Renunciation

A few weeks ago several of our regular contributors were having a discussion in one of the ‘responses’ sections about whether physical renunciation was a prerequisite for progress on the spiritual path. I didn’t contribute much except to say at one point that Bhagavan taught one should ‘renounce the renouncer’, rather than give up particular desires, ways of life, courses of action, and so on. As the debate rumbled on, at some point someone asked me to clarify what Bhagavan had actually taught on this subject. I have therefore, somewhat belatedly, assembled some of Bhagavan’s key teachings on this topic and arranged them under various headings.

Bhagavan taught that true renunciation was giving up interest in and attachment to anything that is not the Self:

Giving up the non-Self is renunciation. Inhering in the Self is jnana or Self-realisation. One is the negative and the other the positive aspect of the same, single truth. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 2nd January, 1946, afternoon)

According to Bhagavan this is accomplished by giving up erroneous identifications and limitations. This basic theme will come up in all the sections of this post, as will the methods by which this is accomplished: self-enquiry and Self-abidance.

Renouncing the ego

Bhagavan often used terms such as ‘mind’, ‘ego’ and ‘individuality’ interchangeably, particularly when it came to giving them up. If the ego (or any of its synonyms) is renounced, no further renunciation is required. The following three verses from Padamalai (p. 171, vv. 103-105) sum this up quite neatly:

For those who have abandoned their ego mind, what other things besides that [mind] are left that are worthy of being renounced?

Renunciation, glorious and immaculate, is the total extirpation of the impure ego mind.

Only those who have renounced the ego-mind have truly renounced. What have all the others, who may have given up other things, really renounced?

The next three verses (Guru Vachaka Kovai, vv. 837, 500 and 850) emphasise the same point and conclude that it is self-enquiry that produces the true renunciation, which is the abandonment of the individual ‘I’:

For those who have, with great difficulty, accomplished the renunciation of the ego, there is nothing else to renounce.

That which is worth taking up is the self-enquiry that reveals jnana; that which is worth enjoying is the grandeur of the Self; that which is worth renouncing is the ego-mind; that in which it is worth taking refuge, to eliminate sorrow completely, is one’s own source, the Heart.

By becoming the source of all desires, the ego is the doorway to the sorrow of samsara. The extremely heroic and discriminating person first attains through dispassion the total renunciation of desires that arise in the form of ‘I want’. Subsequently, through the Selfward enquiry ‘Who am I?’, he renounces that ego, leaving no trace of it, and attains the bliss of peace, free from anxieties. This is the supreme benefit of dharma.

Renouncing desires

The last verse of the previous section makes the interesting point that desires for external objects have to be renounced ‘through dispassion’ before self-enquiry can accomplish the ultimate renunciation, the renunciation of the ‘I’. The same point is made in Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 764:

Those excellent seekers who have completely renounced desires, realising that more and more afflictions result from them, will attain, through the direct path of self-enquiry that they embark on, the endless and supreme experience of the essence of the Self in the Heart.

Sometimes Bhagavan said (as he did in the last two verses) that desires should be tackled prior to the practice of enquiry, but on other occasions he was equally insistent that self-enquiry, properly performed, was the most effective way of eliminating and renouncing desires. The following two dialogues illustrate this particular approach:

Question: What is the best way of dealing with desires, with a view to getting rid of them – satisfying them or suppressing them?

Bhagavan: If a desire can be got rid of by satisfying it, there will be no harm in satisfying such a desire. But desires generally are not eradicated by satisfaction. Trying to root them out that way is like pouring spirits to quench fire. At the same time, the proper remedy is not forcible suppression, since such repression is bound to react sooner or later into forceful surging up with undesirable consequences. The proper way to get rid of a desire is to find out, ‘Who gets the desire? What is its source?’ When this is found, the desire is rooted out and it will never again emerge or grow. Small desires such as the desire to eat, drink and sleep and attend to calls of nature, though these may also be classed among desires, you can safely satisfy. They will not implant vasanas in your mind, necessitating further birth. Those activities are just necessary to carry on life and are not likely to develop or leave behind vasanas or tendencies. As a general rule, therefore, there is no harm in satisfying a desire where the satisfaction will not lead to further desires by creating vasanas in the mind. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 12th April, 1946)

Question: How am I to deal with my passions? Am I to check them or satisfy them? If I follow Bhagavan’s method and ask, ‘To whom are these passions?’ they do not seem to die but grow stronger.

Bhagavan: That only shows you are not going about my method properly. The right way is to find out the root of all passions, the source whence they proceed, and get rid of that. If you check the passions, they may get suppressed for the moment, but will appear again. If you satisfy them, they will be satisfied only for the moment and will again crave satisfaction. Satisfying desires and thereby trying to root them out is like trying to quench fire by pouring kerosene oil over it. The only way is to find the root of desire and thus remove it. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 2nd January, 1946)

The question of how to deal with desire was raised in an earlier post. One reader, Haramurthy, said that it should be effectively tackled by viveka, proper discrimination. Bhagavan himself occasionally took this line himself, suggesting that desires could be tackled, to some extent at least, by cultivating an understanding of what was true and real, and what was not:

Question: How can they [desires] be rendered weaker?

Bhagavan: By knowledge. You know that you are not the mind. The desires are in the mind. Such knowledge helps one to control them.

Question: But they are not controlled in our practical lives.

Bhagavan: Every time you attempt satisfaction of a desire the knowledge comes that it is better to desist. What is your true nature? How can you ever forget it? Waking, dream and sleep are mere phases of the mind. They are not of the Self. You are the witness of these states. Your true nature is found in sleep. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 12th April, 1946)

Bhagavan: There is room for kama [desire] so long as there is an object apart from the subject, i.e., duality. There can be no desire if there is no object. The state of no-desire is moksha. There is no duality in sleep and also no desire. Whereas there is duality in the waking state and desire also is there. Because of duality a desire arises from the acquisition of the object. That is the outgoing mind, which is the basis of duality and of desire. If one knows that bliss is none other than the Self the mind becomes inward turned. If the Self is gained all the desires are fulfilled. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 502)

However, Bhagavan taught that there are limitations to this approach. Viveka can help one to lose interest in the unreal non-Self, but true desirelessness and true renunciation only occur when one abides in and as the Self:

Only the Self-abidance wherein one shines free of affliction will cut asunder all the bonds engendered by the non-Self. Discrimination [viveka], which differentiates between the unreal and the real that is one’s own nature, is [only] an aid to immaculate desirelessness. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 769)

Question: Has the discrimination between reality and unreality [sat asat vicharana] the efficacy in itself to lead us to the realisation of the one imperishable?

