My writings

Look – there’s no one here! (And other false teachings) The essentials of Self-Enquiry | Genuine non-dual realisation | Non-duality

~ Tom Das ~ 4 Comments

This post was originally posted on Facebook here.

‘Looking at your own direct immediate experience and not being able to find a separate self – this exercise or practice or so-called ‘investigation’ has nothing to do with genuine self-inquiry.‘

Looking at your own direct immediate experience and not being able to find a separate self – this exercise or practice or so-called ‘investigation’ has nothing to do with genuine self-inquiry.

Many times I have seen how this teaching leads to confusion and dullness of mind, and actually ensnares you in a belief system called ‘non-duality’ or ‘there is no self’ or ‘there is no person, there is no one here’. These stock phrases are said by a body-mind entity and can create a belief system in the mind that leads you away from the genuine non-dual realisation.

AN EXPLANATION

It is just like saying ‘can you in your direct and immediate experience find air?’, and when you (in this example) cannot find air or see it or touch it or feel it, then you can triumphantly exclaim ‘there is no air!’.

If this was believed, then this would mean you have now entered into a conceptual belief system, and one that is not in line with reality, and therefore needs constant reinforcement and leads to confusion about how to live and act in the world.

Or it is like saying can you find loyalty in your direct experience? No? That means there is no such thing as loyalty! Or can you find a proton or electron in your own direct experience? No? This means you have now discovered there are no protons or electrons! Of course, this kind of exploration and investigation is superficial, non-scientific, irrational and ultimately absurd.

Like loyalty, a separate self cannot always be found in one’s own direct experience, but it emerges in relationship, in daily life and through actions. Merely saying ‘I cannot find my/a separate self’ and repeatedly coming back to this practice/inquiry, will not lead to genuine liberation at all. Whilst it does involve observation and seeing, it is a mental practice as its conclusion is in the mind; ironically it is egoic, as it is for the mind.

SEPARATE SELF KEEPS ON COMING BACK! (WITH THE FLAWED TEACHINGS)

Because the sense of separate self emerges during relationship and actions, it keeps on popping up again, leading the seeker to frustration – why at one point could they (allegedly*) see there was no self, but at another point self keeps on coming back to them again, causing them suffering?

(*If no ego-self was truly ‘seen’, it never comes back again. If ego comes back again, that means it never really went away, and that it was the ego claiming there was no ego all along)

OTHER SIMILARLY FLAWED TEACHINGS

This flawed teaching is similar to other forms of so-called ‘enquiry’ that conclude ‘all is consciousness’ after simply noticing that all they can be conscious of is consciousness, or all objects (that you are conscious of) appear within consciousness. This cannot be a proof that all there is is consciousness – it is merely proof that all you are aware of is within your own awareness, or all that you are conscious of is within your own consciousness, which is self-evident but which tells us nothing about reality per se. Again, this is superficial, irrational and flawed logic.

All is consciousness, but this is only known through a genuine self-enquiry.

More than this, this kind of so-called ‘enquiry’ will also take you away from a genuinely liberating teaching that leads one to genuine discovery of the actual non-dual truth (that is far deeper and also far simpler, more natural and more intuitive than these kinds of superficial, and ultimately conceptual/intellectual, teachings).

SRI RAMANA MAHARSHI SETS US ON THE CLEAR PATH

This is why genuine teachers such as Sri Ramana never gave these kinds of teachings at all. Instead, he always advised we turn our attention inwards, away from phenomenal and objective appearances, towards the sense of self or ‘I am’, the subject, and thereby discover the non-dual truth that we actually, already always are.

See in the text he wrote called ‘The essence of instruction‘ (Upadesa Saram), in verse 16 he writes:

’16. It is true wisdom for the mind to turn away from outer objects and behold its own effulgent form.’

See how he makes the teaching simple and clear!

WHAT ABOUT VERSE 17?

