaken.

Advice on making relationships (man/woman) more loving, honest, and in particular focusing on sexual intimacy.

Note- there's some odd material in this recording.. especially Barry's views around the badness or selfishness of celibacy and the need for everyone to get a partner and start making love appropriately as a form of divine worship or practice. A better re-frame may be to view this teaching as a way to mindfully engage in sexual relationships and in particular the sexual act itself. Let's face it, sexual union with a partner isn't cut out for everyone or even of interest for everyone, just as celibacy isn't cut out for everyone. I feel BL went a little off track with the idea of 'once size fits all', if that's how the recording comes across, although it's obvious he was appealing to the audience at the time of writing and what he thought people were in need of, especially couples.

On the good side, this recording does bring to one's attention how unconscious and emotionally charged we all are when in relationship, and in particular, the differing needs between men and women while in relationship. There's also the key point of how unconscious men/women are in relationship, which extends to the sexual act itself, which is often performed mindlessly or as if in a trance. If anything, it brings some attention to being mindful and aware of what's giong on during and outside of sexual union.

A prayer for life

This recording follows on from the 'About Death' recording and should be listened to after that recording. It deals with:

• The common idea of prayer, and the issues and problems it has created in the world today collectively and for individuals
• Wrong prayer, and how the person/ego uses prayer to implement its own desires, craving and ignorance
• Right prayer, and what this involves, including examples of how right prayer would work and sound
• Guidance on the inner work around 'right prayer'

Essentially, Barry Long reframes prayer from the usual mental focus on goals, even altruistic ones, into a form of inner awareness or inner alignment with being, life, and surrender. Some of these ideas occur in Gurdjieff's teachings on the behaviour of the masses, gain and loss, planetary influence and how man's automatic behaviour and lack of consciousness have wrought conflict and disharmony throughout the world.

The "right prayer" sounds a lot like mindfulness of one's intentions, and aligns with his teachings of being conscious of one's inner sensations, feelings, and alignment with 'life' and 'being'. Overall, this is a good recording, and can be used with the meditation series and as a daily practice in affirming one's surrender of the destructive personality in favour of being, life, and flowing with our true nature.

A Journey into Consciousness

This recording is the last recording in the series along with "Who am I?". It deals with:

• The origins of man's existence and the cosmic nature of life
• The start of the 'spacesuit' or the human body and how this evolved along with the unexpected problems that came about with its use and identification, particularly with the emergence of the past and time
• Advice of resolving the problems above, and how to orient oneself in order to make sense of the mind, body and world that one finds oneself in
• Eternity, the present moment and how this is constantly bypassed by the mind that escapes into time, past and future.

A key point in this recording is the idea of the body being a vehicle to house the cosmic intelligence or 'life' that we are. By rightly orienting oneself in the body, but knowing oneself as life, or consciousness, or being, then one is able to live rightly in the present. Overally, this recording sets the scene for some of BL's ideas on cosmology and performs the function of giving a myth or narrative to the subconscious in order to bring the teachings to life. In this, it's a great and unique recording.

Who am I?

This recording is the last recording in the series. It deals with:

• One's true identity as "I" or "I am", and how this has constantly been covered over or erroneously oriented due to the mind's lack of logic and disoriented use of language
• Rightly orienting oneself as "I" and "I am" in daily life, and undoing the tendency to project one's "I" outward onto external objects rather than know one's "I" as the subject

There are many good points in this recording, and it attempts to deliver an experience along the lines of what Gurdjieff would call "self-remembering", and advaita teachers such as Nisargadatta called the "I am". One can see the influence of Advaita in this recording, and it's a highly practical way to initiate the listener into the feeling of "I" and eliminate the constant projecting outward of the conceptual self.

"Wisdom and where to find it" (book of transcripts from 1969)

This is an interesting book if you are interested in Barry Long's early career starting off from as far back as 1969. This book is a collection of various transcripts given in the UK to a small audience of seekers (presumably in response to an advert). The talks are around various topics and questions related to becoming more conscious, less habitual and how to relate to others and the world. Some of the advice is very specifically aimed at the person asking the question, so will be of limited use to those reading the book decades later.

Barry mentions teachers in the book such as Gurdjieff and Krishnamurti (alive at the time), and those teachings clearly come through in the talks given by Barry at this time. There's some mention of a sort of 'mystic death' experience that Barry had in India prior to coming out at a teacher in the 70s (or even 1969). The details of this event are a little vague, and I've not found much written on the actual experience in BL's books. This book has a vibe of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky's philosophy with a bit of Krishnamurti rebelliousness thrown in. Barry seems sincere in addressing the audience at this time.

