Guest guest Posted October 3, 2002 Report Share Posted October 3, 2002 There is no compulsive necessity, as most advocates of one or the other side seem to believe there is, to choose fully and finally between them, no real need to reject the one because the other is accepted. We may go along with the Vedantins and say that the One alone is real. But we may also go along with the dualists and say that the world around us and the human being are, in another sense, also real! It is quite fruitless to bring the two views into fanatical controversy with one another, far more useful to bring them into amicable relation. Why divide them when they serve us so well when reconciled? Every time there is an attempt to communicate these truths by speech or in writing--let alone teach them to disciples--there is a falsifcation of the Vedantic tenet that there are no others! Then why do the Vedantists preach, teach, lecture, and write? Does this not show the utter impracticality of their position, true though it is as an ultimate metaphysical one? The bliss that meditation practice at its deepest brings to a developed yogi does not annihilate the pain that the same yogi may feel when he resumes his ordinary active condition. Ramana Maharshi himself mentioned this quite a few times. Iso Upanishad: "They enter the region of the dark who are occupied solely with the finite. But they fall into a region of still greater darkness who are occupied solely with the Infinite." Nonduality in its extreme form is not to the taste of the masses. Instinctively they shy away from it. Let the two views accommodate each other. While these levels of reference ought not to be mixed together when theory and principles are concerned, there is one way in which there is considerable profit to be gained if the timeless eternal and universal atmosphere of Vedanta is kept at the back of the mind when the worldly problems have to be met. they can be met with this remembrance that one's true being is, safe and unaffected, and that whatever decision or action we are called to make, the first thing is to keep calm. Each side-dualist and nondualist- is quite correct when they apply their teaching in its proper place, but quite wrong when they misapply. This, dualist who offer dualism as ultimate are wrong, but then nondualist Vedantists are also misconceiving the proper application of their tenets when they on applying their "no world exist, no ego exists" doctrine to human life generally. paul brunton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 They have as their model - RM- someone who they can not describe as being indifferent. As Guru, he was able to impart Reality to the seeker; thus his service to humanity. That Truth being that All is One, the One Consciousness. But this is yet another understanding that is realizable only in measure. Without the informed eastern references, I say that RM achieved the dissolution of personal ego and/or continuous meditation. How absolute was the continuity and when the "meditativeness" was interrupted, what moods and activities filled the gap. Obviously, few of us have done the Self-enquiry practive as RM has. In PB, I quote someone who went to great lengths to practice and describe the "far out lands" of advance meditation; his point was that we do not abolish a relationship with the world. RM devotees may say that Enlightenment does not mean indifference to the world; but then who amongst them will declare that they are enlightened. Instead they speak as if "it is the the road" to enlightenment is full of indifference to the world! As evidence that enlightenment does not turn a cold shoulder to the world they provide anecdotes of how he helped manage the building of ashrams. Was the meditation then unbroken? My point with the "utimate metaphysical" post was to initiate the challenge to what I perceive as their "fixation" on the Absolute. Members of the RM group ignored the post I suspect because they consider it another antagonistic offer to them to hear a voice that says "life is real, rude and it is not absolutely absolutely abolished during or after the course in self-enquiry". I don't want to be peculiar and question the motives of "adoration". Quite frankly, with regard to my own spiritual cultivation, I must make an effort to appreciate where someone else's idealism, borne in their unabashed adoration begins and ends. I appreciate your reply/quote of Adyashanti in this regard. RM is worthy of study and the practice of self-enquiry can offer up gems of self-knowlege. But I would not want to delude myself into believing that while the"world mind" disappears with the dissolution of my personal identity, such a state is constant or beyond corruption. (from ultimately metaphysical quote) > This, dualist who offer dualism as ultimate are wrong, but > then nondualist Vedantists are also misconceiving the proper > application of their tenets when they on applying their "no world > exist, no ego exists" doctrine to human life generally. > > paul brunton > (an enlightened reply) > ))) Many spiritual seekers get "stuck" in emptiness, in the > absolute, in transcendence. They cling to bliss, or peace, or > indifference. > When the self-centered motivation for living disappears, many > seekers become indifferent. They see the perfection of all existence > and find no reason for doing anything, including caring for > themselves or others. I call this "taking a false refuge." It is a > very subtle egoic trap; > it's a fixation in the absolute and all unconscious form of > attachment that masquerades as liberation. It can be very difficult > to wake someone up from this deceptive fixation because they > literally have no motivation to let go of it. Stuck in a form of > divine indifference, such people believe they have reached the top of > the mountain when actually they are hiding out halfway up its