The Forum dedicated to Arunachala and Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi

Ramana Maharshi => The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi => Topic started by: srkudai on January 05, 2010, 01:11:21 PM

Title: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: srkudai on January 05, 2010, 01:11:21 PM
I was watching a movie and during the process, forgot that i am the one watching --- and took myself to be a character in the movie!

Bhagavad Gita says "Dhyayathe vishayan pumshah" ... by meditating on the objects of senses ... this whole world came into existence.

So too ... by meditating on the movie character as myself, i started identifying myself constantly with the movie character ....

The "I" of the mind is this character.

And now ... I need to practice ... everytime i fall into the "movie" [mind], i need to see the source of "me"... the Witness, Pure Consciousness!

Love!
Silence
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: ramanaduli on January 05, 2010, 08:20:36 PM
Is it possible having the true "I"ness and watching the movie. I think it is possible before watching the movie or at the end. Otherwise we do not remember
the story or the actions of the characters. Because mind cannot do two things at one time. I may be wrong.

There is the proverb. when we see the statue of the elephant we cannot see the stone in which the elephant was made. But when we see the stone
we cannot see the elephant.


Ramanaduli

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: ramanaduli on January 06, 2010, 03:52:33 PM
So in every moment we should not forget that whatever we are seeing, hearing,tasting,smelling and feeling is not real. Even my breath also not real?. Ok fine.
I also tried no, of times. Before seeing the movie or Tv, I remember it is not real. But in middle I forget and sometimes I cry also. At the end I and my mind will argue for my actions. It is not only in movie. It happens in every moment.  So far practicing atma vichara, i will be clear after sometimes. but previously I never used to be. the impact is less now. It looks like daily I am writing one examination. Previously I had been doing without knowing how to face the problem.
Now I find difficult to deal with people like servants and relations. The opposite person is doing on the basis of her mind because she does not belive any vedanta or atma vichara. When I give answer to the person, she or he does not expect such answer from me, and says it is wrong statement and sometimes they say
it is waste to talk to me. As I understand now clearly as you said so many times in your post. the consiousness cannot be touches by any one. now I remember these words, so I do not get angry but still some funny feeling is arising from my heart. Sometimes I think whether am I making the other person unhappy by not accepting their views. But after one month if i remember it does not look same because the time does the healing.
While making big decisons we cannot sit by witnessing. Is there any way?


Ramanaduli
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 06, 2010, 05:37:51 PM
Dear srkudai,

Excellent.

Dear Ramanaduli,

Yes,  this is what Ribhu Gita says.  Everything is unreal and
I am (Brahman) the only Reality.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 06, 2010, 07:00:27 PM
Everything is illusion. (by its own)
Only God is real.
God Is Everything. (as God)
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 06, 2010, 07:15:40 PM
Dear I,

I'd like to make a small change here.

Everything is illusion, everything is unreal, etc... is also an illusion. The one that is discriminating this is illusion himself. because everything cannot be illusion, everything cannot be unreal. We cannot define the "everything", it is illusion to even continue something after "everything......"

There is only Atma, Brahman, or there is nothing and everything alone and the one that is telling this is again Illusion itself. The very effort to affirm that everything is illusion is illusion. I just re-iterate this statement that "Thinking Maya as Maya is the greatest Maya"

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: ramanaduli on January 06, 2010, 08:51:25 PM
There is a difference in between with the non living things and living things. The world contains living and non living things. If the chair is neglected by me there is no one being affected but on the other hand if I make a person (living thing) unhappy then it is a sin. When people are suffering or being unhappy, how we can be a witness. My mind is geting confused.


ramanaduli
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 06, 2010, 09:43:33 PM
Dear I,

Being a witness helps quieten the mind, its just like a praanayaama. It stops you from jumping about like a monkey. But also, we should be aware
that the Self is Non Witness. The Self is not a witness. Enquire if there is a witness and a witnessed!

Bhagawan says:

"All that you have to do is to give up being aware of other things, that is of the non-self - 'ego'. If one gives upbeing aware of them then pure awareness alone remains, and that is the Self"

Once a devotee asked Ramana Maharshi - "I do not know how to worship, please tell me, how do I worship?" Bhagawan replied replied - "enquire if there is Worshiped and a worshiper"

So never give any scope of duality.

Actually many Sadhanas or methods are only a quick solution to quietining the mind but not themselves an end to itself to the Self. It sometimes may make one stay put.

Salutations to Sri Ramana

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 12:15:11 PM
Dear I,

The very word "manonasham" itself means destruction of mind. When there is destruction of mind how can there possibly be any thoughts. If there are thoughts, then there is perception, at least the perception that these thoughts do not affect me. Mind or Manam itself is thought.

How can there possibly be thoughts after Manonasham?

Manonasham is absolutely no thoughts at all.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 12:51:00 PM
Dear I,

How can we know if Ramana Maharshi had thoughts? is it not us who are assuming? and similarly with Janaka as well. It is the reader, who is imagining about the state of Ramana or Janaka.

Pls see, who is it that is questioning - "how is it without thoughts" is nothing but a thought. You are just a thought!

The idea that they had thoughts and functioned is our own thought again.

To your last question, you ask "whose thoughts? see if you sit and stop thoughts in your mind ... but my mind has thoughts ... can you say you do not have thoughts? if so, you are identifying with that mind, isnt it ?"

You yourself are just a thought. How can thought kill thought?

You - I are nothing but just a thought!

Manonasham is destruction of You - I.

Salutation to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 07, 2010, 02:34:02 PM
If in a  thoughtless state (mano nasam), why not a Jnani write
books and converse with others?  If the Self is one without a second,
all powerful and eternal, ever pure, can it not do these things.  If
I scratch my elbow or touch my cheek, which is part of me, is it
dvaitic bhavana?

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 07, 2010, 02:51:39 PM
Dear srkudai,

In this context, I shall give you a rough translation of the Invocatory
Song in Tiruvilaiyadal Puranam, which euologizes Sri Dakshinamurty.

It says:

He is sitting under an old stonelike banyan tree.  He is beyond the
four Vedas and six Vedangas.  He tells His state to Sanaka etc.,
"by remaining  as He is, and telling without telling".  Let us contemplate on Him, thinking without thinking about Him."

Telling without telling, thinking without thinking... how can these
happen?  Saiva Siddhantam says that a thoughtless mind, can
shoot out thoughts and activities, through the Self.

I am still trying to understand this song more clearly.  I asked
one inmate of Asramam, about this song.  He says, "that is what
it is, whether you comprehend or not!"

Saint Taymanavar says:  "I have found you without finding you."
Saint Manikkavachagar says: " I am sleeping without sleeping,
to discover you in my heart."

