One of the best books ever written on the subject of Self-Realisation/Liberation is the Seven Steps to Awakening, compiled by Michael Langford. It contains wonderful, clear and rare teachings for those who are able to truly take in what is presented here:
This post is only for those who are deeply interested in liberation, and it was originally posted here on Facebook
There is a teaching that says that after liberation, the liberated sage’s ego becomes dead, like a burnt rope, in that it continues to exist in superficial appearance, in name and form, but doesn’t actually have any robust structure or power.
Similarly, the same teaching says that the liberated sage’s body & mind continues after liberation, but there is no longer any individual will at play, and it is just the destiny of the body mind (known as prarabdha karma in Sanskrit) that plays out. An analogy is given of how a fan continues to rotate even when the power has been turned off, the idea being that in a similar way the sage’s body continues to act in the world according to its pre-existing energy and destiny but without anybody’s individual will or ego being present any longer..
Sri Ramana often gave this teaching himself, but he also said this was a lower teaching for those who were unable to accept the higher teachings. In his writings, and to his closest devotees, he often explained that in truth, in liberation there is no karma (action or activity) whatsoever, and there is no body or mind or world for the Jnani. It only appears this way due to the ignorant view of the ignorant onlooker.
33. The statement that the jnani retains prarabdha while free from sanchita and agami is only a formal answer to the questions of the ignorant. Of several wives none escapes widowhood when the husband dies; even so, when the doer goes, all three karmas vanish.
~ Supplement to the 40 verses on reality, written by Sri Ramana Maharshi
and
The Self-Realised Sage knows not whether the transient body comes and stays, or dies and leaves, even as a senseless drunkard knows not what happens to his clothes.
~ Guru Vachaka Kovai, Sri Bhagavan 24 (a verse written by Sri Ramana Maharshi)
This teaching is known as Ajata, which is the teaching that the appearance of the body mind and world only appear due to ignorance or ego, and that the world, including the body and mind, never really appeared or existed in the first place. Ignorance never really came about at all. Duality, meaning the appearance of any rising phenomena whatsoever, never actually occurred.
This is why the scriptures describe the truth, the true self, as being homogeneous, without multiplicity or variety, devoid of appearances, objects, forms and imagination. The scriptures say in Brahman there are no hands or feet or eyes or ears or thoughts, etc etc, and this is the meaning of those verses, as Shankara has also explained in his commentaries.
eg. Shankara writes the following:
‘Because I am without an eye*, I have no sight. As I have no ear either*, how could I have hearing? As I have no voice I can have no speech. As I have no mind, how could I have thought? There cannot be action on the part of that which does not have life force (prana). There cannot be knowership on the part of that which has no mind. Neither can there be knowledge or ignorance on the part of me who am the Light of Pure Consciousness
~Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 13.1, 13.2
*Shankara is quoting from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.8.8
Here is how Lakshmana Sarma (LS), a direct devotee of Sri Ramana’s, describes this in Maha Yoga pages 59-60; here LS speaks of 2 levels of the teaching, the higher (true) and lower (ultimately untrue); note that LS uses the English word ‘revelation’ to refer to Shruti (the revealed scriptures consisting primarily of the Vedas and Upanishads):
‘The ancient lore is twofold. One part of it is addressed to those who are not conscious of being in ignorance, and therefore have no use for a teaching intended to dispel that ignorance. The other part of the ancient lore is addressed to those that are conscious of the ignorance and are in earnest to escape from it. These two parts are quite distinct. But this feature of the ancient Revelation is not known to these believers. Besides they are offended by the inevitable corollary that theirs is a lower position; they also feel it a grievance that the world, which they believe to be real, should be dismissed as unreal, and often want to quarrel with us who are followers of the Sages; we however have no quarrel with them, as the Sages have pointed out, because we realise that for them it is all right to believe as they do, and, so believing, to make the best of the world while it lasts. They are like dreamers who are persuaded that their dreams are real, and do not want to awake. We have begun to see that this worldly life is only a dream, because the Sages tell us so; and we want to awake.’
See this post below for more on this topic – I share more quotes from Sri Ramana and Sri Shankara which further explains the above in more detail:
You are free to download and share these pictures quotes which contain some key teachings of Advaita Vedanta courtesy of Adi Shankara, taken from the text Upadesa Sahasri (A Thousand Teachings):
You are welcome to download and share any of the following picture quotes – many more can be found on my Facebook page here in the photo albums.
Sri Ramana often said that the Jnani (self-realised or liberate Sage) is totally unaware of the body, the mind and the world, and that the liberated sage also has no awareness of the 3 states of dream, deep sleep or waking, all of which are a projection of ignorance (aka the mind). We will see below that Sri Shankara says the same.
Also see: Does the Sage (Jnani) see the world? Does the world appearance exist after liberation?
In the text Guru Vachaka Kovai (Garland of Guru’s Sayings) – a highly authoritative collection of Sri Ramana’s teachings recorded by Sri Muruganar, there are several verses that were written by Sri Ramana Maharshi himself, often highlighting key or especially important teachings. These verses were called ‘Sri Bhagavan’ – here is the 24th such verse from that text, which Sri Ramana himself wrote:
The Self-Realised Sage knows not whether the transient body comes and stays, or dies and leaves, even as a senseless drunkard knows not what happens to his clothes.
Guru Vachaka Kovai, Sri Bhagavan 24
We can see that Sri Ramana is saying that in truth the Jnani is not aware of the body at all.
This next quote is from Maharshi’s Gospel:
To him who is one with that Reality, there is neither the mind nor its three states, and therefore, neither introversion nor extroversion.
Maharshi’s Gospel (Chapter 6)
We can see here Sri Ramana is implying that it is the mind that gives rise to the 3 states (waking, dreaming, deep sleep) and for the Jnani there is no mind, nor the 3 states, therefore the Jnani’s (non-existent) mind cannot be said to be introverted nor extroverted (both of which are in relation to the body and the world of objects, of which the Jnani is unaware).
