Author Topic: Self-surrender and its meaning as revealed by Maha Guru Bhagwan Sri Ramana  (Read 71531 times)

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
    • View Profile
Dear Devotees,

Devotee : How is God to be seen ?
Sri Bhagwan : Within. If the mind is turned inward God manifests as inner consciousness.
Devotee : God is in all—in all objects we see around us. They say we should see God in all of them.
Sri Bhagwan : God is in all and in seer. Where else can God be seen ? He cannot be found outside. He should be felt within. To see objects, mind is necessary. To conceive God in them is a mental operation. But that is not real. The consciousness within, purged of the mind, is felt as God.
                                                         Talk—244

Dear devotees, not only objects, but all feelings and all thoughts along with all objects are only mental conceptions. Why seeking inward ? Because He can be found only within. Externalisation and rise of ego, along with associated thoughts concerning everything else except the Self, go together. So, Sri Bhagwan says that conceiving God outside is mental operation.
So, Sri Bhagwan teaches that the highest praise or the greatest devotion to God is not that He is God and Supreme Lord of all creation, but THAT HE IS THE MOST BELOVED OF ALL, AS THE SELF IN THE HEART.
THE GREATNESS AND GLORY OF GOD AS GOD, THEREFORE, AT BEST, ARE THE MENTAL CONCEPTS, IN MAYA OR IN RELATIVITY. BUT SAT-CHIT-ANANDA—SWARUPA, AS THE SELF IS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH, BEYOND MAYA.

Thank you,
  Anil   
   

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1835
    • View Profile
    • Fundamental questions about mind
Dear Ramana,  :)

Ego and all other souls which you say exists, exists as yourself only, there is nothing 'other' than you. The sweetness of Sugar, the sugar, is also oneself alone.

(How are you able to say, ego still exists, by which light you were able to discern ego exists? there that very moment, it ceased to exist, there is no ego. You say ego exists, simply for the bliss of discernment, which is the light of the Self!)

still, I say, it is not the world that troubles us, it is oneself who troubles oneself. The broken marriages, people damaged by accidents, are all oneself alone. How are you able to experience the pain, when you are not hurt? it is within you.

(When you see the troubles of the world, the troubles of various people, it is your own pain which you experience, not really theirs, and, the natural response of compassion to them is for oneself alone, and, not really to them. The sweetness you experience when you taste sugar is your own, it is not really derived from the Sugar, it was already in you, you are the sugar)

The world is onself, the pains, the pleasures that we see, is our own, the pain that we experience by seeing 'out there' is our own, everything is within oneself. The demand for God to tell us answers is also our own. And the God that may tell us about the world is also oneself. The feel of separation from Self or God is ones own self as separation to experience the separation to experience the bliss of merging again.

All confusions and troubles raise from onself alone, Simply, for oneself to experience the bliss of looking beyond the confusions, beyond the problems, it is just the play of oneself, because, it is blissful for oneself. Oneself plays hide and seek with oneself.

oneself solves the problem for the bliss of solving the problem, so oneself alone creates the problem for the bliss of solving the problmes, just to enjoy the bliss of discernment, again and again and again...

Salutations to Bhagavan

What you say however much true it is is just a notion, just as the notion of the bhaktas that the ego and all the states of the mind are real. You may say that what I have said now again comes from me. But this just is a notion. This way we can continue this conversation forever. All notion, no matter how enlightened they seem are just notions. Even "I alone exist" is such one. It seems that your inclinations are towards buddhistic and advaitic way of thinking. It is splendid. But your understandings are not more accurate than those of the bhaktas.

You say that everything come from oneself but do you know this self? The self you are talking about is the ego. And Lord Ramana has said many times that when the ego, "I"-thought "exists" then all other things "exist". Bhaktas say at the final "Only the Lord exists", jnanis "All is Brahman", Lord Ramana says "Everything is the Self. The Self alone exists". They all talk about the Reality but what you point to is the ego. You say that one notion of the ego is more true than other. I humbly disagree. The purpose of all religions and philosophical systems is one - to quieten the mind and to help of the person to merge it with its Source.

