So Who are you?

[Guest guest]

>a trap and dilemma that all aspirants of the path must encounter at some

>stage.

>So the question is - how can the one who steps back (or let go) finally

>step

>back (or surrender) from its own self ?

>We have already seen that the Katha Upanishad mentions 'Grace' as the final

>means to remove this last knot, leading to true liberation. Maybe there

>are

>other means ?

 

During April - May, I was working in California and had to walk to the train

station - the walk used to take around twenty minutes. At that point I'd

reached a state when I could center in on myself - without any objectivity.

And I tried to know myself then. In the twenty minute walk, repeatedly I

would sink into myself and try to push into myself - to know myself - it was

impossible - there was no penetrating this wall. I was sunk in frustration -

then I questioned myself - if I let go of this "I" would it mean that I

ceased to exist? No - for whatever remains would still be me - though there

would be no "knowing" or "conception" in this state. (Those who find it

difficult to understand this, know that to "know" from texts or somebody

that you're unreal is very different from the actual experience and

knowledge that you're unreal).

 

Here one should understand is that what remains is not our normal state.

Progressively we by experience, negate the body, senses and mind. When we

reach the subtlest form of the ego, which is nothing but the mind in

essence, we cannot go beyond it. And at this stage your identification has

centered in this subtle ego and if you let go of it, there cannot be any

identification with anything else - all knowledge will cease - but then even

here there's a dilemma - for 1. When one's aware of the antics of the mind,

its cessation itself would be bliss - here understand that when the mind

ceases, there's no I nor mine nor you nor yours - for these themselves are

products of thought. So is this state itself when developed nivAna? Or 2.

When the mind has ceased, is there any scope for any other form of knowledge

to arise - is this what is generally referred to as prAjnam or jnAnam or

intuition?

 

Maybe. But making the mind wheel to cease is itself a Herculean job. Maybe

at the end of it, realization and knowledge of ourselves will occur. For as

we sit in total stillness, probably another kind of awareness (not to be

confused with our empirical awareness) will grow. Here by stillness we

should understand it as total cessation of karma or activity - both physical

and mental - even a conception or awareness of oneself is activity. And this

is an extremely difficult state to maintain - for you're fighting against

the habit of a lifetime - being your normal self (the false you).

 

The best simile to explain this is : take a sword. It's nothing but a piece

of steel. But being of a certain shape with certain features, it gets the

identity "sword". Man is like that. With our form, senses and mind, we

identify ourselves as a man - but when there's quiescence - what's left is

the truth. But even this example is only an indication, but doesn't truly

convey the truth - which can only be experienced.

[Guest guest]

At 01:13 PM 11/6/99 PST, you wrote:

>"nanda chandran" <vpcnk

>Maybe. But making the mind wheel to cease is itself a Herculean job. Maybe

>at the end of it, realization and knowledge of ourselves will occur. For as

>we sit in total stillness, probably another kind of awareness (not to be

>confused with our empirical awareness) will grow. Here by stillness we

>should understand it as total cessation of karma or activity - both physical

>and mental - even a conception or awareness of oneself is activity. And this

>is an extremely difficult state to maintain - for you're fighting against

>the habit of a lifetime - being your normal self (the false you).

 

It may be a difficult state to maintain, but I'll tell you what makes it

much easier: The absolutely certain knowledge that there is no "me," no

false self. I'm not talking about light faith, but absolute, deep

certainty, as one is certain that breathing occurs. Such certainty has a

power to it that can overcome almost any ignorance. It requires a

willingness to seek truth and truth alone, at the expense of anything else.

Truth must be followed even if it leads into hell.

 

With absolute certainty and dedication to truth, the path is much easier

and tends to be self-maintaining. This certainty can only be given by

grace, seeking for it will not have any effect. At some point or another

on the "path," it will come, if complete dedication to truth is there.

 

With Love,

 

Tim

 

-----

"Nonduality is not a popularity contest."

 

Visit "The Core" Website at http://coresite.cjb.net -

Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics.

