Sadhguru (Jaggi Vasudev): A True Guru?

by L. Ron Gardner

[This is my recently posted at two-star review of  Sadhguru's book "Inner Engineering." The  title of the review is "Pop Inner Engineering."]

This book was pretty much what I expected from a big-name pop Hindu guru – lots of allegorical stories (which will impress and entertain neophytes and the ignoranti) spiced with superficial, error-ridden spiritual Dharma that the cognoscenti will turn their noses up at. The book is a smooth and copacetic read – designed to attract new enlistees to Sadguru’s Inner Engineering program -- but real spiritual “engineers,” those with a deep understanding of the “nuts and bolts” of the en-Light-enment process, will find little of value, and much to be critical of, in Sadhguru’s teachings.

The first turn-off for me was Sadhguru’s description -- or should I say ‘non-description” -- of his Awakening and Awakened state. All we get is a vague, hard-to-believe story about how “he never came down” one day after sitting on a rock, and no details about his putatively Enlightened state.

Sadhguru writes, “As Guru, I have no doctrine to teach, no philosophy to impart, no beliefs to propagate. And that is because the only solution for all the ills that plague humanity is self-transformation.” He opines, “Principles and philosophies are only of social consequence.”

First off, the whole book is an exposition of his philosophy, or views, on various subjects, especially those relating to self-transformation. And, IMO, anyone who delimits “principles [which are inherently philosophical in nature] and philosophy” to the social sphere has liitle understanding of what philosophy is really about – “the love of wisdom,” per Pythagoragas, who coined the term.

If “self-transformation” were “the only solution for all the ills that plague humanity,” then why did all the great gurus India has produced over the centuries fail to rid the country of its poverty? Because the solution for this problem was/is capitalism and technology, not self-transformation.” But because Sadhguru has little understanding of philosophy, particularly sociopolitical philosophy, he is seemingly clueless regarding this.

So, how does one upgrade one’s inner technology? According to Sadhguru, “A fundamental step [which he repeatedly emphasizes] would be to recognize consciously just this: ‘My ability to respond is limitless, but my ability to act is limited. I am one hundred percent responsible for everything I am and everything I am not, for my capacities and my incapacities, for my joys and my miseries. I am the one who determines the nature of my experience in this life and beyond. I am the maker of my life.’”

First off, contrary to what Sadhguru says, one’s ability to respond is limited because of one’s conditioning and biological limitations. Secondly, one is not responsible for all one’s incapacities. Is the child who is autistic from being vaccinated responsible for it? How about those who lost limbs in the 2013 Bostom Marathon bombing?

Many of Sadhguru’s statements had me shaking my head. For example, he writes. “It is only juvenile intelligence that analyzes things and arrives at a conclusion.” So, if one reads Hillary Clinton’s emails, which provide clear-cut evidence of her breaches of national security, and conclude that she is guilty of breaching national security, that is juvenile? Gimme a break. And, of course, Sadhguru himself is guilty of “juvenile intelligence,” because he analyzes things and arrives at conclusions in the book.

Sadhguru writes: “I spent twenty-one years of my life transforming a powerful kriya, the Shambhavi Mahamudra, in order that it might be taught to large numbers of people in today’s world. Certain aspects that could empower people either to harm themselves or others, or influence the elements around them have been firewalled, so only the physical, psychological, and spiritual benefits remain. For those two decades I deliberately stayed away from all forms of public outreach, because my entire focus was primarily on re-crafting the kriya to ensure that it could be widely imparted without any adverse effects.”

Twenty-one years transforming a powerful kriya? Yeah, right. Like I said, this book is for the ignoranti, not the cognoscenti, who can only laugh at such statements.

Sadhguru provides some good, but simplistic descriptions of yoga, such as “The science of yoga is quite simply, the science of being in perfect alignment, in absolute harmony, in complete sync with existence.” But instead of providing the radical (or gone-to-the root) method to directly, immediately be in unobstructed alignment to the All (which spiritual traditions such as Dzogchen and Daism provide), he only offers remedial practices, which will benefit newbies, but seem like nothing new or special to spiritual veterans.

The late Alan Watts, when opining on the spiritual adept Adi Da (then known as Franklin Jones), said, “It is obvious, from all sorts of subtle details, that he knows what IT’s all about.” The converse can be said about Sadhguru. Anyone who has “cracked the code” and deeply groks the foremost spiritual Dharmas will reject his staus as a true “Sadhguru.”

