Be as you are #2

[Guest guest]

Be as you are

The teachings of sri Ramana Maharishi

 

The nature of the Self The essence of Sri Ramana's teachings is conveyed in his

frequent assertions that there is a single immanent reality, directly

experienced

by everyone, which is simultaneously the source, the substance and the real

nature of everything that exists. He gave it a number of different names, each

one signifying a different aspect of the same indivisible reality. The following

classification includes all of his

more common synonyms and explains the implications of the various terms used. 1.

The Self This is the term that he used the most frequently. He defined it by

saying that the real Self or real `I' is, contrary to

perceptible experience, not an experience of individuality but a non-personal,

all-inclusive awareness. It is not to be confused with the individual self which

he said was essentially non-existent, being a

fabrication of the mind which obscures the true experience of the real Self. He

maintained that the real Self is always present and always experienced but he

emphasized that one is only consciously aware of it as it really is when the

self-limiting tendencies of the mind have

ceased. Permanent and continuous Self-awareness is known as Self-realization. 2.

Sat-chit-ananda This is a Sanskrit term which translates as

being-consciousness-bliss. Sri Ramana taught that the Self is pure

being, a subjective awareness of `I am' which is completely devoid of the

feeling `I am this' or `I am that'. There are no subjects or objects in the

Self, there is only an awareness of being. Because this awareness

is conscious it is also known as consciousness. The direct experience of this

consciousness is, according to Sri Ramana, a state of unbroken happiness and so

the term ananda or bliss is also used to describe it.

These three aspects, being, consciousness and bliss, are experienced as a

unitary whole and not as separate attributes of the Self. They are inseparable

in the same way that wetness, transparency and liquidity

are inseparable properties of water. 3. God Sri Ramana maintained that the

universe is sustained by the power of the Self. Since theists normally attribute

this power to God he often used the word God as a synonym for the Self. He also

used

the words Brahman, the supreme being of Hinduism, and Siva, a Hindu name for

God, in the same way. Sri Ramana's God is not a personal God, he is the formless

being which sustains the universe. He is not the creator of the universe, the

universe is merely a

manifestation of his inherent power; he is inseparable from it, but he is not

affected by its appearance or its disappearance. 4. The Heart Sri Ramana

frequently used the Sanskrit word hridayam when he was talking about the Self.

It is usually translated

as `the Heart' but a more literal translation would be `this is the centre'. In

using this particular term he was not implying that there was a particular

location or centre for the Self, he was merely

indicating that the Self was the source from which all appearances manifested.

5. Jnana The experience of the Self is sometimes called jnana or knowledge. This

term should not be taken to mean that there is a

person who has knowledge of the Self, because in the state of Self-awareness

there is no localized knower and there is nothing that is separate from the Self

that can be known. True knowledge, or jnana, is not an object of experience, nor

is it an understanding of a state

which is different and apart from the subject knower; it is a direct and knowing

awareness of the one reality in which subjects and objects have ceased to exist.

One who is established in this state is known as a jnani.

6.Turiya and turyatita Hindu philosophy postulates three alternating levels of

relative consciousness - waking, dream and deep sleep. Sri Ramana stated that

the Self was the underlying reality which supported the appearance of the other

three temporary states.

Because of this he sometimes called the Self turiya avastha or the fourth state.

He also occasionally used the word turiyatita, meaning `transcending the

fourth', to indicate that there are not really four

states but only one real transcendental state. 7. Other terms Three other terms

for the Self are worth noting. Sri Ramana often emphasized that the Self was

one's real and natural state of being, and for this reason, he occasionally

employed the

terms sahaja sthiti, meaning the natural state, and swarupa, meaning real form

or real nature. He also used the word `silence' to indicate that the Self was a

silent thought-free state of undisturbed peace and total stillness.

The conversations Q: What is reality? A: Reality must be always real. It is not

with forms and names. That which underlies these is the reality. It underlies

limitations, being itself limitless. It is not bound. It underlies unrealities,

itself

being real. Reality is that which is. It is as it is. It transcends speech. It

is beyond the expressions `existence, non-existence', etc. The reality which is

the mere consciousness that remains when ignorance is destroyed along with

knowledge of objects, alone is the

Self [atma]. In that Brahma-swarupa [real form of Brahman], which is abundant

Self-awareness, there is not the least ignorance. The reality which shines

fully, without misery and without a body, not only when the world is known but

also when the world is not

known, is your real form [nija-swarupa]. The radiance of consciousness-bliss, in

the form of one awareness shining equally within and without, is the supreme and

blissful primal reality. Its form is silence and it is declared by jnanis to be

the final and unobstructable state of true knowledge [jnana]. Know that jnana

alone is non-attachment; jnana alone is purity; jnana is the attainment of God;

jnana which is devoid of forgetfulness of Self alone is immortality; jnana alone

is everything.

Q: What is this awareness and how can one obtain and cultivate it? A: You are

awareness. Awareness is another name for you. Since you are awareness there is

no need to attain or cultivate it. All that you have to do is to give up being

aware of other things, that is

of the not-Self. If one gives up being aware of them then pure awareness alone

remains, and that is the Self. Q: If the Self is itself aware, why am I not

aware of it even now? A: There is no duality. Your present knowledge is due to

the ego

and is only relative. Relative knowledge requires a subject and an object,

whereas the awareness of the Self is absolute and requires no object.

Remembrance also is similarly relative, requiring an object to be

remembered and a subject to remember. When there is no duality, who is to

remember whom? The Self is ever-present. Each one wants to know the Self. What

kind of help does one require to know oneself ? People want to see

the Self as something new. But it is eternal and remains the same all along.

They desire to see it as a blazing light etc. How can it be so? It is not light,

not darkness. It is only as it is. It cannot be defined.

The best definition is `I am that I am'. The srutis [scriptures] speak of the

Self as being the size of one's thumb, the tip of the hair, an electric spark,

vast, subtler than the subtlest, etc. They have no

foundation in fact. It is only being, but different from the real and the

unreal; it is knowledge, but different from knowledge and ignorance. How can it

be defined at all? It is simply being. Q: When a man realizes the Self, what

will he see?

A: There is no seeing. Seeing is only being. The state of Self-realization, as

we call it, is not attaining something new or reaching some goal which is far

away, but simply being that which you always are and which you always have been.

All that is needed is

that you give up your realization of the not-true as true. All of us are

regarding as real that which is not real. We have only to give up this practice

on our part. Then we shall realize the Self as the Self;

in other words, `Be the Self'. At one stage you will laugh at yourself for

trying to discover the Self which is so self-evident. So, what can we say to

this question? That stage transcends the seer and the seen. There is no seer

there to

see anything. The seer who is seeing all this now ceases to exist and the Self

alone remains. Q: How to know this by direct experience? A: If We talk of

knowing the Self, there must be two selves,

one a knowing self, another the self which is known, and the process of knowing.

The state we call realization is simply being oneself, not knowing anything or

becoming anything. If one has realized, one is that which alone is and which

alone has always

been. One cannot describe that state. One can only be that. Of course, we

loosely talk of Self-realization, for want of a better term. How to `real-ize'

or make real that which alone is real ? Q: You sometimes say the Self is

silence. Why is this?

A: For those who live in Self as the beauty devoid of thought, there is nothing

which should be thought of. That which should be adhered to is only the

experience of silence, because in that supreme state nothing exists to be

attained other than oneself.

Q: What is mouna [silence]? A: That state which transcends speech and thought is

mouna. That which is, is mouna. How can mouna be explained in words? Sages say

that the state in which the thought `I' [the ego] does not

rise even in the least, alone is Self [swarupa] which is silence [mouna]. That

silent Self alone is God; Self alone is the jiva [individual soul]. Self alone

is this ancient world. All other knowledge are only petty and trivial knowledge;

the

experience of silence alone is the real and perfect knowledge. Know that the

many objective differences are not real but are mere superimpositions on Self,

which is the form of true knowledge. Q: As the bodies and the selves animating

them are everywhere

actually observed to be innumerable how can it be said that the Self is only

one? A: If the idea `I am the body' is accepted, the selves are multiple. The

state in which this idea vanishes is the Self since in that state

there are no other objects. It is for this reason that the Self is regarded as

one only. Since the body itself does not exist in the natural outlook of the

real Self, but only in the extroverted outlook of the mind which is

deluded by the power of illusion, to call Self, the space of consciousness, dehi

[the possessor of the body] is wrong. The world does not exist without the body,

the body never exists without the mind, the mind never exists without

consciousness and

consciousness never exists without the reality. For the wise one who has known

Self by divining within himself, there is nothing other than Self to be known.

