The qualifications needed to do self-enquiry

A few days ago I was asked to comment on a dialogue between Bhagavan and a devotee in which he appeared to insist that certain moral qualifications were necessary before one could attempt self-enquiry, or follow it successfully. The conversation originally appeared in The Maharshi, the journal of the Arunachala Ashram, Nova Scotia. (http://www.arunachala.org/newsletters/2010/?pg=jul-aug#article.1) I will give the questions and answers first and comment on their origin afterwards:

K.V. next questioned Maharshi:

Who is the Adhikari, i.e., the person competent to launch on this Atma Vichara, the Self-quest? Can anyone judge for himself if he has the necessary competency?

Maharshi: This is an important preliminary question. Before Atma Vichara is started some antecedent experience, some achievement in the moral field is essential.

People having varied experiences in the world, at one stage develop a disgust or repulsion (vairagya) towards sense attractions or, at any rate, an indifference to such attractions, and feel forcibly the miserable transient nature of this body through which these attractions and enjoyments are had. This may be the result of the practice of devotion or some other upasana in this life, or of such devotion or other good works performed in previous lives. People with minds thus purified and strengthened are the adhikaris, the ones competent to launch on Atma Vichara or enquiry into the Self; and these are the qualifications or signs by which one can determine such competency.

Where does this dialogue come from? In an earlier issue of The Maharshi (http://www.arunachala.org/newsletters/2009/?pg=jul-aug) the following introductory remarks are made:

The following text is from an unpublished manuscript on Sri Ramana Gita that has recently surfaced in Sri Ramanasramam. The manuscript contains typed and handwritten pages by B. V. Narasimha Swami, the author of Self Realization.

While BVN was residing at the Ashram, around the year 1930, he appears to have taken up the project of recasting Sri Ramana Gita in its original conversational form. Some of the answers in this new manuscript appear to be quite lengthy compared to the versified text composed by Ganapati Muni. It is unlikely that BVN had access to any notes taken on the occasion of the questions put to the Maharshi between the years 1913 and 1917, so we can only assume, as he explains in his introduction, that the elucidations further developed by the Maharshi in this new version must have come from subsequent questions for clarification put by BVN himself.

Many years after BVN’s preparation of this manuscript (which includes 36 typed legal-size sheets, reproduced from 25 handwritten pages, and 18 handwritten pages never put into typed format), someone began typing up an edited version of the first and second chapters, five pages in all. For whatever reason, this short-lived project also ceased and the manuscript was stored away. After BVN had typed some of his handwritten chapters, he gave a number of these pages over to Bhagavan to read, correct and fill in the required Sanksrit text, for which he left adequate space.

One such Sanskrit text beautifully written by Bhagavan on these pages is his famous verse describing the means to enter the Heart (reproduced on page 2), which is verse two of Chapter II in Sri Ramana Gita. This verse constitutes the basis for that chapter, titled “The Three Paths”.

We do not know why BVN never completed this project, or how these manuscripts came to be filed away and forgotten, buried in an uncatalogued library cabinet of the Ashram. Perhaps someone knows and will come forward with the information.

A historical digression

I can shed a little light on the questions raised in the final paragraph of this introduction. The story is not merely interesting in itself, it also gives some relevant background information to the topic I will discuss later: Bhagavan’s views on who is qualified to undertake self-enquiry.

I first came across Narasimha Swami’s manuscripts when I began to catalogue the ashram’s archives in the late 1970s.

V. Ganesan gave me the key to a couple of cupboards in the ashram office, saying, ‘We are like the “dog in the manger” with these cupboards. We guard them, we bark protectively if anyone goes anywhere near them, but we never do anything with the material inside. We don’t even know what is in there. It’s just a repository for all the old manuscripts that we have collected over the years.’

I went through the contents and found them to be a veritable Aladdin’s cave of archival treasures. There were little notebooks in Bhagavan’s handwriting, proof copies of ashram books personally corrected by Bhagavan, and much, much more besides. One of the items I discovered was a huge folder full of material accumulated by B. V. Narasimha Swami. He had left it all in the ashram when he departed, around 1930, to pursue his spiritual career with Shirdi Sai Baba. The most valuable part of the collection, in my opinion, was the notes he took when he was interviewing Bhagavan for his biography, Self-Realization. Two of these accounts, which related to Bhagavan’s first and second death experiences, were reproduced in The Mountain Path soon after I discovered them. Next in importance were the stories of devotees. Narasimha Swami had written to all the devotees of Bhagavan he knew about, asking them to write accounts of their experiences with Bhagavan. Many of these stories were published in The Mountain Path and in various ashram books. I am personally indebted to Narasimha Swami for persuading Masthan Swami to give a brief account of his association with Bhagavan. This one-and-a-half-page account, in Tamil, is the only first-hand record we have of Masthan’s life with Bhagavan.

Along with his notes and the personal reminiscences of devotees there were a number of pages that belonged to unfinished book projects. From the introductory comments he made it would seem that his intention was to bring out a book of dialogues between Bhagavan and devotees that would communicate the essence of his teachings. The papers that recently appeared in The Maharshi were part of this collection. In addition to the Sri Ramana Gita reconstruction, there were many pages of dialogues that purported to be between Bhagavan and visitors. I found the style and the presentation of these conversations to be highly untypical. I showed them to Viswanatha Swami, who was then the editor of The Mountain Path, and he agreed.

After going through the talks he told me, ‘Bhagavan didn’t deal with devotees in this way. These dialogues creep forward, establishing points one by one, with each new point depending on the arguments that have been presented and concluded in the previous answer. Bhagavan didn’t beat around the bush like this. He always went to the heart of the question with his first reply.’

He was right. The dialogues were incrementally Socratic in style, and quite alien to the way that Bhagavan taught. We both concluded that Narasimha Swami had used his legal skills (he was a lawyer) to assemble the salient points of Bhagavan’s teachings in the form of highly structured but artificially contrived dialogues. The teachings themselves were fairly accurate, but the form they were presented in (a dialogue between Bhagavan and a questioner) was entirely fictitious.

I then showed him the Sri Ramana Gita reconstruction. He went through it with a frown on his face before making the following comments:

‘There is a lot of extraneous material here, comments and extrapolations that are not in the original text. Bhagavan himself went through the original text many times, both in Sanskrit and in some of its translations. We can trust the original version because we know that Bhagavan has gone through it word by word. We have no idea where this extra material came from, and we can have no reason to believe that this is what happened in the original conversations. I don’t think Narasimha Swami ever had any contact with the people who asked these questions, and some of the things that Bhagavan is saying here don’t sound authentic to me.’

As a result of this conversation, the manuscripts containing the dialogues went back into the archives and remained there for decades, whereas the ones containing reminiscences were published in dribs and drabs over the succeeding years.

This explains why, since 1980, ‘these manuscripts came to be filed away and forgotten, buried in an uncatalogued library cabinet of the Ashram’. What about the years before that? Why did no one think about printing any of them prior to 1980? From 1950 onwards I think the main answer would have been financial. In the twenty years that followed Bhagavan’s passing away the ashram was chronically short of funds. I very much doubt that Narasimha Swami’s papers would have been considered for publication in this era, even if they hadn’t been forgotten and buried in a thoroughly neglected archive. One of the items I found in the cupboard was the typed manuscript of At the Feet of Bhagavan. It had sat there, gathering dust, for more than fifteen years. It had been properly edited and it seemed to me to be ready to be sent to the press. There were even instructions for the printer in the margins. It seemed odd to me that, after so much work had been put into it, it had simply been filed away and forgotten about.

