I understand what you imply but we dont read from down to up so…
But thanks for your information anyway it will be useful for me. Even though in some cases its not like that in the part of defending.
[QUOTE=Seeking;82088]Question being respectfully submitted:
The answer all hinges on wither awareness itself is actually permanent. Is it? For example when in a deep sleep where is awareness? Does this not indicate Awareness itself fluctuates?[/QUOTE]
Respectfully or disrespectfully, all is merely a dance in consciousness everything/nothing is to be confirmed by one’s self.
Can any level of consciousness exist without awareness, is consciousness possible without awareness. Examine the three cities of the mind; Waking, dreaming and deep sleep were the awareness in waking and dreaming are self-apparent due to the large percentage of memory accessible, but do you recall every second of yesterday or perhaps there are gaps? When you awaken from deep sleep you sense restfulness, does not the alarm wake you, is there a difference between thinking I was deeply asleep and thinking I was not there, the blankness of deep sleep may be due to insufficient memory, it cannot be said awareness was not present. It seems awareness exists without consciousness but consciousness cannot exist without awareness, furthermore can awareness be aware of itself.
The automic nervouse system is aware.
Is it aware of itself?
An ant to a tree has awareness.
What is consciousness but a level of awareness?
And yes. Self consciousness or self awareness. To say their is sight, to identify with the see’er, and know the see’er is the one who see’s. OR in other words: seeing that the see’er is the one who see’s. That is self consciousness.
[QUOTE=Avatar186;82134]The automic nervouse system is aware.
Is it aware of itself?
An ant to a tree has awareness.
What is consciousness but a level of awareness?
And yes. Self consciousness or self awareness. To say their is sight, to identify with the see’er, and know the see’er is the one who see’s. OR in other words: seeing that the see’er is the one who see’s. That is self consciousness.[/QUOTE]
Is not pure awareness what you were prior to consciousness arising, consciousness being everything this side of the I-AM-NESS, were you aware before this happening in consciousness and will you be aware when it expires.
simply contemplating the awareness.
What is pure awareness? Lol can it ever be impure?
Divided yes. United yes.
If I took a crack at "what is pure awareness"
I would say it is an "enlightened being"
one, in who exists, no unconsciousness.
a being with continual consciousness.
He who would have continual consciousness would be sleepless with perfect memory.
I do believe awareness and consciousness are the same thing. It simply takes a certain level of awareness to be self aware. A tree has awareness. Enough awareness to be self aware? I don’t know.
Even if not sleepless, during sleep, their would be self awareness.
by definition awareness and consciousness are dependent on each other to exist or for that matter even have meaning.
awareness
noun
the state or condition of being aware; having knowledge; consciousness
the paragraph below is copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awareness there is more to this article it is a good read.
Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects, or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as a human’s or an animal’s perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event.
I find myself agreeing with Avatar186’s contributions to this topic
simply contemplating the awareness.
What is pure awareness? Lol can it ever be impure?
Divided yes. United yes.
If I took a crack at "what is pure awareness"
I would say it is an "enlightened being"
one, in who exists, no unconsciousness.
a being with continual consciousness.
He who would have continual consciousness would be sleepless with perfect memory.
I do believe awareness and consciousness are the same thing. It simply takes a certain level of awareness to be self aware. A tree has awareness. Enough awareness to be self aware? I don’t know.
Even if not sleepless, during sleep, their would be self awareness.
I would like to add the following to the “enlightened being” phrase. The"enlightened being" is one that is consciously aware in more and more refined realms and therefore capable of being aware while in those realms to include Deep sleep and states of Samadhi. This super being has arrived at a state of permanency in that this being is always on so to speak whereas ones like myself must shut down nightly not being able to endure ongoing conscious awareness.
Deep sleep is a realm unto itself so is being under anesthesia for a surgery. in either case one is not conscious while in these states and therefore not aware of anything.
ray_killeen likes to write finger pointing at the moon, this is good Zen Koan speak and does inspire Kensho moments. But even Kensho moments are dependent on consciousness wedded to awareness in order to make the intuitive leap and arrive at the Ah Ha! moment.