Why? Because since the ego which identifies the form of a body as `I' has

perished, he [the wise one] is the formless existence-consciousness. The jnani

[one who has realized the Self] knows he is the Self and that nothing, neither

his body nor anything else, exists but the Self.

To such a one what difference could the presence or absence of a body make? It

is false to speak of realization. What is there to realize? The real is as it is

always. We are not creating anything new or achieving

something which we did not have before. The illustration given in books is this.

We dig a well and create a huge pit. The space in the pit or well has not been

created by us. We have just removed the earth which was filling the space there.

The space was there then and

is also there now. Similarly we have simply to throw out all the age-long

samskaras [innate tendencies] which are inside us. When all of them have been

given up, the Self will shine alone. Q: But how to do this and attain

liberation?

A: Liberation is our very nature. We are that. The very fact that we wish for

liberation shows that freedom from all bondage is our real nature. It is not to

be freshly acquired. All that is necessary is to get

rid of the false notion that we are bound. When we achieve that, there will be

no desire or thought of any sort. So long as one desires liberation, so long,

you may take it, one is in bondage. Q: For one who has realized his Self, it is

said that he will not have

the three states of wakefulness, dream and deep sleep. Is that a fact? A: What

makes you say that they do not have the three states? In saying `I had a dream;

I was in deep sleep; I am awake', you must admit that you were there in all the

three states. That makes it dear

that you were there all the time. If you remain as you are now, you are in the

wakeful state; this becomes hidden in the dream state; and the dream state

disappears when you are in deep sleep. You were there then, you are there now,

and you are there at all times. The

three states come and go, but you are always there. It is like a cinema. The

screen is always there but several types of pictures appear on the screen and

then disappear. Nothing sticks to the screen, it remains a screen. Similarly,

you remain your own Self in

all the three states. If you know that, the three states will not trouble you,

just as the pictures which appear on the screen do not stick to it. On the

screen, you sometimes see a huge ocean with endless waves;

that disappears. Another time, you see fire spreading all around; that too

disappears. The screen is there on both occasions. Did the screen get wet with

the water or did it get burned by the fire? Nothing

affected the screen. In the same way, the things that happen during the wakeful,

dream and sleep states do not affect you at all; you remain your own Self. Q:

Does that mean that, although people have all three states,

wakefulness, dream and deep sleep, these do not affect them? A: Yes, that is it.

All these states come and go. The Self is not bothered; it has only one state.

Q: Does that mean that such a person will be in this world merely

as a witness? A: That is so; for this very thing, Vidyaranya, in the tenth

chapter of the Panchadasi, gives as example the light that is kept on the stage

of a theatre. When a drama is being played, the light is there, which

illuminates, without any distinction, all the actors, whether they be kings or

servants or dancers, and also all the audience. That light will be there before

the drama begins, during the performance and also

after the performance is over. Similarly, the light within, that is, the Self,

gives light to the ego, the intellect, the memory and the mind without itself

being subject to processes of growth and decay.

Although during deep sleep and other states there is no feeling of the ego that

Self remains attribute less, and continues to shine of itself. Actually, the

idea of the Self being the witness is only in the mind; it

is not the absolute truth of the Self. Witnessing is relative to objects

witnessed. Both the witness and his object are mental creations. Q: How are the

three states of consciousness inferior in degree of

reality to the fourth [turiya]? What is the actual relation between these three

states and the fourth? A: There is only one state, that of consciousness or

awareness or existence. The three states of waking, dream and sleep cannot be

real. They simply come and go. The real will always exist. The `I' or existence

that alone persists in all the three states is real. The other three are not

real and so it is not possible to say they have

such and such a degree of reality. We may roughly put it like this. Existence or

consciousness is the only reality. Consciousness plus waking, we call waking.

Consciousness plus sleep, we call sleep. Consciousness plus dream, we call

dream. Consciousness is the

screen on which all the pictures come and go. The screen is real, the pictures

are mere shadows on it. Because by long habit we have been regarding these three

states as real, we call the state of mere

awareness or consciousness the fourth. There is however no fourth state, but

only one state. There is no difference between dream and the waking state except

that the dream is short and the waking long. Both are the result of the

mind. Because the waking state is long, we imagine that it is our real state.

But, as a matter of fact, our real state is turiya or the fourth state which is

always as it is and knows nothing of the three states of

waking, dream or sleep. Because we call these three avasthas [states] we call

the fourth state also turiya avastha. But is it not an avastha, but the real and

natural state of the Self. When this is realized, we

know it is not a turiya or fourth state, for a fourth state is only relative,

but turiyatita, the transcendent state. Q: But why should these three states

come and go on the real state or the screen of the Self?

A: Who puts this question? Does the Self say these states come and go? It is the

seer who says these come and go. The seer and the seen together constitute the

mind. See if there is such a thing as the mind.

Then, the mind merges in the Self, and there is neither the seer nor the seen.

So the real answer to your question is, `They neither come nor go.' The Self

alone remains as it ever is. The three states owe their existence to non-enquiry

and enquiry puts an end to them.

However much one may explain, the fact will not become clear till one attains

Self-realization and wonders how one was blind to the self-evident and only

existence so long. Q: What is the difference between the mind and the Self ?

A: There is no difference. The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards,

it becomes the ego and all the world. Cotton made into various clothes we call

by various names. Gold made into various ornaments, we call by various names.

But all the clothes are

cotton and all the ornaments gold. The one is real, the many are mere names and

forms. But the mind does not exist apart from the Self, that is, it has no

independent existence. The Self exists without the mind, never the

mind without the Self. Q: Brahman is said to be sat-chit-ananda. What does that

mean? A: Yes. That is so. That which is, is only sat. That is called Brahman.

The luster of sat is chit and its nature is ananda. These

are not different from sat. All the three together are known as satchit-ananda.

Q: As the Self is existence (sat) and consciousness (chit) what is the reason

for describing it as different from the existent and the non-

existent, the sentient and the insentient? A: Although the Self is real, as it

comprises everything, it does not give room for questions involving duality

about its reality or unreality. Therefore it is said to be different from the

real and the

unreal. Similarly, even though it is consciousness, since there is nothing for

it to know or to make itself known to, it is said to be different from the

sentient and the insentient. Sat-chit-ananda is said to indicate that the

supreme is not asat

(different from being), not achit (different from consciousness) and not an

anananda (different from happiness). Because we are in the phenomenal world we

speak of the Self as sat-chitananda. Q: In what sense is happiness or bliss

(ananda) our real nature?

A: Perfect bliss is Brahman. Perfect peace is of the Self. That alone exists and

is consciousness. That which is called happiness is only the nature of Self;

Self is not other than perfect happiness. That

which is called happiness alone exists. Knowing that fact and abiding in the

state of Self, enjoy bliss eternally. If a man thinks that his happiness is due

to external causes and his possessions, it is reasonable to conclude that his

happiness must

increase with the increase of possessions and diminish in proportion to their

diminution. Therefore if he is devoid of possessions, his happiness should be

nil. What is the real experience of man? Does it

conform to this view? In deep sleep man is devoid of possessions, including his

own body. Instead of being unhappy he is quite happy. Everyone desires to sleep

soundly. The conclusion is that happiness is inherent in man

and is not due to external causes. One must realize the Self in order to open

the store of unalloyed happiness. Q: Sri Bhagavan speaks of the Heart as the

seat of consciousness and as identical with the Self. What does the Heart

exactly signify ?

A: Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the seat of consciousness, it is

all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that Heart means the very core of

one's being, the centre, without which there is nothing whatever.

The Heart is not physical, it is spiritual. Hridayam equals hrit plus ayam; it

means `this is the centre'. It is that from which thoughts arise, on which they

subsist and where they are resolved. The thoughts are the content of the mind

and they shape the universe.

The Heart is the centre of all. That from which beings come into existence is

said to be Brahman in the Upanishads. That is the Heart. Brahman is the Heart.

Q: How to realize the Heart? A: There is no one who even for a moment fails to

experience the

Self. For no one admits that he ever stands apart from the Self. He is the Self.

