aham sphurana

Why is man born, only to die? Why does God create, only to destroy? | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Q.: Why is man born, only to die? Why does God create, only to destroy? Is it not absurd? If one is going to die one day, why is he born? If everything is going to be destroyed one day, why create anything?

B.: All creation is mental hallucination or delusion. In Reality there is no creator and no creation.

Q.: I desire to know the reason for the existence of the world I see around me.

B.: The apparent perceiver is the reason for the apparent perceptions.

Q.: I do not understand.

B.: Perceiver perceived and perception are all completely fictitious.

Q.: For Bhagavan it might be so. I see a solid world around me. I desire an explanation for it.

B.: What of your own apparent existence in the form of this perishable body?

Do you desire no explanation for that?

Q.: Yes, that too.

B.: Any number of theoritical explanations may be given to satisfy the craving of the intellect for the time being; but there will be no permanency in your satisfaction. Soon new doubts will arise and your old intellectual standpoint or belief will collapse. Then you will set about searching for a new explanation.

This goes on happening until the mind becomes disgusted with temporal life as a whole; then, it plunges into the Heart and loses itself there – that is the final dawn of wisdom.

Q.: So, the world is something that appears to exist only because I am engaged or involved in perceiving?

B.: Quite so.

Q.: So, now, if I close my eyes for two minutes, during those two minutes do Bhagavan, the sofa he is sitting on, this Hall and Tiruvannamalai, all totally disappear or vanish into thin air? [closes his eyes seriously for sometime] There, now, was Bhagavan not there in this Hall, were the other people in this Hall not present, even whilst my eyes remained closed? If I ask anyone, ‘Excuse me, did you exist whilst my eyes were closed, or not?’ will they not think I have gone mad?

What is the explanation?

B.: You are confusing implicit existence with implied existence. No doubt corroboration is available from the ‘others’ seated in this Hall including Bhagavan, but naturally in a dream everything is in spontaneous synchronisation. It is [your] one mind that has become all this. So, naturally confirmation is available. What is the surprise in it? You think you are taking corroboration from others, and therefore asking this question. The one whom you are asking is [also] your own mind only. Of course he would corroborate.

The idea that things exist, and then you perceive them, is implied exixstence.

It derives its strength from the principle of intellection, which in turn from the buddhi [faculty of reasoning], which in turn from the mind. Implicit existence is swayam-pratyaksham. It shines by its own light, not by any borrowed light.

Therefore it is the one thing Real.

Q.: Will sriramanamasmaranam [Tom: repetition of the Holy Lord’s name ‘Sri Rama’] help me Realise?

B.: If and only if it be accompanied by intense devotion. The devotion must be so intense that even the thought ‘I am engaging in sriramanamasmaranam’ must not find it possible to arise

The above excerpt is taken from Aham Sphurana, 20th July 1936, see here for more information on this text.

Guru’s Grace means inward-vision or introverted mind | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Questioner: I want Bhagavan to bestow his compassionate glance of Grace on me, so that I should undergo Emancipation in this very lifetime.

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Listen to the following joke:

Once upon a time man was fully aware of his Realised nature, and all humans enjoyed Transcendental consciousness while yet in a body; but on one fine morning, Brahma found he had become jealous of them, since all humans were then equal to him in rank, all being Realised gods. So, Brahma decided to take Self-knowledge away from man and hide it where it could never be found by him. Where to hide It was the question. So Brahma called a council of the gods of Heaven, headed by Indra, to help him resolve the matter.

“Let us bury it deep in the earth,” said the gods. But Brahma answered, “No, that will not do, because men will dig into the earth and find it.”

Then the gods said, “Let us sink it in the deepest ocean.” But Brahma said, “No, not there, for they will eventually learn to dive into the ocean, and so will surely find it one day.”

Then the gods said, “Let us take it to the top of the highest mountain and hide it there.” But again Brahma replied, “No, that will not do either, because they will sooner or later climb every mountain and once again find their Immortal Self.

We must hide It so thoroughly from man that he will never succeed in finding It again.” Then the gods gave up and said, “We do not know where to hide it, because it seems that there is no place on earth or under the sea that man will not eventually reach.”

