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?"
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: Bhuma alone is. Nothing else. It is the mind, which says all this.
D.: Transcending the mind I feel the vastness.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: Keep off thoughts. She: How to reconcile work with meditation?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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 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?"
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: Bhuma alone is. Nothing else. It is the mind, which says all this.
D.: Transcending the mind I feel the vastness.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: Keep off thoughts. She: How to reconcile work with meditation?
Maharshi: 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 1916The Professor: Is not the state of non-consciousness close to Infinite Consciousness?
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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.
Maharshi: 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."
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: What more do you want? Concentration is the thing. What makes you come out of your quiet?
D.: Because I am drawn out.
Maharshi: 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 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."
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: What more do you want? Concentration is the thing. What makes you come out of your quiet?
D.: Because I am drawn out.
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: From whom is this question? Is it from a Jnani [?] or from an ajnani [?]?
D.: From an ajnani.
Maharshi: 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 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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?
Maharshi: 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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
