Living Masters are Still their.

[Guest guest]

This appears to have a different emphasis than Bhagavan Ramana's teaching.

 

Love to all

Harsha

 

 

R. Narayanan wrote:

 

> Yes their is one Guru that I know . He is on the top of Tiruvannamalai

> hill. He is their in the hill for the past 15 - 20 yrs as of now doing

> Tapas and giving darshan to devotees. You can visit this site to have

> a glimpse of the mahan and also details about him.

>

> http://www.nandhi.com/picayya.htm

> http://www.nandhi.com/freedownload.htm

> http://www.nandhi.com/freedownload-ayya.htm

>

> Regards

>

> R.Narayanan

>

>

> */Harsha /* wrote:

>

> Zoya wrote:

>

> > Hello everyone;

> >

> > I can't remember if I or someone else has already

> > asked this.

> >

> > Are there any living saints in India or abroad that

> > could be the same level as Ananda Maye, Ramana

> > Maharshi, Swami Sivananda, Parmahansa Yogananda, and

> > so on that you know of , in India , or Canada or other

> > parts of the world.

> >

> > I did several searches on the net, but could not find

> > anything.

> >

> > Siva Siva,

> > Zoya.

> >

> > "The Self is always realized. Look within and be still!

> > - Bhagavan Sri Ramana

> >

> The answer to your question is in the quote above.

>

> Love,

> Harsha

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Harsha,

 

Indeed.

The post was removed.

It would be appreciated if members could moderate their posts and

ensure they are in keeping with the aims of this site.

 

Kind Regards,

Miles

---------

On 9 Apr 2005, at 12:44, Harsha wrote:

 

> This appears to have a different emphasis than Bhagavan Ramana's

> teaching.

>

> Love to all

> Harsha

Attachment: (text/enriched) [not stored]

[Guest guest]

Dear Miles,

Thank you. It is important that the new devotees become familiar with

Bhagavan's pure teachings of the Self. Books are freely available and

mature devotees speak about it often. Once the teaching is understood

through the words and grace of Bhagavan that lead to Self-Recognition,

the question of being attracted to another teaching, no matter how

glamorous is completely moot. Everything happens according to one's

destiny but the question about a "living teacher' has been answered

well by Sri Miles himself in his essay.

See

/

The first article under the heading teacher is titled, "Sri

Ramana Maharshi, My Living Teacher -

by Miles Wright"

Love to all

Harsha

Miles Wright wrote:

Dear Harsha,

Indeed.

The post was removed.

It would be appreciated if members could moderate their posts and

ensure they are in keeping with the aims of this site.

Kind Regards,

Miles

---------

On 9 Apr 2005, at 12:44, Harsha wrote:

This appears to have a different emphasis than

Bhagavan Ramana's teaching.

Love to all

Harsha

[Guest guest]

Who is Bhagavan? Who is Ramana Maharshi? Is he not a reflection in

your own imagination? Who is there to understand the teaching? What

teaching? Did not Bhagavan say: "There is neither creation nor

destruction, neither destiny nor free-will, neither path nor

achievement; this is the final truth." (Essential Teachings of Ramana

Maharshi [inner Directions])?

 

What are you afraid of? That you do not exist?

 

Hello?

 

Is this RamanaMaharshi forum just another cult of personality?

 

(Just doing the sadhana).

 

Is anybody home?

 

fuzzie

 

 

 

RamanaMaharshi, Harsha wrote:

> Dear Miles,

>

> Thank you. It is important that the new devotees become familiar with

> Bhagavan's pure teachings of the Self. Books are freely available and

> mature devotees speak about it often. Once the teaching is understood

> through the words and grace of Bhagavan that lead to Self-Recognition,

> the question of being attracted to another teaching, no matter how

> glamorous is completely moot. Everything happens according to one's

> destiny but the question about a "living teacher' has been answered

well

> by Sri Miles himself in his essay.

