CHAPTER SIX
THE WORLD
1. "If you make your outlook that of wisdom, you will find the world to be God. Without knowing Brahman, how will you find His all-pervasiveness?"
Talk 1
Note: This `outlook of wisdom' is that of the Jnani [?] who
has realised Brahman which he finds to be the source of all perception, that is, of the world. Brahman is not only the source of the world, but also its pervader, nay, its very self — its warps and woofs, its very stuff and texture. But this all-pervasiveness of God cannot be perceived till the real- isation of the Self has been fully achieved in Sahaja Samadhi.
To tell the unrealised person that the world is God is like writing it on water — meaningless. Ask him first to realise
God, or Brahman, and he will cease to puzzle, but will try to understand.
2. "The world is not external. The impressions cannot have an outer origin, because the world can be cognised only by consciousness."
Talk 53
Note: What is the world? Bhagavan answers, "impressions in the mind." Do impressions have a source? Modern psychology answers, "Yes, the external stimuli," which
Bhagavan repudiates. The psychologists have no proofs at all of a non-psychical stimulus located in outer space. Yogic experience has shown that there exists no such thing as outer
object or space, for if it were, it would not be known at all: what is not mental cannot impress the mind. Therefore impressions rise from the consciousness itself, like the dream impressions which rise from the dreamer's mind and are perceived by it. The world cannot stand by itself, but has to depend upon consciousness to be known, or else how can we be sure that it exists at all (See X, 10)? If for, example, in the midst of the dream we are to be challenged to prove that the world we then perceive and the food we then eat were only figments of our imagination, we would be in as much a dilemma to prove it as we would should such a challenge be thrown at us in the waking state about the jagrat world and jagrat food; for, while in dream we take the dream to be real, much as we take the waking to be real while in it.
Page 56
3. "Can the world exist without its percipient? Which is prior to the other? The Being-consciousness, or the rising-consciousness. The Being-consciousness is always there, eternal and pure. The rising-consciousness rises forth and disappears. It is transient."
Talk 53
Note: Bhagavan follows the line of argument of the previous text that the thinker, whom he calls the Being-consciousness, must precede his thoughts, — the world, — which he calls the rising-consciousness. The thinker must be in existence before he starts thinking. The thinker is one and fixed, whereas his thoughts are countless and ceaselessly change.
Thus, the Being-consciousness is the "eternal and pure"
Reality and the source of the rising-consciousness, which is transient.
4. "The world is the result of your mind. Know your mind, then see the world. You will realise that it is not different from the Self."
Talk 53
Page 57
Note: This sums up the previous texts. The mind projects the world. In order, therefore, to know what the world is by nature, the mind must be looked into. This investigation will ultimately lead to the discovery of the identity of the mind with the Self. So, "see the seer," or "know the knower" is the master-key which opens the grand secret of the Self and the source of the world.
5. "Is the world perceived after Self-realisation?"
Bhagavan: "What does it matter if the world is perceived or not? The ajnani sees the Jnani [?] active and is confounded.
The world is perceived by both; but their outlooks differ.
Take the cinema, for instance. Pictures move on the screen. Let the pictures disappear. What remains? The screen alone. So also here. Even when the world appears find out to whom it appears. Hold the substratum of the `I'. When the substratum is held what does it matter if the world appears or disappears?"
Talk 65
Note: One sympathises with the questioner: his curiosity is a common weakness. In the beginning of this answer the
Master wishes to draw attention to he fact that to the Jnani there is neither gain by seeing the world, nor loss by not seeing it. What matters most is the Being, which is the man himself — as he is in himself — self-sufficient and perfect, and in this Being the Jnani [?] is firmly established. It thus matters very little if he perceives the extraneous world or not.
To speculate about the mental state of the Jnani [?] is an idle labour, for it is anybody's guess, like the state of the
Supreme Brahman; for both are one and the same, notwithstanding the appearance of activity on the part of the Jnani [?]. This activity is, truly speaking, inactivity, like the movements of pictures on the screen, which in reality do not
exist. There is no activity whatever on the screen, but only an appearance of it. As the screen is alone real and the pictures unreal, so is the Self alone real, and not the action.
Activity and the world in which it takes place are thus both unreal. The `I' is the screen, the sentient seer, and all pictures and worlds are the insentient shows playing in, or upon it.
