Ramana's 40 Verses on Reality

[Lozen]

LOL

[doc benway]

Sounds like we're ready to tackle the next one!

 

34. It is due to illusion born of ignorance that men fail to recognise That which is always and for everybody the inherent Reality dwelling in its natural Heart-centre and to abide in it, and that instead they argue that it exists or does not exist, that it has form or has not form, or is non-dual or dual.

 

I really like how he separates reality from the mind and thoughts here. He seems to point his finger at us and say 'stop thinking and debating and just be!' but we are always too busy with our important lives to just live...

[Unconditioned]

34. It is due to illusion born of ignorance that men fail to recognise That which is always and for everybody the inherent Reality dwelling in its natural Heart-centre and to abide in it, and that instead they argue that it exists or does not exist, that it has form or has not form, or is non-dual or dual.

 

This one is really interesting. He describes why we can't recognize Reality and he also is careful to use "inherent" which means it is available to everybody. In addition we fail to abide in the 'Heart' ... as a result we debate about it's all in the mind, it's all material, or some combination of the two. I think this also implies a wasted effort in those pursuits to categorize and debate.

[Mal]

I though I was getting the hang of Ramana but this one took a LOT of pondering....which is a good thing too

 

Because of ignorance we can't see reality. So instead we blindly argue about what it is

[Lozen]

It's a good one.

[doc benway]

I think this also implies a wasted effort in those pursuits to categorize and debate.

Sounds a bit Daoist, doesn't it?

The Dao which can be named is not the true Dao...

 

 

35. To seek and abide in the Reality that is always attained, is the only Attainment. All other attainments (siddhis) are such as are acquired in dreams. Can they appear real to someone who has woken up from sleep? Can they that are established in the Reality and are free from maya, be deluded by them?

 

Hmmmm...

Another good one, I think.

I need to spend some time with this one.

[Unconditioned]

Sounds a bit Daoist, doesn't it?

The Dao which can be named is not the true Dao...

35. To seek and abide in the Reality that is always attained, is the only Attainment. All other attainments (siddhis) are such as are acquired in dreams. Can they appear real to someone who has woken up from sleep? Can they that are established in the Reality and are free from maya, be deluded by them?

 

Hmmmm...

Another good one, I think.

I need to spend some time with this one.

 

This one is tricky for me too but I'll take a stab at it.

 

To abide in the Reality that is always attained... I think this means continuously attained which implies that it is not permanent, it's a constant movement. Being in that state of not attaining/accumulating it is the only thing to Attain.

 

All achievements, 'rewards', abilities etc. are illusory like our dreams. They further the though of the permanent self. When we're in the dream it seems real, when we wake up we see that it was just a dream.

 

So can they appear real to someone who has woken up from sleep? No in the sense that it's not 'real', what is True however is that the attainments are illusions but the illusions themselves are not Reality.

 

Can those that are established in Reality be deluded by them? I would suspect not...

 

I think the message here is that attaining an achievement, ability, etc. is not the same thing as being established in Reality. I also think Ramana is trying to tell us that if we're deluded by attainments, if we see them as Real, then we are not abiding in Reality.

 

Anyone else?

[doc benway]

 

To abide in the Reality that is always attained... I think this means continuously attained which implies that it is not permanent, it's a constant movement. Being in that state of not attaining/accumulating it is the only thing to Attain.

 

To abide in the Reality that is always attained...

Another perspective on this portion -

- we are always already living our reality. All of our attempts to find reality, enlightenment, etc... our efforts to become something other than what we already are, just take us farther from our truth. The is the fundamental Non-Dual position. It's realization (experience, not intellectualization) means the end of the search. Perhaps the hardest hurdle on the path?

[thelerner]

34. It is due to illusion born of ignorance that men fail to recognise That which is always and for everybody the inherent Reality dwelling in its natural Heart-centre and to abide in it, and that instead they argue that it exists or does not exist, that it has form or has not form, or is non-dual or dual.

 

 

To me it means the intellect/ego is always going blah blah blah. Real living is heart centered, the real litmus test is does the action come from the heart.

 

Michael

[Unconditioned]

To abide in the Reality that is always attained...

Another perspective on this portion -

- we are always already living our reality. All of our attempts to find reality, enlightenment, etc... our efforts to become something other than what we already are, just take us farther from our truth. The is the fundamental Non-Dual position. It's realization (experience, not intellectualization) means the end of the search. Perhaps the hardest hurdle on the path?

 

Ahh, that is a much clearer explanation! Ironically I think I was digging for answers that were 'already attained'

[doc benway]

We're getting close!

