The Forum dedicated to Arunachala and Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi

Ramana Maharshi => The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi => Topic started by: ramana_maharshi on June 16, 2010, 01:15:52 PM

Title: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 16, 2010, 01:15:52 PM
D.: Is not destiny due to past karma?

M.: If one is surrendered to God, God will look to it.

D.: This being God’s dispensation, how does God undo it?

M.: All are in Him only.

D.: How is God to be seen?

M.: Within. If the mind is turned inward God manifests as inner consciousness.



D.: God is in all - in all the objects we see around us. They say we should see God in all of them.

M.: God is in all and in the seer. Where else can God be seen? He cannot be found outside. He should be felt within. To see the objects, mind is necessary. To conceive God in them is a mental operation. But that is not real. The consciousness within, purged of the mind, is felt as God.


D.: There are, say, beautiful colours. It is a pleasure to watch them.We can see God in them.

M.: They are all mental conceptions.

D.: There are more than colours. I mentioned colours only as an example.

M.: They are also similarly mental.

D.: There is the body also - the senses and the mind. The soul makes use of all these for knowing things.

M.: The objects or feelings or thoughts are all mental conceptions. The mind rises after the rise of the I-thought or the ego. Wherefrom does the ego rise? From the abstract consciousness or Pure intelligence.

D.: Is it the soul?

M.: Soul, mind or ego are mere words. There are no entities of the kind.Consciousness is the only truth.

D.: Then that consciousness cannot give any pleasure.

M.: Its nature is Bliss. Bliss alone is. There is no enjoyer to enjoy pleasure.Enjoyer and joy - both merge in it.

Source: TALKS WITH SRI RAMANA MAHARSHI Book

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Subramanian.R on June 16, 2010, 02:03:24 PM

When an ajnani sees the world and its colours and contours, he
gets immersed in them and forget the Self within.  Whereas a
Jnani sees within him and experiences the Self.  After the experience,
permanently abiding within, even if he looks at the colours and contours, he sees only God or the Self.

When Muruganar was in the Asramam, someone wanted him to come
to Chidambaram, with him.  Muruganar said:  What can I see there?
My eyes have lost the powers to see anything else.  I am experiencing the Hall of Consciousness within.  Where is the need to see Tiru Chitrambalam (Hall of Consciousness where Nataraja dances).

Arunachala Siva.

 
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 16, 2010, 06:14:34 PM
Dear srkudai and others,

I would like to discuss this concept of mithya a little more in small steps.
What are the characteristics of mithya?
Is it the transient nature of mithya (compared to satya) you are highlighting, or do you have some other characteristics also in mind?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 16, 2010, 06:30:35 PM
This very conversation or discussion about Mithya is itself a Mithya... and Asat...

Thats a paradox///   :-X

Bhagavan would ask to enquire into the I

 :)
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 16, 2010, 07:47:30 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
I don't think Bhagavan will mind the prattles of children. By discussion sometimes things gets clearer.

Dear srkudai,
Let's go by those definitions.

Now let us elaborate one more step.
The horns of a hare, does not exist in the external world, but exist within the mind (as imagination etc) for a finite time period. Since horns of a hare does not exist in the external world, that is why it is not available for perception. So we can say, Asat does not exist in the external world but exists within the mind (as imagination) for a finite time period.

Mithya is something which does not exist in the external world but appears to be existing in the external world, like a mirage in the desert.

But this definition of Mithya does not suit spiritual experiences, because spiritual experiences often does not appear to exist in the external world. For example when a person sees light within during meditation with eyes and ears closed, he does not attend to the external world.

So bringing the term external world seems to have brought some distortions.
So we need to elaborate the term "non-existent" further.
Non-existent where? Is it non-existent in the external world?
 (the horns of a hare example seems to point to non-existence in the external world)
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 16, 2010, 08:37:26 PM
Dear silentgreen Garu,

Five Names Of Maya In Vedanta Chintamani are described in below link

http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=4960.0 (http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=4960.0)

Sri Sundara Chaitanya Swami garu says,

Scriptures tells us to enquire the relationship between god and world but it does not tell that god created the world and etc etc... it is like relationship between pot and mud. mud is god and pot is world. So pot is neither true not false but it is dependent on mud. because pot can break any moment and finally only mud is remaining.

Mithya means it is dependent on other thing like pot which is dependent on mud.

Ideally there is no relation between pot and mud as pot is nothing but mud and there are no 2 entities to have relationship.Similarly between god and world.

As per bhagavad gita lord krishna tells everyone/everything is in him and not otherwise.waves belong to ganges but not otherwise.

Below are bhagavan ramana's views regarding maya...

Quote
Talk 144.

Mr. Prakasa Rao: What is the root-cause of maya?

M.: What is maya?

D.: Maya is wrong knowledge, illusion.

M.: For whom is the illusion? There must be one to be deluded.Illusion is ignorance. The ignorant Self sees the objects according to you. When the objects are not themselves present how can maya exist? Maya is ya ma (maya is what is not). What remains over is the true Self. If you say that you see the objects, or if you say that you do not know the Real Unity, then are there two selves, one the knower and the other the knowable object. No one will admit of two selves in himself. The awakened man says that he himself was in deep slumber but not aware. He does not say that the sleeper was different from the present one. There is only one Self. That Self is always aware. It is changeless. There is nothing but the Self.