The “inner engineering” details that Sadhguru provides make it clear to the cognoscenti that he is not Enlightened, that his Dharma level is that of Osho, and not that of Ramana Maharshi or Adi Da. For example, he writes, “Fundamentally, any spiritual path can be described as the journey from the muladhara to the sahasrara.” Not true. In fact, the final “leg” of the journey to Enlightenment lies down the frontal line of the body -- from the sahasrara to the hridayam (the heart-center, distinct from the ajna chakra), located two digits to the right of the center of one’s chest. This “leg” of the “spiritual circuitry” can only be traversed via Shaktpat, the Descent of Divine Power, the “Higher Kundalini.” But Sadhguru only describes the “Lower” spinal, or ascending, Kundalini. He uses the word “Grace” a few times in his discourse, but never explains what it is. It’s Shaktipat – Blessing/ Blissing Clear-Light-Energy, the same Hypostasis, or “Body,” as the Buddhist Sambhogakaya and the Christian Holy Spirit.

Sadhguru provides a glossary of the Sankrit spiritual terms he uses, but many of the definitions he provides are untenable. For example, he defines Chit (or Cit) Shakti as as “the power of the mind.” This is nonsense. Cit Shakti is the Power of awakened Consciousness, the emissional force-flow of Shakti radiating from the Heart-center (Hridayam) of an awakened yogi.

When I consider the pros of this book (it’s a smooth, polished, basic read that newbies and the ignoranti will appreciate) versus the cons (Sadhguru is not a real Sadguru, his Dharma is superficial and error-ridden, and he’s copying Osho’s stories and “shtick”without mentioning him), I’m only moved to give it two stars.

{ 59 comments… read them below or add one }

Ij September 29, 2017 at 9:18 pm

Checked him out in social media. He is more of a motivational speaker than anything else. Not in the league of Sri Ramana Maharshi, Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Nisargdatta Maharaj and J Krishnamruti. Like you said he is in the league of Osho Rajneesh.. Certainly has not realized Self to be considered a Sadhguru or an enlightened sage.


IJ September 29, 2017 at 9:23 pm

Mr. Gardner,

A very good review on Jaggi Vasudev’s book who is no Sadhguru. How could he consider himself so, I have no idea.



L. Ron Gardner September 30, 2017 at 2:18 pm

IJ, do you know anything about Maharishi Brahmananda Yogi or Paramahansa Nithyananda? I get lots of posts advertising them at my Facebook group. Paramahansa Nithyananda considers himself an Avatar.


IJ October 6, 2017 at 8:32 am

Mr. Gardner,

I will reply shortly regarding the two gentleman you mentioned above.



IJ October 10, 2017 at 3:45 am

Paramahamsa Nityananda is 100% bogus. He is a charlatan, a mere pretender. He wears the saffron robe to show off that he is a sanyasi. He is now 39 years old. There is so much dirt on him available on internet that I don’t need to elaborate.

He ended up absconding from the police for 5 days in India in 2012 before surrendering. Alleged charges against him were quite as bad as Rajneesh’s were or even more. Before 2012 he was all high and almighty but then after the scandals were exposed he fell like a hot potato to say the least.

The scandals ranged from alleged sexual improprieties, money laundering, theft, fraudulent activities, kidnapping, forced imprisonment of devotees, even murders committed by his staunch followers against dissidents. etc. In India law enforcement is rarely enforced on rich swamis like Nityananda and he is still going about his business as if nothing happened. His disciples now are a pale comparison of what it used to be.

In his defense he even told the police that he was trans gender and was incapable of having sexual relations to avoid alleged charges of rape against him. There was a video of Nityananda kissing and making love to a young Tamil actress in a compromising position. This was secretly taped and made public by one of his followers who wanted to expose Nityananda’s double life as a spiritual teacher advocating celibacy and his actual life as an ordinary man or householder.. Enough said about this clown who is an embarrassment to Hindu religion.



L. Ron Gardner October 10, 2017 at 3:53 pm

Thanks IJ.


IJ October 10, 2017 at 9:23 pm

Mr. Gardner,

You are welcome.

Regarding Maharishi Brahmananda Yogi :

He is a young fellow, probably in his early 30’s. He is married and has two children. He speaks Telugu the native language of Jiddu Krishnamurti and U.G. Krishnaumurti, meaning his is from the regions of Andra Pradesh and Telangana in Southern India. He calls himself Maharishi, God only knows why. Lol!

Listened to some You Tube videos of his talking and he has absolutely nothing ground breaking to tell us as far as authentic spirituality is concerned, zero, zilch, nada. He is an absolute rookie because he has said nothing substantial and you would be bored with the general nonsense he spews.

He has a Russian following. He is certainly not in the league of that rascal Nityananda though as far as shenanigans are concerned. This fellow seems more mellow and humble but there is nothing to suggest he is a Self realized Jnani. Frankly speaking he is an absolute moron.

He is more of a motivational speaker who caters to the needs of imbeciles and blind fools who can’t think and learn from for themselves and are in desperate need for make shift spiritual crutches. He is quite an ordinary spiritual novice who has the arrogance to call himself a Maharishi. If he is a Maharshi then I am one too. Makes absolutely no sense. Lol!



