Guest guest Posted October 5, 2003 Report Share Posted October 5, 2003 HI, .This book is for every one out there if you care to wake up out of the dream. The title is Nobody Home From belief to clarity ... by Jan kersschot...author of coming home.ISBN# 1-84293-062-1.....Best regards Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2003 Report Share Posted October 5, 2003 Last night I lay meditating as I do every night, first of all thinking about the postings regarding Sandeep etc and then quite quickly getting to the place of no thoughts arising. Asking myself (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? I know from previous times if I stay with no thoughts long enough then eventually the other 'noises' stop and there is a perfect silence which usually is very short lived. After which I become disturbed or drift off to sleep. But last night I tried to stay with who am I, who is having no thought. The answer I got at first was: 'Me obviously. It's me here.' After that I realised that even the question was not coming from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. So I just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back to 'who is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, but this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact with the world, (put the kettle on, drink tea etc.) If I am just an observer then who is the agent interacting with world? I understand the concept of I (self) and i (ego) but which is which and what do I discard here? Am I getting ahead of myself here? - ie I hold the concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs but to test everything for ourselves? The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my practice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2003 Report Share Posted October 5, 2003 --- Dear Mike, this is a serious question and I will do my best to answer from my own understanding.however I bow to others who may add to or correct what I am saying in the light of their own experience which may be deeper than mine. you wrote: > Last night I lay meditating as I do every night, first of all > thinking about the postings regarding Sandeep etc and then quite > quickly getting to the place of no thoughts arising. Asking myself > (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? This is a sound form of Self Enquiry I know from > previous times if I stay with no thoughts long enough then eventually > the other 'noises' stop and there is a perfect silence which usually > is very short lived. even this is a blessing -and a positive indication -no matter how short lived. After which I become disturbed or drift off to > sleep. quite common at the beginning of this practice when the I thought let's go . > But last night I tried to stay with who am I, who is having no > thought? good The answer I got at first was: 'Me obviously. It's me > here.' ok After that I realised that even the question was not coming > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. the witnessing awareness appeared and saw the 'me' questionig. ok So I > just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back to 'who > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, yes in the state of Self Enquiry awareness emerged as the observer or witness for you but > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > with the world, (put the kettle on, drink tea etc.) No when functioning as an ajnani the 'me' functions.The witnessing consciousness has slipped back behinf the 'me'which is now unaware of its awareness.This is why we are told 'be aware of the awareness' If I am just an > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? answer is above.The me, which is unaware of its awareness . I understand > the concept of I (Self) and i (ego) but which is which and what do I > discard here? Simply begin by surrendering the i{ego]to the I [self or Friend].Recognise your actions are an instrument of the Self not the 'doer'hand over the burden of cares to the Self and let the Self ibe responsible using you as instrument indicating what actions to take or not to take.the conflict is resolved . Am I getting ahead of myself here? No.Partial surrender is possible for all and leads to total surrender eventually -so says the Maharshi . - ie I hold the > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. There is the Self- and the me ,at this stage an instrument of the Self.Eventually the impure me is vanquished by Self Enquiry[vasanas,egotism etc] and then there is no duality ,just spontaneous appropriate action . > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs > but to test everything for ourselves? Surrender the concept of a separate doer responsible for its actions with free will independent of the Self {Awareness} > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my > practice? Surrender and all will be well . I trust this helps .Regards and best wishes in His Grace , Alan ______________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2003 Report Share Posted October 5, 2003 Dear Alan, Correct me if I am wrong. Someone who is on a long journey on railroad, after alighting still has a bodily(mental also) feeling he is still travelling, while there is something inside him which keeps telling him, you are already there. And one more, Where is the surrender, when someone is already at his feet and does not realise that? Love, Durai. --- Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > --- Dear Mike, > > this is a serious question and I will do my best to answer from my own > understanding.however I bow > to others who may add to or correct what I am saying in the light of > their own experience which > may be deeper than mine. > > you wrote: > > Last night I lay meditating as I do every night, first of all > > thinking about the postings regarding Sandeep etc and then quite > > quickly getting to the place of no thoughts arising. Asking myself > > (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? > > This is a sound form of Self Enquiry > > I know from > > previous times if I stay with no thoughts long enough then eventually > > the other 'noises' stop and there is a perfect silence which usually > > is very short lived. > > even this is a blessing -and a positive indication -no matter how short > lived. > > After which I become disturbed or drift off to > > sleep. > > quite common at the beginning of this practice when the I thought let's > go . > > > > But last night I tried to stay with who am I, who is having no > > thought? > > good > > The answer I got at first was: 'Me obviously. It's me > > here.' > > ok > > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a > > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. > > the witnessing awareness appeared and saw the 'me' questionig. ok > > So I > > just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back to 'who > > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, > > yes in the state of Self Enquiry awareness emerged as the observer or > witness for you > > but > > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > > with the world, (put the kettle on, drink tea etc.) > > No when functioning as an ajnani the 'me' functions.The witnessing > consciousness has slipped back > behinf the 'me'which is now unaware of its awareness.This is why we are > told 'be aware of the > awareness' > > If I am just an > > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? > > answer is above.The me, which is unaware of its awareness . > > I understand > > the concept of I (Self) and i (ego) but which is which and what do I > > discard here? > > Simply begin by surrendering the i{ego]to the I [self or > Friend].Recognise your actions are an > instrument of the Self not the 'doer'hand over the burden of cares to > the Self and let the Self > ibe responsible using you as instrument indicating what actions to take > or not to take.the > conflict is resolved . > > Am I getting ahead of myself here? > > No.Partial surrender is possible for all and leads to total surrender > eventually -so says the > Maharshi . > > - ie I hold the > > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have > > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. > > There is the Self- and the me ,at this stage an instrument of the > Self.Eventually the impure me > is vanquished by Self Enquiry[vasanas,egotism etc] and then there is no > duality ,just spontaneous > appropriate action . > > > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs > > but to test everything for ourselves? > > Surrender the concept of a separate doer responsible for its actions > with free will independent of > the Self {Awareness} > > > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my > > practice? > > Surrender and all will be well . > > I trust this helps .Regards and best wishes in His Grace , Alan > > > ______________________ > Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE > Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk > The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2003 Report Share Posted October 5, 2003 ---Dear Sr durai muhil. you wrote: > Dear Alan, > > Correct me if I am wrong. Someone who is on a long journey on railroad, > after alighting still has a bodily(mental also) feeling he is still > travelling, while there is something inside him which keeps telling him, > you are already there. I regret I have never known this feeling on a railway journey so do not follow the relevence of the metaphor in the discussion .Please clarify futher. > > And one more, Where is the surrender, when someone is already at his feet > and does not realise that? At the beginning the surrender may only be partial,even if you feel you are at his feet. .This is because the self-will or I thought has deep roots into the subconscious .So the incomplete surrender has to be deepened and widened by futher meditation on the meaning of surrender and efforts in this direction until it is unconditional .Of course Self Enquiry is a great aid and in loosening the hold of the vasanas the surrender becomes effective .When it is final the 'I Thought' topples as Bhagavan says . > > Love,in His Grace,Alan ______________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2003 Report Share Posted October 5, 2003 Dear Alan, Thanks sir. In India with all the slow coaches on the Railway earlier it used to take us some two the three days to travel from the south end to the northern edge. After alighting, still that feeling in the body persists. And the mind has to be cajoled a little bit into believing that we are in the destination. This I posted it because, before I started this search, there were instances when that used to work. Pushing the mind to believing in what has to happen, and the body used to oblige. I agree with with the partial surrender. When I am there infront of his image and it is total bliss. The body is there, I is not there. When back at work the I is back again, and everything starts revolving around that. Still I have work more on that. Thanks so much. And call me Durai. Love, Durai. --- Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > ---Dear Sr durai muhil. > > you wrote: > Dear Alan, > > > > Correct me if I am wrong. Someone who is on a long journey on > railroad, > > after alighting still has a bodily(mental also) feeling he is still > > travelling, while there is something inside him which keeps telling > him, > > you are already there. > > I regret I have never known this feeling on a railway journey so do not > follow the relevence of > the metaphor in the discussion .Please clarify futher. > > > > And one