Author Topic: Fundamental question about Mind!  (Read 173192 times)

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13662
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #105 on: May 19, 2012, 06:06:38 PM »
Dear Ravi,

The fictitious differentiation about the outward world would vanish only when the outward looking mind is already realized,
the I-I. The outward looking mind still carries the little 'i' with all its inadequacies, then the world will appear good, bad or ugly.
Only after the realization, one can look at the world as Brahma Swarupam and not otherwise.

Arunachala Siva.   

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #106 on: May 19, 2012, 06:14:02 PM »

Quote
The fictitious differentiation about the outward world would vanish only when the outward looking mind is already realized,
the I-I. The outward looking mind still carries the little 'i' with all its inadequacies, then the world will appear good, bad or ugly.
Only after the realization, one can look at the world as Brahma Swarupam and not otherwise.

Dear Sri Subramania, Ravi and others

Isn't this dualistic thinking - outside/inside, Atman/Brahman, the main obstacle? To believe in inside is not the same as believeing in outside? Within, where is this "within"?
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13662
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #107 on: May 19, 2012, 06:33:34 PM »
Dear ramana,

The inward looking of mind, to search and quell itself into the Source is not dual thinking. In fact, no thinking is necessary.
Only sraddha is necessary. Sraddhavan phalathe jnanam, says the scripture. All dual thinking sprouts only when the I thought
comes out and jumps into the world.

An ajnani sees the serpent in the rope. The Jnani sees the rope only. In fact there is no both serpent and rope. There is only
rope and rope for ever. So also the jagat drishti. When one is immersed in jagat drishti, swarupam will not shine. When swarupam
shines, the jagat drishiti will disappear. The jagat itself will become the Brahma swarupam.   

Arunachala Siva.

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13662
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #108 on: May 19, 2012, 06:46:22 PM »
Dear Ravi,

If all life is yoga in what is called practical vedanta, then how come when a Maharajah (in whose palace) with whom, Swami Vivekananda
was staying and when a dance performance was going on in the place, Swami should refrain from attending the dance performance?

Swami said Ketri Maharaj: I cannot come to see the dance performance. I have no desire to see her nor her dance and songs.

After some time, when the song "prabhu mere avaguna chitta na dharo; samadarshi hai nama thihaaro......" was heard, Swami
started thinking and then said to himself. "This woman has taught me the true Vedanta. I created divisions., I shall not indulge
in such divisions...When the dancing girl after the performance came to Swami to prostrate, he blessed her, truly believing that
she was a teacher of Vedanta to him.

(Swami Rangatananda, in his Manisha Panchakam, commentary)         

All divisions would vanish only after Self realization. The inward turned mind which finds out the Source helps this process.

Sri Bhagavan says: You remain summa, you shall soon realize Summa iruthal is Swarupam. Thereafter Swrupam itself is
Jagat, Swarupam itself is Jiva. Swarupam itself is Sivam. All are Siva Swarupam. (who am I).

Arunachala Siva.

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #109 on: May 19, 2012, 07:00:44 PM »
Thank you, Sri Subramanian. I like explanation of what we all are talking about of Sri David Godman. Very profound and deep understanding of his of Lord Ramana's teachings. Here it is what he says:

One of Ramana Maharshi’s most frequent comments was that there were only two reliable methods for attaining Self-Realization; one could either pursue self-enquiry or one could surrender.

An almost equally common statement was that jnana and bhakti are ultimately the same. This second statement is usually interpreted to mean that whichever of the two paths one chooses to follow, the ultimate goal and the culminating experience will be the same.

It is generally assumed that the two paths do not converge until the moment of realisation is reached. However if Ramana Maharshi’s teachings are correctly interpreted, then it will be seen that the paths of surrender and Self-enquiry merge before Realisation, and that in the higher levels of practice, if one follows the path of surrender, then one’s sadhana will be the same as that of someone who has chosen the path of Self-enquiry.

