B. V. Narasimha Swami
I
June 29,1929
THE evening was calm but cloudy. Occasionally it would
drizzle and in consequence it was somewhat cool. The
windows of the Ashram hall were closed and Maharshi was seated as usual on the sofa. A number of devotees sat on the floor facing him. Mr. A. S. K., the sub-judge of Cuddalore, had come to see the Maharshi accompanied by two elderly ladies, his aunt and his cousin. He was also accompanied by Raghupati Sastri, a pleader of Cuddalore. Of the inmates and regular visitors there were about seven or eight, including Sri Niranjanananda Swami (Chinnaswami), Echammal, Ganapathi Bhat, Visvanathan Iyer, Muruganar, and Madhavan.
It was about 6-00 p.m., and the conversation was mainly
carried on by the Maharshi and the Cuddalore visitors. Mr. A. S. K. started the discussion as to the impermanence of all mundane things by putting the question: "Has sat-asat-vicharana (enquiring into the real and the unreal) the efficacy, per se, to lead us to the realization of the One Imperishable?"
Maharshi: As propounded by all and realised by all true
seekers after the Truth, Brahma-Nishtha (abidance in Brahman [?])
Page 20
alone, if one may say so, can make us know and realise it, as being of us and in us. Any amount of vivechana (discrimination) can lead us only one step forward by making us tyaginah (renouncers), by goading us to discard the abhasa (the fleeting), and to hold fast only to the Eternal Truth and Presence.
Then the conversation turned upon the question as to
whether Iswara prasad (the grace of God) is necessary for the attainment of samrajyam (Self rule) or whether an individual's honest and strenuous effort to attain it cannot, of itself, lead us to that from where there is no return. The Maharshi, with an ineffable smile which affected everyone present, replied:
"Iswara prasadam is essential to realisation. It leads to God
realization. But Iswara prasadam is vouchsafed only to him who is a true bhakta [?] or a yogin who has striven hard and ceaselessly on the path towards freedom. . ."
Sri Raghupati then proceeded to question the Maharshi
about the six yogic centres (adharas).
R: The six adharas are mentioned. But the jiva [?] (individual
soul) is said to reside in the heart. Is that not so?
M: Yes. The jiva [?] is said to remain in the heart in sushupti [?]
(deep sleep) and in the brain in waking hours. The heart need not be taken to be the fleshy or muscular cavity with four chambers which propels the blood. There are indeed passages which support the idea. The description that it resembles the bud of the lotus, that it is above the navel and between the nipples, that the blood vessels terminate there appear to confirm that view. There is the stanza in Reality in Forty Verses: Supplement, verse 18, to the same effect. But there are many who hold that the term `heart' denotes a set of ganglia or nerve centres about that region. Whichever view is correct does not matter to us. We are not concerned with anything less than our Self. About that we have certainty within ourselves. No doubts or discussions arise there. The `heart' is used in the Vedas and Shastras to denote the place
whence the notion `I' springs. Does it spring only from this fleshy ball? No. It springs from within us somewhere right in the middle of our being. The `I' really has no locality. Everything is our self. There is nothing but That. So the heart must be said to be our entire body and the entire universe conceived as `I'. But for the practice of the abhyasi (spiritual aspirant) we have to indicate a definite part of the universe or body, and so this heart is pointed out as the seat of the Self. But, in truth, we are everywhere. We are all that is and there is nothing else.
Page 21
R: The six adharas, are they not the seats of the soul?
M: Those six are stated to be the seats of the soul for the
spiritual aspirant's contemplation. He should fix his attention on muladhara first, think of the Self as residing there, and gradually go higher up.
R: There is a description of each of the six as the seat of a
God, or a figure with a varying number of sides, and with a varying number of faces.
M: Yes. These are for purposes of concentration. They are
interpreted symbolically.
R: There is a difference of opinion between two schools as
to the order of the adharas. Sir John Woodroffe mentions that some (probably the Nepalese) place the anahata (the heart) next to muladhara, i.e., as the second of the six.
M: Yes, there may be variations. But the usual order here is
muladhara, swadishtana, manipuraka, anahata, visuddhi, ajna, and sahasrara chakra on the top of all these six.
R: The muladhara is said to be triangular.
M: Yes. We may think of the muladhara or Self therein as
arising from a three-sided figure.
R: The kundalini [?] is said to rise from that.
M: Yes. That current is ourselves. By meditating on each
adhara, the current advances higher and higher and various powers are said to develop.
Page 22
R: It is said that Iswara prasadam is necessary to attain
successful samadhi. Is that so?
M: We are Iswara. By Iswara drishti (seeing ourselves as
Iswara) we are having Iswara prasadam. So we need Iswara prasadam to obtain Iswara prasadam.
Maharshi smiles as he says this and the devotees all laugh.
R: There is Iswara anugraham (grace). That is said to be
distinct from Iswara prasadam.
M: The thought of Iswara is Iswara prasadam. His nature
is arul or prasadam, i.e., grace. It is by Iswara's grace you think of Iswara.
R: Is not Guru anugraham the result of Iswara anugraham?
M: Why distinguish between the two? The Guru is viewed
as Iswara and not as distinct from Iswara.
R: When an endeavour is made to lead the right life and
to concentrate thought on our Self, there is often a downfall and break. What is to be done then?
M: It will come all right in the end. There is the steady
impulse of your determination that sets you on your feet again after every fall or breakdown. Gradually the obstacles disappear and your current gets stronger. Everything comes right in the end. Steady determination is the thing required.
I I
A day in 1929 (date not given)
SRI N. NATESIER, advocate of Madura, arrived this morning at 7-30 a.m. with his family and paid his respects to the Maharshi. He quoted a verse from the Bhagavad Gita and then asked: "How are doubts removed?"
Page 23
Maharshi: By granthichhedan (cutting the knot).
N. Natesier: "All karmas get destroyed on seeing it." How
are we to have that experience? How does this illusion arise and to whom? How is it removed?
M: Instead of pursuing these inquiries as to how illusion
arises and how it is removed, it is sufficient if we solve first the question `To whom?' it arises and then all questions are solved.