L. Ron Gardner October 11, 2017 at 2:58 pm

Thanks again, IJ.


red October 27, 2017 at 4:12 am

Nityananda is 2x or more worse than sadhguru. Both truly believe they cracked the code. Confidence/belief is an interesting thing…I see no difference between jihadists and any true believers.

In a way, even nisargadatta or ramana.m are true believers too. Perhaps they have a better belief/confidence. They are so sure. Just as sadhguru, nityananda, and even you, etc are.

Given this nature of belief/confidence to fool even the best gurus like ramana.m, only one guy had true insight on what to focus on. Buddha. That bodhicitta/bodhisattva stuff is a true stroke of genius!.

As, Maya/illusion can do wonders.

Belief/confidence is just mental masturbation. Sadhguru, nityananda are really good at it. It doesn’t hurt, as long as they do it for themselves.

We don’t need radical ideologies….quite blinding they can be. Buddha was smart to focus on eight-folds…divided into 3. No blindspots left.


L. Ron Gardner October 27, 2017 at 10:56 pm

I, of course, disagree with you regarding Ramana. The unbroken State (or no-state) he abided in — Sat-Chit-Ananda/Sahaj Samadhi — is the same State (or no-state) — Bodhicitta/Nirvana — that Buddha unbrokenly abided in.


red October 28, 2017 at 1:45 am

Except, Buddha was unequivocal on there being no such “no-state” too (“God” , which Buddha destroys unapologetically). This is the problem with ramana.m, or nisargadatta.

At least nisargadatta doesn’t believe in 2.degrees to the right of heart stuff like ramana.m (in this way, ramana.m is more idealogical/delusional). Because of the “notion” , or concept, of heart and 2degree mumbo-jumbo, I actually think nisargadatta is more mature , or kind of cracked the code. Alas, they both got stuck with Maya. They were almost there…one more door to open, to see the true no-concept state(absolute freedom from any idealogy that could bind/pin-them). Buddha sees it.


L. Ron Gardner October 28, 2017 at 6:34 pm

Red, I couldn’t disagree more with you. I contend that Nisragadatta was not fully Enlightened, whereas Ramana and the Buddha both were. What Buddha calls the Heart-release is the same thing Ramana calls Cutting the Heart-knot. The Spiritual Heart-center is located two digits to the right of the center of the chest, and until it is permanently opened, Hridaya Shakti, the Amrita Nadi, the immortal Force-Current between the Heart-center and Crown, cannot flow unbrokenly, and allow the yogi to perpetually abide in Sahaj Samadhi.


red October 28, 2017 at 7:53 pm

How can you be sure, I just can’t imagine the ultimate state is bound by such structure. Have you felt it, or experienced it. Even if you did, I feel one could get to the same aftermath without being aware of this structure. If so, the structure is not important.

I do feel there is an ultimate state in which one doesn’t have to think/analyze/calculate….purely dissolving into existence itself. This is not possible as long as one maintains an identity … heart structure, 2degree notion binds one to an identity, or concept. One has to look past that, not think of it, get past it and totally let go.

Only a bodhisattva can do that, who’s entire vow/life/practice is to live like there is no self…no self identity. It is a process…one won’t get there if they don’t already live like ultimate state of “unidentity” already. All these gurus unfortunately cling on to their learnings, and self-created concepts/identity.


L. Ron Gardner October 29, 2017 at 1:25 pm

I can be sure because my experience accords with the descriptions by Ramana Maharshi and by the Buddha in the Pali Canon. One does not become incapable of perceiving things and experiences associated with embodiment when one becomes Enlightened. Totally letting go, in and of itself, won’t cut it as a sadhana. That is why Buddha also taught Mindfulness and Ramana Maharshi also taught Self-enquiry. My Electrical Spiritual Paradigm (ESP), elaborated in my book “Electrical Christianity,” explains why letting go, or declutching, or surrender, or effortlessness are not integral practices in ans of themselves.


red October 29, 2017 at 5:54 pm

Bodhisattva’s don’t surrender, or “effortlessly experience” … they are the very definition of effort 24×7 (karma).

My point was that, one has to become it.,.self-inquiry alone won’t cut it. Ramana.m, nisargadatta, and all other neo-advaita pundits drown in self-inquiry … it is only a tool that can get you half way there.

The remaining half is to really transform one’s self … shedding one’s old tendencies/ignorant-habits-thoughts aka “self”.

Most neo, or regular, advaitins won’t get past the first half, unfortunately.


L. Ron Gardner October 30, 2017 at 2:43 pm

Red, you’re typical of the delusional Buddhists (which are legion) that I deal with. You don’t have a clue about Ramana’s teachings and Self-enquiry.


red October 30, 2017 at 3:20 pm

You don’t disappoint, you are typical of how true believers/jihadists respond when confronted…accuse others they have no clue (understandable, as they don’t believe anyone else could have gone that deep, or else we would have understood your “depth”!) or forcefully shutdown by all means necessary. It’s blasphemy!

