Please use the response section of this open thread to discuss any matters that are not comments on particular posts that I make. I am happy that readers want to use this blog to discuss such topics. However, please keep such comments on the open threads, and don't add them to other posts.
Sri Ramana Maharshi
Welcome
I propose to use this blog primarily to air my occasional musings on any matters relating to the life and teachings of Ramana Maharshi. There will also be occasional contributions about Arunachala, the sacred mountain where Sri Ramana spent all of his adult life.
Articles and interviews on these topics can also be found on my site: www.davidgodman.org.
Articles and interviews on these topics can also be found on my site: www.davidgodman.org.
966 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 801 – 966 of 966Dear All,
I keep reading that being in the present moment,i.e., focusing intensely on the task at hand is a strong spiritual practice. How does this lead to spiritual enlightment?
This seems like a basic question but I fail to understand.
Regards Murali
In response to murali, I don't really focus on being in the present at all. I remember papaji saying that the present, future and past are all the past. In a way maybe that is what is meant by non-doership, because all the other stuff, the phenomenal stuff is trivialized if it's all the past. In a way, it's like there isn't really a present either, except that I lend legitimacy and importance and reality to what I perceive, or the imagination of past to present to future, and all the little dreams I dream while awake. Get caught up in things, in experiences and enjoy and then suffer. And so maybe it's not the present to focus on, but just the sense that I exist, the reality of existence, which supposedly never changes, which never changes in my experience. I'm always there, there is the key, central fact of existing, and there is the changing things that I lend reality and imagination to. Like today, I just got caught up in several dreams and each of them involved a certain ammount of suffering and drama, or just bad habits. But then I recollect myself and what is it that exists that is not transient, that is here all the time, the central sense that I exist. Maybe that is what Nisargadatta was referring to when he said "I am"
.
Orthodox Christian Booklets
An Incident with an Elder, Who Doubted Divine Providence.
(This story was told by Elder Paisius of Athos [Eznepidis, 1924-1998])
In order to could convince his visitors that God always cares about people and directs everything the best way, the Elder related the following incident:
"One ascetic, suffering in his soul due to the multiple injustices he had seen in his life, begged God to reveal to him, why the pious people so often fall into difficulties and suffer various oppressions, while the sinners and atheists triumph and thrive. For a long period of time, he begged God daily to reveal to him the mystery of the ways of His Providence and explain the riddle of the seeming contradiction between that which should be and that which occurs. Finally, the ascetic heard a voice saying to him:
—Do not examine that, what exceeds your understanding, and do not strive to fathom the mysteries of Divine judgments, for they are an incomprehensible abyss. Condescending to your heart’s pain, God will reveal His Providence to you in one life incident. And you pay attention to what you see.
And so, like in a vision, the elder felt himself above the earth, and a mysterious air-flow brought him to a field, close to which there was a road. On the other side of the field, there was a spring and an old tree. The ascetic was ordered to hide himself in the hollow of that tree and to observe what would happen.
Soon a rich man rode up to the spring on a horse. He stopped to drink some water and to rest. Settling down on the grass, he took out of the basket a small purse, tightly stuffed with gold coins. After counting them, he put the purse back into the basket and took some food out to eat. He did not notice that, when he was taking out the food, the purse fell out into the grass. The rich man ate, lay down to take a nap, and then, mounting the horse, rode on, without noticing that the purse with the coins was left in the grass.
A little later, another passer-by approached the spring. He saw the purse with the gold coins, picked it up and left, delighted.
Soon, there appeared a third passer-by, skinny and badly dressed — apparently, a beggar. He, too, stopped by the spring, drank some water, took a roll out of his handkerchief and sat down to eat. He had not yet finished eating his bread, when suddenly, the first passerby rode up, the rich man that had lost his purse. With a face, crimson with anger, he pounced on the beggar and began demanding the return of his gold coins. Naturally, the beggar, not knowing what the matter was, began to refuse and assure the rich man, that he had never seen his coins. The rich man, however, did not believe the beggar, and, becoming violent, started to severely beat the beggar until he killed him. Upon searching the beggar’s clothes, he did not find anything, and galloped away, anguished.
Observing all this from the hollow, the elder began to grieve and cry, that the beggar died for nothing. And again the elder appealed to God: "Lord, what do these events mean? How can Your goodness tolerate such injustice: the rich man lost his coins absent-mindedly, an accidental stranger took them, and the innocent beggar paid for them with his life."
(continued...)
.
.
... continued: An Incident with an Elder, Who Doubted Divine Providence.
Then the Lord’s Angel descended from Heaven and answered the elder:
—Do not be sad, and do not think that this happened contrary to the will of God. For everything in life happens either because God permits it, or, for the purpose of teaching people, or as part of the Divine house-building. So, listen:
The man, who lost the gold coins, is the neighbor of the one that found them. The latter had a garden, which had a value of 100 gold coins. The rich man, being covetous, made him sell the garden to him for half the price. Suffering damage at the hands of the rich man, the neighbor, not knowing to whom to complain, began to ask God to come to his defense. And God so arranged it: in finding the gold coins, he received what was due him.
The beggar, who, it appeared, had suffered for nothing, had committed a murder in his youth. Later, he sincerely repented of that sin, and lived the rest of the life righteously. Nevertheless, suffering in his soul for his grave sin, He prayed God to send him a death that would redeem him of his sin of the murder of an innocent person. Of course, the merciful Lord forgave him, seeing his complete reformation. Nevertheless, he permitted him to die violently, to crown him with the martyr’s crown, that he had asked for himself!
Finally, the miserly rich man, that lost the gold coins, was punished for his covetousness: God let him commit the grave sin of murder. Staggered by that incident, he came to his senses and with great grief started repenting. Then, having distributed his wealth, he left the world and became a monk in one of the monasteries.
So, in which of these three events do you see injustice or blind fate? Therefore, humble yourself before God, and in future, do not delve into His destinies, for He does everything righteously and leads to the best result.
Concluding this story, Elder Paisius mentioned the words of the Psalm: "Righteous art Thou, O LORD, and upright are Thy judgments" (Ps.118:137).
.
This is more from my teacher's commentary on Maharshi's Self-inquiry.
Disciple: Although I have listened to the explanation of the characteristics of enquiry in such great detail, my mind has not gained even a little of peace. What is the reason for this?
The Maharshi: The reason is the absence of strength or one-pointedness of mind.
My teacher's commentary:
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
The inquiry into the Self is the most excellent of practices. The inquiry into the SElf is the most direct of paths. The inquiry into the SElf is the means for the most immediate revelation of the Self. The fruit of the inquiry into the Self is supreme Bliss.
By whatever means one attempts to realize the SElf, in the end one must know oneself. How is it possible to know oneself without inquiring into the nature of oneself?
Self-inquiry liberates one from all of the imagined bondage. By inquiry, one knows oneself by the SElf. By inquiry, the absence of the ego is revealed as self-evident. Inquiry cannot fail, as it does not presuppose the existence of any of the very illusions or dualisms that one is attempting to transcend.
Since inquiry is concerned with the Self and since the Existence of the Self is beyond doubt in all, inquiry can be practiced by all. As the Self is full and perfect, innately endowed with its own imperishable Light, which is Knowledge itself, inquiry is for all. There is no one who is incapable of inquiry into the SElf, or for whom the SElf is not, or who is farther away from the Self. How far can one be from one's own Existence? The Self is immediately present. Who is other than the Self? Inquiry does not depend on the body, senses, prana, thoughts---which constitute the mind---or the "I" notion, the ego, all of which may be subject to flaws or limitations. Inquiry depends on one's own Existence, and Knowledge of that Existence is intrinsic to it. So who is not endowed with the ability to inquire? Inquiry is like fire, before which the apparently insuperable obstacles are mere straw. Ignorance is insubstantial, so who cannot inquire and know the Self?
Moreover, are there two selves, that one could be ignorant of the other? Inquiry is full in itself and requires no auxillary methods, for all other methods involve the use or manipulation of something that is transcended by inquiry. Inquiry is the power of Siva by which the unreal is destroyed. Inquiry alone was the boon requested of the Supreme Lord by Prahlada as related by Vasistha.
If one is instructed in the immediately accessible supreme path by the best of Gurus, but fails to turn inward with one-pointed focus, the Truth of the Self will not be known. If the Self is not known, peace is not experienced. The Self alone is immutable, as stated earlier, and the immutable alone yields imperturbable peace. Peace is of the Self, the Self must be known for peace. One must inquire into the nature of the Self in order to know it.
At any moment, one is either inquiring into the Self which is the Reality, or one is inquiring into, that is following, the imaginings and vagaries of the mind, which constitute the unreal. A mind caught in its own vasana-s, or tendencies, is regarded as weak by the wise. A mind devoid of vasana-s remains focused upon Knowledge of the Self and is regarded as strong by the wise. To wallow in the unreal is weakness; to rely on the Real as one's support is true strength. The wise say one should attain one-pointedness of mind. It signifies an absence of notions, which constitute the diffusion of ignorance, and implies absorption in That which is without duality.
There should be one-pointedness in wisdom, for is there ever an opportune moment to be deluded? A mind turned inward is spiritual strength. A mind turned outward, lost in its own projections within itself, is weakness. If inquiry were practiced one-pointedly, ignorance could not even arise. Then, what appeared as the practice would be revealed as the natural, effortless state of nondual Knowledge itself.
The intense desire for Liberation yields the necessary focus, leaving one detached from and disinterested in all else. By such one-pointedness in inquiry did Nidagha realize the Truth when instructed by Ribhu. By such focus did Rama realize who he is when instructed by Vasistha. With such one-pointedness did Janaka, fully surrendered to Ashtavakra, realize the Truth when taught by the Guru. With such one-pointedness upon Knowledge did Padmapada, Suresvara, and Hastamalaka realize, being taught by Adi Shankara, and by the same one-pointedness in his deep devotion did Totaka realize the unveiled Absolute in the presence of his Guru, Sri Shhankara. One-pointed was Nachiketa, and so was it with Svetaketu when he was instructed by Uddalaka. The same is so for the rishis-Sanaka, Snandana, Sanat Kumara, and Sanat Sujata (said to be the mind-born sons of Brahma, their names mean: Sanaka-ancient, lasting long; Sana or Sanat Sujata always beautiful, or anceint and well-born; Sanat Kumara- always a youth; and Sanandana-having joy) who realized in the Silence of Dakshinamurthy. All were one-pointed. All realized the Self, Brahman. All abide as That alone, and their peace is eternal.
Whoever, having been blessed with instruction by the Guru, comprehends the ever-present nature of the SElf, and one-pointedly, with utmost intensity, meditates upon the Self, rests firmly in the Truth of the SElf and, at peace, experiences this infinite Wisdom and Bliss.
Om Sri Ramanarpanamastu
Om May this be an offering to Sri Ramana
Murali,
I will keep the response to your poser as brief as possible-What Scott has expressed is the Essence.From the point of Practice,there are two approaches towards handling the roller coaster of being caught up in thoughts and activities-
One approach is not to get onto the Roller Coaster.
The other approach is to flow along with the Roller coaster without trying to resist in the form of Regrets,hopes and Fears.This way one stays WHOLE and in awareness.one then enjoys the rollercoaster ride!
To be WHOLE and not be fragmented is the very essence of spiritual living.
Namaskar.
Hello Everyone,
It's been a very long time since I've posted a comment here. My computer no longer shows the word verification thing (although I'm working on trying to correct that!), and so Ravi has offered to post comments for me, if and when I have something to say.
I was inspired by Murali's question about how being present has anything to do with spiritual enlightment and whether it can be an important part of one's practice.
For me, in my own experience, being present is absolutely key. When I am fully present, there are no thoughts. When there are no thoughts, there are no worries or fears or anxieties. And, more importantly, it is in this state of 'presence' that I feel closest to being who I truly am: the Self. It is the state in which I can feel my existence.
When thoughts are clouding my awareness, which is the vast majority of the time, then I am not here and now in the present. I am drifting somewhere else, past or future, whatever you want to call it.
As I recall, Bhagavan talked often of letting go of thinking, that thoughts are a primary obstacle to experiencing the Self, and that doing Self-enquiry will help one be released from thinking. That being the case, if one can help eliminate thinking by being more present (and finding more and more ways to do so), then it seems like being present is integral to the process of 'seeking' enlightenment. (I hope that makes sense.)
This is just my two cents' worth. I would love to hear what others think.
Best wishes,
Jupes
Being in the presence of a jnani. My feeling on it, from my own experiences is that is definitely possible for the devotees of a jnani to know beyond a doubt that there teacher is fully Realized. Because not intellectually, the jnani by their very glance puts the devotee in such amazingly deep states. I really am skeptical taht someone who wasn't fully Realized would be able to do that. It's funny I describe them as deep states, but that really doesn't cover it. Maybe, the prana gets stilled, the agitation that is so intense in egoic life is completely obliterated, in my own experience and it may or may not have been full on samadhi, because there was some element of perception and thought (which so I hear in nirvikalpa is completely absent), in some way my consciousness became all expansive, encompassing the entire room, and my vision was intensely shimmering. There were visions of things like white ribbons flowing out of the teacher. Maybe the visions are illusions, but they were created I think my mind dealing with the full on power of the Self (again words don't convey). I was watching vids of one of the gurus that is a black sheep (generally not respected), as in there was alot of scandle abotu him, very famous, had a huge fanatical following, but everything he said actually resonated with pure advaita, and the things he said about the guru, devotee relationship resonated with this experience I'm talking about. (It led me to the conclusion that he must be fully Realized and the drama around him was from others and their reactions to him---could be wrong) Anyway, my assumption is that this kind of 'experience' could only happen in the presence of a jnani, not someone who is deluded or even more mature. Because it requries that person being totally the Self with nothing left over. so that infact you are interacting with the Self with the illusion of embodiement. and when the material viewpoint is given up, then there is only that Divine Self (guru and devotee are one). people who have had this kind of experience, including me, will I think be very sure that there teacher is a great saint, sage, guru, jnani. Others who have not had this experience may not see it. So proselytization is useless. If there is only the Self, and that self is my real existence, then pretty much everything else including any material viewpoint has to be given up completely. This black sheep, frowned upon guru said a bunch of things I felt were helpful. One of which is "there is nothing to be gotten here", as in there is nothing to be gotten from this world but brief enjoyments, but mostly suffering, loss and death.
Friends,
This is an Excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna-'Master and M'(chapter 13).One of the most charming aspects of Sri Ramakrishna is his seemingly Human nature(with the usual worry ,hopes,little joys)coexisting with the Divine Nature that Totally Transcends it!
Monday, August 20, 1883
Sri Ramakrishna was sitting on his bed, inside the mosquito net, meditating. It was about eight o'clock in the evening. M. was sitting on the floor with his friend Hari Babu. Hari, a young man of twenty-eight, had lost his wife about eleven years before and had not married a second time. He was much, devoted to his parents, brothers, and sisters.
Hriday, Sri Ramakrishna's nephew, was ill in his home in the country. The Master was worried about him. One of the devotees had sent him a little money, but the Master did not know it.
When Sri Ramakrishna came out of the mosquito net and sat on the small couch, the devotees saluted him.
MASTER (to M.): "I was meditating inside the net. It occurred to me that meditation, after all, was nothing but the imagining of a form, and so I did not enjoy it. One gets satisfaction if God reveals Himself in a flash. Again, I said to myself, 'Who is it that meditates, and on whom does he meditate?' "
M: "Yes, sir. You said that God Himself has become everything-the universe and all living beings. Even he who meditates is God."
MASTER: "What is more, one cannot meditate unless God wills it. One can meditate when God makes it possible for one to do so. What do you say?"
M: "True, sir. You feel like that because there is no 'I' in you. When there is no ego, one feels like that."
MASTER: "But it is good to have a trace of ego, which makes it possible for a man to feel that he is the servant of God. As long as a man thinks that it is he who is doing his duties, it is very good for him to feel that God is the Master and he God's servant. When one is conscious of doing work, one should establish with God the relationship of servant and Master."
M. was always reflecting on the nature of the Supreme Brahman.
Nature of Brahman
MASTER (to M.): "Like the Ākāśa, Brahman is without any modification. It has become manifold because of Śakti. Again, Brahman is like fire, which itself has no colour. The fire appears white if you throw a white substance into it, red if you throw a red, black if you throw a black. The three gunas-sattva, rajas, and tamas-belong to Śakti alone. Brahman Itself is beyond the three gunas. What Brahman is cannot be described. It is beyond words. That which remains after everything is eliminated by the Vedantic process of 'Not this, not this', and which is of the nature of Bliss, is Brahman.
"Suppose the husband of a young girl has come to his father-in-law's house and is seated in the drawing-room with other young men of his age. The girl and her friends are looking at them through the window. Her friends do not know her husband and ask her, pointing to one young man, 'Is that your husband?' 'No', she answers, smiling. They point to another young man and ask if he is her husband. Again she answers no. They repeat the question, referring to a third, and she gives the same answer. At last they point to her husband and ask, 'Is he the one?' She says neither yes nor no, but only smiles and keeps quiet. Her friends realize that he is her husband.
"One becomes silent on realizing the true nature of Brahman.
(To M.) "Well, why do I talk so much?"
M: "You talk in order to awaken the spiritual consciousness of the devotees. You once said that when an uncooked luchi is dropped into boiling ghee it makes a sizzling noise."
continued...
Friends,
'Master and M' continued...
The Master began to talk to M. about Hazra.
MASTER: "Do you know the nature of a good man? He never troubles others. He doesn't harass people. The nature of some people is such that when they go to a feast they want special seats. A man who has true devotion to God never makes a false step, never gives others trouble for nothing.
"It is not good to live in the company of bad people. A man should stay away from them and thus protect himself. (To M.) Isn't that so?"
M: "Yes, sir. The mind sinks far down in the company of the wicked. But it is quite different with a hero, as you say."
MASTER: "How is that?"
M: "When a fire is feeble it goes out when even a small stick is thrown into it; but a blazing fire is not affected even if a plantain-tree is thrown into it. The tree itself is burnt to ashes."
The Master asked M. about his friend Hari Babu.
M: "He has come here to pay you his respects. He lost his wife long ago."
MASTER (to Hari): "What kind of work do you do?"
M: "Nothing in particular. But at home he takes good care of his parents and his brothers and sisters."
MASTER (with a smile): "How is that? You are like 'Elder, the pumpkin-cutter'. You are neither a man of the world nor a devotee of God. That is not good. You must have seen the sort of elderly man who lives in a family and is always ready, day or night, to entertain the children. He sits in the parlour and smokes the hubble-bubble. With nothing in particular to do, he leads a lazy life. Now and again he goes to the inner court and cuts a pumpkin; for, since women do not cut pumpkins, they send the children to ask him to come and do it. That is the extent of his usefulness-hence his nickname, 'Elder, the pumpkin-cutter'.
"You must do 'this' as well as 'that'. Do your duties in the world, and also fix your mind on the Lotus Feet of the Lord. Read books of devotion like the Bhagavata or the life of Chaitanya when you are alone and have nothing else to do."
It was about ten o'clock. Sri Ramakrishna finished a light supper of farina pudding and one or two luchis. After saluting him, M. and his friend took their leave.
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
.
... Ravi; Read books of devotion like the Bhagavata or the life of Chaitanya ...
Who is this Chaitanya? Does this book exist in English?
.
Ramos,
Sri Krishna Chaitanya-You may read this article:
http://www.chaitanya-monks.org/articles/story-sri-krishna-chaitanya
This article is one of the less bigoted version that I have come across.
The ISKON founder is a descendant of the disciple of Sri Chaitanya.you may refer to Prabhupada's online translation of Chaitanya Charitamrita,biography of Sri Chaitanya.
Sri Ramakrishna had pointed out the Bigotry of Vaishnava cults!Proselytisation and Bigotry have undermined the impact of Sri Krishna Chaitanya's Life and Teachings.
You may also look up Swami Sivananda's rather insipid narration of Sri Chaitanya's life :Pls visit http://www.dlshq.org/saints/gauranga.htm
Namaskar.
.
... Sri Krishna Chaitanya ...
Thank you, Ravi. I will have a look at this links.
.
Is this a new fashion that alot of advaita teachers are now also psychotherapists?
Who is charging whom a fee?
How long will the therapy continue?
Until the patients pockets are empty!
Maybe I'm being cynical but I think not.