slope. > > Enlightenment does not mean one should disappear into the > realm of transcendence. To be fixated in the absolute is simply the > polar opposite of being fixated in the relative. With the dawning of > true enlightenment, there is a tremendous birthing of impersonal > Love and wisdom that never fixates in any realm of experience. To > awaken to the absolute view is profound and transformative, but to > awaken from all fixed points of view is the birth of true nonduality. > If emptiness cannot dance, it is not true Emptiness. If moonlight > does not flood the empty night sky and reflect in every drop of > water, on every blade of grass, then you are only looking at your own > empty dream. I say, Wake up! Then, your heart will be flooded with a > Love that you cannot contain. > > ~ Adyashanti > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Dear Cornelius, Perhaps you miss the basic point of the Advaita Vedanta that was taught by Ramana Maharshi, (and other sages since the time of the Upahishads). One way that they say this is: Only Brahman is real. The world is unreal. The world is only Brahman. This cannot be understood from the standpoint of the world. It seems to me that you are trying to interpret Ramana's teachings from this standpoint of the world. My teacher says that what one experieces is a matter of where the seeker stands. If one stands as a body, then there is the world. If one stands as Self, there is only Self. This has been taught for thousands of years. Perhaps it is worthwhile for the seeker to see how this is true within their own being. We are Not two, Richard RamanaMaharshi, "cornelius" <d_agenda2000> wrote: > They have as their model - RM- someone who they can not describe as > being indifferent. As Guru, he was able to impart Reality to the > seeker; thus his service to humanity. > > That Truth being that All is One, the One Consciousness. > But this is yet another understanding that is realizable only in > measure. > Without the informed eastern references, I say that RM achieved the > dissolution of personal ego and/or continuous meditation. How > absolute was the continuity and when the "meditativeness" was > interrupted, what moods and activities filled the gap. > Obviously, few of us have done the Self-enquiry practive as RM has. > In PB, I quote someone who went to great lengths to practice and > describe the "far out lands" of advance meditation; his point was > that we do not abolish a relationship with the world. > > RM devotees may say that Enlightenment does not mean indifference to > the world; but then who amongst them will declare that they are > enlightened. Instead they speak as if "it is the the road" to > enlightenment is full of indifference to the world! > > As evidence that enlightenment does not turn a cold shoulder to the > world they provide anecdotes of how he helped manage the building of > ashrams. Was the meditation then unbroken? > > My point with the "utimate metaphysical" post was to initiate the > challenge to what I perceive as their "fixation" on the Absolute. > Members of the RM group ignored the post I suspect because they > consider it another antagonistic offer to them to hear a voice that > says "life is real, rude and it is not absolutely absolutely > abolished during or after the course in self-enquiry". > I don't want to be peculiar and question the motives of "adoration". > Quite frankly, with regard to my own spiritual cultivation, I must > make an effort to appreciate where someone else's idealism, borne in > their unabashed adoration begins and ends. > > I appreciate your reply/quote of Adyashanti in this regard. > > RM is worthy of study and the practice of self-enquiry can offer up > gems of self-knowlege. But I would not want to delude myself into > believing that while the"world mind" disappears with the dissolution > of my personal identity, such a state is constant or beyond > corruption. > > > (from ultimately metaphysical quote) > > > This, dualist who offer dualism as ultimate are wrong, but > > then nondualist Vedantists are also misconceiving the proper > > application of their tenets when they on applying their "no world > > exist, no ego exists" doctrine to human life generally. > > > > paul brunton > > > > (an enlightened reply) > > > ))) Many spiritual seekers get "stuck" in emptiness, in the > > absolute, in transcendence. They cling to bliss, or peace, or > > indifference. > > When the self-centered motivation for living disappears, many > > seekers become indifferent. They see the perfection of all > existence > > and find no reason for doing anything, including caring for > > themselves or others. I call this "taking a false refuge." It is a > > very subtle egoic trap; > > it's a fixation in the absolute and all unconscious form of > > attachment that masquerades as liberation. It can be very difficult > > to wake someone up from this deceptive fixation because they > > literally have no motivation to let go of it. Stuck in a form of > > divine indifference, such people believe they have reached the top > of > > the mountain when actually they are hiding out halfway up its slope. > > > > Enlightenment does not mean one should disappear into the > > realm of transcendence. To be fixated in the absolute is simply the > > polar opposite of being fixated in the relative. With the dawning > of > > true enlightenment, there is a tremendous birthing of impersonal > > Love and wisdom that never fixates in any realm of experience. To > > awaken to the absolute view is profound and transformative, but to > > awaken from all fixed points of view is the birth of true > nonduality. > > If emptiness cannot dance, it is not true Emptiness. If moonlight > > does not flood the empty night sky and reflect in every drop of > > water, on every blade of grass, then you are only looking at your > own > > empty dream. I say, Wake