Another time guru ramana says,

Quote
Talk 17.

D.: What is illusion?

M.: To whom is the illusion? Find it out. Then illusion will vanish.Generally people want to know about illusion and do not examine to whom it is. It is foolish. Illusion is outside and unknown. But the seeker is considered to be known and is inside. Find out what is immediate, intimate, instead of trying to find out what is distant and unknown.

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 16, 2010, 11:47:45 PM
An actor who has set out to enact a character in a drama, forgets that he is the actor and continues to play the character thinking it to be Himself. This is Mithya. Anything else that is associated with this character, the happennings everything though it seems real, is all Mithya. all the incidents around that character seems so real, but it is just 'enacting' and not real. This is Mithya. Forgeting oneself, the Actor, thinking the character to be real, which is actually 'Not Real' or 'Not True' is is Asat.

In our daily life, we are actuallly playing so many roles, so many characters, at home we play the role of son/daughter/brother/sister/father/mother etc... and at work, we play the role of administrator, manager, programmer, etc... and as a friend, soulmate, husband, wife etc...

Life is such a big cinema made in such a massive scale, so many roles, each one of us are super hero, actor, enacting so many roles, characters.

We just stay put in one of those characters always... depending on our thinking and emotional pattern - as a wife, husband, friend, btother... what ever.. as the case may be. your current thinking would determine your character your are playing.

All these roles are Mithya, they appear to be real, but we are none of these roles, characters! are we? am I a husband? am I a wife? am I a friend? no... I am beyond all these...

Now, since all the drama happens around only those roles and not you, they dont belong to you, the Role, character is Asat, its not real. After all days hard work, when we go to sleep, all alone, nobody by our side, who are we? who am I then? am I any of those characters? if yes then which of those character is going to sleep? is it husband? wife? daughter? son? brother? administrato? manager? friend? ?? who is going to sleep?

none of these are going to sleep...

what is Asat is all those roles we play, all those characters are really unreal.

I am the one, on whose presence, all these are happening.

I am that Sat - the unambiguous, eternal silent witness without any judgement. Just that awareness of truth. Awareness, Consciusness. Continues, Bliss.

That I am
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 08:32:10 AM
Request all to give brief and to the point answers only in a few sentences.
You may take an idea from a scripture or a saint but you need not tell who said that.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 09:18:41 AM
I am summarizing the flow of discussion to avoid diversion. Let the discussion continue in small steps only. Please reply to the immediate next step or if you have any objections with the premises itself. Premises if found faulty can be altered as the discussion continues. I am defining the term external world for clarity.

Premises:
External world: World a person perceives through the senses. If two persons are there, one sleeping and the other waking, the sleeping person has no external world during the period of sleep while the waking person has an external world. The dreams of the sleeping person will not be considered as external world but will be termed as "dream world" of that person (which exist upto the period of the dream). Similarly a person in deep meditation not perceiving anything through the senses will not have any external world during the period of deep meditation.

We started with the two definitions:
1. Asat: What is non-existent and not available to perception: e.g. horns of a hare.
2. Mithya: What is non-existent but appears to be present, like a mirage. It is also changing and time dependent.

Further Analysis:
Now the next part of the analysis is on the term "non-existent". Is existence or non-existence as used in the definition of "Asat" and "Mithya" with respect to the external world only? Or does it include imaginations of mind, dreams etc also (i.e anything which is also not part of the external world)?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 17, 2010, 09:34:34 AM
Dear Silent Green garu,

Mithya means a fantasy; an unreal, misleading appearance beheld in dream or hallucination

According to my personal view you cannot say it is 'non-existing'.  It is neither 'existing' or 'non-existing'.

As i told earlier Sri Sundara Chaitanya Swami garu says,

Scriptures tells us to enquire the relationship between god and world but it does not tell that god created the world and etc etc... it is like relationship between pot and mud. mud is god and pot is world. So pot is neither true not false but it is dependent on mud. because pot can break any moment and finally only mud is remaining.

Mithya means which is dependent on other thing like pot which is dependent on mud.

Ideally there is no relation between pot and mud as pot is nothing but mud and there are no 2 entities to have relationship.Similarly between god and world.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Subramanian.R on June 17, 2010, 10:02:42 AM

Dear silentgreen,

Mithya is seemingly real but really unreal.  The rope appears as
a snake in a dim light.  For sometime, you are afraid.  Then
someone brings a torch light and shows the light and you find
it to be only rope.  So is the mirage.  As you go near the mirage,
you find that there is no water.  Only the road.

Asatya is ever unreal.  It is explained by similes like the horns
of a hare or a child of a barren woman.  These horns and children
do not remain your mind at all.  How can one conceptualize the
horns for a hare?  The very term maladi in Tamil or barren woman, says that she has no issues.  How can one conceptualize the child for her?

