Guest guest Posted March 17, 2004 Report Share Posted March 17, 2004 Dear Shawn: Thank you for posting this. It is very timely in that this subject seems to appear on a regular basis on this and other forums. I know that for myself, the attachment to the pleasant...ok...blissful...OK... ecstatic experiences (blush) was a difficult one to accept as just that, attachment. There, I said it :-) I have seen long threads go on and on arguing whether perpetual bliss was the "goal." Sometimes they go on so long I don't even read one half of them. But the issue is a recurring one. For you to have found and posted Sri Ramana's comments on this issue is a gift, for which I thank you. Chopping wood, washing dishes... immersed in bliss...full memories :-) Love, Joyce no new below... - Shawn Hair Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:07 AM Laya `Laya' - is born from the root `Li' `Li' - means - cling, stick to, adhere; recline on, settle on, lie; disappear, dissolve. `Laya' will mean - sticking, adherance - Fusion, solution - Disappearance, dissolution, destruction - Absorption, deep concentration, exclusive devotion (to any object) - Rest, repose - A place of rest, abode - making the mind inactive, indifferent - Mental inactivity - a swoon - the quick downward movement of an arrow. - Time in music / pause in music - Union of song, dance and instrumental music. It is obvious that as with all Sanskrit words the term `Laya' acquires different meanings in various contexts. Some of these meanings may not be relevant at all to our context. Others may indicate a positive connotation. Hence the word has to be understood in the proper context. (The word `aham' in Tamil, for instance means `ego', `home' and `heart' and is used by Bhagavan in all these contexts in his `Marital Garland of Letters') The root `li' is used in the positive context of sticking, adherance, exclusive devotion by Viswanatha Swami in his `Astottaram' on Bhagavan when he hails him as `Sonacalamaholina manasaha'. This makes it clear that to understand the place of `laya' in spiritual practice we have to look at its meaning from the manner in which Bhagavan has explained it. There is a lucid chapter in `Crumbs from His Table' on the very subject. Ramanananda Swarnagiri states : "I arrive at a stage of stillness of mind. I have no thought of any kind and there is an emptiness... A mild light pervades and I feel that it is myself bodiless. I have neither cognition nor vision of body and form...'' Bhagavan answers : "Such a condition is termed manolaya or temporary stillness of thought. Manolaya means concentration, temporarily arresting the movement of thoughts; as soon as this concentration ceases, thoughts, old and new, rush in as usual and even though this temporary lulling of mind should last a thousand years it will never lead to total destruction of thought...." Let us also look at Bhagavan's explanation of `laya' in Upadesa Saram in Verses 11 and 13 "The mind becomes quiescent by regulation of breath, like a bird caught in a net. This is a means of mind control". "Control of the mind is of two kinds, its lulling and its destruction. A lulled mind will rise again but not the one which is destroyed". In `Ramana Gita' Bhagavan gives a similar example for a mind controlled by restraint of breath. ------ "Then it would, like a tethered animal, cease to stray". Again in the chapter `The Science of the Heart" Bhagavan says : "When there is forcible arrest of thoughts by swooning, sleep, excessive joy or sorrow, fear and so on, the mind goes back to its source, the Heart.Such merger is unconscious and the person is unaware of it. However, when one consciously enters the Heart it is termed `Samadhi'. From these we can arrive at a clear understanding of the state that is termed `laya'. i) `Laya' is a state of mental quietude. The dictionary definitions of `disappearance', `dissolution', `rest', `repose', `mental inactivity' - apply. However, the meanings `destruction' and `exclusive devotion' are not applicable to this state. ii) The experience is pleasant and can be sought about by `deep concentration' and/or breath regulation. iii) The experience is similar to what happens in sleep, `swoon' (one of the definitions) and in any state of excessive emotion. However, these `mergers' `dissolutions' of the mind take place unconsciously, without one's knowledge or volition. `Laya' on the other hand is a state that occurs in the course of spiritual practice. It happens, therefore, with one's volition. It can be repeated by the practitioner and it can also equally be dropped if it is considerd unnecessary or obstructive to further progress. iv) The question follows that if it is not an involuntary stillness like that in excessive emotion or swoon, why is it considered to be different from