The Oasiswithin Article Center
Interview with Ramesh
I met Goran Ekdahl a barrister/judge from Sweden in Bombay in January this year. I was present at Goran's first interview with Ramesh Balsekar - renowned teacher of Advaita -(non-dualism) and his interview with Ramesh is what follows.AN INTERVIEW WITH RAMESH BALSEKAR RAMESH:
Can you tell me your name?
GORAN: My name is Goran.
RAMESH: What brings you to India and Bombay?
GORAN: I spent 60 years of my life in Sweden in the outer world and I have spent 3 months trying to see my inner world. A good friend of mind, Mr Roger Nielsen, spent time with you and recommended highly that I visit you.
RAMESH: Did he tell you what we spoke about?
GORAN: He gave me two books that I was reading. 'Consciousness Speaks' and the other one I don't remember the name . The seeking has been going on for a long time. So what I have discovered now comes as confirmation. - The Ah, Ha! Experience!
RAMESH: What do you do in life or what have you done? Are you still working or have you retired?
GORAN: For the past 10 years I have mainly done commercial arbitration as a Judge.
RAMESH: I see. Yes, You are the one Magnus mentioned yesterday. One of the top five lawyers in Sweden! Anyway that's what he said.
GORAN: He did?
RAMESH: So Goran, you said the seeking has been going on for a long time. Can you remember how it started?
GORAN: No, I cannot. I have always been wondering over the existential question.
RAMESH: Can you explain that a little bit, please Goran?
GORAN: In the Western World you fight, you work hard, and it's a tough life. Being a lawyer there's not much room for emotion. Christianity taught me nothing about Consciousness and mind, but of mind .Reality taught me about mind and money And that God was above those, separated from the human. And you had to ask Him for mercy or whatever.
RAMESH: Yes. In other words God was an all- powerful entity - an entity connected with the manifestation, but all powerful. Much more powerful than the Chairman of the biggest company in the world.
GORAN: If he has any power! My first discovery would pose a question, if I may? Is the main difference between this Western thinking I've been living in and the Eastern thinking, that you take Consciousness, mind and your thought, sort of logically divided - divided is not the right word, but still - while in the West they don't do that. And, if you take the standpoint of Consciousness, as I understand it here, mind separated, and at the same time say Consciousness is God, that is really interesting and that is a fantastic discovery for a Westerner coming out here.
RAMESH: Yes. But Consciousness is God. But think what happens if you think, Goran, in terms of Consciousness being the Source. The One without a second. Nothing other than the Source. Then what happens? If a child asks: " Who made me?" You answer " God made you". And any intelligent child will say: " Who made God?". In other words the tendency is to go back to the Source.
GORAN: I also find the word 'Source' a very good explanation for my way of thinking.
RAMESH: That is why I say if you think Consciousness is God, you have all sorts of problems. But if you think of Consciousness or God as the Source, then there is no problem. So if something has emerged from the Source, which is the only reality, and then even logically what has emerged from the Source can only be an appearance, a vision. The Source is the only Reality and a lovely example in the Hindu Scriptures is the Source creates the manifestation like a Spider creates its web. One of the most appropriate examples I've ever come across. Meaning the Source is the source. There is no material outside the Source, which the Source could have taken to produce the manifestation. So the manifestation has nothing within itself, which is not in the Source. The Source has no other material with which to create the manifestation and the spider the same thing. It doesn't use material outside of itself to create the web. And when it doesn't need the web any longer, it takes the web back into it. You see?
So the Source is like a spider. And I have really no problem in thinking of the manifestation as an appearance. Never did! Not even as a child. It always seemed to me that this is a sort of a dream. Probably because, innately, I took it for granted that what I saw must have come from the One Source. That the one Source is the only reality. Then, whatever has come about has to be an appearance. Has to be an illusion. Many years ago, I remember, my mother didn't like the fact that I wasn't doing the regular routine I was supposed to do as a Hindu child, or a Hindu young man. Once she got so exasperated, she said: " Ramesh, what do you want?" And the answer came straight away. " I want to know that which existed 10.000 years ago, that which exists now and that which will exist 10000 years from now. She replied: " You have always been a queer child." So we made a pact. There is something called a Stotra, which is in praise of Rama. Her chosen deity was Rama, so there is Rama Stotra, What she was basically concerned with was not my spiritual life, but my life as a son. Well I promised her that every morning or every day after my bath, I would recite the Rama Stotra, which, she assumed would prevent me from all kinds of disasters. With that she was happy! So I've been doing it ever since.
