The most recent 'Open Thread' seems to be misbehaving: comments made in the last few days are not displaying, and the number of comments is clearly wrong. The same thing happened a few months ago. I am starting a new thread. If the old 'Open Thread' continues to misbehave and not show your recent posts, feel free to add them to this newly opened thread.
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.
871 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 871 Newer› Newest»Ravi said:
"Firstly,the subject of 'Earning' money has been raised not with a view to judge others;but to understand whether there are guiding principles for us.
Do we have to leave this to 'our judgement' or 'prarabda' or are there definitive principles or guidelines that are available?
The Answer to this is YES,there are definitive guidelines available."
Ravi, thank you for clarifying your point of view! Yes, I certainly understand that there are guidelines available. Most people in the world have grown up with religion of one sort or another, and all the major religions have guidelines for how to live one's life according to acceptable standards of decency towards others and oneself. Not everyone chooses to embrace these, but I think most people have some degree of these principles embedded in them, whether they realize it or not, and therefore would draw on that when making decisions about how to earn money. For those who choose not to follow those guidelines... well, 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink!'
The point I was making about judging others was simply to say that it is a potential pitfall for those who might find fault with the chosen livelihoods of others. And of course, in addition to guidelines around acceptable ways to earn a living, there are also principles about not judging others!
I suspect that you and I are not far apart in the way we view this subject. It's just a matter of what we each focus on and what we each think to include in our comments.
"He taught us that if we maintain an inner silence and have faith in God’s providence, everything we need will come to us automatically."
Somehow, the whole topic of this silent surrender and the effects of it on outer circumstances is intriguing. I personally had experiences which collaborate this but I am at a loss to know as to how to simulate this attitude and maintain it.
I am compelled to share a small experience with all of you.
A few years back, I was living in Finland and was moving back to India. I used to go to Satya Sai organisation there, which has a few Finns doing Bhajans in Finnish. They are all aged. One winter, while shifting my residence, I wanted to give off lots of my used stuff to one of those Finns who regularly goes to Russia to donate things. On a cold, dark evening at around 1130PM, I loaded my car with such stuff and went to the apartment of one of this Finn. In the hurry, I lost the phone number, the apartment number of this person. I was standing on a completely empty road wondering what to do. Finnish roads are empty even during day time and you can imagine the desert like atmosphere on a winter night. My flight in the morning is at 4PM and this is my last chance. Somehow, my mind was in a complete state of resignation to the Lord not thinking of any possibility. I was just waiting there without any reason or expectation. After 5 minutes, I saw an old lady walking slowly towards the building next to me. I went to her and asked her that I am looking for a particular person named Eila who lives in that building but I do not know any more details. She told that she is going to Eila's house for some work and would be very happy to help me in getting into the apartment. I could finally deliver all the stuff at around midnight.
This might be a case of pure coincidence but for me, it is too much to be a coincidence.
I wonder how can I be in a similar kind of surrender attitude for other pressing things in life and what might be the consequences of that.
This whole topic of attitude of surrender and its impact on circumstances is very mysterious.
Regards Murali
"....one could say that if one abides as the Self with the conviction that there is a higher power that arranges for all the necessary things to be supplied, then one need not go looking for them because they will arrive unasked."
If I may ask, can we share amongst ourselves some experiences demonstrating this above principle? It moves me to hear genuine experiences of this kind.
Regards Murali
David/Friends,
David ,thanks very much for those wonderful posts on Sri Bhagavan.
Yes,not just the masters that you have encountered did not charge any fee or solicited donations;this is true of all Masters.This is a vast subject-I would like to share some key teachings as laid out in the Sanathana Dharma(not Hinduism!).I will try to get hold of some good translation of the Talks of The Sage of Kanchi-One of the very Best Exemplars and expounder of this hoary wisdom and Practice.
Coming to Fake Gurus,how often people wonder whether it is not a 'antisocial menace' and whether not the Government should step in,just like it regulates that only 'Genuine Doctors' should Practice and 'Quacks' should be legally proceeded against.I came across this lovely incident!
“Once Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati Swami of Kanchi Mutt (Sri Periyava) had camped in North India. The then Prime Minister, Smt. Indira Gandhi, came to have His darshan.
The Prime Minister of India placed a similar question in front of Sri Periyava, “If you would pinpoint the persons who, in the name of spirituality, lead the people in a wrong way I will take action against them.” Sri Periyava laughed and said, “No! It should not be handled in this manner. Those who approach such fake swamis will themselves, after a time, understand their standard of maturity.”
Sri Periyava knew that this reply did not satisfy Smt. Indira Gandhi. Someone had offered a basket full of mangoes to Periyava. It contained many unripe and a few ripe fruits. Many devotees waited outside for Sri Periyava’s darshan. Sri Periyava instructed the attendants to bring a child from amongst these devotees. A child of about 5 years was brought to Him. Pointing to the basket Periyava smilingly said to the child, “Take whatever you want.” After a search the child picked up a ripe fruit.
Sri Periyava pointed out to Smt.Indira Gandhi who was watching this, “Just as the way a child knows what is ripe and what is unripe, so too would those who go out in search of Truth recognize a true Mahan at some point of their life.”
The Sage of Kanchi,described as the 'Only Monk' of the century by The Dalai Lama,has covered all aspects of Living covering the entire Spectrum,in his wonderful Talks given over a 60 year period.These are available in Tamil as Deivathin Kural(Voice of Divinity)
I have had plenty of experiences that have left no doubt in me, as to there being some kind of, I suppose it could be called divine current or maybe providence that directs things. Earlier in life, I would have these really intensely deep spiritual experiences. One example, is I had (still have) a best friendship that was (still is) very strong. And throughout my early twenties i would have these deep spiritual experiences, egoloss experiences that were very frightening to me. I was worried I was going insane. I've mentioned them already. I've suspected it's related to samadhi, and then fear of it. Regardless, I would run into this friend, when I was in this state, in different parts of the country, where it seemed highly unlikely. That's been one of the most positive examples of this, is I run into connections with people I want to run into when I'm in more spirituall open states. Now, with inquiry, I feel like I have more pro-active say, in how deep of spiritual state I abide in, which is nice. But yeah, lots of odd, uncanny, auspicious things happen when I abide in a deeper place. It reminds me of what David Godman said in one of the interviews with him. When one serves gurus, god foots the bill. That really makes sense to me. And maybe that is how faith is increased. I see more and more, that things are better taken care of when I am more in a state of surrender of my ego.
When the flower blooms the bees come uninvited.
Does an effulgent being need your cash?
Does a business man need your cash, you know the answer to that.
Spirituality cannot be reduced to a commercial transaction.
hj
Many years ago we were sitting in a Bombay lobby (killing time) waiting for our late flight to depart. Looking out a large picture window we saw a badly crippled beggar working like a beaver, helping people in and out of their cars, he tried his very best. Surveying the scene we decided he was most worthy recipient of all our left over Indian currency.
We bundled up all the coins and notes and decided to give it to him.
Suddenly out of nowhere a savage storm arrived with driving rain and everyone in the street fled including the beggar.
There was no one left, the huge crowd had vanished, the beggar had vanished.
The best laid plans of mice and men.....
hj
Friends,
I wish to share some excerpts from the Swami Vivekananda's 'My Master'.The Great Master succinctly brings out the important Facets of Sanatana Dharma-especially the Varna Ashrama Dharma.This is something that sets apart the 'Eternal Dharma' from all other Religions.I am alluding to Jupes mentioning about how all religions have the Do's and Don't Principles set forth-Yet they are in the form of 'moral Precepts';Further they are uniformly advocated to all and Sundry.There is no such a thing as 'Adhikari' Beda-Prequalification for following an Injunction.
For Instance when Jesus says:'But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also'-For Whom this is meant?Who can Rightly Practice it?Religion may not have answer to these questions.People in general appreciate these 'ideas' as very noble,beautiful-Yet when it comes to practice,there is a Huge confusion.Then one starts depending on 'one's Conscience'-which is only a Product of one's conditioning,and hence not reliable.
The wonderful Bhagavad Gita springs out of the inadequacy of this 'conscience' in the Life of Arjuna.Life throws challenges where no moral precept or 'conscience' is of help;one is FORCED into making choices and Decisions.What to do?
Sanatana Dharma addresses all these 'Uncertainties' and Lays Down PRINCIPLES(of Dharma).Dharma is the natural predisposition of an individual-Like the dharma of Fire is to burn,of water is to wet.
Likewise it recognises that Human Nature is VARIED and it sort of broadly classifies the Race into Four Archetypes-based on a Division of Labour as Brahmin,Kshatriya(Kings and warriors),Vaisya(Trade and Commerce) and Sudra(Service Providers).Each of these 'temperaments' have an associated Dharma,that springs NATURALLY from their predisposition and aids in taking them further along their line of development.
With this bit of introduction,we will be equipped to appreciate what Vivekananda says.
------continued--------------
Friends,
Excerpts from 'My Master':
"If you wish to be a true reformer, three things are necessary. The first is to feel. Do you really feel that there is so much misery in the world, so much ignorance and superstition? Do you really feel that men are your brothers? Does this idea come into your whole being? Does it run with your blood? Does it tingle in your veins? Does it course through every nerve and filament of your body? Are you full of that idea of sympathy? If you are, that is only the first step. You must think next if you have found any remedy. The old ideas may be all superstition, but in and around these masses of superstition are nuggets of gold and truth. Have you discovered means by which to keep that gold alone, without any of the dross? If you have done that, that is only the second step; one more thing is necessary. What is your motive? Are you sure that you are not actuated by greed of gold, by thirst for fame or power? Are you really sure that you can stand to your ideals and work on, even if the whole world wants to crush you down? Are you sure you know what you want and will perform your duty, and that alone, even if your life is at stake? Are you sure that you will persevere so long as life endures, so long as there is one pulsation left in the heart? Then you are a real reformer, you are a teacher, a Master, a blessing to mankind. But man is so impatient, so short-sighted! He has not the patience to wait, he has not the power to see. He wants to rule, he wants results immediately. Why? He wants to reap the fruits himself, and does not really care for others."
-----------------------------------
I wish to say this.There is a Human frailty of vanity and self aggradizement-the moment it glimpses an 'idea',the moment it touches the tip of an iceberg,it thinks that it has the Full measure of It and now one has to start one's mission!Vivekananda has beautifully addressed this.
Namaskar.
Friends,
Excerpts from 'My Master':
" While he was quite young, his father died; and the boy was sent to school. A Brahmin's boy must go to school; the caste restricts him to a learned profession only. The old system of education in India, still prevalent in many parts of the country, especially in connection with Sannyasins, is very different from the modern system. The students had not to pay. It was thought that knowledge is so sacred that no man ought to sell it. Knowledge must be given freely and without any price. The teachers used to take students without charge, and not only so, most of them gave their students food and clothes. To support these teachers the wealthy families on certain occasions, such as a marriage festival, or at the ceremonies for the dead, made gifts to them. They were considered the first and foremost claimants to certain gifts; and they in their turn had to maintain their students. So whenever there is a marriage, especially in a rich family, these professors are invited, and they attend and discuss various subjects. This boy went to one of these gatherings of professors, and the professors were discussing various topics, such as logic or astronomy, subjects much beyond his age. The boy was peculiar, as I have said, and he gathered this moral out of it: "This is the outcome of all their knowledge. What are they fighting so hard? It is simply for money; the man who can show the highest learning here will get the best pair of cloth, and that is all these people are struggling for. I will not go to school any more." And he did not; that was the end of his going to school."
-----------------------------------
Sri Ramakrishna could not(not would not!)touch money;he could not tie a knot in his Dhoti!(There were no Bags and people who used to wear Dhotis used to fold them and carry things purchased or Gifted by bundling it in their Dhotis!My Uncle who passed away a few years back used to do this).
Once Naren as a Boy wanted to test whether Sri Ramakrishna could not bear the touch of 'coins'.He secretly kept a few coins under the Master's bed when Sri Ramakrishna was away to the kali temple.When Sri Ramakrishna came and sat on his bed,he immediately jumped up as if bitten by a scorpion!Naren sheepishly took back the coins from under the bed.
Namaskar.
Friends,
Excerpt from 'My Master':
But this boy had an elder brother, a learned professor, who took him to Calcutta, however, to study with him. After a short time the boy became fully convinced that the aim of all scholar learning was mere material advancement, and nothing more, and he resolved to give up study and devote himself solely to the pursuit of spiritual knowledge. The father being dead, the family was very poor; and this boy had to make his own living. He went to a place near Calcutta and became a temple priest. To become a temple priest is thought very degrading to a Brahmin. Our temples are not churches in your sense of the word, they are not places for public worship; for, properly speaking, there is no such thing as public worship in India. Temples are erected mostly by rich persons as a meritorious religious act.
If a man has much property, he wants to build a temple. In that he puts a symbol or an image of an Incarnation of God, and dedicates it to worship in the name of God. The worship is akin to that which is conducted in Roman Catholic churches, very much like the mass, reading certain sentences from the sacred books, waving a light before the image, and treating the image in very respect as we treat a great man. This is all that is done in the temple. The man who goes to a temple is not considered thereby a better man than he who never goes. More properly, the latter is considered the more religious man, for religion in India is to each man his own private affair. In the house of every man there is either a little chapel, or a room set apart, and there he goes morning and evening, sits down in a corner, and there does his worship. And this worship is entirely mental, for another man does not hear or know what he is doing. He sees him only sitting there, and perhaps moving his fingers in a peculiar fashion, or closing his nostrils and breathing in a peculiar manner. Beyond that, he does not know what his brother is doing; even his wife, perhaps, will not know. Thus, all worship is conducted in the privacy of his own home. Those who cannot afford to have a chapel go to banks of a river, or a lake, or the sea if they live at the seaside, but people sometimes go to worship in a temple by making salutation to the image. There their duty to the temple ends. Therefore, you see, it has been held from the most ancient times in our country, legislated upon by Manu, that it is a degenerating occupation to become a temple priest. Some of the books say it is so degrading as to make a Brahmin worthy of reproach. Just as with education, but in a far more intense sense with religion, there is the other idea behind it that the temple priests who take fees for their work are making merchandise of sacred things. So you may imagine the feelings of that boy when he was forced through poverty to take up the only occupation open to him, that of a temple priest."
-----------------------------------
This is a wonderful story-How Providence had neatly 'planned' everything for a Great Master soul to Flower and spread its fragrance-How this temple was just then built by Rani Rasmani,how Gadhadar(Sri Ramakrishna)came to Calcutta to be appointed as a Priest,how he was soon absorbed in a flurry of Sadhana,How Great Teachers came to teach him in this very spot,How the 'teachers' were taught by the 'disciple',How Sri Ramakrishna was atonce a householder and a Sanyasi,...!!!-This is a one of its kind,inspirational Story.
Namaskar.
Friends,
I came across this interesting article by Sri Rajneesh about Fake Swamis.Good Humour!instructive too.
Please vist :
http://www.oshoteachings.com/2009/03/osho-discourse-on-pseudo-masters-and-fake-gurus/
Namaskar.
Neem karoli baba: A young fellow once came and Maharajji asked him how he was, and he said: "Oh, Maharajji, I've overcome anger." Maharajji said: "Very good," and kept praising him. At that time, there was another fellow present who had been asking Maharajji for many years to come to his house, but Maharajji had never come because the boy's father did not believe in sadhus (ascetics). But now Maharajji suddenly agreed. The whole party went to the boy's house and Maharajji sat on a cot belonging to the boy's father. Then Maharajji leaned over, looked the father in the eye and said in Hindi: "You're a great saint." But he used the personal form, which you use only to intimate friends or to people of lower caste. So it was really an insult. The old man got upset but held himself together. A little time passed and Maharajji leaned over once again and said: "You're a great saint." The father's temper was rising by the minute, but he still kept control. A few minutes later, Maharajji said the same thing again. This time the father screamed at Maharajji: "You're no saint. You just eat people's food, and take their beds. You're a phony." At this point, the young fellow who had overcome anger leaped to his feet, grabbed the father and started shaking him, saying: "Shut up, you don't know who you're talking to. He's a great saint. If you don't shut up now, I'll kill you." Now Maharajji got up, looked around bewildered and said: "What's the matter? Don't they want me here? We should go—they don't want me here." So he got up and started walking out. On his way, he turned to the young fellow and said: "It's very difficult to overcome anger. Even some of the greatest saints don't overcome anger." The fellow said: "But Maharajji, he was abusing you!" "That's right," Maharajji said. "But why were you angry?"
It's interesting, there is this open air christian preacher on my campus who is really confrontational and offensive. But I've listened to him, and to a large extent his understanding of the new testement seems deep, kind of impressive. (he's so willing to go outside of established mores, there is kind of this silly inclination on my part to wonder if he could be a jnani, a crazy saint) And anyway, I read his stuff and he was talking about the importance of keeping the torah. Now, he also says xenophobic things, or disregarding other religions that I don't agree with. But there was some parallels, with kind of a core discipline. I think the yamas in yoga like ahimsa for instance. In Self-inquiry by Ramana Maharshi, he kind of goes through how the yamas are kind of in a sense it seems like the beginner practice, leading up to samadhi and Self-inquiry and finally sahaja samadhi. Maharshi's gospel, and Day by Day with Bhagavan I think glow with grace. So does Song Of Ribhu. But the popularity of the New Testement, and then some of the old testement verses this person sent me comprising the torah also seems to glow similarly with grace. Torah is similar with the yamas. Accepting Christ into one's heart, is the same as complete surrender that Maharshi speaks of. Maharshi said so himself. Self-Realization being Christ Consciousness according to him. At the highest level, it's interesting how all religions are the same religion. As Maharshi said silence beneficiently supports them all. More and more, it is easy for me to see the unitary-ness in the division.
Friends,
Excerpt from 'My Master':
'Religion is not talk, or doctrines, or theories; nor is it sectarianism. Religion cannot live in sects and societies. It is the relation between the soul and God; how can it be made into a society? It would then degenerate into business, and wherever there are business and business principles in religion, spirituality dies. Religion does not consist in erecting temples, or building churches, or attending public worship. It is not to be found in books, or in words, or in lectures, or in organizations. Religion consists in realization. As a fact, we all know that nothing will satisfy us until we know the truth for ourselves. However we may argue, however much we may hear, but one thing will satisfy us, and that is our own realization; and such an experience is possible for every one of us if we will only try. The first ideal of this attempt to realize religion is that of renunciation. As far as we can, we must give up. Darkness and light, enjoyment of the world and enjoyment of God will never go together. "Ye cannot serve God and Mammon." Let people try it if they will, and I have seen millions in every country who have tried; but after all, it comes to nothing. If one word remains true in the saying, it is, give up everything for the sake of the Lord. This is a hard and long task, but you can begin it here and now. Bit by bit we must go towards it.
The second idea that I learnt from my Master, and which is perhaps the most vital, is the wonderful truth that the religions of the world are not contradictory or antagonistic. They are but various phases of one eternal religion. That one eternal religion is applied to different planes of existence, is applied to the opinions of various minds and various races. There never was my religion or yours, my national religion or your national religion; there never existed many religions, there is only the one. One infinite religion existed all through eternity and will ever exist, and this religion is expressing itself in various countries in various ways. Therefore we must respect all religions and we must try to accept them all as far as we can. Religions manifest themselves not only according to race and geographical position, but according to individual powers. In one man religion is manifesting itself as intense activity, as work. In another it is manifesting itself as intense devotion, in yet another, as mysticism, in others as philosophy, and so forth. It is wrong when we say to others, "Your methods are not right." Perhaps a man, whose nature is that of love, thinks that the man who does good to others is not on the right road to religion, because it is not his own way, and is therefore wrong. If the philosopher thinks, "Oh, the poor ignorant people, what do they know about a God of Love, and loving Him? They do not know what they mean," he is wrong, because they may be right and he also.
To learn this central secret that the truth may be one and yet many at the same time, that we may have different visions of the same truth from different standpoints, is exactly what must be done. Then, instead of antagonism to anyone, we shall have infinite sympathy with all. Knowing that as long as there are different natures born in this world, the same religious truth will require different adaptations, we shall understand that we are bound to have forbearance with each other. Just as nature is unity in variety--an infinite variation in the phenomenal--as in and through all these variations of the phenomenal runs the Infinite, the Unchangeable, the Absolute Unity, so it is with every man; the microcosm is but a miniature repetition of the macrocosm; in spite of all these variations, in and through them all runs this eternal harmony, and we have to recognize this. This idea, above all other ideas, I find to be the crying necessity of the day.'
-----------------------------------
Namaskar
Friends,
Excerpt from 'My Master':
'The only true teacher is he who can convert himself, as it were, into a thousand persons at a moment's notice. The only true teacher is he who can immediately come down to the level of the student, and transfer his soul to the student's soul and see through the student's eyes and hear through his ears and understand through his mind. Such a teacher can really teach and none else. All these negative, breaking-down, destructive teachers that are in the world can never do any good.
In the presence of my Master, I found out that man could be perfect, even in this body. Those lips never cursed anyone, never even criticized anyone. Those eyes were beyond the possibility of seeing evil, that mind had lost the power of thinking evil. He saw nothing but good. That tremendous purity, that tremendous renunciation is the one secret of spirituality. "Neither through wealth, nor through progeny, but through renunciation alone, is immortality to be reached", say the Vedas. "Sell all that thou hast and give to the poor, and follow me", says the Christ. So all great saints and Prophets have expressed it, and have carried it out in their lives. How can great spirituality come without that renunciation? Renunciation is the background of all religious thought wherever it be, and you will always find that as this idea of renunciation lessens, the more will the senses creep into that field of religion, and spirituality will decrease in the same ratio.'
-----------------------------------
I have often wondered how prophetic these words of Vivekananda are!
Namaskar.
Laugh, it wasn't so easy for this person to see the unitariness in the division.
I think because largely out of necessity, I seek to face the truth, and I seek to look within, and I seek to inquire earnestly. I'm not always good about it. But often this is the case.
But it's amazing to me sometimes, how the opposite is true it seems for lots of people, that they run from truth, avoid it, rationalize it away. Someone says something bad has happened, many people go "it'll be alright". What if it won't?
A sage, might say, i would think, the wisdom of being disidentified, but would not necessarily reassure a person about a situation that might not turn out for the better. "oh you'll beat the cancer". If it may not be true.
Specifically I posted something about how I don't like big social situations because of autistic spectrum issues. And someone said, "but you may meet someone you'd never knew you'd meet". It's like...difficulty acknowledging the facts of a situation. It's true...But that doesn't change the facts.
That seems really common. Even that Christian guy, it's like his focus so intensely on the truth he believes, and violently turning away people who even threaten his worldview, with a different perspective. If it's the truth, it doesn't need my validation. That's the beauty of Maharshi's teachings. I can deny a situation, but why? Maharshi's teachings are focusing on something self-evident and real, that infact all we need to do is stop validating false-hoods, and false realities, and it stands alone as real. That is different, from the way alot of people approach their religions. Even though Maharshi speaks of God, he is speaking of something self-evident that he infact advises questioners to forget about God, find themselves first, because the Self is God. He is saying reality exists and is self-evident, does not need validation, which seems so much more sane, then the Christian guy who says validate my religious ideology, or burn in the lake of fire. If God is God, and omnipotent, why does he need me to validate some ideology, some way of thinking. I love that Maharshi's teachings are about something self-evident, real, that one can repose oneself in. That is why Maharshi's teachings strike me as being true, and the highest truth that can possibly be articulated.
I still struggle with what Self-inquiry is, and how to do it.
There he was again,
This time on a visit to a relatives house,
talking about spiritual awakening,
When someone asked him,
'Why does it only happen to some people?"
Why did it happen to you and not to me,
and not to Mr so and so and Miss so and so?"
And by way of answer he said
You know orthodox Muslim women
Hide their bodies under a burqua, the big flowing robe,
Which covers them from head to foot.
The womans identity is a secret,
and you don't know is who inside the burqua
But the secret is revealed when she reaches home
and removes her burqua.
In the same way
all earthly names and forms are burquas
Hiding the sole reality
Especially the human form,
Is a very good burqua indeed
In the drama of spiritual evolution.
This burqua is worn through many lives
Until the hour of revelation,
When the light within shines forth
So brightly and clearly,
Through some particular human form,
That the burqua is a good as removed!
Then people call him
a Sage , a Siddha, a Jivanmukta.
Such a one was Ramana,
The sweet one,
known to his devotees
Simply as Bhagavan.
Under the burqua of
The boy Venkataraman,
He stealthly slipped into Tiruvannamalai,
Into the waiting arms of Arunachala.
No it wasn't Venkataraman
Who came to Arunachala,
It was Arunachala coming to Arunachala,
In human form
Coming to that same reality
In mountain form.
This poem written by a Parsi devotee in an old edition of The Mountain path.
The poem was obviously written in less radical times.
Friends,
What is Dispassion?Sri Ramakrishna used to say that it is not only Unattachment to the worldly objects;it is also attachment to God.Both these aspects coexist-only then it is dispassion.A temporary recoil or disinterestedness from the objects of the world is only an aspect of Tamas.
Here is a wonderful excerpt from the Chapter 8 of the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna,Sunday February 18,1883-The Master's Birthday Celebrations:
Sri Ramakrishna arrived at Govinda Mukherji's house at Belgharia, near Calcutta. Besides Narendra, Ram, and other devotees, some of Govinda's neighbours were present. The Master first sang and danced with the devotees. After the kirtan they sat down. Many saluted the Master. Now and then he would say, "Bow before God."
Master's attitude toward the wicked
"It is God alone", he said, "who has become all this. But in certain places- for instance, in a holy man-there is a greater manifestation than in others. You may say, there are wicked men also. That is true, even as there are tigers and lions; but one need not hug the 'tiger God'. One should keep away from him and salute him from a distance. Take water, for instance. Some water may be drunk, some may be used for worship, some for bathing, and some only for washing dishes."
'Paths of knowledge and devotion'
A NEIGHBOUR: "Revered sir, what are the doctrines of Vedanta?"
MASTER: "The Vedantist says, 'I am He.' Brahman is real and the world illusory. Even the 'I' is illusory. Only the Supreme Brahman exists.