N. N: The doubts arise in my mind and to me. The books
say that I must know myself and learn my own nature. But how is this to be done?
M: Seek your source. Find out whence the thought I
springs.
N.N: How is that to be done? I don't find that easy.
M: Do we not see things and know them clearly? But what
object can we be surer of and know more certainly than our Self? This is direct experience and cannot be further described.
N.N: If we cannot see the Self, what is to be done?
M: Strenuous endeavour to know the Self. Develop the
antarmukham or introspective attitude. Constantly put before your mind the query "What am I?" and in time you will be able to see your Self. How can you see your Self? You can see that which you have not seen before. But as to what you are always experiencing, there is no drishti (vision), strictly speaking. By drishti, the removal of the hindrance, viz., the idea that you are not seeing the Self, is meant.
N.N: It is said there are trimurtis (three aspects of God)
and that Vishnu is in Vaikunthalokam (a heavenly region). Is that a real world, real like this world, or is it only a fiction?
M: If you and others and this world are real, why are
Mahavishnu and Vaikuntha unreal? So long as you consider this reality, that also is reality.
N.N: I am not referring to the Advaita state or truth that
Brahman [?] alone is real and all else is fiction (mithya). But I am
Page 24
trying to find out if, in vyavahara (empirical) stage, accepting the standards for truth that we have here, Vaikuntha is true. Trikalabadhyam satyam (true in all three states) is not the standard I take. In vyavahara, this body exists now and though it may not be found at other times, it is satyam or true in one sense. In that sense, is Vaikuntha true? Does it exist?
M: Why not?
N.N: Are Mahavishnu, Siva, etc., then included among
jivakoties?
M: There are jivas and Iswara. Jivas are not the only
beings known.
N.N: Is there pralaya (dissolution) for Mahavishnu, etc.,
and do these trimurtis also meet with their end? Or are they eternal? Do they exist with a body, like this panchabhutika (made of the five elements) body of ours? Have they a vyavaharika satyatwam (empirical reality)?
M: Instead of pursuing the inquiry in that direction, why
don't you turn attention on yourself? To whom does the notion of Vaikuntha and Vishnu arise?
N.N: Is Mahavishnu or Vaikuntha a mere notion or idea?
M: Everything to you is a notion. Nothing appears to you
except through the mind and as its notions.
N.N: Then Vishnu and Vaikuntha are creatures of my
imagination and pure fiction? They have no more reality than the snake fancied in the rope or sasa-vishanam, the hare's horn?
M: No. When you consider your body and life and other
things as real, how can you treat Mahavishnu or Iswara as unreal? if you are real, he is real, too.
N.N: It is not about reality in that sense that I am asking.
Sasa-vishanam, for example, never exists. None has seen it. It is a case of atyantika abhavam (absolute nonexistence), whereas this body is felt and exists at least as an object of sense experienced for the present. There is a difference between the
Page 25
two sorts of abhavam. Can it be said that Vaikuntha is as unreal as sasa-vishanam, the hare's horn?
M: No. Just as you experience this world and this body
and say it is true, there are others who have experienced Vaikuntha, the Vishnulokam, and say that is true. Why call that alone unreal, while you talk of your sense experience as real?
N.N: Then Vaikuntha must exist somewhere. Where is
it?
M: It is in you.
N.N: Then it is only my idea, what I can create and control?
M: Everything is like that — your idea.
N.N: That is coming back to the Advaitic idea. But what I
wish to know, is there a separate person like ourselves who is phaladata, the rewarder of virtue and the punisher of sins?
M: Yes.
N.N: Has he an end? Does he get dissolved in pralaya? M: Pralaya is for the soul held by maya [?]. If you can, with
all your defects and limitations, rise by jnana [?] into realisation of the Self, and above all pralaya and samsara, is it not reasonable to expect that Iswara, who is infinitely more intelligent than you, is above and beyond pralaya?
N.N: I have my doubts yet.
M: He who has doubts will go on doubting up to the end
of the world.
N.N: No. I am anxious to get rid of that doubt and
request you to remove my doubts begotten of ignorance. Pray, enlighten me.
M: Enlighten yourself by realising your Self.
N.N: That I am unable to do. In spite of my desire to
shake off all doubts, they cling to me. That is why I seek help. My present doubts about the reality of the existence of other worlds have been long with me. Are devas and pisachas true?
M: Yes.
Page 26
I I I
THIS IS A conversation between the Maharshi and Bezwada Sundararama Reddi from the Nellore district. It took place on the morning of 23-2-30.
Bezwada: What to do to get moksha? Maharshi: Learn what moksha [?] is. B: Should I not leave wife and family?
M: What harm do they do? First find out what you are.
B: Should not one give up wife, home, wealth, etc.?
M: Well, first learn what samsara is. Is all that samsara? Are
there not people who live in their midst and get realization?
B: What steps should I take as sadhana? M: That depends on your qualifications and stage.
B: I am going on with vigraharadhana (worship of a form
of God).
M: Go on. That leads to chitta ekagrata (one-pointedness).
Get one-pointed. All will come right. People fancy moksha is somewhere and has to be searched for after kicking out samsara. Moksha is knowing yourself within yourself. Keep on to a single thought. You will progress. Your mind itself is samsara.
B: My mind is being too much tossed. What to do?
M: Fix yourself to one thing and try to hold on to it. All
will come right.
B: I find concentration difficult.
M: Go on practising. Your concentration must come as
easy as your breathing. That would be the crown of achievement.
B: Brahmacharya, sattvic ahara, etc., are all helpful, are
they not?
M: Yes, all that is good. Then Maharshi is silent, gazing at vacancy and
setting an example to the questioner for him to imitate and follow immediately.
Page 27
B: Do I not require yoga?
M: What is that but concentration?
B: To help in that, is it not better to have aids?
M: Breath regulation, etc., are of much help.
B: Is it not possible to get a sight of God?
M: Yes. You see this and that. Why not see God? Only you
must know what God is. All are seeing God always. Only they don't realize it. Find out what God is. People see and yet they don't see, because they don't know God.
