Saturday, 2 February 2019

In a dream there is only one dreamer, and if the one dreamer wakes up the entire dream will come to an end

A friend recently wrote to me:
I understand that there is one ego, which creates the illusion of many people and a world. If one person in this illusion, i.e. you or I, becomes realized, how is that going to destroy the ego as a whole? When Ramana became realized, this didn’t stop the world appearing for me. I know Ramana when asked about others said there are no others and if all is a dream of course he is correct, but others myself including continue to dream we exist despite Ramana becoming enlightened. Is realization a gradual breaking down of the ego individual by individual?

My second question: What is Shakti? I have looked it up and it seems to say it is energy which creates and that it is part of who we naturally are. This seems contradictory to how I now see realization as being. I now see realization as a kind of nothingness, not dissimilar to deep sleep. Can you remind me is this correct? Is shakti the same as ego and the cause of illusion?
The following is adapted from the reply I wrote to her:

In a dream there is only one dreamer, the ‘I’ who projects and perceives everything, and this is ego. Though ego is aware of itself as if it were a particular person in its dream, it is not that person, because like all the other people it perceives, that person is just a part of what it has projected. Ego is the subject, the one who perceives the entire dream, whereas the person it seems to be is an object, one among all the phenomena it perceives.

According to Bhagavan our present state is just another dream, so there is only one ego who projects and perceives all this. Though this ego now seems to be a person, that person is just one of the objects it perceives.

The person we mistake ourself to be is therefore insentient and hence does not perceive anything, but it seems to be sentient and to be perceiving because in our view it seems to be ourself. Because we as ego (the subject or perceiver of all phenomena) mistake ourself to be a person, we mistake all other people to be egos, and hence they seem to be perceiving the world just as we are.

Since people are not aware, none of them can ever realise what they actually are, so there is no such thing as a self-realised person, except in the deluded view of ego. Bhagavan seems to us to be a self-realised person, but if he is self-realised he is not a person, and if he is a person he is not self-realised. We mistake him to be a person because we mistake ourself to be a person, but as a person he is just one among the many phenomena we see in this dream of ours. Though he seems to be a person, he is actually just pure self-awareness, which is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa).

As a person he appears in our dream in order to teach us to investigate and surrender ourself, because only when we do so will we be aware of ourself as we actually are. When we are aware of ourself as we actually are, we will no longer be this ego or any of the people who we as ego seemed to be, and as we actually are we are always aware of ourself as we actually are, so nothing new will have been achieved. What never existed will have ceased to exist, and what always exists will exist as it always was.

You say that Bhagavan became realised, but it is only in our dream that he seems to have become realised. He is what is real, and what is real is always real, so it never becomes anything. The story of his life as a person is intended to illustrate to us how we should investigate ourself and thereby surrender and eradicate the one and only ego, namely ourself.

This is our dream, so we ourself need to wake up from it. No one else can wake up for us, because everyone else is just a person appearing in our dream. We need to wake up in such a way that we can never dream ever again, so since the dreamer of all dreams is only ourself as ego, we need to wake up by investigating and thereby eradicating this ego.

Since this ego, the one who now perceives this dream, is the only ego there is, if it investigates itself keenly enough to know what it actually is, that will be the end of all dreams, because there will be no ego left to dream anything.