Now in verse 17, the next verse, there is a teaching which is often misunderstood. People do not usually realise that he explains what the actual meaning of verse 17 is in verse 18 and 19. He writes in verse 17:

’17. When unceasingly the mind scans its own form there is nothing of the kind. For everyone this path direct is open’

Whilst this verse seems to be an endorsement of the very teaching I’m saying here is not a genuine teaching, we can see in the next two verses he explains what verse 17 really means. In the next two verses, in verses 18 and 19, Ramana Maharshi explains the meaning of verse 17, namely that one must find the source of the ego and not simply say ‘I cannot find any separate self here’.

What is the source of the ego? It is the self, the subject, as he is already explained in verse 16 and in other verses in the same text.

(For brevity I will not quote all the verses here in this post, as you can easily look at them up yourselves here. The entire text of Upadesa Saram is only 30 verses long.)

THE TRUE TEACHING

The teaching is always to turn within, to turn away from objects, and sink and merge the mind into the Self, the pure subject, thereby attain liberation/self-knowledge. The point of a question such as the question ‘who am I?’, is only to drive one’s attention inwards towards the subject, as he is explained in his writings and verbal teachings.

Sri Ramana Maharshi assures us that this is the essential teaching when he says in The Garland of Guru’s Sayings (Guru Vachaka Kovai) verse 291:

  1. For those who seek eternal life the assurance stands: the senses five retracted tortoise-like, the mind turned homeward to the self and there abiding is pure bliss.

He also chides those who teach these intellectual teachings, who have never turned within and discovered their true nature:

  1. The innocent girl-bride thinking that betrothal is full conjugal union is filled with joy. Even so the learned who have yet to turn within and taste true bliss claim that the verbal wisdom which they prattle is Advaita Jnana (non-dual knowledge)

For an easy to read but comprehensive overview of the true teaching I recommend this book which you can download for free here, or alternatively check out my recommended reading list and/or introductory articles on the homepage of the same website:

The entire path explained: the Path of Sri Ramana (Parts 1 and 2; PDF downloads)

Here are some more quotes from Sri Ramana Maharshi, also taken from Guru Vachaka Kovai (click here to download the entire text for free):

391. Those who do not dive into the Heart
And there confront the Self in the five sheaths hid
Are only students answering out of books
Clever questions raised by books,
And not true seekers of the Self.

835. Renouncing this phenomenal world
Which seems to, but does not, exist
We gain (the great ones say) the Self,
The Awareness shining all unseen.

See here for more verses like the ones above together with a guided meditation.

May we listen to Bhagavan’s teachings and thereby become one with him, discovering our own self, our own glorious true nature, which is found within, shining in the heart as I Am, I Am.

🙏🙏🙏

♥️ Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Arunachala Ramanaya Om ♥️

🙏🙏🙏

Gaudapada’s commentary on Mandukya Upanishad with further comments by Tom Das – Chapter 1

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Tom: Here are most of the verses from Chapter 1 of Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad, as translated by Swami Nikhilananda. I have made comments on some of these verses in italicised red. See here for the full text of Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad.

See here for my translation of Shankara’s Introduction to this great work.

Translation by Swami Nikhilananda

The Mandukya Upanishad is 12 verses on AUM Mantra. It is often cited as the most important of the Upanishads. Gaudapada’s Karika is a commentary relating to those 12 verses and is one of the most important and authoritative texts in the Advaita Vedanta tradition.

Chapter I [of Gaudapada’s Karika] – Agama Prakarana (The Chapter based on Vedic Testimony)

Mandukya Upanishad – Verses I-VI:

I: Harih Aum! AUM, the word, is all this, the whole universe. A clear explanation of it is as follows: All that is past, present and future is, indeed, AUM. And whatever else there is, beyond the threefold division of time—that also is truly AUM.

Tom: all there is is AUM

II: All this is, indeed, Brahman. This Atman is Brahman. This same Atman has four quarters.

