tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post6667058469915903033..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Self-knowledge is not a void (śūnya)Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-40495875774867052812015-11-02T14:50:51.417+00:002015-11-02T14:50:51.417+00:00Thank you Michael for your clear explanation about...Thank you Michael for your clear explanation about the identity of the experience 'all is one' and the experience 'I alone am'.<br />Thanks also for pointing out the unreliability of the tendency of our fuzzy mind to imagine that all these many things are somehow only one thing. According your cautioning advice 'In order to experience 'all is one' (without any alternative)we must experience only the one thing that alone actually exists, namely ourself'.<br />'In order to know what Bhagavan experiences we must experience it ourself'.<br />So let us pray to be able 'to turn our mind inwards and drown it in him, who shines within us as our own actual self'.<br />Hey mind, would you not like to know what in you shines as real self ?Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-73801709230015907012015-11-01T17:08:23.989+00:002015-11-01T17:08:23.989+00:00.... [So long as we see Bhagavan as a person, he s....... [So long as we see Bhagavan as a person, he seems to us to be a body and mind like us, so we imagine that like us he is also aware of many things, and hence we imagine that when he says he is aware of only one thing, namely himself, he means that he is aware of all these many thing as himself. However, when he says that what actually exists is only our real self (ātma-svarūpa), he means that all the many things that seem to exist in our experience do not actually exist, so he is not actually aware of many things but only of himself, the one infinite reality, other than which nothing actually exists or even seems to exist in his experience.] .....<br /><br />Thank you Michael very helpful .... Bhagavan does not experience everything as himself but only experinces himself alone as the one non dual being conciousness.<br /><br />In appreciation <br />Bob Bob - Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-50979548447314980712015-11-01T13:22:02.395+00:002015-11-01T13:22:02.395+00:00Silk weaver, in reply your question about whether ...Silk weaver, in reply <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1446239819530#c3963368373405427625" rel="nofollow">your question</a> about whether the experience ‘all is one’ is the same as the experience ‘I alone am’: Yes, they are one and the same, because since ‘I’ is the only thing that exists, all that exists is only this one thing called ‘I’.<br /><br />However, the statement ‘all is one’ can be easily misunderstood, because so long as we think that many things exists, we understand ‘all’ to mean all these many things, and so long as we experience the seeming existence of many things, we are not experiencing the truth that what actually exists is only one thing, namely ourself, this single ‘I’. Many are many and one is one, so many cannot be one and one cannot be many. Therefore we have to choose whether we want to experience only the one thing that actually exists, namely ourself, or the many things that seem to exist.<br /><br />If the ‘all’ that we experience consists of many things, we are not actually experiencing ‘all is one’ but only ‘all are many’, even though we may be imagining that all these many things are somehow only one thing. In order to experience ‘all is one’, we must experience only the one thing that alone actually exists, namely ourself.<br /><br />So long as we see Bhagavan as a person, he seems to us to be a body and mind like us, so we imagine that like us he is also aware of many things, and hence we imagine that when he says he is aware of only one thing, namely himself, he means that he is aware of all these many thing as himself. However, when he says that what actually exists is only our real self (<i>ātma-svarūpa</i>), he means that all the many things that seem to exist in our experience do not actually exist, so he is not actually aware of many things but only of himself, the one infinite reality, other than which nothing actually exists or even seems to exist in his experience.<br /><br />Therefore what he experiences cannot be adequately comprehended by our mind, so in order to know what he experiences we must experience it ourself, which we can do only by turning our mind inwards and drowning it in him, who shines within us as our own actual self.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-39633683734054276252015-10-30T21:16:59.530+00:002015-10-30T21:16:59.530+00:00Michael,
a hearty thank- you for your comment.
