Ramana Maharshi - Toni-Prarabda

February 6, 2004

Hi Toni:

Thanks for your extensive response.

, "Tony OClery" <aoclery>

wrote:

> , "jim rich" <jimnirene@a...>

> wrote:

> > , "Tony OClery"

> <aoclery>

> > wrote:

> > > , "jim rich"

> <jimnirene@a...>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > http://www.leonardjacobson.com/mystic_set.html

> > > >

> > > > Ramana Maharshi is famous for these quotes: "The Mind has to

> be

> > > > destroyed." "Stay without thoughts and just BE." "Go to the

> > root

> > > of

> > > > the 'I' thought and find out 'Who Am I'? "How would one

> function

> > > > without thinking in this world? Isn't the Mind necessary for

> our

> > > > normal day-to-day functioning in this world? What does Ramana

> > mean

> > > by

> > > > Destroying the Mind?

> > > >

> > > > I find it difficult to believe that Ramana Maharshi could say

> > that

> > > > the mind has to be destroyed, but if he did make such a

> > statement,

> > > ."

> > >

> > > Namaste,

> > >

> > > Whoever this leonardjacobson is or whoever wrote this verbiage,

> > does

> > > not know his proverbial from a hole in the ground. This is the

> > > problem with these 'writers', and would be gurus. A little

> > knowledge

> > > is a dangerous thing, and I am Vidya or true knowledge. This

> > writer

> > > doesn't even have the basic understandting or the relationship

> of

> > > ego to mind and what the mind is. Or is this another joke or

> spoof

> > > I'm falling into........ONS..Tony

> >

> > Somehow your comments do not reflect these words taken from the

> forum

> > policy statement on the home page:

> > Discussion of various teachers and teachings can also be

enriching

> as

> > long as there is mutual respect and a feeling of amity in the

> > conversation. Humor and poetry and other artistic expressions of

> the

> > spiritual life are encouraged and supported. May God Bless

> everyone

> > with Peace, Joy, and Understanding. May we all nourish and heal

> each

> > other in the spirit of Compassion, Wisdom and Love. OM Shanti,

> > Shanti, Shanti. Peace to all living beings.

> >

> > Where is the "mutual respect and feeling of amity in your

> > message...or is this your "humor and poetry and other artistic

> > expressions of the spiritual life"?

> >

> > "May all nourish and heal each other in the spirit of Compassion,

> > Wisdom and Love."

> >

> > "Peace to all living beings."

> >

> > jim

>

> Namaste,

>

> My dear fellow, ( how is that for a starter?).

Hey, I like it - I like it...LOL.

>Most people on here

> have reached a certain level of maturity in understanding what the

> dream is and isn't, to a certain extent anyway.

could you go into or explain the "dream"?

> Mutual respect

> depends on manners and manners depend on culture and other factors,

> including personality and karma. Yes I was blunt with you,

I didn't take it as being blunt with me....just somewhat heavy with

the author of that piece. While I acknowledge that you have a right

to your opinions, your opinion of the author: "Whoever this

leonardjacobson is or whoever wrote this verbiage, does not know his

proverbial from a hole in the ground." seemed rather mean and

hostile too me - quite unlike the goodness and love Harsha wants on

his string.

> but I

> really didn't want to go back to the beginning again with a new

> member who obviously had not done his research.

Obviously had not done what research? Please explain.

> That is a lack of

> patience on my part, one of my many many failings.

Toni, if that's an apology - I accept - thank you.

> In fact the

> biggest success in my life is understanding Ramana and that's it.

> Your post and tout, were in fact 'in your face', for members of

this

> forum or students of Ramana's teaching.

Please explain exactly what you mean by 'in your face' for the

memmbers here. I read Mr. Leonard's response to the question as an

affirmation and comprehension of Ramana's teachings. Perhaps I

missed something but assuming the article denigrated Ramana....so

what? Why didn't you simply take the article apart, line by line, to

expose the falicies and mistakes in it? If I thought the author was

wrong, etc., I would have. Aren't we capable of deciding for

ourselves what we believe, know, love about and understand in

Ramana's teachings and living examples, free of so-called expert's

opinions and judgments of our cherished hero? I've seen in Ramana

books where folks came to argue and insult him and he just let it all

pass right on by whilst staying with his teachings and knowledge

despite the discounters and non-believers.

> I didn't want to get into

> long discussions about denigrating Ramana's teaching-----so as I am

> Irish---I responded directly with no room for misunderstanding.

>I am

> making progress though, you should have seen me in my younger days

> when I was'nt in my sixties, I supported all kinds of violence and

> was in fact a member of an organisation that was responsible for

> most of the violence in Ireland, but now they are respectable. I

was

> a political officer in Provisional Sinn Sein/IRA in fact. So you

see

> everything is relative to the person and the culture.

