Talk 69

21st July, 1935
Talk 69.

There were reports of the above said Professor's University lectures in the Hindu. The lecturer had emphasised the necessity for birth control and discussed the various possibilities of making the man feel his responsibilities so that birth control might be automatic. The Master, on hearing it, casually remarked. "Let them find out the method of dying." [Here death refers to that of the ego (ahankar).]

Talk 68 Talk 70

Talk 68

21st July, 1935
Talk 68.

Dr. Radhakamal Mukerjee, a well-known Professor, fair man of middle age, with a peaceful look, practising yoga or meditation, has had some occult experiences and desires the mystery to be unravelled by the Master. He has written a book and had it published by Messrs. Longmans Green & Co., London. He finds Self-Realisation hard to attain and requires the Master's help. His question: "The upanishadic method of meditation has now disappeared. There was a great sage in Bengal who instructed me in it. After long years of discipline and practice I am having some mystic experiences. I feel sometimes that Bhuma [?] (Supreme Consciousness) is infinitude and that I am finite consciousness. Is that correct?"

Bhuma (Perfection) alone is. It is Infinite. There arises from it this finite consciousness taking on an upadhi [?] (limiting adjunct). This is abhasa [?] or reflection. Merge this individual consciousness into the Supreme One. That is what should be done.
D.: Bhuma is an attribute of Supreme Consciousness.

Bhuma is the Supreme - yatra naanyat pasyati yatra naanyat
srunoti sa bhuma (where one does not see any other, hears nothing, it is Perfection). It is indefinable and indescribable. It is as it is.
D.: There is a vastness experienced. Probably it is just below Bhuma
but close to it. Am I right?

Bhuma alone is. Nothing else. It is the mind, which says all this.
D.: Transcending the mind I feel the vastness.

Yes, Yes…. The professor turned to the lady seated just a little further away from him and interpreted in Hindi to her.
She: What is the difference between meditation and distraction?

No difference. When there are thoughts, it is distraction: when there are no thoughts, it is meditation. However, meditation is only practice (as distinguished from the real state of Peace.)
She: How to practice meditation?

Keep off thoughts. She: How to reconcile work with meditation?

Who is the worker? Let him who works ask the question. You are always the Self. You are not the mind. It is the mind which raises these questions. Work proceeds, always in the presence of the Self only. Work is no hindrance to realisation. It is the mistaken identity of the worker that troubles one. Get rid of the false identity.
2006 Photo of entrance to Virupaksha Cave where Bhagavan stayed from 1899 to 1916

The Professor: Is not the state of non-consciousness close to Infinite Consciousness?

Consciousness alone remains and nothing more.
D.: Sri Bhagavan's silence is itself a powerful force. It brings about a certain peace of mind in us.

Silence is never-ending speech. Vocal speech obstructs the other speech of silence. In silence one is in intimate contact with the surroundings. The silence of Dakshinamurti removed the doubts of the four sages. Mouna vyakhya prakatita tatvam (Truth expounded by silence.) Silence is said to be exposition. Silence is so potent. For vocal speech, organs of speech are necessary and they precede speech. But the other speech lies even beyond thought. It is in short transcendent speech or unspoken words, para vak.
D.: Is there knowledge in Realisation?

Absence of knowledge is sleep. There is knowledge in Realisation.
But this knowledge differs from the ordinary one of the relation of subject and object. It is absolute knowledge. Knowledge has two meanings: (1) vachyartha [?] = vritti [?] = Literal meaning. (2) lakshyartha [?] = Jnana = Self = Swarupa = Secondary significance.
D.: With vritti one sees knowledge.

Quite so, he also confounds vritti with knowledge. Vritti [?] is a mode of mind. You are not the mind. You are beyond it.
The Lady: There is sometimes an irresistible desire to remain in Brahma-akara-vritti.

It is good. It must be cultivated until it becomes sahaja [?] (natural).
Then it culminates as swarupa, one's own self. Later Sri Bhagavan explained: Vritti is often mistaken for consciousness. It is only a phenomenon and operates in the region of abhasa (reflected consciousness). The knowledge lies beyond relative knowledge and ignorance. It is not in the shape of vritti. There are no subject and object in it. Vritti belongs to the rajasic (active) mind. The satvic mind (mind is repose) is free from it. The satvic is the witness of the rajasic. It is no doubt true consciousness. Still it is called satvic mind because the knowledge of being witness is the function of abhasa (reflected consciousness) only. Mind is the abhasa. Such knowledge implies mind. But the mind is by itself inoperative. Therefore it is called satvic mind. Such is the jivanmukta's state. It is also said that his mind is dead. Is it not a paradox that a jivanmukta [?] has a mind and that it is dead? This has to be conceded in argument with ignorant folk. It is also said that Brahman is only the jivanmukta's mind. How can one speak of him as Brahmavid [?] (knower of Brahman). Brahman can never be an object to be known. This is, however, in accordance with common parlance. Satvic mind is surmised of the jivanmukta and of Iswara. "Otherwise," they argue, "how does the jivanmukta live and act?" The satvic mind has to be admitted as a concession to argument. The satvic mind is in fact the Absolute consciousness. The object to be witnessed and the witness finally merge together and Absolute consciousness alone reigns supreme. It is not a state of sunya [?] (blank) or ignorance. It is the swarupa (Real Self). Some say that mind arises from consciousness followed by reflection (abhasa); others say that the abhasa (reflection) arises first followed by the mind. In fact both are simultaneous. The Professor asked Sri Bhagavan to extend His Grace to him although he would soon be a thousand miles off. Sri Bhagavan said that time and space are only concepts of mind. But swarupa (the Real Self) lies beyond mind, time and space. Distance does not count in the Self. The lady with him was most reluctant to leave the Master and return home.

The Master said, "Think that you are always in my presence. That will make you feel right." They left after dusk.

(Photo of entrance of Virupaksha Cave is self-taken, free to copy/use)

Talk 67 Talk 69

Talk 67

21st July, 1935
Talk 67.

A visitor, Mr. K. S. N. Iyer of the South Indian Railway, said, "There is a trifling halting-place in my meditation. When I ask myself, `Who am I?' my reasoning proceeds as follows; I see my hand. Who sees it? My eye. How to see the eye? In a mirror. Similarly to see me, there must be a mirror. `Which is to supply the place of the mirror in me?' is my question."

Then why do you enquire, "Who am I??" Why do you say you are troubled and so on? You could as well remain quiet. Why do you rise out of your composure?
D.: Enquiring thus helps me to concentrate. Is concentration the only benefit?

What more do you want? Concentration is the thing. What makes you come out of your quiet?
D.: Because I am drawn out.

Enquiry of "Who am I?" means finding the source of `I'. When that is found, that which you seek is accomplished. (The gist of Sri Bhagavan's words seems to be that one should make a concerted effort and not give it up baffled, with a defeatist mentality.)

Talk 66 Talk 68

Talk 66

15th July, 1935
Talk 66.

