Let's take an example and see if there is a "I" really 
Statutory Warning: All the "I"'s in this post are merely mithya and have no real resemblance to anything Real
I am seated in meditation and I hear from outside "This is a wonderful movie" . So at first I hear this as simple perception. Then the next thoughts: "they are watching a movie"; "I miss it";"it is a wonderful movie thye say"; "what could it be?" ; "could it be my fav. movie?" ; "oh! that movie i always missed"; "CD is also not available"; "but i should not get up from meditation" ...
Please see the stream of thoughts carefully. This is a very subtle analysis. The first perception is pure perception... its called idam vritti, this thought. The next few thoughts have an "I" in them ... they are called aham vrittis or "I" thoughts. What is happening here? Clearly an aham vritti is not me. Coz, i outlive it. thought comes and dies that very moment. This is what happens. Please observe this carefully and i am sure it will really work wonders during the actual attempt to do self inquiry. so, aham vritti cannot be me.
For example when t he thought "I miss this movie " arises, is there any such "I" apart from the thought? IF there was such an "I" apart from the thought, then the experience of that "I" should have been in the absence of the thought also. Since there is no such "I", we need the thought "I miss this movie" to really miss the movie! Now, that thought arises and passes away! What remains before and after that ? Awareness ! and Awareness does not have any of this "missing". And then the next thought "I want to see this movie" arises. How is this thought getting connected with the previous thought?
Lets take two consecutive "I" thoughts: "I like that movie" ; "i miss it now" ... is the "I" of the first thought same as the "I" of the second thought? They are parts of two different "I" thoughts. they have no commonality. Please see this. The first "I" and the second "I" are not same persons. they are two different entities. two different thoughts. its like a movie. a series of fast moving static pictures create the illusion of a movie. the first static picture and the second static picture are different. but mind does not see the gap. BTW, i am not suggesting that we should start watching gaps. that’s a good practise, but that’s not the point here.
The point here is that there is really no continuous entity between these "I" thoughts ... there are only sparks of "I" thoughts that come and die... but like a movie ... they create the illusion of a continuous entity called "I". the awareness which is uniform basis of all thoughts is continuous and its continuity is superimposed on the "I"'s which are disjoint. there is really no entity called "I" !! There is only awareness within and a few "I" thoughts happening like sparks and dying there and then. there is no continuity between them. Do we see this carefully ? Its really a mistery that momentary thoughts are able to create trouble. The lifespan of a thought is a moment! A series of such momentary thoughts create a feeling that there is a continuous "I" thats getting affected by the events !!
Where is an "I" thats affected by the perceptions ? There is nothing like that. Only a few "I" thoughts which arise and pass away. The Sense of "I" is only a illusion created by a series of fast moving "I" thoughts. On a static movie scree a lot of still photos are projected -- and when they are projected at a fast enough pace, it appears as if there is a movie! Really speaking the continuity of the screen is "superimposed" on the thoughts ! The thoughts are momentary, they pass away. This is what is meant by saying that its a maya! How strange, momentary thoughts are able to create a web called samsara for us !! Self inquiry breaks this illusion.
Self inquiry is merely to break this sense of continuity. What one is expected to do is not ask "who am i" and wait for an answer ... but to simply shift attention towards the "Awareness" which is like the screen of the movie of these "I" thoughts and remain there. so one remains as awareness seeing that there is really no "I" ... only static and disjoint "I" thoughts occurring like sparks. every time an "I" thought arises, it has the tendency to build the train of thoughts and create the illusion of a continuous "I" entity. So, Self inquiry simply breaks this ... by shifting attention away from that thought and remaining as Awareness.
We shift attention to the subject of the "I" thought. That is Self inquiry. The moment attention is shifted to the subject, the "I" thought continuity is destroyed. what this does is breaks the tendency to create a train of thoughts ... and breaks the possibility of the creation of an "I" notion... which is anyway an illusion as seen from above analysis. thus one remains as awareness or with the sense of "I AM" which is the "I" of the "I", i.e., the Subject of the "i" thought ... or the Awareness. This is Self inquiry ... to remain without an "I" notion within... that means: there is awareness within, which is pure witness and there is this physical body which is jada and has no knowing of its own ... and there is no "I" within to fight with happenings etc.
