salutations to all:
the prospect of getting a video recording of annamalai swami's interview made me very happy...so were the many other interesting comments expressed in the past few days...from the posts, i could also guess that most of you (subramanian, arvind, murali, ravi, jupes, a few anonymous'and many others) are very experienced. notwithstanding everything else, since nothing may be a better place than david's blog to discuss about bhagavan's most important teaching, viz., 'vichara' (at least in my humble opinion), i would like to SUGGEST & REQUEST something :
from a strict sadhaka perspective, could we all share as to how exactly we practise self-inquiry? ...by 'practice', i mean every detail that goes into the actual process (both the 'why' and the how')... this way all of us could benefit each other, may be in the best possible way...and wherever we have a doubt/lack of clarity, who better than david to correct or clarify as well as offer the much-required prescription to render our vichara more effective.
let me also add a note that, it seems, at least to me, that we can call ourselves as a devotee of bhagavan if and only if we practise vichara...some of you, or even most of you, may not agree with this last statement of mine because bhagavan also emphasized 'saranagati' or self-surrender... infact, if i am not wrong, i remember david mentioning in one of his long interviews (posted on his site) that only a few among the many who regularly visit ramanasramam actually try to practise vichara as their principal means of sadhana (for a variety of reasons)...yet, as we all know, for bhagavan, the most effective means to 'surrender' too lay through 'vichara'!
(and i really don't understand when people talk of submitting to god's will while thinking & doing their 'own' will most of the time...of course, i don't mean here that saying 'god made me think this way' or 'do this way' is not genuine but don't you think that to mean it 'honestly' requires a very high order of maturity, which is nearly not possible during the better part of this weird journey?)
Sunday, July 20, 2008
An open thread on vichara
One of the comments on the Annamalai Swami film announcement this morning suggested a forum for people to discuss how they do self-enquiry. I think this is a good idea, so I have made a separate post for this which will enable readers to keep track of the discussion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
556 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 556 of 556Scott Fraundorf:
I think sometimes my noticing the heart, is still as something external, maybe inspiration from Ramana, rather then being the Heart. It's only more lately that the gross insecurities, and fears have seriously abated if even temporarily enough to allow for a deeper Inquiry into the being-ness, the I-Am-ness as you put it.
But if it's the unreal in me, who is attempting to find their own unreality and dissipate, then that's good, if it dissipates, and allows the real me to be left over.
Scott Fraundorf:
From wikipedia:
"Jihad means "to strive or struggle" (in the way of God) and is considered the "Sixth Pillar of Islam" by a minority of Sunni Muslim authorities.[58] Jihad, in its broadest sense, is classically defined as "exerting one's utmost power, efforts, endeavors, or ability in contending with an object of disapprobation." Depending on the object being a visible enemy, the devil, and aspects of one's own self, different categories of Jihad are defined.[59] Jihad when used without any qualifier is understood in its military aspect.[60][61] Jihad also refers to one's striving to attain religious and moral perfection.[62] Some Muslim authorities, especially among the Shi'a and Sufis, distinguish between the "greater jihad", which pertains to spiritual self-perfection, and the "lesser jihad", defined as warfare."[63]
So Inquiry in a sense, or attempting Inquiry is in a sense Jihad, spiritual purification. Realization of the Self would be successful Jihad. I don't know, I just thought taht was interesting for my class, finding commonalities with other religions. They all sort of blend into One, wait, One without a Second.
Scott Fraundorf:
The teacher I correspond with in his first response said that "If the source of happiness is ascertained to be within you, dissolution of desire and fear is natural". I've come to realize that that is foundational to Inquiry and spiritual practice in general, otherwise it becomes as Robert Adams said a "dry, intellectual" method. Also I'm finding that seeing happiness within, is the Inquiry, because it's the same as holding the I. The nature of the Self is pure bliss, but this I arises in the form of desire for a happiness erroniously put external. Tracing the thought to it's source, is also tracing that the fulfillment of that desire, it's ultimate happiness is within, not without. Finding happiness within, is the same as finding the real nature of the Self. I'm not permanently abiding in a state where there is no within, or without, so for me, thinking in terms of within is still extremely important. In one of the satsang vids of my teacher, he responded to someone about music that the person heard and thought was extremely beautiful, and was wondering if he should trace that beauty to the Self. The teacher I correspond with said, that paraphrasing, something along the lines of, if the source of beauty, truth, is found where it actually resides, from that standpoint alone are we able to dismiss all this as unreal. I've also been for the first time really seriously putting Robert Adams method of when I wake up in the morning, the whole world is a projection from me, it is unreal. My teacher said something that I've come to understand a little deeper, about the guru, or Maharshi alone existing, when I said well, wouldn't even Maharshi be unreal? He said, and it makes sense to me, the guru alone exists, maharshi alone exists, because since they are the Reality, and nothing apart from the Reality, the me, I take myself to be is unreal, but Maharshi is the SElf, and nothing apart from the Self, looking at a picture of the Maharshi, I'm looking at the Self embodied. Any Gnani including Robert Adams is the Self, and because of that, since there is nothing apart from that, the Gnani, the teacher can be looked at as being the one thing in all of the waking-dream that is real, even I am not real, but the guru, the Gnani, Lakshmana Swami, Maharshi, is real. Just even considering that, is so incredibly ego effacing. I don't exist, but Maharshi does exist, and I'm staring at the Real when I look at Maharshi, when I watch archival footage, and he still is all that exists.
Scott
You say:
'being the one thing in all of the waking-dream that is real, even I am not real, but the guru, the Gnani, Lakshmana Swami, Maharshi, is real. Just even considering that, is so incredibly'
'even I am not real'
...................
Doesn't Ramana say somewhere that 'I am' is only what is real?
You know...'I am that I am' and all that stuff.
Scott Fraundorf:
Here is the letter from my teacher on Maharshi alone existing, it's so beautiful, I feel no shame in posting it here.
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
Namaste. The value of wearing vibhuti is known by those who do so.
Transcendence of the triads, in which the ego is dead, is the inner
adornment with the holy ashes of Siva.
Earnest practice of the helpful instructions is, indeed, wise
thankfulness.
It would be better to say that the disciple is unreal, a mere
misconception, and thus vanishes than to say such of the Guru, who is the
Self, Brahman. The Maharshi indeed exists and alone exists. So, it is
imperative to know him as he is. To accomplish that, one must first know
oneself. Thus, true Knowledge dawns, and devotion wells up and overflows.
Grace remains as Being.
Ever yours in Truth
Scott,
No self realised person will plant any idea that will detract your faith in your Guru.What your master has said is indeed true and beautiful.(I can speak from personal experience here).
This is the 'Bhakti' aspect which is something that the 'intellect'cannot grasp.There is truly no contradiction here with the State of Gnana.
Knowledge born of the Intellect after Book Learning and some superficial experience of 'lack of Ego'(The Witness Ego may be there!)does not amount to anything substantial;There are such persons who imagine they are Gnanis.
This is where the Woodcutter Story of Sri Ramakrishna serves to point the way.
I am pleased with your devotion to your teacher;This is a sure sign that there is steady progress(whatever that be!We need not concern ourselves).
Wishing you the Very Best.
Ravi:
You say:
'Ravi Wrote:「Scott,
No self realised person will plant any idea that will detract your faith in your Guru.What your master has said is indeed true and beautiful.(I can speak from personal experience here).
This is the 'Bhakti' aspect which is something that'
............
Ravi...there is only one 'master'
..if you must use that dreadful term.
It is not you..it is not me.. it is not Ramakhrishna.. it is not Nome.
I wonder if you can guess Who?
Bookworm,
"I wonder if you can guess Who?"
Yourself!-You tend to call it Ramana.
You need to give Sri Bhagavan's Grace a chance.
Best Wishes.
Scott Fraundorf:
"Doesn't Ramana say somewhere that 'I am' is only what is real?
You know...'I am that I am' and all that stuff.」- "
Well, my limited understanding, limited in that my certitude is not firm, is that the I am that is real, I,I, is the Self. The me, that I was saying is unreal, is the personality, the ego entity, that I sometimes think is me, imagine to be me, often infact. in the waking dream, the outer guru, the Self-realized Gnani is "I am that I am" because they have realized that there isn't a seperate individuality apart from I am that I am, Brahman, the Self. So in the waking dream, they are a manifestation of the Self, they are teh SElf, because there is no illusory personality, ego entity that takes themselves to be seperate. In truth, everyone and everything is the Self and there could only be Gnanis, there is only the Self, but since I imagine a seperate personality, an individuality seperate from the Self, an imaginary second when tehre is only One, not everything is equal in terms of realizing that there is only the Self. The Gnani, the Sage, the guru, Maharshi is the one thing that is real, in the waking dream because tehy are the only being that I can count on to speak, and act from the Truth of there being only One Self, and so they are the only thing in the waking dream that can convince me of the fact that the illusory individual I take myself to be, is simply a misperception, the snake in the rope. the I am that I am, is the guru, is my teacher, who is Maharshi. As David Godman pointed out, there is only one guru, only one Gnani, and he/she is within, the outer Gnani is the same as the inner one, because there is nothing seperate from it. In dialogues with my teacher, it becomes clear over time experientially, that the only side of the dialogue that counts is his, because he is the Self, myself. My side of the dialogue is an imaginary figment who thinks they have problems, when there are no problems.
Scott Fraundorf:
"No self realised person will plant any idea that will detract your faith in your Guru.What your master has said is indeed true and beautiful.(I can speak from personal experience here).
This is the 'Bhakti' aspect which is something that the 'intellect'cannot grasp.There is truly no contradiction here with the State of Gnana.
Knowledge born of the Intellect after Book Learning and some superficial experience of 'lack of Ego'(The Witness Ego may be there!)does not amount to anything substantial;There are such persons who imagine they are Gnanis.
This is where the Woodcutter Story of Sri Ramakrishna serves to point the way.
I am pleased with your devotion to your teacher;This is a sure sign that there is steady progress(whatever that be!We need not concern ourselves)."
Robert Adams was adament taht Bhakti is necessary for Realizing the Self, that there are no Gnanis that are not also Bhaktis. As my Inquiry deepens incrementally, I'd have to agree, the joy, the love that is awakened the more correctly I do my Inquiry is also devotion, and gratitude, for these teachings, for Maharshi in all his manifestations, because they, and he are the great liberator from all the huge troubles. I at first felt a little like it was my tabloid ego who wonders if someone is a Gnani (it was), or feels awe that someone is perhaps a Gnani, but Annamalai Swami, I can't remember where I read it, maybe even here, said that the Guru, the Gnani should not be treated as just another human being. It seems healthy to have that natural awe in the presence of the Real Self appearing as a person, because it destroys all those beliefs that covered that joy, that excitement, that bliss that is the Real Self.
wishing you the very best.
scott Fraundorf:
"Ravi...there is only one 'master'
..if you must use that dreadful term.
It is not you..it is not me.. it is not Ramakhrishna.. it is not Nome.
I wonder if you can guess Who?」- "
Were ramakrishna, and Ramana Maharshi different people? No, they were the Self. As Ravi pointed out well, was the same as Maharshi. Maharshi said that you can either Inquire, is the ego real? Or surrender to God, and have the ego struck down. Ramakrishna was saying that as long as you see differentiation, consider yourself a seperate "I", then devotion to God is necessary to clean the mirror. And the marital garland of letters, as well as many other writings featuring or by Maharshi, are full of the same devotion. "Not I, but thou" I don't see Inquiry, and devotion and surrender as different methods, they are one method, they are Realization. It's only the ego that masks steady, earnest, sincere Inquiry, loving devotion to every being on Earth, including the Universe as a whole, or god, and humility. So I don't see them even as different methods. Inquiry requires devotion and surrender to even work, when I'm inquiring whether my ego exists, it is surrender, and it reveals devotion, and love that was masked by the problems of the false individual. Devotion and surrender are Inquiry because as long as I take the selfish individual to be real, my devotion will be selfish, my surrender will be insincere.
Ravi
You say:
'"I wonder if you can guess Who?"
Yourself!-You tend to call it Ramana.
You need to give Sri Bhagavan's Grace a chance.'
............
Not quite sure what you mean Ravi...but you are right. Ramana is the True and only Guru.
As for giving Ramanas Grace a chance..maybe you also need to do so.
Bookworm,
"Not quite sure what you mean Ravi..."
Here is the excerpt from The Brihadaranya Upanishad-The Wonderful Teaching of Sage Yagnyavalkya.Please take your time to absorb this Truth.It will free you from 'RAMANA ONLY'fixation.This is a clear sign of insecurity where the Ego seeks to bolster itself by attaching itself to an 'Idea'.
We go to the Fourth Brahmana of the Brihadaranya Upanishad:
"YAJNAVALKYA and MAITREYIBrihadaranyaka upanishad)
The sage Yajnavalkya is going to retire to the forest, he approaches
Maitreyi to discuss the division of his property between her and her
co-wife Katyayani. Maitreyi, a woman of truly philosophical
temperament, challenges him with a question: will this wealth, she
asks, make her immortal? And Yajnavalkya answers her frankly: it will
not, with great wealth she can live the life of the rich, but she
will still die. Realising this is her last opportunity to ask him
anything, and believing her husband possesses the secret of
immortality, Maitreyi asks him to reveal it to her. He agrees to do
so, telling her, "as I am expounding to you, seek to meditate on it."
{IV.5.5}
Yajnavalkya's advice to her shows how seriously he takes Maitreyi's
question: he is not simply going to offer her an intellectual
account, he tells her to meditate on it so she can assimilate, dwell
on, live what he is about to disclose to her.
Here is the text of the dialogue:
"Maitreyi" said Yajnavalkya, "see, I am indeed about to go forth from
this state. Come, let me make a final settlement for you and for
Katyayani."
Then Maitreyi said: " Sir, if this entire earth filled with its
riches were mine, would I thereby be immortal?"
"No," said Yajnavalkya. "You would live the life of the wealthy.
There is no hope of attaining immortality through wealth."
Then said Maitreyi: "What am I to do with what does not offer me
immortality? Tell me indeed that which you know!"
Then Yajnavalkya said: "Ah! You are already my beloved, and what you
are saying touches me! Come, sit down. I will explain to you, And
while I am explaining, meditate on it."
Then he said: "It is not for the sake of the husband that the husband
is cherished, my dear, but for the sake of the self that the husband
is cherished. It is not for the sake of the wife that the wife is
cherished my ear, but for the sake of the self that the wife is
cherished. It is not for the sake of sons that sons are cherished, my
dear, but for the sake of the self that sons are cherished. It is not
for the sake of wealth that wealth is cherished, my dear, but for the
sake of the self that wealth is cherished. It is not for the sake of
priesthood that priesthood is cherished, my dear, but for the sake of
the self that priesthood is cherished. It is not for the sake of
warriorhood that warriorhood is cherished, my dear, but for the sake
of the self that warriorhood is cherished. It is not for the sake of
the worlds that the worlds are cherished, my dear, but for the sake
of the self that the worlds are cherished. It is not for the sake of
the gods that the gods are cherished, my dear, but for the sake of
the self that the gods are cherished. It is not for the sake of
beings that beings are cherished, my dear, but for the sake of the
self that beings are cherished. It is not for the sake of all that
all is cherished, my dear, but for the sake of the self that
everything is cherished. It is the self, my dear Maitreyi, that
should be discerned, be heard, be pondered on, be meditated on.
Indeed, by discerning the self, by hearing it, pondering on it,
meditating on it, all this is known.
Priesthood has deserted the one who knows priesthood as different
from the self. Warriorhood has deserted the one who knows warriorhood
as different from the self. The worlds have deserted the one who
knows the worlds as different from the self. The gods have deserted
the one who knows the gods as different from the self. Beings have
deserted the one who knows beings as different from the self. All has
deserted the one who knows all as different from the Self! This
priesthood, this warriorhood, these worlds, these gods, these beings,
this all, are all this Self.
Just as when a drum is being beaten, one would not be able to grasp
the sound emitted[1], but by grasping the drum or the beater of the
drum the sound is grasped. Just as when a conch-shell is being blown,
one would not be able to grasp the sound emitted, but by grasping the
conch-shell or the blower of the conch-shell the sound is grasped.
Just as, when a vina is being played, one would not be able to grasp
the sound emitted, but by grasping the vina or the player of the vina
the sound is grasped. Just as from a fire laid with damp fuel,
different kinds of smoke issue forth, so too from this great being
are breathed forth Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda, Hymns of the
Atharvans and Angirases, history, legend, learning, upanishad,Verses,
Aphorisms, Explanations, and Commentaries.
Just as the ocean is where all waters converge, the skin where all
tactile sensations converge, the nose where all odours , the eye
where all forms converge, the ear where all sounds converge, the mind
where all intentions converge, the heart where all forms of knowledge
converge, the hands where all action converges, the sexual organ
where all pleasures converge, the anus where all waste-products
converge, the feet where all locomotion converges, and speech where
all Vedas converge, just as a lump of salt cast in water dissolves in
the water; there would not be anything you could grasp and extract,
so to speak, but wherever one might take any, it would always be
salty, so too, indeed, this great being, infinite, limitless, is just
a mass of awareness. Arising out of these elements into them it
vanishes. After death there is no consciousness. That is what I say,
my dear." Thus spoke Yajnavalkya.
Then Maitreyi spoke. "You have me bewildered, sir, when you
say `after death there is no consciousness'!"
Then Yajnavalkya said: "I am saying nothing bewildering! This is
sufficient for understanding. For where there is duality, so to
speak, there one smells another; there one sees another; there one
hears another; there one speaks to another; there one thinks of
another; there one understands another. Where, indeed, everything has
become one's own self, then by means of what would one smell, and
whom? then by means of what would one see, and whom? then by means of
what would one hear, and whom? then by means of what would one speak,
and who to? then by means of what would one think, and about whom? By
means of what would one know, and whom? By means of what would one
know that by which all this is known? By means of what, my dear,
would one know the knower? "
The version of the dialogue in IV. v. continues as follows:
". . . know the knower? This Self is not this, not this! It is
incomprehensible, for it cannot be comprehended, indestructible, for
it cannot be destroyed, unattached, since it does not attach itself,
unbound, since it does not suffer. It is not injured. By means of
what, indeed, would one know the knower?! There, you are now
instructed, Maitreyi. Such indeed is immortality!"
And having said this, Yajnavalkya departed."
Best Wishes.
.
... "If this entire earth filled with its riches were mine, would I thereby be immortal?" ...
Yes, indeed this is the question. And the corresponding question is: While does man prefers to settle down in worlds far, far before or below immortality?
Some say: Immortality is "insane", "mental madness", "a wish to die", "suicide", "a misunderstanding", "an exaggeration" etc. But does not real madness is to cling to the meaningless worlds of the wordly mind?
.
Friends,
You may download Swami Krishnananda's Excellent Commentary on The Brihadaranya Upanishad:
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/brhad_00.html
scott fraundorf:
YAJNAVALKYA, it's interesting you bring that up, because I did not really know the history of the Upanishads, but my dad sent me a book that he was enthused about what he heard about it, on how most of the world religions have alot in common as far as origin, as ways of being free of the most superficial levels of mind. The stuff, on Yajnavalka, he essentially said, and taught everything Ramana said 2700 years ago, about the I-thought, about the ego, about the inner transcendent bliss of Brahman consciousness, all of that is straight from the Upanishads. I think one of the reasons I tend not to be so closed off to inspiration, or say that it had to come from the mouth of the actual body of Ramana Maharshi, is that it cuts me off from too many sources of wisdom, and for me, spirituality is life or death. Get wise, or die. I don't have the option of being close minded, someone is pointing a gun at me, I look for whatever is available as a tool, maybe at first it was some yoga and tai chi postures, some vipassana techniques, then I was exposed to Self-Inquiry, then the contact of sages, then I realize the highest wisdom is that there is only the One without a Second, the teachings of Yajnavalka, and other sages from the age of the Upanishads, reiterated by Shankara, and Ramakrishna, and Ramana Maharshi (in truth also by Christ, the buddha, and Mohammed), reiterated again by the Realized devotees of Maharshi either those who knew him personally or thsoe who did not. My digging deeper into the layers of the ego, to find the "primal I thought"((I accidentally wrote eye,hmm, primal eye thought), also take on an outer manifestation, and that is digging deeper into the layers of wisdom externally, that I'm exposed to, and the deeper my inquiry, the deeper the aspects of the teachings I understand. Maybe that is the problem with some neo-advaita, they dig a little, and then think they understand the whole package, not realizing that there are subtler levels. Some subtler level of Ramana's teachings which was also Yajnavalka's teachings will suddenly resonate as an actual experiential awareness, as opposed to dry intellectual knowledge. I was learning a filipino martial art called eskabo daan which came upon me the same way maharshi's teachings did, I wasn't looking for it, and in that, some of the beginner students would arrogantly see themselves as being able to do what the advanced students could do, because they weren't aware of the brilliant subtleties, in truth, they couldn't in a million years touch the advanced students. That's why coming to anything with a beginner mentality, seems best, because if I admit my ignorance, I'm bound to start picking up on the subtleties, if I don't close myself off, thinking I already know. lower case k, not capitol K which is Jnana.
Scott:
You say:
'think one of the reasons I tend not to be so closed off to inspiration, or say that it had to come from the mouth of the actual body of Ramana Maharshi, is that it cuts me off from too many sources of wisdom, and for me, spirituality is life or death. Get wise, or die. I don't have the option of being close minded, someone is pointing a gun at me'
......................
Scott it is not a case of being close minded. I am as well read in the Spiritual tradition as any of you.
It is just a case of when you know and are shown what is True you have no need for anything other.