Vichara Who Am I is a powerful method that creates a gravitic singularity and causes the mind to collapse into itself like a black hole.
Who am I? Who is this I that thinks these thoughts? who is this I that sees this thing? the eventual answer is “I I” followed by collapse of mind shunting of ego and silence. Awareness and consciousness without modification of what is left.
This is a very difficult method.
Quoting ray_killeen: Is not pure awareness what you were prior to consciousness arising, consciousness being everything this side of the I-AM-NESS, were you aware before this happening in consciousness and will you be aware when it expires.
No consciousness is not everything this side of the I -am-ness.
Mind is the tool of awareness and ego which is the automated part of the mind the accumulated memories automatic responses with emotions and misidentification with mind and its automated counterpart ego & memories are that which is everything this side of I- am -ness.
Can awareness be ware of itself? of course.
It is mind that ceases to exist and collapses when closely scrutinized via many different techniques. It is mind that can not be aware of itself because mind is the tool of consciousness and awareness and has no reality save for that of tool. The mind can never be aware of mind, the ego can never be aware of ego, the emotions can not be aware of emotions.
When the mind is turned inwards the ego and the emotions collapse, so does tactile sensation and awareness and consciousness of the relative outside word in moments of deep sadhana awareness and consciousness are made to be present in more refined realms as it were where mind becomes a very fine thing and then unneeded even as a tool. Beyond this I lack the ability to communicate so will now stop.
That which who am I exemplifies is that which is aware of the tools listed above.
?Fantasy? is defined in dictionaries in many ways; but the key words are:
Created (constructed, not by itself)
Imagination ( unreal, not ?as is?)
Image (not the thing by itself)
Dream (without real context)
Impractical (not of real significance)
Exaggerated image (intangible additions)
Thus, fantasy is driven by mind, builds unreal images, has no significance or any real, tangible value. So, SQZ?s conclusion is a departure from the common understanding. ?Fantasy isn?t bad nor good, its a necessity to move forward?.Therefore, there is no such thing as indulging in fantasy (vikalpa) which could lead to incorrect knowledge. Because the fantasy (usually) will always lead the person to correct knowledge soon or later (as described above)?.
As unusual interpretations are used for the 3 gunas, it is very difficult to understand that argument. In my opinion, we live in perpetual fantasy until our quest for the truth begins. Our brain stores images, the mind induces thinking that builds on these stored images and the resultant personal reality is really an illusion. Going back a few steps, from where does the brain receive the images? From our experiencing the world that is a collage of objects. Each object has latent energy that manifests as gunas, tamas (the concealing aspects), rajas (the flitting aspects) and sattva (the revealing aspects). They create for us a composite image when we perceive. So, the main input, the image is unreal and so is everything built around it, with it or using it. So our world is a huge construction of fantasy until the reality is known.
SQZ seems to take fantasy as ?potent? or ?prophetic?. But fantasy does not deliver anything by itself, a realization that it is fantasy, does. And that realization comes by working on the main culprit, the gunas. Taming of rajas, extinguishing tamas and letting sattva prevail alone reveals the reality. That is a journey from incorrect knowledge to a correct one. And that is by removing the fog of fantasy, not because of it.
[QUOTE=Suhas Tambe;82145]?Fantasy? is defined in dictionaries in many ways; but the key words are:
Created (constructed, not by itself)
Imagination ( unreal, not ?as is?)
Image (not the thing by itself)
Dream (without real context)
Impractical (not of real significance)
Exaggerated image (intangible additions)
Thus, fantasy is driven by mind, builds unreal images, has no significance or any real, tangible value. So, SQZ?s conclusion is a departure from the common understanding. ?Fantasy isn?t bad nor good, its a necessity to move forward?.Therefore, there is no such thing as indulging in fantasy (vikalpa) which could lead to incorrect knowledge. Because the fantasy (usually) will always lead the person to correct knowledge soon or later (as described above)?.
