Satsang with Oliver - questions and answers 56-60

Oliver, does Andrew Cohen transmit the Truth? In our opinion he goes around in circles, but stays close to the core. Do you see any similarities to your personal style of teaching?

Truth cannot be transmitted. Everything that happens occurs in a time- and space-less Oneness, including Andrew Cohen and his teachings. They are not separate from you or from me. Whatever he tells you, what you should do or not do to reach liberation, is exactly THAT which appears and is therefore perfect. It is THAT. If his words please you and you trust him, this will be your path resp. the path of the psychosomatic apparatus you think you are. Otherwise you can always look for another teacher or throw the towel, because you are fed up of all of this (= my modest suggestion :-). All of this is the movie of life, which appears WITHIN you, within Oneness. It doesn't matter what Andrew Cohen says. He cannot make more or less out of you than that, which you already are. Oneness. With the (apparent) liberation of Andrew Cohen you have been liberated as well. Whether you go to Andrew Cohen, or come to me, or go to the cinema, in every moment exactly THAT is here, what you are looking for.

Oliver, my Indian guru says: "You are love." Okay, I say, but then I am also envy and hatred! He didn't like this at all. What do you, as an approved Satsang teacher, say to this?

My reply as an "approved Satsang teacher" comes directly from common sense (yes, the mind has by all means a function in daily life):
If your guru teaches in a dualistic way (your question points to that) and his concept says that THAT what you really are is love (= the "true" Self), then envy and hatred (= two mortal sins) represent the polar opposite, in fact that which, according to his concept, you have to renounce. Your guru wants to help you with his concept to become a more loving, "better" human being (religions happen to ask the same from their followers). It is a kind of spiritual re-education that your guru offers you.
If you counter this with non-dualistic arguments, you will not get anywhere. It is as if a catholic tried to dissuade the Pope from catholicism with mind games. Of course you are, if everything is One (axiom of non-duality), also envy and hatred. You are also spaghetti. So what? That is not the question. Your guru wants to offer you a gift with his statement and you reject it by questioning him with non-dual thought concepts. No wonder he doesn't like this, as he sees that you are in the wrong place with him. That is the game of life and you have just gone against the rules of your guru. Who cares? :-)

Oliver, you question my amiable guru (a Brahman)! He doesn't sell chocolate. He would never say "all is ONE… or IS = SHOULD BE. He says, You are THAT and my reality as a human being is THAT.

Well, every teacher, master or guru - whether Brahman, Buddhist, Christian or Muslim - is selling chocolate in a certain way (beautiful metaphor :-) I sell chocolate, too. We are trying to sell you with loving words the mystery that the search for enlightenment (chocolate!) is unnecessary.
That you ARE already chocolate. In fact we are poor salesmen as we don't sell anything to you at all. We see that you have already everything and we tell you that. That's all! One does it in a dualistic way, the other in a non-dualistic manner. Everyone does it the way he has learned it himself and the way he can do it best. It doesn't matter with which hand the master points to the moon and how this hand is: big or small, fat or thin, smooth or hairy, clean or dirty. The hand is not important. Only the moon matters.

Oliver, can you please interpret the following question with your words: "Is there life after death? Does true life only come after death?"

Who is it that asks this question? It is the one thought: "I am a body separate from other bodies in a world of linear time and space." Metaphorically speaking it is the wave that feels separate from other waves and from the ocean. When this thought dies, and with it the feeling of separateness, the perception of space, time, life and death also disappears. Through the death of the Thought of Separateness (= that which earlier was equal to "I") a fundamental feeling of existence remains. This feeling can be described as Oneness, Being. But it is not personal; from that follows my statement, utterly confusing for the analytic mind, that there is Nobody who does anything resp. to whom anything happens. In this Oneness the circle of Life and Death appears, just as everything simply appears and fades away again. The notion of "Life", "Death", "Life After Death", "Reincarnation" or whatever, are finally just thought-up concepts of this separate "I". The separate "I" wants to reach a place without distress, e.g. Heaven, Paradise, Nirvana or Eternity. But it can never experience the fact that this Heaven is already NOW here, even if it reincarnates millions of times. Heaven cannot be experienced by a somebody. Heaven simply IS, and it is always NOW.

Oliver, in your opinion, when did the identification with "I" "die" with Ramana Maharshi? Immediately after his near-death-experience or in the years of retreat and immersion?

In the awakening moment of Ramana Maharshi, as he realised during the "death simulation" that what he really is, is the true Self (that's the way he called Being, Oneness), his identification with "I" died also. What followed can be interpreted by the mind at random: It is the path of the conditioned "body-mind-entity" who was drawn to the holy mountain Arunachala in South India. Ramana's conditioning made him choose retreat and immersion, risking the death of the body which, as is well known, was prevented by courageous yogis.

Comment from Oliver: Words I can write down. Whether they lead to trust or not is Grace.

<- back next ->

External Google content targeted advertising

(C) 2008 - Alle Rechte vorbehalten

Diese Seite drucken