Hindu Article-Self must be experienced

[Guest guest]

Self must be experienced

 

 

CHENNAI: An individual evinces interest in spirituality as a result

of meritorious deeds performed over several lives; otherwise, he will

remain preoccupied with the objective world pandering to his five

senses. Why is engagement with the world said to be detrimental to

spiritual life? The world that is apparent to human faculties is in a

state of constant flux while spirituality is the search for that

which is eternal underlying all the phenomena.

In his discourse, Swami Atmashraddhananda said the Self (Atman) was

eternal and it revealed itself only to whom it chose. Thus there is

an element of uncertainty. This is interpreted as God's grace because

even if a spiritual aspirant is steadfast in his pursuit, the Self

reveals itself only when it wishes to. Self-knowledge cannot be

gained as one would any other secular knowledge from secondary

sources, the reason being that it is a matter of direct experience.

The Katha Upanishad reiterates this truth, "This Self cannot be

attained through exposition, nor through intellectual power, nor even

through vast learning. He whom alone this (Self) accepts, by him it

is to be attained. To him this Self reveals its own nature." The

instrument (human personality) has to be refined to intuit the Self

and spiritual practices are the methods to fine-tune it.

On the face of it, it is difficult to believe that there is an

underlying Reality beneath the entire phenomenon that is apparent to

the senses and so an individual finds it difficult to believe in his

divine nature. Man feels miserable because instead of identifying

with the Self he identifies with his body-mind-intellect personality

and his possessions. So a spiritual seeker must learn to withdraw

from the external world of the senses into the inner world of the

Self, which according to the Upanishads, "is waiting to be

discovered."

The scriptures are necessary for guidance to remove the

misconceptions about Reality but it must be remembered that they only

speak about the truth. Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa used to convey

this tellingly to his devotees by saying that by squeezing the

almanac, which predicts abundant rainfall one would not be able to

get even a drop of water. Hence the truth can be known only by direct

experience by every seeker.

 

copy right: The Hindu-Daily

[Guest guest]

Thank you, for sharing this excellent article, B. Vaidyanathan.

 

"Experience" is the hallmark of any true Mysticism. Scripture, and

doctrine derive all of their truth from experience, and we can only

validate that truth with our own direct experience of That to which it

points. "Self" is never remote or hidden from Itself, since 'Self-

awareness' IS the Self. Who needs to inquire of their neighbor, "Am I

here?"? We are always immediately present to ourself. No perceptive

organ, no external witness, is ever required. It's pure

phenomenological observation that experientially confirms the obvious

logic that to deny one's self is self-contradictory.

Thanks again, NS

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "nonsums" <nonsums> wrote:

> Thank you, for sharing this excellent article, B. Vaidyanathan.

>

> "Experience" is the hallmark of any true Mysticism. Scripture, and

> doctrine derive all of their truth from experience, and we can only

> validate that truth with our own direct experience of That to which

it

> points. "Self" is never remote or hidden from Itself, since 'Self-

> awareness' IS the Self. Who needs to inquire of their neighbor, "Am

I

> here?"? We are always immediately present to ourself. No perceptive

> organ, no external witness, is ever required. It's pure

> phenomenological observation that experientially confirms the obvious

> logic that to deny one's self is self-contradictory.

> Thanks again, NS

 

Namaste NS,

 

thank you for your interesting words....

 

so...if i understand your words.....there is no effort necessary to

reach the Self....except "Self-Awareness"...

 

maybe it's true that there is nothing but Self....

 

i don't agree that there is no "experience" necessary to become Aware

of It....

 

it sound little like....

there is a person swimming (lost) in the ocean.....and wouldn't

survive....without the effort of trying to catch to boat.... which is

specially there to save to lost ones....

this person know that there will be death one day....sooner or

later......and so.....think that it make no big sense to be saved from

death.....

death....which will be so the "experience"....of a life-long hesitation

to jump into the ocean by oneSelf.....to "experience" everything what

ever could happen.....

 

i beleive that spiritual experience can show what will happen....after

death.....and what exactly happened after birth.......and also "here

and now"

 

spiritual effort will get fruits.....

like every effort cause some reaction....

 

maybe you already enjoy the fruits of your effort......i hope it's the

case.....

excuse me for all evtl. mistakes....

 

everybodies heart know best....how safe is the place of swimming....