Page 58
Bhagavan asserts that when you are confused by the sights, turn your attention upon yourself, their seer. Continue doing that again and again and you can bet on your assured success.
6. "How to turn the mind away from the world, you say?
Is there a world apart from the Self? Does the world say that it exists. It is you who say that there is a world.
Find out the Self who says it."
Talk 81
Note: The substance of this answer is the same as that
of the preceding ones, but it differs from them in form. In all fundamental principles we discover unity in the substance but diversity in the presentation, which is the superficial form. Differences in the questions impose differences in the answers, and differences in the spiritual quests are responsible for all the scriptures in the world. Otherwise even the voluminous Vedas could be summed up in one syllable — OM.
Thinking is the world: it creates the world. We think and our thoughts appear as the external objects. That the world had been before we were born and continues to be after we are dead, and that science and history bear evidence to this fact, does not alter the truth that even these scientific and historical facts are our present thoughts or notions — notions which haunt us as long as we are in jagrat. All the worlds and the billions of ages which they have lasted, tumble down like a pack of cards the moment we lay our heads on the pillow
and sail off from jagrat, and with them come down the history of the people who preceded us and the world which preceded the people, etc. Yet, notwithstanding the total pralaya of our jagrat thoughts, the complete blotting out of the universe — in our beds — we continue to BE, to travel to new lands and cross new seas, though lands and seas are, like jagrat, our own creation. So the dreamer of jagrat is alone real — the jagrat dream a total fake.
Page 59
7. "You say that the world is materialistic. Whether it is materialistic or spiritual, it is according to your outlook.
Make your outlook right. The Creator knows how to take care of His creation."
Talk 240
Note: The last sentence makes us think of the politician, social worker, philanthropist, economic philosopher, and even the clergyman who are ever anxious to help the nation and the world, perpetually thinking of how to save humanity from misery and disaster. Bhagavan practically tells them that there is a power which is making and moving all things:
Who are you to imagine that you can make and unmake to your liking? Such worries denote ignorance of Providence, or the arrogation to oneself the duties of Providence. These preoccupations should be abandoned by the seekers, who are expected to begin with a strong faith in the omniscience and omnipotence of the Supreme Being Whom they are seeking. Service of others is only permitted if it is done as a sadhana with jnana as the ultimate aim, as a means to self- purification. Find truth and all will be well with the world: "make your outlook right, for the world is according to your outlook".
8. "Does Bhagavan believe in evolution?"
Bhagavan: "Evolution must be from one state to another.
Page 60
When differences are not admitted, how can evolution arise? You say that when Sri Krishna tells Arjuna that after several births the seeker gains knowledge and thus knows "Me", denotes evolution. But you must not forget that the Gita begins with "Neither I was, nor you, nor these chiefs, etc."; "neither it is born, nor does it die, etc." So there is no birth, no death, no present as you look at it. Reality was, is, and will always be. It is changeless."
Talk 264
Note: The questioner is a Theosophist, and, like Arjuna and
Darwin, sees the evolution of forms and mistakes it for the evolution of life, which is changeless. When Sri Krishna saw that Arjuna was unable to grasp His meaning about the absoluteness of the subject, which is neither born nor dies,
He turns a leaf and starts speaking a language which Arjuna understands. What moves, changes and progresses is the form which the life inhabits, or its ideas, concepts, outlooks, which are its functions, and not itself as the thinker or conceiver. We have all observed how man daily changes his views about things and the world, from infancy to old age, though himself remains the same jiva. Life is changeless and ever perfect, so that it has no need to progress, to "evolve". Life is pure sentience, i.e., eternal existence, which is bound by no frontiers to need breaking its chains through "evolution". It is the usual human astigmatism, rather failure in precision of language that ascribes progress to life and brings in evolution and reincarnation. The Srutis also speak of rebirths, but they know what they are talking about, as does Sri Krishna in the Gita.
They say this to the millions of Arjunas of all ages, but speak a different language to the dedicated sadhaka who has prepared himself to receive the truth absolute.
9. "What should we do to ameliorate the condition of the world?"
Page 61
Bhagavan: "If you are free from pain, there will be no pain anywhere. The trouble is due to your seeing the world externally and also thinking that it has pain. But both the pain and the world are within you. If you look within there will be no pain."
