#atma vichara

[compassionmattersmost]

Introduction to Jnana Yoga: The Path of Knowledge and Self-Inquiry

Jnana Yoga is one of the primary paths of yoga, often described as the path of knowledge or wisdom. It is a profound spiritual practice focused on deep inquiry into the nature of the self and the ultimate reality. Through a process of self-examination and discernment, practitioners of Jnana Yoga seek to transcend the illusions of the mind and realize the true, non-dual nature of existence. At…

[shinymoonbird]

Hridaya Kuhara Madhye 'Sloka Chanting'

🕉️  

हृदयकुहर मध्ये केवलं ब्रह्ममात्रम्। ह्यमहमिति साक्षद् आत्मरुपेण भाति॥

हृदि विश मनसास्वं चिन्वता मज्जता वा। पवन चलन रोधाद् आत्मनिष्ठो भव त्वम्॥

hṛdayakuhara madhye kevalaṃ brahmamātram। hyamahamiti sākṣad ātmarupeṇa bhāti॥

hṛdi viśa manasāsvaṃ cinvatā majjatā vā। pavana calana rodhād ātmaniṣṭho bhava tvam॥

🕉️  

‘Hridaya-Kuhara-Madhye’, In the centre of the Heart cave

In the centre of the cave which is the Heart, the one (non-dual) Brahman alone shines directly in the form of Self as ‘I-I’ (or ‘I am I’ ). Enter the Heart (by the mind) sinking scrutinizing Self, or by the mind sinking along with the breath, and be one who abides in Self.

~  Ulladu Narpadu - Anubandham (Reality in Forty Verses - Supplement), V. 8

Note: One day in 1915 a devotee named Jagadiswara Sastri started to compose a Sanskrit verse beginning with the words. ‘Hridaya-Kuhara-Madhye’, (In the centre of the Heart cave), but finding that he was unable to proceed any further to express in verse form the idea which he had in mind, he implored Sri Bhagavan to complete the verse for him. Sri Bhagavan accordingly completed the verse and wrote underneath ‘Jagadisan’, thereby indicating that the ideas in the verse were those of Jagadiswara Sastri and not His own. Some years later, at the request of some Tamil devotees who did not know Sanskrit, Sri Bhagavan translated this verse into Tamil, and the Tamil version, which is given above, was later added in the Anubandham.

_____________

Kavyakanta Ganapati Muni also included this verse in his Sri Ramana Gita, ch. II, v. 2.

🕉️  

___________________ The Sanskrit verse is a facsimile of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s handwriting reproduced from the manuscript.

___________________

Eka Sloki of Sri Ramana Maharshi, his most important verse, was mounted during Bhagavan´s lifetime, obviously with his consent, above his ornate marble couch in the New Hall, where the verse is engraved in gold Sanskrit letters on a tablet of polished black marble.

Image credit: https://www.facebook.com/RamanaMaharshi - Post dated 12.06.2020

🕉️

[lotusmi]

(Atma Vichara)

''Think how many years you'll be going through life, believing you're a body, a mind, an ego. The situations you've been through. The agonies, the ecstasies, the dualities.

You're beginning to see now that all of those things belong to the I-thought to the personal self, which is not really you.

You are total freedom, having absolutely nothing to do with the personal self.

You simply have to ask yourself, "Who is this personal self? Where did it come from? How did it arise? How did it get a hold of me, and make me believe I'm human?

That makes me feel I was born? And I have to die? What is this personal self? Where did it come from?" And as you follow the personal self, the -thought, You'll begin to see it never existed. It was never born. It is absolutely nothingness. And you'll become radiantly happy, Full of Love, Full of Peace.'' Robert Adams.

[telangley]

Remember you are not trying to acquire more knowledge, and add on to the knowledge you already have.

You want to empty yourself totally, absolutely and completely, of all so called knowledge.

You’re afraid to do this, for you think you will become a vegetable.

It’s hard to imagine a person with no mind.

But, when you begin to realize your mind is only an accumulation of thoughts, thoughts from past lives, thoughts from this life, only thoughts, then you begin to see that the mind has to be totally transcended and transmuted.

And those of you who have been practicing sadhana for many years, have come to the point where now you can do nothing.

You no longer have to meditate.

You no longer have to practice atma-vichara.

You no longer have to practice being the witness, vipassana meditation.

Those things are no longer necessary.

They have taken you to a certain point, and here you are.

You now have absolutely nothing to do.

You are free.

If you think about this aright, you will see that your body, what you call your body, will still function very well without your thoughts.

This is sort of a hard one to grasp, for

You have been taught you have to use your mind to function.

You’ve been taught that your mind uses the body to function on this earth plane.

That’s how it appears.

But in truth there never was a body, there never was a mind and there was never anyone to function.

~ Robert Adams

[kingmabry]

C. R. Pattabhi Raman was a minister at the Center. He was the son of Sir C.P. Ramaswami Aiyar, who was Dewan of Travancore.

My first meeting with Ramana Maharshi was in the early 1930s when I returned from England after my studies. I accompanied the young Maharaja of Travancore to Tiruvannamalai. The Maharshi was the same serene blissful self with a friendly and kindly look on his face. When the Maharaja asked him what the first step was for atma vichara, he said that the very fact that he had come to Tiruvannamalai was the first step for him.

The next important occasion when I went to Tiruvannamalai was a few days before the Maharshi’s bodily demise. I accompanied my father, Dr. C.P. Ramaswami Aiyar, along with a friend. We were taken to the sage, who had been operated upon for a carcinomatous growth on his left arm. Apart from a few beads of perspiration on his forehead, there was nothing on his face to show that he was ill or suffering from pain. He proved beyond doubt that pain or sorrow did not affect a realized soul. A leading civil surgeon from Vellore expressed great surprise that the sage did not even want anesthesia for the operation and yet was able to stand the pain and the shock. Ramana Maharshi spoke a few words to my father and we took leave.

