Online Satsang with Tom Das | Advaita with loving devotion to Sri Ramana Maharshi | Online Non-duality meetings | Advaita Vedanta

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

See here for more details

Please join us – all are welcome and no prior knowledge is required.

We meet ONLINE twice every week (every Thursday 8pm and Sunday 3pm UK time).

We meet IN-PERSON on the first Sunday of every month at 2pm UK time and this meeting is also livestreamed on Zoom.

Meetings often start with some Silence followed by some readings, a talk and some questions. The initial silence is a wonderful opportunity for stillness and to put the teachings into practice.

After the meeting there is an opportunity to stay and connect with other people attending the meeting.

To join or find out more please see this link.

Ramana Maharshi: Is it easier for artistic types to turn within and do self-enquiry and attain liberation? (Aham Sphurana)

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following excerpt is taken from the text Aham Sphurana 7th August 1936. You can download the entire text for free here.

Questioner: Those who have a great, insatiable taste or longing thirst for art, those who are profoundly moved by the intricate and subtle beauties of art: is it true that they find it easier to introvert the mind?

Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi: Yes.

Q.: Why so?

B.: Being moved by art renders the mind sensitive. Its dross-content burns up. But the intensity of the passion must be extreme… The idea is that the mind must NOT [be permitted to] peacefully rest content with the present state of Body-am-I consciousness. The Grace of the Guru or the company of a Jnani sparks off the commencement of a regular war within the mind between the 2 elements of sattvagunam and tamogunam. Really the battle is between satvas and tamas only; rajas is merely a form of manifestation of tamas. [Tom: this is a wonderful and deep insight here – tamas is ignorance, and rajas is the projecting or active power that results for springs forth from ignorance; note that nescience, mentioned below, is a synonym for ignorance] So, we are fighting against sleep. Sleep or oblivion is the worst enemy of man. Sleep is the anti-thesis of Realisation. Permanent destruction of sleep or nescience is Realisation.

Q.: Only a Jnani can dispense with sleep altogether.

B.: True. The sadhaka, excluding the neophyte, should try to restrict sleep to 6 hours; very gradually this may be reduced to 4, and then after yet more time has elapsed, 3, hours. It is possible provided the correct lifestyle and dietary patterns are followed. Needless to say it requires vairagyam. All changes introduced should be gradual. Any violent upheaval will toxify the mind and may kill the body. Suddenly trying to reach perfection men try to remain without sleep and food for long periods, imagining they are yogis. Retribution, bodily and mental, is swift and harsh; he is frightened off the spiritual-path forevermore; this is a duplicitous stratagem followed by the mind to prevent its own extinction.

Q.: I sleep for 10 hours a day, but still feel sleepy whilst I am awake.

B.: More sleep produces more craving for more sleep.

Q.: Yes, I observe it to be so. How to break the addiction to sleep?

B.: Change in lifestyle and diet.

Q.: Am I to give up my sybaritic and sedentary pattern of living?

B.: Yes.

Q.: Am I to give up my daily appetite for barbecued hogget?

B.: Yes.

Q.: Will it not be painful to give up these long-cherished habits?

B.: Yes!

Q.: How to avoid the pain?

B.: Do not think, ‘I am feeling pain.’.

Q.: Merely imagining pain to go away does not make it go away.

B.: You are not asked to imagine pain to go away. You are asked to cease imagining the presence of pain.

Q.: The body’s pains are very real to me. I am not able to dismiss it away as fiction.

B.: Get rid of the root cause.

Q.: Which is?

B.: The idea that you are this body or are in it.

Q.: How to get rid of the idea?

B.: Formulas are so as for accquisition not discardal. [Tom: it is the ego-mind that wants the formula, so the seeking of a formula, rather than simply letting go or being still, is an ego-preservation strategy. The ego may pose as if it is sincerely asking ‘How do I let go?…How do I be still?’, but this is actually all a delaying tactic, an ego-preservation strategy]

Q.: But what am I to do to be rid of misery?

B.: Doing is misery. Doing cannot get rid of misery. More doing brings more misery. Try non-doing. See what a refreshing change it brings.

Q.: Well, then, how to not do anything?

B.: [laughing] Can non-doing be accomplished by doing? If it were possible there would be no such thing as non-doing and therefore no possibility of Realisation. You have become so used to doing that when asked to put an end to it all, you ask how this is to be accomplished! Can non-doing be accomplished? Give up everything. Summa iru. That is non-doing.

Q.: Is Summa-iruththal the most efficacious means to Self-Realisation?

B.: It is Self-Realisation [itself].

Q.: Doing and non-doing in Bhagavan’s vocabulary refer to the mind alone; am I correct?

B.: Yes.

