FUNDAMENTAL ERROR? I now believe that the "I AM" teaching is unecessary, and an error by obstruction. Starting with my own contemplations, I have wondered for some time why it seems to have not helped me, and what it does for one's awakening. Now I have additional evidence that it may be an obstacle to self-realization.
But for myself, I find the I AM to reveal only an image of awareness. For me, "I AM" is all that I am aware of, thoughts, body, sensations, etc. But I know that is still illusion.
Still deeper contemplation leads to the complete "falling away" of "I AM" and reveals the falseness of the teaching. For me the "I AM" contemplation itself was not that which brought this experience of falling away. It was my persistence of penetrating my awareness into the silence between my thoughts, that expands my awareness of infinite stillness. In this way, I avoided the obstacle of I AM.
Now I believe Masters like Ramana and Gangaji awakened DESPITE the I AM teaching, not because of it. But they teach it out of compassion and because of a habitual, hand-me-down Advaita belief that it will help others.
I wouldn't allow myself to think this heresy if it wasn't for something that came from a recent religion course combined with my previous knowledge of Buddha's teachings from the Lankavatra Sutra.
But for myself, I find the I AM to reveal only an image of awareness. For me, "I AM" is all that I am aware of, thoughts, body, sensations, etc. But I know that is still illusion.
Still deeper contemplation leads to the complete "falling away" of "I AM" and reveals the falseness of the teaching. For me the "I AM" contemplation itself was not that which brought this experience of falling away. It was my persistence of penetrating my awareness into the silence between my thoughts, that expands my awareness of infinite stillness. In this way, I avoided the obstacle of I AM.
Now I believe Masters like Ramana and Gangaji awakened DESPITE the I AM teaching, not because of it. But they teach it out of compassion and because of a habitual, hand-me-down Advaita belief that it will help others.
I wouldn't allow myself to think this heresy if it wasn't for something that came from a recent religion course combined with my previous knowledge of Buddha's teachings from the Lankavatra Sutra.
From the course on Eastern Religions (see desktop PPTs):
Buddhism rejects…the authority of the ancient VedicBrahmanic concepts and Atman. (This is what gave rise to the I AM teaching!)
Buddhism rejects…the authority of the ancient VedicBrahmanic concepts and Atman. (This is what gave rise to the I AM teaching!)
From the Lankavtara:
Two functions generally are distinguishable, the perceiving and the object-discriminating, there is no difference; they are mutually conditioning. Then, Mahamati, the perceiving Vijnana functions because of transformation's taking place [in the mind] by reason of a mysterious habit-energy, while, Mahamati, the object-discriminating Vijnana functions because of the mind's
discriminating an objective world and because of the habit-energy accumulated by erroneous reasoning since beginningless time.
From nisargadatta I AM THAT:
M: No way is short or long, but some people are more in earnest and some are less. I can tell you about myself. I was a simple man, but I trusted my Guru. What he told me to do, I did. He told me to concentrate on 'I am' -- I did. He told me that I am beyond all perceivables and conceivables -- I believed. I gave him my heart and soul, my entire attention and the whole of my spare time (I had to work to keep my family alive). As a result of faith and earnest application, I realised my self (swarupa) within three years.
You may choose any way that suits you; your earnestness will determine the rate of progress.
Q: No hint for me?
M: Establish yourself firmly in the awareness of 'I am'. This is the beginning and also the end of all endeavour.
Author's introduction to the book: One evening Baagkar took Maruti to his Guru and that evening proved to be the turning point in his life. The Guru gave him a mantra and instructions in meditation. Early in his practice he started having visions and occasionally even fell into trances. Something exploded within him, as it were, giving birth to a cosmic consciousness, a sense of eternal life. The identity of Maruti, the petty shopkeeper, dissolved and the illuminating personality of Sri Nisargadatta emerged
M: Refuse all thoughts except one: the thought 'I am'. The mind will rebel in the beginning, but with patience and perseverance it will yield and keep quiet. Once you are quiet, things will begin to happen spontaneously and quite naturally without any interference on your part. (what about the mind simply going directly into silaence without obstruction by the thought I AM?)
