Can we control mind ?

[sm78]

Thank you everyone for your kind response.

Sometimes a bad thought may leave the person to do some good deed. So I agree the thoughts matures and will bear fruit / or bad things in future.

Example:
Day1:
A rich man who knows that he is going to become deaf in the next one or two years becomes im-patient and curses god that why was he born in such a situation ?

Day2:
He walks around the streets of downtown and sees a beautiful girl. She smiles at him, he feels very happy. She walks down to him and begs for money. He is shocked obviosly, and thinks what has happened to her that she is begging. He helps her and returns home.

Day3:
He goes to a restaurant and sees another family visiting the restaurant to eat. And sees one of the person in the family is blind. And sees another handicap who cannot walk. His agony increases. He curses God again.

Day4:
He walks down another street adjacent to his house and finds a wise man. And talks to the wise man. The wise man explains to him that nobody's life is perfect and teaches him about karma yoga.

Day5:
He thinks and thinks again, and concudes ...Oh my god. What have I done. I have been cursing you all this time. He decided he will build a temple and spread contribute to dharma.

Now what has happened to the person in Day4 and Day5 may not have happened to everyone. So a man's action can be circumstantial. Although a good thought has happened to the guy on the fifth day, he has been cursing God all along.

Now how does Chitragupta who works with Hemadharma weigh his deeds ? Will be become a good guy who is building a temple or a bad guy because he has cursed ? Where will be his next birth be ? At a better place - because he did some things good or at a bad place because he had cursed so many bad things. ?

If Day 4 and Day 5 doesn't happen, I would say that it is a great enough punishment for the man who might go on to loose faith in God and spend more births in suffering.

I can't claim that this is universal but this is what I believe and seen to an extent. When we do mistakes, perform bad deeds in though or action, nature gently tries to correct us placing us in situations where our assumptions gets challenged. If the man was otherwise a good man, incident like Day 4 and Day 5 is bound to happen. It only that the human fails to see what is being shown to him.

[atanu]

Followers of Sri Shankara Bhagavatpada can't say such ~ Sri Vidya is the integral part of the sadhna, although they rarely speakth in public about it.

Yes, I do not know much about it, except that my Guru teaches to concentrate on the experiencer/seer rather than on the experience itself. I do not know fully about Shri Vidya path. Is it synonymous with all Tantrik methods?

But as Shiv Mahimn strotra says: Lord, all paths are illumined by you.
And as Shata Rudriya says: Prostrations to the Lord of paths.

Om

[koya]

Thank you Singhi.

So you mean the Day4 and Day5 has happened because he is a good person ? Meaning because of his past karma ?

So you are basically saying where you are and what you do is because of past deeds ? And not present.

What if those days never happened, there would have never been an oppurtinity for the person to correct himself from his bad deeds ? It could be anything right ? There is no way one knows something has happened because of something ?

[koya]

Doesn't Gita says that one should control the nine-gates of the body and the mind ? So going back to the question ..shouldn't we try to do that..And if we want to control mind, what kind of ways are available ?

[Znanna]

Yes, I think YMMV is the correct thing here. There are many ways.

But Yoga and enquiry paths are valid prescribed paths in sanatana dharma. Slow does it. Love does it. Infinite patience does it.

Watching the thoughts and bringing the thoughts back lovingly to the Seer of the thought is one way. Lord Krishna has taught this in Gita.

Ramana Guru taught that the I thought is the root of all other thought. Enquiring as to who this I is, keeps the mind rooted (centred) and also is drawn to Self eventually. Going by the accounts of many experienced practitioners and of myself and of Ramana himself, I should have no doubt.

Vedic method followers usually dissuade use of Tantra.

But YMMV. The path would not be there had it been not useful --- positively or negatively. hehe.

Namaste,

What I'm trying to say is that *focusing* on controlling mind itself is an attachment, just as a dieter focused on food is constantly reminded they are hungry.

Hope that clarifies.


ZN

[atanu]

Namaste,

What I'm trying to say is that *focusing* on controlling mind itself is an attachment, just as a dieter focused on food is constantly reminded they are hungry.