Brahma thought for a long, long, long time. Finally he said, “Here is what we shall do. We will hide It deep in the center of their own being, for men will never think to look for It there.” All the gods agreed that this, in fact, was the perfect hiding place, and the deed was done. Ever since that day, men have been going up and down the earth, digging, diving, climbing, and excavating- searching for something which is already within themselves.

Q.: How cruel of Brahma to do such a thing…!

B.: That was only a joke. The point is, turn inwards and SEE. That is Guru’s Grace. Guru’s Grace means inward-vision or introverted mind. Guru’s Grace and Jnana-dhrishti [Tom: literally knowledge-vision, ie. vision of self-knowledge or experience of self-knowledge] are thus one and the same.

The above excerpt is taken from Aham Sphurana, 30th August 1936, see here for more information on this text.

If told ‘Everything is an illusion’ people may find it disturbing | The analogy of ‘toxic gas’ | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Gajapathi Aiyyer: If told, ‘Everything is an illusion’, people may find it disturbing…

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Thus they are told, ‘Find your Self’ or ‘Gnothi seauton’ [Tom: Greek for ‘Know thyself’], leaving them to make the discovery themselves that there is no world to see, but only the Self. Actually saying ‘Everything is an illusion’ or ‘There is no anything’ is more meaningful.

Strictly speaking, ‘Know thyself’ is absurd. The Self has nothing to know. It cannot be known by anything. People may say, ‘Bhagavan teaches that the Self is Self-aware, or that the Self knows Itself.’ It is not correct. Knowledge implies vritti [Tom: thoughts]. There are no vrittis in the Self. It is Purity Itself. The Self does not need to know Itself, because it is Knowledge Itself.

It cannot know Itself or anything else, because it is in Motionless Timeless Realisation of Actionless Reality, which is Itself; therefore it is Nescience Itself [Tom: here Bhagavan is saying the Self is actually Nescience or Ignorance, as it knows nothing, which is the literal meaning of nescience or ignorance].

Yet the Self transcends Knowledge and Nescience. Nothing can know the Self, because there is nothing besides it; therefore there is no such thing as not-Self. That day on which man awakens into Living Realisation of the fact that knowledge of the not-Self or nescience of the Self is impossible is the day on which he awakens into his true imperishable nature of Immortality. This teaching alone is verily the nectarous ambrosia which rouses man from the sleep of his illusory mortality.

Chadwick was swimming in tears by the time Bhagavan had finished enunciating these words.

G.: While the teaching sounds simple, practising the state of effortless-and-volitionless-thoughtlessness does not seem to be so easy…

B.: The biggest tragedy is that people, instead of giving up everything, think that by doing some practise they are going to go somewhere or attain something. If everything is thrown away, only Jnana remains. Supposing you want to make space inside a room – how do you go about it? Hurl away the useless objects taking up space in the room – as simple as that. There is no question of importing space from elsewhere. If all ideas or vrittis [mental modifications or conceptualisations] are thrown away or given up, only the Self remains.

If you are able to realise the truth that what you are giving up is indubitably more obnoxious than the egesta in your intestines and what you gain is indubitably worthier than your life in this ephemeral body, you will be able to give up everything in your mind one, neat, simple stroke; to such a one Jnana comes in a trice; then what awaits is only the Kingdom of Heaven from which there is no return possible.

Chadwick: We are unable to develop the conviction that the world is worthless or mirage-like – that is the problem.

B.: There is no need for any [new] convictions to be cultivated. Give up even your existing convictions.

C.: The conviction that the world is unreal can be used to combat the conviction that the world is real.

B.: [laughing] Oh! Is that so? Have you heard the story of the monkey that kept chasing its own tail?

C.: No.

B.: You would not have, and you cannot. Why? Because the story is yet to conclude. The monkey started at the beginning of Krita-yugam. Still he is going on.

C.: He must be a very energetic monkey. Bhagavan must have fed him peanuts with his own hands… [All 3 of us laugh.]

G.: What is the analogy?

