Guest guest Posted July 16, 2002 Report Share Posted July 16, 2002 Dear Alton, it can be confusing for the seeker to compare various teachers. The intellect will be very much engaged with it. You can do it endlessly - and miss the point. Intellectually there may be different approaches to vichara, which may serve as a means at the beginning, but only when the mind is silent the true vichara happens - and there can't be any concepts about it. So our effort is to silence the mind and make it centred on the source, as you say. As long as there is any sensing there is still the I as the experiencer. Then dive more deep within: who is experiencing the silence? This is done without words. Ramana says, that the I-I from within takes over then, so we can trust in that. Without this grace from within - who could succeed? When vichara happens it is absolutely clear, no words can express it. It is nothing "new" so you will recognize it as wellknown - but only forgotten. It is no self-hypnosis - the self-hypnosis is when swerving away from the SELF: this is our own brain-washing, the disease. In HIM Gabriele Alton: Two questions starting with the following. Ramana advises meditating on the Self as the subject. Is that really just another object to meditate on? One starts with some words to help quiet the mind. Nisargadatta suggests repeating the words "I Am" and refusing all thoughts and feelings except the "I Am" sense of conscious presence. Then when a seeker is more advanced he advises to drop the words and do it silently. Ramana suggests the "to whom" series of questions ending in "Who Am I" but for an advanced seeker one meditates on the Self, which is the Subject or "I Am" without words. All this to my knowledge is called Self Inquiry. During this process I noticed that one can sweep away thoughts with the mindfulness broom or if one is gifted one may have enough exclusive focus to mediate on the Subject, But even when the mind is quiet there is still that sensing, so that becomes the object of meditation. Nisargadatta has also said that it is all sensing unless the attention eats up the attention, then you may go to the no-knowingness deep dark blue state. It this how you see the process? Feel free to correct my take on this. Next question: If we succeed in this Self Inquiry and realize the Self, is it just self hypnosis? We have studied the teachings of the sages and are fully convinced, maybe through brain washing, that it is true. Will be then become Ramana Self hypnotized clones? Thanks to anyone who has the knowledge to answer these questions. Aloha, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2002 Report Share Posted July 16, 2002 Dear Gabriele, You expressed this well. Different teachers (sometimes even from the same spiritual 'lineage') use different language. One cannot really comment on any precieved differences until one is deeply versed in these teachings. It is too easy to use some snippet of a teaching out of context, assign some meaning to it, then use this assumed meaning as a basis of comparison. And finally, this is all a mental activity that rarely leads to any greater depth of experience. There is a zen story about an old man who asked a sen master, I have heard from a Buddhist sect that even the trees and grass can become inlightened, and this has pussled me my whole life. What can you tell me about this? to which the zen master answered, "Have you ever thought about how you can become enlightened?" (Perhaps that is a better use of your life.) Deep Inquiry really starts when the mind is quiet (or in samadhi), and the seeker sees that even with the quiet mind that they still exist. This is where the Knowledge of Being is easiest to find. All to get to this place in ones practice is just preparation (even though the seeker feels greater joy, fredom and peace in their life). WE are Not two, Richard RamanaMaharshi, "Gabriele Ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote: > Dear Alton, > it can be confusing for the seeker to compare various teachers. > The intellect will be very much engaged with it. You can do it endlessly - and miss the point. > > Intellectually there may be different approaches to vichara, which may serve as a means at the > beginning, but only when the mind is silent the true vichara happens - and there can't be any > concepts about it. So our effort is to silence the mind and make it centred on the source, as you say. > As long as there is any sensing there is still the I as the experiencer. > Then dive more deep within: who is experiencing the silence? This is done without > words. Ramana says, that the I-I from within takes over then, so we can trust in that. Without this grace > from within - who could succeed? > > When vichara happens it is absolutely clear, no words can express it. It is nothing "new" so you > will recognize it as wellknown - but only forgotten. It is no self- hypnosis - the self-hypnosis is when swerving > away from the SELF: this is our own brain-washing, the disease. > > In HIM > Gabriele > > Alton: > Two questions starting with the following. > Ramana advises meditating on the Self as the subject. Is that really just another object to meditate on? > > One starts with some words to help quiet the mind. Nisargadatta suggests repeating the words "I Am" and refusing all thoughts and feelings except the "I Am" sense of conscious presence. Then when a seeker is more advanced he advises to drop the words and do it silently. > > Ramana suggests the "to whom" series of