Talk 272
Note: Here again the world is sitting on our shoulders: its misery is weighing heavily on us: "What should we do to ameliorate it?" Is this true altruism? Is the life of the man who worries free from the blemishes of selfishness? If not, we know the exact value of such altruism. But this is not really the concern of Bhagavan, who approaches the question from the absolute level. You look outside, he tells us, and see a world, and then you start worrying over its suffering. But is the world really there that you should take its suffering so seriously? The whole drama is enacted by, and inside your mind. You are like the thief dressed as a policeman going in search of the thief. The whole show of sympathy and concern for the world is a show put up by the criminal who is responsible for the world and its suffering. The thinking mind creates the world and its suffering, and the thinking mind now poses as the saviour of the world. Bhagavan virtually asks it not to be a hypocrite: Root out your own sins and you will see no sins anywhere.
10. "Is there a spiritual hierarchy of all the original pro-
pounders of religions watching the spiritual welfare of humanity?"
Bhagavan: "There may or may not be. It is only a surmise at best. Atma is pratyaksha (self-evident). Know it and be done with speculation. One may accept such a hierarchy; another may not. But no one can gainsay the Self."
Talk 274
Note: I have underlined "It is only a surmise", which
should be taken as an authoritative statement from the
Page 62
Master that no one can have the means of knowing definitely whether such a hierarchy exists or not. This must not be forgotten, so that all such claims may be taken at their face value.
But even if such a hierarchy exists, can it help us to attain the reality? Yet "watching the spiritual welfare of humanity" sounds very attractive. But the question is, suppose this is true, how does somebody's watching from some unknown area in some distant, unknown world over, say, my spiritual welfare, help me to attain the reality — a process which should be undergone by myself alone, inside my own consciousness, through the immediate guidance and presence of a Master, who has himself attained it, and has become the reality personified, and who is far more competent for this job than any invisible, remote "watcher"? It all appears mist and fog to the seeker who is too practical and too rational to hug shadows, "speculative" hypotheses. The path is too simple to admit dubious complications. The truth is self-evident (pratyaksha), says the Master. It does not consist in discovering hierarchies, but in discovering the mind, or the being, which discovers hierarchies and everything that is known. And as everybody is a being, it follows that every man is himself the truth and the container of all things, a fact which cannot be "gainsaid". "Know Thyself " remains the wisest and the most practical counsel.
Bhagavan continues:
11. "Anyway there is nothing apart from the Self. Even the
"spiritual hierarchy" cannot exist apart from the Self. It is only in the Self and remains as the Self. Realisation of the Self is the one goal of all."
Talk 274
Note: This clinches the matter: even this hierarchy is,
if it does exist, included in that one absolute Self. Then why
not seek the Self alone right now? Why waste your time on secondary, irrelevant matters, which will lead nowhere?
Page 63
12. "A phenomenon cannot be a reality simply because it
serves a purpose. Dreams also serve dream purposes; for example, the dream water quenches dream thirst. The dream creation is however contradicted in the waking state. What is not continuous cannot be real. The real is ever real, and not real once and unreal at other times.
The same is with magic, which appears real yet it is illusory. Similarly the world is not real apart from the reality which underlies it."
Talk 315
Note: This is an answer to some Tantrikas who hold that the world is not an illusion like a mirage, because it serves a purpose which the mirage does not. Bhagavan refutes the argument of utility as a criterion of reality, on the analogy of dream-objects which have their utility in the dream world, e.g., dream fire cooks dream food, and dream food satisfies dream hunger, and so on, yet they do not exist. The test of reality is not utility but perennial continuity, which places the phenomena of this world — of jagrat — on a par with those of dreams, being as ephemeral and, therefore, as illusory as them, whereas Reality is the fixed substratum on which the phenomena appear. The dream's substratum is the dreamer himself. The jagrat dreamer is the substratum of the jagrat phenomena. He is real but not the phenomena; and as the dreamer of dreams and of jagrat are the one and the same jiva, the jiva is therefore the Absolute
Brahman, which once again validates the identification of the jiva with Brahman by the Srutis: "jive Brahmaiva na parah" (there is no difference between the jiva and Brahman).
The next text graphically illustrates this point.
13. "There is fire on the screen in a cinema show: does it
burn the screen? There is a cascade of water: does it wet
the screen? There are tools: do they damage the screen?
