Talks mar 28

 490

Talk 486. 

Mr. Ganapatram: How shall I find out “Who am I”? 

M.: Are there two selves for the one self to find the other? 

D.: The Self must be only one consisting of two aspects of ‘I’ and sankalpa (i.e., of thinker and thought). After a time he continued: Please say how I shall realise the ‘I’. Am I to make the japa, “Who am I?” 

M.: No japa of the kind is meant. 

D.: Am I to think “Who am I”? 

M.: You have known that the ‘I-thought’ springs forth. Hold the ‘Ithought’ and find its moola (source). 

D.: May I know the way? 

M.: Do as you have now been told and see. 

D.: I do not understand what I should do. 

M.: If it is anything objective the way can be shown objectively. This is subjective. 

D.: But I do not understand. 

M.: What! Do you not understand that you are? 

D.: Please tell me the way. 

M.: Is it necessary to show the way in the interior of your own home? This is within you. 

D.: What do you advise me to do? 

M.: Why should you do anything and what should you do? Only keep quiet. Why not do so? Each one must do according to his own state.

 D.: Please tell me what is suitable to me. I want to hear from you. (No answer.)

..........

Talk 487. An English lady, a young woman, came here dressed in a Muslim sari. She had evidently been in North India and met Dr. G. H. Mees. Sri Bhagavan read out a stanza “The Black Sun” from the anniversary number of The Vision, written by Swami Bharatananda. After a few minutes, Miss J. asked: One gathers from the stanza that one should keep on meditating until one gets merged in the state of consciousness. Do you think it right? 

M.: Yes. 

D.: I go further and ask: Is it right that one should, by conscious will, go into that state from which there is no return? (No answer) - Dinner bell. Afternoon 

D.: What is the object of Self-Realisation? 

M.: Self-Realisation is the final goal and it is the end in itself. 

D.: l mean, what is the use of Self-Realisation? 

M.: Why should you seek Self-Realisation? Why do you not rest content with your present state? It is evident that you are discontented with the present state. The discontent is at an end if you realise the Self. 

D.: What is that Self-Realisation which removes the discontent? I am in the world and there are wars in it. Can Self-Realisation put an end to it? 

M.: Are you in the world? Or is the world in you? 

D.: I do not understand. The world is certainly around me. 

M.: You speak of the world and happenings in it. They are mere ideas in you. The ideas are in the mind. The mind is within you. And so the world is within you. 

D.: I do not follow you. Even if I do not think of the world, the world is still there. 

M.: Do you mean to say that the world is apart from the mind and it can exist in the absence of the mind? 

D.: Yes. 

M.: Does the world exist in your deep sleep? 

D.: It does. 

M.: Do you see it in your sleep? 

D.: No, I don’t. But others, who are awake, see it. 

M.: Are you so aware in your sleep? Or do you become aware of the other’s knowledge now? 

D.: In my waking state. 

M.: So you speak of waking knowledge and not of sleep-experience. The existence of the world in your waking and dream states is admitted because they are the products of the mind. The mind is withdrawn in sleep and the world is in the condition of a seed. It becomes manifest over again when you wake up. The ego springs forth, identifies itself with the body and sees the world. So the world is a mental creation. 

D.: How can it be? 

M.: Do you not create a world in your dream? The waking state also is a long drawn out dream. There must be a seer behind the waking and dream experiences. Who is that seer? Is it the body? 

D.: It cannot be. 

M.: Is it the mind? 

D.: It must be so. 

M.: But you remain in the absence of the mind. 

 D.: How? 

M.: In deep sleep. 

D.: l do not know if I am then. 

M.: If you were not how do you recollect yesterday’s experiences? Is it possible that there was a break in the continuity of the ‘I’ during sleep? 

D.: It may be. 

M.: If so, a Johnson may wake up as a Benson. How will the identity of the individual be established? 

D.: I don’t know. 

