Advaita Vedanta

How to truly know that consciousness is the ground of being and the sole reality

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

This is one of a series of introductory articles – please see the homepage of tomdas.com for more introductory articles. Also see: Recommended Reading: Books for Enlightenment, Liberation and Self-Realisation

This article was first published on Facebook here.

FIRST, A FALSE TEACHING:

‘…Look directly at your own experience. Can you find anything in your own direct experience apart from consciousness? Isn’t everything you perceive sense and know, all arising within your consciousness? More than that, isn’t everything arising not only within your consciousness, but as consciousness itself? And can you find a boundary to this consciousness, can you find a beginning or an end to this consciousness… and so on, and so on….’

Whilst this CAN be and IS a wonderful teaching as an entry point into the teaching*, this is ultimately a false teaching. And by false teaching, as I have just implied, I do not mean a bad teaching necessarily (although some false teachings are bad), by false teaching I mean, in this context, a teaching that is not truly or ultimately liberating.

(*As an aside, were it not for this kind of teaching, I myself probably would not have found the deeper teachings. It was these kinds of teachings that encourage one to explore one’s own direct experience that helped me get into this ‘subject of non-duality’. My mind did, in fact, dismiss the deeper teachings when I first came across them, as I thought them too ridiculous and absurd. It was only many years later that I was led to the deeper teachings, which answered all my questions and were ultimately liberating in my own personal experience.)

FLAWED LOGIC

Why is this a false teaching? Well, the logic is completely flawed and suffering is not removed once and for all (which is what happens with genuine liberation – or to be more accurate, in genuine liberation, suffering is seen never to have arisen in the first place).

Here is how the logic is flawed: you can only be conscious of things you are conscious of. You can only be aware of things that arise in your awareness. So it is a circular argument to say everything is consciousness because everything that arises in your consciousness is not apart from consciousness. The instrument we use, in this case our awareness or our consciousness, determines the nature of what we see/perceive. Because the instrument we are using is consciousness or awareness, this determines that everything perceived must necessarily arise within that awareness. This obviously does not mean that everything is awareness, or everything is consciousness.

For example if I give you a ruler, all you’ll be able to measure is distance. See if you can measure anything with a ruler that is not distance. That does not mean that ‘distance is the only thing that exists’ or ‘all there is is distance’, and that ‘distance is the only measurable thing’. It means that a ruler measures distance only.

Similarly, just as a ruler is only able to detect distance, consciousness only is aware of objects arising in consciousness.

Also see: Look – there’s no one here! (And other false teachings)

TAUTOLOGY

This form of circular reasoning in the field of logic is known as a tautology. Tautological statements often appear to be profound, but in fact provide us with no new information and just restate what is already known in a new or novel way.

An example of a tautological statement would be ‘the future is yet to come’. This may seem to be an inspiring, bold and novel statement, but actually no new information is given. By definition, the future has not yet occurred, so of course the future is yet to come. No new information has been imparted to us. In a particular context, this could actually be an inspiring statement, but this statement is rhetorical (rhetoric is the art of speaking and persuasion through speaking), not informative in its nature.

Similarly, all we can be aware of is what we are conscious of, or to put it a different way, we can only be conscious of those things that rise up in our consciousness. This does not mean that all is consciousness. It just means we are only conscious of what we are conscious of, which is nothing particularly profound, and provides us with no new information at all – it is a tautology.

OTHER PROBLEMS WITH THIS TEACHING

There are several more issues with these kinds of teachings that ask us to explore our own direct experience, not realising that our own direct experience is the problem, and that this ‘direct experience’ should be distrusted for us to discover something more genuine and more real and infinitely more blissful, in which no suffering and duality remains. In fact this trusting in our own direct experience of our body our mind and our senses, is a core part of what ignorance actually is.

NO BOUNDARIES IN CONSCIOUSNESS?

These teachings that encourage us to explore our own direct experience do not reveal to us the infinite, deathless nature of reality, what we truly are. They only give us proxies such as ‘can you find an edge or a border or a boundary to this consciousness? No? Therefore this consciousness is infinite’. Clearly this is just word-play and not the genuine infinite nature of consciousness that the scriptures and great sages are talking about at all. If all ‘infinite consciousness’ means is that we cannot find a boundary to consciousness, isn’t this a rather anticlimactic spiritual statement?

Can you see through a wall or around a corner? No? Well doesn’t that reveal that our own personal consciousness is FINITE and LIMITED? Can you smell better than a wolf or a dog? No? Doesn’t that represent a boundary to your perception and consciousness?

The word ‘infinite’ when applied to consciousness doesn’t mean these types of things at all. It is much grander (and simpler) that this. We are the Source. We are Pure Positivity. We are truly infinite. Not some re-interpretation of the word ‘infinite’ to mean ‘I cannot find a boundary to consciousness in my own direct experience’. This is just word-play.

If we, instead of indulging in word-play, turn towards our own intuitive inner knowing, it is obvious that these are false intellectualised teachings that remain on the surface level only, and that the term ‘infinite consciousness’ is pointing to a far deeper more magnificent truth of what we actually are.

Also see: Ramana Maharshi – three theories of reality of the world – the 3 levels of the teaching

COMMON CONSENSUS IS NOT A PROPER METHOD TO DETERMINE THE TRUTH

Perhaps because so many great teachers or authorities are saying the same thing, that makes it seem true, but this is also a false way of determining the truth. Majority opinion or a proclaimed authority stating something, doesn’t necessarily make it true at all. The idea is to discover this truth for yourself, yes in our own experience, but we will see this is not done by exploring our everyday experience, meaning it is not done by exploring our sense perceptions or our thoughts and seeing how they relate to our awareness or consciousness, or anything like this.

Also see:

Rupert Spira’s ‘Direct Path’ vs Traditional Advaita Vedanta and Sri Ramana Maharshi

THE BODY, THE BRAIN AND CONSCIOUSNESS

These teachings that encourage us to explore our everyday experience also do not really inform us whether or not consciousness depends on the body or brain, or whether or not consciousness is primary and the body and brain arise within it, or something else.

The logic goes ‘what you know of the body and the brain only arises in consciousness, therefore consciousness is primary and the body and brain are secondary’. Again, if you have not been brainwashed by these teachings, which are erroneous conceptual conclusions, it is easy to realise that this is false logic. Just because what we PERCEIVE to be the body or the brain arises within our consciousness, that does not mean that the Brain and body actually DEPEND on consciousness.

It is true that our PERCEPTION of the body/brain depends on consciousness, but that does not mean that there is not something real underlying our perception of the body, a real body/brain beyond our perception so to speak, which precedes consciousness.

The true teachings however resolve all these questions for us directly in our own experience, but not by exploring our own outer experience of thoughts sensations and objects, or how they relate to consciousness or awareness.

