[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
tertonzeno wrote: This is only true (no object sought, thus one gets straight to the Self) of more advanced persons. The vast majority will undoubtedly experience nothing but ordinary mental chatter, then become discouraged. TM cuts directly through the chatter. In any event, Self-Inquiry must absolutely be practiced in conjunction with the Holy Three: 1. Ramana, 2. Arunachala, and 3. Arunachala Shiva. If not, one will be berift of the Shakti necessary to transcend. In TM, the Shakti is in the mantra. In Self-Inquirty, it's only latent in the practitioner until ignited by the Fire of Arunachala Shiva. (this form of Shiva embodies the Fire element, thus Diwali celebrants light a gigantic fire on top of Arunachala Hill in Nov.). Tertonzeno, I quote your words, cuz they should be read several times -- it's a pretty dense statement. Poetry. Thanks for that view. Though I think that Ramana and Nisargadatta's presentation of Advaita is A PERFECT dogma, I am not a devotee of Ramana or Nisargadatta, and, thus, to me, the religious aspects of their separate organizations, seems to be out of harmony with my merely intellectual understanding of the ultimate Advaitic statements. That's just me, and I wish I wasn't quite so wary of the faith based aspects of those organizations. There are folks doing pujas DAILY to them all around the world, but I no longer resonate with this kind of worship -- though I agree it is a legitimate and powerful spiritual program. I also think doing a daily TM puja to Guru Dev would be a profound program, but I don't do that either. Heck, I would even do the TM puja to Ramana or Nisargadatta and feel like I wasn't being a heretic. So, get it? I'm not anti-religious -- just burnt out and beaten and not really qualified to join any community nowadays. I don't even belong here at FFL -- except that, you know, someone has to support the Great Cause of Judy. (Hey, that'd be GC Judy -- h, it has a familiar ring to it.) Thus, I do not immediately, by faith, find it in me to validate the concepts of transmitted Shakti, and, sorry, but I do think that Self Inquiry is possible for most folks even though they would not recognize their SELF in a police line-up. It works for everyone, but most are not subtle enough to know it. So, you're right that Self Inquiry is not for the common person who needs far more than merely a good technique to evolve. Your thoughts skirt about a dynamic that I think is, if anything, the most important part of your post: the need for roots if one is going to be successful in any spiritual practice. I mean, who out there is still using Benson's one as a mantra? Benson's no guru, has no ancient tradition, and his Ivory Tower credentials just are not the strong coattails a newbie needs to regularly use a meditation technique. In short, even if one is a perfectly wonderful sound to meditate with, who's going to use it enough years when we all know that the results of any technique are extraordinarily subtle and almost impossible to grasp cognitively? One needs a guru or dogma to explain to the newbies what's happening as evolution progresses. So, yeah, if I were doing Self Inquiry in Ramana's ashram, in that supportive atmosphere, with so many true believers, I would be far more dedicated to the technique and living a simple lifestyle to boot in an uplifting community. Self Inquiry would be far more powerful there than in my livingroom -- no question about that. If the TM mantras have their own on board Shakti, well, this was never spelled out to me by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, and I had Maharishi literally answering questions from large groups for over 2,000 hours of live and in person. How'd I miss that concept? If he talked about it, it must have gone right over my head. Thus, I cannot immediately resonate with the concept, and I'm probably not enough of a scholar to research this concept until I can intellectually harmonize with it. I could just believe it, but, you see, I'm very exhausted from being a believer for three decades and then watching my life dissolve before my eyes even though I had made a good run at being a yogi. I was in this deal for improvements in my personality -- and to hell with Godot sez me now. I do not think anyone can convince me at this point in my life to jump into a religious scenario and start doing faith again. So, I think I agree with you, and I'm just guessing, but I think I agree that TM would be a better practice than Self Inquiry for most folks -- except that the Raja-thingy pretty much ruins mood-making that one is involved with an ancient tradition of merit, so what newbie will continue to meditate? But, having 29 years of four hours a day of TM probably got me to a place where I can do Self Inquiry. I do feel the vastness when that silence answers my query, Who am I? Silence that is so precious that I disappears just so's I doesn't take up any space that the silence could better fill.