How to find god in two easy steps

[Shadowman]

“....come to think of it I'm bloody sure the Buddha, Jesus and Ramana had a few questions before enlightenment! It's good to know that enlightened beings were sentient, and we can follow in their footsteps.”

“A good teacher will not let you get away with sloppiness - teacher loves you too much for that!” - Pie’n’eal (Tony)


From a linear relative perspective, the reflection of absolute awareness in the limited consciousness of the mind, inhabits ever increasingly complex forms, culminating in the sentient human form. Even the name “human” combines terms for God “hu” and mind “man” (from the Sanskrit word mana). The human form is metaphorically a “springboard” from which the enlightened or awakened state is often realized.

So from a relative perspective it may be said your consciousness evolves through the mineral, plant, animal then human kingdoms.

However reincarnation and evolution of knowledge based consciousness ie identification with both material and conceptual forms, while appropriate as a means of teaching at a certain level of development, are in actuality just a teaching device. Such devices are employed for those who are unable to grasp immediately the direct transmission of the absolute...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzogchen

So while questions (which arise in the mind, and often invoke answers, which then lead to further questions) are appropriate at a certain level of understanding, a close reading of the techniques suggested by Buddha, Jesus and Ramana would reveal that silencing the relative mind is the pathway to realization.

A zen quote by Sosan sums this up beautifully;

“The more you think about it, the more you talk about it, the further you are from it”

Evolution and reincarnation happen to the reflection only (and then only in appearance), not to what you refer to as pure essence, which never ceases to be eternal, whole and perfect.

The whole never “actually” becomes a part (apart), however, what “appears” to be apart or separate, the ego, upon dissolution, reveals the whole. So you go from being alone (in illusory meditation*) to being the root of the word alone, all one.

The mirage of the ego obscures reality. Movement of, or action by the mind, strengthens the illusion, however, nothing illusory has any effect on reality. Which is why enlightenment has also been called the peace that passeth beyond understanding. To realize the Self, is to realize eternal being, eternal bliss and eternal peace. They don't call it heaven for nothin' .

Be still, and know that I am God

I am that I am

Nothing real can be threatened (by mirages), nothing unreal (apparently separate phenomenal forms) exists.

What is IS, what ain’t, ain’t

With Love/Namaste
tim

*

[Tony]

.........................................?...................................!

.........................................?...................................!

[Tarka the Duck]

Hello Tim

Even the name “human” combines terms for God “hu” and mind “man” (from the Sanskrit word mana

Interesting - I always thought the consensus was that word human came from the Latin root, humus, meaning earth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
human (adj.)
mid-15c., humain, humaigne, from O.Fr. humain, umain (adj.) "of or belonging to man" (12c.), from L. humanus "of man, human," also "humane, philanthropic, kind, gentle, polite; learned, refined, civilized," probably related to homo (gen. hominis) "man," and to humus "earth," on notion of "earthly beings," as opposed to the gods (cf. Hebrew adam "man," from adamah "ground"). Cognate with O.Lith. zmuo (acc. zmuni) "man, male person."

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=human
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Could you say more about the source of your explanation?
Thanks!

[The23rdman]

Nice thread.

We don't have to find God (or Dog - I'm slightly confused which of the two I should be finding now...) because we never lost It. All that is required is the absolute surrender of everything we believe ourselves to be. Simple? Yes. Easy? Not on your nelly!

[Shadowman]

Posted by Tarka the Duck (here)
Hello Tim

Even the name “human” combines terms for God “hu” and mind “man” (from the Sanskrit word mana

Interesting - I always thought the consensus was that word human came from the Latin root, humus, meaning earth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
human (adj.)
mid-15c., humain, humaigne, from O.Fr. humain, umain (adj.) "of or belonging to man" (12c.), from L. humanus "of man, human," also "humane, philanthropic, kind, gentle, polite; learned, refined, civilized," probably related to homo (gen. hominis) "man," and to humus "earth," on notion of "earthly beings," as opposed to the gods (cf. Hebrew adam "man," from adamah "ground"). Cognate with O.Lith. zmuo (acc. zmuni) "man, male person."