I asked Ganesan, who looked after all ashram publications for decades, why it had never been printed.

He laughed and said, ‘The ashram decided to print it in the 1960s. It was made ready for the press, but Koppikar, who looked after the ashram accounts, told us we didn’t have enough money to print it. He lost the argument but won the battle by hiding the only copy of the manuscript so we couldn’t waste money on it by printing it. We had no idea what he had done with it until you rediscovered it.’

Around the same time I had a conversation with Suri Nagamma about her writings on Bhagavan. She told me that in the 1950s D. S. Sastri had offered on many occasions to translate Letters from Sri Ramanasramam into English if the ashram would agree to print it. His offer was persistently rejected on the grounds that Ramanasramam didn’t have the funds for it. When the then president finally relented and agreed to the publication, she said that D. S. Sastri raced through the job as fast as he could because he felt that the offer might be withdrawn at any moment if the president felt that his limited funds were needed elsewhere.

Here again is the question that was posed at the end of the introduction to the Sri Ramana Gita reconstruction:

We do not know why BVN never completed this project, or how these manuscripts came to be filed away and forgotten, buried in an uncatalogued library cabinet of the Ashram.

And here are my answers, which are partially just my own personal opinions:

Narasimha Swami never completed the project because he seemed to lose interest in writing about Bhagavan. When he went to Shirdi, he left behind all his papers, including his unfinished book of dialogues with Bhagavan. He also left behind a huge collection of notes on Seshadri Swami since he also had a plan to bring out a separate book on him. Since the book of conversations with Bhagavan was far from complete, there would have been no reason, during Bhagavan’s lifetime, for anyone to contemplate publishing it. After Bhagavan’s death, for a period of about twenty-five years, the manuscript was lost, and even if it hadn’t been, a lack of funds would have prevented its publication. In the late 1970s, when the manuscript was rediscovered, the ashram decided not to publish it because Viswanatha Swami (and a few others I showed it to) felt that the conversations recorded in it were not authentic.

Back to the topic of who is qualified to practise enquiry

I hope that the previous meandering section was not too off-putting for those who are waiting for some useful material on self-enquiry. I included it primarily to provide evidence for my belief that (a) the original Sanskrit text of Sri Ramana Gita is the authentic one and (b) Narasimha Swami’s version is not. Therefore, if there is new or contentious material that only appears in Narasimha Swami’s version, in my opinion it can be discarded as unreliable. Bearing this in mind, look at the initial words that are attributed to Bhagavan in Narasimha Swami’s version:

Question: Who is the Adhikari, i.e., the person competent to launch on this Atma Vichara, the Self-quest? Can anyone judge for himself if he has the necessary competency?

Maharshi: This is an important preliminary question. Before Atma Vichara is started some antecedent experience, some achievement in the moral field is essential.

If you compare this with the original text, you can see that the two sentences that Bhagavan begins with are not present. This is how the 1998 Ramanasramam edition of Sri Ramana Gita presents the question and the answer:

Question: Who is considered fit for this enquiry? Can one by oneself know one’s own fitness?

Bhagavan: He whose mind has been purified through upasana [worship] and other means or by merit acquired in past lives, who perceives the imperfections of the body and sense-objects, and feels utter distaste whenever his mind has to function among sense-objects and who realises that the body is impermanent, he is said to be a fit person for self-enquiry.

By these two signs, that is by a sense of the transitoriness of the body and by non-attachment to sense-objects, one’s own fitness for self-enquiry can be known. (Sri Ramana Gita, chapter 7, verses 8, 9, 10, 11)

The notion that ‘some achievement in the moral field is essential’ for those seeking to practise self-enquiry is an interpolation by Narasimha Swami. Some conditions are laid out in Bhagavan’s original reply, but having a strong moral base is not one of them.

I showed the Narasimha Swami version to Venkatasubramanian yesterday, without telling him any of the background information that I laid out in the previous section. Venkatasubramanian and I have been working on translations of Bhagavan’s teachings for about ten years.

He looked at it and said, ‘I can’t believe that Bhagavan ever said anything like this. It is so completely alien to all his other statements on enquiry.’

My sentiments exactly. I told him about the origins of the manuscript, and he agreed with me that the sentence about morality was most likely a spurious interpolation.

Karshni, the devotee who asked the question, subsequently asked whether various religious rituals should be followed by those who were qualified for enquiry (verses twelve and thirteen). Bhagavan said they were aids to make the mind pure, but he didn’t accept that they were necessary for those who were qualified for enquiry. He concluded by saying (verse 19):

The non-performance of prescribed actions by a mature person pursuing self-enquiry is no sin. For self-enquiry is itself the most meritorious and most purifying [of actions].

Bhagavan did not teach that one should, through one’s deeds, bring about a level of good character and dharma that would then equip one to practise enquiry. In fact, he said the opposite was true: that the practice of self-enquiry was the best way to establish good qualities in oneself:

It is, no doubt, said in some books that one should cultivate one quality after another and thus prepare for ultimate moksha, but for those who follow the jnana or vichara marga [the path of self-enquiry], their sadhana is itself quite enough for acquiring all daivic [divine] qualities; they need not do anything else. (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 18th July, 1946)

A similar reply can be found in the dialogues that precede Sat Darshana Bhashya:

Bhagavan: When one is a sufficiently developed soul (pakvi) he becomes naturally convinced [that the real Self awaits inside].

Question: How is this development possible?

Bhagavan: Various answers are given. But whatever the previous development, vichara (earnest quest) quickens the development. (Sat Darshana Bhashya p. viii)

For me, the essential point in both of these dialogues is that one need not waste time and energy attempting to gain a mature state in which one will be better equipped to do self-enquiry since enquiry itself is the most efficient way to attain spiritual maturity.

In Upadesa Manjari, chapter two, question two, the following question and answer can be found:

Question: Can this path of enquiry be followed by all aspirants?

Bhagavan: This is suitable only for ripe souls. The rest should follow different methods according to the state of their minds.

The ‘different methods’ are listed in the subsequent reply. They include singing the praises of the Lord, japa, meditation and yoga.

Since it is clear that Bhagavan does, on this and a few other occasions, indicate that there are some people who are ready to do enquiry and some who are not, it is worth examining some of his other statements on this topic to get a clearer idea of who he thought could benefit from enquiry, and who should take to other practices.

The following dialogue from Day by Day with Bhagavan gives a few hints about this:

This afternoon, a visitor asked Bhagavan, “No doubt the method taught by Bhagavan is direct. But it is so difficult. We do not know how to begin it. If we go on asking, ‘Who am I?’ ‘Who am I?’ like a japa, with ‘Who am I?’ for [a] mantra, it becomes dull. In other methods, there is something preliminary and positive with which one can begin and then go step by step. But in Bhagavan’s method, there is no such thing, and to seek the Self at once, though direct, is difficult.”

