Jan/ possibilities/ProfessorVK

[Guest guest]

On 11/9/02 at 1:26 AM harshaimtm wrote:

 

º, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

º>

º> On 11/8/02 at 8:58 PM harshaimtm wrote:

º>

º> ºDear Jan,

º> º

º> ºAs a devotee of the Sage of Arunachala, the term Self-Realization

º> ºappears the most relevant to me and my experience as well. The

ºterm

º> ºliberation can mean many things and so I seldom use it.

º>

º> Whatever the term Self-realization means, it is "explanation after".

º> I know the term too and also that the Self doesn't realize one iota

º> by its very definition: that makes the term an oxymoron which

ºdoesn't

º> matter "after" but needlessly confuses "before".

º> º

º> ºFrom a practical Yoga-Advaita perspective, Self is Recognized in

ºtwo

º> ºways.

º>

º> º

º> º1. Mind is stilled, the Shakti rises to the Sahasarara and then

º> ºmerges in the Spiritual Heart. For this to happen, tendencies are

º> ºsuspended by Grace. This is Nirvikalpa Samadhi and usually comes

º> ºafter long years of spiritual practice having undergone other

ºtypes

º> ºof Savikalpa Samadhis and various experiences. For a spiritually

º> ºmature mind, the nature of Self perpetually Reveals It Self as the

º> ºSelf as ever new. Nirvikalpa Samadhi simply makes obvious That

ºwhich

º> ºis already there in all its beauty already.

º>

º> Certainly not so from the Patanjali "Aphorisms on Yoga": no Shakti

º> rising is mentioned nor chakras.

º>

º> º

º> º2. The second way is when the mind merges in the Heart and the

º> ºtendencies are fully destroyed. This is rare as shown in the case

ºof

º> ºSri RAmana. Here terms such as Self-Realization and liberation

ºhave

º> ºlittle meaning.

º>

º> All tendencies destroyed means the tendency to feel pain destroyed

ºtoo.

º> Clearly that was not the case. Would like and dislike qualify for

ºtendencies

º> also? That too remained till physical departure.

º>

º> º

º> ºSelf Is the Self. It Knows It Self By It Self and Through It Self.

ºIt

º> ºis the Seeker and the Sought and the process is contained in IT.

º> ºMethod given by the Guru, practiced truly, is Known as the Goal

ºthat

º> ºis ever-existent.

º>

º> The Absolute has no properties by definition (nirguna)

º> That makes further statements superfluous/confusing.

º>

º> º

º> ºSri Ramana used to say that a true devotee with complete faith in

ºhis

º> ºGuru lives like a prince in this world. Having given up one's

ºbeing

º> ºto the Lord of the Heart, who is the One Guru, what else can one

ºdo?

º>

º> Apparently memory isn't functioning as good as you wrote:

º> --

º--------

º> Tim, by the way, I love you and have no grudges against you at all.

ºI

º> recalled that post of yours from long time ago simply because I

ºhave

º> a good memory and enjoyed it much. I mean who doesn't enjoy being

º> called a fraud now and then. It is so refreshing!

º> --

º--------

º> Remember Tony's story on what happened with his complete faith in

º> his Guru? And he showed his experience is far from singular.

º> As these kind of experiences continue to happen, the quote now

º> is a generalization that lost validity at least 70 years ago and for

º> some now could hurt.

º>

º> Peace,

º> Jan

º>

º*****************

ºGood one Jan! :-).

º

ºLove,

ºHarsha

 

Defining and equating definitions is a lot fun hey Harsha?

 

Peace,

Jan

[Guest guest]

Hi Jan,

 

, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

> Defining and equating definitions is a lot fun hey Harsha?

>

> Peace,

> Jan

 

Seen here, Jnana and Bhakti (either as 'paths' or backgrounds) mix

like oil and water; the former is like splitting hairs to find the

essense, the latter like making wigs to find 'unity'.

 

Nisargadatta knew this well... Bhakti practitioners were 'allowed' to

live near or on the premises, continue with lighting of incense,

prayers, washing the feet and etc. but were barred when those

interested in lectures entered... either with harsh words, or simply

disallowed from the same area.

 

Of course, genuine sincerity is a case for 'getting along' no matter

the outlook (a 'clue' too often overlooked)...