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=human
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Could you say more about the source of your explanation?
Thanks!

Hi Kathie,

I first came upon this explanation in a book entitled "The Path of the Masters", while studying and meditating with the Sant Mat group about 20 years ago. A very worthwhile read, highly recommended. There is a link on Scribd here;

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30321660/J...of-the-Masters

From page 491 (Scribd counter shows p 539 of 619)

"In English the word human explains two facts which are characteristic of humanity— hu means God, and man means mind; which word comes from Sanskrit, manah, mind being the ordinary man. In other words, Hu, God, is in all things and beings, but it is only man by whom He is known,or who is capable of knowing him."

There is also this on dictionary.com;

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man?s=t&ld=1125

Word Origin & History
man
O.E. man, mann "human being, person," from P.Gmc. *manwaz (cf. O.S., O.H.G. man, Ger. Mann, O.N. maðr, Goth. manna "man"), from PIE base *man- (cf. Skt. manuh, Avestan manu-, O.C.S. mozi, Rus. muzh "man, male"). Sometimes connected to root *men- "to think" (see mind)

and on Sanskrit dictionary, mana is translated variously as idea, opinion, thought, view and belief;

http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?s...e&direction=SE

While Sanskrit predates Latin, perhaps both the Latin humanus and the Sanskrit mana have significance, as does the Persian word huma. Julian Johnson explores the meanings of man and Hu in greater detail on the page quoted above and the pages preceding and following it. Enjoy,

With Love/Namaste
tim

[Shadowman]

Hello again Kathie,

Here is an eloquent passage by Ramana putting mana in perspective. The closing paragraph highlights the importance of not getting caught up on the finger (ie the intricate maze of philosophies etc), but rather focusing on that which the finger is pointing towards;

M.: The inner organs (antakaranas) are classified as five: (1) Knowledge - Jnana; (2) Mind - Manas; (3) Intellect - Buddhi; (4) Memory - Chitta; and (5) The ego - Ahankara; some say only the latter four; others say only two, namely (1) Manas, mind and (2) Ahankara, the ego; still others say the Antahkarana is only one whose different functions make it appear differently and hence its different names. Heart is thus the source of the Antahkaranas. There is the body which is insentient; there is the Self which is eternal and self-luminous; in between the two there has arisen a phenomenon, namely the ego, which goes under these different names, mind (manas), intellect (buddhi), memory (chitta), the ego (ahankara), power (sakti), life current (prana), etc. Seek your source; the search takes you to the Heart automatically. The antahkaranas are only ideas (kalpana) to explain the subtle body (sukshma sarira). The physical body (sarira) is made up of the elements: earth, air, fire, water and ether; it is insentient.

The Self is pure and self-luminous and thus self-evident. The relation between the two is sought to be established by positing a subtle body, composed of the subtle aspects of the five elements on the one hand, and the reflected light of the Self on the other. In this way the subtle body which is synonymous with the mind, is both sentient and insentient, i.e.,abhasa. Again, by the play of the pure quality (satva guna) on the elements, their brightness (satva aspect) manifests as the mind (manas), and the senses (jnanendriyas); by the play of rajas (active quality), the raja (active) aspect manifests as life (prana) and limbs (karmendriyas); by the play of dullness (tamas) the tama (dark) aspect manifests as the gross phenomena of the body, etc.

D.: But the mind is reputed to have these three qualities also.

M.: Yes. There is purity (satva) in satva (in the pure quality); activity in it (rajas in satva); and dullness also (tamas in satva); and so on, Suddha satva is quite pure; misra (mixed satva) is a combination of satva with other qualities. The quality satva implies only its predominance over the other two qualities.

Later Sri Bhagavan continued: The intricate maze of philosophy of different schools is said to clarify matters and reveal the Truth. But in fact they create confusion where no confusion need exist. To understand anything there must be the Self. The Self is obvious. Why not remain as the Self? What need to explain the non-self?