questions ending in "Who Am I" but for an advanced seeker one meditates on the Self, which is the Subject or "I Am" without words. All this to my knowledge is called Self Inquiry. > > During this process I noticed that one can sweep away thoughts with the mindfulness broom or if one is gifted one may have enough exclusive focus to mediate on the Subject, But even when the mind is quiet there is still that sensing, so that becomes the object of meditation. Nisargadatta has also said that it is all sensing unless the attention eats up the attention, then you may go to the no- knowingness deep dark blue state. > > It this how you see the process? Feel free to correct my take on this. > > Next question: > If we succeed in this Self Inquiry and realize the Self, is it just self hypnosis? We have studied the teachings of the sages and are fully convinced, maybe through brain washing, that it is true. > Will be then become Ramana Self hypnotized clones? > > Thanks to anyone who has the knowledge to answer these questions. > Aloha, > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2002 Report Share Posted July 17, 2002 RamanaMaharshi, "richard_clarke95125" <r_clarke@i...> wrote: > Dear Gabriele, > > You expressed this well. Different teachers (sometimes even from the > same spiritual 'lineage') use different language. > > One cannot really comment on any precieved differences until one is > deeply versed in these teachings. It is too easy to use some snippet > of a teaching out of context, assign some meaning to it, then use > this assumed meaning as a basis of comparison. And finally, this is > all a mental activity that rarely leads to any greater depth of > experience. > > There is a zen story about an old man who asked a sen master, I have > heard from a Buddhist sect that even the trees and grass can become > inlightened, and this has pussled me my whole life. What can you > tell me about this? > > to which the zen master answered, "Have you ever thought about how > you can become enlightened?" (Perhaps that is a better use of your > life.) > > Deep Inquiry really starts when the mind is quiet (or in samadhi), > and the seeker sees that even with the quiet mind that they still > exist. This is where the Knowledge of Being is easiest to find. All > to get to this place in ones practice is just preparation (even > though the seeker feels greater joy, fredom and peace in their > life). > > WE are Not two, > Richard Dear Richard you've given a very apt explanation which is sane and perfect. half knowledge is indeed dangerous. Its a pity that some misinterpret ramana's teachings .we need more persons like you ... om tat sat > > RamanaMaharshi, "Gabriele Ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote: > > Dear Alton, > > it can be confusing for the seeker to compare various teachers. > > The intellect will be very much engaged with it. You can do it > endlessly - and miss the point. > > > > Intellectually there may be different approaches to vichara, which > may serve as a means at the > > beginning, but only when the mind is silent the true vichara > happens - and there can't be any > > concepts about it. So our effort is to silence the mind and make it > centred on the source, as you say. > > As long as there is any sensing there is still the I as the > experiencer. > > Then dive more deep within: who is experiencing the silence? This > is done without > > words. Ramana says, that the I-I from within takes over then, so we > can trust in that. Without this grace > > from within - who could succeed? > > > > When vichara happens it is absolutely clear, no words can express > it. It is nothing "new" so you > > will recognize it as wellknown - but only forgotten. It is no self- > hypnosis - the self-hypnosis is when swerving > > away from the SELF: this is our own brain-washing, the disease. > > > > In HIM > > Gabriele > > > > Alton: > > Two questions starting with the following. > > Ramana advises meditating on the Self as the subject. Is that > really just another object to meditate on? > > > > One starts with some words to help quiet the mind. Nisargadatta > suggests repeating the words "I Am" and refusing all thoughts and > feelings except the "I Am" sense of conscious presence. Then when a > seeker is more advanced he advises to drop the words and do it > silently. > > > > Ramana suggests the "to whom" series of questions ending in "Who Am > I" but for an advanced seeker one meditates on the Self, which is the > Subject or "I Am" without words. All this to my knowledge is called > Self Inquiry. > > > > During this process I noticed that one can sweep away thoughts with > the mindfulness broom or if one is gifted one may have enough > exclusive focus to mediate on the Subject, But even when the mind is > quiet there is still that sensing, so that becomes the object of > meditation. Nisargadatta has also said that it is all sensing unless > the attention eats up the attention, then you may go to the no- > knowingness deep dark blue state. > > > > It this how you see the process? Feel free to correct my take on > this. > > > > Next question: > > If we succeed in this Self Inquiry and realize the Self, is it just > self hypnosis? We have studied the teachings of the sages and are > fully convinced, maybe through brain washing, that it is true. > > Will be then become Ramana Self hypnotized clones? > > > > Thanks to anyone who has the knowledge to answer these questions. > > Aloha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.