tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post6926182508191369542..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Can we experience what we actually are by following the path of devotion (bhakti mārga)?Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger159125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-54324671853426451172015-10-13T16:35:59.498+01:002015-10-13T16:35:59.498+01:00Jai Ma.
There is something to be said for adhikAr...Jai Ma.<br /><br />There is something to be said for adhikAra, the state at which the aspirant is or asking a question to continue on his quest. The most poignant expression of this is the holy rishi, Valmiki, who is asked to begin with the OSTENSIBLY viparita 'marA' : marA marA marA caiva!<br /><br />Here is an interesting excerpt from a group who are ostensibly dead set against "mayavadis" and should be carefully scrutinized!!<br /><br /> The essence of Srila Gaura Kishora Dasa Babaji's instructions:<br /><br />"The Divine Name of Krishna offers the one and only shelter. One should never try to remember Radha-Damodara's transcendental pastimes by artificial methods. Constant chanting of the Divine Names will purify the heart. By chanting Hari Nama the syllables of the maha-mantra (Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare, Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare) will gradually reveal the spiritual form, qualities, pastimes of Sri Krishna. Then you will realize your own eternal spiritual form, service, and the eleven particulars of your spiritual identity." http://www.stephen-knapp.com/gaurakishore_das_babaji.htm<br /><br />"Your own spiritual form" and the "11 particulars of your spiritual identity" have a bearing on the topic under discussion.<br /><br />Actually, personal experience puts paid to endless discussion, and should be the goal. As was discussed in the post of partial vs. full surrender, these are aspects personal evolution, continuous and seamless. Constant, in fact. The Gopi prema or the internal intensity of the linga svabhava can be the very same thing but such is not possible to be publicly expressed, described, or made much of. Increasing inability to express in words and the unwillingness to do so, is perhaps best describes why the Lord is named Mukesh.<br /><br />Namaskar.gautamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05188124842361333060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-5656217654788432932015-08-24T16:46:22.155+01:002015-08-24T16:46:22.155+01:00Dear Sri James and other devotees,
I have been a ...Dear Sri James and other devotees,<br /><br />I have been a so called devotee of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharishee from 2010. I come back to this beautiful blog and its teachings from time to time.<br /><br />My primary source of Maharishee's teachings are David Godman's books.<br /><br />I have few humble observations and requests to all accomplished sadhaks who regularly post comments here.<br /><br />Whenever I come and read any extract here in this blog, the immediate first hand feeling I get is that we are trying to over intellectualize the whole process of self enquiry. Because of my mind addiction to Bhagavan Sri Ramana's various website resources, I do come back again and again, but everytime because of the over complication of the terms, arguments and counter arguments, clarifications over clarifications, examples over examples etc. I only go back with my buddhi totally confused.<br /><br />Our Bhagavan's teachings in the small booklet Naan Yaar, his replies in Sri Ramana Gita , his answers to Gambiram Seshayer in Vichara manai mala are quite sufficient for sadhaka to know his teachings.<br /><br />And I have observed this in this blog -- there is an artificial endeavor to justify only Self Enquiry and that even the path of devotion is equated to Self Enquiry by proving point by point as if in a theorem or thesis.<br /><br />Our Bhagavan has very clearly adored the physical form of Arunachala and wrote the pearl like Akshara Manamalai to give a free flow to his devotion to Arunachala Shiva who is none other than the three eyed Maheshwara. <br /><br />His reverence to Thiruvasakam and Thevaram are un-disputable -- which speak only dualistic devotion. <br /><br />Now what are we trying to gain by only advocating Self Enquiry and disproving everything else as indirect path?<br /><br />What are we going to achieve by writing misinterpretations of Sri Kavyakanta?<br /><br />Have we first interpreted everything correctly?<br /><br />Someone here beautifully negated the Eka Jiva Vada which our Bhagavan spoke of, by beautiful theorems of logic. But does that give Shanthi?<br /><br />Self Enquiry is bit like a cycling -- David Godman would say. We better practice it and learn by ourselves rather than posting question after question, question on an answer, answer on a question -- the endless cycle. <br /><br />Infact the Upadesa Undiyar and Ulladhu Narpadhu are solely meant by Bhagavan to silently chant and get Shanthi and the grace filled in those words without over analyzing.<br /><br />The traditional vedantist schools do this over analysis on beautiful works of Shankara like Druk Drushya Vivekha etc. The same we should not apply now.<br /><br />You all may not like what I have told here . In fact you all know more than me but my only request is ,let us spend lot of time on sadhana rather than this over complication.<br /><br />Also some people like me are naturally devoted to the external form of Lord Shiva and I take turns with Self Enquiry and Nama Japa and Hearing about Arunachala Shiva tamil songs. There is nothing wrong in this approach. And let us not unnecessarily distract the already feeble seekers like me by proving like 'Time spent in Self Enquiry is better than any other Sadhana etc."<br /><br />Really speaking , there are no fellow travellers or fellow paths here. You are the only traveller. All else including me are objects appearing in your mind. And let us not forget that Ishwara even though appears to us, he appears in Spontaneous creation, immediately with the I raises Ishwara, subsides with the same I. Not after a fraction of second gap between I arising and Ishwara. So as long as you are in Vyavaaharika or Prathibhasika (both are dreams only), Ishwara is undisputable. <br /><br />So devotees let us not over complicate , instead read little bit from original verses , ponder over it, do self enquiry, do some nama japa and get shanthi.<br /><br />Regards,<br />Krishna<br />krishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10287083145696496091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-40987871651469868342015-08-22T18:36:22.726+01:002015-08-22T18:36:22.726+01:00Wittgenstein, prompted by your comment of 18 Augus...Wittgenstein, prompted by <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/07/can-we-experience-what-we-actually-are.html?showComment=1439916400448#c4349096170752757634" rel="nofollow">your comment of 18 August 2015 at 17:46</a> I have written an article in which I discuss in detail the two teachings that Bhagavan gave to Kavyakantha on 18th November 1907: <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/that-alone-is-tapas-first-teachings.html" rel="nofollow">‘That alone is <i>tapas</i>’: the first teachings that Sri Ramana gave to Kavyakantha Ganapati Sastri</a>.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-42425480992688227092015-08-19T21:51:18.523+01:002015-08-19T21:51:18.523+01:00Mr. Sivanarul
Your attitude toward sadhana, your ...Mr. Sivanarul<br /><br />Your attitude toward sadhana, your way of thinking are very similar to me. I am happy to meet you here(:-)). It it clear that from verse.3 of Ulladu Narpadu and Laksmana Sarma's commentary of verse 3 which was checked by Bhagavan, any theory is unnecessary to practice atma-vichara. <br /><br />And Bhagavan himself didn't know any theory when he completed atma-vichara at 16. He didn't even know the word Brahman and Atman. His simple and practical way of teaching accords with his experience at 16.<br /> <br /> What use is it discussing if the world<br /> Be real or unreal, pleasure-ground or not,<br /> A concept of the mind or otherwise?<br /> Transcending it and realizing Self,<br /> Freed from diversity and unity,<br /> And killing ego, reach the common goalshibanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-2158050080115552962015-08-19T18:13:46.869+01:002015-08-19T18:13:46.869+01:00Sivanarul,
You say, "The good news is belief...Sivanarul,<br /><br />You say, "The good news is belief in Eka Jiva Vada or considering waking to be like a dream is not necessary for Sadhana whether it is Vichara, Meditation or Mantra Japa". This is probably true for meditation or mantra japa. However, for <i>atma vichara</i>, <i>eka jiva vada</i> is very crucial.<br /><br />If we read <i>Ulladu Narpadu</i> carefully, Bhagavan starts his teaching by saying, "நாம் உலகம் காண்டலால்" [because we see the world], giving priority to the <i>eka jiva</i> that sees the world and people in it, as the latter two appear only to the former. Thus he develops the theme based on <i>eka jiva vada</i> and gives a summary of the <i>viveka</i> he imparted (before going to talk about he practice of <i>atma vichara</i>) in verse 25 by saying, "அகந்தை உண் டாயின், அனைத்தும் உண் டாகும்" [when the <i>eka jiva</i> rises, everything (the world, people and things in it) rises]. Therefore, the theme used for <i>upadesa</i> is <i>eka jiva vada</i>, because that is the one conducive for the practice of <i>atma vichara</i>.<br /><br />Further, in <i>Nan Yar</i> he says, "பிரபஞ்சத்தை ஒரு சொப்பனத்தைப்போ லெண்ணிக்கொள்ள வேண்டும்" [we should consider the world like a dream]. Now, the practice of <i>atma vichara</i> consists of investigating who this <i>eka jiva</i> is, in whom all other <i>jivas</i> appear and disappear.<br /><br />If, on the other hand, we consider other <i>jivas</i> to be independent of us, then, we are taking their existence/reality for granted. However, the whole spirit of <i>atma vichara</i> is to investigate the reality of this <i>eka jiva</i>, since by doing so, we are in fact investigating the reality of eveything else [as they appear only <i>after</i> this <i>eka jiva</i> appears].Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-78943693855881434432015-08-19T13:42:03.747+01:002015-08-19T13:42:03.747+01:00Shiba & Carlosji,
Thanks for the replies. I h...Shiba & Carlosji,<br /><br />Thanks for the replies. I have accepted those of Bhagavan’s teachings that I can agree with. Rest, I have put it in suspended animation, with the possibility that they may be accepted in the future, upon further progress in the path. Bhagavan’s compassion recognized this very well and that is why he accepted everyone that came to him, as they are. Any disagreements were dealt with his standard answer, “First trace back “I” to its source, then see if there are any disagreements left. Why worry about disagreements now”. His standard answer is how I reconcile my disagreements.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-58683466402620710172015-08-19T06:06:47.813+01:002015-08-19T06:06:47.813+01:00Dear Sivanarul
Forgot to add in my last post that ...Dear Sivanarul<br />Forgot to add in my last post that Maya (dream) in its non-existence has a structure. In that structure there are jnanis (some take care of their mothers some maybe not), robbers, artists, objects of all kind and thoughts/feelings/perceptions about all the above. In that structure Carlos is writing to Sivanarul who is reading it and many non-Carloses and non-Sivanaruls are reading this .... word.<br /><br />Silence...<br /><br />Yours in Sri Bhagavan <br />Carlos<br />Mounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-85214894882859473002015-08-19T05:42:25.479+01:002015-08-19T05:42:25.479+01:00Dear SIVAnarulji, vanakkam again..
(I have the fe...Dear SIVAnarulji, vanakkam again..<br /><br />(I have the feeling that if we were discussing these topics in front of a cup of tea, we would be having more fun, since there is some nice connection here between intellects)<br /><br />Anyhow, back to the real world (or should I say the dream one? :-)<br /><br />You said: "That is my understanding also and I look towards the actions of the three people I mentioned. There was a boy named Venkataraman and a boy named Shankara.” There lies the problem. <br /><br />If you investigate (very closely) what’s happening when you are typing such statement you might realize that what is really happening is that a concept in the form of a story “…there was a boy named Venkataraman…” suddenly appeared in the contents of “mind” (I would call it the contents of ego also. Mind that because of ignorance/identification you will call “MY mind”.<br /><br />A second later (or fraction of it) that concept developed into another one appearing, and another one, and yet another until a sensation arrives that prompts you to go drink a glass of water, and then another emotion/thought,/perception appears that takes “you” in another direction.<br /><br />The sages of lore say that this is all happening without “me” having any control of it, BUT… since veiling/ignorance/ego is our fictitious “identity” we do believe that “WE” interact with this external world, that after all, according to Bhagavan, is just a projection of that same ego.<br /><br />In that regard, Sivanarul is a character in The Dream of Life (sometimes it helps to consider it a play, like Lila) thinking about conceptual people that used to take care of things although they were supposed to be jnanis and encountering other people that do not behave like jnanis that are supposed to behave in a certain way if they believe that there is only one ego!! And WHY is that????<br /><br />BECAUSE YOU ARE TAKING YOURSELF TO BE A REAL BODY AMONGST OTHER BODIES LIVING IN A REAL WORLD HAVING REAL MEMORIES!!!<br />(I’m not shouting, don’t worry)<br /><br />The understandable problem is that any kind of solution is still in EGO, any kind of description of what a jnani should or shouldn’t be is also EGO. There is no way out… unless we investigate these matters deeply turning the attention to the source of the conundrum, because it should be one right? Bhagavan, says everything will be fine once we do that with perseverance, detachment and specially surrender to whatever we might find at the bottom of the bottomless pit. <br /><br />Since I’m not there yet, I for one have “faith” (a better word would be confidence) in him and what he says, because if I “look” around and inside, it’s a mess.<br /><br />Thank you my friend for being so patient if you read until here. <br />And hope your sadhana also is progressing the way it should...<br /><br />Yours in Bhagavan,<br />Carlos <br /><br />(by the way, in my deepest sleep there is not a Bhagavan or a Sankara, are they in yours?) :-)Mounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-87326681034427544702015-08-19T05:20:05.613+01:002015-08-19T05:20:05.613+01:00Mr.Sivanarul
I can understand what you say. Eka-...Mr.Sivanarul <br /><br />I can understand what you say. Eka-jiva vada or other vada which altogether contrary to actual experience, and even logical thinking are very difficult to accept. You said-<br /><br />>The good news is belief in Eka Jiva Vada or considering waking to be like a dream is not necessary for Sadhana whether it is Vichara, Meditation or Mantra Japa.<br /><br />Yes. It is really good news. And about vichara, any assumption isn't needed. Even what I said about two stages or so isn't nessesary at all.<br /><br />But if I say something to defend eka-jiva vada, what you said is only your view , that is ego's view. Bhagavan said Jnani is not body. Jnani realized that he is imortal conciousness, and he actually never concious of body and the world(jagrat-sushputi), it is said so. If the jnani's body don't act according to eka jiva vada, does it mean it is inconsistent to eka-jiva vada?<br /><br />But I am not the follower of ela-jiva vada and there must arise many questions about what I said above. First of all, if Bhagvan is eka-jiva , why does his dream seem to exist till now? Well this is also the question from ego's viewpoint, but why do so many egos seem to exist still after fundamental ego disappears? I can't answer.<br /><br />You seem to like buddha teaching. I like it too. Buddha's practicality is quite similar to Bhagavan.shibanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-18053618022297682672015-08-19T03:31:14.346+01:002015-08-19T03:31:14.346+01:00Carlosji, Vanakkam and thanks for the reply.
Hop...Carlosji, Vanakkam and thanks for the reply. <br /><br />Hope your Sadhana is progressing well.<br /><br />“there are no millions of I-thought or egos, there is only one (only one snake), the thing is, when there will be Self-Realization (according to what I understood so far from Bhagavan) there won't be "someone" thinking about the other characters of the dream (Sivanarul will be long gone) or that someone realizing that he/she was having a dream with others”<br /><br />That is my understanding also and I look towards the actions of the three people I mentioned. There was a boy named Venkataraman and a boy named Shankara. Both of them are believed to be Self-Realized. Hence as you say, there was no “someone” left to think about other characters of the dream (Venkataraman was gone at 16). But Bhagavan did not let go of Venkataraman’s mother. Neither did Shankara let go from cremating his mother. If it is the Self that did all of this, the Self is not aware of anything other than itself, so how could it know of mothers?<br /><br />I can take your saying as Shraddha (faith) as long as there is someone who demonstrates this in action. I cannot find anyone who demonstrated by action the truth of Eka Jiva Vada or treating waking state as a dream. If it is only for the purpose of helping my Sadhana, Buddha’s first noble truth and impermanence can easily be verified and demonstrated that serves the same purpose of helping my Sadhana.<br /><br />I see millions of egos around me (direct sensory experience). I read teachings that say that is not true and there is only one ego. But the teachers do not demonstrate it by action. They work explicitly to grant liberation to multiple egos (Mother, Cow Lakshmi , 3’rd person don’t remember the name).<br /><br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-2277428219962672102015-08-19T02:55:58.855+01:002015-08-19T02:55:58.855+01:00Dear Sivanarul, Vanakam.