And there is also this, differentiating between meditation and vichara, which some may find useful;

D.: When I read Sri Bhagavan’s works I find that investigation is said to be the one method for Realisation.

M.: Yes, that is vichara.

D.: How is that to be done?

M.: The questioner must admit the existence of his self. “I AM” is the Realisation. To pursue the clue till Realisation is vichara. Vichara and Realisation are the same.

D.: It is elusive. What shall I meditate upon?

M.: Meditation requires an object to meditate upon, whereas there is only the subject without the object in vichara. Meditation differs from vichara in this way.

D.: Is not dhyana one of the efficient processes for Realisation?

M.: Dhyana is concentration on an object. It fulfils the purpose of keeping away diverse thoughts and fixing the mind on a single thought, which must also disappear before Realisation. But Realisation is nothing new to be acquired. It is already there, but obstructed by a screen of thoughts. All our attempts are directed for lifting this screen and then Realisation is revealed.

If a true seeker is advised to meditate, many may go away satisfied with the advice. But someone among them may turn round and ask, “Who am I to meditate on an object?” Such a one must be told to find the Self. That is the finality. That is Vichara.

D.: Will vichara alone do in the absence of meditation?

M.: Vichara is the process and the goal also. ‘I AM’ is the goal and the final Reality. To hold to it with effort is vichara. When spontaneous and natural it is Realisation.


With Love/Namaste
tim

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
....come to think of it I'm bloody sure the Buddha, Jesus and Ramana had a few questions before enlightenment! It's good to know that enlightened beings were sentient, and we can follow in their footsteps.

Hi Tony,

Came across the following which you may enjoy;

D.: Our doubts can be cleared only when we ask questions.
M.: Yes. No one objects to questions being asked.
D.: It is said pariprasnena sevaya (by questioning again and again and by service). So we should ask questions and the Master should kindly remove our doubts.
M.: Continue your quotation upadekshyanti tattvam (They give instructions in Truth).
D.: Yes. But our doubts must be cleared.
M.: So it was with Arjuna. For he says in the end nashto mohah smritirlabdha (lost is my ignorance; memory restored).
D.: It was in the end. Before then he asked so many questions.
M.: The Truth was revealed even at the start. For the very first sloka of Sri Krishna’s upadesa starts: “No birth and no death, no change, etc.”
D.: Sri Krishna also says, “We have had many rebirths. I am aware of them; but you are not.”
M.: That was only because the question arose how Sri Krishna could claim to have taught the eternal Truth to Aditya. The Truth was stated even at the start. Arjuna did not understand it. The jnani’s state was later described and also the means of attainment. Incidentally Sri Krishna said that the Truth was eternal and that He had originally taught the same to Aditya. Arjuna was all along identifying himself with the body and therefore thought that Sri Krishna also was the body in front of him. He therefore asked, “How can it be? You (Sri Krishna) were born of Devaki some years before. Aditya was among those who started creation. How could you have taught this Truth to Aditya?” Sri Krishna continues to answer Arjuna’s questions in that strain: “Many rebirths we have had. I know them all; but you do not,” and so on.
D.: We must also know the Truth.
M.: You are taught the Truth. Instructions have been given. See who you are. That is the whole instruction. - Ramana Maharshi

Let me know if the above raises any (ahem) questions,

Namaste/With Love
tim

[Tony]

Posted by tim (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
....come to think of it I'm bloody sure the Buddha, Jesus and Ramana had a few questions before enlightenment! It's good to know that enlightened beings were sentient, and we can follow in their footsteps.

