Self Alone is Real - Annamalai Swami

[neti neti]

 

 

 

 

Key pointers for meditation extracted from this series of Q&A's. 

https://realization.org/p/annamalai-swami/annamalai.talks.html

 

The simplicity of how the Swami expresses the nature of this practice is gold. And for my brethren of a more Buddhist persuasion, that particular YouTube channel is a veritable gold mine. Jewels upon jewels, diamonds in the rough. 

[neti neti]

I was unaware of a crucial part 5!

 

Oh Maya! 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by neti neti

[old3bob]

And of course Shakti and everything derived from it is also real in a sense being that it is inseparable from the Self....thus  a non-duality that is big enough to include duality;  for there are no (real) illusions only misperceptions or limited perceptions since illusion can not arise from the real.

 

Btw.  only a very tiny percentage of people are able to live 100% as monks, nuns or renunciates which if one looks around many or most of these type teachings and their particular path or dharma are for monks, nuns or renunciates since householders would be in dharmic error in trying to live such a path!

Edited October 3, 2020 by old3bob

[neti neti]

9 hours ago, old3bob said:

And of course Shakti and everything derived from it is also real in a sense being that it is inseparable from the Self....thus  a non-duality that is big enough to include duality;  for there are no (real) illusions only misperceptions or limited perceptions since illusion can not arise from the real.

 

Btw.  only a very tiny percentage of people are able to live 100% as monks, nuns or renunciates which if one looks around many or most of these type teachings and their particular path or dharma are for monks, nuns or renunciates since householders would be in dharmic error in trying to live such a path!

 

If Self alone is, a non-duality big enough to go beyond itself in which even oneness is limited perception. Self is the perceiving.

 

As Bhagavan would say in not so many words, the true posture is remaining as one is, the pure consciousness. Thus true renunciation is simply being Self. That is the true dharma free of error. As such, I cannot help but conclude that either path may be the means of shedding one's misperceptions.

 

Edited October 4, 2020 by neti neti

[old3bob]

On 10/3/2020 at 7:37 PM, neti neti said:

 

If Self alone is, a non-duality big enough to go beyond itself in which even oneness is limited perception. Self is the perceiving.

 

As Bhagavan would say in not so many words, the true posture is remaining as one is, the pure consciousness. Thus true renunciation is simply being Self. That is the true dharma free of error. As such, I cannot help but conclude that either path may be the means of shedding one's misperceptions.

 

 

Not sure what you mean by "renunciation is simply being the Self" ?  I meant renunciation as the very strict path or lifestyle if you will for a limited number of people who are vowed to certain traditional Hindu sects;   with some of those sects being the strictest that there is.  (under the title of  Sannyasins,  which elder householders may join after spending most of a lifetime as householders)

 

Anyway, there are a lot of yoga related methods and schools that would be better named or recognized as quasi-Hindu since they  leave out a lot of the traditional, religious and guru-discipleship  aspects that are part and parcel of long time lineages mostly from India.  And to leave out those aspects can definitely result in problems!  (like householders taking up some renunciate practices or vice-a-versa)

 

For myself I definitely appreciate the Hindu teachings and at times have shared my very limited understanding of same,  but  I know that I will not be a renunciate in this lifetime nor be qualified to speak as one...which many of us sometimes act like by quoting and thus in ways advocating the methods that  are really for Renunciates/Rishis/Gurus/yogis/etc.... but which very few of us are prepared for or trained in.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by old3bob

[neti neti]

2 hours ago, old3bob said:

Not sure what you mean by "renunciation is simply being the Self" ?  I meant renunciation as the very strict path or lifestyle if you will for a limited number of people who are vowed to certain traditional Hindu sects;   with some of those sects being the strictest that there is.  (under the title of  Sannyasins,  which elder householders may join after spending most of a lifetime as householders)

 

Anyway, there are a lot of yoga related methods and schools that would be better named or recognized as quasi-Hindu since they  leave out a lot of the traditional, religious and guru-discipleship  aspects that are part and parcel of long time lineages mostly from India.  And to leave out those aspects can definitely result in problems!  (like householders taking up some renunciate practices or vice-a-versa)

 

For myself I definitely appreciate the Hindu teachings and at times have shared my very limited understanding of same,  but  I know that I will not be a renunciate in this lifetime nor be qualified to speak as one...which many of us sometimes act like by quoting and thus in ways advocating the methods that  are really for Renunciates/Rishis/Gurus/yogis/etc.... but which very few of us are prepared for or trained in.

 

I meant to share in my words what Sri Ramana meant.

 

"'Internal renunciation’ is renunciation of the ego whereas ‘external renunciation’ is giving up possessions. Together they are known as giving up ‘I’ and ‘mine’. It is the former that results in enlightenment.'

 

"If you attain perfect mastery of internal renunciation, external renunciation will have no importance." (Padamalai, p. 170, v. 102)

 

https://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/10/renunciation.html?

 

Perhaps an external asceticism is necessary in one's experience prior to receiving the required grace to apply the vow's principle inwardly.

