Was bleibt?

Selbsterforschung ist der direkteste Weg zum Ewigen. Sri Ramana machte deutlich, dass jeder bereits dieses ewige Selbst ist, sich aber fälschlich mit dem Körper und der Persönlichkeit, die sich darum herum entwickelt hat, identifiziert. Dennoch ist in unserem Ich-Empfinden die Tür zu unserer wahren Heimat. So könnten wir die Aussage von Christus ganz wörtlich nehmen: "Ich bin (ist) die Tür."

Deshalb empfahl Ramana, sich direkt des Ich-Empfindens bewusst zu bleiben. Wenn wir darin reifen und stiller werden, wird ganz deutlich, dass wir nur Objekte erleben. Auch unser persönliches 'Ich' setzt sich nur aus mentalen Elementen zusammen, die alle objektiv sind und veräußert werden können. Dennoch bleibt unsere wahre Identität zweifelsfrei zurück. Wir können sie nicht objektivieren. Sri Ramana lehrte, dass dieses reine Ich-Bin absoluten Charakter hat, reines Gewahrsein ist. Sobald das persönliche Ich oder Ego jedes Halten an inneren oder äußeren Objekten aufgegeben hat, sinkt der Ich-Gedanke ins Herz, in das Ewige. In diesem Moment verschwindet die äußere Weltwahrnehmung und es wird klar, dass unser Wahrnehmungsmodus auf einem Irrtum beruht hat. Das wird in Indien Maya, Täuschung, genannt.

 

 

In einer seiner ersten Schriften sagte Ramana:

"Das, was im Körper als 'Ich' aufsteigt, ist der Geist. Ergründet man, wo im Körper dieser Ich-Gedanke zuerst entsteht, wird man entdecken, dass er aus dem Herzen kommt. Das ist der Ort des Ursprungs des Geistes. Sogar, wenn man ununterbrochen 'Ich, Ich'

wiederholt, wird man zu diesem Ort gelangen. Von allen Gedanken, die im Geist entstehen, ist der Ich-Gedanke der erste. Erst wenn er entstanden ist, können sich andere Gedanken erheben. Erst nach dem ersten persönlichen Pronomen können die zweiten und dritten Pronomen erscheinen.                                      

 

Kommentar schreiben

Kommentare: 1
  • #1

    garich (Mittwoch, 22 Februar 2017 08:22)

    from D. Godman's "Be as you Are";
    This belief that the mind can, by its own activities, reach the Self is
    the root of most of the misconceptions about the practice of self-enquiry. A classic example of this is the belief that self-enquiry involves concentrating on a particular centre in the body called the Heart-centre. This widely-held view results from a misinterpretation of some of Sri Ramana’s statements on the Heart, and to understand how this belief
    has come about it will be necessary to take a closer look at some of his ideas on the subject.
    In describing the origin of the ‘I’-thought he sometimes said that it rose to the brain through a channel which started
    from a centre in the right-hand side of the chest. He called this centre the Heart-centre and said that when the
    ‘I’-thought subsided into the Self it went back into the centre and disappeared. He also said that when the Self is
    consciously experienced, there is a tangible awareness that this centre is the source of both the mind and the world.
    However, these statements are not strictly true and Sri Ramana sometimes qualified them by saying that they were
    only schematic representations which were given to those people who persisted in identifying with their bodies. He
    said that the Heart is not really located in the body and that from the highest standpoint it is equally untrue to say that
    the ‘I’-thought arises and subsides into this centre on the right of the chest.
    Because Sri Ramana often said ‘Find the place where the ‘I’ arises’ or ‘Find the source of the mind’, many people
    interpreted these statements to mean that they should concentrate on this particular centre while doing self-enquiry.
    Sri Ramana rejected this interpretation many times by saying that the source of the mind or the ‘I’ could only be
    discovered through attention to the ‘I’- thought and not through concentration on a particular part of the body. He did
    sometimes say that putting attention on this centre is a good concentration practice, but he never associated it with
    self- enquiry. He also occasionally said that meditation on the Heart was an effective way of reaching the Self, but
    again, he never said that this should be done by concentrating on the Heart-centre. Instead he said that one should
    meditate on the Heart ‘as it is’. The Heart ‘as it is’ is not a location, it is the immanent Self and one can only be aware
    of its real nature by being it. It cannot be reached by concentration.
    Although there are several potentially ambiguous comments of this kind about the Heart and the Heart-centre, in all
    his writings and recorded conversations there is not a single statement to support the contention that self-enquiry is to
    be practised by concentrating on this centre. In fact, by closely examining his statements on the subject one can only
    conclude that while the experience of the Self contains an awareness of this centre, concentration on this centre will
    not result in the experience of the Self.