>

>

[Guest guest]

color:navy">Harsha wrote:

color:navy">see

/

The first article under the heading teacher is titled, "Sri Ramana

Maharshi, My Living Teacher -

by

Miles Wright"

font-family:Verdana;color:navy">========================

color:navy">After reading Miles’ article above I immediately came across

the following by Bhagavan:

color:navy">“There are no stages in realisation or mukti. There are

no degrees of jnana. So that there cannot be one stage of jnana with the

body and another stage when the body is dropped. The jnani knows he is

the Self and that nothing, neither his body nor anything else exists, but the

Self. To such one what difference could the presence or absence of body

make.”

color:navy">(“Day by Day with Bhagavan”, A. Devaraja Mudaliar)

color:navy">Peter

[Guest guest]

hai,

few days back ,shri.swathi dora had quoted from bhagawans teaching that advaitha

should not be practised with guru and in worldly life.Though you are right in

saying all r images in mind including the image of guru,should we not pay our

reverence whenever the thought of guru comes for an aspirant?

vijay

 

fuzzie_wuz [fuzzie_wuz ]Sent:

Monday, April 11, 2005 7:45 AMRamanaMaharshiSubject:

[RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.Who is Bhagavan? Who is

Ramana Maharshi? Is he not a reflection inyour own imagination? Who is there to

understand the teaching? Whatteaching? Did not Bhagavan say: "There is neither

creation nordestruction, neither destiny nor free-will, neither path

norachievement; this is the final truth." (Essential Teachings of

RamanaMaharshi [inner Directions])?What are you afraid of? That you do not

exist? Hello? Is this RamanaMaharshi forum just another cult of personality?

(Just doing the sadhana). Is anybody home? fuzzie--- In

RamanaMaharshi, Harsha wrote:> Dear Miles,> >

Thank you. It is important that the new devotees become familiar with >

Bhagavan's pure teachings of the Self. Books are freely available and > mature

devotees speak about it often. Once the teaching is understood > through the

words and grace of Bhagavan that lead to Self-Recognition, > the question of

being attracted to another teaching, no matter how > glamorous is completely

moot. Everything happens according to one's > destiny but the question about a

"living teacher' has been answeredwell > by Sri Miles himself in his essay.>

> Post message: RamanaMaharshi

Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- Un:

RamanaMaharshi List owner:

RamanaMaharshi-ownerShortcut URL to this page:

http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

[Guest guest]

The word 'cult' in the question is a bit strong, unpleasant, unsavory and a

bit shocking.In Latin cultus is religion, organised colected musings and

pratices. In old English it was an abrreviation of 'culture', something born

, nurtured, growing and cherished. However in the recent usage there is an

undertone of 'rituals''secrecy''fadism''authoritarianism'with the word

cult.No sane and rational person will openly associate with the

'sect'."Samaneshu Sakham" Only those sharing common (similar)concerns can be

friends,it is said. Our group is such a group.

'Group' is people coming together,when 'purpose'is added to such 'coming

together',the group becomes a sort of 'forum'.I understand this group at

is such a forum to further the understanding of Ramana Maharshi's

writings and approach in particular and 'advaita' in general.In my opinion,

the group has no aim (to hit at),no objective (to attain),to goal( to

reach),other than enlarging understanding (over what one finds in various

resources in English , Indian languages and elsewhere)and promote healthy

enquiry and help sadhana.

However, there has to be a 'referee' for 'fair play".Moderator/s is/are

needed to import discipline,limit the scope,at times create focus,and rarely

if ever to 'weild stick',etc..His or their task is difficult and at times

may be misunderstood.Let us all understand this.

 

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Thank you, Sir. You kind words are much appreciated by the moderators on this

list.

OM Namo Bhagavathe Sri Ramanaaya

[Guest guest]

The phrase was "cult of personality", not the singular "cult". The

following definition was taken from the site:

<http://www.dpjs.co.uk/counter/personalitycult.html>:

 

"3. What is a Cult of Personality?

 

"There is no standard definition of what a 'Cult of Personality' is.

The term itself appears to post-date Max Weber, although Weber in his

multiple voluminous works ties it up with a religious group that is

dominated, founded or led by a single charismatic leader."

 

More often than not, people tend to embrace the teacher and not the

teaching. Sri Ramana said find the "I" and it disappears. There is no

separate individual, that is the teaching. Therefore, to worship

Ramana or to hold him as being something special, something other or

apart, is to miss the point entirely because there never was a

separate individual Ramana Maharshi in the first place.

 

Just to clarify, no one said this group was a cult of personality.

There was only the inquiry into that possibility.