Tim's other pages are at http://core.vdirect.net

[Guest guest]

nanda chandran wrote:

> Progressively we by experience, negate the body, senses and mind. When we

> reach the subtlest form of the ego, which is nothing but the mind in

> essence, we cannot go beyond it. And at this stage your identification has

> centered in this subtle ego and if you let go of it, there cannot be any

> identification with anything else - all knowledge will cease - but then even

> here there's a dilemma - for 1. When one's aware of the antics of the mind,

> its cessation itself would be bliss - here understand that when the mind

> ceases, there's no I nor mine nor you nor yours - for these themselves are

> products of thought. So is this state itself when developed nivAna? Or 2.

> When the mind has ceased, is there any scope for any other form of knowledge

> to arise - is this what is generally referred to as prAjnam or jnAnam or

> intuition?

>

> Maybe. But making the mind wheel to cease is itself a Herculean job. Maybe

> at the end of it, realization and knowledge of ourselves will occur. For as

> we sit in total stillness, probably another kind of awareness (not to be

> confused with our empirical awareness) will grow. Here by stillness we

> should understand it as total cessation of karma or activity - both physical

> and mental - even a conception or awareness of oneself is activity. And this

> is an extremely difficult state to maintain - for you're fighting against

> the habit of a lifetime - being your normal self (the false you).

>

 

hariH OM! nanda,

 

in my view, your ref. no. 1 is absolutely correct,

representing the paramarthika. and ref. no. 2 is

also correct, from the vyavaharika! the prajnam or

jnanam are adaptable formulations indicating or

deductively pointing to their *source* in brahman.

they amount to forms or catalysts of wisdom that

have the pragmatic function of escorting the jivatma

back to its origin (i.e. its natural home in nirvana).

 

this state is the everpresent substratum and requires

*no effort at all* to realize. this alludes to the

implication of grace, whereby the karmic agglomeration

has reached critical mass and yields *automatically*.

it seems to be sheer evolution of the soul, allowing

the influx of grace to transfigure the typically

anxious tendency of the Mind to interfere with what

is otherwise effortless, innate, and truly everpresent

Self-realization. this is why it is said that nothing

positive need be done (that is, when the soul has

reached its ripened stage of development), but only

residual false notions need be eliminated--such as

the idea that one needs to have practical grasping,

amounting to a 'relative enlightenment,' which is is

probably the most common misunderstanding regarding

the nature of atmasakshath.

 

namaste

[Guest guest]

>It may be a difficult state to maintain, but I'll tell you what makes it

>much easier: The absolutely certain knowledge that there is no "me," no

>false self. I'm not talking about light faith, but absolute, deep

>certainty, as one is certain that breathing occurs. Such certainty has a

>power to it that can overcome almost any ignorance. It requires a

>willingness to seek truth and truth alone, at the expense of anything else.

>Truth must be followed even if it leads into hell.

>With absolute certainty and dedication to truth, the path is much easier

>and tends to be self-maintaining. This certainty can only be given by

>grace, seeking for it will not have any effect. At some point or another

>on the "path," it will come, if complete dedication to truth is there.

 

Dear Tim,

 

Thanks for your advice. Reading your post, I'm certain that you

understand what I'm talking about.

 

Yes, what you say is absolutely right - deep certainity is what is

needed at this junction. I myself considered it at one point. For in

essence what I've to do is just be myself without the Ego. But I don't

think I'm ready for that yet. For how does deep certainity come about -

from first hand absolute knowledge of something. But as I pointed out

before I wasn't able to break into my "I" sense - and that was my

focal point during my two years of Atma VichAram - and only when I

couldn't break into it, did I with inference, decide that I could

give up the "I" and still be me.

 

But the very fact that I couldn't break into the "I" - myself - will not

allow me to let go of myself. For even I have the same attitude as you that

I'll accept the truth as it is, whatever it may be - even if it's evil. I've

to break into it - it might take a while - but with meditation I'm sure

it'll melt away. And this personal experience of the "I" disappearing, I

think, will but be the same as the result of letting go of the "I" and

meditating.

 

And this answers your posting too Frank - I agree with what you say. As long

as I try actively to find the truth - I'm still only in the vyavahArika

level - when I let go of this effort or when I personally dissolve the Ego

whereby there can be no activity - it's paramArtika. But what's beyond that

....

[Guest guest]

 

nanda chandran [vpcnk]

Monday, November 08, 1999 1:51 PM

advaitin

Re: So Who are you?

