tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post8046820118194317162..comments2024-03-20T13:24:11.422+05:30Comments on Arunachala and Ramana Maharshi: Who were you Ramana?David Godmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10354181925332694222noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-79962398914348840792013-09-03T19:25:18.733+05:302013-09-03T19:25:18.733+05:30Thank you David for your time and effort in puttin...Thank you David for your time and effort in putting together several facts about Ramana Maharshi. You are a seeker of truth, not of gimmicks and drama surrounding popular spiritual teachers. <br /><br />I don't know much about Ramana Maharshi except the knowledge that he was a saint from India, nor I read his works.<br /><br />But last month, July 2013, after I got in the morning I asked myself who my guide was. Lord Ganesh appeared as a large 4ft black color statue and next to him was Ramana Marshi. He showed himself in color - I could see his well trimmed white hair, mustache, and beard, and brown skin with tiny spots. So I believe he is guiding me now along with Lord Ganesha. <br /><br />TruthBe108 <br /><br />(I cannot give my name in a public blog. If for some reason you are interested in contacting me please mail to truthbe108@gmail.com) Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05373209286984181637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-79458374973223306882012-01-19T10:00:51.740+05:302012-01-19T10:00:51.740+05:30Ramana says "When you truly feel this equal ...Ramana says "When you truly feel this equal love for all, when your heart has expanded so <br />much that it embraces the whole of creation, you will certainly not feel like <br />giving up this or that. You will simply drop off from secular life as a ripe fruit <br />drops from the branch of a tree. You will feel that the whole world is your home"hey judenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-85582976952499261422012-01-18T23:43:21.020+05:302012-01-18T23:43:21.020+05:30Sri Ramana is nothing other that the Self. And he...Sri Ramana is nothing other that the Self. And he never claimed to be. The rest of us are also nothing other than the Self, except that most of us haven't realized it. All other ways of defining Bhagavan in terms of past lives, etc, are deficient and pertain to maya.duart macleanhttp://www.beingandconsciousness.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-57293556644438507392011-09-10T09:03:08.918+05:302011-09-10T09:03:08.918+05:30This comment has been removed by the author.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875076137584328729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-46049648728777863892011-09-10T07:37:51.065+05:302011-09-10T07:37:51.065+05:30Zee/Friends,
An excerpt from 'Inspired Talks&#...Zee/Friends,<br />An excerpt from 'Inspired Talks'(Record of Vivekananda's Talks in Thousand Isles Park):<br />SATURDAY, July 27, 1895. (Kathopanishad)<br /><br />"Learn not the truth of the Self save from one who has realised it; in all others it is mere talk. Realisation is beyond virtue and vice, beyond future and past; beyond all the pairs of opposites. "The stainless one sees the Self, and an eternal calm comes in the Soul." Talking, arguing, and reading books, the highest flights of the intellect, the Vedas themselves, all these cannot give knowledge of the Self.<br /><br /><br />In us are two — The God-soul and the man-soul. The sages know that the latter is but the shadow, that the former is the only real Sun.<br /><br />Unless we join the mind with the senses, we get no report from eyes, nose, ears, etc. The external organs are used by the power of the mind. Do not let the senses go outside, and then you can get rid of body and the external world.<br /><br /><br />This very "x" which we see here as an external world, the departed see as heaven or hell according to their own mental states. Here and hereafter are two dreams, the latter modelled on the former; get rid of both, all is omnipresent, all is now. Nature, body, and mind go to death, not we; we never go nor come. The man Swami Vivekananda is in nature, is born, and dies; but the self which we see as Swami Vivekananda is never born and never dies. It is the eternal and unchangeable Reality.<br /><br />The power of the mind is the same whether we divide it into five senses or whether we see only one. A blind man says, "Everything has a distinct echo, so I clap my hands and get that echo, and then I can tell everything that is around me." So in a fog the blind man can safely lead the seeing man. Fog or darkness makes no difference to him.<br /><br /><br />Control the mind, cut off the senses, then you are a Yogi; after that, all the rest will come. Refuse to hear, to see, to smell, to taste; take away the mental power from the external organs. You continually do it unconsciously as when your mind is absorbed; so you can learn to do it consciously. The mind can put the senses where it pleases.<b> Get rid of the fundamental superstition that we are obliged to act through the body. We are not. Go into your own room and get the Upanishads out of your own Self. You are the greatest book that ever was or ever will be, the infinite depository of all that is. Until the inner teacher opens, all outside teaching is in vain. It must lead to the opening of the book of the heart to have any value.</b>"<br />Namaskar.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875076137584328729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-70864254999281475782011-09-10T07:02:29.189+05:302011-09-10T07:02:29.189+05:30Zee,
Please provide a translation of the posts fro...Zee,<br />Please provide a translation of the posts from The Life of the Buddha.I find them extremely complex and beyond comprehension.<br />Namaskar.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875076137584328729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-69363414567343157072011-09-10T04:14:14.222+05:302011-09-10T04:14:14.222+05:30[contd...]
