Human Nature...

[tks]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Reference post #45

a-TB ji
You wrote

......bringing up logic in discussion is about your ego. Could you care to comment ..

in post #45

All subject matters that require one to *understand* as opposed to *just believe*, has to allow questioning, which brings some form of logic into the discussion.

Believers and *preachers* do not have to explain much. They simply have to state a belief and use voluminous 'explanations' appealing to sense of fear and greed of human nature in order to elicit compliance.

In the domain of *understanding* of any subject our mind is involved.

All key teaching topics in our scriptures are presented only as Q&A because questioning is an essential part of learning. This is unique to the doctrinal aspects of Hindu thinking only.

Questioning, especially attempting to point out seeming contradictions, is not permitted by religiously indoctrinated people. They are threatened by logic. Hindu religion and its multi-various beliefs are no different from the kind of beliefs *preached* in biblical religion in that regard.

When an adult person has been living in a world of deluded thinking about God for many decades, they may have a well developed insecurity feelings coming from suppressing their own questioning mind. A reaction to this is to insist that they are logical somehow and keep advertising to everyone how wonderful devotee they are and how they have *fully* surrendered to their God.

Once they think they have all powerful God on their side, and their ego is preserved & intact, we have deadly combination for trouble. Best suggestion is to not interact with such people on topics related to religion and logic. They may be nice people otherwise.

A topic requiring *understanding* engages our mind.

The human mind can be viewed as made up of

• Manas - Facility to process information from perception and be center for generating emotion etc
• Chitta - a database that has past impressions stored as names & forms for (re)cognition ,
• Aham-kara: a sense of "I", the doer
• Buddhi - facility to learn, process logic, process discriminatory thinking called Viveka

When a person is indoctrinated by delusion, the chitta which is a database is corrupted by malware. This coupled with Ahamkara is often referred as ego in English.

Now I have not been very rigorous in defining the above but sacrificed rigor for clarity for now.

This ego as taught in our scriptures and something we can understand is that it does not have a real existence and is negated (not destroyed) by knowledge.

Viveka is needed to gain knowledge and get past all the malware & ego for one to realize the vision of life as expounded by our Rishis.

Q&A, and processing logic are all aspects that engage our Buddhi.

Now there is a misconception that those focused on knowledge do not have Bhakthi. I do not know the origin for this misconception.

In fact Viveka and knowledge is NOT possible without intense and 7X24 hours of Bhakthi towards Isvara (please note that I use word God to denote delusional understanding leading to malware in the mind).

Viveka is the only gift of human existence that can serve one to get past the ignorance due to ego and realize one's true nature.

Therefore understanding based on questioning is key, sincerity (shraddha) is key, and Bhakthi arising out of understanding of what Isvara is key if one wants a fulfilled, and conflict free life without human condition known as suffering.

In my prior post I was calling attention to human nature that out of its ignorance want to be lost in delusion . I did not realize it will attract deluded ego to process and be offended !

Now for your LOL pleasure and a request:

In the future you may want to frame a question based on your best understanding rather than ask me to comment on some post.

I have not been following posts in many topics and all posts by few due to lack of interest and limited time.

In important topics, I follow/read/respond only to people who seem to be interested in learning and understanding truth (meaning no 'game playing'), people who are broad minded naturally (meaning no latent or obvious prejudice based on caste, race, gender, location, religion etc) and those that are open minded (meaning not shut down by religious indoctrination).

I rapidly go through posts and try to respond to a few that interests me.
I have a metaphor for the way your question came across to me.

I do not watch any movie or TV show because I have a bad habit of rapidly flipping channels, get bored and move on to do something more worthwhile. It is much like processing the posts here though it is more fun since I stopped reading many posts.

Imagine I was flipping through the TV channels and come across a food channel. A fellow in the channel has nice set up and then talks about how fry a pigs tail let us say. I rapidly move on to next channel. Again in my another channel scanning time I come across this food channel. I pause to see what it is about. There was making of soup of eye balls. I move on to the next channel. Then I decide not to watch those channel and create a favorite list to flip though.

