False 'I'

[Guest guest]

I do have some points to add here from recent experience. I have talked of

losing the sense of "I" to quite an extent (note that I hate to sign my

emails with my name).

I had asked a lot on this list whether this was an ego game, or was

something really happening. Today, I do suspect that this is an ego-game.

 

The ego is pretending as much as it possibly can that the "I" is dead. This

act is based on all the reading I have done of others experience. Then to

top it, the ego is pretending to suspect that it is the ego, and pretending

to watch itself so that I can be satisfied that it is not an ego game!

 

However, there are still things that the ego can perhaps NOT fake. It cant

fake love for others (which I am currently devoid of *completely*). It cant

fake bliss - I feel totally lousy and fed up. It can't fake oneness. It cant

fake a separation from the mind ? Even though I claim there is no one to

feel this or that, still when people ask questions about what I am trying to

do, someone in there gets really upset. So the ego and false "I" is very

much there, pretending as much as it can, but since I do get upset,

therefore the whole thing seems to be a game.

 

Which is really depressing -since the ego is playing a double-cross kind of

deceit.

 

Am I right in saying that only when the mind is completely silent, and I

simply cannot say "I", that the ego will be dead ?

 

Cheers.

 

On 11/14/05 5:10 PM, "dileepsimha" <dsimha wrote:

 

 

> So our FALSE 'I' can rise in any of these sutle states and take us

> away from our true self of being a standing witnesss. Beware!! and

> lets keep enquiring "Who am I?" when every you get consiously aware

> of this false 'I'.

>

[Guest guest]

am a very ordinary devotee of ramana.for me being

part of the group helps to understand some of the

issues that i struggle with.

however i wonder if you are having depressive episode

at this point instead of enlightenment.your symptom

description soemhow sound like that.do forgive me if i

have offended you.

seetha

 

 

 

________

Enjoy this Diwali with Y! India Click here

http://in.promos./fabmall/index.html

[Guest guest]

--- oneness <oneness.univ wrote:

 

> I do have some points to add here from recent

> experience. I have talked of

> losing the sense of "I" to quite an extent (note

> that I hate to sign my emails with my name).

 

 

 

 

So long a deliberate intention to negate the ego

through an act, like not signing a label after an

email,it is the same ego at play.

 

 

 

 

> I had asked a lot on this list whether this was an

> ego game, or was

> something really happening. Today, I do suspect that

> this is an ego-game.

>

> The ego is pretending as much as it possibly can

> that the "I" is dead. This

> act is based on all the reading I have done of

> others experience. Then to

> top it, the ego is pretending to suspect that it is

> the ego, and pretending

> to watch itself so that I can be satisfied that it

> is not an ego game!

>

> However, there are still things that the ego can

> perhaps NOT fake. It cant

> fake love for others (which I am currently devoid of

> *completely*). It cant

> fake bliss - I feel totally lousy and fed up. It

> can't fake oneness. It cant

> fake a separation from the mind ? Even though I

> claim there is no one to

> feel this or that, still when people ask questions

> about what I am trying to

> do, someone in there gets really upset. So the ego

> and false "I" is very

> much there, pretending as much as it can, but since

> I do get upset,

> therefore the whole thing seems to be a game.

>

> Which is really depressing -since the ego is playing

> a double-cross kind of

> deceit.

>

> Am I right in saying that only when the mind is

> completely silent, and I

> simply cannot say "I", that the ego will be dead ?

>

> Cheers.

 

 

 

 

So long a prevailing sense of a question, so long the

prevailing sense of an ego.

 

The absence of the presence of a question and the

absence of the

absence of the presence of a question.

 

Incidentally, no matter what, the ego cannot die.

 

 

Love

 

Avril

 

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.

[Guest guest]

"So our FALSE 'I' can rise in any of these sutle states and take us

away from our true self of being a standing witnesss. Beware!! and

lets keep enquiring "Who am I?" when every you get consiously aware

of this false 'I'."

 

And in the end Dileepsimha one is not even the witness!

Anything that is affirmed is not it.

Louis.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

am a very ordinary devotee of ramana.for me being

part of the group helps to understand some of the

issues that i struggle with.

however i wonder if you are having depressive episode

at this point instead of enlightenment.your symptom

description soemhow sound like that.do forgive me if i

have offended you.

seetha

 

 

 

[Louis Mitchell] Indeed - having experienced the same kind of depression

while seeking enlightenment I speak from experience.