So the wanting is always there. Or not 'wanting' so much as 1) the acceptance that all this is an appearance and 2) that what happens in that appearance - what happens in the movie or on a stage - there is nothing anyone can do about it.
So what is to happen to me is going to happen to me - good, bad or indifferent - and no power on earth can stop it. These were my two earliest, absolute convictions. I can't even call them convictions because convictions mean mental, but this is deepest acceptance. So, someone asked me yesterday, has my seeking been a lot of misery? I said: " No fortunately, it hasn't " Probably because of these two fundamental assumptions.
So what course did your seeking take, Goran?
GORAN: I guess I tried to get back to the roots; get back to the first written scripts; get back to the first thoughts being expressed that we can find today.
RAMESH: Exactly. At what age would you say this seeking took an active turn? Even as a child there must have been these rudiments of wondering, something about beyond what you see or feel. That must have been a passive one, even as a child.
GORAN: I think you're absolutely right
RAMESH: So when would you say this active seeking began. Goran?
GORAN: The active seeking began three months ago. Something going on constantly, 24 hours - if possible - a day, for three months, so it would be a turning point.
RAMESH: So, the seeking was for some deep question, which kept bothering you all the time you were in the waking state? and perhaps the sleeping state. So, what is the question that really bothered you since three months?
GORAN: I visited a Benedictine Monastery in Switzerland for a couple of days- The Einsesen Monastery - and I saw a peace on the faces of the monks and some happiness; some peace that astonished me.
RAMESH: You see, curiously our final state is said to be, as you know Sat - Chit- Ananda - Existence, Consciousness and the word has always, from time immemorial, I don't know why translated as 'Bliss', I never understood why. If there is bliss, you're on cloud seven. You have to go down sometime! You see? But anyway, it has been translated as 'Bliss', which I've never liked and even since I knew something about this I always use the word 'Peace' and not ' Bliss' or 'Joy'. Ramana Maharshi uses the word 'Calm', which he says is higher than 'joy'. So curiously, what you were seeking started when you saw on the faces of the monks a kind of peace. Did you ever wonder what that peace could be?
GORAN? Absolutely.
RAMESH: What is that peace? Did you ask someone? I see peace in your face, what is it? What does it signify? What does it represent?
GORAN: I got the traditional Christian message. Pray to God. Live according to our rules etc.
RAMESH: Yes, but that's the instruction you got. But didn't you ask them what that peace in their faces represents?
GORAN: I didn't have the way of thinking at that time that I could understand. I thought that seeking ways to reach that situation where you could feel peace may have been in my mind.
RAMESH: Yes. If you had asked one of them and, if that person had the understanding, then he - my concept is - that he probably would have said, " The peace that you see on my face represents acceptance of whatever is in the moment" That's my translation of the peace you saw in the monk's face. He accepts what is in the moment.
A friend of mine used to come here. He lives in Bangalore. And you've heard of the Rama Krishna Mision.? They are a sort of mission, like a monastery, where some people go and stay as monks. They're more open. So many people have made it a practice to go to a local Rama Krishna Mission every Sunday morning or something like that. So this friend of mine, his father and his father before him, used to go to the Rama Krishna Mission in Bangalore. They talked to the Swami in charge for 15 or 20 minutes and would probably understand that their duty to God is over. Once they go and see this Swami for half an hour on Sunday morning, it's like going to Church and your duty to God is done.
So this man - maybe he was a bit addicted to Advaita also - so he somehow couldn't make himself go for two or three weeks. And the Swami in charge mentioned to my friend's father. " I haven't seen your son for quite some time" I mean, he didn't - in fairness to the Swami - he didn't say it as a complaint.