As unusual interpretations are used for the 3 gunas, it is very difficult to understand that argument. In my opinion, we live in perpetual fantasy until our quest for the truth begins. Our brain stores images, the mind induces thinking that builds on these stored images and the resultant personal reality is really an illusion. Going back a few steps, from where does the brain receive the images? From our experiencing the world that is a collage of objects. Each object has latent energy that manifests as gunas, tamas (the concealing aspects), rajas (the flitting aspects) and sattva (the revealing aspects). They create for us a composite image when we perceive. So, the main input, the image is unreal and so is everything built around it, with it or using it. So our world is a huge construction of fantasy until the reality is known.
SQZ seems to take fantasy as ?potent? or ?prophetic?. But fantasy does not deliver anything by itself, a realization that it is fantasy, does. And that realization comes by working on the main culprit, the gunas. Taming of rajas, extinguishing tamas and letting sattva prevail alone reveals the reality. That is a journey from incorrect knowledge to a correct one. And that is by removing the fog of fantasy, not because of it.[/QUOTE]
Would you mind giving concrete examples of how one would go about doing as is formulated above taming, extinguishing, and allowing sattva prevail?
If I took crack at that. Lmao.
Woulda say that its done via samadhi.
Union can be had in both body and mind.
and I assume that is the secret of overcoming all.
or the foundation of it.
Union of the elements is union of body.
This alone will facility samadhi.
then actively practice samadhi itself.
both can actually be done at once.
Dual cultivation.
Fantasy, or vikalpa is a type of mental operation/activity where our mind imagines things by combining different kinds of thoughts which we are not actually being experienced directly. It is useful in creative enterprises, in scenarios and role playing. We are doing it all the time subconsciously when we daydream, speculate and think about the future.
In Yoga, fantasy like the other four kinds of mental operations are ultimately to be stilled.
We need to train our minds to become completely silent, so that the higher aspect of our mind our intuitive faculty(prajnana) is awakened. When the intuition is awakened, actions become effortless, inspiration is constant, thoughts are precise, knowledge is automatic.
Sure, Seeking.
All yoga practices are aimed at conscious control of body activities which otherwise dance to the tune of the senses. Senses are outbound and receive vibrations which are churned by the thinking process to derive ‘subjective knowledge’. These vibrations are manifested energy and are given and taken by all objects all the time. Energy of any object (including our own self) is either stationary or kinetic. When we perceive an object, we more likely interact with the stationary energy as the time-space velocity is absent, making the ‘mass’ = ‘energy’.
In perception, the outgoing vibrations of ‘desire’ to perceive, stir the energy dormant in the object and the resultant vibrations are sensed by us. Thinking decodes the vibrations as labels by which we cognize the object ‘descriptively’ that’s why they are called ‘gunas’ (qualities). Qualities help us place the perceived object in our subjective domain of reality.
But do we know the object ‘as is’? No. Let us take concrete examples. We are attracted to a car by watching commercials. Are they truthful? of course not. Still they drive us to the showroom That is tamas dominating. When we see a car in the show-room, first we cognize its appearance (sight), then feel the interior (touch), take in the newness (smell), listen to the salesman (hear) etc and take several hours deconstructing and re-constructing our perceived image. Each successive perception is influenced by factors that later turn out to be deceptive when we read customer feedback (tamas), attention jumping from one to the other not allowing us to grasp one thing at a time (rajas) and factors that get firmly understood (sattva).
Now, how to! In the above example, if we realize how emotions are coloring and crowding our mind, how past experiences create subjective impressions that condition the thinking, and how mind is constantly tossing us between pairs of opposites (like, is it value for money or not, this model better than the other, will friends laugh at my choice or praise me etc etc) we will rise above the influence of tamas and rajas; knowing incrementally more in the sattvic sense.