 

fuzzie

 

RamanaMaharshi, s_rayan <narayanraoshinde>

wrote:

>

> The word 'cult' in the question is a bit strong, unpleasant,

unsavory and a

> bit shocking.In Latin cultus is religion, organised colected musings and

> pratices. In old English it was an abrreviation of 'culture',

something born

> , nurtured, growing and cherished. However in the recent usage there

is an

> undertone of 'rituals''secrecy''fadism''authoritarianism'with the word

> cult.No sane and rational person will openly associate with the

> 'sect'."Samaneshu Sakham" Only those sharing common

(similar)concerns can be

> friends,it is said. Our group is such a group.

[Guest guest]

RamanaMaharshi, vijaysk@i... wrote:

> hai,

> few days back ,shri.swathi dora had quoted from bhagawans teaching that

> advaitha should not be practised with guru and in worldly

life.Though you

> are right in saying all r images in mind including the image of

guru,should

> we not pay our reverence whenever the thought of guru comes for an

aspirant?

> vijay

>

 

"Even when extraneous thoughts sprout up during such enquiry, do not

seek to complete the rising thought, but instead, deeply enquire

within, 'To who has this thought occurred?' No matter how many

thoughts thus occur to you, if you would with acute vigilance enquire

immediately as and when each individual thought arises to whom it has

occurred, you would find it is to 'me'. If then you enquire 'Who am

I?' the mind gets introverted and the rising thought also subsides. In

this manner as you persevere more and more in the practice of

Self-enquiry, the mind acquires increasing strength and power to abide

in its Source."

 

excerpt from "Who Am I?"

 

http://www.satramana.org/html/who_am_i_.htm

 

Note: Ramana did not set any hard and fast rules concerning atma

vichara other than be vigilant. Without vigilance, self-inquiry does

not work.

 

fuzzie

[Guest guest]

Dear Fuzzie,

 

you make a good statement here - yet as a bhakta one embraces both: the teacher

and the teaching.

This is not separate from each other.

To remember Ramana's 'personality' is helpful for sadhana. This is a way envoking His presence.

It may sound contradict as of course, where could Ramana be if He would not be

the inner being of ourselves itself.

Yet to praise him as "Ramana Sadguru ..." this is a valid form too.

But Ramana has composed Akshara Mana Malai ...

The mere advaitins may not always agree to that though - and perhaps miss the

point too as the ones who

only embrace the teaching and not the teacher. As if one could separate.There is

no teaching without a teacher

and no teacher without a teaching.

 

Kind Regards

Gabriele

-

fuzzie_wuz

RamanaMaharshi

Monday, April 11, 2005 11:29 PM

[RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.

The phrase was "cult of personality", not the singular "cult". Thefollowing

definition was taken from the

site:<http://www.dpjs.co.uk/counter/personalitycult.html>:"3. What is a Cult of

Personality?"There is no standard definition of what a 'Cult of Personality'

is.The term itself appears to post-date Max Weber, although Weber in

hismultiple voluminous works ties it up with a religious group that

isdominated, founded or led by a single charismatic leader."More often than

not, people tend to embrace the teacher and not theteaching. Sri Ramana said

find the "I" and it disappears. There is noseparate individual, that is the

teaching. Therefore, to worshipRamana or to hold him as being something

special, something other orapart, is to miss the point entirely because there

never was aseparate individual Ramana Maharshi in the first place. Just to

clarify, no one said this group was a cult of personality.There was only the

inquiry into that possibility. fuzzieRamanaMaharshi,

s_rayan <narayanraoshinde>wrote:> > The word 'cult' in the question is a

bit strong, unpleasant,unsavory and a> bit shocking.In Latin cultus is

religion, organised colected musings and> pratices. In old English it was an

abrreviation of 'culture',something born> , nurtured, growing and cherished.

However in the recent usage thereis an> undertone of

'rituals''secrecy''fadism''authoritarianism'with the word> cult.No sane and

rational person will openly associate with the> 'sect'."Samaneshu Sakham" Only

those sharing common(similar)concerns can be> friends,it is said. Our group is

such a group. Post message:

RamanaMaharshi Subscribe:

RamanaMaharshi- Un:

RamanaMaharshi List owner:

RamanaMaharshi-ownerShortcut URL to this page:

http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

[Guest guest]

sorry, there was a mistake in:

 

It should say: ....as (like) the ones who only embrace the teacher and not the teaching.

 

- gabriele ebert

RamanaMaharshi

Tuesday, April 12, 2005 8:16 AM

Re: [RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.

The mere advaitins may not always agree to that though - and perhaps miss the

point too as the ones who

only embrace the teaching and not the teacher. -

[Guest guest]

who is this bhakta?

