Author Topic: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa  (Read 78308 times)

DRPVSSNRAJU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
    • BE AS YOU ARE
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #90 on: September 17, 2008, 01:18:31 PM »
Dear srkudai,
                 I agree with your observations.I feel that nidhidhyasanam means unbroken self-attentiveness.
pvssnraju

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #91 on: September 17, 2008, 06:20:50 PM »
Dear srkudai and Raju,  Nice exchange of ideas.  I would like to
quote two things that Bhagavan Ramana said.  Papaji was not
impressed with Bhagavan during the first few meetings.  He went
to the Hill and meditated on Krishna, came back and said that
he was playing with Krishna.  Bhagavan said:  Okay Okay.  But
why don't you have Krishna in your Heart?  He is here and now
and is with you always.  There is no need to go the Hill to find Him.
Papaji understood this after a few years. More about that in my
Arunachala Pilgrimage, which was done on 15-17th instant.

Bhagavan also said about Pandharpur Chanting.  In Pandharpur,
women stand around a lamp and start singing at night:  "We
are going to Pandharpur, we are going to Pandharpur".  After a
thousand rounds around the lamp, in the early morning at
2 AM, they sing: "We have arrived at Pandharpur.  We have
arrived at Pandharpur."  They were in Pandharpur all the time.
Right from the early night.  At 2 AM, they have arrived! 

The question therefore is:  When do we arrive?

I want to write about Arunachala Pilgirmage.  There are a lot
of things to share.  One by one.

Arunachala Siva.       

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #92 on: September 17, 2008, 11:00:24 PM »
Dear Raju,
           :) Nirguna is here and now to be seen. Saguna may or may not manifest for someone.
To a bhakta how does it matter how God appears? Its God, that is suffice isnt it ? whether he comes dressed in Jeans or totally naked ... he has already consumed us ! That is the essence.

Love!
Silence

Dear Silence,
    I doubt very much what you have written,'Nirguna is here and now to be seen. Saguna may or may not manifest for someone.'.
You seem to be defining Nirguna experience at the intellectual level. Sri Ramakrishna used to say that the Saguna experience is in fact easier than the Nirguna experience since it is easier to fix one's mind on a Divine Form than fix one's mind by Vichara.

   Moreover whether you use the path of enquiry or the path of devotion, you will notice changes in your body. I have given below a quote from Sri Ramakrishna on the necessary change.

"To be able to realize God, one must practise absolute continence. Sages like
Sukadeva are examples of urdhavreta. Their chastity was absolutely unbroken.
There is another class, who previously have had discharges of semen but who
later on have controlled them. A man controlling the seminal fluid for twelve
years develops a special power. He grows a new inner nerve called medha nadi
(the nerve of memory). Through that nerve he remembers all, he understands
all.

Loss of semen impairs the strength. But it does not injure one if one loses it
in a dream. That semen one gets from food. What remains after nocturnal
discharge is enough. But one must not know a woman.

The semen that remains after nocturnal discharge is very 'refined'. The Lahas
kept jars of mloasses in their house. Every jar had a hole in it. After a
year they found that the molasses had crystallized like sugar candy. The
unnecessary watery part had leaked out through the hole."

--- Sri Ramakrishna

Even after such changes, it is difficult to experience the Nirguna Brahman because it is very difficult to remove all worldly taints. It is in fact easier to experience Saguna Brahman.

Regards

Gangajal

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #93 on: September 18, 2008, 11:56:03 PM »
Dear Silence,

The statement that, 'Consciousness, Awareness -- is Brahman, Atma.' is merely
an intellectual position. I could also tell you that medical doctors say that
consciousness is a product of the functioning of the brain. So how can we know
definitively that scripture and Yogis are in fact right that 'Consciousness,
Awareness -- is Brahman, Atma' and that 'it is that which enables all
experiences... which makes experiences possible.'? It seems to me that in the
absence of any testing method there is a good possibility that the medical doctors
are in fact right!

The question that I am asking is how did the sages and saints and the rishis
who wrote the scriptural Maha Vakyas come to know that Consciousness is
Brahman and that it makes possible all experiences? Or are you asking me to
take at face value the scriptural assertion. It seems to me to be a reasonable
assumption that there must be some way to test the scriptural claim. Otherwise,
why should one believe it? This testing is what I am calling experience.