Best wishes, ramana1359
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4059
    • View Profile
Anil/Friends,
What God is and what he is not is not a matter for discussion or debate or a matter of concept.
Here is an excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna:
Quote
MASTER: "Jnana is the realization of Self through the process of 'Neti, neti', 'Not this, not
this'. One goes into samadhi through this process of elimination and realizes the Atman.
"But vijnana means Knowledge with a greater fullness. Some have heard of milk, some
have seen milk, and some have drunk milk. He who has merely heard of it is 'ignorant'. He
who has seen it is a jnani. But he who has drunk it has vijnana, that is to say, a fuller
knowledge of it. After having the vision of God one talks to Him as if He were an intimate
relative. That is vijnana.
"First of all you must discriminate, following the method of 'Neti, neti': 'He is not the five
elements, nor the sense-organs, nor the mind, nor the intelligence, nor the ego. He is
beyond all these cosmic principles.' You want to climb to the roof; then you must eliminate
and leave behind all the steps one by one. The steps are by no means the roof. But after
reaching the roof you find that the steps are made of the same materials―brick, lime, and
brick-dust―as the roof. It is the Supreme Brahman that has become the universe and its
living beings and the twenty-four cosmic principles. That which is Atman has become the
five elements. You may ask why the earth is so hard, if it has come out of Atman? All is
possible through the will of God. Don't you see that bone and flesh are made from blood
and semen? How hard 'sea-foam' becomes!
"After attaining vijnana one can live in the world as well. Then one clearly realizes that
God Himself has become the universe and all living beings, that He is not outside the
world."

I am sure that Sri Bhagavan has said this-that Self or God alone  is -It is what appears as the world and all living beings.To the jnani there is no such distinction as Absolute or Relative,etc.All is God .
One may think that calling God as 'God' has its limitation because it seems to be some unknown entity,far away;by the same yardstick to call him as 'self' is also a limitation as it seems to be too self centered a view that seems to be ignoring objective reality,like closing one's eyes and proclaiming that the world does not exist.

As long as the attention is on the 'substance'(poruL in Tamil)  referred to by the word and not 'idea' that the word may suggest-it is alright.

Namaskar.

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1835
    • View Profile
    • Fundamental questions about mind
Quote
As long as the attention is on the 'substance'(poruL in Tamil)  referred to by the word and not 'idea' that the word may suggest-it is alright.

Absolutely!
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Nagaraj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5130
    • View Profile

You say that everything come from oneself but do you know this self? The self you are talking about is the ego. And Lord Ramana has said many times that when the ego, "I"-thought "exists" then all other things "exist". Bhaktas say at the final "Only the Lord exists", jnanis "All is Brahman", Lord Ramana says "Everything is the Self. The Self alone exists". They all talk about the Reality but what you point to is the ego. You say that one notion of the ego is more true than other. I humbly disagree. The purpose of all religions and philosophical systems is one - to quieten the mind and to help of the person to merge it with its Source.

Dear Ramana,

you have no possibility of 'knowing' the self that I am talking about? can you? And, that what i point to is the ego, is your understanding, do you see this?

At all times, there is oneself, and there is no possibility of yourself knowing, what i am really pointing towards, it is you, in the end who defines me, it is your own understanding, that defines me, it is yourself, that even understands, defines, what somebody has to convey, i am, too, yourself!

Basically, when you or each one of us, either agree or disagree, we are only agreeing or disagreeing with ourselves alone!

:)

Salutations to Bhagavan
« Last Edit: April 08, 2012, 01:03:56 PM by Nagaraj »
॥ शांतमात्मनि तिष्ट ॥
Remain quietly in the Self.
~ Vasishta

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1835
    • View Profile
    • Fundamental questions about mind
Quote
you have no possibility of 'knowing' the self that I am talking about? can you? And, that what i point to is the ego, is your understanding, do you see this?

Of course it is. But you again and again cannot feel and understand what I am talking about. I have no problem with what you say. I accept that and share your opinion. I will try this time to be even more specific:

1. You say that I am only, that all others are projections of my mind. Even true it doesn't matter. I feel that others exist and this is important now.
2. You, however much true you speak, are exteme. You say "Everything is oneself" and all other things are meaningless. If a devotee comes to you and ask you advice and you continue to tell him again and again "You are alone. You are this God" and he is not prone to that, he wants to surrender to the his own ideal of God you don't do much good. Lord Ramana has never done that. Then again you may say "But this devotee is an illusion. It is myself". Do you know that, do realize that? Is that your experience or you are just talking? That's my question. What are you talking about is your own experience or is it your belief? My observation is that no matter who ask for help you always give him/her one-sided advice "You are alone. Everything is you". What is more important - to tell always the truth or to help this man or woman?