 

And this answers your posting too Frank - I agree with what you say. As long

as I try actively to find the truth - I'm still only in the vyavahArika

level - when I let go of this effort or when I personally dissolve the Ego

whereby there can be no activity - it's paramArtika. But what's beyond that.

 

 

Dearest Nandaji,

 

The Sages tell us that we cannot help engage in activity if we are meant

to. Whether that activity is business, some profession, meditation, etc.,

does not matter. I vaguely recall Bhagawan Krishna saying to Arjuna (when he

refused to fight) that Arjuna's own nature would make him fight. Similarly,

anyone whose nature it is to engage in spiritual practice will do so. I do

not know if it is possible by will to let go of any kind of effort or

dissolve the Ego or anything like that. I do know that Grace allows for

letting go. The gap here is subtle and beyond the intellect. Therefore

intellectual answers are not helpful. The words of the great Sage of

Arunachala acted as Grace for me when the moment was ripe. The words of

scriptures are Grace. Our human capacity to have deep faith in those words

and absolute certainty is Grace. Grace Awakens one to what one already has

known and intuited for an eternity, and it is only one's own Self, that

ancients called Sat-Chit-Ananda. Sat-Chit-Ananda is One Whole. The Sat

(Existence) is intuited to some extent or another at all times even through

the veil of the mind. Therefore, the wise say to pay not the attention to

the mind, but to that which animates it. Holding on to that feeling of

existence in the form of "I AM" is one type of pure meditation. Grace

allows for the effort. Grace ends the effort. In the end, all is Grace Only.

 

Harsha

[Guest guest]

Hari OM Nanda,

 

At 10:50 AM 11/8/99 PST, you wrote:

>"nanda chandran" <vpcnk

>

>Dear Tim,

>

>Thanks for your advice. Reading your post, I'm certain that you

>understand what I'm talking about.

>

>Yes, what you say is absolutely right - deep certainity is what is

>needed at this junction. I myself considered it at one point. For in

>essence what I've to do is just be myself without the Ego. But I don't

>think I'm ready for that yet. For how does deep certainity come about -

>from first hand absolute knowledge of something.

 

Sometimes it just comes of itself. From what you said, you made an effort

to get rid of the ego... and that effort either was fruitless, or

reinforced the ego. For who is it that is trying to get rid of the ego?

Ego cannot negate ego. Yet I cannot tell you directly what it is that can

negate it. Focusing on sattva definitely helps -- in a state of

unconditional love, ego is not there. Also in mental concentration, ego is

not there. These are temporary "states," but if you pause while in these

states and notice what's going on, the lack of ego may suddenly come as a

surprise.

>But as I pointed out

>before I wasn't able to break into my "I" sense

 

Do you realize what you said... there was an "I" trying to break into the

"I." That is similar to thinking the thought "I am not thinking right

now." This kind of sadhana is self-defeating :-)

>and that was my

>focal point during my two years of Atma VichAram - and only when I

>couldn't break into it, did I with inference, decide that I could

>give up the "I" and still be me.

 

It may help to examine... why do you want to be you? Is there some fear

associated with the loss of being you?

 

I was just discussing this with someone else, and here is what he said:

>>You are pointing to an interesting phenomenon here - the fear of the "I"

>>sense disappearing. It is based on a fundamental doubt about whether we

>>really exist in the first place, a fear of having nowhere to stand, and a

>>need to be reassured of our solidity at every turn. You've spoken in

detail >>about some earlier experiences in this realm. This *is* a huge

issue. And >>must be confronted by everyone sooner or later, because the

body dies.

 

>But the very fact that I couldn't break into the "I" - myself - will not

>allow me to let go of myself. For even I have the same attitude as you that

>I'll accept the truth as it is, whatever it may be - even if it's evil. I've

>to break into it - it might take a while - but with meditation I'm sure

>it'll melt away.

 

As long as there is no meditator, and no goal in meditation. Meditating

with a goal in mind tends to be fruitless. Meditate for the sake of

meditating, just for the fun of it, and let whatever happens (or does not

happen) be a surprise.

 

With Love,

 

Tim

 

-----

Visit "The Core" Website at http://coresite.cjb.net -

Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics.