[Bhagavan:] “You yourself concede it is the direct method. It is the direct and easy method. When going after other things, alien to us, is so easy, how can it be difficult for one to go to one’s own Self? You talk of ‘Where to begin’. There is no beginning and no end. You are yourself the beginning and the end. If you are here and the Self somewhere else, and you have to reach that Self, you may be told how to start, how to travel and then how to reach. Suppose you who are now in Ramana Asramam ask, ‘I want to go to Ramana Asramam. How shall I start and how to reach it?’, what is one to say? A man’s search for the Self is like that. He is always the Self and nothing else. You say ‘Who am I?’ becomes a japa. It is not meant that you should go on asking ‘Who am I?’ In that case, thought will not so easily die. All japas are intended, by the use of one thought, the mantra, to exclude all other thoughts. This, japa eventually does for a man. All other thoughts, except the thought of the mantra, gradually die and then even that one thought dies. Our Self is of the nature of japa. Japa is always going on there. If we give up all thoughts, we shall find japa is always there without any effort on our part. In the direct method, as you call it, by saying ask yourself ‘Who am I?’ you are told to concentrate within yourself where the I-thought (the root of all other thoughts) arises. As the Self is not outside but inside you, you are asked to dive within, instead of going without, and what can be more easy than going to yourself? But the fact remains that to some this method will seem difficult and will not appeal. That is why so many different methods have been taught. Each of them will appeal to some as the best and easiest. That is according to their pakva or fitness. But to some, nothing except the vichara marga will appeal. They will ask, ‘You want me to know or to see this or that. But who is the knower, the seer?’ Whatever other method may be chosen, there will be always a doer. That cannot be escaped. Who is that doer must be found out. Till that, the sadhana cannot be ended. So eventually, all must come to find out ‘Who am I?’ You complain that there is nothing preliminary or positive to start with. You have the ‘I’ to start with. You know you exist always, whereas the body does not exist always, e.g., in sleep. Sleep reveals that you exist even without a body. We identify the ‘I’ with a body, we regard the Self as having a body, and as having limits, and hence all our trouble. All that we have to do is to give up identifying our Self with the body, with forms and limits, and then we shall know ourselves as the Self that we always are.” (Day by Day with Bhagavan, 8th October, 1946)

In this dialogue Bhagavan was invited to suggest preliminary exercises or practices that would lead up to self-enquiry. He rejected the suggestion, pointing out that the true starting place should be the ‘I’ or the ‘I’-thought. However, though he recommended this method with enthusiasm to a devotee who didn’t seem very keen on it, he also admitted that not everyone has a natural affinity with the technique:

But the fact remains that to some this method will seem difficult and will not appeal. That is why so many different methods have been taught. Each of them will appeal to some as the best and easiest. That is according to their pakva or fitness. But to some, nothing except the vichara marga will appeal. They will ask, ‘You want me to know or to see this or that. But who is the knower, the seer?’

In Sri Ramana Gita verses I have already given, Bhagavan sets the qualification bar for self-enquiry quite high by saying:

He whose mind has been purified through upasana [worship] and other means or by merit acquired in past lives, who perceives the imperfections of the body and sense-objects, and feels utter distaste whenever his mind has to function among sense-objects and who realises that the body is impermanent, he is said to be a fit person for self-enquiry.

In this Day by Day with Bhagavan exposition, though, he doesn’t mention the Sri Ramana Gita qualifications at all. He says that those who are temperamentally inclined towards vichara can and should practise it, whereas those who are not should take to other methods. The bottom line here is: if you want to do enquiry, and feel good about it as a method, then you are qualified to follow this practice.

My own feeling is that this particular response is more typical of Bhagavan than the reply given in Sri Ramana Gita. Here is a similar answer in which Bhagavan also declares that temperament and personal predilection determine who takes to self-enquiry and who does not:

Bhagavan: An examination of the ephemeral nature of external phenomena leads to vairagya. Hence enquiry (vichara) is the first and foremost step to be taken. When vichara continues automatically, it results in a contempt for wealth, fame, ease, pleasure, etc. The ‘I’ thought becomes clearer for inspection. The source of ‘I’ is the Heart – the final goal. If, however, the aspirant is not temperamentally suited to vichara marga (to the introspective analytical method), he must develop bhakti (devotion) to an ideal - may be God, Guru, humanity in general, ethical laws, or even the idea of beauty. When one of these takes possession of the individual, other attachments grow weaker, i.e., dispassion (vairagya) develops. Attachment for the ideal simultaneously grows and finally holds the field. Thus ekagrata (concentration) grows simultaneously and imperceptibly - with or without visions and direct aids.

In the absence of enquiry and devotion, the natural sedative pranayama (breath regulation) may be tried. This is known as yoga marga. If life is imperilled the whole interest centres round the one point, the saving of life. If the breath is held the mind cannot afford to (and does not) jump at its pets - external objects. Thus there is rest for the mind so long as the breath is held. All attention being turned on breath or its regulation, other interests are lost. Again, passions are attended with irregular breathing, whereas calm and happiness are attended with slow and regular breathing. [A] paroxysm of joy is in fact as painful as one of pain, and both are accompanied by ruffled breaths. Real peace is happiness. Pleasures do not form happiness. The mind improves by practice and becomes finer just as the razor’s edge is sharpened by stropping. The mind is then better able to tackle internal or external problems. If an aspirant be unsuited temperamentally for the first two methods and circumstantially (on account of age) for the third method, he must try the karma marga (doing good deeds, for example, social service). His nobler instincts become more evident and he derives impersonal pleasure. His smaller self is less assertive and has a chance of expanding its good side. The man becomes duly equipped for one of the three aforesaid paths. His intuition may also develop directly by this single method. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no 27)

In many spiritual traditions beginners are given preliminary exercises and do not move on to the supposedly more advanced ones until they have demonstrated that they are doing the first ones successfully. As the preceding quotation indicates, Bhagavan did not follow this approach. He asked almost everyone to start with self-enquiry, and only recommended other methods if devotees complained they didn’t get the hang of it. It was left to the devotees themselves to decide whether they wanted to start or continue with enquiry. Bhagavan himself never told a single devotee that he or she was unfit to practise this method.

This is best illustrated by a wonderful story that was narrated by Kunju Swami:

Once, when Ganapati Muni was present in the hall, a group of villagers asked, ‘How are we to control the mind?’

In reply Bhagavan asked them to look into the origin of the mind and explained the path of self-enquiry. Soon they left and Bhagavan as usual went out for a walk.

Remarking to the others [Ganapati] Muni said, ‘The path of Self-knowledge which Bhagavan teaches is so difficult even for the learned, and Bhagavan advocated it to the poor villagers. I doubt whether they understood it and still less whether they can practise it. If Bhagavan had advised them to practise some puja or japa, that would have been more practical.’

When this was conveyed to Bhagavan, he commented, ‘What to do? This is what I know. If a teaching is to be imparted according to the traditional way, one must first see whether the recipient is qualified or not. Then puja, japa or dhyana are prescribed step by step. Later the Guru says that this is all only preliminary and one has to transcend all this. Finally, the ultimate truth that “Brahman alone is real” is revealed and to realise this, the direct path of self-enquiry is to be taught. Why this roundabout process? Should we not state the ultimate truth and direct path at the beginning itself rather than advocating many methods and rejecting them at the end?’ (Bhagavan Sri Ramana, a Pictorial Biography, p. 74)

If I may sum up: I accept that the comments on the qualifications needed to undertake self-enquiry that were made by Bhagavan in the original Sanskrit text of Sri Ramana Gita (7:8-11) are undoubtedly authentic, but I also am inclined to believe they are not typical of what he had to say on this topic. It was more usual for him to say that anyone who felt an inclination towards enquiry was qualified to pursue it.