M.: If this argument is not clear, follow a different line. You admit “I slept well”, “I feel refreshed after a sound sleep”. So sleep was your experience. The experiencer now identifies himself with the ‘I’ in the speaker. So this ‘I’ must have been in sleep also. 

D.: Yes. 

M.: So ‘I’ was in sleep, if the world was then there, did it say that it existed? 

D.: No. But the world tells me its existence now. Even if I deny its existence, I may knock myself against a stone and hurt my foot. The injury proves the existence of the stone and so of the world. 

M.: Quite so. The stone hurts the foot. Does the foot say that there is the stone? 

D.: No. - ‘I’. 

M.: Who is this ‘I’? It cannot be the body nor the mind as we have seen before. This ‘I’ is the one who experiences the waking, dream and sleep states. The three states are changes which do not affect the individual. The experiences are like pictures passing on a screen in the cinema. The appearance and disappearance of the pictures do not affect the screen. So also, the three states alternate with one another leaving the Self unaffected. The waking and the dream states are creations of the mind. So the Self covers all. 

To know that the Self remains happy in its perfection is Self-Realisation. Its use lies in the realisation of Perfection and thus of Happiness. 

D.: Can it be complete happiness to remain Self-realised if one does not contribute to the happiness of the world? How can one be  so happy when there is a war in Spain, a war in China? Is it not selfishness to remain Self-realised without helping the world? 

M.: The Self was pointed out to you to cover the universe and also transcend it. The world cannot remain apart from the Self. If the realisation of such Self be called selfishness that selfishness must cover the world also. It is nothing contemptible. 

D.: Does not the realised man continue to live just like a non-realised being? 

M.: Yes, with this difference that the realised being does not see the world as being apart from the Self, he possesses true knowledge and the internal happiness of being perfect, whereas the other person sees the world apart, feels imperfection and is miserable. Otherwise their physical actions are similar. 

D.: The realised being also knows that there are wars being waged in the world, just like the other man. 

M.: Yes. 

D.: How then can he be happy? 

M.: Is the cinema screen affected by a scene of fire burning or sea rising? So it is with the Self. The idea that I am the body or the mind is so deep that one cannot get over it even if convinced otherwise. One experiences a dream and knows it to be unreal on waking. Waking experience is unreal in other states. So each state contradicts the others. They are therefore mere changes taking place in the seer, or phenomena appearing in the Self, which is unbroken and remains unaffected by them. Just as the waking, dream and sleep states are phenomena, so also birth, growth and death are phenomena in the Self. which continues to be unbroken and unaffected. Birth and death are only ideas. They pertain to the body or the mind. The Self exists before the birth of this body and will remain after the death of this body. So it is with the series of bodies taken up in succession. The Self is immortal. The phenomena are changeful and appear mortal. The fear of death is of the body. It is not true of the Self. Such fear is due to ignorance. Realisation means True Knowledge of the Perfection and Immortality of the Self. Mortality is only an idea and cause of misery. You get rid of it by realising the Immortal nature of the Self.  3rd May, 1938 The same lady continued: If the world is only a dream, how should it be harmonised with the Eternal Reality? 

M.: The harmony consists in the realisation of its inseparateness from the Self. 

D.: But a dream is fleeting and unreal. It is also contradicted by the waking state. 

M.: The waking experiences are similar. 

D.: One lives fifty years and finds a continuity in the waking experience which is absent in dreams. 

M.: You go to sleep and dream a dream in which the experiences of fifty years are condensed within the short duration of the dream, say five minutes. There is also a continuity in the dream. Which is real now? Is the period covering fifty years of your waking state real or the short duration of five minutes of your dream? The standards of time differ in the two states. That is all. There is no other difference between the experiences. 

D.: The spirit remains unaffected by the passing phenomena and by the successive bodies of repeated births. How does each body get the life to set it acting? 

M.: The spirit is differentiated from matter and is full of life. The body is animated by it. 

