Questioning 'I am not the feelings/thought..I am That'->Moller

[Guest guest]

Dear Moller

 

Thanks for your comments.

You seem to point to the same inquiry as I tried to do.

 

Personally I could never get clear about, what this 'I' in 'I exist',

is that Ramana refers to.

Perhaps there is, but I could never find any reference in his books,

to this, .. there does not seem to be terribly much pointing to the

Facts of the nature of the mind, one can relate to.

Perhaps there is a certain naivity, as you mentioned, in Ramana's

knowing of the 'regular' psychic, and therefore a feeling (in the

listener) that one cannot quite relate to/grasp what he is pointing

to. After all, he was suddenly catapulted into It.

Therefore, my questions.

 

I am aware that there is a tendency for some, to swallow the sayings.

I used to do that, but lately I am in a state of revolt, and

therefore need to actually investigate and not just align my psychic

to something because it sounds good/right and promissing or it

belongs to an old & respectable tradition.

 

There is a tendency in many teachers who are Advaita inspired, to

mainatin that one can side-step/'By-pass' the mind-contents and go

directly to the 'True Self'. It sounds good and some devote

themselves to that approach; but it seems to me that it resluts in an

attitude of Ignoring the thought-structure, because one _thinks_ that

since it is 'illusion', it is not important to bother about.

But suffering goes on ! - to this, someone told me 'BUT, YOU do not

go on!'. Well, that's also part of the formula, or a kind of Zenish

paradox verbiage, is'nt it ?

 

And so some find Krishnamurti's approach, as 'intellectual' and that

he speaks to the person's ego, and not to the true-self, as, they

say, the Advaitans or Dzogchen teachers do.

And I question that.

 

Personally, I find K.'s pointers very sane, in the sense that he

points to where-one-is-as-is and starts from there and not from

the 'other side of the river';

pointing to something one can concretely relate to and investigate.

There is'nt much cryptic stuff in it.

 

So perhaps someone will contribute with some clarifying inquiry, to

our question (holding unto 'I exist' = unto the Sense of I ?

or another 'I', or holding unto the I-sense with inquisitive

awareness, or something else..)

 

- as for 'finding the place/source where thoughts arise from' and

the indication of the 'right side of the heart' as the source.. it

used to tempt me into practicing a form of 'chakra' concentration,..

which now it seems to me as self-delusion out of good intentions;

perhaps if this last mind-trick would've been pointed to, would've

concretely prevented some waste of time.)

 

I know that some would say to me, "you're too much in the head !

analytical"..(especially the believers in God, but also Zen-koanic

fans and the conceptual non-dualists believers in 'all is ilussion')..

 

well, that's where-I-am then,.. so talk to me Here, and not

overthere, on the other river bank.

And they say 'by-pass the nonsense ! you're Not feelings/thoughts'..

and I get another fine idea, to use some time on, and do.

 

Have a nice day !

jb.

 

 

, "Advaita" <Advaita@T...> wrote:

> Dear JB,

>

> In a recent post on Advaita-Ashram, I tried to address the very same

> issue you are raising here.

>

> Like yourself I would also like to enquire from Harsha or anyone

else

> about the validity of Maharshi's statement:

>

> Harsha:

> << The feeling/awareness that "I Exist" is a fundamental fact and

> > self-verifying. Therefore, sages like Ramana have said, hold to

this

> > awareness that "I Exist" which is natural to you.

>

> (M) There is nothing self-verifying about this presumed fundamental

> fact. Has anyone EVER come upon , seen, directly intuited,

> experienced this thing called 'I'? Where does it recide. What is

it

> made of? It seems to me that the only fact about the 'I'-sense, the

> presumed observer/experiencer/awareness behind phenomena is that it

is

> not-true. So many has blindly followed the vision which Maharshi

has

> given of this 'self-verifying' fact and, because so many have been

> repeating this statement uninspectedly since him, it is as though it

> has become indeed a 'self-evident 'truth. Like the word god,

or 'I'.

