Sat-darshana Bhashya (translation)

FOREWORD

The "Talks with Sri Maharshi” are mainly selected from conversations that D has had with him since 1912. Some of these were later incorporated into the Ramana Geeta and one or two booklets. These talks are given with a view to introduce the general reader to the main work, the philosophy of Sat-Darshana. The conversations with Sri Maharshi have been generally in Tamil, intermixed with a few English and Sanskrit words. We do not say ’you’ in talking to him, nor does he refer to himself as ’I.’ They are used here for the purpose of the English version. The name of D is not mentioned as it is considered unnecessary for the importance of the subject.

The translation of the Sat-Darshana slokas is in free verse. The English rendering of the Bhoomika (introduction) as well as the Bhashya (commentary in Sanskrit) is faithful to the spirit of the original. But in some places it is interpretative and amplified in order to make the English appear not a translation but a work readable without reference to the Sanskrit original. The English translation of the commentary on the 44th, the last verse, is not given as the one important subject dealt with therein, namely, the higher value of the revealed word or scripture is to be found substantially in the closing pages of the Bhoomika.

The rules of transliteration of Sanskrit words in Roman script had to be overlooked because of printing inconvenience; but wherever a Sanskrit word occurs it is preceded by its English equivalent.

In the closing part of the book is printed the original Tamil உள்ளது நாற்பது (Ulladu Narpadu) of Sri Maharshi, of which Sat-Darshana is the Sanskrit version, in order to be of use to the Tamil knowing reader.
K.

SHRI MAHARSHI

Let us open the "Talks with prayer to the Divine Lord, Arunachala, (the glowing Peak of Light) hymned by the great seer⁸²

“Cast Thy glance, fix Thine attention, give the touch, ripen me for the Grace of Thy Rule.”

"To be silent like a stone without blossoming, —can it be Silence true, my Lord ?”

"I thought of Thee and was caught in Thy grace; and like the spider in his web, didst Thou keep me captive to take me in at Thine hour.”

“Like the bee Thou stoodest face to face uttering: Ah, you are not yet opened into blossom.”

“Take me in union; or in the river of tears must I perish with body melted into water."

"Speechless Thou didst utter ’stay there mute’ and Silence Thou wert."

In the Heart is the Conscious Light, the one Real; That art Thou.

Not apart from Thee is there a marvellous Power.

Of this, an Atom, prolific of shade-with awareness endued,

Itself in the whirl of the unceasing present, is formed in the mirror of its own Thought-light.

Thus the Atom’s image is the wondrous world within;

And so is the outer world of senses.

O, Hill of Grace on Thee the canvas, yet not separate from Thee,

Falls and glides the moving shade through mind the lens; but unmoved Thou art there."⁸³

INITIAL DOUBTS

Devotee You say one can realise the Self by a search of it. What is the character of this search?

Maharshi — You are the mind or think that you are the mind. The mind is nothing but thoughts. Now behind every particular thought there is a general thought which is the “I”, that is your Self. Let us call this “I” the first thought. Stick to this I-thought and question it to find out what it is. When this question takes strong hold on you, you cannot think of other thoughts.

D. When I do like this and cling to my Self i.e., the I-thought, other thoughts do come and go, but I say to myself ’Who am I?’ and there is no answer forthcoming. To be in this condition is the sadhana or practice of atma-nistha, the exalted state of the Self. Is it so?

M. —This is a mistake that people often make. What happens when you make a serious quest for the Self is that the Ithought as a thought disappears, something else from the depths takes hold of you and that is not the ’I’ which commenced the quest.

D. What is this something else?

M. – That is the real Self, the import of I. It is not the ego. It is the Supreme Being itself.

REJECTION OF THOUGHTS

D. But you have often said that one must reject other thoughts when he begins the quest, but the thoughts are endless; if one thought is rejected, another comes and there seems to be no end at all.

M. – I do not say that you must go on rejecting thoughts. If you cling to yourself, say the I-thought, and when your interest keeps you to that single idea, other thoughts get rejected, automatically they vanish.

D. -And so rejection of thoughts is not necessary.

M. No. It may be necessary for a time or for some. You fancy that there is no end if one goes on rejecting every thought when it rises. No. There is an end. If you are vigilant and make a stern effort to reject every thought when it rises, you will soon find that you are going deeper and deeper into thine own inner Self, where there is no need for your effort to reject the thoughts.

D. — Then it is possible to be without effort, without strain!

M. Not only that, it is impossible for you to make an effort beyond a certain extent.

D. --I want to be further enlightened. Is it that I should try to make no effort at all?

M. -Here it is impossible for you to be without effort. When you go deeper, it is impossible for you to make any effort.

VICHARA AND THE GRACE

D. Then I can dispense with outside help and by mine own effort get into the deeper truth of myself.

M. True. But the very fact you are possessed of the quest of the Self is a manifestation of the Divine Grace, FG. It is effulgent in the Heart, the inner being, the Real Self. It draws you from within to get in. You have to attempt to get in from without. Your attempt is vicara, the deep inner movement is Grace, *9166it. That is why I say there is no real vicara without Grace, nor is there Grace active for him who is without vicara. Both are necessary.

THE SAD-GURU

D. -You have elsewhere stated that without the grace of the sad-guru one cannot get at the Self. How do you mean? What is this Guru ?

M. -From the standpoint of the path of knowledge it is the supreme state of the Self, which is the sad-guru. It is different from the ego-self, what you call yourself.

D. Then if it is the supreme state of my own self, how do you mean that I can’t get at it without the grace of the sad-guru?

M. -The ego-self is the jiva. It is different from the Lord of all, sarvesvara. When through disinterested devotion the jiva approaches the Lord, the gracious Lord assumes name and form and takes the jiva into himself. ....... Therefore, they say the Guru is none other than the Lord. He is a human embodiment of the Divine Grace, *2(66T 250LD “ज्ञानित्वात्मैव मे मतम् ” says the Gita. The real Guru is God himself. What doubt is there?

D. But there are some who seem to have had no human guru at all.

M. True. In the case of certain great souls God reveals Himself as the Light of their light, from within.

D. Then what is true bhakti ?

M. --Whatever I do or consider myself doing is really the Lord’s doing. Nothing really belongs to me. I am here for the service of the Lord. This spirit of service really is परमभक्ति * 9MM Um 15 mo..........and the true devotee sees the Supreme Being as the Lord immanent in everything. Worship of Him by name and form leads one beyond all name and form. Devotion complete culminates in knowledge supreme.

Even when bhakti, devotion, is actuated by worldly desires in the beginning, it does not cease when the desires are fulfilled. It increases by an unshakable faith growing perfect into a supreme state of realization.

D. — Then what is the path of jnana ?

M. – One becomes stripped of the ego and naturally settles himself in a supreme self-awareness.

D. How can we say that both bhakti and jnana lead to the same goal ?

M. Why not? Both the paths lead you to a state of supreme Peace, maunam, that passeth all understanding.

Note. [All must accept that there is a Lord of all the jivas. It quite fits in with truth to take it this way if one is serious to make haste to get into what is called the sayujya state, the state of conscious union. c. f., Instructions to Natananand Swami.]

THE SELF WITHIN WAITS FOR YOU

D. -You often say, ’the whole world exists not without you, ’everything depends upon you’, ’what is there without you’? etc. This is really baffling. The world was there before my birth. It will be there after my death even as it has survived the deaths of so many who once lived as I am living now.

M. — Did I ever say that the world is there because of you? But I have put to you the question ’what is there without thy self’? You have to know that by the self, the body, subtle or gross, was not meant.

Besides, the idea is put to you that if you once know the Self in which all the ideas move, not excluding the idea of yourself, of others like yourself and of the world, you can realise the truth that there is a Reality, a supreme Truth which is the Self of all the world you now see, the Self of all the selves, the one Real, which is the parama atman, the supreme Eternal as distinguished from the jiva, the ego-self which is impermanent. You shall not mistake the ego-self or the bodily idea for the atman.

D. — Then you mean the atman is God?

M. – You see the difficulty. The vicara ’to know thy self’ is different in method from the meditation "sivo’ ham" or "so’ ham" “Lord Shiva I am” or “He I am". I rather lay stress upon self-knowledge, for, you are first concerned with your Self before you proceed to know the world and its Lord. The "so’ ham” meditation or ’I am Brahman’ meditation is more or less a mental thought. But the quest for the Self I speak of is a direct method, indeed superior to the other meditation; for, the movement you, get into a movement of quest for the Self and go deeper and deeper, the real Self is waiting there to take you in and then whatever is done, is done by something else and you have no hand in it. In this process all doubts and discussions are automatically given up just as one forgets for the time all his cares when he gets to sleep.

D. What certainty is there that something else waits there to welcome me?

M. When one is sufficiently developed, pakva, he naturally gets the conviction.

D. How is this development possible?

M. Various answers are given. But whatever the previous development, vicara, earnest quest, quickens the development.

D. — It is arguing in a circle. I am developed and so am strong for the quest. The quest itself gives me development.

M. — The mind has always this sort of difficulty. It wants a certain theory to satisfy itself. Really no theory is necessary for the man who seriously desires to approach God or realise his own true being.

Various means are enjoined in the sastras .......... It is true that contact with great men, exalted souls, is one effective means.

सहवासेन महतां सतामरूढ चेतसाम् ।। (Ramana Gita VI: 1 )

VICARA NOT INTELLECTUAL, IS INWARD AND SUBTLE

D. If I go on rejecting thoughts can I call it vicara?

M. It may be a stepping stone. But really vicara begins when you cling to your self and are already off the mental movement the thought-waves.

D. Then vicara is not intellectual ?

M. No, it is antara vicara, inner quest.

D. -That is dhyana ?

M. – To stick to a position unassailed by thoughts is abhyasa or sadhana, you are watchful. But the condition grows intenser and deeper when your effort and all responsibilities are taken away from you; that is arudha, siddhi state.

JNANA SIDDHI, NO INACTIVITY

D. — Can a man move about, act, and speak, who has attained the siddhi as is now described ?

M. — Why not? Do you mean to say that realisation of Self means to be like a stone or to become nothing ?

D. I do not know, but they say to withdraw from all sense activity, from all thoughts, all life-experiences i.e., to cease to be active, that is the highest state.

M. If so, what is the difference between this state and deep sleep? Besides if it is a state, however exalted it be, that appears and disappears and therefore, not natural and normal to the self, how can that represent the eternal presence of the supreme Self, which persists in all states and indeed survives them? It is true that there is such a state indispensable in the case of some. It is a temporary phase of the sadhana or a state that persists to the end of the life if that be the Divine will or the prarabdha. In any case you can’t call it the highest state. Great men, muktas, siddhas are said to have been very active and are indeed active; why, Ishwara, the Spirit who presides over this world directing activities is obviously not in this supremely inactive state. Then you will have to say God as well as the muktapurusas have not attained the highest state.

D. -. But you have always laid great stress on maunam silence..

M. Yes. I do. But silence does not mean negation of activity or a stagnant inertness. It is not a mere negation of thoughts but something very positive more than you can imagine.

D. If it is unthinkable, ..

M. Yes. As long as you run with the running mind you cannot have it. The silence of the Self is ever there. It is a supreme Peace, maunam, immutable like a rock that supports all your activities, in fact, all movements. It is in this maunam that God and the muktapurusas are rooted.

SAMADHI, NIRVIKALPA AND SAHAJA, TRANCE AND NATURAL

D. --Then what is samadhi ?

M. In yoga the term samodhi refers to some kind of trance and there are various kinds of samadhi. But the samadhi I speak to you of, is different. It is sahaja samadhi. For, here you have samadhana, you remain calm and composed even while you are active; you realise that you are moved by the deeper and the Real Self within and you do or think unaffected by what you do, speak or think. You have no worries, no anxieties, no cares. For here you come to realise that there is nothing belonging to you, the ego. And everything is done by Something with which you get into conscious union.

D.-If this is sahaja-samadhi and the most desirable condition there is no need for nirvikal pa samadhi?

M. The nirvikal pa samadhi of Raja-yoga may, have its use. But in jnana this sahaja sthiti, or sahaja nista itself is nirvikalpa state. For in this state the mind is free from doubts. It has no need to swing between alternatives of possibilities and probabilities. It has no vikalpa of any kind. It is sure of the Truth. It feels the presence of the Real. Even when it is active, it knows it is active in the Reality, the Self, the Supreme Being.

IS BRAHMAN BEYOND?

D. This seems to contradict the statements that the Self is beyond the mind, that the mind cannot know Brahman, that it is beyond thought and speech, avan-manasa-gocara.

M. That is why they say that mind is twofold; there is the higher and pure mind as well as the lower and impure mind. The impure mind can’t know but the pure mind does. It does not mean that the pure mind measures the immeasurable Self, the Brahman. It means the Self makes itself felt in the pure mind so that even when you are in the midst of thoughts you feel the Presence, you realise the truth that you are one with the deeper self and these thought-waves are there only on the surface.

D. That means the mano nasa or the ahankara nasa, the destruction of the mind or of the ego you speak of is not an absolute destruction.

M. It means the mind gets clear of impurities and becomes pure enough to reflect the truth, the real Self. This is impossible when the ego is assertive and active.

I HAVE A RETIRING ABODE IN THE BODY

D. — Whenever a question is put to you, you say “Know first who it is to whom the doubt occurs." "Does anybody doubt the doubter ?” “Know thyself before you proceed to speak of others” etc. This is a veritable brahmastra, a supreme weapon at your hands to deal with the questioner and I, ....

M.-Yes. What are you driving at?

D. You will be pleased to come to our level and remove our doubts. You can understand our position. We cannot yours. You are far above and we are far below. So if you care you can come to us, we can’t go up to you.

M. – What do you want?

D. — They say the Self is everywhere; Brahman is omnipresent. It is beyond and it is also the Self. If my self is Brahman, I should be everywhere. But there is the feeling that I am in this body or confined to this body; even if I am distinct from the body I am inseparable from it. Even so, I am inseparable from the mind, even the ’I’ seems a part of the mind. Where is the mind without the brains ? Surely, I cannot imagine that I can be without the mind or the brains which is a part of this body.

M. You have finished. Doubts never end. If one doubt is removed another takes its place. It is like removing the leaves of a tree one by one. Even if all the leaves are clipped off, new ones grow. The tree itself must be uprooted.

D. — What is to be done? Is it wrong to think and have doubts?

M. No. The only sure remedy is to know him who gets the doubt. No one doubts the doubter...

D. This is what I feared. I am gagged....

M. — No. I am coming. Suppose I give you an answer, would it set at rest all your doubts?........you said you are the body, the mind and so on. What is this mind, which, you say, is your self? You say, it is all thoughts including the so many faculties...... The “I” is a part of the mind. The mind is a part of the body, is it not?

D. — I don’t say it is the Truth; but I feel like that.

M. — Yes, then let us proceed from there. You are the mind. The mind is either located in the brains or identical with it. You concede it is located in the brains. At the same time you said you are distinct from it though not separate from it. Is it not? Then let us locate in the body all our thoughts, emotions, passions, desires, attachments, impulses, instincts, in short, all that we are, feel, think and know. Where would you locate the “I” whether the “I” is an idea, thought or feeling ?

D. — Feelings, emotions, etc., are all located, that is, said to arise in the trunk of the body, in the nervous system; but the mind seated in the brains is aware of them. They call it reflex action.

M. So if you take the “I” as a part of the mind, you would locate it in the brains. But I tell you this "I” is a part indeed but a very radical part of the mind, feeling itself as distinct from the mind and using it.

D.-I concede.

M. — Then this "I" is a radical thought, an intimate feeling, a self-evident experience, an awareness that persists even in deep sleep when the mind is not active as in the waking state. According to yourself then, “I” the radical part must have a locus in the body.

D. Where is it?

M. — You have to find it out yourself. But you can’t find it by dissection of the body.

D. -Then how? By a dissection of the mind ?

M. Yes, as you are the mind, you have to dissect yourself where you (the "I") are. That is why I say, “know thyself.”

D. — But is there really a centre, a place for this "I”?

M. There is. It is the centre of the Self to which the mind in sleep retires from its activity in the brains. It is the Heart, different from the blood vessel, nor is it the anahata cakra in the middle of the chest, one of the six centres spoken of in books on Yoga.

D. Then where is it? I shall know it later. If there is in the body a centre of the self like that, why should they say that brahman is atman, it is all pervasive and so on?

M.-First confine to the Self which is located in the body and find it out. Then you can think of Brahman, the All-Presence.

WHAT IS MYSELF NOW?

D. -I want to know, what the Heart is and where it is and all that. But I want to have this doubt cleared first. I am ignorant of mine own truth, my knowledge is growing, limited, imperfect. You say “I” means the self, atman. But the atman is said to be always self-aware whereas I am unaware....

M. People always allow this confusion. What you call your self now is not exactly the real Self which is neither born nor dies.

D. — Then you admit that what I call my self is the body or part of this body?

M. --But the body is matter jada, it never knows, it is always the known.

D. — Then if I am neither the atman, the self nor the anatman, the not-self,........

M. I am coming. Between spirit and matter the self and body, there is born something which is called the ahamkara, the ego-self, jiva, the living being. Now what you call your self is this ego-self which is different from the ever-conscious Self and the unconscious matter but which at the same time partakes of the character of both spirit and matter, joda and cetana.

D. -Then when you say “know thyself” you want me to know this ego-self?

M. But the moment the ego-self tries to know itself, it changes its character; it begins to partake less and less of the jada, in which it is absorbed and more and more of the Consciousness of the real Self, the atman.

THE SECRET LOCUS OF THE SELF

D. — Then whom do you address when you say ’know thyself’?

M. To whatever you are; to you is given the suggestion ‘know thyself’. The ego-self when it feels the necessity to know its own origin or impelled to rise above itself, takes the suggestion and goes deeper and there discovers the true source and reality of itself. So the ego-self beginning to know itself ends in perceiving its Self.

D. Now, you were telling me that the Heart is the centre of the Self.

M. Yes, it is the one supreme centre of the Self. You need have no doubt about it. Only the Real Self is there in the Heart behind the jiva the ego-self.

D. Now will you be pleased to tell me where it is?

M. You cannot know it with your mind. You cannot realise it by imagination, when I tell you here is the centre (pointing to the right side of the chest). The only direct way to realise it is to cease to fancy and try to be yourself. Then you realise, automatically feel that the centre is there.