 

But depression can be very useful - it helps make clear the activity of

the mind by creating a loveless and joyless state - so one cannot fool

oneself as many non-depressed people do.

Many confuse temporary conditional contentment with some kind of

awakening.

Depression is a great help in the seeking for enlightenment but in the end

is only mind. But because the mind of a depressed person is so negative it

creates negative feelings resulting in the mind being very obvious in ones

emotional state.

When awakening occurs the negative mind will be seen as nothing as will

it's corresponding emotions.

I hope this is of help.

Louis.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Talk 605.

 

A certain Andhra visitor gave Sri Bhagavan a slip of paper containing

several questions which he desired to be answered. Sri Bhagavan took it in

His hands, went through the questions and said:

 

M.: "All these questions arise so long as there is one who can ask

questions. If the questioner is sought and found, the questions will end of

their own accord."

 

 

Talk 245.

 

M.: Realisation is nothing to be got afresh. It is already there. All that

is necessary is to be rid of the thought: "I have not realised."

 

D.: Then one need not attempt it.

 

M.: No. Stillness of mind or peace is realisation. There is no moment when

the Self is not. So long as there is doubt or the feeling of

non-realisation, attempt must be made to rid oneself of these thoughts. The

thoughts are due to identification of the Self with the non-self. When the

non-self disappears the Self alone remains. To make room anywhere it is

enough that things are removed from there. Room is not brought in afresh.

Nay, more - room is there even in cramping. Absence of thoughts does not

mean a blank. There must be one to know the blank. Knowledge and ignorance

are of the mind. They are born of duality. But the Self is beyond knowledge

and ignorance. It is light itself. There is no necessity to see the Self

with another Self. There are no two selves. What is not Self is non-self.

The non-self cannot see the Self. The Self has no sight or hearing. It lies

beyond these - all alone, as pure consciousness. A woman, with her

necklace round her neck, imagines that it has been lost and goes about

searching for it, until she is reminded of it by a friend; she has created

her own sense of loss, her own anxiety of search and then her own pleasure

of recovery. Similarly the Self is all along there, whether you search for

it or not. Again just as the woman feels as if the lost necklace has been

regained, so also the removal of ignorance and the cessation of false

identification reveal the Self which is always present - here and now. This

is called realisation. It is not new. It amounts to limination of ignorance

and nothing more. Blankness is the evil result of searching the mind. The

mind must be cut off, root and branch. See who the thinker is, who the

seeker is. Abide as the thinker, the seeker. All thoughts will disappear.

 

D.: Then there will be the ego - the thinker.

 

M.: That ego is pure Ego purged of thoughts. It is the same as the Self. So

long as false identification persists doubts will persist, questions will

arise, there will be no end of them. Doubts will cease only when the

non-self is put an end to. That will result in realisation of the Self.

There will remain no other there to doubt or ask. All these doubts should

be solved within oneself. No amount of words will satisfy. Hold the

thinker. Only when the thinker is not held do objects appear outside or

doubts arise in the mind.

[Guest guest]

No my brother, I am not offended. I know this state is certainly not

enlightenment, but the question had been whether the self is going, since a

lot of behavior had changed.

I can only say now that : if a person asks whether he has grown spiritually

based on some experience, then that can only be the ego. Only the ego wants

to know if it has grown. If some parts of the self had indeed died, who

would be there to ask?

 

So it likely that this dull, depressive state is just an ego act based on

what I have read.

 

OTOH, depression can be helpful because it spurs me to ask "Who is feeling

sad?". Whereas if I were happy, would I really bother to keep asking "who is

happy?" - not likely. But I do know that this is not the "clinical

depression" - I still know that I am suffering far less than I was, and I

don't want to go back to the earlier darkness where I thought I was happy

and loving etc.

Hope I (my false I) make sense.

 

On 11/16/05 6:31 AM, "seetha gopalakrishna" <cgseetha wrote:

 

>

> however i wonder if you are having depressive episode

> at this point instead of enlightenment.your symptom

> description soemhow sound like that.do forgive me if i

> have offended you.

> seetha

>

>

[Guest guest]

"The mind is nothing but the thought "I". Thoughts arise because of the

thinker. The thinker is the ego, which if sought will automatically vanish."

