Author Topic: Fundamental question about Mind!  (Read 196412 times)

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #405 on: May 28, 2012, 06:36:53 PM »
udai,
I have asked you about Being.You are not answering that.You are asking now why Krishna taught Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna.I will answer that.First answer what you mean by being.
Namaskar.

srkudai

  • Guest
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #406 on: May 28, 2012, 06:39:19 PM »
I have no answer for that.
Or may be u can take what is not non-being
:) since u wanted an answer.

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #407 on: May 28, 2012, 06:43:41 PM »
udai,
What is Self that you have Realized?
Namaskar.

srkudai

  • Guest
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #408 on: May 28, 2012, 06:45:22 PM »
:) Did i make such a claim ? :D
There is no one to "Realize" !

:) Ravi ji ... I am leaving now.
Do post all such queries u have :D

Again, read the story of sanata kumara i posted earlier :)
« Last Edit: May 28, 2012, 06:47:52 PM by srkudai »

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #409 on: May 28, 2012, 07:35:46 PM »
udai,
I have definitely seen your words-'I have Realized' somewhere in this Forum.
Here is another post of yours from 'Systematic study of Scriptures' thread :
Dear Friends,
        :) I too learnt a lot only by studying Sri Ramakrishna's Gospel and Sri Ramana's gospel. They have been the fundamental building blocks of my philosophic life : be it the practise or the thought process as a whole.

But somewhere down the line, I learnt something really wonderful from one saintly person. what he came up with is "I can show you the Truth"
I said, "how can you do that? Its a matter of Experience born out of long practise"
and he said "see , if i see the moon, i can show you the moon. otherwise i cannot."
and i was eager to know. So I said "Ok, please aid me "
he said "Scriptures are darshana shastras, when you study them, they are supposed to give you a Darshan of that Truth"
I said ok, fine, let me have the darshan of myself as presented by the scriptures.
and he indeed presented it to me!! :)
I was really eager to know the Truth and he gave me that darshan and I knew now what all the scriptures were teaching, what all vedanta is all about.
Relaxed , I said to myself "Yes, now i am liberated"
but that was too early. My own weaknesses , still remained.
I searched various scriptures and learnt that mano-nashanam has to happen
. And got the exact meaning of what and how it has to be done within.

Later I learnt from some sources that the mahatma who taught me the Truth was himself not living it ! I said, "how does it matter ? I have got what I am supposed to get and am now on my own. What he teaches is correct and true."

and now I stand of myself, I know the Truth , and yet I know that i need to finally make sure vasana kshaya and mano-nasahanam happen. Coz without that this truth remains not totally owned up"

You may like to review all this.
Namaskar.

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #410 on: May 28, 2012, 07:42:41 PM »
Friends,
An excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna:
Brahman cannot be expressed in words
"What Brahman is cannot he described. All things in the world - the Vedas, the Puranas, the
Tantras, the six systems of philosophy - have been defiled, like food that has been touched
by the tongue, for they have been read or uttered by the tongue. Only one thing has not
been defiled in this way, and that is Brahman. No one has ever been able to say what
Brahman is."
VIDYASAGAR (to his friends): "Oh! That is a remarkable statement. I have learnt
something new today."
MASTER: "A man had two sons. The father sent them to a preceptor to learn the
Knowledge of Brahman. After a few years they returned from their preceptor's house and
bowed low before their father. Wanting to measure the depth of their knowledge of
Brahman, he first questioned the older of the two boys. 'My child,' he said, 'You have
studied all the scriptures. Now tell me, what is the nature of Brahman?' The boy began to
explain Brahman by reciting various texts from the Vedas. The father did not say anything.
Then he asked the younger son the same question. But the boy remained silent and stood
with eyes cast down. No word escaped his lips. The father was pleased and said to him: 'My
child, you have understood a little of Brahman. What It is cannot be expressed in words.
'
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.

Namaskar.

Subramanian.R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13662
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #411 on: May 28, 2012, 08:05:48 PM »
Dear srkudai,

The true Self of me is not bound, but my bondage to the real or illusory ego obscures the true Self of me. Realization of the
Self is the same as Liberation from the ego.

What does it matter if I do believe in a separate individual self, an ego? Why do spiritual teachers speak of it as a sort of
crime? Because it is. It is the original sin, as Sri Bhagavan said. All technical terms mislead - Self, ego, sin, God, mind -- all
get personified like characters on a stage and need to be re-examined from time to time. I have a mental faculty which is used
by what-is to correlate and report the apperception of what-is manifested, submitted to it by my other faculties. But very early
in life, this mental faculty begins to find some of the reports made by it pleasant and others disturbing. And it builds itself up into
a factitious person, demanding the pleasant ones and rejecting or trying to reject the unpleasant. For this purpose it uses and disposes
of the other faculties. It is this fictitious person that is called the mind, or ego. They are the same.

We must be careful about the words we use., we must be careful about the meaning of the words that we use, so as not to
get tangled up in them., Liberation from what? From the ego or the belief in an ego or illusion of an ago?  If there is no ego, then
of course, there can be no bondage to it and no need for Liberation from it. But so long as I live as though there were an ego
and take offence at a slight  or want a cake, there is an ego for me. And I am bound by it or by the service I render to it.

