What does saying "I Am" do?

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

You probably are already aware that Ramana did explicitly state that "that which is eventually does not even say 'I AM' ".

Nisargadatta Maharaj also pointed out that the "I AM" was the gateway to the Absolute.

Well, that's pretty obvious, what Ramana said, lol, imo. But I understand to his audience...it had to be said.

What did Nisargadatta really mean? Since God said, I Am or I am that I am,
(Eheyeh* in Hebrew, actually)...not the English I Am, of course;
did he mean being in a state of realizing 'you' are...and are equal to
Him, the 'I Am'?
N. couldn't have meant saying over and over I Am I Am I Am, could he?
So how exactly is ''the I AM'' a gateway? Anybody, jump in ! :)

Not that I'm doubting it...but how exactly is it the gateway?
How does a new person on the Path ---understand what he meant?
Maybe I should pull out my book, "I Am That".

*pronounced AY-he-yay

[J_A_S_G]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

N. couldn't have meant saying over and over I Am I Am I Am, could he?
So how exactly is ''the I AM'' a gateway? Anybody, jump in ! :)

If used as a silent meditation mantra it's the same as attending any object of meditation in that eventually the separation between subject (meditator) and object (mantra, breath, bodily sensation) vanishes. Samadhi.

At least that would be my guess, not being familiar with his specific technique(s).

Perhaps another way to phrase it is mind eventually exhausts itself and surrenders to That. In essence not at all different from the goal of a devotional practice of surrender.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by J_A_S_G

...Perhaps another way to phrase it is mind eventually exhausts itself and surrenders to That.
In essence not at all different from the goal of a devotional practice of surrender.

Now that I understand and I think a new person to Eastern things could, also.

[Miss Hepburn]

Well, how great is this...in 90 seconds..I learned so much about how to approach this I Am 'course'.
Thank you Aaron Abke. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqwem2mUmF8

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by J_A_S_G

Perhaps another way to phrase it is mind eventually exhausts itself and surrenders to That.
In essence not at all different from the goal of a devotional practice of surrender.

While sometimes seekers get the realization with mantra chanting this way , I am bit uncomfortable with words exhaustion & surrender. My feeling is that it is the increasing intensity and attraction, that at one moment one loses narrow identity and one becomes one with one and becomes I am that Iam (Aham Brahmasmi - in sanskrit) .

Just my 2 cents .

[J_A_S_G]

Originally Posted by HITESH SHAH

While sometimes seekers get the realization with mantra chanting this way , I am bit uncomfortable with words exhaustion & surrender..

It's more a metaphor for what Ramana said about self-inquiry: "and like the stick used for stirring the burning pyre, it will itself in the end get destroyed".

The stick exhausts its fuel stirring the burning pyre and thusly surrenders itself to the flame. I suppose it can also be called ego death and the process leading to it.

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by J_A_S_G

The stick exhausts its fuel stirring the burning pyre and thusly surrenders itself to the flame. I suppose it can also be called ego death and the process leading to it.

Yes I understand stick stirring fire and then becoming the part of the pyre itself. That's great. Very heartening to know there are good number of people with such rare insights.

Here my preferred language will be Ego merge and Integration in place of Ego death and surrender. I think at gross level it may not make much difference but subtly this makes the meditation a far easier process at least for me.With that iam still there forever with greater vigor and power ! And this is also in consonance with 'love' being primary driver than 'fear' for God and His spirituality.

My feedback is based on the public lectures of activist philosopher Late Shri Pandurang Shashtri and I have not read Ramana in detail. I myself is still a toddler taking baby steps in the path .

[Still_Waters]

EXCERPT POST 52:

Originally Posted by J_A_S_G

Perhaps another way to phrase it is mind eventually exhausts itself and surrenders to That. In essence not at all different from the goal of a devotional practice of surrender.

I've been busy this week helping a friend who was just discharged from the hospital so I'm just catching up on this thread.

What you have accurately described is the process of koans (and the "Who AM I" Self-Inquiry is indeed a koan with no answer that can be communicated verbally) where the mind eventually exhausts itself and enters the stillness. As Miss Hepburn indicated in a previous post, that explanation of the "I AM" is more easily digested by one trying to understand this practice. As you duly noted, the "Who Am I" Self-Inquiry/koan is indeed one practice recommended by Ramana.

