Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - srkudai

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
61
Dear Anil ji,
     :)

Quote
I advise doing japa to the Self, either by repeatedly thinking about it or by repeating affirmations such as ?I am the Self?.
This affirmation is the greatest mantra of all. If you can do it continuously, without interruption, you will get results very
quickly. There is no greater japa, no greater sadhana than this.

Do you find this atrocious ? :) Annamalai Swami ji says that this is the highest sadhana, if it is the highest should it be equivalent to self inquiry or not ?  if it is not self inquiry, how can it be highest sadhana ?

Please let me know

Love!
Silence

62
Dear Anil ji,
      :)
Ego can make any activity into protecting itself from destruction.
It is not the particular method that gives protection against this .

and why do you address Ravi ji and talk about me as "him". Please address me as udai, and talk to me if you have something to say. why speak to Ravi ji or other Devotees about some "him" ? :)

There is no contradiction... you are missing it.

Love!
Silence

63
Dear Anil ji,
        :) you have given me a nice task :) ... 13 questions. ok, let me answer as I understand.

1. Aham Vritti
[short answer: "A sense or notion of I" , fictitious entity.]

long answer:
Quote
imagine seeing a dark cloud. What is the actual experience ... only is-ness. or presence.
some background notions are used to carve out a "cloud" even.
and then i think cloud is good or bad for me etc. these are all thoughts.
the background of all these thoughts is a fictitious sense of "me" !
in reality there is this body which as no sense of me
awareness has no sense of me.
rest are thoughts which are transient and momentary.
where is the "me" ?
2. I-thought : [see above.]
3. irreducible datum of all our experiences : [You/Me/Self]
4. The Heart : into which everything dissolves. Self.
5. Diving in:
[
Seeing where from this sense of I is arising. Like a dog sniffing for a smell. see
do the trees or mountains or any of the external world says so ?
if the body says "I" ?
if awareness says so ?
thus recognize there is none.
thus none to move inside or outside. what more is to be done ?
]

6. In-gathering of the mind and senses.
[
Withdrawing importance given to them. We think we will enjoy through senses or mental states and hence give them a lot of importance. when the wisdom dawns that they are irrelevant, one withdraws attention from them and stops giving them importance. one does nothing to gather them ... they simply lose themselves because they rely on the value or importance we give them]

7. Source: Self.

8. I AM THAT I AM
[
A negation of what I am not.
Self , cannot be described. And one need not say I am that Self. Self does not say that , right ?
and infact Self need not be described. It is ever self evident and every description needs it as the background.
so every scriptural statement (like this) is a negation of all notions that we hold about ourselves.
it just means "I am Udai", remove that notion "udai".
"I am a devotee" ... drop that "devotee"
dropping here is simply stop giving it importance... stop believing in its reality. it depends on our constant meditation to gain reality.
then what remains, ... wordless , nameless Self] .

9. Chit-Jada Granthi
[
ignorance.
imagine a red hot ball of fire rolling.
fire has no shape ... its not a ball and cannot roll.
ball is not hot !
the properties of one are superimposed on the other.

body is jada, awareness is cit ... ignorance is to superimpose the properties of one on the other.
is-ness or beingness of cit is superimposed on body
the jada-nature, mortality of body is superimposed on awareness when we say i am tall, short, dying etc.

this ignorance is chit-jada granthi.]

10. Pure I = Self.
[Actually a negation again. Negation of all notions associated with I ]

11.  Reflected Consciousness
[
Consciousness talked about with reference to a specific intellect.
like pot space .
space seen with reference to a pot.
space itself is not bound by pot.
there is nothing else for consciousness to reflect in.

this allegory is only provided to suggest (Adhyatma Ramayana , hanuman is taught by sri rama : sri rama hrdhayam) first withdraw attention away from objects to see oneself as the awareness in our mind and then "my mind" notion needs to be negated, hence this)
]

12. One pointed-ness of mind:
[When there is no where to go, nothing to do, mind remains here, with the present, what is. that is also called one pointedness.
usually minds are scattered because of a "doer" or "enjoyer" who is seeking something or the else... if nothing else, moksha. so when this seeker is dissolved or seen as unreal... one remains where one is, just as one is. this is single pointedness. no where to go , nothing to do.]

13. Attention itself, what is it?
[You.]

Love!
Silence

64
General Discussion / Re: Rough Notebook-Open Forum
« on: December 14, 2017, 10:45:50 AM »
Dear Ravi ji,
       :)

Thank you very much for the wonderful post on Gayatri.
I do not really remember if I read this conversation of Bhagavan, but somehow intuitively it clicked really well when i read this from you today.