 

(excerpt from The Essential Teachings of Ramana Maharshi, p. 15).

 

Dear oneness:

 

It is thought which gives rise to the illusion of the ego "I", just as the

rope gives rise to the illusion of a snake. When looked at directly, the

illusion vanishes.

 

The ego "I" is a shadow of thought. There really is no thinker or ego.

 

sincerely,

 

dannyc

 

 

 

oneness <oneness.univ wrote: No my brother, I am not

offended. I know this state is certainly not

enlightenment, but the question had been whether the self is going, since a

lot of behavior had changed.

I can only say now that : if a person asks whether he has grown spiritually

based on some experience, then that can only be the ego. Only the ego wants

to know if it has grown. If some parts of the self had indeed died, who

would be there to ask?

 

So it likely that this dull, depressive state is just an ego act based on

what I have read.

 

OTOH, depression can be helpful because it spurs me to ask "Who is feeling

sad?". Whereas if I were happy, would I really bother to keep asking "who is

happy?" - not likely. But I do know that this is not the "clinical

depression" - I still know that I am suffering far less than I was, and I

don't want to go back to the earlier darkness where I thought I was happy

and loving etc.

Hope I (my false I) make sense.

 

On 11/16/05 6:31 AM, "seetha gopalakrishna" <cgseetha wrote:

 

>

> however i wonder if you are having depressive episode

> at this point instead of enlightenment.your symptom

> description soemhow sound like that.do forgive me if i

> have offended you.

> seetha

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post message: RamanaMaharshi

Subscribe: RamanaMaharshi-

Un: RamanaMaharshi

List owner: RamanaMaharshi-owner

 

Our Shortcut URL:

http://www./community/RamanaMaharshi

<a href="http://technorati.com/tag/ramanamaharshi"

rel="tag">ramanamaharshi</a>

 

 

 

Religion and

spirituality Ramana maharshi

Sri ramana maharshi

 

 

 

 

Visit your group "RamanaMaharshi" on the web.

 

RamanaMaharshi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Thanks Louis; for correcting me. The witness is still the FALSE 'I';

in the form of intellect negating all the FALSE 'I' in its sutle

state. The TRUE 'I' is just the existence or consiousness.

 

Regards

Dileep

 

RamanaMaharshi, "Louis Mitchell"

<louismitchell@d...> wrote:

>

> "So our FALSE 'I' can rise in any of these sutle states and take us

> away from our true self of being a standing witnesss. Beware!! and

> lets keep enquiring "Who am I?" when every you get consiously aware

> of this false 'I'."

>

> And in the end Dileepsimha one is not even the witness!

> Anything that is affirmed is not it.

> Louis.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Am I right in saying that only when the mind is completely silent,

and I

> simply cannot say "I", that the ego will be dead ?

>

> Cheers.

 

What I can say is that when your mind is completely silent and you

simply cannot say "I", then you in "no doubt" experiening your TRUE

state; or in other words that is your TRUE 'I'.

 

Is the ego dead?

No, absolutely not. This is where we need some extra efforts. This

effort is not required if we can stay in that TRUE state for ever,

since most of us cannot, we need more sadhana until all Vasana's of

the mind is burnt.

 

The experience of "silence of the mind" is what Bhagavan calls

as "Mano Laya" (temporary silence of the mind) in upadesha sara. What

we need to aim is for "Mano Nasha", which in Bhagavan words can be

acheieved, by

 

a. Grace of God/Guru (which is always their for the needy)

b. Atma Nista (always being your TRUE self)

 

Statement#b: To me, being Atma Nista is as follows. Whenever, the

FALSE 'I' is realized (predominently in the waking state); you

enquire as "Who am I". I have quoting one such enquiry here

 

a. Lets say you have a thought(since thoughts can arise only when the

FALSE 'I' is awake and active), "I dont want to quote my name in the

email".

 

b. Question, to whom is this thought? Answer would be to me.

 

c. Question, Who am I? Then recollect your TRUE - "I" state that you

experienced in the silence of the mind (in meditation); then the

thought seizes because

 

As a TRUE 'I'; there is non other then yourself; so to whom am I to

quote my name. This very enquiry makes you Atma Nista. Then this very

act of enquiry makes us the seekers of TRUTH and therefore, eligible

for the grace of guru. This constant enquiry until, the FALSE 'I'

sizes to bother is required; With Bhagavans grace we will for sure

then stand strong in our TRUE state (some day). That depicts mano

nasha.