CONSCIOUSNESS AND DIFFERENT BODIES AND PERSPECTIVES

The false teachings also do not account for how one person may have one perspective of the world, and another person has a different perspective of the world. If all is one, then how can we account for all these seemingly different people with different sense perceptions, different knowledge, different skills, etc

And if consciousness is one, why can we not be aware of what everybody else is thinking, feeling, perceiving, knowing, etc?

And if consciousness is one, why do we have our own particular experience rather than someone else’s particular experience?

And how do we know that there aren’t in fact 8 billion or so different consciousnesses and not just one consciousness? How do we know?

Are not these scientific questions that require scientific answers?

None of these questions are answered by the false teachings, but they are all answered by the true teachings (genuinely, and not just intellectually), and we can discover this truth for ourself.

ETHICS AND TRAGEDY

The false teachings also do not give us a satisfactory answer for why terrible things happen in the world, or why a loving God or a singular consciousness could allow so many terrible things to happen.

The true teachings give a satisfactory answer to this question, again, not just intellectually, but actually in our direct experience.

SO IS ALL NOT CONSCIOUSNESS?

So, am I saying that all is NOT consciousness, and that all the great teachers, sages, and scriptures are wrong when they posit that all IS consciousness?

No! Not at all! What am I saying then? All IS consciousness, and Consciousness IS the ground of being, the sole reality.

All I’m saying is that this teaching of simply exploring one’s direct sensory and mental experience is not a correct method to truly discover that all is consciousness or to discover your true nature. This method of simply exploring one’s own direct experience is NOT a correct method, not a legitimate method, not a rational or logical method to determine that the ground of being, that the sole reality is a consciousness that is beyond the scope of words. It simply doesn’t, by itself, work. To repeat what I said at the start of this post – it is a good teaching in that it may form an entry point into the teaching, which is wonderful, but it is not a liberating teaching itself.

THERE IS ANOTHER WAY

There is another way. This other way has been encoded in the oldest spiritual teachings that still survive to this day, such as the Vedanta teachings of the Upanishads/Vedas, or the early Buddhist teachings that survive to this day. This other method that does work has been given out countless times by numerous sages in different times and different places. Of course this method is often corrupted over the course of time, distorted by the ego, through ignorance, through intellectual (flawed) logic, by the intellectuals and by the well-meaning (or not so well-meaning) ignorant ones (apparently). Many people who teach Vedanta and Buddhism,, some of whom are very prominent and well-respected, are demonstrably teaching something quite different to what the scriptures actually say.

However recently, this teaching has been given in a very pure and simple form by a great sage, Sri Ramana Maharshi.

TRUE TEACHINGS DO NOT ASK US TO EXPLORE OUR EVERYDAY EXPERIENCE IN ORDER TO FIND THE ULTIMATE TRUTH

Notice that never do the Vedanta teachings or the original Buddhist teachings ask us to make an examination of our everyday experience. Notice that never does Sri Ramana or Sri Krishna ask us to examine our everyday experience in order to discover the Truth.

THE TRUE TEACHINGS: ‘DISTRUST YOUR EVERYDAY EXPERIENCE‘

No, instead they ask us to distrust our everyday experience, to distrust what our senses show us, and to distrust what our thoughts may think or conclude about the world around us. They give us a different method.

This theme, as well as other themes, are explored more in this article here as well as in many of the introductory articles on the tomdas.com homepage:

Does Swami Sarvapriyananda teach the same as Swami Vivekananda and Sri Ramakrishna? | Swami Dayananda | Swami Satchidanendra Saraswati | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Advaita Vedanta

PARALLELS WITH MODERN DAY SCIENCE

Just as modern-day science has discovered apparently profound truths about the way the universe operates that seem completely contrary to the world our senses reveal to us, similarly, but much more profoundly, these genuine spiritual teachings reveal a truth that appears counter to what the mind and senses think and perceive to be true.

Contrary to our everyday experience, current quantum mechanics tells us that particles can exist in multiple different states at the same time, something called superimposition. This forms the basis of quantum computers in which quantum bits (qubits) can exist in superimposition as a combination of zero or one (which will later collapse into a one or a zero), whereas a classical bit in classical non-quantum computers can either be a one or a zero. This allows quantum computers to perform some calculations much quicker than classical computers, and even perform calculations that a classical computer would not be able to perform at all.

Einstein’s theory of special relativity reveals that the faster we are travelling, the slower time passes, so theoretically someone travelling at very high speeds will age less quickly compared to someone travelling at a lower speed (not a recommended anti-aging therapy by the way – you would need to travel at near light speed for this feature of special relativity to have any noticeable effect!). Again, this is a counter-intuitive discovery made by exploring more deeply than what our sense perceptions and thoughts present to us in our everyday experience, and discovering that these are not necessarily true.

And this is a key feature of science – it investigates and often contradicts what appears to be self-evident truths.

PLATO’S CAVE

Plato illustrated that we should not trust our own direct experience using the famous example of what has now become known as ‘Plato’s cave’.

The idea is that several human beings, living in a dimly lit cave, seeing only shadows on a wall of the cave, are not able to see themselves. They mistake the shadows dancing on the wall as themselves and as the sole reality. This is akin to trusting our own sense perceptions and thoughts, rather than discovering a more fundamental truth that may superficially seem opposed to what our senses and mind perceives and thinks to be true.

Plato was telling us that in order to discover a deeper truth, we must distrust what we take at face value on the body mind world level and investigate more deeply to find deeper truths that may apparently contradict what we see.

A classic example in science is that the earth seems flat, but when investigated we discover it is spherical, or that the sun and stars and planets appear to orbit around us in our own experience, but actually the solar system is heliocentric, not geocentric.

Similarly we must investigate deeper than our everyday experience to discover what we actually are.

INTUITIVELY WE ALREADY KNOW

Despite these deeper teachings revealing something to us that is contrary to what our mind and senses are telling us, intuitively, it is possible that these genuine deeper teachings ring true despite them seeming superficially incorrect or even perhaps absurd. And intuitively* it is possible for each and every one of us to know this spiritual truth for our self.

(*I am using this word intuitively to mean to know something without using the faculties of the mind, the body or the senses. Ultimately this intuitive knowledge is not for a person at all)

Also see The Non-Dual Vision of Jesus Christ and the teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi

HOW TO KNOW CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE GROUND OF BEING AND THE SOLE REALITY?

So, how to actually know this spiritual truth for oneself, that consciousness is the sole ground of reality? To this end I have put together a recommended reading list on my website, tomdas.com, and a group of introductory articles on the same website which you can read and look at yourself.

