NDM: Can
you please tell me about your awakening, how and
when this happened?
Jerry Katz: In
anyone's spiritual biography you can identify
turning points, moments when truth is stumbled into.
Those moments could take the form of a sudden
awakening, or a question, or a realization of some
kind. You stumble into those moments. You can't plan
for them to happen and, you know, stop off for a
sandwich on the way to experiencing the stumbling.
There's nothing linear about stumbling into truth.
If it was linear you would see the stumbling block
and walk around or over it and never stumble. It is
said in the Kaballah that the stumbling block is in
your hand. It's not separate from you. You stumble
upon yourself.
For most people
there is more than one stumbling. I call them
initiations. I had several initiations into my
true nature as "I Am." They occurred between the
ages of 7 and 10. I knew they were important and
meaningful but I never knew how to live life with
them. So I forgot about them until around age 25,
when I revisited them. What got me to revisit them
was dissatisfaction with life and the sense that
there was something more meaningful I needed to find
out about. It was clear that I needed to investigate
my early initiations into "I Am."
I spend a couple
of years writing about my early experiences, feeling
them, investigating them from different angles, and
wanting to be stabilized as this "I Am." After about
two years, in 1977, that stabilization happened and
was marked with the spontaneous utterance, "There is
only one day." Everything
was seen as
one day, or perhaps you could say one moment;
in today's language you could say I was living in
the now. However, in my words it was as though there
was only one day.
The one day
feeling lasted for about ten years and then it gave
way to an immediacy of awareness as the "I Am"
itself apparently dissolved.
Another way of
talking about this progression is to say that I
started out aware of awareness, then there was the
sense that I was awareness, which was aware of me,
and finally there is only awareness.
So that's a story
of awakening. There is still everyday life,
problems, limitations in expression and ability; or
is there?
NDM: When you came to this Self realization,
that you are "I Am", were you studying the
Kaballah, or anything else like Vedanta,
atma vichara, or Buddhism and so on?
Jerry Katz:
As a boy between ages 7-10 the initiations into
"I Am" were spontaneous and beyond and outside
the influence of any practice, reading, or
exposure to ultimate spiritual teachings. Around
the age of 25 when I started to investigate "I
Am," I read a number of books. The works of Osho
(Bhagwan Sri Rajneesh), and Da Free John (Adi Da)
were especially helpful. I studied Science of
Mind and the correspondence course offered
by the Self-Realization Fellowship of
Paramahansa Yogananda. The latter two helped
me to discipline day to day living, which was
important for being able to focus on "I Am."
NDM: Then when you
finally realized that you are "only awareness".
At this point what kind of a vasana load did you
have?
Jerry Katz:
There's no realizing that you are only
awareness, even though to talk about
it one might say, "I am only awareness," or
"There is only awareness." It is enough -- it is
too much -- to say there is only awareness. To
say anything beyond a variation of, "There is
only awareness," "There is only this," further
diminishes the statement or confession of what
is.
Having said
that, there was and still are habits and
negative psychological states. They are not so
extreme. Most importantly it is realized that
are not me. Still, one must live responsibly in
the world. To exercise a bad habit and to
dismiss it by declaring, "Well, yeah, it's bad
but it's not
me," is an abuse and
neglect of discipline.
I am sure
that having experienced the "I Am" conditioned
me early on toward a life of simplicity. Even
though it was not until the age of 25 that I
began to investigate my sense of "I Am," prior
to that the initiation into "I Am" exerted an
influence upon my life. That's what initiation
is all about: it is a deep penetration of truth
at a cellular level. Compare initiation to a
so-called aha experience. The latter is more
superficial and activates an energy which tends
to burn itself out quickly or which gets
channeled toward seeking and self-improvement
rather than resting in knowing. However,
aha moments are useful in living effectively;
it's important to have realizations about the
nuts and bolts of day to day living.
NDM: Can you please
explain the difference between sense of being
awareness and finally only awareness?
Jerry Katz:
The difference is that in the former there is a
fascination with awareness which is sparked by a
seeming distance from it, a distance which from
time to time disappears, much as the clouds move
away from the sun and it is said that the sun
comes out. The sense of being awareness is like
the sense that the sun is going to come out.
"Only awareness" is recognition that you are the
sun, a recognition that burns away any
forgetting that you are anything else.