 

I am always open for corrections and this is my way to enquire "Who

am I" constanly and through out.

 

Om Namo Bhagavathe Shri Ramanaya.

 

Dileep

[Guest guest]

dileepsimha <dsimha wrote: > Am I right in saying that only when

the mind is completely silent,

and I

> simply cannot say "I", that the ego will be dead ?

>

> Cheers.

 

What I can say is that when your mind is completely silent and you simply cannot

say "I", then you in "no doubt" experiening your TRUE

state; or in other words that is your TRUE 'I'.

The "TRUE I", the "I-I", or whatever term is used, is not a durational

experience, like say the experience of bliss or sorrow or pain or satisfaction

or elation.

 

When I-I is all that there is, who or what is not-I-I to experience I-I.

 

Thus when the sense of a mind is no more, there is also no sense of any

"I-I".

 

For the concepts of "I-I", Self, True State are all the play of the mind.

 

 

 

 

Is the ego dead?

No, absolutely not. This is where we need some extra efforts. This effort is not

required if we can stay in that TRUE state for ever,

since most of us cannot, we need more sadhana until all Vasana's of the mind is

burnt.

 

The act of efforting, in whatever manner may well happen.

 

But there is no "we" who can stay in "that True state".

 

For there has never been a "we" who has come to be as apart from "that True

State", in the first place.

 

 

The experience of "silence of the mind" is what Bhagavan calls as "Mano Laya"

(temporary silence of the mind) in upadesha sara. What

we need to aim is for "Mano Nasha", which in Bhagavan words can be acheieved, by

 

a. Grace of God/Guru (which is always their for the needy)

b. Atma Nista (always being your TRUE self)

 

Statement#b: To me, being Atma Nista is as follows. Whenever, the

FALSE 'I' is realized (predominently in the waking state); you

enquire as "Who am I". I have quoting one such enquiry here

 

a. Lets say you have a thought(since thoughts can arise only when the FALSE 'I'

is awake and active)

 

 

The arising of thoughts has nothing to do with the "False I" or the sense of a

"me" as a sense of individuated separated self.

 

The seemingly taking ownership of the arising thought, infers the sense of the

"me".

 

The belief that it is me which is the thinker of the thought of the moment

infers the sense of a "me".

 

The belief that it is me which seeks to destroy the false-I and thereby hoping

to experience the True I-I and then somehow stay in that on a permanent basis,

infers the sense of a "me-seeker".

 

 

 

 

The object Ramana or any of the objects labeled as enlightened sages were not

free of thoughts.

 

The arising of thoughts and their dissipation, was seen to be no different

than any other of the infinite "eventings" making up the gestalt of

phenomenality.

 

Since the very gestalt of phenomenality is a co-dependent appearance,

arising/cessation of thoughts within that gestalt is apperceived as nuances of

that same appearance.

 

 

 

, "I dont want to quote my name in the

email".

 

b. Question, to whom is this thought? Answer would be to me.

 

c. Question, Who am I? Then recollect your TRUE - "I" state that you experienced

in the silence of the mind (in meditation);

 

 

 

Something can be recalled, when that something has ended and now exists as

mnemonic cells.

 

That which starts and ends, is not

that-whose-expression-is-the-very-sense-of-start/end, ie, the sense of time.

 

 

 

 

then the thought seizes because

 

As a TRUE 'I'; there is non other then yourself; so to whom am I to quote my

name.

 

 

Yes, the prevailing sense of an individuated identity, in the form of an

"owned" name, or in the form of a sense of personal doership, i.e, I am

meditating on the True State or I am now experiencing Ramana's I-I etc, prevails

only in the assumption or belief of teh existence of an "other".

 

When all identities are I, what identity can be of I.

 

 

 

 

 

This very enquiry makes you Atma Nista. Then this very

act of enquiry makes us the seekers of TRUTH and therefore, eligible for the

grace of guru. This constant enquiry until, the FALSE 'I' sizes to bother is

required;

 

 

Nothing is required.

 

And everything that is needed, gets done.

 

Which includes the act, which may get labled as seeking.

 

 

 

 

With Bhagavans grace we will for sure

then stand strong in our TRUE state (some day).

 

In that sense of "some day", exists the sense of "hope".