Taking about a different triad, the triad of jiva, jagat and iswara (individual person, the world, and the power that animates these – the prior verse specifies that this is the triad he is speaking of), Sri Ramana states that none of these remain in Self Realisation in the text Guru Ramana Vachana Mala:
Though these* (three) are unreal, they are not different from the Supreme Reality (Brahman); but the Supreme Reality is different (from these), because It exists without these* in the State of Self -Realisation
*the triad of jiva, jagat and Isvara; ie. the individual person, the world, and the personal God; these 3 do not exist in Self-Realisation
Guru Ramana Vachana Mala, verse 290
But doesn’t Sri Ramana teach us that for the Jnani they see the names and forms and body and mind AS THE SELF and not apart from the SELF? Yes, he does teach this, but this is a lower teaching, as he has also explained. See Sri Ramana’s own writing in Ulladu Narpadu verse 18:
18. To those who do not know and to those who do, the world is real. But to those who do not know, Reality is bounded by the world; while to those who know, Reality shines formless as the ground of the world. Such is the difference between them.
Careful readers will realised that Bhagavan Sri Ramana is saying that for the Jnani, only the substratum is real, and that the ‘world’ of the Jnani is the Pure consciousness only devoid of name and form, as he has already explained above.
Lakshmana Sarma (LS) was a close devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s for over 20 years, and he was one of only 2 people to have private tuition with Sri Ramana Maharshi on the true meaning of Sri Ramana’s teachings. LS was unhappy about how Sri Ramana’s teachings had been misrepresented even by other devotees, so after consulting with Sri Ramana Maharshi he wrote several texts aimed at correcting these distorting teachings. In this post I have included some of what he said about this aspect of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s teachings, and also given LS’s comments and explanation on verse 18 above, which Sri Ramana Maharshi allegedly said was the correct interpretation.
Here are some more teachings of Sri Ramana’s in a similar vein. When read separately they are clear. When read together they surely give a definitive teaching (please also scroll past the pictures for teachings from Shankara on this same topic further below):
So Bhagavan Sri Ramana has give these types of teachings to us many times – see the introductory articles on the homepage of this website which explore many of these teachings even further – but so has Sri Shankara given us these same teachings in various places. Here are some quotes from Upadesa Sahasri (‘A Thousand Teachings’), the only non-commentarial work attributed to Adi Shankara that is universally agreed as being a genuine work of his:
All this world is unreal and proceeds from ignorance, because it is seen only by one afflicted by ignorance
Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 17.20
Having thus effaced the triad consisting of dreamless sleep, dream and waking experience, one crosses over the great sea of ignorance. For he is then established in his own Self, void of all attributes of the empirical world, pure, enlightened, and by his very nature liberated.
Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 17.58
Because I am without an eye*, I have no sight. As I have no ear either*, how could I have hearing? As I have no voice I can have no speech. As I have no mind, how could I have thought?
There cannot be action on the part of that which does not have life force (prana). There cannot be knowership on the part of that which has no mind. Neither can there be knowledge or ignorance on the part of me who am the Light of Pure Consciousness
*Shankara is quoting from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.8.8
Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 13.1, 13.2
Just as a dream is [apparently] real and valid until one awakens from it, so are the experiences of the waking state, such as identity with the body and the authoritativeness of perception and the other means of knowledge, real and valid until knowledge of the Self
Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 11.5
Of me who am ever-liberated, pure, rock-firm and changeless, not subject to modification, immortal, indestructible and so without a body, there is no hunger or thirst or grief or delusion or old age or death. For I am bodiless…
Sri Shankara, Upadesa Sahasri 13.3-13.4
There are many other places Shankara has given this same teaching, such as in his introduction to his commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad which you can view here and if you explore this website you will find many such similar teachings.
Below I have put together some picture quotes of Shankara’s teachings which I previously shared on Facebook (there are dozens more on Facebook!)- you are also welcome to share any picture quotes I have created:
And here are some verses of Sri Shankara’s that Sri Ramana Maharshi himself has translated (into Tamil – these are the English translations of his translations):
Tom: Shankara writes the following in his commentary of Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.9.29.7. My comments are interspersed in italicised red with Shankara’s writings in black.
Here Shankara is making the point that strictly speaking there is no knowing or knowledge in Self-Knowledge/Self-Realisation/The Self, meaning there is no existence of or involvement of the mind in Self. He gives the analogy of water being thrown into a larger tank of water – that initial water does not retain its separateness by which it can know the larger body of water into which it was thrown. Self-knowledge is just a phrase used to point to That which cannot be put into words.
If there was an entity that could know Brahman or know of Brahman, then that would imply 2 entities, Brahman and and knower of Brahman. Or it would imply differentiation of Brahman. Either of these would contradict shruti (revealed scripture/revealed knowledge).
Similarly, Shankara states that bliss is not cognised in Self-Realisation for the same reasons. Rather Bliss is the nature of Self, not something experienced by the Self or by some self-realised entity or person (which is another illusion).
Incidentally, Shankara also reveals just how radical liberation is, stating that in liberation there is no body, no organs, no mind, no knowledge:
Also see: What exactly is Jnana (knowledge) according to Shankara and Gaudapada and the scriptures?
[Shankara:] Absolute separation from the body is liberation, and when there is no body there can be no organs, for they will have no support . Hence too there will be no knowledge, there being no body and organs. If knowledge could arise even in the absence of the body and organs, there would be no necessity for any one to possess them. Moreover (if Brahman as Knowledge Absolute cognises the bliss in liberation), it will contradict the oneness of Brahman.
Tom: Shankara clearly states in liberation there is total or absolute separation from Body, and then says there is no body in liberation. Without a body, there can be no mind and without a mind there can be no cognition or knowledge (in the ordinary sense of these words).
We see similar teachings from Sri Ramana Maharshi: in Ulladu Narpadu verse 12, Sri Ramana Maharshi writes:
True Knowledge is Being, devoid of knowledge as well as ignorance of objects. Knowledge of objects is not true knowledge. Since the Self shines self-luminous, with nothing else for It to know, with nothing else to know It, the Self is Knowledge. Nescience [ignorance] It is not.