I truly believe that you get well my point and you really understand that I don't want to judge you or teach you but I'd rather try to help you, no matter how right or wrong is my pointing.
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Nagaraj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5130
    • View Profile
Dear Ramana,

At no time, i have said anywhere, that all else is meaningless. This i would like to correct.

Suppose, some person is scared of a Ghost pole, and because of fear towards ghost, refuses to go near it, what do you do? do we leave the person right where he is, for his belief is true to that moment? But, for such a person, initially, if somebody says, no it is not a ghost, ghost is unreal, it is just an ordinary pole, which itself seemed like a host, then it surely would seem extreme, for it would take time for the person to really see that it is not ghost and just an ordinary pole.

In the same way, I am not trying to thrust anything to you, it is certainly not my intention, i am just saying what is limited to my experience, and, if it may seem what i am conveying is like the ultimate truth, it is not wrong or fault, for i have also posted a post on a particular verse of Adi Shankaracharya, where he has said that just knowing the truth is not the end, but one has to constantly remain in meditation with it, constantly remain in identity with the truth that one has seen.

But even before this, it is important to 'know' that everything is oneself, that everything has really sprung from oneself, and oneself alone is the cause and effect of everything, but this is just one discernment, only when this is clear, ONE CAN TRULY MEDITATE, for until this is clear, that everything is just oneself, one will keep speculating, this or that, not like this, not like that, etc...

When you say, or we all say, that i'd rather try to help you, i too share the same belief, but with the sweetness of a discernment that by helping 'others' we are actually helping yourself, oneself alone, and that, that, we are helping others is only the real illusion. :)

I believe, if we, each one of us allow ourselves to be helped, unconditionally, it will just flow like the soft moving river.

To tell the truth itself is the Highest help to oneself (to others)

Sometimes, we get caught in the spiritual terms as they become a cliche, So, no matter, what i say, or for that matter, anybody, what ever they say, ultimately is going to be a cliche, that which is over used, unfortunately, truth is the same, and truth is not different.

:) best wishes, ahead.

Salutations to Bhagavan
॥ शांतमात्मनि तिष्ट ॥
Remain quietly in the Self.
~ Vasishta

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4059
    • View Profile
Friends,
Here is a very interesting and instructive story of Papa Ramdas as narrated by his disciple:

Quote
If anyone wants me to tell them something about Beloved Papa, I ask them to visualise what it would be like if, by some divine alchemy, Love and Bliss were to coalesce and stand before them as one luminous entity. That is how Papa can be seen with the naked eye.

Papa was indeed the very image of Love and Bliss divine. What was the source of that Love? When he opened out his heart to Ram, his eternal Beloved, Ram flooded his heart with never-ending, never-fading Love. This happened when Papa turned to his beloved Ram with pure devotion and utter self-surrender, turning his back on the world and the attractions it might hold for him. It was born of the realisation of his oneness with the Infinite and the Eternal Self. Every fibre of his being then thrilled to the sweet rhythm of Love. Bliss ineffable flowed over and saturated him, rising like an artesian spring from the heart's core when Papa realised the entire universe of name and form as the vibhuti or manifestation of the Self.

In the state of pure Bliss-consciousness he carried on his spiritual ministry till his last day on earth. Through his talks and actions he gave those who sought him a taste of the love and bliss divine. The purest pearls of wisdom that fell from his tips spread sweetness and light all round, dispelling gloom, fear and anxiety that held the people in a tight grip. Earnest seekers were lifted up to higher levels of consciousness, getting a glimpse of the true life of the Spirit, with the result that a deep yearning for that life was kindled in them. Papa's talks were often punctuated with jokes and laughter. The total impression left on the mind of the listener was never to be forgotten.

Once, to illustrate the futility of empty, theoretical advaitic knowledge, Papa narrated the following story. He was staying in a small mandir in Jhansi when a man approached him and asked, "Who are you?"

"I am Ramdas," he replied simply.

"No, you speak a lie there," returned his visitor. "You are Ram Himself. When you declare you are Ramdas, you do not know what you say. God is everything and in everything. He is in you and so you are He. Confess it right away.

"True, dear friend," Ramdas replied, "God is everything. But at the same time, it must be noted God is one, and when He is in you and everywhere around you, may I humbly ask to whom you are putting this question?"

After a little reflection, the man could only answer, "Well, I have put the question to myself ".

Papa always stressed the necessity of absolute honesty and sincerity as essential in the great Quest. Better an honest, dualistic bhakti than a hypocritical advaita. Whereas bhakti, however dualistic, will lead ultimately to jnana as jnana mata, the mother of jnana, advaita practised only with the head leads merely to confusion and hypocrisy.