A letter was received containing some learned questions pertaining to memory, sleep and death. It looked, at first sight, that they were cogent yet baffling to answer. But when the Master was approached on the subject he disentangled the skein very nicely, pointing out that all such confusion was due to the non-differentiation of the real `I' from the false `I'. The attributes and modes pertain to the latter and not to the former. One's efforts are directed only to remove one's ignorance. Afterwards they cease, and the real Self is found to be always there. No effort is needed to remain as the Self.

Talk 65 Talk 67

Talk 65

13th July, 1935
Talk 65.

A visitor: Is the jagat [?] (world) perceived even after Self-Realization?

From whom is this question? Is it from a Jnani [?] or from an ajnani [?]?
D.: From an ajnani.

Realise to whom the question arises. It can be answered if it arises after knowing the doubter. Can the jagat or the body say that it is? Or does the seer say that the jagat or the body is? The seer must be there to see the objects. Find out the seer first. Why worry yourself now with what will be in the hereafter? Sri Bhagavan continued: What does it matter if the jagat is perceived or not perceived? Have you lost anything by your perception of jagat now? Or do you gain anything where there is no such perception in your deep sleep? It is immaterial whether the world is perceived or not perceived. The ajnani sees the Jnani active and is confounded. The jagat is perceived by both; but their outlooks differ. Take the instance of the cinema. There are pictures moving on the screen. Go and hold them. What do you hold? It is only the screen. Let the pictures disappear. What remains over? The screen again. So also here. Even when the world appears, see to whom it appears. Hold the substratum of the `I'. After the substratum is held what does it matter if the world appears or disappears? The ajnani takes the world to be real; whereas the Jnani sees it only as the manifestation of the Self. It is immaterial if the Self manifests itself or ceases to do so.

Talk 64 Talk 66

Talk 64

6th July, 1935
Talk 64.

News of someone's death was brought to Sri Bhagavan. He said, "Good. The dead are indeed happy. They have got rid of the troublesome overgrowth - the body. The dead man does not grieve.

The survivors grieve for the man who is dead. Do men fear sleep? On the contrary sleep is courted and on waking up every man says that he slept happily. One prepares the bed for sound sleep. Sleep is temporary death. Death is longer sleep. If the man dies while yet alive he need not grieve over others' death. One's existence is evident with or without the body, as in waking, dream and sleep. Then why should one desire continuance of the bodily shackles? Let the man find out his undying Self and die and be immortal and happy."

Talk 63 Talk 65

Talk 63

6th July, 1935
Talk 63.

A high officer asked: If juniors are promoted over oneself the mind is perturbed. Will the enquiry, `Who am I??' help the man to soothe the mind under such circumstances?

Yes. Quite so. The enquiry `Who am I?' turns the mind inward and makes it calm.
D.: I have faith in murti dhyana (worship of form). Will it not help me to gain jnana?

Surely it will. Upasana [?] helps concentration of mind. Then the mind is free from other thoughts and is full of the meditated form. The mind becomes it - and thus quite pure. Then think who is the worshipper. The answer is `I', i.e., the Self. So the Self is gained ultimately. The present difficulty is that the man thinks that he is the doer. But it is a mistake. It is the Higher Power which does everything and the man is only a tool. If he accepts that position he is free from troubles; otherwise he courts them. Take for instance, the figure in a gopuram [?] (temple tower), where it is made to appear to bear the burden of the tower on its shoulders. Its posture and look are a picture of great strain while bearing the very heavy burden of the tower. But think. The tower is built on the earth and it rests on its foundations. The figure (like Atlas bearing the earth) is a part of the tower, but is made to look as if it bore the tower. Is it not funny? So is the man who takes on himself the sense of doing. Then the Malayalam version of Ulladu Narpadu was read out by a devotee for the benefit of the visitor. After hearing it, he asked: What about the reference to duality in practice and unity at the end?

Some people think that one must begin practice with dualistic idea.
It refers to them. They say that there is God; the man must worship and meditate; ultimately the jiva [?] merges into God. Others say that the Supreme Being and the jiva are always apart and never merge into each other. Howsoever it may be at the end, let us not trouble ourselves about it now. All are agreed that the jiva IS. Let the man find out the jiva, i.e., his Self. Then there will be time to find out if the Self should merge in the Supreme, is a part thereof, or remains different from it. Let us not forestall the conclusion. Keep an open mind, dive within and find out the Self. The truth will itself dawn upon you. Why should you determine beforehand if the finality is unity absolute or qualified, or duality? There is no meaning in it. The ascertainment is now made by logic and by intellect. The intellect derives light from the Self (the Higher Power). How can the reflected and partial light of the intellect envisage the whole and the original Light? The intellect cannot reach the Self and how can it ascertain its nature? Such is the significance of the reference.
D.: One of the stanzas says that the scriptures so scrupulously studied in the earlier stages are ultimately of no use. At what stage do they become useless?

When their essence is realised. The scriptures are useful to indicate the existence of the Higher Power (the Self) and the way to gain it. Their essence is that much only. When that is assimilated the rest is useless. But they are voluminous, adapted to the development of the seeker. As one rising up in the scale finds the regions one has passed to be only steps to the higher stage, and so on, the steps ascended become purvapaksha successively until the goal is gained. When the goal is reached it remains alone, and all the rest becomes useless. That is how the sastras become useless. We read so much. Do we remember all that we read? But have we forgotten the essentials? The essential soaks in the mind and the rest is forgotten. So it is with the sastras. The fact is that the man considers himself limited and there arises the trouble. The idea is wrong. He can see it for himself. In sleep there was no world, no ego (no limited self), and no trouble. Something wakes up from that happy state and says `I'. To that ego the world appears. Being a speck in the world he wants more and gets into trouble. How happy he was before the rising of the ego! Only the rise of the ego is the cause of the present trouble. Let him trace the ego to its source and he will reach that undifferentiated happy state which is sleepless sleep. The Self remains ever the same, here and now. There is nothing more to be gained. Because the limitations have wrongly been assumed there is the need to transcend them.

TENTH MAN: It is like the ten ignorant fools who forded a stream and on reaching the other shore counted themselves to be nine only. They grew anxious and grieved over the loss of the unknown tenth man. A wayfarer, on ascertaining the cause of their grief, counted them all and found them to be ten. But each one of them had counted the others leaving himself out. The wayfarer gave each in succession a blow telling them to count the blows. They counted ten and were satisfied. The moral is that the tenth man was not got anew. He was all along there, but ignorance caused grief to all of them.

LOST NECKLACE: Again, a woman wore a necklace round her neck but forgot it. She began to search for it and made enquiries. A friend of hers, finding out what she was looking for, pointed out the necklace round the seeker's neck. She felt it with her hands and was happy. Did she get the necklace anew? Here again ignorance caused grief and knowledge happiness. Similarly also with the man and the Self. There is nothing to be gained anew. Ignorance of the Self is the cause of the present misery; knowledge of the Self brings about happiness.

