Guest guest Posted January 22, 2004 Report Share Posted January 22, 2004 asking "Who Am I?" simply dissolves the false idea that who you are is limited to a particular place and time.Relieved of this false idea the sense of self expands to include everything.Once the self is all inclusive then your interaction with the world is transformed i.e. there is no world anywhere there is only Pure Consciousness. In all humility, michael dillon p.s. i once wrote "SELF-REALIZATION is quite easy: just transfer your sense of ME to all you can SEE and then simply BE" >"jim37rich" <jim37rich >RamanaMaharshi >RamanaMaharshi >[RamanaMaharshi] TO WHOM? >Thu, 22 Jan 2004 21:21:12 -0000 > _______________ Tired of 56k? Get a FREE BT Broadband connection http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband RamanaMaharshi User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 "jim37rich" jim37rich Mailing-List: list RamanaMaharshi; contact RamanaMaharshi-owner Thu, 22 Jan 2004 21:21:12 -0000 [RamanaMaharshi] TO WHOM? I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To whom does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) and the arisen thought will also subside. What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after the final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? What exactly do you experience - assuming it's describeable? What happens to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? Assuming you go into the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? If you come out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? Have you gone to the Source never to return? Is there a way to stay in/as the Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay the bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? I'd really love to read about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. thanks, jim Post message: RamanaMaharshi Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- Un: RamanaMaharshi List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner Shortcut URL to this page: http://www./community/RamanaMaharshiRamanaMaharshi/ RamanaMaharshi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2004 Report Share Posted January 22, 2004 Dear Jim , we have another site -linked to this which is for people seriously interested in Self Enquiry [Atma Vichara].I am posting your E Mail on t this site and I am sure you will receive interesting useful feed-back .Every best wish , Alan --- jim37rich <jim37rich wrote: > > I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To whom > does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one > asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) > and the arisen thought will also subside. > > What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after the > final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? What > exactly do you experience - assuming it's describeable? What happens > to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? Assuming you go into > the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? If you come > out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? Have you > gone to the Source never to return? Is there a way to stay in/as the > Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay the > bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? I'd really love to read > about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working > with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. > > thanks, > > jim > > > > > > > Post message: RamanaMaharshi > Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- > Un: RamanaMaharshi > List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner > > Shortcut URL to this page: > http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi > > > Links > > > RamanaMaharshi/ > > > RamanaMaharshi > > Your > > > ______________________ Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger./download/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 2004 Report Share Posted January 24, 2004 Dear Jim, When the mind is pure, regardless of one's practice, even the practice of vichara, there will arise the spontaneous sensation that draws your sense of "i" in like a magnet. If there is a thought associated, it might be "Who sees?" or "To whom do these thoughts arise?" Suddenly there will be a sense of radical or extreme inner clarity, like the sun burning off a fog or like the arising out of an amnesia, with will pulse, reverberate, radiate all through the body as soundless sound of "I" or "I as I" the sense of Self and clear acknowledgement of who you are as single and pervasive being, the unchanging subject to all objects. The minds focusing mechanism will relinquish and you will abide in the singles sense of your Self. Holding to this, the whole body will be transformed, radiance will deepen and pour out of every cell, every atom, and from deeper and deeper depths, as you just simply "Watch!" as Christ puts it. "The eye is the light of the body." [i.e., that part of you that sees, the seer, is your True Light.] "When your eye is single." [when you hold to the subject "I" discarding all objects.] "The whole body will be filled with light." [The Enlightenment of the Whole Body.] Christ to the Apostles Luke 11:34. This teaching has been taught by sages throughout time. When we practice a daily Sadhana, the mind