tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post7166414130874054537..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: How is ego to be destroyed?Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-2755154878368329102020-10-15T13:05:40.169+01:002020-10-15T13:05:40.169+01:00In the final paragraph of section 4 of this articl...In the final paragraph of <a href="#vicara" rel="nofollow">section 4</a> of this article I wrote:<br /><br />“When he says that other <i>sādhanas</i> cannot be practised without the mind as the instrument for doing them, does this imply that self-investigation (<i>ātma-vicāra</i>) can be practised without the mind? No, obviously not, because what is to investigate ourself is only ourself as ego or mind, but whereas in other <i>sādhanas</i> the existence of ourself as ego or mind is taken for granted instead of being investigated, in self-investigation we are attending to ego to see whether it actually exists at all.”<br /><br />This was also clearly explained by Bhagavan in a reply recorded in <a href="https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Ramana-Maharshi-Day-by-Day-with-Bhagavan.pdf" rel="nofollow"><i>Day by Day with Bhagavan</i></a>, 8-11-45 Morning (2002 edition, pages 36-7):<br /><br />When (on 2-11-45) Mr. Roy asked Bhagavan the best way of killing the ego, Bhagavan said, “To ask the mind to kill the mind is like making the thief the policeman. He will go with you and pretend to catch the thief, but nothing will be gained. So you must turn inward and see where the mind rises from and then it will cease to exist.” In reference to this answer, Mr. Thambi Thorai of Jaffna (who has been living in Palakothu for over a year) asked me, whether asking the mind to turn inward and seek its source is not also employing the mind. So, I put this doubt before Bhagavan and Bhagavan said, “Of course we are employing the mind. It is well known and admitted that only with the help of the mind the mind has to be killed. But instead of setting about saying there is a mind, and I want to kill it, you begin to seek the source of the mind, and you find the mind does not exist at all. The mind, turned outwards, results in thoughts and objects. Turned inwards, it becomes itself the Self. Such a mind is sometimes called <i>arupa manas</i> [formless mind] or <i>suddha manas</i> [pure mind].”Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-76948818989980973332020-10-13T11:09:52.610+01:002020-10-13T11:09:52.610+01:00A friend wrote to me, ‘I was thinking about death ...A friend wrote to me, ‘I was thinking about death for the past few months. I found out that I am tightly holding to this body without being faced with a death threatening situation. Maybe I have developed this unknowingly after seeing a lot of people dying. This clinging to life propensity (samskāra) has induced a condition called insomnia or trouble in getting to sleep. I don't know how to leave or let loose my habit of holding to this body. Can I exist without being holding to this body? I don't know how to sleep (death). Instead I am afraid of getting into sleep (death)? This samskāra is too hard to let go. Can you please share some thoughts on this?’, in reply to which I wrote:<br /><br />Sleep is a state devoid of body, yet we are perfectly happy while asleep, so our fear of losing the body is irrational. However, in spite of the happiness we experience in sleep, due to our <i>avivēka</i> (lack of clear discernment, discrimination or judgement) we still desire to cling to the body and hence fear to lose it.<br /><br />Therefore to the extent that we gain <i>vivēka</i>, we will be free from the bondage of desire and fear. So how to gain <i>vivēka</i>? When we turn within to attend to ourself, we are facing the original light of pure awareness, so that light will clarify our mind, and the resultant clarity of mind is what is called <i>vivēka</i>. Therefore the more we cling to self-attentiveness, the more <i>vivēka</i> will shine in our mind, and the fruit of <i>vivēka</i> is <i>bhakti</i> (love to surrender ourself by subsiding back into our source) and <i>vairāgya</i> (freedom from desire and consequently from fear also).<br /><br />When our mind is agitated by desire and fear, it is liable to think obsessively, and insomnia is a result of such obsessive thinking. Therefore whenever you find that you are unable to sleep, the most effective means to calm the tired mind and allow it to subside peacefully in sleep is to try to be self-attentive.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-51940376294619419342020-10-13T09:50:28.360+01:002020-10-13T09:50:28.360+01:00A friend wrote to me, ‘The I that clings to the wo...A friend wrote to me, ‘The I that clings to the world is ego. The I that clings to “I” has touched the Guru’s feet. Defence has a place with ego and ego uses the shield of the 5 koshas to ward off the true self. The fear of the self creates the snake. The true disciple, who has surrendered, has no defence. They have given up everything. Defensiveness has no place. :) Is it correct to say that this defensiveness is the “Snake” and that the fear of the “Snake” is the world formation? The emptiness of the world dies with the ego along with the fear of self’, in reply to which I wrote:<br /><br />Your first two sentences are correct: ‘The I that clings to the world is ego. The I that clings to “I” has touched the Guru’s feet.’