I am sure these are all not poetic gimmicks.  It is a state, which
Jnanis alone know.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 03:12:11 PM
Dear I,

If self is "writing books" , "giving talks", why not thinking ?
Can not Self do that?

And who does not have thoughts? The Self in Ramana is the same as the Self here .So that Body Ramana had no thoughts , but this body of Ramana has thoughts!
While Ramana himself --- Consciousness is Ever Thoughtless ! Here as well as there!

It is not the Self that does all these, but the I - mind, thought, ego.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 03:21:40 PM
Dear I,

Infact Sri Ramana Maharshi is verily Dakshinamurthy himself just below the Arunachala hill instead of a Banyan tree.

Ramana is ever seated like Dakshinamurthy. It is only the I - thoughts - mind that is seeing Ramana in action.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 03:27:08 PM
Dear I,

Can you rephrase your questions, I am not able to follow your questions.

Salutations to Sri Ramana

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 03:31:08 PM
Dear I,

What I am more trying to point here is this, that - "It is not a "State" Attained ... it is everyone's state here and now." is also a thought only.

The You, thought, Mind, I, is just working out its continuity.

It is not even this - "It is not a "State" Attained ... it is everyone's state here and now."

The one that says this is still the thought, I, Mind.

You are just Thought.

Salutations to Sri Ramana



Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 04:00:31 PM
Dear I,

Quote
1. If Ego were "alive" it can be destroyed. What is only a shadow ... how do you propose to destroy it?

2. The Ramana who talked to you also a part of the imagination ... So to say that "True" Ramana is thoughtless ... its meaningless ... coz the only Ramana you/I or anyone knows is the one who see , walking talking etc.

1. The very idea suggested is indicative of false perception. The very entity that holds this view itself is the Ego - I - Mind - Thought. The Mind, here, is itself trying to protect itself by thinking that Ego is a shadow, that it cannot be destroyed, that it does not exist. But it is forgetting itself which is itself the Ego, Mind, Thought.

As I said before, Thought cannot kill thought, therefore I never mentioned about destroying it. There is no destroying here. The very idea of destroying it is again another thought and also the very idea of not killing it is also a thought. As long as thought exists, there is no Manonasham.

      a. The Mind cannot become Self
      b. The Mind cannot kill Mind
      c. The entity that says nothing can affect it is also Mind
      d. The Self cannot know it is Self, there is no need for it. So the one that is saying is just the Mind

2. Ramana Maharshi is himself just a thought for thought. Ramana Maharshi exists so long thought/mind exists.

Quote
The finger is pointing to the moon and you are saying "its not the moon, its a finger" !

The statement "its the state of everyone" is meant to be a pointer towards the Self! But why do you have to tell this, all statements here are bound to be thoughts! Coz they are statements.

Thats precisely what I am telling - "The finger is pointing to the moon and you are saying - 'its not the moon, its a finger'" The thought/mind/ego/I is just pointing towards another thought/mind/ego/I

There is no way the thought can point towards the so called "Moon"

To whom is the pointer? who needs the pointer? Please see.

Salutations to Sri Ramana






Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 04:13:09 PM
Dear I,

Quote
If no thought can point to Self, Ramana's whole teaching ... read it , is absolutely useless ... is this what you mean?

Is what you mean, these are all your thoughts, please see them yourself. There is no answer here. Find it out yourself.

Self does not need Self realisation. Absolutely, Bang on! So who is it that is needing the so called Self Realisation? is it not the Mind?, Ego?, I?, Though?

Body is just a thought.

Quote
he mind is "thoughts" --- which you said cannot see the Self. So all vedas , vedantas and teachings are useless... including Ramana and his teachings ... is this what you are telling ?

Is what you mean, these are all your thoughts, please see them yourself. There is no answer here. Find it out yourself.

These are all the questions popping up within you. You have the answers for it too. And if you have answers then it your thought pointing to another thought. If you have question, then it is Mind, thought, Ego, I.

If you don't have both, is manonasham



All the above  - whatever I wrote is your own.


Salutations to Sri Ramana



Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 07, 2010, 04:26:57 PM
Dear I,

Absolutely,

Manonasham remains a thought so long, you question it, so long you have answers to it. Just the absence of both is Manonasham.

So long you have question you have answers. This is what I/Ego/Mind wants.

Question is Ego/Mind/I/Thought
Answers is again the same Ego/Mind/I/Thought

Quote
These are the thoughts too  --- so whats it? manonashanam is also a thought!

Yes! it sure is - thats why, I mentioned "All the above  - whatever I wrote is your own."

Salutations to Sri Ramana Maharshi
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 07, 2010, 04:47:00 PM
Dear all,

I think the long discussions have come about, because,  we think,
that "thinking" process should come out only from the "mind" and
the mindless Jnani cannot write books or converse with others without a mind. 

I am not readily able to find a more exact simile.  However, in
villages, we find that a large pumpset, with electric generator
is needed to ensure a copious flow of water from the earth below.  Now this is something like mind producing thoughts.  However, wherefrom the hill-springs flow out copious water?  Is there an electric connection or is there a pumpset?  Wherefrom this springs come about?  We can at best say, it is Nature's hidden force.

Again, to make a large cavity on earth, we need long hours of labour of ploughing or a drilling machine.  How does the land get separated
with a large hole, when there is an earth quake or a landslide?
Where is the drilling machine or an axe or a plough here?  It is
again, we say Nature.

Jnani is like Nature.  He does not need a pumpset/drilling machine
of a mind to do the springing out of water or an earthern cavity.
The same result, but without a special implement called mind.

(Adapted from the personal hearing of Brahmasri Nochur Venkataraman).

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 07, 2010, 06:09:58 PM
So, the discussion goes on about How a mirage is a mirage  :D

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 08, 2010, 11:27:15 AM
How can a Brahma Jnani without thoughts, write a book or engage
in activities?

When I said Jnani is like Nature, doing certain thing without the
implements/gadgets i..e the thinking process of a mind, people
said when so many things could happen naturally like a water
spring in the Hill or a cavity on earth, due earthquake, thinking
can also happen naturally.  If that be so, then Bhagavan Ramana
should have said about "natural thinking without the instrument
of mind", somewhere in the Conversations / Tallks compiled by
devotees.  But no such reply has been found anywhere.

I think, Ribhu Gita, comes here with the answer.  The Chapter
26 Verse 25 (Tr. in English free verse by Dr.H. Ramamoorthy
and Nome) runs like this:

That which by knowing firmly as oneself
One has no need to anything else in the least,
By knowing which with full conviction as oneself
All is known for ever.
And by knowing which as oneself in complete certitude
All actions are accomplished in their entirety --
Ever abide in Bliss, without a trace of a concept (sankalpa)
In That itself as That itself.