B: Should I not go on with kirtan, nama japa, etc., when I
worship?
M: Yes. Manasa japa (mental repetition) is very good. That
helps with dhyana [?]. The mind gets identified with that japa and then you know what real puja is — the losing of one's individuality in that which is worshipped or revered.
B: Is Paramatma always different from us?
M: The difference is the view a man has now. But by
thinking of him as not different, you achieve identity.
B: That is Advaita, is it not? Becoming oneself.
M: Where is becoming? The thinker is all the while the
same as the Real. He ultimately realizes that fact. Sometimes we forget our identity, i.e., as waking individual self. In sleep Bhagavan is perpetual consciousness.
B: Is not the Guru's guidance needed in addition to
idol worship?
M: How did you start without advice?
B: From puranas, etc.
M: Yes. Someone tells you, or Bhagavan himself, in which
latter case He (God) is your Guru. What matters it who the Guru is? We really are one with the Guru and Bhagavan. The Guru is really Bhagavan. We discover that in the end. There is no difference between them. "Guru is God" is the idea.
B: If we have some merit the search will not leave us.
Page 28
M: Yes. You will keep your effort that way.
B: Will not a cleverer man be a great help in pointing out
the way?
M: Yes, but if you go on working with available light you
will meet your Guru, as he will be seeking you himself.
B: Is there a difference between prapatti (surrender) and
the yoga of the rishis?
M: Jnana marga and bhakti [?] or prapatti advocated by Sri
Aurobindo are the same. The goal is the same. Self-surrender leads to it like enquiry. Complete self-surrender means you have no further thought of `I'. That is what bhakti [?] leads to, and also jnana [?]. Then all your samskaras are washed off and you are free. You should not continue as a separate entity at the end of either course.
B: Don't we attain swarga (heavenly regions) as a fruit of
our actions?
M: Why? That is as true as our present existence in this
world. But, if we enquire what we are and discover the Self, what need is there to think of swarga, etc.?
B: Should I not try to escape from birth and death?
M: Yes. Find out who is born, and who has the trouble of
existence now. When you are asleep do you think of birth and trouble, etc.? You think of it now. So find out whence this trouble arose and you have the solution. You discover none is born. There is no birth, no trouble, no unhappiness in fact. Everything is That. All is bliss. We are then freed from rebirth in truth. Why feel misery?
B: Chaitanya and Ramakrishna wept before God and
achieved success.
M: Yes. They had a powerful shakti drawing them through
those experiences. Entrust yourself to that power to take you on to your goal. Tears are often referred to as a sign of weakness. We cannot attribute weakness to these great ones. These symptoms are passing manifestations while the great current is carrying them on. Let us look to the end achieved.
Page 29
B: Can this physical body be made to disappear into
nothingness?
M: Why this query? Why not find out if you are this body?
B: Can't we appear and disappear like Viswamitra and other
rishis?
M: These are debates about physical matters. Is that our
essential object of interest? Are you not the Atman? Why think about other matters? Seek the essence. Reject other disquisitions as useless. Those who believe that moksha [?] consists in disappearance err. No such thing is needed. You are not the body. What matters it how the body disappears — in one way or another. There is no merit in disappearance of body in one way over the other. Everything is one. Where is superiority or inferiority in the one? See Chap. XIV of Ramana Gita. The loss of the `I' is the central fact — and not of the body. It is the dehatma buddhi (the idea that I am the body) that is your bondage. It is the discarding of it and perceiving the Real that matters. Should you pound to pieces something golden before seeing it is gold? What matters if it is round or powdered when you perceive the truth of its being gold? The dying man does not see this body. It is the other man who thinks about the manner in which the body dies. The realized have no death. Whether the body is active or drops off, he is equally conscious and sees no difference. To him nothing is superior to the other. To an outsider also, the manner of disappearance of a mukta's body is unimportant. Mind your own realisation and after that it will be time enough to see which form of death is preferable!
Are you the body? During night, when you are fast asleep
have you body consciousness?
B: No.
M: What exists always, is the `I'.
Page 30
June 29,1929
THE evening was calm but cloudy. Occasionally it would
drizzle and in consequence it was somewhat cool. The
windows of the Ashram hall were closed and Maharshi was seated as usual on the sofa. A number of devotees sat on the floor facing him. Mr. A. S. K., the sub-judge of Cuddalore, had come to see the Maharshi accompanied by two elderly ladies, his aunt and his cousin. He was also accompanied by Raghupati Sastri, a pleader of Cuddalore. Of the inmates and regular visitors there were about seven or eight, including Sri Niranjanananda Swami (Chinnaswami), Echammal, Ganapathi Bhat, Visvanathan Iyer, Muruganar, and Madhavan.
It was about 6-00 p.m., and the conversation was mainly
carried on by the Maharshi and the Cuddalore visitors. Mr. A. S. K. started the discussion as to the impermanence of all mundane things by putting the question: "Has sat-asat-vicharana (enquiring into the real and the unreal) the efficacy, per se, to lead us to the realization of the One Imperishable?"
Maharshi: As propounded by all and realised by all true
seekers after the Truth, Brahma-Nishtha (abidance in Brahman [?])
Page 20
alone, if one may say so, can make us know and realise it, as being of us and in us. Any amount of vivechana (discrimination) can lead us only one step forward by making us tyaginah (renouncers), by goading us to discard the abhasa (the fleeting), and to hold fast only to the Eternal Truth and Presence.
Then the conversation turned upon the question as to
whether Iswara prasad (the grace of God) is necessary for the attainment of samrajyam (Self rule) or whether an individual's honest and strenuous effort to attain it cannot, of itself, lead us to that from where there is no return. The Maharshi, with an ineffable smile which affected everyone present, replied:
"Iswara prasadam is essential to realisation. It leads to God
realization. But Iswara prasadam is vouchsafed only to him who is a true bhakta [?] or a yogin who has striven hard and ceaselessly on the path towards freedom. . ."
Sri Raghupati then proceeded to question the Maharshi
about the six yogic centres (adharas).
R: The six adharas are mentioned. But the jiva [?] (individual
soul) is said to reside in the heart. Is that not so?