Tom: AUM is Brahman, they are one and the same. Brahman is Atman. It has 4 parts – we will see later that 3 of these 4 parts do not actually exist at all

III: The first quarter is called Vaisvanara (Tom: the waker), whose sphere of activity is the waking state, who is conscious of external objects, who has seven limbs and nineteen mouths and who is the experiencer of gross objects.

IV: The second quarter is Taijasa (Tom: the dreamer), whose sphere of activity is the dream state, who is conscious of internal objects, who is endowed with seven limbs and nineteen mouths and who is the experiencer of subtle objects.

V: That is the state of deep sleep wherein one asleep neither desires any object nor sees any dream. The third quarter is Prajna (Tom: the sleeper), whose sphere is deep sleep, in whom all experiences become unified, who is, verily, a mass of consciousness, who is full of bliss and experiences bliss and who is the door leading to the knowledge of dreaming and waking.

VI: He is the Lord of all. He is the knower of all. He is the inner controller. He is the source of all; for from him all beings originate and in him they finally disappear.

Tom: note that Prajna, or the sleeper or deep sleep, here is characterised as being the source of all maya, the seed of ignorance from which arises all manifestation/duality – ‘He is the source of all; for from him all beings originate and in him they finally disappear.’

Gaudapada’s Karika

1 Visva is all—pervading, the experiencer of external objects. Taijasa is the cognizer of internal objects. Prajna is a mass of consciousness. It is one alone that is thus known in the three states.

Tom: Vivsa is the waker – that which experiences the waking state, taijasa is the dreamer – that which experiences the dream state, and prajna is the sleeper – that which experiences the deep sleep state

2 Visva is the cognizer through the right eye; Taijasa is the cognizer through the mind within; Prajna is the akasa in the heart. Therefore the one Atman is perceived threefold in the same body.

3—4 Visva experiences the gross; Taijasa, the subtle; and Prajna, the blissful. Know these to be the threefold experience. The gross object satisfies Visva; the subtle, Taijasa; and the blissful, Prajna. Know these to be the threefold satisfaction.

5 The experiencer and the objects of experience associated with the three states have been described. He who knows these both does not become attached to objects though enjoying them.

6 Surely a coming into existence must be predicated of all positive entities that exist. Prana manifests all inanimate objects. The Purusha manifests the conscious beings in their manifold forms.

7 Some of those who contemplate the process of creation regard it as the manifestation of God’s powers; others imagine creation to be like dreams and illusions.

8 Those who are convinced about the reality of manifested objects ascribe the manifestation solely to God’s will, while those who speculate about time regard time as the creator of things.

9 Some say that the manifestation is or the purpose of God’s enjoyment, while others attribute it to His division. But it is the very nature of the effulgent Being. What desire is possible for Him who is the fulfillment of all desires?

Mandukya Upanishad Verse VII:

VII: Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three states, It is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized.

Tom: Turiya is here being equated with the Self, Atman, and it is this Turiya that is to be realised: ‘This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized’. This Atman is not conscious of the waking, dream or deep sleep state, nor is it mere ordinary consciousness – it is indescribable and it contains no phenomena within it, so states the Upanishad: ‘Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both…It is not simple consciousness…It is the cessation of all phenomena‘

 Gaudapada’s Karika continued

10 Turiya, the changeless Ruler, is capable of destroying all miseries. All other entities being unreal, the non—dual Turiya alone is known as effulgent and all—pervading.

Tom: Turiya ends all suffering, everything other than turiya is unreal

11 Visva and Taijasa are conditioned by cause and effect. Prajna is conditioned by cause alone. Neither cause nor effect exists in Turiya.

Tom: there is no cause or effect in Turiya

12 Prajna does not know anything of self or non—self, of truth or untruth. But Turiya is ever existent and all—seeing.

13 Non—cognition of duality is common to both Prajna and Turiya. But Prajna is associated with sleep in the form of cause and this sleep does not exist in Turiya.

