The Forum dedicated to Arunachala and Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi

Ramana Maharshi => The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi => Topic started by: srkudai on September 02, 2008, 02:12:45 PM

Title: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: srkudai on September 02, 2008, 02:12:45 PM
Well Friends, I always wanted to write about Sri Ramakrishna ... but every time i start, i find that i cannot proceed beyond a point. for however much i try, i fail to describe him correctly.
Sri Ramakrishna was perhaps one of the most profound Saints of modern times... but it is my honest opinion that most people mistook him.

Sri Ramakrishna's attitude towards life can be described in a simple example he himself gave. He said, he was like a kitten, a kitten knows nothing more than its mother... if something frightens it or if it feels hungry ... all it knows is to cry "meow"... and its mother takes care of it.
He lived his whole life thus. His ego was totally surrendered to his Mother. His life illustrates Total Surrender. He was a child of his mother and nothing else. His mother took care of him, he just remains as a child, without worry and happily enjoying life---at the same time illustrating how one should surrender to God.

The aim of this thread is to describe his teachings and life in a systematic way.

Love!
Silence


 



Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 02, 2008, 02:33:40 PM
Dear srkudai and others,  Mother was everything for Sri Ramakrishna.
Once Mathur Babu, said that his wife Jagadamba is seriously ill
and doctors could not cure her.  He requested RK to pray Kali for
his sake.  RK went to Kali and prayed to Her sincerely.  He took
Mathur Babu to the garden in Dakshineshwar and showed him the
flowers.  Mathur Babu was still sceptic about RK's ability to cure
his wife. Suddenly RK said that these plants, (which will only
have red flowers), will have green flowers, and asked Mathur Babu
to come and see tomorrow.  Mathur Babu did not understand RK's
behaviour, went home and came back again next day, more worried
about his wife's health.  That day RK showed him the green flowers
from those plants, which will have only red flowers!  That evening,
Mathur Babu's wife became totally normal.  RK told him that what
cannot be done by a human being, god will do.  Someone,
who was an agnositc asked RK humourously,  "What is your Kali
doing now?"  RK replied:  "She is pushing an elephant through
the eyes of a needle!"  What is impossible for God or Brahman?


Arunachala Siva.
             
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 02, 2008, 04:08:32 PM
Dear srkudai and others,  Sri Ramakrishna used 'crying' as
an expression of 'bhakti' and considered it as major tool
for self-realization.  He used to talk of 'Maha-bhava', the
horripilation, crying, singing, dancing as indications of
the higest devotion.  Saint Manikkavachagar also sings:
"Can I not get you by crying? O Siva!" in Tiruvachakam.
Even though Jnana and advaita are the main planks of
Sri Ramakrishna Order, many direct disciples and today's
monks of the Order, have recommended 'bhakti', as a major
route, for self realization.  For example, Sri Ramakrishnanda,
who started the Madras Math, was praying to Krishna and
RK.  Swami Vivekananda was not like that.  He was not even
praying before  RK's picture.   Later, Swami Ranganathananda
was an exponent of pure Jnana.  Swami Tapasyananda was an
exponent of bhakti also.

Bhagavan Ramana did not discourage crying.  He told Mother
Azhagamma, to cry, when He had chided her for a small mistake.
Muruganar and Krishna Bhikshu have cried.  Bhagavan said
crying will help to belittle one's own ego but not to merge with
Godhead. In fact, Arunachala Aksharamana Malai, the Marital Garland
of Letters is full of crying, of the lover (Ramana) to merge in Godhead
(Arunachala). 
   
Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 02, 2008, 09:26:00 PM
Dear srkudai and others,  Sri Ramakrishna used 'crying' as
an expression of 'bhakti' and considered it as major tool
for self-realization. 

Bhagavan Ramana did not discourage crying.  He told Mother
Azhagamma, to cry, when He had chided her for a small mistake.
Muruganar and Krishna Bhikshu have cried.  Bhagavan said
crying will help to belittle one's own ego but not to merge with
Godhead.
   
Arunachala Siva.   

DEAR SIR,

THIS IS INDEED A GOOD DISCUSSION AND LOT OF INTERESTING THINGS  IN IT.

YES, CRYING DOES A LOT OF HELP IN SWIMMING OVER VASANAS AND FLYING PAST TO THE GOAL;  AND IT ALSO REMOVES DIRT FROM OUR INNER EYE. DEFINITELY IT IS A HELPING TOOL.

I DO USED TO WEEP GENERALLY IN FRONT OF BHAGVANS PHOTO AS HOW HE LIVED A DIFFICULT LIFE WITH A COD PIECE. WHERE AS I AM NOT COMFORTABLE EVEN WITH ALL THE FACILITIES. AS TO FIND WHAT IS THE WAY OF LIVING HAPPILY AND FINALLY UNDERSTOOD THAT BODY CONSCIOUSNESS IS TO BE TOTALLY DESTROYED BY THE SELF ENQUIRY NAD ABIDING IN SELF AND THAT IS THE LIBERATION. EARNING ANY AMOUNT OF NAME, FAME, WEALTH IS OF NO USE; AS FINALLY WE HAVE TO LEAVE EVERYTHING AND THE WHOLE LIFE IS WASTE.

AS ALL OF US ARE GODS CHILDREN THE MOTHER LIKE GOD ATTENDS FIRST TO THE CRYING BABY.

THANKS A LOT FOR SR KUDAI SIR FOR YOUR KIND POSTING,PLEASE CONTINUE AS IT IS VERY INTERESTING AND ENCOURAGING TO THE BEGINNERS LIKE ME.

SIVA SIVA

Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 03, 2008, 02:16:34 AM
Sri Ramakrishna taught someone according to his or her capacity. He accepted both Bhakti and Jnana. It is my impression that Sri Ramana gave stress to Jnana.

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 03, 2008, 11:39:10 AM
Dear gangajal,  You are a new member.  Hearty welcome to you.
Sri RK stressed both bhakti and jnana.  Sri Ramana's emphasis
was that bhakti is the pathway to jnana and for self realization,
jnana alone is needed.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 03, 2008, 03:33:41 PM
Dear Gangajal,
                   If we closely look at the life and teachings of Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Raman Maharshi there is obvious complete
surrender.You cannot have Jnana or Bhakti without surrender.It is we from our point of view categorise their teaching as Bhakti or Jnana.
Both of them pointed out the importance of Bhakti and Jnana in spiritual practice.Bhagawan wrote Akshara Mana Malai and other poems on
Arunachaleswara.Is it not Bhakti? Likewise Ramakrishna told Jnana in short story forms many a time.Is it not Jnana?
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 04, 2008, 01:19:16 PM
Dear srkudai,  Yes.  Sri RK suggested to act like noble souls,
gods etc.,  Even in normal worldly life, we see mediocre students
keeping the brilliant students as role models, following such
pracices like studying at regular hours, doing the homework
promptly etc., and impoving in their studies.  Many Western
devotees kept fellow seekers or Bhagavan as role models and
stopped eating meat.  Devaraja Mudaliar also adopted vegetarianism
like that.  Many ashramites got up in early mornings, which was
not their usual practice, by following Bhagavan and other Ashramites.

Sri RK, did that with intense bhavana.  It is said that he grew
a tail when he was meditating or acting like Hanuman.  During
his Islamic sadhana, he literally forgot Kali and other Hindu gods
and hated idol worship.  Intense conviction is essential.  Ribhu
Gita also says the same.  A worm inside the cocoon, intensely
meditated on the mother, and came out of the cocoon as a fly!
Saint Manikkavachagar says in Tiruvachakam:  "Natakathal
un-adiyar pol nadithu, veedahathe puguvan vizhaii hindren!"
"I am acting as your devotee and am eager to rush to Sivaloka!"

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 04, 2008, 02:03:04 PM
Intensity of Bhavana is so deep in Ramakrishna Paramahamsa that he developed menstruation when he thought he was Radha longing for
Lord Krishna.Even inspiritual history such events are rare and shows the depth of devotion.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 04, 2008, 02:08:56 PM
Dear Raju, Very nice.  I also remember his menstruation, when
he was playing the role of Radha.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 04, 2008, 11:08:19 PM
Thanks, Silence, Subramanian.R. and DRPVSSNRAJU!

Yes, surrender is certainly one of the recommended methods. In my opinion, however, surrender is a very difficult method.
The ego keeps coming in the way!  To surrender means that one has to accept all the difficulties of life without once asking
God for help. Surrender is for the really strong person. The difficulty of surrendering one's ego leads lot of people to think
of themselves as only an instrument of God. That is also recommended by Sri Ramakrishna.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 05, 2008, 06:45:39 AM
DEAR SIRS,

DEEP DEVOTION AND FULL INVOLVEMENT IS REQUIRED IN PRACTICAL LIFE TOO.

REALLY TO KNOW GOD ONE MUST BECOME GOD.

SIVA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 05, 2008, 07:12:02 AM
Yes, surrender is certainly one of the recommended methods. The ego keeps coming in the way!  To surrender means that one has to accept all the difficulties of life without once asking
God for help. Surrender is for the really strong person.

Regards

Gangajal

DEAR SIR,

SURRENDER IS THE ONLY WAY WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY LEAD TO SELF REALISATION.

AS YOU  SAID SURRENDER IS DIFFICULT BUT TRUE; BUT NO OTHER WAY.

PRACTISE AND SADHANA IS FOR ANNIHILATION OF EGO ONLY.

ONCE WE ARE NOT THE DOER WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THE DIFFICULTIES IN LIFE AS IT IS.

MEDDLING WITH THAT IS INTERRUPTION IN GODS PERFORMANCE  AND THEREBY WE ACCUMULATE KARMA BENEFITS AND IT CAN NOT BE NISHKAMYA KARMA. HE IS  DOING IT ( MAY BE BAD ) FOR THE BETTERMENT OF US AND TO GET RID OF OUR SINS.

WE HAVE TO BECOME STRONG BY ACCEPTING AS IT IS IN LIFE TO GET REALISATION.

THIS SAD AND BAD INCIDENTS ARE TO MAKE US TO BECOME STRONG; SO LET US ACCEPT IT AS IT IS AND SURRENDER TO GOD.

WE ARE ALL THE SINNERS AND TO GET RID OF IT LET US ACCEPT AS THE HAPPENINGS AS IT IS.

THIS IS THE REASON I ASKED SRKUDAI SIR TO POST LIFE OF SAINTS AND LEARN FROM THEM HOW THEY ACCEPTED THE THING AND HOW THEY LEAD A HAPPY LIFE IN THAT DIFFICULT SITUATION TOO. AS THEY SURRENDERED TO GOD AND WEEP AT GOD TO SAVE THEM SELF. THERBY THEY CLEANSED THEIR SINS, EGO AND POLISHED THEIR SELF.

BHAGVAN RAMANA SURRENDERED TO ARUNACHALA
RAMAKRISHNA SWAMY SURRENDERED TO MA KALI
JESUS SURRENDERED TO YEHOVA

FROM THIS IT IS CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD THAT ONE HAS TO SURRENDER COMPLETELY TO THE GOD TO GET LIBERATION THERE IS NO OTHER WAY LEFT OUT. AND IT IS ONE AND ONLY WAY FOR THE LIBERATION. DO IT NOW OR AT ANY GENERATION. THIS PATH WILL NEVER CHANGE; AS TRUTH IS SAME AS FOREVER.


SIVA SIVA ARUNACHALA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 05, 2008, 09:52:03 AM
Surrender requires an innocent mind.Innocent mind neither demands anything nor make any complaints against God.This is possible only
when one loves God for God sake only.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 05, 2008, 10:54:03 AM
Dear gangajal and srkudai,  Yes.  Surrender is as difficult as
self enquiry.   We are all doing partial surrenders thinking it
is surrender.  Total surrender is something quite different.  Saint
Manikkavachagar says in Tiruvachakam, Tiruvembavai,

" O Siva, I am your maiden, I am subservient to you always.
Our breasts will not rest in anyone's else's shoulders excepting yours!
After that, what if, if it is day or night?  I do not see either.
I do not care, even if the sun rises in any direction! "

Arunachala Siva.
 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 05, 2008, 03:18:59 PM
I personally feel that thinking that self-enquiry,surrender,self-realisation are difficult is one of the greatest hurdle on the spiritual path.
In reality they are not difficult but ego for it's own survival makes us feel that they are difficult.Beware of this trick of the ego.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 05, 2008, 04:17:23 PM
Dear Raju,  You have answered srkudai, on the point that
I wanted to make.  Be it atma vichara, or be it  atma samarpana,
the difficulty, is with our fattened ego.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 05, 2008, 10:14:57 PM
Dear Subramanian-ji and Raju-ji,

Surrender being difficult reminds me of the example that Sri Ramana gave of the person carrying his luggage on his head while on a train instead of putting it down and letting the train carry it. It makes me think of the reply he gave to someone saying it was difficult, "Is it difficult for man to know that he is a man". There are many other replies of Sri Ramana on this.

I think that this is very much based on doubt and lack of conviction. We have talked about conviction, Bhavana, in a thread on the Ribhu Gita.

Thus is it really difficult?  Or are we still doubting?  What has to be done is NOTHING!  We have to put the suitcase (thinking of difficulties) down, and let the train (Self) carry it.