Regarding your second question, śakti is a Sanskrit word that means power, so what it refers to depends on the context in which it is used. The power of self-ignorance, which brings this or any other world into existence, is called māyā, which is ego or mind, and which is the power Bhagavan refers to in the fourth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?:
மன மென்பது ஆத்ம சொரூபத்தி லுள்ள ஓர் அதிசய சக்தி. அது சகல நினைவுகளையும் தோற்றுவிக்கின்றது. நினைவுகளை யெல்லாம் நீக்கிப் பார்க்கின்றபோது, தனியாய் மனமென் றோர் பொருளில்லை; ஆகையால் நினைவே மனதின் சொரூபம். நினைவுகளைத் தவிர்த்து ஜகமென்றோர் பொருள் அன்னியமா யில்லை. தூக்கத்தில் நினைவுகளில்லை, ஜகமுமில்லை; ஜாக்ர சொப்பனங்களில் நினைவுகளுள, ஜகமும் உண்டு. சிலந்திப்பூச்சி எப்படித் தன்னிடமிருந்து வெளியில் நூலை நூற்று மறுபடியும் தன்னுள் இழுத்துக் கொள்ளுகிறதோ, அப்படியே மனமும் தன்னிடத்திலிருந்து ஜகத்தைத் தோற்றுவித்து மறுபடியும் தன்னிடமே ஒடுக்கிக்கொள்ளுகிறது. மனம் ஆத்ம சொரூபத்தினின்று வெளிப்படும்போது ஜகம் தோன்றும். ஆகையால், ஜகம் தோன்றும்போது சொரூபம் தோன்றாது; சொரூபம் தோன்றும் (பிரகாசிக்கும்) போது ஜகம் தோன்றாது.

maṉam eṉbadu ātma-sorūpattil uḷḷa ōr atiśaya śakti. adu sakala niṉaivugaḷaiyum tōṯṟuvikkiṉḏṟadu. niṉaivugaḷai y-ellām nīkki-p pārkkiṉḏṟa-pōdu, taṉi-y-āy maṉam eṉḏṟu ōr poruḷ illai; āhaiyāl niṉaivē maṉadiṉ sorūpam. niṉaivugaḷai-t tavirttu jagam eṉḏṟu ōr poruḷ aṉṉiyam-āy illai. tūkkattil niṉaivugaḷ illai, jagamum illai; jāgra-soppaṉaṅgaḷil niṉaivugaḷ uḷa, jagamum uṇḍu. silandi-p-pūcci eppaḍi-t taṉ-ṉ-iḍam-irundu veḷiyil nūlai nūṯṟu maṟupaḍiyum taṉṉuḷ iṙuttu-k-koḷḷugiṟadō, appaḍiyē maṉamum taṉ-ṉ-iḍattil-irundu jagattai-t tōṯṟuvittu maṟupaḍiyum taṉṉiḍamē oḍukki-k-koḷḷugiṟadu. maṉam ātma-sorūpattiṉiṉḏṟu veḷippaḍum-pōdu jagam tōṉḏṟum. āhaiyāl, jagam tōṉḏṟum-pōdu sorūpam tōṉḏṟādu; sorūpam tōṉḏṟum (pirakāśikkum) pōdu jagam tōṉḏṟādu .

What is called mind is an atiśaya śakti [an extraordinary power] that exists in ātma-svarūpa [the ‘own form’ or real nature of oneself]. It makes all thoughts appear [or projects all thoughts]. When one looks, excluding [removing or putting aside] all thoughts, solitarily there is not any such thing as mind; therefore thought alone is the svarūpa [the ‘own form’ or very nature] of the mind. Excluding thoughts [or ideas], there is not separately any such thing as world. In sleep there are no thoughts, and [consequently] there is also no world; in waking and dream there are thoughts, and [consequently] there is also a world. Just as a spider spins out thread from within itself and again draws it back into itself, so the mind makes the world appear [or projects the world] from within itself and again dissolves it back into itself. When the mind comes out from ātma-svarūpa, the world appears. Therefore when the world appears, svarūpa [one’s own form or real nature] does not appear; when svarūpa appears (shines), the world does not appear.
The power of self-knowledge, which is what eradicates ego, is called grace, which is the infinite love that we as we actually are have for ourself as we actually are. This is the supreme and only real power, in front of which the unreal power called māyā cannot stand. This power of grace is what is personified as the goddess Śakti, who is the consort of Śiva, but who is actually none other than him. In other words, God and his power of grace are one, indistinguishable and indivisible.

In verse 19 of Upadēśa Taṉippākkaḷ Bhagavan says:
சாந்தியதே யுண்ணோக்கிற் சத்தி புறநோக்கால்
ஆய்ந்தறிவார்க் கொன்றா மவை.

