17 November 2009


Thank you so much for you quick reply. I have come across the Nisargadatta Gita but have not read it deeply...I will give it my full attention. I did start reading Prior to Consciousness a few weeks back and it feels even more astounding than I am That...if that's even possible.  

Thank you again Ed...I will let you know how it goes.

Yes, Pointers is more advanced because Jean Dunn's understanding was more advanced

Maharaj said of "I Am That," that it was grade school, while Prior to Consciousness was graduate school.

Jean was only one of 2 people Maharaj authorized to teach. Balsekar was not I might add. I think Ramesh falls in the category of my previous post, of someone whose understanding was not backed by sufficient meditation practice.  I understand near the end he had become quite critical of Maharaj and Ramana both, and may have been abusive of some of his students.  I don't know, I only hear rumors.


  1. Ed, you hit the nail on the head concerning Ramesh! In my opinion, through observing and being with him for almost 2 weeks in person, he seemed to have a great intellectual understanding, but without actually experiencing or being it.
    Sometimes he got very, very rude to highly devotional people who asked him about certain translations of sayings from Nisargadatta respectively Ramana, being very authoritarian and demanding. If somebody had a really good point and backed it up with a Ramana or Nisargadatta quotation, I observed that Ramesh would immediately use another quotation to nullify the understanding or point of the questioner and back up his own final-understanding teaching nonsense as the ultimate, final teaching. And if you wanted to go into the depths of his teaching he'd always suggest to the questioner to buy one of his books dealing with exactly that topic (there were plenty of books in the back of his room with western prices for books mainly printed in India - That was just the way he was. I can't really judge him for that, after all he had been in the financial sector for many years until retirement)

    Anyway, Ramesh (who could be very sweet as well) was the perfect mirror and teacher for me in that period of my life and i am very thankful to him for writing down his observations in the book Pointers from Nisargadatta, which was a steady companion for me at that time.

  2. Robert spent time with Nisargadatta when Ramesh was there. He said Nisargadatta was quite abusive of Ramesh. Often students pick up characteristics of how their teacher interacted with them.

  3. Oh, i see. I guess Ramesh, for being the retired banker he was, must have been also some kind of a scapegoat for Nisargadatta. Since Nisargadatta obviously was quite livid, to use a nice word, with life itself. "I spit on consciousness; spirituality for me is like dishwater etc."
    Did Robert make the observation that Nisargadatta was quite an angry person at the end of his life? (I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case)

  4. Yes, Robert made the observation that Maharaj was very rude. He also said Maharaj beat up on Ramesh all the time.

    I met Ramesh several times before I mt Robert. His book Pointers was like a hammer blow to me mind.

    I found Ramesh generally very likable, but once in a while very rude to a student, and often his answers appeared canned, as if he had repeated the same answers a thousand times.

    I found some of his books overly intellectual and they didn't touch me very deeply as did Jean Dunn's Prior to Consciousness, or Consciousness and the Absolute.

    I find Pradeep's Nisargadatta Gita even more clear than Jean's interpretation of Maharaj's talks.

    You have to understand, this whole site is my opinion based on coming from 30 years of a Zen tradition, and before that, kriya yoga Yogananda style. Therefore I find some teachers and works more valuable than others, and those who follow this site find it more or less valuable than others.

    It is all mind and therefore meaningless unless some words are found that lead one beyond mind.

  5. Is it strange to find it peculiar that an enlightened individual could be so insensitive?
    I just get the feeling that all enlightened individuals should be humble and gentle, but I reckon that is not always the case?

  6. "It is all mind and therefore meaningless unless some words are found that lead one beyond mind."

    That's exactly the point, i totally agree on that!

    and P.: Don't worry about that. As far as I'm informed Nisargadatta has been a very, very devotional being for a long time after awakening...It's just my guess that he saw that not too many people (especially western people) would understand and move to what he was pointing to and aiming at. So, as a consequence (knowing the above and also that he wouldn't live forever) he might have developed this kind of hammering technique trying to get people totally beyond mind.

    So let's not lose ourselves in judging his outward behavior, but "innerstand" his pointers and go beyond our mind!

    Thanks again Ed for your wonderful and generous guidance!

  7. "I think Ramesh falls in the category of my previous post, of someone whose understanding was not backed by sufficient meditation practice."

    Of course, meditation practice per se isn't always necessary. Anything that introverts the mind -- turns it upon itself in some way -- will do. Intense japa, bhakti, etc. can also bring one to the same point as formal meditation practice. All of these practices can also be counterproductive, if practiced in the wrong way, with the wrong motive. So long as a strong desire to play in the world persists, practice will be of limited benefit. When the desire for freedom is paramount, one will be automatically drawn to the practices best suited to the individual that will lead to realization.

    There is a great misunderstanding about the purpose and place of spiritual practice that has been reinforced by neo-advaitist, many of whom are former students of Papaji. I never met Papaji, but I've read his 1200 page biography and reviewed and listened to many of his talks. To my knowledge, he never encouraged anyone to drop all practice. What he asked people to do was to drop everything and sit in the Silence with him. In essence, his teaching was to remain in the presence of the Satguru, physically, when possible, and mentally, always. This is the highest practice -- even higher than self-inquiry. It's not Papaji's fault if most people didn't understand this, even sitting in front of him during his lifetime. He could only express truth as it came through him. He actively encouraged and practiced devotion his entire life. Even after sitting at Ramana's feet and accepting his teaching, Papaji continued to practice Krishna japa for some time. To his last day on earth, he honored Ramana and said he was nothing without him. People who point to Papaji in support of stopping practice should consider these things.

    Nisargadatta also practiced devotion and chanted daily. He initiated at least one person into mantra japa, and he told some of his Indian devotees that they should worship him. When one of his American students pointed out that these things seemed inconsistent with his other teachings, he shouted at him and said something like, "Was I talking to you?!!! You can just leave if you don't like what I do."

    So, something has to happen prior to enlightenment. Meditation, bhakti or something else. If one has to think about whether he should stop practice, then he shouldn't. It will naturally fall away on its own in time, being replaced by an effortless state of bliss that will resolve all doubts and questions about what one should or shouldn't do.

    Ramesh was a good writer. Whether he was more than that, I don't really know. I wish him the best.

    Be well Ed.


  8. Hey Ed, thanks so much for sharing David's mail!

    I decided to just ask myself and inquire into "What is perfectly aware prior to mind? (defining mind as all subtle senses including the I sense)" and await the answer.

    Let's see what happens after a while, if i can await it. :-)

  9. That question begs an "objective" answer, as "the mind" is totally a concept.

    Better to make it, What is aware before me, or what is aware before I Am?

    You need to get to the core feelngs and then beyond, not to a concept.

  10. You are right, much too conceptual. Why go the hard way, if there is an easier one?

    Just curious, did the mail come from David Godman? (had a very strong feeling while reading it)