It is obvious that Grace is flowing from the Self, and Self is pulling, inspiring "us"...otherwise we wouldn't even talk about all of the teaching.

We have to let-go. We (ego) have been trying through many births without much success. Why not let Self take over? And get out of the way.

Everytime these thoughts surge...the only thing we have to "do" is to return to self-attention.
Love,
Arunachala Siva
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 06, 2008, 01:32:16 AM
Dear Sankarji,

    I have to disagree with your statement that,'SURRENDER IS THE ONLY WAY WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY LEAD TO SELF REALISATION.' .

Gita chapter 12 lists several possible ways. I have given below the relevant Gita verses:

Those I consider as the most perfect in Yoga, who with their minds fixed
intently on Me in steadfast love, worship Me with absolute faith.
(Gita 12.2)

Those who are devoted to the Imperishable (the Impersonal Absolute) - who is
the firm support of the world and is also undefinable, unmanifested,
transcendent, motionless, and all-pervading - even they reach me alone,
striving with their senses controlled, and with mind tranquillised and set
on the welfare of all.
(Gita 12.3-4)

But, O son of Prtha, soon will I lift from this ocean of death-bound wordly
existence, those whose minds are ever set on Me - those who abandon to Me
the fruits of all their actions together with the sense of agency thereof,
and who worship Me, meditating on Me as their sole refuge and their only
love. (Gita 12.6-7)

Fix your mind on Me alone; let your reason penetrate into Me; without doubt
you will then abide in Me alone for ever more. (Gita 12.8)

If you are unable to fix your mind steadily on Me (even at the start) then try
to reach Me through the systematic practice of concentration. (Gita 12.9)

If you are not capable of practising systematic concentration, then devote
yourself wholeheartedly to works service to Me (consisting in external worship
and discharge of duties for My sake). Thus working for Me, man can attain
to perfection. (Gita 12.10)

If even this is difficult for you to perform, then taking refuge in Me
and then controlling the mind, give up the fruits of all your actions.
.(Gita 12.11)

Take a look at Gita 12.10 where Karma Yoga is being suggested for those who are unable to
systematically practice concentration. Gita is then saying that if one can not do even that
then one should give up the fruits of all action. (Gita 12.11)

It is true, however, that someone who can really surrender will have self realization.

"A man is truly free, even here in this embodied state, if he knows that God
is the true agent and he by himself is powerless to do anything."
--- Sri Ramakrishna

"Give up every thing to Him, resign yourself to Him and there will no trouble
for you. Then you will come to know that every thing is done by His will."
--- Sri Ramakrishna

Regards

Gangajal



Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 06, 2008, 01:33:23 AM
Surrender requires an innocent mind.Innocent mind neither demands anything nor make any complaints against God.This is possible only
when one loves God for God sake only.

Yes, this is absolutely true!
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 06, 2008, 01:37:47 AM
Dear Gangajal,
            :) Thanks for posting, i would like you to post more often here ... thanks you.
as i understand...
Pure Surrender happens only via knowledge.
its like this ...

I think there is a doer, an actor, a sufferer, an enjoyer. This is wrong idea and we have to see that this is an illusion. and that within there is only God ... Sat-Chid-Ananda[Consciousness , awareness... the pure witness] ... that is, when i understand that God alone is ...there is absolutely no place for a doer... coz the things get done, actions happen ... but there is no doer ...

This is the idea Sri Ramakrishna explans... if you understand that what ever happens is through God ... and see clearly that doership is born out of ignorance, that is complete surrender.

its like a wave in an ocean... when the wave understands the ocean, it leaves no place for itself as a separate entity...

Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,
     Surrender is a well known part of Bhakti marga and not just jnana. Let me give 2 examples here.
  Sri Ramakrishna distinguishes between cat bhakti and monkey bhakti. Those who follow monkey bhakti wrap their arms
around the mother the way monkeys do. As a result the Bhakta is responsible for staying on the right path. Those who
follow cat bhakti allow God to carry them towards their goal, i.e., they completely surrender to God.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 06, 2008, 01:38:54 AM
Dear gangajal and srkudai,  Yes.  Surrender is as difficult as
self enquiry.   We are all doing partial surrenders thinking it
is surrender.  Total surrender is something quite different.  Saint
Manikkavachagar says in Tiruvachakam, Tiruvembavai,

" O Siva, I am your maiden, I am subservient to you always.
Our breasts will not rest in anyone's else's shoulders excepting yours!
After that, what if, if it is day or night?  I do not see either.
I do not care, even if the sun rises in any direction! "

Arunachala Siva.
 
Yes, this is very true!
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 06, 2008, 09:34:26 AM
Dear all,
          Buddha said if you come across your Guru while meditating-kill him(mentally).Sri Ramakrishna used to have visions of kali and used to
communicate with her for so many years.Once Totapuri,a realised master with advaita vasana asked Ramakrishna to meditate on thid eye
and Totapuri pierced skin of Ramakrishna over third eye with a glass piece and asked Ramakrishna to go ahead with meditation.
Immedietly Kali appeared before Ramakrishna and he reported the same to Totapuri.Totapuri told Ramakrishna to cut Kali into two pieces if she appears.
Ramakrishna innocently asked how using sword is possible during meditation.Totapuri told Ramakrishna that kali is nothing but your mental
projection arose out of devotion and you create a sword with your mental power and kill kali with it.Ramakrishna did it and he immediately went into deep samadhi and enjoyed the bliss for 21 days continuously without any distraction.So are visions our own mental projections only? though they
help us spiritually.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 06, 2008, 11:04:09 AM
Dear Raju,  Yes.  Visions are also dual but as you say, they help us
in the process of self realization.  David Godman says that even
the visions of Ganapati Muni, seeing Bhagvan as avatara of Skanda,
Jnana Sambandha and Kumarila Bhatta, are also dual and these
may not be correct, even though the Muni made these points
in Sri Ramana Gita.  I had some exachange of comments with
David regarding this point.  I told him that I did not want to
discuss the duality of the visions, but the avatara conclusions
of Ganapati Muni are true.

Arunachala Siva.

   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 06, 2008, 11:06:11 AM
Dear Raju,  The Zen Master's statement:  "If you want to see
Buddha on the road kill him!" is the great truth of Advaita
Sadhana.  There is a book with that title.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 06, 2008, 11:10:43 AM
Dear Gangajal,  Your two ways of Bhakti Marga, the monkey way
and the cat way have also been discussed with Bhagavan by
somone in His Talks.  He said categorically that He did not approve
of the cat way, and wanted every seeker to make efforts on their
own, (by holding on to the mother monkey's belly) to merge
with the Self.  He also says in Who am I?  "God and Guru will
help the seekers to attain self realization, but will not on their
own, lift and drop the seekers into the Self!  Everyone should
follow the ways of god and guru.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 06, 2008, 01:16:05 PM
Dear nonduel,
                  I never said surrender is difficult.I wrote that thinking surrender is difficult is a trick of the ego to save itself from annihilation.I also
wrote that it is a greatest hurdle in spiritual growth to think that surrender is difficult.Kindly see my previous posting also for clarification.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 06, 2008, 01:37:30 PM
Dear srkudai, Raju and others:  Bhagavan Ramana has said
in Talks (I do not remember to whom He said and on what
occasion, but when these two 'margas' were discussed) that
the seekers shoud try to make efforts on their own, that is
monkey way, to realize the Self.  He has also said that Guru and
God will help you in Self realization, but will not lift you up and drop you
into the Self and for that purpose, one should follow the ways of
Guru in letter and spirit.  He has also said the same in Who am I?
to Sivaprakasam Pillai. The story about seeking the Guru who is
keeping his legs on the Siva lingam is from Korak Kumbar & Mukti
Natheshwar and this has also been told by Bhagavan Ramana.  This
is the story told by one of the Veera Saiva saints in 'The Speaking
of Siva.'  This is also attributed to the Tamil poet and Jnani Avvaiyar,
a lady saint.  She said the same thing to the king, who got angry
when he saw her keeping her legs on Siva lingam.

Arunachala Siva.     
 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 06, 2008, 02:01:38 PM
Bhagawan has great reverence for Avvaiyar.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 06:33:29 PM
Dear nonduel,
                  I never said surrender is difficult.I wrote that thinking surrender is difficult is a trick of the ego to save itself from annihilation.I also
wrote that it is a greatest hurdle in spiritual growth to think that surrender is difficult.Kindly see my previous posting also for clarification.

Dear Raju-ji,

I know. If you read my post you will find that I always used "we" which includes nonduel. It wasn't pointing at anyone, but just a thinking out loud sort of post. All of you already know this.

But I find that "we" are all subject to period of finding it difficult, and this is just a play of the mind. It is rather peculiar that we all know this, but nevertheless it keeps surging and surging. The teaching of Sri Ramana, and by many Sages continously say this. We have all read this numerous and numerous times.

Surrender isn't difficult. What can be difficult in doing nothing??? The example of the train is a good one. And what can be difficult in BEING???

Everytime this thought surges, we have to destroy it because it is a delusion...we ALREADY ARE!

Dear Raju-ji, I have written this before, please never see in my post a negative critic to someone. Maybe a badly expressed opinion, but no bad intention whatsoever. There is only SELF.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 06, 2008, 06:49:01 PM
Dear nonduel,
                   I agree with your observations on surrender and nondoing.Bhagawan is of the opinion that for those people with least amount
of tendencies it is easy for them just to "be"without any doing but for those with lot of tendencies,the tendencies always stimulate them
to do this or that and they are not ease with themselves.So it possible the quality and amount of tendencies determine the feeling that
nondoing is difficult or easy.Again i say that feeling that surrender is difficult is the greatest hurdle in spiritual growth. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 06, 2008, 07:04:32 PM
Dear non duel and Raju,  Both of you are correct.  Being still
is the most difficult, because tendencies to act are surging.
Even there are no tendencies to act, thoughts are surging forth.
Bhagavan said that to overcome this, think about one thing,
say, Who am I? or I am Brahman etc., etc.,  If one finds no
answer or get a conviction, I am not this or I am not that, and I am only
Brahman, then at that point, one is merged in the Self.  It is like
a silk worm inside the cocoon, becoming the bee, after contemplating
that I am a bee, and that this is not the place for me!

Arunachala Siva.

     
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 07:30:30 PM
Dear nonduel,
                   I agree with your observations on surrender and nondoing.Bhagawan is of the opinion that for those people with least amount
of tendencies it is easy for them just to "be"without any doing but for those with lot of tendencies,the tendencies always stimulate them
to do this or that and they are not ease with themselves.So it possible the quality and amount of tendencies determine the feeling that
nondoing is difficult or easy.Again i say that feeling that surrender is difficult is the greatest hurdle in spiritual growth. 

Dear Raju-ji,

Who has "tendencies" ?  When you say that for "them" it is easy...you are saying that it is easy for those "egos" ? And for those who have lot of tendencies it is difficult. In both cases you are considering as "real" the egos, and even more, you consider yourself the ego.

It is difficult for the ego, never for Self. 

Everytime "we" have these thoughts we are "outward" and we are in "I am a body".

In my humble opinion and understanding we have to destroy all these thoughts about difficult. And be CONVINCED!

There is nothing to attain, nothing to change, nothing to learn, nothing to do......

The Ultimate Reality is I AM. All the rest is from the ego.

This is the teaching of Sri Ramana.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 07:44:23 PM
Dear non duel and Raju,  Both of you are correct.  Being still
is the most difficult, because tendencies to act are surging.
Even there are no tendencies to act, thoughts are surging forth.
Bhagavan said that to overcome this, think about one thing,
say, Who am I? or I am Brahman etc., etc.,  If one finds no
answer or get a conviction, I am not this or I am not that, and I am only
Brahman, then at that point, one is merged in the Self.  It is like
a silk worm inside the cocoon, becoming the bee, after contemplating
that I am a bee, and that this is not the place for me!

Arunachala Siva.

     

Dear Subramanian-ji,

Please correct me if I am wrong.  But in all my reading I haven't found a Sage who said that we are correct in thinking that it is difficult. You are right that conviction is the important aspect. If one is convinced, tell me...what else is there to do?

I can hear Sri Ramana reply "Who is thinking this?" Whence does this thought come from? WHO AM I?"

Because only the ego can "do" !

We are repeatedly told to abide in the self, to keep the attention on the self. Sri Ramana never said that we are in a battle to control thoughts. We are also repeatedly told that we are the SELF. If one is absolutely convinced, then tell me what is there to "do" ? Because only the ego can "do".

All the "difficulties", vasanas, karma, are from the mind.

We have to get rid of this line of thinking. It only keeps us in the "I am the body" thought.

Rest in the self utterly convince, I AM THAT.

My humble opinion, with Love
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 07:48:43 PM
Dear Subramanian, nonduel , and raju
              :)

There are two things:

a) Being Still
b) Recognizing i am stillness.

If one tries to be still ... that is tough.
if one recognizes that he is stillness ... there is nothing he can do abt it. he is it.
Hence the recognition that i am stillness is what is required.

Attempts to still mind , without recognizing that one is stillness are absolutely useless.
Knowing this, if one tries to still the mind, its fantastic.