> Repeat it often enough and before you know this thing exists- in

> heaven, or somewhere inside this body.

>

> The way I understand this statement and form of practice from

> Maharshi, is that he was rather naive about the depth of the

problem.

> The failure of the Advaitists movement in the USA and very ofetn

> elsewhere to find its feet in the actual soil of real, serious and

> useful practice, and the endless debate about the reality of the

> non-dual condition, and the endless repitition of all the monkey-

minds

> going around trying to convince evryone around them that all is OK,

> just do nothing,You are That, all this nonsense, has much of its

root

> in the naivity of Maharshi's understanding of the un-enlightened

> state. This says nothing about his actual state or non-state. But

if

> someone offers a teaching so simple as the only teaching to

undiscover

> the truth of non-dualism, then to my understanding it is a tragic

> mistake.

>

> No doubt some will be able to use this teaching. No doubt, a great

> many more will fail to put it to any effective outcome. The reason

> lies amongst others in the fact that this apparaently 'self-evident'

> thing has been seen and described by so many in the same way Harsha

> has done here:

>

> <<discover

> the nature of Awareness that looks through the eyes as this passage

is

> read... >>

>

> (M) What is this awareness that is looking out through the eyes?

Has

> anyone ever come upon it? Or is it simply the play of the deluded

> 'I'-conscious state which takes itself as the fundamental center of

> all experience and presents itself to the deluded mind as the

> observer/awareness/I am/I-exist notion. Can we not become real and

> discriminate factually between the deluded self-conscious state of

the

> separate 'I', presenting itself as the 'self-evident' awareness

> looking out through the eyes, and perhaps something categorically

> other than this to which Maharshi might point? I do not know if

> Maharshi means anything else. I merely say 'perhaps' he means

> something deeper, something real, something really conscious as a

> principle of life beyond the confines of the contracted state of

the

> false 'I'.

>

> But until the false sense of the reality of the separate one,

> presenting itself to human experience as the awareness looking out

> through the eyes has been inspected, understood and transcended,

this

> rather adolescent approach to the matter of self-enquiry will

continue

> to sow the confusion so evident in Advaitist circles in the USA and

> elsewhere.

>

> What appears as the 'self-evidence' of the 'I' is really a lie. It

> is untruth being mistaken for truth. It is Samsara being mistaken

for

> the first glimpse of Nirvana. It is the mind perpetuating itself as

> suffering and duality. It is the very essense of illusion and

> self-delusion. The 'I' which presents itself to the initial

enquirer,

> and which is presented to him/her by Maharshi as a sign of the

> enlightened consciousness, is categorically of a diffrerent nature

in

> its functioning and presentation as any presumed 'deeper' awareness

to

> which Maharshi might point.

>

> 'I'-consciousness is not on a continuum with 'Consciousness as the

> essense of life' - if there is such a thing, state, non-thing. A

> categorical break between the deluded 'I'-conscious state and the

> wholeness of life has to happen. It is beacuse this distinction to

my

> understanding has not been drawn by Maharshi, that I have referred

to

> his teaching as naive and even misleading, underestiaming and not

> understanding and appreciating the depth of the dualistic world

> vision.

>

> This is my understanding.

>

> Love Moller.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

> J B <JB789@h...>

>

> 05 October 2000 05:51

> Re: Questioning 'I am not the

> feelings/thought..I am That'

>

>

> Hi Harsha

> Thanks for the sharing.

> I am aware of that type of rough teacher. However Zen-stick

roughness

> might not necessarily indicate a genuiness/purity of realization.

>

> But actually what I would like to have some feedback on is this:

> You write:

> > The feeling/awareness that "I Exist" is a fundamental fact and

> > self-verifying. Therefore, sages like Ramana have said, hold to

this

> > awareness that "I Exist" which is natural to you. The beginning

and

> the

> > ending must be Here and lie in this Pure Simplicity.

>

> Concerning the 'I exist':

> It seems to me that there is no doubt, this Sense of 'I am/exist' is

> there.