M: Yes. The jiva [?] is said to remain in the heart in sushupti [?]
(deep sleep) and in the brain in waking hours. The heart need not be taken to be the fleshy or muscular cavity with four chambers which propels the blood. There are indeed passages which support the idea. The description that it resembles the bud of the lotus, that it is above the navel and between the nipples, that the blood vessels terminate there appear to confirm that view. There is the stanza in Reality in Forty Verses: Supplement, verse 18, to the same effect. But there are many who hold that the term `heart' denotes a set of ganglia or nerve centres about that region. Whichever view is correct does not matter to us. We are not concerned with anything less than our Self. About that we have certainty within ourselves. No doubts or discussions arise there. The `heart' is used in the Vedas and Shastras to denote the place
whence the notion `I' springs. Does it spring only from this fleshy ball? No. It springs from within us somewhere right in the middle of our being. The `I' really has no locality. Everything is our self. There is nothing but That. So the heart must be said to be our entire body and the entire universe conceived as `I'. But for the practice of the abhyasi (spiritual aspirant) we have to indicate a definite part of the universe or body, and so this heart is pointed out as the seat of the Self. But, in truth, we are everywhere. We are all that is and there is nothing else.
Page 21
R: The six adharas, are they not the seats of the soul?
M: Those six are stated to be the seats of the soul for the
spiritual aspirant's contemplation. He should fix his attention on muladhara first, think of the Self as residing there, and gradually go higher up.
R: There is a description of each of the six as the seat of a
God, or a figure with a varying number of sides, and with a varying number of faces.
M: Yes. These are for purposes of concentration. They are
interpreted symbolically.
R: There is a difference of opinion between two schools as
to the order of the adharas. Sir John Woodroffe mentions that some (probably the Nepalese) place the anahata (the heart) next to muladhara, i.e., as the second of the six.
M: Yes, there may be variations. But the usual order here is
muladhara, swadishtana, manipuraka, anahata, visuddhi, ajna, and sahasrara chakra on the top of all these six.
R: The muladhara is said to be triangular.
M: Yes. We may think of the muladhara or Self therein as
arising from a three-sided figure.
R: The kundalini [?] is said to rise from that.
M: Yes. That current is ourselves. By meditating on each
adhara, the current advances higher and higher and various powers are said to develop.
Page 22
R: It is said that Iswara prasadam is necessary to attain
successful samadhi. Is that so?
M: We are Iswara. By Iswara drishti (seeing ourselves as
Iswara) we are having Iswara prasadam. So we need Iswara prasadam to obtain Iswara prasadam.
Maharshi smiles as he says this and the devotees all laugh.
R: There is Iswara anugraham (grace). That is said to be
distinct from Iswara prasadam.
M: The thought of Iswara is Iswara prasadam. His nature
is arul or prasadam, i.e., grace. It is by Iswara's grace you think of Iswara.
R: Is not Guru anugraham the result of Iswara anugraham?
M: Why distinguish between the two? The Guru is viewed
as Iswara and not as distinct from Iswara.
R: When an endeavour is made to lead the right life and
to concentrate thought on our Self, there is often a downfall and break. What is to be done then?
M: It will come all right in the end. There is the steady
impulse of your determination that sets you on your feet again after every fall or breakdown. Gradually the obstacles disappear and your current gets stronger. Everything comes right in the end. Steady determination is the thing required.
I I
A day in 1929 (date not given)
SRI N. NATESIER, advocate of Madura, arrived this morning at 7-30 a.m. with his family and paid his respects to the Maharshi. He quoted a verse from the Bhagavad Gita and then asked: "How are doubts removed?"
Page 23
Maharshi: By granthichhedan (cutting the knot).
N. Natesier: "All karmas get destroyed on seeing it." How
are we to have that experience? How does this illusion arise and to whom? How is it removed?
M: Instead of pursuing these inquiries as to how illusion
arises and how it is removed, it is sufficient if we solve first the question `To whom?' it arises and then all questions are solved.
N. N: The doubts arise in my mind and to me. The books
say that I must know myself and learn my own nature. But how is this to be done?
M: Seek your source. Find out whence the thought I
springs.
N.N: How is that to be done? I don't find that easy.
M: Do we not see things and know them clearly? But what
object can we be surer of and know more certainly than our Self? This is direct experience and cannot be further described.
N.N: If we cannot see the Self, what is to be done?
M: Strenuous endeavour to know the Self. Develop the
antarmukham or introspective attitude. Constantly put before your mind the query "What am I?" and in time you will be able to see your Self. How can you see your Self? You can see that which you have not seen before. But as to what you are always experiencing, there is no drishti (vision), strictly speaking. By drishti, the removal of the hindrance, viz., the idea that you are not seeing the Self, is meant.
N.N: It is said there are trimurtis (three aspects of God)
and that Vishnu is in Vaikunthalokam (a heavenly region). Is that a real world, real like this world, or is it only a fiction?
M: If you and others and this world are real, why are
Mahavishnu and Vaikuntha unreal? So long as you consider this reality, that also is reality.
N.N: I am not referring to the Advaita state or truth that
Brahman [?] alone is real and all else is fiction (mithya). But I am
Page 24
trying to find out if, in vyavahara (empirical) stage, accepting the standards for truth that we have here, Vaikuntha is true. Trikalabadhyam satyam (true in all three states) is not the standard I take. In vyavahara, this body exists now and though it may not be found at other times, it is satyam or true in one sense. In that sense, is Vaikuntha true? Does it exist?
M: Why not?
N.N: Are Mahavishnu, Siva, etc., then included among
jivakoties?
M: There are jivas and Iswara. Jivas are not the only
beings known.
N.N: Is there pralaya (dissolution) for Mahavishnu, etc.,
and do these trimurtis also meet with their end? Or are they eternal? Do they exist with a body, like this panchabhutika (made of the five elements) body of ours? Have they a vyavaharika satyatwam (empirical reality)?
M: Instead of pursuing the inquiry in that direction, why
don't you turn attention on yourself? To whom does the notion of Vaikuntha and Vishnu arise?