So the father asked the son " Why don't you pray?" More in obedience to his father's wish he went to see the Swami. The Swami was very happy to see him. They talked for a while and then the Swami said: " Why haven't you been coming?" Then my friend said " If you promise not to get angry or to hold it against me and, more important, my family, I'll tell you exactly what it is." So the Swami said " I would like to know". So, he said: " I have only one question for you, Swami. You have been here for 30 years. You have been in charge of this Mission living in some Mission or other for 30, 35 years. " And the Swami said: "Yes. 40 years" So he said " The question is this. You have been living in this monastery for 40 years. No problem about your life. You have been fed, you have been clothed, you have been sheltered. All your basic needs are looked after and you have a certain duty prescribed by the Mission. Basically, as I see it you have led a sheltered life for 40 years and what you are doing is advising people like me and my father about life, of which you know nothing. My question is this, Swami, if you had to go out of this Mission and live for 6 months in the world outside, on your own, without reference or resort to any Mission, would you be able to live? Very quickly the Swami said " No!" " So that's why I have not been coming. I didn't feel like talking to a person about life when that Swami has no experience at all of the life which you're going to advise me".
And you just said the monks just told you how to live your life. Do this, don't do that. So that's my question which you could have asked. If you had asked the monk this question, he would also probably have said "No" And what is more, Goran, the amazing thing is that quite a few people, giving up their life and living in the Rama Krishna Mission, or some other mission, doing exactly this. They can never make a million dollars because they can't work. But they live a fully sheltered life. And if the nature of that body-mind organism is to accept a sheltered life and not to have any ambition, then my point is, most of the people who go and live in those missions or monasteries, the peace, which they have could depend to an enormous extent on the security, which they have. You see?
So the peace that you saw on the monk's face could well represent the sense of security, which could be disturbed if the nature of that body-mind organism had ambition. But if the nature of that body-mind organism of a monk is not to be ambitious, to be satisfied, not involved outside, no one can guarantee you the security -food, clothing, shelter, medical needs - everything is satisfied. So to a large extent the peace that you saw could have been based on this security - security of life. But how much of that peace was based on the understanding? It would be very difficult. You see?
So the Buddha has said: "Samsara is dukka" - Life is unhappiness, Nirvana is peace. " And, because he understood that someone who is buffeted about in life and is extremely frustrated would immediately say "I agree that is my experience, so I would like to go and live in Paris -or Sweden" Frankly, according to me I may be wrong - but if there is a paradise on earth - I've always thought of Sweden. And yet I remember reading somewhere the maximum number of suicides are in Sweden. I may be wrong. I don't know.
GORAN: It's a high rate.
RAMESH: It's the highest rate of all. So I said, how can it be -highest suicide rate in paradise? So this sense of security, if the peace is based on that security, then I would say it would be God's Will and your destiny to have that kind of peace wanted by the average person, average seeker, is the Nirvana - Peace of Nirvana, which Buddha said to get rid of the dukha (unhappiness) in life. But he made it clear that Samsara and Nirvana are not two. In other words, Samsara is not Bombay and Nirvana is not Paris. You can drop one and go to the other. What he meant was: You have to understand, just understand the peace of Nirvana and that understanding will bring you peace of Nirvana while you are living - living your life. You see? So the Nirvana of peace had to be had in life, as we know it. For that, I think in my concept, is what the average seeker is seeking. The peace of Nirvana while living your life. You have a question?
GORAN: Well I just came to think of when I feel that I experience truth I can also sense peace. Those two go together.
RAMESH: Yes. You see, peace goes together, as I say. To me the peace of Nirvana represents nothing more that the total acceptance of what is in the present moment - the good and the bad; the beautiful and the ugly.
GORAN: So if I experience truth and feel peace by it, is that acceptance? RAMESH: That depends on what you mean by truth, Goran.
GORAN: The truth the way I experienced it.
