tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post2856725582950921325..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: What creates all thoughts is only the ego, which is the root and essence of the mindMichael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger164125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-86482905903346624142017-10-06T17:05:26.652+01:002017-10-06T17:05:26.652+01:00Salazar
[I do not know your practical experience ...Salazar<br /><br />[I do not know your practical experience but you can hold onto Self while being aware of (or watch) thoughts. It seems to me that you talk from the basis of an abstract imagination than from direct experience.....]<br /><br />What a load of trash!<br />Who hangs on to Self, ha ha!!<br />Who is aware of thoughts? <br /><br />[To be clear, watching thoughts without being distracted by them.]<br /><br />Great Salazar keep watching your thoughts while holding on to Self without be distracted by them!! What an accomplishment. <br /><br />You post comments on this blog with such confidence but you have previously admitted to Venkat that you are not spiritually advanced?<br /><br />Anyway I will leave you to watch your thoughts and gain practical experience <br />so you can become spiritually advanced. <br />Divine Madmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-68645853537541855002017-10-05T23:35:21.949+01:002017-10-05T23:35:21.949+01:00Salazar,
your assumption is correct. I could seldo...Salazar,<br />your assumption is correct. I could seldom "hold the self" (even) during mental activities.nuṇ matinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-22631890230978706952017-10-05T21:26:25.826+01:002017-10-05T21:26:25.826+01:00To be clear, watching thoughts without being distr...To be clear, watching thoughts without being distracted by them.. .https://www.blogger.com/profile/03243347924405863536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-5335206363171652592017-10-05T21:21:11.910+01:002017-10-05T21:21:11.910+01:00nun mati, I didn't say that this is an instruc...nun mati, I didn't say that this is an instruction to watch thoughts, what I meant is that holding onto Self even during mental activities is a synonym for watching thoughts without distraction.<br /><br />I do not know your practical experience but you can hold onto Self while being aware of (or watch) thoughts. It seems to me that you talk from the basis of an abstract imagination than from direct experience..... . .https://www.blogger.com/profile/03243347924405863536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-60001185973474493962017-10-05T21:08:12.174+01:002017-10-05T21:08:12.174+01:00Salazar,
"Hold the Self EVEN DURING mental ac...Salazar,<br />"Hold the Self EVEN DURING mental activities..." does not in the slightest instruct one to watch thoughts. <br />The emphasis of this teaching is clearly on the first three words "HOLD THE SELF even during mental activities...".<br />Of course everyone has to work out his own salvation by having his own interpretation of Bhagavan's instructions ready.nuṇ matinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-62489124440199600232017-10-05T19:56:00.889+01:002017-10-05T19:56:00.889+01:00Bhagavan's contribution to "watching thou...Bhagavan's contribution to "watching thoughts":<br /><br />Sri Ramana: "[...] What does it matter if the mind is active? It is only on the substratum of the Self. Hold the Self even during mental activities [...]"<br /><br />Hold the Self EVEN DURING mental activities................<br /><br />Well, that is just another description of watching thoughts without being distracted by them. <br /><br />If people here would actually focus on PRACTICAL experience than to palaver concepts by Bhagavan seen through the red glasses of Michael :-) ..... maybe then it would not be necessary to point to the obvious even though it may not have directly been mentioned by Bhagavan ----> referring to "watching thoughts".. .https://www.blogger.com/profile/03243347924405863536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-58581322325151630372017-10-04T12:01:47.066+01:002017-10-04T12:01:47.066+01:00Sanjay Lohia,
