tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post5080296999178981317..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Why does ego rise again from manōlaya and not from manōnāśa?Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-77368771958466227202019-08-06T13:54:03.440+01:002019-08-06T13:54:03.440+01:00Michael,
it is said that ego is only a mixture of ...Michael,<br />it is said that ego is only a mixture of the real pure awareness (cit) and the unreal element of awareness (jada)i.e.body or mind.<br />So in both kinds of dissolution [temporary or permanent (manōlaya and manōnāśa)] only the unreal factor mind/ego along with the knot (granthi) is to be dissolved whereas pure awareness of course can never be annihilated. Therefore in this sense of being only a mixture ego does not need and can never be annihilated completely in its total complex/completeness.<br />Is that a correct view ? - apart from the fact that ego does anyway not acually exist at all and therefore does not need and cannot be dissolved.<br />anadi-anantahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08815024045988099944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-91918900546020434412019-07-31T18:46:36.165+01:002019-07-31T18:46:36.165+01:00In continuation of my previous comment:
For those...In continuation of <a href="#c89820184013587747" rel="nofollow">my previous comment</a>:<br /><br />For those who are not satisfied with this and want an explanation for why ego rises from <i>laya</i>, it is said that <i>vāsanās</i> remain in the form of <i>kāraṇa śarīra</i> (the ‘causal body’) in <i>laya</i> and therefore cause ego to rise again, but how can <i>vāsanās</i> exist without ego, whose <i>vāsanās</i> they are? Since ego does not exist in sleep or any other state of <i>manōlaya</i>, nothing else (except pure awareness) exists there, not even ego’s <i>vāsanās</i> or <i>kāraṇa śarīra</i>. This is why Bhagavan says that sleep is a state of pure awareness, which means awareness devoid of any content or phenomena.<br /><br />As I explained in my latest article, <a href="https://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2019/07/which-comes-first-ego-or-self.html" rel="nofollow">Which comes first: ego or self-negligence (<i>pramāda</i>)?</a>, why or how ego arose in the first place cannot be explained, because prior to its rising nothing other than pure awareness exists, so there equally well cannot be any adequate explanation for why and how it arises from sleep. Bhagavan says that why or how are the wrong questions to ask in this context. What we need to investigate is who or what this ego actually is. If we investigate ourself keenly enough, we will see that we are just immutable pure awareness, so we have never actually risen as ego.<br /><br />Since ego does not actually exist, trying to explain how it came into existence, whether from sleep or in the first place, is like trying to explain how the son of a barren woman was born.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-898201840135877472019-07-31T18:45:11.693+01:002019-07-31T18:45:11.693+01:00Referring to this article and in particular to the...Referring to this article and in particular to the sentence in which I wrote ‘in <i>manōlaya</i> pure awareness shines alone as a result of the dissolution of ego, whereas in <i>manōnāśa</i> ego is dissolved as a result of pure awareness shining alone’, a friend wrote a WhatsApp message saying:<br /><br />‘In Chemistry, dissolution involves a medium or another component. In Manonasa, ego gets dissolved completely in pure awareness as it dives into the latter, never to reappear. But in Manolaya, the ego does not dive into the pure awareness, but just remains inactive, having exhausted all its energy to project or perceive, but gets re-charged to rise up at some point of time when the threshold for rising up is reached. Thus it seems to me that either there is no dissolution or it is not complete in manolaya’.<br /><br />The following is adapted from the replies I wrote to this and subsequent messages:<br /><br />Dissolution can be complete but nevertheless temporary, as can be illustrated by the example of salt dissolving completely in water. Though its dissolution is complete, sooner or later the salt may recrystalise. Like salt dissolved in water, the dissolution of mind in <i>laya</i> is complete but nevertheless temporary.