Hi Tony,

Came across the following which you may enjoy;

D.: Our doubts can be cleared only when we ask questions.
M.: Yes. No one objects to questions being asked.
D.: It is said pariprasnena sevaya (by questioning again and again and by service). So we should ask questions and the Master should kindly remove our doubts.
M.: Continue your quotation upadekshyanti tattvam (They give instructions in Truth).
D.: Yes. But our doubts must be cleared.
M.: So it was with Arjuna. For he says in the end nashto mohah smritirlabdha (lost is my ignorance; memory restored).
D.: It was in the end. Before then he asked so many questions.
M.: The Truth was revealed even at the start. For the very first sloka of Sri Krishna’s upadesa starts: “No birth and no death, no change, etc.”
D.: Sri Krishna also says, “We have had many rebirths. I am aware of them; but you are not.”
M.: That was only because the question arose how Sri Krishna could claim to have taught the eternal Truth to Aditya. The Truth was stated even at the start. Arjuna did not understand it. The jnani’s state was later described and also the means of attainment. Incidentally Sri Krishna said that the Truth was eternal and that He had originally taught the same to Aditya. Arjuna was all along identifying himself with the body and therefore thought that Sri Krishna also was the body in front of him. He therefore asked, “How can it be? You (Sri Krishna) were born of Devaki some years before. Aditya was among those who started creation. How could you have taught this Truth to Aditya?” Sri Krishna continues to answer Arjuna’s questions in that strain: “Many rebirths we have had. I know them all; but you do not,” and so on.
D.: We must also know the Truth.
M.: You are taught the Truth. Instructions have been given. See who you are. That is the whole instruction. - Ramana Maharshi

Let me know if the above raises any (ahem) questions,

Namaste/With Love
tim

Hello Tim,
It is true that the truth is at the beginning, middle and the end.
There are many levels, each using the same words
but the meaning changes - perception refines.


We can say that obstacles do not exist,
but the untrained will still stumble.
That is what compassion is all about.


The answer is always in the question.
Tony

[Tony]

This is for anyone reading this who may be confused about the different levels. It's not a matter of going "higher and higher": It's a matter of losing the confusion, and clarity revealing itself. As the Buddha said, "We are only losing that to which we cling." Or as Michelangelo explained, "I saw the figure within the marble: all I did was remove the waste." We can easily see what we are holding on to when we observe our reactions.

It's not a matter of who is right: we all use different language to express ourselves. The answer being found in the question applies to any spiritual question - the answer is to enquire who is asking the question. That which asks the question is the answer. It is that which is aware of the question that is the answer!

An example, taking the question, "What should I be doing?" There are 2 parts to the answer: one is just to be aware of that which is asking the question. At the heart of that is essence, and merely has to be recognised through clarity. The second part is that, whatever arises in our life is karmically produced from the past and If we react, we deepen our karma. But in the moment of recognising that this situation is a product from the past, no karma is produced. It is karmically neutral, as the karma is in our reactions. It's not what occurs in life that produces karma: it is our reaction to those events.

The second part of the path to enlightenment is exhausting all karma - purification.

Tony

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
This is for anyone reading this who may be confused about the different levels. It's not a matter of going "higher and higher": It's a matter of losing the confusion, and clarity revealing itself. As the Buddha said, "We are only losing that to which we cling." Or as Michelangelo explained, "I saw the figure within the marble: all I did was remove the waste." We can easily see what we are holding on to when we observe our reactions.

It's not a matter of who is right: we all use different language to express ourselves. The answer being found in the question applies to any spiritual question - the answer is to enquire who is asking the question. That which asks the question is the answer. It is that which is aware of the question that is the answer!

An example, taking the question, "What should I be doing?" There are 2 parts to the answer: one is just to be aware of that which is asking the question. At the heart of that is essence, and merely has to be recognised through clarity. The second part is that, whatever arises in our life is karmically produced from the past and If we react, we deepen our karma. But in the moment of recognising that this situation is a product from the past, no karma is produced. It is karmically neutral, as the karma is in our reactions. It's not what occurs in life that produces karma: it is our reaction to those events.

The second part of the path to enlightenment is exhausting all karma - purification.

Tony

Thankyou Tony, very well said. That which clings on (Klingon?) is unreal. That which reacts is the mind/ego, not Awareness/Self. Karma is relative to the ego. To be free of the ego is to be free of karma...

