tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post2923395026323027218..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: The mind’s role in investigating ‘I’Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-16909008603201741172016-10-07T10:44:09.126+01:002016-10-07T10:44:09.126+01:00Michael,
many thanks for your given explanation.
S...Michael,<br />many thanks for your given explanation.<br />Sorry about delaying in expressing my sincere thanks.Cho Oyunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-72518235558552260702015-08-09T11:39:36.225+01:002015-08-09T11:39:36.225+01:00Cho Oyu, in answer to each of your questions:
1. ...Cho Oyu, in answer to each of your questions:<br /><br />1. Bhagavan used the term ‘thought’ in a very broad sense to mean any kind of mental phenomenon (which is the same sense in which the term ‘idea’ is used in western philosophy, particularly in the context of metaphysical idealism, which is the view that whatever is perceived or experienced is only an idea). This is why he often said (for example in the <a href="http://www.happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para04" rel="nofollow">fourth</a> and <a href="http://www.happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para14" rel="nofollow">fourteenth</a> paragraphs of <i>Nāṉ Yār?</i>) that the world is nothing but thoughts, because what we experience as this world is only a series of perceptions (sights, sounds, tastes, odours and tactile sensations), which are all only mental phenomena. Therefore like everything else in this seemingly physical world, our body is only a mental phenomenon (a thought or idea).<br /><br />This can be understood by considering our experience in dream. While dreaming we experience a body and world, which at that time seem to be physical, but after we wake up we at once recognise that everything that we experienced in that dream was a creation of our own mind, so our dream body and world were just our own thoughts. Likewise, though our present body and world seem to be physical, they are actually only thoughts, being our own mental creation.<br /><br />2. If we mistake a rope to be a snake, our perception of that snake is a confused experience in the same sense that our ego is a confused experience. Just as the snake is not what it seems to be but is only a rope, our ego is not what it seems to be but is only the one infinite reality that we actually are.<br /><br />The only way to destroy our confused experience of a rope as a snake is to investigate it — that is, to look at it carefully to see what it actually is. Likewise, the only way to destroy our confused experience of ourself as this ego is to investigate ourself — that is, to look at ourself carefully to see what we actually are. If we are not actually this ego that we now seem to be, by investigating ourself we should be able to experience what we actually are, and thereby we will destroy our confused experience that we are this ego.<br /><br />Until we investigate ourself and thereby experience ourself as we actually are, all this is just a theory, but the only way to verify whether or not this theory is correct is to investigate ourself and see whether our investigation actually results in the dissolution of our ego.<br /><br />3. Even now we experience ourself as two things that are completely different in nature, namely a subtle awareness (which is not physical) and a physical body (which is not inherently aware). How this confused experience of ourself has arisen we cannot say, but what we can do is to investigate ourself to find out what we actually are.<br /><br />According to Bhagavan, if we investigate ourself and thereby experience ourself as we really are, we will find that we were never this ego or <i>cit-jaḍa-granthi</i>, so the question how these two completely different things became knotted together as if they were one will not arise and will therefore require no answer.<br /><br />When oxygen (a gas) and iron are knotted together at an atomic level, they form a third substance called rust, so to separate them the rust needs to be smelted at a very high temperature. Our self-investigation is the smelting by which we (who are pure self-awareness or <i>cit</i>) can be separated from our body and all other adjuncts (which are non-conscious or <i>jaḍa</i>), and the heat by which this smelting is done is our love (<i>bhakti</i>) to experience ourself as we really are.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-11827504185820434582015-08-02T23:55:59.167+01:002015-08-02T23:55:59.167+01:00Michael,