The Self is the Heart. The Heart is the centre from which everything springs.

Because you see the world, the body and so on, it is said that there is a centre

for

these, which is called the Heart. When you are in the Heart, the Heart is known

to be neither the centre nor the circumference. There is nothing else apart from

it. The consciousness which is the real existence and which does not

go out to know those things which are other than Self, alone is the Heart. Since

the truth of Self is known only to that consciousness, which is devoid of

activity, that consciousness which always remains attending to Self alone is the

shining of clear knowledge.

Self-awareness and Self-ignorance Sri Ramana occasionally indicated that there

were three classes of spiritual aspirants. The most advanced realize the Self as

soon as they are told about its real nature. Those in the second class need to

reflect on it for some time before Self-awareness becomes firmly established.

Those in the third category are less fortunate since they usually need many

years of intensive spiritual practice to achieve the goal of Self-realization.

Sri Ramana sometimes used a metaphor

of combustion to describe the three levels: gunpowder ignites with a single

spark, charcoal needs the application of heat for a short time, and wet coal

needs to dry out and heat up over a long period of time

before it will begin to burn. For the benefit of those in the top two categories

Sri Ramana taught that the Self alone exists and that it can be directly and

consciously experienced merely by ceasing to pay attention to the wrong ideas

we have about ourselves. These wrong ideas he collectively called the 'not-Self'

since they are an imaginary accretion of wrong notions and misperceptions which

effectively veil the true experience of the

real Self. The principal misperception is the idea that the Self is limited to

the body and the mind. As soon as one ceases to imagine that one is an

individual person, inhabiting a particular body, the whole superstructure of

wrong ideas collapses and is replaced by a

conscious and permanent awareness of the real Self. At this level of the

teaching there is no question of effort or practice. All that is required is an

understanding that the Self is not a goal to be attained, it is merely the

awareness that prevails when

all the limiting ideas about the not-Self have been discarded. Q: How can I

attain Self- realization? A: Realization is nothing to be gained afresh; it is

already there. All that is necessary is to get rid of the thought `I have not

realized'.

Stillness or peace is realization. There is no moment when the Self is not. So

long as there is doubt or the feeling of non-realization, the attempt should be

made to rid oneself of these thoughts. They are due to the identification of the

Self with the

not-Self. When the not-Self disappears, the Self alone remains. To make room, it

is enough that objects be removed. Room is not brought in from elsewhere. Q:

Since realization is not possible without vasana-kshaya

[destruction of mental tendencies], how am I to realize that state in which the

tendencies are effectively destroyed? A: You are in that state now. Q: Does it

mean that by holding on to the Self, the vasanas [mental

tendencies] should be destroyed as and when they emerge? A: They will themselves

be destroyed if you remain as you are. Q: How shall I reach the Self? A: There

is no reaching the Self. If Self were to be reached, it

would mean that the Self is not here and now and that it is yet to be obtained.

What is got afresh will also be lost. So it will be impermanent. What is not

permanent is not worth striving for. So I say the Self is not reached. You are

the Self, you are already that.

The fact is, you are ignorant of your blissful state. Ignorance supervenes and

draws a veil over the pure Self which is bliss. Attempts are directed only to

remove this veil of ignorance which is merely wrong knowledge. The wrong

knowledge is the false

identification of the Self with the body and the mind. This false identification

must go, and then the Self alone remains. Therefore realization is for everyone;

realization makes no difference between the aspirants. This very doubt, whether

you can

realize, and the notion `I-have-not-realized' are themselves the obstacles. Be

free from these obstacles also. Q: How long does it take to reach mukti

[liberation]? A: Mukti is not to be gained in the future. It is there for ever,

here and now. Q: I agree, but I do not experience it. A: The experience is here

and now. One cannot deny one's own Self. Q: That means existence and not

happiness. A: Existence is the same as happiness and happiness is the same

as being. The word mukti is so provoking. Why should one seek it? One believes

that there is bondage and therefore seeks liberation. But the fact is that there

is no bondage but only liberation. Why call it by a name and seek it?

Q: True - but we are ignorant. A: Only remove ignorance. That is all there is to

be done. All questions relating to mukti are inadmissible. Mukti means release

from bondage which implies the present existence of bondage.

There is no bondage and therefore no mukti either. Q: Of what nature is the

realization of westerners who relate that they have had flashes of cosmic

consciousness? A: It came as a flash and disappeared as such. That which has a

beginning must also end. Only when the ever-present consciousness is realized

will it be permanent. Consciousness is indeed always with us. Everyone knows `I

am'. No one can deny his own being. The man in

deep sleep is not aware; while awake he seems to be aware. But it is the same

person. There is no change in the one who slept and the one who is now awake. In

deep sleep he was not aware of his body and so there was no body-consciousness.

In the wakeful state he is aware of

his body and so there is body-consciousness. Therefore the difference lies in

the emergence of body-consciousness and not in any change in the real

consciousness. The body and body-consciousness arise together and sink

together. All this amounts to saying that there are no limitations in deep

sleep, whereas there are limitations in the waking state. These limitations are

the bondage. The feeling `The body is I' is the error.

This false sense of `I' must go. The real `I' is always there. It is here and

now. It never appears anew and disappears again. That which is must also persist

for ever. That which appears anew will also be

lost. Compare deep sleep and waking. The body appears in one state but not in

the other. Therefore the body will be lost. The consciousness was pre-existent

and will survive the body. There is no one who does not say `I am'. The wrong

knowledge of

`I am the body' is the cause of all the mischief. This wrong knowledge must go.

That is realization. Realization is not acquisition of anything new nor is it a

new faculty. It is only removal of all camouflage.

The ultimate truth is so simple. It is nothing more than being in the pristine

state. This is all that need be said. Q: Is one nearer to pure consciousness in

deep sleep than in the waking state? A: The sleep,dream and waking states are

mere phenomena

appearing on the Self which is itself stationary. It is also a state of simple

awareness. Can anyone remain away from the Self at any moment ? This question

can arise only if that were possible. Q: Is it not often said that one is nearer

pure consciousness in deep

sleep than in the waking state? A: The question may as well be `Am I nearer to

myself in my sleep than in my waking state?' The Self is pure consciousness. No

one can ever be away from the Self. The question is possible only if there is

duality. But there is no

duality in the state of pure consciousness. The same person sleeps, dreams and

wakes up. The waking state is considered to be full of beautiful and interesting

things. The absence of such experience makes one say that the sleep state is

dull. Before

we proceed further let us make this point clear. Do you not admit that you exist

in your sleep? Q: Yes, I do. A: You are the same person that is now awake. Is it

not so? Q: Yes. A: So there is a continuity in the sleep and the waking states.

What

is that continuity ? It is only the state of pure being. There is a difference

in the two states. What is that difference? The incidents, namely, the body, the

world and objects appear in the waking state but they disappear in sleep.

Q: But I am not aware in my sleep. A: True, there is no awareness of the body or

of the world. But you must exist in your sleep in order to say now `I was not

aware in my sleep'. Who says so now ? It is the wakeful person. The sleeper

cannot say so. That is to say, the individual who is now identifying the Self

with the body says that such awareness did not exist in sleep. Because you

identify yourself with the body, you see the world

around you and say that the waking state is filled with beautiful and

interesting things. The sleep state appears dull because you were not there as

an individual and therefore these things were not. But what

is the fact? There is the continuity of being in all the three states, but no

continuity of the individual and the objects. Q: Yes. A: That which is

continuous is also enduring, that is permanent. That which is discontinuous is

transitory.

Q: Yes. A: Therefore the state of being is permanent and the body and the world

are not. They are fleeting phenomena passing on the screen of

being-consciousness which is eternal and stationary. Q: Relatively speaking, is

not the sleep state nearer to pure

Consciousness than the waking state ? A: Yes, in this sense: when passing from

sleep to waking the `I'-thought [individual self] must start and the mind must

come into play. Then thoughts arise and the functions of the body come into

operation. All these together make us say that we are awake. The absence of all

this evolution is the characteristic of sleep and therefore it is nearer to pure

consciousness than the waking state. But one should not therefore desire to be

always in sleep. In the

first place it is impossible, for it will necessarily alternate with the other

states. Secondly it cannot be the state of bliss in which the jnani is, for his

state is permanent and not alternating. Moreover, the

sleep state is not recognized to be one of awareness by people, but the sage is

always aware. Thus the sleep state differs from the state in which the sage is

established. Still more, the sleep state is free from thoughts and their

impression on the individual. It cannot be altered by one's will because effort

is impossible in that condition. Although nearer to pure consciousness, it is

not fit for efforts to realize the Self. Q: Is not the realization of one's

absolute being, that is, Brahma-

jnana, something quite unattainable for a layman like me? A: Brahma-jnana is not

a knowledge to be acquired, so that acquiring it one may obtain happiness. It is

one's ignorant outlook that one should give up. The Self you seek to know is

truly yourself.

