Ramana Maharishi propounds self enquiry. The method, as I understand is
1. Every being has an irrefutable feeing of 'I', of one self.
2. Observe the feeling.
3. See the attributes of 'I' as different from the 'I' feeling.
For eg. If I say I am Krishnan. Krishnan is my name, not me. Who am I ?
Iam a man - again my gender, not me ... the sequence to be applied to all the mental personalities that we observe when in introspection.
4. Bhagavan says that this I feeling is like a knot that between the mortal life and the divine. A knot is not an entity in itself. He also says that the I world and God arise and vanish together.
5. If we could de link all the modifiers from the I feeling, the 'I' feeling would dissapear and Divinity would shine forth. This is the most important point, one feels.
This method is marvellous. A one step method. Notice JK speaks about observing oneself in action and speaks about observing all the conditioning in it's completeness and the mind would be silent.
One feels an instinctive connection to dependent arising. As mentioned earlier, the Buddha speaks about the mental concept of body-mind (nama rupa), conciousness, sankara (samskara) and at the last ignorance in the reverse order. But what is ignorance ? Is it not the feeling of 'Iam' ? To be distinguished from 'Iam this vs that' which acomes in nama rupa etc.- Just the feeling of this limited I, separate independent but existing in this space time ?
This feeling of I, as in dependent arising is the basis of samskara. But what causes this feeling ? remember each limb arises depdendent on the other-it is not a linear chain. Hence, the feeling of I is nourished by the samskara itself.
Isn't Bhagavan's instruction directly leading to the 'ignorance'- avijja - first step in the dependent arising ? However, observation of this 'I' without the backdrop of Dhamma could mislead the mind to constructing some theories about the 'I self' - Iam consiousness and the kind.
Ok, suppose that we observed the 'I' on the backdrop of dependent arising, dropped all of its attributes (one should be very very careful not to have any mentations at this point too), what's left ? Would that result in the JK's state of observaing the conditions in its totality ?
we are somewhere, but what's the next step ? Is that the last step ?
On a different note, the textual versions of dependent arising some how do not stress the I feeling, although that feeling is most obvious and potent. It is not surprising, as the guiding principle is anatta. So it would be tricky to emphasise about the self-I feeling- at the beginnning and reject there after. Unless of course one where to resort to a Bhakthi kind of approach where the Other personality is emphasised.
A practisioner could be at cross roads - he/she feels the 'I' but can't accept it- bacause of wrong grapsing of Anatta. Negetivism creeps in. Practising the Bhagavans self enquiry in the same plane as the dependent arising seing the harmony of both, one feels, would help.
Friday, May 14, 2010
The symbolism in Sri Chandi
Sri Chandi-Devi Mahatmyam- is a very potent text. It has so many symbolisms and inner meanings, one feels.
A powerful sequence is when Devi takes on Rakthabhija - the Asura, where a drop of blood falls on earth gives rise to a new Asura of the same kind. As all the manifestations of Devi attack the asura, so much blood is spilled, so many new asuras are formed and the whole world is covered by them. To solve this mess, Devi entrusts Kaali to expand her mouth and drink up all drops of blood before it touches the earth and the asuras if formed. The idea is that subsequently the asura would become deficient of blood and finally collapse. Devi attacks the Asura with all weapons, blood flows profoundly, and Kali drinks up all the blood not letting it fall on the ground. Finally the asura falls.
Clearly the symbolism indicates the vasanas - the tendencies. The tendencies, when fallen on the soil of our samskara - accumulated potencies in a very loose manner - gives rise to a personality. And, tendency is just a celebrated name for desire. So desire takes life on the ground of accumulated tendencies. A detour here, is to note that this is in similar light to the Buddhas Paticha Samuppada-desire arisen in the base of sanskaras give rise to jati. A point to be remembered that the dependent arising is not a linear chain-mutual dependence of every limb is a prerequisite for the other.
Fine, so what does this whole act mean ? Let me jot down some possibilities:
1. The desire fallen on a different base - Kalis tongue, divinity -does not take a new life. In principle similar to Thakur's (Sri Ramakrishna) path of directing the desire to the divine. Lets investigate the 'tongue' a bit more. Tongue is baseless and structureless in itself. It leads to the internals where digestion takes place-a state of flux. So does this symbolism mean that when the desire is taken by a system which does not have the fixed structure - the structure of personality feeling (ignorance and sankara of Paticha Samuppada) - it would not take life.