In keeping with the dog theme of the OP... Worf Worf, lol;



Namaste
tim

[Tony]

Posted by tim (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
This is for anyone reading this who may be confused about the different levels. It's not a matter of going "higher and higher": It's a matter of losing the confusion, and clarity revealing itself. As the Buddha said, "We are only losing that to which we cling." Or as Michelangelo explained, "I saw the figure within the marble: all I did was remove the waste." We can easily see what we are holding on to when we observe our reactions.

It's not a matter of who is right: we all use different language to express ourselves. The answer being found in the question applies to any spiritual question - the answer is to enquire who is asking the question. That which asks the question is the answer. It is that which is aware of the question that is the answer!

An example, taking the question, "What should I be doing?" There are 2 parts to the answer: one is just to be aware of that which is asking the question. At the heart of that is essence, and merely has to be recognised through clarity. The second part is that, whatever arises in our life is karmically produced from the past and If we react, we deepen our karma. But in the moment of recognising that this situation is a product from the past, no karma is produced. It is karmically neutral, as the karma is in our reactions. It's not what occurs in life that produces karma: it is our reaction to those events.

The second part of the path to enlightenment is exhausting all karma - purification.

Tony

Thankyou Tony, very well said. That which clings on (Klingon?) is unreal. That which reacts is the mind/ego, not Awareness/Self. Karma is relative to the ego. To be free of the ego is to be free of karma...

In keeping with the dog theme of the OP... Worf Worf, lol;



Namaste
tim

Morning Tim,

Through adversity may we all learn to live in harmony.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ADjt8At1BcM

Klingon does sound like Hebrew.
I wonder what a conspiracy forum will make of that?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SGZV6fsotYo

Tony

[Tony]

Now we can all join in...and harmonise!

Qoy qeylIs puqloD
Qoy puqbe'pu'
yoHbogh malthbogh je' SuvwI'
Sey'moHchu' may' 'Iw
maSuv manong 'ej maHoHchu'
nI'be'yInmaj 'ach wovqu'!
batlh maH ghbej'jyoqIjDaq
vavpu'ma' DImuvpa'reH maSuvtaH
Qu' DamevQo' maSuvtaH, ma'ov

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=nNTVzwjEyb4

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
Morning Tim,

Through adversity may we all learn to live in harmony.

Tony

Evening Tony,



There’s a famous story about Baso (Matsu) and his teacher Nangaku. Baso was an ardent practitioner of zazen, sitting day and night under all conditions. One time, Nangaku asked him why he was sitting so much and Baso said it was to become a Buddha. Nangaku picked up two bricks and started rubbing them together and Baso asked him what he was doing. Nangaku replied he was polishing a brick to make it a mirror. Baso asked, “How can you make a mirror by polishing a brick??” And Nangaku said, “How can you make a Buddha by sitting zazen.”


Perhaps it is not a question of learning or adversity, which apply to the ego (brick), but the realisation of the eternal “harmony” (mirror) which can be neither gained nor lost.

No amount of learning/polishing an ego turns it into a Buddha. The distorted image in the mirror, whether beautiful or ugly, is just a passing phenomenon. When all the (seemingly separate) images evanesce only the mirror is found to be real,

In Lak’ech
mit

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/zen/fm/fm.htm

"Seng-ts'an" is the Buddhist name of the author of the Hsin-hsin Ming, it means "Jewel of the [Buddhist] Community." (Lit. "Sangha-jewel.")

"Chien-chih" is an honorary title given to Seng-ts'an after his death, by Emperor Hsüan-tsung (Gensõ) of the T'ang dynasty. It means "Mirrorlike Wisdom."

[Tony]

Overcoming temporary obstacles.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wGsF8_QXKBU

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
Overcoming temporary obstacles.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wGsF8_QXKBU

Lol, life is much much easier when the mask (persona) is removed, then there are no obstacles to overcome;

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/persona?s=t

(in the psychology of C. G. Jung) the mask or façade presented to satisfy the demands of the situation or the environment and not representing the inner personality of the individual; the public personality (contrasted with anima ).