There is really no "I", Awareness within and jada body outside thats all an a series of momentary "I" thoughts arising! Knowing this and being thus, there remains none to react to a happening. What IS, simply IS.
Statutory Warning: All the "I"'s in this post are merely mithya and have no real resemblance to anything Real
I am seated in meditation and I hear from outside "This is a wonderful movie" . So at first I hear this as simple perception. Then the next thoughts: "they are watching a movie"; "I miss it";"it is a wonderful movie thye say"; "what could it be?" ; "could it be my fav. movie?" ; "oh! that movie i always missed"; "CD is also not available"; "but i should not get up from meditation" ...
Please see the stream of thoughts carefully. This is a very subtle analysis. The first perception is pure perception... its called idam vritti, this thought. The next few thoughts have an "I" in them ... they are called aham vrittis or "I" thoughts. What is happening here? Clearly an aham vritti is not me. Coz, i outlive it. thought comes and dies that very moment. This is what happens. Please observe this carefully and i am sure it will really work wonders during the actual attempt to do self inquiry. so, aham vritti cannot be me.
For example when t he thought "I miss this movie " arises, is there any such "I" apart from the thought? IF there was such an "I" apart from the thought, then the experience of that "I" should have been in the absence of the thought also. Since there is no such "I", we need the thought "I miss this movie" to really miss the movie! Now, that thought arises and passes away! What remains before and after that ? Awareness ! and Awareness does not have any of this "missing"
. And then the next thought "I want to see this movie" arises. How is this thought getting connected with the previous thought? Lets take two consecutive "I" thoughts: "I like that movie" ; "i miss it now" ... is the "I" of the first thought same as the "I" of the second thought? They are parts of two different "I" thoughts. they have no commonality. Please see this. The first "I" and the second "I" are not same persons. they are two different entities. two different thoughts. its like a movie. a series of fast moving static pictures create the illusion of a movie. the first static picture and the second static picture are different. but mind does not see the gap. BTW, i am not suggesting that we should start watching gaps. that’s a good practise, but that’s not the point here.
The point here is that there is really no continuous entity between these "I" thoughts ... there are only sparks of "I" thoughts that come and die... but like a movie ... they create the illusion of a continuous entity called "I". the awareness which is uniform basis of all thoughts is continuous and its continuity is superimposed on the "I"'s which are disjoint. there is really no entity called "I" !! There is only awareness within and a few "I" thoughts happening like sparks and dying there and then. there is no continuity between them. Do we see this carefully ? Its really a mistery that momentary thoughts are able to create trouble. The lifespan of a thought is a moment! A series of such momentary thoughts create a feeling that there is a continuous "I" thats getting affected by the events !!
Where is an "I" thats affected by the perceptions ? There is nothing like that. Only a few "I" thoughts which arise and pass away. The Sense of "I" is only a illusion created by a series of fast moving "I" thoughts. On a static movie scree a lot of still photos are projected -- and when they are projected at a fast enough pace, it appears as if there is a movie! Really speaking the continuity of the screen is "superimposed" on the thoughts ! The thoughts are momentary, they pass away. This is what is meant by saying that its a maya! How strange, momentary thoughts are able to create a web called samsara for us !! Self inquiry breaks this illusion.
Self inquiry is merely to break this sense of continuity. What one is expected to do is not ask "who am i" and wait for an answer ... but to simply shift attention towards the "Awareness" which is like the screen of the movie of these "I" thoughts and remain there. so one remains as awareness seeing that there is really no "I" ... only static and disjoint "I" thoughts occurring like sparks. every time an "I" thought arises, it has the tendency to build the train of thoughts and create the illusion of a continuous "I" entity. So, Self inquiry simply breaks this ... by shifting attention away from that thought and remaining as Awareness.
