Vichara is rejection ??? Rob, Richard or anyone

[Guest guest]

If you keep diverting your attention from objects appearing, like bodily

sensations that the attention is attached to or, thoughts, visions, pleasant,

unpleasant or neutral feelings, external or internal sounds, anything that is

perceivable or conceivable, then one is in fact rejecting all objects that come

onto the screen of consciousness? Isn't that neti neti, not this not this? Is

Vichara the ultimate rejection of phenomena?

 

Now when one is rejecting all appearing objects, if I got it right in the above

paragraph, then that "I" that one is attempting to focus on cant really be

focused on and that is the paradox. It seems to me to boil down to having some

mysterious power grant you access to the "Self' since the "Self cant see the

"Self"

 

Also, did not Sri Ramana recommend dhyana to those with weak minds, to make

their minds stronger in able to do Vichara? You know there is such a thing as

gradients. Like you don't enter a triathlon until you can swim.

 

Now when one is able to go into Samadhi through dhyana practice, can one then

ask " Who am I' and find the "Self"?

 

You answer these question and if I am satisfied, I may disappear for a few

years. LOL

 

Thanks in advance to anyone who wants to try to answer, including my Ramana

friend Harsha.

 

 

Love,

The "Self" aka Alton

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Alton,

 

First, one does not need to "divert" attention from objects, rather

one can use these objects and discriminate what is real and what is

not. Discrimination sees the object as objective then looks to see

where the (non-objective) sense of reality or existence comes from.

The Reality, it turns out, comes from Being-Consciousness (which is

who we are). Misidentification is a matter of superimposition of

Reality (or constancy or interiorness) onto something other than the

Self. In this misidentification, we project the Reality of Self, onto

some imagination of mind, and then see that which has the Reality

projected onto it as real. Discrimination is a matter of "going back

the way we came," and looking back to the Self and return the Reality

from whence it came. This discrimination is seeing the snake for the

rope that it always was.

 

The following is from Ramana's "40 Verses of Reality,"

 

36. Only if the thought 'I am the body' occurs will the meditation 'I

am not this, I am That', help one to abide as That. Why should we for

ever be thinking, 'I am That'? Is it necessary for man to go on

thinking 'I am a man'? Are we not always That?

 

With the "I am the body" thought arises you, she, them, the world and

all else. If one sees multiplicity, then Ramana advises to reject the

multiplicity and return to the Self.

 

So in the discrimination, one is not focusing on the object, but

rather on the Consciousness in which the object appears. It is this

Consciousness that is real, that is the Self. Discrimination removes

the misidentification, and brings about Knowledge of the Self.

Realization consists of Self-Knowledge.

 

Further, discrimination and negation help eliminate the body

misidentification, which Ramana says is chief among the

misidentifications. This discrimination must be combined, though

with inquiry. After one sees who one is not, one must return to "who

am I?" More from "40 Verses:"

 

29. The only enquiry leading to Self-realization is seeking the

Source of the 'I' with in-turned mind and without uttering the

word 'I'. Meditation on 'I am not this; I am That' may be an aid to

the enquiry but it cannot be the enquiry.

 

Next, the Self is only known by the Self. It cannot be apprehended by

the mind. As I have written about before, it is like there are

two `steps' to the inquiry. The first is for the mind, and has as a

key component this discrimination that I wrote of above. The

discrimination helps bring about the bhava (conviction) that, to say

it one way, Reality is what is Real. This bhava drives the mind

within, making deep inquiry possible.

 

Read, reflect and deeply meditate on what has been written. Look to

see how these are true within your Being. Look right now to see your

Existence. It is constant, changeless, without beginning or end. In

the experience of this moment and in your oldest memory, this sense

of Existence is the same. The Self is the Always So. This is present

right now (how can it be any different?). This constancy of Existence

is a great way to start your mediation and discrimination. As I look

from the constancy of Existence to this changing body, it helps me

see where the Reality comes from. To return one's attention to the

Reality is the focus of inquiry.

 

We are Not two,

Richard

RamanaMaharshi, "THE \"SELF\"" <leenalton@h...> wrote:

>

> If you keep diverting your attention from objects appearing, like

bodily sensations that the attention is attached to or, thoughts,

visions, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral feelings, external or

internal sounds, anything that is perceivable or conceivable, then

one is in fact rejecting all objects that come onto the screen of

consciousness? Isn't that neti neti, not this not this? Is Vichara

the ultimate rejection of phenomena?