Q.: The body is to be kept active in some worthy pursuit or the other, preferrably one of an altruistic nature. Am I correct?

B.: Leave the body to its prarabdha and attend to yourself. One destined to work cannot keep idle. One destined to keep idle cannot find work. It is not in our hands at all. [Tom: whatever is destined to happen will happen, whatever is destined not to happen will not happen; relatively speaking, all happens according to God’s will at all times in all places, thus has Bhagavan taught us]

Q.: May I be assured of Bhagavan’s blessings upon my endeavours?

B.: There cannot be any fruitful endeavour in the absence of Bhagavan’s blessings.

Q.: Are my efforts fruitful or not?

B.: Do not bother with this question; it does not lead anywhere.

Q.: I want some support or encouragement that I am on the right track.

B.: If the mind remains simply AWARE, without being aware of anything, you are on the right track. [Tom: ie. mind turned inwards, away from all objects/phenomena, merely being self only]

Q. But don’t the scriptures talk of Nirguna and Saguna Brahman? Nirguna Brahman is the only true Brahman | Shankara’s commentary on Brahma Sutras

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is taken from the much longer post here which explores this topic in more depth.

Tom: Yes, or rather Shankara in his commentaries speaks of these – Nirguna Brahman (Brahman without objects or without arising phenomena) is the true formless Brahman that exists without any arising phenomena or forms, and when there is ignorance present, we take ourselves to be a body-mind entity living in a world, and that projection of name and form (due to ignorance) is called Saguna Brahman (Brahman with objects or with arising phenomena appearing within it). It is Nirguna Brahman that is to be known, for this is what liberates, not saguna Brahman, which is Brahman plus Maya or Brahman plus ignorance. The latter, saguna Brahman, not only does it not liberate – it doesn’t even truly exist – this is the meaning of ajata vada.

This is explained many times in many places by Shankara in his commentaries, eg. in his commentaries on Brahma Sutras 3.2.14 and 3.2.15 he writes the following, which explains that the true Brahman is nirguna, without name and form, but Brahman is spoken of as saguna (with name and form) for the purposes of meditation and purification of the mind of lower level seekers:

3.2.14: For (Brahman) is merely devoid of form, on account of this being the main purport of scripture.

Shankara's commentary: Brahman, we must definitively assert, is devoid of all form, colour, and so on, and does not in any way possess form, and so on -- why? - 'On account of this being the main purport (of scripture).', 'It is neither coarse nor fine, neither short nor long' (Bṛ. Up. III, 8, 8); 'That which is without sound, without touch, without form, without decay' (Ka. Up. I, 3, 15); 'He who is called ether is the revealer of all forms and names. That within which forms and names are, that is Brahman' (Ch. Up. VIII, 14, 1); 'That heavenly person is without body, he is both without and within, not produced' (Mu. Up. II, 1, 2); 'That Brahman is without cause and without effect, without anything inside or outside, this Self is Brahman, omnipresent and omniscient' (Bṛ. Up. II, 5, 19). These and similar passages have for their purport the true nature of Brahman as non-connected with any world, and have not any other purport, as we have proved under I, 1, 4. On the ground of such passages we therefore must definitively conclude that Brahman is devoid of form. Those other passages, on the other hand, which refer to a Brahman qualified by form do not aim at setting forth the nature of Brahman, but rather at enjoining the worship of Brahman. As long as those latter texts do not contradict those of the former class, they are to be accepted as they stand; where, however, contradictions occur, the passages whose main subject is Brahman must be viewed as having greater force than those of the other kind. This is the reason for our deciding that although there are two different classes of scriptural texts, Brahman must be held to be altogether without form, not at the same time of an opposite nature. But what then is the position of those passages which refer to Brahman as possessing form? To this question the next Sūtra replies.


3.2.15: And as light (assumes forms as it were by its contact with things possessing form, so does Brahman;) since (the texts ascribing form to Brahman) are not devoid of meaning.

Shankara's commentary: Just as the light of the sun or the moon after having passed through space enters into contact with a finger or some other limiting adjunct, and, according as the latter is straight or bent, itself becomes straight or bent as it were; so Brahman also assumes, as it were, the form of the earth and the other limiting adjuncts with which it enters into connexion. Hence there is no reason why certain texts should not teach, with a view to meditative worship, that Brahman has that and that form. We thus escape the conclusion that those Vedic passages which ascribe form to Brahman are devoid of sense; a conclusion altogether unacceptable since all parts of the Veda are equally authoritative, and hence must all be assumed to have a meaning. But does this not imply a contradiction of the tenet maintained above, viz. that Brahman does not possess double characteristics although it is connected with limiting adjuncts? By no means, we reply. What is merely due to a limiting adjunct cannot constitute an attribute of a substance, and the limiting adjuncts are, moreover, projected by Nescience only. That the primeval natural Nescience leaves room for all practical life and activity, whether ordinary or based on the Veda, we have explained more than once.