Moreover, if anything is to be got anew it implies its previous absence. What remained once absent might vanish again. So there would be no permanency in salvation. Salvation is permanent because the Self is here and now and eternal. Thus the man's efforts are directed towards the removal of ignorance. Wisdom seems to dawn, though it is natural and ever present. The visitor, while taking leave, saluted the master, and said, "It is said that the victim in the tiger's mouth is gone for ever." The reference is to a passage in Who am I? where it is stated that a disciple can never revert to the world after he has once fallen into the field of the Guru's gracious look as surely as the prey in the tiger's jaws cannot escape.

(Photo of Bhagavan is copyright Sri Ramanasramam)
Talk 62 Talk 64

Talk 62

6th July, 1935
Talk 62.

Mr. Ekanatha Rao: What is sphurana [?] (a kind of indescribable but palpable sensation in the heart centre)?

Sphurana [?] is felt on several occasions, such as in fear, excitement , etc. Although it is always and all over, yet it is felt at a particular centre and on particular occasions. It is also associated with antecedent causes and confounded with the body. Whereas, it is all alone and pure; it is the Self. If the mind be fixed on the sphurana and one senses it continuously and automatically it is realisation. Again sphurana is the foretaste of Realisation. It is pure. The subject and object proceed from it. If the man mistakes himself for the subject, objects must necessarily appear different from him. They are periodically withdrawn and projected, creating the world and the subject's enjoyment of the same. If, on the other hand, the man feels himself to be the screen on which the subject and object are projected there can be no confusion, and he can remain watching their appearance and disappearance without any perturbation to the Self.

Talk 61 Talk 63

Talk 61

6th July, 1935
Talk 61.

Mr. Ekanatha Rao: How is dhyana [?] practised - with eyes open or closed?

It may be done either way. The point is that the mind must be introverted and kept active in its pursuit. Sometimes it happens that when the eyes are closed the latent thoughts rush forth with great vigour. It may also be difficult to introvert the mind with the eyes open. It requires strength of mind to do so. The mind is contaminated when it takes in objects. Otherwise, it is pure. The main factor in dhyana is to keep the mind active in its own pursuit without taking in external impressions or thinking of other matters.

Talk 60 Talk 62

Talk 60

5th July, 1935 ON MOUNA (SILENCE)

Talk 60.

Sri Bhagavan: The silence of solitude is forced. Restrained speech in society amounts to silence. For the man then controls his speech. The speaker must come forth before he speaks. If engaged otherwise speech is restrained. Introverted mind is otherwise active and is not anxious to speak.
Mouna as a disciplinary measure is meant for limiting the mental activities due to speech. If the mind is otherwise controlled disciplinary mouna is unnecessary. For mouna becomes natural. Vidyaranya has said that twelve years' forced mouna brings about absolute mouna - that is, makes one unable to speak. It is more like a mute animal than otherwise. That is not mouna. Mouna is constant speech. Inactivity is constant activity.

Talk 59 Talk 61

Talk 59

4th July, 1935
Talk 59.

A moulvi asked: How does sleep overtake one?

If the enquirer knows who is awake in the wakeful condition he will also know how sleep comes on. The enquiry arises only to the waking man and not to the sleeper. It must be easier to know the waking Self than the sleeping Self.
D.: I know how I awoke. But I do not know how sleep comes on. I
am aware of my wakeful state. For instance if anyone takes away my stick I prevent his doing so, whereas I cannot do so in sleep or in dream. The proof of wakefulness is evident. But what is the proof of sleep?

Your ignorance is the evidence of sleep: your awareness is that of wakefulness.
D.: My wakefulness is known by the opening of my eye. But how does sleep overtake me?

In the same way as sleep overtakes you, wakefulness also overtakes you.
D.: But I do not perceive how sleep comes on in the same way as I
know my wakefulness.

Never mind.
D.: Please describe what is sleep, without illustrations. Sleep by itself should be known. I want a real picture of sleep.

Such picture is sleep itself.
D.: Is it better to reach salvation, being married, or being a hermit?

Whatever you think better.
D.: Visvamitra had no fall when in the married state, whereas he had a fall in his hermit life. Does it not apply to others also?

Maharshi: Visvamitra was as pure in the hermit life as when he was married.
There was no difference. He was as contaminated when married as when he was a hermit.
D.: Was he a rishi?

When contaminated he was not a rishi.
D.: Can he become a rishi even afterwards?

Yes. By proper bhakti [?] he could become a good rishi. Repentance and prayer will set him right.
D.: With all your penance for so many years what have you got?

I have got what need be got. I see what need be seen.
D.: Can all see the same?

I see only just what all do. It is immanent in all.
D.: Is this the way for seeing It?

Method may be anything. From whatever directions the pilgrims may foregather, they must enter the Kaaba only by one route (passage) or all gather only to enter the Kaaba.
D.: Please tell me two upadesas on the way to salvation as known by you.

What upadesa [?] do I know? Everything is upadesa. Worship of God is the only upadesa.

Talk 58 Talk 60

Talk 58


Talk 58.

Mr. Ranganathan, I. C. S: In Srimad Bhagavad Gita there is a passage:
One's own dharma is the best; an alien dharma is full of risks. What is the significance of one's own dharma?

It is usually interpreted to mean the duties of the orders and of the different castes. The physical environment must also be taken into consideration.
D.: If varnasrama dharma [?] be meant, such dharma prevails only in India. On the other hand the Gita should be universally applicable.

There is varnasrama in some form or other in every land. The significance is that one should hold on to the single Atman and not swerve therefrom. That is the whole gist of it. sva = one's own, i.e., of the Self, of the Atman. para [?] = the other's, i.e., of the non-self, of the anatma. Atma Dharma is inherence in the Self. There will be no distraction and no fear. Troubles arise only when there is a second to oneself. If the Atman be realised to be only unitary, there is no second and therefore no cause for fear. The man, as he is now, confounds the
anatma (non-Self) dharma with atma (the Self) dharma and suffers. Let him know the Self and abide in it; there is an end of fear, and there are no doubts. Even if interpreted as varnasrama dharma the significance is only this much. Such dharma bears fruit only when done selflessly. That is, one must realise that he is not the doer, but that he is only a tool of some Higher Power. Let the Higher Power do what is inevitable and let me act only according to its dictates. The actions are not mine. Therefore the result of the actions cannot be mine. If one thinks and acts so, where is the trouble? Be it varnasrama dharma or loukika dharma (worldly activities), it is immaterial. Finally, it amounts to this: sva = atmanah (of the Self) para = anaatmanah (of the non-self) Such doubts are natural. The orthodox interpretation cannot be reconciled with the life of a modern man obliged to work for his livelihood in different capacities. A man from Pondy interposed: Sarva dharmaan parityajya maamekam
saranam vraja (leaving all duties surrender to me only). Sri Bhagavan: (All) Sarva [?] is only anaatmanah (of the non-self); the emphasis is on ekam (only). To the man who has strong hold of the eka [?] (one) where are the dharmas? It means, "Be sunk in the Self."
D.: The Gita was taught for action.