Bhagavan’s conviction that the path of self-enquiry is suitable for everyone finds confirmation in Upadesa Undiyar. In two succinct verses he describes the method:

18 The mind is only thought. Of all [these thoughts] the thought ‘I’ alone is the root. What is called ‘mind’ is ‘I’.

19 When one scrutinises internally in the following way ‘What is the rising place of “I”?, the ‘I’ will die. This is jnana vichara.

And who is qualified to undertake this? The answer is clearly given in the preceding verse:

17 When one scrutinises the form of the mind without forgetfulness [it will be found that] there is no such thing as mind. This is the direct path for all.

Muruganar on self-enquiry

I have started to compile a post that deals with Bhagavan’s attitude to meditation on names and forms, but it is turning out to be a long and complex one that will take several more days to complete. Here, meanwhile, is another installment from Sri Guru Ramana Prasadam, composed by Muruganar and translated by Robert Butler. The book will go to the press in the next few days and I hope that copies will be available sometime in December.

The enquiry that leads to true jnana

551

The network of thoughts that fills the mind branches out from the perception ‘I am the body’. The proper course of action is to ask the question, ‘What is the place in which this I-am-the-body idea has its source?’ and thus reach and become established within the Heart.

552

Know that the method of teaching which goes straight to the Heart is that of self-enquiry. When the question is asked, ‘Who in reality is this flawed “I”?’, the truth is revealed in a sudden inward illumination, like sunlight flashing in crystal.

553

Ignorance – ajnana – is the state of forgetting the Self, jnana, and becoming intoxicated with the mind’s propensity to differentiate. This ignorance is a delusion that will be dispelled by the enquiry that leads to jnana.

554

The Self dwells inseparably within every incarnated soul, shining out as the ‘I’. Thus, even if we merely repeat it over and over again as a mantra, it will transport us to the seat of the Heart that is union with that Self.

Muruganar’s comment: ‘God, the Atma Swarupa, dwells and shines within all jivas as ‘I’, its authentic name. Therefore, even if we meditate upon it in name only, that meditation will take the mind and establish it within the Heart, in which that Atma Swarupa shines.’

555

The Self, revealed as our true nature within the Heart through the power of self-enquiry, is none other than the peerless reality of the Supreme, which alone remains after this worldly illusion has faded into nothingness.

556

Taking refuge within the Heart, all conditional awareness will be eradicated. Thus the knowledge of the Real, the summit of the Vedas, will illuminate the Cave of the Heart like the rising sun at dawn, shining forth as ‘I-I’.

557

When through self-enquiry the ‘I’ suddenly expands to embrace the infinite fulfilment of the Supreme, the mind, previously weakened by suffering, will be revived, as it experiences its natural state, the peace of being merged in the Heart.

558

If the nature of the mind is closely investigated, the mind will be resolved into consciousness, and give way to the mauna of final liberation in the unalloyed clarity of the Self.

559

‘Who am I?’ is the source of all acts of questioning. If in stillness we direct our attention inward to the place of its arising, so that its truth is known, the dispute that gave rise to the question will be ended completely.

560

When we examine all the objects we hold onto, rejecting them one after the other saying, ‘not this’, ‘not this’, until none are left, the one rare thing that remains is the truth, reality, the ‘I’ that is merged in the Divine Hall of the Heart.

561

The nature of vasanas [inherited dispositions] is such that we take them to be ourselves. This propensity of the mind [to identify with objects of habit and desire] is like that of bees that instinctively rise up and rush towards nectar the moment they see it.

562

That which reveals the truth in which there is no room for duality, and shines as the inner Sadguru within the hearts of the superior ones [jnanis] so that they have merged with it, is the ‘I’, reality, the supreme reality that is without equal.

563

To realise through investigation that the nature [of reality] is beyond the reach of thought, and to slough off that treacherous mental imagination, making the Heart our permanent place of abode – that indeed is the pellucid state of supreme jnana.

564

Due to its false understanding, the mind perceives as foreign to itself that which is in fact not different from it. The practice of abidance in the Self is to firmly hold the mind in abeyance within the Heart. It is not an act of thinking.

565

Shining within the ‘I’ and inseparable from it, the reality of Brahman is the light which illumines mind-consciousness. To control that mind-consciousness, so that it is checked and restrained within that Brahman, is the true mark of Sivahood.

566

The truth of the Self will become established through that powerful state in which the mind subsides in samadhi. This occurs when consciousness, severing all connection with the outward-going mind, is firmly rooted within the Heart.

567

When the devotion accumulated over many births from ancient times fills our hearts and a clear understanding arises there through the power of his grace, so that we become one with the Self, never leaving its embrace, then indeed have we attained the sublime reality of union with God.

568

The fitting form of worship to the Lord who bears a third eye in his brow is to immerse oneself in the Heart. This state, in which the Heart is kept free from the taint of thoughts, is the straight path for those who seek the highest fulfilment.

569

In performing the sacrificial rituals contained in the sastras, the final oblation most worthy of praise and which brings joy to Lord Siva whose judgment is unerring, is to offer up in fitting manner one’s own self.

570

Know that those who have fully accomplished that one thing have fully accomplished all their religious duties, because its greatness far exceeds that of any other offering, and after it nothing whatsoever remains to be done.

571

That which is spoken of as the Life of life itself is the true life. That other ‘life’ is merely the body. That illusory knowledge mediated by the senses [suttarivu] is nothing but delusion. The pure consciousness that underlies it alone is true consciousness.

572

All that is perceived as separate from consciousness is insentient. It will ultimately prove to be a mere error and cease to exist. Therefore, since the indivisible Reality that dwells within is consciousness itself, you should firmly reject as unreal anything which appears separate from that consciousness.

573

The Self shines through its very nature as a beautiful radiance within the Heart, as all thought subsides. Realising that the power of thought could never truly grasp it, you should abandon all such conceptualisation.

574

Is it fitting that we should seek to embrace our own Self by means of intellectual effort mediated by the senses, rather than by becoming a prey to the supreme reality that shines as that Self, and being annihilated through merging with its non-dual nature?

575

Whatever it is that attracts the mind will always cause a disturbance within it, giving rise to the cycle of pleasure and pain. Will this happen if, turning inward, the mind attains the realisation of the reality which lies within the Heart?

576

The enduring attainment is to become established in the Heart, abiding as the pure ‘I’, unruffled by the fierce gale whipped up by all the various [conflicting] branches of knowledge that are apprehended through the mind and senses, and cause us [only] agitation.

577

All universes are contained in that infinitesimally subtle awareness, without marks, without qualities, without any attributes whatsoever and free of all defect: the all-pervading and indivisible Sivam.

578

All dualistic concepts such as ‘this world’ and ‘the next world’ are merely unreal mental creations. Know that when these fall away and are no more, the one true reality underlying all worlds is none other than the unalloyed supreme intelligence of Sivam.

