Ramana Maharishi

Recommended Posts

Excellent videos! Thanks for posting those.


In keeping with the Advaita thread, here are two interesting videos related to Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, a very famous and beloved exponent of the method of "I Am".


That first is biographical and includes some of his talks, the second is a meditation exercise.



Edited by xuesheng

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramana Maharshi:


"The relative hapiness and unhappiness to the mind arise from sheer ignorance of the spiritual truth. Man's true nature is happiness which is inborn. One's search for happiness is an unconcious search fr the Self. At last he finds what is already there. This happiness, bliss, does not come to an end. It is eternal."


"Understand yourself first, then everything will be clear to you"

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

He is a tricky one isn't he! Here you go:


Question:"Is samadhi a blissful or ecstatic state?"


Sri Ramana Maharshi: "In samadhi itself there is only perfect peace. Ecstasy comes when the mind revives at the end of samadhi. In devotion the ecstasy comes first.. It is manifested by tears of joy, hair standing on end, and vocal stumbling. When the ego finally dies and the Sahaj is won, these symptoms and the ecstasies cease."


So if you read him closely he does states that consciousness comes first and is the only thing eternal (not bliss or existence) but yet when the body (existence) is revived (and the mind) then true happiness is experienced.... so... go figure! haha.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that was a good one Drew.

From my experience, the intense ectasy or bliss, however brief, is in a way, a disturbance albeit a pleasurable one. haha

When those experiences subside, then actual peace emerges which isn't blissful as such, it's just..............peace.


So if you read him closely he does states that consciousness comes first and is the only thing eternal (not bliss or existence) but yet when the body (existence) is revived (and the mind) then true happiness is experienced.... so... go figure! haha

It's a great paradox, yet in some ways, it's not paradoxical at all.


From Sri Ramana:

"That which is, is peace. All that we need to do is to keep quiet. Peace is our real nature. We spoil it. We are not going to create space anew. If we remove all the rubish from the mind, the peace will become manifest. That which is obstructing the peace must be removed.

Peace is the only reality"


So that's why he says not to become attached to any state pleasant or unpleasant.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK well if you read Ramana Maharshi in detail he states that of the three -- consciousness, bliss, existence -- consciousness is only permanent.


But Ramana Maharshi is defining consciousness within "time" -- whereas it's beyond even permanence! haha.


The fact is Brahmin priests completely relied on separation from females in order to perfect mind yoga and Ramana Maharshi advocates breath to control the mind if someone can't control the mind on their own. He, himself, rejected his own mother so that he could stay isolated in a sacred place for Brahmins.


As Gurdjieff stated:


"Just remember -- time is breath."




So Gurdjieff also states that the Absolute is MATERIAL but he states that it's also beyond the duality of matter and energy.


What he means is that it's the "highest" frequency of matter -- as found in the source of the Heart.


I think this is also why Ramana Maharshi states that the first siddhi is to become as small as an atom --


Essentially the laser used to test quantum physics matter -- the protons and neutrons and electrons and whatever else the physicist decide is matter -- is the same intensity of energy as the sun.


Healers also create laser energy because they SYNCHRONIZE the energy of the body through ultrasound of the language inside the mind, creating yang -- sun -- energy.


So this is why the Absolute is a 3-1 paradox -- not just the "one" that Ramana Maharshi relies on.


Ramana Maharshi states that consciousness can not be seen and it's best taught through mouna samadhi -- silence -- but he states it's best transmitted THROUGH THE EYES. This transmission is actually the yin electrochemical life force of the BODY resonated into synchronized laser light through the pineal gland -- and it's directed by the complementary opposites -- the desire of the body.


When we listen to the source of our thoughts the process is the same 3-1 paradox and it is permanent as a PROCESS but it's not anthropocentric -- not the "heart" as the body-mind projected as the SELF -- instead it's the earth as nature projected as a balance between the moon (female electrochemical energy) and the sun (laser electromagnetic energy).


If we ignore the moon (body) then we destroy the earth, as is happening due to the symmetric-based "I am that I am" logical axioms which Ramana Maharshi relies on. He's teaching patriarchy as much as he's teaching the truth. Sri Aurobindo is no better unfortunately. There is a purpose for form -- visual-based truth -- and that's the sacred snake or kundalini -- the gopis that join Krishna which Sri Ramana Maharshi dismisses.


OK so the Tai-Chi symbol, the female form of beauty, the kundalini, etc., is resolved in three-dimensions as pyramid power -- the center of the 3-1 or tetrahedron. As Gurdjieff describes there's three forces -- active, passive, and neutralizing or yang, yin and emptiness or consciousness, bliss, existence. He states that in order to be aware of the three forces they always have to be observed in relation to another force but if they exist on their own with no other force then they are matter -- making it a 3-1 paradox. He calls the three forces, oxygen, carbon and nitrogen and the matter is hydrogen. Carbon relies on a tetrahedron for binding to nitrogen whereas hydrogen and oxygen bind as female formless awareness -- or in science water is now called a "macro quantum molecule" relying, again on a tetrahedral form, to create anomalies -- see physics professor J. L. Finney's "What's special about water?" article in the PHilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society journal. So water is the key, as lunar female force, since it creates negentropy -- or the ability for life to live on earth -- through the macro tetrahedral binding.


Oh yea -- the tetrahedron is the full-lotus of course.

Edited by drew hempel

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

This shows the humility of Sri Ramana, his refusal to be treated as 'beter' than others and an example to us i would say:


On one of my visits in the 1920s, Bhagavan complained to me, "See, Rangan, till now I have been sitting on the floor. It seems that from now on they will not allow me to sit like that. They are getting a black ebony sofa from Madras. From now on I shall have to sit on it. Why should I not sit on the floor like everyone else? I feel equally happy whether I sit under this tree or on a garbage heap, but these people will not let me do as I please. I am in jail here, only the jailors are not in uniform."


Bhagavan used to talk like this on many occasions. He did not at all like the sofa we all made him sit on. Once, in an attempt to convince him, I said, "Bhagavan, you have reached a state higher than all of us. So, to show our devotion, if we make you sit on a higher pedestal, it is quite proper that you sit on it."

"I see", he said, obviously not at all convinced.


Years later, some devotees tried to make Bhagavan sit on a chair in the dining room and eat his meals off a table. Prior to that, he had sat on the floor like everyone else. I arrived at the ashram from Madras shortly after this new arrangement had been put into operation. When he saw me in the dining room, Bhagavan called out to me, "Do you see, Rangan, what they are doing to me now? They have ordered me to sit in a chair and eat my meal off this table."


After making a few enquiries I discovered that this new arrangement had been made because devotees had noticed that Bhagavan was finding it difficult to squat on the floor and get up again.


When I found this out, I went up to him and said, "Do you ever ask for anything? You do not want anything. We must therefore look after your comfort." Bhagavan was not convinced. He would rather put up with any difficulty than be given special treatment.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


Gurdjieff? He wasn't fit to carry Ramana's dhoti. Your nonsensical ramblings sound like the side of a bottle of Dr. Bronner's soap.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites