Best of "Be As You Are" (Ramana)

[Reefs]

David Godman has created an excellent collection of quotes from Ramana in his book Be As You Are, which you can find here:

archive.org/details/beasyouaretheteachingsoframanamaharshidavidgodman1985_202004_344_i/mode/1up


An edited audio version can be found here (thanks to zazeniac):

www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8kQeddP69fTonmOh4lY17RoDhptK6pLZ

[Reefs]

Self-realization & Liberation

RM: The state of Self-realization, as we call it, is not attaining something new or reaching some goal which is far away, but simply being that which you always are and which you always have been. All that is needed is that you give up your realization of not-true as true. All of us are regarding as real that which is not real. We have only to give up this practice on our part. Then we shall realize the Self as Self; in other words, ‘Be the Self’. At one stage you will laugh at yourself for trying to discover the Self which is so self-evident.

If we talk about knowing the Self, there must be two selves, one a knowing self, another the self which is known, and the process of knowing. The state we call realization is simply being oneself, not knowing anything or becoming anything. If one has realized, one is that which alone is and which alone has always been. One cannot describe that state. One can only be that. Of course, we loosely talk of Self-realization, for want of a better term. How to ‘real-ize’ or make real that which alone is real?

[Therefore,] it is false to speak of realization. What is there to realize? The real is as it is always. We are not creating anything new or achieving something which we did not have before.

[And so] liberation is our very nature. We are that. The very fact that we wish for liberation shows that freedom from bondage is our real nature. It is not to be freshly acquired. All that is necessary is to get rid of the false notion that we are bound. When we achieve that, there will be no desire or thought of any sort. So long as one desires liberation, so long, you may take it, one is in bondage.

[park]

Is RM referring to flow or to some woo-woo experience of Self?
I sometimes get into flow and think (later) that I was "being that which you always are and which you always have been" ie. just being myself spontaneously. In flow, things seem to be light and good and I am not missing anything.
But that ain't a woo-woo realization of Self, which I think he is pointing to, but may be wrong.

[inavalan]

I like to occasionally ponder on a Ramana quote, and I often interpret it differently than others do.

We often look at things from the opposite point of view. It is like with the belief that the Sun moves above the Earth because it looks that way, that's our direct experience.

For exemple, doctors say "lose weight to get healthier", so you set your goal for a healthy weight, and try all the peddled gimmicks, mostly without success. In my case, the "realization" was that the focus needs to be on health and not on weight, on the better and more constructive goal for me. You can reach the "ideal" weight and not be healthy, but if you are healthy implicitly you have a healthy weight.

It seems the same with this much coveted, disputed, claimed "self-realization". Ramana says that it means to be what you are, to "give up your realization of not-true as true". This leads to the goal of getting self-realized, and when you believe you got it,  to feel that your quest is over.

Your quest is to remember who you are, and when you remembered you're done?

You have to look from the Sun's point of view, from the health's point if view. The goal should be not to remember / realize who / what "you are", that is different from what "you seem" to be here. The goal should be, and it is for whatever "you are" to not forget what it is, and to not get hypnotized into believing that it is what "you seem" to be here. It is a different set of mind, a different focus, with a different result, which is not the end of quests.

The goal isn't for this you-state to get self-realized, but for that you-state to stay lucid when drifts into this you-state for whatever reasons it does.

Maybe in this case it isn't about my different interpretation of Ramana's words, but having a different view than his.

[Reefs]

Jan 24, 2024 15:18:46 GMT -5 park said:

Is RM referring to flow or to some woo-woo experience of Self?
I sometimes get into flow and think (later) that I was "being that which you always are and which you always have been" ie. just being myself spontaneously. In flow, things seem to be light and good and I am not missing anything.
But that ain't a woo-woo realization of Self, which I think he is pointing to, but may be wrong.

No, not flow. Flow is still the relative realm, i.e. conditional (flow requires focus). Ramana points to the absolute realm, i.e. unconditional, just being, akak wu-wei (spontaneous living). Sometimes that is called 'deep flow' or the natural state.

[Reefs]

Jan 24, 2024 15:34:23 GMT -5 inavalan said:

I like to occasionally ponder on a Ramana quote, and I often interpret it differently than others do.