I’m no Buddhist…labels are for the clueless. Why do you think I’m on your blog…you capture a wide variety of labels/topics, but stuck with adi.da, shaiva siddanta(you should have liked nityananda, he peddles a variant), and ramana.m.

All I was saying, self-inquiry is a trap *after* you reached it’s indended goal. It goes so deep, one hits an abyss, which some do not *ever* realize. Death has similar property, as Buddha would like to say. To be clear, I am no buddhist but I like Buddhist analogies.


IJ October 30, 2017 at 6:13 pm

Mr Gardner, I fully agree. I don’t understand the logic here that only Buddha or a Bodhisattva is enlightened but magnificent sages like Sri Ramana or Sri Sankara or even a not so magnificent sage like Sri Nisargadatta are not. This is a one way traffic kind of logic. How does “red” know for sure then that even the Buddha was also enlightened. Red is BS’ing crap and is a full fledged imbecilic jihadist and a fundamentalist type believer. Lol!

I wonder if he is that same cockroach fellow ca-cicero. He used the term mental masturbation. LOL!!!! Hahaha!!!! More later on this “red” as I have to leave this page.



L. Ron Gardner October 31, 2017 at 3:25 pm

There is no logic for most Buddhists. The Self is the Buddha, and Sat-Chit-Ananda is Nirvana. The Buddha did NOT teach that there is no Self. He simply taught Anatta, which was that no Self could be found in the Five Skandhas (or Aggregate, or Grasping Groups). This is tantamount to the Hindu neti-neti teaching, which is that no Self can be found in the conditional body-mind complex.


red October 31, 2017 at 4:00 pm

@IJ you write well, so i am guessing you have decent education…alas, you are one of those “Intellectual-Yet-Idiot” types that nassim taleb always talks about. No-where in my comments i claimed bodhisattva is enlightened…my focus was on practices/excercises, things one needs to *always* do (almost like hygiene). Not claim some made-up-concepts like enlightenment.

Only one guy peddles right action (“dharma”) and 7 other “right” things (eight fold) , and not some illusionary-self-inquiry without a purpose/end-goal (or application of it).

You dont keep proper hygiene(sila, samadhi, panna), you will decompose/destruct …that’s just the nature of things. Whether you do self-inquiry(samadhi alone) or not. What use is wisdom, if one doesnt apply it.


IJ October 31, 2017 at 2:52 am

Mr. Gardner,

I just read all of your responses to red.. Well said. But alas, assholes like “red” are a dime a dozen. Lol! Hahaha!


L. Ron Gardner October 31, 2017 at 3:15 pm

IJ, how right you are. Buddhists, in general, are as parochial as Christians, and most of them think that their nonsensical emptiness Dharma is superior to Hindu Dharma, which rightly emphasizes Self-Realization, which, in Reality, is Buddhahood, or Nirvana. Idiot Buddhists, epitomized by those such as Jackson Peterson, make fools of themselves when they try to argue for the superiority of their Dharma.


red October 31, 2017 at 4:10 pm

you two chuckle me up 🙂 i didn’t get personal first (i respond to drive the point, though).

Only one of the three of us is not deeply lost in one’s own BS. Enjoy your creation…its looking not-so-blissful or “enlighteny” (of course, you will go mentally self-inquiry that away). BTW, mental masturbation is a word that seemed closest, i did not copy it from anyone (i am not that ci;cero guy or whoever). It is a not a difficult, or that hard/innovative, word to make up.


IJ November 1, 2017 at 3:16 am

Mr. Gardner,

Since I am not familiar with Christianity correct me if there are mistakes below.

Father= Siva,

Holy Spirit=Shakti,


Christ Consciousness =Sat-Chit-Ananda or Absolute Consciousness.

Jesus Christ was not an ordinary soul (like ordinary worldly people) or mere jiva-atman but Atman or Avatar.

Corrections sincerely requested,



L. Ron Gardner November 1, 2017 at 9:56 am

IJ, you are correct. And in Mahayana Buddhism, the Dharmakaya is the Father/Siva, The Sambhogakaya is the Holy Spirit/Shakti, and the Nirmanakaya is the Son/Atman. But modern Buddhists fail to understand this, and think everything is just emptiness. and when they practice neti-neti or Who Am I enquiry, they think they are the blank or emptiness they encounter. In reality, empty space is the ether, the space element. These Buddhists never discover the Buddha, or Self, who is beyond both form and formlessness.

As far as I know, I am the only modern spiritual teacher who properly explains Buddhism, tying together its teachings with Hinduism and Christianity. But Buddhists do NOT like this.


red November 1, 2017 at 3:46 pm

Those buddhist kayas were made up by Brahmin converts to help recruit/convert even more vedantins in those times.

BTW, early Buddhist literature is full of these Brahmin converts. Even adi.sankara was a pseudo convert…most of advaita stuff stems from non-self insight from early Buddhist scriptures.

