Neti Neti

[Guest guest]

Dear OTA,

 

Thank you so much. I had a great birthday, surrounded by close

family. You are one of the few who 'gets' my online name. Kudos to

you.

 

The path of jnana is not of much interest to me. It seems to me that

sometimes the mind comes in and tries to reconcile things that do not

make sense to it. Some things just cannot be explained, cannot be

reconciled to the mind. Some things are simply felt in the heart, and

that has to be trusted! My monkey mind tries to talk me out of all

this spiritual stuff and remind me that I am young and should be free

to frolic as I choose, not sit in home and chant Sanskrit. Ahh,

the ego. It dies such a hard and dramatic death.

 

I am definitely a bhaktha, deep in my heart. I may not have read

enough books to quite the Gita from memory or cite stories of saints

and sages, but I know how to LOVE. Or, at least, this child is surely

trying.

 

I do think that, deep inside, we are all bhakthas in some way, shape,

or form. We want to love and be loved. We want to melt into the ocean

of grace.

 

A dear friend of mine is a devotee of Ramana Maharishi. I have read

quite a bit about him. I have actually read an English translation

of "Who Am I?" and found it to be QUITE interesting and mind-

expanding. Neti neti. I am not this, I am not this, but I am THAT --

Aham Brahma Asmi! I am not the mind, the body, the senses. I am

simply the Divine pure love that happens to radiate from our dear

Amma. We are ALL that.

 

The bucket of muck water that is my soul is highly clouded and

taking quite some time to clear up. Amma's heat is burning out the

bacteria and mud, and it hurts! I guess it is all going to be worth

it, in the end...

 

 

 

Ammachi, "one_tiny_atom" <one_tiny_atom>

wrote:

> Dear Sweet & Salt,

> Wish you a belated happy Birthday. Hope you had a good birthday!

>

> Oh btw, questioning is not bad at all.

> Just incessant repetition of the same thing (especially about Amma)

> makes this atom irritated, not that it takes much for that anyway

>

> Since you have an intellectual bent of mind, the path of jnana

> (knowledge) could be of interest to you.

>

> Amma has great respect for Ramana Maharishi (and his path of

inquiry)

> and has spoken about him in certain books. However, Amma has also

> said that although he taught "incessant questioning" such as neti

> neti "not this not this", Bhakti (devotion) was the basis for all

his

> teachings. Swami Paramatmananda considered him as his Guru (even

> though Ramana Maharishi left his body a long time earlier) before

> meeting Amma.

>

> There is one known (generally silent) Vedantin on board, who can

tell

> you more about the path of inquiry.

>

> Amme Sharanam,

> ota

[Guest guest]

Cool Yoga!!!!!!!!!!!

Love it. Well Said.

kisses

malati

[Guest guest]

I can add my opinions here on Ramana's Self Enquiry.

 

The Neti Neti approach is only a preliminary step on this

approach. It starts with the mind (or ego) rejecting the perceived

phenonmena as ultimately unreal (important to note that it doesn't

deny the existence of the phenonmena, only rejects its reality - in

other words understands that phenomena is changing and impermananent,

but it certainly exists - the importance between the words unreality

and nonexistence needs to be kept in mind). After denying everything

that it perceives as unreal, the mind turns around and tries to deny

itself as unreal. But then it reaches a stumbling block here because

in the very process of rejecting itself, it brings itself into

existence. The ego is then consumed by the problem. "How can I see

my own absence?" After intense scrutiny of this problem (this kind

of sadhana can be burning for some people), the ego is forced to

surrender and admit, "I am utterly incapable of seeing my own

absence." At this stage the ego is forced to surrender to Grace.

Then what happens after that is a mystery that none can predict. For

some people, Grace comes and removes the veil of ignorance, for

others it does not. But for a period at this stage True Self Enquiry

will happen - NOT the mind saying Neti Neti as a thought, but an

underlyign Awareness (beneath the thinking mind) that everything that

is perceived including the perceiving mind is just an artificial

construction. That stage usually indicates that Realization is near.

 

Of course one need not go through this approach at all. Grace

after all is unpredictable and can happen to anyone. But for those

for whom this approach seems appropriate, they can assume that Grace

is leading them along this way. As Ramana himself said, "There is no

path, there is no goal, that is the final truth."

