Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Highlights for Wed., Oct 6

Expand Messages
  • umbada@xx.xxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx)
    SELF REALISATION By Sri Ramana Maharshi In the following extract from Gems from Bhagavan, we are reminded of the truth and inspired to realise the True Self.
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 7, 1999
      SELF REALISATION By Sri Ramana Maharshi

      In the following extract from Gems from Bhagavan, we are
      reminded of the truth and inspired to realise the True Self.

      THE STATE WE CALL realisation is simply being oneself, not
      knowing anything or becoming anything. If one has realised,
      he is that which alone is, and which alone has always been.
      He cannot describe that state. He can only be That. Of
      course we loosely talk of Self-Realisation for want of a
      better term.

      Effortless and choiceless awareness is our real state. If
      we can attain it or be in it, it is all right. But one
      cannot reach it without effort, the effort of deliberate
      meditation. All the age long vasanas (impressions) carry the
      mind outwards and turn it to external objects. All such
      thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward.
      For that, effort is necessary, for most people. Of course
      everybody, every book says 'Be quiet or still'. But it is
      not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary.

      There is a state beyond our efforts or effortlessness.
      Until that is realised effort is necessary. After tasting
      such bliss even once, one will repeatedly try to regain it.
      Having once experienced the bliss of peace, no one would
      like to be out of it or engage himself otherwise.

      You may go on reading any number of books on Vedanta. They
      can only tell you 'Realise the Self'. The Self cannot be
      found in books. You have to find it for yourself in

      --contributed by Harsha


      I went to hear Francis Lucilled speak here in NYC last
      weekend. I asked him during his talk about my experience of
      understanding and awareness and then the subsquent "losing
      of it". He told me that I had become attached to a state
      (of being: happiness/compassion/love) and that I turned that
      into an object, hence the thought "I've lost it". He said
      that I could never lose it, awareness has never been gone,
      which others have told me also. He said that I had fallen
      in love with the shadow of my lover, but not my true love.
      And that if it was my true love, "he" would never have left
      me because when someone truly loves you, they will never

      This prompted further investigation for me. I felt I had to
      look deeper into the "why" of having returned to separation
      and the consequent suffering. I am discovering that I
      believe I chose to turn away from the truth of being because
      there were further lessons I needed to learn. And those
      lessons have to do with attachment. Because I clung to the
      state of happiness, I became very worried and fearful when I
      noticed that I had become attached to my boyfriend (now
      husband). I incorrectly thought I had to "get rid" of the
      attachment. That's really when I started to think that I
      was "losing it"! I thought that I shouldn't be attached.
      Can you believe it? It's almost funny now. But I do feel
      compassion for myself for having been so deluded. I feel I
      have had to learn a very hard lesson.

      So, now I have seen that attachment is another process of
      thinking, not meant to be smothered out of one's mind or
      else...!! I truly loved being happy and certainly did not
      want that happiness to leave. Can you blame a person for
      that?? : )

      I haven't "walked over the edge" into 'no separation' yet.
      (I hesitate to say "yet" implying time and some future event
      that I await). Who knows what will happen in my life? I
      could be hit by bus tomorrow...or even today. And as Gene
      so beautifully said during a recent chat, "There's no need
      to rush. We have all the time in the world".

      I guess I feel a huge resolution to those questions that
      have haunted me and now I find it much easier to just relax
      and be where I am. Whatever "happens" in the future is not
      really up to me. That's another big lesson here. I have to
      give up everything to God. People use the word surrender.
      That one has been really tough for me....Judi, thank you for
      constantly saying it over and over.

      So the observation and listening continues. As pointed out,
      that is really all there is to do anyhow. How foolish of me
      to think otherwise.