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2007, at 9:47 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Duveyoung, if you think that what is described below is anything like TM, may I suggest to you that, perhaps, you never did TM properly? Since Nab's out for the rest of the day, I'll be glad to say it for him... Might I suggest a checking? :) Sal Only if you sing it. Perhaps to the music of Sounds of Silence. Or The Sound of Music Or Silence itself by SARAH McLACHLAN Silence (Delirium) Give me release witness me I am outside give me peace Heaven holds a sense of wonder and I wanted to believe that I'd get caught up when the rage in me subsides In this white wave I am sinking in this silence in this white wave in this silence I believe Passion chokes the flower 'til she cries no more possessing all the beauty hungry still for more Heaven holds a sense of wonder... I can't help this longing comfort me I can't hold it all in if you won't let me Heaven holds a sense of wonder... In this white wave I am sinking in this silence in this white wave in this silence I believe I have seen you in this white wave you are silent you are breathing in this white wave I am free Or you could try Happiness Runs in A Circular Motion Actually a medely would be good.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Below is Ramana's Dhyana instructions: sure sounds like TM IN ALL THE IMPORTANT ways, Are you insane? No wonder you play in traffic on a contraption designed to swerve into the path of oncoming cars. I got to about the halfway point of the QA below and IN ALL THE IMPORTANT WAYS what Ramana describes is virtually the exact opposite of the TM Technique. Duveyoung, if you think that what is described below is anything like TM, may I suggest to you that, perhaps, you never did TM properly? and Ramana was not a Vedic scholar -- hardly educated at all. The TM method of saying the mantra is in Ramana's words below. TM had to market itself with the specialness of the mantra selection process to add a mystic of expertise to the sales pitch. TM is indeed ancient, and as we all know, mantra selection is purely arbitrary and can be done by a monkey in a cheap suit. Edg Question: How is meditation to be practised? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Meditation is, truly speaking, atmanishtha (to be fixed as the Self). But when thoughts cross the mind and an effort is made to eliminate them the effort is usually termed meditation. Atmanishtha is your real nature. Remain as you are. That is the aim. Question: But thoughts come up. Is our effort meant to eliminate thoughts only? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes. Meditation being on a single thought, the other thoughts are kept away. Meditation is only negative in effect in as much as thoughts are kept away. Questioner: It is said `Atma samstham manah krtva' (fixing the mind in the Self). But the Self is unthinkable. Sri Ramana Maharshi: Why do you wish to meditate at all? Because you wish to do so you are told `atma samstham manah krtva'. Why do you not remain as you are without meditating? What is that `manah' (mind)? When all thoughts are eliminated it becomes `atma samstha' (fixed in the Self). Questioner: If a form is given I can meditate on it and other thoughts are eliminated. But the Self is formless. Sri Ramana Maharshi: Meditation on forms of concrete objects is said to be Dhyana, whereas the enquiry into the Self is Vichara or Nididhyasana (uninterrupted awareness of being). Question: How is Dhyana practised- with eyes open or closed? Sri Ramana Maharshi: It may be done either way. The point is that the mind must be introverted and kept active in its pursuit. Sometimes it happens that when the eyes are closed the latent thoughts rush forth with great vigour. It may also be difficult to introvert the mind with the eyes open. It requires strength of mind to do so. The mind is contaminated when it takes in objects. Otherwise, it is pure. The main factors in Dhyana is to keep the mind active in its own pursuit without taking in external impressions or thinking of other matters. Question: How do I prevent myself falling asleep in meditation? Sri Ramana Maharshi: If you try to prevent sleep it will mean thinking in meditation, which must be avoided. But if you slip into sleep while meditating, the meditation will continue even during and after sleep. Yet, being a thought, sleep must be got rid of, for the final natural state has to be obtained consciously in jagrat (the waking state) without the disturbing thought. Waking and sleeping are mere pictures on the screen of the native, thought-free state. Let them pass unnoticed. Question: What is to be meditated upon? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Anything that you prefer. Question: Siva, Vishnu and Gayatri are said to be equally efficacious. Which should I mediate upon? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Any one you like best. They are all equal in their effect. But you should stick to one. Top To top of this page Index Alphabetical [Index to Pages] Question: How do I meditate? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Concentrate on that one whom you like best. If a single thought prevails, all other thoughts are put off and finally eradicated. So long as diversity prevails there are bad thoughts. When the object of love prevails only good thoughts hold the field. Therefore hold on to one thought only. Dhyana is the chief practice. Dhyana means fight. As soon as you begin meditation other thoughts will crowd together, gather force and try to sink the single thought to which you try to hold. The good thought must gradually gain strength by repeated practice. After it has grown strong the other thoughts will be put to flight. This is the battle royal always taking place in meditation. One wants to rid oneself of misery. It requires peace of mind, which means absence of perturbation owing to all kinds of thoughts. Peace of mind is brought about by Dhyana alone. Question: What is the difference between Dhyana (meditation) and Vichara (investigation)? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Both amount to the same. Those unfit for investigation must practise meditation. In
