Guest guest Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 Such a long passage! I'll focus on just this portion: 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most frequently. He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary to perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused with the individual self which he said was essentially non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures the true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the real Self is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. >>>>>> Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am feeling very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " which is essentially non-existent. For the Self there is no " state " or condition... Bill --- Era Molnar <n0ndual wrote: > > Be as you are > The teachings of sri Ramana Maharishi > > The nature of the Self The essence of Sri Ramana's teachings is conveyed in > his frequent assertions that there is a single immanent reality, directly > experienced > by everyone, which is simultaneously the source, the substance and the real > nature of everything that exists. He gave it a number of different names, > each one signifying a different aspect of the same indivisible reality. The > following classification includes all of his > more common synonyms and explains the implications of the various terms used. > 1. The Self This is the term that he used the most frequently. He defined it > by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary to > perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but a > non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused with the > individual self which he said was essentially non-existent, being a > fabrication of the mind which obscures the true experience of the real Self. > He maintained that the real Self is always present and always experienced but > he emphasized that one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when > the self-limiting tendencies of the mind have > ceased. Permanent and continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > 2. Sat-chit-ananda This is a Sanskrit term which translates as > being-consciousness-bliss. Sri Ramana taught that the Self is pure > being, a subjective awareness of `I am' which is completely devoid of the > feeling `I am this' or `I am that'. There are no subjects or objects in the > Self, there is only an awareness of being. Because this awareness > is conscious it is also known as consciousness. The direct experience of this > consciousness is, according to Sri Ramana, a state of unbroken happiness and > so the term ananda or bliss is also used to describe it. > These three aspects, being, consciousness and bliss, are experienced as a > unitary whole and not as separate attributes of the Self. They are > inseparable in the same way that wetness, transparency and liquidity > are inseparable properties of water. 3. God Sri Ramana maintained that the > universe is sustained by the power of the Self. Since theists normally > attribute this power to God he often used the word God as a synonym for the > Self. He also used > the words Brahman, the supreme being of Hinduism, and Siva, a Hindu name for > God, in the same way. Sri Ramana's God is not a personal God, he is the > formless being which sustains the universe. He is not the creator of the > universe, the universe is merely a > manifestation of his inherent power; he is inseparable from it, but he is not > affected by its appearance or its disappearance. 4. The Heart Sri Ramana > frequently used the Sanskrit word hridayam when he was talking about the > Self. It is usually translated > as `the Heart' but a more literal translation would be `this is the centre'. > In using this particular term he was not implying that there was a particular > location or centre for the Self, he was merely > indicating that the Self was the source from which all appearances > manifested. 5. Jnana The experience of the Self is sometimes called jnana or > knowledge. This term should not be taken to mean that there is a > person who has knowledge of the Self, because in the state of Self-awareness > there is no localized knower and there is nothing that is separate from the > Self that can be known. True knowledge, or jnana, is not an object of > experience, nor is it an understanding of a state > which is different and apart from the subject knower; it is a direct and > knowing awareness of the one reality in which subjects and objects have > ceased to exist. One who is established in this state is known as a jnani. > 6.Turiya and turyatita Hindu philosophy postulates three alternating levels > of relative consciousness - waking, dream and deep sleep. Sri Ramana stated > that the Self was the underlying reality which supported the appearance of > the other three temporary states. > Because of this he sometimes called the Self turiya avastha or the fourth > state. He also occasionally used the word turiyatita, meaning `transcending > the fourth', to indicate that there are not really four > states but only one real transcendental state. 7. Other terms Three other > terms for the Self are worth noting. Sri Ramana often emphasized that the > Self was one's real and natural state of being, and for this reason, he > occasionally employed the > terms sahaja sthiti, meaning the natural state, and swarupa, meaning real > form or real nature. He also used the word `silence' to indicate that the > Self was a silent thought-free state of undisturbed peace and total > stillness. > The conversations Q: What is reality? A: Reality must be always real. It is > not with forms and names. That which underlies these is the reality. It > underlies limitations, being itself limitless. It is not bound. It underlies > unrealities, itself > being real. Reality is that which is. It is as it is. It transcends speech. > It is beyond the expressions `existence, non-existence', etc. The reality > which is the mere consciousness that remains when ignorance is destroyed > along with knowledge of objects, alone is the > Self [atma]. In that Brahma-swarupa [real form of Brahman], which is abundant > Self-awareness, there is not the least ignorance. The reality which shines > fully, without misery and without a body, not only when the world is known > but also when the world is not > known, is your real form [nija-swarupa]. The radiance of consciousness-bliss, > in the form of one awareness shining equally within and without, is the > supreme and blissful primal reality. Its form is silence and it is declared > by jnanis to be > the final and unobstructable state of true knowledge [jnana]. Know that jnana > alone is non-attachment; jnana alone is purity; jnana is the attainment of > God; jnana which is devoid of forgetfulness of Self alone is immortality; > jnana alone is everything. > Q: What is this awareness and how can one obtain and cultivate it? A: You are > awareness. Awareness is another name for you. Since you are awareness there > is no need to attain or cultivate it. All that you have to do is to give up > being aware of other things, that is > of the not-Self. If one gives up being aware of them then pure awareness > alone remains, and that is the Self. Q: If the Self is itself aware, why am I > not aware of it even now? A: There is no duality. Your present knowledge is > due to the ego > and is only relative. Relative knowledge requires a subject and an object, > whereas the awareness of the Self is absolute and requires no object. > Remembrance also is similarly relative, requiring an object to be > remembered and a subject to remember. When there is no duality, who is to > remember whom? The Self is ever-present. Each one wants to know the Self. > What kind of help does one require to know oneself ? People want to see > the Self as something new. But it is eternal and remains the same all along. > They desire to see it as a blazing light etc. How can it be so? It is not > light, not darkness. It is only as it is. It cannot be defined. > The best definition is `I am that I am'. The srutis [scriptures] speak of the > Self as being the size of one's thumb, the tip of the hair, an electric > spark, vast, subtler than the subtlest, etc. They have no > foundation in fact. It is only being, but different from the real and the > unreal; it is knowledge, but different from knowledge and ignorance. How can > it be defined at all? It is simply being. Q: When a man realizes the Self, > what will he see? > A: There is no seeing. Seeing is only being. The state of Self-realization, > as we call it, is not attaining something new or reaching some goal which is > far away, but simply being that which you always are and which you always > have been. All that is needed is > that you give up your realization of the not-true as true. All of us are > regarding as real that which is not real. We have only to give up this > practice on our part. Then we shall realize the Self as the Self; > in other words, `Be the Self'. At one stage you will laugh at yourself for > trying to discover the Self which is so self-evident. So, what can we say to > this question? That stage transcends the seer and the seen. There is no seer > there to > see anything. The seer who is seeing all this now ceases to exist and the > Self alone remains. Q: How to know this by direct experience? A: If We talk > of knowing the Self, there must be two selves, > one a knowing self, another the self which is known, and the process of > knowing. The state we call realization is simply being oneself, not knowing > anything or becoming anything. If one has realized, one is that which alone > is and which alone has always > been. One cannot describe that state. One can only be that. Of course, we > loosely talk of Self-realization, for want of a better term. How to > `real-ize' or make real that which alone is real ? Q: You sometimes say the > Self is silence. Why is this? > A: For those who live in Self as the beauty devoid of thought, there is > nothing which should be thought of. That which should be adhered to is only > the experience of silence, because in that supreme state nothing exists to be > attained other than oneself. > Q: What is mouna [silence]? A: That state which transcends speech and thought > is mouna. That which is, is mouna. How can mouna be explained in words? Sages > say that the state in which the thought `I' [the ego] does not > rise even in the least, alone is Self [swarupa] which is silence [mouna]. > That silent Self alone is God; Self alone is the jiva [individual soul]. Self > alone is this ancient world. All other knowledge are only petty and trivial > knowledge; the > experience of silence alone is the real and perfect knowledge. Know that the > many objective differences are not real but are mere superimpositions on > Self, which is the form of true knowledge. Q: As the bodies and the selves > animating them are everywhere > actually observed to be innumerable how can it be said that the Self is only > one? A: If the idea `I am the body' is accepted, the selves are multiple. The > state in which this idea vanishes is the Self since in that state > there are no other objects. It is for this reason that the Self is regarded > as one only. Since the body itself does not exist in the natural outlook of > the real Self, but only in the extroverted outlook of the mind which is > deluded by the power of illusion, to call Self, the space of consciousness, > dehi [the possessor of the body] is wrong. The world does not exist without > the body, the body never exists without the mind, the mind never exists > without consciousness and > consciousness never exists without the reality. For the wise one who has > known Self by divining within himself, there is nothing other than Self to be > known. Why? Because since the ego which identifies the form of a body as `I' > has > perished, he [the wise one] is the formless existence-consciousness. The > jnani [one who has realized the Self] knows he is the Self and that nothing, > neither his body nor anything else, exists but the Self. > To such a one what difference could the presence or absence of a body make? > It is false to speak of realization. What is there to realize? The real is as > it is always. We are not creating anything new or achieving > something which we did not have before. The illustration given in books is > this. We dig a well and create a huge pit. The space in the pit or well has > not been created by us. We have just removed the earth which was filling the > space there. The space was there then and > is also there now. Similarly we have simply to throw out all the age-long > samskaras [innate tendencies] which are inside us. When all of them have been > given up, the Self will shine alone. Q: But how to do this and attain > liberation? > A: Liberation is our very nature. We are that. The very fact that we wish for > liberation shows that freedom from all bondage is our real nature. It is not > to be freshly acquired. All that is necessary is to get > rid of the false notion that we are bound. When we achieve that, there will > be no desire or thought of any sort. So long as one desires liberation, so > long, you may take it, one is in bondage. Q: For one who has realized his > Self, it is said that he will not have > the three states of wakefulness, dream and deep sleep. Is that a fact? A: > What makes you say that they do not have the three states? In saying `I had a > dream; I was in deep sleep; I am awake', you must admit that you were there > in all the three states. That makes it dear > that you were there all the time. If you remain as you are now, you are in > the wakeful state; this becomes hidden in the dream state; and the dream > state disappears when you are in deep sleep. You were there then, you are > there now, and you are there at all times. The > three states come and go, but you are always there. It is like a cinema. The > screen is always there but several types of pictures appear on the screen and > then disappear. Nothing sticks to the screen, it remains a screen. Similarly, > you remain your own Self in > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > Such a long passage! > I'll focus on just this portion: > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most frequently. > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary > to perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused > with the individual self which he said was essentially > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures the > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the real Self > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > >>>>>> > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am feeling > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " which is > essentially non-existent. > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > Bill > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > Such a long passage! > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most frequently. > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures the > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the real Self > > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am feeling > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " which is > > essentially non-existent. > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > toombaru > states and conditions are illusion. To suggest that the Self contains states and conditions is to suggest that the Self contains what does not exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. As real as states and conditions seem, it will seem that surely they exist in some sense, even if only *as illusions*. But it is only illusion that so beholds. When the cataract of illusory seeing falls away they are simply not there, AND realized to never have been. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most frequently. > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures the > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the real Self > > > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am feeling > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " which is > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > toombaru > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > To suggest that the Self contains > states and conditions is to suggest > that the Self contains what does not > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > As real as states and conditions seem, > it will seem that surely they exist in > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > When the cataract of illusory seeing > falls away they are simply not there, > AND realized to never have been. > > Bill > > Does the screen contain the image? Does the atmosphere contain the mirage Does the mirror contain the reflection? Does the ground contain the shadow? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most > frequently. > > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary > > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but > > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused > > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures the > > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the real Self > > > > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am > feeling > > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " > which is > > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > > > To suggest that the Self contains > > states and conditions is to suggest > > that the Self contains what does not > > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > falls away they are simply not there, > > AND realized to never have been. > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > Does the screen contain the image? > > Does the atmosphere contain the mirage > > Does the mirror contain the reflection? > > Does the ground contain the shadow? > > > toombaru > You are simply suggesting that the illusion is an " image " and in that sense real. I addressed all that in what I wrote previously: > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > falls away they are simply not there, > > AND realized to never have been. Where is the snake when the rope is seen to be a rope? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most > > frequently. > > > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary > > > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but > > > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused > > > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures the > > > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the real Self > > > > > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > > > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > > > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > > > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am > > feeling > > > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " > > which is > > > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > > > > > To suggest that the Self contains > > > states and conditions is to suggest > > > that the Self contains what does not > > > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > AND realized to never have been. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the screen contain the image? > > > > Does the atmosphere contain the mirage > > > > Does the mirror contain the reflection? > > > > Does the ground contain the shadow? > > > > > > toombaru > > > > You are simply suggesting that the illusion > is an " image " and in that sense real. A mirage is real. The image in a mirror is real. The moving figures on a screen are real. They are natural phenomena. When mind mistakes them for something else....varying degrees of confusion results. A monkey sees its image in a mirror and becomes frightened. A praire dog sees a shadow of a hawk.....and runs to its hole in the ground. A child sees monster on TV and cries. You have a terrible dream and wake up in a cold sweat. Mind lives in a montage of flickering images...many of which it misinterprets. Its primary function is to enhance and promote the survival of its physical and psychological center. It does the best it can...with what it has. toombaru > I addressed all that in what I wrote > previously: > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > AND realized to never have been. > > Where is the snake when the rope is seen > to be a rope? > > Bill > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart > <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most > > > frequently. > > > > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, > contrary > > > > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of > individuality but > > > > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be > confused > > > > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures > the > > > > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the > real Self > > > > > > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > > > > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > > > > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > > > > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > > > > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am > > > feeling > > > > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " > > > which is > > > > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > > > > > > > To suggest that the Self contains > > > > states and conditions is to suggest > > > > that the Self contains what does not > > > > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > > > > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > > AND realized to never have been. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the screen contain the image? > > > > > > Does the atmosphere contain the mirage > > > > > > Does the mirror contain the reflection? > > > > > > Does the ground contain the shadow? > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > You are simply suggesting that the illusion > > is an " image " and in that sense real. > > > A mirage is real. > > The image in a mirror is real. > > The moving figures on a screen are real. > > They are natural phenomena. > > When mind mistakes them for something else....varying degrees of > confusion results. > > A monkey sees its image in a mirror and becomes frightened. > > A praire dog sees a shadow of a hawk.....and runs to its hole in the > ground. > > A child sees monster on TV and cries. > > You have a terrible dream and wake up in a cold sweat. > > > Mind lives in a montage of flickering images...many of which it > misinterprets. > > > Its primary function is to enhance and promote the survival of its > physical and psychological center. > > It does the best it can...with what it has. > > > > > toombaru > All those are escapades in illusion. Meanwhile you did not answer: > Where is the snake when the rope is seen > to be a rope? Bill > > > > I addressed all that in what I wrote > > previously: > > > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > > AND realized to never have been. > > > Where is the snake when the rope is seen > > to be a rope? > > > > Bill > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart > > <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > > > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most > > > > frequently. > > > > > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, > > contrary > > > > > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of > > individuality but > > > > > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be > > confused > > > > > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > > > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures > > the > > > > > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the > > real Self > > > > > > > is always present and always experienced but he emphasized that > > > > > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the > > > > > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. Permanent and > > > > > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > > > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or " I am > > > > feeling > > > > > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " > > > > which is > > > > > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > > > > > > > > > To suggest that the Self contains > > > > > states and conditions is to suggest > > > > > that the Self contains what does not > > > > > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > > > > > > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > > > AND realized to never have been. > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the screen contain the image? > > > > > > > > Does the atmosphere contain the mirage > > > > > > > > Does the mirror contain the reflection? > > > > > > > > Does the ground contain the shadow? > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > You are simply suggesting that the illusion > > > is an " image " and in that sense real. > > > > > > A mirage is real. > > > > The image in a mirror is real. > > > > The moving figures on a screen are real. > > > > They are natural phenomena. > > > > When mind mistakes them for something else....varying degrees of > > confusion results. > > > > A monkey sees its image in a mirror and becomes frightened. > > > > A praire dog sees a shadow of a hawk.....and runs to its hole in the > > ground. > > > > A child sees monster on TV and cries. > > > > You have a terrible dream and wake up in a cold sweat. > > > > > > Mind lives in a montage of flickering images...many of which it > > misinterprets. > > > > > > Its primary function is to enhance and promote the survival of its > > physical and psychological center. > > > > It does the best it can...with what it has. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > All those are escapades in illusion. > Meanwhile you did not answer: > > > Where is the snake when the rope is seen > > to be a rope? > > Bill > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go when they collapse back into the ocean. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart > <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart > > > <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > > > > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most > > > > > frequently. > > > > > > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, > > > contrary > > > > > > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of > > > individuality but > > > > > > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be > > > confused > > > > > > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > > > > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which obscures > > > the > > > > > > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the > > > real Self > > > > > > > > is always present and always experienced but he > emphasized that > > > > > > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when > the > > > > > > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. > Permanent and > > > > > > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > > > > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of individuality " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or > " I am > > > > > feeling > > > > > > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual self " > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > To suggest that the Self contains > > > > > > states and conditions is to suggest > > > > > > that the Self contains what does not > > > > > > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > > > > AND realized to never have been. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the screen contain the image? > > > > > > > > > > Does the atmosphere contain the mirage > > > > > > > > > > Does the mirror contain the reflection? > > > > > > > > > > Does the ground contain the shadow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are simply suggesting that the illusion > > > > is an " image " and in that sense real. > > > > > > > > > A mirage is real. > > > > > > The image in a mirror is real. > > > > > > The moving figures on a screen are real. > > > > > > They are natural phenomena. > > > > > > When mind mistakes them for something else....varying degrees of > > > confusion results. > > > > > > A monkey sees its image in a mirror and becomes frightened. > > > > > > A praire dog sees a shadow of a hawk.....and runs to its hole in the > > > ground. > > > > > > A child sees monster on TV and cries. > > > > > > You have a terrible dream and wake up in a cold sweat. > > > > > > > > > Mind lives in a montage of flickering images...many of which it > > > misinterprets. > > > > > > > > > Its primary function is to enhance and promote the survival of its > > > physical and psychological center. > > > > > > It does the best it can...with what it has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > All those are escapades in illusion. > > Meanwhile you did not answer: > > > > > Where is the snake when the rope is seen > > > to be a rope? > > > > Bill > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go when they > collapse back into the ocean. > > > > > toombaru > No, because the snake doesn't *go* anywhere. It simply never was. When I open my closed fist the " fist " disappears. It was, not it is not. But the snake never was. The rope was mis-taken to be a snake. And the waves can arise again, while for one who (now) knows the rope as rope the snake does not reappear. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart > > <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart > > > > <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a long passage! > > > > > > > > > I'll focus on just this portion: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The Self - This is the term that [Ramana] used the most > > > > > > frequently. > > > > > > > > > He defined it by saying that the real Self or real `I' is, > > > > contrary > > > > > > > > > to perceptible experience, not an experience of > > > > individuality but > > > > > > > > > a non-personal, all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be > > > > confused > > > > > > > > > with the individual self which he said was essentially > > > > > > > > > non-existent, being a fabrication of the mind which > obscures > > > > the > > > > > > > > > true experience of the real Self. He maintained that the > > > > real Self > > > > > > > > > is always present and always experienced but he > > emphasized that > > > > > > > > > one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when > > the > > > > > > > > > self-limiting tendencies of the mind have ceased. > > Permanent and > > > > > > > > > continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice that the Self as Ramana uses the term excludes any > > > > > > > > > " sense of self " . It is " not an experience of > individuality " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So if, for example, there is a feeling, " I am happy " or > > " I am > > > > > > feeling > > > > > > > > > very free " that is not of the Self but the " individual > self " > > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > essentially non-existent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the Self there is no " state " or condition... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet........The Self is all states and conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > states and conditions are illusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To suggest that the Self contains > > > > > > > states and conditions is to suggest > > > > > > > that the Self contains what does not > > > > > > > exist. But that is not so; it is illusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As real as states and conditions seem, > > > > > > > it will seem that surely they exist in > > > > > > > some sense, even if only *as illusions*. > > > > > > > But it is only illusion that so beholds. > > > > > > > When the cataract of illusory seeing > > > > > > > falls away they are simply not there, > > > > > > > AND realized to never have been. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the screen contain the image? > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the atmosphere contain the mirage > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the mirror contain the reflection? > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the ground contain the shadow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are simply suggesting that the illusion > > > > > is an " image " and in that sense real. > > > > > > > > > > > > A mirage is real. > > > > > > > > The image in a mirror is real. > > > > > > > > The moving figures on a screen are real. > > > > > > > > They are natural phenomena. > > > > > > > > When mind mistakes them for something else....varying degrees of > > > > confusion results. > > > > > > > > A monkey sees its image in a mirror and becomes frightened. > > > > > > > > A praire dog sees a shadow of a hawk.....and runs to its hole in the > > > > ground. > > > > > > > > A child sees monster on TV and cries. > > > > > > > > You have a terrible dream and wake up in a cold sweat. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mind lives in a montage of flickering images...many of which it > > > > misinterprets. > > > > > > > > > > > > Its primary function is to enhance and promote the survival of its > > > > physical and psychological center. > > > > > > > > It does the best it can...with what it has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > All those are escapades in illusion. > > > Meanwhile you did not answer: > > > > > > > Where is the snake when the rope is seen > > > > to be a rope? > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go when they > > collapse back into the ocean. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > No, because the snake doesn't *go* anywhere. > It simply never was. > > When I open my closed fist the " fist " disappears. > It was, not it is not. But the snake never was. > The rope was mis-taken to be a snake. > > And the waves can arise again, while for one > who (now) knows the rope as rope the snake does not > reappear. > > Bill > " Fist' is an adjective.....not a noun. The 'wave' never existed....accept to the conceptual mind. How far down in the water does a 'wave' go? Can you draw a line where one wave ends and another begins? How far up your 'arm' does your elbo go? All nouns are illusory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 <snip> > > > > > > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go when they > > > collapse back into the ocean. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > No, because the snake doesn't *go* anywhere. > > It simply never was. > > > > When I open my closed fist the " fist " disappears. > > It was, not it is not. But the snake never was. > > The rope was mis-taken to be a snake. > > > > And the waves can arise again, while for one > > who (now) knows the rope as rope the snake does not > > reappear. > > > > Bill > > > > > > " Fist' is an adjective.....not a noun. ???? Fist is a noun. dictionary.com: fist n. The hand closed tightly with the fingers bent against the palm > The 'wave' never existed....accept to the conceptual mind. > > How far down in the water does a 'wave' go? > > Can you draw a line where one wave ends and another begins? > > How far up your 'arm' does your elbo go? > > > All nouns are illusory. Standing in waist-high water you can be hit by a wave, but you can't be bitten by a rope mis-taken for a snake. You can call a pencil in your hand illusion if you want, but that doesn't mean much. But believing that there is a being-entity holding that pencil, that is truly an illusion. Believing that the pencil is there and believing that the being-entity is there are completely different matters. Self-realization pertains to the latter, not the former. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go when they > > > > collapse back into the ocean. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > No, because the snake doesn't *go* anywhere. > > > It simply never was. > > > > > > When I open my closed fist the " fist " disappears. > > > It was, not it is not. But the snake never was. > > > The rope was mis-taken to be a snake. > > > > > > And the waves can arise again, while for one > > > who (now) knows the rope as rope the snake does not > > > reappear. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > " Fist' is an adjective.....not a noun. > ???? > Fist is a noun. > dictionary.com: > fist n. The hand closed tightly with the fingers bent against the palm > > > The 'wave' never existed....accept to the conceptual mind. > > > > How far down in the water does a 'wave' go? > > > > Can you draw a line where one wave ends and another begins? > > > > How far up your 'arm' does your elbo go? > > > > > > All nouns are illusory. > > Standing in waist-high water you can be hit by a wave, > but you can't be bitten by a rope mis-taken for a snake. > > You can call a pencil in your hand illusion if you want, > but that doesn't mean much. But believing that there is > a being-entity holding that pencil, that is truly an > illusion. Believing that the pencil is there and believing > that the being-entity is there are completely different > matters. Self-realization pertains to the latter, not the > former. > > Bill > > > > There are two minds in man. One deals with the substantial world. One deals with the insubstanital world. toombaru toombaru > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go > when they > > > > > collapse back into the ocean. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, because the snake doesn't *go* anywhere. > > > > It simply never was. > > > > > > > > When I open my closed fist the " fist " disappears. > > > > It was, not it is not. But the snake never was. > > > > The rope was mis-taken to be a snake. > > > > > > > > And the waves can arise again, while for one > > > > who (now) knows the rope as rope the snake does not > > > > reappear. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Fist' is an adjective.....not a noun. > > ???? > > Fist is a noun. > > dictionary.com: > > fist n. The hand closed tightly with the fingers bent against the palm > > > > > The 'wave' never existed....accept to the conceptual mind. > > > > > > How far down in the water does a 'wave' go? > > > > > > Can you draw a line where one wave ends and another begins? > > > > > > How far up your 'arm' does your elbo go? > > > > > > > > > All nouns are illusory. > > > > Standing in waist-high water you can be hit by a wave, > > but you can't be bitten by a rope mis-taken for a snake. > > > > You can call a pencil in your hand illusion if you want, > > but that doesn't mean much. But believing that there is > > a being-entity holding that pencil, that is truly an > > illusion. Believing that the pencil is there and believing > > that the being-entity is there are completely different > > matters. Self-realization pertains to the latter, not the > > former. > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > There are two minds in man. > > One deals with the substantial world. > > One deals with the insubstanital world. > > > > > toombaru > > > toombaru LOL! Is that why you signed twice? One for each? ) Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The snake goes to the same place..............that waves go > > when they > > > > > > collapse back into the ocean. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, because the snake doesn't *go* anywhere. > > > > > It simply never was. > > > > > > > > > > When I open my closed fist the " fist " disappears. > > > > > It was, not it is not. But the snake never was. > > > > > The rope was mis-taken to be a snake. > > > > > > > > > > And the waves can arise again, while for one > > > > > who (now) knows the rope as rope the snake does not > > > > > reappear. > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Fist' is an adjective.....not a noun. > > > ???? > > > Fist is a noun. > > > dictionary.com: > > > fist n. The hand closed tightly with the fingers bent against the palm > > > > > > > The 'wave' never existed....accept to the conceptual mind. > > > > > > > > How far down in the water does a 'wave' go? > > > > > > > > Can you draw a line where one wave ends and another begins? > > > > > > > > How far up your 'arm' does your elbo go? > > > > > > > > > > > > All nouns are illusory. > > > > > > Standing in waist-high water you can be hit by a wave, > > > but you can't be bitten by a rope mis-taken for a snake. > > > > > > You can call a pencil in your hand illusion if you want, > > > but that doesn't mean much. But believing that there is > > > a being-entity holding that pencil, that is truly an > > > illusion. Believing that the pencil is there and believing > > > that the being-entity is there are completely different > > > matters. Self-realization pertains to the latter, not the > > > former. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are two minds in man. > > > > One deals with the substantial world. > > > > One deals with the insubstanital world. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > toombaru > > LOL! > Is that why you signed twice? > One for each? ) > > Bill > > Hummmmmmm.........I don't know. Maybe..... 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.