Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 Namaste, To this Ashram; I would be interested to see how many would survive on a real ashram. Getting up at dawn for Suprabhatam and Pradakshina, eating spare vegetarian meals, chanting and bhajans twice a day, no internet radio, tv, treats etc. Sleeping on hard floors no fancy bathrooms, lots of meditation etc etc. And lots of time with no sensory stimulation to speak of----but meditation. IMO most people do not understand Ramana at all, particularly a lot of westerners. He appeals because he gets right to the point and that is like instant gratification, for people. There seems to be no work or sadhana to do except, Who is me?. Ideal for so called intellectuals. This is a fatal error for Ramana indicates himself a certain amount of purification and awareness is necessary for his system. People who arrived at his Ashram were already Sadhakas in the main, and had carried out a lot of Sadhana. To the superficial, 'Who am I?' is a convenient expression of words. To a Sadhaka the words are irrelevant for it is actually a deep feeling only felt and understood by a somewhat purified Buddhi. For the feeling cannot penetrate a Buddhi full of impurities and samskaras/vasanas. If one realises this one can become a Mukta, if not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am I?'.....ONS...Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 --- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: > Namaste, > > To this Ashram; I would be interested to see how > many would survive > on a real ashram. Getting up at dawn for > Suprabhatam and > Pradakshina, eating spare vegetarian meals, chanting > and bhajans > twice a day, no internet radio, tv, treats etc. > Sleeping on hard > floors no fancy bathrooms, lots of meditation etc > etc. And lots of > time with no sensory stimulation to speak of----but > meditation. > > IMO most people do not understand Ramana at all, > particularly a lot > of westerners. He appeals because he gets right to > the point and > that is like instant gratification, for people. > There seems to be no > work or sadhana to do except, Who is me?. Ideal for > so called > intellectuals. > > This is a fatal error for Ramana indicates himself a > certain amount > of purification and awareness is necessary for his > system. > > People who arrived at his Ashram were already > Sadhakas in the main, > and had carried out a lot of Sadhana. > > To the superficial, 'Who am I?' is a convenient > expression of words. > To a Sadhaka the words are irrelevant for it is > actually a deep > feeling only felt and understood by a somewhat > purified Buddhi. For > the feeling cannot penetrate a Buddhi full of > impurities and > samskaras/vasanas. If one realises this one can > become a Mukta, if > not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes > asking 'Who am > I?'.....ONS...> > Dear Tony, I 100% with you on this one. michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 Tony wrote To the superficial, 'Who am I?' is a convenient expression of words. To a Sadhaka the words are irrelevant for it is actually a deep feeling only felt and understood by a somewhat purified Buddhi. For the feeling cannot penetrate a Buddhi full of impurities and samskaras/vasanas. If one realises this one can become a Mukta, if not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am I?'.....ONS...Dear I dont think you can become anything. Can you explain to me how a young lad ie Ramana became enlightened without any spiritual practise / experience to speak off? To my mind all spiritual practise is a concept and at some time must be released or it becomes "my" identity as a spiritual seeker. I am not saying its not helpfull in this world and I do agree that living on a "real ashram" is an education. All this helps to bring about acceptance of what is and a degree of silence of the mind but enlighenment can only be by the grace of God as was surely the case with Ramana. It just can not be earned. Seeking must stop as it implies there is something external to find. Incidently one of my friends maintains that Osho had the highest sucess rate in "bringing" devotees to realization, whatever realization is! Namaste Chris /join "Love itself is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 , "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: > Namaste, > > To this Ashram; I would be interested to see how many would survive > on a real ashram. Getting up at dawn for Suprabhatam and > Pradakshina, eating spare vegetarian meals, chanting and bhajans > twice a day, no internet radio, tv, treats etc. Sleeping on hard > floors no fancy bathrooms, lots of meditation etc etc. And lots of > time with no sensory stimulation to speak of----but meditation. > > IMO most people do not understand Ramana at all, particularly a lot > of westerners. He appeals because he gets right to the point and > that is like instant gratification, for people. There seems to be no > work or sadhana to do except, Who is me?. Ideal for so called > intellectuals. > > This is a fatal error for Ramana indicates himself a certain amount > of purification and awareness is necessary for his system. > > People who arrived at his Ashram were already Sadhakas in the main, > and had carried out a lot of Sadhana. > > To the superficial, 'Who am I?' is a convenient expression of words. > To a Sadhaka the words are irrelevant for it is actually a deep > feeling only felt and understood by a somewhat purified Buddhi. For > the feeling cannot penetrate a Buddhi full of impurities and > samskaras/vasanas. If one realises this one can become a Mukta, if > not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am > I?'