the natural silence. Or, how is one to recognise it as such? The important factor here, which it shares with the other states of quiescence is that it is a `forcible arrest of thoughts'. Laya is a stillness brought about by the application of an external force. This `force' may be the sudden upsurge of emotion of which one is unaware or the planned breath regulation of which one is aware. In either case there is an external agency causing the thought vaccum. When the application of this force is withdrawn, the mind returns to its original state. The factors distinguishing `laya' from merger in the Self are : (a) There is no change after laya. This is the most important sign to signify whether an experience is `laya', lulling or destruction. Bhagavan says that even after thousands of years of such `laya samadhi' or `yoganidra' one would wake up with the last thought that happened prior to laya. If even the last, superficial thought does not vanish, what of the deep rooted latent tendencies? (b) The presence of identity, of ego, of individuality is undisturbed by laya. The individual is happy with the experience. Whose experience? `His' or `hers'. And the individual wishes to ------ repeat it. `I experienced this and can experience it again at will'. In the natural `destruction' of the mind, the way and the seeker both disappear totally, in the silence, the fullness that is the Self. No tendency survives. Identity itself is lost. v) The experience of `laya' is temporary. The arrest of thoughts is temporary as they return the moment the pressure is released. The stillness comes and goes. Again it must be stressed that `comes and goes' does not mean even for a few minutes or hours. It could be for years too. Then how is one to recognise that the experience is `laya'? By the presence of the experience of course, by the continuation of duality. `I am experiencing this pleasant stillness'. There is `I' the subject and the object `the experience'. This is also the means to distinguish it from natural intermittent dips into the Self which Bhagavan terms `abhyasa'. Because these mergers are also not continuous one should not dismiss them as `laya'. Nor can one argue that `laya' too is a natural merger into the source that is intermittent. In the latter, though for a brief while, the sense of identity would be totally dissolved, like a bucket of water in a well. Secondly, when such merger occurs, the peace, the bliss and the upsurge of love would continue even after one comes out of the experience. The thought force itself would be very minimal even when one is back to functioning with identity. 2) Having understood the nature of `laya' one must strive to leave it behind, to cross over it. Bhagavan clearly warns : "One must not allow oneself to be overtaken by such spells of stillness of thought : the moment one experiences this, one must revive consciousness and enquire within as to who it is who experiences this stillness... By such enquiry, you will drive the thought force deeper till it reaches its source and merges therein..." It is crystal clear that self-enquiry must be used to pursue the mind beyond laya and into the source. 3) `Laya' is not a negative state. As Bhagavan indicates ".. it is a clear sign of one's progress but the danger of it lies in mistaking it for the final goal of spiritual practice and being thus deceived." While everyone may not experience laya as a specific milestone in spiritual practice one may experience similar states in the course of one's lives. Hence, laya, wherever, however it occurs could well be utilised as a stepping stone to merger in the source. Whether unconsciously in a moment of deep joy or sorrow, or consciously in a fusion of the mind in the wonder of nature, music, dance, creativity, or through breath-regulation or concentration on an object, `laya' may occur. Even the experience of light, of pleasant sounds, of vastness and so on during one's spiritual practice would only be `laya'. The criterion, one must not fail to remember, is the presence of the experiencer `I am experiencing this'. The subtler the experience the more one is in danger of mistaking it for the real. The important thing is to recognise this and use `laya' as an asset. `Ah! The mind is now still, calm, unperturbed, free of thoughts. For whom is this experience? For me, I. My experience. Most wonderful. But what is this I ?' Whether or not one actually uses these words, one must pay keen attention to the experiencer of the stillness, the peace, the pleasantness, the vastness. It is a moment, it is a time when the mind has left all else behind. It can easily be made to take the dive. Yes it is time to plunge deeper, into the source, leaving laya behind. http://members.tripod.com/~rmclb/july99.