NDM: On page
16 of you book entitled, One.
Essential Writings on Nonduality,
Sri Ramana
talks about the importance of
vasana-kshya. The destruction of vasanas.
Do you believe it is possible to be Self
Realized, to be liberated, (moksha) without
destroying these vasanas?
Jerry
Katz: The questioner, not Ramana, was seeing
the importance of vasana-kshya. Ramana
responded by saying, "You are in that state
[of realization] now." Ramana said to
"remain as you are." Liberation is complete
liberation including the liberation of the
vasanas. Nothing is not liberated.
NDM: What would
you say to someone who was saying they were
liberated but were still acting out on their
vasanas for violence, and saying they are
not the doer/perpetrator. That it is
God that is the doer/perpetrator of this
violence?
Jerry
Katz: It's too hypothetical a question, but
if someone came to me with that attitude I
would want to know why they have come to me.
Are they boasting, are they testing me, are
they questioning themself, are they
experiencing hallucinations or hearing
voices? Are they looking for me to justify
their excuses to be irresponsible? Are they
shifting responsibility to God? I want to
know where they are coming from then I would
respond.
|
Essential Writings on Nonduality |
NDM: Ok, let me
put it another way. Sri Ramana said:
‘For those who
are very attached to their filthy
bodies, all the study of Vedanta will be
as useless as the swinging of the goat’s
fleshy beard unless, with the aid of
Divine Grace, their studies lead them to
subdue their egos.’
Sri Adi
Shankaracharya says:
The first
step to Liberation is the extreme
aversion to all perishable things, then
follow calmness, self-control,
forbearance, and the utter
relinquishment of all work enjoined in
the Scriptures.
Do you see it
this way or is anyone fit for this, no
matter how they behave or are acting
out?
Jerry
Katz: Divine Grace doesn't discriminate,
so anyone is fit for
Liberation. Students and seekers are
best not told that, otherwise they
might go home and wait for Grace to
strike while they're sitting on the
couch watching TV. However, being fit
for Liberation and realizing Liberation
are two different things. Being fit for
liberation is nothing more than being
fit to live life effectively, and that
fitness is useful whether you are a
spiritual seeker, a professional
athlete, a doctor, or a businessman.
Such fitness doesn't attract Grace but
it allows Grace to operate optimally;
fitness allows you to handle Grace, the
touch of God, which can be quite a
life-changing blow.
NDM: Yes divine
grace but how about being fit to practice
atma vichara?
Sri Adi
Shankaracharya says:
69. The first step to
Liberation is the extreme aversion
to all perishable things, then
follow calmness, self-control,
forbearance, and the utter
relinquishment of all work enjoined
in the Scriptures.
78. He who is free from the
terrible snare of the hankering
after sense-objects, so very
difficult to get rid of, is alone
fit for Liberation, and none else –
even though he be versed in all the
six Shastras. (Vivekachudamani)
Sri Ramana Maharshi also says:
‘Only to such a mind which
has gained the inner strength of
one-pointedness, Self-enquiry will
be successful. But a weak mind will
be like wet wood put into the fire
of jnana-vichara
‘If the
aspirants have not one-pointed mind,
which is possible for him who has
pure mind full of sattva,
dispassion, discrimination, etc.,
Self-enquiry is impossible.’
‘It is
easy, the concentration on the Self,
for him who has qualities like
dispassion, discrimination,
one-pointed mind, renunciation, etc.
For the rest, it is either less or
more, depending on how much one has
these qualities. For those who are
not prepared, it is very difficult,
if not impossible.'
Jerry
Katz: You primarily have to have the hunger
to want to know who you are. That hunger
alone will "clean up" your life and make you
fit to further practice. It will steer you
to others who will help you see the blind
spots
in the way you conduct your life. That
hunger to want to know who you are is Grace
and the Guru, at once. However, it does not
mean you live a solitary life in the
force field of that inner hunger and avoid
other teachers, guides, gurus, and helpers.
Trust yourself while being open to other
teachers, guides, books, and while being
open to nature
itself.
Jerry
Katz: I like the neo-advaita movement. It
doesn't replace traditional advaita or anything
else. It is another offering, that's all. Neo-advaita
is nothing new. It simply focuses on the portion
of advaita that confesses the reality of what
is. Neo-advaita is a partial teaching, but for a
given individual it could be a whole teaching,
depending on what one is ready to receive.
