Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 Dear list, I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is mostly intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many here actually practice it? Most of what I see here comes from the head, not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with the heart? Tim ----- Visit The Core of the WWW at: http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/ND/index.html Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 Tim Greetings! Your questions are wonderful. But let us reflect on them. First who and how one is going to judge the extent and the intensity of the practice? and what is practice anyway and how do you practice advaita vedanta. Sitting in one corner and contemplating - is that considered as practice? Or contemplating in front of the computer - is that practice - What is emphasized is shravanam, mananam, nidhidhaasanam. hearing, reflecting and contemplation is what constitite the essence of sadhana. Repeating I am brahmaasmi or who am I is not practice. Head comes in only where there is heart. Contemplation on the truth itself is a sadhana - only one has to make sure that it is not objective knowledge that one is concerned but subjective knowledge. That depends on the individual subjects and no one other than oneself can be judge of that. It is not therefore how and when or where and to what extent etc of others doing, but how and when and to what extent "I am doing" - it is ones own evaluation of oneself by oneself. This reflection and Nidhidhyaasanam refects in ones action or the texture or motives of ones action. With sadhana one becomes more and more involved in helping others than himself. That automatically comes out of compassion and love as one sees oneself in all. That one can see and evalate. Self-fishness and egotistical attitude should desolve with sadhana. uddharet atmanaa atmaanam - one has to lift oneself by oneself. neither others can do it nor judge it. To what extent I am selfless and caring for others and less agitated and more equianimous - these are the only litmus tests. These are the byproducts of sadhana. These again not to judge others but to evaluate oneself by oneself. Hari Om! Sadananda >Tim Gerchmez <fewtch >advaitin >Advaitin > Question for list members >Wed, 16 Jun 1999 09:36:59 -0700 > >Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > > >Dear list, > >I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is mostly >intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many >here actually practice it? Most of what I see here comes from the head, >not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with >the heart? > >Tim > _____________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 Hari Om Shri Tim: Thanks for a thought provoking question with unresolvable puzzles: I have also resolved the following questions: Who am I? Who is in Sadhana? Who does practice? Who is the Believer and what is his/her belief? Such questions arise because of subjective notions and definitions which vary by person. All discussion groups are subject to the criticism - that they are mostly intellectual discourse without substance. Also those who conduct unselfish community services are also humble and they don't want to advertise about their activities. Unfortunately we try to use our own yardstick to measure others and tend to quickly jump into our conclusions. To a large extent, this list has shown restraints and has avoided finger pointing who is noble and who is evil. I would rather give the benefit of doubt and assume that someone speaks from the heart until I have enough facts to conclude otherwise. In conclusion, I believe that the question you have raised is too delicate and no answer is likely to satisfy everyone! Hari Om! Ram Chandran Tim Gerchmez wrote: > > Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > > Dear list, > > I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is mostly > intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many > here actually practice it? Most of what I see here comes from the head, > not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with > the heart? > > Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 On Wed, 16 Jun 1999, Tim Gerchmez wrote: > Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > > > Dear list, > > I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is mostly > intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many > here actually practice it? Most of what I see here comes from the head, > not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with > the heart? > > Tim > namaste. I have the following comments on the above. 1. In a medium like the internet, it is hard to say whether what is written has come from the head or the heart. 2. In trying to answer a question which Tim has raised, we should look at what are the objectives of the List and whether the List is active. The objective of the List is to discuss advaita philosophy, and the List is active. This is not a List which teaches us how to advance in the materialistic world; this List does not say how to make money and it does not tell us how to seek pleasures. Or in other words, this List is not for people who go after worldly activities. Yet, about one hundred or so people stay with the List, of which may be about twenty or so regularly write something of what they know. The very fact that these hundred or so people follow these discussions (which provide no worldly benefits) without being pressured to be on the List, says that they are practitioners of advaita. An advaita practitioner can range from someone who is in nitya-samAdhi (like Shri GovindAcArya, the guru of Shri Shankara) to someone who have glimpses of Ananda (bliss) to people who are in search of Ananda (bliss). All these are practitioners of advaita. If they are not, they would have d from the List, and would be drinking beer and watching television, or d to some other List of their interest. 3. The one who *consciously* thinks he/she is a practitioner of advaita is not a practitioner of advaita. Advaita should be an inherent part of the being rather than a conscious practice. 