Now imagine that you come and tell me that in this food channel I am not watching, there was a recipe about frying a cow's tongue and at that time the chef remarked that he can never appreciate the smell of camphor. Supposed you ask me to comment on the this statement. What would I say?

It is just for a LOL moment!

Peace,

 

[Vaagmi]

Reference post #45and 51:

Believers and *preachers* do not have to explain much. They simply have to state a belief and use voluminous 'explanations' appealing to sense of fear and greed of human nature in order to elicit compliance.
In the domain of *understanding* of any subject our mind is involved.

Who decides who is preaching and who is explaining. It is our convenience. When you come across difficult questions from the opponent give him names like preacher,scared and greedy person etc., and dump all your accumulated prejudices as wisdom on him and also conclude that he will never understand any of it. Now after doing all this you can have your sleep.

Questioning, especially attempting to point out seeming contradictions, is not permitted by religiously indoctrinated people. They are threatened by logic. Hindu religion and its multi-various beliefs are no different from the kind of beliefs *preached* in biblical religion in that regard.

So indoctrination is another label that can be conveniently attached to those who differ with you. Those matters which are logically explained also have contradictions and to resolve the contradiction you always start with the excluding words, In the given circumstances, In the given situation etc., All logical conclusions work within a certain given coordinates only. Beyond them they may not hold. When a person points this out and tell that there is also something called intuition, the logic enthusiast finds himself at all sixes and sevens and runs for cover. The logics enthusiast throws a challenge to the person to prove logically the intuited fact and the person has only the answer that time will prove him right. But that is tomorrow and the logics enthusiast can understand only today. He rather feels threatened from the knowledge of history that many of the intuitions are superior knowledge and his logic may becomes a useless relic when the intuited truth comes to shine tomorrow. So the branding exercise goes on. Call a Hindu and tell him that his facts are not unique and that they are all what Bible says. Side tracking is also a method adopted to cover up the exposed self's fears and helplessness in the face of failure of logic.

When an adult person has been living in a world of deluded thinking about God for many decades, they may have a well developed insecurity feelings coming from suppressing their own questioning mind. A reaction to this is to insist that they are logical somehow and keep advertising to everyone how wonderful devotee they are and how they have *fully* surrendered to their God.

This is presuming that the other person is a member of some African or Andamanian distant tribe with no exposure to the progress in thinking that has been presented to a person in a civilized world. The questioning mind remains in tact and it keeps questioning. But it has not been blind to things other than questioning. One of them is intuition. There are several others. These brilliant minds are not blind to logic either. They accept logic upto a point and beyond that, when logic fails to function effectively they accept other tools available. Unlike the 'logics only' enthusiast who stays stuck at that point and runs hither and thither to understand what is happening. This is what I said "like a chicken let loose in the midst of the forest" in an earlier post. Those who are at that level of understanding never proclaim that they are a wonderful devotee. It is plain name calling again.

Once they think they have all powerful God on their side, and their ego is preserved & intact, we have deadly combination for trouble. Best suggestion is to not interact with such people on topics related to religion and logic. They may be nice people otherwise.

To interact or not is a personal choice. I am hearing this for the umpteenth time. I heard this first from my knowledgeable Advocate Anna (we used to call him that way) who took classes on dialectic materialism for me, when I was college going, in the Annachi Sankaranarayanan Jananayaka Vaalibar Sangam ( a student wing of Communist Party) at Tuticorin. But I have been taking such 'closing of mind' suggestions with a liberal pinch of salt to keep myself above any ism. When you close your mind you do not want to hear opposite points of view. You live in your own paradise which is nothing but a fools paradise. It is the choice of individual to live in his fools paradise for ever with his own notes and hard to give up love for useless logic even after the logic becomes useless.

