Author Topic: Buddha and Ramana -2  (Read 1897 times)

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Buddha and Ramana -2
« on: April 12, 2009, 05:53:26 PM »
There is, indeed, an apparent contradiction, for Sri Bhagavan proclaimed that there is only Atma whereas Lord Buddha declared
that there is no Atma.  But such a contradiction between two Masters
who both point the way to the Absolute Truth can never be more
than verbal.  In this case, Sri Bhagavan used the word Atma to mean
the Universal Self which is Nirvana, whereas Lord Buddha used it
to mean the individual soul.  And Sri Bhagavan taught also that there
is no individual being, not only in the sense that it will not endure  but that it is not now:  "Never mind what you will be when you die, find
what you are now."

The Buddha was very little concerned with theory.  His purpose was
not to erect either a theology or a social order but simply to show men the way from suffering to peace.  And yet theorists have descended
upon his teaching and argued it out into patterns which help neither
themselves nor others to escape from the wheel of suffering.  It is
possible that they will fasten on to the teaching of Sri Bhagavan also, but it will not be His real teaching that they expound, for His real teaching was to avoid the inessential and follow the way to Self-
Realization.  "But people do not like even to hear of this Truth, whereas they are eager to know what lies beyond, the heaven and hell and reincarnation.  Because people love mystery and not the Truth religions cater to them so as to eventually bring them round
to the Self.  Whatever be the means adopted, you must at last return to the Self, so why not abide in the Self here and now?" 

Even more explicitly, He said:  "Just as it is futile to examine the rubbish that has to be swept up only to be thrown away, it is
futile for him who seeks to know the Self, if instead of casting away the tattvas that envelop the Self, he sets himself to enumerate them or to examine the qualities."(Who am I?).  He who says that this Master taught this and taught the other has not understood their purpose.  They are not here to argue but to show men the way from suffering to Blessedness.  Even though they may expound the one Truth in different modes and point different paths, the Truth and Goal is the same. But in these two  cases there was striking similarity in the
language spoken and the Path indicated.

(Source:  Be Still, it is the Wind that sings.  Arthur Osborne.)

Arunachala Siva.

matthias

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
    • View Profile
Re: Buddha and Ramana -2
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2009, 03:13:29 PM »
the essence the non dual experience of buddha, and all who came after, is still part of tibetan buddhism in form of the dzogchen teachings...

but as arthur osborn says...there is all kinds of plays and fears that errected all the different schools, methods etc...

it is all useless, all just based of fear, and this fear is a fear of the natural state....or the inborn truth...

you can call it "IAMness" or "nature of mind" there is no gap between it, no social or ethnical difference int he expereince, it is the same in all people and all cultures..that is why it makes one humble and not a superstar

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Re: Buddha and Ramana -2
« Reply #2 on: April 13, 2009, 04:06:15 PM »
Yes.  Buddha never intended to form a religion.  He found the Truth
and He remained in Truth and that is what Bhagavan Ramana also
had done.  But there arose schools of different types.  Man is not
merely content with Truth. He wants rituals around it. Fortunately
the Ramansramam people have not found any religion.  In His
Samadhi, they do some poojas and that is all.  This is necessary
to remember Him everyday.  Buddhists also founded Mahayana and
Hinayana and Hinayana adopted several religious rituals.  Mahayana
does not adopt any rituals but merely meditation, with some key
phrases in the form of Koans to work out. In fact, Arthur Osborne
has given a long appendix, how his article gave rise to a lot of objections.  I did not give this appendix.  If someone wants it, I shall
also give the appendix.

Arunachala Siva.