Guest guest Posted September 6, 2002 Report Share Posted September 6, 2002 I think Sadaji and Ramji are perhaps being a little hard on the Direct Path teachers. I do not think that the well-respected Sages in this 'tradition' claim that we really just sit back and let enlightenment happen. In the chapter on Direct Path in my book, one of the paragraphs reads as follows: "Having presumably read what has gone before, the logic of Direct Path must now be inescapable to the reader. If the Reality is that there is only One, then this must be eternal and permanent, i.e. 'we' must already be it. Therefore, nothing needs to be done or can be done; we just need to acquire the knowledge and then have the direct experience that this is indeed the case. What seems to happen, however, is that our present state of ignorance is such that all of our conditioning and prior experience means that we are unable to come to terms with this immediately. Instead we must follow such 'paths' as have been described earlier, in order to prepare our minds and intellect for the simple acceptance that there is truly nothing to be done. In a sense it is an 'unlearning', a return to innocence, which is why paths such as bhakti - worshipping a non-existent God - can work. It requires a surrendering of all of our claims that we are autonomous individuals, able to make decisions, to act and to enjoy the results of those actions. Not until all such notions have been given up do we become 'ripe' to acknowledge the truth and drop our mistaken notions of separate existence." I feel that, for myself at least - and we must each follow our individual nature - it is valuable to be told repeatedly that we are already the Self NOW. The way in which Sages such as Ramana Maharshi, Nisargatta and Krisnamenon put this message across embodies the best of the intellectual material from the shruti. Any words of wisdom conveying this truth have the potential to strike home and wipe away some of the ignorance that covers this up. That they may not be advocating the more traditional 'paths' to this recognition should not be allowed to detract from their value. I, for one, shall be joining the DirectPath group. In fact, I confess, I already have and there is a truly excellent summary of Jean Klein's life and work, with many quotations from his dialogues, downloadable from the 'files' section. I have only had a quick scan through so far but here is one bit I picked up: "Our profound desire is to be and this desire comes from being, itself. When you give all your love, all your intelligence and earnestness to this desire it brings you to what you most desire: desirelessness. Desire is the shadow which, if you follow it, brings you to its substance. But you must give all your love to it or you remain with only the shadow desire. A real truth-seeker is impelled by Truth itself. The momentum comes from Truth. All other attainment belongs to the mind, to ideas, to aspirations. There is nothing wrong with desire, but it must be clear, have gone through discrimination." Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2002 Report Share Posted September 6, 2002 I just learned from new member Dennis Waite that there is a file with some great quotes and biographical info about Jean Klein on the Direct Approach website, which a former member posted back in March. (Hey, what do I know, I'm only the moderator!) Thanks, Dennis! Hey, next time somebody puts something up there, let the list know, OK? Check it out: DirectApproach Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2002 Report Share Posted September 6, 2002 Hi Dennis-ji, In fact, in your book Dennis, I seem to remember that you attribute the "direct path" to Ramana Maharshi. Of course the direct/indirect distinction is as insubstantial as any other distinction. In every kind of path, lots of distinctions are made, and it seems clear that you don't mean this direct/indirect to be any more profound or meaningful than any other. One way to look at it is like this. It reflects Sadananda-ji's comments about how formal advaita-vedanta is taught in the sampradya, as well as my observations of those on Jean Klein and Atmananda's kind of path: The direct path is effective and direct. But mostly for those who have done previous work on the indirect path. :-) All contradictions and nonsensicalities acknowledged! OM! --Greg At 09:05 PM 9/6/02 +0100, Dennis Waite wrote: >I think Sadaji and Ramji are perhaps being a little hard on the Direct Path >teachers. I do not think that the well-respected Sages in this 'tradition' >claim that we really just sit back and let enlightenment happen. In the >chapter on Direct Path in my book, one of the paragraphs reads as follows: > >"Having presumably read what has gone before, the logic of Direct Path must >now be inescapable to the reader. If the Reality is that there is only One, >then this must be eternal and permanent, i.e. 