Your supposed ignorance causes you needless grief like that of the ten foolish

men who grieved at the loss of the tenth man who was never lost. The ten foolish

men in the parable forded a stream and on

reaching the other shore wanted to make sure that all of them had in fact safely

crossed the stream. One of the ten began to count, but while counting the others

left himself out. `I see only nine; sure enough, we have lost one. Who can it

be?' he said. `Did you count

correctly?' asked another, and did the counting himself. But he too counted only

nine. One after the other each of the ten counted only nine, missing himself.

`We are only nine', they all agreed, `but who

is the missing one?' they asked themselves. Every effort they made to discover

the `missing' individual failed. `Whoever he is that is drowned', said the most

sentimental of the ten fools, `we have lost him.' So saying he burst into tears,

and the others followed suit.

Seeing them weeping on the river bank, a sympathetic wayfarer enquired about the

cause. They related what had happened and said that even after counting

themselves several times they could find no more than nine. On hearing the

story, but seeing all the ten before

him, the wayfarer guessed what had happened. In order to make them know for

themselves they were really ten, that all of them had survived the crossing, he

told them, `Let each of you count for himself but one after the other serially,

one, two, three and so on, while I shall

give you each a blow so that all of you may be sure of having been included in

the count, and included only once. The tenth missing man will then be found.'

Hearing this they rejoiced at the prospect of finding their `lost' comrade and

accepted the method suggested by the

wayfarer. While the kind wayfarer gave a blow to each of the ten in turn, he

that got the blow counted himself aloud. `Ten,' said the last man as he got the

last blow in his turn. Bewildered they looked at one another,

`We are ten,' they said with one voice and thanked the wayfarer for having

removed their grief. That is the parable. From where was the tenth man brought

in ? Was he ever lost ? By knowing that he had been there all the while, did

they

learn anything new ? The cause of their grief was not the real loss of anyone,

it was their own ignorance, or rather, their mere supposition that one of them

was lost. Such is the case with you. Truly there is no cause for you to be

miserable and unhappy. You yourself impose limitations on your true nature of

infinite being, and then weep that you are but a finite creature. Then you take

up this or that spiritual practice to transcend the non-

existent limitations. But if your spiritual practice itself assumes the

existence of the limitations, how can it help you to transcend them ? Hence I

say know that you are really the infinite pure being, the Self.

You are always that Self and nothing but that Self. Therefore, you can never be

really ignorant of the Self. Your ignorance is merely an imaginary ignorance,

like the ignorance of the ten fools about the lost

tenth man. It is this ignorance that caused them grief. Know then that true

knowledge does not create a new being for you, it only removes your ignorant

ignorance. Bliss is not added to your nature, it is merely revealed as your true

natural state, eternal

and imperishable. The only way to be rid of your grief is to know and be the

Self. How can this be unattainable ? Q: However often Bhagavan teaches us, we

are not able to understand. A: People say that they are not able to know the

Self that is all

pervading. What can I do ? Even the smallest child says, `I exist; I do; this is

mine.' So, everyone understands that the thing `I' is always existent. It is

only when that `I' is there that there is the feeling that you

are the body, he is Venkanna, this is Ramanna and so on. To know that the one

that is always visible is one's own Self, is it necessary to search with a

candle ? To say that we do not know the atma swarupa [the

real nature of the Self] which is not different but which is in one's own Self

is like saying, `I do not know myself.` Q: But how is one to reach this state?

A: There is no goal to be reached. There is nothing to be attained.

You are the Self. You exist always. Nothing more can be predicated of the Self

than that it exists. Seeing God or the Self is only being the Self or yourself.

Seeing is being. You, being the Self, want to know how to

attain the Self. It is something like a man being at Ramanasramam asking how

many ways there are to reach Ramanasramam and which is the best way for him. All

that is required of you is to give up the thought

that you are this body and to give up all thoughts of the external things or the

not-Self. Q: What is the ego-self ? How is it related to the real Self ? A: The

ego-Self appears and disappears and is transitory, whereas the

real Self is permanent. Though you are actually the true Self you wrongly

identify the real Self with the ego-self. Q: How does the mistake come about? A:

See if it has come about. Q: One has to sublimate the ego-self into the true

Self.

A: The ego-self does not exist at all. Q: Why does it give us trouble? A: To

whom is the trouble ? The trouble also is imagined. Trouble and pleasure are

only for the ego. Q: Why is the world so wrapped up in ignorance?

A: Take care of yourself. Let the world take care of itself. See your Self. If

you are the body there is the gross world also. If you are spirit all is spirit

alone. Q: It will hold good for the individual, but what of the rest?

A: Do it first and then see if the question arises afterwards. Q: Is there

avidya [ignorance]? A: For whom is it? Q: For the ego-self. A: Yes, for the ego.

Remove the ego and avidya is gone. Look for

it, the ego vanishes and the real Self alone remains. The ego professing avidya

is not to be seen. There is no avidya in reality. All sastras [scriptures] are

meant to disprove the existence of avidya. Q: How did the ego arise?

A: Ego is not. Otherwise do you admit of two selves? How can there be avidya in

the absence of the ego? If you begin to enquire, the avidya, which is already

non-existent, will be found not to be, or you will say it has fled away.

Ignorance pertains to the ego. Why do you think of the ego and also suffer? What

is ignorance again? It is that which is nonexistent. However the worldly life

requires the hypothesis of avidya. Avidya is only our ignorance and nothing

more. It is ignorance or

forgetfulness of the Self. Can there be darkness before the sun? Similarly, can

there be ignorance before the self-evident and self-luminous Self ? If you know

the Self there will be no darkness, no ignorance and no misery.

It is the mind which feels the trouble and the misery. Darkness never comes nor

goes. See the sun and there is no darkness. Similarly, see the Self and avidya

will be found not to exist. Q: How has the unreal come? Can the unreal spring

from the

real? A: See if it has sprung. There is no such thing as the unreal, from

another standpoint. The Self alone exists. When you try to trace the ego, which

is the basis of the perception of the world and

everything else, you find the ego does not exist at all and neither does all

this creation that you see. Q: It is cruel of God's leela (play) to make the

knowledge of the Self so hard. A: Knowing the Self is being the Self, and being

means existence,

one's own existence. No one denies one's existence any more than one denies

one's eyes, although one cannot see them. The trouble lies with your desire to

objectify the Self, in the same way as you objectify your eyes when you place a

mirror before them. You have

been so accustomed to objectivity that you have lost the knowledge of yourself,

simply because the Self cannot be objectified. Who is to know the Self ? Can the

insentient body know it? All the time you speak and think of your `I', yet when

questioned you deny

knowledge of it. You are the Self, yet you ask how to know the Self. Where then

is God's leela and where is its cruelty ? Because of this denial of the Self by

people the sastras speak of maya, leela,

etc. Q: Does my realization help others? A: Yes, certainly. It is the best help

possible. But there are no others to be helped. For a realized being sees only

the Self, just like a goldsmith estimating the gold in various items of

jewellery sees

only gold. When you identify yourself with the body then only the forms and

shapes are there. But when you transcend your body the others disappear along

with your body-consciousness. Q: Is it so with plants, trees, etc.?

A: Do they exist at all apart from the Self ? Find it out. You think that you

see them. The thought is projected out from the Self. Find out from where it

rises. Thoughts will cease to rise and the Self alone will remain.

Q: I understand theoretically. But they are still there. A: Yes. It is like a

cinema-show. There is the light on the screen and the shadows flitting across it

impress the audience as the enactment of some piece. If in the same play an

audience also is

shown on the screen as part of the performance, the seer and the seen will then

both be on the screen. Apply it to yourself. You are the screen, the Self has

created the ego, the ego has its accretions of

thoughts which are displayed as the world, the trees and the plants of which you

are asking. In reality, all these are nothing but the Self. If you see the Self,

the same will be found to be all, everywhere and always. Nothing but the Self

exists.