Bhagavan: As propounded by all and realised by all true seekers, fixity in the supreme spirit [Brahmanishta] alone can make us know and realise it. It being of us and in us, any amount of discrimination [vivechana] can lead us only one step forward, by making us renouncers, by goading us to discard the seeming [abhasa] as transitory and to hold fast to the eternal truth and presence alone. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 29)

The best kind of renunciation is remaining in the state in which the mind holds extremely tightly to the swarupa. (Padamalai, p. 170, v. 100)

In the context of Bhagavan’s teachings, the implication of this warning about the limitations of viveka is that it is only through enquiry or surrender that true Self-abidance can be attained. This point is made in Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 415:

Having, through discrimination, distinguished between the supreme [para] and the world [apara], one should, through enquiry and dispassion, attain attachment to para and detachment from apara. Then, with the strength of dispassion thus attained, one should live with one’s heart completely free from the infatuations of ‘I’ and ‘mine’. This alone is the way of life that should be taken up by those who desire to live in the expansive world of true jnana.

Renunciation of ‘I’ and ‘mine’

‘Internal renunciation’ is renunciation of the ego whereas ‘external renunciation’ is giving up possessions. Together they are known as giving up ‘I’ and ‘mine’. It is the former that results in enlightenment.

If you attain perfect mastery of internal renunciation, external renunciation will have no importance. (Padamalai, p. 170, v. 102)

Bhagavan sometimes illustrated the superiority of inner over outer renunciation by telling the story of King Sikhidhvaja who unnecessarily gave up his kingdom and retired to the forest to seek enlightenment:

He [the king] had vairagya [non-attachment] even while ruling his kingdom and could have realised the Self if he had only pushed his vairagya to the point of killing the ego. He did not do it but came to the forest, had a timetable of tapas and yet did not improve even after eighteen years of tapas. He had made himself a victim of his own creation. Chudala [his enlightened wife] advised him to give up the ego and realise the Self, which he did and was liberated.

It is clear from Chudala’s story that vairagya accompanied by ego is of no value, whereas all possessions in the absence of ego do not matter. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 404)

However, Bhagavan would sometimes say that surrendering to God all the objects and ideas that comprise ‘mine’ would also lead to the same goal:

Whatever the means, the destruction of the sense ‘I’ and ‘mine’ is the goal, and as these are interdependent, the destruction of either of them causes the destruction of the other; therefore in order to achieve that state of silence which is beyond thought and word, either the path of knowledge which removes the sense of ‘I’ or the path of devotion which removes the sense of ‘mine’, will suffice. So there is no doubt that the end of the paths of devotion and knowledge is one and the same. (Upadesa Manjari, chapter one, answer 11)

Generally, though, Bhagavan would recommend enquiry even to those who were pursuing union or identity with a form of the divine:

Through delusion the trickster sometimes arrogantly regards the property of the boundless perfect one, the Lord of all, as ‘I’, and at other times, through attachment to it, regards it as ‘mine’. If he [the trickster] enters the Heart, his source, and examines who he is, then where is he to be found?

Abandon your mind unconditionally at the feet of him [Siva] who shares his form with the Lady [Uma]. Then, as the ‘I’ that investigates the false dies away, along with [the concept of] ‘mine’, the powerful Supreme Self will unfold fully and flourish eternally. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, vv. 484, 487)

Renouncing the ‘I am the body’ idea

Identification with the body is, says Bhagavan, just a wrong idea, but it is an association that prevents us from being aware of who we really are. The renunciation of this idea is therefore central to Bhagavan’s teachings:

Question: Why cannot the Self be perceived directly?

Bhagavan: Only the Self is said to be directly perceived [pratyaksha]. Nothing else is said to be pratyaksha. Although we are having this pratyaksha, the thought ‘I am this body’ is veiling it. If we give up this thought, the Atma, which is always within the direct experience of everyone, will shine forth. (Living by the Words of Bhagavan, 2nd ed., pp. 218-19)

This theme appears many times in Bhagavan’s teachings. Here is a sequence of verses from Guru Vachaka Kovai that covers this important aspect of renunciation:

34

The world that associates with us as an appearance of names and forms is as transient as a lightning flash. The faltering understanding ‘I am the body’ is the deceptive device that makes us desire the world as if it were real, [thereby] entrapping us instantaneously in the powerful snare of bondage.

39

In the experience of true knowledge, which is the reality of the Self, this world is merely the beautiful [but illusory] azure-blue colour that appears in the sky. When one becomes confused by the veiling, the ‘I am the body’ delusion, those things that are seen through suttarivu [the consciousness that divides itself into seer and seen] are merely an imaginary appearance.

846

Be aware that the ‘I am the body’ ego is truly the one unique cause of all the sorrows of samsara. Therefore, make genuine, firm and steady efforts to destroy that ego, and desist from making any other kind of effort.

266

Following the destruction of the ‘I am the body’ idea, whatever body it may be, the radiance of being exists forever, free of limitation, without any bondage, shining as the pure expanse. Dwelling in the hearts of all individuated jivas as attribute-free jnana, as wholly the Self, and as non-distinct from them, this radiance of being abides as the all-encompassing supreme power [akila-para-sakti].

348

Having become free from concepts, which are afflicting thoughts, and with the ‘I am the body’ idea completely extinguished, one ends up as the mere eye of grace, the non-dual expanse of consciousness. This is the supremely fulfilling vision of God.

Bhagavan 17

Know that the eradication of the identification with the body is charity, spiritual austerity and ritual sacrifice; it is virtue, divine union and devotion; it is heaven, wealth, peace and truth; it is grace; it is the state of divine silence; it is the deathless death; it is jnana, renunciation, final liberation and bliss.

