Reply to I AM, The significance.

May 22, 2008

Dear Friends

In another group I posted " I AM " . The significance. I got this reply. I

thought that you should have a look at it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Reply

Yes, one has to be extremely careful in advaita as to what one means by

I the Self.

We are so well-entrenched in the false i - even though it is labeled a

i-notion - it is more than a mere notion or concept that we need to let

go of - it is verily who we are - the i who thinks, talks, eats, sleeps,

dreams, desires, is sad, is happy, plans, breathes, etc. - this i is

our very sense of

individuality, nourished as it has been through millions of births from

beginningless time!

Letting go of one's individuality means dying to one's self as

we now know it, see it, feel it. While our Masters like Bhagwan Ramana,

and many other Seers may make it look simple, direct, even effortless, I

think there is a grave danger into a seeker falling into a complacent

trap of delving into a comfort zone. There is nothing more difficult in

the world than letting go

of our cherished notional individuality.

Even the Gods fail in this, what to speak of mortals. Indra, the ruler

of the Heavens, how much prowess he must have had to acquire that

status - and yet he spends hundreds of years after approaching a Guru

for self-knowledge and still finds himself incomplete, unable to pierce

the barriers of his own notionality.

Sage Narada, who has the darshan of Lord Narayana at a moments wish,

and is the Rishi for the devas, who has completely mastered all the

scriptures all the sciences in the world, has learnt all that is to

know, still approaches Sage Vamana saying I am in a sea of sorrow for i

lack knowledge of the Self. The Upanishads talk about these instances

to point out just how hard it is to attain Self-realization.

Our teachers out of sheer benevolence so as not to discourage us from

coming to this field, from

rejecting it or shunning it outright do tell us it is the gain of

something already existent, it is a direct approach, etc - these are in

the way of getting the child to the mountain he needs to climb - you are

almost there - just a little longer, just a little more...etc...until

the seeker has made sufficient progress to gain a sense of commitment

to the journey, having been fully convinced of the ephemerality of the

world. If after gaining such a commitment, the sheer magnitude of the

task at hand is not appreciated, there is a real danger of self-effort

becoming lax. Gaining knowledge of the Self is harder than emptying

the entire Ocean drop by drop with a leaf of grass! No less!

See how the Gita talks and Shankara talks about such a Seer. A Seer

views his own body like a corpse - if it were to shrivel and die it

would make not one iota of a difference to him - what then to speak of

any near and dear ones, if he had any. He views the world as nothing

but a play. He is unconcerned, unattached to anything, dwelling in his

own nature - the entire riches of the Universe to him are worthless. He

is indifferent to the status of his body and its needs. IN the words

of the GitA - he is totally free from harsha---from elation;

amarsha---intolerance;

bhaya---fear; ca udvegaih---and anxiety of any sort.

It is the rarest treasure - to be found only at the pinnacle of

spiritual perfection, and available only to that rare person who

succeeds in the steepest path to climb.

Even spiritual giants like MadhavAcharya and RamanujAcharya could not

get themselves to accept Advaita - why?? - because advaita demands

nothing short of a complete surrender of one " self " - total

death, annihilation in toto. I give myself up, and I gain God. They

stopped short, preferring the easier path of proximity - be near Him,

enjoy Him, admire Him, but " i " want to be there too -

" i " cannot die - not so fast, not so soon, not even for the

Lord, my true Self.

As if this were not enough there is one more paradox to contend with.

Effort is not going to get you this knowledge either!! It is not a

matter of purusha-tantra but vastu-tantra. Effort pertains to the self

that is notional Effortlessness pertains to the being, the awareness,

that is Real.

Effort betrays the very veiling of what is effortless - and yet not

" efforting " is in itself a effort that

only veils more. The reason is the very Ego that makes all these

Efforts is also the Ego that needs to be dissolved so a vision of the

Self, of the Lord be gained. So if i set out to dissolve this concept

of the Ego or my concepts of the world, God, etc the very i that is

setting to dissolve all this is verily the only i that needs to be

dissolved, it is also the only i that can

get dissolved - everything else - all the neti neti in the world being

part of Ishwara srshti.

So something besides my intellect needs to be involved in this

process. And that something else is Grace - the Grace of the very Self

to which have i the seeker have a severe longing for, and an undying

devotion to.

