Author Topic: "I-I"  (Read 12258 times)

nonduel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
"I-I"
« on: May 06, 2008, 06:27:03 PM »
Could someone explain to me why Sri Ramana used "I-I" isntead of just "I"?
Oh Arunachala, blazing fire of Jnana, in my heart I pray and think of Thee from afar, root out the ego, merging me in the Self.

sonagiri

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2008, 08:42:22 PM »
The question is discussed at some length here:  http://davidgodman.org/rteach/iandii1.shtml. It's very good review of all the occurrences of the term min Bhagavan's writings

nonduel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2008, 12:42:18 AM »
Thank you  :)
Oh Arunachala, blazing fire of Jnana, in my heart I pray and think of Thee from afar, root out the ego, merging me in the Self.

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43530
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2008, 11:38:54 AM »
Could someone explain to me why Sri Ramana used "I-I" isntead of just "I"?

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi used the word I-I to distinguish
between Brahman from Jeevatman.  In Tamil, He used "thaan"
and "naan", the first denoting Brahman and the second Jeevatman,
Ego, mind and intellect.  Both "thaan" and "naan" appear in
Who am I? (Tamil version).  It is Brahman Vs. mind, intellect,
mind-stuff and ego

nonduel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2008, 04:58:02 AM »
I have a different comprehension of "I-I" than yours. I could be mistaken, but the link that Sonagiri gave (David Godman's site) gives a different explanation.

Sri Ramana said that by being one-pointed on the "I-Thought", it will eventually be dissolve by the Self . And this is what he called the "I-I". He also said that this wasn't the Jnani's, or SELF. Hence why he used "I-I", which is just before the Sahaja state or the Jnani state. The word "state" is of course used here only for discussion.

Sri Sadhu Om said that Self-Enquiry is keeping the attention on the self or self-attention, this is the "I-Thought". This "I-Thought" is the first thought from where all the others sprout from.

Oh Arunachala, blazing fire of Jnana, in my heart I pray and think of Thee from afar, root out the ego, merging me in the Self.

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43530
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2008, 01:06:14 PM »
Dear nonduel, I am not able to access davidgodman.org.  But I have
got his book "Be as you are" (1992 Penguin edition).  Unlike Aruthur
Osborne and others, dg does not use the word "I-I", many times, but
in his book, in page 58 says:... the seer, the seen and the seeing are
all manifestations of the same consciousness, namely "I-I".  Sri
Sadhu Om says that self-attention, will lead to dissolution of the " I
thought" in the Self. Further, the translation of famous Verse 2 of
Chapter 2 of Ramana Gita, (the verse composed by Bhagavan Himself)
gives two different versions in English.  Arthur Osborne says:
"In the inmost core, the Heart
Shines as Brahman alone,
As I-I, the Self-aware
Enter deep into the Heart
By search for Self, or diving deep,
With breadth under check,
Thus abide ever in Atman."

S. Sankaranarayanan, who has done English translation of Kapali
Sastri's Ramana Gita Bhashya says:

"In the Heart's cavity, the sole Brahman, as an ever persisting "I"
shines direct in the form of Self. Into the Heart, enter thyself, with
mind in search or in deeper plunge.  Or by restraint of life-movement,
be firmly poised in the Self."
 
Perhaps, the whole confusion arises due to English not having a direct word for Brahman or Self or Consciousness, like "thaan" in Tamil.
May be, writers could have used "i" and "I", but again the confusion
would have taken a different form!         
 

nonduel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2008, 06:19:37 PM »
Dear Subramanian,

The text on David Godman is too lenghty to post here, but I could copy and send you a copy if you agree.

My understanding is that, as Sri Sadhu Om wrote, self-attention will lead to the dissolution of the "I-Thought", or maybe a better way to say this is that the Self will "surge" and dissolve the "I-Thought". Thus the use of "I-I" instead of "I" or Self.

The nuance here is that this isn't Sahaja, or Jnani yet.

I would like your comprehension on "meditation".  Sri Ramana often said that meditation is self-attention (Sri Sadhu Om). Which is also Self-Enquiry. In his third book, Sri Sadhu Om mention that sometimes one will fall asleep during meditation. Which is fine and one should keep at it and that one will eventually stay "aware" in this "state" (sleep). He also said to practice (Sadhana) for a short lenght of time because this will enable one to acquire strength towards thoughts. Otherwise the mind will oppose more and more.

Thus, does it implies sitting, closed eyes "meditation" (self-attention), or does one practice self-attention throughout all activities. Or both! 

Sri Nisargadatta said to "dwelve" in I AM, which is the same as self-attention. My understanding is that he Self-Realized in three years through this. I think that he did also spend some time in a "classic" meditation (eyes closed...). I could be completely of track here. What is your opinion on these?
Oh Arunachala, blazing fire of Jnana, in my heart I pray and think of Thee from afar, root out the ego, merging me in the Self.