We shift attention to the subject of the "I" thought. That is Self inquiry. The moment attention is shifted to the subject, the "I" thought continuity is destroyed. what this does is breaks the tendency to create a train of thoughts ... and breaks the possibility of the creation of an "I" notion... which is anyway an illusion as seen from above analysis. thus one remains as awareness or with the sense of "I AM" which is the "I" of the "I", i.e., the Subject of the "i" thought ... or the Awareness. This is Self inquiry ... to remain without an "I" notion within... that means: there is awareness within, which is pure witness and there is this physical body which is jada and has no knowing of its own ... and there is no "I" within to fight with happenings etc.
There is really no "I", Awareness within and jada body outside thats all an a series of momentary "I" thoughts arising! Knowing this and being thus, there remains none to react to a happening. What IS, simply IS.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletebeautifully explained sir, i have few more questions on the same topic as I understand from Bhagavan Ramana's teaching. May I ask?
ReplyDeleteDear Chidambaram ji,
DeleteThanks for the question
Please ask.
If I am able to answer it , I will definitely do so.
:) Awaiting your permission (there is no yours though ;) )
ReplyDeleteNo permission required sir.
DeletePlease do post in your questions and we can together
inquire into them.
Thank you so much.
ReplyDeleteWell reading the posts and with my limited experience in understanding it, I can infer two things:
1. When we really look closely at the thoughts, it is just set of independent thoughts and since we dont look carefully, a illusion is created of each thoughts together and giving an impression of "Iam"
2, Understanding that, one simply turns the attention from the individual thoughts and move to the Awareness within which is always continuous.
I was reading couple of major works of Bhagavan on the topic of Self Enquiry. One is by Annamalai Swami in his Final Talks book and also in the Q& A that comes in Living by words of Bhagavan The other work is David Godman's Ba As You Are.
Looking at what Bhagavan said with respect to Self Enquiry:
Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] has said: 'When thoughts arise stop them from developing by enquiring, "To whom is this thought coming?" as soon as the thought appears. What does it matter if many thoughts keep coming up? Enquire into their origin or find out who has the thoughts and sooner or later the flow of thoughts will stop.'
1. First indication is when we ask within ourselves spontaneously and bein aware that we have been lost in thoughts, the question Who is thinking, stops the train of thoughts. The thoughts have already gone and the questioning stops the train of thoughts. That is just the preliminary step. Actually we don't even have to ask the question. Just the quick awareness that we are lost in thoughts, breaks the though waves in building up and that moment there is a silence. Just few moments. Possibly, it will again build up with some new thoughts.
2. Once these train of thoughts break up, we turn the attention automatically to the sense of silence, the empty space within us and just being there. we just have to keep vigilant in that space and stay as long as we can. In that space too, the thoughts come , our attention is turned there and if we are very vigil, we again turn away attention from these thoughts and without allowing to be build up, just come back to the empty silent space inside.
Is my understanding right so far. I want to articulate few more of my understanding but will stop now and wait for your views.
Thank you
Dear Chidambaram ji,
ReplyDelete:) Thank you for the message.
Thoughts are not a problem. Self Inquiry has been explained at various places by Bhagavan and Annamalai Swami in different ways. We have to appreciate what it is in a totally holistic way. Here is one very simple and direct statement by Annamalai Swami:
"
What ever kind of thought arises, have the same reaction: 'Not me, not my business'. IT can be a good thought or a bad thought. Treat them the same way. To whom are these thoughts arising ? To You. That means you are not the thought.
You are the Self. Remain as the Self, and don't latch onto anything that is not the Self. "
Bhagavan's essential teaching was "JUST BE". But, for example, when someone comes and says "I Cannot just be since i am worried" ... he said "Find out who is worried" ? This is not a question to be asked within, but something to be directly seen that there is really no one who is hurt ... no one who is really hit by the thoughts !