By all means read or investigate for your pleasure or entertainment
but if you ever get a bit lost...
Just remember that Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing BUT Truth.
Scott/Bookworm/Friends,
As Sri Ramakrishna says:
"Sri Ramakrishna was talking to Kāli, the Divine Mother of the Universe. He said: "Mother, everyone says, 'My watch alone is right.' The Christians, the Brahmos, the Hindus, the Mussalmans, all say, 'My religion alone is true.' But, Mother, the fact is that nobody's watch is right. Who can truly understand Thee? But if a man prays to Thee with a yearning heart, he can reach Thee, through Thy grace, by any path. "
All Reactions,Self Justifications are clearly a product of Ego infected Ignorance.True Knowledge dissolves all differences.It does not claim any Exclusivity.A Tree is known by the Fruit it bears,not by the species to which it belongs to.
Best Regards.
Scott Fraundorf:
"Scott it is not a case of being close minded. I am as well read in the Spiritual tradition as any of you.
It is just a case of when you know and are shown what is True you have no need for anything other.
By all means read or investigate for your pleasure or entertainment
but if you ever get a bit lost...
Just remember that Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing BUT Truth."
Bookworm, I wasn't accusing you of being close minded, or unknowledgable about spiritual material, or that having an intellectual grasp on religions, or spirituality, is really any value as far as being spiritual. My point is that when I see that I am in need of spiritual realization, realization of the Self, the unitariness of all being, I use whatever takes me closer to that transcendent sense of joy, love, bliss, courage, transcendence of the body. I can read the New Testement, or hear an anarchistic punk song, and pull inspiration from that. Yes, I was pretty jaded with all the talking, and words, and ideas, which seemed to me to be just that, Maharshi was the first time I was exposed to this pure, clear, Truth, that resonated so deeply, uncontaminated. While there is a bit of truth in everything, there it was pure, clear, uncontaminated. But Maharshi the body, clearly, wasn't the only person where the Self realized the SElf, and there was only the SElf, and no delusion whatsoever. I find that same Truth, clearly uttered by Papaji, by Lakshmana Swami, Annamalai Swami, Ramanagiri, Nisargadatta, Jesus, Buddha, maybe even Socrates. Lao Tsu and Rumi as well. Ramakrishna too. It seems that my teacher is a Self realized of the SElf with no individual left over. It doesn't matter whether we agree on which bodies had that pure realization of the SElf with no individuality left over. For instance the teacher I correspond with, I follow Ramana's advise on that, if it takes me closer to peace, equanimity, happiness, if the impure tendencies and ego are more and more surrendered than I trust that teacher to the degree that happens. If there is anything else, where I'm supposed to accept becoming less at peace, less blissful, less good then I can guess that it's because that teacher is a fraud, or misguided, or not Realized but thinks they are. Seeing the need for REalization, I practice intensely of what I know, and expose myself to anything that enhances, or helps me understand, what the SElf is, how to realize it, how to realize the non-existance of the person. If on reading Who am I? I didn't get it initially, I practice it, but I'm also fluid, and willing to ask for help, from those who perhaps know, if I feel that egolessness is deepening, and I feel more at peace, blissful, equanimity, kindness, compassion, then I trust that I'm on track. If I decided to hang out with Adi da, and in his organization, I would base my growth on whether my REalization of the SElf is deepening, and on nothing else whatsoever, since that is all that mattres. If it becomes about his personality flaws, and justifying them, then I trust that this is not pointing me Inward, toward the SElf. With that criteria, how could I become duped by false teachings, or teachers.
Ravi
You say:
'infected Ignorance.True Knowledge dissolves all differences.It does not claim any Exclusivity.A Tree is known by'
.............
I do not think you quite understand Ravi.
I am not claiming any exclusivity for Ramanas Teaching. It has been known for many thousands of years...even the Heart on the right.
I am only stating what is simply true...which is:
Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing BUT Truth.
Have you a problem with that? Do you disagree?
Bookworm,
I have repeatedly in several exchanges clarified that the Focus is on 'Oneself'.To put oneself in a judgement seat to say X's Teachings are nothing BUT Truth and Y is not a guru which you have been dishing out from time to time simply smacks of utter immaturity and ignorance.Who are you to vet Sri Bhagavan?As if you have had a measure of him and Truth.
I have noted your claim to experiencing the "heart" on the Right-All these belong to the Psychophysical phenomena and are not TRUTH.Know That TRUTH is a Pathless land and the initial Runway before takeoff may be different for different persons.
All your interactions here are full of 'I Know' 'I am Right' arrogance.What is the use of your experiencing the 'Heart' on the 'Right'either to you or to anyone else?
You say that you are not a stranger to Spiritual Tradition and that you have 'Read' all!The point is not in 'Reading' but in assimilating of which there is little evidence in your interactions here.Pray,what is the Tradition that you are familiar with-Muktananda's Yoga and Adi Da's antics?!!!
First understand and assimilate how Sri Bhagavan Lived(Do you consider it as 'another story' which does not bother you) and ask yourself a simple question in what manner the 'TRUTH' which you claim you have 'Experienced' has any correspondence with that wonderful Life.
The Spiritual path is full of pitfalls and one can easily be lead astray.Guidance by a guru is essential.One needs to be on guard to eschew Self Sufficiency,complacency and self pride.
Relationship is a mirror in whih one understands oneself.The Entire world will become our Guru if we 'choose' to be a disciple.Remember the GREAT TRUTH.IF WE ARE EARNEST TRUTH WILL FIND US and not the other way round.This is what Sri Ramakrishna has repeatedly emphasised-and there certainly is no message more encouraging than this.
I would have preferred to write to you in private,but do not have your contact details.
Wishing you the Very Best.
A note on moderation policy:
I read all the comments that are posted here before I allow them to be posted and I usually delete any which, in my opinion, abuse and insult particular teachings, Gurus, or devotees who post here. I have no objection to devotees who want to disagree with ideas that have been posted, but I draw the line at comments that are personally abusive or which claim that the teachings of one sect or Guru are vastly superior to those of another.
In recent times Bookworm has been guilty of this several times, and the usual target of his scorn and derision has been Ravi. I have given Ravi a ‘right of reply’ on this one since he has been the one whose views have been most frequently attacked, but I am not going to allow any further personal insults or claims of superiority. From now on I am adopting a policy of zero tolerance on this topic: comments that abuse, denigrate, or ridicule philosophies, teachers or fellow posters will not be posted.
In Sri Ramana Paravidyopanishad, verse 61 it is written:
‘Therefore the aspirant should, with a mind at peace, cease from hatred of other faiths and from all disputation and engage in sadhana as taught by his own faith, intent on winning deliverance.’
In a similar vein Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 991 states:
‘Instead of turning outwards, arguing against other religions on account of your attachment to your own, turn inwards and practise whichever religion you have faith in with genuine love.’
As a third source I will cite the first ten verses of the Padamalai chapter on religions:
Religious doctrines
1 The doctrines of all religions contradict each other. They wage war, collide with each other, and finally die.
2 On this battlefield all the religions retreat defeated when they stand before mauna, which abides beneficently, sustaining them all.
3 The rare and wonderful power of mauna is that it remains without enmity towards any of the religions.
4 The many different religions are appropriate to the maturity of each individual, and all of them are acceptable to reality.
5 Abandoning vain disputation, which only deludes and torments the mind, accept the doctrine of the mauna religion, which always remains undisturbed.
Religious tolerance
6 Only as long as the mind survives will there be religion. When the mind attains silence, religion will also cease.
7 In the peaceful state the mind will reach the Heart – the harmonising light of the path of being – and reality will shine forth.
8 Feeling anger and hatred in the mind on account of a blind fanaticism towards one’s own religion is a cruel and ignoble deed.
9 On seeing this treachery, both Iswara and true devotees feel ashamed and deem it no better than the act of an ignorant harlot.
10 Instead of condemning another’s [path], destroying your clarity, learn one method. Observe it and cherish it in your heart.
* * *
Bhagavan himself did not make rude comments about the beliefs of people who came to see him, nor did he side with those who came to him with complaints about other devotees. I am adopting similar rules here. Everyone should feel free to dispute any ideas that are posted here so long as such refutations do not degenerate into personal attacks, or attacks on other teachers and traditions.
David, Ravi
A bit over the top you two arn't you.
All I said was that Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing But Truth.
Does nobody else in this place know or feel or even believe and agree with this.
Don't worry about writing to me
in private Ravi...you can say what you like or criticise me as you wish here...and I think David should
print whatever you may write no matter how critical or offensive it might seem to appear.
This should be a place of Truth where one is able and allowed to be critical of a religion, teaching or guru if that is what one truly is moved and is good to do.
True, I admit, I probably was a little, or maybe a bit more than a little, bit over the top with some of my criticism of Ravi... but then...there is a lot to be critical about. (that is meant as a joke)..(ish)
You people jump on my back just because I say:
Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing But Truth.
That simple statement seems to cause offence...and this is a site supposedly dedicated to Ramana and Ramanas Teaching.
I am sure if I had said:
Swami Flowing Robes and Guru Pot Belly and their Teaching are nothing But Truth...
That most people would not be offended and some would even have been certain or brave enough to agree.
Does anyone even truly like Ramana in this place?
Dear All,
Whatever has happened has happened. There is anaccount in 'Living By The Words Of Bhagavan' where Annamalai Swami recounts how in the evening, He recounted to Bhagavan, the fact that He had slapped a worker sometime during the day. At which Bhagavan chided Him for going back to what had happened a long time ago.
Let us forget whatever has happened. And in Bhagavan's words, 'Attend to the purpose for which we came'.
Back to Self-Enquiry - I personally have found Robert Adams' technique of telling oneself that 'I realise, feel and understand that everything, everything is a projection of my mind' and then trying to go back to see from where this projection begins.
The other thing that seems to work for me is watching the Annamalai Swami DVD, or any of Papaji's satsangs on youtube. They both seem to make me aware of something that is below the mental noise, after which I feel enquiry becomes easier.
Nandu Narasimhan
David/Bookworm/Friends,
"I am an insignificant person.But I live by the side of an ocean and I keep with me a few pitchers of sea water.When a visitor comes,I entertain him with that.What else can I speak of but his words"-
This is what 'M' told Subodh(Later Swami Subodhananda,a direct disciple of Sri Ramakrishna).Subodh was directed by Sri Ramakrishna to keep in touch with 'M'.The Young Subodh shot back -"He is a householder.What does he know!".Sri Ramakrishna was quite amused at the boy's outburst but he insisted that he meet 'M'.Subodh met 'M' and frankly told him what transpired.This was what elicited the words quoted above.
I have always felt that one has more to learn from the Lives of the Great ones than latching on to any verbal teaching,however lofty.One simple act of these mahatmas is worth more than tons of philosophical Thoughts.
I wish to clarify,that I have not been in any way offended or put off by any of Bookworm's remarks.All the same,I could not dismiss what was happening- that a person could consider himself a Gnani and yet indulge in sarcastic remarks which only served to drive away other sincere aspirants from this wonderful Blog;I felt that I need to stop this nonsense.
David,Thanks for all that you are doing.I wish you are spared of this policing.
Bookworm,
I look forward to your continued participation in this Forum.I wish you the very Best.May Sri Bhagavan's Grace be ever with you and guide you.
Salutations.
Nandu
You say:
Back to Self-Enquiry - I personally have found Robert Adams' technique of telling oneself that 'I realise, feel and understand that everything, everything is a projection of my mind' and then trying to go back to see from where this projection begins.
..............
Robert Adams was a devotee or disciple of Ramana.
All of the above is thinking or involves thought.
The best thing I feel Only to do
is what Robert Adams Guru taught which is... whenever you become aware
of attentions entrapment in thought ask yourself
Who am I. Ramana taught this way for good reason.
Scott Fraundorf:
I agree, with David's putting his foot down, for the sole reason that that kind of abusiveness, ridicule, doesn't really create a safe space for people to be themselves, or to grow spiritually. I don't attribute anything to anybody's character over it, and personally have been learning to not take things so personally. But it's an unnecessary atmosphere, and we shoudl be on each other's side, helping each other, not trying to take the wind out of each other's sails, trying to show each other who is boss, who has a better grasp of the teachings. So far Bookworm's arguments against various teachers have resorted to more of a mudslinging sarcasm (fit for punditry) rather than making a well-thought out well-argued point, which then could easily be refuted, as Ramakrishna, the Upanishads, and various others have taught the same Truth as Ramana. Where did Ramana get the lingo that he used, "Thou art that", Chondogya Upanishad. Realization of Brahman, the Self, is all throughout the Upanishads, the Ribhu Gita, and probably much more since I'm just beginning to dive in. In Ravi's quoting the story of Yashnavalka, how was that wisdom different, or less illuminating then words spoken by The Maharshi? Ramana translated Shankara, and used many of the same analogies such as Rope/snake. At first I would have thought Ramana's teachings were like a break off sect, similar to Christ and Judaism, but infact, when I read Crown Jewel of Discrimination by Adi Shankara (Maharshi's translations, as well as others), I could just as easily be reading Maharshi. Maharshi said chapter 26 of the Ribhu Gita is the same as Samadhi itself. Reading the excerpt from ch.26 on the Society of Abidance in Truth website through exposure from Nome, essentially put me in a brief state of samadhi. i have found reading Ribhu Gita, the English translation of the Tamil verson by H. Ramamoorthy and Nome to be indispensible for spiritual practice. There is a picture of Papaji reading the Ribhu Gita,and wasn't it recited during Maharshi's time at Ramanashramam?
Robert Adams, a Western devotee, generally recognized to be Self-Realized, is full of indispensible clues, as to how to practice Self-Inquiry, both him and Ramanagiri advised mixing it with the breath, I've taken to that, and find that I can really get deeper below superficial levels of mind. I'm not so familiar, but I'm sure the sage Ramakrishna was full of valuable insight into how to conduct oneself, because how I conduct myself has a huge bearing on my progress toward Realization. If I behave selfishly, cowardly, (which I have, and why I don't judge), or abusively, capriciously I'm feeding the ego. So acting better and better toward others, which is why many of the sages including Ramana advised being kind to others, and to behave with humility, and there isn't a sage that doesn't have the Golden rule as a core belief that is told. Because since there is only One Self, treating others as oneself, is also indispensible for Realization of the Self, no one is going to Realize the Self, "sink into the heart" to quote Bookworm without observation of the Golden Rule. And Inquiry also increases in me, the natural observation of it.
Ravi
You say:
'that a person could consider himself a Gnani and yet indulge in sarcastic remarks which only'
.............
I do not consider myself anything Ravi
Bookworm,
"The best thing I feel"
Best for whom? All these are relative.What seems best for one may be utterly useless for another.
Nandu has said that he has found it beneficial to follow what Robert Adams has taught.Should he simply give it up just because of the brute logic that Ramana is Robert Adams's Guru(hence should be Knowing better)and Ramana taught 'Who am I'(which you feel has benefitted you).
I will appreciate if you can explain in more human terms how you have been benefitted-other than saying this as 'Truth','Only Truth',etc.What is the value of this Truth in my daily dealings in office,at home,in my view of myself and others.
What is the proof that 'Truth' is 'Truth' and not just an illusion?
Best Regards.
Scott,
Truly appreciate your well rounded understanding of the essentials of spiritual living.Wonderful post by you.I understand your fondness of Ribhu Gita which Sri Bhagavan recommended so highly.
One of my Favourites is Sage Thayumanavar and his compositions which sri Bhagavan used to relish greatly-They are a rare blend of Highest wisdom,devotional fervour,expressed in intensely moving and fervent poetry-Sri Bhagavan used to call it Devamrita(divine elixir).
Best Regards.
Dear Bookworm,
I came to Bhagavan thirteen years ago and follow Him only.
I use Robert Adams' technique and Papaji's words to help me get back to correct Self-Enquiry, after it became a mere mental exercise.
In my heart, there is no difference between Bhagavan, or anyone else that He points me to. The goal is to be able to do Self-Enquiry properly.
By the same logic, if something you say also strikes me as good, why should that not be followed?
Everything is Ramana, right?
Nandu
.
...One of my Favourites is Sage Thayumanavar and his compositions ...
Does exist prosa by him, Ravi? Poetry I find difficult to translate.
.
Bookworm,
"I do not consider myself anything Ravi"
Friend,do you not consider yourself as a devotee of Sri Bhagavan?You are that.It is not a coincidence that this is so.No prey ever escapes the Tiger's jaws.
You wanted me to agree(or disagree)-Ramana and Ramana's teachings are nothing but Truth.
To agree or disagree-is possible only on matters of opinion.
Truth is something that stands on its own-one either understands or one remains ignorant.Sri Bhagavan is the Supreme Self,as he himself said-""The Supreme Self who Sports as Awareness
in the cave of the lotus-heart of all souls
beginning with Hari, is Ramana of Arunachala.
If you enter the Heart where the Supreme Being shines,
open the Eye of Knowledge and seek (with melting love)
with utmost earnestness,
then the truth of it becomes quite plain to you."
Can we add or subtract to what Sri Bhagavan said?
Wish you all the Best.
Clemens Vargos Ramos
The following Thayumanavar verses were selected by Bhagavan and included in the fifteen-day long cycle of Tamil poems that was chanted in Bhagavan’s presence. The poems were translated by T. V. Venkatasubramanian, Robert Butler and myself and included in an article that was serialised in The Mountain Path a few years ago. The full article is posted on my site. The link is: http://www.davidgodman.org/rteach/Thayumanavar.pdf
There are many other translation of Thayumanavar’s poetry there that may interest you.
In all people, as soon as the ego-sense known as ‘I’ arises to afflict them,
the world-illusion, manifesting as multiplicity, follows along behind.
Who might have the power to describe the vastness
of the ocean of misery that grows out of this:
as flesh; as the body; as the intellectual faculties;
as the inner and the outer; as the all-pervasive space;
as earth, water, fire, and air; as mountains and forests;
as the multitudinous and mountainous visible scenes;
as that which is invisible, such as remembering and forgetting;
as the joys and sorrows that crash upon us, wave upon wave, in maya’s ocean;
as the deeds that give rise to these;
as the religions of manifold origin that [try to] put an end to them;
as their gods, as their spiritual aspirants, and as the methods
described in many a treatise that bear witness to their practices;
and as the doctrinal wrangling amongst them?
It is like trying to count the fine grains of sand on the seashore.
In order to teach me to discern the truth
of how all these woes, impossible to measure –
which spontaneously accumulate, multiplying bundle by bundle –
were insubstantial, like the spectacle of a mountain of camphor
that disappears entirely at the touch of a flame,
he associated with food, sleep, joy, misery, name-and-place,
and wearing a bodily form similar to my own,
he came as the grace-bestowing Mauna Guru
to free me from defilement, in just the same way that a deer
is employed to lure another deer.
Coming thus, he claimed my body, my belongings, my very life
as his possessions, and teaching the path of rejection, he declared:
‘The five senses, the five elements, the organs of action, and all the rest,
you are not. You are none of these.
Nor are you any of the qualities that pertain to these.
You are not the body, nor are you knowledge and ignorance.
You are chit, the real, which is like a crystal,
reflecting the qualities of whatever is placed before it,
and yet having no connection with it.
It is my inherent nature to enlighten you
when I find that you are ripe for it.’
‘If you desire to gain the vast, supreme reality
that is the temple of refreshing grace,
inseparable from all that is, becoming pure consciousness
and obtaining the indestructible state whose nature is bliss,
listen as I explain to you the proper means:
May you live long, winning in your heart
the reality that is devoid of all qualities!
May you attain the state of bliss-consciousness,
so that all the dense accumulation of ignorance disappears!
May you liberate yourself from bondage!’
Through his grace, he imparted to me the state of mauna,
the true knowledge in which bondage is abolished:
‘For that state, there is no thought, no “I” sense,
no space, no time, no directions, no pairs of opposites,
nothing lost, nothing other, no words,
no phenomena of night and day,
no beginning, no end, no middle, no inner or outer.
Nothing is.’
‘When I say: “It is not, it is not”, this is not a state of nothingness.
It is pure identity; it is the nature that eternally endures,
a state that cannot be expressed in words.
It is the swarupa which engulfs everything,
so that neither ‘I’ nor anything else appears.
As the day consumes the night, it consumes ignorance entirely.
Easily overcoming and swallowing up your personal consciousness,
it transforms your very self, here and now, into its own Self.
It is the state that distinguishes itself as self-luminous silence.’
‘Other than the nature that is its own Self,
it allows nothing else to arise.
Because there is no other consciousness,
should anything attempt to arise there
it will, like a camphor flame, vanish.
The knower, devoid of both knowledge and objects known,
falls away, without falling, since it still remains.
But who can tell of its greatness, and to whom?
By dint of becoming That, one exists only as That.
That alone will speak for itself.’
‘If we call it “That”, then the question will arise, “What is That?”
Therefore did Janaka and the other kings
and the rishis, foremost among whom is Suka,
lived happily, like bees intoxicated with honey,
entirely avoiding any mention of “That”.
Remain in this state.’ Thus did he speak.
Grant me the abundance of your grace
so that, in the nirvikalpa state of total tranquillity,
I may know and attain the condition of supreme bliss,
in accordance with your rule.
I shall not sleep or take up any other work
until I attain this state.
Conceiving you as everything from earth to space,
I shall record my thoughts on the large page of my mind,
and looking at that image ever and again, I shall cry out:
‘Lord of my life, will you not come?’
Repeatedly believing myself to be You,
I am unable to fix my attention on anything else.
Lamenting in this way, like one whose heart is wounded,
dissolving inwardly, so that tears pour down in floods,
uttering deep sighs, unaware even of my body,
I stand transfixed.
