Guest guest Posted December 30, 2002 Report Share Posted December 30, 2002 Another member of this group asked if this is Ramana on the "kosha" post. She did not think it was Ramana. I said it was, but I have to admit I have the same feelings as she. Is this Ramana or Brunton and company putting a spin on Ramana. Up until this book I had practically no qualms concerning anything that was ascribed to Ramana. I have to tell anyone who is reading this that because of stuff in this book, Consciousness Immortality, I am no longer an outer guru Ramana Bhakti. I was unable to bond with the 5 previous Masters that initiated me and thought because Ramana was so pure I would switch over and become a outer Guru Bhakti. Now I see that I can only worship the inner Guru Self or the Attention. I through this out to the group because someone here may tell me that it was not Ramana who said the stuff in the two paragraphs below. Don't worry I still accept Ramana and Nisargadatta as my two teachers and will stick around until my meditation kicks in or I not longer have to meditate. Eternal Blessings, Alton Q: Why do you not preach to set people on the right path? M: You have already decided that I do not preach. Do you know who I am and what preaching is? How do you know that I'm not doing it? Does preaching consist of mounting a platform and haranguing people? Preaching is simply the communication of knowledge. It may also be done in silence. What do you think of someone listening to a speech for and hour and going away unimpressed? Compare that with another who sits in the holy presence and goes away after some time with their outlook on life totally changed. Which is better--preaching loudly without effect, or sitting silently emanating intuitive forces that influence others? .. .. Oral questions and answers may appear to benefit the questioner and a few listeners in this hall, but actually they obstruct, delay and interrupt the silent communication of thought waves to thousand of spiritual aspirants all over the world. So any sadhaks who come to me for enquiry and elucidation would amply benefit themselves and others by sitting before me silently- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2002 Report Share Posted December 30, 2002 Dear Alton, this part is not shown clearly as a Ramana-quote in the book. I would read it more as an interpretation by Paul Brunton. In Sri Ramana Gabriele - ">Alton Slater <leenalton (AT) hawaii (DOT) rr.com> RamanaMaharshi Monday, December 30, 2002 3:45 PM [RamanaMaharshi] Apostasy? Another member of this group asked if this is Ramana on the "kosha" post. She did not think it was Ramana. I said it was, but I have to admit I have the same feelings as she.Is this Ramana or Brunton and company putting a spin on Ramana. Up until this book I had practically no qualms concerning anything that was ascribed to Ramana. I have to tell anyone who is reading this that because of stuff in this book, Consciousness Immortality, I am no longer an outer guru Ramana Bhakti.I was unable to bond with the 5 previous Masters that initiated me and thought because Ramana was so pure I would switch over and become a outer Guru Bhakti.Now I see that I can only worship the inner Guru Self or the Attention.I through this out to the group because someone here may tell me that it was not Ramana who said the stuff in the two paragraphs below.Don't worry I still accept Ramana and Nisargadatta as my two teachers and will stick around until my meditation kicks in or I not longer have to meditate.Eternal Blessings,AltonQ: Why do you not preach to set people on the right path?M: You have already decided that I do not preach. Do you know who I am and what preaching is? How do you know that I'm not doing it? Does preaching consist of mounting a platform and haranguing people? Preaching is simply the communication of knowledge. It may also be done in silence. What do you think of someone listening to a speech for and hour and going away unimpressed? Compare that with another who sits in the holy presence and goes away after some time with their outlook on life totally changed. Which is better--preaching loudly without effect, or sitting silently emanating intuitive forces that influence others?..Oral questions and answers may appear to benefit the questioner and a few listeners in this hall, but actually they obstruct, delay and interrupt the silent communication of thought waves to thousand of spiritual aspirants all over the world. So any sadhaks who come to me for enquiry and elucidation would amply benefit themselves and others by sitting before me silently- Post message: RamanaMaharshi Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- Un: RamanaMaharshi- List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner Shortcut URL to this page: /community/RamanaMaharshi Your use of is subject to the Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2002 Report Share Posted December 30, 2002 PS: My comment was relating to the kosha-post, not to the quote you have given below. Relating to that below there is something similar