Really thoughts cannot touch us ! Thoughts cannot affect ! Now ... and I cannot be lost in thoughts ... coz I am the Awareness, which cannot be "Touched" by thoughts.
So there is neither an attempt get rid of thoughts nor an attempt to encourage them ... Just Be.
Thank you sir. Yes, the key, one and only teaching of Bhagavan is dont be that or this, but just Be. And only when people were not able to, he suggested Self Enquiry.
ReplyDeleteBut when people like David Godman, Sadhu Om etc have indicated that Bhagavan as part of Self Enquiry meant to just hold to the sense of Iam, the feeling of Iam, the subjective feeling of yourself, that is same as Just Being right?
Dear Chidambaram ji,
Delete:) Yes ... to remain as "I AM" is same as Just Be.
Only thing is, when I take myself to be something else ... I would require to again and again remind myself or reiterate to myself that I have to remain as "I AM". this process is Self Inquiry.
So everytime I see myself as an "I" other than the Awareness - Being , I AM , i see within to see who is this "I" and remain as the "I" of the "I".
That said, thoughts are mithya, they are never a problem as long as they are seen as mithya.
Mind is a shadow says Annamalai Swami.
To add to that, "Remain as I AM" is an instruction ... You are that "I AM" is a statement of fact.
Deletewhen its given as an instruction ... one tries to practice it ... and in practice there will be moments one misses it!
But when its given as "You are that Awareness - Being" ... one learns that there is no choice but to be that ! Coz I am That, what else can I be! So then the ignorance that I am something else needs to be knocked off and nothing else ... Even when there are moments of apparent slippage ... right in that moment I have to see that "I AM"! there is no difference in me ... so its a re-education.
I was just reading this talks from Bhagavan which brings another factor,
ReplyDeleteBhagavan: You will have to search for ‘I’ [aham]. Then, the apparent ‘I’ will vanish.
Question: Please give me the details of the process.
Bhagavan: Mind is, in reality, a bundle of thoughts. And every thought springs from the ‘I’. So, it is the first thought. Instead of dwelling on the secondary thoughts, the seeker has to concentrate on the primary thought, which is this ‘I’.
Bhagavan: Thoughts are not independent. They have a standing only when they are associated with the ‘I’. But the ‘I’ can stand by itself. Actually, this ‘I’ is also not independent. In its turn it is supported by the Atman.
Again and again it rises from the Self and sinks there. It subsides in deep sleep and it comes out again in waking. We have to find out the place of its birth with an introverted vision.
Bhagavan: I am not telling you to grapple with the thoughts. There will be no end if you do it that way. Here lies the secret: there is the ‘I’, the source of all thoughts, and we have to catch it and see from where it arises. This is absolutely necessary. As a dog traces his master by following the track of his smell, you have to follow the inner development of the ‘I’ to reach its source, which is the [true] soul.
Bhagavan: It is by the grace of God that you come to desire to know yourself. This desire to know yourself is itself a clear sign of the Atman’s grace. So, there is grace already working as the source of your effort. Grace is not an external quality of the Self but its very nature. It abides in your Heart, pulling you inward into itself. The only task you must do is turn your attention inward and search the source of ‘I’. This is the only personal effort we have to put in. That is why [one can say that] where there is no grace, there is no desire at all for the quest for the Self.
.........................................................................................................
So Bhagavan mentions,
1. Instead of dwelling on the secondary thoughts, the seeker has to concentrate on the primary thought, which is this ‘I’.
>>> But then this primary thought "I" is not "I" of i right?
2. Here lies the secret: there is the ‘I’, the source of all thoughts, and we have to catch it and see from where it arises.
>>>> I was in understanding, that every thought was just an independen static thoughts and the illusion we create by say all these thoughts are my thoughts and there is an individual I. But Bhagavan mentions, the thoughts are not independant and they are all associate under one "I" thought ?
Dear Chidambaram ji,
Delete:) The context of Bhagavan's presentation here is slightly different.
when I say I am experiencing this. There is a "I" and there is an environment that is "affecting me". Both are notions created due to a series of thoughts. The division of subject and object.