I agree with you there and it seems that many misunderstandings occur

on websites because of cultural differences and styles of

communication which the different sides do not understand or take

into account when struggling over concepts and opinions. When I

lived in Europe, I noticed that feelings are easily hurt with the

most innocent and casual of comments, actions, etc. but no body

stopped to realize it was just about differences in upbringing and

socialization, not about ignorance, meanness, stupidity, etc. - when

hurt, nothing else mattered. After I was there for a while, I came

to speak and act in ways that did not offend my European pals - they

of course did not change their behavior to avoid offending me though -

but then, I was on their turf, while they were not on mine...LOL.

> I am still a

> little to quick to be provoked, perhaps you could do us all a

favour

> and not do it

Perhaps you could do me and others reading this a favour to exactly

explain in detail what you mean here. As far as I can see, I have

not and never will be "quick to provoke" anyone....although I am

sure, due to differences in communication styles, many will take my

responses as povocative. It would be useful and valueable to me for

you to offer in detail all or anything I've ever written that is

provokative so that I may either apologize (which I will) or explain

the comment(s). If, however, you are telling me that I should not

ever "talk back" to you or anyone here....you would need to explain

what all that is. I will assure you that I will not povoke you or

anyone at this list. My intentions are positive and come from good

will and I assume everyone here is doing the same.

......We welcome any discussion on here but indirect

> shots at the Guru who blessed this Sangha, for that is a personal

> attack on most members for believing in him,

Let's suppose some mean, ignorant, bitter, foolish person does take a

shot at Ramana on this wide open public forum. Are we not big

enough, wise enough, strong enough, cool enough, enlightened enough,

mature enough, etc. to handle it - ignore it - not take it

personally - laugh it off - inteligently challenge it - or respond to

such a "shot" as our beloved teacher, Ramana, might. How do you

think Ramana himself would have responded to Leonard's article?

Would Ramana have come back at the author with insulting accusations

and outrage? The Ramana I believe in would most likely have laughed

it off and/or offered clarification of the author's misconceptions,

in my humble opinion. I am not the least bit worried or concerned

with someone taking shots at Ramana or anyone in this wide open

public forum (what's to prevent it?) whereas I am concerned about how

I will react to some shot - hopefully as my teacher would have

reacted. At least I can ask myself "Who is reacting to this shot?"

and hopefully the answer will be the FELT reality of me - a non-

person who is not at all affected by shots or anything else. Re:

Ramesh Balsekar: "who cares?" Let 'em come - who cares? Yes, who

cares? - is it a little personal, touchy, worried, angry, disturbed,

upset, outraged, offended egoic personal me or Prarabda? Everything

is Prarabda anyway including "shots" and those who take them, in my

opinion.

> and he has never been

> proved to be a fraud or anything like it.In the end result we are

> all one and I hope the learning experience and love on here is

> helpful Everything is Prarabda anyway Welcome

> Brother........ONS...Tony/

Thanks for the welcome and I appreciate this friendly discussion with

you. I look forward to your response.....

Respectfully,

jim

February 6, 2004

, "jim rich" <jimnirene@a...>

wrote:

> Hi Toni:

>

> Thanks for your extensive response.

Namaste Jim,

One doesn't need to disect Jakobson's piece, just his question on

the dropping of the mind was enough. I would hazard a guess that

most on here know that is Ramana's central teaching already and

accept it. So anything in the same vein on a site like this would be

similar to prosylatising. As I already said a waste of time covering

all that again, especially from a teacher who obviously isn't

realised..........No Offence just straight talk that's

all........ONS..Tony.

February 6, 2004

>---- Original Message ----- >jim rich >To:

>Friday, February 06, 2004 10:08

PM> Re: Ramana Maharshi - Toni-Prarabda>

Let's suppose some mean, ignorant, bitter, foolish person does take a

> shot at Ramana on this wide open public forum. Are we not big >

enough, wise enough, strong enough, cool enough, enlightened enough,

> mature enough, etc. to handle it - ignore it - not take it >

personally - laugh it off - inteligently challenge it - or respond to

> such a "shot" as our beloved teacher, Ramana, might. How do you >

think Ramana himself would have responded to Leonard's article? >

Would Ramana have come back at the author with insulting accusations

> and outrage? The Ramana I believe in would most likely have

laughed > it off and/or offered clarification of the author's

misconceptions, > in my humble opinion. I am not the least bit

worried or concerned > with someone taking shots at Ramana or anyone

in this wide open > public forum (what's to prevent it?) whereas I am

concerned about how > I will react to some shot - hopefully as my

teacher would have > reacted. At least I can ask myself "Who is

reacting to this shot?" > and hopefully the answer will be the FELT

reality of me - a non-> person who is not at all affected by shots or

anything else. Re: > Ramesh Balsekar: "who cares?" Let 'em come -

who cares? Yes, who > cares? - is it a little personal, touchy,

worried, angry, disturbed, > upset, outraged, offended egoic personal

me or Prarabda? Everything > is Prarabda anyway including "shots" and

those who take them, in my > opinion.