This is the centre, the Heart spoken of in the scriptures as hrt-guha, cavity of the Heart, *2. Girou, Ullam.

D. -In no book have I found it stated that it is there.

M. Long after I came here I came across a verse in the Malayalam version of Astangahrdayam, the standard work on Ayurveda, wherein the ojas sthana is mentioned as located in the right side of the chest and is called the seat of consciousness, samvit. But I do not know any other work.

D. — Can I be sure that the ancients meant this centre by the term ’Heart?

M. -Yes, that is the experience. But do not go on trying to locate an experience; try to have the experience. A man need not go to find out where his eyes are located when he wants to see. The Heart is there ever open to you if you care to get into it, ever supporting all your movements even while you are ignorant of it. It is perhaps more proper to say that the Self is the Heart itself than to say that it is in the Heart. Really, the Self is the Centre itself. It is everywhere aware of itself as ’Heart’ the Self-awareness. Hence I said "Heart is Thy name” हृदयं ते नाम’.

D. Has anyone else addressed the Lord this way naming him the Heart?

M. When I said so I did not know. Long after, one day, I came across a hymn in St. Appar’s Thevaram, where he mentions the Lord by the name of ullam which is the same as the Heart.

D. If you say that the Heart is the supreme centre of the purusa, the atman, you mean it is not one of the six yogic centres ?

M. The yogic chakras from the bottom to the top are various centres in the nervous system. They represent various steps manifesting different kinds of power or knowledge leading to the sahasrara the thousand-petalled lotus where is seated the supreme sakti. But the Self that supports the whole movement of sakti is not involved in it, but it supports it from the Heart-centre.

D. Then it is different from the sakti manifestation ?

M. — Really there is no sakti manifestation apart from the Self. The Self has become all this sakti.... When the yogin goes up to the highest centre in trance samadhi, it is the self in the Heart that supports that state whether he is aware of it or not. But if he is aware in the Heart, he knows that whatever states or whatever centres he is in, it is always the same truth the same Heart, the one Self, the Spirit that is present throughout, eternal and immutable. The Tantra Shastra calls the Heart suryamandala or the solar orb, and the sahasrara, candramandala or, the lunar orb. These symbols present the relative importance of the two, the ahmasthana and the sakti sthana.

REALISATION AND BODILY EXPERIENCE

D. Then what is the difference between the baddha and the mukta, the bound man and the one liberated ?

M. From the Heart, the Self-centre, there is a subtle passage leading to the sahasrara, the sakti sthana. The ordinary man lives in the brain unaware of himself in the Heart. The Jnana Siddha lives in the Heart. When he moves about and deals with men and things, he knows what he sees is not separate from the one Supreme Reality, the Brahman which he realises in the Heart as his own Self, the Real.

D. What about the ordinary man?

M. – I just said he sees things outside himself. He is separate from the world, from his own deeper truth, from the truth that supports himself and what he sees. The man that has realised the surpeme Truth of his own existence realises that it is the one supreme Reality that is there behind him, behind the world. In fact, he is aware of the One, as the Real, the Self in all selves, in all things, Eternal and Immutable, in all that is impermanent and mutable.

D. You speak in very high terms of knowledge, I began with body. Is there any difference between the jnanin and the ajnanin in bodily experience ?

M. There is. How can it otherwise be ? I have quite often repeated it.

D. Then the vedanta jnana as spoken of and discussed is perhaps one different from what is practised and realised. You often say that there is the real meaning of “I” in the Heart,.....

M.— Yes, when you go deeper you lose yourself in the abysmal depths as it were, then the Reality which is the atman that was behind you all the while takes hold of you. It is an incessant flash of I-consciousness, you can be aware of it, feel it, hear it, sense it, so to say; this is what I call ‘aham sphurti.’

D. -Then, you said the atman is immutable, self-effulgent, etc. But, if you at the same time say that there is the incessant flash of I-consciousness, this ‘aham sphurti,’ does it not imply movement, which cannot be complete realisation, in which there is no movement?

M. – What do you mean by complete realisation? Does it mean you become a stone, an inert mass ? The aham vrtti is different from aham sphurti. The former is the activity of the ego, and is bound to lose itself and make way for the latter which is an eternal expression of the Self. In Vedantic parlance this aham sphurti is called urtti jnana. Realisation or jnana is always a vrtti. There is a distinction to be understood between the vrtti jnana or Realisation and the svarupa, the Real. Svarupa is jnana itself, it is Consciousness.

Svarupa is Sat Cit, which is omnipresent. It is always there self-attained. When you realise it, the realisation is called vrtti jnana. It is only with reference to your existence, you talk of realisation or jnana. Therefore when we talk of jnana, we always mean vrtti jnana and not to the svarupa jnana for svarupa itself is jnana Consciousness always.

D. I understand it so far. But about the body? How would I feel it in the body, this vrtti jnana ?

M. — Yes. You can feel yourself as one with the one that exists; the whole body becomes a mere power, a force-current: your life becomes a needle drawn to a huge mass of magnet and as you go deeper and deeper, you become a mere centre and then, not even that, you become a mere consciousness, there are no thoughts or cares here they were shattered at the threshold, it is a big inundation; you are a mere straw, a broken reed; you are taken in, swallowed alive, but it is pleasant, very delightful, you become the very thing that takes you in; this is the union of jiva with brahman, the loss of ego in the real Self, the destruction of falsehood, the attainment of Truth.

THE MUKTA AND THE SIDDHIS

D. Hitherto I had great fear of mukti, my conception of it was very horrible till now, now I see, it is a very agreeable state. But they talk of powers, siddhis, are they possible? Are they opposed to mukti ?

M. The highest siddhi is realisation of the Self, atma-saksatkara; for, here once you realise the truth you cease to be drawn to the path of ignorance.

D. -_Then are the siddhis, .?

M. There are two kinds of siddhis; one kind may well be a stumbling block to realisation. It is said that by mantra, by some drug of occult virtues, by severe austerities or by samadhi of a certain kind powers can be acquired; but these are no means of Self-knowledge; even when you acquire them, you may well be in ignorance.

D. — What is the other kind ?

M. There are manifestations of power and knowledge quite natural to you, when you realise the Self. They are siddhis, products of the normal and natural tapas of the man who has the self-attainment. They come of their own accord, they are God-given; they come according to one’s own karma so to say, whether they come or not the Siddha of the Real, settled in the supreme peace is not worried. For, he knows the Self and that is the unshakable siddhi. But these do not come by your attempt. When you are in the state of Realisation, you will know what these powers are (cf. Ramana Gita. Ch. 11)

D. --You have said a mukta in the long run by his natural tapas, can become intangible, invisible, can assume any form ...

M. -Yes: it is the mukta that is most competent for such developments. But you can’t judge the jnanin by these developments, as these are not the signs of true knowledge, which essentially consists in possessing eye of equality samatva drsti,
ज्ञानिनः समशिनः। सर्वभूतसमत्वेन लिङ्गेन ज्ञानमूह्यताम् । cf. Ramana Gita. I:16

D. I have finished. But only this doubt.

M. What?

D. You said ’Heart’ is the one centre for the ego-self, for the Real self, for the Lord, for all.

M. Yes, the Heart is the Real’s centre. But the ego is impermanent. Like everything else it is backed by the Heartcentre. But the character of the ego is a link between spirit and matter; it is a knot, granthi, the knot of radical ignorance in which one is steeped. This granthi is there in the ’hrt the Heart. When this knot is cut asunder by proper means you find that this is the Self’s centre.

D. You said there is a passage from this centre to Sahasrara.

M. -Yes. It is closed in the man in bondage; in the man in whom the ego-knot the hrdaya granthi is cut asunder, a force-current called amrta nadi rises and goes up to the Sahasrara, the crown of the head.

D. -Is this the susumna?

M. No. This is the passage of liberation moksa. This is called atma nadi, brahma nadi or amrta nadi. This is the nadi that is referred to in the Upanishads.

शतं चैका च हृदयस्य नाड्यः तासां मूर्धानमभिनिःसृतका तयोर्ध्वमायन्न. मृतत्वमेति।

When this passage is open, you have no moha, no ignorance. You know the Truth even when you talk, think or do anything, dealing with men and things.

D. — Hearing all this I am puzzled. I do not know how can one get such great experiences by simply bearing in mind the sayings "see the Seer", "know thyself," "I am Brahman," etc.

M. It is difficult indeed, but not impossible once you are earnest about it ..... That is why they say you must have the touch of the Grace அருளும் வேணுமே. The influence of a jnanin steals into you in silence.... He need not talk.

KEEP YOUR BURDEN TO THE LORD’S TRUST

D. When I am here I am convinced; I am impressed. But when I go out and think of the society or the country and I remember your answer ’know thyself’.

M. – What can you do to society or country when you are weak? You must become strong first. But I would tell you Self-attainment is the supreme strength. Don’t have the fear that you will lose the strength to act when you become a jnanin.

D. I have that fear.

M. You need not. If you are destined or chosen to do a particular thing, it will be done.

D. — Then should I resign everything? Can I not perform tapas and ask God to grant my desires ?

M. — You can. But, for tapas or for your prayers to reach God there must be some abhyasa, you must do some sadhana. When you are in the sadhana whether it is meditation or prayer, will you be thinking of your desires or of God?

D. — If I think of my desires in meditation, it is no dhyana at all.

M. Then take it that there is the same dhyana, the same tapas, the same meditation, for both, sakama or niskama, whether it is actuated by desire or is disinterested.

Even when your desires are fulfilled, the tapas grows. It does not cease. That is the true character of tapas. It is the same in the case of bhakti also.

Now I put a question to you. When a man with luggage gets into a Railway carriage where does he keep it?

D. He keeps it in his compartment or luggage-van.

M. And so he does not carry it on his head or keep it on his lap.

D. – No fool does it.

M. If you call him a fool who keeps it on his head, a thousand times more foolish is it to bear your burden when you get into the spiritual life, whether it is vicara-marga, path of knowledge or bhakti-marga, path of devotion.

D. But can I throw off all my responsibilities, all my commitments?

M. Now, look at the temple tower, gopura. There are many statues in it and there is a big statue, one on each corner. Have you seen them?

D.-Yes. I have.

M. — Now I tell you this. The big and tall tower is borne by these statues.

D. How can it be? How do you mean? M. I mean if I take this view, it is not more foolish than your attitude when you say that you have to carry and are carrying all cares, burdens, responsibilities, etc.....

The Lord of the Universe carries the whole burden. You imagine you do. You can keep all your burden to his trust. Whatever is to be done by you, you will be made an instrument for doing it at the right time. Don’t think you can’t do it unless you have the desire to do it. Desire does not give you the strength to do. The strength is the Lord’s.

D. Am I to understand that you are giving me the essence of karma yoga.

M. It is the essence of karma yoga, of bhakti yoga why, even of jnana yoga for even though the paths in the beginning may differ, they all after a certain distance lead to this position.

THE ASHRAMAS AND THE SOCIAL RULE

D. -They speak of the four Ashramas or prescribed vocations in life. What is their significance ?

M. It is a social rule intended for the generality to go by stages. But if one is a pakva, a well developed being, he need not or does not mind this rule. Young or old, man or woman, Brahmin or outcaste, if one is paripakva, ripe, he or she can and does go straight to the goal, without minding the stages.

D. Then, Ashramas have no use for spiritual life.

M. The first three Ashramas are there for the conduct of worldly affairs in life गतये लोककार्याणां and are regulated in such a way as not to clash with the ideal of spiritual knowledge न ज्ञानप्रतिकूलता.

D. What about the fourth, Sannyasa ?

M. -Oh, Sannyasa does not lie in taking to the begging bowl, or having a clean bald-headed shave, or putting on an orangecolored robe. न काषायो न मुण्डनम्.

When the Brahmacharin, the student with his purity exalted by celibacy, becomes an ideal house-holder for the service of others, of the society in a spirit of detachment, the Light naturally flashes forth.

Then for the purpose of Tapas, for concentrated effort, the third Ashrama वानप्रस्थ is intended. When by ardent tapas, the tapasvin becomes crystal-pure and fit, the fourth asrama automatically comes. As I said it is not an external thing that one assumes.

SOCIETY AND THE GOAL OF MANKIND

D. – What is my duty to Society? What should be my relation to it?

M. You are a limb of the society. Society is the body, individuals are its members, its limbs. Just as the various limbs help and co-operate with one another and are happy, so each must unite with others in being helpful to all in thought, speech and action. ... One may see to the good of one’s own group, i. e., the group that is immediate to him, and then proceed to others.

D. – Some speak high of santi, Peace; some praise sakti, Power. Which of the two is good to society?

M. For the individual, ’Peace’ is absolutely essential; power is necessary for the upkeep of society. By Power one has to uplift society and then establish peace therein.
शक्त्या सङ्घ विधायोच्चैः शान्तिं संस्थापयेत्ततः (Ramana Gita. X: 8)

D. What is the goal towards which mankind on earth is moving?

M. -Real equality and fraternity (समत्वं सौभ्रातं) form the true goal; for then, the Supreme Peace may reign on earth, and the earth herself can be a single household. तदेयं शोभते सर्वा भुमिरेकं गृहं यथा (Ramana Gita X: 11)

D. — The ideal is grand. But if great men, jnanins are quiet in the caves, how can society be helped ?

M. I have often said that Self-attainment atmalabha is the greatest good to society. And..

[The subject was not pursued further, as M. always maintains that the jnanin is not an inert mass vide infra page 268]

THE EQUALITY OF THE JNANIN

D. — You have said that the jnanin can be and is active, and deals with men and things. I have no doubt about it now. But you say at the same time, that he has no difference भेदभाव ; to him all is one, he is always in the Consciousness. if so, how does he deal with differences, with men, with things which are surely different?

M. — He sees these differences as but appearances, he sees them as not separate from the Truth the Real, with which he is one.

D. — The jnanin seems to be more accurate in his expressions, he appreciates the differences better than the ordinary man.. If sugar is sweet and wormwood is bitter to me, he too seems to realise it so. In fact, all forms, all sounds, all tastes, etc., are the same to him as they are to others. If so, how can it be said that these are mere appearances? Do they not form part of his life-experience ?

M. I have said that equality is the true sign of jnano. The very term equality समत्व implies the existence of differences. It is a unity that the jnanin perceives in all differences, which I call equality. Equality does not mean ignorance of distinctions. When you have the Realisation, you can see that these differences are very formal, they are not at all substantial, or permanent, and what is essential in all these appearances is the one Truth, the Real. That I call unity . . . You referred to sound, taste, form, smell, etc. True the jnanin appreciates the distinctions, but he always perceives and experiences the one Real in all of them. That is why he has no preferences, whether he moves about, or talks, or does, it is all the one Real in which he does or moves or talks. He has nothing apart from the one supreme Truth.

SHAKTI AND SHAKTA (THE ETERNAL POWER AND THE IMMUTABLE PRESENCE)

D. — The trinity (triputi) of knower, known and knowledge is an appearance; you say that there is a unity behind it, supporting it. What is this unity, is it a powerful one?

M. – It is an All-powerful existence, सर्वशक्तम

D. -You have often said, and the books also say, that Brahman is immobile. Now you say, it is all powerful. Does it not then move?

M. Power implies movement. Though Ishwara moves by his power sakti, which is movement, He transcends the movement, He is acala, atita.

D. Is there no difference between sakti and sakta, the Power and the Powerful?

M. – No. That depends upon your attitude. There is only one Truth. Looking at the movement, one calls it sakti Power; settling himself in the support of the movement, asraya, another calls it सद्वस्तु acala. If the former is activity, vyapara, the latter is its support, asraya, substance. sakti and vastu, force and substance, are inseparable, are indeed two aspects of one and the same Truth. Only without the sakti, vyapara or the movement of the power, the substance Real वस्तु स्वरुप is not apprehended. ‘बिना शक्तिं नरश्रेष्ठ स्वरूपं न प्रतीयते’ (Ramana Gita. XII: 20)

D. What is the true character of sakti ?

M. It is eternal with the eternal Ishwara, it has no existence apart from him. It is the eternal activity vyapara of Ishwara, creating the myriads of worlds.

D. Worlds are created and they perish. How can you say that this activity vyapara is eternal ?

M. Supposing all the worlds in course of time are dissolved still they persist in the activity in the movement, lying latent, लीनवत

That is to say, the sakti does not perish. After all what is all this movement, every moment there is creation, every moment there is destruction? There is no absolute creation or absolute destruction. Both are movement, and that is eternal.

D. Then shall I take it that the sakti and vastu vyapara and asraya, both are aspects of the same Truth?

M. -Yes, but this whole movement, the creation, called a play of sakti is a formulation kalpana of the Lord ईशकल्पना. If this kalpana is transcended, what remains is svarupa.

I OF NON-DUALITY

⁸⁴

Note:-[The world is a formation of the substance which is termed pure Existence, pure in the sense of its absolute independence of the particular forms in which it finds a certain expression. "All this therefore is Brahman, the one Existence-in-Substance; and this Existence, the substantial truth Brahman, is not without relation to its own forms of expression. It is Purusha, the Spirit, the Conscient, that is all this, what has become and what has yet to become.]