A topic requiring *understanding* engages our mind.
The human mind can be viewed as made up of

• Manas - Facility to process information from perception and be center for generating emotion etc
• Chitta - a database that has past impressions stored as names & forms for (re)cognition ,
• Aham-kara: a sense of "I", the doer
• Buddhi - facility to learn, process logic, process discriminatory thinking called Viveka

When a person is indoctrinated by delusion, the chitta which is a database is corrupted by malware. This coupled with Ahamkara is often referred as ego in English.
Now I have not been very rigorous in defining the above but sacrificed rigor for clarity for now.
This ego as taught in our scriptures and something we can understand is that it does not have a real existence and is negated (not destroyed) by knowledge.
Viveka is needed to gain knowledge and get past all the malware & ego for one to realize the vision of life as expounded by our Rishis.
Q&A, and processing logic are all aspects that engage our Buddhi.

This is all the output of a 'hanging' system. It has been affected by a serious malware and has been hanging for long. So it keeps giving the same output again and again and again. It is a regressive cycle syndrome.

Therefore understanding based on questioning is key, sincerity (shraddha) is key, and Bhakthi arising out of understanding of what Isvara is key if one wants a fulfilled, and conflict free life without human condition known as suffering.

Endless questioning is stupidity. At some point the answers have to be accepted and processed for internalization.

In my prior post I was calling attention to human nature that out of its ignorance want to be lost in delusion . I did not realize it will attract deluded ego to process and be offended !

Who is deluded and who is not is the question.

I have not been following posts in many topics and all posts by few due to lack of interest and limited time.

In important topics, I follow/read/respond only to people who seem to be interested in learning and understanding truth (meaning no 'game playing'), people who are broad minded naturally (meaning no latent or obvious prejudice based on caste, race, gender, location, religion etc) and those that are open minded (meaning not shut down by religious indoctrination).

I rapidly go through posts and try to respond to a few that interests me.
I have a metaphor for the way your question came across to me.

I do not watch any movie or TV show because I have a bad habit of rapidly flipping channels, get bored and move on to do something more worthwhile. It is much like processing the posts here though it is more fun since I stopped reading many posts.

Imagine I was flipping through the TV channels and come across a food channel. A fellow in the channel has nice set up and then talks about how fry a pigs tail let us say. I rapidly move on to next channel. Again in my another channel scanning time I come across this food channel. I pause to see what it is about. There was making of soup of eye balls. I move on to the next channel. Then I decide not to watch those channel and create a favorite list to flip though.

Now imagine that you come and tell me that in this food channel I am not watching, there was a recipe about frying a cow's tongue and at that time the chef remarked that he can never appreciate the smell of camphor. Supposed you ask me to comment on the this statement. What would I say?

A lot of arrogance in a position statement. An elephant size ego belting out about how intelligent it is, how its time is more important/valuable than all others in the world, how it reads only what it wants to read,what its favorite passtimes are etc., as if members here are all very interested in knowing all this nonsense. If I have a point I come here and tell. Otherwise I keep quiet. This is a two sentence story as against the three paragraph story told above. And I believe that most of the discerning and intelligent members here have just a two line story.

And yes, LOL.

 

[prasad1]

You have ego, so too others have it.

 

[a-TB]

Mr tks - thank you for a detailed response in post 51. I have some questions.
Q1) In your scheme of mind, where do you place intuition?
Q2) The last part is funny, but dont you think it is a bit over the top meaning there is focus mainly on "I"?
Q3) You say in your post that
In fact Viveka and knowledge is NOT possible without intense and 7X24 hours of Bhakthi towards Isvara (please note that I use word God to denote delusional understanding leading to malware in the mind).

How is knowledge/reasoning connected to Bhakthi which is an emotion?

 

[renuka]

In another site, I posted the OP of Mr. Auh ji and a wise mod replied that he believed humans are capable of true altruism. That while Freud categorized people as acting according to their 'instincts', Jung proposed that individuals acted on the basis of their altruistic instincts, that is manifested in varying degrees and at various circumstances!

I thought this is a good reply.

dear JR,

To some extent I feel Altruism might be "instinct" but to me I am going to sound semi philosophical here..that is the "Altrustic instinct" could be also related to our previous birth imprints called Vasanas.

I feel Altruism is acquired and if it already exists in a person in well developed proportions rather precociously..it could be due to our Vasanas.