Losing M Mind wrote:
"Inquiry alone was the boon requested of the Supreme Lord by Prahlada as related by Vasistha."
Can someone point me to the appropriate reference for this (perhaps in Yoga Vasishta). This is very interesting.
Regards Murali
.
... Murali; Can someone point me to the appropriate reference for this ...
On Dissolation - The Story of Prahlada
[...] Every day Prahlada thus worshipped the lord Visnu by thought, word and deed. As the immediate fruit of such worship, all the noble qualities like wisdom and dispassion grew in him. He did not seek pleasure; even his mind did not contemplate pleasure. Having abandoned craving for pleasure, his mind was dangling without support. Lord Visnu came to know of the state of Prahlada. He travelled along the netherworld to where Prahlada was worshipping him. Seeing that lord Visnu himself had come to the palace, Prahlada rejoiced even more and worshipped Visnu again.
PRAHLADA said:
I take refuge in the Lord in whom the three worlds rejoice, who is the supreme light which destroys the darkness of every kind of ignorance and impurity, who is the refuge of the hebless destitute, who alone is the Lord whose refuge is worth seekirg, the unborn, the surest security. You are radiant like the blue lotus or the blue jewel; your body is blue like the zenith of the clear winter sky; and you hold your divine insignia in your hands — I take refuge in you. I take refuge in him whose voice is the truth (the holy scriptures), whose navel-lotus is the seat of Brahms the creator and who dwells in the hearts of all beings. I take refuge in him the radance of whose nails sparkles as the stars in the heaven, whose sweet smiling face is the moon, in whose heart there is a jewel from which rays emanate and flow as the holy river Gataga and who is clai in the pure autumnal sky. I take refuge in him in whom this extensive universe rests without diminution, who is ever unborn and unchanging, whose body is composed of all the auspicious qualities and who rests on a banyan leaf. I take refuge in him who has goddess Laksmi at his own side, the beauty of whose body is like the beaut) of the setting sun. I take refuge in the Lord who is like the sun unto the Lotus of the three worlds, who is like a lamp unto the darkness of ignorance, who is of the nature of infinite consciousness, and who destroys the suffering and distress of all beings in the universe.
THE LORD said:
O Prahlada, you are an ocean of good qualities and you are indeed the jewel among the demons. Ask of me any boon of your choice which is conducive to the cessation of the sorrow of birth.
PRAHLADA prayed:
Lord, you are the indweller of all beings and you grant the fruition of all our wishes. Pray, grant me that boon which you consider to be limitless and infinite.
THE LORD said:
Prahlada, may you be endowed with the spirit of enquiry till you rest in the infinite Brahman, so that all your delusions might come to an end and you may attain the highest fruit (blessing).
VASISTHA continued:
Having said thus, the Lord disappeared. Prahlada concluded his worship and after singing hymns in praise of the Lord, began to reflect in the following manner.
PRAHLADA contemplated:
The Lord had commanded "Be continually engaged in enquiry"; hence, I shall engage myself in enquiry into the self. What am I who speaks, walks, stands and functions on this elaborate stage known as the world - I should find this out to begin with.
Surely, I am not this world which is outside and which is inert [...]
.
Thanks Clemens:
"Be continually engaged in enquiry"; hence, I shall engage myself in enquiry into the self. What am I who speaks, walks, stands and functions on this elaborate stage known as the world - I should find this out to begin with."
This is amazing. I never came across this. In Indian life, Prahlada is a household name symbolising Selfless devotion and an example of Lord's protection of His devotees. Its suprising for me to see that the Lord finally advised Prahlada to practice Self Enquiry! Truly Bhagavan said Bhakti is Jnagna-Maatha.
Regards Murali
I was just thinking about hwo it seems to me, that this getting caught up in mental stuff again is kind of inevitable, since those underlying vasanas are there. That they are weakened by the persistant attempts and returning to inquiry. I can feel really terrible, and then kind of do different aspects of the inquiry as I remember them, and then suddenly find myself feeling pristinely good and illumined, sometimes even thoughtless. And then I kind of rest in that. Before I wrote this, I thought about joking about how I'm not a jnani, as if I'd need to tell anyone, when I am, I won't have to tell anyone. (oh, the point was that I never write as a form of saying something as true, because only a jnani can talk about or give advice on inquiry, because it can only be understood from that perspective, whatever that is?) My teacher had said practice is cumulative, it really seems so. For instance, my practice started as getting acupuncture weekly (+ filipino martial arts which are not spiritual) for anxiety (& hallucenations), then eventually working up to yoga daily which sometimes then became tai chi daily since it was easier on the musculature, sometimes chi gong. Then there would be another breakdown where I'd realize my egoic powerlessness to a greater extent, it was usually not something I wanted to recognize. But then this would force a deeper practice on me, then it was vipassana meditation daily. Then it was surrender to Christ and vipassana meditation. I had read Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis which does indeed have some transcendent wisdom. Then my martial arts teacher (filipino martial arts) about 6 months after starting Vipassana meditation took me to the SAT temple and there I met the person who would eventually become a sat-guru and was introduced to Maharshi and self-inquiry. Now, I experience transcendent states of bliss and illumination which are sometimes far beyond taht which I experienced from the previous practices, or are more clear awareness of just Existence. So each practice got a little deeper in terms of clearing ignorance, and I would guess that they were all necessary.
Why speak of 'Truth'?
Why use the word at all?
It is only a word, a sound with no meaning outside itself.
It is the most used word in 'spirituality' and the most
misused, the most abused.
It is not a doctrine, not a method, not a procedure, not a
ritual.
It may be the same as 'Stillness' 'Freedom' 'Self' and 'no
Self.'
But all are words, sounds with no meaning outside of
themselves.
--Petros
This is a satsang transcript with my teacher.
I found a paragraph which I surrounded with 3 brackets really thought provoking, as it is something I'm verifying for myself. Initially, I thought of within as being within, but the other within, the one that considers of the teachings to be great, of sages to be great is starting to be more what I consider within to be.
N.: So, the different kinds of differences
are not true for your Existence: differences of
the same kind, differences of different kinds,
and homogeneous but divided within itself.
Such are not true of your Existence. If that
Existence steadily abides in the Knowledge of
itself, you, yourself, are the Source of the
teaching. The teaching, the Source, and the
one who knows it are entirely the same.
(Silence)
[[[Can you see that it is better to even have
the idea that the source of the teaching is some
great thing, even outside of yourself, but
abandon the ego notion than to retain the ego
notion yet somehow think that the source is
inside you? For “inside” would still be only
within an ego context. It would not really be
within.]]]
Q.: (laughing) It would be within a mistake.
I don’t want to be there.
N.: Clear?
Q.: It is clear, but little thoughts want to
start rising up.
N.: Who knows them?
Q.: I know them. They are mine.
N.: Then, inquire who are you.
(Silence) When thoughts appear to rise, do
they rise outside of you or within you?
Q.: At first they seem to rise outside, but
then I know that they are inside. No, they are
still outside.
N.: “Outside” is another idea inside.
Q.: (laughing) Yes.
.
... PRAHLADA ...
* He intelligently decides the best wish: Grant me that boon which you consider to be limitless and infinite..
* Be continually engaged in enquiry is in my eyes the same as Pray without ceasing (1 Thessalonians 5,17)
.
.
... LMM; differences of the same kind, differences of different kinds, and homogeneous but divided within itself ...
This reminds me of:
Talk 264.
D.: Does Bhagavan see the world as part and parcel of Himself? How does He see the world?
M.: The Self alone is and nothing else. However, it is differentiated owing to ignorance. Differentiation is threefold: (1) of the same kind: (2) of a different kind, and (3) as parts in itself. The world is not another self similar to the self. It is not different from the self; nor is it part of the self.
--------------
This threefold differentiation is an exact description of the structure of the conceptual mind.
.
in response to anonymous, I had been confused about the meaning of within, why do they call it within, when it is not within physically, or inward physically. Why do they use that word, within? My teacher responded that (paraphrasing), what may appear to be the parading of book knowledge is actually because those words have subtler and more profound meanings then what they seem to inititally. I still don't exactly know what 'within' or 'inward' means in the context of these teachings. But I think it has to do with being immersed in the awareness of the Self these teachings speak of. My teacher said it would be wiser to ask what the meanings of those words are, then arbitrarily change them. So I would think the same applies with Truth. I don't think truth refers to doctrinal truth, or ideological truth. My guess is that why the term truth is used, is because everything else that is experienced is false, is maya, and the non-objective Self is truth because there is an absence of the false. Also those immersed in the Self, jnanis, only speak the truth. Definitely it is my experience that these words are not just useless symbols and concepts that they actually resonate with the Self, itself. Maharshi wasn't giving an intellectual lesson. That is my experience, that actually the teachings much of it sometimes did seem to initially be a parading of book knowledge, and less so as I go on, I think it's that I'm less in tamas guna, and in tamas guna, these words do just seem like meaningless symbols.
more personal interpretations:
I take stillness to mean samadhi, where the sense of individuality and agitated thought based on it is silent and being merged in Bliss. "Silence is that state in which no "I" arises".
I take freedom to be freedom from the bondage of desire, wanting something to be some way, and then all the worries that come fro that desire, which is bondage. Freedom is freedom from the desire.
I take Self to be the Self because the sense of existing is the Self, and it is always, the sense of self that I actually am, is the Self. The ego "self" is a set of ideas and thoughts. "mind is only a bundle of thoughts" that arise to me, they are objective to me, so they couldn't be me. "the Consciousness overlooking the blank is the Self" which I took to mean the consciousness overlooking or aware of the tamasic state of dullness is the Self. So it is called the Self because we are very much that Self always. I know I exist, and that knowing that I exist without the thoughts about it is the Self. Everything else that arises including the idea of "me" is an illusion. I'm not there experientially, but that's my intellectual interpretation.
These words truth, stillness, freedom, self and no self seem like they are very much meant to make all the other stuff fall away and not be considered real any longer.
.
Dear friends,
who knows more of the Book Jivanmukti Viveka of Swami Vidyaranya? Who was this Swami?
.
I was reading Eckhart Tolle's the power of Now online Google Books preview. I have to say, it seems pretty true to a pure nondual advaita kind of approach to things. In other words, he seems to give really good advice.
Writing and talking about it and appearing on chat shows and having a chin wag with Oprah does not a Jnani make.
It would not at all surprise me if Eckhart Tolle is a jnani. I mean, there was something really resonating with me and the teachings of Maharshi, and other advaita sages. He did use slightly different langauge, but he wasn't influenced by Advaita directly it seems. The thing that really resonated is it seemed like he was talking about the nondual Self and and that everything else is non-consequential. He kept talking of Being. How that is the central thing. I forget what he said, but he said that pure Being has infinite depth. And I thought that fit with the Self, and it being hte space between thoughts, and so easily imaginible that he fully found that state of egoless existence as the Self, because he was so darn good at explaining it. He also like alot of Advaita sages did not seem to talk about how you can succeed in the world more, his teachings seemed completely world transcendent. So because of that, I would not say that it struck me neo-advaita in the pejorative use of that term. I'm not of the crowd that say Jnanis don't go on Oprah. Why not? Sages get famous in India, why wouldn't they get famous in the West, and the West is ridiculously obsessed with commercialism, so it's not surprising that a commercial context would manifest around a Self-Realized sage. Particularly thinking of 3 that have struck me immensely wise and helpful. Don Miguel Ruiz, Byron Katie, and now that I've checked it out Eckhart Tolle. Sometimes I wonder if there is a bigotry that a sage must be from India, and if they don't wear a loin cloth, they are not a sage. I can't abide that logic. Now, all I know is that those 3 seem to be possessed of some kind of immensely transcendent wisdom, that I find helpful, that is what I know. I've kind of got tired of all the ways teachers get derided for things that seem kind of superficial. Or the kind of superficial expectation that their motives are crass, i.e. they are in it for the money. I'm sorry some of these guys seem a little too wise to prize wealth. I mean what is wealth in comparison to immaculate Bliss. The kind of wisdom they seem to possess, seems the kind that even in th striving for it, you must see through temporary pleasures and wealth to a large extent, they seem to possess a full measure of that wisdom.
I only respond to grown ups.
Also I haven't seen any reason why the ratio of jnani/populace would necessarily be any higher in any given place in the world. Maharshi hadn't even read much of Hindu scripture when he spontaneously became enlightened, so taht is not a pre-requisite. In India, I can think of several people that were probably jnanis. Maharshi, all of his Realized devotees, Nityananda, Nisargadatta, more recently that Sat-guru Nannagaru, and that other one who granted boons. That's a handfull of twentieth century jnanis. Ramakrishna if you go back to the nineteenth century and several others, who I would guess were fully established in that state. It stands to reason that there are probably an equal number or roundabouts in other places in the world. They may use a different philosophical language. Not every jnani becomes famous, some walk off and do their own thing. So like in the U.S. where I live, you'd imagine that there are atleast several at any given time, and that of those several, some have gained some fame because of it, which might even manifest either as being the founder of some Christian sect, or a best-selling new age author who ACTUALLy is Realized. As I said, my experiences around my teacher suggest to me that he is not an individual (jiva), but the Self alone.
but serendipitously (i guess), I've already responded. I doubt the reactionary egotism I'm displaying will get these posted anytime soon. (laugh).
Happy Deepam!
God, whose love and joy
are present everywhere,
can't come to visit you
unless you aren't there."
Happy Deepam, everyone.
I think there is a Sun TV (?) live telecast of the Deepam today.
Anyone with a TV-Tuner card can record it. If you do, please doshare.
Thanks,
Nandu
I went to a fanatical political blog and then joked on Facebook, "Down with the Super Ego!". And then went to wikipedia and looked it up. I was thinking in terms of these teachings what I understood, is that fanaticism, judgement (including self-judgement), self-righteousness would all be super-ego. The id would be desires and fears. In Self-Realization the id and the superego would be dissolved I would think. The ego itself would be like maybe how it's described that the pure mind, the sattvic mind becomes formless. Because it seemed like a jnani might have a functioning ego in freudian terms. Be able to plan for instance. But the thing that in Realization would not be there are the id and super ego, intense desires and fears and the self-righteous kind of thoughts or self-judgemental thoughts of the super ego. The ego (in Freudian terms) would function superbly or perfectly in the jnani (I'm guessing) because it would no longer be balancing the super ego and the id (which no longer exist). I was just curious, so the way ego is used in psychoanalysis is not exactly the same. Because it seemed to me the ego is like mental ability. (which would still function in someone enlightened, even better) The super ego and the id together are what make up the jiva in Advaita terms it seemed like. For instance Maharshi saying about poring kerosine on the fire, or finding out who desires? That seems like it is aimed at dissolving and not perpetuating the id. Who am I? or the whole process of inquiry seems aimed at dissolving the whole apparatus that gives rise to both the super-ego and the id. The super-ego might be in Maharshi terms the sense of personal importance and identity. Interestingly Freud initially called the Id, the It, the ego, the "I", and the super-ego the Over I. Someone else latinized it.
(from Jupes)
First of all, thanks to Ravi for kindly posting this for me.
In response to the comments from LMM Scott and Anonymous about Eckhart Tolle's spiritual state, I would like to say that I believe Eckhart has indeed realized the Self. Ever since first reading The Power of Now about 9 years ago, and reading most of his other books since then, I have thought that Eckhart is an enlightened being. I have to wonder if Anon has actually read any of Eckhart's books or if his comment comes only from seeing him on Oprah. (I missed the Oprah thing.) It is a delight to read these books. Every time I pick one up, no matter what page I turn to, there is some profound gem there to be savored, and I find myself transported to a quieter, deeper state than I am normally in. This experience alone makes the books worth reading.
I was watching Eckhart Tolle on Youtube, and just as I thought, gee he reminds me so much of Krishnarmurti, Jiddu (laugh). Just then he quoted Krishnamurti. So me and Eckhart are in sync. (laugh). Oh, he's so good. I'm not on the side of the naysayers on this one.
Hi Jupes Please take a second look, Tolle doesn't have the integrity of Ramana. As impressive and refreshing as the book is, Tolle's presentation of the spiritual life is not without its disconcerting moments, and some of his conclusions are worth a second look. Are we really in the middle of a "profound transformation that is taking place in the collective consciousness of the planet and beyond," even as our "social, political, and economic structures . . . enter the final stage of collapse"? Are women really "closer to enlightenment" than men, and is their monthly menstrual cycle poised to become the powerful catalyst for their widespread awakening? Does greater consciousness actually lead to a "significant slowing down of the aging of the physical body"? Whatever the ultimate veracity of these and other unusual declarations, their inclusion in the book only served to raise further questions, rather than illuminating or clarifying the territory of enlightenment.
The commercialized set up of Oprah is annoying. Oprah expressing non-Realized sentiments such as being excited abotu how many viewers they have, that is something that has shifted in me, where I'm hardly interested in hearing the perspectives of the unRealized (in terms of gleaning wisdom). No offense to Oprah, she seems really nice. But yeah, I get the same feeling, that Eckhart has realized the Self. I don't know if i mentioned it, but Eckhart, Byron Katie, and Don Miguel Ruiz I would suspect have all truly Realized the Self. I mean like Maharshi, their wisdom seems out of htis world. There are others, and I'm not judging them in New age lit. that I would suspect haven't. Andrew cohen, Burt Harding and Deepak Chopra. But I don't know really know that. I know that in my own delusions, I like to talk about other things or lend reality to other thigns besides the Self, I don't think I could even fake Realization, not in a convincing way. I've noticed some people always stick to talking about something so transcendent and have novel ways of talking about it. It's interesting on one of the Oprah eckhart segments. She kind of I thought a little bit obnoxiously referred to him as the Father of Now. And the first time I saw it, I was a little bit turned off that he nodded and smiled. But it became clear to me, taht it wasn't a caught up in the praise nod and smile, but a kindly and attentively validating smile, validating of Oprah, not what she was saying. And sometimes I feel like I can sense this silence in some of these people, but I'm not sure that there behavior or speech pattern is what i'm seeing or if it's something almost hallucenatory. More and more it becomes clear how to practice, how to stay in Bliss, which is the purpose of this practice. It's interesting how he validated that hte essence of the individuality what is loved about it, is the sense of I Am, teh sense of I exist, pure existence and even though we fear losing it, we can never lose it. My teacher telling me that one of the ways the Self is described in scriptures is the true, teh good and the beautiful, that everything true good and beautiful is the Self shining unobscured. Eckhart in one of his books wove a really intriguing tale about how that is true of flowers, crystals, birds and diamonds, how they are savored because they are almost manifestations of the formless, and brilliantly he compared the jump from jivahood to Enlightenment, to the evolution of flowers 114 million years ago.
Eckhart does question and answer on this one website, someone asked him:
Dissolving the ego is quite a scary business. When it comes to complete surrender, it is actually quite difficult to do because everyone wants to be an individual. Is individuality lost? Is there any awareness of an individual self after awakening and what about after physical death?
Answer:
When you say “individual self”, I assume you mean who you are in your essence, your true identity. What is the essence of who I am? Is it the flesh and bones of my body? Is it my memories, my thoughts, my emotions, social roles? It is none of the above. Who I feel to be in my essence - what some people call “my individuality” or “my identity”, is felt to be something very precious, but what exactly is it? It is the underlying sense of I Am, which is consciousness itself. It is the only thing I cannot lose because it is who I am. So we could put it like this: you will lose everything except yourself.
You say: “everyone wants to be an individual”. I would just say: everyone wants to be. Awareness of Being is self-realization. Awareness of Being is true happiness.
LMM(lol): I thought the way he turned the question around, so taht he was affirming that individuality survives Realization, but that individuality is just the formless Cosnciousnses and not your personhood, I thought that reminds me very much of Maharshi. There is something about words like that that stops my mind and I experience what perhaps is what grace is referring to, a Bliss takes over. In reading the words of any jnani, I get the distinct feeling that any other jnani could have said those words. It looks like something out I am That, it also looks like something out of day by Day with Bhagavan, it also looks like something my teacher has responded in his answers to me via correspondence. When it's text, I could almost substitute any jnani for any other jnani. And the feeling of grace on reading the words is the same. The feeling of watching him, and I did get this with Eckhart, as well as other sages, there is the feeling that I'm looking at a mirror. Like, the consciousness version of a mirror. I actually thought he was awesome on Oprah, today I watched some of the clips.
Said Anononymous: "Hi Jupes Please take a second look, Tolle doesn't have the integrity of Ramana."