‘Akarabuvanam-Chidambara Rahasya’, vv. 15-24
The unique source [tan], fullness [purnam],
prevailed within, in my Heart
so that the ‘I’ which deemed itself
an independent entity
bowed its head in shame.
Conferring matchless bliss,
consuming my whole consciousness
and granting me the state of rapture,
it nurtured in me the condition of mauna.
This being so, what more is there to be said?
‘Payappuli’, verse 14
Ramos,
only Hymns of Thayumanavar are there.I am not aware of any English translations;There may be excerpts to be found.There is a very absorbing article -Bhagavan and Thayumanavar-By David,Butler and Venkatramanai Trio.This may serve as a bait to explore further.
Coming to the Translation of the Hymns-perhaps Literary meaning has been given the priority over Poetic Charm-Yes,Looks like we need Sir Edwin Arnold!
All the same,this article is quite absorbing and I warmly recommend to all -Please visit davidgodman.org and open the link - Tamil Translations-and look for the pdf link -Bhagavan and Thayumanavar.
My Master is very fond of Thayumanavar's Paripoorananandam-Ten Hyms on Wholesome Bliss.Just listening to his freeflowing recital will fill the place with Bliss.Such is the power and Beauty of these compositions.
I will just copy one Translation done by master of Thayumanavar's earnest call to the Whole Of Humanity-
" O ye humans,
have you not observed
the crow calling out
to birds of its clan
so as to share and partake of
the food-material
it has spotted
on its own?
Likewise have I known
the Bliss that is the flood
of experience of the Absolute
which bubbles and brims over
in a surge of Perfection –
one vast expanse it is,
stretched out before me!
O, do come over
in your multitude
to lap It up in glee,
ere your physical frame
which you were born with
falls as it needs must
when your life-span runs out…"
Master's translation has wonderfully captured the spirit of the original without sacrificing anything!
Here is one more(These are the only two that are available!):
When you look at the panorama
of the Universe,
is it not a fact
that all the objects
and appearances
including the Earth
are but agglomerations
of the elements five
with the grand display rooted
in the Static State?
O Mind, we should also
dwell in that substratum
and other than this practice
there is nothing to be learnt now or in the future!
Best Regards.
.
The full article is posted on my site. The link is: http://www.davidgodman.org/rteach/Thayumanavar.pdf
Thank you. This could become my next translation project. I think that Thayumanavar and the stories of "Arunachala Saints" fit to my present needs.
Padamalai:
37 Even the gods in the heavens cannot stir those deeply peaceful ones who shine, having
killed their minds.
Reading the excerpt of Padamalai I remembered a saying of my diary written years ago:
"A man becoming perfectly still rests at a place being beyond the reach of the powers of the universe."
.
Anonymous
You say:
just beginning to dive in. In Ravi's quoting the story of Yashnavalka, how was that wisdom different, or less illuminating then words spoken by The Maharshi? Ramana'
...................
I Trust and feel certain that Ramana and Ramanas Teaching is Perfect Truth and also the most straight road.
If you want to travel by various back roads all I can say is have fun and good luck.
..............
You say:
Realization of the Self, no one is
going to Realize the Self, "sink into the heart" to quote Bookworm without observation of the Golden Rule.
.................
You are right when you say no one is going to sink into the Heart.
It is the ego which sinks or disolves bsck into where it came from.
...........
You say:
lf has a huge bearing on my progress toward Realization.
.............
Who is making this progress?
It cannot be you, who you are.. as it is taught you are already/always and only who you truly are .. the Self or Heart
Maybe you should find out what is True in you
Who are you?...are you the one you are...or are you the one you think you are?
Shouldn't take you long to find the answers to these questions as you find Truth in so many places.
,
Scott Fraundorf:
I'm finding that if, when an intense fear arises, a problem, that is a stepping stone, opportunity as it were, to find what is my blissful nature, that is unaffected by the problem, no matter how intense, horrible, immanent the problem seems. Questions such as that strike me as Inquiry, because I'm Inquiring into the nature of the seeker, which is utter happiness transcendent of any situation. And it's less of a method, but more finding the Self, the current, to whom the problems of the individual are irrelevent. The promise of these teachings and captured by Thayamuanavar, is that there is this substratum, of eternal being-consciousness, if the problems of the individual are no longer considered problems. Problems seem so real, to consider them unreal, is such a huge leap of faith, and then I find if I do it, that I'm deeper into bliss. As an auxillary sometimes it helps to remind myself that any other person taht I miss, they are the nature of the Self, people I miss are me, not something seperate from me, so there is no reason to miss them. What is different about them, in a different place about them, is not what is real about them, what I like about them. Then I watch the hour long archival footage of the Maharshi, and his entire surroundings and including himself, does not just posess but is, radiant, contagious bliss. The film almost glows, and I cannot imagine how being around Maharshi, one could not be infected by that happiness, forget even those most unsolveable, horrible, painful problems. It is like the metaphor, the darkness retreating from the rising sun at dawn. I was reading the Ashtavakra Gita, the one that is on Realization.org, it's a decent translation, and it captures a bliss that is not circumstance dependent, and when I read it, I feel a free-spirited bliss, completely care free. And I see that in Maharshi, just the way he holds his stick, without a care, in old age, with an assortment of physical problems, he is still utterly without a care, with such an infectious smile.
Scott Fraundorf:
That's why bhakti, and jnana strike me as being the same, because bhakti is the natural devotion that is the bliss, and why the devotion of Ramakrishna, does not strike me as even slightly different from the teachings of the Maharshi. The more I feel blissful, there is a natural devotion that is just there, it takes no effort
Scott Fraundorf:
I think from watching that archival footage, I get a real sense of Arunachala, and why people say that it has some special power. Because the whole place was pure bliss, I felt the whole surroundings of the RamanaAshramam, of the hill, were pure bliss, were the Self. I was privately skeptical, about a hill being special, or having power, or being spiritual. Even when lakshmana swami told david godman, taht it clearly had a special power to turn people's minds inward. When I watch that archival footage, it's like Thayamanavar's description, bees intoxicated with honey. That is the perfect analogy. Watching the archival footage is like eating something that is really delicious. Both Ramana, who is saucily care free, and the Hill which is the perfect place, the Absolute Utopia.
Scott Fraundorf:
It's funny my favorite pictures of Maharshi are not the ones that are on the cover of the books, or behind Papaji, but there are a couple moments that floored me in the archival footage. There is the one where the british newscaster is trying to sum about Ramana in a few soundbites, with some corny music, and then SILENCE!, totally still, sitting there, a mysterious void, the contrast of the British newscaster, and Ramana's mystery. The scene where he is reading the newspaper, of course, and then looking off into space, completely absorbed. Today, watching it, there was a smile, he gave the camera with the sky behind him, the smile is filled me so deeply with intoxicating bliss, words could not do it justice. The message, is there are no problems before that smile, it has an element of childish mischief, which I have to say is one of the things I really appreciate of all the sages I've been exposed to. Shankara had that same sense of childish mischief in the debate with Misra. It's this utter freedom from anything of this world. Yashnavalka and the woman he was talking to from Ravi's comment, I appreciated in the same way I appreciate Ramana, the best I can put it is bees intoxicated with honey, there is just nothing of Earthly language that could remotely convey it, bees intoxicated with honey is just about the best I can imagine language doing.
.
... Ravi, I am not aware of any English translations;There may be excerpts to be found ...
Fortunateley I found more than 1440 hymns by Thayumanavar here:
The Hymns of Thayumanavar
.
Scott/Friends,
I wish to share this excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna-This is from the Chapter 'The Master with The Brahma Devotees-Part 1',Oct 28,1882-The Beauty in Sri Ramakrishna's Teaching is that it is accessible to the casual layman as well as the Advanced aspirant;here is no one size fits all type of approach-It simply recognizes that human personality has a huge variety and DOES NEED different paths.The other wonderful thing is how The Master could figure out individual kinks in personality and convert it into a huge Plus!Here is a PolyClinic!....Sorry....I get lost...Back to The Excerpt from the Gospel:
Sign of Perfect Knowledge
"There is a sign of Perfect Knowledge. Man becomes silent when It is attained.
Then the 'I', which may be likened to the salt doll, melts in the Ocean of Existence-
Knowledge-Bliss Absolute and becomes one with It. Not the slightest trace of
distinction is left.
"As long as his self-analysis is not complete, man argues with much ado. But he
becomes silent when he completes it. When the empty pitcher has been filled with
water, when the water inside the pitcher becomes one with the water of the lake
outside, no more sound is heard. Sound comes from the pitcher as long as the
pitcher is not filled with water.
"People used to say in olden days that no boat returns after having once entered
the 'black waters' of the ocean.
"All trouble and botheration come to an end when the 'I' dies. You may indulge in
thousands of reasonings, but still the 'I' doesn't disappear. For people like you and
me,(SEE HOW THE MASTER IS ACCESSIBLE,LIKE A FRIEND-Ravi) it is good to have the feeling, 'I am a lover of God.'
Personal God for devotees
"The Saguna Brahman is meant for the bhaktas. In other words, a bhakta
believes that God has attributes and reveals Himself to men as a Person, assuming
forms. It is He who listens to our prayers. The prayers that you utter are directed
to Him alone. You are bhaktas, not jnanis or Vedantists. It doesn't matter whether
you accept God with form or not. It is enough to feel that God is a Person who
listens to our prayers, who creates, preserves, and destroys the universe, and who
is endowed with infinite power.
"It is easier to attain God by following the path of devotion."
195
BRAHMO DEVOTEE: "Sir, is it possible for one to see God? If so, why can't we see
Him?"
MASTER: "Yes, He can surely be seen. One can see His forms, and His formless
aspect as well. How can I explain that to you?"
Intense longing enables one to see God
BRAHMO DEVOTEE: "What are the means by which one can see God?"
MASTER: "Can you weep for Him with intense longing of heart? Men shed a jugful
of tears for the sake of their children, for their wives, or for money. But who
weeps for God? So long as the child remains engrossed with its toys, the mother
looks after her cooking and other household duties. But when the child no longer
relishes the toys, it throws them aside and yells for its mother. Then the mother
takes the rice-pot down from the hearth, runs in haste, and takes the child in her
arms."
Why so much controversy about God?
BRAHMO DEVOTEE: "Sir, why are there so many different opinions about the nature
of God? Some say that God has form, while others say that He is formless. Again,
those who speak of God with form tell us about His different forms. Why all this
controversy?"
MASTER: "A devotee thinks of God as he sees Him. In reality there is no confusion
about God. God explains all this to the devotee if the devotee only realizes Him
somehow. You haven't set your foot in that direction. How can you expect to know
all about God?
Parable of the chameleon
"Listen to a story. Once a man entered a wood and saw a small animal on a tree.
He came back and told another man that he had seen a creature of a beautiful red
colour on a certain tree. The second man replied: 'When I went into the wood, I also
saw that animal. But why do you call it red? It is green.' Another man who was
196
present contradicted them both and insisted that it was yellow. Presently others
arrived and contended that it was grey, violet, blue, and so forth and so on. At last
they started quarrelling among themselves. To settle the dispute they all went to
the tree. They saw a man sitting under it. On being asked, he replied: 'Yes, I live
under this tree and I know the animal very well. All your descriptions are true.
Sometimes it appears red, sometimes yellow, and at other times blue, violet, grey,
and so forth. It is a chameleon. And sometimes it has no colour at all. Now it has a
colour, and now it has none.'
"In like manner, one who constantly thinks of God can know His real
nature; he alone knows that God reveals Himself to seekers in various forms and
aspects. God has attributes; then again He has none. Only the man who lives under
the tree knows that the chameleon can appear in various colours, and he knows,
further, that the animal at times has no colour at all. It is the others who suffer
from the agony of futile argument.
"Kabir used to say, 'The formless Absolute is my Father, and God with form is my
Mother.'
"God reveals Himself in the form which His devotee loves most. His love for the
devotee knows no bounds. It is written in the Purana that God assumed the form of
Rama for His heroic devotee, Hanuman.
Vedantic Non-dualism
"The forms and aspects of God disappear when one discriminates in accordance
with the Vedanta philosophy. The ultimate conclusion of such discrimination is that
Brahman alone is real and this world of names and forms illusory. It is possible for a
man to see the forms of God, or to think of Him as a Person, only so long as he is
conscious that he is a devotee. From the standpoint of discrimination this 'ego of a
devotee' keeps him a little away from God.
197
"Do you know why images of Krishna or Kali are three and a half cubits high?
Because of distance. Again, on account of distance the sun appears to be small. But
if you go near it you will find the sun so big that you won't be able to comprehend it.
Why have images of Krishna and Kali a dark-blue colour? That too is on account of
distance, like the water of a lake, which appears green, blue, or black from a
distance. Go near, take the water in the palm of your hand, and you will find that it
has no colour. The sky also appears blue from a distance. Go near and you will see
that it has no colour at all.
"Therefore I say that in the light of Vedantic reasoning Brahman has no
attributes. The real nature of Brahman cannot be described. But so long as your
individuality is real, the world also is real, and equally real are the different forms
of God and the feeling that God is a Person.
"Yours is the path of bhakti. That is very good; it is an easy path. Who can fully
know the infinite God? and what need is there of knowing the Infinite? Having
attained this rare human birth, my supreme need is to develop love for the Lotus
Feet of God.
"If a jug of water is enough to remove my thirst, why should I measure the
quantity of water in a lake? I become drunk on even half a bottle of wine—what is
the use of my calculating the quantity of liquor in the tavern? What need is there
of knowing the Infinite?"
Yes,there is no difference between Jnana and Bhakti as mentioned in your beautiful post.
Salutations.
Dear Ravi,(also David)
It is interesting that you post from one of my favorite dialogues from GSR.
The Master in His impeccable way has taught the path of Surrender and Self Enquiry in this dialogue which I try to follow intermittently.
A salt doll dissolving in the Ocean.
I imagine my mind, ego , intellect and everything perceivable as a salt doll and imagine the Ocean of My guru's feet and try to plunge into it with no fear. I imagine my mind totally dissolving and getting destroyed in it. Though I dont have any great experiences to state, many times when I did this the rest of the day has surprisingly been irritable and chaotic.
Sometimes when the Mind permits I try to indulge in Self Enquiry by being concious of the I. On one such trial while just getting up from sleep I suddenly 'felt' a pure mass of Light expanding in my conciousness. Within a second into the experience I remembered my family and felt scared and the experience abated.
Best Regards
Ah
You say:
'with no fear. I imagine my mind totally dissolving and getting destroyed in it'
..........
Imagimation is the mind working so rather than dissolving it you make it strong. Ramanas self enquiry is best to do.
Anonymous Scott
You say:
'Questions such as that strike me as Inquiry, because I'm Inquiring into the nature of the seeker, which is utter happiness transcendent of any situation. And it's less of a method, but more finding the Self, the'
..............
Enquiry is As Ramana Taught.
The nature of the seeker is utter suffering.
How can you not Be who you are... the Self?
Ramos,
Bravo!You have discovered a Diamond mine!Thanks very much.The Translation seems to be quite good.
A veritable treasure indeed.
I am extremely happy to share that I did my graduation from Tiruchirappalli,in Tamil Nadu where the Rock Temple of Lord Ganesa is situated.The Presiding Deity of this temple is Thayumanaar(Another name for Lord Siva,meaning 'who also became Mother';In Tamil Thai(y)means Mother).It is on the steps of this temple that Thayumanavar met his Guru-the Silent one.
I will share more,someother time.
Meantime,wishing you all the Best in your labour of love-Translating into German.
Do let me know how you find Thayumanavar!
Namaskar.
salutations to all:
a couple of days back, got to know about a beautiful sufi song from a colleague at the school where i work...an excerpt:
[
urdu script transliterated in english:
(jo ulfat mein tumhari kho gaya hai, usi kho’ay hoay ko kuch mila hai; na but-khanay, na kabay mein mila hai, magar totay hoay dil mein mila hai; adam bun ker kaheen to chup gaya hai, kaheen to hast bun ker aa gaya hai; nahi hai tu to phir inkaar kaisa, nafi bhi tairay honay ka pata hai mein jiss ko keh raha hoon apni hasti, agar wo tu nahi to aur kia hai nahi aaya khayaloon mein agar tu, to phir mein kaisay samjha tu khuda hai; tum ek gorakh dhanda ho)
(he who is lost in your love, he is rewarded you could not be found either in a temple or ka’bah but you could be found in a broken heart, sometimes you are hidden as non-existence and somewhere you appear as existence, if you are not then why deny? even the negation confirms your existence
the one i call my existence who is that if not you? if you didn’t come in my thoughts then how did i learn you are god?
you are a puzzle)
]
this beautiful sufi song 'tum ik gorakh dhanda ho' (you are a puzzle) was composed by naaz khialvi and sung melodiously by nusrat fateh ali khan... if anyone wishes to listen to the full song (runs for 30+ minutes), please visit (http://www.imeem.com/tag/?q=album%3aGorakh+Dhandha+vol.5)
click 'song details' for the song
the transliterated script with a translation is available at (http://publicmb.wordpress.com/2008/03/19/naaz-khiaalvi-tum-ek-gorakh-dhanda-ho-you-are-a-puzzle/)
"I Trust and feel certain that Ramana and Ramanas Teaching is Perfect Truth and also the most straight road.
If you want to travel by various back roads all I can say is have fun and good luck."
The fact that Ramana quoted Yashnavalka (I think in Talks a few times), translated Sankara, quoted the Bhagavad Gita, and had Ribhu Gita recited suggests to me taht these are not backroads, but is the same Truth that Ramana suggested. Infact on reading for isntance the Bhagavad Gita today, I didn't find one statement made different then teh statements made by Maharshi (the only difference was Krishna was talking to Arjuna instead of Ramana to Dr. Syed), not one single sentence remotely deviated from what Ramana taught, or should I say, Ramana didn't deviate or perhaps that Ramana was the embodiement of the same Truth as the Bhagavad Gita. Ramana wasn't a plagiarist, he Realized it, but found that much of the previously used language and analogies rope/snake, salt doll (courtesy Ramakrishna, although that may even predate Ramakrishna), the unmanifest Brahman accorded perfectly with his Realization. Far from backroads, it's wanting the whole picture, what did Ramana mean by I am not the doer of action. If you've realized this for yourself, if your individuality has completely dissolved in pure bliss of timeless being so that you never experience even a trace of "I", if you are indistinguishible from the unborn, imperishable, Brahman, then yes, what need of you of these aids. I on the other hand, am not realized, am often full of delusion, so I'm making an earnest effort to understand what Ramana meant. Shankara, and the Bhagavad Gita's prescription that, "those who strive are liberated", helps me understand how to realize I am not the doer. Non-attached action, non-attached striving, without desiring the products of action. Doing my school work as best I can, but not so that i can make ltos of money, or status, so that I get the girl, that would be desiring the fruits of action, and be contrary to the Bhagavad Gita, and Ramana's teachings, it would also be according to all these sources contrary to realization of real, abiding happiness. It would not help me realize the unmanifest Brahman, which is real happiness.
"You are right when you say no one is going to sink into the Heart.
It is the ego which sinks or disolves bsck into where it came from."
If someone hasn't realized it, as in their individuality dissolved, then it's all talk, just a bunch of words. The gist I get from these teachings is that the words are pointers, so being able to repeat some Ramana-esque soundbite doesn't really have much meaning. Words like that are not helpful, because they are not intuitive, or sensitive to the state of those they are directed at.
"Who is making this progress?
It cannot be you, who you are.. as it is taught you are already/always and only who you truly are .. the Self or Heart
Maybe you should find out what is True in you
Who are you?...are you the one you are...or are you the one you think you are?
Shouldn't take you long to find the answers to these questions as you find Truth in so many places."
All I get from that is an ability to repeat what has been read, which really doesn't have much meaning to me. I've read those statements too. However, understanding staements such as that. Being in a place, where there is no progress, being without even an iota of identification with the body and the mind, where there is no distinguishing subject and object, the body and the universe, and that tendency can never arise again forever, it's easy to say, much more difficult to do. And if one isn't speaking from experience, then they are just concepts. I can say the word Self, but it would be great if just saying the word Self, led me to instant realization of a state of perfect, eternal, happiness and bliss, where the body carried out desireless, selfless, courageous actions (the right ones in all circumstances) to help illumine for others. By realizing I don't know what was meant by alot of Ramana's statements, but recognizing that it resonated closer to my experiences then anything previously had, I seek out understanding what I don't understand. Piece together the fragments that I have the beginning of understanding. What did he mean by the state of jnana transcends waking, dreaming and deep sleep. What did he mean, by oen is not the performer of action? Not just an intellectual understanding, I can imagine a guy walking along, and the body doing things, without volition on their part. But that's just an intellectual understanding, clearly what I imagine I am not the performer of action means is not what ramana meant by it. Krishna tells Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita, 'You are not the doer of action". So this goes back that far. What was meant, was that Arjuna should strive to perform his duties, in this case the battle where he didn't want to kill his greedy, but related foes, because it was his duty, Krishna said that he should do it, or be a disgrace and a sinner, and that nobody was born, nobody dies, there is only Brahman, which doesn't change. In that selfless action, the notion of being the individual performing it will dissolve, since "those who strive are liberated" (all of the above, Shanakra, Maharshi, Bhagavad Gita) But the key to "I am not the doer" of action, is that it starts with selfless action, action with non-attachment to the fruits of the action. At the same time, realizing by "who am I?" not the thoughts, but what are they pointing to, that this sense of I-ness, this feeling of being a person, with a name, a history, is an obstruction to the Being-Consciousness and bliss that is my real nature. Until that is realized, experientially, the words are meaningless, absolutely meaningless, and I might as well talk abotu Brittany Spears, and Doritos, because the intellectual meaning of such phrases is far removed from the experiential understanding that Ramana, Yashnavalka, Shankara, Papaji were living in. To realize it, I admit I don't know it, and make an earnest, sincere, honest attempt to understand what Ramana really meant, not only that how to be a person who props people up, not tears them down, who makes others happy, and is happy myself, realizing my nature is love, courage, and happiness.