The silkworm example is a good one. But one has to see oneself as Brahman and not just think one is brahman...
That is, one has to understand Brahman is Awareness : CidRupam... and then see that one is Awareness, coz Awareness is the only live entity in us. Thus seeing, one has to see it continuously until the mind is totally convinced... This is Self Attention, isnt it ?

Love!
Silence



Dear Srkudai,

YES YES YES!

Only one point:  quote

""Attempts to still mind , without recognizing that one is stillness are absolutely useless.
Knowing this, if one tries to still the mind, its fantastic. ""

Arunachala Siva
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 08:01:08 PM
Dear all,

BEING is difficult if we are trying to BE SOMETHING.

Does anyone here has difficulty in being what he is? 

Arunachala Siva
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 06, 2008, 08:59:34 PM
Dear nonduel,
                   Because of self-ignorance every human being tries to be something and so there is difficulty in just being"as they are".
                   If it is so easy in being"what he is"(Being as the self) why so many people are still self-ignorant?
                   Intellectual conclusion that one is self is onething and being as the self is completely another thing.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 09:36:13 PM
Dear nonduel,
                   Because of self-ignorance every human being tries to be something and so there is difficulty in just being"as they are".
                   If it is so easy in being"what he is"(Being as the self) why so many people are still self-ignorant?
                   Intellectual conclusion that one is self is onething and being as the self is completely another thing.

Dear Raju-ji,

You ARE the SELF!  You will never "become" the SELF. If we are not convinced of this, then we doubt Sri Ramana's teaching.

All the rest is "there" because of the thought "I am the body".

And thinking that it is difficult, that many are self-ignorant, are only thoughts. Without these, you are the Self.

The belief that many are self-ignorant, implies that this isn't easy to attain. The difficulties is in the mind ONLY.

From Annamalai Swami, "Final Talks" page 105:

"""Even when you are told, "Hapiness is within you as your own Self. Look inwards and find it", still you think that you have to do something or go somewhere to discover it. This is the power of Maya, of illusion. This is like one fish in the sea asking another fish for directions to the ocean.
When you are not aware that your glasses are resting on your nose, you may look for them all day, thinking that they are lost. As a consequence, you believe that they are an object to be found. Eventually, you realise that you were wearing them all the time.
While the search was on, that which was being sought was, in reality, that through which the seeing was taking place. You were looking for an object that finaly turned out to be the subject that was doing the seeing. So it is with the mind and the Self. Mind sets up the notion that the Self needs to be found, and then proceeds to hunt for it as if it were some object that could be located in some interior place. This is as foolish as a man with a goat wrapped round his shoulders spending his time wandering around, looking for his goat, and asking everyone he meets where it might be."""


What we are looking for is what we ARE. There's nothing else to do. Like in the story of the tenth man, after the slap on the tenth man, is there any need the pursue the search for the "missing" man?

The only effort, is for self-attention. Break the habit, after many births, of looking outwards. Even then, we will not attain something, we will just realise that "the glasses where on our nose" all of the time.

If one is convinced of the truth taught by Sri Ramana, then is it hard to BE what one IS? It is harder to be something, or someone ELSE. Acting is a role that actors do, and this isn't easy to be good at. Sri Ramana..."does a man continously repeat he is a man to know he is a man?"  Is it difficult for a man to be a man or for a women to be a women?
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 06, 2008, 10:21:34 PM
Dear Raju-ji,

This example came up.  We are like a person wearing green tinted glasses and going to an eye specialist to complain that we see everything green. The specialist (Sadguru) takes the sunglasses of (removes the doubts) and the person realises that it was the glasses (thoughts) causing this.  ;D
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 07, 2008, 09:03:46 AM
Dear nonduel,
                   Mind is covered by a nonexistent membrane of self-ignorance which makes us to forget our nature as self and shows the unitary
thing as multiplicity.The membrane is there just because we believe it is there.If we enquire into the existence of the membrane it will be found
to be nonexistent.What exists is self,the membrane and the consequent delusion are nonexistent.The Guru who is free of delusion that
membrane of self-ignorance is covering the self tells us how to be free of that belief that we are self-ignorant.The concept that we are self-ignorant
is nothing but a belief,it is an idea which is annihilated by self-enquiry which confers self-knowledge.Self-knowledge is the only way to get rid
of that nonexistent membrane of self-ignorance which seems to cover the self effulgence of the self.We are conditioned as self-ignorant people.
Self-enquiry is a deconditioning process which helps us to know ourselves as we are.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 07, 2008, 11:25:34 AM
Dear non duel, srkudai, Raju,  I saw all the posts exchanged between
you three.  Very interesting.  What is difficult?  The difficulty is in
removal of thoughts.  It is like adamantly wearing green glasses
and complaining to the doctor that the world is looking green.  It
is like that fellow (the story that I have written about a few days
back), who wants the 'monkey' on his chest all the time, even
after the doctor has cut the knot and released the monkey.
Bhagavan said:  Be still.  He did not say: Think still.  That is the
whole problem.  If one could vanquish all the thoughts, then
one is self realized.

Dear nonduel, You are asking, What is next?  There is no next.
Being still is self realization.  The very thought to ask, What is
next? produces thoughts.  Since there is no next, it is Brahman,
for Brahman is One without a second.  Brahman is all pervasive,
there is no next, there is no pretext.  It is this conviction that should
remain with us all the time.

I am not sure, whether I have made the point clear.  If it is not
clear, we  should all work it out with, different sets of words.

What Bhagavan told Annamalai Swami, IS THE TEACHING, THE CRUX.

Arunachala Siva.           
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 07, 2008, 12:28:45 PM
Dear srkudai,
                 In your post to nonduel you said"you have the liberty to see the world green or remove the glasses and see it as it is".That is a
comprehensive understanding.There is nothing wrong in wearing glasses,we require them sometimes as you said.I appreciate your understanding.
Probably such freedom to wear or remove the glasses are possible for chosen few.Many do not remove the glasses even when they are
not required.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 07, 2008, 02:12:39 PM
Dear srkudai,  You car example fits your reasoning.  But see my
reasoning. Sri RK said, that when your mother asks you to fetch
a kg of fish, after seeing her note, your throw away the note,
because you are fetching a kg of fish!  After you have fetched a
kg of fish, the paper note is no longer needed!

Who am I? is a note.  After merging with the Self, the note
is no longer necessary.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 07, 2008, 05:03:36 PM
Dear non duel, srkudai, Raju,  I saw all the posts exchanged between
you three.  Very interesting.  What is difficult?  The difficulty is in
removal of thoughts.  It is like adamantly wearing green glasses
and complaining to the doctor that the world is looking green.  It
is like that fellow (the story that I have written about a few days
back), who wants the 'monkey' on his chest all the time, even
after the doctor has cut the knot and released the monkey.
Bhagavan said:  Be still.  He did not say: Think still.  That is the
whole problem.  If one could vanquish all the thoughts, then
one is self realized.

Dear nonduel, You are asking, What is next?  There is no next.
Being still is self realization.  The very thought to ask, What is
next? produces thoughts.  Since there is no next, it is Brahman,
for Brahman is One without a second.  Brahman is all pervasive,
there is no next, there is no pretext.  It is this conviction that should
remain with us all the time.

I am not sure, whether I have made the point clear.  If it is not
clear, we  should all work it out with, different sets of words.

What Bhagavan told Annamalai Swami, IS THE TEACHING, THE CRUX.

Arunachala Siva.           

Dear Subramanian-ji,

Just a correction on my preceeding post. The excerpt and the words are those of Sri Annamalai himself to a devotee.

You are absolutely correct that this IS THE TEACHING...THE CRUX.

I have read my posts and couldn't find where I have asked "what's next?"
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 07, 2008, 05:31:39 PM
Dear All,

There is never an instant when SELF isn't "there".

Is happiness difficult in deep sleep? Only in the waking state do questions like difficult, doing, surge. Why?  Because the "I-thought" arises on waking. Then the ego starts his show, the movie is projected on the screen and throughout the waking state we believe we are the actor. The actors goes through difficulties, not the spectator, the "witness".

Like Subramanian-ji wrote this is the CRUX. The Ribhu Gita says that if one is CONVINCED (Bhavana) that I AM BRAHMAN, this is the most rapid way to Self-Realisation.

In the same book, Sri Anamalai also said:

""All is my Self". "All is the nectar of my own Self". These are the great affirmations that counter the "I am the body" thought. Holding on to one of these sayings is the equal of millions of punyas. If we continously meditate on the truth of these statements, if we hold on to the truth that they are pointed towards, countless punyas will accrue to us.
There are many other mantras, but none are as usefull as these. Ribhu Gita says, "All is one, All is the Self". This is the truth that you have to hold onto. To the real "I", nothing is foreign in the entire universe. If you know you are everything, there will be no desire to pursue some things and not others.
""

All is my Self. Difficult ?

Love to all,

Arunachala Siva



Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 07, 2008, 06:51:08 PM
Dear non duel (and others),   I saw your various posts.  First thing
first.  It is Annamalai Swami's talks and not Bhagavan's talks
to Annamalai Swami.  Secondly, when I said, "What next?", I
was referring to Raju's post, (which was indicated as yours by
mistake), where he had said  to the effect that "we may be
requiring the glasses sometimes...."

In the merger with the Self, there is nothing, no universe and
all that crap.  I want to quote of a portion of a poem by Saint
Manikkavachagar.  It comes in Tiruppadai-Atchi in Tiruvachakam,
a decad on Holy Rule of Siva, after his merger with Siva, Brahman.

" Will I be fondling the well formed breasts of nicely ornamented
women?"

This is shocking!  Particuarly after becoming Siva.  There are two
answers for this question.  According to G.U. Pope's translation:

Yes and No.

Yes, because after becoming Siva, there is nothing other than me.
The well formed breasts, the breasts that look like champagne glasses,
of nicely oranmented women, are not other than me!  If, I, as
Siva, touch my earlobes, am I touching anything else?   
 
No. Becuase there is no one other than me.  Where is the question
of women, their ornaments, their well formed breasts that look
like champagne glasses?

"Will be I praying to Siva and his holy ashes?"

Again, yes and no.

Yes, since there is no one other than me, Siva, I shall be touching
my forehead, and the holy ashes!

No, because there is no one to pray or touch, it is the touch
of the untouch, the one hand clapping of Zen masters!

Arunachala Siva. 

   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 07, 2008, 07:07:22 PM
Dear subramanian,
                        Bhagawan got realisation after death experience.Probably he never heard the word Brahman but attained to the state of Brahman.
Later after coming to Tiruvannamalai Palani Swami used to bring books from the library to clear his doubts through Bhagawan.Bhagawan started
reading these books and he is surprised to see the description of thing of what he has experienced.By that time Bhagawan is a realised master but has to use thought(glasses)to read the books and clarify the doubts of Palani Swami.This is what i mean when i say that sometimes we need glasses
even after realisation.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 07, 2008, 07:11:53 PM
Dear Raju,  Yes, That way one may need glasses, that is the
Suddha Manas, Pure Mind, to read, write, clarify.  All the
actions and thoughts of Bhagavan Ramana in Tiruvanamalai,
for 54 years, sprang forth the Suddha Manas.

Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 08, 2008, 05:39:06 PM
Dear All,

I would like to add one thing to this discussion. I do not want to leave the impression that no "effort" is needed. Keeping the mind one-pointedness on the self, requires an effort, as everyone here knows. Once the "I-thought" is disolved in the Self, then no effort is necessary.

The discussion on "difficult" is to nonduel, to destroy such thoughts as soon as they come, because they are from the ego and only the ego can do, work, try...
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 08, 2008, 11:12:57 PM
Dear all,
          Buddha said if you come across your Guru while meditating-kill him(mentally).Sri Ramakrishna used to have visions of kali and used to
communicate with her for so many years.Once Totapuri,a realised master with advaita vasana asked Ramakrishna to meditate on thid eye
and Totapuri pierced skin of Ramakrishna over third eye with a glass piece and asked Ramakrishna to go ahead with meditation.
Immedietly Kali appeared before Ramakrishna and he reported the same to Totapuri.Totapuri told Ramakrishna to cut Kali into two pieces if she appears.
Ramakrishna innocently asked how using sword is possible during meditation.Totapuri told Ramakrishna that kali is nothing but your mental
projection arose out of devotion and you create a sword with your mental power and kill kali with it.Ramakrishna did it and he immediately went into deep samadhi and enjoyed the bliss for 21 days continuously without any distraction.So are visions our own mental projections only? though they
help us spiritually.

Dear DRPVSSNRAJU,
   There is a brief discussion about Divine forms. There Sri Ramakrishna says that Divine forms are not mental projections but are projected by Brahman on the person's mental plane.

 Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 08, 2008, 11:29:02 PM
Dear Silence,
     There is a difference between Shankaracharya and Sri Ramakrishna on whether only jnana can lead to moksha. I have given below two quotes from Ramakrishna Kathamrita that will tell you his position.

Bhaktiyoga is the religion for this age. But that does not mean that the lover
of God will reach one goal and the philosopher (Jnani) and worker (Karmayogi)
another. It means that if a person seeks the knowledge of Brahman he can
attain It by following the path of Bhakti too. God, who loves His devotee,
can give him the knowledge of Brahman if He so desires.