This may seem very radical at first sight, but this is only because of the general misconceptionsthat many people have about Ramana’s teachings on the true nature, meaning and practice of surrender. In order to eliminate these misconceptions, and to clarify Ramana’s attitude and approach to surrender, it will be helpful to examine some of these commonly held ideas in the light of Ramana’s statements on the subject, firstly to show how unfounded most of these ideas are, and secondly, by eliminating them, to illustrate the profundity of Ramana’s real teachings.The most convenient starting point for this enquiry is the relationship that exists between Ramana Maharshi, the Guru, and the thousands of people who call themselves his devotees.

There is a long tradition in this country (India) of people accepting certain teachers as their gurus, and then proclaiming immediately that they have surrendered to them. In most cases, this surrender is only a statement of intent, or at best, there is a partial surrendering to this new authority figure in the hope of acquiring some material or spiritual reward.

Ramana’s opposition to this type of religious bribery was quite clear and it is best summed up in the following statement:

‘Surrender to Him and abide by His will
whether he appears or vanishes;
await His pleasure.
If you ask Him to do as you please,
it is not surrender but command to Him.
You cannot have Him obey you and yet
think that you have surrendered.
He knows what is best and when and
how to do it. Leave everything to Him;
His is the burden, you no longer have any cares.
All your cares are His.
Such is surrender.
This is bhakti”.
(Talks, p. 425).

This statement, typical of many that he made is a categorical refutation of the idea that one can surrender to one’s God or Guru, and yet demand that the God or Guru fulfills one’s desires or solves one’s problems. Despite this often repeated refutation, it is probably true to say that the majority of Ramana’s devotees both believe that they have surrendered to Ramana, yet at the  same time, would not hesitate to approach him with their personal and material problems, especially if the perceived need required an urgent solution.

In Ramana’s teachings on surrender, there is no room for stray desires, and no room for expectations or miracles, no matter how desperate the situation might appear to be.

Ramana says:

“If you have surrendered,
you must be able to abide by the will of God
and not make a grievance
out of what may not please you.”
(Talks p.115)

Under Ramana’s strict interpretation of absolute surrender, the only appeals which might qualify for approval are those where the devotee approaches the God or Guru with the attitude “This is your problem and not mine; please attend to it in any way you see fit.”

This attitude bears the marks of partial surrender, for it fulfills the bare minimum requirements of Ramana’s definition of true surrender. On this level of surrender, there is no longer any expectation of a particular solution, there is simply a willingness to accept whatever happens.

It is interesting to note in this connection that although Ramana clearly stated that devotees who wanted their problems solved were not practicing true surrender, he did admit that surrendering one’s problems to God or to the Guru was a legitimate course of action for those who felt that they could not stick to His absolute teaching of complete surrender.

He was once asked: “Is it proper that one prays to God when one is afflicted by worldly ills?” and his answer was:

“Undoubtedly.”
(Talks, p. 501).

This admission that the Guru may be approached with personal problems should be seen as an extension of, and not a contradiction of his teachings on absolute and unconditional surrender. For those who are not ready for complete surrender, there is this intermediate practice of surrendering one’s problems to the external “Higher Power.” It is not a dilution of his notion that surrender must be complete and total to be effective, it is more an admission that for some devotees, such a massive step is impractical without some lesser intermediate stage.

If we can reach this point where we accept that we cannot ask Ramana to solve our problems and still claim that we have surrendered, then we move forward a few steps in our understanding of his teachings, but if we then try to put our new understanding into practice, we immediately encounter a new and apparently insoluble problem. The problem is that the desire to surrender is in itself a desire which we want fulfilled, and since, according to Ramana, true surrender cannot be accomplished without complete desirelessness, the presence of this desire in us is sufficient to prevent true surrender from taking place. It is the paradox of effort which is inherent in nearly all forms of sadhana.

Simply stated, the problem is that there is a perception that there is an individual self which wants to extinguish itself so that the state of Realisation will be revealed, but anything which this individual self tries to do to eliminate itself merely prolongs its own existence. If one sees spiritual practice as something that one does to attain Realisation, then there is no solution to this problem; there is no solution because the whole problem stems from the totally false assumption that this individual self has a real
existence.

The first step along the path to true surrender is not to throw oneself at someone’s feet and say “I surrender”,  it is the cultivation of the awareness and the understanding that there is no individual self to surrender, and that this individual self never at any time had, has, or will have any real existence.