Renouncing the ‘I am the doer’ idea

According to Bhagavan, it is not actions themselves that should be given up, but the inner feeling that one is doing them:

If total cessation from activity is alone the determining criterion for jnana, then even the inability to act because of leprosy will be a sure indication of jnana! You should know that the state of jnana is the exalted state of remaining without any sense of responsibility in the heart, having renounced both the attraction to, and the revulsion from, the performance of actions. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 1160)

There are two Sanskrit terms that are relevant to this part of the discussion: kartrutva and kartavya. The former denotes the feeling of being the performer of actions that the body undertakes, while the latter denotes the feeling that there are activities that must be done. Here is one verse from Guru Vachaka Kovai and two from Padamalai that summarise the problem and its solution:

Unless one’s connection with individuality is destroyed at its root, one will not become a true jnani, free of the sense of doership [kartrutva]. Even if one attains a supreme and eminent state of tapas that can be marvelled at, one is still only a sadhaka who is qualified to realise the truth. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, v. 122)

The ignoble infatuation kartrutva that associates with you is the confused attitude of mind that regards the instruments [of action and cognition] as ‘you’.

Deeds [karma] are not your enemy, only the sense of doership [kartrutva] is. Therefore, live your life, having completely renounced that enemy. (Padamalai p. 171, vv. 106, 107)

The next sequence of verses, also from Padamalai, stresses the necessity of abandoning kartavya, the idea that there are courses of action that must be pursued:

The notion of duties that need to be done [kartavya] will not cease as long as the sense of doership [kartrutva] exists in the heart.

Why do you become mentally agitated, blindly believing there are things you have to do [kartavya]?

The bondage called ‘duty’ will cease [being known] as a delusion caused by the ego, when the firm knowledge of reality is attained.

A mind that has dissolved in the state of God, and ceased to exist, will not be aware of any activity that needs to be performed because when the ego, which has the idea that it is the performer of actions, has been completely destroyed, the idea that something needs to be accomplished ends.

Those who do not see anything as a duty that has to be done will attain the bliss of peace that yields limitless contentment. (Padamalai, vv. 119-124)

The abandonment of the ‘I am the doer’ idea is not accomplished by giving up certain courses of action, or even all of them, but by enquiry into the nature and origin of the ‘I’ that thinks it is performing the actions:

The truth of karma [activities] is only the realisation of one’s true nature by the enquiry ‘Who is the doer, the “I” who is embarking upon the performance of karma?’ Unless the ego, the performer of action, perishes by enquiring into and knowing [its real nature], the perfect unassailable peace in which all doing has ended will be impossible [to attain].

Prarabdha, like a whirlwind, relentlessly agitates and spins the mind that has shrunk through the ‘I am the body’ idea. However, it cannot stir, even slightly, the limitation-free mind that shines as the extremely clear space of being-consciousness when that ego-impurity [the ‘I am the body’ idea] is destroyed by self-enquiry. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, vv. 703, 698)

Enquiry leads to an unbroken experience of the Self, and it is this culminating experience, rather than the preceding enquiry, that ultimately destroys the ‘I am the body’ belief. Here is a statement from Bhagavan (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 699) on this topic, followed by a brief commentary on it by Muruganar:

O mind, other than meditation which takes the form of the akhandakara vritti [unbroken experience] that shines as the Self, have you discovered any means to burn to ashes the evil ‘I am the doer’ belief that propels and plunges the jiva into the bottom of the ocean of karma? If you have, let me know.

Muruganar: The ‘I am the doer’ belief repeatedly plunges the jiva into the ocean of karma, without allowing it to rise up and reach the shore. By doing this it obstructs the attainment of liberation. It has therefore been described as ‘the evil “I am the doer” belief’. The fire that burns this [belief] to ashes is the fire of jnana that has taken the form of akhandakara vritti. The practice of this vritti burns to destruction the ‘I am the doer’ idea by revealing to the jiva the truth that one’s nature is not to do karma but to shine as mere being. There is no other means to destroy this ‘I am the doer’ belief. This is the implication. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, p. 303)

The end of result of this process is the state of Self-abidance wherein both kartrutva and kartavya are absent:

He whose ego, the veiling, has subsided in swarupa-consciousness, and who has become wholly that forever, will, through the disappearance of the ‘I am the doer’ idea, lose all his personal volition, and he will [then] shine with the blissful state, whose nature is peace, flaring up in his Heart. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 864)

Taking sannyasa

In a Hindu context ‘renouncing the world’ is usually associated with the ritual of ‘taking sannyasa’ – becoming a renunciate monk. The restrictions involved in this lifestyle vary – the different religious orders that are authorised to initiate have slightly different rules – but they would generally include celibacy, leaving home and giving up the ties to one’s family, and, more often than not, living on begged food. According to Bhagavan the true and definitive renunciation of the world is not accomplished through giving up relationships or by ceasing to indulge in activities that are prompted by physical desire; it is instead something that happens when the thought-created externally perceived world ceases to appear in the experience of the Self:

Sankalpa [thought] creates the world. The peace attained on the destruction of sankalpas is the [permanent] destruction of the world. (Padamalai, p. 264, v. 6)

The world is seen distinctly only in the waking and dream states in which sankalpas [thoughts] have emerged. Is it ever seen during sleep, where sankalpas do not emerge even slightly? Sankalpas alone are the material substance of the world. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, v. 29)

It is this more profound form of renunciation that Bhagavan was referring to when he said:

Instead of ruining yourself by clinging, as your refuge, to the utterly false world that appears as a conjuring trick, it is wisdom to renounce it in the mind and remain still, forgetting it and remaining detached from it, like the ripe tamarind fruit that, despite remaining inside its pod, stays separate from it. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 825)

The abandonment of the mechanism through which the perceived world is projected and sustained is quite a different process from the adoption of a lifestyle that restricts one from pursuing certain actions. However, even though most of Bhagavan’s devotees were aware of these teachings on mental renunciation, some still wanted to express their inner desire to renounce by formally taking sannyasa. Bhagavan was asked on many occasions to initiate individual devotees into sannyasa, but he refused every single request. Some devotees who felt compelled to adopt this particular lifestyle, even after being refused an initiation by Bhagavan, went elsewhere to obtain it, but they usually faced some degree of disapproval when they returned to Ramanasramam. Kunju Swami and Maurice Frydman both took the sannyasa initiation elsewhere, after being refused by Bhagavan. Others, such as Papaji, went back to a family life after Bhagavan had refused to initiate them.