"But the 'I' cannot be got rid of. Therefore it is good to have the feeling, 'I am the servant of God, His son, His devotee.'
"For the Kāli Yuga the path of bhakti is especially good. One can realize God through bhakti too. As long as one is conscious of the body, one is also conscious of objects. Form, taste, smell, sound, and touch-these are the objects. It is extremely difficult to get rid of the consciousness of objects. And one cannot realize 'I am He' as long as one is aware of objects.
"The sannyasi is very little conscious of worldly objects. But the householder is always engrossed in them. Therefore it is good for him to feel, 'I am the servant of God.'"
------continued--------------
Friends,
The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna Ctd....
'God's name destroys sin'
NEIGHBOUR: "Sir, we are sinners. What will happen to us?"
MASTER: "All the sins of the body flyaway if one chants the name of God and sings His glories. The birds of sin dwell in the tree of the body. Singing the name of God is like clapping your hands. As, at a clap of the hands, the birds in the tree flyaway, so do our sins disappear at the chanting of God's name and glories.
"Again, you find that the water of a reservoir dug in a meadow is evaporated by the heat of the sun. Likewise, the water of the reservoir of sin is dried up by the singing of the name and glories of God.
"You must practise it every day. The other day, at the circus, I saw a horse running at top speed, with an Englishwoman standing on one foot on its back. How much she must have practised to acquire that skill!
"Weep at least once to see God.
"These, then, are the two means: practice and passionate attachment to God, that is to say, restlessness of the soul to see Him."
Sri Ramakrishna began his midday meal with the devotees. It was about one o'clock. A devotee sang in the courtyard below:
Awake, Mother! Awake! How long Thou hast been asleep
In the lotus of the Muladhara!
Fulfil Thy secret function, Mother:
Rise to the thousand-petalled lotus within the head,
Where mighty Śiva has His dwelling;
Swiftly pierce the six lotuses
And take away my grief, O Essence of Consciousness!
Hearing the song, Sri Ramakrishna went into samādhi; his whole body became still, and his hand remained touching the plate of food. He could eat no more. After a long time his mind came down partially to the plane of the sense world, and he said, "I want to go downstairs." A devotee led him down very carefully. Still in an abstracted mood, he sat near the singer. The song had ended. The Master said to him very humbly, "Sir, I want to hear the chanting of the Mother's name again."
The musician sang:
Awake, Mother! Awake! How long Thou hast been asleep
In the lotus of the Muladhara! . . .
The Master again went into ecstasy.
-----------------------------------
'his whole body became still, and his hand remained touching the plate of food. He could eat no more'
"Sir, I want to hear the chanting of the Mother's name again."
How Blessed are the devotees to have witnessed these scenes.'M'has captured this for posterity.
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
... I still struggle with what Self-inquiry is, and how to do it. ...
Self enquiry is to see the restlessness and anxiety of your mind and to step behind this. Don't allow the mind to express itself. Self enquiry means to close down the book of your experiences. Tell your mind: Shut up! You know the truth but your mind don't wants to practise it. Make the mind clear not to be disobedient to you. The disobedience of the mind is a serious psychological disorder.
Scott/Ramos/Friends,
"If God is God, and omnipotent, why does he need me to validate some ideology, some way of thinking."
Wonderfully said.I enjoyed reading this post of yours.
" Self enquiry means to close down the book of your experiences."
Well said Ramos.
Sri Ramakrishna says:
"A holy man had a book. When
asked what it contained, he opened it and showed that on all the pages were written
the words 'Om Rama', and nothing else."
It is to say 'God alone is'.Nothing else matters.
Namaskar.
Question : I am aware of the `I'. Yet my troubles are not ended.
Ramana Maharshi : This `I'-thought is not pure. It is contaminated with the association of the body and senses. See to whom the trouble is. It is to the `I'-thought. Hold it. Then the other thoughts vanish.
"He pointed to the hill and told us, ‘This Arunachala gives us everything we want’."
Normally sages have said "God gives us what we need than what we want". Bhagawan here, however says that Arunachala gives us whatever we want!
One of my firends had this experience:
She had been to the Virupaksha cave at early morning, after breakfast, in summer, with the intention of staying there till evening, at cost of not having her lunch. As she was meditating in the cave, at some point in afternoon, her stomach started grumbling, and thankfully so when she was alone in the cave. She wanted to eat something atleast for the heck of being embarassed by the stomach grumbling, before anyone else visited the cave. Since she did not want to go back till evening, there was no way as such to get food. As she continued with her meditation, the stomach grumbling thankfully stopped before two others came in shortly. And then a person comes, a localite and gives everyone a "packed" meal which had curd rice with the tadka. People there nomrally distribute tamarind rice, which is not good for the body in summer as it produces more heat in the body. She took it as a move from Arunachala and was very moved at how He took care of her meals. Not only did He provide something for stomach , He provided something that was actually good in the season. Seemed like it meant a lot to her, even with the small move by Him!
Indeed, He gives us what we want!
I was listening to an audio CD of my spiritual teacher Nome. And, one interesting thing he said that stuck that atleast while I was listening putting into practice really stilled the ego and mind, so I was a clear pond for a sec. Essentially the thing that stuck was the mind is running, but the power of it's running is my own power given to the thoughts, and that the racing mind is actually seeking either to know what is real, or satisfaction, happiness. (both of which are the nature of the Self) So to see that the motive for the mind's running is delusional in a sense. But one thing I'm realizing, is that it is tuff to make a method out of something that works, and have it work consistently. I'm not saying it's not possible. But so far... That hasn't been the case. The only thing that I can say really truly benefited me, was listening to these audio Cd's of this teacher, who seems to in my experience abide in the highest, as the highest, so that there is some transmission, and coming at it from different angles. It's for right now, my satsang, association with the wise. For a brief moment, I got a glimpse of how the mind running, thinking about all these things, in a racing way, is actually kind of my own creation, based on my desires and attachments. That I don't need to lend my power to thinking, and belief in thought in the first place. I've heard other jnanis make similar statements. On mathrusrisarada.org, Lakshmana Swami advised not thinking an evil thought, and taking a complete vow of celibacy (to not think about sexuality), because he was saying, and I think it's something Ramana himself said, about in a sense being the cause of our own tendencies, and then making a vain struggle to transcend them. While with that Christian guy there is some un-needed, and maybe even harmful baggage that is in what he was espousing. There is something to be said for, I think complete effacement, complete renunciation of all desire, and the acting upon it. If it takes the threat of a lake of fire, maybe that could be a benefit to a some. I haven't completely renounced, and I also haven't completely realized, and there is perhaps some connection. Because to desire, and then to act on it, I have to be a person, I have to be the thinker, and the doer, the one who desires, and the one who acts upon it. In the glimpses of total stillness that I've had, desire is impossible. It's hard to even understand how sex happens for a jnani. Maybe, that's because I don't understand the healthy, and correct relationship the jnani has to the body, and to relationships. But desire itself, seems to require a desire-er, and an actor upon that desire. Completely vowing to not desire, along with inquiry, how long would it take to Realize the Self? It's hard for me to believe that the so-called person wouldn't realize. Papaji had said in Summa Iru interview with David Godman (don't know if it's appropriate to use first name), that essentially you hvae the choice, "this or next life".
. . .Yet my troubles are not ended
just find out WHO cares
To Clemens Ramos,
You said: 'Self enquiry is to see the restlessness and anxiety of your mind and to step behind this. '
If I do this, 'I' will be the 'observer' of my thoughts, right? Won't the 'I' thought get strengthened if we practice this? I am in the same boat as LMM, and am trying to understand this practice correctly. Any advice or suggestions would be welcome.
Thanks.
Can we make a scaffold out of non dualism? Can self-enquiry be a method?
When Ramana had the momentous breakthrough as a teenager he faced
death head on with fear and then incredible courage.
Without any preconceived concepts and book learning to cloud the mind....his was a leap of purity, faith and courage.
With self enquiry just do the best you can with whatever resources you
have within.
hj
It sounds like Arunachala gave her moer what she needed. It's funny, one time when I went here, the word verification was bacti. Today it's nedde. As in before it was bhakti, today it is neti. haha. Stuff like that, totally not coincidence in my opinion.
Honestly, I think that Christian guy may be a jnani. I foolishly started arguing with him, and it's like the tiger's jaws. There is some serious grace there.
I don't know why, I have a very open mind. In the sense that, I have alot of trouble rejecting something as wrong. That was how I ended up being a devotee of Nome. I initially, felt very, very negative about everything there, but I waited to see, and I listened, and I didn't reject it out of hand. And then I had a really profound experience around him, because what he said struck me true. That was how I found out about Ramana, and got so deep into these teachings. Grace was operating to in a sense maybe cleanse me further, and the Truth came in a form that I could listen to. That really makes sense now, about how you can't tell a jnani by his teachings. Because the form of the teachings is to bring the devotee closer to the full Realization whatever that is. It's not an intellectual truth. It's not something that can be conceptualized. It may be foolish to classify people whether they are a jnani or not. But this Christian guy, is interesting. Unconventional, dogmatic, aggressive and confrontational, he speaks on my campus. And has since I've gone there. I've never really taken him all that seriously. Some weird events suddenly I ended up with his e-mail. So e-mailed him. It's interesting, intellectually I would disagree with him. He takes the classic Christian, only through Christ, but I know Maharshi was a sage of the highest magnitude, no doubt there. But even though this guy disagrees with that (well he didn't disagree specifically about Maharshi, but he said all other teachings are descended from Nimrod), in a way, it makes sense, and I'm wondering if, and keeping an open mind, to this being a new guru. Because he seems to respond correctly to a surprising extent, in a way I will listen to. And it's almost like the shakti of the Self has taken a new form to force me to surrender. And it even makes sense that this next guru would be Christian, because I have my reservations about Christianity (and the full surrender that would entail), and it's hard for me to accept. But I do feel that sat-guru presence coming from him. An unlikely source. It's weird. So... Maharshi said, the Self manifests as a guru. It makes sense it would manifest in a form that would complete the surrender, where I've hitherto been unwilling to surrender. Just like Papaji with Maharshi. Maharshi, did not come in the form Papaji expected or wanted, and told him that he should find the seer instead of chanting Krishna's name (laugh). Because that was his last hold out in a sense. It's like the Self is the real guru, and will manifest in form-gurus to challenge the remaining resistance to complete and utter surrender. But it can come in any form, from any philosophy. But it makes sense, that htis Christian would challenge my ideas, that are my hold-outs in a sense to complete surrender. It's about me still having reservations to complete surrender, but making the earnest attempt to realize through inquiry, the Self will take it from there! (laugh). It may take some unexpected form, from some unexpected philosophy and force the issue.
The ego subsidence I experienced from this guy's responses, was intense. And he responds very impersonally, similar to Nome. It's weird. He would pull out key phrases that I said, and respond with a jesus quote, or a quote from the old testement. I asked him, he said that he had completely surrendered to YahShua (Jesus), and paraphrasing, he couldn't bare to sin (displease YahShua), and so does not sin. Interestingly, Nome's responses end, "ever yours in truth, Nome". This person's responses end, "Yours in YahShua, Daniel" That is very strange to me. That's why I said, Tiger's Jaws. No escape for my ego. It's almost like Nome (with Ramana) set it up, and Daniel is finishing the job (laugh). Maybe. An aspirant. But the supernatural aspects of these teachings, you don't know what you are getting yourself into, when you earnestly practice. This stuff is real. Don't doubt it.
It's funny, the dialogues between me and this guy, remind me of the dialogues between Papaji and Abshiktinanda (is that his name?). Except the opposite. But I'm just as retiscent to give in, as Abshiktinanda. It's funny, that it's from the opposite angle. (but this guy's aggressive is very similar to Papaji in that dialogue) I'll post it on my blog. I said, I can't bare the thought of people languishing in hell. Suddenly he escapes me, and cites Daniel and says, no one is languishing in hell right now. See, that's the thing, the Self will come at you, where you are resisting. But I feel this guy his responses, are so surprising, and ungraspable, and frightening, and Maharshi talks about the Lion awakening you from the dream of samsara. I relaly feel that this guy is pushing me, where I'm resisting surrendering completely my ego, my self. It's so strange. But I was thinking Papaji, was so aggressive with Abshiktinanda where Abshiktinanda did not want to go, he didn't want to give up his Christian ritual. And I'm the opposite. It doesn't matter, it can be different for different people, the Self will manifest differently. See, when he's disregarding other teachings as leading to hell-fire, what he is doing in sat-guru speak, is not letting me think about anything else. Not letting me think about anything else but surrender, and giving me one target to think about it. It's not like the ordinary Christians I've talked to.
It's the equivalent of when Papaji would knock the book out of the person's hand, he was knocking their crutch out of their hand.
hj/Friends,
"Can we make a scaffold out of non dualism? Can self-enquiry be a method?
When Ramana had the momentous breakthrough as a teenager he faced
death head on with fear and then incredible courage.
Without any preconceived concepts and book learning to cloud the mind....his was a leap of purity, faith and courage.
With self enquiry just do the best you can with whatever resources you
have within."
hj,you have expressed a fundamental point so beautifully.Thought cannot annul thought.something deeper has to take over.I recall what our Friend, 's' used to say repeatedly-he does not know why he is doing 'self enquiry';he is moved to do this.
As I said,I do not follow the path of self enquiry.I will however try to express a way of approach(not that one can hold onto it as a method!).Those who follow Self Enquiry may try to figure out if there is any element of 'Self Enquiry' in this.Let this simple Prayer move us:
I am a hollow reed bored through and through with innumerable holes;May the the Breath of Thy Grace blow through the holes.I await the touch of your lips as you play divine music through me.
----------------------------------
Just be the Prayer.The 'I' is there but the focus is on something deeper,which is not known but felt.That something deeper has to be allowed to have its play.
Even to say the prayer is an act of Grace-otherwise,it will be another 'corpse' of thought and not the 'living' prayer of the soul.
Namaskar.
LMM; The question is why are you drawn to a preacher that is dogmatic and aggressive? Why does this man hang around campus and browbeat people? The need in Christianity to "spread the good news" is overwhelming.
If a nomadic people are found in some remote corner of the world the missionaries are there before doctors and anthropoligists can draw breathe.
Sometimes I watch some of these Christian preachers on TV; they're on a roll. Talk about' mouth from the south'. They tend to be very articulate and will tolerate no opposition.
I understand advaita can be difficult and because it's so subtle, you may feel you are making no progress.
This is not a problem if you are not attached to any particular outcome.
HJ
"Falling in love -- totally and completely with YahShua -- is the only thing that matters.
Once that happens -- all my other words I have spoken to you will fall into place."
This person wrote me this...That reminds so much of Papaji, pour more benzine on it. How he would speak of the divine as his lover. Or he would tell someone to surrender completely and accept whatever happens to them. It's also so direct, and pushing me beyond where I want to go, in terms of surrender.
Getting at the truth requires undoing, undoing to the very
core, and beyond.
We are "born" into a physical world...
In that instant the deceptions started.
We must undo those.
Many teachings use techniques of undoing, but they are not the
only ones.
Once one "arrives"; is undone, everythig is thrown away
including the teachings.
Words from nowhere,
Dave
I am glad this matter of satsang/counselling fees has arisen here, though I still feel no closer to any kind of state of resolution on the subject (though I also question whether the sort of state of resolution I envision is possible at all).
I am aware of numerous sages (those mentioned by David and others) who have not requested payment in order to be in their presence or to ask them questions. There is now an ever-increasing number of reportedly "realized" personages, however, who charge by the hour or by the day for the honour of sitting in their presence and having the opportunity to speak with them. I have seen fees increased substantially from one day to the next and then again from one year to the next. I am aware of the––voiced or otherwise––"reasons" or "justifications" for charging entrance fees: we live in a capitalist culture where everything costs money, and the more rare or inherently valuable something is, the more it costs; nothing in life is free; sages have to pay for airline tickets and restaurant meals just like you and me, and so on. It's easy to dismiss these reasons/justifications for $500-1000/hour satsang salaries when one has no love for the person nor appreciation for their guidance, but the waters become muddied when one feels love and respect arising: "Who am I to question whether and/or how much they charge for satsang?" etc.
There have been widely-respected teachers such as Jean Klein (whom I never met) who charged for their seminars, and I have not ever seen this fact used as an argument against the authenticity or depth of their realization nor against the value of their teachings, so how can the fact of charging entrance fees alone be sufficient to tarnish the reputation, so to speak, of a teacher or sage?
I am just rather puzzled by the behaviour of those who seem to charge the most the market will bear for their time, especially when they go around quoting or claiming association in one way or another with Bhagavan or Maharaj.
"I understand advaita can be difficult and because it's so subtle, you may feel you are making no progress.
This is not a problem if you are not attached to any particular outcome."
Anonymous, it has nothing to do with that. I'm also not drawn to aggression, or dogamtic-ness. Nor do I agree with that preacher, on some of what he said. (I'm just keeping an open mind) I don't agree with one religion being right to the exclusion of others. But a core of Ramana's teachings is surrender. He's not talking about partial surrender. He's talking about total, complete surrender of yourself. Utter surrender. Ramana also said you can't tell a jnani by their actions. There are some things about this particular preacher, such as that he speaks of how he totally surrendered and had given up all sin, and that he speaks in an impersonal way, and I experienced grace from his responses (and that they were intelligent), that made me question my initial assessment. I also don't feel, anonymous, like results have been subtle, or that I'm makikng no progress. It's like being burned in a fire.
When you inquire, earnestly, when your attempt at this is earnest, and you don't intend to just stay complascently at the level you are at, with a closed mind. Grace starts to operate in really intense ways. If you haven't experienced things beyond the normal, logical, material viewpoint. For me, anonymous, that is very tenuous. Things that happen around me, have intense meaning. This christian preacher, I have no doubt is operating at a very graceful level, as in the sense the ways Maharshi describes about surrender, grace, the Self. His responses are utterly sincere. As far as aggressive, what about Nisargadatta, I believe you've quoted him, or U.G. haven't you quoted him. They were both extremely aggressive. Anonymous, I'm not enlightened, but these things are real, and some of them, I've had some pretty strong direct experiences of. There were ways with this Christian preacher, I've already said, I depart from his understanding. But he's not an ordinary, Christian like the ones you describe. I have no doubt about that. It's like your approach to Nome. You just see the surface. Which is fine. You believe the facts. But seem to not have direct experience of how tenuous, and fragile that material viewpoint is. What you said about Christians, what you say about money. All that to me, is totally cliche. It's like O.K, but I moved on, time to get deeper. Time to question more. Not just rest on what I already think I know. All that, what I think I know, my opinons, even the self that has them, to be realized in the way Maharshi has talked about has to be totally given up, relinquished, surrendered, dissolved.
There is an urgency to that. There is an urgency to that. (you could die in a week) "do not postpone" Papaji said. This isn't some thing to be approached lightly. This isn't another hobby. Our hair is on fire, and we have to find the nearest pond. Because death is around the corner. If teachers have to decide whether to charge or not charge, they are not enlightened. This stuff is supernatural. I've had some experience of that supernatural-ness, so the material aspect, like what did this guru do or not do, does not interest me? The tabloids in the grocery store interest me more. If I'm interested in gossip, I'll read those. Unlike for you it seems, spirituality is a life or death matter for me. When I'm in a life or death struggle (which it is), I don't care about forming opinions about illusory others, or a world that I'm only going to experience several decades. When you die, anonymous, where are these Christians, and false gurus going to be for you? How will all the time you've spent obsessing about that help you, when you are dead? You are obsessing about things, that will not be there for you in several decades, when your focus could be primarily on saving yourself, finding out who you are.
Friends,
With regard to the charging of Fees by 'Teachers',this much can be said-Spirituality cannot be commoditized.This is true for all times.
It is upto each one to think for oneself.One can only start with oneself-If we are sincere,the Guru will find us.we need not go around spending money on this.
Satchidananda alone is the Guru.He is available for a genuine song but all the riches of the world cannot 'buy' him.
Namaskar.
LMM,you said:
"When you die, anonymous, where are these Christians, and false gurus going to be for you? How will all the time you've spent obsessing about that help you, when you are dead? You are obsessing about things, that will not be there for you in several decades, when your focus could be primarily on saving yourself, finding out who you are."
Very powerful thing you said here, LMM. Once again I am inspired by the strength of your commitment and the depth of your seeking.
Ravi: "Satchidananda alone is the Guru.He is available for a genuine song but all the riches of the world cannot 'buy' him."
Beautifully put, Ravi! This is it in a nutshell.
Anonymous/Friends,
"I am just rather puzzled by the behaviour of those who seem to charge the most the market will bear for their time, especially when they go around quoting or claiming association in one way or another with Bhagavan or Maharaj."
Even during Sri Bhagavan's time,there were persons who went around claiming that they were devotees of Sri Bhagavan.People were fooled and used to dole out alms to these 'professional beggars'.It was then that the genuine devotees of Sri bhagavan prayed that Sri Bhagavan should compose a Hymn that they could chant while doing circumambulation of Arunachala.This also would serve to mark them out from the impostors.
The Akshara Mana malai gushed out from Sri Bhagavan as an act of Grace.Not even Sri Bhagavan attempted to comment on this utterly sublime Hymn to Arunachala.Truly this is Sri Bhagavan's Magnum opus.
It is not surprising to find some people claiming association with Bhagavan,to further their own interests.
Sri Bhagavan is available for all those who want his guidance.
Namaskar
Maharshi says:
"Surrender appears easy because people imagine that, once they say with their lips ‘I surrender’ and put their burdens on their Lord, they can be free and do what they like. But the fact is that you can have no likes or dislikes after your surrender; your will should become completely non-existent, the Lord’s will taking its place.Robert Adams said, something along the lines of, when you worship a particular diety, it should not be more than one. I remember Papaji saying that. Adams I do think continued to say, if it is Christ it should be Christ alone, and the same for other dieties, Krishna, Allah, Hanoman, Ram. He said it should be one, because otherwise it would be dissipated. That helps me have an open mind to dogmatic teachers. The Muslim Pir that Papaji encountered and said was also a jnani. I have a feeling that Muslim Pir did not teach nonduality, or advaita, but taught strict, orthodox Islam. Except a pir, related to sufi-ism, so maybe it would have been more nondual. Nonetheless, even sufi-ism is not pure nondual like advaita, despite new age western commodification of it. Again, I don't know, but there were things about this Christian preacher's responses that reminded me of a sat-guru, that he wasn't letting my mind wonder to other things. He wasn't forcing his beliefs on me. But he was making a convincing case, for what I would normally not accept, and I felt like there was some spiritual-like being in a headlock, there was kind of an element of surrender your normal position on things. Here is a quote by Ramana Maharshi on surrender...Repeating it from above.
"Surrender appears easy because people imagine that, once they say with their lips ‘I surrender’ and put their burdens on their Lord, they can be free and do what they like. But the fact is that you can have no likes or dislikes after your surrender; your will should become completely non-existent, the Lord’s will taking its place."
Like that, this Christian preacher, said that when he talks in the Park blocks, he only says what the Lord gives him to say. But anonymous, the only words you saw that I wrote in all that I wrote about it, were he was aggressive and dogmatic, if you read anything else,it was like you didn't even see it. I feel the same with your responses about Nome. In both cases, I'm fine with you having a different opinion, or not liking particular teachers I like. I don't want you to accept what I say. But you don't deal with my own experiences with that teacher, you invalidate with generalities. Generalities only get me so far. I have to explore and find out what is true in a particular case. I can't go, Christian, no Christians are enlightend. Dogmatic, that means he's wrong. If I had that attitude, I would never learn anything. And yes, it seems like a majority of humanity does hardly learn anything, sometmies, because they already think they know. To me, that seems foolish.
That's the thing about Nome and this Christian preacher (and I haven't made up my mind about him-lol). Both of them. Neither came in forms I would have wanted in a spiritual teacher. And it makes sense. That judge who went to Papaji, and asked how do I become enlightened like Janaka did? He said prostrate full length to the traffic cop at a nearby intersection. That was something that judge was unwilling to do, so he didn't, and he didn't become enlightened. With Papaji's vision, he probably saw exactly what someone could do and become enlightened, or realize their non-existence, surrender completely. Same with that other interaction. My point being, it seems that Self-Realization requires total sacrifice, and I think the reason most of us here are not Realized, is because we are still attached and unwilling to totally sacrifice ourselves. When we encounter a jnani, a sage who has totally surrendered themselves, it's not surprising that it would be in a form that challenges our notions. In a sense, maybe that's why Nome stopped responding, I don't know why, but one thing was I totally accepted everything he said, but wasn't really doing it, fully. This christian preacher, I really felt that feeling of a vice closing around my ego, that to some degree I am still unwilling to surrender to. If, anyone of us, decided, that we would totally surrender, the Lord would put us where he wants us, and we wouldnt' question it, we would no longer want things, we would no longer desire, we would no longer act on desire. That's a choice we could make, and we would be Self-Realized like that. The only thing holding us back, in some ways seems like a choice. We choose our attachments (what is called sin), over surrender.
This is in response to another post (from another "Anonymous")--which post I cannot now locate: has it been removed?--suggesting that wo/men of great virtue, talent or genius are, no doubt, frequently jnanis as well (not that I take "jnanihood" to be some quality or substance that exists in addition to any manifest qualities of the apparent individual...).
Why this almost reckless urge to toss the label "jnani" like confetti onto those who, through natural gifts and/or apparent effort, earn places of distinction in the pantheon of those who have made great contributions to civilization? Throughout my acquaintanceship with the non-dual teachings of India, China, Japan, and elsewhere, the sages have consistently affirmed that realization or awakening has essentially nothing to do with manifestations of brilliance, ingenuity, power, healing or psychic abilities, etc., though of course these may manifest in the case of one who is no longer identified with or as the bodymind as they would in the case of one who is so identified.
There are obviously those among us who want their temporal heroes--the great and the mighty of this world--to be worshipped as great sages as well, but to me it smacks of idolatry, and in way accords with anything I have heard from those who have seen into their own nature. I welcome any quotes from authentic sages which assert that great human achievements can in any way be taken as reflective of liberation or awakening having "occurred" in the case of the achiever.
correction, third line of the final paragraph:
and in *no* way accords
I, Spirit, deny none of My children.