ArunachalaHeart,
You have referred to two approaches-In the First one,is the way of 'Yoga', one is trying to employ the mind(imagination that one is a salt doll,etc) to dissolve the mind-There is no Fear(as the mind knows that this is imagination ).This as a Practice will still yield some calmness and peace,if persisted in proportion to the extent to which the activities of the mind are kept in abeyance.
The Irritation and chaos that you experience may be due to two Factors-1.Your Sensitivity has increased(temporarily) and you get to OBSERVE yourself better.
2.The Mind has been Stirred to Greater Depths and the Vasanas are rising up.HERE I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT FAVOURABLE VASANAS CAN ALSO RISE UP and bathe us in peace and Bliss.YOU GET BACK WHATEVER YOU HAVE DEPOSITED!SO WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF OUR DEPOSITS(Actions and Thoughts)RIGHT THROUGH THE DAY.
The Second approach is where you are NOT IMAGINING but are STAYING WITH THE 'I'-This is Self Enquiry-to arrive here,one should have already jettisoned a good portion of Baggage,Garbage(even momentarily)-This operates at a core Level-and hence can threaten the mind which is the 'Fear' that you experience.
Now Sri Ramakrishna is not even remotely suggesting the First approach-He instead,is offering a Third way-Which Sri Bhagavan also advocates-Self Surrender.Yet What Sri Ramakrishna is adding is that this Surrender is not arrived at using the 'Intellect',but through INTENSIFICATION OF LOVE,in whatever form,however humble and primitive ,lowly and unrecognizable-VALUE THIS and establish a relationship with the Divine in whatever form,nurture this ATTRACTION and let it snowball.This will lead to a Natural and easy meger with the Divine-without any fear.
BHAKTI is not imagination-( people confuse this aspect as they put greater confidence in their 'Rational' approach).BHAKTI IS THE SIMPLE RECOGNITION OF THE SPARK of Love that is there even in lower forms of Life-Right from the Plants ,to insects,birds and animals-only that there is much smoke covering the Flame.THE FLAME exists and the Bhakta is simply keeping his eyes on this spark and is fanning it into a huge conflagration.THIS AUTOMATICALLY ELIMINATES SMOKE.This Gnana.
More later.
Salutations.
Scott Fraundorf:
E"nquiry is As Ramana Taught.
The nature of the seeker is utter suffering.
How can you not Be who you are... the Self?」- 2009-03-"
I'm sorry, I thought you were critical of Neo-advaita (lol, joking-ish). Yes, how can I not be who I am, the Self, I guess I can't. But until that is conclusively realized, until I realize that I am infact the tenth man, that the necklace, is infact around my neck, sometimes I still have to remind myself, and call attention to the I-thought, the subject/object. The practice goes on, until as you said, I realize the seeker that is suffering doesn't exist, never existed. Unlike you, I still have to practice, until I achieve the great heights that you have, some day. (lol) Should I call you Sri Bookworm? (meant in good fun) I really like the Ashtavakra Gita.
Happy he stands, happy he sits, happy sleeps, and happy he comes and goes. Happy he speaks and happy he eats. This is the life of a man at peace. 18.59
He who of his very nature feels no unhappiness in his daily life like worldly people, remains undisturbed like a great lake, cleared of defilement. 18.60
Even abstention from action has the effect of action in a fool, while even the action of the wise man brings the fruits of inaction. 18.61
A fool often shows aversion towards his belongings, but for him whose attachment to the body has dropped away, there is neither attachment nor aversion. 18.62
The mind of the fool is always caught in thinking or not thinking, but the wise man's is of the nature of no thought because he thinks what is appropriate. 18.63
For the seer who behaves like a child, without desire in all actions,there is no attachment for such a pure one even in the work he does. 18.64
Blessed is he who knows himself and is the same in all states, with a mind free from craving whether he is seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, or tasting. 18.65
There is no one subject to samsara, no sense of individuality, no goal or means to the goal in the eyes of the wise man who is always free from imagination and unchanging like space. 18.66
Glorious is he who has abandoned all goals and is the incarnation of the satisfaction, which is his very nature, and whose inner focus on the Unconditioned is quite spontaneous. 18.67
In brief, the great-souled man who has come to know the Truth is without desire for either pleasure or liberation, and is always and everywhere free from attachment. 18.68
What remains to be done by the man who is pure awareness and has abandoned everything that can be expressed in words from the highest heaven to the earth itself? 18.69
Scott Fraundorf:
I was just thinking about how Inquiry becomes more and more contemplative and less rote as it goes along. Really thinking about the teachings, and how they apply to some kind of suffering. Is it my suffering, or is the bodies suffering? If it's the bodies suffering, why am I resisting it? Am I the body? How am I putting happiness in an objective world? What is my nature? Who is this I, the subject of these experiences?
Scott Fraundorf:
I was just thinking about several things that struck me as interesting, in light of Inquiry, and Ramana Maharshi. I was just thinking about how one of the things the people who Realized the Self have in common, the one's who had to practice that is, is that they really went for it. I was also thinking about how there is the intellectual understanding, and then there is the experiential understanding even un-Realized. For instance, with Lakshamana Swami, he had that experience where the name of Ram drove the evil spirit away, and after that, he was really intense about chanting the name of Ram, and practicing breath control. Things change, when something shows you that the world taken to be real, is not solid in the way other people think it is. I was also thinking about how different things lead to Self-Inquiry. For instance in my own case, I had an experience in my early twenties, where the world no longer seemed real, and it was a terrifying experience for me, because I didn't have anyway of understanding it, it seemed like the world was in my imagination, it was short glimpses, not Realization. So I eventually took up doing yoga classes on a regular basis, then tai chi, then chi gong, acupuncture, finally vipassana meditation. Eventually I was doing Vipassana meditation in the mornings and the evenings. It wasn't a choice, things weren't going O.K, if I didn't constantly spiritually progress. Then almost fatefully I was taken to a place that had a spiritual teacher I'm convinced is Realized, and through that was exposed to the teachings of Ramana Maharshi, which I tried to practice, but until I contacted that teacher (e-mail), there was alot that was incorrect and repressive about my practice (still is). I was just thinking that even if one does not know of Inquiry but practices Hatha Yoga dilligently, sincerely. They will eventually be exposed to Inquiry in one form or another. I only know of the form Ramana taught, but I imagine that in one form or another, a sincere practicer will get exposed because it has to lead to Inquiry, as in a thorough diving in to one's own Consciousness, to reveal what is only consciousness, and not forms. I was also thinking about how even though Ramana advised against neti, neti. Any of those previous descriptions of Inquiry really work, and in a sense are part and parcel of doing Inquiry, but the sincerity is the deciding factor. If I really investigate, am I the body? Is the world real? Who am I? Am I this imaginary entity, the individual I take myself to be? That is where Inquiry has taken over. It's not really a method, it's more of a finding out that I'm not particularized, I'm not a person. For me, my first exposure as in written teachings to Inquiry, although less direct, it certainly was Inquiry was through the Four Agreements. The Four Agreements were not a practice, but an Inquiry. So I assume Don Miguel Ruiz is the Self without a trace of ego.
Scott Fraundorf:
I was even thinking about how even if a person does not know how to do Inquiry as effectually as possible, the earnest, consistent, attempt will lead to finding (and/or being able to tell) a qualified teacher, a Jnani. Because even though they are "supposedly" rare, and I don't doubt that, they are out there, but as many people including Lakshmana Swami pointed out, you can't judge if someone is a jnani by the intellect, and Maharshi repeatedly I believe said that you can't judge if someone is a jnani by what they do or say. But through earnestly attempting to practice, the ability to discern what is sincere, and what is not, what is real and what is not, is definitely increased, and also Jnanis, the Self, they don't function on the level of cause and effect, so the finding a qualified spiritual teacher is also not a logical, rational, cause and effect process, and tuning away fro m the ego, leads more and more to the sensitivity, to end up in the right place.
Scott Fraundorf:
I wanted to invite, anyone who wants to, or nobody who wants to, to look at my blog Precambrian Corner if they wish, especially aquaintances such as Ravi, and Bookworm... Should they wish to. Just click on the name.
.
... ellengwhite; to look at my blog Precambrian Corner ...
I enjoyed the spirit of your blog, especially this statements:
"If you do not know your own nature, the one who does not know is not your nature."
Master Nome
"This truth is so high, so beautiful. I've stumbled on something so precious., so full, so complete."
"In the Thayumavar poem a couple of posts below, it was mentioned that the I bows it's head in shame, (...)"
(This is the "pain issue" I/we have spoken of earlier)
"...and so I'm overwelming with the beauty of the individual-less One, the petty personal ideas, while trying to realize it as myself, ..."
"I was just thinking about how one of the things the people who realized the Self have in common ... is that they really went for it.
-----------------
.
Scott,
I did visit your site and found that you have a lot more to share than what we find here!I also found that 'portrait' of yours quite engaging.
I did not leave any comments though.
Best Regards.
Scott Fraundorf:
At http://presentnonexistence.org, Cee's artwork is amazing Advaita artwork, and I posted some of that on my blog, however if you go to the poetry section on that website, she is supposedly Self-Realized, and that is where the artwork is (the poetry section), it really conveys something really profound. "Nothing is my Lover", "Seeing kisses the blessed feet of Being". It sort of reminds me a little of Mathru Sri Sarada's drawings. There are also some videos on that site of her giving Satsang. I really liked it, found it inspiring. I also wanted to add, from listening to some audio commentary on a work by Adi Shankara by Nome, the teacher I correspond with for instruction, one of the things I found really helpful, was Shankara talking about how in comparison to the Absolute all these things that are considered important in life, kingdoms, wealth, problems, spiritual practice, are insignificant in comparison to the Absolute. What I got from it, as far as practice, is that when the mind is habitually running toward certain attachments, of a fearful, or desiring character, calling attention to their insiginifcance in comparison to the Absolute, the Self, and the Realization of the Self, the same goes for where is happiness? That bliss arises from within, so within is where to look for happiness, not in phenomenon. Something that is key to Advaita, and Maharshi's teachings, that has at times recently taken on an intuitive character, is that if things change, and if being attached to them causes suffering, that is a clear indication, that they aren't meant for attachment, they point to a Reality that does not change, is always full of happiness, because why would the suffering reality of being attached to transient things be real? Maybe also why a guru is helpful, because they can establish that Knowledge of happiness in the Self, so that more and more that is what is sought.
Scott Fraundorf:
CVR says: "In the Thayumavar poem a couple of posts below, it was mentioned that the I bows it's head in shame, (...)"
(This is the "pain issue" I/we have spoken of earlier)"
I agree, however, this is a liberating shame, it's the I, surrendering itself, whereas there are other kinds of shame, where it's more a stuck kind of shame. This is because it hit the right note, for the I to bow it's head, so that peace and happiness are unveiled. It's the perfect kind of shame
scott Fraundorf:
To clemens vargas Ramos, I know that Nome helped out in the past other people doing translations of the Ribhu Gita into other languages, it was mentioned on the Reflections editions on the SAT website. sat@cruzio.com is the Society of Abidance in Truth e-mail/Nome's spiritual e-mail. for me he's helpful more in a traditional guru-role.
I was also thinking how one of the great things about Inquiry is that if we are getting too immersed in the ego and suffering and/or being egotistical, or delusional. It is within our power to turn our attention to breaking attachments and diving within to investigate the ego itself. and everything seems to really follow from that, even relations with "external" gurus, who of course are not really external. In that sense, it really is the "Good News!", and despite any circumstances, perceived problems, there is nothing too big that it can't be overcome through this method of directly going within to dissolve the sense of being an individual, seeing happiness within. Suddenly all these problems, that seemed really severe, and I had many they do noticeably fall away, because for Brahman, the Self, there is no limitation or worldly problem, and letting Brahman, the Self live my life, by dissolving the false egoic individual, basically dissolving myself in the midst of activities, or non-activity, all that is left over is Brahman, the Self, and then Brahman, the Self starts to do all of the activities far better. Because it is unlimited. why did we get in the way?
There is a feeling of failure occassionally at Inquiry, and then I get to thinking what other practices can I add as auxillary. But then it occurs to me, that with any thought, even this agitated thinking, I can always inquire into the identity at the core of it, and no other practice will ever be that direct. Who is it that feels like a failure? That is the only way of ceasing to feel like a failure? Not by adding more practices. Isn't that beautiful? But certainly other spiritual texts "Who am I?" being really the most comprehensive there is. But the Tao te ching, and Ribhu Gita certainly inspire further conviction. The beatiful thing is that if I'm suffering, it doesn't matter the cause, the circumstance, even the worsed circumstance, there is one way, one foolproof way out of that suffering and that is by observing the observer, finding the I, and being myself. Over time, there is a giving up the world, and the objects as potential sources of happiness, and looking in to the source of happiness.
Losing M. Mind, you say:
'one foolproof way out of that suffering and that is..
by observing the observer'
...
M. Just my friend The Devil in me... but exactly how many observers are there in you?
You seem to have more than I do which I think is a bit unfair and as soon as I find the One responsible I shall definitely complain.
Otherwise I think, very good post.
Scott Fraundorf:
In my correspondence with that teacher that I correspond with who Bookworm refers to as Flowing Robes (lol)
" The discrimination that regards as real only that which is eternal, without beginning or end and free of interruption, is wise. Being-Consciousness-Bliss is the very nature of the Self. This is timeless, free of the past, the present, and the future. This is nonobjective and absolutely undifferentiated. "
I'm finding that really helpful. There aren't many problems if you only treat as real that which is eternal, and formless. That seems to be an effective "neti, neti" approach. Because when something grabs my mental attention, a vasana, an attachment, whatever it is. I simply ask, "is it eternal?" and if not, then treat it as if it's not real. What problem, what attachment can survive that discrimination? It is definitely helpful to have contact with a Jnani. It seems almost like a manifestation of the grace aspect of the teachings. Infact said teacher responds to me when I get deep in my practice, when I get off the attachment level I find his response in my (I almost wrote his, I'm not sure that isn't true) inbox and it usually is affirming what I just figured out. Without the grace even with the best intention and determination I'm stuck on something. It assures that I continually get deeper that mix of my own practice, and responses from a sage doesn't let me get too far in the wrong direction. As to what Bookworm said, on the intellectual level I agree, but what does that mean? I cna say there is "only the One without a second", but is that my experience? And if it isn't my experience, how do I ensure that it becomes my experience? I can just continually expose myself to aspects of these teachings, reading Collected Works, and noticing different aspects, corresponding with a Realized Being, and earnestly practicing continually what I understand.If you no longer have to do this, and are now qualified to give advise, more power to you (lol)
Losing M. Mind says:
'continually what I understand.If you no longer have to do this, and are now qualified to give advise, more power to you (lol.
....
M. You are right to laugh and just lucky that I don't know your address.
It is 'advice' and no...I am not fit or qualified to give it..even to you.
I was just joking... maybe a little miffed that you have these observers in you that I do not observe in me.
What are you...teachers pet? What else have you got in your head that I don't have? an odd Trance? some altered states of conciousness? a few visions maybe?
It is obvious favouritism and I shall complain.
No I won't... I have just remembered, I don't really want any of that stuff and you can have as many observers in you as you wish.
"M. You are right to laugh and just lucky that I don't know your address.
It is 'advice' and no...I am not fit or qualified to give it..even to you.
I was just joking... maybe a little miffed that you have these observers in you that I do not observe in me.
What are you...teachers pet? What else have you got in your head that I don't have? an odd Trance? some altered states of conciousness? a few visions maybe?
It is obvious favouritism and I shall complain.
No I won't... I have just remembered, I don't really want any of that stuff and you can have as many observers in you as you wish."
So, Talks with Bookworm Maharshi II (It is really funny, and way too irreverent that you put an M. before your words), I don't even know how to respond to that. Yeah, I have all these ridiculous observers I mistakenly believe that I'm two or more. Me? The teachers pet? Because I get to have all these cool "states"? Hallucenations? It is favoritism, and unfair that I get all of this undue credit. I shall have to resigns from my political office.
Scott Fraundorf:
I've been really focused lately with what is eternal in my experience. That and happiness being within, and when I catch the false identity Who am I? I was thinking about the three gunas and how accurate they are for the realms of experience. Tamas being dullness and stupor, but also being the veiling power of the ego based on who I think I am and the life I imagine for myself all is tamas. I was thinking that perhaps rajas (agitation) is higher then tamas because it is when I've become discontented and agitated with the veiling power of tamas. (note: even if it is directed externally, anger at someone, fear about something, desire for a circumstance to produce happiness) Which is why perhaps I'm guessing Mathru Sri Sarada said that it is easier to work with the rajas in a devotee then tamas. Because when I feel dull, or stupor-ish I find that incredibly hard to turn into inquiry. But when I feel intensely agitated, desperate, afraid, angry, it is much easier to inquire and experience intense grace. Maybe with tamas the best approach is really waking myself up out of it one way or another.
Dear David and others,
I would like to stress out something that occurs in my sadhana. I would be happy if any of you had some comments to make about it, if you could for example share some of your experiences on the same line as what I am saying.
At some point, I sometimes feel like doing some kind of self-enquiry. So I just engage myself in self-enquiry. However, this generally makes me eager to practice self-enquiry all the time, whatever I am doing. So I kind of have always in the background a sort of feeling of self-enquiry, which has the consequence to make myself uninterested by my surroundings. Turning myself inwards, I don't feel love towards my surroundings.
I have to say at this point that although I have then a eagerness to do self-enquiry, I don't feel bliss, or love, or peace doing it. I rather have some kind of rough feeling.
For example, for the last few days, I have been conscious of the "I am" (the reading of Nisargadatta Maharaj pulled me towards this "I am"). However I don't feel the "I am" as being bliss, or peace, but as I said, the feeling I have when I hold the "I am" is rather rough, cold, without any love. From this I conclude that the "I am" which I am experiencing is not the "I am" of the atman, and that it must be some mental "I am".
Feeling this way when I hold the "I am", and bearing in mind that being aware of the "I am" turns myself inwards, it is normal that I feel uninterested and without love towards the outer world.
This happens to be a problem when I meet people. If I am not in a period when I practice self-enquiry, I interact with people with some sort of peace and love. But if I am practicing self-enquiry, as I am eager to practice and always trying to turn myself inwards, then, when meeting people, I am not able to interact very well with them : I am then relatively cold towards people, I may act or feel tense, etc.
So I maybe think self-enquiry, or holding the "I am", may not be the way for me. But I also sometimes think that, practicing more self-enquiry, I could maybe overcome this coldness and roughness, and attaining love inside, I could then give it outside.
The fact may also be that it's not really the roughness I feel when doing self-enquiry that makes me unable, when doing it, to interact well with people. It may also be that I am not really detached from action, that I am not in a state of pure witnessing, so that practicing self-enquiry while engaged in a conversation is like a conflict between this conversation pulling me outwards, and myself, wanting to turn inwards.
Any comments would be grately appreciated,
Regards,
Mana
Mana,
Wonderful observation.
Does spiritual Practice(Self Enquiry or any other)isolate oneself or releases one from isolation?
When a young scholboy asked vivekananda about reading Bhagavad Gita,he said-Go,Play Football!
I will request you to ask yourself-'What Do I want'?and find out more about it.This is what I have mentioned in the 'open thread'-What is the 'Motivation' behind any spiritual practice?
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
Mana-
Self-inquiry and Maharaj's advice of holding to the 'I am' is the same practice. You seem to think these are different practices.
The sense of 'I am' is mental, at its core is the atman. There is only one I am.
My personal advice would be to sit and practice self-enquiry separate to other activities. I know Bhagavan taught that self-enquiry could be practiced continuously regardless of the activity, but it in my opinion only a spiritually mature person can effectively practice this way and few are so mature.
As for the rough feelings you describe while practicing, you may not be practicing correctly. There is not much room for many thoughts when one is holding fast to self-attention. Perhaps these difficult sensations may just be the minds reaction to going against its ingrained habit of continuous mental chatter. Anyway self-enquiry does not yeild immediate peace or bliss.
-- Kevin
Mana,
Kevin's advice is well considered.To set apart sometime for Self Enquiry(or any other Practice).I will like to add that Spiritual approach should encompass the whole gamut of Life-the Physical,emotional ,social,intellectual aspects.All these need to be oriented towards the goal that has 'fired' us to do that 'spiritual Practice'.without this preparation,no practice will yield anything.It is like rowing a boat firmly anchored.
If we are struggling with thoughts-we need to examine why they are there in the first place-may be that we are giving our 'consent' for their perpetuation and would like at the same time to have the 'Goodies'.This needs to be scrutinised and sorted out.This is part of Viveka and Vairagya.
Association with the wise is one of the strongest help-This develops the 'taste' for spiritual living and sustain it.Reading the lives and teachings of Great Masters is one of the most accessible and potent way of having this association.This reading itself is 'Practice'.
Understanding and putting into practice what little we have imbibed will do.This will lay a strong foundation upon which one may pursue whatever that one is inspired/motivated to do.ONE WILL BE GUIDED.