 

 

Regards

 

love and peace

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "nonsums" <nonsums> wrote:

 

"'Experience' is the hallmark of any true Mysticism."

 

.... however advaita is neither an experience, nor mysticism.

 

 

Since list moderators have got a blanket permission from Sw. Dayananda

to quote his articles, below is one that is relevant to this point:

 

 

KNOW THAT TRUTH CANNOT BE INFERRED OR EXPERIENCED

The Speaking Tree, The Times Of India, 17 June 2005

(Q- Question by disciple; A- Answer by swami)

 

Q. Rational minds cannot comprehend the truth of the Self because the

mind is stuck in its patterns of thinking. Will intense experiences

shake these patterns loose?

 

A. How can experience shake a thinking pattern? A logical pattern

cannot be shaken by anything. You are taught that the sun stands still

and that the earth goes round. Does your everyday experience of a

rising sun shake that thinking? You think you are the physical body.

Yet every night in a dream experience while that body is stretched out

on a mattress, a `you' unconnected to the body works and eats and

plays, is happy and sad. That dream experience does not shake your

conclusion that you are the body.

 

A teacher may use your dream experience as an aid to help you

discover, through knowledge, that you are not the body, but the

experience itself does not do the job of shaking off the wrong

thinking. Wrong thinking can be shaken only by right thinking which

comes from knowing, from seeing, not from experiencing. Techniques

which incapacitate thinking do not really work for seeing yourself.

You can arrest thinking for a while but you cannot shake off wrong

thinking. When thinking returns, the wrong thinking will repeat itself.

 

 

Q. What is the right technique to deal with this?

 

A. A quiet mind is a useful mind, ready to learn, ready to see. There

are techniques and practices which are helpful. Pranayama (certain

breathing practices), physical exercises, certain diets, are all fine

if their purpose is understood. A relatively contemplative lifestyle

and assimilated ethical values are also important. All these

constitute preparation of the mind for knowledge. It is the same in

any branch of knowledge. The mind must have proper preparation for

learning. It must be ready to be taught the particular subject.

Learning to read comes before the study of literature.

 

Q. Can some teachers induce experience that can help one to realise

the Truth?

 

A. No. Truth is not an intellectual conclusion, nor is it something to

be `reached' by experiences. The student is not an elevator to go up

to Brahmn at the touch of a guru. Brahmn is you — not a place to be

reached. It is not through an experience that you become Truth. There

is nothing to become. There is nothing to transform. You are the Truth

that you are seeking. The teaching of Vedanta is simply a pramana, a

means of knowledge, an instrument that shows you what you are.

 

What you are is not an intellectual conclusion. Intellectual means

inferential. An intellectual conclusion is an inferential conclusion

about something not available for immediate perception but about which

there are data available from which some logical conclusion can be

reached. Your existence requires no inference. You are not available

for inference because you are right here as yourself; you are

immediately present. You are available to be known, not to be

inferred. You fail to know yourself only due to ignorance, not due to

lack of availability of yourself. Knowledge, not inference, nor

experience, destroys that ignorance.

 

You do not require a new experience to see yourself. There is no

source of ananda, the vision of that fullness that you call happiness,

except yourself.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Marc,

Marc: so...if i understand your words.....there is no effort

necessary to

reach the Self....except "Self-Awareness"...

 

NS: When you say, "…to reach the Self," who is the subject that

intends to `reach' It? If I say the Self is an object other than me,

then who is this `me,' and why call the distant object "Self"? You

yourself, are The Self. There is no `reaching' required to touch

your own core Self. `Reaching out' is to go away from your Self.

There is so much seeking outside for a lost treasure, when the

treasure is our very own home. Stay Home.

 

Marc: maybe it's true that there is nothing but Self...

 

NS: Everything, except our Self-experience, comes to our mind via the

imperfect senses and the brain's interpretation of them. `Dream

world,' `external world,' `any world at all,' who's to know the truth

of maya? But, take away all of your senses, silence your thoughts

and feelings, and still there is one unshakable constant, "I Am."

 

Marc: i don't agree that there is no "experience" necessary to become

Aware

 

NS: "Become Aware"? Aren't you aware right now, or am I speaking to

a dead man? As Ramana once told me (in a book): "There are no

stages. The man is illumination itself." Please, don't look to

bring something or other about. Look, instead, at the `Awareness'

that is currently going on.