In Upadesa Saram verse 27, Sri Ramana Maharshi writes:
That is true knowledge which transcends
Both knowledge and ignorance,
For in pure knowledge
Is no object to be known.
OBJECTION: Suppose we say that the Supreme Brahman, being eternal Knowledge, ever knows Itself as Bliss Absolute?
REPLY: No, (this has just been answered). Even the person under bondage, when freed from relative existence, would regain one’s real nature (Brahman). (So the same argument would apply also) .
Like a quantity of water thrown into a tank, one does not retain a separate existence so as to know the blissful Brahman. Hence, to say that the liberated person knows the blissful Self is meaningless. If, on the other hand, the liberated one, being different from Brahman, knows the bliss of Brahman and the individual self as, “I am the Bliss Absolute”, then the oneness of Brahman is contradicted, which would be against all Srutis; and there is no third alternative.
Tom: See my explanation in the introduction above
Moreover, if Brahman ever knows Its own bliss, it is superfluous to distinguish between awareness and unawareness. If It is constantly aware of this bliss, then that is Its nature; hence there is no sense in maintaining that It cognises Its own bliss.
Tom: the point here is that if Brahman is ‘constantly aware of it’s own bliss’, then this bliss is simply the nature of the Self, as Self is One, and it doesn’t make sense to think of an entity that cognises or perceives bliss in some way in Self-Realisation.
Such a view would be tenable if ever there was the possibility of Its not knowing that bliss, as for instance one knows oneself and another (by an act of will). There is certainly no sense in distinguishing between a state of awareness and one of unawareness in the case of one whose mind is uninterruptedly absorbed in making an arrow, for instance.
Tom: Shankara’s argument here is saying that to speak of ‘constantly knowing bliss’ during self-realisation would only make sense if there would be a possibility of not knowing bliss during self-realisation, which is not possible, so again, bliss is the nature of Self and not a cognised object.
If, on the other hand, Brahman or the Self is supposed to be knowing Its bliss interruptedly, then in the intervals when It does not cognise Itself, It must know something else; and the Self would become changeful, which would make It non-permanent.
Tom: If the bliss of Brahman came and went, or increased and decreased, then that would mean the Self is subject to change (which it isn’t) and is therefore impermanent (which it isn’t).
Hence the text, ” Knowledge , Bliss “, etc, must be interpreted as setting forth the nature of Brahman, and not signifying that the bliss of the Self is cognised.
Tom: Regarding the initial statement of Shankara’s above, namely that there is no body in Liberation, here are some quotes of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s that say the same, taken from Guru Vachaka Kovai:
86 Don’t ask, “How did this error rise,
Why this ignorance that the Self
Itself is as the world transformed?”
Seek rather and find out to whom
This happened, and the error [Tom: of the world appearance] will
Persist no more.
87 What is the Self’s self-transformation
As the world? A coil of straw
Appearing as a snake? Look hard,
You see no snake at all. There is
No transformation, no creation, none,
No world at all. [Tom: ie. ajata vada]
97 Only the mind, by maya’s might
Deluded, and looking outward sees
The body. The true Self knows no body.
To call the Self of Pure Awareness
The body’s owner or indweller
Is an error.
[Tom: This is reference to Chapter 13 of the Bhagavad Gita where Krishna states the Self is the knower of the body, and various other scriptures which advise that the Self is somewhere deep within the body, dwelling in each and everyone’s body, here Bhagavan Ramana is saying even this is not true, pointing us to a deeper teaching]
1230 The things you think of as existing
Do not exist. But That of which
You know not if it does exist
Or does not [Tom: ie. the supreme birthless deathless unchanging ever-pure blissful Self], That alone exists.
This is one of a series of introductory articles – please see the homepage of tomdas.com for more introductory articles. Also see:
Zen Teaching of Instantaneous Awakening by Zen Master Hui Hai
Realisation of Essence of Mind through ‘thoughtlessness’ Zen (Chan) Master Hui Neng – Platform Sutra
Zen (Ch’an) Master Yuanwu: The Sure Way to Enlightenment, The Way of Zen
Tom: Here in this post I have selected some key teachings from Zen Master Huang Po that outline his view of the ‘Path’ to Liberation. In addition to this, I have also selected some specific teachings in order to compare and contrast Huang Po’s teachings to that of Advaita Vedanta and of Sri Ramana Maharshi (see here for some essential teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi). Whilst I make no claim that these teachings are all exactly the same, in this particular post I have emphasised commonalities rather than differences.
As usual my comments will be in italicised red. To gain the most from this post please explore the related posts that are hyperlinked throughout, such as the one above on the Essential Teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi. So you can read Huang Po’s zen teachings in their full context, I have provided the complete translation of Huang Po’s teachings as a PDF file below from which the various quotes below are taken:
The first teaching I cite is in fact the entire first teaching given in the above book, The Zen Teaching of Huang Po, teaching 1 from the Chun Chou record. Here is Huang Po:
‘The Master [Huang Po] said to me: All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists. This Mind, which IS without beginning, is unborn (Unborn not in the sense of eternity, for this allows contrast with its opposite; but unborn in the sense that it belongs to no categories admitting of alteration or antithesis) and indestructible.
‘It is not green nor yellow, and has neither form nor appearance. It does not belong to the categories of things which exist or do not exist nor can it be thought of in terms of new or old. It is neither long nor short, big nor small, for it transcends all limits, measures, names, traces, and comparisons. It IS that which you see before you – begin to reason about it and you at once fall into error. It is like the boundless void which cannot be fathomed or measured.
‘The One Mind alone is the Buddha, and there is no distinction between the Buddha and sentient things, but that sentient beings are attached to forms and so seek externally for Buddhahood. By their very seeking they lose it, for that is using the Buddha to seek for the Buddha and using mind to grasp Mind. Even though they do their utmost for a full aeon, they will not be able to attain to it.
‘They do not know that, if they put a stop to conceptual thought and forget their anxiety, the Buddha will appear before them, for this Mind is the Buddha and the Buddha is all living beings. It is not the less for being manifested in ordinary beings, nor is it greater for being manifested in the Buddhas.’