N.N: Is Mahavishnu or Vaikuntha a mere notion or idea?
M: Everything to you is a notion. Nothing appears to you
except through the mind and as its notions.
N.N: Then Vishnu and Vaikuntha are creatures of my
imagination and pure fiction? They have no more reality than the snake fancied in the rope or sasa-vishanam, the hare's horn?
M: No. When you consider your body and life and other
things as real, how can you treat Mahavishnu or Iswara as unreal? if you are real, he is real, too.
N.N: It is not about reality in that sense that I am asking.
Sasa-vishanam, for example, never exists. None has seen it. It is a case of atyantika abhavam (absolute nonexistence), whereas this body is felt and exists at least as an object of sense experienced for the present. There is a difference between the
Page 25
two sorts of abhavam. Can it be said that Vaikuntha is as unreal as sasa-vishanam, the hare's horn?
M: No. Just as you experience this world and this body
and say it is true, there are others who have experienced Vaikuntha, the Vishnulokam, and say that is true. Why call that alone unreal, while you talk of your sense experience as real?
N.N: Then Vaikuntha must exist somewhere. Where is
it?
M: It is in you.
N.N: Then it is only my idea, what I can create and control?
M: Everything is like that — your idea.
N.N: That is coming back to the Advaitic idea. But what I
wish to know, is there a separate person like ourselves who is phaladata, the rewarder of virtue and the punisher of sins?
M: Yes.
N.N: Has he an end? Does he get dissolved in pralaya? M: Pralaya is for the soul held by maya [?]. If you can, with
all your defects and limitations, rise by jnana [?] into realisation of the Self, and above all pralaya and samsara, is it not reasonable to expect that Iswara, who is infinitely more intelligent than you, is above and beyond pralaya?
N.N: I have my doubts yet.
M: He who has doubts will go on doubting up to the end
of the world.
N.N: No. I am anxious to get rid of that doubt and
request you to remove my doubts begotten of ignorance. Pray, enlighten me.
M: Enlighten yourself by realising your Self.
N.N: That I am unable to do. In spite of my desire to
shake off all doubts, they cling to me. That is why I seek help. My present doubts about the reality of the existence of other worlds have been long with me. Are devas and pisachas true?
M: Yes.
Page 26
I I I
THIS IS A conversation between the Maharshi and Bezwada Sundararama Reddi from the Nellore district. It took place on the morning of 23-2-30.
Bezwada: What to do to get moksha? Maharshi: Learn what moksha [?] is. B: Should I not leave wife and family?
M: What harm do they do? First find out what you are.
B: Should not one give up wife, home, wealth, etc.?
M: Well, first learn what samsara is. Is all that samsara? Are
there not people who live in their midst and get realization?
B: What steps should I take as sadhana? M: That depends on your qualifications and stage.
B: I am going on with vigraharadhana (worship of a form
of God).
M: Go on. That leads to chitta ekagrata (one-pointedness).
Get one-pointed. All will come right. People fancy moksha is somewhere and has to be searched for after kicking out samsara. Moksha is knowing yourself within yourself. Keep on to a single thought. You will progress. Your mind itself is samsara.
B: My mind is being too much tossed. What to do?
M: Fix yourself to one thing and try to hold on to it. All
will come right.
B: I find concentration difficult.
M: Go on practising. Your concentration must come as
easy as your breathing. That would be the crown of achievement.
B: Brahmacharya, sattvic ahara, etc., are all helpful, are
they not?
M: Yes, all that is good. Then Maharshi is silent, gazing at vacancy and
setting an example to the questioner for him to imitate and follow immediately.
Page 27
B: Do I not require yoga?
M: What is that but concentration?
B: To help in that, is it not better to have aids?
M: Breath regulation, etc., are of much help.
B: Is it not possible to get a sight of God?
M: Yes. You see this and that. Why not see God? Only you
must know what God is. All are seeing God always. Only they don't realize it. Find out what God is. People see and yet they don't see, because they don't know God.
B: Should I not go on with kirtan, nama japa, etc., when I
worship?
M: Yes. Manasa japa (mental repetition) is very good. That
helps with dhyana [?]. The mind gets identified with that japa and then you know what real puja is — the losing of one's individuality in that which is worshipped or revered.
B: Is Paramatma always different from us?
M: The difference is the view a man has now. But by
thinking of him as not different, you achieve identity.
B: That is Advaita, is it not? Becoming oneself.
M: Where is becoming? The thinker is all the while the
same as the Real. He ultimately realizes that fact. Sometimes we forget our identity, i.e., as waking individual self. In sleep Bhagavan is perpetual consciousness.
B: Is not the Guru's guidance needed in addition to
idol worship?
M: How did you start without advice?
B: From puranas, etc.
M: Yes. Someone tells you, or Bhagavan himself, in which
latter case He (God) is your Guru. What matters it who the Guru is? We really are one with the Guru and Bhagavan. The Guru is really Bhagavan. We discover that in the end. There is no difference between them. "Guru is God" is the idea.
B: If we have some merit the search will not leave us.
Page 28
M: Yes. You will keep your effort that way.
B: Will not a cleverer man be a great help in pointing out
the way?
M: Yes, but if you go on working with available light you
will meet your Guru, as he will be seeking you himself.
B: Is there a difference between prapatti (surrender) and
the yoga of the rishis?
M: Jnana marga and bhakti [?] or prapatti advocated by Sri
Aurobindo are the same. The goal is the same. Self-surrender leads to it like enquiry. Complete self-surrender means you have no further thought of `I'. That is what bhakti [?] leads to, and also jnana [?]. Then all your samskaras are washed off and you are free. You should not continue as a separate entity at the end of either course.
B: Don't we attain swarga (heavenly regions) as a fruit of
our actions?
M: Why? That is as true as our present existence in this
world. But, if we enquire what we are and discover the Self, what need is there to think of swarga, etc.?
B: Should I not try to escape from birth and death?