Who is it that embraces?

Who is it that makes the distinction between teacher and teaching?

Who determines what is not seperate?

Who remembers Ramana?

To remember Ramana, to make distinctions, to decide what is a valid

form and the rest of it, is to engage in ignorance.

Not a cult of personality

A cult of ingnorance.

 

 

RamanaMaharshi, "gabriele ebert"

<g.ebert@g...> wrote:

> Dear Fuzzie,

>

> you make a good statement here - yet as a bhakta one embraces

both: the teacher and the teaching.

> This is not separate from each other.

> To remember Ramana's 'personality' is helpful for sadhana. This is

a way envoking His presence.

> It may sound contradict as of course, where could Ramana be if He

would not be the inner being of ourselves itself.

> Yet to praise him as "Ramana Sadguru ..." this is a valid form too.

> But Ramana has composed Akshara Mana Malai ...

> The mere advaitins may not always agree to that though - and

perhaps miss the point too as the ones who

> only embrace the teaching and not the teacher. As if one could

separate.There is no teaching without a teacher

> and no teacher without a teaching.

>

> Kind Regards

> Gabriele

> -

> fuzzie_wuz

> RamanaMaharshi

> Monday, April 11, 2005 11:29 PM

> [RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.

>

>

>

> The phrase was "cult of personality", not the singular "cult". The

> following definition was taken from the site:

> <http://www.dpjs.co.uk/counter/personalitycult.html>:

>

> "3. What is a Cult of Personality?

>

> "There is no standard definition of what a 'Cult of Personality'

is.

> The term itself appears to post-date Max Weber, although Weber in

his

> multiple voluminous works ties it up with a religious group that

is

> dominated, founded or led by a single charismatic leader."

>

> More often than not, people tend to embrace the teacher and not

the

> teaching. Sri Ramana said find the "I" and it disappears. There

is no

> separate individual, that is the teaching. Therefore, to worship

> Ramana or to hold him as being something special, something other

or

> apart, is to miss the point entirely because there never was a

> separate individual Ramana Maharshi in the first place.

>

> Just to clarify, no one said this group was a cult of personality.

> There was only the inquiry into that possibility.

>

> fuzzie

>

> RamanaMaharshi, s_rayan

<narayanraoshinde>

> wrote:

> >

> > The word 'cult' in the question is a bit strong, unpleasant,

> unsavory and a

> > bit shocking.In Latin cultus is religion, organised colected

musings and

> > pratices. In old English it was an abrreviation of 'culture',

> something born

> > , nurtured, growing and cherished. However in the recent usage

there

> is an

> > undertone of 'rituals''secrecy''fadism''authoritarianism'with

the word

> > cult.No sane and rational person will openly associate with the

> > 'sect'."Samaneshu Sakham" Only those sharing common

> (similar)concerns can be

> > friends,it is said. Our group is such a group.

> Post message: RamanaMaharshi

> Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi-

> Un: RamanaMaharshi

> List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner

>

> Shortcut URL to this page:

> http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

>

>

> Sponsor

>

> Children International

> Would you give Hope to a Child in need?

>

> ?Click Here to meet a Girl

> And Give Her Hope

>

> ?Click Here to meet a Boy

> And Change His Life

>

> Learn More

>

>

--

----------

> Links

>

>

> RamanaMaharshi/

>

> b..

> RamanaMaharshi

>

> c.. Terms of

Service.

[Guest guest]

Well said Gabriele, dear Sister in Ramana,

 

let me add, that intrinsically what you, Fuzzie, say is also right. But

it pertains to the Jnani.

For a beginner or even advanced devotee it would be an impediment to

his sadhana to not develop Bhakti for his Guru. As our Bhagawan has

said: "Bhakti is the mother of Jnana". He set the example himself, as

you mentioned, by regarding Shri Arunachala Shiva himself as his Guru

and writing his praises in glowing terms from the standpoint of the

longing lover. Ramana's Way is a twofold one, Bhakti and Jnana.

Anyway, who could not fall in love with Ramana when immersing

him/herself more and more into his life and teachings, let alone the

people, who had the great good fortune to live in his proximity. I just

cannot imagine.

 

Om Arunachala Shiva

Christiane

 

 

On Apr 12, 2005, at 08:16, gabriele ebert wrote:

 

> Dear Fuzzie,

>  

> you make a good statement here - yet as a  bhakta one embraces both:

> the teacher and the teaching.