As we were getting ready for dinner, my father said to me that he did not want food and would have some milk. At that very moment, an attendant ran to us with a message from the Maharshi, “The elderly person will say he will only have milk. Let him eat some fruits also.” It was miraculous because the Maharshi was nearly half a furlong away and could not have heard what my father was saying.

The Maharshi was unique in many respects. Like Dattatreya of the Puranas, he did not have a guru as such. One could see on his facial expressions of joy when recitations from the Vedas and Upanishads were taking place in the Ashram. His path of knowledge was not rigid or exclusive.

Sri Ramana did not seek to establish any new cult but showed the direct way to Self-realisation. He taught as a jivanmukta (liberated soul), exemplifying Tat tvam asi (‘Thou art That’ of the Chhandogya Upanishad). Like Suka of the Bhagavatam, he was characterized by samatva (sameness in joy and sorrow and freedom from duality).

He frequently referred to verses from the Yoga Vashista wherein the Sage Vashista advised the young Sri Rama to fulfill his mission as avatara Purusha, all the while abiding in the Self. The ideal of Self-realisation is not visionary but is the very goal of life. Unswerving abidance in the Self, the one eternal Truth, whatever one may be doing, is well described in the Yoga Vashista: Firmly established in the vision that shines forth/ On the renunciation of all desires, and rooted/ In your own Being as a jivanmukta / Act playfully in the world, Oh Raghava.

To have seen the Maharshi in flesh and blood and have heard his word is our great fortune and most treasured memory.

- Face to Face

[om-namo-narayani]

Atma Vichara ~ SatChitAnanda

🦋

No mind, Never mind.

‘This place is a dream. Only a sleeper considers it real. Then death comes like dawn, and you wake up laughing at what you thought was your grief.’

[spiritualsoull1969]

Brahman and Beyond: Understanding Advaita Vedanta

In the labyrinth of philosophical inquiry within Hinduism, Advaita Vedanta emerges as a beacon illuminating the path to understanding the ultimate reality. Central to this ancient wisdom is the concept of Brahman, a profound and ineffable essence that transcends all limitations of time, space, and form. In this exploration, we delve deep into the multifaceted layers of Advaita Vedanta, unravelling the mysteries of Brahman and beyond.

At the heart of Advaita Vedanta lies the principle of non-duality (Advaita), which asserts that the true nature of reality is fundamentally undivided and indivisible. This concept challenges the conventional understanding of existence as a multiplicity of distinct entities, instead proposing that there exists only one ultimate reality – Brahman. Advaita Vedanta posits that Brahman is the substratum of all creation, the unchanging essence that underlies the ever-changing phenomena of the manifest world.

To comprehend the nature of Brahman, one must first grasp its characteristics as described in the sacred texts of Advaita Vedanta. Brahman is often described as Sat-Chit-Ananda – existence, consciousness, and bliss. It is the ground of being from which all existence arises, the pure consciousness that illumines all experience, and the ineffable bliss that transcends all worldly pleasures. Brahman is not an object of perception or conceptualization but is rather the very essence of the perceiver and the object of perception.

In Advaita Vedanta, the individual self (Atman) is understood to be identical with Brahman, not separate from it. This realization forms the cornerstone of spiritual liberation, as it leads to the dissolution of the ego and the recognition of one's true nature as infinite and eternal. However, due to the veiling power of Maya – the cosmic illusion – individuals remain unaware of their essential identity with Brahman and instead identify themselves with the finite and transient aspects of their existence.

The journey of understanding Advaita Vedanta and realizing Brahman involves transcending the limitations imposed by Maya and piercing through the veil of ignorance. This process is facilitated through various means, including self-inquiry (Atma Vichara), meditation (Dhyana), and the study of sacred texts (Shravana and Manana). Through diligent practice and guidance from a qualified teacher (Guru), aspirants gradually come to recognize the illusory nature of the phenomenal world and awaken to the eternal reality of Brahman.

One of the key concepts elucidated in Advaita Vedanta is the distinction between the empirical reality (Vyavaharika Satyam) and the absolute reality (Paramarthika Satyam). The empirical reality refers to the world of everyday experience, characterized by the diversity of objects, subjects, and interactions. While this level of reality is valid within the context of ordinary human perception, it is ultimately illusory and impermanent. In contrast, the absolute reality denotes the ultimate truth of Brahman, which remains unchanging and eternal amidst the flux of the phenomenal world.

Advaita Vedanta employs various metaphors and analogies to elucidate the concept of Brahman and the illusory nature of the world. One such metaphor is that of the rope and the snake, wherein a rope mistakenly perceived as a snake illustrates how Brahman is mistaken for the world due to ignorance. Upon the illumination of knowledge, the illusion is dispelled, and the true nature of Brahman is revealed. Similarly, the analogy of the dreamer and the dream highlights the transient nature of the phenomenal world and the underlying reality of consciousness.

Furthermore, Advaita Vedanta posits that the diversity and multiplicity perceived in the world are merely manifestations of the underlying unity of Brahman. Just as waves are but temporary expressions of the ocean, individual beings are expressions of the singular reality of Brahman. This recognition of unity amidst diversity fosters a sense of interconnectedness and compassion, as individuals realize their intrinsic connection to all of creation.

In the context of Advaita Vedanta, the path to understanding Brahman is not merely intellectual but experiential. It requires a shift in consciousness wherein the individual transcends the limited perspective of the ego and attains a state of non-dual awareness. This state of consciousness, known as Samadhi, is characterized by the dissolution of subject-object duality and the direct realization of the unity of all existence.

