Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough

[eranilkumarsinha]

Quote:
"May I request to post the wonderful Kabir Dohas in a separate thread?...They can be easily accessed by one and all and will be immensely beneficial...."






Dear Sri Ravi, I felt that this topic was mostly viewed by those who love Sri Bhagwan and were drawn to His Teaching. I felt that such seekers and devotees couldn't miss and would discern the message to man contained in these immortal Dohe or Couplets, which were composed in the language of the common people. I am also aware that these couplets are of utmost importance and precious for those who are familiar with Hind. So, it occurred to me that I should translate them, for I didn't see their adequate translation anywhere, and  was inspired to post them in this forum though I do not consider myself a good translator as you yourself are.
However, having said as above, I wish to say that you have also made a valid point of access to them. Therefore,  I have accepted  your suggestion, and am considering to open a new thread elsewhere where I shall naturally endeavour to post Sri Kabir's and other Poets' compositions.
Pranam,
 Anil 

[srkudai]

Quote:
"if it is false why should it perish ? 
if it is real it cannot perish"





Dear Sri Udai, do you really not understand what Sri Bhagwan meant by the word 'perish' in the holy Utterance "The false 'I' must perish", and do you mean to say that you need to be explained what really the word meant?
Anil

Dear Anil

Uday follow traditional vedanta and the methods prescribed there in.  to my knowledge the false I and real I are very very illuminary revelations that only Sri Ramana brought to the world.  that is why he was called a Maharishi because in one sense his teachings were not earlier propounded in that same manner.

so coming to the topic,  the way Bhagavan Ramana and his disciples Sadhu Om , Muruganar has clearly stated his teachings is not exactly the one concurring with traditional vedanta methods .  though the goal is the same.  so it is not that useful to explain Uday or Uday explaining us because we are taking different paths within the fold of self enquiry.

Dear ksksat27,
          The traditionalists disown me as much as the others. I follow my own inquiry ...
I do accept the false-i, real-i idea ... i do not agree its originally by Ramana ... but then ... that much is fine ...

There a subtle difference in my outlook however. The fact that it is false means one need not fight it, one need not kill it. this is my main moot point. It has sanction in Annamalai Swami's lectures.
When i say "This is difficult" , i am actually giving it a reality. This reality is my belief and this belief in the reality of a false self and then if i go to fight it out, it is going to not work.

The path of Self Inquiry is really reverting back to relaxed "let-go" state again and again as long as there is a tendency to "do" !

Love!
Silence

[srkudai]

Dear Anil ji,
       

Please read my reply to ksksat27, above.
This is what i have been saying ... nothing more.

Love!
Silence

[Ravi.N]

Anil,
"I have accepted  your suggestion, and am considering to open a new thread elsewhere where I shall naturally endeavour to post Sri Kabir's and other Poets' compositions".

Thanks very much...have noted that you shall be abstaining from writing  here for some days on account of bereavement.
namaskar

[eranilkumarsinha]

कबीर सब जग निर्धन, धनवंता नाहि कोय |
धनवंता सोई जानिए, राम नाम धन होय ||
Sri Kabir

Kabir sab jag nirdhana, dhanwanta naahi koye,
Dhanwanta soi janiye, ram nam dhan hoye.



Sri Kabir says that the whole world is poor, no one is truly rich. Know that only he who has Ram's Name (God's Name) in the heart is rich alone. 




Dear devotees, the material wealth or things and the ego-mind which imagines that it owns them are all transient and ephemeral. To go on amassing wealth during, the brief sojourn in this word, is to forget the real purpose of life and get lost in the jungle of materialism which is akin to get entangled in a labyrinth. The Path of true prosperity therefore is that which confers the Awareness of the Indwelling Spirit within, and establishes one in Its Fullness of Unity. 
Pranam,
 Anil 

[eranilkumarsinha]

Quote:
"so it is not that useful to explain Uday or Uday explaining us because we are taking different paths within the fold of self enquiry."