When the topic of taking sannyasa was brought up in Bhagavan’s presence, his usual response was that true physical renunciation was something that happened naturally and spontaneously, like a fruit dropping from a tree when it is ripe. He did not approve of people who took a formal decision to renounce their former lifestyles, but he did concede that it was good if physical renunciation happened automatically:

Question: I have a good mind to resign from service and remain constantly with Sri Bhagavan.

Bhagavan: Bhagavan is always with you, in you, and you are yourself Bhagavan. To realise this it is neither necessary to resign your job nor run away from home. Renunciation does not imply apparent divesting of costumes, family ties, home, etc., but renunciation of desires, affection and attachment. There is no need to resign your job, but resign yourself to Him, the bearer of the burden of all. One who renounces desires, etc., actually merges in the world and expands his love to the whole universe. Expansion of love and affection would be a far better term for a true devotee of God than renunciation, for one who renounces the immediate ties actually extends the bonds of affection and love to a wider world beyond the borders of caste, creed and race. A sannyasi who apparently casts away his clothes and leaves his home does not do so out of aversion to his immediate relations but because of the expansion of his love to others around him. When this expansion comes, one does not feel that one is running away from home, but drops from it like ripe fruit from a tree; till then it would be folly to leave one’s home or his job. (Crumbs from his Table, p. 43)

The analogy of the ripened fruit also appears in Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 830, although there Bhagavan qualifies his remarks by saying that such spontaneous renunciation can only take place if personal circumstances are favourable:

Just as a ripened fruit separates effortlessly from the tree and falls, when a sadhaka who is [aiming to] merge his mind in the supreme attains maturity, he will definitely renounce family life as unsalted gruel unless his unfavourable prarabdha stands in the way.

For complete renunciation to take place one must give up all identities except the identification with the formless Self. Giving up one physical identity (‘I am a householder’) and replacing it with another (‘I am a sannyasi’) does not get to the root of the problem of false identification:

Question: Should not a man renounce everything in order that he might get liberation?

Bhagavan: Even better than the man who thinks ‘I have renounced everything’ is the one who does his duty but does not think ‘I do this’ or ‘I am the doer’. Even a sannyasi who thinks ‘I am a sannyasi’ cannot be a true sannyasi, whereas a householder who does not think ‘I am a householder’ is truly a sannyasi. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 530)

Know that not regarding oneself erroneously as being limited to the body and trapped in family bonds is a far superior renunciation to the state wherein one thinks repeatedly within one’s mind: ‘I have truly extricated myself by renouncing all the ties of this world.’ (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 840)

Muruganar made the following comments on this Guru Vachaka Kovai verse:

Thinking, ‘I am a person who has renounced’ is only mental imagination. The state of truth transcends such imagination. Only the state of remaining still, which is the natural state, is true sannyasa, the nature of liberation. It is not thinking repeatedly, ‘I am someone who has renounced samsara’. Therefore, not thinking is a far superior renunciation to thinking. Like the thought, ‘I am caught in bondage’, the thought, ‘I am one who is free from bondage’ indicates the delusion of regarding yourself as being limited to the body. When that delusion is destroyed, along with it, both of these thoughts will cease. Unless the ‘I am the body’ belief is present to some extent, there can be no possibility of having the thought, ‘I have renounced’.

Refer to Ulladu Narpadu, verse 39, where Bhagavan wrote: ‘So long as one thinks “I am in bondage”, thoughts of liberation and bondage will remain. When one sees oneself through the enquiry “Who is the bound one?”, and the Self alone remains, eternally attained and eternally free, will the thought of liberation still remain, where the thought of bondage cannot exist?’

The general supposition amongst most Hindus is that sannyasa demonstrates one’s commitment to following the spiritual path full time, and by extension, somehow makes it easier to meditate and realise the Self. Since Bhagavan taught that inner renunciation was more important than outer renunciation, he did not accept the generally accepted premise that sannyasins were in a better position to realise the Self than householders. I put the following dialogue in one of my recent replies, but it is worth posting again because it shows quite definitely that living a normal life in the world is not, according to Bhagavan, a disadvantage when it comes to making spiritual progress:

When I [Rangan] started to visit Bhagavan regularly at Skandashram, it occurred to me that it would be good if I became a sannyasin [mendicant monk]. I knew that this was a foolish and irresponsible dream because it would leave my family, already in a precarious financial position, with no one to support them. However, the thought would not leave me. One night, while I was lying in my bed at Skandashram, I was unable to sleep because this thought kept recurring so strongly.

As I was turning uneasily in my bed, Bhagavan came to my side and asked me, ‘What is the matter? Are you in pain?’ ‘

Venkataraman, [Bhagavan’s childhood name]’ I replied, ‘I want to adopt sannyasa.’

Bhagavan went away and came back with a copy of Bhakta Vijayam, an anthology of the lives of some famous saints who lived in western India many centuries ago. He opened the book and read out the story in which Saint Vithoba decided to take sannyasa. In the story his son, Jnanadeva, who is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, gave him the following advice.

‘Wherever you are, whether in worldly society or the forest, the same mind is always with you. It is the same old mind, wherever you reside.’

After reading this out Bhagavan added, ‘You can attain jnana even while you are living in samsara [worldly activities]’.

‘Then why did you become a sannyasin?’ I countered.

‘That was my prarabdha [destiny],’ replied Bhagavan. ‘Life in the family is difficult and painful, no doubt, but it is easier to become a jnani while living as a householder.’ (The Power of the Presence, part one, pp. 6-7)

Conclusion

Peace can never be attained by one who subjects himself to ignorance by embracing the body and the world, regarding them as enduring and beneficial. Equally, suffering or fear will never be experienced by one who renounces this ignorance and reaches the permanent resting place of the ego, the Heart, clinging tenaciously to it like an udumbu lizard, without letting go.

