|
Post by satchitananda on Dec 29, 2019 22:26:03 GMT -5
Yes. I am not Ramana so I have a continuous stream of self (little s) referential thoughts. But here's Ramana's take on this. Now understand that Self cannot be referenced then it is an object. One can only be Self and that is even not completely accurate. ZD is right. Silence is best. From Godman's "Be As You Are?"... Q: You sometimes say the Self is silence. Why is this? A: For those who live in Self as the beauty devoid of thought, there is nothing which should be thought of. That which should be adhered to is only the experience of silence, because in that supreme state nothing exists to be attained other than oneself. Q: What is mouna [silence]? A: That state which transcends speech and thought is mouna. That which is, is mouna. How can mouna be explained in words? Sages say that the state in which the thought āIā [the ego] does not rise even in the least, alone is Self [swarupa] which is silence [mouna]. That silent Self alone is God; Self alone is the jiva [individual soul]. Self alone is this ancient world. All other knowledges are only petty and trivial knowledges; the experience of silence alone is the real and perfect knowledge. Know that the many objective differences are not real but are mere superimpositions on Self, which is the form of true knowledge. I have my own understandings of Self that is beyond thought and beyond mind and beyond references, but we are not talking about Self in this way . You see where it is said that there is nothing which should be thought of ' That which should be adhered to is only the experience of silence' . There is a reference of silence isn't there . When you shop for milk without thinking you still see milk don't you . Ramana still see's milk, but there are states of mind where there is no thought of milk . The main problem as I have seen it Z is the total lack of peeps keeping the context true and present . When you look in your fridge and notice that there is no milk, I don't care if it is you or Ramana for if you notice there is the need for milk, there is a self reference for milk that is needed . If we keep within context there will be total agreement between you and I . You don't go shopping for milk and when you get to the shops you say you don't see it as milk .. The reason being because the reference is already there and there is a response and an action to that acknowledgement . There is only one course of action from the initial self reference had . The statement .. That silent Self alone is God .. is another reference isn't it . How can there be the notion presented as that without a self referential thought being present . Peeps can't say anything about anything unless there is a reference for it . Do you understand this? They obviously don't because this is a spirituality forum and peeps want to shift everything to the absolute realm and ignore the relative. I like the story of when someone complained to Papaji that he was living in a house and his next door neighbour was making a racket in the middle of the night. He asked Papaji what he should do. Should he be at one with the noise. Should he realize that the noise was not real that it was just an illusion. Papaji turned to him and said, "move to a quieter house". Papaji didn't say this is an existential problem that needs an existential answer. He didn't resort to the kind of mystical ramblings that zendancer always engages in. He recognized it was something in the relative for which this guy had a self reference. Papaji also had a self reference because he recognized the problem and the solution was found on that level. Zendancer might not see the milk but I'm sure that Ramana saw all the vegetables that he helped to chop up when he went to the kitchen at 4 am every morning and incidentally used a lot of what was happening in the kitchen as stories and analogies for deeper spiritual teachings, but he knew he was cutting up carrots with a knife in his hand for which he had a self-reference.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 29, 2019 23:32:48 GMT -5
Maybe ST should be titled "prickly judgmental arrogant ad hominem-oriented squabbling sages" rather than just "squabbling sages?" LOL. Respect seems to be in exceedingly short supply these days, so perhaps its best to seek venues with a little less stone throwing. Best wishes to all for a happy and prosperous new year.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 1:09:15 GMT -5
Maybe ST should be titled "prickly judgmental arrogant ad hominem-oriented squabbling sages" rather than just "squabbling sages?" LOL. Respect seems to be in exceedingly short supply these days, so perhaps its best to seek venues with a little less stone throwing. Best wishes to all for a happy and prosperous new year. Happy new year ZD.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 4:26:24 GMT -5
Maybe ST should be titled "prickly judgmental arrogant ad hominem-oriented squabbling sages" rather than just "squabbling sages?" LOL. Respect seems to be in exceedingly short supply these days, so perhaps its best to seek venues with a little less stone throwing. Best wishes to all for a happy and prosperous new year. Happy New Year Zendancer!