Q: Yes, I still understand only theoretically. Yet the answers are simple,

beautiful and convincing. A: Even the thought `I do not realize' is a hindrance.

In fact, the Self alone is.Our real nature is mukti. But we are imagining we are

bound and

are making various, strenuous attempts to become free, while we are all the

while free. This will be understood only when we reach that stage. We will be

surprised that we were frantically trying to attain something which we have

always been and are. An

illustration will make this clear. A man goes to sleep in this hall. He dreams

he has gone on a world tour, is roaming over hill and dale, forest and country,

desert and sea, across various continents and

after many years of weary and strenuous travel, returns to this country, reaches

Tiruvannamalai, enters the ashram and walks into the hall. Just at that moment

he wakes up and finds he has not moved an inch but was sleeping where he lay

down. He has not

returned after great effort to this hall, but is and always has been in the

hall. It is exactly like that; If it is asked, `Why being free do we imagine

that we are bound?' I answer, `Why being in the hall did

you imagine you were on a world adventure, crossing hill and dale, desert and

sea? It is all mind or maya [illusion]. Q: How then does ignorance of this one

and only reality unhappily arise in the case of the ajnani [one who has not

realized

the Self]? A: The ajnani sees only the mind which is a mere reflection of the

light of pure consciousness arising from the Heart. Of the Heart itself he is

ignorant. Why? Because his mind is extroverted

and has never sought its source. Q: What prevents the infinite, undifferentiated

light of con-sciousness arising from the Heart from revealing itself to the

ajnani? A: Just as water in a pot reflects the enormous sun within the

narrow limits of the pot, even so the vasanas or latent tendencies of the mind

of the individual, acting as the reflecting medium, catch the all-pervading,

infinite light of consciousness arising from the Heart. The form of this

reflection is the phenomenon called the

mind. Seeing only this reflection, the ajnani is deluded into the belief that he

is a finite being, the jiva, the individual self. Q: What are the obstacles

which hinder realization o f the Self? A: They are habits of mind [vasanas].

Q: How to overcome the mental habits (vasanas]? A: By realizing the Self. Q:

This is a vicious circle. A: It is the ego which raises such difficulties,

creating obstacles and then suffering from the perplexity of apparent paradoxes.

Find

out who makes the enquiries and the Self will be found. Q: Why is this mental

bondage so persistent ? A: The nature of bondage is merely the rising, ruinous

thought `I am different from the reality'. Since one surely cannot remain

separate from the reality, reject that thought whenever it rises. Q: Why do I

never remember that I am the Self ? A: People speak of memory and oblivion of

the fullness of the Self. Oblivion and memory are only thought-forms. They will

alternate so long as there are thoughts. But reality lies beyond these. Memory

or oblivion must be dependent on something. That something must be foreign to

the Self as well, otherwise there would not be oblivion. That upon which

memory and oblivion depend is the idea of the individual self. When one looks

for it, this individual `I' is not found because it is not real. Hence this `I'

is synonymous with illusion or ignorance (maya, avidya or ajnana]. To know

that there never was ignorance is the goal of all the spiritual teachings.

Ignorance must be of one who is aware. Awareness is jnana. Jnana is eternal and

natural, ajnana is unnatural and unreal. Q: Having heard this truth, why does

not one remain content?

A: Because samskaras [innate mental tendencies] have not been destroyed. Unless

the samskaras cease to exist, there will always be doubt and confusion. All

efforts are directed to destroying doubt and confusion. To do so their roots

must be cut. Their roots are the

samskaras. These are rendered ineffective by practice as prescribed by the Guru.

The Guru leaves it to the seeker to do this much so that he might himself find

out that there is no ignorance. Hearing the

truth [sravana] is the first stage. If the understanding is not firm one has to

practise reflection [manana] and uninterrupted contemplation [nididhyasana] on

it. These two processes scorch the seeds of samskaras so that they are rendered

ineffective.

Some extraordinary people get unshakable jnana after hearing the truth only

once. These are the advanced seekers. Beginners take longer to gain it. Q: How

did ignorance (avidya] arise at all? A: Ignorance never arose. It has no real

being. That which is, is

only vidya [knowledge]. Q: Why then do I not realize it? A: Because of the

samskaras. However, find out who does not realize and what he does not realize.

Then it will be clear that there is no avidya.

Q: So, it is wrong to begin with a goal, is it? A: If there is a goal to be

reached it cannot be permanent. The goal must already be there. We seek to reach

the goal with the ego, but the goal exists before the ego. What is in the goal

is

even prior to our birth, that is, to the birth of the ego. Because we exist the

ego appears to exist too. If we look on the Self as the ego then we become the

ego, if as the mind we become the mind, if as the body we become the

body. It is the thought which builds up sheaths in so many ways. The shadow on

the water is found to be shaking. Can anyone stop the shaking of the shadow? If

it would cease to shake you would not

notice the water but only the light. Similarly take no notice of the ego and its

activities, but see only the light behind. The ego is the thought `I'. The true

`I' is the Self. Q: If it is just a question of giving up ideas then it is only

one step

to realization. A: Realization is already there. The state free from thoughts is

the only real state. There is no such action as realization. Is there anyone who

is not realizing the Self ? Does anyone deny his own existence?

Speaking of realization, it implies two selves - the one to realize, the other

to be realized. What is not already realized is sought to be realized. Once we

admit our existence, how is it that we do not know

our Self ? Q: Because of the thoughts,the mind. A: Quite so. It is the mind that

veils our happiness. How do we know that we exist ? If you say because of the

world around us, then how do you know that you existed in deep sleep?

Q: How to get rid of the mind? A: Is it the mind that wants to kill itself ? The

mind cannot kill itself. So your business is to find the real nature of the

mind. Then you will know that there is no mind. When the Self is sought, the

mind is nowhere. Abiding in the Self, one need not worry about the mind. Q: Is

mukti the same as realization? A: Mukti or liberation is our nature. It is

another name for us. Our wanting mukti is a very funny thing. It is like a man

who is in the

shade, voluntarily leaving the shade, going into the sun, feeling the severity

of the heat there, making great efforts to get back into the shade and then

rejoicing, `How sweet is the shade! I have reached

the shade at last!' We are all doing exactly the same. We are not different from

the reality. We imagine we are different, that is we create the bheda bhava [the

feeling of difference] and then undergo great sadhana [spiritual practices] to

get rid of the bheda bhava and

realize the oneness. Why imagine or create bheda bhava and then destroy it? Q:

This can be realized only by the grace of the master. I was reading Sri

Bhagavata. It says that bliss can be had only by the dust

of the master's feet. I pray for grace. A: What is bliss but your own being ?

You are not apart from being which is the same as bliss. You are now thinking

that you are the mind or the body which are both changing and transient. But you

are unchanging and eternal. That is what you should know. Q: It is darkness and

I am ignorant. A: This ignorance must go. Again, who says `I am ignorant '? He

must be the witness of ignorance. That is what you are. Socrates

said, `I know that I do not know.' Can it be ignorance? It is wisdom. Q: Why

then do I feel unhappy when I am in Vellore and feel peace in your presence? A:

Can the feeling in this place be bliss? When you leave this place

you say you are unhappy. Therefore this peace is not permanent, it is mixed with

unhappiness which is felt in another place. Therefore you cannot find bliss in

places and in periods of time. It must be permanent in order that it may be

useful. It is your own being which

is permanent. Be the Self and that is bliss. You are always that. The Self is

always realized. It is not necessary to seek to realize what is already and

always realized. For you cannot deny your own existence. That existence is

consciousness, the Self.

Unless you exist you cannot ask questions. So you must admit your own existence.

That existence is the Self. It is already realized. Therefore the effort to

realize results only in your realizing your present mistake - that you have not

realized your Self. There is no

fresh realization. The Self becomes revealed. Q: That will take some years. A:

Why years ? The idea of time is only in your mind. It is not in the Self. There

is no time for the Self. Time arises as an idea after the

ego arises. But you are the Self beyond time and space. You exist even in the

absence of time and space. Were it true that you realize it later it means that

you are not realized now. Absence of realization in the present moment may be

repeated at any moment in the future, for time is infinite. So too, such

realization is impermanent. But that is not true. It is wrong to consider

realization to be impermanent. It is the true eternal state

which cannot change. Q: Yes, I shall understand it in course of time. A: You are

already that. Time and space cannot affect the Self. They are in you. So also

all that you see around you is in you. There

is a story to illustrate this point. A lady had a precious necklace round her

neck. Once in her excitement she forgot it and thought that the necklace was

lost. She became anxious and looked for it in her home but could not find it.