-----------------------------------
coming to 'Self Enquiry' or any other practice-Prayer is a very potent way of connecting with our 'source'.Self Enquiry is only to connect oneself with the source.
There is no technique in all this-just that one 'wants' will do.Yes,one must WANT it.one is INTERESTED in this.(Bliss,Love)
-----------------------------------
Best Wishes.
Namaskar.
Dear Mana,
You see the conflict, because you still want to enjoy the world and life.
You want to enjoy conversations with people, but you cannot do so when you are doing self-enquiry.
But that is the way it should be.
Self-enquiry will make you less interested to the world.
You feel out-of-tune with people and the world.
That is the inevitable consequence of the practice.
It has happend to me, it can happen to anybody who practice self-enquiry.
So go slowly without pushing you too hard. Do not try to do around-the-clock self-enquiry if you feel it too stressful.
As you go on practicing, the world would attract you less and less, and the conflict, which is now troubling you, would become smaller and smaller. And that is when you start to feel the inner peace.
Best regards,
Akira
Friends,
Mana's post has exposed certain dimensions that cannot be approached in a simplistic fashion.
Is spiritual Living another 'preoccupation'?Does it involve giving up all 'socialising' and isolating oneself with the sole intention of pursuing 'Truth' or 'Self' or 'God'?
Depends on what we mean by 'Socialising'-Let us examine the things that we use here as long as we live-Food,Water,Books,Electricity,Transportation,so many other utilities and services.(Yes, The 'I' is unreal but these things are very 'Real'!)We are 'Dependant' on others for most of these things.This makes us indebted to Society, Environment,to Parents,Spouse,etc.
We all need to earn our Living.This also necessitates 'Social' Interactions.
Spiritual living is all about Harmony and Balance-How we can live it Fully and Joyously amidst the 'Plus' and 'Minus' that are part and parcel of Life.
This is the 'middle path' as the Buddha calls it.
As Sri Ramakrishna says-Like people coat their hands with oil and then peel the sticky Jackfruit,fix your mind in God and Go about your business in the world.It will be foolish to give up eating 'Jack fruit' simply because it is Sticky!We need not live a 'Killjoy' type of 'Spirituality'.
Sri Ramakrishna also says-Young Plants need to be protected with Fencing,otherwise they will be eaten by the Goats.Similiarly,the Beginner needs to take care to surround himself with Good Company.
-----------------------------------
Self Enquiry or any other Practice should put us at ease with ourselves and with others-Yes,there can be transitional phases and this may demand our attention, necessitating temporary 'Neglect' of some of the Routine things that we do.Yet,one should get back to business as soon as possible.
If one has set apart Time for 'Meditation'-Often after a 'Concerted' Effort,one has to 'Let Go'-and most often,what was 'missed' during that period of meditation may happen a little after 'Meditation'-This 'Cooling Period' is important and one must not get sucked into the routine activities soon after.
-----------------------------------
Mana has mentioned that he Feels Peace and Love without any practice-and the 'Practice' seems to take it away.Please think it over and Mana ,you will find your way!
Namaskar.
Friends,
An Excerpt from 'I am That' where Maharaj says(Page 83):
M: There is nothing wrong with duality as long as it does not create conflict. Multiplicity and variety without strife is joy. In pure consciousness there is light. For warmth, contact is needed. Above the unity of being is the union of love. Love is the meaning and purpose of duality.
-----------------------------------
@Mana,
Your eagerness to do enquiry alone is enough to take you wherever you need to be. Just hang in there.
Reading through these posts has been an enlightening experience, with so many insights into sel enquiry.
I myself have been practicing self enquiry/meditation for about a year now. Some of my thoughts:
(a) Self enquiry, since we question the nature of our very existence, could lead to some sort of an 'identity crisis'. You question your relation to a country, name, attributes, etc. Example: I am a reserved person, I am very interlligent, etc. These form the very basis of your 'character' to the outside world. Now when you question these attributes, you may seem to be unsure about yourself and lose confidence (from a third person's perspective). How many of you have faced such consequences?
(b) Sometimes, during weekends, I shut myself off from everybody and practice self enquiry seriously, read spiritual books, etc for 2 or 3 days. When I do join back the 'world' I find myself in a trance-like state, with eyes dazed/dull and this seems 'abnormal' to the outside world. Is this the norm or have I been practicing too seriously?
Raj
Dear Raj,
Regarding the question (b), that is good. But don't say that to anybody around you and behave normally, so that other people would not notice you have been doing spiritual practice.
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." (Matthew 6-6)
In some of the debates that have gone on here, I'd have to say that when Self-inquiry does not make me blissful or isolates me more then I would otherwise be isolated, I don't think that is Self-inquiry that I'm practicing, but some sort of mental self-denial. I like Ravi's qutoe of Vivikenanda saying "go play football". That is why it has helped me to be in contact with a teacher that is more mature then I am and is a helpful guide because I would have gotten stuck on believing self-inquiry to be like that, an austere practice of self-denial. As I've gotten perhaps deeper, I would have to say the opposite is true, the ego is isolating and results in non-bliss. The more I'm invested in the ego, or myself the individual the mroe I'm cut off from others, because I view myself as seperate from them, and I have a seperate selfish agenda that also isolates me. In conversations, I already have my reply planned, or the things I want to talk about at my lips, this alienates the other people. So what is Self-inquiry, how to tap into the Bliss, and not get caught up in a mental exercise? I'm not sure all the time, and sometimes I get caught up in that. When I do, I think it is better, to when people interact with me, interact with them as natural as possible. It may not even be a bad idea to get involved in social activities instead of renouncing them. But every opportunity where I have a moment to myself commencing the attempt at inquiry. I had alot of depression issues about love. That teacher emphasized happiness and love being within of the nature of the One indivisible Self, atman, Brahman, Siva. I'm not a qualified teacher, the deeper I get into this, the more I realize that only the Realized can truly teach this. Only a Jnani can teach Self-inquiry, that's my opinion from my experience. Because it is really so individual. I can say that the key things that have seemed central to Self-inquiry are eliminating the objective as non-real and non-self because they are transient and have a beginning and end. I don't take this to mean, every time I see a candelabra, or a DVD player I need to say to myself, this is non-real and non-self. It's important to me it seems to not do something like that that is off track and obsessive. It's where I get caught up and attached and am afraid of losing, or infatuated with, or craving something. That something is transient, unreal, and not the Self. Most of Self-inquiry to me does not it seems involve repeating to myself something verbally, but dissolving attachments. There are so many attachments, and those attachments cause suffering, they cause non-Bliss. Those attachments I believe are the duality. Because tehre is the subject suffering attachment, and the attachments themselves the objects. All Self-inquiry it seems to me in purpose is to dissolve the attachments and experience the natural Bliss that was there the whole time. Dissolving the attachment to the transient by regarding it as unreal, and non-Self and simultaneously or seperately I don't know, dissolving the notion of a subject everytime it arises the essence of the question Who am I?. Or where is the source of happienss, in pure Being as opposed to something circumstancial, or objective can give the happiness that is of the nature of the Self. It is that delusion that leads to the craving. I am not Realized, and it takes some seriously courage to continue with the practice when teh attachments seem severe, and the suffering intense.
Scott(LMM)/Friends,
Scott,Wonderful to read your last two posts-which brings out the deep implication of Self Enquiry-Is it Self Enquiry or Self Abidance!It is pretty much like the parable of the two birds in the Mundaka Upanishad.Sometime it seems to be referring to the bird that eats the Fruits(sweet and bitter) and again it seems to refer to the Bird that does not eat at all!
Here is what Sri Bhagavan says -From Letters from Ramanasramam(Page 345-346):
The devotee: “According to the material world, we have
to say, ‘this is mine’, must we not?”
“Yes, indeed,” replied Bhagavan, “we have to say so.
By merely saying so, however, there is no need to think
that we are all that, and get immersed in the pleasures and
sorrows relating to that. When we ride in a carriage, do we
feel that we are the carriage? Take the example of the sun;
it shines in water in a small pot, in big rivers and in a mirror.
Its image is there. But just because of that, does it think
that it is all that? The same thing with us. All the trouble
arises if one thinks one is the body. If one rejects that
thought, then, like the sun, one will shine everywhere and
be all-pervading.”
The devotee: “It is for that, is it not, that Bhagavan says
that the best thing to do is to follow the path of Self-enquiry
of ‘Who am I’?”
Bhagavan: “Yes; but in the Vasishtam it is mentioned
that Vasishta told Rama that the path of Self-enquiry should
not be shown to anyone who is not sufficiently qualified. In
some other books it has been stated that spiritual practices
should be done for several births, or for at least twelve years
under a Guru. As people would be scared away if I said that
spiritual practices had to be done for several births, I tell
them, ‘You have liberation already within you; you have
merely to rid yourselves of exterior things that have come
upon you’. Spiritual practices are for that alone. Even so,
the Ancients have not said all this for nothing. If a person is
told that he is the Godhead, Brahman itself, and that he is
already liberated, he may not do any spiritual practices,
thinking that he already has that which is required and does
not want anything more. That is why these Vedantic matters
should not be told to spiritually undeveloped people
(anadhikaris); there is no other reason.” And Bhagavan smiled.
-----------------------------------
This clearly brings out the importance of what Scott has brought out-The guidance of a Gnani.This is absolutely necessary.
Friends,
I wish to share this reassuring excerpt from Sri Aurobindo-
"The lotus
of the eternal knowledge and the eternal perfection is a bud
closed and folded up within us. It opens swiftly or gradually,
petal by petal, through successive realisations, once the mind of
man begins to turn towards the Eternal, once his heart, no longer
compressed and confined by attachment to finite appearances,
becomes enamoured, in whatever degree, of the Infinite. All life,
all thought, all energising of the faculties, all experiences passive
or active, become thenceforward so many shocks which disintegrate
the teguments of the soul and remove the obstacles to the
inevitable efflorescence. He who chooses the Infinite has been
chosen by the Infinite. He has received the divine touch without
which there is no awakening, no opening of the spirit; but once
it is received, attainment is sure, whether conquered swiftly in
the course of one human life or pursued patiently through many
stadia of the cycle of existence in the manifested universe.
Nothing can be taught to the mind which is not already
concealed as potential knowledge in the unfolding soul of the
creature. So also all perfection of which the outer man is capable,
is only a realising of the eternal perfection of the Spirit within
him. We know the Divine and become the Divine, because we
are That already in our secret nature. All teaching is a revealing,
all becoming is an unfolding. Self-attainment is the secret; selfknowledge
and an increasing consciousness are the means and
the process."
Namaskar.
Friends,
I wish to share this excerpt from Devaraja Mudaliar's 'Day By Day with Bhagavan'(Pages 87-89):
Mr. Joshi put five questions. I give below the questions
and Bhagavan’s answers.
Question 1: Should I go on asking ‘Who am I?’ without
answering? Who asks whom? Which bhavana (attitude)
should be in the mind at the time of enquiry? What is ‘I’ the
Self or the ego?
Answer: In the enquiry ‘Who am I?’, ‘I’ is the ego. The
question really means, what is the source or origin of this
ego? You need not have any bhavana in the mind. All that is
required is, you must give up the bhavana that you are the
body, of such and such a description, with such and such a
name, etc. There is no need to have a bhavana about your real
nature. It exists as it always does; it is real and no bhavana.
Question 2: I cannot be always engaged in this enquiry,
for I have got other work to do, and when I do such work I
forget this quest.
Answer: When you do other work, do you cease to exist?
You always exist, do you not?
Question 3: Without the sense of doership — the sense
‘I am doing’ — work cannot be done.
Answer: It can be done. Work without attachment. Work
will go on even better than when you worked with the sense
that you were the doer.
Question 4: I don’t understand what work I should do
and what not.
Answer: Don’t bother. What is destined as work to be
done by you in this life will be done by you, whether you
like it or not.
Question 5: Why should I try to realise? I will emerge
from this state, as I wake up from a dream. We do not make
an attempt to get out of a dream during sleep.
Answer: In a dream, you have no inkling that it is a dream
and so you don’t have the duty of trying to get out of it by your
effort. But in this life you have some intuition, by your sleep
experience, by reading and hearing, that this life is something
like a dream, and hence the duty is cast on you to make an
effort and get out of it. However, who wants you to realise the
Self, if you don’t want it? If you prefer to be in the dream, stay
as you are.
-----------------------------------
Salutations.
@ Akira
Thats a good quote you pointed out. But my experience has been, these states 'weaken' the mind - thoughts are a lot slower, and thus making it difficult to 'function' in the world. You do feel some bliss, but maybe it is mano laya, as the Maharishi said.
@ Losing M. Mind
The more you get into social activities, the more you are trying to temporarily 'escape' from the clutches of the mind. Why is solitary confinement so feared? Because the mind is then free to create havoc and it does. Why do you talk to people? To escape the constant 'flow' of thoughts.
Having said that, we are not yogis and have to function in the 'world'. Just puts in perspective the 'mental strength' of yogis and sannyasis, who have the guts to face the wrath of their minds 24*7. Salutations to them!
Thanks
Raj
Just to add to my previous post, being a socially 'active' person brings with it some expectations of your behaviour, and if you dont live up to it, some ridicule, especially if you are a principled person, which most spiritually inclined people are. Every time you 'defend' yourself, it is the ego that is asserting itself and so you're moving away from the goal. However, I'm speaking from a very cosmopolitan place, and if you're in a more spiritually inclined place, being social might be easier. As they say, 'satsang' is important.
Thanks
Raj
'The more you get into social activities, the more you are trying to temporarily 'escape' from the clutches of the mind. Why is solitary confinement so feared? Because the mind is then free to create havoc and it does. Why do you talk to people? To escape the constant 'flow' of thoughts.'
From what I understand, it doesn't matter one way or another whether you interact with people or not. Maharshi had several quotes about the person who goes off into the forest and the person of the city have just exchanged one setting for another. That resonates with my experience. I don't feel free of the mind in solitary situations, I don't feel free of the mind with other people. I'm worrying about things when I'm inactive, and I'm distracted when I'm doing things. Neither is liberating. What is? I don't know, I suppose inquiry. I think what you said would be true, if my external life did not show alot of the signs and symptoms of Asperger's which is a mild form of autism. So I can't really relate to being caught up in the distractions of interacting with other people, or doing it as an escape. though i do interact with people sometimes alot, sometimes hardly at all. Strength and endurance of solitude when I really want to be with others, does not resonate with me as true spiritual practice, or sadhana. Because it is the mind that is being endured, or forcefully repressed. Inquiry is on some level, that I can't say I've gotten the hang of, transcendence of the mind, which is on a whole different level. As you said, I've found it easier then at any other time in the company of people who have Realized it, satsang. On my own, I find it confusing, and difficult, and occassionally really rewarding.
.
Living in spiritual and physical solitude is no question of "better" or "not better" or of "that is, what fits most to me or not" or of "that is, what sages recommend or not recommend".
It is a gift, a blessing, one of the greatest divine boons to be grant. It is not for the many. The ones living in solitude have nothing more to do in this world - their life is dialogue with the heart. The world can't understand this because "world" is another word for "fear of death" - and living in solitude means living death while alive.
"What benefit, what divine delight, solitude and the silence of the hermitage bring to those who love them, only those who have experienced them can tell. Here strong men can return into themselves as much as they wish, and abide there; here they can with eager earnestness cultivate the seeds of virtue, and with gladness eat of the fruits of paradise. Here is acquired that eye, by whose serene gaze the Spouse is wounded with love; that eye, pure and clean, by which God is seen. Here the solitary is occupied in busy leisure, and at rest in tranquil activity. Here God rewards his athletes with the longed-for prize: peace that the world does not know, and joy in the Holy Spirit."
"The monk, who continues faithfully in his cell and lets himself be molded by it, will gradually find that his whole life tends to become one continual prayer. But he cannot attain to this repose except at the cost of stern battle; both by living austerely in fidelity to the law of the cross, and willingly accepting the tribulations by which God will try him as gold in the furnace. In this way, having been cleansed in the night of patience, and having been consoled and sustained by assiduous meditation of the Scriptures, and having been led by the Holy Spirit into the depths of his own soul, he is now ready, not only to serve God, but even to cleave to him in love."
Book One, Chapter 1 & 3, Prologue to the Statutes of the Carthusian Order
.
Raj/Scott(LMM)/Friends,
Raj has expressed-" Every time you 'defend' yourself, it is the ego that is asserting itself and so you're moving away from the goal."
This is something worth pondering about.It is true one should not get 'drawn' into the Thick of things-all the same,one may be required to 'Assert' oneself-Like in Sri Ramakrishna's parable of the Holy man and the Snake-where The Holy man advises the Snake to hiss instead of biting.
Most importantly,it is in social interactions that one truly discovers the workings of the 'Ego'.
There is no 'Formula' in these matters.
I agree with Scott that there is no point trying to 'weather the storm' of the mind by staying in solitude.
One may be ALONE in a crowd;one may be LONELY in solitude.It all boils down to who and what we are.
There is a very interesting story in the Mahabharata wherein a Yogi does Tapas(Penance)in Solitude in a forest for over 10 years.As he walks past a Tree,a crane's Droppings fall on him;In anger he looks at the crane which burns it to ashes.The Yogi decides that he has now done sufficient tapasya and it is time for him to return to the Town.Entering the town and Feeling Hungry,he knocks at the door of a small hut.He is made to wait for a while until the housewife makes her appearance and invites him in.The Yogi gives her an annoyed stare(He has been made to wait!)to which the Housewife replies-"I am No CRANE that you can burn me to ashes!".The Puzzled Yogi asks her how she came to know about the incident of the burnt crane.The Housewife First feeds the Yogi and then advises him to meet the Village Butcher.The Yogi goes looking for the Butcher who is busy chopping pieces of Meat.As the Yogi approaches him,the Butcher enquires whether the Housewife has sent him .The Yogi wonders how the Butcher knows about ths sequence!The Butcher then refers him to a Holy Man.The Yogi Proceeds to the Holy man and narrates the whole thing to him and asks him-How come the Housewife and The Butcher knew what they knew.The Holy man tells the Yogi-The Housewife and Butcher are Gnanis-The Housewife became a Gnani by faithfully serving her husband and the Butcher by being absolutely Truthful regarding the Weighing(in Scales)of what he sold.This is the essence of True Tapas.
-----------------------------------
Let us take simple events in our everyday life.If we are late for Office and if we can say-'I am Late' instead of 'I got Late',this is also Tapasya.A Better Tapasya would be not having to say 'I am Late'.This is how the everyday world schools us in Spiritual Living.No such opportunity is there when we live in Solitude!
-----------------------------------
Namaskar.
@ Ravi
"The Housewife became a Gnani by faithfully serving her husband and the Butcher by being absolutely Truthful regarding the Weighing(in Scales)of what he sold.This is the essence of True Tapas"
This sounds very nice to hear, but in my humble opinion, Karma Yoga is probably the most difficult and tricky of the three prescribed paths.
Karma Yoga is defined as desireless/dispassionate action. However, practically speaking, if there is no desire for the result/success/recognition, there is no motivation to give your 100% to the job on hand. Karma Yoga is also non-doership. This is where it gets tricky. If you inculcate a feeling of non-doership, then who is the one who takes responsibility?
No responsibility + no 100% effort could lead to troubles. If your life is then messed up, who do you blame? God? You? Or you just have to accept your 'fate'? If you accept 'fate', then doesn't it imply that 'fate' is more powerful than God?
Having said that, do you know of anyone in recent times who has successfully followed karma yoga as a path to salvation? Maybe thats the reason why the Maharishi discouraged people from following KY.
Thanks.
Raj.
Raj,
"do you know of anyone in recent times who has successfully followed karma yoga as a path to salvation?"
Please visit Open Thread on Vichara,where I have posted about Master-an 'Ordinary person'.(In my Post to Arvind).
Having said that-It is not as if Karma Yoga is a 'Stand alone' approach;Neither is 'Self Enquiry' .Life is too vast and varied to be confined to any 'approach'.Living means -Doing,Feeling,Thinking,Being.These are the modes and and all of them need to be aligned with the Goal(If we may call so).
In the story referred to -it is to show that irrespective of one's calling in life,one may still achieve the Goal-provided one has the Right Attitude.In the story of the Wife Serving her Husband -Attention,care,Love - These are implied;Not just 'washing clothes,Cooking the Meal' etc.
"if there is no desire for the result/success/recognition, there is no motivation to give your 100% to the job on hand."
Yes,as you have mentioned it is not easy to bring in the required balance here.All the same,it clearly points to the chinks in the armour and helps to keep one well Grounded.
First step is to recognize that work is unavoidable and one cannot escape from it.
Second step may be to give it the Best that we can.
Third Step may be to accept the Results(Positive or Negative)with Equanimity.
We need not concern ourselves whether we are able to Act Without 'Doership',etc.
It is enough if we can start at this level.The Rest are bound to come.
Wishing you the Very Best.
Namaskar.
Raj,
The Reference to Master-The 'Ordinary person' is in this very thread-Please see my post on August 2,2008(Please visit the oldest Posts 1-200 in this thread)and the followup by me on August 3,2008.
Namaskar.
Ravi mentioned...
"First step is to recognize that work is unavoidable and one cannot escape from it.
Second step may be to give it the Best that we can.
Third Step may be to accept the Results(Positive or Negative)with Equanimity.
We need not concern ourselves whether we are able to Act Without 'Doership',etc."
I was wondering what should be our reaction when is comes to evaluating the type of work we are doing. Many times, we land up in a work which we know that below what we are capable of doing or not to our liking. In such a situation, what is the advise given? One approach is the normal way i.e, getting restless - try to change it - and perhaps succed in changing. The second way is to accept that this work is divinely ordained and continue to do it - though internally I might feel still that this is not exactly what I want.