Such is not My Nature.
Ever waiting, above forgiveness,
I pour Myself in through the opened doors.
I remember specifically in Talks that Maharshi did say that all great revelations, come from awareness of the Self. It struck me a true statement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDFXYCvTguE
Papaji is specifying here, that someone with ego cannot succeed in anyway.
Maharshi I also remember responded to a group of I believe activists, or people agitating for decolonization in the Ghandian movement, and I think this is Bhagavan and the Politics of his day. In essence, I think he said when asked why it is so difficult to change the world. Maharshi responded, "They are ego-centered and thus their difficulty".
At Ramanasram, it seems the most talented people there were jnanis, or people who realized the SElf in that lifetime. Maharshi with his skill at cooking, interpreting the Vedas. Muruganar, with his excellent poetry. Annamalai Swami architecture.
Look! A bunch of personalities, a bunch of preferences, dislikes and
allegiances. we get personally involved, we mark around our bush and get territorial.
If you take 'it' seriously (yes in a light way, but seriously), then you get
indignant when somebody disagrees
or points out, or makes it difficult.We all want peace or bliss( are we bliss junkies?) because it is a precious thing.
You have felt its value.
Thinking all and sundry are Jnanis,
is enthusiastic but discrimination is needed. If you are in a fragile state you become prey to predators.
hj
thank you so much Jupes for the kind words!
Ravi and friends: I am weak -- pathetic really.
If I were not:
I would always speak the truth from my heart.
I would speak to the wise essence of others
and not to the them that they know.
I would speak with an intonation
that shared the fullness of my being
instead of protecting and hoarding
what wealth made there lie.
Prayers would be unnecessary --
every utterance and thought would be a prayer.
Meditation would be redundant --
every step and gesture -- every movement
and stillness
would be meditation.
If I could be myself
which is not myself
but of whose wholeness I am a part
-- whose allness breathes me --
I would gather friends around me
and delight but not be lost
in their company.
Lovely
I've felt weak - pathetic really, pretty much my entire life. Lately, that feeling of powerlessness has been sometimes so strong, that I actually feel strong, because there is a giving in. I guess that's the point in a sense. To not feel that by one's own auspices one can effect anything, only as Maharshi said. "Thy will be done!"
"If you take 'it' seriously (yes in a light way, but seriously), then you get
indignant when somebody disagrees
or points out, or makes it difficult.We all want peace or bliss( are we bliss junkies?) because it is a precious thing.
You have felt its value."
Only recently I realized, I'm the one obstructing the natural bliss.
"Thinking all and sundry are Jnanis,
is enthusiastic but discrimination is needed. If you are in a fragile state you become prey to predators."
I do think, in agreement with you, think that it's a matter of being able to recognize the sign, of predators, or realizing there is nothing good or spiritually about being preyed on. If you don't feel inspired to pay for something don't. If there is inspiration, go with it. But sometimes, in the depth of inspiration, or feeling good, within myself, my mind is way more open, and I see inspiration in way more sources, and appreciate things I may previously have rejected, or not seen the wisdom there. As to whose a jnani? I may be someone who gets excited about that. There are those that make me wonder. But part of it, may be like as Ramana Maharshi said, everything becomes your guru. Though in inquiry, and being into Ramana so to speak, I find many of the glowing inspirations of the past, still glow. I don't now see through them, even though I understand deeper. which says to me, they may have still had some serious jnana going on. And another thing, I imagine that if one looks for jnanis within Advaita circles, then they are going to find alot of so-called pseudo-gurus. If one notices 'people' who seem to channel pure wisdom, and glow with bliss in contact with them. Then...just maybe some of these people I'm saying are jnanis, are...no idea. Because it makes sense that Self-glowing beings would be scattered in alot of walks of life, philosophical outlooks. But one thing that strikes me potent, is some express this pure glowing optimism, that makes me feel bliss radiating through me. That's what I like about Ramana. And impersonal, sturdy, kind... above the fray, folks like that I certainly wonder about. Some of them, I've hitherto mentioned do show that.
http://books.google.com/books?id=81XmDQiiQEcC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Timeless+Presence+Nome&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
That aside, this is the link to Nome's story of realizing the Self. But more then that, this is a beautiful devotional poetic work to Ramana Maharshi (if nothing else feel free to read it for that). I personally, highly recommend. This is only the place I've encountered Nome specifically talking about how he completely gave up the objective, ego outlook permanently. I believe it. Since it is unimportant, I don't expect others to. But I with very little hesitation would say that he is a jnani. But the important part, is how helpful he has been for me, at questioning my delusions, illusions, and merging in my own blissful Self. That is the important part. Titles, have nothing to do with the Self or jnana. Jnani taken as a VIP label, I guarantee that those are not jnanis. lol. I mean Lakshmana Swami, Mathru Sri Sarada say they are not interested in meeting people. The Self is satisfying enough. So, I would agree who is a jnani cannot be determined by the senses and mind. There are lots of so-called advaita "jnanis" but how many of them really know experientially, perfectly what Ramana is talking about. haha.
http://vimeo.com/9322248
This link is a U.K. punk band I listened to my first time in college, while I can't say he is a jnani. I do think he possibly is (the real kind, Self-glowing light bulb-lol), because he seems so established in this glowing optimism, and clarity, and his lyrics are beautiful. He is very mesmerizing to watch. Jnani or not, he is sattvic, and I am sure his graces are grace. I drank this band's lyrics, like it was the bible. That clip is footage of him. I might share lyrics sometime. Because I still feel filled with bliss listening to them. Something is going on. maybe 1 in a million are enlightened-lol, as is said. But I think the chances are better of finding them -lol, if you let the bliss-liberation-clarity barometer guide you, then what you expect a jnani to be, or look like, or espouse. This is my way of thinking, I'm not saying others should, or be excited in the way I'm excited. But this has been an excellent forum to share that excitement. I got kind of excited about the possiblity of that Christian preacher who browbeats students being a jnani. How many advaitins, would look there? Or this punk lead singer with bad hygein, who drinks like a fish? haha.
"Sit tight and wait, concentrate on the now. Resolve and decide not to let it get you down! Keeping your head straight above all the pressure" Lead singer of the band in the 1st song play in that video!
Losing M Mind says:
"I've felt weak - pathetic really, pretty much my entire life."
Well, as long as we have the ego we will feel like above very often. However, the following is what I always keep in mind when I am assailed by such thoughts. They are by Paul Brunton.
---------------------------
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.”
His words come as an invigorating tonic. They refresh and
inspire me. From another man’s lips, from some lesser and feebler
soul, I would refuse to accept them at such worth and would
persist in refuting them. But an inward monitor assures me that
the Sage speaks out of the depth of a great and authentic spiritual
experience, and not as some theorising philosopher mounted
on the thin stilts of speculation.
---------------------------------
#1. Papaji when asked about those he sent to teach.
He said that the purpose was to have them point the
way to Lucknow not to pose as awakenened teachers.
#2. Papaji said that many can fool others into
thinking they are liberated but they are the false
coin.
#3. When asked about the experiences that so many
people had in Lucknow. He said they were false
experiences.
#4. when asked why did you give them false
experiences?
He said to get the leeches off my back.
#5. Papaji said he met only two Jnani's in his
lifetime. One was Ramana Maharshi. The other was a man
who appeared from out of the jungle into the town of
Krishnagiri.
#6. Ramana Maharshi said that there is a false sense
of liberation that aspirants reach that very few ever
go beyond.
#7. Ramana Maharshi wrote: "By him alone whose saved
himself, can other folk be freed, the help of others
is as if, the blind, the blind would lead.
It is about people
who lie every second to themselves pretending they are
being honest.
The ego notion has millions of strategies to preserve
itself. Seeking out those who have not yet ended the
ego notion to be one's spiritual teacher is one such
strategy.
Humans lie. And they bring that ego preservation lie
to their spirituality, including to the very
teachings that are aimed at the ego notions end.
Dylan
'Don't follow leaders,
watch the parking meters'
HJ
... spiritual leeches and liars ...
Even spiritual leeches and liars have this intense desire to be free forever. It is not their fault not to know how. A true disciple knows no false teachers - he knows teachers. Point. I met a false teacher being like a nightmare to me but in the chain of teachers this actually was the person which (unconsciously) sets me free. One can say that a true disciple knows no false teachers but false disciples.
Murali
Terrific! Thank you for sharing Mr Brunton’s words.
We can spend a life time judging our own self (and judging others!), not to mention trying to weed out countless imagined deficits.
I recall in the youtube video “Ramana Maharishi: Abide As The Self”, Ramana being quoted as having said something to the effect, that our practice must be directed to removing the “doubter”, not the doubts. For even if we did manage to remove a doubt, it will only be replaced by another.
Hence, we are far better to look to the ‘I’ as it arises moment-to-moment, and enquire, “who is this I?” Instead of allowing the ‘I’ to drag us all over the place as it pleases.
* * *
This thread, as we read, gives many opportunities to do just that, enquire into the unruly, assertive ‘I’.
In just the part I read of Nothing Ever Happened, Papaji's autobiography, edited by the blog-author here, Papaji atleast met one other jnani in Part One, which is the only one I've read. Maharshi, the sage you mentioned, and a muslim pir that Dr. syed took him to. In that book also, I think, David godman specifically asked him the question of all the jnanis he met, there were several more. I believe Papaji agreed that Nisargadatta was a jnani, and about Krishnamurti said, "that is an enlightened man!". Just to get your facts straight!
Anonymous/Friends,
"Prayers would be unnecessary --
every utterance and thought would be a prayer.
Meditation would be redundant --
every step and gesture -- every movement
and stillness
would be meditation."
Friend,seeking is necessary as long one as one feels the seperation.What you are referring to is where seeking has ended.
Sadhana is needed until then.
An Excerpt from 'My Master':
That is what my Master found, and he then set about to learn humility, because he had found that the one idea in all religions is, "not me, but Thou", and he who says, "not me", the Lord fills his heart. The less of this little "I" the more of God there is in him. That he found to be the truth in every religion in the world, and he set himself to accomplish this. As I have told you, whenever he wanted to do anything he never confined himself to fine theories, but would enter into the practice immediately. We see many persons talking the most wonderfully fine things about charity and about equality and the rights of other people and all that, but it is only in theory. I was so fortunate as to find one who was able to carry theory into practice. He had the most wonderful faculty of carrying everything into practice which he thought was right.
Now, there was a family of Pariahs living near the place. The Pariahs number several millions in the whole of India and are a sect of people so low that some of our books say that if a Brahmin coming out from his home sees the face of a Pariah, he has to fast that day and recite certain prayers before he becomes holy again. In some Hindu cities when a Pariah enters, he has to put a crow's feather on his head as a sign that he is a Pariah, and he has to cry aloud, "Save yourselves, the Pariah is passing through the street", and you will find people flying off from him as if by magic, because if they touch him by change, they will have to change their clothes, bathe, and do other things. And the Pariah for thousands of years has believed that it is perfectly right; that his touch will make everybody unholy. Now my Master would go to a Pariah and ask to be allowed to clean his house. The business of the Pariah is to clean the streets of the cities and to keep houses clean. He cannot enter the house by the front door; by the back door he enters; and as soon as he has gone, the whole place over which he has passed is sprinkled with and made holy by a little Ganga water. By birth the Brahman stands for holiness, and the Pariah for the very reverse. And this Brahmin asked to be allowed to do the menial services in the house of the Pariah. The Pariah of course could not allow that, for they all think that if they allow a Brahmin to do such menial work it will be an awful sin, and they will become extinct. The Pariah would not permit it; so in the dead of night, when all were sleeping, Ramakrishna would enter the house. He had long hair, and with his hair he would wipe the place, saying, "Oh, my Mother, make me the servant of the Pariah, make me feel that I am even lower than the Pariah." "They worship Me best who worship My worshippers. These are all My children and your privilege is to serve them"--is the teaching of Hindu scriptures.'
-----------------------------------
To think 'I am nothing' is not the same thing as to truly feel 'I am nothing'.This is the difference between a 'lie' and 'Truth'.
Namaskar.
Anonymous/Friends,
With regard to 'lie' and 'Truth'-An Excerpt from 'My Master':
This is the tremendous thirst that seizes the human heart. Later on, this very man said to me, "My child, suppose there is a bag of gold in one room, and a robber in the next room; do you think that the robber can sleep? He cannot. His mind will be always thinking how to get into that room and obtain possession of that gold. Do you think then that a man, firmly persuaded that there is a Reality behind all these appearances, that there is a God, that there is One who never dies, One who is infinite bliss, a bliss compared with which these pleasures of the senses are simply playthings, can rest contented without struggling to attain It? Can he cease his efforts for a moment? He will become mad with longing." This divine madness seized the boy. At that time he had no teacher, nobody to tell him anything, and everyone thought that he was out of his mind. This is the ordinary condition of things. If a man throws aside the vanities of the world, we hear him called mad. But such men are the salt of the earth. Out of such madness have come the powers that have moved this world of ours, and out of such madness alone will come the powers of the future that are going to move the world.'
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
Murali/Peter/Friends,
Sri Bhagavan' words to Paul Brunton-are indeed inspirational.A ignorant person would have come out with a cliched-'Find out who is dejected'.This sort of a stupid stance is coming to be regarded as 'Gnana Path'!
Namaskar.
"#2. Papaji said that many can fool others into
thinking they are liberated but they are the false
coin."
@Anonymous, I almost want to point out, that it seems to me that you do exactly that. Pretend to be an authority on spirituality. Alot of what you say, i.e. the last two paragraphs, comes from your present egoic stand/understanding. Nothing wrong with that. But sometimes it seems you are presenting your opinion as fact. I try not to do that. There is a difference between my intellectual understanding, and deep spiritual realization which is far beyond that. Papaji who you are talking about, had extremely deep realization. He wasn't speaking from an intellectual understanding. I wouldn't present your understanding of the ego, and it's strategies as fact, since you have not transcended the ego, or know what it is like to be truly free of the ego. I wouldn't pretend to know which of Papaji's devotees that went off and taught, what kind of realization they have. I just don't know. Who is he speaking about? I don't know. Maharshi had realized devotees. It stands to reason Papaji did as well. He may not have told people who they were, but there may have been people who went off from Papaji perfect gurus somewhere. Even some of the stories around Papaji, that one guy, had months where the world was himself. It stands to reason some people went off permanently like that, and were eternally realized. They may not have advertised themselves. I guess I'm saying a little humility, please. A little less vitriol. Know what you don't know. You may not know what you think you know. At a deeper level, you may know more then you think you know. But you spend a lot of time wanting to debunk, and maybe not enough time wanting to understand.
Yes the exchange between Ramana Maharshi and Brunton was marvelous.
The exchange shows the infinite wisdom of Ramana.
Later on Paul Brunton did a few foolish things but his book Search in secret India brought many serious devotees to Ramana.
Glory be to the Maharshi.
hj
I'm certain, anybody who spent an appreciable time around Papaji, got something out of it, even if they thought they knew more then they did, or interpreted in a way that led to self-aggrandizement, or were a 'guru', when they had more to learn. (are we better? in our egoic life? I mean it's so easy to sit and judge. Am I better then some false guru, really? really? Or am I seeing my own self-aggrandizement, in their self-aggrandizement, putting it on someone else? If I was true to myself, if I was an honest person, would I need to sit their judging others, no matter what they've done. I'm like "oh what a fake", while in my imagination I commit every possible transgression) Anybody who spent time around Papaji benefited from it. And the incredible stories of how contact with him influenced their life, we may not even know. I even know, from my experiences with Nome, the way that has influenced my life, things have been juiced up in incredible ways since then. Things are happening and falling into place. Infact I think the touching the intense grace, I touched, brought me in contact with that Christian preacher the last few weeks. What I'm saying is, the intellect cannot touch the enormity of true spirituality. I can make Maharshi's teachings into easily digestible concepts, but that is not Maharshi's teachings. Maharshi is so much more enormous than that. We cannot understand Maharshi's teachings, that's the conclusion I've come to, somehow through grace, misguided efforts, the fruits of of however it happens, some enormous realization I haven't had yet, so cannot describe, and probably even then could not describe, one in which self cannot recur. How could I even touch on that, through some puny intellectual, pretentious understanding? Of what I think, I don't even know how false many of my thoughts actually are. When this Christian preacher, says how I need the blood atonement of Jesus Christ, and I feel immense mental quietude in grace, even as I formulate my retiscence, and disagreement with him, his words shut me up, how can i argue? Maharshi describes mouna. No matter how much I may intellectually think I understand, this Christian preacher, whose philosophy I greatly object to, causes me in even formulating my arguments against him, to be burned in a glowing bonfire of grace. Intellectually, I might go, that's not Maharshi's teachings, but Maharshi's teachings, are not a philosophical outlook. Maharshi might see that this Christian preacher has full-understanding, i.e. complete surrender, even though he (the christian preacher) says all other teachings come from Nimrod and are false. You just can't grasp the enormity of spirituality through what ammount to the part of the brain that understands political opinions. It's so enormous. When I saw white streamers of light flowing out of Nome. Muruganar said Maharshi morphed into Jesus before his eyes. That almsot needs twenty exclamations. We're not dealing with things that can be understood in an ordinary way. but something that needs to be grasped held of for salvation. Like David Godman accepting Arunachala's dictate to stay and serve gurus, when he wanted to be writing for the Guardian (laugh), just kidding. He made a conscious and profound act of surrender, who knows the depths he's experienced since then. Like the character Richard in the TV show LOST, "I've seen things so beautiful you could scarcely imagine". It's even bigger than that.
LMM; I see the interplay of consciousness through all the personalities
here as a continuous self-presenting teaching. There is a commonality.
Some of us are slightly misguided but there is no one who is totally right or totally wrong.
We humans exhibit all kinds of
behaviours. They range from hate filled facism to love filled
compassion. From scripture thumping fundamentalists to
incomprehensible mystics.
Michael
I suspect that dichotomy that you draw there, is a false dichotomy.
Ravi Said:
"A ignorant person would have come out with a cliched-'Find out who is dejected'.This sort of a stupid stance is coming to be regarded as 'Gnana Path'!"
My own experience is that our tendencies and habits are like a storm. When they hit us, we are simply blown out of the ground. These words of Maharshi and such things are like finding a tree for a blown up person. You simply hold on to the tree like a leech while the storm is ongoing. While actually holding on, every moment, there will be a feeling that its all useless and nothing can stop the impending blowing up. But, my experience is that, however feeble and hopeless, if we hold on, the storm will pass away and the the feeble thoughts start gaining strength. Soon, we will realize that the storm itself is something self made by repeated thinking of the wrong thoughts.
Ravi: So, it is my humble experience that if we hold on to the thoughts "Find out the doubter" or "Maharshi told this and hence it is true" irrespective of how weak those thoughts are at the moment, they will gain strength.
Last few months/years, I have passed through lot of tough situations and I am learning to hold onto to these thoughts irrespective of what happens. I am finding that they are indeed gaining roots.
Regards Murali
Vernon Howard
“If I don’t have a compulsive need to appear successful, what do I care if you make more money than I? If I have no unhealthy attraction to shallow social functions, does it bother me if I get no invitations? If I have freedom from fearful dependency upon persons and objects, will I be pained if you no longer wish to be my friend? If my artificial needs fall away through self-insight, do I need to think about these things at all?
No. If my false sense of “I” has dissolved, who is there to suffer or complain?”
A ignorant person would have come out with a cliched-'Find out who is dejected'.This sort of a stupid stance....
what do you mean Ravi? Ramana often used these types of directives.
Vernon Howard is an interesting fellow, just watched these 3
"A ignorant person would have come out with a cliched-'Find out who is dejected'.This sort of a stupid stance...."
It's very easy to imitate the kinds of things Ramana said. It's very, very difficult to equal his Realization. That's why I don't waste my time trying to imitate the things he said. I pursue as ardently as possible the actual Realization, that his words point to. You can't fake it. Do I just have to go "who is dejected?", and then Realization happens? Or worse fill my sentences with Knowing and Beingness-lol It's obviously deeper, subtler, and way more profound then that. I would never have been exposed to Ramana Maharshi, let alone inquiry, let alone attempted it ardently, if I had a mentality, where i so easily was convinced I already knew. Even still...I don't assume I know. I'm burdened with worries. If what I'm doing doesn't get free of the grossest forms of mental suffering, and worrying, (selfishness) no matter what rote method I may be pursuing, I know I'm not doing what Ramana talked about. So I adjust, I adapt, I question, I look to sources of wisdom, and as much as possible am open minded. If when I was at Society of Abidance in Truth, I had of believed my initial impression, went with that, if I didn't at all have a listening (though critical) spirit, I would never have been exposed to Maharshi. Fortunately I did. So then I read Who am I? and recognized that this was like the key to it all, this was such a powerful thing I had stumbled upon. I knew that the wisdom I was drinking, as I was reading Talks, was not something I could just imitate by repeating the words, pretending I understand. And anyone who does that, doesn't grasp the brilliance, the glory of his teachings. They think it's just another stale philosophy on the bookshelves, pretentious knowledge. And i can understand how many people (who have never had their illusions shaken), may be able to do that. Go, oh, "who am I?" "whose dejected?" repeat corny phrases like that to people, and consider themselves an advaita expert, maybe impress women or something. Advaita, in my experience, opinion is the full Realization, and the attempt, and the grace leading to it. It has no life apart from that. Seriously if you want a philosophy to be pretentious about, don't waste your time with advaita, read Nietzsche and Sartre, become an existentialist, go to your local coffee shop. Those who do not yet, in this lifetime, have any earnestness, are doing it for those reasons, do not know what they are missing? I may not have dissolved my egoity completley, but I can tell you, that even the earnest attempt to Realize this teaching is so much more glorious then the most glorious experience in this world, and infact contains every sought after, meaningful thing one could experience. Once I read that Who am I? I was like this is the key to it all. The key to it all.
Peter/Murali,
"what do you mean Ravi? Ramana often used these types of directives."
Please read my comment in that context.Why did not Sri Bhagavan suggest that question to Paul Brunton at that moment?Why should he hold before him the Goal so Glorious?
A Weak mind will only try to flee,to 'escape' and sometimes self denial('I' is 'unreal'and hence all that happens to the 'I' is unreal,All the Unhappiness around is unreal etc) is a convenient escape.A Weak mind cannot Pray;it can only petition.It may take recourse to 'social work',trying to solve other's woes,etc.Thus the escape can be through any of the professed paths-Jnana,Bhakti or Karma Yoga.
It is only a Strong mind that is fit for Sadhana and a cheerful mind(Satvic)is a basic Requirement.
Murali,What you have expressed is also the same.With Faith ,the mind becomes strong and is able to better weather the storm.
Self Enquiry does require a Satvic Mind.In the company of Great souls this is more easily accomplished.More than anything that one does,it is the receptivity to this Presence that does the job.
Namaskar.
The truth laughs, is easy going. It must be.
This may not make sense to most of the people here, it may not even be true. I have no idea. So this Christian preacher. I corresponded with him as mentioned. He is someone, I viewed as a total nut, even more recently, when I would see him, I felt so much wiser for my Self-inquiry, thought I understood spirituality so much deeper than his dogmatic, bigoted, ideas. Now, i am not so sure. Today, he sent me two e-mails, I can't say they were vitrolic in hindsight, but they seemed that way, threatening. And I so vehemently disagreed, abhored what he was saying, and I felt pretty blissful that it just goes to show that what he is saying is wrong. The thing is, and I can't explain this to people who have not had this experience. I think it is related to the Self, but I don't know how. The best I can describe it, is it is like a psychoactive, psychadelic experience, tripping. It is what I experienced throughout my early twenties. My experiences with Nome were like that, where e-mail, or in person, it was like there was this feeling in my chest, I can't explain it. But then I would be totally psychologically opened up, and things would be trippy again. No matter what Nome said, he opened up my psyche just by contact with him. Blissful, but potentially a little frightening, and perceptually overwhelming. Well, I get that from these responses from this teacher. No Christian proselytizer has ever had this effect on me. That is why I took his letters seriously, and wanted to see if I could agree with him, if there was someway to compromise with his view. Though I can't accept that all other religions including advaita are essentially satanic. I'm sure it's not true. I normally would never even entertain that any of what this guy is saying, except that to some degree interactions with him, fit with the description of tiger's jaws, or the lion appearing in the dream. I find him intensely frightening. I don't find most dogmatic Christians intimidating. Or worry when they tell me Yah is going to shake up your world. Earlier today, I was assuming again, that well maybe there is some truth there, but it's also contaminated with fascism, dogmatism, and untruth, essentially what Anonymous was saying. I was blissful, even though he told me Yah would rebuke me for my wickedness. When he e-mailed me that, my world was so opened up in that way I described with Nome that, I was really worried some supernatural punishment was about to befall me, but then started to feel just radiantly blissful when none did. I've talked to proselytizing Christians, and in the last few years, and normally I've felt like I could run mental laps around them. Anyway, I wrote him about how he's wrong, his attitude is fascist, and Yah does not rebuke me! But just now, as I was walking through campus I saw him laughing kindly and talking to all these foreign students, and I peered at him curiously, and tried to sneak on past, and laughing with these new friends, or devotees he's behind me, oblivious to me, he doesn't know I'm the one I corresponded with. And there was that feeling of intimidation, lion in the dream again, that feeling in my chest, the waking-dream world opening up in that 'trippy' way, and immense peace. When I asked if he was enlightened, he said that he was mere dust, but he also says that he only says what Yahweh gives him to say. So again, for that reason, I'm wondering, well maybe he is a jnani, but does that mean what he is saying is true? Does that mean Christ is the only way? I just don't know. Anonymous don't respond, laugh, you are too close minded on this topic.