Satya is all time real, and nothing but real.  Even in a dark room, a little child, if I call: Where are you Hari, answers I am here. It needs no external light for the child to find out that He is.

Arunachala Siva.           
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 12:16:25 PM
Dear prasanth_ramana_maharshi & Subramanian.R
You gave two characteristics of Mithya:
1. An appearance or fantasy
2. Dependence on other things like pot and mud

Further Analysis:
An appearance or fantasy or impossibility (like hare with horns) can be considered to exist for a finite time within the mind as imagination. They do not consume space but consume time.
Pot is made up of mud. If matter and mind are mithya, what are they made up of?

Dear srkudai,
You gave the following characteristic of Mithya:
- What is in the mind is Mithya. Mind means perception.

Further Analysis:
Does perception include only the perception through the five senses? Where is its boundary?
When a meditator loses body consciousness in meditation, is he/she still perceiving?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 02:54:24 PM
The possibility that a rope can be mistaken for a snake shows that a "phenomenon" exists which can give rise to this error. There is a difference between nothing happens and something happens whether that something be illusion, delusion or whatever. Each individual magic of a magician can be an illusion, but that a magic show is going on cannot be said to be non-existent.

If yesterday we had a dream, we cannot say that the dream was non-existent. The dream took place and it ended. Only the dream world which I saw yesterday is non-existent today. If the dream itself was non-existent, we will say "yesterday I did not have a dream".

Suppose we have a dream that there is a bag of gold under a tree. We go there and find that there is none. We never repeat going there anymore. But even after a person becomes jnani, he continues to engage in the world. If hunger, thirst etc are non-existent (mithya), why does the jnani continue to have food and drinks?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 03:41:42 PM
The possibility that the rope is mistaken for a snake exists because of existence of knowledge of snake and ideas about it. Even the ideas about happenning or not happening is all because of some already existing knowledge of events and similarly about the illusions of a magician.

Existence of Mithya basically is because of some already preconceived knowledge about the subject matters.

There for who is the one that has been possessing all these knowledges? That is the repository of all knowledges sum of all total past lives of ours. Who is that 'I' then?

That 'I' is itself found to be Mithya!

Mithya exists only for Mithya !!!!!!

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 04:05:49 PM
What about Arunachala mountain?
Is it also a rope mistaken for a snake?
Is it also a mithya existing for a mithya?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 04:17:06 PM
Arunachala, is verily our own Self. It is reflection of our True Self.

The very first Shloka in Aksharamana Malai goes thus:

Arunachalamena Ahameninaippavar Ahattaiveraruppay Arunachala.

1. Thou dost root out the ego of those who meditate on Thee in the heart, O Arunachala!
2. Thou dost root out the ego of those who dwell on their (spiritual) identity with Thee, O Arunachala!

Eventually even rope has to go. The Rope which is mistaken for a snake is verily our selves - our false self.

Even that a Rope is existing is also a knowledge.

That I real Self is beyond any description, attributeless. There is absolutely no second to it, to even compare. For even for knowledge, we need a second to make it as a knowledge.

It itself is.


 
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 04:19:47 PM
Arunachala, is our true Self. Sri Bhagavan has said that our Self is our True Guru. Arunachala, as our Self is a grace of our True Self, which keeps reminding us about our true nature. It is reminding us to descard the robes of all the character we are playing and just remain as Self. When we really descard all roles we are playing, what role do we have to play? That is when we will be truly naked. Spatika!

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 17, 2010, 04:22:01 PM
Dear silentgreen garu,

Quote
If hunger, thirst etc are non-existent (mithya), why does the jnani continue to have food and drinks?

We should not mix up dream state and waking state.

As bhagavan says,Ideally waking and dream states are same and just as in dream state where we try to fill our hunger with dream food in waking state he try to fill our hunger with waking food.But as known both waking and dream are not our real nature.

Quote
If yesterday we had a dream, we cannot say that the dream was non-existent. The dream took place and it ended. Only the dream world which I saw yesterday is non-existent today. If the dream itself was non-existent, we will say "yesterday I did not have a dream".

We can surely say that dream was non-existent because all dreams are happening only in mind which itself is temporary as it stays with us in dream/waking states and disappears in deep sleep.


Quote
Pot is made up of mud. If matter and mind are mithya, what are they made up of?

Matter is neither true nor false.matter if known that it is brahman only is true but if seen outside brahman is false.

Sri Adi Sankara Says

a) world is false
b) brahman is real
c) world is brahman


As i told earlier Sri Sundara Chaitanya Swami garu says,

Scriptures tells us to enquire the relationship between god and world but it does not tell that god created the world and etc etc... it is like relationship between pot and mud. mud is god and pot is world. So pot is neither true not false but it is dependent on mud. because pot can break any moment and finally only mud is remaining.

Ideally there is no relation between pot and mud as pot is nothing but mud and there are no 2 entities to have relationship.Similarly between god and world.

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 04:28:13 PM
When the false 'I' is reminded that it is NOT, there arises a tremendous fear of oblivion, of non existence. The false 'I' does not want to let go its identity - the characters it has been playing. It cannot imagine itself without any attribute. This fear keeps the false 'I' going.