I have been sitting with Gayathri Mantra Dhyana every day and I do see how powerful it is. Infact i was intuitively feeling that it is drawing me inside ... deeper by each chant ... and almost as if "am i chanting ?" or "is it that some power is making me do it and drawing me in" !

What can it be if not Self Inquiry ?

I completely agree with this:

Quote
Meditation is to merge the mind in this reality by dwelling on this essence of pure consciousness...and this is something that can be done only by invoking the grace and it is this 'anu-graha' that can bring about this (graha refers to this pulling power)....it is the power of the Self that has to effect this.


I think all practices culminate into Self Inquiry. Suppose someone were to imagine a God in heart and meditate on the God , eventually as he gets absorbed , he is left in Just Be State. And if he holds onto the wrong idea that god is a specific form, that gets cleared eventually through the grace.

Grace is very powerful. I was listening to Nochur Venkataraman ji and he speaks Atma Darshanam, Ishvara Darshanam and Krpa Darshanam or the darshanam of Grace - and  Krpa is the highest actually .

The point is I may dissolve in Self / Awareness [or God] by chanting Rama nama
or I may keep concentrating on the "I AM" and retain my "individuality"
It is not what method i choose , but whether i dissolve or not that matters.
if i am using the method to dissolve the individuality in the Presence/God ... that is Self Inquiry. Since the individuality is dissolved there is nothing more to do and that is Just Be.

if i use the same method and retain the individuality in a subtle way ... the best sign that this is the case is that i am not relaxing enough , or i am not mindful enough... when this is the case, it is not self inquiry.



Love!
Silence

65
Dear Anil ji,
       :)

Some verses from Vijnana Bhairava Tantra:

verse 98:

Quote
इच्छायामथवा ज्ञाने जाते चित्तँ निवेशयेत् ।
आत्मबुध्दयानन्यचेतास्ततस्तत्त्वार्थदर्शनम्॥

One should fix one's attention on the point where iccha [desire] or knowledge [knowingness] has arisen with undivided attention on that one gains insight into the essence of the reality.


verse 97:

Quote
yadaa mamecChaa notpannaa GYaana.N va kastadaasmi vai |
tattvato~ha.N tathaabhuutastalliinastanmanaa bhavet ||

यदा ममेच्छा नोत्पन्ना ज्ञानँ व कस्तदास्मि वै ।
तत्त्वतोऽहँ तथाभूतस्तल्लीनस्तन्मना भवेत् ॥

When neither the will nor knowledge (or thought) has arisen, what is my primordial state, by being one with that, remaining there, one should merge one's mind there.

Love!
Silence


66
Dear Anil ji,
          :)

Quote
I requested you to wait for my responses, but you are so assailed by thought-wave, having no patience at all, that you promptly came with a barrage of useless and meaningless questions in a hurry, without even reading my post

Do you see , Anil ji, that you are unnecessarily saying this ? Whether i did it intentionally or "assailed by a thought wave" :) you have no way to know. Why this personal attack Anil ji ? Lets talk the topic. not people .

:) and Anil ji, suppose  i am indeed being assailed by thought waves ... then as a person with calmness what should you do ? ensure that i do not get caught in thought waves ... not say "you are assailed by thought waves and have no patience" ... LOL that amounts to looking down upon someone ... if i am indeed a lowly being, you should have calmly and with lot of compassion said ... "please do not get carried away, lets calmly inquire etc" ...


Quote
I have written that as soon as one becomes aware that the Self-attention has been broken on account of rising of a thought, one should not complete the sequence, but instead, by the contrivance pointed out, one should regain the Self-attention.

:) so is it completing the sequence of thoughts or completing a single thought ? :)
the original question was about a single thought , so i considered it not an answer.
but if u say that its the stream that is blocked ... i consider it an answer, i have some more questions , but for now we can park it.

Love!
Silence

67
This is very nice explanation and let us together see what this has to say :)

Quote
Who am I? The sthūla dēha [the gross physical body], which is [composed] of sapta dhātus [the seven constituents, namely chyle, blood, flesh, fat, marrow, bone and semen], is not 'I'.

Lets do an interesting experiment. we need two people for this. We may invite our friend to participate with us.
so i close my eyes, and my friend touches me on my hand with a pen.  :) The experiment is done.
lets now ask : "what was my experience ?"

lets just stick to what we experienced.
what is the description ? Please see...
"my friend touched my hand with a pen" is this an accurate description or is the description:
"experience of touch"
its just an experience of touch, rest of the story is added up by my mind. Please see this as this is very important.