Self-knowledge is not a matter of repetition - it is not even a matter

of memory. It is not that i have to keep remembering this fact that

" i am brahman " every single moment of the day. Nor is it a

matter of brainwashed dissociation - " i am not angry - i am

awareness that is illumining the angry mind " - this kind of

conscious thinking or dwelling upon is not Self-realization.

Self-knowledge is also not a matter of denial, even if be of the

non-self. neti neti does not mean i simply persist in my efforts to

deny the world, or deny my feelings, emotions, - if i go on

denying everything all through my life i will only end up wasting it

away in an ashen sea of nothingness. It is not about repeatedly

proclaiming i am awareness, nor even is it to arrive at a rationally

thought-out conclusion that i am awareness.

Dissolution of the ego - needs a purified mind and a focussed

intellect - the Ego can only be dissolved in the fire of knowledge the

ocean of devotion - Its dissolution has to be both total, and

irreversible. in that dissolution alone the Real Self shines forth on

its own accord.

Because my intellect by itself is not adequate in this task - this is

where Shruti comes in, as the only valid pramAna - it is verily a

mirror to my Self - since scriptures come in, naturally grammar, logic,

concepts, language, etc all come in to play - So the various arguments

the mind puts forth to reject self-knowledge are put to rest. At the

same time any comfort zones the mind may slip into in complacency at a

task pre-accomplished are also shaken off.

Constantly is this knowledge stirred into the mind, every concept

churned over and over.

Simply resorting to " who am i? " even in the silent recesses of

your mind, will never be enough. the " i " asking the question

" who am i? " will ever be veiling the reality of the Self that

never has a question to begin with.

In the Bhagwan's (Ramana) own words -

Ahami naasha bhaajyaham aham tayaa

Sphurathi Hrut Svayam parama poorna sat

When I-thought or Ego is destroyed,

the pure I shines forth on its own

as the Supreme and perfect (full) Existence.

then what??..listen..

Bandha Muktyatheetham param sukham

Vindhathi iha jeevah thu daivikah

The Individual Jeeva (who has acquired the knowledge

of the Self) realizes the Divine Lord who is Supreme,

Blissful and beyond both bondage and liberation here

in this world itself.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I had to put a reply, because I saw that it was very gloomy.

This is an excellent exposition of man's pathetic condition. The amount

of work ahead of him is huge. Man's sole assignment is Realization.

Anything that sways man away from his assignment is ego.

Now, the crucial question, HOW this is accomplished? A total

transformation has to occur. A total change in man's perspective has to

occur. I am sorry, I know that it is very difficult or even impossible

to draw a path that one can follow from A to Z. Any way, and I will try.

It is a change from the personal perspective to the objective

perspective.

Then from the objective perspective to the impersonal perspective. The

world when examined will appear in perfect tune with the adopted

perspective. From the personal perspective, the world will appear where

I am, is at the center, and everything else revolves around me. It is

very pleasing to adopt and become glued to the personal perspective.

From the objective perspective, the world will show its ugly face. Man

has no security, there is nothing to secure man, to the extent that man

cannot live there any longer, it is no longer a dwelling place. This

will push the seeker forward to the impersonal perspective, where man is

no more, there is no need to be secure, and God is everywhere.

This is a very silly oversimplification to the path, but it touches the

core of the ego -which we want to dissolve. It touches the pleasures we

are deriving from our present personal perspective and the subject of

security. I hope that someone might draw the way in better terms.

All I can say that although it is the most arduous assignment assigned

to man, yet it can be carried out.

mourad

May 22, 2008

Dear Mourad,

Thank you very much for his posting, and your reply, which demand a great deal

of study.

My initial response is that the key paragraph, or the gist, is contained as

below. It seems to sum up the whole discussion in a few lines- or am I being

over simplistic? I have, however, added one word , in caps, to make it even more

pointed.

" Dissolution of the ego - needs a purified mind and a focussed

intellect - the Ego can only be dissolved in the fire of knowledge AND the

ocean of devotion - Its dissolution has to be both total, and

irreversible. in that dissolution alone the Real Self shines forth on

its own accord. "

This I feel is the jewel of the piece, set in the gold of erudition.

All best wishes and love,

In Bhagavan,

As ever,

Alan

May 22, 2008

Dear Friends

If I may say:

Yes surrender is indeed unquestioning. Ultimately to give up the

questions of mind too. Unconditional surrender - as Sri Ramana said -

surrender, not even for liberation but simply for the love of the

Self only.

Unconditional love of the Self alone, for no liberation nor well

being nor deliverance from any " trouble " there may be now or ever,

complete effacement. In that the ego dies.

This utterly pure love, surely only the Self is? Can any ego love so

purely? Is that possible? Or is it that the ego itself surrenders

itself to that very love, which is Self!

So it may be, it is Self which is love, loving itself, if that makes

any sense. Then there is no ego " in the middle " left to surrender

anymore.

Namaste

Raph

, " mourad " <mourad_shamel

wrote:

>

> Dear Friends

>

> In another group I posted " I AM " . The significance. I got this

reply. I

> thought that you should have a look at it.

>

> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>

> The Reply

>

> Yes, one has to be extremely careful in advaita as to what one

means by

> I the Self.

> We are so well-entrenched in the false i - even though it is

labeled a

> i-notion - it is more than a mere notion or concept that we need

to let

> go of - it is verily who we are - the i who thinks, talks, eats,

sleeps,

> dreams, desires, is sad, is happy, plans, breathes, etc. - this i

is

> our very sense of

> individuality, nourished as it has been through millions of births

from

> beginningless time!

>

> Letting go of one's individuality means dying to one's self as

> we now know it, see it, feel it. While our Masters like Bhagwan

Ramana,

> and many other Seers may make it look simple, direct, even

effortless, I

> think there is a grave danger into a seeker falling into a

complacent

> trap of delving into a comfort zone. There is nothing more

difficult in

> the world than letting go

> of our cherished notional individuality.

>

> Even the Gods fail in this, what to speak of mortals. Indra, the

ruler

> of the Heavens, how much prowess he must have had to acquire that

> status - and yet he spends hundreds of years after approaching a

Guru

> for self-knowledge and still finds himself incomplete, unable to

pierce

> the barriers of his own notionality.

>

> Sage Narada, who has the darshan of Lord Narayana at a moments

wish,

> and is the Rishi for the devas, who has completely mastered all

the

> scriptures all the sciences in the world, has learnt all that is

to

> know, still approaches Sage Vamana saying I am in a sea of sorrow

for i

> lack knowledge of the Self. The Upanishads talk about these

instances

> to point out just how hard it is to attain Self-realization.

>

> Our teachers out of sheer benevolence so as not to discourage

us from

> coming to this field, from

> rejecting it or shunning it outright do tell us it is the gain

of

> something already existent, it is a direct approach, etc - these

are in

> the way of getting the child to the mountain he needs to climb -

you are

> almost there - just a little longer, just a little

more...etc...until

> the seeker has made sufficient progress to gain a sense of

commitment

> to the journey, having been fully convinced of the ephemerality

of the

> world. If after gaining such a commitment, the sheer magnitude of

the

> task at hand is not appreciated, there is a real danger of self-

effort

> becoming lax. Gaining knowledge of the Self is harder than

emptying

> the entire Ocean drop by drop with a leaf of grass! No less!

>

> See how the Gita talks and Shankara talks about such a Seer. A

Seer

> views his own body like a corpse - if it were to shrivel and die

it

> would make not one iota of a difference to him - what then to

speak of

> any near and dear ones, if he had any. He views the world as

nothing

> but a play. He is unconcerned, unattached to anything, dwelling

in his

> own nature - the entire riches of the Universe to him are

worthless. He

> is indifferent to the status of his body and its needs. IN the

words

> of the GitA - he is totally free from harsha---from elation;

> amarsha---intolerance;

> bhaya---fear; ca udvegaih---and anxiety of any sort.

>

> It is the rarest treasure - to be found only at the pinnacle of

> spiritual perfection, and available only to that rare person who

> succeeds in the steepest path to climb.

>

> Even spiritual giants like MadhavAcharya and RamanujAcharya

could not

> get themselves to accept Advaita - why?? - because advaita demands

> nothing short of a complete surrender of one " self " - total

> death, annihilation in toto. I give myself up, and I gain God.

They

> stopped short, preferring the easier path of proximity - be near

Him,

> enjoy Him, admire Him, but " i " want to be there too -

> " i " cannot die - not so fast, not so soon, not even for the

> Lord, my true Self.

>

> As if this were not enough there is one more paradox to contend

with.

> Effort is not going to get you this knowledge either!! It is not a

> matter of purusha-tantra but vastu-tantra. Effort pertains to

the self

> that is notional Effortlessness pertains to the being, the

awareness,

> that is Real.

>

> Effort betrays the very veiling of what is effortless - and yet

not

> " efforting " is in itself a effort that

> only veils more. The reason is the very Ego that makes all these

> Efforts is also the Ego that needs to be dissolved so a vision of

the

> Self, of the Lord be gained. So if i set out to dissolve this

concept

> of the Ego or my concepts of the world, God, etc the very i that

is

> setting to dissolve all this is verily the only i that needs to be

> dissolved, it is also the only i that can

> get dissolved - everything else - all the neti neti in the

world being

> part of Ishwara srshti.

>

> So something besides my intellect needs to be involved in this

> process. And that something else is Grace - the Grace of the very

Self

> to which have i the seeker have a severe longing for, and an

undying

> devotion to.

>

> Self-knowledge is not a matter of repetition - it is not even a

matter

> of memory. It is not that i have to keep remembering this fact

that

> " i am brahman " every single moment of the day. Nor is it a

> matter of brainwashed dissociation - " i am not angry - i am

> awareness that is illumining the angry mind " - this kind of

> conscious thinking or dwelling upon is not Self-realization.

> Self-knowledge is also not a matter of denial, even if be of the

> non-self. neti neti does not mean i simply persist in my efforts

to

> deny the world, or deny my feelings, emotions, - if i go on

> denying everything all through my life i will only end up

wasting it

> away in an ashen sea of nothingness. It is not about repeatedly

> proclaiming i am awareness, nor even is it to arrive at a

rationally

> thought-out conclusion that i am awareness.

>

> Dissolution of the ego - needs a purified mind and a focussed

> intellect - the Ego can only be dissolved in the fire of

knowledge the

> ocean of devotion - Its dissolution has to be both total, and

> irreversible. in that dissolution alone the Real Self shines

forth on

> its own accord.

>

> Because my intellect by itself is not adequate in this task -

this is

> where Shruti comes in, as the only valid pramAna - it is verily a

> mirror to my Self - since scriptures come in, naturally grammar,

logic,

> concepts, language, etc all come in to play - So the various

arguments

> the mind puts forth to reject self-knowledge are put to rest. At

the

> same time any comfort zones the mind may slip into in complacency

at a

> task pre-accomplished are also shaken off.

> Constantly is this knowledge stirred into the mind, every

concept

> churned over and over.

>

> Simply resorting to " who am i? " even in the silent recesses of

> your mind, will never be enough. the " i " asking the question

> " who am i? " will ever be veiling the reality of the Self that

> never has a question to begin with.

>

> In the Bhagwan's (Ramana) own words -

>

> Ahami naasha bhaajyaham aham tayaa

> Sphurathi Hrut Svayam parama poorna sat

>

> When I-thought or Ego is destroyed,

> the pure I shines forth on its own

> as the Supreme and perfect (full) Existence.

>

> then what??..listen..

>

> Bandha Muktyatheetham param sukham

> Vindhathi iha jeevah thu daivikah

>

> The Individual Jeeva (who has acquired the knowledge

> of the Self) realizes the Divine Lord who is Supreme,

> Blissful and beyond both bondage and liberation here

> in this world itself.

>

> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>

> I had to put a reply, because I saw that it was very gloomy.

>

> This is an excellent exposition of man's pathetic condition. The

amount

> of work ahead of him is huge. Man's sole assignment is Realization.

> Anything that sways man away from his assignment is ego.

>

> Now, the crucial question, HOW this is accomplished? A total

> transformation has to occur. A total change in man's perspective

has to

> occur. I am sorry, I know that it is very difficult or even

impossible

> to draw a path that one can follow from A to Z. Any way, and I

will try.

> It is a change from the personal perspective to the objective

> perspective.

> Then from the objective perspective to the impersonal perspective.

The

> world when examined will appear in perfect tune with the adopted

> perspective. From the personal perspective, the world will appear

where

> I am, is at the center, and everything else revolves around me. It

is

> very pleasing to adopt and become glued to the personal

perspective.

> From the objective perspective, the world will show its ugly face.

Man

> has no security, there is nothing to secure man, to the extent

that man

> cannot live there any longer, it is no longer a dwelling place.

This

> will push the seeker forward to the impersonal perspective, where

man is

> no more, there is no need to be secure, and God is everywhere.

>

> This is a very silly oversimplification to the path, but it

touches the

> core of the ego -which we want to dissolve. It touches the

pleasures we

> are deriving from our present personal perspective and the subject

of

> security. I hope that someone might draw the way in better terms.

>

> All I can say that although it is the most arduous assignment

assigned

> to man, yet it can be carried out.

>

> mourad

>

May 23, 2008

Dear Alan

Yes, the key is the paragraph you mentioned. I will attempt to interpret

the paragraph.

What is meant by a " purified mind and a focussed intellect " . A seeking

mind is needed. A mind that is not convinced nor satisfied with the

conventional logic, this type of mind is still keeping his common sense,

a mind that did not loose the faculty of common sense. if some one says

there is a God in the skies that you have to obey, this mind will say I

do not believe you. There is a God that created all this universe, but

not in the skies. I do not know , WHO or WHERE IS THIS GOD. The

conventional logic did not answer the questions about life, death, an

after life, a heaven or man's destiny...etc. All these questions are

answered theoritically by the conventional logic of man. But this

theoritical answer, the eschatology in religions did not satisfy this

type of mind. Moreover, this seeking mind was not convinced nor

satisfied with answers presented by religion and concluded that the

conventional logic is only for worldly communications. This mind is

purified from absolute reality of the conventional logic. The

conventional logic is not water proof nor air tight. Out of this simple

understanding the intellect will become focused in the form of

expressing what this mind understood.

What does Sri Ramana means by " The fire of knowledge and Ocean of

Devotion " .

This seeking mind will not stop examining his whole experience. The

seeking mind will find that this conventional logic is being experienced

24 hours a day. This seeking mind will discover that what is blinding

him from seeing things as they are is this conventional logic. The

conventional logic is the blinding agent. Out of this revelation, things

will appear as they are -not as they were coloured by the conventional

logic. Another type of logic will emerge based on seeing things as they

are. This new logic is called Knowledge to distinguish it from the old

conventional logic which is termed ignorance. All this would had never

happened unless devotion was there. A devotion which means one pointed

attention and the willingness to sacrifice anything for the sake of

man's destiny.

Fod Bless

mourad

, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs

wrote:

>

> Dear Mourad,

>

> Thank you very much for his posting, and your reply, which demand a

great deal of study.

>

> My initial response is that the key paragraph, or the gist, is

contained as below. It seems to sum up the whole discussion in a few

lines- or am I being over simplistic? I have, however, added one word ,

in caps, to make it even more pointed.

>

> " Dissolution of the ego - needs a purified mind and a focussed

> intellect - the Ego can only be dissolved in the fire of knowledge AND

the

> ocean of devotion - Its dissolution has to be both total, and

> irreversible. in that dissolution alone the Real Self shines forth on

> its own accord. "

>

> This I feel is the jewel of the piece, set in the gold of erudition.

>

> All best wishes and love,

>

> In Bhagavan,

>

> As ever,

>

> Alan

>

May 23, 2008

Dear Mourad,

Thanks for your interesting explanation relating to the perverse logic of the

thinking mind. However I believed that 'purification' referred to the removal of

the vasanas, and that the fire of Knowledge is Jnana Yoga, and the Ocean of

Devotion is Bhakti Yoga. It just shows how two sadhaks can interpret the same

text differently. Perhaps we are both are right?

All best wishes and love in Sri Bhagavan,

Alan

--- On Fri, 23/5/08, mourad <mourad_shamel wrote:

mourad <mourad_shamel

Re: Reply to " I AM " , The significance.

Friday, 23 May, 2008, 12:26 PM