Are we consciousness, prior to consciousness or beyond consciousness? Nisargadatta Maharaj I Am That
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 июл 2021
- Are we consciousness, prior to consciousness or beyond consciousness? Nisargadatta Maharaj and I Am That
If it's written somewhere that you are prior to consciousness, that which you are prior to must be Maya. If a sage, a holy person says you are consciousness, then that which he refers to must be the Self.
Teachings of Advaita Vedanta | Nonduality
This video was recorded live during a Satsang meeting with Tom Das and put together by volunteers. To attend satsang, see here: tomdas.com/events.
For guided meditations see the 'guided meditation' playlist here: / tomdasnonduality
For recommended reading for liberation see here: tomdas.com/2020/10/19/recomme...
To book a 1 to 1 session with Tom see here: tomdas.com/nondual-spiritual-...
Recommended texts for liberation that directly and uncompromisingly point the way: tomdas.com/2020/10/19/recommended-reading-books-for-enlightenment-liberation-and-self-realisation/
Om Peace! peace!
Very clear and clearing❤Thank you Tom, lovely🙏
👍🏼
Nice
True; And the reason they didn't teach the absolute reality is because words are futile, understanding words doesn't mean understanding TRUE self. "UNDERSTANDING" comes with ego. you think you UNDERSTAND but it is just EGO that understand on intellectual level. REALISATION brings enligtenment, it should arise from within, you can't learn/gain anything from outside. it's all within. Everything you need to get liberated is inside you only.
Tom, thanks for boiling all the confusing terms down to Self and Maya - that helps immensely
:-)
You're most welcome. Let's keep it straighforward and direct!
@HemPat56 You expressed it for me, thank you 🙏🏻
Yes, helpful and much clearer
Thank you Tom 🙏🏻
You indeed are ....what is needed in these confusing times of multi-explanatory interpretational teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi....thank you for saving me from the jungle i strayed into , maybe for a good reason...._/\_....
You're most welcome!
Tom, I think you are right. I remember reading I AM THAT in my 20s and being totally confused. Since then I've reread sections and have come to sort it out in the way you described.
That's great
The key takeaways from Tom Das's discourse on consciousness and self-realization, particularly in the context of teachings by Nisargadatta Maharaj and Ramana Maharshi, include:
1. **Understanding of Consciousness**: The term "consciousness" can refer to different aspects depending on the context. When described as "prior to consciousness," it points to Maya or the illusion of reality. When identified as "consciousness," it signifies the true self or Atman beyond illusion.
2. **Distinction Between Self and Maya**: There's a clear demarcation between the reality of the self (Atman/Brahman) and the illusory nature of the world (Maya). This distinction is central to the teachings of Advaita Vedanta.
3. **The Role of Language in Spiritual Teachings**: Language can both illuminate and obfuscate spiritual truths. The same terms can mean different things in different contexts, which necessitates a careful consideration of how words like "consciousness" are used by spiritual teachers.
4. **The Importance of Lineage and Teaching Methodology**: The discourse highlights the significance of the lineage of teachers (gurus) and their methods of imparting wisdom. Different lineages may use similar terms but with nuanced meanings, affecting the seeker's understanding and path to realization.
5. **Critique of Textual Interpretations**: Works like "I Am That" by Nisargadatta Maharaj, while profound, can be confusing due to their dialogic nature and lack of systematic presentation. This can lead seekers astray if they do not discern the core teachings amidst the conversational context.
6. **The Ego’s Resistance to Liberation**: The ego-mind tends to cling to lower or preliminary teachings that do not directly lead to self-realization, as a way to perpetuate its own existence. True liberation requires transcending these lower teachings to grasp the essence of the self beyond the ego.
7. **Guidance Toward Self-Realization**: Effective guidance on the path to self-realization often involves systematic and clear teachings, as opposed to fragmented or context-dependent dialogues. Seekers are encouraged to delve into teachings that methodically lead them through the stages of understanding the self, Brahman, and beyond.
8. **Personal Journey and Guidance**: While spiritual teachers can point the way, the journey to self-realization is deeply personal. Each seeker must find their own path, influenced but not dictated by the teachings of any single guru or tradition.
❤️
Nisargadatta had people mesmerized. He spoke of a state that is prior to consciousness or beyond consciousness. Modern Science says we came into existence from nothing. That's what maharaj was talking about. Nothing. We are caught in a matrix, Mr Tom Das you need to help us get out of it.
lol :-)
Tom,
I don’t think that there could be any dispute that the intention of the teachings of all the great sages you mentioned in this video was always designed to point to the fundamental nature of reality, or what could simply be called the source, or ground of reality. Additionally, it certainly seems pretty clear that from time to time various labels have been used to represent this.