 

Peace,

 

Tim

[Guest guest]

On 11/9/02 at 10:02 PM fewtch wrote:

 

ºHi Jan,

º

º, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

º> Defining and equating definitions is a lot fun hey Harsha?

º>

º> Peace,

º> Jan

º

ºSeen here, Jnana and Bhakti (either as 'paths' or backgrounds) mix

ºlike oil and water; the former is like splitting hairs to find the

ºessense, the latter like making wigs to find 'unity'.

 

Instead of accepting those paths, i see the mechanics behind them:

common is that the interest in "worldly affairs" drops to nearly zero.

Thusly, the mind doesn't add more attachment but instead, loses the

already existing. This makes the difference, attachment to ecstasies,

the only difference ;-)

º

ºNisargadatta knew this well... Bhakti practitioners were 'allowed' to

ºlive near or on the premises, continue with lighting of incense,

ºprayers, washing the feet and etc. but were barred when those

ºinterested in lectures entered... either with harsh words, or simply

ºdisallowed from the same area.

 

When love is so strong as to tolerate what otherwise wouldn't be

bearable, Bhakti is like a homing device through the mine fields of

attachment. A bit rare though..

º

ºOf course, genuine sincerity is a case for 'getting along' no matter

ºthe outlook (a 'clue' too often overlooked)...

 

The popular expression, God and mammon cannot be served simultaneously.

Today, mammon is called "the tube" ;-)

 

Peace,

Jan

º

ºPeace,

º

ºTim

[Guest guest]

Hi Jan,

 

, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

> ºSeen here, Jnana and Bhakti (either as 'paths' or backgrounds) mix

> ºlike oil and water; the former is like splitting hairs to find the

> ºessense, the latter like making wigs to find 'unity'.

>

> Instead of accepting those paths, i see the mechanics behind them:

> common is that the interest in "worldly affairs" drops to nearly

> zero.

 

A good point, except that it requires a distinction between "worldly

affairs" and "something else" (spiritual affairs?). Yet another

mental split that has to be dropped later on, or continues as

another "burden."

> Thusly, the mind doesn't add more attachment but instead, loses the

> already existing. This makes the difference, attachment to

> ecstasies, the only difference ;-)

 

I wouldn't know... 'Bhakti' is a mostly unfamiliar path here (at

least as an assumed means to some goal). It can be analyzed, but

love defies analysis.

 

Only one thing seems clear -- memories of forms cannot be 'loved'.

You pointed out once that love is based on a sense of touch -- if

true, then "love for God" is an impossibility :-).

> When love is so strong as to tolerate what otherwise wouldn't be

> bearable, Bhakti is like a homing device through the mine fields of

> attachment. A bit rare though..

 

I'll take this on trust... having never followed one path to the

exclusion of another (or stated differently, having dipped my feet in

many different wells) i wouldn't know Bhakti to 'completion'...

 

Peace,

 

Tim

[Guest guest]

On 11/10/02 at 3:44 AM fewtch wrote:

 

ºHi Jan,

º

º, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

º> ºSeen here, Jnana and Bhakti (either as 'paths' or backgrounds) mix

º> ºlike oil and water; the former is like splitting hairs to find the

º> ºessense, the latter like making wigs to find 'unity'.

º>

º> Instead of accepting those paths, i see the mechanics behind them:

º> common is that the interest in "worldly affairs" drops to nearly

º> zero.

º

ºA good point, except that it requires a distinction between "worldly

ºaffairs" and "something else" (spiritual affairs?). Yet another

ºmental split that has to be dropped later on, or continues as

ºanother "burden."

 

Not really - "worldly affairs" is an acronym for a mind engrossed in desiring,

which process is 'hosting' continuously running subroutines called

"evaluation/judgement". That's why adding another routine called "path"

rarely has the desired effect but instead can lead to despair & giving up

which has a profound effect ;-)

º

º> Thusly, the mind doesn't add more attachment but instead, loses the

º> already existing. This makes the difference, attachment to

º> ecstasies, the only difference ;-)

º

ºI wouldn't know... 'Bhakti' is a mostly unfamiliar path here (at

ºleast as an assumed means to some goal). It can be analyzed, but

ºlove defies analysis.

 

In deep dreamless sleep, where is love?

No further analysis required.

º

ºOnly one thing seems clear -- memories of forms cannot be 'loved'.

ºYou pointed out once that love is based on a sense of touch -- if

ºtrue, then "love for God" is an impossibility :-).

 

When kids are brought up well, "God" is the extrapolation of parental love,

which has everything to do with touch ;-)

BTW, words and a glance are touch too.

º

º> When love is so strong as to tolerate what otherwise wouldn't be

º> bearable, Bhakti is like a homing device through the mine fields of

º> attachment. A bit rare though..

º

ºI'll take this on trust... having never followed one path to the

ºexclusion of another (or stated differently, having dipped my feet in

ºmany different wells) i wouldn't know Bhakti to 'completion'...

 

With so much child abuse & neglect going on, some 'ingredients'

for Bhakti are missing. In the West this has led to the overrating

of Self-realization. For Ramana, Self-realization meant the end

of the ability to function as a student, it was the start for many

years of intense meditation and he wrote the 40 verses on the red

mountain. In this respect, not different from Lalla, Hafiz, Rumi,

Ramakrishna who left devotional 'evidence' behind as well.

 

Peace,

Jan

º

ºPeace,

º

ºTim

[Guest guest]

Hi Jan,

 

, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

> On 11/10/02 at 3:44 AM fewtch wrote:

> ºA good point, except that it requires a distinction

between "worldly

> ºaffairs" and "something else" (spiritual affairs?). Yet another

> ºmental split that has to be dropped later on, or continues as

> º

> Not really - "worldly affairs" is an acronym for a mind engrossed

in desiring,

> which process is 'hosting' continuously running subroutines called

> "evaluation/judgement". That's why adding another routine

called "path"

> rarely has the desired effect but instead can lead to despair &

giving up

> which has a profound effect ;-)

 

OK, that makes sense... for some reason, thinking was still hung up

on another post re: "spiritual vs. worldly" when that posting was

made.

 

Seen here, the 'root of desiring' still involves "will to live,"

translating also to "desire for sensual/mental experiencing." Using

the onion analogy, it would be at the center... taking a 'miracle' to

vanish without going through each layer first (millions).

 

It seems possible with 'one pointedness' + surrender a sort of hole

could be drilled in the onion, using the same analogy. Without one-

pointedness despair could lead to suicide or just depression.

> ºI wouldn't know... 'Bhakti' is a mostly unfamiliar path here (at

> ºleast as an assumed means to some goal). It can be analyzed, but

> ºlove defies analysis.

>

> In deep dreamless sleep, where is love?

> No further analysis required.

 

No analysis happens in deep dreamless sleep... no love either. Of

course none of the 'paths' apply in that case.

> ºYou pointed out once that love is based on a sense of touch -- if

> ºtrue, then "love for God" is an impossibility :-).

>

> When kids are brought up well, "God" is the extrapolation of

> parental love, which has everything to do with touch ;-)

 

When kids aren't brought up, "God" can be an extrapolation of

parental anger, too (perhaps often is).

> BTW, words and a glance are touch too.

 

Ok...

 

<snip>

> With so much child abuse & neglect going on, some 'ingredients'

> for Bhakti are missing. In the West this has led to the overrating

> of Self-realization.

 

'Overrating' in which way... ?

> For Ramana, Self-realization meant the end

> of the ability to function as a student, it was the start for many

> years of intense meditation and he wrote the 40 verses on the red

> mountain. In this respect, not different from Lalla, Hafiz, Rumi,

> Ramakrishna who left devotional 'evidence' behind as well.

>

> Peace,

> Jan

> º

> ºPeace,

> º

> ºTim

[Guest guest]

On 11/10/02 at 3:54 PM fewtch wrote:

 

ºHi Jan,

[...]

º

º> With so much child abuse & neglect going on, some 'ingredients'

º> for Bhakti are missing. In the West this has led to the overrating

º> of Self-realization.

º

º'Overrating' in which way... ?

 

One indication is the use of "twice born" or "born anew" instead of the term

"Self-realization". That implicits a growing up in the same sense as happened

after the first birth. There are several stories illustrating this, the most

well-known

is the N.T., where the story survived thanks to its personification: the "born

anew"

is called Jesus who after quite some drama has to die but miraculously is

restored to life.