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
Actually Edg, this is UNLIKE TM in all the important ways. Try reading it again. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Below is Ramana's Dhyana instructions: sure sounds like TM IN ALL THE IMPORTANT ways, and Ramana was not a Vedic scholar -- hardly educated at all. The TM method of saying the mantra is in Ramana's words below. TM had to market itself with the specialness of the mantra selection process to add a mystic of expertise to the sales pitch. TM is indeed ancient, and as we all know, mantra selection is purely arbitrary and can be done by a monkey in a cheap suit. Edg Question: How is meditation to be practised? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Meditation is, truly speaking, atmanishtha (to be fixed as the Self). But when thoughts cross the mind and an effort is made to eliminate them the effort is usually termed meditation. Atmanishtha is your real nature. Remain as you are. That is the aim. Question: But thoughts come up. Is our effort meant to eliminate thoughts only? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes. Meditation being on a single thought, the other thoughts are kept away. Meditation is only negative in effect in as much as thoughts are kept away. Questioner: It is said `Atma samstham manah krtva' (fixing the mind in the Self). But the Self is unthinkable. Sri Ramana Maharshi: Why do you wish to meditate at all? Because you wish to do so you are told `atma samstham manah krtva'. Why do you not remain as you are without meditating? What is that `manah' (mind)? When all thoughts are eliminated it becomes `atma samstha' (fixed in the Self). Questioner: If a form is given I can meditate on it and other thoughts are eliminated. But the Self is formless. Sri Ramana Maharshi: Meditation on forms of concrete objects is said to be Dhyana, whereas the enquiry into the Self is Vichara or Nididhyasana (uninterrupted awareness of being). Question: How is Dhyana practised- with eyes open or closed? Sri Ramana Maharshi: It may be done either way. The point is that the mind must be introverted and kept active in its pursuit. Sometimes it happens that when the eyes are closed the latent thoughts rush forth with great vigour. It may also be difficult to introvert the mind with the eyes open. It requires strength of mind to do so. The mind is contaminated when it takes in objects. Otherwise, it is pure. The main factors in Dhyana is to keep the mind active in its own pursuit without taking in external impressions or thinking of other matters. Question: How do I prevent myself falling asleep in meditation? Sri Ramana Maharshi: If you try to prevent sleep it will mean thinking in meditation, which must be avoided. But if you slip into sleep while meditating, the meditation will continue even during and after sleep. Yet, being a thought, sleep must be got rid of, for the final natural state has to be obtained consciously in jagrat (the waking state) without the disturbing thought. Waking and sleeping are mere pictures on the screen of the native, thought-free state. Let them pass unnoticed. Question: What is to be meditated upon? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Anything that you prefer. Question: Siva, Vishnu and Gayatri are said to be equally efficacious. Which should I mediate upon? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Any one you like best. They are all equal in their effect. But you should stick to one. Top To top of this page Index Alphabetical [Index to Pages] Question: How do I meditate? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Concentrate on that one whom you like best. If a single thought prevails, all other thoughts are put off and finally eradicated. So long as diversity prevails there are bad thoughts. When the object of love prevails only good thoughts hold the field. Therefore hold on to one thought only. Dhyana is the chief practice. Dhyana means fight. As soon as you begin meditation other thoughts will crowd together, gather force and try to sink the single thought to which you try to hold. The good thought must gradually gain strength by repeated practice. After it has grown strong the other thoughts will be put to flight. This is the battle royal always taking place in meditation. One wants to rid oneself of misery. It requires peace of mind, which means absence of perturbation owing to all kinds of thoughts. Peace of mind is brought about by Dhyana alone. Question: What is the difference between Dhyana (meditation) and Vichara (investigation)? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Both amount to the same. Those unfit for investigation must practise meditation. In meditation the aspirant forgetting himself meditates `I am Brahman' or `I am Siva' and by this method holds on to Brahman or Siva. This will ultimately end with the residual awareness of Brahman or Siva as being. He will then realise that this is pure being, that is, the Self. He who engages in investigation starts by holding on to himself, and by
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