B.: That will be the perverse fate of one who endeavours to counteract concepts with concepts. The fetid odour of concept-gas can be eliminated only by diverting the gas away from the mind-room. Instead, some want to release into their own originally odour-free, pristine and blemishless mental environment more and more poisonous, odious concept-gases, thinking, ‘Aa haa! This concept-gas will fight [all] the previous one[s]!’. If this should keep on happening, as it does indeed in the case of many unfortunate beings on this Earth, what will the result be? [laughs] Will not everyone suffocate unto death? What has caused the absurd mentality which prompts man to go on releasing one mephitic concept-gas after another? HE HAS FORGOTTEN THE BLISS OF HIS ORIGINAL ODOUR-FREE ENVIRONMENT.

He thinks being surrounded with the miasmic fumes of his own concept-gas is his natural state. When it has all become patently and obviously unmanageable, he goes to a charlatan, who says unto him:

[Tom: in all the following examples Bhagavan is referring to thoughts and concepts as being like toxic gas, and various false teachers as handing out these toxic-gas concepts]

‘Sir! Be certain that your anxities end with today. What I have with me is the most precious concept-gas in the world, released by the Self-Realised Sages of the Himalayas. Here I have captured it in this areca nut-coloured bottle. You are indeed fortunate that you have met with me today, sir, have not the least doubt about it. Forthwith take this invaluable gas into your room and release the same. Then you will come back and thank me till your mouth aches.’

Delighted, the man rushes back into his noisome room and with tremendous eagerness does as told. What is the result? He ends up burning his nostrils. He thinks his delicate nostrils are to blame and thus harbours no ambition to pick any quarrel with the charlatan.

What does he do next? Go to another charlatan. This time the gas has been released by the Sages of the Vidhya Hills. And then another – perhaps this time the Podhigai Hills. And so on and so forth. Finally he decides these foreign gases are only making his room more olid, and, abjectly resigning himself to his miserable fate of having to put up with his putrid mental environment, gives up hunting after newer and newer exotic nocuous concept-gases to release.

Then a friend of him chances to meet him and asks why he should look so despondent, whereupon the man confesses unto him his malodorous problem. ‘Oh! Is this all?’, says the other, ‘Don’t worry. I know just the thing to set you aright. In the Arunachala Hill there is one koupeenadhâri-swami; he-‘.

[Tom: koupeenadhâri means one who wears a kaupina or loin cloth]

The next moment the vexed man catches hold of his friend by the scruff of the neck and shouts wrathfully into the alarmed man’s face, ‘I shall have no more of it, I tell you. It is all a grand fraud; I realised the fact just some time prior. ALL GAS STINKS’.

‘Pray, do not enrage yourself, my good man.’, says the calm friend, shaking himself free from the first man’s irate grip, ‘This swami will neither demand any money from you nor will he give you any gas to release.’

‘Then what is he a swami for?’ ‘He never announced himself as a swami. People understand him to be this or that depending upon their individual tempraments of mind. I am sure you will benefit by visiting him…’ The man reluctantly makes the trip, telling himself, ‘At any rate I don’t have anything to fear from possibility of disappointment, since this time I have no expectations. What is probably going to happen is this: he will try to sell me a bottle of his gas, and I shall refuse to buy it and come away peacefully, after telling him, “Thank you very much for the kind offer, sir, but you see, my nostrils have been assaulted with enough gas for this one lifetime.”. If he tries to persuade me [into making a purchase] I shall slap him and run away from the place.’.

When he puts his difficulty before the koupeenadhâri-swami, he expects to as usual be handed with a bottle of concept-gas and demanded money, but the swami, being no gas-releaser, merely decorously says, ‘Open the windows’. The man is stunned. Can it really be that simple?, he wonders. For a time the man is reluctant to give up the rancid odours to which he has been for a long time now acclimatised. Then he begins to yearn for the odour-free state. Finally he abandons altogether his penchant for concept-gases and throws the windows open as per the advice of the koupeenadhâri-swami of Arunachala Hill. Then sweet, fresh air, which he has not experienced in [his] living memory, bursts into the room and he dances for ecstatic joy. He remembers all his various exploits with the different charlatans he had encountered and enjoys a hearty laugh at his own expense…

Chadwick is unable to contain himself. He has already collapsed against the wall of the Hall in laughter at hearing Bhagavan’s ‘gas-analogy’. His paroxysmic convulsions, which are yet to abate, are now observed with a curious eye by early inmates and visitors trickling into the Hall. ‘Shoo! Shoo!’ says Bhagavan, smiling and putting a finger to his lips. Chadwick – with difficulty – manages to straighten himself up. He wipes away the tears trickling down his cheeks and tries to look serious.