śāntiyadē yuṇṇōkkiṟ śatti puṟanōkkāl
āyndaṟivārk koṉḏṟā mavai
.

பதச்சேதம்: சாந்தி அதே உள் நோக்கில் சத்தி புற நோக்கால். ஆய்ந்து அறிவார்க்கு ஒன்று ஆம் அவை.

Padacchēdam (word-separation): śānti adē uḷ nōkkil śatti puṟa nōkkāl. āyndu aṟivārkku oṉḏṟu ām avai.

அன்வயம்: உள் நோக்கில் சாந்தி அதே புற நோக்கால் சத்தி. ஆய்ந்து அறிவார்க்கு அவை ஒன்று ஆம்.

Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): uḷ nōkkil śānti adē puṟa nōkkāl catti. āyndu aṟivārkku avai oṉḏṟu ām.

English translation: [What is experienced as] śānti [peace] in inward look itself is [what is experienced as] śakti [power] by outward look. For those who investigate and know, they are one.
That is, both infinite power and infinite peace are our real nature, so the true form of power is only peace, which is a state not of doing anything but of just being. As Sadhu Om used to say, the motionless power of a dam holds water in the reservoir in a calm and peaceful condition, but if the dam is not sufficiently strong, it will crack, thereby disturbing the peaceful state of the water and allowing its power to flow out through the crack and create havoc. Likewise, the supreme power is the state of self-abidance, which is the peaceful state of just being, and the rising of ego is like a crack in the dam, which disturbs the peace of just being and releases its power to create phenomena, which cause endless havoc.

Therefore the power of creation, which is ego or māyā, is not the supreme power but arises only due to weakness. The supreme power is the power of absolute peace, which never allows any room for ego to rise and create phenomena. Ego and its creation do not actually exist, but they seem to exist in the view of ego so long as it does not investigate itself keenly enough to see what it actually is.

Therefore having risen as ego, the only wise course for us now is to surrender ourself entirely by investigating who or what we actually are.

22 comments:

Aham said...

.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/19VeoKeHgQAal0r5ZzGyPGuh215zEpAqh/view


.

Michael James said...

In a comment on one of my recent videos, 2019-01-12 Ramana Maharshi Foundation UK: discussion with Michael James on Nāṉ Ār? paragraph 14, a friend wrote: ‘What is the difference between solipsism and the teaching of Ramana? I mean as a starting point. Obviously, Ramana’s teaching goes beyond that, but first I must accept that all experience comes to me through thought. This “thought” is not “my thought”, however. Maybe that’s the difference? Thought comes to me uninvited’.

In reply to this I wrote:

Ross, solipsism is understood differently by different people. Bhagavan taught a form of solipsism called ēka-jīva-vāda, the contention that there is only one jīva, ego or perceiver. This does not mean that there is only one person, because obviously there are many people, nor does it mean that only one person is aware, because as he pointed out no person is aware of anything, because a person is just an object of perception (or a set of such objects) and is therefore jaḍa (insentient or non-aware). What is aware is not the person we seem to be, but only we who are aware of this person and all other phenomena. We are the perceiver, and the person we seem to be is an object perceived by us as if it were ourself.

A person is a bundle consisting of a physical body, life, mind, intellect and will (the so-called five sheaths), and the perceiver is the false awareness that is aware of itself as ‘I am this person’. In other words, the perceiver is ego, which is what experiences both waking and dream, but in each state it experiences itself as a different body, and in sleep it disappears, so does not experience itself as any body and therefore does not perceive any phenomena.

In a dream we perceive ourself as a body, and through the five senses of that body we perceive a world full of numerous people. So long as we are dreaming, that world seems to exist out there, independent of our perception of it, and all those other people seem to be perceiving that world just as we are. However, as soon as we wake up, we recognise that it was just a dream, so we were the only one who perceived it, and everything we perceived in it seemed to exist only because we perceived it and therefore did not exist independent of our perception of it. Therefore in a dream there is only one perceiver, namely ourself.