 

Which infers the sense of the "me-hoper".

 

And thus a cul-de-sac.

 

 

 

 

That depicts mano nasha.

 

I am always open for corrections and this is my way to enquire "Who am I"

constanly and through out.

 

 

There is a particular form of enquiry happening.

 

There is none to claim that as "my way", even if it so strongly seems so.

 

 

 

 

 

Om Namo Bhagavathe Shri Ramanaya.

 

Dileep

 

 

Love

 

Avril

 

 

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Dileep,

 

Another way to look for the false I is to inquires "What is the

source of "I"?

 

Look to see if the source of the "I"-thought is from the body? From

the senses? From the prana (life force)? From thoughts? From the

intellect (that projects the object-subject relationship into the

waking state and to dreams)? From the happiness of deep sleep?

 

There is an "I" present in all of these? Does it come from any of

them? Or is it projected ONTO them?

 

Where does this "I: come from?

 

Not two,

Richard

 

RamanaMaharshi, "dileepsimha" <dsimha@h...>

wrote:

>

> > Am I right in saying that only when the mind is completely

silent,

> and I

> > simply cannot say "I", that the ego will be dead ?

> >

> > Cheers.

>

> What I can say is that when your mind is completely silent and you

> simply cannot say "I", then you in "no doubt" experiening your <snip>

[Guest guest]

dileepsimha <dsimha wrote: > Am I right in saying that only

when the mind is completely silent,

and I

> simply cannot say "I", that the ego will be dead ?

>

> Cheers.

 

What I can say is that when your mind is completely silent and you simply cannot

say "I", then you in "no doubt" experiening your TRUE

state; or in other words that is your TRUE 'I'.

 

-------

The "TRUE I", the "I-I", or whatever term is used, is not a durational

experience, like say the experience of bliss or sorrow or pain or satisfaction

or elation.

 

When I-I is all that there is, who or what is not-I-I to experience I-I?

 

Thus when the sense of a mind is no more, there is also no sense of any

"I-I".

 

For the concepts of "I-I", Self, True State are all the play of the mind.

 

-------

 

 

Is the ego dead?

No, absolutely not. This is where we need some extra efforts. This effort is not

required if we can stay in that TRUE state for ever,

since most of us cannot, we need more sadhana until all Vasana's of the mind is

burnt.

 

--------

 

The act of efforting, in whatever manner may well happen.

 

But there is no "we" who can stay in "that True state".

 

For there has never been a "we" who has come to be as apart from "that True

State", in the first place.

 

---------

 

 

The experience of "silence of the mind" is what Bhagavan calls as "Mano Laya"

(temporary silence of the mind) in upadesha sara. What

we need to aim is for "Mano Nasha", which in Bhagavan words can be acheieved, by

 

a. Grace of God/Guru (which is always their for the needy)

b. Atma Nista (always being your TRUE self)

 

Statement#b: To me, being Atma Nista is as follows. Whenever, the

FALSE 'I' is realized (predominently in the waking state); you

enquire as "Who am I". I have quoting one such enquiry here

 

a. Lets say you have a thought(since thoughts can arise only when the FALSE 'I'

is awake and active)

 

---------

 

The arising of thoughts has nothing to do with the "False I" or the sense of a

"me" as a sense of individuated separated self.

 

The seemingly taking ownership of the arising thought, infers the sense of the

"me".

 

The belief that it is me which is the thinker of the thought of the moment

infers the sense of a "me".

 

The belief that it is me which seeks to destroy the false-I and thereby hoping

to experience the True I-I and then somehow stay in that on a permanent basis,

infers the sense of a "me-seeker".

 

 

 

 

The object Ramana or any of the objects labeled as enlightened sages were not

free of thoughts.

 

The arising of thoughts and their dissipation, was seen to be no different

than any other of the infinite "eventings" making up the gestalt of

phenomenality.

 

Since the very gestalt of phenomenality is a co-dependent appearance,

arising/cessation of thoughts within that gestalt is apperceived as nuances of

that same appearance.

 

-----------

 

 

, "I dont want to quote my name in the

email".

 

b. Question, to whom is this thought? Answer would be to me.

 

c. Question, Who am I? Then recollect your TRUE - "I" state that you experienced

in the silence of the mind (in meditation);

 

 

-----------

 

Something can be recalled, when that something has ended and now exists as

mnemonic cells.