“What we see is what we are” translated in terms of guna mean when we are less tamasic and rajasic we become more sattvic. Since gunas are energy manifestations, one must make one’s energy purer through practices of asanas and pranayama. The net effect of purer prana is instant connection with an object that reciprocates with sattva that reveals everything about the object instantly. Dharana (concentration) stabilizes rajas, Dhyana (meditation) subjugates tamas and in Samadhi (absorption) only sattva prevails, delivering correct knowledge.
Even though your book has been purchased the right moment has not yet struck to really begin reading it. There is a section on this very topic. Hmmm time to read that section.
In perception, the outgoing vibrations of ‘desire’ to perceive, stir the energy dormant in the object and the resultant vibrations are sensed by us. Thinking decodes the vibrations as labels by which we cognize the object ‘descriptively’ that’s why they are called ‘gunas’ (qualities). Qualities help us place the perceived object in our subjective domain of reality.
Interesting, could you please be so kind to elaborate on the part ‘stir the energy dormant in the object’ ?
I’ve heard that kind of phrases many times, but I’m really curious what people really mean by this.
Questions:
[ul]
[li] is the dormant energy made out of gunas?
[/li][li] is the dormant energy different for each individual? (if I look at an flower, and you also do the same, do we both stir the same dormant energy?)
[/li][li] does an object have unlimited dormant energy (regarding previous question)
[/li][li] what happens to males when they look at a naked woman, what dormant energy is in her?
[/li][/ul]
thanx in advance!
Sir, hope you do not mind if an error has been made please alert Dave the forum admin and ask him to remove this post with my blessings of course but I too would like to hear more and remind others this book is really different from others and a worthwhile purchase. Seriously where else will you ever get to communicate witht the author
SQZ maybe this will help.
Quotes From Suhas Tambe’s book:
Your own subtle desire to perceive an object that projects itself through the senses and, riding over many subtle layers, touches the subtle energy of the perceived object.
In return, this contact generates sensory signals as raw material to the thinking process. This subtle energy, called gunas, is alive when perceived, but otherwise dormant in all objects.
Guna supplies the qualitative data we can use for knowing. Perception activates guna and causes its cognition.
The way I interpret this is that the dormant guna is it’s own reality standing on it’s own dormant merit even as a seed is to a tree. Mr. Tambe is this correct?
If you don’t mind perhaps you could clear this up? Does the one perceiving influence the reality of the gunas? Or are they independent?
If I read you right, do you think I am pointing to any errors in the post? I want to stand corrected, because I am not. SQZ is always seen innovating with concepts and they are stimulating, or only unconventional. The beauty of Yogic knowledge is room for interpretation and space for innovation. I will feel sad only when a personal agenda and commercial interests drive such experiments.
Little that I understand about E=mc2, makes me believe that ?E?nergy = ?m?ass, when the velocity on the opposite scales of time and space is zero. Energy is the underlying cause and mass, its manifested effect. They are not two independent entities or phenomena, but rather 2 sides of a coin. So, when the energy is stirred, the mass manifests and the perceiver cognizes an appearance or a form. This is what Swami Vivekanand calls the ?first distortion? caused by the screens of time, space and causation. That we see the mass and do not see the energy is the basic avidya (ignorance) that keeps us perpetually entangled in the ?separateness? of mass rather than the ?oneness? of energy. Appearances lend artificial plurality to a single cause.
The greatest obstacle that denies us this simple view, is our own mindset, laden with pre-conceived notions. For example, in each object we are talking about ?dormant? energy not dead energy. Though apparently stationary, it is very potent, dynamic and intelligent. ?Inert? objects at several degrees of magnification are seen quite fluid with particles staging a chaotic dance. So, energy is easily stirred by the wavelength of the desire to perceive. What manifests is guna that is multi-threaded and suitably placed in 3 categories: deceptive factors (tamas), factors that toss us between pairs of opposites (rajas) and the revealing factors (sattva). Gunas are always composites and hence, collectively never the same. Also, the gunas are manifest when perceived, and only unmanifest otherwise. They collapse or rather implode only when the perceiver just ?sees? with no desire. Now the questions:
is the dormant energy made out of gunas? --->> No, rather, gunas are manifest energy.
is the dormant energy different for each individual? (if I look at an flower, and you also do the same, do we both stir the same dormant energy?) --->> Energy is the same (?sum total of all energy is the same?) but its guna manifestation differs from moment to moment, perceiver to perceiver.
does an object have unlimited dormant energy (regarding previous question) --->> an object?s energy, if artificially separated from the universal energy, appears to be limited and conditioned.
what happens to males when they look at a naked woman, what dormant energy is in her? --->> ?woman? and ?naked? and all its associated baggage is a cognitive impact of gunas to which our reality is mortgaged. Otherwise, as an object she is a collection of organs, each organ a functional co-operative society of physical cells which are made of purposeful bonding of molecules which are composed of atoms which carries a family of particles, each potent with energy enough to destroy the world. That makes her so explosive!![QUOTE=Seeking;82142]ray_killeen likes to write finger pointing at the moon, this is good Zen Koan speak and does inspire Kensho moments. But even Kensho moments are dependent on consciousness wedded to awareness in order to make the intuitive leap and arrive at the Ah Ha! moment.
Vichara Who Am I is a powerful method that creates a gravitic singularity and causes the mind to collapse into itself like a black hole.
Who am I? Who is this I that thinks these thoughts? who is this I that sees this thing? the eventual answer is “I I” followed by collapse of mind shunting of ego and silence. Awareness and consciousness without modification of what is left.
This is a very difficult method.
Quoting ray_killeen: Is not pure awareness what you were prior to consciousness arising, consciousness being everything this side of the I-AM-NESS, were you aware before this happening in consciousness and will you be aware when it expires.
No consciousness is not everything this side of the I -am-ness.
Mind is the tool of awareness and ego which is the automated part of the mind the accumulated memories automatic responses with emotions and misidentification with mind and its automated counterpart ego & memories are that which is everything this side of I- am -ness.
Can awareness be ware of itself? of course.
It is mind that ceases to exist and collapses when closely scrutinized via many different techniques. It is mind that can not be aware of itself because mind is the tool of consciousness and awareness and has no reality save for that of tool. The mind can never be aware of mind, the ego can never be aware of ego, the emotions can not be aware of emotions.
When the mind is turned inwards the ego and the emotions collapse, so does tactile sensation and awareness and consciousness of the relative outside word in moments of deep sadhana awareness and consciousness are made to be present in more refined realms as it were where mind becomes a very fine thing and then unneeded even as a tool. Beyond this I lack the ability to communicate so will now stop.
That which who am I exemplifies is that which is aware of the tools listed above.[/QUOTE]
If ones were to use a process of elimination method such as self-inquiry “WHO AM I” the inquest might progress as such:
a.) Am I this body?
b.) Am I this mind?
c.) Am I this consciousness?
You seem to be indicating; “I think therefore I AM” whereas my experience is; “I AM therefore I think” wherein this sensation of “being-ness” (I-AM-NESS) becomes the self-evident source as to what sparks consciousness into play. The Yoga’s become extremely useful in moving about and evaluating all the various levels of consciousness (Waking, Dreaming, Sleeping) but as we go deeper into consciousness this mind/language communication becomes less effective, hence the terminology “finger to the moon” we simply point to that to which only you alone can confirm, in that sense I’m not accurately using Webster’s Dictionary definition for awareness. One may begin to realize that the mind/body is needed to sustain consciousness but consider whether consciousness belongs to mind/body or is it this animating consciousness that gives sentience to the psychosomatic apparatus.
d.) From where does consciousness arise?