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

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #110 on: May 19, 2012, 07:05:19 PM »

When Ramana said on several occasions:

“Who is to surrender what and to whom?”
(Talks, p. 176),

he was trying to drive home this fundamental point that without this understanding that there is no individual self, then all spiritual practices are done under false pretences, and that meditation, surrender or self-enquiry done without this constant awareness are merely exercises in self-deception.

The best illustration of this point that I have come across appears in a recent publication called The Secret of Arunachala. In it, a devotee remarked to Ramana that a certain fellow devotee must be well advanced onthe spiritual path because he meditated for eight to ten hours every day. (Page 73).

“Oh,” replied Ramana,
“he meditates, he eats he sleeps.
But who is meditating, eating, sleeping?
What advantage is there in meditating for
ten hours a day if in the end that only has
the result of establishing you a little more deeply
in the conviction that it is you
who are meditating?”

This aspect of Ramana’s teachings, that one is already realised here and now is widely ignored when it comes to practice, but its importance cannot be overstated.

Ramana has said:

“The removal of ignorance is the aim of practice
and not acquisition of Realisation.”
(Talks p. 322).

The most fundamental piece of ignorance is that there exists an individual self who is going to do sadhana, and that by doing sadhana, this individual self will disappear or be merged in some super-being.

Until this concept is eliminated on the mental level, it is not an exaggeration to say that one is wasting one’s time in attempts to surrender or to enquire ‘Who am I?’ Correct attitude and correct understanding of this matter are of pre-eminent importance if the application of Ramana’s teaching is to be successful.

Returning now to the practice of surrender, and bearing in mind the necessity of maintaining the right attitude with regard to the nonexistence of the individual self, there remains the problem of how to surrender since the mere desire to surrender invents an illusory person who is going to surrender.

The key to this problem and the key to all problems connected with the practice of Ramana’s teachings, is to bypass the mind and move to the realm of being. One cannot truly surrender without escaping from that vast accumulation of ideas and desires we call the mind, and according to Ramana, one cannot ecape or destroy themind by any kind of mental activity.

Ramana’s solution is to let the mind subside to the point where it disappears, and what remains when the mind has subsided is the simple, pure being that was always there. In a conversation in Talks Ramana gives the following illuminating answer. He says:

“It is enough that one surrenders oneself. Surrender is to give oneself up to the original cause of one’s being … One’s source is within oneself. Give yourself up to it. That means that you should seek the source and merge in it.”
(Talks p.175).

This is an immensely profound statement which not only sweeps away many of the myths that surround the practice of surrender – it also shows an indication that the route to the rediscovery of the Self is the same whether one chooses to label it “surrender” or “self-enquiry”.

If we examine this statement closely it is possible to extract three important conclusions regarding Ramana’s attitude and approach to surrender. Firstly, there is no external deity or manifestation to whom one must surrender; secondly, the source of one’s being is within us; and thirdly, and most importantly, true surrender is to go back tothe original cause of one’s being and remain firmly and continually rooted there.

If this is translated into terms of practical advice, then surrender comes down to two words: being and stillness.

In Talks Ramana says:

“Your duty is to be, and not to be this or that,‘I am that I am’ sums up the whole truth. The method is summed up in ‘Be still’.”
(Talks, p.333).

The stillness and the being of which Ramana speaks co-exist with each other and reveal themselves in their full radiance whenever interest in one’s thought stream dries up. Thus, for Ramana, the practice of surrender is to find within oneself this feeling of beingness and surrender oneself completely to it. On this level of surrender, practice consists of giving up wrong ideas by refusing to give them attention.

Ramana’s statement that

“The removal of ignorance is the aim of practiceand not acquisition of Realisation”
(Talks, p. 322)

is extremely relevant in this connection, for it is only wrong ideas that separate us from a full awareness of our natural state. This final stage of surrender is simply a giving up of attachment to ignorance by bypassing the mental processes which cause and perpetuate it. The practice is the fruit of the conviction that there is nothing to surrender, for by denying attention to the mental processes, one is finally surrendering the erroneous idea that there is an individual self to surrender.