 

36. Only if the thought 'I am the body' occurs will the meditation 'I am not this, I am That', help one to abide as That. Why should we for ever be thinking, 'I am That'? Is it necessary for man to go on thinking 'I am a man'? Are we not always That?

 

This really surprises me. It seems to be a direct response to Nisargadatta Maharaj and his guru. It makes perfect sense, though. Who is it that is saying "I am that"? Surely, 'that' would never need to remind itself what it is, would it?

[Unconditioned]

We're getting close!

 

36. Only if the thought 'I am the body' occurs will the meditation 'I am not this, I am That', help one to abide as That. Why should we for ever be thinking, 'I am That'? Is it necessary for man to go on thinking 'I am a man'? Are we not always That?

 

This really surprises me. It seems to be a direct response to Nisargadatta Maharaj and his guru. It makes perfect sense, though. Who is it that is saying "I am that"? Surely, 'that' would never need to remind itself what it is, would it?

 

Also if the though 'I am the body' is there then the meditation is useful. Use a match to light the fire, then burn it in the flames.

[Ian]

Please ignore me if I'm interrupting the flow - I only just noticed this great long thread.

 

Just wanted to mention. Michael (AugustLeo) told me about Perfect Brilliant Stillness by David Carse. If you're investigating non-duality it is a wonderful book. As near to describing the indescribable as I imagine it's possible to get.

 

I've been listening the spoken version, read by Terence Stamp.

 

(Not on commission, no vested interest, blah blah)

 

Ok, back to you guys, forget I was here !

[doc benway]

Please ignore me if I'm interrupting the flow - I only just noticed this great long thread.

 

Just wanted to mention. Michael (AugustLeo) told me about Perfect Brilliant Stillness by David Carse. If you're investigating non-duality it is a wonderful book. As near to describing the indescribable as I imagine it's possible to get.

 

I've been listening the spoken version, read by Terence Stamp.

 

(Not on commission, no vested interest, blah blah)

 

Ok, back to you guys, forget I was here !

Thanks Ian -

what, afraid to throw down with us on Ramana?

[Todd]

37. The contention, 'Dualism during practice, non-dualism on Attainment', is also false. While one is anxiously searching, as well as when one has found one's Self, who else is one but the tenth man?1

 

1 - This refers to a traditional story of a party of ten fools who were travelling together. They had to cross a river and on reaching the other shore wanted to check up whether all of them had got safely across. Each one counted in turn, but each one counted the nine others and forgot himself. So they thought the tenth man had been drowned and began to mourn him. Just then a traveller came past and asked them what was the matter. He at once saw the cause of their mistake and in order to convince them he made them walk past him one by one, giving each one a blow as he passed and telling them to count the strokes.

 

Not an easy enjoinder to take, when one is viewing the world from duality. The beauty of it, however, is that it removes time. It removes the idea that reality is ever not present, that it is something that is achieved. If all of my actions and thoughts that are based upon the notion of a self, including those that are focused on seeing through the self, are merely distractions from what already is, then what am I doing?

 

It kind've takes away the excuses, like, "I need to do this and that to get things in the right alignment to know and embody truth." Ramana seems to be saying, "No. Its much simpler than that. Just appreciate what already is." In this appreciation the seeker cannot find any point of reference, since it knows itself by the conflicts that it engages in. This might seem like confusion, or uncertainty at first, but it is pretty powerful when we acknowledge and don't move from it.

 

When combined with earlier verses, which may or may not be a wise thing to do, an interesting picture emerges. I am thinking of the verses where he enjoins us to seek the state of the non-emergence of "I" or to seek the Reality that is always attained, or to dive into oneself with keen one-pointed mind, controlling speech and breath, and to find the place whence the "I" originates... It seems like he's telling us to do something. This last verse can be seen as clarification of that. Our doing cannot be based upon the idea of a separate self. To act upon that is to perpetuate illusion, to give energy to illusion. Let go of our ideas of separateness, but then, if there remains a question, or a dissatisfaction, we may inquire, "What, in direct experience, is real?" Or if something seems to lost, "What could ever be lost? If everything is non-self, then that must include this." Then, but without the words, "What is this?".

 

Its funny how the end of the "I" seems like such an END. As if, "Well, thats too simple; I'm not interested in that. There's all this other stuff to do before i get fed up and END." And yet, its like the tenth man. The thought of "I" stops us, leaves us at the side of river, mourning something that never was. It paralyzes us and makes things seem so small and limited. It is only in the moments when the "I" is not maintained that any progress can be made. And when the "I" is not given reality, that is just the beginning of EVERYTHING ELSE.

[trailmaker]

Cool discussion, and a cheap book with no postage problems How about.

 

The illusion

"I" can see these objects "world" "soul" and "God"."I" understand they are divisions of the perfect one.