She asked her friends and neighbors

if they knew anything about the necklace. They did not. At last a kind friend of

hers told her to feel the necklace round her neck. She found that it had all

along been round her neck and she was happy. When others asked her later if she

had found the necklace which

was lost, she said, `Yes, I have found it.' She still felt that she had

recovered a lost jewel. Now did she lose it at all ? It was all along round her

neck. But judge her feelings. She was as happy as if she had recovered a lost

jewel. Similarly with us, we imagine that we will realize that Self some time,

whereas we are never anything but the Self. Q: There must be something that I

can do to reach this state. A: The conception that there is a goal and a path to

it is wrong.

We are the goal or peace always. To get rid of the notion that we are not peace

is all that is required. Q: All books say that the guidance of a Guru is

necessary. A: The Guru will say only what I am saying now. He will not

give you anything you have not already got. It is impossible for anyone to get

what he has not got already. Even if he gets any such thing, it will go as it

came. What comes will also go. What always is will alone remain. The Guru cannot

give you anything new,

which you don't have already. Removal of the notion that we have not realized

the Self is all that is required. We are always the Self only we don't realize

it. We go round and round in search of atma [self] saying, `Where

is atma? Where is it ? till at last the dawn of jnana drishti [vision of

knowledge] is reached, and we say, `This is atma this is me.' We should acquire

that vision. When once that vision is reached, there

will be no attachments even if one mixes with the world and moves about in it.

When once you put on shoes your feet do not feel the pain of walking on any

number of stones or thorns on the way. You walk about without fear or care, even

if there are mountains on the

way. In the same way, everything will be natural to those who have attained

jnana drishti. What is there apart from one's own Self ? Q: The natural state

can be known only after all this worldly vision Subsides. But how is it to

subside ?

A: If the mind subsides, the whole world subsides. Mind is the cause of all

this. If that subsides, the natural state presents itself. The Self proclaims

itself at all times as `I, I'. It is self- luminous. It

is here. All this is that. We are in that only. Being in it, why search for it ?

The ancients say: `Making the vision absorbed in jnana one sees the world as

Brahman.` The jnani Many of the Sri Ramana's visitors appeared to have an

insatiable

curiosity about the state of Self-realization and they were particularly

interested to know how a jnani experienced himself and the world around him.

Some of the questions he was asked on the subject reflected the bizarre notions

that many people had about this state,

but most of them tended to be variations of one of the four following questions:

1. How can a jnani function without any individual awareness of consciousness?

2. How can he say that he `does nothing' (a statement which Sri

Ramana often made) when others see him active in the world? 3. How does he

perceive the world? Does he perceive the world at all? 4. How does the jnani's

awareness of pure consciousness relate to the alternating states of body and

mind consciousness experienced in

waking, dreaming and sleeping? The hidden premise behind all such questions is

the belief that there is a person (the jnani) who experiences a state he calls

the Self. This assumption is not true. It is merely a mental construct devised

by those who have not realized the Self (ajnanis) to make sense of the jnani's

experience. Even the use of the word jnani is indicative of this erroneous

belief since it literally means a knower of jnana,

the reality. The ajnani uses this term because he imagines that the world is

made up of seekers of reality and knowers of reality; the truth of the Self is

that there are neither jnanis nor ajnanis, there is

only jnana. Sri Ramana pointed this out both directly and indirectly on many

occasions, but few of his questioners were able to grasp, even conceptually, the

implications of such a statement. Because of this

he usually adapted his ideas in such a way that they conformed to the prejudices

of his listeners. In most of the conversations in this chapter he accepts that

his questioners perceive a distinction between the jnani and the

ajnani,and without challenging the basis of that assumption, he assumes the role

of the jnani and attempts to explain the implications of being in that state. Q:

Then what is the difference between the baddha and the

mukta, the bound man and the one liberated? A: The ordinary man lives in the

brain unaware of himself in the Heart. The jnana siddha (jnani] lives in the

Heart. When he moves about and deals with men and things, he knows that what

he sees is not separate from the one supreme reality, the Brahman which he

realized in the Heart as his own Self, the real. Q: What about the ordinary man?

A: I have just said that he sees things outside himself. He is

separate from the world, from his own deeper truth, from the truth that supports

him and what he sees. The man who has realized the supreme truth of his own

existence realizes the one supreme reality that is there behind him, behind the

world. In fact, he is aware of

the one, as the real, the Self in selves, in all things, eternal and immutable,

in all that is impermanent and mutable. Q: What is the relation between the pure

consciousness realized by the jnani and the `I am'-ness which is accepted as the

primary

datum of experience? A: The undifferentiated consciousness of pure being is the

Heart or hridayam, which is what you really are. From the heart arises the `I

am'-ness as the primary datum of one's experience.By

itself it is completely pure [suddha-sattva] in character. It is in this form

of pristine purity [suddha-sattva-swarupa], uncontaminated by rajas and tamas

[activity and inertia], that the `I' appears to subsist in the

jnani. Q: In the jnani the ego subsists in the pure form and therefore it

appears as something real. Am I right? A: The existence of the ego in any form,

either in the jnani or ajnani, is itself an experience. But to the ajnani who is

deluded into

thinking that the waking state and the world are real, the ego also appears to

be real. Since he sees the jnani act like other individuals, he feels

constrained to posit some notion of individuality with reference to the jnani

also.

Q: How then does the aham-vritti [`I'-thought, the sense of individuality]

function in the jnani? A: It does not function in him at all. The jnani's real

nature is the Heart itself, because he is one and identical with the

undifferentiated,

pure consciousness referred to by the Upanishads as the prajnana [full

consciousness]. Prajnana is truly Brahman, the absolute, and there is no Brahman

other than prajnana. Q: Does a jnani have sankalpas [desires]?

A: The main qualities of the ordinary mind are tamas and rajas [sloth and

excitement]; hence it is full of egoistic desires and weaknesses. But the

jnani's mind is suddha-sattva [pure harmony] and formless, functioning in the

subtle vijnanamayakosha [the

sheath of knowledge], through which he keeps contact with the world. His desires

are therefore also pure. Q: I am trying to understand the jnani's point of view

about the world. Is the world perceived after Self-realization?

A: Why worry yourself about the world and what happens to it after

Self-realization? First realize the Self. What does it matter if the world is

perceived or not ? Do you gain anything to help you in your quest

by the non-perception of the world during sleep? Conversely, what would you lose

now by the perception of the world? It is quite immaterial to the jnani or

ajnani if he perceives the world or not. It is seen by both, but their

view-points differ.

Q: If the jnani and the ajnani perceive the world in like manner, where is the

difference between them? A: Seeing the world, the jnani sees the Self which is

the substratum of all that is seen; the ajnani, whether he sees the world or

not, is

ignorant of his true being, the Self. Take the instance of moving pictures on

the screen in the cinema-show. What is there in front of you before the play

begins ? Merely the screen. On that screen you see the entire show, and for all

appearances

the pictures are real. But go and try to take hold of them. What do you take

hold of ? Merely the screen on which the pictures appeared. After the play, when

the pictures disappear, what remains ? The screen

again. So with the Self. That alone exists, the pictures come and go. If you

hold on to the Self, you will not be deceived by the appearance of the pictures.

Nor does it matter at all if the pictures appear or disappear.

Ignoring the Self the ajnani thinks the world is real, just as ignoring the

screen he sees merely the pictures, as if they existed apart from it. If one

knows that without the seer there is nothing to be seen, just as

there are no pictures without the screen, one is not deluded. The jnani knows

that the screern and its pictures are only the Self. With the pictures the Self

is in its manifest form; without the pictures it remains

in the unmanifest form. To the jnani it is quite immaterial if the Self is in

one form or the other. He is always the Self. But the ajnani seeing the jnani

active gets confounded. Q: Does Bhagavan see the world as part and parcel of

himself ?