Anima mea (my soul)
Mane! (Wait!)
Quanta Qualia (how great and how wonderful)
Conventus gaudia (the joys of the meeting)
Erunt. (will be)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=S8QVe7d3q8U

Namaste
tim

[Shadowman]

Everything you need to know about God you can learn from the Road Runner (or Bugs)

Everything you need to know about ego you can learn from Wile E Coyote - Genius (or Daffy)

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

Posted by tim (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
....come to think of it I'm bloody sure the Buddha, Jesus and Ramana had a few questions before enlightenment! It's good to know that enlightened beings were sentient, and we can follow in their footsteps.

Hi Tony,

Came across the following which you may enjoy;

D.: Our doubts can be cleared only when we ask questions.
M.: Yes. No one objects to questions being asked.
D.: It is said pariprasnena sevaya (by questioning again and again and by service). So we should ask questions and the Master should kindly remove our doubts.
M.: Continue your quotation upadekshyanti tattvam (They give instructions in Truth).
D.: Yes. But our doubts must be cleared.
M.: So it was with Arjuna. For he says in the end nashto mohah smritirlabdha (lost is my ignorance; memory restored).
D.: It was in the end. Before then he asked so many questions.
M.: The Truth was revealed even at the start. For the very first sloka of Sri Krishna’s upadesa starts: “No birth and no death, no change, etc.”
D.: Sri Krishna also says, “We have had many rebirths. I am aware of them; but you are not.”
M.: That was only because the question arose how Sri Krishna could claim to have taught the eternal Truth to Aditya. The Truth was stated even at the start. Arjuna did not understand it. The jnani’s state was later described and also the means of attainment. Incidentally Sri Krishna said that the Truth was eternal and that He had originally taught the same to Aditya. Arjuna was all along identifying himself with the body and therefore thought that Sri Krishna also was the body in front of him. He therefore asked, “How can it be? You (Sri Krishna) were born of Devaki some years before. Aditya was among those who started creation. How could you have taught this Truth to Aditya?” Sri Krishna continues to answer Arjuna’s questions in that strain: “Many rebirths we have had. I know them all; but you do not,” and so on.
D.: We must also know the Truth.
M.: You are taught the Truth. Instructions have been given. See who you are. That is the whole instruction. - Ramana Maharshi

Let me know if the above raises any (ahem) questions,

Namaste/With Love
tim

Hello Tim,
It is true that the truth is at the beginning, middle and the end.
There are many levels, each using the same words
but the meaning changes - perception refines.


We can say that obstacles do not exist,
but the untrained will still stumble.
That is what compassion is all about.


The answer is always in the question.
Tony

Excellent Tony,

By all means exercise compassion with the untrained.

The highly direct/advanced instruction from Krsna to Arjuna discussed above by Ramana
was not directed to the untrained, it was directed to "you", one with the capacity to grok it,

with Love and Respect,
tim

[Tony]

Posted by tim (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

Posted by tim (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
....come to think of it I'm bloody sure the Buddha, Jesus and Ramana had a few questions before enlightenment! It's good to know that enlightened beings were sentient, and we can follow in their footsteps.

Hi Tony,

Came across the following which you may enjoy;

D.: Our doubts can be cleared only when we ask questions.
M.: Yes. No one objects to questions being asked.
D.: It is said pariprasnena sevaya (by questioning again and again and by service). So we should ask questions and the Master should kindly remove our doubts.
M.: Continue your quotation upadekshyanti tattvam (They give instructions in Truth).
D.: Yes. But our doubts must be cleared.
M.: So it was with Arjuna. For he says in the end nashto mohah smritirlabdha (lost is my ignorance; memory restored).
D.: It was in the end. Before then he asked so many questions.
M.: The Truth was revealed even at the start. For the very first sloka of Sri Krishna’s upadesa starts: “No birth and no death, no change, etc.”
D.: Sri Krishna also says, “We have had many rebirths. I am aware of them; but you are not.”
M.: That was only because the question arose how Sri Krishna could claim to have taught the eternal Truth to Aditya. The Truth was stated even at the start. Arjuna did not understand it. The jnani’s state was later described and also the means of attainment. Incidentally Sri Krishna said that the Truth was eternal and that He had originally taught the same to Aditya. Arjuna was all along identifying himself with the body and therefore thought that Sri Krishna also was the body in front of him. He therefore asked, “How can it be? You (Sri Krishna) were born of Devaki some years before. Aditya was among those who started creation. How could you have taught this Truth to Aditya?” Sri Krishna continues to answer Arjuna’s questions in that strain: “Many rebirths we have had. I know them all; but you do not,” and so on.
D.: We must also know the Truth.
M.: You are taught the Truth. Instructions have been given. See who you are. That is the whole instruction. - Ramana Maharshi

Let me know if the above raises any (ahem) questions,

Namaste/With Love
tim

Hello Tim,
It is true that the truth is at the beginning, middle and the end.
There are many levels, each using the same words
but the meaning changes - perception refines.


We can say that obstacles do not exist,
but the untrained will still stumble.
That is what compassion is all about.


The answer is always in the question.
Tony

Excellent Tony,

By all means exercise compassion with the untrained.

The highly direct/advanced instruction from Krsna to Arjuna discussed above by Ramana
was not directed to the untrained, it was directed to "you", one with the capacity to grok it,

with Love and Respect,
tim

Dear Tim,

"See who you are." Recognition is.....

The difficulty in talking on a forum is the misunderstandings that follow.
We can easily repeat words and make assumptions that we know...
when in fact we do know!

But. The knowing is distracted into the "I" know. This "I" know is the karmic overlay.
That is what has to be recognised, then 'Recognition is.....!


In appreciation,
Tony

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

Dear Tim,

"See who you are." Recognition is.....

The difficulty in talking on a forum is the misunderstandings that follow.
We can easily repeat words and make assumptions that we know...
when in fact we do know!

But. The knowing is distracted into the "I" know. This "I" know is the karmic overlay.
That is what has to be recognised, then 'Recognition is.....!

In appreciation,
Tony

Morning Tony,

Votre véhicule est subtile, mon véhicule est direct non?

Assumptions, distractions and recognition require a separate entity. In truth, no such separate entities exist.

An illusory separate entity is however utilized by an awakened one compassionately to (apparently) expound dharma, to those for whom the highest upadesa of silence is not yet feasible.

A car (mind) may be utilized to drive your friends from A (lala land) to B (alla land ), and your friends may refer to it as your car, but it is not the case from the realised perspective. Again, they may attribute characteristics to your car (mind), ie it is making assumptions, or it is deluded, or it is parroting scriptures, or it’s assertions are erroneous - but these characteristics are often simply projections of their own limitations or misunderstandings, based on their own identification with ego/mind.

Even assuming their assertions about the car (mind) were somehow relatively correct, they apply to the car (mind) being utilized, not the realised being.

The question is, is there any identification left with the karmic overlay known as Tony? Is the direct experience/realisation of essence unmistakable, unwavering and unshakable? Do Tony’s actions, including his expression, or lack of expression, of compassion in any way effect who you really are?

Bhagavad Gita 13:30 One who can see that all activities are performed by the body, which is created of material nature, and sees that the Self does nothing, actually sees.

"Good Subhuti," answered the Buddha, "whenever someone announces, "I want to follow the Bodhisattva Path because I want to save all sentient beings; and it does not matter whether they are creatures which are formed in a womb or hatched from an egg; whether their life cycles are as observable as those of garden worms, insects and butterflies; or whether they appear as miraculously as mushrooms or gods; or whether they are capable of profound thoughts or of no thoughts at all, for I vow to lead every individual being to Nirvana; and not until they are all safely there will I reap my reward and enter Nirvana!" then, Subhuti, you should remind such a vow-taker that even if such uncountable numbers of beings were so liberated, in reality no beings would have been liberated. A Bodhisattva does not cling to the illusion of separate individuality or ego-entity or personal identification. In reality, there is no "I" who liberates and no "they" who are liberated.” - Diamond Sutra

Seng-ts'an (Jap. Sõsan, the third patriarch of Ch'an (Zen) in China; the dharma successor of Hui-k'o and the master of Tao-hsin) went for instruction to the twenty-ninth patriarch and asked, "The body of the student is possessed by mortal illness. I beg you, master, wipe away my sins." The patriarch [Hui-k'o] said, "Bring me your sins here, and I'll wipe them away for you."