Another incident illustrates this point well. When Papa was staying at Mount Abu he was taken to meet a "great saint", Swami Kaivalyananda, a young sannyasin living in a cave, his body completely shaved, but surrounded by a number of books.

Papa approached him and prostrated.

With a look of surprise, the sannyasin asked, "To whom are you offering this salutation?"

"To Ram," Papa replied.

"Who are you?"

"Ramdas. "

"Ramdas. Ramdas, funny, isn't it? There is only one Truth. Why do you assume this false duality?"

"It is Ram Himself, being One, who has chosen to be many. "

"Wrong," retorted the advaitin. "He is always One; many is false, illusion."

"Truth has become God and His devotee for the sake of lila, the divine play," Papa responded.

"Why play?"

"For love and bliss; so when Ramdas prostrates before you, it is yourself who do it in the form of Ramdas," Papa went on.

"Bosh!" cut in the sannyasin. "There is only one, never two." "Then to whom are you talking, dear Swamiji," asked Papa, pulling out his brahmastra.

The sannyasin reflected a while and had to reply, "To myself".

"Exactly. You assume there are two although in the light of absolute Truth there is only one."

"No, no--no realised person believes in duality," maintained the advaitin, getting jumpy. "Here, take this book and read it. You will understand things more clearly, I assure you. It is written by me." He pressed Papa to accept it. Noticing the author's name on the cover, Papa noted that he referred to himself as "Swami Kaivalyananda, M.A."!
(M.A refers to the college degree that Kaivalyananda had obtained and refers to Master of Arts.The poor man could not get over this vanity-Ravi)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Papa's life is an inspiration to all seekers as it is a perfect example of what self surrender means-not as it is talked but as it is lived.Papa's autobiography 'In quest of God' can be downloaded from this site:
http://www.anandashram.org/html/text.html
There is a wonderful sequel 'In the Vision of God' that is simply glorious-it reveals papa wandering the length and breadth of India as a jivanmukta-carefree in his joyous abandonment in God.A must read for all earnest devotees.Unfortunately no e-book version of this is available.

Namaskar.


Nagaraj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5130
    • View Profile
Dear Ravi,

nice story of Papa Ramdas, also, Papa acknowledged himself as a visishtadvaitin:

Papa: Ramdas is not a pure advaitin. He believes in the co-existence of dvaita and advaita. The jivanmukta retains a higher subtle individuality; he moves about and acts in the world realising that he and God are one. Ramdas in this body is active in doing things. Whatever he may do, he is at the same time conscious that he is the eternal and all-pervading Reality. So, in that state there is separation and unity simultaneously.



I had raised a topic on this subject some time back -----> Click Here <-----

We are caught in this dilemma, rather unconsciously, friends, I am never condemning or speaking less about bhakthi any where, infact, if you look at my past posts, you could very well see a equal mix of bhakti and jnana, together. I firmly believe, non difference between both bhakthi and jnana.


Also, when Bhagavan said Bhakthi is Jnana Mathe, generally, the translation in english is as follows: "Bhakthi is the mother of Jnana" but to me, it is thus: "Bhakthi is Mother Jnana herself" and there is subtly a deep difference, in the way one looks at it.


This has been an age old debate, especially, between the Visishtadvaitins and Advaitins, both being at logger heads for over centuries, one trying to prove superiority over the other.

Salutations to Bhagavan
« Last Edit: April 08, 2012, 05:09:02 PM by Nagaraj »
॥ शांतमात्मनि तिष्ट ॥
Remain quietly in the Self.
~ Vasishta

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4059
    • View Profile
Nagaraj,
I do not subscribe to these differences-I do not see them as one versus other.In fact this is why I like Sri Ramakrishna's teachings-He accepts all views as God cannot be reduced to fit into Darshanas.I accept all as Mahatmas and no one can claim that his view is the highest.It is the mind that looks for 'ultimate' or 'Highest' etc;the Heart does not care a straw for the 'ultimate'.

This is how Sri Ramakrishna expresses this-"Who can fully know the
infinite God? and what need is there of knowing the Infinite? Having attained this rare
human birth, my supreme need is to develop love for the Lotus Feet of God.
"If a jug of water is enough to remove my thirst, why should I measure the quantity of
water in a lake? I become drunk on even half a bottle of wine-what is the use of my
calculating the quantity of liquor in the tavern? What need is there of knowing the Infinite
?"

