mind

Gaudapada and Shankara explain Ajata Vada: No body,mind or world appear in Self-Realisation or Liberation | Advaita Vedanta

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

This article is an excerpt from a much longer article which you can view here, that gives further quotes from others including Sri Ramana Maharshi, more quotes from Shankara, Suresvara (Shankara’s main student), Yoga Vasistha and Ribhu Gita on this same topic.

There was a particular conceptual world-view that great sages such as Sri Ramana Maharshi encouraged us to take on, if we are able to, in order to facilitate our spritual practice and thereby attain self-realisation or liberation.

For lower seekers of liberation, meaning for those whose minds were unable to be open to the higher teachings, Sri Ramana Maharshi and the great sages often did not give the teachings we will outline below, but for those whose minds were ready and ripe, he would often encourage this following view of creation and the world, as it is this conceptual view that most readily allows the seeker’s mind to properly do self-enquiry and thereby realise the Self.

However, rest assured, that regardless of how one conceives of the world, meaning that even if you do NOT agree with the teachings below, if one makes an earnest attempt to understand and carry out Self-Enquiry, liberation will be assured irrespective of your conceptual view on liberation and the world. Then you will discover the truth for yourself.

A warning/disclaimer

The teachings that are given below, whilst they are open to anyone, they are very radical in their nature. It is not recommended that you read them if you are not an earnest seeker of liberation or if your mind is likely to be destabilised by a more radical notion of the nature of the universe or what liberation looks like.

We will see that these same exact teachings have been given for many centuries, but traditionally these teachings would only be given to a prepared mind, a mind prepared by devotion, faith and loving surrender. This infuses the mind and heart with an energy of peace, calm and loving kindness and happiness. It is this stable peaceful mind that is most able to receive these teachings, although it is possible there can be some exceptions to this.

Some people can find these teachings quite distressing and destablising and the author of this post takes no responsibility for providing this information to you that has been traditionally written about and taught for many centuries and is already in the public domain.

Be open minded to receive these teachings

Similarly, the ego-mind will often reject these teachings when it first hears them. Often a person’s ego will only be able to come to these teachings once it has suffered enough. The more insight the ego has into suffering, and the more it is able to contemplate the causes of suffering, then the more likely it is able to appreciate the truth of these teachings.

Usually only a sharp intellect is usually able to discern these teachings. Many people read these types of spiritual teachings and immediately project their own preconceived ideas onto them, and so distort the teachings from the very beginning. If we keep an open mind and read the range of quotes given, we will inevitably see what they are truly pointing too. If we cling to our own preconceived notions then we are less likely to receive these teachings in the way they were intended.

These teachings are rare and often misunderstood

Many prominent spiritual teachers, including prominent teachers of advaita and non-duality, give out distorted versions of these teaching, so it is important to be able to temporarily put aside all you have learnt whilst reading or listening to these teachings if you really want to understand what the intended communication actually is.

It is also important to not assume that all spiritual teachers are teaching their own versions of the Same One Teaching, and be open to the fact that they may be teaching very different things; just because a teaching is helpful, doesn’t mean it is liberating; and just because a teaching isn’t liberating, it doesn’t mean it will not be helpful to you.

The Jnani does not see the world

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, as does his guru’s guru, Sri Gaudapada, as well as his student, Sri Suresvara.

For a clear definition of what Ajata vada is, please see this article here.

Sri Gaudapada’s Mandukya Karira and Shankara’s commentary on this

Gaudapada, who was the guru of Shankara’s guru, also makes these teachings (ie. that the body mind and world no longer appear in liberation, ie. Ajata Vada) very clear repeatedly throughout his writings, and Shankara makes these same points in several of his other commentaries too. If you read discerningly you can see Gaudapada makes the following points in the quotes below (as Shankara has already made these points above), and that Shankara brings these very points out in his own commentary on Gaudapada’s verses:

  • The term ‘duality’ refers to the appearance of objects
  • Similarly the term ‘non-duality’ refers to that which remains when no objects whatsoever arise
  • In non-duality there is no duality whatsoever, not even as an appearance (some people are of the impression that the non-dual acts as a ‘container’ for the apparently dual)
  • The entire world (of phenomenal arisings), which is duality, is projected or created by ignorance and is also known as ‘the effects of ignorance’.
  • Ignorance is also known as the mind, and every thing (object) we perceive, from the subtle to the gross, is actually a manifestion of thought or mind
  • When the mind stops, that is the cessation of ignorance; then there are no thoughts, no duality and therefore no effects of ignorance (ie. no appearance of body, thoughts/feelings or the world) as their cause (ignorance) has been removed.
  • This is akin to the rope and the snake, wherein the snake disappears when the truth of the rope is seen; similarly the arising phenomena, which are illusory like the rope, all cease when the truth of Self is realised.
  • It is spoken as if there are two levels or aspects of reality – (1) conventional or relative reality consisting of the body mind and world ie. all objects or duality, and (2) the Ultimate or the Absolute, which is the non-dual Brahman/Atman. However, although it is spoken of as two levels, in truth, only one of these actually exists, and in self-realisation it is seen that the relative never existed at all, not even as an appearance. The notion of there being two aspects of reality is a fictional concesession merely used as a teaching device for the ignorant who are presently unable to fathom the unreality and non-existence of the phenomenal world. See here for more.

