Guest guest Posted May 13, 2001 Report Share Posted May 13, 2001 Hi Vicki, >Sorry for the delay , I am here. Thought you were on the way out to work!! >" In your last quote of him, he encouraged people to take their own >paths re. the ego... >which seems to me to be accepting of experiences of different >kinds. But perhaps that isn't what you meant? " > *** > >This reminds me something I've already posted under the subject >Can a jnani help those who follow other paths ? >"A jnani helps people following any particular path , > whatever it may be." > >Ultimately a seeker of truth should reach the top of the hill, >by his/her own path and sit beside the jnani.(what a dream!) > >"He will therefore be able to tell people who are coming up >to move a little to this side or that or to avoid a pitfall. >The goal is the same for all." > *** > >I understand by "accepting the experiences of different kinds" >as you say , - accepting the path to Truth that implies having those >experiences that certain human beings are supposed to pass through , Yes, that's what I meant. But I think we have a little problem here - that is, it's a common problem in discussion - with confusing the uses of the word "experience." When we warn people not to seek experiences, we mean not to go after those big flashy psychic/spiritual Experiences... know what I mean? But everything we do is an experience... so to avoid having any experience we'd have to sit down like a yogi on a hill and do nothing but meditate... but even that would not prevent us from having the big flashy psychic/spiritual Experiences, right? )) >ultimately asking themselves "To whom this experience appears? >Who is the experiencer? ". > >To me , I am. Then "WHO AM I ?" comes naturally. Yes! Even if this is not one's method from the beginning, sooner or later the question is there and must be answered. >From this point of you , Ramana didn't encourage the experience >in itself but encouraged the seeker to discover the experiencer. >And that depends on the seeker to decide if he wants the experiences >or he feels that the time came to search for the experiencer, >as a continuation of his path. >Just a little change in point of view. > >That siddhis could come naturally during one's development , >I have no doubts. >But one should continue one's path to Truth , >which is not the acquiring of psychic powers. Well, I would say that the path to Truth usually includes the incidental development of siddhis, but they are not something to seek after. >That could be a "stumbling block to realisation" >because one might want to enjoy the powers >and that could "inflate" the ego dangerously , >and the top of the hill would remain still far . Yes, with the lower siddhis it often happens, especially when people advertise and go professional using clairvoyance, clairaudience, telepathy, etc. But even if the student on the path doesn't seek them, they do come... or more likely, the one or two that are most natural for him... and then, if he keeps on developing, they also go, whether he wants that or not. That is sometimes a kind of black night of the soul for some people... they think they've lost everything. And then the higher siddhis come. For someone like Ramana, it is possible to use any of them, higher or lower, at will. I think the only way a siddhi is important is that it is important to have some contact with the internal guide, the spiritual guru, and that does take what I would call a gift or siddhi. Some people say that Ramana is their spiritual guru... if they "see" him or "hear" him or just receive a "knowing" from him, that doesn't happen through the normal senses... it happens by means of a siddhi, a gift. >Ultimately we are supposed to kill the ego and reach beyond. Yes. I never use the word "kill" myself in that regard, but as Ramana said, all methods lead toward the same end. >I am going to look for and post some quotes about siddhis >from Ramana's Teachings , I'll be back soon , Wonderful! Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2001 Report Share Posted May 14, 2001 Hi Vicki, >>I >> never use the word "kill" myself in that regard, but as Ramanasaid, all >> methods lead toward the same >>end. > > - forgot to say. I love to use the "to kill the ego" . I like the >"crucify" the ego too. Could there be Self-Realization with a >flourishing, strong,powerful,invincible ego? Death of the ego brings the >kingdom of heaven, Well, in the first place, I think we have different meanings for the word "ego." For what you are talking about, I would say "ego image"... or "persona," which means "mask." No argument... I simply don't find it necessary to do violence at all. Simply seeing that I am not the same thing as the persona ("mask"), or the ego image, is enough. It is then something that can be used or set aside... no more "real" or "unreal" than a suit of clothes. Different terms, different methods... Remember what Bhagwan said: >"What is the best way of killing the ego ?" >Bhagavan: > To each person that way is the best which appears > easiest or appeals most. All the ways are equally good, > as they lead to the same goal , which is the merging > of the ego in the Self. What the bhakta calls surrender, > the man who does vichara calls jnana. > Both are trying only to take the ego back to the source > from which it sprang and make it merge there. The word "Ego" simply means "I." I notice that in the little Tamil book that Bhagwan loved, which Glo quoted from, the term "Universal Ego" is used. Interesting... I like it. >Therefore your goal, without doubt, is this Universal Ego (I-am-Brahman). Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.