steve Posted June 25, 2008 Oh. Steve hope you feel better. Here's 17: To those who have not realized the Self, as well as to those who have, the word 'I' refers to the body, but with this difference, that for those who have not realized, the 'I' is confined to the body whereas for those who have realized the Self within the body the 'I' shines as the limitless Self. So if you are aware or awake or whatnot you realize that you are more than just your body. This almost sounds Christian; like he's talking about soul or spirit or whatnot. I'm feeling much better, thanks! The worst part of the entire ordeal was a bad reaction to one of the antibiotics... I'm definitely on the mend but can't train hard for ~ 2 months - ARGGHHH! Well, once my mind and body are cleared of the medicines, I'll at least have more time to devote to meditation. Anyway - I think you're exactly right with your comments. All of the major religions point to the unity of self with God. I think Ramana is pointing out the fact that, until there is direct experience of this, there is a slightly more limiting perspective of the self ending at the boundary of the skin and thoughts. Once you have the experience of truly being more than that, not the idea but the experience, then the sense of being the body remains, yet there is an additional dimension of the identification with or experience of the universe sort of experiencing itself through the body. I don't know if that makes it more or less clear. It's hard to put into words but, once you feel it, there's no mistaking it and no going back... I think that one of the primary functions of prayer, meditation, self inquiry, cultivation, and so forth is to create an environment where this sort of experience is more likely to occur. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted June 26, 2008 18. To those who have not realized (the Self) as well as to those who have the world is real. But to those who have not realized, Truth is adapted to the measure of the world, whereas to those that have, Truth shines as the Formless Perfection, and as the Substratum of the world. This is all the difference between them. I think this is like the last one, sort of. Like, everyone realizes they are in a body but some realize they are more than just their body. Everyone realizes the world is real but others realize truth is more than its body, the world. Or something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted June 27, 2008 18. To those who have not realized (the Self) as well as to those who have the world is real. But to those who have not realized, Truth is adapted to the measure of the world, whereas to those that have, Truth shines as the Formless Perfection, and as the Substratum of the world. This is all the difference between them. I think this is like the last one, sort of. Like, everyone realizes they are in a body but some realize they are more than just their body. Everyone realizes the world is real but others realize truth is more than its body, the world. Or something. Agreed... There seems to be some belief that, once "awakened", suddenly the world is different. I think he is saying that it's more like the perspective is different. Awakened or not, the world is the world. A car will crush your foot, your children will make you cry, food can be delicious. And yet there is the perspective of something beyond, that suffuses and includes everything including the body, the sense of self, and so on, that just makes it feel different. This is why all of the magic, the extraordinairy experiences, the ghosts and spirits, and all that supernatural stuff rings false and empty for me... all of that is just part of the world, our thoughts, hopes, dreams, desires, fears, and so on... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted June 27, 2008 19. Only those who have no knowledge of the Source of destiny and free-will dispute as to which of them prevails. They that know the Self as the one Source of destiny and free-will are free from both. Will they again get entangled in them? The first part makes sense - if the self is also the SELF, then destiny and free-will are one and the same because everything has it's source in the SELF. If they are one and the same, what concern is there for them? Will they again get entangled in them? Does this mean - the awareness of the source of destiny and free-will can come and go? Does it refer to rebirth? This is very interesting... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted July 4, 2008 I still don't really get 18 but onto 19... Those who don't understand the source are always arguing between destiny and free will. I guess this is the false dichotomy thing... I've actually had this argument an awful lot, arguing for free will, because I WANT it to be true, to think we have choice... But then eventually I decided it didn't matter... if we have choice I get to present more choices (to my students for example), if we don't have choice and it is all based on heredity and environment then all I need to do is change the environment (by mentioning "choices"). But anyway I am not sure what he means by seeing SELF as the source of destiny and free will, but I guess doing that will make you free from both...but he's saying you can get un-free too. Like, get caught up in old mindsets or what he'd probably call false dualism. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted July 4, 2008 I still don't really get 18 but onto 19... Those who don't understand the source are always arguing between destiny and free will. I guess this is the false dichotomy thing... I've actually had this argument an awful lot, arguing for free will, because I WANT it to be true, to think we have choice... But then eventually I decided it didn't matter... if we have choice I get to present more choices (to my students for example), if we don't have choice and it is all based on heredity and environment then all I need to do is change the environment (by mentioning "choices"). But anyway I am not sure what he means by seeing SELF as the source of destiny and free will, but I guess doing that will make you free from both...but he's saying you can get un-free too. Like, get caught up in old mindsets or what he'd probably call false dualism. Why don't we hang out with 18 for a while longer and see what happens. Perhaps