> This is not separate from each other.

> To remember Ramana's 'personality' is helpful for sadhana. This is a

> way envoking His presence.

> It may sound contradict as of course, where could Ramana be if He

> would not be the inner being of ourselves itself.

> Yet to praise him as "Ramana Sadguru ..." this is a valid form too.

> But Ramana has composed Akshara Mana Malai ...

> The mere advaitins may not always agree to that though - and perhaps

> miss the point too as the ones who

> only embrace the teaching and not the teacher. As if one could

> separate.There is no teaching without a teacher

> and no teacher without a teaching.

>  

> Kind Regards

> Gabriele

> -

> fuzzie_wuz

> RamanaMaharshi

> Monday, April 11, 2005 11:29 PM

> [RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.

>

>

> The phrase was "cult of personality", not the singular "cult". The

> following definition was taken from the site:

> <http://www.dpjs.co.uk/counter/personalitycult.html>:

>

> "3. What is a Cult of Personality?

>

> "There is no standard definition of what a 'Cult of Personality' is.

> The term itself appears to post-date Max Weber, although Weber in his

> multiple voluminous works ties it up with a religious group that is

> dominated, founded or led by a single charismatic leader."

>

> More often than not, people tend to embrace the teacher and not the

> teaching. Sri Ramana said find the "I" and it disappears. There is no

> separate individual, that is the teaching. Therefore, to worship

> Ramana or to hold him as being something special, something other or

> apart, is to miss the point entirely because there never was a

> separate individual Ramana Maharshi in the first place.

>

> Just to clarify, no one said this group was a cult of personality.

> There was only the inquiry into that possibility.

>

> fuzzie

>

> RamanaMaharshi, s_rayan <narayanraoshinde>

> wrote:

> >

> > The word 'cult' in the question is a bit strong, unpleasant,

> unsavory and a

> > bit shocking.In Latin cultus is religion, organised colected musings

> and

> > pratices. In old English it was an abrreviation of 'culture',

> something born

> > , nurtured, growing and cherished. However in the recent usage there

> is an

> > undertone of 'rituals''secrecy''fadism''authoritarianism'with the

> word

> > cult.No sane and rational person will openly associate with the

> > 'sect'."Samaneshu Sakham" Only those sharing common

> (similar)concerns can be

> > friends,it is said. Our group is such a group.

 

>   Post message: RamanaMaharshi

>   Subscribe:    RamanaMaharshi-

>   Un:  RamanaMaharshi

>   List owner:   RamanaMaharshi-owner

>

> Shortcut URL to this page:

>   http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

>

>

>

>

>

>   Post message: RamanaMaharshi

>   Subscribe:    RamanaMaharshi-

>   Un:  RamanaMaharshi

>   List owner:   RamanaMaharshi-owner

>

> Shortcut URL to this page:

>   http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

>

>

>

>

> Sponsor

>

>

>

> Children International

>

> Would you give Hope to a Child in need?

>

>  

> <332170_011805_newchildforemail.jpg>

>

> ·

> Click Here to meet a Girl

> And Give Her Hope

>

> ·

> Click Here to meet a Boy

> And Change His Life

>

> Learn More

>

> <l.gif>

>

> Links

>

> •

> RamanaMaharshi/

>  

> •

> RamanaMaharshi

>  

> • Terms of

> Service.

>

>

>

Monsoonhouse Int.

Kovalam/Kerala

contact: christianecameron

Attachment: (text/enriched) [not stored]

[Guest guest]

RamanaMaharshi, "gabriele ebert" <g.ebert@g...>

wrote:

> Dear Fuzzie,

>

> you make a good statement here - yet as a bhakta one embraces both:

the teacher and the teaching.

> This is not separate from each other.

> To remember Ramana's 'personality' is helpful for sadhana. This is a

way envoking His presence.

> It may sound contradict as of course, where could Ramana be if He

would not be the inner being of ourselves itself.

> Yet to praise him as "Ramana Sadguru ..." this is a valid form too.

> But Ramana has composed Akshara Mana Malai ...

> The mere advaitins may not always agree to that though - and perhaps

miss the point too as the ones who

> only embrace the teaching and not the teacher. As if one could

separate.There is no teaching without a teacher

> and no teacher without a teaching.