"How do you conceive this, Anurad...[contd...]<br /><br />"How do you conceive this, Anuradha: do you see the Perfect One<br />as material form, feeling, perception, formations and consciousness?"—<br />"No, Lord."<br />"How do you conceive this, Anuradha: do you see this Perfect One<br />as having no material form, no feeling, no perception, no formations,<br />no consciousness?"—"No, Lord."<br />"Anuradha, when a Perfect One is here and now unapprehendable<br />by you as true and established, is it fitting to say of him: 'Friends, one<br />who is a Perfect One, highest of men, the supreme among men, one<br />attained to the supreme attainment, when a Perfect One is describing<br />him, he describes him apart from the following four instances: After<br />death a Perfect One is; or after death a Perfect One is not; or after<br />death a Perfect One both is and is not; or after death a Perfect One<br />neither is nor is not?' "<br />"No, Lord."<br />"Good, good, Anuradha. What I describe, now as formerly, is suffering<br />and the cessation of suffering."<br />S. 44:2<br />"Why are these questions not answered by a Perfect One? Because<br />they all treat of a Perfect One after death in terms of form (and<br />the rest)" (S. 44:3). "Because they are asked by one who is not free<br />from desire, love, thirst, fever, and craving for form (and the rest)" (S.<br />44:5). "Because they are asked by one who relishes form (and the rest)<br />and also being and clinging and craving, and who does not know how<br />these things cease" (S. 44:6). "Such questions belong to the thicket of<br />views ... the fetter of views: they are connected with suffering, anguish,<br />despair and fever, and they do not lead to dispassion, fading, stilling,<br />direct knowledge, enlightenment, Nibbana".<br />(M. 72).<br />"One who is Thus-gone (Tathagata, a Perfect OneJ is here and<br />now unknowable, I say. So saying, so proclaiming, I have been baselessly,<br />vainly, falsely, and wrongly misrepresented by certain monks<br />and brahmans thus: 'The monk Gotama is one who leads away (to<br />annihilation); for he describes the annihilation, the loss, the nonbeing,<br />of an existing creature.' "<br />M. 22Zeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15529540057558347821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-74862342542824684402011-09-10T04:13:21.253+05:302011-09-10T04:13:21.253+05:30Life of the Buddha by Nanamoli
*******************...Life of the Buddha by Nanamoli<br />***********************************<br />Where are you Ramana?<br />***********************************<br />Once some wanderers of other sects went to the venerable<br />Anuradha and asked him: "Friend Anuradha, one who is a Perfect<br />One, highest of men, the supreme among men, one attained to the<br />supreme attainment, when a Perfect One is describing him, in which<br />of the four following instances does he describe him: After death a<br />Perfect One is; or after death a Perfect One is not; or after death a<br />Perfect One both is and is not; or after death a Perfect One neither is<br />nor is not?'6<br />"Friends, a Perfect One in describing him describes him apart from<br />these four instances."<br />When this was said they remarked: "This will be a new bhikkhu<br />or an Elder not long gone forth who is foolish and inexperienced."<br />Then, having no confidence in the venerable Anuradha and thinking<br />202 THE LIFE OF THE BUDDHA<br />him newly gone forth and foolish, they got up from their seats and<br />went away. Then, soon after they had gone he wondered: "If they<br />had questioned me further, how should I have answered them so<br />that I might say what the Blessed One says without misrepresenting<br />him with what is not fact and might express ideas in accordance with<br />the Dhamma with nothing legitimately deducible from my assertions<br />that would provide grounds for condemning me?" So he went to the<br />Blessed One and told him about this.<br />"How do you conceive this, Anuradha, is material form permanent<br />or impermanent?"—"Impermanent, Lord."<br />NARRATOR TWO. The Buddha then continued as he had done in<br />the Second Sermon preached to the bhikkhus of the group of five,<br />after which he asked:<br />"How do you conceive this, Anuradha: do you see material form as<br />the Perfect One?"—"No, Lord."—"Do you see feeling ... perception<br />... formations ... consciousness as the Perfect One?"—"No, Lord."