What is it that remains as impossible to renounce after all that can be renounced has been renounced? It is the harvest of bliss, the surging flood, the reality of the Self, shining in the Heart, as the Heart, as that which cannot be renounced. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, vv. 130, 836)

Desire for the Self

There was an extensive discussion between Arvind and Broken Yogi in the response column of the post on ‘Relations with the Guru’. Arvind defended the position that desiring the Self was wrong, while Broken Yogi took the opposing view. The pros and cons of this debate prompted the following query from an anonymous contributor:

There was a pretty serious debate on desire between Broken Yogi and Arvind and others. Now I am left unsure as to who was actually describing Sri Ramana’s position correctly. What is the correct teaching? Am I to desire the Self consciously as much as possible till I achieve the Self, or am I to desire it only unconsciously and keep no desire-thoughts in my mind? Does the Self have desires or does God have desires? …

I think in such situations you have to clarify what was the teaching as per Sri Ramana. I don’t want Papaji’s position or Lakshmana Swamy’s position nor the position of some of the other Masters - but Sri Ramana’s actual teaching.

The question ‘Does the Self have desires, or does God have desires?’ is probably the easiest component of the query to give an answer to. According to Bhagavan, the answer would be ‘no’:

Bhagavan: Without desire, resolve or effort, the sun rises; and in its mere presence the sunstone emits fire, the lotus blooms, water evaporates, people perform their various functions and then rest. Just as in the presence of the magnet the needle moves, it is by virtue of the mere presence of God that the souls governed by the three functions or the fivefold divine activity perform their actions and then rest, in accordance with their respective karmas. God has no resolve; no karma attaches itself to him. That is like worldly actions not affecting the sun, or like the merits and demerits of the other four elements not affecting all-pervading space. (The Collected Works of Sri Ramana Maharshi, pp. 42-3.)

Bhagavan included a summary of these ideas in one of his replies in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 28:

Question: Why then is samsara - creation and manifestation as finitised - so full of sorrow and evil?

Bhagavan: God’s will!

Question: Why does God will it so?

Bhagavan: It is inscrutable. No motive can be attributed to that Power - no desire, no end to achieve can be asserted of that one Infinite, All-wise and All-powerful Being. God is untouched by activities, which take place in His presence; compare the sun and the world activities. There is no meaning in attributing responsibility and motive to the One before it becomes many.

That is to say, God has no sankalpa, no resolve, will, desire or intention. It (God or the Self) simply is.

One of the briefest sections in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi (talk no. 537) comprises the following quotation by Bhagavan: ‘Desire constitutes maya, and desirelessness is God.’

A moment’s reflection will see why this is so. Desire can only exist if there is something separate from the subject who desires. When that separation is not there, desire no longer exists:

Bhagavan: There is room for kama (desire) so long as there is an object apart from the subject (i.e., duality). There can be no desire if there is no object. The state of no-desire is moksha. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 502)

The other question that was asked – is it good or bad to desire the Self? – is a more complex one. I think that one reason this debate went on for so long in the responses’ section is that it is possible to find statements from Bhagavan that can support either side of the argument.

Here are some unqualified assertions from Bhagavan, recorded in Padamalai, pages 71-2, which stress the importance of wanting and desiring the Self:

79

Through a longing for the swarupa that waxes more and more as abundant bliss, infatuation for the false world will slip away.

80

The glory of Self-realisation is not experienced except in the hearts of those who are very zealous about sinking into the Self.

81

Those who greatly desire the Self, the state of mere being that transcends all concepts, will not desire anything else.

82

Devotion to the Self, the best of desires, yields the true jnana sight in which all names and forms are names and forms of the Self.

83

If you wholeheartedly desire and realise the truth, that truth itself will liberate you.

Verse twenty-seven of Guru Vachaka Kovai contains similar sentiments:

Do not be confounded by this worthless samsara that appears as a dream in the deluding [sleep of] ignorance. In a mind that has an intense desire for reality – consciousness, the supreme – it is impossible for the binding mental delusion that arises in the dense darkness of ignorance to remain.

In contrast to these verses, and seemingly contradicting them, we have the following unequivocal statement, recorded on page 191 of Padamalai:

16

Even the desire for liberation is the work of delusion. Therefore, remain still [summa iru].

Similar sentiments can be found in a reply Bhagavan gave in Day by Day with Bhagavan, 24th December, 1945:

Bhagavan: Liberation is our very nature. We are that. The very fact that we wish for liberation shows that freedom from all bondage is our real nature. That has not got to be freshly acquired. All that is necessary is to get rid of the false notion that we are bound. When we achieve that, there will be no desire or thought of any sort. So long as one desires liberation, so long, you may take it, one is in bondage.

Here is another reply on this topic, this time to a devotee who wanted to follow the path of surrender:

Question: Does not total or complete surrender require that one should not have left in him the desire even for liberation or God?

Bhagavan: Complete surrender does require that you have no desire of your own, that God’s desire alone is your desire and that you have no desire of your own. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 1st March, 1946)

Since the questioner has asked for ‘Sri Ramana’s actual teaching’ on this topic, I will add one more citation, Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 378:

Only in those who have completely severed the bond of desire and attachment will the illusory appearance that associates with them through ego-defilement perish. The aim, then, is to cut off, without so much as a second thought, even the desire for the indescribable supreme bliss of peace that is full of jnana.

How may these seemingly contradictory statements to be resolved? I would say (and I will back this up with some quotes from Bhagavan) that desiring the Self intensely is, somewhat paradoxically, a way of reaching the state where all desires, including the desire for the Self, vanish. Bhagavan might say, as he did in one of the Padamalai verses I cited, remain still, without having a desire for liberation, but who can carry out this particular instruction? If I say, ‘Give an apple to your mother,’ that is a simple physical action that can easily be accomplished. If, on the other hand, I say ‘Give up all desires, including the desire for liberation, and remain still,’ who has the capacity to do this? Those who cannot will request a route to the state of desirelessness, and in such circumstances Bhagavan would say that one should take attention off desires for the objects of the non-Self and instead direct it towards the Self. At this preliminary stage of practice the Self is an object to be focused on, and a strong desire to reach it will enhance one’s ability to focus on the goal. If one wants and desires it to the exclusion of all else, then one is not diverted by mental and physical distractions.