Due to the potentially radical natures of this teaching, these resources are aimed at those who are genuinely seeking liberation, and who are not just seeking mere entertainment (it is absolutely fine by the way if you are looking to kill a few hours! It is just not the intended audience of this material). It is also recommended that you read several of the resources with an open mind before jumping to any conclusions and dismissing these teachings.

Many people start to read these teachings, and when they seem counter to what they have already learnt and what they think they know, they dismiss the teachings. This is what I did when I first came across these teachings – it was only a few years later I was able to engage with them. The ego mind often clings to teachings that it likes and then it can feel secure in, and that it can understand, and rejects teachings that go against its preconceived views, but this is often an (unconscious?)attempt of the ego to preserve itself.

The reading list compiles teachings from different times and different places. Some of these teachings are ancient, some are less ancient, and some of these teachings were written very much in the modern day. All give the same essential teaching using different words, and each different expression of the teaching gives us a different flavour and different clues as to how this truth can be truly known.

A LABOUR OF LOVE FOR YOU

All of the above is available for free, without a subscription or without you having to give any of your personal information to anyone. Some of the books you will have to buy, but I do not receive any money when you purchase these books. Most of the books are available for free as downloads from tomdas.com

This has been done as a spontaneous labour of love for you. No, actually it was not a ‘labour’ at all, as ‘labour’ implies hard work – it flowed effortlessly and organically over time through interacting with various people. Most of the posts, including the recommended reading list itself and this post here, were a product of people asking me questions and my writing them answers, or a response to interacting with seekers and seeing the difficulties they are going through.

No, this is not a labour of love, this is a spontaneous expression of love, for you, and for anyone who is interested.

Wishing you well on your (apparent) journey

🙏🙏🙏

SOME COMMON QUESTIONS

Q. Tom, aren’t all these teachings pointing to the same thing, but in different ways? You may have found your way but that doesn’t mean these other ways are not pointing to the same truth.

Tom: unfortunately this is not true. While all teachings YOU come across in YOUR journey will help YOU towards the truth, that does not mean those specific teachings are actually specifically pointing to the same truth. Some people, when they come across the teachings I share, are able to see this at once, for others it can take several months of engaging with these teachings for them to start to see the genuine differences. I encourage you to engage with the teaching material, and if it resonates, go with it. Otherwise it is fine to go with a different teaching and a different teacher that resonates with you right now.

Q. Tom, it is great that you have so much love and devotion for your teacher Ramana Maharshi, but perhaps you are a bit biased towards him, no?

Tom: it is true that I have a great devotion towards Sri Ramana, but I genuinely do not feel I am being biased in my presentation. Quite the opposite. The reason I enjoy sharing his teachings is because he points the way to truth, not the other way around. There are many others who have also pointed this same way, and it is this way that is important, not my personal affection for a singular teacher. If other teachers, who have genuinely realised this truth for themselves, recommend this same way, then I will recommend them too! And this is demonstrated by the variety of teachers and teachings in my recommended reading list.

Q. Thanks Tom for putting all this together, but I really don’t feel it is for me. I prefer another teacher or teaching.

Tom: that is great – it is important you follow your heart when it comes to these things. If you do not resonate with what I share, and you resonate with something else, it is likely that this something else is going to be more beneficial for you right now. It is much better to follow your heart with these things, and engage with the teacher or teaching you think is right for you, than to engage with a teaching that is theoretically ‘the best’ but you are not genuinely engaged with on a heart level. If you follow your heart, and you are discerning in mind, you will surely find the way that is quickest for you, irrespective of whether or not you follow these teachings which I share. In 1 to 1 meetings with people I often stray from these teachings and meet the person where they are, whereas in satsang meetings I generally share these higher teachings. This is not always the case but is generally true. I will say that eventually all have to come to this teaching in their own way, and I hope it is obvious that it doesn’t have to be through me or what I share here.

Q. I already have a teacher and a teaching I follow. What should I do?

Tom: again, I encourage you to follow your heart on this matter. If you genuinely want to stay with your teacher and follow that teaching, then I encourage you to do so. However if you feel there is something lacking, then question them if that is possible or feel free to explore other teachers and teachings and find the right one for you – this is what I did. See if you can find someone who you trust and who is genuine. Even if the teacher is not fully realised, if you can trust them and if they are genuine, and if you connect/resonate with them, no doubt they will help you on your journey. One of my best teachers was someone who was not self-realised, but they were sincere and genuine, and I learnt a lot from them.

Q. Do I need a teacher for these teachings you share?

Tom: everybody needs a teacher. For some the teacher will be solely within (ie. no external teacher is required), and ultimately this teacher within is the only true teacher, but for others, perhaps for most, an external teacher is seemingly required. It is for you to discern and decide this matter for yourself.

Q. Isn’t the very idea of a teacher, or even a teaching, a hindrance on this path?

Tom: yes, it can be. But it can also be an essential help. When I first started teaching I often said how teacher is not that important, as all we need is already within us, but through teaching and having experience teaching others I have come to see how a teacher is necessary for most of the people who come to me. So now I emphasise the importance of being in close regular contact with a teacher, as I can see how beneficial this is in removing ignorance which seems to constantly creep back in. However this experience of mine may be due to selection bias, in that the people who are drawn to me may be the very ones who need a teacher, and perhaps I am less likely to come across those who do not need a teacher – so again, it is up to you to decide. My personal experience is that a teacher can be invaluable on this apparent spiritual journey and save you much time, but I leave that up to you to discern for yourself. Eventually all concepts, even that of a teacher, a teaching, a path – the very notion of liberation itself – these are all ultimately obstacles, but until then they can be most helpful. I hope this answer makes sense.

There are many other questions like these that I answer in the introductory articles on the homepage of tomdas.com and more that are also answered in the books in the recommended reading list. There are hundreds of free articles also available on tomdas.com and lots of videos on my YouTube channel that answer almost every conceivable question on this path. If there is a question that has not been answered, you are welcome to simply ask me!

With love and best wishes

Namaste

Tom

🙏🙏🙏

‘It is wrong to call Self the Witness’ – Sri Ramana Maharshi

~ Tom Das ~ 7 Comments

The following is an excerpt from this post: Is the Self a witness? Or is it everything? Or both?

Sri Ramana Maharshi has taught us in Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 98 (Guru Vachaka Kovai is the most authoritative record of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s verbal teachings according to Sri Ramana Ashram):

98. Unless the body is taken to be ‘I’, otherness – the world of moving and unmoving objects – cannot be seen. Hence, because otherness – the creatures and their Creator – does not exist, it is wrong to call Self the Witness.

Sri Sadhu Om, a direct devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi, writes in his commentary on this verse:

Descriptions of self as the ‘witness of the individual soul’ (jiva sakshi) or the ‘witness of everything’ (sarva sakshi), which can be found in some sacred texts, are not true but are only figurative (upacara), because only when other things are known would the one who knows them be a ‘witness’ of them. Since self does not know anything in the state of absolute oneness, which is devoid of any other thing, to what can it be a witness? Therefore describing self as a ‘witness’ is incorrect.

What both Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri Sadhu Om are saying is that objects only appear when the ego/ignorance is present. In Self-realisation, there are no objects, only the Self, so in truth the Self cannot be said to be a witness.

In verse 869 of Guru Vachaka Kovai Sri Ramana teaches us:

869. ’Tis a foolish fancy to ascribe the role of ‘witness’ to the Self, the luminous Sun, the mighty sky of Pure Awareness. In the Self Immutable there is no room for maya’s darkness void. The Self is one sole whole without a second.

Here is an alternative translation of the same verse, with Sri Sadhu Om’s commentary, which essentially states in truth, ie. in realisation, there is no Maya in the Self. It is only for ajnani’s, ie. the ignorant, that consider the Self to be a witness of phenomena/maya:

869. The role [dharma] of seeing is ascribed to Self – the space of consciousness, the sun – only in the imagination of ajnanis, [because] maya, the empty ignorance [of seeing otherness], never exists in Self, the support [sthanu], [and also because] Self is without a second.

Sri Sadhu Om’s comments: Since Self is in truth that which transcends all roles and all qualities, and since It exists as one without a second, to glorify It as the ‘witness of all’ [sarva-sakshi] or as the ‘knower of all’ [sarvajna] is merely the folly of ignorant people.

Also see: The practice of witnessing thoughts and events was never even in the least recommended by Sri Ramana Maharshi

Q. The sage and the ignorant both have a body – what is the difference between them? Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana | Verse 17 Ulladu Narpadu 40 verses on Reality

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is from the text Aham Sphurana from the entry dated 15th September, 1936. Some of the language is quite difficult so I have summarised the points in my comments which, as usual, are in italicised red:

Questioner: The Jnani [Tom: knower, enlightened sage] and ajnani [Tom: non-knower, the ignorant one] both have a body; what is the difference between them?

Tom: See Sri Ramana’s text ’40 Verses on Reality’ (Ulladu Narpadu), Bhagavan writes in verse 17:

17. To those who do not know the Self and to those who do, the body is the ‘I’. But to those who do not know the Self the ‘I’ is bounded by the body; while to those who within the body know the Self the ‘I’ shines boundless. Such is the difference between them.


Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: The mistake made by the ajnani is that he limits his “I” to the body. Both the Jnani and the ajnani have a body, and both say ‘I am the body’. The difference lies in the fact that in the case of the Jnani the diaphanous [Tom: subtle] stream of consciousness needed to sustain life in the body is an upadhi [Tom: adjunct, superimposed object], whereas in the case of the other, that macilent [Tom: thin or subtle] ray of reflected consciousness [known as body-consciousness] is the one and only consciousness he is aware of.

I Am is the truth. Body-consciousness is an obnubilating [Tom: obscuring] limitation which obscures Revelation of the Self in the case of the ajnani and an upadhi in the case of the Jnani. You are always the same “I”, whatever state it is that may be passing in front of you. In sleep “I” remains without a body. That same “I” remains undisturbed and unmutilated in the jagrat [Tom: waking] and swapna [Tom: dream] states also.

Tom: To summarise the above paragraph, which contains some convoluted language, Bhagavan says that for the Jnani, the body is a mere appearance in Consciousness (Upadhi) which doesn’t cover his true identity as Self/Consciousness, whereas for the ajnani, the body is the sole identity and this obscures the vision of Truth of ‘I’ or ‘I AM’ or ‘True Self’. However, we will see below that this description is only from the relative point of view, and that truly there is no body for the Jnani in Truth.

Only, in these states, we abandon our actual identity with “I” and imagine ourselves to be perishable bodies made of matter. Despite this confusion on our part, “I” remains happily without a body in truth always, although we assume that we are within the body. Although by us imagined to be within the body, the Real “I” ever is without any body or other limitation, being the Absolute Immutable Self Itself. One’s ignorant outlook is not merely ‘I am the body.’; it lies in having confounded the Self with the not-Self, such as the mind, intellect or body. Does the Real “I” formulate or proclaim the idea of it being this or that? Is it not always perfectly silent? It is the spurious “I” which is capable of rumbustiousness or obstreperousness, and which says, ‘I am this.’ or ‘I am that.’.The body is insentient and cannot say so. Our mistake lies in thinking “I” to be what “I” is not. “I” cannot be insentient; therefore “I” is not the inert body. What then is this “I”? “I” means Sentience or Awareness which is not adumbrated by the faculty of thought-manufacture- i.e., the aham vritti.

The body’s movements are confounded with “I” and excruciating agony is the result. Whether the body and mind work or not, “I” remains free and happy i.e., in its nativistic or intrinsic state of ecstatic, Eternal Emancipation. The ajnani’s “I” is limited to his body and mind only; that is where his whole error lies. The Jnani’s “I” includes the body and everything else. For the Emancipated-one there cannot be anything apart from “I” the Self. He sees no other. Verily everything is only Himself. In the case of the ajnani, some phantasmagoric, intermediate entity known as ahankaram [Tom: ego] arises between the body and the Self and gives rise to all sorts of trouble. If its source is sought, it disappears, leaving the Self alone behind, as the solitary residue. Continuous and intense inward-pointed scrutiny of the mind results in its disappearance.

Tom: similar to my previous comments, Bhagavan is saying essentially the same thing here, namely that the Jnani is not identified with the body whereas the ajnani is. There is also a hint that in truth there is no body, and this is made slightly clearer below.

Bhagavan also says that it is this phantom ego which arises and claims to be I and also claims to be the body, and it is this that ‘gives rise to all sorts of trouble’. The method of self-enquiry is thereafter briefly described – seek the source of this ego, and via this continuous intense inward pointedness of mind, the mind disappears and Self-knowledge remains.

Q.: Since the Jnani has a tangible body, what happens to the soul in that body after its death?

B.: Others say that the Jnani has a body, and talk of jivanmukti, videhamukti, mukti by means of making the body disappear in a flash of blazing light, etc.; the Jnani’s experience of Reality is altogether unconditioned and totally absolute. His experience is that he has no body. If others see him as being one with a body, or as possessing a body, can that affect him? He does not identify himself with the body even whilst the body is yet alive. Can the death of the body then affect him?

Tom: for a moment here Bhagavan Sri Ramana speaks in absolute terms, declaring that for the Self or Jnani, there is no body at all. Below, however, Bhagavan will flip back into speaking in relative terms, presumably due to the nature of the question and the state of the questioner:

Q.: But just now Bhagawan said that the Jnani also says “I am the body.”.