Regards

Gangajal

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #94 on: September 19, 2008, 11:41:31 AM »
Dear Gangajal and srkudai,  To add a few things.  Consciousness
is called "Witness", it is not expressible.  It does not 'see' in the
ordinary palance of the term.  It merely IS.  There is a typical
example in Tamil literature.  There is a theft at home, when nobody
is there.  But a lamp was burning at the house.  The Lamp is the
Witness.  The lamp does not 'see'.  Likewise Brahman is the Witness.
In the villagers, people often say that the god is the witness, when
there is no one else to prove their point.  When people who have
self realized, either with or without reading the books, they can
only express it in negative terms.  Neti  Neti, it is not this; it is not
this.  Because they cannot express it what is experiential.

I just now posted an example given by Tayumanavar, a 17th century
Tamil poet.  It is like a bride after the nuptial night coming out and
going to her mother straight, without telling anything to anyone. 
Even to her mother, she merely 'looks' at her and does not say anything.

What then, all the scriptures point out?  They point out the 'way'
only and not the 'destination'.  Words go and come back failing.....

Arunachala Siva.

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #95 on: September 20, 2008, 12:14:29 AM »
Dear Gangajal,
          :) Let me tell the practise now... Coz i am sure  you are more interested in what to do. :)

Having known your are consciousness... live it. Live a Ramana's life. Just become witness of everything that happens... the mind might have lots of thoughts, worries, ideas ... allow them to remain... u just witness.

Love!
Silence


Dear Silence,

     Your claim that the scripture does not talk of any experience will mean that there is no way
to test the scriptural claims. You say here that ,'Having known you are consciousness..'. How can
one know that one is consciousness?

Look at the following statement by Subramanian,'Because they cannot express what is experiential.'
What this suggests is that one has to directly experience that one is consciousness. Simply knowing
it at the intellectual level is not enough. You will have to directly experience it. A minimum requirement
is chittasuddhi, or purification of chitta (an aspect of the mind). What is the seat of chitta? It is located in
the subtle body in the Ajna Chakra in the forehead. Chittasuddhi implies that you will have changes in
your body, Kundalini Shakti will be active in you, Ajna Chakra will have to be pierced. Then one will have
to completely activate Sahasrara Chakra which is a near impossible task.

You say, 'Live a Ramana's life'. If only it were that easy!

Gangajal

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #96 on: September 20, 2008, 12:16:22 AM »
Dear Subramanian,
   I agree with what you have written. The sages can not express their experience. What I am
trying to tell Silence is that we will also have to have the same experience. Mere intellectual
knowledge is not enough.

Regards

Gangajal

cravinash

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #97 on: September 22, 2008, 09:27:15 AM »
Dear Friends,
I am a new entrant to this forum. The topics you people having being discussing are really interesting and thought provoking.
As Gangajal has posted, "One has to strongly feel one is the witness ... this has to firmly get established and that happens with Sradha [Faith and surrender], Constant reflection [mananam], and meditation on it [nidhidhyasam] ... by mananam , nidhidhyasam ..."

I come across a basic question, in the above process are we not presupposing some kind of model to exist. To be more clear we are trying to meditate and believe in a process that we are not sure if it is actually right or wrong. I do experience such mental state some times, but what confuses me is having faith in such a process when we are not sure Why it is so?
I always fear if continuing to believe in such a process, there is a chance of hypnotizing myself. I hope I am able to reach you guys and am in sync with you. Initially I used to believe Sri RK very much( even now I put into practice some of his teachings). But at one stage I felt may be I am believing more ? AM not sure if this is the right way of thinking.

How does one demarcate between this "believing it as a result of our feeling  it"  and "feeling it as a result of our  believing  it"----- Atleast I am not fortunate to have a real physical guru with whom I could interact, so having read through these discussions, I felt atleast I could put forth my questions with you... and get some positive guidance..

regards
avinash

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #98 on: September 23, 2008, 01:47:47 AM »
Dear Avinash

What you have written here,

''I come across a basic question, in the above process are we not presupposing some kind of model to exist. .....................
I always fear if continuing to believe in such a process, there is a chance of hypnotizing myself. I hope I am able to reach you guys and am in sync with you. Initially I used to believe Sri RK very much( even now I put into practice some of his teachings). But at one stage I felt may be I am believing more ? AM not sure if this is the right way of thinking.