Fire and water are only phenomena on the screen of
Brahman and do not affect it."
Talk 316
Page 64
Note: This is a practical and perfect illustration of Sri
Krishna's words in the Bhagavad Gita that fire does not burn it (the Self), nor does water wet it, nor can swords cut it, of which no one can plead ignorance; for there is scarcely an intelligent person who has not witnessed it in a picture-house, and has not known that the piece of cloth — the screen — which receives the fury of fire, water and swords remains completely unaffected by the celluloid conflagration that appears to rage on it. The screen is the seeing mind, the subject spoken of in the last note, and the celluloid conflagration is the world.
14. "Why should individuals remain caught in the affairs of
this world and reap trouble in the result? Should they not be free? If they are in the spiritual world they will have greater freedom." The Master answered: "The world is only spiritual. Because you identify yourself with the physical body you speak of this world as physical and the other world as spiritual. Whereas that which is, is only spiritual. If you realise yourself as the spirit, you will see that this world is only spiritual."
Talk 328
Note: If pure consciousness alone is, the phenomena
that are seen and endured by it are utterly superfluous. But because we take them seriously, we say that the affairs of the world are troublesome. What is more serious is that we take the body to be even more real than the phenomena, because the body adheres to us throughout life as an inseparable companion, from which we have no relief. We are never given a chance in the waking state to see ourselves by ourselves without the body, so that we may distinguish
between the real us and the unreal body. This ceaseless companionship through which we perceive, act, obtain and enjoy the objects of our desires, has created the illusion that the body is our very Self. And in that illusion lie all our difficulties. Because the body is physical, we think that we are physical; because the body is diseased and tired, we think that we are diseased and tired, and so on. But when the
Master draws our attention to our error, we take measures to correct it — from seeing the outer world, including the body, we turn back upon our own selves as the knowers of the world and the body; for knowledge is not physical: it does not have shape, smell or colour; it cannot be bound by time or limited by space, as does the body. We will thus realise ourselves to be the infinite Consciousness which uses the body, when the suffering of the body will cease to affect us, and we likewise will cease to see the world and the body as external, but as phenomena inside our own Self. From being physical the world will turn out to be consciousness or spiritual in essence. The conscious separation of the body from the pure consciousness, as a first step, will thus resolve all doubts and is the aim and object of this sadhana.
Page 65
15. A Spanish lady writes in a letter: "If the individual self
merges in the universal Self, how can we pray to God for the uplift of humanity?"
Bhagavan comments: "They pray to God and finish with, `Thy will be done.' If His will be done why do they pray at all? It is true that the Divine will prevails at all times and under all circumstances. The individuals cannot act of their own accord. Recognise the force of the Divine will and keep quiet. Each one is looked after by God.
He has created all. You are among 2,000 millions. When
He looks after so many will He omit you? "Again there is no need to let Him know your needs. He knows them Himself and will look after them."
Talk 594
Page 66
Note: The recorder adds that "the question seems to be common among the thinkers of the West." So it is! for the simple reason that the Westerners are taught from infancy to pray for others, not forgetting, of course, to begin with themselves, their fathers and mothers, sisters and brothers.
At the same time they are taught to have absolute faith in the Lord. They find no inconsistency in having this absolute faith side by side with ordering Him to execute what they wish Him to, as if He knows nothing about it. They forget the Sermon on the Mount which enjoins them, like this text, "Be not ye, like unto them (the heathens who make long petitional prayers): for your father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him" (Matthew VI, 8).
Sometimes they even involve God in international squabbles and invoke His help on both sides of the fighting line. They coerce Him through mass religious processions and open-air prayers.
Rational faith is a great unifying force in the spiritual world, but blind faith is most disastrous all around, as the lurid history of the Dark ages has evidenced. Blind faith is still going strong in this 20th century, but, mercifully, with all its fangs blunted.
Followers of Sri Ramana remain consistent and hold on to the rational Advaitic path. God is our very Self, and so long as we do not realise Him as such, we continue to bear this belief firmly in us, which we reinforce by the conviction that no man is ever neglected. God, Who is infinite wisdom, knows what is best for each and does it without our reminding
Him. He does not need our suggestions or advice.