Tim's other pages are at http://core.vdirect.net

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

"nanda chandran" <vpcnk wrote

 

"Yes, what you say is absolutely right - deep certainity is what is

needed at this junction. I myself considered it at one point. For in

essence what I've to do is just be myself without the Ego. But I don't think

I'm ready for that yet. For how does deep certainity come about - from first

hand absolute knowledge of something."

 

What one has to understand here is certainty comes only from knowledge and

knowledge comes from a valid means of knowledge. To reveal our true nature

we have to look upon the Vedas as a valid means of knowledge. Otherwise one

has to only live with speculations. Only knowledge leads to Moksha and not

speculation. To look upon the Veda as a valid means of knowledge is called

Shraddha without that there is no knowledge. Thats why Bhagavan Krishna says

in BG 'Shraddhavan labhate jnanam' - 'The one with shraddha gains

knowledge'.

 

Tim has written

 

" Sometimes it just comes of itself. From what you said, you made an effort

to get rid of the ego... and that effort either was fruitless, or reinforced

the ego. For who is it that is trying to get rid of the ego? Ego cannot

negate ego. Yet I cannot tell you directly what it is that can negate it. "

 

I will tell the words of the Vedas and Guru are the means to negate the ego.

When knowledge takes place by repeated vedanta shravanam along with the

world, the knower or the ego also is negated. Here the effort of the seeker

is only upto the listening, but on listening to the words of the guru there

is no will or ego involved in the rise of knowledge or to put it correctly

in the removal of ignorance. This removal of ignorance by the words of the

Guru and Vedas is what is called as Akhanda-akara-vritti or

Brahma-sakshatkara in the tradition.

 

What one should understand is in any knowledge there is no place for the

will or ego because Knowledge is vastutantram or dependent only on the

Object of knowledge. But in contrast Karma or action is Purushatantram or

dependent on the will or ego of the person. For example if one's eye is open

and if I hold a flower in front of that person, just because he does'nt like

that flower he cannot know it differently because knowledge is not dependent

on the will of that person. But if I ask someone to sit he can sit or not

sit or sit later on. So an action is will or ego based but knowledge is

independent of the ego. In fact the problem is the interference or the

refusal of the ego to accept the truth. But that will go away with satsangha

and repeated Vedanta shravana.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar.

[Guest guest]

 

Dave Sirjue [Dave_Sirjue]

Wednesday, November 17, 1999 12:21 PM

advaitin

Cc: auroconf

Re: So Who Are You?

 

"Dave Sirjue" <Dave_Sirjue

 

 

 

[Greg]

>Let me ask you something. You say that:

>> Nobody gets enlightened, sir !

>> It more accurate to say that when enlightenment happens there is no

>>"you" around. "You" don't see or experience anything rather "you" are

>>that experience itself ! "You" are identical to what is happening, there

is

>>no separate watcher or looker, else you would be presuming duality.

>If nobody gets enlightened (which I agree with), then what do you mean by

>the "when enlightenment happens"? Is that an actual occurrence? So we

>have an event instead of a person? How is that any different? Where/how

>would the happening be? Is there somehow a "you" up until that time, but

>not from then on? Does something actually disappear? Did it really exist

>before? Even the thought of the thing? (Thoughts are no less thing-like

>than oranges) If there's really not a "you" after, then how can there be

>one before?

[cut]

 

Dear Greg,

 

Because of the duality of our language, whatever is said about such

deep matters, turns out to be false or distorted, and according to

Hegelian dialectics, for every thesis there is an equal anti-thesis,

which can be logically argued and proven. It eventually boils down

to a game of words and the true experience is missed.

I am tempted to clarify the phrase "when enlightenment happens"

by replacing it with "enlightenment is already the case, not caused"

but this can be equally disputed by some bright novel individual.

 

All your inquiry concerning this "you", is because of our self-

obsession and the fact that we have so much investment in the

ego, we believe in it to the point that we become auto-hypnotised

and there seems to be an apparent "you".

As such, the false has become the real, the dream has become

reality, the shadow has become substance. This is our sad

predicament. Now you may very well ask how do we correct this

error? If this "you" was real then we can actually do something to

remove it. But because it is not real there is nothing we can really

do, in terms of personal effort.