 

Marc: it sounds little like.. this person knows that there will be

death one day....sooner or later......and so.....thinks that it makes

no big sense to be saved from death..

 

NS: I can see how it might appear as though I am suggesting this

viewpoint, but I am actually indicating something far more radical

than just `giving up.' I'm suggesting a complete `divorce' from the

self that: desires realization, does practice, makes any effort.

Detach from all that the jiva is, or does, or wishes to do. If the

jiva wishes to catch a boat, let it. But, you OTOH, should do

nothing. Discriminate, don't swim.

 

"Bodies move and act, and the fool thinks: "I act, I experience, I

am

killed". (Shankara, `Crest-Jewel of Discrimination')

 

Marc: everybodies heart know best....how safe is the place of

swimming....

 

NS: Indeed! I am merely (poorly) explaining a point of view on

matters mystic. Please, don't take on, or off, anything your heart

tells you otherwise, Marc. My guru, back in the early seventies,

would tell us, "Listen to the Guru within you."

 

A pleasure to discuss these things with you,

NS

[Guest guest]

Namaste Vineeta,

Vineeta: "Q. Rational minds cannot comprehend the truth of the Self

because the

mind is stuck in its patterns of thinking. Will intense experiences

shake these patterns loose?"

 

NS: I apologize for my imprecision, Vineeta. When I spoke

of "experience," I was not speaking of sensory experiences in

general. I was referring to a specific Experience, that is, the Self-

reflective, direct (non-perceptive, non-conceptive), "I Am Aware"

Experience, and none other.

 

I believe Swami and I are on the exact same page on this matter.

Some (such as your quoted Swami) call this unique

Experience, "Knowledge." Not because it is something for a mind to

learn and add to its store of information, but because this is a

special sort of knowing. The Self Knows Itself in a continuous event

where the subject and object are one and the same. Hegel suggests

that this is a characteristic of the Absolute, i.e. `absolute

independence.' This case of 'Knowledge' concerns...

 

"By whom shall the Knower be known?" (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad)

 

"We are actually `experiencing' the Reality only; still, we do

not know it. Is it not a wonder of wonders?" (Ramana)

 

Ramana, in one place, even calls it "feeling." Perhaps, we need to

capitalize these imperfect words when we apply them to perfection? I

am sorry to have confused you. The bottom line comes down to

direct `S'eeing our very `B'eing.

 

"The 'I' is already Brahman. You need not think so. Simply find

out the 'I'." (Ramana)

Ciao, NS

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sanjayji,

 

Really enjoying your posts! Thanks for the forwarded article.

 

praNAms,

--Satyan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "nonsums" <nonsums> wrote:

>

> "NS: When you say, "…to reach the Self," who is the subject that

> intends to `reach' It? If I say the Self is an object other than

me,

> then who is this `me,' and why call the distant object "Self"? You

> yourself, are The Self. There is no `reaching' required to touch

> your own core Self. `Reaching out' is to go away from your Self.

> There is so much seeking outside for a lost treasure,

............"

 

Namaste NS,

 

thank you for your detailed answer....

my pleasure too to read your viewpoint and words....

 

ok, there is the Self....always....no need to "search far" ....

when the senses remain in calmness....there is Self....means,

the "understanding" and "experience" at same time ....

 

it take some time to calm down the senses and the moving

mind.....this spiritual path take years or even "lifes"....(whatever

is the definition of "life" ...)

 

your explanation of "awareness" is interesting.....

maybe this "awareness" is more or less the same in

people.....depending if they are still alive ...or not.....or just

completely the slave of sense organs and emotions....

 

i agree that on one certain point.....even the "desire or wish" for

realization exlude the possibility that this could "happen"....

the "wish and desire .." for realization is still sign of

being "unaware" of the Self.....of oneSelf

and sign of ego-mind which is not able to "jump" in the

ocean...."here and now"

 

if the Awareness of Self remain "active" most of time....then there

is no more question about any "realization"....but it's about to

remain calmness and inner peace....to just live the life.....in truth

with oneSelf

 

in the message "the empty space" i wrote few days ago.....

this could be more a "reflection" of myself.....of my view of

things ...of existance and Maya....

 

i think that it's nearly same if one say that "every perception of

things....of bodies....words...." is Maya.......

and the statement that "everything is Brahman".....