becomes pure, then when we read such phrases as the one above, texts from Vedanta, i.e., the various Gitas, Upanishads, and similar texts of different religions, who you really are suddenly "hears" and "recollects" and "abides" in and as Itself, where the attraction towards True Remembrance of your identity is so strong that the mind, body and Soul are Transformed and Transfigured into That which we really are, Consciousness Itself. If one is practicing a daily Sadhana, the mind will become pure and a Force of Intelligence inherent in the Being Consciousness that animates the universe like a self effulgent screen arises and draws the sense of "i" inward until there emerges the recollection of who you really are. then all that is not single pervasive truth, is simply relinquished, no thought nor a thinker. This is certainly the experience of many..... Pieter Thu, 22 Jan 2004 21:14:24 -0000 "jim37rich" <jim37rich >TO WHOM?I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To whom does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) and the arisen thought will also subside.What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after the final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? What exactly do you experience - assuming it's describable? What happens to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? Assuming you go into the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? If you come out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? Have you gone to the Source never to return? Is there a way to stay in/as the Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay the bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? I'd really love to read about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. thanks,jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 2004 Report Share Posted January 24, 2004 , <pietersa@l...> wrote: > Dear Jim, > > When the mind is pure, regardless of one's practice, even the practice of vichara, there will arise the spontaneous sensation that draws your sense of "i" in like a magnet. If there is a thought "I as I" the sense of Self and clear acknowledgement of who you are as single and pervasive being, the unchanging subject to all objects. The minds focusing mechanism will relinquish and you will abide in the singles sense of your Self. > > Namaste, When the mind is pure---there isn't one.........ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 Warwick: thanks for this thoughtful, sincere and useful response. I have been getting some rather preachy, offensive and useless responses so I really love what you wrote. , "Warwick Wakefield" <formandsubstance@t...> wrote: > Hi Jim, > > you were asking for first hand experience, so I will give you some. > > Firstly, the approach that I know is slightly different. The approach that I am intimate with is in seeing who "I" am, or what "I" is, rather than seeing that the person does not exist. This is "I" in the deepest possible sense. > > My approach is in seeing quite clearly what is known as the person, Warwick, and then asking, "Am I all of those attributes which make up the person, or am I that which sees all those attributes?" > After asking that question it becomes clear that I am simple consciousness, pure subjectivity, consciousness without form or attributes. > > And there is another, and important, dimension to it. All of what I know as "me", that which is observable and has attributes, whether of the body or the mind, exists in time. > What does that mean? > Well, it is very simple. Time simply refers to movement and change. Imagine that everything that is known, physical and mental, were to be snap-frozen. Then time would have no meaning. > Have you ever been watching a home movie when the projector jammed? Then movement and change are stopped and time, within that frame of reference, ceases. > > So me, the entity, (and the world too, for that matter), lives, exists in the dimension of time, where all is moving and all is changing. But consciousness belongs to the dimension of eternity. Eternity doesn't mean events, happenings, things, (for things are also events) going on and on and on and on ad infinitum; eternity means consciousness not going anywhere. And obviously, eternity is not to be gained in the future, eternity is NOW. But now is not a point in time. When people say, "Be here now", they mostly, so it seems to me, get it wrong. They mean, "Consider these things/events which are happening in front of the me." > They are referring to a very narrow focus of time, whereas NOW is not in time at all. > > So in fact, consciousness, eternity and now are all the same. Of course it is absolutely necessary to make the distinction between mind, which is always moving and changing, and consciousness, which is changeless. > > Jim, you asked for first-hand stuff. I assure you that all the above is first hand. None of it, not a bit, is beholden to anything read in a book or heard in a lecture. > > But you ask, how long does this last? What relevance does it have to the world of changing nappies (diapers) preparing dinner and the rest.? > > Jim, I am struggling with the same question. It seems that I live in two dimensions simultaneously, the dimension of time, where things exist (because things are events) and deeds are done, and the dimension of eternity, where no change