up! Then, your heart will be flooded with > a > > Love that you cannot contain. > > > > ~ Adyashanti > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Dear Cornelius , as I( understand this dilemna - Ramana Maharshi when cooking , talking , directing , book binding , editing ,writing , walking etc . was still in the enlightned non-dual state .The functional part of the mind still responds appropriately to 'what is' ..he or she (and other enlightend beings ] are not acting from the ' me ' which has left them ..From the emptiness of "no mind' the appropriate action arises -God willed - they witness it impartially etc. Does this clarify it ? regards Alan P>S>Ramana often said to doubter's something like "let's surrender first and see what happens afterwards "."Self Enquiry is also an infallible way "- he also said . <tt> They have as their model - RM- someone who they can not describe as <BR> being indifferent. As Guru, he was able to impart Reality to the <BR> seeker; thus his service to humanity.<BR> <BR> That Truth being that All is One, the One Consciousness.<BR> But this is yet another understanding that is realizable only in <BR> measure.<BR> Without the informed eastern references, I say that RM achieved the <BR> dissolution of personal ego and/or continuous meditation. How <BR> absolute was the continuity and when the "meditativeness" was <BR> interrupted, what moods and activities filled the gap.<BR> Obviously, few of us have done the Self-enquiry practive as RM has.<BR> In PB, I quote someone who went to great lengths to practice and <BR> describe the "far out lands" of advance meditation; his point was <BR> that we do not abolish a relationship with the world.<BR> <BR> RM devotees may say that Enlightenment does not mean indifference to <BR> the world; but then who amongst them will declare that they are <BR> enlightened. Instead they speak as if "it is the the road" to <BR> enlightenment is full of indifference to the world!<BR> <BR> As evidence that enlightenment does not turn a cold shoulder to the <BR> world they provide anecdotes of how he helped manage the building of <BR> ashrams. Was the meditation then unbroken?<BR> <BR> My point with the "utimate metaphysical" post was to initiate the <BR> challenge to what I perceive as their "fixation" on the Absolute. <BR> Members of the RM group ignored the post I suspect because they <BR> consider it another antagonistic offer to them to hear a voice that <BR> says "life is real, rude and it is not absolutely absolutely <BR> abolished during or after the course in self-enquiry".<BR> I don't want to be peculiar and question the motives of "adoration".<BR> Quite frankly, with regard to my own spiritual cultivation, I must <BR> make an effort to appreciate where someone else's idealism, borne in <BR> their unabashed adoration begins and ends.<BR> <BR> I appreciate your reply/quote of Adyashanti in this regard.<BR> <BR> RM is worthy of study and the practice of self-enquiry can offer up <BR> gems of self-knowlege. But I would not want to delude myself into <BR> believing that while the"world mind" disappears with the dissolution <BR> of my personal identity, such a state is constant or beyond <BR> corruption.<BR> <BR> <BR> (from ultimately metaphysical quote)<BR> <BR> > This, dualist who offer dualism as ultimate are wrong, but <BR> > then nondualist Vedantists are also misconceiving the proper <BR> > application of their tenets when they on applying their "no world <BR> > exist, no ego exists" doctrine to human life generally.<BR> > <BR> > paul brunton<BR> > <BR> <BR> (an enlightened reply)<BR> <BR> > ))) Many spiritual seekers get "stuck" in emptiness, in the <BR> > absolute, in transcendence. They cling to bliss, or peace, or <BR> > indifference. <BR> > When the self-centered motivation for living disappears, many <BR> > seekers become indifferent. They see the perfection of all <BR> existence <BR> > and find no reason for doing anything, including caring for <BR> > themselves or others. I call this "taking a false refuge." It is a <BR> > very subtle egoic trap;<BR> > it's a fixation in the absolute and all unconscious form of <BR> > attachment that masquerades as liberation. It can be very difficult <BR> > to wake someone up from this deceptive fixation because they <BR> > literally have no motivation to let go of it. Stuck in a form of <BR> > divine indifference, such people believe they have reached the top <BR> of <BR> > the mountain when actually they are hiding out halfway up its slope.<BR> > <BR> > Enlightenment does not mean one should disappear into the <BR> > realm of transcendence. To be fixated in the absolute is simply the <BR> > polar opposite of being fixated in the relative. With the dawning <BR> of <BR> > true enlightenment, there is a tremendous birthing of impersonal <BR> > Love and wisdom that never fixates in any realm of experience. To <BR> > awaken to the absolute view is profound and transformative, but to <BR> > awaken from all fixed points of view is the birth of true <BR> nonduality. <BR> > If emptiness cannot dance, it is not true Emptiness. If moonlight <BR> > does not flood the empty night sky and reflect in every drop of <BR> > water, on every blade of grass, then you are only looking at your <BR> own <BR> > empty dream. I say, Wake up! Then, your heart will be flooded with <BR> a <BR> > Love that you cannot contain.<BR> > <BR> > ~ Adyashanti<BR> > <BR> <BR> <BR> </tt> <br> <tt> <BR> Post message: RamanaMaharshi <BR> Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- <BR> Un: RamanaMaharshi- <BR> List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner <BR> <BR> Shortcut URL to this page:<BR> <a href="/community/RamanaMaharshi"> Terms of Service</a>.</tt> </br> </body></html> Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.''>http://uk.my.'>http://uk.my. 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.