4. I do not think one should be concerned whether an article written by X comes from the head or from the heart. What is of importantance in our learning process is what we are understanding out of it rather than worry that X's understanding is intellectual and not from the heart. Shri RamaNa's answer to one of the devotee's questions is very similar to this: Shri RamaNa says: see what your understanding is rather than worry what someone else understands or not. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 At 06:02 PM 6/16/99 PDT, you wrote: >Kuntimaddi Sadananda <k_sadananda >Your questions are wonderful. But let us reflect on them. First who and >how one is going to judge the extent and the intensity of the practice? and >what is practice anyway and how do you practice advaita vedanta. Sitting in >one corner and contemplating - is that considered as practice? It could be one form of practice - that sounds like meditation. It depends on what is contemplated. If such questions as "Who am I?" are contemplated, I think sadhana would be an applicable term. >Or >contemplating in front of the computer - is that practice That could be too, if the contemplation is not on the same level as memorization or scholarship. There are professors of religious studies who know more than many realized yogis, but who is it that really "knows" the Advaita Vedanta? Intellectual knowledge is useless to final liberation from samsara. At best, it can serve as a tool for the jnana practitioner, but is eventually to be discarded entirely. >What is >emphasized is shravanam, mananam, nidhidhaasanam. hearing, reflecting and >contemplation is what constitite the essence of sadhana. Repeating I am >brahmaasmi or who am I is not practice. Of course not, that is parroting. A parrot could be taught to say "I am Brahman" (in any language in the world, including sanskrit) but of course no realization would take place. >Head comes in only where there is >heart. Contemplation on the truth itself is a sadhana - only one has to >make sure that it is not objective knowledge that one is concerned but >subjective knowledge. Yes. Subjective knowledge in the beginning anyway... upon moksha, both subject and object seem to become meaningless. I say "seem to" because I am not fully liberated, and in no position to judge what happens when all layers of ignorance are completely removed. >That depends on the individual subjects and no one >other than oneself can be judge of that. You're right... still, I often sense a "study" going on here, rather than a quest for truth. Often I sense that this is like a classroom for the study of the Advaita Vedanta philosophy. That is not sadhana. This is just a personal impression I get of the list however. It may be entirely off-base. Hari OM, Tim ----- Visit The Core of the WWW at: http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/ND/index.html Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 At 12:01 AM 6/17/99 -0230, you wrote: >Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy > This is not a List which teaches us how to advance in the > materialistic world; this List does not say how to make money > and it does not tell us how to seek pleasures. Or in other > words, this List is not for people who go after worldly > activities. Yet, about one hundred or so people stay with the > List, of which may be about twenty or so regularly write > something of what they know. > > The very fact that these hundred or so people follow these > discussions (which provide no worldly benefits) without > being pressured to be on the List, says that they are > practitioners of advaita. I don't think that's necessarily true. A university student could simply be taking a religious studies course and need a basic understanding of advaita. Such a one might in no way be a practitioner, and in fact perhaps not even be interested in advaita, only in getting a good grade in the class. >3. The one who *consciously* thinks he/she is a practitioner of > advaita is not a practitioner of advaita. Advaita should be > an inherent part of the being rather than a conscious practice. I agree with this, up to a point. It's a bit too broad and sweeping of a claim (the first sentence, not the last). OM Shanti, Tim ----- Visit The Core of the WWW at: http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/ND/index.html Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 1999 Report Share Posted June 16, 1999 > > Tim Gerchmez [sMTP:fewtch] > Wednesday, June 16, 1999 7:37 PM > Advaitin > Question for list members > > Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > > > Dear list, > > I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is > mostly > intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many > here actually practice it? [Madhava Replies:] *I* DO :-) > Most of what I see here comes from the head, > not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with > the heart? [Madhava Replies:] *I* AM :-) > Tim > > ----- > Visit The Core of the WWW at: > http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/ND/index.html > Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics. > > ------ > Looking to expand your world? > > ONElist has 170,000 e-mail communities from which to choose! > ------ > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy > focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available > at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Tim - your interjectory comments are well taken and appreciated. I am susre you agree with me that evaluation and progress in ones sadhana is individualistic. By way of your questions you are focussing what is ultimately needed and there is no doubt in anyone's mind that Sadhana has to be the essence to purify the mind to see the truth as the truth. The discussions has been emphasized in shadhana as a means for the intellect to get fully established in the truth. Ultimately it is an inquiry by the intellect - viveka - discriminative process and you are extremely right that one has to ensure that ego does not raise in the process. It is indeed a razor edge path - and one has to walk very carefully. Ego-hood can raise any time unnoticed. Even Bhakti this can raise to - 'I am greater bhakta than the other fellow etc.' Mind and intellect as two wings of the bird are required to take the inner flight. Your questions, I believe are intended for everyone to stand apart and critically examine themselves to look within how for they are on the way and how else they