B.: Yes. His “I” includes the body. His experience is that for him there cannot be anything apart from “I”. If the body is destroyed there is no loss for the “I”. “I” remains the same as ever. If the body feels dead let it raise questions. Can it? No; being inert it cannot. “I” never dies and it does not ask any question. Who then dies and who asks questions?

Q.: For whom are all the sacred-books then? They cannot be for the real “I”. They must be for the unreal “I”. The real one would not require them. Am I correct?

B.: Yes, yes.

Q.: Is it not strange that an unreal entity should have so many sacred-books written for him?

B.: Quite so. Death is merely a thought and nothing more. He who thinks raises questions and experiences troubles. Let the thinker tell us what happens to him in death.

Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya Om

‘All that is necessary is to be rid of the thought: “I have not realised”’ – the teaching explained | Sri Ramana Maharshi

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

‘All that is necessary is to be rid of the thought: “I have not realised.”’

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 245

This teaching sounds so simple, but let us see what this teaching actually means. To do this, we have to take a look at the context in which this teaching was given, and not merely cling to a single quote taken out of context. The quote was taken from talk 245 from the book ‘Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi’. Let us look at the talk in its entirely. We will see there are many wonderful and revealing teachings packed into this short talk. As usual my comments will be in italicised red and the text itself will be in black:

Devotee (D):“I understand that the Self is beyond the ego. My knowledge is theoretical and not practical. How shall I gain practical realisation of the Self?”

Sri Ramana Maharshi (M).: Realisation is nothing to be got afresh. It is already there. All that is necessary is to be rid of the thought: “I have not realised.”

Tom’s comments: we can see that the questioner is asking a very relevant question, namely how to covert their intellectual knowledge into genuine realisation. Bhagavan Sri Ramana is essentially pointing out that you are the Self already and that you simply have to remove any ideas of non-realisation. We will see below, based on the text itself, that this actually means removing the entirely of non-self, for any residue of non-self is synonymous with the idea ‘I have not realised’ or ‘the feeling of non-realisation’ (this term is used next below).

D.: Then one need not attempt it.

M.: No. Stillness of mind or peace is realisation. There is no moment when the Self is not.
So long as there is doubt or the feeling of non-realisation, attempt must be made to rid oneself of these thoughts.

Tom: As Sri Ramana has said that you are already the Self, the questioner naturally follows up by asking – if that is the case, then there is no need to seek, no need to search, and by extension, no need to practice, correct? Bhagavan replies by stating ‘No’, this is not the case. As long as there is ‘the feeling of non-realisation’, one must attempt to remove or ‘rid oneself’ of these thought. He goes on to define realisation as ‘stillness of mind’. We will see later that this means cessation of mind, or pure mind, which is Self. But what is this ‘feeling of non-realisation’? What thoughts do we have to remove, and how? Do we have to remove some thoughts or all thoughts? Sri Ramana continues:

The thoughts are due to identification of the Self with the non-self. When the non-self disappears the Self alone remains. To make room anywhere it is enough that things are removed from there. Room is not brought in afresh. Nay, more – room is there even in cramping.

Absence of thoughts does not mean a blank. There must be one to know the blank. Knowledge and ignorance are of the mind. They are born of duality. But the Self is beyond knowledge and ignorance.
It is light itself. There is no necessity to see the Self with another Self. There are no two selves. What is not Self is non-self. The non-self cannot see the Self. The Self has no sight or hearing. It lies beyond these – all alone, as pure consciousness.

Tom: there are a large number of points Sri Bhagavan makes in the above paragraph. Let us briefly go through them -each of the following can be derived from the above 2 paragraphs:
-Thoughts appears due to identification with the non-self (ie. the body, the mind, the world)
-Self alone remains when non-self disappears – Bhagavan gives the metaphor of clearing the rubbish from a room to make space. The idea is that we do not need to find the self or bring the self in from elsewhere, we just need to clear space and the self or room will remain over, self-shining. The junk we need to clear out is the non-self
-The absence of thoughts is not a mere blank, but instead we are to know the One who knows the ‘blank, that is we must know the Self.
-Knowledge and ignorance are both of the mind, whereas the Self is beyond the mind, Self is the Light that lights up knowledge and ignorance.
-Knowledge and ignorance are born of duality, ie. they are false, non-self, born of primal ignorance or ego. They too must disappear, like all non-self, is the implication, for liberation to ensue.
-The non-self (ie. body or mind in this case), cannot see the Self. It is the Self that ‘sees’ the Self by simply being the Self
-The self has no sight and no hearing (because it has no body or mind, both of which are non-self, both of which must disappear for realisation to occur).
-The Self is beyond all phenomena, it is Pure Consciousness. If we read carefully we will see that the word ‘Pure’ means without any objects or thoughts appearing in it. Bhagavan continues:

A woman, with her necklace round her neck, imagines that it has been lost and goes about searching for it, until she is reminded of it by a friend; she has created her own sense of loss, her own anxiety of search and then her own pleasure of recovery. Similarly the Self is all along there, whether you search for it or not. Again just as the woman feels as if the lost necklace has been regained, so also the removal of ignorance and the cessation of false identification reveal the Self which is always present – here and now. This is called realisation. It is not new. It amounts to elimination of ignorance and nothing more.

Tom: Here Bhagavan makes it very clear, using the traditional story of the woman and her necklace, that the Self is ever present. All we need to do is remove ignorance. This is the same as removal of the cessation of the false identification with non-self. Earlier Bhagavan said all we have to do is ‘be rid of the thought ‘I have not realised” and that we have to be rid of the ‘feelings of non-realisation’. It therefore follows that ignorance, identification with non-self, feelings or non-realisation and the thought ‘I have not realised’ are all the same thing. In each case, Bhagavan is simply saying ignorance must be removed. What does this actually mean? Bhagavan will explain further:

Blankness is the evil result of searching the mind. The mind must be cut off, root and branch. See who the thinker is, who the seeker is. Abide as the thinker, the seeker. All thoughts will disappear.

Tom: Bhagavan makes it clear: ‘The mind must be cut off, root and branch’. This is what Bhagavan means by removing the thought ‘I have not realised’. This is what it means to remove ignorance. This is what it means to remove identification with non-self and rid one of ‘feelings of non-realisation’. This is what he means when he says ‘realisation is stillness of mind’. He is speaking of manonasa. It is not just the peripheral thoughts (branches) that must go, but the root thought too, the thought ‘I am the body-mind’ – ‘The mind must be cut off, root and branch‘.

How to do this? Bhagavan says ‘See who the thinker is, who the seeker is’, meaning find out the Subject, the Self, know your Self, ie. Self-enquiry is the way. Bhagavan says then ‘All thoughts will disappear’. Not some thoughts will disappear, but all thoughts will disappear.

D.: Then there will be the ego – the thinker.

M.: That ego is pure Ego purged of thoughts. It is the same as the Self. So long as false identification persists doubts will persist, questions will arise, there will be no end of them. Doubts will cease only when the non-self is put an end to. That will result in realisation of the Self. There will remain no other there to doubt or ask. All these doubts should be solved within oneself. No amount of words will satisfy. Hold the thinker. Only when the thinker is not held do objects appear outside or doubts arise in the mind.

Tom: Does Bhagavan want us to hold onto thoughts or the thinker? Does he want us to hold onto the mind or the Self? Clearly when Bhagavan says ‘only when the thinker is held’, he is not speaking of the mind, but of the Self. Especially as he has already said ‘The mind must be cut off, root and branch’ and ‘all thoughts will disappear’ a few moments earlier. Self knowledge is the way. Self Enquiry is the way.

The questioner asks this very question – are we to hold onto the ego then? The thinker? Bhagavan gives us another wonderful and revealing answer: the ego purified or ‘purged of thoughts’ – that purified ‘ego’ or ‘I’ is Self. The Jiva (purified, purged of thoughts) is Siva.

In the Skanda Upanishad it is stated:

‘Jiva is Siva. Siva is Jiva. That Jiva is Siva alone. Bound by husk [non-self], it is paddy [jiva]. Freed from husk, it is rice [Self]‘

Shankara also wrote in verse 20 of Brahma Jnanavali Mala ‘Brahma satyam, jagat mithya, jivo brahmaiva naparah’ which means ‘Brahman is Truth/Reality, the world is illusion, the Jiva [when enquired into] is nothing but Brahman’

Concluding points

We have seen that Bhagavan has said ‘When the non-self disappears self alone remains‘ and ‘the mind must be cut off, root and branch‘ and ‘it amounts to elimination of ignorance, nothing more‘ and ‘the self has no sight or hearing‘.

We can therefore deduce that ‘the mind’, ‘non-self’ and ‘ignorance’ are essentially synonyms, as in each case Bhagavan has said only these have to be removed. Sure, these words may be used in different ways in different contexts, but essentially they are one, one ignorance, one maya (illusion).

How to do this? How to remove ignorance? How to end Maya? How to still the mind? How to remove non-self and clear ‘space in the room’? And to come back to our original question, How to be rid of the thought ‘I am not realised’? By going back to the Subject, all thoughts and objects disappear and only Self remains. This is known as Self-Enquiry and it results in liberation.

Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya Om



Awareness continues even in Deep Sleep | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Maharhi’s Gospel PDF download

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is from the book Maharshi’s Gospel (Click on the link for a PDF download), Book 2, Chapter 6:

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Do you remember, I told you once previously that existence and awareness are not two different things but one and the same? Well, if for any reason you feel constrained to admit the fact that you existed in sleep be sure you were also aware of that existence.

What you were really unaware of in sleep is your bodily existence. You are confounding this bodily awareness with the true Awareness of the Self which is eternal. Prajnana [Pure Consciousness], which is the source of ‘I-am’-ness, ever subsists unaffected by the three transitory states of the mind, thus enabling you to retain your identity unimpaired.

Prajnana is also beyond the three states because it can subsist without them and in spite of them.

It is that Reality that you should seek during your so-called waking state by tracing the aham-vritti to its Source. Intense practice in this inquiry will reveal that the mind and its three states are unreal and that you are the eternal, infinite consciousness of Pure Being, the Self or the Heart.

Q. I already know I am not the body-mind but I still have difficulty with the teaching and with aspects of daily life

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

This is one of a series of introductory articles – please see the homepage of tomdas.com for more introductory articles.

Q. I ALREADY KNOW I AM NOT THE BODY MIND BUT I STILL HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH THE TEACHING AND WITH ASPECTS OF DAILY LIFE

Also see: Look – there’s no one here! (And other false teachings)

This post was originally posted on Facebook here.

Tom: Many people say ‘I know that I am not the body-mind’, not realising that:

1) if that were truly known, genuinely known, then that is full liberation, and there would be no more questions (or answers) possible, and that is the end of the spiritual journey/search, that is unending bliss and the end of all suffering forever*, transcendence of time and space and the sense of individuality.

2) when someone says ‘I know I am not the body-mind BUT…’ (and then goes on to ask a question/express some kind of doubt or dissatisfaction), this means the entity that (thinks it) knows it is not the body-mind is in fact the mind. ie. it is the mind that is stating ‘I know I am not the body-mind’. This is essentially conceptual knowledge for the mind, even if it is based in some deeper intuitive knowing. This means the basic reference point for knowledge is still the mind, ie. we are still looking to our mind/thoughts for knowledge, and this indicates ongoing identification with the (body-)mind.

3) it is not truly or actually possible for the mind to understand ‘I am not the body-mind’. It is not something the mind can ever understand or know. The mind can repeat the phrase ‘I know I am not the body-mind’ and convince itself it knows something but this is not the true understanding at all.

TRUE UNDERSTANDING

The true understanding is not of the mind at all. It is beyond the mind. The true understanding is not of the mind at all. The true understanding is simply being the Self, also known as Silence.

HOW TO KNOW TRUTH?

How to know or be the Self? And are we not already always the self?

Yes, we are already the self. We are always the self. This self-knowledge we are looking for is always and already here. We already know, in our hearts, not in our minds, all we need for the spiritual journey. Self-knowledge is always and already here with us. There is never a need to discover anything new. Never.

THE PROBLEM

So what is the problem, and why does it appear that ‘I am not liberated’?

The issue is we ignore our self knowledge, and instead we pay attention to our thoughts, our mind, and we believe the contents of our thoughts. All we have to do is come back to our own inner self knowing.

Again, the issue is that we pay attention to our thoughts and we believe the contents of our thoughts.

**READ THIS PART CAREFULLY**

Now here is an important point that many people miss: it is not possible to pay attention to thoughts and not eventually start to believe the contents of the thoughts. I repeat, it is not possible to pay attention to thoughts and not eventually get involved in the contents of the thoughts.

This is an important point which many people miss. Try this for yourself and see.

You may feel you can dispassionately observe or witness your thoughts for a short time, but they will always draw you back in again. For placing attention to thoughts is ALREADY believing their content at the root level. Placing attention to thoughts means the root thought, ‘I am the body-mind’ is ALREADY there.

For it is not possible to dispassionately pay attention to thoughts and not believe already in the concept ‘I am the body mind’.

AS SOON AS YOU PAY ATTENTION TO THOUGHTS, THE ROOT THOUGHT, THE ROOT IGNORANCE ‘I AM THE BODY-MIND’ IS ALREADY THERE.

Yes, the root thought is the thought ‘I am the body mind’. It is this root concept or thought that gives rise to all other thoughts. This root thought, also known as ignorance, also gives rise to all perception of all objects, but more on this another time perhaps.**

As soon as we pay attention to thought, this root thought ‘I am’ or ‘I am the body mind’ is already fully there.

