Still_Waters

That's a nice quote from the Tao, but I hold fast to my point that Truth cannot ultimately be expressed in words. Words may be very helpful along the way and, to some extent, a few words from an enlightened master can trigger major breakthroughs. As one matures spiritually, less and less words are needed until , eventually, that knowing silence is completely sufficient. By the way, have you read the beautiful story above by Dwai? If so, I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. Which of the three masters in the story would command your attention most ?

What an awesome story ! Purification is indeed the key, as duly noted in your story. "They have to attain a degree of purification of the mind to comprehend what they teach." In a nutshell, that is the key. Your earlier point ("Some sages have an uncanny ability to transmit the truth (even in words). I think/IME it is because the written/studied word works at the subtle level (madhyama), where as words verbalized without presence mainly work at the gross level (vaikhari). ") is also right on target. With my spiritual mentor, there was indeed an "uncanny ability to transmit the truth (even in words)" though there were generally very very few words needed to make the point, as in my prior example (four words). Sometimes, the presence alone --- even a glance --- spoke volumes. I love your posts ! To a large extent, we seem to be on exactly the same wavelength.

Thank you for the very thorough and thoughtful response. I agree that most humans "need simple instructions", as you pointed out. Those simple instructions though, as you also pointed out, are often not without their own set of problems. My teacher left the spiritual plane in 2015 so she no longer frequents the earthly ashrams. Here is a link to a story written about her in the book, "Living Women Saints of India". It may give you some insights into what it was like to practice over 30 years with this "No Nonsense Yogini". https://books.google.com/books?id=ACdgNlL-q3cC&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=ma+yoga+shakti&source=bl&ots=OdkrqP1eqM&sig=ynQriv4csDux4MWZyYYiTMG8mMI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3rUAVbz0GtLlsASQhoDQBg&ved=0CB0Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=ma yoga shakti&f=false Unfortunately, as you also pointed out, too many self-proclaimed "masters" "don't really understand the point of waking up, and just want more power". A real master can see deeply into a disciple's psyche and ask a simple question or make a brief mind-boggling statement that triggers a process leading to an enlightening experience. My spiritual mentor once said something to me (only four words) that really pissed me off and led me to leave her for almost two years whereupon, through meditation and meeting other masters, I eventually realized that what she had said was right on target. Somehow, she understood that her brief intervention would trigger what it did ... and, during that two year period, it was constantly on my mind (first in anger, then in doubt, then in pondering deeply, and finally in realization of the Truth in what had been communicated). Wow ! That corresponds in a way to your statement, "Others can be touch by a master and bang." The first verbal touch took a long time (about 2 years) to bear fruit but, after trust and confidence was established, I never again took anything that she said lightly and, henceforth, it was more like a series of "bangs" to which you alluded.

Well said. For the longest time, the pride of intellect was a major hindrance for my unfolding and it took an awesome spiritual mentor and many direct experiences to shake me out of that. As you duly noted, "when you walk through the (gateless) gate, the intellect stays behind." As you most appropriately pointed out, "how can it (the Truth) ever be an object of any story?" Too many people, however, prefer to hear the stories and talk about the various theories and utilize the intellect ..... because, as you also noted, "the ego wants explanations; it needs the intellect to make up a satisfactory story". As the Sufi Master Pir Vilayat Khan once said, "The ego is very important ... until one no longer needs it." Thanks for sharing !

Are you suggesting that, for a realized being, words are adequate to express the Reality ? As eloquent as a master may be, my experience has been the opposite of yours in that words, while most assuredly helpful in certain instances and actually in most instances with the masses, are at least two levels removed from the Reality that they are trying to express (words and thoughts constituting a minimum of two levels though I am aware that some masters speak without activating the thought processes). Having spent time with masters who communicate in complete and utter silence, that "communication" (in my opinion) is incomparable to anything expressed in words. Since you mention the Taoists, there is a saying attributed to Lao Tzu that has resonated completely with me. Though I don't recall the exact words, the gist is: "In utter emptiness and complete silence (thoughts implied as well), simply watch the Return (to original nature)." How does one communicate that in words. My sense is that it must be experienced. Having said this, words do serve a purpose .... until they are no longer needed.

"Communion" is a reasonably good word to describe the restoration of Original nature. I like it. How does one "repeatedly" merge with the universal if I may ask? Do you view this as a repetitive process ? I did not fully understand what you meant in your post. (By the way, I did not mean to imply "conceptual boasting" though I must admit that hearing a person merely saying words such as "Atman is Brahman" certainly does not convince me that the person is actually at that level of realization and not just repeating words. However, one most assuredly does not know what is in the mind of another so one must continue to explore the understanding behind the understanding behind ... the words. If there is depth behind the spoken words, than one can learn a lot from that person.)