When one attempts to practice this conviction by putting attention on the feeling of being that is within us, thoughts and desires will initially continue to grow at their normal rate, but if attention is maintained over a period of time, the density of thoughts decreases, and in the space between them there emerges the clarity, the stillness and the peace of pure being. Occasionally this stillness and this peace will expand and intensify until a point is reached where no effort is needed to sustain the awareness of being, the attention merges imperceptibly with the being itself, and the occasional stray thoughts no longer have the power to distract.

When this point of surrender has been reached, all the ignorant misperceptions, which constitute the illusory ego, have disappeared. But this is not the final state of Realisation, because the misconceptions are only in suspension and sooner or later, they can emerge again.

Ramana has stated that the final, definite elimination of ignorance is a matter for Self. He says that effort can only take one to a certain point and then the Self takes over and takes one to the goal. In the case of surrender, the initial effort is the shifting of one’s attention from the world of thoughts to the feeling of being. When there is no attention on it, the mind subsides revealing the being from which it came, then in some mysterious way, the Self eliminates the residual ignorance and Realisation dawns.

Ramana summed it all up very neatly when he said:

“Just keep quiet and Bhagavan will do the rest.”
(Ramana Maharshi and the Path of Self-Knowledge p. 147)

This shifting of attention is the ultimate act of surrender. It is an acknowledgement that the mind, its concepts and desires are all ignorance, and that involvement in and attachment to the ignorance is all that prevents a full awareness of Reality.

It is an acknowledgement that nothing that is understood or believed is of any use; that no belief, theory, idea or mental activity will bring one any nearer to Realisation. It is an acknowledgement and a final acceptance of the idea that all striving and all notions of attainment are futile and illusory. This simple shifting of attention constitutes the culmination of surrender because it is the final surrendering of the ignorant notion that there is an individual self to surrender. It is the final acceptance in practice of the conviction that there is only attachment to wrong ideas and that this attachment can be severed by refusing to give these ideas any attention.

This final level of surrendering ignorance represents the full flowering of Ramana’s teachings on surrender, and any less absolute interpretation merely entangles one in the meshes of the ignorant ideas he was striving so hard to eliminate. It is admitted that as a concession to weakness, he occasionally permitted and approved lower levels of surrender such as devotion and worship, but for those who could comprehend and practice his more absolute teachings, he would be satisfied with nothing less than the total unconditioned surrender which is implied in the practice of being and the detachment from ignorance.

Bearing this in mind it will now be constructive to have a closer look at the practice of self-enquiry, and to focus attention on the large overlap that exists between enquiry and surrender. Ramana’s advice on self-enquiry was clear, simple and direct, but like his advice on surrender, it has often been misunderstood and misrepresented. The easiest way to avoid errors is to remember three simple but fundamental tenets of Ramana’s teachings; firstly, that we are all Realised here and now and that the only purpose of sadhana is to remove the idea that we are not; secondly, there is no individual self to extinguish because the individual self never at any time existed; and thirdly no amount of mental sadhana is helpful because the mind cannot do anything except extend the frontiers of its own ignorance. If an awareness of these points is continually maintained, then the most obvious errors in practice can be avoided. One immediately sees that concentration on a point in the body is counterproductive because it involves mental effort. One can also eliminate the idea that self-enquiry is a mantra or an exercise in self-analysis because both of these approaches involve mental activity. On a more subtle level, if one maintains an awareness that the individual self at no time ever existsthen one can avoid the dangerous but often deeply-rooted notion that self-enquiry involvesone self looking for another self.

To cut through the entanglements of these and similar misconceptions, and to find out what positive practical advice Ramana had to offer on self-enquiry, one cannot do better than go back to the words of Ramana himself.

In Maharshi’s Gospel, he says that:

“The purpose of self-enquiry is to focus the entire mind at its source”.
(p.48).

The purpose of this focussing is the same as that which has just been outlined for the practice of surrender. According to Ramana the mind is only a connection of ignorant ideas and unless one steps completely outside this mental realm by keeping attention on the being from which the mind emerges, then the ignorance and the wrong ideas inevitably continue. It is important to note that Ramana never explains self-enquiry as a practice by which an individual self is eliminated, he always phrases his advice to indicate that when one looks for the source of the mind or the ego, they both disappear, and it is discovered that neither of them ever existed. This stepping outside the mind is as crucial to an understanding of self-enquiry as it is to an understanding of surrender.