The...Michael,<br />a hearty thank- you for your comment.<br />The generally seeming difficulty to follow the path shown by Bhagavan - simply being attentively self-aware – comes from the enmeshment "in our desires to experience other than ourself" as you call it. That enmeshment should not be seen separately from our wanting to be cured from spiritual blindness because it goes hand in hand with our spiritual ripeness. Our desire to experience other than ourself is in the end nothing other than to experience our real self.<br />The density of our ignorance is in proportion to that our enmeshment.<br /> That longing for cure we do not have to hand. This decision is not (always) in our hands but depends of the quantity of unsatisfied and satisfied desires.<br />That is why we do not even want to begin sipping Bhagavan's seeming bitter medicine.<br />Watching my personal situation I do not see me only desiring to enjoy the trivial pleasures of this world. My desire „to be free of all this“ is surely not only slight. But I am not able to walk unfailingly along the path that Ramana-Arunachala has shown.<br />What you write about the fotos of a newspaper reading Bhagavan I agree now fully.<br />Is it the same to experience "all is one" as Bhagavan's experience as simply 'I alone am'?<br />That we cannot understand what he experiences but to experience it ourself is clear to me. <br />Your statement about the gap called 'sleep' made this theme very vivid.<br />It may be easy to know 'I am'. But to comprehend Bhagavan's word or the fact that we experience ourself without any ego in sleep (verse 21 of Upadesa Undiyar "we do not cease to exist in sleep, which is devoid of ego") is not revealed to me from own experience. Why do we –as we really are - not know the place of residence of the ego during the gap called sleep ? When I would know that place I could do without any piece of documentary evidence. So my condition seems to be really hopeless. Obviously my massive self-ignorance does obstruct Bhagavan's treatment and the ability to be attentively self-aware at all times.<br />How can such one failure as I cling fast to uninterrupted svarupa-smarana ?<br />Bhagavan, why did you appear 35 years ago in Central Europe when I was "meditating" sitting on a stone mountainside on a slope of Arunachala smiling at me and beckoning me over with your right hand around fifty meters above Skandashram ? Did you not see my incurable disease ? How could you expect me to surrender entirely to you ? Did you not take on too much ? Attaining svarupa is in the lap of the Gods.Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-60990312018859884522015-10-29T11:06:47.334+00:002015-10-29T11:06:47.334+00:00Michael,
thanks for your reply.
What I have tried ...Michael,<br />thanks for your reply.<br />What I have tried to express was the idea that not only what you have written again in your above reply „So long as we seem to be anything other than 'I'(ourself) alone, such as a body or a mind – what we seem to be may be an illusion (...),<br />because the only thing that we actually are is ourself, this ‚I‘ that now seems to be other things." is merely a thought produced by the illusory mind but also your statement "All we can be absolutely sure about is our own existence and our own awareness,[because in order to be aware of anything, whether real or illusory, we must actually exist.]". <br />We as the thinking mind cannot at all be "absolutely sure" about anything. Because we are like the tiny ants which are themselves convinced by the correctness of their cognition,insights and action. Therefore also that maybe an illusion.<br />What I here have compared with an ant is the narrowness of our mind’s intellectual faculties/skills/capabilities to recognice our true state.<br />The only counter –evidence to my above expressed idea is Bhagavan’s or other sages statement 'I am I'. But also the sages and Bhagavan’s teaching do we know only from hearsay or book-reading.<br />So unless we are not aware of being merged completely with the awareness of (like) Bhagavan or Dakshinamurt(h)i themselves we (will) have no proof of (our) reality. Therefore let us be(come) Bhagavan.<br />I am aware that the above opinion is only the work of an illusory mind using its body to type that lines which are only illusory outbursts.<br />As soon as possible I will study section 15c with particular attention as you recommend.Ereschkigalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-77489169913049303612015-10-28T09:21:41.512+00:002015-10-28T09:21:41.512+00:00[Bhagavan did his medical residency under the best...