Nisargadatta Maharaj and Ramana Maharshi, part two
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2013
- www.davidgodman.org
This is a further explanation on how Ramana Maharshi and Nisargadatta differed in their teaching methods.
Further talk on the difference between Bhagavan Ramana and Nisargadatta Maharaj
David, I understand you were told by a number of these great Realized Souls to, "write a book". Its obvious why. Your detailed and descriptive story telling abilities are wonderful. You've brought the experience of sitting at these Master's feet to tens of thousands of Seekers.
As Ramana Maharshi said, "the difference is only in your imagination".
You are really a God man.David a beautiful Narrator and so much I learnt all the knowledge from Bhavagavan through your simple crisp language.
Thanks for everything Dear David Godman
David I doubt that you read comments on a video you put together 7 years ago. But I want you to know that I and many others are grateful for you.
Yes!!!
I have just been watching Nisargadatta Maharaj videos. There was something about the way he straight talked and gesticulated, often seeming a bit pissed off that resonates with me. He is like a real working class bloke with no airs and graces, telling it like it is. He really got to me.
Thanks for introducing me to Him David - I really appreciate all your video posts.
He was a good baba !
Yeah almost like an angry grandpa who really just loves you and wants nothing else but the best for you.Often you can see Maharaj smile after some sentences 😃Angry but very funny in this.Like a comedian.
Thank you so much David for sharing, much appreciated
The best descriptions of the two masters I have heard. It’s like Ramesh Balsekar would say just listen to the teachings ….don’t try and grasp at the concepts and argue with them ….let them sink in and with time they will uproot the conditioning you have received since you were small. He loved people to ask him questions …he was very impatient and sometimes would often rephrase the questions for people ….. he said he always wanted to be very clear in his concepts.
Fascinating, David. Thanks. Two different approaches but with the same end: One is more verbal and argumentative while the other is more contemplative but both have the same purpose of planting seeds in you that will grow in their own time without "interference" by you and will come to fruition when the time is right.
Thank you for your discourses and talking about your experiences. i really appreciate your efforts and wonderful books, some of which i own... Best wishes to you.
The section between 8:53 and 10:30 almost brought me to tears. It solves so much for me!
The thing about David is this. Another person at 6.23 would have said “nisarga said I am enlightened - I am putting up ashram - and building an empire”. You see many examples like that.
Ramana and Nisarga and countless Jnanis have blessed David to be beyond all mundane. 🙏
You hold true keys of wisdom , shakti shakti ,,,,high five
I enjoyed this immensely!
I agree with the words: You've got it, now go. Why hang onto another when you realize that you are the other? There is no distinction between any living thing once the realization of the true self comes through. The whole person worship and bowing down to another is mind. When you're awake you don't need the alarm clock to keep ringing to wake you up. Goi wake someone else up. :) Peace and contentment to you.
Thank you David!!!!
It’s difficult to relay the words of a seer if you’re not realised but this video is matter of fact and relatable.
heart felt Thanks David , for your sharings ,.. has a smell of truth ...... inspiring
Truth doesn't have smell
Ok you are right .. truth has fragrance of joy , peace . Can’t separate 🌷 from its smell 🕉
And yet nobody can see the flower ..
😍😍
Thank you!
I wish there was someone I could see face to face. Manchester UK there's no one haha.
Muito obrigado! Brasil na escuta!🇧🇷 thanks!🤗🙏! Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil
The comparison of RM and N sounded like a difference between Dogen and Rinzai (or Hakuin) in Zen. Quite interesting, thanks.
Gracias.
🙏🙏🙏 Namaste Sir. ❤️
Merci pour vos vidéos, j'ai été voir sur votre blog si il y avait une traduction du livre de Sri Ramana Maharshi, j'ai pas vu de traduction, serait t'il possible d'avoir une traduction du livre des poèmes et versets de sri Ramana Maharshi en français , je découvre, je n'y connais rien dans la philosophie indienne, mais j'aime bien la poésie merci beaucoup .
Gracias ♡ ♡ ♡
Namaste.Thank you for uploading this,thank you!
I’d love to meet a man like that
David, thanks! I dont know if you read this, can please recomend me a book from Ramana Maharshi, just one book, wich?