Bhagavan himself says that thoughtlessly one can have neither "I" nor the "Other" ...
Basically when Bhagavan says "I" thought is the root of another thought ... he is talking about the flow ... one thought leads to another ... for example the thought that "I am a rich" ... can give rise to the thought "I am at a better position than another" and so give rise to pride. So if we ask ... whats at the root of all these thoughts ? The thought that "I" am separate from the "objective world"...
here he is talking about secondary "I" as the notion of I created out of a stream of "I-thoughts" ! ITs a notion of "I" as an individual experiencing various things.
So the secondary I is nothing but an assumed notion of me that is created out of a stream of "I-thoughts". These secondary I gives a feeling that there is an individual I or a person or me or ego.
Deleteright?
Yes. A notion ... based on which other thoughts arise.
DeleteFor example a notion that "I am oppressed" ...that notion has started as a series of "I" thoughts ... but once its in place ... it creates a lot of thoughts ... a whole world is built around it!
and its this notion that feels hurt, sad, worried etc.
its excited easily :).
so this notion ... the secondary sense of "I" separate from "the other".
Got it. This notion, is an illusion as such. The more we see, the more we will know that there is nothing this sense of "I" This is about secondary thoughts.
DeleteBut when he says hold on to to primary I-thought, it is the sense of IAM, the Awareness?
Yes. There are slight differences of view. Some people would say Awareness is a little deeper than "I AM" because "I AM" is still an object ... but then to be "I AM" is not to concentrate on some point but to remain as awareness.
Deleteand this I would look as natural abidance.
Ashtavakra gita says "yadi deham prtak krtya, if , having disassociated yourself from the body (which includes mind) " citti vishramya tishtasi ... remain seated in awareness (as awareness)... adhunaiva ... immediately ... sukhi shanto ... you remain happy and bliss ful and bandha mukto bhavishyati ... you become free of all bodange!
so here and now ...
i would just say ... instead of "hold onto" ... "know" ... because its not a practice but just your true nature ... you have to know yourself to be that and be since what else can you be ? :)
To put it simply, it is just being and only when we are not able to, self enquiry pitches in. We need not verbally ask "to whom does this thoughts arise" but then silenty look what is these thoughts and know they are just thoughts and come back to Iam.?
ReplyDeleteThere are few statements which is confusing, where Bhagavan says?
a) Investigate this Iam
b) Hold on to or concentrate on I- thought
c) This I-thought or I--feeling is the source of all thoughts, so catch hold of it there, before other thoughts arise and see WHERE IT arises
So is it that when we say, Just Being..should we also see where this I-thought arises? Because this is contradicting with earlier, where we saw everything to be just thoughts including I-thoughts.. and there is nothing left only awareness. Now when he says Look from where I thought arise, it gets confused. Instead of looking from where it arises, we can just rest in the Awareness?
Dear Chidamabaram ji,
Delete:) I would put it not as a "Practice" but as "Knowledge".
which is to say ... "Know you are Self" ... know that there is no "I that gets affected" ... So its impossible that "I" can get affected. When this is put as knowledge ...
one says "Hey, but I feel hurt" ... this is called Viparitha bhavana, opposite experience. So when this is the case Ramana says ... ok, do you feel hurt ? Find out who is really hurt ! See within if there is someone hurt !
So one does not hold onto the practice ... but the Knowledge ... which means one starts to see oneself as Awareness, which is not affected by mind ... and whenever viparitha bhavana arises, one inquires to see its invalidity.
if we take it as a practice ... it becomes tiresome soon. because one has to "Do" something about it ... and there will always be a moment of relaxation when one cannot hold onto the practice! So there is lot of trouble in such approach.
But when on sees that its oneself ... I AM THAT ... now ... there is no one who can be hurt ... no one who needs to reach anywhere ... no one who needs to achieve anything ... so one is naturally resolved into JUST BE!