Tom: Shankara concludes, as he does throughout his many commentaries, that Brahman is to be truly known without form, but Brahman is said to be with form only for purposes of worship (ie. purification of the mind as opposed to self-realisation). He states that the teachings that state Brahman has form do have value in that regard only, but he concludes by reaffirming that name and form and 'practical life' (vyavaharika) only appear/arise due to nescience (ignorance) - ie. that in liberation or Brahma-Vidya, no names and forms arise, ie. nirguna Brahman is to be realised as ones self.

Ramana Maharshi: Q. Is Hitler really a divine instrument in God’s hands? Why does Bhagavan wear no clothes? Occult powers, Milarepa | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is taken from Aham Sphurana 19th July 1936

A convivial, middle-aged Caucasian asked –
Questioner: I understand that according to Bhagavan, Reality refers to consciousness unsullied by thought.

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: What you comprehend, or think you are able to apprehend, can never be Reality. That suble space in which this fleeting you, as you are now falsely imagining yourself to be, ceases to exist, so exposing the actual, permanent you lying underneath as true Being, is Reality.

Q.: It is said that this mountain Arunachala posseses a powerful spiritual energy. If I carry away rocks from the mountain back home, will the mountain’s power accompany me? From which portion of the Hill should rocks be gathered for maximum beneficious effect?

B.: Is there any use in going on rock-hunting expeditions? The contumacious [Tom: stubborn and disobedient] mind must be introverted and destroyed. That [regaining the natural state of Self] is the only worthwhile thing to do in life.

Q.: I am interested in experimenting with alternate forms of medicine. What is Bhagavan’s opinion on Hahnemann’s system of ‘Like-cures-like.’? How can diluting a substance make its effect upon the patient more potent?

B.: [no answer]

Q.: What is Bhagavan’s opinion on the present German Chancellor? Today morning I met a Brahmin in this place, who confidently asserts that he is a divine incarnation, or a servile instrument in God’s hands, meant to ruthlessly put down injustice wherever it occurs in the world, commencing from Germany. Is deployment of violence justified to root out injustice? Does not Mr. Gandhi advocate –

At that moment, an excited voice, in strained English, suddenly announced into the air from the back of the Hall –

‘I am convinced that Sri Hitler and Sri Bhagawan are in the same supreme state of Brahmajnana [Tom: Brahman-knowledge, ie. self-knowledge]. But perhaps Hitler may be a Brahma-rakshasha [Tom: an evil spirit arisen from a sinful or fallen Brahmin].Nevertheless he is also a Jnani, nothing inferior to that… Has not his deputy said, “Do not seek Hitler with the mind. It is through the Heart that you shall succeed in finding Him.”? Is this not Bhagawan’s teaching verbatim, when people question Him about finding God? Hitler may use violent methods because it is his ordained style of functioning. Nonetheless, He is an avatar. I know… Consider his inspiring words – “It is a necessity of human evolution that the individual should be imbued with the spirit of sacrifice in favour of the common weal, and that he should not be influenced by the morbid notions of those knaves who pretend to know better than Nature and who have the impudence to criticize her decrees.”, “The Strong is Mightiest Alone.”, “Man has become great through perpetual struggle. In perpetual peace his greatness must decline.”, “He who would live must fight. He who does not wish to fight in this world, where perpetual struggle is the only permanent law of life, has not the right to exist.”, “The sledgehammer of fate which strikes down the one so easily suddenly finds the counter-impact of Steel when it strikes at the other.”, and many more. Are these not the words of a Jnani? Is it not self-evident that it must be so? If Bhagavan will give permission I want to read out more, so that everyone can be benifitted by these holy words uttered by a great Jnani.’

There was no response from Bhagavan. The brahmin retreated into silence.

Q.: Yes, this is the man. What is to be made out of his outlandish claims? Is Herr Hitler really a divine instrument in God’s hands?

B.: நாம் எல்ேலாேம அவரால் ஆட்ைவக்கப்பட்ட ைகப்பாைவகள் தாேன. [All sentient beings are verily divine instruments in the hands of the Supreme Lord {Parameshwara}.]

Q.: Sri Bhagawan wears only underwear. I hear, whilst living in the Hill, He was totally nude. What is the philosophy behind it? Is it aversion to luxury? Will being nude help in Realising the Self?

B.: Mental nudity is the way to the Self.

Q.: And what is that?

B.: Mind denuded of vrittis.

Q.: What is a vritti?

B.: A strand of modification in and of pure consciousness.