But the Bhakta wants to realize the Personal God endowed with form and talk
to Him. He seldom seeks the knowledge of Brahman. But God, who does everything
at His pleasure, can make His devotee the heir to His infinite glories if it
pleases Him. He gives His devotee both the love of God and knowledge of
Brahman. If one is able to reach Calcutta, one can see the Maidan and the
musuem and other places too. The thing is how to reach Calcutta.

--- Sri Ramakrishna


By realizing the Divine Mother of the universe, you will get knowledge as well
as devotion. You will get both. In bhava samadhi you will see the form of God,
and in nirvikalpa samadhi you will realize Brahman, the Absolute Existence-
Knowledge-Bliss. In nirvikalpa samadhi ego, name, and form do not exist.

--- Sri Ramakrishna

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 09, 2008, 12:14:03 AM
I am not surprised that Sri Ramana did not approve of cat marga. Following cat marga implies another
while strict Advaita does not accept anything except the Self!
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 09, 2008, 07:28:24 AM
SURRENDER IS THE ONLY WAY WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY LEAD TO SELF REALISATION.' .

 "A man is truly free, even here in this embodied state, if he knows that God
is the true agent and he by himself is powerless to do anything."
--- Sri Ramakrishna

"Give up every thing to Him, resign yourself to Him and there will no trouble
for you. Then you will come to know that every thing is done by His will."
--- Sri Ramakrishna

Regards

Gangajal





DEAR SIR,

YOUR POSSIBLE WAYS ARE TELLING THE CONCEPT OF SURRENDER, AND ULTIMATELY TO REACH THE STATE OF SURRENDER ALONE.

IS IT NOT THAT SURRENDER WHO FIXES HIS MIND AND HEART ON HIM CONTINUOUSLY ON HIM AND HAS NO DOERSHIP FOR ACTIONS PERFORMED BY HIM. WHEN WE DO WORK WITHPUT DOERSHIP IT IS SURRENDER ONLY AS I SUPPOSE; BECAUSE WE PUT ALL THE FRUITS OF ACTION ON HIM AND WE ARE FREE FROM IT.

WE MAY FOLLOW ANY WAY ONE CHOOSES BUT FINALLY HE REACHES ENQUIRY OF THE TRUTH, THEN ULTIMATELY SURRENDERS TO THE SELF. THIS IS WHAT I MEANT. WITHOUT SURRENDER ONE CAN NOT ATTAIN SALVATION, BECAUSE EGO IS THE HINDERANCE TO THE SURRENDER. AS LONG AS WE SAY SURRENDER IS DIFFICULT WE ARE NOT READY FOR SURRENDER.

AS SURRENDER REQUIRES INNOCENCE, WE ARE THINKING WITH OUR INTELLIGECE HOW CAN SURRENDER. INTELLIGENCE IS ANOTHER KIND OF ENEMY(EGO) WHICH IS OBSTRUCTING US FROM SURRENDER.

PLEASE ENQUIRE DEEPLY IN SILENCE YOU WILL FIND THE NECESSARY ANSWER.

SURRENDER ALONE SUCCEEDS.
TRUTH ALONE TRIUMPHS
KNOW THE TRUTH
BE THE TRUTH.

SIVA SIVA ARUNACHALA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 09, 2008, 08:31:52 AM
how are we interested in the many ? We are interested in ourselves ... i am interested in myself, you in yourself.

I am Subramanian ji agreed to disagree on one point: Thoughts need not be removed is my claim. Thoughts have to be removed Subramanian ji says [Beautiful disagreement isnt this ? We respect each others position and yet have our own ideas on this]...

 people think thoughtlessness is liberation. i wish someoen asked him this question :)



DEAR SIR,

RAMANA SPEAKS EVEN NOW IN SILENCE. ONE CAN UNDERSTAND.

HERE HIS THOUGHTS AND SPEECH ARE FROM PURITY AND FOR BETTERMENT OF OTHERS WITH OUT ANY DESIRES.

DONT ASK IS IT DUALITY TO THINK FOR OTHERS. CERTAINLY NO. BECAUSE HE SEES NO ONE OTHER THAN HIMSELF, THAT IS YOU AND ME ARE PART OF HIM AND NOTHING EXIST BEYOND HIM AND WHATEVER HE IS DOING IT IS FOR HIMSELF; AS WITH OUT SELF EXIST NOTHING ELSE. AND WHAT EVER EXIST IS ALSO THE SELF. THEN WHERE IS THE WHERE IS THE QUESTION OF YOU AND ME AS ALL ARE ONE.

IT IS ONLY OUR EGOFUL MIND THAT OURSELF TO LIMITED RELATIONS; WHERE AS THE SELF IS LIMITLESS AND PURITY AND NOTHING EXISTS APART FOM IT.

EVERYTHING IS TRUE AS EVERYTHING AS EMANATED FROM TRUTH. ONE WHO HOLDS ON TRUTH UNDERSTAND THIS OTHERS NOT, AND THIS DOES NOT MEAN OTHERS ARE NOT APART FROM SELF.

ENQUIRE AND FIND THE TRUTH TILL THE TIME YOU UNDERSTAND IT AS I UNDERSTOOD. IF NOT PLEASE CORRECT ME.

SIVA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 09, 2008, 08:49:00 AM
Dear all,

BEING is difficult if we are trying to BE SOMETHING.

Does anyone here has difficulty in being what he is? 

Arunachala Siva

DEAR SIR,

I AM STILL LIKE OCEAN OF BED AT MY HEART.
BUT THE THOUGHTS ARE LIKE WAVES IN THE OCEAN AND NOT APART FROM OCEAN.

SO WHEN YOUR THOUGHTS ARE PURE WITH OUT ANY DESIRE AND DOERSHIP, IT IS NOT OUR THOUGHT BUT FROM THE SELF.

AS ANY EXPLOSION COMES FROM SILENCE AND ALL THE TIME SILENCE ALONE EXIST AS THERE IS AFTER EXPLOSION AGAIN SILENCE. SO THE UNDERLYING SILENCE IS FOR ALL THE TIME, BEFORE, DURING,AFTER EXPLOSION.

THE EXPLOSION COMES AND GOES LIKE OUR THOUGHTS AND BODY, BUT THE PURE CONSCIOUSNESS EVER EXIST AS IT IS FOREVER.

SIVA SIVA ARUNACHALASIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 09, 2008, 10:44:05 AM
Dear Gangajal,  I agree with you, that the visions are not mental
projections and these are made out by Brahman for the seeker
to 'see' its divine forms.  Kavyakanta Ganapati Muni had a vision
in which Bhagavan appeared as Skanda, Kumarila Bhatta and Jnana
Sambandha.  Again, When Bhagavan approved only the monkey
marg, because efforts are needed by the seeker to to attain
Brahman.  Again, Bhagavan did not disapprove the bhakti marga,
but only added that the bhakti towards the Atman within, will make you
to go for self enquiry and  that, enentually makes you to merge
in the Self, through atma-samarpana.

Arunachala Siva.     
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 09, 2008, 03:10:09 PM
Dear srkudai,   I shall give a quote from Bhagavan, in Who am I?

Q:-  What is wisdom insight?  (Jnana dhrishti)

A:   Being still is wisdom insight.  To know one's thoughts, the
past, present and future and to know what is happening at a
far off place, are not wisdom-insights.

Please work it out.

To work it out differently,

Brahman always knows what is in srkudai's mind or his thoughts
or imaginations.  Definitely knows.  Why?  Becuase there is
nothing other than Brahman, the One without a second.  It is
like Manikkavachagar fondling the well formed breasts of a
nicely oranmented women?  Becuase, by fondling such breasts,
Brahman(or Siva) is only touching his earlobes!

Arunachala Siva.       
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 09, 2008, 04:32:23 PM
Dear srkudai,  I got your correct now.  Mental simulation of
God, as your iskcon friend had, is definitely 'his own' and
that God cannot know anything else, other than, what he simulates,
e.g. your date of birth.  I fully agree.

But the word Vision means something more than that.  Even though,
again, it is one's own,  If it is activated by personal God, it is called  mantra sakti. Several mantra saktas, had these visions. E.g. Ganapati
Muni had seen Bhagavan Ramana, as Skanda, Kumarila Bhatta and
Jnana Sambandha.  One Jnani is Hrishikesh, who was a Skanda
Bhakta, saw Bhagavan as Skanda.  In fact, this Jnani has written
an Ashottara - 108 Holy Names on Bhagavan.  Yogi Ram Surat
Kumar, who lived in Tiruvannamalai, had seen Kanchi Kamakoti
Sri Chandrasekara Saraswathi as Rama.  Perhaps, I do not know,
Arjuna's vision of Sri Krishna in Viswaroopa is also the divine vision
as conferred by Sri Krishna.

But to be activated by Brahman and 'see' things is the highest.
This cannot be achieved by mantra sakti.  For example, Bhagavan
has 'seen' several caves inside the Arunachala, wherein yogis
are living and all treasures of the world are abundant inside that.
This is said by Bhagavan Sri Ramana, in Arunachala Mahatmyam,
Tamil verses.  No one, even Kavya Kanta Ganapati Muni, who had
mastered Sri Vidya, could not fathom the Arunachala and tell what
Bhagavan has seen and told.

Arunachala Siva.       
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 09, 2008, 07:07:20 PM
Dear srkudai, Visions, I believe are more than mental imaginations.
Do you then, say what Arjuna saw (Krishana's Visvaroopa) is a
fevered mental imagination and Krishna is a fraud?

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 09, 2008, 11:17:27 PM
Dear Subramanian ji, Gangajal,
                 :)

I am not yet convinced that Ramana disapproved the "cat" marga. I think he approved it when he said : surender completely... leave everything to God. Whether or not he called it "cat" marga, he mentioned specifically that one should surrender completely.

And for those who could not do it, partial surrender was suggested... this is "monkey" marga.

This is my understanding...

And Gangajal ... Ramana was a great Bhakta at heart... his Arunachala Akshara manimalai ... if u listen it has statements like :
"i have a friend, having made this faith firm, dont leave me in the ocean of Samsara" ... and
"you are more loving than a Mother, how come you do not remove my ignorance"
etc...

His bhakti was of the kind you mentioned: I requote...

Quote
"A man is truly free, even here in this embodied state, if he knows that God
is the true agent and he by himself is powerless to do anything."
--- Sri Ramakrishna

"Give up every thing to Him, resign yourself to Him and there will no trouble
for you. Then you will come to know that every thing is done by His will."
--- Sri Ramakrishna

And i think this is the essence of True Living... just leave it totally to him.... which means, you understand 100% that things happen as per God and you are not the doer ... that is things are getting done through us, we are not the doers of the actions that happen.
Firmly holding onto this conviction one gets rid of all sense of doership and firmly abides in God (Self) itself.
isnt this so ?
Just Strenghten the faith... and cling to it like a monkey until it becomes so natural that you become a cat totally.
cat attitude ... cling to it like a monkey ;)

Love!
Silence


Dear Silence,
   Yes, I agree with what you have written. The only thing is that it is a nontrivial matter to get rid of all sense of doership. Intense
spiritual practice is needed to get rid of all sense of doership.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 09, 2008, 11:21:39 PM
Conversation on the reality of Divine form in Ramakrishna Kathamrita:

Ramdayal (to Shashadhar):"The scriptures speak of Brahman's form as a
projection of mind. Who is it that projects?"

Shashadhar:"It is Brahman Itself that does so. It is no projection of
man's mind".

Pratap:"Why does Brahman project the form?"

Sri Ramakrishna:"You ask why? Brahman doesn't act in consultation with others.
It is Brahman's pleasure. Brahman is self-willed."

(Pandit Shashadhar was a famous Vedanta teacher at that time.)
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 10, 2008, 01:58:03 AM
DEAR SIR,

YOUR POSSIBLE WAYS ARE TELLING THE CONCEPT OF SURRENDER, AND ULTIMATELY TO REACH THE STATE OF SURRENDER ALONE.

IS IT NOT THAT SURRENDER WHO FIXES HIS MIND AND HEART ON HIM CONTINUOUSLY ON HIM AND HAS NO DOERSHIP FOR ACTIONS PERFORMED BY HIM. WHEN WE DO WORK WITHPUT DOERSHIP IT IS SURRENDER ONLY AS I SUPPOSE; BECAUSE WE PUT ALL THE FRUITS OF ACTION ON HIM AND WE ARE FREE FROM IT.

WE MAY FOLLOW ANY WAY ONE CHOOSES BUT FINALLY HE REACHES ENQUIRY OF THE TRUTH, THEN ULTIMATELY SURRENDERS TO THE SELF. THIS IS WHAT I MEANT. WITHOUT SURRENDER ONE CAN NOT ATTAIN SALVATION, BECAUSE EGO IS THE HINDERANCE TO THE SURRENDER. AS LONG AS WE SAY SURRENDER IS DIFFICULT WE ARE NOT READY FOR SURRENDER.

AS SURRENDER REQUIRES INNOCENCE, WE ARE THINKING WITH OUR INTELLIGECE HOW CAN SURRENDER. INTELLIGENCE IS ANOTHER KIND OF ENEMY(EGO) WHICH IS OBSTRUCTING US FROM SURRENDER.

PLEASE ENQUIRE DEEPLY IN SILENCE YOU WILL FIND THE NECESSARY ANSWER.