[Bhagavan did his medical residency under the best Mountain doctor (Arunachala) who is capable of curing all maladies. He himself says that in verse 76 of Aksharamanamalai:]<br /><br />Yes while we experience oursleves not as we really are we wrongly percieve Bhagavan and Arunachala to be two separate things when it is my understanding that they are both one including the teaching. Bhagavan didn't do anything ... this is all in our ignorant view ... And I certainly admit I am ignorant as I do expereince Bhagavan as a indian sage who has now passed and Arunachala as a holy hill in India. <br /><br />In appreciation. <br />Bob <br />Bob - Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-36548126337500064412015-10-28T06:29:06.799+00:002015-10-28T06:29:06.799+00:00Michael has put it beautifully in one of his recen...Michael has put it beautifully in one of his recent comments: <br /><br /><i>Our self-ignorance is so dense that no other doctor has been able to cure us, but Bhagavan has happily accepted us and vowed to cure us, so however hopeless our condition may seem to be, we can be sure that he will cure us. However, in order to avoid obstructing his work and thereby delaying our cure, we must surrender ourself entirely to him by faithfully adhering to the course of treatment that he has prescribed for us, namely trying as much as possible to be attentively self-aware at all times.</i><br /><br />Many of my friends used to feel that if we just take Bhagavan to be our <i>sadguru</i> and request him to give us jnana, he will surely destroy our ego. They argued that how can a non-existent and illusory ego make any effort to know self or God, when the ego itself does not exist? It is like saying that if we just have ourself admitted in the best hospital, we are sure to be cured of our deadly disease. Obviously we have to obey the doctors at the hospital, and take the medicines and other treatments prescribed by them in order to be cured. <br /><br />Yes, in reality our ego does not exist, but as long as we take it to real, we have to make all efforts to know experientially that it does not exist. Therefore, once we have come to Bhagavan we are without any doubt under the treatment of the best doctor who can cure our self-ignorance, but we have to faithfully and wholeheartedly follow his course of treatment. And his main treatment is, as Michael says, 'trying as much as possible to be attentively self-aware at all times'. Of course regular <i>sravana</i> and <i>manana</i> of his direct words, and praying to him to annihilate our ego, are also powerful support treatments. Regards. <br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-3785574949450513092015-10-27T21:33:18.279+00:002015-10-27T21:33:18.279+00:00Bhagavan did his medical residency under the best ...Bhagavan did his medical residency under the best Mountain doctor (Arunachala) who is capable of curing all maladies. He himself says that in verse 76 of Aksharamanamalai:<br /><br />"You whose grace shines as Sanjivi mountain able to cure all maladies, why are you afraid of applying to me the remedy for confusion?"<br /><br />Arunachala is the only Khestra that offers liberation to people who only think/meditate of it. Having trained well under such a doctor and having merged in it, can there be any doubt that he will cure us? (including me, who does not follow many of his advanced teachings).<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-53930317067949506152015-10-27T17:57:55.549+00:002015-10-27T17:57:55.549+00:00[Those of us who have come to Bhagavan are such pa...[Those of us who have come to Bhagavan are such patients. Our self-ignorance is so dense that no other doctor has been able to cure us, but Bhagavan has happily accepted us and vowed to cure us, so however hopeless our condition may seem to be, we can be sure that he will cure us.]<br /><br />This is very powerful .. it is very easy for the ego to think it must be very ripe or very spiritually mature to understand or accept Bhagavan's teaching.<br /><br />Your statement is a real blow to ones ego so to speak. <br /><br />Thank you for the above posts Michael<br />Bob Bob - Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-51860227116451613402015-10-27T15:51:45.438+00:002015-10-27T15:51:45.438+00:00In continuation of my previous comment in reply to...In continuation of <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1445960636878#c5848575191767378564" rel="nofollow">my previous comment</a> in reply to Silk weaver:<br /><br />Regarding <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1445243047092#c4498275311201248232" rel="nofollow">your sixth comment</a>, were you aware of the presence of your ego while asleep? I assume you will agree that you were not, yet you remember having been in that state in which were not aware of it or of anything else. You can remember having been in such a state only because you were aware of being in it. If you were not aware of having been in a state in which you were not aware of anything else, you would not know that such a state existed. All you would be aware of would be a seemingly uninterrupted succession of alternating states of waking and dream with no perceptible gap between any two such consecutive states. However, since you are aware that between some such states there is a gap in which you are not aware of anything else, while in that gap (which is what we call ‘sleep’) you must have been aware of being in it. Being aware of yourself in sleep without being aware of your ego or anything else is what I described as being aware of the absence of the ego. You were there, but your ego was not, so your ego is not what you really are.<br /><br />You ask what ‘supporting documentary evidence’ there is for saying that we are aware of ourself without being aware of any ego while asleep. Bhagavan frequently pointed this out (for example, in <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/by-attending-to-our-ego-we-are.html#uu21" rel="nofollow">verse 21</a> of <i>Upadēśa Undiyār</i> he says that we do not cease to exist in sleep, which is devoid of ego), but what he pointed out is what we actually experience, so once we recognise the fact that we do experience ourself without any ego in sleep, we do not need any ‘supporting documentary evidence’ to convince us. Do we need any supporting documentary evidence in order to know ‘I am’ or anything else that we ourself experience?<br /><br />In <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1445281291228#c3642760131333554822" rel="nofollow">your eighth comment</a> you ask, ‘Is there any hope for me? [..] or am I a patient beyond help?’ To borrow an analogy often given by Sadhu Om, if you visit the clinic of a doctor who has specialised in curing patients with a disease that is so serious that no other doctor has been able to cure them, what sort of patients would you expect to find there? You will not find anyone who suffers only from minor ailments, such as a cough or cold, but only those who suffer from that seemingly hopeless and incurable condition. Those of us who have come to Bhagavan are such patients. Our self-ignorance is so dense that no other doctor has been able to cure us, but Bhagavan has happily accepted us and vowed to cure us, so however hopeless our condition may seem to be, we can be sure that he will cure us. However, in order to avoid obstructing his work and thereby delaying our cure, we must surrender ourself entirely to him by faithfully adhering to the course of treatment that he has prescribed for us, namely trying as much as possible to be attentively self-aware at all times.<br /><br />As he said in the <a href="http://www.happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para11" rel="nofollow">eleventh paragraph</a> of <i>Nāṉ Yār?</i>:<br /><br />“ஒருவன் தான் சொரூபத்தை யடையும் வரையில் நிரந்தர சொரூப ஸ்மரணையைக் கைப்பற்றுவானாயின் அதுவொன்றே போதும்."<br /><br />“<i>oruvaṉ tāṉ sorūpattai y-aḍaiyum varaiyil nirantara sorūpa-smaraṇaiyai-k kai-p-paṯṟuvāṉ-āyiṉ adu-v-oṉḏṟē pōdum</i>.”<br /><br />“If one clings fast to uninterrupted <i>svarūpa-smaraṇa</i> [self-remembrance] until one attains <i>svarūpa</i> [one’s own actual self], that alone will be sufficient.”Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-58485751917673785642015-10-27T15:43:56.878+00:002015-10-27T15:43:56.878+00:00Silk weaver, in reply to your first comment, our s...Silk weaver, in reply to <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1445206514728#c5801503578004258200" rel="nofollow">your first comment</a>, our spiritual blindness is not an incurable illness, and the simple way to cure it has been clearly shown by Bhagavan. However, though the cure is indeed very simple (since it entails nothing other than simply being attentively self-aware), it generally seems to us to be very difficult, but that is only because we do not yet want to be cured.<br /><br />So long as we are enmeshed in our desires to experience anything other than ourself, the sweet medicine he has given us will seem very bitter, so we are reluctant to drink it. However, if we practise sipping it little by little, we will certainly gain a taste for it, and one day we will happily and greedily gulp it all down. So all we need now do is to begin sipping it (which is what Sadhu Om meant by saying that <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/we-ourself-are-what-we-are-looking-for.html?showComment=1445451072331#c5361051246803831619" rel="nofollow">we should allow the camel’s nose to enter our tent</a>).<br /><br />You ask, ‘Are the sages a lot of use for us? What benefit can we derive from the insights of the sages?’ If our only desire is to enjoy the trivial pleasures of this world, they are not a lot of use to us, but if we have even the slightest desire to be free of all this, then they and their words are immeasurably valuable and beneficial, because by following their advice we can wake up from this dream. However, as Bhagavan concluded the <a href="http://www.happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para12" rel="nofollow">twelfth paragraph</a> of <i>Nāṉ Yār?</i> by saying, ‘குரு காட்டிய வழிப்படி தவறாது நடக்க வேண்டும்’ (<i>guru kāṭṭiya vaṙi-p-paḍi tavaṟādu naḍakka vēṇḍum</i>), which means ‘it is necessary to walk unfailingly along the path that <i>guru</i> has shown’.<br /><br />Regarding <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1445214710455#c6596186842210439008" rel="nofollow">your fourth comment</a>, Bhagavan never actually read any newspaper. It seems to us that he read them because we mistake him to be a body, but according to him he did not experience that body as himself, and he was not even aware of that body or this world. His experience was simply ‘I alone am’. As he said in <a href="#un31" rel="nofollow">verse 31</a> of <i>Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu</i>, who can and how to conceive the state of those who do not know anything other than themself? To understand what he experiences we must experience it ourself, and to experience it we must investigate what we actually are.<br /><br />(I will continue this reply in my next comment.)Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-79525929489400059042015-10-26T12:13:49.472+00:002015-10-26T12:13:49.472+00:00Ereschkigal, when you write in your comment ‘Look ...Ereschkigal, when you write in <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/09/self-knowledge-is-not-void-sunya.html?showComment=1445085741425#c4924047899189654976" rel="nofollow">your comment</a> ‘Look at somebody who lies down in brain-death’ or ‘But if we imagine an ant thinking in that way’ you are talking about someone other than yourself, whereas what I wrote in <a href="#nothing" rel="nofollow">section 3</a> was applicable only to ourself. As I wrote there, ‘The fact that we do experience and are aware is sufficient to prove that we do exist’, but ‘Except ourself, anything or everything else that we experience could be non-existent, because even though such things seem to exist, they might not actually exist. They might be just illusions or false appearances — things that seem to exist in our experience but do not actually exist independent of our experience of them’.<br /><br />In a dream we see many other people and animals (including perhaps some brain-dead people or some ants), and so long as we are dreaming we assume that those other people and animals are aware of that dream world like us (unless they are sleeping, in coma or brain-dead), but when we wake up we realise that they were all just an illusion created by our own mind and were therefore not aware of anything at all. Likewise, all the other people and animals we see now may also be an illusion and hence aware of nothing, because what we are now experiencing could be just another dream.<br /><br />All we can be absolutely sure about is our own existence and our own awareness, which according to Bhagavan are one and the same thing, because our very nature is to be self-aware. Because we are aware, we must exist. Everything else that we are aware of may be an illusion, so it may not actually exist, but our own existence cannot be an illusion, because in order to be aware of anything, whether real or illusory, we must actually exist.<br /><br />So long as we seem to be anything other than ‘I’ (ourself) alone, such as a body or a mind, what we seem to be may be an illusion (and according to Bhagavan it is an illusion), because the only thing that we actually are is ourself, this ‘I’ that now seems to be other things. This is why Bhagavan always insisted that real self-experience is not ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’ but only ‘I am I’ (though unfortunately in most English books the Tamil words he used to express this fact, namely ‘நான் நான்’ (<i>nāṉ nāṉ</i>), have been routinely mistranslated as ‘I-I’, whereas in fact they mean ‘I am I’, as I explain in <a href="#un30" rel="nofollow">section 15c</a> of this article).Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-89399265044219798612015-10-19T21:36:17.379+01:002015-10-19T21:36:17.379+01:00Michael,
sections 13 and 14:
To linger as the ego ...Michael,<br />sections 13 and 14:<br />To linger as the ego instead to be aware of our pure self-awareness is a incomprehensible, tremendous and outragous behaviour. What has to be more resolutely condemned than allowing and tolerating readily the development and flourishing of the mistaken experience of the ego ? Can there be a more embarrassing error than fail to recognize that we alone as atma-svarupa exist ? Why do we prefer the illusory knowledge other than ourself ? To worship the view of ourself as the ego is really more dangerous and pernicious than make an attempt to cross a torrential stream on the back of a crocodile. How can we labouring under the delusion which makes us overlook that we are self-shing or svayam-prakasa ?<br />So let the explosive of true knowledge blow up that illusion for ever and ever.<br /> Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-47485870618442366972015-10-19T20:27:16.252+01:002015-10-19T20:27:16.252+01:00Michael,
how could I prefer to live in the darknes...Michael,<br />how could I prefer to live in the darkness of all hells instead to see what this ego is and thereby make vanishing its illusory appearance ?<br />Really, I did not cover myself with glory. I don't know whether Arunachala wants to punish me or decides to help me now wipe out that shame. Otherwise false knowledge and ignorance will not cease and true knowledge will not remain.Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-36427601313335548222015-10-19T20:01:31.228+01:002015-10-19T20:01:31.228+01:00Michael,
sections 11 and 12:
How could I ever be s...Michael,<br />sections 11 and 12:<br />How could I ever be satisfied with the dreary hallucination of imprecise untrue knowledge ? What an evil product of concentrated idiocy and obduracy I am, not having taken care to experience myself as I really am ? Is there any hope for me ? Have I gone completely round the bend or am I a patient beyond help ?Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-87158944633354013452015-10-19T09:47:33.009+01:002015-10-19T09:47:33.009+01:00Michael,
section 12:
"Knowing the non-existe...Michael, <br />section 12:<br />"Knowing the non-existence of the ego is true knowledge".<br />Yes, that is what I call a conclusive statement.<br />But I do not understand why in my life I missed to investigate to whom knowledge and ignorance appear. I must be a fool: What could be more important than making the ego subside and knowing ourself as we really are ? Is not true knowledge alone worth to be experienced ?Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-44982753112012482322015-10-19T09:24:07.092+01:002015-10-19T09:24:07.092+01:00Michael,
section 10:
"However, since we exper...Michael,<br />section 10:<br />"However, since we experience not only the presence...but also its absence in sleep, we exist and experience ..."<br />I would lie like mad if I would claim that I was fully aware of that experience of the absence of the ego in my sleep last night. The memory of that experience at waking does not substantiate that "theory".<br />However, the statement about that experience of the absence of the ego in (deep) sleep is essential and of considerable and fundamental importance. Which are the supporting documentary evidence for it ?Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-11579066739919286712015-10-19T08:39:34.188+01:002015-10-19T08:39:34.188+01:00Michael,
section 11:"[...]This one real knowl...Michael,<br />section 11:"[...]This one real knowledge is therefore the knowledge 'I am', which is our pure self-awareness, uncontaminated with any awareness of anything else whatsoever."<br />That mahavakya should easily break the stubborn and proud nature of the (my) ego.<br />I bow my head to its abundance/fullness.<br />Only a ripe jiva/sadhaka will comprehend its meaning fully.<br />Mere mental understanding is not enough.Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-65961868422104390082015-10-19T01:31:50.455+01:002015-10-19T01:31:50.455+01:00Michael,
section 13: "Knowing anything other ...Michael,<br />section 13: "Knowing anything other than oneself is ignorance"<br />I hope you do not feel it as sacrilegious when I ask if it is well suited to the above statement, when we see fotos with Bhagavan reading newspapers and showing obviously curiosity about the news in the world. Why does Bhagavan want to get knowledge of anything other than himself ? To answer my home-made question I think because Bhagavan did know his real nature he was not be trapped by ignorance.Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-13446456828503469532015-10-19T00:18:02.063+01:002015-10-19T00:18:02.063+01:00Michael,
to investigate to whom knowledge and igno...Michael,<br />to investigate to whom knowledge and ignorance appear sounds so easy as to carry out the task: give me a spoon out of the drawer !<br />But trying it just now into practice I find it difficult.Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-47635863225773587522015-10-18T23:59:08.118+01:002015-10-18T23:59:08.118+01:00Michael,
section 11: Last clause: "..., and a...Michael,<br />section 11: Last clause: "..., and according Bhagavan true knowledge is devoid of any thing other than ourself."<br />When a shepherd tells that theorem to his flock of sheep would the most astute sheep understand him ?Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-58015035780042582002015-10-18T23:15:14.728+01:002015-10-18T23:15:14.728+01:00Michael,
section 8 and section 9. "We are ful...Michael,<br />section 8 and section 9. "We are fullness, not avoid, because nothing other than ourself actually exists" and section 10. "What exists always by its own light is only ourself" summarize the world drama in a very brief and simple way.<br />When it is equally said "Don't cry" - What actually exists is only atma-svarupa[our own essential self]one would feel asked: Have you got any further questions ?<br />It is nice to hear that Dakshinamurti made the one self-substance[ekatma-vastu]known by speaking without speaking.<br />An entirely different matter is that we do experience something contrary than the sages report to us. Of course it is not in the sphere of responsibility of the sages that we or the majority of us are afflicted by the possibly incurable illness of spiritual blindness and the inability to make our ego subside back into ourself, the silent source from which it arose.<br />But the 'suspicion that we are the only thing that actually exists, and that we are therefore the one substance that appears as whatever else seems to to exist' does not help us further to eliminate our illness. Are the sages a lot of use for us ?<br />What benefit can we derive from the insights of the sages ? What the advantage would be for a terminally ill person in hearing and accepting the knowledge of sages ? Silk weavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-49240478991896549762015-10-17T13:42:21.425+01:002015-10-17T13:42:21.425+01:00Michael,