 

There is much misconception about Enlightenment. The traditional

model says that the seeker searches for Truth, and then after much

sadhana eventually finds it (as an object) and all his doubts are

resolved. In actually the doubts are resolved not because the seeker

finds Truth, but rather the seeker himself is dissolved through

Grace. In the absence of the seeker, there can be no doubts.

Another misconception is that all Realized Sages will be like

Ammachi. That is not true. Ammachi is a unique sage with incredible

yogic powers and a very unique mission in this world. There are many

realized sages in this world who have no siddhis or powers of any

kind at all, or any special mission at all. The presence or absence

of yogic powers says nothing about the nature of the sage. There are

many sages who do not even speak publicly about spirituality. For

the true sage, these powers are utterly irrelevant. People who

evaluate their spiritual attainments by using Ammachi as a benchmark

are likely to be severely disappointed.

 

Regards

Yogasidh

 

 

 

Ammachi, "Erica" <sugarandbrine> wrote:

> Dear OTA,

>

> Thank you so much. I had a great birthday, surrounded by close

> family. You are one of the few who 'gets' my online name. Kudos to

> you.

>

> The path of jnana is not of much interest to me. It seems to me

that

> sometimes the mind comes in and tries to reconcile things that do

not

> make sense to it. Some things just cannot be explained, cannot be

> reconciled to the mind. Some things are simply felt in the heart,

and

> that has to be trusted! My monkey mind tries to talk me out of all

> this spiritual stuff and remind me that I am young and should be

free

> to frolic as I choose, not sit in home and chant Sanskrit. Ahh,

> the ego. It dies such a hard and dramatic death.

>

> I am definitely a bhaktha, deep in my heart. I may not have read

> enough books to quite the Gita from memory or cite stories of

saints

> and sages, but I know how to LOVE. Or, at least, this child is

surely

> trying.

>

> I do think that, deep inside, we are all bhakthas in some way,

shape,

> or form. We want to love and be loved. We want to melt into the

ocean

> of grace.

>

> A dear friend of mine is a devotee of Ramana Maharishi. I have read

> quite a bit about him. I have actually read an English translation

> of "Who Am I?" and found it to be QUITE interesting and mind-

> expanding. Neti neti. I am not this, I am not this, but I am THAT --

 

> Aham Brahma Asmi! I am not the mind, the body, the senses. I am

> simply the Divine pure love that happens to radiate from our dear

> Amma. We are ALL that.

>

> The bucket of muck water that is my soul is highly clouded and

> taking quite some time to clear up. Amma's heat is burning out the

> bacteria and mud, and it hurts! I guess it is all going to be worth

> it, in the end...

>

>

>

> Ammachi, "one_tiny_atom"

<one_tiny_atom>

> wrote:

> > Dear Sweet & Salt,

> > Wish you a belated happy Birthday. Hope you had a good birthday!

> >

> > Oh btw, questioning is not bad at all.

> > Just incessant repetition of the same thing (especially about

Amma)

> > makes this atom irritated, not that it takes much for that

anyway

> >

> > Since you have an intellectual bent of mind, the path of jnana

> > (knowledge) could be of interest to you.

> >

> > Amma has great respect for Ramana Maharishi (and his path of

> inquiry)

> > and has spoken about him in certain books. However, Amma has also

> > said that although he taught "incessant questioning" such as neti

> > neti "not this not this", Bhakti (devotion) was the basis for all

> his

> > teachings. Swami Paramatmananda considered him as his Guru (even

> > though Ramana Maharishi left his body a long time earlier) before

> > meeting Amma.

> >

> > There is one known (generally silent) Vedantin on board, who can

> tell

> > you more about the path of inquiry.

> >

> > Amme Sharanam,

> > ota

[Guest guest]

Yogasidh,

 

Namah Shivayah. Thank you for adding your well-laid out thoughts on

the subject.

 

>From this tiny atom's understanding, "neti neti" is merely a concept

and not a thought or phrase to be followed to the letter. It is one

step -- the first step -- to understanding that we are ALL of That

(divine love), but also NONE of this (body, senses, ego, mind). All

of these things are merely tools, from my limited understanding,

that teach us to train the mind to disappear. We cannot see our own

eye unless we use a mirror. The Guru is that mirror. We need to

utilize the mirror to see ourselves for what we are now and for what

we can overcome.

 

>From my limited view, we are all here on this earth to learn what we

are NOT -- to get back to our true selves, get through the grime,

and merge with The Divine.

 

Ammachi is a true sage and a learned being with many siddhis. But

what is most important to this child is the Divine Love that

radiates from Amma. It gives me hope that someday, I will be able to

experience it more and more, not only from outside but from within.

The reason that Ammachi's divine energy feels so familiar and home-y

to me is because I have this love inside of me, waiting to come out.

When I feel it from Her, it's like lightning to a metal rod.

 

With love,

Forever seeking,

Erica

 

 

Ammachi, "yogasidh" <yogasidh> wrote:

> I can add my opinions here on Ramana's Self Enquiry.

[Guest guest]

I used to be quite immersed in the Advaita Vedanta of Ramana Maharshi

and prepared a talk on the subject a few years ago. I thought it

might help elucidate the process of self-inquiry and the philosophy

of this non-dual school by posting it...

 

Today I hope to bring into question in a very deep way the nature of

who you are and ultimately my intention is to completely undermine

your sense of identity. There is a philosophical system in Hinduism

called Advaita, a system that underlies all mystical traditions and

religions. Advaita in Sanskrit means "nondualism" or literally "not

two". It is the teaching that the subject, or the self, and the

objective world in truth are not separate; they are of one nature.

 

We of course perceive the objective world as separate from ourselves.

We know objects are separate because we can observe them, because

they are finite or limited in space. For instance, the ring on my

finger is apparently separate. It is finite and limited. It can be

observed and because it can be observed, it is obviously not self. It

seems clear to us what constitutes the self and what is separate from

the mind and body. We consider the body, feelings, and thoughts

though to be part of who we integrally are. Descartes of course

said "I think, therefore I am." But his assertion does not hold up to

our present line of reasoning. I can observe my body. There is

something I call "I" that experiences my body. So, "I" must be

separate than the body. So we can see that through the same logic

that showed the ring as separate, we can see that the body is

separate, finite, and limited. The body can be observed, so in the

same way it must be "not self". There is something that we call "I"

that is separate from the body, something that observes or

experiences it. My feelings, too, can be observed. I can experience

them. They are thus separate, finite, and limited, so they also must

be "not self". My thoughts are also separate, finite, and limited. I

can experience my thoughts, so I know they are separate. So in the

same way they must be not self. So when I say "I" what do I mean? If

we are not the body, not feelings, not thoughts, then what are we?

 

If we turn our focus inward toward the "I", if we focus on that which

is looking, that which is experiencing, we realize that this observer

can not be observed because it is that which is observing. If

the "I", our self, could be observed, then it would be an object

appearing to the "I" just like thoughts, feelings, and emotions and

thus there would have to be an observer there observing it. The "I",

the self, then is not an object and because it is not an object, it

is not finite, it is not limited. That which is centrally us, the

self, is not limited and finite like the body, thoughts, and feelings.

 

But we of course using common sense logic can say of course I am the

body. This is my body. But through this line of questioning, this

inquiry, it becomes apparent that the reason the universe appears to

us like this is solely through habit and convention. Because

everything in the universe is a finite, limited object, we see the

self too as a finite and limited object. Because we cannot observe

the observer, we overlook the fact that it is not an object, that it

is not limited and not finite.

 

Many people assume that the quintessential spiritual experience is an

experience of "oneness" with all things. But we see that the

principles of advaita negate the possibility of oneness as being the

highest transcendent experience. Advaita as I said means non-dualism

or "not two". It is called "not two" for a reason. It is not called

monism, or the belief that everything is one. This is because if I

have the experience of oneness, we immediately fall again into

dualism. There is in this case an observer that is experiencing

oneness, the subject experiencing an object (which is oneness) which

is two, not one. The experience of advaita is indescribable because

it transcends the subject-object worldview that created language in

the first place. Thus, it cannot be spoken.

 

This is the deepest, most subtle teaching that underlies all

religions and all mystical pathways. The Hindu Upanishads say "Only

God exists and you are that." Rumi, a Muslim saint, states " the

source is within you and this whole world is springing from it." From

Tibetan Buddhism we can see the same when Kangyur Rinpoche

says, "What is enlightenment but the heart knowing itself? Just as

the eye can see the whole world, but cannot see itself, so the heart

can know everything but has great difficulty in understanding

itself." Even St. Francis, probably the most popular of all the

Catholic saints, tells us "What you are looking for is what is

looking." And finally this is what Jesus was referring to when he

said "the Kingdom of Heaven is within you."