1. On page 2 you write:
Sri Ramana descr...Michael,<br />1. On page 2 you write: <br />Sri Ramana describes the ego (this thought called 'I') as a thought because it is a confused mixture of what 'I' actually is and of […],<br />and all such adjuncts (beginning with the body that now seems to be 'I') are mere thoughts. This is why he also described the ego as the thought called<br />'I am this body', as he did...in Anma-Viddai.<br />My question : How or why can it be said that the (gross) body is only a thought ?<br />2. On page 3 you write:<br /> […] Since this primal thought 'I am this body' is a confused experience of 'I', we can destroy it only by investigating it and […]-who I actually am.<br />My questions : How can a confused experience be destroyed only by investigation ? Can it not be/happen that the confused experience of 'I' does not react in any way to the investigation ?<br />3. On page 4 you write:<br />[…],the ego is called cit-jada-granthi, the knot (granthi) that binds the conscious (cit) to the non-conscious (jada), because it is a confused and tightly bound mixture of our real 'I', which is pure consciousness or awareness (cit), and a physical body which is non-conscious (jada).<br />My question: How can two things of completely different denseness, a) the subtle awareness (be) got bound to b) the gross physical body through a knot ?<br />Similary, can be gas knoted to iron ?Cho Oyunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-65264355179820050812014-06-04T13:10:46.797+01:002014-06-04T13:10:46.797+01:00Revered Sir,
Just to put the above written analogy...Revered Sir,<br />Just to put the above written analogy differently, whether it is 0 degrees or it is 180 degrees, it is always a rope. That is, though from 0 degree to 179.99 degrees we may experience ourself as this snake (that is, this ego, this mind and body), we are really always the rope (that is, this non-dual, infinite self, 'I am').<br />Thanking you and pranams,<br />Sanjay LohiaSanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-57684508715918425572014-05-31T09:55:32.767+01:002014-05-31T09:55:32.767+01:00Sanjay, even to say '179 degrees turn towards ...Sanjay, even to say '179 degrees turn towards self <i>may</i> still be a snake' is not quite strong enough, because it certainly <i>will</i> still be a snake. 179 degrees turn means that 'I' is still mixed with adjuncts, albeit in a very attenuated form, so it is still the ego.<br /><br />Only when we turn a full 180 degrees away from everything else towards 'I' alone will we experience absolute clarity of self-awareness, and will our mind or ego thereby be destroyed completely and forever.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-91145584115138810382014-05-31T09:23:13.937+01:002014-05-31T09:23:13.937+01:00Sorry, what I meant to write was this:
Yes, 0 degr...Sorry, what I meant to write was this:<br />Yes, 0 degrees may a snake and 180 degrees a rope,as Wittgenstein writes, but 179 degrees turn towards self may still be a snake.<br />Sanjay LohiaSanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-56772821818062461382014-05-31T07:04:00.623+01:002014-05-31T07:04:00.623+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-88505596852295541622014-05-29T05:40:58.721+01:002014-05-29T05:40:58.721+01:00Michael:
You quote from Maharshi’s Gospel: ‘In yo...Michael:<br /><br />You quote from <i>Maharshi’s Gospel</i>: ‘In your investigation into the source of the thought ‘I’, you take the essential <i> cit </i> [consciousness] aspect of the <b>ego</b>’ (bold emphasis mine). This should also be the consciousness aspect of our essential self, as Sri Sadhu Om says in the eighth chapter of <i>The Path of Sri Ramana (Part One)</i> that, ‘The mind which attends to Self is no more the mind; it is the consciousness aspect of Self (<i>atma-chit-rupam</i>)’. However, if we take other statements of Bhagavan from <i>Ulladu Narpadu</i> (<i>’Ulladu aladu ulla unarvu ullado?’ </i>) and from <i> Upadesa Undiyar</i>, (<i>’Ulladu unara unarvu veru illai’</i>), it is clear that this <i>cit</i> aspect is also the <i>sat</i> aspect of the essential self. Finally, from <i> Upadesa Undiyar</i>, verse 28, it is also the <i>ananda</i> aspect of the essential self. That is to say, these aspects cannot exist separately but can only co-exist. If that is so, the mind turned inwards is <i>Atman</i> or <i>Brahman</i>. I vaguely recollect having read that when someone asked Bhagavan what is the difference between the mind and the essential self, he is believed to have said, “No difference. The mind turned inwards is the essential self”, clearly bringing out the role of mind in the pursuit of enquiry.