In conclusion, Advaita Vedanta offers a profound and comprehensive understanding of Brahman – the ultimate reality that transcends all limitations of time, space, and form. Through the process of self-inquiry, meditation, and spiritual practice, aspirants can unravel the mysteries of existence and awaken to the eternal truth of non-duality. In this realization lies the key to liberation from suffering and the attainment of ultimate peace and fulfillment.

[anokha-swad]

I Am is the first name of God. When you want to think of God, you think of I Am with your respiration. I Am is the first name of God. Close your eyes and try. Inhale and say, “I.” Exhale and say,  “Am.” Doesn’t that make you feel good? Just by saying I Am to yourself, it lifts you up. So the thing to do is this: Whenever you have a problem, I don’t care what it is, I don’t care how serious you think it is, whether it’s worldly or personal, wherever it came from, the secret is to forget yourself. For the moment, forget about the problem for as long as you can, and do the I Am meditation. If your mind wanders, bring it back again, and do the I Am meditation.

When I explain this to some people they say, Robert, but you tell us we have to get rid of our minds. We have to annihilate the mind, not think with it. This is true. This is the highest truth. But most people cannot do this. Remember Advaita Vedanta is really for mature souls, people who have practiced sadhana in previous lives. It’s like going to school. Self-inquiry, Advaita Vedanta, is like the university of spiritual life. You cannot fool yourself.

There are so many people who try to practice Self-inquiry and they give it up. Then I tell them to surrender, surrender completely. That’s the other way. Again this becomes difficult. They try it for a while and they always revert back to themselves, your personal self. So, I give them the I Am meditation.

Everybody can do that. When nothing seems to work, go back to the I Am. It’s really powerful. Do not take it as simple. I can guarantee you this: if you practice I Am for one day, all of your troubles will be transcended. You will feel happiness like you have never felt before. You will feel a peace that you never even knew existed.

As you keep practicing the I Am, your thoughts will become less and less. Your personal self will go into the background and you will feel an inner bliss. You will begin to feel that it no longer matters what I’m going through. It makes no difference, because it is God that is going through this, not me. And God has no problems. You automatically become happy, just by using the I Am meditation.

In the Bhagavad Gita it says, “Out of a million people, one searches for God. And out of a million people who search, one finds Him. It’s sort of difficult. That’s how it appears. But, if you begin to use I Am as a meditation and you allow the I Am to go deeper and deeper, your bodily consciousness will disappear, and the I Am will take over.

If you want to mix Self-inquiry, Atma Vichara, with I Am, that’s permissible. You can use them both together. I’ll explain how. Say you’re using the I Am meditation. In between, thoughts keep popping up. Whether they’re good thoughts or bad thoughts makes no difference, but thoughts keep interfering. You can now inquire “To whom come these thoughts?” Just observe and watch.

When your mind becomes silent again, you go back to the I Am meditation with your respiration. When thoughts come again you inquire, “To whom do they come?” As you progress in this method, you complete the question. “The thoughts come to me. What is the source of me? Who am I? What is the source of I?”

You begin to feel and see that the “I” that seems to have the problem is not you. You begin to feel “I” have a problem. “I” am sick. “I” am angry. “I” have no peace of mind. And you begin to laugh. For the realization tells you, “I” has all these things, I don’t. “I” is the culprit. “I” appears to want this and need that. So it is with wants, desires and self-aggrandizement. All of this belongs to the “I.” Who is this I? Where does it come from? If the “I” isn’t really me, then who am I? And you keep still.

Now you may go back to the I Am with respiration. You inhale and you say I. You exhale and say Am. As you progress this way, you’re going to find out something interesting happens to your life.  You’re going to find there’s more space between I Am. It will happen by itself. You will inhale and you will say I, and all of a sudden, nothing will come out of that.  Then you will exhale with Am. You will inhale again and say I. Remember you’re not putting this on, you’re not making this happen. It’s happening all by itself and the space between I Am is the fourth dimension of consciousness. After waking, sleeping, dreaming. It is the state of the Jnani. It is your freedom. It is Pure Awareness. And when you keep practicing, “Who am I?” alternating with both of them, there will be a greater space before you say, “Who am I?” again.

That space is bliss. You’ll feel something you’ve never felt before. An inner joy. An inner delight. You will just know that the whole universe is the Self, and I Am That. As the months progress, the words become less and less. You may start off  with I Am, and then you will be in the Silence. You will not say another word. You will just experience the Silence. That Silence is Nirvana, Emptiness. It is no thing. It is the nothing I was talking about. You will just sit in the Silence.

[compassionmattersmost]

An Introduction to Ramana Maharshi’s Forty Verses on Reality

Ramana Maharshi, one of the most revered spiritual teachers of modern times, has left an indelible mark on the landscape of non-dual philosophy. Among his profound contributions is a text known as the “Forty Verses on Reality”, or “Ulladu Narpadu”, originally composed in Tamil. These verses are a deep exploration of the nature of existence and the true Self, offering guidance on the direct path…

[sophiaepsiche]

Rimozione o trascendenza?

‘La pratica del ‘chi sono io’ e di allontanare i pensieri psicologici non li spinge nell’inconscio, non potrebbe risultare in una rimozione?’

‘E c’eri Tu che mi mettevi nuovamente di fronte a me stesso e costringevi i miei occhi a guardare dentro me stesso affinché scoprissi e odiassi la mia malvagità’ (Sant’Agostino)

La risposta breve è no, perché la domanda ‘chi sono?’ (o ‘chi percepisce?’ o ‘chi sente?’) ha l’effetto di spingere l’attenzione indietro, cioè dentro, e non in avanti, o fuori, o su altri oggetti mentali. Torno ad usare lo stesso disegno usato più volte, scusandomi per la monotonia, ma se abbiamo bene in mente la direzione che deve prendere l’attenzione, è tutto più facile. Anche altri lettori mi avevano segnalato questo dubbio sul fatto che allontanare i pensieri psicologici potesse mandarli nell’inconscio a prescindere ma, in realtà, dipende da che parte siamo con l’attenzione.