~ the first teaching from The Chun Chou record of Zen Master Huang Po, translated by John Blofeld, as found in the book ‘The Zen Teaching of Huang Po’
Tom comments:
(1) The nature of Mind. All is Mind. Mind is That which is unborn, devoid of objectivity and objective characteristics and is unending/indestructible. It has no form or appearance according to Huang Po, indicating its pure Subjectivity, form and appearance pertaining only to objects. It also cannot be understood. Mind here is equivalent to Sri Ramana Maharshi’s concept of the Self. The implication of this is that it is something you already ‘have’ and/or already ‘are’. Huang Po writes:
‘This Mind, which IS without beginning, is unborn and indestructible. It is not green nor yellow, and has neither form nor appearance‘
Compare this with Shankara writing in Vivekachudamani, a major text in the Advaita Vedanta tradition:
‘254. That which is beyond caste and creed, family and lineage; devoid of name and form, merit and demerit; transcending space, time and sense-object – that Brahman art thou.‘
More quotes like this can be found here: Shankara: How to Meditate for Self-Realisation
In teaching number 8 from this same text, the Chun Chou record, Huang Po states the following, confirming the lack of objects in Buddha-Mind:
‘Our original Buddha-Nature is, in highest truth, devoid of any atom of objectivity. It is void, omnipresent, silent, pure; it is glorious and mysterious peaceful joy – and that is all’
In teaching number 6 Huang Po states that Mind has nothing to do with conceptual thought (ie. the intellect) and it has nothing to do with forms:
‘This Mind is no mind of conceptual thought and it is completely detached from form‘
We see this in echoed in Shankara’s Vivekachudamani here, where he describes the Absolute as being distinct from the Universe/Maya (Maya means the illusion of the world, also known as duality):
‘261. That which is free from duality; which is infinite and indestructible; distinct from the universe and Maya, supreme, eternal; which is undying Bliss; taintless – that Brahman art thou‘
And from teaching number 2 Huang Po says:
‘The Mind IS the Buddha, nor are there any other Buddhas or any other mind. It is bright and spotless as the void, having no form or appearance whatever.’
From teaching 18 Huang Po says:
‘the real Mind as formless and neither coming nor going; his nature as something neither commencing at his birth nor perishing at his death, but as whole and motionless in its very depths’
And from teaching 22 of Wan Ling record Huang Po says (capitalisation present in the original translation):
‘NO BODIES AND NO MINDS – that is the Way of the Buddhas!‘
(2) Mind vs sentient beings (Self vs jiva): All is Mind, BUT Huang Po points out a very important distinction: when Mind seeks externally in forms, ie. when the mind goes out towards objects/objective phenomena, that characterises ‘sentient beings’, meaning jivas or apparent individual people. So we can see that the term ‘sentient being’ roughly translates as ‘jiva’ (apparent individual people). Huang Po writes ‘sentient beings are attached to forms and so seek externally for Buddhahood‘, the implication being that Buddhahood cannot be attained in this way through seeking externally.
This is similar to Sri Ramana Maharshi stating In Day by Day with Bhagavan:
‘The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world’
Similarly the great Advaita text Yoga Vasishta states:
‘Consciousness which is undivided imagines to itself desirable objects and runs after them. It is then known as the mind.’
and
‘After knowing that by which you know this (world) turn the mind inward and then you will see clearly (i.e. realize) the effulgence of the Self.’
and
‘O Rama, the mind has, by its own activity, bound itself; when it is calm it is free.’
Similarly Huang Po states in teaching 5:
‘You students of the Way who do not awake to this in your own minds, and who are attached to appearances or who seek for something objective outside your own minds, have all turned your backs on the Way’
Again, Huang Po admonishes seeking Buddhahood/liberation externally via objective phenomena.
(3) Ego cannot know Mind or Self: John Blofeld capitalises the ‘M’ in Mind in some places and leaves it uncapitalised when it is referring to ego-mind: Huang Po says ‘By their very seeking they lose it, for that is using the Buddha to seek for the Buddha and using mind to grasp Mind’, meaning Mind cannot be known by mind, or Self cannot be known by ego/mind/jiva (a person).
In the Wan Ling record, Huang Po states in teaching 18:
‘It cannot be reached with the body nor sought with the mind. All sentient beings ARE ALREADY of one form with Bodhi [Tom: Bodhi means Knowledge or liberation/enlightenment]‘
Similarly, Shankara in Vivekachudamani states the Absolute (Brahman) cannot be known with the Mind or intellect (Buddhi):
‘256. That which is untouched by the sixfold wave; meditated upon by the Yogi’s heart, but not grasped by the sense-organs; which the Buddhi [intellect] cannot know; and which is unimpeachable – that Brahman art thou’
(4) The remedy is to end all thoughts (by knowing your true nature): What is the remedy? Huang Po says ‘Put a stop to conceptual thoughts and forget ones anxieties’. How to do this is not explained in this teaching. However, if all is one already, why the need to do this at all? Why not just allow things to be as they are? Why the need to stop thoughts? The reason is that only then does Buddha reveal himself as Mind (or Self). Otherwise, if thoughts are not stopped, the illusion of being a ‘sentient being’ (ie. the illusion of being a jiva, ie. an apparent individual person with an apparent individual and separate consciousness) continues unabated and unchallenged. This ignorance must be removed. When divested of its objectivity and seeming multiplicity, only then does Mind or Buddha or Self or God reveal itself as Self, only then does illusion cease and suffering end and unity and absolute love fully shine.
Amritabindu Upanishad, verse 5 states:
‘The mind should be prevented from functioning, until it dissolves itself in the heart. This is Jnana [Tom: knowledge (of our true nature)], this is Dhyana [Tom: meditation (on our true nature)], the rest is all mere concoction of untruth.’
In teaching 23 of the Wan Ling record, Huang Po answers a question:
Q: If I follow this Way, and refrain from intellectual processes and conceptual thinking, shall I be
certain of attaining the goal?
A: Such non-intellection IS following the Way!
