2024-06-29 Ramana Maharshi Foundation UK: Pure awareness, manōnāśa and manōlaya
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 чер 2024
- In a Zoom meeting with the Ramana Maharshi Foundation UK on 29th June 2024, Michael answers various questions about Bhagavan’s teachings.
A clearer audio copy of this video can be listened to on Sri Ramana Teachings podcast (ramanahou.podbean.com) or downloaded from ramanahou.podbean.com/e/2024-... and a more compressed audio copy in Opus format (which can be listened on the VLC media player and some other apps) can be downloaded from mediafire.com/file/izsxu39niq...
A clearer audio copy of this video can be listened to on Sri Ramana Teachings podcast (ramanahou.podbean.com) or downloaded from ramanahou.podbean.com/e/2024-06-29-ramana-maharshi-foundation-uk-pure-awareness-manonasa-and-manolaya and a more compressed audio copy in Opus format (which can be listened on the VLC media player and some other apps) can be downloaded from mediafire.com/file/izsxu39niqoab40
Ego rises with the body that is the great explanation given by the best teacher of Ramana I think he has I mean Michael Jam Sir has well digested the teaching of Sadguru Ramana thank you Sir, Michael James, please continue at least as long as I live in this body. May you have all the strength of Bhagvan
🙏
Bhagavan taught that when ego rises, everything else rises. It seems people hear that but many do not grasp its full implications because they are attached to concepts they have picked up from different sources than Bhagavan. Alas these sources can only create confusion if one tries to mix these concepts with Bhagavan's teachings.
What does Bhagavan mean with *everything?* He means all phenomena, all ideas, anything that a mind can imagine. That includes the idea of "evil forces" and consequently "divine forces" like angels and what not. For the immature aspirant it's an appropriate explanation and many believe this. However if one wants to dig deeper and listen to Bhagavan, study his chore texts, then one realizes that the ultimate cause of all ideas and evil and good forces is ego. If ego does not rise then there are no evil forces or anything else, just that what is truly only real and that is atma-swarupa.
Ego is the first thought and if no second and third thoughts would arise nothing evil could arise too. However as soon as ego rises with it rises (simultaneously) second and third thoughts as all phenomena, objects, and mental ideas. Only ego gives ideas like good and evil seeming reality. However they are only as real as ego and since ego is actually non-existent then evil or good forces are non-existent too.
*Thus ego is the cause of all evil forces!*
How does that help the aspirant? Bhagavan pointed out to go after the root cause of suffering and that is ego as the first thought. And he gave us the great practice of atma-vichara. When we practice properly atma-vichara we transcend duality and no "evil" forces including karma can affect us the deeper we sink with self-investigation. Thus our only concern should be to attend to "I am" and not go after follies like evil forces or anything else which transpires in this dream world.
Namo Ramanaya 🙏🙏🙏
❤❤❤
Short Q&A videos from this channel can be watched on youtube.com/@sriramanateachingsqa
Thank you. 🙏
You are a great teacher! Thanks for your full heartet dedication to truth. You helped me a lot on my way to peace. May we always remember. May we fully accept the truth of formless oneness. May we die into that. Only that is truth, completeness, peace. All beings and all universes are in peace and freedom when I am formless.
I am god. Only being aware of myself as pure being I am able to create and sustain infinite universes in perfection. In my formless being endless heavens dance. All worlds in harmony. No suffering, no limitation. Identity is form and form is division, incompleteness, becoming without being. May all the gods and boddhisattvas in my being let go even of the path of light, liberating world After world. Only being formless oneness all beings are liberated.
As long as you have a mind and it's alive and vibrating you have no choice but to live this mind generated physical illusion through births and deaths as an ego self.since you being consciousness living a mind wake. A dying mind leads you to enlightenment and finally freedom.
Sri Arunachala Aksharamanamalai sung by Sri Sadhu Om, with English translation by Michael James, can be watched here: vimeo.com/ramanahou/am000 . For advertisement-free videos on teachings and songs related to Bhagavan Ramana, please visit vimeo.com/ramanahou and click 'showcases' on the bottom left. Each original work of Bhagavan Ramana has its own showcase with explanations of Michael James.
so sorry to hear about lost manuscripts and denied access; what better than to have the person most familiar, far from imperfect instrument! to oversee the arrangement and scan these priceless works for posterity 🙏🕉️
Is the direct method of Self enquiry the easiest method also?