If we read discerningly and carefully, we will see that several other notions or theories are refuted by the quotes below and therefore not compatible with them:

  • the notion that in self-realisation all phenomena continue to arise but are seen as illusion (for it is only the ego or ignorance that sees phenomena or could know phenomena as being real or illusory)
  • the notion that in self-realisation all phenomena continue to arise but are seen as one with Self (for to admit to phenomena arising would be to admit to multiplicity or duality as somehow existing or apparently existing in the self, and this is not permissable according to the scriptures)
  • the notion that for the realised sage the body-mind continues according to its remaining (prarabdha) karma – this is a lower teaching for those who are unable to accept the radical ajata teachings explained above.
  • the notion that when Gaudapada or Shankara deny objects, they are not really denying the objects, but just the notion they are separate from the Self. It is important to note in the quotes below that (1) this view is denied by Shankara and (2) nowhere in the scriptures is this view given, apart from as a lower view.
  • because the world is an illusion, there is no need to do a practice or have a teacher, as these too are part of the illusion. No, rather the teaching and teacher, whilst ultimately being part of the illusion, they are part of the illusion that help us get out of the illusion, like dreaming of a lion that scares us and wakes us up from that dream. There is a specific teaching and practice that is necessary to undergo whilst the illusion/ignorance appears to exist, and whilst we consider ourself to be a person living in a world and thereby suffering accordingly.

Before we get to verses from Gaudapada, let us read Shankara’s introduction to his commentary on Mandukya Upanishad and Karika, where he explains the purpose of the text:

‘What is the aim of the text? Let me explain: just as a healthy person afflicted by disease will seek a cure for the disease in order to regain the natural state of health, the natural state of being the Self, when afflicted by suffering, will be returned to its ‘natural state of health’ through the cessation of the phenomenal universe of duality.

The aim therefore is the realisation of non-duality. Since the phenomenal world of duality is a creation of ignorance, it can be eradicated through knowledge.’

~ Sri Shankara, introduction to his commentary on Mandukya Upanishad and Mandukya Karika

We can see right that the outset Sri Shankara is summarising the teachings. Let us now see what Gaudapda says in his writings. If we read carefully and discerningly, we will see he is giving a very clear teaching. As usual, unless we read with a clear and discerning mind, the true teaching may ellude us:

‘This duality, which consists of the moving [ie. living beings/creatures] and the unmoving [ie. inert or non-living things], is a projection seen by the mind. Indeed, when there is the state of no-mind, this duality is not perceived/experienced at all.’

(manodṛśyam idaṃ dvaitaṃ yat kiṃcit sacarācaram
manaso hy amanībhāve dvaitaṃ naivopalabhyate)

~ Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 3.31

Gaudapada states that duality, which consists of all living and non-living things – ie. all objects – is merely a projection of the mind, and when the mind no longer exists (later it will be explained the mind no longer appears or exists in self-realisation), this duality is not experienced/perceived at all. Note how Guadapada specifically refers to and thereby defines duality as the objective realm of living and non-living things, and note how Gaudapada is clear there is no duality in non-duality. Shankara, in his commentary on this verse, states the following:

This duality as a whole, that is perceived by the mind, is nothing but the mind, which itself is imagined – this is the proposition. For duality endures so long as the mind does, and disappears with the disappearance of the mind.

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 3.31

See here how Shankara repeats that duality is a projection of the mind, which itself is a projection/imagination – ie. the mind itself is not a real entity. Note how Shankara also asserts that all phenomenal arising are themselves nothing but mind, and they all disappear when the mind disappears (it will be explained later that the mind disappears in self-realisation).

Shankara also writes the same in his wonderful masterpiece of a text, Vivekachudamani, in many verses, some of which I have included below. Verse 170 in particular was highlighted by Sri Ramana Maharshi as containing a most essential teaching of Vedanta – (see here for verses Sri Ramana Maharshi thought were most important in Vivekachudamani, and see here for more verses like these from Vivekachudamani, as there are many more – this last link also explains the method by which liberation is attained which is not explored so much in this post, and is perhaps the more important topic!):

169. There is no Ignorance (Avidya) outside the mind. The mind alone is Avidya, the cause of the bondage of transmigration. When that is destroyed, all else is destroyed, and when it is manifested, everything else is manifested.

170. In dreams, when there is no actual contact with the external world, the mind alone creates the whole universe consisting of the experiencer etc. Similarly in the waking state also; there is no difference. Therefore all this (phenomenal universe) is the projection of the mind.

179. Man’s transmigration is due to the evil of superimposition, and the bondage of superimposition is created by the mind alone.

180. Hence sages who have fathomed its secret have designated the mind as Avidya or ignorance, by which alone the universe is moved to and fro, like masses of clouds by the wind.

407. This apparent universe has its root in the mind, and never persists after the mind is annihilated. Therefore dissolve the mind by concentrating it on the Supreme Self, which is thy inmost Essence.