      I was just listening to an audio on Isaac Shapiro's website
      in which he points one toward the state of deep sleep and
      says there is no attention there. Then as one awakes, there
      is attention. And in that way the whole world comes into
      being. Being very still can bring one to the moment before
      thought or attention. Those are Isaac's words and who am I
      to argue? By the way, he's a great speaker. Much is said
      in his silence. He teaches by silence, that is very clear,
      ironically, even in his audios:




      What is an "external object" if the Truth has no outside or
      An "external object" can only be a way of defining,
      labelling, understanding the "One True Thing" in a dualistic
      way. What then would "turning inward" be? It could only be
      seeing through one's own labelling, defining, and
      (mis)understanding process. The "One True Thing" has no
      inside or outside. The "effort" to turn "inside" is itself
      a labelling, defining, and understanding of "One True
      Thing." Therefore, inevitably, the "effort" needs to be
      surrendered in exactly the same way that One surrendered the
      definition of "external objects" as existing separately
      (from Oneself). Finally, the labelling of "One" or "Self"
      needs to be surrendered as well.



      It is obvious that a simple teaching like nondualism does
      have a disadvantage; it is fairly easy to grasp and at the
      first glimpse of recognizing one's real nature, the
      proclamation of another EO follows. It is entirely
      forgotten that a rather gifted one like Ramana was plunged
      into incessant self-absorption for years, hiding from the
      crowd when possible and finally gave in to accept the role
      of a teacher. The seemingly complicated path of Mahayana
      Buddhism is an effective guard against "instant guruism" as
      displayed in the West and the vows are a safeguard against
      amassing personal wealth. Although Sufism and Rosicrucianism
      don't implicitly mention nonduality, "one will get there",
      without the possibility of "instant guruism" at the first
      glimpse. Alas, the genie is out of the enlightened bottle
      and can't be pushed back. As science provided for the
      encephalogram and cardiogram, time to devise a machine the
      make a gurugram :)


      Many of the conventional paths have built-in safeguards
      against this fast-food EO proclamation. In the AMORC
      (commercialized) Rosicrucian teachings, the path is 32 years
      of dues-paying membership. Advaita Vedanta has a 15 year
      path once the student begins the Vedanta - and this is after
      the regular "karmakanda" portion of practice. In Kabbala it
      is said that one must be married, 40 yrs old and have
      "swallowed the Torah." The Mahayana 10 stages of a
      Boddhisattva are downright mythological, and in conventional
      understanding, they are preliminaries to being a Buddha.
      Not only do these paths guard against personal wealth, but
      also personal aggrandizement of all kinds. Yes, we can't
      push the toothpaste back into the tube. One teacher,
      Ramesh, takes it as a sign of non-enlightenment the
      proclamation of enlightenment. But he also regards it as a
      sign of enlightenment if HE proclaims you to "have the final
      understanding..." This stuff gets completely wacky.



      My impression is that the mystics speak of oneness or unity
      more than nonduality. They're very big on Oneness, but it
      would be nice to find the ones that went beyond.


      Mystics like St. John of the Cross and gnostics like Hermes
      Trismegistus certainly went beyond but never expressed it in
      writing; the "mystical union" of Christian mystics, the
      "alchemical wedding" of Valentin Andraede, the union of
      Shiva And Shakti, nirvana, moksha, all different words for
      the very same psychophysical event.


      Okay, from experience, the mystic experience happens at
      heart chakra on the way up, when all chakras above are open,
      meaning throat, crown, etc., then beyond that, the
      unification with Soul happens over a period of time, until
      the Crown completely fires nonstop for awhile and the energy
      is brought back down into heart where it blooms outwards,
      feels like about three feet. From here one is in "mind" or
      "soul" unifica- tion. One is not a saint and human, that is
      why i say there is always more ... you understand ... and
      i'm sure there is more beyond this but i do not speak to
      what i do not know.

      --~ Rainbo ~
      Nonduality Salon Website
      Nonduality Salon Email Forum
      Nonduality Salon Chat
      Nonduality Salon List of Nondual People
      Encyclopedia of Nonduality
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.