Incidentally Sri Lingeshwara Rao's Sanskrit-English version,
does not have this!  Everything is Ramana maya.

Arunachala Siva.     
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: ramanaduli on January 08, 2010, 02:13:39 PM
To witness anything, two things are required. One is the subject means that is me. and the object. After witnessing, we come to know all the objects are mithya.
Then I turn to myself. i.e. who is the witness and where I dwell. I tried this. slowly  there is nothing,there is no answer. I am nowhere. Now tell me  the witness i.e. Me also is Mythya?  The thought of "I" also is it a thought?


Ramanaduli
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 08, 2010, 02:32:46 PM
We know Self is without concepts.

Lets step aside for a bit to bring a discussion from different perspective.
Could we then rise a different question, like: 1. can MIND be free of concepts totally?

2. Isn't MIND itself is Self when not outward pointed?
3. Lets take a bird, for example, bird sings beautifully, flies beautifully, does it mean that some kind of intelligence can work through living beings which in no way needs a concept-like mind?
(to my mind why it doesn't need a concept-like mind to perform deeds? because That knows what is to be done. This knowing through not knowing indeed is a mystery.)

What do you think? (1,2,3)




Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 08, 2010, 03:48:26 PM
Dear amiatall,

1.  One can be without mind, that is, mind permanently curling
up in the Self.  This is the no-mind state. 

2. Mind when not outward pointed permanently, it is said to curl up
in the Self.  It is like the moon on the high noon.

3. Every activity of all living beings, is due to God's engineering and the living being's vasana.  A terrorist also kills a group of people out
of God's engineering, but it is his vasana which has thrust him that
work.  Sri Ramakrishna used to say to Kali.  Thum Yantri Ami Yantra.
You are the operator and I am the machine.

Okay, why God instead of keeping quiet, should engineer the living
beings?  The answer is:  Who am I question Him?  Among the
million spermatoza, one unites with ovum and causes fertility.
Why this particular one, among the millions?  Who chooses?  God.
Why should He?  Who am I to question Him?

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 08, 2010, 03:50:20 PM
Dear Ramanaduli,

I and Me are only thoughts.  Only abidance in I AM is Real.  It is
a thoughtless state.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 08, 2010, 06:18:59 PM
Dear I,

By your own definition,
the "as long as" ... is thought ... its thought that "after" that there is something and that manonashanam , which is absence of both is a thought too! so you are just saying everything is a thought ... even the absence of thought is a thought !

:) I thought Everything is Brahman ;)

Well, this is what the thought is doing, giving out one more answer -

 "so you are just saying everything is a thought ... even the absence of thought is a thought !"

":) I thought Everything is Brahman ;)"

As long as there is question and answer, so long it goes. As I said before both questions and answers are both one and the same. I have nothing more to say here. what ever questions are there, they are your own and surely there will be an answer too, within you.

If there is a question, it will have an answer, and if there is an answer, there will be question, again.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 08, 2010, 07:11:33 PM
Question, answer, further question, further answer.  This is endless.
This reminds of Gaudapada Karika and Panchadasi, where the
"whether the egg came first or the hen came first"... question
is taken up and answered. (This is of course, regarding free will
and destiny dichotomy.)  Sureswara says in Panchadasi:  "Break
the egg and crush the neck of the hen.  Throw them both to the
earth.  Prostrate and pray to the earth, from which was born both
the first egg or the first hen."  Then all questions will stop.  No answers will come. It is like, as Bhagavan said, the stick that
stirs the funeral pyre..... in Who am I?  The answerless state
(or further questionless state) is abidance.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 08, 2010, 07:17:57 PM
Dear srkudai,Subramanian.R

really excellent answers.

Let me humbly make you follow my trend of thought and elaborate further.
Consciousness is nor liberated nor in bondage. Also there is what we call attention.
Do you agree, that through attention consciousness expresses itself?
What is attention, really ?
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 09, 2010, 08:22:52 AM
Dear amiatall,

Attention is only Self Attention, nothing else.  If Self Attention
is sincere and complete, the sadhak will 'attend' to all that is to
be attended in the objective world.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 11, 2010, 03:03:01 PM
Dear I,

In that case, what happens to these thoughts when you are sleeping? in Sushupti? Where are thoughts during sushupti that point towards Self? where are thought during sushupti that lead you to liberation? Where are you - 'I' during Sushupti, Deep Sleep?

It is only during waking - Jagrat, that you are able to say all there:

Quote
This too is a thought ... and by your argument no thought can lead you to Self ! So this thought & what ever you have done as an action upon it ... is futile! Your argument, not mine!
 
Nagaraj, in a prior post you said "no thought can point to Self" ... its the opposite of reality. "Every Thought Points To Self"
Amazing ... infact every thought can lead to liberation!!

What about during Sushupti? Infact what you say is just Swapa - State

Salutations to Sri Ramana

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 11, 2010, 05:33:43 PM
Dear I,
 :)

Quote
and moreover ... suppose that information is not there ... how can you function in the world ?

why is there a need to function in the world? Please see who has this need? who is that 'I' ? and is there a world? what is world? are you in the world in first place, if one such world even exists?

Then we can look into the second aspect of your side of argument as to:

Quote
and moreover ... suppose that information is not there ... how can you function in the world ? suppose Ramana were to not have any thoughts ... he would have not remembered. Yesterday you went and he would see [if at all] and today you go ... all blank!!

Lets leave Ramana, it does not matter to know whether Ramana had thoughts, did not have thoughts, whether he remembered... yesterday today and all. suppose you - 'I' feels that he had thoughts, how does it affect you - 'I', suppose he did not have thoughts, still how does it affect you - 'I'. Infact who is it that is concluding, that Ramana had thoughts or did not have thoughts? It is more important to find this 'I' who is concluding all these. Infact, it is you 'I' in the end that is deciding How Ramana was and not Ramana! It is absolutely of no consequence to see the world or the Truth from Ramana Maharshi's eyes. It is more important to see(being) the truth ourselves.

and

Quote
Tell me ... Suppose you see a dog. The brain brings up all previous memories you had about the dog. That this dog bit you when you were a kid ... if such a memory is there, it shall surface. you do not do anything about it ... the thought just pops up. when you did not do anything to bring the thought, how do u plan to stop it from coming

why a need arised in first place to see that dog? please see this need, why it arised,  for whom did it arise?, who is the 'I' to whom this need arised.

Suppose you have not seen the dog? do these thoughts pops up as you say? The need has been there, similarly, to the girl friend example you quoted.

Question the very need! Who is having the need? Thoughts are arising because there is some need in first place.