more, Where is the surrender, when someone is already at his > feet > > and does not realise that? > > At the beginning the surrender may only be partial,even if you feel you > are at his feet. .This is > because the self-will or I thought has deep roots into the subconscious > .So the incomplete > surrender has to be deepened and widened by futher meditation on the > meaning of surrender and > efforts in this direction until it is unconditional .Of course Self > Enquiry is a great aid and in > loosening the hold of the vasanas the surrender becomes effective .When > it is final the 'I > Thought' topples as Bhagavan says . > > > > Love,in His Grace,Alan > > > ______________________ > Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE > Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk > The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2003 Report Share Posted October 6, 2003 ---Dear Durai , Thank you for this clarification . Every best wish, in His Grace ,love, Alan ______________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2003 Report Share Posted October 6, 2003 5/10/03 10:58 AM +0000 waveydata mike (AT) wavedata (DOT) co.uk wrote: > Asking myself > (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? Undoubtedly, I say. Regards, John Plum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2003 Report Share Posted October 6, 2003 5/10/03 10:58 AM +0000 waveydata mike (AT) wavedata (DOT) co.uk wrote: > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. So I > just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back to 'who > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, but > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > with the world. Why? The body is in the world, of the world. The body is moving (in an illusory world). If I am just an > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? Agent for whom? I see the bodymind as the agent. I understand > the concept of I (self) and i (ego) but which is which... One is one and the other is the other. One is real and the other is perplextion trying to lead itself; It wants to be sure, as much as it can.....and it needs to be for your sake it loves you so much...it wants to serve You, but does not know how to receive directions, but plots and plans and asks questions concerning truth and progress, mistaking You for the body, or something other ephemera. Recognise the question you are meditating upon. You started with Who am I? POst-meditation, you asked who am I (meaning both the body and ego, and the notion of I), an agent for? It often happens to me, that I am led to a new question that perplexes me. In that question are some assumptions I have to unravel. But for the time being they are not seen. I am no longer 'in meditation' , but at a point where I have uncovered the question I next need to meditate upon with power. BUt at first I have limited power, just as I do for any number of reasons later on in time. One may be my humour...too much seriousness or some other style of motivation. I like the way you meditate on you back, because it is allowing meditation to be natural, enjoyable and comfortable. However, I must confess, that I find that as more power comes, I wind up in to a sitting position more and more, until it is a strong position and I do not tire due to physical fluxes and urges to move I find it is better to give thanks as I tire, stop and ask for the power to continue later, rather than persist with questions you cannot meditate upon. It also means that meditation becomes much more spontaneous, with a sense of continuity and fitting purpose. and what do I > discard here? Am I getting ahead of myself here? - ie I hold the > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. Ego can discard, but do You? The concept is addressed to the conceptual Ego mind-formation. (If I do this...If-subject-action-object...). If it is something you carry to meditation, then as a tool it is a potent inspiration de facto, not something to be discarded. > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs > but to test everything for ourselves? > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my > practice? Yes, that seems to follow. The recognition that all inspired acts are acts of grace, are the thanks for such grace, and empower your next act of inspiration....such as the next meditation swoon, zooming with quick recollection of 'where you were at', to where you can get. Give thanks for the glee of being brought to meditation in such comfort. Who is bringing who to meditation? Renounce meditation for yourself and so know who is ego; ego wants to be enlightened. Ask yourself, to be humbly and regularly dragged to meditation, to the company of Baghavan who is not you, and so come to know who is I and who is the agent. Regards, John Plum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2003 Report Share Posted October 6, 2003 Dear John, it would be good if you would be so good as to post your interesting letter on the Atma Vichara Site too .iIt would interest members there who are majoring on Self Enquiry ..There is a link from this site to there .All love,in His Grace,Alan --- chueewowee <chueewowee wrote: > > > 5/10/03 10:58 AM +0000 waveydata mike wrote: > > > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a > > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. So I > > just watched the questions come and go. > > But then I come back to 'who > > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, but > > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > > with the world. > > Why? The body is in the world, of the world. The body is moving (in an > illusory world). > > If I am just an > > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? > > Agent for whom? I see the bodymind as the agent. > > I understand > > the