RELIGIONS
It should be clear from what we said in previous section that Bhagavan's teaching was not opposed to any religion. If philosophers or theologians wished to argue whether the human soul was permanently and essentially separate from the Divine Being, he would refuse to join issue with them but try to turn them to spiritual effort instead, as, for instance, in his talk with a Jesuit priest on page 39. When they attained Realisation they would know, and theoretical knowledge without Realisation would not help them anyway.Strictly speaking, Bhagavan was not exclusively a Hindu or subject to Hindu ritual, since Hinduism recognises that one who is established in constant, conscious identity with the Self is above all religions; he is the mountain peak towards which
the various paths converge. Bhagavan had many followers who were not Hindus -- Christians, Muslims, Parsis and others -- and none was ever recommended to change his religion.
A religion involves two modes of activity; what might be called the horizontal and the vertical. Horizontally it harmonises and controls the life of the individual and society in conformity with its faith and morality, giving opportunity and incentive for a good life leading to a good death. Vertically it provides spiritual paths for those who strive to attain a higher state or realise the ultimate truth during this life on earth. Horizontally, religions are mutually exclusive, but not really contradictory. Bhagavan was concerned rather with the vertical mode, the paths to realisation, and therefore his teaching clashed with no religion. He guided those who would follow him on the most direct and central path, the quest of the Self; and for this any religion could serve as a foundation. He approved of every religion and if some devotees came to him who followed no formal religion, he did not insist they should do so. When asked about the different religious practices, he would stress their deeper meaning, and about different religions their basic unity.
D.: What is yoga?
B.: Yoga (union) is necessary for one who is in a state of
viyoga [?] (separation). But really there is only one. If you realise the Self there will be no difference.
D.: Is there any efficacy in bathing in the Ganges?
B.: The Ganges is within you. Bathe in this Ganges; it will
not make you shiver with cold.
D.: Should we sometimes read the Bhagavad Gita?
B.: Always.
D.: May we read the Bible?
B.: The Bible and the Gita are the same.
D.: The Bible teaches that man is born in sin.
Page 52
B.: Man is sin. There is no feeling of being man is deep
sleep. The body-thought brings out the idea of sin. The birth of thought itself is sin.
D.: The Bible says that the human soul may be lost.
B.: The `I'-thought is the ego and that is lost. The real `I' is
`I am that I am'.1
The doctrine of the Trinity was explained: God the Father is equivalent to Ishwara, God the Son to the Guru, and God the Holy Ghost to the Atman. Isvaro gururatmeti murti bheda vibhagine vyomavad vyapta dehaya dakshinamurtaye namah, means that God appears to His devotee in the form of a Guru (Son of God) and points out to him the immanence of the Holy Spirit.
That is to say, that God is Spirit, that this Spirit is immanent everywhere and that the Self must be realised, which is the same as realising God.2
He protested against being satisfied with formal heavens, whether Hindu or any other, because so long as there is form there remains seer, sight and seen and not the One Self.
D.: There is a short account of the spiritual experiences of
St. Theresa, in the March number of Prabuddha Bharata. She was devoted to a figure of the Madonna which became animated to her sight and she was in bliss. Is this the same as saktipata?
B.: The animated figure indicates the depth of meditation
(dhyana bala). Saktipata prepares the mind for introversion. There is a process of concentration of the mind on one's own shadow which in due course becomes animated and answers questions put to it. That is due to strength of mind or depth of meditation. Whatever is external is also transitory. Such
Page 53
phenomena may produce joy for the time being, but abiding peace (Shanti) does not result. That is got only by the removal of avidya [?] (ignorance).1
D.: Can't we see God in concrete form?
B.: Yes. God is seen in the mind. A concrete form may be
seen but still it is only in the devotees' mind. The form and appearance in which God manifests are determined by the mind of the devotee. But that is not the ultimate experience. There is a sense of duality in it. It is like a dream or vision. After God is perceived, Self-enquiry begins and that leads to Realisation of the Self. Self-enquiry is the ultimate route.2
Sometimes his answers were cryptic and epigrammatical. The same universal truth is to be found in them; their rather prickly form may reflect the aggressive manner of the questioner.
Q.: What is the best of all religions? What is Bhagavan's
method?
B.: All methods and religions are the same.
Q.: But different methods are taught for attaining
liberation.
B.: Why should you be liberated? Why not remain as you
are now?
Q.: I want to get rid of pain. To be rid of pain is said to be
liberation.
B.: That is what all Religions teach.
Q.: But what is the method?
B.: Go back the way you came.*
Q.: Where did I come from?
Page 54
B.: That is just what you have to find out. Did these
questions arise when you were asleep? And yet you existed then. Were you not the same person?
Q.: Yes, I existed in sleep. So did the mind. But the senses
had merged so that I could not speak.
B.: Are you the individual? Are you the mind? Did the
mind announce itself to you when you were asleep?
Q.: No. But the authorities say that the individuality is
different from God.
B.: Never mind about God; speak for yourself.
Q.: What about myself? Who am I?
B.: That is just what you have to find out. Then you will
know everything. If you do not, it will be time enough to ask then.