>

> Now when one is rejecting all appearing objects, if I got it right

in the above paragraph, then that "I" that one is attempting to focus

on cant really be focused on and that is the paradox. It seems to me

to boil down to having some mysterious power grant you access to

the "Self' since the "Self cant see the "Self"

>

> Also, did not Sri Ramana recommend dhyana to those with weak minds,

to make their minds stronger in able to do Vichara? You know there is

such a thing as gradients. Like you don't enter a triathlon until you

can swim.

>

> Now when one is able to go into Samadhi through dhyana practice,

can one then ask " Who am I' and find the "Self"?

>

> You answer these question and if I am satisfied, I may disappear

for a few years. LOL

>

> Thanks in advance to anyone who wants to try to answer, including

my Ramana friend Harsha.

>

>

> Love,

> The "Self" aka Alton

[Guest guest]

Bhagavan once said:

 

"Not allowing the mind to go outwards towards objects (i.e. rejection) is

vairagya. Turning the mind inwards towards the self is vichara or jnana"

 

regards

 

Swami

 

>Message: 10

> Sat, 16 Nov 2002 22:50:58 -1000

> "THE \"SELF\"" <leenalton

>Vichara is rejection ??? Rob, Richard or anyone

>

>

>If you keep diverting your attention from objects appearing, like bodily

>sensations that the attention is attached to or, thoughts, visions,

>pleasant, unpleasant or neutral feelings, external or internal sounds,

>anything that is perceivable or conceivable, then one is in fact rejecting

>all objects that come onto the screen of consciousness? Isn't that neti

>neti, not this not this? Is Vichara the ultimate rejection of phenomena?

>

>Now when one is rejecting all appearing objects, if I got it right in the

>above paragraph, then that "I" that one is attempting to focus on cant

>really be focused on and that is the paradox. It seems to me to boil down

>to having some mysterious power grant you access to the "Self' since the

>"Self cant see the "Self"

>

>Also, did not Sri Ramana recommend dhyana to those with weak minds, to make

>their minds stronger in able to do Vichara? You know there is such a thing

>as gradients. Like you don't enter a triathlon until you can swim.

>

>Now when one is able to go into Samadhi through dhyana practice, can one

>then ask " Who am I' and find the "Self"?

>

>You answer these question and if I am satisfied, I may disappear for a few

>years. LOL

>

>Thanks in advance to anyone who wants to try to answer, including my

>Ramana friend Harsha.

>

>

>Love,

>The "Self" aka Alton

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>______________________

>______________________

>

>

>

>Your use of is subject to

 

 

_______________

Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

[Guest guest]

Dear Alton,

 

> If you keep diverting your attention from objects

> appearing, like bodily sensations that the attention

> is attached to or, thoughts, visions, pleasant, unpleasant

> or neutral feelings, external or internal sounds, anything

> that is perceivable or conceivable, then one is in fact

> rejecting all objects that come onto the screen of

> consciousness? Isn't that neti neti, not this not this? Is

> Vichara the ultimate rejection of phenomena?

 

The best short answer I can think of is Bhagavan's

metaphor about the dog. He said that enquiry is like a

dog who searches for his master by following his

master's scent.

 

You have to be like that dog. Follow the scent.

The scent is the feeling of "I" and the goal is the

Self.

 

(I'm tempted to stop here because if we really

imagine ourselves in the dog's place, the question

is fully answered. But I'm too much of a windbag

to stop.)

 

Along the way, the dog encounters a lot of other

interesting aromas. In the same way, we encounter

thoughts and pains and other objects.

 

The dog doesn't pay attention to the other scents

because he really wants to find his master and the

other scents don't lead him to that goal.

 

In the same way, we try to keep our attention on

"I" because that is what will lead us to our goal.

 

Is the dog "rejecting" the other scents? I wouldn't

use that word. I'd say he just isn't interested in them

at the moment.

 

One of Bhagavan's devotees wrote a book called

"Hunting the I." That's what we're doing -- hunting the

I, tracking it down, following it.

 

On the other hand, we have to become the prey

(surrender) somewhere along the way. These

metaphors definitely have their limitations.

 

> Isn't that neti neti, not this not this? Is

> Vichara the ultimate rejection of phenomena?

 

Bhagavan was insistent that enquiry and neti-neti are

two different methods. For example, near the

beginning of "Talks With Ramana Maharshi" we find:

 

.. D.: I meditate neti-neti (not this -- not this).

..

.. M: No -- that is not meditation. Find the

.. source. You must reach the source without fail.

.. The false 'I' will disappear and the real 'I' will

.. appear. (Article 41.)

 

The difference is, with neti-neti you look at objects

and recognize that they are not you. In vichara you

look for the subject and hunt for it and hold on to it.

