Arthur Osborne - Upadesa #1

[Guest guest]

IT IS SURPRISING how secret was the upadesa of Sri

Bhagavan, that is to say the guidance or instruction he gave

to his disciples — there is no exact English translation of the

word. Although he was accessible to all alike, although questions

were normally asked and answered in public, the guidance given

to each disciple was nevertheless intensely direct and adapted to

his character. When asked once by Swami Yogananda, a Swami

with a large following in America, what spiritual instruction

should be given to the people for their uplift, he replied: “It

depends on the temperament and spiritual maturity of the

individual. There can be no mass instruction.” It is enough to

recall the stories of four devotees already referred to —

Echammal, the Mother, Sivaprakasam Pillai and Natesa Mudaliar

— to realize how enormously the treatment varied.

Sri Bhagavan was intensely active — he himself has said

so, though none who experienced his Grace needed any

confirmation — and yet so concealed was his activity that casual

visitors and those who failed to perceive believed that he gave

no upadesa at all or that he was indifferent to the needs of seekers.

There were many such, like the Brahmin who tried to dissuade

Natesa Mudaliar from visiting him.

 

The extreme importance of this question lies in the fact

that (except in the rarest of cases, such as that of Sri Bhagavan

himself ) Realization is possible only through the Grace of a Guru.

Sri Bhagavan was as definite about this as other Masters.

Therefore it was not enough for the sadhaka (aspirant) to know

that his teaching was sublime and his presence inspiring; it was

necessary to know that he was a Guru giving diksha (initiation)

and upadesa (instruction).

 

The term ‘Guru’ is used in three senses. It can mean one

who, although he has no spiritual attainment, has been invested

(like the ordination of a priest) with the right to give initiation

and upadesa. He is often hereditary and is not unlike a family

doctor for spiritual health. Secondly, the Guru can be one who,

in addition to the above, has some spiritual attainment and can

guide his disciples by more potent upadesa (even though the

actual practices enjoined may be the same) as far as he himself

has gone. But in the highest and truest meaning of the word,

the Guru is he who has realized Oneness with the Spirit that is

the Self of all. This is the Sadguru.

 

It is in this last sense that Sri Bhagavan used the word.

Therefore he said, “God, Guru and Self are the same.” And in

describing the Guru he said (in Spiritual Instruction):

“The Guru is one who at all times abides in the

profound depth of the Self. He never sees any difference

between himself and others and he is completely free from

false notions of distinction — that he himself is the

Enlightened or the Liberated while others around him are

in bondage or the darkness of ignorance. His firmness or

self-possession can never be shaken under any circumstances

and he is never perturbed.”

 

Submission to this Guru is not submission to any outside

oneself but to the Self manifested outwardly in order to help

one discover the Self within. “The Master is within; meditation

is meant to remove the ignorant idea that he is only outside. If

he were a stranger whom you were awaiting he would be bound

to disappear also. What would be the use of a transient being

like that? But as long as you think that you are separate or are

the body, so long is the outer Master also necessary and he will

appear as if with a body. When the wrong identification of oneself

with the body ceases the Master is found to be none other than

the Self.”

 

It is axiomatic that one who is a Guru in this supreme

sense of having realized his identity with the Absolute does not

say so, inasmuch as there is no ego left to affirm the identity.

Also he does not say that he has disciples, for, being beyond

otherness, there can be no relationship for him.

Although the Jnani (Enlightened) is One with the Absolute,

his traits of character continue to exist outwardly as the vehicle

of his manifestation, so that one Jnani can have quite different

human characteristics from another. One characteristic of Sri

Bhagavan was his shrewdness and perspicacity. There seems no

doubt that, just as he allowed himself to be considered a mouni

(one who has taken a vow of silence) during his early years at

Tiruvannamalai in order to avoid disturbance, so he took

advantage of this doctrinal impossibility of asserting identity or

admitting relationship in order to ward off unwarranted demands

for upadesa from those who were not his real devotees. It is

remarkable how successful the defence was, while real devotees

were not taken in by it and were not intended to be.

 

Let us examine Sri Bhagavan’s statements carefully. He

sometimes said he had no disciples and never stated explicitly

that he was the Guru; however, he used the expression ‘the Guru’

as equivalent to ‘the Jnani’ and in such a way as to leave no

doubt that he was the Guru, and he more than once joined in

singing the song ‘Ramana Sadguru’.

 

Moreover, when a devotee was genuinely distressed and

seeking a solution he would sometimes reassure him in a way that

left no room for doubt. An English disciple, Major Chadwick,

kept a record of such an assurance given to him in the year 1940:

 

C: Bhagavan says he has no disciples?

B: Yes.

C: He also says that a Guru is necessary if one wishes to attain

Liberation?

B: Yes.

C: What then must I do? Has my sitting here all these years

been just a waste of time? Must I go and look for some

Guru in order to receive initiation seeing that Bhagavan

says he is not a Guru?

B: What do you think brought you here such a long distance

and made you remain so long? Why do you doubt? If

there had been any need to seek a Guru elsewhere you

would have gone away long ago.

The Guru or Jnani (Enlightened One) sees no difference

between himself and others. For him all are Jnanis, all are

one with himself, so how can a Jnani say that such and

such is his disciple? But the unliberated one sees all as

multiple, he sees all as different from himself, so to him

the Guru-disciple relationship is a reality, and he needs

the Grace of the Guru to waken him to reality. For him

there are three ways of initiation, by touch, look and

silence. (Sri Bhagavan here gave me to understand that

his way was by silence, as he has to many on other

occasions).

C: Then Bhagavan does have disciples!

B: As I said, from Bhagavan’s point of view there are no disciples;

but from that of the disciple the Grace of the Guru is like

an ocean. If he comes with a cup he will only get a cupful.

It is no use complaining of the niggardliness of the ocean;

the bigger the vessel the more he will be able to carry. It is

entirely up to him.

C: Then to know whether Bhagavan is my Guru or not is just a

matter of faith, if Bhagavan will not admit it.

B: (Sitting straight up, turning to the interpreter and speaking

with great emphasis). Ask him, does he want me to give

him a written document?

 

Few were so persistent as Major Chadwick in their demand

for an assurance. The statement involving recognition of duality

would not be made, but short of that Sri Bhagavan admitted

being the Guru clearly enough for any person of understanding

and goodwill; and some knew it without verbal confirmation.

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

 

from Ramana Maharshi & The Path of Self-Knowledge, Arthur Osborne