There's some good parts in this book, being those on self-observation and habit breaking. There's also a lot of philosophy as well which sounds much like Ouspensky's content. Later Barry moved into a totally different direction with emotional work, relationships, sexual union, and mindfulness, which is a good direction to proceed. Eckhart Tolle probably took the best parts out of Barry's teachings, and used those in his simplified approach.

Still, Barry does have some interesting creative content in his later teachings, particularly around the origins of man, the psyche and why emotional work is important, as well as the basics of entering back into the body as a valid means for awakening.

Some of the best recordings in terms of being useful for personal awakening and inner work are- "Start Meditating Now", "How to stop thinking", "The Being Behind the Mask", "A prayer for life", "A Journey into Consciousness", and "Who am I?". Those in relationships could do with listening to "Making Love", if only to become aware of how unconscious behaviour and emotionality affect our close relationships with the other gender with whom we are in intimate relationship with.

Approaching Nonduality via dualistic concepts and practices.

I was prompted to write this short post due to some readings and listenings over the last few months.

Briefly stated, I want to present the idea that there can be no approach to non-duality, or the ultimate Truth, except through dualistic concepts, or at least a basic dualistic setup.

There are a number of modern teachers who like to talk about the need for a 'direct, uncompromising pointing' to the ultimate truth. These teachers seem to indicate that their pointing totally removes the need for all practices, concepts, etc. and directly points at the ultimate truth of non-duality, which lies in the direct experience of presence, beingness, aliveness, etc.

Unfortunately, this too is a concept. The dualistic concept of beingness, presence, etc., even the actual felt sense, is still a concept. "Just this! Nobody here!" is still a concept. There is the thought-stream, mind, world etc. and then there's presence, awareness (another concept). Everything is perfect, nothing needs to be done or attained, and yet there's a pointing happening in the appearance. (Another concept). 

There's really no escape from concepts, right from the moment someone or something opens its mouth.

Then there are the time-tested teachings of the sages, which openly espouse dualistic concepts or systems for the apparent seeker to engage with, as a precursor to the direct truth of non-duality. Sometimes the direct truth is presented first (as in dzogchen, and teachings such as practical Advaita Vedanta). At other times it is reserved for a later time in one's 'progressive path', such as in traditional Buddhism, Dhyana, or Sankhya yoga.

Some examples of dualistic concepts that were used by teachers (that I'm familiar with) include:

Purusha/Prakriti (and 3 gunas) - Sankhya yoga

Pure consciousness / the witness - Sri Atmananda

Food body / consciousness - Sri Nisargadatta

ego, I-thought / Self - Sri Ramana Maharshi

mindfulness of the 4 Foundations, samsara / Nibbana - Buddhism (Theravada)

non-conceptual awareness / thought, concepts - contemporary Advaita teachers (e.g. Sailor Bob)

form / emptiness - Mahayana Buddhism

Real / unreal - Sri Sankara

Space, 'headlessness' / the world, universe - Douglas Harding


One important point on the above, is that the conceptual system presented by the teacher must in some way deconstruct itself or provide the means for its own undoing. It is of no use to be stuck in the dualistic concept or hang on to it as such when its work is done. Any valid use of a dualistic concept must contain the seed, as it were, for its own undoing or unfolding that naturally occurs, and thus make way for an understanding of the real state of things (ie. one's own nature being nothing other than non-dual existence+non-existence).

Ramana Maharshi on the topic of "family life" and liberation.

Excellent little dialogue found in "Talks". Direct pointing by the Master himself.



Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi

Talk 524.

Another pilgrim asked: I am a man with a family. Is it possible for
those in a family to get release, and if so how?

M.: Now what is family? Whose family is it? If the answers to these
questions are found the other questions solve themselves.
Tell me: Are you in the family, or is the family in you?

The visitor did not answer. Then Sri Bhagavan’s answer was
continued: Who are you? You include three aspects of life, namely,
the waking, the dream and the sleep states. You were not aware of the
family and their ties in your sleep and so these questions did not arise
then. But now you are aware of the family and their ties and therefore
you seek release. But you are the same person throughout.