Il concetto è che se ci spingiamo fuori o altrove con l’attenzione, i pensieri diventano subconsci (vedi C). Il che non vuol dire che ci sia davvero una rimozione, ma che rimangono a far rumore in sottofondo perché non sono ascoltati da noi. Rimangono ignorati (il termine psicologico ‘rimozione’ indica un tentativo maldestro di rimozione e non un’effettiva rimozione).  Se, al contrario, siamo talmente dentro di noi  con l’attenzione (vedi A),  da superare i pensieri del tutto e vederli svanire, vuol dire che siamo divenuti pienamente consci. Quest’ultima è trascendenza e  la prima è ‘rimozione’. Sono i due estremi opposti.

Ora, tra i due estremi c’è una via di mezzo, ed è quella che capita quando non riusciamo a fare un passo indietro tanto forte da trascendere i contenuti. Se siamo in questa posizione (vedi B), siamo a confronto con la nostra interiorità e dobbiamo imparare cosa vuol dire davvero ‘meditare’. Dobbiamo sviluppare la capacità di stare abbastanza indietro da poterla osservare senza rimanerci impigliati: se partecipiamo attivamente non stiamo meditando, se riusciamo ad essere distaccati ed osservarla, per quanto non sarà piacevole o pacifico come vorremmo, stiamo già meditando. 

L’osservazione distaccata rende consci i contenuti e matura discernimento sulle loro dinamiche, favorendo un maggiore distacco, un ulteriore passo indietro, che ci aiuterà in futuro. Un meditante molto esperto, grazie ad un distacco già ben nutrito, può avere allora più successo e posizionarsi così bene dentro di sé da veder svanire tutto. Questo è lo scopo dell’atma vichara, del ‘chi sono io?’

Il chiedersi ‘chi pensa?’ ‘chi sta percependo?’ o ‘chi sono’ è un antichissimo ‘trucco’ per mettersi dalla parte giusta, dalla parte della consapevolezza. È un modo per fare l’essenziale passo indietro, che ci permette di conoscere noi stessi. Non è stato consigliato solo dal nostro Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, ma anche da Socrate, era già presente nelle Upanishad, così com’è consigliato nel Buddhismo. A tal riguardo, citerei che nei commentari del Satipatthana Sutta (il sermone del Buddha sulla presenza mentale) “si fa notare che porsi la domanda “chi sente?” segna il passaggio dal semplice provare una sensazione al contemplarla”, e che “lo scopo di questa forma di investigazione è superare l’idea di un io che sente” (Bhikku Analayo)*. 

È un’indagine attiva che scioglie l’ego perché lo smaschera. Per chi avesse il dubbio che questa pratica sia in via positiva e non in via negativa, rasserenatevi, è sicura ed è in via negativa. Non aggiunge niente, non è posta per trovare una risposta concettuale ma per posizionarsi nella consapevolezza e ‘per dissolvere colui che pone la domanda’ (Bhagavan Ramana). Ovviamente, c’è anche chi impara a fare questo passo indietro senza chiedersi nulla, gli basta solo il ricordo di praticare o di porre dentro l’attenzione. Se capite in cosa consiste la pratica, non c’è bisogno di chiedervi nulla. È utile invece per chi, ad oggi, non ha ancora capito come praticare, come andare dentro e conoscersi. 

L’altra istruzione geniale di Bhagavan è quella di rimanere nel senso di ‘io’, in ciò che crediamo essere noi stessi, nel ‘pensiero io’. Un modo eccellente per stabilizzarci nel silenzio, sempre allo scopo di rimuovere, una volta per tutte, la radicata convinzione che ci sia un io individuale in noi. Se riusciamo a rimanere in noi così profondamente, stiamo praticando l’atma nishta, il ‘dimorare in sé’ per i non duali, il ‘samadhi’ degli yogi, il ‘dimorare indipendente’ dei Buddhisti, lo stato contemplativo dei mistici ecc.

Non vorrei però delineare tanto una differenza nella pratica, quanto nei risultati della pratica. Deve essere chiaro che è solo a seconda dell’esperienza e del discernimento del praticante che ci sarà differenza tra i risultati. A volte dipende anche dal momento che si sta vivendo, dalla sfida che stiamo affrontando. Se gli input sono troppo travolgenti possono destabilizzarci temporaneamente, anche se siamo già esperti praticanti. Non ci sconfortiamo mai! Nel caso che ci troviamo in mezzo alla mente, al corpo, alle sensazioni e ai pensieri, applicheremo la meditazione, se siamo così dentro da trascenderli sarà silenzio. 

Il silenzio può esserci anche sin da subito, con dei picchi d’attenzione intensa, per brevi momenti, e poi, nel corso della pratica costante, si stabilizza sempre più; rendendo necessario un impegno sempre meno arduo per restarci. Ritornare nel pensiero sarà gradualmente meno penoso perché il distacco si stabilizzerà e  non aggrappandoci a nulla non nascerà l’ego né il pensiero psicologico. Ci saranno pensieri ‘puliti’, semplici. Qualora vi ricapitasse di formare quelli psicologici, però, non vi abbattete e ricominciate! Capita a tutti noi!

Il punto essenziale è che bisogna aver pazienza e stare dentro di noi il più possibile, a prescindere dai risultati. Se ragioniamo così: ‘che caos dentro di me, non riesco a meditare’ e smettiamo, è un grave errore. Se ci offriamo al caos e lo studiamo, ce ne distacchiamo sempre più e sviluppiamo saggezza. Ed è lei la nostra salvezza. ‘È la verità che rende liberi, non il nostro sforzo di essere liberi’ (J.Krishnamurti). Restiamo dentro e impariamo! 