Here is a well-known dialogue from Day by Day with Bhagavan (11th January 1946) that illustrates some of these points:

A young man from Colombo asked Bhagavan, ‘J. Krishnamurti teaches the method of effortless and choiceless awareness as distinct from that of deliberate concentration. Would Sri Bhagavan be pleased to explain how best to practise meditation and what form the object of meditation should take?

Bhagavan: Effortless and choiceless awareness is our real nature. If we can attain it or be in that state, it is all right. But one cannot reach it without effort, the effort of deliberate meditation. All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, “Be quiet or still”. But it is not easy. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once achieved the mauna or Supreme state indicated by “Be still”, you may take it that the effort necessary has already been finished in a previous life. So …, effortless and choiceless awareness is reached only after deliberate meditation. That meditation can take any form which appeals to you best. See what helps you to keep away all other thoughts and adopt that method for your meditation”.

In this connection Bhagavan quoted verses 5 and 52 from ‘Udal Poyyuravu’ and 36 from ‘Payappuli’ of Saint Thayumanavar:

'Remain still, mind, in the face of everything!’
This truth that was taught to you, where did you let it go?
Like wrestlers, bent upon their bout, you raised your arguments.
Where is your judgement?
Where, your wisdom? Begone! (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 5)

Bliss will arise if you remain still.
Why, little sir, this involvement still with yoga, whose nature is delusion? Will [this bliss] arise through your own objective knowledge?
You need not reply, you who are addicted to ‘doing’!
You little baby, you! (‘Udal Poyyuravu’, verse 52.)

Though I have listened unceasingly to the scriptures
that one and all declare,
‘To be still is bliss, is very bliss,’
I lack, alas, true understanding,
and I failed even to heed
the teachings of my Lord, Mauna Guru.
Through this stupidity I wandered in maya’s cruel forest.
Woe is me, for this is my fated destiny. (‘Payappuli’, verse 36.)

Though all the scriptures have said it, though we hear about it every day from the great ones, and even though our Guru says it, we are never quiet, but stray into the world of maya and sense objects. That is why conscious deliberate effort is required to attain that mauna state or the state of being quiet.

In the original Day by Day citation Bhagavan merely summarised the ideas in these three verses. I have added the complete text, which I took from a translation that Venkatasubramanian, Robert Butler and myself did a few years ago.

While we still have minds, we have choices, motives and desires. Bhagavan advises us in these circumstances to choose the Self over the non-Self, and with a strong dose of vairagya (discrimination between what is real and important and unreal and unimportant) keep one’s attention on the Self by desiring awareness of the ‘I’ to the exclusion of all other desires.

Here is another well-known passage from Bhagavan, taken from Sadhu Om’s translation of Bhagavan’s essay version of Who am I?:

The mind will subside only by means of the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ The thought ‘Who am I?’, destroying all other thoughts, will itself be finally destroyed like the stick used for stirring the funeral pyre.

The question ‘Who am I?’ indicates a desire to find the true nature of the ‘I’. If that thought ‘Who am I?’ is held strongly and continuously, it burns up all other thoughts and eventually consumes itself, the original desire to know the Self, leaving a desire-free ‘I’. However, for this to happen the desire for the Self must exceed the distracting power of one’s vasanas:

Bhagavan: If the will and desire to remember Self are strong enough, they will eventually overcome vasanas. There must be a great battle going on inwardly all the time until the Self is realised. (Conscious Immortality, 1st ed., p. 57)

The process by which a strong desire for the Self burns up the mind and all its desires was stated even more explicitly by Bhagavan in the flowing reply, taken from Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 152:

Bhagavan: Long for it [God or the Self] intensely so that the mind melts in devotion. After the camphor burns away no residue is left. The mind is the camphor; when it has resolved itself into the Self without leaving even the slightest trace behind, it is realisation of the Self.

All these ideas are neatly tied together in Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 149:

The non-dual experience will only be attained by those who have completely given up desires. For those with desires, it is far, far away. Hence it is proper for those with desires to direct their desires towards God, who is desireless, so that through desire for God the desires that arise through the delusion that objects exist and are different from oneself will become extinct.

The last line of this verse may also be translated as ‘so that through desire for God their deluding desires become extinct’. This second version is the one that appeared in Padamalai, on page 242.

So, ‘Anonymous’, I have stuck to your brief and only included citations from Bhagavan. I hope they will dispel a little of your confusion. To conclude, here are two more verses from Guru Vachaka Kovai. Though they do mention that giving up desires is essential for Self-realisation, they don’t really contribute much more to this discussion on desiring or not desiring the Self. However, since they do offer good practical advice on self-enquiry, that is a good enough reason for me to include them here:

850

By becoming the source of all desires, the ego is the doorway to the sorrow of samsara. The extremely heroic and discriminating person first attains through dispassion the total renunciation of desires that arise in the form of ‘I want’. Subsequently, through the Selfward enquiry ‘Who am I?’, he renounces that ego, leaving no trace of it, and attains the bliss of peace, free from anxieties. This is the supreme benefit of dharma.

851

Instead of marring the fullness of being that is God, who exists and shines without a second, by rising arrogantly as ‘I’ in opposition to him, a person should enter and subside in the Heart, his source. This truly is the virtuous discipline that should be unfailingly observed by a person who wants to reach God’s sanctum sanctorum, his consciousness-presence [jnana-sannidhi].

* * *

Apologies to everyone for not posting much recently. I am working on a couple of very long topics and they will both take time to complete.

Bhagavan’s Promises and Declarations

This morning, when I wrote a response to someone about an earlier post, I ended up talking about Bhagavan’s boons and promises. This reminded me of an extraordinary sequence of verses from Padamalai in which Bhagavan makes some astonishing promises and declarations.

Padamalai is a long poem in Tamil that was composed by Muruganar after Bhagavan passed away. The three of us who recently translated Guru Vachaka Kovai translated 1,800 out of the 3,000 verses in this work and arranged them by subject. One of the chapters within the book was this extraordinary series of promises. Almost all of these verses end with the words ‘en padam’, which is the equivalent of having a ‘he said’ at the end of an English sentence. It indicates that a direct quotation has been made by Padam, who is this case is Bhagavan. Padam, literally means ‘the foot’, but it is also the name Muruganar used in this work to denote Bhagavan. We did not include the ‘en Padam’ in the translation of most of the verses, since it would have been highly repetitive, but it is there in all the verses in which the word ‘Padam’ does not appear.