Lot of kashmir.shaivism, tantra, etc superimposed on Buddhist non-self views. Vajrayana is a good case study.

Neti-neti came *after* Buddhist non-self views. Before Buddhist non-self revolution, things were rampant with Gods, 100s of them, with different practices, concepts…everyone making up their own rituals,mantras, practices. Talk about an abyss.


L. Ron Gardner November 2, 2017 at 4:13 pm

Red, Buddha did NOT teach no-self. He taught Anatta, meaning that no Self could be found in the Five Skandhas.


IJ November 1, 2017 at 3:22 am

Mr Gardner,

I tried to post it under “Jesus on the Practice of Divine Yoga” but it said it was spam and the message was blocked when I hit submit button. So posted it here.



IJ November 1, 2017 at 8:19 pm

You indulge in mental masturbation and nothing else. You have said nothing profound so far to prove your are spiritually awakened or spiritually enlightened as the Buddha, Sri Ramana Maharshi or Sri Nisargadatta were. You are no better than that fellow ca_cicero. You are both identical, meaning you are both cyber-stalking trolls as Mr. Gardner would say. Mr. Gardner is correct. You are exactly a Buddhist jihadist/true believer/fundamentalist jerk. You are just another overweening ass like ca_cicero is without any spiritual credentials and achievements whatsoever. I don’t fault you for being a spiritual novice at all as much as for your other shenanigans displayed here in your comments.



IJ November 1, 2017 at 8:29 pm

Mr. Gardner,

Thanks for explaining above. Good comment.

I agree with you about the “empty headed” Buddhists of today. It is a tragedy that not one Buddhist like “red” here, has actually understood Buddha’s spiritual teachings. Yes. I have read your reviews on Buddhist authors in Amazon to know how you expose the nonsense the Buddhists spew over and over with their nonsense of emptiness etc. They are so utterly boring that one can go to sleep reading their junk.



L. Ron Gardner November 2, 2017 at 4:20 pm

From the Hindu side, we get the neo-Advaita Vedantans who pervert real Advaita Vedanta, and from the Buddhist side we get clowns like Red who pervert the Buddha’s teachings. It’s a sad commentary on modern Eastern spiritual teachings.


red November 2, 2017 at 4:57 pm

Mr. Gardner,

Do not pervert my comments, i did not say “no-self” … i said “non-self” specifically to avoid that confusion. I did not even say “emptiness” in any of comments here … i am no emptiness follower, to be clear.

by “non-self” , i mean a state beyond self or no-self … as if “self” as a concept does not even figure or useful.

Again, if one is so deep in their own BS they will be blinded to any other view(s). BTW, this is exactly why “self”, or even “no-self”, as a concept has to be let-go. You talk lot about anatta, but alas you are the one stuck too deep in it, which anatta wants to avoid. Maya, stuck in a delusion.


red November 2, 2017 at 6:54 pm

buddha taught anatta as a caution not to attach to any specific view points. Even things like 2degree/heart stuff that ramana.m obsessed about … the point is to go beyond any obsessions.

But, unfortunately, pseudo-converts like adi.shankara had to reimagine it to fit into their “views” … he ended up making into a thing/god again. And, all advantins, including neo-advantins, followed suit. All kinds of concepts were imagined/superimposed by different sects … kashmir.shaivism which is mr.gardner’s favorite superimposed their shaktipat, and tantric people did their thing, vajrayana thought they could “get there” faster … there is no there-there, which is what anatta cautions against.

There is ignorance and wisdom, the only difference is application. Without application there is no difference between wisdom and ignorance. I wish adi.shankara saw this, that dude had a huge impact on indian religion/culture after his time (which was >500-1000 years *after* buddha).

The original purpose of anatta is to avoid exactly this abyss/trap … so unfortunate…maya is an interesting indrajala.


L. Ron Gardner November 3, 2017 at 4:14 pm

Red, you are a victim of Buddhist ignorance, which has perverted and subverted the religion. Clowns like you are the same thing to real Buddhadharma that neo-Advaita Vedantans are to real Advaita Vedanta.

Again, Anatta, which is the teaching that no self can be found in the Aggregates, is the same thing Hinduism teaches. The neti-neti the Advaita Vedantans practice is the same disidentification from the body-mind complex that Buddha taught. The Self of Advaita Vedanta is the Buddha, or Buddha-nature, of Buddhism.


red November 3, 2017 at 6:04 pm

“The Self of Advaita Vedanta is the Buddha, or Buddha-nature, of Buddhism.”

we agree on that part.

I guess the missing piece is, how one expresses it. The difference between ignorance and wisdom is its application/expression.

Wisdom (“self of advaita vedanta”) is not the end-goal … it is a vehicle with which one has to live/express. The expression is the key. Everything else is just mental masturbation (including people obsessing about buddha-nature, or self of advaita vedanta).

One cannot **live it**, or express it, if they are stuck/obsessed with 2degre-heart and other abyss like maya/indrajala.