SURRENDER ALONE SUCCEEDS.
TRUTH ALONE TRIUMPHS
KNOW THE TRUTH
BE THE TRUTH.

SIVA SIVA ARUNACHALA SIVA

Surrender is only for the aspirant. The question of surrender does not arise for a person who can directly see
that he is not the doer.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 10, 2008, 06:02:09 AM

Surrender is only for the aspirant. The question of surrender does not arise for a person who can directly see
that he is not the doer.
[/quote]

DEAR SIR,

YES, SURRENDER IS ONLY FOR THE ASPIRANT AND NOT TO THE SURRENDERED.

Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 10, 2008, 10:56:34 AM
Dear srkudai, Gangajal and Sankar,

Gangajal has said the final thing.  If a person is doing everything
without a sense of doership, he can 'see', Siddhas, caves and
treasures of the Arunachala. 

Arjuna 'saw' the Visvaroopa of Krishana, without the sense
of doership.  Hence it was shown to him.

Bhagavan Ramana has also said in Talks,( when someone asked
whether Indraloka, Chandraloka are real,) that these lokas
are as real as the world, and there are people sitting before Me,
asking questions too!"

In Sri Dakshinamoorthy Stotram, of Sankara,  (which Bhagavan has translatedin Tamil verses) it is said that a Brahma Jnani, gets
eight virtues along with being Brahman.  These virtues inlcude
anima, mahima etc., and contain a virtue of 'seeing everything
at will'.  This seeing and willing are without the sense of doership.

Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 11, 2008, 12:06:04 AM
Well, Doership is not there even now.

The body and brain are dead entities.
Consciousness/God is pure witness.
Who is the doer here ?
Doership is just a thought in the mind !

That is why "Om Namh Sivaya" means I am not... Namah.... only OM, or Siva IS.
So in Siva's Siva Tandavam, i appear alive ... Truely this is a Seva even now ...
Siva is birthless and deathless.
Body is never alive... so it is neither born nor dies!


Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,
     If you really believe that 'Body is never alive... so it is neither born nor dies! ' then you
should not call a doctor when you become sick. A Jnani must consider his own body as
like dirt. Sri Ramana refused operation to save himself from cancer. Sri Ramakrishna scolded
his disciples for asking him to request the Divine Mother for curing his cancer.

    It is a non-trivial matter to be a Jnani! I am yet to see one although I sat through nearly 750
lectures given by different Swamis of Ramakrishna Order and other organizations from 1985 to 2000.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 11, 2008, 07:44:53 AM
Well, Doership is not there even now.

The body and brain are dead entities.
Consciousness/God is pure witness.
Who is the doer here ?
Doership is just a thought in the mind !

That is why "Om Namh Sivaya" means I am not... Namah.... only OM, or Siva IS.
So in Siva's Siva Tandavam, i appear alive ... Truely this is a Seva even now ...
Siva is birthless and deathless.
Body is never alive... so it is neither born nor dies!


Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,
     If you really believe that 'Body is never alive... so it is neither born nor dies! ' then you
should not call a doctor when you become sick. A Jnani must consider his own body as
like dirt. Sri Ramana refused operation to save himself from cancer. Sri Ramakrishna scolded
his disciples for asking him to request the Divine Mother for curing his cancer.

    It is a non-trivial matter to be a Jnani! I am yet to see one although I sat through nearly 750
lectures given by different Swamis of Ramakrishna Order and other organizations from 1985 to 2000.

Regards

Gangajal


DEAR SIR,

AS YOU SAID BODY IS NOT A MATTER TO BE BOTHERED FOR A JNANI AS HE IS NOT THE BODY. BUT AS OF NOW SO CALLED GURUS SAY SO ONLY TO THE PUBLIC AND NOT FOR THE SELF. AS THEY GO FOR SPECIALISED TREATMENT. THAT IS CLEAR INDICATION OF PREACHING IS NOT IN PRACTICE AND THOSE ARE NOT REALISED IN REAL.

EVEN ONE HAS DESIRE FOR AND EXHIBITS SIDDHI IS ALSO NOT REALISED AS HE IS CRAVING FOR NAME AND FAME. AS SIDDHIES ARE AS WELL REQUIRED FOR THIS BODY ONLY. REMAINING WITHOUT ANY DESIRE FOR ANYTHING AND LOSS OF BODY CONSCIOUSNESS ATTAINED BY SRI RAMANA, JESUS, RAMAKRISHNA SWAMI ARE REALISED SOULS WITHOUT ANY DOUBT AND THEY ARE LIVING AS BEFORE EVEVN NOW. AND ONE CAN DEFINITELY CHOOSE THEM AS GURU INSTEAD OF LIVING BOGUS BODIES, HOLD ONTO THEIR FEET AND CAN SWIM FROM THIS WORLD TO THE REALISATION BY THEIR GRACE WITH OUR SINCERITY.

MY DESIRE IS TO HAVE DESIRELESSNESS AND TO LOSS BODY CONSCIOUSNESS TOTALLY AND IT CAN ONLY HAPPEN ONLY WHEN I AM RIPE UNTIL THEN I KEEP FOLLOW THEIR PATH. THE PATH IS VERY DIFFICULT AND YET VERY EASY AT LATER STAGE. ONLY I BELIEVE IN PATIENCE, PERSISTENT ENQUIRY WITH TOLERANCE. I FALL DOWN MANY TIMES BUT STILL I DONT LEAVE THE FEET OF SRI RAMANA, AS I AM A CHILD HOLDING HIS HAND AND LEARNING TO WALK.

SIVA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 11, 2008, 11:16:52 AM
Dear Gangajal,  As you say, only a Brahma Jnani can feel
that he is not the body and he is neither born, nor is he going
to die.  For all the rest, body is very much there and so are the
pain and pleasure and the fear of burning ghats.  Vivekananda,
I believe, once said:  I believe in Advaita, but when a stone
hits my leg, there is pain and I feel 'Oh, there is pain."

Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 11, 2008, 11:08:18 PM
Dear Subramanian and Sankar,
     Both of you are correct.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 12, 2008, 10:37:57 AM
Dear Gangajal and srkudai,  Your nice posts.  Jnani does also
have pain.  But only thing is, he does not mind it, because he
has no mind.  Saiva Siddhanta says that the pain and suffering
from will be 'thinned'.  In other words, what has come to hit
the Jnani's head, will hit his head-wear and it will fall.  Bhagavan
Ramana has said the pain due to sarcoma bleeding and surgeries
were like ant bites!  Dr Guruswami Mudaliar who did the surgeries
has said that the pain would be as excrucitating as if a lorry is
running over your hand.

Arunachala Siva.     
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 12, 2008, 12:41:24 PM

when presence of pain does not create any conflict, why remove it at all ?


 DEAR SIR,

HE MUST HAVE ACCEPTED AS NOT TO DISAPPOINT THE DOCTORS WHO HAS COME WITH SO MUCH COMPASSION AND CARE IS ONE THING.

AND ANOTHER THING LET ANY AMOUNT HUMAN STRUGGLE BE PUT ON WITH ANY AMOUNT OF CARE CAN NOT CURE THE DISEASE WHICH IS FOR DESTRUCTION OF THIS BODY. THIS MIGHT THE ANOTHER LESSON HE MUST TAUGHT TO ALL IN SILENCE.

IT IS CLEAR THAT ONE HAS TO ACCEPT THE PAIN OF DEATH AS IT IS WITH MEDICAL OR WITH OUT IT AND NO OTHER GO. ONE SHOULD GET ABSORBED IN SELF ALL THE WHILE TO MITIGATE THE PAIN WITH EASE AND COMFORT.

SIVA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 12, 2008, 12:59:34 PM
Dear srkudai and Sankar,

You said that Bhagavan withdrew the mind, due to surgery so
that He could not have the pain and did not do so, during knee
problem.  This raises another question.  Where was the mind
for Him to withdraw or not to withdraw?

In this connection, I have to quote only the first verse of
Kamba Ramayanam in Tamil by Kambar, 10th century AD.

O Narayana, we surrender to your feet,
You are the one who plays a clueless play!
You make the world, sustain it and and dissolve it,
You are there in the world but not there."

Like Brahman, Brahma Jnani is also a person of clue less play!

Why did He bear with the pain of surgery?  Why did He not.
during knee joint pain?   Why did He have medicine for His
eczema? Why did He have spectacles for reading (during His
later years?  Why did He fall down in the Ashram and have a
sprained neck?

How do we know, srkudai?

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 12, 2008, 05:22:20 PM
What nonduel "sees" and interpret is nonduel's delusion.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 12, 2008, 05:28:07 PM
Dear non duel,  Or could it be non duel's Knowledge?

Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 12, 2008, 06:00:09 PM
Dear non duel,  Or could it be non duel's Knowledge?

Arunachala Siva. 

Dear Subramanian-ji,

Yes! Knowledge is also delusion, Self is beyond knowledge.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: SANKAR on September 12, 2008, 06:53:37 PM

O Narayana, we surrender to your feet,
You are the one who plays a clueless play!
You make the world, sustain it and and dissolve it,
You are there in the world but not there."

Like Brahman, Brahma Jnani is also a person of clue less play!

Why did He bear with the pain of surgery?  Why did He not.
during knee joint pain?   Why did He have medicine for His
eczema? Why did He have spectacles for reading (during His
later years?  Why did He fall down in the Ashram and have a
sprained neck?


Arunachala Siva.

DEAR SIR,

SORRY SIR, IT IS NOT REQUIRED FOR US TO ANALYSE.

HE IS  CLUELESS. WE CAN NOT FIND ANY SOLUTION. BUT BE PRACTICAL THAT WE CAN BEAR SOMETHING AND EVERYTHING WHEN THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE.

IN BHAGVANS ACTION THERE MAY BE MESSAGE TO SOMEONE IN DIRECT FORM OR INDIRECT FORM.

WE CAN NOT JUDGE HIS ACTIONS. THOSE MAY BE SPONTANIOUS AND TO SHOW LESSON TO SOME ONE. PLEASE LET US NOT DRAG THIS KIND OF DISCUSSIONS AS IT IS NOT REQUIRED. WE ARE LEAVING THE CONCEPT.

YOUR ABOVE QUOTES NICELY THAT, THEY ARE THERE AND NOT THERE AND CLUELESS. IT IS TRUE.

SIVA SIVA ARUNACHALA SIVA
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 12, 2008, 07:07:44 PM
Dear Sankar,  You are correct.  Jnani's actions cannot be
deciphered into any partiuclar empirical truth.  For example,
He told Ramanatha Brahmachari, to remove his tuft and have
a shave and also discontinue daily ritual of Gayatri and Sandhya
Vandhanam.  When someone else wanted to put these into
practice, he shouted at him and said not to discontinue. This
is also true for a Jnani's teachings.  Kavyakanta Ganapati Muni
interepreted Ulladu Narpadu as a sakta treatise.  Lakshmana
Sarma interpreted Ulladu Narpadu purely on the basiis
of Ajata doctrine of Gaudapada, the highest form of Advaita.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 12, 2008, 07:09:33 PM
Dear Subramanian-ji,

My preceeding reply could be elaborated upon. It is from avidya that vidya arrises. Vidya is Self, avidya is nonduel's knowledge.

Your posts Naishkarmya Siddhi - (29 and others) for example talks of this.

If one goes further, is it nonduel's "knowledge" that eventually leads him to vidya, or is it Grace from Self ? We are back to prarabdha!

There is only Self, one without another. Thus is there any knowledge and/or ignorance?

Sri Ramana said that when one loves the teaching and Self-Enquiry, it shows that Grace is flowing from Self. Although the tree has numerous leaves (Jivas) there is only one tree (Self) and the sap is the same.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 12, 2008, 07:10:42 PM
No no... its not non-duel's delusion ... coz non-duel knows it to be one with himself

 ;) ;D
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 12, 2008, 07:18:12 PM
Dear non duel, Sankar, srkudai,  The delusion or avidya or
ignorance can be empirical knowledge.  Knowledge is Self
Knowledge.  The empirical knowledge of snake, is delusion
avidya, ignorance.  When rope is seen, it is Self Knowledge.
The loss of necklace or the drowning of the 'tenth man' is
again empirical knowledge.  Finding the necklace around one's
own neck and 'seeing the tenth man alive' is Self Knowledge.

Dear non duel, the Self is definitely not beyond knowledge.
It is Knowledge.
 
Self is neither delusion nor knowledge in its empirical sense.
Self is Knowledge.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 12, 2008, 07:29:57 PM
Dear non duel, Sankar, srkudai,  The delusion or avidya or
ignorance can be empirical knowledge.  Knowledge is Self
Knowledge.  The empirical knowledge of snake, is delusion
avidya, ignorance.  When rope is seen, it is Self Knowledge.
The loss of necklace or the drowning of the 'tenth man' is
again empirical knowledge.  Finding the necklace around one's
own neck and 'seeing the tenth man alive' is Self Knowledge.

Dear non duel, the Self is definitely not beyond knowledge.
It is Knowledge.
 
Self is neither delusion nor knowledge in its empirical sense.
Self is Knowledge.

Arunachala Siva.

