tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post7227887030454215772..comments2024-03-19T10:52:32.528+05:30Comments on Arunachala and Ramana Maharshi: Answering one’s own questionsDavid Godmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10354181925332694222noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-45643350166013363302010-11-17T09:07:02.386+05:302010-11-17T09:07:02.386+05:30Thanks my friend for this story!KarthikThanks my friend for this story!<br>KarthikMaria Rosehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17777361998667456287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-84353841435748935242009-03-01T01:22:00.000+05:302009-03-01T01:22:00.000+05:30Scott Fraundorf:The teacher that I've been corresp...Scott Fraundorf:<BR/><BR/>The teacher that I've been corresponding with, has occassionally been extremely intuitive. Sometimes the answers are more appropo. to my current state, then when I wrote the question. Part of it, there is it seems a grace, that makes me see what the response is pointing to.<BR/>His last response, had an element, not quite as intriguing similar to the anecdotes on this thread, where he seemed to know that I had been saving them electronically and printing them out. He mentioned it off-hand, and certaintly I have made references to earlier responses, but still, that was shockingly intuitive, because it was exactly what I had been doing. Mainly, it's that what is Real, doesn't play by the rules of what is Unreal in me expects, it's much more direct. I'm basically just communicating with the Real in me, from the unreal in me, and more and more the unreal in me realizes that it has no actual existance, and there gets to be only the Real. It's a neat process. The Real being me, knows me inside out. But still these stories, they give pause, because they defy the logic of the unreal cause and effect, and since for so long that was taken to be Real, there is still something really impressive, when there is such a clearcut sign, that what seemed so absolutely true, has no reality whatsoever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-56779184070108793342008-09-28T18:45:00.000+05:302008-09-28T18:45:00.000+05:30This comment is mainly to respond to Michael’s req...This comment is mainly to respond to Michael’s request (at: “Discovering Mastan”) to provide some feedback to his assertion on various issues. Thought it would be more appropriate to do here (at “Answering one’s ...).<BR/>When in comment (under “Mastan”) your conclusions in connection with the Ajata issue have been characterised as “biased”, the underlying idea was that it is generally better to remain aware of one’s categories of description as pertaining to a personally preferred model than to get fixated upon a “strong opinion” that it actually represents reality as such. Unless one is able to avail oneself of alternative model, there is a tendency to take what is arbitrarily constructed as corresponding to reality. Thus, given there may be this advantage, the comment, en passant, merely indicated a possibility of ideahistorically contextualising notions such as “world” and “self” (what you make of it, if anything, is your job). There is nothing wrong at all with momentary bias, it is just natural when employing a given model for the sake of illuminating a certain point; however, history has never been tired to actualise the horror that may ensue, when a model is totalised and turned into a metaphysical monotheory (as a glance at, e.g.,the Christian and Islamic spheres of influence, past&present, may easily demonstrate).<BR/><BR/>Michael, you said:<BR/>“i do have strong opinions on the topic of self-knowledge because of some non-dual glimpses of the self, but so far i've been frustrated in terms of finding someone to connect with intellectually and experientially. <BR/>as much as i respect the Great Teachers, i'm beginning to feel that it's possible to focus too much on our ideas about them and their teachings (a secondary source of insight) to the expense of first-hand non-dual experience (the only truly primary source of insight). <BR/>the primal experience is so simple that it just does not need to be connected to anything else, even reverance for a teacher or tradition.”<BR/><BR/>As to the Great Teachers, nobody compels you to follow others into expressing their appreciation (while there may be many types and levels), if you don’t like to do so; on the psychological level, it is even quite necessary to disentangle from the quackmire of common and collective views; and most spiritual practices entail a corresponding discipline (just by keeping “silence”, probably for many the most difficult practice, this keeping univolved is efficiently achieved, while physically you can move around as you please). Under different headings on this site, many wise and beautiful things have already been expressed considering modes of relating to a sadguru (even if he be physically absent), conventionally and ultimately. <BR/>Just take care of not embodying a variant of “Henry Wells” as portrayed by Robert Adams (at: Attend to what you came here for, June).<BR/><BR/>Most dominantly in the recent post-Papaji era, almost all neo-advaita teachers appear merely as manifestations of spiritual narcissism -- whoever knows an exception, may point it out.<BR/>And, Michael, your sentences (quoted above) preceding and following your expression of reserve regarding great teachers (leaving aside who may be included) seem to paradigmatically reflect this atmosphere in the post-Papaji era: <BR/>on the one hand, primal experience is “so simple”, on the other hand, despite expressiong the strong opinion that the world is unreal, you’ve “been frustrated in terms of finding someone” to reconfirm your views about your exalted attainments of non-dual glimpses of the self.<BR/>Whatever the metaphor “glimpse of the self” may imply, it seems to be employed with a sense of status enhancing satisfaction by persons associating themselves with that metaphor in terms of providing a valid reference to claimed experiences.<BR/>While insistingly reconfirming and reinforcing their notions about their specific personality in its history (now supposed to be enriched with appropriations of the ultimate), those people do not seem to have even the slightest “glimpses” of the stupidity their claims entail; otherwise they would not indulge in narcissistic pride (admittedly a presupposition for making money with the ultimate by selling what they claim to have appropriated), but they would be deeply ashamed and disgusted about their failures and about whatever perverted compensations their mental dispositions [vasanas] invent.