Dear Sri Krishna,

Why do you say so? Sri Udai is a seeker par excellence, and it is always useful, in my view, to share understanding and experience among devotees and seekers. Is it not? Sri Udai is my good friend, and I love his wonderful spirit of enquiry. He elucidates the truth brilliantly. So, without doubt, he belongs here, for he is, after all one of us. Is he not? Yes, sometimes he comes hard at it, but then that is his wont. Yes, sometimes we are not able to reconcile with each other, and our understanding and insights appear irreconcilable. But so long as the ego-mind has not perished, that is, if one has not known the true form of the mind experientially, such differences are bound to surface time and again. These differences do not drag us back, but takes us forward.

Thanks very much.
Pranam,
 Anil     

[eranilkumarsinha]

Dear Sri Udai,

Quote:
"I follow my own inquiry ...
I do accept the false-i, real-i idea ... i do not agree its originally by Ramana ... but then ... that much is fine ..."


False-i is an idea, but not the Real 'I', which is Existence. It does not matter whether it was originally revealed by Sri Bhagwan or not. What is important from the sadhak's standpoint is to ensure that the false-i does not has power to disturb one from the natural state of mediation, and get entangled once again in the labyrinth that is the world. 


Quote:
"There a subtle difference in my outlook however. The fact that it is false means one need not fight it, one need not kill it. this is my main moot point. It has sanction in Annamalai Swami's lectures."


Dear Sri Udai, yes, just as it is not necessary to kill the rope which one imagines to be snake, so also, there is no need to destroy the mind. Knowing the form of the mind makes the mind disappear.


Quote:
"When i say "This is difficult" , i am actually giving it a reality. This reality is my belief and this belief in the reality of a false self and then if i go to fight it out, it is going to not work."



Those who follows Sri Bhagwan's Teaching, in my view, do not nurture beliefs of the kind as you have mentioned. 




Quote:
"The path of Self Inquiry is really reverting back to relaxed "let-go" state again and again as long as there is a tendency to "do" !"




Yes. Once a nest of squirrels was above Sri Bhagwan's couch. A cat had eaten the mother of the young squirrels and therefore He Himself took over the responsibility for their care. The little squirrels didn't know that wisdom lied in staying in their nest. They kept attempting to come out. However, each time a young squirrel came out, He kept putting it back in its nest. In this way He has taught that if the mind is not externalized, but remains sunk in the heart, then there would be only happiness. But the mind keeps moving out on account of force of residual tendencies.

So, yes, when the mind moves out, one must draw it back and sink it in the heart, till it learns the happiness of staying at home. This is Sri Bhagwan's Vichara.

Therefore, when the residual tendencies compel the mind to move out and the mind takes one in the realm of 'doing', one must draw it back, focus onto oneself, and be. For,
BE  QUIET, THAT  IS  TRUTH.
BE  STILL,  THAT  IS  GOD.


Thanks very much, Sri Udai.
Pranam,
  Anil     

[ksksat27]

ok sir . i meant that the general methods and path followed by Udai is that of Chinmaya mission thoughts and of traditional vedantic approach of assertions, negations and Bhava meditations. they call it nidhidhyaasana .

but generally Ramana Maharishee's Self Enquiry is the only one where the I was asked to be taken hold of , the innermost feeling of I, the true conscious being was touched.   that path is unique and hence I was wondering if Udai is currently taking that path.

from his previous posts he seems to appreciate the Bhava Meditation, I am Self meditation etc. of Annamalai Swami.

We generally follow holding on to the I thought as intense as possible.

so when two devotees with entirely different paths want to compare notes , only common thing will be the goal.  that is what I meant.

anyhow we should discuss as you told ,  within the fold of commonality, i agree with you sir.