RAMESH: You said it. " If I experience truth, is that acceptance?" That was your question. So, I don't know what you mean by 'when you experience the truth '. Truth to me is what is in the present moment. What is the truth? That which exists in any present moment, both the good and the bad; both the beautiful and the ugly. So, if this is so, then experiencing the truth - again I would translate into 'acceptance of what is in the present moment'. You are accepting - What is the basis of unhappiness, Goran? Samsara is dukkha. What is the basis - and nor was Buddha talking of unhappiness as physical ailment. He was talking of the psychological dukha. The psychological pain. So when do you have this unhappiness or pain? You have this unhappiness or pain when what is in the present moment becomes not acceptable to you. So the pain arises when you are not accepting what is: you want something different from what is. That is when unhappiness arises. But if the acceptance is there of whatever there is, including the Mother Teresa's and the psychopaths, including Jesus Christ and the Hitlers, at that moment, so even that is what is - the totality of what is now. If that is acceptable then you are experiencing the truth. So, if your experiencing the truth brings about the peace, -translated with my concept - it means Goran is accepting whatever is at the present moment, without choosing any one between the two inter-connected opposites as what is. In the next moment 'what is' may change. The ratio of the good and the bad and the beautiful and the ugly may change at the next moment. So, what you accept in the present moment, you accept it not for all time, but for that moment, knowing in the next moment things could change. It's not a static life, it's always variable. So, acceptance of what is includes acceptance that the 'what is' in this moment may change in the next moment. You see? And whatever is at any moment is accepted as something over which no power on earth can have any control.
GORAN: In Consciousness, do things change?
RAMESH: What we see is a reflection in Consciousness. In other words, if you take an example of the movie, the movie changes all the time. But what is the basis of the movie? The screen. So I would say Consciousness is the screen on which the movie of life happens. And when you watch the movie of life, the peace is never being unaware that what is real is the screen behind. The peace arises out of never being unaware of the screen while the movie goes on. When the movie goes on you participate in the movie. You see something sad; tears may come. Something happens and you get angry. You get angry with the villain. Something amusing happens; you laugh. So in this weeping or anger or compassion, or whatever, there is never any forgetting that this is a temporary appearance. The real is the screen. so, the understanding that the real is the screen does not prevent Goran from participating in life. So, accepting the reality of the present moment - 'what is' - does no prevent Goran from participating in life. Therefore, if- according to my concept - the accepting, the ability to accept, 'what is' in the understanding or the self-realisation or whatever. So, when this enlightenment or self- realisation happens, the misconception is that Goran suddenly becomes a saint and Goran will not be able to enjoy what he has enjoyed so far! You see? So, of this misconception the ego is afraid. If self-realisation means my being demolished, I wouldn't want self-realisation. I don't want to be dead! You see? So that is a misconception. So what would I tell the ego about the objection. He says " I tend to go towards the understanding. Something pulls me back. I'm afraid" So I say " Find out what is this fear for?" The fear is by the ego. The fear is the fear of death. If self-realisation means my being annihilated, why should I want self-realisation?" The answer is this: "what the self -realisation brings is the demolition of the sense of personal doer-ship. Whatever is, is not of the doing of any of the people concerned but the happening. So the basis of self-realisation for me is the total unconditional acceptance that I'm not the doer of actions, which happen through me - nor is Goran the doer of actions happening through him. You see? The peace happens with this understanding. So the ego continues to function and live after self-realisation but without the sense of personal doership. So I would tell the ego, " not only are you not going to die but you are going to live so long as the body -mind organism is alive. " You see? So I would tell the ego " You don't have to be afraid of dying. Not only will you live, but you will live with a much greater sense of freedom".
How? This way. If I totally am able to accept - I use the words 'able to accept' because acceptance is not my choice. Whether that acceptance happens or not is, like everything else, the Will of God. Therefore, the basis of what I say, Goran, in life - not theoretically the Source - we are now concerned with life. So my fundamental basic understanding about life as it happens is the four words in the Bible. " Thy Will be Done" which means in effect that something has happened as part of what is at that moment. It could not have happened unless it was the Will of God. You see? So assuming that nothing is my doing and yet I participate in life. Yet the ego participates in life. So what happens? An action happens through the body-mind organisim, which is applauded by society. This action has helped a lot of people. Ramesh has been a kind man. Ramesh should be honoured. So this is the input in this body-mind organism, along with the basic concept of ' Thy Will be Done'.
My other basic concept is that the human being is no more than a uniquely programmed computer. You had no choice about being born to particular parents and therefore the genes of a unique DNA in this object Goran had no control. Similarly, Goran had no control about being born of particular parents in a particular environment in Sweden. You had no choice. So nobody had the choice of being born in Sweden or to hungry parents in Ethiopia. So you had no choice about being born in Sweden and therefore apart from the unique DNA, the conditioning , which this human object has received from day one. Conditioning at home, conditioning in society, conditioning in church or temple, conditioning in school, the bombardment of conditioning at every moment, which is still going on.