 

That which starts and ends, is not

that-whose-expression-is-the-very-sense-of-start/end, ie, the sense of time.

 

-----------

 

 

then the thought seizes because

 

As a TRUE 'I'; there is non other then yourself; so to whom am I to quote my

name.

 

 

------------

 

Yes, the prevailing sense of an individuated identity, in the form of an

"owned" name, or in the form of a sense of personal doership, i.e, I am

meditating on the True State or I am now experiencing Ramana's I-I etc, prevails

only in the assumption or belief of teh existence of an "other".

 

When all identities are I, what identity can be of I.

 

------------

 

 

 

 

This very enquiry makes you Atma Nista. Then this very

act of enquiry makes us the seekers of TRUTH and therefore, eligible for the

grace of guru. This constant enquiry until, the FALSE 'I' sizes to bother is

required;

 

 

--------

 

Nothing is required.

 

And everything that is needed, gets done.

 

Which includes the act, which may get labled as seeking.

 

------------

 

 

 

 

With Bhagavans grace we will for sure

then stand strong in our TRUE state (some day).

 

 

--------

In that sense of "some day", exists the sense of "hope".

 

Which infers the sense of the "me-hoper".

 

And thus a cul-de-sac.

 

----------

 

 

That depicts mano nasha.

 

I am always open for corrections and this is my way to enquire "Who am I"

constanly and through out.

 

------------

 

There is a particular form of enquiry happening.

 

There is none to claim that as "my way", even if it so strongly seems so.

 

-------------

 

 

 

Om Namo Bhagavathe Shri Ramanaya.

 

Dileep

 

 

-------

 

Love

 

Avril

 

 

 

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Avril,

 

Thanks for the insight on my earlier email. I really, like the

following statement of yours.

 

> The seemingly taking ownership of the arising thought, infers the

> sense of the "me".

 

Regards

Dileep

[Guest guest]

dileepsimha <dsimha wrote: Dear Avril,

 

Thanks for the insight on my earlier email. I really, like the

following statement of yours.

 

> The seemingly taking ownership of the arising thought, infers the

> sense of the "me".

------

 

Yes.

 

As well as the seemingly taking ownership of the external actualization of

thought, viz a physical action and the consequential invoked response to that

action.

 

All going towards inferring the sense of the individuated-separated-me.

 

The sense of the belief that it is me which is on the path of Ramanas'

Self-Enquiry and thus it is me which sits in meditation doing Self-Enquiry and

thus the ensuing reverence or the ridicule from society for

"my-Ramanasque-Self-Enquiry", is me being revered or me being ridiculed.

 

 

 

As is thus evident, Ramana's beautiful suggestion to ascertain to whom does

the thought arise to, cuts the very platform on which rests that sense of a

belief of personal ownership.

 

For the sense of personal ownership, whether of thought or of the ensuing

external actualization as physical action/reaction, is once again, an arising

thought.

 

 

 

 

The deeper, (so to say), questing is the question "The thought of "to whom did

this thought arise to", what is the source of that thought?"

 

When the sense of enquiry into the source of thought, is seen to be itself a

thought and that very thought as the sense of enquiry, is itself enquired into.

 

And this is not an infinte mental regression.

 

 

Love

 

Avril

 

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Avril Sanya <avrilsanya wrote:

 

dileepsimha <dsimha wrote: Dear Avril,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When the sense of enquiry into the source of thought, is seen to be itself

a thought and that very thought as the sense of enquiry, is itself enquired

into.

 

And this is not an infinte mental regression.

 

 

Love

 

Avril

 

What is the point of the infinite regress coming to an end?

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enjoy this Diwali with Y! India Click here

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sankarraman,

 

This List being focussed exclusively to posting only Ramana's teachings,

if you wish to re-pose your question off-List, you are welcome.

 

If not, you are still welcome :-)

 

 

Love

 

Avril

 

 

 

 

Sankarraman Gamesam <sankarraman_gamesam wrote:

 

 

Avril Sanya <avrilsanya wrote:

 

dileepsimha <dsimha wrote: Dear Avril,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When the sense of enquiry into the source of thought, is seen to be itself

a thought and that very thought as the sense of enquiry, is itself enquired

into.

 

And this is not an infinte mental regression.

 

 

Love

 

Avril

 

What is the point of the infinite regress coming to an end?

Sankarraman

 

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.