Consider Consciousness a reflection of, what I refer to as, Pure Awareness against the surface of matter that which brings about your sense of being-ness and illusion in separation. This Pure Awareness is an Absolute state without beginning or end, timeless, space-less in no need of support of any kind, it can only become conscious (aware of itself) when it has an object to reflect against. Consciousness is the link to the Absolute and yet there is a gap in which mind cannot cross, a common analogy; the sun (being Pure Awareness) compared to sun reflected in dewdrops (awareness reflected as consciousness) i.e. the appearance of sun in the dew drops is not the sun. To sit in Samadhi (state of absolute perfection) consciousness comes to a complete stillness, movement ceases, not even the sense of I-AM-NESS exist, this is the state of Awareness I point to, only after the thought I AM arises does consciousness with its illusion of separation stir into play.
e.) Am I this Pure Absolute Awareness (consciousness at rest); that which was never born and shall never die, timeless, space-less, infinite, everything/nothing, this, that, neti neti…
Forgive me for the criticism Suhas, but this:
The greatest obstacle that denies us this simple view, is our own mindset, laden with pre-conceived notions. For example, in each object we are talking about ‘dormant’ energy not dead energy. Though apparently stationary, it is very potent, dynamic and intelligent. ‘Inert’ objects at several degrees of magnification are seen quite fluid with particles staging a chaotic dance. So, energy is easily stirred by the wavelength of the desire to perceive.
Sounds like pseudoscience.
What do you mean by “the wavelength of the desire to perceive” ?
What do you mean by “dormant energy”? Do you mean the atomic energy stored up in the atom or the zero point energy stored in free space?
[QUOTE=ray_killeen;82188]If ones were to use a process of elimination method such as self-inquiry “WHO AM I” the inquest might progress as such:
a.) Am I this body?
b.) Am I this mind?
c.) Am I this consciousness?
You seem to be indicating; “I think therefore I AM” whereas my experience is; “I AM therefore I think” wherein this sensation of “being-ness” (I-AM-NESS) becomes the self-evident source as to what sparks consciousness into play. The Yoga’s become extremely useful in moving about and evaluating all the various levels of consciousness (Waking, Dreaming, Sleeping) but as we go deeper into consciousness this mind/language communication becomes less effective, hence the terminology “finger to the moon” we simply point to that to which only you alone can confirm, in that sense I’m not accurately using Webster’s Dictionary definition for awareness. One may begin to realize that the mind/body is needed to sustain consciousness but consider whether consciousness belongs to mind/body or is it this animating consciousness that gives sentience to the psychosomatic apparatus.
d.) From where does consciousness arise?
Consider Consciousness a reflection of, what I refer to as, Pure Awareness against the surface of matter that which brings about your sense of being-ness and illusion in separation. This Pure Awareness is an Absolute state without beginning or end, timeless, space-less in no need of support of any kind, it can only become conscious (aware of itself) when it has an object to reflect against. Consciousness is the link to the Absolute and yet there is a gap in which mind cannot cross, a common analogy; the sun (being Pure Awareness) compared to sun reflected in dewdrops (awareness reflected as consciousness) i.e. the appearance of sun in the dew drops is not the sun. To sit in Samadhi (state of absolute perfection) consciousness comes to a complete stillness, movement ceases, not even the sense of I-AM-NESS exist, this is the state of Awareness I point to, only after the thought I AM arises does consciousness with its illusion of separation stir into play.
e.) Am I this Pure Absolute Awareness (consciousness at rest); that which was never born and shall never die, timeless, space-less, infinite, everything/nothing, this, that, neti neti…[/QUOTE]
Seeking: No I am not indicating “I think therefore I am” that is Ren? Descartes mistaken belief not mine. I say the whole I am construct is mind itself.
Since you have quoted Descartes I shall quote a far wiser being, and raise you a not this and a nor that
Here are some things from Ramana Mahrishi he says it better than either one of us. This also confirms what I have been saying in other threads about the need for ego as a tool to communicate try communicating without mind and see how much you get across on an internet forum.
I guess we could all go around pointing at stuff and using the word “one” instead of “I” rearranging our grammar in an attempt to appear lofty & spiritually correct or spit out Koanish answers but that leaves even more open for misinterpretation and ultimately only further fools the ego doing this, confounds meaningful communication and generally is a nuisance to read.