>

> Kind Regards

> Gabriele

 

 

There is no teacher. No devotee. (No doer). That is advaita;

nonduality. Ramana never claimed to be a teacher. He never claimed to

be anything. There is no separate, individual, ego-self. There is no

one to learn anything; no one to teach. It's all one. Nondual. It is

as it is.

 

"Just as fire is obscured by smoke, the shining light of conciousness

is obscured by the assemblage of names and forms. When, by

compassionate divine grace, the mind becomes clear, the nature of the

world will be known to be not illusory forms, but only the reality."

 

Sri Ramana

 

RamanaMaharshi/message/10862

 

Sincerely,

 

fuzzie

[Guest guest]

fuzzie_wuz wrote:

 

>

> There is no teacher. No devotee. (No doer). That is advaita;

>

>

>

No. It is just a statement made up words.

[Guest guest]

Dear Fuzzie,

 

it may not make any sense to discuss this topic at all. Folk is different. Yet,

if one reads about devotees who

have been with Ramana, they mostly felt a deep attraction to Him - see

Muruganar, Kunju Swami, Arthur Osborne,

Suri Nagamma, and and ... and not stopping with todays Devotees. Have they all

missed the point?

I was attracted to Ramana by seeing a photo from Him in Bruntons A Search in

Secret India. Together

with what Brunton was writing I came to know that this is the Sadguru. In first

instance the face was the magic pull -

and it is so until today.

These eyes ... did you ever notice this bright shining eyes with this special

look ... it hits somewhere a certain string.

What can one do? He needs not even speak a single word. So I came across

Bhagavan and that was the most

beautiful time - free of all the discussions.

If it would be for all like you say - I can't imagine I would have ever been

drawn to Ramana - certainly not.

It would not have interested me at all Fortunately Ramana's teaching and also

verses speak a more open language.

I can accept what you are saying though - there is no problem.

 

sincere regards

Gabriele

..

 

 

-

fuzzie_wuz

RamanaMaharshi

Tuesday, April 12, 2005 7:41 PM

[RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.

There is no teacher. No devotee. (No doer). That is advaita;nonduality. Ramana

never claimed to be a teacher. He never claimed tobe anything. There is no

separate, individual, ego-self. There is noone to learn anything; no one to

teach. It's all one. Nondual. It isas it is. "Just as fire is obscured by

smoke, the shining light of conciousnessis obscured by the assemblage of names

and forms. When, bycompassionate divine grace, the mind becomes clear, the

nature of theworld will be known to be not illusory forms, but only the

reality."Sri Ramana

RamanaMaharshi/message/10862Sincerely,fuzzie

Post message: RamanaMaharshi

Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi- Un:

RamanaMaharshi List owner:

RamanaMaharshi-ownerShortcut URL to this page:

http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

[Guest guest]

Dear Fuzzie and other Sadhakas,

I seek your pardon for overlooking the word 'personality'.Though I had used

the adjective 'a bit',and given innocent Latin and old English meanings,it

could not stop the resultant spurt of postings on the site." None alleged

that the group is a cult, nor that of personality" should put the final nail

on that part. Silver linings in all these, that one notices, is that the

Group here is a live, buoyant and kicking and not that of the pensioners to

be written off. We are all real 'Jignashus'( wanting to know), and many good

and advanced 'Sadhakaas'(ardent seekers) and (practioners) 'Upaasakas'.

May our tribe increase! and May Maharshi continue to guide us

(Prachodayaat).

On namah Bhagavate Ramanaye

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- fuzzie_wuz <fuzzie_wuz wrote:

>

> The phrase was "cult of personality", not the singular "cult". The

> following definition was taken from the site:

> <http://www.dpjs.co.uk/counter/personalitycult.html>:

>

> "3. What is a Cult of Personality?

>

> "There is no standard definition of what a 'Cult of Personality' is.

> The term itself appears to post-date Max Weber, although Weber in his

> multiple voluminous works ties it up with a religious group that is

> dominated, founded or led by a single charismatic leader."

>

> More often than not, people tend to embrace the teacher and not the

> teaching. Sri Ramana said find the "I" and it disappears. There is no

> separate individual, that is the teaching. Therefore, to worship

> Ramana or to hold him as being something special, something other or

> apart, is to miss the point entirely because there never was a

> separate individual Ramana Maharshi in the first place.

>

> Just to clarify, no one said this group was a cult of personality.

> There was only the inquiry into that possibility.