[eranilkumarsinha]

Dear Sri Krishna,

Quote:
"i meant that the general methods and path followed by Udai is that of Chinmaya mission thoughts and of traditional vedantic approach of assertions, negations and Bhava meditations. they call it nidhidhyaasana ."
"but generally Ramana Maharishee's Self Enquiry is the only one where the I was asked to be taken hold of , the innermost feeling of I, the true conscious being was touched.   that path is unique"
"We generally follow holding on to the I thought as intense as possible."



Sri Krishna, you have, in my view, grasped Sri Bhagwan's Vichara wonderfully. Yes, I totally concur with you regarding the contents of the above quote. Every sadhana cannot be categorized as the Atma-vichara or the Self-enquiry, which Bhagwan Sri Ramana revealed, and taught till the very end, that is, till He walked apparently in bone and flesh in this relative world. And Wonder of wonders, I am more than cent percent certain that He is still doing the same abiding as the Inner Self of devotees and seekers all over the world.
Yes, it is true that the Quest of the Self, taught by Sri Bhagwan, is not entirely new, and we may presume that this was the method followed by Realized Ones of the past. Sri Lakshmana Sarma has written in the 'Mahayoga' that it appears that the method followed by Lord Sri Gautam Budha was this, but somehow the secret of this method seemed to have been lost. For what we find in the books is not quite this method, but something else, which you rightly, in my view, called the traditional, philosophical enquiry.

Therefore, yes, all sadhanas are not Enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan. However, Sri Bhagwan has enjoined that all sadhanas ultimately lead to His Atma-vichara or the Self-enquiry. So, it is crystal-clear that all spiritual sadhanas culminate in Self-abidance (Self-attention, or Just Be), and therefore, it is known to seekers from the ancient times. I have read somewhere that even the traditional method of philosophical enquiry was taught by the Sages to advanced seekers in hermitages only. So, however much some may argue otherwise, it is certainly a fact that what Bhagwan Sri Ramana revealed and taught was the new Avatar of the Quest, and it is well known that He laid much emphasis on pursuing Vichara from the very beginning. Did He not? 

       

Quote:
"so when two devotees with entirely different paths want to compare notes , only common thing will be the goal.  that is what I meant.

anyhow we should discuss as you told ,  within the fold of commonality, i agree with you sir."




Yes, having said as above, I wish to say that I firmly hold that there is essential unity in all spiritual matters, for, the attainment of the Self-God or I-God is the purpose of all efforts whatsoever.



Thanks very much.
Pranam,
 Anil

[srkudai]

Dear Friends,
     

what does this line mean:

"We generally follow holding on to the I thought as intense as possible."

?

A thought is transitory , how will one hold it ? and who is the one who is supposed to hold onto it ?

Love!
Silence

[srkudai]

Dear Nishta,
         

Maharshi used the phrase "hold on to the I thought" many times.
Was He wrong to say so?

is this about authority of Ramana ? He would be the last person to support authority based acceptance because he said something.
 what did he mean is what i am asking.
how will you hold onto an i thought or feeling that is like transient , does not have staying power ?
and who is it that will hold it ...

there is no harm in revisiting such basic questions , we are not going to loose anything here.
we are not debating, we are not showing off learning .. we are just inquiring into the meaning of a statement of bhagavan with a calm and single pointed mind. and i think this is important.

Love!
Silence

[srkudai]

Dear Nishta,
       
please see... waht do we mean by soundness of that suggestion ?

have we understood what it means ? what is it saying ? how to hold onto a transitory thoguht ?

Love!
Silence

[eranilkumarsinha]

Quote:
"It's a good starting point when an aspirant needs something to do, and is not yet ready to do nothing; be still.

But importantly, as the aspirant makes the attempt to "hold on to the I thought", he/she inevitably arrives at an impasse, and intuitively, spontaneously the notion, "who should hold on, and what should be held?" arises."

Hence, a dedicated effort to "hold on to the I thought", will ironically arrive at your conclusion srkudai, there is no one to hold and nothing to be held."

 Quote:
"I would add that Maharshi directed others to "just be" or "be as you are", and even gave no words at times, as we well know. But why the difference? Probably because of the listeners ability."





