Pitfalls of Hunting the "I"

[Guest guest]

There is a mistake which

happens regularly to beginners.

 

Many of them are blessed with various glimpses of

the higher life, which they have entered. These carry

the stamp of a genuine change of consciousness, and

of course the sadhaka is happy, and convinced that he

has made real progress. There is no harm in it, because

he soon has to face the fact that his 'experience' is fading

away, never to return. When this happens again and again,

he learns to understand these sparks as what they are,

glimpses from another dimension which want to teach him

to discriminate between the different dimensions but which

also lure him on in his spiritual endeavour. They only become

a pitfall, when he, by vanity or impatience, gets stuck in one

of them, taking it for final Realisation. Then his further progress is blocked.

 

The mark by which this pitfall is recognised is 'I' have realised...'

This 'I' can only be a 'wrong I', because it is not the 'I' that realises.

....

With this idea he gives his 'personal I' a strong chance to

develop into a 'spiritual I',

which is much worse than his

original quite ordinary 'I', strenghtened by all his previous

spiritual effort. The result is a spiritual pride, the worse the

more advanced the sadhaka has become, because his attainments, serve only to

confirm his 'right' to be proud of his success.

 

But even if he perceives the gentle Voice from within, warning him

against his trend going on in him and reminding him/her of the secret

of real 'attainment',

 

**silent humility, and

 

even if s/he is quite prepared

to accept the warning, there is still the risk that the cunning

ego now is concealing itself

behind his pride in his humility!

 

There is only one remedy against these and all other pitfalls on

the Path to Realisation: Alert Awareness, relentlessly focussing

on the treacherous ego-I.

.....

The most cunning pitfall on the path of sadhaka is the last one,

hidden in Realisation Itself.

 

The first Revelation of the Self

is temporary.

 

"Jnana, once revealed, needs time to steady itself." (Talks, 141)

 

The danger is not in the sliding back; it is natural to most sadhakas and is met

quite naturally by continuing one's practice faithfully, which in its turn will

lead to further Revelations of the Self until

finally there is no sadhaka left, but the Self only.

 

If, on the other hand, the sadhaka tries to 'hold on' to that first

Revelation, in spite of his Inner Guide warning him, (Who is holding

on?), then the ego-I slinks again in where the Self is veiled again and

distorts the Revelation of the Self into the cry of victory: 'I have

realised!'

 

Blindfolded by the Bliss of the final 'success' (whose success?) he

never stops to scrutinize his condition and thus never finds out the`truth; That

he became a yoga-bhrashtha, one who has fallen out of his yoga, his 'union'.

 

The new and definitive disguise of his ego-I is 'the Guru', and this

last and most powerful pitfall never releases him, because he

never recognises that he is its victim.

 

There are nowadays many whose Guru-pitfall caught them even

much earlier on their path.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lucy Cornelssen: Hunting the 'I', from pp.48-51

 