found in Talks or another book, but I can't remember at the moment where. It is about the most powerful effect of silent upadesa. But in the last part which starts with: "Oral questions ..." I would also not trust in 100%. There is somehow a wrong inclination in as it gives the impression that people should not ask questions to Ramana. So perhaps some context missing or whatever. Ramana's highest teaching was in silence, but he always willingly answered all questions if earnestly asked. Gabriele RamanaMaharshi, "Gabriele Ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote: > Dear Alton, > this part is not shown clearly as a Ramana-quote in the book. > I would read it more as an interpretation by Paul Brunton. > > > In Sri Ramana > Gabriele > > - > Alton Slater <leenalton@h...> > RamanaMaharshi > Monday, December 30, 2002 3:45 PM > [RamanaMaharshi] Apostasy? > > > > Another member of this group asked if this is Ramana on the "kosha" > post. She did not > think it was Ramana. I said it was, but I have to admit I have the > same feelings as she. > Is this Ramana or Brunton and company putting a spin on Ramana. > Up until this book I had practically no qualms concerning anything > that was ascribed to Ramana. > > I have to tell anyone who is reading this that because of stuff in > this book, Consciousness Immortality, I am no longer an outer guru > Ramana Bhakti. > I was unable to bond with the 5 previous Masters that initiated me and > thought because Ramana was so pure I would switch over and become a > outer Guru Bhakti. > Now I see that I can only worship the inner Guru Self or the > Attention. > > I through this out to the group because someone here may tell me that > it was not Ramana who said the stuff in the two paragraphs below. > > Don't worry I still accept Ramana and Nisargadatta as my two teachers > and will stick around until my meditation kicks in or I not longer > have to meditate. > > Eternal Blessings, > Alton > > > > > Q: Why do you not preach to set people on the right path? > M: You have already decided that I do not preach. Do you know who I am > and what preaching is? How do you know that I'm not doing it? Does > preaching consist of mounting a platform and haranguing people? > Preaching is simply the communication of knowledge. It may also be > done in silence. What do you think of someone listening to a speech > for and hour and going away unimpressed? Compare that with another who > sits in the holy presence and goes away after some time with their > outlook on life totally changed. Which is better--preaching loudly > without effect, or sitting silently emanating intuitive forces that > influence others? > > . > . > > > Oral questions and answers may appear to benefit the questioner and a > few listeners in this hall, but actually they obstruct, delay and > interrupt the silent communication of thought waves to thousand of > spiritual aspirants all over the world. So any sadhaks who come to me > for enquiry and elucidation would amply benefit themselves and others > by sitting before me silently- > > > > Post message: RamanaMaharshi > Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- > Un: RamanaMaharshi- > List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner > > Shortcut URL to this page: > /community/RamanaMaharshi > > Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2002 Report Share Posted December 30, 2002 om namo bhagavate sri ramanaya Dear Alton, > I through this out to the group because someone here may tell me that > it was not Ramana who said the stuff in the two paragraphs below. In Talks (no. 282 and 285) there are similar (same?) conversations. 282: D. : Why do you not preach to the people to set them on the right path? M. : You have already decided by yourself that I do not preach. Do you know who I am and what preaching is? 285: D. : Why does not Sri Bhagavan go about and preach the Truth to the people at large? M. : How do you know that I am not doing it? Does preaching consist in mounting a platform and haranguing to the people around? Preaching is simple communication of knowledge. It may be done in Silence too. What do you think of someone listening to a harangue for and hour and going away without being impressed by it so as to change his life? Compare him with another who sits in a holy presence and leaves after some time with his outlook on life totally changed. Which is better : To preach loudly without effect or to sit silently sending forth intuitive forces to play on others? ---- Ever Yours in Sri Bhagavan, Miles >[snip] > Q: Why do you not preach to set people on the right path? > M: You have already decided that I do not preach. Do you know who I am > and what preaching is? How do you know that I'm not doing it? Does > preaching consist of mounting a platform and haranguing people? > Preaching is simply the communication of knowledge. It may also be > done in silence. What do you think of someone listening to a speech > for and hour and going away unimpressed? Compare that with another who > sits in the holy presence and goes away after some time