.....ONS...Tony re: "if not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am I?'....." LOL....so what? Who is this "condemned one"? Who cares? .... Since you already are the ultimate, eternal, supreme being ALONE (to mention just a few possibilities).....what do a few lifetimes or lots and lots of spiritual practices or impurities matter to you? LOL...it's all just your Leela anyway, so enjoy it....the good/bad, right/wrong, postitive/negative....LOL. You alone exist ~ Ramana Maharshi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 , "AnneChris" <am009a8716@b...> wrote: > Tony wrote > > To the superficial, 'Who am I?' is a convenient expression of words. > To a Sadhaka the words are irrelevant for it is actually a deep > feeling only felt and understood by a somewhat purified Buddhi. For > the feeling cannot penetrate a Buddhi full of impurities and > samskaras/vasanas. If one realises this one can become a Mukta, if > not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am > I?'.....ONS...> > > Dear > I dont think you can become anything. > > Can you explain to me how a young lad ie Ramana became enlightened without any spiritual practise / experience to speak off? > > To my mind all spiritual practise is a concept and at some time must be released or it becomes "my" identity as a spiritual seeker. I am not saying its not helpfull in this world and I do agree that living on a "real ashram" is an education. > All this helps to bring about acceptance of what is and a degree of silence of the mind but enlighenment can only be by the grace of God as was surely the case with Ramana. It just can not be earned. Seeking must stop as it implies there is something external to find. > Incidently one of my friends maintains that Osho had the highest sucess rate in "bringing" devotees to realization, whatever realization is! > > Namaste Chris Namaste, Ramana had done his sadhana in previous lives and by the time he was a teenager in India, he would have already done more sadhana than all the people on this board combined. I doubt osho brought realisation to anyone, other than the realisation they had sexual organs........Onions old fellow onions hahah..........ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 , "jim rich" <jimnirene@a...> wrote: > , "Tony OClery" <can become a Mukta, if > > not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am > > I?'.....ONS...Tony > > LOL....so what? Who is this "condemned one"? Who cares? .... Since > you already are the ultimate, eternal, supreme being ALONE (to > mention just a few possibilities).....what do a few lifetimes or lots > and lots of spiritual practices or impurities matter to you? > LOL...it's all just your Leela anyway, so enjoy it....the good/bad, > right/wrong, postitive/negative....LOL. You alone exist ~ Ramana > Maharshi Namaste, Thank you for demonstrating exactly what I am talking about. Here is a file I wrote some years ago, on this subject of purification. http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/PurificationofBuddhi.htm ONS...Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 , Michael Bowes <rmichaelbowes> wrote: > > --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote: > > Namaste, http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/PurificationofBuddhi.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 Tony wrote ----- Namaste,Ramana had done his sadhana in previous lives and by the time he was a teenager in India, he would have already done more sadhana than all the people on this board combined. chris replying Which is exactly why I believe Eckhart is realized. I doubt osho brought realisation to anyone, other than the realisation they had sexual organs........Onions old fellow onions hahah..........ONS.. Off to try the onions. Fond regards Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 , "AnneChris" <am009a8716@b...> wrote: > Tony wrote > > ----- Namaste, > Ramana had done his sadhana in previous lives and by the time he was > a teenager in India, he would have already done more sadhana than > all the people on this board combined. > chris replying > Which is exactly why I believe Eckhart is realized. > > > I doubt osho brought realisation to anyone, other than the > realisation they had sexual organs........Onions old fellow onions > hahah..........ONS..> > Off to try the onions. > Fond regards Chris Namaste, Eckhardt is as realised as Osho, he is an author IMO. Very few people are realised count them on one hand and most unknown....ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 Lo siento! Pero no entiendo usted. miguel --- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: > , Michael Bowes > > <rmichaelbowes> wrote: > > > > --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote: > > > Namaste, > > > http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/PurificationofBuddhi.htm > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Share Posted February 21, 2004 , "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: > > I doubt osho brought realisation to anyone, other than the > > realisation they had sexual organs........Onions old fellow > onions > > hahah..........ONS..> > > > Off to try the onions. > > Fond regards Chris > > Namaste, > > Eckhardt is as realised as Osho, he is an author IMO. Very few > people are realised count them on one hand and most > unknown....ONS..Tony ===================== That way your safe from criticism, no one can blame you for trying so hard and not getting there, the goal is so lofty and barely reachable at all, and all the "real" jivamuktas have left the building!! And on top of that, sadhana is so hard that barely a one would try. I mean you must get up earlier than god Almighty, slop the hogs, don't step on the grass, don't eat a full and satisfying meal, recite scriptures you don't understand, and in your spare moments, when not contemplating the righteousness of your activities, sing bahjans! Remind me not to send you guys out for missionary work. Sheesh, Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 , Michael Bowes <rmichaelbowes> wrote: > Lo siento! Pero no entiendo usted. > > miguel > > > --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote: > > , Michael Bowes > > > > <rmichaelbowes> wrote: > > > > > > --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote: > > > > Namaste, > > > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/PurificationofBuddhi.htm > > > > Namaste, Go to alta vista or lycos translations and do an english to spanish.......ONS...Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 , "Shawn Hair" <shawn@w...> wrote: > , "Tony OClery" > <aoclery> wrote: > > > > I doubt osho brought realisation to anyone, other than the > > > realisation they had sexual organs........Onions old fellow > > onions > > > hahah..........ONS..> > > > > > Off to try the onions. > > > Fond regards Chris > > > > Namaste, > > > > Eckhardt is as realised as Osho, he is an author IMO. Very few > > people are realised count them on one hand and most > > unknown....ONS..Tony > > ===================== > > That way your safe from criticism, no one can blame you for > trying so hard and not getting there, the goal is so lofty and barely > reachable at all, and all the "real" jivamuktas have left the > building!! > > And on top of that, sadhana is so hard that barely a one would > try. I mean you must get up earlier than god Almighty, slop the > hogs, don't step on the grass, don't eat a full and satisfying meal, > recite scriptures you don't understand, and in your spare > moments, when not contemplating the righteousness of your > activities, sing bahjans! > > Remind me not to send you guys out for missionary work. > > Sheesh, > > Shawn Namaste S, I'm so happy to have you here to continually prove my point...ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 , "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: > I'm so happy to have you here to continually prove my > point...ONS..Tony I am happy that you tolerate me as tolerance is the basis for ahimsa. ~Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2004 Report Share Posted February 22, 2004 Living in an ashram is not so much different from having a good time in a porterhouse in Dublin with your friends. I once wrote a poem about that. Maybe I will post it sometime. Big smile and cheers, Ben. - Tony OClery Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:17 PM The Danger of Ramana and Sadhana Namaste,To this Ashram; I would be interested to see how many would survive on a real ashram. Getting up at dawn for Suprabhatam and Pradakshina, eating spare vegetarian meals, chanting and bhajans twice a day, no internet radio, tv, treats etc. Sleeping on hard floors no fancy bathrooms, lots of meditation etc etc. And lots of time with no sensory stimulation to speak of----but meditation.IMO most people do not understand Ramana at all, particularly a lot of westerners. He appeals because he gets right to the point and that is like instant gratification, for people. There seems to be no work or sadhana to do except, Who is me?. Ideal for so called intellectuals.This is a fatal error for Ramana indicates himself a certain amount of purification and awareness is necessary for his system.People who arrived at his Ashram were already Sadhakas in the main, and had carried out a lot of Sadhana.To the superficial, 'Who am I?' is a convenient expression of words. To a Sadhaka the words are irrelevant for it is actually a deep feeling only felt and understood by a somewhat purified Buddhi. For the feeling cannot penetrate a Buddhi full of impurities and samskaras/vasanas. If one realises this one can become a Mukta, if not one may be condemned to interminal lifetimes asking 'Who am I?'.....ONS...Tony/join "Love itself is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2004 Report Share Posted February 23, 2004 , "Shawn Hair" <shawn@w...> wrote: > , "Tony OClery" > <aoclery> wrote: > > > I'm so happy to have you here to continually prove my > > point...ONS..Tony > > I am happy that you tolerate me as tolerance is the basis for > ahimsa. > ~Shawn Namaste, My dear Shawn tolerance is something one learns. I have had my life in danger from intolerance, and on one occasion it nearly brought my demise, so a little fencing in here is no problem. It ferrets out the truth anyway..........ONS...Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2004 Report Share Posted February 23, 2004 , "Ben Hassine" <ben.hassine@x> wrote: > Living in an ashram is not so much different from having a good time in a porterhouse in Dublin with your friends. I once wrote a poem about that. > Maybe I will post it sometime. > > Big smile and cheers, > > Ben. 2004 Namaste B, Well I don't drink anymore but any ashram I was on didn't serve 'Mother's Milk'---Guiness.........hahah...ONS...Tony 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.