Suzanne said,
"There is no right or wrong." That's true.
That's the pure confession of neo-advaita. The
Avadhuta Gita makes such statements over and
over again: "How can I speak of good and evil? I
am free from disease -- my form has been
extinguished."
The Avadhuta
Gita and a few other texts are more "neo" than
neo-advaita. Neo-advaita writings or discussions
probably always have contained within them some
instruction, some suggestion of what to do in
order to realize what the neo-advaitin
confesses. The Avadhuta Gita has no such
instruction. The Avadhuta Gita doesn't tell you
to investigate anything. It doesn't tell you to
follow the I Am, as Nisargadatta has urged. It
doesn't tell you to Full Stop, as 'Sailor' Bob
Adamson advises. It doesn't suggest you inquire
into who you are, what you're doing, why you're
here, what the truth is, or anything at all. It
just confesses. Period.
Neo-advaita
is not as extreme as some very old
writings. Neo-advaita is an evolution, a
morphing of those writings and at the same time
a morphing of traditional advaita. The morphing,
the evolution continues, and watching that
evolution is the delight of being involved in
the world of nonduality.
NDM:
Yes, but Avadhuta Gita is also reading
material meant for the use of advanced
students.
Jerry Katz:
It is
appropriate for today's mainstream nondual
spirituality audience, I feel. Even James
Swartz, a current and strong proponent of
the stepwise teaching of traditional Advaita
Vedanta, includes Avadhuta Gita style of
confessions in his book How to Attain
Enlightenment. For example, he says, "I am
neither a person nor a non-person ... I am
not male, female, or neuter ... I have never
lived or died ... I am pure knowing, even
though there is nothing to know." The entire
book explains details about life, practice,
experience, and those confessions occur at
the end of the book in a section called
Beyond Enlightenment. With the proper
preparation, such as delivered by Swartz in
his book, or with a strong intuition of
truth, these confessions and the Avadhuta
Gita itself become understandable. I wrote a
series of verses based on the Avadhuta Gita,
called The Wild Song of Standing Free, which
is available online here:
http://members.upnaway.com/~bindu/windsong/stafreeindex.htm.
I wrote that in 1997, before I went on the
Internet, and it served to prepare me for
the adventure of introducing nonduality to a
mainstream audience and to deal with all the
people I would be encountering.
NDM: The
Ashtavakra Gita is also from the
absolute level.
Jerry Katz:
Yes, The
Ashtavakra Gita is more popular than the
Avadhuta Gita, too.
NDM: Yes
on this absolute level there is no right or
wrong. But what about on the relative
level. See here.
Jerry Katz:
People
may teach with reference to such levels, but
teachers don't go around thinking about what
level they're in. One might question whether
there is a relative level or an absolute
level. Such a questioning is an inquiry. If
you inquire from time to time, "Is this the
relative level?" "Is this the absolute
level?" at what level do you find yourself
upon making these inquiries? Questions about
right or wrong, absolute and relative
levels, have doors within them that take you
out of the questions. Turning a question
into an inquiry exposes the door and opens
it. And then where do you find yourself? For
example, the question, "Is there right or
wrong?" can be turned into the inquiry,
posed randomly throughout the day, "Is this
right or wrong?" It may be seen that there
is no right or wrong in that moment of
inquiry and also that there is no relative
or absolute level.
NDM:
Dattatreya is considered by some
to be the
predecessor
of the
Aghori tradition.
The tantric left hand path. Are you
saying that neo- advaita is a new
western left hand path of the Aghori?
That Tony Parsons and Suzanne Foxton,
Jeff Foster are some kind of neo advaitic
tantric Aghori? Breaking all taboos and
violating traditions?
Jerry Katz: I'm
not saying that. Dattatreya's tradition
doesn't have a bearing on his confession
of truth. Jay Michaelson has recently
introduced nondual Judaism to the world.
Jay has written that as a Jew he
keeps kosher and follows other
Jewish practices. Jeff Foster, for
example, may state things similar to
Jay, however it doesn't mean Jeff keeps
kosher. Although it wouldn't hurt if he
did, haha! Truth is truth and it
is expressed in multitudes of ways by
people with all kinds of backgrounds.