Regards Murali
It seems to me lately, but I'm running this by my teacher, that inquiry is really successful if it focuses on the problems in experience, the things I consider problems, and leaves all else alone. For instanec I start to suffer about something, even slightly. But then I realize that in the scheme of things it is transient and so really unreal. (When I'm dead, this will not be a problem, or when I'm in deep sleep this is not a problem.) So maybe a rule of thumb is that only things that are problems in the state of being dead (or in between incarnations) or deep sleep can be called problems. Treat everything else as unreal. (that should do it) Once there are no problems, I cease to practice, I let it unfold as it will. The other day when I did this, I think I may have even entered samadhi by donig taht. By doing this, it becomes no problem it seems to get thigns done, because the 'inquiry' is not a mental activity, it's just the dissolution of the causes of problems in my experience. Doesn't matter what they are, how big or small. I don't know when this body is going to die, and no problems are going to be still there when that happens. Even if I reincarnate, and have new problems. The problems themselves are transient. And this seems to maybe a powerful way to get off the suffering level. It seems like if the mind doesn't have problems, what can it grab onto? How can it perpetuate an egoic identity, or subject/object? And if there are no problems, what else gives the world that solidity as something seperate? I also write my teacher for that reason, as it seems to trivialize the problems. And his responses certainly do. So the effort it seems is to get off the problem level, after that let the guru inward dissolve the dualism, non-duality (the real, nonconceptual, Reality) doesn't need my help to reveal itself.
David and friends,
I came across this article in the website arunachala ramana on vichAra.
http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/articles/article_self_enquiry.htm
Has anyone come across it and know if the steps mentioned by the anonymous writer has authenticity...I havent read Bhagavan's 'Sri RamanaGita'
Soorya, It may be the website of Graham Boyd,check it out.
Raj,
The Reference to Master-The 'Ordinary person' is in this very thread-Please see my post on August 2,2008(Please visit the oldest Posts 1-200 in this thread)and the followup by me on August 3,2008.
Namaskar.
Friends,
I wish to share this reassuring excerpt from Sri Aurobindo-
"The lotus
of the eternal knowledge and the eternal perfection is a bud
closed and folded up within us. It opens swiftly or gradually,
petal by petal, through successive realisations, once the mind of
man begins to turn towards the Eternal, once his heart, no longer
compressed and confined by attachment to finite appearances,
becomes enamoured, in whatever degree, of the Infinite. All life,
all thought, all energising of the faculties, all experiences passive
or active, become thenceforward so many shocks which disintegrate
the teguments of the soul and remove the obstacles to the
inevitable efflorescence. He who chooses the Infinite has been
chosen by the Infinite. He has received the divine touch without
which there is no awakening, no opening of the spirit; but once
it is received, attainment is sure, whether conquered swiftly in
the course of one human life or pursued patiently through many
stadia of the cycle of existence in the manifested universe.
Nothing can be taught to the mind which is not already
concealed as potential knowledge in the unfolding soul of the
creature. So also all perfection of which the outer man is capable,
is only a realising of the eternal perfection of the Spirit within
him. We know the Divine and become the Divine, because we
are That already in our secret nature. All teaching is a revealing,
all becoming is an unfolding. Self-attainment is the secret; selfknowledge
and an increasing consciousness are the means and
the process."
Namaskar.
Raj,
"do you know of anyone in recent times who has successfully followed karma yoga as a path to salvation?"
Please visit Open Thread on Vichara,where I have posted about Master-an 'Ordinary person'.(In my Post to Arvind).
Having said that-It is not as if Karma Yoga is a 'Stand alone' approach;Neither is 'Self Enquiry' .Life is too vast and varied to be confined to any 'approach'.Living means -Doing,Feeling,Thinking,Being.These are the modes and and all of them need to be aligned with the Goal(If we may call so).
In the story referred to -it is to show that irrespective of one's calling in life,one may still achieve the Goal-provided one has the Right Attitude.In the story of the Wife Serving her Husband -Attention,care,Love - These are implied;Not just 'washing clothes,Cooking the Meal' etc.
"if there is no desire for the result/success/recognition, there is no motivation to give your 100% to the job on hand."
Yes,as you have mentioned it is not easy to bring in the required balance here.All the same,it clearly points to the chinks in the armour and helps to keep one well Grounded.
First step is to recognize that work is unavoidable and one cannot escape from it.
Second step may be to give it the Best that we can.
Third Step may be to accept the Results(Positive or Negative)with Equanimity.
We need not concern ourselves whether we are able to Act Without 'Doership',etc.
It is enough if we can start at this level.The Rest are bound to come.
Wishing you the Very Best.
Namaskar.
Dear Mana,
You see the conflict, because you still want to enjoy the world and life.
You want to enjoy conversations with people, but you cannot do so when you are doing self-enquiry.
But that is the way it should be.
Self-enquiry will make you less interested to the world.
You feel out-of-tune with people and the world.
That is the inevitable consequence of the practice.
It has happend to me, it can happen to anybody who practice self-enquiry.
So go slowly without pushing you too hard. Do not try to do around-the-clock self-enquiry if you feel it too stressful.
As you go on practicing, the world would attract you less and less, and the conflict, which is now troubling you, would become smaller and smaller. And that is when you start to feel the inner peace.
Best regards,
Akira
There is a feeling of failure occassionally at Inquiry, and then I get to thinking what other practices can I add as auxillary. But then it occurs to me, that with any thought, even this agitated thinking, I can always inquire into the identity at the core of it, and no other practice will ever be that direct. Who is it that feels like a failure? That is the only way of ceasing to feel like a failure? Not by adding more practices. Isn't that beautiful? But certainly other spiritual texts "Who am I?" being really the most comprehensive there is. But the Tao te ching, and Ribhu Gita certainly inspire further conviction. The beatiful thing is that if I'm suffering, it doesn't matter the cause, the circumstance, even the worsed circumstance, there is one way, one foolproof way out of that suffering and that is by observing the observer, finding the I, and being myself. Over time, there is a giving up the world, and the objects as potential sources of happiness, and looking in to the source of happiness.
Scott Fraundorf:
At http://presentnonexistence.org, Cee's artwork is amazing Advaita artwork, and I posted some of that on my blog, however if you go to the poetry section on that website, she is supposedly Self-Realized, and that is where the artwork is (the poetry section), it really conveys something really profound. "Nothing is my Lover", "Seeing kisses the blessed feet of Being". It sort of reminds me a little of Mathru Sri Sarada's drawings. There are also some videos on that site of her giving Satsang. I really liked it, found it inspiring. I also wanted to add, from listening to some audio commentary on a work by Adi Shankara by Nome, the teacher I correspond with for instruction, one of the things I found really helpful, was Shankara talking about how in comparison to the Absolute all these things that are considered important in life, kingdoms, wealth, problems, spiritual practice, are insignificant in comparison to the Absolute. What I got from it, as far as practice, is that when the mind is habitually running toward certain attachments, of a fearful, or desiring character, calling attention to their insiginifcance in comparison to the Absolute, the Self, and the Realization of the Self, the same goes for where is happiness? That bliss arises from within, so within is where to look for happiness, not in phenomenon. Something that is key to Advaita, and Maharshi's teachings, that has at times recently taken on an intuitive character, is that if things change, and if being attached to them causes suffering, that is a clear indication, that they aren't meant for attachment, they point to a Reality that does not change, is always full of happiness, because why would the suffering reality of being attached to transient things be real? Maybe also why a guru is helpful, because they can establish that Knowledge of happiness in the Self, so that more and more that is what is sought.
Scott Fraundorf:
I wanted to invite, anyone who wants to, or nobody who wants to, to look at my blog Precambrian Corner if they wish, especially aquaintances such as Ravi, and Bookworm... Should they wish to. Just click on the name.
Scott Fraundorf:
E"nquiry is As Ramana Taught.
The nature of the seeker is utter suffering.
How can you not Be who you are... the Self?」- 2009-03-"
I'm sorry, I thought you were critical of Neo-advaita (lol, joking-ish). Yes, how can I not be who I am, the Self, I guess I can't. But until that is conclusively realized, until I realize that I am infact the tenth man, that the necklace, is infact around my neck, sometimes I still have to remind myself, and call attention to the I-thought, the subject/object. The practice goes on, until as you said, I realize the seeker that is suffering doesn't exist, never existed. Unlike you, I still have to practice, until I achieve the great heights that you have, some day. (lol) Should I call you Sri Bookworm? (meant in good fun) I really like the Ashtavakra Gita.
Happy he stands, happy he sits, happy sleeps, and happy he comes and goes. Happy he speaks and happy he eats. This is the life of a man at peace. 18.59
He who of his very nature feels no unhappiness in his daily life like worldly people, remains undisturbed like a great lake, cleared of defilement. 18.60
Even abstention from action has the effect of action in a fool, while even the action of the wise man brings the fruits of inaction. 18.61
A fool often shows aversion towards his belongings, but for him whose attachment to the body has dropped away, there is neither attachment nor aversion. 18.62
The mind of the fool is always caught in thinking or not thinking, but the wise man's is of the nature of no thought because he thinks what is appropriate. 18.63
For the seer who behaves like a child, without desire in all actions,there is no attachment for such a pure one even in the work he does. 18.64
Blessed is he who knows himself and is the same in all states, with a mind free from craving whether he is seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, or tasting. 18.65
There is no one subject to samsara, no sense of individuality, no goal or means to the goal in the eyes of the wise man who is always free from imagination and unchanging like space. 18.66
Glorious is he who has abandoned all goals and is the incarnation of the satisfaction, which is his very nature, and whose inner focus on the Unconditioned is quite spontaneous. 18.67
In brief, the great-souled man who has come to know the Truth is without desire for either pleasure or liberation, and is always and everywhere free from attachment. 18.68
What remains to be done by the man who is pure awareness and has abandoned everything that can be expressed in words from the highest heaven to the earth itself? 18.69
Ah
You say:
'with no fear. I imagine my mind totally dissolving and getting destroyed in it'
..........
Imagimation is the mind working so rather than dissolving it you make it strong. Ramanas self enquiry is best to do.
David/Bookworm/Friends,
"I am an insignificant person.But I live by the side of an ocean and I keep with me a few pitchers of sea water.When a visitor comes,I entertain him with that.What else can I speak of but his words"-
This is what 'M' told Subodh(Later Swami Subodhananda,a direct disciple of Sri Ramakrishna).Subodh was directed by Sri Ramakrishna to keep in touch with 'M'.The Young Subodh shot back -"He is a householder.What does he know!".Sri Ramakrishna was quite amused at the boy's outburst but he insisted that he meet 'M'.Subodh met 'M' and frankly told him what transpired.This was what elicited the words quoted above.
I have always felt that one has more to learn from the Lives of the Great ones than latching on to any verbal teaching,however lofty.One simple act of these mahatmas is worth more than tons of philosophical Thoughts.
I wish to clarify,that I have not been in any way offended or put off by any of Bookworm's remarks.All the same,I could not dismiss what was happening- that a person could consider himself a Gnani and yet indulge in sarcastic remarks which only served to drive away other sincere aspirants from this wonderful Blog;I felt that I need to stop this nonsense.
David,Thanks for all that you are doing.I wish you are spared of this policing.
Bookworm,
I look forward to your continued participation in this Forum.I wish you the very Best.May Sri Bhagavan's Grace be ever with you and guide you.
Salutations.
David, Ravi
A bit over the top you two arn't you.
All I said was that Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing But Truth.
Does nobody else in this place know or feel or even believe and agree with this.
Don't worry about writing to me
in private Ravi...you can say what you like or criticise me as you wish here...and I think David should
print whatever you may write no matter how critical or offensive it might seem to appear.
This should be a place of Truth where one is able and allowed to be critical of a religion, teaching or guru if that is what one truly is moved and is good to do.
True, I admit, I probably was a little, or maybe a bit more than a little, bit over the top with some of my criticism of Ravi... but then...there is a lot to be critical about. (that is meant as a joke)..(ish)
You people jump on my back just because I say:
Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing But Truth.
That simple statement seems to cause offence...and this is a site supposedly dedicated to Ramana and Ramanas Teaching.
I am sure if I had said:
Swami Flowing Robes and Guru Pot Belly and their Teaching are nothing But Truth...
That most people would not be offended and some would even have been certain or brave enough to agree.
Does anyone even truly like Ramana in this place?
Ravi
You say:
'infected Ignorance.True Knowledge dissolves all differences.It does not claim any Exclusivity.A Tree is known by'
.............
I do not think you quite understand Ravi.
I am not claiming any exclusivity for Ramanas Teaching. It has been known for many thousands of years...even the Heart on the right.
I am only stating what is simply true...which is:
Ramana and Ramanas Teaching are nothing BUT Truth.
Have you a problem with that? Do you disagree?
Scott Fraundorf:
"Doesn't Ramana say somewhere that 'I am' is only what is real?
You know...'I am that I am' and all that stuff.」- "
Well, my limited understanding, limited in that my certitude is not firm, is that the I am that is real, I,I, is the Self. The me, that I was saying is unreal, is the personality, the ego entity, that I sometimes think is me, imagine to be me, often infact. in the waking dream, the outer guru, the Self-realized Gnani is "I am that I am" because they have realized that there isn't a seperate individuality apart from I am that I am, Brahman, the Self. So in the waking dream, they are a manifestation of the Self, they are teh SElf, because there is no illusory personality, ego entity that takes themselves to be seperate. In truth, everyone and everything is the Self and there could only be Gnanis, there is only the Self, but since I imagine a seperate personality, an individuality seperate from the Self, an imaginary second when tehre is only One, not everything is equal in terms of realizing that there is only the Self. The Gnani, the Sage, the guru, Maharshi is the one thing that is real, in the waking dream because tehy are the only being that I can count on to speak, and act from the Truth of there being only One Self, and so they are the only thing in the waking dream that can convince me of the fact that the illusory individual I take myself to be, is simply a misperception, the snake in the rope. the I am that I am, is the guru, is my teacher, who is Maharshi. As David Godman pointed out, there is only one guru, only one Gnani, and he/she is within, the outer Gnani is the same as the inner one, because there is nothing seperate from it. In dialogues with my teacher, it becomes clear over time experientially, that the only side of the dialogue that counts is his, because he is the Self, myself. My side of the dialogue is an imaginary figment who thinks they have problems, when there are no problems.
Scott Fraundorf:
Here is the letter from my teacher on Maharshi alone existing, it's so beautiful, I feel no shame in posting it here.
Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya
Namaste. The value of wearing vibhuti is known by those who do so.
Transcendence of the triads, in which the ego is dead, is the inner
adornment with the holy ashes of Siva.
Earnest practice of the helpful instructions is, indeed, wise
thankfulness.
It would be better to say that the disciple is unreal, a mere
misconception, and thus vanishes than to say such of the Guru, who is the
Self, Brahman. The Maharshi indeed exists and alone exists. So, it is
imperative to know him as he is. To accomplish that, one must first know
oneself. Thus, true Knowledge dawns, and devotion wells up and overflows.
Grace remains as Being.
Ever yours in Truth
Scott Fraundorf:
The teacher I correspond with in his first response said that "If the source of happiness is ascertained to be within you, dissolution of desire and fear is natural". I've come to realize that that is foundational to Inquiry and spiritual practice in general, otherwise it becomes as Robert Adams said a "dry, intellectual" method. Also I'm finding that seeing happiness within, is the Inquiry, because it's the same as holding the I. The nature of the Self is pure bliss, but this I arises in the form of desire for a happiness erroniously put external. Tracing the thought to it's source, is also tracing that the fulfillment of that desire, it's ultimate happiness is within, not without. Finding happiness within, is the same as finding the real nature of the Self. I'm not permanently abiding in a state where there is no within, or without, so for me, thinking in terms of within is still extremely important. In one of the satsang vids of my teacher, he responded to someone about music that the person heard and thought was extremely beautiful, and was wondering if he should trace that beauty to the Self. The teacher I correspond with said, that paraphrasing, something along the lines of, if the source of beauty, truth, is found where it actually resides, from that standpoint alone are we able to dismiss all this as unreal. I've also been for the first time really seriously putting Robert Adams method of when I wake up in the morning, the whole world is a projection from me, it is unreal. My teacher said something that I've come to understand a little deeper, about the guru, or Maharshi alone existing, when I said well, wouldn't even Maharshi be unreal? He said, and it makes sense to me, the guru alone exists, maharshi alone exists, because since they are the Reality, and nothing apart from the Reality, the me, I take myself to be is unreal, but Maharshi is the SElf, and nothing apart from the Self, looking at a picture of the Maharshi, I'm looking at the Self embodied. Any Gnani including Robert Adams is the Self, and because of that, since there is nothing apart from that, the Gnani, the teacher can be looked at as being the one thing in all of the waking-dream that is real, even I am not real, but the guru, the Gnani, Lakshmana Swami, Maharshi, is real. Just even considering that, is so incredibly ego effacing. I don't exist, but Maharshi does exist, and I'm staring at the Real when I look at Maharshi, when I watch archival footage, and he still is all that exists.
Scott Fraundorf:
In states where i'm aware of grace, it becomes clear, that I'm incapable of bringing it on. For instance, when I watch an entire satsang of the spiritual teacher who has been helping me, my mind is very active initially, and I try to practice but it's almost as futile as it is when I'm doing other things and attempting to Inquire. But I find myself in a state where the mind is not very active, where there is a feeling of happiness, and peace, that it doesn't matter what happens, and I want to stay there, because it's so much better. But I'm powerless to stay there, I'm powerless to bring it on. Any effort of the mind is of the mind, so my attempts at Inquiry don't really necessarily get past the mind. However I still think the effort is very, very important and continue to do it.
It's kind of fascinating. Since I experience that grace, that inward pull I continue to watch those satsang videos, knowing that my mind cannot judge a teacher based on what they say, do, look like, move, but I know that when there is that strong inward pull that is individual obliterating, where I get a taste of being free of the bondage that seemed impossible to free myself of, I recognize that, and I associate myself with it, because everything including functioning, happiness is greatly increased in the absence of my ideas.
You kind of realize there is nothing I can do in respect to Realization, and feeling that powerlessness, a reverence grows in the heart, I give up the egoically motivated reason for doing spiritual practice, my own self-aggrandizement, how I imagine it will make me a better person, and I associate with that that causes happiness, devotion, courage, fearlessness to grow, and continue to try on my own futilly to eliminate the self-conjured egoic tendencies.
Pranam to all Devotees,
Bhagwan teachings always very straight and this being understood by only stilling the mind whenever that was happening automatically in a thoughtless state. That state may be a beginner's vichara or a noble path towards self realization or the ultimate bliss which every body wants to hold always.
When will the mind go blank ?
May be during a happiest occasion in your daily life or worst things occurred in your vicinity .
If you observe why the mind becomes blank you will come to know that it is very natural that any substance dissolved , submerged or vanished because it has find out the SOURCE and merged in that .
So Bhagwan's teachings always insists that one should go to the Source by fixing the mind to the Self or Source .
The method is Be Still and every body knows this method which is happening every moment in our life.
as per their daily happenings.
Observe that and with Bhagwan's Grace everybody can continue to be in that Still state amidst this all chaos and confusions they come across in this world.
Be Still
Be Pure
Be Conscious
Be Aware and finally
Become the awareness
Be the Known ( Self)which is Unknown to so many .
Scott Fraundorf:
There are moments of deep meditative almost falling in, then suddenly, things can become so extremely tamasic, paranoia, insanity, or rabid desire. But the feelings of peacefulness are deeper, more extensive. I've been really obsessed lately with David Lynch, and the connections of creativity and meditation. I have noticed that it seems the deeper people are in their inquiry or meditation, the more asthetically pleasing everything they do becomes. I don't know if there is a hard fast rule about that. But for instance, the pictures of Lakshmana Swami and Saradamma on the website, are beautiful. This website is beautiful. David Lynch's films deal with twisted material, some of the hardest to watch, but people are so deeply effected by his movies and television. His willingness to go into the darkest aspects of people's psychic illnesses, to convey it through film in a way that is tangible and horrifying, as if you are seeing through the eyes of dark madness, is purifying. And if you watch interviews with him, he is clearly the sweetest, most innocent seeming soul. Where does that darkness come from? And I think it is because he is so free and uncorrupt, and so the corruption, the delusions, are so clear, and he is unafraid of portraying what he sees in the world. He described Philadelphia as a city that was diseased, and filled with fear.
Scott:
You can only go your own way Scott.
I stand on everything I have said.
As far as Ravi goes..I think his advice is bad advice.
But we all must walk our on path.
The end of all paths is Ramana Scott.
Atleast it's safely tucked away in OTOV
Scott Fraundorf:
Since this is personal, and obnoxious. I don't want to become a jnani, or even Realize the Self, necessarily. The idea of duality being banished to be quite honest, doesn't appeal to me all that much. But that's because I'm ignorant and in the "I am the body" notion.
However, I also want to be in Truth, and be in tune, not deluding myself, and having a mind interfering with the smooth flow of the script. That is why I practice Inquiry. To get me out of the way, so auspiciousness can flow without me, constantly breaking it into discrete events, and drama.
Maharshi, Papaji, any of these people, who are not people, were not happy because they had attained a great state, but because they were in their innate happiness. That does appeal to me, to always be in bliss, because that is my natural state.