can do to insure Ego does not raise its hood in the process of discussions. To tell you frankly, I write or teach not for others but for my own sadhana. Hence each question is important for me to satisfy myself that the discussion is appropriate. I donot like to get into extended orguments and leave once I have made the points I believe in and logical to my satisfaction. The second reason I participate in the discussion is my obligation to my teacher. He taught me freely what all I know and I have to pass it on to my best the benefit that I received from him to others who are interested and receptive. This is my Guru-R^iNa - or duty to my teacher. Hence I spend lot of time in studying and contemplating and writing what I understand. This is the only to insure my mind is not dissipated in other mandane issues. But you are right - One has to be extremely careful to insure that the ego-does not come in there. I thank you for that teaching. Hari Om! Sadananda >Tim Gerchmez <fewtch >advaitin >advaitin >Re: Question for list members >Wed, 16 Jun 1999 20:39:55 -0700 > >Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > >At 06:02 PM 6/16/99 PDT, you wrote: > >Kuntimaddi Sadananda <k_sadananda > >Your questions are wonderful. But let us reflect on them. First who and > >how one is going to judge the extent and the intensity of the practice? >and > >what is practice anyway and how do you practice advaita vedanta. Sitting >in > >one corner and contemplating - is that considered as practice? > >It could be one form of practice - that sounds like meditation. It depends >on what is contemplated. If such questions as "Who am I?" are >contemplated, I think sadhana would be an applicable term. > > >Or > >contemplating in front of the computer - is that practice > >That could be too, if the contemplation is not on the same level as >memorization or scholarship. There are professors of religious studies who >know more than many realized yogis, but who is it that really "knows" the >Advaita Vedanta? Intellectual knowledge is useless to final liberation >from samsara. At best, it can serve as a tool for the jnana practitioner, >but is eventually to be discarded entirely. > > >What is > >emphasized is shravanam, mananam, nidhidhaasanam. hearing, reflecting >and > >contemplation is what constitite the essence of sadhana. Repeating I am > >brahmaasmi or who am I is not practice. > >Of course not, that is parroting. A parrot could be taught to say "I am >Brahman" (in any language in the world, including sanskrit) but of course >no realization would take place. > > >Head comes in only where there is > >heart. Contemplation on the truth itself is a sadhana - only one has to > >make sure that it is not objective knowledge that one is concerned but > >subjective knowledge. > >Yes. Subjective knowledge in the beginning anyway... upon moksha, both >subject and object seem to become meaningless. I say "seem to" because I >am not fully liberated, and in no position to judge what happens when all >layers of ignorance are completely removed. > > >That depends on the individual subjects and no one > >other than oneself can be judge of that. > >You're right... still, I often sense a "study" going on here, rather than a >quest for truth. Often I sense that this is like a classroom for the study >of the Advaita Vedanta philosophy. That is not sadhana. This is just a >personal impression I get of the list however. It may be entirely >off-base. > >Hari OM, > >Tim _____________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Tim Gerchmez <fewtch Dear list, I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is mostly intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many here actually practice it? Most of what I see here comes from the head, not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with the heart? Tim Harsha: Be not puzzled Tim. Befuddlement is natural when one objectifies. What do you imagine constitutes practice? The nature of the Self is Perfect Peace, Perfect Awareness, Perfect Wholeness, and Perfect Self Satisfaction. Therefore the practice must reflect that. Ramana Maharshi has beautifully stated that what is Sahaj for the Jnani is the practice of the aspirant. One objectifies when one is restless and discontent. You see "others." You wish to compare where the "others" are on the path. You wish to know if the "others" are coming from the head or the heart, etc. This web of reasoning and curiosity is endless and does not have understanding at its foundation. "Others" in fact exist nowhere but in your perception. The focus of the man of understanding is on his own perception. Make it so for yourself. When you relax with the practice of awareness, contentment, and peace, all the "others" including the world will disappear into the Self. No "others" will remain for you to ask. The Perfect Subject See only It Self, as there is nothing else to see, and there are no others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 1999 Report Share Posted June 18, 1999 Tim Gerchmez wrote: > > > Dear list, > > I have a question that's been puzzling me about this list. There is mostly > intellectual discourse on the Advaita philosophy here, but do very many > here actually practice it? Most of what I see here comes from the head, > not the heart. Who here is in sadhana, who practices, who believes with > the heart? > hariH OM! the mind is a superficial overlay on the individual soul. it can cause the individual to appear excessively heartless or intellectual or emotional, etc. yet these are only appearances. beneath them rages the pulse of Being itself. and everyone has it full. this is why the mind has to be gotten rid of. not the practical reasoning mind, needed to get us through the world, but the Mind that is the value-oriented philosophical-speculative judgment machine. the Mind that obsessively compulsively tears us away from our innate natural Bliss. the Mind that destroyed the Innocent Child in the Heart. or *seemed to* destroy. fact is, the Child is very much alive and waiting to be reunited with its soul's awareness, to play once again the Sport of Brahman. and the means to securing this is done by an effortless release of the stronghold habit of Mind. of course this comes as a result of considerable sadhana. namaste 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.