Also see Ramana Maharshi: The Self is realised when thoughts subside
We see this unambiguous teaching of needing to stop ALL thoughts given repeatedly by Huang Po. See here from teaching 23 of the Wan Ling record in which Huang Po explains further the method of liberation, explaining how thoughts create karma and the entire world/universe (or 3 worlds of samsara, see below):
Were you now to practice keeping your minds motionless at all times, whether walking, standing, sitting or lying; concentrating entirely upon the goal of no thought-creation, no duality, no reliance on others and no attachments; just allowing all things to take their course the whole day long, as though you were too ill to bother; unknown to the world; innocent of any urge to be known or unknown to others; with your minds like blocks of stone that mend no holes – then all the Dharmas [Tom: teachings] would penetrate your understanding through and through. In a little while you would find yourselves firmly unattached. Thus, for the first time in your lives, you would discover your reactions to phenomena decreasing and, ultimately, you would pass beyond the Triple World; and people would say that a Buddha had appeared in the world. Pure and passionless knowledge [Enlightenment] implies putting an end to the ceaseless flow of thoughts and images, for in that way you stop creating the karma that leads to rebirth – whether as gods or men or as sufferers in hell [Tom: this refers to ending the ‘triple world’ of suffering of (1) gods in heaven, (2) men on earth and (3) sufferers in hell].
Once every sort of mental process has ceased, not a particle of karma is formed. Then, even in this life, your minds and bodies become those of a being completely liberated. Supposing that this does not result in freeing you immediately from further rebirths, at the very least you will be assured of rebirth in accordance with your own wishes. The sutra declares: ‘Bodhisattvas are re-embodied into whatsoever forms they desire.’ But were they suddenly to lose the power of keeping their minds free from conceptual thought, attachment to form would drag them back into the phenomenal world, and each of those forms would create for them a demon’s karma!
Contrast this with Sri Ramana Maharshi himself writing in his poem Atma Vidya (Self-Knowledge), verse 5, in which he recommends stilling the mind completely in order to end karma and rebirth, ie to end samsara and suffering:
5. For loosening karma’s bonds and ending births,
This path is easier than all other paths.
Abide in stillness, without any stir
Of tongue, mind, body. And behold
The effulgence of the Self within;
The experience of Eternity; absence
Of all fear; the ocean vast of Bliss.
And Sri Ramana also writes in ‘Who Am I?’ in his answer to question 23 that the purpose of teaching is only to silence thoughts but discovering the Self, which is analogous to Huang Po saying end any and all conceptual thoughts and discover your true nature as Mind:
‘All the texts say that in order to gain liberation one should render the mind quiescent; therefore their conclusive teaching is that the mind should be rendered quiescent; once this has been understood there is no need for endless reading. In order to quieten the mind one has only to inquire within oneself what one’s Self is; how could this search be done in books?’
And here are some more teachings from Sri Ramana on the role of stilling thoughts:
True wealth is but the gracious silence of steady, unswerving Siva-awareness. This bright, rare treasure can be gained only by those who earnestly strive for extinction of all thoughts.
Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 1066
When all thoughts cease, including thought of God, this thought-free state, this Pure Awareness
Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 1207
Be still. Apart from this the mind has no task to do or thought to think
Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 773
If you remain still, without paying attention to this, without paying attention to that, and without paying attention to anything at all, you will, simply through your powerful attention to being, become the reality, the vast eye, the unbounded space of consciousness.
Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 647
Because that state is taught by silence, and also because it is attained by remaining in silence, it is called silence. The sage is in silence always, even when he speaks.
Sri Ramana Maharshi, Sri Ramana Paravidyopanishad, verse 539
In teaching 24 of the Wan Ling record Huang Po states all the 3 worlds of hell, earth and heaven will end in liberation:
‘For you also the Three Worlds [Tom: Trailoka – (1) hell – the world of desire, kamaloka, (2) earth – the world of form, rupaloka, and (3) heaven – the formless realm of heavenly beings, arupaloka; sometimes referred to as the 3 worlds of desire, form and formlessness] will vanish if you can reach the state beyond thought. On the other hand, if you still cling to the notion that something, even if it be as small as the hundredth part of a grain, might exist objectively, then even a perfect mastery of the entire Mahayana Canon will fail to give you victory over the Three Worlds. Only when every one of those tiny fragments [of the world or universe] is seen to be nothing can the Mahayana achieve this victory for you.’
Compare with Sri Ramana Maharshi as he writes in ‘Who Am I?’ in his response to Question 7:
‘When the mind, which is the cause of all cognition and of all actions, becomes quiescent, the world will disappear.’
Later we will see Huang Po state all we have to do is awake to Mind, or as I sometimes say, awake to what we Really Are. This is similar to Sri Ramana Maharshi emphasising knowing Self rather than ending all thoughts. This is from teaching 2 of the Chun Chou record of Huang Po:
‘Only awake to the One Mind, and there is nothing whatsoever [more] to be attained.’
Here in teaching 26 of the Wan Ling record, Huang Po explains more on how to realise your true nature:
Q: How, then, does a man accomplish this comprehension of his own Mind?