579

The supreme reality – in which the noble nature of pure grace flourishes, and which merges with us so that all the many false appearances such as ‘this birth’ and ‘the next birth’ cease to exist – shines out as the truth-imbued and flawless ‘I’.

580

In the unreal state where our true nature is veiled, the creations of the mind that swirl about are mere names and forms. But even these will be revealed to be of the nature of pure consciousness in the state of peace that prevails as Sivam, the Self.

581

The world is apprehended as separate from Sivam due to the error of sense-mediated perception [suttarivu]. This is caused by fruitlessly occupying oneself with mental concepts – which are the cause of birth – and failing to engage in the spiritual practice of turning inward.

582

The soul is nothing other than the Siva lingam itself. It is a grievous error for those who are unable to concentrate their attention and realise this through the subtle awareness that enters the Heart and asks, ‘Who am I? to wail and lament as if they were sinners.

583

Those who pursue the enquiry ‘Who am I?’ until the last vestige of identification with the physical body is eradicated from their hearts will gain the treasure that, like the sky itself, pervades all things as the Self, Sadasiva, shining as itself alone.

584

The correct expiation for living beings who feel they have erred is to abide steadfastly in the reality of the Heart, the unwritten lore of the Vedas, through the self-enquiry that asks, ‘For whom is the sin?’

An open thread on vichara

One of the comments on the Annamalai Swami film announcement this morning suggested a forum for people to discuss how they do self-enquiry. I think this is a good idea, so I have made a separate post for this which will enable readers to keep track of the discussion.

salutations to all:
the prospect of getting a video recording of annamalai swami's interview made me very happy...so were the many other interesting comments expressed in the past few days...from the posts, i could also guess that most of you (subramanian, arvind, murali, ravi, jupes, a few anonymous'and many others) are very experienced. notwithstanding everything else, since nothing may be a better place than david's blog to discuss about bhagavan's most important teaching, viz., 'vichara' (at least in my humble opinion), i would like to SUGGEST & REQUEST something :

from a strict sadhaka perspective, could we all share as to how exactly we practise self-inquiry? ...by 'practice', i mean every detail that goes into the actual process (both the 'why' and the how')... this way all of us could benefit each other, may be in the best possible way...and wherever we have a doubt/lack of clarity, who better than david to correct or clarify as well as offer the much-required prescription to render our vichara more effective.

let me also add a note that, it seems, at least to me, that we can call ourselves as a devotee of bhagavan if and only if we practise vichara...some of you, or even most of you, may not agree with this last statement of mine because bhagavan also emphasized 'saranagati' or self-surrender... infact, if i am not wrong, i remember david mentioning in one of his long interviews (posted on his site) that only a few among the many who regularly visit ramanasramam actually try to practise vichara as their principal means of sadhana (for a variety of reasons)...yet, as we all know, for bhagavan, the most effective means to 'surrender' too lay through 'vichara'!

(and i really don't understand when people talk of submitting to god's will while thinking & doing their 'own' will most of the time...of course, i don't mean here that saying 'god made me think this way' or 'do this way' is not genuine but don't you think that to mean it 'honestly' requires a very high order of maturity, which is nearly not possible during the better part of this weird journey?)

Robert Adams again

About a week ago I posted a Robert Adams dialogue in which he explained self-enquiry. Since it was very well received, here is another, with the added bonus of some extra stories about his experiences at Ramanasramam.

* * *

When I was eighteen years old, I arrived at Tiruvannamalai. In those days they didn’t have jet planes. It was a propeller plane. I purchased flowers and a bag of fruit to bring to Ramana. I took the rickshaw to the ashram. It was about 8:30 a.m. I entered the hall and there was Ramana on his couch reading his mail. It was after breakfast. I brought the fruit and the flowers over and laid them on his feet. There was a guardrail in front of him to prevent fanatics from attacking him with love. And then I sat down in front of him. He looked at me and smiled, and I smiled back.

I have been to many teachers, many saints, many sages. I was with Nisargadatta, Ananda Mayi Ma, Papa Ramdas, Neem Karoli Baba and many others, but never did I meet anyone who exuded such compassion, such love, such bliss as Ramana Maharshi. There were about thirty people in the room. He looked at me and asked me if I’d eaten breakfast. I said, ‘No’. He spoke some Tamil to the attendant and the attendant came back with two giant leaves, one with fruit and one with some porridge with pepper. After I had consumed the food, I just lay down on the floor. I was very tired.


It was time for his usual walk. He had arthritis in the legs and could hardly walk at that time. After his attendants had helped him to get up, he walked out the door. When he was outside he said something to his attendants, and his attendants motioned for me to come. He guided me to a little shack that I was going to use while I stayed there. He came inside with me, and I bet you think we spoke about profound subjects. On the contrary, he was a natural man. He was the Self of the universe. He asked me how my trip was, where I was from, what made me come here. Then he said I should rest, so I lay down on the cot and he left.


I was awakened about 5 o’clock. It was Ramana again. He came by himself and he brought me food. Can you imagine that? We spoke briefly; I ate and I slept. The next morning I went into the hall. After the morning chanting there was breakfast, and everybody sat around just watching Ramana as he went through his routine. He would go through the mail and read it out loud, talk to some of his devotees. I just observed everything. His composure never changed. Never did I see such compassion, such love.


Then people started to come over to him, asking him questions. His replies were very succinct. They weren’t like you read in a book. Apparently, what you read in a book is his reply to three or four people. They condense it all into one question and answer. But people usually asked a question or made a statement. If he agreed, he would nod or say, ‘Yes. That’s it’. If he didn’t, he would offer an explanation in maybe one or two sentences.


There were foreigners at the ashram when I was there, Muslims, Catholic priests, people from all races and all nationalities. The devotees would sit around and say nothing, but the seekers and disciples would ask questions. After I had been there a week or so, two of his disciples were sort of jokingly arguing with him about something in Tamil. I asked the interpreter what they were talking about.


He said, ‘Ramana’s couch is covered with lice, and he refuses to let us kill them. They climb over his body and his legs and he doesn’t care. He even feeds them. We want to exterminate all the bugs on the couch, but he won’t let us.’


So, the next day they tricked him. When he went outside for his morning walk, they sprayed his couch with DDT.


When he came back, he smelled the couch. He smiled and jokingly said, ‘Someone has tricked me’.


He never got angry, never got mad. I don’t think he knew what the words meant.


A couple of weeks later a German lady came to the ashram. Apparently, she had made a donation of some kind, but she wasn’t happy for some reason. She was complaining to Ramana, but he just kept silent.


I asked the interpreter, ‘What does she want?’


The interpreter said, ‘She wants her donation back. She wants to go home, back to Germany.’


So she started to argue. Everything was going on in front of Ramana. She started to argue with one of the managers of the ashram and Ramana just looked.


Then Ramana said in English, ‘Give her back her donation and add fifty rupees to it,’ which they did, and she left.


This was his nature. He never saw anything wrong. He never took anyone out of his love. No matter what they did, who they were, where their ego was, he understood. He loved everyone just the same.


Six months prior to his leaving his body, I went to Bangalore to see Papa Ramdas. While I was there, I was informed that he [Bhagavan] had left his body. I went back to Tiruvannamalai. The crowds had already started to come, thousands and thousands of people. So, I climbed the hill and went into one of the caves. I stayed there for five days. When I came down, the crowds had dispersed. Ramana had already been interred.