D’altro canto, non dobbiamo fare neanche l’errore opposto: ‘c’è silenzio, sto mandando tutto nell’inconscio’. No, no, se stiamo dentro non c’è alcun errore. Restiamo il più possibile in quel silenzio, che è il nostro stato naturale. Non stiamo rimuovendo nulla ma trascendendo tutto. Se devo essere proprio sincera, questo è un dubbio teorico, non si pone se praticate davvero, perché la differenza tra la rimozione e la trascendenza è immensa e palpabile.

Chiarito questo, vorrei cogliere l’occasione per specificare che ciò di cui parliamo è ben diverso dal tentativo di manipolare l’inconscio volutamente, di sostituire i contenuti, di cui si sente parlare spesso oggi. Nonostante la sostituzione possa avere dei risultati psicologici, è un escamotage temporaneo, che non ha molto a che fare con la meditazione. Nella conoscenza di sé, si riconosce appieno la perfetta funzione naturale che il subconscio svolge, la si rispetta, la si onora e la si sfrutta.

In mancanza di comprensione delle dinamiche, l’inconscio si presenta come un meccanismo ripetitivo, questo a primo acchito può far sembrare l’inconscio stupido e manipolabile, mentre stupido è l’atteggiamento dei detentori dell’inconscio, di per sé perfetto. 

Siamo noi ad essere più o meno consci e consapevoli, non l’inconscio. L’inconscio non è una ‘cosa’, è la nostra ignoranza su di noi. L’ignoranza presenta ciclicamente i suoi effetti, esterni ed interni, a causa della nostra ostinata noncuranza nel conoscere noi stessi. La cosa essenziale per superare una dinamica è capirla, conoscendola, e non sostituirla con un altro ‘contenuto’ o ‘messaggio’, più piacevole. La dinamica che si ripresenta non è casuale, è quella che ci serve! Spesso è proprio quella che ha mostrato, in passato, di avere il maggior potenziale di riportarci indietro e puntare l’attenzione dentro. 

La funzione dell’inconscio è di tentare senza tregua di rendersi conscio, in un modo o nell’altro. Direi, letteralmente, a tutti i costi. Possiede un enorme potere proiettivo, sostituire o manipolare non è la scelta più saggia.

Anche se la dinamica che ripresenta non è piacevole, va conosciuta e, così, adempiendo al dovere che aveva di riportarci indietro, si scioglie. L’inconscio non è né un mostro stupido, né un mostro cattivo. La spiacevolezza dei contenuti è dovuta alla nostra negligenza a dar attenzione alle dinamiche penose, che vogliamo ‘ignorare’ e ‘sostituire’. Questo crea il destino sfavorevole dell’uomo, fa sì che la ‘via del dolore’, non obbligatoria di per sé, diventi la via prediletta dalla nostra specie e le conseguenze esterne di questo atteggiamento le vediamo sempre meglio. Per evitare la ‘via del dolore’, almeno in termini individuali, una volta sciolta una problematica, invece di ricominciare ad ignorare la nostra interiorità, dobbiamo continuare a conoscerla con sempre maggiore intensità, così da renderla pienamente conscia. E questo vuol dire diventare praticanti spirituali. 

Solo così porteremo a compimento l’evoluzione interiore dell’uomo e il suo fine più alto. È più impegnativo ma porta alla sublimazione della psiche e alla scoperta di una pace profonda. Nel silenzio e nella vacuità, sede non del nulla ma dell’infinito potenziale, dissiperemo l’ignoranza definitivamente e porteremo in essere il meglio dell’uomo. 

Vista in quest’ottica, l’unica ‘sostituzione’ veramente efficace è da cercarsi nella lettura degli insegnamenti dei veri saggi, che hanno un impatto profondo in noi e ci indicano la via da seguire.

Più ci conosciamo, più conosciamo la via, lo scopo e i funzionamenti della vita interiore ed esterna. Più progrediamo, meno saremo inclini a sostituire o a manipolare questo impeccabile dono di natura, che vuole portarci a fare il nostro dovere, per sbarazzarci una volta per tutte della violenza, della divisione e delle risposte più arretrate e malvagie della nostra specie.

Rileggete la citazione di Sant’Agostino adesso e gustate la sacralità e la perfezione di questo impeccabile dono. Comprendetene l’enorme potenziale creativo o distruttivo ed ‘usatelo’ con cautela, rispetto e gratitudine, per il bene vostro e dell’intera umanità.

Citazioni da ‘Satipatthana - Il cammino diretto’ (pag 190) di Bhikku Analayo, puoi scaricarlo gratuitamente qui

Leggi anche ‘La comprensione della mente’,   puoi scaricarlo gratuitamente qui

Per altri articoli simili, premi sul tag ‘inconscio’

[shinymoonbird]

"Ramana Maharshi's Forty Verses on What Is"

🕉️ 🔱  Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Arunachala Ramanaya   🔱 🕉️

🕉

From the Book: Ramana Maharshi’s Forty Verses on What Is - A compilation of the writings and talks on Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu - By Michael James (published by Sandra Derksen)

Extract from: Editor’s note

🕉

Michael’s explanation about not capitalising ‘s’ in ‘self’

There is one point I would like to mention and on which I had to ask Michael’s advice. I noticed that he did not capitalise the ‘s’ in ‘self’ or ‘self-investigation’, among other terms, something I was used to doing myself and encountered when reading texts by others who write and talk about ‘the Self’. I want to share his detailed explanation with you, because it provides an important clarification that can deepen your understanding of Bhagavan’s teachings and who you actually are; to my knowledge, he is unique in this usage.

Michael avoids the term ‘the Self’ as it is usually written in English books. One reason is that there is no such term in either Sanskrit or Tamil, because they contain no definitive articles (‘the’) and, secondly, there are no capital letters.

