The teaching never ultimately points towards an object

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

What are we all really looking for? We are looking for total fulfillment devoid of any misery. This is our heart’s desire and you do not get that from someone else or something else. The best teacher/teaching can do is to point you back to yourself.

This video was recorded live during a Satsang meeting with Tom Das and put together by volunteers.

To attend satsang, see here: https://tomdas.com/events.

For guided meditations see the ‘guided meditation’ playlist here: https://www.youtube.com/c/TomDasNonduality/playlist

For recommended reading for liberation see here: https://tomdas.com/2020/10/19/recommended-reading-books-for-enlightenment-liberation-and-self-realisation/

To book a 1 to 1 session with Tom see here: https://tomdas.com/nondual-spiritual-counsellor/

Q. Arahant vs Bodhisattva – which is best? | Buddhism

~ Tom Das ~ 4 Comments

Q. According to Buddhism is it better to be a Bodhisattva or an Arahant? I’ve heard quite a few conflicting things about this so would be good to get some clarity.

Tom: According to the Pali Suttas, the earliest records of Buddha’s teachings, true enlightenment/liberation is to be an Arahant, a Boddhisattva being anyone who desires liberation. By this definition, a Bodhisattva is unenlightened and still stuck in suffering/samsara, and an Arahant is an enlightened sage.
⁠
In later Buddhist schools/thought, a Bodhisattva became someone who foregoes enlightenment in order to help all sentient beings attain liberation. The idea here is that an Arahant, whilst liberated, is somehow ‘cold’ and ‘self-centred’ (I don’t agree with this by the way), placing their enlightenment above others, and so the ‘compassionate’ Bodhisattva rejects full liberation in place of compassion towards others. The problem with this, as has been oft pointed out, is that only a ‘liberated being’ can lead another to full liberation, and that with Nirvana, duality and the sense of ‘another’ outside of yourself, ceases (please excuse my dualistic language – see these quotes from Diamond sutra if you are unsure what I am talking about here when I say ‘dualistic language’)
⁠
Later still, a Bodhisattva was defined loosely as a compassionate enlightened being who helps all others attain liberation. By this definition, a Bodhisattva is a desirable outcome!
⁠
So take your pick!
⁠
There is more complexity and nuance in this topic if you want to delve into it, but the above is a broad outline. Hope that helps 🙏⁠
⁠

Shankara: The Self or Brahman cannot be known!

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

A definition of Jnana by Shankara

The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, verse 4.4.20, states the following:

20. It [Brahman] should be realised in one form only, (for) It is unknowable and eternal. The Self is taintless, beyond the (subtle) ether, birthless, infinite and constant.

Here we can see that the Upanishad is stating that Brahman is unknowable. So what of Self-Knowledge or knowledge of Brahman that is so often spoken about? Shankara explains this contradiction in his commentary on this verse:

The knowledge of Brahman too means only the cessation of the identification with extraneous things (such as the body). The relation of identity with It [Brahman] has not to be directly established, for it is already there. Everybody always has that identity with It, but it appears to be related to something else. Therefore the scriptures do not enjoin that identity with Brahman should be established, but that the false identification with things other than That should stop. When the identification with other things is gone, that identity with one’s own Self which is natural, becomes isolated; this is expressed by the statement that the Self is known. In Itself It is unknowable – not comprehended through any means. Hence both statements are consistent.

We can see that Shankara is stating that Brahman is indeed unknowable, and that Jnana, or knowledge, only signifies the cessation of identification with extraneous things, ie. loss of identification with objects, specifically the body-mind. Jnana is not of the mind and is not for the jiva or individual.

We do not need to affirm our identity as Brahman, as we already are and always have been and always will be Brahman. Any affirmation of Brahman would simply be on the level of thought or concepts, and so it would be Maya, or more ignorance. But once the false identification has been removed, then the Self naturally shines as itself, and this lack of wrong-knowledge, or lack of wrongly identifying as the body-mind, is what is called ‘Jnana’ or ‘knowledge’.

In Ulladu Narpadu verse 12, Sri Ramana Maharshi writes:

True Knowledge is being devoid of knowledge as well as ignorance of objects. Knowledge of objects is not true knowledge. Since the Self shines self-luminous, with nothing else for It to know, with nothing else to know It, the Self is Knowledge. Nescience It is not.

In Upadesa Saram verse 27, Sri Ramana Maharshi writes:

That is true knowledge which transcends
Both knowledge and ignorance,
For in pure knowledge
Is no object to be known.