Bhagavan continues:
16. "Still more, why do you pray? Does not your Creator and
Protector know that you are weak? You say God helps
those who help themselves. Certainly, help yourself and that is itself according to God's will. Every action is prompted by Him only. As for prayers for others it looks so unselfish on the surface of it. But analyse the feeling and you will detect selfishness there also. You desire others' happiness so that you may be happy. Or you want the credit for having interceded on others' behalf.
God does not require intermediaries. Mind your business and all will be well."
Talk 594
Page 67
Note: Bhagavan's accusation of the intercessor of selfishness is fully justified. We have only to read religious history to realise the havoc this intercession played in the political, social, domestic and spiritual life of the West. Intercessions and certificates of intercessions under the name of indul- gences were bought and sold in the open market for some centuries in Europe, and the practice, at least the notion of intercession, still, even today, lingers among a vast section of humanity, so that we should not wonder at people who want to pray for others and for the peace of the world and pose as heroes in the eyes of God and men. Even in India the imported notion has spread to some spiritual institu- tions, where intercession is being practised on a large scale.
Bhagavan reminds us that "God does not require interme- diaries."
That "every action is prompted by God" requires some explanation. On the face of it, it looks as if this statement negates karma and free-will. In fact it does not. What it means is simply this: since the Self or God is pure intelligence, that is, alone intelligent, and since no action is done without an intelligent actor, it follows that the Self Itself is the doer (or prompter) of all actions, notwithstanding these being bound by the laws of karma, which are themselves the work of the same Self. Thus God is the all-doer and all-knower.
Page 68
The Self alone is intelligent existence, and because it is not perceived as such, there is all this wrong thinking, this false belief about the impotence, sinfulness and ignorance of man, which need confessions, intercession of saints, prayer for forgiveness and for peace, and what not. Bhagavan shows us the right way and asks us to mind our own business and go on practising till we realise the truth about God and about humanity by our own efforts and direct experience.
17. "Does not God work His will through some chosen
person?"
Bhagavan: "God is in all and works through all. But His presence is better recognised in purified minds. The pure one reflects God's actions more clearly than the impure mind. Therefore people say that they are the chosen ones.
But the chosen man does not himself say so. If he thinks that he is the intermediary, then it is clear that he retains his individuality and that there is no complete surrender."
Talk 594
Note: That God is alone the doer we have already discussed the point. The new point brought in here is to the effect that only a pure mind can understand Him as such, and such a mind does not pose as intercessor. He who so poses, as certainly many people do, should be branded as victim to egoistic delusions.
But the questioner seems to mean differently from the implications of deliberate intercession. He seems to refer to an act of Divine Grace for the benefit of someone or other, or of a whole nation, through a human agency. This is quite valid. But Bhagavan's point is that such an agency is possible in a mind which is fitter than another for this particular work. Yet this `chosen' person would not know, still less say, that he is chosen without contradicting his mission, for the
simple reason that the choice is an automatic act, and appears to the person himself as natural as any other act, though it turns out to be for the benefit of mankind.
Page 69
If we grant that all actions are God's then there is nothing to distinguish one act from another, all actions being induced or inspired by the intelligent actor from inside himself without the reminder that it is God's. The same may be said of the universally or individually beneficial act. Thus he who poses as an intercessor, a conscious intermediary, must be looked at with suspicion, more so if he lays claims to higher spirituality through the tapas of surrender. This proves that his surrender is very defective and his tapas not worth the name.
18. "Are not the Brahmins considered to be the priests or
intermediaries between God and others?"
Bhagavan: "Yes, but who is a Brahmin? A Brahmin is one who has realised Brahman. Such an one has no sense of individuality in him. He cannot think that he acts as an intermediary."
Talk 594
Note: This definition of Brahminism is as ancient as the hills.
When Bhishma was lying on his bed of arrows some thousands of years ago and taught the Dharma Shastras to the Pandavas in the presence of Sri Krishna, he also, like
Bhagavan, gave the true meaning of Brahminhood, as follows:
"Acts alone determine who is a Brahmana and who is
not. Performing all rituals and sacrifices does not make a
Brahmana. There is only one bondage, namely, that caused by desire. He who is free from this bondage is a Brahmana.