We often look at things from the opposite point of view. It is like with the belief that the Sun moves above the Earth because it looks that way, that's our direct experience.

For exemple, doctors say "lose weight to get healthier", so you set your goal for a healthy weight, and try all the peddled gimmicks, mostly without success. In my case, the "realization" was that the focus needs to be on health and not on weight, on the better and more constructive goal for me. You can reach the "ideal" weight and not be healthy, but if you are healthy implicitly you have a healthy weight.

It seems the same with this much coveted, disputed, claimed "self-realization". Ramana says that it means to be what you are, to "give up your realization of not-true as true". This leads to the goal of getting self-realized, and when you believe you got it,  to feel that your quest is over.

Your quest is to remember who you are, and when you remembered you're done?

You have to look from the Sun's point of view, from the health's point if view. The goal should be not to remember / realize who / what "you are", that is different from what "you seem" to be here. The goal should be, and it is for whatever "you are" to not forget what it is, and to not get hypnotized into believing that it is what "you seem" to be here. It is a different set of mind, a different focus, with a different result, which is not the end of quests.

The goal isn't for this you-state to get self-realized, but for that you-state to stay lucid when drifts into this you-state for whatever reasons it does.

Maybe in this case it isn't about my different interpretation of Ramana's words, but having a different view than his.

No. That would still be relative living. The 'goal' is absolute living. Not remembering (duality, subject/object), but just being (non-duality, no subject/object)...

RM: You are awareness. Since you are awareness there is no need to attain or cultivate it. All you need to do is to give up being aware of other things, that is of the not-Self. If one gives up being aware of them then pure awareness alone remains, and that is the Self.

There is no duality. Your present knowledge is due to ego and is only relative. Relative knowledge requires a subject and an object, whereas the awareness of the Self is absolute and requires no object.

Remembrance also is similarly relative, requiring an object to be remembered and a subject to remember. When there is no duality, who is to remember whom?

That's pure TAV, btw.

[park]

Jan 24, 2024 20:28:02 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Jan 24, 2024 15:18:46 GMT -5 park said:

Is RM referring to flow or to some woo-woo experience of Self?
I sometimes get into flow and think (later) that I was "being that which you always are and which you always have been" ie. just being myself spontaneously. In flow, things seem to be light and good and I am not missing anything.
But that ain't a woo-woo realization of Self, which I think he is pointing to, but may be wrong.

No, not flow. Flow is still the relative realm, i.e. conditional (flow requires focus). Ramana points to the absolute realm, i.e. unconditional, just being, akak wu-wei (spontaneous living). Sometimes that is called 'deep flow' or the natural state.

Hmm... can you elaborate more on the distinction between what you see as flow and deep flow?

And could you define "absolute realm" and "unconditional"? Seems to me these are Big Words which I historically normally associated with woo-woo experiences. But here you are apparently using them lightly in the context of (what I would call) "ordinary flow".

Seems to me flow is flow and there is no need for two depths of flow. When I am in flow, sure, focusing on this or that still happens, since focusing is a normal part of mind/attention, but as everything else, it happens spontaneously and naturally. "Could you please hold this plate for a minute?", "sure" (focuses on hands and plate to be able to hold it). When I am in flow, it's more like something is missing - and that's the self-referential "stickiness" of thought - I am more like a feather in a breeze and marvelling at how things are simple, direct, light, and unconfused. Then a sticky-thought is believed, negative emotion arises, and I back in monkey mind.

[Reefs]

Jan 25, 2024 1:37:27 GMT -5 park said:

Jan 24, 2024 20:28:02 GMT -5 Reefs said:

No, not flow. Flow is still the relative realm, i.e. conditional (flow requires focus). Ramana points to the absolute realm, i.e. unconditional, just being, akak wu-wei (spontaneous living). Sometimes that is called 'deep flow' or the natural state.

Hmm... can you elaborate more on the distinction between what you see as flow and deep flow?

And could you define "absolute realm" and "unconditional"? Seems to me these are Big Words which I historically normally associated with woo-woo experiences. But here you are apparently using them lightly in the context of (what I would call) "ordinary flow".

