dwai

imho, effort in this context refers to "mental effort" and not necessarily physical. My teachers have told me that Tai chi should be practiced with effortless effort. Put too much effort and it is detrimental and put too little effort and there's no effect whatsoever. The right amount of effort is effortless effort (paradoxical). So when I teach now, I see my friends struggling with the same conundrum - how much effort is too much effort? What does it take to become effortless in your effort? My yardstick is, if you feel strained in anyway, that is too much effort. It should be as you put it, just like "things as they is"...

Can you tell me which Upanishad says that the ego will be destroyed completely? If you read more advanced texts on Advaita Vedanta like Ashtavakra Gita you'll see that they are suggesting something similar to Papaji. I used to believe the same thing as you - that the ego must be "killed", until my teacher told me that there is no need. The ego is needed in order to function in this world. We have to just make it realize that it is subservient to the True Self (He called it Spiritual Mind). Slowly, as experiences unfolded, I realized that while the ego doesn't "die", it slowly relinquishes control and lets the True Self take over. The upadhi (limiting adjunct aka body-mind) is only limiting if there is absolute identification with it and it's modifications. Stop the modifications and see that your true self is not the body-mind. Then, further more that all that is, is predicated on that true self. With that being established as a fact, let go of your attachments to the impulses of the body-mind, and be free. What is prarabhda (already acivated) will continue to play out until they run their course or the body-mind ends.

Yes. The mainstream media in India is heavily indoctrinated with an anti-Hindu mindset. Till this present government got elected in a clear majority, this was far more rampant. The current government is formed by the primarily Hindu middle-classs party known as the BJP (which has been called a right wing extreme nationalist party by this same media who hate Hinduism) - and is therefore more sympathetic.

So the question asked to Papaji is "there are many teachers who prescribe some practice following which a certain result is achieved. Further he asks, you yourself seem to have done many thousand hours of practice and read many scriptures. How can you then say that no effort is needed?" Papaji's response as I understood is this. He spontaneously experienced the full awakening at the age of 7 or 8. But he couldn't understand it and no one could explain to him what it was that he became fully aware of. So he went from teacher to teacher, did many practices till he realized that, that which he was seeking to understand was beyond understanding, and that he never once was not THAT! Further he suggests that all practices/efforts to attain something might get you to that thing but it won't be permanent. Only by becoming aware of that which we never not are, and fully accepting that simple and constant fact of our being, can we become fully free. In another talk he asks "tell me who you are..."...in a split second of a split second, try to see what your identity is..." That is a telling question really, as it brought home to me the same realization/awareness that I have now and always had (but didn't recognize it)...

attention bindi -- This is relevant on your OP about effort vs no-effort -- https://youtu.be/TfCPPzztKYM?t=1079

I love this guy's bhajans. My grandfather used to play his and his dad's music when I was in 3rd-4th grade...grew up listening to this music.