concept of I (self) and i (ego) but which is which... > > One is one and the other is the other. One is real and the other is > perplextion trying to lead itself; It wants to be sure, as much as it > can.....and it needs to be for your sake it loves you so much...it wants to > serve You, but does not know how to receive directions, but plots and plans > and asks questions concerning truth and progress, mistaking You for the > body, or something other ephemera. > > Recognise the question you are meditating upon. You started with Who am > I? POst-meditation, you asked who am I (meaning both the body and ego, and > the notion of I), an agent for? It often happens to me, that I am led to a > new question that perplexes me. In that question are some assumptions I > have to unravel. But for the time being they are not seen. I am no longer > 'in meditation' , but at a point where I have uncovered the question I next > need to meditate upon with power. BUt at first I have limited power, just > as I do for any number of reasons later on in time. One may be my > humour...too much seriousness or some other style of motivation. > I like the way you meditate on you back, because it is allowing meditation > to be natural, enjoyable and comfortable. However, I must confess, that I > find that as more power comes, I wind up in to a sitting position more and > more, until it is a strong position and I do not tire due to physical > fluxes and urges to move > I find it is better to give thanks as I tire, stop and ask for the power to > continue later, rather than persist with questions you cannot meditate > upon. It also means that meditation becomes much more spontaneous, with a > sense of continuity and fitting purpose. > > and what do I > > discard here? Am I getting ahead of myself here? - ie I hold the > > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have > > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. > > Ego can discard, but do You? The concept is addressed to the conceptual Ego > mind-formation. (If I do this...If-subject-action-object...). If it is > something you carry to meditation, then as a tool it is a potent > inspiration de facto, not something to be discarded. > > > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs > > but to test everything for ourselves? > > > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my > > practice? > > Yes, that seems to follow. The recognition that all inspired acts are acts > of grace, are the thanks for such grace, and empower your next act of > inspiration....such as the next meditation swoon, zooming with quick > recollection of 'where you were at', to where you can get. Give thanks for > the glee of being brought to meditation in such comfort. > > Who is bringing who to meditation? Renounce meditation for yourself and so > know who is ego; ego wants to be enlightened. Ask yourself, to be humbly > and regularly dragged to meditation, to the company of Baghavan who is not > you, and so come to know who is I and who is the agent. > > > Regards, > > John Plum ______________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 John, Thanks for your reply, but a couple of questions. I agree body/mind is agent - but agent for who. who is the executive?? how can the executive be just an observer?? I don't understand what you mean by 'power' in meditation. mike RamanaMaharshi, chueewowee <chueewowee> wrote: > > > 5/10/03 10:58 AM +0000 waveydata mike@w... wrote: > > > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a > > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. So I > > just watched the questions come and go. > > But then I come back to 'who > > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, but > > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > > with the world. > > Why? The body is in the world, of the world. The body is moving (in an > illusory world). > > If I am just an > > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? > > Agent for whom? I see the bodymind as the agent. > > I understand > > the concept of I (self) and i (ego) but which is which... > > One is one and the other is the other. One is real and the other is > perplextion trying to lead itself; It wants to be sure, as much as it > can.....and it needs to be for your sake it loves you so much...it wants to > serve You, but does not know how to receive directions, but plots and plans > and asks questions concerning truth and progress, mistaking You for the > body, or something other ephemera. > > Recognise the question you are meditating upon. You started with Who am > I? POst-meditation, you asked who am I (meaning both the body and ego, and > the notion of I), an agent for? It often happens to me, that I am led to a > new question that perplexes me. In that question are some assumptions I > have to unravel. But for the time being they are not seen. I am no longer > 'in meditation' , but at a point where I have uncovered the question I next > need to meditate upon with power. BUt at first I have limited power, just > as I do for any number of reasons later on in time. One may be my > humour...too much seriousness or some other style of motivation. > I like the way you meditate on you back, because it is allowing meditation > to be natural, enjoyable and comfortable. However, I must confess, that I > find that as more power comes, I wind up in to a sitting position more and > more, until it is a strong position and I do not tire due to physical > fluxes and urges to move > I find it is better to give thanks as I tire, stop and ask for the power to > continue later, rather than persist with questions you cannot meditate > upon. It also means that meditation becomes much more spontaneous, with a > sense of continuity and fitting purpose. > > and what do I > > discard here? Am I getting