 

The difference is only clear if we consider neti-neti

and enquiry as methods. If we consider their

results, or their goals, they are the same. This seems

to cause some confusion. Right now we're talking

about them as methods.

 

Sadhu Om, one of Bhagavan's main devotee-commentators,

said that neti-neti is negative and enquiry is positive,

because the first focuses on that which is *not* you and

the second tries to focus on that which *is* you.

 

This whole issue is addressed directly by Bhagavan

(in a very terse way) in article 25 of "Talks with

Ramana Maharshi" where he says:

 

.. Seeking the drik (seer) until all the drisya (the

.. seen) disappears, the drik will become subtler

.. and subtler until the absolute drik alone survives.

.. The process is called drisya vilaya (the

.. disappearance of the objective world).

 

Notice the difference between method and result here.

The method is to seek the subject, i.e., the effort is aimed

at the subject. The result of this is that the objects

disappear. However, the method doesn't pay any

attention to the objects.

 

The dialogue then continues:

 

.. D.: Why should the objects drisya be eliminated?

.. Cannot the Truth be realized even keeping the

.. object as it is?

..

.. M.: No. Elimination of drisya means elimination

.. of separate identities of the subject and object.

 

Perhaps this is relevant to your question about rejection,

if by rejection you meant something like elimination. We

learn here that things get eliminated only in the sense that

a misunderstanding about them is cleared up.

 

> Also, did not Sri Ramana recommend dhyana to those

> with weak minds, to make their minds stronger in able

> to do Vichara?

 

It's true that he said dhyana provides this benefit.

However I don't think it's quite accurate to say that he

recommended it. What he actually said was that enquiry

also provides this same benefit, so why not simply do

enquiry from the beginning instead of starting with dhyana

and switching to enquiry down the road?

 

> Now when one is able to go into Samadhi through dhyana

> practice, can one then ask " Who am I' and find the "Self"?

 

I don't think the situation is so cut and dried, but the

general idea is right. Bhagavan said it's necessary to

get to a stage where the mind is pretty quiet before you

can do the "sinking into the Self" stage of enquiry.

 

I hope I haven't misrepresented Bhagavan too badly here.

 

Rob

 

RamanaMaharshi, "THE \"SELF\"" <leenalton@h...> wrote:

>

> If you keep diverting your attention from objects appearing....

[Guest guest]

RamanaMaharshi, "THE \"SELF\"" <leenalton@h...> wrote:

>

> If you keep diverting your attention from objects appearing, like

bodily sensations that the attention is attached to or, thoughts,

visions, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral feelings, external or

internal sounds, anything that is perceivable or conceivable, then

one is in fact rejecting all objects that come onto the screen of

consciousness? Isn't that neti neti, not this not this? Is Vichara

the ultimate rejection of phenomena?

>

> Now when one is rejecting all appearing objects, if I got it right

in the above paragraph, then that "I" that one is attempting to focus

on cant really be focused on and that is the paradox. It seems to me

to boil down to having some mysterious power grant you access to

the "Self' since the "Self cant see the "Self"

>

> Also, did not Sri Ramana recommend dhyana to those with weak minds,

to make their minds stronger in able to do Vichara? You know there is

such a thing as gradients. Like you don't enter a triathlon until you

can swim.

>

> Now when one is able to go into Samadhi through dhyana practice,

can one then ask " Who am I' and find the "Self"?

>

> You answer these question and if I am satisfied, I may disappear

for a few years. LOL

>

> Thanks in advance to anyone who wants to try to answer, including

my Ramana friend Harsha.

>

>

> Love,

> The "Self" aka Alton

>

>

>

 

****************

Alton you seem to be getting clearer and clearer in your path. No,

this is not Rob or Richard or the voice of spiritual experience.

 

But I had an experience just last night nearing the full moon which

is so well described by what you have written. It was like being on

one side which is the world and thoughts and then disappearing into

the other side where there was nothing, neti, neti, describes it. It

was so totally UN phenomenal I did not recognize it. But if samadhi

is like that then, it was so. It was like just plain disappearing. Is

that possible? Is that an experience of the Self? No experience at

all? I don't know but it seemed brief and it was like one moment I

was there and the next I was dropped out of the box, the body. And

best of all I have STOPPED trying to be or do anything or to

accomplish any state or BE spiritual, I just am being myself you

might say. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

PS: I left you a note a while back within another post in which I

released your consciousness. And then I was reading here the next day

after I posted that note, (and had no way of knowing if you read it

physically) and you were saying you had some sort of Samadhi

experience, that was so weird, but I only believe in spirituality not

coincidences.

 

Netemara

>

**************

>