Hope that clarifies.


ZN

Namaste ZN,

I get your point and this has been the criticism of meditative methods from many sides.

But:

Gita 5.26. Absolute freedom exists on all sides for those self-controlled ascetics who are free from desire and anger, who have controlled their thoughts and who have realised the Self.

6.25. Little by little let him attain to quietude by the intellect held firmly; having made the mind establish itself in the Self, let him not think of anything.

6.26. From whatever cause the restless, unsteady mind wanders away, from that let him restrain it and bring it under the control of the Self alone.

6.27. Supreme bliss verily comes to this Yogi whose mind is quite peaceful, whose passion is quieted, who has united with Brahman, and who is free from sin.

end of citation

That's why I said that Vedantic teaching differs from Tantrik method, though the goal is One. In a Upanishad, Varuna teaches his son Bhrigu that the unmoving mind itself is Brahman.

And meditation is not actually focussing the mind, that is a preliminary stage. It is gaining mastery over the mind. Little by Little, as Lord Krishna says. Either one keeps vigil on the movement of the wandering mind and nudgses it back to the source gently. Or, one enquires Neti, Neti.

The high mystical qualities as seen in sages do not arise without one pointed mind. The effort might be unseen in the present incarnation.

What you say about mind control is certainly valid for certain devotees but not for all. Meditative methods, are the one prescribed in Upanishads preferentially and are suggested for those who have attained a degree of dispassion.

Whatever suits one, is given.

Regards, YMMV,

Om Namah Shivayya

[atanu]

Thank you Singhi.

So you mean the Day4 and Day5 has happened because he is a good person ? Meaning because of his past karma ?

So you are basically saying where you are and what you do is because of past deeds ? And not present.

What if those days never happened, there would have never been an oppurtinity for the person to correct himself from his bad deeds ? It could be anything right ? There is no way one knows something has happened because of something ?

Namaskar Koya,

You have excellent argument.

Yoga Vashista begins with a note as below (approximately):

Nothing is stronger than the present self effort. What happens in unforeseen ways is said to be daivam, but actually is the past actions fructifying. But the present action is always stronger.

Yoga Vasista, puts the whole onus on effort -- the right effort and placing meditation on Self/God as the highest self effort.

Om

[Znanna]

Namaste ZN,

I get your point and this has been the criticism of meditative methods from many sides.

But:

Gita 5.26. Absolute freedom exists on all sides for those self-controlled ascetics who are free from desire and anger, who have controlled their thoughts and who have realised the Self.

6.25. Little by little let him attain to quietude by the intellect held firmly; having made the mind establish itself in the Self, let him not think of anything.

6.26. From whatever cause the restless, unsteady mind wanders away, from that let him restrain it and bring it under the control of the Self alone.

6.27. Supreme bliss verily comes to this Yogi whose mind is quite peaceful, whose passion is quieted, who has united with Brahman, and who is free from sin.

end of citation

That's why I said that Vedantic teaching differs from Tantrik method, though the goal is One. In a Upanishad, Varuna teaches his son Bhrigu that the unmoving mind itself is Brahman.

And meditation is not actually focussing the mind, that is a preliminary stage. It is gaining mastery over the mind. Little by Little, as Lord Krishna says. Either one keeps vigil on the movement of the wandering mind and nudgses it back to the source gently. Or, one enquires Neti, Neti.

The high mystical qualities as seen in sages do not arise without one pointed mind. The effort might be unseen in the present incarnation.

What you say about mind control is certainly valid for certain devotees but not for all. Meditative methods, are the one prescribed in Upanishads preferentially and are suggested for those who have attained a degree of dispassion.

Whatever suits one, is given.

Regards, YMMV,

Om Namah Shivayya

Namaste,

There is no doubt that each remembers in their own way, dear Atanu. I did not mean to imply (nor do I ever) that my personal observations and comments are anything more than my reflections on experiences. Thus, "YMMV" and "just a girl" and "from a mleChcha point of view" disclaimers all the time

Sorry if I gave a misimpression.

Gita 5.26. Absolute freedom exists on all sides for those self-controlled ascetics who are free from desire and anger, who have controlled their thoughts and who have realised the Self.