happens, not birth nor death, and no "things" exist. > > When I am in conversation with you, or various others, or when I listen to Francis Lucille, or read Atmananda, the consciousness of consciousness is a tranquil presence. > > But then I am caught in a traffic jam, or contemplating the bills I have to pay and the income with which I will pay them, and the tranquil awareness of awareness is obscured. (I know it can't be destroyed -- it is not subject to change -- but it is certainly obscured.) In my current experience, the Awarenss (of my Impersonal self) gets obscured by things/thoughts/feelings because I habitually slip back into my little separate personal me/self and then start reacting to whatever is distracting me from Me. So far, I use the question: Who am I or who is this little me? to stop the drama and move back into my larger clearer Self. If I can notice the subtle difference between my Big OK Self and my little troubled self, I have a chance to return to the big Me....at least for awhile, LOL. The key seems to be an awareness of the real Me as compared to the imagined me. All these descriptive terms are constantly changing based on reading or personal experience so this is the best I can state for now. > > So we are in the same boat. > > I could make some suggestions about lines of enquiry that might lead to the dethronement, the permanent dethronement, of time. I don't necessarily mean that time is to be destroyed; I just mean that it is to be dethroned, no longer given pride-of-place. > Or to put it in less high-falutin terms, I could mention some hot leads I'm following that might solve the case. > > And I would like to hear any suggestions from you. The leads I'm currently following with limited success are: Ramesh Balsekar, Eckhart Tolle, Leonard Jackobson, David Godman on Ramana Maharshi, Gangagi, Papaji, Nisargadatta and all the Advaitic teachers I can find. To me, understanding the big Self vs. the little self is at the heart of everything that matters. Thanks again for a useful and respectful response.....a rare thing at these boards in my experience. I may write you more if other ideas come up and I welcome your feedback on these matters..... jim > - > jim37rich > > Friday, January 23, 2004 8:14 AM > TO WHOM? > > > I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To whom > does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one > asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) > and the arisen thought will also subside. > > What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after the > final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? What > exactly do you experience - assuming it's describeable? What happens > to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? Assuming you go into > the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? If you come > out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? Have you > gone to the Source never to return? Is there a way to stay in/as the > Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay the > bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? I'd really love to read > about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working > with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. > > thanks, > > jim > > > > > /join > > > > > > "Love itself is the actual form of God." > > Sri Ramana > > In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma > > > > -- ---------- > Links > > > / > > b.. > > > c.. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 Dear Jim and Dear Warwick thank you for the work you have done. What you are writing about - this is what I was thru. Believe me I tried to follow the new "gurus" of "our times" - but its not THAT Reading Ramana..... complete understanding its IT my "personal" conclusion following IT is happiness following EGO in all its nuances even for a minute... unhappiness be embraced and tku again michael bindel >"jim37rich" > >To: > Re: TO WHOM? >Mon, 26 Jan 2004 06:31:02 -0000 > >Warwick: > > >thanks for this thoughtful, sincere and useful response. I have been >getting some rather preachy, offensive and useless responses so I >really love what you wrote. > > >--- In , "Warwick Wakefield" > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > > > you were asking for first hand experience, so I will give you some. > > > > Firstly, the approach that I know is slightly different. The >approach that I am intimate with is in seeing who "I" am, or what "I" >is, rather than seeing that the person does not exist. This is "I" in >the deepest possible sense. > > > > My approach is in seeing quite clearly what is known as the person, >Warwick, and then asking, "Am I all of those attributes which make up >the person, or am I that which sees all those attributes?" > > After asking that question it becomes clear that I am simple >consciousness, pure subjectivity, consciousness without form or >attributes. > > > > And there is another, and important, dimension to it. All of what I >know as "me", that which is observable and has attributes, whether of >the body or the mind, exists in time. > > What does that mean? > > Well, it is very simple. Time simply refers to movement and change. >Imagine that everything that is known, physical and mental, were to >be snap-frozen. Then time would have no meaning. > > Have you ever been watching a home movie