Again⁸⁸

So then, the sole Purusha being the efficient source and substance of all that is and can be, there can be no real opposition between the two forms of existence, variously designated by the pairs, the Outer and the Inner, World and Soul, Matter and Spirit, This-ness and I-ness. In fact this biune existence termed duality dvandva, inter-related, inter-dependent, and co-existent, is the presentation of an inseparable twofold aspect of the Supreme Truth, the thing as it is and as it becomes, the One Reality in being and in becoming. The Upanishads tell us that the One is expressed in a manifold form and the twofold existence, world and soul, jagat and jiva, is formed by the boundless energy of the dividing and differentiating conscious force variously called tapas, creative incubation, cit-sakti, conscious force, kama, desire to become many, iksa, the gaze of the eternal wide-awake self-awareness of the Indivisible Limitless sat, Purusha. Therefore world and soul, idam-bhava and aham-bhava, This-ness and I-ness, form an inseparable twofold aspect, a biune presentation of the Supreme Reality and are the primal modification parinama implied in the ceaseless change of the forms of consciousness which sees in its unlimited being a movement of limitations, a becoming of its own substance, a formation of its own eternal movement. This original substance which is of the nature of a supreme consciousness, intense and infinite, does not lose itself in its own self-becoming, in its own modifications into a variety of forms effected by its inherent conscious force. It is to be noted that this modification is not-as is thought in scholastic circles-of the nature of milk becoming curds, in which the former is lost and irrecoverable, but is of the character of gold formed into ornaments, in which gold the substance not merely persists but reveals its potentiality for formation into an endless variety. The forms change but the substance endures and it is the identity of the persisting substance that is stressed as the central truth by the Chandogya Upanishad analogy of gold in ornamental forms. The Purusha sat is not affected in his character as substance, the material for all this formation of endless worlds and numberless souls which are but his countless parts, thus manifest in virtue of his conscious force tapas. It is clear then that Brahman is one substance, svarupa, in all its forms and conditions⁹⁰

The truth of the one substance, the Reality, revealed in experience to the supra-sensual consciousness as one-without-a-second, becomes to the sense-mind in experience the many full of duality. And finding opposition between the One and the Many, certain schools of philosophic thought, by way of recognising the higher sanction of the superconscious experience in which the One alone is felt, have hastened to affirm the One by a denial of the Many, as this latter is manifest only to sense experience which is indeed not to be relied upon for getting at the Reality, for realising the truth that transcends the sphere of the senses. But since we find in the scriptures oft-repeated passages that the One has become the Many and is expressed or veiled in the Many, it is reasonable to conclude that the One and the Many are not really opposed to each other, and the contradiction has no place in the Reality but is a figment of the enquiring mind. Hence it is preferable to solve the problem of the Many by reducing the contradiction, if at all there is any, to a reconciliation in the Truth itself.

Let us take the instance of a pot. When the form of the pot is perceived without the knowledge that the pot is made of clay, no one denies the truth of this form or the validity of its perception on the ground that he has no knowledge of the substance of which it is made, and thus of the true character of the pot. Similarly we do not deny the form or its perception when we gain knowledge of the true nature of the pot, viz, that it is made of clay. Both the statements that the material of the pot is clay and that it is of a particular shape, can be truly made of the pot. The knowledge that the pot is of clay neither contradicts nor is incompatible with the knowledge that it has a particular shape. Nor does the predication that the pot has a particular form negate the substantial truth that the pot is of clay. Therefore it has to be admitted that the truth of the thing is twofold according to the view-point and understanding capacity of the enquiring mind. That the pot is made of clay may be termed the substantial truth of the pot and that it has a particular shape, its formal truth. Both are true and together give the whole truth of the pot. That clay is the substance of the pot is the substantial or the primal truth. The form assumed by the substance is the formal truth. Since form depends upon substance and substance refers to the essential character of the thing, the one is the substantial and primary truth, and the other is the formal or attributive and secondary truth of the same, especially in view of the fact that the same thing is apprehended differently by the different sense-organs. But the understanding of the form and other aspects of substance as distinct and apart from substance itself is entirely dependent on sense-mind and intelligence and its development. Thus the distinct apprehension of these two aspects, the substantial and the formal, not only does not lead to error, but there is a great gain in it, for then the synthetic truth is apprehended in its integrality .

Similarly, dealing with the subject of the triune existence, God, world and soul, we are to recognize that the sole Reality, Brahman, presents two aspects, the substantial and the formal. Brahman, the one existence, becomes the Lord, isvara, in relation to its own modes of being as world and soul, as it is the substance and support and directing intelligence of its own formation in the shape of World and Soul. It is the Brahman that is really present in and signified by the various modes of its own existence, by the numberless selves and the countless worlds; these are the signifying factors and their Lord is the One signified in all of them. So then, it is as a relation of substance to form that we are to understand the relation of God to world and soul, the world with all that is included in it and the soul with all its limitations and developThese modes of Brahman are formed and constituted in Brahman itself and are variously termed in philosophic parlance, according to the type and temperament of the enquiring mind or the viewpoint of the vision that gave birth to the religio-philosophic system. Thus they are called modes prakaras, particulars visesas, parts or aspects kalas, qualities or attributes gunas; all these refer to the formulated existence presented to the intuitive philosophic mind as an intellectual translation of a supra-intellectual truth.

Like a particular form of substance, say the pot-shape assumed by clay, this world in which we live and move and have our being is really a mode of Brahman, an aspect of it expressive of its omnipotence, a quality of the Unqualified, a form of the supreme Substance which in itself is formless and beyond forms. And for this reason, this world of name and form as we understand it is the qualitative and formal truth, a partial truth, of Brahman the one Reality. But like the clay of the pot it is the Divine Existence, nameless and formless in itself, that is the material, the rootsubstance, of which all this (idam sarvam) is a form, and hence that is the substantial and primal truth of ’all this’. Thus there is no real opposition between these two aspects, the substantial and the formal, of the same truth. It is evident then that it is both futile and false to affirm that the substantial truth alone of the world-being, Brahman, is real and that the formal aspect of Brahman as the world is unreal. Both the aspects nirguna and saguna, the formless Brahman and the Brahman of forms, are not only not contradictory but together give a complete understanding of the truth of existence as it is.

By the terms nirguna and niskala, "absolved of qualities and parts”, it is meant that Brahman is beyond qualities and parts or aspects and not that it is devoid or incapable of qualities and parts. Besides, when Brahman is described as greater than the greatest and smaller than the smallest, it is clear that Brahman as a quantitative existence is transcendental in either direction. It follows that the Infinite Brahman, while manifesting countless finite parts in definite qualities and quantities, transcends these and thus continues to be infinite. It must be borne in mind that though it is the Infinite the omnipotent Brahman, that by its creative gaze brings these myriads of worlds into existence out of a part of its own being, and having created these enters into them for their sustenance, yet it does not lose itself in them. Hence the wise hold that while Brahman is beyond and not limited by space and time, it is pervasive of all space and enduring in all time. Everywhere, in everyone of its parts great or small, Brahman is full. This is the profound significance of the comprehensive Advaita revealed in the scripture,⁹¹

पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते । पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ।।
“This is full and that is full; out of fullness, fullness is lifted up. Fullness being taken from fullness, fullness alone remains."

To sum up: To know the world as it appears to my imperfect understanding is a partial knowledge which ignores the substance. A knowledge of the world of name and form without knowing its substantial reality is imperfect knowledge. Partial knowledge, as such and in itself, is only imperfect but not false. It is the mistaking of the partial truth for the whole that is false knowledge. As this partial knowledge is an imperfect understanding, too gross to penetrate to subtler truths, it is almost like ignorance. Since it moves in a futile circle, apprehending only the formal without getting at the substantial truth, and often leads to error and mischief, it is referred to by the disparaging term, ajnana ignorance. It is when Brahman, the root-substance of all existence, is realised that there is clear realisation of the whole truth that Brahman, the Self of all existence, is not different from its own formation as world-existence and soul-existence. That alone is complete knowledge, that alone is integral truth.

II OF CREATION

We have said, and the truth cannot be too often repeated or too much stressed, that the Original Substance, the source and support of all the worlds with all their beings, is the one Existence Consciousness, the Infinite Self whose gaze iksa, or creative fervour tapas, or force of consciousness involves an eternal movement of activity forming this world, and that this in its turn, by an ordered difference in development, brings into existence all these beings, or rather becomings, in a variety of species, with striking differences in the nature of their embodiments such as physical, vital and mental and with remarkable variations in their capacity to develop the organs of vital, mental and spiritual or divine functions.

Really, Brahman is equal in all these beings. Still there is a vast difference in their capacities for vital activity, sense perception and general experience. They do not come into being simultaneously and at the same place. Differences among the created are the result of the functioning of the creative power in terms of space and time. Conditioned in space, which is full, intense and immobile, in the Self as Extension, there arise and endure the endless distinctions among perceptible objects. The endless distinctions among internal processes, ceaselessly arising in the one continuous flow of activity, the phenomena of remembrance and expectation, and all the differences in condition everywhere, even outside, these exist conditioned in Time, which like an intangible void is only the Self as eternal change and ceaseless movement.

Thus there is no creation without the all powerful Consciousness of the Self assuming spatial and temporal terms of existence. In the absence of created existence, the question of my existence and of other existences does not arise. It is in creation, whose reality is established to our experience, that our own individual existence is founded. It is to be noted then that all these objects, sentient or otherwise, are subject to space and time which are the terms of Existence-Consciousness assumed by the eternal force-movement inherent in it for the sustenance of creation. Therefore in the all-pervading Existence-Consciousness thus formulated into spatial and temporal existence making countless distinctions possible, there manifest various species, and in each, innumerable forms. And in each of the numberless kinds thus manifest in this physical world of ours, there are countless individual objects. Among rocks and rivers, among trees and plants, among birds, beasts and other creatures, while there are common features binding each to its kind, there are endless differences characterising the particular appearances in each kind or species. Thus in the human kind also numberless are the individual forms, each distinct from every other.

Therefore X is different from Y in form or character. Individual variations in mankind can be seen in general capacity and experience, in assimilation, action and the instruments of these, in receptivity and application. This indeed is the wonder of creation that countless divisions and finites are formed from and in the one Indivisible Infinite. In this unending differentiation into numberless finites and divisions of the undifferentiated Infinite Self, the abode and support of all, the question occurs to man, ’What is the character of the world in which this body lives? Whence are these creatures whose appearance and disappearance are common phenomena? Who again am I, to whom occurs this enquiry?’ The man with the spirit of enquiry awakened becomes gradually possessed of a sense of bondage and a keen sense of bondage develops a desire for liberation. Therefore it is they say that whoever has a straightforward desire for freedom is an advanced being. Such a development is sufficient qualification for the knowledge of the Self, adhyatma vidya.

Here the intelligent critic is struck with a doubt. "If it is established that the Infinite Self, eternally free and conscious, is also the Self of all that it has become, who is it that is in bondage from which release is desired? What is the true character of this bondage? What again is the nature of the development by which one becomes competent for freedom?"

Let us pause for a moment and consider. The birth of the worlds from the all-powerful Supreme Brahman reveals a principle of bifurcation in the Infinite Consciousness itself. The created world called the inconscient jada and the creating consciousness isvara are the two bifurcated parts of the really indivisible. The One Infinite Self is absolute, absolved of all the finites or relatives that are derived from it. Hence while remaining free and absolute the Infinite Consciousness assumes in relation to the creative movement the double form or aspect of the knower and the known, the conscient and the inconscient, cetana and jada. It must be borne in mind that it is the limitless Indivisible itself that is thus limited in the form of Subject and Object.

Though it is the One Existence-Consciousness which is the substantial truth in both the created world and the Creator-Lord, in both the Object and the Subject, yet the Creator-Lord being the illuminator is termed the Self, the knower and the created world being the illuminated is termed the not-self, the known, as distinguished from the knower. Through a subtle activity or movement of its own light, this illuminating consciousness with its unlimited capacity for infinite divisibility throws out particular forms of itself, which in the subtler states are of the character of knowledge and activity and are termed mind-stuff and life-force citta and prana, and which in the grosser state become modified into what is called the inconscient world, jada.

Therefore the wise state that in ultimate truth there is no real difference between the Subject and the Object, between the Lord and His creation, as both are of the same substance and endure in a relation of identity tadatmya⁹²

दृश्यते विषयाकारा ग्रहणे स्मरणे च धीः । प्रज्ञाविषयतादात्म्यमेवं साक्षात् प्रदृश्यते ।। > न चेत्समष्टिविज्ञानविभूतिरखिलं जगत् । विषयव्यष्टिविज्ञानतादात्म्यं नोपपद्यते ।। > (उमासहस्रम्)
. And for this reason, the text is acceptable to reason, that refers to the all-becoming of the Brahman, "All this is Brahman."

Therefore, consciousness in the subjective being is the illuminating cause karana and the gross world which forms the objective existence is the illumination effect. Between these two, between the world, characterised as objective existence, gross (sthula) and inconscient (jada) on one side and the conscient subjective being, the causal (karana), the Supreme self on the other, there is ever active a play of the conscious force, manifested as a movement of knowledge and activity and called mind and life-force, citta and prana and this is termed the subtle, suksma.

This subtle movement of knowledge and activity, of mind and life force, at once divides and links the world and its Lord, the inconscient and the conscient. In the macrocosm it is called the world of life-force pranc-loka and other worlds still subtler. In the microcosm, the same is termed the subtle body, the suksma-deha including the sheaths of life-force and mind, pranamaya-manomaya-kosas.

The relation of the inconscient and the conscient is that of the illuminator and the illuminated, and the same in terms of action becomes that of the developer and the developed, the force that works up and the thing that is worked up. When the created world is illuminated by the Conscient, the inconscient is stirred to change and development; and in the course of its development it manifests an individuation of life and mind’ resulting in the appearance of human beings. What are called ’life and mind’, though differing functionings, are really a twofold branch from the same root, viz., the conscious force which forms into a dual movement of knowledge and action, represented by mind and life. In the words of Upadesha Sara "The mind-stuff and life-force functioning as knowledge and action are twin branches from one root-source, sakti.

III OF BONDAGE

Because of the difference in development among human beings who are all alike subject to conditions of space, time and causation, some are stung by a sense of bondage while others are not. The man with a sense of bonds is already on the way to freedom. Such a man is better developed than he who like a brute is unaware of his bonds, and he that has release from bondage is still better developed than one with a mere sense of bondage. The course of all this development through a gradation of stages is all a play of the Conscious Force, cit-sakti. Thus development takes place in the inconscient objective existence as well as in the subtle movement called ’knowledge and action’, vrtti, both being illuminated and thereby acted upon by the illuminating Conscient, the cause of all differentiated existence. Therefore development paripaka refers to both the subtle suksma and the gross sthula, the subtle movement of mind and life vrtti and the gross objective existence visaya.

Now the nature of the bondage bandha is quite clear. The link between the subject and the object, between spirit and matter, is itself the binding element denoted by the term suksma sarira, the subtle body. Though this subtle body presenting the principle of knowledge and action is a composite of both mind and life, yet since the mind with its greater subtlety is closer to and more easily receptive of the light of Consciousness, the mind alone is sometimes called the suksma sarira, the subtle body.

This subtle body is the link between matter and spirit and it binds the soul or self to the body. The self or soul then becomes lost in the bodily consciousness and hence arises the feeling and sense that the body is the self, and conversely the self is thought to have the bodily attributes of birth etc. Now then, let us see who is in bondage. The indwelling consciousness in all (sarvantaryami) which is the support of all existences presides over all that exists, over the universal and the individual, over the great and the small; therefore there is room everywhere for the subtle movement of knowledge and action, covert and overt.’ It must not be forgotten that there is an inexhaustible power inherent in this intra-cosmic spirit that presides over and resides in everything. Shakti and Shakta, the power and the powerful, are inseparable and can be separated only in mind and speech, never in fact or in experience. And this power is of the nature of a Supreme Capacity.

On the smallest as on the biggest, on the collective as on the individual, the presiding and directing consciousness confers by a natural poise the capacity needed for their formation, sustenance and dissolution. It is the wonderful Shakti of the All-Conscious Supreme Lord of creation that by its very nature constitutes the capacity of the presiding veiled Intelligence to enter, hold and direct the formation, endurance and disappearance of countless finite objects. These finite objects are of endless variety, the objects of the material world having an embodiment purely physical, the objects of the vegetable kingdom with an embodiment physical-vital, and the beings of the human kind possessed of an embodiment physical-vital-mental.

But on the ground that the self is limited to the body, or the spirit is bound to matter through the link of what is called the suksma sarira, the subtle movement of mind and life, it should not be mistaken that the presiding spirit is in bondage. The spirit is self-existent and eternally free and can never be in chains. Nor can it be said that because it presides, to that extent it is affected and bound. The presiding poise of the Supreme Self or Spirit is eternal and inherent in its very being, since it relates to its own becomings. The Self or the free Spirit is not fettered, nor is bondage for the body which has no sense or feeling. Who then is it that is bound and feels chained? There must be in the bondage itself, in the suksma sarira, some element that experiences the bondage, something by which the presiding Spirit is signified. That element is called the ego, ahamkara. It is a persistent though impermanent form of atman, the self, formed and centred in the vital-mental subtle body with which it identifies itself. By drawing upon the power of becoming, inherent in the gaze of the self-aware atman, it imposes itself upon thoughts and things and makes them its own; ever dependent for support, it yet poses itself as free and figures as the spirit itself. This apparent self, born in forms ever shifting from form to form, finding its mainstay in forms, itself without form, this is termed jiva or soul, in the sense that it is born and perishable and not the real self, atman. By this identification of the bondage with the bound, of the support with the supported, of the ego with the bondage which it has woven round itself, this apparent self with its central principle of ahamkara is both the bondage and the bound.

This ego, which is the apparent self, a reflection of the Real Self in the vital-mental stuff called the subtle body appropriates the latter to itself, becomes it as it were, and as a consequence the subtle body is subjected to the sanction of the ego which is its immediate centre, so to speak. Like the light of the lamp, the activity of the ego extending out from this centre is imposed primarily on the subtle body which is its main domain. For the reasons thus briefly stated, a number of terms with varying connotations emphasising different aspects are used to denote this ego. It is the subtle body itself, the jiva or soul in the making, the apparent self, the mind, the link between the self and the body. It is clear then that it is this apparent self or soul-formation in the subtle body, that is stung by a sense of bondage and is actually in chains. Therefore liberation and bondage are used with reference to the ego, with its pose as self. In the undeveloped condition, it becomes active in the subtle or the gross and is then absorbed in the world of forms. That is bondage. In a developed state, it gets into a single movement of search for its source, the real self in the depths and thus becomes withdrawn or released from all subjective movements vrtti and all objects visaya which constitute the not-self. This is release. Both the power that binds and the power that releases lie latent in a germinal state in this very subtle body dominated by the ego or the apparent self. The Conscious Force directed to the creative movement brings about in the indivisible infinite Self distinct forces and finite forms, separates them from their root-source so as to produce in consciousness an experience of their distinctness, and throws them into an outgoing movement directed to grosser forms. This differentiating movement proceeding from the creative Conscious Force throws a veil of self-forgetfulness over the innumerable finite forms of Existence-Consciousness (Sat-Cit) for their definite formation. This veil of self-forgetfulness, cast over all that is formed, limited and distinct, is a function of what is called the tirodhaua sakti, the screening power over all formations in the free, eternal and infinite Self. It is this power of veiling that creates the knot between matter and spirit, causes the subtle stuff of mind and life to assume and be absorbed in grosser forms and constitutes itself as the suksma sarire, which is at once the power and property of the ego as well as its bondage.