<br />"How do you conceive this, Anuradha: do you see the Perfect<br />One as in material form?"—"No, Lord."—"Do you see the Perfect<br />One as apart from material form?"—"No, Lord."—"Do you see the<br />Perfect One as in feeling ... as apart from feeling ... as in perception ...<br />as apart from perception ... as in formations ... as apart from formations<br />... as in consciousness ... as apart from consciousness?"—"No,<br />Lord."<br />[contd...]Zeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15529540057558347821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-51100889195664925042010-11-17T09:05:52.072+05:302010-11-17T09:05:52.072+05:30David,Thank you for bringing together the multiple...David,<br>Thank you for bringing together the multiple versions of Bhagavan spiritual genealogy. How amusing it must have been for Maharshi to see our desperation to give form and establish familial relations to the formless that dwells in him and everywhere else in this universe!<br><br>No other saint had delivered a message so emphatically and lucidly as Maharshi had with his silence and the beatific detached smile!<br><br>Thanks again!Mitrahttp://thoughtworks.rediffiland.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-71216635539757492592010-11-17T09:05:51.700+05:302010-11-17T09:05:51.700+05:30David,I remember having a discussion with you on t...David,<br><br>I remember having a discussion with you on this topic while I was visiting Tiruvanamalai. My only addition to the Samskaras would be his talent and interest in cooking.<br><br>Also, did Muruganar make any suggestions on Bhagavan's previous life?<br><br>I agree with you that the Tamil and Arunachala connection is unquestionable.Aloknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-72852630897312923272010-11-17T09:05:49.473+05:302010-11-17T09:05:49.473+05:30Daer DavidThanks for the detailed reply to my quer...Daer David<br><br>Thanks for the detailed reply to my queries on the various Shankaracharya's visiting Ramanashram .Can u give the name of the Puri Shankaracharya who visited him ?<br><br>I knew about Kanchi Paramacharya's love and admiration for Bhagwan and yet at the same he did not want to compromise on his Dharma .But I was surprised as to how he could recommend him to Paul Brunton without even meeting him ? Do you have any information about how Kanchi Paramacharya knew about the greatness of Bhagwan without even meeting him ?Krishnanandhttp://dailyspiritualmessage.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-65477637526088009442010-11-17T09:05:49.051+05:302010-11-17T09:05:49.051+05:30Ramana Maharshi is my favorite among the various w...Ramana Maharshi is my favorite among the various works and books I have read.<br><br>But I would have to agree with Mitra..."How amusing it must have been for Maharshi to see our desperation to give form and establish familial relations to the formless that dwells in him and everywhere else in this universe!"<br><br>An interesting read, thank you for your work in presenting it.<br><br>Namaste,<br><br>~ Eric PutkonenEric Putkonenhttp://www.awaken2life.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-89181310721516813852010-11-17T09:05:48.278+05:302010-11-17T09:05:48.278+05:30Dear David,I thoroughly enjoyed going through this...Dear David,<br><br>I thoroughly enjoyed going through this article and this is what I feel...<br><br>The Mystery of the Divine Incarnation is dealt in the GSR by Sri Ramakrishna:<br><br>Chapter 49: The Master at Cossipore<br><br>"The devotees sit silently in the room. Sri Ramakrishna looks at them tenderly. Then he places his hand on his heart He is about to speak.<br><br>MASTER (to Narendra and the others): "There are two persons in this. One, the Divine Mother-" <br><br>He pauses. The devotees eagerly look at him to hear what he will say next. <br><br>MASTER: "Yes, One is She. And the other is Her devotee. It is the devotee who broke his arm, and it is the devotee who is now ill. Do you understand?"<br><br>The devotees sit without uttering a word.<br><br>MASTER: "Alas! To whom shall I say all this? Who will understand me?" Pausing a few moments, he says:<br><br>"God becomes man, an Avatār, and comes to earth with His devotees. And the devotee leave the world with Him."<br><br>RĀKHĀL : "Therefore we pray that you may not go away and leave us behind."<br><br>Sri Ramakrishna smiles and says:<br><br>"A band of minstrels suddenly appears, dances, and sings, and it departs in the same sudden manner. They come and they return, but none recognizes them.""