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 17, 2004 Report Share Posted March 17, 2004 , "Lady Joyce" <shaantih@c...> wrote: > Dear Shawn: > > Thank you for posting this. It is very timely in that this subject seems to appear on a regular basis on this and other forums. I know that for myself, the attachment to the pleasant...ok...blissful...OK... ecstatic experiences (blush) was a difficult one to accept as just that, attachment. There, I said it :-) > > I have seen long threads go on and on arguing whether perpetual bliss was the "goal." > Sometimes they go on so long I don't even read one half of them. But the issue is a > recurring one. For you to have found and posted Sri Ramana's comments on > this issue is a gift, for which I thank you. Chopping wood, washing dishes... > immersed in bliss...full memories :-) > > Love, > > Joyce > > no new below... > - > Shawn Hair > > Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:07 AM > Laya > > > > > > `Laya' - is born from the root `Li' > > `Li' - means - cling, stick to, adhere; recline on, settle on, lie; > disappear, dissolve. > > `Laya' will mean - sticking, adherance > > - Fusion, solution > > - Disappearance, dissolution, destruction > > - Absorption, deep concentration, exclusive devotion (to any > object) > > - Rest, repose > > - A place of rest, abode > > - making the mind inactive, indifferent > > - Mental inactivity > > - a swoon > > - the quick downward movement of an arrow. > > - Time in music / pause in music > > - Union of song, dance and instrumental music. > > It is obvious that as with all Sanskrit words the term `Laya' > acquires different meanings in various contexts. Some of these > meanings may not be relevant at all to our context. Others may > indicate a positive connotation. Hence the word has to be > understood in the proper context. (The word `aham' in Tamil, for > instance means `ego', `home' and `heart' and is used by > Bhagavan in all these contexts in his `Marital Garland of Letters') > The root `li' is used in the positive context of sticking, adherance, > exclusive devotion by Viswanatha Swami in his `Astottaram' on > Bhagavan when he hails him as `Sonacalamaholina > manasaha'. This makes it clear that to understand the place of > `laya' in spiritual practice we have to look at its meaning from the > manner in which Bhagavan has explained it. There is a lucid > chapter in `Crumbs from His Table' on the very subject. > Ramanananda Swarnagiri states : "I arrive at a stage of stillness > of mind. I have no thought of any kind and there is an > emptiness... A mild light pervades and I feel that it is myself > bodiless. I have neither cognition nor vision of body and form...'' > Bhagavan answers : "Such a condition is termed manolaya or > temporary stillness of thought. Manolaya means concentration, > temporarily arresting the movement of thoughts; as soon as this > concentration ceases, thoughts, old and new, rush in as usual > and even though this temporary lulling of mind should last a > thousand years it will never lead to total destruction of thought...." > Let us also look at Bhagavan's explanation of `laya' in Upadesa > Saram in Verses 11 and 13 "The mind becomes quiescent by > regulation of breath, like a bird caught in a net. This is a means > of mind control". "Control of the mind is of two kinds, its lulling > and its destruction. A lulled mind will rise again but not the one > which is destroyed". > > In `Ramana Gita' Bhagavan gives a similar example for a mind > controlled by restraint of breath. > > > > ------ > > > > "Then it would, like a tethered animal, cease to stray". > > Again in the chapter `The Science of the Heart" Bhagavan says : > > "When there is forcible arrest of thoughts by swooning, sleep, > excessive joy or sorrow, fear and so on, the mind goes back to > its source, the Heart." > > "Such merger is unconscious and the person is unaware of it. > However, when one consciously enters the Heart it is termed > `Samadhi'. > > From these we can arrive at a clear understanding of the state > that is termed `laya'. > > i) `Laya' is a state of mental quietude. The dictionary definitions > of `disappearance', `dissolution', `rest', `repose', `mental > inactivity' - apply. However, the meanings `destruction' and > `exclusive devotion' are not applicable to this state. > > ii) The experience is pleasant and can be sought about by `deep > concentration' and/or breath regulation. > > iii) The experience is similar to what happens in sleep, `swoon' > (one of the definitions) and in any state of excessive emotion. > However, these `mergers' `dissolutions' of the mind take place > unconsciously, without one's knowledge or volition. `Laya' on the > other hand is a state that occurs in the course of spiritual > practice. It happens, therefore, with one's volition. It can be > repeated by the practitioner and it can also equally be dropped if > it is considerd unnecessary or obstructive to further progress. > > iv) The question follows that if it is not an involuntary stillness like > that in excessive emotion or swoon, why is it considered to be > different from the natural silence. Or, how is one to recognise it > as such? The important factor here, which it shares with the > other states of quiescence is that it is a `forcible arrest of > thoughts'. Laya is a stillness brought about by the application of > an external force. This `force' may be the sudden upsurge of > emotion of which one is unaware or the planned breath > regulation of which one is aware. In either case there is an > external agency causing the thought vaccum. When the > application of this force is withdrawn, the mind returns to its > original state. The factors distinguishing `laya' from merger in > the Self are : > > (a) There is no change after laya. This is the most important sign > to signify whether an experience is `laya', lulling or destruction. > Bhagavan says that even after thousands of years of such `laya > samadhi' or `yoganidra' one would wake up with the last thought > that happened prior to laya. If even the last, superficial thought > does not vanish, what of the deep rooted latent tendencies? > > (b) The presence of identity, of ego, of individuality is undisturbed > by laya. The individual is happy with the experience. Whose > experience? `His' or `hers'. And the individual wishes to > > > > -----------> > > > repeat it. `I experienced this and can experience it again at will'. > In the natural `destruction' of the mind, the way and the seeker > both disappear totally, in the silence, the fullness that is the Self. > No tendency survives. Identity itself is lost. > > v) The experience of `laya' is temporary. The arrest of thoughts is > temporary as they return the moment the pressure is released. > The stillness comes and goes. Again it must be stressed that > `comes and goes' does not mean even for a few minutes or > hours. It could be for years too. Then how is one to recognise > that the experience is `laya'? By the presence of the experience > of course, by the continuation of duality. `I am experiencing this > pleasant stillness'. There is `I' the subject and the object `the > experience'. This is also the means to distinguish it from natural > intermittent dips into the Self which Bhagavan terms `abhyasa'. > Because these mergers are also not continuous one should not > dismiss them as `laya'. I second Lady Joyce and thanks Shawn > Nor can one argue that `laya' too is a > natural merger into the source that is intermittent. In the latter, > though for a brief while, the sense of identity would be totally > dissolved, like a bucket of water in a well. Secondly, when such > merger occurs, the peace, the bliss and the upsurge of love > would continue even after one comes out of the experience. The > thought force itself would be very minimal even when one is back > to functioning with identity. > > 2) Having understood the nature of `laya' one must strive to leave > it behind, to cross over it. Bhagavan clearly warns : "One must > not allow oneself to be overtaken by such spells of stillness of > thought : the moment one experiences this, one must revive > consciousness and enquire within as to who it is who > experiences this stillness... By such enquiry, you will drive the > thought force deeper till it reaches its source and merges > therein..." It is crystal clear that self-enquiry must be used to > pursue the mind beyond laya and into the source. > > 3) `Laya' is not a negative state. As Bhagavan indicates ".. it is a > clear sign of one's progress but the danger of it lies in mistaking > it for the final goal of spiritual practice and being thus deceived." > While everyone may not experience laya as a specific milestone > in spiritual practice one may experience similar states in the > course of one's lives. Hence, laya, wherever, however it occurs > could well be utilised as a stepping stone to merger in the > source. Whether unconsciously in a moment of deep joy or > sorrow, or consciously in a fusion of the mind in the wonder of > nature, music, dance, creativity, or through breath-regulation or > concentration on an object, `laya' may occur. Even the experience > of light, of pleasant sounds, of vastness and so on during one's > spiritual practice would only be `laya'. The criterion, one must not > fail to remember, is the presence of the experiencer `I am > experiencing this'. The subtler the experience the more one is in > danger of mistaking it for the real. The important thing is to > recognise this and use `laya' as an asset. `Ah! The mind is now > still, calm, unperturbed, free of thoughts. For whom is this > experience? For me, I. My experience. Most wonderful. But what > is this I ?' Whether or not one actually uses these words, one > must pay keen attention to the experiencer of the stillness, the > peace, the pleasantness, the vastness. It is a moment, it is a > time when the mind has left all else behind. It can easily be > made to take the dive. Yes it is time to plunge deeper, into the > source, leaving laya behind. > > http://members.tripod.com/~rmclb/july99.