Again in this subtle body of bondage itself, there is another movement succeeding and superseding the power of self-veiling or tirodhana. This is the self-revealing power anugraha, which is but the reverse of tirodhana. By a covert and close following it holds and educates the ego which covering up the light of the conscious self poses as its figure and impels it to further development. Thus propelled, the apparent self is forced to advance through experience of pain and pleasure, through wandering about in a seemingly unending and apparently ever repeating movement of mind and life or by getting absorbed in grosser forms, only to find at the end the futility of its endless revolution in its own prison-house. Then it is the anugraha sakti that directs the egoidea to a single movement leading to the deeper and real self, and thus cuts asunder the knot of ego and dissolves the bond of the jiva or the apparent self.

Thus there are two movements of the Supreme Conscious Force in creation, the one preceeding and throwing a veil over the finite formations in the infinite self, the other succeeding, with an intimate hold on them for the unfolding of the infinite in them. The self-veiling power tirodhana first envelops the ego with the covering of the subtle movement of mind and life called vrtti, and then develops it to a diffusion and loss in the objective world of forms. The tirodhana sakti, this power for bondage, is reversed and transformed into a power for release by the anugraha, which succeeds and gets a close grip on the ego or the apparent self. Then the outstreaming activity of the subtle body, mind and life’, is relaxed or withdrawn from the external and the gross, all its widespread, diffused and disorderly movement is gathered up and fixed in a single movement on the ego-sense to find its source in the self, thus involving correction or transformation of the ego which is but an impermanent and distorted figure of the eternal Self. Therefore this twofold power in the creative movement of the conscious force is ever active in the ego as well as in the subtle body which is here called the cord binding spirit to matter, the knot linking the self to the body.

Such in brief outline is the true character of bondage and the bound, and of the development leading to release.

IV THE ’I-SENSE’

The Upanishads use the third person in stating the nature of Brahman as the Supreme Sole Reality, as for instance in texts⁹³

When like sparks from the flaming fire the innumerable soul forms or jivas get differentiated from the Brahman, it is the sole Self, the basis of the notion of ’l’ that is signified in the various individuals. For Brahman is the Self that has become the self in and of all created beings. And this self is really the Supreme Self parama atman, the Lord of all, one without a second. It is the self, the basis of ’I-notion,’ that is really signified in the various individuals, in X and in Y. Free and Supreme in itself, it becomes the basis and support of the distinct experience of the separate egos formed in the different individuals. As it is the one unmanifest Infinite that becomes the support of all manifested beings, the self in them is not different from but is the same as the One Infinite Self. And this is the essential sense of the philosophic teaching that there are not many selves but only one Self.

Now then, the paramartha, the supreme sense of ’I’ is the Supreme Self, unmanifest and infinite, the Purusha. At the same time, as the inner self and support of all individual manifestations, He is the real significance of ’T’ its laksyartha, the ’l’ really signified in the individuals. The immediate and apparent sense of ’I’ is the ego, as even this is a derivation from and figure of the Inner Self, by whose covert support it poses as the self on the surface, identifying itself with, and appropriating to itself, the subtle stuff of ’mind and life’ that links the spirit with matter, the self with the body.

As the ego, which is the direct and immediate sense of ’l’ is centred and figured in each of the distinct and separate individuals in a subtle movement of life-force and mind-stuff, it is termed jiva here. This sense of l’ is separate in each individual being and preserving the distinctness of the individual behaves in a manner that would strengthen the individual’s distinct character. But such a movement of the ego or the apparent self has its root and support in something that is the real basis of individuality and that does not move with or lose itself in the movement of the apparent self, a something that is a continuous conscious principle related to the past, present and future; that is the Real Self signified, the laksyartha, in the individual, of which the ego is the apparent self. This latter is different in different individuals and is loosely called the jiva atman. But atman the self is really one; the self of all individuals as of all existence is one. But jivas or living beings are many, as many as the individuals that are formed. These are soul-formations that are dissoluble in time, unlike their supporting self which is eternal, being identical with the Infinite Eternal which maintains its many-centred existence in an endless movement of formation and dissolution.

Thus we see that there are three distinct senses in which ’I’ is used. The supreme meaning of ’I’, its paramartha, is the Purusha who becomes the laksyartha the signified sense in the individual, as it is the same self that presides over individual existence and the immediate or apparent sense of ’I’, vacya artha, is the ego or the apparent self formed temporarily for purposes of individuation. Threefold then is the sense of the Self, the ’I’ and in this threefold sense is it to be understood.

V OF RELEASE

Release is said to be a liberation of the soul or jiva from the bondage in which it is lost. This bondage has been described as a knot tying spirit to matter. It has been also stated that the real nature of this bondage consists in the play of the ego or the apparent consciousness. Hence the Shastras lay down that liberation is nothing but the dissolution of the ego, and show the means of such dissolution. Elsewhere is discussed the difference between the bound man and the liberated. It is sufficient here to note what is common to both in order to clear a possible misapprehension that with the dissolution of the ego individuality also is dissolved. When the ego is dissolved or reformed individuality is not destroyed. The self that supports the individuality is a continuous conscious principle that survives the appearance and disappearance of the ego and does not depend upon the ego for the preservation of its individuality. This self, as has been already noted, is none other than the infinite self which, in maintaining a manifold individuality in its own movement of all-becoming, becomes the self of each individual, in which, however, there is a play on the surface of a figure of the self, called the ego or the apparent self. This latter is a temporary formation and like every formation is dissoluble in time. The individual in whom the bondage is shattered and the ego is dissolved retains his individuality even after the release mukti. He can recall in his liberated state the experiences of his former life in bondage and thus connect the past of his distinct individuality in an unbroken continuity with the present. The individuality persists in spite of the withdrawal of the ego, and it is a mistaken notion that the ego is a permanent mark or eternal expression of individuality. Perhaps a real and more enduring individuality commences only from liberation, in the absence of the disfiguring ego and its interference. Therefore the liberated life of the jivan mukta is an ideal realised in the individual. So then, whether a soul is in bondage or released from it, the individuality persists, because it is the direct concern of the Infinite and not at all of the ego. Certain truths about the mukta or the liberated soul are stated in the Ramana Gita (Ch. VII, IX, XIV) to which we shall later make reference. Though experience alone can verify their truth and one must have taken to spiritual life and have had some kind of personal experience before one can understand and appreciate them, the true state of the liberated man, mukta purusa, is described there with many details regarding the wonderful development that comes upon his body, life and mind, in order to strengthen the faith of the intelligent critic of earnest enquiry, and to infuse interest and spirit into him.

As bondage and release refer to the jiva or the apparent self, the doubt arises if the means of release lies with the jiva or not. An answer is possible either way. It may be argued that if the jiva be the cause of bondage then the means of liberation also lies with him. In that case, since the jiva is a formation in the suksma deha, the subtle stuff between the self and the body, he is bound in matter and freed in spirit. The element of jada, the inconscient in him, causes the bondage and that of consciousness works for release. On the other hand, it may be urged that since in reality the jiva himself is said to be a formation identified with bondage he is not the cause of his own imprisonment. finds himself there as the apparent self bound to a movement of the subtle body which he has made his own by a sort of identity. So then, if we remember that this bondage is the work of the selfveiling power tirodhana in the creative movement itself and that release is the result of a succeeding movement of the conscious force called anugraha, the Grace, we are led to conclude that mukti or liberation is a matter of development. The power of grace of He Sat-darshana Bhashya 301 the supreme Lord of all existence, the Infinite Self, chooses the developed jiva, the pakva, removes the deflection of the apparent self in him, and transforms the ego into a true reflection of Himself, ever signified as the free and the real ’I’ in the individual. The Upanishad is clear upon this point and will bear quotation.⁹⁵

We have already stated that it is a double movement of the creative conscious force which by the play of her Maya manifests as a self-veiling power constituting itself as bondage and also as a revealing power moving towards release. As we have seen that it is the jiva or the apparent self that is chained and released, it is clear that the jiva in the individual is born and disappears. At the same time it must be borne in mind that the self of the individual jiva is free from the temporary character of the jiva and is not subject to the changes attendant on the formation of the soul called jiva.

VI OF SADHANA AND SIDDHI

If it is the Grace that causes the dissolution of the ego and founds in the jiva a true reflection of the self, a consummation which is called self-attainment atmclabha, the doubt may arise that human effort can be safely omitted and that the Shastras that point to the jiva the means and methods for his liberation are purposeless and futile. But the doubt is groundless. The egostruck jiva, as the apparent self posing himself as free, cannot stand still and refrain from effort until he realises his freedom in the Self. Human effort is inevitable and has its purpose so long as one experiences the sense of bondage and dependence. The Grace of the Conscious Light upon the apparent self jiva fulfils itself in an impulsion from within or compulsion from without for human effort. And effort takes various forms, such as meditation and concentration upon the true nature of the Self, absolute submission to a Higher Will and surrender to Him of all that one is and all that one has, as the only proper course for a human soul to take, and other disciplines or sadhanas, well-known or ill-known enjoined or unenjoined by the Shastras, or it may adopt any other method such as Raja yoga, Mantra yoga, Bhakti yoga, Jnana yoga, Karma yoga, the last three constituting the triple path of devotion, knowledge and disinterested action. Human effort adopts any or all of these means either for the Realisation of the Self, or for the attainment of the Nishkala, Impersonal, or of the Sakala, Personal God, the goal of all religions. Therefore human effort is not opposed to Divine Grace; on the other hand it is an instrument of the latter.

The great Advaita Acharya Shri Shankara and Shri Maharshi Ramana agree upon the central teaching of the Upanishads, the oneness of the self with Brahman. But there are certain points of difference between them. The passages stating the world as false, unreal or illusory do not leap to the eye in the Upanishads but are discoverable only by a close search and they are taken as affirming the illusory character of the world by some sort of interpretation; after all they do not affirm the illusoriness of the world in clear categorical terms. Maharshi holds that the statement of the illusory nature of the world is but a means of creating disgust for what is impermanent in the world, thus driving you home to search for thy Self, for what is permanent in you. Again in the authoritative works of Acharya Shankara’s school certain truths are either omitted or slightly touched, and if mentioned at all, they are expounded in such a way as to give room to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. In the works⁹⁶

One of such truths is the necessity of Upasana.⁹⁷

Such is the unconventional and rational attitude revealed in the works as well as in the life of Shri Maharshi.

Again just as there are⁹⁸

The conventional interpretation of dahara vidya is this: Since the Supreme Brahman is impersonal, nirguna, and beyond mind and speech, for purposes of meditation one has to form by the imaginative mind a concept of the Saguna Brahman or Personal God, and fixing it in the space called hrd-guha, the cavity of the Heart, meditate upon it. Of course this Saguna Brahman is meant for the weak, manda adhikarin, who cannot realise the supreme Brahman who is Nirguna, Impersonal. The HridayaVidya that Shri Maharshi teaches is different from the Dahara Vidya thus understood. Here is not indispensable an intellectual knowledge either of the Personal or of the Impersonal Brahman. Nor is it necessary to conceive a spatial symbol of the Purusha, or any cavity as the dwelling place of the Purusha. Nor is it suggested that the Saguna Brahman should be fixed in the imagined dahara akasa, the cavity of the Heart-centre and there meditated upon. As Brahman the All-Existence has become the self in every one’s being in the centre called hrdaya, Heart, and is there effulgent as the imperishable I-conciousness, a serious quest for the origin and support of one’s own being naturally impels the lifebreath or inspires the mind to move towards the origin of its own movement. And in this deeper movement of search for the Self, the root knot of ignorance in the Heart, the hrdaya granthi is automatically loosened, if not cut asunder; the soul is liberated from the bodily tangle and restored to the self in the Heart; and the origin and support of the I-thought or the ego-sense is realised in the Heart as one’s own real self. This self-attainment leads to the realisation of the truth that it is Brahman, the Self, of All-Existence, that is ablaze in one’s heart as the Self of the jiva and thus results in the experience of conscious union of the jiva with Brahman. Hence the secret of this Sad-Vidya or Hridaya Upasana is the truth that self-realisation culminates in the conscious union of jiva with Brahman

Great are the results of success or perfection in this Upasana. The knot of ignorance in the heart is untied, the soul is released from the hold of the body, there is a settled state, natural and unstrained, of the equipoised mind in the self, and there is an intimate realisation in the heart of the oneness of jiva and isvara. Therefore it is that in the exposition of the nature of sat-darsana we find it stated, “To live settled in the Reality (Existence as it is) by realising one’s identity with it is Sat-darshana, Realisation of Truth or Perception of Reality.” Again in describing the nature of atma-darsana or Perception of Self this Shastra states that the finite self or jiva must become the food⁹⁹

Thus the state of Realisation, the fruit of success in Hridaya Vidya, can be viewed from two different standpoints as Kaivalya and as Sayujya, setting in the Self as the sole Reality and the attainment of conscious union with Brahman. And because of this dual aspect of Truth-Realisation, we find Sat-Darshana explained in one place and Atma-Darshana in another.

Since the state of the jivan-mukta, of one who lives released from bondage can thus be understood and described in two ways, in the two opening verses of benediction, mangala slokas, Shri Maharshi mentions the niskala Brahman for nistha and the sakala Brahman as the sole refuge and subject of conscious union, sayujya.

Again, in the account of the difference between the bound man and the liberated, there is a remarkable verse revealing profound truths about the liberated life in the bodily existence. Referring to the Siddha, the perfected man who has his life and being in the Heart and who has learnt to live normally in and move and act from it, the verse says, “In his body, the self is awake and aglow in the Heart; by its own light it pervades, possesses, and overpowers the body, the environment and the world at large, and lives full.” When development comes upon the man in bondage and under its stress his bonds are shattered, the effulgence of consciousness of the supreme essential life-breath srestha or mukhya prana which moves covertly in the body like salt dissolved in water withdraws from the body and the bodily consciousness, and turns to the source of its own movement, the hrdaya, which is the seat of the ’I’. consciousness. Entering and retiring into the Heart, it is caught up in the grip of its Lord, the Lord of all existence, seated there as one’s own deepest being, the Self; and directed thence by Him it takes a different course in its movement and abandoning the habitual passage for bondage takes the path for freedom. As the light of the lamp pierces through the enclosure of the chimney, this conscious light of life streams out from the Heart through what in yogic parlance is called amrta nadi, atma nadi, brahma nadi, or mukhya prana nadi, and sweeping aside all obstruction overpowers the body and permeates the environment and the world. In lucid and unmistakable language it is stated in the Ramana Gita that though the Self has no motion the splendour of its light is an eternal active movement; itself of the nature of development, it hastens the development of others and it is not at all a stone-like inertness like the apparently static Inconscient.

“No torpor in the natural poise of the Self, sahaja sthiti.”

“Settled State in the Self, that alone is tapas unshakable."

“By that unremitting tapas (the ardour of creative energy) development takes place moment after moment."

“Whoever sees knowledge Jnana as divorced from power sakti, such an one knows not."

"sahaja nistha, natural settled state in Self yields a development by which powers saktis manifest.

“That state is the Supreme Power, that peace is the Supreme Calm."

“He is a jivan-mukta who in embodied existence lives liberated.”

"By the development in tapas, the jivan-mukta in course of time becomes intangible even while embodied, and still in the course of further development he becomes invisible, and that perfected one, Siddha, now but a sublime centre of consciousness goes about free in his movements."

Passages such as these from the teachings of Shri Maharshi throw light upon the greatness of the soul liberated alive, jivanmukta.

VII THE GRACE

There is a great secret mentioned in the [^100]

[^100]: आहारशुद्धौ सत्त्वशुद्धिः सत्त्वशुद्धौ ध्रुवा स्मृतिः स्मृतिलम्भे सर्वग्रन्थीनां विप्रमोक्षः तस्मै मृदितकषायाय तमसः पारं दर्शयति भगवान् सनत्कुमारस्तं स्कन्द इत्याचक्षते तं स्कन्द इत्याचक्षते.Chandogya Upanishad about Mukti, liberation. The soul of sufficient development discovers the limit to ignorance or in the words of the Upanishad is taken ashore across the Ignorance by Sanat Kumara, Skanda, the eternal youth, the great spiritual teacher of mankind. When by meditation on the subtle truths of the Self and by other spiritual practices, Sadhanas, yielding nourishment to the inner stuff sattva it becomes pure and strong for a steady and constant awareness dhruva smrti, and the various ties of ignorar.ce granthis are loosened in him, then the Divine Grace functioning through Skanda, Sanat Kumara gives the overt and immediate finishing touch to lead him beyond Ignorance by cutting asunder the guha granthi or the root-knot of ego-sense in the Heart-cavity. He is the original Guru, the Great Teacher of mankind, in whom the Divine Grace functions for the individual and collective uplift of mankind. In the Puranas, this supreme Guru is described as Sanat Kumara the eternal youth, a mental offspring of the Creative Spirit Brahma, and also as Skanda and Kumara, an issue of the effulgence of Lord Shiva. It is this Kumara Spirit the Supreme Teacher that presides over the spiritual destiny-and that is the only real destiny-of mankind and maintains the continuity of self-knowledge adhyatma vidya in humanity, by entering into and possessing the developed, fit and chosen soul, or otherwise effecting a substantial union with him. Therefore the Mukta or the liberated soul is said to incarnate the Grace, to represent the influence of Skanda, or even to be taken in and appropriated as a part and parcel of the Divine itself. And many are such liberated souls; notwithstanding their common experience of the Self’s oneness with Brahman there is to be seen a vast difference in their human conduct in life and in their understanding and interpretation of the supreme experience. This is due to the difference in their general capacity and their individual type and temperament, and also to the state of development of mankind in their age, to whose requirements their attitude is specially directed.

Hence this Shastra ’Sat-darshana’ represents the teaching of the Supreme and Original Teacher of mankind who has given it to the World through Shri Maharshi Ramana in whom he is verily incarnate with one of His parts, nijakala.