regarding Section 3. We are not sunya in ...Michael,<br />regarding Section 3. We are not sunya in the sense of non-existent or nothing<br /><br />Does it really sufficiently substantiate the statement (or at least the conclusion) that we do exist only when we consider the facts of (human)experience and awareness ?<br />Look at somebody who lies down in brain-death. On the assumption that he or she does not experience anything and is not aware of anything this person nevertheless exists.<br /><br />Second paragraph: [Except ourself, anything or everything else...do not merely seem to exist]. The sequence of the train of thought about our existence is quite logical and understandable. But if we imagine an ant thinking in that way, would we really take seriously that tiny being ? We would rather feel at most/best compassion with the little ant.<br />So let us hope the creator(Ishvara)will have compassion with the limitedness/narrow -mindedness of us tiny thought-producers.Ereschkigalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-81584180322041211262015-09-24T11:31:14.398+01:002015-09-24T11:31:14.398+01:00That duck-rabbit link brought smile to my face!That duck-rabbit link brought smile to my face!Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-82755567358846292262015-09-23T18:56:32.765+01:002015-09-23T18:56:32.765+01:00Dear Michael
I have read your article / reply an...Dear Michael <br /><br />I have read your article / reply and it was a tremendous help to me, thank you. <br /><br />I shall be re reading it and have printed it out as I prefer to read things offline. <br /><br />Your insights below on emptiness / void was especially helpful to me. <br /><br />[Since we are beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda, nothing other than ourself actually exists, so we are empty or void only in the sense that we are devoid of anything other than ourself, but being devoid of anything else means that we are full of ourself — that is, full of beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda, which is all that actually exists. There is therefore no need or reason for us to fear the loss of our ego, because what we will then experience will not only be full of what is real and devoid of what is unreal, but will also be full of infinite happiness and devoid of even the slightest trace of unhappiness or misery.]<br /><br />[Since nothing other than ourself exists or ever could exist, we cannot actually be empty or void, because there is nothing of which we could be empty or void. Therefore we are not only fullness but absolute and unconditional fullness. We are full, and full of nothing but ourself, and since we can never be void of ourself, we can never be void at all.]<br /><br />Your comment directly below reinforces my understanding as did your insight about ātma-jñānis / many ātma-jñāni / ātma-svarūpa in the following paragraph below it. <br /><br />[This can also be clearly illustrated by the ambiguous image or a rabbit or duck, which we can see either as a rabbit or as a duck, but never as both simultaneously. Just as we cannot see it as both simultaneously, we cannot see the world as a collection of multiple forms and simultaneously see it as our formless self. When we see it as multiple forms we do not see it as ourself, and when we see it as ourself we do not see any forms[<br /><br />[The existence of many ātma-jñānis or ‘self-realised people’ seems to be real only in the self-ignorant view of the ego, because according to Bhagavan what is real is only ourself, who are one, infinite and indivisible whole, so there cannot be anything other than ourself to know ourself or to make ourself known. Therefore the ātma-jñāni is not a person but only ourself, the one ātma-svarūpa, other than which nothing actually exists. Only if anything other than ourself actually existed could it know ourself or be known by ourself, but according to Bhagavan nothing other than ourself actually exists so nothing other than ourself can either know ourself or be known by ourself.[<br /><br />Lastly your conclusion - <br />18. Why do we fear to let go of everything?<br /><br />I think I needed to hear this Michael so thank you because it has helped me immensely.<br /><br />I accept if I truly wanted to experience myself as I really am I would not be writing this message to you .. So obviously there is a deep rooted desire in me to attend to things other than myself. <br /><br />If you were to ask me do you want to experience yourself as you really are Bob? I would say of course Michael, but in truth this mustn't be the case if I am totally honest even though I want it to be. <br /><br />However if you said to me would you be prepared to go to sleep tonight and never wake up again Bob? I would say yes ... I see this as a very good sign along with finding Bhagavan and his teaching which does resonate with me deeply. Another good sign is finding your book about his teaching and your blog / website and the article you just wrote linked to my question about the fear of the unknown.<br /><br />So I must be see these things as a very good sign indeed. <br /><br />You wonderful reply as given me hope and strengthened my resolve to keep with my practise without looking for progress.<br /><br />But most importantly of all it has helped remove or dilute the fear I have about dissolving into myself. <br /><br />In deep appreciation Michael as always. <br /><br />Bob <br /><br /><br />Bob - Pnoreply@blogger.com