<br /><br />Most advaitic scholars exalt Brahman to such transcendental heights that it remains ‘untouched’ and ‘untouchable’ and the possibility of ‘knowing’ it forever remains bleak. In other words, the questions of how duality can ‘touch’ non-duality and if there is (really) a practice to achieve this inevitably arise. Bhagavan puts all such troubles to end by saying that the inward turned mind is the essential self and all <i> jada</i> aspects (<i>upadhi</i>) get automatically dissolved in such a process of turning inwards and ‘knowing’ is being (<i>thanai iruthale thannai aridalam</i>). Of course, this turning in ranges from zero to 180 degrees, to use Sri Sadhu Om's terminology, zero being snake and 180 being rope. Nevertheless, enquiry is non-dual and it works!Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-31818626237513403232014-05-27T12:34:43.680+01:002014-05-27T12:34:43.680+01:00Thanks Michael,your precise explanations again are...Thanks Michael,your precise explanations again are helpful.<br />Our confused and deluded mind seems to be not just the best tool to destroy the illusory knot. Nevertheless lets continue that work of close examination ot the mixture-I,because we have no other chance and no other choice.Lets direct the mind within towards 'I'<br />to prevent its rising from its source. We should not oppress the essential cit aspect of our ego but let it do its work of investigation in order to experience 'I' as it actually is !<br />Let us stop adulteration of the one pure self-awareness. Let us not to be content with playing the role of repeated receiving of a mistaken experience of 'I'. <br />Oh Arunachala do not be the onlooker of us mistaker but do undermine our illusion of confused experience of other things/thoughts as the pure adjunct-free 'I'. Josef Brucknernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-89033915397684228732014-05-27T07:02:44.499+01:002014-05-27T07:02:44.499+01:00Nice post on the role of mind in enquiry. The '...Nice post on the role of mind in enquiry. The 'I' (ego), being still, knows 'I am that I am'. And here, knowing is being (thanai iruthale thannai aridhalam). Also, this post reminds: "Nan ondru(m) (s)tanathu nan nan endrondru thanaga thondrume - adhudhan pundram (purnam)". With that one can sing, “idhuve moname; eka vaname; inba thaname”: such beautiful lines from the divine poet – just reading that gives ecstasy and switches off the mind. Many thanks for your explanations and best wishes for your good work.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-88034901905713784012014-05-26T21:38:26.970+01:002014-05-26T21:38:26.970+01:00Thank you for this answer... I really appreciate y...Thank you for this answer... I really appreciate your work, your explanation... Thank you very much.<br /><br />JFinvestigation de soihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07785467481308543769noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-598785282534949322014-05-26T17:05:08.992+01:002014-05-26T17:05:08.992+01:00Thanks for your kindness to explain so clearly wha...Thanks for your kindness to explain so clearly what is mind, and what is the role of mind in investigating 'I'. <br /><br />In this context, I would like to refer to verse 870 of Guru Vachaka Kovai. The commentary of Sri Sadhu Om for this verse (in Tamil) conveys this: The world experienced by the five senses, and the 'I' that sees the world are all part of that one infinite truth and being(existence). <br /><br />Finite being within the infinite, the finite 'I' (what we mistake us to be) is within that infinite 'I' (what we really are). <br /><br />Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 585 and 1028 also convey nearly the same meaning, but in somewhat a different way: that it is ignorance (or rather not investigating the source of rise of illusory thoughts)which keeps persons search for happiness outside. <br /><br />In verse 585, the dog which bites a bone is ignorant that the blood that oozes out is its own, and hence bites it still harder. In verse 1028, a special deer species (Kasthuri)is ignorant that the fragrance that emanates as it roams around is from its own body, and hence keeps the search on for the fragrance by roaming more and more.<br /><br />R Viswanathan https://www.blogger.com/profile/18066293987969833262noreply@blogger.com