Tom: In both deep sleep and Turiya there is no cognition of duality or cognition of objects – we can see that Gaudapada equates perception of objects with perception of duality. However in deep sleep the Self is not known as there is a cause or seed of ignorance present (the Sanskrit word ‘bija’ used in this verse means both cause or seed). In Turiya this sleep-seed of ignorance is not present.

14 The first two, Visva and Taijasa, are associated with dreaming and sleep respectively; Prajna, with Sleep bereft of dreams. Knowers of Brahman see neither sleep nor dreams in Turiya.

Tom: in Turiya (or for the knower of Brahman or the one who is Self-realised), there is no perception or arising of waking, dream or deep sleep

15 Dreaming is the wrong cognition and sleep the non—cognition, of Reality. When the erroneous knowledge in these two is destroyed, Turiya is realized.

16 When the jiva, asleep under the influence of beginningless maya, is awakened, it then realizes birthless, sleepless and dreamless Non—duality.

Tom: the reality (ie. Self or Turiya) is without birth (objects arising), without sleep, and without dream. ie. the waking, dream and deep sleep states are not present, nor do they arise in reality. So, do they disappear in self-realisation? Let us see…

17 If the phenomenal universe were real, then certainly it would disappear. The universe of duality which is cognized is mere illusion (maya); Non—duality alone is the Supreme Reality.

Tom: this verse is often quoted by itself without the preceding verses, and so misinterpreted. We can see in context that it is saying the following: if the phenomenal universe ever appeared, then it would certainly disappear. However, since the universe is maya, it (paradoxically to the mind) never actually appeared at all. There was only the non-dual Turiya or Self, nothing else. See here for more on this teaching.

18 If anyone imagines illusory ideas such as the teacher, the taught and the scriptures, then they will disappear. These ideas are for the purpose of instruction. Duality ceases to exist when Reality is known.

Tom: The same point is being made again – ie. in truth duality or maya or appearances never actually ever came about. Note that Gaudapada here, like elsewhere, equates appearances with duality.

Mandukya Upanishad – Verses VIII-XI:

VIII: The same Atman explained before as being endowed with four quarters is now described from the standpoint of the syllable AUM. AUM, too, divided into parts, is viewed from the standpoint of letters. The quarters of Atman are the same as the letters of AUM and the letters are the same as the quarters. The letters are A, U and M.

IX: Vaisvanara Atman, whose sphere of activity is the waking state, is A, the first letter of AUM, on account of his all— pervasiveness or on account of his being the first. He who knows this obtains all desires and becomes first among the great.

X: Taijasa Atman, whose sphere of activity is the dream state, is U, the second letter of AUM, on account of his superiority or intermediateness. He who knows this attains a superior knowledge, receives equal treatment from all and finds in his family no one ignorant of Brahman.

XI: Prajna Atman, whose sphere is deep sleep, is M, the third letter of AUM, because both are the measure and also because in them all become one. He who knows this is able to measure all and also comprehends all within himself.

Gaudapada’s Karika continued

19 When it is desired to describe the identity of Visva and the letter A, the chief ground given is the fact that each is the first in its respective sphere. Another reason for this identity is the all—pervasiveness of each.

20 The clear ground for realizing Taijasa as of the same nature as the letter U is the common feature of superiority. Another plain reason for such identity is their being in the middle.

21 The indisputable reason given for the identity of Prajna and M is the common feature that both are the measure. The other reason for such identity is another common feature, namely, that both represent the state of mergence.

22 He who knows for certain the similarity of the three states and the three letters of AUM, based upon their common features, is worshipped and adored by all beings and also is a great sage.

23 Through meditation on A the seeker attains Visva; through meditation on U, Taijasa; and through meditation on M, Prajna. Meditation on the “soundless” brings no attainment.

Mandukya Upanishad – Verse XII:

XII: The Fourth (Turiya) is without parts and without relationship; It is the cessation of phenomena; It is all good and non—dual. This AUM is verily Atman. He who knows this merges his self in Atman—yea, he who knows this.

Tom: like in verse 7, Turiya is again equated with Atman and AUM – it is without any parts, meaning there are no objects that can arise in it, again emphasised by stating it is without relationship – meaning there is no relative ‘truth’ present and it has no relation to objects or phenomena. This is further emphasised when it states ‘It is the cessation of phenomena’, as per verse 7 which states the same. It is all good, meaning it is pure positivity without any negativity whatsoever, without any opposite. It is non-dual, meaning without any time, space, people or objects. It is what you are. Aum Tat Sat. This will be further explained and elaborated upon in the following verses. See here for more on this teaching.

See here for the full text of Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad.

The meaning of ‘Real’ and ‘Unreal’ in Advaita Vedanta | The Mirage analogy vs the Rope and Snake | The world and self-realisation

~ Tom Das ~ 3 Comments

Also see this post on Ajata Vada and this post on Turiya

‘Unreal’, both in Vedanta and in common parlance, means that which doesn’t actually exist; ‘real’ means that which exists.

This means that if something exists it is real, and vice versa. This is highlighted by the fact that in Sanskrit, the most common word for both ‘real’ and ‘exists’ is the same word ‘satya’ or ‘sat’. ie. the Sanskrit word ‘sat’ means both ‘real’ and ‘exists’. I have seen some commentators say that something can be unreal but still exist, and vice versa. In doing so they have uncoupled the meaning of these synonymous words, ‘real’ and ‘exists’, which is particularly ironic as in Sanskrit they are one and the same word, ‘sat’.

Vedanta texts say that which changes is unreal, or the things that are subject to change are unreal, meaning that which changes does not truly exist (ie. They do not exist in self-realisation, or they are non-existent when the self is realised).

Vedanta texts do not define ‘real’ as being ‘that which doesn’t change’, nor does the word ‘unreal’ simply refer to things that exist but change/are subject to change. Never do we see this false definition in the Vedanta scriptures.

I hope you can see the difference. If you cannot see the difference, then please reflect on the above as it is in important part of the teaching, and this is an important way the teaching is distorted by the ego-mind.

Note that if the teaching is distorted in this way it is likely not to lead to liberation.

So how does this all fit together?

The idea is that if you discover Sat (reality) in its true essence, meaning as it really or truly is, devoid of illusion or ignorance, all that is anitya (impermanent) will disappear, and so be revealed to be asat (unreal or non-existent), its only having appeared to exist due to ignorance/error.

This has been explained by Sri Ramana Maharshi many times, for example, see the following verses of Sri Ramana Paravidyopanishad:

88. That which survives in the experience of the real Self is the supreme state. [That] alone is real. All else is only unreal. This is the distinction between the real and the unreal, revealed to us by the teachings of all the sages.

91 As the dream world is known to be unreal for the reason that it vanishes upon waking, so this waking world is also proved to be unreal by its vanishing in the light of the real Self.

92 But ignorant men, who are averse to winning the supreme state, put forth an endless series of arguments, [trying to refute this teaching]. The sages clear the doubts generated by these arguments so that earnest aspirants may not be deluded by them.

We are then cautioned about teaching this teaching to those who are attached to the notion that they are the body mind (living in a world), or those who cling to the notion of the self being the owner of the body mind:

93 This teaching of the unreality of the world is not addressed to those who look upon the body itself as the Self, or consider the Self to be the owner of the body. For these people the world is real, not unreal.

However, for those who genuinely seek liberation, this teaching is given:

95 To those who seek deliverance, the teaching is that all these three are equally unreal. This teaching must [therefore] be accepted, exactly as it is taught, by those who are earnestly seeking to win deliverance by the extinction of ignorance.

How can something that we perceive be unreal? Sri Ramana explains:

98 Everyone who is ignorant [of the real Self] thinks the world is real because it is seen. This is no proof because it proves too much. The same reason would prove the reality of the mirage, the rope in the snake, etc.