Many of the expressions sound alike.
There is a sharing in the similarity of
expression but not necessarily in other
details of a person's life.
NDM: Yes, ok.
When you said earlier. "Such a
questioning is an inquiry. If you
inquire from time to time, "Is this the
relative level?" "Is this the absolute
level?" at what level do you find
yourself upon making these inquiries?
Would not that
depend on the level you are at. For example,
how could a non realized person even know
the difference with out "knowing" the
absolute level? If you are not the
absolute, all you know is the relative?
You can understand it to a degree, but
cannot "know" it. The knowing only comes
with realization.
Jerry
Katz: The inquiry is sufficient if a person
has had only an intuition of the absolute.
However, I don't recommend doing inquiry
just for the heck of it. Behind all
efforts there must be the hunger to know who
you are. Inquiry is a powerful tool. One
must find an inquiry that truly draws their
attention.
NDM: Did you experience
at any point, close to your realization,
intense temptation by your ego to co-opt this in
any way. Such as your shadow self at the time
trying to make a power grab and use it for its
own motivations?
Bernadette Roberts
talks about this here.
"The major
temptation to be overcome in this period is the
temptation to fall for one of the subtle but
powerful archetypes of the collective
consciousness. As I see it, in the transforming
process we only come to terms with the
archetypes of the personal unconscious; the
archetypes of the collective consciousness are
reserved for individuals in the state of
oneness, because those archetypes are powers or
energies of that state. Jung felt that these
archetypes were unlimited; but in fact, there is
only one true archetype, and that archtype is
self. What is unlimited are the various masks or
roles self is tempted to play in the state of
oneness - savior, prophet, healer, martyr,
Mother Earth, you name it. They are all
temptations to seize power for ourselves, to
think ourselves to be whatever the mask or role
may be. In the state of oneness, both Christ and
Buddha were tempted in this manner, but they
held to the "ground" that they knew to be devoid
of all such energies. This ground is a
"stillpoint", not a moving energy-point. "
www.spiritualteachers.org/b_roberts_interview.htm
Jerry Katz: I
never had such dramatic experiences. I'm sure a
lot of the shocks encountered in the adventure
to nonduality were, in my case, ameliorated by
the substantial initiation into "I Am" that
occurred in my childhood. We're each put
together differently and we each unravel
differently, and in that unraveling the sparks
of all kinds of experiences and psychological
encounters could take off.
NDM: What are your
thoughts on Sri Aurobindos intermediate zone? Do
you think this could be an explanation for Adi
Da and Osho? Please see here.
Jerry Katz:
You'll see in my work on nonduality that I have
never been into rating gurus. I like some and
don't like some, but I don't rate. One of the
qualities of my work has been to create a list
of gurus/teachers/realizers/confessors which
included just about anyone who spoke with some
real knowing of the realized state. I don't see
that some people are more enlightened than
others. It doesn't interest me too much --
except in a gossipy way.
Seekers and
students need to connect with their own inner
knowing, their own inner hunger for truth, and
to allow the inner force to be one's teacher and
guide. That, in fact, is the Guru. One may then
be led to this or that teacher. If so, from a
practical point of view one should learn as much
as possible about a prospective teacher.
NDM:
When you say" There's no realizing that you are
only awareness, even though to talk about
it one might say, "I am only awareness," or
"There is only awareness." It is enough -- it is
too much -- to say there is only awareness. To
say anything beyond a variation of, "There is
only awareness," "There is only this,", further
diminishes the statement or confession of what
is."
So what is it that "knows" that it is
awareness? What is this knower that knows this
and how does this knower get to know this?
Jerry Katz:
There is no knower and no knowing of it. There
is only it. As far as getting to know
this, it is said that Direct Path teachings can
facilitate that. These days Greg Goode might
have the best handle on the "There is only
awareness" realization.
NDM: It obviously isn't "seen" as neo advaita people
say because a seer cannot see itself no more
than an eye can see its own pupil?
Jerry Katz:
Yes, it isn't seen. It is. To say "It is," is,
again, too much, which is why silence is a
teaching.
NDM: What do you think that happened in the
cases of Da Free John (Adi Da) and Osho?