<br /><br />The root and essence of mind is ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, which is completely absent in sleep, so in sleep ego does not just remain inactive but ceases to exist altogether, albeit only temporarily, and according to the principle that Bhagavan expresses in the second sentence of <a href="https://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2017/10/ulladu-narpadu-tamil-text.html#un26" rel="nofollow">verse 26</a> of <i>Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu</i>, namely ‘அகந்தை இன்றேல், இன்று அனைத்தும்’ (<i>ahandai iṉḏṟēl, iṉḏṟu aṉaittum</i>), ‘If ego does not exist, everything does not exist’, which he reiterates elsewhere, such as in <a href="https://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2019/06/how-can-there-be-any-experience-without.html#aa7" rel="nofollow">verse 7</a> of <i>Śrī Aruṇācala Aṣṭakam</i>, ‘இன்று அகம் எனும் நினைவு எனில், பிற ஒன்றும் இன்று’ (<i>iṉḏṟu aham eṉum niṉaivu eṉil, piṟa oṉḏṟum iṉḏṟu</i>), ‘If the thought called ‘I’ [ego] does not exist, even one other [thought or thing] will not exist’, and in the concluding sentences of the <a href="https://happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para05" rel="nofollow">fifth paragraph</a> of <i>Nāṉ Ār?</i>, ‘மனதில் தோன்றும் நினைவுக ளெல்லாவற்றிற்கும் <b>நானென்னும் நினைவே முதல் நினைவு</b>. இது எழுந்த பிறகே ஏனைய நினைவுகள் எழுகின்றன. தன்மை தோன்றிய பிறகே முன்னிலை படர்க்கைகள் தோன்றுகின்றன; தன்மை யின்றி முன்னிலை படர்க்கைக ளிரா’ (<i>maṉadil tōṉḏṟum niṉaivugaḷ ellāvaṯṟiṟkum <b>nāṉ-eṉṉum niṉaivē mudal niṉaivu</b>. idu eṙunda piṟahē ēṉaiya niṉaivugaḷ eṙugiṉḏṟaṉa. taṉmai tōṉḏṟiya piṟahē muṉṉilai paḍarkkaigaḷ tōṉḏṟugiṉḏṟaṉa; taṉmai y-iṉḏṟi muṉṉilai paḍarkkaigaḷ irā</i>), ‘Of all the thoughts that appear [or arise] in the mind, <b>the thought called ‘I’ alone is the first thought</b> [the primal, basic, original or causal thought]. Only after this arises do other thoughts arise. Only after the first person [ego, the primal thought called ‘I’] appears do second and third persons [all other things] appear; without the first person second and third persons do not exist’, since ego does not exist in sleep, nothing else exists there. Therefore sleep (or any other state of <i>manōlaya</i>) is complete dissolution of ego and everything else.<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-58801738541823541412019-07-31T14:32:42.055+01:002019-07-31T14:32:42.055+01:00Beautiful. Thank you Michael.Beautiful. Thank you Michael.Pajóhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601693443293317323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-29642339055828860242019-07-30T13:56:18.088+01:002019-07-30T13:56:18.088+01:00I'm sitting in the waiting room at the dentist...I'm sitting in the waiting room at the dentist writing this as a note on my phone. I notice there is only one other patient in the room, a rather anxious-looking woman. <br /><br />We exchange a brief smile and, she says she's come for a filling and I reply: I'm having a tooth removed. And so, here we are, two people seated opposite one another and everything that happened in life brought us to this particular time and place and neither of us knowing anything whatsoever about the other. <br /><br />The thought occurs: this situation, how similar it is to that of the ego and pure-awareness. The ego in ignorance of pure-awareness and pure-awareness happy knowing only itself. <br /><br />I start to laugh to which the woman opposite I imagine mistakes my laughter for that of nervousness at the prospect of having a tooth removed. <br /><br />Suddenly, my name is called and, before rising, I imagine Bhagavan as the dentist to say: it's easier to remove the ego than it is a tooth I always use the anaesthetic Ātma-vichāra. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-1224038080188791942019-07-29T21:02:33.993+01:002019-07-29T21:02:33.993+01:00AumAumAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13752673469824040765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-69708185539312165292019-07-29T16:49:19.019+01:002019-07-29T16:49:19.019+01:00Sometimes we refer to our body as ’I’, and sometim...<i>Sometimes we refer to our body as ’I’, and sometimes we refer to it as ‘my body’. Which is correct?</i><br /><br />The language always expresses our confusion because sometimes we refer to our body as ‘my body’ and sometimes as ‘I’. So is this body ‘I’ or is it mine? It is not ‘I’ and it is not actually mine because I have nothing to do with this body – what I actually am has nothing to do with this body. So whether we refer to it as ‘I’ or as ‘my body’, we are still expressing our ignorance.<br /><br />Maybe it helps a little to say ‘my body’ than ‘I’ because we are then beginning to separate ourself from this body, or rather we are beginning to recognize a separation between ourself and this body. <br /><br />~*~ Edited extract from the video: <i>2019-07-28 Yo Soy Tu Mismo: Michael James discusses myths about ‘traditional Advaita Vēdānta’</i><br /><br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.com