* * * Killing the Ego * * * Question : Papaji, a recurring difficulty for me is that my ego wants to be part of the process of becoming free. My ego want to congratulate itself by saying “Look at me. Look at what l am doing " Part of me says, 'No, you are not coming here, " but my ego, feeling like a little child, says, “Me , too I am coming too ! So there isn't quite that letting go. Sri Papaji : No need for letting go. You should make use of this very sympathetic ego. It is a nice ego, a good ego. If the ego wants to be free, it is a good symptom. First, the ego will start. Usually, the ego doesn't want you to be free, and will tend to take you toward the objects of the senses. Mostly for enjoyment. If the ego wants to be free, start with the ego itself. First, I is an ego, isn't it? Yes. Through this ego you are working. Everything is being worked by the ego itself in the world. Now you have to make use of this ego. Take this ego Selfward from where it arises. If she wants to be free, take this ego toward freedom. What is that? Return to its source. Ego is a thought, isn't it? Ego is the first thought that rises in the morning. " I am Fred" is Fred-thought. So dive this ego-thought toward where it rises. I has taken a role of ego itself. I, the real I, has become I as an ego. "I am doing this; I have done that; I want that; I don't want this; I know." These thoughts rise as the ego. Then, turn the ego back towards its source from where it rises. "My ego wants to be free," you said. So bring this ego back to its source. Then this ego-I will introduce you to the real source, also an I. When she returns to her source, this I will merge into the source. That is why this thought is a very blessed thought. "I want to be free" is still ego appearing. So you must work on this ego-thought, this I-thought. And return back to its source. Then the ego will see her face; she will merge and ego will vanish. What will be left is the source itself. And this ego will not appear again. It will be dissolved.., discharged into the ocean as a river discharges into the ocean and becomes ocean and does not return. From there, file functions will be from the source itself ! Not egoistic. Spontaneous, without involvement in the thought process. No thought process will be there--only direct sponta¬neous activity without thinking. First I think and then I act. This process will be gone and direct activity will be there according to circumstances. In this process even the memory won't be there either. You don't need memory. Memory is ego itself. All this will be finished. Mind wiIl be no-mind. Mind and ego, there is not much difference. Neither the mind nor the ego exist. In fact, they never existed ! These are just your own desires. Desires for the enjoyment of the samsara. Yet in reality, they don't exist. You have never seen the face of your ego, nor tile face of your mind. It is like a ghost, so as a ghost we accept it. This has been handed down from generation to generation. In reality, the ego doesn't exist, the mind doesn't exist, and samsara doesn't exist. Yet when the ego rises, samsara rises. When the ego ceases, samsara ceases. When samsara ceases, then you will recognize your nature. You are not to earn it by any effort ! Even when you meditate it is the suggestion through the ego itself that you meditate. Q : The way you speak about it now, it sounds like a very loving process. Normal, I think of getting rid of the ego or killing the ego, to let it go. But now you are saying that one should let the ego see its own true nature. Sri Papaji : Yes, Q : That seems like an incredibly loving thing to do for anything. Because then it isn't killing but an enhancement. Whatever sees its own true nature would be perfect. Sri Papaji : When you decide to kill ego, this is the ego itself. How will you kill it? Has anybody killed the ego? What is the weapon needed to kill the ego? First there must be something to be killed. First you must see the thing that is to be killed. Then, in the seeing, it is already killed. This thought arises: "I want to kill the ego." Trace this I itself. When you say, "I want to kill the ego," return back to this l and see if there is any ego to be killed. Q : You have often said the ego is like a wave arising in the ocean. It seems to me that the ocean and the ego are part of the same thing. Now l see I should really sink into my ego and from the place of the ego recognize that I am of the ocean itself Sri Papaji : No, not that way. When you say the wave belongs to the ocean, who is saying the wave is different from the ocean? Q : Ego. Sri Papaji : Ego is the wave. You are the source. You are ocean, yet you do not identify yourself with the ocean in that place. When you are the ocean, how do you differ from the waves? What conflict do you have with the waves? Q: None. But my problem is to go from the ego to the source. Sri Papaji : This source is ocean itself. Ego plays on the surface of the ocean like a wave. The trouble is that right now you are describing yourself as an onlooker of both ocean and wave, standing somewhere on the beach. You have to identify yourself and say, "I am the ocean." Q : l see. I thought I was seeing myself as the wave. But if I really saw myself as the wave then I wouldn’t be separate from the ocean. So the wave can't see itself as separate from the ocean. Sri Papaji : You have to be ocean itself. You are the ocean. When a wave arises, you be under the wave. How is the wave different from the ocean itself ? Name, shape, and movement. All this is activity, but how is the ocean concerned with the wave's name, form, or movement ? Waves rise and fall and move about, and how is this the ocean's concern? You be the ocean first and then see. Where is the wave? Where is your ego? These waves are only samsara rising from the ocean. Under¬neath is nirvana. Ocean is nirvana. Emptiness. In that emptiness waves arise. And in emptiness if waves are moving, how are they different from emptiness itself? They are all empty ! So you have to return to the source, to emptiness, to the ocean, and then see how you feel, how you are different in activities, movement, name, form. Q: What is your response to someone who says, "I have a family and children. I have too many commitments, so what possibility is there for me to awaken?" Sri Papaji : That person must wake up from the dream that he or she has a family. One is always free and one is always alone. The mind is only dreaming. For example, when I fall asleep I dream that I marry and have children. In the dream I start to worry that I have no time for meditation or to go to the cave in the mountains. All these things are uttered when a person is living in a dream. It is better to wake that person up from the dream. Nothing has ever touched this person; he or she is always alone. When you see any name or any form, it is only a dream. Q : I read that the Maharshi said we should constantly abide in the Self Sri Papaji : I would say instead, liberate the mind from any abiding. Q: But the mind does not abide. Sri Papaji : Who else but the mind abides? Yes, but the mind finishes. Sri Papaji : Yes, this is non-abidance. If you abide somewhere, you have rejected someplace else to abide here. If you abide here, the mind will jump to abide somewhere else as well. Allow the mind to abide nowhere and what will be the result? Mind has to abide on an object. If the object is removed, the mind can¬not hang with an object. Then there will be no-mind. Q : Then the mind is its object. Yes, same thing. Any object is objectified mind. And if you don't allow the mind to abide anywhere, there is no-mind. No-mind is freedom. When mind abides, samsara appears. Samsara is a construction of the mind. ~ From WakeUp and Roar Satsang with H.W.L. Poonja Book

nice...one of my buddies did his research in Asheville....on fuel-cell technology in the early 2000s.

May I come record here?