 

~~~~~~~~~

love, Era

[Guest guest]

Dear Era

 

Pls could you explain this portion. Your posting was very insightful, thanks

a lot.

 

On 11/7/05 9:34 PM, "Era" <mi_nok wrote:

 

> The new and definitive disguise of his ego-I is 'the Guru', and this

> last and most powerful pitfall never releases him, because he

> never recognises that he is its victim.

[Guest guest]

Era,

 

Does it mean that in the Reality, the not-ego, there is no Guru, and

if the seeker submits continuously to the non-existent guru he/she

shackles the self to that non-existence, thereby never finding the

escape of who one really is, the Self.?

 

Ibrahim.

 

 

 

RamanaMaharshi, gautam <oneness.univ@g...>

wrote:

>

> Dear Era

>

> Pls could you explain this portion. Your posting was very

insightful, thanks

> a lot.

>

> On 11/7/05 9:34 PM, "Era" <mi_nok> wrote:

>

> > The new and definitive disguise of his ego-I is 'the Guru', and

this

> > last and most powerful pitfall never releases him, because he

> > never recognises that he is its victim.

>

[Guest guest]

> Dear Era

>

> Pls could you explain this portion. Your posting was very insightful, thanks

> a lot.

>

> On 11/7/05 9:34 PM, "Era" <mi_nok> wrote:

>

> > The new and definitive disguise of his ego-I is 'the Guru', and this

> > last and most powerful pitfall never releases him, because he

> > never recognises that he is its victim.

>

 

 

Hello Gautam,

 

At an other forum we were discussing how one has to be vigilant always, becuse

even after enlightenment, when one becomes a teacher, a guru the ego can

highjack the realized-self, by feeling special as 'the Guru', forgetting to be a

surrendered witness, becomes the 'doer' and blinded so much, that never

recognises, that s/he fell victim of his ego.

 

OMHO This is a pitfall, the last one called the gugu-ego.

 

Best regards,

Era

[Guest guest]

Hi Ibrahim,

 

> Era,

>

> Does it mean that in the Reality, the not-ego, there is no Guru, and

> if the seeker submits continuously to the non-existent guru he/she

> shackles the self to that non-existence,

 

 

if you mean to the phamtom-guru: the ego... yes

 

 

> thereby never finding the

> escape of who one really is, the Self.?

>

 

 

Yes, I think so..

 

Isn't Guru the Self ?

 

and in oneself it is the guide-guru-light.. and

 

if one is a surrendered witness to it it is ok ?

 

 

 

> Ibrahim.

 

love, Era

 

 

 

> > Dear Era

> >

> > Pls could you explain this portion. Your posting was very

> insightful, thanks

> > a lot.

> >

> > On 11/7/05 9:34 PM, "Era" <mi_nok> wrote:

> >

> > > The new and definitive disguise of his ego-I is 'the Guru', and

> this

> > > last and most powerful pitfall never releases him, because he

> > > never recognises that he is its victim.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

So this is a post-realization pitfall ? But I thought that the ego was

burned out completely in realization ?

 

What surprises me, and worries me, is that one hears of very few realized

beings who embody realization. Many have "fallen" (devotee abuse etc).

Having embarked on this line, what worries me is - how can guru's after

realization do such reprehensible things.

Is is not a requirement for realization that one's attachments are

destroyed. Or in the sudden school or enlightenment, does that not happen?

 

What I mean is that (I think) the Buddha and the Gita say that attachments

must go prior to realization. The Buddha certainly burned out his

defilements before. In Bhagavan Ramana's case, I wonder whether in the 10-20

years he spent in solitude/samadhi after realization, his attachments and

defilements got burned out, or did that happen in that one day when he had

the NDE.

 

Regards.

--

The Buddha seed grows in accordance with not taking life.

- Dogen Zenji (1200 - 1253)

 

>>

>> On 11/7/05 9:34 PM, "Era" <mi_nok> wrote:

>>

>>> The new and definitive disguise of his ego-I is 'the Guru', and this

>>> last and most powerful pitfall never releases him, because he

>>> never recognises that he is its victim.

>>

>

>

> Hello Gautam,

>

> At an other forum we were discussing how one has to be vigilant always, becuse

> even after enlightenment, when one becomes a teacher, a guru the ego can

> highjack the realized-self, by feeling special as 'the Guru', forgetting to be

> a surrendered witness, becomes the 'doer' and blinded so much, that never

> recognises, that s/he fell victim of his ego.

>

> OMHO This is a pitfall, the last one called the gugu-ego.

>

> Best regards,

> Era

>

[Guest guest]

'oneness@gmail' writes

 

>>> So this is a post-realization pitfall ? But I thought that the ego was

burned out completely in realization ?

What surprises me, and worries me, is that one hears of very few realized

beings who embody realization. Many have "fallen" (devotee abuse etc).

Having embarked on this line, what worries me is - how can guru's after

realization do such reprehensible things.

Is is not a requirement for realization that one's attachments are

destroyed. Or in the sudden school or enlightenment, does that not

happen?<<<

 

Dear 'oneness',

 

Perhaps we need to appreciate there may be different experiences of the Self

(samadhi/immersion of the mind in the Self), some only temporary. Ramana

refers to 3 different experiences of samadhi:

 

SAVIKALPA samadhi is attained with effort, because the vasanas (mental

tendencies) otherwise disturb the mind. When this effort is lost, or

falters, or the vasanas gain strength enough to overcome the effort, the

savikalpa samadhi is lost. A temporary state; clearly the mind/ego is not

destroyed at this stage.

 

KEVALA NIRVIKALPA samadhi is attained effortlessly, yet the vasanas and ego

still remain. It is a temporary state usually involving a loss of body

consciousness. When the body consciousness is disturbed or asserts itself

the state may be lost. Also, as the vasanas and ego remain this is not

'mukti', liberation. Ramana says the analogy is like that of a bucket

lowered down into a well. It may remain submerged under the water for a

time but can be pulled out by the rope that is still attached to it.

 

SAHAJA NIRVIKALPA samadhi is the state of the jnani (eg Sri Ramana) ; the

effortless abidance in the natural state, which is the real Self. Sahaja =

natural. This is mukti, liberation, as the ego/mind has been destroyed.

The jnani is able to move freely in the world without loss of the natural

state, seeing 'no difference' (nirvikalpa) between himself and the world.

All is Brahman. Ramana gives the analogy of the well whereby both bucket

and rope are immersed in the water. There is no longer any ties /

attachments to pull the mind out of samadhi. It is dissolved in the Self,

like the salt doll in sea water.

 

Regards,

 

P.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the inputs. So this suggests that

A) "realized" people who fell, but who managed to take others to

realization, were actually not in Sahaj Nirvikalpa, but the earlier 2

states. That much is understandable.

B) more importantly or relevantly, if one today (in the unrealized state)

does not have a certain tendency (lust for money, or sex) then at no stage

of realization will it suddenly pop up and take control of me/ruin me.

 

That also suggests that the "fallen angels", already had such tendencies to

start with. I would then wonder why with such strong desires they embarked

on a spiritual path, and did so much penance etc (although this isn't really

relevant to me). If you suggest that they never may have done any penance,

or reached any realization, then I would wonder how others attribute their

realization to them.

 

Why this point is relevant (and not just mental curiosity) is that I don't

want suddenly one day to find *myself* in a situation where desires that

were never a part of my life earlier, suddenly get excavated (due to the

spiritual process) and take over.

 

Bhagavan himself says with examples that we can never judge or understand

the life or actions of a jnani - yet his own life was flawless.

 

I summarize by saying that our original/existing personality (and

weaknesses) will remain with us as long as we are in temporary states of

samadhi, but will leave us when in sahaj Nirvikalpa. Also no new weaknesses

will emerge at any stage as we are purified.

 

In Ramana,

gautam

 

On 11/16/05 7:33 PM, "Peter" <not_2 wrote:

 

>

> 'oneness@gmail' writes

>

>

> Perhaps we need to appreciate there may be different experiences of the Self

> (samadhi/immersion of the mind in the Self), some only temporary. Ramana

> refers to 3 different experiences of samadhi:

>