thanks for your comment and giving t...Sanjay Lohia,<br />thanks for your comment and giving the mentioned chapter "The Nature of Our Mind" of Michael's book "Happiness and the Art of Being (HAB)".<br />Since it is clearly stated that our pure and essential being ...remains alone in the gap between ..." it suggests itself to linguistically differentiate between "remaining in the gap" and "being the gap" itself as such.<br />So we can leave it at that. atma-jyotinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-15425820373780471992017-10-04T08:40:48.600+01:002017-10-04T08:40:48.600+01:00In continuation of my previous comment (extract fr...In continuation of my previous comment (extract from <i>HAB</i>): <br /> <br />Because each individual pixel is formed only momentarily, and dissolves almost immediately, within a fraction of a second the oscillating ray of electrons is able to form another pixel of different colour and intensity upon the same spot on the screen, and thus in each successive fraction of a second it forms a slightly different picture upon the screen. Because the cognitive power of our eyes is not sufficiently subtle and refined for us to be able to perceive distinctly the rapid formation and dissolution of each individual pixel, or even the slightly less rapid formation and dissolution of each entire picture that is formed on the screen by a single sweep of the ray of electrons, what we cognise is not many rapidly changing individual spots of light but only a complete and continuously changing picture. <br /><br />Each individual thought that momentarily rises and subsides in our mind is similar to a pixel that is momentarily formed and dissolved on a television screen. Because each individual thought rises or is formed only momentarily, and subsides or dissolves almost immediately, within an infinitely small fraction of a second our mind can form another thought in its place. Because the cognitive power of our mind is usually not sufficiently subtle and refined for us to be able to discern distinctly the extremely rapid formation and dissolution of each individual thought, what we usually cognise is not many rapidly rising and subsiding individual thoughts but only a single but continuously changing flow of thoughts.<br /> <br />However, if we practise being attentive to our infinitely subtle consciousness of being, ‘I am’, our power of attention or cognition will gradually become more subtle and refined, and eventually we will be able to cognise each individual thought as it rises. When by the practice of self-attentiveness our power of attention is thus refined and made sufficiently subtle to be able to detect distinctly the rising or formation of each individual thought, it will also be able to cognise clearly our pure and essential being, which always underlies and supports the formation of our thoughts, and which momentarily remains alone in the gap between the dissolution of one thought and the formation of our next thought. <br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-48585524854563354972017-10-04T08:38:46.635+01:002017-10-04T08:38:46.635+01:00atma-jyoti, we were discussing the subject of the ...atma-jyoti, we were discussing the subject of the gap between two thoughts. Michael has explained this in detail in his book <i>Happiness and The Art of Being</i> in the chapter called <i>The Nature of Our Mind</i> (pages 176, 177). He writes: <br /><br />Since at any single moment our mind can attend to and know only one thought, it cannot imagine or form more than one thought at the same time. Therefore, our thoughts rise and subside in our consciousness one at a time. Each consecutive thought can rise or be formed only after the previous thought has subsided or dissolved. <br /><br />However, because each individual thought rises and subsides in an infinitely small period of time, during each second a countless number of consecutive thoughts can rise and subside in rapid succession. Therefore, because of the rapidity with which thoughts thus rise and subside, our surface mind is unable to discern the rising and subsiding of each individual thought, and therefore cognises only the collective impression formed by a series of such individual thoughts.<br /> <br />This is similar to our eye being unable to discern each individual spot of light on a television screen, as a result of which it cognises only the collective impression formed by a series of such spots covering the entire screen in rapid succession. The picture that we see on the screen of a cathode-ray tube television is formed by many horizontal lines of light, each of which is formed by many individual spots of light of varying colours and intensity. These individual spots of light, which are known as pixels (the syllable ‘pix’ standing for pictures, and ‘el’ standing for element), are formed on the screen one at a time by a ray of electrons discharged from the cathode at the back of the tube. Controlled by the steady sequence of oscillations of the magnetic or electrostatic field through which the ray of electrons is sprayed, in a fraction of a second the entire television screen is covered with a series of pixels of varying colours and intensity, thereby collectively forming a complete picture. <br /><br />(I will continue this in my next comment)<br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-35569283585005441592017-10-03T23:44:45.938+01:002017-10-03T23:44:45.938+01:00Salazar,
great grief, just my sheer ignorance is t...Salazar,<br />great grief, just my sheer ignorance is the reason why I eagerly attempt to learn from the blazing brilliance of your wisdom. I feel real grief that you suffer greatly by your impact against the dense darkness of my inexperience, don't I ?atma-jyotinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-28625196104642097922017-10-03T22:39:02.595+01:002017-10-03T22:39:02.595+01:00Atma-jyoti, you crack me up. It is good to have a ...Atma-jyoti, you crack me up. It is good to have a dictionary handy isn’t it? LOL<br /><br />You took from who knows where and it doesn’t matter the following:<br /><br />“A substratum is an underlying substance.<br />A substratum is a foundation or basis of something.<br />A substratum is a feature that is less obvious than other features”<br /><br />My friend, all these definitions are objects, created by mind. And looking at your response I don’t expect you to grasp that nor why your answer is the revelation of sheer ignorance on so many levels. Sorry man, if you feel now put down, but I call a spade a spade. What are you doing on a spiritual blog making big speeches without the foggiest clue what you are talking about? Good grief.<br /><br /><br /><br />. .https://www.blogger.com/profile/03243347924405863536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-67691980250305299012017-10-03T22:12:51.809+01:002017-10-03T22:12:51.809+01:00Salazar,
you state "That gap between thoughts...Salazar,<br />you state "That gap between thoughts is not finite at all..." and ask "What exactly is a substratum?"and presume "The answer can only be an imagination." <br />You may compare the linguistic meaning of the two mentioned terms and take what you like:<br /><br />A gap is a break or hole in an object or between two objects.<br />A gap is a space or interval between two things.<br />A gap is a difference between two situations.<br />A gap is a break in continuity.<br /><br />A substratum is an underlying substance.<br />A substratum is a foundation or basis of something.<br />A substratum is a feature that is less obvious than other features.<br /><br />Therefore I can hardly accede to Sanjay's statement "that this gap is what we actually are". To brand my objection as superior attitude is a bit out of place. <br />atma-jyotinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-78149985904088455732017-10-03T18:00:19.791+01:002017-10-03T18:00:19.791+01:00atma-jyoti, I had used the term ‘gap’ in response ...atma-jyoti, I had used the term ‘gap’ in response to what Salazar wrote. Actually this ‘gap’ is a metaphor for what we actually are. Though in between two thoughts - after one thought subsides and before another rises – there is a gap. However, usually we are not aware of this gap, because, to take an example, this gap could be merely lasting for one hundredth of a second. Therefor, it is beyond our present power of attention to experience this gap.<br /> <br />It is like a gap in between two frames of a film roll. Although we know that there are gaps in between two frames of the film roll, but we only experience a moving film on the screen without any gaps. It is because of the speed at which the film roll moves inside the projector. <br /><br />Likewise there are gaps in between two thoughts, but we don’t experience these gaps. We just experience a continues stream of thoughts, and this continuous stream of thoughts make up all the perceptual images we experience, and the collection of such perceptual images make up our world.<br /><br />Yes, we are the unchanging substratum of all our thoughts. We can reflect on verse 7 of <i>Ulladu Narpadu</i> to understand this better:<br /><br />Though the world and mind arise and subside simultaneously, the world shines by the mind. Only that which shines without appearing or disappearing as the base for the appearing and disappearing of the world and mind is <i>poruḷ</i> [the real substance], which is <i>pūṉḏṟam</i> [the infinite whole or <i>pūrṇa</i>].