A: That which asked the question IS your own Mind [Tom: ie. you are the Mind/Self] but if you were to remain quiescent and to refrain from the smallest mental activity, its substance would be seen as a void [Tom: ie. devoid of objects] – you would find it formless, occupying no point in space and falling neither into the category of existence nor into that of non-existence. Because it is imperceptible Bodhidharma said: ‘Mind, which is our real nature [Tom; Here Huang Po confirms Mind is in fact the same as our real or true nature], is the unbegotten and indestructible womb [Tom: womb, ie. The Source, or the source of all phenomena or creation is Mind]; in response to circumstances, it transforms itself into phenomena [Tom: ie. Mind creates all phenomena]….Every one of the sentient beings [Tom: ie. Jivas] bound to the wheel of alternating life and death is re-created from the karma of his own desires! [Tom: ie. the illusion of samsara, the cycle of repeated birth, death and suffering experienced by the illusionary jiva/ego/person is created by our own desires, which is turn is born from ignorance of our true nature!]… We can see from this that every sort of dharma [Tom: note the use of a Sanskrit term here by Huang Po – dharma here means any phenomenal arising or ‘thing’, or Dharma can also mean teaching, meaning that every teaching or thing is just a creation of the mind] is but a creation of Mind. And all kinds of beings – humans, devas, sufferers in hell, asuras and all comprised within the six forms of life – each one of them is Mind-created [Tom: here it is clear that Huang Po is stating all phenomena are mind-created]. If only you would learn how to achieve a state of non-intellection [Tom: ie. no thoughts], immediately the chain of causation would snap…Chih Kung says: ‘Our bodies are the creations of our own minds.’ [Tom: ie. the above teachings tell us the body mind and world are all projections of Mind only] But how can one expect to gain such knowledge from books? If only you could comprehend the nature of your own Mind and put an end to discriminatory thought, there would naturally be no room for even a grain of error to arise. [Tom: the emphasis is on genuine Self-knowledge through cessation of mental activity and not book-knowledge]‘
Still from teaching 26 of the Wan Ling record, Huang Po says:
‘Your true nature is something never lost to you even in moments of delusion, nor is it gained at the moment of Enlightenment [Tom: ie. Analogous to the Self in Vedanta]. It is the Nature of the Bhutatathata [Tom: Bhutatathata, this means the Unitary Substratum of Being or Isness/Thusness as opposed to the multiplicity of objective phenomena]. In it is neither delusion nor right understanding [Tom: both of which are of the ego-mind or thought]. It fills the Void everywhere and is intrinsically of the substance of the One Mind. How, then, can your mind-created objects exist outside the Void? The Void is fundamentally without spatial dimensions, passions, activities, delusions or right understanding. You must clearly understand that in it there are no things, no men and no Buddhas; for this Void contains not the smallest hairs-breadth of anything that can be viewed spatially; it depends on nothing and is attached to nothing. It is all-pervading, spotless beauty; it is the self-existent and uncreated Absolute. Then how can it even be a matter for discussion that the REAL Buddha has no mouth and preaches no Dharma, or that REAL hearing requires no ears, for who could hear it? [Tom: for there is no body, mind, world, thoughts or things in the real Buddha, so Buddha has no mouth and no ears, ie. in reality there is no mouth, ears, bodies, etc.] Ah, it is a jewel beyond all price!’
Here is a brief summary of some of the key points of Huang Po’s teachings taken from the above quotes:
All of these points are consistent with the path to realisation as outlined by Sri Ramana Maharshi and Upanishads in my view. There are many other teachings present in the Zen Teaching of Huang Po and I have just selected some that align with the teaching of Sri Ramana Maharshi. Perhaps some of the other teachings do not fully align, or perhaps they are distortions due to the one recording the teachings or due to the translation/translator. Or perhaps not. Regardless, I hope this post has been of interest and is perhaps even inspiring for you.
The method of how to still the mind and stop all conceptual thought/realise the One Mind (ie. the practice of Self-Enquiry) is not explained more fully by Huang Po, but in my view the method of self-enquiry is implied – ie. knowing Mind directly through Mind (and not through body, sense organs, mentation or thought), ending all karma/ phenomena/ thoughts, how going out towards objects/arising phenomena blocks the way and describing Mind as One, as formless and as essentially without time, space, dimension, and ultimately and essentially distinct from form/objects – all these together imply direct intuition of Self via Self-Enquiry as opposed to going out towards objective phenomena (when Huang Po denies practices, he is denying practice that involve objective phenomena, in my interpretation at least).
If you want to read more of Huang Po’s method to liberation please see teaching 26 of the Wan Ling record which expands further upon this method – I have already partially quoted from this teaching above. Perhaps I will write a post more about this in the future if you want me to. Do let me know your thoughts in the comments below. For a summary of the essential teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi which explain in more detail the path to liberation, please see here.
Wishing you all a very Happy New Year!
I will leave you the quote from teaching 22 of the Wan Ling record, perhaps the most radical of the teachings I found, in which Huang Po says, with the capitalisation being present in the original translation:
‘NO BODIES AND NO MINDS – that is the Way of the Buddhas!‘
Also see: Recommended Reading: Books for Enlightenment, Liberation and Self-Realisation
I have also written an article contrasting traditional Buddhism with Vedanta. In this post you will also see references to other posts exploring themes in both these great traditions. Let me know what you think in the comments, best wishes:
Buddhism vs Vedanta | Self vs no-self | Nirvana vs Self-Realisation
Sravana means hearing the teachings. Manana means contemplating upon the teachings. Nididhyasana means meditating upon the Self or placing one’s attention onto the Self in order to discover its true nature. Together these three traditionally sum up the method or process of self-realisation according to Vedanta teachings.
However…
1) There are some that say that Sravana alone leads to self-realisation, and that Manana and Nididhyasana are ancilary practices to just remove the blocks and purify/ripen the mind and ready it for Sravana, and that Sravana is the liberating factor.
2) There are some that say Sravana is just an initial teaching to allow Nididhyasana to finally occur and it is Nididhyasana that is the primary sadhana (spiritual practice) that allows liberation to arise.
This is further confounded as there are scriptural verses in support of both of the above visions of the teachings.
eg.
‘Thus only is It realised-when these means, viz. hearing, reflection and meditation, have been gone through. When these three are combined, then only true realisation of the unity of Brahman is accomplished, not otherwise – by hearing alone.’
~ Shankara’s commentary on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.4.5
and seemingly contradicting this is the following:
‘for highly qualified aspirants, [self-] knowledge can arise even from mere listening to the teachings.’
~ Shankara’s commentary of Brahma Sutra 4.1.2
Swami Satchitanandendra Saraswati (SSS) in his many books on the teachings of Vedanta and on Shankara’s commentaries makes the following observation, namely that either Sravana, Manana or Nididhyasana can be the direct causes of liberation (ie. direct cause of removing ignorance), depending on the level of maturity of the (apparent) mind of the seeker. For those interested, Sri Ramana Maharshi says the same here, and also goes further to explain how this can be the case and also how both of the above scriptural passages do not actually contradict each other.