'we' must already be it. >Therefore, nothing needs to be done or can be done; we just need to acquire >the knowledge and then have the direct experience that this is indeed the >case. What seems to happen, however, is that our present state of ignorance >is such that all of our conditioning and prior experience means that we are >unable to come to terms with this immediately. Instead we must follow such >'paths' as have been described earlier, in order to prepare our minds and >intellect for the simple acceptance that there is truly nothing to be done. >In a sense it is an 'unlearning', a return to innocence, which is why paths >such as bhakti - worshipping a non-existent God - can work. It requires a >surrendering of all of our claims that we are autonomous individuals, able >to make decisions, to act and to enjoy the results of those actions. Not >until all such notions have been given up do we become 'ripe' to acknowledge >the truth and drop our mistaken notions of separate existence." > >I feel that, for myself at least - and we must each follow our individual >nature - it is valuable to be told repeatedly that we are already the Self >NOW. The way in which Sages such as Ramana Maharshi, Nisargatta and >Krisnamenon put this message across embodies the best of the intellectual >material from the shruti. Any words of wisdom conveying this truth have the >potential to strike home and wipe away some of the ignorance that covers >this up. That they may not be advocating the more traditional 'paths' to >this recognition should not be allowed to detract from their value. > >I, for one, shall be joining the DirectPath group. In fact, I confess, I >already have and there is a truly excellent summary of Jean Klein's life and >work, with many quotations from his dialogues, downloadable from the 'files' >section. I have only had a quick scan through so far but here is one bit I >picked up: > >"Our profound desire is to be and this desire comes from being, itself. >When you give all your love, all your intelligence and earnestness to this >desire it brings you to what you most desire: desirelessness. Desire is the >shadow which, if you follow it, brings you to its substance. But you must >give all your love to it or you remain with only the shadow desire. A real >truth-seeker is impelled by Truth itself. The momentum comes from Truth. >All other attainment belongs to the mind, to ideas, to aspirations. > >There is nothing wrong with desire, but it must be clear, have gone through >discrimination." >Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2002 Report Share Posted September 6, 2002 Sorry, I obviously sent this to the wrong list! Mark I just learned from new member Dennis Waite that there is a file with some great quotes and biographical info about Jean Klein on the Direct Approach website, which a former member posted back in March. (Hey, what do I know, I'm only the moderator!) Thanks, Dennis! Hey, next time somebody puts something up there, let the list know, OK? Check it out: DirectApproach Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2002 Report Share Posted September 6, 2002 advaitin, Gregory Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > > The direct path is effective and direct. > But mostly for those who have done previous > work on the indirect path. :-) > > All contradictions and nonsensicalities acknowledged! Namaste, As Sri Ramakrishna said, 'the tadpole can become an amphibian frog only after it sheds its tail (of ego)!' Or, the the butterfly can't fly till the caterpillar sheds its body! Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 7, 2002 Report Share Posted September 7, 2002 I would just like to back up something pointed out by Mark in his responses to Ram and Harsha in the last digest. He said: "But we already KNOW the location, as you point out: "I am Brahman." The problem is that we would rather play around in our minds than face this truth. Give me a mantra, give me a technique, give me something to play with, but don't ask me to actually look at myself! Yes, it is not easy, because we are so attached to this supposed separate identity. And yes indeed, we need help. We need somebody to point out the truth of our situation, not someone to dispense lollipops to keep us happy. And again, nothing wrong with mantras and other techniques. But if we don't simultaneously face the truth about ourselves (self-inquiry, surrender, abandoning doership, renouncing the fruit of our actions, etc.), they may do more harm than good, strengthening the ego rather than destroying it. This is the essence of Jean Klein's criticism of the gradual path. I think it is far more dangerous to undertake a practice with the idea of achieving something, acquiring something. How could this do anything but strengthen the ego? Again, I am not saying not to practice. I have my own practices, and I assume that most people do. But if I am doing my practice with the motive to attain something, it will be useless." This is exactly what happens. I observed it on a big scale in the SES Organisation in England (Philosophy Foundation in US), to which I belonged for about 15 years. Some people had been members for 30 years or more but all that had happened is that their egos had been adapted into ones that fitted in well with the style of teaching and practice. 'Strengthening' is in fact a good term here - they became very strong people, very sure of their methods and their ultimate efficacy. Of the many thousands that have passed through the organisation in its existence of more than half-a-century, however, I am not aware of any recorded 'enlightenment'. They were all convinced that 'they' were going somewhere and that there was somewhere to go. They were also unreceptive to the sort of statements associated with Direct Path. Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 7, 2002 Report Share Posted September 7, 2002 Dear Dennisji, Isn't that too much to ask for? Documentation for enlightenment? Light cannot be enlightened? In that sense, I don't think we also cannot be enlightened. Anyway, I am also there behind you on this Direct Path. If you just turn around, you can see me winking at you mschievously. Let us take the stride easy and enjoy as we are light and light is the lightest thing known. By the way, the word enlightenment reminds me of a simile I thought of for advaitic englightenment. Just imagine a big floodlit stadium. There are bulbs all around lighting up an on-going cricket match. Suddenly, one of the bulbs, that was perhaps meditating for a long while, oblivious of Sachin Tendulkar and his gang, lost its "bulbiness" or "bulbship" or whatever, and simply dissolved into being light and "realized" that it was just light and that there existed only light and no more any bulbs. Will the other bulbs that are engrossed in the game and wagering on the English and Indian teams ever know that a fool among them has just become Buddha? Will they have a record of it? So, losing bulbiness and being light, which any way we are, is enlightenment. There are no more any unreceptive bulbs around us then. There is a cricket game going on. Let me watch it please. Best of luck and best regards. Englightened Madathil Nair advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@a...> wrote: Of the many thousands that have > passed through the organisation in its existence of more than > half-a-century, however, I am not aware of any recorded 'enlightenment'. > They were all convinced that 'they' were going somewhere and that there was > somewhere to go. They were also unreceptive to the sort of statements > associated with Direct Path. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 8, 2002 Report Share Posted September 8, 2002 Nice simely ...I got it Thanks madathilnair wrote:Dear Dennisji, Isn't that too much to ask for? Documentation for enlightenment? Light cannot be enlightened? In that sense, I don't think we also cannot be enlightened. Anyway, I am also there behind you on this Direct Path. If you just turn around, you can see me winking at you mschievously. Let us take the stride easy and enjoy as we are light and light is the lightest thing known. By the way, the word enlightenment reminds me of a simile I thought of for advaitic englightenment. Just imagine a big floodlit stadium. There are bulbs all around lighting up an on-going cricket match. Suddenly, one of the bulbs, that was perhaps meditating for a long while, oblivious of Sachin Tendulkar and his gang, lost its "bulbiness" or "bulbship" or whatever, and simply dissolved into being light and "realized" that it was just light and that there existed only light and no more any bulbs. Will the other bulbs that are engrossed in the game and wagering on the English and Indian teams ever know that a fool among them has just become Buddha? Will they have a record of it? So, losing bulbiness and being light, which any way we are, is enlightenment. There are no more any unreceptive bulbs around us then. There is a cricket game going on. Let me watch it please. Best of luck and best regards. Englightened Madathil Nair advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@a...> wrote: Of the many thousands that have > passed through the organisation in its existence of more than > half-a-century, however, I am not aware of any recorded 'enlightenment'. > They were all convinced that 'they' were going somewhere and that there was > somewhere to go. They were also unreceptive to the sort of statements > associated with Direct Path. Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Finance - Get real-time stock quotes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 8, 2002 Report Share Posted September 8, 2002 advaitin, Gregory Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > Hi Dennis-ji, > > In fact, in your book Dennis, I seem to remember that you attribute the "direct path" to Ramana Maharshi.....snip.... ***************************** Dear Sri Greg-ji: Devotees and yogi adepts with more than a passing familiarity with Bhagavan Sri Ramana's teachings prefer to rely on the words of the Sage of Arunachala Himself and not on interpretations given by others. Sri Frankji noted some time ago that those who are seriously interested in Sri Ramana should spend not only time reading the dialogues and what the Maharshi wrote, but also the practical everyday interactions Bhagavan had with devotees and non-devotees. Again, I think everyone should pursue the path that feels natural to them. Sri Ramana often asked the people who came to the Ashram about their present mode of spritual practice and supported whatever they were doing and told them to pursue it until the end. Love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 8, 2002 Report Share Posted September 8, 2002 Hari OM! Blessed Self, Only an Enlightened one can completely appreciate or recognize another enlightened, it is like asking the exact time you slept. This is totally another state of consciousness, whcih cannot be explained as the Sweetness in the Sugar, Only we have to eat sugar to know the sweetness, it cannot be explained through words. With Love & OM! Krishna Prasad --- madathilnair <madathilnair wrote: > Dear Dennisji, > > Isn't that too much to ask for? Documentation for enlightenment? > Light cannot be enlightened? In that sense, I don't think we also > cannot be enlightened. > > Anyway, I am also there behind you on this Direct Path. If you > just > turn around, you can see me winking at you mschievously. Let us > take > the stride easy and enjoy as we are light and light is the lightest > > thing known. > > By the way, the word enlightenment reminds me of a simile I thought > > of for advaitic englightenment. Just imagine a big floodlit > stadium. There are bulbs all around lighting up an on-going > cricket > match. Suddenly, one of the bulbs, that was perhaps meditating for > a > long while, oblivious of Sachin Tendulkar and his gang, lost > its "bulbiness" or "bulbship" or whatever, and simply dissolved > into > being light and "realized" that it was just light and that there > existed only light and no more any bulbs. Will the other bulbs > that > are engrossed in the game and wagering on the English and Indian > teams ever know that a fool among them has just become Buddha? > Will > they have a record of it? > > So, losing bulbiness and being light, which any way we are, is > enlightenment. There are no more any unreceptive bulbs around us > then. > > There is a cricket game going on. Let me watch it please. > > Best of luck and best regards. > > Englightened Madathil Nair > > > > advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@a...> wrote: > > Of the many thousands that have > > passed through the organisation in its existence of more than > > half-a-century, however, I am not aware of any > recorded 'enlightenment'. > > They were all convinced that 'they' were going somewhere and that > > there was > > somewhere to go. They were also unreceptive to the sort of > statements > > associated with Direct Path. > > > Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 8, 2002 Report Share Posted September 8, 2002 Namaste. Thank you, Krishna Prasad-Ji. I am fully with you. However, please don't ever say enlightenment is "totally another state of consciousness". There is no state like we say solid state, liquid state, conscious state, unconscious state etc. Enlightenment is knowing that there have never been any states at all and all appreciation of states resulted from ignorance (which incidentally had also never existed in the true sense). Pranams. Madathil Nair ____________________ advaitin, Krishna Prasad <rkrishp99> wrote: > Only an Enlightened one can completely appreciate or recognize > another enlightened, it is like asking the exact time you slept. This > is totally another state of consciousness, whcih cannot be explained > as the Sweetness in the Sugar, Only we have to eat sugar to know the > sweetness, it cannot be explained through words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 9, 2002 Report Share Posted September 9, 2002 Dear Madathil, You said: << Dear Dennisji, Isn't that too much to ask for? Documentation for enlightenment? Light cannot be enlightened? In that sense, I don't think we also cannot be enlightened.>> I did put the word 'enlightenment' in quotation marks! ("I am not aware of any recorded 'enlightenment'.") It does not seem to matter how many times it is pointed out that we can never ultimately discuss reality with the use of words, people still pull up others for the use of particular expressions. This just happened on the 'Million Paths' list, where someone (who, I believe, is also a member of this list) pulled me up for a quotation that used the word 'being'. The following was my response: << But (since 'we' are communicating on this group) we are obliged to use words. Even 'nirguna brahman' or 'truth' are just words - dualising concepts and ultimately meaningless. 'Non-being', too, is only an attribute. I suggest that we all tacitly accept all of this and don't quibble over the various ways that Sages (and we) have of expressing them-(our)selves. To quote the last few paras. of Wittgenstein's Tractatus: 6.522 There are, indeed, things that cannot be put into words. They make themselves manifest. They are what is mystical. 6.53 The correct method in philosophy would really be the following: to say nothing except what can be said, i.e. propositions of natural science - i.e. something that has nothing to do with philosophy - and then, whenever someone else wanted to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had failed to give a meaning to certain signs in his propositions. Although it would not be satisfying to the other person - he would not have the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy - this method would be the only strictly correct one. 6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognises them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.) 7 What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence. >> I'm not really getting at you, Madathil, I know your 'complaint' was light-hearted, but I do think it is worth making this point again in the hope that we might reduce the frequency of this sort of objection. It is clearly important that everyone knows what we are talking about but, as long as this is the case, the precise words that we use when attempting to talk about something that is beyond words does not really matter. I'll let you get back to your cricket now! I also feel I should say something to Sadananda, too. I have a little trepidation about this, however - after all, he is the chief moderator at present! Dear Sadananda, About your response to Mark on the subject of Direct Path - I think you were over-reacting. I believe the post was in good faith, not attempting to 'push' a particular 'path' but making a genuine contribution perfectly in the spirit of the Advaitin 'constitution'. Having spent many years studying both traditional and direct viewpoints, I firmly believe that we can all learn something from both. Mark's views were expressed respectfully and uncontroversially, I thought and I, for one was interested in what he had to say. Hope you don't mind my saying this and I acknowledge, of course, that any response is your decision. All the best, Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 9, 2002 Report Share Posted September 9, 2002 Dear Dennisji. I am very talkative when it comes to vedanta and was just trying to be jovial with you sprinkling a bit of advaita here and there. I know where you stand and your vedantic acumen is never in doubt. I am, therefore, very sorry that you felt "pulled up" by my words. Will endeavour my best to be careful in future. Thanks for your frankness. Your quote of Wittgenstein is very educative. Incidentally, I know a renowned vedanta teacher who studiously avoids the use of adjectives, even at the cost of compromising his extraordinary eloquence, when it comes to speaking about the Truth because Truth is beyond attributes. He has been marvellously successful and very effective as evident from the adulation he receives from his listeners. Yesterday, I posted a message "objecting" to the use of the word "state" by our Shri Krishna Prasadji in reference to Consciousness. I would not have done that today. My apologies to Shri Krishna Prasadji for being intemperate and thanks to you again, Dennisji, for opening my eyes to the human side of things. Best of best regards. Madathil Nair ______________________________ advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@a...> wrote: It does not seem to matter how many times it is pointed out that we can > never ultimately discuss reality with the use of words, people still pull up > others for the use of particular expressions. .................. > I'm not really getting at you, Madathil, I know your 'complaint' was > light-hearted, but I do think it is worth making this point again in the > hope that we might reduce the frequency of this sort of objection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2002 Report Share Posted September 10, 2002 --- Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote: > > Dear Sadananda, > > About your response to Mark on the subject of Direct Path - I think > you were > over-reacting. I believe the post was in good faith, not attempting > to > 'push' a particular 'path' but making a genuine contribution > perfectly in > the spirit of the Advaitin 'constitution'. Having spent many years > studying > both traditional and direct viewpoints, I firmly believe that we > can all > learn something from both. Mark's views were expressed respectfully > and > uncontroversially, I thought and I, for one was interested in what > he had to > say. Hope you don't mind my saying this and I acknowledge, of > course, that > any response is your decision. > > All the best, > > Dennis > Thanks Dennis for your note. I do not have any problems in discussing any paths but I was concerned about two things - One is implied or expressed