Please introspect as follows:

1. why there is a need in first place?
2. to whom has the need arised
3. who is the 'I' to whom, those needs have arised
4. Who am I?

Needs are nothing but thoughts themselves, Mind itself, Ego itself, 'I' itself.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 12, 2010, 04:08:56 PM
Dear I,

Quote
What do you mean "what is the need to see the dog". The dog is seen. Its not a choice. You are seeing. You are seeing all this. The moment you see you will have thoughts flashing. What is the need ?? Its not in your hands. Things are happening. Even if you close your eyes, perceptions will be there ... there is no choice here!

As you are seeing this reply, why do you see just the words and sentences, why don't you see the monitor, the computer? are not these sentences now in the computer? but you - "I' just sees the reply, because, it is more interested in what it wants. How come it is not aware of the computer but only the words, here? see, this is what it wants, thoughts wants thoughts!

Everyday, we may read hundreds of articles in newspaper, stories and other contents in various different magazines and papers, when you were reading all these, were you aware about the paper in first place? you - 'I' wouldn't have even seen or registered the paper, because, we - 'I' is more interested in what it needs, the thoughts that are written.

In the Dog illustration, why only Dog, is registered and not the earth or mud, or any other thing for that matter, because there is some sort of need of recollecting about the past happenings. Even remembering your past - memories is just a need, a desire, you cherish your memories - good or bad.

As long as you - 'I' - thoughts are there, thoughts lasts, perception will be there. You - 'I' are nothing thoughts themselves.

Thoughts are nothing but Vasanas.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 12, 2010, 08:13:32 PM
Dear I,

So you chose to see the dog or the tree in your corridor
did you chose to "think" a particular thought?

if you chose, then we can discuss.
if u did not chose, how can u chose not to have them ???
its not in ur hands at all!

I din't quite get what you are conveying here.

The question is that why a need arised to see the dog. In particular only the dog, please introspect and tell me.

To tell me means introspection, you are not telling me in reality, but to yourself

Saluations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 12, 2010, 10:35:02 PM
Where this discussion is being lead to?

A mirage is a mirage, what can one do? There is nothing to be done in Reality.

Nagaraj always points that there is Jiva which makes these statements and that statements.
But at the same time it is being said that we don't know if Bhagavan had thoughts and personality or whatever.
Is it not the same to assume that that which made this statement or that statement is Jiva? How one knows? And who knows?
Everyone knows that a child is being fed, but in case of a child there is no awareness of it. So, one assumes that Jiva makes this statement but is it?
If we talk of unreality please talk about everything that is unreal. The Jiva that is being assumed to exist here, does it truly exist?


Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 08:07:34 AM
Dear I,

The 'Jiva' is there so long thoughts exists. Thoughts themselves is verily 'Jiva'

You are Thoughts. As long as thoughts are there, You are there!

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:26:48 AM
Dear I,

        :) Between two thoughts, there are no thoughts ... you are still there!
suppose you are not there, how did the next thought come ???

in deep sleep, no thoughts ... you are still there.

you are totally independent of the thoughts. thoughts do not make you.
There presence or absence cannot touch you... just as a shadow cannot touch the real person ... or a mirage's presence or absence does not make any difference.  

Who is it that is saying this ? Whos is the 'I' that is saying thus? Thinking thus? How do you - 'I' Mind know that you are there in deep sleep? why are you not able to say this in deep sleep? why don't the 'I' say that between thoughts as you put? Who is the one that is saying all there?

It is the Ego, Thought, Mind, I

Who is the one that is saying "you are totally independent of the thoughts. thoughts do not make you." ???

Who am 'I' ?

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:30:23 AM
Dear I,

The question is that why a need arised to see the dog. In particular only the dog, please introspect and tell me.

Do you have a choice? There is no choice. The Dog is seen.
you cannot choce "I'll not see Dog" or "i'll See a Dog now" ... its not possible!

Please question again, Please introspect why the dog is seen? it is seen because of some desire which you - thought - Mind! Please enquire further to whom this thought or desire has come !

Vasanas are nothing but thoughts themselves!

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:34:53 AM
Dear I,

that "its ego, thought, mind!" ... is a thought too ;)

Yes, so long thoughts are there it continues. Your second thought

Quote
BTW ... :) and "you" need not know who you are ;) cant ask me abt it! ;)
just kidding!

is no kidding, please see, introspect further, the "you" to whom you are addressing is yourself! Mind addressing to mind, thought addressing to thoughts.

You are really talking and answering your own questions, your arguments are for yourself only.

It is so very important to know who the "Who" is. Who is this?

Who am I? is no different from Who are you? Both are one and the same for 'I' and 'You' are just Ego, thoughts, Mind, I

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:37:23 AM
Dear I,

There is no choice. Desire is where there is a choice.

Seeing, perception ... no choice.

All that I am trying to tell is this, that the one that is saying this is 'I' Ego, thoughts, Mind and it is saying so because it is under threat. Questioning it means dabbling with death for it - Mind, Thoughts, Ego.

The Ego Mind, Thought is just trying to find some way or the other to continue - "Seeing, perception ... no choice."

Please introspect, it is so clear!

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Dear I,

Why do you want to interospect so much?
leave this thought ;)

To whom are you asking this question? Who is the YOU? you are addressing to? In reality you - thought are asking yourself this question - "Why do you want to interospect so much? leave this thought ;)"

Because the YOU you are addressing is yourself!

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:41:07 AM
Dear I,

Ego , mind ... has no choice in seeing ...
only the "reaction" to seeing is in its hands!

Now how did this ego come into existence? is it there in first place to make choice? how can it make choices if it is not there? Is not the Ego - Mind, thoughts acknowledging itself?

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:46:05 AM
Dear I,

You are wrong. You are addressing only to yourself. Please introspect. That is the whole issue. There is no me here as you think. It is all your thoughts. There are only thoughts, there is no your thought or my thoughts and all.

There is just thoughts alone.

Quote
if its to me... i need not write here! in a blog


You are writing all these just for yourself! Please Introspect.

(This is a positive constructive discussion,  :) )

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:48:37 AM
Dear I,

what do you mean "how did this ego come into existence" ? it is there. That's all. normally what kind of answer would you expect for "how are you in office" ... "i started from home and reached here ... so on " ... how did this ego come into existence ... i cannot give u an explanation of the process before "i" came into existence! that would be meaningless --- for any one to give a reason .

OK, now if you say Ego is there, please enquire who is this ego? who is this I?

And this sentence you mentioned - "normally what kind of answer would you expect for "how are you in office" ... "i started from home and reached here ... so on " ... how did this ego come into existence ... i cannot give u an explanation of the process before "i" came into existence! that would be meaningless --- for any one to give a reason"

Ego, Mind, Thought is addressing to itself!

