the nondoer fallacy pseutra

there’s a key misunderstanding of nondoing teaching of Nisargadatta

which originates in its misinterpretation by final teachings of Balsekar.

Nisargadatta points to doing as phenomenal and there is no individual—

Balsekar mis-points to doing as noumenal thru an individual phenomenon.

Nisargadatta points to Nondoing as universal-consciousness doing—

Balsekar mis-points to an individual Nondoer as the absolute doing.

relatively speaking this results in the error of doing on an individual level

with the (mis)understanding it’s not responsible for its doing—

but all doing from the viewpoint of an individual is false.

i see Balsekar’s fallacy resulting from the difficulty of students grasping

there’s no individual to grasp—so teaching was adapted to them—

as nondual teaching of Nisargadatta degenerates to a religion of nonduality

by a prosaic teacher’s inability to transmit the subtle teaching.