 

is there any difference.....?

or other question....."does it matter if everything is Maya or

Brahman....or only Brahman....or...."

 

.....if one know that we are not body-mind-

intellect....and "experience" this by whole of being......

 

only few words....

i'm open-minded for corrections...

 

Regards

 

love and peace

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

Namaste Marc,

My pleasure as well to read your alternative POV.

 

Marc: it takes some time to calm down the senses and the moving

mind.....this spiritual path takes years or even "lives".

 

NS Yes, those things do take time and effort. My question to you is,

why do them? Why take issue with a mind whose nature is to "move,"

and worldly senses whose purpose is to sense the world? If you told

me that it took years to perfect your golf score, I would agree.

But, what has golf, or any other activity, have to do with realizing

who you actually are?

 

Shankara says: "Man is in bondage because he mistakes what is non-

Atman for his Real Self."

 

Ramana says: "Do not take the non-self to be the Self. Then the

Self will be evident to you."

 

NS: "Non-Self,Non-Atman," is the definition of `mind' and all its

products. My question to you is: What has the `mind' (quiet or

otherwise) got to do with You?

 

Marc: maybe this "awareness" is more or less the same in

people.....depending if they are still alive ...or not.....or just

completely the slave of sense organs and emotions....

 

NS: That is the Mechanistic theory of Consciousness furthered by the

more materialistic of scientists. `Consciousness' is not a byproduct

of a mind. Minds project images, like a movie projector. But, what

if the movie plays to an empty house? It would be the same as no

movie shown at all; wouldn't it? A Consciousness is what is primary

and essential, not mental images.

 

Marc: if the Awareness of Self remains "active" most of time....then

there is no more question about any "realization"....but it's (all)

about (the effort) to remain (in) calmness and inner peace....to just

live the life.....in truth with oneself.

NS:(I inserted some parenthetical expansion to aid you in seeing how

I took your meaning. Please correct me where I go astray.)

 

NS: You don't "live `with' Self," you are the Self alone. "Alone with

the Alone." Ask yourself, when I am calm who am I? When I am in

turmoil who am I? Aren't you `you' whether calm or churned? Do you

disappear (become nobody, become other people) when your mind is over-

active. Even severe amnesiacs will say: "I don't know who I am?"

Notice that the amnesiac didn't forget that she was a Self

called `I.' Try to loose this `I' guy; it can't be done.

 

Marc: i think that it's nearly same if one says that "every

perception of things....of bodies....words...." is Maya.......and the

statement that "everything is Brahman".....

 

NS: I find "everything is Brahman" as misleading. There is a

tendency, when people say, "everything is unreal," to think that

there is a something called, "unreal." The `unreal' is the non-

existent. Like the million dollars in your pocket right now. My

naming it, doesn't make you suddenly rich. It is nothing, an error

has no weight or value. The unreal (i.e. "everything") is Not

Brahman. Brahman is, and everything else (like that million $

(sorry)) isn't.

 

Marc: is there any difference.....?

or other question....."does it matter if everything is Maya or

Brahman....or only Brahman....or...."

.....if one know that we are not body-mind-

intellect....and "experience" this by whole of being...... (NS: not

sure I got you right here, but…)

 

NS: The `difference' is made in the intellect only. There is nothing

wrong in satisfying the mind. Spirit is already, and always, free;

though our minds may suffer ignorance of this, our true identity.

When you realize your Self as The Self, nothing will change for

You. "All are already Enlightened." Your jiva (body, mind, acts) will

continue as it they fated to, but now as bereft of an individual

self. You, as you now `conceive' yourself, will be completely

empty. While, `You' as your always `felt' yourself, will be

disembodied, mentally detached, inactively Present at all times.

May you see it so, NS

[Guest guest]

Namaste NS,

 

thank you for your message....

 

as far i see....i think that we are not much far from each concerning

the Self and mind....and the relation of mind to the world....

 

ok....i still don't agree that there is no "effort" necessary....or

nearly no "effort"....

there is effort needed to get whatever one want to BE.....

if there is no knowledge and experience of the Self......there is

some "effort" necessary to "discover" It.

The mind is all the time occupied with the "world"....it's the nature

of the mind......

The Self reveal all the time ....the limitation of the mind.....it

reveal all the time Maya so........

What is necessary to be "Aware" of this Self?.....

a busy and restless mind could be "Aware" of the Self?