So I look at this as Knowledge that I AM FULFILLED, COMPLETE, PURNA.... therefore there is no where to go, nothing to do ... thus I remain JUST BE! [even if I am very active ... life becomes a long holiday]
And whenever viparitha bhavana arises, i inquire to solve the situation...
so its not continuous practise.
its continuous Abidance ... JUST BE... Relaxed ... As AWareness ... because you are that anyway ... so that requires no practice unless viparitha bhavana arises to make us feel otherwise and then only i inquire.
inquiry is to eliminate the wrong idea of viparitha bhavana.
This is a new perspective. So actually it is not a continuous practice. And I agree with your point, when you make it as a point of practice, it becomes very tiresome and a hectic activity.
DeleteSo it is more about knowing and abiding in that knowing. So whenever there is a sense of secondary "I", the notion of me arises, we can inqquire and just come back to our knowing and abiding. And the more we are, the density and intensity of the secondary "i", the notion of individual me, decreases.
Yes. Its a matter of knowing, not a matter of doing.
DeleteShankara spends volumes and volumes of his works explaining that karma and upasana cannot lead to mukthi... self knowledge alone does ! So I am sure Ramana would not disagree with that!
Upasanas and karmas may aid through mental purification...
ultimately one has to know oneself ... so be, just be! what else can one be anyways ? Even when one thinks one is not just be ... one is just be ... that thinking that i am not just be ... is due to ignorance ... and thats what one has to see right at that moment ... right in the midst of an apparent turmoil ... see that the Awareness which is the true me is totally unscathed .ignorance is to think i am some times just be , some times not ... and then try to just be as a practice ...
knowledge is to know that I am always just be ... if i ever see myself as something else its due to ignorance ... and therefore that ignorance can be corrected right at that moment by seeing how ... the Self was ever untouched witness of the whole scene from the beginning and the one who felt hurt is really not there at all!! A fictitious entity !
Right, it is more about Knowing which comes by Being and not identifying with the secondary sense of "I" which arises due to the fact of serious individual thoughts giving a feeling of me.
ReplyDeleteSo true ! :)
DeleteIts like a shadow taken to be a ghost.
Mind is the shadow. It is taken to be something that can hurt me!
so now ...
i just have to know that mind cannot hurt me.
but since i have a tendency to conclude that mind can hurt me ... i do tend to get heated up.
so every time i feel mind is hurting me ... right at that moment i see that it cannot.
even as a person who thinks shadow can haunt him has to only know that it cannot and then every time he feels its chasing him ... he has to see right at that moment that it can not hurt him! This is elimination of viparita bhavana.
that also means i make no attempts to alter the content of mind ... just ignore it ! allow it to pass away ... since it can never hurt me ... its only a shadow. i do not try for lulling mind to emptiness ! I do not try for samadhi ... and yet samadhi may happen spontaneously ... when it happens it does not change me ... i remain unaltered ! since i am ever the Self ... unchanged by all mental states!
DeleteYes got it.
ReplyDeleteBut when Bhagavan says.. "you have to see for yourself where this "I" arise, from whence"
This "I" which we is referring is the secondary notion of sense I that comes because of series of thoughts? He is asking us to see from whence this "I" arises?
That "I" he is referring to is Awareness.
DeleteAll thoughts arise in Awareness and dissolve in Awareness.
For example when i wake up in the morning ...
a sense of "I" separate from the world ... subject-object division is formed.
if we ask, where is this sense of "I" arising from ?
its that Self ...
Self from which this "I" is as if projecting and that Self in whose presence there is the subject and the object.
Thank you so much for your patience in explaining. There are few questions , but the underlying essence of understanding I got it.
ReplyDeleteI have to log off now, but will post them later. Do you have an e--mail id, where I reach you?
You can reach out to me at: tushnim.asanam@gmail.com
DeleteIts a pleasure to discuss these kind of questions, its mutually beneficial since they aid in my nidhidhyasanam as well.
Regards
udai