<br /><br />Therefore, as you rightly say, ‘Hence we as the infinite atma-svarupa [<i>porul</i>] can actually never be a limited entity or finite gap’. To see this <i>porul</i> (the real substance) as it really is, we have to turn within. There is no other way to experience ourself as we actually are. <br /> <br /><br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-75165778594495687112017-10-03T15:47:08.559+01:002017-10-03T15:47:08.559+01:00atma-jyoti, you are splitting hairs here. That gap...atma-jyoti, you are splitting hairs here. That gap between thoughts is not finite at all but that's besides the point. No term can capture the natural state, they can only be pointers. What exactly is a substratum? The answer can only be an imagination. <br /><br />When the sages are satisfied to talk about a gap between thoughts, why would we think we know better? <br /><br />I.e. consciousness, there is only one consciousness and the consciousness of a Jnani and Ajnani is identical. Any distinctions made like cidabhasa and chit are mere imaginations, literally. <br /><br />It is a waste of time to look for accurate descriptions and to dabble too much with all of these concepts. In fact, it is a trap. <br />. .https://www.blogger.com/profile/03243347924405863536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-15020380288775226082017-10-03T11:06:17.287+01:002017-10-03T11:06:17.287+01:00Sanjay Lohia,
thank you for your reply of 27 Septe...Sanjay Lohia,<br />thank you for your reply of 27 September 2017.<br /><br />You wrote in your comment of 29 September 2017 at 17:27 (addressed to Salazar):<br />"The best place and time to watch ourself (the gap) is here and now. Why should we wait for the time of just before falling asleep or just after waking? Of course, we can use these favourable times also. Our aim should be self-attentive every moment. This gap is what we actually are, and therefore we should be able to experience it whenever we want to."<br />Instead of saying that we are actually a gap (between thoughts) one should say more accurately that we are the substratum of any such gap. How can a gap exist without a fundamental substratum ? A gap is naturally bounded by something. Hence we as the infinite atma-svarupa can actually never be a limited entity or finite gap.atma-jyotinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-3879638298659685882017-10-03T07:53:13.478+01:002017-10-03T07:53:13.478+01:00gargoyle, I thank you for your kind words about me...gargoyle, I thank you for your kind words about me. Yes, surely you can ‘purchase’ some of my love or passion for Bhagavan and his teachings. However, Michael has given this passion to me without charging anything, so how I can I charge anything for the thing which I have received as free. So you are most welcome to take whatever love I have, because even if you take it from me, I know I will still have as much love as I now have.<br /><br />It is said by one of the devotees (in Hindi): <i>Ram naam ki loot hai, loot sake so loot, anth samay pachtayega jab prana jagenye chhoot</i>. Meaning: Lord Rama has offered himself as a free loot, and it is therefore left to us to take his name as much as we want. If we do not take his name now, we will repent in the end when our life (<i>prana</i>) will leave us. <br /><br />It is our love for Bhagavan and his teachings which puts us sometimes in trouble. However, everything is a learning process. Yesterday I received a few bricks (criticism) and a few bouquets (praise). I think a <i>sadhaka</i> needs both of these. If we receive only criticism we may become diffident, and if we receive only praise our heads may become swollen. This combination should do us good. <br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-45682019409195226492017-10-02T22:16:18.627+01:002017-10-02T22:16:18.627+01:00Anonomous
I can easily understand your point about...Anonomous<br />I can easily understand your point about Sanjay Lohia. I started reading Michaels blog about 4 years ago and noticed the change in Sanjay. At first I asked myself…who is this guy? For quite some time I simply skipped over his comments and did not care what he had to say.<br /> <br />Time marches on……<br /><br />I see Sanjay as a very passionate jiva, and very passionate about his love for Bhagavan. His approach seems to irritate some, as it did me back about two years ago but I could not but help seeing the his love for Bhagavan as I read more and more of his comments.<br /> <br />I actually feel guilty for thoughts I had about Sanjay in the past. I would like to purchase some of his passion for Bhagavan, as I seem to be short of passion.<br /><br />Best Regards<br />gargoylenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-71763562022184996972017-10-02T17:34:00.827+01:002017-10-02T17:34:00.827+01:00Salazar, I fully agree with you when you say about...Salazar, I fully agree with you when you say about me: ‘But I guess you have to learn in time and mature as everybody else’. So at last we are in perfect agreement!