Arthur Osborne - Sri Ramana Maharshi [4]

[Guest guest]

...........................

 

Unfortunately, few in the West understand the possibility

of this supreme state. To make matters worse, the philosophers

and theologians, who should be the ones to explain it, introduce

confusion by misunderstanding and therefore denying or

misrepresenting it. In the East there is the opposite trouble—

that this possibility is widely understood and is therefore claimed

indiscriminately for every one who can gather disciples.

Bhagavan was also commonly referred to as ‘the Maharshi’

or ‘Ramana Maharshi’. A pundit once explained to me that this

title, condensed from ‘Maha-Rishi’, ‘Great Sage’, is applied to

one who does not merely continue a tradition but inaugurates

a new spiritual path. Certainly that would justify its application

to Ramana Maharshi.

 

In speaking of spiritual men, the question also arises of their

recognition. It is not uncommon to hear some one express

confidence that he would recognize a spiritual man if he met one.

This, however, is not always possible. High spiritual attainment,

even complete liberation, is not always recognizable. Naturally, it is

not easy to give examples of this, for this very reason that they are

not recognized, but one very striking one is that of Christ before

he set forth on his mission. According to Christian doctrine, he

was born without original sin (which means Self-realization from

birth) and attained no new state when he went forth on his ‘Father’s

business’; and yet he exerted no influence on others before that but

went completely unrecognized. Not only is there no record of

crowds flocking to Nazareth, as they would have in any country or

age to the seat of one recognized as a holy man, but, on the contrary,

when he returned there with his disciples his fellow-townsmen

expressed surprise, if not incredulity that the local carpenter should

have turned out a prophet. The Maharshi also was not recognized

when he first attained Realization but only later when he began to

shed Grace on others and act as a Guru.

 

The reason for this is that it is not a man’s inner state

which is felt by others but the Grace flowing through him

towards them. Perceptible Grace may thus flow through one

who has not attained the Supreme Identity (as has been the case

with many saints) or even through one who has not attained

any spiritual state at all; and again it may not through one who

has. There may be other spiritual functions besides the guidance

of disciples, for some of which anonymity is desirable. If so it

will be maintained.

 

With a guru, of course, the question of recognition ought

not to arise, since it is, so to speak, his function to be recognized. It

is important that he should be, because my saying that perceptible

grace can flow through one who has not attained does not mean

that he can guide others farther than he has gone himself. There

may be other and more exoteric purposes for which the Grace is

channeled through him, but as a guru he can only guide as far as

he has gone. (And that was why Martin Lings warned me off my

first murshid). That was the real ground for the Buddha’s

dissatisfaction with the gurus he went to before attaining

Enlightenment. Finally (as may happen with the opener of a new

path — as happened also with the Maharshi) he attained

Enlightenment with no outer guru. The disciple who sets no limits

to his aspiration needs a guru to whose achievement there are none.

Actually, recognition of a guru is complicated by impurities

in the disciple which make him imagine perfection where it

does not exist and overlook it where it does. There were many

who did not recognize the Maharshi as a Guru and there are

many who ascribe a high or the highest state to gurus who have

only a formal legitimacy, if that.

 

.............................

 

taken from Arthur Osborne's My Life & Quest