|
Post by tenka on Nov 22, 2019 2:53:41 GMT -5
For myself SE was about a journey within myself, at the time I wasn't aware that there was a SE that involved a focus solely on I or I AM . I sat to enquire at the time of great sufferings and I needed the quietness and the solitude, it's hard to describe but over the years more and more stuff came to the surface that I needed to look at and overtime coming to terms with that and self healed in many ways . I see S.E. in a way where there is a purifying and a getting to know oneself that can eventually as I found out realize what you are, it is the classic onion peeling analogy stripping back the layers of self while opening the heart and healing the heart at the same time .. To be honest there wasn't much conscious activity going on most of the time for the process takes care of itself at a certain point, just like when the wind is in your sail it carries you forth and momentum is there .. but the direction one goes is inwards for use of a better word. I see this as an absolute necessity to work through your krap, and this is why all the dream like, no self mentality will get you absolutely nowhere fast .. I mean seriously, if you really really believed self was an illusion and there is no-one here, you wouldn't self enquire, you would search for self, you wouldn't purify, you wouldn't meditate because none of it is believed to be real . So with all respect when I hear peeps like sifting tell me to go and S.E. to have a realization to reveal that the mind is false, I kinda think wtf is he on about and why would I need that supposed realization when I know that S.R. has got now't to do with what is true or what is false .. Not that you would care, but if you read Godman, Michael James or Sifty's book, you'll find they describe a process that is pretty specific and very different from what you write above. I make no claim about SR, but I have studied SE quite extensively. What you describe is not what Ramana speaks of. You are describing a form of self reckoning, which I think is valuable and others on this site might as well, but it is not what Ramana had in mind. Reefs and Laffy make a distinction between awakening and realizarion. They would describe your experience as awakening, I think. All I know is that I enquired into self within heart and mind to get to that which I am that was the cause of sufferings. In essence it is an enquiry into who Am I that suffers. It doesn't matter really what the concern or interest is, what matters is there is an enquiry into who AM I . That IS S.E. Every enquiry starts with the sense of self had otherwise one would not enquire into I AM while trying to blot out the world lol . The Self realized doesn't need a mantra or a self practice into Self .. All I know is that after the initial thought to self enquire was made the inner process took a form of it's own and within the peeling back of the layers and within the healing of self, S.R. was in hindsight inevitable. I didn't enquire to S.R. I didn't know what was mean't by S.R. all I knew was that I had to go into solitude and meditate .. it took 8 years of enquiring before it happened .. In my eyes having simply a focus on I AM without self healing through the heart is missing something .. and I believe I have heard Ramana say about there are some that S.R. without the practice and the self effort but this is because the work has already been done. So in my eyes don't think for a second you can carry around all ya krap and then simply focus on I AM cos the sun aint gonna shine anytime soon. All peeps are doing is covering over the cracks and brushing the krap under the carpet, it's a sense of denial while trying to transcend the krap into Self. In regards to awakening and S.R. I know the difference between the two and you can't have S.R. without awakening to some degree first. Even the thought to find a master or self enquire is an awakening .. My awakening happened when I wanted to heal the world while I was suffering within and I know what the enquiry involves and what can be experienced within the journey, I also know that awakening has now't to do with transcending this mindful world .. in such a way where there is no mistaking one for the other . I think you have the wrong end of the stick in regards to what I have been saying, what I experienced and realized .. but your in good company because there isn't many that know what I am talking about lol .. How can beyond the mindful world be associated with an awakening of sorts? Makes no sense to me .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 22, 2019 3:02:02 GMT -5
