Self Inquiry - questions

[Shakazulu]

Okay I've read " be as you are " by sri ramana & I thought his book would have the step by step, clinical self inquiry process. Does anyone recommend other self inquiry books? 

Edited May 2, 2019 by Shakazulu

[SriBhagwanYogi]

 

You can do it everywhere

Edited May 2, 2019 by SriBhagwanYogi

[Preetom]

9 hours ago, Shakazulu said:

Okay I've read " be as you are " by sri ramana & I thought his book would have the step by step, clinical self inquiry process. Does anyone recommend other self inquiry books? 

"Happiness and the art of being" by Michael James.

Throughout this book he surgically explains self inquiry by breaking down many sayings to find out what Sri Ramana actually wanted to convey with the technique self inquiry.

You can download a PDF of that book free from the authors website.

That being said, "be as you are" explains self inquiry really well too. Perhaps read that whole 2nd section/chapter 10 more times, take notes and you'll eventually start to have a hang of it. And the good news is, it'll be far more clear and effective than reading 10 more books because you worked it out yourself.

All the best.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Preetom

[FoxFoxFox]

@Shakazulu Hopefully you have not read too much into the commentary by David Godman because he misses the point. Instead of 'Be as you are' read 'Talks With Sri Ramana Maharshi' which is not commentated. That is the only book you need with regards to self-inquiry. 

Edited May 3, 2019 by FoxFoxFox

[Preetom]

3 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Shakazulu Hopefully you have not read too much into the commentary by David Godman because he misses the point. 

Can you specify a point or two how Godman misinterprets the actual technique of self inquiry?

[FoxFoxFox]

@Preetom He begins his commentary by saying:

"The essence of Sri Ramana's teachings is conveyed in his frequent assertions that there is a single immanent reality, directly experienced by everyone, which is simultaneously the source, the substance and the real nature of everything that exists."

This is not the case. Having began his commentary with the above assumption, you cannot expect what follows it to be more truthful. The reason is that if the above statement is accepted, then self-inquiry is done with the purpose of bringing about that specific condition, which will not happen - so the effort is wasted.

The purpose of self-inquiry is only to cast away doubts, and anything else that might obstruct the Self, not to make proof of any one specific idea the aim. That is why Godman's commentary will most likely lead the seeker astray. Read TSRM.

[Preetom]

25 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Preetom He begins his commentary by saying:

"The essence of Sri Ramana's teachings is conveyed in his frequent assertions that there is a single immanent reality, directly experienced by everyone, which is simultaneously the source, the substance and the real nature of everything that exists."

This is not the case. 

that is the case!

every single person in all situation and at all time experiences ''i am". But the problem is even though people experience ''i am", they have a seriously confused and deluded knowledge about that "i am".

It's like a bug or virus that continuously mistranslates a signal and thus distorting it constantly. Its like looking at a mirage which is nothing but a play of light but always mistakenly translating that sight as 'water'. And the consequence of that perpetual error is suffering.

The essence of Sri Ramana's teaching is that self-realization is not a new event to be had. It is always and already the case.

That is why the technique of self-inquiry becomes relevant. It instructs us to keenly scrutinize that "i am" or that which we feel as 'i'. Through focused and deliberate scrutiny, our delusion about the "i am" ceases and we directly realize the real truth of "i am"-just like upon scrutiny, the deluded knowledge of the snake goes and the rope is clearly seen as it really is. This is exactly why self-inquiry is and only is about scrutinizing and attending to the "i am"- NOT watching or dissecting thoughts, emotions or contents of experience.

If we watch/attend to/scrutinize thoughts, we will have psychological insights about thoughts, but never about ''i am''. If we wanna know the truth of ''i am'', we need to watch/investigate/scrutinize only ''i am" and not something else other than ''i am'' e.g. objects of experience.

And BTW I've read TSRM and its a great book 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Preetom

[FoxFoxFox]

@Preetom No sorry, can't agree with what you wrote. That is still one step removed from the real thing. The "I am" itself merges back into its source and effortless grace replaces it.

Of course that might be the case in your experience, can't tell from text, but if you are still searching, then you still got that one last step to take. If not, then great! Enjoy the bliss. 

[Jkris]

@Preetom I didn't know what they mean I am.so I tried to do self enquiry.What ever emotion thought I will immediately to whom this is.After few minutes it was so rapid like it was happening on its own.At one point the attention touched the sense of me or I feeling or the me feeling.Thats the first time I experienced the I feeling so intensely.Since then it is always there.Waiting for it to vanish like Nisargadatta Maharaj said the I AM will go  ?? 

But I am confused nobody is talking about this vanishing of I or me feeling in the forum.

Is it that they are referring as ego death experience by the people who take physcadelics?

Edited May 3, 2019 by Jkris
Edited

[Preetom]

22 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Preetom No sorry, can't agree with what you wrote. That is still one step removed from the real thing. The "I am" itself merges back into its source and effortless grace replaces it.

this is where a lot intellectual nitpicking can take place but they are rarely helpful for a sincere seeker.

There are teachers like Nisargadatta who made distintions like abiding as the ''i am" and going beyond the "i am" into the absolute which he marked as prior to Consciousness.