that there is something new in the so called direct approachs which are essentially what Veda-s proclaimed too in no uncertain terms. Second a false impression that the direct approaches supercedes any sadhana that is required for purification. It gives a false impression that study of scriptures is unnecessory or any other yoga-s are waste of time. I did not mean Mark meant these and mine was a note of caution if you look hack from my post one, and it is intended to bring attention of the pit falls in these without correct understanding of the role of yoga or sadhana. This is from my own personal experience and hence, to start with, my note was only a word of caution. In my next post I explined in detail the dangers involved in trying to teach direct path across the board, which as you recognize requires a subtle frame of mind. This is one of the reasons why Veda-s insists on the qualifications for not only a teacher but to student also. Shravana is the direct path but works only if the mind is ready - as you went though Brahmasuutra notes, mananam and nidhidhyaasanam are required before words - tat tvam asi can work. And even to come to this stage, the a degree of detachement along with viveka and vairaagya are required to pursue any path particularly that which is so subtle. Kenopanishad startes with the direct path for those who are mature but in the third chapter goes into story form for those who need lot more for contemplation and meditation. There is a lot of misguided notion that sadhana is a path and truth is a path less land. As you are aware any discipline of the mind is meant for purifciation or preparation for the knowledge to take place - this is true in the objective science and more so when the object of inquiry is the very subject itself, deep routed with wrong notions about oneself. My second post explained in detail where the problem lies. When Mark followed up that there is nothing dangerous and he is going to advocate the path (he may not mean what I thought he meant), I have to put the hat of chief moderator to insists that this forum cannot be used for that kind of advocacy. He may not mean the way it came acorss the me. My note is nothing against Mark but just to remainder to all that very purpose of this list serve, so that there is no derailment. Now let us go back to study and I was planning to continue from Suutra 5, and realize that I have to summarize for own mind what has been discussed so far. I am doing review of the notes and in the process rewriting the summary of the notes. I will start positng summary soon. By the by how is penny? Still remember with fond memories the wonderful time I had. A note to Mark - Mark I donot mean to sound harsh - this is nothing against you. The truth is self-evident all the time and immediate since any mediation by definition is limited and cannot lead to knowledge of the infinite. But all paths are for purification of the mind and the nature of purification depends on the quality of the mind. Minds are divergest and yoga-s are means for purification. There cannot be one medicine for all patients. Any impression that gives that there is some direct path which takes one directly to goal compared to others is obviously due to lack of recognition of the qualifications of the students. It is not that Vedic teachers did not know this - they were extremely careful to whom it is tought. You may not recognzie the dangers involved. That is why I gave my own example since I was there in the same lot going after a direct path which led me no where since my mind was not ready. Let us continue our study of the scriptures since as you mentioned that is the purpose of your joining the list.You are indeed blessed if you mind is subtle enough to pursue the direct path. My best wishes in your pursuit. With Pranaams to all. Sada ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. - We Remember 9-11: A tribute to the more than 3,000 lives lost http://dir.remember./tribute Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2002 Report Share Posted September 10, 2002 Namaste Sadanandaji: In a recent post, Sri Dennis was of the opinion that you and me were too harsh in our replies to Sri Mark. I am happy to see your appropriate reply to the concerns raised by Sri Dennis. Let me add some additional comments in support of the views expressed by you. These comments may also serve as additional clarifications regarding my position on this important issue. First, it should be pointed out that none of the posts of Sri Mark was ever moderated and were released to the members without any reservation. This list always entertained opposite points of views and will continue to do so as long as the poster is civil. As a matter of fact, Sri Mark has conducted his discussions appropriately even though several of us do not agree with his contention. Second, list members should be aware about the list policies and guidelines (as correctly pointed out by the Chief Moderator, Sri Sadananda) and