The above is an excerpt from the following post which further explores this topic: What exactly is Jnana (knowledge) according to Shankara and Gaudapada and the scriptures?

Ramana Maharshi: There are not many Jivas/egos/people (Eka Jiva Vada)

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

(Here a questioner asks are there not many jivas? Sri Ramana informs the questioner there is only one jiva)

A question was asked why it was wrong to say that there is a multiplicity of jivas. Jivas are certainly many. For a jiva is only the ego and forms the reflected light of the Self. Multiplicity of selves may be wrong but not of jivas.

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Jiva is called so because he sees the world. A dreamer sees many jivas in a dream but all of them are not real. The dreamer alone exists and he sees all. So it is with the individual and the world.

There is the creed of only one Self which is also called the creed of only one jiva*. It says that the jiva is only one who sees the whole world and the jivas therein.

~Talks 571

*Tom: This is called the doctrine of eka jiva vada (the view there is only a single jiva/ego/person). Our own body-mind, and the body-mind of apparent others are all projections of the Self. Like a dream, it appears we are many, but actually this entire dream world is an illusion, and there is only the Dreamer, the Self, the Consciousness from which all is projected. Tat Tvam Asi, You are That.

The above is an excerpt taken from this longer post that further explores this theme:

Ramana Maharshi: The world should be considered like a dream

Mind and Consciousness | Fully awake in Deep Sleep

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

Q. I have a question. If mind guides us while we are awake and in dream, and in sleep we are not conscious (because mind is switched off), doesn’t that imply mind is what we mistake for ‘consciousness’ or ‘awareness’?

Tom: Yes, that is correct. We consider ourselves to be awake/conscious in both the waking state and the dream (whilst we are dreaming) and asleep/unconscious in deep sleep.

Actually it is just the mind, ie. ignorance/duality, that is awake in ‘waking’ and dream and we are actually fully conscious in deep sleep – it is just the mind that is ‘asleep’.

This is why the in the Bhagavad Gita verse 2:69 it states: ‘What all [ignorant] beings consider as day is the night of ignorance for the wise, and what all [ignorant] creatures see as night is the day for the introspective sage.’

Also see:

Ramana Maharshi on Deep Sleep and Self-Realisation

Ramana Maharshi: the method of wakeful sleep (Jagrat Sushupti) to attain liberation

Deep sleep is Brahman – the three states according to the Birhadaranyaka Upanishad with commentary by Shankara

Neti-Neti is not Self-Enquiry | Ramana Maharshi – The 5 Sheaths (Pancha-Koshas)

~ Tom Das ~ 3 Comments

For more on this topic see this article

Neti-Neti means ‘not this, not that’. Who am I? What am I? Not this, not that. In this context, this and that refers to objects, any object that arises. Notice, when you say neti-neti, not this, not that, it’s the mind saying it. Ramana makes this point, he says when you do neti-neti, you can only do so up to the mind. He’s talking about the teaching of the five sheaths.

This video was recorded live during a Satsang meeting with Tom Das and put together by volunteers.

To see all the guided meditations see the ‘guided meditation’ playlist here: https://www.youtube.com/c/TomDasNonduality/playlist

For recommended reading for liberation see here: https://tomdas.com/2020/10/19/recommended-reading-books-for-enlightenment-liberation-and-self-realisation/

To attend satsang, see here: https://tomdas.com/events.

To book a 1 to 1 session with Tom see here: https://tomdas.com/nondual-spiritual-counsellor/

What is the best way to deal with suffering? | Spiritual Bypassing | Vasanas and conditioning

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

There are two basic paths you can take with suffering. One is pure Self-Enquiry, and just like any other phenomena that is arising, you say “To whom does this occur? To me. Who am I?, in order to direct your attention away from the suffering and the thoughts and go back to the Self.

However, with strong vasanas, strong suffering, you may need to go into Maya and solve these on the level of cause and effect. Just like any other practical problem in life, we can try to solve them on the level of life.

This video was recorded live during a Satsang meeting with Tom Das and put together by volunteers.

To see all the guided meditations see the ‘guided meditation’ playlist here: https://www.youtube.com/c/TomDasNonduality/playlist

For recommended reading for liberation see here: https://tomdas.com/2020/10/19/recommended-reading-books-for-enlightenment-liberation-and-self-realisation/

To attend satsang, see here: https://tomdas.com/events.

To book a 1 to 1 session with Tom see here: https://tomdas.com/nondual-spiritual-counsellor/