https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Talks-with-Sri-Ramana-Maharshi--complete.pdf
Talk 307.
Mr. Shamanna from Mysore asked Sri Bhagavan: Kindly explain Aham Sphurana (the light of ‘I-I’).
M.: ‘I’ is not known in sleep. On waking ‘I’ is perceived associated with the body, the world and non-self in general. Such associated ‘I’ is Aham vritti.
When Aham represents the Self only it is Aham Sphurana.
This is natural to the Jnani and is itself called jnana by jnanis, or bhakti by bhaktas. Though ever present, including in sleep, it is not perceived. It cannot be known in sleep all at once. It must first be realised in the waking state, for it is our true nature underlying all the three states.
Efforts must be made only in the jagrat state and the Self realised here and now.
It will afterwards be understood and realised to be continuous Self, uninterrupted by jagrat, svapna and sushupti.
Thus it is akhandakara vritti (unbroken experience).
Vritti is used for lack of a better expression. It should not be understood to be literally a vritti. In that case, vritti will resemble an ‘ocean-like river’, which is absurd. Vritti is of short duration, it is qualified, directed consciousness; or absolute consciousness broken up by cognition of thoughts, senses, etc. Vritti is the function of the mind, whereas the continuous consciousness transcends the mind. This is the natural, primal state of the Jnani or the liberated being. That is unbroken experience. It asserts itself when relative consciousness subsides.
Aham vritti (‘I-thought’) is broken.
Aham sphurana (the light of ‘I-I’) is unbroken, continuous.
After the thoughts subside, the light shines forth.
..........
M.: It will become constant when the mind becomes strengthened.
Repeated practice strengthens the mind; and such mind is capable of holding on to the current.
In that case, engagement in work or no engagement, the current remains unaffected and uninterrupted.
........
Talk 312.
Mr. V. K. Cholkar, of Poona: It is said “Know thyself” or see who the “I” in you is. What is the way to do it? Is it by simply repeating the mantra mechanically all along or have you to do it, remembering every moment why you are repeating the mantra?
M.: You are always repeating the mantra automatically.
If you are not aware of the ajapa which is eternally going on, you should take to japa. Japa is made with an effort.
The effort is meant to ward off other thoughts.
Then the japa becomes mental and internal.
Finally, its ajapa and eternal nature will be realised.
For it will be found to be going on even without your effort.
The effortless state is the state of realisation.
Mr. Cholkar again requested instructions from a practical point of view, i.e., suitable to himself
M.: It is not external and therefore need not be sought elsewhere. It is internal and also eternal. It is always realised. But you say you are not aware.
It requires constant attention to itself.
No other effort is necessary.
Your effort is only meant not to allow yourself to be distracted by other thoughts.
The person was satisfied.
294
M.: The Self is all.
Now I ask you: Are you apart from the Self?
Can the work go on apart from the Self? Or is the body apart from the Self? None of them could be apart from the Self. The Self is universal. So all the actions will go on whether you engage in them voluntarily or not. The work will go on automatically. Attending to the Self includes attending to the work
.........
M.: Because you identify yourself with the body, you consider that the work is done by you. But the body and its activities, including the work, are not apart from the Self. What does it matter whether you attend to the work or not? Suppose you walk from one place to another place. You do not attend every single step that you take. After a time, however, you find yourself at your destination. You notice how the work, i.e. walking, goes on without your attention to it. Similarly it is with other kinds of work.
D.: Then it is like sleep-walking.
M.: Quite so. When a child is fast asleep, his mother feeds him in sleep. The child eats the food quite as well as when well awake. But the next morning he says to the mother “Mother! I did not take food last night”. The mother and others know that he did. But he says that he did not. He was not aware and yet the action had gone on. Somnambulism is indeed a good analogy for this kind of work.
Take another example: A passenger in a cart has fallen asleep. The bulls move or stand still or are unyoked on the journey. He does not know these occurrences, but finds himself in a different place after he wakes up. He has been blissfully ignorant of the occurrences on the way, but his journey has been finished. Similarly with the Self of the person.
He is asleep in the body. His waking state is the movement of the bulls, his samadhi is their standing still (because samadhi = jagrat sushupti)
i.e. to say, he is aware of but not attached to actions.
So the bulls are in harness but do not move. His sleep is the unyoking of the bulls, for there is complete suspension of activities corresponding to the release of the bulls from the yoke. Still another example: Scenes are projected on the screen in a cinema show. But the moving pictures do not affect or alter the screen. The seer pays attention to the pictures and ignores the screen. They cannot remain apart from the screen. Still its existence is ignored. So also the Self is the screen on which the pictures, namely activities, are going on. The man is aware of the latter, ignoring the former. All the same he is not apart from the Self. Whether aware or unaware the actions will continue.
D.: Protested that he did not confuse the body with the operator as the above answer would imply.
M.: The functions of the body were kept in mind involving the need for the operator. Because there is the body - a jada object - an operator, a sentient agent, is necessary. Because people think that they are jivas, Sri Krishna has said that God resides in the Heart as the operator of the jivas. In fact there are no jivas and no operator. The self comprises all. It is the screen, the pictures, the seer, the actor, the operator, the light and all else. Your confounding it with the body and imagining yourself as the actor amounts to the seer being represented as an actor in a cinema picture. Imagine the actor in the picture asking if he could enact a scene without the screen. Such is the case of the man who thinks of his acting apart from the Self.
296
D.: It is like asking the spectator to act in the cinema picture. Somnambulism seems to be desirable.
M.: There is the belief that the crow rolls only one iris into either eye to see any object. It has only one iris but two eye sockets. Its sight is manipulated according to its desire. Or again the elephant has one trunk with which it breathes and does work such as drinking water, etc. Again serpents are said to use the same apparatus for either seeing or hearing. Similarly the actions and states are according to one’s point of view. Sleep waking or waking sleep or dreaming sleep or dreaming wakefulness are about the same.
D.: We have to deal with a physical body in a physical waking world. If we sleep while work is done or work when sleep overtakes us, the work will go wrong.
M.: Sleep is not ignorance; it is your pure state. Wakefulness is not knowledge; it is ignorance. There is full awareness in sleep; there is total ignorance in waking. Your real nature covers both, and extends beyond. The Self is beyond knowledge and ignorance. Sleep, dream and waking are only modes passing before the Self. They proceed whether you are aware or not.
That is the state of the Jnani in whom pass the states of waking, samadhi, deep sleep and dream, like the bulls moving, standing or being unyoked when the passenger is asleep as aforesaid.
These questions are from the point of view of the ajnani; otherwise these questions do not arise.
D.: Of course they cannot arise for the Self. Who would be there to ask? But unfortunately I have not yet realised the Self.
M.: That is just the obstacle in your way.
You must get rid of the idea that you are an ajnani, yet to realise the Self.
You are the Self.
Was there ever a time when you were apart from the Self?
D.: So it is an experiment in somnambulism .... or in day dreaming.
Bhagavan laughed.
...............297
Drops of nectar:
Talk 314.
In yesterday’s answers, Sri Bhagavan said that the Self is pure consciousness in deep slumber, and He also indicated the Self of the transition from sleep to the waking state as the ideal for realisation.
He was requested to explain the same.
Sri Bhagavan graciously answered:
The Self is pure consciousness in sleep; it evolves as aham (‘I’) without the idam (‘this’) in the transition stage; and manifests as aham (‘I’) and idam (‘this’) in the waking state.
The individual’s experience is by means of aham (‘I’) only.
So he must aim at realisation in the way indicated (i.e., by means of the transitional ‘I’).
Otherwise the sleep-experience does not matter to him.
If the transitional ‘I’ be realised the substratum is found and that leads to the goal.
Again, sleep is said to be ajnana (ignorance). That is only in relation to the wrong jnana (knowledge) prevalent in the wakeful state. The waking state is really ajnana (ignorance) and the sleep state is prajnana (full knowledge). Prajnana is Brahman, says the sruti. Brahman is eternal. The sleep-experiencer is called prajna. He is prajnanam in all the three states. Its particular significance in the sleep state is that He is full of knowledge (prajnanaghana).
What is ghana? There are jnana and vijnana.
Both together operate in all perceptions. Vijnana in the jagrat is viparita jnana (wrong knowledge) i.e., ajnana (ignorance). It always co-exists with the individual. When this becomes vispashta jnana (clear knowledge), It is Brahman. When wrong knowledge is totally absent, as in sleep, He remains pure prajnana only. That is Prajnanaghana.
Aitareya Upanishad says prajnana, vijnana, ajnana, samjnana are all names of Brahman.
Being made up of knowledge alone how is He to be experienced? Experience is always with vijnana.
Therefore the pure ‘I’ of the transitional stage must be held for the experience of the Prajnanaghana.
The ‘I’ of the waking state is impure and is not useful for such experience.
Hence the use of the transitional ‘I’ or the pure ‘I’. How is this pure ‘I’ to be realised?
Viveka Chudamani says, Vijnana kose vilasatyajasram
(He is always shining forth in the intellectual sheath, vijnana kosa).
Tripura Rahasya and other works point out that the interval between two consecutive sankalpas (ideas or thoughts) represent the pure aham (‘I’).
Therefore holding on to the pure ‘I’, one should have the Prajnanaghana for aim, and there is the vritti present in the attempt.
All these have their proper and respective places and at the same time lead to realisation.
Again the pure Self has been described in Viveka Chudamani to be beyond asat, i.e. different from asat. Here asat is the contaminated waking ‘I’. Asadvilakshana means sat, i.e. the Self of sleep. He is also described as different from sat and asat. Both mean the same. He is also asesha sakshi (all-seeing witness).
If pure, how is He to be experienced by means of the impure ‘I’? A man says “I slept happily”. Happiness was his experience. If not, how could he speak of what he had not experienced? How did he experience happiness in sleep, if the Self was pure? Who is it that speaks of that experience now? The speaker is the vijnanatma (ignorant self) and he speaks of prajnanatma (pure self). How can that hold? Was this vijnanatma present in sleep? His present statement of the experience of happiness in sleep makes one infer his existence in sleep. How then did he remain? Surely not as in the waking state. He was there very subtle. Exceedingly subtle vijnanatma experiences the happy prajnanatma by means of maya mode. It is like the rays of the moon seen below the branches, twigs and leaves of a tree. The subtle vijnanatma seems apparently a stranger to the obvious vijnanatma of the present moment. Why should we infer his existence in sleep? Should we not deny the experience of happiness and be done with this inference? No. The fact of the experience of happiness cannot be denied, for everyone courts sleep and prepares a nice bed for the enjoyment of sound sleep. This brings us to the conclusion that the cogniser, cognition and the cognised are present in all the three states, though there are differences in their subtleties. In the transitional state, the aham (‘I’) is suddha (pure), because idam (‘this’) is suppressed. Aham (‘I’) predominates. ‘Why is not that pure ‘I’ realised now or even remembered by us? Because of want of acquaintance (parichaya) with it. It can be recognised only if it is consciously attained. Therefore make the effort and gain consciously.
..............299............................end,.............................................
No comments:
Post a Comment