VIII ’SAT-DARSHANA’

(How the work was given to the world)

This work was first written by Shri Maharshi in Tamil stanzas, forty-two in number including the first two benedictory verses, to give intellectual satisfaction to the earnest devotee of a metaphysical bent. It was rendered into Sanskrit, verse for verse, by his great disciple, the well-known scholar and genius Vasishtha Ganapati Muni. As the title of the work shows, it is a discourse on the perception or realisation of Truth. Sat-darsana is a compound word formed of Sat and Darshana, Sat meaning primarily existence and secondarily the real and the true, and darsana meaning perception. It is direct perception of Truth that is here meant by the term. Indeed this work is based upon the Maharshi’s perception of Truth, and from this it derives its title “Truth-Perception’. But Darshana’ also means a system of philosophy, such as the Nyaya and other Darshanas of the post-shruti period. Even in this sense, the work is a darshana, a philosophy of the Real. For the epigrammatic verses packed with profound thoughts yield a wealth of philosophic concepts furnishing sufficient material for the metaphysical basis of a philosophy that is involved in an intellectual statement of the Maharshi’s attitude to life and earthly existence. As there is nothing that is really unreal, a fact that is often stressed by Shri Maharshi, this system may be appropriately called a ’True Realism’ or ’Ideal Realism’.

It is needless to say that this Shastra is not intended either to refute or to support the current systems such as the Saivite and the Vaishnavite, the Dvaita and the Advaita. It does not follow the method of metaphysical speculation, such as characterises the Nyaya and other systems of the Sutra period. Nor does it purport, like the two Mimamsas of Jaimini and Badarayana to harmonise and to remove doubts or misconceptions in scriptural texts or other authoritative utterances of great souls. Like the sacred words of the Tamil Veda of Saint Nammalvar or of Manikka Vachaka, and like the texts of the Upanishads, the words of the Maharshi are an original and independent utterance based upon personal experience, and though they support and elucidate authoritative pronouncements both of the scriptures and of exalted souls, they have really an independent origin and validity coming as they do directly from himself.

THE GREAT SOUL

In his sixteenth year, the great Acharya Shankara, according to tradition, completed his matchless Bhashya on the Brahma Sutras, and fulfilling the work of the Supreme Teacher, the karana Guru, by establishing the identity of Atman with Brahman rose to the position of Jagad-guru or world-teacher.

In his sixteenth year, the great devotee, Saint Jnana Sambandha, an ornament to the famous quartette of Acharyas of Shaivaism, completed his earthly career and reached the abode of the Lord whom he worshipped and recognised as his own Father and whose commission he carried out in his earthly life.

Just on the completion of his sixteenth year, the great seer and sage Sri Ramana Maharshi, from fear of death sought in himself the protection of the Conqueror of Death, experiencing his inner being the Self in the Heart, as something distinct from the body; and feeling the urge of a supreme impulse recognised the Father of the universe as his own Father, and by His command quitted the post of his ego-self and reached, here and now in this earthly life, the Abode of his father, which he describes in his hymns as the immutable rock of Peace, the ambrosial ocean of Grace the Supreme Love, the ineffable Delight, the Ananda of the Real.

His life throws a flood of illumination on the great mystic teaching of the Upanishad, “Great is your loss if you do not realise; but if you realise it here, then there is Truth for you.” Ever gracious to come down to those in need of help in ways best suited to them, scattering ennobling ideas and radiating uplifting influence constantly shedding all around in external life the splendour and glory of the inner life, here indeed is a divine life incarnate on earth, a Shankara in giving by precept and practice the gift of Self-knowledge to the world of earnest souls aspiring for liberation, a Sambandha in the spirit of devotion to the Father of the universe, a life-celibate unseized by the lure of sex and worldly possession, a soul liberated from Maya, illusion, a son of Maya, the Divine Mother, such is the great seer and sage, Shri Ramana Maharshi.

NOTE

The subject of the ’individual soul’ jivavyakti has been given here quite an unconventional treatment. In some places, the jiva is mentioned as the ego; in others, it refers to a fixed form of consciousness and action; in still others it is taken as signifying individuality. In the commentary on the second half of the 26th verse it is stated that terms ahamkara ego, granthi knot, vibandha bondage, suksma sarira subtle body, cetas mind, bhava or samsara the cycle of birth and death and jiva living being, though referring in a way to the same thing, are not synonymous and interchangeable but signify the different functions of the something that is formed between spirit and matter, between the self and the body. It is also stated that with the destruction of the ego there is no dissolution of individuality.

In order that these terms might be understood in their right senses and true relation to one another, and not confounded one with another, reasoned explanations are adduced in the Bhashya as well as in the Bhoomika to elucidate them then and there, helping the earnest mind in search of truth to find harmony amidst the differing conclusion of the different philosophic systems. To set all doubts at rest, it is proposed to recapitulate here briefly the essence of the discussion on the individual soul, jiva-vyakti.

In the Upadesha Sara of Shri Maharshi, mind-stuff and lifebreath are mentioned together as a twin branch growing out of the same root, the conscious force, suggesting that this is the jiva or the living being, with the ego formed in it for its centre of activity. And this stuff of mind and life is termed the subtle body in this Shastra. As long as there is this subtle body there is individuality, as the latter requires a form of some kind, subtle or gross, for its manifestation. Since this subtle body is a formation, and as such subject to space and time, it is dissoluble. But the dissolution of individuality into the unmanifest, like its emergence (manifestation) from it, is not determined by its own choice but is absolutely dependent on the Unmanifest Infinite, avyakta akhanda.

This subtle body, called upadhi by some, is the basis for mental and vital activity in the mundane life of the man in bondage as well as of the liberated soul. When this suksma sarira is not sufficiently developed, it remains a factor of bondage, a knot between matter and spirit, a prison-house of the self in the body. By the force of the inconscient, which is the preponderant element in it, the subtle body is partly absorbed or submerged in matter jada, directed of course by a distorted reflection of the self, a posing figure, formed in it as the ego ahamkara. In an advanced state of development, this individual living being gets freed from the bondage of the body, by the preponderance of the element of conscious force which relcases it from the hold of matter.

Thus, as the subtle body develops, it absorbs in a larger measure the conscious force which eliminates or transforms the element of the inconscient jada in the subtle body, and the ego yields to the pressure of the force of Self-consciousness. As the ego thus dissolves, being but the apparent self, the immediate sense of ’l’ it is reborn as it were into the Real ’I’ that has been all along signified by it. What really happens in this process of liberation is this. When through the development of the subtle body in which it is firmly rooted posing as the Real self this ego is stung by a sense of its own weakness and falsity, the wide-awake self-awareness of the Purusha, the spirit seated in the Heart, finds a true reflection in the subtle body, thus displacing the ego or transforming it into the pure ’I’, suddha ahambhava. And in consequence of the birth of the pure ’I’, the real soul, the subtle body undergoes a remarkable change making it a true vehicle of the soul so formed. Thus freed from the hold of the material body, this subtle stuff becomes a true expression of individuality faithful to the Original Self, and an individual centre to its supreme consciousness. Hence we find such statements as:

“Then flashes forth another ’l’, ego that is not; perfect is that, the Supreme itself.”

“The Supreme is not different from the Heart, from the Self in the Heart".

“He shines having devoured the ego ... Whatever he sees, he sees not separate from his self.”

Therefore the person liberated alive from bodily bondage does not fall into the separative movement nor yields to the allurement of the apparent diversity, but perceives diversity in unity and experiences unity in diversity. And though he is well aware of the divergent way taken by the intelligence of others living in ignorance, his own individual life on earth is guided by the Supreme Lord of all, by the Self, all-controlling and independent, eternal and ever unmanifest, and thus it is an effulgent manifestation of the Heart, the secret centre of the Spirit in man. Such a liberated soul, whether here or there, and regardless of the possession of the material body, is firmly settled in the Infinite Self.

Verse 1.

सत्प्रत्ययाः किनु विहाय सन्तं?
हृद्येष चिंतारहितो हृदाख्यः ।
कथं स्मरामस्तममेयमेकं ?
तस्य स्मृतिस्तत्र दृढव निष्ठा॥

Without something that exists, can there be notions of existence?
Free of thoughts, it is there, the Inner being, named the Heart.
How then to conceive it is the question --It, the one inconceivable.
To conceive it is but to be it, in the Heart.

Commentary.

“Without something that exists can there be notions of existence?" From the question itself the answer is clear that without existence there can be no notions of it. Many are the notions of existence that are formed, having as their basis and pressupposition existence which is one. Existence is the common basis of all the varying and contradictory notions which are occasioned by objects without or thoughts within. Themselves varying, they unite in suggesting the one that exists. In order that ’existence’ satta may not be mistaken for a class concept signifying a class of existences in this world of name and form full of various groups or objects the singular ’existence and the plural ’notions’ are used to suggest that this world of name and form with its numberless groups and endless species of objects has for its source and support something which is variously called the Real, the one Existence, the Self, the Infinite, the Brahman, that which is the essential truth of the Vedas and the subject of intimate experience. It is because of this sumething that is present everywhere, within and without, that whatever is visible, whether real or not, occasions and suggests the notion of ’Is’. This something that exists and that we call Brahman forms the basis of all existences and therefore is present everywhere.

Though its presence is everywhere, yet the Heart hrdayam is stressed as its special seat. “Free of thoughts it is there in the heart, the inner Being named the Heart”. How is it that Brahman is said to be present in the Heart while it is really omnipresent? Though it is really present everywhere, it is luminous in the Heart of every living being as its own Self. And every one is concerned with his own self first before he proceeds to consider existence outside himself. Since it is direct, natural and easy to realise this Allpresence, the Brahman, in one’s own self through the I-notion of which it is the basis, it is taught that Brahman is present in every being as one’s own self. By one’s own self is meant the subject of the intimate experience and awareness ’I am’. Where there is this experience that is called the Heart. Therefore when we find in the second line "It is there, the Inner Being", the sense is clear that the Real Existence or omnipresent Brahman of the first line is the inner being in every one, everyone’s own self. In a piece of focussing glass, the solar rays which are free and everywhere are focussed into an intenser light and heat. On this analogy is to be understood the special luminous appearance of the omnipresent Brahman in the Heart as one’s own self, in the form of the experience and awareness ’I am.’

The Sanskrit term hrdayam connotes that it is a centre, a locus of the soul. Literally it means ’the self is here. If then a centre is affirmed of the self in the bodily existence, such a centre is necessarily spatial and apprehended by the intelligence as subject to space. The doubt may then arise if the self is limited by and dependent on anything but itself. To remove such a doubt, the self itself is named the Heart. The self is not merely in the Heart but it is the Heart itself. For it is the free eternal self which is centred in the living being as the Heart, the real ’I’, the self-being, and is rightly viewed as located there unattached to his selfbecomings as mind, life and body. This unattachment means freedom from the movement while giving support to it. Therefore it is stated that Brahman the Real Existence is the Heart itself, the centre of the self, but it can also be viewed by the external mind as self in the Heart-centre. Thus the sense is clear that the Heart and the self in every individual are identical, for the reason that both refer to the same intense root-consciousness of self-being, to the same supreme awareness.

From the universal view-point also, Brahman is the Heart, the Self-centre, as it is the self of all that it has become. Brahman is the essence and secret of all existence and hence may be truly called its Heart. Again men who have realised the Self hold that the Self is the basis of the I-notion, the root source of mental movement such as that of the knower and the known, and is hence termed the Heart. Really the I-thought is the root of all thoughts.

Then the doubt arises that since all thoughts spring from a common centre, the root-thought ’I’ and are thus intimately related to the self, the latter undergoes modification in its mental becomings and being thus subject to ceaseless change is liable to ultimate disappearance. To obviate such a doubt it is stated that He in the Heart is free of thoughts, cinta-rahita. Here the word cinta connotes all mental becomings. The Self in the being’s centre, the Heart, while it is the support and source of all mental movement retains its radical unchangeability as the Self; and because it is Brahman that is glowing in the Heart as the radical I-consciousness, its persistent continuity which supports the notion of personal identity remains unaffected by the ceaseless flow of thoughts arising from it as part of a general movement of its becoming which is of the character of incessant change. Therefore the statement is unexceptionable that the Self which is in the Heart and which is also the Heart is eternal and not at all subject to the mutations of mental movement. Even as the source of all mental becoming it remains the eternal and changeless Self.

Here a difficulty presents itself. If the Self, the Heart is beyond thoughts i.e., does not admit of being approached by thought, how can we have any conception of it? "How to conceive it is the question.” It must be admitted that it cannot be conceived. It is inconceivable. Itself the source of mind, it is not to be measured by mind, for it is subtler than the mind to which it gives rise. In the first place it was stated by implication and suggestion that the Real Existence, the Brahman of the Upanishads, is omnipresent and is the basis of all existence, subjective and objective, giving birth to the basic notion of ’Is’ both in the inner and in the outer world-being. In the next line it was affirmed that as that Brahman or Reality has become the Heart of all beings, shining as their distinct self, it is to be discovered as one’s own self in the Heart, as the innermost being. To impress the idea that though there are so many distinct individual beings the Self is really one in all of them, it is stated as ’the One, Inconceivable’. is the one Self that apparently has become the distinct selves of the individuals that are its formations. It is inconceivable in the sense that it cannot be thought of in terms implying a relationship such as that of the knower and the known, as it is the Absolute, absolved of all the relatives, which however result from its own power to become.

If then the One Supreme Self of all our selves dwells in our own inner being, the Heart, and yet is beyond, though behind, all our thoughts, how are we to contemplate it? The fourth line gives the answer, "to conceive it is to be it, in the Heart.” To be in a settled poise in the Heart, the Self-centre, which needs no outside support and does not depend upon any thought or object for its self-awareness is the only way to contemplate it. Obviously such a state cannot be connoted by the term conception. The suggestion is that conceptual thought must deepen and reduce itself into a direct perception in order to become a true mould and reflection of the real self-awareness.

It must be borne in mind that just as objective existence is the basis and support of all the objects therein, and in the subjective being the I-thought is the root of all thoughts, even so the Self’s experience ’I am’ is the root of all experiences, while yet it is unseized by the movement of thoughts of which it is the basis. Therefore when the diverse thought-forms are forged into a homogeneous unity and assume the form of a single movement, that of the Ithought which is the persistent basis of all thoughts, the uncreated Self-awareness that is always there giving birth and support to the I-thought in the Heart-centre becomes a living experiences to the mental movement itself.

Meditation upon or contemplation of self lies then in a single ceaseless thought-movement directed to the self, a movement, steady and constant, strengthened by the idea that the Self is there as a radical awareness in the Heart, as one’s own innermost being from which all thoughts arise and to which they all return. This is called the “Spiritual art of the Heart,’ Hridaya Vidya. Thus this verse, after affirming that Brahman the Reality is the Heart of all and is in the Heart of everyone as the self, beyond the range of the senses and independent of the mind and other instruments, to be realised only by direct experience, proceeds to point out the path of meditation which is of the nature of awareness—an awareness which in graded terms is a union of the diverse thought-movements with the single I-thought, of the mind with the self, of the self with Brahman, the Supreme Being.

Thus of the four sentences in the verse, the first asks a suggestive question to create interest in the search for the Truth, the Real that is present everywhere; the second gives the answer that the mental search for it in the external is both tedious and futile, that it is here in the self, is one’s own inner being named the Heart and that the search for it there is easy, natural and direct. That third sentence raises the question, "If the mind cannot reach or compass it, what is the way to know it?" And the fourth gives the answer that the divergent thoughts must be turned to a single thought-movement directed to the idea of the self and thus by what is called hrdaya vidya, the training and moulding of the mind to harmonise with the real nature of the self, true knowledge of the self is gained.

In this connection it is appropriate to give an English rendering of the Sanskrit verse of Shri Maharshi which puts in a nutshell the substance of the hrdaya vidya, the mystic path of the Heart.

[^101]

[^101]: Ramana Gita Ch. II. हृदयकुहरमध्ये केवलं ब्रह्ममात्रं हमहमिति साक्षादात्मरूपेण भाति । हृदि विश मनसा स्वं चिंंवता मज्जता वा पवनचलनरोधादात्मनिष्ठो भव त्वम् ।“In the Heart’s Cavity, the sole Brahman as an ever-persisting ’I’ shines direct in the form of the Self.

Into the Heart enter thyself, with mind in search or in deeper plunge; Or by restraint of lifemovement be firmly poised in the Self.”

Verse 2.

मृत्युञ्जयं मृत्युभिया श्रिताना-
महमति भृत्युमुपैति पूर्वम् ।
अथ स्वभावादमृतेषु तेषु
कथं पुनर्म त्युधियोऽवकाशः॥

Those lose at once their selves who from fear of death Seek refuge in the Lord, Conqueror of death. Then by nature immortals are they. How then is thought of death to them?

They are great and realise that nothing on earth could conquer death for them; and from this the most invincible of all fears, they seek the protection of the Lord. What happens when they seek refuge in the Lord from fear of death? "They lose their selves at once’. Obviously it cannot be the real self that dies, immortal as that is. It is the ego-idea aham-mati that is put out the moment it seeks the protection of Him from whom it has derived its being. It is the ego-self that is struck with fear. What is this ego? It is a persistent pose of the Real Self on the surface being reflected in the self; it is the apparent self, the immediate sense of ’I’. It identifies itself with the body and says ’I am independent and separate from other existences; I am this body, this body is mine’. It is primarily formed in the mind and helps it to lend its support to the separative movement and divided interests of bodily life on earth. And when we say that it is the ego-self that loses itself on our approach to the Lord, Conqueror of death, it follows that there is no formation of the ego in the Real Self, who is the Lord of all existence and who is seated in the Heart spoken of in the first verse. That is why it is stated to be the apparent and impermanent self, not in the depths but on the surface. It is clear then that what is fear-struck in man is the ego which being a dissoluble formation naturally dies.

Now where does the ego-self seek the Lord’s protection? Evidently in the Heart itself. Even though the ego, circumscribed as it is in its own movement, may try to seek the Lord outside of itself, He is really in the Heart as its own ultimate Reality, the Self-being. Therefore when the ego seeks the Lord’s protection in earnest, the burden it carries and all its interests are either forgotten or automatically committed to the Lord’s hands. Then if the ego gets stripped of all its interests, its coverings, it ceases to be the ego. For it is the divided interests of the ego that spin around it a cobweb of notions, constructing a personal world of elusive and illusory forms of consciousness and strengthen it in its own fancy of a detached and exclusive personal existence with a false and wrong claim for the all that environs it. But it all its interests are focussed in and taken up into one supreme interest, then the ego is unwinged, as it were, dissolved or transformed into a true mould or reflection of the Real Self, the Lord in the Heart, ever one with Him, the Immortal without birth and death.