In a passage in Talks he says:

“The fact is that the mind is only a bundle of thoughts. How can you extinguish it by the thought of doing so or by a desire… Your thoughts and desires are part and parcel of the mind! The mind is simply fattened by new thoughts rising up. Therefore it is foolish to attempt to kill the mindby means of the mind. The only way to do it is to find its source and hold on to it.’’
(p. 463).

This finding the source and holding on to it is the beginning, end and purpose of self-enquiry. The precise method is simple and well known. When thoughts arise one does not allow them to develop. One asks oneself the words “To whom do these thoughts occur?” And the answer is “To me,” and then the question occurs “Then who am I? What is this thing in me which I keep calling ‘I’?”

By doing this practice one is shifting attention from the world of thoughts to the being from where the thought and the thinker first emerged. The transfer of attention is simply executed because if one holds onto the feeling “I am” the initial thought of “I” will gradually give way to the feeling of “I” and then sooner or later this feeling “I am” will merge into being itself, to a state where there is no longer either a thinker of the thought ‘I’ or a feeler of the feeling ‘I am’; there will only be being itself. This is the stage where attention to the feeling of “I am” has merged with the being from which it came so that there is no longer the dualistic distinction of a person giving attention to the feeling of “I am”. There is only being and awareness of being.

lf this practice is done persistently, then the verbal redirection of attention soon becomes redundant; as soon as there is the awareness of attachment to a particular thought then attention is immediately switched back to the being, from which the thoughts and the imaginary thinker came. It is important to stress that the verbal preliminaries of asking “Who am I?” or “To whom do these thoughts occur?” are simply tools to redirect the attention; the real self-enquiry begins with the subsequent witnessing of the disappearance of the thoughts and the re-emergence of being as the mind subsides into temporary abeyance.

Ramana summarized this very succinctly when he said in Talks:

“Abhyasa (spiritual practice) consists of withdrawal into the self everytime you are disturbed by thought. It is not concentration or destruction of the mind, but withdrawal into the Self”.
(p. 464).

Since, in Ramana’s terminology the terms being and Self are virtually synonymous, what he is describing here is the practice of withdrawing into being, and remaining there undisturbed by the transient distractions of thoughts.

This practice may be viewed from two perspectives. On the higher levels of surrender maintaining awareness of being can be seen as a surrendering of wrong ideas including the wrong idea that there is someone to surrender, whereas in self-enquiry, one reaches this same point of being by actively discarding thoughts and by tracing back the feeling of “I am”,  until it finally subsides into the being from which it came.

Though the two descriptions might appear to be describing two completely different approaches, particularly in the preliminary stages, if the practices of surrender and self-enquiry are persistently and earnestly persued, the two approaches finally merge imperceptibly into the single practice of being.

To surrender false ideas is simply to be and that same state of being is the point where thoughts and the idea of the thinker disappear. This point, this state of being, is beautifully described in Talks when Ramana says:

“It is the state of perfect awareness and perfect stillness combined. It is the interval between two successive thoughts, and the source from which the thoughts spring…Go to the root of the thoughts and you reach the stillness of sleep. But you reach it in the full vigour of search, that is with perfect awareness.”
(p. 564)

This point which Ramana describes so graphically is the point of convergence between the path of self-enquiry and the path of surrender. The final, definitive detachment from ignorance has not yet happened, for this final elimination is a matter for the Self. Until that elimination takes placeone can only be, and once the awareness of being is maintained effortlessly, then the being of surrender in which one has given up all ideas,is the same being which results from witnessingthe disappearance of the “I–thought”.

This state of being is still a stage of sadhana, for it lacks permanence and the mind is liable to reassert its dominance at any time. However it is the final stage, and as such it is the purest and deepest level of both surrender and self-enquiry. It is a state which belongs neither to the world of ignorance nor to the Absolute Reality, but somehow, mysteriously, according to Ramana, it provides the link between the two.

When Ramana said on one occasion,

“Do not meditate, BE,
do not think that you are, BE”,
(Secret of Anurachala, p. 73),

he was summarising the whole of his practical teachings, because for Ramana, it is only in this state of effortless awareness of being that the final Realisation will be revealed.