~ Sri Shankara, Vivekachudamani

See also how Shankara insists duality ends when the mind ends and equates duality with the appearance of objects or phenomenal arisings. You can also see Shankara is equating ignorance with maya (the power the projects the illusory world) repeatedly. Shankara goes on to say the following in his commentary on the same verse:

For, when the mind ceases to be mind, like the disappearance of the illusory snake in the rope, the mind’s activity stops through the practice of wisdom and detachment, or when the mind gets absorbed in the state of deep sleep, duality is not perceived.

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 3.31

Shankara is likening the illusory projection of objects onto the self to the illusory projection of the snake onto the rope: just like the snake disappears when the truth of the rope is seen, the objects disappear when the truth of the Self is seen/known/realised. Sri Ramana Maharshi explains this same exact teaching in his text ‘Who Am I?’ as follows:

If the mind, which is the cause of 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, which is the base, will not be obtained unless the perception of the world which is a superimposition, ceases.

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, ‘Who Am I?’

Note that Shankara states that objects cease to appear both in deep sleep (when no objects are perceived) and in Self-realisation, making clearer the intended meaning that ‘duality’ refers to the presence or perception or appearance of objects, and that these are absent in self-realisation. Shankara in his commentary then asks how to attain this state of ‘no-mind’ and says this will be explained in Gaudapada’s next verse. In the next verse Gaudapada explains that this no-mind state is attained through self-realisation, and that the mind no longer exists in Self-realisation due to there being no thoughts present:

‘The mind ceases to think as a consequence of the realisation of the Truth that is the Self (Atmasatya), then the mind attains the state of no-mind; in the absence of objects to be perceived, it ceases that perception (of objects).’

Ātma-satya-anubodhenā na saṅkalpayate yadā |
Amanastāṃ tadā yāti grāhy-ābhāve tad-grahaṃ

~ Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 3.32

We can see here in verse 3.32 Gaudapada is stating that in Self-Realisation, all thoughts cease, and when all thoughts cease, there is no mind. Verse 3.31 has already stated that the mind is the cause of the appearance of all objects, the implication is therefore that when the mind ceases to think, it ceases to project any phenomena or objects, and therefore no arising phenomena or objects are perceived in the self. In 3.32 Gaudapada states in the state of no-mind, there are no objects to be perceived and therefore no perception of objects remains. Shankara write the following in his commentary on this verse:

The mind does not think, as fire does not burn in the absense of fuel, then at that time it attains the state of no-mind. In the absense of objects to be perceived, that mind becomes free from the entire illusion of perception.

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 3.32

Notice how Shankara is comparing the mind to fire and objects to fuel – he is saying just as there can be no fire without fuel, there can be no mind without objects appearing/being present. This is the state of no-mind, or self-realisation, in which freedom from all of Maya or phenomenal arising occurs. Again we see the same teaching from Sri Ramana Maharshi in his text ‘Who Am I?’:

What is called mind (manam) is a wondrous power existing in Self. It projects all thoughts. If we set aside all thoughts and see, there will be no such thing as mind remaining separate; therefore, thought itself is the nature (or form) of the mind. Other than thoughts, there is no such thing as the world. In deep sleep there are no thoughts, (and hence) there is no world; in waking and dream there are thoughts, (and hence) there is the world also, Just as the spider spins out the thread from within itself and again withdraws it into itself, so the mind projects the world from within itself and again absorbs it into itself. 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…The mind can exist only by always depending upon something gross [ie. objects]; by itself it cannot stand’

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, ‘Who Am I?’

We can see how Sri Ramana also concurs with Shankara and Gaudapada stating that the entire world is merely a projection of the mind, comparing this to a spider projecting a web (a traditional metaphor also used by Shankara in his commentaries) – an apt comparison before the days of computer simulation and wide use of projecting devices. Sri Ramana also states that when the world appears, the Self will not be realised and vice verse – when the Self is realised, the world will not appear. This is made even clearer in the question and answer version of ‘Who Am I?’:

Question 4. When will the realisation of the Self be gained?
Sri Ramana: When the world, which is what-is-seen, has been removed, there will be realisation of the Self, which is the seer

Question 5. Will there not be realisation of the Self even while the world is there?
Sri Ramana: There will not be

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, ‘Who Am I?’
(Question and Answer version)

Also note how Sri Ramana uses an analogy similar to Shankara’s fuel/fire analogy when he writes ‘The mind can exist only by always depending upon something gross [ie. objects]; by itself it cannot stand‘, meaning that devoid of objects, the mind cannot survive, just as fire cannot survive without fuel.

Shankara and Ramana are both stating that in self realisation, objects or duality no longer exist or even appear to exist, and therefore, as the mind mind cannot exist without objects, it too can no longer exist. This causality can also be stated the other way round, as causality itself is an illusion, so we can also say that as objects (all living and non-living things as Gaudapada and Shankara put it) are projection of the mind, when the mind becomes no-mind, ie. when there are no thoughts and when therefore there is no mind, the objects can no longer appear. Shankara makes this point repeatedly in his commentaries on other Upanishads and in his various other writings such as Upadesa Saharsri, eg:

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

‘For it is not possible for the same person to be engaged in thoughts of sense-objects and to have the vision of the Self as well.’