D.: Because I now feel that I am in the family it is right that I should
seek release.
M.: You are right. But consider and say: Are you in the family or is
the family in you?
Another visitor interposed: What is family?
M.: That’s it. It must be known.
D.: There is my wife and there are also my children. They are
dependent on me. That is the family.
M.: Do the members of the family bind your mind? Or do you bind
yourself to them? Do they come and say to you “We form your
family. Be with us”? Or do you consider them as your family and
that you are bound to them?
D.: I consider them as my family and feel bound to them.
M.: Quite so. Because you think that so-and-so is your wife and so-and-so
are your children you also think that you are bound to them.
These thoughts are yours. They owe their very existence to you.
You can entertain these thoughts or relinquish them. The former
is bondage and the latter is release.

D.: It is not quite clear to me.
M.: You must exist in order that you may think. You may think these
thoughts or other thoughts. The thoughts change but not you. Let
go the passing thoughts and hold on to the unchanging Self. The
thoughts form your bondage. If they are given up, there is release.
The bondage is not external. So no external remedy need be sought
for release. It is within your competence to think and thus to get
bound or to cease thinking and thus be free.
D.: But it is not easy to remain without thinking.
M.: You need not cease thinking. Only think of the root of the thoughts;
seek it and find it. The Self shines by itself. When that is found the
thoughts cease of their own accord. That is freedom from bondage.

D.: Yes. I understand it now. I have learnt it now. Is a Guru necessary?
M.: So long as you consider yourself as an individual, a Guru is
necessary to show to you that you are not bound by limitations
and that your nature is to be free from limitations.

Is spiritual practice needed (if the world is just a dream?) - question.

Some comments from Michael James on the question of why spiritual practice, or reflection is even needed (or anything) when "the world is just a dream, and the dreamer can't actually do anything"-- a common Neo-Advaita idea.

In this comment, the questioner puts forth the idea that it would be a mistake to even consider the world to be a dream, since the person or dreamer can't do anything.


--

MJ: “If that is your view [that it is a mistake to try to consider the world to be a dream], how would you explain what Bhagavan teaches us in the final sentence of the seventeenth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?, namely: ‘பிரபஞ்சத்தை ஒரு சொப்பனத்தைப்போ லெண்ணிக்கொள்ள வேண்டும்’ (pirapañcattai oru soppaṉattai-p-pōl eṇṇi-k-koḷḷa vēṇḍum), ‘It is necessary to consider the world like a dream’?”

Your central argument seems to be, ‘it is a mistake to try to see the world as a dream because it is ridiculous for the dreamer to “try” because that very attempt is part of the dream too’, but by that logic it would be a mistake for us to do any spiritual practice, including self-investigation and self-surrender, because whatever spiritual practice we may do is a part of whatever dream we are currently experiencing. The reason Bhagavan advised us to practise self-investigation and self-surrender is that they are the only means by which we can wake up not only from this dream but from the underlying sleep of self-ignorance, in which all dreams occur.

According to Bhagavan any state in which we are aware of anything other than ourself is just a dream, so we can practise self-investigation and self-surrender only in a dream, but that does not mean that it is a mistake for us to try to practise them. Quite the contrary, it would be a mistake for us not to try to practise them, because if we do not try to do so how can we wake up from this sleep of self-ignorance? 

Radical Nonduality- Tony Parsons, Jim Newman etc. 1 The good and the bad.

I've been listening to some talks and videos from Tony Parsons, Jim Newman, and lesser acolytes such as Richard Sylvester etc. lately. For some reason these radical non-duality (Neo-Advaita in some people's lexicon) popped up into my awareness.

Overall, I like the simplicity and directness of their approach. I also like their uncompromising attitude towards the duality of self and the non-duality of things as they really are. Just this. The hopelessness of the "I" projections and all its plans etc, and even its very existence.

However, there's a couple of ugly flaws in this 'non teaching', which probably serve to deepen confusion in some of their 'non-listeners', as is obvious with a few that have been attending for over 10 years with nothing to show. Obviously, the bodies talking at the front of the room are happy for such a comment, since they do confess that they have nothing to give, teach or impart for the hopeless individuals that attend.