M: Yes. Find out who is born, and who has the trouble of
existence now. When you are asleep do you think of birth and trouble, etc.? You think of it now. So find out whence this trouble arose and you have the solution. You discover none is born. There is no birth, no trouble, no unhappiness in fact. Everything is That. All is bliss. We are then freed from rebirth in truth. Why feel misery?
B: Chaitanya and Ramakrishna wept before God and
achieved success.
M: Yes. They had a powerful shakti drawing them through
those experiences. Entrust yourself to that power to take you on to your goal. Tears are often referred to as a sign of weakness. We cannot attribute weakness to these great ones. These symptoms are passing manifestations while the great current is carrying them on. Let us look to the end achieved.
Page 29
B: Can this physical body be made to disappear into
nothingness?
M: Why this query? Why not find out if you are this body?
B: Can't we appear and disappear like Viswamitra and other
rishis?
M: These are debates about physical matters. Is that our
essential object of interest? Are you not the Atman? Why think about other matters? Seek the essence. Reject other disquisitions as useless. Those who believe that moksha [?] consists in disappearance err. No such thing is needed. You are not the body. What matters it how the body disappears — in one way or another. There is no merit in disappearance of body in one way over the other. Everything is one. Where is superiority or inferiority in the one? See Chap. XIV of Ramana Gita. The loss of the `I' is the central fact — and not of the body. It is the dehatma buddhi (the idea that I am the body) that is your bondage. It is the discarding of it and perceiving the Real that matters. Should you pound to pieces something golden before seeing it is gold? What matters if it is round or powdered when you perceive the truth of its being gold? The dying man does not see this body. It is the other man who thinks about the manner in which the body dies. The realized have no death. Whether the body is active or drops off, he is equally conscious and sees no difference. To him nothing is superior to the other. To an outsider also, the manner of disappearance of a mukta's body is unimportant. Mind your own realisation and after that it will be time enough to see which form of death is preferable!
Are you the body? During night, when you are fast asleep
have you body consciousness?
B: No.
M: What exists always, is the `I'.
Page 30
A day in 1929 (date not given)
SRI N. NATESIER, advocate of Madura, arrived this morning at 7-30 a.m. with his family and paid his respects to the Maharshi. He quoted a verse from the Bhagavad Gita and then asked: "How are doubts removed?"
Page 23
Maharshi: By granthichhedan (cutting the knot).
N. Natesier: "All karmas get destroyed on seeing it." How
are we to have that experience? How does this illusion arise and to whom? How is it removed?
M: Instead of pursuing these inquiries as to how illusion
arises and how it is removed, it is sufficient if we solve first the question `To whom?' it arises and then all questions are solved.
N. N: The doubts arise in my mind and to me. The books
say that I must know myself and learn my own nature. But how is this to be done?
M: Seek your source. Find out whence the thought I
springs.
N.N: How is that to be done? I don't find that easy.
M: Do we not see things and know them clearly? But what
object can we be surer of and know more certainly than our Self? This is direct experience and cannot be further described.
N.N: If we cannot see the Self, what is to be done?
M: Strenuous endeavour to know the Self. Develop the
antarmukham or introspective attitude. Constantly put before your mind the query "What am I?" and in time you will be able to see your Self. How can you see your Self? You can see that which you have not seen before. But as to what you are always experiencing, there is no drishti (vision), strictly speaking. By drishti, the removal of the hindrance, viz., the idea that you are not seeing the Self, is meant.
N.N: It is said there are trimurtis (three aspects of God)
and that Vishnu is in Vaikunthalokam (a heavenly region). Is that a real world, real like this world, or is it only a fiction?
M: If you and others and this world are real, why are
Mahavishnu and Vaikuntha unreal? So long as you consider this reality, that also is reality.
N.N: I am not referring to the Advaita state or truth that
Brahman [?] alone is real and all else is fiction (mithya). But I am
Page 24
trying to find out if, in vyavahara (empirical) stage, accepting the standards for truth that we have here, Vaikuntha is true. Trikalabadhyam satyam (true in all three states) is not the standard I take. In vyavahara, this body exists now and though it may not be found at other times, it is satyam or true in one sense. In that sense, is Vaikuntha true? Does it exist?
M: Why not?
N.N: Are Mahavishnu, Siva, etc., then included among
jivakoties?
M: There are jivas and Iswara. Jivas are not the only
beings known.
N.N: Is there pralaya (dissolution) for Mahavishnu, etc.,
and do these trimurtis also meet with their end? Or are they eternal? Do they exist with a body, like this panchabhutika (made of the five elements) body of ours? Have they a vyavaharika satyatwam (empirical reality)?
M: Instead of pursuing the inquiry in that direction, why
don't you turn attention on yourself? To whom does the notion of Vaikuntha and Vishnu arise?
N.N: Is Mahavishnu or Vaikuntha a mere notion or idea?
M: Everything to you is a notion. Nothing appears to you
except through the mind and as its notions.
N.N: Then Vishnu and Vaikuntha are creatures of my
imagination and pure fiction? They have no more reality than the snake fancied in the rope or sasa-vishanam, the hare's horn?
M: No. When you consider your body and life and other
things as real, how can you treat Mahavishnu or Iswara as unreal? if you are real, he is real, too.
N.N: It is not about reality in that sense that I am asking.
Sasa-vishanam, for example, never exists. None has seen it. It is a case of atyantika abhavam (absolute nonexistence), whereas this body is felt and exists at least as an object of sense experienced for the present. There is a difference between the
Page 25
two sorts of abhavam. Can it be said that Vaikuntha is as unreal as sasa-vishanam, the hare's horn?
M: No. Just as you experience this world and this body
and say it is true, there are others who have experienced Vaikuntha, the Vishnulokam, and say that is true. Why call that alone unreal, while you talk of your sense experience as real?
N.N: Then Vaikuntha must exist somewhere. Where is
it?
M: It is in you.
N.N: Then it is only my idea, what I can create and control?
M: Everything is like that — your idea.
N.N: That is coming back to the Advaitic idea. But what I
wish to know, is there a separate person like ourselves who is phaladata, the rewarder of virtue and the punisher of sins?
M: Yes.