Arunachala Siva.               

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #412 on: May 28, 2012, 10:05:57 PM »
udai/Friends,
These couple of stories udai attributed to Sri Ramakrishna,in the course of our interchange in this thread:
1."“remember the story of a person who had 6 horses and one day they bring a 7th horse with them from the forest ? and people said "u r lucky" and the guy said "is that so ?"
and then his son broke his leg riding the horse. and people said "u r unlucky" and he said "is that so ?"
... i am sure u remember this story. its also from ramakrishna !”

2.“Ramakrishna said something ... he said "see through those branches what u see is moon"
and from that day ppl are always seeing between branches. Ramakrishna saw it. he could have
said it different way or the same way.
but others who keep repeating ... just keep repeating.
if u have seen u can convey ... otherwise not.”

Just want to set the facts right.Sri Ramakrishna never told these stories.
This is why it is better to quote from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna,so that no such masala are added!
Namaskar.


nonduel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #413 on: May 28, 2012, 10:42:02 PM »
This thread is beginning to be "weird", if you permit me to use that expression...

You KNOW that you ARE! Everyone here knows without a doubt that he exist.

If you stay put there, that's BEING!

Not trying to be something, but just BEING. Being STILL in one owns consciousness is Being, that's BEING.

ALL ELSE is not being because you are trying to find, to attain something that you cannot BE.

To BE is to STOP ALL QUESTIONS. All this is playing with the mind which is the tool of Maya.

Ramana said to a disciple:  Are there TWO SELF?

If in the Absolute Reality there is only the non-dual SELF, then ALL, EVERYTHING IS THE SELF. There is NOTHING else but the SELF. So WHO IS BOUND???

Please everyone answer this, tell me who is bound? Except in continuing to act as a bound individual believing that one is a body

The chains are in the mind, WE ARE NOT THE MIND (S.A.)

There is this incident where a woman asked Ramana for "only" moksha...that's all she wanted. And Ramana laughed when she left saying that that desire was the obstacle.

It is like the snake and the rope. If one knows that it is a rope but continues to stay away, and being afraid, and asking someone to get rid of the snake etc...

Not being in the "state" Ramana was/is, doesn't change the fact that there is only the Self.

In respect to all the opinion expressed here, and with Love :)

My dear Raviji, if you were a cow, I would say...BE what you ARE!

My dear Subramanianji,
Quote: "The true Self of me is not bound, but my bondage to the real or illusory ego obscures the true Self of me. Realization of the Self is the same as Liberation from the ego."

Are there two Self? Your bondage is only because you do not believe what Ramana said. He saw everyone as himself, everyone as a Jnani....there is nothing but the Self. Who is the one you believe to be that is bound?
The Realised, all say that once they realised, they understood that they were never bound, it was an illusion.

To get rid of the veil, the source of this illusion, one has to recognized that it is an illusion and STOP giving it a reality by accepting that he is bound, that he is appart from the Self, that he doesn't deserve to be the Self, that he has to do all sort of thing to attain what HE IS.

You are already the True Self! There is none other!
« Last Edit: May 29, 2012, 04:19:40 AM by nonduel »
Oh Arunachala, blazing fire of Jnana, in my heart I pray and think of Thee from afar, root out the ego, merging me in the Self.

prasanth_ramana_maharshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
  • ఓం నమో భగవతే శ్రీ రమణాయ
    • View Profile
    • HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #414 on: May 29, 2012, 01:10:44 AM »
yes, Being STILL in one owns consciousness using our body as a tool.

afterall our body needs solid food when hunger and no vedanta can resolve this issue.
ఓం  నమో  భగవతే  శ్రీ  రమణాయ   
ప్రశాంత్  జలసూత్రం
ప్రేమే శాశ్వతము

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #415 on: May 29, 2012, 07:09:11 AM »
nonduel,
I enjoyed reading your post.I appreciate the earnestness with which you have expressed yourself.
"My dear Raviji, if you were a cow, I would say...BE what you ARE!"
How will I understand your words-"BE what you ARE!"?
How does communication happens?Not because of words but despite them!
Love is the State of Being and it does not need words to communicate.Love gets across where words fail and fail miserably.'anbE sivam'-Love is Being.
I was only trying to point to this limitation of using words ,reasoning,Deduction and all that.All that has a place in everyday world,but are not of much value in sadhana.
Here is an excerpt from paramahansa Yogananda's Whispers from Eternity:
"O Divine Hart, I ran after Thee, equipped with spears of selfish desires. Thou didst fly! I raced after Thee in the plane of loud prayer. It crashed to the earth of my restlessness, and the noise frightened Thee away from me! Stealthily I crept upon Thee with the dart of my concentration. But my hand shook with unsteadiness, and Thou didst bound from me, and Thy feet echoed—“Without devotion thou art a poor, poor marksman!” With firmness of devotion, as I held the dart of meditation, I heard Thy divine steps resound again—“I am beyond thy mental dart; I am beyond!” At last in despair, I entered the cave of celestial love and, lo! Thou, the Divine Hart, camest willingly within"

Namaskar.