G.: Concept-gas stands for vrittis, the bottles stand for instructions on sadhana, releasing them in one’s room means trying to practise any mental activity as sadhana, and opening the windows is summa iruththal [Tom: ‘Be still’ or ‘just be’]. Am I correct?

C.: Hey, boy! Isn’t it obvious?

G.: I still want to make sure. So I am corroborating my understanding with Bhagawan. What does Bhagavan say?

B.: Yes. Also, the reluctance to abandon one’s age-old mental predilections is exclusively the handiwork of – But at that moment the brahmins enter the Hall. It is time for the chanting of the vedas. For now the conversation is at an end.

The above excerpt is taken from Aham Sphurana, 14th August 1936, see here for more information on this text.

One who would try to teach something can never be the Sadhguru | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

B.: One who would try to teach something can never be the Sadhguru [Tom: the true or genuine or real guru]. He who gives unto the earnest sadhaka suggestion to do this or that can never be the Sadhguru. The sadhaka wants rest from activity – that is why he has come in search of spiritual awakening. He has already become exasperated with ‘doing’, although he might be unable to understand, express or articulate that such is the case with himself. The peace he is searching for so longingly is permanent termination of possibility of activity. In other words he wants everlasting cessation of the madness called ‘doing’.

Instead of being told how to achieve the same, the conned sadhaka finds that the charlatan asks him to do something in addition to, or in place of, his incumbent activities. Could more ‘doing’ possibly be a help to the sadhaka? It will make him lose what little peace of mind he yet had.

Activity stands for creation; creation stands for the destruction of one’s inherent happiness – i.e., the natutal state of poorna.

Reality is perfect happiness only because there is no creation possible in that state. Creation is seen owing to avidya maya. If activity be advocated, the adviser is not a Guru but a heartless tormentor. In such cases we can say that Lord Yama has come in the guise of a Guru, to torture the unsuspecting, gullible sadhaka.

The [evil-minded] charlatan cannot Emancipate; but the one thing he invariably does is this – he strengthens the fetters of those who care to pay any attention to him. You talk of appointing an uttharadikari [Tom: heir or successor] for Ramana Maharshi. Ramana Maharshi has nothing to say; he makes no assertions; he has no message for the world; he has got nothing to convey; he is no teacher; he has no teachings. He IS. That is all. That being the case, where is the question of any successor? The charlatan, therefore, first collects a hefty fee as ‘dhakshina’ and then persuades the unwitting man on the Clapham omnibus to do this and that, saying, ‘If you sincerely do as I tell you, you will obtain peace of mind…’. It is like paying a fortune to purchase poison, thinking it to be amrutham, and drinking it gleefully, congratulating yourself on your ‘rare luck’ at having chanced upon the same. So, the charlatan abets your attempt to kill yourself; obscuring the self-luminous Aathman, which is fathomless Bliss Itself, with upadhis that obnubilate it, and reaffirming for yourself thereby the poisonous, false conviction that your self-identity lies with the perishable body, is certainly an act of attempting suicide. As for Sec. 306, no amount of concealment can permanently veil the Self.

No matter how dense one’s nescience [Tom: ignorance] might be, one casual, merciful glance of Grace from the compassionate Sadhguru, lasting not even for a complete nimisha, will suffice to destroy countless aeons of accumulated ignorance. A mountainsized heap of gunpowder is burnt up by a single spark of fire.

A room might have been in darkness for thousands of years, but when the door is thrown open and sunlight floods in, how long does it take for the room to become totally illumined? Thus, since ignorance is totally vulnerable to being eviscerated by the Sadhguru’s Grace at any time, it cannot be said to have any permanence; so, it is unreal or non-existent…

…The point is, turn inwards and SEE. That is Guru’s Grace. Guru’s Grace means inward-vision or introverted mind. Guru’s Grace and Jnana-dhrishti [Tom: literally, knowledge-vision, ie. seeing the self or self-knowledge] are thus one and the same.

The above excerpt is taken from Aham Sphurana, 30th August 1936, see here for more information on this text.