this list focuses the discussions using the framework of Sankaracharya's advaita Vedanta philosophy. I fully respect the judgement of Sri Sadananda on contesting viewpoints and related issues and I believe that he has thorough knowledge of advaita Vedanta philosophy as postulated by Sankara. Also the list moderators come from different background and we recognize the plausibility for other viewpoints come with a different framework. All approaches including the so-called 'Direct Approach' have been discussed with an open mind. But the posters are reminded that such postings are for the purpose of information and they have only limited scope for additional discussions in this list. With the Internet revolution, do entertain thousands of mailing list groups with various philosophical ideas. Every list under the has a different scope and purpose and members interested in specific topics always have a choice to join and enjoy those discussions. But there is no reason for continued discussions that do not fall within the scope of this list. Reasonable people will agree that for the welfare of all concerned, we are better off to discuss topics pertain to this list scope and fall within the list policies. We do fully respect the opinions of Sri Mark and we do not necessarily agree with his contention. Third, Sri Mark has already posted several postings inviting members of this list to join the 'DirectApproach list.' Such information is quite relevant because some interested members such as Sri Dennis were able to join the new list to get new insights. It should be pointed out that not everyone in this list is interested in getting insights different from Shankara's approach. This list has entertained in the past many such informational posts on lists related to 'nonduality' and related topics and will continue to encourage such informational posts. Now let come back to some issues on the philosophical side of the 'neovedantic' approaches. The pitfalls of 'lightening speed self- realization approaches' have been well documented and we have no intention to debate them in this list. All such debates will divert the focus of this list and more than that such debates can never resolve contentional issues. As for as I can see, Sri Ramana's approach of Self-awareness closely resembles the 'Direct Approach.' At the same time, we do need to understand that Ramana's approach is the most difficult and self-awareness requires the supremum of devotion, dedication, discipline and single mindedness. Ramana at a young age from Madurai (my hometown) to Arunachalam (Thiruvannamalai) and surrendered his body and soul to temple deity. For several years, people were unaware of his whereabouts and finally found him in a cave near the temple. How many of us are prepared to leave everything that we possess (most importantly our BIG EGO) and focus our thoughts on the 'SELF.' This is the direct approach as I understand but to get to this stage we do need gradual development of our spirituality. Ramana had strange experiences and with the full grace of the Jyoti (Light) of Arunachala, he was able to continue his Self-Enquiry. In Hindu terminology, Ramana's Self-enquiry is also known as "Tabas – Deep Meditation." Great Rishis have undertaken the Tabas to get rid of all the impurities and became the Self-realized souls. We should be reminded that Tabas is always conducted without any expectation what so ever and is impossible for one to continue without His Grace. Finally, human life is mystical and we have no way of finding the mystics until we succeed in knowing the Brahman. Just by saying, "I am Brahman" one will not become the Brahman. Human life requires preparation for small and big things that we want to achieve. For example, when we take our journey by Air, the plane undergoes gradual preparation before it finally takes off! The rackets that fly from Kennedy Space Center needs also lots of preparation before the actual flight. There is nothing in our life that can be accomplished without preparation. At the same time we do need to recognize that preparations alone may not yield the result that we are looking for. This has been well recognized by the scriptures and in Gita the role of our efforts is well stated in clear terms in the verse describing the Karma Yoga (Chapter 2, Verse 47). According to Gita, it is essential that we should do our best in all our actions and we should also recognize that our efforts alone will not guarantee the results that we are looking for. Ideally, we should act spontaneously and accept the fruits of our action with equanimity. Sometime, the fruit may be sweet and at other times it can be sour or bitter. When we prepare ourselves to go to sleep, we fail to go to sleep in spite of all our efforts. Sometimes when we take all efforts not to go to sleep, we ended up in sleep in spite of heavy doses of Caffeine and other means. This is part of the `mAyA' of human life and the controller of mAyA doesn't want reveal His presence! Warmest regards, Ram Chandrran advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada> wrote: > Thanks Dennis for your note. I do not have any problems in > discussing any paths but I was concerned about two things - One is > implied or expressed that there is something new in the so called > direct approachs which are essentially what Veda-s proclaimed too in > no uncertain terms. ........