I do believe Ramana said "correcting oneself is correcting the world". I'm trying to get over my addictive habit (vasana) of thinking I have a right to judge people or their integrity. i.e. "don't point out the speck in your neighbors eye while ignoring the beam in your own. First pull the beam out of your own eye and see clearly to pull the speck out of your neighbors eye"
I actually did find that stuff interesting. But here is my interpretation of something that I notice, and that is that the Realized when they are instructing, for instance I even believe Maharshi mentioned this about how if a jnani talks dualistically it is only a means to help the devotee realize the nondual state. In Power of Now, Eckhart is really focused on the pure goal of living free of the ego, it's self-identities and problems, and I thought there was alot of useful advice in that book. (that I thought was in perfect accord with advaita and Maharshi's teachings even though the things he quotes suggests that advaita is not his primary influence, although he is familiar with it and quotes Maharshi once that I've found)
I started to read his more recent book A New Earth, which I'm assuming is maybe what anonymous was referring to. Some of the claims he's quoting I haven't encountered and so don't know their context. But what I encountered I thought was brilliant. And there was some weaving of a story or mythology or world history in it. But I found it incredibly uplifting, yes out of my own ego, so my interpretation was that was it's purpose tlaking dualistically to help the devotee realize the nondual. Basically convincing the devotee that the world will take care of itself, and so that to help it along the best thing that can be done would be to turn within and realize the egoless state. (but I should add, with brilliant metaphors really the likes of such that I haven't ever encountered) This makes sense, because a jnani being a perfect mirror would be sensitive to the audience that they have and the best way to convince them. Krishnamurti similarly talked dualistically but then used it as a platform for questioning the reality of thought, personal identity and duality of subject and other. Papaji did say that Krishnamurti was indeed enlightened. And Nisargadatta saw him on the street and said I believe "that man is a jnani". Also, I'm not sure the claim taht the world is becoming more Self-Realized or that there is a global change in consciousness is so ludicrous. Maharshi did say that all things including the world resolve themselves in the Self.
There was a really good quote that I quoted on Facebook from that book, he was talking about the evident madness of the twentieth century, and he mentioned how communism is a very good example about how the desire or effort to change things externally without dealing with the ego, the kind of consequences it has.
"The history of communism, originally inspired by noble ideals, clearly illustrates what happens when people attempt to change external reality---create a new earth---without any prior change in their inner reality, their state of consciousness. They make plans without taking into account the blueprint fo dysfunction that every human being carries within: the ego." Eckhart Tolle.
Eckhart's death experience: (laugh) described on Oprah (laugh again)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJItBR8t0i4&feature=PlayList&p=0CF42A87318C011C&index=6
Mozart's Requiem as background music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcIqZoxV0sA&feature=related
(from Jupes)
Hey, Anonymous, thanks for the feedback. I certainly hear what you say about a difference in integrity between Eckhart and Bhagavan, but, in my view, that doesn't mean they aren't both jnanis. I think it's worth noting the vast difference between the times and worlds they live(d) in and the people and cultures that surround(ed) each of them. Of course, there will be differences in the message that each puts out, and if Eckhart's message leans towards the "new agey" side of things, that doesn't really bother me.
As far as the lines you quoted, without knowing where they are in the book and without seeing the context in which they were written, it would be hard to respond. I'm sure your concerns are valid, and at the same time I would say that, whatever I think and whatever you think, those are our perceptions and opinions and therefore have their limitations. In any case, I will keep your comments in mind and I thank you for stating them.
(My thanks to Ravi for posting this!)
I have to say this is the funnest blog/comment board I have commented on by far, and part of the reason I think is the strong presence of grace, the holy atmosphere. It's way more self-correcting of stray egotism then other comment boards. It could be the lovely picture of Arunachala that is so huge at the top, or the picture of Maharshi ensure that we don't stray too far from the kinds of sentiments expressed in Marital Garland of Letters.
Dear Jupes, The etymology of the word integrity, suggesting insight, wholeness and completeness
not "new agey."
There is no new age. The absolute is as it ever was.
As I understand you to be a man
who has grown weary of the world,
I only think of you as not at all longing for
a temporary shelter.
~~~~Saigyo from "Sankasha" poems
.
Dear friends, as a reminder:
TALK 41
D.: What is that one thing, knowing which all doubts are solved?
M.: Know the doubter. If the doubter be held, the doubts will not arise. Here the doubter is transcendent. Again when the doubter ceases to exist, there will be no doubts arising. From where will they arise? All are jnanis, jivanmuktas. Only they are not aware of the fact. Doubts must be uprooted. This means that the doubter must be uprooted. Here the doubter is the mind.
D.: What is the method?
M.: ‘Who am I?’ is the investigation.
--------------------
What could be the use of debating the state of other persons? In relation to my own person and my own habits I can say the following:
* I'm looking for a teacher but I don't trust him.
* More worse: I'm looking to straws to clutch at.
* I fear to be wrong with my convictions.
* I fear to meet someone.
* I cannot overcome hostile feelings against someone or something.
* I fear not to be trustworthy and not to be respected by others.
* I cannot overcome my habit to talk about someone behind his back.
* I cannot overcome my habit to see myself as an embodied and weak individual in this world of apparently embodied individuals.
* and, and and ...
.
(from Jupes)
Dear Clemens,
Yes, what could be the use of debating the state of another person? None, as far as I can see. Thank you for saying that.
"The mind is incessantly looking not only for food for thought; it is looking for food for its identity, its sense of self. This is how the ego comes into existence and continuously re-creates itself."
"In your dealings with people, can you detect subtle feelings of either superiority or inferiority toward them? You are looking at the ego, which lives through comparison."
~~Eckhart Tolle, from STILLNESS SPEAKS
.
... Anonymous, Jupes ...
On the other hand it is certainly important to contemplate the question which teacher is best for me and my "spiritual needs".
A western teacher (Raphael) says: One must know the state one is within to choose the best method and practice.
.
I always like to open 2 youtube windows. One for the Wise sage, and the other for the music. For me these days only wise sages are worth listening to.
This almost like a beatific speech of Papaji.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDFXYCvTguE
With Beethoven's 7th sympthony movement 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgHxmAsINDk
I like when he says Who is praying Whom? Because who is there to pray to someone else? And if you pray without "I", where is a separate God to pray to?
"The etymology of the word integrity, suggesting insight, wholeness and completeness
not "new agey."
There is no new age. The absolute is as it ever was."
The Ribhu Gita might say after that: "And that I ever am. Be always of this changeless certitude and abide in Supreme Peace"
The parliament of World religions has arrived "down under" This is a far cry from Vivekananda.
All and sundry selling their wares.
Anyone who can string a sentence together is flogging a book.
People wearing various costumes cobbled together from imagination or the previous century.
The spirit of commerce is flourishing. A woman selling prayer beads, $2000 antique prayer beads from Persia. Can it be authenticated? "No," replies the woman " You'll have to trust me!"
Found on Non duality Salon: One day it all came together: my lease
was up, my last child had just moved out, the funds for my job were
terminated, and i knew what i wanted to "do" without a doubt. In a quick
week, i sold all my "possessions" except for what i stuffed in the back
seat of my Ford SW - leaving room to sleep, and took off, with $124 in
my purse, i knew not where.
But, inspired by St. Francis, i knew that i was done - finally! with
raising five children on my own, running a business, saving the children
of the county, being 'Wonder Woman" - it was all finished!
And I lived in the fields, on the mountain tops, by the ocean, in and
out of ashrams, monasteries, temples,wherever the Dharma wind blew me -
for seven years, the most beautiful years of my life! To not know where
i was going to sleep that night, what i would eat, where the morning's
light would find me, was a fantastic freedom that, at that time in my
life, was needed, perhaps as a healing, perhaps as a calling, it doesn't
matter, i just knew it was the only choice, and i shall be forever
grateful.
I was feeling like I was getting glimpses of a deeper understanding of the Who am I? paragraph, "to whom did this thought arise?" the answer would be "to me". then inquire "Who am I?"
The reveltaion I think I'm having is that the question is that normally I take myself to be the train of thoughts, which imply me, the thinker, the personality, and it kind of runs amok, very commonly as it is just taken for granted as me. And this seems to work when bliss is realized to have it's source in me, as me. "To whom did this thought arise?" Because normally I take the thoughts to be me, so they aren't considered to be rising to me. But it calls attention to the fact that the thought, and it's implied thinker arise to me "to me", or within me, within the real blissful existence which is always experienced as 'I exist". "Who am i?" Maharshi often I recall would say "do you doubt your own existence?" Of course not, we always know we exist. But the thinker implied in thought, the world and all of this stuff arises in me and dissolves into me, the real existence. One thing I've noticed from correspondence with my teacher, is that the gross ignorance has to be curbed, to even inquire. But I guess even with that. For instance when I get really depressed or angry or whatever, it can be called attention that the whole emotion is in reaction to a bunch of thoughts that are unreal. They may be habitual and seem to have alot of power ot htem, but all they are is thoughts. But I can't be running after that stuff and still inquire. I can't be get mad at people and judging them, and inquiring while letting that stuff go on. Desires as well probably have to be dealt with. But I'm not a jnani and so some of that stuff, I can't talk about at all. For sure anger and judgement of "others", which are only our own perception of others, that has to be completely stopped as soon as it arises. Anger prevents clear introspection, it is the highest form of ego assertion, so for my teacher wrote some vehement responses that ahimsa has to be embraced first and foremost, and that is with body, speech and mind, no harm to others. Some of that stuff I see is in texts like Yoga Vasistha.
There are quite a few things in the new testement that resonate with advaita. I was looking in a quote book and found several quotes.
This one reminded me of Ribhu Gita, substituting Christ for Brahman.
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
It makes me want to read all of Galatians.
I also remember "God is a consuming Fire".
This is also in Galatians.
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty with which Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."
I was noticing that different translations some lines were translated more as an injunction and others as transcending duality. I would imagine the latter is the correct translation, that most of the New Testement is really a nondual text, maybe even alot of the old testement as well. For instance in King James ironically, it was translated in Galatians that circumcision or lack of circumcision would not avail a person either way. But then in the New International version, it almost made it sound like being circumcised is to fall away from grace. I'm guessing the King James version is more correct. I was thinking how often dualistically minded individuals mis-translate ancient texts in favor of their own injunction-minded dualism. Whereas Paul and Jesus were jnanis, even Maharshi said so. It is interesting that teachings of Christianity make alot more sense, the core teachings actually in the New Testement in light of Maharshi's teachings. In the dualistic-mindset it seems obfuscatory and hard to understand, but the more I actually exist in Self-Bliss it's clear that that is what the new testement whether paul or Jesus is talking about.
There is a line where Paul says if you are guided by Spirit then (paraphrasing), the law is inapplicable, does not apply to you. i thought that resonated with maharshi and shankara. Basically he was saying that the good qualities, virtues also can never be against the Law.
I really like the chapter in the Tamil Ribhu Gita on the Jivanmukta! Thanx to Google Books, I can share it, I gave my copy away to someone who was really inspired by it. i still have my sanskrit translation which is just as useful, though I think perhaps the Tamil version is more beautiful.
1
Nidagha! In this exposition, I shall tell you
About the characteristics of a jivanmukta (one who is liberated while living).
One who is ever the SElf,
A mass of Bliss, and filled with peace is a jivanmukta (one who is liberated while alive).
One who has the certitude in his immense, perfectly full repose,
"I am, indeed, the Supreme Brahman, Consciousness-Bliss, Which is not different from the Self, the complete, the ultimate Truth, of the nature of Awareness,"
Is a jivanmukta
2. One who has the certitude
"I am the Supreme Brahman, without the three qualities of sattva (illuminating) and others (rajas-agitation, tamas- inertia darkness),
The Truth, transcending the highest, of the nature of Consciousness-Bliss,"
Is a jivanmukta.
One who ever has the certitude,
"I am the eternal, supreme Self without the three bodies (gross, subtle, causal)
Of the nature of Knowledge, the mass of Bliss, the One, the eternal,"
Is a jivanmukta.
3
One who ever abides in a state of Bliss,
With no trace of attachments to the body or such,
In the certitude, "I am the Supreme Brahman," the One, is a jivanmukta.
One who is all Silence and in great Bliss, rid of delusions,
And is of the nature of pure Consciousness alone,
Without a trace of the sorrow-ridden ego,
Is a jivanmukta.
4
One who, in a pure state of mind,
Is ever intent on realizing Consciousness alone and, becoming, himself, of the nature of Consciousness,
Disregards all imaginary things like delusion,
Is a jivanmukta.
One who, though in the body,
Is not attached to any illusions,
Is established ever in bliss and is pure and changeless,
Is a jivanmukta.
5
One who ever abides in the Self and knows,
"I am the one Supreme Knowledge,"
And, without any ego, becomes himself the Supreme Bliss
Is a jivanmukta.
One whose mind is motionless like a rock,
Who, as the unsullied, pure Self alone,
Revels ever in Truth and Bliss
Is a jivanmukta.
6
One who completely discards all other ideas,
Is of the nature of the indivisble One, is peaceful,
Is rid of all false ideas of multiplicity, and exists without differences
Is a jivanmukta.
One who has the certitude, "I have no delusion,
Mind, intellect, wisdom, ego, life, and various senses;
I am Brahman,"
Is a jivanmukta.
7
I do not have the five sensations such as sound.
Nor do I have the enemies [known as] desire, anger defects, or effects of the intellect.
Nor do I have any other illusory things,
Nor base bondage, nor liberation.
Because I have no mind or thought or such,
I am Brahman devoid of all these.
One with this steadfast certitude
Is a jivanmukta.
8
There is no body, gross or otherwise, apart from me.
There is no state such as waking apart from me.
There is no waker apart from me.
There is microcosm or macrocosm apart from me.
There is no inner world apart from me.
There is no external world apart from me.
there is nothing at all apart from me.
I am Brahman. One with this certitude is a jivanmukta.
There is a line where Paul says if you are guided by Spirit then (paraphrasing), the law is inapplicable, does not apply to you. i thought that resonated with maharshi and shankara. Basically he was saying that the good qualities, virtues also can never be against the Law.
"The etymology of the word integrity, suggesting insight, wholeness and completeness
not "new agey."
There is no new age. The absolute is as it ever was."
The Ribhu Gita might say after that: "And that I ever am. Be always of this changeless certitude and abide in Supreme Peace"
There are quite a few things in the new testement that resonate with advaita. I was looking in a quote book and found several quotes.
This one reminded me of Ribhu Gita, substituting Christ for Brahman.
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
It makes me want to read all of Galatians.
I also remember "God is a consuming Fire".
This is also in Galatians.
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty with which Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."
Dear Jupes, The etymology of the word integrity, suggesting insight, wholeness and completeness
not "new agey."
There is no new age. The absolute is as it ever was.
I was watching Eckhart Tolle on Youtube, and just as I thought, gee he reminds me so much of Krishnarmurti, Jiddu (laugh). Just then he quoted Krishnamurti. So me and Eckhart are in sync. (laugh). Oh, he's so good. I'm not on the side of the naysayers on this one.
God, whose love and joy
are present everywhere,
can't come to visit you
unless you aren't there."
I only respond to grown ups.
Writing and talking about it and appearing on chat shows and having a chin wag with Oprah does not a Jnani make.
more personal interpretations:
I take stillness to mean samadhi, where the sense of individuality and agitated thought based on it is silent and being merged in Bliss. "Silence is that state in which no "I" arises".
I take freedom to be freedom from the bondage of desire, wanting something to be some way, and then all the worries that come fro that desire, which is bondage. Freedom is freedom from the desire.
I take Self to be the Self because the sense of existing is the Self, and it is always, the sense of self that I actually am, is the Self. The ego "self" is a set of ideas and thoughts. "mind is only a bundle of thoughts" that arise to me, they are objective to me, so they couldn't be me. "the Consciousness overlooking the blank is the Self" which I took to mean the consciousness overlooking or aware of the tamasic state of dullness is the Self. So it is called the Self because we are very much that Self always. I know I exist, and that knowing that I exist without the thoughts about it is the Self. Everything else that arises including the idea of "me" is an illusion. I'm not there experientially, but that's my intellectual interpretation.
These words truth, stillness, freedom, self and no self seem like they are very much meant to make all the other stuff fall away and not be considered real any longer.
.
... LMM; differences of the same kind, differences of different kinds, and homogeneous but divided within itself ...
This reminds me of:
Talk 264.
D.: Does Bhagavan see the world as part and parcel of Himself? How does He see the world?
M.: The Self alone is and nothing else. However, it is differentiated owing to ignorance. Differentiation is threefold: (1) of the same kind: (2) of a different kind, and (3) as parts in itself. The world is not another self similar to the self. It is not different from the self; nor is it part of the self.
--------------
This threefold differentiation is an exact description of the structure of the conceptual mind.
.
This is a satsang transcript with my teacher.
I found a paragraph which I surrounded with 3 brackets really thought provoking, as it is something I'm verifying for myself. Initially, I thought of within as being within, but the other within, the one that considers of the teachings to be great, of sages to be great is starting to be more what I consider within to be.
N.: So, the different kinds of differences
are not true for your Existence: differences of
the same kind, differences of different kinds,
and homogeneous but divided within itself.
Such are not true of your Existence. If that
Existence steadily abides in the Knowledge of
itself, you, yourself, are the Source of the
teaching. The teaching, the Source, and the
one who knows it are entirely the same.
(Silence)
[[[Can you see that it is better to even have
the idea that the source of the teaching is some
great thing, even outside of yourself, but
abandon the ego notion than to retain the ego
notion yet somehow think that the source is
inside you? For “inside” would still be only
within an ego context. It would not really be
within.]]]
Q.: (laughing) It would be within a mistake.
I don’t want to be there.
N.: Clear?
Q.: It is clear, but little thoughts want to
start rising up.
N.: Who knows them?
Q.: I know them. They are mine.
N.: Then, inquire who are you.
(Silence) When thoughts appear to rise, do
they rise outside of you or within you?
Q.: At first they seem to rise outside, but
then I know that they are inside. No, they are
still outside.
N.: “Outside” is another idea inside.
Q.: (laughing) Yes.
Friends,
'Master and M' continued...
The Master began to talk to M. about Hazra.
MASTER: "Do you know the nature of a good man? He never troubles others. He doesn't harass people. The nature of some people is such that when they go to a feast they want special seats. A man who has true devotion to God never makes a false step, never gives others trouble for nothing.
"It is not good to live in the company of bad people. A man should stay away from them and thus protect himself. (To M.) Isn't that so?"
M: "Yes, sir. The mind sinks far down in the company of the wicked. But it is quite different with a hero, as you say."
MASTER: "How is that?"
M: "When a fire is feeble it goes out when even a small stick is thrown into it; but a blazing fire is not affected even if a plantain-tree is thrown into it. The tree itself is burnt to ashes."
The Master asked M. about his friend Hari Babu.
M: "He has come here to pay you his respects. He lost his wife long ago."
MASTER (to Hari): "What kind of work do you do?"
M: "Nothing in particular. But at home he takes good care of his parents and his brothers and sisters."
MASTER (with a smile): "How is that? You are like 'Elder, the pumpkin-cutter'. You are neither a man of the world nor a devotee of God. That is not good. You must have seen the sort of elderly man who lives in a family and is always ready, day or night, to entertain the children. He sits in the parlour and smokes the hubble-bubble. With nothing in particular to do, he leads a lazy life. Now and again he goes to the inner court and cuts a pumpkin; for, since women do not cut pumpkins, they send the children to ask him to come and do it. That is the extent of his usefulness-hence his nickname, 'Elder, the pumpkin-cutter'.
"You must do 'this' as well as 'that'. Do your duties in the world, and also fix your mind on the Lotus Feet of the Lord. Read books of devotion like the Bhagavata or the life of Chaitanya when you are alone and have nothing else to do."
It was about ten o'clock. Sri Ramakrishna finished a light supper of farina pudding and one or two luchis. After saluting him, M. and his friend took their leave.
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
Friends,
This is an Excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna-'Master and M'(chapter 13).One of the most charming aspects of Sri Ramakrishna is his seemingly Human nature(with the usual worry ,hopes,little joys)coexisting with the Divine Nature that Totally Transcends it!
Monday, August 20, 1883
Sri Ramakrishna was sitting on his bed, inside the mosquito net, meditating. It was about eight o'clock in the evening. M. was sitting on the floor with his friend Hari Babu. Hari, a young man of twenty-eight, had lost his wife about eleven years before and had not married a second time. He was much, devoted to his parents, brothers, and sisters.
