Guest guest Posted December 12, 1999 Report Share Posted December 12, 1999 Dear Maiello, You write: No. moksha is here and now, for the taking. There is no real liberation, or renunciation. As the Maharshi told us, "the only obstacle to Self-realization, is thinking you are bound." in the early going, desire has to be reckoned with. there's a point reached where it however no longer represents gravity, simply because the awareness is seated in the source brahman, and nothing within Its specific projections [in thoughts, words, deeds, etc] can ever again be delimiting. for, such delimitation was ever only a product of erroneous isolated thinking. this is why to refer to oneself as being yet unrealized is simply blunderous, because it is predicated on an isolated habit of perception: the habit of believing in the specific dictates of the internal thought stream. ----------------- Although this appears paradoxical, it is true. Quoting from "The Science of Enlightenment" (see homepage:http://personal.vsnl.com/ntrasi) -------------------- Why do the Masters sometimes say that actually speaking, everyone is already Enlightened? ".. everyone is in fact Self-realised." (Sri Ramana Maharshi). The average person believes that `he' is a separate entity over and above, and apart from the body-mind complex. In reality no such entity exists, and we have defined Enlightenment as the (intuitive) understanding of this very truth. But when the average person hears about this, his immediate reaction is to think of (and pursue) Enlightenment as something to be achieved by or for the entity that he believes himself to be. The original (erroneous) idea that he is a separate entity, is further qualified by yet another idea that he is an `unenlightened' entity. This is a double fallacy. That is why he may become even more miserable than another person who is not bothered about Enlightenment at all (see `Spiritual Suffering,' Chapter 3). It is to clear this double fallacy that the Master tries to point out that there are no unenlightened beings or entities, because there are no separate entities at all in the first place (see Buddha's answer, Ch.6). The truth is that there are no entities - either Enlightened or unenlightened. There is the fact of Enlightenment, but this occurs not `to' an `entity,' it occurs in a body-mind complex or unit. The statement `all are already Enlightened' implies that if (as the average man thinks), Enlightenment is considered to be the disappearance of the entity, then it already exists, because there are no entities - there never were any. (But of course if Enlightenment is defined as the disappearance of the illusion of the entity in a body-mind unit, as we have defined it, then all body-mind units could not be considered as Enlightened). ----------------- Best wishes, Nitin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 12, 1999 Report Share Posted December 12, 1999 Hi :-) Thankyou Nitin for this wonderful quote & sharing. Nitin Trasi wrote: > Dear Maiello, > > You write: > No. moksha is here and now, for the taking. There is no real liberation, or renunciation. As the Maharshi told us, "the only obstacle to Self-realization, is thinking you are bound." Yes thought is a bad habit of self condemnation usually. What a pity! :-) So much suffering. I guess this is reminding me not to take to heart too much, when polarity challenges present themselves. If I can only allow it All as perfect, I will suffer less. > in the early going, desire has to be reckoned > with. there's a point reached where it however > no longer represents gravity, simply because > the awareness is seated in the source brahman, > and nothing within Its specific projections > [in thoughts, words, deeds, etc] can ever again > be delimiting. for, such delimitation was ever > only a product of erroneous isolated thinking. > > this is why to refer to oneself as being yet > unrealized is simply blunderous, because it is > predicated on an isolated habit of perception: > the habit of believing in the specific dictates > of the internal thought stream. > ----------------- A habit ~ a contraction to seek to find, even when found, can keep you playing more suffering :-). I'm good at that! > Although this appears paradoxical, it is true. Quoting from "The Science of Enlightenment" (see homepage:http://personal.vsnl.com/ntrasi) > -------------------- > Why do the Masters sometimes say that actually speaking, everyone is already Enlightened? > > ".. everyone is in fact Self-realised." (Sri Ramana Maharshi). Thanks for the reminder. > The average person believes that `he' is a separate entity over and above, and apart from the body-mind complex. In reality no such entity exists, and we have defined Enlightenment as the (intuitive) understanding of this very truth. But when the average person hears about this, his immediate reaction is to think of (and pursue) Enlightenment as something to be achieved by or for the entity that he believes himself to be. The original (erroneous) idea that he is a separate entity, is further qualified by yet another idea that he is an `unenlightened' entity. This is a double fallacy. Yes this is enough to make me giggle. I have needed some writings to help me learn to not resist knowing I Am free, & to help 'me' trust depersonalisation. Last night I found myself to an Andrew Cohen video sharing & I like it! This is new to me. He is actually brave enough to call his fellowship the Impersonal Enlightenment Fellowship! He speaks of a choiceless realisation that comes, I guess after much devotion has readied you for Grace's Gift. But then after That Glimpse (or shattering), there is need for consciously choosing to let go the habit of seeking to retrain the mind I guess. I guess this pure ego we mentioned still uses mind to express through. Some talk of no ego, or ego death, & even no mind. So I still wonder sometimes ... > That is why he may become even more miserable than another person who is not bothered about Enlightenment at all (see `Spiritual Suffering,' Chapter 3). It is to clear this double fallacy that the Master tries to point out that there are no unenlightened beings or entities, because there are no separate entities at all in the first place (see Buddha's answer, Ch.6). > The truth is that there are no entities - either Enlightened or unenlightened. There is the fact of Enlightenment, but this occurs not `to' an `entity,' it occurs in a body-mind complex or unit. Hmm ... good to ponder & hits persona on the head as a myth! Oh dear! > The statement `all are already Enlightened' implies that if (as the average man thinks), Enlightenment is considered to be the disappearance of the entity, then it already exists, because there are no entities - there never were any. > > (But of course if Enlightenment is defined as the disappearance of the illusion of the entity in a body-mind unit, as we have defined it, then all body-mind units could not be considered as Enlightened). > > ----------------- > > Best wishes, > > Nitin Thanks Nitin this is good stuff! I would like to hear more. Best, Col 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.