So in the third line we find, "Then by nature Immortals are they.’ Those that have lost their ego-selves by seeking the Lord’s protection, gain their Real Self, and as this is immortal unlike the mortal ego-self, they are called immortals. From the divine and spiritual standpoint, to be immortal is natural; and to be mortal is also natural from the human and the mental view point. As it is the ego that identifies itself with mind, life and body that perishes at the Lord’s feet, it is stated ’they lose their selves at once’. That is their ego-selves. And they become immortals because of their conscious union with the immortal Lord who is seated in the Heart. Do they not all become one in God, their Supreme centre? Will it not be more proper to say they become the Immortal, as it is the One Lord that is the Real Self in and of all beings. No. It is true that it is the One Self atman that has become the support of the ego-selves of the many; but when the ego perishes, the individuality of the Lord as its Real Self does not dissolve with the ego. In fact, the immortality of the immortal Lord is not at all manifest in the individual as long as the mortal ego does not work itself out. And it begins to manifest in the individual in whom the purpose of the ego is fulfilled in its loss or transformation into a true mould of the Lord or the Real Self; as it thereby loses its character as the ego, this transformation is generally mentioned as the death or disappearance of the ego. This ego then discovers its original and the Real and becomes a true mould of distinct individuality of the self, and, thereby, the individual Soul of the Self Supreme.

Hence the plural “immortals’ is used to denote the distinct individuality of such souls as are true moulds of the Self in conscious union with the Immortal Supreme seated in the Heart.

Therefore in those holy beings who take refuge in the Lord of all existence, the ego which the ancients discovered to be a psychophysical knot, called granthi in their parlance is loosened or cut asunder, and with the dissolution of this radical knot all other ties of ignorance disappear. How then is it possible for such beings to be lost in bodily consciousness and led astray by the mortal ego when they are firmly established in the knowledge by identity, in the supreme expereience of their real self, the Immortal Divine.

It is to be noted that this verse stresses the need and justification of the path of devotion Bhakti which consists in a spirit of surrender prapatti. But the surrender can be complete only in those that are in that exalted state of self-poise referred to in the first verse. Search for the Self in the Heart occasioned by some felt need or by fear of death, as in the case of Shri Ramana Maharshi, results in the giving up of all that one is and has to the care of the Lord. Indeed this verse of invocation throws light on Shri Maharshi’s inner life and personal experience, for it is a well-known fact that it was his search for protection from fear of death that initiated the process of building up his inner life and led him to the Father whom he describes as the one eternal Self cf all souls and of all existences. That is why he mentions fear of death as occasioning the surrender, instead of explicitly stating that surrender from love of God is the means that is right and natural, seeing that He is our own deepest self, the most Beloved and that indeed ’All are He’ as the next verse states. It may be remarked in passing that the fear of death is of all fears the hardest to bear and the most invincible and being most natural is the least unreasonable. From this dreaded mortality there is no protection from any source other than the One that itself has conquered it.

Thus we see that settled state in the self nistha and surrender prapatti lead to the same end. Though the attitudes in the path of knowledge jnana and in that of devotion bhakti are different, because of the difference in temperament and development of the devotee and the seeker after Truth, the state of Self-realisation is consummated in the surrender of all that one is and has to the Supreme and conversely, surrender is fulfilled in knowledge of the Self. Thus the Maharshi does not see contradiction between the paths of knowledge and Devotion, jnana and bhakti.

These two verses at the commencement of the work suggest the two-fold path of Knowledge and Devotion, affirming the Impersonal Brahman niskala as the subject of nistha and invoking the Grace of the Personal God sakala, the Supreme goal of self-offering. Incidentally such a commencement conforms to the sacred convention of beginning a work with a word of Prayer to one’s adored and chosen deity, ista devata.

Verse 3.

सर्वैनिदानं जगतोऽहमश्च
वाच्यः प्रभुः कश्चिदपारशक्तिः।
चित्रेऽत्र लोक्यं च विलोकिता च
पटः प्रकाशोऽप्यभवत्स एकः॥

Of myself and the world
All the cause admit-a Lord of limitless power.
In this world-picture, the canvas, the light,
The seer and the seen-all are He, the One.

We have commented on the first two verses of benediction. This verse really begins the Shastra.

The cause of the world and myself is admitted by all as a Lord of limitless power. The world is what I see around me, the object of sense-perception. Myself is the apparently conscient, self-evident ’I’ called the jiva, the living being distinguished by personal identity. Both the world and myself are in perpetual change and this fact presupposes a cause which must be of such an illimitable power that this vast universe and myself and other beings are formed by it, live, move, and have their being in it. This cause is the Lord God, the Omnipotent. Then, in order that the triple truth of God, world and soul may not be taken to imply a denial of non-duality or advaita, the oneness of all existence, the analogy of artist and picture is given. This world of name and form is the picture, God is the supreme artist that draws the picture possessed of the limitless skill and power needed for it.

He has also the capacity to see his own picture of the world, hence he is the seer. All the materials needed for a picture are different from the human artist while the skill and the sight alone are his, inherent in him and inseparable from him. But in the case of God, the Divine artist that creates the world-picture, the material for the world is inherent in Him. “All are He’, the canvas on which the picture of the world is painted, the picture itself which is the world of name and form and the light without which one cannot see even though one has the eye. Thus He, the one God is also the many and nothing is there which is not ’He’. Therefore the one Real, the Brahman of limitless power, becomes the subject, the object and the instruments and all these are various modes of His existence. He is the material as well as the efficient cause of all, of the world jagat as well as of the soul the jiva. It is in this sense that the Upanishad proclaims "All this is verily Brahman”. By this living self may I differentiate existence into name and form."

If it is a fact that it is the One supreme existence that has become the triple truth of God, world and soul, how is it that the One Supreme Reality is not understood as such and that we are faced with the many?

Verse 4.

आरभ्यते जीवजगत्परात्म-
तत्त्वाभिधानेन मतं समस्तम् ।
इदं वयं यावदहमति स्यात्
सर्वोत्तमाऽहंमतिशून्यनिष्ठा॥

God, world and soul, from this triple truth, all religions proceed. While the ego reigns, the three are apart. Transcending all states is the poise of Self where ego is lost.

All religions begin with the three-fold truth, God world and soul, but they do not end there. Even the Absolute monist advaitin admits the trinity in the phenomenal existence. Then if the essential truth of all existence is one Supreme Reality, how is it that it assumes the three-fold form of God, world and soul? “While the ego reigns, the three are apart.” These three are separate from one another only as long as the ego endures. It is the ego that carves a three-fold category out of the One that exists, the Real. But there is a state in which it is outgrown and to live in it is the supreme poise of the Self. “Transcending all states is the poise of self where the ego is lost."

There are many methods of spiritual discipline recommended in the scriptures and this one of keeping to the supreme poise of the Self is the highest of them all; for here as the result of the dissolution of the ego, Brahman, the Supreme Reality and source of the triple truth, reveals itself to direct perception, to immediate experience. It is the nature of the ego that through it the One undivided supreme Brahman presents itself as the triple truth, as the manifold existence. This ego is mentioned as a knot granthi, an obstruction to the apprehension of the truth of the Supreme Reality.

As God, world and soul are not apprehended as three separate existences in the absence of the ego, the disputations and conclusions of religio-philosophic systems aiming at solving the riddle of the world, such as whether it is real or unreal, are not directly helpful to a knowledge of the Truth. So the next verse proceeds :

Verse 5.

सत्यं मृषा वा चिदिदं जडं वा
दुःखं सुखं वेति मुधा विवादः ।
अदृष्टलोका निरहंप्रतीति-
निष्ठाऽविकल्पा परमाऽखिलेष्टा ।।

‘All this is the Real, the Conscient, the Delight.’
’No, it is the reverse’. Such are quarrels vain.
Agreeable to all, from uncertainty aloof, is the state exalted,
Where the ego lives not, nor the world is seen.

The philosophic disputations with reference to the reality or unreality of the world, or as to whether it is conscient or inconscient, sorrow or delight, are all futile, as the solution of the problem is not, by the way of intellect at all. It is only an exalted state of the Self that could remove all doubts and misconceptions. For in that state the world as we apprehend is not to be seen as an existence separate from ourselves, nor is the ego-sense active there. The doubts and uncertainties, as to whether all this is real or unreal, conscient or otherwise, delight or not, cannot then arise. Such a supreme state is not only acceptable to all but is held desirable by all, the dualist and the non-dualist alike. The various systems, even those that are opposed to each other, like the dvaita and the advaita, though they may disagree in certain fundamentals, are agreed upon the necessity of some kind of inner discipline, Bhakti Yoga or Jnana Yoga, the path of devotion or of knowledge, to realise their respective aims; and in no spiritual practice, in no Sadhana that is earnest, is there room for thought of the world or for the ego-self, as the discipline followed in any method lies in a concentrated reaching forth of the whole being towards the Ideal, the goal, whether it is Truth or Self or God. Hence it is stated that the exalted state of the self where the ego lives not, nor the world is seen in a state removed from all uncertainties which to the end beset the intellectual mind, which is trained or habituated to move between probables and possibles.

In this verse, there are three sets of alternatives offered and the suggestion is but thinly veiled that the truth of the world is not nonexistence, but existence, is not inconscient but conscient, is no sorrow but delight. Thus the ultimate Truth, Sat-Chit-Ananda, Existence-Consciousness-Bliss, is affirmed to be a matter of personal experience to be gained by nistha and not at all by an intellectual knowledge of Shastraic disputations. As it is implied that this world is not non-existent, nor inconscient, etc., it may be noted that the Samkhyan dualism and the Jain and Buddhistic Nihilism are not agreeable to Shri Maharshi.

Because of the absence of difference between subject and object (seer and seen) in the Infinite Self in which the world, soul and God find their oneness, the next verse mentions the Infinite formless Self as the One limitless Eye.

Verse 6.

सरूपबुद्धिर्जगतीश्वरे च
सरूपधीरात्मनि यावदस्ति ।
अरूप आत्मा यदि कः प्रपश्येत्
सा दृष्टिरेकाऽनवधिहि पूर्णा ॥

To him who holds the self as having form God has form and so has the world. But who is there to see in the formless Self? Itself is the Eye-limitless, one and full.

If the seer is an embodied being, the world and the Lord that are the seen, have also an embodied existence; and embodiment is not necessarily physical, nor is it used to denote only what is visible to the eye. It is any or all of the five sheaths of which mention is made in the next verse. Thus having stated that God, world and soul have form presented to the seeing soul that is embodied, the verse proceeds to state that they are formless in the formless Infinite Self.

The question is asked, “Who is there to see in the formless Self?’ If the seeing self is formless who is there to see? The infinite Self is itself the Eye, one, limitless and full. Here one is reminded of the Upanishad that refers to Brahman as that in which the Self has become all beings (existences).

The Self is the all; it is that which has become all this; and there is nothing for the Self to see outside of itself or apart from it, as it includes (lit. devours), all forms and transcends them (lit. shines forth). Here, there is no knowledge of distinction between seer and seen; hence the Upanishad describes the character of the One, the Infinite, advaita, akhanda by putting the question ’whom to see and by what?’ tatkena kam pasyet. Here also the same question is put, ’Who is there to see? “The answer is obvious, there is none. "Why’? ’Itself is the Eye’. The Supreme Brahman is denoted by the third person ’Itself’. It is mentioned as the Eye to denote that it is Consciousness. It is ’One’, without a second, Infinite. It is ’limitless’ or endless, the full’, the all-pervasive. If it is mentioned as ’seer’, then the question may arise that there is the seen’ apart from the seer. To avoid it, the word ’Eye’ drsti is used in the sense of sight or awareness (consciousness) and not in the sense that there is a seer apart from the sight.

When like incessant waves of the shoreless ocean, myriads of worlds are born of the Supreme Brahman and endure and are dissolved, the eternal Infinite Self, called here ’the Eye’, remains full and perfect and is not lost in the incessant change taking place in it, in its self-becomings, in the creative movement of its consciousness that brings into existence and supports the distinctions of God and world, individual and universal, seer and seen, supporter and supported. In the first half of the verse it was stated that the form of God and the world depends upon the seeing soul jiva that has form; in the latter half we find it stated in unmistakable terms that if the seeing self is realised to be formless then the truth can be understood that there is nothing that is really other than the Self which is Infinite, Eternal, the limitless Eye, the Full and Perfect. Thus though the formlessness of the Self is clearly stated to be the Supreme Truth, yet the seeing self that has form sees the Creator and His creation in form.

How the self takes on this form, which impermanent as it is still clings to it for the time being, is elsewhere discussed.

The Discourse upon the seeing selfs form or embodied existence raises the question of the nature of the embodiment itself. The next verse proceeds to state that five-fold is this embodied existence, and that consciousness of the world of forms is due to the self identifying itself with any of the five bodily sheaths.

Verse 7.

यत्पञ्चकोशात्मकमस्ति देहं
तदन्तरा किं भुवनं चकास्ति ।
देहं विना पञ्चविधं तदेतत्
पश्यन्ति के वा भुवनं भणन्तु ॥

Five-fold is the bodily sheath. Apart from it, the world appears not. Can it? Without the five-fold body, Where are they that cognize the world?

The form of the body is made up of five sheaths (five-fold) and they differ in kind. Beginning with the gross material existence, there are five sheaths, called the physical annamaya, the vital pranamaya, the mental manomaya, the sheath of Truth-knowledge vijnanamaya, and the sheath of Bliss anandamaya. And without embodiment of some kind there is no knowledge of world-existence. The apprehension of the world depends upon the embodiment of the apprehending consciousness. Therefore it is questioned “without the five-fold body, where are they that cognize the world ?” Every one that cognizes the world in any state is embodied in any of the five sheaths, and none that is not embodied in any of these has cognition of the world. It should be borne in mind that in this Shastra the connotation of ’body’ extends to the five-sheaths kosas, physical, vital, mental and others, and is not restricted to the narrow sense of the gross, visible and material body.

The body is related to the world as the individual to the universal (lit. collective) and as part to the whole. The embodied knower is bound to, and identifies himself, with the embodiment without which he ceases to be the knower. In the absence of the bodily bondage there can be no such thing as a knower knowing. To whom then can the world as the seen present itself?

As the seeing subject in man is a mental being and the seen object (the world) is of a mental form, the next verse deals zoith the subject of the identity of subject and object, of thought and world, of Vritti and Vishaya.

Verse 8.

शब्दादिरूपं भुवनं समस्तं
शब्दादिसत्तेन्द्रियवृत्तिभास्या। I
सत्तेन्द्रियाणां मनसो वशे स्यात्
मनोमयं तद्भुवनं वदामः॥

Sound and form, smell, touch and taste, these make up thy world.
Upon these the senses let the light.
In mind’s domain the senses move.
Hence the world is but the mind.

The appearance of the world as I have it is a collection of groups of sensations. The character of the world as it presents itself to my apprehension is such that I preceive it as something that is audible, visible, smellable, tangible and tastable. This world then, is a sum of sensations, presented apparently outside myself, that is, my embodied existence. These sensations or sense-activities manifest the quality of sound, form, smell, touch and taste, and are all in the ’domain of mind’. They form the sense-mind so to say, and are dependent upon mind and form part of mind itself. Indeed we can conclude that the world we cognize is but a projection or modification of the mind which throws the senses into activity resulting in the manifestation of the qualities of sound, form, etc., that make up the sum total of world-existence to me.

Here the underlying idea is that the world is but a gross form of the mind, which is subtle. Then it is to be understood that world and mind, the gross and the subtle, different only in their states are of the same substance, of one Truth, and therefore are in a relation of identity, tadatmya, and these two, the subtle and the gross, are derived from the one causal substance, which is dealt with in the next stanza.

Note. [When it is stated that the world is but the mind,’ by mind is meant a cosmic principle tattwa, manifest in the individual as well as in the Universal. It should be noted then that if the mind of X is withdrawn or dissolved, his world of mind alone disappears and not that of Y or of the Lord, the Universal].

It may be mentioned in this connection that it is an ancient conception that the world is a graded expansion and contraction made up of different systematic states and this fact is stressed by the statement that from the unmanifest avyakta comes the mahat (the Intelligent principle); from it the ‘ahamkara’ (the Ego), from this the tan-matras causal states of the senses that manifest or develop the qualities of sound, form, etc., which in their turn form the world.

The world and mind are never apart from each other; still it is the mind that lights up the world.

Verse 9.

धिया सहोदेति धियास्तमेति
लोकस्ततो धीप्रविभास्य एषः।
धीलोकजन्मक्षयधाम पूर्ण ।
सद्वस्तु जन्मक्षयशून्यमेकम् ॥

Thought and world together rise and together set.
Still by thought the world is lit.
In Existence Real, thought and world are formed and lost.
One and perfect, unborn is That, unending too.

The world appears and disappears with the I-thought which is the root of all thoughts, and both the world and the mind (thoughts) may be said to co-exist, to be inseparable. Yet this world’ of the senses is lit by the ’I-thought.’ For, thought represents a conscious principle and illuminates the world, the object that is illuminated or made known. As the world itself is stated to be mental in its form and is nothing but a grosser form of ’thought which is subtle, if all the thoughts are withdrawn and traced to their origin and support, then one can perceive the truth that both thought and world, subject and object, inner and outer, which appear and disappear together are really of one existence, and have a common source. Thus the latter half of the verse states ’In Existence Real, thought and world are formed and lost. Then what is the character of this Existence Real that brings forth, sustains and dissolves the subjective thought and the objective world? It is ‘One and Perfect, perfect and therefore not affected by the subtle thought and the gross world. It is ‘unborn and unending too’, while the inner (mind) and the outer (world) begin and end in It. It is substance, the cause, the material for all the subjective and objective manifestations. It is eternal, permanent and persistent and does not lose itself in its manifestations as thought in the subtle state or as thing in the gross. Though the source of the Manifold of the All, of world-expression and soul-formation, yet it is one.