I enquired of the devotee who saw him last, ‘What were the last words he spoke?’


The devotee said, ‘While he was leaving his body a peacock flew on top of the hall and started screeching. Ramana remarked to his devotee, ‘Has anyone fed the peacock yet?’ Those were the last words he spoke.


Now, let’s talk about you. Think of the problems you believe you have. Think of the nonsense that you go on with everyday. Think how furious you become, how you always want to stick up for your rights, as if you had any. The problem is, you think. If you would only stop thinking.


You say, ‘How can I function if I stop thinking?’


Very well, thank you! As a matter of fact you will function much better than you do now, for you will always be taken care of. The universe loves you. It will always supply you with your needs. Forget about other people, what they do, what they don’t do. Do not listen to malicious gossip. Be yourself. Understand who you really are. You are the absolute reality, unconditioned consciousness. Work from that standpoint. Do not work from your problems. Do not get lost in meaningless gossip. Understand your true reality. Be yourself.


What Ramana taught was not new. Ramana simply taught the Upanishads. ‘Who am I?’ has been around since time immemorial. If a teacher always tells you he has something new to teach you, be careful, because there’s nothing new under the sun. Ramana simply revised the ‘Who am I’ philosophy and made it simple for people in the twentieth century. But what did he teach? He simply taught that you are not the body-mind principle. He simply taught that if you have a problem, do not feel sorry for yourself, do not go to psychiatrists, do not condemn yourself. Simply ask yourself, ‘To whom does this problem come?’ And of course the answer will be, ‘The problem comes to me’. Hold onto the ‘me’. Follow the ‘me’ to the source, the substratum of all existence.


How do you do that? How do you hold onto ‘me’? How do you hold onto ‘I’? By simply asking yourself, ‘Who am I? What am I?’ It’s the same thing. Ask yourself again and again, ‘Who am I?’


Forget about time. Forget about space. Forget everything. Keep yourself from thinking. When the thoughts come, ask yourself, ‘To whom comes the thoughts?’


Again, ‘They come to me.’ Hold onto the ‘me’. ‘I think these thoughts. Well then, Who am I? Who thinks these thoughts? Who am I?’


An easier way to do this I have found is to simply say to yourself, ‘I-I, I-I,’ and you will notice as you do this, the I-I goes deeper, deeper, deeper within you into your Heart centre, right to the source. For westerners I have found that saying ‘I-I’ seems to be more helpful than ‘Who am I?’ Again, do not look at time. Do not ask yourself, ‘When is something going to happen?’


A devotee went to Ramana and said, ‘I’ve been with you for twenty-five years, doing “Who am I?” and nothing has happened yet,’ so Ramana said, ‘Try it another twenty-five and see what happens’.


Forget about time. Forget about when something is going to happen. Even if nothing happens in this life, you are ahead of the game, for, if you’ve been sincere, and if you’ve really been working on yourself, you will come back to an environment that is conducive for your realisation, and at that time you may have realisation when you’re about twelve or thirteen years old, because you’ve earned it.


But if you’re like most people and go around minding everybody’s business and saying, ‘I have no time to do this. I’ve tried it for two hours and it doesn’t work,’ then you will keep coming back again, and again, and again, going through all kinds of experiences, until one day, maybe 10,000 years from now you may actually get it and start working on yourself diligently; what you should be doing now.


What do you do with yourself all day long? Think. From the moment you get out of bed, how does your day go? Do you think of God at all? Do you practise or do you think about your affairs and your body? Be honest with yourself. If you’re not making any headway in spiritual life, it’s because you’re not putting anything into it. You have to realise that whatever you see in the world is only a reflection of yourself. If people are mean to you, if they abuse you, it is because you’re seeing yourself as those people. In other words, you’ve got those qualities.


Remember the story of Ramana and the German lady, the one he returned the donation to, plus some extra money?


The following afternoon a devotee asked him, ‘Bhagavan, why did you do that?’ and Ramana explained, ‘When she gave us a donation, to whom do you think she gave it? She gave it to herself, for there’s only one Self. When she took it back, she took it away from herself. When she goes back to Germany, I’m sure she’ll have financial problems until she learns that anything you give is only giving to yourself, for there’s not two or three or four selves, there’s only one Self.’


This includes everything you do in your life, the way you look at another person. Whatever you see, you’re simply seeing yourself.


This is why the only thing I can do for you is to love you, because I love myself and you are myself. When I say ‘I love myself’, I am not referring to Robert. When I use the word ‘Self’ I am referring to infinity, to omnipresence. It includes everything in this universe. So when I love myself, I am obviously loving everyone and everything that exists. I also realise that everything that exists is a projection of my own mind, so I do not identify with the images. I identify with the source, with consciousness, with absolute reality, with ultimate oneness, with nirvana, with emptiness. While I’m talking to you, I realise I’m talking to myself because again there is only one Self. If you can only remember that in your dealings with others, whichever way you deal with anyone else, you’re doing it to yourself. Can you see now why a person like Ramana could never hate anyone or be angry? It wasn’t in his nature.


How do you react to life? When a person displeases you, what do you do? Curse him or her, become angry or violent? How do you handle it? How do you react? Be honest with yourself. It’s the only way. Start from where you are. No human being is perfect. We all make mistakes. Do not feel sorry for yourself, but start from where you are. Where are you? You are consciousness. This is your true nature. Learn to love everything. Learn to see only the good. Realise there’s a reason for everything. If a person displeases you, simply look the other way and forget it. Learn to stop your mind from thinking. You do this by immediately catching yourself when you react to a condition, and enquiring within yourself, ‘Who is becoming angry? Who feels out of sorts?’ ‘I do. “I”.’


Realise you’re dealing with the personal ‘I’, and that all the anger, all the frustration, all the karma, all the samskaras are all attached to that personal ‘I’. Consequently, when you get rid of the personal ‘I’, everything else will go with it. So, don’t try to solve your problems. Do not try to become a better person. Do not try to run away from your life. Simply see who it is who is running, who it is who needs to be a better person. Who has all these problems? ‘I’, ‘I’, always ‘I’. Hold onto that ‘I’ with all of your might, but do not concentrate on the ‘I’. You concentrate on the source of it, which is consciousness, God.


Everybody asks me, over and over again, ‘How do I hold onto the “I”?’


By asking, ‘Who am I?’ or just saying, ‘I-I, I-I, I-I.’ Automatically you will notice the ‘I’ going deeper, and deeper, and deeper and deeper within your Heart, and one day you will become free. But you’re already free. Why not wake up right now? Why go through anything? Everybody is different.


If this appears too difficult for you, if vichara appears hard, then your next best bet is to surrender completely to God. Surrender everything, your problems, your ego, your body, your mind, your work, your world.


Say, ‘Here, God, take it, I want no more of this. I am yours. Do with me as you will. Thy will be done.’


This means you no longer have anything to worry about. If you truly surrender, you will immediately become radiantly happy, for you have given your ego to God. And what’s left is God. You have no body. You have no mind. You have no work. You have no problems. It has been your ego all the time fooling you, making you believe that something is wrong, and you’ve been playing hide and seek, trying to find God here, there and everywhere, when all the time God was within yourself as yourself.