And so the text continues in this vein, drumming home the teaching. See the introductory articles on tomdas.com to explore this further, especially this article. I have made a YouTube video on this that explains this more here.

AN OBJECTION TO THIS TEACHING – THE MIRAGE vs ROPE & SNAKE

Q. Tom, a mirage exists yet it is unreal. In the same sense a separate ego-mind-body-world exists yet is unreal in the sense that its existence is dependent. Knowing that on which it depends as oneself is bliss…..
Just some early morning musings…

Tom: this is not the vedanta teaching given in the Upanishads. This is a modern re-writing of the vedantic teaching.

Vedanta usually uses the rope and snake metaphor, eg, Sri Ramana Maharshi writes in Who Am I?:

Q. When will the realization of the Self be gained?
A. When the world which is what-is-seen has been removed, there will be realization of the Self which is the seer.

Q. Will there not be realization of the Self even while the world is there?
A. There will not be.

Q. Why?
If the mind, which is the cause (and base) of all knowledge (all objective knowledge) and all action, subsides, the perception of the world (jagat-drishti) will cease. Just as the knowledge of the rope, which is the base, will not be obtained unless the knowledge of the snake, the superimposition, goes, so the realization of Self (swarupa-darsanam), which is the base, will not be obtained unless the perception of the world (jagat-drishti) which is a superimposition, ceases.

And later from the same text:

When the mind comes out (rises) from Self, the world appears. Therefore, when the world appears, Self will not appear; and when Self appears (shines), the world will not appear.

And later:

The mind will subside only by means of the enquiry Who am I?’. The thought ‘Who am I?’ (which is but a means for turning our attention Selfwards), destroying all other thoughts, will itself finally be destroyed like the stick used for stirring the funeral pyre.

And later:

By repeatedly practising thus, the power of the mind to abide in its source increases. When the mind (the attention), which is subtle, goes out through the brain and sense-organs (which are gross), the names-and-forms (the objects of the world), which are gross, appear; when it abides in the heart (its source, Self), the names-and-forms disappear. Keeping the mind in the heart (through the above-described means of fixing our attention in Self), not allowing it to go out, alone is called ‘Selfwardness’ (ahamukham) or ‘introversion’ (antarmukham). Allowing it to go out from the heart alone is called ‘extroversion’ (bahirmukham). When the mind thus abides in the heart, the ‘I’ (the thought ‘I’, the ego), which is the root of all thoughts, having vanished, the ever-existing Self alone will shine.

And later:

The place (or state) where even the slightest trace of the thought ‘I’ does not exist, alone is Self (swarupam). That alone is called ‘Silence’ (maunam). To be still (summa iruppadu) in this manner alone is called ‘seeing through (the eye of) knowledge’ (jnana-drishti). To be still is to make the mind subside in Self (through Self-attention). Other than this, knowing the thoughts of others, knowing the three times (past, present and future), knowing events in distant places – all these can never be jnana-drishti (knowledge realisation).

And later:

What really exists is Self (atma-swarupam) alone. The world, soul and God are superimpositions in it like the silver in the mother-of-pearl; these three appear simultaneously and disappear simultaneously.

🙏🙏🙏

Does the liberated Jnani or Sage see the body, the mind, the world or the 3 states of deep sleep, waking and dream according to Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri Adi Shankara? | Advaita Vedanta Essential teachings| Picture quotes

~ Tom Das ~ 8 Comments

You are welcome to download and share any of the following picture quotes – many more can be found on my Facebook page here in the photo albums.

Sri Ramana often said that the Jnani (self-realised or liberate Sage) is totally unaware of the body, the mind and the world, and that the liberated sage also has no awareness of the 3 states of dream, deep sleep or waking, all of which are a projection of ignorance (aka the mind). We will see below that Sri Shankara says the same.

Also see: Does the Sage (Jnani) see the world? Does the world appearance exist after liberation?