The Good

- Direct, uncompromising teaching in contemporary language
- No cultural baggage
- Humour and laughs included, which is genuine and warm.
- No hope for the seeker, individual or self-improvement junkie
- Returns again and again to 'just this' as the end and reality of everything
- Great communication of how it is seen from 'their' end
- Good explanation of nonduality in simple, understandable terms
- Excellent attack on the "I am" and leaves no room for the "I" to escape

The Bad

- Confusing use of some common words such as 'awareness'. Tony seems to only refer to this as pointing to self-awareness that arises with the individual. It seems he doesn't want to acknowledge that there's any awareness outside of the individual's seeming self-awareness (ie the individual being aware of itself versus the world as a duality). This seems ridiculous since it implies that the loss of the self/me entails a loss of awareness, or that awareness doesn't exist apart from the individual's perceived awareness.. so there's no awareness of objects in the room for instance. No awareness full-stop. (?!)

- One sided use of the word 'knowing' and 'know'. To know can mean intellectually know or comprehend concepts, but it can also mean to become aware of, or conscious of as a function. I can know mathematics, but I can also know that there's a screen in front of my face. This knowing or being conscious of isn't the same as amassing conceptual knowledge, it is just a registering in consciousness which requires no effort. However, TP and JN don't acknowledge this use of the word and slap it down at any opportunity. They seem to be equating it only with thinking, conceptualizing. Nothing can be known, registered etc.

- The insistence that the individual can do nothing at all and that nobody can do anything to alleviate their cause. This is 99% true, except for the fact that one's actual, undeniable reality can be investigated, looked at, inquired on. Perhaps that too is a non-event. However, from the point of view of the individual, that still remains a valid action to take; Looking at that which is already here right now. If the pointer or suggestion arises to investigate one's own apparent consciousness or beingness, isn't this worthy of mentioning, instead of the blanket there's no-one here who can do anything, the individual (you) are in a hopeless situation, so don't bother.. this will either happen or not. Of course, the whole "you can do nothing!" tip may be a teaching device or aid to 'giving up', which may or may not be useful for some, especially those hooked on the personal responsibility game. However, this isn't intimated in any way during these meetings, but enforced as a belief that the listener either accepts or rejects (since their own person experience won't tally with this, at least not in the beginning stages). 

- Vague suggestions of 'this' and 'things' being both unreal and real, with no further explanation on what those words actually mean. Yes, this is meant to be a mind-stopper. But, his confuses most of the listeners into a dumb silence. By unreal, it seems they are referring to the conceptual story that is built up in the mind, in which the 'me' takes ownership and personal claim for. It could also refer to completely unreal concepts, such as unicorns flying past. By real, it seems they are referring to just this "spacious aliveness" present. Again, the word 'awareness' is shunned in place of "spacious aliveness" or "empty fullness". OK.

- Idiotic explanations and poo-pooing of time-tested tools such as self-inquiry, contemplative investigation, or pointers such being 'aware of being aware'. Tony points out that 'being aware of being aware' implies a duality or two awarenesses, and so rubbishes this approach for example as ineffectual. But for the life of me, I can't fathom what is so difficult about looking at the fact that one seems to be aware right now. Or that there can be a movement here and now to become aware of the fact that one IS aware and conscious (versus asleep). Besides, in addition to Tony's philosophizing, is there anything more dualistic than a guy sitting in front of an audience talking about how the 'me' is an energy contraction in the body?

- Confusion over the word/concept "I am". I think most people having spent some time within the Nonduality teachings understand the difference between the concept "I am", which equates to a separate entity 'me' that appears temporarily, versus "I am" pointing to the wordless presence in which the concept appears and which appears on waking from sleep- the beingness. For some reason, Tony & friends only acknowledge the conceptual "I am". In one talk he seems to be criticizing: "teachers who teach people to be in the "I am" state - (pointing to his head and laughing) I mean most people are in the 'I am' state anyway.." -- This is false. "Most people" have no idea about the nature of their existence or "I am" state, being totally absorbed in external objects. Most people are NOT in the "I am" state, but identified with the conceptual "I am" and in the mind identified state of being an individual. If they were only in the 'I am' state they would be residing as just the beingness or existence that's happening now, and have no need to attend satsangs etc.


Overall, these talks are great value (and freely given), and worth taking the time to enjoy if one is so inclined, but just be wary of some potholes in the road when travelling along.

The Gnani (Jnani) Chapter 15 - I Am That by Sri Nisargadatta. Quotes and commentary.

Maharaj: All is His doing, no doubt. What is it to me, since I want nothing? What can God give me, or take away from me? What is mine is mine and was mine even when God was not. Of course, it is a very tiny little thing, a speck — the sense ‘I am’, the fact of being. This is my own place, nobody gave it to me. The earth is mine; what grows on it is God’s.