To end this, I think I should add a passage from the Ribhu Gita,
"That in which there is nothing bad or good, in which there is neither sorrow nor pleasure, in which there is neither silence nor speech, in which there are no pair of opposites, in which there is no distinction of "I or body", in which there is no notion the body is myslef, and in which there is not the least thing to perceive. Ever abide in bliss, without a trace of a concept, in that itself as that itself"
Ravi
Yes, How can the efforts of the Ego be successful?-Beautiful point! The Answer to this is "IT CANNOT BE!" Then Why is it that Efforts are called for! The answer to this is that NOT MAKING EFFORTS is worse still!
This is the LOSE-LOSE situation! Then What is it that can be done?
I can't remember where I read it, but I recollect Arthur Osborne saying that enquiry was a win-win situation: either you got enlightened, or you just got peaceful, quiet and happy.
As you say, the ego cannot bring you good results by doing anything. What it can do, though, is stop 'doing' and face the Self. When this happens, the ego is dissolved in the Self.
Ravi,
Many thanks for the kind comments; many more for sharing the information about your Master.
It was a real joy to read. I could clearly feel your great shraddha towards him shining thro’ the narrative. I could also sense your Master’s greatness - in terms of knowledge, his simple and all-inclusive teachings, and particularly his uncomplicated lifestyle. He is certainly not an ordinary person.
Of course I would love to hear more about him, but even if you stop with what you’ve written, I ‘know’ him already, so to speak, and do not need to hear anything more.
Please convey my heartfelt namaskars to him when you meet him next.
best wishes
PS: Chalam’s story is in “Power of the Presence, Vol I” as David has mentioned in his comment.
Thanks, Ravi. In a world with too much words, it was my feeling that the great ones are using the some pointings. The sense of I Am is exactly the aim of self-enquiry. And, at the end, our essence is prior to the I Am. And, finally, we know that sense of abiding in the self. Simple but it really works, there is understading and peace, and things are more clear.
Good luck and patience!
S,
Very interesting to read your thoughts. The Buddha!I completely agree with you.In the whole history of Mankind,there has been only one Buddha!So clear headed and compassionate!Vivekananda was his closest approximation(Why approximation?-He lived only 39 years.The Youthful impetuosity was there!may be if he would have lived longer,the World would have seen the Second Buddha!Notwithstanding this,there were many who were startled by swamiji's close resemblance with The Buddha).
I respect your deep thirst for knowledge;your distrust of Emotion and worship of reason.I do not see any problem there;only that Reason has the ability to pull things down and NOT PUT THINGS TOGETHER. you seem to be aware of this.
I wish to share this wonderful GEM from The Gospel,where Sri Ramakrishna speaks about HOW THERE CAN BE NO COMPROMISE IN TRUTH.(page 312):
'After my vision of the Divine Mother,I prayed to her ,taking a flower in my hands:'Mother,Here is Thy Knowledge and here is Thy ignoranance.Take them both and give me pure Love.Here is Thy Holiness and here is Thy unholiness.Take them both and give me pure love.Here is Thy Good and here is Thy Evil.Take them both and give me pure Love.Here is Thy Righteousness and Here is Thy unRighteousness.Take them both,Mother ,and Give me pure Love.'I MENTIONED ALL THESE,BUT I COULD NOT SAY:'MOTHER,HERE IS THY TRUTH AND HERE IS THY FALSEHOOD.TAKE THEM BOTH'....(now comes the Beauty!)...I GAVE UP EVERYTHING AT HER FEET BUT COULD NOT BRING MYSELF TO GIVE UP TRUTH."
Just think about this wonderful,inspirational Gem !Sri Ramakrishna is asking for PURE LOVE.He is not able to give up TRUTH.
Implication is TRUTH=LOVE.(DEVOTION).
S,you are a devotee,as long as you have this uncompromising quest for TRUTH(not reason alone).Perhaps it is this that is drawing you to Sri Ramakrishna and Sri Bhagavan.
Your Path(If I may call it that way)is as Good as Any!More Importantly YOUR PRACTICE-SELF ENQUIRY FITS LIKE A TEE to your temperament.
SEEK YE FIRST THE KINGDOM OF GOD AND ALL THESE THINGS SHALL BE ADDED UNTO YOU!
Wishing you The Very Best!
P.S:Please keep your musings flowing.It helps to clean the dross.
salutations to all:
(sorry folks, the following are not directly related to vichara, just some personal musings that i felt like posting...my apologies if any of you after reading felt this to be a waste of time)
ravi/arvind: thank you for all your warm messages & insightful comments.
i request you to write with the same liberty that you have exercised so far...am an agnostic because am neither sure of god's existence nor its non-existence... perhaps, am an agnostic in the spirit of the buddha, whom i have always loved & respected...from whatever little i have read, in the words of vivekananda, this man among men, who didn't have any cobwebs in him, could love the whole world...what courage? what compassion? (what more can i say?)
arvind also mentioned russell etc. ...unfortunately or fortunately, i value reason above emotion and still have a strong desire to study the works of some great thinkers (orient & occident)...i admire schopenhauer & spinoza as much as sankara & madhva (for me, sankara is more of a great thinker; i don't subscribe much to the plethora of myths that have raised him to cult status... this makes it a lot more easier to criticize sankara and appreciate madhva, wherever the latter did have a logical argument more potent than that of sankara)...
since modern philosophy, primarily after kant, as a discipline got totally demerged from religion, there is a remarkable sincerity in their intellectual quest, which deserves complete respect in my modest opinion... though meagre (as on date), whatever little i have sampled, be it husserlian phenomenology or kierkegaardian existentialism, wittgensteinian investigations or russellian logic, the beauty of the search is unmistakable and the purity of the pursuit is undeniable...
i wholly agree that all these systems are perhaps no more than excursions in 'thought'...all am saying is that for those who evince an interest (like me) in man's fascinating journey, these great works are a worthy read...
let me also clarify that when it comes to 'practice', i hold on to the one thing that am most fond of: self-enquiry :-) arvind had concluded his post with '...that’s what Naren did. He quit his atheism & embraced Ramakrishna...'
all i would like to add is that if i were to be in the presence of a towering inferno like thakur or bhagavan, most probably i wouldn't have been left with even the remnants of this stifling darkness of talk and thought :-)))
Many thanks everyone for the wonderful remarks. Ravi, Maneesha, Jupes, S., I have learnt a lot from all your posts.
S.,
I must confess I was initially confused by your writings. But now I think I understand. You are a true blue-blooded agnostic! So let me guess, Huxley, Russel, Ingersoll etc would be your real mentors. You would hold that, the existence or non-existence of God, or the “Ultimate Reality” (or the Self), is not knowable, as we are unable to verify any experience by anything but another subjective experience. The implication of this, of course being, that you would believe any experience only if you can experience it for yourself. Since you cannot experience God or the Self for yourself, you are unable to say whether they exist or not. Only your ‘beingness’ is the one thing known for sure. [But then, what to do with this ‘beingness’ ?]
So that is why you said about Sri Bhagavan in your earlier post:
“ 'And that His Grace is available wherever you might be and at all times' etc. are all 'belief' statements...i find it very hard to relate to such statements unless someone is telling out of their undeniable experience...”
Really, I will not debate the agnostic viewpoint. I am sure with your clearly wonderful intellect you would have worked out all the ‘kinks’ in this philosophy for yourself. But you have asked in your earlier post, “ … am interested to know what would you have suggested for an agnostic”. In all humility let me only say that a philosophy like this needs total commitment. There is no mid-way. So you cannot say that you are an agnostic and still ‘dabble’ in religious writings. Because, according to the agnostic view, they are all false. Not only the religious writings, but all the experiences of Sri Ramakrishna or Sri Bhagavan regarding ‘God’ or the ‘Self’ would necessarily have to be false to you. Or more accurately, you cannot say whether they are true or false.
But if you are still drawn towards religious writings, and towards the teachings of Sri Ramakrishna or Sri Bhagavan, and devotional songs bring tears to your eyes, then maybe agnosticism is not for you and you should give it up.
S., sincerely, forgive me if the foregoing was objectionable or hurtful in any manner.
David,
Are you still active on this thread?
I am interested in your responses to a few queries on vichara, which was being discussed in the initial part of this thread. :)
S,
You asked about Faith-I will try to explain the link between Belief,Faith and Realization.
Let us say that we had a good rainfall throughout the year(A Boon in a Place like Chennai!).Let us say that We want to dig a Borewell(Again may be a necessity in Chennai!).I NEED TO START WITH BELIEF that Ground water will be available.I NEED to Scout around for Reputed a WATER DIVINER next.He will come with his Instruments and explore for water.He will indicate Where to Dig and approximately to what depth.NOW I HAVE FAITH THAT WATER CAN BE TAPPED if only DIGGING is undertaken.Next I Will arrange for the BORER who will bore at that spot,lay a pipe and fit a motor and OUT GUSHES the water! This is akin to Realization.
The point I was trying to make through this PEDESTRIAN and SILLY story is to delineate the succesive stages in the progression- Belief,Faith and Realization.
S.-I am yet to understand your premise.
1.Are you in need of Help?
2.Are you offering help?
3.Is it only a discussion?
Unable to make out your objective.may be you can be a little more clear on this.As for me,I do have some lighter moments here,but primarily it is to share something which I hope may be helpful and to learn from this sharing.
I am unable to understand your experience with the Gospel.I find that you have looked at it for its EMOTIONAL CONTENT only,not for the priceless gems of PRACTICAL advice that it contains.These things cannot be had for the asking.One has to be patient and Diligent.Like a Farmer who has to till the soil,sow the seeds,water them ,wait for the saplings to grow and ripen before Harvesting.
How do you find Self Enquiry?Is it DOable?Are you satisfied with your understanding and practice of it?IT IS THE PRACTICE that is important.
Wishing you the very Best!
Maneesha,
As I have said -That both the views are equally valid.
Why are the Great ones born?There is some SUBSTANCE behind the MANIFESTATION which is not the same after WITHDRAWAL.Do not know what?Yet,it has been the experience of many!hard to accept,yet true.
Maneesha,one thing I have learnt is that in these matters,the point as well as Counter point are Valid.All that matters to us is WHAT IS SERVICEABLE!
The ONLY UNCHANGING ENTITY THAT STAYS THE SAME IS THE SELF.
NO NEED FOR ANY DISCLAIMER when you post anything intended for me!
Salutations!
Arvind,
Thanks very much for bringing out that beautiful point-"DIRECTS".Sri Bhagavan also asked T K Sundaresa Iyer to write a foreword to the Book-'Complete Works of Sri Ramana Maharshi'(Remember this is the one).It looks like none of the Devotees of Sri Bhagavan was willing to write a Foreword as they all felt totally Incompetent and inadequate to write a FOREWORD!Sri Bhagavan then suggested that TKS should write the Foreword.TKS was diffident,yet Sri Bhagavan encouraged him to write.TKS did as 'DIRECTED'(Arvind-I am borrowing your latest update here).He wrote the foreword and showed it to Sri Bhagavan.Sri Bhagavan went through it and cleared it and asked TKS to send it to the Office for Publishing.As TKS took a few paces,Sri Bhagavan called him back and asked for the Manuscript and corrected one WORD in a sentence which originally stated-"It is hoped that all those who read this book will attain to Self Realization".Sri Bhagavan correctd the word 'HOPE'(NAMBUDAL) to 'CERTAIN'(THINNAM in Tamil).
Here again Sri Bhagavan has left some GUARANTEES!
Maneesha,
I was scrolling up on this thread and found your little gem of a query on David’s remark,
“Those of us who are not blessed with such a powerful catalytic presence have to do it the hard way with unremitting effort.” Let me say that one has been really impressed by the honesty and earnestness of purpose shining thro’ all your posts. And forgive me once again for attempting to find an answer without David’s reply.
I also beg the indulgence of David and all readers in that I have been making all sorts of posts, ALL of the level of a baby’s prattle or even worse! I request all readers to take my posts as those put up by a silly but enthusiastic beginner who deserves to be condescended with, rather than berated. So please don’t get angry and upset with what I write!
Maneesha, I agree wholeheartedly with what you have mentioned in your post. That Sri Bhagavan is not the body but the Self itself. His Grace is available to all and did not stop flowing after He left the body. And that His Grace is available wherever you might be and at all times. Nor is there any diminution whatsoever in the amount of Grace flowing. To disagree with all this would be to negate the basic teachings of Sri Bhagavan!
But it is an empirical fact that it was a special experience for all to sit in the old hall in the physical presence of Sri Bhagavan. These blessed people have written how easily their minds became still and their egos dropped away and sank into the Self. They have also written that when they left Sri Ramanasramam and went back to their homes to continue their sadhana, they found that their great experiences could not be repeated whatever they tried. Obviously there was something to being physically in Bhagavan’s presence. In that David is absolutely right.
So how are we to reconcile this paradox? I think the clue may lie in the famous anecdote recorded by Sri T. K. Sunderesa Iyer. He had written 2 verses on the Lord in Tamil, which he then submitted to Sri Bhagavan for perusal. The 2nd verse described the Lord as, “from whom Grace is flowing over the sentient and the insentient”. TKS writes that Bhagavan asked him to change one letter which altered the meaning to, “who directs His Grace to the sentient and insentient”. [From “First Meetings with Ramana Maharshi”, 2nd edition, Pg 14].
Though the verse was talking about the Grace of the ‘Lord’, I am sure all would agree that the words would apply equally to Sri Bhagavan and the Grace flowing from Him. So Sri Bhagavan Himself, in a bit of an enigmatic way, is suggesting something. That those
who come to Him and sit in His presence get a ‘direct’ look of Grace. That He perhaps, ‘takes up’ His ever-flowing and omnipresent Grace and feeds it, as if to a baby, into those who sit in His presence. Perhaps that is what the devotees who sat in His presence write about, when they say that Sri Bhagavan’s luminous, compassionate eyes pierced into them to their core and their minds became still and so on.
And so what are we to do, His devotees in today’s world? I believe that we have to simply invoke His PRESENCE to be with us all the time, like it was physically with the old devotees. We can go about doing our day-to-day activities with the unshakeable and deep conviction that even now, Sri Bhagavan is physically present near us, 24x7. That He is peering over our shoulder when we are writing something for example, or that he is eating food along with us at the table, or that He is sitting next to us when we are driving to work and so on. This would be virtually similar to trying to hold on to the ‘Self’ during all our activities, but easier. I believe then, if this is done with full faith and devotion, one would find that when one sits down for formal Vichara, it would be just like sitting in His presence in the old hall in the olden days.
Thanks for your sensitive response.I am deeply moved by what you had to say.You have a GENUINE AND DEEP THIRST!It is GRACE that has sought you out in VARIOUS FORMS and has lead you to Sri Bhagavan.RAIN WATER FALLING FROM THE SKY issues out through different spouts.
As Sri Aurobindo says so beautifully-"HE WHO CHOOSES THE INFINITE HAS BEEN CHOSEN BY THE INFINITE.HE HAS RECEIVED THE DIVINE TOUCH WITHOUT WHICH THERE IS NO AWAKENING,NO OPENING OF THE SPIRIT;BUT ONCE IT IS RECEIVED,ATTAINMENT IS SURE,WHETHER CONQUERED SWIFTLY IN THE COURSE OF ONE HUMAN LIFE OR PURSUED PATIENTLY THROUGH MANY STADIA OF THE CYCLE OF EXISTENCE IN THE MANIFESTED UNIVERSE."
You talked about the BEAUTY in the surrender of the circling dervishes!I have heard about it.I COULD GET A WHIFF of it from your description.Looks like in the whirling you perceive what remains STATIONARY and remain in a state of surrender!
Salutations!
Jupes,
Good!Augurs well for you!
Happy Reading!
Salutations!
Chris,
Very interesting to read your story and to hear your experiences with vichara, starting at such a young age! I don't know that I can answer your questions, but I would echo what Ravi said about Grace and also about looking at Bhagavan's and David's writings related to self-enquiry. There was another blogger, Broken Yogi, who mentioned feeling love during vichara. Perhaps he will have some things to say on this.
Best wishes!
Chris,
Salutations!Interesting to go through your Life experiences.I am not competent to give you any specific advice.
All the same,If I were you,I will start exploring what Sri Ramana Maharshi has to say on this(From the Books on his teachings)-From what I have understood,he would most likely ask you to shift your attention to the 'I'Feeling than be distracted by the pleasant feeling of lightness.If there is work to do,it can still be done by a part of the mind without losing the awareness.At first it may be difficult and the state of awareness may be lost every now and then,yet through practice one will learn to regain this by shifting of attention to the 'I'Feeling.YET THIS IS ONLY JUST TECHNIQUE!It may give you a little quietude.EARNESTNESS TO KNOW THE TRUTH OF YOURSELF is VITAL to break the barrier.This is the same as SURRENDER -The Other pursuit that you have mentioned as LOVE culminates in surrender when you purge it of all vestige of INDULGENCE AND SELF SEEKING(ENJOYMENT)
Whether it is through Self Enquiry or through Self Surrender,The paths converge at this point.SELF REALIZATION occurs due to the GRACE AND GRACE ONLY.EFFORT CANNOT TAKE ONE THERE.
When the aspiration becomes sincere and pure,the mind itself becomes the Guru and guide you.
It will also help to go through the Robert Adams articles in this BLog as well as other articles by David.
Wishing you the Very Best.
Hello beautiful beings,
I would appreciate your feedback.
My brief history with the practice of “Who Am I?”, and some other pranayam practices, is that I began doing this as a small child. I was brought up in atheistic environment (a communist country) and had no education or information about any spiritual practices. Almost daily I was put very early to bed to be out of the way of my adult family in the very small apartment where we lived. Sometimes, at such times, I would entertain myself with “Who Am I?” and actually do it in a sequence of discarding my body, sense impressions, feeling/emotions, and thoughts, and eventually the very thought “Who Am I?” At that point I would fall asleep.
Years passed. I came to the United States.
In 1975, now as a young adult, I attended a Hindu Bhakti spiritual retreat with Ram Dass and, among other practices, was briefly introduced to self-inquiry. When I tried doing self-inquiry, I would get distracted by my thoughts and soon abandoned this particular practice. Nevertheless, since then my life became consumed with the Bhakti yearning. For some periods of time I did various practices, at other times none, but the longing for God continued always.
When I would try doing the self-inquiry, I would soon become frustrated by being distracted by my thoughts. Occasionally I would enter a peaceful spaciousness for a few seconds, but soon would return into my personality dramas.
A couple of years ago I tried the self-inquiry, and again gave it up as I would become frustrated by the internal distractions.
A year and half ago I have started to channel a Divine being. I channel some for myself but mostly for other people. While in the state of channeling incredible peace and love pours through me for extended periods of time, and this practice affects the rest of my time with its peace and love.
About half a year ago I tried again the self-inquiry practice, and now it consistently brings me into a state of pure awareness and kindly neutrality toward everything. I drop identification with my body and personality, see myself as a puppet going through various motions, and it is a very light and pleasant state. Now this can last from a few minutes to several hours, waxing and waning.
Eventually I either get distracted out of this state by some life’s demands or an emotional stress (I suspect that with practice I could stay longer in this neutral awareness without being so easily distracted), but even more so by a longing for the love which I experience when I am in the channeling state. It is not an attached, needy, conditional love to which I am referring, but sweet love or kindness that fills me and extends itself to anyone, anything its focus falls on.
My question is: how to bring this love to the awareness that comes out of self-inquiry? Doesn’t this love belong in this awareness? Why doesn’t it come naturally for me with the awareness consequent to my doing self-inquiry?
I would appreciate your input very much. Thank you. Chris
Murali,
Thanks for summing up in such a fashion;yes,more or less they mean the same thing.Fine distinctions may be there,yet there is no need for any hair splitting.
Namaskar!
Folks, apologies for another ‘off-topic’ comment.
Was keen to understand how a disciple of Sri Ramakrishna, who studied for many years under Swami Nikhilananda, would later join a Muslim religious sect.
A little research shows that Lex Hixon’s story is an inspiring one and that he was an extraordinary person by all accounts. It is not as if he left one faith and took up another. In the quest to show that all religions were basically virtuous, and to create a unifying religious force, he added on sadhanas and practices to the ones he had already become proficient in. In fact, to be accurate, he practiced them all simultaneously. In his own words – “I try to remain current in four sacred traditions - Ramakrishna Vedanta, Vajrayana Buddhism, the Jerrahi Dervish Order, and Eastern Orthodox Christianity”. Apparently, he was quite an advanced ‘Master’ in each of the faiths, and actively taught all of them. He was also a great musician and had studied classical sarod under the Master Vasant Rai. He died of cancer, “conscious and light-hearted right up to the moment of leaving the body”.
His life was an echo of his Guru’s, as Sri Ramakrishna, we all remember, undertook the sadhana of various faiths to realize for himself how each is a path to the same Final Goal. And Jupe’s post tells us of the high respect and regard he obviously had for Sri Bhagavan.
I am sorry that my remarks in the previous post may have been perhaps too casual. And the foregoing is posted with apologies to Lex Hixon, to set the record straight.
25. Pure devotional service, on the other hand, is far superior to fruitive work, philosophical speculation, and mystic meditation.
26: After all, bhakti is the fruit of all endeavor.
27: Furthermore, the Lord dislikes the proud but is pleased with the humble.
Narada, Bhakti Sutras
--------------------------
The most important for Bhagavan was humbleness.
Annamalai Swami, Living by the words of Bhagavan
David,
Its not because I am in your blog, but each day I discover your book "Be as You Are" is the more clear and helpful to "learn" Atma-Vichara.
The almost 240 milion of Brazilian and portuguese people would love have your books translated into the portuguese.
Ramana teachings and devotees are increasing day by day here in Brazil.
We hope your books be soon published here.
Thanks.
Scott,
The last sentence made me laugh out loud too... :)
Your sentence that you are a better student now is very inspiring for people like me who find it hard to reconcile work with vichara.