What does the Gita say? Arjuna refused to fight.
Krishna said, "So long as you refuse to fight, you have the sense of doership. Who are you to refrain or to act? Give up the notion of doership. Until that sense disappears you are bound to act. You are being manipulated by a Higher Power. You are admitting it by your own refusal to submit to it. Instead recognise the Power and submit as a tool. (Or to put it differently), if you refuse you will be forcibly drawn into it. Instead of being an unwilling worker, be a willing one. "Rather, be fixed in the Self and act according to nature without the thought of doership. Then the results of action will not affect you. That is manliness and heroism."
Thus, `inherence in the Self' is the sum and substance of Gita
teaching. Finally, the Master Himself added, "If a man be established in the Self these doubts would not arise. They arise only until he is established there."
D.: Then of what use is such reply to the enquirer?

The words still have force and will surely operate in due course.

Talk 57 Talk 59

Talk 57

23rd June, 1935
Talk 57.

Sri Bhagavan said that sushumna [?] is the name mostly mentioned in scriptures. Other names also occur; e.g., para, atma, amrita. It is also stated that sushumna becomes leena (merged in para [?]). So it may be said that para is the terminology of jnana, whereas sushumna is that of Yoga [?].
Chapter XIV, Stanza 10 reads: "With yet further progress, invisibility also may result. Such an one, being pure consciousness only, flourishes as a siddha [?]." Chapter XVIII, Last Stanza reads: "The glory of the siddhis is past imagination, they are equal to Siva, yea Siva himself, in being able to grant boons."
The meaning is that, with Self-Realization, real and incessant tapas results. With the maturing of such tapas some jnanis can make their bodies intangible and invisible. They are known as siddhas. Later, "the greatness of the siddhas is incomprehensible. They are equal to Siva and can even grant boons." So said Sri Bhagavan.
There is an Upanishad mantra [?], atmajnam hyarchayet bhutikamah (one desirous of liberation or wealth must serve a Self-realised Sage). Here is no mention of siddha for granting boons. The Jnani [?] can do so. The mantras again, swe mahimni pratishtitah (abiding in his own grandeur), anantam Brahma (Brahman is infinite), will seem confounding when read with the slokas cited above. Sarvam
Khalvidam Brahma (All this is Brahman); Brahmavid Brahmaiva
Bhavati (the knower of Brahman becomes Brahman Itself), show that a Jnani is sarvajna [?] (all-knower). What then is the distinction between the Jnani and the siddha, and the ability of the latter to grant boons, implying the absence of it in the former?
This was the doubt. The master explained: "The Gita questions were asked in a certain spirit. The answers were according to it. People look to the body only and they want siddhis also. With Self-Realisation no powers can extend even into it, and how can they extend beyond? People anxious for siddhis are not content with their idea of jnana and so want siddhis associated with it. They are likely to neglect the supreme happiness of jnana and aspire for siddhis. For this they are going through the by-lanes instead of the royal path and so will likely lose their way. In order to guide them aright and keep them on the royal road alone the siddhis are said to accompany jnana. In fact jnana comprises all, and a Jnani will not waste even a thought on them. Let the people get jnana and then seek siddhis if they so desire. I have said: sarira samsrayah siddhayah (the siddhis relate to the body), because their outlook is concerning the body. A Jnani and siddha are not different. In varan datum (to bestow boons) the boons include atmalabha (the gain of Self) also. The siddhis are not merely of an inferior order but of the highest order.
The sastras are meant to suit varying conditions. Their spirit remains the same. In Halasya Mahima there is a chapter on the eightfold siddhis. There Siva says that His bhakta [?] never wastes a thought on them. Again Siva says that He never grants boons. The desires of the devotees are fulfilled according to their prarabdha [?] only. When Iswara Himself says so, what of others? In order to display siddhis there must be others to recognise them. That means there is no jnana in the one who displays them. Therefore siddhis are not worthy of any thought. Jnana alone is to be aimed at and gained. Sri Ramana Gita Chapter XVII, Verse 4, Translation in Tamil is inaccurate.
Sri Bhagavan pointed out the inaccuracy and corrected it. Vaidharbha's question was: "In practice, the thoughts are found to manifest and subside alternately. Is this jnana?" Sri Bhagavan explained the doubt as follows:
Some people think that there are different stages in jnana. The Self is nitya aparoksha, i.e., ever-realised, knowingly or unknowingly. Sravana [?], they argue, should therefore be aparoksha jnana (directly experienced) and not paroksha jnana (indirect knowledge). But jnana should result in duhkha nivriti (loss of misery) whereas sravana [?] alone does not bring it about. Therefore they say, though aparoksha [?], it is not unshaken; the rising of vasanas is the cause of its being weak (not unchanging); when the vasanas are removed, jnana becomes unshaken and bears fruit.
Others say sravana is only paroksha jnana. By manana [?] (reflection) it becomes aparoksha spasmodically. The obstruction to its continuity is the vasanas: they rise up with reinforced vigour after manana. They must be held in check. Such vigilance consists in remembering = "I am not the body" and adhering to the aparoksha anubhava (direct experience) which has been had in course of manana (reflection). Such practice is called nididhyasana [?] and eradicates the vasanas. Then dawns the sahaja [?] state. That is jnana, sure.
The aparoksha in manana cannot effect dukha nivritti (loss of misery) and cannot amount to moksha [?], i.e., release from bondage because the vasanas periodically overpower the jnana. Hence it is adridha (weak) and becomes firm after the vasanas have been eradicated by nididhyasana (one-pointedness).


Mr. T. K. S. Iyer, a devotee, was speaking of the chakras Sri Bhagavan said: Atman (the Self) alone is to be realised. Its realisation holds all else in its compass. Sakti
[?], Ganapati; siddhis, etc., are included in it. Those who speak of these have not realised the Atman. Atman is in the heart and is the Heart itself. The manifestation is in the brain. The passage from the heart to the brain might be considered to be through sushumna or a nerve with any other name. The Upanishads say pare
leena - meaning that sushumna or such nadis are all comprised in para , i.e., the atma nadi [?]. The yogis say that the current rising up to sahasrara [?] (brain) ends there. That experience is not complete. For jnana, they must come to the Heart. Hridaya [?] (Heart) is the alpha and omega.

Talk 56 Talk 58

Talk 56

22nd June, 1935
Talk 56.

A youth of twenty asked how to realise the Self. He sat down in silence and waited more than an hour and then was about to leave. While doing so, he asked:
D.: How to realise Self?

Whose Self? Find out.
D.: Who am I??

Find it yourself.
D.: I do not know.

Think. Who is it that says "I do not know"? What is not known?
In that statement, who is the `I'?
D.: Somebody in me.

Who is the somebody? In whom?
D.: Maybe some power.

Find it.
D.: How to realise Brahman?

Without knowing the Self why do you seek to know Brahman?
D.: The sastras say Brahman pervades all and me too.

Find the `I' in me and then there will be time to think of Brahman.
D.: Why was I born?

Who was born? The answer is the same for all of your questions.
D.: Who am I then?

(Smiling) Have you come to examine me and ask me? You must say who you are.
D.: In deep sleep the soul leaves the body and remains elsewhere.
When it re-enters I awake. Is it so?

