Ramana Maharshi and the Cult of 'Pure Awareness.'

[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

I guess it makes sense for one who had the realization he was perfect, to have another realization that he was mistaken about that.

I was once a believer in these concepts but part of my personal experience was a deep, spontaneous questioning of all of the things I accepted as truth. Then I realized that I had just internalized another conceptual system by accepting the tenets of non-duality. I find it impossible to believe any of these absolutist statements anymore so, when I hear my friends discussing them, I recognize the same religious fervor I once held for these ideas. I was also once very good at explaining these beliefs to others and could often cause them to have an "aha" moment and corresponding dopamine rush. Some might even call it an "enlightenment" experience! Many people came to me to talk about these things when I was speaking about them with certainty. Now I wonder if the fascination with "transcendence" is really just hopeful thinking and wish fulfillment.

You can read there Ramana's account of his panic attack when he was 16 years old, that resulted in a transformative experience, eventually in his philosophy.

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"

“The temple of the most high begins with the body which houses our life, the essence of our existence. Africans are in bondage today because they approach spirituality through religion provided by foreign invaders and conquerors. We must stop confusing religion and spirituality. Religion is a set of rules, regulations and rituals created by humans, which was suppose to help people grow spiritually. Due to human imperfection religion has become corrupt, political, divisive and a tool for power struggle. Spirituality is not theology or ideology. It is simply a way of life, pure and original as was given by the Most High of Creation. Spirituality is a network linking us to the Most High, the universe, and each other…”
Haile Selassie

Does Spirituality do that today? Do we link to ourselves or do we link to and reach out for some imagined likeness of our 'Spiritual selves' or perhaps link to some imagined world that is better, bigger and brighter than the one we exist in?

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by inavalan

I guess it makes sense for one who had the realization he was perfect, to have another realization that he was mistaken about that.

I was once a believer in these concepts but part of my personal experience was a deep, spontaneous questioning of all of the things I accepted as truth. Then I realized that I had just internalized another conceptual system by accepting the tenets of non-duality. I find it impossible to believe any of these absolutist statements anymore so, when I hear my friends discussing them, I recognize the same religious fervor I once held for these ideas. I was also once very good at explaining these beliefs to others and could often cause them to have an "aha" moment and corresponding dopamine rush. Some might even call it an "enlightenment" experience! Many people came to me to talk about these things when I was speaking about them with certainty. Now I wonder if the fascination with "transcendence" is really just hopeful thinking and wish fulfillment.

You can read there Ramana's account of his panic attack when he was 16 years old, that resulted in a transformative experience, eventually in his philosophy.

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"

Did Morgan Caraway (the author of the blog) actually have the realisation that he was perfect? It reads more as if he only had a mental understanding of Advaita, which is a very different thing. He only speaks about believing, not realising.

And I question the labelling of Ramana's experience at 16 as a panic attack. Yes, he was shocked by the violent fear of death which prompted him to go within, but when you read Ramana's own full description he seems to have investigated the nature of his physical death in a very calm and detached manner, leading to a vivid flash of realisation.

As Ramana says (and this is just after the section quoted by Morgan Caraway) "From that moment onwards the 'I' or Self focussed attention on itself by a powerful fascination. Fear of death had vanished once and for all. Absorption in the Self continued unbroken from that time on."

Morgan Caraway may label this a panic attack, which then becomes the basis of his argument, but I suspect that the blog reveals more about Morgan Caraway than about anything to do with Ramana Maharshi.

Peace

[inavalan]

Surely, you being a believer have a different perspective than the author has now. I don't take sides.
To me, more fascinating is how a a guy who was a guru for awhile changed his views. He was a guru, per his quote in the first post above, didn't just have an intellectual understanding, as you suspect ... He imparted knowledge that induced "aha" in his followers (!)
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."

[inavalan]

By the way, "all being one that doesn't change, never changes" means "perfect" doesn't it?

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by inavalan

Surely, you being a believer have a different perspective than the author has now. I don't take sides...

I would not have described Morgan Caraway as a guru. He does not say that he ever realised the Self - he simply talked to others about Advaita from his own understanding of it. And the thing with Advaita is that it is not difficult to grasp on a mental level.

As Morgan Caraway himself said "I was also once very good at explaining these beliefs to others and could often cause them to have an "aha" moment." We have no idea what kind of 'aha' moment was induced in those he spoke to. So all that Morgan Caraway did was change his mind about Advaita.

And RM's description of his experience, after the initial fear, seems very calm, just observing in a detached manner. This does not seem to qualify as a panic attack.

Peace

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by iamthat

Excerpt: I would not have described Morgan Caraway as a guru. He does not say that he ever realised the Self - he simply talked to others about Advaita from his own understanding of it. And the thing with Advaita is that it is not difficult to grasp on a mental level.

I don't intend to challenge your beliefs.

My beliefs aren't fixed. All the time I learn new things, or I clarify things about reality, about myself, aspects of myself, what to do, why, how, etc.. I am growing, expect to grow, want to grow. My beliefs expand, and get more detailed.

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? I heard people saying that they had successive realizations, not only one, every time discovering something deeper than they thought is all (this, that, ...).

From what I understand non-duality implies that there is no progress to look for, because all being this (or that ...), there is nothing else to trend to, to reach. Is that what you believe? How would it fit having another realization?

I read his blogs. I hear a lot of believing, not a claim of Self-realization. If I had to guess it sounds to me like Neo-Advaita, a very shallow and surface level intellectual understanding of one tiny part of the philosophy and to me his blogs bare that out. In other words it's all about believing what was told to him and not first-hand experience, thus it's also prone to eventual disbelief.

If he understood anything about Advaita Vedanta it should be it's not about belief but about using reasoning and an in-depth examination of one's own experience to discover what the teachings point to. He believed the finger was pointing at the Moon but never looked for the Moon himself, eventually questioning if there really was a Moon.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

I read his blogs. I hear a lot of believing, not a claim of Self-realization. If I had to guess it sounds to me like Neo-Advaita, a very shallow and surface level intellectual understanding of one tiny part of the philosophy and to me his blogs bare that out. In other words it's all about believing what was told to him and not first-hand experience, thus it's also prone to eventual disbelief.

If he understood anything about Advaita Vedanta it should be it's not about belief but about using reasoning and an in-depth examination of one's own experience to discover what the teachings point to. He believed the finger was pointing at the Moon but never looked for the Moon himself, eventually questioning if there really was a Moon.

So you're saying that it implies reasoning? Are you sure? Have you had a "self-realization" through reasoning?

Originally Posted by inavalan

So you're saying that it implies reasoning? Are you sure? Have you had a "self-realization" through reasoning?

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.