Again Sri Ramakrishna expresses the Dvaita,Visishtadvaita advaita aspects as follows:
Quote
"Rama asked Hanuman, 'Hanuman, what attitude do you cherish toward Me when you
worship Me?' Hanuman answered: 'Sometimes I see that You are the whole and I am a part;
sometimes I see that You are the Master and I am Your servant. But Rama, when I have the
Knowledge of Reality, then I find that You are I and I am You.'

For all practical purposes,let me ask -How many of us will not rush to Sri Ramanasramam if through some divine will Sri Bhagavan makes his appearance in flesh and blood again for a few days? We may see how Hanuman's attitude towards Sri Rama is the ideal one for all Sadhakas.

I also like this wonderful parable of Sri Ramakrishna-'The Dyer and his tub':
Quote
"A certain man had a tub. People would come to him to have their clothes dyed. The tub
contained a solution of dye. Whatever colour a man wanted for his cloth, he would get by
dipping the cloth in the tub. One man was amazed to see this and said to the dyer, 'Please
give me the dye you have in your tub.' "

All philosophical positions ,even if based on anubhuti, are necessarily partial only.None can say with finality what God is.Sri Ramakrishna expresses this wonderfully again:
Quote
"Parable of ant and sugar hill
"Men often think they have understood Brahman fully. Once an ant went to a hill of sugar.
One grain filled its stomach. Taking another grain in its mouth it started homeward. On its
way it thought, 'Next time I shall carry home the whole hill.' That is the way shallow minds
think. They don't know that Brahman is beyond one's words and thought. However great a
man may be, how much can he know of Brahman? Sukadeva and sages like him may have
been big ants; but even they could carry at the utmost eight or ten grains of sugar!
"As for what has been said in the Vedas and the Puranas, do you know what it is like?
Suppose a man has seen the ocean, and somebody asks him, 'Well, what is the ocean like?'
The first man opens his mouth as wide as he can and says: 'What a sight! What tremendous
waves and sounds!' The description of Brahman in the sacred books is like that. It is said in
the Vedas that Brahman is of the nature of Bliss - It is Satchidananda.
"Suka and other sages stood on the shore of this Ocean of Brahman and saw and touched
the water. According to one school of thought they never plunged into it. Those who do,
cannot come back to the world again.
Parable of salt doll
"In samadhi one attains the Knowledge of Brahman - one realizes Brahman. In that state
reasoning stops altogether, and man becomes mute. He has no power to describe the nature
of Brahman.
"Once a salt doll went to measure the depth of the ocean. (All laugh.) It wanted to tell
others how deep the water was. But this it could never do, for no sooner did it get into the
water than it melted. Now who was there to report the ocean's depth?"

I love Sri mAdhvacharya,Sri Ramanujacharya and Sri Sankaracharya.I do not consider any one of these as special or ultimate.

Namaskar.




Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Dear Ravi, Nagaraj,

Sri Bhagavan used to handle this Visishtadvaitam, Dwaitam and Advaitam quarrels deftly.  He used to ask: What do all these say?
To attain atma sakshatkaram. Attain that and see. You will see that there are no differences.


Arunachala Siva. 

Nagaraj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5130
    • View Profile
Dear Sri Ravi, Subramanian Sir,

I share the same views, across religions.

Salutations to Bhagavan
॥ शांतमात्मनि तिष्ट ॥
Remain quietly in the Self.
~ Vasishta

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
    • View Profile
Dear Sri Subramanian Sir and Sri Nagaraj Ji,

For the followers of 'Ramana Way', identification with the body is Dvaita and non-identification is Advaita.

Regards,
 Anil

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
    • View Profile
Dvaita, Visishtadvaita  and Advaita are philosophical terms in the relativity.Reality or the Self transcends or is beyond Dvaita, Visishtavaita and Advaita. However, as It is said to transcend Sat and asat, nevertheless it is Sat. As It is beyond light and darknness, all the same it is Light. Likewise, the Self is beyond Dvaita and Advaita, nevertheless It is Advaita.

Regards,
  Anil   

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
    • View Profile
Although Sri Bhagwan taught that dvaita consists in wrongly identifying the Self with the non-Self and Advaita is ceasing to do so, He did not advise Advaita in action. Sri Bhagwan says that non-dual idea is advised but not Advaita in action.

"How will one learn Advaita, if one does not find a master and receive instructions ? Is there not duality then ? That is the meaning." Sri Bhagwan

And hence the injunction.

Anil