The Forum dedicated to Arunachala and Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi

Ramana Maharshi => The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi => Topic started by: wio on June 23, 2008, 10:21:33 PM

Title: A quote
Post by: wio on June 23, 2008, 10:21:33 PM
Quote
"Meditation is your true nature. You call it meditation now, because there are thoughts distracting you. When these thoughts are dispelled, you will remain alone in the state free from thoughts. And that is your real nature."

-Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi

Hi,

can someone organize/use the following words (concepts) in the the quoted text?
- ego, self, atman, brahman

Regards
Title: Re: A quote
Post by: Subramanian.R on June 24, 2008, 11:28:10 AM
Dear who, meditation is with ego, which is spoken of as of four
coexisting constituents as - mind, intellect, ego and mind-stuff (chit).
When this meditation reaches 'completeness', it is self or atman or brahman. When Bhagavan says: 'Meditation is your nature.  Even
this is a thought and thoughts are distracting', He means that one
meditates with ego, which is a thought and even this could be distracting.
But instead of having innumerable thoughts, it is better to have one
thought through meditation.  But even this has to go to dwell in the
self, which is again is spoken of as, atman or brahman.  It is like one
stick which is used to stoke the burning pyre and eventually, that stick
also gets burnt!  Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: A quote
Post by: wio on June 24, 2008, 02:11:24 PM
Hi Subramanian.R, thank you for your reply.

If i understand correct,
there are only two states which we can talk about (in the context of the quote).

State-A: with thoughts.
State-B: without thoughts.

State-A: mind, intellect, ego and mind-stuff (chit),...
State-B: that,...

All other words/concepts in literature are used to describe either state-A or state-B.

Is this correct?
If this is correct then i'm interested where does the words/concepts atman and brahman go. I assume atman is state-A and brahman is state-B.

Regards
Title: Re: A quote
Post by: nonduel on June 24, 2008, 04:26:03 PM
Dear who, meditation is with ego, which is spoken of as of four
coexisting constituents as - mind, intellect, ego and mind-stuff (chit).
When this meditation reaches 'completeness', it is self or atman or brahman. When Bhagavan says: 'Meditation is your nature.  Even
this is a thought and thoughts are distracting', He means that one
meditates with ego, which is a thought and even this could be distracting.
But instead of having innumerable thoughts, it is better to have one
thought through meditation.  But even this has to go to dwell in the
self, which is again is spoken of as, atman or brahman.  It is like one
stick which is used to stoke the burning pyre and eventually, that stick
also gets burnt!  Arunachala Siva. 

Dear Subramaniam,

You just wrote what I was trying to express in my reply to you in the "I-I" thread.
Title: Re: A quote
Post by: Subramanian.R on June 24, 2008, 04:53:50 PM
Dear "wio", the confusion arises because the word "Atman" and
"Brahman" are used interchangeably by writers and pandits.  In
Saiva Siddhanta, there is a concept of 'individual soul' and the
'Great Soul."  The individual soul is atman, that is the state of all
individual beings and when some of these people attain (even
"attain" is a wrong use) liberation, they get merged with the
Great Soul.  When you say Type A and Type B,  atman  in the
process of merging with Brahman, is in Type A, and on merger
it is Type B.  Some writers use the words Atman and Para-atman to
indicate the difference.  Ultimately all these are polemics and
semantics.  Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: A quote
Post by: wio on July 03, 2008, 01:56:40 AM
Quote
Though his primary teaching is associated with Non-dualism, Advaita Vedanta, and Jnana yoga, he highly recommended Bhakti, and gave his approval to a variety of paths and practices. [Wikipedia: Ramana_Maharshi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramana_Maharshi)].

How is it that he recommended Bhakti, when (to my knowledge) Bhakti and Advaita Vedanta (impersonalism) do not go together...?
Is Brahman, in the teachings of Ramana Maharshi, (in some way?) a deity- individual person?

Regards




Title: Re: A quote
Post by: Subramanian.R on July 03, 2008, 01:36:57 PM
Dear wio, who said Bhakti and Jnana cannot go together?  Bhakti is
not the cup of Advaita's tea?  This question has been put to Bhagavan
on many many occasions when He was in body.  Bhakti is the mother of
Jnana.  Bhakti to deity outside is known to all of us.  When this bhakti
matures, you start expressing bhakti within you.  It is like going to the
temple and praying in the home-altar.  After these prayers within, you
graduate to bhakti to the Formless and Nameless.  To meditate constantly on the dictum, "I am Brahman" takes one to merger in the Self, which is
Jnana.  When Sivaprakasam Pillai asked Bhagavan in 1901-02:  "Who is the greatest of all devotees?", He had replied:  "One who gives himself to the Self, is the greatest devotee."  Sankara, who is the foremost exponent of Advaita, has written a number of songs, not only on Siva, but also on
Vishnu, Rama, Krishana, Ganesh, Subramanya, Devi and others.  He has
prescribed bhakti  as the first step for beginners, who cannot enquire about the Self directly.

Arunachala Siva.