This is the real fear of Death, the scriptures talk about, not the clinical death. The death of 'I'.

When Bhagavan faced the death experience, he was down with some fever and he faced it upfront and realised the true Self. There was no more necessity for Him to play any more roles, the false 'I' just dropped of like a dry leaf in a tree.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 04:49:22 PM
and moreover,

1.
Quote
If hunger, thirst etc are non-existent (mithya), why does the jnani continue to have food and drinks?
2.
Quote
If yesterday we had a dream, we cannot say that the dream was non-existent. The dream took place and it ended. Only the dream world which I saw
    yesterday is non-existent today. If the dream itself was non-existent, we will say "yesterday I did not have a dream".
3.
Quote
Pot is made up of mud. If matter and mind are mithya, what are they made up of?

all these only exists on the seer's mind and never for a Jnani. The Jnani only sees Self in everything (infact, there is no everything at all) The Jnani sees only Self and Self alone. This "Everything" exist only in the Seer's mind

For a Jnani, the Seer and Seen are just One as Self

So long there is a Seer, so long there would be a Seen.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 17, 2010, 05:19:08 PM
well said udai garu and Nagaraj garu.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 06:06:55 PM
[q]The dream was there as long as you were seeing it. This world too is there as long as you are seeing it![/q]

What is Self Realisation in this scheme? Is it also a part of the dream?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 17, 2010, 06:21:29 PM
Dear SilentGreen garu,

There is an elephant in the forest.The elephant is scared about the Lion in the forest.The Lion has not appeared before the elephant in recent times. It was once sighted and the elephant became totally afraid of lion. One night, the elephant dreamt of the Lion, it got scared even its dream about the Lion. It woke up with a huge cry.There was not Lion. Only it was there. The elephant got self realized.

All are dreams. But unlike the elephant's dream, our dream about Bhagavan Ramana is a pleasant dream. But this dream should also end one day, when you would really wake up.That waking is the realization.

...After an ‘I’ rises, everything rises… -- Ulladu Narpadu verse 23

Bhagavan Ramana used to tell one story:

Once two persons were sleeping in a hall.Both were poor.During the sleep, one man was dreaming.He dreamt that he is a very rich person and he has stacked all the gold and currency in a cupboard.And a thief comes and takes away all the gold and currency, and runs away.The dreaming man shouts in shock: "O! the thief is running away with all my wealth.

Please catch him, please catch him...."

The other man woke up. He was not dreaming anything, neither the thief, nor the gold and currency. What shall he do? Will he run out to the front yard to catch the thief? Will he rush to the police station to complain? He will simply wake that wailing man from sleep and dream.

The Guru is like the man who wakes us, the dreaming men, up.The only difference is that the Guru is within your Heart.

The state where "I-thought" is not there, even in a trice,is Swarupam. This is called as Silence. I am Swarupam.The world is Swarupam. Isvara is Swarupam. All are Siva-Swarupam."

When we are not with Self, then we are with dreams. so, to contact us, It is something like Ramana comes to our dream by taking a form of a human body and says to us please come out of dreams...

More details in below link

http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=3713.msg0#new (http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=3713.msg0#new)
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 06:22:30 PM
Who is the one that is seeking Self Realisation here? is it not the false 'I' again? Does the Self ever require to realise itself ?

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 17, 2010, 07:09:54 PM
Quote
But this dream should also end one day, when you would really wake up.That waking is the realization.

Today I woke up from yesterday's dream. But this is also a dream. Tomorrow when I wake up from today's dream, what is the guarantee that it is again not a dream? How many nested levels of dreams are there? Alternatively what are the indicators that a person is self-realized?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 17, 2010, 08:21:33 PM
Quote
what are the indicators that a person is self-realized?

Silent Green Garu,

Now this is really a very good question.

Few indicators of a self-realised persons according to me

a) They donot find happiness in external objects
b) they live a very simple life and maintain austerity and simplicity.
c) no attachment towards wealth etc
d) for them god/self is only business they are living in this world and nothing else bother's them.
e) they live their life by begging alms if needed also.
f) they renounce "women and gold"
..... list can go on and on

Now it depends on our prarabdha karma to find out self-realised jnanis in this world.

If our prarabdha is good (ofcourse it is good for all members in our forum) then we find real self-realised jnani like guru ramana

If our prarabdha is sick then we may settle in some fake swamiji's (Ex: sex scam hit swami nityananda) feet and ruin our spiritual journey which can demoralise us to great extent.

Now if you show me a guru and ask me whether he is really self-realised or not then my answer is I DONOT KNOW.

Because he may tell you something but he may actually may not implement the same or he may secretly enjoy 'women and gold'  :D


Maybe other members also can give their opinions so that we can have more clear picture regarding this.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 09:12:45 PM
Honestly, the very need to know or find out if one is realised has to end.

Firstly, why do we need such indicators? After all who are we to determine or say ok, Such and such a person has such qualities, He is a Liberated soul.... Why ...

What are we going to gain by knowing whether a person is realised or not?

If he is a realised person, how does it affect us or if he is not realiased person how does it affect us?