Jupes and Ravi,
Sorry for barging in... but feel like sharing my experience regarding sitting at a place and doing vichara... I find it easy to sit at a place and do vichara very few times. Most of the times as I sit for vichara, my mind simply runs amock. I find it easier to do vichara when the body is engaged otherwise. Its the easiest when I am reading something about Ramana/vichara on blogs or books, or while watching a video related to Maharshi or vichara on youtube. The reading/watching will happen with the attention to the source in the background pretty easily.
PS. I just read Scott Fraundorf's interesting comments on Asberger's and Enquiry and laughed outloud at the last sentence. Way to go, Scott.
Asperger's and Enquiry:
I think overall I find enquiry probably as difficult as everyone else. And it's really hard to say, and also I only know one other person personally who 'practices' Enquiry, the one who introduced me to it. Off the subject, he was my Filipino Martial Arts teacher, a martial art called Eskabo Daan, which is fascinating in itself, but too much of a tangent. He took me to Society for Abidance in Truth in Santa Cruz a year ago, and then I immediately started reading everything about Maharshi and Enquiry.
Honestly, I don't know whether the local guru there at SAT "Nome" is a jnani, although he claims to be on the website, which is a little suspect. I really didn't like him at first, gave me a fraudulent vibe, but my mind became completely still in his presence, much like the grace described around Maharshi, Papaji, etc. Intellectually, and with many of the issues I've suffered and attempts to become 'relaxed', everything Maharshi, upon reading it, made perfect sense.
With the person you mentioned also having Asperger's, I share those qualities. And I actually find that I can be superfocused on Enquiry. The social difficulties of Asperger's stem from not being able to read and reciprocate nonverbal social interaction effectively. It's hypothesized that this is because mirror neurons which are believed to be involved in imitative social behavior in primates and some birds, mirror neurons do not distinguish between the action of 'self' and action of 'other' (ex. whether you pick up a cup, or someone else does). On the Autism Spectrum, they're thought to respond poorly, sluggishly, or not at all. Because of that, it's like flying in a storm without radar, not being able to gauge others intentions except intellectually.
This has to do with Enquiry, because for instance the person who introduced me to it is much more caught up in the 'world' then I am. and I'm hardly caught up in it. His efforts are as sincere as mine. But I think all the rebuffs and lack of success I've had in the 'social world', which I so badly wanted, forced me to turn inward much more, or gave me little choice. (like the Maharshi quote "if you desire Realization it will be forced upon you whether you want it or not) In that respect I find that Asperger's has made things easier, in a sense paved the way for me to look inward because the 'world' as I imagined it, didn't hold much promise. But upon turning inward, ironically, I find that the things I wanted come easier, even if I am less attached. Someone asked Maharshi "Why is there suffering in the world?" And I believe he said something like "To make you turn to God"
I should also add that with Asperger's, I've had experiences where the percepual world around me, became so grand and visionary, and clearly unreal, although it still has that consistency, that it wasn't such a big stretch for me to accept the idea that "waking is long, dreaming is short. Other then that there is no difference" But despite all this, I still have a very existent ego, but I'm enjoying Enquiry, and the happiness I now experience much more often. I should add, ironically, since I've been practicing Enquiry I'm a much better student, biochemistry major. Fun to give powerpoint presentations on protein molecules, and not even believe that any of it is true.
Anonymous
"“Then I came across pieces of writings from “Ramana Leela” and “Guru Ramana” that the method of vichara really is a method of “recollection” of memory, similar to the way we try to concentrate and remember a thing that we have lost. Maharshi says it is as if we have forgotten our name and we argue within ourselves to know who I am…”"
An example Bhagavan often used was the woman who has lost her necklace and who looks for it, unaware that she is still wearing it around her neck. The key to 'recollection' is the understanding 'that which is being searched for is that which is doing the looking'. Recollection means becoming subjectively aware of the one who is trying to remember.
Scott Fraundorf:
... the burning desire need to find the source increase as I've pulled the mind back from its 'pets'.
That is exactly what I meant with "vichara gives pain".
The ego, which is the "I"-thought, finds itself in a dead-end-street, the world (=its pets, the love for itself and its objects). This world is no longer attractive. The only way is the way back, the source where the "I"-thought arised. This source is consciousness without the "I"-thought - without any form, creator of all forms, pure being. Certainly the "I"-thought will find its death therein.
The "I"-thought don't wants to merge with this consciousness. It will survive and continue to live in its world. Therefore the pain.
The "burning" is the process of being aware of this pain. One can say it is a feeling (I prefer to say: a subtile thought). But there is also a clear understanding of what is happening in the mind and why. That is my experience.
Clemens Vargas Ramos
Oldenburg, Germany
Kamalesh
I loved your description of how you went about doing self-enquiry, how it was an intimate expression of your love for Bhagavan himself.
This is not a specific comment on what you wrote; it is more a stray thought that arose as I was reading what you had to say.
When I was reading one of the Robert Adams dialogues I posted here a few weeks ago, I was struck by his comment that we should not just concentrate on the 'I'; we should instead try to find its source. I think we all find it relatively easy to revert to the feeling of 'I'. What is far more difficult is holding onto it so fiercely, it has no option but to subside and disappear. The intensity and hunger to find the source seems to be absent in us all, which is why we end up on the merry-go-round of enquiry-distraction-enquiry-distraction, and so on.
It was Ramakrishna who said that when one wants God as badly as a drowning man, who is having his head held underwater, wants air, then one will find Him. Papaji used the example of a man whose clothes are on fire and who is rushing towards a river so that he can jump in and extinguish the flames. Nothing distracts him on the way because nothing is as important as putting out the flames.
I am now back in the position that I explained in the first comment in this series: it is intense desire for the Self that takes us to the goal, not the practice itself.
While the desire for the non-Self always seems to win out in the battle for our attention, each time we pull the mind's focus from objects of thought and desire to 'I' we lessen the outgoing momentum of the mind and develop an opportunity to dwell in silence for a moment, a moment in which the silence and peace of the Self can reveal itself to us.
It's late evening here. I will carry on with the replies tomorrow morning.
S wrote:
'[ravi and maneesha also mentioned about devotion...i face a dichotomy here: whenever i hear some of the tamil songs of the 'naynamars' (saivaite saints) or songs sung by sri ramakrishna), i find myself hopelessly in tears quite often...yet am more of an agnostic (very often whenever i do get pulled into an argument (indulge in it less and less), am typically on the side of atheism!) ...don't know how to reconcile :( ]'
I spoke to Chalam shortly before he passed away in the late 1970s. His story appears in the first volume of The Power of the Presence.
He said, 'David, I came to Bhagavan as an atheist, and I stayed an atheist all my life. However, whenever I was sitting in the presence of Bhagavan I knew that I was sitting in the presence of God Himself. That knowledge should have cancelled out my atheism, but somehow it never did.'
I could never understand how he managed to keep these two ideas in his mind, without one dislodging the other. You seem to have mastered the same trick!
Ravi wrote:
'A certain Quietude is a prerequisite for a certain measure of success.In the event of an inability to effect this, I have found that there is no better thing than to read and listen to the words of the Great ones. This helps to reconnect.'
Someone once asked Bhagavan if he should meditate all day. Bhagavan replied, 'Try it and see. Your vasanas will not allow you to do it.'
While, ideally, one should be doing enquiry at all times, it is everyone's experience that this is not possible. It does take a certain inner quietness and focus to do enquiry well, and there are times when the mind simple refuses to co-operate.
When Kunju Swami asked Bhagavan how he should spend his time and live his life after he had informed Bhagavan that he was planning to leave Bhagavan's service and move to Palakottu, Bhagavan replied, ‘It is enough if the mind is kept one-pointedly on vichara, dhyana, japa and parayana without seeking anything else’.
When the mind refuses to cooperate with the attempts to practise vichara one should, instead of letting the mind run wild, occupy it with the other activities mentioned by Bhagavan. 'Reading and listening to the words of the great ones' is one such 'plan B' activity for when the mind is proving to be stubborn.
Kunju Swami narrates what happened next:
'I left feeling that I had received the full blessings of Sri Bhagavan.
'Though I had given up my ashram duties, I found it hard to decide how exactly I should spend the entire day in search of realisation. I referred the matter to Sri Bhagavan and he amplified the advice he had already given me.
‘"Make self-enquiry your final aim," he said, "but also practise meditation, japa and parayana. If you find one method irksome or difficult, switch to one of the others. In the course of time the sadhana will become stabilised in self-enquiry and will culminate in pure consciousness or realisation."’
I have posted the following link. I would recommend all to go through the course in consciousness which is posted there. I found it personally very useful in Sadhana.
http://www.faculty.virginia.edu
Regards Murali
An open thread to vichara is indeed
filling up the gap for the earnest
sadhakas. Self enquiry
or vichara through 'who am I' is a perfect method to self realisation
a direct method advocated by Bhagawan and noneelse so far. The mind when introverted (ie.antharmuka) is absorbed in the self when thought level/force is zero. Mind can become antharmuka by catching the 'I' thought and following its root source through Bhagavan's sef enquiry. We are not to be absessed with the thought 'I'
but look for it's source deep within and remain silent till a thought surfaces which is erased though the enquiry process and stay antharmuka ie,silently looking at the source of the 'I' thought. The mind is a slave of habit and using its weakness repeat the practice of being antharmuka and over time mind will prefer to stay within aiding gradually the full absorbtion of the mind in the self. You can call it the merging of the 'I' in the spiritual heart. The whole process is a conscious one leading to awareness of the self only when the last thought'I' also perishes.
Through Bhagavan's method it is harmonious and the self realisation takes place in a measured pace not induced suddenly or forced into it. The change to a realised state will not destabilise the system since the whole process is gradual through Bhagavan's method. Though Bhagavan himself had realised in a flash his method stipulates slow sinking of the mind to zero thought level/force. Understanding the process is very important. During the vichara mind quietens down and thought level/force subsides. If the mind does not relax and quieten using this method, please note something is wrong in the practice. Be quiet and calm for sometime atleast before you start the practice. I am also a beginner. All that I am stating is through my analysis and attempts I am making sporadically ever since I started the enquiry. Good luck to everybody and pray to Bhagavan for everybody's success.
The way I do self-enquiry is almost like mantra. A moment to moment noting of (the feeling) I-I-I as you reach out in your heart away from self concern and towards your true identity. Your heart may feel like its breathing. The reaching out is the most important, Nisargadatta said simply the desire for liberation takes one speedily to their goal. Earnestness is most important.
This is slightly different than the grasping of the sense of "I am" and holding onto it for dear life. I used to do it that way but I found it requires too much effort to be really effective and causes headaches. Nisargadatta said sadhana should be effortless, I've found that slowly refining effort is essential.
It is important not to do self-enquiry periodically. It has to be done from the moment of waking to the edge of sleep (hence the need for refining effort). Its all or nothing. I've never gone a whole day without stopping but I'm getting better daily.
Some side effects of self-enquiry is that my bodies has started to feel too "big" to be me. Too arbitrary and silly to be who I really am. Its an estrangment that is a little frightening at first. There is also the paradox of there being observation but there is no observer to be found. That is, I keep looking for myself but the very thought of looking is not being done by me, so sometimes I feel there is no me but who is the one observing "no me"? Accompanied by this paradox is the seeing of my self in objects. This is hard to describe. I see a shape and it has the feeling of me attached to it. Existence itself is becoming an increasingly bizarre and puzzling fact. The world sometimes feel fake and strange. These aren't very frightening thoughts or feelings so it no big deal.
The reason why I do self-enquiry, is out of a search for meaning. Nothing has ever interested me as much as the search for meaning in my life. I've discovered that all the self-concepts I've constructed and took for granted are hollow, incomplete and have a need for justification attached to them. I believe this is the cause for humanities search for meaning in life.
The value of self-enquiry is that instead of trying to change one's habits of thought and action for the better, which simply leads to fresh karma, one puts the urges on hold and let the energy behind them slowly dissipate. Either self-worth and happiness is conditional or its not. The Maharishi to me is proof that it is not. Self-enquiry is the giving of doership regardless of circumstance, past actions and feelings of unworthiness.
I meant to add whether this practice of not thinking about anything beyond the next 1 hour at most can progressively be shortened to only be in the NOW
Some very inspiring posts here, His grace indeed.
Introduced to enquiry for the last 2+ years, I've gone through various phases. I had once felt I had made it look so complicated!
I very recently came across the 'forgotten I' concept. 'I' that is being enquired is something that I already knew and due to (whatever) reasons, have forgotten now. With this knowledge, pursuing enquiry into the 'forgotten I', is making the process look simple. In this, I find an extra bit of endurance for enquiry, compared to simply looking for the source of I or asking 'who am I?'.
During the process, I am tending to end at 'What is that I knew, which I have forgotten now?'
Please share your thoughts. Anyone else who are following such a method?
Thanks,
Sri.
Hello All,
Am posting the way I do self enquiry. This is the way I started when I first came to Bhagavan. But I sort of 'forgot' it, and just stumbled back into doing it again.
Try not to laugh, as it is a childish technique.
1. I close my eyes and visualise all the thoughts in my head as starting from a single point, the thoughts typically being 'I like this', or 'I dont want a certain thing', etc. I try to see them as rays emanating from a single point.
2. I go in close to the centre and sort of visualize an 'I'.
3. I tell myself that this 'I' is the centre of all thoughts. And that all thoughts begin from here.
4. I then ask myself where this 'I ' comes from, since all thoughts come from here.
5. I start with 'Where does this 'i' come from?', and shorten it to 'who am i?' along the way. I find that as this happens, attention goes to the heart by itself.
It is admittedly a silly method, but it works, in the sense that whenever the thread is broken, one seems to be able to go back quickly.
Here is what I do in implementing Vichara.
In my case, I am finding that banging the ego in two directions - by both Vichara and Surrender is looking effective.
1. Vichara: I pretty much follow what David has elaborated. Focusing on the feeling of I while rejecting other thoughts. One thought which helps me is to remember that the mind is always in two states...i.e., the state of "lost in thoughts" and the state of "not lost in thoughts". I think that the state of "not lost in thoughts" is almost same as focusing on the feeling of I. I used to get confused many times whether I was focusing on the I or on something else. But, after I found how this "not lost in thoughts" feels like, I feel confident now that when I focus on I, I am not actually focusing on the thought that I am focusing on I. These are all words but I hope I am expressing myself clearly. I am still far away from what Bhagavan told that Vichara has to be continuous. I have put 30 minutes in the morning and 30 mintues in the evening for a kind of "do or die" sitting.
2. Surrender: I pretty much follow again what David has recommended...i.e., to be in the continuous feeling of gratitude towards Bhagavan for whatever is happening in my life. There is an interview between Maalok and David Godman in David's website which has one question on Surrender. That question acted as a life changer for me and I hooked onto the method outlined there. I found this to be amazingly effective in terms of leaving the grip on the likes and dislikes.
The problem I am facing is my day to day struggle to "give up my control" on my life and let Bhagavan steer it. Concerns, Ambitions and the likes are strong in me and hopefully Bhagavan will interfere soon.
Regards Murali
Nearly three years since this! :)
Neway, had been to Ashram in last weekend and Sri Nochur Venkataraman had given talks on Ulladu NArpadu the week before the weekend. On Sunday, a talk from him in English was arranged. He made a remark "ENquiry when done in right way..." i don't recollect rest of his sentence, but this rang a bell in me. Now, somehow I recollected his words and i also remembered that David had said that he knew of only one person that had enquired only once and got it right and that was Bhagavan :)
Coming to the point... What exactly is the "right way" of vichara? What is meant? Indeed, blessed are those who could experience what Bhagavan told, when He did... We have to put so much effort into understanding what exactly the finger is pointing at!! :'(
Why is it so difficult to understand what enquiry is?
:) As I was ging thru the comments last nite, came across David commenting that Many people pay attn to the "I feeling" than enquiring to the source itself. It did strike me but this morning I realized I had somehow lost my track and realized have been doing the same (concentrating on the i-feeling); best part being that I did not realize that this was what I was doing!
Back on track now. Felt so glad, cudnt resist posting this early morning... TIme for me to get ready for office now. Gud day!
Maneesha Wrote:
"Why is it so difficult to understand what enquiry is? "
This was bothering me too. Apart from lack of "overwhelming urge to find the Self", I find that the vagueness of ego is another factor. Our minds are used to always handle things which are concrete and this ego is very subtle. You cannot touch and feel, nor visualise it. It is vague.
Here is something which Frank Humphreys wrote in this regard. He is the first western disciple of Bhagavan:
"....try to keep the mind unshakenly fixed on That Which Sees. It is inside yourself. Do not expect to find that "That'' is something definite on which the mind can be fixed easily; it will not be so."
Many times, I get fed up with the vagueness of this Feeling of I and the mind goes back to its natural pasteurs. I think the only way is to increase the urge to find the Self and keep praying.
Regards Murali
Could not resist writing an additional comment.
One of the clues I have taken for myself as to how to increase the urge to find the Self is from the 2nd sloka of Sad-darsanam Invovation.
"Those who are in dread of death when they seek refuge at
the feet of the deathless, birthless Lord Supreme, their ego
and attachments die; and they, now deathless, think no more
of death."
Looks like the longing for the Self comes when the fear of death captures our mind. Suppose there is no death, then why will anyone try to seek anything outside the mundane world - unless he is bored to the core by the shallow-ness of the world?
I heard from my Muslim friends that the Prophet used to advocate frequent visits to the burial grounds to get a proper perspective of life.
From my side, I try to entertain often the thought of impending death. I try to count my age reverse - i.e., how many possible years are left for me etc., I try to attend all kinds of death funerals. These might be perverted ways but I am hopeful that mind might catch hold of the inevitability of death and possibly develop a longing to reach the feet of "Mrityunjaya".
Any comments from others?
REgards Murali
If Self-enquiry is diving deep then there are two problems:
1)Diving deep into the body space(our idea of our body/head cave space and then getting to the core of that mental space)
2)Diving outer that which ends up as observing the consciousness
3)Observing the observer ends up in endless loop of a jumping monkey
4)For me holding on to the feeling of 'I' is memory,Then I have to say 'I' 'I' every so many seconds to get a snapshot/memory of 'I' and then watch that snapshot.
5)If I try to say who is watching this 'I' or looking for 'I' then simultaneosly the 'I' jumps and forms a new thought.So one can never catch the 'I' becuase the one who looks for the source of the 'I' is itself the 'I'.This will end in endless loop.
From BAYR
*********
In the early stages of practice attention to the feeling ‘I’ is a mental activity which takes the form of a thought or a
perception. As the practice develops the thought ‘I’ gives way to a subjectively experienced feeling of ‘I’, and when
this feeling ceases to connect and identify with thoughts and objects it completely vanishes. What remains is an
experience of being in which the sense of individuality has temporarily ceased to operate. The experience may be
intermittent at first but with repeated practice it becomes easier and easier to reach and maintain.
****
I have practised very little probably less than 4 hours to make further comments.Those that have tried for months and years will surely know more about these phases that every body goes through and the pitfalls.
Next time when I try I will try to slow-motion this question who is looking for the 'I' question and see if I can catch the jumping 'I'.
Regards,
-Z
Murali,
This is not a joke.This is a widely known and current practise among Theravada Buddhists in Thailand where devotees offer their dead bodies to be skinned and hung in the rooms of Bhikkus fresh after death.When the spirit comes back they have to remain steady not pass out.This is to conquer fear and fear of death or you can try to keep a skull under ur pillow every night kiss a good bye and try to sleep and kiss a good morning if it did not disturb you overnight or like Ravi quotes beat your chest and cry in a temple every day.Suit yourself mate.
Personally I would find out the root of that fear or I would busy myself with some hobby or observe that fear(mindfullness) or introspect what is causing that fear or look around and you will see everyone is into fear at one time or the other and sometimes there is no other way but to bite the bullet and say come on you bitch bring it on and brace that fear.There is no shortcut.There is only great pain in anything for the first few times and then u get used to it and wudn't give a toss to it after that.THERE IS NO REAL SHORTCUT AND NO REAL ADVICE.
Once I thought I was miserable and then got invited to a grand celebration of SitaRama Kalyanam and there the Pundit was saying we re-enact this Kalyaanam for thousands of years but did they really enjoy anything.Soon after marriage he was sent away to forests and then Ravana took away and then Ravana was killed and she was brought back and most inhumanly sent away to forests while pregnant and then she committed suicide.Then I thought for Godssake God , the Father of the entire universe himself did not have a few good moments of what is generally regarded as the most perfect match of the most eligible bachelors and that which was overseen by all the Gods and angels of this universe.Do I pray to this God to mitigate my suffering.He probably will say:look my son all I have gone thru is suffering;I can share with you some; that is all I have:)
There is no shortcut nor no real advise mate, there is only comforting.Take it easy.
Regards,
-Z
@Z,
That was interesting that you brought up the miseries post-marriage of Sri Rama to which we prolly dont pay much attn et al.
"Then I thought for Godssake God , the Father of the entire universe himself did not have a few good moments of what is generally regarded as the most perfect match of the most eligible bachelors and that which was overseen by all the Gods and angels of this universe.Do I pray to this God to mitigate my suffering.He probably will say:look my son all I have gone thru is suffering;I can share with you some; that is all I have:)
"
Brought a smile on my face... :)
@Murali
"Our minds are used to always handle things which are concrete and this ego is very subtle. You cannot touch and feel, nor visualise it. It is vague."
I think what adds further to it is that we unkowingly many times try to find it objectiely. I feel thats the crux of the problem.
Post a Comment