The golden rule is that one's theory falls down if there is something illogical that is made sense of . What is made sense of is a concept that is false isn't it . Your saying that your realization was beyond words but yet you have made perfect sense of beyond words and made it out to be True in words . You said yourself that your theory isn't fully logical, so it can't be fully Truthful can it . I am simply relaying your own rule book back by you and you seem very reluctant to follow your own rules . If your just going to ignore what I am saying and suggesting by telling me to self enquire, please don't . If you listen to what I have said you will know that I have had a realization beyond mind and guess what .. there is no thought that the mind and the world and all concepts are false . Perhaps there is some mindful realization that you had that revealed something else mindful to you .. I don't require that realization to know that if it's mindful then it's in someway false by your reckoning . You don't prescribe to beyond self and beyond mind so your reference you talk about must be mindful which is what I have suggested many times . When mindful realizations occur it can lead to no end of confusion because one hasn't had the comparison like said a 100 times . That's why some peeps think that the selfhood is an illusion because they have experienced something different of the mind that is self related, they can and have even thought they have lost self .The separate, volitional self is an illusion because oneness is the case. Yes, it is referenced to a realization. No, it is not logical. Yes, this is a pointer. Some perceive the individual self that is not separate as being illusory in regards to their being no self present at all . That is why you have dream characters presented and not real life peeps. One can see their own sense of self individuality without shooting up a warning flare of separation . Peeps can think they have lost self even when self is present . These as explained are mindful realizations and confusion can reign because they have no comparison for no self . This is why you have peeps running about thinking no one is here . If there was S.R. had and a knowing of the mind of self's absence, one would not conclude that, nor would they suggest that their presence is in some way illusory.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Nov 22, 2019 4:04:54 GMT -5
This is why you have peeps running about thinking no one is here . All you have to do is ask them, who thinks there is no one here? If they say no one, don't ask any more questions. 😀
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 22, 2019 4:44:17 GMT -5
This is why you have peeps running about thinking no one is here . All you have to do is ask them, who thinks there is no one here? If they say no one, don't ask any more questions. 😀 Haha, well perhaps that is one of many good options, for myself I like to get to the heart of their realization to that effect but alas round and round we go in some kinda bermuda triangle type of weirdness never getting a straight answer to anything or getting an answer that reflects their foundation .. Very odd indeed . I definitely don't have as much patience for these types nowadays, I will give it a go for a short while but it becomes evident pretty quickly who is in denial, lying or simply utterly confused by their own model and beliefs ..
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Nov 22, 2019 6:34:57 GMT -5
This is why you have peeps running about thinking no one is here . All you have to do is ask them, who thinks there is no one here? If they say no one, don't ask any more questions. 😀 So, are you saying that thinking requires a separate entity (as in “I think, therefore I am”), that sometimes there is an entity and sometimes not, or that there is someone? Just thought to ask since we’re discussing snakes, ropes, and, dare I say, perhaps some newly crea-perceived snapes and rokes.
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Nov 22, 2019 7:56:37 GMT -5
To help avoid confusing it with Sports Illustrated. "Enquiry vs Inquiry These days, the two terms are often used interchangeably. However, there is a difference between the two. Enquiry means to ask a question, and inquiry is a formal investigation. Yet another difference lies in the etymological source of the prefixes ‘en’ and ‘in’. ‘En’ comes from French, and ‘in’ from Latin. Inquiry has a formal and official ring to it, while enquiry is informal in its connotation." Read more: Difference Between Enquiry and Inquiry | Difference Between www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-enquiry-and-inquiry/#ixzz65xqLjyCAWhen referring to Ramana's teachings both Godman and James use "enquiry." Two wrongs don't make a right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2019 8:54:58 GMT -5
Not that you would care, but if you read Godman, Michael James or Sifty's book, you'll find they describe a process that is pretty specific and very different from what you write above. I make no claim about SR, but I have studied SE quite extensively. What you describe is not what Ramana speaks of. You are describing a form of self reckoning, which I think is valuable and others on this site might as well, but it is not what Ramana had in mind. Reefs and Laffy make a distinction between awakening and realizarion. They would describe your experience as awakening, I think. All I know is that I enquired into self within heart and mind to get to that which I am that was the cause of sufferings. In essence it is an enquiry into who Am I that suffers. It doesn't matter really what the concern or interest is, what matters is there is an enquiry into who AM I . That IS S.E. Every enquiry starts with the sense of self had otherwise one would not enquire into I AM while trying to blot out the world lol . The Self realized doesn't need a mantra or a self practice into Self .. All I know is that after the initial thought to self enquire was made the inner process took a form of it's own and within the peeling back of the layers and within the healing of self, S.R. was in hindsight inevitable. I didn't enquire to S.R. I didn't know what was mean't