Tom: compare the above text to Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 271:

271.
The guru who tells his disciple
“Do this or that,” becomes for him
Yama, lord of death, or Brahma,
Lord of birth. He who declares
“You have done enough,” is the true guru
Bringing grace divine.

[The true guru prescribes no discipline, but the enquiry “Who am I?”]

Why has God created the world? | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

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

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Did God come and tell you that He has created the world?

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

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

Q.: I do not understand.

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

Q.: No.

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

Q.: Should I always be sleeping?

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

Q.: Awareness of what?

B.: Being.

The above excerpt is taken from Aham Sphurana, 17th July 1936, see here for more information on this text.

You also are a Jnani; only, you think otherwise! | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

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

Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: You also are a Jnani; only, you think otherwise!

Q.: How could that be?

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

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

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

Q.: How to eliminate worldly attchment?

B.: By turning the mind inwards.

Q.: Really!

B.: The more you hold on to the Self or retain the mind in its native state of subjective-awareness-sustained-effortlessly-and-volitionlessly, the more the mental tendancies and worldly attachments wither off; the lesser the mental tendancies and worldly attachments, the easier does become retention of the mind in its native state of subjective-awareness-sustained-effortlessly-andvolitionlessly.

Q.: Which comes first?

B.: The sadhaka [Tom: seeker] recognises and reflects upon the ephemeral nature of the objective world and the transient nature of his own body. He gets fed up with material pleasures, because they eventually lead only to sorrow, when their enjoyment becomes, for any reason, impossible. He asks himself if a more permanent experience of life might not be possible.

Then he discovers the Ajata-advaita doctrine. Initially he is not convinced, and argues that if it were a dream there would be no possibility of corroboration, but that here his relatives and friends are able to confirm the evidence provided by his senses; he also asks why the same dream should be repeated everyday, were it all only a dream – according to him, here he sees the same sun, moon and earth everyday, whereas in his dreams he finds himself in new worlds moment to moment.

Eventually it dawns upon him that everything he thinks he knows, including an understanding of the apparent permanency of the world he believes himself to live in, is only thought or imagination. Then at the intellectual level he understands the truth – that the names and forms constituting the world are fictitious. This sparks a search for the substratum said to be underlying them, which alone is said to be Real by the wise.

He hears the teaching that the source of the mind, Beingness, is the gateway to the Real Self. Then he begins the practice of quietening the mind by vichara or any other method, tackling various distractions as and when they arise, by withdrawing attention from them and fixing it on Beingness or the Self. The beginning is only becoming fed-up with the evanescent nature of the world and the fugacious attractions it has to offer.

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

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

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

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

Q.: At least is the present real?

B.: Anything seen cannot be Real. What is seen is not Pratyaksha. It is not self-evident, because there is a subject-object relationship involved. It is merely sensory information that is fed into the mind by the strength of its own evil faculty of avidya maya. That alone is Real which shines by its own light.
You are asking about the objects of the world. Can such objects exist without a YOU, a perceiver? When there is no perceiver, as in swoon or deep slumber, is there anything to be perceived? No. What is the inference? The objects owe the appearance of their apparent existence to you only. They are merely mental creations. The appearance of this enormous cosmos around you is merely a mental information. The mind is fiction. Therefore the ‘objects’ manufactured by it are also fictitious. Have not the least doubt about it.

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

B.: Yes.

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

B.: Exactly!

Q.: I do not understand.

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

Q.: How can remaining in ignorance be sadhana?

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

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

B.: Yes.

The above excerpt is taken from Aham Sphurana, 17th July 1936, see here for more information on this text.

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

Q. Is it really true that I am not this body? Physical pain & liberation, How to elminate wordly attachment? Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana book excerpt | Advaita Vedanta

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

The following is a teaching excerpt from a large unedited manuscript, well over 1000 pages long, called ‘Aham Sphurana’.

Aham Sphurana [‘I Shining’ or ‘I vibration’ or ‘I Am shining’ or ‘Shining of the I AM’] claims to contain a collection of previously unpublished talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi as apparently recorded by a visitor to Sri Ramana Ashrama, Sri Gajapathi Aiyyer, in 1936.

The authenticity of the teachings as being genuinely from Sri Ramana Maharshi cannot be confirmed, a fact acknowledged in the manuscript preamble itself, but I share these teachings here in case they are of interest to you.

17th July 1936

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

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes.

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

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

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

Sri Ramana Maharshi: True, the body experiences the physical stimulus of pain if it is injured, but why should that fact create a thought in the mind, “I am feeling pain.”?

Physical pain creates mental agony because of the following reason – the mind assumes itself to be the body and appropriates to itself the bodily identity, because in the absence of such false self-objectification it cannot survive or thrive. If the idea “I am the body” is abandoned, everything, including pain suffered by the body, is only Bliss.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sri Ramana Maharshi: You also are a Jnani; only, you think otherwise!

Questioner: How could that be?

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

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

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

Questioner: How to eliminate worldly attchment?

Sri Ramana Maharshi: By turning the mind inwards.

Questioner: Really!

Sri Ramana Maharshi: The more you hold on to the Self or retain the mind in its native state of subjective-awareness-sustained-effortlessly-and-volitionlessly, the more the mental tendancies and worldly attachments wither off; the lesser the mental tendancies and worldly attachments, the easier does become retention of the mind in its native state of subjective-awareness-sustained-effortlessly-andvolitionlessly.

Questioner: Which comes first?

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

Then at the intellectual level he understands the truth – that the names and forms constituting the world are fictitious. This sparks a search for the substratum said to be underlying them, which alone is said to be Real by the wise.

He hears the teaching that the source of the mind, Beingness, is the gateway to the Real Self. Then he begins the practice of quietening the mind by vichara or any other method, tackling various distractions as and when they arise, by withdrawing attention from them and fixing it on Beingness or the Self. The beginning is only becoming fed-up with the evanescent nature of the world and the fugacious attractions it has to offer.

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

Sri Ramana Maharshi: In turn those “all” are seen by you only. In deep slumber when there is no mind, nothing is available to be seen, but your existence is a constant.

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

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

Questioner: At least is the present real?

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

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

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

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes.

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

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Exactly!

Questioner: I do not understand.

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Remaining as you are is the loftiest Sadhana.

Questioner: How can remaining in ignorance be sadhana?

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

Questioner: Is even desire for Liberation an obstacle to Liberation?

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes

Q. I find it shocking to consider the waking state to be another dream | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Aham Sphurana book excerpt | Advaita vedanta

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

The following is a teaching excerpt from a large unedited manuscript, well over 1000 pages long, called ‘Aham Sphurana’. You can download the entire text here.

Aham Sphurana [‘I Shining’ or ‘I vibration’ or ‘I Am shining’ or ‘Shining of the I AM’] claims to contain a collection of previously unpublished talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi as apparently recorded by a visitor to Sri Ramana Ashrama, Sri Gajapathi Aiyyer, in 1936.

The authenticity of the teachings as being genuinely from Sri Ramana Maharshi cannot be confirmed, a fact acknowledged in the manuscript preamble itself, but I share these teachings here in case they are of interest to you.

7th July 1936

Questioner: I find it shocking to consider seriously Advaita’s proclamation that the Jagrat [Tom: waking] state is nothing better than a dream. It amounts to saying that I am now dreaming whereas I believe to the contrary, that whatever I am experiencing through the senses exist independantly of my perception thereof. How is it that the numerous disciples of yours – or followers or devotees or worshippers or afficionados or whatever it is that one would be justified in calling them – take gladly to the idea that the world – the same world they experience everyday- is a dream?

Sri Ramana Maharshi: You say it is the same world you saw yesterday that you are seeing today. How do you know that? Through memory. Memories are also illusory. They create a deceptive fabric of intellectual continuity where in fact none exists. What actually exists is only Beingness or Self. Even in dreams you have memories, go to familiar places, etc. How is it? Jagrat [Tom: waking] or Swapna [Tom: dream], the same mind draws the poisonous veil of objectification or differentiation over the pure Self, hiding it. This veil is called the screen of avidya maya. Don’t ask, who cast this veil? Instead, ask, Who sees the veil? Then you will see there was never any veil. This is called Self-Realisation. The desire to do sadhana to attain it is itself meaningless because it presupposes the existence of someone apart from the Self who is doing Sadhana to reach the Self.

