Nome dialogues in the book Self-Knowledge.
I have found dialogues, and writings by Nome to be an invaluable resource for understanding and deepening in the practice of Inquiry. As with most things, sometimes it's best to randomly pick.
Nome: So, you need simply transcend the senses by Knowledge of who you are, of your identity. When you meditate, seek to find the Truth by actual direct experience. It need not be approached in terms of the "right answer and the wrong answer." The inquiry does not have an answer in that sense. As the Maharshi has said, "The inquirer is himself the answer, and there cannot be another answer." So the inquirer should seek the Truth of who he is.
The same holds true in Satsang. We are having a dialogue. Do not worry about whether you aree right or wrong in your question or in your answer in response to a question, but only have your heart set upon finding and actually experiencing blissfully for yourself, what is really your Being. It is, therefore, not an objective study or scholastic study. There is no grading on this. It is all a matter of blissfully experiencing your own Being as it is, of finding what is true. If you approach every meditation in that way, every opportunity to read in that way, satsangs in that way, you will find it to be immensely beneficial. Thereby, what is discerned through discrimination rapidly becomes your experience, and the stop over in the intellect is no longer needed. You are on the express. You do not need to stop at the intellect station. (laughter)
Q: That is good. I would much rather have the Transcendent Express than the intellect local. (laughter).
Another Q: (describing meditation experience) The experience has been like falling in llove, but it is a falling that is inward toward the Self. Moreover, the experience sometimes carries over in the experience of the world. Sometimes, I see things that I have conflicts with and these are what I need to meditate on. Underlying these, there is a steady feeling of falling in love with my Self. Should I keep going into that or keep questioning my ideas as they arise? To go into That feels like the deepest desire. Meditation is desirable because it is going into the Self.
Nome says: It is because the Self is of the nature of Bliss that the feelings of yearning for it, desire for it, and love for it arise. Are you familiar with the book Who am I?
Q: Yes.
Nome says: You will remember that, in the preamble, the text deals with where happiness is. The Maharshi mentions that it is observed in everyone that they have a supreme, or highest, love for their own Self. He indicates this is proof of the source of Bliss being within, for, obviously, we love that which causes us happiness. We do not necessarily love something which causes us suffering. Even if we say that we love something or someone, though they cause us suffering, it is because we love something else, in spite of that suffering, that makes us happy inside. What we love is the source of happiness. That source can only be the Self and cannot be anything external.
Q: I am seeing that when I am passionately attached, it is a case of misidentification.
Nome says: You should look for the experience where it is experienced. If happiness, or love, would be some object seen, you should look for it in the object seen. If it is a tactile sensation, you should look for it in the objects touched. If happiness, or love, is something that wells up from within, you should look within.
If you have lost something, you look for it exactly where you lost it. You do not run outisde for what is lost inside. If you lose something in the satsang hall, you should look for it in the satsang hall. You should not run outside on Ocean Street, looking for it, lest you wind up on the other side of Ocean Street (laughter--referring to the cemetary across the street from the temple). So, it is with samsara. People look outside for what is inside, and they wind up in the cemetary, perishing as the things perish. That is why we are on this side. (laughter) We are already on the other shore, figuratively and literally in this case. (laughter)
You must look for what you love where the experience arises. The desire comes from the same place. In the Upanishad-s, it is said that, "The husband is not loved for the sake of the husband, but because of the Self, for the sake of the Self, and continues to say thus the wife is loved that way, the child is loved, and so on. Everything is loved, including the whole universe, for the sake of the Self; not for the thing itself; not for the thing itself, but for the sake of the Self. Perceive that Self. The desire to experience it more, to meditate more, is a result of meditation, and it is only natural. Bliss becomes its own fascination. If you lift yourself beyond the senses, your experience becomes all the more beautiful and all the more intense. If you lift yourself beyond thought, it is ever more so.
The happiness of one who is beyond the senses is myriad more than any pleasure that could come through the senses, even the most intense pleasure. The happiness of one who is experiencing it in her mind is more than anything the senses could possibly be. The happiness of one who stands transcendent of the mind is myriad times more than the happiness that you could have in any mode of mind. You will find that the happiness, which is what is loved, found in the Self, is incomparable. It is the root of all the kinds of happiness or joys felt in any circumstance.