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2004 Report Share Posted March 18, 2004 1. The Doctor's Prescription : Leaving Laya Behind Dr. Sarada 144 "It is pleasant, it seems, to be at peace. Why should we pursue enquiry further and leave this calm lull behind? To experience steadily the vibrant silence of Truth of course." Hi I clicked on the link and found the above quote in the same article and thought it pertinent. It is sort of the thesis of the article. The part below I have a question about. >"There is `I' the subject and the object `the > experience'. This is also the means to distinguish it from natural > intermittent dips into the Self which Bhagavan terms `abhyasa'. > Because these mergers are also not continuous one should not > dismiss them as `laya'. Nor can one argue that `laya' too is a > natural merger into the source that is intermittent. In the latter, > though for a brief while, the sense of identity would be totally > dissolved, like a bucket of water in a well." Dr. Sarada's idea of the sense of identity as totally dissolved like a bucket of water in a well does not mesh with the statement below by Ramana. Perhaps someone can explain this matter to me. page 62 of "The Spiritual Teachings of Ramana Maharshi" M. Samadhi alone can reveal the Truth. Thoughts cast a veil over Reality, and so It is not realized as such in states other than samadhi. In samadhi there is only the feeling "I am" and no thoughts. The experience "I am " is being still. Thanks Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2004 Report Share Posted March 19, 2004 , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > 1. The Doctor's Prescription : Leaving Laya Behind > > Dr. Sarada 144 > > "It is pleasant, it seems, to be at peace. Why should we pursue > enquiry further and leave this calm lull behind? To experience > steadily the vibrant silence of Truth of course." > > Hi > > I clicked on the link and found the above quote in the same article > and thought it pertinent. It is sort of the thesis of the article. > > The part below I have a question about. > > >"There is `I' the subject and the object `the > > experience'. This is also the means to distinguish it from natural > > intermittent dips into the Self which Bhagavan terms `abhyasa'. > > Because these mergers are also not continuous one should not > > dismiss them as `laya'. Nor can one argue that `laya' too is a > > natural merger into the source that is intermittent. In the latter, > > though for a brief while, the sense of identity would be totally > > dissolved, like a bucket of water in a well." > > Dr. Sarada's idea of the sense of identity as totally dissolved like > a bucket of water in a well does not mesh with the statement below by > Ramana. > > Perhaps someone can explain this matter to me. > > page 62 of "The Spiritual Teachings of Ramana Maharshi" > > > M. Samadhi alone can reveal the Truth. Thoughts cast a veil over > Reality, and so It is not realized as such in states other than > samadhi. In samadhi there is only the feeling "I am" and no > thoughts. The experience "I am " is being still. > > Thanks > Love > Bobby G. Hi Bobby, I am not sure where the confusion lies. As long as there is an experience arrising to "you" then inquiry is needed to ask to whom does this stllness arrise- to "i"- where deos this "i" originate. It is not enough to stick with the "I am" feeling, one must look for it's source. This looking becomes a kind of waiting in the "I am" whereupon Grace pulls the I am into the Self. ~Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2004 Report Share Posted March 19, 2004 , "Shawn Hair" <shawn@w...