Love is the nature of the Self. It is absolute equanimity towards all things, knowing that they are just projections of one's own Self. There is no good or bad, this or that there. Love and Joy are the same thing. When this expresses itself through the mind-body, they become what we consider love and joy in the normal, everyday sense. What we experience through any object in our consciousness (mind), e.g. I love my dog or I'm in love with someone, is just the means to taste that which is already within us. Similarly joy - when we listen to a most beautiful piece of music and experience joy, it is just a taste of the joy that is our own nature. When we become truly present, we find that love and joy is already there. And that these are unlimited as the consciousness that we really are.

Actually We are able to also discern between relative goodness or badness. That suggests we are capable of fuzzy logic, in which there are more than just "yes or no/on or off" states. To state we are binary in logic is a reductionism that doesn't factor all the "in-between" states we regularly encounter and respond to. Do I need to give examples therein? Another factor I think is cultural. Western culture today is more binary than eastern cultures, where we have more awareness of in-between states....

It seems that I am in the world. But really, the world is in me

all of us are nothing but pure consciousness. Matter, body, etc are mere projections

I notice that certain tendencies that rise, for whatever reason, do due to memories (past) or projections based on memories (future). As soon as it happens, a realization rises too - I am observing these tendencies/patterns emerging. If these patterns are emerging (in my mind), then those can't be me. So, just by staying aware of my Self as the observer of these patterns, these patterns which were very powerful triggers for certain behaviors in the past, seem to just whither away and die. Behaviors and tendencies that have managed to control "me" in the past just seem to drop away as soon as I go back to being present. I mean some patterns that have been my companions for 25 years or even longer (some from childhood even), seem to be "dying on the vine" so to speak... I find that practice/cultivation too seems to be affected by these patterns/habits. First I wanted to cultivate to develop martial prowess. Then I wanted to cultivate for spiritual prowess. Then I forgot why I practice (or so I thought). There still exist subtle "desires" which are based on past and future. But slowly, they seem to be also withering away by staying present. The pace is slow, but I think staying present helps as it is timeless and patience is a lot easier this way. sure, the mind vacillates from being present to not being present, but seems like the pendulum, even though it (mind) swings left or right, always touches the center (which is the present). I do experience morbid depression (which I have before too) from time to time. Periods where nothing seems to be happening -- no growth, no experiences, etc. Now slowly I'm realizing that experiences do not directly indicate growth. Sometimes in the midst of my most morbidly dark moments (in the past), the growth still happened, something was working, quietly and silently, dissolving the bonds.... Before I struggled more with these seemingly inert periods of gloom. Now it seems I struggle less...especially with the realization that, I am just witnessing all these happenings. I am not the doer of these things. Like my master told me - "keep doing your work and be patient. You'll get there eventually..."

From Papaji--

Meditation and stillness is our very nature.

Beautifully explained by Swami Sarvapriyananda!

Watch this series if you can -- Curious Minds | The Chopra Foundation Put aside any preconceptions you have about Deepak Chopra and just watch this series.

Yes. Daoist metaphysics is absolutely applicable to Quantum Mechanics. Actually, it resolves both classical as well as quantum physics at the meta-level. It is applicable for thermodynamics, newtonian mechanics, quantum mechanics, etc etc. More and more scientists today are stumbling onto the framework provided by Daoists - The "Dao <--> Taiji <--> 10,000 things" without background (or in many cases, ignoring the prior groundwork already laid down by the ancients).

Discussion on miracles (attention Pilgrim and Bindi) --

You should learn to open and close your joints and let the energy circulate even while seated in cross-legged posture. If you build up your sitting practice gradually (sit only 15 mins at a time, slowly, i.e. every 2 weeks, building up to 20-25-30 and so on) , with regular joint opening/closing, i think the circulation problem will go away. Also, consider using a meditation cushion or a folded blanket (I think raising your butt 3-4" above the ground is sufficient) to relieve pressure from the joints in the legs as well.

instead of awakened vs enlightened, could we perhaps talk about whether we know the Witness, we can empty the mind, etc? How we handle stresses that life throws at us from time to time? What are some of the strategies employed to stay in that "goldilocks zone", to address disturbances from the equilibrium (emotional, etc)? Are we struggling with/judging behaviors/habits of ourselves that we find disturbing? Are we truly comfortable in our "own skin", so to speak?

What that greater and essential spiritual meaning is, varies, depending on who you ask. For me, the Advaita Vedanta view is the most accurate and meaningful. For some others, it is not.

Yeah, Shankaracharya has been accused of being a crypto-buddhist many times. It really is a matter of whether someone accepts the Advaita Vedanta view or not. Gaudiya Vaishnavites literally turn red in the face with anger if you talk about "mayavad"

My Master has some stories like that...yes, yes, yes, yes and yes -- they are miraculous (did I miss some yesses?)