I don't know if you have seen the movie:Jupiter Ascending,but it touches on a great many things-reincarnation-the desires for fame/fortune & yet one finds no real love or inner peace thru that egocentric pursuit.
I just found it a fascinating overview of how as our technology grows in sophistication we may lose a greater part of our spiritual natures.
fantastic
didn't know you were on you tube, so now subscribed. can you put some notice on your site for our poorly attended arunachalavedas?? thanks
aum shanti
What is interesting, is even if one examines Ramana Maharishi's teachings alone, one will find multiple seeming contradictions.
So is Bhagavan Ramana wrong?
A liar?
Certainly not.
It is simply that he spoke to the different points of views of those he taught.
When Yogananda asked Bhagavan what teaching should be taught to the masses, Bhagavan replied that each person must be taught according to their own spititual maturity and temperament.
Foe there is no set "path" that can easily be walked by all.
And so we see that the purpose of these teachings is not to lay out infallible dogma.
It is to point the seeker in the right direction, to discover truth for themselves.
Upon success, the seeker disappears, and all methods and scriptures become pointless, unneeded.
For when the seeker realizes the Self, union with God, etc, etc, this occurs when the ego that seeks, is removed from the equation.
And all that remains is God.
Not having had the great opportunity meeting two of the" greatest Advaita masters" of that era. I can only say, that Nisar Gadatta left people like myself, and (hopefully) many generations after me, his "timeless" words. In I am that, and other books .In which people wrote down his conversations. While Ramana, left "relatively little" then , an image. That is getting "worshiped" Having more "noble features" than Nisar. The typical "saint at the mountain " .To simplify , One had to experience Ramana. while we can still "read I am that" and absorb his wisdom.
+Spirtual Paradoxicalist Sri Ramana's spoken teachings have appeared in many books. I would guess the total of pages in print exceeds that of all the Nisargadatta Maharaj material. You can find his spoken teachings in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Day by Day with Bhagavan, Letters from Sri Ramanasramam, Maharshi's Gospel, Spiritual Instruction, Guru Vachaka Kovai, Padamalai, Maharshi's Gospel, Guru Ramana, Sat Darshana Bhashya, and other titles. There are also his written works of which the most important are Who am I?, Ulladu Narpadu, Upadesa Undiyar, along with the devotional poetry he addressed to Arunachala.
I have a fairly thick book of Ramana's Satsangs.
"Talks with Ramana Maharshi. On Realizing Abiding Peace and Happiness"
InnerDirections Publishing
Did you ever meet Maurice Friedman? (editor of I am That, and Jnani)
The last bit about contradictions reminded me of Nietzsche insofar as he was not a systemic philosopher. Nietzsche asked what if Truth is a woman, or like a woman? Partly hidden, partly revealed. Yet, we feel that Truth should be consistent, not illogical nonetheless. What if Niz and Nietz were right, that Truth cannot actually be conveyed systematically, but only hints and insights? I would say Nietzsche did want you to think deeply about what he was saying though, a big difference. I think with Niz, he does not want you to think about it because the thinking mind itself is what is criticized. I think Nietzsche attacked logic itself, questioning our assumption that Truth must be logical and non-contradictory, and that what is real is what does not change. The latter is assumed by Eastern philosophy as well as Western. I think he asks why isn't it the other way around, that the real is precisely what changes, as the mark of its reality? He argued that worshiping the unchanging is like worshiping death or nothingness. In other words, the real does give a fig about our mind's preference or insistence that reality be that which is self-consistent. What, indeed if Truth is a woman? I imagine that Nietzsche's answer to Ramana's self-inquiry would be to say I am this individual will, and left it at that. He would reject the flustered response and felt he had given the best response, an individual will, not one universal will in which he somehow participated. Let's not forget that Hinduism has no free will, which is pretty hard to accept, along with the distance it puts between us and our lives, by identifying as not in the world, not in the body, not existing at all, and not able to know what we are. There may be a reason why Niz admitted only one student had ever really gotten it fully, out of thousands who came.
no sound on this video
🕉🕉🕉🙏
you could be a brilliant teacher yourself, in fact as an author you are.