However, the "I AM" mantra (with absolutely no other thoughts such as "I am Still_Waters"), if one can indeed call it a mantra in the traditional sense, is somewhat different. While repeating "I AM" is probably the best way to VERBALIZE this practice, meditating on the I-AM-ness as one may say the words actually facilitates the experience of unitary consciousness (the indescribable I-AM-ness) leading to the rising of the I AM consciousness. As a parallel alternative to that, Ramana also recommended the I-I practice (which took me a while to intuit the point of which) as another way to facilitate the experience of unitary consciousness.

If you are familiar with Pantanjali's Yoga Sutras, there is one particularly relevant passage:

Avidya asmita raga dvesa abinivesha. The key words relevant to this discussion are "avidya" (ignorance) and "asmita" (I-am-ness, also translated as ego by some). It is said that ignorance and the sense of I-am (something) arise simultaneously but, in the realm of words, one must put one of the words first in the sequence. That is unfortunately a feature of language. (Yogis can communicate more effectively telepathically. At least that has been my experience.) All the rest follows from this. While this passage is directed towards those practicing yoga on the path to samadhi, it should be noted that, in accordance with the Hermetic principle (As above, so below), it also applies to the manifestation of the great I-AM on the cosmic level. I have my teacher's private commentaries on Pantanjali and the concepts of I-am-ness and I-AM-ness are not well understood. With this practice, it is the I-AM-ness on which one meditates though outwardly those who don't understand the process can only wonder how repeating the words "I AM" can be effective. It is an experiential practice; it is not an intellectual process.

[Still_Waters]

EXCERPT POST 51:

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Not that I'm doubting it...but how exactly is it the gateway?
How does a new person on the Path ---understand what he meant?
Maybe I should pull out my book, "I Am That".

I have a friend whom I am planning to meet on Thursday of this week. She actually spent time in India in the physical presence of Nisargadatta.

It was stated that he regretted entitling his book "I am That" since it didn't go far enough. The title is more directed towards the masses to encourage them to expand their consciousness from the little separatist "I am" (lower case significant) to all "That" ....but it stops short of proceeding from "That" to the great "I AM" and then to ............ (indescribable in words).

In one of his books (I can't find the exact quote but am still looking), he specifically referred to the great "I AM" as the gateway to the Absolute. For some reason, it seems very clear to me now though I readily concede that it was definitely a subject for meditation when I first read it.


The Sufi Master Hazrat Inayat Khan says essentially the same thing but comes from the other direction. In "The Message of Our Time", written by his son Pir Vilayat Khan under whom I practiced for years, Hazrat describes the process of creation. He said that creation begins with the activity of consciousness, which can be called vibration. He describes as best as possible in words how the vibrations mass together and become audible ... which turns into sound ... at which point "the knower so to speak becomes known to himself, in other words, the consciousness bears witness to its own voice". (While he doesn't use the specific words "I AM", the continuation of this indicates that this is the first awareness of existing which I can think of no other way to verbalize except as "I AM".)

I have had friends who were drawn to this "I AM" meditation (I think I will stop calling it a mantra) who had unitary consciousness experiences. One in particular was a Christian with no previous knowledge of non-duality or unitary consciousness. I was amazed how his intensity drew him to that state of awareness so quickly.

Obviously, this practice is NOT for everyone. In my formative years, I don't think that it would have worked well for me.

As for Ramana, he spoke highly of the interpretation of the Jewish Biblical passage "I am that I AM". In one of his talks, what really resonated was the use of upper and lower case characters as if to say that the little "I am" proceeds to "That" and proceeds from there to the great "I AM" and then ...... (indescribable) as in "That which is no longer even says I AM".

This is indeed a very interesting subject.

[Miss Hepburn]

From post 58 -Still_Waters:

However, the "I AM" mantra (with absolutely no other thoughts such as "I am Still_Waters"), if one can indeed call it a mantra in the traditional sense, is somewhat different. While repeating "I AM" is probably the best way to VERBALIZE this practice, meditating on the I-AM-ness as one may say the words actually facilitates the experience of unitary consciousness (the indescribable I-AM-ness) leading to the rising of the I AM consciousness.
As a parallel alternative to that, Ramana also recommended the I-I practice (which took me a while to intuit the point of which) as another way to facilitate the experience of unitary consciousness.

Now see, THAT is all I needed to hear on the first page of this thread;
that the 'I Am' meditation is actually concentration of the I Am-ness.

Of course, that makes sense now ---but what was being said here about
'I AM' by someone... threw me way off of what it actually was.

I feel stupid now even asking.