N.N: Has he an end? Does he get dissolved in pralaya? M: Pralaya is for the soul held by maya [?]. If you can, with
all your defects and limitations, rise by jnana [?] into realisation of the Self, and above all pralaya and samsara, is it not reasonable to expect that Iswara, who is infinitely more intelligent than you, is above and beyond pralaya?
N.N: I have my doubts yet.
M: He who has doubts will go on doubting up to the end
of the world.
N.N: No. I am anxious to get rid of that doubt and
request you to remove my doubts begotten of ignorance. Pray, enlighten me.
M: Enlighten yourself by realising your Self.
N.N: That I am unable to do. In spite of my desire to
shake off all doubts, they cling to me. That is why I seek help. My present doubts about the reality of the existence of other worlds have been long with me. Are devas and pisachas true?
M: Yes.
Page 26
I I I
THIS IS A conversation between the Maharshi and Bezwada Sundararama Reddi from the Nellore district. It took place on the morning of 23-2-30.
Bezwada: What to do to get moksha? Maharshi: Learn what moksha [?] is. B: Should I not leave wife and family?
M: What harm do they do? First find out what you are.
B: Should not one give up wife, home, wealth, etc.?
M: Well, first learn what samsara is. Is all that samsara? Are
there not people who live in their midst and get realization?
B: What steps should I take as sadhana? M: That depends on your qualifications and stage.
B: I am going on with vigraharadhana (worship of a form
of God).
M: Go on. That leads to chitta ekagrata (one-pointedness).
Get one-pointed. All will come right. People fancy moksha is somewhere and has to be searched for after kicking out samsara. Moksha is knowing yourself within yourself. Keep on to a single thought. You will progress. Your mind itself is samsara.
B: My mind is being too much tossed. What to do?
M: Fix yourself to one thing and try to hold on to it. All
will come right.
B: I find concentration difficult.
M: Go on practising. Your concentration must come as
easy as your breathing. That would be the crown of achievement.
B: Brahmacharya, sattvic ahara, etc., are all helpful, are
they not?
M: Yes, all that is good. Then Maharshi is silent, gazing at vacancy and
setting an example to the questioner for him to imitate and follow immediately.
Page 27
B: Do I not require yoga?
M: What is that but concentration?
B: To help in that, is it not better to have aids?
M: Breath regulation, etc., are of much help.
B: Is it not possible to get a sight of God?
M: Yes. You see this and that. Why not see God? Only you
must know what God is. All are seeing God always. Only they don't realize it. Find out what God is. People see and yet they don't see, because they don't know God.
B: Should I not go on with kirtan, nama japa, etc., when I
worship?
M: Yes. Manasa japa (mental repetition) is very good. That
helps with dhyana [?]. The mind gets identified with that japa and then you know what real puja is — the losing of one's individuality in that which is worshipped or revered.
B: Is Paramatma always different from us?
M: The difference is the view a man has now. But by
thinking of him as not different, you achieve identity.
B: That is Advaita, is it not? Becoming oneself.
M: Where is becoming? The thinker is all the while the
same as the Real. He ultimately realizes that fact. Sometimes we forget our identity, i.e., as waking individual self. In sleep Bhagavan is perpetual consciousness.
B: Is not the Guru's guidance needed in addition to
idol worship?
M: How did you start without advice?
B: From puranas, etc.
M: Yes. Someone tells you, or Bhagavan himself, in which
latter case He (God) is your Guru. What matters it who the Guru is? We really are one with the Guru and Bhagavan. The Guru is really Bhagavan. We discover that in the end. There is no difference between them. "Guru is God" is the idea.
B: If we have some merit the search will not leave us.
Page 28
M: Yes. You will keep your effort that way.
B: Will not a cleverer man be a great help in pointing out
the way?
M: Yes, but if you go on working with available light you
will meet your Guru, as he will be seeking you himself.
B: Is there a difference between prapatti (surrender) and
the yoga of the rishis?
M: Jnana marga and bhakti [?] or prapatti advocated by Sri
Aurobindo are the same. The goal is the same. Self-surrender leads to it like enquiry. Complete self-surrender means you have no further thought of `I'. That is what bhakti [?] leads to, and also jnana [?]. Then all your samskaras are washed off and you are free. You should not continue as a separate entity at the end of either course.
B: Don't we attain swarga (heavenly regions) as a fruit of
our actions?
M: Why? That is as true as our present existence in this
world. But, if we enquire what we are and discover the Self, what need is there to think of swarga, etc.?
B: Should I not try to escape from birth and death?
M: Yes. Find out who is born, and who has the trouble of
existence now. When you are asleep do you think of birth and trouble, etc.? You think of it now. So find out whence this trouble arose and you have the solution. You discover none is born. There is no birth, no trouble, no unhappiness in fact. Everything is That. All is bliss. We are then freed from rebirth in truth. Why feel misery?
B: Chaitanya and Ramakrishna wept before God and
achieved success.
M: Yes. They had a powerful shakti drawing them through
those experiences. Entrust yourself to that power to take you on to your goal. Tears are often referred to as a sign of weakness. We cannot attribute weakness to these great ones. These symptoms are passing manifestations while the great current is carrying them on. Let us look to the end achieved.
Page 29
B: Can this physical body be made to disappear into
nothingness?
M: Why this query? Why not find out if you are this body?
B: Can't we appear and disappear like Viswamitra and other
rishis?
M: These are debates about physical matters. Is that our
essential object of interest? Are you not the Atman? Why think about other matters? Seek the essence. Reject other disquisitions as useless. Those who believe that moksha [?] consists in disappearance err. No such thing is needed. You are not the body. What matters it how the body disappears — in one way or another. There is no merit in disappearance of body in one way over the other. Everything is one. Where is superiority or inferiority in the one? See Chap. XIV of Ramana Gita. The loss of the `I' is the central fact — and not of the body. It is the dehatma buddhi (the idea that I am the body) that is your bondage. It is the discarding of it and perceiving the Real that matters. Should you pound to pieces something golden before seeing it is gold? What matters if it is round or powdered when you perceive the truth of its being gold? The dying man does not see this body. It is the other man who thinks about the manner in which the body dies. The realized have no death. Whether the body is active or drops off, he is equally conscious and sees no difference. To him nothing is superior to the other. To an outsider also, the manner of disappearance of a mukta's body is unimportant. Mind your own realisation and after that it will be time enough to see which form of death is preferable!