We generally assume that our present state is not a dream, but even while dreaming we make the same assumption. So long as we are dreaming we seem to be awake, and only when we wake up do we recognise that it was just a dream. Therefore how can we be sure that we are not dreaming now? Is there anything that we experience in our present state that we could not equally well experience in a dream? No, obviously not, so our assumption that our present state is not a dream is unjustified, because it is not supported by any evidence.

(I will continue this in my next comment.)

Michael James said...

In continuation of my previous comment:

If our present state is just a dream, as Bhagavan says it is, then there is only one perceiver of this state, and whatever we, this one perceiver, perceive in it does not exist independent of our perception of it. This is what is called dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda (the contention that perception is what causes the appearance of creation), and one of its implications is ēka-jīva-vāda.

I have explained in more detail about both dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda and ēka-jīva-vāda in many articles in my blog, and in one of my recent articles, Which is a more reasonable and useful explanation: dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda or sṛṣṭi-dṛṣṭi-vāda?, I have considered all the main arguments for and against our usual assumption that our present state is not a dream.

Regarding what you write about thought, no thought can appear unless we attend to it, so though some thoughts may seem to come uninvited, they appear only because we are willing to attend to them. From where do thoughts come? They came only from us, so ultimately we alone are responsible for all our thoughts. Sometimes we may be overwhelmed by unpleasant thoughts, but we allow ourself to be overwhelmed by them due to our weakness, which is the result of our scattering our mind in many directions. In order to gain the strength required to avoid being overwhelmed by thoughts, whether pleasant or unpleasant, we need to patiently and persistently practise trying to attend only to ourself rather than to any thoughts.

Unknown said...

Mr. James,

Below is your own quote:

"nor does it mean that only one person is aware, because as he pointed out no person is aware of anything, because a person is just an object of perception (or a set of such objects) and is therefore jaḍa (insentient or non-aware). What is aware is not the person we seem to be, but only we who are aware of this person and all other phenomena. We are the perceiver, and the person we seem to be is an object perceived by us as if it were ourself."

But elsewhere you have said that the absolute Self or the true I is only aware of Itself as Itself and absolutely nothing else just as in deep sleep. So then how can IT be aware of the person as an object (body) and all other phenomena?

Michael James said...

Unknown, what I wrote in the passage you quoted was in the context of explaining ēka-jīva-vāda, the contention that there is only one jīva, ego or perceiver, so what I meant by ‘we’ when I wrote ‘What is aware is not the person we seem to be, but only we who are aware of this person and all other phenomena. We are the perceiver, and the person we seem to be is an object perceived by us as if it were ourself’ is we as ego (the false awareness ‘I am this person’), not we as we actually are (the pure awareness ‘I am’).

First we need to distinguish ourself, the perceiver, from the person we perceive ourself to be, in order to focus our entire attention on the perceiver alone, and when we do so (that is, when we see ourself without any adjuncts) we will see that we are not actually a perceiver but only pure awareness, in whose clear view nothing else exists to be perceived. First we need to look at the snake very carefully, and then we will see that it is not actually a snake but only a rope.

Sanjay Lohia said...

All problems have their own solutions, so the problems will take care of themselves

Bhagavan says, ‘whatever comes has to go’. All problems have their own solutions. So the problems will take care of themselves. Nothing can stay – even the ego has to go one day, and ego is the only real problem. It will go when it becomes fed up of looking outside and eventually decides to look within. It will see that it does not exist - all problems are over.

Edited extract from the video: 2019-02-03 Sri Ramana Center, Houston: discussion with Michael James on Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 25 (1:09)

Reflections: There is saying ‘even this will pass’. The greatest problem will be solved; the greatest pleasure will fade away. So eventually everything will pass by us, but we will remain where we are. So why be attached to these things. As Michael implies, solutions are inbuilt in our problems. As it is said, time is the greatest healer. It will make us forget everything.

Unknown said...

Mr. James,

Thank you for the clarification on 5 February 2019 at 10:24. Now your earlier comment is much clearer to understand and makes complete sense. I am glad I asked you that question and I am happy you answered it. My sincere regards to you.

Sanjay Lohia said...