However, in the pursuit of this type of investigation, one thing I feel must be absolutely self-evident, and therefore, beyond question, is that reality must be eternally present, or eternally ‘is’, and therefore, must interminably ‘be’, or is simply ceaseless ‘being’. Although I am aware that there exists a certain point of view that claims that the ultimate ‘reaches’ beyond or prior to being, this suggests that something can ‘be’ outside of ‘being’, which to me is clearly an impossible, non-viable self-contradiction, so I reject that viewpoint as directly in opposition to basic common sense.
Now, setting labels aside for the moment, what is it that could be said to be eternally present, or ‘be’ eternally? It seems pretty clear to me that the simplest, clearest, and most direct answer must be, pure being itself. So, I would say that when all extraneous concepts are abandoned, all that remains is pristine being alone, as itself, which simply can have no ‘outside of’, ‘prior to’, or quite simply, no ‘other’.
However, while I would certainly allow that absolutely nothing at all could ever be known in the absence of consciousness, just as I would also say that nothing at all could ever be felt in the absence of the feeling heart, on the other hand, as an irrefutable consequence of its self-defining meaning, nothing could ever ‘be’ in the absence of being.
Therefore, it just seems to intuitively follow that it is being, and not consciousness, which should be established as the fundamental reality.
However, even though I consider being to be fundamental, it also seems to be unavoidably self-evident that both consciousness (as mind) and heart (as feeling) are nonetheless wholly inseparable to being.
As such, I see consciousness as the ‘knowing’ element of being, just as I see the heart as the ‘feeling’ element of being.
Putting the three together we get - being, consciousness, and the attributes of peace, love, and happiness as the deep heart, or borrowing the phrase from the Upanishads - sat, chit, ananda.
To sum this all up, from my point of view, I recognize terms like the Self, God, Brahman etc., as various labels that have been used from time to time to represent infinite being, which to me, seems to be a term less much likely to evoke any sense of ambiguity. Also, by using the term of being, I find that I am now able to describe all reality (and that means all reality) as simply the one infinite being, being itself.
❤️🙏❤️
Adi Da mentions some of these distinctions. Ascended vs Nirvikalpa Samahdi viewable on beezone with a google search. Have mulled the nature of parabrahmin for years in conjunction with non dual practices. Those practices form a tech of witnessing and understanding oneself as witnessing consciousness. Under the right conditions, however, the witnessing goes all the way beyond maya and reveals the True Self intuitively. These conditions are a deep state of feeling combined with a profound ability to continually witness. That feeling for me, was a confounding loss of a beloved companion. The Self beyond consciousness was revealed as nothing that can be put into words, yet had beautiful blue light coming from the cracks of what can be closest described as a sun being witnessed non separately, unborn, with forms/maya projected above it as holograms in relation. The "sun" was love itself with love shared between beings being the only thing that's real, or the only way to taste what's real. All these descriptions could never do the realization justice, yet being a realization was/is a total and abiding understanding. Non dual experiences have been practiced, with occasional moments of total unity, yet they were more of the ego dissolving into impartial witness, amazingly One, yet the bhakti element took me beyond that to realizing something beyond consciousness, to rapturous and blissful Love unborn. Love.
the one who is aware of all experiences the world the sense perceptions the thoughts and feelings is awareness or consciousness and where does this awareness or consciousness arise from ? sir can you please help me to know who i am. the books are so confusing
Come to satsang 🙏
We evolved to be sexual active and learn the World but sexual active and survival is our main goal but the irony is once we became and we have becomes full blown learned and billions we then learn that sex is also our downfall ! And our consciousness starts working backwards .. so sex is consciousness and consciousness was sex
Hello Tom ,
Thankyou for your efforts in helping us
I have a doubt
Sri Nisargadatta Mahraj says that YOU ARE BEYOND THE EXPERIENCER ,i understand that experiences changes but the experiencer is constant, but what can be beyond experiencer, and does that mean we avoid experiences of our lives and even spirtiual realisation is a sort of experience ,as we feel more peaceful and joyful ,please explain me
Great question. The ego is both the experiencer and the doer. This is all Maya (ie. illusion or fiction) or the waking dream. What you are is beyond this Maya or waking dream.