>

> fuzzie

>

> RamanaMaharshi, s_rayan <narayanraoshinde>

> wrote:

> >

> > The word 'cult' in the question is a bit strong, unpleasant,

> unsavory and a

> > bit shocking.In Latin cultus is religion, organised colected musings and

> > pratices. In old English it was an abrreviation of 'culture',

> something born

> > , nurtured, growing and cherished. However in the recent usage there

> is an

> > undertone of 'rituals''secrecy''fadism''authoritarianism'with the word

> > cult.No sane and rational person will openly associate with the

> > 'sect'."Samaneshu Sakham" Only those sharing common

> (similar)concerns can be

> > friends,it is said. Our group is such a group.

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

Mail Mobile

Take Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.

http://mobile./learn/mail

[Guest guest]

Dear Gabriele,

 

Thank you for your patience and tolerance and for letting me present

my understanding, be it right or wrong. It's good to get feedback from

others on this subject matter. I appreciate your correspondence and

the correspondence of others on this forum. I am not here to belabor

the point or to try to prove anything. Just doing the sadhana.

 

This is a great forum. There are some awesome posts on here.

 

Yours truly,

 

fuzzie

 

RamanaMaharshi, "gabriele ebert" <g.ebert@g...>

wrote:

> Dear Fuzzie,

>

> it may not make any sense to discuss this topic at all. Folk is

different. Yet, if one reads about devotees who

> have been with Ramana, they mostly felt a deep attraction to Him -

see Muruganar, Kunju Swami, Arthur Osborne,

> Suri Nagamma, and and ... and not stopping with todays Devotees.

Have they all missed the point?

> I was attracted to Ramana by seeing a photo from Him in Bruntons A

Search in Secret India. Together

> with what Brunton was writing I came to know that this is the

Sadguru. In first instance the face was the magic pull -

> and it is so until today.

> These eyes ... did you ever notice this bright shining eyes with

this special look ... it hits somewhere a certain string.

> What can one do? He needs not even speak a single word. So I came

across Bhagavan and that was the most

> beautiful time - free of all the discussions.

> If it would be for all like you say - I can't imagine I would have

ever been drawn to Ramana - certainly not.

> It would not have interested me at all Fortunately Ramana's

teaching and also verses speak a more open language.

> I can accept what you are saying though - there is no problem.

>

> sincere regards

> Gabriele

> .

[Guest guest]

RamanaMaharshi, s_rayan <narayanraoshinde>

wrote:

> Dear Fuzzie and other Sadhakas,

> I seek your pardon for overlooking the word 'personality'.Though I

had used

> the adjective 'a bit',and given innocent Latin and old English

meanings,it

> could not stop the resultant spurt of postings on the site." None

alleged

> that the group is a cult, nor that of personality" should put the

final nail

> on that part. Silver linings in all these, that one notices, is that

the

> Group here is a live, buoyant and kicking and not that of the

pensioners to

> be written off. We are all real 'Jignashus'( wanting to know), and

many good

> and advanced 'Sadhakaas'(ardent seekers) and (practioners) 'Upaasakas'.

> May our tribe increase! and May Maharshi continue to guide us

> (Prachodayaat).

> On namah Bhagavate Ramanaye

 

 

Amen to that, brother. No pardon necessary. This is a discussion

forum. Sometimes it's good to have a discussion on a discussion forum.

It's perfectly natural. Thanks for your correspondence.

 

Yours,

 

fuzzie

[Guest guest]

Dear fuzzie,

 

I am glad we spoke about. Thanks for your patience too and that you explained your understanding.

There is much good in it. Also I don't know if what I said is right or wrong, it

is just how it feels here.

Yes, practice is best. Perhaps practice itself is the best teacher of all.

 

yours sincerly

Gabriele

 

Enjoy the list! Yes, there are some very awesome postings in the archive.

 

 

-

fuzzie_wuz

RamanaMaharshi

Thursday, April 14, 2005 5:29 AM

[RamanaMaharshi] Re: Living Masters are Still their.

Dear Gabriele,Thank you for your patience and tolerance and for letting me

presentmy understanding, be it right or wrong. It's good to get feedback

fromothers on this subject matter. I appreciate your correspondence andthe

correspondence of others on this forum. I am not here to belaborthe point or to

try to prove anything. Just doing the sadhana. This is a great forum. There are

some awesome posts on here. Yours truly, fuzzie