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:55:39 AM
Dear I,

plz tell me ...
if i am just interacting with myself.
why this blog ? ;)
why dont i just sit home and talk to myself... infact even just think
Ok ... suppose by interospecting you find i am not there ... how do u know that is not hallucination?

This is such an important question, you have to ask yourself.

By the statement "plz tell me ..." you are asking yourself - ego, thoughts, mind itself.

Please ask yourself this so very important question "if i am just interacting with myself.
why this blog ? ;) why dont i just sit home and talk to myself... infact even just think"

Please enquire who is the I to whom these thoughts arising "Ok ... suppose by interospecting you find i am not there ... how do u know that is not hallucination?"

Please introspect on these. Who am 'I'

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 10:59:36 AM
Thats the Ignorance Avidya

Please introspect and see for yourself

My argument ends here.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 01:27:48 PM
Dear I,

You are welcome to your thoughts.... your body, your plate, your property, your food everything! You seem to know very well about what is good and what is bad! you have all choices to select what food you want to take!

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 03:35:37 PM
Dear I,
 :)

Definitely, as I already mentioned in some posts between our discussions, that this is positive and constructive discussion. There is no victor or loser in the end, if at all there is any victor or a loser, its simply for the ego/mind/thoughts.
 
I do not contest the points you have mentioned, in the small and sweet illustrations of yours :) they are all true, and form a good Satsang.

How a realized person is, cannot at all be known. even that "a Realized person does not mean he should remain with closed eyes, never write blogs etc. What ever is the prarabdha that shall continue the body and mind equipment. he himself remains ever as the Self. A particular lifestyle does not make someone wise." is also a thought right? :)

What I was trying to convey is that - Who holds this idea? or thought? that a realized person can also be like this.... He has to be enquired :)

What I saw is that this person is verily Mind itself, thoughts themselves. Which is why I mentioned about the example of Sushupti or Deep sleep, why is there nothing in deep sleep, what about the blogs, writing, eating and all? it is not here in deep sleep? But we know the one that is existing is constant in all the three states - Jagrat Swapna and Sushupti. Let us call this as consciousness, and this consciousness was there in deep sleep, but the ideas and thoughts about writing and other actions did not exist at all in deep sleep or Sushupti :) then how come all these arise in Jagrat - Waking or Swapna - Dream states? why not in Sushupti? Therefore these ideas, thoughts are truly not the consciousness. as it was not there in Sushupti.

Here is what my argument was, that these arise in Jagrat and Swapna states because there is thoughts, mind, ego but the same thoughts, mind, ego did not exist in Sushupti.

What is there in Sushupti is there in Jagrat and Swapna as consciousness. We agree that this consciousness is absolutely changeless right :) but then during Jagrat and Swapna some thing pops up right? doing all these? these thoughts and all? This is Ego, Mind, Thoughts :) which are not there in Sushupti.

Which is why all that is happening is just thoughts. The You or 'I' that is seen only in Jagrat and Swapna is this mind, ego, thought, limited - 'I' but in deep sleep or Sushupti, there is none of all these, there is even no I, The Consciousness which is there at all states does not affirm itself during Sushupti right? :) were there thoughts then? No? Because the one who is holding these thoughts did not exist during Sushupti. who holds these thoughts during Jagrat and Swapna? that is the You - 'I' - I was talking about. This 'I' is just thoughts, Mind, ego, I.

Regarding the Yours-Mine, Everything happens only in the realms of thoughts. Where am I to you? it may be that you see me and are replying to me, but I am not in your mind? what I am writing here, the mind takes it and the mind itself responds? Where am I to you? am I separate from you? what ever I am saying here, is not the mind that is conveying what it understands? the mind is only telling what it has understood :) what it has understood is just its own thoughts? based on its own pre-conceived notions. In this way, everything is just thoughts there is nothing perceivable apart from thoughts themselves. I am also a thought only to you and you to me.

When I say 1+2=3. the mind checks with its previous notions if 1+2=3 if it is yes then it agrees other wise it says it is wrong because its very notions are being questioned. :) If I say 1+2=1, and then the mind when it checks this, does not agree, its beliefs and notions are put to test. is this - '1' '2' '3' '+' yours and mine differently? are they not the same? there cannot be your '1' and my '1'

what the thoughts/ego/mind/I want is simply fuel to confirm its belief patterns and notions. anything that questions its beliefs and notions it tries to rebel.

But all these do not exist during Sushupti. and the one in Sushupti Jagrat and Swapna is same all the time. But during the jagrat and Swapna, thoughts pop up i.e. ego/mind/I

:)
Salutations to Sri Ramana


Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: ramanaduli on January 13, 2010, 03:38:18 PM
I think. one way it is good to have mind and the thoughts. If we do not have mind then we may be lying on bed like a coma patient. If we do not have thoughts then we become like autism person. It is my understanding that, when we realise our suffering and think why we are suffering. This is also thought but it is good thought because this sort of thought would lead to find out the correct answer. That how Ramana's thought helped Him and found out the answer. Like Him we all are having good thought and joined this forum, discussing. Upto this point our thought is a good and helping to find out the answer. As we are a healthy  person who are having healthy mind and body, we are trying to find out about the thought. Actually speaking, our thoughts are all coming up from our own mind. So our mind, our thought and we are all one. All these are seen on our own consiousness like a image on the cinema screen. If there is no screen nothing is possible to be seen. Thoughts never stay permanently it comes and goes but the consiousness is always exisits. So we are the consiousness ever exists always. In deep sleep there is no mind so there is no thoughts and we are very happy. But we realise after waking up the happiness where during the sleep we never feel. Every creature is having this experience but Jnani during waking state also he lives in the same condition like in deep sleep where we cannot do. we forget due to our
latent vasans and prarabdha. To have 24 hours that same conditions, we always should ask ourselves To whome it happens. As Bhagavan says, if we ask as soon as the thought pops up it will go to its starting point i.e. mind. As Bhagavan says, we should be like a stick which burns the corpse. At the same time we should pray for His grace also. Without His grace nothing is possible. In the begining we may have millions questions. all are thoughts only. If we watch our own thoughts slowly it will die away. Before puting it, just posephone it. Thoughts will loose the grip.

This is my understanding after joining this forum. It is also Bhagavan's grace to discuss with experienced people like, srkudai ji, Subramaniyan ji and Raju ji.
We need lots of practice only watching our own thoughts. So far we are watching other man's thoughts and justify,  appreciates, liking disliking all are thoghts only which we cannot avoid. But through vichara margam, we can watch our own thoughts like movie. It avoids lots of unnecessary unwanted situations.