Seems to me flow is flow and there is no need for two depths of flow. When I am in flow, sure, focusing on this or that still happens, since focusing is a normal part of mind/attention, but as everything else, it happens spontaneously and naturally. "Could you please hold this plate for a minute?", "sure" (focuses on hands and plate to be able to hold it). When I am in flow, it's more like something is missing - and that's the self-referential "stickiness" of thought - I am more like a feather in a breeze and marvelling at how things are simple, direct, light, and unconfused. Then a sticky-thought is believed, negative emotion arises, and I back in monkey mind.

Flow is a concept that comes from psychology. It has been originally applied to activities. Flow happens when the challenge you face matches your skill level. When the challenge exceeds your skill level, you will be in a state of anxiety. When the challenge is below your skill level, you will be in a state of boredom. That's why the original book on Flow had the subtitle "beyond boredom and anxiety". If you know this, then you can create flow states at will. It's just a matter of right choice and right focus. That's why it is conditional. It also belongs into the personal realm, because there a goal and a doer and also clear feedback.

Now, deep flow is different. Deep flow happens spontaneously and there is a sudden loss of any sense of doership, self, time and space. It's just pure impersonal functioning in the NOW. And that's basically what is called wu-wei, or spontaneous living. It is unconditional because it does not depend on focus, skill level etc. So it cannot be created at will, it just happens. It is actually your natural state, so there is no way that you could ever make that happen, because it just is. 

[Reefs]

Mind, the witness & Self

RM: The idea of the Self being the witness is only in the mind; it is not the absolute truth of the Self. Witnessing is relative to objects witnessed. Both the witness and his object are mental creations.

There is no difference [between mind and the Self]. The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world. Cotton made into various clothes we call by various names. Gold made into various ornaments, we call by various names. But all the clothes are cotton and all the ornaments are gold. The one is real, the many are mere names and forms. But the mind does not exist apart from the Self, that is, it has no independent existence. The Self exists without the mind, never the mind without the Self.

[laughter]

Jan 27, 2024 3:01:16 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Mind, the witness & Self

RM: The idea of the Self being the witness is only in the mind; it is not the absolute truth of the Self. Witnessing is relative to objects witnessed. Both the witness and his object are mental creations.

There is no difference [between mind and the Self]. The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world. Cotton made into various clothes we call by various names. Gold made into various ornaments, we call by various names. But all the clothes are cotton and all the ornaments are gold. The one is real, the many are mere names and forms. But the mind does not exist apart from the Self, that is, it has no independent existence. The Self exists without the mind, never the mind without the Self.

It's hard for a stoic to let go of the benefits!

[Reefs]

Everything in moderation

RM: Fasting should be chiefly mental [abstention from thoughts]. Mere abstinence from food will do no good, it will even upset the mind.

In the early days after my coming here, I had my eyes closed and I was so deeply absorbed in meditation that I hardly knew whether it was day or night. I had no food and no sleep. When there is movement in the body, you need food. If you have food, you need sleep. If there is no movement, you do not need sleep. Very little food is enough to sustain life. That used to be my experience. Somebody or other used to offer me a tumblerful of some liquid diet whenever I opened my eyes. That was all I ever ate. But remember one thing: except when one is absorbed in a state where the mind is motionless, it is not possible to give up sleep or food altogether. When the body and mind are engaged in the ordinary pursuits of life, the body reels if you give up food and sleep.

It amounts to this, that sleep and food should not be taken in excess. If you want to cut off either of them completely, your mind will always be directed towards them. Therefore, the sadhaka [spiritual seeker] should do everything in moderation.

[Reefs]

Solitude and Renunciation

RM: Solitude is in the mind of man. One might be in the thick of the world and maintain serenity of mind. Such a one is in solitude. Another may stay in a forest, but still be unable to control his mind. Such a man cannot be said to be in solitude. Solitude is a function of the mind. A man attached to desires cannot get solitude wherever he may be, whereas a detached man is always in solitude.

Renunciation is always in the mind, not in going to forests or solitary places or giving up one's duties. The main thing is to see that the mind does not turn outward but inward.

It is no help to change the environment. The one obstacle is the mind and it must be overcome whether in the home or in the forest. If you can do it in the forest, why not in the home? Therefore, why change the environment? Your efforts can be made even now, whatever the environment.