Also see: Look – there’s no one here! (And other false teachings)

**HERE IS ANOTHER POINT PEOPLE OFTEN MISS**

The same goes for gross and subtle objects. As soon as we are aware of objects, even gross objects such as cars and trees or the body, the root thought ‘I am the body mind’ is ALREADY fully there. Ignorance is ALREADY fully there.

If you are not sure about this, you can try it for yourself. You can try to remain aware of objects without the idea that you are a person and see how that goes!

AS SOON AS YOU PAY ATTENTION TO THOUGHTS, OR ANY OBJECT, INCLUDING GROSS OBJECTS SUCH AS A CAR OR A TREE, THE ROOT THOUGHT, THE ROOT IGNORANCE ‘I AM THE BODY-MIND’ IS ALREADY THERE.

If this is not understood, then the solution to this ignorance, which is outlined below, may not be accepted by the mind, and liberation may not ensue.

Also see: Self-Enquiry is not a doing but a BEING

And: For those attached to the world, the world is considered to be a divine manifestation. For the advanced seeker, the world is considered to be an illusion

HOW TO REMOVE THIS IGNORANCE

To remove ignorance we must turn away from all gross and subtle objects, meaning all names and forms and external objects, as well as all internal objects such as thoughts and feelings.

The only way to do this is to attend to the subject, your very own self, your own inner self knowing, that which always is, and that which is always known. The clear way to do this becomes clear through the practice, which I explain more about below.

See Sri Ramana’s teaching in Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 291. Note he says that this is the ‘essential’ advice. Notice also the use of the word ‘alone’:

291. ‘If one wants to be saved, one is given the following true and essential advice: just as the tortoise draws all its five limbs within its shell, so one should draw the five senses within and turn one’s mind Selfward. This alone is happiness.’

Compare with Bhagavad Gita 2.58:

2.58 ‘One who is able to fully withdraw the senses from their objects, just as a tortoise withdraws its limbs into its shell, is established in Divine Knowledge’.

Many people try to distort the meaning of these verses, but the imagery of the tortoise is used to make the meaning clear. There are many more verses like this I could cite, and with these other verses, again the true meaning of these verses is very clear (see here for many more of these verses, and follow the links within that post for even more).

Please note THIS IS NOT A PATH OF SUPPRESSION OR REPRESSION OR AVOIDANCE. THIS IS NOT A PATH OF SPIRITUAL BYPASSING. It is actually a path of love, a flowering of love and self-knowledge. I touch upon this further below, and have written on this topic on tomdas.com (use the search bar). there are also many videos on this on my YouTube channel, explaining how this can be the case.

This is why all genuine spiritual traditions and teachings (ie. teachings that genuinely lead to liberation) tend towards introversion, meditation and silence in some way shape or form.

This is why, historically, many traditions across geography and time all end up in some form of silent contemplation or meditation.

It is also why, if we look inwards to our own hearts, we already intuitively know that the Truth (of ourselves) arises only in Silence, deep within our very own selves, and NOT through words, concepts or the mind.

This self-attention is also known as devotion or bhakti, for the true form of your self is God absolute, it is pure holiness, pure divinity, pure oneness devoid of ignorance and duality.

A PRACTICAL WAY FORWARD

How to practically put these teachings into practice? My suggestion, as this is what worked for me (you will need to find out what works for you!), is to listen to the teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi. Personally I have not found another teacher or teaching that comes close, even though some other teachers and teachings sound very similar, as you go deeper you will start to see the differences more and more.**** At least this is my experience.

If you are lucky, you will feel some love and devotion and connection with Him. If this love, devotion and connection occurs, it is very wonderful and in my opinion this is something you should nurture and treasure. This connection and love and devotion is a very important part of the teaching in my experience. Unfortunately this aspect of the teaching cannot be taught and spontaneously arises when the time is right.

For most of my ‘seeking career’, not only did I NOT feel love and devotion for Ramana, but this is something I was not actively looking for, and something I actively looked down upon in fact. I never wanted a guru, I never wanted to follow another human being, I wanted to figure out for myself, like the Buddha or like J Krishnamurti. I share this as if you do not feel love or devotion in your hearts, please do not be deterred or discouraged, as this is how it was for me for many years.

But as the fates would have it, this was not to be my path, and the teachings I share are coloured by my own personal experience, so this is what I will share with you:

1) Allow the love and connection with Bhagavan Sri Ramana to develop and grow. Think about him, perhaps learn a little about his life, pray to him, praise him, adore him, prostrate yourself to him, bow to him, etc etc, as you please, find your way in this regard to connect with him and love him and, very importantly, surrender to him. This surrender is very important and often missed by some devotees. This is my view at least. At the same time know in your heart that He is You, meaning your true self. You are He, You are That, connect with that inner knowing that is your Self and that is also He.

2) regularly listen to his teachings (sravana, listening/being exposed to the teachings), regularly read his teachings, become familiar with his deeper teachings, not just the teachings he gave to the masses, many of whom were not truly interested in liberation***. See my recommended reading list for my suggestions of what to expose your mind to in terms of truly liberating teachings, and also read the introductory articles on the homepage of this site, which give a broad but thorough introduction to all aspects of the teaching. Everything you need for step two is available free of charge on tomdas.com and my YouTube channel. You will find the answer to almost any question you have somewhere on this website! There is enough content for about 20+ books on tomdas.com, all of it freely available, so use the search bar and explore the introductory articles too. Similarly my YouTube channel has hundreds of videos on it covering all aspects of the journey. Most of these videos were put together by volunteers, so hopefully the videos are particularly relevant to seekers as they have been selected and created by seekers. Do let me know if there are any areas that are not covered.

3) you will find that the more you do (1) and (2) above, the more your mind will be pulled inwards towards the self (nididhyasana, going towards or abiding as the self). When this happens, allow yourself to naturally go back to yourself. If you are unclear what this means, the more you do (1) and (2) above, the clearer it will become to you. Do not force this, allow it to happen naturally through exposure to Bhagavan Ramana’s Presence and His Teachings. (ie. nididhyasana naturally follows from sravana and manana) If you force this, it is just ego perpetuating itself. Everything should be allowed to happen naturally. THIS IS NOT A PATH OF SUPPRESSION OR REPRESSION (NO ‘SPIRITUAL BYPASSING‘ HERE PLEASE), but a natural outcome, a flowering of self-knowledge and love and bliss. 🙏❤️

4) consider attending a group, such as the satsang group I hold twice a week online, which supports both devotion (bhakti) to Sri Ramana and a knowledge and exploration of his deeper teachings (sravana and manana, manana means thinking about and reflecting upon the teachings), as well as allows time for meditation, silence and deep self attention (nididhyasana), ie. a group that supports (1), (2) and (3) above. Contact with a teacher can be very helpful, both for motivation, regular reminders and for clarification of the true way. This can supercharge and cut years off your spiritual path, as a teacher can often point something out in a few seconds that may have taken you years to realise yourself. If you don’t have access to a teacher, please don’t worry, as Devotion/Surrender and Connection will bring to you/attract to you all you need. See here for what Sri Ramana Maharshi said about satsang.