<br /><br />However, it is not correct to say that fear creates the snake, because the snake in this context is ego, and the fear is ego’s, so there can be no fear without ego.<br /><br />As Bhagavan implies in <a href="https://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2017/10/ulladu-narpadu-tamil-text.html#un25" rel="nofollow">verse 25</a> of <i>Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu</i>, grasping is the very nature of ego, and ego’s grasping is what we call desire, so desire will exist so long as we rise and stand as ego. Desire and fear are two sides of the same coin, because if we desire something we will fear to lose it (for example, we desire life so we fear death), and if there were no desire that would be not fear, so both desire and fear are the very nature of ego. Therefore we can eradicate them only by eradicating ego.<br /><br />When ego dies, desire, fear and all worlds will all cease to exist along with it, because they seem to exist only in its view.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-46823498555725955012020-10-13T08:58:07.123+01:002020-10-13T08:58:07.123+01:00A friend wrote to me asking, ‘If we’re really time...A friend wrote to me asking, ‘If we’re really timeless, why is it said that “we exist during sleep”? Doesn’t the word “during” imply the existence of time. Could it be that it’s yet another concession given to the seeker to spark his self-investigation?’, in reply to which I wrote:<br /><br />Our language is the language of time, so when we talk about timelessness we can do so only in the language of time. The true nature of timelessness can only be expressed in silence, because silence is the very nature of timelessness, and timelessness is the very nature of silence. Timeless silence is our own real nature.<br /><br />In our language of time, we have to say that timelessness exists at all times, because time is a mere appearance in timelessness. Sleep is a state in which we exist without the appearance of time, but from the perspective of ourself as ego in waking or dream sleep does seem to have a duration, so from this perspective we have to say that we exist during sleep, albeit not as ego.<br /><br />As ego we cannot grasp timelessness, but if we try to grasp ourself keenly enough, we as ego will dissolve and our timeless real nature alone will remain.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-55543041111564249512020-09-29T16:27:23.190+01:002020-09-29T16:27:23.190+01:00In reply to my reply that I reproduced in my previ...In reply to my reply that I reproduced in my previous comment, another friend wrote, ‘if one sees that what actually exists is only ourself as ātma-svarūpa, how could such one return to the state in which the world, soul and God appear and disappear as kalpanaigaḷ [fabrications, imaginations, mental creations, illusions or illusory superimpositions] in śiva-svarūpa or ātma-svarūpa, the one infinite whole, which is oneself?’, in reply to which I wrote:<br /><br />Josef, we can never return to such a state, because when we see what we actually are, we will see that we have always immutably been only that and not anything else, and that what actually exists is ourself alone, ‘one without a second’ (<i>ēkam ēva advitīyam</i>), so there will be noting else to return to, and no ego to return to it.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-9545056720554435392020-09-28T10:05:08.540+01:002020-09-28T10:05:08.540+01:00In a comment on my latest video, 2020-09-26 Ramana...In a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznRoiMl8u8&lc=Ugw58Htt1ZBZ5M_8aK14AaABAg" rel="nofollow">comment</a> on my latest video, <a href="https://youtu.be/jznRoiMl8u8" rel="nofollow">2020-09-26 Ramana Maharshi Foundation UK: Michael James discusses the role of <i>guru</i> and other matters</a>, a friend wrote, ‘Around the 24 minute mark, Michael spoke about Arunachala will be long after us. Does that mean this world continues after the death of the body, or does it mean Arunachala will always be shining within us a I, for it is infinite? It has been a few months since Bhagavan brought me to this path, please pardon my confusion’, in reply to which I wrote:<br /><br />Xhesi, so long as we look outwards, Arunachala will always be manifest in the form of the hill, but when we look within, we will see that what Arunachala actually is is our own real nature (<i>ātma-svarūpa</i>), which is what is always shining within us as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’.<br /><br />God (as something separate from ourself) and the world seem to exist only when we look outwards, away from ourself, but if we look at ourself keenly enough we will see that what actually exists is only ourself (<i>ātma-svarūpa</i>), as Bhagavan says in the <a href="https://happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para07" rel="nofollow">seventh paragraph</a> of <i>Nāṉ Ār?</i>.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.com