<br /><br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-57080936609303016042017-10-02T16:41:10.729+01:002017-10-02T16:41:10.729+01:00Sanjay Lohia, you said and I quote: "The best...Sanjay Lohia, you said and I quote: "The best place and time to watch ourself (the gap) is here and now. Why should we wait for the time of just before falling asleep or just after waking?"<br /><br />When Robert Adams suggested to watch the gap between two thoughts shortly after awakening or briefly before falling asleep he did not say to NOT do that at other times. Who said that we should wait? However, at these two times in a day, it is much easier to experience Self than at other times. And again, I can verify that by my own experience! What about you? <br /><br />For quite awhile I enjoyed your comments, but that was before I started engaging you with a dialog where it quickly became apparent that you are just parroting Michael's concepts (which are not Michael's but Michael's interpretation of Bhagavan) without having reached any depth because you simply lack experience. Your mind may present memorized concepts in a pleasing way, but alas there is no substance behind it.<br /><br />Sanjay, you got to loosen up a bit. You seem to be a young guy who is not yet dry behind his ears and that explains the often naive,unseasoned and rigid approach of Bhagavan's teaching. But I guess you have to learn in time and mature as everybody else.<br /><br />To close: I believe everybody who frequents this blog should heed your advice from your previous comment to Anonymous and ignore your comments. Seriously. <br /><br /><br /><br /> . .https://www.blogger.com/profile/03243347924405863536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-56412774523203462612017-10-02T09:02:31.926+01:002017-10-02T09:02:31.926+01:00Anonymous, I thank you for your suggestions. These...Anonymous, I thank you for your suggestions. These may have some merit, and therefore I have noted these with care. However, it remains to be seen how much I can adhere to these suggestions. As they say habits die hard. <br /> <br />Since you post your comments on this blog, I presume you are also practising self-investigation. If you are sincerely practising Bhagavan’s path, you should not be bothered about what others are doing or not doing, because you should be focusing all your attention only on yourself – that is, on your own study, reflection and practice of Bhagavan’s teachings. <br /><br />Since you have given me a suggestion, I would also like to give you one. Why don’t you just ignore my comments? So many news items appear any newspaper, but we read only that which interests us. Anyway I thank you once again for your suggestions, which as I said may have some merit. <br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-57342015661267849992017-10-02T07:54:00.019+01:002017-10-02T07:54:00.019+01:00A quick note to Sanjay Lohia
Sanjay – You are sur...A quick note to Sanjay Lohia<br /><br />Sanjay – You are surely kidding yourself by assuming that posting constantly on this forum is some kind of manana. It is evident to everyone on this site that your ego rises just as much as everybody else’s not only when you are defending a certain point of view but also while paraphrasing MJ’s teachings (frankly why you do that is beyond me...others may find it rather patronising). Anyone who has been on this forum long enough has seen how you behavior has changed from eager contributor and sharer to shrill defender of a very narrow point of view.<br /><br />Why? Oh Why? Why not just dedicate your spare time (which seems rather ample) to Self Attention (attend to I, NOW, Being, Existence, whatever…). Why are you debating points with Roger and Salazar and others who may or may not be arguing just to get a rise out of you?<br />You are increasingly coming across as dogmatic and often downright puerile. (And No, please don’t look up the dictionary and tell me the meaning of that word when you craft your response. In fact, please don’t respond at all to this comment, but do manana on it instead). <br /><br />Remember, Bhagavan took the words of an unknown old woman on the hill to heart when she asked him why he was wandering around the mountain (and thereafter ceased this activity). I am not an old woman and you are certainly not Bhagavan, I’ve taken the privilege of anonymity that this blog bestows to tell you what many others on the blog are surely thinking but may be hesitant to point out. Please take what I’ve written in the right spirit and stop wasting so much of your time. Believe me what little benefit you may be getting by frequenting this site is far outweighed by the ego-games one ends up playing and the opportunity cost of wasted time.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-7562462992830985992017-09-30T20:29:06.584+01:002017-09-30T20:29:06.584+01:00Hector, in no way was my comment geared to belittl...Hector, in no way was my comment geared to belittle you. I am sorry that you are seeing it that way.Purification of mind does NOT reflect on one’s outward behavior, a purified mind is no mind and any perceived behavior is illusionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03403745904820287115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-63471326099715327902017-09-30T12:49:49.319+01:002017-09-30T12:49:49.319+01:00Hi Salazar