by S.R. all I knew was that I had to go into solitude and meditate .. it took 8 years of enquiring before it happened .. In my eyes having simply a focus on I AM without self healing through the heart is missing something .. and I believe I have heard Ramana say about there are some that S.R. without the practice and the self effort but this is because the work has already been done. So in my eyes don't think for a second you can carry around all ya krap and then simply focus on I AM cos the sun aint gonna shine anytime soon. All peeps are doing is covering over the cracks and brushing the krap under the carpet, it's a sense of denial while trying to transcend the krap into Self. In regards to awakening and S.R. I know the difference between the two and you can't have S.R. without awakening to some degree first. Even the thought to find a master or self enquire is an awakening .. My awakening happened when I wanted to heal the world while I was suffering within and I know what the enquiry involves and what can be experienced within the journey, I also know that awakening has now't to do with transcending this mindful world .. in such a way where there is no mistaking one for the other . I think you have the wrong end of the stick in regards to what I have been saying, what I experienced and realized .. but your in good company because there isn't many that know what I am talking about lol .. How can beyond the mindful world be associated with an awakening of sorts? Makes no sense to me . Don't have a problem with your awakening or realization. And in some instances I agree that some use the Self/self aka dream model as Watts described as another hiding place for the ego. I'm just stating that Ramana describes a specific process that he names atma vichara, translated as self enquiry, self inquiry, self abidance, even self remembrance. And yes Ramana talks about the removal of asanas(krap) being part of a "progressive" process, but this is different than self-enquiry which he maintains is direct. Ramana, I believe, did not maintain this as the only path, though some debate this.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 22, 2019 9:25:08 GMT -5
When referring to Ramana's teachings both Godman and James use "enquiry." Two wrongs don't make a right. Haha! So true. I glanced through several books about Ramana, and both spellings were used. Mahadevan used "inquiry" whereas Osbourne used "enquiry," but if SE is commonly used here, I guess that's what matters.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 22, 2019 10:31:02 GMT -5
I'm just stating that Ramana describes a specific process that he names atma vichara, translated as self enquiry, self inquiry, self abidance, even self remembrance. And yes Ramana talks about the removal of asanas(krap) being part of a "progressive" process, but this is different than self-enquiry which he maintains is direct. Ramana, I believe, did not maintain this as the only path, though some debate this. Yup. Actually in Ramana’s model self-inquiry does burn vasanas like crazy, in fact, though a seeker who is interested in inquiry tends to already have some degree of purity. Also the other path for Ramana is surrender. And these are two sides of a coin.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 22, 2019 10:42:32 GMT -5
All I know is that I enquired into self within heart and mind to get to that which I am that was the cause of sufferings. In essence it is an enquiry into who Am I that suffers. It doesn't matter really what the concern or interest is, what matters is there is an enquiry into who AM I . That IS S.E. Every enquiry starts with the sense of self had otherwise one would not enquire into I AM while trying to blot out the world lol . The Self realized doesn't need a mantra or a self practice into Self .. All I know is that after the initial thought to self enquire was made the inner process took a form of it's own and within the peeling back of the layers and within the healing of self, S.R. was in hindsight inevitable. I didn't enquire to S.R. I didn't know what was mean't by S.R. all I knew was that I had to go into solitude and meditate .. it took 8 years of enquiring before it happened .. In my eyes having simply a focus on I AM without self healing through the heart is missing something .. and I believe I have heard Ramana say about there are some that S.R. without the practice and the self effort but this is because the work has already been done. So in my eyes don't think for a second you can carry around all ya krap and then simply focus on I AM cos the sun aint gonna shine anytime soon. All peeps are doing is covering over the cracks and brushing the krap under the carpet, it's a sense of denial while trying to transcend the krap into Self. In regards to awakening and S.R. I know the difference between the two and you can't have S.R. without awakening to some degree first. Even the thought to find a master or self enquire is an awakening .. My awakening happened when I wanted to heal the world while I was suffering within and I know what the enquiry involves and what can be experienced within the journey, I also know that awakening has now't to do with transcending this mindful world .. in such a way where there is no mistaking one for the other . I think you have the wrong end of the stick in regards to what I have been saying, what I experienced and realized .. but your in