He who restrains his senses, who is constantly in yogic samadhi is a Brahmana: he is distinguished above all others, and derives his joys from the Self alone." (Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata)
Page 70
Thus a Brahmin is, truly speaking, a dweller in Brah- man, a Jnani [?], or at least a foremost sadhaka, irrespective of his physical descent. But the questioner is thinking only of the sacred-thread wearers, who claim Brahminism by right of descent, which the Srutis, Smritis, as in the above quotation, and Bhagavan repudiate. Yet the Brahmins as a caste have done a lot of good to India and to the world by saving the Shastras from destruction, through staunch adherence to tradition in the many vicissitudes through which this subcontinent has passed in its long history. But unfortunately, the wind of change that blew over the world in the last century or two affected this caste also. The majority of the Brahmins found themselves faced with the need to struggle for their existence, which compelled them to occupy positions which had been reserved for the Kshatriyas and Vaishyas. Yet, notwithstanding these disadvantages they continue to stand in the forefront where the study and practice of Yoga and Vedanta and the spreading of Sanskrit knowledge are concerned, which is a redeeming feature in the materialistic tendencies of this age.
It is now clear that there exists no human agency of any kind that can intervene between God and man. The Jnani [?], the God-realised mukta, alone can help — not as intermediary, but as teacher of, and guide to, the absolute state of the Self.
19. "Dream and sleep do not make any appeal to me. The
sleep state is really dull; whereas the waking state is full of beautiful and interesting things."
Bhagavan: "What you consider to be filled with beautiful and interesting things is indeed the dull and ignorant state of sleep to the Jnani [?]. (A Sanskrit saying goes) `The wise one is wide awake just where darkness rules for
others.' You must certainly wake up from the sleep which is holding you at present."
Talk 607
Page 71
Note: The English lady who has asked this question seems to have unwittingly given us the secret of Creation. She has most probably hit on the cause of the disturbance of the gunas in consciousness, which has given rise to the senses, that is, the world. The disturbance is admittedly an inner impulse, an urge to experience the "beautiful and interesting things", and lo! the beautiful and interesting things are. The formless, colourless, tasteless, smell-less, soundless state of the pure being becomes intolerably `dull', and the stir in consciousness takes place to spread a dream, to erect a picture-house in order to enjoy a kaleidoscopic show, this world of multiplicity. At all events the desire of this lady for beauty, is the cause of this body of hers, which permits her to enjoy "beauty".
Now the question arises, if the questioner is so devoted to the beautiful things of this world, why does she leave hem daily to seek the "dullness" of sleep? She is hardly consistent in her loyalty to beauty when she deliberately and even longingly forsakes it for the uncouth, obscure sleep — not once in a blue moon, but at least three hundred and sixty- five times a year. She ought seriously to think that there is something uncanny, something mysterious in her ardently seeking what she ardently dislikes, namely, dull sleep. Some enquirers do not care so cast a glance — even when reminded by sages — at their conditions in the sleep state, taking it to be irrelevant to their questions. They imagine themselves well-established in a solid world of truth, and there can be no sense in taking them out of it into a world of shadows and mist. But the fact remains that the comparison and coordination of all the three states are most essential for the
full understanding of the true nature of jagrat. Again the questioner fancies sleep to be useful for the "relaxation of the body". Relaxation implies an antecedent feeling of tension. We have on many occasions proved the body to be insentient. That being the case how can an insentient object feel a tension? Moreover, if relaxation of the body is the objective, where is the earthly reason of dropping the body completely in this world in bed and going to another world for it? Why cannot it be done right here, where so many other machines are given rest?
Page 72
The fact is, that what impels us to seek sleep is the longing for the rest and delight of the inner "home", where we gather ourselves, so to say, from the exhausting dissipations caused by the senses, whose "interesting" creation is fictitious, and "beauty" an ephemeral mirage. What we take to be waking is actually dreaming, and our sleep is actually waking into the sanity of dreamlessness. What is darkness for the ignorant is light for the wise, Bhagavan's quotation reads, and its significance we have to study carefully.
Bhagavan explains:
20. "The sleep, dream and waking states are mere phenomena appearing on the Self, which is itself stationary as simple awareness. The same person sleeps, dreams and wakes up. The waking state is perceived to be full of beautiful and interesting things, the absence of which makes one think that sleep is dull. Because you identify yourself with the body you see the world around you and say that the waking state is filled with beautiful things. Sleep appears dull because you are not there as an individual and therefore these things are not perceived. But what is the fact? There is the continuity of Being in all the three states, but not of the individual and the objects.