Here is SSS writing in the Appendix of his book ‘The Salient Features of Sankara’s Vedanta‘ on page 82:
6. Sravana (study of sacred revelation), Manana (reflective thinking) and Nididhyasana (concentrated contemplation), are all means for realizing Atman. Highly developed souls, however, who can immediately grasp the true meaning of the Vedic teaching, do not stand in need of any additional effort.
Not taking this principle into account is responsible for the divergence of opinion among commentators of Sankara Bhashya [Tom: Shankara’s commentaries] about the relation of Sravana and Nididhyasana. Of these, some aver that Sravana is the principal means and the other two are only ancillary to it; while others insist that nididhyasana is the one means to direct realization and without it mere Sravana would be of no avail.
7. Sravana and the other means [Tom: ie. manana and nididhyasana] are enjoined only in so far as they turn the seeker inwards and direct him to stay his mind on Atman, but the resultant knowledge is no object of any injunction. [Tom: ie. Sravana, manana and nididhyasana all have their intended effect of self-realisation by turning the seeker’s attention towards the Self, but that the Self that is subsequently realised as truth cannot itself be caused or created by any spitirual practice or effort or action, ie. the Self is uncaused and uncreated]
Those who cannot distinguish between the’ effort required for Sravana, etc, and the resultant knowledge in each case, have made it a matter for controversy whether or not ‘srotavyah’ [Tom: lit ‘that which is (to be) heard’, ie. scripture] and similar texts constitute true injunctions. Some of them maintain that these are all injunctions while others insist that they are seemingly injunctions in form but are really statements of fact. Some even think that they are merely eulogistic statements. [Tom: ie. because Shankara says actions or karma cannot lead to liberation or Jnana, there is argument about the ontological status of whether or not the 3 sadhanas of sravana, manana and nididyasana are karmas or not. In truth we should know that the Self is not a product of any action, but that the sadhana is an action that occurs in the phenomenal world of maya, and so if we discern properly between these 2 there is no real conflict.]
8. Manana refers to the type of reasoning suggested by the Sruti itself conducive to experience. Hence the term ‘experience’ here should be understood to mean the supersensuous intuition [Tom: ie. Self knowledge] which results from our enquiry which takes in one sweep the whole field possible of whatever is knowable.
From this the reader has to understand that use might be made of ordinary reasoning also in so far as it is conformable to the reasoning suggested by the Sruti. Advaitins do try to disclose the hollowness of other systems according to the course of reasoning accepted by themselves. But Advaita itself cannot be established by means of pure logical ratiocination. People who are not aware of this fact, often try to apply speculation or inferences based upon partial experiences to Vedanta also. Others condemn all reasoning and affirm that reasoning is of no use in matters taught by the Sruti. So they interpret Sruti according to their own predilection and place their own convictions before seekers as the final Vedantic truth.
9. Nididhyasana is that kind of spiritual discipline by means of which one concentrates one’s mind on the subtle principle, Atman. At the end of this discipline, one becomes conscious of the fact that the mind itself is a superimposition on Atman. Then the mind becomes no mind, that is to say, it is realized essentially as Atman himself.
Tom: Here in Shankara’s introduction to his commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad and his commentary on Sri Gaudapada’s Karika (ie. Sri Gaudapadas commentary on the same Mandukya Upanishad), Shankara explains some fundamental teachings of vedanta which may (or may not) suprise you!
Throughout, Shankara’s writings are in black whilst my comments are in italicised red.
Shankara gives these same teachings throughout his commentaries, eg. in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad but also in many other places too. However these teachings are often missed, glossed over or re-interpreted by many current so-called traditional teachers of Vedanta.
The following translation is my own, and I have simplified the language to aid understanding. Below I have also provided the PDF of a more literal translation of this commentary by Shankara on the Mandukya Upanishad from Swami Gambhirananda of Advaita Ashrama (this is the translation that I recommend as it is the most literal of the available translations in English, and so has the smallest amount of distortion and re-interpretation according to the prior beliefs and prejudices of the translator) which you can also read, which states the same as my translation but perhaps using more complex and at times archaic language.
Translated by Tom Das
Om! O gods, may we hear auspicious words with
the ears; while engaged in sacrifices, may we see
auspicious things with the eyes; while praising the
gods with steady limbs, may we enjoy a life that is
beneficial to the gods.
May Indra of ancient fame be auspicious to us;
may the supremely rich and all-knowing Pisa, god
of the earth, be propitious to us; may Garuda, the
destroyer of evil, be well disposed towards us; may
Brihashpati ensure our welfare.
Om! Shanti! Shanti! Shanti!
(Om! May there be peace! May there be peace! May there be peace!)
Tom: Some say that the Mandukya Upanishad, which is the smallest of the Upanishads consisting only of 12 verses, has no mention of God within it. They clearly have not read the invocatory verses above! Devotion and worship has always been a part of the nondual tradition of Vedanta. Below Shankara will provide 2 more invocatory verses that he has written:
I bow to that Brahman,
which after having enjoyed the gross objects [in the waking state],
by pervading all the worldly objects through a diffusion of Its rays of unchanging consciousness that embraces all that moves or does not move;
Which after having ‘drunk’ [during the dream state] all the variety of objects, produced by desire and lighted up by the intellect,
And sleeps [in the deep sleep state] while enjoying bliss
and making us enjoy through Maya;
and which is [in liberation] counted as the Fourth from the point of view of Maya,
and is supreme, immortal, and birthless.
Tom: Shankara in his first invocatory verses states that liberation, or Turiya, is called the Fourth state, but that this is only from the point of view of Maya (or ignorance), which admits of the 3 states. In true liberation, the 3 states, which are superimpositions on the Self, do not exist in any way shape or form, so Turiya is actually the Singular Reality and not the Forth state at all. This is explained in more detail later in the text by both Shankara and Gaudapada, and Shankara also explains this in more detail here in the text he wrote called Upadesa Sahasri.