with their > outlook on life totally changed. Which is better--preaching loudly > without effect, or sitting silently emanating intuitive forces that > influence others? > > Oral questions and answers may appear to benefit the questioner and a > few listeners in this hall, but actually they obstruct, delay and > interrupt the silent communication of thought waves to thousand of > spiritual aspirants all over the world. So any sadhaks who come to me > for enquiry and elucidation would amply benefit themselves and others > by sitting before me silently- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 om namo bhagavate sri ramanaya Dear Gabriele, This posting (by Alton; see below) does not seem incongruous with Bhagavan's teaching. The proximity of the Guru removes irrelevant questions by simply reducing them to the common denominator. Until the disciple is prepared to surrender his questions, made up of the curiousity of mindstuff (ego), and adding to the mindstuff cart, can he remain quiet? 'Reality is simply the loss of ego. Destroy the ego by seeking its identity. Because the ego is no entity it willl automatically vanish and Reality will shine forth by itself. This is the direct method. Whereas all other methods are done, only retaining the ego. In those paths there arise so many doubts and the eternal question remains to be tackled finally. But in this method the final question is the only one and it is raised from the very beginning. No sadhanas are necessary for engaging in this quest.' (from Talks; 146) Ever Yours in Sri Bhagavan, Miles >[snip]> > Gabriele wrote: > But in the last part which starts with: "Oral questions ..." I would > also not trust in 100%. There is somehow a wrong inclination in as it > gives the impression that people should not ask questions to Ramana. > So perhaps some context missing or whatever. > Ramana's highest teaching was in silence, but he always willingly > answered all questions if earnestly asked. >> - >> Alton Slater <leenalton@h...> >> Oral questions and answers may appear to benefit the questioner >> and a few listeners in this hall, but actually they obstruct, delay and >> interrupt the silent communication of thought waves to thousand >> of spiritual aspirants all over the world. So any sadhaks who come >> to me for enquiry and elucidation would amply benefit themselves and >> others by sitting before me silently- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 --In the Bodhisattva path, Bhagavan will be the Guru forever, even among Enlightened people; and "Bhagavan" will then have two meanings: the Self, and the real Person (which also applies to seekers); but the Enlightened people will still have Bhagavan as a Guru even in the relative sense since a. His love is profound b. He "really" exists in the inner planes, and c. For the sake of seekers, the latter need an objective focal point, so they too can get sucked into the Self and realize their innate Identity as That. Only in the Nihilistic schools is there talk of relinquishing the form of the Guru into the formless. For Bodhisattvas, Bhagavan rules forever! - In RamanaMaharshi, Miles Wright <ramana.bhakta@v...> wrote: > om namo bhagavate sri ramanaya > > Dear Gabriele, > > This posting (by Alton; see below) does not seem incongruous with Bhagavan's > teaching. > > The proximity of the Guru removes irrelevant questions by simply reducing > them to the common denominator. Until the disciple is prepared to surrender > his questions, made up of the curiousity of mindstuff (ego), and adding to > the mindstuff cart, can he remain quiet? > > 'Reality is simply the loss of ego. Destroy the ego by seeking its identity. > Because the ego is no entity it willl automatically vanish and Reality will > shine forth by itself. This is the direct method. Whereas all other methods > are done, only retaining the ego. In those paths there arise so many doubts > and the eternal question remains to be tackled finally. But in this method > the final question is the only one and it is raised from the very beginning. > No sadhanas are necessary for engaging in this quest.' (from Talks; 146) > > Ever Yours in Sri Bhagavan, > Miles > > >[snip]> > > Gabriele wrote: > > But in the last part which starts with: "Oral questions ..." I would > > also not trust in 100%. There is somehow a wrong inclination in as it > > gives the impression that people should not ask questions to Ramana. > > So perhaps some context missing or whatever. > > Ramana's highest teaching was in silence, but he always willingly > > answered all questions if earnestly asked. > > > >> - > >> Alton Slater <leenalton@h...> > >> Oral questions and answers may appear to benefit the questioner > >> and a few listeners in this hall, but actually they obstruct, delay and > >> interrupt the silent communication of thought waves to thousand > >> of spiritual aspirants all over the world. So any sadhaks who come > >> to me for enquiry and elucidation would amply benefit themselves and > >> others by sitting before me silently- 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.