 

Others are able to receive such grace as householders, while silently renouncing that false "I" inwardly.

 

Traditions are a safety net of sorts which surely protect seekers and aspirants from certain pitfalls.

 

Who am I to judge, but another mere spoke in the wheel of samsara? I am not that which imparts grace nor power, for grace and power are expressed on my behalf.

 

I have however been graced with enough glimpses of a higher reality, to know without reservation, that this very moment contains the potential to serve as all the preparation and training I may ever need.

This very moment possesses the power of the Guru and the lineage, as I regard all things as my Guru and all as of my lineage.

 

If one reads such words and concludes I am in error, then I would challenge them to consider if there is anything impossible for Self.

 

If Self alone is, then Self alone is perceived. How radical.

Edited October 18, 2020 by neti neti

[old3bob]

"'Internal renunciation’ is renunciation of the ego whereas ‘external renunciation’ is giving up possessions. Together they are known as giving up ‘I’ and ‘mine’. It is the former that results in enlightenment.'"  by Neti neti

 

That is an important part of it but I'd say there is a whole lot more than that regarding Sannyasins!

(although and of course I'm not one but have done a little study on the subject)

Edited October 19, 2020 by old3bob

[neti neti]

It comes to you in stages. There are pauses for effect.

 

 

[old3bob]

again, only a tiny percentage of people can and do live  the dharma of a complete renunciate or sannyasin...and for householders to try and do so would be  against and conflict with their rightful dharma.  

[dwai]

11 hours ago, old3bob said:

again, only a tiny percentage of people can and do live  the dharma of a complete renunciate or sannyasin...and for householders to try and do so would be  against and conflict with their rightful dharma.  

Ramana Maharshi did say that real renunciation is simply the letting go of positions -- neither crave, nor shirk away from anything. He gives a variety of ways in which renunciation occurs.

Quote

Giving up the non-Self is renunciation. Inhering in the Self is jnana or Self-realisation. One is the negative and the other the positive aspect of the same, single truth. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 2nd January, 1946, afternoon)

http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/10/renunciation.html

 

There are two forms of renunciation recognized in Advaita Vedanta circles. One is the renunciation of the seeker, which is called Vividisha Sanyasa. The other is the renunciation of the Awakened/enlightened one -- which is called Vidvata Sanyasa. 

 

It is true that not everyone can or must enter into vividisha sannyasa -- those who do, certainly choose the path of the monk. But jnana is not dependent on vividisha sannyasa -- jnana is simply the unveiling of our true nature. When it happens, Vidvata Sannyasa will occur in varying degrees. 

Edited October 19, 2020 by dwai

[neti neti]

The link I shared addresses all those concerns. The particular section is titled, Taking Sannyasa.

[old3bob]

54 minutes ago, dwai said:

Ramana Maharshi did say that real renunciation is simply the letting go of positions -- neither crave, nor shirk away from anything. He gives a variety of ways in which renunciation occurs.

http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/10/renunciation.html

 

There are two forms of renunciation recognized in Advaita Vedanta circles. One is the renunciation of the seeker, which is called Vividisha Sanyasa. The other is the renunciation of the Awakened/enlightened one -- which is called Vidvata Sanyasa. 

 

It is true that not everyone can or must enter into vividisha sannyasa -- those who do, certainly choose the path of the monk. But jnana is not dependent on vividisha sannyasa -- jnana is simply the unveiling of our true nature. When it happens, Vidvata Sannyasa will occur in varying degrees. 

 

well lets say depending on lineages/schools...since all are not the same.

[old3bob]

29 minutes ago, neti neti said:

The link I shared addresses all those concerns. The particular section is titled, Taking Sannyasa.

 

I'd say concerns for that school and its students but not others.

[dwai]

1 hour ago, old3bob said:

 

well lets say depending on lineages/schools...since all are not the same.

The OP was about the Advaita school.  

[old3bob]

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

The OP was about the Advaita school.  

 

right, and a heads up for those who may get the impression that there are only a few schools when there are hundreds times "x" or maybe thousands?

[neti neti]

15 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

right, and a heads up for those who may get the impression that there are only a few schools when there are hundreds times "x" or maybe thousands?

 

Jnana is universal, allowing for thousands of expressions. It matters little in what form or fashion it may unveil itself in the aspirant. Those details may matter to the aspirant, but only until the unveiling whereby only unity is perceived within diversity.

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by neti neti

[dwai]

10 hours ago, neti neti said:

 

Jnana is universal, allowing for thousands of expressions. It matters little in what form or fashion it may unveil itself in the aspirant. Those details may matter to the aspirant, but only until the unveiling whereby only unity is perceived within diversity.

 

Maybe some people want to maintain 31 flavors of vanilla ice cream?  

[old3bob]

4 hours ago, dwai said:

Maybe some people want to maintain 31 flavors of vanilla ice cream?  

 

ask the lineage holders and or Satguru's of thousand, two thousand year old schools why they do such a thing? 

Edited October 21, 2020 by old3bob