 

vs

 

The reality

"world"+"soul"+"God" = us

 

"I" am all of them, but there is no "I" because "I' implies separate and there is no separateness

 

"the person who sees, the screen on which he sees, and the light by which he sees: he himself is all of these"

 

Mmmm does my post make ANY sense?

 

 

your post making finest kind sense.

 

a teacher told me once - learn this discipline, and with practice, 'that there is no separateness', will become intuitively obvious.

[doc benway]

I am thinking of the verses where he enjoins us to seek the state of the non-emergence of "I" or to seek the Reality that is always attained, or to dive into oneself with keen one-pointed mind, controlling speech and breath, and to find the place whence the "I" originates... It seems like he's telling us to do something. This last verse can be seen as clarification of that. Our doing cannot be based upon the idea of a separate self. To act upon that is to perpetuate illusion, to give energy to illusion. Let go of our ideas of separateness, but then, if there remains a question, or a dissatisfaction, we may inquire, "What, in direct experience, is real?" Or if something seems to lost, "What could ever be lost? If everything is non-self, then that must include this." Then, but without the words, "What is this?".

It's wonderful to me how closely this ties in to what I consider to be the fundamental teaching of Daoism - Wu Wei. Let go of the "I" who is doing, becoming something, wanting, planning, and so forth. When that is gone, everything that happens is just the happening - Dao - unsullied by the illusion of a separate being.

[Todd]

It's wonderful to me how closely this ties in to what I consider to be the fundamental teaching of Daoism - Wu Wei. Let go of the "I" who is doing, becoming something, wanting, planning, and so forth. When that is gone, everything that happens is just the happening - Dao - unsullied by the illusion of a separate being.

 

I agree. In a way Wu Wei and non-self are just different ways of looking at the same thing. The "I" isn't so much a thing as a movement of energy, a verb. When the extra effort drops, then we are the Dao or the Self, consciously. Then there is movement without excess effort and identity without falsehood.

 

Another way of looking at it, is that when we acknowledge the impossibility of separation, then we fall in line with the return. The movement of all things is return, from excess effort to appreciation.

[doc benway]

38. As long as a man is the doer, he also reaps the fruit of his deeds, but, as soon as he realizes the Self through enquiry as to who is the doer his sense of being the doer falls away and the triple karma2 is ended. This is the state of eternal Liberation.

 

I absolutely love this verse.

 

It reinforces the nature of Liberation as a matter of perspective.

That doesn't mean that it is easily achievable but rather it says to me that it's a matter of recogntion followed by conviction. Liberation is simply the state of being the Self rather than the self. Once experienced, it's then simply a matter of dwelling there - this can achieved through mindfulness.

 

Karma is linked to the self and doesn't exist in Reality following Liberation.

Recognize that you are the Self and not the self and stay there.

It takes a great deal of energy and conviction but is not beyond our grasp.

Edited May 25, 2009 by xuesheng

[Lozen]

39. Only so long as one considers oneself bound, do thoughts of bondage and Liberation continue. When one enquires who is bound the Self is realized, eternally attained, and eternally free. When thought of bondage comes to an end, can thought of Liberation survive?

[vx3.taoist]

just reading over a few of these verses... they sound a lot like koans.

 

the way they are written and the usage of the words seem to be intentionally in such a way that one cannot understand them easily but instead must contemplate, read again and contemplate.

 

at least thats why i bookmarked the page.

[Lozen]

We're so close to finishing; just waiting for people to comment on 39 before I post 40.

[doc benway]

39. Only so long as one considers oneself bound, do thoughts of bondage and Liberation continue. When one enquires who is bound the Self is realized, eternally attained, and eternally free. When thought of bondage comes to an end, can thought of Liberation survive?

 

Alright, I'll bite...

 

Only the bound self can dream of liberation. When the perspective shifts beyond the limitation of the self to that of the Self, bondage is gone, and yet this can be a relatively subtle shift. It is a matter of recognizing who it is that experiences the bondage. If you follow that inquiry to its ultimate conclusion, one realizes that the bondage is illusory. If bondage is illusory, what is liberation?

 

This seems to me the transition from Taiji back to Wuji. Bondage and liberation arise mutually, when one is seen through the other cannot exist. Therefore, the end of bondage is the end of the search for liberation.

 

Hope that is worth something...

[Mal]

We're so close to finishing; just waiting for people to comment on 39 before I post 40.

 

I'm bound to a desire to reach the end... that can't be good

[Lozen]

40. If it is said, that Liberation is of three kinds, with form or without form or with and without form, then let me tell you that the extinction of three forms of Liberation is the only true Liberation.