D.: The realised being is then the spirit and unaware of the world. 

M.: He sees the world but not as separate from the Self. 

D.: If the world is full of pain why should he continue the world-idea? 

M.: Does the realised being tell you that the world is full of pain? It is the other one who feels the pain and seeks the help of the wise saying that the world is painful. Then the wise one explains from his experience that if one withdraws within the Self there is an end of pain. The pain is felt so long as the object is different from oneself. But when the Self is found to be an undivided whole who and what is there to feel? The realised mind is the Holy Spirit and the other mind is the home of the devil. For the realised being this is the Kingdom of Heaven. “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.” That Kingdom is here and now.

...................................................

496

Talk 489. 

Another group of visitors was asking the method of Realisation. 

In the course of a reply Sri Bhagavan said:

 “Holding the mind and investigating it is advised for a beginner. 

But what is mind after all? It is a projection of the Self. 

See for whom it appears and from where it rises.

 The ‘I-thought’ will be found to be the root-cause. 

Go deeper; the ‘I-thought’ disappears and there is an infinitely expanded ‘I-consciousness’. 

That is otherwise called Hiranyagarbha. When it puts on limitations it appears as individuals.”

.........

Talk 490. 

The English lady desired to have a private talk with Sri Bhagavan. 

She began, “I am returning to England. I leave this place this evening. I want to have the happiness of Self-Realisation in my home. Of course it is not easy in the West. But I shall strive for it. What is the way to do it?” 

M.: If Realisation be something outside you a way can be shown consistent with the safety of the individual, his capacity. etc. Then the questions if it is realisable and, if so, in what time - will also arise. But here, Realisation is of the Self. You cannot remain without the Self. 

The Self is always realised. But only you do not recognise the fact. The Realisation is now obscured by the present world idea. 

The world is now seen outside you and the idea associated with it obscures your real nature. All that is needed is to overcome this ignorance and then the Self stands revealed. No special effort is necessary to realise the Self. All efforts are for eliminating the present obscuration of the Truth.

 A lady is wearing a necklace round her neck. She forgets it, imagines it to be lost and impulsively looks for it here, there and everywhere. Not finding it, she asks her friends if they have found it anywhere, until one kind friend points to her neck and tells her to feel the necklace round the neck. The seeker does so and feels happy that the necklace is found. Again, when she meets her other friends, they ask her if her lost necklace was found. She says ‘yes’ to them, as if it were lost and later recovered. Her happiness on re-discovering it round her neck is the same as if some lost property was recovered. In fact she never lost it nor recovered it. And yet she was once miserable and now she is happy. So also with the realisation of the Self. The Self is always realised. 

The Realisation is now obscured. When the veil is removed the person feels happy at rediscovering the ever-realised Self.

 The ever-present Realisation appears to be a new Realisation. Now, what should one do to overcome the present ignorance. Be eager to have the true knowledge. As this eagerness grows the wrong knowledge diminishes in strength until it finally disappears.

............

D.: Is not individuality anadi (without beginning)? 

M.: Investigate and see if there is any individuality at all. Ask this question after solving this problem. 

Nammalvar says: “In ignorance I took the ego to be myself; however, with right knowledge, the ego is nowhere and only you remain as the Self.” 

Both monists and dualists are agreed on the necessity of Self Realisation. Let us do it first and then discuss the side-issues. Advaita or dvaita cannot be decided on theoretical considerations alone. If the Self is realised the question will not arise at all. Even Suka had no confidence in his brahmacharya whereas Sri Krishna was sure of his brahmacharya. Self-Realisation is designated by so many different names, satya, brahmacharya, etc. What is natural to the state of Self-Realisation forms the disciplinary course in the other state. 

“I-am-the-body” idea will become extinct only on Self-Realisation. With its extinction the vasanas become extinct and all virtues will remain ever.

...........................500.......................end........................