<br><br>In this dialogue Sri Ramakrishna eplains the mystery of the Avatar which equally applies to Ramana.<br><br>The Body temple with attributes which housed the Paramatman in full splendour was the physical body and mind of Venkatraman. Its previous incarnations could have been jnanasambandhar, Bhatta or an unknown disciple of Virupaksha Sage or Guhai Namasivai.<br><br>But 'the Light of Paramatman' which shone through this temple was of Arunachala Ramana, the Pure Being, the Root Cause.<br><br>This is the same power in all incarnations.<br><br>The temple through which It manifests is different.<br><br>Th sarcoma was of Venkatraman and not of Ramana. The collar bone fracture was of Venkatraman and not of Ramana.<br><br>Hence, though Venkatraman might have been Jnanasambandhar, Bhatta or anyone else, Bhagwan Ramana was beyond, He was the Divine Mother, the Divine Father, the Divine Child.<br><br>If you call Him Subramanya...he responds, if you call Him Kali...he responds, if you call Him Arunachala....he responds.<br><br>He is Pure Light...the prism of relativity and personal preference makes Him appear as Blue, Red, Green or other.<br><br>I would like to post this link for people who want to understand what I mean.<br><br>http://arunachalaheart.blogspot.com/2009/03/arunachala-seer.html<br><br>The color, shape and consistency of the Triangle differs...but Arunachala which is Ramana, doesnt.ArunachalaHearthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03562370945818853323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-51639034207254102112010-09-28T18:04:17.690+05:302010-09-28T18:04:17.690+05:30Extract from A Sadhu's Reminescenses' by A...Extract from A Sadhu's Reminescenses' by A.Chadwick<br />***********************************<br />One often hears people saying that Bhagavan was an<br />Avatar, in this way thinking to add to his glory; but except<br />for the fact that everybody might possibly be called an<br />Avatar, since each of us is God in a human body, therewas absolutely no ground for saying so. One day a<br />Sannyasin belonging to a well-known order, who think that their Guru alone attained Self-realization, challenged Bhagavan in a most aggressive and unmannerly fashion. Sadhu: “People say that you are an Avatar of Subramaniam. What do you say about it?” Bhagavan said nothing.<br />Sadhu: “If it is a fact, why do you keep silence about it? Why don’t you speak out and tell us the truth?” Bhagavan did not reply.<br />Sadhu: “Tell us, we want to know.”<br />Bhagavan (quietly): “An Avatar is only a partial manifestation of God, whereas a Jnani is God himself.”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-83648364104213588072010-06-21T21:28:46.597+05:302010-06-21T21:28:46.597+05:30David,
As everyone knows, Bhagawan composed most ...David,<br /><br />As everyone knows, Bhagawan composed most of the verses in the difficult Tamil venba styl;e. SO, just curious, Are these verses, that you have posted, of Isanya Jnana Desikar in the Tamil version in Venba/ kali-venba style too?Maneeshahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15693008674509444946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-12977588672496285502010-05-02T15:42:32.442+05:302010-05-02T15:42:32.442+05:30Murali/Friends,
Definitely Paul Brunton was a Grea...Murali/Friends,<br />Definitely Paul Brunton was a Great soul and an advanced seeker.He had a deep love for Sri Bhagavan.He did deviate from the Teachings of Sri Bhagavan-as he did not find the reconciliation with worldly activity satisfactory -he perceived a disconnect.This is an area where other seers like Sri Aurobindo also differed.<br />I wish to recall what Vivekananda said once when Sri Ramakrishna ignored him without even speaking to him for over a month,asked him-'Why do you come here;I am not even speaking to you'.Naren replied-'I come here because I love you;Not to listen to your words!'.Such is the tradition in Sanatana Dharma-that a disciple need not admit the 'ideas' or 'philosophy' of his master.It is enough if he has Love for him.<br />I also recall how Sri Dilip Kumar Roy could never accept the philosophy of Sri Aurobindo-The Supramental Transformation,etc just did not have any attraction for him.Yet he had deep Love for Sri Aurobindo and vice versa.<br /><br />coming to the criticism of PB,I have seen this sort of a streak in most places-If you love my Master,you need to love his 'dog'!<br />If not,one runs the risk of getting debunked as 'ungrateful',etc,etc.