We are what we are.

Personally I would like to create a little bit of controversy

but so far I have failed to do so : )

I did read a comment somewhere on an 'incident' with Paul Brunton, not mentioning what it was,

and I found something here:Alan from ( I supply the link as it is a

reference to the source within a week at least

)http://www.sentient.org/maharshi/novdec95.htm Bhagavan's brother had

to endure considerable criticism while

managing the ashram. Even so, there is little doubt that Bhagavan used him

as his instrument. When Niranjanananda Swami felt an inner prompting from

Bhagavan, he confidently acted on it. The following may be an example of

one such occasion.

It is widely known that Paul Brunton's book, A Search in Secret

India, did much to make known to the world that the Maharshi, a unique sage

of this century, was living inTiruvannamalai. Brunton was a professional

writer and in those days wherever he would go he would often be seen taking

notes on bits of paper. While in the Old Hall listening to questions put to

Bhagavan and his replies, he would be eagerly taking notes. After the

success of A Search in Secret India, he began writing many other books in

which he would sometimes adopt the Maharshi's teachings without giving due

acknowledgment. When the ashram authorities realized this they decided to

stop him from taking notes in the hall.

One day in 1939, Brunton was sitting next to me taking notes as

usual when Niranjanananda Swami boldly walked into the hall, stood next to

Bhagavan and told Munagala Venkataramiah to tell Brunton in English that he

is no longer permitted to take notes while sitting before Bhagavan. Brunton

was told accordingly. Brunton looked at Venkataramiah and said, "Is this

also Bhagavan's view?" Venkataramiah did not reply to this question and

Bhagavan who was quietly sitting there didn't say a word either. A few

tense moments passed. Then Brunton stood up and left the hall. That was the

last time he took notes in the hall, and that was also when Brunton began

distancing himself from the ashram.

It was very unusual to see the Sarvadhikari appear so bold and

authoritative before the Maharshi. He must have felt that this exploitation

should stop and was confident that Bhagavan was behind him.

February 6, 2004

, "Al Larus" <eg@k...> wrote:

>

> >---- Original Message -----

> >jim rich

> >

> >Friday, February 06, 2004 10:08 PM

> > Re: Ramana Maharshi - Toni-Prarabda

>

> > Let's suppose some mean, ignorant, bitter, foolish person does take a

> > shot at Ramana on this wide open public forum. Are we not big

> > enough, wise enough, strong enough, cool enough, enlightened enough,

> > mature enough, etc. to handle it - ignore it - not take it

> > personally - laugh it off - inteligently challenge it - or respond to

> > such a "shot" as our beloved teacher, Ramana, might. How do you

> > think Ramana himself would have responded to Leonard's article?

> > Would Ramana have come back at the author with insulting accusations

> > and outrage? The Ramana I believe in would most likely have laughed

> > it off and/or offered clarification of the author's misconceptions,

> > in my humble opinion. I am not the least bit worried or concerned

> > with someone taking shots at Ramana or anyone in this wide open

> > public forum (what's to prevent it?) whereas I am concerned about how

> > I will react to some shot - hopefully as my teacher would have

> > reacted. At least I can ask myself "Who is reacting to this shot?"

> > and hopefully the answer will be the FELT reality of me - a non-

> > person who is not at all affected by shots or anything else. Re:

> > Ramesh Balsekar: "who cares?" Let 'em come - who cares? Yes, who

> > cares? - is it a little personal, touchy, worried, angry, disturbed,

> > upset, outraged, offended egoic personal me or Prarabda? Everything

> > is Prarabda anyway including "shots" and those who take them, in my

> > opinion.

>

> We are what we are.

>

> Personally I would like to create a little bit of controversy

> but so far I have failed to do so : )

>

> I did read a comment somewhere on an 'incident' with Paul Brunton, not

mentioning what it was,

> and I found something here:

> Alanfrom ( I supply the link as it is a reference to the source within a week

at least )http://www.sentient.org/maharshi/novdec95.htm

> Bhagavan's brother had to endure considerable criticism while

> managing the ashram. Even so, there is little doubt that Bhagavan used him

> as his instrument. When Niranjanananda Swami felt an inner prompting from

> Bhagavan, he confidently acted on it. The following may be an example of

> one such occasion.

