Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 D: Was not Jesus a Perfected Being possessing occult powers ? M: He could not have been aware of his powers [siddhis]. D : Is it not good to acquire them, such as telepathy,etc.? M: Telepathy or radio enables one to see or hear from afar. They are all the same , hearing and seeing. Whether one hears from near or far does not make any difference in hearing. The fundamental factor is the hearer , the subject. Without the hearer or the seer, there can be no hearing or seeing. The latter are the functions of the mind. The occult power [ siddhis ] are therefore only in the mind. They are not natural to the Self. That which is not natural , but acquired , cannot be permanent , and is not worth striving for. They denote extended powers ; a man is possessed of limited powers and is miserable ; he wants to expand his powers so that he may be happy . But consider if it will be so ; If with limited perceptions one is miserable , with extended perceptions the misery must increase proportionally. Occult powers will not bring happiness to anyone , but will make him all the more miserable ! Moreover , what are these powers for ? The would-be occultist [ siddha ] desires to display the siddhis so that others may appreciate him . He seeks appreciation , and if it is not forthcoming he will not be happy .There must be others to appreciate him. He may even find another possessor of higher powers . That will cause jealousy and breed unhappiness. The higher occultist [ siddha ] may meet a still higher siddha and so on until there will come one who will blow up everything in a trice. Such is the the highest adept [siddha ] and He is God or the Self. Which is the real power ? Is it to increase prosperity or bring about peace ? That which results in peace is the highest perfection [siddhi]. ( Talks ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Hi Vicki, This is very interesting. We know from various stories of Maharshi that he did have gifts (siddhis) and used them. So he cannot have been saying that it's wrong to use these gifts. Reading carefully, I think he was saying that it's a mistake to pursue them... to work to acquire gifts. He speaks of the person who wants them in order to have happiness or power or prestige... this is the problem, not the siddhis themselves. He says that Jesus could not have been aware of his powers. Perhaps he was thinking of himself... perhaps he did what he did so naturally that he didn't think in terms of powers or special gifts. If he wanted to see far away, he just looked... it wasn't like turning something on. Love, Dharma > D: Was not Jesus a Perfected Being possessing occult powers ? M: >He could not have been aware of his powers [siddhis]. D : Is it not >good to acquire them, such as telepathy,etc.? M: Telepathy or radio >enables one to see or hear from afar. They are all the same , >hearing and seeing. Whether one hears from near or far does not >make any difference in hearing. The fundamental factor is the >hearer , the subject. Without the hearer or the seer, there can be > no hearing or seeing. The latter are the functions of the mind. > The occult power [ siddhis ] are therefore only in the mind. >They are not natural to the Self. That which is not natural , but >acquired , cannot be permanent , and is not worth >snip< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 , Dharma <deva@L...> wrote: > Hi Vicki, > > This is very interesting. We know from various stories of Maharshi that he > did have gifts (siddhis) and used them. So he cannot have been saying that > it's wrong to use these gifts. > > Reading carefully, I think he was saying that it's a mistake to pursue > them... to work to acquire gifts. He speaks of the person who wants them > in order to have happiness or power or prestige... this is the problem, > not the siddhis themselves. > > He says that Jesus could not have been aware of his powers. Perhaps he was > thinking of himself... perhaps he did what he did so naturally that he > didn't think in terms of powers or special gifts. If he wanted to see far > away, he just looked... it wasn't like turning something on. > > Love, > Dharma > > > D: Was not Jesus a Perfected Being possessing occult powers ? M: > >He could not have been aware of his powers [siddhis]. D : Is it not > >good to acquire them, such as telepathy,etc.? M: Telepathy or radio > >enables one to see or hear from afar. They are all the same , > >hearing and seeing. Whether one hears from near or far does not > >make any difference in hearing. The fundamental factor is the > >hearer , the subject. Without the hearer or the seer, there can be > > no hearing or seeing. The latter are the functions of the mind. > > The occult power [ siddhis ] are therefore only in the mind. > >They are not natural to the Self. That which is not natural , but > >acquired , cannot be permanent , and is not worth > >snip< Namaste All, Siddhis happen spontaneously around realised people, there is no ego to be attached to them.....ONS Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Hi Vicki, >It's the same subject we've been talking about , and it seems to me we >both agree on this subject. Working deliberately for acquiring siddhis >does not lead to Self-realization , It's not that using a "power" is bad in the way that killing a person is bad. Power is neither good nor bad... it's the use you make of it that's good or bad. But working for siddhis is not the same thing as working on spiritual development. If you spend your time working for siddhis, you are NOT spending it on spiritual development. > and Ramana doesn't call one like this a spiritual aspirant . There are plenty of courses in "psychic development," but such work is usually completely lop-sided and leads to imbalance. It's like going to school and finding you're scheduled for nothing but gym classes. You might enjoy it and get very good at these physical activities, but no matter how long you stay in school, you could hardly be called an educated person if you study nothing but physical education. >That they might interfere with a true spiritual aspirant's path - that >is something else , If he becomes fascinated with siddhis or attached to them, of course. Then that becomes a block to his progress. > but one should continue his sadhana [ spiritual practice ] and not >become involved with the siddhis , ) I doubt if you can help it! The gifts come naturally with development... to remain "uninvolved" with them, you would have to give time and energy to keeping yourself pulled in, held back from using your own capacities. It's like this: as you expand and become aware of the wider world, your senses expand into new levels, new ranges. You wouldn't consider your physical senses bad and try to stay uninvolved with them. You'd be walking around with cotton in your ears, your eyes shut, and your arms wrapped around your chest, muttering, "Mustn't look... mustn't hear... mustn't touch." Of course not... there's