Self-surrender and its meaning as revealed by Maha Guru Bhagwan Sri Ramana

[Ravi.N]

Anil/Nonduel/Subramanaian/friends,
I agree with all that you have posted.A quiet mind is the basis to understand anything.Then one realizes that ideas or thoughts are not important.The content that they express is what is the essence.Otherwise one idea that emphasizes only one aspect of this essence is at loggerheads with another idea that emphasizes another aspect of the same essence.The clash of ideas multiply and diverge and leads to endless discussion and debate.At the same time one also needs to exercise the discrimination that what one thinks as 'Essence' is truly so!Another one cannot do it for us.The more one is clear about it,the fewer the words one would use;also ,the less one would impose it on others.It will be offered as a 'Take it or leave it'.
I fully agree with what nonduel has posted in his latest post here.
Namaskar.

[Hari]

Yes, Sri Ravi, I understand what this story points to. That is what I mean. If a bhakta says that the world and God are not real then he/she fools him/herself. How can he or she to truely believe and surrender to "imaginary" God? To say "O, God is real until you have ego and then He stops existing" is ridiculous. He exists or He does not - there is no middle position. This is why I don't like people who consider themselves "jnanis" (who are actually as ignorant as ourselves) "Listen to me, God is an illusion. So stop worshipping. Start Self-inquiry.

We want to embrace everything. We want to call God unreal one time, unreal another. Our ego wants we to be superior (cleverest). Ego wants we think that our 'advaitic knowledge' contains everything, that we are almost on the top on the mountain and others philosophies are inconsistent. Ingorance! We fool ourselves many times. Can you pray to God if you don't believe He is real? To pray to Shiva all night and in the morning to teach people that God is unreal is hypocracy! It's the same with the ego. "There is no ego! There is no ego, my friends!" and suddenly he who's said this start going angry. That's my point. I don't mean to offend anyone or to prove he/she is wrong but he or she to be honest to the others and most importantly - TO THEMSELVES.

I now everyone of us give his/her best. That all comments come from the heart. I understand every point of view. But I strongly believe that every topic and every comment we made, make and will make lead us more and more to the Final Goal!

Best wishes, ramana1359

[Nagaraj]

Dear Ramana,

There is a subtle pointer that i discern from your expression, in your previous post.

you said:

(Ramana)

Can you pray to God if you don't believe He is real? To pray to Shiva all night and in the morning to teach people that God is unreal is hypocracy! It's the same with the ego. "There is no ego! There is no ego, my friends!" and suddenly he who's said this start going angry. That's my point. I don't mean to offend anyone or to prove he/she is wrong but he or she to be honest to the others and most importantly - TO THEMSELVES.

The hypocracy which you or we see in others is actually ourselves, how are you or we able to discern something as hypocracy, unless it is first found in oneself?

it is oneself alone who gets angry at seeing somebody getting angry after somebody who had been talking all along about "There is no ego! There is no ego, my friends!", it is oneself who is agitated, you or we are agitated, but we say, they who talk all nice words get angry in the end!

If you perceive anger of somebody else, it is your own anger, if you perceive love of somebody else, it is your own love. To point somebody their hypocracy, is actually pointing ones own hyporacy. Do you see this?

it is all ourselevs, oneself.

Salutations to Bhagavan

[Nagaraj]

actually it is impossible to perceive the anger or just anything external to yourself, what you see in others is ones own.

What is impossible is verily 'maya' or 'Asat' or 'Unreal'

Suppose, somebody gets angry and is a top rate hypocrite, how does one go about making the 'other' understand? is it the 'other', who has to discern or is it one self who needs to discern?

It is all within oneself.

Salutations to Bhagavan

[Ravi.N]

Ramana,

I understand what this story points to. That is what I mean. If a bhakta says that the world and God is not(I think you intended this not-ravi) real then he/she fools him/herself. How can he or she to truely believe and surrender to "imaginary" God? To say "O, God is real until you have ego and then He stops existing" is ridiculous. He exists or He does not - there is no middle position. This is why I don't like people who consider themselves "jnanis" (who are actually as ignorant as ourselves) "Listen to me, God is an illusion. So stop worshipping. Start Self-inquiry.

We want to embrace everything. We want to call God unreal one time, unreal another. Our ego wants we to be superior (cleverest). Ego wants we think that our 'advaitic knowledge' contains everything, that we are almost on the top on the mountain and others philosophies are inconsistent. Ingorance! We fool ourselves many times. Can you pray to God if you don't believe He is real? To pray to Shiva all night and in the morning to teach people that God is unreal is hypocracy! It's the same with the ego. "There is no ego! There is no ego, my friends!" and suddenly he who's said this start going angry. That's my point. I don't mean to offend anyone or to prove he/she is wrong but he or she to be honest to the others and most importantly - TO THEMSELVES.

  cannot agree with you more!
Advaitic Truth is not something that can be expressed in words-To say that 'I' and God is unreal requires someone to say it!This is not to be taken literally,it means that the distinction between 'I' and 'God' is no longer there;that God apart from oneself and the world is unreal,it is the gulf that is not real.
Yet,if the seeker thinks that God is 'imagination' and that he and his 'self-enquiry' alone is real,he is definitely fooling himself.He just needs to look around and see the vast universe where he is tinier than an atom!It is only the one who is steeped in Bhakti who can if so inclined question the Reality of the 'i' and get rid of the seeming seperation of the 'i' and 'God'.He then perceives that there is no 'I' in actual sense,and that God or Self alone exists.