some other Bums with chime in and help shed some light on this. I think it's better to sit with these for a while than to move on for the sake of getting through these... I think 18 is very important. He seems to be comparing what it means to be 'enlightened' with 'not enlightened.' He says that they both see the same world and the same reality. THe difference between them is very small, simply a matter of perspective. To those who haven't realized, "Truth is adapted to the measure of the world." Maybe this means that "Truth" is limited to the perception and awareness of the physical world and thoughts as being separate from the self. Whereas others have "realized" something else. He calls it the "Formless Perfection" and the "Substratum of the World." What could these mean? THis is a tough one for sure. To me this is pointing to the connection between the one who realizes and that which is realized. That is the substratum, the formless perfection. The mutual arising between self and other, observer and observed. Tai Ji? This is formless and ineffable yet the mutual arising is certainly perfection and awareness, not mine or yours, but the existence of awareness itself (remember awareness is just a word, not really the thing) could be the substratum of the world. Does that make any sense? Anyone else out there want to help out? Putting this stuff into words is tough! But fun... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteTiger Posted July 5, 2008 Putting this stuff into words is tough! But fun... Agreed and i will attempt in having some fun Which reminds me... Sorry for not keeping up with the stuff... honestly i don't have the book but i hope that i can join in the middle or in the late and commenting on stuff. I'm just in search of knowledge and wisdom, just like most others are. 18. To those who have not realized (the Self) as well as to those who have the world is real. But to those who have not realized, Truth is adapted to the measure of the world, whereas to those that have, Truth shines as the Formless Perfection, and as the Substratum of the world. This is all the difference between them. I think this is like the last one, sort of. Like, everyone realizes they are in a body but some realize they are more than just their body. Everyone realizes the world is real but others realize truth is more than its body, the world. Or something. I don't really understand 18. I fear that i never will but that just means i gotta work much harder to understand it. So i guess being enlightened or at least thats the word that comes to mind when i hear "Truth shines as a formless perfection, and as the substratum of the world" I can clearly say I have not realized the Self... my self. I also know when a teacher of mine started doing purposely bad things to me messing with me and getting away with it was when he had a long discussion asking me if i understood what my true self was. I assume now that thats because he had understood what his true self was. 18 is a complete blank for me (i feel bad because of it too... honestly bad because of it) 19. Only those who have no knowledge of the Source of destiny and free-will dispute as to which of them prevails. They that know the Self as the one Source of destiny and free-will are free from both. Will they again get entangled in them? The first part makes sense - if the self is also the SELF, then destiny and free-will are one and the same because everything has it's source in the SELF. If they are one and the same, what concern is there for them? Will they again get entangled in them? Does this mean - the awareness of the source of destiny and free-will can come and go? Does it refer to rebirth? This is very interesting... 19 is a very interesting discussion. I have felt glimpses of and little spurts of practicing to the tiniest level of the fact you can create your own destiny and you can have your own free-will to actually to some level control it. Depending on your ability to do so. I go back and forth between believing in this. I don't understand why. When I don't believe in it it is always to my demise and when I believe in it I always survive duality or strive to stay away from being caught in duality without being tainted. I know from experience this is true. Personally i understand this is taoism we speak of but is it not the our mother that techniqually show our survivability and thus creating out true source of self. (reminder that I'm a male, it could be opposite for a female, although I'm not sure it is or isn't) I have even read books that claim that destiny is preordained that you can not escape it and the only thing you can do is change it. although thats only a thought to make people start thinking a little more about being free from destiny and free-will. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted July 5, 2008 honestly i don't have the book but i hope that i can join in the middle or in the late and commenting on stuff. No book needed - we're working from this link http://www.satramana.org/html/forty_verses_on_reality.htm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteTiger Posted July 8, 2008 No book needed - we're working from this link http://www.satramana.org/html/forty_verses_on_reality.htm Thank you very much xuesheng! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteTiger Posted July 16, 2008 Anyone else? So I have some questions, i will limit to as few as i can. (maybe even one or just two) In hopes to be answered still apart of this understanding these texts. The true self, or whom have realization of the true nature of self, is it anything to do with Yin Chi? (At least for a male) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted July 18, 2008 So I have some questions, i will limit to as few as i can. (maybe even one or just two) In hopes to be answered still apart of this understanding these texts. The true self, or whom have realization of the true nature of self, is it anything to do with Yin Chi? (At least for a male) I think the Self has everything to do with everything. Limiting Self to any particular concept or description sort of contradicts the concept. I would cautiously compare Self more with Yuan Qi but even that really goes contrary to the concept of Self as non-dual. Just some words about something that is difficult to discuss