good company because there isn't many that know what I am talking about lol .. How can beyond the mindful world be associated with an awakening of sorts? Makes no sense to me . Don't have a problem with your awakening or realization. And in some instances I agree that some use the Self/self aka dream model as Watts described as another hiding place for the ego. I'm just stating that Ramana describes a specific process that he names atma vichara, translated as self enquiry, self inquiry, self abidance, even self remembrance. And yes Ramana talks about the removal of asanas(krap) being part of a "progressive" process, but this is different than self-enquiry which he maintains is direct. Ramana, I believe, did not maintain this as the only path, though some debate this. I am sure Ramana made his own way to rome just like everyone else and if we relate to their being the work already done then there isn't much asanas to burn off so to speak, it really does depend on where you are at within yourself at the point of enquiring. Some can enquire and not get far because they are still stuck in a loop of self denial somewhere down the line or are stuck in some rigid belief pattern in some way where it hinders the process. I do see self abidance as part of my process as said there wasn't the continuous thought to self heal or to self purify nor was there the constant mantra of who am I, who am I .. the process took care of it's self, one session perhaps was silent, the next there was tears, the next another emotion that arises . Perhaps some think that there is a constant stern focused thought pattern on I AM and one put's aside anything that comes to surface, but that would be in some respect suppressing or toadally ignoring what is relevant that needs to be addressed or at the very least acknowledged . I also see the process as self remembering too, this is why one self enquires, to remember what you are and when the layers are peeled back a little more awareness of that comes to the fore ..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 22, 2019 10:48:16 GMT -5
The separate, volitional self is an illusion because oneness is the case. Yes, it is referenced to a realization. No, it is not logical. Yes, this is a pointer. Some perceive the individual self that is not separate as being illusory in regards to their being no self present at all . That is why you have dream characters presented and not real life peeps.One can see their own sense of self individuality without shooting up a warning flare of separation . Peeps can think they have lost self even when self is present . These as explained are mindful realizations and confusion can reign because they have no comparison for no self . This is why you have peeps running about thinking no one is here . If there was S.R. had and a knowing of the mind of self's absence, one would not conclude that, nor would they suggest that their presence is in some way illusory. It depends on what you mean by self. If you mean a separate, volitional person, then no, there is no self. If you mean an appearance in/as what you are (a kind of dream occurring in what you are) then you can say there is a self. To say it's a kind of dream in Consciousness doesn't address the idea of 'real life' because they are in different contexts. In the context of Consciousness being all there is, real and unreal lose their meaning, as do life and death.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 22, 2019 11:27:55 GMT -5
Don't have a problem with your awakening or realization. And in some instances I agree that some use the Self/self aka dream model as Watts described as another hiding place for the ego. I'm just stating that Ramana describes a specific process that he names atma vichara, translated as self enquiry, self inquiry, self abidance, even self remembrance. And yes Ramana talks about the removal of asanas(krap) being part of a "progressive" process, but this is different than self-enquiry which he maintains is direct. Ramana, I believe, did not maintain this as the only path, though some debate this. I am sure Ramana made his own way to rome just like everyone else and if we relate to their being the work already done then there isn't much asanas to burn off so to speak, it really does depend on where you are at within yourself at the point of enquiring. Some can enquire and not get far because they are still stuck in a loop of self denial somewhere down the line or are stuck in some rigid belief pattern in some way where it hinders the process. I do see self abidance as part of my process as said there wasn't the continuous thought to self heal or to self purify nor was there the constant mantra of who am I, who am I .. the process took care of it's self, one session perhaps was silent, the next there was tears, the next another emotion that arises . Perhaps some think that there is a constant stern focused thought pattern on I AM and one put's aside anything that comes to surface, but that would be in some respect suppressing or toadally ignoring what is relevant that needs to be addressed or at the very least acknowledged . I also see the process as self remembering too, this is why one self enquires, to remember what you are and when the layers are peeled back a little more awareness of that comes to the fore ..Do you really think something has been forgotten, or is 'remembering' being used metaphorically?