Here is an excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna:

M. accompanied the
Master to the verandah, where Narendra was talking with Hazra. Sri Ramakrishna knew
that Hazra always indulged in dry philosophical discussions. Hazra would say: "The world
is unreal, like a dream. Worship, food offerings to the Deity, and so forth, are only
hallucinations of the mind. The aim of spiritual life is to meditate on one's own real Self."
Then he would repeat, "I am He." But, with all that, he had a soft corner in his heart for
money, material things, and people's attention.
Sri Ramakrishna smiled and said to Hazra and Narendra, "Hello! What are you talking
about?"
NARENDRA (smiling): "Oh, we are discussing a great many things. They are rather too
deep for others."
MASTER (with a smile): "But Pure Knowledge and Pure Love are one and the same thing.
Both lead the aspirants to the same goal. The path of love is much the easier."
Narendra quoted a song:
O Mother, make me mad with Thy love!
What need have I of knowledge or reason?
Narendra said to M. that he had been reading a book by Hamilton, who wrote: "A learned
ignorance is the end of philosophy and the beginning of religion."
MASTER (to M.): "What does that mean?"
Narendra explained the sentence in Bengali. The Master beamed with joy and said in
English, "Thank you! Thank you!" Everyone laughed at the charming way he said these
words. They knew that his English vocabulary consisted of only half a dozen words.

Sri Ramakrishna is a Great Master who knew all the angularities and deceptions of the mind and  would come out with utterly simple and interesting tales that would not only be humorous but also illuminate the position for the seeker.He is like an expert Doctor who not only knew what medicine to administer but also what dosage and frequency.

Namaskar.

[Hari]

The hypocracy which you or we see in others is actually ourselves, how are you or we able to discern something as hypocracy, unless it is first found in oneself?

I can know what is sweetness without having something sweet in my mouth right now.

If you perceive anger of somebody else, it is your own anger, if you perceive love of somebody else, it is your own love. To point somebody their hypocracy, is actually pointing ones own hyporacy. Do you see this?

My hypocracy is my own. It is not your. Or you again speak from more absolute point of view? Hypocracy is when you say something you don't believe or feel. I don't judge or correct anyone, Sri Nagaraj. I don't know if you really understand me. There is no problem even in hypocracy. My point is that if you want something, then everything must be clear and most importantly - understanding of your (our) own actions and thoughts.

[Hari]

Advaitic Truth is not something that can be expressed in words-To say that 'I' and God is unreal requires someone to say it!This is not to be taken literally,it means that the distinction between 'I' and 'God' is no longer there;that God apart from oneself and the world is unreal,it is the gulf that is not real.
Yet,if the seeker thinks that God is 'imagination' and that he and his 'self-enquiry' alone is real,he is definitely fooling himself.He just needs to look around and see the vast universe where he is tinier than an atom!It is only the one who is steeped in Bhakti who can if so inclined question the Reality of the 'i' and get rid of the seeming seperation of the 'i' and 'God'.He then perceives that there is no 'I' in actual sense,and that God or Self alone exists.

Absolutely! Why I emphasize on this is because that people who follow bhakti marga and at the same time say that God is unreal actually are putting obstacles in their own relationship with God. And it is not because God is angry because they call Him unreal but because they unconciously or not distance from Him. Mind cannot be attached and truely surrender to something which it considers unreal.

Thank you for the quoting of Sri Ramakrishna!

Best wishes, ramana1359

[Nagaraj]

Dear Ramana,

I am not talking about you or me, or absolute point of view or relative point of view. that which i discern, i share. this also is discernment, on our way... 

Ramana

I can know what is sweetness without having something sweet in my mouth right now.

This is the point, this alone, the sweetness is in you, only yourself, or only ourselves, and not elsewhere.

The world doesn't trouble us, it is ourselves alone always.

The world, that which we see, the experience of our 5 senses, see, hear, touch, taste, breathe is ours own.