How does he see the world? A: The Self alone is and nothing else. However it is

differentiated owing to ignorance. Differentiation is threefold : (I) of the

same kind; (2) of a different kind; and

(3) as parts in itself. The world is not another Self similar to the Self. It is

not different from the Self; nor is it part of the Self. Q: Is not the world

reflected on the Self ? A: For reflection there must be an object and an image.

But the

Self does not admit of these differences. Q: Does a jnani have dreams? A: Yes,

he does dream, but he knows it to be a dream, in the same way as he knows the

waking state to be a dream. You may call them dream no. l and dream

no.2. The jnani being established in the fourth state - turiya, the supreme

reality - he detachedly witnesses the three other states, waking, dreaming and

dreamless sleep, as pictures superimposed on it. For those who experience

waking, dream and sleep, the state

of wakeful sleep, which is beyond those three states, is named turiya [the

fourth]. But since that turiya alone exists and since the seeming three states

do not exist, know for certain that turiya is itself turiyatita [that which

transcends the fourth].

Q: For the jnani then, there is no distinction between the three states of mind?

A: How can there be, when the mind itself is dissolved and lost in the light of

consciousness? For the jnani all the three states are equally unreal. But the

ajnani is unable to comprehend this, because for him the standard of reality is

the waking state, whereas for the jnani the standard of reality is reality

itself. This reality of pure consciousness is eternal by its nature and

therefore subsists equally during what you call waking, dreaming and sleep. To

him who is one with that reality there is neither the mind nor its three states

and, therefore, neither introversion nor extroversion.

His is the ever-waking state, because he is awake to the eternal Self; his is

the ever-dreaming state, because to him the world is no better than a repeatedly

presented dream phenomenon; his is the ever-sleeping state, because he is at all

times without the 'body-am-I'

consciousness. Q: Is there no dehatma buddhi [i-am-the-body idea] for the jnani?

If, for instance, Sri Bhagavan is bitten by an insect, is there no sensation? A:

There is the sensation and there is also the dehatma buddhi. The

latter is common to both jnani and ajnani with this difference, that the ajnani

thinks only the body is myself, whereas the jnani knows all is of the Self, or

all this is Brahman. If there be pain let it be. It is

also part of the Self. The Self is poorna [perfect]. After transcending dehatma

buddhi one becomes a jnani. In the absence of that idea there cannot be either

kartritva [doership] or karta [doer]. So a jnani has no karma [that is, a jnani

performs no

actions]. That is his experience. Otherwise he is not a jnani. However the

ajnani identifies the jnani with his body, which the jnani does not do. Q: I see

you doing things. How can you say that you never perform

actions? A: The radio sings and speaks, but if you open it you will find no one

inside. Similarly, my existence is like the space; thou this body speaks like

the radio, there is no one inside as a doer.

Q: I find this hard to understand. Could you please elaborate on this? A:

Various illustrations are given in books to enable us to understand how the

jnani can live and act without the mind, although living and acting require the

use of the mind. The potter's wheel goes

on turning round even after the potter has ceased to turn it because the pot is

finished. In the same way, the electric fan goes on revolving for some minutes

after we switch off the current. The prarabdha [predestined karma] which created

the body will make it

go through whatever activities it was meant for. But the jnani goes through all

these activities without the notion that he is the doer of them. It is hard to

understand how this is possible. The illustration

generally given is that the jnani performs actions in some such way as a child

that is roused from sleep to eat eats but does not remember next morning that it

ate. It has to be remembered that all these

explanations are not for the jnani. He knows and has no doubts. He knows that he

is not the body and he knows that he is not doing anything even though his body

may be engaged in some activity. These explanations are for the onlookers who

think of the jnani as

one with a body and cannot help identifying him with his body. Q: It is said

that the shock of realization is so great that the body cannot survive it. A:

There are various controversies or schools of thought as to

whether a jnani can continue to live in his physical body after realization.

Some hold that one who dies cannot be a jnani because his body must vanish into

air, or some such thing. They put forward all sorts of funny notions. If a man

must at once leave his body when

he realizes the Self, I wonder how any knowledge of the Self or the state of

realization can come down to other men. And that would mean that all those who

have given us the fruits of their Self-realization in books cannot be considered

jnanis because they went

on living after realization. And if it is held that a man cannot be considered a

jnani so long as he performs actions in the world (and action is impossible

without the mind), then not only the great sages

who carried on various kinds of work after attaining jnana must be considered

ajnanis but the gods also, and Iswara [the supreme personal God of Hinduism]

himself, since he continues looking after the world. The fact is that any amount

of action can be performed,

and performed quite well, by the jnani, without his identifying himself with it

in any way or ever imagining that he is the doer. Some power acts through his

body and uses his body to get the work done.

Q: Is a jnani capable of or likely to commit sins? A: An ajnani sees someone as

a jnani and identifies him with the body. Because he does not know the Self and

mistakes his body for the Self, he extends the same mistake to the state of the

jnani. The

jnani is therefore considered to be the physical frame. Again since the ajnani,

though he is not the doer, imagines himself to be the doer and considers the

actions of the body his own, he thinks the jnani to be similarly acting when the

body is active. But

the jnani himself knows the truth and is not confounded. The state of a jnani

cannot be determined by the ajnani and therefore the question troubles only the

ajnani and never arises for the jnani. If he is a doer

he must determine the nature of the actions. The Self cannot be the doer. Find

out who is the doer and the Self is revealed. Q: So it amounts to this. To see a

jnani is not to understand him. You see the jnani's body and not his jnana. One

must therefore be a jnani

to know a jnani. A: The jnani sees no one as an ajnani. All are only jnanis in

his sight. In the ignorant state one superimposes one's ignorance on a jnani and

mistakes him for a doer. In the state of jnana, the jnani

sees nothing separate from the Self. The Self is all shining and only pure

jnana. So there is no ajnana in his sight. There is an illustration for this

kind of illusion or superimposition. Two friends went to

sleep side by side. One of them dreamt that both of them had gone on a long

journey and that they had had strange experiences. On waking up he recapitulated

them and asked his friend if it was not so.

The other one simply ridiculed him saying that it was only his dream and could

not affect the other. So it is with the ajnani who superimposes his illusory

ideas on others. Q: You have said that the jnani can be and is active, and deals

with

men and things. I have no doubt about it now. But you say at the same time that

he sees no differences; to him all is one, he is always in the consciousness. If

so, how does he deal with differences, with men,

with things which are surely different? A: He sees these differences as but

appearances, he sees them as not separate from the true, the real, with which he

is one. Q: The jnani seems to be more accurate in his expressions, he

appreciates the differences better than the ordinary man. If sugar is sweet and

wormwood is bitter to me, he too seems to realize it so. In fact, all forms, all

sounds, all tastes, etc., are the same to him as they

are to others. If so, bow can it be said that these are mere appearances? Do

they not form part of his life-experience? A: I have said that equality is the

true sign of jnana. The very term equality implies the existence of differences.

It is a unity that the

jnani perceives in all differences, which I call equality. Equality does not

mean ignorance of distinctions. When you have the realization you can see that

these differences are very superficial, that they are

not at all substantial or permanent, and what is essential in all these

appearances is the one truth, the real. That I call unity. You referred to

sound, taste, form, smell, etc. True, the jnani appreciates the

distinctions, but he always perceives and experiences the one reality in all of

them. That is why he has no preferences. Whether he moves about, or talks, or

acts, it is all the one reality in which he acts or

moves or talks. He has nothing apart from the one supreme truth. Q: They say

that the jnani conducts himself with absolute equality towards all? A: Yes.

Friendship, kindness, happiness and such other bhavas [attitudes]

become natural to them. Affection towards the good, kindness towards the

helpless, happiness in doing good deeds, forgiveness towards the wicked, all

such things are natural characteristics of the jnani (Patanjali, Yoga Sutras,

I:37).

You ask about jnanis: they are the same in any state or condition, as they know

the reality, the truth. In their daily routine of taking food, moving about and

all the rest, they, the jnanis, act only for others.

Not a single action is done for themselves. I have already told you many times

that just as there are people whose profession is to mourn for a fee, so also

the jnanis do things for the sake of others with detachment, without themselves

being affected by them.

The jnani weeps with the weeping, laughs with the laughing, plays with the

playful, sings with those who sing, keeping time to the song. What does he lose?