I've played with thoughts, like a true-guru being the Self might knock all your crutches out from under you. And my liberal anti-christianity, is an egoic crutch, and it could be kind of the equivalent of Papaji knocking the book out of that person's hand, or telling that person if they go to the wedding, and take care of their errands, he'll miss his chance to see God. There was another aspect of this. I could see a guru using Hell to motivate devotees to get in line, if the power of the Self is behind them, and it was through surrender to Christ that they became enlightened, they might be really adamant about that. And that even though I do, sense this power from him, it's really hard to accept that, because if I accept that he is a true teacher, or even explored it deeply. I am really not O.K with proselytizing Christianity, I am really not O.K, with giving up my liberal friends, for what could be a fanatical cult. See, I am not naieve, I am critical. Ya know, with Nome, there was none of that. There was no dogmatism, no fascism, no cult-like quality (actually there is no cult-like with this guy, because he claims to be nothing, and of no importance, but that the bible must be obeyed, which fits more with him being a true enlightened person) really, even though that was my initial impression. At SAT it was total live and let live (same with Maharshi). I like that, I don't like this accept only Christ, rejecting everything else, or burn in the lake of fire, it's like spiritual fascism. And this is what intellectually makes sense to me, but I keep having contact with this teacher, that suggests that something very powerful is operating through him. It's beyond words like jnani, even though that might be what it is. I'm not even saying it's real. But each time I reject him, I keep having these experiences in contact with him. And so, at the very least it makes me humble, spirituality has some element of being a dangerous river, that i don't want to be careless in.
One reason, some people might not understand these things, is I've had some even unwillingly, deep spiritual experiences, and some intellectual advaitins might go, "who had those experiences?' but no! They don't know what they are talking about. That's why whatever they mean, I take seriously things like ribbons of light flowing out of Nome. This teacher says that it from the devil, because the devil is angelic -lol. I can't say how crazy, nuts, and supernatural my experiences in my early twenties were, and how frightening they were to me, I wasn't prepared for them, I wasn't prepared for crazy people on the street to tell me what I was thinking. I wasn't prepared for birds to look like oragami, and the direct perception that I'm creating the world, or that I think about someone, they show up 5 minutes later. Everything that is the normal idea of reality was just totally thrown out, in a way, that I've honestly met few people who have experience that. That is why, for instance, no offense to anonymous, but some of his responses show me, that he hasn't had things like that happen, I don't think. Because there wouldn't be that certainty. I would see people's bad thoughts manifest in frightening hallucenations of demonic-ness on them. And then, with Nome, angelic-ness, kindness. So, because of that, I do think these things are not to messed with, and cliche answers like bible thumping dogmatist, that only makes you feel safe, gives an illusory sense of security, where you don't know the dangers. When I saw that person pass about twenty minutes ago, the radiant power that I felt from them, and that unlike previous times, they actually seemed kind of kind. I don't know what to think. I'm not commiting.
Friends,
An excerpt from 'Letters from Sri Ramanasramam':
2nd February, 1947
(87) DIVINE FORCE
I went to the hall at 2-30 this afternoon. Bhagavan
was there already, reading a slip of paper which someone
had handed over to him. I sat there waiting to hear what
Bhagavan would say. Bhagavan folded the paper with a
smile and said, “All this will occur if one thinks that there is
a difference between Bhagavan and oneself. If one thinks
that there is no such difference, all this will not occur.”
Is it enough if we say that there is no difference between
Bhagavan and ourselves? Is it not necessary to enquire who
oneself is, and what one’s origin is, before one thinks that
there is no difference between oneself and Bhagavan? Why
is Bhagavan saying this? I was thinking of asking Bhagavan
why he was thus misleading us but could not summon up
enough courage to do so. I do not know if Bhagavan sensed
this misgiving of mine; but anyway he himself began speaking
again as follows:
“Before one could realise that there is no difference
between him and Bhagavan, one should first discard all these
unreal attributes which are really not his. One cannot perceive
truth unless all these qualities are discarded. There is a Divine
force (Chaitanya Sakti) which is the source of all things. All
these other qualities cannot be discarded unless we get hold
of that force. Sadhana is required to get hold of that force.”
I got courage as I heard those words and said
unconsciously, “So there is a force?” “Yes,” replied Bhagavan,
“There is a force. It is that force that is called swasphurana
(consciousness of the Self).” I said with a quivering voice,
“Bhagavan said casually that it is enough if we think that
there is no difference between us and God. But we can
discard these unreal attributes only if we are able to get hold
of that force. Let it be the Divine force or the consciousness
of the Self. Whatever it is, should we not know it? We are
not able to know it however much we try.”
Never before this did I ask Bhagavan questions in the
presence of others so boldly. Today, the inner urge was so
great that words came out of my mouth of their own accord
in the course of the conversation, and my eyes were filled
with tears and so I turned my face towards the wall. A lady
sitting next to me told me afterwards that Bhagavan’s eyes
also became moist. How tender-hearted he is towards the
humble!
-----------------------------------
"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 strength to a transcendent Force."-Savitri by Sri Aurobindo.
Namaskar.
But there are other things, like the drunken guy who was banging on Lakshmana Swami's hut and saw black snakes chase him back into town and got his act together. I mean, this Christian preacher, I wouldn't want to mess with him. There is something perhaps divine operating through him very strongly. And that's the thing, lets say he is what some call a jnani, it's so beyond words like that. I feel so small in comparison. So destructable. When he was walking behind me, well, it kind of was like, i could understand how, lets say he is what some call the omnipotent Self or Brahman or in his own words YHVH gives him the words he speaks. Well, there is this feeling that I am destructible, he is unaffected. Like I threw it all at him e-mail wise, and he wasn't effected. He was solid. But then, the unwillingness to accept things like hell, or his unliberal ideas on homosexuality, even though I am heterosexual, I am a tolerant person of things like that. I can't reject Self-inquiry, or Ramana Maharshi. But what if the Self is attacking my ego from a different angle. And maybe it's not even about the specific ideas, it's about the attack of the ego, on it's hitherto unattacked side. Bam!
I've never had contact with someone, who I abhor the ideas as much as I do his, that my mulling over what he is saying, has caused me to grow so much, faster than I want. Earlier today, I was thinking that maybe it was just because it was because that dogmatic, God-fearing part of me, was being questioned by seeing the negativity expressed with this guy. But when I read over his beatific letters, or see him, then it's maybe my unwillingness to surrender, I just don't know. It's funny the grace of interaction with him, is actually making me so much happier, like shocking me.
It's funny the feeling that is so intense and challenging I get with this guy, my total unwillingness to surrender to anything he is saying, makes me wonder, that if I made that leap, showed up to all the events he invited me to, preached with him, just gave up every last vestige of myself to essentially what he was saying, if I'd become enlightened. (lets say he's wrong, and I find out he's just a dumb bigot, then I could still go away, probably none the worse for wear. I didn't get the impression that he was physically dangerous, or anything weird was going on around him. My resistance is mostly psychological) It really becomes clear, and I wonder if people like David Godman have wrestled with this...It's almost like to become Self-Realized, not just the words I said, but truly enlightened, one has to as Maharshi said completely surrender oneself. I really would not be surprised if this Christian preacher is that, because there is this feeling of total truth that radiates through me when I get a response, and my unwillingness, because to go with him, I'd have to give up everything, even if I don't give up everything, and that makes me wonder if things would go so much better, if I just went, "ya know what you are right, I'll go with you to your mass, or whatever, and Passover dinner and eat the lamb, and try to convert my family to torah-based Christianity-lol" I mean that was I was thinking about, I really find what he is saying challenging. I don't find what Maharshi says challenging as much anymore. But the people around Maharshi, when you read Talks, it must have been a terribly intense experience in his presence, and there would have been an incredible unwillingness to give up, basically to go to Maharshi, a total bhakti, worshipping Siva, and Maharshi says, "find yourself first, don't worry about Siva, question as to Who am I?". That would have been so challenging, and scary. We read that, in our secular culture, and in a way, it accords nicely with our culture. I was even speculating that for instance Maharshi was seemingly way more a pure advaita (nondual) guru, then many gurus, who may have been equally enlightened, really, some of them, atleast a few of them. But we all could probably agree, that the power to enlighten, or the force of his grace was kind out of this world. But I was thinking, if the ideas of a guru don't challenge you. Even if the grace is equal. It makes sense that the Self would provide a guru, that would challenge the very things you were unwilling to face, which would be extremely terrifying. So when Maharshi said these things, for all i know, people were like, "yeah, but if I listen to you, I'll get some bad birth, how do I know what you are saying, is really going to liberate me, maybe I should just continue with my familiar pujas, to have a nice life." I'm just saying, that the things Maharshi said, might have been frighteningly challenging, Maharshi, I'm not saying he wasn't religious, I'm saying that I could imagine, that he was coming from an angle, that many people there, were unwilling to face, though he was infact a true embodiment of the religion. Like N. Krishnamurti Ayer's story, where he felt like a bomb exploded under him after Maharshi asked, "state? What do you mean by state?" When I read that, from the safe confines of my apartment, warm, cozy, no jnanis around, snug in my illusions, it's a brilliant story, and entertaining. But what did Maharshi say to N.Krishnamurti Ayer, that his whole entire mind came unraveled. (just a second before he was going to disprove God to ignorant Maharshi) What he said, must have struck some really deep, even I would say threatening chord. Remember afterwards he said to himself, "this is an extremely dangerous man".
You either need a hug or a warm blanket? I am not unsympathetic to your searching. Just take care not to be drawn into or be influenced by an authoritarian figure overriding your own good judgement.
Maybe you should walk around campus softly chanting Ramana's name for protection.
hj
"The more you talk and think about it,
the further astray you wander from the truth."
Sengtsan, Third Ch'an patriarch
"Do not deceive yourselves with conceptual thinking, and do not look anywhere for the truth, for all that is needed is to refrain from allowing concepts to arise."
Huang Po, Ninth century Ch'an master.
Questioner: "Sir, I am an humble seeker,wandering from
Guru to Guru in search of release. My mind is sick,
burning with desire, frozen with fear. My days flit by,
red with pain, grey with boredom. My age is advancing,
my health decaying, my future dark and frightening.
At this rate I shall live in sorrow and die in despair.
Is there any hope for me? Or have I come too late?"
Nisargadatta: "Nothing is wrong with you,
but the ideas you have of yourself are althogher wrong.
It is not you who desires, fears and suffers,
it is the person built on the foundation of your body
by circumstances and influences.
You are not that person.
hj
thank you Sengtsan and Huang Po for bringing us back to the path
do not hestitate to remind us another 10 000x, we will surely need it
David,
I have an important question for you. How big of a hindrance to sadhana/self-realization is marriage and sex? I remember reading that you were married at some point in your life. What is Bhagavan's position on this? What is yours? Please feel free to draw from personal experiences. I don't know if this topic has been addressed in the blog. If it already has, do post a link to the discussions. Thank you.
Ultimately, everything has to be surrendered including the root, of even the assumption of the individual personage. So anyway you take it, some kind of sacrifice is required. As Papaji said, "you have to ask yourself once and for all, this or next life". Probably, this is my guess, for the sake of argument, lets say he is enlightened. If I didn't do what he said, and went my own way, and inquired, I might encounter another such enlightened person, but anyway it goes, what I haven't sacrificed, what is a core-part of my ego, what is why I find this particular person frightening, whatever that is, I'm probably going to have to make some sacrifice to get closer to a sage. Even Nome, I would have to move to Santa Cruz, and I'm so into my attachments in Portland. And it's almost like in the 3D world, the obstacles manifest, as not wanting to give up what would be required to give up. Now ultimately in Self-Realization, or being around a sage even. God doesn't forsake one who surrenders. So in either case, moving to Santa Cruz, or becoming an evangelizing Christian, I would give up, and surrender what i'm not surrendering, and the life may flower way more then it did before, because I gave up myself to the Self, atleast more then I am now. I definitely recognize there is some power to the Self going on with this guy, like In Ravi's letter. And Nome for sure. but I don't know what's happening. Nome was different, there were interactions with him, that reminded me so much of the Power of the Presence. Where he kindly would say something, or I would even overhear something. Despite what the gossip says about him, I don't see one iota of authoritarian in him, and so I trusted him. I trust him alot more. If nothing else, I get out of this, more determination to give up bad habits.
"Just take care not to be drawn into or be influenced by an authoritarian figure overriding your own good judgement.
Maybe you should walk around campus softly chanting Ramana's name for protection."
I agree with your first sentence wholeheartedly. If this person is an authoritarian figure, then I would reject him, that's why I haven't gone with him, is because I don't want to be around an authoritarian-figure, or I don't trust that he is not that, and that there is something creepy going on with him. And that is stuff I would totally reject. But I haven't gotten that sense from correspondence with him. He hasn't been an authoritarian figure, but he gives clarity on what he believes. What he believes is that if you don't obey the bible, and accept Christ unreservedly you will burn in the lake of fire for eternity, his own words. Not an untypical Christian viewpoint, it is untypical though he believes that you have to completely give up sin to be saved, you have to attain godly perfection, few Christians believe that, they believe it's the faith in Christ that saves you. I think the conflict for me is, I can't accept that all other religions and paths lead to hell. I like Krishnamurti's "Truth is a pathless land". I can't accept that my liberal, or queer friends are going to hell. It doesn't even make sense to me. Nonetheless, I'm getting some real purifying benefit out of corresponding with him. You asked about sexuality that is a key thing. I probably have pretty liberal non-religious views on sexuality in general, especially what I accept from friends. And I grew up in the U.S., which is a more secular place. But... desire is the issue. Because desire causes suffering. It is very tied to the ego, "I want". Ramana says so himself. To me...when even this Christian preacher says sin, I translate in my brain, not as having sex with someone you like in or out of marriage, but desire, and the assertion of self-hood that requires to want, to desire (for me alot of my desires are sexual). There is so much this Christian preacher says that translates in my brain into the same things Maharshi said. Essentially unreserved surrender to YHVH, and he has referred to YHVH as eternal, and he said that YHVH (God) willingly surrenders to the Torah. (like Maharshi saying the Lord is so great because he is the most humble) He also says that he has completely surrendered, and doesn't sin because he wants to put a smile on YahShua's (Jesus') divine face. That says to me, that this is maybe someone who has completely surrendered self-hood, and desire, to YHVH, and when he says YHVH gives him the words he speaks, that he wouldn't say something unless YHVH told him to, and when I asked him (all e-mail, I haven't talked to him in person), what he meant by that, he told me to read certain passages that were beautiful about Jesus. But I thought he's talking about how he's surrendered completely, and is no longer the doer of actions. When I would observe him screaming like a nut-case at passersbys, I didn't give him much of a second thought. And even when I e-mailed him, I thought wise me, was going to influence some sense into him. I can't explain the intense grace that comes through his responses, and I think honestly interaction with actual enlightened folks is way more intense, and potentially intimidating because they will confront you with what you are not facing.
Scott,
The objective of all spiritual paths is to restore one back to oneself-not to make one a slave of another ,however Noble and Elevated.
Here is an Excerpt from Sri Aurobindo:
"his nature calls for a human intermediary so that he may feel the Divine in something entirely close to his own humanity and sensible in a human influence and example. This call is satisfied by the Divine manifest in a human appearance, the Incarnation, the Avatar-Krishna, Christ, Buddha. Or if this is too hard for him to conceive, the Divine represents himself through a less marvellous intermediary, -- Prophet or Teacher. For many who cannot conceive or are unwilling to accept the Divine Man, are ready to open themselves to the supreme man, terming him not incarnation but world-teacher or divine representative.
This also is not enough; a living influence, a living example, a present instruction is needed. For it is only the few who can make the past Teacher and his teaching, the past Incarnation and his example and influence a living force in their lives. For this need also the Hindu discipline provides in the relation of the Guru and the disciple. The Guru may sometimes be the Incarnation or World-Teacher; but it is sufficient that he should represent to the disciple the divine wisdom, convey to him something of the divine ideal or make him feel the realised relation of the human soul with the Eternal.
The Sadhaka of the integral Yoga will make use of all these aids according to his nature; but it is necessary that he should shun their limitations and cast from himself that exclusive tendency of egoistic mind which cries, "My God, my Incarnation, my Prophet, my Guru," and opposes it to all other realisation in a sectarian or a fanatical spirit. All sectarianism, all fanaticism must be shunned; for it is inconsistent with the integrity of the divine realisation."
-----------------------------------
The Christian Teacher is quite right in his Faith in Jesus and The Bible.He is totally blind if he thinks that his is the Only Path to Salvation.The Hell Fire and Satan,etc are absolutely kindergarden stuff and he who is hugging such belief is best left alone until he realises for himself,either here or in the hereafter.
He who claims he is 'Nothing' is compensating by saying that his 'belief' is everything.The Ego thus reclaims the lost ground with a multiplier effect that gives a tremendous Vitality and satisfaction.Often,this type of a personality has strong will and a Dominating influence.
-----------------------------------
I have written a little candidly and overtly.you need to think about it critically;although you claim to be doing so,I find it otherwise.
Better to approach Jesus,the Christ directly sans his fanatical adherents.We certainly do not require their recommendations and exhortations.
uncle moon is everyone's uncle;Likewise God is everone's God.
Wish you the Very Best.
Namaskar
Yeah, Ramana Maharshi survives all the detours. Once Ramana Maharshi and the inquiry to see, hey this person isn't me, is there. It can't be really gotten rid of, or forgotten. And Bliss-Integrity over-rides any other truths, once it's been experienced.
This punk band really speaks to my bliss-integrity!
http://vimeo.com/9461838
I think inquiry, and earnest spirituality makes it harder to reject people and what they say, with a walled-off closed mind. But then when something is investigated, it may not resonate with a deeper, happier integrity. And that's the thing Ramana and his real Truth, has awakened to me a sense of bliss, happiness that I carry with me wherever I go. And I'm learning that things that make you feel worse, are usually not true. Truth makes one happier.
Anonymous asked about sex, this is from mathrusrisarada.org, in Words of Grace, this is her 50th birthday message, there was alot more, but blogspot only allows a certain ammount of characters: (I recommend the whole message)
S: "Most people think that sex is happiness but it is really unhappiness. Just think of the amount of trouble people go through in order to get sex. They want a girl but they can't get that girl. They worry, they get sad, they get angry and lose their intelligence, they don't know what they are doing and some even commit murder in that state. All these troubles just to get a girl.
· After all these troubles they then get the girl, but how long is the pleasure going to last? How long is that enjoyment going to stay with them? They then get bored and tired. After sex where has the passion gone? After enjoying passion, dispassion sets in for a while. After eating too much food you can't eat any more, and food loses its taste. Sex is also like that.
· People know sex is not really happiness but still they want it for passing time. They think "I can't get happiness but at least with sex I can get some enjoyment." Like the camel eating thorns which make its mouth bleed, but continues to eat them for their taste.
· People see beautiful scenes in nature (prakriti). They listen to nice music and get enjoyment, but they still want sex included in this! Bhagavan tells the traditional Indian story of how the five senses (indrias) lead to downfall. The deer likes the sound of sweet music and the hunter uses this to attract and kill the deer. The fisherman puts tasty bait on the hook and the fish is caught and dies because of its liking for nice tastes. The moth sees the beauty of the joyti, the candle light, and wants to possess that beauty so it flies into the flame and perishes. Similarly, some insects are attracted to the smell of poison plants and consequently die. The he elephant is attracted by the touch of the she elephant. Hunters train she elephants to lead the he elephants by the touch of their trunks to fall into the pits prepared for trapping them. In these examples one sense alone is sufficient to cause the animal to lose its life.
Bhagavan laughs, telling this story and says that merely because of one sense these animals lose their life but people go to movies in order to enjoy all five senses at the same time! They see sexy scenes on the screen and hear enticing songs and dance. They like the taste of the popcorn and the smell of the perfume of the girl in the next seat and they also like to touch her.
· Anything too much is boring so people try to keep their stimulations spaced apart so they can enjoy them without losing pleasure. Only the Self can give continuous eternal happiness but people try to keep their sexual interest by doing some sadhana or something else for a time before going back to sex. By alternating in this manner they try to keep their sexual interest up until old age. Then they pay much money for many remedies to keep sex working.
· Anybody falling for sex is a slave! Intelligent people treasure freedom and avoid sex.
· People say their mind automatically goes out to girls even if they don't want it to but this is because they don't have real devotion and love. If you really love someone strongly you will lose all attraction for other people and will think only of the person you are in love with, like the heroes and heroines at the end of movie love stories.
· People having kama (lust) are blind. They can't see age or AIDS or anything.
· A person who has turned vegetarian cannot stand the sight of meat after a time. It is similar with a life that has truly turned from sex to sadhana.
· People waste their time running after these pleasures. Then old age starts creeping on them and they begin to think why am I wasting my time for these things?
Bhagavan did not teach that either sex or marriage was an impediment to Self-realisation.
Many people came to Bhagavan and asked his permission to renounce their worldly responsibilities in order to become a celibate sannyasin, but he never gave his permission. He often said doing that just replaces one identification with another: you start thinking 'I am a sannyasin' instead of 'I am a householder'.
He also said that wherever you go, you have to take the mind with you. It is therefore the mind and its identifications that need to be renounced, not particular activities of the body. In the first chapter of part one of 'The Power of the Presence', he told Rangan, who was toying with the idea of physical renunciation, that it was easier for a householder to realise the Self than a sannyasin.
It is well known that he said that enquiry and surrender were the only two ways to realise the Self. As an aid to either path he said one should take sattvic food, in moderate quantities. Celibacy did not appear on this list of primary aids.
He did say once that as practice becomes more intense, thoughts of sex drop off. However, he didn't say that abstaining from sex would result in a better spiritual practice. When it was brought to his attention that even married couples in Aurobindo Ashram were obliged to sleep in separate rooms, he remarked 'What is the use of that? If it exists in the mind, what use it it to force people to abstain.'
Bhagavan was once asked, How do we root out our sex idea?' and he replied, 'By rooting out the false idea of the body being the Self. Be the Self and you will have no sex troubles.'
My conclusion from reading all of Bhagavan's words on this topic is that he advocated enquiry over repression. One should enquire into the nature of the one who has the desires rather than simply refuse to indulge in them.
While that makes sense. What about for people with social difficulties, that make forming amorous relationships much more difficult. Like, personal detail, I've never had, and may never have an intimate, physical relationship with another, because autism spectrum issues. I haven't ruled it out, and I still make an attempt, still have asked people out. I wouldn't think Bhagavan would have advised indulging in depression, or despair, or negative thoughts, or obssessively wanting what isn't available, or lamenting disabilities and conditions. And inquiring, and not being the doer, and just seems more tricky. Part of the reason I kept deepening in spirituality, was to help perhaps eventually form relationships with people, be more open, non-verbally. To be quite honest, hopefully not inappropriately, yeah, dating and sex, are a natural part of being a living organism. And I don't think inquiry is about going against nature in that way. But if your brain, doesn't work as well in some way... Desire, and then depression, they are so connected. So it's tricky. The only thing I can come up with is inquire, disidentify completely, negate thinking about what isn't happening now, and if in the moment, something is able to happen, go with it. Today at a cafe, I can tell when people are interested in me, maybe, and inquiry seems to heighten that, it seemed like there was some interest from this woman that worked there. I just kept the inquiry up, tried to stay in as blissful, of samadhi, not thinking as possible. I don't know. Why didn't Maharshi and some of his devotees have sex, why did maharshi try to keep annamalai swami from thinking about sex? So maybe the question is about thinking about it. Just like food shouldn't be obssessed about or thought about. It's trick though. I have to willfully eat, if I don't desire food. I have no idea in practice. I of course, probably like every other human would like to have fall in love, be romantic, all that. I have no idea how to approach it. But for sure, lamenting, or being depressed, is something to be prevented, I think. Maybe not repressed, but not indulged in.
It's that i don't indulge sexual desires. (without others) But I may have struggled with that a little. Seeing spirituality as my only hope, becoming almost nuts religious, just because of social failings in the world, seemed like a possibility. And inquiry doesn't really answer social questions. And so far, i've found with mild autistic issues, it much more difficult to have those kind of relationships (to let people you know you like that you like them), and have struggled with intense despair. Nome was the real deal as a spiritual teacher, I mean, he has the goods as far as I was concerned. He also did not advise repression, and said sex is of the body and what it does. But he did for a long time, first and foremost focus on finding the source of happiness within. That atleast has helped somewhat. I've taken Robert Adams advise that in some life you get everything, in another life nothing because of karma. I've figured my difficulties socially, not having romantic relationships is a prarabdha karma issue. Life is playing itself out with a worse deck of cards.
'By rooting out the false idea of the body being the Self. Be the Self and you will have no sex troubles.'
This is why, I think I have a leg-up, that I mentioned earlier in some way. My only hope in the world is to abide as the Self. Otherwise, I'm totally screwed. I have to inquire to be completely in samadhi, as much as possible, otherwise I would get so extremely depressed. I guess that is the answer, is if I abide in the Self, perfectly, whatever relationships that are meant to form will form. But, see that is a big ? for me about inquiry, something I find difficult to understand, I guess that means motivation to do things including have sex, is not negated necessarily by inquiry. But inquiry, and abiding as the Self, does have the potential to make the action more harmonious. I have found myself more naturally reciprocating flirtation, not enough to actually have relationships, or sex, or dating, or marriage. But...an increase in non-verbal communication the more in samadhi I am. But it requires being completely without wants, without desires, without obsession about it, completely forgetting it about it, after an interaction. My only hope is Realization. I have no other hope.
By going through the teachings of various jnanis including Bhagavan Ramana, it could be deduced that a Person's worldly desires (including the desire for sex) will weaken and drop-off themselves with the one-pointed rise in the strength of the desire for Self-realization.
At the same time, they have pointed out that forceful suppression or excessive indulgence with regard to worldly desires do no good to the mind and the body due to the excessive stress it creates.
Moderation is the key for balance in all worldly activities. Discrimination and detachment is essential for this as well as for Self-Realization. A Person's breathing pattern/rhythm will be slow, steady and calm/relaxed when he/she is peaceful.
Thanks. Sankar Ganesh.
Annamalai Swami :" Since the desire for women came to me the other day, I have not slept or taken food for the last three days. As these thoughts occur quite often, what will eventually happen to me?"
Bhagavan, after remaining silent for a couple of minutes, replied
'Why should you always be thinking that an evil thought occurred at such and such a time in the past? If you instead meditate "To whom does this thought come?" It will fly away of its owen accord. You are not the body or the mind, you are the self. Meditate on this and all your desires will leave you."