Q.: When I wake, I see the world and I am not changed at all.
B.: But you do not know this when asleep. And yet you
exist in both states. Who has changed now? Is it your nature to change or to remain unchanging?
Q.: What is the proof?
B.: Does one require proof of one's own being? Only
remain aware of yourself and all else will be known.
Q.: Why then do the dualists and non-dualists quarrel
among themselves?
B.: If each would attend to his own business (of seeking
Realisation) there would be no quarrel.1
Spiritual experience may be differently expressed because some form must be given to the Formless in order to express them at all, but essentially they are the same.
D.: Is the experience of the highest state the same to all, or
is there any difference?
Page 55
B.: The highest state is the same and the experience is the
same.
D.: But I find some difference in the interpretation given
of the highest truth.
B.: The interpretations are made with the mind. The minds
are different, so the interpretations also differ.
D.: I mean to say that the seers express themselves differently.
B.: Their modes of expression may differ according to the
nature of the seekers for whose guidance they are intended.
D.: One speaks in terms of Christianity, another of Islam,
a third of Buddhism, etc. Is that due to their upbringing?
B.: Whatever may be their upbringing, their experience is the
same. Only the modes of expression differ according to circumstances.1
So also with different paths or schools within a religion.
D.: Different teachers have set up different schools and
proclaimed different truths and so confused people. Why?
B.: They have all taught the same truth but from different
standpoints. Such differences were necessary to meet the needs of different minds differently constituted, but they all reveal the same truth.
D.: Since they have recommended different paths, which
is one to follow?
B.: You speak of paths as if you were somewhere and the
Self somewhere else and you had to go and attain it. But in fact the Self is here and now and you are It always. It is like being here and asking people the way to Ramanasramam and then complaining that each one shows a different path and asking which to follow.2
Page 56
While confirming the various religions, Bhagavan at the same time urged people to get beyond them to the One Self. Paul Brunton, author of A Search In Secret India asked him about the various doctrines of heaven and hell.
D.: Why do religions speak of gods, heaven, hell etc?
B.: Only to make people realise that they are on a par with
this world and that the Self alone is real. The religions are according to the viewpoint of the seeker. (Take the Bhagavad Gita for instance; when Arjuna said that he would not fight against his own relations and elders, in order to kill them and gain the kingdom, Sri Krishna said: `Not that these, you or I were not before, are not now, nor will be hereafter. None was born, none has died, nor will it be so hereafter' and so on. Later, as he developed the theme and declared that He had given the same instruction to the Sun, through him to Ikshvaku, etc. Arjuna raised the doubt: `How can that be? You were born a few years ago. They lived ages ago'. Then Sri Krishna, understanding Arjuna's standpoint, said: `Yes, there have been many incarnations of myself and yourself; I know them all, but you do not'). Such statements appear contradictory, but still both are right according to the point of view of the questioner. Christ also declared "Before Abraham was, I am."
D.: What is the purpose of such descriptions in religion?
B.: Only to establish the reality of the Self.
D.: Bhagavan always speaks from the highest standpoint.
B.: (smiling): People will not understand the bare and simple
truth -- the truth of their everyday, ever-present and eternal experience. That is the truth of the Self. Is there any one not aware of the Self? Yet, they do not even like to hear of it, whereas they are eager to know what lies beyond -- heaven and hell and reincarnation. Because they love mystery and not the plain truth, religions pamper
Page 57
them -- only to bring them round to the Self in the end. Moreover, much as you may wander you must return ultimately to the Self; so why not abide in the Self here and now?1
A passage was quoted above in which the questioner was recommended to read the Gita or the Bible constantly; and yet on other occasions people were reminded that their scriptures also have to be superseded.
All the scriptures are meant only to make a man retrace his steps to his original source. He need not acquire anything new. He only has to give up false ideas and useless accretions. Instead of doing this, however, he tries to grasp something strange and mysterious because he believes his happiness lies elsewhere. That is the mistake.2
All scriptures without exception proclaim that for attaining salvation, the mind should be subdued. And once one knows that control of the mind is their final aim, it is futile to make an interminable study of them. What is required for such control is actual enquiry into oneself by self-interrogation ? `Who am I?' How can this enquiry in quest of the Self be made by means of a studying of the scriptures?3
One should realise the Self by the Eye of wisdom. Does
Rama need a mirror to recognise himself as Rama?4 That to which `I' refers is within the five sheaths, whereas the scriptures are outside them. Therefore, it is futile to seek by means of the study of the scriptures, the Self that has to be realised by summarily rejecting even the five sheaths.5
Page 58
To enquire `who am I that is in bondage?' and to know one's real nature alone is Liberation. To keep the mind constantly turned within and to abide thus in the Self is alone Atmavichara (Self-enquiry), whereas dhyana [?] (meditation) consists in fervent contemplation of the Self as Sat-Chit-Ananda (Being- Consciousness-Bliss).1 Indeed, at some time, one will have to forget everything that has been learnt.2
The Realised Man stands forth as That to which all the attributes enumerated by the scriptures refer. To him therefore, these sacred texts are of no use whatever.3
Page 59