Questioner: Is it the realisation you speak of as Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi? Should I not do any Sadhana? Is Sadhana useless then?

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Yes, it is the same realisation. Sadhana is the means to gain the Self. Only the idea “I am doing Sadhana.” renders the Sadhana totally pointless and useless. Sadhana becomes natural if attraction to worldly pleasures stands removed. Desire for worldly pleasures take to their heels when you realise the world is only a dream.

Questioner: I still find it impossible to believe this solid world could only be a mere dream.

Sri Ramana Maharshi: [smiling] Two different categories of spiritual aspirants or sadhakas exist. One is the Spülauftrag [Kritopasaka] and the other is the Wischauftrag [Akritopasaka]. [Bhagavan sometimes used words in the questioner’s native tongue to drive the impact home, or where technical terms were involved.] The former is born with the intellectual conviction, born of aeons of serious and steadfast spiritual practice directed along the correct channel [that of making the mind turn Selfwards or Sourcewards], that the cosmos he sees around him is the merest of illusions, and that expending one’s mental faculties upon it would be the ruin of one’s inherent nature of abiding peace and unshakeable happiness; whereas the latter is shocked and unsettled when informed that there is no difference – for all practical purposes – between the Jagrat and swapna states. The firm intellectual conviction that the perceived cosmos is seen, owing to delusion, as being constituted by multiple disparate entities while the truth is that it is vested in the same Substratum, Adhishtanum, or Sadhvasthu as the Seer, is born only as a result of arduous spiritual practice which is possible only if the Sadhguru’s abundant Grace is available as a catalyst, which Grace descends unto him alone who perpetually bathes his heart in the effulgent glow of unselfish and non-reciprocationexpecting love of God, Humanity or any other single-minded ideal of pure, ecstatic devotion or parabhakti, and this intellectual conviction [as to the world’s objective unreality] is the seed of Jnana that grows into the tree that chokes the poisonous weed of Egotism or Ahankara at its root, destroying it once and for all, such seed having been planted long ago in the fathomless, dark misty depths of the mind by way of the Supremely merciful glance of Grace of the infinitely compassionate Sadhguru

Aham Sphurana – Scintillations of Jnana from Sri Ramana Maharshi – PDF download of the complete unedited text

~ Tom Das ~ 11 Comments

Aham Sphurana [‘I Shining’ or ‘I vibration’ or ‘I Am shining’ or ‘Shining of the I AM’], an unedited text of over 1000 pages, claims to contain a collection of previously unpublished talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi as apparently recorded by a visitor to Sri Ramana Ashrama, Sri Gajapathi Aiyyer, in 1936.

This is a controversial text and the authenticity of the teachings as being genuinely from Sri Ramana Maharshi cannot be confirmed, a fact acknowledged in the manuscript preamble itself, but I share these teachings here in case they are of interest to you.

At the time of writing this post, there is also a 280 page version of this text which is available from Open Sky Press – this is a beautifully arranged set of teachings collated from Aham Sphurana – but the teachings have been edited and therefore subtly changed. Sometimes this makes the teachings easier to access, but sometimes the meaning of the text may inadvertently be altered.

For example, this post, which I have presented in unedited form, is also present in the Open Sky Press version but the word ‘solipsism’ was removed from the edited version of the text on page 57 and for some reason replaced with the word ‘egoism’; the reference to Berkeley was also removed and the Latin phrase was (slightly) wrongly translated. For some this may make it easier to access, as the word solipsism is a philosophical term that some may not be familiar with, but for others reading Sri Ramana’s alleged view on solipsism may be fascinating and useful, and the removal of this term could take away from the depth of the teaching; similarly with the reference to the philosopher Berkeley.

Having read many spiritual texts, my personal preference is to read as near to the source material as possible (and where possible to go to primary sources themselves), as this gives the most accurate presentation of the teachings. I have read many texts that try to be helpful through editing but many end up inadvertently distorting the teachings. This is also why when I make comments on texts, I try to make it very clear what is added by me as opposed to what is present in the original, so the reader has an opportunity to assess my comments in light of the actual source material. To this end I am sharing the unedited PDF here for those who find it useful.

Best wishes & Namaste

Tom