OUR NATURAL STATE
A `Pilgrim'
The author of this article is unknown but the incidentmust have taken place some time after 1946 when the answer
to D.S. Sarma's question was first printed. The quotation
was first printed in Vedanta Kesari in January 1947 (Vol.
33, No. 9, P. 327)
I WAS ON MY long cherished pilgrimage to Bhagavan Sri
Ramana. On the train I was chewing the cud of doubt. In
the December and January issues of the Vedanta Kesari, I had
read the answer Maharshi gave to the question put to him by
Prof. D.S. Sarma as to whether there was a sadhana [?]period in
the life of Sri Bhagavan previous to his enlightenment. Sri Dilip
Kumar Roy had put the answer in a poetical garb under the
caption, "My yoga" and Prof. Sarma had given his question
and Maharshi's answer under the title, `Sahajasthithi'. I reproduce
below the answer of Sri Bhagavan,
"I know no such period of sadhana. I never performed
any pranayama [?] or japa. I know no mantras. I had no rules of
meditation or contemplation. Sadhana implies an object to be
gained and the means of gaining it. What is there to be gained
which we do not already possess? In meditation, concentration
and contemplation what we have to do is only not think of
anything but to be still. Then we shall be in our natural state."
Page 70
This indeed was an intriguing situation for me. I had read
in the `Life and Teachings of Sri Ramana' of the severe sadhana [?]
he did in the lonely rooms of the big temple at Tiruvannamalai
and in the caves on the hill. Now here is Bhagavan himself
denying it all! And more than that, how can illumination come
without sadhana [?]? That was something against the word of the
scriptures. However, I consoled myself with the thought that at
the Ashram, I might have the chance of placing my difficulties
before Sri Maharshi himself.
It was one of those beautiful mornings in Tiruvannamalai.
After my daily ablutions and duties I was ready for the darshan
of Bhagavan. As I approached the Maharshi's room I could feel
the peace that was radiating from his room. I entered the room
and then came my first shock. I expected to see something
glorious, a face surrounded by a halo, etc. I didn't find any of
these. Has he not said, I was reminded, in his answer that Self-
realisation does not mean that something would descend upon
us as something glorious? Has he not said, "People seem to think
that by practising some elaborate sadhana [?] the Self would one
day descend upon them as something very big and with
tremendous glory and they would then have what is called
sakshatkaram."
None of the biographies state that Bhagavan did any
sadhana [?] after coming to Tiruvannamalai. I might have
interpreted Bhagavan's period of silence and solitude as a period
of sadhana, although it has been clearly stated both by Bhagavan
and the writers who have written about him, that no sadhana [?]
was taking place during this period.
That winning smile that accompanied his greeting me
meant more than Self-realisation. He beckoned to me to sit
down and I sat there for more than two hours not knowing
Page 71
the passage of time. I realised then that silence is more eloquent
than words. I dared not break the silence to raise my own petty
doubts.
Later, though, I communicated my wish to place my doubts
before the Maharshi and the consent came by midday.
When we reassembled before Sri Bhagavan at three, I was
given the typescript of the question and answer to read and I
read it aloud. I had framed my question thus:
Question: "You have said here that you know no such
period of sadhana; you never performed japa or chanted any
mantra; you were in your natural state. I have not done any
sadhana [?] worth the name. Can I say that I am in my natural
state? But my natural state is so different from yours. Does that
mean that the natural state of ordinary persons and realised
persons are different?"
Answer: "What you think to be your natural state is your
unnatural state. (And this was my second shock that shook me
from the slumber of my pet notions). With your intellect and
imagination you have constructed the castles of your pet notions
and desires. But do you know who has built up these castles,
who is the culprit, the real owner? The `I' who really owns them
and the `I' of your conception are quite different. Is it necessary
that you put forth some effort to come into the `I' who owns
these, the `I' behind all states?"
"Would you have to walk any distance to walk into the `I'
that is always you? This is what I mean by saying that no sadhana [?]
is required for Self-realisation. All that is required is to refrain
from doing anything, by remaining still and being simply what
one really is. You have only to dehypnotise yourself of your
unnatural state. Then you have asked whether there is any
difference between the natural state of ordinary persons and
Page 72
realised persons. What have they realised? They can realise only
what is real in them. What is real in them is real in you also. So
where is the difference?"
"Even then, some may ask", the Maharshi continued,
reminding me so vividly of those Upanishadic rishis, "where is
the conviction that one's Self is sakshat all right, that no sadhana [?]
is required at all for Self-realisation? Well, do you need anybody
to come and convince you that you are seated before me and
talking to me? You know for certain that you are seated here
and talking to me."
"When we read a book, for instance, we read the letters
on the page. But can we say that we are reading only the letters?
Without the page of the book where are the letters. Again we
say that we are seeing the picture projected on a canvas. No
doubt we are seeing the picture, but without the canvas where is
the picture?"
"You can doubt and question everything but how can you
doubt the `I' that questions everything. That `I' is your natural
state. Would you have to labour or do sadhana [?]to come into
this natural state?"
Page 73