 

[renuka]

Now imagine that you come and tell me that in this food channel I am not watching, there was a recipe about frying a cow's tongue and at that time the chef remarked that he can never appreciate the smell of camphor. Supposed you ask me to comment on the this statement. What would I say?

,

????

Which cooking show is this where donkeys are the chefs!LOL


Kazhudaikku theriyuma karpoora vaasanai?

 

[tks]

Mr tks - thank you for a detailed response in post 51. I have some questions.
Q1) In your scheme of mind, where do you place intuition?
Q2) The last part is funny, but dont you think it is a bit over the top meaning there is focus mainly on "I"?
Q3) You say in your post that
In fact Viveka and knowledge is NOT possible without intense and 7X24 hours of Bhakthi towards Isvara (please note that I use word God to denote delusional understanding leading to malware in the mind).

How is knowledge/reasoning connected to Bhakthi which is an emotion?

Your Question 1.

My response: First. let me say that the scheme about the mind is obviously not mine. It is in our scriptures.
Buddhi is the center for intuition as well creativity , wisdom etc.

Those who are deluded often conclude that delusion is actually intuition. But delusion resides in Chitta, and projected by Aham-Kara and amounts to malware of the mind because it covers up the truth.

Intuition on the other hand resides in the faculty of Buddhi and is verifiable. Our Rishis wrote about timeless truths revealed by intuition. Rishis exist in Science also (like Einstein) by this definition. When Mathematics-genius Ramanujan came up with equations without any derivation, it was due to his intuition. They are not delusions because they are all verifiable and can be understood by others via teaching. By the Isvara can be realized by an enlightened person in the faculty of Buddhi only.

Obviously the mind is not physically divided - the classification is used to better understand how our mind works. However based on modern research in neuroscience, it appears that the left part of the brain gives rise to sense of an individual and the right brain gives right to thinking that is not connected to sense of individuality. If anyone is interested I can supply some videos.

Question 2.

My response: Yes, it is a bit over the top. We all have many personas - at work, at home, with friends and even online personas. The underlying messages in my posts are the only thing that is significant. My weakness is that I have a sense of mischief and some திமிர் which occasionally finds its expression via the forum online persona where I tend to 'decorate' and embellish non-essential items for fun . But my intention is not to cause harm. If some poor 'soul' is disturbed then my apologies for causing harm

Question 3

My response:
This is a huge topic and I cannot do justice with few lines. But I will try

We make primary center for our life's decisions like – money, spouse, family, children, work, career etc.

Stephen Covey describes how any of these centers create a situations in the long run where they end up losing the very center that is their focus in making decisions. For example a person who is focused only on work may end up losing the family through divorce (at least in western world more so than in India) which in turn may make the person lose the work as well due to depression. The larger point is valid in any country and it requires some creativity to appreciate this point.

Some add a deluded God as a center as well for their primary decision making . Their life may revolve around this center. When the idea of God has no basis in understanding, it has a high probability of being wrong. It is hard to argue which unreasonable belief is correct. A highly 'God centric' person could even become a violent jihadist by certain indoctrination methods.

So Viveka/Buddhi is needed to understand how Bhakti is expressed and how God is understood (and not believed only)



Even if we have some idea of a God which is satisfying, our devotion finds time here and there among many other priorities. One can play overlordship over this God idea because you can simply choose when and where to not think about this God.

More enquiries and studying scriptures may make one to think that Isvara is actually everywhere (notion of so called Antaryami) which with proper teaching can allow one to view all other centers described actually as manifestations of the same Isvara. This isvara is actually realized to be present not anywhere but in our Hridayam (which is not the physical heart)

When one is able to see Bhagavan in everything it is called ananya-bhakti.

Deeper studies is needed to *understand* that there is nothing other than Īśvara.

Your devotion to Isvara will grow as you understand who that Isvara is until you find that there is nothing outside Isvara.

 

[auh]

This is what the same moderator writes in the other site:
There are many factors, and also levels or maturity of the souls who inhabit these bags o' nine holes. So immture souls (reflected as immature people) are motivated by instinctive drives like greed, lust, pleasure, fear of discomfort, etc. Their awareness spins in lower chakras.