> On closer inspection though, as far as I can see, this 'Sense of I'

> is like the smoke produced by a fire,.. the fire being the

> whole 'story of me', the Image of myself, the structure and contents

> of of thought/feeling.

> Is that your observation also ?

>

> If so, the way, it seems to me, that Ramana's statement is

> interpreted/'practiced' by some, is that it results in a

> reinforcing/strengthening of the 'I'.

>

> If this is a wrong understanding, what is, according to you, the 'I'

> that Raman points to ?

>

> Is it this sense of 'me', _and_ an Inquiry into seeing the

> truth/falsity/unreality of it ?

>

> Or is it, the 'I' that is refered to in 'I am That', or the so-

> called 'True Self' ?

> If it is this Self, how can the 'false-self' hold onto the True

> self ? Also if one thinks one does so, would it not be a case of

self-

> deceit ?.. like holding onto an Image of God/saviour.. (though these

> might bring comfort).

> How would holding onto a factor of self-delusion, bring one to the

> Real ?

>

> Perhaps you would share some of your understanding on this.

> Thanks.

> jb.

>

>

>

> , "Harsha" <harsha-hkl@h...> wrote:

> > Thank you JB for your thoughtful posts and continuing inquiry. The

> True

> > Teaching has a certain paradox in it because the "True Master"

does

> not see

> > him/her self as the "Teacher" or in any way different than

> the "student" or

> > anyone else. Yet, he or she may be viewed as different due to the

> needs of

> > the student.

> >

> > I have heard of teachers who are abusive, sometimes very abusive

to

> their

> > students in the name of enlightenment. Yet, Self-Awareness and

> > Self-Realization spontaneously have the effect of making our

> emotions and

> > feelings and those of others transparent to us. The unconscious

and

> the

> > invisible is made conscious and visible and there is tolerance and

> > acceptance of suffering involved in that. This is a natural effect

> on the

> > mind and body of Self-Realization. A movement towards Self-

> Realizations is

> > the movement in the moment towards Awareness Recognizing It Self

in

> All

> > Purity and Clarity. So the behavior of such a person, who has

> become that

> > sensitive to the arising of thoughts and feelings, would be harsh

> under only

> > the most unusual and extreme circumstances. Great Sages such as

> Ramana

> > Maharshi exemplify the first principle of Yoga. Ahimsa Param

> Dharma -

> > Nonviolence is the Supreme Religion.

> >

> > The Inquiry "Who Am I" is a potent practice which can help one to

> discover

> > the nature of Awareness that looks through the eyes as this

passage

> is read.

> > The feeling/awareness that "I Exist" is a fundamental fact and

> > self-verifying. Therefore, sages like Ramana have said, hold to

this

> > awareness that "I Exist" which is natural to you. The beginning

and

> the

> > ending must be Here and lie in this Pure Simplicity. This is the

> main path,

> > but there are many side paths. Because of Grace of God emanating

> from the

> > Heart, even the side paths can become the main path for those so

> inclined.

> > Therefore, there is no need to be critical of any path involving

> spiritual

> > practices to gain Self-Knowledge. As you know Mantra Yoga,

> Kundalini Yoga,

> > Raj Yoga, Jnana Yoga, all involve use of consciousness as an

> instrument to

> > discover its own nature and ultimately lead to Jnana or Self-

> Knowledge.

> >

> > A spiritually mature mind is not seduced by a false teaching or a

> false

> > teacher that promises something which you do not have. The wise

> remain

> > utterly contented with what they have, their own nature, and where

> they are,

> > in their own Self, and see the bait of higher wisdom and knowledge

> (to be

> > given by someone else) as a mirage without any foundation what so

> ever.

> >

> > Love to all

> > Harsha

>

>

> //

>

> All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

> perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and

> subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not

> different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of

the

> nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always

> Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the

Heart

> to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the

> Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It

> Self. Welcome all to a.

>

> To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at

> www., and select the User Center link

> from the menu bar

> on the left. This menu will also let you change

> your subscription

> between digest and normal mode.