when the projector jammed? >Then movement and change are stopped and time, within that frame of >reference, ceases. > > > > So me, the entity, (and the world too, for that matter), lives, >exists in the dimension of time, where all is moving and all is >changing. But consciousness belongs to the dimension of eternity. >Eternity doesn't mean events, happenings, things, (for things are >also events) going on and on and on and on ad infinitum; eternity >means consciousness not going anywhere. And obviously, eternity is >not to be gained in the future, eternity is NOW. But now is not a >point in time. When people say, "Be here now", they mostly, so it >seems to me, get it wrong. They mean, "Consider these things/events >which are happening in front of the me." > > They are referring to a very narrow focus of time, whereas NOW is >not in time at all. > > > > So in fact, consciousness, eternity and now are all the same. Of >course it is absolutely necessary to make the distinction between >mind, which is always moving and changing, and consciousness, which >is changeless. > > > > Jim, you asked for first-hand stuff. I assure you that all the >above is first hand. None of it, not a bit, is beholden to anything >read in a book or heard in a lecture. > > > > But you ask, how long does this last? What relevance does it have >to the world of changing nappies (diapers) preparing dinner and the >rest.? > > > > Jim, I am struggling with the same question. It seems that I live >in two dimensions simultaneously, the dimension of time, where things >exist (because things are events) and deeds are done, and the >dimension of eternity, where no change happens, not birth nor death, >and no "things" exist. > > > > When I am in conversation with you, or various others, or when I >listen to Francis Lucille, or read Atmananda, the consciousness of >consciousness is a tranquil presence. > > > > But then I am caught in a traffic jam, or contemplating the bills I >have to pay and the income with which I will pay them, and the >tranquil awareness of awareness is obscured. (I know it can't be >destroyed -- it is not subject to change -- but it is certainly >obscured.) > >In my current experience, the Awarenss (of my Impersonal self) gets >obscured by things/thoughts/feelings because I habitually slip back >into my little separate personal me/self and then start reacting to >whatever is distracting me from Me. So far, I use the question: Who >am I or who is this little me? to stop the drama and move back into >my larger clearer Self. If I can notice the subtle difference >between my Big OK Self and my little troubled self, I have a chance >to return to the big Me....at least for awhile, LOL. The key seems >to be an awareness of the real Me as compared to the imagined me. All >these descriptive terms are constantly changing based on reading or >personal experience so this is the best I can state for now. > > > > > So we are in the same boat. > > > > I could make some suggestions about lines of enquiry that might >lead to the dethronement, the permanent dethronement, of time. I >don't necessarily mean that time is to be destroyed; I just mean that >it is to be dethroned, no longer given pride-of-place. > > Or to put it in less high-falutin terms, I could mention some hot >leads I'm following that might solve the case. > > > > And I would like to hear any suggestions from you. > >The leads I'm currently following with limited success are: Ramesh >Balsekar, Eckhart Tolle, Leonard Jackobson, David Godman on Ramana >Maharshi, Gangagi, Papaji, Nisargadatta and all the Advaitic teachers >I can find. To me, understanding the big Self vs. the little self is >at the heart of everything that matters. > >Thanks again for a useful and respectful response.....a rare thing at >these boards in my experience. I may write you more if other ideas >come up and I welcome your feedback on these matters..... > >jim > > > > > > > - > > jim37rich > > > > Friday, January 23, 2004 8:14 AM > > Subject: TO WHOM? > > > > > > I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To >whom > > does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then >one > > asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the >Self) > > and the arisen thought will also subside. > > > > What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after >the > > final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? >What > > exactly do you experience - assuming it's describeable? What >happens > > to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? Assuming you go >into > > the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? If you >come > > out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? Have you > > gone to the Source never to return? Is there a way to stay in/as >the > > Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay >the > > bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? I'd really love to >read > > about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working > > with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. > > > > thanks, > > > > jim > > > > > > > > > > /join > > > > > > > > > > > > "Love itself is the actual form of God." > > > > Sri Ramana > > > > In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma > > > > > > > > -- >---------- > > Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > / > > > > b.. To from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > c.. Your use of is subject to the Terms of >Service. > MSN 8 helps ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES. Get 2 months FREE*. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 thanks tg: re:"I've really enjoyed reading everyone's real experiences with him. I hope to hear more!" I'd really love to read of your own personal experiences instead of your ideas about my experiences and others. You have offered many "you statements" and very few "I statements". My orininal post asked for folk's own personal experiences (as I statements), not opinions of others reality/process. , "teegee555" <Teegee555@a...> wrote: > , "jim37rich" <jim37rich> > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > > I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To > whom > > does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one > > asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) > > and the arisen thought will also subside. > > It's not that the thought subsides, but that the thought then becomes > a part of the whole, instead of a part of the part. The thought is > there, but not in your own mind, but in the mind of the whole. > > > > > What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after > the > > final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? > > As you are now a part of the whole mind, your attention goes to the > whole of all things. Thoughts are seen outside yourself (you, as > Jim). Jim's mind is now quiet so there is nothing inside of your own > mind to put your attention to, except the knowledge of how quiet and > peaceful your mind is! What about your mind? Or is this a description of your experience presented as my experience? Did I ask for a commentary on my experience? > > What > > exactly do you experience - assuming it's describeable? > > It is describeable, although I guess you could compare the > description as if I were describing how wonderful and beautiful the > Grand Canyon is -- I could even show you pictures of it -- but, to > truly experience and appreciate the Grand Canyon, and get the whole > gist of it, you just have to be there. It's not that it is beyond > description. It's just that describing it cannot do it justice, if > that makes sense. No it doesn't "make sense"! The question is not: What is the grand canyon like? The question is: What is your own personal experience of the grand canyon.....get the difference? If it is describeable....describe it in your own words and from your own personal experience with 'I' statements....that's all. How about: "I saw the grand canyon as.........." and "felt that it was....." , etc. > > What happens > > to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? > > 'You' become a part of the whole mind. Imagine for a second 'you' as > a body. You have your brain, your thoughts, your arms, legs, etc. > You are always a part of the whole mind, but now you can only see > from your eyes, think from your mind, etc. OK, but what about your own experience? What do you become.....? Start with: I become....... or I don't become...... > > If you want to see it on paper, draw a big circle. Put a small stick > figure (you) inside it. Now draw a circle inside your stick > mind/brain to represent 'your' mind. > > With that pix, all your thoughts seem to be coming from your mind. > You can't see the whole, because you are still (thinking) you are a > body. > > Now, with this big circle picture, imagine now you are seeing from > the whole mind. Go outside your stick body's mind and look at the > big picture. Put pretend eyes on the big mind. > > Your thoughts will now be seen and not heard in your mind, if you are > seeing/hearing from the whole. If you are only hearing from the > whole mind, your thoughts will seem to have disappeared. > > Assuming you go into > > the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? > > The thing is, we are always there. > > If you come > > out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? > > Fear, doubt, some kind of fear, must pop in to come out of the > awareness. Having to get on with life here on Planet Earth. Is that your own personal experience of Planet Earth? > > Have you > > gone to the Source never to return? > > One couldn't live Are you this One? How about you - just you yourself - what have you yourself experienced with this? long in a body like that unless you were to be > taken care of. And this is my personal opinion, so take it with a > grain of salt. It is possible in this body to have a quiet mind > though. And again, allowing fear/doubt/fantasy to grasp onto, brings > that to a halt. > > Is there a way to stay in/as the > > Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay > the > > bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? > > I love your mind and the way it contemplates all these things. > > These are just fears. Look at them, ask yourself if you want to keep > them, and if not, let them go. Don't seek for Love/God, but > eliminate all the things blocking the way for Love's presence. You needn't preach to me or assume that my questions are pleas for help. All you need to do is honestly and sincerely offer your experiences on the questions of decline to respond...no sermons, judgments, opinions about others reality, or sage pronouncements which were not requested. thanks anyway and I look forward to either your responses to the questions of your own experience or a refusal to resond. jim > > I'd really love to read > > about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working > > with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. > > I've really enjoyed reading everyone's real experiences with him. I > hope to hear more! > > Love, > xxxtg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 , <pietersa@l...