Anonymous,
"I have an important question for you. How big of a hindrance to sadhana/self-realization is marriage and sex? I remember reading that you were married at some point in your life. What is Bhagavan's position on this? What is yours?"
Friend,understanding Sri Bhagavan's position or any other's position is not the same as understanding one's position.What is need for one may not be a need for another.
A reverential attitude towards the whole of life is the basic premise of Spiritual Living;not looking for easy formulas,do's and dont's.Marriage and sex will fall into place if this attitude is inculcated.
Man(or woman)has first and foremost learn to be Human;Learn to treat others as Human beings(Not as Objects of Enjoyment or Dominion).Marriage is a wonderful school where he can learn the ABCs of Living-essentially sharing the joys and sorrows,learn to assume responsibility for oneself and one's Family,care for one's parents,one's Neighbours,learn the basics of FRIENDSHIP and KINSHIP.
Sex also is not to be viewed as a pure physical act, to simply satisfy one's animal urges.More than seeking one's satisfaction,it can be refined into a giving of oneself.
In Tirukkural,The Sage Tiruvalluvar has devoted a great deal of chapters to this Noble Ashrama(Grihasthashrama-that of the Householder):
In one of his couplets he says:
"puNarchi Pazhaguthal veNda,uNarchithaan
naTpAm kizhamai tharum"
I will give my understanding of this(Other Translators may interpret it differently)
"There is no need for Sex;it is the Feeling(Refined-ravi) that leads to companionship".
Where Love is Full,the need for sex drops away.
Yet this flowering has to happen in a natural way.
in yet another couplet,the Sage describes the Essence of Marriage:
udambodu uyiridai enna marranna
madandhai yodu emmidai Natpu.
meaning-
"like unto the relationship between the Body and Life that animates it;similiar is the FRIENDSHIP between me and my Lady"
----------------------------------
This is a vast subject and Sanatana Dharma has given due importance to this crucial Ashrama(Stage of Life)-It is this Ashrama that has yielded the Great souls to us.
As Sri Bhagavan in his incomparable Akshara maNa Maalai has payed his homage to this Ashrama,i.e to his parents:
Like Azhagu(Mother)and Sundaram(Father),May you and I be without differentiation(Whole),Oh Arunachala!
More Later.
Namaskar.
If one is able to accept whatever his/her prarabdha karma (or) existing circumstances/situation as it is and face them or deal with them calmly without any resistance then there will be no desires to trouble him/her. This is actually nothing but Jnana itself which we are all striving for.
Thanks. Sankar Ganesh.
I have had great loving moments with people I've had crushes on, or was interested in. I mainly haven't had relationships, kissing, sex, marriage any of it. Partly because of difficulties. What you guys Ravi and the previous person who posted makes alot of sense. It isn't about end results. And it is about accepting one's prarabdha karma. For me, that would be, inquiring abiding in Bliss(in that itself, as that itself) as much as possible, let interactions happen naturally. If there is an obvious opportunity for a cool experience take it, or do something about it. I've never really understood the religious thing about why sex is an issue for people. For me, sex (and relationship) has been an issue, because of not having it, and wanting it. (which maybe is a more rare issue, surprisingly to me) Having people seem interested, and it not turning into anything. So the issue, is longing, regret, not knowing how to approach interactions, not being able to figure it out. That still bothers me. So then I have no choice, it's like my happiness, the only happiness I could find is through inquiry. Maharshi said one should not say "should I do this, or should I do that?" But leave it all up to that power. That is often the approach, but sometimes, maybe i get flirted with, and then I'm like maybe I should do something about it, what? Then confusion, being trapped in the past, all the things that seemed like they could have become something that didn't. Because of that one, one might think someone who lived a healthy, boisterous life would be closest to Realization. I'm not sure, because sometimes people who have been most successful at fulfilling their desires, and definitely sexual desires, can be the most arrogant, and the least introspective, it seems like. Not to mention, because they projected the desire, the objectification, it keeps them in their own imagination, and arrogant about other people. And my path, has led me to things like Maharshi and inquiry. So I guess, I'm saying, it's not so straight forward. People who have alot more ease at success in thsi world. It's a violent world, so they learn it's violent ways, and then are not humble. They are competative, aggressive, dishonest, it seems sometimes. Most people I know, are not judging them, considerably more that way then me. I of course have fallen into sub-cultures that are more kind. But most of the people, have not been humbled, as much as I have, and so you know have all sorts of opinions about the world, about people, gossip. And those are things, I don't really do so much. Because I've been really reduced down, and forced to give up my arrogance to a large extent. And so in some ways, I unintentionally live a more renounced life, and am I can honestly say, without hesitation, closer to enlightenment then anyone I know in my circle of friends. (laugh). No doubt about this, because I'm the only one whose trying to dissolve my ego. The only people I know are myself, people on this website, and enlightened sages, I've either maybe met or read about.
More on sex: I have no sense-lol, so David Godman can use his discretion. Ramana's enlightened perspective on this makes sense. It almost is unwise to turn down passionately being with someone you like, and really who would? But like in my own case, I can get distracted by the possibility, and the wondering should I do something about it. And I was thinking in the Ramana-inquiry, jnana perspective. It's best to inquire and just be happy, and let those things happen naturally. Like I have trouble with non-verbal communication. I could perhaps help it along, by telling I like them in a romantic way when opportunities arise, they either feel the same or they don't. But really letting things happen naturally, not leaving the peace and bliss of abiding in my own self, to try to formulate strategies. And it will happen or it won't. But it seems like Ramana's advice, makes alot of sense, you don't get enlightened by self-denial. Well, to be quite honest, it then seems like Ramana's advice would seem to apply whether someone else is involved or not. But it's really about being in the present, and being happy, and letting things happening, instead of trying to manipulate. From my own experiences, the more I do that, the more beautiful my interactions with others anyway. And Ramana, I would think would question results oriented motivation. Like thinking, how do I make things happen the way I want? And allowing things to flower naturally. That's why, you know, that punk band I shared...there is something that resonates with that sense of freedom and bliss....For instance, maybe I had an interaction, and I'm like she sure was looking at me in a glowing way...Should I have sat down next to her, asked her out? Maybe,maybe not, it didn't happen naturally. The natural end result, is I smiled at her, said hi, and walked on. But now it's over, I'm here, I'm now, and Ramana would never advise suffering to anyone. I should be fall into, let flower, radiant bliss and stay there, no matter what, let that determine my life, let that alter circumstances, let that emerge relationships, let that emerge sexual, affectionate relationships, interactions.
Let the Self, God, which is Bliss itself, help to create relationships, don't shoulder the burden myself, and wonder how? Why don't I get it? That must be the best strategy.
Oh, if countries were run on spontaneous thought, then maybe we'd base things on love a bit more. The feeling you get when someone you know, but had never dared speak, comes up says hello. When the whole world exists in one kiss, and we long for the things, we swore we'd never miss. Gut feelings the stomach, the head spins around. There are so many things that we don't talk about. if I gave a lecture on the glory of sex, instead of a lecture on political crimes. You'd get red and embarressed and shuffle your legs, and say that we live in spontaneous times. I'm told by superiors we like it this way being told what to do in our lives day by day, being ordered and disciplined is natural they say, and if that's what you want, you can hate me O.K, I don't expect less, it's the thought for the day, but you'd probably deny what you feel anyway. And even deny your own self-denial, and even deny your own self-denial. At this point I'll stop or get bottled off stage, if it's down in a book, you'd rip out the page. Pure hatred is good, in a frightening way, it can help you let out what you're dying to say. Express what's inside in a momentary rage, from normal suppression it makes a good change. But pure love or anger should not be the factors that tell us apart from the everyday actors who live out the role they were given to play, suppress all their feelings and try not to say, that they love it, it's beautiful, it tears them apart. Or they hate it, it's a bastard, they don't know where to start. Try opening your mind and see what falls out, it's really amazing if you don't think about it, just go on instinctive spontanaiety drive, it's reality stop number 35. Where there queing for miles to watch you survive on the freedom of conscience that keeps you alive (makes me think of Ramana and Papaji). There's not many people who like the idea of a life without freedom yet they all live in fear, of losing the minute ammount that they've got, they say they know who they are, but they're not (inquiry), we're all individuals under the skin, born losers we're told that no one can win, born winners created by money, not skill, this structure is sick, it's even making me ill, it's rubbed off on me, and you can tell by these songs, but I went the other way, I think it's wrong. Oh, it's all too much, it's all out of touch, you're telling me, I can hear you, you see. You can see, you can hear, but you cannot believe, cus your concept of life, lies in envy and greed, just cus you want something, don't mean you need. If you can hear and be conscious the rest comes for free. To bring it to basics this life is a dream, and when you wake up you will see what I mean."
I was thinking about how, one of the reasons bliss is left, is because there is a lack of faith that in that bliss everything will be taken care of. Like when I worry about should I do this? Or should I do that? or nothing at all? I feel that I need to answer that question, instead of just being in bliss. And the more there is this attempt just to be, and to be in bliss, the more the faith is increased, that things didn't work out so bad. It wasn't so necessary to give up my peace of mind. I was also thinking about how, there is something about inquiry, and the earnest attempt to practice it, that now, when I attempt it, it gets at something deeper, then it previously did. A mix of all these things, including life experiences and adhering to it, it gets deeper. And there is no explaining it, there is no intellectually understanding it. And as a last aside. Ramana's teachings, are thankfully something that can be trusted, when nothing else can be trusted. Everything else might have some aspect that could lead one astray (into confusion). But inquiry, and all the aspects of attempting it, is something that can help discern the truth, where there is any confusion about something. Oh, I would wonder is that true, Oh I would wonder should I do that, oh I would worry about this or that. But inquiry itself, is a discernment that can reveal clarity and clear up that confusion. And immerse one back in one's own natural happiness. And the big changes are gradual. And I'm finding they are inexplicable. I can't tell you why I'm happier now, or what I'm doing differently. I'm still attempting to follow Ramana's instructions. I can't tell you what or why or how, there is some way in which it is more effective then it used to be. It's gradual changes. One thing, is it can help me discern that this here blog is a good place.
I believe proselytising has been banned in Tamil Nadu. I don't know about other parts of India.
What is Quo Vadis doing in Tiruvannamalai? It's run by the Lutheran church and has an outreach program of interfaith dialogue. Is that just a cover for Christian proselytising?
Do they have a hidden agenda and if so, what is it?
A disciple asked Bhagawan Ramana: Am i qualified to be enlightened?
Ramana asked: Are you still breathing?
Suprised the man said, yes, I am.
Ramana said: then you are qualified.
Scott,
I wish to share a few thoughts.Firstly,spiritual living is all about understanding ourselves and finding our equilibrium.Bliss and experiences are no guarantee that we are advancing in the spiritual Path.Equanimity and emotional stability are certainly a better indication than experiences of Bliss,etc.
Understanding ourselves would include our Physical,emotional,mental,Intellectual and spiritual aspects and bringing them into harmony.
'Who am I' is not a panacea for this.For example,if we are Hungry,Asking 'Who is Hungry' is meaningless.Hunger has to be appeased by eating Food-i.e it has to be handled at that level only.
Similiarly in cases of urges like Sex,it has a physical base-What is called the Vital Body(Pranamaya Kosha)-The Vital is the seat of Energy.This Energy cannot be bottled up and has to be channelised.This energy reaches its peak level in early youth(adolescence)and it needs to be transmuted.Games and Sports are an excellent way of Harnessing this Energy(at a Physical level).Healthy relationship is also needed to channelise the subtle aspect of this Energy.Here is where Prayer and Bhakti can play a Huge Role(Apart from Human Relationships).This is where the personal aspect of God is indispensable.Depending on one's predisposition,one can enter into a Relationship with God as Mother,Father,Friend,Master and in Rare but quite sublime cases as Beloved(This aspect is a super set of all other aspects).There is nothing 'imaginary' about this-as the Divine is all this and much more.This is the central Truth of Sri Ramakrishna's glorious Life and Teaching-that the Divine can be approached in a Human way-that this sweet way can lead to all the Rest.
The Divine is atonce personal and Impersonal,depending on how we approach Him.
-----------------------------------
This gives us a taste of Love and all human relationships would pale into insignificance when we establish this Relationship with the Divine.This would lead us to perceive this 'core' relationship in all our relationships with our HumanMother,Father,Children,spouse.
Classical Music is a Great aid in Refining our Emotions.
-----------------------------------
Along with this,Discrimination and Dispassion needs to be developed-by unflinchingly looking at ourselves without self pity or embarassment.Take a look at the desires we cherish.Take a hardlook at what can be fulfilled and what cannot be-without injuring oneself and others in the process.Rationalise what can be worked for and what are futile and hence needs to be ruthlessly dropped.
When working towards the desires that one wishes to fulfill,take into account the Responsibility that it entails-Is one prepared to discharge the Responsibilities?If yes,then one may go ahead.Otherwise,may be we have to go back to see whether we should drop these desires and FIND INTELLIGENT way of dropping them.
-----------------------------------
The 'Who am I' will be effective only if this preliminary work has been undertaken;to mop up any left over vasanas that may still be lurking there and escaped our attention.This is not to say that 'Self Enquiry' should not be practised in the beginning;if one is Drawn to it,please resort to it.Sri Bhagavan never laid any such guidelines.
Yet,it should not be used as a Pacifier to escape from coping with the Basic realities of existential problems;i.e All problems exist because 'I' exist;So get rid of the 'I'.This is rank escapism.This is not the purpose of Self Enquiry.It is to discover the 'I',not to eliminate it.(Sometimes Sri Bhagavan would have made similiar comments;yet this needs to be understood properly).
Scott,all seekers will have some such difficulty and 'routes of escape'.So,this is not peculiar to you or any individual.If one unflinchingly looks at this and takes a courageous stance,that is a Great advancement on the spiritual path.
-----------------------------------
Wish you the Very Best.
Namaskar.
LMM,
Next time, if you do come across that girl-or any girl that you like-please try to ask her out. That is the first step. You need a big hug. We all do, sometimes.
Best,
m
I don't know, to be quite honest, I'll just respond, um, I would, but part of it is fear of rejection, but I think also wanting to be natural, and not depart from that, and so doing something risky or courageous, if it doesn't come naturally, if I have to do it, and it isn't just the natural response to the situation. It seems like I've usually gotten rejected. So it is tricky! I didn't know what to do, so I would in the past ask women I liked if they wanted to hang out, and then I would tell them I liked them in that way. Just nothing happened. so it's been tricky! I don't know.
It seems like most people really, do not have those kinds of relationships start except through circles of friends. And then...I don't know I've really struggled with it for a long time, with no success. I've taken some courageous actions, but nothing has come of it.
there are things Ravi, you say, that strike me incorrect about inquiry. I'm not saying you are wrong. But I don't think inquiry is escapism. Because in my experience it is the I that alienates. And that is the thing, with my dating problems, never having a girlfriend, all that stuff, which I've never figured out. In my twenties my approach, was well, I'll just do whatever it takes externally. and that didn't work, it didn't have the sensitivity. As far as responsibility. I don't feel like that is the issue, of wanting to shirk responsibility. All I know, is that my peers date, and I don't. I have no idea why. I have no idea why I spend alot of my time alone. It's not by choice. Inquiry, which I don't think is exactly escapism, has been the one thing I've found that has worked. When I say bliss, I mean stability and equilibrium. That's what I'm looking for. I think they are connected. When I'm in bliss, I'm also in stability and equilibrium. I'm open, and truly heart to heart speech is going on. That is why for instance, taking a situation, this woman who works at the cafe, who gives me a glowing look even when she isn't working. And seemed really excited when I asked her a question. Inquiry, gives me the sensitivity to be truly intimate with someone, and I don't mean in a romantic or sexual way. I may want that. But the sensitivity seems so important. And that's why either gross courage, like asking them out, telling them I have a crush on them. Or purely being sensitive don't seem to work. And
Ravi,
You have mentioned the benefits of listening to 'classical music' in a couple of posts that I have read. I am curious to hear about its benefits. I am a bit of a classical fan myself-Baroque music.
Could you please elaborate a bit more on this topic?
Thanks.
PS: I enjoyed reading your posts. Thanks for posting them.
What would Maharshi or Papaji (or Lakshmana Swami) tell me? i think they would tell me the same thing Nome did. They would tell me to seek to find happiness within, and be non-attached to what is happening circumstance wise. I don't think they'd tell me to do what did not feel or come naturally. They would tell me to be happy first. Ravi said, simply asking Who is hungry? and not eating. Well inquiry I don't think is that. I can still be a person wanting to be escapist and asking, who is hungry? I think the reason it is not escapist, is because it's deeper and looking into this entity that is not satisfied, these thoughts carrying me away from pure stillness. That's the thing, I fully agree, I would not deny myself in a situation where there was potential romance.
But... I don't think any jnani would advise, and I don't think it's wise, to do things out of a sense of desperation. That's why I find the whole thing difficult. Is because asking out that person, it would be based on desperation and need. And that's why I would get rejected, is that would be sensed. So the only thing I can think of, is abiding in the Self, where the harmony takes over, and there is true intimacy with people, and not objectifying as "I need" something, which takes me out of the moment with those people. It's not about sexuality being wrong. It's about I can't cultivate relationships in the 'normal' (maybe abnormal) egoic way. Where I manipulate someone, into what I want from them? Yes, I might think someone is attractive, and want to have sex with them. And there is nothing wrong with that. But I think the only intimacy I will find in this life, is by abiding in the source of intimacy, the Self itself, in pure Bliss. I now after talking to that Christian guy have a sense that when religious people have their ideologies, they are wrong to the degree they think grace and Bliss are different from each other, or that God and Bliss are seperate. And when I think about doing something like asking that person out, there are times where I've asked people out, and it's in the midst of an interaction, and it is really natural, and I can be happy. We might not kiss (even if I'm attracted to them), but more likely they will say yes to hanging out. But where I feel unhappy, because I'm not having sex, and then formulate strategies, to make it happen, because I'm not naturally happy, I need that pleasure. That is I think out of accord with Maharshi's teachings. That is the desire he is talking about. He's not talking about sex or not sex. One can abide in the Self and have sex, way better sex, because the love is true. But anytime you feel you need something from this world, because you are not naturally happy, that is where inquiry comes in, because I am dwelling in unreality. Reality is happiness. And, so the question is, if I abide in Reality, which is happiness, or Bliss, which is merger, and abidance in God, it's a very helpful way to sort fiction from fact, truth from untruth. Instead out of desperation, need, unhappiness, taking a desperate course, doing something unnatural and scary to fill a self-created hole. And I've done that, and I've never succeeded. I've never made out with someone, had a relationship, I've never had them say yes, when that is the mood I was coming from. So if I'm in happiness, and it doesn't come natural in a situation, feels somehow inappropriate to ask them out then, I wait, until they get close enough, then I say, "I want to kiss you". This hasn't happened, but this must be the only game plan that will work.
Ok after, that thing with the Christian preacher, I have a deeper understanding of why I can't label people possible jnanis. So I take back my speculations. Nonetheless, with Nome, his advice was the best advice I've ever personally gotten, it was really the advice I knew was true, but everyone else was telling me was wrong. Radiantly, he gave me the right advice. And even, now when I think of his advice, it can sometimes take me above and beyond my slipping into depression or suffering.
Dear Kassy,
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
Namaste. Deeply answering one simple question will resolve all that is currently
perplexing and depressing you. You have read the question previously. Not knowing the
answer, living beings wander in delusion with the pursuit of unfulfilled desires and chased by their fears.
When alone, they dream of others, and when with others, they still feel lonely. Even hearing the Truth,
they are unable to adhere to it, their minds frantic with their own imaginative thinking that seems as if so real.
The suffering is so needless. Oblivious to the blessings beyond measure, their minds
stagnate in despair and hopeless moods.
The single question is: What is the source of happiness? Only if that
is answered deep within you will you be beyond sorrow. Only if this is answered does one’s
life become profoundly and enduringly spiritual. Only if this is answered does the steady,
ardent motivation for spiritual practice and for Realization shine in one’s heart.
Knowing the source of happiness within, the delusive thinking unravels and dissipates,
attachments fade, and one sees how false the cravings and fears of her own
mind were, and peace prevails.
In a sense, everyone pursues happiness in an endless variety of ways,
in objects, in circumstances, in relating to others, etc. Not knowing the answer,
the goal seems to be endlessly receding and the pursuit interminable. This is said
to occur life after life. If only they examined their experience, heeding the advice
of the wise, and plunged within and thus knew. Isn’t time that you knew?
You must come to this sooner or later. No one can do this for you, but if you
turn within, valuing it more than all else, a thousand hands of Grace support you.
Ever yours in Truth,
Nome
Dear Kassy,
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
Namaste. Thank you for your message.
Love may be said to be the unitary "feeling" of Being; that is, it
is of the very nature of the indivisible Self. One who revels in the Self is
the same in a crowd or in a solitary place, with close friends or without,
married or single, and so forth and so on.
That which is truly desired by all is the Bliss of the Self, which
is undivided Being. Finding that within, all desires dissolve for the one
who knows. The Being of the Self is ever-existent. It is not born when the
body is born and does not perish with the death of the body. It exists:
realize it within you and do not postpone your bliss.
Love in the form of desire, wishing for someone or something else to
provide the happiness that is actually innate, is mired and entangled in
delusion. If it is in the form of the desire to make the other or others
happy, too, it is higher because of less egotism. If it is the wish for
others to be happy with no regard for the ego, it is better. If it is in the
form of the perfect fullness of the Self, with no notion of ego or other, it
is true and without a veil. Such a one experiences neither desire nor fear
and rests content within.
I hope that the above is helpful for you. Reflect upon its meaning
and inquire to know yourself. You will thus be ever happy and at peace.
Ever yours in Truth,
Nome
With these social questions, I've done many things, I've done things that seemed scary, I've been boldly honest with people. But nothing has worked like being at peace, and happy within. And that's why, I trust inquiry more then anything else. I feel like I'm more likely to get a girlfriend (I really like) while being blissfully happy and transcendent, like the Ashtavakra gita describes, then if I'm scared, and out of sorts, doing something like anonymous said that doesn't feel natural. It can feel natural. I've asked out people, in our subculture out here, it's not clear, where the line is between asking out and romance (ha, liberals!). And that didn't lead to being affectionate. Essentially, I've done everything I can think of. But in the chaos of the world, making up my mind before hand how I'm going to approach a situation, doesn't necessarily work. Whereas abiding in the bliss, harmony, wisdom, sensitivity. I have more success, social interactions are far better. But what if I want something outside of that? What if abiding in Bliss, in that itself as that itself isn't fulfilling some deep seated desire, I don't get the girl. What then? Desperation, and frantic-ness to fulfill a need has never worked for me. Where when I'm happy, to some degree, people are drawn in, I find that without trying my reactions are alot more appropriate, then when I'm self-conscious about it. So, planning how I'm going to interact with someone. i'm going to ask them to hang out, next time I see them. Then I'm nervous, and not paying attention, not listening to them, waiting for my moment. Whereas, sometimes, when I'm in bliss, some person may hang out with me, and keep hanging out with me, and forget about the time, even when they have a busy day. And...I've come to the conclusion, that falling madly in love, or true love with someone, probably comes from the Self, or unitary love, not need. The people associate naturally in their own bliss and love. Robert Adams said something specifically, the books at home about 'many people think that you need to get what you want, and then become happy. But I tell you, be happy first, and what you want will come to you of it's own accord". I have to say that is a tell tale sign of wisdom that comes from the Self. So like, with my autistic issues. I mean, I maybe never will have a romance, I might, I might not. But desperation, and craving, and attempting to act on that, hasn't caused someone to fall into my arms. However much I might want it to. So that's where I think I may see differently then some people. It seems to me, that spirituality, and functioning in the world are not apart. Only the Self can give the supernatural, grace, power to succeed in the world. Yes, people succeed, in the world all the time with their egos, but often they are incompetent at what they do, they get by by playing the game, they aren't good at what they do. I mean, how can a selfish ego, love another person? It's not love. When I crave sex? That is not love! What is love?
This preacher tells me I'm going to hell? Yahweh hates me, what of it? (laugh)
Dear Kassy,
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
Namaste.
Self-Knowledge and Self-inquiry are of the nature of Reality, which
knows no sectarian division. It is like asking if God is a Hindu or
Christian. The humor of such is obvious. The same holds true for the nature
of Jesus.
Vedanta has excellently preserved, in experience and scripture,
these essential teachings. Perhaps this is due to the absence of "heresy
hunting," with its concomitant book burning, violence, malice etc. carried
out by those who have not a clue as to the real nature of God, worship,
wisdom, etc. but who nonetheless masquerade as "religious." Or it may be due
to the abundance of sages who have appeared in this ancient spiritual
tradition.
Heaven and hell are according to the conceiver or perceiver of them.
For those who experience such, such appear to be real. For those who know
all is in the mind, they appear as states or modes of mind. They thus rid
themselves of the errors that form the hell and find the heaven within. For
those who abide as the Self, there is only That, God, and nothing else
whatsoever.
The value of the ritual or form of worship is according to the one
who practices it. See Saddarshanam and Upadesha Saram (both by the Maharshi)
for a profound understanding of the relation of worship with name and form
to the practice of what is formless or the worship of the formless. Yes, the
final worship, puja, oblation, offering, etc. is Self-Realization.
Nonetheless, Sri Muruganar performed puja with a Siva-lingam, and Sri
Ramanasramam conducts much worship (puja), holy text recitations (Veda
Parayana and the Tamil Parayana), etc., and there is at the center of its
premises at Arunachala the Matribhutesvara Temple in traditional style with
traditional worship offered by the priests.
So, worship in any form is good if it diminishes the ego. It is best
to know what you worship, for thus your worship is in Truth.
Ever yours in Truth,
Nome
Scott,
I will have to leave it at that;Just to add that I have not intended that you should go ahead with attempting to establish Romantic relationships.The whole problem with such relationships is-I use 'you' for my end,and you will use 'me' for your end.The moment that 'use' is over,we call it off!This is the sort of superficial farce that is termed as 'Romantic'.one needs to ask whether this is what one wants.