<br />To come back,PB was definitely a Great soul and all his works deserve Reading.Seekers would find a lot of useful hints and it would definitely help widen the Horizons-particularly the book that is questioned here-The Hidden Teaching beyond Yoga.<br />One need not accept whatever that is said in this book ,but it definitely points out the Rigour that has to be exercised in understanding the meaning of 'words'.<br />Namaskar.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875076137584328729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-68718125934767333502010-05-02T07:57:33.942+05:302010-05-02T07:57:33.942+05:30Perhaps, something happened to PB in the later par...Perhaps, something happened to PB in the later parts of his life. Alleast during his initial days with Bhagavan, PB was echoing Bhagavan's words correctly. Also, his views on Mentalism are akin to Dhristi-Shristi vada.<br /><br />The following is one of my favorite quotations from PB's book. He quotes these as the summary of Bhagavan's teachings.<br /><br />"Pursue the inquiry 'Who am I' relentlessly. Analyse your entire personality. Try to find out where the I-thought begins. Go on with your meditations. Keep turning your attention within. One day the wheel of thought will slow down and an intuition will mysteriously arise. Follow that intuition, let your thinking stop, and it will lead eventually to the goal.<br /><br />Unless and until a man embarks on this quest of the true Self, doubt and uncertainty will follow his footsteps through life. The greatest kings and statesmen try to rule others when in their heart of hearts they know that they cannot rule themselves. Yet the greatest power is at the command of the man who has penetrated to his inmost depth."<br /><br />Regards MuraliMuralihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04720150736535781474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-73755968369648752332010-05-01T18:00:08.165+05:302010-05-01T18:00:08.165+05:30I take your comments to be a compliment, but I don...I take your comments to be a compliment, but I don't feel any affinity with Brunton. Though he had a lifelong respect for Bhagavan, I don't think he ever really accepted Bhagavan's teachings. This is clear from the many books he wrote after his final visit to Ramanasramam.<br /><br />A few months ago the president of Ramanasramam showed me a new book of writings by Brunton. Somewhere in the first couple of pages he wrote that 'Who am I?' was only for beginners, and that more advanced people should start with an enquiry into the nature of the world. I didn't read the book, and nor, apparently did the president.<br /><br />He told me, 'As soon as I read that comment, I closed the book and didn't open it again'.David Godmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10354181925332694222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-80313648413344415992010-05-01T15:55:03.721+05:302010-05-01T15:55:03.721+05:30David,
I have a strong feeling that you could hav...David,<br /><br />I have a strong feeling that you could have been none other than PB himslef. he had cisited Bhagwan and in this birth you have been with Papaji, Laxmana Sarma like enlightened souls and of course, so closely associated with Bhagawan and Arunachala. Like Brunton, you too have been writing books, which have all been great sellers. <br /><br />I dont anything else about PB. I saw that he passed away only in 1981 while DG was born in 1953. But then, there is a Talk (Talk 276) in the Talks with Bhagwan book, where there seems ot be a possibility that there can be rebirth before the old body is dead.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-36100848771287677772009-03-25T15:58:00.000+05:302009-03-25T15:58:00.000+05:30Dear David,I thoroughly enjoyed going through this...Dear David,<BR/><BR/>I thoroughly enjoyed going through this article and this is what I feel...<BR/><BR/>The Mystery of the Divine Incarnation is dealt in the GSR by Sri Ramakrishna:<BR/><BR/>Chapter 49: The Master at Cossipore<BR/><BR/>"The devotees sit silently in the room. Sri Ramakrishna looks at them tenderly. Then he places his hand on his heart He is about to speak.<BR/><BR/>MASTER (to Narendra and the others): "There are two persons in this. One, the Divine Mother-" <BR/><BR/>He pauses. The devotees eagerly look at him to hear what he will say next. <BR/><BR/>MASTER: "Yes, One is She. And the other is Her devotee. It is the devotee who broke his arm, and it is the devotee who is now ill. Do you understand?"