~Sri Shankara, commentary on Katha Upanishad 2.1.1

‘The highest truth is that in Brahman, which is Truth by nature, nothing whatsoever, not even a jot or a tittle, is born [ie. no phenomenal appearances arise whatsoever]‘

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 3.48

Shankara makes it clear that in Self-Realisation objects do not even arise as an appearance

These teachings are usually only discernable by people of sharp intellect (or intuitively by those who dive deep within and realise the Self or who experience revelation through Grace of God). Despite the above verses, which make the teachings very clear, some people say that Shankara and Gaudapada are not really saying there are no objects that appear in the Self, but they instead are saying that objects do appear and arise in the Self but are either seen to be the Self, or they are seen to be unreal/illusory arisings and in this sense they do not exist: objects arise and appear, but they are not real, like a dream may arise and appear, but is ultimately not real. This view is known as Dristi-Sristi Vada (DSV), and this view is different from Ajata Vada as expounded by Shankara and Gaudapada – see this article here where this is more clearly explained.

Both Shankara and Gaudapada in various places explicity refute this notion of DSV. Towards the end of Chapter 4 of his Mandukya Karika, Gaudapada makes this very point. He states that in order to explain for purposes of teaching we talk about 2 levels of reality:

1) Vyavaharika – firstly there is the vyvaharika or realm of objects, also called conventional reality, transactional reality (because you can transact objects here), the empirical outlook, the phenomenal realm, the relative world of (living and non-living) things, or maya. We can see from the earlier verses cited above that this is also known as duality or the mind.

2) Paramarthika – and secondly there is paramartikha or the ultimate truth, also known as the Self/Atman, the Absolute reality, Brahman. This is no-mind or non-duality where no duality whatsoever is present.

Both Shankara and Gaudapada state that for purposes of teaching usually these 2 levels are acknowledged, but in reality only one of them, Atman, truly exists, and the first one appears to exist only due to maya or ignorance or the mind. This is akin to saying that for teaching purposes we temporarily or provisionally admit of duality or ignorance as actually existing: we talk as if objects, people and things are real and existent, but in truth these things do not exist whatsoever, not even as an appearance, ie. there is no duality in non-duality, or put differently, there are no objects that arise (or are ‘born’) in the self, nothing ever happened and ignorance or maya never existed at all in any way shape or form. This is the meaning of ajata vada, as explained by Shankara and Gaudapada.

Logically, it should be obvious that there cannot really be two points of view if reality is truly non-dual, for two points of view denotes duality.

This teaching comes to a crescendo in Chapter 4 of Gaudapada’s Karika and Shankara makes clear and highlights this teaching even further. For example starting in verse 4.61 through to 4.70 Gaudapada and Shankara explain the (lower and ultimately false) teaching of Dristi-Sristi Vada, namely that all objects arise in consciousness as consciousness and all objective arisings are one with that consciousness. In verse 4.68 Gaudapda states this conventional reality of objects appearing is like a dream, in which all dream phenomena are a projection of mind and one with the mind-consciousness in which they appear, and in verses 4.69 and 4.70 they state it could also be likened to an illusion created by a magician (4.69) or a hallucination created by drugs, etc (4.70). In both these cases the objects come and go, but the consciousness onto which they are projected or superimposed is constant and unchanging.

But then in verse 4.71 Gaudapada states in the highest truth, ie. in self-realisation, no living being is ever born, as there is no source or cause for it (the cause or source for birth would be ignorance, also known as maya, ego or mind):

‘No creature whatsoever has birth, there is no source for it. This is the highest truth where nothing whatsoever is born’

~ Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 4.71

Shankara then makes this teaching even clearer in his commentary on this verse:

‘It has been said that birth, death, etc of creatures within the range of empirical existence are like those of the creatures in a dream etc, but the highest truth is that where no creature undergoes birth. The remaining portion was explained before [in his commentary on verse 3.48 cited above]’

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 4.71

We can see in this commentary Shankara is clearly refuting the idea that objects continue to appear, like in a dream, in Self-realisation, as in actuality no objects appear (no objects are ‘born’). Shankara refers to his previous comments on verse 3.48 where he writes ‘The highest truth is that in Brahman, which is Truth by nature, nothing whatsoever, not even a jot or a tittle, is born [ie. no phenomenal appearances arise whatsoever]‘.

In the next verse the same teaching is given in a different way: here it is said that objects arise from a vibration of the self, which is the mind or ignorance:

‘The duality of the perceiver and the perceived is the vibration or movement of consciousness or mind (citta-spandikam); yet consciousness itself is always without an object, eternal, and unattached — therefore, it is so described or proclaimed.

cittaspandikamevedaṃ grāhyagrāhakavaddvayam
cittaṃ nirviṣayaṃ nityamasaṃgaṃ tena kīrtitam

~ Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 4.72

Shankara writes in his commentary on this verse:

All duality, which consists of a subject and object, is a vibration of mind/consciousness. But from the Ultimate point of view, consciousness is nothing but the Self, and accordingly it is nirvasayam, without objects…as consciousness is without objects, it is unattached, this is the meaning [of the verse].

