Guest guest Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 How peaceful would it be if there is no `claimer' of actions while actions are just taking place? Why is it so difficult to take the `I' out of all the actions? sundar The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 , sundar sundararajan <sundar22ca> wrote: > Through out our lives, the identification has been with the ego-self. That ego-self claims that it is the doer of actions. It also has realised that it can not guarantee results. So, it feels powerless, anxious and sad. When looked for, this ego-self is found as just a thought. > > How peaceful would it be if there is no `claimer' of actions while actions are just taking place? > > Why is it so difficult to take the `I' out of all the actions? > > sundar Dear Sundar, In my opinion, this is one of the most important questions that we can ever raise. It is so difficult because we are mechanical and not conscious...the good that we would do, that we do not because we are asleep. Grace is needed and for that we must wait. Love, Vicki > > > > > The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 , sundar sundararajan > > Why is it so difficult to take the `I' out of all the actions? > > sundar > > It is not difficult. It is IMPOSSIBLE. (It is also impossible to put an 'I' into an action!) Love, Kheyala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 On 10/22/03 at 8:00 PM sundar sundararajan wrote: Through out our lives, the identification has been with the ego-self. That ego-self claims that it is the doer of actions. It also has realised that it can not guarantee results. So, it feels powerless, anxious and sad. When looked for, this ego-self is found as just a thought. How peaceful would it be if there is no `claimer' of actions while actions are just taking place? Why is it so difficult to take the `I' out of all the actions? sundar Consider the amount of thoughts starting with "I" and those without it. That could give an indication of "I" involvement. Like water fills a dry sponge, the sense of "I" fills the mind and attaches itself to everything, from opinions on the nature of the void to the righteousness of present rulers. So the "I" can't be decapitated at once: instead, its territories like opinions, like & dislike can be surrendered in the sense that it is clear, opinions are in the realm of the relative (there's always a perspective that something is wrong, with another perspective that something is right, and discussions on that can continue forever, irrespective of "solving" an issue). With like & dislike, a matter of biological destiny (like being human or a cat). The like for fresh, cool air to breathe isn't a like but a necessity for living. Actively giving up the cherished notions is painful (so avoided), as in every one of them, the sense of "I" has been invested. Reflecting on these issues and acting accordingly,vigilantly, can strip the sense of "I" from every thought and action in a couple of years. Peace, Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 Thank you Vicki, Jan et al. It is too easy to give up trying to remove the 'I' connection saying that it may be an 'evolution' thing. But, try we must, I guess. Also, this 'I' has been an anchor for all our actions thus far. Simultaneously, the 'Self' or 'the pure consciousness' will start being the alternate anchor. All very abstract... But such seems to be the nature of reality! sundar Dear Sundar,In my opinion, this is one of the most important questions that we can everraise. It is so difficult because we are mechanical and not conscious...thegood that we would do, that we do not because we are asleep. Grace is neededand for that we must wait.Love, Vicki Consider the amount of thoughts starting with "I" and those without it. That could give an indication of "I" involvement. Like water fills a dry sponge, the sense of "I" fills the mind and attaches itself to everything, from opinions on the nature of the void to the righteousness of present rulers. So the "I" can't be decapitated at once: instead, its territories like opinions, like & dislike can be surrendered in the sense that it is clear, opinions are in the realm of the relative (there's always a perspective that something is wrong, with another perspective that something is right, and discussions on that can continue forever, irrespective of "solving" an issue). With like & dislike, a matter of biological destiny (like being human or a cat). The like for fresh, cool air to breathe isn't a like but a necessity for living. Actively giving up the cherished notions is painful (so avoided), as in every one of them, the sense of "I" has been invested. Reflecting on these issues and acting accordingly,vigilantly, can strip the sense of "I" from every thought and action in a couple of years. Peace, Jan Through out our lives, the identification has been with the ego-self. That ego-self claims that it is the doer of actions. It also has realised that it can not guarantee results. So, it feels powerless, anxious and sad. When looked for, this ego-self is found as just a thought. How peaceful would it be if there is no `claimer' of actions while actions are just taking place? Why is it so difficult to take the `I' out of all the actions? sundar The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2003 Report Share Posted October 24, 2003 It seems to me that the "I" is a mental construct or mental creation that, although non-existent, is necessary because of the body and the personality which must perform tasks in the world as long as there is prarabdha-karma. But where does this "I" originate? I see that some people, like Tony O'Clery -- with whom I agree on much of what he writes -- seem to consider the "I" thought as dependent upon the body, therefore the body having been the ultimate cause which made the "I" thought appear. Then, following this view, with the death of the physical body the I would cease and there would be immediate final dissolution into Parabrahm. I do not share this view, though. In my humble opinion, the I thought is what creates the body which creates the I thought. A vicious circle, a paradox. But then would the I thought or Jiva cease with body? Perhaps yes temporarily, but a new body, with a new "I" thought, would then emerge again. Just exploring some possibilities I hope I am not bothering anyone. Cheers, Fred - kheyalove Thursday, October 23, 2003 4:38 PM Re: Why is it so difficult? , sundar sundararajan > > Why is it so difficult to take the `I' out of all the actions?> > sundar > > It is not difficult.It is IMPOSSIBLE.(It is also impossible to put an 'I' into an action!);)Love,Kheyala/join "Love itself is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma Terms of Service. 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.