Dear Subramanian-ji,

My use of knowledge was in the dualistic sense. The duo of knowledge and ignorance. Thus Self is beyond knowledge in that way. I make a distinction between nonduel's knowledge (snake) and Self-knowledge (rope).
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 12, 2008, 10:40:28 PM
Dear Gangajal,
    :)
Sorry for delaying the response...

Quote
:) Are you forgetting that both Ramakrishna and Ramana took medicines from doctors ? Ramana , i think, did not refuse to get operated... he mentioned that anesthesia is not required for operating it. Perhaps he considered it equivalent to taking drugs.
But both had pain. Ramakrishna too had suffering.

Please do not think that just because you are a Jnani you will not feel pain.
Pain will be there. Discomfort will be there --- Ramakrishna, had discomfort.
If pain is relieved, there is more comfort. Ramakrishna's Gospel talks abt it.

But Pain does not get converted into "Suffering" . Physically the pain is there, The acceptance is so complete, there is no suffering.
The Discomfort is not "unhappiness" . They are not unhappy.

You might have seen Jnani's but not recognized them. You might have met them, but coz your ur preconditionings, you may not understand them... for exampled if you think that someone should not go to a doctor if he is a jnani... Ramakrishna and Ramana are not jnani's too! Please ... a person who is ill and does not go to a doctor ... is not a jnani ... he is stupid! Please understand this.

Its like, i am an expert driver, therefore i wont take my car to the mechanic when it gives a problem.

That is a perfect sign that the person has gone nuts.
And please, just becoz Ramakrishna did it, dont throw money into waters ... if u do not want it, give it to the poor ... money is not the problem ... money does not say : " please pick me up, put in your pocket and feel proud"... we do that. We do not know how to handle money ... not knowing ourselves, we start to think that money makes us complete and become greedy. The money in your shelves does not even know u r the owner. it cannot trouble u. that is why when a thief picks it up, it does not even protest ... the thief comes, takes away the money and the money does not care! i become mad ! coz i, not knowing myself as the Self, associated my own completeness with the money. Ramakrishna was trying to get rid of his greed, but i think better would have been to give it to someone for whom it can be of use.

Lets be jnani's but also be intelligent. lets go to doctor for curing our diseases, not to a Swami. Let us go to the car machanic when car gets into trouble ... not pray before it! and for mental health ... eat good food, exercise ... but when you cannot eat some food, dont become a miserable person... when you have a body that is ill, accept ... that is the sign of a jnani.

Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,
      I read in a book that Sri Ramana refused to amputate his arm to prevent the cancer from spreading.
Any way, if as you say that one should take medicine for the illness of the body (a very sensible advice)
then how can you say that the body is dead?
      I asked a resident of a Ramakrishna Vedanta center if Sri Ramakrishna felt pain during his cancer. He told me that
according to the Swamis, Sri Ramakrishna did not feel any pain during his cancer.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 12, 2008, 11:53:07 PM
Dear Silence,

    I was responding to your assertion that the ego is even now not there. In that post
you said that, 'Body is never alive... so it is neither born nor dies!'.   Yet you have no
problem taking medicine to cure the dead body!

   I suggest that the statement, 'Body is never alive... so it is neither born nor dies!' is not
true for us. So when is such a statement true? I think such a statement is true only when
one is in ego-less Nirvikalpa samadhi. Otherwise you will run into paradoxes!

   I also think that the ego is a real problem It is a real problem since as Sri Ramakrishna says,
'Maya is nothing but the egotism of the embodied soul. This egotism has covered everything like
a veil'. The ego is an expression of the Divine Maya shakti. This is the reason why it is non-trivial
to go past it.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 13, 2008, 11:07:00 AM
Dear non duel, srkudai, Gangaal, Sankar,  We are all going
round and round the snake, because we are yet to see the rope!
Where is the tenth man, by the way?

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: nonduel on September 13, 2008, 04:31:05 PM
Dear non duel, srkudai, Gangaal, Sankar,  We are all going
round and round the snake, because we are yet to see the rope!
Where is the tenth man, by the way?

Arunachala Siva.

Sitting with Sri Ramana on Arunachala and laughing out loud .... ::)
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 13, 2008, 05:00:25 PM
Dear non duel,  Bhagavan Sri Ramana is the 'stranger'
who comes and gives us all one blow each, so that we
shall count for each blow once, and Eureka! the tenth
man is with us! 

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 14, 2008, 12:21:12 PM
Dear skrudai, Nice story of Sri RK about the dog biting and chewing
the dry bone and enjoying the blood that was oozing out from its
gums.  One story of Sri RK, where He was exccedingly kind and
cool, was when Girish asked Him to cure His throat cancer, and when
He was doing nothing to cure Himself, Girsh said:  "You are believing
in a God, and if that god does not cure you, I shall piss on that god!"
Sri RK did not react in either way!

Arunachala Siva.
 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 14, 2008, 12:28:11 PM
Dear srkudai,  About the intentions and not the act of the Zen
master,  one day, I was seen caressing a photo of Bhagavan
Sri Ramana, (the bust size photograph) on a book, and on seeing
me, my wife asked:  "What are you doing?  What are you telling
Ramana?  I answered, which was a truth:  " I am asking Him,
why not You apply some oil or thylam everyday on your chest,
so that the marks on your chest, (due to some ailment of the past),
can be kept wet and it will not dry up and peel off, causing pain
and bleeding!"  My wife looked at me curiously and asked "Why?
Does He not know Himself?"  I replied:  "No, may be Yes. But, I am
only telling Him, my intention and wish!"

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 15, 2008, 10:55:31 PM
Yes, now I agree with you Silence!
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 17, 2008, 10:13:05 AM
Some are interested in Saguna Brahman in which they relate with God in dualistic way,some are interested in God without any attributes
i.e Nirguna Brahman.It all depends on the mind set of the devotee.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 17, 2008, 11:02:47 AM
Dear srkudai,
                 To experience Saguna or Nirguna Brahman one must have the same intensity as that of a drowning man struggling for air
                  says Chaitanya Prabhu.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 17, 2008, 01:18:31 PM
Dear srkudai,
                 I agree with your observations.I feel that nidhidhyasanam means unbroken self-attentiveness.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 17, 2008, 06:20:50 PM
Dear srkudai and Raju,  Nice exchange of ideas.  I would like to
quote two things that Bhagavan Ramana said.  Papaji was not
impressed with Bhagavan during the first few meetings.  He went
to the Hill and meditated on Krishna, came back and said that
he was playing with Krishna.  Bhagavan said:  Okay Okay.  But
why don't you have Krishna in your Heart?  He is here and now
and is with you always.  There is no need to go the Hill to find Him.
Papaji understood this after a few years. More about that in my
Arunachala Pilgrimage, which was done on 15-17th instant.

Bhagavan also said about Pandharpur Chanting.  In Pandharpur,
women stand around a lamp and start singing at night:  "We
are going to Pandharpur, we are going to Pandharpur".  After a
thousand rounds around the lamp, in the early morning at
2 AM, they sing: "We have arrived at Pandharpur.  We have
arrived at Pandharpur."  They were in Pandharpur all the time.
Right from the early night.  At 2 AM, they have arrived! 

The question therefore is:  When do we arrive?

I want to write about Arunachala Pilgirmage.  There are a lot
of things to share.  One by one.

Arunachala Siva.       
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 17, 2008, 11:00:24 PM
Dear Raju,
           :) Nirguna is here and now to be seen. Saguna may or may not manifest for someone.
To a bhakta how does it matter how God appears? Its God, that is suffice isnt it ? whether he comes dressed in Jeans or totally naked ... he has already consumed us ! That is the essence.

Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,
    I doubt very much what you have written,'Nirguna is here and now to be seen. Saguna may or may not manifest for someone.'.
You seem to be defining Nirguna experience at the intellectual level. Sri Ramakrishna used to say that the Saguna experience is in fact easier than the Nirguna experience since it is easier to fix one's mind on a Divine Form than fix one's mind by Vichara.

   Moreover whether you use the path of enquiry or the path of devotion, you will notice changes in your body. I have given below a quote from Sri Ramakrishna on the necessary change.

"To be able to realize God, one must practise absolute continence. Sages like
Sukadeva are examples of urdhavreta. Their chastity was absolutely unbroken.
There is another class, who previously have had discharges of semen but who
later on have controlled them. A man controlling the seminal fluid for twelve
years develops a special power. He grows a new inner nerve called medha nadi
(the nerve of memory). Through that nerve he remembers all, he understands
all.

Loss of semen impairs the strength. But it does not injure one if one loses it
in a dream. That semen one gets from food. What remains after nocturnal
discharge is enough. But one must not know a woman.

The semen that remains after nocturnal discharge is very 'refined'. The Lahas
kept jars of mloasses in their house. Every jar had a hole in it. After a
year they found that the molasses had crystallized like sugar candy. The
unnecessary watery part had leaked out through the hole."

--- Sri Ramakrishna

Even after such changes, it is difficult to experience the Nirguna Brahman because it is very difficult to remove all worldly taints. It is in fact easier to experience Saguna Brahman.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 18, 2008, 11:56:03 PM
Dear Silence,

The statement that, 'Consciousness, Awareness -- is Brahman, Atma.' is merely
an intellectual position. I could also tell you that medical doctors say that
consciousness is a product of the functioning of the brain. So how can we know
definitively that scripture and Yogis are in fact right that 'Consciousness,
Awareness -- is Brahman, Atma' and that 'it is that which enables all
experiences... which makes experiences possible.'? It seems to me that in the
absence of any testing method there is a good possibility that the medical doctors
are in fact right!

The question that I am asking is how did the sages and saints and the rishis
who wrote the scriptural Maha Vakyas come to know that Consciousness is
Brahman and that it makes possible all experiences? Or are you asking me to
take at face value the scriptural assertion. It seems to me to be a reasonable
assumption that there must be some way to test the scriptural claim. Otherwise,
why should one believe it? This testing is what I am calling experience.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 19, 2008, 11:41:31 AM
Dear Gangajal and srkudai,  To add a few things.  Consciousness
is called "Witness", it is not expressible.  It does not 'see' in the
ordinary palance of the term.  It merely IS.  There is a typical
example in Tamil literature.  There is a theft at home, when nobody
is there.  But a lamp was burning at the house.  The Lamp is the
Witness.  The lamp does not 'see'.  Likewise Brahman is the Witness.
In the villagers, people often say that the god is the witness, when
there is no one else to prove their point.  When people who have
self realized, either with or without reading the books, they can
only express it in negative terms.  Neti  Neti, it is not this; it is not
this.  Because they cannot express it what is experiential.

I just now posted an example given by Tayumanavar, a 17th century
Tamil poet.  It is like a bride after the nuptial night coming out and
going to her mother straight, without telling anything to anyone. 
Even to her mother, she merely 'looks' at her and does not say anything.

What then, all the scriptures point out?  They point out the 'way'
only and not the 'destination'.  Words go and come back failing.....

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 20, 2008, 12:14:29 AM
Dear Gangajal,
          :) Let me tell the practise now... Coz i am sure  you are more interested in what to do. :)

Having known your are consciousness... live it. Live a Ramana's life. Just become witness of everything that happens... the mind might have lots of thoughts, worries, ideas ... allow them to remain... u just witness.

Love!
Silence


Dear Silence,

     Your claim that the scripture does not talk of any experience will mean that there is no way
to test the scriptural claims. You say here that ,'Having known you are consciousness..'. How can
one know that one is consciousness?

Look at the following statement by Subramanian,'Because they cannot express what is experiential.'
What this suggests is that one has to directly experience that one is consciousness. Simply knowing
it at the intellectual level is not enough. You will have to directly experience it. A minimum requirement
is chittasuddhi, or purification of chitta (an aspect of the mind). What is the seat of chitta? It is located in
the subtle body in the Ajna Chakra in the forehead. Chittasuddhi implies that you will have changes in
your body, Kundalini Shakti will be active in you, Ajna Chakra will have to be pierced. Then one will have
to completely activate Sahasrara Chakra which is a near impossible task.

You say, 'Live a Ramana's life'. If only it were that easy!

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 20, 2008, 12:16:22 AM
Dear Subramanian,
   I agree with what you have written. The sages can not express their experience. What I am
trying to tell Silence is that we will also have to have the same experience. Mere intellectual
knowledge is not enough.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: cravinash on September 22, 2008, 09:27:15 AM
Dear Friends,
I am a new entrant to this forum. The topics you people having being discussing are really interesting and thought provoking.
As Gangajal has posted, "One has to strongly feel one is the witness ... this has to firmly get established and that happens with Sradha [Faith and surrender], Constant reflection [mananam], and meditation on it [nidhidhyasam] ... by mananam , nidhidhyasam ..."

I come across a basic question, in the above process are we not presupposing some kind of model to exist. To be more clear we are trying to meditate and believe in a process that we are not sure if it is actually right or wrong. I do experience such mental state some times, but what confuses me is having faith in such a process when we are not sure Why it is so?
I always fear if continuing to believe in such a process, there is a chance of hypnotizing myself. I hope I am able to reach you guys and am in sync with you. Initially I used to believe Sri RK very much( even now I put into practice some of his teachings). But at one stage I felt may be I am believing more ? AM not sure if this is the right way of thinking.