God or Ishwara is equated with a principle that exists within the world, phenomena and affects the individual. As such, it appears within the “I am” or self-aware consciousness, wakefulness. This “I am” was not given, but appeared spontaneously when we were around the age of two. Prior to this, there was no self-awareness, no God, no world etc.

M: Without you is there a world? You know all about the world, but about yourself you know nothing. You yourself are the tools of your work, you have no other tools. Why don’t you take care of the tools before you think of the work?

Since the world depends on our self of being, “I am” for its existence, the advice is given to examine and understand one’s own self first. The “I am” here is referred to as the instrument used to perform any work. Understanding the instrument is necessary before attempting to carry out any work. How is this done? By taking the time to notice it, live with it, abide in it, and understand it completely. By understanding it and living with it, ultimately it is seen through as not our true identity. This is an initial step from the object-identified state.

M: Within the prison of your world appears a man who tells you that the world of painful contradictions, which you have created, is neither continuous nor permanent and is based on a misapprehension. He pleads with you to get out of it, by the same way by which you got into it. You got into it by forgetting what you are and you will get out of it by knowing yourself as you are.

M: The gnani is the supreme and also the witness. He is both being and awareness. In relation to consciousness he is awareness. In relation to the universe he is pure being.

The Jnani or Self-realized state is always prior to any manifestation and stands as the primary principle. From the point of view of the world, that state is consciousness or “I am”. From the point of view of consciousness, wakefulness or “I am”, that state is the Absolute or all-inclusive awareness.

Papaji speaks the truth, but the message is often garbled.

Today I was listening to a Papaji talk on YouTube ("Papaji - Wake up from the dream").

There are a few good points in this talk, but also some points that need clearing up due to distortion.

People tend to love Papaji's simple message of - do nothing, no teaching, no method or process, you are already free, it only takes one second in your entire life to realize.

It's no coincidence he had a massive amount of students and 'teachers' stemming from his lineage.

Agreed, there's something freeing about knowing that one is already free, and that it doesn't take much to realize this. "A second of silence" is almost like his motto.

In this talk, Papaji starts of, strangely, by talking about places of pilgrimage, the power there, and how he went around showing people these "special places". This seems a little strange, in light of the fact that his own teacher pointed out that one place was as good as another for reaching Self-Realization, and that one need not venture here or there.. but instead inquire within.

Papaji talks about the world being one's own projection which only 'we' can remove. But if he wants to play the do-nothing game, how can he talk about self-directed action in removing oneself from one's own projection? Either the projection happens spontaneously without a doer or owner involved, or else we have to buy into the doer having the power to remove it. We're back in practice-mode, but trying to 'do nothing'.

Papaji then talks about the next best thing to being convinced of his 'freedom message', and that's to meditate around the clock on 'I am already free', and also (?) to remain in the thought-free state for even a second.

OK great.. not much to do there.. but isn't that a process? Something to do?

So some seeker is convinced they're already free. And then they run around proclaiming that they're free, and we're all free, we just have to realize it (or believe it). They try teaching others. Is there any difference with this and Born-Again Christianity?

Or a seeker sits for a time, and settles into a no-thought, no-mind state. They abide there. They did the "1 second" thing. So now they know they are just consciousness or freedom or silence. But then the vasanas return and they get lost in thought, feelings, context. They lose their belief in freedom, and need another instant Papaji fix, or satsang or sitting. They attend talks for years, but still remain seeking. Is this freedom?

Yes, there's nothing to do and no practice to become what we already are in truth.

No, there's no quick fix in making that realization one's direct and permanent experience, or rather, predominant experience. 

Unlike Papaji says, the Buddha likely never said that "Buddha Nature is in all of you, don't be shy, spend one second on it." Rather, he likely said all things are not-self, and to "strive diligently" for one's own salvation. He didn't say that it takes "just one moment". He also stressed that ethics in one's life are important too while traversing the path.

Neo-Advaita can be helpful in terms of offering direct pointers for the advanced along the path. However, it's a double edge sword, offering lots of yummy fuel for the ego to become spiritualized and falsely self-realized. The ego loves to appropriate any little insight or discovery along the way, and then attempts to re-capture such experiences.

There is indeed much value in the Papaji (TM) practice of "Just one second of no-thinking". Sailor Bob Adamson uses a similar method when he talks about "Pause a thought". One of my own teachers also used this often.