 

A nondual or other perspective doesn't change the events of the drama 1 iota, in

the same

sense that such a perspective doesn't change indigestion, only the outlook on

it.

 

In the East, a similar story is the biography of Padma Sambhava, who is said to

have

founded Tibetan Buddhism.

 

[...]

º> Peace,

º> Jan

º> º

º> ºPeace,

º> º

º> ºTim

[Guest guest]

Hi Jan,

 

It implies to me the end of having been born.

 

Dying to time, being reborn as the atemporal.

 

Being born again is to be unborn to the first birth.

 

Dying to the conditioning and the one conditioned,

through the process of having been born, living, dying.

 

-- Dan

 

 

, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

> On 11/10/02 at 3:54 PM fewtch wrote:

>

> ºHi Jan,

> [...]

> º

> º> With so much child abuse & neglect going on, some 'ingredients'

> º> for Bhakti are missing. In the West this has led to the

overrating

> º> of Self-realization.

> º

> º'Overrating' in which way... ?

>

> One indication is the use of "twice born" or "born anew" instead of

the term

> "Self-realization". That implicits a growing up in the same sense

as happened

> after the first birth. There are several stories illustrating this,

the most well-known

> is the N.T., where the story survived thanks to its

personification: the "born anew"

> is called Jesus who after quite some drama has to die but

miraculously is restored to life.

>

> A nondual or other perspective doesn't change the events of the

drama 1 iota, in the same

> sense that such a perspective doesn't change indigestion, only the

outlook on it.

>

> In the East, a similar story is the biography of Padma Sambhava,

who is said to have

> founded Tibetan Buddhism.

>

> [...]

> º> Peace,

> º> Jan

> º> º

> º> ºPeace,

> º> º

> º> ºTim

[Guest guest]

Hi Dan,

 

It's correct: the potential to renew conditioning

is what is dying, symbolized by Jesus dying at the cross.

Unable to look over the "event-horizon" the notion of dying

is striking and could be frightful when in bad health.

"Resurrected" <> "awake" irrespective vicissitudes, impossible to

forget/veil... Which still leaves the "true" mystery to unfold

as the one untold.

 

Jan

 

 

On 11/10/02 at 10:20 PM dan330033 wrote:

 

ºHi Jan,

º

ºIt implies to me the end of having been born.

º

ºDying to time, being reborn as the atemporal.

º

ºBeing born again is to be unborn to the first birth.

º

ºDying to the conditioning and the one conditioned,

º through the process of having been born, living, dying.

º

º-- Dan

º

º

º, "ecirada" <ecirada@m...> wrote:

º> On 11/10/02 at 3:54 PM fewtch wrote:

º>

º> ºHi Jan,

º> [...]

º> º

º> º> With so much child abuse & neglect going on, some 'ingredients'

º> º> for Bhakti are missing. In the West this has led to the

ºoverrating

º> º> of Self-realization.

º> º

º> º'Overrating' in which way... ?

º>

º> One indication is the use of "twice born" or "born anew" instead of

ºthe term

º> "Self-realization". That implicits a growing up in the same sense

ºas happened

º> after the first birth. There are several stories illustrating this,

ºthe most well-known

º> is the N.T., where the story survived thanks to its

ºpersonification: the "born anew"

º> is called Jesus who after quite some drama has to die but

ºmiraculously is restored to life.

º>

º> A nondual or other perspective doesn't change the events of the

ºdrama 1 iota, in the same

º> sense that such a perspective doesn't change indigestion, only the

ºoutlook on it.

º>

º> In the East, a similar story is the biography of Padma Sambhava,

ºwho is said to have

º> founded Tibetan Buddhism.

º>

º> [...]

º> º> Peace,

º> º> Jan

º> º> º

º> º> ºPeace,

º> º> º

º> º> ºTim

º

º

º

º/join

º

º

º

º

º

ºAll paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

ºperceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and

ºsubside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not

ºdifferent than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the

ºnature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present.

ºIt is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the

ºFinality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of

ºSelf-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome

ºall to a.

º

º

º

ºYour use of is subject to