What is it that leaves the body?
D.: The power, perhaps.

Find out the power.
D.: The body is composed of five elements. What are the elements?

Without knowing the Self how do you aim at knowing the elements?
The young man sat awhile and left with permission. The Master remarked later: "All right. It will work."

Talk 55 Talk 57

Talk 55

18th June, 1935
Talk 55.

D.: Can advaita [?] be realised by japa [?] of holy names; say Rama , Krishna, etc.?

D.: Is it not a means of an inferior order?

Have you been told to make japa or to discuss its order in the scheme of things? Silence.

Talk 54 Talk 56

Talk 54

16th June, 1935
Talk 54.

An Andhra Pandit - an elderly gentleman - had some doubts regarding Kavyakantha's exposition of Advaita. He has found it in books that Brahman is free from sajatiya, vijatiya and swagata bheda. Such conditions are satisfied in vivarta vada but not in parinama vada [?]. In the latter, swagata bheda is bound to be.

The Master pointed out that Dakshinamurti did not teach anything of the kind. He did not say that Brahman is related to Sakti [?] or not related. All that was, was only silence; and the doubts of the sishyas (disciples) were cleared. The significance is that there is nothing to be learnt, discussed and concluded. Everyone knows `I am.' There is the confusion that the `I' is the body. Because the `I' arises from the Absolute and gives rise to buddhi [?] (Intellect). In buddhi the `I' looks the size and shape of the body, na medhaya [?] means that Brahman cannot be apprehended by buddhi. Brahman aham [?] (`I-I') buddhi (intellect). How can such buddhi crossing over aham discover Brahman? It is impossible. Just get over the false conception of the `I' being the body. Discover to whom the thoughts arise. If the present `I'-ness vanishes, the discovery is complete. What remains over is the pure Self.

Compare deep sleep and wakefulness. Diversity and body are found only in the latter. In the former the Self remains without the perception of body or of the world. Happiness reigns there.
The Sruti vakya, `Aham Brahmasmi', relates to the state and not the mode of mind. One cannot become Brahman by continuing to repeat the mantra [?]. It means that Brahman is not elsewhere. It is your Self. Find that Self; Brahman is found. Do not attempt to reach Brahman as if it were in some far off place.

The Pandit remarked that thoughts are so persistent that the aham cannot be reached.
The Master said: The Brahma akara vritti helps to turn the mind away from other thoughts. Either some such practice is necessary or association with sadhus should be made. The sadhu has already overcome the mind and remains in Peace. His proximity helps to bring about such condition in others. Otherwise there is no meaning in seeking a sadhu's company.
Deho aham (I am the body) is limitation and is the root of all mean and selfish actions and desires. Brahma aham (I am Brahman) is passing beyond limitation and signifies sympathy, charity, love etc., which are divine and virtuous.
D.: How does a grihasta (householder) fare in the scheme of moksha [?]

Why do you think you are a grihasta? If you go out as a sanyasi , a similar thought (that you are a sanyasi) will haunt you. Whether you continue in the household, or renounce it and go to the forest, your mind haunts you. The ego is the source of thoughts. It creates the body and the world and makes you think you are a grihasta. if you renounce the world, it will only substitute the thought sanyasi
for grihasta and the environments of the forest for those of the household. But the mental obstacles are always there. They even increase in new surroundings. There is no help in the change of environment. The obstacle is the mind. It must be got over whether at home or in the forest. If you can do it in the forest, why not in
the home? Therefore why change the environment? Your efforts can be made even now, in whatever environment you may be. The environment never abandons you, according to your desire. Look at me. I left home. Look at yourselves. You have come here leaving the home environment. What do you find here? Is this different from what you left? Even if one is immersed in nirvikalpa samadhi [?] for years together, when he emerges from it he will find himself in the environment which he is bound to have. That is the reason for the Acharya emphasising sahaja [?]
samadhi in preference to nirvikalpa samadhi in his excellent work Viveka Chudamani. One should be in spontaneous samadhi - that is, in one's pristine state - in the midst of every environment.
Later on Sri Bhagavan said: "Control of breath may be internal or external." The antah pranayama [?] (the internal breath-regulation) is as follows:- Naham chinta (I-am-not-the-body idea) is rechaka [?] (exhalation). Koham (who am I?) is puraka [?] (inhalation). Soham [?] (I am He) is kumbhaka [?] (retention of breath). Doing thus, the breath becomes automatically controlled. Bahih pranayama (external control) is for one not endowed with strength to control the mind. There is no way so sure as that; or a sadhu's company. The external practice must be resorted to by a wise man if he does not enjoy a sadhu's company. If in a sadhu's company the sadhu [?] provides the needed strength, though unseen by others, Pranayama [?] need not be exactly as described in hatha Yoga. If engaged in japa [?], dhyana, bhakti, etc., just a little control of breath will suffice to control the mind. The mind is the rider and the breath the horse. Pranayama is a check on the horse. By that check the rider is checked. Pranayama may be done just a little. To watch the breath is one way of doing it. The mind abstracted from other activities is engaged in watching the breath. That controls the breath; and in its turn the mind is controlled.
If unable to do so, rechaka and puraka need not be practised. Breath may be retained a short while in japa, dhyana, etc. Then, too, good results will follow.

Talk 53 Talk 55

Talk 53

15th June, 1935
Talk 53.

A young man, Mr. Knowles, came for darsan. He had read Paul Brunton's two books. He asked: "The Buddhists say that `I' is unreal, whereas Paul Brunton in the Secret Path tells us to get over the `I- thought' and reach the state of `I'. Which is true?"

There are supposed to be two `I's; the one is lower and unreal, of which all are aware; and the other, the higher and the real, which is to be realised. You are not aware of yourself while asleep, you are aware in wakefulness; waking, you say that you were asleep; you did not know it in the deep sleep state. So then, the idea of diversity has arisen along with the body-consciousness; this body-consciousness arose at some particular moment; it has origin and end. What originates must be something. What is that something? It is the `I'-consciousness. Who am I?? Whence am I? On finding the source, you realise the state of Absolute Consciousness.
D.: Who is this `I'? It seems to be only a continuum of sense-impression. The Buddhist idea seems to be so too.

The world is not external. The impressions cannot have an outer origin. Because the world can be cognised only by consciousness. The world does not say that it exists. It is your impression. Even so this impression is not consistent and not unbroken. In deep sleep the world is not cognised; and so it exists not for a sleeping man. Therefore the world is the sequence of the ego. Find out the ego. The finding of its source is the final goal.
D.: I believe that we should not inflict suffering on other lives. Should we then endure the mosquito bite and submit to it also?

You do not like to suffer yourself. How can you inflict suffering on others? Just keep off mosquitoes since you suffer by their stings.
D.: Is it right that we kill other lives, e.g., mosquitoes, bugs?

Everyone is a suicide. The eternal, blissful, and natural state has been smothered by this life of ignorance. In this way the present life is due to the killing of the eternal, pristine Being. Is it not a case of suicide? So then, everyone is a suicide. Why worry about murders and killing?
In the course of a later talk the visitor said: "The world sends impressions and I awake!"