Ramanaduli
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 13, 2010, 05:13:14 PM
Dear Ramanaduli,

Living without the mind is not comatose or atuistic.
Living without thoughts is not comatose or atuistic.
These are all states of different kinds.

Coma is a state, where there brain signals temporarily suspend
  functioning due to some syndrome.
Atuism is where the mind is fractured but not dead.  A
fractured mind is sickness.  Permanently abiding in no-mind is Jnanam. If the word "no-mind" is troubling you, then have it as "no-thought."

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: ramanaduli on January 13, 2010, 05:59:48 PM
When the thought arises. ok I witness my thought? I use my bhudhi whether is it necessary to act immedietly or not? If it is very necessary, then I ask with
what basis I react whether expecting any profit from that. Finally coming to the conclusion it is not selfish act, no expectation out of the action. After all the analysis can u call it this thought came from pure mind.  If there is manonasam, how the action would take place. Here Udai ji would say, be an actor. It if fine
being an actor, and doing the actions, without any expectation, and doing samarpanam the result to God. is the pure mind? Hope you would explain.


Ramanaduli
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: silentgreen on January 13, 2010, 06:29:22 PM
With pure mind, the pure consciousness is always felt as the substratum in the heart, irrespective of whether thoughts are there or not. In the language of the devotee, the whisper of the divine is felt in the heart.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 13, 2010, 08:47:14 PM
Dear I,

Observe this?
Essentially what i am presenting is straight forward. that which is of the mind will remain in the mind. that which is outside the mind will remain outside the mind! There is nothing anyone can do abt this.

Actually, there is nothing outside the mind and of the mind, what you see as outside the mind and inside the mind is just the same mind. There is just the mind alone. There is nothing anyone can do about it - Very true. Now this is actually the essence of Sharanagati. A sense of giving up. The mind realises its real nature, the nature of its limitedness. This is the sense of Humbleness.

Now, here is where, we have to apply what Krishna has said in the Gita:

tad viddhi pranipatena
pariprasnena sevaya
upadeksyanti te jnanam
jnaninas tattva-darsinah

Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth.

This kind of submissive is attained only after realising the limitedness of the 'I' thoughts. This is in reality true Sharanagati. A sense of bowing down due to its own limitedness.

Bhagawan, has explained very clearly, to exactly the same question you raised:

"That which makes the enquiry is the ego, the 'I' about which the enquiry is made is also Ego, as a result of enquiry, Ego ceases to exist and only Self is found to exist"

This ego has to cease! The maximum the ego, mind can do is only attain the realisation of its own reality - Limitedness.

This 'I' has to merge, Bhagawan has said:

"The Mind will merge only by self enquiry" It has to merge - it has to cease

He further says:

"Where the 'I' merges, another entity emerges as 'I-I' of its own accord, that is the perfect Self" and not this 'I'

which is what I observed, that even though 'I' reads Ribhu Gita, Ashtavarka Gita, Avadhoota Gita and keeps affirming that it is Brahman etc... is still only a thought to it right? other wise it will not tell that thoughts cant affect it for it itiself is the very thought.

"Where the mind merges, another entity emerges" itself very clearly says that Mind has to go - this is Manonasam. When this happens, in its place the perfect self is found. And when the Perfect Self arises as 'I-I' there you - Mind as not there to see the perfect Self - this is the essence of manonasam - this again is just a thought to the mind now.

This mind cannot know that perfect Self. For it has to cease for perfect Self to arise in its place.

This is what Bhagawan has said:

"First the Self sees itself as objects, then the Self sees itself as void, and finally, it sees itself as Self, here there is no seeing as seeing is being"

So when, mind reads Ribhu Gita, Avadhoota Gita, it is just is still seeing the Self as a perfect being, as some state(First the Self sees itself as objects), then on attaining its reality of its realisation of its limitedness, it sees void(then the Self sees itself as void):  
Quote
There is nothing anyone can do abt this.

and then, it has to now cease to exist. it has to get merged for the perfect Self to arise as 'I-I' which it will not be there to know! for here there is no seeing as it is being. When Mind ceases, Pefect self is (and finally, it sees itself as Self, here there is no seeing as seeing is being)

Salutations to Sri Ramana




Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Subramanian.R on January 14, 2010, 12:50:37 PM
To add something to the already long back and forth volley of
posts:-

This is from Day by Day of Devaraja Mudaliar.

On 2.1.1946, Mr. Joshi has submitted what Bhagavan calls a question
paper and Bhagavan answered the same.

Bhagavan:  First about the Jnani's doing work, without the mind.
"You imagine that one cannot do work if the mind is killed.  Why
do you suppose that it is the mind alone that can make one do work?
There may be other causes which can also produce activity.  Look
at this clock, for instance.  It is working without a mind.  Again
suppose we say that the Jnani has a mind.  His mind is very different from the ordinary man's mind.  He is like the man who is hearing a story told with his mind all on some distant object.  The mind rid of vasanas, though doing work, is not doing work.  On the
other hand, if the mind is full of vasanas, it is doing work, even if the body is not active or moving.

(Source:  As indicated above)

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 14, 2010, 04:52:26 PM
Dear Subramanian.R,

This is true and
only if experienced this can be understood. But if trying to explain this is of no avail. As we see in these and earlier discussions.
One must experience - the doing without doing, the doing without thoughts. It's like a bird singing without thinking, flying without thinking before/after actual event. The bird just is.
An event happens without thought at any level - this is a fact, thinking arises before/after event - this is a fact as long as thinker exists. But in reality an action can happen even without thinking before/after an actual event. It just happens. And not even iota of any kind of entity is involved. It is called non-doership. Again, like baby is being fed but is not aware that 'I am drinking a milk', though there can be an awareness that he is being fed.

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 14, 2010, 08:03:07 PM
Dear I,

But in reality an action can happen even without thinking before/after an actual event. It just happens. And not even iota of any kind of entity is involved. It is called non-doership. Again, like baby is being fed but is not aware that 'I am drinking a milk', though there can be an awareness that he is being fed.

What you say is just as good as the Swapna (State) or dream state. Its like some events take place in your dream, themselves involuntarily, where You are not here physicallly, but events take place.

So long You are able to perceive the so called events, the perceiver has to be enquired, who is perceiving these events, who is it that is perceiving that these events are taking place without even thinking and doing? That is very important!

It is just like a sleep with dream, you are there before you slept and then you are there when you wake up. This is just as good as a dream.

The subtle thing to notice here is that, the Mind/Ego/Thought/I is trying to identify a way out that events take place themselves without actually its own involvement so that It - Mind/Thoughts/Ego/I can just continue for ever.

