Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Dear List Members Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Have a fun new week. Enjoy -d About fifteen years ago, when I was collecting information for Nothing Ever Happened, I had the assistance of a group of people who were helping me by transcribing satsang tapes. Occasionally, the volunteers would make mistakes, especially if they did not know technical terms or the names of saints and gods that Papaji occasionally inserted in his stories. Sometimes, when non-native English speakers were involved, ignorance of English idioms occasionally caused errors. Usually, I could spot mistakes and correct them without ever needing to listen to the tapes, but I did occasionally get stuck, as when someone offered me a transcript in which Papaji had apparently said, ‘I don’t give people any goose or goats’. I thought for a few seconds, knowing that it was obviously wrong, but having no idea of what the original words might have been. I gave up, ran the tape, and heard Papaji say: ‘I don’t give people any do’s or don’ts’. Last year I mentioned this story to a friend of mine, Aruna, who occasionally does graphic design and page making work for me. Since she was coordinating transcription work for another Guru, I thought she might appreciate the story. She supplied me with her own best example, taken from her own volunteer crew. One of them had sent her a transcript in which the Guru had apparently said: ‘I am neither a butler nor a nanny.’ After deciding that this was probably not what the Guru had said, she checked the tape and found he had said: ‘I am not a bhakta or a jnani.’ Mishearings such as these were nicely parodied in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, in the scene where a group of men find themselves slightly too far away to hear Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. One of them asked the people in front what Jesus was saying, and the word came back, ‘Blessed are the cheese makers’. This confused most of the group, but one man, who considered himself to be a theological expert, started to give a talk on the religious significance of ‘Blessed are the cheese makers’. How many religious doctrines, I wonder, have emerged from misunderstandings such as these? The last two paragraphs are just entertaining digressions. What I want to do today is elaborate a little on Papaji’s statement: ‘I don’t give people any do’s or don’ts.’ Many people go to the Guru with the idea that he should tell them to ‘do’ something in order to reach some goal or be relieved of some problem or other. We are all so addicted to ‘doing’, we believe that we have to ‘do something’ to attain whatever spiritual goal we are chasing. When the Guru says, ‘You are the Self, you are Brahman,’ the disciple often responds by saying, ‘Yes, I understand, but what do I do to attain it? How do I discover this for myself?’ The asking of such a question means that the disciple thinks that Brahman is something he should become, through effort, rather than something that he already is. The assumption implicit in this world-view is the premise behind all sadhana. With this in mind, read verse 271 of Guru Vachaka Kovai: The Guru who instructs the disciple, who has taken complete refuge in him, by giving one more prescription for action, instead of directing him towards jnana, and who leads him into activities, saying ‘These should be done,’ is for the disciple [equivalent to] the coming of cruel Yama and Brahma. Only he who consummates them [the disciples], transforming them into those who have done all that needs to be done, enabling them to attain the true benefit of this birth, is the grace-bestowing, divine Guru. Since Brahma is the god of birth and Yama the god of death, the verse is implying that gurus who get their disciples involved in unnecessary activities, physical or mental, instead of directing them towards jnana, will be responsible for them being reborn. Bhagavan gave similar advice to the following devotee when the latter came up with a ‘Yes I understand, but what do I do?’ query: Question: Our grasp is only intellectual. If Sri Bhagavan be pleased to direct us with a few instructions we shall be highly benefited. Bhagavan: He who instructs an ardent seeker to do this or that is not a true master. The seeker is already afflicted by his activities and wants peace and rest. In other words, he wants cessation of his activities. Instead of that he is told to do something in addition to, or in place of, his other activities. Can that be a help to the seeker? Activity is creation; activity is the destruction of one’s inherent happiness. If activity be advocated the adviser is not a master but the killer. Either the Creator (Brahma) or Death (Yama) may be said to have come in the guise of such a master. He cannot liberate the aspirant but strengthens his fetters. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 601.) The same idea appears in Day by Day with Bhagavan, 27th March 1946, afternoon, where Bhagavan tells a questioner: ‘the truth is, all karma of whatever kind will lead to fresh bondage. That is why it is said in Ozhivil Odukkam that the Guru who prescribes fresh karma or action of any sort, i.e., rituals or sacrifices to one who after trying various karmas comes to him for peace, is both Brahma and Yama to the disciple i.e., he only creates fresh births and deaths.' Ozhivil Odukkam is a Tamil philosophical text composed by Kannudaiya Vallalaar several centuries ago. It was one of Bhagavan’s favourite advaita texts, so much so that he asked Muruganar to make a Tamil prose rendering of it in order to make the meaning clearer and more accessible. The original Tamil is extremely difficult to follow, and most people gain an understanding of the work through a commentary that has appeared in all editions of the text. Unfortunately, the commentator incorporated a few interpretations of his own that are not present in the text, which is why Bhagavan thought that a new and clearer rendering of the original was desirable. Muruganar never found time to execute this commission, so the true meaning of the original verses remains inaccessible to all but the most learned Tamil scholars. The idea that Gurus who tell disciples to do things are Yama and Brahma in disguise comes from verse 123 of this work: Having exhausted themselves by activities, aspirants come to the Guru seeking jnana. He alone is the true jnana-bestowing Guru who, possessing the wealth of bliss, produces the crop of bliss in them so that they wander without volition and without doing anything. But the Guru who occasions the least rising of their ego through his instructions is both Brahma, he who possesses the ability to create the world, and Yama too, the god of death. ‘Without volition and without doing anything’ refers to the ego-free state in which there are no sankalpas (decisions or choices made by the mind) and no sense of being the performer of the actions that the body is doing. Most people will read a verse like this and decide that it refers to physical activities alone. ‘My Guru is OK.’ they will say, ‘He doesn’t tell me to run around doing things; he tells me to meditate instead.’ That is not an acceptable response to this verse because it is also implying that keeping the mind busy – even with meditation – is no different from keeping the body busy. Anyone who prescribes either course keeps his followers on the wheel of birth and death. It would seem that Bhagavan accepted this position because, in the two citations from Talks and Day by Day that I have already given, he is introducing the ideas from this verse and endorsing them. I began with a quote from Papaji. I will reintroduce him here because one of his often-repeated maxims is highly relevant to what I am endeavouring to say: ‘Physical activities produce physical results; mental activities produce mental results; since the Self is neither physical nor mental, an awareness of it cannot be brought about by either physical or mental activity.’ That’s a hard conclusion to accept for most people because it undercuts and negates all their mental activities that are optimistically geared towards realising the Self. The solution, as both Bhagavan and Papaji pointed out on many occasions is ‘being still’ (summa iruttal). When Bhagavan gives out the instruction ‘Summa iru’ (be still), he is not telling us to practise being still – that would just be more ‘doing’ – he is telling us desist from all mental activity, even meditation. ‘Being still’ is not something you accomplish by effort; it is what remains when all effort ceases. Here is a Thayumanavar verse (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 52) on this topic that Bhagavan was fond of quoting: Bliss will arise if you remain still. Why, little sir, this involvement still with yoga, whose nature is delusion? Will [this bliss] arise through your own objective knowledge? You need not reply, you who are addicted to ‘doing’! You little baby, you! To which I will add verse 647 of Guru Vachaka Kovai, followed by another quote from Thayumanavar that comes from the same poem: If you remain still, without paying attention to this, without paying attention to that, and without paying attention to anything at all, you will, simply through your powerful attention to being, become the reality, the vast eye, the unbounded space of consciousness. If we truly see-without-seeing the inner light, not investigating, not thinking at all, will not the flood of bliss come, spreading in all the ten directions, rising up in surging waves to overflow its banks? (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 58) There is a section in Padamalai that gives a broad summary of Bhagavan’s views on ‘being still’. I will conclude today’s offering by reproducing it. The verses are in bold, editorial comments in italics, and parallel quotations in roman. 25 Supreme liberation will shine as Atma-swarupa if one remains still. This verse is introduced by the word ‘amma’, which indicates that Bhagavan is expressing surprise in this statement, possibly at the thought that anyone could think otherwise. 26 Through his gentle smile, radiant Padam joyfully declares: ‘Why this distress? Be happy by just remaining still.’ Bhagavan: Your duty is to be, and not to be this or that. ‘I am that I am’ sums up the whole truth; the method is summarised in ‘Be still’. And what does stillness mean? It means ‘Destroy yourself’; because, every name and form is the cause of trouble. ‘I-I’ is the Self. ‘I am this’ is the ego. When the ‘I’ is kept up as the ‘I’ only, it is the Self. When it flies off at a tangent and says ‘I am this or that, I am such and such’, it is the ego. Question: Who then is God? Bhagavan: The Self is God. ‘I am’ is God. If God be apart from the Self, He must be a selfless God, which is absurd. All that is required to realise the Self is to be still. What can be easier than that? Hence Atma-vidya [self-knowledge] is the easiest to attain. (Maharshi’s Gospel, pp. 31-2) 27 Since becoming established in the state of the Self is both the means and the goal to be attained, remain still. Though it was Bhagavan’s highest and simplest upadesa, he conceded that for many people, it was an impossible command to execute: Question: What should one do in order to remain free from thoughts as advised by you? Is it only the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ Bhagavan: Only to remain still. Do it and see. Question: It is impossible. Bhagavan: Exactly. For the same reason the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ is advised. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 322) Bhagavan: All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, ‘Summa iru,’ i.e. ‘Be quiet or still’. But it is not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once achieved the mauna or supreme state indicated by ‘Summa iru’ you may take it that the effort necessary has already been finished in a previous life. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 11th January, 1946) 28 The wonderful meaning of the one supreme word [summa iru] is to know and rest in the Atma-swarupa through the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ 29 Except by remaining still [summa iruttal] by what great tapas can the Atma-swarupa be attained in the Heart? Bhagavan: People seem to think that by practising some elaborate sadhana the Self will one day descend upon them as something very big and with tremendous glory, giving them what is called sakshatkaram [direct experience]. The Self is sakshat [direct] all right, but there is no karam or kritam about it. [That is, there is no one who performs actions, and no actions being performed.] The word ‘karam’ implies doing something. But the Self is realised not by doing something but by refraining from doing anything, by remaining still and being simply what one really is. (The Power of the Presence, part three, pp. 131-3) 30 It will be impossible to merge with the feet of Lord Sonachala [Arunachala], unless one remains still, with the mind consumed and annihilated. Bhagavan: Stillness is total surrender without a vestige of individuality. Stillness will prevail and there will be no agitation of mind. Agitation of mind is the cause of desire, the sense of doership and personality. If that is stopped there is quiet. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 354) 31 By shining motionlessly, which is meditation on the Self, all manner of excellent benefits accrue. 32 To remain still, without thinking about that which is other than the Self, is to offer the mind to the Self. 33 Being still is the experience of swarupa jnana. Whatever is perceived by the senses is a false, illusory appearance. 34 To rest, remaining still as consciousness, is union [sayujya], the abundance of peace. 35 Knowing That is only abiding as That. Therefore, shine, remaining still without objectifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Dear Dave , Thank you so much for making the paradoxical effort which was no effort in giving us this most interesting and well worth dissertation. All best wishes and regards, Alan--- On Mon, 22/9/08, Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote: Dave Sirjue <davesirjue Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Monday, 22 September, 2008, 6:49 PM Dear List Members Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Have a fun new week. Enjoy -d About fifteen years ago, when I was collecting information for Nothing Ever Happened, I had the assistance of a group of people who were helping me by transcribing satsang tapes. Occasionally, the volunteers would make mistakes, especially if they did not know technical terms or the names of saints and gods that Papaji occasionally inserted in his stories. Sometimes, when non-native English speakers were involved, ignorance of English idioms occasionally caused errors. Usually, I could spot mistakes and correct them without ever needing to listen to the tapes, but I did occasionally get stuck, as when someone offered me a transcript in which Papaji had apparently said, ‘I don’t give people any goose or goats’. I thought for a few seconds, knowing that it was obviously wrong, but having no idea of what the original words might have been. I gave up, ran the tape, and heard Papaji say: ‘I don’t give people any do’s or don’ts’. Last year I mentioned this story to a friend of mine, Aruna, who occasionally does graphic design and page making work for me. Since she was coordinating transcription work for another Guru, I thought she might appreciate the story. She supplied me with her own best example, taken from her own volunteer crew. One of them had sent her a transcript in which the Guru had apparently said: ‘I am neither a butler nor a nanny.’ After deciding that this was probably not what the Guru had said, she checked the tape and found he had said: ‘I am not a bhakta or a jnani.’ Mishearings such as these were nicely parodied in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, in the scene where a group of men find themselves slightly too far away to hear Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. One of them asked the people in front what Jesus was saying, and the word came back, ‘Blessed are the cheese makers’. This confused most of the group, but one man, who considered himself to be a theological expert, started to give a talk on the religious significance of ‘Blessed are the cheese makers’. How many religious doctrines, I wonder, have emerged from misunderstandings such as these? The last two paragraphs are just entertaining digressions. What I want to do today is elaborate a little on Papaji’s statement: ‘I don’t give people any do’s or don’ts.’ Many people go to the Guru with the idea that he should tell them to ‘do’ something in order to reach some goal or be relieved of some problem or other. We are all so addicted to ‘doing’, we believe that we have to ‘do something’ to attain whatever spiritual goal we are chasing. When the Guru says, ‘You are the Self, you are Brahman,’ the disciple often responds by saying, ‘Yes, I understand, but what do I do to attain it? How do I discover this for myself?’ The asking of such a question means that the disciple thinks that Brahman is something he should become, through effort, rather than something that he already is. The assumption implicit in this world-view is the premise behind all sadhana. With this in mind, read verse 271 of Guru Vachaka Kovai: The Guru who instructs the disciple, who has taken complete refuge in him, by giving one more prescription for action, instead of directing him towards jnana, and who leads him into activities, saying ‘These should be done,’ is for the disciple [equivalent to] the coming of cruel Yama and Brahma. Only he who consummates them [the disciples], transforming them into those who have done all that needs to be done, enabling them to attain the true benefit of this birth, is the grace-bestowing, divine Guru. Since Brahma is the god of birth and Yama the god of death, the verse is implying that gurus who get their disciples involved in unnecessary activities, physical or mental, instead of directing them towards jnana, will be responsible for them being reborn. Bhagavan gave similar advice to the following devotee when the latter came up with a ‘Yes I understand, but what do I do?’ query: Question: Our grasp is only intellectual. If Sri Bhagavan be pleased to direct us with a few instructions we shall be highly benefited. Bhagavan: He who instructs an ardent seeker to do this or that is not a true master. The seeker is already afflicted by his activities and wants peace and rest. In other words, he wants cessation of his activities. Instead of that he is told to do something in addition to, or in place of, his other activities. Can that be a help to the seeker? Activity is creation; activity is the destruction of one’s inherent happiness. If activity be advocated the adviser is not a master but the killer. Either the Creator (Brahma) or Death (Yama) may be said to have come in the guise of such a master. He cannot liberate the aspirant but strengthens his fetters. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 601.) The same idea appears in Day by Day with Bhagavan, 27th March 1946 , afternoon, where Bhagavan tells a questioner: ‘the truth is, all karma of whatever kind will lead to fresh bondage. That is why it is said in Ozhivil Odukkam that the Guru who prescribes fresh karma or action of any sort, i.e., rituals or sacrifices to one who after trying various karmas comes to him for peace, is both Brahma and Yama to the disciple i.e., he only creates fresh births and deaths.' Ozhivil Odukkam is a Tamil philosophical text composed by Kannudaiya Vallalaar several centuries ago. It was one of Bhagavan’s favourite advaita texts, so much so that he asked Muruganar to make a Tamil prose rendering of it in order to make the meaning clearer and more accessible. The original Tamil is extremely difficult to follow, and most people gain an understanding of the work through a commentary that has appeared in all editions of the text. Unfortunately, the commentator incorporated a few interpretations of his own that are not present in the text, which is why Bhagavan thought that a new and clearer rendering of the original was desirable. Muruganar never found time to execute this commission, so the true meaning of the original verses remains inaccessible to all but the most learned Tamil scholars. The idea that Gurus who tell disciples to do things are Yama and Brahma in disguise comes from verse 123 of this work: Having exhausted themselves by activities, aspirants come to the Guru seeking jnana. He alone is the true jnana-bestowing Guru who, possessing the wealth of bliss, produces the crop of bliss in them so that they wander without volition and without doing anything. But the Guru who occasions the least rising of their ego through his instructions is both Brahma, he who possesses the ability to create the world, and Yama too, the god of death. ‘Without volition and without doing anything’ refers to the ego-free state in which there are no sankalpas (decisions or choices made by the mind) and no sense of being the performer of the actions that the body is doing. Most people will read a verse like this and decide that it refers to physical activities alone. ‘My Guru is OK.’ they will say, ‘He doesn’t tell me to run around doing things; he tells me to meditate instead.’ That is not an acceptable response to this verse because it is also implying that keeping the mind busy – even with meditation – is no different from keeping the body busy. Anyone who prescribes either course keeps his followers on the wheel of birth and death. It would seem that Bhagavan accepted this position because, in the two citations from Talks and Day by Day that I have already given, he is introducing the ideas from this verse and endorsing them. I began with a quote from Papaji. I will reintroduce him here because one of his often-repeated maxims is highly relevant to what I am endeavouring to say: ‘Physical activities produce physical results; mental activities produce mental results; since the Self is neither physical nor mental, an awareness of it cannot be brought about by either physical or mental activity.’ That’s a hard conclusion to accept for most people because it undercuts and negates all their mental activities that are optimistically geared towards realising the Self. The solution, as both Bhagavan and Papaji pointed out on many occasions is ‘being still’ (summa iruttal). When Bhagavan gives out the instruction ‘Summa iru’ (be still), he is not telling us to practise being still – that would just be more ‘doing’ – he is telling us desist from all mental activity, even meditation. ‘Being still’ is not something you accomplish by effort; it is what remains when all effort ceases. Here is a Thayumanavar verse (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 52) on this topic that Bhagavan was fond of quoting: Bliss will arise if you remain still. Why, little sir, this involvement still with yoga, whose nature is delusion? Will [this bliss] arise through your own objective knowledge? You need not reply, you who are addicted to ‘doing’! You little baby, you! To which I will add verse 647 of Guru Vachaka Kovai, followed by another quote from Thayumanavar that comes from the same poem: If you remain still, without paying attention to this, without paying attention to that, and without paying attention to anything at all, you will, simply through your powerful attention to being, become the reality, the vast eye, the unbounded space of consciousness. If we truly see-without- seeing the inner light, not investigating, not thinking at all, will not the flood of bliss come, spreading in all the ten directions, rising up in surging waves to overflow its banks? (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 58) There is a section in Padamalai that gives a broad summary of Bhagavan’s views on ‘being still’. I will conclude today’s offering by reproducing it. The verses are in bold, editorial comments in italics, and parallel quotations in roman. 25 Supreme liberation will shine as Atma-swarupa if one remains still. This verse is introduced by the word ‘amma’, which indicates that Bhagavan is expressing surprise in this statement, possibly at the thought that anyone could think otherwise. 26 Through his gentle smile, radiant Padam joyfully declares: ‘Why this distress? Be happy by just remaining still.’ Bhagavan: Your duty is to be, and not to be this or that. ‘I am that I am’ sums up the whole truth; the method is summarised in ‘Be still’. And what does stillness mean? It means ‘Destroy yourself’; because, every name and form is the cause of trouble. ‘I-I’ is the Self. ‘I am this’ is the ego. When the ‘I’ is kept up as the ‘I’ only, it is the Self. When it flies off at a tangent and says ‘I am this or that, I am such and such’, it is the ego. Question: Who then is God? Bhagavan: The Self is God. ‘I am’ is God. If God be apart from the Self, He must be a selfless God, which is absurd. All that is required to realise the Self is to be still. What can be easier than that? Hence Atma-vidya [self-knowledge] is the easiest to attain. (Maharshi’s Gospel, pp. 31-2) 27 Since becoming established in the state of the Self is both the means and the goal to be attained, remain still. Though it was Bhagavan’s highest and simplest upadesa, he conceded that for many people, it was an impossible command to execute: Question: What should one do in order to remain free from thoughts as advised by you? Is it only the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ Bhagavan: Only to remain still. Do it and see. Question: It is impossible. Bhagavan: Exactly. For the same reason the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ is advised. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 322) Bhagavan: All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, ‘Summa iru,’ i.e. ‘Be quiet or still’. But it is not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once achieved the mauna or supreme state indicated by ‘Summa iru’ you may take it that the effort necessary has already been finished in a previous life. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 11th January, 1946) 28 The wonderful meaning of the one supreme word [summa iru] is to know and rest in the Atma-swarupa through the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ 29 Except by remaining still [summa iruttal] by what great tapas can the Atma-swarupa be attained in the Heart? Bhagavan: People seem to think that by practising some elaborate sadhana the Self will one day descend upon them as something very big and with tremendous glory, giving them what is called sakshatkaram [direct experience]. The Self is sakshat [direct] all right, but there is no karam or kritam about it. [That is, there is no one who performs actions, and no actions being performed.] The word ‘karam’ implies doing something. But the Self is realised not by doing something but by refraining from doing anything, by remaining still and being simply what one really is. (The Power of the Presence, part three, pp. 131-3) 30 It will be impossible to merge with the feet of Lord Sonachala [Arunachala] , unless one remains still, with the mind consumed and annihilated. Bhagavan: Stillness is total surrender without a vestige of individuality. Stillness will prevail and there will be no agitation of mind. Agitation of mind is the cause of desire, the sense of doership and personality. If that is stopped there is quiet. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 354) 31 By shining motionlessly, which is meditation on the Self, all manner of excellent benefits accrue. 32 To remain still, without thinking about that which is other than the Self, is to offer the mind to the Self. 33 Being still is the experience of swarupa jnana. Whatever is perceived by the senses is a false, illusory appearance. 34 To rest, remaining still as consciousness, is union [sayujya], the abundance of peace. 35 Knowing That is only abiding as That. Therefore, shine, remaining still without objectifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Hya Allan Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I may repeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to the bibical phrsahase "Behold I have seen everything under the sun and it's all vanity, strifle in the wind" or Shakesphere "A tale told by an idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing". And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in a viscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busy chasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting) lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody, being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things as illusive, impermanent - things are continually disappearing only to re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when he talks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish to desire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux, including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activity that is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physical pathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when there is deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). Cheers -d --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobsRe: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dave, Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known. sundar , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote: > > Hya Allan > > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I may repeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to the bibical phrsahase " Behold I have seen everything under the sun and it's all vanity, strifle in the wind " or Shakesphere " A tale told by an idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing " . > > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in a viscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busy chasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting) lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody, being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things as illusive, impermanent - things are continually disappearing only to re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when he talks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish to desire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux, including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activity that is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physical pathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when there is deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > Cheers > -d > > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs > Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Sundar, wanna give it a shot about inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself) ? -d--- On Mon, 9/22/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca wrote: Sundararajan <sundar22caRe: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:01 PM Dave,Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the natureof things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known.sundar, Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote:>> Hya Allan> > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I mayrepeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to thebibical phrsahase "Behold I have seen everything under the sun andit's all vanity, strifle in the wind" or Shakesphere "A tale told byan idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing".> > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in aviscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busychasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting)lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody,being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things asillusive, impermanent - things are continually disappea ring onlyto re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when hetalks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish todesire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux,including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activitythat is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physicalpathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when thereis deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > Cheers> -d> > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:> > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...>> Re: Nothing Ever Happened !> > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dear Dave, Wonderful and funny reading. Who wrote it? Love, Harsha On Behalf Of Dave Sirjue Monday, September 22, 2008 1:50 PM Nothing Ever Happened ! Dear List Members Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Have a fun new week. Enjoy -d About fifteen years ago, when I was collecting information for Nothing Ever Happened, I had the assistance of a group of people who were helping me by transcribing satsang tapes. Occasionally, the volunteers would make mistakes, especially if they did not know technical terms or the names of saints and gods that Papaji occasionally inserted in his stories. Sometimes, when non-native English speakers were involved, ignorance of English idioms occasionally caused errors. Usually, I could spot mistakes and correct them without ever needing to listen to the tapes, but I did occasionally get stuck, as when someone offered me a transcript in which Papaji had apparently said, ‘I don’t give people any goose or goats’. I thought for a few seconds, knowing that it was obviously wrong, but having no idea of what the original words might have been. I gave up, ran the tape, and heard Papaji say: ‘I don’t give people any do’s or don’ts’. Last year I mentioned this story to a friend of mine, Aruna, who occasionally does graphic design and page making work for me. Since she was coordinating transcription work for another Guru, I thought she might appreciate the story. She supplied me with her own best example, taken from her own volunteer crew. One of them had sent her a transcript in which the Guru had apparently said: ‘I am neither a butler nor a nanny.’ After deciding that this was probably not what the Guru had said, she checked the tape and found he had said: ‘I am not a bhakta or a jnani.’ Mishearings such as these were nicely parodied in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, in the scene where a group of men find themselves slightly too far away to hear Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. One of them asked the people in front what Jesus was saying, and the word came back, ‘Blessed are the cheese makers’. This confused most of the group, but one man, who considered himself to be a theological expert, started to give a talk on the religious significance of ‘Blessed are the cheese makers’. How many religious doctrines, I wonder, have emerged from misunderstandings such as these? The last two paragraphs are just entertaining digressions. What I want to do today is elaborate a little on Papaji’s statement: ‘I don’t give people any do’s or don’ts.’ Many people go to the Guru with the idea that he should tell them to ‘do’ something in order to reach some goal or be relieved of some problem or other. We are all so addicted to ‘doing’, we believe that we have to ‘do something’ to attain whatever spiritual goal we are chasing. When the Guru says, ‘You are the Self, you are Brahman,’ the disciple often responds by saying, ‘Yes, I understand, but what do I do to attain it? How do I discover this for myself?’ The asking of such a question means that the disciple thinks that Brahman is something he should become, through effort, rather than something that he already is. The assumption implicit in this world-view is the premise behind all sadhana. With this in mind, read verse 271 of Guru Vachaka Kovai: The Guru who instructs the disciple, who has taken complete refuge in him, by giving one more prescription for action, instead of directing him towards jnana, and who leads him into activities, saying ‘These should be done,’ is for the disciple [equivalent to] the coming of cruel Yama and Brahma. Only he who consummates them [the disciples], transforming them into those who have done all that needs to be done, enabling them to attain the true benefit of this birth, is the grace-bestowing, divine Guru. Since Brahma is the god of birth and Yama the god of death, the verse is implying that gurus who get their disciples involved in unnecessary activities, physical or mental, instead of directing them towards jnana, will be responsible for them being reborn. Bhagavan gave similar advice to the following devotee when the latter came up with a ‘Yes I understand, but what do I do?’ query: Question: Our grasp is only intellectual. If Sri Bhagavan be pleased to direct us with a few instructions we shall be highly benefited. Bhagavan: He who instructs an ardent seeker to do this or that is not a true master. The seeker is already afflicted by his activities and wants peace and rest. In other words, he wants cessation of his activities. Instead of that he is told to do something in addition to, or in place of, his other activities. Can that be a help to the seeker? Activity is creation; activity is the destruction of one’s inherent happiness. If activity be advocated the adviser is not a master but the killer. Either the Creator (Brahma) or Death (Yama) may be said to have come in the guise of such a master. He cannot liberate the aspirant but strengthens his fetters. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 601.) The same idea appears in Day by Day with Bhagavan, 27th March 1946, afternoon, where Bhagavan tells a questioner: ‘the truth is, all karma of whatever kind will lead to fresh bondage. That is why it is said in Ozhivil Odukkam that the Guru who prescribes fresh karma or action of any sort, i.e., rituals or sacrifices to one who after trying various karmas comes to him for peace, is both Brahma and Yama to the disciple i.e., he only creates fresh births and deaths.' Ozhivil Odukkam is a Tamil philosophical text composed by Kannudaiya Vallalaar several centuries ago. It was one of Bhagavan’s favourite advaita texts, so much so that he asked Muruganar to make a Tamil prose rendering of it in order to make the meaning clearer and more accessible. The original Tamil is extremely difficult to follow, and most people gain an understanding of the work through a commentary that has appeared in all editions of the text. Unfortunately, the commentator incorporated a few interpretations of his own that are not present in the text, which is why Bhagavan thought that a new and clearer rendering of the original was desirable. Muruganar never found time to execute this commission, so the true meaning of the original verses remains inaccessible to all but the most learned Tamil scholars. The idea that Gurus who tell disciples to do things are Yama and Brahma in disguise comes from verse 123 of this work: Having exhausted themselves by activities, aspirants come to the Guru seeking jnana. He alone is the true jnana-bestowing Guru who, possessing the wealth of bliss, produces the crop of bliss in them so that they wander without volition and without doing anything. But the Guru who occasions the least rising of their ego through his instructions is both Brahma, he who possesses the ability to create the world, and Yama too, the god of death. ‘Without volition and without doing anything’ refers to the ego-free state in which there are no sankalpas (decisions or choices made by the mind) and no sense of being the performer of the actions that the body is doing. Most people will read a verse like this and decide that it refers to physical activities alone. ‘My Guru is OK.’ they will say, ‘He doesn’t tell me to run around doing things; he tells me to meditate instead.’ That is not an acceptable response to this verse because it is also implying that keeping the mind busy – even with meditation – is no different from keeping the body busy. Anyone who prescribes either course keeps his followers on the wheel of birth and death. It would seem that Bhagavan accepted this position because, in the two citations from Talks and Day by Day that I have already given, he is introducing the ideas from this verse and endorsing them. I began with a quote from Papaji. I will reintroduce him here because one of his often-repeated maxims is highly relevant to what I am endeavouring to say: ‘Physical activities produce physical results; mental activities produce mental results; since the Self is neither physical nor mental, an awareness of it cannot be brought about by either physical or mental activity.’ That’s a hard conclusion to accept for most people because it undercuts and negates all their mental activities that are optimistically geared towards realising the Self. The solution, as both Bhagavan and Papaji pointed out on many occasions is ‘being still’ (summa iruttal). When Bhagavan gives out the instruction ‘Summa iru’ (be still), he is not telling us to practise being still – that would just be more ‘doing’ – he is telling us desist from all mental activity, even meditation. ‘Being still’ is not something you accomplish by effort; it is what remains when all effort ceases. Here is a Thayumanavar verse (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 52) on this topic that Bhagavan was fond of quoting: Bliss will arise if you remain still. Why, little sir, this involvement still with yoga, whose nature is delusion? Will [this bliss] arise through your own objective knowledge? You need not reply, you who are addicted to ‘doing’! You little baby, you! To which I will add verse 647 of Guru Vachaka Kovai, followed by another quote from Thayumanavar that comes from the same poem: If you remain still, without paying attention to this, without paying attention to that, and without paying attention to anything at all, you will, simply through your powerful attention to being, become the reality, the vast eye, the unbounded space of consciousness. If we truly see-without-seeing the inner light, not investigating, not thinking at all, will not the flood of bliss come, spreading in all the ten directions, rising up in surging waves to overflow its banks? (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 58) There is a section in Padamalai that gives a broad summary of Bhagavan’s views on ‘being still’. I will conclude today’s offering by reproducing it. The verses are in bold, editorial comments in italics, and parallel quotations in roman. 25 Supreme liberation will shine as Atma-swarupa if one remains still. This verse is introduced by the word ‘amma’, which indicates that Bhagavan is expressing surprise in this statement, possibly at the thought that anyone could think otherwise. 26 Through his gentle smile, radiant Padam joyfully declares: ‘Why this distress? Be happy by just remaining still.’ Bhagavan: Your duty is to be, and not to be this or that. ‘I am that I am’ sums up the whole truth; the method is summarised in ‘Be still’. And what does stillness mean? It means ‘Destroy yourself’; because, every name and form is the cause of trouble. ‘I-I’ is the Self. ‘I am this’ is the ego. When the ‘I’ is kept up as the ‘I’ only, it is the Self. When it flies off at a tangent and says ‘I am this or that, I am such and such’, it is the ego. Question: Who then is God? Bhagavan: The Self is God. ‘I am’ is God. If God be apart from the Self, He must be a selfless God, which is absurd. All that is required to realise the Self is to be still. What can be easier than that? Hence Atma-vidya [self-knowledge] is the easiest to attain. (Maharshi’s Gospel, pp. 31-2) 27 Since becoming established in the state of the Self is both the means and the goal to be attained, remain still. Though it was Bhagavan’s highest and simplest upadesa, he conceded that for many people, it was an impossible command to execute: Question: What should one do in order to remain free from thoughts as advised by you? Is it only the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ Bhagavan: Only to remain still. Do it and see. Question: It is impossible. Bhagavan: Exactly. For the same reason the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ is advised. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 322) Bhagavan: All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, ‘Summa iru,’ i.e. ‘Be quiet or still’. But it is not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once achieved the mauna or supreme state indicated by ‘Summa iru’ you may take it that the effort necessary has already been finished in a previous life. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 11th January, 1946) 28 The wonderful meaning of the one supreme word [summa iru] is to know and rest in the Atma-swarupa through the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ 29 Except by remaining still [summa iruttal] by what great tapas can the Atma-swarupa be attained in the Heart? Bhagavan: People seem to think that by practising some elaborate sadhana the Self will one day descend upon them as something very big and with tremendous glory, giving them what is called sakshatkaram [direct experience]. The Self is sakshat [direct] all right, but there is no karam or kritam about it. [That is, there is no one who performs actions, and no actions being performed.] The word ‘karam’ implies doing something. But the Self is realised not by doing something but by refraining from doing anything, by remaining still and being simply what one really is. (The Power of the Presence, part three, pp. 131-3) 30 It will be impossible to merge with the feet of Lord Sonachala [Arunachala], unless one remains still, with the mind consumed and annihilated. Bhagavan: Stillness is total surrender without a vestige of individuality. Stillness will prevail and there will be no agitation of mind. Agitation of mind is the cause of desire, the sense of doership and personality. If that is stopped there is quiet. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 354) 31 By shining motionlessly, which is meditation on the Self, all manner of excellent benefits accrue. 32 To remain still, without thinking about that which is other than the Self, is to offer the mind to the Self. 33 Being still is the experience of swarupa jnana. Whatever is perceived by the senses is a false, illusory appearance. 34 To rest, remaining still as consciousness, is union [sayujya], the abundance of peace. 35 Knowing That is only abiding as That. Therefore, shine, remaining still without objectifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote: > > Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Dear Dave, Thanks for these quotes (I assume it's a writing by David Godman, right?) that demonstrates that the word effort has been misused quite a lot in recent times, it has not to be taken as a contraction or a becoming but mainly as an expansion and a dissolution. In dissolving Ignorance only those " efforts " that carry in themselves their own destruction and dissolution are the ones worth pursuing. Sometimes even the very word " effort " is not appropiate in some contexts, specially in spirituality, I believe sadhana is a better word, since it denotes practice: one can " practice " relaxing, letting go, control of thoughts, effortless abidance, stillness, etc.. until the Natural State (Sahaja) doesn't have any more illusory impediments and shines forth timelessly. All the best, Yours in Bhagavan, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dear Dave, Thanks. An interesting new book was recently published called Effortless Meditation by Madhu, a former Ramakrishna Monk living in Tiru. He teaches how to reach 'stillness'. It is a well worth while book and also has a chapter on the difficulties a Devotee may encounter on the way. All best wishes, Alan --- On Tue, 23/9/08, Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote: Dave Sirjue <davesirjueRe: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Tuesday, 23 September, 2008, 2:03 AM Sundar, wanna give it a shot about inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself) ? -d--- On Mon, 9/22/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca > wrote: Sundararajan <sundar22ca >Re: Nothing Ever Happened !Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:01 PM Dave,Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the natureof things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known.sundar, Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote:>> Hya Allan> > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I mayrepeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to thebibical phrsahase "Behold I have seen everything under the sun andit's all vanity, strifle in the wind" or Shakesphere "A tale told byan idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing".> > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in aviscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busychasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting)lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody,being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things asillusive, impermanent - things are continually disappea ring onlyto re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when hetalks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish todesire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux,including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activitythat is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physicalpathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when thereis deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > Cheers> -d> > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:> > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...>> Re: Nothing Ever Happened !> > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 It is from David Godman's blog.It's a blog post titled:'Yes, but what do I do?' http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/06/yes-but-what-do-i-do.htmlRegards,Ram-- On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Harsha wrote: Dear Dave, Wonderful and funny reading. Who wrote it? Love, Harsha On Behalf Of Dave Sirjue Monday, September 22, 2008 1:50 PM Nothing Ever Happened ! Dear List Members Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Have a fun new week. Enjoy -d About fifteen years ago, when I was collecting information for Nothing Ever Happened, I had the assistance of a group of people who were helping me by transcribing satsang tapes. Occasionally, the volunteers would make mistakes, especially if they did not know technical terms or the names of saints and gods that Papaji occasionally inserted in his stories. Sometimes, when non-native English speakers were involved, ignorance of English idioms occasionally caused errors. Usually, I could spot mistakes and correct them without ever needing to listen to the tapes, but I did occasionally get stuck, as when someone offered me a transcript in which Papaji had apparently said, 'I don't give people any goose or goats'. I thought for a few seconds, knowing that it was obviously wrong, but having no idea of what the original words might have been. I gave up, ran the tape, and heard Papaji say: 'I don't give people any do's or don'ts'. Last year I mentioned this story to a friend of mine, Aruna, who occasionally does graphic design and page making work for me. Since she was coordinating transcription work for another Guru, I thought she might appreciate the story. She supplied me with her own best example, taken from her own volunteer crew. One of them had sent her a transcript in which the Guru had apparently said: 'I am neither a butler nor a nanny.' After deciding that this was probably not what the Guru had said, she checked the tape and found he had said: 'I am not a bhakta or a jnani.' Mishearings such as these were nicely parodied in Monty Python's Life of Brian, in the scene where a group of men find themselves slightly too far away to hear Jesus' Sermon on the Mount. One of them asked the people in front what Jesus was saying, and the word came back, 'Blessed are the cheese makers'. This confused most of the group, but one man, who considered himself to be a theological expert, started to give a talk on the religious significance of 'Blessed are the cheese makers'. How many religious doctrines, I wonder, have emerged from misunderstandings such as these? The last two paragraphs are just entertaining digressions. What I want to do today is elaborate a little on Papaji's statement: 'I don't give people any do's or don'ts.' Many people go to the Guru with the idea that he should tell them to 'do' something in order to reach some goal or be relieved of some problem or other. We are all so addicted to 'doing', we believe that we have to 'do something' to attain whatever spiritual goal we are chasing. When the Guru says, 'You are the Self, you are Brahman,' the disciple often responds by saying, 'Yes, I understand, but what do I do to attain it? How do I discover this for myself?' The asking of such a question means that the disciple thinks that Brahman is something he should become, through effort, rather than something that he already is. The assumption implicit in this world-view is the premise behind all sadhana. With this in mind, read verse 271 of Guru Vachaka Kovai: The Guru who instructs the disciple, who has taken complete refuge in him, by giving one more prescription for action, instead of directing him towards jnana, and who leads him into activities, saying 'These should be done,' is for the disciple [equivalent to] the coming of cruel Yama and Brahma. Only he who consummates them [the disciples], transforming them into those who have done all that needs to be done, enabling them to attain the true benefit of this birth, is the grace-bestowing, divine Guru. Since Brahma is the god of birth and Yama the god of death, the verse is implying that gurus who get their disciples involved in unnecessary activities, physical or mental, instead of directing them towards jnana, will be responsible for them being reborn. Bhagavan gave similar advice to the following devotee when the latter came up with a 'Yes I understand, but what do I do?' query: Question: Our grasp is only intellectual. If Sri Bhagavan be pleased to direct us with a few instructions we shall be highly benefited. Bhagavan: He who instructs an ardent seeker to do this or that is not a true master. The seeker is already afflicted by his activities and wants peace and rest. In other words, he wants cessation of his activities. Instead of that he is told to do something in addition to, or in place of, his other activities. Can that be a help to the seeker? Activity is creation; activity is the destruction of one's inherent happiness. If activity be advocated the adviser is not a master but the killer. Either the Creator (Brahma) or Death (Yama) may be said to have come in the guise of such a master. He cannot liberate the aspirant but strengthens his fetters. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 601.) The same idea appears in Day by Day with Bhagavan, 27th March 1946, afternoon, where Bhagavan tells a questioner: 'the truth is, all karma of whatever kind will lead to fresh bondage. That is why it is said in Ozhivil Odukkam that the Guru who prescribes fresh karma or action of any sort, i.e., rituals or sacrifices to one who after trying various karmas comes to him for peace, is both Brahma and Yama to the disciple i.e., he only creates fresh births and deaths.' Ozhivil Odukkam is a Tamil philosophical text composed by Kannudaiya Vallalaar several centuries ago. It was one of Bhagavan's favourite advaita texts, so much so that he asked Muruganar to make a Tamil prose rendering of it in order to make the meaning clearer and more accessible. The original Tamil is extremely difficult to follow, and most people gain an understanding of the work through a commentary that has appeared in all editions of the text. Unfortunately, the commentator incorporated a few interpretations of his own that are not present in the text, which is why Bhagavan thought that a new and clearer rendering of the original was desirable. Muruganar never found time to execute this commission, so the true meaning of the original verses remains inaccessible to all but the most learned Tamil scholars. The idea that Gurus who tell disciples to do things are Yama and Brahma in disguise comes from verse 123 of this work: Having exhausted themselves by activities, aspirants come to the Guru seeking jnana. He alone is the true jnana-bestowing Guru who, possessing the wealth of bliss, produces the crop of bliss in them so that they wander without volition and without doing anything. But the Guru who occasions the least rising of their ego through his instructions is both Brahma, he who possesses the ability to create the world, and Yama too, the god of death. 'Without volition and without doing anything' refers to the ego-free state in which there are no sankalpas (decisions or choices made by the mind) and no sense of being the performer of the actions that the body is doing. Most people will read a verse like this and decide that it refers to physical activities alone. 'My Guru is OK.' they will say, 'He doesn't tell me to run around doing things; he tells me to meditate instead.' That is not an acceptable response to this verse because it is also implying that keeping the mind busy – even with meditation – is no different from keeping the body busy. Anyone who prescribes either course keeps his followers on the wheel of birth and death. It would seem that Bhagavan accepted this position because, in the two citations from Talks and Day by Day that I have already given, he is introducing the ideas from this verse and endorsing them. I began with a quote from Papaji. I will reintroduce him here because one of his often-repeated maxims is highly relevant to what I am endeavouring to say: 'Physical activities produce physical results; mental activities produce mental results; since the Self is neither physical nor mental, an awareness of it cannot be brought about by either physical or mental activity.' That's a hard conclusion to accept for most people because it undercuts and negates all their mental activities that are optimistically geared towards realising the Self. The solution, as both Bhagavan and Papaji pointed out on many occasions is 'being still' (summa iruttal). When Bhagavan gives out the instruction 'Summa iru' (be still), he is not telling us to practise being still – that would just be more 'doing' – he is telling us desist from all mental activity, even meditation. 'Being still' is not something you accomplish by effort; it is what remains when all effort ceases. Here is a Thayumanavar verse ('Udal Poyyuravu', verse 52) on this topic that Bhagavan was fond of quoting: Bliss will arise if you remain still. Why, little sir, this involvement still with yoga, whose nature is delusion? Will [this bliss] arise through your own objective knowledge? You need not reply, you who are addicted to 'doing'! You little baby, you! To which I will add verse 647 of Guru Vachaka Kovai, followed by another quote from Thayumanavar that comes from the same poem: If you remain still, without paying attention to this, without paying attention to that, and without paying attention to anything at all, you will, simply through your powerful attention to being, become the reality, the vast eye, the unbounded space of consciousness. If we truly see-without-seeing the inner light, not investigating, not thinking at all, will not the flood of bliss come, spreading in all the ten directions, rising up in surging waves to overflow its banks? ('Udal Poyyuravu', verse 58) There is a section in Padamalai that gives a broad summary of Bhagavan's views on 'being still'. I will conclude today's offering by reproducing it. The verses are in bold, editorial comments in italics, and parallel quotations in roman. 25 Supreme liberation will shine as Atma-swarupa if one remains still. This verse is introduced by the word 'amma', which indicates that Bhagavan is expressing surprise in this statement, possibly at the thought that anyone could think otherwise. 26 Through his gentle smile, radiant Padam joyfully declares: 'Why this distress? Be happy by just remaining still.' Bhagavan: Your duty is to be, and not to be this or that. 'I am that I am' sums up the whole truth; the method is summarised in 'Be still'. And what does stillness mean? It means 'Destroy yourself'; because, every name and form is the cause of trouble. 'I-I' is the Self. 'I am this' is the ego. When the 'I' is kept up as the 'I' only, it is the Self. When it flies off at a tangent and says 'I am this or that, I am such and such', it is the ego. Question: Who then is God? Bhagavan: The Self is God. 'I am' is God. If God be apart from the Self, He must be a selfless God, which is absurd. All that is required to realise the Self is to be still. What can be easier than that? Hence Atma-vidya [self-knowledge] is the easiest to attain. (Maharshi's Gospel, pp. 31-2) 27 Since becoming established in the state of the Self is both the means and the goal to be attained, remain still. Though it was Bhagavan's highest and simplest upadesa, he conceded that for many people, it was an impossible command to execute: Question: What should one do in order to remain free from thoughts as advised by you? Is it only the enquiry 'Who am I?' Bhagavan: Only to remain still. Do it and see. Question: It is impossible. Bhagavan: Exactly. For the same reason the enquiry 'Who am I?' is advised. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 322) Bhagavan: All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, 'Summa iru,' i.e. 'Be quiet or still'. But it is not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once achieved the mauna or supreme state indicated by 'Summa iru' you may take it that the effort necessary has already been finished in a previous life. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 11th January, 1946) 28 The wonderful meaning of the one supreme word [summa iru] is to know and rest in the Atma-swarupa through the enquiry 'Who am I?' 29 Except by remaining still [summa iruttal] by what great tapas can the Atma-swarupa be attained in the Heart? Bhagavan: People seem to think that by practising some elaborate sadhana the Self will one day descend upon them as something very big and with tremendous glory, giving them what is called sakshatkaram [direct experience]. The Self is sakshat [direct] all right, but there is no karam or kritam about it. [That is, there is no one who performs actions, and no actions being performed.] The word 'karam' implies doing something. But the Self is realised not by doing something but by refraining from doing anything, by remaining still and being simply what one really is. (The Power of the Presence, part three, pp. 131-3) 30 It will be impossible to merge with the feet of Lord Sonachala [Arunachala], unless one remains still, with the mind consumed and annihilated. Bhagavan: Stillness is total surrender without a vestige of individuality. Stillness will prevail and there will be no agitation of mind. Agitation of mind is the cause of desire, the sense of doership and personality. If that is stopped there is quiet. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 354) 31 By shining motionlessly, which is meditation on the Self, all manner of excellent benefits accrue. 32 To remain still, without thinking about that which is other than the Self, is to offer the mind to the Self. 33 Being still is the experience of swarupa jnana. Whatever is perceived by the senses is a false, illusory appearance. 34 To rest, remaining still as consciousness, is union [sayujya], the abundance of peace. 35 Knowing That is only abiding as That. Therefore, shine, remaining still without objectifying. -- Hunting the 'I' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Oh yes, David. Is he here in this group? David, are you here? We should put your writing on the Luthar.com site and link to yours. Hope you are well and in good spirits. Lots of love Harsha On Behalf Of ram Tuesday, September 23, 2008 1:43 AM Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! It is from David Godman's blog. It's a blog post titled: 'Yes, but what do I do?' http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/06/yes-but-what-do-i-do.html Regards, Ram -- On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Harsha wrote: Dear Dave, Wonderful and funny reading. Who wrote it? Love, Harsha On Behalf Of Dave Sirjue Monday, September 22, 2008 1:50 PM Nothing Ever Happened ! Dear List Members Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Have a fun new week. Enjoy -d About fifteen years ago, when I was collecting information for Nothing Ever Happened, I had the assistance of a group of people who were helping me by transcribing satsang tapes. Occasionally, the volunteers would make mistakes, especially if they did not know technical terms or the names of saints and gods that Papaji occasionally inserted in his stories. Sometimes, when non-native English speakers were involved, ignorance of English idioms occasionally caused errors. Usually, I could spot mistakes and correct them without ever needing to listen to the tapes, but I did occasionally get stuck, as when someone offered me a transcript in which Papaji had apparently said, 'I don't give people any goose or goats'. I thought for a few seconds, knowing that it was obviously wrong, but having no idea of what the original words might have been. I gave up, ran the tape, and heard Papaji say: 'I don't give people any do's or don'ts'. Last year I mentioned this story to a friend of mine, Aruna, who occasionally does graphic design and page making work for me. Since she was coordinating transcription work for another Guru, I thought she might appreciate the story. She supplied me with her own best example, taken from her own volunteer crew. One of them had sent her a transcript in which the Guru had apparently said: 'I am neither a butler nor a nanny.' After deciding that this was probably not what the Guru had said, she checked the tape and found he had said: 'I am not a bhakta or a jnani.' Mishearings such as these were nicely parodied in Monty Python's Life of Brian, in the scene where a group of men find themselves slightly too far away to hear Jesus' Sermon on the Mount. One of them asked the people in front what Jesus was saying, and the word came back, 'Blessed are the cheese makers'. This confused most of the group, but one man, who considered himself to be a theological expert, started to give a talk on the religious significance of 'Blessed are the cheese makers'. How many religious doctrines, I wonder, have emerged from misunderstandings such as these? The last two paragraphs are just entertaining digressions. What I want to do today is elaborate a little on Papaji's statement: 'I don't give people any do's or don'ts.' Many people go to the Guru with the idea that he should tell them to 'do' something in order to reach some goal or be relieved of some problem or other. We are all so addicted to 'doing', we believe that we have to 'do something' to attain whatever spiritual goal we are chasing. When the Guru says, 'You are the Self, you are Brahman,' the disciple often responds by saying, 'Yes, I understand, but what do I do to attain it? How do I discover this for myself?' The asking of such a question means that the disciple thinks that Brahman is something he should become, through effort, rather than something that he already is. The assumption implicit in this world-view is the premise behind all sadhana. With this in mind, read verse 271 of Guru Vachaka Kovai: The Guru who instructs the disciple, who has taken complete refuge in him, by giving one more prescription for action, instead of directing him towards jnana, and who leads him into activities, saying 'These should be done,' is for the disciple [equivalent to] the coming of cruel Yama and Brahma. Only he who consummates them [the disciples], transforming them into those who have done all that needs to be done, enabling them to attain the true benefit of this birth, is the grace-bestowing, divine Guru. Since Brahma is the god of birth and Yama the god of death, the verse is implying that gurus who get their disciples involved in unnecessary activities, physical or mental, instead of directing them towards jnana, will be responsible for them being reborn. Bhagavan gave similar advice to the following devotee when the latter came up with a 'Yes I understand, but what do I do?' query: Question: Our grasp is only intellectual. If Sri Bhagavan be pleased to direct us with a few instructions we shall be highly benefited. Bhagavan: He who instructs an ardent seeker to do this or that is not a true master. The seeker is already afflicted by his activities and wants peace and rest. In other words, he wants cessation of his activities. Instead of that he is told to do something in addition to, or in place of, his other activities. Can that be a help to the seeker? Activity is creation; activity is the destruction of one's inherent happiness. If activity be advocated the adviser is not a master but the killer. Either the Creator (Brahma) or Death (Yama) may be said to have come in the guise of such a master. He cannot liberate the aspirant but strengthens his fetters. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 601.) The same idea appears in Day by Day with Bhagavan, 27th March 1946, afternoon, where Bhagavan tells a questioner: 'the truth is, all karma of whatever kind will lead to fresh bondage. That is why it is said in Ozhivil Odukkam that the Guru who prescribes fresh karma or action of any sort, i.e., rituals or sacrifices to one who after trying various karmas comes to him for peace, is both Brahma and Yama to the disciple i.e., he only creates fresh births and deaths.' Ozhivil Odukkam is a Tamil philosophical text composed by Kannudaiya Vallalaar several centuries ago. It was one of Bhagavan's favourite advaita texts, so much so that he asked Muruganar to make a Tamil prose rendering of it in order to make the meaning clearer and more accessible. The original Tamil is extremely difficult to follow, and most people gain an understanding of the work through a commentary that has appeared in all editions of the text. Unfortunately, the commentator incorporated a few interpretations of his own that are not present in the text, which is why Bhagavan thought that a new and clearer rendering of the original was desirable. Muruganar never found time to execute this commission, so the true meaning of the original verses remains inaccessible to all but the most learned Tamil scholars. The idea that Gurus who tell disciples to do things are Yama and Brahma in disguise comes from verse 123 of this work: Having exhausted themselves by activities, aspirants come to the Guru seeking jnana. He alone is the true jnana-bestowing Guru who, possessing the wealth of bliss, produces the crop of bliss in them so that they wander without volition and without doing anything. But the Guru who occasions the least rising of their ego through his instructions is both Brahma, he who possesses the ability to create the world, and Yama too, the god of death. 'Without volition and without doing anything' refers to the ego-free state in which there are no sankalpas (decisions or choices made by the mind) and no sense of being the performer of the actions that the body is doing. Most people will read a verse like this and decide that it refers to physical activities alone. 'My Guru is OK.' they will say, 'He doesn't tell me to run around doing things; he tells me to meditate instead.' That is not an acceptable response to this verse because it is also implying that keeping the mind busy – even with meditation – is no different from keeping the body busy. Anyone who prescribes either course keeps his followers on the wheel of birth and death. It would seem that Bhagavan accepted this position because, in the two citations from Talks and Day by Day that I have already given, he is introducing the ideas from this verse and endorsing them. I began with a quote from Papaji. I will reintroduce him here because one of his often-repeated maxims is highly relevant to what I am endeavouring to say: 'Physical activities produce physical results; mental activities produce mental results; since the Self is neither physical nor mental, an awareness of it cannot be brought about by either physical or mental activity.' That's a hard conclusion to accept for most people because it undercuts and negates all their mental activities that are optimistically geared towards realising the Self. The solution, as both Bhagavan and Papaji pointed out on many occasions is 'being still' (summa iruttal). When Bhagavan gives out the instruction 'Summa iru' (be still), he is not telling us to practise being still – that would just be more 'doing' – he is telling us desist from all mental activity, even meditation. 'Being still' is not something you accomplish by effort; it is what remains when all effort ceases. Here is a Thayumanavar verse ('Udal Poyyuravu', verse 52) on this topic that Bhagavan was fond of quoting: Bliss will arise if you remain still. Why, little sir, this involvement still with yoga, whose nature is delusion? Will [this bliss] arise through your own objective knowledge? You need not reply, you who are addicted to 'doing'! You little baby, you! To which I will add verse 647 of Guru Vachaka Kovai, followed by another quote from Thayumanavar that comes from the same poem: If you remain still, without paying attention to this, without paying attention to that, and without paying attention to anything at all, you will, simply through your powerful attention to being, become the reality, the vast eye, the unbounded space of consciousness. If we truly see-without-seeing the inner light, not investigating, not thinking at all, will not the flood of bliss come, spreading in all the ten directions, rising up in surging waves to overflow its banks? ('Udal Poyyuravu', verse 58) There is a section in Padamalai that gives a broad summary of Bhagavan's views on 'being still'. I will conclude today's offering by reproducing it. The verses are in bold, editorial comments in italics, and parallel quotations in roman. 25 Supreme liberation will shine as Atma-swarupa if one remains still. This verse is introduced by the word 'amma', which indicates that Bhagavan is expressing surprise in this statement, possibly at the thought that anyone could think otherwise. 26 Through his gentle smile, radiant Padam joyfully declares: 'Why this distress? Be happy by just remaining still.' Bhagavan: Your duty is to be, and not to be this or that. 'I am that I am' sums up the whole truth; the method is summarised in 'Be still'. And what does stillness mean? It means 'Destroy yourself'; because, every name and form is the cause of trouble. 'I-I' is the Self. 'I am this' is the ego. When the 'I' is kept up as the 'I' only, it is the Self. When it flies off at a tangent and says 'I am this or that, I am such and such', it is the ego. Question: Who then is God? Bhagavan: The Self is God. 'I am' is God. If God be apart from the Self, He must be a selfless God, which is absurd. All that is required to realise the Self is to be still. What can be easier than that? Hence Atma-vidya [self-knowledge] is the easiest to attain. (Maharshi's Gospel, pp. 31-2) 27 Since becoming established in the state of the Self is both the means and the goal to be attained, remain still. Though it was Bhagavan's highest and simplest upadesa, he conceded that for many people, it was an impossible command to execute: Question: What should one do in order to remain free from thoughts as advised by you? Is it only the enquiry 'Who am I?' Bhagavan: Only to remain still. Do it and see. Question: It is impossible. Bhagavan: Exactly. For the same reason the enquiry 'Who am I?' is advised. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 322) Bhagavan: All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, 'Summa iru,' i.e. 'Be quiet or still'. But it is not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once achieved the mauna or supreme state indicated by 'Summa iru' you may take it that the effort necessary has already been finished in a previous life. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 11th January, 1946) 28 The wonderful meaning of the one supreme word [summa iru] is to know and rest in the Atma-swarupa through the enquiry 'Who am I?' 29 Except by remaining still [summa iruttal] by what great tapas can the Atma-swarupa be attained in the Heart? Bhagavan: People seem to think that by practising some elaborate sadhana the Self will one day descend upon them as something very big and with tremendous glory, giving them what is called sakshatkaram [direct experience]. The Self is sakshat [direct] all right, but there is no karam or kritam about it. [That is, there is no one who performs actions, and no actions being performed.] The word 'karam' implies doing something. But the Self is realised not by doing something but by refraining from doing anything, by remaining still and being simply what one really is. (The Power of the Presence, part three, pp. 131-3) 30 It will be impossible to merge with the feet of Lord Sonachala [Arunachala], unless one remains still, with the mind consumed and annihilated. Bhagavan: Stillness is total surrender without a vestige of individuality. Stillness will prevail and there will be no agitation of mind. Agitation of mind is the cause of desire, the sense of doership and personality. If that is stopped there is quiet. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 354) 31 By shining motionlessly, which is meditation on the Self, all manner of excellent benefits accrue. 32 To remain still, without thinking about that which is other than the Self, is to offer the mind to the Self. 33 Being still is the experience of swarupa jnana. Whatever is perceived by the senses is a false, illusory appearance. 34 To rest, remaining still as consciousness, is union [sayujya], the abundance of peace. 35 Knowing That is only abiding as That. Therefore, shine, remaining still without objectifying. -- Hunting the 'I' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dave, I do not feel qualified to take a shot, since I have not yet had success in self inquiry. After quickly realising that I am not the body, I get stuck. I am unable to maintain the focus on the inquiry, when no progress is noted during the contemplation session i.e. other thoughts intervene & take over. I do try to keep my focus as a 'feeling' or 'heart' based one rather than an intellectual one. For example, I find it interesting to feel the sense of my existence. But, the full focus is there only in the first fraction of second. I am looking for suggestion (in few words) on how to get un-stuck. sundar , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote: > > Sundar, > > wanna give it a shot about inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself) ? > > > -d > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca wrote: > > Sundararajan <sundar22ca > Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:01 PM Dave, > Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the nature > of things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known. > sundar > > , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ....> wrote: > > > > Hya Allan > > > > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I may > repeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to the > bibical phrsahase " Behold I have seen everything under the sun and > it's all vanity, strifle in the wind " or Shakesphere " A tale told by > an idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing " . > > > > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in a > viscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busy > chasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting) > lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody, > being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things as > illusive, impermanent - things are continually disappea ring only > to re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when he > talks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish to > desire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux, > including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activity > that is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physical > pathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when there > is deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > > > Cheers > > -d > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote: > > > > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> > > Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! > > > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 --- On Tue, 23/9/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca wrote: Sundararajan <sundar22ca Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! Tuesday, 23 September, 2008, 2:21 PM Dave, I do not feel qualified to take a shot, since I have not yet had success in self inquiry. After quickly realising that I am not the body, I get stuck. I am unable to maintain the focus on the inquiry, when no progress is noted during the contemplation session i.e. other thoughts intervene & take over. I do try to keep my focus as a 'feeling' or 'heart' based one rather than an intellectual one. For example, I find it interesting to feel the sense of my existence. But, the full focus is there only in the first fraction of second. I am looking for suggestion (in few words) on how to get un-stuck. sundar , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote: > > Sundar, > > wanna give it a shot about inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself) ? > > > -d > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca@ ...> wrote: > > Sundararajan <sundar22ca@ ...> > Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:01 PM Dave, > Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the nature > of things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known. > sundar > > , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ....> wrote: > > > > Hya Allan > > > > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I may > repeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to the > bibical phrsahase " Behold I have seen everything under the sun and > it's all vanity, strifle in the wind " or Shakesphere " A tale told by > an idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing " . > > > > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in a > viscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busy > chasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting) > lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody, > being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things as > illusive, impermanent - things are continually disappea ring only > to re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when he > talks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish to > desire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux, > including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activity > that is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physical > pathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when there > is deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > > > Cheers > > -d > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote: > > > > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> > > Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! > > > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dear Sundar, I totally agree with your last sentence in your last posting. This sums the whole issue up precisely. All best wishes and warm regards, Alan --- On Tue, 23/9/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca wrote: Sundararajan <sundar22caRe: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Tuesday, 23 September, 2008, 2:21 PM Dave,I do not feel qualified to take a shot, since I have not yet hadsuccess in self inquiry.After quickly realising that I am not the body, I get stuck. I amunable to maintain the focus on the inquiry, when no progress is notedduring the contemplation session i.e. other thoughts intervene & takeover.I do try to keep my focus as a 'feeling' or 'heart' based one ratherthan an intellectual one. For example, I find it interesting to feelthe sense of my existence. But, the full focus is there only in thefirst fraction of second.I am looking for suggestion (in few words) on how to get un-stuck.sundar, Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote:>> Sundar,> > wanna give it a shot about inquiry into the nature of things (andoneself) ?> > > -d> > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca@ ...> wrote:> > Sundararajan <sundar22ca@ ...>> Re: Nothing Ever Happened !> > Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:01 PM> > > > > > > Dave,> Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the nature> of things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known.> sundar> > , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote:> >> > Hya Allan> > > > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I may> repeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to the> bibical phrsahase "Behold I have seen everything under the sun and> it's all vanity, strifle in the wind" or Shakesphere "A tale told by> an idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing".> > > > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in a> viscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busy> chasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting)> lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody,> being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things as> illusive, impermanent - things are continually disappea ring only> to re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when he> talks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish to> desire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux,> including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activity> that is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physical> pathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when there> is deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > > > Cheers> > -d> > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:> > > > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...>> > Re: Nothing Ever Happened !> > > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Sadhuji, Even the the term practice or sadhana has loaded connotations. SEEING into the futility of effort, relaxation into stillness occurs. Seeing the imagination or shadow of the snake, the rope remains as was always the case. How do you practice relaxation directly? My point is relaxation happens when tension is released, just as the imaginary self-contraction is seen and released revealing the natural (sahaj) state that is always already the case. It's that simple, Jnana is effortless 'seeing' or intuitive understanding at least from my standpoint and those of my teachers from the Pratyabhijna school of Kashmiri Shivaism. Seeing untruth, Truth is revealed. 'Self' can never be seen or experienced directly. When 'you' are not the 'Self' is. -d--- On Mon, 9/22/08, upadesa <maunna wrote: upadesa <maunna Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 11:31 PM Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote:> > Here's another perspective dealing with effort and stillness. Dear Dave,Thanks for these quotes (I assume it's a writing by David Godman,right?) that demonstrates that the word effort has been misused quitea lot in recent times, it has not to be taken as a contraction or abecoming but mainly as an expansion and a dissolution.In dissolving Ignorance only those "efforts" that carry in themselvestheir own destruction and dissolution are the ones worth pursuing.Sometimes even the very word "effort" is not appropiate in somecontexts, specially in spirituality, I believe sadhana is a betterword, since it denotes practice: one can "practice" relaxing, lettinggo, control of thoughts, effortless abidance, stillness, etc.. untilthe Natural State (Sahaja) doesn't have any more illusory impedimentsand shines forth timelessly.All the best,Yours in Bhagavan,Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Sundarji, My few cents. Not sure that I understand what you mean by 'Feeling' and 'Heart', but if its identification with emotional feelings beware. Jnanis point directly to separating or dis-identifying the witnessing Purusha from the Prakritti energies, before Integration. Seeing into the mechanism how one clings to a (false) identity and get imprisoned or enslaved is the way and the fruit. Just a pointer -d--- On Tue, 9/23/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca wrote: Sundararajan <sundar22caRe: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 9:21 AM Dave,I do not feel qualified to take a shot, since I have not yet hadsuccess in self inquiry.After quickly realising that I am not the body, I get stuck. I amunable to maintain the focus on the inquiry, when no progress is notedduring the contemplation session i.e. other thoughts intervene & takeover.I do try to keep my focus as a 'feeling' or 'heart' based one ratherthan an intellectual one. For example, I find it interesting to feelthe sense of my existence. But, the full focus is there only in thefirst fraction of second.I am looking for suggestion (in few words) on how to get un-stuck.sundar, Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote:>> Sundar,> > wanna give it a shot about inquiry into the nature of things (andoneself) ?> > > -d> > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Sundararajan <sundar22ca@ ...> wrote:> > Sundararajan <sundar22ca@ ...>> Re: Nothing Ever Happened !> > Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:01 PM> > > > > > > Dave,> Only detail worth elucidation is the one about inquiry into the nature> of things (and oneself). All else is theory or already known.> sundar> > , Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote:> >> > Hya Allan> > > > Simply sharing what I consider the gems of Bhagavan...and if I may> repeat what was pointed out to Mouna Sadhu along similar to the> bibical phrsahase "Behold I have seen everything under the sun and> it's all vanity, strifle in the wind" or Shakesphere "A tale told by> an idiot with sound and fury, signifying nothing".> > > > And here is the catch 22, which most of us get caught up in a> viscous cycle - Stillness will not occur as long as one is busy> chasing after things due to ignorance - seeing (or rather projecting)> lasting value in objects. This includes oneself as being somebody,> being something. Jnana reveals that the nature of all things as> illusive, impermanent - things are continually disappea ring only> to re-appear as fresh new possibilities. Blake has it right when he> talks about kissing the roses in passing. It is utterly foolish to> desire, grasp or cling to what is perpetually in a state of flux,> including the the concept of liberation. This contractive activity> that is the cause of tension and all associated psycho-physical> pathologies, that Bhagavan is alluding to, will only cease when there> is deep insight from inquiry into the nature of things (and oneself). > > > > Cheers> > -d> > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:> > > > Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...>> > Re: Nothing Ever Happened !> > > > Monday, September 22, 2008, 4:34 PM> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dave Sirjue <davesirjue wrote: > > Sadhuji, > Even the the term practice or sadhana has loaded connotations. > SEEING into the futility of effort, relaxation into stillness occurs. Seeing the imagination or shadow of the snake, the rope remains as was always the case. How do you practice relaxation directly? My point is relaxation happens when tension is released, just as the imaginary self-contraction is seen and released revealing the natural (sahaj) state that is always already the case. It's that simple, Jnana is effortless 'seeing' or intuitive understanding at least from my standpoint and those of my teachers from the Pratyabhijna school of Kashmiri Shivaism. Seeing untruth, Truth is revealed. 'Self' can never be seen or experienced directly. When 'you' are not the 'Self' is. > > -d d-Ji, Think we are saying the same with different backgrounds and semantics... When you say: " My point is relaxation happens when tension is released " , how could I not agree? This is exactly what Self-Enquiry is all about, " seeing " or investigating the snake under the light of Enquiry, releases the contraction/tension of the I-Thought, then dissolves, then Self shines (as always been the case). Now, sadhana or efforts or whatever word we want to call it is a continuous coming back to that seeing/relaxation/effortless understanding when mind wanders again in Wonderland. Glimpses are not Realization, neither Sahaja or Liberation. We can't " just " eliminate the vasanas like that, they will keep pushing until the process of dissolving will be complete (practice, at least for me, means dissolving or eliminating vasanas, through the process of seeing as you say). I suppose that you agree with me that we are not sweeping out any kind of effort/practice/sadhana but we are trying to implement it from the right perspective, yes? Otherwise we may fall into the pitfall of Neo-Advaita where almost all people get a taste os " Self " , to find out later that " it is not enough " (if they are honest to themselves), not knowing how to proceed further on, since the vasanas KEEP coming back and again. David Godman used to say that it is a funny paradox that " Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi was awakened without any sadhana and kept the rest of his life suggesting efforts while Papaji that did sadhana throughout his life, after Realization, advocated that no efforts are necessary!! " (even this statements are not to be taken literally because both advocated the contrary in many occasions.) All the best, Yours in Bhagavan, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Sadhuji, Once there is clear understanding why get imprisoned and suffer again and again ? Have we not had enough, lifetimes of sorrows? In the case of a double-bind, a vested interest or secret wish to suffer, I recognize that tacit understanding may take some time, as you're suggesting. In this case suffering may hopefully leads to breakdown, dis-illusionment of the apparent ego and ultimately transcendence of suffering. -d--- On Tue, 9/23/08, upadesa <maunna wrote: upadesa <maunna Re: Nothing Ever Happened ! Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 1:46 PM Dave Sirjue <davesirjue@ ...> wrote:>> Sadhuji, > Even the the term practice or sadhana has loaded connotations. > SEEING into the futility of effort, relaxation into stillnessoccurs. Seeing the imagination or shadow of the snake, therope remains as was always the case. How do you practice relaxationdirectly? My point is relaxation happens when tension is released,just as the imaginary self-contraction is seen and released revealingthe natural (sahaj) state that is always already the case. It's thatsimple, Jnana is effortless 'seeing' or intuitive understanding atleast from my standpoint and those of my teachers from thePratyabhijna school of Kashmiri Shivaism. Seeing untruth, Truth isrevealed. 'Self' can never be seen or experienced directly. When'you' are not the 'Self' is.> > -dd-Ji,Think we are saying the same with different backgrounds and semantics... When you say:"My point is relaxation happens when tension is released", how could Inot agree? This is exactly what Self-Enquiry is all about, "seeing" orinvestigating the snake under the light of Enquiry, releases thecontraction/ tension of the I-Thought, then dissolves, then Self shines(as always been the case).Now, sadhana or efforts or whatever word we want to call it is acontinuous coming back to that seeing/relaxation/ effortlessunderstanding when mind wanders again in Wonderland. Glimpses are not Realization, neither Sahaja or Liberation. We can't"just" eliminate the vasanas like that, they will keep pushing untilthe process of dissolving will be complete (practice, at least for me,means dissolving or eliminating vasanas, through the process of seeingas you say). I suppose that you agree with me that we are not sweeping out any kindof effort/practice/ sadhana but we are trying to implement it from theright perspective, yes? Otherwise we may fall into the pitfall ofNeo-Advaita where almost all people get a taste os "Self", to find outlater that "it is not enough" (if they are honest to themselves), notknowing how to proceed further on, since the vasanas KEEP coming backand again.David Godman used to say that it is a funny paradox that "BhagavanRamana Maharshi was awakened without any sadhana and kept the rest ofhis life suggesting efforts while Papaji that did sadhana throughouthis life, after Realization, advocated that no efforts arenecessary!!" (even this statements are not to be taken literallybecause both advocated the contrary in many occasions.)All the best,Yours in Bhagavan,Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Sundararajan wrote: Dave, I do not feel qualified to take a shot, since I have not yet had success in self inquiry. After quickly realising that I am not the body, I get stuck. I am unable to maintain the focus on the inquiry, when no progress is noted during the contemplation session i.e. other thoughts intervene & take over. [...] Sundar, It might be worthwhile to contemplate profoundly. It is impossible to realize "you are not the body" because you never were the body. So the issue is one of false identification... When that has become clear enough via contemplation, it will also be clear how such false notions (like "I am body + mind etc.) could be allowed for a first time and then, nurtured with all ill effects resulting from it (suffering). False identifications gone and thoughts lose their power because they are no longer fed (entertained or engaged in) and then, inquiry or any meditation or yoga practice will be effortless. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2008 Report Share Posted September 23, 2008 Dave-Ji > > Once there is clear understanding why get imprisoned and suffer again and again ? Yes, I also wonder why?, if that is the case, like Sundar's question, is because the understanding is not so clear YET. .......... >Have we not had enough, lifetimes of sorrows? We did, and WE WILL, unless preparation (sadhana in whichever form) to assimilate the Knowledge that will free us from the delusion of bondage is not addressed. ........... >In the case of a double-bind, a vested interest or secret wish to suffer, I recognize that tacit understanding may take some time, as you're suggesting. We are not the controllers of our vasanas, Daveji. And they exist only within this relative reality that we are sharing in front of our monitors, and it is even because of them that we are sharing in this way. So time, within the Relative, is a factor. Now, from the Absolute point, what are we really talking about? NOTHING EVER HAPPENED!!! Yours In Bawan, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 , " Sundararajan " <sundar22ca wrote: > > Dave, > I do not feel qualified to take a shot, since I have not yet had > success in self inquiry. > > After quickly realising that I am not the body, I get stuck. I am > unable to maintain the focus on the inquiry, when no progress is noted > during the contemplation session i.e. other thoughts intervene & take > over. > > I do try to keep my focus as a 'feeling' or 'heart' based one rather > than an intellectual one. For example, I find it interesting to feel > the sense of my existence. But, the full focus is there only in the > first fraction of second. > > I am looking for suggestion (in few words) on how to get un-stuck. > sundar > Namaste... I hope it is ok to join in here... I read your words of feeling stuck and a reply (in a few words) came.... This is... See that " feelings " are also simply arising in that which you are.. ie Awareness. The feeling of existence/sensations are also Not who you are, just as are thoughts. Soul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 Hello Soul, 'Who I am' has no problems. Thank you very much. The 'who I am not (presumably)' has lots of problems. That is the whole problem. Is the solution simply to say 'Go away. You are not me?' We all know, it is too simplistic. sundar > > > Namaste... I hope it is ok to join in here... I read your words of > feeling stuck and a reply (in a few words) came.... > This is... See that " feelings " are also simply arising in that which > you are.. ie Awareness. The feeling of existence/sensations are also > Not who you are, just as are thoughts. > > Soul > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 " Sundararajan " <sundar22ca wrote: > > 'Who I am' has no problems. Thank you very much. > The 'who I am not (presumably)' has lots of problems. > That is the whole problem. > Is the solution simply to say 'Go away. You are not me?' Dear SUndar, greetings I was reading the last postings/questions and exchanges you submit in the last few days, and the thought came to share with you some of my own. As you guessed, the solution is not to say 'Go away, you are not me' because the one who is saying that is the one that is being chased out. If 'Who I am' has no problems then the solution is a coming back to That One, relentlessly, because we already recognized the 'who I am not' as the cause of all our miseries. The 'who I am not' won't easily go away, just like that, even with a few sessions of Glimpses in satsangs, since 'who I am not' gets nurished by habits, unfullfilled desires, ignorance, etc.. (this includes spiritual seeking as well). My guru Bhagavan kept pointing the direction to take, keep coming back..., keep coming back..., when there is awareness 'of' the mind going outwards in all these gross (material) and subtles (thoughts, opinions, emotions) objects, come back to the simple Enquiry, that will lead to the Source where all the objective world is arising from. Time is a factor not to discard, until one will be established in the timeless state. There is a book by David Godman called " Annamalai Swami, Final Talks " that was very usefull at one point for my sadhana. As you may know Annamalai Swami was a Jnani who lived with Bhagavan almost all his Life, practicing with him and serving him until the day Bhagavan told him that 'his vasanas (or karma) were destroyed' and suggested him to live his life by himself, not around Bhagavan anymore. In this book, Annamalai Swami, bring back all of the seekers questions (very similar to yours, getting stuck, forgetfullness, etc...) to the practice of bringing the mind relentlessly and patiently again and again to the source (Self). In this sense, yes, IT IS A PROCESS. But our contemporary mind, with all the conditionings of modern technology, fast food, and cheap chinese production items (this happens also in India and over the world) is so restless that won't allow slow and progressive " methods " . The Dalai Lama used to say that the modern seeker wants " fast, easy and cheap " . Neo-advaita is the clear example of this, like eating MacDonalds, it's food allright, it takes the hunger out of you for a little while, but what is the nutritional aspect of it?. All this to say that from my own experience (I was also a neo-advaitin supporter) I realized some of these points points: .. Sadhana is necessary unless you are Self-Realized. .. Sadhana is both Enquiry and Surrender, they go together. .. Sadhana prepares the ground for the final establishment of Knowledge to " sink in " . .. Any thought or emotion that jeopardizes sadhana needs to be enquired upon (I got stuck, I am not enlightened, I am enlightened, I'm doing great, this guy is a fake, that one is great, etc, etc...) It's a continual coming back, coming back and coming back from the place we think we went out until the moment we are firmly established in the understanding that WE NEVER LEFT. From that Heart we share, All the best, Yours in Bhagavan, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 25, 2008 Report Share Posted September 25, 2008 Dear Mouna-ji, Until someone comes up with a fast track method to stop the mis-identification, or the hijacked identification, I guess, I have to reluctantly accept your view that there is fast food, but no fast method. sundar , " upadesa " <maunna wrote: > > " Sundararajan " <sundar22ca@> wrote: > > > > 'Who I am' has no problems. Thank you very much. > > The 'who I am not (presumably)' has lots of problems. > > That is the whole problem. > > Is the solution simply to say 'Go away. You are not me?' > > > Dear SUndar, greetings > > I was reading the last postings/questions and exchanges you submit in > the last few days, and the thought came to share with you some of my own. > As you guessed, the solution is not to say 'Go away, you are not me' > because the one who is saying that is the one that is being chased out. > If 'Who I am' has no problems then the solution is a coming back to > That One, relentlessly, because we already recognized the 'who I am > not' as the cause of all our miseries. > The 'who I am not' won't easily go away, just like that, even with a > few sessions of Glimpses in satsangs, since 'who I am not' gets > nurished by habits, unfullfilled desires, ignorance, etc.. (this > includes spiritual seeking as well). > My guru Bhagavan kept pointing the direction to take, keep coming > back..., keep coming back..., when there is awareness 'of' the mind > going outwards in all these gross (material) and subtles (thoughts, > opinions, emotions) objects, come back to the simple Enquiry, that > will lead to the Source where all the objective world is arising from. > Time is a factor not to discard, until one will be established in the > timeless state. > There is a book by David Godman called " Annamalai Swami, Final Talks " > that was very usefull at one point for my sadhana. As you may know > Annamalai Swami was a Jnani who lived with Bhagavan almost all his > Life, practicing with him and serving him until the day Bhagavan told > him that 'his vasanas (or karma) were destroyed' and suggested him to > live his life by himself, not around Bhagavan anymore. > In this book, Annamalai Swami, bring back all of the seekers questions > (very similar to yours, getting stuck, forgetfullness, etc...) to the > practice of bringing the mind relentlessly and patiently again and > again to the source (Self). In this sense, yes, IT IS A PROCESS. > But our contemporary mind, with all the conditionings of modern > technology, fast food, and cheap chinese production items (this > happens also in India and over the world) is so restless that won't > allow slow and progressive " methods " . The Dalai Lama used to say that > the modern seeker wants " fast, easy and cheap " . Neo-advaita is the > clear example of this, like eating MacDonalds, it's food allright, it > takes the hunger out of you for a little while, but what is the > nutritional aspect of it?. > All this to say that from my own experience (I was also a neo-advaitin > supporter) I realized some of these points points: > . Sadhana is necessary unless you are Self-Realized. > . Sadhana is both Enquiry and Surrender, they go together. > . Sadhana prepares the ground for the final establishment of Knowledge > to " sink in " . > . Any thought or emotion that jeopardizes sadhana needs to be enquired > upon (I got stuck, I am not enlightened, I am enlightened, I'm doing > great, this guy is a fake, that one is great, etc, etc...) > It's a continual coming back, coming back and coming back from the > place we think we went out until the moment we are firmly established > in the understanding that WE NEVER LEFT. > > From that Heart we share, > All the best, > > Yours in Bhagavan, > Mouna > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 25, 2008 Report Share Posted September 25, 2008 Namaste, Here it works directly.... Neti Neti.... to see (not think) all that comes and goes is not who I am... at once reveals That which is always here.. the One with no names.... It is directly available now..faster than fast food... always here, always was... Blessings to you on your joueney, Soul , " Sundararajan " <sundar22ca wrote: > > Hello Soul, > 'Who I am' has no problems. Thank you very much. > > The 'who I am not (presumably)' has lots of problems. > > That is the whole problem. > > Is the solution simply to say 'Go away. You are not me?' > > We all know, it is too simplistic. > > sundar > > > > > > Namaste... I hope it is ok to join in here... I read your words of > > feeling stuck and a reply (in a few words) came.... > > This is... See that " feelings " are also simply arising in that which > > you are.. ie Awareness. The feeling of existence/sensations are also > > Not who you are, just as are thoughts. > > > > Soul > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 25, 2008 Report Share Posted September 25, 2008 I just found this which may help... From " Who Am I? " by Ramana Maharishi 1. Who am I? The gross body which is composed of the seven humours (dhatus), I am not; the five cognitive sense organs, viz. the senses of hearing, touch, sight,taste, and smell,which apprehend their respective objects,viz.sound,touch, colour, taste, and odour, I am not; the five cognitive sense organs, viz. the organs of speech, locomotion, grasping, excretion, and procreation, which have their respective functions- speaking,moving, grasping, excreting, and enjoying, I am not; the five vital airs, prana etc., which perform respectively the five functions of in-breathing, etc., I am not; even the mind which thinks, I am not; the nescience too, which is endowed only with the residual impressions of objects, and in which there are not objects and no functioning's, I am not. 2. If I am none of these, then who am I ? After negating all of the above mentioned as 'not this', 'not this' that Awareness which alone remains- that I am. ................................................... Blessings, Soul , " Soul " <soulyoginima wrote: > > Namaste, > Here it works directly.... Neti Neti.... to see (not think) all that > comes and goes is not who I am... at once reveals That which is > always here.. the One with no names.... > > It is directly available now..faster than fast food... always here, > always was... > > Blessings to you on your joueney, > Soul > > > > , " Sundararajan " > <sundar22ca@> wrote: > > > > Hello Soul, > > 'Who I am' has no problems. Thank you very much. > > > > The 'who I am not (presumably)' has lots of problems. > > > > That is the whole problem. > > > > Is the solution simply to say 'Go away. You are not me?' > > > > We all know, it is too simplistic. > > > > sundar > > > > > > > > > Namaste... I hope it is ok to join in here... I read your words > of > > > feeling stuck and a reply (in a few words) came.... > > > This is... See that " feelings " are also simply arising in that > which > > > you are.. ie Awareness. The feeling of existence/sensations are > also > > > Not who you are, just as are thoughts. > > > > > > Soul > > > > > > 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.