In the text Guru Vachaka Kovai (Garland of Guru’s Sayings) – a highly authoritative collection of Sri Ramana’s teachings recorded by Sri Muruganar, there are several verses that were written by Sri Ramana Maharshi himself, often highlighting key or especially important teachings. These verses were called ‘Sri Bhagavan’ – here is the 24th such verse from that text, which Sri Ramana himself wrote:

The Self-Realised Sage knows not whether the transient body comes and stays, or dies and leaves, even as a senseless drunkard knows not what happens to his clothes.

Guru Vachaka Kovai, Sri Bhagavan 24

We can see that Sri Ramana is saying that in truth the Jnani is not aware of the body at all.

This next quote is from Maharshi’s Gospel:

To him who is one with that Reality, there is neither the mind nor its three states, and therefore, neither introversion nor extroversion.

Maharshi’s Gospel (Chapter 6)

We can see here Sri Ramana is implying that it is the mind that gives rise to the 3 states (waking, dreaming, deep sleep) and for the Jnani there is no mind, nor the 3 states, therefore the Jnani’s (non-existent) mind cannot be said to be introverted nor extroverted (both of which are in relation to the body and the world of objects, of which the Jnani is unaware).

Taking about a different triad, the triad of jiva, jagat and iswara (individual person, the world, and the power that animates these – the prior verse specifies that this is the triad he is speaking of), Sri Ramana states that none of these remain in Self Realisation in the text Guru Ramana Vachana Mala:

Though these* (three) are unreal, they are not different from the Supreme Reality (Brahman); but the Supreme Reality is different (from these), because It exists without these* in the State of Self -Realisation

*the triad of jiva, jagat and Isvara; ie. the individual person, the world, and the personal God; these 3 do not exist in Self-Realisation

Guru Ramana Vachana Mala, verse 290

But doesn’t Sri Ramana teach us that for the Jnani they see the names and forms and body and mind AS THE SELF and not apart from the SELF? Yes, he does teach this, but this is a lower teaching, as he has also explained. See Sri Ramana’s own writing in Ulladu Narpadu verse 18:

18. To those who do not know and to those who do, the world is real. But to those who do not know, Reality is bounded by the world; while to those who know, Reality shines formless as the ground of the world. Such is the difference between them.

Careful readers will realised that Bhagavan Sri Ramana is saying that for the Jnani, only the substratum is real, and that the ‘world’ of the Jnani is the Pure consciousness only devoid of name and form, as he has already explained above.

Lakshmana Sarma (LS) was a close devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s for over 20 years, and he was one of only 2 people to have private tuition with Sri Ramana Maharshi on the true meaning of Sri Ramana’s teachings. LS was unhappy about how Sri Ramana’s teachings had been misrepresented even by other devotees, so after consulting with Sri Ramana Maharshi he wrote several texts aimed at correcting these distorting teachings. In this post I have included some of what he said about this aspect of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s teachings, and also given LS’s comments and explanation on verse 18 above, which Sri Ramana Maharshi allegedly said was the correct interpretation.

Here are some more teachings of Sri Ramana’s in a similar vein. When read separately they are clear. When read together they surely give a definitive teaching (please also scroll past the pictures for teachings from Shankara on this same topic further below):

So Bhagavan Sri Ramana has give these types of teachings to us many times – see the introductory articles on the homepage of this website which explore many of these teachings even further – but so has Sri Shankara given us these same teachings in various places. Here are some quotes from Upadesa Sahasri (‘A Thousand Teachings’), the only non-commentarial work attributed to Adi Shankara that is universally agreed as being a genuine work of his:

All this world is unreal and proceeds from ignorance, because it is seen only by one afflicted by ignorance

Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 17.20

Having thus effaced the triad consisting of dreamless sleep, dream and waking experience, one crosses over the great sea of ignorance. For he is then established in his own Self, void of all attributes of the empirical world, pure, enlightened, and by his very nature liberated.

Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 17.58

Because I am without an eye*, I have no sight. As I have no ear either*, how could I have hearing? As I have no voice I can have no speech. As I have no mind, how could I have thought?

There cannot be action on the part of that which does not have life force (prana). There cannot be knowership on the part of that which has no mind. Neither can there be knowledge or ignorance on the part of me who am the Light of Pure Consciousness

*Shankara is quoting from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.8.8

Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 13.1, 13.2

Just as a dream is [apparently] real and valid until one awakens from it, so are the experiences of the waking state, such as identity with the body and the authoritativeness of perception and the other means of knowledge, real and valid until knowledge of the Self

Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 11.5

Of me who am ever-liberated, pure, rock-firm and changeless, not subject to modification, immortal, indestructible and so without a body, there is no hunger or thirst or grief or delusion or old age or death. For I am bodiless…

Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 13.3-13.4

There are many other places Shankara has given this same teaching, such as in his introduction to his commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad which you can view here and if you explore this website you will find many such similar teachings.

Below I have put together some picture quotes of Shankara’s teachings which I previously shared on Facebook (there are dozens more on Facebook!)- you are also welcome to share any picture quotes I have created:

And here are some verses of Sri Shankara’s that Sri Ramana Maharshi himself has translated (into Tamil – these are the English translations of his translations):

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

🙏🙏🙏

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

The Role of Guru Bhakti (Devotion to Guru-Self)

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

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

The following was originally posted here on Facebook

For me, Guru Bhakti was such an important feature of my path. Worshipping the name and form of Bhagavan Sri Ramana took me, eventually, to the formless objectless Guru in my Heart, whereupon, through the revelation of self-inquiry, He consumed me, totally and utterly, making me One with Him:

(Non-Dual) Love, Being, Consciousness and Bliss, beyond (dualistic) love, being, consciousness and bliss.

It was only later, retrospectively, that I analysed and realised what had happened and what had been happening. The intellectual understanding and appreciation of His Teachings came later.

Prior to this I never cared much for Bhagavan Sri Ramana’s written/spoken teachings – in my mind I had actually dismissed them. I just, for some reason, had a love for Him. I actually preferred Buddhist-style teachings or intellectualised versions of Advaita Vedanta, or even the teachings of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, as they made more sense to my rational scientific mind. Before I thought I had seen many flaws and holes in His Teachings.

Now, in retrospect, I can see how perfect His verbal and written teachings in fact are! Now I love to share his teachings. Sharing his teachings for me is a spontaneous expression of devotion, not an act of teaching at all!

At the time I was simply loving my Beloved, at the time I simply felt compelled to surrender myself to my Beloved, throw myself down at his feet. Everything else, such as Self Enquiry and Silence, spontaneously flowed from this Love and Bhakti without my being conscious at the time of what was happening or why.

This is why I often say that if you have some kind of connection to Sri Ramana, nurture that, and surrender to that, and know you are already saved. Metaphorically speaking, once you have come to Sri Ramana, your head is now in the tiger’s mouth!

Thus, in my experience, is the power of Genuine Heartfelt Guru Bhakti in which you surrender yourself to Him.

🙏❤️ Om Nama Bhagavate Sri Arunachala Ramanaya Om ❤️🙏

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

Q. Do Neo-advaita teachings point to the same realisation as traditional Advaita Vedanta and Ramana Maharshi?

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

Q. Tom, do you believe that the neo advaita teachings do point to the same realisation as Sri Ramana’s teachings? Because from what I have read of the neo advaita teachings, they do not even point to the Absolute Self in a clear way and are not even talking about the same realisation. They don’t speak of the Absolute Self but “the absolute appearing as the relative” in their words, so I think that following those teachings do not lead to the same realisation.

Tom: I agree, the neo-advaita teachings do not lead to the same genuine realisation in my view. They do not lead to genuine absolute love, non-duality and cessation of suffering. Please see the introductory articles on the tomdas.com homepage and my recommended reading list for more on this.