These things, which the mind says - thinking without thinking, doing without doing, etc... How is it able to know this? is not there an entity who is cognising all these events? this entity is mind/thoughts/ego/I itself. Otherwise, how is it able to tell that events are taking place without actually any involvement? In the end what is the real consequence to the entity who is able to cognise all these so called - Thinking without Thinking, Doing without Doing, etc...

What does it matter to the entity whether the events take place or not? how does it affect it? what does it want out of these events? Even if it is involuntary? So long it is able to cognise these involuntary events, there is Mind/Thoughts/Ego/I - difference - Witness and Witnessed.

In the end these are just thoughts themselves again, Thoughts just generate thoughts after thoughts so that it can continue by creating many hypotheses in such ways so that it can remain a witness for ever - as in keep watching movies for ever, keep watching thoughts, thoughts watching thoughts!

Who is this entity? Who is the 'I' to whom all these thoughts are arising? Who am I

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 14, 2010, 11:56:51 PM
At any level you are right. No matter how many times you try to speak out, it is only on mental level.
You talk only about dream and waking state, but how about deep sleep? Who is there aware of Itself? Can That be answered?

This question - who am i? is the purpose of these appearances you talk about. This question is the purpose of existence itself. That's why there is existence as such. It is a cause of it.
The point to be grasped here is that the witnessing happens without any effort on your part. That is - there is no-one in control to make witnessing happen or not happen.
There is no entity as you would like it to be and then disappear or whatever.
The problem arises when the center is formed out of thoughts which feels itself because it borrows the subjectivity of Absolute (which again is You). Thoughts can't know You as world can't know senses. Only you can know thoughts. And in reality you are That always which appears as This (world).
No-thing ever is, then the Knowledge comes. That's why you know that you know.
And because of Knowledge Self-realization (as it is called) is Possible.
It means that the question who am I? can only be answered through ever expanding Knowledge but not in a limited sense. An answer can't be defined in limited sense of mind.
Now we ask, to whom this Knowledge comes? And it will be known that to no-one it comes. And it needs not come because You yourself IS the Knoweldge. You are whole, complete and not separate like you imagine yourself to be. You are That.
What about individual self which is body-mind-intellect-ego which we consider to be us? This so called 'entity' is nothing more but a reflection Which is caused by Consciousness shining on bundle of experiences-impressions making up our minds. If experiences of past were positive our minds will be peaceful, if negative then our minds will be resentful and despairing. Thus, the ignorance is mental and emotional that arises because of identification with the mind i.e. the past. To experience and know our true, immediate, self-evident nature, the mirror of the mind should be clean and undistorted.
What is to be done? We can refer to shankaracharya work and conclude that:
To purify the mind we need to become mindful of Self ignorance by watching our thoughts, monitoring our feelings, and observing our speech.  After examining a particular misconception discard it as “not Self.”  The verse calls for “constant” practice of Knowledge because Self ignorance continually manifests in our Consciousness as the four following limiting concepts, major limbs on the tree of non-apprehension from which myriad minor branches grow.
These self-limiting concepts, referred to as “not Self” are:
1. I am the body
2. I am the mind
3. I am the intellect
4. I am the Ego

It does not mean that an entity must do something. It means that Knowledge works on Knowledge. That is all.
Everything bathes itself in Awareness which is all-round, available any time, whether you assume yourself as waker, dreamer or sleeper.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 15, 2010, 07:59:55 AM
Dear I,

I/mind agrees to most of what you have conveyed in your post, but I would like to point out the subtle-ness of the ego/mind...

The point to be grasped here is that the witnessing happens without any effort on your part. That is - there is no-one in control to make witnessing happen or not happen. There is no entity as you would like it to be and then disappear or whatever.

What I/mind is tying to point out is this - "The point to be grasped here is that the witnessing happens without any effort on your part." - it is again the same mind/ego which is concluding thus? please see introspect? Thoughts are building upon itself. It is only the mind/thoughts. It itself concludes that - "there is no-one in control to make witnessing happen or not happen." and again it is the same I/mind that concludes - "There is no entity as you would like it to be and then disappear or whatever."

Quote
The problem arises when the center is formed out of thoughts which feels itself because it borrows the subjectivity of Absolute (which again is You). Thoughts can't know You as world can't know senses. Only you can know thoughts. And in reality you are That always which appears as This (world).

Is it not again the same mind/thought/ego/I that is even concluding how the problem arising, and is it not itself giving out a reason - "when the center is formed out of thoughts which feels itself because it borrows the subjectivity of Absolute (which again is You). Thoughts can't know You as world can't know senses. Only you can know thoughts. And in reality you are That always which appears as This (world)."

By this what is happening is that by giving out such possible probable conclusions, the mind/ego/I forgets itself. Who is the 'I' that is coming out to such conclussions? This is more important than to analyse why the problem is arising. The very entity enquiring is Mind itself.

Quote
And because of Knowledge Self-realization (as it is called) is Possible.
It means that the question who am I? can only be answered through ever expanding Knowledge but not in a limited sense. An answer can't be defined in limited sense of mind.

all these points are so subtle, it is the same mind/thought that is concluding "It means that the question who am I? can only be answered through ever expanding Knowledge but not in a limited sense. An answer can't be defined in limited sense of mind." all though it is aware of its own limitedness -  "An answer can't be defined in limited sense of mind." So on one had it is aware that it cant know but still persists indulges in more and more thoughts.

Quote
Now we ask, to whom this Knowledge comes? And it will be known that to no-one it comes. And it needs not come because You yourself IS the Knoweldge. You are whole, complete and not separate like you imagine yourself to be. You are That.

Is it not the same mind/thought/I that concludes - "And it will be known that to no-one it comes. And it needs not come because You yourself IS the Knoweldge. You are whole, complete and not separate like you imagine yourself to be. You are That. "

It is the Mind/ego/I/thought itself that is saying that "You are That" - By saying thus, the mind/thought/I/ego is just able to continue for eternity - this is the agenda of Mind/thought.