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

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13662
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #111 on: May 19, 2012, 07:33:01 PM »
Dear ramana,

first things first.

1. Sri Bhagavan never said effortless awareness. It is JK's pet thoery. To attain the ever abiding awareness, one should
put in great efforts.

2. Secondly the various quotes given by you are told by Sri Bhagavan on different occasions to suit the maturity level of
the devotees. e.g. Who is to surrender to whom? It only means that one can achieve total surrender to know that the
surrendered and the surrendered are the same Substance.

3. He said that there is no individual self and all are only Brahman. But at the same time He advocated spiritual practices,
because one should not understand individual self and Brahman are one and the same is not a statement. It is a state.

This state of oneness is to be achieved by practice with efforts.

4. Sri Bhagavan never said that hours of meditation is a yardstick for progress. No. True and deep meditation even for
a few minutes would confer more benefits than long hours of mind wandering meditation. He even told Chadwick once
that the progress achieved in the self inquiry can never be measured. The realization dawns suddenly like a lightning.
By merely seeing a devotee or his practices (number of hours etc.,) one can never measure the progress.

5. Sri Bhagavan called everyone as Jnani. He said that there is no Ajnani at all.  For that matter there is not even Jnani.
Only Jnanam. Why did He say that? Because to be a Jnani is not a title. It is fullness. No one to utter that one is a Jnani
after realization. Again, why did he say that all are pretending to be ajnanis. It is because, we take the role of little 'i'
and do gory dances in the world.  This pretension that this little 'i' should go. The body and mind are real  - this idea should
go. This idea or vasana is there since several births. The dirt is thick and this should cleaned up every day systematically.     

6. Sri Bhagavan has said that I is the Original Sin, the primal and primordial ignorance. This should go.  The realization
is a myth - He said. What is necessary is only wash off the sin. Then realization will reveal itself on its own. See Verse 45 of AAMM.

7. The three cardinal truths mentioned by you are correct. There is no deity outside you. They are all mental concepts.
See His shocking revelations in Verses of Devi Kalottaram - 15, 62, 69, 71. And His verses in Atma Sakshat Prakaranam - 23, 58, and 59.
See also the verse 5 of Ulladu Narpadu - anubhandam.

8. Finally, what is the essence? Summa Iru. Be. don't be doing anything.

Arunachala Siva. 

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #112 on: May 19, 2012, 07:44:29 PM »
Just to mark that my last post are not my own words but of Sri David Godman which I like very much. The important thing is that I understand what you mean and I agree.
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #113 on: May 19, 2012, 08:23:04 PM »
Subramanian,
We need to read the life of Swami Vivekananda to understand this completely.Most of the 'Swamis' add their masala! :)
When the incident happened Swamiji was a 'wandering sannyasi'.This is what Sri Ramakrishna says:
"The sannyasi must observe very strict discipline. He must not look even at the picture of a
woman. But this rule doesn't apply to householders. An aspirant should not associate with a
woman, even though she is very much devoted to God. A sannyasi, even though he may
have subdued his passions, should follow this discipline to set an example to householders.
"

Now here is the story of Swami Vivekananda and the Nautch girl:
At Khetri an incident occurred that the Swami remembered all his life. He was invited
by the Maharaja to a musical entertainment in which a nautch-girl was to sing, and he
refused to come, since he was a monk and not permitted to enjoy secular pleasures.
The singer was hurt and sang in a strain of lamentation. Her words reached the
Swami's ears:
Look not, O Lord, upon my sins!
Is not Same-sightedness Thy name?
One piece of iron is used
Inside the holy shrine,
Another for the knife
Held in the butcher's hand;
Yet both of these are turned to gold
When touched by the philosophers' stone.
Sacred the Jamuna's water,
Foul the water in the ditch;
Yet both alike are sanctified
Once they have joined the Ganga's stream.
So, Lord, look not upon my sins!
Is not Same-sightedness Thy name?
The Swami was deeply moved. This girl, whom society condemned as impure, had
taught him a great lesson: Brahman, the Ever Pure, Ever Free, and Ever Illumined, is
the essence of all beings.
Before God there is no distinction of good and evil, pure and
impure. Such pairs of opposites become manifest only when the light of Brahman is
obscured by maya. A sannyasin ought to look at all things from the standpoint of
Brahman. He should not condemn anything, even a so-called impure person.
The Swami then joined the party and with tears in his eyes said to the girl: 'Mother, I
am guilty. I was about to show you disrespect by refusing to come to this room. But
your song awakened my consciousness.'