> wrote: > Dear Jim, > > When the mind is pure, regardless of one's practice, even the practice of vichara, there will arise the spontaneous sensation that draws your sense of "i" in like a magnet. If there is a thought associated, it might be "Who sees?" or "To whom do these thoughts arise?" Suddenly there will be a sense of radical or extreme inner clarity, like the sun burning off a fog or like the arising out of an amnesia, with will pulse, reverberate, radiate all through the body as soundless sound of "I" or "I as I" the sense of Self and clear acknowledgement of who you are as single and pervasive being, the unchanging subject to all objects. The minds focusing mechanism will relinquish and you will abide in the singles sense of your Self. Pieter, is this your own personal experience? Is this all that happens to or for you, personally? If it is, wouldn't it make sense to say: "When my mind is pure......" or "Suddenly, I experience a sense of radical....." and other forms of 'I' statements to demonstrate your own real experience such as you write about here? > > Holding to this, the whole body will be transformed, radiance will deepen and pour out of every cell, every atom, and from deeper and deeper depths, as you just simply "Watch!" as Christ puts it. > > "The eye is the light of the body." [i.e., that part of you that sees, the seer, is your True Light.] "When your eye is single." [when you hold to the subject "I" discarding all objects.] "The whole body will be filled with light." [The Enlightenment of the Whole Body.] Christ to the Apostles Luke 11:34. > > This teaching has been taught by sages throughout time. When we practice a daily Sadhana, the mind becomes pure, then when we read such phrases as the one above, texts from Vedanta, i.e., the various Gitas, Upanishads, and similar texts of different religions, who you really are suddenly "hears" and "recollects" and "abides" in and as Itself, where the attraction towards True Remembrance of your identity is so strong that the mind, body and Soul are Transformed and Transfigured into That which we really are, Consciousness Itself. > > If one is practicing a daily Sadhana, the mind will become pure and a Force of Intelligence inherent in the Being Consciousness that animates the universe like a self effulgent screen arises and draws the sense of "i" inward until there emerges the recollection of who you really are. then all that is not single pervasive truth, is simply relinquished, no thought nor a thinker. This is certainly the experience of many..... What about Pieter's experiences? What about the various questions I asked about your own personal acctual experiences with these teachings? I eagerly look forward to any offering of your own acctual experience in this regard. thanks, jim > > Thu, 22 Jan 2004 21:14:24 -0000 > "jim37rich" <jim37rich> > TO WHOM? > > I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To whom does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) and the arisen thought will also subside. > > What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after the final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? What exactly do you experience - assuming it's describable? What happens to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? Assuming you go into the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? If you come out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? Have you gone to the Source never to return? Is there a way to stay in/as the Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay the bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? I'd really love to read about other's actual, real experiences with the fruits of working with Ramana's formula for Self-realization. > > thanks, > > jim > > -- ------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Hi Jim... Man you are tough! Put up or shut up. LOL Jim: > I'd really love to read of your own personal experiences instead of your ideas about my experiences and others. You have offered many "you statements" and very few "I statements". My orininal post asked for folk's own personal experiences (as I statements), not opinions of others reality/process. TG: My personal experiences have been posted previously and I didn't want to bore others; so I just answered your questions based on my experiences, not as an opinion of your process. I have no idea what is your process! Jim: > > I need to ask some of you with experience about the formula: To whom does this thought, etc. arise? The answer will be: To me! Then one asks: Who am I? The mind will turn back to it's source (the Self) and the arisen thought will also subside. TG: > > It's not that the thought subsides, but that the thought then becomes a part of the whole, instead of a part of the part. The thought is there, but not in your own mind, but in the mind of the whole. Jim: > > What, in your own personal or otherwise