There are teachers like winternight who talk about the Self, but it doesn't feel like a conventional I - and yet, you are still you! You haven't become a new thing all of the sudden or your substance hasn't vanished. In fact you are now more really you than you've ever been!

And on the other hand there are statements like "i am that i am", i am is all there is, Consciousness is the sole Reality etc.

This also boils down to Consciousness vs Unconsciousness debate. Like, is Consciousness really the Absolute or is the Absolute prior to consciousness?

Basically we can see that these people are really talking about the same thing. It just seems flat out contradictory due to how these words like i, i am, consciousness, absolute etc are defined in those particular contexts.

So a seeker engaged in self inquiry doesn't have to entangle in that confusing debate. The investigation will end in seeing the rope clearly. Then it doesn't matter if you call it a rope or fooking lion lol.

22 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Preetom

Of course that might be the case in your experience, can't tell from text, but if you are still searching, then you still got that one last step to take. If not, then great! Enjoy the bliss. 

And I agree with you on this one. Bliss or one's own subjective realization is the only test of enlightenment. 

Thats why it's impossible to really know if other beings exist or not, let alone deciding if they are enlightened or not haha

Edited May 3, 2019 by Preetom

[FoxFoxFox]

@Preetom

These confusions are absent in dreamless sleep. So what happens in waking that they come about? The Gita says bring sleep into waking and it'll be alright.

You see this...

Quote

Bliss or one's own subjective realization is the only test of enlightenment. 

Thats why it's impossible to really know if other beings exist or not, let alone deciding if they are enlightened or not haha

...is still not agreeable. This is still indicative of perceiving separation. It's not just figure of speech, statements such as this will not even appear if understanding is firm. 

Wisdom is unshakable. It does not admit "I am". Saying I am amounts to saying there is existence. Existence implies duality between existence and non-existence. For "I am" to be truth, there needs to be one that exists. None of this is truth. Mouna - silence - is eternal truth. A dead mind is a blissful mind. A dead mind does not say "I am".

[Preetom]

45 minutes ago, Jkris said:

@Preetom I didn't know what they mean I am.so I tried to do self enquiry.What ever emotion thought I will immediately to whom this is.After few minutes it was so rapid like it was happening on its own.At one point the attention touched the sense of me or I feeling or the me feeling.Thats the first time I experienced the I feeling so intensely.Since then it is always there.Waiting for it to vanish like Nisargadatta Maharaj said the I AM will go  ?? 

But I am confused nobody is talking about this vanishing of I or me feeling in the form.

Is it that they are referring as ego death experience by the people who take physchiatrists ?

What you are referring as the feeling of 'i', grab onto it keenly. Dont bother about any thought or content of experience. Just attend to that i feeling.

Now find out if that i feeling was present during deep sleep. If not, then that i feeling is only another subtle sensation. Existence remains unbroken in deep sleep even in the absence of that i feeling, so existence has nothing to do with that i feeling just like existence has nothing to with anything that comes and goes.

Then investigate the i feeling again. Is that something you are? Or is it something you know or focus on?

You can never 'know' yourself. You can only be yourself and that is already the case. You can only know something alien or other than yourself.

What you are mentioning as the i feeling here is indeed the ego or the i thought. And by investigating and keenly staying with it, it will make that conceptual feeling of i vanish along with the identification mechanism.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Preetom

[Preetom]

7 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Preetom

...is still not agreeable. This is still indicative of perceiving separation. It's not just figure of speech, statements such as this will not even appear if understanding is firm. 

Wisdom is unshakable. It does not admit "I am". Saying I am amounts to saying there is existence. Existence implies duality between existence and non-existence. For "I am" to be truth, there needs to be one that exists. None of this is truth. Mouna - silence - is eternal truth. A dead mind is a blissful mind. A dead mind does not say "I am".

Now we are just running in circle and deconstructing language. We cant really utter a True statement.

I am, existence, absolute, silence etc every word gets it's interpretation from its opposite.

And yet Reality remains as it is no matter how we verbalize it or not 

[FoxFoxFox]

@Preetom Language needs not be deconstructed if it's not indicative of wrong understanding.

And yes, if you can reconcile  "language can never capture it." with "real grace does not utter a single ignorant sentence." AND you are at peace, then you are good. 

Grace is why I recommend TSRM over other books and commentaries.

The practices you explained for @Jkris is the correct method. Your understanding of self-inquiry is firm. 

[Preetom]

26 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Preetom

These confusions are absent in dreamless sleep. So what happens in waking that they come about? The Gita says bring sleep into waking and it'll be alright.

and of course these confusions are never for the Jnani. 

They are only a topic of debate and confusion for Ajnanis. After all, ajnanis are confused and deluded about everything so no love lost here hehe

[Anirban657]

What is TSRM btw? @Preetom @FoxFoxFox

 

[Preetom]

Just now, Anirban657 said:

What is TSRM btw? @Preetom @FoxFoxFox

 

The 700 page long book called

"Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi"

[Jkris]

@Preetom ??? @FoxFoxFox ???

[Anirban657]

3 hours ago, Preetom said:

The 700 page long book called

"Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi"

@Preetom Thank you!!

[Shakazulu]

So TSRM is the go to booklet?