This shows the Human side of Swamiji,not that he  meant to show disrespect but had to play the role of a Sannyasi.

To understand this completely,we only need to go back to the time when as Narendra ,how he was taken to a brothel by a friend of his!This happened soon after his father's death when Narendra was in great difficulty and his friends thought that taking him to a place of illfame would help relieve his 'Stress'!
In Swamiji's words:"Some of my boyhood friends,whose characters had become dissipated in their youth and who had resorted to unscrupulous means to earn money,now became aware of my poverty and tried to drag me into their company.I noticed that those among them who had suddenly fallen into difficult circumstances as I had,and were forced to adopt an ignoble path for their livelihood,actually had empathy for me.A wealthy woman had been infatuated with me for a long time.When she found an opportunity,she sent a message inviting me to end my poverty by accepting her along with her wealth.I sternly rejected her offer.Another woman approached me with a similiar proposal:'I told her:'Look.you have wasted your life seeking the pleasures of your worthless body.Now death is in front of you .Have you done anything to prepare yourself?Shun these filthy desires and call on God'!
That lady later rebuked the 'Friends' of Narendra for her misbehaving with a Sadhu!

We only need to see what Sri Ramakrishna said about Narendra-Swamiji was one who came to earth not to work out 'his karma'  but to teach Humans.More on this later.

Namaskar.

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #114 on: May 19, 2012, 08:25:12 PM »
Quote
Finally, what is the essence? Summa Iru. Be. don't be doing anything.

When I read this statement of yours words of Ramesh Baleskar popped up in my mind. Summa iru is synonym of Saranagathi, Atma-jnana and so on. But see what Sri Bakeskar says:

"The joke is even the surrendering is not in your control. Why? Because so long as there is an individual who says "I surrender" there is a surrenderer, an individual ego... What I'm saying is that even the surrendering is not in [your] hands."


So I questioned myself how can I surrender when surrendering means "I (ego) am no more existent"? So please friends, explain me that. What is Lord Ramana's opinion about that?
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Nagaraj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4132
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #115 on: May 19, 2012, 08:39:38 PM »
So I questioned myself how can I surrender when surrendering means "I (ego) am no more existent"? So please friends, explain me that. What is Lord Ramana's opinion about that?

Dear i,

Responding from the point of your question. Thou Art That, There is no ignorance, there is nothing to enquire, there is nothing to surrender, Bhagavan says: “Enquire to whom has this ignorance come and you will find it never came to you and that you have always been that Sat-Chit-Ananda. One performs all sorts of penances to become what one already is.

All effort is simply to get rid of this viparita buddhi or mistaken impression that one is limited and bound by the woes of samsara.”

Let one practise enquiry (what ever Sadhana) so long as separateness is perceived. If once realisation arises there is no further need for enquiry. The question will also not arise. Can awareness ever think of questioning who is aware? Awareness remains pure and simple.

(Talks 454)

Prostrations to Bhagavan
मनश्चेन्न लग्नं गुरोरंघ्रिपद्मे ततः किं ततः किं ततः किं ततः किम् ।।

Manaschenna lagnam Gurorangri padme, Thatha kim Thathah Kim, Thathah kim Thathah kim

If the mind does not remain at the Lotus feet of Guru, What is the use? What is the use? What is the use!!

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #116 on: May 19, 2012, 08:41:08 PM »
Thank you, Sri Nagaraj. It was much helpful and relieving!
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #117 on: May 19, 2012, 08:53:52 PM »
Friends,
Excerpt from 'Practical Vedanta'-Talk by Swami Vivekananda
The ideals of religion must cover the whole field of life, they must enter into all our thoughts, and more and more into practice. I will enter gradually on the practical side as we proceed. But this series of lectures is intended to be a basis, and so we must first apply ourselves to theories and understand how they are worked out, proceeding from forest caves to busy streets and cities; and one peculiar feature we find is that many of these thoughts have been the outcome, not of retirement into forests, but have emanated from persons whom we expect to lead the busiest lives — from ruling monarchs.