Its value lies in it being a practice that is repeated with minimal effort during one's day, anywhere and anyhow. Just one second of non-thinking or silence allows for a break in the mind-identified state that we find ourselves in habitually each day. One second of no-thought does feel liberating. A new habit is then formed in doing this again and again, because it is peaceful, pleasant, liberating. At some point, one may realize that actually one's true nature IS the peace, silence and liberation that is revealed in the 1 second of no-thought. The practice has then done its job, and the knowledge of one's very nature can take over from that point, guiding the apparent individual back to its source. Lost in thought again? Easy, start from one second.

One of the better Papaji videos related to this point above can be found here and is worth watching:

https://youtu.be/xk237xi72RI
(PAPAJI - Save ONE second for Not thinking Zone)

Consciousness from Nama-Rupa and Nama-Rupa from Consciousness - with links in Buddhism, Advaita

Consciousness from Nama-Rupa and Nama-Rupa from Consciousness - with links in Buddhism, Advaita

 

"This must be well grasped: the world hangs on the thread of consciousness:
no consciousness, no world." – Nisargadatta

 

“Enlightenment means nothing more than to be rid of conceptual thinking.
What remains is the noumenal 'I', pure subjectivity without the slightest
touch of objectivity or temporality. But instead of simply being this, we
mistakenly try to get it as an object of experience.” – Ramesh Balsekar

 

“"The thought occurred to me, 'I have attained this path to Awakening, i.e., from the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of consciousness, from the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form..’” – Nagara Sutta (Buddha)

 

I have recently been going back to “I”-ness in my contemplations and explorations. This was prompted by some talks I had been listening to. Some random things then fell into place today, related to these topics- “I”, consciousness, name-form, mind-body etc.

Sometimes, it’s as if the teachings are waiting for the exact right time to assert themselves in our apparent journey. Some have called this the workings of the Inner Teacher.

One thing that really jumped out today, which I had not seen in years of reading the Buddhist Pali suttas, was a Sutta detailing the Links of Dependent Origination in a unique kind of way. The way it was presented, tallies perfectly with how some modern teachers, such as Nisargadatta, present their model of consciousness to/from mind-body. This model can be of use conceptually in helping to disidentify consciousness from the primary attachment of the conceptual body-mind. In reality, the body-mind (materiality-mentality) is nothing other than consciousness (according to Advaita), however, as a conceptual label and perceived external object, it has been included with consciousness to form the “I” thought-feeling complex.

The Pali suttas usually talk about the 12 links in Dependent Origination in the following flow: Ignorance – Formations – Consciousness – Name/Form – 6 Sense Media – Contact – Feeling tone – Craving – Clinging/Habitual Tendency – Becoming/Sustenance – Birth – Death/Aging/Stress.

However, in the Nagara Sutta (SN 12.65) the following can be found:

"Then the thought occurred to me, 'Aging & death exist when what exists? From what as a requisite condition is there aging & death?' From my appropriate attention there came the breakthrough of discernment: 'Aging & death exist when birth exists. From birth as a requisite condition comes aging & death.' Then the thought occurred to me, 'Birth exists when what exists? From what as a requisite condition comes birth?' From my appropriate attention there came the breakthrough of discernment: 'Birth exists when becoming exists. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth... 'Name-&-form exists when what exists? From what as a requisite condition is there name-&-form?' From my appropriate attention there came the breakthrough of discernment: 'Name-&-form exists when consciousness exists. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form.' Then the thought occurred to me, 'Consciousness exists when what exists? From what as a requisite condition comes consciousness?' From my appropriate attention there came the breakthrough of discernment: 'Consciousness exists when name-&-form exists. From name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.'



"Then the thought occurred to me, 'This consciousness turns back at name-&-form, and goes no farther. It is to this extent that there is birth, aging, death, falling away, & re-arising, i.e., from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media... Thus is the origination of this entire mass of stress. Origination, origination.' Vision arose, clear knowing arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before.”

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.065.than.html



It is very interesting that the Sutta ends the links with consciousness not going further back, and turning around back into Name-Form.



From one point of view, this almost mirrors Nisargadatta’s unique teaching on consciousness. Nisargadatta has a similar view on consciousness, which is actually closer to the Buddhist meaning of consciousness, than the usual Advaita meaning of consciousness (which equates with awareness and thus Brahman, Absolute etc.). Nisargadatta’s view of consciousness is that it is infinite in its ability to manifest, but ultimately temporary and conditional (depending on the body, prana, prakruti for its manifestation or appearance). It also requires a subject to be present by definition, and thus allow for its own self-recognition.