Q.: Still, what is the reason Bhagavan won’t wear any clothes?

B.: Have you come all the way from the New World only to ask this question?

Q.: It is said that the Jnani never sleeps. Is it true? Do you never sleep?

B.: On the other hand, I am always asleep. I have permanently put myself to Eternal Sleep from which no waking could ever be possible.

Q.: Bhagavan is now talking to me. How can he be asleep? Is he talking in his sleep, then?

B.: Yes.

Q.: I am beginning to guess there is a hidden layer of meaning in all your answers…

B.: The Jnani’s mind is asleep in Brahman. It is awake to Brahman but unaware of anything else – rather, there is no ‘anything else’ for him, apart from Brahman, to be aware of. “I” am not talking to “you”; these [are appearances that] are inseperable from Brahman. Their substratum or vasthu [Tom: truth or reality] is Brahman only. There cannot be a not-Brahman. What IS, is only Brahman. What IS NOT, cannot BE. Thus the import of Sri Krishna’s wisely enunciated words: Nasatho vidyathey bhavo nabhavo vidyathey sathaha [Tom: ‘Of the unreal, there is no being; of the Real, there is no non-being…’ This is the first section of Bhagavad Gita verse 16.2]

Q.: The yogi smears his body all over with ash from the crematorium. What is the purpose?

B.: To remember: ‘One day I shall likewise be reduced into ash.’

Q.: Why keep on reflecting upon such a macabre truth?

B.: To get rid of the idea, ‘I am this body.’; so long as such an idea, or any other vritti, remains, Realisation cannot be had, even in dreams.

Q.: How, and why, did the Absolute Self or ‘the Brahman’ fall from his high state of Godhood, and become the mind?

B.: He never fell.

Q.: What then is to account for the existence of the mind?

B.: Its own ignorance.

Q.: How did that ignorance arise?

B.: On the false strength of the one who meaninglessly asserts, ‘I am ignorant.’.

Q.: If the assertion ‘I am ignorant.’ is wrong, all are then Jnanis.

B.: Quite so.

Q.: I am also a Jnani like Bhagavan, then? Am I not a mere mortal?

B.: In fact, all are only Jnanis – at least in my vision it is so. One who feels otherwise should ask himself, ‘Who is the one who admits the apparent truth of his own ignorance?’.

Q.: Back to Who-am-I? again, I see!

B.: It is the only useful thing to do.

Q.: What is the purport of this investigation? I mean – what does it aim to reach?

B.: Subjective awareness maintained without volition and without effort is the objective of Atma-vichara.

Q.: If everything is a dream, right now what is the position? I mean: Is Bhagavan appearing in my dream? Or am I appearing in Bhagavan’s dream?

B.: Bhagavan does not dream. He is the Real.

Q.: So it is I who have imagined the great Ramana Maharshi, thus bringing him into existence! How great I must be, to have created not only this whole cosmos, but also Ramana Maharshi himself!

B.: [laughs]

Q.: You see the – pardon me – the absurdity of your thesis that the world is a dream… ?

B.: The world of name and form is the merest of illusions. Only the substratum underlying it is Real and True. Only by right Experience can this be further understood.

Q.: Can you give me ‘the saktipada’? It is said to be transfer of psychic energy from master to pupil.

B.: Who is the master and who is the pupil? In whose point of view?

Q.: I humbly pray that my request be considered favourably.

B.: Catch hold of the “I-Current” and remain still. It will give you all you need.

Q.: How to discover this psychic current?

B.: Once all thoughts have subsided, a steady stream of subjective consciousness remains as the residue. Hold on to it without effort and without volition. It will lead you to the Goal invariably.

Q.: There is said to have lived a saint called ‘Sadasiva Brahmendral’ in South India. He is said to have bodily manifested at the same measured time, at various different locations, perfectly simultaneously! Further, according to the same legend or story, once for some reason the King of the land became furious with him and ordered that his arms be chopped off. This was done.

The saint merely picked up the severed arms with his mouth, and holding them by the skin, betwixt his rows of teeth, demurely walked away from the place, blood trailing along in his wake. Even the slightest twitch of pain could not be observed in him. The king then begged for forgiveness. The saint said nothing; he seemed to be unaware of his environment; he would not even care to look at anyone. Just then, a beetle was about to drown in the pool of blood lying on the ground. Moved by compassion for the hapless creature, the saint dropped his severed arms from his mouth; instead of falling on the ground, the arms magically attached themselves in their original positions, and functioned normally! The saint rescued the beetle, which everyone else noticed only now, and went his way as if nothing at all had happened. What are we to make out of this story? Many otherwise normal people seem to believe in it!

