Guest guest Posted August 19, 2002 Report Share Posted August 19, 2002 from: An Interview with Ramesh Balsekar by Anne and Darrell Newberg Q: Is holding on to the sense of 'I amness' according to Maharaj similar to the Self-inquiry of Ramana Maharshi? Are both a means of transcending the mental or known? RB: Holding on to the sense of 'I amness' means letting go of the 'me'. Q: Is it the same as Ramana Maharshi's Self-inquiry? RB: Ramana Maharshi's teaching is still a process, a process which says, " Find who wants to know " . And in his book he says, " If you try to find out the nature of the mind, the mind will disappear " . He made it perfectly clear, " Who am I? " - then that which is asking the question will disappear. He calls it atma vichara (Self-inquiry). He makes it perfectly clear that it is not a mantra to be repeated. Q: So the holding on to 'I amness' does not lead you to the same place? RB: No. By holding on to the 'I amness' gives you the impression that it will lead you somewhere. What I am saying is that there is no 'you' to hold on to the 'I amness'. So, only when the 'you' disappears ... Q: Which is Self-inquiry, and which makes the 'you' disappear. RB: Yes, then you are already in the 'I am'. In life, either you are 'I am' or you are 'I am Anne'. So when 'Anne' is not present, in those moments what exists is 'I am'. So the 'I am' and the 'I am Anne' keeps on alternating, you see. 'Anne' is absent in deep sleep, but 'I am' is present. So, whenever 'Anne' is absent, then 'I am' is present. Q: And 'I am' cannot be held onto. RB: Who is to hold on to 'I am'? That can only happen if it is the destiny of that body-mind organism and the will of God. 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.