experience, happens after the final question: Who am I? Where do you or your attention go? TG:> > As you are now a part of the whole mind, your attention goes to the whole of all things. Thoughts are seen outside yourself (you, as Jim). Jim's mind is now quiet so there is nothing inside of your own mind to put your attention to, except the knowledge of how quiet and peaceful your mind is! Jim: > What about your mind? Or is this a description of your experience presented as my experience? Did I ask for a commentary on my experience? TG: Hey buddyJim, lighten up! You didn't ask for a commentary on your experience. You asked for my experience. (which I gave you). Personally though, I never asked the question 'Who Am I" as this is not my path. I did ask "Who are you?" (in a sense). Since you like particulars, I literally asked "Please help me see (this person) differently." Jim: > > What exactly do you experience - assuming it's describeable? TG> > It is describeable, although I guess you could compare the description as if I were describing how wonderful and beautiful the Grand Canyon is -- I could even show you pictures of it -- but, to truly experience and appreciate the Grand Canyon, and get the whole gist of it, you just have to be there. It's not that it is beyond description. It's just that describing it cannot do it justice, if that makes sense. Jim: > No it doesn't "make sense"! The question is not: What is the grand canyon like? The question is: What is your own personal experience of the grand canyon.....get the difference? If it is describeable....describe it in your own words and from your own personal experience with 'I' statements....that's all. How about: "I saw the grand canyon as.........." and "felt that it was....." , etc. TG: Hey, I thought that was a great description of why it could be difficult to describe! LOL Bless your heart, I apologize for not giving you what you asked for in the beginning. I'm sending you my story offline as it has been posted here before. If you have any questions about anything, please let me know. Jim: > > What happens to 'you'? What do you become or go into, etc.? TG:> > 'You' become a part of the whole mind. Imagine for a second 'you' as a body. You have your brain, your thoughts, your arms, legs, etc. You are always a part of the whole mind, but now you can only see from your eyes, think from your mind, etc. > Jim: > OK, but what about your own experience? What do you become.....? Start with: I become....... or I don't become...... I have no idea what I became -- I didn't look at myself! It never occurred to me and it didn't really matter at the time. Since everything was only light, maybe I was light too? If you reread the paragraphs I wrote, replace 'you' with 'I'. JIm: > > Assuming you go into the Source as Ramana claims, how long do you stay there? TG: > > The thing is, we are always there. Jim: > > If you come out again, how does it occur and (in your opinion) why? TG: > > Fear, doubt, some kind of fear, must pop in to come out of the > > awareness. Having to get on with life here on Planet Earth. > Jim: > Is that your own personal experience of Planet Earth? TG: Yep. Jim: > > Have you gone to the Source never to return? TG: > > One couldn't live > Jim: > Are you this One? How about you - just you yourself - what have you yourself experienced with this? TG: Yes, I was describing my own experience. As the years went by and my experiences were being integrated, my mind became quieter and quieter, more and more peaceful. That is one of the wonderful benefits of this path! I have my moments tho. :-) For years though, I have to admit I wanted to stay in this light forever. But as my mind became more peaceful, I found it didn't really matter. When you have peace, what else is there? TG> long in a body like that unless you were to be > > taken care of. And this is my personal opinion, so take it with a > > grain of salt. It is possible in this body to have a quiet mind > > though. And again, allowing fear/doubt/fantasy to grasp onto, > brings > > that to a halt. > > Jim: > > Is there a way to stay in/as the Source/Self and yet do your job, attend your spouse and kids, pay the bills, use the restroom, fix dinner, etc.? TG: > > I love your mind and the way it contemplates all these things. These are just fears. Look at them, ask yourself if you want to keep them, and if not, let them go. Don't seek for Love/God, but eliminate all the things blocking the way for Love's presence. Jim: > You needn't preach to me or assume that my questions are pleas for help. TG: Oh Jim, I didn't think I was preaching -- so sorry! I was sincerely trying to answer your questions to the best of my knowledge, based on my experiences. You asked a question about being able to live life, and I answered. That still is the only answer I can give you. Look at Harsha -- he has a beautiful family, a new baby, a great job. Jim: All you need to do is honestly and sincerely offer your > experiences on the questions of decline to respond...no sermons, > judgments, opinions about others reality, or sage pronouncements > which were not requested. TG: Yessiree! Now play nice. > Jim: > thanks anyway and I look forward to either your responses to the questions of your own experience or a refusal to resond. TG: You are most welcome. Love, xxxtg 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.