But then there are more mature souls who view all that stuff (or try to) as necessary but not in the overwhelming way of the previous type. They understand intuitively or by logic that there are benefits from the opposite traits. In other words, they've reached the muladara and Ganesha's guidance, can see ethica, and try to act ethically. They care less about being uncomfortable, and are decent net contributers to society. They give.

And then ... there are the yogis, sadhaks, etc, the serious spiritual aspirants, awareness well established in higher chakras, modest, humble, and motivated by a drive for Self-realisation.

So, what motivates humans varies, depending on the qualities of each individual.
[/COLOR]

What is maturity and immaturity to those on board a ship that would eventually sink? The passenger who is 'aware' of the end, and remains calm and composed, and the passenger who is fretting about constantly, all meet the same end eventually.

And consider this statement

But then there are more mature souls who view all that stuff (or try to) as necessary but not in the overwhelming way of the previous type. They understand intuitively or by logic that there are benefits from the opposite traits

So here the 'driver' is to benefit... which may either be avoiding discomfort or to move towards comfort.

People give because it is in giving that we receive.

Why should one realize the self? Pls try to answer this and then perhaps we can understand if this is really not for 'avoiding discomfort'.

 

[JR]

And consider this statement So here the 'driver' is to benefit... which may either be avoiding discomfort or to move towards comfort.

People give because it is in giving that we receive.

Why should one realize the self? Pls try to answer this and then perhaps we can understand if this is really not for 'avoiding discomfort'.

Correct, Sir! It is for the sake of seeking benefit of some kind (which is suitable to one's prakriti) that one behaves. So since one seeks benefit to avoid discomfort of being without it, it can be said that humans "behave" in a way as to avoid discomfort.

I made this reply about the other site's mod replying, only to prove humans have differing degrees of altruism, in a reply to Mr. Zebra16.

Did you happen to read my previous reply to this one (post #50)? I did agree with your original analysis, that is, avoiding discomfort being the reason behind what motivates humans to behave. I just only feel it needs some qualifiers to address issues such as sacrificing one's life, embracing pain willfully, etc.

---

 

[a-TB]

What is maturity and immaturity to those on board a ship that would eventually sink? The passenger who is 'aware' of the end, and remains calm and composed, and the passenger who is fretting about constantly, all meet the same end eventually.

And consider this statement So here the 'driver' is to benefit... which may either be avoiding discomfort or to move towards comfort.

People give because it is in giving that we receive.

Why should one realize the self? Pls try to answer this and then perhaps we can understand if this is really not for 'avoiding discomfort'.

I want to know this too: Why should one realize the self?

 

[Vaagmi]

I want to know this too: Why should one realize the self?

I too ask, why should one realize the self? LOL.

 

[CHANDRU1849]

In such situation - Raman aandal enna Ravanan aandal enna? People donot bother if it is Rama or Ravana!

As long as the ruler performs well. If not, people will show the exit door, whether it is Ravan or Raman. You cannot merely live in the name of reputation anymore. If people have more pressing problems to be solved first, other issues will take the back seat, and it is the responsibility of ruler to act promptly. Temple issue is an example.

 

[CHANDRU1849]

LOL!


But you know..I never let my petrol tank go lower than half tank.

When it reaches half tank..right away I make it full again!

Nice. You are always very alert.

 

[sangom]

I want to know this too: Why should one realize the self?

Shri a-TB Sir,

My humble view is, there is no compulsion about this, just as there is no compulsion on all people to compulsorily learn nuclear physics/polymer science/genetics, etc.; if you so feel, then you can or may learn any of these sciences. Similarly, if anyone so feels, he/she may try to learn what exactly is this "I" which all of us seem to know well.

Our ancient Acharyas have advised that trying to know what exactly is this "I" will be of great benefit to anyone who attempts it. Even the latter day guru, Ramana Maharishi advocated this line, I think. Hence, we may believe that there must be some benefit in knowing about this "I".