-----------------------------------
Wishing you the very Best.
Namaskar.
I did not condition my mind by thinking: “I am God, I am wonderful, I am beyond”. I simply followed (my Gurus) instruction which was to focus the mind on pure being “I am”, and stay in it. I used to sit for hours together, with nothing but the “I am” in my mind and soon peace and joy and a deep all-embracing love became my normal state. In it all disappeared – myself, my Guru, the life I lived, the world around me. Only peace remained and unfathomable silence.
Nisargadatta Maharaj (pg. 239, I Am That)
No name suits God, so truly, aptly, and beautifully as the name ‘I’ or ‘I am’…………Even if one unceasingly meditates upon that name ‘I-I’ with one’s attention on the feeling ‘I’, it will take one and plunge one into the source from which thought rises, destroying the ego.
Ramana Maharishi (pg. 203, Be As You Are)
I remember an interesting exchange between Papaji and a woman in Lucknow. Papaji was talking about the beloved (god) and the woman responded
by talking about her husband. They were speaking at cross purposes. The woman couldn't understand where Papaji was coming from. He started to gently tease her but she still didn't grasp the divine input. Some of the devotees laughed but others looked a little embarrassed.
It shows you have to be ripe to even understand a verbal discussion with a guru.
As Ramana says "as you are so is the world."
hj
Love Minus Zero/No Limit
Bob Dylan
My love she speaks like silence,
Without ideals or violence,
She doesn't have to say she's faithful,
Yet she's true, like ice, like fire.
People carry roses,
Make promises by the hours,
My love she laughs like the flowers,
Valentines can't buy her.
In the dime stores and bus stations,
People talk of situations,
Read books, repeat quotations,
Draw conclusions on the wall.
Some speak of the future,
My love she speaks softly,
She knows there's no success like failure
And that failure's no success at all.
The cloak and dagger dangles,
Madams light the candles.
In ceremonies of the horsemen,
Even the pawn must hold a grudge.
Statues made of match sticks,
Crumble into one another,
My love winks, she does not bother,
She knows too much to argue or to judge.
Swami Vivekananda some where in his talks has given an example about detachment. It's gist is like this:
If you are destined by Prarabdha karma (or) a circumstance/situation to enjoy a great meal, enjoy it.
If by destiny you are not going to get a great meal don't even bother or think or worry about it.
The thoughts about what happened in the past or what will be the future and the resulting restlessness clouds our inherent Peace instead of living moment to moment in the present.
All kinds of spiritual sadhanaas are there for achieving this end only i.e., living only in the present without a wandering mind and accepting whatever that comes of its own accord.
Thanks. Sankar Ganesh.
"The whole problem with such relationships is-I use 'you' for my end,and you will use 'me' for your end.The moment that 'use' is over,we call it off!This is the sort of superficial farce that is termed as 'Romantic'.one needs to ask whether this is what one wants."
Needing romance to be happy strikes me false, but this also seems kind of false too. It's not black and white. People love eachother genuinely as well. Not everyone is in relatinship to manipulate the other into getting what they want or need. That is a farce. So your statement here, strikes me as often not true. But I think the important thing I took from Nome's responses, and Maharshi's teachings, is that happiness is within, and no one and nothing can give it to me. And that truly I have no needs in the world. My only need is Self. And that I think is what Maharshi teaches. That there is no valid feeling of insufficiency, and needing something to fill an unreal space. But I think that was also Maharshi's teachings, that David Godman brought up, that rejecting romance (and sex that is consensual) as somehow unholy or unspiritual, is not true either. It's just that, love is not what someone gives another someone. Love is Being, and it's always. What you are calling here a romantic relationship, is not a valid romantic relationship, that is an abusive relationship. I thought, honestly on happiness, that Nome's "bliss can never be wrong", is the perfect response. And that was the problem, with this Christian preacher's point of view, is that he thought there was something religious about sacrificing happiness, and I think the view that Bliss or complete sufficiency could ever not be a sign of spiritual deepening, is a completely false view. Bliss is the very sign of spiritual deepening. Because it means one is no longer putting one's happiness on things that can never fulfill it. When, and I think that is one of the most central tenets of Maharshi's teachings and advaita, happiness is the very nature of the self. And I will say, I can almost I think smell out a pseudo-advaitin when they downplay the importance of happiness. Because they think enlightenment is some mental feat. But happiness and enlightenment are inextricably woven, they are identical. Maharshi said, the Self is Bliss. And Ramakrishna who you always quote. So it is sorrow, desperation, anger, dullness, craving, that are escapism, not happiness. And Maharshi and Papaji all made the point that it is the I that gives trouble, that causes one to be unhappy. So to inquire into the I, to realize that there is no person, but pure Bliss. The only reason someone would say that Bliss is unrelated to spiritual developement, I think, is because of either a religious ideology (the preacher thought like this), or thinking enlightenment is a personal accomplishment of their ego. (pseudo-advaita)
People who play the expert are usually wrong. "Those that preach, don't know, those that know, don't preach" Swami Ramanagiri!
I'm a little hesitant, over my obsession with the word jnani, but essentially qualified spiritual teachers, are not that, ironically, they realize they aren't people, and instruction is from the natural state of happiness. So they aren't playing expert, nor even being experts, it seems. Maharshi, and other true teachers, know who they are. They aren't doing anything, or telling anybody anything. People who think they know something, and they think they have something they know, that they want to tell you. Papaji probably said it aptly, "they preach, because they want to destroy you, come to me, I will give you good advice (laughing), don't take anybody's advice!"
Swami Vivekananda some where in his talks has given an example about detachment. The gist is like this:
If you are destined by Prarabdha karma (or) a circumstance/situation to enjoy a great meal, enjoy it.
If by destiny you are not going to get a great meal don't even bother or think or worry about it.
The thoughts about what happened in the past or what will be the future and the resulting restlessness clouds our inherent Peace instead of living moment to moment in the present.
All kinds of spiritual sadhanaas are there for achieving this end only i.e., living only in the present without a wandering mind and accepting whatever that comes of its own accord.
Thanks. Sankar Ganesh.
Anonymous,
You have asked about the benefits of listening to classical music.Glad to know that you enjoy listening to Baroque period music.I will try to put some thoughts on what you have asked for.
Meantime ,I will refer you to the Following link in this BLOG where I have posted Regarding the Bhakti Approach and Classical Music.Pl visit:
http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/07/open-thread-on-vichara.html?commentPage=2
Please look for my post addressing Jupes dated August 13,2008 10:55 PM and the subsequent posts.
More Later.
Namaskar.
Scott,
"People love eachother genuinely as well. Not everyone is in relatinship to manipulate the other into getting what they want or need."
You got it!This is what I have tried to say about the Glorious Grihasta Ashrama(Householder's Life).Great Souls are born of such parents.
This is also Bhakti-Sri Ramakrishna used to refer to his sister serving food to her husband with Great devotion.
He says:"The thing is that one must love God. Through intense love one attains the vision of Him. The attraction of the husband for the chaste wife, the attraction of the child for its mother, the attraction of worldly possessions for the worldly man--when a man can blend these three into one, and direct it all to God, then he gets the vision of God."
This is how we need to channelise all our Emotional and vital energies.
Wish you The Very Best.
Namaskar.
LMM Scott: It's been interesting, if not a little heart wrenching to read your comments related to relationships, being in love, being sexual, expressing intimacy with another, etc. I appreciate your openness and I suspect that many of us are benefiting from this discussion.
It makes sense that you have come to a place of turning to inquiry as a way to deal with your frustrations, knowing that through inquiry you can be in a state of true happiness, which for you is equilibrium and stability. (I hope I'm stating that correctly.) I think it also helps that you have such a good grasp on your situation and you have the intelligence to explore your options in a sensible way.
One thing that I learned many years ago is that sexual energy and creative energy rise from the same place. You said that channeling your sexual energy into sports is not a good option for you. I wonder if doing something in the creative realm would be helpful.
Here is a quote that you might find useful. It is from a book called Atom From the Sun of Knowledge, by Lex Hixon, aka Sheikh Nur al-Jerrahi.
"The dervishes who walk the mystic way not only accept but cheerfully welcome the sufferings that come upon them by the Will of Allah, regarding every form of privation, pain and struggle, just as the sword in the hand of the weapon maker regards anvil, hammer and fire. The more intense the suffering, the more
precious the opportunity for refinement of faith, increase of wisdom, purification of heart, and blossoming of selfless patience, that Gift from Allah so sweet that the human soul that tastes such patience needs nothing else. For human reality to be transmuted into a clear mirror for the Divine Attributes--Patience, Faith, Justice, Beauty, Wisdom--more pressure is necessary than is required to transform coal into diamond. To welcome the overwhelming pressure that Allah Most Awesome brings upon the soul through internal experience and external events, never burdening the soul with even one atom's weight more spiritual responsibility than it can bear--to welcome this pressure instantly and instinctively, with all one's heart and mind, is submission."
Here is a beautiful excerpt from Practicing the Power of Now, by Eckhart Tolle:
The Power to Choose
Choice implies consciousness--a high degree of consciousness. Without it, you have no choice. Choice begins the moment you disidentify from the mind and its conditioned patterns, the moment you become present.
Until you reach that point, you are unconscious, spiritually speaking. This means that you are compelled to think, feel, and act in certain ways according to the conditioning of your mind.
Nobody chooses dysfunction, conflict, pain. Nobody chooses insanity. They happen because there is not enough presence in you to dissolve the past, not enough light to dispel the darkness. You are not fully here. You have not quite woken up yet. In the meantime, the conditioned mind is running your life.
Similarly, if you are one of the many people who have an issue with their parents, if you still harbor resentment about something they did or did not do, then you still believe that they had a choice--that they could have acted differently. It always looks as if people had a choice, but that is an illusion. As long as your mind, with its conditioned patterns, runs your life, as long as you are your mind, what choice do you have? None. You are not even there. The mind-identified state is severely dysfunctional. It is a form of insanity.
Almost everyone is suffering from this illness in varying degrees. The moment you realize this, there can be no more resentment. How can you resent someone's illness? The only appropriate response is compassion.
If you are run by your mind, although you have no choice you will still suffer the consequences of your unconsciousness, and you will create further suffering. You will bear the burden of fear, conflict, problems, and pain. The suffering thus created will eventually force you out of your unconscious state.
You cannot truly forgive yourself or others as long as you derive your sense of self from the past. Only through accessing the power of the Now, which is your own power, can there be true forgiveness. This renders the past powerless, and you realize deeply that nothing you ever did or that was ever done to you could touch even in the slightest the radiant essence of who you are.
When you surrender to what is and so become fully present, the past ceases to have any power. You do not need it anymore. Presence is the key. The Now is the key.
Since resistance is inseparable from the mind, relinquishment of resistence - surrender - is the end of the mind as your master, the imposter pretending to be "you," the false god. All judgment and all negativity dissolve.
The realm of Being, which has been obscured by the mind, then opens up.
Suddenly, a great stillness arises within you, an unfathomable sense of peace.
And within that peace there is great joy.
And within that joy there is love.
And at the innermost core there is the sacred, the immeasurable. That which cannot be named.
Rumi, best-selling Sufi writer.
I had to laugh as a large percentage of Americans buying Rumi's poems would interpret his writings as sentimental.
The more Rumi talks of the beloved, the moon and heady wine.
The more Westerners think 'this is boy meets girl' and romantic love.
Still not everyone is obtuse and those that understand will benefit.
hj
I've had that response too! I think when I was young and first read Rumi I thought that. I remember someone telling me that Rumi was a love poet from Afghanistan (laugh). I actually bought a Rumi book right after I started Self-inquiry, and just after I was becoming obsessed with Ramana Maharshi's teachings. And it was clear to me at that point, that much of what he was saying was the same thing. When he says Beloved, i.e. the Self, or God! It's kind of lifting one's vision above the relative. He actually in some of the poems, seems to me to kind of play down, or deride, human romance, and sexuality in comparison to the divine. There are things, some of his analogies are similar to Maharshi's analogy. The river/ocean analogy. That the Beloved, or the divine, or Allah, is like an ocean, and one dives into the ocean, instead of going after sense objects. There is one poem where he says burn down the house to get the buried treasure, and with the buried treasure one can buy a thousand houses. I thought that was an analogy, that burning down one's own ego, the treasure there is so much more vast and worthwhile then the puny things one can get as an ego. Surrender is a big theme throughout Rumi's poetry as well. There was one about not fearing whether you will eat, that the bread runs away from you, only because it can sense your lack of self-denial. So there's alot of good stuff. Maybe Rumi was a jnani!
thank you Jupes, that is beautiful! Yeah, that does cover it.
I was not drawn to the simple metaphor of Ramesh, of each of us
as a sandcastle. At the end of our life, God squashes this
with the glee of a child and everything becomes once again
the formless sand that it always was. This is easy for us
to appreciate with our feeble intellect but where does it
leave that traditional model of the aspirant making slow
but steady progress over many lifetimes?
Would anyone like to comment?
LMM; One of the biggest struggles of all is in giving up this
notion of 'having a Christian heart' ....of being a helper
or healer....of being my brothers' keeper. And yet, my
observations (of my self and others) show me that this
'compassionate' intent can not only create considerable
sorrow and suffering and above all delusion.
Who am I to be helping others (the lost ones?) I'm doing it cause I'm on a mission, I'm special, I'm chosen for bigger things etc etc!
LMM; Do we want puppety-poppety romance? There is of course real love out there, enduring serious relationships that last the test of time. However there is also alot of commercial/rosecoloured claptrap about as well. we are all like barnacles that secrete glue which holds the barnacle to the
rock against the turbulence of the pounding tides; it is the
nature of the barnacle to do this, to cope with the unpredictable.
Then you have the free swimming fish who seem to have it all.
Ulimately who is hanging on frightened and who is the free wheeling spirit?
Ramana says everything is preordained. So the wish for romance or the big house or perfect job will only come if it's meant to.
Grace will also only come it it's meant to.
I don't believe you can force the issue.
hj
Ravi:
Thanks for the link to that post. I read it, and also listened to those musical pieces. I look forward to your post.
Jupes:
Beautiful passage from PON. Thanks for sharing.
Best,
m
hj: "So the wish for romance or the big house or perfect job will only come if it's meant to."
Interesting that you chose to qualify job ("perfect") and house ("big"), but not romance. If you had a layabout 20-something son smoking the weed in his basement room, would you tell him that the job (you would like him to get) will only come if it's meant to? Or tell your college-age daughter that the apartment she needs to find in her distant college town will only come if it's meant to?
In both these cases, the "perfect" home or job may or may not come, but I suspect that even you, hj, would encourage these youths to apply themselves and look for *something*, even if it didn't quite meet their (perhaps lofty or unrealistic) expectations/ideals. So why not encourage LMM to be more proactive in finding someone to love and be loved by, even if what he found fell short of his (our?) expectations/ideals?
Many would consider a regular/predictable source of income and home of some kind near- (if not absolute!) necessities for "functional living" in *Western* societies (let's keep itinerant sadhus out of this discussion... :) ), with a loving partner not far behind these in importance. Certainly for people of LMM's age, it is normal/common to be engaging in intimacies of one kind or another, and given what he has said about this issue here, it seems to me (and I could of course be mistaken!) that he is not one of those who can just take off for Arunachala––or the Self––and forget about/forsake everything else. And if that is the case, then might not an "obsession with self-enquiry" have something of an escape or flight (from the frustrations/misery/muck of the realm of human relationships) about it?
LMM: If you were broke and on the street, I would encourage you to find a source of money and somewhere warm and dry to sleep. After reading what you have written about love and romance, I am encouraging you to take some small risks and reach out to some girl--maybe not the most beautiful––with love and affection. Yes, you may get hurt, or become embarrassed, self-conscious, or uncomfortable: but then what a perfect situation in which to ask yourself who it is that is feeling these things.
Get going -- fortune favors the bold!
(And though you have accused this Anonymous of being uncaring in the past, I hope you can trust that I am sincere in wishing you the very best––and at the soonest opportunity––with this vexatious issue of yours.)
This is about Love, an excerpt of a writing by a contemporary european master:
THE CONCEPTION OF LOVE (from The Science of Love)
15. We are accustomed to speak quite naturally about sexual, emotional, filial love, love for life, for animals or for games, etc. But using the word love in reference to these qualitative aspects does not seem quite appropriate, or else we have identified love with our animal instincts, with desire, lust and coveting. In such a situation, we would have Love, with a capital letter, mixed up with desire which is a simple and even unstable psychological state. Thus, it is necessary to distinguish between the desire of an individual without possessions (and this gives rise to the craving to own and to possess) and Love that because it has, it can give; because it owns, it can offer; being full and complete, it can offer and donate.
Sexuality as an end in itself is not love, but a simple instinct of the species which at times takes the form of craving and a yearning to possess the object of our sexual appetite in order to relieve our energetic tension; from this point of view a partner becomes an instrument we use to satisfy our needs.
Love may be expressed also at the sexual level, but this is not its essential aspect, since it can exist without the sexual act as such.
18. Love is, therefore, a powerful unifying influence, which transmits the grace of joy. Love floods and involves all it comes into contact with.
As the initiated Poet states,
Love is a propelling power that moves the sun and the other stars (Dante).
The miracle of Love allows growth, redemption and the expansion of consciousness to universal dimensions. Love sublimates the sexual act because the intent comes from above and not from below, where it is prompted by instinct and need. This implies that the act, made sacred, is adorned with sweet desires, by ecstatic contemplation and joyful and luminous glances which take root in Madonna Beauty herself, so that it creates beings that originate from the intelligible Heavens.
Love does not see the other as an object to possess or an instrument of mere enjoyment but as a subject to whom it offers itself; two polar hearts that love each other vibrate a joy and harmony which imparts rhythm to the space around them. If all the couples on Earth loved each other with sublime Mind, the planet would emanate a different beam of light and have a different rhythm: it would become a sacred planet.
19. It is worth recalling that Love, on the manifest plane, is that Teaching which resolves all the duality, contradictions and sufferings of the world. Jesus gave us the key to the gates of the Heavenly Kingdom,and this key, according to Jesus himself, is Love.
Knowledge illuminates, clarifies and reveals, but it is born under the impulse of Eros-Love. Cognitive illumination, or Holy Wisdom, knows that all is One and that multiplicity is mere appearance, but the activation of such a truth is the work of Eros-Love which unifies the subject and the object of knowledge.
«So then, from such a remote source stems the mutual love innate to man. Love leads back to the primeval condition; it seeks to make one of what is two, it seeks to cure human nature. As a result, each of us is but one part, one half of the whole man: a man split open like a sole. He once was one and now they are two. And so each of us is always looking for the corresponding other half»
20. Love is comprehension, which means embracing, involving, enclosing, understanding with intelligence, integrating the other, or any thing, and integrating it until unity is achieved. ...
Comprehension is divine Wisdom ... it is a state of consciousness which responds appropriately and wisely to the stimuli which may be both external and internal to the individual. Comprehension is Love in action; it is the sweet expression of the Heart.
to be continued
... THE CONCEPTION OF LOVE (continued)
22. Love is life-giving, unifying and growth-bestowing. Desire, which is a surrogate, a negative reflection of Love, creates duality or differentiation because it glorifies the ego. Love belongs to the Soul, desire to individuality and to the empirical ego, which, being separated from its divine counterpart, is forced into deprivation and is obliged to wander about in search of gratification.
23. Love is joy-beatitude which does not stem from taking (otherwise it would be mere gratification) but from the act itself of offering, of giving. Love rejoices in Love; Love thrives on Love, therefore it is removed from all duality or individualized relationships. Unlike desire, which is necessity, Love lives in and by its own essence because it is beingness, which is the prerogative of the nature of the Soul.
24. Love is fullness ... Fullness is the integral state of the Soul as Person. Hence the beatitude that comes from being an accomplished being. Only those who have reached peace of mind and brought into unity the manifold and discordant voices of imperfect and demanding desire, can be in a state of fulfilment and therefore in a condition to offer, concede and give ...
«Can Love be in want of Love being itself Love?... Sensory love is nostalgia for the lost Paradise»
25. Love is freedom ...
26. Love is a gentle sound which attracts and pacifies. Being an influence a current, according to Plato (Cratilus, 420 a-b) it is also a vibration, a rhythm, a breath which penetrates, envelopes, contains, fulfilling the spirit which receives it. From this point of view, Love is the revelation of Harmony which is but the right Accord with the polarity of life, ... revelation of tonal consonance ...
A couple who express the kind of Love-Accord we have spoken of so far, represent a sound comparable to what Pythagoras defines as the Music of the spheres. The two polar notes involved enter into a harmonic relationship capable of touching life at other levels...
«... It is necessary for the seer to become first similar and like what must be seen, and then concentrate on the Vision. Just as the eye would not be able to look upon the sun without becoming solar, thus the soul cannot contemplate Beauty without first becoming itself Beautiful» (Plotin)
To anonymous, several thing. First thing, you had said that grace, like things in the world is something that comes to us when it wants, it's not something we can choose. I have to say in my own experience, if what I think is grace is grace, that is not true. Grace is a choice. Because I'm the one whose seperating myself from grace. I'm the one creating the non-grace. So it is within my power to stop doing that. I understand grace as effulgent happiness, which is natural. I cause my own sorrow, by putting my happiness on the world. That's why I keep saying inquiry is not escapist. The closest I have come to romance, has been since practicing inquiry, I've had alot more flirtatious interactions since. So it isn't escapist. Inquiry to me, and abiding as the Self, as clearing away the causes of sorrow, that is what inquiry is. It's not a rote method. Who is thinking this? who is feeling this? No, I don't think so. I was going to mentnion, people are more drawn in to those who don't want something from them. Some of my problems in the past were from being in a state of depression, or desperation, or craving, and people, women, whoever pick up on that and are not interested. It's almost psychic.
There was this person (female) that I did find really attractive, and alot of our interactions were kind of flirtatious, more then usual for me. And recently, I e-mailed her that I had a crush on her (I disclaimered that I want to be her friend, and it didn't have to be that way). She was seeing someone else, so that's what she told me. And then, we had coffee anyway (and she was really interested in the Self-inquiry stuff, she asked me what I do as far as spiritual practice, there was some definite kindredness). I'm just saying, I'm not avoiding doing something about it. But I also don't want to do things that are futile, where I know every time nothing is giong to happen. Even yesterday, there was another person that seemed kind of superficial. But we caught eachothers glance, and her and the male-person she was with (I guess just a friend), she wondered all the way accross the campus, and shyly sat next to me. Even though, I thought, personality-wise, she's kind of shallow, overhearing her conversation, I still introduced myself to her, and had another male-person (a boyfriend) not sat down next to her, I would have continued conversing with her, and asked her if she wanted to hang out. I was also with my friend, who could sense she was superficial, and seemed a little annoyed with my introducing myself to her. So it just wasn't a ripe situation. When I was in my late teens, early twenties, it wasn't until I picked up on the importance of sensitivity, the kinds of things that yoga, meditation, Self-inquiry increase that I had any success with making friends, and being able to have a conversation with someone unself-consciously. I mean, I think that is the reason, it's not lack of grit, that I haven't been romantically involved. It's that that non-verbal stuff is key, that's what people are looking for. And it's not something I could fake, by reading the books on non-verbal communication (I hate that stupid advice). In the martial art I learned, peopel who were really good, went really fast, and some of the beginner students, I had better discernment, thought that the advanced students were putting herculaen effort into the speed. When in truth, it was completely effortless, grace. that's what I think Self-inquiry helps with. Yes, in this martial art, one had to have the power, so the strikes would do damage to the opponent, but it was the fluidity and effortlessness that allows one to actually work off someone's strikes. If it's not fluid and effortless in practice, it won't work. So the beginner students had no control, I felt were dangerous to work out with. In the same way, it's not a simple matter of just taking risks. One can take ineffective risks, and do something a million times, and never succeed. In my opinion, that's stupid. Yes, maybe the odds are 1 in a billion, so there is a small chance that something will go your way. But that's stupid. I prefer to figure out what I can do, to make the odds higher. I think with being more in a state of grace, it is easier to see, oh this person looked at me, I find that i notice being noticed more, so then I just notice how an interaction is escalating. Kind of like with that person who sat down next to me yesterday.
On the worldly issues (sorry I keep dealing with this personal issue, but this in response to anonymous), i thank you for your advice, but most of what you are saying, I am already doing. It's just that I like to be sensitive, the opportunities have to be there. Yes, I could walk around and be forward with strangers (that i didn't get a vibe from that they were interested. But I've taken alot of risks in this life, and they just haven't played out. And I'm not sure why, especially in my early to mid-twenties I was really forward verbally with alot of women. And alot of times I got mixed reactions, but nothing I could clearly discern, and nothing happened. There was one exception at a party (laugh), where we kissed all night. Asperger's is difficulty with non-verbal communication, so I have felt more comfortable with verbal communication. From talking to most of my friends. The way they form romances (of all sorts), does not involve verbal communication. Whatever they are picking up on, and reciprocating, i don't pick up on, or reciprocate (and may not be able to). So then, logically, I would use verbal communication.