<BR/><BR/>The devotees sit without uttering a word.<BR/><BR/>MASTER: "Alas! To whom shall I say all this? Who will understand me?" Pausing a few moments, he says:<BR/><BR/>"God becomes man, an Avatār, and comes to earth with His devotees. And the devotee leave the world with Him."<BR/><BR/>RĀKHĀL : "Therefore we pray that you may not go away and leave us behind."<BR/><BR/>Sri Ramakrishna smiles and says:<BR/><BR/>"A band of minstrels suddenly appears, dances, and sings, and it departs in the same sudden manner. They come and they return, but none recognizes them.""<BR/><BR/>In this dialogue Sri Ramakrishna eplains the mystery of the Avatar which equally applies to Ramana.<BR/><BR/>The Body temple with attributes which housed the Paramatman in full splendour was the physical body and mind of Venkatraman. Its previous incarnations could have been jnanasambandhar, Bhatta or an unknown disciple of Virupaksha Sage or Guhai Namasivai.<BR/><BR/>But 'the Light of Paramatman' which shone through this temple was of Arunachala Ramana, the Pure Being, the Root Cause.<BR/><BR/>This is the same power in all incarnations.<BR/><BR/>The temple through which It manifests is different.<BR/><BR/>Th sarcoma was of Venkatraman and not of Ramana. The collar bone fracture was of Venkatraman and not of Ramana.<BR/><BR/>Hence, though Venkatraman might have been Jnanasambandhar, Bhatta or anyone else, Bhagwan Ramana was beyond, He was the Divine Mother, the Divine Father, the Divine Child.<BR/><BR/>If you call Him Subramanya...he responds, if you call Him Kali...he responds, if you call Him Arunachala....he responds.<BR/><BR/>He is Pure Light...the prism of relativity and personal preference makes Him appear as Blue, Red, Green or other.<BR/><BR/>I would like to post this link for people who want to understand what I mean.<BR/><BR/>http://arunachalaheart.blogspot.com/2009/03/arunachala-seer.html<BR/><BR/>The color, shape and consistency of the Triangle differs...but Arunachala which is Ramana, doesnt.ArunachalaHearthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03562370945818853323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-6020753841548691682008-07-17T19:44:00.000+05:302008-07-17T19:44:00.000+05:30For those who are coming late to this discussion, ...For those who are coming late to this discussion, I have given my response to the last seven comments in a new post entitled 'replies to recent comments' that I posted on July 17th<BR/>(http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/07/replies-to-recent-comments.html)David Godmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10354181925332694222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-53863378326108093892008-07-15T13:28:00.000+05:302008-07-15T13:28:00.000+05:30S.comments are quite to the point.It is indeed tru...S.comments are quite to the point.It is indeed true that the 'I'can attach itself in a vain way to any object of its adoration and bask in the Reflected Glory.Yet it is also true that this need not be the case always.For the genuine disciple,His Guru is Supreme and he will share this only with likeminded people,not with all and sundry.Even the Gnanis despite realising the oneness of Existence still maintain a seperate status for the Guru;Like papaji was doing Namaskar to the Photo of Sri Bhagavan or Nisargadutta Maharaj doing Pooja to his Guru's Photograph.<BR/>For all it is worth,I wish to share my Feelings-When I Think of Sri Ramakrishna/Sarada Devi/Vivekananda ,I strongly assert that there was not another like them(not in this Forum).When I think of Swami Ramdas(papa Ramdas)I tend to assert that there was not another like him!All great Sages and Saints are unique.They are like diferent flowers,each with their Signature Fragrance.<BR/>Coming to the other point that S. has raised,regarding the opinion or statement of even a Realized Soul,I believe that there is no claim for any infallibility;whatever is of the mind is only plausible,not an absolute certitude.<BR/>Sri Ramakrishna used to say that Brahman is the Only Reality in comparison with which even the vedas are lies!All that has been uttered has become defiled!<BR/>Thanks S.for raising some of these counterpoints.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875076137584328729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-62953192133492275612008-07-14T19:43:00.000+05:302008-07-14T19:43:00.000+05:30[david, am very sorry if this comment is long. it'...