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 4.72

We can see that Shankara is clearly stating that unlike a dream or magic show or a drug-induced or otherwise-induced hallucination, in (Ultimate) Reality, appearances or objects no longer arise. In the next verse Gaudapada makes this even clearer:

‘That which exists because of a fancied empirical (relative) outlook, does not do so from the standpoint of the absolute Reality. Anything that may exist on the strength of the empirical outlook, taught by various other schools of thought, does not really exist‘

yo’sti kalpitasaṃvṛtyā paramārthena nāstyasau
paratantrābhisaṃvṛtyā syānnāsti paramārthataḥ

~ Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 4.73

Gaudapada is clearly stating that that which appears to exist from a relative point of view is actually non-existent in self-realisation. In his commentary on this verse Shankara emphasises this same point stating that the empirical outlook is an imagined illusion that certainly has no actual existence.

All of this has already been stated earlier in Chapter 2 of the same Mandukya Karika, eg. 2.17:

As a rope whose nature has not been well ascertained is imagined in the dark to be various things like a snake, a line of water, etc, so also is the Self imagined variously

~ Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 2.17

On his commentary on this verse Shankara states the following:

‘..this is the illustration – similarly the Self is imagined to be such countless diverse objects as an individual creature or the vital force, etc, just because It has not been ascertained in its true nature to be pure intelligence, existence and non-duality, and different from such evils as cause and effects that are characteristics of the world. This is the conclusion of all Upanishads’

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 2.17

Some may argue that unlike the rope and snake in which the snake disappears when the rope is seen, when the Highest Truth (of Self) is seen the appearance of the world does not disappear but it continues, but Gaudapada and Shankara both refute this view in the next verse:

‘As illusion (eg. of the snake) ceases and the rope alone remains when the rope is ascertained to be nothing but the rope, so also is the ascertainment about the Self’

~Sri Gaudapada, Mandukya Karika 2.18

Shankara makes it explicitly clear what exactly this means in his commentary on this verse:

‘As on certainly realising that the rope is nothing but a rope all imaginations disappear and there remains rope alone without anything else, so also from the scriptural text ‘neti, neti’ [Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.22] establishing the Self as devoid of all wordly attributes, there dawn, as a result of the light of the sun of realisation certainty about the Self.’

~ Sri Shankara, commentary on Mandukya Karika 2.18

We can clearly see the analogy between the rope and the imaginary appearance of the illusory snake, is analogous to the Self and the imaginary appearance of objects, and Shankara is clearly stating that the appearances no longer arise in self-realisation. We have already seen that Sri Ramana wrote the same in his text ‘Who am I?’:

If the mind, which is the cause of 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, which is the base, will not be obtained unless the perception of the world which is a superimposition, ceases.

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, ‘Who Am I?’

But perhaps Shankara says it best in his own introduction to the Mandukya Upanishad where he writes:

‘Since the phenomenal world of duality is a creation of ignorance, it can be eradicated through knowledge, and hence this book is begun in order to reveal the knowledge of Brahman’

~ Shankara, introduction to his commentary on Mandukya Upanishad and Gaudapada’s Karika

Shankara also makes the following remark in his introduction, this time summarising chapter 2 of Mandukya Karika:

‘The second chapter is concerned with rationally proving the unreality of the phenomenal world of duality, on the cessation of which is attained non-duality, just as the reality of the rope is know on the elimination of the illusion of the snake etc imagined upon it’

~ Shankara, introduction to his commentary on Mandukya Upanishad and Gaudapada’s Karika

Lastly I will leave you with a verse from Chandogya Upanishad and Shankara’s commentary on this:

‘The infinite is that where one does not see anything else, does not hear anything else, and does not understand anything else. Hence, the finite is that where one sees something else, hears something else, and understands something else. That which indeed is the Infinite is immortal. On the other hand, that which is finite is mortal’

~ Chandogya Upanishad 7.24.1

Shankara writes the following in his commentary on this verse – note he is making a statement about the entire text. Hopefully given all of the above the meaning is clear without my having to comment any further:

‘Therefore the meaning of the whole text is that phenomenal dealing does not exist in the Infinite…the idea is that this [phenomenal dealing] exists during the period of ignorance. It is like a thing seen in a dream, which only exists in that period, before waking’

~ Shankara’s commentary on Chandogya Upanishad 7.24.1

There are so many more quotes, both from Gaudapada and Shankara, on this same topic that give the same teaching. If we explore Shankara’s other commentaries we see these same teachings given again and again. For example, see this post here on Chapter 1 of Gaudapada’s Karika which explains many things including:

  • the True Self (Atman) is also known as Turiya
  • there are no phenomenal arisings in Turiya/Atman
  • no cause or effect or karma exists in Turiya/Atman
  • in Turiya/Atman there is no consciousness of the waking, dream or deep sleep state
  • in truth we cannot even say the the phenomenal world disappears in liberation, as when truth (self) is realised, it is ‘known’ that the phenomenal world never even arose or appeared in the first place (ie. the radical ajata doctrine is being ellucidated here)

And I haven’t even included this most famous verse from Gaudapa which expounds the highest truth in Vedanta teachings – I hope that after reading the above, you can hopefully understand exactly what the verse does and does not mean!