Here is the whole chapter. The comments that appear after some of the verses also appear in the book.

Knowing and experiencing me

1

Padam tells and reveals: ‘Instead of knowing with certainty by enquiry that I myself am present as your “I”, why do you despair?’

2

To become established as the Self within the Heart is to experience my real nature, which is pure bliss.

3

Know me as the true essence of jnana that shines uninterruptedly in your Heart. Destroy the objectifying awareness of the ego-mind that arrogantly cavorts as ‘I’.

4

When I am shining in your Heart as ‘I-I’, your own real nature, your attempt to ‘attain’ me is indeed a great marvel!

5

To meditate on my swarupa, which possesses the light that is the source of life, all that is needed is your one-pointedness of mind.

6

Whether you retire to the forest or remain in the midst of everyday life, attain my swarupa in the home that is the Heart.

7

Your search to attain me is like searching all over the world, ceaselessly straining to find the necklace around your own neck.

8

Just as you know that the necklace is there by feeling your neck, seek the treasure of the Self, your real nature, within the Heart, and know it.

9

Those who have come to my feet with love, and without delaying, are those whose birth has been graced by God. [Theirs is] an eminent and true life.

10

Through the thought of the feet of the Guru who has reigned over devotees, the intense darkness of ignorance [present in the] hearts of devotees will perish and ultimate liberation will be attained here and now.

Give me your burdens

11

Padam lovingly said: ‘It will be a duty well done if you place all your duties upon me.’

12

For the cruel disease of burning samsara to end, the prescribed diet is to entrust all your burdens to me.

‘Prescribed diet’ is a translation of pattiyam, an ayurvedic term. Ayurvedic practitioners say that their medicine will not work unless the pattiyam, the prescribed diet, is also followed. The implication in this verse is that the medicine is one’s sadhana, such as enquiry or surrender, while the accompanying prescribed diet is entrusting all of one’s burdens to Bhagavan.

This explanation is supported by Lakshmana Sarma’s Tamil commentary on verse 17 of Ulladu Narpadu Anubandham. Lakshmana Sarma received this explanation directly from Bhagavan while he was having private lessons on the meaning of this work:

One should, with faith, hand over to Iswara all of the burdens, such as the family and the body, which naturally appear, and then remain without anxiety. Otherwise one cannot perform, with a one-pointed mind, either devotion or self-enquiry. (Ulladu Narpadu, p. 142, 1979 ed.)

13

In order that your needless anxieties cease, make sure that all your burdens are placed on me through the courageous act of depending totally on grace.

Devaraja Mudaliar once sang two of Muruganar’s songs to Bhagavan. Bhagavan immediately asked him to translate parts of them for the benefit of the Maharani of Baroda who had come to the ashram in need of some consolation because she was separated from her husband, who had gone abroad. The portions that Bhagavan asked him to translate are as follows:

May all those devotees with great love also live long, who, coming to Ramana, get their desires fulfilled and, planting his feet in their heart, set all their troubles at rest and attain peace.

The gist of it [the second verse that Bhagavan asked him to translate] is that Ramana bears upon his head, because it is his fate, the burdens of all those who throw themselves at his feet and regard him as their sole refuge, that peace comes naturally to all those who live with him, that whatever dangers may threaten his devotees they need have no fear, and that Bhagavan had saved him, Muruganar, bidding him not to fear. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 24th June, 1946)

14

If you completely surrender all your responsibilities to me, I will accept them as mine and manage them.

15

When bearing the entire burden remains my responsibility, why do you have any worries?

16

Why do you still retain this attachment to the mental concepts of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ when, on that day, you had offered up all those things to me, avowing them to be mine?

After surrendering one’s body and possessions to the jnana-Guru, to regard the body as ‘I’ and the possessions as ‘mine’ constitutes the sin of stealing back what has been given away as a gift. You should know that avoiding this fault is the impeccable worship of the Sadguru. (Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 317)

17

If you enquire and know me, the Self within, in that state there will be no reason for you to worry about the world.

Question: Before and after meditation I get many thoughts about the unhappy people of the world.

Bhagavan: First find out whether there is an ‘I’ in you or not. It is this ego ‘I’ [ahamkara] that gets these thoughts and, as a result, you feel weakness. Therefore find out how identification with the body takes place. Body consciousness is the cause of all misery. When you conduct the enquiry into the ego ‘I’, you will find out its source and you will be able to remove it. After that there will be no more questions of the type you are asking. (The Power of the Presence, part one, p. 234)

18

Abandon the drama [of the world] and seek the Self within. Remaining within, I will protect you, [ensuring] that no harm befalls you.

19

Seek my grace within the Heart. I will drive away your darkness and show you the light. This is my responsibility.

20

Like the children of an emperor, my devotees are heirs to abundant rejoicing.

Meditating on me

21

Splendorous Padam declares: ‘Meditating on me with no sense of difference [between us] is accepting my grace and offering yourself to me. This in itself is enough.’

22

If you worship me by meditating well on the excellence of my true nature, the greatness of your own true nature will well up in your Heart.

23

Knowing that what abides in your Heart is the Self, my true and real nature, you should search for it there. Only this can be regarded as meditating on me with devotion.

24

Padam advises: ‘Keeping one’s attention on the subtle consciousness that is experienced by the extremely subtle mind is personal service to me.’

The following story is narrated by Kunju Swami:

In 1932, after spending about twelve years in personal attendance on Sri Bhagavan, I began to feel an urge to devote myself entirely to sadhana. I wanted to spend all my time alone. However, I could not easily reconcile myself to the idea of giving up my personal services to Sri Bhagavan. I had been debating the matter for some days when the answer came in a strange way. As I entered the hall one day I heard Sri Bhagavan explain to others who were there that real service to him did not mean attending to his physical needs; it meant following the essence of his teachings. That is, concentrating on realising the Self. Needless to say, that automatically cleared my doubts.

I had heard Sri Bhagavan speak like this before. Once I had heard him say, ‘It is no use saying to oneself, “I am doing personal service to Sri Bhagavan; I am dusting his bed; I have served him for so many years”. In addition to serving the Guru physically, it is also important to follow the path shown by the Guru. The best service to the Guru is engaging in vichara, dhyana and other practices with a purity of body, speech and mind.’