ahead of myself here? - ie I hold the > > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have > > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. > > Ego can discard, but do You? The concept is addressed to the conceptual Ego > mind-formation. (If I do this...If-subject-action-object...). If it is > something you carry to meditation, then as a tool it is a potent > inspiration de facto, not something to be discarded. > > > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs > > but to test everything for ourselves? > > > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my > > practice? > > Yes, that seems to follow. The recognition that all inspired acts are acts > of grace, are the thanks for such grace, and empower your next act of > inspiration....such as the next meditation swoon, zooming with quick > recollection of 'where you were at', to where you can get. Give thanks for > the glee of being brought to meditation in such comfort. > > Who is bringing who to meditation? Renounce meditation for yourself and so > know who is ego; ego wants to be enlightened. Ask yourself, to be humbly > and regularly dragged to meditation, to the company of Baghavan who is not > you, and so come to know who is I and who is the agent. > > > Regards, > > John Plum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 Dear Alan, Thank you for replying I am beginning to understand that I am not familiar with some of the conventions of language in this group and am getting tied up in semantics. The contradiction I saw with putting on the kettle etc; I was meaning staying in awareness and putting on the kettle. If SELF is just an observer and ego does not exist, and body/mind is the agent, then who is the executive?? who decided to put the kettle on? Not pure awareness, not non-existant ego-mind - what is left?? regards Mike RamanaMaharshi, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs> wrote: > --- Dear Mike, > > this is a serious question and I will do my best to answer from my own understanding.however I bow > to others who may add to or correct what I am saying in the light of their own experience which > may be deeper than mine. > > you wrote: > > Last night I lay meditating as I do every night, first of all > > thinking about the postings regarding Sandeep etc and then quite > > quickly getting to the place of no thoughts arising. Asking myself > > (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? > > This is a sound form of Self Enquiry > > I know from > > previous times if I stay with no thoughts long enough then eventually > > the other 'noises' stop and there is a perfect silence which usually > > is very short lived. > > even this is a blessing -and a positive indication -no matter how short lived. > > After which I become disturbed or drift off to > > sleep. > > quite common at the beginning of this practice when the I thought let's go . > > > > But last night I tried to stay with who am I, who is having no > > thought? > > good > > The answer I got at first was: 'Me obviously. It's me > > here.' > > ok > > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was like a > > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. > > the witnessing awareness appeared and saw the 'me' questionig. ok > > So I > > just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back to 'who > > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, > > yes in the state of Self Enquiry awareness emerged as the observer or witness for you > > but > > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > > with the world, (put the kettle on, drink tea etc.) > > No when functioning as an ajnani the 'me' functions.The witnessing consciousness has slipped back > behinf the 'me'which is now unaware of its awareness.This is why we are told 'be aware of the > awareness' > > If I am just an > > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? > > answer is above.The me, which is unaware of its awareness . > > I understand > > the concept of I (Self) and i (ego) but which is which and what do I > > discard here? > > Simply begin by surrendering the i{ego]to the I [self or Friend].Recognise your actions are an > instrument of the Self not the 'doer'hand over the burden of cares to the Self and let the Self > ibe responsible using you as instrument indicating what actions to take or not to take.the > conflict is resolved . > > Am I getting ahead of myself here? > > No.Partial surrender is possible for all and leads to total surrender eventually -so says the > Maharshi . > > - ie I hold the > > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but have > > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. > > There is the Self- and the me ,at this stage an instrument of the Self.Eventually the impure me > is vanquished by Self Enquiry[vasanas,egotism etc] and then there is no duality ,just spontaneous > appropriate action . > > > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold beliefs > > but to test everything for ourselves? > > Surrender the concept of a separate doer responsible for its actions with free will independent of > the Self {Awareness} > > > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in my > > practice? > > Surrender and all will be well . > > I trust this helps .Regards and best wishes in His Grace , Alan > > > ____________________ __ > Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE > Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 Dear Mike, Thoughts come into the mind-seemingly from no where .Some are accepted and acted upon -others are rejected as useless or unworthy by the 'I thought'or "me" .Who is the executive ?The Inner Ruler-The Sat-Guru in the Heart-God-Iswara-Self-Consciousness -Awareness ,the Friend,-Shakti-'That'-Your True Nature etc.The terms are somewhat synonymous but with different