Quote
What about individual self which is body-mind-intellect-ego which we consider to be us? This so called 'entity' is nothing more but a reflection Which is caused by Consciousness shining on bundle of experiences-impressions making up our minds. If experiences of past were positive our minds will be peaceful, if negative then our minds will be resentful and despairing. Thus, the ignorance is mental and emotional that arises because of identification with the mind i.e. the past. To experience and know our true, immediate, self-evident nature, the mirror of the mind should be clean and undistorted.
What is to be done? We can refer to shankaracharya work and conclude that:
To purify the mind we need to become mindful of Self ignorance by watching our thoughts, monitoring our feelings, and observing our speech.  After examining a particular misconception discard it as “not Self.”  The verse calls for “constant” practice of Knowledge because Self ignorance continually manifests in our Consciousness as the four following limiting concepts, major limbs on the tree of non-apprehension from which myriad minor branches grow.
These self-limiting concepts, referred to as “not Self” are:
1. I am the body
2. I am the mind
3. I am the intellect
4. I am the Ego

Is it not again the same mind/thoughts that is working out some answers here? "This so called 'entity' is nothing more but a reflection Which is caused by Consciousness shining on bundle of experiences-impressions making up our minds. If experiences of past were positive our minds will be peaceful, if negative then our minds will be resentful and despairing. Thus, the ignorance is mental and emotional that arises because of identification with the mind i.e. the past. To experience and know our true, immediate, self-evident nature, the mirror of the mind should be clean and undistorted."

Quote
What is to be done? We can refer to shankaracharya work and conclude that:
To purify the mind we need to become mindful of Self ignorance by watching our thoughts, monitoring our feelings, and observing our speech.  After examining a particular misconception discard it as “not Self.”  The verse calls for “constant” practice of Knowledge because Self ignorance continually manifests in our Consciousness as the four following limiting concepts, major limbs on the tree of non-apprehension from which myriad minor branches grow.
These self-limiting concepts, referred to as “not Self” are:
1. I am the body
2. I am the mind
3. I am the intellect
4. I am the Ego

Please see, why the need is arising "What is to be done?"  to whom is it arising? is it not arising to the mind itself? so mind itself is deciding that it should read Adi Shankaaracharya, etc...

It is again the Mind/Ego/thought/I that examines so called misconceptions and discards thoughts as "Not-Self"

What is most important is that the thought forgets that it itself is the Mind/Thought/I instead what it does is go externally, analyse, examines scriptures etc,.. and arrives at come conclusions etc... so that it can keep going.

The questions/answers themselves are the problem! The Mind/thought/I/Ego is nothing but questions and answers.

And it is important to know that the one that one who will again be trying to stop these questions and answers is just thoughts/mind itself.

Please see, how subtly, the Mind/thoughts/Ego is going outwards. This reply when you read is again thoughts/mind.

The only duty the Mind or desire or doing it can do is that to stick to only this alone:

"Who am 'I' to whom these thoughts are arising?" is the only thing to be done after the mind/thoughts/I realises its own reality - its limitedness.

the maximum the mind/thought/ego can do is to realise its own limitedness and remain humble and this is true Sharanaagati! When this has been realised, the very need to anslyse further will end for the Mind/thoughts and then Mind/thoughts will humbly stick to "Who am I to whom these thoughts are arising to?"

All these are all again thoughts/Mind.

I/Mind/Ego/Thought admit that my responding to these thoughts, I/Mind/thoughts are just building further on thoughts. All these questions and answers are just a fuel for thoughts.

"Who am I to whom these thoughts are arising?"

Salutations to Sri Ramana

Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: amiatall on January 15, 2010, 12:43:52 PM
The subtlety of which you speak is clear as the sky. But there is no other way to communicate. (there is heart-to-heart).
Now, let us remember a few different forum posts back when we started to interact with each other, it has been said:
"..Yes. But we can play with concepts all we want."
And so far we have been doing this all the time. And will do so for some time. Until an understanding will arise that limited will stay limited and unlimited will stay unlimited, in realization only an interaction between limited and unlimited will be grasped.
Why discussion at all? Because you have a concept of something ( a conclusion ) and with one you discuss has a concept of something (a conclusion), and this conclusion is "how the things must be". But it will not be so and it isn't. Minds nature is to conclude. Who concludes Mind or Self? The answer is obvious. To whom answer is obvious or not obvious? This is too obvious.
This is a circle.
Now, that which sees this Mind in play is not a Thought. This is not to be understood, this is a Fact to be Aware Of. The ultimate Seer never was a thought and never will be a thought. You cannot be a thought.
Subject and Object plays out a game in Your Light.
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 15, 2010, 01:36:40 PM
Dear I,

Nothing much to contest in your pot. Just that:

Now, that which sees this Mind in play is not a Thought. This is not to be understood, this is a Fact to be Aware Of. The ultimate Seer never was a thought and never will be a thought. You cannot be a thought.

Subject and Object plays out a game in Your Light.

My intention is to not keep the cycle going on and on... It is endless. But still, what ever fact it may be, that - "Now, that which sees this Mind in play is not a Thought. This is not to be understood, this is a Fact to be Aware Of. The ultimate Seer never was a thought and never will be a thought. You cannot be a thought. " What I say is that - "Now, that which sees this Mind in play is not a Thought." still remains a thought now! The fact to be aware of it is just knowledge. That the ultimate seer was never a thought and never remains a thought is knowledge.

So long you are aware of so called ultimate seer, it is just thought. As awareness, what is there to to be aware off?

Who has this knowledge? is it the Self or You? Does the Self require any knowledge? but then who is having the knowledge of the ultimate seer then? it is Mind/Thought/I - It is just a thought.

Thoughts are ignorance and Knowledge also is ignorance. because both knowledge and ignorance belong only to the Mind.

The Self is neither Knowledge nor ignorance. In Nirvana Shatkam, Shankara sings:

Neither I am Mantra nor I am the Veda (knowledge)

The very attempt is going outwards.

Bhagawan has said:

"Outwardness of mind is ignorance and its inwards in happiness."

and even if it be that mind has the knowledge and fact about the ultimate seer, is actually Outwardness of mind. Mind inwards is Attempt-less, thoughtless.

Thoughts be it even knowledge of Brahman is still but a thought. Has to go. has to cease.

Just Be.

Any thought that springs up is taking you away from Tat. and if a thought springs up, we have to enquire "who am I to whom these thoughts arising?

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 15, 2010, 01:49:45 PM
Dear I,
:)

How can anything ... thought or what ever ... take me away from myself ???!
I cannot be taken away from the Self ... no matter how many thoughts come or go!

Just that the mind/ego/I will persist, continue. Where can you go?

The one that is saying - "How can anything ... thought or what ever ... take me away from myself ???!
I cannot be taken away from the Self ... no matter how many thoughts come or go!" is just the mind

The one that is asking this is just Mind/thoughts itself.

Please see why this is popping up? this is the one and only agenda of Mind! to keep going on and on.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: The Witness of the Movie
Post by: Nagaraj on January 15, 2010, 01:57:18 PM
Dear I,

How can anything ... thought or what ever ... take me away from myself ???!
I cannot be taken away from the Self ... no matter how many thoughts come or go!

Ideally, what you asked should be the question of the Self? But does the self ask question? Is it not the Mind here that is asking this?

Salutations to Sri Ramana