 

[auh]

Shri a-TB Sir,

My humble view is, there is no compulsion about this, just as there is no compulsion on all people to compulsorily learn nuclear physics/polymer science/genetics, etc.; if you so feel, then you can or may learn any of these sciences. Similarly, if anyone so feels, he/she may try to learn what exactly is this "I" which all of us seem to know well.

Our ancient Acharyas have advised that trying to know what exactly is this "I" will be of great benefit to anyone who attempts it. Even the latter day guru, Ramana Maharishi advocated this line, I think. Hence, we may believe that there must be some benefit in knowing about this "I".

Shri sangom sir,

In the case of "nuclear physics/polymer science/genetics, etc", we know the subject of study, i.e., the topics, and the number of years it would take for an average person to complete it with a fair grade (pass level, if you insist). It is also possible to know beforehand, i.e., before undertaking the study, from those who have already completed the course, as to what the knowledge differential is - before and after, and the benefit thereof from such incremental knowledge (value addition). The student after completion of such course would be able to corroborate such a statement. This is not possible in the case of realizing the "I", as it seems that there is no concrete mechanism to evaluate if the potential benefits or "neutral state" or any other possibilities is/are realistically feasible, as claimed. Many eminent scholars have delved in, deeply in the study of the "I" and come out with contrasting opinions, which have only done damage to the subject. Furthermore, it seems that the claims of realizing the self and attaining a purported state, whatever that may be, is a mirage, for there are no scientific experiments possible. How different is it from delusion? It will keep the aspirant in perpetual search, as it would seem that the goal is only near but ever so far, and thus, he/she would only perish in the thirst, but perhaps in the 'cultivated' satisfaction that he/she has at least seen the oasis.

Then comes the question of 'why should we learn about this "I"?"; would you say, notwithstanding the above para that the study of "I" is just similar to any other study undertaken - in pursuit of knowledge, or in pursuit of tangible material gain - or is it a hobby? Without subscribing to a belief system, is it possible to recognize this "I" let alone learn about it?

My queries are not to riducule but in earnest.

Regards,

 

[sangom]

Shri sangom sir,

< Clipped >

Then comes the question of 'why should we learn about this "I"?"; would you say, notwithstanding the above para that the study of "I" is just similar to any other study undertaken - in pursuit of knowledge, or in pursuit of tangible material gain - or is it a hobby? Without subscribing to a belief system, is it possible to recognize this "I" let alone learn about it?

My queries are not to riducule but in earnest.

Regards,

would you say, . . . . that the study of "I" is just similar to any other study undertaken - in pursuit of knowledge, or in pursuit of tangible material gain -

No, the enquiry into "I" is not like any other study undertaken, which are about aspects of this seen and experienced world/universe. Nor can the study of "I" give one any material gain. Hence it is that there is no compulsion. It cannot be pursued as a hobby either. It may be pursued only if you come to a stage where you sincerely want to know what it is.

You have knowingly or unknowingly come very close when you say, "is it possible to recognize this "I"?"
There is no need for subscribing to any belief system either; you can have a clean slate and start. But, for people in this present day and age, it is my feeling that there is no point in pursuing this enquiry about "I" at least till they travel past the mid-point of life, i.e., 50 years of age, roughly. Unfortunately, however, most people become, by that time, completely indoctrinated (and irreparably brainwashed) by one set of belief or another, with the result that they neither have the inclination towards this study (because the indoctrination makes them believe very ruthlessly that their belief/s are inerrant and supreme), nor can they start on a completely clean slate. That is a great human tragedy!

People making the study or enquiry of this "I" do end up with conflicting views; I think perhaps our different philosophical schools also arose as a result of this. But one point which strikes me is that all our Acharyas had to conform to the already existing vedas, upanishads and so on and had little freedom to diverge therefrom. Plus, all of them had the effects of brainwashing by whatever they had learned from the various scriptures.

chArvAka was perhaps the earliest to propound that there is nothing beyond and besides this seeming life and he got discredited for being an atheist; but, in my view, he was right — partially.The advantages of enquiring into the "I" phenomenon is, in my limited knowledge, that we come to a position in which we are able to understand and appreciate the diverse god-belief systems and practices, myriad types of gods/goddesses, and so on, with the result that you either become an agnostic (as in my case) or become a great guru, perhaps. But, let me say once again, there is no compulsion at all on anyone to study about this "I" phenomenon, it does not change you/your nature as a person (you will be what you were, unless you make concerted efforts to change), and there is absolutely no material gain coming because of this (unless you hold yourself out to be a guru/godman, etc., and start making money.).