 

Only understanding and a direct penetrative insight is needed,

My understanding of Shankara is that by clearly seeing the point

(its unreality) it vanishes spontaneously, effortlessly.. it automatically

drops off (or surrenders) no effort is needed. Could one then ask

for some method, technique or yoga to drop a shadow, a dream.

You have a good laugh it was all nonsense....but to arrive at

"this moment" requires our understanding to be complete

and perfect. This may take from a split second,as Vashishta tells

Lord Rama, to one or many more lifetimes.

Already we have spent many lifetimes and so few of us has seen

the point.

 

To use an analogy, understanding is like heating water and

enlightenment like the point of evaporation. Understanding takes time

and grows and is equivalent to the heating process from 0-100 deg

but still in the water phase. Enlightenment is sudden and is independent

of time, just as evaporation is a sudden flashover from water to steam

at 100 deg, independent of external heating.

(It may be noted here too, that the boiling state which is a reversible

intermediate state between water and vapor is comparable

to the pseudo-enlightened state called satoRi, where one gets a

glimpse of reality, but due to a lack of full knowledge, it is unsteady,

momentary and reversible.)

During the understanding phase we are called upon to do some

spiritual practices, yoga etc. or more directly to remain alert, aware

or vigilant as to how we entangle and bind ourselves, and then

irresponsibly look to someone else, perhaps a guru, for release.

The guru may be effective in pointing out our crazy game, though.

We must be ever conscious of this habitual self-action, how we

keep clinging and identifying with the familiar transient surface ego,

(thought-forms, imagery, past memories, future dreams and desires)

while avoiding, resisting and fighting the Unknowable moment (Now)

which is really the eternal and permanent part of ourselves.

When we start becoming sensitive and disgusted by this compulsive,

unconscious and obscuring activity, when the confinement of the ego

starts suffocating us, when breakdowns and crisis starts occurring in

our life ....maturity and true viaraGya develops.

Suddenly the evaporation, the point of perfect radical understanding,

complete letting go, total surrender, perfect seeing, the enlightenment,

at a moment's notice, completely independent of time.

 

So with intense perspiration, effort and a burning aspiration, one looks

forward to an early Dawn, as if realization is a gradual logical process,

but also waits patiently knowing that "this" moment is totally

unpredictable and transrational. Mere effort cannot hasten its

realization, since it beyond effort or grasping.

Enlightenment is sudden and ultimately depends on Divine Grace.

 

This is about all I can possibly share with this forum.

Now its time to rest and relax in my native delightful, unformulated

childlike Innocence, listening.....

 

Om shanti, shanti....,

 

~dave

 

 

Hari Om! Hurry Home!

 

Harry

[Guest guest]

At 11:20 AM 11/17/99 -0600, Dave Sirjue wrote:

>Dear Greg,

>Because of the duality of our language, whatever is said about such

>deep matters, turns out to be false or distorted, and according to

>Hegelian dialectics, for every thesis there is an equal anti-thesis,

>which can be logically argued and proven. It eventually boils down

>to a game of words and the true experience is missed.

>I am tempted to clarify the phrase "when enlightenment happens"

>by replacing it with "enlightenment is already the case, not caused"

>but this can be equally disputed by some bright novel individual.

 

This is a fine clarification. That disputer won't be me...

 

>All your inquiry concerning this "you", is because of our self-

>obsession and the fact that we have so much investment in the

>ego, we believe in it to the point that we become auto-hypnotised

>and there seems to be an apparent "you".

 

There do seem to be apparent objects, such as "you's" and "me's" and

"chairs" and "tables," but if they are deeply investigated, they just

cannot be found - their substantiality is seen through, it vanishes in the

sense that it is seen never to have been real (as objects) in the first

place. Their reality, is none other than the Consciousness from which the

objects seem to arise, in which they subsist, and into which subside. As

the great teacher Krishna Menon said, "All nouns - all names - point to the

Abolute."

 

Dave:

>This is about all I can possibly share with this forum.

>Now its time to rest and relax in my native delightful, unformulated

>childlike Innocence, listening.....

 

Thank you for sharing your viewpoint and many analogies.

 

Ragards,

 

--Greg

[Guest guest]

[Greg]

>Let me ask you something. You say that:

>> Nobody gets enlightened, sir !