 

i don't think so.....

maybe those who found one "concept" and theorie to stay being

restless in mind........are lost in Maya......

 

It's true....there is nothing bad in perceiving a world.....there is

nothing bad in doing an occupation....and life....just

like "everybody else".....

with "Awareness"....all this life "appear" little different.....

what make the "difference"?

there are less "illusions" to fight for......there are endless

discussions one can observe and listen ......and be at same

time "detached" emotionally.....

to be "detached" emotionally....it's necessary that the heart remain

mainly "home of Brahman".....means,filled up with....the

truth......the Self......Brahman.....Love....infinite Peace......

 

in this peace.....there is the "observation" of someone

talking.....and at same time.....the perception of Consciousness

which let this someone talking.....which is exactly the same than the

absolut Consciousness.......in All......

but the "choosed" words this someone is talking depends on the actuel

Karma....means, in how far this person live close to HimSelf or

not....

 

the absolut Consciousness can be "perceived" in the bible which one

hold in the hands.....or a stone.....or whatever....

 

maybe nobody ever "told" even one word....without This absolut

Consciousness......

to be "Aware" of It.....make the difference.....

as far i see....you would agree on this point...

 

you wrote:

"You don't "live `with' Self," you are the Self alone. "Alone with

> the Alone." Ask yourself, when I am calm who am I? When I am in

> turmoil who am I? Aren't you `you' whether calm or churned? Do

you

> disappear (become nobody, become other people) when your mind is

over-

> active. .."

 

yes....we are all One.....in being Alone with the Self......

 

what is remaining....is "pure" Consciousness.......

 

Regards

 

love and peace

[Guest guest]

Namaste to you, Marc,

I'm glad that we are similar in our understanding of mind and Self.

Without common ground our discussion would have no place to stand at

all.

 

Marc: .i still don't agree that there is no "effort" necessary....or

nearly no "effort"....

there is effort needed to get whatever one want to BE.

 

Ns: You say that you are `Marc.' How much effort will it take for me

to cease being NS and become an identical `Marc' too? Was it hard

for you to become `Marc'? How long did it take you? What practices

did you employ to become `Marc'?

 

M: if there is no knowledge and experience of the Self......there is

some "effort" necessary to "discover" It.

 

NS: "Knowing Itself is the Self." The Self isn't an idiot.

It `Knows,' and constantly `Experiences' Itself. What you are

concerned about is whether or not your mind is well informed on all

matters concerning the Self, no? Too bad. The Self is not for

mental consumption. It would be like trying to fit an elephant into

your back pocket. `Mind centrism' is what makes jivas think they are

real selves, makes them seek the Self within the mind, makes them try

to discipline the mind into becoming a Self instead of a mind. Try

as one may, so long as we remain `mind centered' we will never

realize our Self. But, the instant you come out of the mind, you

fall into your Self-realizing Self.

 

M: What is necessary to be "Aware" of this Self?.

 

Ramana: "Do not take the non-self to be the Self. Then the Self will

be evident to you." (NS: Simple as that. Try it and see for

your `Self')

 

M: a busy and restless mind could be "Aware" of the Self?

 

NS: Nope (Good question!). That's why you must cease to be mind

fixated and located, and then you will automatically become Self

fixated and located.

 

"Stay as you are. No effort is needed. You have to go somewhere

to become something else. When you know it is stupid to become

something, this is enlightenment. For this you do not need any

effort at all." (Poonjaji)

 

Thank you, Marc, for the beautifully put explanation in the latter

half of your post. I agree, we are not only very close in our

insight, but "are One" and the same identical Self. Pranam, my Self.

NS

[Guest guest]

Namaste NS,

 

thank for your message...

 

i think that there are things in your mind....that you would like to

tell and share....

please don't try to "catch" few words from a message....to repeat the

same kind of answers you already did before

 

i think there is not much differences in the point of view...

only in the "practice".....seem that there is some difference

 

you use parly the words of some "Masters".....

difficult to know so....what is your personal "understanding" of

things

 

i don't make reference to any detailed "statements" of Master(s)...

 

i feel better when i write on my own....and try to tell about what is

realy in my personal mind and heart....even if i risc to write non-

sense......

 

maybe that's the Sadhana too......to see what is coming out of

oneself......to get a better feeling of the balance ....

 

i don't beleive that anybody could Be the Self.....

only if one loose completely the mind....maybe there is Self

remaining....the problem is that this person would no more know

about........Self...and mind...and world....and whatever

 

better to calm down the mind.....and let the Self ....show the

path...and next steps...

 

the mind is a good intrument....

if there were no mind.....

there were no messages here appearing......

and you could not try to share your view of things.....

with....."whoever".......

 

or just.....oneself....

 

and enjoying the appearence of truth......Maya......by perceiving

this world

 

Regards

 

love and peace

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

Namaste Marc,

Marc: i think there is not much differences in the point of view...

only in the "practice".....seem that there is some difference

 

NS: I suspect you are right. I doubt anything new has been said

since the early Rishis. After all, the experience Itself is the same

for all. No one religion, or philosophy, has a special corner on a

Self that won't be repressed. The Truth doesn't rely on Scripture,

or Sages. It's the other way around.

 

Marc: i don't make reference to any detailed "statements" of Master

(s)...

i feel better when i write on my own....and try to tell about what is

realy in my personal mind and heart....even if i risc to write non-

sense......

 

NS: This is cool too. I do both, and find it odd that you say I

haven't said anything from my own personal "understanding," in my

very own inadequate words? To my mind, I appear to yak too much. I

love, and save, quotes from all mystical traditions. It comes from

my long jnana background. I would concentrate (or, `meditate' in the

western use of the word) on a passage for weeks at a time until I

could gain a deeper insight into its meaning. Someone (Vivikenanda?)

once advised that it was best to read only the enlightened, in order

to avoid the confusion of those who merely guess.

 

M: i don't beleive that anybody could Be the Self.....

only if one loose completely the mind....maybe there is Self

remaining....the problem is that this person would no more know

about........Self...and mind...and world....and whatever

 

NS: I didn't mean to imply that you have a mental lobotomy. It is

more a matter of `identity.' Do you think up, conceive & perceive,

who you are; maybe check your I.D. card, or, do you disregard all of

that and look for an ongoing, never changing, disembodied,

transcendent, Experience that can best be called, `Me'? Do you have

one of those, Marc?

 

M: better to calm down the mind.....and let the Self ....show the

path...and next steps..

 

NS: Yes, the Self will lead the way Home for those who have fallen

into identifying with their minds. But, I seriously doubt the Self

cares whether some bodily organ is "calm" or not before it does what

it does.

 

M: the mind is a good intrument....if there were no mind.....there

were no messages here appearing......and you could not try to share

your view of things.....with....."whoever"....

 

NS: Yes, the mind does its thing very well; I'm not into banning it.

So does the stomach do its thing well, well…most of the time (burp!),

and let's not forget to applaud the heart and lungs while we're at

it. All very fine organs, indeed. But, when I donate them to

someone else, I won't be going with them. I'm pleased to say that I

am a Self, not an organ or organist. I discriminate this fact, and

never suffer the confusion of Self with organ, even before I donate

them. [appropriate quote goes here, but vetoed by Marc. Too bad it

was a good one. His loss. ;-]

 

M: enjoying the appearence of truth......Maya......by perceiving this

world

 

NS: There is a dream of a world and a perceiving participant, and in

this dream there are also dreams of other worlds and other p.p.'s

within them. They are all enjoying and suffering, until they tire of

this endless regression and repetition. When they tire sufficiently,

they turn away from the dreams of world&jiva and refuse to

participate on any terms ever again. "They die before they die."

This is called, returning Home. Are you tired yet, Marc?

Respectfully,

NS (Nice Shoes)

[Guest guest]

Namaste NS,

 

thank you for your message....

sorry for the late answer....will have only few times the access to

a computer this week....have a week of holiday...

 

the discussion on the subject is ~calming little down~ as i see....

after all...i beleive we do all the best in (the practice of)

~Being~....

 

just Being.....what could ever be most simple and beautiful at same

time....?

 

you talk about "exeriences"....and about the "Me" eperience...

i think that everybody who is on a spiritual

path....get "experiences"....however they are called...

the spiritual experiences on the path can be very different from

each.....and because of experiences there is much confusion rising

in the mind of (spiritual) people

i beleive that, as long whatever experience happen, if it allow to

go on....on the path....without causing too much trouble in the mind

and balance.....it`s fine....

some people think they got "enlightenment" when they experience kind

of spiritual step.....