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 30, 2019 4:29:36 GMT -5
Peeps can't say anything about anything unless there is a reference for it . Do you understand this? And do you understand that the underlined is generally called a personal reference? Continually calling a personal reference a 'self-referential thought' and then complaining that there isn't anyone that can answer your question is why there is probably at least another 4 to 6 years in this. That's it in a nutshell.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 30, 2019 4:33:02 GMT -5
They obviously don't because this is a spirituality forum and peeps want to shift everything to the absolute realm and ignore the relative. I like the story of when someone complained to Papaji that he was living in a house and his next door neighbour was making a racket in the middle of the night. He asked Papaji what he should do. Should he be at one with the noise. Should he realize that the noise was not real that it was just an illusion. Papaji turned to him and said, "move to a quieter house". Papaji didn't say this is an existential problem that needs an existential answer. He didn't resort to the kind of mystical ramblings that zendancer always engages in. He recognized it was something in the relative for which this guy had a self reference. Papaji also had a self reference because he recognized the problem and the solution was found on that level. Zendancer might not see the milk but I'm sure that Ramana saw all the vegetables that he helped to chop up when he went to the kitchen at 4 am every morning and incidentally used a lot of what was happening in the kitchen as stories and analogies for deeper spiritual teachings, but he knew he was cutting up carrots with a knife in his hand for which he had a self-reference. I'm curious Satch, why do think Ramakrishna bowed before untouchables and kissed the feet of prostitutes? Was it A) because when he looked at the other he saw untouchables and prostitutes or B) because when he looked at the other all he could see was God?
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Dec 30, 2019 5:50:06 GMT -5
I'm curious Satch, why do think Ramakrishna bowed before untouchables and kissed the feet of prostitutes? Was it A) because when he looked at the other he saw untouchables and prostitutes or B) because when he looked at the other all he could see was God? Neither. It was C) to show that everyone was worthy. That a sinner could become a saint.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 30, 2019 5:55:04 GMT -5
And do you understand that the underlined is generally called a personal reference? Continually calling a personal reference a 'self-referential thought' and then complaining that there isn't anyone that can answer your question is why there is probably at least another 4 to 6 years in this. That's it in a nutshell. Giraffe .. When or where have I said that a personal reference cannot be a self reference? My whole premise is that one can relate to anything that one wishes to associate themselves being .. In my reference here there was a personal one . When you said in a nutshell in response to another Giraffe by Sharon you said what you did from what perspective? From what reference? A giraffe? a buffalo? a frog? I am not expecting an answer because that isn't the norm around here . I have pointed out a few giraffes of late, but for some reason depending on what side of the fence one stands the giraffe will be dealt with or not . Double standards here and perhaps has always been depending on whose on your tag team or not .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 5:59:34 GMT -5
Giraffe .. When or where have I said that a personal reference cannot be a self reference?My whole premise is that one can relate to anything that one wishes to associate themselves being .. In my reference here there was a personal one . When you said in a nutshell in response to another Giraffe by Sharon you said what you did from what perspective? From what reference? A giraffe? a buffalo? a frog? I am not expecting an answer because that isn't the norm around here . I have pointed out a few giraffes of late, but for some reason depending on what side of the fence one stands the giraffe will be dealt with or not . Double standards here and perhaps has always been depending on whose on your tag team or not . spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/468464
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 30, 2019 6:02:04 GMT -5
I have my own understandings of Self that is beyond thought and beyond mind and beyond references, but we are not talking about Self in this way . You see where it is said that there is nothing which should be thought of ' That which should be adhered to is only the experience of silence' . There is a reference of silence isn't there . When you shop for milk without thinking you still see milk don't you . Ramana still see's milk, but there are states of mind where there is no thought of milk . The main problem as I have seen it Z is the total lack of peeps keeping the context true and present . When you look in your fridge and notice that there is no milk, I don't care if it is you or Ramana for if you notice there is the need for milk, there is a self reference for milk that is needed . If we keep within context there will be total agreement between you and I . You don't go shopping for milk and when you get to the shops you say you don't see it as milk .. The reason being because the reference is already there and there is a response and an action to that acknowledgement . There is only one course of action from the initial self reference had . The statement .. That silent Self alone is God .. is another reference isn't it . How can there be the notion presented as that without a self referential thought being present . Peeps can't say anything about anything unless there is a reference for it . Do you understand this? They obviously don't because this is a spirituality forum and peeps want to shift everything to the absolute realm and ignore the relative. I like the story of when someone complained to Papaji that he was living in a house and his next door neighbour was making a racket in the middle of the night. He asked Papaji what he should do. Should he be at one with the noise. Should he realize that the noise