How does one demarcate between this "believing it as a result of our feeling  it"  and "feeling it as a result of our  believing  it"----- Atleast I am not fortunate to have a real physical guru with whom I could interact, so having read through these discussions, I felt atleast I could put forth my questions with you... and get some positive guidance..

regards
avinash
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 23, 2008, 01:47:47 AM
Dear Avinash

What you have written here,

''I come across a basic question, in the above process are we not presupposing some kind of model to exist. .....................
I always fear if continuing to believe in such a process, there is a chance of hypnotizing myself. I hope I am able to reach you guys and am in sync with you. Initially I used to believe Sri RK very much( even now I put into practice some of his teachings). But at one stage I felt may be I am believing more ? AM not sure if this is the right way of thinking.

How does one demarcate between this "believing it as a result of our feeling  it"  and "feeling it as a result of our  believing  it""

is spot on. One can never be sure if one is not hypnotizing oneself. So one must follow what sages and saints actually say about the experience.

What Silence is not understanding is that all Yogic paths ultimately lead to the activation of Sahasrara Chakra in the linga sarira (subtle body).
The minimum requirement for that is the activation of Ajna Chakra which leads to Chitta suddhi. No one can have chittasuddhi without many years of celibacy and practice of meditation. The Yogi will have many experiences before ultimate realization. These experiences can even be at the physical level (like physiological changes of the body) and at the mental level. It is these cumulative changes which convince a person that he is not hallucinating. It is not even necessary to be convinced that the theory of the scripture is right. All one has to have is sraddha.

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 23, 2008, 10:53:16 AM
Dear gangajal,  To add a few things that you have said:

1.  The basic requirement is sraddha and saburi.  Faith and perseverence.
The faith gives us a belief that our goal is the correct one.  Perseverence
is required to pursue the goal. 

2. To have doubts as to whether these are hallucinations or whether
Sri RK or Bhagavan Ramana are correct or not is lack of faith.
Even to keep these doubts involve duality and it does not lead to
non dual Brahman.

3.  Keep Sri RK or Bhagavan as your Guru and keep the duality only
during/for  following path indicated by them.  Once you attain
non dual realization, even Guru is no further there, since You are
He.

Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 23, 2008, 11:24:48 AM
Dear srkudai,  Yes.  Bhagavan has also said, that Karma, Bhakti
and Yoga are only auxillary sub-tracts, to go to the royal road
of Jnana Vichara, and to reach the goal of Brhaman.  See
Upadesa Saram.

The trouble with the first three are that they only render Chitta
suddhi, purity of mind, and do not go beyond that.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 23, 2008, 11:11:11 PM
Dear Silence, Subramanian,

          Patanjali's Yoga Sutra is a dualistic system which considers Isvara as a special Purusha. On that ground alone, followers of Kevala Advaita school will not accept it. However, even Bhagavan Ramana accepts the need for activation of chakras. Just check his discussion of hrit chakra (heart chakra) in "Talks with Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi".

         Yes, I did read Sri Ramana's statement about celibacy as only an option. I do not see how it can only be an option. It is not possible to awaken the Kundalini and to activate the chakras without strict celibacy. Moreover Sri Ramakrishna stresses the need for celibacy for higher experiences.

         I also do not accept that only Jnana can lead to the Advaita experience. Even Bhakti can lead to the same experience although Bhaktas usually do not want such an experience. I recall reading somewhere Bhagavan Ramana admitting the even Japa can lead to the Advaita experience. So he must disagree with Shankara's position that only jnana can yield the Advaita experience. Of course Sri Ramakrishna says that Bhakti also leads to the Advaita experience.

        It is NOT possible to keep spiritual experiences separate from the linga sarira. We do not 'see' God because of impurities in our linga sarira. The various techniques used in sadhana, vichara, bhakti, karma, raja yoga, are there to purify the linga sarira.

        I am not advanced enough to know if Vichara is the best method for chittasuddhi!

Regards

Gangajal
         
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 24, 2008, 05:11:02 AM
I think it is impossible in these matters to prove in any debate who is right and who is wrong. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: cravinash on September 25, 2008, 09:09:26 AM
Dear Gangajal,
  The comment, "We do not 'see' God because of impurities in our linga sarira. The various techniques used in sadhana, vichara, bhakti, karma, raja yoga, are there to purify the linga sarira."...is little ambiguous.
I did have this question in my mind for a long time in my mind too..

Firslty, the concept of purity or impurity is a relative phenomena. What seems to pure to one could be impure to another. The same holds true for the concept or right and wrong. And there is no concept of complete purity(it's an ideal one as far as my understanding goes).
Now coming to the stress or emphasis laid by some gurus on the purity aspect, i feel all these rules or preachings are laid down in order to enable one person to focus more towards something higher.not to distract himself with the worldly aspects.


So depending on the environment a person is exposed to, the degree of purity, the extent of Yoga sutra practice varies.

In the above cases,  where we tend to talk about the linga sarira, we are talking in the frame of this linga sarira..., which itself is supposed to be a wrong reference frame, as per the concept of advaita. So, when the reference frame is itself wrong, the attributes that we define in that frame has no meaning.


Also, once one is affirming the existence of purity, he is indirectly affirming the duality aspect. SO as long a one is stressing on the purity aspect, he is more moving away from the aspect of advaita.

For example, Janaka, is an perfect example of one who lead his life enjoying the material aspect and at the same time always in syn with the higher aspects.


The patanjali yoga sutras, presume that (as one member was pointing out) existence of dual phenomena. So when we talk about the concept of advaita, these stand no where (due regards to Patanjali), but the main purpose of these is to enable a common man to head towards the ultimate goal. So,Once, an emphasis is laid on these principles, there is more chances for a common man to implement or rather try to implement them. Also, these principles, talk more about having a balanced and moderate approach towards life. May that could be the reason fr emphasizing them more.

Also, in one of the answers, that Ramana points out so does SRK, committing sin is humane. But brooding on that is really sinful. And as long as we experience this linga sarira we belong to humane creed.

Correct me if my thinking is wrong!!!

Regards
avinash

Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 25, 2008, 11:40:53 PM
Dear Avinash,
     You have raised the following issues:

1. You find the concept of purifying linga sarira to be ambiguous. You are saying that since 'purity or impurity is a relative phenomena. What seems to pure to one could be impure to another. The same holds true for the concept or right and wrong.'.

2. You feel that the concept of linga sarira is itself a wrong reference frame as far as Advaita is concerned. Hence,
you say that 'when the reference frame is itself wrong, the attributes that we define in that frame has no meaning.'
You also say,'once one is affirming the existence of purity, he is indirectly affirming the duality aspect. SO as long
as one is stressing on the purity aspect, he is more moving away from the aspect of advaita.'.

3. The patanjali yoga sutras have no locus standi as far as Advaita Vedanta is concerned.

4. You also say that,'Ramana points out so does SRK, committing sin is humane. But brooding on that is really sinful.
And as long as we experience this linga sarira we belong to humane creed.'.

This would be my answer to your 4 issues or questions:

You have actually answered your questions when you say in point 4 that, 'as long as we experience this linga sarira we belong to humane creed'. Indeed, you are right. Right now, unless you or any other member are Self realized, you feel the existence of the mind.
Neither the body nor the mind nor the world are unreal to you. You have yourself admiited that when you have written that you experience the 'linga sarira' in point 4. It does not matter what Advaita is saying.

So what can we deduce from the fact that the mind is real to us and that it is a small fraction of the linga sarira? We deduce that it is IMPOSSIBLE to claim that linga sarira is a wrong reference frame simply because it is unreal as far as Advaita is concerned. Even Shankaracharya admits this when he says that 'Chittasuddhi' is sine qua non for a spiritual aspirant. The seat of Chitta is in Ajna Chakra in the linga sarira. No one can reach the ultimate state without gaining control of the Ajna Chakra. The piercing of Ajna Chakra leads gradually to 'Chittasuddhi'.  If the linga sarira is a wrong reference frame then why would Shankaracharya ask for chittasuddhi when chitta is part of the linga sarira?

This also answers the issue you raised about the relativity of purity and impurity. The piercing of the chakras of the linga sarira is the definition of purity. The issue of  relativity of phenomena is a non sequitur issue.

It is true that Advaita does not accept the dualistic stance of Patanjali's Yoga Sutra. Nevertheless, the practice of stilling the mind is accepted by Advaita.

As far as I know Sri Ramakrishna did ask us not to brood over sins. He also asked us not to commit sins.

So when does the Advaitic concepts od unreality of linga sarira apply? It certainly does not apply to us who are experiencing the mind part of the linga sarira. Only that person can say that the linga sarira is unreal who has actually 'seen' that. Otherwise even a beginner would commit sin, kill, rape and loot and say that he is doing nothing since stressing on the purity aspect implies moving away from the aspect of advaita.

Any way this is my opinion.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 26, 2008, 02:39:17 AM
I notice that many followers of Advaita mix the positions proper for paramarthika with those proper for vyavaharika level.
Such mixing leads to claims that purity leads us away from Advaita and that linga sarira does not matter in Advaita. The unreality
of the world is a paramarthika satya. It is not true from the point of view of vyavaharika.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 26, 2008, 11:45:39 PM
Dear Silence,

      Yes, from the point of view of vyavaharika level you can interpret the word unreal to mean transitory. From the point of view of paramarthika I believe that the universe and its living beings do not exist. I am also glad that you feel your mind! I also agree with you that, 'the root of the problem is mental identification with mind and body  ... We have to see the problem and eliminate it. So we need not eliminate mind ... nor eliminate the body ... we need to eliminate identification with these.'.

      My problem is with your statement, 'Don't touch any of these ... just curl back into the Consciousness ... and then, the body, subtle body and mind are where they are... you are pure witness of them all !'  Surely you can see that your advice not to touch any of these directly contradicts your statement,'Chitta Suddhi is not "Controlling Mind" ... it is purification ...'. How would you purify your chitta without 'touching' it? I know you have argued that purification means,'not identifying with all these ... That is all ... Nothing else what so ever. A mind that does not identify "I" with body , subtle body and mind is simply the mind that is pure... coz it works right way.'  What I am saying is that it is not possible for a mind full of lust, greed, anger, jealousy, ego, deception etc to not identify with the sthula and linga sarira.

     No spiritual practice will succeed unless you cleanse your chitta of lust, greed, anger, jealousy, ego, deception etc. Such a cleansing will automatically open your Ajna Chakra which is the seat of chitta!  It doesn't matter whether you use the path of enquiry or the path of Yoga or any other path to cleans your mind.

    You have stated that,'No Ajna chakra, no Pranayama, pratyahara etc... All that is futile waste of time. Someone who is not convinced will do them to learn they are waste of time ! [Pranayama can have physical benefits not ... spiritual]'. Some people might think these are waste of time. Then there are others who do not find these waste of time. It all depends on one's experience.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 27, 2008, 03:53:11 AM
Dear Silence,
   
 Let me point to the following points in 'Genuine directions to the true seeker(3)' posted by Subramanian:

29. Heart is the temple and seat of God.

30. The first lesson of the sannyasis is to keep a pure heart.

A pure heart is the minimum requirement for spiritual practice to succeed. This pure heart is attained by Chittasuddhi. The seat of Chitta is Ajna Chakra. So one can NOT avoid cleaning the linga sarira in any spiritual practice.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on September 27, 2008, 08:42:48 AM
Linga Sarira is a reflecting medium of Pure conscious being.At present that mirror is ridden with dust of tendencies.
Tendencies persists only with our encouragement to them.The very attending to the tendencies is to give them
strength.Whatever the spiritual practice one has to withdraw attending to the tendencies and clean te mirror of
the mind so that there is exact reflection of pure conscious being in it.In self-enquiry we attend to the source of
the mind rther than the contents of the mind.Once we stop attending to the contents of the mind their grip on
the mind becomes less and less,finally the contents die a natural death because of lack of food supply,their food
being attention.Unless the mirror of the mind is cleaned reflection of Pure conscious beig in it is not possible.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 28, 2008, 11:41:04 AM
Dear srkudai, gangajal and others,

Bhagavan says, that when we obtain the thing that we desired or
when something bad happens to the thing that we hated, the
mind goes inwards and experiences the bliss. (Who am I?)
All the emotions, good and bad, on culmination get only the bliss
of the Self.  But this is temprorary, bliss.  After one such attainment
of bliss, we go to something else.  Like a man suffering in the scroching
sun, going to the tree shade, and again coming out to the schorching
sun!  (Again, Who am I?)  Once we know, how to remain in the shade,
permanently, that is Jnana.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: ramanaduli on September 28, 2008, 11:33:09 PM
Dear sir
I a new to this foru. It is very interesting and good to learn, Recently I saw one video of Rajammal from Rajapalayam who
saw many siddas, yagna and Sri bhagavan in her vision. Really very higher soul she is.

Ramanaduli
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 29, 2008, 11:40:24 PM
Linga Sarira is a reflecting medium of Pure conscious being.At present that mirror is ridden with dust of tendencies.
Tendencies persists only with our encouragement to them.The very attending to the tendencies is to give them
strength.Whatever the spiritual practice one has to withdraw attending to the tendencies and clean te mirror of
the mind so that there is exact reflection of pure conscious being in it.In self-enquiry we attend to the source of
the mind rther than the contents of the mind.Once we stop attending to the contents of the mind their grip on
the mind becomes less and less,finally the contents die a natural death because of lack of food supply,their food
being attention.Unless the mirror of the mind is cleaned reflection of Pure conscious being in it is not possible.