Self-inquiry is the most helpful tool, ironically, that I've found socially, I probably wouldn't do it, if it was just to become enlightened. But that is kind of similar to becoming a martial arts master at life. Some here, may think Self-inquiry is a rote mental method, who is doing this? But I know from success at it, sometimes, that is not the case. Who is this who is...? question, is as I've said, pointing to that the thinker, the person, is unreal. That person, is almsot like a parasite, that i'm putting my energy into, when it could be used more efficiently. It really goes back to that martial arts metaphor. I use Self-inquiry for the effortlessness, and fluidity. I may still have to jump off the diving board so to speak, take the risk at various points. But I want it to be informed risks. Lets say I see a woman that I think is beautiful. Yes, lets face it sexuality and romance have an element of shallowness to it. But I see that she has an annoyed look on her face, or she's deep into studying. I could sit next to her and talk to her, but that could be really annoying, and she doesn't know me, that could even make her feel unsafe. So what do I do? I wait until there is a sign of interest. Waiting to see how a situation escalates. Most of the interaction requires that sensitivity, that psychicness. That is what Self-inquiry helps with, so I'm clear and undistracted. i don't know when an opportunity is going to arise, so thinking about it, when it isn't happening, makes it so I'm not open when it does happen. But if I abide in egoless bliss, receptiveness, then when something happens I'm ready for it. And I'm present with it. Not to mention, the Self is where love is. Why did those thousands of people flock to be around Maharshi, because he abided as the Self, he was love itself, he was happiness and contentment itself. It shows that, people like that. they like people who are self-sufficiently happy. The least successful thing I've done is taken risks out of desperation. I think the chances are so low of success. Because it so unattractive to be in a state of desperation. But when someone is glowing in their own happiness. So I try to stay there, glowing in my own happiness. Even though I may be frustrated at 31 never having a girlfriend. I try to forget that, I try to forget the past. Now, another aspect is, there is something supernatural about Self-inquiry. I mean, Papaji and Maharshi both have said that God is in the absence of I. And Maharshi said, "God never forsakes one who has surrendered". In my experience, like that woman I told I had a crush on her via e-mail. Recently, a few weeks ago, I was in a much more egoless state, and she called my name, and started talking to me, and then said that she wanted to go to coffee with me again. The odds seemed slightly unlikely for me being in teh right place and the right time, to run into her. So I guess what I'm saying, is, literally, the world isn't real like we think it is, and so abiding as the Self, inquiring so that I am in a state of bliss, that is natural, there is some element that real magical things can happen I guess. Ego, it becomes clear, really has nothing going for it, even in terms of worldly success. yes, anonymous, I do think the people who are the most successful, the genius' people remember for centuries, the power of their creativity, came from the Self. So...I don't know if i'll ever be successful in the romantic sphere, but I do know that Self-inquiry, abiding in Bliss itself, as that itself, is the best thing I could be doing for myself even in terms of success in this endeavor. Maybe, my failures have been a blessing in that regard, realizing how much more power is in egolessness, then ego.
LMM I wish you lots of joy. Anonymous you can tell your weed smoking son or daughter whatever you like. You can encourage them to improve, to wake up to themselves, to get a move on. What if they can't or won't?
You can lie in bed at night worrying about the kids and there progress or lack of.
The kids lonely, his suffering and dear god he's 20 years old and still sucking his thumb! Where will it end?
Somewhere along the way it'll dawn on you that no matter what you say or do things will happen when they're meant to, not when you will it. Maybe you'll find you can't push life around.
hj
Jupes,
I enjoyed reading the Lex Hixon Excerpt on the Dervishes.
Coming to Tolle,The ending is fine where he talks about the 'Now'.
I am not so sure about what he says about Choice.Is it Freedom to be able to choose or is it Freedom not having to choose?
I will give this example-When my wife asks me-"What do I cook today?"-She is very keen that she should cook something that I Relish.
I find myself caught in a quandry.
I tell her -"Anything that you feel is okay".
I feel total freedom if I do not have to choose.
Quite often,this turns out better than if I had chosen!Otherwise also it is quite Okay.
So,wondering if it would be better if we are not compelled to choose.
----------------------------------
So,I am wondering whether Chance and Choice belong to the Realm of conditioning only.
Living by chance serves to continue the conditioning;Living by Choice helps to break that Conditioning;not having to do either is to live in Freedom.
As the Gita says,Man's own mind is his enemy and this same mind is also his Friend,depending on whether one lives by Chance or Exercises his Choice in applying his Discriminative Faculty.
Namaskar.
Anonymous, and I mean this kindly. I like you, I have nothing against you. But... it's funny to me that you think you are the solid one, and I'm the one who needs help. That is hysterical to me. It's like you don't really read what I write, and still think you are in the position to be giving advice. I think what I laid out is pretty sound on this. I think, in other words, I'm doing the best things I could be doing. I have freakin' Asperger's Autism, so it's not easy to get a girlfriend. I'm sorry, no matter what I do (even being, so I'm told fairly attractive, thoughtful). That is your obstacle to Realization, is your believing you already have the answers. that is what I observe with people who are somewhat successful in this life, is that they are stuck in their own self-importance (even fanclubs), and have no humility, when things are easy for you, you don't have the incentive to awaken your intelligence. Someone like me, I can't afford to be dumb. I've had to spend every waking hour, figuring out how to be more intelligent, more efficient. I have not been able to afford arrogance. I'm like a low budget movie, that has to be extremely creative with the materials available, and so in the end makes a far better movie. Whereas a high budget movie, take the new and terrible Star Wars movies, is complascent and uncreative. It's kind of like telling a person with cerebral palsy. "Why can't you just walk to the store? That's what we all do".
Ravi,
One of my favorite quotes on the subject of choosing comes from Living By the Words of Bhagavan. I've posted this here before but will do so again:
Annamalai Swami: Before we came into this life all the incidents of our life were predestined: where we have to live, what acts we have to perform, etc. If we desire anything other than our prarabdha, that which was already destined for us, we cannot attain it.
Questioner: So there is no point in planning future projects. It is better to live with what comes, day by day.
AS: According to one's prarabdha, the efforts which are necessary and which have to happen will arise in one's mind.
Q: So we only think that we have choices. The sense of choice is not real.
AS: Correct! All the difficulties that we experience in life have been given to us by Bhagavan in order to turn the mind toward the Self.
~~~~~
Yes, I think we are conditioned to believe we have choices, and I would agree that there is a sense of freedom in not having to choose, as in the case of your responding to your wife's question about what to cook.
Tolle talks a bit differently about choice from what I've said here, but in some ways it is similar. He does say that there is no choice when one is run by the mind and that without consciousness you have no choice.
Annamalai Swami also said that "in every moment you only have one real choice: to be aware of the Self or to identify with the body and the mind."
To even be at a point where one can make the choice between awareness of the Self and identification with the body and mind requires a high degree of consciousness. The connection between what Tolle and A.S. are saying is 'consciousness'. Consciousness is the key.
Anonymous,
"I read it, and also listened to those musical pieces. I look forward to your post."
Friend,I do not know how to structure my response-not knowing your expectations.I am also not a musicologist,so I will not be able to write a knowledgeable dissertation on Music.
I love music-that is all.I like Western as well as Indian(Carnatic as well as Hindustani styles of Music).
What is this compelling thing about Music?Does sheer sound has this capacity to sway us?How does it feel like to listen to the Church or Temple Bells?
In contrast,how does it feel like hearing the relentless sound of a drilling machine in our neighbour's Apartment?
It is very clear that sound can produce sympathetic vibrations in our psyche and this can be beneficial or otherwise.
Music it is when it produces a beneficial effect.Like notes,the Regularity of the notes(The Beat) repeated at definite intervals also has an effect on our psyche.
We can think of a Metronome of the pendulum clock(Now no longer heard!),how soothing it can be!
Similiarly the Pitch and timbre of the notes can have their own impact on us-This explains how different musical instruments (including Human Voice)have their personality and character.
Then there is the Melody and harmony in the way the Notes are struck one after the other or at the same time(to form a Chord).
In Indian Music the Melody is developed to rare hights-as What are called Ragas.Raga is that which can colour the Mind.For instance if a Master musician plays Raga Behag,the Listener will feel the Beauty of Wonder and Longing!
In Western Classical,The Harmony is the Basic Element (Chords) and Melodic Development is not as sustained as in Indian Classical music.This sets the character and adds a Greater Dramatic Impact-
Just like the E-Flat Major chord has the Stentorian Character.Like the opening movement of Beethoven's Emperor Piano Concerto-How does it feel like listening to the Garndiose opening-Even a timid person would feel charged up with courage and awaken to the sublime.
-----------------------------------
I should also add that Music appreciation is Highly subjective.It does require a little exposure and receptivity to unravel the treasures in these Master compositions.
Coming to Bach,I enjoy his Air on the G String,Jesu Joy of man's Desire,His violin Concertos and especially the Double concerto,Brandenburg concertos.
My favourite composers are Haydn,Beethoven,Schubert and Brahms.
If you push me back to the wall,I would have to say that it is Beethoven and Schubert-Their Piano Sonatas and Piano Trios ,I would say are some of the most profound and wide ranging pieces of music ever composed.They cover the entire spectrum of Human sensitivity.
I have recording of complete sonatas by many artists-If I have to single out one set(overall),I would have to say it is by Wilhelm Kempff.For the Schubert Piano Sonatas,the D960 ,I would Recommend Sviatoslav Richter-One of the Great Pianists of all times.A pity that he never bothered to play all the Sonatas.
I hope ,I could respond to some extent to meet your expectation.
----------------------------------
Nmasakar.
I was thinking about how Ramana had the death experience, and how throughout my life, death has loomed. I've never felt free of death, that somehow death has to be dealt with in a certain way. And alot of the most adharmic people, who are obsessed with what can be gotten here, and power and doing whatever they can, no matter how dishonest to succeed in this world, seem, even if they would pretend to be somehow religious, unconcerned, or unaware of death. In my teens, I was really terrified of death, it seemed to like disprove everything that everybody says. How can anything be true, if we die? If it doesn't last? And that sense, that feeling, seems to lend itself to surrender to death even while alive, and that seems to lend itself very strongly to falling into being interested in Maharshi's tesachings. I mean, that is how Ramana became Realized. That almost seems to be the gate that seperates the unrealized from the realized. The realized have surrendered everything, because of the fact that it doesn't endure. Even while wanting these things like romance, I'm all the while aware, that it's not worth if, if it isn't sustainable, if I have to somehow promote, perpetuate or engage in an ego, that won't last. If I have to lie, and manipulate to survive. There is kind of a part of me, that I only want to engage in what is compatable with total surrender, Bliss, because I'm not attached to what cannot last, which just causes worry, and suffering. That's why for happiness, it seems like this kind of diving into, or total facing of death seems necessary. and inquiry is that. You disregard until there is only what cannot die, because it wasn't born. And be that, always. Makes total sense, and a clarity grows as to what is attuned to that and not attuned to that. Because it's not inactivity, but there are certainly actions that require engaging myself as an ego, becoming an ego, believing in my ego. And in that sense, i think it can be trickier, O.K, how to survive. Now, look at Papaji's life, I mean he was highly successful, but in a state of total surrender, he was doing what came to him to be done, he wasn't engaging himself as an ego, he wasn't engaging himself in something insincere in in-authentic, he was in pure Being always. If the natural thing, was rescuing his family from teh Punjab, it happened. If it was working at that mining company, it happened. But he didn't engage himself as or with something false. He didn't pretend to be something he's not. It's really instructive.
"Somewhere along the way it'll dawn on you that no matter what you say or do things will happen when they're meant to, not when you will it. Maybe you'll find you can't push life around."
hj
If I want to eat a cherry, fulfilling that desire involves getting together the money together to buy it (if I do not live near some trees with ripe cherries hanging off the branches), putting on enough clothes so that when I go out I am comfortable and not in such a state of undress that I risk apprehension by agents of the current regime, getting to where the cherry is though muscular exertion (perhaps combined with mechanical means of locomotion), selection of the most desirable or appropriate cherry for my consumption, interaction with the owner/vendor of the cherry including payment for the cherry, return trip, and, finally, devouring of the cherry.
If someone inexperienced in procuring and devouring cherries rings me up and expresses his desire to eat--but his frustration in acquiring––a cherry, shall I, speaking from a concept of non-doership or destiny, advise him that––no matter what anyone says or does––he will eat the cherry when he is meant to, not when he wills it? That maybe he will find he can't push life around?
Or (to break it down conceptually by referring to seemingly distinct, individual entities with apparent volition) will I be of greater service by going through the steps as outlined above, and encouraging him on his way?
Of course, he may find after following my suggestions that the vendor has no cherries, and that indeed they are unavailable for many months until the cherries are in season. Then, so be it (I might then suggest the perhaps less-attractive option of preserved cherries, or the possibility of importing them from afar via courier service).
But to advise someone with a persistent and ongoing, yet unfulfilled, desire for a cherry that it will happen if it's meant to, seems to me like providing a justification for inaction through a mere concept/theory of non-doership or of unalterable destiny rather than the fruit of the realization that everything is spontaneously happening (and that anything may spontaneously happen--including getting dressed and going to the store to buy a cherry!) but there is no individual actor separate from the action.
Better that LMM, and those of us in whom entirely natural desires for loving intimacy still arise, take pains to fulfill these desires while still young, rather than just ignore them and allow them to fester in darkness, only to find them emerging years later after decades of self-enquiry, when one is now a spiritual guide of one sort or another, and one's unlived/unexpressed desires lead one to underhandedly manipulate one's admirers into bed.
Anonymous, I guess you were giving yourself advice, though it applies to all of us!
Dear all,
Regarding "living in the present moment", the following is from Bhagavan.
The below makes me conclude that Bhagavan endorses the practices of Eckhart Tolle.
----------------------------------
While walking on the hill, TPR asked Ramana Maharshi whether it was ever possible to totally eradicate one's karma or fate, summarily, in this birth itself. "Oh Yes... It can be done, one hundred percent, if you do as I tell you" replied Bhagavan.
"The totality of one's karma" said Bhagavan, "is divided into two. (I) the past I.e., memories of incidents, success, failure, change, pain, pleasure, growth and decay (II) the future., I.e., desires, impending ambitions, achievements, plans and their executions, etc., If one is prepared to completely erase the past, that is, all that has happened to one till this present moment, then fifty percent of one's karma will be warded off" TPR interrupted and asked "what about the other fifty percent?"
Bhagavan smiled graciously and said, "if you have succeeded in giving up the past, that is fifty percent of your karma, you will yourself realize that the remaining fifty percent is also destroyed. Simultaneously with past and future erased, there will be only the NOW"
"How does one achieve this almost impossible act of completely eradicating the past?" pleaded TPR. Bhagavan replied. "Accept and see without any trace of doubt or reaction, that whatever has happened up to the present moment is only through God's injunction. One will then get tremendous energy to totally erase one's past, on the valid ground and inner understanding that no one through one's effort can ever change or alter one's past"
I like your analogy, Anonymous. The problem I see though is that we are dealing with people, and people are complicated. Lets say I have dirty dishes. Then probably prarabdha karma is not the best solution to whether the dishes get done or not (laugh). Non-doership, I can sit, and my body either will do it or not. That is probably incorrect, and they won't get done. The cherry vendor is maybe closer to the issue of romantic relationships, in the sense that having a job, or the money necessary to get cherries, can be determined by alot of factors truly out of one's control. If you grow up in a third world country, taht is suffering famine, then it may not be in your power to get cherries. No matter how much free-will you think you have. (laugh). Relationships are similar in that sense, that it's not a simple matter of do or not do. There are other conscious entities involved that have to consent, that have to be interested, taht have to agree. If the issue, I have, was that i had never made the effort, never asked anyone out, never told anyone I liked them in a romantic way, then yes perhaps, it would be a good idea to try that first, before complaining that it's not in the cards. I've done that. So, it is different. Unlike whether I do the dishes or not. A choice. It doesn't require sensitivity, it just requires doing them. Interacting with others, is not a simple matter of enforcing your will on them, not in a healthy relationship. It's a dialogue, a dance. And that's I think much more complicated. even if someone may consider me a romantic interest, telling them, that I feel that way about them, doesn't necessarily makes something happen, it can help facillitate it, but it does get there completely. That's why denying intuition, um, this doesn't feel right, can be a bad move. I'm finding that the closest I come to communion with others, is when I abide in a state of grace, or bliss. Then I don't feel self-conscious, and it's amazing how much communication goes on, on that level. Relationships are definitely more of a dialogue, a dance, then buying cherries at the store, which is straight forward. I think autism issues, are a disability with the ability to participate in that dance. And I definitely have some of those disabilities. Enough so, that I don't know if realization will cause something to happen. i only know that when I'm clear, and in bliss, it's more likely to have positive interactions with others. I can sometimes for a sec. get envious that for you, maybe these things are as simple as going to the store, buying a girlfriend. But also, it is maybe easier for you to, the downside, to view relationships as a commodity.
Anonymous/hj/Friends,
Interesting discussion-Essentially this is related to what is called Swadharma-That the Dharma of one however lofty is no good for another.Each individual is unique and has to develop along his own path.
The other theme is that of the age old discussion on Destiny and Freewill.hj has taken up the position that everything is predestined and try what one may,things will take their course(Predestined).Anonymous has contested this and rightly so.
This is what Swami Vivekananda has said:
"We are responsible for what we are, and whatever we wish ourselves to be, we have the power to make ourselves. If what we are now has been the result of our own past actions, it certainly follows that whatever we wish to be in future can be produced by our present actions; so we have to know how to act."
This is it.Essentially if we can bind ourselves in knots ,we can free ourselves as well by untying them.This is where Predestination and Freewill come into play.Say,if there are 10 Knots to be untied,the act of untying would follow an EXACT sequence in the reverse order-so this is so to say,predestined.This does come about by exercising the Freewill in that direction.
On the other hand if one exercises the Freewill in adding to the knots,and calls it Destiny ,it is pure Fatalism.
We may thus say that at every point in time man is free to exercise his choice to whatever results that he wants-not that the results would materialise immediately.The element of time has to be factored in.Looked at from another perspective,we may say that the previous choices that he made limits his present choice.
Yet it is not at all that straight jacketed as all that.It is not at all uncommon for a Debaucher to become a Great Saint while a virtuos person may continue to be a virtuous seeker and an also ran!
-----------------------------------
considering all this,I would say,Vivekananda's advise says it all-is the most rational and energising.
Namaskar.
"Better that LMM, and those of us in whom entirely natural desires for loving intimacy still arise, take pains to fulfill these desires while still young, rather than just ignore them and allow them to fester in darkness, only to find them emerging years later after decades of self-enquiry, when one is now a spiritual guide of one sort or another, and one's unlived/unexpressed desires lead one to underhandedly manipulate one's admirers into bed."
No response!! But in the future deal with your own issues, without invoking me. This is pretty offensive, and contains in it alot of twisted ideas about spirituality and sexuality that should be questioned. However, I'm glad you are here, because it may lead you to not being a danger to others. There is alot in your last several e-mails abotu sexuality, that reminds me of the point of view I've heard expressed by sexual abusers and rapists who do not understand things like consent. And think sexuality and selfish aims (in regards to others) can co-exist with eachother safely. If you want I can give you materials on such things.
haha, on the timing of my last comment!
On the issue of becoming a spiritual teacher. I think, honestly, from all I've been exposed to within these teachings. (laugh). Here is what I think is the best approach of when it is a good idea to take up spiritual teaching. (laugh). Never, if there is still one who can decide to do something like that. My favorite band had a great lyric on this... "It's best to just do things and see how it goes, for no-one can tell you what nobody knows".
I don't think it's a good idea, to attempt, or practice Self-inquiry, with the aim of one day being a spiritual teacher a guru. If one is doing it for that reason, I would guess they are doing it for the wrong reason. The reason to practice Self-inquiry is to know one's self, to find the true source of happiness and abide in it. More generally, I think it's unhealthy to want to be in a position of power over others in anyway. If someone is seeking to become a spiritual teacher, they are seeking power over others, and that is unhealthy.
As far as letting desires fester...Yeah, it's probably a good idea not to, maybe. But also, setting out with selfish aims in regards to others, is maybe always a bad idea. I already covered that, in my conclusions in how to approach the issues I've dealt with, which were related to asperger's autism. As I already specified, I wasn't purposely letting desire fester. I think it would be dangerous, to take up a more aggressive, manipulative strategy. and better, to follow the advice of Annamalai Swami as quoted by Jupes and that the difficulties were given to me by Bhgavan to turn my mind inward toward the Self. Since it has served that purpose of making me earnestly try to understand and practice Self-inquiry, I think it is serving that purpose. And I experience sometimes a bliss transcending the need for sex. Which is different then letting it fester. But again, as I said, anonymous' point of view reminds me of people I've known who sexually assaulted people, who did not understand consent, who viewed sexuality as a mere going to the store to buy cherries. And I think it probably doesn't need too much more of a response then that.
The conclusion I've drawn, from what Ramana Maharshi and other realized sages have said about sexuality. Is that, one doesn't repress teh sexual need, or abstain. And doing those things would not be helpful. But at the same time, from everything I know from there teachings. They would not be into taking up a manipulative strategy to have sexual experiences, or to be disrespectfully aggressive in pursuit. So I think the ultimate strategy in terms of the teachings of Maharshi, in relation to the issues I have with Asperger's, is much of what i've already been doing. To inquire, to be in bliss, be in harmony. If an opportunity arises, ask that person to hang out. If I'm hanging out with some cool, hot person, tell them I like them, or want to kiss them, whatever. The earnest, honest approach! It may not work for end results because of being on the autism spectrum, but it is the best, most honest strategy, I think.
"Anonymous, I guess you were giving yourself advice, though it applies to all of us!"
Well, one reason I urge you on is because you are still relatively young, and it's all too easy for these matters to become more... complicated... as one advances in age. Not that I am saying that fulfillment of these desires is *necessarily* easy or simple when one is young, but I would say that, in many cases, it is indeed simpler then.
As far as giving advice to myself along with others is concerned, well, it has always been my experience that, with regard to amorous relations, when I do not act and just tell myself that something will happen if it's meant to happen... then nothing happens. Of course, I have no problem with the position that something will happen if it's meant to happen when that is accompanied by the apparent effort/activity to enable something to happen (when there is a desire for a certain experience) and, to address your comment, yes, the position of avoiding action/effort and saying that the desired event will happen if it's meant to happen has indeed been a danger at times in my own case as well.
What do you mean, though what action to take? I already specified. I've done what i know how. It didn't happen. I didn't avoid doing things. Yeah, in some ways, in a worldly sense, yeah, it sucks! I found it tricky, what to do, how to approach the situations, I was having trouble with inter-personal skills. So when I told someone, I'm attracted to them, I would get rejected. The non-verbal skills are just not there. Yes, I'm 31, it's already gotten more complicated. It's not easy. You can go even look at Dan Savage, a very liberal dating advice columnists. When he was responding to someone with Asperger's, he fully admitted that person may never be able to date. You seem to be a little thick, on getting the fact that I'm autism spectrum. You keep acting like this is just me, not doing something. But to take action, you have to be picking up on things, and know when and what kind of action to take. When you were 'younger' did you just go up to strangers? I'm just asking. So the only thing I've had have any success with, is inquiry. WIth yoga and tai chi a little, but once it moved on to inquiry, and I have gotten alot mroe clear, it's been easier, to interact with people. You don't seem to get, I like could hardly to talk to people when I entered adulthood. I found extremely challenging in some ways carrying on conversations, because my own pedantic, and obsessive thought patterns, made it difficult, adn I'm mild on the spectrum. It's not just waiting and seeing. It's waiting and seeing, because I've already experienced alot of rejection. And don't want to just do things that are futile. And then...most of my peers that are dating, they didn't take the kinds of risks i did. They didn't have to be courageous. It just naturally happened. I'm not saying they didn't take any risks, I'm not saying they did nothing, but they didn't take blind risks, that were extremely scary, they had some sense that it would be accepted, and they did it non-verbally. I've told women I wanted to kiss them, and they didn't tell me one way or the other. So I didn't know what to do next, they gave me mixed signals. But most of my dating friends, have told me, they've never told someone they had a crush on them, or wanted to kiss them.I've told like probably 15+ 20+ I had crushes on them, maybe more. But quite a few. Yeah, it sucks! I wish I could change it. It's not just wait and see, there is some element of resignation, that in this life I probably won't get to date, I won't have passionate relationships. It just isn't in the cards. I've taken way more harrowing risks then most of my friends at points. I realized I needed more sensitivity if I was going to have success, so I started getting acupuncture, that led to yoga, that led to tai chi, that led to chi gong, that led to vipassana meditation, that led to religious surrender, that led to Self-inquiry. It just progressed, and I've definitely gotten more psychic along the way. But I don't know what else to do, honestly. If you read my last few messages, you see my approach. I'm not doing nothing, you keep ignoring that. If you have any advice, hitherto not mentioned by me, please share. But don't just make these vague assertions about me not taking action. That's not the case. In the last month or two. I told two people I was romantically interested in them. One, we ended up going out to coffee, but she informed she's seeing someone else monogomously. The other person, said that she wasn't interested. I mean I can't just go up to strangers, "will you be my girlfriend?" "will you come home with me? You're hot".
LMM, I understand that one of the issues people with Asperger's frequently have is literalness. If you want to read attitudes towards sexual relations into what I wrote about finding a cherry, by all means go ahead and take pleasure in doing so.
Obviously, I was simplifying for the sake of getting a point across, and considered mentioning how, of course, human relationships are far more complex than the simple act of buying a cherry––the other party may say "no," unlike the cherry, etc.––but did not do so as I thought it unnecessary since so obvious. The point of that illustration was not that finding a lover is like buying a cherry, but that even such a simple act as buying a cherry relies on apparent initiative and action, and if the person is unwilling to make even the slightest effort to get out of bed in order to procure the cherry, who can take very seriously their statement that they will get a cherry if they are meant to get one?
I am somewhat puzzled by your successive comments, and think it best to refrain from possibly adding more fuel to the fire. I do believe you may be reading things into what I have said, or are taking general comments personally -- I don't know. Anyway, it sounds like you have perhaps taken more initiative over the years than I had assumed was the case, so I suppose it *has* simply "not been meant to be" in your case *up until now*.
It wouldn't work. It didn't work, even when I kind of new the people, let alone just some stranger. So... yes, i don't look forward to being an older man, that has never been with anyone. But it's not my fault that I'm mildly autistic. I can't help it. Do you have any actual advice? Like what action to take? Ones that would work? How did you end up in relationships? How did that occur for you?
I just happened to come across this (while following some links having nothing to do with the subject matter at hand here) and find it a good illustration of what I was saying earlier about the resurfacing of unlived desires once one finds oneself in the role of spiritual guide:
Barlow, 40, said she first met Rinpoche in the mid-1970s, when she was 21, and that she was sexually exploited by him during meditation retreats in New York and Berkeley.
"I went to an apartment to see a highly esteemed lama and discuss religion," she said in an interview with the Free Press. "He opened the door without a shirt on and with a beer in his hand."
Once they were on the sofa, Barlow said, the Tibetan "lunged at me with sloppy kisses and groping."