When Sri Bhagavan spoke like this he would often point out verse eighty-seven of Kaivalyam in which the disciple asks the Guru how he can repay him for the grace he has received. The Guru replies that the highest return the disciple can render to the Guru is to remain fixed in the Self without being caught by the three kinds of obstacles that obstruct it. Hearing Sri Bhagavan speak like this made me resolve to find a new attendant so that I could devote myself full-time to meditation. (The Power of the Presence, part two, pp. 84-5)

Sadhu Natanananda has also recorded Bhagavan’s views on this topic:

Some of the devotees coming to the ashram from far off places to spend their holidays had a tendency to engage in ashram service. They were always directing their attention towards various activities. They would seize even the smallest opportunity to get immersed in activities throughout the day. They felt satisfied that such service would alone be sufficient for their salvation. Whenever Bhagavan happened to notice their attitude, he would refer to them by saying:

‘In the name of service to the Guru, they should not waste their time in activities and become disappointed later. Such people will have cause to regret their ignorance in their last days. One should not forget, even for a moment, the aim of satsang. Having the belief that residence in the ashram will make realisation, which is most difficult to achieve in other places, easy to attain, one should always remain intent upon the realisation of one’s true nature. There is no meaning in people who are not interested in that [Self-realisation] taking this place to be a special place. The spiritual service that devotees render to themselves by exerting themselves on the spiritual path for the attainment of their goal – that alone is sacred service to the Guru.’

Through these words he made it clear that he cannot be pleased by anything other than stilling the mind. The real benefit of coming to him was the subsidence of the mind. Because of this, he would exhort devotees to try to attend to the Self all the time. (The Power of the Presence, part one, pp. 114-5)

25

The compassionate heart that flows from me to you will never fail except when you cease to have remembrance of ‘me’, who command and conduct everything.

26

You can know and experience my grace, which is my nature, if you remember me with no forgetfulness in your heart.

Union with me

27

Seeking my true nature in your Heart, discovering it and rejoicing in it by bathing in the bliss of my jnana swarupa – this is union.

28

Only bhakti sadhana performed continuously with love will facilitate easily, in a gradual way, this union.

29

Enter with love the temple that is your own Heart and experience the bliss of being absorbed in my swarupa, becoming one with it.

30

I myself will command and control a mind that has died by the sacrifice of the ego.

Give me your mind

31

‘You should offer up to me the bright ruby of your mind. That is the gift that will bring me delight.’

32

‘The sweet love I have for such a mind I do not have for anything else.’ Padam desires this.

33

Padam receives the minds of loving devotees as an offering, swallowing them through a ruby-red light.

34

Padam accepts only the mind as a fitting offering, rejecting everything else as being incompatible.

Many visitors came on one occasion and they all saluted Sri Bhagavan with the single prayer, ‘Make me a bhakta. Give me moksha.’ After they left Sri Bhagavan said, thinking aloud: ‘All of them want bhakti and moksha. If I say to them, “Give yourself to me,” they will not. How then can they get what they want?’ (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 543)

Bhagavan’s darshan

35

Why do you pointlessly find fault with me, saying that I no longer look at you?

36

If you would only fix your gaze upon me, you would know that, established in the Heart, my gaze is ever fixed upon you.

Bhagavan: Bhagavan is always bestowing grace. To regard the real as unreal and the unreal as real is alone ignorance. You yourself are always shining naturally as ‘I’, ‘I’. Does Bhagavan exist apart from that being-consciousness? It is the attention turned towards the body that causes the distinctions between ‘you’ and ‘I’. If, through Self-attention, it [attention to the body] is itself transformed into being-consciousness, and if one realises that the reality is only one, where, then, is the scope for saying ‘you’ or ‘I? Remaining still, having realised the truth as it is, is the Guru’s grace. (Sri Ramana Darsanam, p. 11)

37

Looking at you from within the Self, I never leave you. How can this fact be known to your externalised vision?

The reality, the perfect One, exists in the state of supreme truth [paramartha] as ‘I alone exist as the indivisible illumination in every discrete being’. It possesses the nature of the Heart that exists and shines as Atma-swarupa, the soul of the soul. It is verily the form of divine grace [tirvarul] that dances on high, subduing everything else. Therefore, the fault of slighting it by not even thinking about it [lies] only with the beings who ought to think of that reality all the time and to such an extent that their minds soften and melt at such supreme love from reality. How can the blame for God not bestowing his sweet grace on them be attributed to God, the reality that exists? (Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 966, Muruganar’s expanded prose rendering)

Feeling that the jivas should not suffer in the least in knowing and reaching Him, God, without remaining different from them, exists and shines as the Atma-swarupa, the reality of every being. This indeed is the greatness of the supreme compassion that God has towards jivas. It has therefore been said: ‘It [reality] … is verily the form of divine grace that dances on high, subduing everything else.’

God is perpetually bestowing His grace on all beings in the form of the illumination that is shining unceasingly as I-I in the Heart. It has therefore been said, ‘How can the fault of not bestowing His sweet grace be attributed to God?’

Unless they [jivas] turn within, in His direction, and put attention on Him, the truth that God is continuously bestowing His grace on them all the time will not be known to them. Therefore, for the beings – who, through the individual self, do not enquire into Him who is the very form of grace – to say that He is not bestowing His grace on them, even slightly, is a grave mistake. This is why it has been said: ‘the fault of slighting it by not even thinking about it [lies] only with the beings who ought to think of that reality all the time to such an extent that their minds soften and melt with supreme love from reality.’

The one reality, Atma-swarupa, exists and shines in the Heart, one without a second. Appearing as if it is many, it shines as ‘I-I’ in every individual being, who seem to be many because of upadhi [limiting ideas and associations]. Therefore, the plural term ullam [meaning] ‘we exist’ is appropriate. Because the Heart is the place for the existing and shining of the Atma-swarupa, in Tamil the Heart is known as ullam. The word ullam here gives both meanings simultaneously. (Muruganar’s explanatory note to verse 966 of Guru Vachaka Kovai)