Guest guest Posted August 30, 2002 Report Share Posted August 30, 2002 Reading some of the books on Amma (Awaken Children) which seems to me that are translations of Amma's words, I see her quoted many times as saying the mind is an obstacle in some parts of the book. Yet in others she is quoted as inspiring people to educate themselves so they can work helping others (Amma has schools that teach computer science, medicine and other scientific topics). It seems to me that it would be difficult to pass exams in any school if we refuse to use our "minds" (think). By this I do not pretend to say that we need a "chatty" mind. Concentration is part of the eight limbs of yoga. We need to train the mind so that I can be useful in helping others and ourselves solve our daily problems and, also to help us find the correct spiritual path and teacher (I know it has been said that the GURU finds you, however i write know from a seekers perspective) for us. I have spoken with a few of Amma's Swamis, and they do not seem "mindless" to me, they seem "ego less". I wonder if this is part of the confusion (of mine and others). Does a person that has lost his mind capable of concentrating, and performing acts to help others, like a doctor or a nurse? I think that we can interchange in many quotes of Amma the term "mind" and "ego" -------------------- some quotes from Amma: "To remember God,you have to forget. To really be focused on God is to be fully and absolutely in the present. That alone is real prayer" "The best way to get rid of the great burden of guilt, which is like an infected would gnawing at you from within, is to become conscious of it. This can only happen in the presence of a true master" "Only a sat guru, can bestow the necessary grace and create the right conditions that will uncover your pain" "If you were to really see Amma as she is, it will overwhelm you, you could not possible bear it" "The true jnani will always be active in some way, benefiting the world with his presence, words, and action" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2002 Report Share Posted August 30, 2002 Ammachi, "rastanaga" <rastanaga> wrote: > Reading some of the books on Amma (Awaken Children) which seems > to me that are translations of Amma's words, I see her quoted > many times as saying the mind is an obstacle in some parts > of the book. Yet in others she is quoted as inspiring people > to educate themselves so they can work helping others (Amma has > schools that teach computer science, medicine and other scientific > topics). > > It seems to me that it would be difficult to pass exams in any > school if we refuse to use our "minds" (think). > > By this I do not pretend to say that we need a "chatty" mind. > Concentration is part of the eight limbs of yoga. We need to train > the mind so that I can be useful in helping others and ourselves solve > our daily problems and, also to help us find the correct spiritual > path and teacher (I know it has been said that the GURU finds you, > however i write know from a seekers perspective) for us. > > I have spoken with a few of Amma's Swamis, and they do not > seem "mindless" to me, they seem "ego less". I wonder if this > is part of the confusion (of mine and others). > > Does a person that has lost his mind capable of concentrating, and > performing acts to help others, like a doctor or a nurse? > > I think that we can interchange in many quotes of Amma the > term "mind" and "ego" > > -------------------- > > some quotes from Amma: > > "To remember God,you have to forget. To really be focused on God > is to be fully and absolutely in the present. That alone is > real prayer" > > "The best way to get rid of the great burden of guilt, which > is like an infected would gnawing at you from within, is > to become conscious of it. This can only happen in the presence > of a true master" > > "Only a sat guru, can bestow the necessary grace and create > the right conditions that will uncover your pain" > > "If you were to really see Amma as she is, it will overwhelm you, > you could not possible bear it" > > "The true jnani will always be active in some way, benefiting > the world with his presence, words, and action" Rastanga, My understanding...the way I have learned and was taught, is that the mind is both the source of bondage and liberation. That is, the purified mind is the source of liberation, but the unpurifed mind full of ego and delusion is the source of bondage. So we do sadhana to purify the mind and make it wide and universal so it can hold the experience of the Divine. When I was in Amritapuri in April, I was standing on line for lunch at the Western canteen. As I approached the servers, I kind of looked at the soup and one of the servers said to me, "Are you a renunciant?" He was asking me this, I guess, because the soup may have contained onions or some ingredient that could have been stimulating. It was so funny the way he asked me this, and I was taken aback. One can label oneself in so many ways, renunciant, bramachari, sanyassi, but I think the real renunciation is the giving up of one's ego. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2002 Report Share Posted August 30, 2002 Hi lbrachlin, You and Bala are like fresh air for me in this room. I greatly appreciate that you take the time to share your views. Ammachi, "lbrachlin" <lalita120@h...> wrote: > My understanding...the way I have learned and was taught, > is that the mind is both the source of bondage and liberation. > That is, the purified mind is the source of liberation, > but the unpurifed mind full > of ego and delusion is the source of bondage. So we do sadhana to > purify the mind and make it wide and universal so it can hold the > experience of the Divine. This is also my understanding. Let's see what other think. All feed back is welcomed. > One can label > oneself in so many ways, renunciant, bramachari, sanyassi, > but I think the real renunciation is the giving up of one's ego. Again, this is also my understanding. Namaste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2002 Report Share Posted August 30, 2002 Namah Shivaya, >> but I think the real renunciation is the giving up of one's ego. Amma says real renunciation is stilling the mind. Aum Amriteshvaryai Namah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2002 Report Share Posted August 30, 2002 I think stilling the mind and losing the ego go hand in hand. It's sort of like 2 sides of a coin. But when I said this, I was remembering a story from the Yoga Vashitha where Queen Chudala's husband the King renounces everything...from his kingdom to his loincloth. Queen Chudala, who is secretly a great yogini, takes the form of a sadhu or the likes and instructs him. He finally learns through trial and tribulation that the true renunciation is of the ego. After this realization, he happily returns with Queen Chudala to rule the kingdom...and more wisely in his enlightened state. Lisa Ammachi, Kenna <kenna@m...> wrote: > > Namah Shivaya, > > >> but I think the real renunciation is the giving up of one's ego. > > Amma says real renunciation is stilling the mind. > > Aum Amriteshvaryai Namah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2002 Report Share Posted August 30, 2002 Ammachi, Kenna <kenna@m...> wrote: > Amma says real renunciation is stilling the mind. Thanks Kenna : ) I take it that very few will qualify as renuciates then. yoga citta virtti nirodha yoga = yoga citta = consciousnes? thinkin-principle? vasanas ? (I would like more feed back on this one from the people that have studied Sanskrit.) vrtti = fluctuations nirodha = restiction Yoga is the restriction of the fluctuations of the thinking process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2002 Report Share Posted August 31, 2002 "yoga citta virtti nirodha". This is the first statement of Patanjali's Yoga sutras. In this case, 'citta' is the mind. He goes to explain that the mind can have five different types of modifications (not sure what they are). Here, 'mind' is defined by the 'constant flow of thoughts in the mind'. Please note that, in my inference, the 'mind' that needs to be controlled is different from the 'conscious application of the mind/brain instrument to a specific activity'. For e.g., if you are playing a musical instrument, you entire concentration is on playing it perfectly. This concentration is exhibited outwardly using the brain(hardware) and the mind (Central Processing Unit). Excuse the use of computer terms here, but it's the best analogy I could come up with. It's when the CPU starts functioning on its own (ceaseless nonsense thinking), do we have a problem called the 'mind' which needs to be restricted (nirodha). Unfortunately, for the vast majority of us, this frankenstein('live' CPU) has long been in motion, and the momentum is so great that inspite of our intellectual understanding of needing to restrict it, we find ourselves relatively helpless to accomplish that. Hence the need for spiritual practices, and most importantly, a Guru, who can see far beyond our small identifications, and instruct us on the best path. In this sense, 'stilling the mind' may be different from 'stilling the ego'. I think they are 2 separate entities, and may each need to be treated. This is because a being may, possibly, have many 'nonsense thoughts' without necessarily having an ego. (I can even now, sense a lot of disagreement amongst members about this statement, but please do read more to hear me out). The best would be to have a two-pronged attack on the mind/ego pheomenon. The only argument I have here is of elimination of bad qualities vs cultivation of good qualities. The fact that I have eliminated bad qualities does not automatically guarantee that I will have good qualites. A two-progned strategy - nip the bad, grow the good - works best. Coming back to the mind/ego subject, it is clear that once both are present, they both feed the other ravenously, and prop each other up. You can visualize the mind and the ego as two huge trees, very close to each other, with very complicated intertwining branches. So, intially focussing on one aspect (ego or mind) may work as it will cut the stems of the other too, but, I sense, that as one advances in spirituality, then he may have to focus on the roots of both, and uproot them both to be 'free'. All this is just my understanding of what I have perceived so far in life. Jai Ma! manoj --- rastanaga <rastanaga wrote: > Ammachi, Kenna <kenna@m...