His presence is like a pure, transparent mirror. It

reflects the image exactly as it is. But the jnani, who is only a mirror, is

unaffected by actions. How can a mirror, or the stand on which it is mounted, be

affected by the reflections? Nothing affects them as

they are mere supports. On the other hand, the actors in the world - the doers

of all acts, the ajnanis - must decide for themselves what song and what action

is for the welfare of the world, what is in accordance with the sastras, and

what is practicable.

Q: There are said to be sadeha mukta (liberated while still in the body) and

videha mukta [liberated at the time of death]. A: There is no liberation, and

where are muktas? Q: Do not Hindu sastras speak of mukti?

A: Mukti is synonymous with the Self. Jivan mukti [liberated while still in the

body] and videha mukti are all for the ignorant. The jnani is not conscious of

mukti or bandha [bondage]. Bondage, liberation

and orders of mukti are all said for an ajnani in order that ignorance might be

shaken off. There is only mukti and nothing else. Q: It is all right from the

standpoint of Bhagavan. But what about us? A: The difference `he' and `I' are

the obstacles to jnana.

Q: You once said: `The liberated man is free indeed to act as he pleases, and

when he leaves the mortal coil, he attains absolution, but returns not to this

birth which is actually death.' This statement gives the impression that

although the jnani takes no

birth again on this plane, he may continue to work on subtler planes, if he so

chooses. Is there any desire left in him to choose? A: No, that was not my

intention. Q: Further, an Indian philosopher, in one of his books, interpreting

Sankara, says that there is no such thing as videha mukti, for after his death,

the mukta takes a body of light in which he remains till the whole of humanity

becomes liberated. A: That cannot be Sankara's view. In verse 566 of

Vivekachudamani

he says that after the dissolution of the physical sheath the liberated man

becomes like `water poured into water and oil into oil'. It is a state in which

there is neither bondage nor liberation. Taking another

body means throwing a veil, however subtle, upon reality, which is bondage.

Liberation is absolute and irrevocable. Q: How can we say the jnani is not in

two planes? He moves about with us in the world and sees the various objects we

see. It is not as if

he does not see them. For instance he walks along. He sees the path he is

treading. Suppose there is a chair or table placed across that path; he sees it,

avoids it and goes round. So, have we not to admit he

sees the world and the objects there, while of course he sees the Self ? A: You

say the jnani sees the path, treads it, comes across obstacles, avoids them,

etc. In whose eye-sight is all this, in the jnani's or yours? He sees only the

Self and all in the Self.

Q: Are there not illustrations given in our books to explain this sahaja

[natural] state clearly to us? A: There are. For instance you see a reflection

in the mirror and the mirror. You know the mirror to be the reality and the

picture in it a

mere reflection. Is it necessary that to see the mirror we should cease to see

the reflection in it ? Q: What are the fundamental tests for discovering men of

great spirituality, since some are reported to behave like insane people?

A: The jnani's mind is known only to the jnani. One must be a jnani oneself in

order to understand another jnani. However the peace of mind which permeates the

saint's atmosphere is the only means by which the seeker understands the

greatness of the saint.

His words or actions or appearance are no indication of his greatness, for they

are ordinarily beyond the comprehension of common people. Q: Why is it said in

scriptures that the sage is like a child?

A: A child and a jnani are similar in a way. Incidents interest a child only so

long as they last. It ceases to think of them after they have passed away. So

then, it is apparent that they do not leave any impression on the child and it

is not affected by them mentally. So it

is with a jnani. Q: You are Bhagavan. So you should know when I shall get jnana.

Tell me when I shall be a jnani. A: If I am Bhagavan there is no one besides the

Self - therefore no jnani or ajnani. If otherwise, I am as good as you are and

know as

much as yourself. Either way I cannot answer your question. Coming here, some

people do not ask about themselves. They ask: `Does the jivan mukta see the

world ? Is he affected by karma? What is liberation after being disembodied ? Is

one liberated only after

being disembodied or even while alive in the body ? Should the body of the sage

resolve itself in light or disappear from view in any other manner? Can he be

liberated though the body is left behind as a corpse?'

Their questions are endless. Why worry oneself in so many ways? Does liberation

consist in knowing these things ? Therefore I say to them, `Leave liberation

alone. Is there bondage ? Know this. See yourself first and foremost.`

Enquiry and surrender `I exist ' is the only permanent self-evident experience

of everyone. Nothing else is so self-evident as `I am'. What people call

self-evident, that is, the experience they get through the senses, is far from

self-

evident. The Self alone is that. So to do self-enquiry and be that `I am' is the

only thing to do. `I am' is reality. I am this or that is unreal. `I am' is

truth, another name for Self. Devotion is nothing more than knowing oneself.

On scrutiny, supreme devotion and jnana are in nature one and the same. To say

that one of these two is a means to the other is due to not knowing the nature

of either of them. Know that the path of jnana and

the path of devotion are interrelated. Follow these inseparable two paths

without dividing one from the other. Self-enquiry - theory It will be remembered

that in the chapter on Self-awareness and Self-

ignorance Sri Ramana maintained that Self-realization could be brought about

merely by giving up the idea that there is an individual self which functions

through the body and the mind. A few of his advanced devotees were able to do

this quickly and easily, but the

others found it virtually impossible to discard the ingrained habits of a

lifetime without undertaking some form of spiritual practice. Sri Ramana

sympathized with their predicament and whenever he was asked to prescribe a

spiritual practice which would facilitate Self-

awareness he would recommend a technique he called self-enquiry. This practice

was the cornerstone of his practical philosophy and the next three chapters will

be devoted to a detailed presentation of all

its aspects. Before embarking on a description of the technique itself it will

be necessary to explain Sri Ramana's views on the nature of the mind since the

aim of self-enquiry is to discover, by direct experience, that

the mind is non-existent. According to Sri Ramana, every conscious activity of

the mind or body revolves around the tacit assumption that there is an `I' who

is doing something. The common factor in `I think', `I remember', `I am acting'

is the `I' who assumes that it is

responsible for all these activities. Sri Ramana called this common factor the

`I'-thought (aham-vritti). Literally aham-vritti means `mental modification of

I'. The Self or real `I' never imagines that it

is doing or thinking anything; the `I' that imagines all this is a mental

fiction and so it is called a mental modification of the Self. Since this is a

rather cumbersome translation of aham-vritti it is usually

translated as `I'-thought. Sri Ramana upheld the view that the notion of

individuality is only the `I'-thought manifesting itself in different ways.

Instead of regarding the different activities of the mind (such as ego,

intellect

and memory) as separate functions he preferred to view them all as different

forms of the `I'-thought. Since he equated individuality with the mind and the

mind with the `I'-thought it follows that the disappearance of the sense of

individuality (

i.e. Self-realization) implies the disappearance of both the mind and the

`I'-thought. This is confirmed by his frequent statements to the effect that

after Self-realization there is no thinker of thoughts, no performer of actions

and no awareness of individual existence. Since he upheld the notion that the

Self is the only existing reality he regarded the `I'-thought as a mistaken

assumption which has no real existence of its own. He explained its appearance

by saying that it

can only appear to exist by identifying with an object. When thoughts arise the

`I'-thought claims ownership of them - `I think', `I believe', `I want', `I am

acting' - but there is no separate `I'-thought

that exists independently of the objects that it is identifying with. It only

appears to exist as a real continuous entity because of the incessant flow of

identifications which are continually taking place.

Almost all of these identifications can be traced back to an initial assumption

that the `I' is limited to the body, either as an owner-occupant or co-extensive

with its physical form. This `I am the body' idea is the primary source pf all

subsequent wrong identifications

and its dissolution is the principal aim of self-enquiry. Sri Ramana maintained

that this tendency towards self-limiting identifications could be checked by

trying to separate the subject `I' from the objects of thought which it

identified with. Since the

individual `I'-thought cannot exist without an object, if attention is focused

on the subjective feeling of `I' or `I am' with such intensity that the thoughts

`I am this' or `I am that' do not arise, then the

individual `I' will be unable to connect with objects. If this awareness of `I'

is sustained, the individual `I' (the `I'-thought) will disappear and in its

place there will be a direct experience of the Self. This constant attention to

the inner awareness of ` I ' or `I am'

was called self-enquiry (vichara) by Sri Ramana and he constantly recommended it

as the most efficient and direct way of discovering the unreality of the

`I'-thought. In Sri Ramana's terminology the `I'-thought rises from the Self or

the

Heart and subsides back into the Self when its tendency to identify itself with

thought objects ceases.