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Nov 22, 2019 12:14:34 GMT -5
Two wrongs don't make a right. Haha! So true. I glanced through several books about Ramana, and both spellings were used. Mahadevan used "inquiry" whereas Osbourne used "enquiry," but if SE is commonly used here, I guess that's what matters. Well, the point(er) is that ultimately there's nothing substantial to enqiure about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2019 14:10:44 GMT -5
Two wrongs don't make a right. Haha! So true. I glanced through several books about Ramana, and both spellings were used. Mahadevan used "inquiry" whereas Osbourne used "enquiry," but if SE is commonly used here, I guess that's what matters. Not commonly used here. I just got lazy and since I've been reading Michael James lately and he uses self-enquiry, though he prefers self-remembrance, the "e" version stuck in my head.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 22, 2019 15:09:23 GMT -5
I am sure Ramana made his own way to rome just like everyone else and if we relate to their being the work already done then there isn't much asanas to burn off so to speak, it really does depend on where you are at within yourself at the point of enquiring. Some can enquire and not get far because they are still stuck in a loop of self denial somewhere down the line or are stuck in some rigid belief pattern in some way where it hinders the process. I do see self abidance as part of my process as said there wasn't the continuous thought to self heal or to self purify nor was there the constant mantra of who am I, who am I .. the process took care of it's self, one session perhaps was silent, the next there was tears, the next another emotion that arises . Perhaps some think that there is a constant stern focused thought pattern on I AM and one put's aside anything that comes to surface, but that would be in some respect suppressing or toadally ignoring what is relevant that needs to be addressed or at the very least acknowledged . I also see the process as self remembering too, this is why one self enquires, to remember what you are and when the layers are peeled back a little more awareness of that comes to the fore ..Do you really think something has been forgotten, or is 'remembering' being used metaphorically? I saw this posted somewhere a few years ago and again just recently .. God is love. And Love must love. And to love there must be a Beloved. But since God is Existence infinite and eternal there is no one for Him to love but Himself. And in order to love Himself, He must imagine Himself as the Beloved whom He as the lover imagines He loves. Beloved and lover implies separation. And separation creates longing; and longing causes search. And the wider and the more intense the search, the greater the separation and the more terrible the longing. When longing is at its most intense, separation is complete, and the purpose of separation, which was that love might experience itself as lover and Beloved, is fulfilled; and union follows. And when union is attained, the lover knows that he himself was all along the Beloved, whom he loved and desired union with; and that all the impossible situations that he overcame were obstacles which he himself had placed in the path to himself. To attain union is so impossibly difficult because it is impossible to become what you already are!Meher BabaIn the same breath it's in a way difficult to remember what you already are and already know on some level .. For some reason the physical experience for many has a veil of forgetfulness that comes with each lifetime .. I understand why because otherwise it's like watching a movie with knowing the ending before it ends .
|
|