a question about thoughts and the thought-free state

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

at the moment I am reading the "No Mind"-book. Lakshmana Samys teaching

relating to atma vichara is very similar to that of the Maharshi's.

He speaks of the effortless thoughtfree state as a prerequisite to Realisation,

and here a question comes up.

 

If atma vichara is deepened the mind becomes silent and stays more and more

permanently in the Heart. Nevertheless on the surface normal thoughts play

their normal games: coming and going and then again no thoughts at all -

as it is needed for leading a normal life and reacting normally.

On the surface thoughts are like clouds, they have no substance by themselves,

and in the debth of the heart there is absolute silence and the focus in vichara

is here only.

It is the ground wherefrom everything arises. When there are thoughts on the

surface

they are watched but not given attention and importance - so they do what is

needed,

but they are left alone.

Concentration is in the Heart.

 

If one is not identificated with the surface-play of thoughts and centred in the

Heart only

driving the question "Who am I?" within, is this then enough?

 

Sri Ramana and also Lakshmana said that the mind has to be pure in full.

There may not be a single thought left and the I-thought as the last thought

will then be destroyed

by the Self. Only then the real Self is revealed in full.

 

How do you understand that? How is your experience?

The absolute thoughtfree state, would that not be nirvikalpa samadhi?

 

In Sri Ramana

Gabriele

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Gabriele

 

This response is from a different point of view than the "Sink into

the Heart" view. Perhaps this approach is not relevant to your

practice, but does represent what I think that Nome might say. I have

heard similar questions at SAT.

 

Perhaps you may have not been thorough enough with your inquiry. It

might be worth looking at `where you stand' in terms of your own

sense of identity. If as a body there is life and death and such, if

as a mind there will be thoughts and `moods' (bundles of thoughts),

etc. that we take as our reality. If as the Self, then there is

no 'other.'

 

What I have come to understand is that each thought requires an "I",

so I can use a thought (one thought, any thought, a group of

thoughts) to see where more inquiry is needed. Take the thought

apart and see what it assumes in terms of identity. Each thought

revolves around the ego-`I' and its projection of identity as

something other than the Self. The proejction is a misidentifiaction,

a placing of the Reality of Being onto something that is changeful

and passing, like something in a dream. Each misidentification

becomes an opportunity for inquiry and to discriminate who you are

(and who you are not).

 

So I would suggest further inquiry, being open to the question --

to "don'tkknow" and see where it takes you. If to the Self,

then 'sink into the Heart,' if to some 'other,' then look at your

stand and inquire: "Is this who I am?Who am I?"

 

We are Not two,

Richard

 

RamanaMaharshi, "Gabriele Ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote:

> Dear All,

> at the moment I am reading the "No Mind"-book. Lakshmana Samys

teaching

> relating to atma vichara is very similar to that of the Maharshi's.

> He speaks of the effortless thoughtfree state as a prerequisite to

Realisation,

> and here a question comes up.

>

> If atma vichara is deepened the mind becomes silent and stays more

and more

> permanently in the Heart. Nevertheless on the surface normal

thoughts play

> their normal games: coming and going and then again no thoughts at

all -

> as it is needed for leading a normal life and reacting normally.

> On the surface thoughts are like clouds, they have no substance by

themselves,

> and in the debth of the heart there is absolute silence and the

focus in vichara is here only.

> It is the ground wherefrom everything arises. When there are

thoughts on the surface

> they are watched but not given attention and importance - so they

do what is needed,

> but they are left alone.

> Concentration is in the Heart.

>

> If one is not identificated with the surface-play of thoughts and

centred in the Heart only

> driving the question "Who am I?" within, is this then enough?

>

> Sri Ramana and also Lakshmana said that the mind has to be pure in

full.

> There may not be a single thought left and the I-thought as the

last thought will then be destroyed

> by the Self. Only then the real Self is revealed in full.

>

> How do you understand that? How is your experience?

> The absolute thoughtfree state, would that not be nirvikalpa

samadhi?

>

> In Sri Ramana

> Gabriele

[Guest guest]

Dear Gabriella:

 

"A rose in any other name smells as sweet"

 

 

>

> If one is not identificated with the surface-play of thoughts and

centred in the Heart only

> driving the question "Who am I?" within, is this then enough?

 

NO: "YOUR EITHER FREE OF NOT FREE AT ALL" MAHARSHI IN "TALKS"

"a SILENT MIND IS ALL THERE IS" NISARGADATTA

>

> Sri Ramana and also Lakshmana said that the mind has to be pure in

full.

> There may not be a single thought left and the I-thought as the

last thought will then be destroyed

> by the Self. Only then the real Self is revealed in full.

>

> How do you understand that? How is your experience?

> The absolute thoughtfree state, would that not be nirvikalpa

samadhi?

 

YES AND NO. IF YOU ARE BRAIN DEAD THE ANSWER IS NO. IF YOU

ARE ENBODIED AND AWARE THEN THE ANSWER IS YES. IF THERE IS NO LONGER

A BODY THEN THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR ANSWERS.

 

Disclaimers: Take my answers with a grain of salt. I am the most

unevolved member of this group.

 

Loving Sri Ramana, aka Swami Slater

[Guest guest]

Dear Richard,

thank you.

 

> Perhaps you may have not been thorough enough with your inquiry.

It

> might be worth looking at `where you stand' in terms of your own

> sense of identity. If as a body there is life and death and such,

if

> as a mind there will be thoughts and `moods' (bundles of thoughts),

> etc. that we take as our reality. If as the Self, then there is

> no 'other.'