B.: The world is under no obligation to produce forth only those events which lie within the horizon of your ability to comprehend.

Q.: So the supernatural… is real?

B.: Only as real as you are – you as the body or mind.

Q.: If I also try to get occult or thaumaturgic powers such as reading others’ thoughts, moving physical objects using the mind, manifesting objects and making them vanish, predicting the future, spontaneously coming to know of events happening far away, transmutation of base metals into gold, etc., will they carry me towards or away from Realisation of the Brahman?

B.: The latter.

Q.: Why so – may I know?

B.: Because the powers are exercised using the mind. Patanjali himself says, Bahirakalpita vrittir mahavideha tataha prakashavaranakshayaha [Tom: The ‘great bodiless state’ is a state of ‘mind’ that functions outside the body and is unimagined. From this, the covering of the light is destroyed.]. From this it is obvious that the Atman will never reveal itself unless and until one has transcended the mind in its entireity. Whilst I was living in Virupaksha-cave, in 1902 or 1903, a man came who showed me many tricks of the sort you mention. Then he drove Palanisamy out, and showed me his crowing act. Do you know what this crowning act was?

Q.: I am eager to hear it.

B.: [in English] He slanted his body. The lower jaw remained on the neck. The rest of his head rolled off. I picked it up and parted the hair in a neat manner. The half-mouth in my hand, somehow produced the sound ‘Thank you!’ – in English. I smiled at it and fitted it back.

I and another in the Hall who could understand English were horrified; the American coolly said –

Q.: Oh! Really! Bhagavan is sure it was not a mere dream?

B.: [waving at the Hall] As much as all this is.

Q.: Will the omnipotent Bhagavan do the same trick himself now and show me, so that I am convinced?

B.: What you should be convinced about is this – such powers are worthless. They lead you away from peace. The illusionist, once his head was safely back on, wept and wept in front of me. He had learnt these tricks from an occultist by serving him like a dog for three decades; only now did he see the pointlessness, the futility and the evil repercussions of it all. Now he was tempted to perform these everywhere. As a result of the distraction, he was unable to find the time for genuine spiritual pursuits. His peace of mind was now totally extinct. He begged me to take the powers away. To that effect, I gesticulated him to circumambulate the Hill that very night. He replied that it was ammavasai that night, hence he would not be able to see his way. I signalled it was all the better that he be not guided by his perfidious senses, but rather by God’s grace. Thanking me, he went away. I never saw him thereafter. A few days later Palanisamy, it seems, chanced to meet him near the Sona theertham. He had followed my advice, and now was bereft of his psychic abilities. He sent his many thanks to me through Palanisamy. I never heard of him since. So, what is the observation? Even one with such advanced powers finds them a nuisance. Thus you should aim for Realisation and Realisation alone.

Q.: But it is all said to be pre-determined: ‘One shall be able to Realise only if destiny permits it.’ Who knows what she permits? I have heard that Bhagavan himself is not even a determinist, but an absolute fatalist. Am I right?

B.: Destiny cannot so much as cause a ripple upon the introverted mind. Let her do what she will with the body. You merge in the Self.

Q.: ‘Destiny is powerless to disturb the introverted mind.’ Very well. Now – has she the power to thwart a mind that is endeavouring to introvert itself? If yes, what is the use of engaging in spiritual practices?

B.: That power goes on diminishing the more and more the introversion becomes intense.

Q.: I will now frame the question in a slightly different way – If everything is predestined, are my thoughts also predestined?

B.: Do you choose to forsake the Self and think, or do you choose to inhere in the Heart? This is the only choice given to you at any given point in time. The only freedom given to you is to turn inward and drown yourself in the Heart. This is the one and only free-will allowed to man.

Q.: I find nowadays that my faculty of memory often gives me the slip. What is the remedy?

B.: Forgetting [also the fact of] your forgetfulness.

Q.: Is it true that for the south-Indian and Japanese people, Realisation comes easily relative to other cultures on the Earth, on account of conducive psychological constitution caused by appropriate upbringing?

B.: It may or may not be true. But can you help your place of birth? Can it be retroactively changed? Impossible. So, make the best out of the prevailing circumstances and try to direct the mind into the Heart here and now. All other pursuits are ultimately proved futile.

Q.: Am I under any moral obligation to Realise the Self? Is it my rightful duty? Or do I have a choice to remain an ignoramus, should I so please? Is it wrong morally not to Realise?

B.: If and once you practically understand the personal-self to be an illusion [or delusion], the inescapable obligation [to Realise] does devolve on you invariably and automatically.

Q.: The direct means to regain the Absolute – according to Bhagavan, it is the one and only ‘Who-am-I?’ investigation, is that not so?

B.: Yes.

Q.: Why so?