Two functions generally are distinguishable, the perceiving and the object-discriminating, there is no difference; they are mutually conditioning. Then, Mahamati, the perceiving Vijnana functions because of transformation's taking place [in the mind] by reason of a mysterious habit-energy, while, Mahamati, the object-discriminating Vijnana functions because of the mind's
discriminating an objective world and because of the habit-energy accumulated by erroneous reasoning since beginningless time.
From nisargadatta I AM THAT:
M: No way is short or long, but some people are more in earnest and some are less. I can tell you about myself. I was a simple man, but I trusted my Guru. What he told me to do, I did. He told me to concentrate on 'I am' -- I did. He told me that I am beyond all perceivables and conceivables -- I believed. I gave him my heart and soul, my entire attention and the whole of my spare time (I had to work to keep my family alive). As a result of faith and earnest application, I realised my self (swarupa) within three years.
You may choose any way that suits you; your earnestness will determine the rate of progress.
Q: No hint for me?
M: Establish yourself firmly in the awareness of 'I am'. This is the beginning and also the end of all endeavour.
Author's introduction to the book: One evening Baagkar took Maruti to his Guru and that evening proved to be the turning point in his life. The Guru gave him a mantra and instructions in meditation. Early in his practice he started having visions and occasionally even fell into trances. Something exploded within him, as it were, giving birth to a cosmic consciousness, a sense of eternal life. The identity of Maruti, the petty shopkeeper, dissolved and the illuminating personality of Sri Nisargadatta emerged
M: Refuse all thoughts except one: the thought 'I am'. The mind will rebel in the beginning, but with patience and perseverance it will yield and keep quiet. Once you are quiet, things will begin to happen spontaneously and quite naturally without any interference on your part. (what about the mind simply going directly into silaence without obstruction by the thought I AM?)
Give up all questions except one: ‘Who am I?’ After all, the only fact you are sure of is that you are. The ‘I am’ is certain. The ‘I am this’ is not. Struggle to find out what you are in reality. To know what you are, you must first investigate and know what you are not. NO WE CANNOT KNOW WHAT WE ARE WHICH IS BY DIRECT EXPERIENCE THE UNKNOWN INCOMPREHENSIBLE THIS IS BUDDHA'S teaching.
The clearer you understand on the level of mind you can be described in negative terms only, the quicker will you come to the end of your search and realise that you are the limitless being. THIS CAN BE DISMANTLED:
And on waking up, was it not the sense ‘I am’ that came first? Some seed consciousness must be existing even during sleep, or swoon. On waking up the experience runs: ‘I am -- the body -- in the world.’ It may appear to arise in succession but in fact it is all simultaneous, a single idea of having a body in a world. Can there be the sense of ‘I am’ without being somebody or other? THE I AM IS IMPERMANENT AND UNREAL. THERE IS DIRECT EXPERIENCE WITHOUT IT
MY CONCLUSION: the I AM teaching causes the discriminating mind (the mind that sees things as separate) to create an object (I AM) which is perceived by erroneous reasoning to lead to the Truth. It does not lead to the truth because it is the MIND PERCEIVING ITSELF, and this perception cannot by itself hold True and reveal to us the absolute reality that is beyond the grasp of the mind.And on waking up, was it not the sense ‘I am’ that came first? Some seed consciousness must be existing even during sleep, or swoon. On waking up the experience runs: ‘I am -- the body -- in the world.’ It may appear to arise in succession but in fact it is all simultaneous, a single idea of having a body in a world. Can there be the sense of ‘I am’ without being somebody or other? THE I AM IS IMPERMANENT AND UNREAL. THERE IS DIRECT EXPERIENCE WITHOUT IT
Now I will complete my contemplation of this as I continue to go to teachers, fellow seekers, etc. I only think its fair we have a chance to contemplate it, because so many are so dedicated to seeking the way through I AM. My thinking on this will continue to evolve.