In this regard, Nisargadatta’s view of consciousness is that it must depend on Name/Form in the form of sattva guna, and the material body. Paradoxically, the material body, prana and Name/Form can only be known when consciousness is present. Thus the description in the Nagara Sutta also acknowledges that consciousness arises in dependence on Name/Form and that Name/Form arises in dependence on consciousness.



This is an important point to ponder over, since this bi-directional acknowledgement must be encountered during any thorough investigation into consciousness, or the “I-am”ness. This is normally done in self-inquiry (in Advaita), or during vipassana or insight practices (in Buddhism). Just settling on one outcome, such as consciousness arising from the body or past formations, or alternatively the body/Name-Form arising from consciousness is only finding half of the story.

This isn't a feeling or conceptual understanding. Advaita.

I was watching a live stream of Wayne Liquorman on YouTube.



It is good that he offers live, free streamings of his satsangs for anyone to watch. He makes a lot of good points in his satsangs as well, especially for questioners present- such as bringing back experience to one's own personal experience (rather than some objective experience or the teacher's experience.



There were a lot of different questions coming up in the satsang. Some asked about a 'flat feeling' that they have after having discovered these 'teachings'. Another asked about whether to do or not to do sadhana (spiritual practice). And another asked about whether this teaching is a mechanism for 'growth' or more understanding.





Wayne Liquorman was a student of Ramesh Balsekar, and thus his spin on things is generally Neo-Advaita and non-practice apart from seeing the absence of doership or the 'me' entity. This generally involves no practice, no path, and the understanding that all things happen spontaneously only, there's no doer or anything to actually do, and that the understanding of this 'truth' of how things are-- essentially one substance playing out, leads to freedom.





It is interesting that Wayne actually has very little to say or contribute in his satsangs. He mostly just repeats the question, adds a little philosophy, and settles down the questioner into a kind of acceptance of the situation. That's pretty much about it. A fair amount of silence and some smiles.





"The question is what is playing out in your doing more or not doing more?"





"That's a response I've heard about a thousand times.."





"What is it that's responsible for what you do or don't do?"





One questioner talks about depression and how this whole teaching leaves her in a flat kind of place. Wayne's response is that he's heard that a lot.. but there's no magic fix.





I found myself a little reactive to this.



IME if someone is talking about having the legit understanding of this teaching, and having realised the Self (or not-self).. then that should blow away any concept or perception about reality being some kind of perceived flat-land of barren emotion or void. It was so obvious that the questioner was living out a concept of what they felt to be the 'teaching' (due to Wayne/Ramesh's view on non-doership). Of course, having such a belief and concept DOES lead to a barren and depressing state of things for the ego identified mind. But this isn't the real deal. Reality isn’t a barren state of void, but a living expansive state of energy. Wayne isn't doing any one a service by sticking to his absolutist view of how things really are, and that the questioner needs to just accept things etc. according to 'how things are'.





I find some Neo-Advaita teachers to actually be doing a disservice to would-be seekers. If they really believed in the no-doer thing, what possible benefit would having satsangs give, versus going to the pub to play darts, or better having a satsang with a group of trees in the park? "Oh, but it's just happening"..



I recall an interview a while back with Jeff Foster on some Nonduality show. He was going on about the same thing, whereby he discovered these wonderful teachings and views on reality, then plunged into a year or so of depression and feeling like it was all an empty void.. this 'enlightenment' that he had found. Unfortunately, Jeff published a truck load of material, and people also bought into the ideas presented, and that Jeff Foster actually knew something (which he admitted was nothing, and just an 'extraordinary absence'). Jeff since moved on, and away from Nonduality into psychology and love relationships, as Neo’s sometimes do.



Seekers would well in carefully selecting a teacher that understands their current predicament, and can apply the teachings to suit their context and situation, with the aim of alleviating suffering and delusion, rather than fostering new belief systems. Teachers that teach on an absolute level are often not well suited to beginners or those starting out on the path, especially with psychological issues they're grappling with. A more practical, life-focused teaching would suit. However, some advanced seekers actually do very well with the Neo-Advaita type teaching and need much less practical guidance in furthering their understanding and undoing of self-efforting.