Buddha focusses on cultivating buddha-nature as a means, not an end-goal. As there is no beginning-end … all that matters is expression (noble eightfold path reflects this). I doubt your expression is reflecting that. At least i am open to different view points, no ill feelings, just trying to point out (hopefully help).


L. Ron Gardner November 4, 2017 at 4:00 pm

Red, Nirvana is the goal in original Buddhism. Nirvana is the end of becoming (samsara), hence it means Being, and what an Enlightened sage is Being is Consciousness-Bliss — and this is Sat-Chit-Ananda, the same unbroken Blissful State (or non-state) as Nirvana. Another synonym for Nirvana is Sahaj Samadhi — unbroken natural, effortless Being (Consciousness-Bliss). What the Buddha called the Heart-release (that precipitates Nirvana) is the same thing Ramana Maharshi called cutting the Heart-knot, which precipitates Sahaj Samadhi.

The Hindus rightly understand that the Buddha attained the same Realization as the greatest Hindu sages, most recently Ramana Maharshi. But few Buddhists understand that Nirvana = Sahaj Samadhi.


red November 4, 2017 at 5:44 pm

as i mentioned before, i get all that … buddhist nirvana == sahaj samadhi (self of advaita vedanta) … we agree on that part. It is blissful, super nice, and all that jazz.

What people miss, due to their delusion (“maya”), is that this blissful (sat-chit-ananda) is a side-effect … not a thing in itself. Even Ramana.m was smart enough to just stick to self-inquiry (which i recommend) … not this sat-chit-ananda obsession. The former is a process, the latter a thing in itself (thus, has a danger of capturing you in its maya).

It is no different than drug addiction…in fact, its exactly that. This was my main point if you go back to the beginning of my comments here. There is no there-there…there is only “ideal expression” … the experience/bliss is a side-effect.

Buddha was smart to see this, and used “tools” (means) like “anatta” (aka “self” of advaita vedanta) to explain ultimate nature. But it was just that…a means to understand ultimate nature. The end goal is the expression…not experience.

I dont know how else to say this, i rehashed this few different times, alas maya (“addiction”) is such.

@IJ , i will channel bodhicitta and say to you, may you get well. no ill feelings here. It is all your’s, as buddha would say.

IJ November 3, 2017 at 10:10 pm

You are an imbecilic moron and a spiritual novice steeped in useless misunderstood book knowledge. I never venture into Buddhist terminology nor have I done it before. I am sick to the neck with Buddhists like you. I never said anything about annata or anatman. You made it up.

Actually I say there is certainly the Atman or the Self. Only an idiot like you can deny its existence. Supreme Self or Sat-Chit-Ananda is not a concept. This is why Buddhism failed in India because of the confusion it created. No fault of the Buddha. Now go and wallow in your good for nothing Buddhistic stench.

Mr. Gardner please post this comment and do not delete it. Thanks.



red November 5, 2017 at 5:29 pm

I understand what you are saying, it is the state you abide-in. It is the ultimate state of being.

But, life/living doesn’t just “timelessly rest”… life is expression. Death rests timelessly.

You may say, that you are aware of your abiding…but, I don’t see the difference. Just as there is no difference between ignorance and wisdom, except application/expression.

Effortlessly “expressing” the sat-chit-ananda is what I’m pointing at. And, one cannot effortlessly express until one becomes it. (This is also called cultivation of bhavana, the original definition of meditation as Buddha taught it).

For one to become something, there is no shortcut, one just has to start acting like it. One has to apply, express, do, be.

This is what bodhisattva’s do…act like Buddha until they “become” one. They don’t just “timelessly rest in sahaj samadhi” and expect to automatically become it.

Vajrayana, Kashmir shaivism/shakitpat, tantra, self-inquiry etc.etc all of these paths have the same end.state as target, but they fail to focus on “doing”, “being” … to eventually become it., Only then will the effortless ly/timeless-resting is even feasible.

If one could just sit and imagine/recite-mantras/self-inquiry alone, they have a shot at ultimate wisdom…not at it’s effortless-expression, yet. There is ways to go, as bodhisattva’s show.


IJ November 6, 2017 at 3:37 am

You are a fucking moron like I said all along. You have misunderstood everything here including what the Buddha taught. May you rot in Buddhistic egoic ignorance for eternity. You will take birth an infinite number of times and end up being the same fucking , bumptious idiot that you are today. Sat- Chit Ananda is a side effect? Yeah, your stinking arse is the same for you. Go OD on some cocaine or heroin and drop dead. Good riddance. Lol! Hahahaha!


red November 6, 2017 at 8:31 pm

Cool headedness is one of the things focussing on expression can give you…as if it’s a daily habit.

I was looking to see if there is something I can learn from your implosion…only thing it reinforces my conviction to never lose track of right-expression(right.speech, etc). Enjoy the patala.