Shvetaketu was the son of Âruni, a sage, most probably a recluse. He was brought up in the forest, but he went to the city of the Panchâlas and appeared at the court of the king, Pravâhana Jaivali. The king asked him, "Do you know how beings depart hence at death?" "No, sir." "Do you know how they return hither?" "No, sir." "Do you know the way of the fathers and the way of the gods?" "No, sir." Then the king asked other questions. Shvetaketu could not answer them. So the king told him that he knew nothing. The boy went back to his father, and the father admitted that he himself could not answer these questions. It was not that he was unwilling to answer these questions. It was not that he was unwilling to teach the boy, but he did not know these things. So he went to the king and asked to be taught these secrets. The king said that these things had been hitherto known only among kings; the priests never knew them. He, however, proceeded to teach him what he desired to know. In various Upanishads we find that this Vedanta philosophy is not the outcome of meditation in the forests only, but that the very best parts of it were thought out and expressed by brains which were busiest in the everyday affairs of life. We cannot conceive any man busier than an absolute monarch, a man who is ruling over millions of people, and yet, some of these rulers were deep thinkers.


Everything goes to show that this philosophy must be very practical; and later on, when we come to the Bhagavad-Gita — most of you, perhaps, have read it, it is the best commentary we have on the Vedanta philosophy — curiously enough the scene is laid on the battlefield, where Krishna teaches this philosophy to Arjuna; and the doctrine which stands out luminously in every page of the Gita is intense activity, but in the midst of it, eternal calmness. This is the secret of work, to attain which is the goal of the Vedanta. Inactivity, as we understand it in the sense of passivity, certainly cannot be the goal. Were it so, then the walls around us would be the most intelligent; they are inactive. Clods of earth, stumps of trees, would be the greatest sages in the world; they are inactive. Nor does inactivity become activity when it is combined with passion. Real activity, which is the goal of Vedanta, is combined with eternal calmness, the calmness which cannot be ruffled, the balance of mind which is never disturbed, whatever happens. And we all know from our experience in life that that is the best attitude for work.

Those interested in reading the complete talk may refer:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Complete_Works_of_Swami_Vivekananda/Volume_2/Practical_Vedanta_and_other_lectures/Practical_Vedanta:_Part_I
Namaskar.

Nagaraj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4132
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #118 on: May 19, 2012, 09:03:29 PM »
Thank you, Sri Nagaraj. It was much helpful and relieving!

Dear i, please stay with this discernment, what is discerned can be easily forgotten by passage of time and by the advent of vasanas, other wise, we have to travel once again all through the jungle all over again, needlessly :D

Saint Jnanaeshwar has expressed maximum only on the subject that there is no ignorance, whatsoever. i will share here some really thought provoking exclamations of His, in short time.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Complete_Works_of_Swami_Vivekananda/Volume_2/Practical_Vedanta_and_other_lectures/Practical_Vedanta:_Part_I

Dear i, yes, this practical Vedanta is truly excellent book.

Prostrations to Bhagavan
मनश्चेन्न लग्नं गुरोरंघ्रिपद्मे ततः किं ततः किं ततः किं ततः किम् ।।

Manaschenna lagnam Gurorangri padme, Thatha kim Thathah Kim, Thathah kim Thathah kim

If the mind does not remain at the Lotus feet of Guru, What is the use? What is the use? What is the use!!

Hari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1811
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #119 on: May 19, 2012, 09:14:19 PM »
Quote
Dear i, please stay with this discernment, what is discerned can be easily forgotten by passage of time and by the advent of vasanas, other wise, we have to travel once again all through the jungle all over again, needlessly :D

Haha, unfortunately, you are right dear Nagarajji! I have observed this phenomenon while reading my post from different times of posting. :D Sometimes I ask one question many time or speak about one thing multiple times. But what can I do? It is not purposly. :D As you have said vasanas can do many miseries. :)
Web Page dedicated to the Great Sages:
https://someoneelsebg.000webhostapp.com/Sages/HTML.html