[david, am very sorry if this comment is long. it's an art to write the way you do :)]<BR/>salutations to all:<BR/>(the writing here is typically like a chat conversation...just a collection of some thoughts...my apologies if any of you find anything inappropriate in the <BR/>comment)...<BR/><BR/>i guess every sect or community would prefer calling their leader or guru as the supreme personification of the godhead...this is pretty interesting because all those who claim, including some of us who have been speculating, ought to have already then known whats god or godhead before talking anything about such a thing's personification...(sort of people saying 'it's all god's will'...i have no idea about god, much less about god's will...)to consider or believe or imagine that one's own chosen ideal or personal deity or even the sadguru is the 'best' or 'unique' or 'complete' manifestation of the supreme is, for me, just a sign of insecurity where the 'I' wants to desperately cling and later assert that that to which it so clings is the best among everything...this is entirely different from considering or believing or imagining one's sadguru as god himself because there is no comparison whatsoever in the latter...<BR/><BR/>as we know bhagavan was typically non-committal about most such opinions that were showered upon him quite repeatedly by his devotees...many may have seen <BR/>their chosen ideal in bhagavan, or perhaps just imagined him to be the embodiment of their chosen ideal, as in the case of ganapati muni etc...but regardless of whoever it may be, such an aspect cannot be generalized...just because someone sees something in bhagavan (it really doesn't matter who that someone is), and even if bhagavan himself had confirmed the same to that devotee, it still doesn't imply that bhagavan was indeed that 'something'...with due respects to ganapati muni, he was a scholar par excellence in linguistics but not in what or who bhagavan is...likewise, i may sound really impudent, but the same can also be said for kanchi paramacharya...does that mean could even the self-realized say something that may not be all that right? (this being a clear digression, i will postpone my thoughts on this contentious issue)...<BR/><BR/>as all of us are well aware, there was only one thing that bhagavan kept on emphasizing, and that too relentlessly and ceaselessly: "vichara"...and thus thats the only thing that could be universalized...everything else, or almost everything else, even if bhagavan himself had said so could have been for a particular devotee at a particular time to satisfy a particular need in a particular situation...to enquire & realize, isn't that the only way to know 'who was ramana'? <BR/><BR/>obviously, david's blogs are very sweet but whenever they are not addressing the teachings of bhagavan, the only thing that plausibly could be done is to read, relish, keep it aside, and get back to vichara...so, is bhagavan an avatara or a jnani?...honestly, i don't know what either of those two terms mean...but i do know that although i have no idea of the state he was in, i feel irresistibly drawn to that state :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-36787102137891316482008-07-14T13:12:00.000+05:302008-07-14T13:12:00.000+05:30Is Bhagavan unique?I have to say an emphatic "YES"...Is Bhagavan unique?I have to say an emphatic "YES" despite the risk of sounding like a zealot.I have the backing of Sri Annamalai Swami and I wish to share this interesting piece of information.<BR/>It was in 1994(or 1995),after visiting Yogi Ramsurat Kumar in his Ashram,myself and siva(a cousin of mine)went to see Sri Annamalai Swami.We told him that we had just visited the Yogi.In a tone of Soliloquy,he observed-" have heard that he has Siddhis.HAVE SEEN THE SIDDHA OF SIDDHAS!NO SEEING ANY OTHER!"<BR/>I have tried to translate(verbatim) his words as closely as possible.<BR/>I should also add here that Sri Annamalai Swami was the last person to try to suggest or INFLUENCE others.His disciple Sri Sundaram used to travel to Chennai to attend J Krishnamurti's Talks,whenever JK was in Chennai.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875076137584328729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3961358105214008284.post-65714416200852864112008-07-13T08:31:00.000+05:302008-07-13T08:31:00.000+05:30Since Bhagavan was the one and only reality how ca...Since Bhagavan was the one and only reality how can he not be everything that has ever been and will be. Be still and the question never happens.<BR/><BR/>ManfredAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com