Harsha/Ramana's interesting statement

[Guest guest]

>"Harsha (Dr. Harsh K. Luthar)" <hluthar

>

>SELF REALISATION

>By Sri Ramana Maharshi

>

> In the following extract from Gems from Bhagavan, we are reminded of the

>truth and inspired to

> realise the True Self.

>

> THE STATE WE CALL realisation is simply being oneself, not knowing anything

>or becoming

> anything. If one has realised, he is that which alone is, and which alone

>has always been. He cannot

> describe that state. He can only be That. Of course we loosely talk of

>Self-Realisation for want of a

> better term.

>

> Effortless and choiceless awareness is our real state. If we can attain it

>or be in it, it is all right. But

> one cannot reach it without effort, the effort of deliberate meditation.

>All the age long vasanas

> (impressions) carry the mind outwards 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.

 

Dan: (Thank you Harsha - wanting to follow this a little further)

What is an "external object" if the Truth has no outside or inside?

An "external object" can only be a way of defining, labelling,

understanding the "One True Thing" in a dualistic way.

What then would "turning inward" be? It could only be

seeing through one's own labelling, defining, and (mis)understanding

process. The "One True Thing" has no inside or outside. The "effort"

to turn "inside" is itself a labelling, defining, and understanding

of "One True Thing." Therefore, inevitably, the "effort" needs to

be surrendered in exactly the same way that One surrendered the

definition of "external objects" as existing separately (from Oneself).

Finally, the labelling of "One" or "Self" needs to be surrendered

as well.

 

> There is a state beyond our efforts or effortlessness. Until that is

>realised effort is necessary. After

> tasting such bliss even once, one will repeatedly try to regain it. Having

>once experienced the bliss of

> peace, no one would like to be out of it or engage himself otherwise.

 

Clearly, then, the idea that one is "out of it" is similarly a labelling

and defining process. The idea that bliss or peace is "other than this" is

the same kind of process. What else could be meant by a "state beyond our

efforts or effortlessness" except that *this present moment* is exactly that?

> You may go on reading any number of books on Vedanta. They can only tell

>you 'Realise the Self'.

> The Self cannot be found in books. You have to find it for yourself in

>yourself.

 

And where is this Self not? Is not the effort to find it the only way to

"lose" it? Does not this effort arise from the assumption of separation?

Does not the assumption of separation arise without any separation ever

having actually occurred?