Another reason is when we talk of ‘the Self’ we are reifying it. We make it sound like ‘the Self’ is something, but obviously there is no such thing as ‘the Self’ other than the thing whose self it is. Everything is itself. The lamp post is itself, the road is itself, the water in the lake is itself, you are yourself, I am myself. From where can we extract some separate thing called ‘the Self’? If we talk about something, ‘the Self’, then it seems to imply something other than ourself. So, we do not naturally talk about ‘the Self’: ‘the Self’ is now going for a walk, ‘the Self’ is now leaving a message. We do not talk like that, we say ‘I’: I myself am doing it. So, using the word ‘Self’ as a noun with a definitive article, ‘the’, reifies it.

‘Self’ is better understood as a pronoun because the word ‘self’ refers to something. Whose self is it? You are yourself, I am myself. So, if you use ‘self’ it can have a meaning only in a particular context, like any pronoun. If you say ‘he’, ‘she’ or ‘it’, that has to refer to something, and if it is not clear from the context what it is referring to, it is meaningless. If you have got a group of fifty people and you say, ‘He and she are the ones I am looking for’, which he and she? There are so many he’s and she’s. So we can use pronouns only in context where it is clear what the pronoun is referring to. Pronouns do not have a fixed reference, their reference is determined by the context.

The only pronoun that could arguably have a fixed reference is ‘I’, because when we each use the term ‘I’, we are always referring to ourself. But if you say ‘I’ you are referring to someone different than when I say ‘I’. That is, when we use the word ‘I’ in the usual sense, in the superficial sense that we usually use it, for me ‘I’ refers to Sandra, for Michael ‘I’ refers to himself. That is, of course, not the real meaning of ‘I’, but that is the sense in which we usually use the word ‘I’. So ‘self’ is like that, ‘self’ is regarded as a pronoun, which is why Michael generally translates the Sanskrit term ātman, and the equivalent term in Tamil, namely taṉ, as ‘oneself’ or ‘ourself’. That is a more natural way of expressing it in English.

Also, when we use capital letters, when we talk about ‘the Self’ with a capital ‘S’ and another ‘self’ with a small ‘s’, there is implied duality there, as if there are two selves. Something that Bhagavan repeatedly said is that there are not two selves, there is only one self. What we actually are is the pure awareness ‘I am’ without any adjuncts. But now we experience ourself mixed and conflated with adjuncts, as ‘I am Michael’, ‘I am Sandra’, ‘I am whoever’. That is the same ‘I am’, but the ‘I am’ in pure condition is our real nature, the ‘I am’ mixed and conflated is ego. So it is not that there are two selves, it is ourself as we actually are and ourself as ego, just like the rope and the snake are not two different things. There is only one thing there. What is actually there is just a rope. But the difference between the snake and the rope is not a difference in substance, it is a difference in appearance. So in some places it may be useful to make a distinction between ego and our real nature.

Often when we use the word ‘self’, or when Bhagavan uses the word ‘self’, it is not specifically referring to ego or to our real nature. For example, in the word ātma-vicāra, is the ātma in ātma-vicāra ego or is it our real nature? Well, it is not necessary to say, because we begin by investigating what seems to be ego and we discover it to be our real nature. That is, if you look carefully at the snake, you see it is a rope. If you look carefully at ego, you see it is pure awareness. It ceases as ego and it remains as pure awareness. That is, it ceases to appear as ego. So ātma-vicāra is usually translated as ‘self-enquiry’. Michael thinks a more useful and accurate translation is ‘self-investigation’. But whether you use ‘self-enquiry’ or ‘self-investigation’ most people will put a capital ‘S’ for that. But why put a capital ‘S’ there? We are not investigating some big self that we do not know, we are investigating the very self that we are. So by introducing capitals that you sometimes use and sometimes do not use, you are limiting the meaning, because when you put a small ‘s’ it means ego, if you put a big ‘S’ it means our real nature. It just creates an unnecessary dichotomy, an unnecessary and false duality, that does not actually exist. Sometimes ātma means ego, for example, in the term ātma-samarpaṇa, which means self-surrender. What is the self that needs to be surrendered? Obviously that is not our real nature, it is ego. So that is another reason why Michael prefers not to use capitals.

Then people sometimes use capitals, for example, for ‘consciousness’ or ‘awareness’. Sometimes they put a capital and sometimes they do not. But again, you make it sound like there are two ‘consciousnesses’, two ‘awarenesses’. That is just creating a confusion. Bhagavan did distinguish between pure consciousness and the adjunct-mixed consciousness that we call ‘ego’. But that does not mean that there are two ‘consciousnesses’. It is one consciousness: one in its pure condition and one and the same consciousness mixed and conflated with adjuncts, which is called cidābhāsa, the semblance of awareness. So as soon as you start using capitals you have to decide in each case whether you are referring to what is real or to what is unreal — whether you are referring to the reality, or whether you are referring to the appearance. If it is the reality, you have to put a capital ‘S’, if it the appearance you have to put a small ‘s’. But what if you do not want to specify if you are talking about the reality or the appearance, you are just talking about the thing in general? So it creates an unnecessary confusion that is not there.

All duality is false. That is, thinking in terms of two selves, a big ‘Self’ and a small ‘self’, is not helpful, because it is missing the whole point of Bhagavan’s teachings. Michael affirms this is an important point. It is not just a matter of literary style, it is a matter of conveying what Bhagavan is saying in the clearest and most accurate way that is true to how he expressed himself.

🕉

A free book sample is available (includes ‘Introduction by Michael James’) on:

https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=XZol6NVZvajJMSyzNgz6hM4lY75mkzrbjgY7&fbclid=IwAR020rUa3su0MIDiVU4hO2XpkhIhBsBK0bmt_XY33csWqNSbrqTecwtphFw

🕉

[advaita-vedanta]

Alza tu cabeza. No mires hacia abajo al agitado y tormentoso mar de la vida transitoria. Si lo haces te hundirás en sus fangosas olas. Fija tu mirada en lo elevado hasta que veas la Realidad Espléndida.