2. The asura needed attack by two forces to be destroyed: Devi attacking him, making the blood to flow and Kaali to take up all that blood. Does it mean that to eliminate all the negativism we need two pronged attack ? On in which the tendencies flow out, and another in which they are annihilated ? Interesting to note that this two forces faintly resemble the Vishnu Siva tatvas respectively.
This point needs some thought. Every spiritual path has symbolisms about both the facets. One presenting ('out going') , the other withdrawing. Shakti-Siva, Pravritti-Nivratti, Prakruti-Purusha, Yin-Yang. In one perspective, the Theravada principle of Nirvana faintly resembles the latter where as the Mahayana principle of Bodhisatta resembles the former. In Chandi too, the blessing the Vaisya seeks is to attain 'Sanga vichyuti karaakam', to go beyond the self identity (the latter) where as the king sought the former to be born as Manu. Is there some deeper message here ? Is it impied that for complete going beyond, one needs creativity as well as renunciation in the same potency ?
3. The assurance of Devi is most encouraging. She says 'Ksheena raktha bhavisyati' will be depleted of blood - about the asura. Wow ! so is it a promise that tendencies will be depleted on practice ? There is of course, only a limited amount of blood-but I guess this works if the depleting process is quicker than the rate at which blood is regenerated !
A powerful sequence is when Devi takes on Rakthabhija - the Asura, where a drop of blood falls on earth gives rise to a new Asura of the same kind. As all the manifestations of Devi attack the asura, so much blood is spilled, so many new asuras are formed and the whole world is covered by them. To solve this mess, Devi entrusts Kaali to expand her mouth and drink up all drops of blood before it touches the earth and the asuras if formed. The idea is that subsequently the asura would become deficient of blood and finally collapse. Devi attacks the Asura with all weapons, blood flows profoundly, and Kali drinks up all the blood not letting it fall on the ground. Finally the asura falls.
Clearly the symbolism indicates the vasanas - the tendencies. The tendencies, when fallen on the soil of our samskara - accumulated potencies in a very loose manner - gives rise to a personality. And, tendency is just a celebrated name for desire. So desire takes life on the ground of accumulated tendencies. A detour here, is to note that this is in similar light to the Buddhas Paticha Samuppada-desire arisen in the base of sanskaras give rise to jati. A point to be remembered that the dependent arising is not a linear chain-mutual dependence of every limb is a prerequisite for the other.
Fine, so what does this whole act mean ? Let me jot down some possibilities:
1. The desire fallen on a different base - Kalis tongue, divinity -does not take a new life. In principle similar to Thakur's (Sri Ramakrishna) path of directing the desire to the divine. Lets investigate the 'tongue' a bit more. Tongue is baseless and structureless in itself. It leads to the internals where digestion takes place-a state of flux. So does this symbolism mean that when the desire is taken by a system which does not have the fixed structure - the structure of personality feeling (ignorance and sankara of Paticha Samuppada) - it would not take life.
2. The asura needed attack by two forces to be destroyed: Devi attacking him, making the blood to flow and Kaali to take up all that blood. Does it mean that to eliminate all the negativism we need two pronged attack ? On in which the tendencies flow out, and another in which they are annihilated ? Interesting to note that this two forces faintly resemble the Vishnu Siva tatvas respectively.
This point needs some thought. Every spiritual path has symbolisms about both the facets. One presenting ('out going') , the other withdrawing. Shakti-Siva, Pravritti-Nivratti, Prakruti-Purusha, Yin-Yang. In one perspective, the Theravada principle of Nirvana faintly resembles the latter where as the Mahayana principle of Bodhisatta resembles the former. In Chandi too, the blessing the Vaisya seeks is to attain 'Sanga vichyuti karaakam', to go beyond the self identity (the latter) where as the king sought the former to be born as Manu. Is there some deeper message here ? Is it impied that for complete going beyond, one needs creativity as well as renunciation in the same potency ?
3. The assurance of Devi is most encouraging. She says 'Ksheena raktha bhavisyati' will be depleted of blood - about the asura. Wow ! so is it a promise that tendencies will be depleted on practice ? There is of course, only a limited amount of blood-but I guess this works if the depleting process is quicker than the rate at which blood is regenerated !