....but the path go on....

the "understanding" that the path always continue....whatever could

happen on the way.....i think is also a good "experience"

 

we talked about to "calm down" the mind.....for a

better "understanding and experience" of the Self....

i think that there are very various explanations about Self going

around.....

there is a oneself....kind of wrong self......which is as

long "dreaming"....as there is no waking up of dream....

what happen in waking up?

it happen that one become more and more aware of what one realy

Is....and of what one never realy have been....

i think we agree on this....

one person who realized completely the Self....perceive this same

Self in everybody and everything around.....

and "experience" that there have never been any difference in the

real Nature of beings.....

there is a "medium" through which we all communicate.....

it`s this mind.....means,this world.......

 

the world could "end" now........

....and "we" would still be there.....means, the Self

 

the real Self is free from the limitation of this appearing world...

 

some people are confused about an ending of the world ...one

day....or on a special day.....and begin to beleive on the "end of

the world"....

....maybe this "end of world"....is just their "end of

illusions".....kind of spiritual "experience" they have problems to

digest.....

hundreds of books are going around.....on this kind of subjects....

"esoteric" without end.....means also business without end....

 

so there is food for the mind....at every corner...

 

where is the real food....?

 

it`s in the calmness of the mind......in the inner world......in the

peace of the heart.........in the Oneness

in this Oneness...there is the knowledge that "whole the food" can

be found inside oneSelf....and the confidence that

it "appear" ...right time....and at the right "corner"....if

necessary....

like also the one of this group....

 

this "confidence" in....the Self.....is also kind of "experience"...

 

so far a description of what i mean with "practice".....

 

few thoughts....and with open mind....

 

you wrote:

"When they tire sufficiently,

> they turn away from the dreams of world&jiva and refuse to

> participate on any terms ever again. "They die before they die."

> This is called, returning Home. Are you tired yet, Marc?"

 

this is a very deep personal question....which i refuse to

answer...sorry to don`t talk about

 

"returning Home"....i know what you mean.....

 

maybe some Karma and strong tendencies would be necessary to keep on

being ....out of "Home"....

 

Regards

 

love and peace

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

Hi Marc,

Marc: sorry for the late answer.

 

NS: That's alright. I feel asleep on the porch anyway.

 

M: after all...i beleive we do all the best in (the practice of)

~Being~.

 

NS: Wherever would we `be' without practicing `Being'? I know

Hamlet's equivocation on the issue gave him no end of troubles.

 

M: just Being.....what could ever be most simple and beautiful at same

time....?

 

NS: In my experience, `Being' never comes unattended with a `Self'

and `Consciousness.' `Being' (`Am'-ness) Consciously knows Itself

as `I.' It doesn't just hang out there `Being' by itself, without a

Self, and without a clue that it exists at all. Is that your

Experience, or am I `Being" alone in this?

 

M: you talk about "exeriences"....and about the "Me" eperience...

i think that everybody who is on a spiritual

path....get "experiences"....however they are called...

the spiritual experiences on the path can be very different from

each..

 

Ns: Yes, sensory `experiences' differ, but not so Self-Experience.

Even the bacteria in the stomachs of my cat's fleas Know the same one

Experience of "I Am."

 

M: .whatever could happen on the way.....i think is also a

good "experience"

 

NS: The "Pledge of the Tibetan Gurus," goes: "Whatever happens along

the path, may I neither accept nor reject."

 

M: where is the real food....?

it`s in the calmness of the mind......in the inner world......in the

peace of the heart.........in the Oneness

in this Oneness...there is the knowledge that "whole the food" can

be found inside oneSelf.

 

NS: This is very nicely put!

 

M: .and the confidence that it "appear" ...right time....and at the

right "corner"

 

NS: Better yet, have the "confidence" that it has already "appeared,"

and you've been too distracted to notice; like spending all day with

your fly unzipped. Best to look down and see how things stand now,

rather than waiting to turn some "corner."

 

M: this is a very deep personal question....which i refuse to

answer...sorry to don`t talk about

 

NS: This is surely your right, Marc, and I will respect it. I enjoy

My right to ask "very deep personal questions," on the off chance

that some reader (not necessarily you) has failed to ask it of

themselves. This practice got poor old Socrates into a jam. He

probably would have done much better by sticking to the internet, and

calling himself some silly name.

`Non Sum'