Work performed with attachment is a shackle, whereas work performed with detachment does not affect the doer. One who works like this is, even while working, in solitude.

[Reefs]

Samadhi (David Godman's version)

The word samadhi is widely used in eastern spiritual literature to denote an advanced stage of meditation in which there is a conscious experience of the Self or an intense undisturbed absorption in the object of meditation. Many gradations and sub-divisions of samadhi have been described, with different schools and religions each tending to produce their own distinctive categories and terminology.

The classification generally used by Sri Ramana divides the various samadhis into the following three-fold division:

1) Sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi: This is the state of the jnani who has finally and irrevocably eliminated his ego. Sahaja means ‘natural' and nirvikalpa means ‘no differences’. A jnani in this state is able to function naturally in the world, just as any ordinary person does. Knowing that he is the Self, the sahaja jnani sees no difference between himself and others and no difference between himself and the world. For such a person, everything is a manifestation of the indivisible Self.

2) Kevala nirvikalpa samadhi: This is the stage below Self-realisation. In this state there is a temporary but effortless Self-awareness, but the ego has not been finally eliminated. It is characterised by an absence of body-consciousness. Although one has a temporary awareness of the Self in this state, one is not able to perceive sensory information or function in the world. When body-consciousness returns, the ego reappears.

3) Savikalpa samadhi: In this state Self-awareness is maintained by constant effort. The continuity of the samadhi is wholly dependent on the effort put in to maintain it. When Self-attention wavers, Self-awareness is obscured.


David Godman, Be As You Are: The Teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi, Chapter 14

[Reefs]

Samadhi (Ramana's version) (1)

RM: Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either savikalpa or nirvikalpa, is sahaja [the natural state].

What does it then matter whether the body-consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

In yoga the term samadhi refers to some kind of trance and there are various kinds of samadhi. But the samadhi I speak of is different. It is sahaja samadhi. From here you have samadhana [steadiness] and you remain calm and composed even while you are active. You realise that you are moved by the deeper real Self within. You have no worries, no anxieties, no cares, for you come to realise that there is nothing belonging to you. You know that everything is done by something with which you are in conscious union.

The nirvikalpa samadhi of raja yoga may have its use. But in jnana yoga this sahaja sthiti [natural state] or sahaja nishtha [abidance in the natural state] itself is the nirvikalpa state. In this natural state the mind is free from doubts. It has no need to swing between alternatives of possibilities and probabilities. It sees no vikalpas [differences] of any kind. It is sure of the truth because it feels the presence of the real. Even when it is active, it knows it is active in the reality, the Self, the supreme being.

[Reefs]

Samadhi (Ramana's version) (2)

RM: One who accustoms himself naturally to meditation and enjoys the bliss of meditation will not lose his samadhi state whatever external work he does, whatever thoughts may come to him. That is sahaja nirvikalpa.

Sahaja nirvikalpa is nasa [total destruction of the mind] whereas kevala nirvikalpa is laya [temporary abeyance of the mind].

Those who are in the laya samadhi state will have to bring the mind back under control from time to time. If the mind is destroyed, as it is in sahaja samadhi, it will never sprout again. Whatever is done by such people is just incidental, they will never slide down from their high state.

Those that are in the kevala nirvikalpa state are not realised, they are still seekers. Those who are in the sahaja nirvikalpa state are like a light in a windless place, or the ocean without waves; that is, there is no movement in them. They cannot find anything which is different from themselves. For those who do not reach that state, everything appears to be different from themselves.

People have all sorts of notions about nirvikalpa… Some yogis by breathing exercises allow themselves to fall into a cataleptic state far deeper than dreamless sleep, in which they are aware of nothing, absolutely nothing, and they glorify it as nirvikalpa. Some others think that once you dip into nirvikalpa you become an altogether different being. Still others take nirvikalpa to be attainable only through a trance in which the world-consciousness is totally obliterated, as in a fainting fit. All this is due to their viewing it intellectually.

Mere non-perception of the differences [vikalpas] outside is not the real nature of firm nirvikalpa. Know that the non-rising of differences [vikalpas] in the dead mind alone is the true nirvikalpa.