MORE SUPPORT FOR I AM AS ERRONEOUS TEACHING
We cannot practice Advaita without a Guru! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta
According to Śankara and others, anyone seeking to follow the philosophy of Advaita Vedānta must do so under the guidance of a Guru (teacher).[7] The Guru must have the following qualities (see Mundaka Upanişad 1.2.12):
Śrotriya — must be learned in the Vedic scriptures and sampradāya
MORE ADVAITA AND I AM
Atman is self-proven...The common and constant factor is the "I" which is but the Immutable Consciousness. When the blindness, happiness, etc are inquired and negated, "I" the common factor... shines forth. This proves the existence of Atman, and that Consciousness, Reality and Bliss are its characteristics. Atman, being the silent witness of all the modifications.... It is incorporeal and independent.(THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE REAL PER BUDDHA)
Adi Shankara exposed the relative and thus unreal nature of the objective world and propounded the truth of the Advaita {One without a second} by analysing the three states of experience of the atman — waking (vaishvanara), dreaming (taijasa), and deep sleep (prajna).
MORE SUPPORT FOR I AM AS ERRONEOUS TEACHING
We cannot practice Advaita without a Guru! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta
According to Śankara and others, anyone seeking to follow the philosophy of Advaita Vedānta must do so under the guidance of a Guru (teacher).[7] The Guru must have the following qualities (see Mundaka Upanişad 1.2.12):
Śrotriya — must be learned in the Vedic scriptures and sampradāya
- Brahmaniṣṭhā
— literally meaning 'established in Brahman'; must
have realised the oneness of Brahman in everything, and in
himself/herself.
MORE ADVAITA AND I AM
The swan in Advaita...is called
hamsah...which becomes hamso...repeating this hamso indefinitely, it
becomes so-aham, meaning, "I am That".
The soul or the
self (Atman) is identical with Brahman. Atman is only one and unique. It is a false concept that there are
several Atmans (Anekaatma Vaadam. ... the one Atman appears as multiple atmans in our bodies
because of Maya.Atman is self-proven...The common and constant factor is the "I" which is but the Immutable Consciousness. When the blindness, happiness, etc are inquired and negated, "I" the common factor... shines forth. This proves the existence of Atman, and that Consciousness, Reality and Bliss are its characteristics. Atman, being the silent witness of all the modifications.... It is incorporeal and independent.(THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE REAL PER BUDDHA)
Adi Shankara exposed the relative and thus unreal nature of the objective world and propounded the truth of the Advaita {One without a second} by analysing the three states of experience of the atman — waking (vaishvanara), dreaming (taijasa), and deep sleep (prajna).
ADYA says in REFLECTIONS:
Don’t try to go beyond this
“I”. The question is, what exactly is this I? Where is this I? Explore
this I by being still and quiet. Abide in the simple sense of existing.
Not I am this or that, but the simple sense of being.