The above can be summarised as Intuitive Connection/Surrender/Bhakti, Satsang, Sravana, Manana and Nididhyasana, to use some of the traditional Sanskrit words. The term Self-Enquiry can be used to mean just Nididhyasana or alternatively it can mean the trio of sravana, manana and nididhyasana, depending on context. So we can summarise the above further as Bhakti, Satsang and Self-Enquiry being the essence of the path. Going further we will actually find that the true Satsang is to be with the Guru in our Heart, namely be with our Self as our Self, and that this is also the highest form of Bhakti, so all of these are actually One.

These are just my suggestions, and of course it is for you to decide if this is for you. My suggestion here is that if you resonate even slightly with this, then you should go with it, at least for a bit, give it a go. Of course if you do not resonate, there is likely a different way for you, at least for now… We all have our own path, at least superficially this is the way it seems. Eventually we have to come back to our self.

I hope this has been of help

Namaste and best wishes

Tom

❤️🙏 Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Arunachala Ramanaya Om 🙏❤️

❤️🙏❤️

*Forever is used figuratively as it is beyond time, not infinite time

**Bhagavan Sri Ramana explains this clearly in the first few paragraphs of his short text, ‘Who am I?’ Which explains all the teachings you need to know for liberation. The book I recommend to understand this is a book called The Path of Sri Ramana (click here to download for free) which fully explains the teachings found in the small booklet, ‘Who am I?’. This book also has a very good translation of ‘Who am I?’ in the appendix of the book, as many other translations of ‘Who am I?’ contain distortions added by the translator that are not present in the original Tamil.

***When somebody asks a question, and that seeker is not truly interested in liberation, the sage, who is like a mirror, merely reflects a superficial teaching back at them. This is spontaneous response, and not a deliberate attempt to give a superficial teaching. The teaching is given spontaneously by the true teacher according to the earnestness and sincerity and degree of desire for liberation in the seeker who is asking the question. Therefore the deeper teaching is usually only given when a seeker who has a deep and genuine desire for liberation asks a question or approaches the teacher.

****Some people think I am being partial towards my own guru (and maybe I am, despite my best efforts to be objective) but this is my personal experience, so this is what I share. If there were other teachers whose writings and teachings were as clear, I would happily say so! See my recommended reading list for the teachers that I think are equally as clear. Note I am not saying that Sri Ramana Maharshi is the only truly liberated sage, but I am merely commenting here on the quality and fidelity of the teachings that have come down to us. There may be other realised teachers, but the verbal/written teachings that have come to us may be less clear. Because we are relatively close in time to Sri Ramana, because we have his written works in his own handwriting, and because of the clarity and simplicity in which he explained the teachings, this is a huge advantage for those who are interested in these written/verbal formulations of his teaching. Of course, if you have another Guru, then by all means stick with your Guru. Ultimately, all is One and there is only truly One Guru anyway.

🙏❤️

For those attached to the world, the world is considered to be a divine manifestation. For the advanced seeker, the world is considered to be an illusion | Advaita Vedanta | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Ajata Vada

~ Tom Das ~ 3 Comments

For those seekers who are attached to the world, the world is considered to be a divine manifestation. For the more advanced seeker, the world is considered to be an illusion. Many teachers teach this the wrong way around – this, of course, is itself due to their attachment to the world, ie. this wrong teaching is due to ignorance.

This is why Sri Ramana says, right at the start in the beginning few verses of The Garland of Gurus Sayings (Guru Vachaka Kovai), in verse 21:

21. For those who take the world appearance as real and enjoy it, it is the Lord’s creation. But for those who, free from fear, have known the Truth, the undeluded Self, it is no more than a mere mental image projected by desire.

For those who are fearful of the world, Sri Ramana gives the following even more radical advice in the same text, verse 28:

28. Ye who in fear shrink from the world, know that the place has no existence. Fear of this phenomenal world is like being frightened by a rope mistaken by you for a snake.

In verse 35 he uses the same analogy as Gaudapada (in his commentary on Mandukya Upanishad, Mandukya Karika), of a glowing flame whirled in a circle:

35. The empirical world of jostling names and forms is false and has no real existence in bright, full Awareness. Like a ring of fire formed in the dark when one whirls fast a glowing joss-stick, ’tis an illusion, mind-created.

The idea here is that in the dark (ie. in ignorance), a whirling flame appears as a world (that is a body, a mind and a world), but in the light (ie. in self-knowledge or self-realisation, also known as liberation), it is not seen at all.

Sri Ramana explains this in page 193 of Day by Day with Bhagavan when he states:

‘In reality, saying ‘We must see Brahman in everything and everywhere’ is also not quite correct. Only that state is final, where there is no seeing, where there is no time or space. There will be no seer, seeing and an object to see. What exists then is only the infinite eye.’

Similarly, Sri Ramana says in Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 87:

‘…just as the snake is, on scrutiny, found to be ever non-existent, so is the world found to be ever non-existent, even as an appearance‘

And in Guru Ramana Vachana Mala, verse 21, Sri Ramana gives us the Ajata teaching, that no-thing ever really came into existence at all:

‘There is no mind, nor body, nor world, nor anyone called a soul; the One pure Reality alone exists, without a second, unborn and unchanging, abiding in utter Peace’

For more on this teaching see here and here

Namaste

Everyone must eventually come to the path of Self-Enquiry | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Sri Sadhu Om

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

When I first came to Bhagavan and heard him repeating constantly that everyone must eventually come to the path of self-enquiry, I wondered whether he was being partial to his own teaching, but I soon understood why he insisted that this is so. The final goal is only oneness, and to experience oneness our mind must subside, which will happen entirely only when we attend to nothing other than ourself.

So long as we attend to anything other than ourself, our mind cannot subside, because attention to other things sustains it, since that which experiences otherness is only this mind. When the mind subsides completely, only self-attention remains, and self-attention alone is the state of absolute oneness. Bhagavan used to repeat this teaching every day, maybe ten or twenty times, but still we didn’t change. He didn’t change his teaching either, because to him this truth was so clear.

The above is an excerpt from ‘The Paramount Importance of Self Attention’ by Sri Sadhu Om, entry dated 29th December 1977. The book is highly recommended. You can download the entire text here. Also see the full recommended reading list here.