Click here to go to the next issue.

SELF REALISATION By Sri Ramana Maharshi

In the following extract from Gems from Bhagavan, we are
reminded of the truth and inspired to realise the True Self.

THE STATE WE CALL realisation is simply being oneself, not
knowing anything or becoming anything. If one has realised,
he is that which alone is, and which alone has always been.
He cannot describe that state. He can only be That. Of
course we loosely talk of Self-Realisation for want of a
better term.

Effortless and choiceless awareness is our real state. If
we can attain it or be in it, it is all right. But one
cannot reach it without effort, the effort of deliberate
meditation. All the age long vasanas (impressions) carry the
mind outwards and turn it to external objects. All such
thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward.
For that, effort is necessary, for most people. Of course
everybody, every book says 'Be quiet or still'. But it is
not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary.

There is a state beyond our efforts or effortlessness.
Until that is realised effort is necessary. After tasting
such bliss even once, one will repeatedly try to regain it.
Having once experienced the bliss of peace, no one would
like to be out of it or engage himself otherwise.

You may go on reading any number of books on Vedanta. They
can only tell you 'Realise the Self'. The Self cannot be
found in books. You have to find it for yourself in
yourself.

--contributed by Harsha

_____________________________________________________________________

I went to hear Francis Lucilled speak here in NYC last
weekend. I asked him during his talk about my experience of
understanding and awareness and then the subsquent "losing
of it". He told me that I had become attached to a state
(of being: happiness/compassion/love) and that I turned that
into an object, hence the thought "I've lost it". He said
that I could never lose it, awareness has never been gone,
which others have told me also. He said that I had fallen
in love with the shadow of my lover, but not my true love.
And that if it was my true love, "he" would never have left
me because when someone truly loves you, they will never
leave.

This prompted further investigation for me. I felt I had to
look deeper into the "why" of having returned to separation
and the consequent suffering. I am discovering that I
believe I chose to turn away from the truth of being because
there were further lessons I needed to learn. And those
lessons have to do with attachment. Because I clung to the
state of happiness, I became very worried and fearful when I
noticed that I had become attached to my boyfriend (now
husband). I incorrectly thought I had to "get rid" of the
attachment. That's really when I started to think that I
was "losing it"! I thought that I shouldn't be attached.
Can you believe it? It's almost funny now. But I do feel
compassion for myself for having been so deluded. I feel I
have had to learn a very hard lesson.

So, now I have seen that attachment is another process of
thinking, not meant to be smothered out of one's mind or
else...!! I truly loved being happy and certainly did not
want that happiness to leave. Can you blame a person for
that?? : )

I haven't "walked over the edge" into 'no separation' yet.
(I hesitate to say "yet" implying time and some future event
that I await). Who knows what will happen in my life? I
could be hit by bus tomorrow...or even today. And as Gene
so beautifully said during a recent chat, "There's no need
to rush. We have all the time in the world".

I guess I feel a huge resolution to those questions that
have haunted me and now I find it much easier to just relax
and be where I am. Whatever "happens" in the future is not
really up to me. That's another big lesson here. I have to
give up everything to God. People use the word surrender.
That one has been really tough for me.... thank you for
constantly saying it over and over.

So the observation and listening continues. As pointed out,
that is really all there is to do anyhow. How foolish of me
to think otherwise.

--Becky

____________________________________________________________________

I was just listening to an audio on Isaac Shapiro's website
in which he points one toward the state of deep sleep and
says there is no attention there. Then as one awakes, there
is attention. And in that way the whole world comes into
being. Being very still can bring one to the moment before
thought or attention. Those are Isaac's words and who am I
to argue? By the way, he's a great speaker. Much is said
in his silence. He teaches by silence, that is very clear,
ironically, even in his audios:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/2689/home.html

--Jerry

____________________________________________________________________

What is an "external object" if the Truth has no outside or
inside?
An "external object" can only be a way of defining,
labelling, understanding the "One True Thing" in a dualistic
way. What then would "turning inward" be? It could only be
seeing through one's own labelling, defining, and
(mis)understanding process. The "One True Thing" has no
inside or outside. The "effort" to turn "inside" is itself
a labelling, defining, and understanding of "One True
Thing." Therefore, inevitably, the "effort" needs to be
surrendered in exactly the same way that One surrendered the
definition of "external objects" as existing separately
(from Oneself). Finally, the labelling of "One" or "Self"
needs to be surrendered as well.

--Dan

___________________________________________________________________


It is obvious that a simple teaching like nondualism does
have a disadvantage; it is fairly easy to grasp and at the
first glimpse of recognizing one's real nature, the
proclamation of another EO follows. It is entirely
forgotten that a rather gifted one like Ramana was plunged
into incessant self-absorption for years, hiding from the
crowd when possible and finally gave in to accept the role
of a teacher. The seemingly complicated path of Mahayana
Buddhism is an effective guard against "instant guruism" as
displayed in the West and the vows are a safeguard against
amassing personal wealth. Although Sufism and Rosicrucianism
don't implicitly mention nonduality, "one will get there",
without the possibility of "instant guruism" at the first
glimpse. Alas, the genie is out of the enlightened bottle
and can't be pushed back. As science provided for the
encephalogram and cardiogram, time to devise a machine the
make a gurugram :)

--Jan


Many of the conventional paths have built-in safeguards
against this fast-food EO proclamation. In the AMORC
(commercialized) Rosicrucian teachings, the path is 32 years
of dues-paying membership. Advaita Vedanta has a 15 year
path once the student begins the Vedanta - and this is after
the regular "karmakanda" portion of practice. In Kabbala it
is said that one must be married, 40 yrs old and have
"swallowed the Torah." The Mahayana 10 stages of a
Boddhisattva are downright mythological, and in conventional
understanding, they are preliminaries to being a Buddha.
Not only do these paths guard against personal wealth, but
also personal aggrandizement of all kinds. Yes, we can't
push the toothpaste back into the tube. One teacher,
Ramesh, takes it as a sign of non-enlightenment the
proclamation of enlightenment. But he also regards it as a
sign of enlightenment if HE proclaims you to "have the final
understanding..." This stuff gets completely wacky.

--Greg

___________________________________________________________________


My impression is that the mystics speak of oneness or unity
more than nonduality. They're very big on Oneness, but it
would be nice to find the ones that went beyond.

--Jerry

Mystics like St. John of the Cross and gnostics like Hermes
Trismegistus certainly went beyond but never expressed it in
writing; the "mystical union" of Christian mystics, the
"alchemical wedding" of Valentin Andraede, the union of
Shiva And Shakti, nirvana, moksha, all different words for
the very same psychophysical event.

--Jan

Okay, from experience, the mystic experience happens at
heart chakra on the way up, when all chakras above are open,
meaning throat, crown, etc., then beyond that, the
unification with Soul happens over a period of time, until
the Crown completely fires nonstop for awhile and the energy
is brought back down into heart where it blooms outwards,
feels like about three feet. From here one is in "mind" or
"soul" unifica- tion. One is not a saint and human, that is
why i say there is always more ... you understand ... and
i'm sure there is more beyond this but i do not speak to
what i do not know.

--~ Rainbo ~

top of page