[nurtureoneslife]

*** Deham Naham Koham Sohum ***

*** Deham Naham Koham Sohum ***

Once G.V. Subbaramaiah, had brought his two young daughters, Lalita and Indra, to the Asramam. The younger one Indra,who was hardly 5 years old was quite mischievous. In the Hall, some devotees at that time were asking Bhagavan Ramana, how to remain still [to remain Summa], amidst various work in the world.

Bhagavan Ramana said that it is all in the mind. If the mind could be quelled and made to stay in the Self, within, any amount of work could be done, without desire and doer-ship.

Meantime, Indra, was moving here and there in the Hall.She was pulling out books, Bhagavan Ramana's stick, alms-bowl, the time-piece near the sofa etc.,

Bhagavan Ramana asked: "Amma, what are you doing?"

Indra replied: " I am not doing anything.

I am remaining Summa.( I am still)"

Everyone laughed.

Bhagavan Ramana also laughed and said:

"See, this is how the worldly work should be performed !,

She is doing some work there but she says I am still.

This is the essence of atma vichara( Self enquiry).

One can do any work and still be still in mind.

During the same trip, one day Indra took out a Sanskrit book and was seeing it. She only understands Telugu. So she went to Bhagavan Ramana, with a line shown by her from the book and asked what it was.

It read: Deham Naham Koham Soham.

Bhagavan Sri Ramana called her near and read out the line and started explaining.

Deham Naham. "Amma! You are wearing the skirt.

Is it You?

You are wearing nice golden bangles.

Is it You?

The child said: No, they are not I.

They are only mine.

Bhagavan further said:

Amma ! Like these, even this body is not You.

It may be your for some time.

Then, Koham, Who am I?

Soham, I am Siva. Soham shivoham, I am the Heart!

The child was very seriously listening to Bhagavan Sri Ramana's words. She repeated the words and Bhagavan Ramana told her to remember this line always.

Viswanatha Swami, who was listening to all these curious exchanges between Indra and Bhagavan Ramana, asked Him: "What can she understand?"

Bhagavan Ramana replied Viswanatha Swami:

"Oh! Is is known only by understanding?

You have understood everything.

Have you known It?"

Viswanatha Swami kept mum.

On the day of leaving,

Indra said to Bhagavan Ramana :

"Thatha! I shall always say this and remember this.

Deham Naham, Koham, Soham."

Bhagavan Ramana said: "That is good,that is sufficient."

The girl and her father left for Andhra.

In two months, Indra took seriously ill and saying Deham Naham, Koham, Soham,

she left the body and

merged with Pure Space !

G.V.S. constructed a small samadhi for her at the backyard of his house.

Many cannot see Him Only some can see Him.

When G.V.S. informed about the demise of Indira and what he had done, Bhagavan Sri Ramana approved his step.

A few are called

And a fewer are chosen.

Arunachala Siva.

[telangley]

Question: Mooji, is it really possible to become or to gain enlightenment? Has there been anyone who has become enlightened or awake through coming to Satsang and if so, could you say who? ( All laugh )

Mooji: In truth it is not possible to become enlightened as you put it because no one is there as such to become enlightened in the first place. The firm recognition or realisation that there isn't a 'somebody' in reality to gain enlightenment, and that there can never be an entity at any time, either now or in the future, to gain any such state, is what amounts to enlightenment. This direct realisation occurs and becomes revealed, confirmed and convincing truth through the process of self enquiring. 'Self-enquiry', also called atma-vichara, is one effective means of exposing the unreality of the 'I-concept', or ego, ordinarily felt to be the fact of oneself, leaving the pure immutable Self as the single and perfect reality. This is the ultimate truth.

You ask: 'Is there anyone who through attending Satsang has become awake'. This has already been addressed in my previous statement but I will further add here that there has been and continues to be the constant recognition of this fact that the ego identity is a myth, a fictitious character. That individuality as such is an expression of pure consciousness/beingness and not the fact or definition of that Beingness. That oneself remains behind as the witness or the noticing of the phenomena arising spontaneously in consciousness. That ones true self is formless and nameless presence only which arises or shines as peace, joy and happiness felt as loving contentment. When this recognition occurs within each individual point or expression of consciousness known as a person, that state is called 'awakening' or 'enlightenment'.

~ Mooji

[sanathanadharmasblog]

ATMA BINDU: ARDHANAREESHWARA

"BINDU" as we know is a single point and in its nascent presence, lies unfolded the mystic secret of all universes. Think of it and your mind cannot ever grasp it and the words never be able to narrate it. beyond all duality and thought, The Bindu in each of us is the SELF that exists in its formless autonomy as THE ONE. in this state, there cannot exist two. But the journey to the Atma Bindu traverses through many phases and probably lifetimes of the pursuit of arrival.

Sadhana and preparation can take us leaps and bounds, reward us with experiences and till the soil. But no one can ever promise or know when one will arrive at the distillation of the SHIVA SHAKTI merger as the ATMA BINDU/ ARDHANAREESHWAR consciousness.

Grace alone will choose when, how and who will be chosen. Until the arrival, the steadfast disciplined practice of Atma Vichara needs to be practised. Whatever spiritual path one may follow, But if there is no MANAN (meditation on the truth) or JIGYASA ( enquiry into the truth), sooner or later, It will fall apart or merely become a plastic flower with no fragrance.

The ARDHANAREESHWARA is not merely an androgyne but a reality with its two paradoxes in sambhoga ( sacred mating). Its not as simple as the coming together of the yin and yang but is the wondrous blossoming of the fusion within. Revelling in this state is the only outcome after it has happened as the pursuit and its results both drop off like dead snakeskin.