In any event pointing at the moon still requires a mind and the boogy man ego. It is just hiding better when one does that and less likely to create waves in a temporary placidity. Catch that pointer by surprise and hear him yelp. :eek:
Language and writing is the ultimate outward form of mind expression and ego play. Still important to education none the less.
Question : What is the nature of the mind?
Ramana Maharshi : The mind is nothing other than the `I’-thought. The mind and the ego are one and the same. The other mental faculties such as the intellect and the memory are only this. Mind [manas], intellect [buddhi], the storehouse of mental tendencies [chittam], and ego [ahamkara]; all these are only the one mind itself. This is like different names being given to a man according to his different functions. The individual soul [jiva] is nothing but this soul or ego.
Question : How shall we discover the nature of the mind, that is, its ultimate cause, or the noumenon of which it is a manifestation?
Ramana Maharshi: Arranging thoughts in the order of value, the `I’-thought is the all-important thought. Personality-idea or thought is also the root or the stem of all other thoughts, since each idea or thought arises only as someone’s thought and is not known to exist independently of the ego.
The ego therefore exhibits thought activity. The second and the third persons [he, you, that, etc.] do not appear except to the first person [I]. Therefore they arise only after the first person appears, so all the three persons seem to rise and sink together. Trace, then, the ultimate cause of I' or personality. From where does thisI’ arise? Seek for it within; it then vanishes.
This is the pursuit of wisdom. When the mind unceasingly investigates its own nature, it transpires that there is no such thing as mind.
This is the direct path for all. The mind is merely thoughts.
Of all thoughts the thought I' is the root. Therefore the mind is only the thoughtI’. The birth of the `I’-thought is one’s own birth, its death is the person’s death.
After the `I’-thought has arisen, the wrong identity with the body arises.
Get rid of the I'-thought. So long asI’ is alive there is grief. When `I’ ceases to exist there is no grief.
Question : Yes, but when I take to the `I’-thought, other thoughts arise and disturb me.
Ramana Maharshi: See whose thoughts they are. They will vanish.
They have their root in the single `I’-thought. Hold it and they will disappear.
Question : How can any enquiry initiated by the ego reveal its own unreality?
Ramana Maharshi: The ego’s phenomenal existence is transcended when you dive into the source from where the `I’-thought rises.
Question : While making japa for an hour or more I fall into a state like sleep.
On waking up I recollect that my japa has been interrupted. So I try again.
[COLOR=“blue”]Ramana Maharshi:[/COLOR] `Like sleep’, that is right. It is the natural state.[/COLOR] Because you are now associated with the ego, you consider that the natural state is something which interrupts your work. So you must have the experience repeated until you realize that it is your natural state. You will then find that japa is extraneous but still it will go on automatically. Your present doubt is due to that false identity, namely of identifying yourself with the mind that does the japa. Japa means clinging to one thought to the exclusion of all other thoughts. That is its purpose. It leads to dhyana which ends in Self-realization or jnana.
Seeking: This is what I have been trying to indicate. The differences that leads this I away from I is done via Kriya Pranyama not self inquiry. It works quite well to arrive at what is so correctly described above by the Maharishi himself.
Now as far as Samadhi states go I can not sustain them for long periods of time they are often quite brief or so it seems often after Kriya practice I look at the clock and even though it seems as if no time has passed quite a bit has.
In any event there is a kind of bleed over into daily and nightly life. It is kind of like dipping a wooden spoon into a pot of boiling water with Tumeric little by little the spoon becomes more and more yellow with each removal of the spoon.
Maybe dipping a spoon into a pot of acid is a better analogy minus the connotation with pain. Dipping the spoon into the pot of acid time after time less and less of the spoon remains.
Kriya does not produce Samadhi. Kriya just sets the stage when performed with sincerity. Samadhi happens as it will or won’t. Practicing Kriya is like dipping the spoon.
What is it you do Ray? It seems that Yoga has not been it for you from your comments. Zazen perhaps?