There is no need to know if one person is realised at all...

Even for that matter, To me it does not even matter to me whether Sri Ramana Maharshi is realised or not. It is only the pull of love or compassion that is worth looking into.

This entire business of Realisation, etc.. is all only the play of our limited 'I' In the name of realising itself (false 'I') it is just continuing.

Sharanagathi is the only way for this limited I.

The only thing the limited 'I' could do is to just realise its limitedness. That is all.

Salutations to Sri Ramana





Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: amiatall on June 17, 2010, 09:27:25 PM
Who is the one that is seeking Self Realisation here? is it not the false 'I' again? Does the Self ever require to realise itself ?

Are there two Is? One is false and one is true?
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 17, 2010, 09:59:47 PM
"That which makes the enquiry is the Ego; the Self about which the enquiry is made is also is the Ego, as a result of enquiry Ego ceases to be and only Self is found effulgent"

Sri Ramana Maharshi
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: amiatall on June 18, 2010, 12:06:47 AM
I asks I about I and is left as I to shine alone

that's great mystery indeed  ;)
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramanaduli on June 18, 2010, 01:37:31 AM
If it is difficult to find out what is mithya, let us find out which is nithya or true. At least we would not go out of our way. ( That you are)




Ramanaduli
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 18, 2010, 08:18:46 AM
In a dream state you are likely to have dream realisation only...mithya.

A person goes to dream and after waking up says that he met a sage, did penance and became self-realised. His wife congratulates him and prints a certificate for the dream realisation. The wife encourages him to get some more certificates in future. That way her husband's ascetic tendencies will be satisfied and he will not leave her. The person said that with proper orientation of the mind he will try to get some more realisations in future dreams.

If this present world is exactly like the dream world, many of us are likely to get dream certificates, may be more than one.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 18, 2010, 10:09:23 AM
Really, subconsciously, most of the spiritual aspirants, even though they may not even be associated with "these" organisations which give enlightenment certificates, they still get caught in Self Realisation, trying to become "Something" which is endless.

Its simply wisdom. It is our nature. Instead we try, try and keep trying....

Sharanagati, thats the best way, Giving up. Just be.

All else will happen. So what for us, the real Self. why to analyse them, everything is perfect and happening perfectly.

quiescence of mind is our nature. Where nothing raises up. whenever 'I' raises up, just get it back in to Self.

The Self being tutor, watchman, police to Self itself. Let not the 'I' escape out. Let it be in the divine prison and let it get merged with Self.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Subramanian.R on June 18, 2010, 10:13:03 AM
Bhagavan Ramana said:

1. The Real is only Atma Swarupam.  The world, jiva and Iswara
(personal god) are all imaginations.  All the three appear and
disappear simultaneously.  Answer to the Question 16 of M.S. Pillai.
(First Part)

Bhagavan Ramana then proceeds to write the second part:

2. Where there is no I-thought even for a trice, is Swarupam.
That is also called Maunam.  Swarupam is the world, Swarupam
is I.  Swarupam is Iswara.  All are Siva Swarupam.

So, Arunachala is only a Hill, when one has got I thought.  When
there is no I thought, where there is total silence, it is Swarupam.

So Aruna Hill appears both ways to a person and a Brahma Jnani.

The same will apply to pot and mud and snake and rope too.
When a person looks at the pot, it is pot.  When a person looks
at the rope, firs it is snake only.  When the 'true knowledge' is
attained, they are mud and rope respectively.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 18, 2010, 10:44:42 AM
Let us end this discussion with the following saying of Sri Ramakrishna:

It is the unwavering conviction of the jnani that Brahman alone is real and the world illusory. All these names and forms are illusory, like a dream. What Brahman is cannot be described. One cannot even say that Brahman is a Person. This is the opinion of the jnanis, the followers of Vedanta philosophy. But the bhaktas accept all the sates of consciousness. They take the waking state to be real also. They don't think the world to be illusory, like a dream. They say that the universe is a manifestation of God's power and glory. God has created all these -- sky, stars, moon, sun, mountains, ocean, men, and animals. They constitute His glory. He is within us, in our hearts. Again, He is outside. The most advanced devotees say that He Himself has become all this -- the twenty-four cosmic principles, the universe, and all living beings. The devotee of God wants to eat the sugar, and not to become the sugar.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 18, 2010, 01:58:23 PM
Quote
The devotee of God wants to eat the sugar, and not to become the sugar.

This is one difference between ramakrishna and ramana maharshi.

Quote
In day-by-day bhagavan tells

They hold that they must exist and God must exist, but how is that possible? It seems that they must all remain for ever doing service in Vaikunta, but how many of them are to do service and where would there be room for all these Vaishnavites?”

Bhagavan said this laughing, and then, after a pause, he added, “On the other hand, Advaita does not mean that a man must always sit in samadhi and never engage in action. Many things are necessary to keep up the life of the body, and action can never be avoided. Nor is bhakti ruled out in Advaita.

Shankara is rightly regarded as the foremost exponent of Advaita, and yet look at the number of shrines he visited (action), and the devotional songs he wrote.”

Anyhow as i said earlier there are N number of school of thoughts in Indian Philosphy where each school tells that their philosphy is best and perfect.

It depends on our nature to choose one school and follow their teachings.

Few famous schools In Indian Philosphy

a) advaita   (adi sankara,ramana maharshi,sri sundara chaitanya swami...)
b) dvaita   ( iscon and in general vaishnavaites)
c) Vishishtadvaita  (  Ramanuja)
d) Dvaitadvaita  ( Nimbarka)
e) Buddhist philosophy
f) Raja Yoga  ( Yoga Sutras of Patanjali)
g) Samkhya  ( Sage Kapila)
h) Cārvāka ( Madhavacharya)  (Carvaka believed there was no afterlife, no life after death)

.... still there are totally atleast > 25 schools

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 18, 2010, 05:46:43 PM
The life of Sri Ramakrishna is a combination of jnana and ecstatic devotion.
Sri Ramakrishna is perhaps the only saint who has worshipped so many Gods and Goddesses together with such a great intensity of devotion and at the same time pursued advaita sadhana. The knowledge of advaita did not reduce the ecstatic bhakti of Sri Ramakrishna. As he was a child of the Divine Mother, so he remained as her child only. Sri Ramakrishna's devotion for Sri Krishna reached the height of Mahabhava, the highest devotional stage of Bhakti mentioned in the Vaishnava literature. It is said that Sri Radha, Sri Chaitanya and Sri Ramakrishna are the only three who has reached the Mahabhava. Listening to scriptures of Shiva used to take Sri Ramakrishna to such deep samadhi as if he will never come back. So he often told the devotee to chant stotras of Devi to bring the mind down.

In a single life Sri Ramakrishna had the vision of Divine Mother, Sri Krishna, Lord Shiva, Sri Radha, Sri Chaitanya and Nithyananda, Sri Rama, Jesus Christ, Buddha and many more. And combine it with Advaita. Sri Ramakrishna is a combination of the essence of all major religions and sects.

To understand Sri Ramakrishna one has to have a devotion as transparent as pure water which is at the same time fathomless, on which any Gods and Goddesses can be imprinted. It is equally amenable to bhakti and jnana. Bhagavan Ramana used to walk all by himself till the end, but Sri Ramakrishna always had an attendent; for his moods were varied, "Bhava Sagara", and anytime his mind used to surge to samadhi losing all sense of external world. He once fell down during samadhi and injured his arm.

Many have slighted the visions of Sri Ramakrishna, including Narendranath himself in the beginning. Who can fathom such mysteries? Sri Ramakrishna continued to have visions even after Advaita realisation. And many of his visions used to come true. He was Brahman Himself with both Nirguna and Saguna aspects, who sang and danced in ecstasy seeing His own nature. And he freely shared that ecstasy with others. Many have stopped short to describe Brahman (being indescribable) but Sri Ramakrishna described Brahman in so many different ways.

The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna is a veritable nectar of devotion and knowledge ... Kathamrita, the nectar of words.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 18, 2010, 06:05:32 PM
There is one saying in Tamizh, by Tirumoolar I suppose, Please correct me if I may be wrong.

"Arindadu chiridalavu Alavu, Ariyaadadu Ulagalavu" What we know is just very little, and what is unknown is as much/big as this universe.

Thats why Sri Thyagaraj sang, "Endaro Mahanubhavulu"

general meaning of the song goes thus:

In this gem of a poem, Thyagaraja, described the greatness of the devotees through the ages. He pays his salutations to the great men who live in all the ages, A yogi attains and enjoys paramananda by reaching the stage of samadhi when in the course of sahasra chakra the power of kundalam and maheswara are joined  together from where at flood of nectar is released. In the soundarya Lahiri , Shankara Bhagwat Sahesrarey praises ambal as “Padma Sahahasi, Padya Vihase”. True devotees are persons who have attained this stage.

Rama is handsome like manmada, He has a majestic walk, and we should see him clearly. Those who are engaged in Samagana should do Rama's bhajan through music based on ragam, bhava and laya, The poet says that devotion means to surrender you lotus like mind at his feet,

We should understand that paramatma lives in all the living things and therefore we should live with love and friendship. We should understand the meaning and greatness of the religion after careful study and praise the glory of Rama with a peaceful mind There will be many men, Who knowing the greatness of Shri Rama, have understood that religion without bhakti is meaningless. There will be any devotees who fall into the above category who by means of true bhakti are able to derive boundless joy by meditation on him.

I bow to all these great men and my salutation are to the immortal men who through bhakti are totally devoted to Rama and who are close Thayagaraja. My salutations to his dear followers and worshippers


Internet sources

Salutations to all great souls of all ages

My beloved Ramana, Salutations to you, in whom who I see all
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramanaduli on June 19, 2010, 12:32:49 AM
Dear Nagaraj ji


I think it is KARRADHU KAIALAVU KALLADHDHAU ULAHALAVU. It comes in Avvaiyar movie when she was defeated by Lord Muruga. When He asked CHUTTA PAZHAM VENDUMA CHUDADHA PAZHAM VENDUMA.  So I think it is said by
Avvaiyar.
As you say there are many many true devotees. Appar swamigal also say in His Thevaram.  Adiyarkku adiyen.
It seems easier than any other step.

Ramanaduli
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 19, 2010, 01:52:13 AM
Quote
what are the indicators that a person is self-realized?

Silent Green Garu,

There was also some discussion happened in this forum in the past of who is Satguru and how to recognise a geniune guru.

If you are interested please read below link as well.

http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=317.0 (http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=317.0)

Udai garu's response might be of interest to you.

Quote
Dear Friends,
      While selecting modern living gurus please be cautious. If we select someone and the person proves out to be a fraud --- it is lot of sorrow. We need to be very cautious to see every move of the person before calling him a guru.
My way is , i pick what ever is correctly said, no matter who says it --- ask doubts and get clarifications : ultimately, i treat no one as guru in ultimate sense, but everyone from whom i learnt a new perspective or way is  a guru so to say. But someone who taught me something vital, if he proves out to be a fraud, i wont feel let down, as i took his teaching and not everything aspect of his life. This would make sure we wont get let down by personal defects of the teacher.

Love!
Silence

Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: ramana_maharshi on June 19, 2010, 12:40:32 PM
Dear Silent Green Garu,

There was also some discussion happened in this forum in the past How Ramana's Philosophy can help us spot a Fake Swami.

http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=4688.0 (http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=4688.0)

That link also can help you.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 19, 2010, 02:26:15 PM
Dear I, (ramanaduliji)

Yes, you are correct, I have heard that quote in some Avvaiyaar movie, I had forgotton where I had heard it. They made such brilliant movies during that time, Kandan Karunai, Thiruvarutchelvar, Thiruvilayaadal, Thirumaal perumai, etc... they are all my favorites.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: viswanathan on June 19, 2010, 06:09:46 PM
Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real

There are quite interesting and elaborate posts on the  topic “Ramana maharishi says to9 see god in other external objects is not real”  .I would like share some of my views based on my understanding of sastras and the teachings of Bhagavan on the subject matter

As per Drik-Drisya Viveka of Adi sankara(Bhagavan has also given commentary on Drik Drisya Viveka), the SEER is conscience and SEEN is inert. This is the golden rule. This is what Sri Ramana Maharishi means by the statement  to see god in external objects is not real since  what ever seen is the object which is mithya (Mithya means it is dependent and not independent) and asat and not the subject which is independent.. The the very first sloka of Drik Srisya Viveka  beautifully explains about seer and seen as under.

When we see forms and colours through eye, the eye is the seer and forms and colours are seen. However, eye cannot see the objects unless the objects seen by eye are recognized by mind. Then the mind becomes the seer and the eye becomes seen. But, the mind cannot recognize the objects unless it gets its power from atma .This, we daily experience  in our deep sleep where the mind is withdrawn and we are not aware of any objets. Ultimately, witness/ atma/conscience/Self/I/god whatever name we call is the SEER(subject) and all others are SEEN(object) and hence inert only. However, the objects such as the physical body, the subtle body (consisting of manas,buddhi,ahankara and chittam) and the causal body gets their sentiency due to its association with atma. Sastras proclaim  that  Jiva is the combination of sentient atma(Chit)and insentient  body(asat). Similarly, Easwara(God) is the combination of Sentient Brahman (chit)+ inert maya (asat).

As per Swami Sukabodananda, the body is seen, the mind (which is nothing but collection of thoughts) is  seen and the intellectual knowledge is also seen and there is SEER within which is known as  Drik in Sanskrit and is the subject. All others are Drisyam or SEEN also known as objects and hence jada or inert.

Swami Tejomayanandai (Head of Chinmaya Mission) in his  commentary to  25th sloka  of Upadesa Saram,  says that during meditation, a devotee  can have a vision of   god as Sri.Balagopalan or Sri Rama due to the grace of god and due to the power of his deep faith and due to his deep devotion.  However,what is seen by the devotee as a form is only Jada, perishable  and has limitation whereas God is beyond time, space and causation. (Swami Tejomayananda has given  excellent commentaries on Upadesa saram and Drik, Drsya Viveka and these  books are published by Central Chinmaya mission Trust,).
Hence, seer is the god and whatever seen is inert only







Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 19, 2010, 06:29:31 PM
Dear I,

very nice and concise post on Seer and Seen, Sri Shankara's Drik Drisya Viveka is very interesting work, that gives the subtle essence of Advaita Tatva very beautifully.

The universe is just a reflection of our own Self, The thoughts in the form of knowledge manifests itself as the world. When this Chitta or mind stuff is directed inward to Self, the external world is not!

The ideal interpretation would be, that the Self is neither the Seer or the Seen, as it is only the 'I' with ideas and knowledge that sees but Self is just Is.

Therefore through this wisdom, one needs to uplift oneself through ones own Self - Uddaret Atmanaatamanam.

Self is Sri Bhagavan, Self is our Guru.