> wrote: > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > 1. The Doctor's Prescription : Leaving Laya Behind > > > > Dr. Sarada 144 > > > > "It is pleasant, it seems, to be at peace. Why should we pursue > > enquiry further and leave this calm lull behind? To experience > > steadily the vibrant silence of Truth of course." > > > > Hi > > > > I clicked on the link and found the above quote in the same article > > and thought it pertinent. It is sort of the thesis of the article. > > > > The part below I have a question about. > > > > >"There is `I' the subject and the object `the > > > experience'. This is also the means to distinguish it from natural > > > intermittent dips into the Self which Bhagavan terms `abhyasa'. > > > Because these mergers are also not continuous one should not > > > dismiss them as `laya'. Nor can one argue that `laya' too is a > > > natural merger into the source that is intermittent. In the latter, > > > though for a brief while, the sense of identity would be totally > > > dissolved, like a bucket of water in a well." > > > > Dr. Sarada's idea of the sense of identity as totally dissolved like > > a bucket of water in a well does not mesh with the statement below by > > Ramana. > > > > Perhaps someone can explain this matter to me. > > > > page 62 of "The Spiritual Teachings of Ramana Maharshi" > > > > > > M. Samadhi alone can reveal the Truth. Thoughts cast a veil over > > Reality, and so It is not realized as such in states other than > > samadhi. In samadhi there is only the feeling "I am" and no > > thoughts. The experience "I am " is being still. > > > > Thanks > > Love > > Bobby G. > > > Hi Bobby, > > I am not sure where the confusion lies. As long as there is an experience arrising to "you" > then inquiry is needed to ask to whom does this stllness arrise- to "i"- where deos this "i" > originate. It is not enough to stick with the "I am" feeling, one must look for it's source. > This looking becomes a kind of waiting in the "I am" whereupon Grace pulls the I am into > the Self. > > ~Shawn Hey Shawn: Since Ramana says that samadhi is being I am with no thoughts how could you search deeper or look for a source? Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2004 Report Share Posted March 20, 2004 , "texasbg2000" > > > Hi Bobby, > > > > I am not sure where the confusion lies. As long as there is an > experience arrising to "you" > > then inquiry is needed to ask to whom does this stllness arrise- > to "i"- where deos this "i" > > originate. It is not enough to stick with the "I am" feeling, one > must look for it's source. > > This looking becomes a kind of waiting in the "I am" whereupon > Grace pulls the I am into > > the Self. > > > > ~Shawn > > Hey Shawn: > > Since Ramana says that samadhi is being I am with no thoughts how > could you search deeper or look for a source? > > Bobby G. Dear Bobby and Shawn, You are both right, I believe. In Samadhi, "I AM" shines as It Self without distraction. So It Recognizes It Self without hinderance. The question of thought and inquiry is moot at that point. When the I AM asserts itself as Pure Being in the waking state and all states, revealing itself as the primary (state), who is going to inquire......and about what? Shawn, you are right that remaining in the "I", the sense of being, one is pulled by Grace into the Heart. All of this means the same.....Grace, Being, Consciousness, Awareness, I AM, Heart, Absolute, etc. The distinctions are of the language, which arises from the mind. When mind goes, everything goes. Mind is a condition, a power, that arises from the Heart. The Heart remains. Love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2004 Report Share Posted March 20, 2004 Dear Harsha, THANKS michael - "harshaimtm" <> Saturday, March 20, 2004 2:44 PM Re: Laya > , "texasbg2000" > > > > Hi Bobby, > > > > > > I am not sure where the confusion lies. As long as there is an > > experience arrising to "you" > > > then inquiry is needed to ask to whom does this stllness arrise- > > to "i"- where deos this "i" > > > originate. It is not enough to stick with the "I am" feeling, > one > > must look for it's source. > > > This looking becomes a kind of waiting in the "I am" whereupon > > Grace pulls the I am into > > > the Self. > > > > > > ~Shawn > > > > Hey Shawn: > > > > Since Ramana says that samadhi is being I am with no thoughts how > > could you search deeper or look for a source? > > > > Bobby G. > > Dear Bobby and Shawn, > > You are both right, I believe. In Samadhi, "I AM" shines as It Self > without distraction. So It Recognizes It Self without hinderance. > The question of thought and inquiry is moot at that point. > > When the I AM asserts itself as Pure Being in the waking state and > all states, revealing itself as the primary (state), who is going to > inquire......and about what? > > Shawn, you are right that remaining in the "I", the sense of being, > one is pulled by Grace into the Heart. > > All of this means the same.....Grace, Being, Consciousness, > Awareness, I AM, Heart, Absolute, etc. The distinctions are of the > language, which arises from the mind. > > When mind goes, everything goes. Mind is a condition, a power, that > arises from the Heart. > > The Heart remains. > > Love to all > Harsha > /join > > > > > > "Love itself is the actual form of God." > > Sri Ramana > > In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma > Links > > > > > 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.