See here for the rest of this article which provides extensive quotes from Sri Ramana Maharshi, more quotes from Shankara, and other quotes from Yoga Vasistha and Ribhu Gita on this same topic of Ajata Vada

Q: Why is it necessary for the mind to die? | Lakshmana Swamy | Ramana Maharshi

~ Tom Das ~ 2 Comments

Q: Why is it necessary for the mind to die?

Lakshmana Swamy [a devotee of Ramana Maharshi]: The mind must die, there is no other way to realize the Self. Some people say that complete equanimity of mind is Self realization, but this is not true. This is only a stage one passes through on the way to Self-realization. Other people say that seeing the Self or God everywhere is Self-realization, but this idea is not true either. To see the Self everywhere there must be an “I” who sees, and while that “I” exists the mind will also exist. The jnani does not see anything because the seeing entity in him has died. In the Self there is no seeing, only being. When the mind still exists one can reach a stage where one can see the whole world as a manifestation of the Self, but when the mind dies, there is no one who sees the world and no world to be seen.

If you have a mind then the earth, the sky and the stars will exist and you will be able to see them. When the mind dies there will be no earth, no sky, no stars and no world. The world of objects, names and forms is only the mind, and when the mind dies, the world dies with it. Only the Self then remains.

Seeing everything as the Self gives the impression that the Self is equally distributed everywhere. This is also an idea in the mind. When the mind finally dies you realize that there is no distribution and no everywhere.

Shankara: the body and mind are symptoms of ignorance | Advaita Vedanta | Nisargadatta Maharaj

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

Sri Shankara, both in his commentaries and in his shorter works, often writes that the body and mind are symptoms (or effects) of ignorance, and when ignorance goes, the symptoms or effects of ignorance also go.

He also writes that the body, mind and world can never have any connection whatsoever with What You Truly Are, the Self, Pure Consciousness – and that only through ignorance can a connection between the two appear to be there.

eg. In Vivekachudamani Shankara writes:

195. But for delusion there can be no connection of the Self – which is unattached, beyond activity and formless – with the objective world, as in the case of blueness etc., with reference to the sky.

196. The Jivahood of the Atman, the Witness, which is beyond qualities and beyond activity, and which is realised within as Knowledge and Bliss Absolute – has been superimposed by the delusion of the Buddhi, and is not real. And because it is by nature an unreality, it ceases to exist when the delusion is gone.

197. It exists only so long as the delusion lasts, being caused by indiscrimination due to an illusion. The rope is supposed to be the snake only so long as the mistake lasts, and there is no more snake when the illusion has vanished. Similar is the case here.

198-199. Avidya or Nescience and its effects are likewise considered as beginningless. But with the rise of Vidya or realisation, the entire effects of Avidya, even though beginningless, are destroyed together with their root – like dreams on waking up from sleep. It is clear that the phenomenal universe, even though without beginning, is not eternal – like previous non-existence.

200-201. Previous non-existence, even though beginningless, is observed to have an end. So the Jivahood which is imagined to be in the Atman through its relation with superimposed attributes such as the Buddhi, is not real; whereas the other (the Atman) is essentially different from it. The relation between the Atman and the Buddhi is due to a false knowledge.

202. The cessation of that superimposition takes place through perfect knowledge, and by no other means. Perfect knowledge, according to the Shrutis, consists in the realisation of the identity of the individual soul and Brahman.

205. When the unreal ceases to exist, this very individual soul is definitely realised as the eternal Self. Therefore one must make it a point completely to remove things like egoism from the eternal Self.

Here Sri Nisargadatta also says the same:


Liberation or Self-Knowledge is not an understanding | Advaita Vedanta

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Many erroneously think liberation is mere understanding in the mind ‘I am That’ or the ability to discern the difference (viveka) between what is lasting (nitya) and what is temporary (anitya), and thereby know in the mind that you are That which is lasting, and the temporary depends on you.

Sri Ramana Maharshi, completely in line with the vedanta scriptures, explains that Jnana or Liberation is nothing of the kind – it is not mere intellectual understanding or thoughts or discernment (viveka) in the mind, although this may be a useful precursor.

Here are two verses that Sri Ramana wrote himself:

‘Cease all talk of ‘I’ and search with inward diving mind whence the thought of ‘I’ springs up. This is the way of knowledge. To think, instead, ‘I am not this, but That I am,’ is helpful in the search, but it is not the search itself.’

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Ulladu Narpadu (Forty Verses on Reality), Verse 29

‘When the Vedas have declared, ‘Thou art That’ – not to seek and find the nature of the Self and abide in It, but to think ‘I am That, not This’ is want [ie. lack] of strength. Because, That abides forever as the Self.’