Hriday, Sri Ramakrishna's nephew, was ill in his home in the country. The Master was worried about him. One of the devotees had sent him a little money, but the Master did not know it.
When Sri Ramakrishna came out of the mosquito net and sat on the small couch, the devotees saluted him.
MASTER (to M.): "I was meditating inside the net. It occurred to me that meditation, after all, was nothing but the imagining of a form, and so I did not enjoy it. One gets satisfaction if God reveals Himself in a flash. Again, I said to myself, 'Who is it that meditates, and on whom does he meditate?' "
M: "Yes, sir. You said that God Himself has become everything-the universe and all living beings. Even he who meditates is God."
MASTER: "What is more, one cannot meditate unless God wills it. One can meditate when God makes it possible for one to do so. What do you say?"
M: "True, sir. You feel like that because there is no 'I' in you. When there is no ego, one feels like that."
MASTER: "But it is good to have a trace of ego, which makes it possible for a man to feel that he is the servant of God. As long as a man thinks that it is he who is doing his duties, it is very good for him to feel that God is the Master and he God's servant. When one is conscious of doing work, one should establish with God the relationship of servant and Master."
M. was always reflecting on the nature of the Supreme Brahman.
Nature of Brahman
MASTER (to M.): "Like the Ākāśa, Brahman is without any modification. It has become manifold because of Śakti. Again, Brahman is like fire, which itself has no colour. The fire appears white if you throw a white substance into it, red if you throw a red, black if you throw a black. The three gunas-sattva, rajas, and tamas-belong to Śakti alone. Brahman Itself is beyond the three gunas. What Brahman is cannot be described. It is beyond words. That which remains after everything is eliminated by the Vedantic process of 'Not this, not this', and which is of the nature of Bliss, is Brahman.
"Suppose the husband of a young girl has come to his father-in-law's house and is seated in the drawing-room with other young men of his age. The girl and her friends are looking at them through the window. Her friends do not know her husband and ask her, pointing to one young man, 'Is that your husband?' 'No', she answers, smiling. They point to another young man and ask if he is her husband. Again she answers no. They repeat the question, referring to a third, and she gives the same answer. At last they point to her husband and ask, 'Is he the one?' She says neither yes nor no, but only smiles and keeps quiet. Her friends realize that he is her husband.
"One becomes silent on realizing the true nature of Brahman.
(To M.) "Well, why do I talk so much?"
M: "You talk in order to awaken the spiritual consciousness of the devotees. You once said that when an uncooked luchi is dropped into boiling ghee it makes a sizzling noise."
continued...
Murali,
I will keep the response to your poser as brief as possible-What Scott has expressed is the Essence.From the point of Practice,there are two approaches towards handling the roller coaster of being caught up in thoughts and activities-
One approach is not to get onto the Roller Coaster.
The other approach is to flow along with the Roller coaster without trying to resist in the form of Regrets,hopes and Fears.This way one stays WHOLE and in awareness.one then enjoys the rollercoaster ride!
To be WHOLE and not be fragmented is the very essence of spiritual living.
Namaskar.
This is more from my teacher's commentary on Maharshi's Self-inquiry.
Disciple: Although I have listened to the explanation of the characteristics of enquiry in such great detail, my mind has not gained even a little of peace. What is the reason for this?
The Maharshi: The reason is the absence of strength or one-pointedness of mind.
My teacher's commentary:
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
The inquiry into the Self is the most excellent of practices. The inquiry into the SElf is the most direct of paths. The inquiry into the SElf is the means for the most immediate revelation of the Self. The fruit of the inquiry into the Self is supreme Bliss.
By whatever means one attempts to realize the SElf, in the end one must know oneself. How is it possible to know oneself without inquiring into the nature of oneself?
Self-inquiry liberates one from all of the imagined bondage. By inquiry, one knows oneself by the SElf. By inquiry, the absence of the ego is revealed as self-evident. Inquiry cannot fail, as it does not presuppose the existence of any of the very illusions or dualisms that one is attempting to transcend.
Since inquiry is concerned with the Self and since the Existence of the Self is beyond doubt in all, inquiry can be practiced by all. As the Self is full and perfect, innately endowed with its own imperishable Light, which is Knowledge itself, inquiry is for all. There is no one who is incapable of inquiry into the SElf, or for whom the SElf is not, or who is farther away from the Self. How far can one be from one's own Existence? The Self is immediately present. Who is other than the Self? Inquiry does not depend on the body, senses, prana, thoughts---which constitute the mind---or the "I" notion, the ego, all of which may be subject to flaws or limitations. Inquiry depends on one's own Existence, and Knowledge of that Existence is intrinsic to it. So who is not endowed with the ability to inquire? Inquiry is like fire, before which the apparently insuperable obstacles are mere straw. Ignorance is insubstantial, so who cannot inquire and know the Self?
Moreover, are there two selves, that one could be ignorant of the other? Inquiry is full in itself and requires no auxillary methods, for all other methods involve the use or manipulation of something that is transcended by inquiry. Inquiry is the power of Siva by which the unreal is destroyed. Inquiry alone was the boon requested of the Supreme Lord by Prahlada as related by Vasistha.
.
... continued: An Incident with an Elder, Who Doubted Divine Providence.
Then the Lord’s Angel descended from Heaven and answered the elder:
—Do not be sad, and do not think that this happened contrary to the will of God. For everything in life happens either because God permits it, or, for the purpose of teaching people, or as part of the Divine house-building. So, listen:
The man, who lost the gold coins, is the neighbor of the one that found them. The latter had a garden, which had a value of 100 gold coins. The rich man, being covetous, made him sell the garden to him for half the price. Suffering damage at the hands of the rich man, the neighbor, not knowing to whom to complain, began to ask God to come to his defense. And God so arranged it: in finding the gold coins, he received what was due him.
The beggar, who, it appeared, had suffered for nothing, had committed a murder in his youth. Later, he sincerely repented of that sin, and lived the rest of the life righteously. Nevertheless, suffering in his soul for his grave sin, He prayed God to send him a death that would redeem him of his sin of the murder of an innocent person. Of course, the merciful Lord forgave him, seeing his complete reformation. Nevertheless, he permitted him to die violently, to crown him with the martyr’s crown, that he had asked for himself!
Finally, the miserly rich man, that lost the gold coins, was punished for his covetousness: God let him commit the grave sin of murder. Staggered by that incident, he came to his senses and with great grief started repenting. Then, having distributed his wealth, he left the world and became a monk in one of the monasteries.
So, in which of these three events do you see injustice or blind fate? Therefore, humble yourself before God, and in future, do not delve into His destinies, for He does everything righteously and leads to the best result.
Concluding this story, Elder Paisius mentioned the words of the Psalm: "Righteous art Thou, O LORD, and upright are Thy judgments" (Ps.118:137).
.
.
Orthodox Christian Booklets
An Incident with an Elder, Who Doubted Divine Providence.
(This story was told by Elder Paisius of Athos [Eznepidis, 1924-1998])
In order to could convince his visitors that God always cares about people and directs everything the best way, the Elder related the following incident:
"One ascetic, suffering in his soul due to the multiple injustices he had seen in his life, begged God to reveal to him, why the pious people so often fall into difficulties and suffer various oppressions, while the sinners and atheists triumph and thrive. For a long period of time, he begged God daily to reveal to him the mystery of the ways of His Providence and explain the riddle of the seeming contradiction between that which should be and that which occurs. Finally, the ascetic heard a voice saying to him:
—Do not examine that, what exceeds your understanding, and do not strive to fathom the mysteries of Divine judgments, for they are an incomprehensible abyss. Condescending to your heart’s pain, God will reveal His Providence to you in one life incident. And you pay attention to what you see.
And so, like in a vision, the elder felt himself above the earth, and a mysterious air-flow brought him to a field, close to which there was a road. On the other side of the field, there was a spring and an old tree. The ascetic was ordered to hide himself in the hollow of that tree and to observe what would happen.
Soon a rich man rode up to the spring on a horse. He stopped to drink some water and to rest. Settling down on the grass, he took out of the basket a small purse, tightly stuffed with gold coins. After counting them, he put the purse back into the basket and took some food out to eat. He did not notice that, when he was taking out the food, the purse fell out into the grass. The rich man ate, lay down to take a nap, and then, mounting the horse, rode on, without noticing that the purse with the coins was left in the grass.
A little later, another passer-by approached the spring. He saw the purse with the gold coins, picked it up and left, delighted.
Soon, there appeared a third passer-by, skinny and badly dressed — apparently, a beggar. He, too, stopped by the spring, drank some water, took a roll out of his handkerchief and sat down to eat. He had not yet finished eating his bread, when suddenly, the first passerby rode up, the rich man that had lost his purse. With a face, crimson with anger, he pounced on the beggar and began demanding the return of his gold coins. Naturally, the beggar, not knowing what the matter was, began to refuse and assure the rich man, that he had never seen his coins. The rich man, however, did not believe the beggar, and, becoming violent, started to severely beat the beggar until he killed him. Upon searching the beggar’s clothes, he did not find anything, and galloped away, anguished.
Observing all this from the hollow, the elder began to grieve and cry, that the beggar died for nothing. And again the elder appealed to God: "Lord, what do these events mean? How can Your goodness tolerate such injustice: the rich man lost his coins absent-mindedly, an accidental stranger took them, and the innocent beggar paid for them with his life."
(continued...)
.
Friends,
Concluding part of Excerpt from 'At the Feet of Bhagavan' :
The “Arunachala Pancharatna”, last of the hymnal series,
was first composed by Sri Bhagavan in Sanskrit, and
subsequently translated by Himself into Tamil verses. The
first stanza, commencing “Karunaa purna sudaabdhe”, alone
was casually written by Sri Bhagavan. Long afterwards,
someone showed it to Sri Kavyakanta Ganapati Muni, who
requested Him to write four more verses in the same arya
metre, the first being benedictory, the second on the Divine,
and the next three being on Jnana, Yoga and Bhakti.
At the Feet of Bhagavan 79
Thus it will be easily seen that these five gems form
a complete treatise in themselves, and they are also
devotional hymns giving immense consolation to those
who sweeten themselves by chanting them. Sri Kavyakanta
had planned to write an exhaustive commentary on these,
such as could compare with the famous “Maanasollaasa”
of Sri Sureswaracharya. But Providence took him from us
before he could carry out this plan. There is however a
good commentary in Sanskrit, by Sri Kapali Sastri called
“Arunachala Pancharatna Darpana,” published by
Sri Ramanasramam.
We quote verses 2 and 5 here, only as a sample:
“O Crimson Hill all these scrolls of painting arise,
remain and merge in Thee; the Seers call Thee the Heart
and Self, because Thou dancest in the Heart eternally
as ‘I’.
“Seeing Thee eternally through the heart surrendered
to Thee and seeing all as Thy form, he who does singleminded
devotion to Thee is victorious, being merged in
Thee.”
How clearly Sri Bhagavan has here explained the
Truth; may His devotees who benefit by reading this be
blessed!
For me, a guru is so necessary. All the little ways, that I go into delusion, but don't even recognize it. I was thinking about how another aspect is that I could read Talks with Ramana Maharshi and find it intensely inspiring and want to practice it, but really, one of the helpful things about 'keeping holy company', is that I can get advise about the gross issues. Because Self-inquiry itself is on such a subtle level. And if I'm suffering gross levels of emotional problems, those are big vasanas, and the Self-inquiry isn't going to be very fruitful if those are left intact. Everything from anger, sadness, fear, judgement, self-importance (assertiveness), self-judgement. Even though really, getting past that is included in the inquiry. And alot of times in Talks, no one asked the specific questions that pertain to individual issues I or someone else may suffer. There already down to the actual inquiry into the "I". When for me, there maybe was so much that I was dealing with that arises out of or is peripheral to the "I", that I'm intensely attached to, or suffering. And so it's hard to just dive straight in and inquire into the Self, the individual-less state, when there are so many things that are a result of the ego that I'm actually attached to, and can't keep my mind off of. Then it's like just a repression, or a redirection. When really Self-inquiry is advanced spirituality, someone said it's like the college of spirituality. (can't remember who?) I learned that I had alot of primary school issues. Alot of what is contained in other spirituality and religion is still applicable if there are the gross vasanas. Doing unto others, etc. A sage, can really it seems like deal with all those levels. And if, what they advise is earnestly practiced, then some of those gross levels of ignorance and suffering can relatively quickly clear, and then the inquiry into the Self can be fruitful or even successful. It really seems earnestness is the key factor. There has to be a willingness to be humbled, and to be a beginner or a willingness to become willing to be humbled or to become a beginner. If the homework is done at the primary school level, or there is a willingness to go back and do those requirements, it seems like it is easier. I'm realizing that I can't Realize the Self without actually becoming in a sense spiritually purified of all my other motives that are non-spiritual. I have found that besides writing my teacher and getting responses, which is immensely helpful, that the neti-neti approach, but not as in mentally counting everything, but just eliminating the non-eternal, and non-infinite as non-Self. To trivialize all the problems, as a discernment.
Friends,
Excerpt from 'At the Feet of Bhagavan' continued....
The following few verses, though a poor rendering
from Tamil, amply gather in our hearts to the Lord:
1. “O Arunachala, Thou hast entered into me,
drawn me and kept me enclosed in the cavity
of Thy Self; why is this?
2. “For whose sake didst Thou accept me as a
lover? Do not abandon me, or the entire world
would blame Thee.
3. “Avoid this blame. Why didst Thou at first
make me remember Thee? Hereafter I can
never abandon Thee.
4. “Take away this garb of mine; make me naked,
and then clothe me in the raiment of Thy
Grace.
5. “Be seated there in me; let the ocean of Bliss
ebb, and let words and feelings subside in me.
6. “If Thou gather me not in Thy arms, my whole
being will melt in tears and perish.
7. “There is no room for laughter (at my ugliness).
Bedeck me with Thy Grace, me who has sought
Thee, and then see.
8. “Let us cling together without distinction of
‘Thou’ and ‘I’, at rest in eternal Bliss; grant
Me that State.
9. “Let me not dangle like a green creeper with
nothing to hold; be Thou my support and save
me.
10. “Come, let us be happy in the home of empty
Space, void of night and day!”
76 At the Feet of Bhagavan
The following few verses contain a profound
Philosophy:
1. “Thou art the eye of the eye, and seest without
the eye; who then can see Thee; O Arunachala?
2. “Thou art the food of all; I shall draw near to
Thee and become Thy food, and then shall I
go in peace.
3. “Thou art alone the Truth, and shalt Thyself
reveal Thyself.
4. “I thought of Thee and fell into Thy Grace;
and, like a spider in its web, Thou didst bind
and swallow me!”
...to be continued
Friends,
'At the Feet of Bhagavan' by Sri T K Sundaresa Iyer is a gem of a little book that captures the essence of Sri Bhagavan's wonderful life and Teachings in an intimate way.How the Five Hymns to Arunachala came about is revealed in this excerpt( a longish one and this may have to be split into a few posts):
28. HOW THE “FIVE HYMNS TO
ARUNACHALA” CAME ABOUT
TO be calm and know “I AM THAT I AM”, is really
Bhagavan’s one work. The inmost core, the Heart,
the Divine shining all alone as ‘I-I’, the Self-aware, is He.
This centre simply IS; It is all Knowledge and all Bliss. It
is from here that all begin to manifest, and in It all get
lost. Being Itself That, It is all peace; no discord is there
since the ‘I’ or ego does not arise and has no ‘he’ or ‘you’
to oppose. Being the ever-present and all-pervading, the
Supreme ‘I’ is the Lord, Ramana who ever rejoices.
This state of Pure Bliss is the Supreme Man; the Truth
Absolute is such as cannot be hidden under any cover. It
spreads far and wide, and attracts to Itself kindred or
seeking souls. It is Stillness, eternally expressive. Others
can know it, enjoy it, but cannot know its fullness nor Its
source. They long to know, but the Stillness is unbreakable.
Their longing grows and becomes an agony.
This Stillness, diamond hard, is milky kindness and at
last responds. First it stirs, finds voice, and lisps a syllable or
two. Though pregnant with fire and penetrating like light,
the Voice seems like the prattle of a child. Then, gradually
attuned, it picks up its chords and trickles out — first as a
small gentle stream, then expanding like the majesty of
the Ganga, fertilising the soul by the waters of its songs,
74 At the Feet of Bhagavan
and surpassing itself in revealing the placidity of ocean
depths.
Such is the origin and the growth of Sri Bhagavan’s
spoken words, which have been gathered up in the form
of published works.
“Aksharamanamalai” (The Marital Garland of Letters)
first and foremost of His hymns to Arunachala, came out
in response to the prayers of his sadhu-devotees for some
distinctive prayer songs which they could sing on their
rounds for alms. Usually, when Sri Maharshi’s devotees
went around singing common songs, the householders in
the town knew that the food was being partaken of by
Sri Bhagavan; and they gave large quantities of food, as
against a single morsel given to other groups of sadhus.
Knowing this, a few unscrupulous beggars began to pose
as the Ramana group and created difficulties for them. To
get over this difficulty, there was felt the need for a
distinctive prayer-song.
When the request for such a song was made, Bhagavan
as usual kept quiet and for a long time there seemed to be
no prospect of their desire being fulfilled. But during one
of the processions round the Hill, there blossomed forth
from Sri Bhagavan the 108 sweet flowery verses strung
like a marriage garland for Arunachala, the Lord of the
Heart. These songs are like the outpourings of a pining
soul to her lover, and they are no less ardent than Saint
Manickavachakar’s for Siva. These and other soul-stirring
hymns of Sri Bhagavan are the delight and solace of His
devotees, who sing them to this day in the Hall.
continued...
Thanks for introducing to Annamalai Swami.
Saw Jim's interview with Annamalai Swami (available in Youtude and Veoh) and ........ almost like listening to Bagawan Ramana...
Thanks
Prakash
Is there a new Brunton book out containing new, unreleased photos of Ramana Maharshi, Yogananda and Meher Baba?
I also have to mention Krishna Swami and his austere life style.
When I met him he was very old. His task was to feed the animals and monkeys. He was very joyful despite the conditions he lived in.
He would wait for stragglers outside the dining hall and only go in when all were seated.
I remember his lovely, smiling face as he showed us around.
Anonymous,
It is indeed providential good fortune to meet Great souls-you and your children are Blessed.I had the opportunity to have 'Darshan' of Yogi Ramsurat Kumar twice-The last time was when his statue was shaping up in his new asram.The Yogi was sitting near his statue and people were prostrating to the statue!Round about this time,the Yogi was not as accessible as he used to be in earlier years(as I am given to understand by others who had seen him in his earlier days).I never got to exchange a word with him.
With Annamalai Swami,it was like meeting a 'Friend' from your village/town.Swami was totally unassuming,simple and a wonderful host;when he smiled it was more through his eyes than his lips!In the course of a discussion if you understand a point,he would strike his Right palm over his left and point to you as if to say 'There you are!You got it!'-in childlike glee.
In 'Living By the words of Bhagavan'David had beautifully captured how even in recounting stories about his several encounters with the Sarvadhikari of SriRamanasramam,Swami always did so with a wry humour without a trace of rancour.
Also,how Swami gave a big Grin when David mentioned about the title that he chose-'Living by the words of Bhagavan'.
I used to visit Swami after visiting Ramasramam-and Swami like a child will go through the books that I bought at Ramanasramam-identifying the people in the photographs in those books.
Swami always responded promptly to all letters-The Replies were drafted by someone as Swami spoke;Often Swami not satisfied with this,would again start writing on his own all over again filling all the Space Left in that Letter.A constant Refrain in these letters -'Body is not 'I';Thoughts are not 'I';Atma I am.Do thou forever contemplate thus and attain that state of Changeless Bliss.
He would also advise writing this in a notebook as a Japa.I once wrote a Letter with just this content!Swami was very happy and responded as If I had attained what I had written!
-----------------------------------
Thanks very much Friend. Remembering swami is to invoke his Blessings.
Namaskar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUiu7tEX5kg&feature=related
Krishnamurti clip that is positively beatific. Showing his guru/jnani nature.
background music I was using.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&source=hp&q=amelie%20soundtrack&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
Today we remember Annamalai Swami.
I remember reading when Ramana Maharshi was near the end; gossips
came to him complaining" Annamalai has not come to visit you."