IJ November 6, 2017 at 4:31 am

Mr. Gardner,

How you can tolerate “intolerable nuisance assholes” like @red is beyond me. I admire your tremendous patience and cool in even bothering to explain correctly as you have in your comments. Kudos to you. Please post my earlier comments to @ red which I posted today because that is how I feel towards all these self claimed Buddhists of the West. Buddhists in India are not like this.



L. Ron Gardner November 6, 2017 at 7:41 pm

IJ, when I started reading and reviewing modern Buddhism books, I never expected to encounter the stupid parochialism of Buddhists that I have. And I’m sure the criticism I now receive from Buddhists will get worse after I publish my Buddhism books.


red November 6, 2017 at 8:41 pm

I focus on the one BIG missing piece, or the core issue with advaintin’s in general, and all you can think of is parochialism ?

As demonstrated by @IJ, without daily/active “expression”, delusion/addiction/Maya is a step away. Expression has to become a habit, only then you become!(you call this becoming sat-chit-ananda…the expression is required to sustain it, but then, since you became it, you don’t have to think about it…it’s just a habit, but the key is still the expression…not the sat.chit.anada).

Sorry for being too parochial..but this an important thing to re-emphasise to help folks like @IJ.


L. Ron Gardner November 7, 2017 at 3:29 pm

Red, your writing here is so unclear, I don’t know what you’re talking about.


IJ November 7, 2017 at 7:14 pm

Mr. Gardner,

He or she (red or blue or purple or whatever) is pouring in more and more of his/her own made-up stinking hogwash he/she considers Buddhistic wisdom or Jnana. Lol! Poor chap can never attain moksha in this miserable life of his or the next. Look what Buddhism did to him. He thinks he is free from delusions of maya. No, far from it. @red is an imbecilic nincomPOOP. Pun intended. Hahahaha! @red belongs in a loony bin. Lol! hahahaha!

Mr. Gardner please do not delete this comment. Thanks.


red November 8, 2017 at 4:45 am

sorry, it is real simple. I will use your lingo. We should focus on “expressing” sat-chit-ananda than obsessing over it. That’s it. Express it, live it.

I dont see sat-chat-anada in @IJ’s comments , or to some extent your’s too.

sorry you guys cant even realize/see what true sat-chit-ananda is truly about…really sad, unfortunate.

IJ November 7, 2017 at 12:17 am

Mr. Gardner,

Yes. I agree. Good luck with your books’ publication.

@red’s comments on Hindu Vedanta and Buddhism are the worst I have come across so far. He is as bad as Peterson Jackson is. This shows that people with huge egos like @red can misunderstand everything spiritual and behave like imbecilic circus clowns and make utter fools of themselves. How can they attain moksha? Lol!



IJ November 7, 2017 at 7:24 pm

Mr. Gardner,

The big missing piece @red is focusing here is his own stinking Buddhistic POOP! Lol! Hahahaha!
Please post this comment because it is extremely relevant to @red’s “Buddhism’s BS Jnana”. LMAO! Hahahaha!!!!



IJ November 7, 2017 at 7:51 pm

Mr. Gardner,

All your comments make complete sense.

Buddhists do not want the highest reward that Buddha taught being Nirvana like you sincerely wish. They are afraid to plunge into it. All they are interested in, is to focus on matters that lead to Nirvana. In that process they lose track and they go way of the intended target which is the highest goal of Nirvana. @ red is a prime example of this based on his ridiculous, nonsensical and foolish comments about Hindu Vedanta, Hindu sages and Buddhism itself.

I admire your efforts in having read so many books and posted as many relevant, wise and witty comments at Amazon.



IJ November 8, 2017 at 6:34 pm

Comments by @red are all wrong about nirvana, Sat-Chit-Ananda, Hindu Vedanta and sages. Yes it is nice to be good in life instead of being bad. But being good in life does not guarantee moksha or nirvana. There are millions of good people who know nothing of Sat-Chit-Ananda or have actually realized it.

@red is showing off again in vain saying he is a good person and so has attained moksha and realized Sat-Chit-Ananda which he has not. No one is going to fall for his pretentious crap. Quit lying and acting @ed. Lying and pretending are not the qualities of a good person. You have not attained moksha or Sat-Chit-Ananda (sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi) and you are not such a good person you claim here that you are.

Mr. Gardner has not showed off and boasted like you shamelessly have done here but has explained everything here correctly which you have failed to do in any of your comments. Why should I be nice to a shameless liar like you? You deserve no compassion or sympathy. Go wallow in patala yourself. Lol!



Ij November 8, 2017 at 9:48 pm

To @red
One cannot express Sat- Chit -Ananda (that is impossible and ridiculous) or live it without having realized it, meaning without having attained moksha or nirvana or as Mr. Gardner says without having having cut the Heart-knot of desires. You have not done any of the above. You are nothing but a shitbag of lies, a fucking shameless pretender, a show -off.