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #416 on: May 29, 2012, 07:23:01 AM »
Friends,
An excerpt from The Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi:
D.: Sri Bhagavan’s silence is itself a powerful force. It brings about
a certain peace of mind in us.
M.: Silence is never-ending speech. Vocal speech obstructs the other
speech of silence. In silence one is in intimate contact with the
surroundings
. The silence of Dakshinamurti removed the doubts of
the four sages. Mouna vyakhya prakatita tatvam (Truth expounded
by silence.) Silence is said to be exposition
. Silence is so potent.
For vocal speech, organs of speech are necessary and they precede
speech. But the other speech lies even beyond thought. It is in short
transcendent speech or unspoken words, para vak.
D.: Is there knowledge in Realisation?
M.: Absence of knowledge is sleep. There is knowledge in Realisation.
But this knowledge differs from the ordinary one of the relation
of subject and object. It is absolute knowledge
. Knowledge has
two meanings:
(1) vachyartha = vritti = Literal meaning.
(2) lakshyartha = Jnana = Self = Swarupa = Secondary significance.
D.: With vritti one sees knowledge.
M.: Quite so, he also confounds vritti with knowledge. Vritti is a mode
of mind. You are not the mind. You are beyond it
.

Namaskar.

sanjaya_ganesh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #417 on: May 29, 2012, 08:22:48 AM »
Quote
Just want to set the facts right.Sri Ramakrishna never told these stories.
This is why it is better to quote from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna,so that no such masala are added!

Ravi Ji

Whatever is in Gospel is also not written down by Sri Ramakrishna :) . It is from his disciples. A story is to impart a special inner meaning. Why worry so much about attachments to specific books and gurus as long as a message is conveyed? :) Sorry for being blunt :)

-Sanjay
Salutations to Bhagawan

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #418 on: May 29, 2012, 08:52:20 AM »
Sanjaya,
Friend,No problem with your question.There are several dimensions to the answer:
1.The Words of Great ones have to be approached with great care attention and faith.This is called sraddha.If we are attributing something to them that they have not uttered,it is a form of falsehood and if we do not take care,such things become habitual and affect us.Leave aside the fact that the story narrated may be a simple one and can be enjoyed even had it come from an anonymous source.
2.In cultivating this habit of referring to the exact words,we tend to become receptive and internalize the teachings.This is like Sri annamalai swami's 'Living by the words of Bhagavan'.So intense was his sraddha to his guru that he copied even the dress and posture of Sri Bhagavan.
3.The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna is a unique book ,in that it has captured the very words of Sri Ramakrishna with stenographic precision-Nothing has been added or deleted!Everything is there including Sri Ramakrishna asking 'M' to scrape his tongue!Such was 'M' 's devotion to the Master that he just wrote down all that was said,including repetitions without any 'editing'.If you are interested,you may read my post on this in the 'Rough Note-book' thread.
In short,to recapitulate ,one should cultivate the discipline to ensure what one posts is authentic.
Just imagine what would have happened to the Upanishads if the Oral Tradition had not been so faithful and diligent to have preserved for posterity the voice of the Ancient Rishis.Do we have the same thing when it comes to writing from memory!Atleast one should acknowledge that one is writing from memory and may not be accurate,when it comes to citing the words of Great ones.Gradually ,eyes,nose will get added and the entire substance will be lost!
This in short is the reason why I have put that note.
Namaskar.

sanjaya_ganesh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
    • View Profile
Re: Fundamental question about Mind!
« Reply #419 on: May 29, 2012, 09:09:21 AM »
Ravi Ji -

Quote
In cultivating this habit of referring to the exact words,we tend to become receptive and internalize the teachings.This is like Sri annamalai swami's 'Living by the words of Bhagavan'.So intense was his sraddha to his guru that he copied even the dress and posture of Sri Bhagavan.

:) My humble thoughts - Words, however exact you repeat - cannot help internalize teachings. Else, Dakshina Murthy would be a myth - where silence is the teacher :). Second part - copying a guru is not a mandatory pre-requisite. I dont need to tell you (you know so well) - that Swami Vivekananda was anything - but a copy of Sri Ramakrishna in dress and posture :)

Quote
Just imagine what would have happened to the Upanishads if the Oral Tradition had not been so faithful and diligent to have preserved for posterity the voice of the Ancient Rishis

Why is there so many interpretations of great texts like Gita and Upanishads even after such diligence? Every Gita Bhashya I see is completely different. If they were so clear, why so many interpretations? Now there is even "Management thru Gita" :) :). This example you quoted is the perfect example to prove that words cannot express this irrespective of source you quote. Else, anybody who reads it diligently will become instant Jnani :)

My Friend, I am not arguing with you - but just stating what you see around in real world history and life.

Yes - I agree with your statement that it is not good to "put words into the mouths of great ones" :) by mis-quoting. But that is all it is there to it.

-Sanjay
« Last Edit: May 29, 2012, 09:12:04 AM by sanjaya_ganesh »
Salutations to Bhagawan