directly. One of the things I like about Ramana's verses is that they point to the truth without really trying to categorize, describe, or pigeon hole it. They're very poetic in that sense. I would suggest reading the verses without indulging in the tendency to compare to more familiar or commonly accepted paradigms. Try it, you may like it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteTiger Posted July 18, 2008 I think the Self has everything to do with everything. Limiting Self to any particular concept or description sort of contradicts the concept. I would cautiously compare Self more with Yuan Qi but even that really goes contrary to the concept of Self as non-dual. Just some words about something that is difficult to discuss directly. One of the things I like about Ramana's verses is that they point to the truth without really trying to categorize, describe, or pigeon hole it. They're very poetic in that sense. I would suggest reading the verses without indulging in the tendency to compare to more familiar or commonly accepted paradigms. Try it, you may like it. Thanks, I will try it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted July 24, 2008 20. He who sees God without seeing the Self sees only a mental image. They say that he who sees the Self sees God. He who, having completely lost the ego, sees the Self, has found God, because the Self does not exist apart from God. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted July 25, 2008 You know, I think Alan Watts explains this more clearly than Ramana did... "It must be obvious, from the start, that there is a contradiction in wanting to be perfectly secure in a universe whose very nature is momentariness and fluidity. But the contradiction lies a little deeper than the mere conflict between the DESIRE for security and the FACT of change. If I want to be secure, that is, protected from the flux of life, I am wanting to be separate from life. Yet it is this very sense of separateness which makes me feel insecure. To be secure means to isolate and fortify the "I" but it is ust the feeling of being an isolated "I" which makes me feel lonely and afraid. In other words, the more secrurity I can get, the more I shall want..." -Alan Watts, the Wisdom of Insecurity Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted July 26, 2008 If I want to be secure, that is, protected from the flux of life, I am wanting to be separate from life. Yet it is this very sense of separateness which makes me feel insecure. To be secure means to isolate and fortify the "I" but it is just the feeling of being an isolated "I" which makes me feel lonely and afraid. In other words, the more secrurity I can get, the more I shall want..." -Alan Watts, the Wisdom of Insecurity Thanks Lozen, I really like that explanation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted July 26, 2008 You're welcome!! I read Sam Harris and got all depressed; reading Alan Watts saved me! Praise the Lord! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted July 29, 2008 I read Sam Harris and got all depressed; reading Alan Watts saved me! Praise the Lord! I had a similar experience only a friend loaned me a set of 12 CDs called Out of Your Mind. They are recordings of his lectures and are fabulous. Listening to him speak is even better than reading his books, IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted July 29, 2008 Anyone else on verses 19 or 20? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Simon1983 Posted August 19, 2008 wow, thanks alot for posting this link...this stuff is very good. gob smacked after 20 seconds... 3. 'The world is real.' 'No, it, is a mere illusory appearance.' 'The world is conscious.' 'No.' 'The world is happiness.' 'No.' What use is it to argue thus? That State is agreeable to all, wherein, having given up the objective outlook, one knows one's Self and loses all notions either of unity or duality, of oneself and the ego. Sort of left me like Bart Simpson thinking about one hand clapping. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lozen Posted August 20, 2008 21. What is the Truth of the scriptures which declare that if one sees the Self one sees God? How can one see one's Self? If, since one is a single being, one cannot see one's Self, how can one see God? Only by becoming a prey to Him Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted August 21, 2008 What is the Truth of the scriptures which declare that if one sees the Self one sees God? How can one see one's Self? If, since one is a single being, one cannot see one's Self, how can one see God? So I think Ramana is challenging our use of language and imagery about "seeing" what we are, the Self or God. That is, how can one see oneself? How can the eyeball see itself (without a mirror, of course)? The nature of the Self is all-encompassing so that one cannot step outside of the Self to see it as a separate entity. It can only be experienced from within, somehow. That's how I interpret this part. Now the next bit: Only by becoming a prey to Him is very interesting. Is he saying that one must allow oneself to be completely 'gobbled up' by the self? Give oneself over to being absorbed into the Self and experience it from within? Something like that? Just my read on this - I'd love to hear from others... Mat? Mal? Lozen? White Tiger? We're getting there... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted August 25, 2008 Roll call. I'm still here but it's a bit deep for 3 second in between work replies Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted August 25, 2008 Roll call. I'm still here but it's a bit deep for 3 second in between work replies You need to get your priorities straight, brother. Understanding the universe vs work... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unconditioned Posted August 27, 2008 Only by becoming a prey to Him My interpretation of this line is that this means complete surrender. When one surrenders the self it is similar to just letting go, emptying yourself, so that the Self can shine. For what it's worth, I have a .pdf of Ramana's complete works (700+ pages) that I can share with people if they'd like, just send me a message. I've personally found his methods of introspection a very powerful path. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