shades of 'pointing at the 'unnameable' .See what term you resonate best with.That may be the one for you . ..I am interested in what others have to say . Best wishes, in His Grace, Alan > Thank you for replying > I am beginning to understand that I am not familiar with some of the > conventions of language in this group and am getting tied up in > semantics. The contradiction I saw with putting on the kettle etc; I > was meaning staying in awareness and putting on the kettle. If SELF > is just an observer and ego does not exist, and body/mind is the > agent, then who is the executive?? who decided to put the kettle on? > Not pure awareness, not non-existant ego-mind - what is left?? > regards Mike > > RamanaMaharshi, Alan Jacobs > <alanadamsjacobs> wrote: > > --- Dear Mike, > > > > this is a serious question and I will do my best to answer from my > own understanding.however I bow > > to others who may add to or correct what I am saying in the light > of their own experience which > > may be deeper than mine. > > > > you wrote: > > > Last night I lay meditating as I do every night, first of all > > > thinking about the postings regarding Sandeep etc and then quite > > > quickly getting to the place of no thoughts arising. Asking > myself > > > (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? > > > > This is a sound form of Self Enquiry > > > > I know from > > > previous times if I stay with no thoughts long enough then > eventually > > > the other 'noises' stop and there is a perfect silence which > usually > > > is very short lived. > > > > even this is a blessing -and a positive indication -no matter how > short lived. > > > > After which I become disturbed or drift off to > > > sleep. > > > > quite common at the beginning of this practice when the I thought > let's go . > > > > > > > But last night I tried to stay with who am I, who is having no > > > thought? > > > > good > > > > The answer I got at first was: 'Me obviously. It's me > > > here.' > > > > ok > > > > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > > > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was > like a > > > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. > > > > the witnessing awareness appeared and saw the 'me' questionig. ok > > > > So I > > > just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back > to 'who > > > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, > > > > yes in the state of Self Enquiry awareness emerged as the observer > or witness for you > > > > but > > > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > > > with the world, (put the kettle on, drink tea etc.) > > > > No when functioning as an ajnani the 'me' functions.The witnessing > consciousness has slipped back > > behinf the 'me'which is now unaware of its awareness.This is why we > are told 'be aware of the > > awareness' > > > > If I am just an > > > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? > > > > answer is above.The me, which is unaware of its awareness . > > > > I understand > > > the concept of I (Self) and i (ego) but which is which and what > do I > > > discard here? > > > > Simply begin by surrendering the i{ego]to the I [self or > Friend].Recognise your actions are an > > instrument of the Self not the 'doer'hand over the burden of cares > to the Self and let the Self > > ibe responsible using you as instrument indicating what actions to > take or not to take.the > > conflict is resolved . > > > > Am I getting ahead of myself here? > > > > No.Partial surrender is possible for all and leads to total > surrender eventually -so says the > > Maharshi . > > > > - ie I hold the > > > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but > have > > > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. > > > > There is the Self- and the me ,at this stage an instrument of the > Self.Eventually the impure me > > is vanquished by Self Enquiry[vasanas,egotism etc] and then there > is no duality ,just spontaneous > > appropriate action . > > > > > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold > beliefs > > > but to test everything for ourselves? > > > > Surrender the concept of a separate doer responsible for its > actions with free will independent of > > the Self {Awareness} > > > > > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in > my > > > practice? > > > > Surrender and all will be well . > > > > I trust this helps .Regards and best wishes in His Grace , Alan > > > > > > > ____________________ > __ > > Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE > > > Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk > > > > > Post message: RamanaMaharshi > Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- > Un: RamanaMaharshi > List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner > > Shortcut URL to this page: > http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi > > Your use of is subject to > > ______________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 Mike, I'll try to answer honestly, but its hard. Only worth skimming. 