Begin to see the truth. Begin to stand up tall. Become fearless. Become strong. Leave the world alone. It’ll take care of itself. There is a mysterious power that guides the world to its right destiny. It doesn’t need any help from you. If you’re meant to do certain work in the world, it will be done, but you have nothing to do with that. It doesn’t mean that you have to leave your job, or go sit in a cave, or give up your life. Wherever you are, right now is where you’re supposed to be. Just feel, ‘I am not the doer’ and your work will go on. Do not be attached to your work. Do not react to any situation or any condition. Be yourself. Focus your attention on consciousness, and your body will go on doing whatever it came here to do. Everything is preordained. Even when I raise my finger like this, it is preordained. Do not be egotistical and believe that you have any power over everybody or anybody, or that you are the doer. It’s a privilege to have been born on this earth, and the reason you have been born is to find your real Self. Go for it, do it, and become free.


I don’t know why I talk so much. It doesn’t do you any good. I always want to sit in silence, but sometimes we have some new people and they do not understand the silence yet, so I keep on chatting. I wonder if I know what I’m talking about. It doesn’t matter anyway. Any questions?


Question: What is the relationship between effort and realisation, since only the ego is doing this effort. How can the ego doing this effort... ?


Robert: What you call ‘effort’ has been preordained.


Question: Self-enquiry is the ego doing effort?


Robert: Self-enquiry is the ego trying to find itself as the Self, so the effort is brought on through your karma so that you may become Self-realised. It is a privilege to have been able to find in this life the method of self-enquiry. Therefore, it’s been predestined that you should make the effort to find yourself.


Question: Since God or realisation is something that really is like an effortless presence, how could it be ... ?


Robert: When you get on the path correctly, after awhile it becomes effortless. In the beginning there seems to be a little effort you have to take, because you’re breaking away from your old patterns, and as you continue it becomes effortless, easier and easier. It becomes a pleasure. It becomes a joy and you’re always doing it, effortlessly, so the effort is only the beginning stages. It’s not really effort, but when you break into a new habit, the old wants to still stay there and take over. So you still have to push it out as you enquire, ‘To whom does it come? Who feels miserable?’


And as you keep practising and practising it becomes effortless, and pretty soon you do not have to do anything. It just happens by itself. You become happier and happier, more peaceful, and your life becomes a joy to others and to yourself.


Question: I’m confusing the false ‘I’ with the true ‘I’.


Robert: There is only one ‘I’, but for the sake of conversation we say there is a personal ‘I’ which is your ego. The only confusion is your identifying with the personal ‘I’ instead of the real ‘‘I. The real ‘I’ is absolute reality, pure intelligence, Parabrahman, sat-chit-ananda. That is the real ‘I’, and you have a choice.


That choice is: ‘With whom am “I” going to identify?’


Identify with yourself, with consciousness, and there will be no question of two ‘I’s. But again, when you begin, it is your ego ‘I’ that you’re working with. ‘Who am I?’ means the ego. Who is this ego? Where did it come from? Who gave it birth? Why does it exist?


Eventually you will realise, ‘Why, I gave it birth by believing in it. I created my ego myself. I did all this.’


Then it begins to change. The personal ‘I’ becomes weaker and consciousness becomes stronger until the personal ‘I’ disappears altogether and you become free. So, do not keep identifying with the personal ‘I’. Hold on to it. Follow it by asking, ‘What is “I”? Who am I?’


All levels and all teachings are an emanation of the mind, for there has to be someone to experience those levels. Vichara, or self-enquiry, goes right to the heart of the matter. It bypasses every system, negates every system, and awakens you immediately. The mind, as ‘I,’ gives you the problem. When the mind, as ‘I,’ goes, everything else goes with it: all of your past teachings, the world, the universe, God, reincarnation, karma. You become free of the whole mess, and you awaken.


So again, every system is a projection of the mind. In these systems you have to be present to do the work, whereas in this teaching we get rid of the ‘you’ that does the work. So, if the ‘you’ is gone, there’s no work to be done. In other words, who has to meditate? I do. There has to be somebody present for you to meditate. Instead of meditating, ask yourself, ‘Who meditates?’ and the answer will be, ‘I do.’ Then ‘Who am I?’


The lights will come on and you’ll be free. Once the ‘I’ goes there is nobody left to do any spiritual work, for you become consciousness. You become absolute reality, omnipresent, infinite.


Question: So you’re saying these are progressive systems?


Robert: These are progressive systems, and I suppose most people need these things. They’re good. There’s nothing wrong with these things, but the direct path is vichara. You bypass everything.


Question: In the case of the man who spent twenty-five years with Ramana, who isn’t understanding, is he not going through stages?


Robert: On the contrary, he is just there. He’s at peace with himself, and when the time is right for him, he’ll awaken. There are no stages to go through as long as he’s present.


Question: That brings up this question then. If someone comes in here and they never heard this teaching before and they start practising, the first thing they have to do is to recognise that they have a mind and to recognise the storm within. And when they recognise that, then they have a herd of horses within, a stampede. So for a while, for atma vichara and ‘Who am I?’ to work, they have to slow down that stampede by working through a system. So that’s a progressive stage in a way, because there are emotions involved and feelings and sensations that come up. And all of this, for a person to cut through this and to evolve, they must work on those levels.


Robert: How do you know?


Question: Because I’ve been through it.


Robert: Does that mean everybody goes through it?


Question: Well, looking at the average human being, I would say ‘Absolutely’.


Robert: There are some people who just awaken. There are some people who go through stages. There are some people who do a lot of work. There are some people who practise meditation and mantras all day long. There are some people who do nothing and they awaken.


Question: Yes, but the people like that are very few, like Ramana. Ramana was an exception.


Robert: Well, then learn how to do it and become like Ramana. Practise what Ramana practised, and you too can be an exception. Why should you identify with the other? Identify with Ramana’s practice. He said the same thing. Why go through the trouble to go through yoga practices? You’ll come back life after life after life and keep practicing yoga. Find out who’s practising and become free.


Doesn’t that sound reasonable? All you have to do is to find out who’s practising. Who needs to do all these things? I do. Well, ‘Who am I? Where did I come from?’ ‘I-I’. Get rid of that ‘I’ and you’re home free.


Question: What about the identification with the body? I’m confusing the body with thought.


Robert: What about it?


Question: Identification. When there’s pain in the body, you’re just involved in the pain, not the reality.


Robert: The reality is not the pain. The body is in pain, but you are not the body. So, if you stick to your true Self, you will hardly feel the pain. Let the body take care of itself. Do not concern yourself with the body. The body will still eat, it will still go to the bathroom, it will still take a shower, it will still take care of itself, but you have absolutely nothing to do with it. You are not the body, so why identify with the pain. Identify with consciousness, with the Self, and then see what happens.


This is why, when people like Ramana and Ramakrishna were dying, especially Ramakrishna, he literally wasted away, and they used to tell him the same thing they did Ramana: ‘Master, heal yourself. We have seen you heal others. Heal yourself.’


And the answer would always be the same, ‘You foolish people, what do you see? Who sees a sick body? There is nobody to be sick. What are you looking at? Change your identification. See the truth.’