May all arrive at the ATMA BINDU and discover the Nondual self that we are!

Regards

[gardensprit]

Meditation 101

here is a link to sun’s witch academy database, where you can find information on a variety of topics as they are posted! 

meditation

the oldest documented evidence we have regarding the origin of meditation comes from india, somewhere in the time period between 5,000 and 3,500 BCE. hints of meditative techniques being developed in the west came as early as 20 BCE, though these attempts were not popular. meditation remained firmly rooted in asian culture until at least the late 19th century - the only exception being some meditative judaist practices, which seem to have been developed separately from many of the techniques and beliefs in central, eastern, and southern asia.

there are so many different forms of meditation. many people consider it difficult to achieve or understand, and it can be. for me, meditation is less focused on emptying your mind and more about focusing inward, about tuning in and listening to your body, to your senses, and to your own personal reality. it takes living in the moment to a higher, more impactful level. it can be extremely restful and healing if done properly, with care and commitment. 

for those who have adhd or minds with fast-moving thoughts, for those who find it difficult to calm your mind and empty it, i would give this advice: don’t worry about having thoughts. the goal should not be to not think at all (at least, perhaps, not at first). instead, choose a method of meditation that includes giving you something specific to focus on. then, when extraneous thoughts enter your mind, acknowledge them and calmly release them, and use the opportunity to refocus on your meditation.

uses

meditation can be used for a number of things, some depending on belief system. these include stress reduction, improved emotional health, increased self-awareness and knowledge, longer attention span, improving sleep, controlling/mitigating pain, relaxation, reflection, and more.

i personally am not certain how widespread this belief is, but apparently some witches consider meditation as a prerequisite to any spell-casting or magic making, believing that you need to be in a specific headspace to make magic work. i personally don’t subscribe to this, seeing as i have cast a number of spells and done a number of workings before i ever got interested in meditation - HOWEVER! if you feel that you need meditation in order to work your own magic, that’s okay! meditation can help us become more aware of ourselves and our own energy, so it makes sense that people would feel more attuned or connected to their own energy and their own magic when meditating. meditation could possibly help you feel the effects that your magic is having more easily, if you are struggling with that, rather than just relying on trust. ultimately, your beliefs are up to you.

methods

guided, affirmation/chanting, sound bath, binaural, breath, etc

culture-specific methods:

zen, vipassana, metta, mantra, transcendental (unadvised), vedic and yogic systems (unadvised), self inquiry (atma vichara), taoist systems, qigong, christian systems, sufi systems, and more (i will go into more detail on these in a future post; for now you should simply know that many culture-specific methods would fall under cultural appropriation if used improperly, so do your research and tread wisely.) 

examples (guided)

these meditation techniques are written by me - they might not work the best for your personal usage, they are more meant to serve as examples for what some kinds of meditation can look like. i encourage you to do your own research and find other methods that may work better for you!

(from my post on centering)

find a quiet place where you are unlikely to be interrupted or distracted. close your eyes and sit cross legged with straight posture, if you can. avoid lying down. focus on your breath, and draw deep breaths of air into your belly, rather than your chest. once you have a rhythm, begin to take note of each individual part of your body and how it feels. let tension relax and bleed out, let negativity and pain leave your body. let it be replaced by your own peaceful, healing, centering energy. with each breath you take in, your energy consolidates around you and centers your focus on yourself, on your world, on your current moment. each exhale will carry anxiety, distraction, and disruptive energy out of your body and will release it into the universe. focus on this for as long as is needed. when you are ready, remember to give yourself a moment to reconnect to the physical world and settle your energy within yourself. don’t attempt to jump right into the next thing after meditating. 

(focused on the breath)

find a quiet place where you are unlikely to be interrupted or distracted. close your eyes and sit cross legged with straight posture, if you can. let yourself breathe naturally and easily. as you do so, begin to pay closer attention to your own rhythm of life. how long do you inhale? how much do you fill your lungs? is your breath shaky or sure? does your exhale last longer than your inhale? simply evaluate your natural breath. focus on that. eventually, you may wish to attempt to improve your quality of breathing, such as taking deeper, calmer breaths. focus on slowly shifting from how your breath is to how you want it to be. as you inhale, imagine yourself drawing in positive, healing, calming energy. as you exhale, imagine yourself releasing negativity and stress. when you are ready to exit meditation, take some time to ground yourself and settle your energy.

(affirmation)

choose a simple and easy to remember affirmation that has personal value and importance to you. (for example: i am patient; i have willpower; i am well-rested after sleeping; etc.) use this simple affirmation and focus on it, either repeating it in your thoughts or out loud. the goal here is to focus only on your affirmation until you enter a trancelike meditative state. if other thoughts enter your mind, don’t panic, simply acknowledge them and then release them, taking the opportunity to focus even more upon your affirmation. when you are ready to exit meditation, take time to ground yourself and settle your energy before moving on.

personal meditation

meditation can be an intensely personal experience. you can create your own meditations, either by writing a guide (as specific or loose/vague as you want!) and then following it, or by improvising the path you take while meditating. i often find that it is nice to have something to write or type on near to me, in case i have any thoughts during or after meditation that i want to remember.

the final words i will leave you with are these: if meditation isn’t working for you, or you find yourself too stressed about meditating “correctly,” you don’t need to use it. meditation is supposed to relieve stress, not cause it! the first time i considered attempting meditation was a few years ago, and it was not working for me at all. i didn’t understand it, couldn’t do it right, etc etc. so i let it fall away from my life and focused on other things. only recently have i come back to it with a higher vibration, a different perspective, and a better understanding of how i can use it to grow and heal. maybe you will eventually come back to meditation, and maybe you won’t. ultimately, you just have to do what is best for your practice and for yourself.