He already IS a brillant teacher.
David one impression I had of Nisargadatta was his habit of smoking. As an unconscious worldly addicted body mind being I am caught up in the illusory perception that an enlightened guru like Nisargadatta Maharaj would have self control and not smoke. This is not the case, i think its a body mind attachment and a guru is beyond the body mind and smoking is just happening. however what if a guru habit directly hurts others?
Hmm...for sure someone must have asked him about his smoking. I would like to see his answer.
there are no others, there is only the self.
and there is no being hurt.
Fix the volume
It appears to me that there is something else apart from Being that we all know and can use as a pointer. Have you ever taken a good look at the incredible pictures of outer space taken by The Hubble Telescope? They are truly magnificent. But what struck me is that scientists and commentators talk about the stars, planets galaxies and other objects up there, but completely ignore that which is infinite, which is the endless black space in which these objects are situated. The real wonder is not the objects - it’s the space they are in, its infinite nature and the implications of that.
So how do we know it’s infinite? Well, if it wasn’t that dark space would have to come to an end and there would have to be something beyond the space that was different to and unable to be contained by space. But space doesn’t discriminate about what it contains. Fly in a rocket for a million years at the speed of light and you will never come to big wall with a sign on it saying: “The End.” So we know it’s infinite and so has no limits whatsoever. So, why is this important?
If space is infinite and has no limits, then it doesn’t stop where your body starts. It doesn’t stop where a planet starts either. If it did space wouldn’t be infinite. This means that all objects (including our bodies/ feelings/ thoughts) are all space appearing as something. It means that, in reality, there is nothing but space - sometimes appearing as an object - sometimes not - but always being space.
It’s incredible that we walk along the road noticing cars, houses. Shops, bodies - but never the space that they appear in. When we think of Oneness we think of different objects - (a tree - a bush - a person) and try to see them as ONE - but we don’t recognise that the space in-between them is part of the totality as much as or even more than the objects themselves. The mind sees the space as NOTHING rather than NO-DEFINED-THING. What’s also amazing is that the space two feet around your body is the same space as the space a million lightyears away! There is no separation or place where one bit of space becomes another bit of space!
Since recognising this everything is now seen as space - all one.
bombay is place.... one can reach from different places(by walk with difficulty, by oceans with patience, by planes with ease) with different circumstances and speak differently about their travels, yet feel satisfied and happy when they reach home... there's no point in arguing whose travel was the best one. what matters is that they reached their destination.
thank you for not allowing advertising in your videos..
Why did the Maharaj say that the I Am (Universal Consciousness) disappears after the physical body dies? We know this is not true! Even individual consciousness ("I am the body") remains after the death of the food-body.
How do you know that?
@@adamnaperty, good morning. Know what?
@@MarceloSiqueiraLima_CdC That individual consciousness remains after death
Consciousness of i am a body is not a so called physical consciousness of physical body anymore, it simply transcend into an awareness of you that you are still alive and aware that you have a form that seems like your body but in this transition of after death, realisation of the oneness with everything in this cosmos are experienced and you may perceive something as light or orbs or any kind of form and you see life in it, and you see that you are it, you are always part of everything you see, i cant say many because if you want to know it you must experience death first. be blessed
@@joshuajack5220 What I meant is that everything you said is knowledge acquired from others. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but simply I'm just wondering. Have you had any knowledge of anything before you were born? There was no experience, no knowledge of anything. The concept of
karma, birth and death ,body or
no body was non existent. Like
nothing ever happened. Why assume that after you die is gonna be different.
Thanks, for sharing, loved them both; but some how you seem in your descriptions of the differences between them, I detected a slight subtle hostility and disappointment from you, like you missed something or wanted supernatural powers instead of simplicity of recognition. You were very fortunate to in his company!
Bullshit.
You never meet Ramana Maharshi but speak as if you had a personal encounter... Why
sir you are not a self claimed guru like many but every one trust you
Nor is he qualified to be a guru, yet.
@@silverlake973 Who decrees who is qualified to be called guru? To the point however, there is only one guru. That guru lives inside all of our hearts.
I wish you share your journey and exoeriences too