~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Ulladu Narpadu (Forty Verses on Reality), Verse 32

If this is a new or strange teaching for you, please explore the recommended reading list here to understand these teachings in full.

UPANISHADS

In the Amritabindu Upanishad Jnana is defined as follows in verse 5:

‘The mind severed from all connection with sensual objects, and prevented from functioning out, awakes into the light of the heart, and finds the highest condition. The mind should be prevented from functioning, until it dissolves itself in the heart. This is Jnana, this is Dhyana, the rest is all mere concoction of untruth.’

Some people think I selectively quote merely to prove my own point, but note that this above verse was also quoted to make this very same point by Swami Vidyaranya (1296-1386), author of the wonderful Advaita Vedanta text Panchadasi and Shankaracharya (head monk and preserver of Advaita Vedanta) of Sringeri Math, in his work Jivanmukti Viveka.

GAUDAPADA AND SHANKARA

Sri Gaudapada wrote the following in his commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad, explaining how in liberation no mind exists:

3.32 When the Truth of Atman has been realised, the mind ceases to think; then the mind attains the state of not being the mind. In the absence of things to be perceived, it becomes a non-perceiver.

Shankara gives his commentary on this verse 3.31 explaining how the entire phenomenal existence is dependent on the mind and how mind is stilled or stopped in liberation, agreeing with Gaudapada above:

‘This duality as a whole, that is mano-drsyam, perceived by the mind; is nothing but the mind, which is itself imagined – this is the proposition [Tom: ie. meaning of the verse]. For duality endures so long as the mind does, and disappears with the disappearance of the mind.

‘For when the mind ceases to be mind when, like the illusory snake disappearing in the rope, the mind’s activity stops through the practice of discriminating insight and detachment, or when the mind gets absorbed in the state of sleep, duality is not perceived. From this non-existence is proved the unreality of duality. This is the purport. How does the mind cease to be the mind? This is being answered [in the next verse and commentary]’

The rest of the text continues in this manner.

MORE SHANKARA

We see the same teaching in Shankara’s masterpiece Vivekachudamani which explains all the teachings given in Shankara’s various commentaries in a much clearer form. Here is verse 169 where he equates the mind with ignorance:

169. There is no Ignorance (Avidya) outside the mind. The mind alone is Avidya, the cause of the bondage of transmigration. When that is destroyed, all else is destroyed, and when it is manifested, everything else is manifested.

Then he states the world is but an illusion projected by the mind, like a dream, essentially equating the mind with maya:

170. In dreams, when there is no actual contact with the external world, the mind alone creates the whole universe consisting of the experiencer etc. Similarly in the waking state also; there is no difference. Therefore all this (phenomenal universe) is the projection of the mind.

Shankara then warns the seeker to stay away from the mind:

176. In the forest-tract of sense-pleasures there prowls a huge tiger called the mind. Let good people who have a longing for Liberation never go there.

MANONASA

Shankara teaches us that the mind eventually must die (manonasa, a traditional synonym of self-realisation), and the method of how this is achieved:

277. The Yogi’s mind dies, being constantly fixed on his own Self.

407. This apparent universe has its root in the mind, and never persists after the mind is annihilated. Therefore dissolve the mind by concentrating it on the Supreme Self, which is thy inmost Essence.

481. My mind has vanished, and all its activities have melted, by realising the identity of the Self and Brahman; I do not know either this or not-this; nor what or how much the boundless Bliss (of Samadhi) is

502. How can there be merits and demerits for me, who am without organs, without mind, changeless, and formless – who am the realisation of Bliss Absolute? The Shruti also mentions this in the passage “Not touched”, etc.!

🙏🙏🙏

Simply let go of seeking! (and why that doesn’t work)

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

This was originally post on Facebook here

1. Seeking will necessarily continue until the ego is completely destroyed. You cannot simply chose to stop seeking or ‘let go of seeking’. THE EFFECTS WILL BE TEMPORARY AT BEST, and this is ultimately dissatisfactory. Seeking (and its counterpart, suffering) will always come back until ego is completely gone. That’s just the way it is. There will always be a sense of lack until the self is discovered.

2. And ego is not destroyed by trying to destroy the ego… Your true nature prior to the arising of ego (ie. source) must be discovered, and the ego ends as a side effect of this discovery of truth.

3. Only when ego is completely destroyed in this way, is it then seen that the ego never existed in the first place. Ego never arose at all! The world (which is a projection of ego, and is also known as duality) never came into existence at all, not even as an appearance! (Why would anyone want this? Because it is heaven, because it is bliss, because it is what you are truly seeking for and have always been seeking for. It is total love, it is your own true self.)

4. Merely saying ‘there is already no such thing as ego’, without having truly discovered the formless objectless worldless Source-Subject-Self, doesn’t work to genuinely end seeking or genuinely end suffering. This is merely an empty proclamation for the mind.

5. This discovery of your true nature is never for the mind (or the body, or the body-mind). Mind is the same as ego. Ego is the same as mind. There is literally no difference. If the discovery is for the mind, suffering may be reduced, but suffering and seeking will still persist on a subtle level until the self is truly known, devoid of thought, devoid of mind.