7/10/03 7:23 AM +0000 waveydata mike (AT) wavedata (DOT) co.uk wrote: > John, > Thanks for your reply, but a couple of questions. > I agree body/mind is agent - but agent for who. who is the > executive?? how can the executive be just an observer?? You said your identity with the experience of just observing contradicts experience of worldly interaction and asked, who then is the agent? I said bodymind is the agent that interacts, or acts on behalf of You. You wish to imagine an executive capacity as being quite other than observer? Shapes seen may be illusory and ephemeral, but have their authenticity beyond this world, and are not composed by the physical brain or by your physical eye. In short the illusory world is not seen by the illusory world. Vision of this world is a gift, even if limited vision, even if clouded with individually operating sensory and symbolic (memory and logic) mind . The lessons to be learnt from this vision may be simple, but they point to authentic being, which is not simple or complicated, but just so. So they are worth following, these lessons, when we are able. That is enquiry. > I don't understand what you mean by 'power' in meditation. It is the difference between inspired thought (thought with breath awareness) and discursive conceptual thought. When tired and not bright , the bodymind is there, heavily. Therefore, power in meditation may be understood as a buoyancy. However, power doesn't just come all at once. Power comes up with the agent's service. We cannot easily abandon our investment in ourselves, and so service is required of it. No one on earth is an executive. If we are actors, we have a duty to play our part. All on this planet are servants with duties to obey, rather than freelance scientists with a personal mission to achieve. On earth we have few choices, except to say no or yes to opportunity and inspiration, which means service. This perhaps throws more light on the notion of an agent. The agent is a servant, not a doer in the executive sense. The lessons of this world are simple. We have learn't them as children growing up, coming to terms with our world. Beyond that, service obedient to the heart is required, not a conceptual map. All powers are given by grace of authentic being. When we are able, is power. Power in meditation is the ability to continue in meditation upon the self, without resorting back to a new analysis, however weak the presence of Self. Arising questions may be realised without losing the object of meditation, Self. In a way it is the power to keep one's realisation, answer arising questions, and not be confused by the symbolic terms of reference. Self is a presence, not something to be understood, or identified with something else. One comes closer to the presence with correct understanding and honest enquiry. However, even the enquiry is not initiated by the false self (ego), but by the real you, as a matter of Grace, upon the abating of samskaras, even if the presence is felt as weak or with a sense of seperation. It is not because you are smart, that the enquiry appeals, it is because YOU are authentic, and taking over. Power, means bright: Being bright, a sense of seperation becomes a sweet tool in meditation , and not a painful sense of confusion, and peplexity. For the coarse mortal knot, the question, who am I?, has fear and perplexity. It will not relinquish control as protector. Identity with body, inspite of having learnt what we are not, is powerful and habitual, and associated with fear too. Our mind seeking enlightenment, confuses itself, though it tries, because it is limited to conceptual, logical thought, and constructs arguments and thesis. It is not a seer of things. It will always bang up against a brick wall unless it serves well and leads not. It doesn't know when to stop, or when its limited role is over, to rest and enjoy, but tires trying to create meaning with symbols; But symbols reflect meaning, which is to meditate. It doesn't know when to hand over to the real executive life itself,the bringer of rest and power, and to hand over is to meditate, Paradoxically, Power in meditation, is quick obedience to inner voice saying rest, or whatever. Therefore , you never forget realisation, because you never are so tired. To rest is to meditate. A chain of realisations is safeguarded and linked up, and power increases. These happenings , the inspired thoughts we serve, we may also call mind, but it is only a name this word mind, reffering to manifestations, happenings, just like worlds are, and deeply personal, not discursive. I'm tired now, I should have stopped earlier, so discard this. Regards, John Plum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2003 Report Share Posted October 8, 2003 Dear friends, Mike and Alan have addressed an intriguing facet of existence. In moments when the mind is quiet (I can't take credit for it!) there is a subtle feeling that thoughts, emotions and body movements are constantly stirred up by some Invisible Force from within. But when the mind is active, consciousness appears to be gripped in a vice and taken on a roller coaster ride. It appears that the feeling of individualistic identity and the feeling that 'I" am the executor is imposed on this body by Somebody. I don't choose the quality of thoughts. I don't even know what thought is next in line. I am not sure that I am consistently rejecting certain types of thoughts. Acceptance and rejection of thoughts happens in a jiffy. If the outcome appears to be favourable,the mind says 'I" did it. If the outcome is unfavourable 'It' looks for excuses. Bhagvan likened the search for the 'Self' to a thief, dressed like a policeman and trying to go out in search of the thief. If I try often to recollect that feeling I experienced, namely everything inside and outside is driven by an Invisible Force, may be that Force will hasten the process of decelerating the mind. May be the Force will permit me to recollect this feeling more often, make the feeling linger on long enough each time for thoughts to temporarily cease and hopefully someday the inevitable to happen! May be this is the reason Bhagvan put a stop to most queries by quizzing ' Find out who wants to know? Who is asking?' etc etc. If the mind can turn inwards to sincerely find an answer, thoughts temporarily cease. Of course the day one finds an answer one stops questioning. May the blessings of Bhagvan guide us and lead us on the path! Sivaramakrishna RamanaMaharshi, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs> wrote: > Dear Mike, > > Thoughts come into