 

So the question hangs there in the air, begging to be answered. "Who

are you?" If you are not the body, if you are not your feelings, if

you are not your thoughts, then who are you really?

 

 

 

Ammachi, "Erica" <sugarandbrine> wrote:

> Yogasidh,

>

> Namah Shivayah. Thank you for adding your well-laid out thoughts on

> the subject.

>

> From this tiny atom's understanding, "neti neti" is merely a

concept

> and not a thought or phrase to be followed to the letter. It is one

> step -- the first step -- to understanding that we are ALL of That

> (divine love), but also NONE of this (body, senses, ego, mind). All

> of these things are merely tools, from my limited understanding,

> that teach us to train the mind to disappear. We cannot see our own

> eye unless we use a mirror. The Guru is that mirror. We need to

> utilize the mirror to see ourselves for what we are now and for

what

> we can overcome.

>

> From my limited view, we are all here on this earth to learn what

we

> are NOT -- to get back to our true selves, get through the grime,

> and merge with The Divine.

>

> Ammachi is a true sage and a learned being with many siddhis. But

> what is most important to this child is the Divine Love that

> radiates from Amma. It gives me hope that someday, I will be able

to

> experience it more and more, not only from outside but from within.

> The reason that Ammachi's divine energy feels so familiar and home-

y

> to me is because I have this love inside of me, waiting to come

out.

> When I feel it from Her, it's like lightning to a metal rod.

>

> With love,

> Forever seeking,

> Erica

>

>

> Ammachi, "yogasidh" <yogasidh> wrote:

> > I can add my opinions here on Ramana's Self Enquiry.

[Guest guest]

> The Neti Neti approach is only a preliminary step on this

> approach. It starts with the mind (or ego) rejecting the perceived

> phenonmena as ultimately unreal (important to note that it doesn't

> deny the existence of the phenonmena, only rejects its reality - in

> other words understands that phenomena is changing and

impermananent,

 

Here I add my opinions- the whole process of "Neti Neti" is a yogic

sadhana aiming at one-pointedness of the mind; while the perceived

phenomena is not unreal, it is less real than what is usually not

perceived. With every thought that impinges on the chitta, we

say "Neti Neti" and eject that thought out, eventually we attain

perfect concentration. The true meaning of perceiving the unreality

of the phenomenal world is to have perfect control over the mind;

when this happens the five senses do not act in tandem as it usually

does when one is awake; for instance, with perfect concentration on a

certain idea, one will not see anything with the eyes even if the

eyes are open, one will not hear anything even though you are sitting

right next to a loudspeaker, and likewise with all the senses (we all

have some attainment of this eg while fully engrossed in a novel and

being blissfully unware of someone shouting your name). There are

some other sign posts, the breath stops totally and it is a lower

form of samadhi; and the body may float in air (vayu siddhi); with

constant practice the astral body will separate out form the physical

body and one can fly off to any place. At this point a Guru will

bestow grace and one's limited consciousness will blossom onto cosmic

consciousness where one is aware of thought, feelings, identity of

every living thing in the universe (we have a wonderful description

of Yogananda's samadhi, bestowed by Sri Yukteswar in the ABOY)

 

>

> There is much misconception about Enlightenment. The traditional

> model says that the seeker searches for Truth, and then after much

> sadhana eventually finds it (as an object) and all his doubts are

 

I think there is certain degree of truth in this; grace happens only

to the deserving, it is a gift after long and arduous sadhana. In

Adisankara's sadhaka panchaka (or upedesa sahasrari), acharya says

the Guru contributes 1/4th to the sadhaka's ultimate journey, the

others being self-effort, right companions and circumstances. While

we cannot quantify how much comes from grace and how much from self-

effort, I think acharya is trying to say that all of this is needed,

certainly much self-effort in the early stages.

 

> Grace. In the absence of the seeker, there can be no doubts.

> Another misconception is that all Realized Sages will be like

> Ammachi. That is not true. Ammachi is a unique sage with

incredible

> yogic powers and a very unique mission in this world. There are

many

 

Mukti could be krama mukti or videha mukti (moksha during ones

lifetime or at the point of death); i think for the vast majority

they attain liberation at the point of death.

 

 

> many sages who do not even speak publicly about spirituality. For

> the true sage, these powers are utterly irrelevant. People who

> evaluate their spiritual attainments by using Ammachi as a

benchmark

> are likely to be severely disappointed.

 

That would be like a small flame comparing itself with the sun LOL.

 

-yogaman