Namaskaram. Yes, as Bhagavan explains in Āṉma-Viddai, sriramanateachings.org/translations.html#av, particularly in verse 4, happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2023/11/anma-viddai-verse-4-self-investigation.html
Namo Ramanaya
🙏🙏🙏
@@SriRamanaTeachings Thank you for the information. As this is the easiest method there must be lot of people who have reached the state of Sri Ramana. You may be familiar with such people. I would like to contact some such people. Can you please give me the contact information of some such realized saints?
Is there consciousness in anaesthesia?
is there consciousness in sleep?
This question is answered in this video: ua-cam.com/video/R3JCUQylJcM/v-deo.htmlsi=GkPpkg-XhJiLF_kV
If pure awareness becomes aware of something, like a breeze, is that no longer pure awareness, as it now has an object?
Pure awareness can *never* be aware of "something" whatever that would be! That assumption is nonsense and it is apparent you have not grasped what pure awareness entails.
Pure awareness is only aware of pure awareness. It IS. Truly - it is not even aware of itself since that would imply duality. Mind cannot truly fathom this only a practitioner of proper atma-vichara could know that.
@@johnmcdonald260 How would one distinguish pure awareness from pure non-awareness? If one experiences oneself as Silence, isn't that in duality with noise? At what point does pure awareness transcend and include objects? I am trying to get specific about what subject-object consciousness has to see in order to be set free. What is the order of things, that the subject-object awareness sees its unreality, then one sees the self-identical/self-sufficient, or the opposite, that one sees the si/ss and then drops the subject/object egoity? Or, are they the same thing and it happens simultaneously?
@@jazzsnare When Bhagavan mentions silence he means atma-swarupa what is no thought, no vritti, but manonasa or an "annihilated mind". Only that is silence or summa iru per Bhagavan.
What most aspirants believe to be silence is a pause of the chatter of mind where one seemingly is in a peaceful and quiet state. There seems to be no thought.
*However* , there are still subtle thoughts and especially the "unconscious" thought (which we are not aware of), of "I am a body". That thought is the cause for all phenomena and a world. These subtle thoughts are not silence of course since only the complete and eternal absence of thoughts could be summa iru or Silence.
Objectified awareness can never and will never see pure awareness. As I said many times before, pure awareness/atma-swarupa and ego/objectified awareness are *mutually exclusive* . Did that ever reach your comprehension? Think about it: if they are mutually exclusive how can there be any connection?
You keep asking the same questions and ignore all of the answers given since you seem to not comprehend them.
@@johnmcdonald260 be gentle, he’s trying. The fact that he wrote up his question in that manner means he’s interested and wants to learn why use harsh language and call his ideas “nonsense”. Why not encourage him to continue practicing? Eventually, we all will outgrow our own questions as our love for Bhagavan deepens and that’s fine.
@@johnmcdonald260" Objectified awareness can never and will never see pure awareness. As I said many times before, pure awareness/atma-swarupa and ego/objectified awareness are mutually exclusive . Did that ever reach your comprehension? Think about it: if they are mutually exclusive how can there be any connection?"
I think your problem is that you conflate reciting the teaching as comprehension. Bhagavan gave pointers but the individual must come to comprehend them. That is why you cannot grasp what I am getting at with say, the specifics of what the ego must see in order to be free, for example. You notice that MJ gives the analogy of the prisoner who escapes before the judgment can affect him. Note that MJ and Bhagavan say that when the Self shines, the ego flees, or when one looks at the ego, it flees. How is that different from manolaya, where the ego is gone prior to the arrival of pure awareness? In both cases, the ego flees upon arrival of pure awareness, so how is one of them manonasa? You are right, that they are mutually exclusive. But, what is not answered is how this does not make manonasa impossible in that in both cases, the ego never meets the pure awareness; it is not there when pure awareness comes. What specifically must the ego acknowledge in order for the transformation or insight to occur? If they have no connection, then ...? Your problem is you are satisfied with concepts, which remain abstract and inefficacious. If you really understood these things you would have had mukti by now. What is essential for manonasa? That is the question. What in the analogy is the part where the criminal is confronted and charged and executed? The ego absconds in both manolaya and apparently in manonasa by the descriptions given. I am trying to get at what would make for a good manonasa. In the analogy there is a confrontation possible, it is implied, so what would be the equivalent in real terms?