Dear Sri Nishta,

Clarity and deep insight with which you have captured the essence of Sri Bhagwan's Teaching of the Atma-vichara are wonderful, to say the least.
"Wherefrom does this 'I'-thought arise? If one enquires thus, it vanishes, then another 'I-I' springs forth as the Heart spontaneously. It is not a thought, but Existence in all its fullness." Thus taught Bhagwan Sri Ramana.

Thanks very much.
Pranam,
 Anil 

[eranilkumarsinha]

Quote from Sri Krishna:
"We generally follow holding on to the I thought as intense as possible."



Quote from Sri Udai:
"A thought is transitory , how will one hold it ? and who is the one who is supposed to hold onto it ?"





Dear Sri Udai,

I thought you knew better. I thought you understood what holding onto the 'I'-thought, Attention and Self-attention, which are one and the same, really meant, in the context of Sri Bhagwan's Teaching of the Self-enquiry.

Holding or clinging to the consciousness 'I' is attending or paying attention, with a keen mind, (Attention is reflection of the Power of the Self) to the awareness of Existence-Consciousness, 'I Am', which no one can deny, and thereby gaining greater and greater intensity of CONCENTRATION upon it. This is what is meant by diving deep within as well. This is Dhyana on the Self Itself, contrary to second and third person thoughts and objects, that is, the Self-attention, from the very beginning, for there are not two selves. 

Dear Sri Udai, in Bhagwan's Vichara, it is not necessary for sincere aspirants to even name before-hand the feeling 'I' as either ego or the Self and thus stall the investigation. This is because there are not two selves. So, instead of hovering on the surface of the thought-wave and keep endlessly arguing, one must endeavour to maintain unwavering Self-attention till it is irreversibly revealed that the 'I'-thought, mind (impure) and all thoughts whatsoever are transitory and unreal.     
As far as meditation such as 'I am He' or 'I am Brahman' is concerned, Sri Bhagwan has taught that this is nothing but an activity of the mind diverging towards a second or third person. There is therefore a vast difference (as between a mountain and a valley) between these meditations, which are mental activities, and the Self-attention taught by Bhagavan Sri Ramana, which is a stillness of mind!

Dear Sri Udai, when you encounter a serpentine object on the way in dim light, what do you do? How do you know that this is not a snake but a rope? Of course, you are not supposed to kill it. You attend to it and investigate with a keen but open mind and find out for yourself that this is a mere rope after all. This is what Sri Bhagwan has taught us to do: to investigate and find out for ourselves that it is the Self or Brahman. That what exists is only the Self or Brahman.

Thanks very much.
Pranam,
 Anil

[srkudai]

Dear Anil ji,
         

I thought you knew better. I thought you understood what holding onto the 'I'-thought, Attention and Self-attention, which are one and the same, really meant, in the context of Sri Bhagwan's Teaching of the Self-enquiry.

Thought hai na bhai, it wont stay. it has to pass away. Waise ... if your understanding now is that i do not know as well as you thought i knew ... you have come to the right knowledge. I am really not very knowledgeable.

Holding or clinging to the consciousness 'I' is attending or paying attention, with a keen mind, (Attention is reflection of the Power of the Self) to the awareness of Existence-Consciousness, 'I Am', which no one can deny, and thereby gaining greater and greater intensity of CONCENTRATION upon it. This is what is meant by diving deep within as well. This is Dhyana on the Self Itself, contrary to second and third person thoughts and objects, that is, the Self-attention, from the very beginning, for there are not two selves. 

How can awareness pay attention to awareness ? Awareness is not an object. 
if you are saying its concentrating on the heart center ... people have known it for ages. one gains concentration from that, i do not deny.
but is that what ramana said ?


Please do not get angry with me, i am simply asking questions. if you are paying attention, ... it has to be an object , the subject cannot be payed attention to. so awareness cannot watch awareness. what is really meant ?

Love!
Silence