was not real that it was just an illusion. Papaji turned to him and said, "move to a quieter house". Papaji didn't say this is an existential problem that needs an existential answer. He didn't resort to the kind of mystical ramblings that zendancer always engages in. He recognized it was something in the relative for which this guy had a self reference. Papaji also had a self reference because he recognized the problem and the solution was found on that level. Zendancer might not see the milk but I'm sure that Ramana saw all the vegetables that he helped to chop up when he went to the kitchen at 4 am every morning and incidentally used a lot of what was happening in the kitchen as stories and analogies for deeper spiritual teachings, but he knew he was cutting up carrots with a knife in his hand for which he had a self-reference. Haha, I was thinking the same thing about Ramana chopping up the veggies and your right about the spiritual forum ignorance to the relative, but as always said, peeps log off from the forums and their partners or their kids perhaps ask then to do something or god forbid ask for you to go to the shops for milk or help clean up the dogs mess on the lawn .. Peeps do know what all these self references mean and imply and they work towards doing what is required . They don't stand there with a silly look on their faces not knowing of what is what and instead of going for milk they come up with a koan instead . So many denials and so much deceit going on and it doesn't resemble much of a spiritual forums at all to be honest, it's no point being topped up with book knowledge of the masters when peeps can't even be true to themselves or other's . It's a farce .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 30, 2019 6:06:41 GMT -5
Giraffe .. When or where have I said that a personal reference cannot be a self reference?My whole premise is that one can relate to anything that one wishes to associate themselves being .. In my reference here there was a personal one . When you said in a nutshell in response to another Giraffe by Sharon you said what you did from what perspective? From what reference? A giraffe? a buffalo? a frog? I am not expecting an answer because that isn't the norm around here . I have pointed out a few giraffes of late, but for some reason depending on what side of the fence one stands the giraffe will be dealt with or not . Double standards here and perhaps has always been depending on whose on your tag team or not . spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/468464No Keep within context here . My post didn't contain a personal reference . I said ''There has to be a foundational thought regarding oneself in order to sense there is a feeling of being hot ''. I didn't imply the self reference you had was a personal one, I said there has to be a foundational thought regarding oneself . Another Giraffe, butt don't worry anything goes around here because your on the right side of the fence . Your allowed to simply bite my ankles not answer questions and carry on with your crusade . I have asked you a few times to respect my wishes to not converse with me and you still don't you just post mainly to discredit me . Butt feel free to carry on, don't let what I say stop you from being your usual charming self .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 30, 2019 6:08:54 GMT -5
And do you understand that the underlined is generally called a personal reference? Continually calling a personal reference a 'self-referential thought' and then complaining that there isn't anyone that can answer your question is why there is probably at least another 4 to 6 years in this. Bingo. Nope it was giraffe .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 30, 2019 6:13:48 GMT -5
Maybe ST should be titled "prickly judgmental arrogant ad hominem-oriented squabbling sages" rather than just "squabbling sages?" LOL. Respect seems to be in exceedingly short supply these days, so perhaps its best to seek venues with a little less stone throwing. Best wishes to all for a happy and prosperous new year. Yes absolutely, it seems as if peeps can toadally ignore questions put to them and instead try and make it out to be the fault of the questioner and then have a tag team in effect in order to try and discredit the questioner even to the extent of picking fault in their spelling and make out they said things they actually hadn't . The questioner can even get their posts reported because they bore other's and have their wishes toadally ignored . Hows that for a spiritual forum . Are you not a staff member of such a spiritual forum?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 6:14:53 GMT -5
No Keep within context here . My post didn't contain a personal reference . I said ''There has to be a foundational thought regarding oneself in order to sense there is a feeling of being hot ''. I didn't imply the self reference you had was a personal one, I said there has to be a foundational thought regarding oneself . Another Giraffe, butt don't worry anything goes around here because your on the right side of the fence . Your allowed to simply bite my ankles not answer questions and carry on with your crusade . I have asked you a few times to respect my wishes to not converse with me and you still don't you just post mainly to discredit me . Butt feel free to carry on, don't let what I say stop you from being your usual charming self .Oh don't worry, I shan't.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 30, 2019 6:17:11 GMT -5
No Keep within context here . My post didn't contain a personal reference . I said ''There has to be a foundational thought regarding oneself in order to sense there is a feeling of being hot ''. I didn't imply the self reference you had was a personal one, I said there has to be a foundational thought regarding oneself . Another Giraffe, butt don't worry anything goes around here because your on the right side of the fence . Your allowed to simply bite my ankles not answer questions and carry on with your crusade . I have asked you a few times to respect my wishes to not converse with me and you still don't you just post mainly to discredit me . Butt feel free to carry on, don't let what I say stop you from being your usual charming self .Oh don't worry, I shan't. Good for you, keep doing what you do best ..
|
|