You have desire. The conditions of the desire are met momentarily, or you forget about them. Because the limitation is then not being imagined, the natural happiness of the Self shines. Because of the previous ignorance, superimposition occurs, and you think this thing is your happiness. The moment you think that, misery begins at that point, and, with the disappearance of that thing, grief commences. There is only one happiness, and it has only one source. If you mix it up with other things, it is veiled or seems limited. If you do not so mix it up, it is unlimited and is never veiled from your experience.
Another Q: Earlier in this session, someone made a comment, and you answered with a wonderful silence. I have always felt the word "Kaivalya" to be the strongest medicine in Vedanta. It was mentioned only briefly, because it is such strong medicine. If you look at it from the point of the individual, it is scary, but it is one of the most absolute, nondual pointers in the scriptures. If one takes the good part and takes away the scary part, which is very frightening to the individual to consider, it is such a deep, final answer.
Nome says: The reference to Kaivalya ("That which alone is") was in reference to a passage read aloud last week from one of the texts of Sri Shankara. Sri Shankara was not frightened when he uttered the word, "Kaivalya." In fact, he had no fear whatsoever. The abolishment of fear occurs by realizing the Nondual. The Upanishad declares, "Where there is a second, there is fear." The "second" is the "I." You are saying, "From the position of the "I", Kaivalyam is scary." No, it is not so. From the position of the "I", the "I" is scary. The "I"-less state is the fearless state. The "I"-less true "I" is fearless. Fear arises when there is a second, which is some individuality. Even if the individual being, or jiva, never heard the word, "Kaivalya" and simply immersed himself day and night in the dream of multiplicity he would still have fear.
Q: I was trying to keep the individual within that vision. That is the scary part.
Nome says: No. Even if the individual so much thinks of That which alone is--the significance of Kaivalyam---his fear will begin to dissipate. Even just by thinking about these things, this occurs, because then there is some portal, as it were, to Liberation from the ego. The ego is only conducive toward, and productive of, that which is fearful, grievous, undesirable, and futile. Without the ego, there is no cause at all for any kind of suffering or bondage. If you turn your mind inward and even begin to think about the teachings of Vedanta, the highest final Knowledge, of Advaita, of Nonduality, of Kaivalyam, of That which alone really is--- fear will start to reduce from that moment onward. The measurement stick, though, that you might use would be rather insignificant, since the measuring stick will also be abandoned in the search for Reality. If, having heard about it, you think about it very deeply and then commence meditation upon it, fear will dissolve. It will dissolve in exactly the same proportions as the notion of an ego-entity dissolves. So,while, on the one hand, one can loosely say that the Absolute is a terror for the individual, in actual experience, it is not fearful. It is sweet in the beginning, in the middle, and in the end. There is nothing fearful about it at all. It is joy becoming greater joy, becoming bliss. This is why apasmara, the demon of forgetfulness, symbolizing the ego, at the bottom of the Nataraja symbol, is pointing to the foot that is raised in the Ananda tandava, dance of Bliss. Generally, he will be portrayed as smiling. Even though he is going out of existence, he is smiling. He is not terrified.
On the path to Self-Realization, there are no trials and tribulations. If you want trials and tribulations, stay in samsara, the illusion of one's own mind. Does effort need to be applied? Yes. can one become afraid? Yes. However, that is due to lack of practice rather than due to practicing.
Loosely and unwisely, a person can say that he is afraid of ego-loss. He is afraid within the position of the ego, and if he even moves a toe in the direction of ego-loss, he will begin to see the dissipation of whatever he is afraid of, of the fear itself. Is the distinction being shown clear for you?
Q: Yes, and I can feel the Bliss with which you say it, too. That is a big pointer itself.
Nome: Is Bliss scary? (laughter)
Q: (Shaking his head) No.
Nome: I did not think so. (laughter) What Bliss is, so is Being, and Being is the ego-less real nature.
I have found dialogues, and writings by Nome to be an invaluable resource for understanding and deepening in the practice of Inquiry. As with most things, sometimes it's best to randomly pick.
Nome: So, you need simply transcend the senses by Knowledge of who you are, of your identity. When you meditate, seek to find the Truth by actual direct experience. It need not be approached in terms of the "right answer and the wrong answer." The inquiry does not have an answer in that sense. As the Maharshi has said, "The inquirer is himself the answer, and there cannot be another answer." So the inquirer should seek the Truth of who he is.
The same holds true in Satsang. We are having a dialogue. Do not worry about whether you aree right or wrong in your question or in your answer in response to a question, but only have your heart set upon finding and actually experiencing blissfully for yourself, what is really your Being. It is, therefore, not an objective study or scholastic study. There is no grading on this. It is all a matter of blissfully experiencing your own Being as it is, of finding what is true. If you approach every meditation in that way, every opportunity to read in that way, satsangs in that way, you will find it to be immensely beneficial. Thereby, what is discerned through discrimination rapidly becomes your experience, and the stop over in the intellect is no longer needed. You are on the express. You do not need to stop at the intellect station. (laughter)
Q: That is good. I would much rather have the Transcendent Express than the intellect local. (laughter).
Another Q: (describing meditation experience) The experience has been like falling in llove, but it is a falling that is inward toward the Self. Moreover, the experience sometimes carries over in the experience of the world. Sometimes, I see things that I have conflicts with and these are what I need to meditate on. Underlying these, there is a steady feeling of falling in love with my Self. Should I keep going into that or keep questioning my ideas as they arise? To go into That feels like the deepest desire. Meditation is desirable because it is going into the Self.
Nome says: It is because the Self is of the nature of Bliss that the feelings of yearning for it, desire for it, and love for it arise. Are you familiar with the book Who am I?
Q: Yes.
Nome says: You will remember that, in the preamble, the text deals with where happiness is. The Maharshi mentions that it is observed in everyone that they have a supreme, or highest, love for their own Self. He indicates this is proof of the source of Bliss being within, for, obviously, we love that which causes us happiness. We do not necessarily love something which causes us suffering. Even if we say that we love something or someone, though they cause us suffering, it is because we love something else, in spite of that suffering, that makes us happy inside. What we love is the source of happiness. That source can only be the Self and cannot be anything external.
Q: I am seeing that when I am passionately attached, it is a case of misidentification.
Nome says: You should look for the experience where it is experienced. If happiness, or love, would be some object seen, you should look for it in the object seen. If it is a tactile sensation, you should look for it in the objects touched. If happiness, or love, is something that wells up from within, you should look within.
If you have lost something, you look for it exactly where you lost it. You do not run outisde for what is lost inside. If you lose something in the satsang hall, you should look for it in the satsang hall. You should not run outside on Ocean Street, looking for it, lest you wind up on the other side of Ocean Street (laughter--referring to the cemetary across the street from the temple). So, it is with samsara. People look outside for what is inside, and they wind up in the cemetary, perishing as the things perish. That is why we are on this side. (laughter) We are already on the other shore, figuratively and literally in this case. (laughter)
You must look for what you love where the experience arises. The desire comes from the same place. In the Upanishad-s, it is said that, "The husband is not loved for the sake of the husband, but because of the Self, for the sake of the Self, and continues to say thus the wife is loved that way, the child is loved, and so on. Everything is loved, including the whole universe, for the sake of the Self; not for the thing itself; not for the thing itself, but for the sake of the Self. Perceive that Self. The desire to experience it more, to meditate more, is a result of meditation, and it is only natural. Bliss becomes its own fascination. If you lift yourself beyond the senses, your experience becomes all the more beautiful and all the more intense. If you lift yourself beyond thought, it is ever more so.
The happiness of one who is beyond the senses is myriad more than any pleasure that could come through the senses, even the most intense pleasure. The happiness of one who is experiencing it in her mind is more than anything the senses could possibly be. The happiness of one who stands transcendent of the mind is myriad times more than the happiness that you could have in any mode of mind. You will find that the happiness, which is what is loved, found in the Self, is incomparable. It is the root of all the kinds of happiness or joys felt in any circumstance.
You have desire. The conditions of the desire are met momentarily, or you forget about them. Because the limitation is then not being imagined, the natural happiness of the Self shines. Because of the previous ignorance, superimposition occurs, and you think this thing is your happiness. The moment you think that, misery begins at that point, and, with the disappearance of that thing, grief commences. There is only one happiness, and it has only one source. If you mix it up with other things, it is veiled or seems limited. If you do not so mix it up, it is unlimited and is never veiled from your experience.
Another Q: Earlier in this session, someone made a comment, and you answered with a wonderful silence. I have always felt the word "Kaivalya" to be the strongest medicine in Vedanta. It was mentioned only briefly, because it is such strong medicine. If you look at it from the point of the individual, it is scary, but it is one of the most absolute, nondual pointers in the scriptures. If one takes the good part and takes away the scary part, which is very frightening to the individual to consider, it is such a deep, final answer.
Nome says: The reference to Kaivalya ("That which alone is") was in reference to a passage read aloud last week from one of the texts of Sri Shankara. Sri Shankara was not frightened when he uttered the word, "Kaivalya." In fact, he had no fear whatsoever. The abolishment of fear occurs by realizing the Nondual. The Upanishad declares, "Where there is a second, there is fear." The "second" is the "I." You are saying, "From the position of the "I", Kaivalyam is scary." No, it is not so. From the position of the "I", the "I" is scary. The "I"-less state is the fearless state. The "I"-less true "I" is fearless. Fear arises when there is a second, which is some individuality. Even if the individual being, or jiva, never heard the word, "Kaivalya" and simply immersed himself day and night in the dream of multiplicity he would still have fear.
Q: I was trying to keep the individual within that vision. That is the scary part.
Nome says: No. Even if the individual so much thinks of That which alone is--the significance of Kaivalyam---his fear will begin to dissipate. Even just by thinking about these things, this occurs, because then there is some portal, as it were, to Liberation from the ego. The ego is only conducive toward, and productive of, that which is fearful, grievous, undesirable, and futile. Without the ego, there is no cause at all for any kind of suffering or bondage. If you turn your mind inward and even begin to think about the teachings of Vedanta, the highest final Knowledge, of Advaita, of Nonduality, of Kaivalyam, of That which alone really is--- fear will start to reduce from that moment onward. The measurement stick, though, that you might use would be rather insignificant, since the measuring stick will also be abandoned in the search for Reality. If, having heard about it, you think about it very deeply and then commence meditation upon it, fear will dissolve. It will dissolve in exactly the same proportions as the notion of an ego-entity dissolves. So,while, on the one hand, one can loosely say that the Absolute is a terror for the individual, in actual experience, it is not fearful. It is sweet in the beginning, in the middle, and in the end. There is nothing fearful about it at all. It is joy becoming greater joy, becoming bliss. This is why apasmara, the demon of forgetfulness, symbolizing the ego, at the bottom of the Nataraja symbol, is pointing to the foot that is raised in the Ananda tandava, dance of Bliss. Generally, he will be portrayed as smiling. Even though he is going out of existence, he is smiling. He is not terrified.
On the path to Self-Realization, there are no trials and tribulations. If you want trials and tribulations, stay in samsara, the illusion of one's own mind. Does effort need to be applied? Yes. can one become afraid? Yes. However, that is due to lack of practice rather than due to practicing.
Loosely and unwisely, a person can say that he is afraid of ego-loss. He is afraid within the position of the ego, and if he even moves a toe in the direction of ego-loss, he will begin to see the dissipation of whatever he is afraid of, of the fear itself. Is the distinction being shown clear for you?
Q: Yes, and I can feel the Bliss with which you say it, too. That is a big pointer itself.
Nome: Is Bliss scary? (laughter)
Q: (Shaking his head) No.
Nome: I did not think so. (laughter) What Bliss is, so is Being, and Being is the ego-less real nature.
Journal
No comments:
Post a Comment