6. If realisation is for the mind or in the mind, then you are still on the level of seeking, and the true formless self, the source of all, the subject, is yet to be truly discovered – you are still a seeker. The general advice here is to find a teacher, learn the genuine method of self-enquiry and put the teaching into practice.

7. Without a teacher it is very difficult for most to truly learn self-enquiry, which cannot usually be taught from books or from static words, but is transmitted in a variety of ways, including through the well-timed words/interactions of a teacher and through the silence and the presence of the sage. For some the technique can be revealed by simply going/sinking within, towards the I AM (which is the true or ultimate teacher), away from objective phenomena, but this seems to be very rare. The exact path to self-inquiry and self-realiaation (or self-knowledge) for each apparent individual person varies greatly, and so for most a teacher is necessary, or at least very helpful.

8. ‘To know the (worldless objectless) self, is merely to be the (worldless objectless) self.’

9. Eternal love, adoration and gratitude to my beloved guru and teacher, Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi, who is truly the nature of my very own Self, residing in the Heart of all beings, whose radiant presence shines forth in all times and in all places, whose teachings can be discovered by simply turning within and searching within, and who has revealed these teachings to me both in his precious words and within my Heart.

Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Arunachala Ramanaya Om

🙏🙏🙏

‘The practice of witnessing thoughts and events…was never even in the least recommended’ by Sri Ramana Maharshi | Sri Sadhu Om | The Path of Sri Ramana

~ Tom Das ~ 5 Comments

The following is written by Sri Sadhu Om, a direct devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s, and is taken from the text ‘The Path of Sri Ramana – Part 1’, from one of the footnotes in Chapter 7. You can download the entire text for free here – it is a wonderful and rare text that explains the entire path to liberation. Please also see recommended reading for liberation here as well as the introductory articles on the homepage for more.

The practice of witnessing thoughts and events, which is much recommended nowadays by lecturers and writers, was never even in the least recommended by Sri Bhagavan, Indeed, whenever He was asked what should be done when thoughts rise (that is, when attention is diverted towards second or third persons) during sadhana, He always replied in the same manner as He had done to Sri Sivaprakasam Pillai in ‘Who am I?’, where He says:

“If other thoughts rise, one should, without attempting to complete them, enquire ‘To whom did they rise?’. What does it matter however many thoughts rise? At the very moment that each thought rises, if one vigilantly enquires ‘To whom did this rise ?’, it will be known ‘To me’. If one then enquires ‘Who am I?’, the mind (our power of attention) will turn back (from the thought) to its source (Self)”.

Moreover, when He says later in the same work, “Not attending to what-is-other (that is, to any second or third person) is non-attachment (vairagya) or desirelessness (nirasa)”, we should clearly understand that attending to (witnessing, watching, observing or seeing) anything other than Self is itself attachment, and when we understand thus we will realize how meaningless and impractical are such instructions as ‘Watch all thoughts and events with detachment’ or ‘Witness your thoughts, but be not attached to them’, which are taught by the so-called gurus of the present day.

————

Tom: The following excerpt is also taken from the same chapter, chapter 7, of The Path of Sri Ramana – Part 1:

Since, whether we know it or not, Self, which is now wrongly considered by us to be unknown, is verily our reality, the very nature of our (the Supreme Self’s) attention itself is Grace (anugraha). This means that whatever thing we attend to, witness*, observe or look at, that thing is nourished and will flourish, being blessed by Grace…

…Hence, when the power of attention of the mind is directed more and more towards second and third person objects, both the strength (kriya-bala) to attend to those objects and the ignorance – the five sense-knowledges in the form of thoughts about them – will grow more and more, and will never subside! Have we not already said that all our thoughts are nothing but attention paid to second and third person objects? Accordingly, the more we attend to the mind, the thoughts which are the forms (the second and third person objects) of the world, the more they will multiply and be nourished. This is indeed an obstacle. The more our attention – the glance of Grace (anugraha-drishti) – falls on it, the more the mind’s wavering nature and its ascendancy will increase. That is why it is impossible for the mind to negate anything by thinking ‘I am not this, I am not this’ (neti, neti). (Footnote to text here: This is why aspirants who, in order to destroy evil thoughts like lust, anger and so on, fight against them and thereby think about them fail in their attempts, while aspirants practising Self-enquiry, who pay their full attention to Self with an indifference towards their thoughts, bypass them easily)

On the other hand, if our (Self’s) attention is directed only towards ourself, our knowledge of our existence alone is nourished, and since the mind is not attended to, it is deprived of its strength, the support of our Grace. “Without use when left to stay, iron and mischief rust away” – in accordance with this Tamil proverb, since they are not attended to, all the ‘vasana-seeds, whose nature is to rise stealthily and mischievously, have to stay quiet, and thus they dry up like seeds deprived of water and become too weak to sprout out into thought-plants. Then, when the fire of Self-knowledge (jnana) blazes forth, these tendencies (vasanas), like well-dried firewood, become a prey to it.

This alone is how the total destruction of all tendencies (vasanakshaya) is effected.

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