 

[a-TB]

Shri a-TB Sir,

My humble view is, there is no compulsion about this, just as there is no compulsion on all people to compulsorily learn nuclear physics/polymer science/genetics, etc.; if you so feel, then you can or may learn any of these sciences. Similarly, if anyone so feels, he/she may try to learn what exactly is this "I" which all of us seem to know well.

Our ancient Acharyas have advised that trying to know what exactly is this "I" will be of great benefit to anyone who attempts it. Even the latter day guru, Ramana Maharishi advocated this line, I think. Hence, we may believe that there must be some benefit in knowing about this "I".

Thank you Mr Sangom, for that reference. I found online resources about Ramana Maharishi. I will browse what he had said.

 

[a-TB]

I too ask, why should one realize the self? LOL.

Who is asking? LoL
I thought you already surrendered your "I" to god. If at all you have to ask that god !

 

[Vaagmi]

Thank you Mr Sangom, for that reference. I found online resources about Ramana Maharishi. I will browse what he had said.

And end up as nothing. What a waste of time! LOL.

 

[a-TB]

And end up as nothing. What a waste of time! LOL.

End up as nothing?? Speaking out of experience, eh?? LoL

 

[Vaagmi]

End up as nothing?? Speaking out of experience, eh?? LoL

Oh No. Not the experience of getting annihilated. LOL. I said, after all the search with the help of Ramana etc., you will end up in that wonderful world of nothingness or Shunya which is also called UC (Universal Consciousness). If you have doubt you can refer to my friend Renukaji on this. She is an expert on UC.

 

[a-TB]

Oh No. Not the experience of getting annihilated. LOL. I said, after all the search with the help of Ramana etc., you will end up in that wonderful world of nothingness or Shunya which is also called UC (Universal Consciousness). If you have doubt you can refer to my friend Renukaji on this. She is an expert on UC.

No one can annihilate you - I thought you do believe in rebirth if it were to happen LoL

What I meant was if you gave up your "I" to god (effaced is the word you used), then ("I" minus "I") you can be in nothingness.

In your example if you met a Dog (not sure who is left if "I" is surrendered already), then it is true "you" dont surrender again to a Dog because there is nothing to surrender!

But whatever is there left behind to realize "I" is not possible because there is only nothingness to realize and you cannot take your "I" back from god!!

You are already in the wonderful world of nothingness and not sure how Madam Renuka can sense nothingness in you ?

Even the one that wants to annihilate you will run away just sensing nothingness LoL

 

[sangom]

No one can annihilate you - I thought you do believe in rebirth if it were to happen LoL

What I meant was if you gave up your "I" to god (effaced is the word you used), then ("I" minus "I") you can be in nothingness.

In your example if you met a Dog (not sure who is left if "I" is surrendered already), then it is true "you" dont surrender again to a Dog because there is nothing to surrender!

But whatever is there left behind to realize "I" is not possible because there is only nothingness to realize and you cannot take your "I" back from god!!

You are already in the wonderful world of nothingness and not sure how Madam Renuka can sense nothingness in you ?

Even the one that wants to annihilate you will run away just sensing nothingness LoL

Dear Shri a-TB,

Sarcasm at its polished best!

 

[Vaagmi]

Someone said:

"Sarcasm at its polished best!"

I agree. And it does not deserve a reply. LOL.

 

[a-TB]

Someone said:

"Sarcasm at its polished best!"

I agree. And it does not deserve a reply. LOL.

Some people need validation by others to form their own opinion! Though that is human nature I thought you are different. What 'someone' says should not matter unless you have absolute reverence to that 'someone' which is entirely understandable in this case LoL

Again my sincere suggestion is for you to stay focused on substance of a discussion - you will win more friends and influence people !