My response was indeed a bit long. You are, of course, correct about the lengthiness. I just wanted to ensure that my point was clear. I am very familiar with the Zen koan that you quoted and have used it extensively .... in the past. These discussions are causing me to ponder more and more deeply the nature of Reality. Gaudapada, who wrote a commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad, "explains" the nature of apparent multiplicity by simply saying that this is the very nature (Unity in Diversity) of the Effulgent Being. It may sound overly simplistic but he does have a point. Hence, in addressing your statement, he would probably avoid the discussion on whether "there is no mountain" (your impression of the yoga sutras) or whether there is a mountain, then there is not, and then once again there is a mountain (obviously in a totally different light). Therefore, it does not seem constructive to continue the "mountain" discussion differences between the two philosophies that you referenced; whether the "mountain" exists or not or perceptions change in stages is not really that important. What is important is Truth .... that which is. I agree with you that it is really only at a certain level that it appears that differentiation drops. (I did not mention my teacher's understanding of differentiation. Hence, your perspective is not necessarily contrary. All I said was that each system of words is inadequate but generally internally consistent though it may apparently contradict another system due to the obvious conflicts introduced by the use of inadequate words.)

When I accompanied my spiritual mentor to the Khumba Mela in Haridwar, India, in 1998, at the foothills of the Himalayas, I met several really extraordinary beings. One of them manifested to a friend of mine and me in the middle of an open field with no one else in sight. Without being asked, he precisely answered a question that we were discussing in exactly six words. (That answer is not germane to this discussion.) When I turned to my friend and looked back, the being was gone. Questioning my sense of perception, I asked my friend open-ended questions such as "Did you see anything", "What did you see", "Did you hear anything", "What did you hear", etc. When I realized that he had seen and heard exactly what I had seen and heard, we went back to the ashram to bring this to the attention of our teacher who was sitting with various sages. When she saw us, she detected a sense of ego and she was correct. She summoned us into her immediate presence and, after we had told her what had happened and described the sage who had manifested since he had been at a bandara (feast) the previous day, she and the other sages looked at us very knowingly. After a long silence, she stated: "Oh, that's Sri <so-and-so, as I don't recall his name>. He does this from time to time. Everyone knows that." To us, this was extraordinary. To the sages, it was just another day. She then directed us to meditate in silence on what had just happened and, to keep us busy, she also directed us to clean the hallways and the bathrooms. In your opening statement, you wrote: "None of us is "unity consciousness" ... you can see this very clearly when you try to manifest a new star ... give it a try for a few minutes." While this sage most assuredly did not manifest a new star, he did manifest his body and, just as mysteriously, vanished. I used this example since there was another direct eye-witness and several sages who attested that this sage did indeed do this from time to time. That is the only point in your post on which I choose to comment since the rest is more theoretical than experiential.

Apparently !

My spiritual mentor for over 30 years was the first female mahamandeleshwara in the orders of Shankaracharya and an acknowledged adept in classical Hinduism and Pantanjali's Yoga Sutras (Asthanga Yoga). Above all, she was a seeker of Truth regardless of tradition and often quoted from the scriptures and teachings of other traditions. She often said that words were inadequate to express the inexpressible but that the various systems taught as best as possible within the realm of words. Such systems, while generally consistent within themselves, may sometimes apparently contradict other systems at some level(s) but less and less so as one goes deeper and deeper. My mentor was once lecturing on Pantanjali's Yoga Sutras when a question was raised regarding an apparent contradiction with another philosophical school of thought. (The specific details are unimportant.) Her response was exactly as stated above in agreeing that certain apparent contradictions may indeed arise between different systems at the lower levels and that, for purposes of the lecture in progress, it was important to stay within the consistent context of Pantanjali. You may already have intuited where this is leading but, to get back to your original point, I have come across too many people who quote extensively from various systems without really having any direct experience relevant to the subject at hand. Therefore, as Zen masters do, it is important to test the waters with the equivalent of "dharma battles" to ascertain true depth. When some one takes the somewhat standard position of "oneness" or "there is only one of us", one raises the question as to how they shift back-and-forth between unitary consciousness (the One) and the apparent separateness or whether they can even get into the unitary consciousness state which they are so casually stating. One does not know until one probes the depths if indeed there is depth instead of mere repetitious book knowledge that "sounds enlightened". Hence, I raised the Zen statement as a probe not only to probe the depths but to get the other out of the comfort zone of a particular system. In this particular case, whether the Zen statement is an "important differentiation from the classical Hindu view" or not is completely irrelevant to me. Personally, I do not subscribe to one system or another and attach no label to myself. Like my teacher, I seek Truth. When differences arise due to wording and theories in the various systems, I find it best to raise the level (or go deeper depending on which wording you prefer) where the essences of the various religions converge and more meaningful dialogues can proceed until, of course, those "dialogues" are conducted in utter and complete silence as in the case of several extraordinary masters whom I've encountered during the course of my travels.