<BR/><BR/>An impotent married man, who (despite innumerable despairing attempts in consultation with many specialists) never manged to satisfy his wife, though sometimes, for a few seconds, this hanging-down thing may have risen 45 or 90 degrees -- wouldn’t he have to be considered as a rather sad failure. <BR/>Imagine, now, such a failure went around and, compensating his itching inferiority complexes, proudly proclaimed to have experienced “glimpses of sex” -- surely, he would become the laughing stock of everybody else. Hence, we haven’t heard about such cases.<BR/><BR/>However, in contrast to earlier times where people were much more humble and more careful with their assertions, numerous teachers pertaining to various contemporary spiritual scenes seem to reinterpret vice as virtue, while the compulsive urges of their narcissistic personalities shamelessly and with great strength enter into competition for the attention of others. What is easy to see in the case the impotent man’s claims of “glimpses of sex” somehow turns into something people are incapable of perceiving, these days, with regard to “glimpses of self”. <BR/>Thus utterly unrecognised urges, compensating their failures of being altogether fulfilled by the ultimate, blind so-called teachers to their ridiculous stupidity, and they seem to thrive feeding on being admired (“reconfirmed”) by even more stupid people, who quickly learn the neo-advaitic jargon and rhetorics, eventually to enter into the lucrative footsteps of their dysfunctional teachers.<BR/><BR/>It was said (in Michael’s comment at: Glimpses of the self):<BR/><BR/>As the Black Hole (text reads: whole)<BR/>I do not need consciousness<BR/>to see Myself<BR/><BR/>These lines, which you seem to quote with appreciation, reflect this fairly general psychological (hence spiritual) postmodern milieu of borderline personality disorder and pathological narcissism -- by now also officially by psychologists recognised as “by-product” of contemporary society -- rather well.<BR/><BR/>I do not need sunlight <BR/>to see Myself<BR/>.....<BR/>My self-knowledge is non-dual.<BR/>As a Solid Mass of Existence,<BR/>I alone am.<BR/><BR/>Yes, above you have expressed, how frustratingly alone you are -- but once you dare letting a little bit of sunlight to touch you, the apparent solidity of frozen existence may melt .... and something may start flowing ..... but that may already be a bit too frightening and indeed painful .....<BR/><BR/>Ramana, who never shyed away from looking into transmitted mirrors of consciousness and turned into a man of considerable erudition, had occasionally also to take recourse to the analogy of an elephant moving about in a thatched hut<BR/>when trying to characterise certain phenomena people asked him about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-68017585528231637202008-09-03T22:24:00.000+05:302008-09-03T22:24:00.000+05:30David,1. you mention that the 'dense mass of jnana...David,<BR/><BR/>1. you mention that the 'dense mass of jnana' is Jnanasambandhar's description of Arunachala. but isn't it, first and formost, a description of the self? as great as Arunachala is, it does not exist as a physical entity. a few years ago, when i wrote to you about an experience of something dense and massive, i had not yet heard of Jnanasambandhar's description.<BR/><BR/>2. when you ask "Does knowing that 'jnana alone is' help you to experience the truth of that statement?" you seem to be assuming that a dirct experience of self is itself mediated by mind, whereas i was only describing a mediated after-effect of the direct experience. <BR/><BR/>3. in any case, it would seem that direct experience of self cannot be constrained in any way by non-existent boundaries. since we can't expect consistent laws within an unreal world, how can we exclude the possibility that experience will take the form of a temporary glimpse of eternity? stripping away the non-existent terms here, we are left with eternity/self Itself.<BR/><BR/>please forgive the challenging tone. as i mentioned earlier, i have only adopted it in an attempt to get the the Heart of the 'matter'.<BR/><BR/>michaelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-2290457353757210942008-08-24T09:28:00.000+05:302008-08-24T09:28:00.000+05:30michael said... David, lately, without being...michael said...<BR/><BR/> David,<BR/><BR/> lately, without being any less committed to the goal, i have felt like "it doesn't matter if i ever get it. that's not the point. the point is that the dense mass of jnana IS". does this strike you as a counter-productive attitude?<BR/><BR/><BR/>The 'dense mass of jnana' is Jnanasambandhar's description of Arunachala. Bhagavan loved that phrase; it was one of his favourite lines from the Tevarams.<BR/><BR/>Does knowing that 'jnana alone is' help you to experience the truth of that statement? I think in a few rare case it can, but everyone else has to make some effort to convert intellectual knowledge into direct experience.David Godmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10354181925332694222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-29687482152088996882008-08-24T08:06:00.000+05:302008-08-24T08:06:00.000+05:30David,lately, without being any less committed to ...David,<BR/><BR/>lately, without being any less committed to the goal, i have felt like "it doesn't matter if i ever get it. that's not the point. the point is that the dense mass of jnana IS". does this strike you as a counter-productive attitude?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-42828237266480164922008-05-16T13:17:00.000+05:302008-05-16T13:17:00.000+05:30Thanks my friend for this story!KarthikThanks my friend for this story!<BR/>KarthikUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17777361998667456287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-78342606532293147112008-05-16T05:40:00.000+05:302008-05-16T05:40:00.000+05:30That's a great anecdote! I feel jealous that you h...That's a great anecdote! I feel jealous that you had the chance to fall in that trap like Swami Pranavananda!;)<BR/>"The information he had picked up in his school from his Guru had convinced him that the Atman was bliss, and his real nature, but his day-to-day experience could not validate this in any way. He fully believed that the Self was bliss, but was utterly despondent that he had failed to recognise or experience it in any way." That sounds like a lot of spiritual seekers.<BR/>"My Guru had spent twelve years teaching me about the bliss of the Self, but Bhagavan made me taste it for myself with just a single look." That should have been quite a day for Swami Pranavananda!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-66321313168719048892008-05-15T15:50:00.000+05:302008-05-15T15:50:00.000+05:30Tks David. good oneBalasubramanianTks David. good one<BR/>BalasubramanianAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com