That’s why Jesus was able to say, ‘I am with you always, even unto the end of the world,’ for he realised he was consciousness, not the body, not what appears to be real. Everything that most of you are looking at right now is an appearance. It is not the truth. There is another world of reality where there is only perfection, love, bliss, joy. With whom are you identifying? The choice is yours.


Question: The ‘I’ seems to be such a deeply ingrained habit. It seems like the primary addiction. It seems like all other addictions come out of the addiction of ‘I’. The ego addiction is the primary addiction. That’s the problem: it’s so addictive.


Robert: Indeed. Correct. As you keep referring back to yourself and saying, ‘Who am I?’ the ‘I’ becomes weaker and weaker and weaker. Eventually it has to disappear, and then you’re free.


Question: It’s funny that sometimes I feel a little loosened up, abiding, and at other times it’s all forgotten, and it’s back to the ego again.


Robert: That’s how it appears to work, but as you continue practising and practising and practising, the day will come when you’re home free. That’s why I said, do not look at time, even if it takes more than a lifetime. You’re still ahead of the person going bowling.


Question: Even when you see the thoughts moving and you see how identified you are, it’s almost like the ego enjoys this. It enjoys resisting the peace, silence and intelligence. It’s so used to this, it seems to like its own suffering.


Robert: Are you talking from the standpoint of the ego or the Self?


Question: From the ego.


Robert: So ask yourself, ‘Who’s going through all this? Who’s suffering? To whom does it come?’ Identify with the source, not with the ego. Do not go into all the details of what the ego does. Go into the details of what the Self is, pure intelligence, absolute awareness, sat-chit-ananda, Parabrahman. Speak of those things, and let the ego take care of itself.


Question: The ego doesn’t seem to want all that.


Robert: No, you don’t want all that because you refuse to identify with those higher things. You keep talking about the ego over and over again as if it were a power. It doesn’t even exist. It’s a non-entity.


Question: I guess I’m possessed.


Robert: You’re possessed by God, You can never get away from God, no matter how hard you try.


Question: I’ve been trying with all my might.


Robert: Maybe that’s the problem. Just observe and watch. Stop trying. Watch your mind in action. Observe your thoughts, become the witness, and then you’ll say, ‘Ah, look what’s happening to me. Am I that? Of course not.’ Then it will become easier for you.


Question: It’s really embarrassing to watch my mind, because you feel like you should be committed to a mental institution. It’s total nonsense, total craziness.


Robert: Again, to whom is it embarrassing? It’s embarrassing to the ego. The ego watches, the ego’s embarrassed, and the ego fights back, but you do not react to it. Do not react. Watch, observe and ask the question, ‘To whom does it come?’ That’s all you’ve got to do, and everything else will take care of itself.


Question: Watching it breaks the identification?


Robert: Observing.


Question: It’s funny, when you start to forget to observe, you melt into the identification of it so easily. You melt into the identification with the ego. That’s what is wonderful about enquiry, that it breaks it.


Robert: Don’t get caught up in too many details. Make it simple, very simple. The simpler the better.


Question: I think part of the problem is, speaking for myself of course, is that I don’t believe it will happen. I feel it happens just to a favored few, like Jesus, Buddha or yourself. What’s the sense of trying it if it’s not going to happen?


Robert: Well, if you don’t feel it’s going to happen, what can you do? Go see a movie. You’ve got to realise you are greater than you think, and you’ve got the same power within you as everybody else does. It may appear to be asleep, but as you work on yourself, work on yourself, work on yourself, you will awaken it, and one day it will become stronger than you are and take you over completely and you’ll be free. But you’ve got to keep on working on yourself, and stop putting yourself down. The worst thing you can do is put yourself down. That’s blasphemy because you’re putting God down. Think of yourself as a higher person, love yourself, worship yourself, bow to yourself. You are greater than you think.


Question: Robert, at first when you were speaking to Bob, you said to make things simple and follow self-enquiry of ‘Who am I?’, and at the same time you said, ‘Don’t make it like a mantra’. If you keep saying ‘I-I’ or ‘Who am I?, I am me,’ you get caught in a circular answer and question thing. You said not to make it like a mantra.


Robert: ‘Who am I?’ is never a mantra. You simply observe yourself, ask yourself the question, ‘To whom do these things come? To me,’ then say ‘Who am I?’ or ‘I-I’, ‘I-I.’ It’s not a mantra. As you keep doing it to yourself, you will awaken.


Question: Even if I do the question and answer, even though I come into a circle of three questions with three answers, and I kept going around and around, it’s not a mantra?


Robert: No it’s not. But you can ask yourself, ‘To whom do these things come? To whom do the three questions come?’ There has to be a person to experience the three questions. Get rid of that person and you’ll be free.


Question: Would I be breaking self-enquiry if I got rid of the me with, ‘To whom to these questions come? They come to me.’


Robert: Self-enquiry is only for the ego.


Question: I’m like Bob then. I’ve got a big ego.


Robert: Keep practising. Keep practising and you’ll break it down.


Question: Robert, you said, when you ask yourself the question, you don’t answer because when you answer, that just comes from the mind. When you ask, ‘Who am I?’ just rest, don’t question.


Is consciousness observing the self-enquiry?


Robert: Consciousness is self-contained. It has nothing to do with self-enquiry. Only the ego does.


Question: Then why do we have to do self-enquiry?


Robert: Because you have to use the ego to get rid of the ego.


Question: So consciousness is noticing all of the self-enquiry then?


Robert: It doesn’t notice anything. As you practice self-enquiry, your mind will disappear and your true Self will come forth all by itself.


Question: Isn’t our true Self here now?


Robert: Yes, you will awaken to it, but you don’t believe it is, so you must practice self-enquiry.


Question: How do you trace it to the heart, when you say that with self-enquiry you trace it to the heart?


Robert: Another term for the heart is consciousness, so the heart is really consciousness. You simply enquire, ‘Who am I?’ It takes care of itself. The ‘I’ becomes weaker and weaker and disappears.


Question: Your attention then should always be focused on the source. When you hold onto the ‘I’, that’s just a way of focusing attention on the source from whence the ‘I’ arises.


Robert: Yes, when I say hold onto the ‘I’, I mean you’re witnessing the ‘I’. You’re watching where it goes. From whence it came from and where it goes back to.


Question: When you say that consciousness or God dwells in you as you, that ‘as you’ is not referring then to the ego?


Robert: No, it’s referring to consciousness.


Question: It’s redundant really.


Robert: Yes. Consciousness is your true existence and nothing else. Everything else we talk about, everything else we do is to make you realise that your true nature is consciousness. Then everything becomes redundant, but we have to talk like this because you believe you’re human. You believe you’re the body. When will you stop believing that?


Question: Robert, if a person believes that they’re happy in this alleged consciousness that we all possibly share, I mean your students, is that the same thing? Being in love with nature as being in love with life. Is that about on the same level in your eyes as...


Robert: All of these things that you’re referring to are a projection of your mind. You create your universe, and you create your world, and you create the trees and the birds and everything else. So get rid of your mind and everything else will go.


Question: There won’t be any trees?


Robert: You’ll be the tree. You’ll be everything you like.


Question: So then it’s really the ego that has all the beauty.


Robert: You can say that, yes. You bring fresh flowers into your room and then they die in a couple of days. So how can that be real ultimately? Everything you fall in love with gets old and dies. So how can you say that’s real? Contact reality and you will always be happy.