 

Right! Inquiry must become thoroughly, each moment. But does this

really mean thoughts will not arise anymore? "Thoughts" are perhaps a

misleading term a wrong term for this. The basis of the mind, the

first thought, which is the I-thought, will be destroyed more and

more and one day it will be finally, and thoughts are of the mind. So

this are not this "thoughts" of course. How should one call this

then? A movement in the Self? If not we would become like lifeless

stones - but vichara is very vivid - becomes more vivid each day. It

is life itself - inwardly, outwardly .... How could one describe?

This is what was pointed to - but how to say in words?

 

In HIM

Gabriele

[Guest guest]

Dear Alton,

 

> YES AND NO. IF YOU ARE BRAIN DEAD THE ANSWER IS NO. IF YOU

> ARE ENBODIED AND AWARE THEN THE ANSWER IS YES. IF THERE IS NO

LONGER

> A BODY THEN THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR ANSWERS.

 

Good answer, thanks!

 

>

> Disclaimers: Take my answers with a grain of salt. I am the most

> unevolved member of this group.

 

A grain of salt gives the taste, so thanks for each grain of

salt. "Unevolved member" - I can't see any one here.

>

> Loving Sri Ramana, aka Swami Slater

 

In HIM

Gabriele

[Guest guest]

Dear Gabriele,

 

Nome says (and other sages say) that this REALLY DOES MEAN that

thoughts will not arise anymore.

 

So as longs as they do, we still need to keep inquiring. He says as

long as you can inquire, do so. There comes a time where inquiry is

not needed and is not possible, because there is nothing else upon

which to inquire.

 

What you experience, if it has the experience of movement, cannot be

the absolute, the changeless.

 

The increased "vividness" of your inquiry certainly is in the

right "direction" (more inward).

 

Others in the group have written of sphurana. I understand this as

something that "happens" to some seekers as they get quite deep,

something that seems to `rise' after the mind becomes quiet. After

the discussion in the group, I asked Nome about sphurana. He agreed

(as Ramana said) that sphurana is the Self. He said that sphurana is

often talked about as "throbbing" or "pulsing" but that it is really

more of a "shining" -- the shining of the Self (out of the quiet

mind). He did not say so in this discussion, but I understand that

since sphurana is of the Self, that it is continuous, always true.

If there is a sense of pulsing, it is like the clouds (of remaining

misidentification) obscuring the sun for a moment. We must continue

our inquiry until we stand as Self – our Self-Knowledge is complete,

we know once and for all Who We Are, and that Self is `where' we

stand.

 

This discussion of the realities of practice is good, I think.

Hopefully for each of us, and for those who are able to read and

absorb. I feel like we seekers can help light the path for others who

follow.

 

We are Not two,

Richard

 

 

 

RamanaMaharshi, "gabriele_ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote:

> Dear Richard,

> thank you.

>

> > Perhaps you may have not been thorough enough with your inquiry.

> It

> > might be worth looking at `where you stand' in terms of your own

> > sense of identity. If as a body there is life and death and

such,

> if

> > as a mind there will be thoughts and `moods' (bundles of

thoughts),

> > etc. that we take as our reality. If as the Self, then there is

> > no 'other.'

>

> Right! Inquiry must become thoroughly, each moment. But does this

> really mean thoughts will not arise anymore? "Thoughts" are perhaps

a

> misleading term a wrong term for this. The basis of the mind, the

> first thought, which is the I-thought, will be destroyed more and

> more and one day it will be finally, and thoughts are of the mind.

So

> this are not this "thoughts" of course. How should one call this

> then? A movement in the Self? If not we would become like lifeless

> stones - but vichara is very vivid - becomes more vivid each day.

It

> is life itself - inwardly, outwardly .... How could one describe?

> This is what was pointed to - but how to say in words?

>

> In HIM

> Gabriele

[Guest guest]

Dear Richard,

Thanks again for the reply. Your Master Nome is a great sage and

teacher, who always sets focus on inquiry as did Bhagavan. Inquiry is

indeed the final solution - nothing can keep up with it. So please

keep on sharing with us what you have learned and understood from

him. It is a great enrichment.

In HIM

Gabriele

 

 

RamanaMaharshi, "Richard Clarke" <r_clarke@i...> wrote:

> Dear Gabriele,

>

> Nome says (and other sages say) that this REALLY DOES MEAN that

> thoughts will not arise anymore.

>

> So as longs as they do, we still need to keep inquiring. He says

as

> long as you can inquire, do so. There comes a time where inquiry

is

> not needed and is not possible, because there is nothing else upon

> which to inquire.

>

> What you experience, if it has the experience of movement, cannot

be

> the absolute, the changeless.

>

> The increased "vividness" of your inquiry certainly is in the

> right "direction" (more inward).

>

> Others in the group have written of sphurana. I understand this as

> something that "happens" to some seekers as they get quite deep,

> something that seems to `rise' after the mind becomes quiet. After

> the discussion in the group, I asked Nome about sphurana. He

agreed

> (as Ramana said) that sphurana is the Self. He said that sphurana

is

> often talked about as "throbbing" or "pulsing" but that it is

really

> more of a "shining" -- the shining of the Self (out of the quiet

> mind). He did not say so in this discussion, but I understand that

> since sphurana is of the Self, that it is continuous, always true.

> If there is a sense of pulsing, it is like the clouds (of remaining

> misidentification) obscuring the sun for a moment. We must

continue

> our inquiry until we stand as Self – our Self-Knowledge is

complete,

> we know once and for all Who We Are, and that Self is `where' we

> stand.

>

> This discussion of the realities of practice is good, I think.

> Hopefully for each of us, and for those who are able to read and

> absorb. I feel like we seekers can help light the path for others

who

> follow.

>

> We are Not two,

> Richard