We need not tell others that they are dreaming and therefore they need to wake up, because they are just part of our dream

Advaita as taught by Bhagavan is extremely simple so we can easily defend it against any other philosophies. In fact, all philosophies are challenged by advaita, not that advaita has any quarrel to pick with other philosophies. Advaita doesn’t need to assert itself as right. True advaita is not about convincing other people. We have risen as this ego and created all this multiplicity and therefore created all our problems. So ego is the root of all our problems. Therefore we need to get rid of ego to experience true advaita, and only advaita is without any problems.

So this is such a simple and robust philosophy that it need not pick up a quarrel with any other philosophy. Let anyone believe anything, what does it matter? All philosophies, science, religions . . . in whose view do they exist? To whom does it appear? To me; so ‘who am I?’ This is the essence of Bhagavan’s teachings.

We do not have to go out into the world and teach this to others. If others ask about it, we can tell them. In a dream, do we need to tell other people that they are dreaming and therefore they need to wake up? There is no point in doing so. If we are dreaming, we are the only dreamer and others are just our mental projection. So we have to turn within and wake up ourselves. This is the whole purpose of Bhagavan’s teachings.

So Bhagavan’s philosophy is not for arguing or establishing it in the world. It is a philosophy for living, and how do we live it? By turning our attention within and surrendering ourself completely to the pure awareness that we actually are – the one sole reality.

Paraphrased extract from the video: 2019-02-03 Sri Ramana Center, Houston: discussion with Michael James on Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 25 (23:00)



Sanjay Lohia said...

If we can make this ego vanish, everything will vanish along with it, including a disease like bipolar disorder

Recently I had a conversation with a patient suffering from bipolar disorder. This is a mental condition in which one’s mood alternates between extreme states of elation and depression. The conversation went somewhat as follows:

John: Sanjay, as you know, I have this bipolar disorder. Does your Bhagavan have any solution for this also?

Sanjay: Yes, Bhagavan can cure all our problems because he tackles the very root of our problems, which is ego. If we can make this ego vanish, everything will vanish along with it, including disease like bipolar disorder.

John: However, my ego is obviously intact now, how can his teachings help me now?

Sanjay: Who has this disorder? Your mind has it, but are you this mind? No, according to Bhagavan, you are pure being-awareness-bliss. So if you are not this mind which has this bipolar disorder, you do not have this disorder. Does this make sense?

John: Yes, but it all sounds like a wonderful philosophy.

Sanjay: It is a philosophy but a practical philosophy. It is a philosophy pointing in a particular direction. It is a philosophy - which if applied in practice - can enable us to separate ourselves from our body and mind. If you are able to achieve this separation, why should you bother about any disease occurring to your body and mind? You will not be even aware of such issues.

John: Sounds great…

Sanjay: Yes, Bhagavan has given us a direct path to experiencing ourself as we actually are, and this is the cure of all our diseases. It is such a simple and beautiful path.

Unknown said...

If we can make this ego vanish, everything will vanish along with it. End Quote.

Sri Ramana Maharshi actually did so at age 16. But can you or can we? No. You and we can't. If we could, we would have done it by now.

Sanjay Lohia said...

Unknown, you say, ‘Sri Ramana Maharshi actually did so [made his ego vanish] at age 16. But can you or can we? No. You and we can't. If we could, we would have done it by now’. I think, your logic is quite off the mark. If Venkataraman could investigate himself and thereby make his ego vanish, we can also do the same. To me, it seems quite simple to understand this. We are all at a certain stage of our spiritual development, and Venkataraman must have been in our position at a certain time in his past, and we will perhaps reach his level of maturity sometime in future.

However, we cannot judge our spiritual maturity. Our job is to remain attentively self-aware as long and as intensely as possible and leave the rest to Bhagavan. We cannot fail because Bhagavan's grace cannot fail, and we are under the sway of his grace. So we should march on with confidence. Our next step can take us to victory!

Unknown said...

Sanjay Lohia, I will reply to you shortly to your last comment of 9 February 2019 at 17:01 addressed to me. Take care and all the best to you sir in this matter. My sincere regards to you in this matter.