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43530
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2008, 11:58:12 AM »
Dear non-dual,  Bhagavan has said about "meditation" in his
several talks.  A brief summary has been given by David Godman,
in his book "Be as you are" in Part 4-Chapter 10.  A few
sentences are:

* The best meditation is that which continues in all the three
states.  It must be so intense that it does not give room even
to the thought " I am meditating."

*Mentally imagining oneself to be the supreme reality, which
shines as existence-consciousness-bliss, is meditation.  Fixing
the mind to the Self that so that the unreal seed of delusion
will die is enquiry. (vichara)

*For the beginner, meditation on a form is more easy and
agreeable.  Practice of it leads to self enquiry, which consists
in sifting the reality from unreality.

*Meditation differs according to the degree of advancement
of the seeker.

* Meditation is possible only if the ego is kept up.  There is the
ego and the object meditated upon.  The method is therefore
indirect, because the Self is only one.  Seeking the ego, that is
its source, the ego disappears.  What is left over is the Self.  This
the direct method.

* Meditation on forms or concrete objects, is said be 'dhyana',
whereas the enquiry into the Self is 'vichara' (enquiry) or
'nididhyasana' (uninterruped awareness of being).

*If you try to prevent sleep, it will mean thinking in meditation,
which must be avoided.  But if you slip into sleep while meditating,
the meditation will continue even during and after sleep.
Yet sleep being a thought, it must be got rid of, for the final natural
state has to be obtained in jagrat (the waking state) without the disturbing thought.

P.S. In spite of reading all these, I am still a beginner, meditating
with form and that  too not continuously.
   

mark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #8 on: June 19, 2008, 09:55:16 PM »
From "Who am I" question and answear # 27:

27. What is the difference between inquiry and meditation?
Inquiry consists in retaining the mind in the Self. Meditation consists in thinking that one's self is Brahman, existence-consciousness-bliss


Reading the set of questions asked of Ramana in "Who am I"  I would take this to mean meditation is a mental activity about the self, self inquiry is returning the "mind spider"  it's true nature of heart where the first "I" thought  originates in Self. Or in other words being instead of doing.
Regards,
Mark
 

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43530
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2008, 11:07:32 AM »
Dear 'Mark', you are correct.  Meditation on Brahman, with the
'bhavana' that I am Brahman, is one thought that will ward off
other thoughts.  This one thought will also get vanquished once
you 'be'  the Self, like 'the stick that stir the burning corpse gets burnt at the end.'  The Arunachala Aksharamanamalai starts:  "Thou dost root out the ego of those who meditate on Thee. Oh! Arunachala!" To meditate
on Arunachala, one should have this one thought, say, "I am Arunachala" or "I am Brahman" and eventually, this thought gets dissolved in the Self
or Arunachala or Brahman.
I am repeating what I posted elsewhere, "Who am I?" is adequate for the entire civilization and all the books and treatises of all faiths including
Hindu faith, right from Brahma Sutram or Prajna Parimata to today's
"Easy way to Salvation"  techniques are only details.  Arunachala Siva.     

mark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #10 on: June 20, 2008, 10:04:49 PM »
You speak wisdom here Subramanian.  The technique used are details that make no difference.  What is key however, is intent and what is useless and distracting is belief.
Would you agree?
Mark

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43530
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2008, 12:21:12 PM »
Dear Mark,  Thanks.  I am only reflecting the Wisdom of my
Great Guru, the matchless after Sankara.  Arunachala Siva.

nonduel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2008, 05:01:22 AM »
Would you agree that, the core of the teaching is resumed in BE-ing.  Like in "BE still (no thought) and KNOW that I AM GOD"

Thus it is more a dwelling in I AM, not thinking or entertaining the thought I AM Brahman, but BEING what you ARE.  It's not even a "feeling" but a BEING. A without-a-doubt BEING. Not trying to convince oneself.

There is nothing to attain, practice, "do"...just BE.  As Sri Sadhu Om said...self-attention.

Oh Arunachala, blazing fire of Jnana, in my heart I pray and think of Thee from afar, root out the ego, merging me in the Self.

mark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2008, 06:10:50 AM »
Nonduel
but that's just it, it is not a matter of "no" thought but rather the "I" thought, the first thought, there lies at it's feet is who am I.
Mark

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43530
    • View Profile
Re: "I-I"
« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2008, 11:16:48 AM »
Dear non duel and mark, the first thought the "I thought" gives
rise  to a pleothara of other thoughts.  Bhagavan says, "Hold on to
that I thought and see whence it comes.  This is vichara.  If it is
difficult, He prescribed "dhyana" or meditating on "I am Brahman",
which is of course, a thought, but this thought will also eventually
get vanquished and one becomes or be the "Swarupa" or "Brahman" or
"Self".  This is the ultimate "No thought" state.   In sum total, we
have to go round and round to stay where we are!    Arunachala Siva.