But, is *focusing* on controlling thoughts the way to control thoughts or is it that realizing the Self means that one have controlled their thoughts?

It may be that it is a girl thing, as to me, "focus" and "infinite" are the same thing, so my pointedness really is dispersion, all the same time.

6.26. From whatever cause the restless, unsteady mind wanders away, from that let him restrain it and bring it under the control of the Self alone.

"Focus" ... how effortless is that when one is embracing one's Beloved?

6.27. Supreme bliss verily comes to this Yogi whose mind is quite peaceful, whose passion is quieted, who has united with Brahman, and who is free from sin.

Why does the Buddha smile?

That's why I said that Vedantic teaching differs from Tantrik method, though the goal is One. In a Upanishad, Varuna teaches his son Bhrigu that the unmoving mind itself is Brahman.

Forgive me, I am just now starting to learn where the lines of lineages are drawn. My suspicion is that it has to do with the friction of the One and the Many, as well as the pointedness of infinity. But, I just say that because that's what it feels like to me.

And meditation is not actually focussing the mind, that is a preliminary stage. It is gaining mastery over the mind. Little by Little, as Lord Krishna says. Either one keeps vigil on the movement of the wandering mind and nudgses it back to the source gently. Or, one enquires Neti, Neti.

Um, from a female point of view (if that isn't an oxymoron, hehe), it is reasonably easy to determine the balancing point.

The high mystical qualities as seen in sages do not arise without one pointed mind. The effort might be unseen in the present incarnation.

Again, I question whether this is a particularly male point of view ... as opposed to DEVI. Perhaps that is the crux of our difference in interpretation/expression?

What you say about mind control is certainly valid for certain devotees but not for all. Meditative methods, are the one prescribed in Upanishads preferentially and are suggested for those who have attained a degree of dispassion.

I think the Saundarya Lahari is one of the most explict expressions I've come across in describing "yoga". But, I am very unstudied in your scriptures, as I am just starting to learn sanskrit, so this is definitely FWIW (for what its worth).

Whatever suits one, is given

Absolutely, forever :P



Love,
ZN

[atanu]

Namaste,

-------

But, is *focusing* on controlling thoughts the way to control thoughts or is it that realizing the Self means that one have controlled their thoughts?

It may be that it is a girl thing, as to me, "focus" and "infinite" are the same thing, so my pointedness really is dispersion, all the same time.

---------

Realizing the Self means that one is never deluded into thinking that I am a fleshy body and I have such and such tasks to do, etc etc.

'Know Thyself' is the aim. It is abiding in one's infinite nature.

Well, my Guru says that abiding in the Self (infinite) seems an effort for you but with refinement, to not abide in the Self will require effort.

Thoughts are actually pointed -- related to some or other pointed objects. Absence of any thought, like in deep sleep is infinite. In deep sleep one does not know it, but in samadhi (and further in sahaja samadhi) one attains what one is.

Why does the Buddha smile?

Obvious. He is taking bath in the Self. There is no other.

Absolutely, forever :P

Absolutely.

Like you said in a previous post that considering that Devi can have millions of forms, 33 Devas is too small a number.

Similarly, there are infinite personalities each at different stages of evolution. The soiled consciousness evolves and evolves, till one removes all perceptions and remains as one is. Then it is natural.

But for me who is struggling to keep away desires (related to my apparent fleshy reality), an effort to know that the desires do not belong to the Self is essential and thus I have been drawn to a Guru who teaches so.

Regards,

Om Namah Shivayya

[atanu]

Namaste,

----Um, from a female point of view (if that isn't an oxymoron, hehe), it is reasonably easy to determine the balancing point.

---Um, that------ . See how we say this is a female thought and this a male thought? It makes me wonder whether such female and male thoughts romance or not?

I think the Saundarya Lahari is one of the most explict expressions I've come across in describing "yoga". But, I am very unstudied in your scriptures, as I am just starting to learn sanskrit, so this is definitely FWIW (for what its worth).

I agree. Absolutely.



Regards,

Om Namah Shivayya