Sunday, February 28, 2010
About Divinity
Into "Hindu" readings of late. The difference between this and "Buddhist" seems very blurd and seems to fade.
One glitch, a diffucilty that one feels when one enters the former is the personality inherently associated with the divinity.
What if one looks at the various gods as the various approaches to divinity itself ?
In reaching vishnu - krishna you take up an encompassing path - reject none, sarvam vishnumayam jagat. It does not really matter if u reach the feet of vishnu, the locale of vishnu, etc. etc.
In reaching auspicious (ness), siva, rudra you take up the path of denial, destruction or (going as it seems) beyond the imminent obvious conclusions about our selves and the surroundings.
It is sort of made obvious in the mother worship though. Sri chandi speaks about devi as eternal, but as if appears when there is a need an imbalance. The three charitas have mention about the taking form of the devi, and her disappearance after the task is done.
One glitch, a diffucilty that one feels when one enters the former is the personality inherently associated with the divinity.
What if one looks at the various gods as the various approaches to divinity itself ?
In reaching vishnu - krishna you take up an encompassing path - reject none, sarvam vishnumayam jagat. It does not really matter if u reach the feet of vishnu, the locale of vishnu, etc. etc.
In reaching auspicious (ness), siva, rudra you take up the path of denial, destruction or (going as it seems) beyond the imminent obvious conclusions about our selves and the surroundings.
It is sort of made obvious in the mother worship though. Sri chandi speaks about devi as eternal, but as if appears when there is a need an imbalance. The three charitas have mention about the taking form of the devi, and her disappearance after the task is done.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Meditations in dependent origination-cessation
In meditation, one seeks the personality that is evident at that state.
The birth - jati can be seen as
the present personality that is evident. This is pointed out by Ajan Chah.
The cause of that can be seen
as becoming-bhava. We became this (momentary) personality because we
held to something strongly - clinging (upadana). That clinging
happened because we liked it- we craved for it- tanha. The craving was
caused by the feeling- vedana, caused by the contact-phasso. contact
of sense objects with the sense spheres occurred as there are the
sense spheres - salayatanam. The senses are because of our mind and
body- this is the key link - nama rupa. This pertains to our mind made
body- the mental concept of our body. It is interesting that in the
components of nama rupa, the sankara is included.- it is due to our
past impressions that the present concept of our mind body exits. What
exits in the mind, as a cause of mind body ? what is beyond that ?
Buddha says it is consciousness-vinnanam. I think this is where a link
Ramana Maharshi's idea of self enquiry- "the feeling of I" exists. The
cause of that Buddha says is sankara. Sankara is caused by ignorance-
Avijja. What is this now ? Is it the concept of self ? It it the
limitedness one perceives ? Is it the concept that every one of the
above links exists because of the central concept of self ? Is it,
like in the Kachayana vacha gotta sutta, the extremes of the feeling
of "is" and the other extreme of 'is not' ? Or is it the substance
view- the view that all these are existent as absolute entities ?
The mind cannot perceive, the thought cannot touch. Here another link
to Krishnamurti's idea of "Precipice" looks close.
Now, at every step Nagarjuna's idea that each of these cause effect
links are not temporally connected and are not absolute, but each
exist because the other came to be will help us from falling into the
trap 'existentialism'- considering that each this links are absolutely
existent.
The birth - jati can be seen as
the present personality that is evident. This is pointed out by Ajan Chah.
The cause of that can be seen
as becoming-bhava. We became this (momentary) personality because we
held to something strongly - clinging (upadana). That clinging
happened because we liked it- we craved for it- tanha. The craving was
caused by the feeling- vedana, caused by the contact-phasso. contact
of sense objects with the sense spheres occurred as there are the
sense spheres - salayatanam. The senses are because of our mind and
body- this is the key link - nama rupa. This pertains to our mind made
body- the mental concept of our body. It is interesting that in the
components of nama rupa, the sankara is included.- it is due to our
past impressions that the present concept of our mind body exits. What
exits in the mind, as a cause of mind body ? what is beyond that ?
Buddha says it is consciousness-vinnanam. I think this is where a link
Ramana Maharshi's idea of self enquiry- "the feeling of I" exists. The
cause of that Buddha says is sankara. Sankara is caused by ignorance-
Avijja. What is this now ? Is it the concept of self ? It it the
limitedness one perceives ? Is it the concept that every one of the
above links exists because of the central concept of self ? Is it,
like in the Kachayana vacha gotta sutta, the extremes of the feeling
of "is" and the other extreme of 'is not' ? Or is it the substance
view- the view that all these are existent as absolute entities ?