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2002 Report Share Posted September 11, 2002 My thanks to Ram and Sadananda for clarifying the stance of the moderators on this topic and I am entirely in agreement. The group clearly exists for expressing and discussing the teaching according to Shankara and aspects of other approaches to the extent that these shed light on the essential subject. To this extent, I for one agree to keep the emphasis of any of my posts in line with these guidelines and retain any direct 'advocacy' for other groups! You have pointed out ways in which the classic teaching has already made similar statements and how it can highlight the potential pitfalls of any so-called 'direct approach'. I would just like to suggest that the converse applies equally. Statements by acknowledged Direct Path Sages can throw light upon traditional approaches and also warn of possible, dare I say, complacencies. Sri Ram made the following statements in his last response: "The pitfalls of 'lightening speed self-realization approaches' have been well documented." and then goes on to say: "Human life requires preparation for small and big things that we want to achieve... There is nothing in our life that can be accomplished without preparation. At the same time we do need to recognize that preparations alone may not yield the result that we are looking for... According to Gita, it is essential that we should do our best in all our actions and we should also recognize that our efforts alone will not guarantee the results that we are looking for." I firmly believe that many of us, on the traditional path, do have such beliefs. Not only do we use such words colloquially, we also think them and effectively follow them, even though we would acknowledge intellectually that they cannot be true, according to Shankara's teaching. We do nothing. Therefore we cannot achieve anything. While we are looking for results we are not even following the path of karma yoga, let alone j~nAna. It can only ever be the ego that is looking for results and the ego does not exist. While we are looking outwards for external consequences, we cannot be looking inwards, wherein lies the truth. And so on... I know that you know all of this - I do not want to sound patronising. My point is that we cannot be told this too often because we continually revert to the habitual way of thinking. The supreme value of the so-called Direct Approaches is that they repeatedly spell this out! All the best, Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2002 Report Share Posted September 11, 2002 Namaste Sri Dennis; Let me first thank you for expressing your opinions wholeheartedly and I appreciate your comment and wisdom. Though I am agreement with your concluding statements, some caveats may become necessary. Your statement, "We do nothing. Therefore we cannot achieve anything ..." is quite correct if we are "Perfect Yogis" but while sailing through the 'Samsara Saharam' we face a different reality and fully absorbed by the spell of mAyA. The spell of mAyA brings a different attitude and influences our behavior as though we have Ego and as though we are doing something to achieve a prescribed goal. Shankara postulates that our ignorance is the cause of all notions (including that of yoga, karma, jnana and finally the vedantic philosophy). We can fully restore our 'full wisdom' or our 'True Divine Nature' if and only if discards all the notions empowered by the spell of mAyA. Honestly, even this discussion is due to the spell of 'mAyA.' Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@a...> wrote: > My thanks to Ram and Sadananda for clarifying the stance of the moderators on this topic and I am entirely in agreement. ... >.... > ... > We do nothing. Therefore we cannot achieve anything. While we are looking > for results we are not even following the path of karma yoga, let alone > j~nAna. It can only ever be the ego that is looking for results and the ego > does not exist. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2002 Report Share Posted September 11, 2002 advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote: > We can fully restore our 'full wisdom' or > our 'True Divine Nature' if and only if discards all the notions > empowered by the spell of mAyA. Honestly, even this discussion is due > to the spell of 'mAyA.' Namaste, If anyone thinks the 'Direct Approach' is s.l..o...w...., there is a "The 'Fast Track' to Enlightenment"! at URL: http://community-2.webtv.net/yogafarm/NetiYoga/ Regards, Sunder 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.