Are you the body? During night, when you are fast asleep
have you body consciousness?
B: No.
M: What exists always, is the `I'.
Page 30
THIS IS A conversation between the Maharshi and Bezwada Sundararama Reddi from the Nellore district. It took place on the morning of 23-2-30.
Bezwada: What to do to get moksha? Maharshi: Learn what moksha [?] is. B: Should I not leave wife and family?
M: What harm do they do? First find out what you are.
B: Should not one give up wife, home, wealth, etc.?
M: Well, first learn what samsara is. Is all that samsara? Are
there not people who live in their midst and get realization?
B: What steps should I take as sadhana? M: That depends on your qualifications and stage.
B: I am going on with vigraharadhana (worship of a form
of God).
M: Go on. That leads to chitta ekagrata (one-pointedness).
Get one-pointed. All will come right. People fancy moksha is somewhere and has to be searched for after kicking out samsara. Moksha is knowing yourself within yourself. Keep on to a single thought. You will progress. Your mind itself is samsara.
B: My mind is being too much tossed. What to do?
M: Fix yourself to one thing and try to hold on to it. All
will come right.
B: I find concentration difficult.
M: Go on practising. Your concentration must come as
easy as your breathing. That would be the crown of achievement.
B: Brahmacharya, sattvic ahara, etc., are all helpful, are
they not?
M: Yes, all that is good. Then Maharshi is silent, gazing at vacancy and
setting an example to the questioner for him to imitate and follow immediately.
Page 27
B: Do I not require yoga?
M: What is that but concentration?
B: To help in that, is it not better to have aids?
M: Breath regulation, etc., are of much help.
B: Is it not possible to get a sight of God?
M: Yes. You see this and that. Why not see God? Only you
must know what God is. All are seeing God always. Only they don't realize it. Find out what God is. People see and yet they don't see, because they don't know God.
B: Should I not go on with kirtan, nama japa, etc., when I
worship?
M: Yes. Manasa japa (mental repetition) is very good. That
helps with dhyana [?]. The mind gets identified with that japa and then you know what real puja is — the losing of one's individuality in that which is worshipped or revered.
B: Is Paramatma always different from us?
M: The difference is the view a man has now. But by
thinking of him as not different, you achieve identity.
B: That is Advaita, is it not? Becoming oneself.
M: Where is becoming? The thinker is all the while the
same as the Real. He ultimately realizes that fact. Sometimes we forget our identity, i.e., as waking individual self. In sleep Bhagavan is perpetual consciousness.
B: Is not the Guru's guidance needed in addition to
idol worship?
M: How did you start without advice?
B: From puranas, etc.
M: Yes. Someone tells you, or Bhagavan himself, in which
latter case He (God) is your Guru. What matters it who the Guru is? We really are one with the Guru and Bhagavan. The Guru is really Bhagavan. We discover that in the end. There is no difference between them. "Guru is God" is the idea.
B: If we have some merit the search will not leave us.
Page 28
M: Yes. You will keep your effort that way.
B: Will not a cleverer man be a great help in pointing out
the way?
M: Yes, but if you go on working with available light you
will meet your Guru, as he will be seeking you himself.
B: Is there a difference between prapatti (surrender) and
the yoga of the rishis?
M: Jnana marga and bhakti [?] or prapatti advocated by Sri
Aurobindo are the same. The goal is the same. Self-surrender leads to it like enquiry. Complete self-surrender means you have no further thought of `I'. That is what bhakti [?] leads to, and also jnana [?]. Then all your samskaras are washed off and you are free. You should not continue as a separate entity at the end of either course.
B: Don't we attain swarga (heavenly regions) as a fruit of
our actions?
M: Why? That is as true as our present existence in this
world. But, if we enquire what we are and discover the Self, what need is there to think of swarga, etc.?
B: Should I not try to escape from birth and death?
M: Yes. Find out who is born, and who has the trouble of
existence now. When you are asleep do you think of birth and trouble, etc.? You think of it now. So find out whence this trouble arose and you have the solution. You discover none is born. There is no birth, no trouble, no unhappiness in fact. Everything is That. All is bliss. We are then freed from rebirth in truth. Why feel misery?
B: Chaitanya and Ramakrishna wept before God and
achieved success.
M: Yes. They had a powerful shakti drawing them through
those experiences. Entrust yourself to that power to take you on to your goal. Tears are often referred to as a sign of weakness. We cannot attribute weakness to these great ones. These symptoms are passing manifestations while the great current is carrying them on. Let us look to the end achieved.
Page 29
B: Can this physical body be made to disappear into
nothingness?
M: Why this query? Why not find out if you are this body?
B: Can't we appear and disappear like Viswamitra and other
rishis?
M: These are debates about physical matters. Is that our
essential object of interest? Are you not the Atman? Why think about other matters? Seek the essence. Reject other disquisitions as useless. Those who believe that moksha [?] consists in disappearance err. No such thing is needed. You are not the body. What matters it how the body disappears — in one way or another. There is no merit in disappearance of body in one way over the other. Everything is one. Where is superiority or inferiority in the one? See Chap. XIV of Ramana Gita. The loss of the `I' is the central fact — and not of the body. It is the dehatma buddhi (the idea that I am the body) that is your bondage. It is the discarding of it and perceiving the Real that matters. Should you pound to pieces something golden before seeing it is gold? What matters if it is round or powdered when you perceive the truth of its being gold? The dying man does not see this body. It is the other man who thinks about the manner in which the body dies. The realized have no death. Whether the body is active or drops off, he is equally conscious and sees no difference. To him nothing is superior to the other. To an outsider also, the manner of disappearance of a mukta's body is unimportant. Mind your own realisation and after that it will be time enough to see which form of death is preferable!
Are you the body? During night, when you are fast asleep
have you body consciousness?
B: No.
M: What exists always, is the `I'.
Page 30