@red, so why don’t you either shut your fucking rear end, fuck off or post relevant comments backing up your laughable claims that you have tasted Sat-Chit-Ananda first hand and living it moment to moment. Prove it to us here that you have attained liberation like the Buddha did instead of lying and boasting or bust. Quit posting comments from your stinking rear-end. The last thing one can tolerate is pretentious fuck-offs like you.


red November 9, 2017 at 5:20 pm


i understand what you are saying, I know that feeling, I was once ardent Gita follower, then explored sivananda yoga vedanta, aurobindo, ramana.m, nisargadatta, even read swami Rama/osho/countless-gurus.

Now you know why I visit Mr. Gardner’s site, he has unique background in covering not just eastern spirituality but comparing it to other half of Earth. With Christinity etc. I obviously also looked into Buddhism/zen/Mahayana/old-madhyamaka/
Theravada and countless Buddhist monks/views. Early pragnaparimita sutras, which originated in south.india are one of my favorites…nagarjuna, shantideva’s bodhisattvakarika.etc.

I “see” them all, I understand their views, I know how they became their views. Jnana is supposed to do this for anyone on the path. Knot breaking takes different forms.

One is supposed to properly “see” themselves first, then apply that seeing to others and “see them”, then one develops full vision/wisdom. The reason one needs to see themselves first, is because that is the one true thing only YOU can know yourself…depends on nothing else. This is understanding true self. Buddha explains this process here:

BTW, Buddha was a “Hindu” who has access to state-of-the-art Hindu spirituality/practices during his time. He explored all of them.

His recommendation to stick to noble eightfold practices(“right expression” all together), is for a reason. The below uses some analogy, but worth “seeing” it why.

See the empty spaces analogy. Others are good too. They are just analogies, I don’t believe in emptiness 🙂 before you come back with that.


IJ November 16, 2017 at 6:46 am


Not to mention the ridiculous comments you have posted here which Mr. Gardner and I already pointed out. No point in going over it again. You are a conceited and arrogant idiot with a lot of book knowledge which you have misunderstood completely.



red November 18, 2017 at 2:22 am


i understand what Mr. Gardner is saying, but I did not see you expand on your beliefs. why dont you share your insight ?

we all make our worlds. sadhguru makes his , nityananda peddles sadhashivoham or his take on it, kashmir.shaivism does it its thing, Mr. Gardner/you do yours.

sat-chit-ananda (universal consciousness or “self”, shaktipat etc.) is one such world , but an ideal/universal one. It is pure-bliss-consciousness , Mr. Gardner has more colorful explanation/imagination for it. It is just another world, make no mistake.

The key is to have the freedom; To not be foreclosed by *any* world – including sat-chit-ananda. And one cannot exercise it, or *live* that freedom, if they are bound (maya, delusion, obsession, addiction, lack-of-clarity, etc).

There are different practices to come unbound. Some practices (eg: tantra/kundalini, even shaktipat is one such) though may work, have the danger of foreclosing you. They are supposed to unbind you , but you find yourself bound. Sad, unfortunate.

some practices (like the bodhisattva practices) are not only effective they are practical, as we have to “exist” in the real world. Self.inquiry of ramana.m (or general advaitins) miss that blind-spot…they tend to get foreclosed by “non-duality” (or their theory of it). Just as some people get foreclosed by sat-chit-ananda.

I dont read books, i read “them’ — all of them.


IJ November 22, 2017 at 6:38 am

You are the one who is bound. But that is okay if you are still bound. What is not okay is that you are an idiotic, arrogant prick who has posted imbecilic trash over here. I don’t even have to bother correcting you because you sir or madam are completely lost. So get lost and stay lost.


Mario December 12, 2017 at 2:42 pm

Mr. Gardner,

To a Westerner who doesn’t have a clue about the diversity of spiritual traditions, Sanskrit, nor the depth of Vedanta teachings, especially those of Ramana Maharshi, which teachings would you recommend to introduce the subject in the gentlest possible way? For example, I find that Rupert Spira’s Youtube teachings to be the most sensible and simplest teachings for beginners – Westerner neophytes.

What do you think of Rupert’s Youtube teachings in general, and who would you recommend instead, assuming you don’t find him a worthy introductory teacher (preferably on Youtube), nor one who can certainly take you to the final cutting of the Heart-knot?



L. Ron Gardner December 13, 2017 at 5:08 pm

Rupert Spiro is OK as an introductory teacher to Advaita Vedanta. But those interested in other traditions need to look elsewhere for introductory teachers.


L. Ron Gardner November 5, 2017 at 4:27 pm

Sat-Chit-Ananda is not a side effect nor an “egoic fixation,” as Jackson Peterson describes it. It is the same Reality as the Dharmakaya, and Nirvana, which Buddhism describes as a Dhatu, or Divine Domain. A yogi in Sahaja Samadhi is timelessly rested in, and as, this Divine Domain, or Supreme Source.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: