tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post1906236142446241671..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: What is unique about the teachings of Sri Ramana?Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-44819278350589776252015-11-28T16:50:58.280+00:002015-11-28T16:50:58.280+00:00Sanakarraman, namaste
Let's not throw out the...Sanakarraman, namaste<br /><br />Let's not throw out the baby with the bath waters, everything has a place... and a time.<br />I have been part of the advaitin list for some years in the past and even get to know (in person), some of the people involved. In my case, it helped me a lot to understand the shastras and many of the advaitic texts, that further on, helped me understand Bhagavan's teachings. Many of the people involved are true sadhakas, it is just that their way and/or tools of practice runs by digging deep into the manana side of the sadhana process. <br />What we don't know is what level of nididhyasana hides behind all those words, so we really can't judge (or can't generalize), in this case, a book by its cover. <br />Paths are many and the way of Ishwara is hidden to our veiled eyes, so the best we can do is attend to our own business and try to be attentive to our own 'kosha-vichara' following the path and sadhana that best suit our understanding.<br />In the end "we" are in the same boat as long as the dream goes on.<br /><br />Yours in Bhagavan,<br />Mouna<br /><br />Mounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-60146168428364003882015-11-28T16:21:49.136+00:002015-11-28T16:21:49.136+00:00Regarding the Advaitn list, I wish to point out th...Regarding the Advaitn list, I wish to point out that they are filled to the brim with Sastra Vasanas, repeatedly discussing such stereotyped and monotone concepts like Avidya, Maya, the duality of Atman-Brahman, etc, all their aim being no more than polishing and honing the intellect, such people being involved only in what Bhaghavan calls ' Kosa-Vichar,' and not the exalted ' atma- vichara,' taught by Bhaghavan. So let us not be entrapped in such dangerous detours.Sankarramanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01718256859263931847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-48890809565452797692015-09-19T15:40:45.557+01:002015-09-19T15:40:45.557+01:00In continuation of my previous comment:
Once coul...In continuation of my previous comment:<br /><br />Once could say Bhagavan had effectively bought Arunachala through his intense love right from the time he first heard the word Arunachala till his last breath where he heard the chanting of Arunachala Siva. One could also postulate that just like Bhagavan was afraid of the two devotees, Arunachala itself was afraid of Bhagavan because Arunachala cannot refuse anything that Bhagavan asks. <br /><br />Bhagavan asked Arunachala to cure both his mother’s bodily ill (typhoid) and worldy ill of Samsara. Arunachala, of course could not refuse and granted both. While Bhagavan’s mother spiritually matured significantly under the guidance of Bhagavan, it was not enough for liberation and the last day had come. But Arunachala who cannot refuse Bhagavan, made mother live several lifetimes during the 12 hours and finished the granting of liberation. Bhagavan himself has said that mother lived several lifetimes during those 12 hours.<br /><br />The point here, especially for people for whom Bhakthi and Surrender are the main Sadhana, to understand that love for the lord (effort is not quite the right word) is the most powerful tool we have. It is so powerful that the Lord cannot refuse granting us liberation, provided our love is of the highest caliber. Our effort is then to focus on attaining the highest love for the lord through Bhakthi, Jnana and Service to Ishvara.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-27184454316750056962015-09-19T14:57:43.277+01:002015-09-19T14:57:43.277+01:00In regards to Ramesh’s statement:
“Can we buy Lor...In regards to Ramesh’s statement:<br /><br />“Can we buy Lord (Sensient) with effort (insensient)?”<br /><br />The intent of effort is not to buy the Lord. Effort quietens the senses and mind and prepares the jiva to be offered to the Lord for absorption. <br /><br />But effort can indeed buy the Lord. There are plenty of examples in the spiritual literature to support that notion. Bhagavan has himself said that he is afraid of two people, in that he cannot refuse anything they ask (Mudaliyar Patti and someone else I can’t remember now). If you take effort to mean as love for the lord, then Mudaliyar Patti had effectively bought Bhagavan through her love and service to him.<br /><br />With regards to the below statement:<br /><br />“Refer Sri Muruganar's statement: "I never did any Sadhana.... "”<br /><br />Being around Bhagavan is the highest Sadhana one can do. What else would he have to do? For those of us who do not have the physical presence of a Jnani, Sadhana is the only way out.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-14340271546781430742015-09-16T10:11:16.682+01:002015-09-16T10:11:16.682+01:00Ramesh,
the word "destroy" is also equiv...Ramesh,<br />the word "destroy" is also equivalent with abate, diminish, lessen, let up, quieten, subside, but is further synonymous with abolish, annihilate, crush, demolish, eradicate,extinguish,extirpate, overturn, overwhelm, raze, ruin, shatter, slay, smash, subdue, wipe out, wreck.Aconcaguanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-14396577901165623922015-09-16T07:11:03.214+01:002015-09-16T07:11:03.214+01:00All authors here agree on one point: "to dest...All authors here agree on one point: "to destroy" the ego (ahanthai uru azithal)<br /><br />Can effort in any form destory the ego? Can we buy Lord (Sensient) with effort (insensient)? <br /><br />Refer Sri Muruganar's statement: "I never did any Sadhana.... " <br /><br />Also refer "Sadhak Sanjivani" by Swami Ramsukh Das ji English detailed commentary on Bhagvad GitaRameshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04624482233433384329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-16365318906057726802015-09-07T15:17:04.294+01:002015-09-07T15:17:04.294+01:00Continued from previous comment:
“Let me tell you...Continued from previous comment:<br /><br />“Let me tell you something -- without agreeing 100% with what your Guru has written, even though we love the Guru, the inner conflict will be there as residual impression and that will anytime bounce back. Grace will not be able to operate as efficiently as possible in such a scenario.”<br /><br />The above quote of yours requires an elaborate reply and I may not find time to do it in the near future. At some point I want to address this insistence that when it comes to Bhagavan’s teachings it is either 100% or it is not of much use. The big assumption here is that aspirants come with a clean slate to Bhagavan’s teachings, they absorb Bhagavan’s teachings and hence they should follow 100%. This may be true for a few aspirants. But most are exposed to various spiritual traditions and have various kinds of religious and spiritual upbringing and they need to reconcile the teaching to their own level of maturity and capacity.<br /><br />Second the statement tends to assume that unless one agrees 100% with Bhagavan’s teaching, it will produce inner conflict and that will somehow impede the flow of grace. I can say honestly that I don’t have any inner conflict whatsoever in not accepting eka jiva. Grace will operate to the extent Ishvara wants it to operate, no more and no less. <br /><br />Bhagavan never in his lifetime asked anyone to follow 100% of his teachings. For that matter, he did not ask anyone to follow anything at all, unless they asked him something. At that point, he told them his highest teachings. If they couldn’t agree with it, he went down to the level to what they could agree and prescribed it. <br /><br />Even in Bhagavan’s lifetime, a significant number of devotees assumed they know better than Bhagavan and started advising even him. This is typical behavior of some disciples. First they go to the guru to solve their problem. They spend some time with the guru, absorb some or all of his teachings (intellectually). They turn around, look at other devotees who are not at their absorption level and proclaim to those devotees that their progress will somehow impede unless they follow it exactly as he/she is following. <br /><br />What is lost in such statement is that the guru himself did not require that all of his devotees follow his teachings in the exact same manner. More importantly, it is a failure to recognize that Bhagavan as Ishvara resides in the heart cavity of each and every devotee and sentient being and directs that devotee in accordance to the maturity and capacity of that devotee. Fellow devotee’s lives outside the body/mind/intellect complex of the devotee they are proclaiming to and have no access to information that Bhagavan as Ishvara in the heart cavity has.<br /><br />It would be best to let Bhagavan as Ishvara in the heart cavity do his job on each and every devotee. If fellow devotees come together in that spirit and trust Bhagavan in that manner, it may be the best puja one can do for Bhagavan.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-38146355279327033732015-09-07T15:11:46.135+01:002015-09-07T15:11:46.135+01:00Krishna,
Thanks for your latest reply. It is defi...Krishna,<br /><br />Thanks for your latest reply. It is definitely conversational in tone and thanks for keeping it that way.<br /><br />I think the disconnect may be due to your equating that any debate or discussion for/against Bhagavan’s writings (or any other writings for that matter) means not keeping things simple and that we are not at peace. Debates and discussions have their place and time in spiritual unfoldment and is part of spiritual growth. For aspirants like me who are not yet mature, they provide a way to keep our focus on spirituality as much as we can (and turning our way from materialism). <br /><br />Many people do not realize how much materialism pervades their life. You yourself wrote in an earlier reply, that you spend your weekends watching t.v. and movies. If you truly believe in Eka Jiva and follow 100% Bhagavan’s teachings, how do you reconcile that with watching movies or t.v. shows? (We all can agree that movies have no basis in reality). I am not trying to put your behavior down. I myself have several behaviors that I am working on eradicating and may never succeed in eradicating. So please don’t take it personal. I say that simply to highlight that people can deceive themselves that they are adhering to something 100%, when upon introspection it will be clear that it is not true. To me, discussing about Eka Jiva (for or against) is better than watching t.v., since the discussion is much closer to reality whereas t.v. definitely falls on the edge of the unreality spectrum.<br /><br />Continued in next comment:<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-51214510687451599332015-09-07T09:55:22.299+01:002015-09-07T09:55:22.299+01:00Thank you very much Wittgenstein that was extremel...Thank you very much Wittgenstein that was extremely helpful to read. <br />In appreciation. <br />Bob Bob - Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-63400731108626538752015-09-06T16:53:37.342+01:002015-09-06T16:53:37.342+01:00Just to add, I would suggest the Mandukya-karika, ...Just to add, I would suggest the Mandukya-karika, arguably the most significant upanishad, and which articulates ajata vada, also hints at eka jiva vada. In 2.16 it says:<br /><br />"First of all is imagined the Jiva (the embodied being) and then are imagined the various entities, objective and subjective, that are perceived."<br /><br />For my part, I think it is impossible to prove whether my perception of the world and other jivas, is actually seen from another perspective, from another point in space by another jiva. I only have the evidence of what appears before this mind, none other. And if this jiva-mind dissolves too, then what else is left. <br /><br />So even if you don't take eka jiva vada literally, I think it can be appreciated that it is pointing to the fact that you alone exist. Now find out what that 'you' is. And don't be distracted by other things.venkatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-18104504907204065192015-09-06T16:53:06.773+01:002015-09-06T16:53:06.773+01:00Wittgenstein,
Thank you so much for your very luc...Wittgenstein,<br /><br />Thank you so much for your very lucid, well-articulated and excellent comments on eka jiva. It is one of the best cohesive explanations I have ever read on it. Thanks for taking the time to write it.<br /><br />I have some urgent work to catch up on, so my reply being written in a hurried manner, is not going to do justice to your excellent comments. But I do want to get some thoughts out now, do some reflection on what you wrote for a week or so, and then reply back with more questions/comments, if need be.<br /><br />What I meant by Eka Jiva denying Ishvara, is Ishvara outside of oneself. Ishvara, within as Self-Awareness, is clearly accepted by all systems (Jnana, Bhakthi etc). Many like me depend on Ishvara outside of us more than the one who is within is. It is akin to inner guru and outer guru explained in Bhagavan’s literature. Ishvara as inner guru directs us to go to Ishvara as outer guru (as in temples, mantras, japa, meditation etc). Ishvara as outer guru then purifies the mind (via those practices) and sends us back to Ishvara that resides within us. This back and forth happens repeatedly, until the ego is dissolved or absorbed, wherein the distinction between inner and outer also dissolves and Ishvara is seen everywhere (experientially realizing the vedic statement, “Verily all this is Brahman” meaning “Verily all this is Ishvara” since both Brahman and Ishvara are the same in the Siddhanta Bhakthi literature denoted as Para Siva or simply as Siva). So Eka Jiva will only work for people who do not need the help and guidance of Ishvara external to themselves. I certainly need the help, guidance and support of Ishvara in external form. That is why I have discarded Eka Jiva for now and to be considered at a future time.<br /><br />You raise a very valid and excellent question that why would one, who believes in duality or nana jiva vada, take up vichara in the first place? This is going to require some serious soul searching to answer and what I write below is not the proper answer to it. But I do want to get some thoughts out. Even a beginning student, once he/she has read some basic spiritual literature and spent some time reflecting on it, becomes aware of the fact that the mind/ego does not like quieting down. More importantly it does not like the focus turned on itself. It comes up with all kinds of reasons why it needs to go outside. The student becomes really curious, why is it so? Why does the mind/ego does not like attention turned on itself? Vichara (I like to think of it as Meditation on ‘I’) is then a way to see what happens if one increases the time/frequency of turning attention within. I use Vichara, Meditation, Japa, Mantra all in the same vein in that they are exercises in trying to see what would happen if the mind quietens down. <br /><br />I really like your rationale for packing Vichara with Eka Jiva, considering the world as a dream etc. It is a nice full package. But, for now, I am taking it as a la carte. I will reply more on this in a week or so, mostly for the benefit of students like me who have been deeply influenced by Bhakthi literature and Sadhanas.<br />Just saw Venkat’s reply before posting this, and thought his last comment was very appropriate and am including it “Suresvaracarya has clarified, “By whatever method one gets knowledge of the inner Self, that means should be considered proper. Such methods are several”.<br /><br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-87489611031991781142015-09-06T16:40:09.415+01:002015-09-06T16:40:09.415+01:00Hi, some of the traditional Vedantins go on to say...Hi, some of the traditional Vedantins go on to say that those disciples of Bhagavan, who go about saying "who am I" is his primary teaching have misunderstood him and / or that they are trying to create a cult around Bhagavan. They don't believe self-investigation can give you knowledge / jnana, only the shastras through a qualified teacher can do that. Consequently, they try to say that Bhagavan has been misunderstood by these cultists, who haven't listened to his full teaching. They seem to overlook the fact that Bhagavan himself wrote Nar Yar.<br /><br />On eka jiva vada, there is acceptance of it from the most authoritative 'traditional' source. The 35th Sankaracharya of Sringeri said (in Exalting Elucidations, p.280) in almost similar terms to Bhagavan:<br /><br />Q; What is creation?<br />A: Perception alone is creation. There is no creation other than perception. Perception of a thing is its origination.<br />Q: What about Isvara?<br />A: He too is part of your dream. In reality there is neither cause nor effect. One has bondage as long as one considers that one has bondage. He who feels that he is free is indeed free.<br />Q: Is the removal of the wrong idea that one has bondage the means to attain moksha<br />A: Yes. So far I was speaking with drsti-srsti vada in mind. This however is not suitable for many people because their minds are not pure enough to imbibe it. People accept that the dream state is unreal. However if told that the waking state is equally unreal they would feel disturbed. That is why the sastras do not speak much of the drsti-srsti vada.<br /><br />Again, on p.305:<br />“The variations seen [in advaita philosophy] are in the description of the world, God and the individual self. The differing views serve to cater to the requirements of aspirants of differing competence and temperament. To a highly competent and advanced aspirant the eka-jiva-vada is appealing. Difficulty may arise if others are also taught in the same fashion. So for them nana-jiva-vada (the view that there are many jivas) is presented. Suresvaracarya has clarified, “By whatever method one gets knowledge of the inner Self, that means should be considered proper. Such methods are several”<br />venkatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-58216300365795824842015-09-06T15:18:38.935+01:002015-09-06T15:18:38.935+01:00Wittgenstein,
Thank you for the correction, you ar...Wittgenstein,<br />Thank you for the correction, you are absolutely right. (What was I thinking when I wrote that posting?)<br />But although I know why I got confused in the moment, the posting still stands, Vedanta scholars use Upadesa Saram as a vedantic text for instruction (along with Tattva Bodha as an introductory text) since Upadesa Saram lays down nicely, like the different chapters of the Gita, the process of vedantic understanding and practice from beginning to end.<br />But they (vedantins) also comment and use Sat-darshanam, although the Ganapati Muni version, not Lakshmana Sharma’s one, rarely mentioning that Bhagavan wrote those verses (UN and UU) first in tamil and then translated them in sanskrit, specially Upadesa Untiyar / Upadesa Saram (Ulladu Narpadu / Sri Ramana Hridayam-Revelation / Sat-Darshanam was translated both by Lakshmana Sharma with Bhagavan’s help but also by Ganapati Muni, the controversial version).<br />Mounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-44704981517572886282015-09-06T13:35:36.245+01:002015-09-06T13:35:36.245+01:00Just as a summary of my views on eka jiva vada, I ...Just as a summary of my views on <i>eka jiva vada</i>, I thought of sharing these words.<br /><br />There can’t be any standalone <i>eka jiva vada</i>. We are under the sway of <i>nana jiva</i> all the time, giving all our attention. <i>Nana jiva</i> is part and parcel of world. However, time to time, due to the spirit of the investigation [founded on <i>eka jiva vada</i>] in the form, ‘Who am I [for whom all these <i>nana jivas</i> appear]?, we turn our attention to ourselves. With more and more of this turning-in, the <i>nana jivas</i> start losing our attention steadily. Finally, both <i>nana jivas</i>, along with <i>iswara</i>, and their apparent substratum [<i>eka jiva</i>] will be consumed once for all in <i>jnana</i> [the ultimate substratum], as they form the triad world-soul-god [<i>nana jiva-eka jiva-iswara</i>]. <i>Iswara</i> is the self-awareness that we have now. By attending to the self-awareness, we are actually worshipping <i>iswara</i>. The triads always work together [there is no one element of the triad without the other]. And as long as they work, we will be experiencing ourselves as this body. If this is understood, in my opinion, most disputes will be resolved.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-28188658912990031892015-09-06T12:44:16.541+01:002015-09-06T12:44:16.541+01:00Mouna,
'Upadesa Saram' you mention is the ...Mouna,<br />'Upadesa Saram' you mention is the Sanskrit version of 'Upadesa Undiyar' (in original Tamil). This translation is by Bhagavan himself. Lakshmana Sarma translated 'Ulladu Narpadu' (from original Tamil) into Sanskrit.It is called 'Sri Ramana Hridayam'. Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-62080445403692522332015-09-06T08:53:24.358+01:002015-09-06T08:53:24.358+01:00This is continuation of my previous comment.
The ...This is continuation of my previous comment.<br /><br /><b>The one who has only <i>nana jiva vada</i> at his disposal and discards <i>eka jiva vada</i> should explain why he would do <i>atma vichara</i> [which is investigating the source of the <i>eka jiva</i>] at all. This is very perplexing for me.</b><br />In <i>Nan Yar</i> Bhagavan says, “சதாகாலமும் மனத்தை ஆத்மாவில் வைத்திருப்பதற்குத் தான் ‘ஆத்மவிசார’ மென்று பெயர்” [Keeping the mind (attention) always fixed in <i>atma</i> [ourselves] is called <i>atma vichara</i>. Further he says in the same essay, “ஆன்மசிந்தனையைத் தவிர வேறு சிந்தனை கிளம்புவதற்குச் சற்றுமிடங்கொடாமல் ஆத்மநிஷ்டாபரனா யிருப்பதே தன்னை ஈசனுக் களிப்பதாம்” [Getting established in <i>atma</i> without leaving room for other thoughts is offering oneself to <i>Ishwara</i>]. From the above two statements it is clear that ‘offering oneself to <i>Ishwara</i> is equated with <i>atma vichara</i>. Further, as the spirit behind <i>atma vichara</i> is <i>eka jiva vada</i>, it stands clear that for the one who is self-investigating, <i>Ishwara</i> is the self-awareness on which he keeps his attention during all ups and downs and plateaus of his life. <i>Ishwara</i> is very much available to such a person at all moments.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-85153713491295782902015-09-06T08:51:49.016+01:002015-09-06T08:51:49.016+01:00This is a continuation from my previous comment.
...This is a continuation from my previous comment.<br /><br />Now, investigating this source is <i> not</i> an action. Action is <i>jada</i> and the investigation overlooks any <i>jada</i>. Actions have a law of their own and the one who takes up this investigation understands that tinkering with actions is not within his range of freedom, since he experiences himself as the body and hence he (as a body) is bound by the laws of the body. The only freedom he has is to investigate himself. Therefore, there is no point in thinking we have unlimited licence to do anything that we want. On the other hand, to do something or not is not in our hands. However, whatever we do, we can attend to ourselves, if we wish so. There is no point in bringing up arguments related to actions here. Further, it should be remembered that Sri Ramana’s stand point is <i>ajata</i> (not <i>eka jiva vada</i>) and there is no action and not even this single <i>jiva</i> in <i>ajata</i>. In fact, <i>eka jiva vada</i> is of no use when we experience ourselves as we are, at the end of the testing phase.<br /><b>The mechanism seems to be something like this. <i>Nana jiva vada</i> keeps pulling us all the time and from time to time [when not being carried away by it] we doubt it in the spirit of <i>eka jiva vada</i> and self-investigate [that is, investigate the <i>eka jiva</i> from which these multiplicity springs] to settle the doubts, find ourselves being pulled by <i>nana jivas</i> again, doubt them, investigate and so on till the investigation ends and only <i>ajata</i> remains.</b><br />I am not familiar with other <i>sadhanas</i>. However, when Bhagavan says in <i>Ulladu Narpadu</i>, verse 26 that when the ego [<i>eka jiva</i>] rises, everything else [world and the other <i>jivas</i>] rise and goes on to say that investing the source of the ego is getting rid of everything (including the ego). Therefore, he was indicating that <i>eka jiva vada</i> is the key for <i>atma vichara</i>.<br />We cannot get into <i>atma vichara</i> without <i>eka jiva vada</i>. To illustrate this, consider what would Bhagavan say when we see another person. Would he not prompt us to ask, “Who is the person that is in front of me? Does he say he is a person or am I saying he is a person? Even if he says he is a person, is that not what I hear from him? For whom does this person appear including the claim that he is a person? Since it is for me, who am I?”. And hence attention turns to ourselves. This attention turning to ourselves is <i>atma vichara</i> and the questioning is the spirit behind it. Is not the spirit behind it <i>eka jiva vada</i>? We are investigating even our own appearance and as long as we are investigating, we cannot take it to be unreal. On the other hand, for a dualist, who treats everything as ultimately real, what is the use of <i>atma vichara</i>? There is no need to question our reality as far as we take it to be ultimately real. We can only question it when we doubt it and as long as we question it, we cannot come to a conclusion about its reality.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-14582013528795984312015-09-06T08:48:50.593+01:002015-09-06T08:48:50.593+01:00‘World is a dream’, eka jiva vada and atma-vichara...<b>‘World is a dream’, <i>eka jiva vada</i> and <i>atma-vichara</i></b><br />The teaching ‘world is a dream’ is generally <i>misquoted</i> and misunderstood. Having misunderstood, it is tempting to arrive at the following conclusions.<br />1. The world is <i>unreal</i> like a dream.<br />2. If one ‘accepts’ this teaching, it would lead to undesirable actions.<br />3. To avoid such undesirable actions, the ones who advocate such teaching involve themselves in desirable actions, to set example for a <i>sadhaka</i>.<br />4. Such a teaching is not necessary for <i>sadhana</i>.<br />5. Those who ‘accept’ this teaching consider themselves [spiritually] superior to the ones who take up other <i>sadhanas</i>.<br />6. <i>Ishwara</i> is rejected here.<br />These conclusions do not have basis. When Bhagavan says in ‘Nan Yar’, “பிரபஞ்சத்தை ஒரு சொப்பனத்தைப்போ லெண்ணிக்கொள்ள வேண்டும்” [we should consider the world as a dream], we should notice the word ‘consider’. He never says, “World is a dream”. There is no point in ascribing unreality to the world, as long as we have finished investigating our reality. Bhagavan would say the world is as real as us and in order to ascertain the reality of the world it would be better to investigate our reality (since the world does not say it exists and we are the one who says so). Further, we do not say the dream is unreal as long as we are dreaming. Similarly, if the world is a dream, as long as we experience the world, does it not appear real to us? How can we call it unreal?<br />What is the sense in which we should consider the world as a dream? Since upon waking we realize that the dream world with multiple <i>jivas</i> in it was an emanation from a single <i>jiva</i> and since dream is not <i>substantially</i> different from <i>waking</i>, it is <i>possible</i> that even the waking world with all <i>jivas</i> in it is an emanation from a single <i>jiva</i>. Therefore, we are talking about a <i>possibility</i> here, which has sound basis and hence worthy of being taken up as a <i>hypothesis</i> to be tested. The sound basis is that the difference in waking and dream is only of <i>degree</i>, not of <i>kind</i>.<br />Further, even this single <i>jiva</i> appears (along with suffering) from sleep and disappears (along with suffering) into sleep. Therefore, it is desirable (in order to eliminate suffering) that the emergence of such a single <i>jiva</i> is to be totally annihilated. Bhagavan says it is possible to do so by investigating the source of this single <i>jiva</i> [this is the testing phase of the hypotheis]. That the ego will be dissolved permanently at the end of this investigation is what we take on trust – we can experience it only when we reach that end. However, our confidence in the efficacy of this investigation increases as we investigate more and more. Therefore, the idea behind the teaching that we should consider the world as a dream is to prompt us [as a guiding principle] into investigating the source of the <i>eka jiva</i>. Therefore, the teaching that we should consider the world as a dream and <i>eka jiva vada</i> are intertwined.<br />The one who is thus still investigating experiences himself as a body and hence the world is as real as the body for him, with all the <i>jivas</i> in it. In what way is he better than the dualist as far his experience is concerned? I don’t find any superiority or inferiority here. For practical purposes, we can define a scale of inferiority-superiority: those who currently experience themselves as the body are inferior and the ones who experience themselves as they are are superior.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-41647349426856669562015-09-06T08:45:01.596+01:002015-09-06T08:45:01.596+01:00Sivanarul,
Most of the things you have written ab...Sivanarul,<br /><br />Most of the things you have written about <i>eka jiva vada</i> are very reasonable. This made me reconsider this topic and in the following comment I have written my own views. I thought it might interest you.Wittgensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-58885043829784213432015-09-06T07:05:24.378+01:002015-09-06T07:05:24.378+01:00Dear Sivanarul,
This is Krishna here, who replied...Dear Sivanarul,<br /><br />This is Krishna here, who replied earlier as Anonymous. <br /><br />You are right that my tone is unnecessarily sharp and bit with anger.<br /><br />As I told in the beginning of that comment, I nowadays write with a free flow of what comes to my mind without giving much emphasis to words and its harshness.<br /><br />I totally agree with you, but I could not explain , why answers come with this much force from me.<br /><br />It is true that Bhagavan would not give a general advise to everybody and when somebody meets a jnani, he will get the most opt and as near as possible cirucmstance in his replies.<br /><br />Some people never got any answer to their questions from Bhagavan, because the Self simply consumed those questions without prompting Bhagavan to reply. Actually all of Bhagavan's actions are of the Self or Atma since he did not have mind. So it is no wonder the Self reacted in inexplicable ways with different visitors.<br /><br />But coming to Bhagavan's writings, they are considered to be goals and what is his core teaching. <br /><br />Let us assume A approaches Bhagavan Ramana and Bhagavan asked him to pray to a vigraha of vittal in duality mode of devotion.<br /><br />Now A is supposed to do two things:<br /><br />i) Start doing that practice which Bhagavan suggested<br />ii) At the same time, understand the Bhagavan's ultimate position through his authentic scriptures and have a harmony of a belief system within him taking all that to be true.<br /><br />Now i) and ii) is really contradictory in theory and as per intellect.<br /><br />Still one has to totally ignore his intellect and be at ease with Bhagavan.<br /><br />Let me tell you something -- without agreeing 100% with what your Guru has written, even though we love the Guru, the inner conflict will be there as residual impression and that will anytime bounce back. Grace will not be able to operate as efficiently as possible in such a scenario.<br /><br />So it all depends on what we need from Bhagavan Ramana. If we require only Grace and spiritual progress (without intellectual conviction or intellectual progress) then it is better to keep all this very simple and simply abide by Bhagavan's teachings. At the max to ignore these complex topics and carry with our self enquiry.<br /><br />If on the other hand, if we are interested in philosophical reconcilation, it is better to look it elsewhere like Sri Madhusudhana Saraswathi's works, works like Vedanta Paribhasha etc. where these complex topics are analyzed in very detailed manner.<br /><br />And before closing, there is no end for philosophical debates and different sub schools within Advaita.<br /><br />That is why when Kunju Swami told like you that he is going to some Mutt for a traditional vedantic course, Bhagavan asked him not to go and keep it simple.<br /><br />Not sure how harsh my tone this time, but let me tell from my heart, I write all this in free flow and quite raw, uninterrupted from the source.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-70088431656541781772015-09-05T21:58:29.899+01:002015-09-05T21:58:29.899+01:00S-ji,
"I am a beginner’s beginner"
Are...S-ji,<br /><br />"I am a beginner’s beginner"<br /><br />Aren't we all unless dissolved-in-Him?<br /><br />"Too bad, if I walk into that door, you all will become my dream characters."<br /><br />Glad to be one of your characters since you are already one of mine! :-)<br /><br />Be well my friend,<br />Carlos Mouna<br /><br />Mounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-39730095359259599892015-09-05T21:55:07.654+01:002015-09-05T21:55:07.654+01:00Mounaji,
Completely agree. I meant reject to mean...Mounaji,<br /><br />Completely agree. I meant reject to mean for now, not forever. Life has taught me well not to say "never forever" :-). Who knows what Ishvara has in store for me? I am a beginner’s beginner, so it would be really foolish of me to close any door that Ishvara may want me to walk into, in the future. That door might very well be Eka Jiva :-) Too bad, if I walk into that door, you all will become my dream characters.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-77883689410249378252015-09-05T21:42:51.465+01:002015-09-05T21:42:51.465+01:00Sivanarulji, pranams
I completely understand your...Sivanarulji, pranams<br /><br />I completely understand your point of view, believe me.<br />One little phrase you said raised a red flag: "It was Bhagavan who gave me the freedom to accept those of his teachings that I can and reject those that I cannot."<br /><br />If I were you I'll change the word "reject" in that phrase and replace it for "put on hold". Do you agree?...<br /><br />Yours in Bhagavan,<br />CarlosMounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-80984089621466083012015-09-05T21:19:46.671+01:002015-09-05T21:19:46.671+01:00Mounaji,
Vanakkam. Thanks for the info about the...Mounaji, <br /><br />Vanakkam. Thanks for the info about the Advaitin List. I was not aware of it and I will look into it. At some point I do want to read more on traditional advaita teachings.<br /><br />I am quite familiar with the traditional advaita school’s insistence on learning Shastra from a traditional Sampradhaya teacher as a MUST for enlightenment. I have also read some disparaging / questionable comments about Bhagavan made in that community (notably from James Swartz). I generally view them as sibling rivalries (although I know they seem to accept Bhagavan only as an anomaly sibling who they are forced to reconcile with, due to Bhagavan’s extreme popularity in the West and Bhagavan’s impeccable life story and saintly life). But I don’t want to throw the baby along with the bath water. Traditional advaita has a 5000+ year history and plays a very important role in the broader spiritual community and these teachers play an important role in transmitting those teachings.<br /><br />What brought me to Bhagavan was his life story, his impeccable saintliness, his willingness to forgive people for mistakes they commit and his demonstration by example, how one can live life in complete surrender to Ishvara (Arunachala). It was Bhagavan that made traditional advaita palatable to me. It was Bhagavan who gave me the freedom to accept those of his teachings that I can and reject those that I cannot. It was Bhagavan who first taught me the importance of ‘I’ in the search. <br /><br />So I am very grateful to him. I am sure he would not mind me considering him as real and not as a lion in my dream :-) If he does mind, too bad, he is stuck with me.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-26940869791063888752015-09-05T20:33:57.375+01:002015-09-05T20:33:57.375+01:00Dear Sivanarul, Vanakkam
The "advaita commun...Dear Sivanarul, Vanakkam<br /><br />The "advaita community" as you define it doesn't necessarily mean acceptance of Bhagavan's teachings, as strange as that might sound. In general, I would define it more accurately as "vedantic community" because many of the views exposed in those groups (Mr Dennis White included) come from a traditional Vedanta point of view.<br /><br />Just to give you an example, the traditional Vedanta view of learning the shastras is that you MUST go through a qualified teacher that is part of the parampara or lineage of at least one of the lineages established by Sri Sanakaracharya. And as you guess, that puts Bhagavan out of the loop, since he never studied with anybody. He is mostly considered a saint and a yogi, more than an advaitin teacher.<br /><br />I was part of the Yahoo Advaiting List for some years (where Mr Dennis White was or is maybe still a part of) and I can tell you this by direct experience and interaction in that list. If you want to complement Vedanta studies in the traditional form, there might be no better place than the Advaitin List, since the members of the List have a firm and rooted knowledge/understanding about the shastras.<br /><br />Bhagavan's Updesa Saram is part of the syllabus of Vedantic teaching, unfortunately the version used is not the one written by Lakshmana Sharma, who was in close contact with Bhagavan when he wrote it. So it is interpreted also under the traditional vedantic canon.<br /><br />Yours in Bhagavan,<br />CarlosMounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.com