While I agree with your point that, ultimately, there is no plurality, it is often difficult to speak from two radically different perspectives simultaneously ---- that of unity consciousness and that of apparent individualistic separateness. There is a famous Zen saying from the period of the Tang Dynasty that I have never forgotten. "Equality without differentiation is poor equality; differentiation without equality is poor differentiation". There's just unity in diversity. Now, to get back to your original point, "to whom was your post directed?" (I'm playing with you; it's a good post.)

I just wanted to thank rideforever for the informative comments. Our paths seem to have a lot in common.

My earlier meditations did eventually rise to the ajna chakra in the forehead and rested there for a while .... after, I might add, going through the other chakras. It has since been drawn to the crown and beyond.

One must follow one's intuition and my intuition has led me to follow the subtle vibrations back to the Source from the crown of the head. After I had already gravitated to that practice, I realized that Edgar Cayce did something similar except that he followed the Light. ( I am not familiar with Sant Margh, but gravitated naturally toward my particular practice.) I can relate quite easily to four of the five phases that you mentioned while I must ponder the fifth phase.

Those are profound statements and I can relate to them best with my own symbology. I often meditate on the process of creation using the OM symbology with the bindu (dot/point) closely correlating to your "seed" which connects to "a structure (entity) created in order to explore itself". "These seeds are the way that existence explores itself". This is well said. It would seem that, once one connects to the Source, one can shift attention from the Source perspective to the entity perspective without losing its direct connection to the Universal Consciousness just as an actor can assume a role when appearing on the stage without losing his connection to his worldly identity. In this manner, one remains connected to the Source while simultaneously acting out one's role in an outwardly ordinary manner. Once again, it would be interesting to hear what you have to say on this subject. P.S. I broke my response to your lengthy post into two parts since it seems easier to discuss the two related points separately at this time. It is my sense that the process is one subject and the "what next" is another subject though the two are obviously closely related.

First of all, I want to thank you for your very informative, experiential response. I was drawn to a process similar to what you just described with only somewhat minor variations. (I will try to use your terminology wherever possible since it is quite clear and appropriate.) When the mind is completely still and thought-free, one becomes aware of very subtle vibrations in the crown of the head (as opposed to the back of the head in your process). These vibrations are subtler than thoughts and are generally obscured by one's thought vibrations. One is drawn to those vibratory "sounds" just as Ulysses was drawn to the sounds of the sirens in Homer's epic, the Odyssey. Instead of being shipwrecked on the distant shore as ships were in the Odyssey, the vessel (body/ego) is destroyed/transcended (these words are clearly inadequate, but the best I can do for now) as "this inner feeling attention feels identity" as you described. Therein, "it is totally still and peaceful inside, which is what you are. And it is directly connected to the Universal Consciousness behind ... so your feel above (as opposed to behind) your head it opens into infinity". This is a great beginning so let us proceed a step further as this is where I ultimately wanted to go when I introduced this subject. As one becomes "directly connected to the Universal Consciousness behind" it all and "it opens into infinity", I have meditated extensively on what to do next once one gets glimpses of the infinite consciousness without all the details. At first, like the "Sleeping Prophet Edgar Cayce" , I had the initial urge to explore the Universal Consciousness in detail as in past lives and the Akashic Records and other things along those lines. That didn't last long for reasons which we can discuss later. Eventually, I became inclined to just rest where "it is totally still and peaceful inside" and be receptive to whatever is manifested and/or revealed and upon which one's pure intuition is inclined/guided to act. I would be very interested in hearing what you have to say on this subject. P.S. Although I have done extensive chakra meditation in the past, I am no longer inclined to meditate similarly on the other centers which you mentioned such as the "other important centers in the forehead", the "heart", the "solar plexus", etc. The subtle vibrations at the crown of the head command the most attention now and, as you stated in the rest of your post (which I will comment on in a separate post) allow us to trace back or " feel back along the tree to the source".