Can the world exist without someone to perceive it? Which is prior? The Being-consciousness or the rising-consciousness? The Being-consciousness is always there, eternal and pure. The rising- consciousness rises forth and disappears. It is transient.
D.: Does not the world exist for others even when I am asleep?

Such a world mocks at you also for knowing it without knowing yourself. The world is the result of your mind. Know your mind. Then see the world. You will realise that it is not different from the Self.
D.: Is not Maharshi aware of himself and his surroundings, as clearly as I am?

To whom is the doubt? The doubts are not for the realised. They are only for the ignorant.

Talk 52 Talk 54

Talk 52

9th June, 1935
Talk 52.

A man from Cocanada asked: "My mind remains clear for two or three days and turns dull for the next two or three days; and so it alternates. What is it due to?"

It is quite natural; it is the play of brightness (satva), activity (rajas [?])
and darkness (tamas [?]) alternating. Do not regret the tamas; but when satva comes into play, hold on to it fast and make the best of it.
D.: What is the Heart?

It is the seat (if such could be said of it) of the Self.
D.: Is it the physical heart?

No. It is the seat wherefrom `I-I' arises.
D.: What becomes of the jiva [?] after death?

The question is not appropriate for a jiva now living. A
disembodied jiva may ask me, if convenient. In the meantime let the embodied jiva solve its present problem and find who he is. There will be an end of such doubts.
D.: What is dhyana [?]?

The word dhyana usually signifies meditation on some object , whereas nididhyasana [?] is used for enquiry into the Self. The triads persist until the Self is realised. Dhyana [?] and nididhyasana are the same so far as the aspirant is concerned, because they involve trinity and are synonymous with bhakti [?].
D.: How should dhyana be practised?

Dhyana serves to concentrate the mind. The predominant idea keeps off all others. Dhyana varies according to the individual. It may be on an aspect of God, on a mantra [?], or on the Self, etc.

Talk 51 Talk 53

Talk 51

5th June, 1935
Talk 51.

A young Brahmin (25 years of age) came on a visit to the Master. At his sight he became hysterical and shouted Sivoham, Aham Brahma
Asmi, "You are God", "You are Para Brahmam". "You are my father", "Father, save me" and so on. His hysterics waxing, he beat his chest violently alternately with both his hands, shouting Sivoham, Sivoham. Then again he shouted hysterically gnashing his teeth, "I will stamp out materialism", as if he was crushing materialism between his teeth. Then he asked. "Either give me power, either give me power - or - or - or - I will…" He began as if to throttle himself.
When gently removed by others he fell prostrate before Sri Bhagavan, saying, "I will take refuge at the feet of my Father. Father! You are Parthasarathi, I am Arjuna. We will stamp out materialism," and so on. He was finally taken away from the presence of Maharshi. He washed himself, took some light refreshment and quietly seated himself in the hall for some hours. He abstained from the midday meal. In the afternoon he had another fit when he shouted, "I will chop off the head of Krishna, if he should come here now. He advised me to give up my job, but does not protect my mother. Or let him chop off my head," and so on.
After some hours of quiet, Sri Bhagavan asked Mr. K. L. Sarma to read out a portion of his commentary on Anubandha (Appendix to 40 verses). The gist of it is that people, unable to help themselves, ask for divine powers to be utilised for human welfare. This is similar to the story of a lame man who blustered, saying that he would overpower the enemy if only he were helped on to his legs. The intention is good but there is no sense of proportion. The young man on hearing it suddenly sprang to his feet, saluting Sri Bhagavan and saying "Father! Father! I was mistaken. Pardon me. Teach me. I shall abide by what you say," and so on. Then again in the evening he prostrated himself, saying, "I surrender."

Talk 50 Talk 52

Talk 50

24th April, 1935
Talk 50.

Sri Bhagavan read out, from the Prabuddha Bharata, Kabir's saying that all know that the drop merges into the ocean but few know that the ocean merges into the drop. This is para bhakti, said he.

Talk 49 Talk 51

Talk 49

24th April, 1935
Talk 49.

Some men asked the Master questions which ultimately resolved themselves into one, that `I' is not perceptible however much they might struggle.
The Master's reply was in the usual strain: "Who is it that says that `I' is not perceptible? Is there an `I' ignorant, and an `I' elusive? Are there two `I's in the same person? Ask yourself these questions. It is the mind which says that `I' is not perceptible. Where is that mind from? Know the mind. You will find it a myth. King Janaka said, `I have discovered the thief who had been ruining me so long. I will now deal with him summarily. Then I shall be happy.' Similarly it will be with others."
D.: How to know the `I'?

The `I-I' is always there. There is no knowing it. It is not a new knowledge acquired. What is new and not here and now will be evanescent only. The `I' is always there. There is obstruction to its knowledge and it is called ignorance. Remove the ignorance and knowledge shines forth. In fact this ignorance or even knowledge is not for Atman. They are only overgrowths to be cleared off. That is why Atman is said to be beyond knowledge and ignorance. It remains as it naturally is - that is all.
D.: There is no perceptible progress in spite of our attempts.

Progress can be spoken of in things to be obtained afresh. Whereas here it is the removal of ignorance and not acquisition of knowledge. What kind of progress can be expected in the quest for the Self?
D.: How to remove the ignorance?

While lying in bed in Tiruvannamalai you dream in your sleep that you find yourself in another town. The scene is real to you. Your body remains here on your bed in a room. Can a town enter your room, or could you have left this place and gone elsewhere, leaving the body here? Both are impossible. Therefore your being here and seeing another town are both unreal. They appear real to the mind. The `I' of the dream soon vanishes, then another `I' speaks of the dream. This `I' was not in the dream. Both the `I's are unreal. There is the substratum of the mind which continues all along, giving rise to so many scenes. An `I' rises forth with every thought and with its disappearance that `I' disappears too. Many `I's are born and die every moment. The subsisting mind is the real trouble. That is the thief according to Janaka. Find him out and you will be happy.

Talk 48 Talk 50

Talk 48

20th April, 1935
Talk 48.

A visitor asked Sri Bhagavan, "You are Bhagavan. So you would know when I shall get jnana. Tell me when I shall be a Jnani [?]." Sri Bhagavan replied,
"If I am Bhagavan there is no one besides the Self - therefore no Jnani or ajnani [?]. If otherwise I am as good as you are and know as much as yourself. Either way I cannot answer your question."

Talk 47 Talk 49

Talk 47

20th April, 1935
Talk 47.

A Malayalee visitor expressed his concern for the misery of the world and his opinion that `Quest for Self' looked selfish in the midst of such suffering environments. His solution appeared to be selfless work.

The sea is not aware of its wave. Similarly the Self is not aware of its ego.
Note: This makes clear what Sri Bhagavan means by quest for the source of ego.

Talk 46 Talk 48

Talk 46

12th April, 1935
Talk 46.

