Ramana Maharshi and the Cult of 'Pure Awareness.'

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Yup. Sravana (hearing the teachings), Manana (critical examination of what was taught until it is intellectually understood) and Nididhyasana (deep contemplation - Vedantic Self-inquiry - on what was first taught and then understood and in relation to one's own experience).
If I had to guess he never made it past Sravana and even then only heard a tiny portion of the teachings and in a very informal and non-structured way (i.e. Satsang).
Beyond that there's also the supporting practices to facilitate purity and clarity of mind and I don't see any evidence of that in his blog.

I see.
I don't believe that existential questions can be answered by intellectual exercise.
Also, I give credit to the author of that article for seeing that "the emperor has no clothes", stating it, and acting accordingly. He did what he believed it, and as expected some people agree with him, others don't (as that article comments show).
I especially give him credit for not blaming anybody else (neither gurus, nor dogmas) for his delusions (as he thinks now), as many people tend to accuse others for their delusions and mistakes.
I didn't post this in the non-dualism forum, as I didn't intend to offend those adepts.
Obviously, I don't subscribe to non-dualism.

[Gem]

Pretty interesting.
I read a bit of Ramana and listened to some of his lineage, and the meditation of persistently returning attention to your essential being seems sensible enough to me as some sort query into reality or truth. I think the principle has some merit, but I can do without all the trimmings.

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by inavalan

Excerpt: I don't know a lot about non-duality, although recently I got some brushing with some adepts. I'm curious: do you think it is possible to have a realization that confirms your beliefs in non-duality, then to get another realization that contradicts your previous realization?

Perhaps there is too little information in the blog to draw any definite conclusions.

My interpretation is that he had a certain understanding and then changed his mind. Actual realisation of Oneness would be different - if we realise that there is Oneness pervading all things and this is a genuine shift in consciousness, then it is difficult to imagine having a subsequent realisation which contradicts this. Because Oneness would still be present, pervading all things.

The idea of non-duality implying there is no progress and nothing to reach is common with the various Neo-Advaita teachers over the past 30 years. Perhaps it is why they are so popular with certain people. This philosophy can be understood on a mental level without having to make any effort - for example, without having to sit down to meditate.

In an earlier post you say "To me, more fascinating is how a a guy who was a guru for awhile changed his views."

You may then be interested in the story of Jeff Foster. He was an ordinary fellow who had an awakening and then began teaching the usual non-duality teachings, writing books and doing videos. At one stage he became disillusioned with the whole teaching process and the kind of people attracted to Neo-Advaita. Unfortunately, I cannot find the relevant pages where he talks about this. And he still seems to be teaching so he cannot have become too disillusioned. I'll keep looking for the details.

Peace

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by iamthat

Shortened: Perhaps there is too little information in the blog to draw any definite conclusions.

My interpretation is that he had a certain understanding and then changed his mind. Actual realisation of Oneness would be different - if we realise that there is Oneness pervading all things and this is a genuine shift in consciousness, then it is difficult to imagine having a subsequent realisation which contradicts this. Because Oneness would still be present, pervading all things.

Thanks. You don't need to. It is besides the point. I also read about a "Bobbie-san", Dutch I believe, very smart, that studied and practiced Zen, and at some point was highly appreciated in Japan for his results, who at some point gave up Zen.

I think these examples are just examples. It happens.

One of the points I can't understand, nor accept, is when somebody claims that they know the Truth and that there is no question they do. If you question that belief, it is only because you didn't have that experience. To me, that is the same thing that billions of people of other faiths claim / claimed.

[psychoslice]

Its not a matter of simple accepting what others or what external authorities tell us. Those who have experience that which is beyond the mind, have simply made a map, to share with those who are still searching, you can either use the map or just keep on the search hoping for the best. If you are making a cake which you have never made before, is it easier to follow the recipe by those who have already made this cake or is it easier to just guess the recipe and hope for the best ?........I know which cake I would rather taste.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by psychoslice

Its not a matter of simple accepting what others or what external authorities tell us. Those who have experience that which is beyond the mind, have simply made a map, to share with those who are still searching, you can either use the map or just keep on the search hoping for the best. .

Now, THIS is a great way to describe it!!!! Luv that you're back.

[ajay00]

Originally Posted by inavalan

This an explanation of an ex-believer in Advaita Vedanta (Non-Duality):

http://blesseddisillusionment.blogspot.com/2015/03/ramana-maharshi-and-cult-of-pure.html
......In conclusion: "why we should accept the word of ANY external authority as gospel Truth. Instead of parroting ancient, dead 'wisdom,' I personally feel that we would be better served by looking at life for ourselves"

Advaita means nonduality and Advaita is about direct knowing rather than believing in concepts.
The term 'concept' itself is a dualistic expression which ought to be transcended to experiential understanding.
In fact the yoga Vasistha teaches the need to transcend all concepts for direct realization of the Divine within.

Consciousness minus conceptualization is the eternal Brahman the absolute; consciousness plus conceptualization is thought. -- Yoga Vasistha

So, the very concept of Advaita or nonduality through blind attachment, can be a barrier to nondual perception.
Morgan states himself to be " a believer in these concepts " , but if you are a believer it means you still don't know. If you don't know, then you have to believe, and take on the label of a believer.
It is actually knowing directly or direct perception of the Self or thoughtless awareness within. This is all there is to it.

It is very simple and obvious, but it is the very simplicity and obviousness that make people ignore it habitually and not investigate it further. This is unfortunate because peace and bliss are the nature of the Self which everyone can access as their true nature within.
However ignoring this free resource of bliss within, people run after happiness in craving for impermanent sensory objects and suffer in the process.
This is what Maya is all about. Ignoring the kingdom of God within for external delights of a temporary nature.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by inavalan

In conclusion: "why we should accept the word of ANY external authority as gospel Truth. Instead of parroting ancient, dead 'wisdom,' I personally feel that we would be better served by looking at life for ourselves"

Not many can truthfully argue with this point, life experience is the biggest teacher, but for many including Ramana, and other teacher's require teachers also . Many teachers have studied the scriptures also and recite them in their own way, niz in one of his books said to put his book down and find it out for yourself which again mirrors what Ramana say's but what also happens is that within this type of teaching where one should find it out for themselves and not rely on dead wisdom so to speak is that their devotees idolise their teachers and put them in a similar cult bracket as the teachings point to not do lol .

This isn't living their life in the way that one should experience and realise what these dudes are talking about but instead you get armchair spiritual philosophers reciting teachers words in their own way trying to emulate and live their life through another's experiential wisdom .


x daz x

[Miss Hepburn]

niz= Nisargadatta Maharaj for new people. D. 1981

[django]

Originally Posted by inavalan

...
This is Ramana's description in his own words (from the beginning of that article):

"...a sudden violent fear of death overtook me.
The shock of the fear of death drove my mind inwards and I said to myself mentally, without actually framing the words: "Now death has come; what does it mean? What is it that is dying?
......The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death. That means I am deathless Spirit."

Isn’t Ramana’s conclusion, that “The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death” actually just a belief that he is expressing in this specific moment? It’s not as though he actually had an experience of himself as a deathless Spirit is it?