The master [Seng-ts'an] sat in silence for a while, then said, "Although I've looked for my sins, I can't find them." The patriarch said, "In that case I've already thoroughly wiped away your sins. You should live in accordance with Buddha, dharma, and sangha"

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house (abode/identity/existence) on the rock (Sat/Being/Self.) And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew (the travails of samsara) and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand (transient shifting phenomena/body/mind/ego). 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall (into death/delusion/sin/hamartia) of it.” - Matt 7: 24-27


Two more easy steps;

Begin in Silence and arrive in Love (Buddha's Way), begin in Love and arrive in Silence (Christ's Way), or,

Begin in Surrender and arrive in Peace (Mohammed's Way), begin in Devotion and arrive in Union (Arjuna's Way).

Namaste
tim

[Shadowman]

Posted by tim (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

Dear Tim,

"See who you are." Recognition is.....

The difficulty in talking on a forum is the misunderstandings that follow.
We can easily repeat words and make assumptions that we know...
when in fact we do know!

But. The knowing is distracted into the "I" know. This "I" know is the karmic overlay.
That is what has to be recognised, then 'Recognition is.....!

In appreciation,
Tony

The question is, is there any identification left with the karmic overlay known as Tony? Is the direct experience/realisation of essence unmistakable, unwavering and unshakable? Do Tony’s actions, including his expression, or lack of expression, of compassion in any way effect who you really are?

Bhagavad Gita 13:30 One who can see that all activities are performed by the body, which is created of material nature, and sees that the Self does nothing, actually sees.

"Good Subhuti," answered the Buddha, "whenever someone announces, "I want to follow the Bodhisattva Path because I want to save all sentient beings; and it does not matter whether they are creatures which are formed in a womb or hatched from an egg; whether their life cycles are as observable as those of garden worms, insects and butterflies; or whether they appear as miraculously as mushrooms or gods; or whether they are capable of profound thoughts or of no thoughts at all, for I vow to lead every individual being to Nirvana; and not until they are all safely there will I reap my reward and enter Nirvana!" then, Subhuti, you should remind such a vow-taker that even if such uncountable numbers of beings were so liberated, in reality no beings would have been liberated. A Bodhisattva does not cling to the illusion of separate individuality or ego-entity or personal identification. In reality, there is no "I" who liberates and no "they" who are liberated.” - Diamond Sutra

Seng-ts'an (Jap. Sõsan, the third patriarch of Ch'an (Zen) in China; the dharma successor of Hui-k'o and the master of Tao-hsin) went for instruction to the twenty-ninth patriarch and asked, "The body of the student is possessed by mortal illness. I beg you, master, wipe away my sins." The patriarch [Hui-k'o] said, "Bring me your sins here, and I'll wipe them away for you."

The master [Seng-ts'an] sat in silence for a while, then said, "Although I've looked for my sins, I can't find them." The patriarch said, "In that case I've already thoroughly wiped away your sins. You should live in accordance with Buddha, dharma, and sangha"

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house (abode/identity/existence) on the rock (Sat/Being/Self.) And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew (the travails of samsara) and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand (transient shifting phenomena/body/mind/ego). 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall (into death/delusion/sin/hamartia) of it.” - Matt 7: 24-27



tim

Morning Tony,


For one so strong in the force, I find your lack of a response to the question above disturbing..



OK, not really disturbing, lol, I don't get disturbed. Puzzling? No, that won't do either, I don't get confused.

Odd, perhaps? Yes, odd, let's go with odd

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=R55e-uHQna0

Just wondering whether you are one of the thousands, the few, or the very very few...

BG 7:3

http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-07-03.html

ie "technically, are you inside yet, lol?"

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=WPkByAkAdZs

With Love / In Lak'ech
tim