I wish I could say that I met him while I was deep in the woods. I’d say that I was wandering along a trail and that I met up with him while he was washing what clothes he had in the river. In my wishful thought, he enlightened me, as great teachers do, and when I found my way out of the woods, I understood life’s great mysteries.
But I didn’t meet him that way. As a matter of fact, I haven’t met him at all and never will, seeing how he passed away in 2009. I did learn of him and his teachings while reading a Rolling Stone article about the late Leonard Cohen. It seemed that after Mr. Cohen completed his stay at a Buddhist monastery, he came upon the work of Ramesh Balsekar (RM) and decided to study with him, personally, in India. Now, I don’t know what the outcome of his studies were; however, if Mr. Cohen found RM’s work of merit, then I felt compelled to also find RM’s work and study it for my own learning. I am a big Leonard Cohen fan; his language mastery comes from a place that wish to be. If RM aided in developing that mastery, then perhaps RM could help develop my own mastery.
I researched RM and found out that he was married and had three kids. Really though, he wrote way too many books for me to read in one lifetime. I narrowed down his immense list to two books whose titles resonated with me: 1) The Final Truth. A Guide to Ultimate Understanding; and, 2) Confusion No More. Those two titles seemed to coincide with my own work; that is, I know that understanding one’s reality is a big key to health and if I could find the “ultimate understanding” then maybe I could teach it. Further, I also know that confusion leads to a portal through which evil can emerge; if I could find a means to eliminate confusion, then maybe I could also pass it along to others who need to eliminate confusion and in doing so, we could close those portals of evil.
So, I’ve begun with The Final Truth and after one chapter, I’m not sure what to make to RM’s writings, but I can see the validity in understanding consciousness, which is his primary teaching. What’s more, he says that, “The spontaneous arising of I Am (as a movement in Consciousness) is the sense of existence, the sense of presence.”
To that, I say, “From where did you get your idea of ‘I Am?’ It sounds pretty dang familiar…” The reality is that I do agree that consciousness determines a person’s circumstances. For example, where there’s substance abuse, there’s usually a consciousness rooted in comparison and/or scarcity. If, however, people realize that there’s a consciousness rooted in connection to all life, there’s usually an empathic and healthy person exhibiting that consciousness.
Plus, I agree that the arising “I Am” is the birth of a sense of place and responsibility. So, while I’ve only gotten through the first chapter as of yet, RM’s statement, “When the truth is realized, and apperceived, all notions of dualism cease. Whatever is seen, in any form, can only be consciousness because all is consciousness, and all manifestation now or at any time cannot but be consciousness” sounds a lot like what I believe to be the Imago Dei.
Lastly, though, a consciousness based in comparison and/or scarcity creates dualism, which creates suffering. The idea that all is separate and “either/or” does little to build an integrated spirit. If humanity is to succeed, it will require recognition that we all emerged from the same source, whatever it is, and that we are all stewards of the same place. Perhaps RM is onto something….