the mind-seemingly from no where .Some are accepted and acted upon -others are > rejected as useless or unworthy by the 'I thought'or "me" .Who is the executive ?The Inner > Ruler-The Sat-Guru in the Heart-God-Iswara-Self-Consciousness - Awareness ,the > Friend,-Shakti-'That'-Your True Nature etc.The terms are somewhat synonymous but with different > shades of 'pointing at the 'unnameable' .See what term you resonate best with.That may be the one > for you . > > .I am interested in what others have to say . > > Best wishes, in His Grace, Alan > > > > > Thank you for replying > > I am beginning to understand that I am not familiar with some of the > > conventions of language in this group and am getting tied up in > > semantics. The contradiction I saw with putting on the kettle etc; I > > was meaning staying in awareness and putting on the kettle. If SELF > > is just an observer and ego does not exist, and body/mind is the > > agent, then who is the executive?? who decided to put the kettle on? > > Not pure awareness, not non-existant ego-mind - what is left?? > > regards Mike > > > > RamanaMaharshi, Alan Jacobs > > <alanadamsjacobs> wrote: > > > --- Dear Mike, > > > > > > this is a serious question and I will do my best to answer from my > > own understanding.however I bow > > > to others who may add to or correct what I am saying in the light > > of their own experience which > > > may be deeper than mine. > > > > > > you wrote: > > > > Last night I lay meditating as I do every night, first of all > > > > thinking about the postings regarding Sandeep etc and then quite > > > > quickly getting to the place of no thoughts arising. Asking > > myself > > > > (is this a thought?) who is it that has no thoughts? > > > > > > This is a sound form of Self Enquiry > > > > > > I know from > > > > previous times if I stay with no thoughts long enough then > > eventually > > > > the other 'noises' stop and there is a perfect silence which > > usually > > > > is very short lived. > > > > > > even this is a blessing -and a positive indication -no matter how > > short lived. > > > > > > After which I become disturbed or drift off to > > > > sleep. > > > > > > quite common at the beginning of this practice when the I thought > > let's go . > > > > > > > > > > But last night I tried to stay with who am I, who is having no > > > > thought? > > > > > > good > > > > > > The answer I got at first was: 'Me obviously. It's me > > > > here.' > > > > > > ok > > > > > > After that I realised that even the question was not coming > > > > from me as I seem to be just an observer and each question was > > like a > > > > cloud passing in the sky, not really eminating from me at all. > > > > > > the witnessing awareness appeared and saw the 'me' questionig. ok > > > > > > So I > > > > just watched the questions come and go. But then I come back > > to 'who > > > > is doing the watching?' I still seem to be just an observer, > > > > > > yes in the state of Self Enquiry awareness emerged as the observer > > or witness for you > > > > > > but > > > > this contradicts my everyday experience of being able to interact > > > > with the world, (put the kettle on, drink tea etc.) > > > > > > No when functioning as an ajnani the 'me' functions.The witnessing > > consciousness has slipped back > > > behinf the 'me'which is now unaware of its awareness.This is why we > > are told 'be aware of the > > > awareness' > > > > > > If I am just an > > > > observer then who is the agent interacting with world? > > > > > > answer is above.The me, which is unaware of its awareness . > > > > > > I understand > > > > the concept of I (Self) and i (ego) but which is which and what > > do I > > > > discard here? > > > > > > Simply begin by surrendering the i{ego]to the I [self or > > Friend].Recognise your actions are an > > > instrument of the Self not the 'doer'hand over the burden of cares > > to the Self and let the Self > > > ibe responsible using you as instrument indicating what actions to > > take or not to take.the > > > conflict is resolved . > > > > > > Am I getting ahead of myself here? > > > > > > No.Partial surrender is possible for all and leads to total > > surrender eventually -so says the > > > Maharshi . > > > > > > - ie I hold the > > > > concept of the two I's as a belief ( in what Ramana said) but > > have > > > > not yet the experience to make sense of it myself. > > > > > > There is the Self- and the me ,at this stage an instrument of the > > Self.Eventually the impure me > > > is vanquished by Self Enquiry[vasanas,egotism etc] and then there > > is no duality ,just spontaneous > > > appropriate action . > > > > > > > Should I discard this belief? - are we not instructed not hold > > beliefs > > > > but to test everything for ourselves? > > > > > > Surrender the concept of a separate doer responsible for its > > actions with free will independent of > > > the Self {Awareness} > > > > > > > > The fundamental question I have I guess is what do I do next in > > my > > > > practice? > > > > > > Surrender and all will be well . > > > > > > I trust this helps .Regards and best wishes in His Grace , Alan > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________ > > __ > > > Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE > > > > > Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk > > > > > > > > > > Post message: RamanaMaharshi > > Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- > > Un: RamanaMaharshi > > List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner > > > > Shortcut URL to this page: > > http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > > > > ____________________ __ > Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE > Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk 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.