At this point, Bhagavan said something to an attendant, whereupon the latter extracted a heavy-looking volume from the book-case in the Hall. The book was handed to Bhagawan. He opened it once and it had opened onto the very page he had been aiming for; this curious knack I have already noticed many times in the master. He handed the open book to the interpreter, and gave him some instructions. Presently the interpreter read as follows –

The following are the words of the Tibetian Yogi Milarepa:

‘Oh! Ignorant mortal! When you run after your thoughts, you are verily a dog chasing a stick. Everytime a stick is thrown, you run after it. Instead be like a lion. The lion, rather than chasing the stick, turns to face the thrower. One only throws a stick at a lion once.

‘Oh! Ignorant mortal! Know this for certain – all worldly pursuits have but one unavoidable and inevitable end, and that is sorrow. Accquisition ends in dispersion, building in destruction, meetings in seperation, births in death, and so on. Knowing this, one should, from the very beginning, renounce accquisition, accumulation, and the like.

‘Oh! Ignorant mortal! How long will you go on dreaming, rotting in this odious marsh of births and deaths? Do you not want to taste the sweet, intoxicating nectar of immortality? For this, investigate your “I”. Do not entertain hopes or ambition for Realisation, but sincerely practise all your life.’

Q.: Are there pre-requisites or qualifications needed for one who wishes to follow this path of inquiry?

B.: Only one – complete absence of belief in the world as an objectively real, self-supporting, or continuous entity.

4 more books added to the recommended reading list | Law of Attraction | Self-Help

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

I have added a further section to my recommended reading list as follows. Whilst the other recommended books point the way directly to liberation, these books instead may help you more in your daily life:

Appendix 2 – other book recommendations

These are books that contain teachings that are not directly liberating but may be helpful to you on the path. Some of these I have read myself, others are books that people I have worked with have found particularly helpful for them.

1. Jesus Calling by Sarah Young (a book for devotional practice)

This is a beautiful book, devotional in nature, written by a Christian, which encourages us to feel God’s Presence, Love and Support throughout our life. There is an entry to read for each day of the year. Whilst it is dualistic in nature, it can serve as a wonderful reminder to surrender to That Higher Power and lean on It rather than try to do everything by oneself…and much more…highly recommended for those who resonate

2. Maximum Achievement by Brian Tracy (a book for personal success in daily life)

This wonderful book, which in my opinion is a spiritual book disguised as a self-help productivity manual, contains many skills and tips on all areas of your life in order to help you attain personal success. It gives advice on health, energy levels, finances, relationships, personal fulfillment and peace of mind. Have a read, see if you like it.

3. The Astonishing Power of Emotions by Abraham Hicks (on the Law of Attraction)

This wonderful book summarises many of the teachings given by Abraham Hicks on the Law of Attraction and also helps us use our own positive and negative emotions to guide us along the way. See if it resonates with you.

4. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt (a book on society and politics)

I haven’t read this book myself, but some of us find the area of society and politics to be a cause of confusion, stress and worry, and several people have told me that this book has helped them. See what you think and feel free to let me know.

Sri Ramana Maharshi on the heavenly realm of Shambala and the secret of Mount Kailash | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is taken from Aham Sphurana 19th July 1936:

Sri Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] was given a sheet of paper filled with questions. He asked the interpreter to read them out:

1. The heavenly realm of Shambala is said to be located somewhere in Tibet. One who merely visits it once is said to be absorbed in Bliss forever. Is it so? Is it acceptable for ordinary mortals to aspire to locate and enter the place? Does the place actually exist, or is it a mere mythical construct? If it is there, how to find it, since the mountainous region is largely unchartered?

2. What is the secret of Mount Kailash? Does Lord Shiva really reside at the top of the peak?

3. It is said that if a sinner touches the mountain, he suddenly ages 2 decades in a span of 2 minutes. Is this true?

4. Is Mt. Kailash the axis mundi of the earth? Does it give access to the hidden realms of heaven that are frequently mentioned in the Hindu scriptures?

At this point, Bhagavan asked the interpreter to stop reading, and said to the young man who had presented the questions:

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Look here, I don’t know anything about such things.

Questioner: But B. is widely regarded as a Sarvagnar [Tom: ‘all knowing’ or omniscient].

B.: People foist on me whatever they like. What am I to do? The kingdom of Heaven you seek is within. It is to be found by turning the mind inward, not by journeying to all sorts of impossible places.

Q.: If all places are the same, why did Bhagavan leave Madurai and come to Tiruvannamalai?

B.: Always the same question! You want to go to all sorts of exotic locations. I did not [personally] desire to go anywhere; rather, I was pulled here.