Good point. What I am trying to discuss, however, is the process whereby that "which is prior" (in your terminology) becomes the "individual" (in your terminology) and HOW one shifts attention to become "established in the Consciousness which is prior". The process of creating the "union", the bridge of the personal and universal, is what interests me most for purposes of this discussion. You also stated "that is why HE will live beyond death". Since you seem to equate "HE" with the "individual", what exactly do you think it is that lives beyond death?

It has been well said that the body and brain and mind itself are ultimately all projections of consciousness. You raise a good point which can lead to an even deeper discussion on the nature of the Reality and the manifestation of "apparently" separate entities. The words themselves, as I noted in a previous post, eventually become completely inadequate so let's be mindful about the inherent problems with specific terminology and focus more on the process.

Since the text is a translation, you may have a point here regard a mistranslation but keep in mind that words clearly become inadequate as one goes deeper and deeper into meditation. The key point in Ramana's statement was a description of the process in which individual entities appear as "apparently" separate entities. There are obvious implications in accordance with the "As above so below" and "Man is made in the image of God" principles. You referenced the Mandukya Upanishad, which is one of my favorite Upanishads. As you duly noted, "he (Ramana) is explaining the process of waking world, dream world, deep sleep state, and the turiya state beyond those three as described in the Mandukya Upanishad. Having been stirred to practice "conscious sleep" by the Mandukya Upanishad, I have been able to observe how dream-objects manifest in the dream-world. In validating Ramana's statement, I came to the same conclusion that he did but am still thinking about what are the best words to describe the formation of the entity --- brain, mind, consciousness, etc. In any case, Ramana's statement seems to be quite accurate and that is what I did personally to initially validate what he said via the dream experience .... before going further.

...or it can mean that Ramana became established in that which doesn't change but lies beyond/behind it all and is inherent in all of creation. You raise an interesting point which touches on the nature of the Reality and the "unity in diversity" of which Ramana has often spoken.

The dream is often used as an analogy to the process of creation whereby the "One becomes many". Do you view individuals as separate entities or as parts of a whole. Therein lies the answer to your question "in who's brain".

"Your Self is ever present". What more can one add to that?

I'm re-reading my Brian Walker translation which I started reading in 2010, and looking at the notes that I wrote at that time This chapter triggered the practice for me to "just help without reservation" without discriminating regarding who are deserving and who are not deserving. This manifested in what I call "random acts of kindness" without looking back. I just follow my inner voice and, if it inspires me to helpful action, I just do it and then move on. Last Sunday, on the subway, my friend Margie and I met a man our age with very good energy. He was a person of meager income who was a "busker" (sings on the subway for extra money to make ends meet) and who gave me his "entertainer card" with contact information after we had a very good conversation. I was planning to go to the opera Tosca at the Met and called him to ask if he had ever been to the opera. Since he was a musician, he indicated that he would love to go but had never been to an opera since it was not in his budget. I told him that, if I could get online RUSH tickets, I would treat him. Sure enough, I got orchestra RUSH tickets to the opera for $25 each (tickets which normally sold for $230 each) and treated him to a wonderful evening. When one does "random acts of kindness" without even considering who is "deserving" or "not deserving", the Universe somehow cooperates in the best interests of all. (I should add that, prior to going to the opera, his sister warned him to be careful since she couldn't imagine a virtual stranger taking her economically-challenged elderly brother to the opera. However, his intuitive sense of good vibes worked to his benefit and his sister afterwards said that he was fortunate to have met such an altruistic person who "helps others" without looking for something in return.) This is a very good chapter which helped to develop a "random acts of kindness" practice for me and I now try to do at least one "random act of kindness" each day. Talk and theory must be translated into action or it is just talk.

I am a new member here, and I am so glad to find this thread. It inspired me to take out my Hua Hu Ching book (translated by Brian Walker), which I started reading on March 19th 2010, and to review the notes that I made in the book while reading the comments on this thread. I had underlined practically the whole chapter () and it's great to re-read it. This chapter resonated completely with me. I particularly liked: "Those who wish to know the whole truth take joy in doing the work and service that comes to them". I am a firm believer of staying in the moment and not missing opportunities to learn via whatever "comes to them" naturally. I've discovered that, when one is mindful and follows one's pure intuition, one naturally and effortlessly comes in contact with whatever is in the best interests of all in any given moment.

If the words resonate with me, I investigate further but this does not necessarily mean that words that don't resonate are not true Tao. It may simply mean that I don't understand, and I can cite many instances in my life where the words didn't resonate at first but, at some point in my life, I finally recognized as Truth. The words hadn't changed ...... but I had.