BAGHAVAD GITA: (Numerous I AM contemplations!) EVERYTHING IS A MANIFESTATION OF THE ABSOLUTE
I am the ritual, I am the sacrifice, I am the offering, I am the herb, I am the mantra, I am the clarified butter, I am the fire, and I am the oblation. (See also 4.24). I am the supporter of the universe, the father, the mother, and the grandfather. I am the object of knowledge, the sacred syllable OM, and the Vedas. I am the goal, the supporter, the Lord, the witness, the abode, the refuge, the friend, the origin, the dissolution, the foundation, the substratum, and the immutable seed. (See also 7.10 and 10.39) (9.16-18) I give heat, I send as well as withhold the rain. I am immortality as well as death, I am also both the eternal Absolute and the temporal, O Arjuna. (The Supreme Being has become everything, See also 13.12) (9.19) I am the origin of all. Everything emanates from Me. The wise ones who understand this adore Me with love and devotion. (10.08)
BAGHAVAD GITA: (Numerous I AM contemplations!) EVERYTHING IS A MANIFESTATION OF THE ABSOLUTE
I am the ritual, I am the sacrifice, I am the offering, I am the herb, I am the mantra, I am the clarified butter, I am the fire, and I am the oblation. (See also 4.24). I am the supporter of the universe, the father, the mother, and the grandfather. I am the object of knowledge, the sacred syllable OM, and the Vedas. I am the goal, the supporter, the Lord, the witness, the abode, the refuge, the friend, the origin, the dissolution, the foundation, the substratum, and the immutable seed. (See also 7.10 and 10.39) (9.16-18) I give heat, I send as well as withhold the rain. I am immortality as well as death, I am also both the eternal Absolute and the temporal, O Arjuna. (The Supreme Being has become everything, See also 13.12) (9.19) I am the origin of all. Everything emanates from Me. The wise ones who understand this adore Me with love and devotion. (10.08)
UPANISHADS: BRAHMAN IS FALSE _ SEE THIS:
This is done by
explaining the five forms of Brahman annamaya,
prANamaya, etc., as immanent forms present in the five koshha-s. Thus all these forms mean Brahman only. There is also no
difficulty in interpreting brahmapuchchha, when Anandamaya
is also taken as referring to Brahman, as there is no difference between avayava and avayavi (Part and the Whole) in Brahman. Another point
to be noted here is that the expression yato vAcho nivartante... does not mean that Brahman is totally beyond words. It only
states that Brahman being Infinite can not be completely comprehended or
explained. (JW - BRAHMAN CANNOT BE ULTIMATE ABSOLUTE REALITY BECAUSE UTTER ABSOLUTE CANNOT BE CHARACTERIZED)
RAMANA (website)
Who Am I ? Enquiry
For all thoughts the source is the 'I' thought. The mind will merge only by Self-enquiry 'Who am I?' The thought 'Who am l?' will destroy all other thoughts* and finally kill itself also. If other thoughts arise, without trying to complete them, one must enquire to whom did this thought arise. What does it matter how many thoughts arise? As each thought arises one must be watchful and ask to whom is this thought occurring. The answer will be 'to me'. If you enquire 'Who am I?' the mind will return to its source (or where it issued from). The thought which arose will also submerge. As you practise like this more and more, the power of the mind to remain as its source is increased. THOUGHTS CANNOT AND NEED NOT BE DESTROYED. "WHO AM I" IS AN OBSTRUCTION, A FABRICATION OF SOMETHING UNREAL TO ATTACH TO BEFORE THE ABSOLUTE CAN BE REALIZED
This was what he thought:
Well, this body is now dead. It will be carried to the burning ground and there burnt and reduced to ashes. But with the death, of this body am I dead? Is the body I? This body is silent and inert. But I feel the full force of my personality and even the voice of the “I” within me, apart from it. So I am the Spirit transcending the body. The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death. That means I am the deathless Spirit.
REALLY?? WHERE IS THE I AM?
RAMANA (website)
Who Am I ? Enquiry
For all thoughts the source is the 'I' thought. The mind will merge only by Self-enquiry 'Who am I?' The thought 'Who am l?' will destroy all other thoughts* and finally kill itself also. If other thoughts arise, without trying to complete them, one must enquire to whom did this thought arise. What does it matter how many thoughts arise? As each thought arises one must be watchful and ask to whom is this thought occurring. The answer will be 'to me'. If you enquire 'Who am I?' the mind will return to its source (or where it issued from). The thought which arose will also submerge. As you practise like this more and more, the power of the mind to remain as its source is increased. THOUGHTS CANNOT AND NEED NOT BE DESTROYED. "WHO AM I" IS AN OBSTRUCTION, A FABRICATION OF SOMETHING UNREAL TO ATTACH TO BEFORE THE ABSOLUTE CAN BE REALIZED
This was what he thought:
Well, this body is now dead. It will be carried to the burning ground and there burnt and reduced to ashes. But with the death, of this body am I dead? Is the body I? This body is silent and inert. But I feel the full force of my personality and even the voice of the “I” within me, apart from it. So I am the Spirit transcending the body. The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death. That means I am the deathless Spirit.