Sanjay Lohia said...

Of late, there has been a deluge of videos by Michael . . .

It is an exciting and busy time for those following Michael’s videos, which he is regularly posting on his YouTube channel: Sri Ramana Teachings.

He is posting about five to six videos every month on an average. These are pure grace, pure love and pure wisdom. Bhagavan’s light is shining through these videos almost unhindered. It is almost as if Michael has disappeared from the scene, and Bhagavan has completely taken over. I bow to this overflow of grace. We can just thank Bhagavan and listen to these videos in awe and deep admiration.

Do others share my sentiment?

Rob P said...

Of course Sanjay. I share your sentiments entirely and could not put it any better than yourself. Well said.

morrison said...

Sanjay

Yes, I also share your sentiments in regards to Michaels videos and I also am grateful for your time in extracting the video text and posting it.

I read and re-read every article Michael posts as well as every comment and have not missed one in over 5 years.

I just don't get around to giving thanks like I should because I prefer to dwell in silence.

Best Regards to all

Bob

Unknown said...

Sanjay Lohia.

In response to your comment of 9 February 2019 at 17:01,

S.L.: If Venkataraman could investigate himself and thereby make his ego vanish, we can also do the same. Quote.

Will we? Can we really do so? Why have we not done so till now? Is it because we cherish our "ego" and our bodies more than our own Self? Are we all so scared to die and to lose our breath once and for all and become absolutely nothing or a void?, because Sri Ramana at age 16 itself invited death fearlessly and realized he was not the body, the breath or the ego called Venkatraman.

S.L.: To me, it seems quite simple to understand this. End Quote.

Yes, to understand in theory is very easy and simple but to actually practice it and make the ego vanish is a totally different matter altogether.

S.L.: We are all at a certain stage of our spiritual development, and Venkataraman must have been in our position at a certain time in his past, and we will perhaps reach his level of maturity sometime in future. However, we cannot judge our spiritual maturity. Our job is to remain attentively self-aware as long and as intensely as possible and leave the rest to Bhagavan. We cannot fail because Bhagavan's grace cannot fail, and we are under the sway of his grace. So we should march on with confidence. Our next step can take us to victory! End Quote.

That is a very optimistic way of looking at our own failures and wishfully thinking and hoping the same thing will happen to us the way it actually happened to Sri Venkataraman SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE.(See the clever catch or hook the ego gives itself to carry on its own separate individual bodily existence imaginary though it may be).

As far as I know no one other than Sri Venkataraman has been able to do what he himself did at age 16. Let me know if someone else has been able to replicate what the "greatest of the great" and "bravest of the brave" Sri Ramana Mahrashi actually did since Sri Ramana Maharshi.

Sincerely,

Unknown.






Sanjay Lohia said...

Morrison, you write, ‘I just don't get around to giving thanks like I should because I prefer to dwell in silence’. What can be greater than ‘to dwell in silence’? So you are doing the only thing worth doing.


Sanjay Lohia said...

Unknown, we have risen as this ego along with our desires and when we have had enough of this world, we will long to subside back and be as we actually are. This is the common story of all egos, so in this respect, we are not different from Venkataraman. We have to pass through the stage which Venkataraman must have passed, and we will come to the state of Bhagavan sooner or later. This is certain. Bhagavan describes this journey beautifully in verse 8 of Sri Arunachala Ashtakam:

The water showered by the clouds, which rose from the ocean, will not stop, even if obstructed until it reaches its abode, the ocean. Similarly, the embodied soul rises from you and will not stop, though it wanders on the many paths which it encounters until it reaches you. Though it wanders about the vast sky, in that sky there is no abode for the bird. The place for the bird to rest is not other than the earth. Therefore, what it is bound to do is to go back the way it came. O Aruna Hill, when the soul goes back the way it came it will unite with you, the ocean of bliss.

So we have to go the way we have come and unite with Bhagavan. There can be no deviation on this journey. We rise as ego, suffer, learn the way to end suffering, turn back within and eventually merge in Bhagavan. This story has been repeating itself with each ego, so how can our story be different?