After hearing the Malayalam version of Upadesa Sara chanted, Mr. Ramachandra Iyer of Nagercoil asked in a characteristically unsophisticated way about the mind, concentration and control. The Master said that the mind is only identity of the Self with the body. It is a false ego that is created; it creates false phenomena in its turn, and appears to move in them; all these are false. The Self is the only Reality. If the false identity vanishes the persistence of the Reality becomes apparent. It does not mean that Reality is not here and now. It is always there and eternally the same. It is also in everyone's experience. For everyone knows that he is. "Who is he?" Subjectively, "Who am I??" The false ego is associated with objects; this ego itself is its own object. Objectivity is the falsity. Subject is alone the Reality. Do not confound yourself with the object, namely the body. This gives rise to the false ego, consequently of the world and your movements therein with the resulting misery. Do not think yourself to be this, that or anything; to be so and so, or to be such and such. Only leave off the falsity. The Reality will reveal itself. The scriptures say that the Self is nityasiddha, ever present, and yet speak of the removal of ajnana [?]. If Self is (nitya [?]) always and (siddha [?]) present, how can there be ajnana? For whom is the ajnana? These are contradictory. But such statements are for guiding the earnest seeker in the right way. He does not readily understand the only Truth if mentioned in plain words as in natwam naham neme janadhipah (not thou, nor I, nor these kings …). Sri Krishna declared the Truth, but Arjuna could not grasp it. Later Krishna plainly says that people confound Him with the body, whereas in reality He was not born nor will He die. Still Arjuna requires the whole Gita for the Truth to be made clear to him.
Look, the Self is only Be-ing, not being this or that. It is simple Being. Be - and there is an end of the ignorance. Enquire for whom is the ignorance. The ego arises when you wake up from sleep. In deep sleep you do not say that you are sleeping and that you are going to wake up or that you have been sleeping so long. But still you are there. Only when you are awake you say that you have slept. Your wakefulness comprises sleep also in it. Realise your pure Be-ing. Let there be no confusion with the body. The body is the result of thoughts. The thoughts will play as usual, but you will not be affected. You were not concerned with the body when asleep; so you can always remain.
Mr. Ekanatha Rao: How can anyone reconcile such activity with the wage-earning which is a necessity for worldly people?

Actions form no bondage. Bondage is only the false notion. "I am the doer." Leave off such thoughts and let the body and senses play their role, unimpeded by your interference.

Talk 45 Talk 47

Talk 45

6th April, 1935
Talk 45.

A visitor asked: The path of realisation is difficult. Worldly matters are easy of understanding, whereas this is not.

Yes. The mind always seeks external knowledge, leaving aside its own inner knowledge.
D.: A stay of one day with Sri Bhagavan is good; a stay of two days is better; of three days, more so, and so on. If it is a continuous stay here, how shall we get on with our mundane work?

Stay here or elsewhere must be understood to be the same and to have the same effect.

Talk 44 Talk 46

Talk 44

3rd April, 1935
Talk 44.

Mr. Ekanath Rao, an Engineer, asked Sri Bhagavan if solitude is necessary for vichara.

There is solitude everywhere. The individual is solitary always.
His business is to find it out within, and not seek it without.
D.: The work-a-day world is distracting.

Do not allow yourself to be distracted. Enquire for whom there is distraction. It will not afflict you after a little practice.
D.: Even the attempt is impossible.

Make it and it will be found not so difficult.
D.: But the answer does not come for the search inward.

The enquirer is the answer and no other answer can come. What comes afresh cannot be true. What always is, is true.

Talk 43 Talk 45

Talk 43

28th March, 1935
Talk 43.

Mr. S. Ranganathan, I.C.S., Collector of Vellore, Mr. S. V. Ramamurthi, I.C.S. and Mr. T. Raghaviah, late Diwan of Pudukottah State, visited the Asramam. Mr. Ranganathan asked, "Kindly instruct me as to how the mind may be controlled."

There are two methods. The one is to see what the mind is; then it subsides. The second is to fix your attention on something; then the mind remains quiet. The questioner repeated the question for further elucidation. The same answer was returned with a little more added. The questioner did not look satisfied.
Mr. Raghaviah: Men of the world that we are, we have some kind of grief or another and do not know how to get over it. We pray to God and still are not satisfied. What can we do?

Trust God.

We surrender; but still there is no help.

Yes. If you have surrendered, you must be able to abide by the will of God and not make a grievance of what may not please you. Things may turn out differently from what they look apparently. Distress often leads men to faith in God.

But we are worldly. There is the wife, there are the children, friends and relatives. We cannot ignore their existence and resign ourselves to Divine Will, without retaining some little of the personality in us.

That means you have not surrendered as professed by you. You must only trust God.

Mr. Ramamurthi: Swamiji, I have read Brunton's book A Search in Secret India, and was much impressed by the last chapter, where he says that it is possible to be conscious without thinking. I know that one can think, remaining forgetful of the physical body. Can one think without the mind? Is it possible to gain that consciousness which is beyond thoughts?

Yes. There is only one consciousness, which subsists in the waking , dream and sleep states. In sleep there is no `I'. The `I-thought' arises on waking and then the world appears. Where was this `I' in sleep? Was it there or was it not? It must have been there also, but not in the way that you feel now. The present is only the `I-thought', whereas the sleeping `I' is the real `I'. It subsists all through. It is consciousness. If it is known you will see that it is beyond thoughts.

Can we think without the mind?

Thoughts may be like any other activities, not disturbing to the Supreme consciousness.
D.: Can one read others' minds?
The Master as usual told him to find his Self before worrying about others. "Where are others apart from one's own Self?" asked the Master.
Mr. Raghaviah: How shall we correlate the higher experience with the lower experience (meaning spiritual experience with mundane affairs)?

There is only one experience. What are the worldly experiences but those built up on the false `I'? Ask the most successful man of the world if he knows his Self. He will say "No". What can anyone know without knowing the Self? All worldly knowledge is built upon such a flimsy foundation.
Mr. Ramamurthi: How to know the `Real I' as distinct from the `false I'.

Is there anyone who is not aware of himself? Each one knows , but yet does not know, the Self. A strange paradox. The Master added later, "If the enquiry is made whether mind exists, it will be found that mind does not exist. That is control of mind. Otherwise, if the mind is taken to exist and one seeks to control it, it amounts to mind controlling the mind, just like a thief turning out to be a policeman to catch the thief, i.e., himself. Mind persists in that way alone, but eludes itself."

Talk 42 Talk 44

Talk 42

24th September, 1936
Talk 42.