How does one demarcate between this "believing it as a result of our feeling  it"  and "feeling it as a result of our  believing  it""

is spot on. One can never be sure if one is not hypnotizing oneself. So one must follow what sages and saints actually say about the experience.

What Silence is not understanding is that all Yogic paths ultimately lead to the activation of Sahasrara Chakra in the linga sarira (subtle body).
The minimum requirement for that is the activation of Ajna Chakra which leads to Chitta suddhi. No one can have chittasuddhi without many years of celibacy and practice of meditation. The Yogi will have many experiences before ultimate realization. These experiences can even be at the physical level (like physiological changes of the body) and at the mental level. It is these cumulative changes which convince a person that he is not hallucinating. It is not even necessary to be convinced that the theory of the scripture is right. All one has to have is sraddha.

Gangajal

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #99 on: September 23, 2008, 10:53:16 AM »
Dear gangajal,  To add a few things that you have said:

1.  The basic requirement is sraddha and saburi.  Faith and perseverence.
The faith gives us a belief that our goal is the correct one.  Perseverence
is required to pursue the goal. 

2. To have doubts as to whether these are hallucinations or whether
Sri RK or Bhagavan Ramana are correct or not is lack of faith.
Even to keep these doubts involve duality and it does not lead to
non dual Brahman.

3.  Keep Sri RK or Bhagavan as your Guru and keep the duality only
during/for  following path indicated by them.  Once you attain
non dual realization, even Guru is no further there, since You are
He.

Arunachala Siva. 

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47994
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #100 on: September 23, 2008, 11:24:48 AM »
Dear srkudai,  Yes.  Bhagavan has also said, that Karma, Bhakti
and Yoga are only auxillary sub-tracts, to go to the royal road
of Jnana Vichara, and to reach the goal of Brhaman.  See
Upadesa Saram.

The trouble with the first three are that they only render Chitta
suddhi, purity of mind, and do not go beyond that.

Arunachala Siva.   

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #101 on: September 23, 2008, 11:11:11 PM »
Dear Silence, Subramanian,

          Patanjali's Yoga Sutra is a dualistic system which considers Isvara as a special Purusha. On that ground alone, followers of Kevala Advaita school will not accept it. However, even Bhagavan Ramana accepts the need for activation of chakras. Just check his discussion of hrit chakra (heart chakra) in "Talks with Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi".

         Yes, I did read Sri Ramana's statement about celibacy as only an option. I do not see how it can only be an option. It is not possible to awaken the Kundalini and to activate the chakras without strict celibacy. Moreover Sri Ramakrishna stresses the need for celibacy for higher experiences.

         I also do not accept that only Jnana can lead to the Advaita experience. Even Bhakti can lead to the same experience although Bhaktas usually do not want such an experience. I recall reading somewhere Bhagavan Ramana admitting the even Japa can lead to the Advaita experience. So he must disagree with Shankara's position that only jnana can yield the Advaita experience. Of course Sri Ramakrishna says that Bhakti also leads to the Advaita experience.

        It is NOT possible to keep spiritual experiences separate from the linga sarira. We do not 'see' God because of impurities in our linga sarira. The various techniques used in sadhana, vichara, bhakti, karma, raja yoga, are there to purify the linga sarira.

        I am not advanced enough to know if Vichara is the best method for chittasuddhi!

Regards

Gangajal
         

gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #102 on: September 24, 2008, 05:11:02 AM »
I think it is impossible in these matters to prove in any debate who is right and who is wrong. 

cravinash

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #103 on: September 25, 2008, 09:09:26 AM »
Dear Gangajal,
  The comment, "We do not 'see' God because of impurities in our linga sarira. The various techniques used in sadhana, vichara, bhakti, karma, raja yoga, are there to purify the linga sarira."...is little ambiguous.
I did have this question in my mind for a long time in my mind too..

Firslty, the concept of purity or impurity is a relative phenomena. What seems to pure to one could be impure to another. The same holds true for the concept or right and wrong. And there is no concept of complete purity(it's an ideal one as far as my understanding goes).
Now coming to the stress or emphasis laid by some gurus on the purity aspect, i feel all these rules or preachings are laid down in order to enable one person to focus more towards something higher.not to distract himself with the worldly aspects.