Ramana replied" you are here but your mind is there" "Annamalai is there but his mind is here"
Every answer Ramana Maharshi gave was a mahavakya.
"And Bhagavan said that only ripe soul can do self-enquiry.I have no confidence in my ripness.All I can say is that I have interested in self-enquiry.I hope I have qualification for self-enquiry."
Ramana said that anyone who is actually interested in self-enquiry is ripe enough to practice it - that's the sign of being ripe. No other qualification is necessary as far as he is concerned. It is simply a natural process that those who develop the qualifications for self-enquiry end up becoming interested in it and begin to experiment with it.
There's no need for self-doubt about your qualifications for self-enquiry, therefore. No one who is genuinely interested in it is unqualified to practice it.
Thank you for your detailed explanation of my questions.
I wrongly interpreted the sentence 'The word that is translated as "knowledge" is Tamil equivalent of "jnana"' in the note of 'who am I?' in this site.I see that 'jnana' is a Sanskrit word.
Then, can 'arivu' be translated into both 'knowledge' and 'consciousness'?It seems 'jnana' means '(true) knowledge' and not 'consciousness'.
Is 'arivu' a wider concept than 'jnana'?
About verse 19 of Ulladu Narpadu, in 'collected works' 'taan' seems to be translated into 'Self'.I think this interplatation isn't wrong.
I think Bhagavan said everything(ego,world,god and maybe freewill and fate that is the concepts of ego etc) emanated from the Self.In this sense I think the Self can be considered as source of fate and freewill.
About verse 21, I also think it is right to say that individual can't see the Self, strictly speaking.But I think it is possible bhagavan used the expression like 'see the Self'.
I think he sometimes used such expression like 'realize the Self' and also said that there is nothing to realize and the Self alone is.Sometimes bhagavan used the expression that objectify the Self outwardly.
I suddenly became kind of interested in karma more in depth. I was reading the glossary of the Ribhu Gita that was tranlsated by Ramamoorthy and Nome. It was talking about how there are 3 kinds of karma. Sanchita, agama and prarabdha. (I'm new to this, so I could have mixed them up) I thought sanchita was karma created in this life but won't take effect until a future life. Agama is karma created in this life that will take effect in this life. I was thinking I shoot someone, I get death penalty might be agama karma. Or I make people mad at me by doing something unrighteous and they harm me. Prarabdha is karma created in past lives that take effect in this life. And the sweeping arc of this life is prarabdha karma. Even aspects of the teaching like this one can be liberating and put things in perspective. If I suffer some kind of difficulty or worldly problem in this life it probably fits into prarabdha or agama karma? But I was also thinking vasanas create added affliction. So my desires, suffering, unharmonious actions, even unrighteous actions and thoughts (resulting from vasanas) also compound the suffering in the current life. But in all these things how much is actually my responsibility? The only thing to do is to inquire and free myself of vasanas. My teacher was saying in the videos I posted that paraphrasing a flawed way of going about inquiry is to ignore all the misidentifications or self-definitions and perspectives that are responsible for patterns of thought, ignore them and go for the I-thought without that. Because tehn it just becomes a mental exercise. Experientially I found that profound. It is of course I think harder to actually inquire into the what I'm taking myself to be, because I'm addicted to it. Another mental exercise, practice actually can be just another way of staying in the inertia of tamas guna. I believe Mathru Sri Sarada talked about that. For instance, I in this life have Asperger's, and besides that have alot of tendencies that might be considered mental illness. Which is of course huge fuel for motivation for this practice? What other route of escape do I have? God or Ishwara set me up nice with no escape route but to earnestly and sincerely spiritually practice. That could be the same with others here. Maybe, I speculate, that is the driving force for people who are getting a little warmer in terms of Self-Realization. samsara, maya becomes more unbearable. Will not let you return into it as easily. I've even wondered if sadhana in a previous life set me up so that if i went with the ego (and desires), I would have enormous difficulties in this life. Which erroneously I did. That (the personal) aside, I found thinking about karma kind of fascinating, and it resonates with me as actually real.
.
Friends,
does someone here knows where to find the full text of:
Dattatreya - Jivanmukta Gheeta
in the net? I tried it but unsuccessful, at many places.
.
Akira
I have just checked the essay version and the question-and-answer version of Who am I? in both English and Tamil. The phrase 'they are the same' appears in all the versions. Check question twenty-six and the beginning of the answer in the versions you have consulted.
Thank you for your reply, Mr.Godman.
It seems 'jnana' is Tamil, but 'jnana' is not often translated into 'knowledge' in English.
In tanslation, all Sanskrit words didn't remain as Sanskrit and all Tamil words didn't taranslated into English.
Except 'individual self' in the last section of 'who am I' in this site, I think there is no need to translate 'taan' into 'self' not into 'SELF'.
And is there paticular Tamil word which indicate 'individual' in original text? In 'collected works', it is expressed as 'one’s self'.
About 'prana',in 'collected works', all 'prana' seems to be translated into 'breath',but in 'who am I' in this site 'breath' and 'prana' is distinguished.
Did bhagavan distinguish 'prana' and 'breath'?
In the sentence 'these two are one and the same' in 'who am I' in this site, two are explained as 'non-attachment' and 'desirelessness', but I think two are 'non-attachiment or desirelessness' and 'jnana'.
Two sentences 'Not giving... and Not leaving ... ' are pralleled, so it seems natural for me to think so.
Thank you Ravi for your quotation.
Hi David,
I left a complimentary copy of my novel for you in Ramanashram bookstall. It is a successul novel called 'The Storyteller'.
Hope you enjoy it.
www.arunachalaheart.blogspot.com
If you do look at it. It's the first one on the list. I purposely picked part 3, because there was really good conversation between my teacher and several seekers. So Silent Self SAT satsang Part 3. Should be first on list. Especially it deals with the formation of opinions, which I think is something I struggle with, complacently forming opinions about others, when I even know that an opinion cannot encapsulate anything or anybody. Worse fear and anger that arise from those opinions. Maybe at some point from all this stuff, my ego will be sufficiently destroyed or (rendered) non-existent that I won't feel the need to excitedly show others what I find helpful. Who knows?
Hi Clemens, I get your interesting drift but ultimately one pointed effort is required, grace is needed and its mysterious. One can't grasp it with the mind and lord knows we're all top heavy.
Accept the mystery of it, as it's really all too obscure and inexplicable and yet it fascinates!
Friends,
I wish to share this excerpt from Guru Ramana by S S Cohen:
22nd February, 1949
A well-educated North Indian came forward,
prostrated to Sri Bhagavan and sat in the front line. He asked
in excellent English:
Visitor. What is the cause and origin of the universe?
Bh. Have you no worries of your own?
V. Of course I have; that is why I want to know about Life,
Death, Consciousness, etc.
Bh. Begin with the beginning: who has Life, Consciousness,
etc.? Have you, for instance, life?
V. Of course I know I am alive, for I see my body.
Bh. Do you always see the body? What happens to it and to
the universe when you go to sleep?
V. I don’t know, it is a mystery.
Bh. You may not know what happens to them, but do you
for that reason cease to exist?
V. I don’t know.
Bh. How do you then know that you exist even now?
V. Now I have awareness and see my body moving and
thinking.
Bh. But you see your body also moving and thinking and
being in all sorts of places while it is actually lying fast
asleep in Tiruvannamalai.
V. It is a mystery. Can I say that I, the permanent, am ever
present and only my ego changes?
Bh. So you think you are two persons: the permanent ‘I’ and
the ego. Is that possible?
V. Then please show me the way to the Real.
Bh.The Real is ever-present, like the screen on which all the
cinematographic pictures move. While the pictures
appear on it, it remains invisible. Stop the pictures, and
the screen, which has all along been present, in fact the
only object that has existed throughout, will become clear.
All these universes, humans, objects, thoughts and events
are merely pictures moving on the screen of Pure
Consciousness, which alone is real. Shapes and
phenomena pass away, but Consciousness remains ever.
A few days later Sri Bhagavan gave a different answer to a
similar question asked by Dr. Godel, a French Medical
Officer of the Suez Canal. He told the doctor: “You must
distinguish between the ‘I’, pure in itself, and the ‘I’-
thought. The latter, being merely a thought, sees subject
and object, sleeps, wakes up, eats and thinks, dies and is
reborn. But the pure ‘I’ is the pure Being, eternal
existence, free from ignorance and thought-illusion. If
you stay as the ‘I’, your being alone, without thought,
the I-thought will disappear and the delusion will vanish
forever. In a cinema-show you can see pictures only in a
very dim light or in darkness. But when all lights are
switched on, all pictures disappear. So also in the floodlight
of the Supreme Atman all objects disappear.”
Dr. G. That is the Transcendental State.
Bh. No, transcending what, and by whom? You alone exist.
.
... Master Nome: (...) what the Self may be, what Self-Realization may be, etc. (...) whether cloudier or clearer, it remains an idea. (...) If you are inspired, is this the best way to share what you have found? ...
Keep staying in that inner room of not knowing anything and watch your mind trying to escape from this room. By a european master this is called the "fire of awareness".
.
Dear Brothers,
Today is the auspicious occasion of Vijayadasami. On this day, any endeavour which needs heroic efforts are initiated. Sages like Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Shirdi Sai baba etal used to give lot of importance to this day.
On this day, let us re-dedicate ourselves in our sadhana and the following dialogues between Bhagavan and Paul Brunton always inspire me.
------------------------------
On another visit he finds me in a pessimistic mood. He tells me of the glorious goal which waits for the man who takes to the way he has shown.
“But, Maharshi, this path is full of difficulties and I am so conscious of my own weakness,” I plead.
“That is the surest way to handicap oneself,” he answers unmoved, “this burdening of one’s mind with the fear of failure and the thought of one’s failings.”
“Yet if it is true — ?” I persist.
“It is not true. The greatest error of a man is to think that he is weak by nature, evil by nature. Every man is divine and strong in his real nature. What are weak and evil are his habits, his desires and thoughts, but not himself.”
-------------------------
“Pursue the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ relentlessly. Analyse your
entire personality. Try to find out where the I-thought begins.
Go on with your meditations. Keep turning your attention
within. One day the wheel of thought will slow down and an
intuition will mysteriously arise. Follow that intuition, let your
thinking stop, and it will eventually lead you to the goal.”
-------------------------
“Unless and until a man embarks upon this quest of the true
Self, doubt and uncertainty will follow his footsteps throughout
life. The greatest kings and statesmen try to rule others, when in
their heart of hearts they know that they cannot rule themselves.
Yet the greatest power is at the command of the man who has
penetrated to his inmost depth. There are men of giant intellects
who spend their lives gathering knowledge about many things.
Ask these men if they have solved the mystery of man, if they
have conquered themselves, and they will hang their heads in
shame. What is the use of knowing about everything else when
you do not yet know who you are? Men avoid this enquiry into
the true Self, but what else is there so worthy to be undertaken?”
---------------------------
Regards Murali
"Sri Ganesan asks "What has Bhagavan taught you?"
Professor Aiyer said: "I observed the personal habits of Sri Bhagavan and tried to follow His example. One noticed in Bhagavan's daily life, personal cleanliness, tidiness of dress, habitual wearing of vibhuti and kumkum on forehead; equal sharing of all enjoyments with those around one; strict adherence to a time schedule; doing useful work however 'low' it be; never leaving a work unfinished; the pursuit of perfection in every action; incessant activity except while sleeping or resting after a spell of hard work; never considering oneself superior to others; speaking the truth always, or strict silence if the expression of a truth would hurt or lower the reputation of others; perfect self-help, never asking another to do a piece of work which can be done by oneself; taking full responsibility for failure, if any, without shifting the blame on others; accepting success and failure with equanimity; never disturbing the peace of another; leaving the leaf or plate clean after eating; complete non-interference in the affairs of others; never worrying about the future."
I think some of my interest in Maharshi and inquiry and jnanis comes from being a graceless, oblivious clutz about many endeavors. And there has been a slow awakening to that this perfect gracefulness in action comes from being in that state where there is no world and no ego, that things just go on. Quotes like this prove that this, indeed, is the perfect state. As i've mentiond I see this kind of perfect selfless grace in President barack obama, and famous quarterback Joe Montana. And so there is this connection that superb success, but selfless success doing the duty well comes from abiding in the Self. and the people that are the people that everyone heroizes as the Great people, and wants to emulate. The kind who don't let fame go to their heads have some serious grace going through them. I notice that in both those cases taht I mentioned and certainly with Maharshi. Huge fame, but being completely oblivious to praise and renown. So it seems like, if you really want to do something incredibly heroic in this life, aim sincerely for Self-Realization, and deeply inquire into the Self. This quote is proof in the pudding.
A more recent response from my teacher:
Dear Kassy,
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
Namaste. Thank you for your recent messages.
It is wise to continue to distinguish the eternal from the non-eternal, disidentifying and remaining detached from the latter so that the former is revealed as the very nature of your Being.
Ardent inquiry to know the Self as transcendent of the mind, along with a keen cognizance of life and death, eliminates tamas. Awareness of the precious opportunity for Liberation and deep devotion also bring on out of inertia.
Yes, knowledge of happiness being within frees one from rajas.
Knowledge of the Self beyond all states and modes even transcends sattva.
May you abide firmly in the Knowledge of the Self, full or bliss and peace.
Ever yours in Truth,
Nome
[ 2 ]
Of course, one had been praying away all this while. One even remembered how Sri Bhagavan had mentioned the Surya Mantra to Sri Jagadeeswara Sastri and one tried that too ! But there was a lesson to be taught to me still. The confidence bit had disappeared long ago. And now one was confused, nauseous and so hot that one thought that one would literally melt away into the red fire-like rock on which one was sitting.
I had been cooking like this for perhaps an half-hour, maybe 45 mins, when one saw coming down from a spur in front of me, a wizened, old shepherd, slightly bent and walking with the help of a long stick, a stick like that of Gandhiji’s in popular pictures. I picked him up from quite a distance away and it took him 10 minutes to come down to me, slowly, his form swaying in the heat haze. He came and sat down, close, right next to me on the rock.
He was medium-tall, darkish, aged, with very short snow-white hair. He was wearing a loose vest-sort-of white shirt many sizes too small, and a very short lungi perhaps; mostly bare-bodied. He smelt of the trees, and it actually felt as if a big, tall, leafy tree had walked up and sat down next to me. Automatically, I looked down at his feet and saw - he was wearing, without socks, a pair of brand new, spotless, gleaming blue and white, “air” padded sports-shoes; the ones that cost Rs. 5,000/- !!!
By this time my lower jaw was reaching my chest. He did not say a word and my jaw was anyway now stuck to my chest. He gave the briefest of what I can only describe as a wistful, meaningful smile, the slightest of nods, and then he got up and quickly walked away.
He was gone even before my jaw came back to meet its upper member. And it was to be a great regret later that I did not catch him then and there and hang on to him for dear life; whoever he had been.
For I found that immediately thereafter, my head cleared up and it felt much cooler. And that I could easily walk the hot, burning stones all the way back to Sri Ramanasramam.
And I learnt my lessons. The naiveté with respect to pain and heat went; and I knew it was alright for me to wear footwear on the Hill if needed. I STILL DONT, but now I keep a pair of slippers in my bag for emergency use, along with the bottle of water etc, when I am on the Hill.
And who was he ? Funnily enough, though I can recall all the other details about him, I just cannot remember the features of his face; except that he had smiled. Was he just a villager-shepherd on the Hill ? To whom some kindly visitor-devotee had given his own pair of sports-shoes ?
I wonder …...
Conocete a ti mismo ! Cuidados !
GVK:
758. The best way of quelling the movements of the mind that, as the perceiver, the objects perceived and the act of perception, runs far and wide, is that of employing the mind to see itself through itself.
759. Since reality shines radiantly within you as the Self, only that Self deserves to be known by you. For enquiry into your real nature as it actually is in the Heart, the infallible guide is the true light of the Self ['I am'] that cannot be rejected.
Bhagavan: To realize that you yourself are the Self, why do you require any light other than being-consciousness, the light of the Self?
Ch.11 cont.
39. Death and birth are unreal. Sentience and insentience are unreal. All the world, is, indeed, unreal. The concept of oneself is unreal.
40. Forms are all unreal. The idea of an auspicious state is uneal. "I" ever is unreal. "You" is also unreal.
41. Everywhere there is unreality. the moving and non-moving are unreal. All beings are unreal. All results of action are unreal.
42. All the universe is unreal. All attributes are unreal. All the rest is unreal. All that is dual is unreal.
43. All sin is unreal. The triad of sravana and others (listening, reflection, and one-pointed profound meditation) is unreal. Single categories and multiple categories are ever unreal.
44. All power is unreal. All things are ever impermanent. Gods and others are unreal. All purpose is unreal.
45. Sama is always unreal; sama is ever unreal. The doubt-ful is unreal. The fight between gods and demons is unreal.
46. The concept of Isvara is unreal; Worship is unreal. Time and space are unreal. The concept of holy shrines and such is unreal.
47. Dharma and adharma arising therefrom, as also their definitions, are unreal; all activities are unreal. The misapprehension as oneself and another is unreal.
48. The concept of existence of the mind is also unreal. The gross body is unreal; the subtle body is also unreal. I say, in the name of Siva, all I say is truth, the truth.
49. Heaven and hell are unreal; happiness arising therefrom (from heaven) is unreal. All grasping is unreal; al that is of the form of the graspable is unreal.
50. "Shining like truth" is unreal. I say, in the name of Siva, it is all unreal. All that is of the nature of the present is unreal; all that is of hte nature of the past is unreal.
51. What is said to be the future is unreal, too. This is the truth, teh truth, I say in the name of Siva. Of this world, the beginning is unreal, the middle is unreal, and the end is unreal.
52. The probable is always unreal. Ever, there is no doubt that it is unreal. Knowledge, ignorance, and what is to be known are ever unreal.
53. The universe is ever unreal. The inert is ever unreal. The seen is ever unreal. These are like the horns of a horse.
54. though is ever unreal. The existence of sheaths is unreal. All mantra-s are unreal. Tehre is no doutb that this is the truth. This is the truth.
55. There is no world apart from the Self. There is nothing of the non-Self, ever. Anything apart from the Self is uneral. This is the truth--the truth. There is no doubt of this.
Dear Nandu,
I admire you for your devotion. You are a true devotee of Bhagavan.
Dear Clemens,
I love the quote. Thank you for posting.
cont.
What purpose does it serve to worship these as scripture, if one does not live them in relationship with others in the same generous spirit that Ramana himself generated them in? Ramana frequently said that the life of self-enquiry is a gregarious one, not one lived in isolation, apart from others, in a cave or silent retreat somewhere. He certainly did not live apart, but kept his doors open 24 hours a day to any devotee who needed to speak with him. He did not put himself, or his writings, on a pedestal to be worshipped. He wanted his teachings to be practiced, engaged, lived, and yes, discussed as needed.
The same is true of self-enquiry itself. Self-enquiry, he repeatedly said, is not learned through scripture, but through practice. The Guru's role is not merely to write something beautiful and complete that we cherish and worship in itself, but to guide us in the actual practice of those words, both through his own words, and through his silent instruction. But in the end, it is up to us to actually practice them. As he says in GVK:
391. The enquiry of those who do not enter the Heart and directly encounter the Self that remains established within the sheaths but instead attempt to learn about it in the famous jnana sastras is merely scriptural enquiry. Can it be self-enquiry? No.
Bhagavan: One's self is within the five sheaths, whereas the scriptures are outside them. Therefore, enquiring in the scriptures about oneself, who is to be enquired into, setting aside the five sheaths, is futile.
Bhagavan: That trustworthy vichara is found neither in book learning nor in learning from others but only in one's own sense of "I" [aham].
I am not interested in discussion about which writings of Ramana's are the best or most important or where they should be placed in one's room. I am only interested in how they are practiced. What else about them even matters?
Amusing discussion of Ulladu Narpadu. I seem to have been misconstrued somehow as disrespecting this work of Ramana's, when that is simply not my view or intention. Ulladu Narpadu occupies a rare position in Ramana's oevre, being a distillation of his entire teaching in 40 verses. It is of great value and inspiration.