Salutations to Bhagavan

[Ravi.N]

Ramana,
In this excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna,the master is quite categorical in the injury that undigested advaitic knowledge can do:

Householders and Non-dualism
MASTER (to M.): "Self-Knowledge is discussed in the Ashtavakra Samhita. The nondualists
say, 'Soham', that is, 'I am the Supreme Self.' This is the view of the sannyasis of
the Vedantic school. But this is not the right attitude for householders, who are conscious of
doing everything themselves. That being so, how can they declare, 'I am That, the
actionless Supreme Self'? According to the non-dualists the Self is unattached. Good and
bad, virtue and vice, and the other pairs of opposites, cannot in any way injure the Self,
though they undoubtedly afflict those who have identified themselves with their bodies.

It is not to say that the Master decried the path of jnAna-he considered that it is something beyond the reach of all but the most ripe aspirants.The Master had a copy of the Ashtavakra Gita hidden under his pillow!He allowed only Narendra(Swami Vivekananda) and 'M' (the only house-holder that he permitted!)to read it.
Nowadays 'advaita' has become a buzzword and everyone is eager not to be left behind!
Yet,this is not to detract from all those who are sincerely drawn to Advaitic teachings and are doing sadhana.The ones who are in right earnest are the ones who will not talk about it.For advaita is not a matter for affirmation or discussion.

Namaskar.

[Hari]

This is the point, this alone, the sweetness is in you, only yourself, or only ourselves, and not elsewhere.

The world doesn't trouble us, it is ourselves alone always.

The world, that which we see, the experience of our 5 senses, see, hear, touch, taste, breathe is ours own.

Thanks for your answer, Sri Nagaraj. There is what I think:

You say the sweetness is in me. What "me"? The ego? If the ego exists then all other souls exist. If they exist then why not to accept that they taste sweetness of the sugar too?

You say that the world doesn't trouble us. Say that to the people living on the street or those with broken marriages or people damaged by car-crash. If dehatma buddhi is there everything is there. So we cannot say we are only, everything is from us.

You say that the world is our own. Let ask God what would He tell us about that ?

You see, we talk about different levels of the Truth according to the different levels of the mind and mix them. That's where all confusion and troubles arise. We could not compare the palace in which we live in as kings during our dream sleep with the ordinary house from our waking state, could we? But I am sure everything will be cleared up in our further posts.

Best wishes, ramana1359

[Hari]

Sri Ravi, excellent explanation from Sri Ramakrishna!

Jnani's and bhakta's statements about Reality are the same in fact . Jnanis say only God (the Self) exists, everything is unreal. Bhaktas say only God exists, everything is God. No one statement is more or less accurate than the other. We choose which one to apply to our spiritual sadhana. The Goal is one - annihilation of the ego. And when this happen there is no matter any of the statements because the person for whom they had mattered is now gone and only God (the Self) 'remains'.

Best wishes, ramana1359

[eranilkumarsinha]

Today You have graced me, removed the darkness in my mind,
Like the sun that removes the darkness.
Your state in my heart, I am remembering without break
There is nothing other than You,
Approaching approaching You, O Lord of Tiruperundurai,
Who wore me down, more and more to an atom's size,
till I, becoming less and less, became one with You.

Dear Sri Subramanian Sir,

I am grateful to you indeed for your sublime rendering of the V. 7 from the Tiruvachakam into a beautiful English poetry.
Dear sir, I wish to add here that if the degree of absence of thoughts is the measure of our progress towards Self-Realisation, continued reduction in the size of the ego is the measure of progress of the bhaktas towards becoming one with God—worn down, reduced to an atom’s size and becoming less and less till becoming one with Him.
Dear sir, who among the great Tamil sages did sing the following Verse ?
‘Not knowing the truth of myself I was deluded by the ideas ‘I’ and ‘mine’; but when I came to know myself I knew also that Thou art both I and mine.’

Therefore, dear sir, it follows that true devotion is also nothing but to come to know oneself. The above Verse implies that coming to know oneself also means knowing that Lord Himself is I and mine.

Thank you so much, sir.

Regards,
  Anil     

[eranilkumarsinha]

Dear Sri nonduel,
              Pranam

I wish to convey through this post that I have also followed almost all your posts and sometimes I felt as if they are my own.
Yes, there is nothing but being and ‘I am’ what I am looking for. Therefore, who will find whom? Finding implies a subject-object relationship—the finder and the found whereas I myself am what I am looking for—both the finder as well as the found. Hence, I can only BE It. ‘Summa Iru’ is the practice as well as the Goal and that of course is the essence of Sri Bhagwan’s Teaching.

Thank you so much for your brilliant post.
Anil 

[Nagaraj]

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

[eranilkumarsinha]

Dear Sri Subramanian Sir,

I found the verse I referred to in Talks. The Verse was composed by The great Saint Nammalvar.The Verse given in Talks is as follows :

"I was in a maze, sticking to 'I' and 'mine'; I wandered without knowing my Self. On realising my Self I understand that I myself am You and that 'mine' (my possesions) is only You."

Sri Bhawan: Thus--you see--devotion is nothing more than knowing oneself.

Regards,
  Anil