On Nov 16, 2007, at 9:47 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Duveyoung, if you think that what is described below is anything like TM, may I suggest to you that, perhaps, you never did TM properly? Since Nab's out for the rest of the day, I'll be glad to say it for him... Might I suggest a checking? :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
These naysayer reactions to the words of Ramana show that so many posters here are woefully inept, and perhaps literally too dumb to mindfully read words and actually trying to have clarity about the Ramana's intent -- such that they resort to flaming to try to mask their failure at such scholarship. There is not a single sentence of Ramana's instructions below that is suspect -- except that warped understandings in the minds of some (most?) here are projected into his words, and thus, thinking makes it so. So far, the naysayers don't even seem to understand that Ramana is presenting TWO ENTIRELY DIFFERENT KINDS OF MEDITATION. One is TM, the other is Self Inquiry. This is huge -- he clearly says that TM meditation style is for a weaker mind to use until Self Inquiry is possible. I don't see any naysayer here being able to really be a participant in this debate -- having clarity about these two techniques is something that requires HUNDREDS of hours of intellectual roiling. I dare any naysayer here to take ANY SENTENCE below and try to interpret it with their own words to show that they are at least grokking what Ramana is saying before they knee-jerkingly reject it. I will debate this with anyone who is able to keep the flames out of the discussion. (I'm not flaming when I say that the naysayers are stupid -- since it's true) ;-) TM requires concentration, not much, but some -- this is called identification -- an act of a nervous system that creates duality such that a mind, 1, and an object, 2, exist. Any act is volitional in that the Self is incapable of having such a quality, and thus, any meditation is an ego's act of concentration on an illusion of doership. If ego merges into amness, concentration ceases. When a mantra is used as taught by TM, it becomes increasingly an ACT of love, bhakti, a willful maintenance of the mind's focus on an object that is evermore becoming ephemeral -- and, it literally takes loving the object to keep the mind tracking it as it becomes a mere whisper. This is practicing love -- when perfected one realizes that the primal identity is love and that one is now disidentified with loving. Bringing the mind back onto the mantra is NOT a perfect effortlessness -- the checking notes instruct that if the mantra does not come automatically, then one should gently introduce the mantra again. Effortlessly or with effort, doesn't matter -- TM instructs that the mantra is to be attended upon and this slight step towards subtlety pleases the mind enough that it -- usually but not always -- automatically begins a repetitive process which the practitioner, ideally speaking, merely witnesses. The very definition of ego is an act of concentration. What's been concentrated? The Self has been reduced down into a point value egoalmost nothing. That's concentration -- that's holding a focus on purpose -- insisting moment by moment that one is. I is the first lie. As the mind attends the mantra, this keeps the ego on task in its pretense and maintenance of the delusion of sentience -- a fool is encouraged by the TM instructions to do folly perfectly. Like the chain given to the elephant to keep its trunk from wandering into mischief, the mantra's allure keeps the monkey's trunk/mind on one piece of fruit even as the fruit/monkey/tasting evaporates into amness. If considered from the level of duality, it is incorrect to opine that the mantra comes automatically, and if considered from unity, then there is no doingness whatsoever -- let alone mere acts of concentration by robots. I got a special technique from Maharishi. Later he checked my use of the technique, and I had to admit that I was uncomfortable with the fact that I was using effort to do the technique -- it wasn't coming automatically. Maharishi actually said to me, and with a bit of obvious frustration, You've got to do something, can't just sit there and wait for God to do everything for you. He was right. At the one month SCI course in Arcata, CA 1971, some guy got on the mike and berated Maharishi about how Krishnamurti said there was no way to volitionally reach God, and that one must abandon any such attempts. (I paraphrase wildly here.) Maharishi said, Notice his word 'must.' Just so, MUST the mantra be taken. That's a willful action. Will is the mind concentrating on one intent and having all other intents in the background. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Below is Ramana's Dhyana instructions: sure sounds like TM IN ALL THE IMPORTANT ways, and Ramana was not a Vedic scholar -- hardly educated at all. The TM method of saying the mantra is in Ramana's words below. TM had to market itself with the specialness of the mantra selection process to add a mystic of expertise to the sales pitch. TM is indeed ancient, and as we all know, mantra selection is purely arbitrary and can be done by a monkey in a cheap suit. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
Duveyoung wrote: Below is Ramana's Dhyana instructions: sure sounds like TM IN ALL THE IMPORTANT ways, and Ramana was not a Vedic scholar -- hardly educated at all. Sri Ramana Maharshi: Concentrate on that one whom you like best. Concentration is counterproductive in reaching a transcendental state. TMer should not concentrate on mental objects or mantras. That's exactly the problem that Shemp alluded to. Most meditation teachers insist on concentration on an object or thought. Marshy says NOT to concentrate, but to let the meditation object come of it's own. In other words do not try to meditate, just sit with eyes closed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
---More differences than similarities, chiefly: Self Inquiry involves mentation on meaning, at the initial level of experience. (in the advanced level of Self Inquiry, there's just the Self and no consideration of the meaning); but this is putting the cart before the horse, since the majority of practitioners will be in the beginning category. After some time with the practice of Self Inquiry, the Self emerges to a degree and one can perform true Self Inquiry without the Inquiry part. However, this program still requires a Transmission from Ramana; in which case one can tune into the Ramana vibes by getting the audio CD's of Pundits at the Ramanasramam chanting the chanting the Rudram: (in the evending Veda Parayana audio CD), available from http://www.arunachala.org FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2007, at 9:47 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Duveyoung, if you think that what is described below is anything like TM, may I suggest to you that, perhaps, you never did TM properly? Since Nab's out for the rest of the day, I'll be glad to say it for him... Might I suggest a checking? :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
Matrix, I think I see your point, but to me, when one asks the question: Who am I? yes, this is an act, a willfulness, but, unlike mantra-meditation, there is no object sought to be held in consciousness. The intellect and the heart do not get involved in Self Inquiry. The Self, not the intellect or heart is being sought. The phrase who am I is not a mantra, nor should it be repeated per se. Ramana is not suggesting that one take that phrase to subtler levels until amness is found. Instead, and this is huge, this is core, what Ramana's Self Inquiry involves is asking a question for which there is no answer. Even amness cannot answer this question. It is a koan, not really a question. Funnily enough, an answer comes nonetheless: silence is the answer. The correct answer to all koans. When doing Self Inquiry, one immediately listens for the Self to say, I am that I am, or, OM, but the only way for the realization of Self to be truthfully embodied is to, erp, not embody itsilence alone can serve as a symbol for the Self. At first, the silence is actually the screaming OM. TM will take you to this EXPERIENCE. Amness is loud. Then, suddenly, grace, and the identification with OM stops, and the Absolute is all that remains. That's the true Self -- not manifest Being/amness/soul. Buddha calls this the void. The mind grows in subtlety by this practice and at some point, amness itself is no longer needed as a symbol when the Absolute is, AHEM, RIGHT THERE IN THE FLESH!! When one asks Who am I? the mind is bypassed. The questioner asks who is experiencing ALL THIS, and since the ego does not exist, is not sentient, no one is home to answer a question that only an ego (by definition) can attempt to answer. Koans I tells ya -- stymieing the intellect which cannot see and the heart which cannot feel the Absolute. Effort ceases immediately as soon as the question is posed. Success is astoundingly immediate: one is COMPLETELY ENLIGHTENED for a nonce. Whereas in mantra meditation, one's gaze passively awaits for the faintest sign of the next mantra -- this is a continual willing of a witnessing alertness. An act. Will power. Self Inquiry is suddenly stopping thinking for a nanosecond and listening to nothing. One asks: Who am I? and if the question is sincere, of course, one PAUSES for an answer to come, and WHAMMO it is immediate, fully blown, not a titch less than all of the truth, silencesilence for as long as one can pause to hear it. No ego steps forward to say, I am you. That would be two I's then, donchasee? Self Inquiry results in an immediate REALIZATION (a non-action) (for however little a span of time doesn't matter) of the Self. Practicing this technique of Self Inquiry will lead to a strengthening of the power to perceive, cuz, well, you gotta have some ears on ya to hear nothing, right? Consider those phone company commercials that brag about having no lost connections. You see some person say something jokingly to another, and the phone disconnects at that precise moment, and the awkward silence is palpable as the joker listens for the laugh that never comes. Asking, Who am I? just such a joke. Finding out that the ego will not answer the question is the silence. Ramana instructs us to ask the question with all the egoic smugness and certainty one can muster -- all the more stunning when the truth, the silence, is seen instead of the expected reply from the other end of the phone line. Enter that silence. Home free Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---More differences than similarities, chiefly: Self Inquiry involves mentation on meaning, at the initial level of experience. (in the advanced level of Self Inquiry, there's just the Self and no consideration of the meaning); but this is putting the cart before the horse, since the majority of practitioners will be in the beginning category. After some time with the practice of Self Inquiry, the Self emerges to a degree and one can perform true Self Inquiry without the Inquiry part. However, this program still requires a Transmission from Ramana; in which case one can tune into the Ramana vibes by getting the audio CD's of Pundits at the Ramanasramam chanting the chanting the Rudram: (in the evending Veda Parayana audio CD), available from http://www.arunachala.org FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Nov 16, 2007, at 9:47 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Duveyoung, if you think that what is described below is anything like TM, may I suggest to you that, perhaps, you never did TM properly? Since Nab's out for the rest of the day, I'll be glad to say it for him... Might I suggest a checking? :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana teaches how to meditate (Chopra's Intent blog)