NOTE:-In the commencement of the work meditation upon the existence Real, called niskala the Impersonal Brahman was enjoined and its character was suggested to be a normal supreme awareness of the self’s poise sahaja atma nistha. But the second verse suggested complete self-surrender to the Divine being, sakala brahman, the personal in a wide sense. A two-fold invocation was made in these two verses as the same Brahman can be viewed by our limited being as both Personal and Inpersonal. Then, in order to stress that really it is the one Purusha, the Spirit supreme, that becomes the world, the manifold existence, the third verse which is really the opening verse of the Shastra affirmed the cause to be a Lord of limitless power, ‘All are He’. The next verse, the fourth hastens to remove a possible misapprehension of the third verse by stating that the manifold is not the Absolute Truth of existence and that all religions begin with the triple truth of God world and soul, but find their culmination in a supreme reality, the ultimate Truth and thus reminds us of the Impersonal aspect. Thus the fifth verse proclaims that it is the exalted state of the Self alone which can transcend the ego and give us the Truth, and not all the intellectual gymnastics, the metaphysical speculations, the Shastraic disputations,—the whole dialectical machinery that is set to work to bring out the Truth for our realisation. Thus it appeals to the earnest mind and directs it to turn to the Self by means of nistha, some discipline of the inner life. In the next verse it is admitted that God, world and soul have all forms presented to the jiva; of whose existence each of us is directly and immediately aware, the soul that is embodied: but this is followed by the statement that these are really formless in the formless Ultimate Truth, the one supreme existence that transcends all forms. Thus this Shastra reminds us then and there of the truth that there is no real opposition between the Personal and the Impersonal, between saguna and nirguna and wherever the Personal, the iswara is mentioned, it is immediately suggested that the Impersonal aspect should not be lost sight of and that the Personal Brahman is an actual fact and must be admitted as tenable, and that the opposition between the Personal and the Impersonal aspects of Brahman, is not to be found in the One Indivisible which is both, but is a necessary creation of the analytical mind intoxicated with the pride of the subtle reasoning of its logic.

Similarly in the 7th, 8th and 9th verses, the Shastra proclaims the identity of the Individual with the Universal and suggests that the five-fold sheath or body of the jiva or the soul, is its five-fold world and that the five-fold universe is the body of the Lord. Then discussing the true nature of the mind as one of the five sheaths or koshas and of the world as mental in its form, it reduces the world of form to mind and mind to the I-thought and this I-thought is further traced to its source in the Supreme Reality, the One that is unborn and unending. Here it may be noted that the converse truth also is made clear that the Supreme Reality brings forth the I-thought which becomes the mind and this in its turn becomes the world of name and form.

Truth-Perception Sat-darshana is nothing but a stable poise in the Self, the Supreme Truth, by realisation of identity Tadatmya Nistha.

Verse 10.

भवन्तु सद्दर्शनसाधनानि
परस्य नामाकृतिभिः सपर्याः।
सद्वस्तुनि प्राप्ततदात्मभावा
निष्ठव सद्दर्शनमित्यवेहि ॥

For perception of the Truth, worship of the Supreme
In name and form is means indeed.
But the state of being that in natural poise of Self,
That alone is perception true.

Names of the Lord such as Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Indra and others, or his forms such as the Hiranmaya, the mystic gold-form of the Upanishad, or the eight-fold form Universal, asthamurti[^102]

[^102]: The Lord’s embodiment in created existence is Earth, Water, Fire, Air, Ether, Sun, Moon and yajamana, the soul that offers its all in sacrifice to the Lord., all these are means of worship leading to the ultimate Realisation of the Supreme Truth, sat-darsana. Worship by means of forms is indeed fruitful, and has a purpose and usefulness of its own, whether these forms are as imaged in the human mind, such as Shiva with his vehicle of the symbolic Bull vrsavahana or Vishnu seated on the Divine Eagle garudavahana, or whether these are as formed in the universal mind, such as Agni, Vayu and Surya. But the fruit of worship depends upon the grace of the worshipped Lord who responds to the measure of faith in the worshipper. The worshipped Lord, not confined to the particular form in which he is worshipped, responds to the call of the devout worshipper whose being in all its entirety is filled with faith and bestows on him the fruit of his worship. Worship by means of names and forms are a help indeed to the realisation of Brahman as our deepest being, the Self. "But the state of being that in natural poise of the Self is perception true.” Nistha the supreme state is verily sat-darsan real perception of the Truth.

And this is the nistha, the settled state in the Supreme Reality, in the one Substance, support and basis of the worshipper and the worshipped, in which is realised the identity of self with Brahman. In this verse, Truth-perception is described to be the highest poise of the self. In a subsequent verse (the 23rd), Self-perception or God-realisation is said to consist in the jiva or soul becoming food, i.e., object of enjoyment or experience to the Lord. So we have two descriptions of the one exalted state, sat-dorsana and atmadarsana, Truth-perception and Self-realisation. Similarly in the two invocatory verses commencing the work, this Supreme Brahman was described to be both Impersonal and Personal, Impersonal for purposes of kaivalya nistha the sole supreme poise, and Personal for sayujya, conscious union of the soul with Brahman. Thus we are reminded that the two aspects are presented for the two distinct paths of knowledge and devotion, that ultimately culminate in a Supreme Realisation, which, in view of the Oneness of the being in the jiva as well as in the Ishwara is mentioned as sat-darsana (nistha) and in view of the jiva’s relation in world-existence to Iswara is named atma-darsana sayujya.

Then search is suggested as a means, a discipline helpful to an earnest enquirer of the discriminating mind.

Verse 11.

द्वन्द्वानि सर्वाण्यखिलास्त्रिपुटयः
किञ्चित्समाश्रित्य विभान्ति वस्तु ।
तन्मार्गणे स्याद्गलितं समस्तं
न पश्यतां सच्चलनं कदापि ।

Dualities and Trinities on something do hang.
Supportless never appear they.
That searched, these loosen and fall,
There is the Truth. Who sees that never wavers.

All dualities are interdependent,-Self and not-self, conscient and inconscient, seer and seen, subject and object, and the like; and their truth is to be found in something which lends them its support from behind. The trinities, such as knower, known and knowledge derive their existence from something that is their source and support. A search for this something behind the dualities and the trinities leads to their disappearance while what remains in them is the Reality, their supreme Existence. They that perceive it by a sort of apprehending consciousness do not waver as theirs is an unshakable position, a firm status, in the Supreme for whoever is single-minded in pursuit of the Truth becomes indeed the very functioning of the Truth-principle. It is elsewhere stated by Shri Maharshi in answer to the question whether Brahman the Truth becomes known to the knowing mind[^103]

[^103]: 1Ramana Gita स्वात्मभूतं यदि ब्रह्म ज्ञातुं वृत्तिः प्रवर्तते स्वात्मकारा तदा भूत्वा न पृथक् प्रतितिष्ठति ॥, “If the thought seeks to know Brahman that has becomes one’s own self, it becomes self-minded and assumes the form of the self, and as such does not and cannot remain separate or maintain its position as knower distinct from the known, Atman, Self, Brahman."

Thus by a psychological search for the Self implying a rejection of all the mental forms involving dualities and trinities, the possibility is mentioned here that one can arrive at their root and support, which is none other than the Supreme Self that needs no other support and which being realised, no further search is possible or necessary for the human mind, as that is the unshakable state beyond which there is nothing to seek.

Then from the 12th to the 21st verse, various kinds of meditation on subtle truths are mentioned as helpful to the enquiring mind.

Verse 12.

विद्या कथं भाति न चेदविद्या
विद्यां विना कि प्रविभात्यविद्या।
द्वयं च कस्येति विचार्य मूल-
स्वरूपनिष्ठा परमार्थविद्या॥

If ignorance were not, how can knowledge be?
If knowledge were not, how can ignorance be?
Searching close the source of both,
Settled state there is knowledge true.

The dual terms of knowledge and ignorance are relative and one should discover their root in something, which is neither of them, by a kind of psychological examination of self. For instance, when I say ’I am aware,’ or ’I am ignorant, the quest that is suggested here is to find out who it is that knows or who it is that knows not. The quest, when serious, involves a close watchfulness bearing fruit in the discerning of a supreme awareness in the self, which is the source of all forms of consciousness. And this is real knowledge, for it is not a mental conception, or intellectual conviction but a revelation, a realisation, an experience, a consciousness that is supreme knowledge paramartha vidya.

Thus after speaking of the search for the source of the duality of knowledge and ignorance, the Shastra proceeds to explain the subtler method of getting at the ultimate truth by direct experience and knowledge by identity, by meditating upon and comprehending the truth underlying the knower, knowledge and known.

Verse 13.

बोद्धारमात्मानमजानतो यो
बोधः स कि स्यात्परमार्थबोधः।
बोधस्य बोध्यस्य च संश्रयं स्वं
विजानतस्तद्वितयं विनश्येत् ॥

The knower knowing himself not, Can knowledge such be awakening true? The self being seen, the support of both, Dissolves the duality of knower and known.

The knowledge of the knowing subject who does not know himself is no true knowledge. But who ever knows the support of knowledge and known to be the knower himself realises that both, knowledge and known do not have separate existence apart from himself, the knowing subject, and as such they both (knowledge and known) perish, in the sense that they are lost to his perception as independent existence. We are to note the underlying idea here that the true character of the Real is such that it is the substance and support not merely of the knower but also of the knowledge and the known. And he that realises, that is, knows by experience, that he is not different from the Real, the Self supreme, the ultimate Being, perceives that knowledge and known also are not different from that Real of which he has knowledge by identity. That is why it is stated that on the knower’s realising his self, the other two of the trinity (knowledge and known) disappear and whatever is Real in them persists and that is the same as the one Reality of all existence, of the subject within and of the object without. Though all the members of the trinity have a common origin and have the same truth, knowledge of the subjective being, the knower is stressed because it is nearer the conscious light and the other two are its grosser modifications. It may not be out of place to mention here what the Maharshi states on the subject of triputi in the Ramana Gita (Ch. XII. Slo. 4,5).

"The knower that knows himself as not different from the Real, swarupa, knows that known and knowledge are not apart from him.”

“The knower that is cut off (in experience) from the Real, knows the known and the knowledge to be separate from himself”.

Knowledge of the knower the subjective being, leads to the source, the Real. It is supreme knowledge; it is once again emphatically declared to be consciousness different from both knowledge and ignorance.

Verse 14.

निद्रा न विद्या ग्रहणं न विद्या
गृह्णाति किञ्चिन्न यथार्थबोधे ।
निद्रापदार्थग्रहणेतरा स्यात्
चिदेव विद्या विलसन्त्यशून्या॥

Insensibility is no knowledge, nor is apprehension of objects seen.
Nothing is seen in awareness supreme.
Different from both is consciousness there.
No void is that-the knowledge, luminous and true.

Insensibility or a state of sleep in which there is no sense-activity is no knowledge. It is an established fact that in the consciousness of the self, nothing is seen as separate from or outside of itself, and an ignoramus may mistake such a state for perfect oblivion, a complete non-recognition of objects. To remove this misconception it is stated that Self-knowledge Atmajnana is no insensibility. Nor is it apprehension of objects seen. This is a knowledge indeed, but a knowledge of the known as differentiated from the knower. True knowledge is different from both of these, yet it is consciousness that lends its light to the duality of knowledge and ignorance. It is ’luminous’, not inert, or indifferent to the duality, dvandva, though it is different from the relational knowledge and ignorance.

The next verse gives the analogy of gold in ornamental forms to make clear that Truth is consciousness and One alone, and that the different forms of it are not really separate from their original, the one Substance.

Verse 15.

सत्यश्चिदात्मा विविधाकृतिश्चित्
सिध्यत्पृथक्सत्यचितो न भिन्ना।
भूषाविकाराः किमु सन्ति सत्यं
विना सुवर्ण पृथगन लोके ॥

Consciousness, the Self alone is real. Manifold is its form indeed. Can they be real from the one apart? Separate are not the ornamental forms from gold, their Reality. Can they be?

The character of the Self is Consciousness which is Truth. It is one. The various forms of Consciousness are not separate from it. These forms do not exist apart from the one Consciousness; just as various ornaments are formed of one substance, gold, and the gold persists in all its mutable forms, the one Consciousness persists in all subjective soul-being or in the objective world-existence. We have already noted that one substance, Swaroopa, manifests in a multiple form. Here the character of that substance is clearly affirmed to be the Supreme Consciousness, of which ourselves and the world about us are but subtler and grosser forms.

The basis of the I-notion must be discovered by the discerning intelligence and that is surely an aid to the questing mind.

Verse 16.

तयुष्मदोरस्मदि संप्रतिष्ठा
तस्मिन्विनष्टेऽस्मदि मूलबोधात् ।
तद्युष्मदस्मन्मतिजितैका
स्थितिवलन्ती सहजाऽऽत्मनः स्यात् ॥

The notions ’He’ and ’Thou’ are bound with ’I’. In the realised root of ’I’ vanishes the ’I’, in the inborn luminous state of Self, the Real ’I’ Free of the notions ’He”Thou’ and ’I’.

The notion of tat, ’He’ which refers to the third personal pronoun and the notion of ’Thou,’ the second personal pronoun have meaning for me in so far as they are related to the notion of ’I’. The I-notion is the supreme significance of my being, and it is with reference to it that the other notions ’He’ and ’Thou’ have significance and they cease to be intelligible in the absence of the Inotion. Thus to understand the real character of the notions ’He’ and ’Thou’ one has to discern the basis of the I-notion and when one is awakened to its source the three notions ’He’, ’Thou and I are lost in the luminous state that is inborn of the Self the Real ’I’. It is normal supreme poise of the Self, sahaja atma sthiti, ever luminous, uncreated and one. Thus we have the assurance that such a normal state of a deeper consciousness of the Self is attained by the search for the source of the basic I-notion with which are bound up the other two notions of ’He’ and ’Thou’.

The Purusha, the spirit that is beyond all space and time is yet pervasive of all space and enduring in all time. Hence one can get at the ultimate Truth by contemplating upon the true character of time and of space. This is the teaching of the next two verses.

Verse 17.

भूतं भविष्यच्च भवत्स्वकाले
तद्वर्तमानस्य विहाय तत्त्वम् ।
हास्या न किं स्याद्गतभाविचर्चा
विनकसंख्यां गणनेव लोके ॥

Past was present when that was current. The future coming will then be present. Unaware of the present in threefold time, Vain to discourse on future and past. Canst thou the numbers count, without the unit one?

When it was occurring, past was current, i.e., present. Similarly the future, when it occurs will then be present. Thus one can see that the real character of the threefold time, past, present and future is one eternal flow, the present. It is an eternal now. In itself without a break, an unbroken continuity, itself indivisible, it gives room for the mind to relate it to what has happened and to what is yet to happen, and thus to divide it into past, present and future. Hence without knowing the true nature of the present, it is futile, if not impossible, to discourse upon past and future, or to think of having a true knowledge of them, just as numbers cannot be counted without the unit one. Counting not merely begins with ’one’ the unit, but it is the unit that swells the numbers and is present in every number. The true character of time is an eternal present; really, past and future are in themselves present. This eternal now is the Time-spirit kalatma which is but the becoming of Brahman, the Real, and is like the string in a garland, present in and as the whole indivisible time movement.

One way to attain settled poise in the Self is by meditation upon Time. One can meditate upon Time by being closely watchful and thus becoming intimately aware of the interval between thoughts of the past and those of the future and can realise that the consciousness that backs the incessant thought-flow is really the eternal now which is not other than the Brahman itself, the ultimate Truth.

We sense and feel that we are the body and our embodied existence is subject to space and time. But if our existence is traced to its source in the infinite Self, the ultimate Reality beyond space and time, then it would be clear that we are beyond space and time, and yet have a spatial and temporal existence.

Verse 18.

क्व भाति दिक्कालकथा विनाऽस्मान्
दिक्काललीलेह वपुर्वयं चेत् ।
न क्वापि भामो न कदापि भामो
वयं तु सर्वत्र सदा च भामः॥

Where is space without me and where is time? The body exists in space and time, but no body am I. Nowhere I am, in no time I am. Yet am I everywhere in all time.

Space and Time exist with reference to the subjective being which is a conscious principle. When the force of Consciousness manifests the mind, assuming spatial and temporal terms of existence, the subjective being becomes mental, manomaya, in its character. It is necessary here to recall to mind what was stated in the beginning of the Shastra, that "All are He...a Lord of Limitless power". The power to assume a manifold existence is inherent in the Spirit, the Purusha. And manifold form presupposes extension or space; and there is no movement without time, for time itself is movement. Thus the force of consciousness as movement and extension becomes time and space for mental comprehension. It must be borne in mind that space and time which are but the twin terms of the creative conscious force are inalienable from Existence-Consciousness itself sat-cit, which is the substantial Truth, Brahman. Brahman and His Shakti, Consciousness and Force are really in a relation of identity like light and its radiation. “In speech alone can one separate substance from its force, never in fact, never in experience.” Therefore when the Self whose character is Consciousness becomes mentalised, it becomes subject to space and time in an embodied existence. But the supreme truth of ourselves is the ultimate reality which is the basis of the spatial and temporal manifestation of the mental being. Hence it is easy to understand the statement that there is no space or time without me, the mental being. If I am embodied, then there can well be the talk of ’space and time’ which are but manifestations of the conscious force. But ‘nowhere I am’; my root-being is not subject to space; ’In no time I am’; nor is my self-being subject to time. Yet as the Real, my ultimate being has become all space and time; "I am everywhere, in all time.”

Subject to space and time, the conscious self is mental; beyond space and time it transcends the mind. Thus the Existent, the Spirit, Purusha, is spoken of in his two-fold aspect, the dynamic and the static and here again we are reminded of the One Brahman that is at once sakala and niskala, Relative and Personal as well as Absolute and Impersonal, of which repeated mention has been made in the earlier part.

Next the difference in experience between the ignorant and the man of Realisation is mentioned.

Verse 19.

देहात्मभावे ज्ञजडौ समाना-
वेकस्य देहे हृदि दीप्त आत्मा।
आक्रम्य देहं च जगच्च पूर्णः
परस्य मेयं तनुमानमात्मा ॥

Body is Self to the wise and the ignorant alike. To the body is limited the ignorant one’s self. The self effulgent in the Heart of the wise, Possesses the body and the world around, And stands limitless and perfect.