Our Sthula Deha ... what is it ? Carefully , it is only a collection of sensations. Do i experience this sthula body or is it only a set of sensations ? This is an interesting inquiry. i see , i feel, i hear etc. these all that are there. This is what we call a body. Its only a set of sensations.

And what happens if we zoom into a particular sensation ... observe it and zoom into it, closely seeing what is there ... and we see what ? There is no "I" out there. My hair is graying, it does not protest this. I may protest it. Please see this. In the lap of God, this body is eternally fulfilled.
The body does not alienate itself from the whole body of God. This is the beauty. It has not individuality of its own. it just functions as per a certain set of laws.

This cannot be a me , because there is no one out there. this is the starting point of our investigation.

Love!
Silence


68
Dear Anil ji,
     :)
you have not answered any of the questions Anil ji. You have not answered the first question here. Please take your time and answer to the point raised. what is the use in posting a paragraph that does not answer the point raised ? 

Firstly :
when i said am i criticizing or looking down upon ramana/ sadhu om ... its saying "no" ... not that i am asking you.
suppose i say "can one quench thirst using mirage water" ... it just means "no.

anyways :

a) you have to recognize that thought has arisen , which you cannot do without observing. Am I right or do you think there is a way to discover that thought has arisen without observing.

you have not answered this.


b) What is meant by without completing ? when you observed it has already gone ! its something of the past.

you have not answered this either.


you have combined them and said "this is not correct" --- please take your time and answer the questions directly point by point Anil ji.

Love!
Silence


69
Dear Anil ji,
         :)

If you understand what self inquiry is : every method taught in the scriptures is self inquiry in content.
But if you have exotic ideas about it, it is missed even when presented. It is not that i do not understand self abidance.
i disagree with your idea of self abidance. this is the point.

what is the problem in answering my questions ? they are simple and straight ... instead you have raised another set of questions ...
my questions are direct and simple , single pointed questions.
you have raised so many generic questions "what is aham vritti" and we can go on discussing about it !

we need to have a systematic discussion -- the questions i raised , if you feel they are meaningless ... point it out. but answer them ... no hurry . you have written 3 posts in-between ... talking about everything other than the points raised. obviously you have no way to know what i read or what is my state of mind as i present this. so please do not waste time by discussing about these points which are out of your reach and lets discuss the topic. take your time and answer those questions . i think they are meaningful.

Love!
Silence

70
Dear Anil ji,
          :)

Quote
We are friends. Are we not? Well, what follows is emanating from my deep feeling of friendship and solicitude, and therefore, I hope that you will not mind at all.

No doubt on that Anil ji. We are friends who disagree on some ideas. That is perfectly fine.

Quote
I have reached conclusion that you have not read/studied Sri Bhagwan's Vichara in particular and His Teaching in general except Sri David Godman's 'Final Talks' and perhaps  the booklet 'Who Am I?'.  I feel that you might have read perfunctorily a few other books on Sri Bhagwan as well. Yes, of course, you have read some Vedanta, Sri Shankara's Works, Ashtavakra Gita , etc.
:) LOL how did you come to derive a list of books i read ? :D

Quote
From the study of these, you concluded that even Sri Bhagwan's Vichara could not go outside the scope of these sacred Works, and must be the same as presented in the Vedanta and taught by Sri Shankara.  But that is certainly not true as Sri Sadhu Om who moved closely intimately with Sri Bhagwan and associated closely with Sri Muruganar, has made clear in the above quote.

Ramana Paravidyopanishad , Sri Lakshmana Sarma:
verse 345:
The guru sugata [buddha] taught this truth, also the great teacher shankara taught the same; our own guru also tells us the same and this is also the essence of the vedanta.

Anil ji, In Vedanta being unique or different from tradition is not a virtue. A sage's greatness lies in the effortlessness with which he lives the teaching and not in giving a "different" teaching ... this is vedantic standpoint , some abrahmic faiths think that their prophet has to teach something different and new ... not so with vedanta.

Coming to your questions Anil ji, ill wait for you to answer my questions first and then ill respond to each and every one of these. There is no hurry , please take your time [not just hear , everywhere in life. be relaxed and calm is the fundamental aspect of vedanta , as you definitely know. we both are in agreement on this ]

Love!
Silence

71
I would like to repost : Atmavichar's post in Rough notebook forum here ...
This made my day and so i cannot help reposting it...