Q.: The same fascination you have for Mount Arunachala, I have for Mount Kailash. What is wrong in it? Both are dwelling places of Shiva.

B.: Right. You may do as fancy pleases you. Why solicit my opinion?

Q.: It is difficult to reach the mountain. Not many have succeeded. I want Bhagavan’s blessings so that I may succeed in safely reaching there. If I once have darshan of the mountain, it will do. Even if I drop dead the next moment, it
matters nothing. Will Bhagavan please Bless my endeavour? I plan to start 2 weeks hence.

B.: [smiles]

Q.: Can I take it that Bhagavan’s blessings for my journey are descended upon me?

B.: Yes.

[Tom’s comments: what is it that we really need to know for liberation?]

Ramana Maharshi: If I am not the body, why do I feel physical pain? Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is taken from Aham Sphurana 17th July 1936:

Questioner: Is it really true that I am not this body?

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes.

Q.: If so, when some damage is suffered by the body, why do I feel pain? If, say, a piece of burning coal falls on somebody near me, I do not feel anything, but that person alone feels the pain. Likewise if a thorn pricks my foot I alone feel the pain, but not the one walking by my side.

B.: Does the body cry out, saying, ‘I am feeling pain!’? You associate yourself with your body and speak of it as your “I”. The body is only in the mind. All pain apparently suffered by the body is as imaginary as the body itself. The body cannot know anything. It is insentient flesh and bone. Notions of pain spring from our own imagination only. Thus, in deep slumber, the mind being inactive, there is no pain.

Q.: Suppose I have a piece of metal wire in my hand. If I cut it into pieces, the metal cannot be aware that it is being cut, because it is insentient. Whereas, if a living body were to so much as be scratched, it explodes with agony. In what sense, therefore, does Bhagavan mean that the body is insentient?

B.: True the body experiences the physical stimulus of pain if it is injured, but why should that fact create a thought in the mind, “I am feeling pain”? Physical pain creates mental agony because of the following reason – the mind assumes itself to be the body and appropriates to itself the bodily identity, because in the absence of such false self-objectification it cannot survive or thrive. If the idea “I am the body” is abandoned, everything, including pain suffered by the body, is only Bliss.

Q.: But I am aware of the pain if the body is injured!

B.: When the body is injured, in the case of the unenlightened one, the following happens – his body feels the physical stimulus of pain, and his mind spontaneously manifests the thought, “I am injured”, causing him to become mentally agitated; the reason for the manifestation of such thought is the underlying erroneous idea “I am the body”. In one who is free from the mistaken idea of accepting the body for the Self, injury of the body causes no disturbance to his peace. Each one is indeed the Self, but absurdly confounds himself with the not-Self and so needlessly suffers on account of such dehatma-buddhi [Tom: the idea ‘I am the body’; deha = body; atma = self; buddhi = intellect or understanding or knowledge].

Q.: The question still remains – if, as postulated by Sri Bhagavan, the body is insentient, how can it and why does it feel pain at all?

B.: The word “pain” is employed because there is a prejudice in the mind against such stimuli. When the mind is dissolved in Pure Consciousness [Tom: ‘Pure Consciousness’ means consciousness devoid of arising phoenomena/objects], its prejudices also disappear. For the enlightened one, therefore, pain and pleasure are physical stimuli that stand on an equal footing. He does not covet the one and abhor the other; nor does he abhor the one and covet the other. Mind gone, there remains no yardstick by means of which one sensation is to be regarded as pain and another as pleasure.

Q.: Sri Bhagavan seriously means to say he is unable to tell the difference between the sensation that ensues when an insect bites his leg and the one that ensues when someone is massaging it?

B.: That they are different sensations is self-evident; that the one is abhorrent and the other agreeable is mere mental judgement from which the Jnani is quite free. He himself seeks out neither pain nor pleasure, but accepts what comes his way without resisting; in Jnana only automatic acceptance remains.

[Tom’s comments: we can see here that Bhagavan is answering on the level of dristi-sristi vada]

Q.: For Jnanis it is different; what of the common man?

B.: You also are a Jnani; only, you think otherwise!

Q.: How could that be?

B.: The option of turning inwards and quietly allowing the mind to plunge and dissolve in the Self is equally available for all. It is not the fiefdom of a select few. All are verily only the Self.

Q.: That does not satisfy me. I am unable to Realise it for myself.

B.: So long as worldly attachments are present the mind cannot be succesfully turned inwards.

Q.: How to eliminate worldly attchment?

B.: By turning the mind inwards.

Q.: Really!