So this unique DNA, plus the environmental conditioning is what I say is the programming in every human computer. So, how does the computer work? How does God in bringing about His will, use a human computer? Put it this way. An action happens through this body-mind organism, which is applauded by society. So the applause of society, either heard or seen, becomes the input in this computer. The brain reacts to that input and the output is a sense of pleasure. That is what I mean by participation in life. The applause of society is the input, the output is a sense of pleasure. So a sense of pleasure arises as a mere mechanical output, brought about by the body-mind computer, but with this understanding that what has brought about the applause from society - is not my action, I'm absolutely convinced. So, knowing it is not my action which has brought about the applause of society, a sense of pleasure will arise, a sense of gratification will arise, but not a sense of pride.
So the other extreme. An action happening which hurts some people. Society or whoever it is of that society will say " This is a bad action, this action of Ramesh has hurt someone" You see? So that is the input. The output will be a sense of regret. A sense of regret that somebody has been hurt. Not my action in hurting, but the sense of regret, will arise almost certainly. Help being rendered to those who have been hurt to the best of my ability. So a sense of regret may arise but knowing it is not my action., which has caused the hurt, there is no need for any guilt to arise. A sense of pleasure, but not pride.
A sense of regret, but not guilt.
That is for actions happening through this body-mind organism. And if I accept that no action is my action, then I must also accept that no action is anybody's action. That all action is a Divine happening through some human body or the other. It is not something done by anyone. So if an action happens through this body-mind organism called Goran, which hurts me, then the understanding will bring about the acceptance of the hurt, not as something done by Goran, but acceptance of the hurt as being at that moment God's Will and the destiny of this body-mind organism. So the hurt will be accepted as the destiny of the body-mind organism, but not as something done by Goran to me. You see? So while the hurt will be accepted, knowing that Goran, or anybody, just doesn't have the power to hurt me. If it is God's Will, the hurt will be there, but how can I hate Goran when I know that Goran had nothing to do with the hurt. You see? The hurt will happen, but not hatred.
So the result of my simple acceptance - one simple thing - that no action is anybody's action; all action is God's Will means I'm still participating in life, with a sense of pleasure, a sense of regret at being hurt by someone, but not pride. No pride, no guilt, no hatred, no envy. So I still participate in life exactly as before. And participation in life means the reactions happening in this body-mind organism according to the programme. And yet I participate in life without pride, guilt, hatred or envy. And my concept is that is what means peace in life. Absence of pride, guilt, hatred, and envy in life means the peace we're looking for.
GORAN: May I take it practically as I come to think about it? It happens that I take decisions that have wide implications for a lot of people. How do I defend myself when I see that I, by the decisions, create miseries. I could lay off 300 people in one decision, for example, which is a terrible thing.
RAMESH: Yes, but if you are forced to lay off 300 people, would you say it is your action? What forces you to lay off 300 people? Are forces beyond your control?
GORAN: Absolutely.
RAMESH: Is that not so? Action may be apparently yours and for that action consequences will happen. Any action that happens consequently will happen, not only for that body-mind organism, through which the decision for action has been happening, but for others.
GORAN: But what do I tell the people in the press release?
RAMESH: What you tell the people is this, assuming one person comes: " If you were in my place, you would have done the same. You see? Normally you blame the circumstances - the economical, the market conditions or whatever - which have forced Goran to take the decision. So it is not really Goran's decision, is it?
GORAN: No. It's definitely not.
RAMESH: So that decision, whichever way the decision, the action happens because it is God's Will and the consequence, whoever is concerned, may also affect a lot of people. It's still God's Will. You see? I'll tell you exactly the same situation. A personal friend of mine got into this situation. He was the head of a company. That big company got merged with a bigger company and it fell to the lot of this friend of mind to sack 300 people (Actually the figure was also 300 people) so he did it, but it affected his mind so much he had a nervous breakdown and ultimately I think, he died. Because that body-mind organism was so sensitive that it was the destiny of that body-mind organism to make that decision, the result of which was a nervous breakdown and ultimately his death. So that was God's Will for that particular body-mind organism and the destiny.
