Guest guest Posted April 8, 2008 Report Share Posted April 8, 2008 Hello, thank's for your answer but it seems to me that we can make some confusions about what we call "I AM". one can listen here I AM = ego (the individual person with a name and a body). So if I am going beyond the I AM, I will discover the pure consciousness. For exemple some buddhist compare atman to the ego and non-atman means only non-ego, not non-awareness. But for other people (maybe for Niz), the I AM will mean the pure consciousness wich is without limit, without time, universal, and in which the world happens now. This pure consciousness is the source of the world. So in this case going beyong the pure consciousness is going also beyong all self because self = consciousness. Self means being conscious that I AM conscious. So what do you mean by I AM? thanks josé ----- Message d'origine ----De : sujal_u <sujal_uÀ : Nisargadatta Envoyé le : Lundi, 7 Avril 2008, 15h24mn 45sObjet : Re: two states Dear Jose,The method tought by Sri Nisargadattaji involves the use of mind. The enquiry about 'I am' or to find out 'who Am I' by Sri Ramana Maharshi or chanting of 'AUM' is all the same.All these require you to sit and meditate. This process involves mental efforts. The reason for suggesting this kind of enquiry (about 'I am' or 'who am i') is that with the help of this al other thoughts are dissloved. The only thought that remains is the 'I am' or 'who am i' or the chanting of 'AUM'. But still, it is not the final state because, in this state, duality exists i.e. 1. the one who is chanting or making the enquiry and 2. and the one who observes the chanting.Now Sri Nisargadattaji askes us to go beyond the 'i am'. Who to go beyond 'i am'?. By trying to know from where the chanting or the enquiry has originated. i.e. the source. In ramana maharshi's words, the fire burns the corpse (which implies the desires) and then it also dies out. After you find the source from where this enquiry has originated, then everything dissolves and only the source, i.e. you or 'SELF' remains this is known as 'Nirvikapl Samadhi'Vikalp=changesNirVikalp= the one which does not changesSamadhi = state of awareness about our true natureHence first we should try to enquire or find 'i am ' or 'who am i' and then go beyond it.A person who regularly meditating can understand this.Ramesh Balsaker is from Yoga. In Yoga, the philosophy, we have to tune with the body both gross and subtle. So it has its limitations and you need to go beyond kundalini. finally every thought has to be discarded. which people fail to do so as they have tuned with the body. So these people cannot go beyond or find diffucult or go beyond 'i amj'Hope this clears outSincerelySujal UpadhyayNisargadatta, jose le roy <joseleroyfr@ ...> wrote:>> Dear members,> I am just joined you and I have a question.> It seems to me that Nisargaddat talked about two states: the first is the discovering of the "I am", of the consciousness which is formless, without limit, divine. > But he asked us to go further, beyond the "I am", beyong the consciousness. > Among the spiritual teachers today, it seems to me that they often make confusions between this two states maybe even Balsekar.> And it's difficult to find in the past teachers who are able to make this difference.> Do someone agree with me or am I reading Nisargadatta in the wrong way?> thanks > josé (from Paris, france)> > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _> Envoyez avec Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail..fr> Envoyé avec Mail.Une boite mail plus intelligente. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2008 Report Share Posted April 8, 2008 Dear Jose, 'I AM' definetely means the true self and not ego. But to think on 'I AM', we need the support of mind. So we need to drop the word 'I AM' but not our true self. It is like a pole volt. You take the support of the pole (long stick 3-4 Mtrs long) to cross the cross bar (which is the mind) and then drop the pole and reach the other end. (divine bliss). Why there is the need to think on 'I AM'? To remove all the other thoughts. Basically ours is a demanding mind and mind is nothing but continous flow of thoughts according to Ramana Maharshi. To realise our true SELF, we need to remove all the other thoughts. How can we remove other thoughts? First we should be able to imagine what is our true nature. So by thinking on our true nature, i.e. i am conciousness, i am awareness, i am not the ego but the state where the ego does not exists. i am peace, divine bliss. I am beyond senses, beyond mind, etc. By thinking in such a way, (which Sri Nisargadattaji Maharaj has pointed out) we can develop all thoughts which are of similar kind ( nature) and when our mind is filled with these thougths then there is no space for worldly thoughts. our mind is full of the thoughts which are related to our SELF. In this way one pointedness is achieved. Total surrenderance of the EGO to the SELF is the real devotion according to Ramana Maharshi.When we are able to do so we find the source of ego, where the ego does not exists, but only the SELF exists. Everything dissolves and only you exists i.e. pure awareness. This is the reason why Sri Nisargadattaji has told us to think on 'I AM'. this is to reach one state i.e. mind full of thoughts related to our SELF. Then he says go beyond it. It does not mean that there is something beyond our SELF. It means that DROP this thought about 'I AM' (because the desire of knowing our true nature is also a desire and distruction of desires is nothing but liberation says Sri Adi Sankaracharya) and then the mind is perfectly calm we can go beyond the mind and realise our true self. If you keep on thinking about 'I AM' still it is not enough because to think means to involve the mind and till you are within the mind you cannot go beyond the mind. Now, to go beyond the mind or thoughts, we have to be aware of this thoughts and try to find their origin. The origin of thought is EGO, which is the cause of duality, and the origin of EGO is the SELF. If you are meditating then you can understand what do i mean. As far as Buddhism is concerned, i cannot comment on Buddhism and its principle of Shunyata - i.e. Soul means nothing or emptyness or zero state. I have read Sri Ramana Maharshi's " 40 verses on truth " and in that it is said that there is no state in which you can deny your existance. So Who says (observes) that the soul is the zero state is the SELF and not the ZERO state. The knowner of zero state is the SELF. I hope this clears your doubt. AUM Sujal --- jose le roy <joseleroyfr wrote: > Hello, > thank's for your answer but it seems to me that we > can make some confusions about what we call " I AM " . > one can listen here I AM = ego (the individual > person with a name and a body). So if I am > going beyond the I AM, I will discover the pure > consciousness. For exemple some buddhist compare > atman to the ego and non-atman means only non-ego, > not non-awareness. > But for other people (maybe for Niz), the I AM will > mean the pure consciousness wich is without limit, > without time, universal, and in which the world > happens now. This pure consciousness is the source > of the world. So in this case going beyong the pure > consciousness is going also beyong all self because > self = consciousness. Self means being conscious > that I AM conscious. > So what do you mean by I AM? > thanks josé > > > > ----- Message d'origine ---- > De : sujal_u <sujal_u > À : Nisargadatta > Envoyé le : Lundi, 7 Avril 2008, 15h24mn 45s > Objet : Re: two states > > > Dear Jose, > > The method tought by Sri Nisargadattaji involves the > use of mind. The > enquiry about 'I am' or to find out 'who Am I' by > Sri Ramana Maharshi > or chanting of 'AUM' is all the same. > > All these require you to sit and meditate. This > process involves > mental efforts. The reason for suggesting this kind > of enquiry (about > 'I am' or 'who am i') is that with the help of this > al other thoughts > are dissloved. The only thought that remains is the > 'I am' or 'who am > i' or the chanting of 'AUM'. But still, it is not > the final state > because, in this state, duality exists i.e. 1. the > one who is > chanting or making the enquiry and 2. and the one > who observes the > chanting. > > Now Sri Nisargadattaji askes us to go beyond the 'i > am'. Who to go > beyond 'i am'?. By trying to know from where the > chanting or the > enquiry has originated. i.e. the source. In ramana > maharshi's words, > the fire burns the corpse (which implies the > desires) and then it > also dies out. After you find the source from where > this enquiry has > originated, then everything dissolves and only the > source, i.e. you > or 'SELF' remains this is known as > > 'Nirvikapl Samadhi' > > Vikalp=changes > NirVikalp= the one which does not changes > Samadhi = state of awareness about our true nature > > Hence first we should try to enquire or find 'i am ' > or 'who am i' > and then go beyond it. > > A person who regularly meditating can understand > this. > > Ramesh Balsaker is from Yoga. In Yoga, the > philosophy, we have to > tune with the body both gross and subtle. So it has > its limitations > and you need to go beyond kundalini. finally every > thought has to be > discarded. which people fail to do so as they have > tuned with the > body. So these people cannot go beyond or find > diffucult or go beyond > 'i amj' > > Hope this clears out > > Sincerely > > Sujal Upadhyay > > Nisargadatta, jose le roy > <joseleroyfr@ ...> > wrote: > > > > Dear members, > > I am just joined you and I have a question. > > It seems to me that Nisargaddat talked about two > states: the first > is the discovering of the " I am " , of the > consciousness which is > formless, without limit, divine. > > But he asked us to go further, beyond the " I am " , > beyong the > consciousness. > > Among the spiritual teachers today, it seems to me > that they often > make confusions between this two states maybe even > Balsekar. > > And it's difficult to find in the past teachers > who are able to > make this difference. > > Do someone agree with me or am I reading > Nisargadatta in the wrong > way? > > thanks > > josé (from Paris, france) > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ > _________ _ > > > Envoyez avec Mail. Une boite mail plus > intelligente http:// > mail..fr > > > > > > > > ___________________________ > > Envoyez avec Mail. Une boite mail plus > intelligente http://mail..fr ______________________________\ ____ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals./tc/blockbuster/text5.com 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.