B.: The more you hold on to the Self or retain the mind in its native state of subjective-awareness-sustained-effortlessly-and-volitionlessly, the more the mental tendancies and worldly attachments wither off; the lesser the mental tendancies and worldly attachments, the easier does become retention of the mind in its native state of subjective-awareness-sustained-effortlessly-and-volitionlessly. [Tom: like the phrase ‘Pure Consciousness’ used above, this ‘native state’, native referring to the birth-place or source, means consciousness of Pure Subjectivity only, devoid of any airisng phenomena/ appearances/ objects]

Q.: Which comes first?

B.: The sadhaka recognises and reflects upon the ephemeral nature of the objective world and the transient nature of his own body. He gets fed up with material pleasures, because they eventually lead only to sorrow, when their enjoyment becomes, for any reason, impossible. He asks himself if a more permanent experience of life might not be possible. Then he discovers the Ajata-advaita doctrine. Initially he is not convinced, and argues that if it were a dream there would be no possibility of corroboration, but that here his relatives and friends are able to confirm the evidence provided by his senses; he also asks why the same dream should be repeated everyday, were it all only a dream – according to him, here he sees the same sun, moon and earth everyday, whereas in his dreams he finds himself in new worlds moment to moment. Eventually it dawns upon him that everything he thinks he knows, including an understanding of the apparent permanency of the world he believes himself to live in, is only thought or imagination.

Then at the intellectual level he understands the truth – that the names and forms constituting the world are fictitious. This sparks a search for the substratum said to be underlying them, which alone is said to be Real by the wise. He hears the teaching that the source of the mind, Beingness, is the gateway to the Real Self. Then he begins the practice of quietening the mind by vichara or any other method, tackling various distractions as and when they arise, by withdrawing attention from them and fixing it on Beingness or the Self. The beginning is only becoming fed-up with the evanescent nature of the world and the fugacious attractions it has to offer.

Q.: The boubts Bhagavan mentioned – they are my doubts also. Why is everyone witnessing the same dream? The sun moon etc. are seen by all.

B.: In turn those ‘all’ are seen by you only. In deep slumber when there is no mind, nothing is available to be seen, but your existence is a constant.

Q.: Why do I dream the same dream everyday? For instance yesterday I came to the ashram and had darshan of Bhagawan; he was sitting on the same sofa in exactly the same manner. Today I am seeing Bhagawan and tomorrow also it is going to be the same Bhagawan.

B.: The future is a mere mental projection. The past is a mere memory. Have you not had dreams where the places you visit look extremely familiar?

Q.: At least is the present real?

B.: Anything seen cannot be Real. What is seen is not Pratyaksha [Tom: directly known]. It is not self-evident, because there is a subject-object relationship involved. It is merely sensory information that is fed into the mind by the strength of its own evil faculty of avidya-maya. That alone is Real which shines by its own light.

You are asking about the objects of the world. Can such objects exist without a YOU, a perceiver? When there is no perceiver, as in swoon or deep slumber, is there anything to be perceived? No. What is the inference? The objects owe the appearance of their apparent existence to you only. They are merely mental creations. The appearance of this enormous cosmos around you is merely… a mental information. The mind is fiction. Therefore the ‘objects’ manufactured by it are also fictitious. Have not the least doubt about it.

Q.: If everything is unreal, can we conclude that bondage and liberation are also unreal?

B.: Yes.

Q.: Then why should I try to obtain Liberation? Let me remain as I am.

B.: Exactly!

Q.: I do not understand.

B.: Remaining as you are is the loftiest Sadhana.

Q.: How can remaining in ignorance be sadhana?

B.: You think that you are in ignorance. When you do not think at all, what remains is only wisdom. Removal of the screen of thought is all that is required for Reality to be revealed. Since you want a sadhana by means of which you may reach this thought-free state, vichara is suggested. Actually there is no need for any sadhana for one who has mastered the art of remaining as he is – the art of Being. That is the import of the advice Summa Iru [Tom: ‘be still’ or ‘just be’]. People generally misunderstand it. It does not mean keeping the body idle. It means keeping the mind still or free from thought. Remain perpetually absorbed in the thought-free I-Current. This will automatically lead you to the Sahaja-stithi [Tom: Natural state] without requirement for further effort.

Q.: Is even desire for Liberation an obstacle to Liberation?

B.: Yes.

S>M>

Q.: Why has God created the world? I want to know why.

B.: Did God come and tell you that He has created the world?

Q.: I see creation around me. There must be some reason for creation.

B.: You say “I see.”; if you see that seer, all your doubts will be resolved.

Q.: I do not understand.

B.: Is there anything to be seen in sleep?

Q.: No.

B.: Continue to remain in the state where there is nothing to be seen.

Q.: Should I always be sleeping?

B.: Not seeing anything while remaining AWARE is Realisation. That is God and that is everything.

Q.: Awareness of what?

B.: Being.