"I thought I should take it as the deepest compliment that he was interested and basically surrender to him," she said.
It really is frustrating to me, how you don't listen to what I say at all. I laid out a very clear strategy, it wasn't just wait. What am I supposed to do, walk around town and say "hey, want to have sex?" to some really cute person as I walk around town. I don't think that's what you are suggesting. And I don't think that would work. They would think I was a creep. The nuanced interaction, that leads one to be able to maneuver social situations I don't have that. That's a neurotypical trait. You have to understand anonymous, I've tortured myself over this issue since high school. There was just some point, in my late twenties, where I kind of just gave up on it. I didn't give up on it totally, but there is a feeling if despite my best efforts, understanding it hasn't happened yet, it never will. I even saw counselors, I saw an autism specialist, that got me dressing fancy. I've really explored this issue as far as I possibly can. I also don't need to talk to strangers, because I've met tons of people I was interested in, to talk to, to pursue. But pursuing to me, is asking to hang out. Well, then we're hanging out, when and how do I act if I am interested in them. That's where it's hung up. It's not asking them to hang out. It's how I do go to kissing them. even observing most people, even just friends, they have an easier time being physically affectionate with eachother. I have difficulty reading people to give physical affection in any sense. So it's just romance, but that's why it's difficult. Is, people form romances, because even developing friendship with someone, they might have their arm around the person, that leads to physical affection, kissing, sex all of it. Relationships develop naturally. Most people aren't taking huge risks. There may be a little risk involved.
I mean really what it comes down to, is I wish I could have a girlfriend, I wish I could fall in love. I wish those almost situations with people I really liked, turned into something. I wish I had of kissed them. But what i've learned from this life, is that my autism issues are just severe enough, that it ain't happening. I am not going to have a girlfriend in this life, amorous relations are out of the picture, I'm not going to "fall in love". I'm not going to have sex. That's just the facts. I can wish it were otherwise all I want. But it's not going to change it. And you know what, from having done Self-inquiry, I have to say, I'm of all people I know, besides those who are enlightened, that I've known in person, I am the most directly facing of the truth of things. And I think that shows in that I am pursuing the most direct truth that is not in odds as David Godman pointed out with sexuality. I spent my twenties in such intense despair I couldn't even describe it, and my resolve was so intense, I could bend iron. I wouldn't have let anything stand in my way. It was just that fierce determination was not enough. The sensitivity was required. And really I think, the non-autistic ability to interact with others in the way most neurotypical people interact. Was necessary. And I don't have that. No wishing will change it. I wish it would. I mean, basically if I want to have sex, since sex was the big issue, that David godman brought up with those quotes of Maharshi, it would involve looking at pictures, videos, and getting myself off, honestly (maybe that's too honest for this forum). I'm not rejecting sexual pleasure, I guess is what I'm saying. I'm not lacking in courage. I am willing to be rejected. I hardly have any 'me' left to be rejected honestly. There's hardly a 'me' left to be hurt. Not to brag! (laugh). I've been reduced to nothing by this life. Humiliated beyond compare. So fear of rejection is not holding me back. If there was something I haven't tried yet, that might just work, I'd do it. So anonymous, if you have any such advice please share, if you really have read what i've written, please share what i haven't done. Because it sure seems I've tried everything many times I could possibly try, and came up with nothing. So what do I have left but inner happiness? What do I have left but inquiry? The Self is my only friend. I only Realization to get, there's nothing else for me here. It's not exactly the way the other sages became realized, but there's nothing holding me back, whose going to stop me from being a jnani? No one, because there is nothing else here. Anything else here, was out of my reach. So it really comes down, to the final goal. Tehre is nothing else. Falling in love, and sex were the only things holding my attentiong, and that was just utter failure. So it's not escapism, it's just that the Self is all I've got. That Bliss is all I have. I'm someone who life tore up, destroyed, until there was nothing left but Realization, I may not be quite there, but I can't be far. Honestly, I think some divine force was so adamant, that I not get what I want, so that I would totally surrender and turn within, maybe because, I'm just guessing, I'm not saying this is true, I'm supposed to be a sage. That's the only assumption I can think of, and I don't mean as an individual. But that life hasn't given me any other option. Anything else, it reduces me to rubble. It's not letting me go for anything else. How could I not become a jnani in this life time? How could I not?
LMM,
Am I the only one who sees a trend here? You post things about being attracted to girls and how you are having trouble relating to them.
Then, when others offer you suggestions, you curtly ask them to mind their own business. If you are not open to receiving suggestions, you might as well say that upfront, which would save everyone lots of time.
You end up summarizing your own views on all these topics. So, you do not need any suggestions or advice, from anyone, imho.
This would be my final post addressing this issue, as I thought it needed to be addressed.
The rest is upto you.
Best,
m
And I just want to reiterate, because anonymous, you don't seem to be getting it. I have went for it with my whole. i've put my whole being into it. There is nothing in what I've said that should give the impression that it was laziness, or lack of determination that is hte reason I've never had a girlfriend, or sex or any of that. I don' tknow where you are getting that. And it's funny because most of my friends who have dated, have not done what I've done, have not put themselves on the line like I have. I really, really have exhausted my options. That's why all that stuff Nome told me was true, that's why Nome is the real deal. Because he didn't tell me something that wouldn't work. FINALLY, someone told me, happiness is within. Said, if you are meant to be in a relationship you will be in a relationship.
Ravi:
Thanks a lot for elaborating on western music. Most, if not all, the composers are new to me. So. I look forward to listening to these musical pieces. I did listen to Bach and really liked the piece. I am a novice when it comes to classical music. So. I really appreciate your pointers.
I do need to add that, by pointing to the post on Self-enquiry, You have answered a question that has been lingering in my mind for some time. You had posted what Sage TGN had to say on 'having the strength of face situations', and 'giving our hundred percent always', and 'assuming responsibility' for our actions. I had been under some fatalistic notion , where I used to, and still (unfortunately) do, sometimes, equate 'surrender with not taking any constructive action. That advice is extremely helpful. So, thanks to you, and TGNji, for answering that question, as well. :)
Best,
m
I think me and dating, is like David Godman and getting a job somewhere else besides Tirruvanamalai. I think the Self will not let me succeed in this endeavor. the Self is adamant that I realize it, and will not let me succeed in other endeavors. Darn Self, why are you doing this to me? Because I really was not after enlightenment. I've been grudging the whole way. But if there is nothing else, then what else is there? And that is why every waking moment is dedicated to inquiry. It's not for fun. This isn't to be spiritual. This isn't to be escapist. This is because inquiry is my only hope. There is no other redemption for me in this world, or any other. i didn't choose that. Inquiry, really doing it, like I am, relaly pursuing, it doesn't happen if you have other options. If there was another choice I'd be doing it. It is hair on fire. Yeah there are spiritual tourists who come and dabble in inquiry.(without really doing it) i'm not one of htose. I'm someone who pursues inquiry with every atom of my being. And you know what throughout my early twenties I pursued romance with just as much determination. And failed so miserably. And its almost like romantic love, and enlightenment are the two choices in any given lifetime. I'm not saying that one can't realize and be in a relationship, but caring about, being attached to sex and romance, and caring about and being driven toward realization, I think are the two choices of a given lifetime. (I am talking about mentally, not physical behavior, jnanis have sex, and people who don't have sex can be unspiritual) For me, I shifted toward realization when the former choice was absolutely denied me by fate, genetics or whatever. So I've went grudgingly but sincerely toward the latter choice. I only went because I was forced to. The Self, God, whatever, decided, that it was going to absolutely and ruthlessly refuse me any other options besides enlightenment. I don't know why, I don't know of any other cases like this.
It seems to me, that a good barometer of what is right and wrong in terms of maharshi's teachings is happiness. The Christian preacher helped for me, to fully put the nail in the coffin of ideas like hell. Because I could see that what he was saying, he didn't know what he was talking about. It did not come from an experience of grace, atleast the obvious negative parts, that required one to be afraid and unhappy and do things that went against one's intuition.
This more recent dialogue I just engaged in, has done the same for a point of view that I've heard from so many people. That you should just "go for it". You should take big risks that feel scary, and risk rejection again and again. I remember a key line in Talks where Maharshi said about disliking someone, something like, "in the Self, you will see all as the Self. But if you still perceive someone as being apart from the Self avoid them".
What I took that to mean, this was my interpretation. If I'm around friends, or having a good time, or enjoying school or whatever, then in a sense, I'm not seeing things so much as apart from me. But when I ahve some kind of drama with someone, disliking them, fearing them, putting them on a pedestal, desiring them, so that I can't be natural and happy in their presence. It's important to find the Self first, and be happy, before engaging these people. And I think that applies to social actions as well. And again, I say, there were alot of ideas that exposed themselves to me as bankrupt. Alot of ideas about sexuality, alot of ideas about spirituality, that I've already observed being dangerous in practice. So both cases, reinforced a deeper intuition, it seems the important part in maharshi's teachings is to be happy first, not act out of desperation (fear of getting older), and then be happy.
If one has to not be themselves to get something, or get in a relationship, then that relationship will be built on not being natural, not being oneself. You will have to deny yourself to maintain it. If one is natural, and a relationship formed on that will be really what they call true love. Being natural, I may not get in a relationship, but if being myself can't fulfill the deepest longings that still exist, then nothing will.
In my experience, people are never the object of constructive action. Because they are conscious beings, and to make them the object of constructive action is manipulation. My point earlier, was that unlike going shopping or doing the dishes, which do just involve will, and giving your all. The same does not apply to people, I don't think. Because you are in relationship.
LMM: "That's why all that stuff Nome told me was true, that's why Nome is the real deal. Because he didn't tell me something that wouldn't work. FINALLY, someone told me, happiness is within. Said, if you are meant to be in a relationship you will be in a relationship."
Based on my own experience I would say that Nome's words are spot on. The few lasting, important (romantic) relationships that I've had have all come about naturally and without effort. A good sign that a potential relationship is NOT the real deal is if it feels strained, contrived, and/or awkward. If it's meant to happen and if it's meant to be meaningful and lasting, there will probably be a sense of ease and naturalness that is unmistakable. It may seem like it came to you without asking, as if you stumbled upon it by accident.
Of course everyone is different, but this is how it's been for me. You will KNOW when it is right, when it is real, especially with your level of sensitivity. In the meantime, there is nothing to worry about, and you know what to do.
Murali:
'Bhagavan smiled graciously and said, "if you have succeeded in giving up the past, that is fifty percent of your karma, you will yourself realize that the remaining fifty percent is also destroyed. Simultaneously with past and future erased, there will be only the NOW."'
Thank you for posting this from Bhagavan. It does seem like he and Eckhart Tolle are saying similar things.
LMM,
I think the approval process/delay here may be leading to minds becoming confused as messages are not always in response to the immediately preceding messages (which may only have been published after a response to an earlier message was written). Also, my later comments re action and destiny were more in response to what I interpreted as hj's advocacy of inaction (re which, I was hunting around for Annamalai Swami's comments on prarabdha vs. free will, and how everything is destined, but the sadhaka still must be encouraged to make effort -- can anyone point me to the comments thread in which they are to be found?) than to your plight.
Well, it sounds like you have indeed exerted yourself in the arena of male/female relations, no doubt much more than your acquaintances and even your humble servant here have done. So it's doubtful whether any advice in the form of tactics, strategies, or techniques would be helpful or of any practical use. (Though I feel compelled to ask: have you ever gone in search specifically of girls with A.S.? They too might have difficulties forming relationships with non-A.S. individuals. I'm sure you've seen this book Asperger's in Love or something like that...)
The only thing I can mention, which has "worked" for me when I was truly desperate, had depleted my own resources, and knew not what more to try/do to resolve an unbearable/unsustainable situation, was turning to the Divine, inspired mainly by Maharaj's comment that (praying to) God is for worldly things.
Without going into the details, I began a nightly practice which culminated, very quickly (within a couple of months), in the happy resolution of a very problematic living situation. The sequence of events that led to that happy resolution was completely out of the ordinary and could never have been engineered or brought about through my own resources or initiative. And not only was the specific issue for which I was seeking "Divine intervention" resolved, but one of the characters--previously unknown to me--who featured in the "script" had a vital piece of information (of which only very few people would have been aware) which also brought an unexpected, and, for me, rather substantial, cash windfall. I can honestly say that nothing miraculous in this way had ever transpired in my life before! So maybe only GOD has the solution you seek, LMM.
We're all like characters out of 'waiting for godot' by Samuel Beckett. The 1st man is muttering about getting his boot off "nothing to be done"
It's a very vague, nebulous unfolding and there seems to be no conclusion.
There has to be a breakthrough.
hj
Advice from non-sages has very little value, maybe no value. They will just tell you what you've heard before. "It's best to just do things, and see how it goes, for no-one call tell you what nobody knows" Sages, though give great spiritual advice, on how to be happy in the midst of it all! No, I don't share things, or talk about things, or share thought processes, in the hopes that someone can clear it up for me. Though always welcome for good, Original suggestions! But really, in my entire life, I've never heard any, so they probably don't exist for hardly any problem. Papaji did say to seek help from any body besides a jnani, is pretty much foolish!
Anonymous(m),
I should say that it is your earnestness that has lead you to receiving that message from TGN.Master used to say-It is not in my intention to spread this teaching;Whoever is earnest,wherever he be,Nature(The wholeness of Life)will see to it that the demand is met.
I will share an excerpt from one of TGN's Talk:'Learn to be Self-Contained'
Your Peace and Happiness should not depend on another person or object.If you do not ensure this you would find that even an inanimate article upsets your emotional balance.
The mark of culture is emotional balance and when that is lost even for a brief while,you stand degraded and your self-esteem(Very important-Ravi)suffers an erosion.
There is a plaything known as Thanjavur doll.However-much the child rocks it,the funny-looking doll will regain its equilibrium immediately afterwards and remain in that position which is its natural state.For an earnest seeker,even the doll can don the mantle of a Guru.You should learn from this plaything that the eddies and storms of worldly life might have the power to buffet you about,but you should ensure that you are not thrown or blown off your feet.A training is required for this.Do you not train yourself to ride a bicycle or drive a car,to run a race or swim and to operate a computer or a cell-phone for that matter?Man alone,of all living beings has the potential in him to learn to improve himself continuously,throughout his life-span.Is not the best lesson that which is learnt before you get a blow on your head as the penalty for your wanton ignorance?
I have listened to persons of all age-groups indulging in a threnody that their co-borns and kith and kin do not extend to them a 'supportive system' which ,they claim ,is theirs by Right.Well,sirs,you have no such right,divine or human,and if you fancy you have,you bargain for disillusionment.When the umbilical cord binding you to your mother was cut,you were born alone and when in process of time you have to quit the world,it is again a necessarily lone journey.Your co-borns and kith and kin are only co-actors,with each having to play his or her role;and when the curtain falls,it is 'exeunt' for all.If you take the drama to be real you have only yourself to blame for the consequent heart-breaks.
..........continued...............
Anonymous(m),
........TGN continued..............
Among the devotees of Ramana Maharshi was an elderly householder who once had a long series of complaints against his own family.In lugubrious repetition he said,'There are only ungrateful children and disloyal servants in my household.Not one of them cares for me.Why,even the doctor whom I have engaged for daily visits to check me medically plays truant very often'.
Bhagavan gave him a patient hearing,but without saying to him directly,started rubbing medicated oil on his own knees,which were arthritic,while intoning 'We are our own servant,we are our own doctor'.Realising that maharshi's comment was by way of reply to him,the visitor said querulously,'Bhagavan can say that because he has the strength to apply ointment.But last month I was laid low with fever and could not stir!'
Bhagavan now told him,"Even when bed-ridden you had the strength to take up food with your hand and put it into your mouth.While so,you should have been able to take care of yourself in other aspects also!"
Thus did Bhagavan bring the grumbler's tale of woes to a humourous close.The lesson to us from the anecdote is that we can be self-contained if we want to.The mind has to be levered out of the rut for this.It is possible to bring about this transformation and so why not commence the task straightaway?All that you have to lose is your lethargy and the gain would be undimming optimism'.
-----------------------------------
Surrender is the culmination of Self Effort;not a substitute for it.
Self esteem is quite important as well;without this how would anyone even have the confidence to go through with sadhana.
As the Mahakavi Bharati used to say-'Thimirnda Jnana Cherrukku'-The Just pride of Knowledge.(Not bookish.)It is what Sage Pattinathar told the king.Pattinathar was a Rich Merchant before he suddenly renounced everything-Wife,son and Riches.As a mendicant,he was seated under a tree when the king happened to go that way.Seeing that Ascetic seated under a tree,the king asked his Minister who the person seated under the tree was.On coming to know that he was arich merchant earlier,the King became curious and wanted to know what the Ascetic had gained by his renunciation.
Pattinathar Replied:'First gain is -I am seated and you are standing before me'.He went on to explain-O King,earlier i used to queue along with others to see you,please you and pay taxes;Now all that trouble is gone.It is you who have come to me!'
----------------------------------
Namaskar.
It becomes clear, there are all these little wants, and desires, that produce a sense of dullness, mild sadness. Sometimes I'm realizing lately, that only wanting my own self, and wanting my own consciousness, and wanting nothing else can give me happiness. There is no happiness in this world. Wanting anything in this world is only sorrow, only sorrow! Wanting myself, being myself is only Bliss, only Bliss!
Scott,
" So I've went grudgingly but sincerely toward the latter choice. I only went because I was forced to. The Self, God, whatever, decided, that it was going to absolutely and ruthlessly refuse me any other options besides enlightenment. I don't know why, I don't know of any other cases like this."
Scott,one needs to go unreservedly to god;sincerity is not enough.Self or God does not decide anything;If we say 'yes',God says 'so be it';if we say 'No',God says,'So be it'(in Sanskrit this is called 'Thathasthu').Bhagavan or God does not give us 'problems';It is our perception whether any given 'situation' is a problem or opportunity.
The very first step that one needs to take is to build one's self esteem(Please do not dismiss the Ego.It is there for a very good cause.Just like the shell of the egg is what is ordained for the development of the embryo.At the time of hatching the shell will be left behind.).
Have you ever thought of Females as your sister?why limit it that the only relationship should be as a sexual partner only?
Have you gone into a pure listening mode?Have you tried to understand the interests of other females and given them an opportunity to share what THEY want(not what you want).
Please set aside the obsession of one's WANT AND NEED.See this trend clearly.Jettison this trend.It is not Autism or any other handicap that is binding you.
Peace be with you.You have great potential and you are squandering it away by imagining that you have a serious 'handicap'.
I could not bear this self destructive streak in you.I have offered 'suggestions' and do not intend to 'teach' you.
Please take it as coming from a 'Friend' who is on his journey.
Please go along with Sri Nome ,whose teachings and guidance you value so much.Do not look here and there.
I wish you all the very best.
Namaskar.
"I had been under some fatalistic notion , where I used to, and still (unfortunately) do, sometimes, equate 'surrender with not taking any constructive action."
I understand this statement, I mean, being in my blissful self is not in contradiction to doing something, or being active. But on the other hand, there is a much deeper need for something being meaningful, and good. And so many activities in this world are useless. So there is an element, that I find myself in inactivity. I mean, I have some friends on campus we sit and talk, and I play martial arts with one of them now. So I'm not inactive, but those are meaningful, natural actions. Being a slave to a corporation, playing manipulative social games to get into grad school, just have no interest for me. Because all of this has no lasting value. It lasts a few decades, that's all. So what is the point? Why participate in society? Most things are shoddy, and destructive. So abiding in the Self, and participating in alot of htings does seem at odds. It's hard to sell yourself out, well much of this world expects that of one. Social sitautions often engage on a very superficial level. Is that compatable with Self-inquiry? Not much. I don't think so. So, my activities have been greatly scaled back. People invite me out, but I don't want to small talk. Sitting and blissing out, is viewed as pathological. And why talk to people if the conversations are meaningless? This whole humanity is so much a rejection of heart to heart speech. So surrending into the Self, into love, into Bliss, into total communion. Which is true love with everything, how do I join in the self-sacrifice and betrayal of this world? Some basic hygein gets taken care of. Brush teeth, change clothes sometimes. Clean apartment when it starts to get bad. But when happiness is within, and things aren't based on the acceptance of rejection of 'others'. That reduces the motivation to do alot of activities. How did Papaji work for a mining company? i think to some degree, that things must start happening by grace, I give myself up, and grace steps in and starts carrying things. But how can I give up doership, and be the statue holding up the tower, and at the same time, behave like i'm the mover and shaker of my life? There must be some element of scaling back activities. So in some ways, I don't know. Regardless, of whether this is correct or not, it is what I want to do. I don't want to participate in all this superficiality. Sorry.
I don't want to engage in incompetent, inefficient activities, called the work world. I don't want to engage in the meaningless dog barks called conversations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv0THY4o6mI
these videos are great for me. One thing, is I've decided to not feel self-conscious about how much I write, or what I write about, but to write when and if inspired. I give david godman carte blanche to edit, not publish, publish, whatever he wants. (his judgement may be better than mine) So... I write by the muse. Um...one other element I'm discovering to all this (inclusive of previous mentioned dating issues) is psychic-ness. In a materialist standpoint, we think purely in terms of, getting this, requires this action. In deeper, peaceful surrender, and just enjoyment of my own self, peace, bliss, there is incredible psychic-ness, and people I am meant to run into I run into. I'm done with a not very interesting focus on end results. That woman that I invited to coffee, and she's seeing someone, there was a moment as I was walking to campus, that I totally surrendered, I mean that I accepted what comes, what doesn't come, and I saw her wave to me, I find in that peace, I sometimes have trouble initially recognizing someone, but she waved and said "hi", and then she said that she tried to manifest me. I laughed and said, "good job manifeting me". and she said, "you know" and gave me a pointer finger. i.e. psychicness. I'd rather interact on this pleasent level. Then, (on the level of) that is a person I want to copulate with, and thinking for end result. Nisargadatta: Nothing extraordinary can happen to the one who knows what they want. Nisargadatta: Before desiring, deserve! I surrendered, and had this pleasent, truly loving interaction, because I was love, and that person, was much more my own self. And this person, this women I have a crush on, is a non-superficial person, who can interact on this supernatural level. So why waste my time, becoming something I'm not, doing acitivities that stress me out. Why not just be in this state of immensely rewarding grace. Why not, to hell with society! It's ego motivated carrot on the stick, selfish genocidal, faceless institutional motivations. In that interaction with this women, she was with her boyfriend, and I had no jealousy, and just love for her, and him. He was nice, he was good. So lets have fun. Lets not think in terms of end results. Can you see, how this can perhaps be a better way of doing things, may be more fruitful in terms of a good life. Why compromise with that which is unholy, and selfish? Why compromise one's Being to fit in? Why not be in bliss, and wait, and perform, and participate in activities that are beatiful, and selfless, and giving, and imaginative when they ariise? Why think of want at all?
An agitated state is an ideal time to ask "who am I". The I of the storm
is a dead calm, simply there
Q. So there is no point planning furture projects. It is better to live with what comes, day by day.
Annamalai Swami: According to one's prarabdha the efforts which are necessary and which have to happen will arise in one's mind.
Q. So we only think we have choices. The sense of choice is not real.
Annamalai Swami: Correct! All the difficulties that we experience in life have been given to us by Bhagavan in order to turn our minds towards the self.
hj
hj,
Thanks for the Annamalai Swami quote, the passage I was thinking of is from further on in the same thread (I have it saved on a drive which was unmounted when I looked for it earlier...), and is penned by our gracious host here:
I had a discussion about this with Annamalai Swami in the early 1990s.
I asked: 'How can the activity of the individual self, which is an imaginary entity, result in awareness of reality? If the individual self is an illusion, then all its efforts must be illusory as well.'
Annamalai Swami was a great believer in hard,unremitting effort, and I knew I was playing devil's advocate on this one.
Not surprisingly, he replied, 'You mustn't think like this. You must continue to make efforts until the moment of realisation.'
I replied, 'But who is making the effort? If the one making the effort is unreal, then his efforts are also unreal. The unreal cannot produce awareness of the real. It can only hide it from view.'
Again he admonished me for being defeatist and said if I started to believe this I would give up all effort and practice and lapse into samsara again.
I said, 'I don't think it's my choice. I think I have a destined moment for realisation and that in the years and lifetimes prior to that moment there will be an increasing desire and interest in the Self which will eventually culminate in the final experience. I don't actually have a choice on whether I should meditate or do self-enquiry. This is also in my script. It seems to me that the progressive intensity of one's sadhana as one approaches the moment of liberation is an illusion, maya's final joke. This illusion, this script, creates the impression that individual effort culminates in liberation whereas it is just a script reaching its final climax.'
I don't know if I believed this or not. I think I took this position just to wind him up, to get him to give a forceful pep talk on the necessity of more and more effort.
Instead, he was silent for a while. Finally he said, 'It's true. The ego cannot choose to make more and more effort to hasten its final end. The desire to make the effort, and the intensity of that effort are also in the script. It is also in the script that I tell people every day that they must have more determination and make more effort. People who are ready to be inspired to make more effort come here and listen to me speak, and when I cajole them into more effort, they go away and make more effort. But it wasn't their choice, their decision. They were scripted to come to someone who would inspire them to try harder. And that subsequent trying harder is also in their script.'
I was astounded that he backed down on this one. He did say afterwards that he didn't speak like this in his public satsangs (this was a private meeting) since he didn't want people to become lazy and get defeatist. However, if he accepted this position, he must have known that, just as the individual self cannot make a choice to try harder, it cannot make the alternate choice of being lazy.
The thing is though, in reaction to the annamalai swami quote. I would have action plans and think I was going to do that were based in the ego, wanting to perpetuate who I think I am, or fulfill desires, or make people like me. All of that is based on taking myself to be an ego, and thinking happiness is outside me, that I have to attain it. So without ego all those projects that were built on ego, and desperation, would dissolve as well. So it would change the kinds of things done, or the kinds of things planned. Like right now, i spend alot of time happier because of attempting inquiry and reading the inquiry-related stuff. And there is also alot less motivation to do alot of things, because my motivation was based on insufficiency of happiness. I don't know how the same actions could possibly go on.
Post a Comment