> wrote: > > Amma says real renunciation is stilling the mind. > > Thanks Kenna : ) > > I take it that very few will qualify as renuciates then. > > yoga citta virtti nirodha > > yoga = yoga > citta = consciousnes? thinkin-principle? vasanas ? > (I would like more feed back on this one from > the people that have studied Sanskrit.) > vrtti = fluctuations > nirodha = restiction > > Yoga is the restriction of the fluctuations of the thinking > process. > > Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2002 Report Share Posted August 31, 2002 Im am sure most of the people here have heard of the analogy of stilling the water waves in a pond. I will use it here to try to explain my point, but with a slight twist. If we take a second look at the analogy of the waves in the pond we see that once the waves (random and disruptive thoughts are stopped) we can see the bottom of the pond (or the reflection of the sky, pick the one you like best). I suppose we can call that here (the sky or the bottom of the pond) the true self, for the sake of this analogy. However, this analogy does not say, "if we pump out all the water out of the pond". Of course, if we do that, we will see the bottom of the pond, but not the sky. ; ) It is my hope, that all the posts on this topic have cleared the confusion that is implied when we use terms like "we need to kill the mind" or "the mind is an obstacle" As Pantanjali defines it, and Lisa (lbrachlin) clearly said "the mind is both the source of bondage and liberation" Thank you Connie and Manoj for (also) taking the time to participate in this discussion. Om Namah Shivaya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2002 Report Share Posted August 31, 2002 Mind and Guru Dear Rastanaga, you are in good company of having given up to understand the gurus. Swami Amritananda Puri, president of Mata Amritananda Mayi Mission and for 20 years very close with Amma admitted in Matruvani Magazine that Amma remained a mystery to him and he speculates that she'll remain a mystery for him even in the next 20 years to come. So if even he can't make it out how do we have a chance? May be not a chance to understand what makes Amma tick but from my own expereinces I know we can have glimpses of boundless love and joy -something alien to us while we are mesmerized in our normal perception/thoughtstream world-. This can happen spontaniously in the presence of a being which is aware of the divine presence in everything everytime - Amma. That is our chance. So many people report that thier minds gets still in her presence. And in that stillness the awareness of something deeper can happen... eventually something from our higher self gets reflected in our hearts or is this something always there but so subtle that we don't perceive it? I've no clue. My mind is to gross right now to grasp that! Lutz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2002 Report Share Posted September 1, 2002 Various things can quiet the mental chatter. As Patanjali, et. al. discovered, phyical exercise works, any physical exercise. Jogging, walking, dancing, T'ai Chi, karate, kalaryppayat, etc. works -- temporarily. Visual art works. Women in many indigenous cultures consider their practical creations -- making and decorating pots, weaving cloth, etc.--spiritual practices for this reason. Think of hte quietness of mind of someone like Michaelangelo. And which ego is everyone so eager to still or destroy? Better not destroy the functioning focus of consciousness in the body or you'll be in the local mental hospital or on serious medication. The only other "ego" is a bunch of thoughts, memories that comprise your biography to which you identify. If you understand that you can't be equivalent ot that bunch of thoughts any more than you can be equivalent to your thoughts about computer systems, what is the need to destroy them? Thoughts about pasta and thoughts about my third grade teacher are thoughts. What's the harm in them if I know they are not the real me? Aikya Ammachi, Manoj Menon <manoj_menon> wrote: > "yoga citta virtti nirodha". > > This is the first statement of Patanjali's Yoga sutras. In this case, 'citta' > is the mind. He goes to explain that the mind can have five different types of > modifications (not sure what they are). Here, 'mind' is defined by the > 'constant flow of thoughts in the mind'. > > Please note that, in my inference, the 'mind' that needs to be controlled is > different from the 'conscious application of the mind/brain instrument to a > specific activity'. For e.g., if you are playing a musical instrument, you > entire concentration is on playing it perfectly. This concentration is > exhibited outwardly using the brain(hardware) and the mind (Central Processing > Unit). Excuse the use of computer terms here, but it's the best analogy I could > come up with. It's when the CPU starts functioning on its own (ceaseless > nonsense thinking), do we have a problem called the 'mind' which needs to be > restricted (nirodha). > > Unfortunately, for the vast majority of us, this frankenstein ('live' CPU) has > long been in motion, and the momentum is so great that inspite of our > intellectual understanding of needing to restrict it, we find ourselves > relatively helpless to accomplish that. Hence the need for spiritual practices, > and most importantly, a Guru, who can see far beyond our small identifications, > and instruct us on the best path. > > In this sense, 'stilling the mind' may be different from 'stilling the ego'. I > think they are 2 separate entities, and may each need to be treated. This is > because a being may, possibly, have many 'nonsense thoughts' without > necessarily having an ego. (I can even now, sense a lot of disagreement amongst > members about this statement, but please do read more to hear me out). The best > would be to have a two-pronged attack on the mind/ego pheomenon. > > The only argument I have here is of elimination of bad qualities vs cultivation > of good qualities. The fact that I have eliminated bad qualities does not > automatically guarantee that I will have good qualites. A two- progned strategy > - nip the bad, grow the good - works best. > > Coming back to the mind/ego subject, it is clear that once both are present, > they both feed the other ravenously, and prop each other up. You can visualize > the mind and the ego as two huge trees, very close to each other, with very > complicated intertwining branches. So, intially focussing on one aspect (ego or > mind) may work as it will cut the stems of the other too, but, I sense, that as > one advances in spirituality, then he may have to focus on the roots of both, > and uproot them both to be 'free'. > > All this is just my understanding of what I have perceived so far in life. > > Jai Ma! > manoj > > --- rastanaga <rastanaga> wrote: > > Ammachi, Kenna <kenna@m...> wrote: > > > Amma says real renunciation is stilling the mind. > > > > Thanks Kenna : ) > > > > I take it that very few will qualify as renuciates then. > > > > yoga citta virtti nirodha > > > > yoga = yoga > > citta = consciousnes? thinkin-principle? vasanas ? > > (I would like more feed back on this one from > > the people that have studied Sanskrit.) > > vrtti = fluctuations > > nirodha = restiction > > > > Yoga is the restriction of the fluctuations of the thinking > > process. > > > > > > > > > Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2002 Report Share Posted September 1, 2002 Rastanaga, You bring up some interesting points. >From what I've understood. the Upanishads treat the "mind" as different from the "intellect". The "intellect" is what is used to rein in the "mind" (using the terminology of the Katha Upanishad: http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/katha/katha_3.htm) 3. 'Know the Self to be sitting in the chariot, the body to be the chariot, the intellect (buddhi) the charioteer, and the mind the reins.' 4. 'The senses they call the horses, the objects of the senses their roads. When he (the Highest Self) is in union with the body, the senses, and the mind, then wise people call him the Enjoyer.' 5. 'He who has no understanding and whose mind (the reins) is never firmly held, his senses (horses) are unmanageable, like vicious horses of a charioteer.' 6. 'But he who has understanding and whose mind is always firmly held, his senses are under control, like good horses of a charioteer.' Namashivaya, Girish On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, rastanaga wrote: > Reading some of the books on Amma (Awaken Children) which seems > to me that are translations of Amma's words, I see her quoted > many times as saying the mind is an obstacle in some parts > of the book. Yet in others she is quoted as inspiring people > to educate themselves so they can work helping others (Amma has > schools that teach computer science, medicine and other scientific > topics). > > It seems to me that it would be difficult to pass exams in any > school if we refuse to use our "minds" (think). > > By this I do not pretend to say that we need a "chatty" mind. > Concentration is part of the eight limbs of yoga. We need to train > the mind so that I can be useful in helping others and ourselves solve > our daily problems and, also to help us find the correct spiritual > path and teacher (I know it has been said that the GURU finds you, > however i write know from a seekers perspective) for us. > > I have spoken with a few of Amma's Swamis, and they do not > seem "mindless" to me, they seem "ego less". I wonder if this > is part of the confusion (of mine and others). > > Does a person that has lost his mind capable of concentrating, and > performing acts to help others, like a doctor or a nurse? > > I think that we can interchange in many quotes of Amma the > term "mind" and "ego" > > -------------------- > > some quotes from Amma: > > "To remember God,you have to forget. To really be focused on God > is to be fully and absolutely in the present. That alone is > real prayer" > > "The best way to get rid of the great burden of guilt, which > is like an infected would gnawing at you from within, is > to become conscious of it. This can only happen in the presence > of a true master" > > "Only a sat guru, can bestow the necessary grace and create > the right conditions that will uncover your pain" > > "If you were to really see Amma as she is, it will overwhelm you, > you could not possible bear it" > > "The true jnani will always be active in some way, benefiting > the world with his presence, words, and action" > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2002 Report Share Posted September 1, 2002 Ammachi, "hermes1008" <hermes1008> wrote: > Mind and Guru > Dear Rastanaga, > you are in good company of having given up to > understand the gurus. > Swami Amritananda Puri, president of Mata Amritananda Mayi Mission > and for 20 years very close with Amma admitted in Matruvani Magazine > that Amma remained a mystery to him and he speculates that she'll > remain a mystery for him even in the next 20 years to come. Lutz, Thank you for sharing this information. I have not been reading the Matruvani Magazine, I did not know about this. I try to write based on my own experience. ---- So let the words of I mouth and, and the meditations of I hearth be acceptable in thy sight, oh Amma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2002 Report Share Posted September 1, 2002 Ammachi, Girish <girishv@e...> wrote: > You bring up some interesting points. Girish, I think that we all have been sharing good points and ideas. > From what I've understood. the Upanishads > treat the "mind" as different from the "intellect". > The "intellect" is what is used to rein in the "mind" Most esoteric book I have seen, do treat the mind as more than a single, undivided entity. Yes, in nutshell, we can say, that there is a higer/lower mind. However, I can not claim to be an expert in this topic. I was just writing based on "common sense". I do have a lot to learn. My point is that we should exercice judgement and control, with the (and I will correct myself here) the intellect, as you have said. Maybe I was "stuck" with the western definition. Thanks for giving me a push = ) (Connie and Aikya you both also had some great feed back on this, thanks) ----------- mind {Gk. nouV [nous]; Lat. mens} That which thinks, reasons, perceives, wills, and feels. Philosophy of mind is concerned with explaining the characteristic features of mental events, the proper analysis of conscious experience, the relation between mind and body, and the moral status of persons. ----------- The topic of the mind, is very extence, as we all know. Great philosophers of the east and west have dedicated a lot of time to this. ---- Amma is I shepherd, I shall nor want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2002 Report Share Posted September 1, 2002 Yes, I know, my spelling, use of prepositions and tenses is terrible = ) Unfortunaly I only know one language, 1/2 Spanish and 1/2 English. Please forgive my (very) space out writing, on my many previous posts.No matter how much I try, I always see the typos, after I hit send. There was an extra "and" on the last line, and I did want to fix that one. It should read... So let the words of I mouth and, the meditations of I hearth be acceptable in thy sight, oh Amma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 2, 2002 Report Share Posted September 2, 2002 Namah Shivaya, > The only argument I have here is of elimination of bad qualities vs > cultivation of good qualities. The fact that I have eliminated bad qualities > does not automatically guarantee that I will have good qualites. A two-progned > strategy - nip the bad, grow the good - works best. Appreciated your point here, dear Manoj, and as a gardener (by Amma's grace) couldn't help but think of how true this is in the garden. This summer I had to transplant a big area of the flower bed where I had many years ago put in 2 kinds of plants that would choke out all the others. Had spent a lot of time taking them out, but their roots would twist around the roots of the other plants and even a little root left would develop more rapidly. Finally realized it was a loosing battle unless I covered the area with landscape cloth and mulch and let it sit until next spring. Thought of the parable from the Bible about taking care to sow the seeds on fertile ground. This was a lesson in taking care what seeds to sow. Aum Amriteshvaryai Namah 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.