If jivanmukta leaves body ( separate itself from the body, while living ) how body can act without awareness or ego, if body comes into existence simultaneously with the rising of ego, how come it not disappears when ego is annihilated?
If I ( as ego ) kill myself as ego, what remains is pure awareness, and let's say if I do it at this very moment, should my body not disappear from sofa where it is sitting?
Why is this path full of contradictions and paradoxes?
A jivanmukta does not leave a body but as an imagination of mind. There is no such thing as a jivanmukta, only Jnana or pure awareness or atma-swarupa.
*Everything* what is seen, experienced is an imagination of mind including bodies and a "world".
Ego cannot kill itself, it never will. It can only be "killed" with total surrender to atma-swarupa and then seemingly atma-swarupa "kills" ego. However since there was never ego in the first place ego could never be killed since all that what truly exists is atma-swarupa.
This path is full of contradictions because of the paradoxical nature of ego. It does not exist, it never existed, *BUT* from its own viewpoint! Ponder this for a while. Everything, all phenomena, this world, your relatives seemingly only exist because you, as ego, have risen and that rising gives legitimacy to everything else but that what is real only - atma-swarupa.
When ego is annihilated all phenomena and this world vanishes. If you see a "jivanmukta" then ego sees a jivanmukta, not pure awareness. Even a jivanmukta is a projection/creation of mind. Uh, ah, more confusion. Just practice atma-vichara and things will become clear. The intellect will never understand this completely.
@@Ropeorsnake That's not true, the teachings must contradict since it touches reality, viewpoint from the absolute, and unreality, viewpoint from ego.
Since we seem to be ego we need to look at both viewpoints and these inevitably must contradict each other, as clear as Bhavavan's teachings are for his devotees.
@@johnmcdonald260 solipsism is a very radical concept and the greatest secret of all is why we risen as ego in the first place. To say; find out who is asking the question, to see that ego never have risen is Brahmastra. Michael says that not even Bhagavan could answer that question. But maybe non duality is Just not my way to go. Someone could now say that I am not ready yet.
@@markocvrljak3681 it is radical to what we are assuming is correct, but if given a chance, it’s quite simple. I think that Bhagavan said the reason for rising as ego was because of our non-attention to ourself. Because we’re still so interested in outward experiences, Bhagavan’s teachings may not be as interesting at this point. But he is ever patient.
@@Ropeorsnake Well, perception is ego only, that means only ego perceives a snake because it attends to phenomena and not "I am". It is as simple as that and no contradiction.
Contradictions only arise with mind and its need for explanations. If we could trust Bhagavan then seeming contradictions cannot trouble us.
Of course I agree with you and that particular viewpoint. 🙏
Michael. I’m so thankful that I’ve discovered you and your teachings, unbiased it’s incredible ♥️. But I really have to say, even if this tangible exterior is a dream, there are evil forces. Like ramana said there is a force, a pishacha , that is real. It is not part of us.
This tangible exterior has evil forces. It is not part of me, it’s enveloping me, and I see it all around me, it’s enveloping most. The ego are forces that want to latch onto our purity, our consciousness.
It’s not many of us. Take Bhagavan seriously in his words about pishacha, it’s an evil force latching onto ppl. Possibly that’s why you were denied access to his writings.
@johnmcdonald260
Please don’t comment on this
@@morgancambara2792 You have mentioned "evil forces" in three different separate comments before on Michael's videos and I never responded to these comments. What makes you think that I'd respond now? I did not respond for the same reason why Michael never responded because the mere mentioning of folly notions like that shows that any response to the contrary would not fall on receiving ears. Thus what would be the point?
Since you keep mentioning this you seem to be quite attached to this idea.
However for the sake for all who visit Michael's videos I posted a separate comment on this comment section so people can see how Bhagavan's teachings relate to "good" and "evil".
By the way, to ask certain people to not respond to one's comment is silly and immature, this is a public comment section after all and one should think that people who seem to be interested in Bhagavan's teachings have moved beyond silly high school games like that.
If you do not want to hear the truth and are not eager to hear it despite of preconceived notions then you are not ready for this path.