The mind cannot perceive, the thought cannot touch. Here another link
to Krishnamurti's idea of "Precipice" looks close.
Now, at every step Nagarjuna's idea that each of these cause effect
links are not temporally connected and are not absolute, but each
exist because the other came to be will help us from falling into the
trap 'existentialism'- considering that each this links are absolutely
existent.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Meditations
In meditation, on observation of any phenomena, the minds starts to go deeper, observes the reactions, and further deeper.
All the depth arising with the feel of layers of our consciousness are all creations of the mind.
A single sight -like the sights of Varanasi - has all the reaction, samskara, dependent origination built into it. The search of phenomena to observe is also a construct of the mind,
so is to mentally map dependent origination to the observed phenomena - although the latter leads to a deep silence within.
Why ? Lets go back to dependent origination. The Nama Rupa - name and form pertains to our own form and name - identity, inclusive of all the samskara- and not of the object. Sense bases are the evolute and contact and further it proliferates.
Retracing back takes us to ignorance.
Ignorance of what ? Ignorance of having a belief in a self- a person- defined, limited, reacting, conditionally substantiated living process bundle.
On a clearer perspective, once again we can connect with Kacchanna Gotta sutta. The Buddha says that having an opinion 'this exits' means eternalism and 'does not exist' means nihilism. Thus the feeling that some thing 'exits' - not even limiting as a self, is ignorance.
So what then is beyond the ignorance ?
Is this is the precipice versed by JK ?
Is this where the suttas stop and other spiritual paths continue verbalising ?
Indeed this should be the stoppage to all proliferations as we understand..
All the depth arising with the feel of layers of our consciousness are all creations of the mind.
A single sight -like the sights of Varanasi - has all the reaction, samskara, dependent origination built into it. The search of phenomena to observe is also a construct of the mind,
so is to mentally map dependent origination to the observed phenomena - although the latter leads to a deep silence within.
Why ? Lets go back to dependent origination. The Nama Rupa - name and form pertains to our own form and name - identity, inclusive of all the samskara- and not of the object. Sense bases are the evolute and contact and further it proliferates.
Retracing back takes us to ignorance.
Ignorance of what ? Ignorance of having a belief in a self- a person- defined, limited, reacting, conditionally substantiated living process bundle.
On a clearer perspective, once again we can connect with Kacchanna Gotta sutta. The Buddha says that having an opinion 'this exits' means eternalism and 'does not exist' means nihilism. Thus the feeling that some thing 'exits' - not even limiting as a self, is ignorance.
So what then is beyond the ignorance ?
Is this is the precipice versed by JK ?
Is this where the suttas stop and other spiritual paths continue verbalising ?
Indeed this should be the stoppage to all proliferations as we understand..
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Sights of Gaya sissa - readings in Fire sermon
Had the good fortune of gazing at the Gayasissa and recollecting the Aditta pariyaya sutta - the fire sermon.
A wrong impression one gets when one reads the suttas are they biased to the negative ? more mention of suffering, lamentation, grief ..
The awareness is the simple awareness. Awareness of the processes occurring in the senses, any thing as occurring as deep is a construct of mind, artificial.
The simile of fire pertains to transience as well as the process of proliferation. Thinking about the burning sensation causes irritation in mind something the mind wants to avoid. But it is to be noted that it is a reaction.
In a deeper perspective, it can be noted that the word 'Dukkha' creates reactions that are of the same nature as one created by 'hatred' - dwesha (dosa). That of pain - mind recoils and wants to avoid. Mind confuses between these two. But Dukkha is translated as unsatisfactoriness - a nature of dhamma and does not pertain to our minds reaction. When one tries to understand the suttas with this impression, the suttas look negative and biased towards the painful. When one notices that this is a reaction and does not address to it, the suttas look very clear and unbiased - as the truth should be.
Again, if one looks at the three roots of existence, raga dosa and moha as liking, disliking and delusion, rather than greed hatred and delusion, it can be seen to address all our types of reactions and is not biased to the painful.
This outlook clears much a mist from reading of the suttas. Suttas can be seen in a very different 'positive' light.
A wrong impression one gets when one reads the suttas are they biased to the negative ? more mention of suffering, lamentation, grief ..
The awareness is the simple awareness. Awareness of the processes occurring in the senses, any thing as occurring as deep is a construct of mind, artificial.
The simile of fire pertains to transience as well as the process of proliferation. Thinking about the burning sensation causes irritation in mind something the mind wants to avoid. But it is to be noted that it is a reaction.
In a deeper perspective, it can be noted that the word 'Dukkha' creates reactions that are of the same nature as one created by 'hatred' - dwesha (dosa). That of pain - mind recoils and wants to avoid. Mind confuses between these two. But Dukkha is translated as unsatisfactoriness - a nature of dhamma and does not pertain to our minds reaction. When one tries to understand the suttas with this impression, the suttas look negative and biased towards the painful. When one notices that this is a reaction and does not address to it, the suttas look very clear and unbiased - as the truth should be.
Again, if one looks at the three roots of existence, raga dosa and moha as liking, disliking and delusion, rather than greed hatred and delusion, it can be seen to address all our types of reactions and is not biased to the painful.
This outlook clears much a mist from reading of the suttas. Suttas can be seen in a very different 'positive' light.
Sights of Varanasi
Varanasi enlightens one.
The flow through the Ganga, one side all the ghats and the other, nothingness, infinitude.
The ghats represent various phases in ones life. As one moves through them, one can see the liking that the mind takes towards one, and the recoil that it goes thru at another.
And then it occurs that this bias of the mind is artificial. All the sights encompass life, all of this is life. This is all of life in one single snapshot.
When the boat reaches the ghat from the middle of the river, it all becomes clear. People involved in all activity- prayers, passion, poignant, faith - the faces reveal all the states, all the moods. Life comes in front of your eyes.
Then it occurs that all such facets have the same content of life in them - from gorgeous sights to that of a man gobbling a morsel of food- the choice of one to another is an erroneous construct of mind.
This construct involves our deeper impressions about things, the construct of an inner samskara and the various outcomes of the same is also an erroneous mind process.
An evolute of this thought process is all the sights that encompass life of various people various modes involves the ergodic theory. The theory says the observation of a system that evolves in time, as opposed of observation of various instantaneous snapshots of equivalent systems with different initial conditions and evolution equations, would result in the same conclusions.
Implies that all the snapshots of all the people around are snapshots of ourselves projected out in front of our eyes.
Explains why Herman Hesse's Siddhartha lives as a boatman in the Ganga.
The flow through the Ganga, one side all the ghats and the other, nothingness, infinitude.
The ghats represent various phases in ones life. As one moves through them, one can see the liking that the mind takes towards one, and the recoil that it goes thru at another.
And then it occurs that this bias of the mind is artificial. All the sights encompass life, all of this is life. This is all of life in one single snapshot.
When the boat reaches the ghat from the middle of the river, it all becomes clear. People involved in all activity- prayers, passion, poignant, faith - the faces reveal all the states, all the moods. Life comes in front of your eyes.
Then it occurs that all such facets have the same content of life in them - from gorgeous sights to that of a man gobbling a morsel of food- the choice of one to another is an erroneous construct of mind.
This construct involves our deeper impressions about things, the construct of an inner samskara and the various outcomes of the same is also an erroneous mind process.
An evolute of this thought process is all the sights that encompass life of various people various modes involves the ergodic theory. The theory says the observation of a system that evolves in time, as opposed of observation of various instantaneous snapshots of equivalent systems with different initial conditions and evolution equations, would result in the same conclusions.
Implies that all the snapshots of all the people around are snapshots of ourselves projected out in front of our eyes.
Explains why Herman Hesse's Siddhartha lives as a boatman in the Ganga.
While in the boat, we had to go into the centre of the river. The boat appeared stationary. I thought it had been anchored. Nandu the boatman said it is not anchored, and is not stationary also. It is wood, will move in the direction of the flow - he explained. But I could not feel it, not even see it looking at the water- it looked all the same. The sandy bank also gave the same feel. Nandu woke me up and said look at the Ghats - where were we and where are we now. It was amazing - we hade moved a considerable distance from our earlier location!
It occured that life also is similar. Every day looks the same, just like the other. But between two points in time, we would have moved a considerable distance - from within and without. Well, shucks, it also turns out to be only in one way ..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)