I was quite sure we had different view...Hi Salazar <br />I was quite sure we had different viewpoints about destiny and free will and was confused why you said you agreed fully with what I wrote previously and asked for a concrete example?. <br /> <br />Thank you for picking that quote from Annamalai Swami just for me as you put it. <br /> <br /><br />"If you cultivate this attitude of indifference towards the mind, gradually you will cease to identify yourself with it."<br /><br />You then say:<br /><br />The last one is especially for you Hector, an attitude of indifference towards the mind means to NOT react positive nor negative for being in the hospital. The "decider" is the ego/mind who believes it decides, making a decision is not indifferent at all! To be involved via the mind in any way is cementing the ego. <br /><br />(Sigh) I thought this might happen Salazar. It is apparent why you asked for a so called concrete example. <br /><br />You wanted my example so you could belittle it and criticise my understanding. You think you have successfully done this by posting a random quote from Annamalai Swami??? Which seems to contradict my example and thereby reinforce your own understanding that you are convinced is 100% true.<br /><br />This is why I was reluctant to answer your questions about kicking dogs and hurting people. <br /><br />By the way I too use to believe that everything was preordained and turning within was the only free will I have just like you. It was when I was listening to all Roberts audio recordings and reading the transcriptions many years ago. Also at the time I was also reading a lot of Nisargadatta. <br /><br />But now I don't, but beliefs change and are just pointers. <br /><br />One last thing you believe that everything is preordained and the only free will you have is to turn within. But maybe you are destined to discard it and believe something completely different that contradicts this very belief. <br /><br />Quite funny when you think about (lol)!. <br /><br />Anyway I appreciate you believe you have no control of what you think or write in comment boxes and how you treat people, because you think it's all pre ordained.<br /><br />I don't mind maybe it is helpful for you in some way. <br /> <br />H <br /> <br />Hectornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-41156628941464506982017-09-30T02:19:35.631+01:002017-09-30T02:19:35.631+01:00Anonymous above is a fan of Mark Twain and Pink Fl...Anonymous above is a fan of Mark Twain and Pink Floyd and I am one too! Greetings. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-19794152312717636172017-09-29T17:27:08.097+01:002017-09-29T17:27:08.097+01:00Salazar, you say, ‘Robert Adams i.e. recommended w...Salazar, you say, ‘Robert Adams i.e. recommended watching the gap between two thoughts and the best time to do it is just before falling asleep or just after waking up. You can actually have an experience of Self doing that. Papaji favorite method was also to attend to the gap between two thoughts because that gap is what we really are’.<br /> <br />Yes, Bhagavan also sometimes said that we should watch the gap between two thoughts. He gave us many such clues, but each such clue amounts to being self-attentive, ignoring everything else.<br /><br />We do exist between the gap between two thoughts, but even when the thoughts are active, we are there as the unchanging substratum of these thoughts. So the more we attend to ourself, the more our thoughts will subside, and the more our thoughts subside the more clearly we will be aware our fundamental self-awareness (the gap). <br /><br />The best place and time to watch ourself (the gap) is here and now. Why should we wait for the time of just before falling asleep or just after waking? Of course, we can use these favourable times also. Our aim should be self-attentive every moment. This gap is what we actually are, and therefore we should be able to experience it whenever we want to.<br /> <br />We just need to turn a full 180 degrees towards ourself, and this gap will open and remain open forever. Thereafter only this ‘gap’ (pure-awareness) will remain. <br /><br /><br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.com