Jerry Katz:
Probably nothing new to add to this. They were
human beings with human limitations and
blindspots. They were not different from you or
I in that way. What's amazing to me about those
guys is not that they were enlightened but that
they were in possession of awesome intellects
and charismatic qualities. Their intellect and
charisma allowed their teachings to become
valued and widespread and to benefit many
people, however they were screwed up in some
ways and hurt people too. When incidents of
controversy as exhibited by Adi Da and Osho are
seen, then one must investigate what is about
them that is bothersome and puzzling. Take these
incidents and make them your own inquiry.
NDM: Have you
seen this silent teaching by Adi Da. What are
your thoughts on this?
Jerry Katz: I watched it.
The music isn't necessary. It's a nice video of
an interesting guy. I don't make much of it. It
is possible to get caught in the charismatic and
psychological grip of certain people, especially
if they are extremely attractive in in the way
of intellect, celebrity, power, and psychic
magnetism. I look for a teacher that turns me
toward what I am on a fundamental level, not
toward what he or she is on a psychic or some
other energetic level. This video turns me
toward the psychic energy of Adi Da, not toward
the fundamental nature of what I am.
NDM: What are your thoughts on Christ
consciousness as Paramahansa Yogananda describes
it? Was he seeing this as an object?
Consciousness as a thing, or a reflection of the
Self?
Jerry Katz:
It's been too many years since I've studied
Yogananda. I had to read the article on
Wikipedia to refresh myself on him. Apparently
he was talking about nonduality in the way the
audience of his time (1920-1950) could
understand. A quote from the Wikipedia article
shows that he was saying nothing different from
Ramana Maharshi:
"Self-realization is the
knowing in all parts of body, mind, and soul
that you are now in possession of the kingdom of
God; that you do not have to pray that it come
to you; that God’s omnipresence is your
omnipresence; and that all that you need to do
is improve your knowing."
My sense is
that he would not have seen Christ Consciousness
as an object but as who he was, as a sublime
expression of reality beyond which is what could
perhaps be called the Father or emptiness or
awareness. At some point the terms we use need
to be defined. I would call the "I Am" the
Christ Consciousness. Although the experience of
Christ Consciousness or Mystical Oneness may be
full of literal light, soul travel, meetings
with heavenly beings, and so on, when all that
excitement settles down it resolves itself as
the "I Am": a simple presence and knowing
residing in the atmosphere of awareness itself.
NDM
: On page one of your book you say "However ,
being by its nature cannot be known. so words
can only give us a direction in which to look"
James Swartz
for example says that Vedanta
is S habda,
a word means. He says that it is crystal clear on where
to look and what to look at. It is more than
using pointers.
It is a statement of fact. It is a statement
that delivers knowledge. It does not point to
anything. It removes ignorance. He
says the difference
is a pointer leaves you looking, searching,
seeking. Self knowledge removes the one who is
looking.
For example.
The word Awareness is Awareness. Its not a
pointer. It's saying the sun rises in the East,
not the West. How do
you see this?
Jerry Katz:
Formal Advaita starts out as a pointing and
develops into a more refined pointing. At
some point the words themselves are known
as not separate from what is being pointed
to. Advaita means "not-two" so how could
there be separation between the finger and
what is being pointed to? They ever-arise
perfectly. It becomes known that "There is
only this," as the neo-advaitins confess.
This is this: this perfect arising of
individualistic things. Residing in or
abiding in the perfect arising as the
perfect arising, what am I? What am I not?
So yeah, there is talk of pointing and the
failure of words, and then there's talk of
all things arising as they are, individual
and without division. If nonduality isn't
coming across as paradoxical then it's been
cooked too long.
NDM:
Yes, ok, but what is "There is only this,"?
How does that deliver any clear knowing?.
Jerry Katz:
The statement is a
variation of "There is only awareness," or
"There is only God." "There is only truth."
There is only this moment." It could resonate
with a person's intuition or intellectual
understanding of interconnectedness, or with
their experience of oneness. As part of some
response or description, the statement could
strike a chord of clarity for a person. However,
to deliver that statement as a first and last
teaching consisting only of words and bearing no
knowing-substance on the part of the teacher,
could mean you have meaningless words.
Therefore, clarity arises when there is
substance behind the words, substance consisting
of
the teacher's realization and the
student's or devotee's intuition and experience
of nonduality.