Mr. Duncan Greenlees, Madanapalli, wrote as follows:- One has at times had vivid flashes of a consciousness whose centre is outside the normal self and which seems to be inclusive. Without concerning the mind with philosophical concepts, how would Bhagavan advise us to work towards getting, retaining and extending those flashes? Does abhyasa [?] in such experiences involve retirement? Sri Bhagavan answered: `Outside' - For whom is inside or outside? They can be only so long as there are the subject and object. For whom are these two again? They both will resolve into the subject only. See who is in the subject. The investigation leads you to pure consciousness beyond the subject.
Normal self is the mind. This mind is with limitations. But pure consciousness is beyond limitations and reached by investigation as above outlined.
Getting - Self is always there. One seeks to destroy the obstacles to the revelation of the Self. Retaining - Having once gained the Self it will be understood to be Here and Now. It is never lost. Extending - There is no extending the Self, for it is always without contraction or expansion. Retirement - Abiding in the Self is solitude. Because there is nothing alien to the Self. Retirement must be from some one place to another. There is neither the one nor the other apart from the Self. All being the Self, retirement is impossible and inconsistent. Abhyasa [?] is investigation into the Self.

Talk 41 Talk 43

Talk 41

22nd September, 1936
Talk 41.

D.: Are there heaven (swarga) and hell (naraka) ?
Maharshi: There must be someone to go there. They are like dreams. We see time and space exist in dream also. Which is true, dream or wakefulness?
D.: So we must rid ourselves of lust (kama [?]), anger, (krodha ), etc.

Give up thoughts. You need not give up anything else. You must be there to see anything. It is the Self. Self is ever-conscious.

Are pilgrimages, etc., good?

What effort is necessary for reaching the Self?
`I' should be destroyed. Self is not to be reached. Is there any moment when Self is not? It is not new. Be as you are. What is new cannot be permanent. What is real must always exist.

What is sacrifice through wisdom (jnana yajna) or other sacrifices?

Other disciplines exist for it. Practice is for gaining wisdom (jnana).
D.: Are jivanmuktas (living liberated souls) of different kinds?

What does it matter if they differ externally? There is no difference in their wisdom (jnana).

When loyal to one Master can you respect others?
Maharshi: Guru is only one. He is not physical. So long as there is weakness the support of strength is needed.
D.: J. Krishnamurti says, "No Guru is necessary?"
Maharshi: How did he know it? One can say so after realising but not before.

You have gained this state by great effort. What shall we poor souls do?

We are in our Self. We are not in the world.

Heaven and hell - what are they?
Maharshi: You carry heaven and hell with you. Your lust, anger, etc., produce these regions. They are like dreams.

The Gita says that if a man fixes his attention between the eyebrows and holds his breath he reaches the Supreme state. How is that done?
Maharshi: You are always in the Self and there is no reaching it. The eyebrow is only a place where attention is to be fixed (seat of meditation - upasanasthana).

You have spoken of the Heart as the seat of meditation?
Maharshi: Yes, it is also that.
D.: What is Heart?
Maharshi: It is the centre of the Self. The Self is the centre of centres. The Heart represents the psychic centre and not the physical centre.

The term `jnana' is realised Wisdom. The same term is used for the method also. Why?
Maharshi: `Jnana' includes the method also because it ultimately results in realisation.
D.: Is a man to engage in teaching his knowledge however imperfect?

If his prarabdha [?] be that way.

In the seventh chapter, Arjuna asks if Karma is a method (sadhana [?]). Krishna answers that it is so if done without the sense of doership. So also are Karmas approved by scriptures which deny Karma. The Karma disapproved by them is that which is done with the sense of doership. Do not leave Karma. You cannot do so. Give up the sense of doership. Karma will go on automatically. Or Karma will drop away from you. If Karma be your lot according to prarabdha, it will surely be done whether you will it or not; if Karma be not your lot, it will not be done even if you intently engage in it. Janaka, Suka, etc., were also in work without ahankara [?], Karma may be done for fame, or may be done unselfishly and for the public good. Yet even then they want applause. So it is really selfish.
D.: What is that one thing, knowing which all doubts are solved?

Know the doubter. If the doubter be held, the doubts will not arise. Here the doubter is transcendent. Again when the doubter ceases to exist, there will be no doubts arising. From where will they arise? All are jnanis, jivanmuktas. Only they are not aware of the fact. Doubts must be uprooted. This means that the doubter must be uprooted. Here the doubter is the mind.
D.: What is the method?

`Who am I??' is the investigation.
D.: May we perform japa [?]?

Why should you think I am this? Investigate and the thoughts cease. What is, namely the Self, will be revealed as the inescapable residue.
D.: Is hatha yoga [?] necessary?

It is one of the aids - not that it is always necessary. It depends upon the person. Vichara [?] surpasses pranayama [?]. In Yoga Vasishta Chudala advises investigation (vichara [?]) to Sikhidvaja for killing the ego. Reality can be reached by holding on to prana [?] or intellect. Hatha
yoga [?] is the former; Vichara is the latter.
D.: Is there any individuality for the Jnani [?] after Realization?

How can he retain individuality?
Even ordinarily the elders advise achamana [?] and pranayama before undertaking any work - be it worldly or other-worldly. That means, concentration of mind accomplishes the work.

I meditate neti-neti (not this - not this).

No - that is not meditation. Find the source. You must reach the source without fail. The false `I' will disappear and the real `I' will be realised. The former cannot exist apart from the latter.

Talk 40 Talk 42

Talk 40

22nd September, 1936
Talk 40.

The Brahmin questioner resumed: "How do we know that action is ours or not?"

If the fruits of actions do not affect the person he is free from action.
D.: Is intellectual knowledge enough?

Unless intellectually known, how to practice it? Learn it intellectually first, then do not stop with that. Practise it. Maharshi then made certain remarks: "When you adhere to one philosophical system (siddhanta) you are obliged to condemn the others. That is the case with the heads of monasteries (matadhipatis)". All people cannot be expected to do the same kind of action. Each one acts according to his temperament and past lives. Wisdom, Devotion, Action (jnana, bhakti, karma) are all interlocked. Meditation on forms is according to one's own mind. It is meant for ridding oneself of other forms and confining oneself to one form. It leads to the goal. It is impossible to fix the mind in the Heart to start with. So these aids are necessary. Krishna says that there is no birth (janma [?]) to you, me, etc., and later says he was born before Aditya, etc. Arjuna disputes it. Therefore it is certain that each one thinks of God according to his own degree of advancement. You say you are the body in wakeful state; not the body in sleep. Bodies being several-fold for an individual, should not there be infinite capacities for God? Whichever method one follows, that method is encouraged by the Sages. For it leads to the goal like any other method.

Talk 39 Talk 41

Talk 39

22nd September, 1936
Talk 39.

Conversing with R. Seshagiri Rao, a visitor, Maharshi remarked that a Self-Realised sage (Atma Jnani [?]) alone can be a good Karma yogi. "After the sense of doership has gone let us see what happens. Sri Sankara advised inaction. But did he not write commentaries and take part in disputation? Do not trouble about doing action or otherwise. Know Thyself. Then let us see whose action it is. Whose is it? Let action complete itself. So long as there is the doer he must reap the fruits of his action. If he does not think himself the doer there is no action for him. He is an ascetic who has renounced worldly life (sanyasin)."

How did the ego arise?

It is not necessary to know it. Know the present. Not knowing that, why do you worry about other times?

Maharshi said in reply to a question: "Is the world within you or without you? Does it exist apart from you? Does the world come and tell you `I exist'?"

Talk 38 Talk 40