However, those who call it "complete", and yet who have not realized the Self through the study of it, need to explain how they are qualified to make that judgment. There may indeed be people for whom reading Ulladu Narpadu is enough to bring them to full realization of the Self. I, sad to say, am not one of them. Thus, it is certainly not complete for me, or for the vast majority of Ramana's students. Ramana himself surely knew this, which is why he wrote and taught in so many other texts and talks and conversations over the years. I have faith that Ulladu Narpadu contains the essence of the way, and its brief description of self-enquiry seems to contain the essence of the practice of self-enquiry. But most of us, especially myself, need more than the nere essence of self-enquiry. Some greater explanation and exposition is needed. Which, of course, Ramana supplied in great detail over his entire lifetime to anyone who asked, without taking some kind of offense.
I have never heard of Ramana suggesting that beginners simply study Ulladu Narpadu and ask no further questions. He encouraged people to study self-enquiry to whatever degree they felt was necessary for them to get a feel for what it is in practice. He welcomed questions about it, and never put anyone down for asking how the practice should be done or what it's meaning was. So I don't understand the attitude of some here that look down upon those who are trying to understand self-enquiry, who ask questions, who discuss the various issues involved, the various ideas that Ramana used to teach self-enquiry, and the general framework of a student learning within the context of a friendly conversation. Most of Ramana's instruction took the form of friendly conversations with those who had questions for him. Most of GVK, Padamalai, and so on, were compiled from these friendly conversations into more formal texts of poetic and scriptural quality. So I simply fail to understand how any student of Ramana's could condemn or criticize or look down on those who engage in friendly discussions of Ramana's teachings. To revere Ramana's teachings, to place them on a pedestal of worship, but to take a critical stance towards those who actually engage those teachings in the manner that Ramana himself originated them - friendly conversation - is I think disrespectful not only to devotees, but to Ramana himself.
salutations to all:
agree with arvind, yet this my opinion – just as one can read any number of texts in advaita, the essence can be said in one simply pithy sentence – ‘brahma satyam, jagan mithya, jivo brahmaiva naaparaha’ (brahman is real, the world is false, jiva and brahman are one and the same)… likewise, whichever be the right manual or scripture or whatever else, we all agree that, the essence of vichara is just this – ‘seek the source and abide in the self’… as long as this fundamental issue is constantly there somewhere within us, then, no matter what one does as practice or reads as scripture or anything else, the means may take care of the ends… everything else is just peripheral…
it’s not because of the so-called right method that our vichara isn’t effective… on the contrary, the more one looks for the ‘right’ method, the more will one be wasting one’s time in unnecessary interpretations or dreamy speculations or verbose nonsense (exactly as this very sentence!; self-referential?)… the ability to do vichara is a simple function of the purity of our mind… the purer the mind, do it in whatever way it suits you, the better might it become for being the fodder to be consumed by the self… this is what strikes me everytime when i read bhagavan saying ‘self-enquiry is for the pakkuvi or a ripe soul’... now folks, please don’t say meaningless sentences like ‘there is no becoming, only being’ or that ‘the mind is a fictitious non-entity’, or ‘vichara hasn’t got anything to do with ability’ etc. etc…. firstly, this is how i understand it to be; secondly, if am not mistaken, none of you are realised to talk about abstract things like ‘being’, ‘effortless effort’, or ‘no-mind’, which in any case none of us understand (am not judgmental, just opinionated :-)), isn’t it? if anyone ‘truly’ does, let me know – will be more than happy to keep my mouth shut and listen & only listen :-)
everytime, we feel like saying something uncharitable about the ‘mind’, it might be good to remember what the upanishad says ‘mana eva manushyaaNaam kaaraNam bandha mokshayet’ (the mind alone is the cause of bondage as well as freedom)… hahaha
"3. 'The world is real.' 'No, it, is a mere illusory appearance.' 'The world is conscious.' 'No.' 'The world is happiness.' 'No.' What use is it to argue thus? That State is agreeable to all, wherein, having given up the objective outlook, one knows one's Self and loses all notions either of unity or duality, of oneself and the ego."
I suppose he is saying all these disputes over happiness and the world cease when I give up the objective outlook, and as he said, know the Self and lose all of my notions.
"4. If one has form oneself, the world and God also will appear to have form, but if one is formless, who is it that sees those forms, and how? Without the eye can any object be seen? The seeing Self is the Eye, and that Eye is the Eye of Infinity."
If I take myself to have form, the world and god also have form, but if I am formless and inclusive of everything, how could there be something apart from me to see as apart. Without the eye can any object be seen? this seems to be saying that myself, not the objectified version is seeing everything, and it is infinite, or not limited. Kind of what I was coming to that I cannot objectify myself, because whatever I objectify is not myself. The objectification arises to myself. so I can never see myself, i can see the body, I can feel my personality or thoughts about myself, but myself I can't know in that way. Which I think is the meaning of the question Who am I?
"5. The body is a form composed of the five-fold sheath; therefore, all the five sheaths are implied in the term, body. Apart from the body does the world exist? Has anyone seen the world without the body?"
I am not sure what the five-sheaths are. They are not the five senses, because they include the mind. But he is saying that maybe that all these mental states do not arise apart from the body. And without these mental states is there a world?
6. The world is nothing more than an embodiment of the objects perceived by the five sense-organs. Since, through these five sense-organs, a single mind perceives the world, the world is nothing but the mind. Apart from the mind can there be a world?
Same thing, this is pretty straight forward. But you can see how he is laying the frame-work of inquiry, what is necessary to understsand in inquiring. Because in inquiry I am inquiring to see that these things mentioned in 40 verses are true.
"If all these are One, why distinguish between individual self-confidence and transcendental Self-confidence?"
Because individual self-confidence still emphaizes self-importance and that there is a difference between god, the world, and the soul. there has to a distinct person, or soul, for their to be individual self-confidence. Is that the case?
.
... What is Sri Bhagavan's Magnum opus?I do not think that it was ever uttered or written or compiled. [...] but may be because we are so busy with our own ideas and preoccupations,we never for a moment care to listen. Even a casual look at Sri Bhagavan's photographs brings this aspect. ...
It is great to read this words. One can have the feeling that they are really scraping the barrel now (do you say so? I consulted a dictionary to express it this way...).
Ramana once said: "All the problems only the bookworms have."
What is the "self" so often mentioned here as the goal or source of everything? On my part I don't have the least idea of *what* or *who* this is. There are a lot of words about it, but words don't nourish.
Is it really the question to know "what" it is and "how" to get to it? Then you should know that the journey of your mind will never end.
There are two kinds of self enquiry in my understanding:
* The one for beginners - people lost in ego concepts of what this world is and what they are themselves believe to be. They enquire into the ego, the non-self - to get rid of it. Ego is all our bad emotions, our irrational ideas, our desires to get (including the "self") and to avoid something.
* The one for the people taking themselves back. They enquire into the nature of the self which is an enquiry with answers but with no words to discuss.
Kondor in On Robert Adams again said: "And the doubts begin anew." This is more important then the question of "what the self is or should be". Ramana once said: "It is because of the doubts that the mind is restless. Practice until all doubts are vanished."
How to fight the doubts? One way is impossible: To think again and again about things being illusory, or to cry for help, or to pretend to know already all what one needs to know. One way often is described as "the path of not knowing anything". It is good to remember this when the war of words rages.
I often say that no one needs to *discuss* all this matters because we have the sayings of the sages; we have the tradition, we have the scriptures. Why discuss something? Some sentences in "Be as you are" or "Talks" dispel any doubts and completely clarify difficult questions. When this doubts one day come back - and they *will* come back - then reading this anew helps - until the day when all doubts are gone.
Therefore I don't participate in discussions any longer - it is senseless. It is a misunderstanding of the problem demanding that we take ourselves back und listen to the sages but not discuss about it. The sages and holy ones will answer your questions and not anyone else. They have trustworthy knowledge - your knowledge is false. Ramana never "discussed" or "debated" - he clarified things. His mind was free from the inner conflict of ego thoughts. I would even prefer to say that talks on his part (and of all sages and holy ones) where like breathing, praying or singing.
Self enquiry also means to be aware of our unconscious tendencies in talking about something, like for example a hidden desire to "socialize". The truth you are looking for is to be found in yourself - not on the marketplace. And this was meant literally - not metaphorical.
.
Scott,
I am not trying to suggest that there is some discrepency between Ramana's teachings in Ulladu Narpadu and elsewhere. Clearly there is not. Ramana's teaching on self-enquiry is the same throughout his many works and talks. It is only that if one is looking for detailed descriptions of self-enquiry to guide one's practice, I don't think Ulladu Narpadu is the source one would turn to. Each of Ramana's works serves its purposes, as do all his talks and instructions, and one simply cannot expect a short treatise of 40 verses to serve the purpose of providing a detailed instruction on the practice of self-enquiry.
Nor, frankly, do I see that the verses Arvind has cited from Ulladu Narpadu contradict any of the views that have been expressed on this forum, as he evidently does. So I am at a bit of a loss to understand the basis for Arvind's criticisms of people here, since Ulladu Narpadu does not seem to offer any contradictory viewpoint that I can see. It appears that the sole basis of his criticism is that since Ulladu Narpadu does not use some of the phrasings employed by Ramana in his other writings and talks, those phrasings are invalid or inferior. That is a highly dubious claim not backed up by reason or demonstration, and certainly not backed by Ramana himself. Ulladu Narpadu is far too brief a work to burden it with that kind of responsibility or authority, and there is no evidence that Ramana intended it to be read in that manner.
For Ravi
Yes Ravi, you are right. The only thing is, that at the end stage, dharma is performed with no feeling of ' i '. It is not a compulsion any more. All the vasanas that once compelled desire and action drop off.
Till then compulsions will remain and we are compelled to do.
A stage is arrived at when, if these are things to be done, they will be executed without compulsive ideas that bind and attach.
This is a gift which is cherished.
respectfully yours
Broken Yogi/Friends,
I came across this debate on Adhyasa(Avidya).Pl visit:
http://www.sankaracharya.org/library/WhenceAdhyasa.pdf
Namaskar.
I'd like to ask about the word 'I'-thought.
I understand that 'I'-thought is translation of Aham-Vritti.
This term appears quite often in'Talks'.
What I want to ask is the origin of this translation, that is, who started to use the term 'I'-thought originally, and if Bhagavan confirmed this translation.
Did Bhagavan himeself use this English term 'I'thought?
Regards,
Scott/Friends,
Tirumular is the Great sage whose work Tirumanthiram was highly regarded by Sri Bhagavan.Thayumanavar's Guru comes in the lineage of Tirumular.
The Following verse fom Tirumanthiram is a classic.Interestingly ,I found this translation on Master Nome's website!
Here is that verse:
The ignorant think that love and Sivam are two.
They do not know that love is Sivam.
knowing that love is Sivam,
they abide in the love that is Sivam.
-The Tirumantiram (Tirumular)
This is from a magazine-Reflections March-April 2005.You may download from this site.
http://www.satramana.org/Reflections_Web_MarAp_2005.pdf
It also has a very interesting conversation between Nome and other devotees on Self Enquiry.
Namaskar
Broken(integrated)Yogi/Friends,
"simply attend to our own mind and the basic struggle with the "I". It is best not to struggle at all, but simply to feel and observe and allow Grace the room to manifest itself in our own awareness, as the self-enquiry itself going on in us. It is not important to know if we are doing self-enquiry "right", it is merely important to persist in attending to our feeling of "I", and allowing that to mature into something more profound through patience and silence. "
This is right on Dot.It is actually that simple.
Namaskar.
Scott,
"Any attempt at inquiry I've ever made starts with an aim, a very clear aim, and that is to find out the cause of the suffering and solve the problem at it's root. "
I understand what you are trying to say.What I mean is 'finding the cause' is not the same as 'seeing the problem'.The Former is intellectual whereas the later is 'actual'.If we can see the problem,it is easier to rid oneself of it.One simply GETS RID OF IT and does not AIM to get rid of it.
Namaskar.
Friends,
Please find the translation of Appalam song with a nice commentary-Michael James is a sincere devotee and seems to have a decent knowledge of Tamil as well.
Please visit:
http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2009/06/appala-pattu-explanatory-paraphrase.html
Please compare this to the Thayumanavar songs that I have posted.
Namaskar.
Just one more example came to mind, while observing the banyan tree concerning the illusionary 'i' ( incidentally the one at the northern point of Arunachala where the ' merging " is observed,) . The banyan tree has only one original. primal trunk ( The Self - The Eternal I ) From It emerge the branches, leaves etc ( cosmic creation ). From these branches descend roots ( thoughts, ideas, emotions, memory, abstract thinking etc ) that lie close to one another but are separate. On reaching the ground they take root and all these components merge to form a new trunk ( the illusionary "i"). similarly, there is only One, from which creation has emerged. The individual creations are formed by our own imagination, that also creates the appearance of an individual " i" ( the secondary trunks ). see it, as it truly is - and the illusion is gone.
From afar,a lion perceives a herd of zebras to be long grass. This illusion has been created to offer protection to zebra, when they remain close together in a herd. It is only on approaching the herd and looking carefully ( the enquiry ) that individual zebras may be spotted, especially if one of them decides to move away from the herd. Similarly, it is only when we look keenly within and question the "i", that we will be able to detect the different components of this so called individual personality, realizing that there is no one else in there !In fact everything is in us. Bhagwan says "Realization is realizing the unreal to be unreal !". Advaita is pure scientific investigation.
sometimes it comes to mind, that maybe, just maybe, the neutron represents The Self. The proton, The initial vibration that sets the laws in place ( Ganesh, the first born ) They remain still, dense and immobile. Electromagnetism in its pure form is The Light ( Subramaniam, the second born - The Atman ) from which invisible and visible creation have emerged in the form of electrons, which can ionize to aquire positive and negative charges ( likes and dislikes - the disturbed, active mind, full of desires ). Only when the spin of electrons has slowed ( by sadhana or 'effort' as Bhagwan would say ), can The Power or Grace completely deionize and cause these electrons ( thoughts ) to be neutral. this neutral immobile State is Brahman
Eerily, I wasn't aware, that tp had made that comment about electrons.
First part of Sri Natarajan's article:
http://living.oneindia.in/yoga-spirituality/vedanta/power-mind.html
Maybe, just maybe,the illusion of individuality is dark matter ( the desire to hold everything together and make it appear as an individual entity ) and thoughts that emanate from it, is expanding dark energy. when attention ( The Self or even the 'who am I 'question ) shines on the individual feeling of 'i' It transforms it back into Itself and thoughts automatically disappear. But this stage is reached by many ( including myself )only after intense sadhana has already been performed by other methods to quieten and rein in the expanding or outgoing energy of thought. otherwise it is not possible to look dispassionatly without judgements and emotions either at the thoughts or the ' i '. The Guru then appears, to direct us inwards, back to our home. He shows us The Way by exposing what we are not and Powerfully draws us back to Himself. As Christ says " no man cometh unto Me unless The Father in Heaven draw him "
Dear David,
:)
Tell me why is this not Self Inquiry:
When ever I arises in mind, merge it into Consciousness.
:)
Love!
Silence
Nandu Narasimhan said:
"Personally, I follow what you had suggested by quoting Bhagavan's advice to Kunju Swami. If enquiry does not work, I immediately switch to 'nama japa', or read a random passage from a book on Bhagavan."
For me too, this is what happens. 60 minutes of Self Enquiry and Nama Japa rest of the time. I could not do Self Enquiry more than 5 to 10 minutes initially. In one of the postings, David gave his own personal experience that he used to determine initially that he is not going to get up from his seat irrespective of what his body/mind says. Eventually, he is able to sit all day long. I followed this method and within a week, I was able to sit 1 hour without an urge to getup.
Also, I found that the urge to getup flares up when somewhere in the mind, there is a doubt that self enquiry is not proceding well. I try to overcome this feeling in exactly the same way David pointed out i.e., do as Bhagavan told and assume that it is correct. Who am I to judge whether it is proceding correctly or not? Once this feeling takes hold, I found that staying in one seat for a long time works.
1 hour is not a long time for the task at hand but for my mind, it is.
I remember Thakur saying that when he was about to sit for meditation, he used to see the statue of Bhairava on the wall of Dakshineswar temple and tell his mind that he is going to sit like that statue for the entire day. The urge to get up is common even to Mahapurusha like Thakur.
Regards Murali
{continued from part 1}
salutations to all: (part 2)
humility & faith: the very awareness of humility leaves me anything but humble (in my opinion, and am not saying in my ‘humble’ opinion :-))… humility cannot be cultivated, and ‘humble’ words may have little to do with humility… perhaps, it’s something natural to one who can even temporarily abide in the self, and it’s only the others who happen to come across such a person label him or her as humble etc.
likewise, when it comes to this thing called faith, for sure i simply don’t have the faith of ravi, nandu, ramprax, arvind, murali, and the several others who write here…on the contrary, one of the prime reasons why am drawn to self-enquiry is that it doesn’t demand anything like faith in anything like a god or stuff like that (i have no clue whatsoever about that weird thing called ‘self-surrender’) …yes, i love bhagavan, but why am i trying out vichara if not because of ‘faith’ - not necessarily; i love studying math but don’t know why i like it; it’s not because i have faith in math; i love the violin but don’t know why i like it, not because i have faith in the violin :-) …
likewise, for reasons unknown to me, am drawn to vichara, and as i said early on, in a pretty hopeless & helpless way…yes, will keep trying what i like, and perhaps, if i keep doing that, arunachala & bhagavan, will be happy to knock at my door and forcibly establish me their ‘state’…hahahahahaha (well, that speaks for my ‘humility’, and ‘faith’ too!)
keep writing, it’s wonderful to know all of you :-)))
salutations to all: (part 1)
indeed it’s nice to once again see broken yogi, arvind, ramprax etc. in the blog…felt really nice to listen to the views of all those extraordinarily sincere folks out there discussing about ‘vichara’, which i believe is one of the most important purposes of this forum :-) …went back and browsed at random some of the earlier posts & comments on self-enquiry…got to read yet again the post ‘dialogue on self-enquiry’ & ‘robert adams on self-enquiry’…
today morning, after going through the aforementioned posts, tried sort-of the same thing that ramprax, arvind, broken yogi, and david were suggesting and referring to…the quality of vichara was definitely better :-) undoubtedly, self-enquiry is a self-correcting process, seems to get better when it is attempted again and again and again… it’s a great opportunity indeed to get advice from so many excellent enquirers…
the only thing where i hopelessly differ is my ‘attitude’ towards bhagavan and vichara… neither do i have the sublime humility nor the unflinching faith that almost all of you possess in such abundant measure - of course, am & will keep trying & trying & trying to the best of my abilities to practise the vichara as taught by bhagavan, but wouldn’t request or plead or pray to bhagavan to ‘help’ me’; instead would like to tell bhagavan (and even abuse bhagavan, after all he is the only one whom i can abuse to the fullest measure, and the only way he can abuse me back is rid me of my ‘i’!):
[“freedom is my birthright, and you better make me realize this ‘true’ nature asap, or else……… (some threat, hahahahahahaha…) the very fact i have come to you ought to be enough evidence of my being ripe enough to “be”, and in case you think am not, it’s completely & wholly your ‘headache’ to render me ripe enough to be eaten in toto…am trying to do whatever little i can, it’s high time you start ‘doing’ what you are supposed to be doing…am no longer going to be deceived by your unfathomable silence or your disarmingly benign smile!” etc. etc.] (or some such thing)
{Continued in Part 2:}
David,
Thanks for your explanation. It merely confirms the need for faith, even when doing Self Enquiry.
Personally, I follow what you had suggested by quoting Bhagavan's advice to Kunju Swami. If enquiry does not work, I immediately switch to 'nama japa', or read a random passage from a book on Bhagavan.
Somehow, this serves to quieten the noise in my head and almost always leads me back into enquiry.
I still cannot do enquiry for more than ten minutes, and therefore I read, repeat Bhagavan's name or look at His picture in no particular sequence.
If all else fails, I call a fellow devotee and speak to him for a brief while on anything concerning Bhagavan.
Long way to go...
First of all, it's nice to see old friends such as Arvind, Ramprax and Broken Yogi commenting again. Welcome back!
Second, I am having problems getting through to Google, although I can connect easily with any other site I need. This situation has unfortunately coincided with a big increase in the number of people who are making comments. Apologies if there are occasionally delays; most of the time I just can't get through to Blogger to post the comments.
Third, Ramprax made a comment a few days ago:
'I think of Bhagavan and say, "If I am doing vichara improperly, it is your job to correct me!" And I do whatever I understand vichara to be. There is inner guidance. Vichara is self-correcting.'