Absolutely wonderful, DRPVSSNRAJU! You have very clearly made the point I was trying to make.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on September 30, 2008, 12:18:49 AM
Dear Silence,
      Yes, what you have written is theoretically correct.However, your advice to 'Correct the cause, not the symptoms.', seems to me
not to be practical. I think the symptoms also need to be treated. Otherwise the patient may die! One has to first cleanse the mirror of the
heart. Otherwise it is impossible to attain Self realization.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on September 30, 2008, 12:04:28 PM
Dear gangajal, I agree with skrudai, that, it is the cause that
one should correct and not the symptoms, even though the
process is very very difficult and is hard to put into practice.

I wrote sometime back, about a man who had monkey around his
neck and did not know how to get rid of it.  One doctor said,
"you sedate the monkey so that the monkey will not trouble you."
Another said, 'i shall sedate you so that you will not be worrying
about the monkey."  The third one, who came, cut the knot
that was tying the monkey with the man and the man was free!
Later, the man came to the third doctor and said, 'I am a little
restless becuase the monkey is no longer there and I was so
much used to it."  Then, the docor painted a monkey picture
on his chest and said, "Here is your monkey and be happy."

All English medicines correct the symptoms.  If there is a head
give a pain killer.  If there is insomonia, give sleeping tablet.
But native Indian medicines attacked the cause.  Even though
the process is difficult and takes a long time, the cure is
permanent.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 01, 2008, 02:18:26 AM
Dear Subramanian, Silence,

         Most people fail to find the cause. This is true even for the vast majority of monks. This is
the reason why most monks fail to get ultimate realization.

         In fact all that spiritual practices do is to purify our hearts, i.e., treat the symptoms. Very few people can
treat the cause of their symptom. One reason why they fail is actually stated in the Upanishads:

"That Self cannot be gained by the Veda, nor by understanding, nor by much
learning. He whom the Self chooses, by him the Self can be gained. The Self
chooses him as his own.
"(Mundaka Upanishad III.2.3)

Self realization is a gift of the Atman. No one can attain it through one's own effort. What one can do on one's
own effort (even here help from Guru is useful) is to purify one's heart.  So if Atman has not chosen you then no
human effort to treat the cause will succeed.

Another reason is time. If the time is not right the spiritual aspirant will not succeed. I have posted below Vyasa's lecture on
the importance of time:

No man can acquire anything by his own acts or by sacrifices and worship. No
man can give anything to a fellow man. Man acquires everything through Time.
The Supreme Ordainer has made the course of Time the means of acquisition.
By mere intelligence or study of the scriptures, men, if Time be unfavorable,
cannot acquire any earthly possession. Sometimes an ignorant fool may succeed
in winning wealth. Time is the efficacious means for the accomplishment of
all acts. During times of adversity, neither science, nor incantations, nor
drugs, yield any fruits. In times, however, of prosperity, those very things,
properly applied, become efficacious and bear success. By Time the winds blow
violently; by Time the clouds become rain charged; by Time tanks become
adorned with lotuses of different kinds; by Time trees in the forest become
decked with flowers. By Time nights become dark or lighted. By Time the moon
becomes full. If the Time for it does not come, trees do not bear flowers and
fruits. If the Time for it does not come, the currents of rivers do not
become fierce. Birds and snakes and deer and elephants and other animals
never become excited when the Time for it does not come. If the Time for it
does not come, women do not conceive. It is with Time that winter, and summer,
and the rainy seasons come. If the Time for it does not come, no one is born
and no one dies. If the Time does not come, the infant does not acquire the
power of speech. If the Time does not come, one does not acquire youth. It is
with Time that the seed sown puts forth its sprouts. If the Time does not
come, the Sun does not appear above the horizon, nor, when the Time for it
does not come, does he repair to the Asta hills. If the Time for it does not
come, the Moon does not wax nor wane, nor the ocean, with its high billows,
rise and ebb. .... The irresistible course of Time affects all mortals. All
earthly things, ripened by Time, suffer destruction. Some slay some men. The
slayers again are slain by others. This is the language of the world. Really,
however, no one slays and no one is slain. Some one thinks men slay (their
fellow-men). Another thinks men do not slay. The truth is that the birth and
destruction of all creatures have been ordained to happen in consequence of
their very nature. ... This body even is not mine. Nothing in this earth is
mine. Or, the things of this earth belong as much to others as to me. The
wise, seeing this, do not suffer themsleves to be deluded. There are thousands
of causes for sorrow, and hundreds of causes for joy. These everyday affect
the ignorant only, but not him that is wise. These in course of Time, become
objects of affection or aversion, and appearing as bliss or woe revolve (as if
in a wheel) for affecting living creatures.

(Mahabharat: Santi Parva Section XXV)


Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on October 01, 2008, 08:01:14 AM
Dear Gangajal,
                   Three things are required for self-realistion.1)swaprayatnam---Effort to know the Truth.All spiritual disciplines come under this category.
                                                                               2)Eswara kataksham---God's grace.
                                                                                3)kala Paripakvam------Favorable time.Unless time is favorable to us we cannot do anything.   
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on October 01, 2008, 10:55:46 AM
Dear Gangajal and Raju,  Three things as you has said are
essential for attaining the Self.  Bhagavan has also said that
the desisreless actions, bhakti, raja yoga ---  all these can only
purify the heart.  But Atman can be attained only through self
enquiry, the jnana marga.  Again the Self can be attained only
through the grace of the Self.  Here, what you have said is
correct, that is, the Isavara, has to choose the one to whom
He can reveal Himself.   That is why, I mentioned earlier in
some other post, that the symptoms can be removed to obtain
chitta shuddhi.  But the Self realization can be attained only
through annihiilation of the cause, the 'I'.  Of course, the Self
should choose you. 

Saint Manikkavachakar has said in Siva Puranam, (Decad of
Siva's immmeasurable antiquity):

Avan arulale avan thaal vanangi.....

Praying His feet through His grace.

In Reflections of the golden eyes, I mentioned about somebody,
who got Self realization, by Bhagavan's stern look for one minute!
To Lakshmanaswami, He spoke only a few words!

That is Bhagavan's choice and grace!

Arunachala Siva.

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on October 01, 2008, 12:08:39 PM
Disidentifying with the nonself amounts to attaining the self because you are already that.Spiritual discipline is a process of negation of nonself
rather than attaining the self.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 01, 2008, 10:57:44 PM
Dear Subramanian,

     What you have written here, "But Atman can be attained only through self enquiry, the jnana marga. " is the standard Kevala Advaita position. I am posting below a Sri Ramakrishna quote which does not agree with the Kevala Advaita position:

"Bhaktiyoga is the religion for this age. But that does not mean that the lover
of God will reach one goal and the philosopher (Jnani) and worker (Karmayogi)
another. It means that if a person seeks the knowledge of Brahman he can
attain It by following the path of Bhakti too.
God, who loves His devotee,
can give him the knowledge of Brahman if He so desires.


But the Bhakta wants to realize the Personal God endowed with form and talk
to Him. He seldom seeks the knowledge of Brahman. But God, who does everything
at His pleasure, can make His devotee the heir to His infinite glories if it
pleases Him.
He gives His devotee both the love of God and knowledge of
Brahman. If one is able to reach Calcutta, one can see the Maidan and the
musuem and other places too. The thing is how to reach Calcutta."

--- Sri Ramakrishna
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 01, 2008, 11:01:47 PM
Disidentifying with the nonself amounts to attaining the self because you are already that.Spiritual discipline is a process of negation of nonself
rather than attaining the self.

Dear DRPVSSNRAJU,

Yes! Yes! Yes!

No amount of spiritual practice can yield Ultimate Realization. All that spiritual practices do is reduce the obstacle somewhat. As both you and Subramanian have written there are 2 other factors, Atman choosing and time.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 01, 2008, 11:09:45 PM
Dear Gangajal,
            :)

That statement essentially is a restatement of what i was saying: You are not the Doer. Things happen through you, you are not the one who is doing. A devotee of Ramana says: I am like a flute... it is the wind that whistles. Please see the simplicity of this...

There is nothing like "Attainment" of self ... You are it. But doership has to die... but doership dies of itself ... in due course. That you are inquiring into Spirituality is already a sign that your "doer-ship" 's time has come...

So this is how it happens ... someone who wants to know the Truth ... if he is ready , hears this: You are not the Doer ... and if he is truely ready "FLASH" he is free.

If he is not ready, he might take a different track ... keep on putting limitations on himself ... and one fine day, he would hear this again --- lo! Flash, he is free.


Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,

      It would be lovely if it happens like ,"You are not the Doer ... and if he is truely ready "FLASH" he is free. ". In reality Spiritual practice is a hard slog trying to remove impurities or obstacles.

     Let me tell you a conversation with some of us and a certain Swami S some years ago. I attended 4 lectures by the Swami on Pancadasi. After the lecture ended some of us met the Swami outside the lecture hall. An American asked the Swami whether he knew anyone who has experienced Savikalpa Samadhi. The Swami smiled and said yes. Then he asked us if we noticed anything wrong with his behavior. I
got the distinct impression that he was stuck at some point and he was trying to find out the reason for his spiritual problem. People fail because they have failed to completely purify their heart.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 02, 2008, 01:41:53 AM
Dear Silence,
      I have a question for you about a completely different topic. Do you know the policy of Lord Venkataswara temple in Tirupati. Do they allow white Hindus to enter the temple?

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on October 02, 2008, 09:00:16 AM
Self-enquiry is one of the path for self realisation,it is "not the only path".Bhagawan himself admitted that if there is total surrender there is no need to do
self-enquiry.Total surrender is Para Bhakti.This is seen in Gopikas,chaitanya Prabhu,Ramakrishna Paramahamsa,Meera Bai,Raman Maharshi,Moses,Jesus after
crucifixion,Hanuman,Radha,Narada,Vidura to mention few.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on October 02, 2008, 01:57:21 PM
Dear Gangajal,  I never said that Atma Vichara alone confers
Atma Jnana, the Knowledge of the Self.  Bhagavan approved
all the other paths as ancillary tracts to reach the roay path
of self enquiry.  One can take an route that it suits him most.
But, at the end, he comes to the royal path.  In Sri Ramana
Pada Malai, about 3000 verses on Ramana's Feet, (which
contains many of Bhagavan's direct sayings, Muruganar says:

My Ramana's feet said: " Para Bhakti is Para Jnana.  Siva Bhakti
is Siva Jnana." 

This is also described in Upadesa Saram. 

Arunachala Siva. 
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 02, 2008, 11:14:20 PM
Dear Subramanian,

     Thank you for the clarification.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 02, 2008, 11:15:25 PM
Dear Silence,
     Thank you for the information regarding Tirupathi.

Regards

Gangajal
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: gangajal on October 02, 2008, 11:43:04 PM
Dear Silence,

        You have written,

  "Without understanding if the same thing is done to keep the mind still, the basic problem is not solved, so the quietness of mind will only remain for a limited time... and soon, vanish. Coz cause of the lack of calmness is not eliminated... only mind is calmed for a few moments."

I looked at the following Gita verses:

Fix your mind on Me alone; let your reason penetrate into Me; without doubt
you will then abide in Me alone for ever more. (Gita 12.8)

If you are unable to fix your mind steadily on Me (even at the start) then try
to reach Me through the systematic practice of concentration. (Gita 12.9)

It seems to me that one does not need the type of understanding you are advocating. It is enough to accept that you are trying to fix your mind on God. If the mind refuses to remain calm then Gita 12.9 says try again. One can get control over the mind through practice. So what
role does understanding play? I would say none. One has a crude intellectual type understanding at the beginning. One's understaning
grows as one tries repeatedly to fix the mind.

Of course Gita also accepts the path of Jnana as is clear from this verse:

Those who are devoted to the Imperishable (the Impersonal Absolute) - who is
the firm support of the world and is also undefinable, unmanifested,
transcendent, motionless, and all-pervading - even they reach me alone,
striving with their senses controlled, and with mind tranquillised and set
on the welfare of all. (Gita 12.3-4)

Gita, however, says that

The obstacles facing those devoted to the Impersonal Absolute are far greater;
for the way of an unclear ideal is difficult for an embodied being to understand and follow.
(Gita 12.5)

Regards

Gangajal

Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: Subramanian.R on October 03, 2008, 10:43:35 AM
Dear srkudai,  Yes.  The first 6 chapters of Gita speak about Thou,
the second 6 chapters speak about That and the last six, the union
: Tat Tvam Asi.  I have also read Gambhirananda's book.  It is
wonderful.  It is also said:  The second chapter, Sankhya Yoga,
is the essence of the entire Gita.  The other chapters are all
details. 

Arunachala Siva.
Title: Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
Post by: DRPVSSNRAJU on October 03, 2008, 11:03:07 AM
Though self is both manifest and unmanifest during Sadhana stage we have to disciminate between drik and drisya.Even Bhagawan spoke
about drik drisya viveka.We should not start from paramarthika satya during Sadhana.The truth that both manifest and unmanifest is one and the same is the final existential understanding.
Wise people do not hold on to Adviata when they relate to a Master though they knew pretty well about Advaita.