Author Topic: Thoughtlessness is not it --- Ramesh Balsekar.  (Read 2241 times)

srkudai

  • Guest
Thoughtlessness is not it --- Ramesh Balsekar.
« on: November 07, 2009, 10:15:38 AM »

Now, let me also quote Ramesh Balsekar on the same topic of thoughtlessness...

http://rameshtalks.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19&Itemid=34

this is what he has to say [please read the whole article for details]

Quote
if you are working on something, you have to think about it. Doing something, you have to go back into your past to draw on its experience. So you have to go back into your past, draw on your experience, come back into the present and deal with what you are doing. That means thinking. But according to my point thinking by the working mind is totally different from thinking by the thinking mind. See what I mean? For me, such an important factor. And I am astonished. People keep on ... Thoughts, thoughts, thoughts,  give up your thoughts! How can you give up something over which you have no control. The next thought you get, you have no control. See what I mean? For me thought and thinking is such an important question. And I am astonished that its left to me to make a distinction. Thought arises, leads to thinking, even the thinking can be thinking by your working mind which is very much necessary. And thinking by the thinking mind.  What is the difference between the thinking by the working mind and thinking by the thinking mind?.

Thinking by the working mind concerns in the present only, the job you're doing. Any thinking, going into the past or going into the future, you come back into the present to whatever job you are doing. Therefore thinking by the working mind whether you have to dip into the past or dig into the future concerns your job which you're doing in the present moment.  Therefore, without the working mind no human being can live his life. The thinking mind always dips into the past and projects something in the future. Working mind always is in the present. May have to dip into the past for his memory and experience and again it goes into the future if that is its job. If your job is to plan for the future of the company, your job is to plan for the future but the planning for the future is done by you in the present moment. So the working mind always works in the present moment whereas the thinking mind is never in the present moment. It dips into the past and projects the future mainly through fears and worries and failures. See what I mean? See the difference?  Thought and thinking, see the difference? For me, such an important thing. And not being clear about it causes so much confusion, causes so much confusion. Didn't your realize it?


Love!
Silence

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Re: Thoughtlessness is not it --- Ramesh Balsekar.
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2009, 03:11:45 PM »
Dear srkudai,

I read Ramesh Balsekar's views and thought for a long time.
It is said that followers of Sri Sankara, complicated the direct
teachings of the Master, by adding all sorts of things.  Sureswara
and Padmapada complicated Sri Viveka Choodmani, through
their Naishkarmya Siddhi and Panchadasi.

Bhagavan Ramana has clearly said in Who am I? that there is
only one mind.  Only vasanas are multiple. There could be
subha-vasanas and a-subha vasanas.  So to say, that there
are thinking mind that thinks and working mind that thinks,
is only to make the direct simple teachings of Bhagavan Ramana,
complex.  If these are taken to mean viz., subhha vasanas
and asubhava vasanas, then one can agree.

Subha-vasanas are like bhoga-vasanas of Annamalai Swami.
There is Bhagavan Ramana strolling on the Hill, and a ripe mango
falls from the tree.  Bhagavan Ramana takes it and eats it along
with others.  This is Subhavasana.

If there is nothing like death of mind, then there was no
need to Bhagavan Ramana, to cateogrize it as mana-adakkam,
(quisecence of mind) and mano-nasam,(death of mind).  Bhagavan Ramana uses death of mind, specifically in Who am I?

One way out, is to treat the Self realized person, as Brahman
with Brahman-mind (Alan Jacobs uses this word, see his
compendium of Advaita Bodha Deepika today) and this does
all the work in Jnani's Sahaja Samadhi state. 

If a person leaves the body, instantaneously upon Self realization,
as in the case of Hunter Kannappa and Arivattaya Nayanar
in Periya Puranam, then all these discussions would not arise.
Since Bhagavan Ramana and Sri Sankara were in self realized
state without leaving the body for long years, such discussions
arise.  Is it not?

I shall give separately a few verses from Who's Sri Ramana
Parividya Upanishad, which will add light or confusion to this
issue.

Arunachala Siva.     

amiatall

  • Guest
Re: Thoughtlessness is not it --- Ramesh Balsekar.
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2009, 05:20:41 PM »
Jnani have no thoughts and he is not thinking. He is consciousness. This paradox need to be understood.
srkudai, you yourself say that no thought can touch you and it means that you are not thoughts and it means you have no thoughts and it means you do NOTHING.
If you think you have thoughts that it is not you who thinks so.
ON THE OTHER HAND there are thoughts here and there and everything just happens.