The structure of Shankara’s invocatory verses also mimics the structure of the actual Mandukya Upanishad, which first explains the nature of the 3 states of waking, dream and deep dreamless sleep, before lastly explaining the nature of liberation (see verse 7 of the Mandukya Upanishad here), also known as the Self or Turiya, Turiya literally meaning ‘the fourth’ in Sanskrit. Let us continue with Shankara’s second invocatory verse:
May that Fourth one protect us which,
after having [in the waking state] identified Itself with the universe,
enjoys the gross objects created by the merits (and demerits) of past deeds;
After having [in the dream state] experienced through its own light the subtle objects of enjoyment that are called up by its own intellect;
Which [in deep sleep] withdraws promptly all these into Itself;
and which lastly [in liberation] becomes free from all attributes,
by discarding every distinction and difference [ie. by discarding all phenomenal appearances/objects].
Tom: the implication is that in liberation, there are no appearances of any objects, for these have been cast out, and that the appearance of any objects is tantamount to duality. This is further explained below. Let us read Shankara’s introduction to both the Mandukya Upanishad and to Gaudapada’s Karika:
The word [or letter] Om is everything [idam sarvam, literally meaning ‘all this’ or ‘all things’]. This will all be explained in the rest of this following text.
The four chapters of Sri Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad, that sum up the quintessence of Vedanta, starts with the phrase ‘The word Om is everything…’. Because Gaudapada starts with this phrase, the stated aim and purpose of this text, which we would usually state at the start of any text on Vedanta, should be obvious and need not be stated here. Clearly the aim and purpose of the text is the unfolding of Vedanta.
However, as I am giving a commentary here, I should briefly state the purpose of the text. The text, as it explains the spiritual disciplines that lead to a desired goal, will naturally have an aim and subject matter.
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.
Hence this text aims to reveal the knowledge of Brahman.
Tom: Shankara here is stating that the entire phenomenal world is a creation of ignorance, and that it needs to be eradicated for liberation to occur. This eradication of the phenomenal world can be attained through knowledge of Brahman, which is the same as liberation. The exact nature of knowledge of Brahman is explained later in this commentary here and how to attain this knowledge is explained by Gaudapada here and here.
Compare to Sri Ramana Maharshi when he says in the text Guru Vachaka Kovai in the following verses:
23. The Realised, who do not know anything as being other than Self, which is absolute Consciousness, will not say that the world, which has no existence in the view of the Supreme Brahman, is real.
28. O aspirants who hide yourselves away fearing this world, nothing such as a world exists! Fearing this false world which appears to exist, is like fearing the false snake which appears in a rope.
35. Since this world of dyads [knower-known] and triads [perceiver-perceiving-perceived] appears only in the mind, like the illusory ring of fire formed [in darkness] by whirling the single point of a glowing rope-end, it is false, and it does not exist in the clear sight of Self.
[Tom: The illusory ring of fire is a metaphor that Gaudapada himself uses throughout Chapter 4 of Gaudapada’s Karika].
87. Self appearing as the world is just like a rope seeing itself as a snake; just as the snake is, on scrutiny, found to be ever non-existent, so is the world found to be ever non-existent, even as an appearance.
Also compare also to Sri Ramana Maharshi when he writes in the beginning few paragraphs of his work entitled ‘Who Am I?’:
Q. When will the realization of the Self be gained?
A. When the world which is what-is-seen has been removed, there will be realization of the Self which is the seer.
Q. Will there not be realization of the Self even while the world is there?
A. There will not be.
Shankara will now justify his assertions by quoting from the highest scriptural authority in Vedanta, the Upanishads, let us see:
This fact is established by such Vedic texts as:
‘Because when there is duality, as it were, then one-smells something, one sees something…’ and so on (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad II. iv. 14);
‘When there is something else, as it were, then one can see something, on can know something’ (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV. iii. 31);
‘But when to the knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what? What should one know and through what?” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad II. iv. 14).
Tom: we can see that Shankara is providing 3 quotes from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad to back up this assertion, namely that appearances in the world, or perceiving things (apparently) through the senses, is the same as duality, and that all perceptions of the sense organs and all knowledge in the mind ceases with liberation. Now Shankara will summarise the contents of the 4 chapters of Gaudapa’s Karika (commentary) on the Mandukya Upanishad:
That being so, the first chapter explains the meaning of Om based on the traditional teachings [of Vedanta] and helps us to attain the reality that is the Self.
The second chapter aims to rationally prove the unreality of that phenomenal world of duality, on the cessation of which non-duality is attained, just as the reality of the rope is known on the elimination of the illusion of a snake imagined on it.
Tom: Shankara is again stating that non-duality or liberation is attained upon the cessation of the phenomenal world, which is duality, and Shankara gives the example of the rope and snake to justify his claim. We will only see the rope when the wrong-seeing or illusion of the snake (which causes fear and suffering) goes. Compare with Sri Ramana Maharshi when he writes in ‘Who Am I?’:
‘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.’
Shankara continues to summarise the contents of the last 2 chapters of Gaudapa’s Karika, and thus ends Shankara’s introduction to the Mandukya Upanishad. If you wish, you can compare my translation of Shankara’s introduction to this wonderful text to the more scholarly translation below by Swami Gambhirananda:
The third chapter aims to rationally establish the truth of non-duality, and to prevent it too from being negated by a similar process of argument.
The fourth chapter seeks to logically refute all the non-Vedic points of view, which are counterproductive to attaining of the truth of non-duality, and which remain concerned with this unreal duality.
Tom: we can see that in the last sentence of his introduction, Shankara is stating that the false teachings, ie. the teachings that do not lead to liberation, keep on coming back to the unreal duality, ie. false teachings keep on wanting to come back to the world of names and form, also known as maya. There is no Maya in the Self, and in truth there never was. This is the doctrine of ajata vada (no creation or no birth) that is famously explained in Gaudapada’s commentary on this Mandukya Upanishad.
The two main ways that the truly liberating teaching is distorted is firstly by stating that we do not need to turn within in order to realise the self, and secondly by stating that once the self has been realised we must turn back towards the world and integrate our newly-found non-dual understanding/ knowledge/ realisation with the world of phenomenal appearances.
Tom Das 