Sometimes the Self is said to be the Witness, but this is not actually true, for it is the (fictional) ego that witnesses things/objects, that thinks, that emotes, etc. The Self is devoid of all phenomena
This can only really be understood fully by doing Self-Enquiry, eg. as per Sri Ramana's instructions in the text Who Am I?
eg. See here verse 7 from the Mandukya Upanishad which explains that the Self is not the witness/observer of objects and also the Self is devoid of phenomena. (note Turiya is another name for the Self, as is also explained):
Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three states, It is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss and non-dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realised.
For more see this link and also follow the links cited within the post: tomdas.com/2021/08/12/mind-and-consciousness-fully-awake-in-deep-sleep/
Thankyou very much for responding
1.So does that mean we devoid ourself from experiences as even a sense of BEINGNESS is an experience ,
2.Is Universe Illusion
Is consciousness illusion
@@TomDasNonduality Thankyou very much for responding
1.So does that mean we devoid ourself from experiences as even a sense of BEINGNESS is an experience ,
2.Is Universe Illusion
Is consciousness illusion
@@joshiankit4592 Hi Joshi, these questions are best resolved through speaking. Please consider coming to Satsang and I hope to be able to resolve any doubts you may have as Sri Ramana resolved all my doubts. Please see the links above. Also there is a recommended reading list - most of the texts cited will also answer many of your questions, any remaining ones I can answer through talking with you. There are also many additional benefits of regularly attending Satsang which are often non-verbal and not easily quantified. Namaste
The conciosness that maharaj refers to when he says you are prior to conciousness is certainly not the jiva. Maharaj has stated on multiple occassions that conciousness is universal and not private property. By conciousness he means That Atman. The Absolute is that out of which the knowledge I am arises.
Ramana also refers to the absolute when he speaks of pure conciousness.
You say here that everything falls into one of two categories, knowledge and ignorance. But the jnani is beyond knowledge and ignorance. I encourage you to check out the maharajs later talks. Conciosness and the absolute perhaps or prior to conciousness
Thank you for your comments, yes, I am aware of his later talks. Is this advaita or dvaita? I encourage you to contemplate my words again. For example, when it is said that you are beyond both knowledge and ignorance, what exactly is meant by knowledge and ignorance in this case? Bhagavan Sri Ramana makes it very clear in his text Ulladu Narpadu which you can read here, namaste 🙏 tomdas.com/2020/04/09/ulladu-narpadu-reality-in-forty-verses-by-sri-ramana-maharshi/
You do not need any Guru because that implies separation and duality. Source is NonDual and animates physicality. On a physical, duality level, the ego can follow anyone it wants to and different teachers teach in different ways to different people. However, Source (or whatever name you call it) is all there is and NonDual. Ego plus Guru = 2 and that is an illusion or dream. All there is, is Source, NonDual. This video is talking from a duality standpoint.
Source = guru. There is only one teacher or guru, not many...
@@TomDasNonduality You are your own Guru. Not other physical beings. Your true Higher Self is your guru.
@@lorideener5237 There are no others so if a guru happens to appear in another body, it’s still the same source .. your own self reflected in another body .. It’s like seeing the mirror where you actually see a perfected version of yourself and that mirror image shows you path to not achieve the truth because you already are the Truth but to remove the obstacles that you have superimposed on yourself and forgotten who you Truly are! There are no others.. Others that appear to you as different people, animal, thing all is YOU.. Non duality isn’t just about your individual inner Self.. There is nothing except that Self.. your body and mind also appears in it
@@Prashant-cw3ir Yes, that is all already known. Guru is for one who does not know the truth about NonDuality, and even that one that looks for a Guru is the One source. What seems to be known and not known is One. The illusion of duality is still nondual. All is One. ❤️🙏
@@TomDasNonduality except in the physical plane when a human is looking for another human guru to lead. This is my point, the only true Guru is the One nondual source. Many belief systems believe in a physical guru, but even that is all under NonDuality. ❤️🙏
I respectfully disagree. It's impossible to explain in words but for me Nisargadatta teachings is the end of spirituality. It's all over! I don't get the same feeling from Ramana or anybody else. you are right 'I am that' is misleading but there are other books that are pointing better to that ultimate reality. Examples: prior to consciousness, seeds of consciousness....
With what part of the video do you disagree?
@@TomDasNonduality in my experience they are different. that's what I mean by 'disagree', not that you are wrong it's just that I have a different experience. unfortunately nothing can be said about it!
Om Peace! peace!