That which is continuous endures; that which is discontinuous is transitory. Therefore the state of Be- ing is permanent, whereas the body and the world are not."
Talk 609
Page 73
Note: This is extremely lucid. It all amounts to saying that because the body which sees "the beautiful and interesting things" in the waking state is absent in sleep, that these things are then also absent. Therefore the world and the body rise and sink together without affecting the being who wakes, dreams and sleeps. Thus the body is not the being, but only the instrument it has chosen for itself to enjoy the beautiful and interesting things, just as one chooses a telescope to see an object ten miles away, which otherwise would remain invisible. The body is no more oneself than the telescope is.
Further, the body can be discarded, whereas the being is continuous. Thus the being is the reality, whereas the temporary body is not.
21. "The mind is like akasa (ether of space). Just as there are
objects in space, so there are thoughts in the mind....
One cannot hope to measure the universe and study the phenomena. It is impossible. For the objects are mental creation; it is like trying to stamp with one's foot on the head of one's shadow; the farther one moves the farther goes the shadow's head."
Talk 485
Note: We have already seen that space is the mind's extension, containing thoughts which appear to be the external objects. Since the objects are our own creation, pursuing them in the attempt to reach their end is like trying to place one's foot on the head of one's own shadow, which recedes as the body moves nearer, for the more we think the larger will the universe grow, however unwieldy and of incomprehensible immensity it already is.
Page 74
Therefore the study of the phenomena will lead absolutely nowhere but to the never-ending phenomena — never to the Real which underlies them. All sciences — mathematics, physics, medicine — pertain to the phenomena, the world of space, of time, of experience, of bodies, of action, and perish with them.
22. "Are thoughts mere matter?"
Bhagavan: "Do you mean matter like the things you see around you? But who is the thinker? You admit that he is Spirit. Do you mean that Spirit generates matter? Can
Consciousness generate non-consciousness, or light darkness?"
Talk 613
Note: The questioner rightly demands clarification of the oft-repeated assertion that the world is merely our thoughts.
Bhagavan's answer implies that by "our thoughts" is meant a mere appearance, which has nothing real in it, like the appearance of water in a mirage, which is no water at all.
Thoughts are after all mere vibrations in consciousness, in themselves they are NOTHING, but in our minds they assume ideas or notions of objects — mountains, lands, seas, forests, and the thousands of the things that surround us, — or else how can Brahman or God, who is pure Spirit, generate stones, fire, water, however much the religions of the world may hail Him as their creator? Further, it is utterly inconceivable that He, Who is immaculate radiance as supreme Bliss-Intelligence, should give rise to the abnormal darkness of avidya [?], or to fear, hatred, envy, pain, diseases, etc. The inference is neither world nor avidya [?] exists. They are pure fantasy — Consciousness alone is.
Vasishta tells Rama: "The visible world, O Rama, myself, thyself and all things are NOTHING; they are
uncreated, unborn; the Supreme Spirit alone exists by
Itself.
Page 75
"As pearls in the sky the world is nonexistent; it is as
unreal as the (individual) soul in the void of consciousness."
(Yoga Vasishta, III, xiv-xv)
Yoga Vasishta's quoted verse clinches the content of the
chapter, which has again and again proved that the world is nothing but a state of the mind, that is, a temporary appearance in the mind of its experiencer. By itself it does not exist at all.
It is an oft-repeated truth that the Reality — Self or
Brahman — is changeless and ever present — not once present and once absent. The Reality is the experiencer of the states himself. He is present in the waking, dreaming, dreamless sleep and Turiya (the fourth) or samadhi, whereas the world is present only in the waking (jagrat) and completely absent in the others. The world with all its mountains, oceans, mighty rivers and mightier volcanos is simply wiped off the slate of the seer's consciousness the moment he steps out of the waking into another state. This proves that the senses which are active only in the waking to make it are the creators of the world. The physical body through the sensory organs — eyes, ears, nose, etc., — which are lodged in it feeds the senses on the impressions received by them from an apparent outside. In no other body this machinery of sense and sense organs are found, which is why its deluding power — Maya [?] — prevails only in the waking state (jagrat) and why deliverance from it (Maya) is sought in jagrat only, through the practice of tapas — meditation and study. This is the only maya known to us — Advaitins — put in the simplest language to unbaffle the baffled seekers and students who love simplicity and direct approach.