So depending on the environment a person is exposed to, the degree of purity, the extent of Yoga sutra practice varies.

In the above cases,  where we tend to talk about the linga sarira, we are talking in the frame of this linga sarira..., which itself is supposed to be a wrong reference frame, as per the concept of advaita. So, when the reference frame is itself wrong, the attributes that we define in that frame has no meaning.


Also, once one is affirming the existence of purity, he is indirectly affirming the duality aspect. SO as long a one is stressing on the purity aspect, he is more moving away from the aspect of advaita.

For example, Janaka, is an perfect example of one who lead his life enjoying the material aspect and at the same time always in syn with the higher aspects.


The patanjali yoga sutras, presume that (as one member was pointing out) existence of dual phenomena. So when we talk about the concept of advaita, these stand no where (due regards to Patanjali), but the main purpose of these is to enable a common man to head towards the ultimate goal. So,Once, an emphasis is laid on these principles, there is more chances for a common man to implement or rather try to implement them. Also, these principles, talk more about having a balanced and moderate approach towards life. May that could be the reason fr emphasizing them more.

Also, in one of the answers, that Ramana points out so does SRK, committing sin is humane. But brooding on that is really sinful. And as long as we experience this linga sarira we belong to humane creed.

Correct me if my thinking is wrong!!!

Regards
avinash


gangajal

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa
« Reply #104 on: September 25, 2008, 11:40:53 PM »
Dear Avinash,
     You have raised the following issues:

1. You find the concept of purifying linga sarira to be ambiguous. You are saying that since 'purity or impurity is a relative phenomena. What seems to pure to one could be impure to another. The same holds true for the concept or right and wrong.'.

2. You feel that the concept of linga sarira is itself a wrong reference frame as far as Advaita is concerned. Hence,
you say that 'when the reference frame is itself wrong, the attributes that we define in that frame has no meaning.'
You also say,'once one is affirming the existence of purity, he is indirectly affirming the duality aspect. SO as long
as one is stressing on the purity aspect, he is more moving away from the aspect of advaita.'.

3. The patanjali yoga sutras have no locus standi as far as Advaita Vedanta is concerned.

4. You also say that,'Ramana points out so does SRK, committing sin is humane. But brooding on that is really sinful.
And as long as we experience this linga sarira we belong to humane creed.'.

This would be my answer to your 4 issues or questions:

You have actually answered your questions when you say in point 4 that, 'as long as we experience this linga sarira we belong to humane creed'. Indeed, you are right. Right now, unless you or any other member are Self realized, you feel the existence of the mind.
Neither the body nor the mind nor the world are unreal to you. You have yourself admiited that when you have written that you experience the 'linga sarira' in point 4. It does not matter what Advaita is saying.

So what can we deduce from the fact that the mind is real to us and that it is a small fraction of the linga sarira? We deduce that it is IMPOSSIBLE to claim that linga sarira is a wrong reference frame simply because it is unreal as far as Advaita is concerned. Even Shankaracharya admits this when he says that 'Chittasuddhi' is sine qua non for a spiritual aspirant. The seat of Chitta is in Ajna Chakra in the linga sarira. No one can reach the ultimate state without gaining control of the Ajna Chakra. The piercing of Ajna Chakra leads gradually to 'Chittasuddhi'.  If the linga sarira is a wrong reference frame then why would Shankaracharya ask for chittasuddhi when chitta is part of the linga sarira?

This also answers the issue you raised about the relativity of purity and impurity. The piercing of the chakras of the linga sarira is the definition of purity. The issue of  relativity of phenomena is a non sequitur issue.

It is true that Advaita does not accept the dualistic stance of Patanjali's Yoga Sutra. Nevertheless, the practice of stilling the mind is accepted by Advaita.

As far as I know Sri Ramakrishna did ask us not to brood over sins. He also asked us not to commit sins.

So when does the Advaitic concepts od unreality of linga sarira apply? It certainly does not apply to us who are experiencing the mind part of the linga sarira. Only that person can say that the linga sarira is unreal who has actually 'seen' that. Otherwise even a beginner would commit sin, kill, rape and loot and say that he is doing nothing since stressing on the purity aspect implies moving away from the aspect of advaita.

Any way this is my opinion.

Regards

Gangajal