Sanjay Lohia said...

A friend (using a pseudonym AK11020) commented on Michael’s latest video as follows:

AK11020: It's funny how the right lesson appears at the right time - I feel blessed, because the answers were exactly what I needed at this point in my journey.

I replied to him:

Sanjay: Yes, Bhagavan is the master of proper timing and proper placement. Things happen at the correct time - not a second before and not a second after.

If I may add to this comment, Bhagavan knows our needs better than we know ours. We may want all sort of foolish things, but Bhagavan will give us only that which is good for our spiritual development. Things happen when they are meant to happen and as they are meant to happen. So we should not be in hurry to implement our plans. He is taking care of everything – we just have to leave our luggage on the luggage rack of the train and travel peacefully. The train will carry us and our luggage safely to our destination.

Likewise, Bhagavan is bearing all our burdens by his mere being, so why should we worry about anything? He knows our destination, because he himself is our destination, so he will not mislead us. In fact, we are already at our destination even though we may not know it - we have never left it in the first place. We imagine that we are on a journey, but this is all ego's delusion. Eventually, we will know that there never was a journey because there was no passenger to undertake any journey.

Roger Isaacs said...

Michael,
you say
Therefore the power of creation, which is ego or māyā, is not the supreme power but arises only due to weakness.


You also say that the atma-jnani sees exactly the same creation as the a-jnani.

Is the creation that the atma-jnani sees also attributed to "weakness" ?

If there was no "weakness" then there would be no creation? This is the ideal that you strive for to extinguish creation?

Apparently the atma-jnani should also strive to end the "weakness" of creation?

The atma-jnani still sees exactly the same creation (according to you) therefore since the goal is to make the ego vanish and everything else along with it... the atma-jnani still has work to do to make creation vanish permanently?

Hi Sanjay,
You say such things as It is an exciting and busy time for those following Michael’s videos.... He is posting about five to six videos every month on an average. These are pure grace, pure love and pure wisdom. .... Do others share my sentiment?

I am reminded of the Bible Mark 10:18.
"Good Teacher" he asked "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
Jesus replied. "No one is good except God alone".


Sanjay, you are making Michael James, or Bhagavan et al "good" and hold them above others. There is NONE good but God, you are looking in the wrong place. God is not found in any teaching... but within. Holding one teacher above another creates conflict.

Sanjay Lohia said...

There is no higher power other than you . . .

A friend: We should trust the higher power?

Michael: Ok, what is that higher power?

The friend: I have no idea.

Michael: You are that.

Edited extract from: 2017-12-09 Ramana Maharshi Foundation UK: discussion with Michael James on Nāṉ Ār? paragraph 1(1:34)

Reflection: There is only ‘higher power, or to be more accurate there is only pne power, and we are that. Tat-tvam-asi.

Sanjay Lohia said...

Real happiness does not lie in Ramanasramam; it lies within you

Michael: You yourself are happiness, but we look for it in the wrong places. All we need to do is to look for it in the right place. What is the right place? It is within you – to be more accurate it is you. You yourself are that happiness which you are seeking outside. Bhagavan teaches us this in Nan Ar?.

A friend: When I was in Aurobindo Ashram, I was very happy there.

Michael: We cannot find any happiness outside ourself. What you experienced there may have been a greater degree of happiness than you generally experience. However, it was still limited or finite happiness. There may have been more peace there than you find in London, but still, there must have been problems of one sort or another even there. So happiness doesn’t lie in even Ramanasramam, leave alone Aurobindo Ashram.

So we should not look for happiness in external circumstances. Even if you get happiness outside of you, how long will it last? In fact, as ego we are always dissatisfied, and dissatisfaction is the root of all unhappiness.

We say happiness is ‘within you’ because we are aware of multiplicity – there is outside and there is inside, but it is not actually inside. It is what we really are.

Paraphrased extract from: 2017-12-09 Ramana Maharshi Foundation UK: discussion with Michael James on Nāṉ Ār? paragraph 1(1:36)