During the last days of Sri Bhagavan, He said "Where could I go, I am here"

That 'I' which Sri Bhagavan meant was not Himself, but the Self which is One, which is our True Self, which is Always effulgent

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 19, 2010, 06:41:36 PM
Sri Bhagavan in Ramana Hridayam 25 says thus:

द्र्ष्टारं स्वमुपेक्ष्य पश्यति नरो रूपं परेशस्य चेत्
सा रूपस्य मनोमयस्य हि भवेद्वीक्षा न सत्या विभोः ॥
तत्वं स्वं किमु तं प्रपश्यति परं त्वस्येक्षको वा मुनिः
नष्टाहंकृतिरेष किंचिदपि नो भिन्नः परस्माद्विभोः ॥

When one sees a form of God, neglecting oneself the seer, that vision is merely the vision of a mental form; it is not a true vision of God. Does the Sage that has direct vision of the Self see that supreme Being, who is (the) Real Self? Having lost the ego, he (the Sage) is not in the least distinct from Him.

Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Nagaraj on June 19, 2010, 06:57:48 PM
वीक्षा स्वस्य परस्य चेति गदितं ग्रन्थेषु वीक्षाद्वयं
तत्तत्त्वं किमिति ब्रवीमि घटते वीक्षा कथं न्वात्मनः।
एकत्वान्न स वीक्ष्यते यदि परं वीक्षेत को वा कथं
ईशस्यौदनभावमेव गणय स्वेक्षां परेक्षामपि॥

Two (types of) vision are mentioned in the sacred lore, namely, vision of the Self and vision of God. I shall say what they really mean: How can there be vision of the Self? Since He cannot be seen, for the reason that He is One (with the would-be seer), who is there to see God. (who is just the Real Self), and how? Know that the vision of the Self and the vision of God (alike) consist in (the ego) becoming food for God.

चैतन्यद्युतिमेष चिन्मयतनुर्मत्यै प्रयच्छन् स्वयं
आत्मत्वेन सदैव भाति हि मतेरन्तरस्तुरीयश्शिवः ।
तत् तस्मिन् विनियोजनं ह्रदि मतेरन्तर्मुखीकृत्य तां
हित्वा तं प्रभवेत् कथं वद परं मत्यैव मन्तुं नरः ॥

This blissful and transcendental Being, who is Pure Consciousness, is ever shining within the mind as Himself, the Real Self, imparting to the mind the light of consciousness. Such being the case, how can a man know Him by turning it inwards?


Salutations to Sri Ramana
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: silentgreen on June 20, 2010, 08:29:37 PM
Dear prasanth_ramana_maharshi,

Thanks for your links.
However I am not searching for any guru.
Title: Re: Ramana Maharshi says to see god in other external objects is not real
Post by: Subramanian.R on June 21, 2010, 11:00:42 AM

Dear everyone,

Very nice exchange of discussions.  Bhagavan Ramana said both the
things.  He said that to see God outside as real is in the beginning
of Sadhana.  Later the sadhak finds himself as the Self.  Even after
this, the sadhak sees the world or God outside, as Real, in the sense that every object and being are only Brahma Swarupam for him.

Even a die hard Advaiti, once he starts addressing the world, has to
be become a dvaiti implicitly.  This is inevitable. Otherwise he cannot teach anyone else.   But while teaching such a disciple,
the advaiti (one who has attained the Self and not a mere theoretical advaiti) he sees the disciple also as the Self and only some impurities are covering him. 

That is why Bhagavan Ramana had said on a number of occasions, that He was seeing everyone as Jnani and there are no ajnanis at all.  Everyone is a Jnani covered with some impurities. (malas).

That is why Bhagavan Ramana said in Verse 37 of ULLadu Narpadu:-

"During the search, duality; on attainment, unity, -- This doctrine is also false.  When eagerly he sought himself and later when he found himself, the tenth man in the story was the tenth man and none else."  (The story of Dasaman, tenth man, should be known to members.)"               
 
Sri J. Jayaraman, the Chief Librarian of Sri Ramanasramam Centenary Library told me, (when I had visited him on 19th and
20th June 2010):  Perhaps this conflict only made Sri Ramanuja to
propound the doctrine of qualified non dualism.  Yamunacharya
taught Ramanuja Advaitam.,   He said:  You are the Self.  Sri
Ramanuja should have also attained advaita siddhi.  But he had
the conflict, how to teach others?  So the best way is to make a doctrine of Visishtadvaitam. 

Bhagavan Ramana said that all the four great Saiva saints (Tiru
Jnana Sambandha, Tirunavukkarasar, Sundaramurty, and Manikkavachagar) indicate even in their first verses, that they are Self realized.  Then why should they write plethora of poems.
Jnana Sambandha wrote more than 8000 verses, and so was
Saint Tirunavukkarasar, Sundaramurty wrote about 1000.  Saint
Manikkavachagar wrote slightly less than 1000.  In these verses, they say: "I am useless, I am lowlier than a dog.  I am not able to overcome by kama and karma.  Please grace me!"  Why all these words?  These are all for US and not for them!  Each one became a dvaiti and started teaching others, about the travails of a human life in seeking Sivam.

Arunachala Siva.