One element that you kee...Dear Sivanarul, Vanakam.<br /><br />One element that you keep forgetting (or not taking into account) in your equation of "your" dream or other's dream is that "you" yourself Sivanarul are also part or the one dream, there are no millions of I-thought or egos, there is only one (only one snake), the thing is, when there will be Self-Realization (according to what I understood so far from Bhagavan) there won't be "someone" thinking about the other characters of the dream (Sivanarul will be long gone) or that someone realizing that he/she was having a dream with others, there will only be...<br /><br />I'll leave it there.<br /><br />Yours in Bhagavan,<br />CarlosMounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-55263418967264908812015-08-19T02:38:31.882+01:002015-08-19T02:38:31.882+01:00Continuation...
Another answer to the above thoug...Continuation...<br /><br />Another answer to the above thoughts is, since they are all my projections and dream characters, I should not take into account what they did. The problem is these dream characters are supposed to help me wake up and I cannot find even a single dream character who demonstrated by action the truth of Eka Jiva Vada.<br /> <br />Another answer provided is, forget about actions and focus on the teaching/writings. Since the writings uphold Eka Jiva Vada, it can be taken to be true. The problem is that in both materalism and spirituality things are validated by actions and not by words. A person may be hired by a very impressive resume and interview (words), but if the action does not match words, he/she will be fired within 90 days. A guru can write that he is in constant bliss of the Self and the sense experiences are trivial, but if his actions show that he is a glutton and engages in sense pleasures all the time, then how does the writing matter?<br /><br />I have no problem in accepting teachings that match action. Bhagavan taught that he is not the body. That was matched by his action where he clumped up all food together and ate it as one lump (showing no care for taste). It was also matched by action when he paid no attention to his body ravaged by cancer. Bhagavan taught that the one Self resides in all people. He matched it by action by treating prince and pauper the same, humans and animals the same.<br /><br />The good news is belief in Eka Jiva Vada or considering waking to be like a dream is not necessary for Sadhana whether it is Vichara, Meditation or Mantra Japa.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-85687411813862077502015-08-19T02:36:48.523+01:002015-08-19T02:36:48.523+01:00Venkat,
Thanks for the reply. The problem with Ek...Venkat,<br /><br />Thanks for the reply. The problem with Eka Jiva vada is that, the dream characters that promulgated it did not show it by action to match what they wrote. Let me explain.<br /><br />Let’s take 3 dream characters that are in my dream namely Sri Shankara, Bhagavan and Kannudaiya Vallalar (author of Ozhivil Odukkam). All 3 dream characters are telling me that Eka Jiva vada is the truth (forget Ajata for this discussion). When I ask them, how do you know?, the answer I get is, that they themselves woke from their dream into reality and Eka Jiva Vada is their direct experience (again, forget Ajata). Ok, fair enough. Then I study their behavior of how they treated the dream characters that appeared in their dream and what I find is that they treated them as real characters and not dream characters. Examples include Sri Shankara installing 4 mutts for his dream characters, Bhagavan carefully planning will and trust for future dream characters, and Kannudaiya Vallar profusely thanking his dream character (his Guru Jnana Sambandar) for helping him to wake up (as lion in an elephant’s dream).<br /><br />I wake up in the morning from my dream. Let’s say, I dreamt of a Dad, Mom and disciple. I also dreamt that I was a King who is responsible for millions of my citizens. The first seconds, after I wake up, the dream is very clear. I remember those characters clearly and I think, “Wow, all those were only a dream”. After that few seconds, I do not give any thought or attention to those dream characters that had appeared in my dream. I do not make elaborate plans to help my dream citizens.<br /><br />As an answer to the above thoughts, it is said that Eka Jiva vada should only be taken as an inner attitude and should not be applied to the outer world. It is also said that the purpose of such attitude is to help wean one’s interest towards worldly objects. Now if there is no other way to wean one’s interest other than Eka Jiva vada or by considering waking state like a dream, then that’s fine. But there is another way, where there is no conflict between inner and outer, and that is by recognizing that Samara is suffering (Buddha’s first noble truth) and reflecting upon impermanence. Both of these can be validated directly through life’s experience and both of these help oneself to wean away from worldly objects.<br /><br />Continued in next comment...<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-79431872904823625932015-08-18T18:07:57.831+01:002015-08-18T18:07:57.831+01:00Michael,
please hear Wittgenstein's request/pl...Michael,<br />please hear Wittgenstein's request/plea and do clarify that current KGM-discussion.<br />Without your concluding comment the fruitless disputation will not be brought to a quick end.Nilakanthanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-43490961707527576342015-08-18T17:46:40.448+01:002015-08-18T17:46:40.448+01:00Michael,
The discussion about the presumed stages...Michael,<br /><br />The discussion about the presumed stages in <i>atma vichara</i> took unexpected turns due to the mentioning of the source related to KGM. I just wanted to keep aside all emotions involved here from our friends and look at the problem in a reasonable manner.<br /><br />I thought if KGM learnt <i>atma vichara</i> from Bhagavan as a two stage process and if it is recorded somewhere [especially by someone close to KGM or better still by KGM himself to avoid suspecting Lakshmana Sarma], it could be of great value. Consequently, I stumbled upon one such source (http://kavyakantha.arunachala.org/KNatesan.htm) where KGM's devotee, Natesan, writes how KGM learnt <i>tapas</i> from Bhagavan (I am sure you know this). He goes to quote how Bhagavan taught KGM: "If one watches where the notion of 'I' springs, the mind will be absorbed into that. That is tapas". Now, it is clear that the notion 'I' springs from me (from where else can it spring?) and if I have to watch it, it is equivalent to saying that I have watch myself (or equivalently, my source, the place from where 'I' springs). That is, Bhagavan is teaching here self-attention or <i>atma vichara</i> , although he calls it <i>tapas</i>. Further, as a result of it, he says the mind will be aborbed into the very same place from where it springs. However, he never divides this into two or more stages. Therefore, it stands clear that Bhagavan instructed KGM into <i>atma vichara</i> without dividing it into stages. Since your understanding is far better than mine, please do correct me if I have drawn any wrong conclusions.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-76433621898745622172015-08-18T14:01:56.767+01:002015-08-18T14:01:56.767+01:00Thanks Michael for writing a separate answer-artic...Thanks Michael for writing a separate answer-article regarding my questions about the reflected ray of self-consciousness(Tuesday, 11 August 2015).Nilakanthanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-1433871057326756312015-08-18T12:30:55.254+01:002015-08-18T12:30:55.254+01:00Shiba,
Atma vichara is a dynamic process - everyt...Shiba,<br /><br />Atma vichara is a dynamic process - everything required in the process is given by Bhagavan as we persevere. You seem to be very motivated and certainly Bhagavan's grace will see you through. I wish you good luck with your preliminary stage. Good bye.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-8834441239731623882015-08-18T11:40:41.716+01:002015-08-18T11:40:41.716+01:00Mr.Wittgenstein
>I think it would be best to d...Mr.Wittgenstein<br /><br />>I think it would be best to drop Kavyakanta Ganapathi Muni's discussion, as it does not help in our spiritual progress.<br /><br />I didn't intend to mention about Kavyakanta Ganapathi Muni in the first place. Mr.James said what Kavyakanta Ganapathi Muni and his followers wrote are not trustworthy and what I quote is not authentic or so. Then you come and backed up Mr.James's view. And then, after I found and quoted the opposite view, you say let's drop the topic. How fair it is! But I agree with your proposal if you wish. <br /><br />>As far the two-stage atma vichara is concerned, well, we'll go ahead and get introverted and compare notes if we get to the second stage. Atleast, there is some agreement that there should be introversion of mind to begin with. As you have mentioned, I gather you have not got into the second stage. Therefore, talking about it also does not lead us anywhere.<br /><br />Truly I am in the first stage, and here also though you asked me about two stages first, you say let's drop the topic. But I agree with your proposal again if you wish. <br /><br />shibanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-63697279677903019182015-08-18T11:12:14.294+01:002015-08-18T11:12:14.294+01:00Mr.Wittgenstein
>When you say, “You should dis...Mr.Wittgenstein<br /><br />>When you say, “You should distinguish ego from the Self”, I think things related to this have already been discussed by Michael in his article, “By attending to our ego we are attending to ourself”, on 31 July 2015. That was why I had the feeling you were repeating your questions when they have been adequately answer.<br /><br /> I haven't ask any question about ego and Self to anyone. The objections were raised by Mr.James and you, so I answered for these objections. How dare you say "I am repeating qestions".<br /><br /> And what about the topic of two stages? I haven't ask you to reproduce Mr.James's explanation.<br /><br /><br /><br /> shibanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-84966699345407850632015-08-18T11:01:26.633+01:002015-08-18T11:01:26.633+01:00Dear Shiba,
I think it would be best to drop Kavy...Dear Shiba,<br /><br />I think it would be best to drop Kavyakanta Ganapathi Muni's discussion, as it does not help in our spiritual progress.<br /><br />As far the two-stage atma vichara is concerned, well, we'll go ahead and get introverted and compare notes if we get to the second stage. Atleast, there is some agreement that there should be introversion of mind to begin with. As you have mentioned, I gather you have not got into the second stage. Therefore, talking about it also does not lead us anywhere.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-69796721221572947212015-08-18T10:16:23.009+01:002015-08-18T10:16:23.009+01:00Shiba,
When you say, “You should distinguish ego ...Shiba,<br /><br />When you say, “You should distinguish ego from the Self”, I think things related to this have already been discussed by Michael in his article, “By attending to our ego we are attending to ourself”, on 31 July 2015. That was why I had the feeling you were repeating your questions when they have been adequately answered.<br /><br />I never said ego is <i>really</i> our [essential] self, as the self does not undergo any <i>real</i> transformation.<br /><br />Attending to the PC before me is not attending to the self, as Bhagavan says in the current awareness of ‘I am the body’, we need to take the <i>chit</i> aspect alone [‘I am’] for investigation. As the body and world rise and sink together, ‘the body-world’ is in the <i>jada</i> part of ‘I am the body’ idea/thought. When we say world, everything in the world is included in it, that is, the people (it may even be Shankaracharya, just to taken an example by Sivanarul) and things in it (e.g. mutts established by Shankaracharya, the PC in front of me, etc). Therefore, attending to things do not qualify as <i>atma vichara</i>.<br /> <br />Ego is not mixed with the self. On the other hand, a <i>jada</i> (the body) is mixed with the self. This is an unreal mixture and it is called the ego.<br /><br />Therefore, as a <i>sadhaka</i>, when Bhagavan says we should attend to ourselves, I would take it that he is asking us to take up the <i>chit</i> aspect of the ego for investigation.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-8088623432651375382015-08-18T09:46:15.274+01:002015-08-18T09:46:15.274+01:00About Kavyakanta ganapathi Muni
The account of Sr... About Kavyakanta ganapathi Muni<br /><br />The account of Sri Ganesan from "The Human Gospel of Sri Ramana Maqharshi"<br />(http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=6273.msg70487;topicseen#msg70487)<br /><br />>When I went to Ramanashram some people, for whom I had respect, often spoke ill of Kavyakantha. They claimed that his accounts were figments of his imagination. I was influenced by their views on the genius. Even today there is a lot of literature that portrays Kavyakantha in a poor light. I approached Munagala Venkataramaia, a distinguished scholar and one of the recorders of the talks with Bhagavan. Now, Munagala had not seen Kavyakantha and was therefore neutral about him. ―Why do people pull down Kavyakantha so much?‖ I enquired, listing out all the transgressions he is rumored to have made. ―Ganesan, stop!‖ he exclaimed. ―How did you know all this?‖ I revealed the names of the people who told me this. He replied, ―They have given an opinion and you have received it. Are you sure it is the Truth?‖ I was puzzled. ―How can we know which opinion is correct?‖ I asked. Munagala then said, ―Whatever Bhagavan says is trustworthy.‖<br />I was still not satisfied. I had read a tiff that Kavyakantha was not a Self-realized soul because he had so many sankalpas. His detractors often quoted this too, and I was convinced by this logic. I put forth my argument to Munagala. He told me, ―I asked Bhagavan the same thing?how come it is written in such and such a book that Kavyakantha was not Self-realized. Bhagavan told me, ‗That is not what I said, but what the recorder must have expected me to say.‖ Munagala then advised me, ―Go by whatever Bhagavan has said, and you will be near the Truth. Do not go by opinions, particularly if they divide people?whether saints or anyone else. Do not pay heed to them. Aspirants should never be carried away by negative statements made about any sage or saint. In order to progress, this is the first guideline to remember. What detractors say are just opinions and if we believe them, we fall victim to the mind.‖<br /><br /> I asked if the two articles by Lakshmana Sarma are one-sided or not. To be fair, we should hear opposite opinions. Which do you believe? shibanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-55759296907896295792015-08-18T09:13:45.292+01:002015-08-18T09:13:45.292+01:00Sivanarul
This idea of the waking state is as muc...Sivanarul<br /><br />This idea of the waking state is as much of a dream as the the dream state, is really only best explained by eka jiva vada (which was posted on by Michael previously). To recap, this is the theory that there is only one jiva (you) who projects all the world. Therefore Sankara, Bhagavan and all the people posting on this website, are just in your projection. They never actually existed. Consequently Sankara setting up mutts, Bhagavan's life and teaching, etc are all part of that elaborate projection of your one jiva. Arguably it arises in your projection, in order to help you wake up from the dream.<br /><br />It is important to realise that the jiva is also part of the dream, that is in actually a projection by Brahman / atman. Consequently, Bhagavan could logically say turn inwards and see the illusoriness of the jiva/ego, and as it dissolves, so will the world appearance, and the triads, leaving only Brahman.<br />venkatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-60946470840391005482015-08-18T06:21:44.181+01:002015-08-18T06:21:44.181+01:00Mr.Wittgenstein
I didn't say "introversi...Mr.Wittgenstein<br /><br />I didn't say "introversion (ahamukam) can take one to two stages". I said introversion can take one to "second" stage. <br /> <br />>Everything in atma vichara is an attempt to turn towards ourselves. When we really succeed in doing so, the investigation ends. Where are two stages in this process?<br /> <br /> Because now you are ego, there is the second stage ego sink into the real Self. You should distinguish ego from the Self. And it take some time ego dissolve in the Self entirely(sahaja). All I said in not new, novel idea, but the idea that everyone who read Bhagavan's teaching easily know. <br /><br /> If you say that ego is really Self and attending to ego mean attnding to Self, attnding to PC before me also attending to Self, because ALL is Self. You should not mix ego with Self, when you are in the position of sadhaka. You should make clear what is "ourselves" you said.<br /><br />>Regarding what Ramanasramam prints, as Carlos says, one has to ask them .<br /><br /> I never think these books are harmful to devotees so there is no need for me to ask any question to ashram . <br /><br />> I see that you repeat many questions for which answers were already given.<br /><br /> I don't.<br />shibanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-86230964625836786592015-08-18T05:35:33.219+01:002015-08-18T05:35:33.219+01:00Shiba,
It is not clear how introversion (ahamukam...Shiba,<br /><br />It is not clear how introversion (ahamukam) can take one to two stages. Everything in atma vichara is an attempt to turn towards ourselves. When we really succeed in doing so, the investigation ends. Where are two stages in this process? I think you are not convinced even after reading Michael's article.<br /><br />Regarding what Ramanasramam prints, as Carlos says, one has to ask them. I have a feeling that you have not read the two articles by Lakshmana Sarma (as Michael cited it). It is clear that in the article, even during the Bhagavan's times, sarvadhikari decided things about what is to be printed and Bhagavan never interrupted in anything. Only exceptional case is when he entered into the office of the sarvadikari to suggest printing Sarma's commentary on Ulladu Narpadu in Tamil, when the latter showed some reluctance. Bhagavan never forced his teachings down someone's throat. I see that you repeat many questions for which answers were already given. It is very difficult to convince you.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.com