nothing wrong with using your sight or your hearing or touch. And as it becomes easier and easier to use them on other levels, there is nothing wrong with that. So Ramana says: >They are all the same, hearing and seeing. Whether one hears from near or >far does not make any difference in hearing. The fundamental factor is >the hearer, the subject. Without the hearer or the seer, there can be no >hearing or seeing. The latter are the functions of the mind. There's nothing wrong with "hearing" your spiritual guru. If a friend in another country is sick and asks you to look at his chakras for him, there's nothing wrong with taking a look at his chakras and telling him what you see. If he asks for your help and thus gives permission, there's nothing wrong with tweaking something a bit )... nudging something back into alignment or removing a big block that you see. If you look at a friend in the same room and see a spider on his neck, you would tell him. If you look on another level and see a block that's hurting him, why not tell him... or remove it... or at least break it into little bits that are easier for him to clear? No, it's not best to work for the gifts, but there's no need to fear them either. When I'm asked if I'm psychic, I just say, "Isn't everybody?" And I think we all are naturally psychic, to one extent or another, and in different ways. Some people don't even know they are using siddhis until someone tells them... it's that natural. Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2001 Report Share Posted May 19, 2001 Hi Vicki, >>When I'm asked if I'm psychic, I just say, "Isn't everybody?" And I >>think we all are naturally psychic, to one extent or another, and in >>different ways. Some people don't even know they are using siddhis until >>someone tells them... it's that natural. >I would say , when you are asked if your psychic , and if you are I have said I think everyone is. > - to one extent or another - more than others naturally are In this kind of thinking, you compare me to others and suggest that it is important or noticeable whether I'm psychic "more than others." This is not the way I think... I'm not constantly deciding whether some action is using a siddhi or is not... And the only way that comparing myself to others is useful is in order to understand what someone else is saying on the basis of my own experience and/or reading. >, why not ask yourself "to whom these psychic powers appear?" ? (....half >joke ... half serious .....) 1) When someone asks me a question, I don't respond by asking myself another question. 2) I know the answer. But it's a good method... always good to bring it up again. Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2001 Report Share Posted May 19, 2001 , Dharma <deva@L...> wrote: > Hi Vicki, > > >It's the same subject we've been talking about , and it seems to me we > >both agree on this subject. Working deliberately for acquiring siddhis > >does not lead to Self-realization , > > It's not that using a "power" is bad in the way that killing a person is > bad. Power is neither good nor bad... it's the use you make of it that's > good or bad. > > But working for siddhis is not the same thing as working on spiritual > development. If you spend your time working for siddhis, you are NOT > spending it on spiritual development. > > > and Ramana doesn't call one like this a spiritual aspirant . > > There are plenty of courses in "psychic development," but such work is > usually completely lop-sided and leads to imbalance. It's like going to > school and finding you're scheduled for nothing but gym classes. You might > enjoy it and get very good at these physical activities, but no matter how > long you stay in school, you could hardly be called an educated person if > you study nothing but physical education. > > >That they might interfere with a true spiritual aspirant's path - that > >is something else , > > If he becomes fascinated with siddhis or attached to them, of course. Then > that becomes a block to his progress. > > > but one should continue his sadhana [ spiritual practice ] and not > >become involved with the siddhis , > > ) I doubt if you can help it! The gifts come naturally with > development... to remain "uninvolved" with them, you would have to give > time and energy to keeping yourself pulled in, held back from using your > own capacities. > > It's like this: as you expand and become aware of the wider world, your > senses expand into new levels, new ranges. You wouldn't consider your > physical senses bad and try to stay uninvolved with them. You'd be walking > around with cotton in your ears, your eyes shut, and your arms wrapped > around your chest, muttering, "Mustn't look... mustn't hear... mustn't > touch." Of course not... there's nothing wrong with using your sight or > your hearing or touch. And as it becomes easier and easier to use them on > other levels, there is nothing wrong with that. So Ramana says: > > >They are all the same, hearing and seeing. Whether one hears from near or > >far does not make any difference in hearing. The fundamental factor is > >the hearer, the subject. Without the hearer or the seer, there can be no > >hearing or seeing. The latter are the functions of the mind. > > There's nothing wrong with "hearing" your spiritual guru. If a friend in > another country is sick and asks you to look at his chakras for him, > there's nothing wrong with taking a look at his chakras and telling him > what you see. If he asks for your help and thus gives permission, there's > nothing wrong with tweaking something a bit )... nudging something back > into alignment or removing a big block that you see. If you look at a > friend in the same room and see a spider on his neck, you would tell him. > If you look on another level and see a block that's hurting him, why not > tell him... or remove it... or at least break it into little bits that > are easier for him to clear? > > No, it's not best to work for the gifts, but there's no need to fear them > either. > > When I'm asked if I'm psychic, I just say, "Isn't everybody?" And I think > we all are naturally psychic, to one extent or another, and in different > ways. Some people don't even know they are using siddhis until someone > tells them... it's that natural. > > Love, > Dharma Namaste Dharma, Bondage and attention!! There is no need to know anything about avidya or creation. There is no need to know the atomic and molecular structure of water and chlorine to get out of the pool. Just climb out without thinking about it. ONS Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2001 Report Share Posted May 19, 2001 Tony: >Bondage and attention!! There is no need to know anything about avidya >or creation. There is no need to know the atomic and molecular >structure of water and chlorine to get out of the pool. Just climb out >without thinking about it. ONS Tony. Why don't you take your own advice? Who are you? 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.