>

> It is widely known that Paul Brunton's book, A Search in Secret

> India, did much to make known to the world that the Maharshi, a unique sage

> of this century, was living inTiruvannamalai. Brunton was a professional

> writer and in those days wherever he would go he would often be seen taking

> notes on bits of paper. While in the Old Hall listening to questions put to

> Bhagavan and his replies, he would be eagerly taking notes. After the

> success of A Search in Secret India, he began writing many other books in

> which he would sometimes adopt the Maharshi's teachings without giving due

> acknowledgment. When the ashram authorities realized this they decided to

> stop him from taking notes in the hall.

>

> One day in 1939, Brunton was sitting next to me taking notes as

> usual when Niranjanananda Swami boldly walked into the hall, stood next to

> Bhagavan and told Munagala Venkataramiah to tell Brunton in English that he

> is no longer permitted to take notes while sitting before Bhagavan. Brunton

> was told accordingly. Brunton looked at Venkataramiah and said, "Is this

> also Bhagavan's view?" Venkataramiah did not reply to this question and

> Bhagavan who was quietly sitting there didn't say a word either. A few

> tense moments passed. Then Brunton stood up and left the hall. That was the

> last time he took notes in the hall, and that was also when Brunton began

> distancing himself from the ashram.

>

> It was very unusual to see the Sarvadhikari appear so bold and

> authoritative before the Maharshi. He must have felt that this exploitation

> should stop and was confident that Bhagavan was behind him.

Dear Alan,

Dr. Raynor C. Johnson, who wrote The Spiritual Path, said that Paul Brunton was

ultimately stopped by his own intellect, which proved to be a barrier to his

further understanding. I have never forgotten that. Intellect must be left

behind (or so I hear).

Re your being controversial....your understated sense of humor is relished,

Alan. Rock on.

Vicki

February 6, 2004

, "Al Larus" <eg@k...> wrote:

>

> >---- Original Message -----

> >jim rich

> >

> >Friday, February 06, 2004 10:08 PM

> > Re: Ramana Maharshi - Toni-Prarabda

>

> > Let's suppose some mean, ignorant, bitter, foolish person does

take a

> > shot at Ramana on this wide open public forum. Are we not big

> > enough, wise enough, strong enough, cool enough, enlightened

enough,

>was behind him.

Namaste,

I'm not making excuses, but he posted just at the wrong time, when

we had just about finished talking of gurus and Sadgurus.

Unfortunately I am not as advanced as your or my personality is more

volatile. I perhaps had a long road to hoe from a believer in so

called justified violence to a believer in Ahimsa. But then so did

Aurobindo and Bose. I can only seek refuge in the fact that Rajas is

a quicker way to Sattva than Tamas.......ONS...Tony

February 6, 2004

, "Tony OClery" <aoclery>

wrote:

> , "Al Larus" <eg@k...> wrote:

> >

> > >---- Original Message -----

> > >jim rich

> > >

> > >Friday, February 06, 2004 10:08 PM

> > > Re: Ramana Maharshi - Toni-Prarabda

> >

> > > Let's suppose some mean, ignorant, bitter, foolish person does

> take a

> > > shot at Ramana on this wide open public forum. Are we not big

> > > enough, wise enough, strong enough, cool enough, enlightened

> enough,

> >was behind him.

>

> Namaste,

>

> I'm not making excuses, but he posted just at the wrong time, when

> we had just about finished talking of gurus and Sadgurus.

> Unfortunately I am not as advanced as your or my personality is

more

> volatile. I perhaps had a long road to hoe from a believer in so

> called justified violence to a believer in Ahimsa. But then so did

> Aurobindo and Bose. I can only seek refuge in the fact that Rajas

is

> a quicker way to Sattva than Tamas.......ONS...Tony

and Rabindranath Tagore also, so there's hope for me.

February 7, 2004

Dear Seer Alan Larus,

When someone does not like another's views,there are many options.

A tamasik option is not to react at all!

A rajasik option is to fight it out and establish your view!

A sattvik option is to love him and show him the truth!

A NON - Pravrutthi Option is best known to Ramana Maharshi!!!

That reminds me of an incident with my master Sri Adi Sankara Bhagavatpujyapada:

A ka:pa:lika wanted to kill him to offer a human sacrifice.My Lord and

My Ocean of Mercy advised him to come and kill him when his disciples

were not around.Fortunately for us the kapalika went when his

disciple was watching my Master.When the Kapalika came to kill him,

he killed him in stead!The ways of God are best known to God!

In my most humblest opinion we should welcome him with his doubts and

discuss with him in total humility and leave the rest to Eswara!

I am sure as he follows the photos sent by you he will learn more

about Ramana Maharshi. It is only such rebels who become

unparallelled converts.

Each runs his karmik race alone along with others.

Love is the actual form of God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yours in Sri Sankara Bhagavatpujyapada's love,

Chilukuri Bhuvaneswar

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 Al Larus wrote :