---This is only true (no object sought, thus one gets straight to the Self) of more advanced persons. The vast majority will undoubtedly experience nothing but ordinary mental chatter, then become discouraged. TM cuts directly through the chatter. In any event, Self-Inquiry must absolutely be practiced in conjunction with the Holy Three: 1. Ramana, 2. Arunachala, and 3. Arunachala Shiva. If not, one will be berift of the Shakti necessary to transcend. In TM, the Shakti is in the mantra. In Self-Inquirty, it's only latent in the practitioner until ignited by the Fire of Arunachala Shiva. (this form of Shiva embodies the Fire element, thus Diwali celebrants light a gigantic fire on top of Arunachala Hill in Nov.). In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matrix, I think I see your point, but to me, when one asks the question: Who am I? yes, this is an act, a willfulness, but, unlike mantra-meditation, there is no object sought to be held in consciousness. The intellect and the heart do not get involved in Self Inquiry. The Self, not the intellect or heart is being sought. The phrase who am I is not a mantra, nor should it be repeated per se. Ramana is not suggesting that one take that phrase to subtler levels until amness is found. Instead, and this is huge, this is core, what Ramana's Self Inquiry involves is asking a question for which there is no answer. Even amness cannot answer this question. It is a koan, not really a question. Funnily enough, an answer comes nonetheless: silence is the answer. The correct answer to all koans. When doing Self Inquiry, one immediately listens for the Self to say, I am that I am, or, OM, but the only way for the realization of Self to be truthfully embodied is to, erp, not embody itsilence alone can serve as a symbol for the Self. At first, the silence is actually the screaming OM. TM will take you to this EXPERIENCE. Amness is loud. Then, suddenly, grace, and the identification with OM stops, and the Absolute is all that remains. That's the true Self -- not manifest Being/amness/soul. Buddha calls this the void. The mind grows in subtlety by this practice and at some point, amness itself is no longer needed as a symbol when the Absolute is, AHEM, RIGHT THERE IN THE FLESH!! When one asks Who am I? the mind is bypassed. The questioner asks who is experiencing ALL THIS, and since the ego does not exist, is not sentient, no one is home to answer a question that only an ego (by definition) can attempt to answer. Koans I tells ya -- stymieing the intellect which cannot see and the heart which cannot feel the Absolute. Effort ceases immediately as soon as the question is posed. Success is astoundingly immediate: one is COMPLETELY ENLIGHTENED for a nonce. Whereas in mantra meditation, one's gaze passively awaits for the faintest sign of the next mantra -- this is a continual willing of a witnessing alertness. An act. Will power. Self Inquiry is suddenly stopping thinking for a nanosecond and listening to nothing. One asks: Who am I? and if the question is sincere, of course, one PAUSES for an answer to come, and WHAMMO it is immediate, fully blown, not a titch less than all of the truth, silencesilence for as long as one can pause to hear it. No ego steps forward to say, I am you. That would be two I's then, donchasee? Self Inquiry results in an immediate REALIZATION (a non-action) (for however little a span of time doesn't matter) of the Self. Practicing this technique of Self Inquiry will lead to a strengthening of the power to perceive, cuz, well, you gotta have some ears on ya to hear nothing, right? Consider those phone company commercials that brag about having no lost connections. You see some person say something jokingly to another, and the phone disconnects at that precise moment, and the awkward silence is palpable as the joker listens for the laugh that never comes. Asking, Who am I? just such a joke. Finding out that the ego will not answer the question is the silence. Ramana instructs us to ask the question with all the egoic smugness and certainty one can muster -- all the more stunning when the truth, the silence, is seen instead of the expected reply from the other end of the phone line. Enter that silence. Home free Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor matrixmonitor@ wrote: ---More differences than similarities, chiefly: Self Inquiry involves mentation on meaning, at the initial level of experience. (in the advanced level of Self Inquiry, there's just the Self and no consideration of the meaning); but this is putting the cart before the horse, since the majority of practitioners will be in the beginning category. After some time with the practice of Self Inquiry, the Self emerges to a degree and one can perform true