NDM:
In the chapter on the Kaballah in your
book you hint at Moses being given this
secret non dual truth by God. The I
Am-ness. Do you believe that Jesus
Christ also made the exact same Self
discovery as Moses?
Jerry Katz:
Yes.
There are two bottom line teachings,
that of the "I Am" or the Holy Spirit,
and that at Ein Sof, or, in Christ's
term, The Father. Anyone can know these.
You don't have to be a legendary
religious figure. Some people know these
truths and sweep floors for a living.
Others have served as the seed for major
world religions. One is not more
wonderful than the other.
NDM:
Why did Jesus talk about this truth in
public while Moses kept this
truth hidden?
Jerry Katz:
I'm
not a scholar on this topic so I can't
confirm the assumption, but let's say it
was the case. The same could be said
about the guy sweeping floors. Why is he
or she sweeping floors when he knows the
Absolute? Jesus and Moses each had his
way, his people, his time, his job to
do; and each had different people around
him, serving him, representing him,
trying to understand him. They were
different men operating in different
spheres of engagement. Implicit in the
question is whether some evolutionary
force was involved in the differences
between the two men. I would call the
evolutionary
force Grace and, yes, Grace is
always present and exerting a force.
But don't ask me why Grace does what
it does. Certainly Grace wouldn't
know.
NDM: The way that
Ein sof is explained sounds almost
identical to the Vedas. Do you know
if the people of Moses' time ever
visited India through the silk trade
routes, across Iran, Persia,
Arabia, Pakistan and into India?
The Shaktona (symbol of shiva/shakti
union) is identical to the Star of
David. Do you think this was a
coincidence?
Jerry Katz:
I'm not up on
the history to be able to answer this. I would
have to research it. Great questions.
NDM: What do
you teach by the way. Do you have a method of
teaching. Do you do satsangs or anything like
that?
Jerry Katz:
I don't teach or
give satsang. My work is to bring nonduality to mass
consciousness in a variety of ways: Through
websites, email forums, a blog, twitter, radio
appearances, conference development, public
speaking, organizing local gatherings, interviews,
publishing e-books, individual
correspondences, encouraging and supporting various
people in the field of nonduality, writing book
reviews. Of course a lot of teachers do those
activities, and more, too.
If I did teach there wouldn't be any method.
I would look at what each person requires and offer
direction and guidance that is right for that
person.
NDM: How long have you
been doing this work of bringing non duality
awareness to mass consciousness?
Can you please elaborate a
little more on your work and the impact this has
had?
Jerry Katz:
I
first went onto the Internet in November, 1997.
My intent was to bring nonduality "to the
streets," to the spirituality mainstream. At the
time, nonduality was a topic and a word largely
reserved for discussion within ashrams, the
circles of certain teachers, and university
departments of philosophy and religious studies,
and as well as part of the lesser
known teachings of the world's religions.
The best
known nonduality teaching is Zen, which belongs
to Buddhist tradition. I wanted to introduce
nonduality as a broader Zen. To do that, I
introduced the word "nonduality" itself
and colored it according to a vision. Just as
the word "Zen" has a certain magic and power to
it, it is my opinion that the word "nonduality"
has its own significant meaning or "color." I
have tried to keep nonduality wide open and
all-embracing.
Many people
are involved in bringing nonduality to the
mainstream. I have provided online spaces for
people to gather and talk about nonduality in
whatever way they wished and have welcomed and
encouraged a number of people. Over the years
the broad teaching of nonduality and the word "nonduality"
itself have entered the spirituality mainstream
and even the general mainstream.
Lives are
impacted in different ways. There's a peaceful,
holistic, harmonious, Yogic side to nonduality
which benefits a person's life. It is more about
coherence and oneness. Then there is the jarring
and harsh side of nonduality -- the bottom line
nonduality -- in which our ego strategies are
seen through or split wide open. Knowing who you
are requires a cutting away of who you think you
are. Practically no one is exempt from that
harshness since layers of ego strategy are
constantly re-constituting. For living life
effectively, I highly recommend the holistic,
Yogic type of path. Seeing who your really are,
which is the atmosphere in which this effective
life is lived (and which it actually is)
requires that one question the effective life
even while living it. It's tricky business and
only those who have no other choice will engage
in it.
For more
visit
|