-----------------------------------------------------------

Quote
CHADWICK'S ENLIGHTENMENT
Once, I asked Chadwick, ?Are you realized?? I have put this question to all of the old devotees like Muruganar, Cohen, Osborne, Sadhu Natanananda, Devaraja Mudaliar and others. None of them either said yes or no - all smiled.
When I asked him whether he was realized, he did not say yes or no. Instead, he told me, ?I will tell you what happened. After many years of my stay with Bhagavan - four or five years, I committed the mistake of trying to evaluate how much I had progressed spiritually. This is a thing any seeker should not do. I felt that I had not progressed.
Many who saw me in Ramanasramam, looked at me like I was a sage or a saint saying, ?Oh! He is so fortunate. He is so close to Bhagavan. He meditates so much. He is already in that state.‟
This created a contradiction in me as I personally felt that I was not progressing spiritually. However, having left the material life I could not go back to a worldly life either. I felt caught between the devil and the deep sea.
I was sorrow-stricken. I ran to Bhagavan's hall. He was alone. I told him, ?Bhagavan, this is my plight. I am neither here nor there and this causes much sorrow in me.‟
Bhagavan looked at me compassionately and said, "Chadwick, who says all this?‟
Immediately, there was a current like shock in my body and I literally ran to my room, shut the doors and went into a neutral state. I was not bothered whether I was spiritually maturing or whether I would be able to stay in the world. I was in a neutral state of silence. A few days passed like that wherein I was neither happy nor worried.?
The only luxury that Chadwick allowed himself was taking his bath in a bathtub which he had in the verandah of his cottage. One day, shortly after the above incident, something happened unexpectedly.
As Chadwick told me later, ?I was taking my bath and very honestly Ganesan, I was not in a spiritual state or in a prayerful mood when it suddenly dawned - the ?I AM‟!?
He experienced it - not just as words. He was so ecstatic that he did not even dry himself. He just wrapped a towel around his waist and ran to the Old Hall from where a few days back he had run away. Fortunately, this time too, Bhagavan was alone. In this spiritual ecstasy of experiencing the ?I AM‟, where there was no Chadwick, just the ?I AM‟, he asked Bhagavan, ?Bhagavan, is
THIS it??
Chadwick recounted, ?Bhagavan gave me the most glorious smile, and then confirmed, ?Yes, Chadwick, THIS is THAT!‟ I then asked him, ?Bhagavan, is it so simple?‟
Bhagavan replied, ?Yes it is that simple.‟ Since then, I've never had any doubt.?
Ramana Periya Puranam

72
General Discussion / Re: Rough Notebook-Open Forum
« on: December 12, 2017, 03:18:23 PM »
Dear Atmavichar,
             :) This post brought tears to my eyes.

This is one of the rare gems really.

Love!
Silence

73
Dear Anil ji,
         :)
Quote
Yet, if you insist, I shall come up with my  own responses to all your questions some time tomorrow or the day after.

Please do so.

Love!
Silence

74
Dear Anil ji,
       :)

I hope if i question some of these things:
1. you would not take it to mean i am trying to teach you
or
2. i am criticizing or looking down upon Ramana / Sadhu OM

An inquiry can be conducted with an open mind without falling into any of these traps.

now ... you have written an entire post please comment on the following questions:

1.
Quote
"If other thoughts rise, one should, without attempting to complete them, enquire 'To whom did they rise?'
For this:
a) you have to recognize that thought has arisen , which you cannot do without observing. Am I right or do you think there is a way to discover that thought has arisen without observing.
b) What is meant by without completing ? when you observed it has already gone ! its something of the past.
or do you think a thought has staying power... it remains static ?

2.
Quote
'Watch all thoughts and events with detachment'
your emphasis on this quote:
Are you saying this is not vichara or are you questioning this method itself ?
if you are saying this is not vichara, who said it is vichara ? I certainly did not say so.
If you are questioning the method itself, then this is from the Buddha ... not from me.

3.
Quote
Self-attention,
what is this ? Self is not an object to be attended to.
how will you attend, please elaborate.
BTW : are you speaking of this awareness-watching-awareness school of thought ?



Love!
Silence
             

75
Dear Ravi ji,
     :) Yes its possible that thoughts do not arise.

If we do not talk [observe physical mauna] for a long time it would be a little difficult to start talking.
The same thing holds for mind too. when the mind does not talk for a long time, it takes some time to get it back to the thinking habit. Just as we might need a little effort to stop mind, it might require effort to make mind active again.

The crux of the understanding however is : whether mind is active or inactive, i remain ever untouched by the mind itself.

This is a very deep understanding. Movements in mind are seen as "That" ... like a mirage.  Not theoretically but really during the day to day activities.

In order to get to this simple understanding, however its important to revert to just be again and again.

Love!
Silence

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12