Excellent sentiments!
I should like to relate two well-know incidents from the ashram kitchen and then extrapolate the conclusions to the realm of self-enquiry.
Egg plants had been cut and the spiky ends were about to be thrown away. Not even the cows would eat them. Bhagavan, though, insisted that they be turned into a vegetable dish. A devotee was deputed by Bhagavan to stir a pot of these inedible and probably indigestible leftovers. He faithfully stayed at his post stirring away, even when the 'vegetable' was reduced to a charred and sticky mess at the bottom of the pot. Just before the meal was to be served, Bhagavan reappeared. He seemed delighted that the devotee had stuck to his task, even though it seemed that the food had been ruined. Bhagavan added a few condiments and the contents of the pot miraculously transformed themselves into a tasty vegetable dish.
On another occasion, when Bhagavan was cooking, something was about to be burned unless immediate action was taken.
He called out, 'Take the plate from the stove!' and the devotee immediately obeyed and removed it with his bare hands, even though it was a heavy iron plate that had been sitting on a blazing fire. When he looked at his hands afterwards, the devotee was amazed to discover that his hands had not been burnt.
What is the relevance of these stories to the practice of self-enquiry? Bhagavan has given us very specific instructions on how to practise self-enquiry. If we follow them to the letter, without attempting to analyse, query or vary them, we naturally invoke his grace in our attempts to succeed. If we take matters into our own hands, thinking that we have found a better way, I suspect that the grace is somehow withdrawn because we have shown a lack of faith in Bhagavan's instructions.
I know some people (at least one has posted on this thread) who say that, when attention wanders, one should simply revert to the feeling of 'I', without going through the rigmarole of asking 'Whose attention has wandered?' - 'I' - 'Then who am I?' These people think that Bhagavan's enquiry can be done simply by a quick transfer of attention from the distraction to the one who was distracted.
In the same vein there is a western devotee of Bhagavan who has laboured long and hard in his writings and on his site to convince other devotees that the method of self-enquiry is really 'awareness watching awareness'.
When I do self-enquiry, irrespective of how quiet I might be, I always make a point of asking 'Who am I?' at regular intervals, and often when I do it, I see a picture of Bhagavan's smiling face inside me.
Self-enquiry is never easy, and Bhagavan himself has said that one cannot extinguish the 'I' without the grace of the Self. By following Bhagavan's instructions to the letter, and by having faith in his words, I like to feel that I have the wind of his grace behind me. Knowing that I could not succeed by my own efforts, I stick to the script and leave the rest to Him.
Friends,
I wish to share this wonderful excerpt on Brother Lawrence from Wikipedia:
"As a young man, Herman's poverty forced him into joining the army, and thus he was guaranteed meals and a small stipend. During this period, Herman had an experience that set him on a unique spiritual journey; it wasn't, characteristically, a supernatural vision, but a supernatural clarity into a common sight.
In the deep of winter, Herman looked at a barren tree, stripped of leaves and fruit, waiting silently and patiently for the sure hope of summer abundance. Gazing at the tree, Herman grasped for the first time the extravagance of God's grace and the unfailing sovereignty of divine providence. Like the tree, he himself was seemingly dead, but God had life waiting for him, and the turn of seasons would bring fullness. At that moment, he said, that leafless tree "first flashed in upon my soul the fact of God," and a love for God that never after ceased to burn. Sometime later, an injury forced his retirement from the army, and after a stint as a footman, he sought a place where he could suffer for his failures. He thus entered the Discalced Carmelite monastery in Paris as Brother Lawrence.
He was assigned to the monastery kitchen where, amidst the tedious chores of cooking and cleaning at the constant bidding of his superiors, he developed his rule of spirituality and work. In his Maxims, Lawrence writes, "Men invent means and methods of coming at God's love, they learn rules and set up devices to remind them of that love, and it seems like a world of trouble to bring oneself into the consciousness of God's presence. Yet it might be so simple. Is it not quicker and easier just to do our common business wholly for the love of him?"
For Brother Lawrence, "common business," no matter how mundane or routine, was the medium of God's love. The issue was not the sacredness or worldly status of the task but the motivation behind it. "Nor is it needful that we should have great things to do. . . We can do little things for God; I turn the cake that is frying on the pan for love of him, and that done, if there is nothing else to call me, I prostrate myself in worship before him, who has given me grace to work; afterwards I rise happier than a king. It is enough for me to pick up but a straw from the ground for the love of God."
Brother Lawrence retreated to a place in his heart where the love of God made every detail of his life of surpassing value. "I began to live as if there were no one save God and me in the world." Together, God and Brother Lawrence cooked meals, ran errands, scrubbed pots, and endured the scorn of the world.
He admitted that the path to this perfect union was not easy. He spent years disciplining his heart and mind to yield to God's presence. "As often as I could, I placed myself as a worshiper before him, fixing my mind upon his holy presence, recalling it when I found it wandering from him. This proved to be an exercise frequently painful, yet I persisted through all difficulties."
Only when he reconciled himself to the thought that this struggle and longing was his destiny did he find a new peace: his soul "had come to its own home and place of rest." There he spent the rest of his 80 years, dying in relative obscurity and pain and perfect joy.
----------------------------------
"It is enough for me to pick up but a straw from the ground for the love of God."-This Karma,Bhakti and Gnana!To even think of these Great souls is a Blessing.
The key thing to note is that seeing an object outside need not pull the mind outside.On the contrary,it may turn the mind inward.It all depends on the "bhava" with which it is done.
Salutations.
Thankyou for the Swaminathan article. I remember reading ages ago that Chadwick was not overly impressed by Somerset Maugham who did not fully understand or appreciate Ramanas core teaching. As for Jung, he could have visited Ramana Maharshi but was too concerned that it may tarnish his scientific reputation. How sad to miss out on such a wonderful encounter!
Hi Folks,
Great to read all the responses. Happy to hear from my old friend Broken Yogi again.
Like mentioned, folks, I will not pick up the active debate, neither on hot points raised by others, nor in defence of mine. Apologies on that score. But, would be happy to clarify or expand on any point should anyone so require.
Peter, yours was a rhetorical query only.
Ravi, let me mention (have I mentioned this earlier ?), and tho’ my posts may suggest otherwise, that it has been my firm belief, always, that Devotion and Jnana are like the two engines of a twin-engined aircraft. Either one can make the plane fly, but with both engines firing, the plane flies smoother and faster. And the biggest secret is both the engines are identical, though their cowling-covers make them look different !
Namaskars to all
"Likewise, all the questions and arguments we may have about what self-enquiry actually is can only be resolved in the practice of self-enquiry, which as Ramana said above does not exist in books or in conversation but only in the sense of “I”. So again, one must investigate the actual feeling sense of “I” to find out what self-enquiry is, and if one does, one will find a dynamic process of active instruction going on there, not just some passive process. The intellect by its very nature has only a passive role in any case, whereas it is the sense of Being and Awareness that becomes active through self-enquiry and leads us to understanding."
It seems to me that the actual practice of Self-inquiry is very much conveyed in the verbal teachings of Ramana and other Jnanis, infact is the Self-inquiry in a sense. Reading the texts and dialogues with Maharshi is even sometimes more effective then when I try to do it on my own. I'm also not sure, not knowing what inquiry is, whether the intellect plays a passive or active role. Originally I would have said passive, but more and more the discrimination seems key, which is an active role it seems. I don't know whether it is intellectual. I guess it comes down to, what is Self-inquiry? And the discrimination seems central to what it is. Even the question Who am I? is an ascertaining of my real nature as some sort of non-objective Blissful consciousness. Broken Yogi, referred to it as a being somewhere, but it seems to be boundary-less. At this point, I couldn't tell you what my attempt at Self-inquiry looks like other then it is an attempt to transcend suffering and enter into deeper levels of blissful being. That seems to be the telltale sign of success. External events help it along by instilling the necessary humility that might not already be present. I try different methodologies, but it really isn't the methodologies that get me back into blissful being, it's for instance writing the sage I correspond with, honestly. Because in that, is an implied recognition of my own powerlessness to succeed at inquiry. That recognition that I as an individual is powerless to do anything, worthless, and that only in getting past the trap of the individual will there be genuinely positive experience. Association with a sage, is recognition of my powerlessness as an individual. I would say more then any other thing it is that, that brings on deeper experience. When I, as an individual wants peace, and strives it may have played some role, but it's really when I give up that that supernatural Bliss takes over. But then I try to stay there by not activating the mind. So far, I would say what I just described is what inquiry is it seems, the inquiry is the Self, the inquiry is the peace that takes over when the individual, and it's web of self-importance relinquishes itself.
Arvind/Friends,
Good to have arvind sharing his insights.
"So what is Sri Bhagavan actually telling us by this round-in-a-circle conundrum ? He is basically saying that the position CANNOT BE reconciled. We have to deal with the contradiction as-it-is. We have throw all our questions and intellectual dissections away. We have to stop thinking about subjectivity or objectivity or whether the process of Self-enquiry will lead to making the ‘I’ into an object or not, or worrying about it. All that may indeed be relevant, but only in the realm of theory. As far as practice is concerned, we toss that aside to try to seek what cannot be sought. In fact we have to try to do that for which there is no method theoretically possible. It is truly a leap of faith."
Interesting to see this perspective-that Self Enquiry is a leap of Faith.All the circumlocutions of Thought was inflated and then deflated!Wonder why we cannot start with surrender to God or Guru-Even if one starts in a tottering way,one may atleast have a sense of direction to start with.A Simple Prayer is quite potent.
"A magic leverage suddenly is caught
That moves the veiled Ineffable's timeless will:
A prayer, a master act, a king idea
Can link man's strenth to a transcendent Force"-Sri Aurobindo(Savitri)
.
...Papaji's students ...
It may be interesting to read himself about this in "Nothing Ever Happened". I never read the book but I found an extract of it in the net (I believe it to be authentic). I have to admit that I felt a certain disgust because there I read something about spiritual "leeches".
.
Friends,
I totally appreciate what David has expressed about Guru's Grace and Self Effort.They appear different to start with but are two sides of the same coin.
Thayumanavar in ' Obeisance to Mauna Guru' Says:
In a house of refreshment
Enough will be the choice
Of diverse things to eat.
Unto it the four ends of man -
dharma, artha, kama and moksha,
The ends that Vedas and Agamas declare
The critical path of jnana,
The methods of demonstration and inference -
Of such varieties is the choice made
That the clamor of I-ness is stalled.
Realizing the four paths
And their gradations from chariya to jnana
And cognizing the difference
Of anu paksa *[1] and sambhu paksa *[2]
And the functions of maya and the rest(karma & anava)
And overcoming the mental aberration
That gives the distortion of one and two -
''To stand thus is our tradition.''
Thus Thou declared. Oh! Parama Guru!
Oh! Mantra Guru! Oh, Yoga Tantra Guru!
Mauna Guru that comes in the line of Mula the Holy! "
FootNotes:
[1] anu paksa - Jivas striving to reach God.
[2] sambhu paksa - Jivas made to strive by God to reach Him.
-----------------------------------
Thayumanavar's Guru comes in the lineage of Tirumular-The Great one who composed the Tirumanthiram-A work which Sri Bhagavan recommended to be recited as part of the consecration/construction of Samadhis to the Great ones like Mastan Swami.
Namaskar.
David
After reading your post Sept 4, 5:08pm, it struck me as to how incredibly unlikely it is that a person, randomly selected from the worlds population, will get past the ego
for these reasons:
1) of the billions of people on the planet only a very, very small percentage will encounter those teachings capable of liberating the practitioner
2) and of those who do encounter teachings with the power to liberate, even fewer will be moved by the value, or appreciate the value, of those teachings
3) and finally, even if 1) and 2) fall into place for a person, the likelihood of applying the teachings in a sincerely earnest manner decade after decade, is quite rare
Most reading this post will have 1) and 2) covered. It will be 3) that will be the challenge, including for myself; mind creates countless distractions.
Nisargadatta spoke about EARNESTNESS like a broken record. And I recall Papaji in a video say something to the effect that he rarely sees that all important ingredient in people, fire in the belly, . . . . . or is it heart!?
Perhaps Ramana also emphasised EARNESTNESS. Others may have some suitable quotes.
Peter.
Shiba,
I warmly recommend 'Guru Ramana' by Cohen.You should be able to download a PDF copy from the Ramansramam downloads.
This covers all the essential Teachings of Sri Bhagavan in an easily assimilable form .You will find a chapter on 'Maya' that you had wondered about.
Namaskar.
Clemens Vargas Ramos (3)
27 Without maturity [desirelessness] in the mind, the abiding experience of sahaja samadhi will not ripen.
28 Unless one has an extremely pure sattvic mind, it will be impossible to have darshan in the Heart of the reality that is jnana.
29 It is due to maturity of mind [chitta-paripaka] that what is very difficult for the many is extremely easy for the very few.
Bhagavan: We have to contend against age-long samskaras. They will all go. Only, they go comparatively soon in the case of those who have already made sadhana in the past, and late in the case of the others.
Question: Do these samskaras go gradually or will they suddenly disappear one day? I ask this because, though I have remained fairly long here, I do not perceive any gradual change in me.
Bhagavan: When the sun rises, does the darkness go gradually or all at once? (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 31st March, 1945)
30 Those very few who realise the Self through daiva gathi and get redeemed have minds that are fully mature.
Kunju Swami: In those early days of my stay at Skandashram, as I always used to remain close to Sri Bhagavan, I found that I could get all my doubts cleared merely by listening to all the answers to other devotees’ questions. Moreover, by listening to all these answers I was able to learn many new aspects of Sri Bhagavan’s teachings. I rarely had to ask a question myself. Usually, if I was waiting for an opportune moment to raise a question on some spiritual topic, another devotee would ask Sri Bhagavan that very same question. Sri Bhagavan’s answer would then clear the doubts of both of us. This method of acquiring knowledge is known in the scriptures as daiva gathi. A good example of daiva gathi can be found in Vasishtam where it is said that King Janaka got his doubts cleared and attained knowledge by hearing the conversation of some siddhas.
In books such as Vedanta Chudamani three ways of getting realisation, daiva gathi, viveka gathi and viraktha gathi, have been mentioned. To approach a Sadguru and to obtain knowledge by both learning the spiritual texts and by practising discrimination is called viveka gathi. Viraktha gathi is the instantaneous dawn of knowledge, like a bolt of lightning, irrespective of age and environment. Jnanis such as the Buddha, Pattinathar and Sri Bhagavan are examples of this viraktha gathi. Vasishtam, an authoritative text, proclaims, ‘Like fruit falling unexpectedly from above, true knowledge arises easily’.
A person who goes to have the darshan of a realised soul without any desire finds the latter answering the spiritual questions of his disciples. On hearing them, because of past merits, realisation dawns immediately like the lighting up of an electric bulb at the press of a switch. This is known as daiva gathi. The great karmas performed in many past births become the cause of attaining knowledge by any of the three ways mentioned above. Many other scriptural texts proclaim the same truth. (The Power of the Presence, part two, pp. 13-14)
.
... David Godman, If anyone reading this doesn't have a copy, I would be happy to post these few pages here...
Please do so, I'm interested in that.
.
Murali says:
From what I gather from Bhagavan, if anyone has interest in Self Enquiry, it means the following
a. The person has the required ripeness
b. The person has accumualated enough punyam (merits)
I am very happy to hear that.But I have not read such comments from Bhagavan,so I would like you to teach me the books or articles which contain such comments.
For me, Bhagavan's way to teach self-enquiry is somehow confusing.
And I would like to ask David,does your understanding of the way of self-enquiry derive from not only intellectual understandeing but also your experiences of practice of self-enquiry?I read your interviews but I have not read your experiences of practice very much.I am very interested in experiences of experts.It must be useful for novice like me.
regards shiba
So Maharshi is saying focus on the personality, and I'm thinking, he means to explore it's unreality. Who am I? is more then a rote question, it's sort of it seems, an acknowledgement, that this personality, for instance that is having these thoughts and typing them is not real, and by not real, the thing that seems obvious about that, is that it is imaginary, it's not even tangible, it's not even sensed, I don't even know what this persoanlity is. I do know, that there is a feeilng of safety with it. Self-inquiry seems to be an exploration that I am Being-Consciousness-Bliss, I am what that refers to. This Self that is eternal, infinite and the source of peace, is what is, there is not something else. What I'm typing now is Self-inquiry, because it's an earnest attempt to reason out, and understand what these teachings mean, and in doing so, it brings me in touch with more peaceful experience. I can't remember which is which, but there is manana, sravana, and niddidyasana.(sorry if I'm butchering the spelling). One is listening, and then trying to understand, and I believe niddidyasana is deep meditation. Aftter coming to a deeper understanding, I leave the level of thought. Leave it, I don't fight it. I just don't need to think any more, I can dive deeper into this sense of peace without thinking, just let it take hold of me. That is what Nome quoting Shankara has referred to as deep, profound, meditation, a practice of samadhi.
Shiba said:
"For me,'concentrate on I-thought' is easier to understand about how to do self-enquiry than 'find the source'."
My experience is also same. I wondered for a long time as to what is meant by "find the source"? Practically, when I close my eyes, what am i supposed to do? What is meant by this "finding" when I am sitting closing my eyes?
I found the answer only after I came in touch with David Godman and it got further confirmation from Sadhu Om's book.
Once I understood that it means focusing on the feeling of 'I', I realized that what else can we do? Suppose I close my eyes and start looking inside, I can just do two things - either observe my thoughts or observe the feeling of I. What else is possible? Observing the thoughts is nothing different from observing the gross objects outside. So, what is left is observing the feeling of I. I did not have anything else to do apart from this and hence I accepted that this is all I can do and this what Bhagavan meant.
Except observing the feeling I, everything else is a concept for me at this stage. For example, "The Heart", "The source of I", "chakras", "kundalini" etc., etc., are all just concepts and Bhagavan told that we should reject all concepts. So, what else is left but just to hang on to the feeling of I?
I am a novice on the path and hence I dont say that I am right but this is all I can do at this stage.
Regards Murali
Scott,
I have referred to Master TGN-Please see my post in the open thread on Vichara dated August 2,2008(To Arvind).
Your 'assumption' that I may be referring to Sri Ramakrishna is quite understandable-indeed the very mention of his name acts like a charm on me.All masters are dear to me.
Sri Ramakrishna had the unique gift of expressing the most subtle Truths in a homely down to Earth Fashion.The Way he expresses what I have mentioned(Regarding dealing with worldly affairs)is like this-He says:
He who does not know the Price of Salt(world) will not know the Price of Sugar(God)!
If other Masters are like 'Teachers in the Classroom',Sri Ramakrishna is like a Personal Tutor at Home!He will allow you to go your way and you will find that you have come to his way!This is the unique charm of this Great Master.
Salutations.
Friends,
Raj had asked:
"do you know of anyone in recent times who has successfully followed karma yoga as a path to salvation?"
As I had said that this sort of classification as Gnana,Yoga,Bhakti,Karma is more for easy assimilation-They are but different modes of Living and are inseperable.In The outward manifestation one or the other may appear to predominate.That is all there to it.
It is interesting to see what Sadhu Arunachala(Major Chadwick) had to say regarding the exemplars in recent times(From:A Sadhu's reminiscences-page 54)
"The classic examples of these four Yogas in modern
times are: Jnanam, Sri Ramana Maharshi; Bhakti,
Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa; Yoga, Sri Aurobindo of
Pondicherry; and Karma, Sri Shankaracharya of Kanchi
Peetam, the only one of the above still in the body."
A Study of the Life of the Sage of Kanchi and Teachings is extremely rewarding.One gets a comprehensive ,all inclusive,balanced view of Vedic Living.The Teachings are available in about 8 Volumes-covering all the aspects of Gnana,Bhakti,Yoga and Karma(individual and collective aspects).This is a Joy to Read-Nothing academic at all.Everything is put in its place and given due weightage.I understand that These are Translated into English-but nothing like reading them in Tamil.
I warmly recommend 'Deivathin Kural'(Voice of The Divine)to all aspirants who understand and can read Tamil.
Namaskar.
.
It's in my eyes a fine and clear description of the kind we have in vedantic texts (Tripura Rahasya elaborates on that).
Implicitly it points to the fact that we can't be "aware of awareness" - we only can be aware of changes in conciousness. While we are daydreaming we don't know that it is daydreaming. We know it afterwards.