So my main point is this. Self-realisation or enlightenment does not take the self-realised being out of life. He still continues to live his life with life happening more or less the way as before. So he still participates in life but he result of this self-realisation may make change in other ways. you see, the nature, the programming in this body-mind organism is not to give talks. If I had to make an after-dinner speech, I wouldn't enjoy my meal. And yet you will find me day after day, every morning talking for two hours. So it simply means God is using this body-mind organism, with its understanding, for His own purposes.
So words are happening. But what happens here, if I find Goran receptive to what I am saying, certainly a sense of pleasure will arise, a sense of gratification will arise that the words are producing the desired effect. But I know that is happening because it is the destiny of that body-mind organism to be receptive. So, on the other hand, if some other body-mind organism is not able to receive it, I don't feel disappointed. I feel sorry for that person because their destiny is not to be able to accept this wonderful feeling of freedom. But I'm not guilty. You see? Therefore, a sense of gratification may arise, a sense of regret that it is not acceptable, either may arise, but not pride or guilt.
GORAN: Something that I see in Goran, that I see in myself, is that although I'm not a judge or sitting as a judge, he has to exact all these decisions and they can be harmful to others and something goes on within him that caused him to feel angry himself about these decisions.
RAMESH: But that is the reaction of the body-mind computer. but deep down the judge knows that it is his duty. So he can either resign, or do his duty. You see, I remember reading somewhere Mahatma Gandhi, when he was brought to trial about whatever he had done illegally - it certainly was illegal based on the laws existing at that moment. So he was taken to the court and when the jailors brought Gandhiji into the room the judge stood up along with the others - English Judge- stood up along with the others; sat down and said: " This court is honoured to have you here" He finally condemned him, because what he had done was against the law as it remained. What could he do? If he were a computer, the computer would have condemned him. But he was not a computer in the usual sense, he was a human being. So, as a human being he stood up and honoured the man he was supposed to judge. That is the remarkable thing about British justice - whatever else they may have done.
The basic question, Goran is this: If I understand that everything happens according to Gods' Will, how do I live my life? Valid question! How do I take a decision?. Life is nothing but taking decision. How do I make a decision next time I have to make a decision.? How do I live my life? Apparently a valid question. And a valid answer, according to my concept is: Do whatever you like. But investigate that a little. What you like means what you think you should do, Isn't it? And what you think you should do is based on your conditioning. So is it really you who makes a decision or is it the conditioning, over which you have no control, which is making this decision.? So let your conditioning make the decision. So my point is: this understanding does not preclude Goran from doing whatever he thinks he should do at the moment. or put another way, what Goran thinks at any moment he should do is exactly what God wants him to think, because that is the way He has programmed it. In other words, do whatever you like as if you had free will.
GORAN: You really do what you like if you are programmed anyway.
RAMESH: Then what you mean is, what it comes to, is that you really have no free will. It does. So, I said do what you like' So Goran said 'Do I or do I not have free will?' I say yes, you have free will to make any decision that you like.. But if you investigate you will find that that free will depends on the programming, over which you have no control. That means the apparent free will that you have is counterfeit.
You buy an old house. There's an attic. You find a big box in the attic. You open it. Bundle of notes. Goran is delighted. God knows how much it is - a million maybe. So does Goran have a bundle of notes? Yes. But Goran takes it to the bank next day and the bank teller says "hey, this is counterfeit! " So does Goran have free will? Yes! But that free will is counterfeit. Therefore when you have to make a decision, make it freely, without any feeling of restriction or constriction.
GORAN: The decision as such comes out of the conditioning anyway.
RAMESH: Therefore I say, whatever you do will be exactly what God wanted you to do at that moment. But that does not prevent Goran from making a valuable decision. If that is the nature of the programming of Goran, he had to make a decision; he will take all alternatives into action; give some thought over it; take his assistant's opinion; finally come to a decision, which, as I say, is exactly as God wanted Goran to do. So, having made that decision, Goran need not feel either pride or guilt. Therefore Goran need not worry what consequences it will have, because that decision that is being made is God's Will. Whether action happens according to that Will is also God's Will. And what consequences that action produces is also God's Will.
This document maintained by
multifaith@aol.com.
Material
Copyright © 2000 Oasiswithin