REALLY?? WHERE IS THE I AM?
Indeed - in the West "I am" is not helpful -it seems to push us back into thinking in the mind.
ReplyDeleteMaybe this is a function of the english language where "I" is the most common word spoken as we know. So sentences that start "I..." immediately becomes that person who cleans their teeth!-the mini self.
For thought only consider "What am I not?".
"I am not" seems to 'send' me better to a 'place' outside the mind!
"What am I?" seems to work also better than "Who am I?"
I dont like "I am " at all - my entrance point to the Infinite was to suspend all thought right down to "that's a chair","this is blue" and "this is near (me)" or distant. There was just The Looking, The Perceiving. The Me or I was nowhere to be seen!!!
When I eventually located myself I was surprised and lost my breath -I included everything percieved!
BUT..."I am" now seems very inaccurate - there was and is no "me" or "I" that alligns with those english words...and there is no being (from am-the verb to be )and no being(big entity) either.
So -yes
"I am" - I dont think it fits in english and our culture (me in the UK -you in the USA)
These texts you quote have been translated into english and often by people that are perhaps not qualified to do so(??)
There are 2 verbs to be in spanish -ser and estar - maybe it goes better into other languages...also we dont have the familiar written so much these days -thee, thou, thine so english is somewhat distant and aloof.
Has the meaning been lost in translation and culture clash and time??
...Maybe consider:-
"Everything"
rather than "I am"?
This is a great point you make:
DeleteThese texts you quote have been translated into english and often by people that are perhaps not qualified to do so(??). Helps me remember the limitations of the words coming from ancient texts. I'm thinking my remedy is that eventually I will survey all of them, and do cross correlations which will hopefully find the common elements - that could sort of overcome the translation barrier in a way.
These posts I wrote are exhaustive. I'm writing a book based on them already, and your comments are giving me ideas for ways to put certain things in the book:)
I appreciate that you see the view on I AM. I don't mean to say it shouldnt be considered at all, just that it shouldn't be the entire foal point of teaching awakening lol. We'll see how that goes...
What follows IS NOT my deductive reasoning - I Looked !!!
ReplyDeleteLook for yourself because the logic(of the mind) of it doesn't work!
"I am " as an expression of God/The Infinite/Brahman seems to be "one set of eyes" or one viewpoint...it's a habit from daily life !
But Brahman (ME) is a 'manyness'(as Joel might call it) , so 'I am' might be restrictive to that extent.
The whole I/me thing is one viewpoint.
'I see the cat' and 'I see the world'
Compare with the multiple viewpoints in
'I see everything from everywhere'.
"I am Everything" almost works but leaves the me-ness out!
"Everything is Me" is pretty good -as everything is included in Me and this tries to add "I am more than everything!"...(I am more than infinite because I created infinity!)
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH JOEL HERE:-
To focus on something is Concentration not Meditation - imho - so to focus the mind on "I am" is to quieten it for sure but as Joel might say it still holds the mind with a thought.
"I am" is actually a nice place to start to quieten the mind :))
BUT
"I am" is not truth !! - not for me anyway.
I find all of these including "I am" very limiting and a fraction of what I am!
All I do is stop thinking for my Truth - why mess around with the mind and words at all?
I like when you said:
DeleteI find all of these including "I am"...a fraction of what I am! All I do is stop thinking for my Truth - why mess around with the mind and words at all?
It's a very clear way of putting things, can help people over my "academic" approach perhaps lol. Thanks:)
I get pretty black and white on these things to lol- spending the time to look them over, rather closely, and my old habit of questioning everything, like you do, just brings out that way.
DeletePaloma,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your excellent comments and inspirations! I will re-read everything, there is a lot there - a lot of teaching too:)
It just so happens Ive been suddenly away from the blog a few days while i was getting ready for the SL event, and just getting back to it. Wishing all is well and will be replying to you soon!
Joel
Its great to have a like-minded friend:)