>> It more accurate to say that when enlightenment happens there is no

>>"you" around. "You" don't see or experience anything rather "you" are

>>that experience itself ! "You" are identical to what is happening, there is

>>no separate watcher or looker, else you would be presuming duality.

>If nobody gets enlightened (which I agree with), then what do you mean by

>the "when enlightenment happens"? Is that an actual occurrence? So we

>have an event instead of a person? How is that any different? Where/how

>would the happening be? Is there somehow a "you" up until that time, but

>not from then on? Does something actually disappear? Did it really exist

>before? Even the thought of the thing? (Thoughts are no less thing-like

>than oranges) If there's really not a "you" after, then how can there be

>one before?

[cut]

 

Dear Greg,

 

Because of the duality of our language, whatever is said about such

deep matters, turns out to be false or distorted, and according to

Hegelian dialectics, for every thesis there is an equal anti-thesis,

which can be logically argued and proven. It eventually boils down

to a game of words and the true experience is missed.

I am tempted to clarify the phrase "when enlightenment happens"

by replacing it with "enlightenment is already the case, not caused"

but this can be equally disputed by some bright novel individual.

 

All your inquiry concerning this "you", is because of our self-

obsession and the fact that we have so much investment in the

ego, we believe in it to the point that we become auto-hypnotised

and there seems to be an apparent "you".

As such, the false has become the real, the dream has become

reality, the shadow has become substance. This is our sad

predicament. Now you may very well ask how do we correct this

error? If this "you" was real then we can actually do something to

remove it. But because it is not real there is nothing we can really

do, in terms of personal effort.

 

Only understanding and a direct penetrative insight is needed,

My understanding of Shankara is that by clearly seeing the point

(its unreality) it vanishes spontaneously, effortlessly.. it automatically

drops off (or surrenders) no effort is needed. Could one then ask

for some method, technique or yoga to drop a shadow, a dream.

You have a good laugh it was all nonsense....but to arrive at

"this moment" requires our understanding to be complete

and perfect. This may take from a split second,as Vashishta tells

Lord Rama, to one or many more lifetimes.

Already we have spent many lifetimes and so few of us has seen

the point.

 

To use an analogy, understanding is like heating water and

enlightenment like the point of evaporation. Understanding takes time

and grows and is equivalent to the heating process from 0-100 deg

but still in the water phase. Enlightenment is sudden and is independent

of time, just as evaporation is a sudden flashover from water to steam

at 100 deg, independent of external heating.

(It may be noted here too, that the boiling state which is a reversible

intermediate state between water and vapor is comparable

to the pseudo-enlightened state called satoRi, where one gets a

glimpse of reality, but due to a lack of full knowledge, it is unsteady,

momentary and reversible.)

During the understanding phase we are called upon to do some

spiritual practices, yoga etc. or more directly to remain alert, aware

or vigilant as to how we entangle and bind ourselves, and then

irresponsibly look to someone else, perhaps a guru, for release.

The guru may be effective in pointing out our crazy game, though.

We must be ever conscious of this habitual self-action, how we

keep clinging and identifying with the familiar transient surface ego,

(thought-forms, imagery, past memories, future dreams and desires)

while avoiding, resisting and fighting the Unknowable moment (Now)

which is really the eternal and permanent part of ourselves.

When we start becoming sensitive and disgusted by this compulsive,

unconscious and obscuring activity, when the confinement of the ego

starts suffocating us, when breakdowns and crisis starts occurring in

our life ....maturity and true viaraGya develops.

Suddenly the evaporation, the point of perfect radical understanding,

complete letting go, total surrender, perfect seeing, the enlightenment,

at a moment's notice, completely independent of time.

 

So with intense perspiration, effort and a burning aspiration, one looks

forward to an early Dawn, as if realization is a gradual logical process,

but also waits patiently knowing that "this" moment is totally

unpredictable and transrational. Mere effort cannot hasten its

realization, since it beyond effort or grasping.

Enlightenment is sudden and ultimately depends on Divine Grace.

 

This is about all I can possibly share with this forum.

Now its time to rest and relax in my native delightful, unformulated

childlike Innocence, listening.....

 

Om shanti, shanti....,

 

~dave