Explicitly it emphasizes that we can be conscious of a state of "not thinking", and that there is a practice to understand and to live this. But in my eyes we need the further understanding that this is a process of thinking too.
We need to understand that awareness is independent of consciousness, independent even from life or death.
I define "awareness" as the presence of consciousness but the absence of the "I". It is not the type of consciousness the "I" knows (as experiences).
The "I" can't understand this. It can't understand how to survive in the absence of consciousness because all of its activities are based on that type of consciousness.
There is the need to eradicate consciously the endless stream of mental images caused by personal thinking, the "I", and then to see what remains.
.
Dear Friends,
Request your views.
I read one account where the author tries to explain how to get into the aware state atleast momentarily.He says through an analogy of how to recognise the aware state.
I would request your views on the following. Personally, I felt that this is a brilliant and clear description but I am not sure where it is correct.
Here is the extract of the article:
"During meditation everybody has the experience of suddenly realizing that for the previous five or ten minutes they hadn't been meditating at all. They got lost in daydreams without realizing it. Suddenly they snap back to their senses and realize, "Oops! I lost my concentration and got lost in daydreams for several minutes without noticing it. I only just noticed and remembered this instant that I was supposed to be meditating."
If the last paragraph isn't familiar to you, try meditating some more until you notice this experience happening to you.
What does this experience have to do with the aware state? Well, at the instant that you snap back to your senses, you are momentarily in the aware state.. An instant later you will probably begin to berate yourself for abandoning your meditation, causing you to slip back into the ordinary lost-in-thoughts state, but at the very moment in which you come back to yourself, you are in the aware state. (To be precise, you are closer to the aware state at that moment. It's really a matter of degree.)
Keep putting yourself in situations where this experience happens, and each time, try to notice the heightening of awareness that occurs at that moment.
(Incidentally, if you've ever been puzzled by the traditional instruction to look at the space between two thoughts, this is what it's refering to. At the moment I'm describing, your daydreaming just ended and your next thought hasn't yet carried you away.)
As you observe these moments more carefully, you'll begin to see that thinking and awareness are polar opposites. The more you have of one, the less you have of the other. At one end of the continuum, you are lost in thought. At the other end, you are aware.
You can learn to move voluntarily between these two states, but most people remain lost in thought during almost all of their waking hours. They never notice that the aware state exists.
As you observe the difference between the two states you will notice that when you are thinking, you aren't really conscious. This may sound strange, but you'll see for yourself that it's true. When we think, we are actually lost in thought and not aware. When we become aware, we emerge from thoughts. We stop being lost and find something — ourselves. This is why some people call the aware state "self remembering" or "knowing that you are." Try it, you'll see. These traditional terms make sense once you see what they refer to.
You'll also see why most forms of meditation are useless. Meditation only works if it gets you into the aware state, but most people stay in the lost-in-thoughts state when they do it.
Real meditation is remaining in the aware state continuosly."
Regards Murali
Friends,
The Following excerpt from Day By Day with Bhagavan-page 55 throws light on the implications of 'Who Am I'?
"I returned here last night. Maha Vir Prasad, Chief Engineer
to the U. P. Government who had been staying here for about
twenty days in October and November and who went on a
pilgrimage to Rameswaram and other places, is back here. In
continuation of an old question of his with reference to a certain
passage in Maha Yoga, he asked Bhagavan whether it was
necessary and a condition precedent for a man to watch his
breathing before beginning the mental quest ‘Who am I?’
Bhagavan: All depends on a man’s pakva, i.e., his
aptitude and fitness. Those who have not the mental strength
to concentrate or control their mind and direct it on the quest
are advised to watch their breathing, since such watching will
naturally and as a matter of course lead to cessation of thought
and bring the mind under control.
Breath and mind arise from the same place and when
one of them is controlled, the other is also controlled. As a
matter of fact, in the quest method — which is more correctly
‘Whence am I?’ and not merely ‘Who am I?’ — we are not
simply trying to eliminate saying ‘we are not the body, not
the senses and so on,’ to reach what remains as the ultimate
reality, but we are trying to find whence the ‘I’ thought for the
ego arises within us. The method contains within it, though
implicitly and not expressly, the watching of the breath. When
we watch wherefrom the ‘I’-thought, the root of all thoughts,
springs, we are necessarily watching the source of breath also,
as the ‘I’-thought and the breath arise from the same source."
The 'Self Enquiry' is breaking the chain of thoughts and switching over to a state of awareness.No isolation of 'I' thought and 'Holding' onto it is implied.Attention is part and parcel of this awareness.
The Point in repeatedly enquiring 'who am I'?is to just break the chain of thoughts and see whether this 'Switch over' happens.(Immediately,not after sometime).It is not as if one follows the 'chain' and arrives at the 'source'.Once the 'Switching over' happens,there is no further need for this nonverbal question.
-----------------------------------
A certain quietude of mind is a prerequisite for this to be effective.Otherwise it is not possible to effect the switch over.
Namaskar.
Friends,
I wish to share this excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna(Chapter 16:With The Devotees at Dakshineswar)-The Master says:
"One must have childlike faith-and the intense yearning that a child feels to see its mother. That yearning is like the red sky in the east at dawn. After such a sky the sun must rise. Immediately after that yearning one sees God.
"Let me tell you the story of a boy named Jatila. He used to walk to school through the woods, and the journey frightened him; One day he told his mother of his fear. She replied: 'Why should you be afraid? Call Madhusudana.' 'Mother,' asked the boy, 'who is Madhusudana?' The mother said, 'He is your Elder Brother.' One day after this, when the boy again felt afraid in the woods, he cried out, 'O Brother Madhusudana!' But there was no response. He began to weep aloud: 'Where are You, Brother Madhusudana? Come to me. I am afraid.' Then God could no longer stay away. He appeared before the boy and said: 'Here I am. Why are you frightened?' And so, saying He took the boy out of the woods and showed him the way to school. When He took leave of the boy, God said: 'I will come whenever you call Me. Do not be afraid.' One must have this faith of a child, this yearning."
....................
What is the impact of the words of the Master?We get to see a little later in that same chapter!
"Late at night M. sat alone in the nahabat. The sky, the river, the garden, the steeples of the temples; the trees, and the Panchavati were flooded with moonlight. Deep silence reigned everywhere, broken only by the melodious murmuring of the Ganges. M. was meditating on Sri Ramakrishna.
At three o'clock in the morning M. left his seat. He proceeded toward the Panchavati as Sri Ramakrishna. had suggested. He did not care for the nahabat any more and resolved to stay in the hut in the Panchavati.
Suddenly he heard a distant sound, as if someone were wailing piteously, "Oh, where art Thou, Brother Madhusudana?" The light of the full moon streamed through the thick foliage of the Panchavati, and as he proceeded he saw at a distance one of the Master's disciples sitting alone in the grove, crying helplessly, "Oh, where art Thou, Brother Madhusudana?"
Silently M. watched him."
-----------------------------------
I wish to add that 'Bhavana' is not the same as 'Kalpana'.I have seen quite often both the words translated as 'Imagination'.Kalpana is 'Imagination'/Fancy and is a mental product.
'Bhavana' is one's 'particular' Feeling of SOMETHING REAL.One may not have a full measure of this Reality but one may have a 'Hook' to hold onto it.
'Kalpana' belongs to the 'Future',something yet to come.
'Bhavana' is in the 'Present'.
When the Master tells in this story 'You Have an Elder Brother',he is saying something that is TRUE,in a manner that is accessible in Human Terms-A small beginning will lead to the Full Truth.
The above is 'bhavana'.Contrast this with the statement-'There is a Ghost in the Next Room'-This is Kalpana,as no such thing is Real.
----------------------------------
Namaskar.
Dear Nandu,
Thanks for your reply.
You say - "As I have read, from both David's explanation of SE and as recorded in 'Be As You Are', the technique of "attention on awareness of I" seems to be one of isolating the 'I' thought and holding on to that experience for as long as possible. In an interview, David has clarified that this experience will be but fleeting in the beginning."
I understand this technique of isolating the 'I' thought and holding on to it. But is that all enquiry? In my understanding, just holding on to the I-thought is more a mano-laya than mano-nasha. After reaching this 'I-am' (ego) awareness, isn't seeking the very source from where this I-thought arises, the true Self-enquiry? Please clarify.
I agree Ravi,
I first saw Arunachala on Nov 23 2008.
I was stunned to see such power.
That night I slowly crept to the terrace of Nannagaru ashram to spend some time with Arunachala. But seeing the overpowering infinite form of the Hill with a magnificent cloud hugging its peak, my knees shivered in fright and my spine froze to the bone, prostrating before an unknown Power which was emanating from the Hill.
I had to call my brother in law to sit beside me after some time for I was dead scared to see the Hill! My heart was throbbing like mad.
I felt a margin of that fear perhaps in front of Lord Venkateshwara in Tirupathi previously. But never to the intensity of Arunachala.
After that everytime I think of Arunachala...especially the first time I saw it and more so whence I saw it from the terrace of Nannagaru Asramam in the night, all alone...I shiver.
perhaps David can start an open thread about first sight of Arunachala and experiences and we all can chip in with our feelings.
thank you, thank you, thank you a million times for reminding me of my first sight of Arunachala.
Dear David,
I came across the below text from 'Be as you are' [Pg 45, Ch:Self enquiry-theory].
"Since the individual `I'-thought cannot exist without an object, if attention is focused on the subjective feeling of `I' or `I am' with such intensity that the thoughts `I am this' or `I am that' do not arise, then the individual `I' will be unable to connect with objects. If this awareness of `I' is sustained, the individual `I' (the `I'-thought) will disappear and in its place there will be a direct experience of the Self. This constant attention to the inner awareness of ` I ' or `I am' was called self-enquiry (vichara) by Sri Ramana"
Can you please elaborate on "constant attention to the inner awareness of 'I'"?
From what I have gathered from reading Maharshi's books for the last couple of years, I have understood that the actual enquiry is to seek the source of the 'I'-thought, as to from where it raises. The "attention on awareness of I", I have believed is a preliminary process, which helps gather higher concentration for actual enquiry. It will be great if you can quote from any of Maharshi's texts regarding this.
Thanks,
Srikantha.
Friends,
It is interesting to see what Sri Aurobindo has to say on 'Maya' and advaita(Letters on Yoga):
"People are apt to speak of the Adwaita as if it were identical
with Mayavada monism, just as they speak of Vedanta as
if it were identical with Adwaita only; that is not the case.
There are several forms of Indian philosophy which base
themselves upon the One Reality, but they admit also the reality
of the world, the reality of the Many, the reality of the
differences of the Many as well as the sameness of the One
(bhedÀbheda). But the Many exist in the One and by the One,
the differences are variations in manifestation of that which
is fundamentally ever the same. This we actually see as the
universal law of existence where oneness is always the basis
with an endless multiplicity and difference in the oneness;
as, for instance, there is one mankind but many kinds of man,
one thing called leaf or flower but many forms, patterns, colours
of leaf and flower. Through this we can look back into one
of the fundamental secrets of existence, the secret which is contained
in the one Reality itself. The oneness of the Infinite is not
something limited, fettered to its unity; it is capable of an infinite
multiplicity. The Supreme Reality is an Absolute not
limited by either oneness or multiplicity but simultaneously capable
of both; for both are its aspects, although the oneness
is fundamental and the multiplicity depends upon the oneness."
Sri Aurobindo's position is equally based on direct first hand experience(This word is used to indicate something Fundamental-not a Fleeting phenomena).This is supported by the verses in the Vedas and Upanishads-as much as the other Standpoints.
-----------------------------------
I have stated the above to just say that there are different views of Different Schools-and these schools were championed by persons who had Direct ,First Hand experience.
One may be inclined to prefer one school of thought-this is only natural.
Namaskar.
92 When attention is paid exclusively to the [infinite] space that never gets fragmented, the effect, the finite pot, will not shine at all. Therefore, it is an error to say that just because the pot moves, the space within the pot moves as well.
93 Since in the plenitude of the Self the imperfections – the inert body and the world that comprise the non-Self – will never exist and shine, it is not logical to say that the Self too experiences the movements of that body and world, which are bound for destruction.
94 The Self abides motionless because of its all-pervasive fullness. Because the apparent connection between the Self and the mind-limitation seems to exist on account of ignorance – which is the jiva-perspective, the reflected consciousness that rises as ‘I’ – the Self too appears to have experienced movement through the motion of the mind. But the movement of samsara that comprises birth and death, bondage and liberation, and so on, is only for the jiva and never for the Self, the transcendental reality.
Muruganar: The reason why the Self remains motionless is because of its nature as all-pervasive fullness. It only appears to have moved on account of the movement of the mind. In agitated water the reflected image of the sun appears to move, but that agitation is only in the reflection and not in the real sun.
95 If it is asked, ‘How has the Supreme Self, the one without a second, come to possess the limitation of the mind, the form of ignorance?’ the reply is, ‘The limitation has attached itself only through the deluded jiva-perspective. In truth, it never attached itself to the Self, consciousness.’
Muruganar: In the same way that, through confusion, a rope is perceived as a snake, consciousness appears as mind through the delusion of the jiva. When one enquires into the matter, no such entity as mind will be seen to exist at all separate from consciousness. Like someone questioning a kind person who looks after his parents very well, ‘How did you acquire this habit of annoying your parents?’ the question itself is fundamentally inappropriate.
96 The little jiva will not rise as a tiny separate ‘I’-entity from the supreme reality that is the plenitude of consciousness. Only from a ball of fire of finite size can tiny sparks split off, fly away and fall to the ground.
Editor’s note: Since consciousness is all pervasive, nothing can arise from within it and then become separate from it. The idea of a separate jiva is therefore just an erroneous idea that arises through ignorance.
97 The body itself does not exist in the unrestricted view of the real Self, but only in outward-turned attention, which is the perspective of the mind that has become deluded through the expansion of maya. Therefore, it is wrong to call the Self, which is the vast expanse of consciousness, the owner-occupier of the body.
Friends,
The Latest discussions in this thread is revolving around 'Nitya-Anitya' Viveka(Discrimination) And 'Mumukshutva'.It is helpful to recall what LMM(Scott) had posted on 29 06 2009 (in the other open Thread).I am copying it here for our benefit:
"Bookworm, on yearning for REalization
From Collected Works:
Maharshi's translation of Crest Jewel of Discrimination by Adi Shankara:
Liberation in the form of abidance as the Self, born of that wisdom, is not to be attained except as a result of righteous actions performed throughout countless crores of births.
However, even though all the above qualifications may not be obtained, Liberation is assured through the Grace of the Lord if only three conditions are obtained: that is a human birth, ***intense desire for liberation***, and association with Sages.
It goes on to say...The qualifications are enumerated as follows
1. Discrimination between the Real and Unreal.(
2. Disinclination to enjoy the fruits of one's actions either in this or any future life.
3.The six virtues of tranquility, self-control, withdrawal, forbearance, faith, and concentration of the Self.
4. ***Intense yearning for Liberation***
Nome (who supposedly Realized the Self) wrote a pamphlet on these entitled the Four Requisites for Realization and Self-Inquiry.
What he had to say (part of) on the fourth Intense yearning for Liberation;
The desire for Liberation functions as the fuel for one's spiritual practice. If all sorts of attributes are present, even the other requisites mentioned, but there is a lack of desire for Liberation, actual advancement, as determined by the degree of freedom from misidentification, will be slow, if at all.
If though, the aspirant would have none of the other requisites or beneficial attributes, but was endowed with an intense desire for Liberation, the other needed requisites and such would manifest in due course of the practice of Self-inquiry. When the requisites are practiced fueled by the desire for Liberation, the highest good results."
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
Ramos/Friends,
What is the 'Motivation' in the present moment?
.
... Now this sort of a 'boon'(?!) will take the sting out of the Transitoriness of Existence. What happens in this case? What will be the 'Motivating' factor? ...
The answer for this is given in part II, verse 1 and 2:
"Yama said: The good is one thing and the pleasant another. These two, having different ends, bind a man. It is well with him who chooses the good. He who chooses the pleasant misses the true end."
"The good and the pleasant approach man; the wise examines both and discriminates between them; the wise prefers the good to the pleasant, but the foolish man chooses the pleasant through love of bodily pleasure."
Death is our true master - there is no other then the King of Death because he makes us discriminate between the perishable and the unperishable, between eternity and wordliness.
Someone having a human master since a long time but still is unable to discriminate has to admit that his master obviously is unable to teach this point. The human master may utter a fruitless stream of words related to enlightenment but when death comes we will understand immediately.
.
anonymous to Maneesha,
I thought your comment about self enquiry was really good and clearly explained.
Still we must remember that Ramana Maharshi plunged deep within useing self enquiry because of intense fear. Fear was the catalyst! Only a rare man like that can face it headon.
Friends,
There has been a good deal of discussions on the 'How' of Self Enquiry.
Much more fundamental is 'why' we pursue any practice at all.What is 'motivating' us?
'Love' is one of the fundamental 'motivators'-We want to 'love' and be 'loved'-This basic attraction is the basis for the 'Path of Devotion'.
Likewise,why one wants to do 'self enquiry'?unless this is understood,the 'how' becomes ineffective.
I am keen to learn what you have to share regarding this.I understand that Scott has shared to a great extent-to break all 'shackles'(i.e one must have deeply felt these SHACKLES)and be FREE-There is this 'intense desire' for freedom.
-----------------------------------
Salutations.
Attention Bookworm
I have been deleting most of your comments recently because I find them to be inexcusably rude and offensive in tone. I think I have probably moderated out six in the last twenty-four hours alone. You are the primary reason why moderation exists on this blog. I haven't been keeping track, but I suspect I decline to publish less than one comment a month by other contributors.
I have finally had enough of the sneering contempt you persistently show towards other contributors, their teachers and their opinions. Irrespective of what you write, I will not be posting any of your comments here for three months.
If you are willing to engage with other contributors in a more civilised and respectful way, you can try again in mid-October.
.
Thinking aloud:
A Variation of the World
It is the restlessness of the mind causing the appearance of the world. The minds tries to express itself, it will speak, and by doing so and by aquiring the necessary means the human world appears. Why one talks? Why people talk with each other? They are seeing the world and because of their perceptions they can't bear to remain silent.
While abandoning the silence they deform the original world - made up of birds and flowers, rivers and mountains -, they create kind of a new world, a variation of the original world.
After living some time in this kind of an artificial world they abandon all their efforts therein and return to this ineffable space - being neither silence nor emptiness - which exists before, during and after this new world.
Isn't it therefore true to state that the origin of this world is nothing else then nervousness?
.
Nice comment Clemens
Dear Losing M. Mind.
President Obama is a mature and intelligent man but to jump to the
conclusion that he is a Jnani is perhaps somewhat premature.
Dear David,
Perhaps you would consider including Uma Devi in your big Maurice Frydman project mentioned elsewhere. MF was her very close friend and associate in many projects. Sri Bhagavan’s devotees, though familiar with her from “Talks” or “Day by Day”, may not realize how extraordinary a lady she was. In many ways, much like MF, she led a life which is astonishing in its scope and influence. Her story is yet to be written.
Briefly, for those who may not know:
Umadevi, or Wanda Dynowska, was the chief of the Theosophical society, Poland in the 1920s. A great scholar of her times, she was the Professor of Slavonic Literature at the University of Madrea, and translated a whole host of Indian spiritual literature, from the Bhagavadgita to the Thirukural into Polish. For this purpose MF and WD created the “Polish-Indian Libraries” with perhaps as many as a 100+ books/articles published, an astonishing feat in itself for just 2 people.
Together they met virtually every Indian political and spiritual luminary of that time, for instance, Sri J. Krishnamurti, Mahatma Gandhi, the Dalai Lama etc. Gandhiji’s collected works, contains many letters written by him to WD ( & MF ) . The Dalai Lama has also spoken about her very fondly many times. WD was to later die in Tibet, trying to do help Tibetan children caught up in the Chinese purges.
Few also would know that she was the early influence in Poland in the spiritual life of one Mieczyslaw (one of the several first-names used by him) Sudowski, later on to be well known to Sri Bhagavan devotees as Mouni Sadhu, from Australia.
regards
We are all searching for something which does not exit at all.
We have so many answers / solutions, a real solution / answers should have wiped out all our questions.
Either the question should end or an answer should end all our questions.
Ashtavakara Gita - Only by forgetting all the knowledge one can free. Otherwise even if Siva / Brahama becomes your guru, it is of no use.
Post a Comment