The idea that the self is the body is common to the man that has realised the Truth and to him that has not. In the Heart of the man of realisation, in the centre of the Purusha and the seat of the Lord in man, the Supreme is effulgent as the Self, the supreme ’I’ ‘possessing the body and the world around, perfect and limitless’. But the ignorant, the undeveloped man has only the body itself for his self; for he feels and thinks that he is not separate from the body and that in fact he is the body. But the wise, the advanced man realises that he is a Self distinct from the body—and the Self itself is his body, the Self that is ever effulgent in the Heart as the incessant I-consciousness possessing the body and the world at large. This Self, the Infinite, the real and perfect ’l’ is experienced by the wise man, the man of realisation as his own body. Thus the difference between the wise and the ignorant lies in experience, which is dynamic in its character, and not in an intellectual conviction which is but the flower of philosophic reasoning.

To put it briefly: to the man that knows, Existence Real that is the All, is the Self and this includes his particular embodiment. To the ignorant, his body alone is the Self.

Because of the deficiency in understanding capacity of the unregenerate, his knowledge is imperfect and defective. To mistake his imperfect and, in this sense, faulty understanding for complete knowledge is false knowledge. It is not that the defective knowledge itself is false.

In other words, the undeveloped man experiences the Self in his own body, while the developed, the wise man realises his Self in the universal body, in the world, and his Self is not limited to his particular embodied existence. The grand idea of this verse has been fully discussed in the Introduction.

The difference between the wise and the ignorant as well as the element common to them has been thus discussed with reference to the individual body. The next verse takes up the world, the universal body; with reference to that it speaks of the difference between the wise and the ignorant.

Verse 20.

अज्ञस्य विज्ञस्य च विश्वमस्ति
पूर्वस्य दृश्यं जगदेव सत्यम् ।
परस्य दृश्याश्रयभूतमेकं
सत्यं प्रपूर्ण प्रविभात्यरूपम् ॥

To the ignorant and the wise alike the world exists. To the former, the world observed alone is real. To the wise, the formless source of the visible Is the one world, Real and Perfect.

The world is real to the ignorant and the wise, to the unregenerate and the regenerate; and both hold that the world exists. The ignorant man who is not aware of the source of the world he sees, takes the world as it appears to his superficial sense for ultimate truth; to him what appeals to his sense-mind sums up Reality, the whole truth. But the wise, he in whom is developed the capacity to apprehend the basic and therefore, the whole truth of the world that is visible, perceives the formless source of the world of form as the One and limitless Truth, the Real world that is luminous and perfect.

The wise man sees the world of forms, but does not stop with it like the ignorant; he sees in it the formless Brahman that permeates all existence. Hence his knowledge takes the essential truth of the world as the Real world, which includes but is not confined to the world of forms. Hence it is knowledge, true and perfect. The knowledge of the ignorant is limited to the visible, to the surface, and does not reach down to its essential truth. Therefore it is imperfect, partial, defective. As in the previous verse here also it must be noted that this partial knowledge is no falsehood, but to mistake it for perfect and integral knowledge is illusion and falsehood, mithya.

It would be futile arguing in a circle to discuss Fate vidhi and human effort prayatna, but they that know the origin of both are affected neither by karma nor by effort.

Verse 21.

विधेः प्रयत्नस्य च कोऽपि वाद
स्तयोर्द्वयोर्मूलमजानतां स्यात् ।
विधेः प्रयत्नस्य च मूलवस्तु
सञ्जानतां नैव विधिन यत्नः।।

Of Fate and Effort They are given to talk, that know not whence come forth the two. Those that know the source of both, Beyond the twin are they, by Fate untouched and by Effort too.

The momentum of an unseen force, adrsta, working out certain results, the fruit of action karma commenced in previous states or lives prarabdha is called Fate vidhi, daiva. And purusakara is human exertion. Effort and fate are commonly considered as cause and effect, but really there is a First Cause, a Final Effect which is neither karma nor effort; and that is beyond the two. Whoever realises the source of these two is not subject to their influence.

The theory of Karma is a puzzle to many. All that is done and experienced by me now, is the result of past action, the working of Karma, fate, and the effort that I now make, moved and sustained by a sense of freedom is also the working of fate, of an unseen Force that gives the momentum for my present exertion. Again Fate or Karma itself is the effect of a past effort, and present effort is an effect of past Karma. Effort as an effect is traced to its cause in fate and fate again is pushed back to its cause in an antecedent effort. This kind of viewing fate and effort as cause and effect leads to a regressus ad infinitum. Therefore one must look for something behind the two, behind this movement of vidhi and prayatna of Fate and human exertion. And once that something is known, these two change their colour, present an utterly different aspect and that is the only right solution of the problem of fate and freewill.

This much may be stated here. Neither vidhi fate nor effort is free or independent. vidhi depends on effort as it is always considered the result of one’s own past exertion. And one’s exertion depends upon his desire and his tendency to do a particular act. Desire is natural to or co-exists with the ego-self called the jiva that poses or considers itself free. But real freedom of the jiva, the individual, is in the Self, the Lord that supports the individual existence. Thus both fate and effort are found to depend upon the free Self, the Lord who alone gives the momentum for action that inevitably yields its fruit. Therefore it is urged that the source of Fate and Freewill must be looked for in the Self which alone is really free and independent.

Here reference may be made with profit to the discussion of human effort and Divine Grace in the Bhoomika.

Then we find it stated in the next verse that knowledge of the Self is of the nature of a supreme poise of the Self.

Verse 22.

यदीशितुर्वीक्षणमीक्षितार-
मवीक्ष्य तन्मानसिकेक्षणं स्यात् ।
न द्रष्टुरन्यः परमो हि तस्य
वीक्षा स्वमूले प्रविलीय निष्ठा।II

To see the Lord without seeing the seer, That is but seeing with the mind. Separate from the seer, the Supreme is not. Real sight is the poise supreme of the Self in the deep.

If one sees the Lord without perception of one’s own Self which sees things other than itself, then this seeing of the Lord is but a mental seeing, a mental figure which however true in its own kind is only a mental image of the Lord, and not the highest and truest perception of Him. For real perception of the Lord is impossible without realisation of the self that sees. Thus Self-realisation is a condition precedent to God realisation. In order to impress the truth that Self-realisation consists of an intimate experience of God as one’s own deepest being, the Self, ever luminous as the supreme I-consciousness in the mystic centre called the Heart, it is suggested that the seeing self must first be realised before one can perceive the Lord. And in the realisation of one’s own self, the root of one’s existence is experienced as the source of all existences, the Lord, and nothing is there which is different from Him or which is not Himself, ’All are He’; and this is the true perception of the Lord. But the subjective self the visayi, the mental being manomaya can have a vision of the Lord and that is naturally a mental vision of God.

But the Self behind the mental being does not perceive the Lord by means of the mind, but sees Him by itself without any means other than itself, and this is direct perception.

There is a natural and supreme poise of the self, which is the source of mind and there the Lord is realised as one’s own deepest being, the Real Self. That is why it is stated ’separate from the seer is not the supreme.’ It is a fact that the jiva or the soul is identical with parama the supreme being in the sense that both are of the same consciousness. But this knowledge by identity presupposes or involves a consciousness which is not mental in its character, a consciousness which is the basis not only of one’s own being but of all-being as well as of God-being. This consciousness then is a settled natural state of the Self, a sublime and unshakable poise, and this is attained by the ego-mind or the mental being withdrawing itself from the outer and going deeper into its origin in the deepest being, the Self where the individual soul and the universal Lord are one and known by identity.

Then we have a description of Self-perception atmadarsan.

Verse 23.

आत्मानमीक्षेत परं प्रपश्ये-
दित्यागमोक्तेः सुलभो न भावः।
नात्मैव दृश्यो यदि का कथेशे
स्वयं तदनीभवनं तदीक्षा।

‘See thyself and see the Lord.’ That is the revealed word and hard is its sense indeed. For the seeing Self is not to be seen. How then is sight of the Lord ? To be food unto Him, that indeed is to see Him.

The sense of the authoritative utterance ’See the Self and see the Lord’ is difficult to grasp. For if the Self itself cannot be seen, how can the question of seeing the Lord arise? Here it is the nature of ’seeing’, perception or realisation of the Self that has got to be understood. With the object of revealing its true character, the seeing of the Lord is described by an illuminating phrase as being ’food unto Him’. The seeing soul is never seen; it is always the seer, the subject never an object to be apprehended by anything other than itself. If this soul, the ego-self, the Jeeva, the subjective being, attempts to know its Lord, its own deepest being, it automatically withdraws itself from its pre-occupations with divergent thoughts in the subjective or divergent forms in the objective existence, and finds itself drawn to something deeper than itself and once it experiences its original being, its source, the deep Self in this manner, it ceases to be cut off in consciousness from its Supreme source to which it thus becomes a food, as it were, an experience and an enjoyment.

And there is no dualism dvaita here, because of this relation between isvara and jiva, between God and Soul, as enjoyer and enjoyed. For this relation is one of identity realised in a conscious union of the soul with its Lord, of the ego with the Self in the one basic Consciousness. Even before the Self allows the ego to get merged in it, there is no dvaita in the sense that the ego-self has an absolutely separate existence apart from its real Self, as the ego is nothing but a temporary formation in the consciousness of the Self. It is the Self that is behind the ego and though the ego is not aware of it so long as it is in a state of ignorance or bondage, yet it becomes aware of it once it is free from its preoccupations and prepossessions. When it is thus aware, it feels drawn to the deeper being of which it is the surface or the apparent self.

Thus we see that this description of Atma-Darshan or Selfperception does not contradict that of sat-darsan or Truth-perception (vide verse 10) as both refer to the same exalted state of the Self, nistha which can also be viewed as sayujya, with reference to the real Self holding the ego-self jiva in conscious union.

In the next verse it is pointed out how perception of Self does not differ from God-perception.

Verse 24.

धिये प्रकाशं परमो वितीर्य
स्वयं धियोऽन्तः प्रविभाति गुप्तः।
धियं परावर्त्य धियोऽन्तरेऽत्र
संयोजनान्नेश्वरदृष्टिरन्या॥

The Supreme gives the light to thought. Within it, Himself hidden, He shines. Hence to turn in the thought to unite within, that is to see the Lord. How else to see?

The Supreme Lord, the Creator, is Himself consciousness; and when by the force that is inherent in and inseparable from the consciousness various forms of it are created, the light of the consciousness lends its support to them for their sustenance. But this consciousness being the cause of all causes, subtler than the subtle, it lies hidden in thought, i.e., the mind, at the same time supporting its movement. So if the diffused mind with its scattered thoughts, gathers itself up and gets in to discern the light that supports it, what remains is the consciousness of the Lord that has become the Self. Therefore to withdraw from the Outer and turn to the Inner is to see the Self and to unite with the Lord, whose light is the controlling and directing principle of the thought-mind.

The next three verses discuss the character of the ego.

Verse 25.

न वक्ति देहोऽहमिति प्रसुप्तौ
न कोऽपि नाभूवमिति प्रवक्ति ।
यत्रोदिते सर्वमुदेति तस्य
धियाऽहमः शोधय जन्मदेशम् ॥

No one says ’the body is self,’ Nor asserts ’I was not in the deeper sleep’. The ’I’ rising, rises all. With thy keen eye discern that ’I’.

It is common experience, whatever one’s philosophy be, that the sense of ’l’ representing personal identity is distinct from the body and hence no one says ’I am the body’. Nor does any one deny that he existed in deep sleep when the world of his waking state was practically lost to him and he could not relate his waking state to whatever he was in sleep. Hence perhaps he believes after returning to the waking state that he was practically non-existent; but he cannot and does not assert that really he was not in sleep, for the simple reason that there is an unbroken continuity of self-consciousness in him, and that personal identity is maintained. Thus there is a persistent ’l’ in waking as well as in sleep, irrespective of the changing states. When this ‘I’ rises, the whole world presents itself to the mind. What is the source of this ‘I’?

Explore the source of this I-notion by a keen and unrelaxing watchfulness.

“Whoever incessantly watches the rise of ’I’, merges himself in the Supreme mahat.” (Uma Sahasra).

Thus we have it that all phenomenal existence presents itself to the ego-consciousness. The next verse speaks of the ego-formation and mentions it by various names.

Verse 26.

देहो न जानाति सतो न जन्म
देहप्रमाणोऽन्य उदेति मध्ये।
अहङकृतिग्रन्थिविबन्धसूक्ष्म-
शरीरचेतोभवजीवनामा॥

The body is blind, unborn is the Real Self. The twain between, within the body’s limit, There a something else appears. That is the knot of matter and spirit, the Mind, the living soul, the body subtle, the egoself. That is Samsara the revolving wheel (of life and death).

What is this ’I’ to which the whole world of phenomena presents itself? It cannot be the body which is insentient; nor can it be the unborn self which is perfect consciousness. Here we have the authoritative assertion of Bhagawan Maharshi that between the twain, something appears within the body’s limit. Between the unborn self which is the basis of the I-notion in all beings and the insentient jada the visible body, there crops up something which is called the ego-self distinct on the one hand from the unborn self and on the other from the body, and to this extent it is at once pervasive and limited. Thus, this ego-self partakes of the character of both the self and the body as it is formed betwixt the two and serves as a liaison between them.

Then various names are mentioned to denote its various functions. It is the ahamkara the ego, which is a fleeting formation, a reflection, of the self with a certain fixity behind it. The conscious self is free, but this is limited and bound to the body. The statement that the ego is a formation between the self and the body and links them together, as it were, is quite peculiar to Shri Maharshi’s philosophic outlook and expressive of his personal experience. This fact is made clearer when he calls the ahamkara by the name of cit-jada-granthi, a psycho-physical knot connecting spirit with matter. It is true that the granthi-idea is at least as ancient as the Upanishads, but here it receives a special treatment with a significant stress.

And because it is a knot, a tie between spirit and matter, it is called bandha, bondage. It lies between the causal and the gross, between the karana self and the sthula deha and so is subtle suksma. It is limited to the body and has bodily functions and hence is called the subtle body, suksma sarira.

Of the two main elements of the subtle body, prana and manas (life force and mind-stuff), mind is nearer the conscious light. Hence with the stress falling upon this element the subtle body is called the mind. But it is the life-force in the living being that manifests the mind in which the ego poses itself as the Self. With the stress shifted to prana it is called the jiva, the living being. It is this jiva, the ego-self, the soul in the making, so to say, that turns round the wheel of birth and death; hence it is samsara.

The other points bearing upon this subject of ego have been discussed in the Introduction.

The play of the ego is described in the next verse.

Verse 27.

रूपोद्भवो रूपततिप्रतिष्ठो
रूपाशनो धूतगृहीतरूपः।
स्वयं विरूपः स्वविचारकाले
धावत्यहड़कारपिशाच एषः॥

Born of form, rooted in forms, Living on forms, ever changing its forms, Itself formless, flitting when questioned, Such is the ego-ghost.

The ego was stated to be a subtle formation moving between matter and spirit linking the self with the body. It was characterised as a psycho-physical knot in the material body of the individual. Its true character is described here in the statement that though it is a formation it has no form of its own. As has been already remarked, it is a figure of the Self formed in the subtle being of mind-stuff and life-force, here called the subtle body, and it is ever shifting from form to form, as it is ’born and rooted in forms of mind, which is nothing but an incessant thought-movement, a creation of the conscious-force.

The ego is the apparent self, supported at its root by the light of the conscious self. It is drawn to external objects and is moved to and absorbed in them by the subtle body of ’mind and life with which it identifies itself. In fact it is formed and dissolved in the subtle stuff itself.

Indeed this ego-self ahamkara is called jiva in the preceding verse; but the dissolution of the ego leads to the destruction of ego-life and ego-sense and not at all to that of individuality. The ego, plunging into the abyss of the Self in a serious quest to know itself, makes a deeper stratum of consciousness come to the surface and that is the Real ’I’, the ultimate reference of existence, the supreme significance of self-being, which is remotely reflected and temporarily represented on the surface by the ego or the apparent self, atmabhasa; (cf. 32nd verse. “Then flashes forth another ’I’).

The search for the ego and its total abandonment is an indispensable condition of the conquest.

Verse 28.

भावेऽहमः सर्वमिदं विभाति
लयेऽहमो नैव विभाति किञ्चित् ।
तस्मादहरूपमिदं समस्तं
तन्मार्गणं सर्वजयाय मार्गः॥

With the ego-self rising, all appear. On its setting, they disappear. Hence is all this but the ego’s form. The quest for it is the way to conquest.

So much has been said of the ego, its character and origin, its pose and play that we are now in a position to appreciate the truth of the statement "The ego rising, all rises.’ But it should not be misunderstood that the world, whatever its real character, depends for its existence upon my ego or any other ego. It only means that the world as it presents itself to my ego-sense, that is, as a separate independent existence manifest in qualities and quantities, ceases to do so in the absence of a consciousness formed as the ego which uses the world of appearance as a suggestion from which it draws out its forms in qualities and quantities, in which it revels. If this ego is merged or outlived, the world of forms as we have it vanishes and in its place the world of Reality (vide verse 20) presents itself to the surviving persisting, supreme consciousness of the Self which is not the ego. Hence to search for the ego and conquer it (by abandoning it) is the indispensable condition for the conquest, and possession of the All-and this involves a control over the appearances that screen the Truth, the Real Self from the external and surface being, (cf. verses 5 and 6.)

Nishtha the supreme poise of the Self results from the merging of the ego implemented by an earnest quest.

Verse 29.

सत्या स्थिति हमुदेति यत्र
तच्चोदयस्थानगवेषणेन ।
विना न नश्यद्यदि तन्न नश्येत्
स्वात्मैक्यरूपा कथमस्तु निष्ठा ।

That is the Real state, where the ego lives not. Its birth-place sought, the ego dissolves. Nowise else can one attain The supreme state of one’s own Self.

There is no formation of the ego in the state of supreme reality of the Self. This is a truth that survives the ego, even as it is always present behind the appearance of the ego. Though it is present in all states, even during the persistence of the ego, its presence is not felt in egoistic existence. When the ego-self feels the pressure of a need to know its own source, or feeling the urge of a supreme impulse gets into a movement of serious quest for its origin, it loses itself. Loss of ego results in the realisation of the oneness of the ego-self with the real ’I’ the deeper self in that exalted settled state called nistha (vide 32nd verse).

Having pointed out many methods of quest, the Shastra now enjoins a different method, that of plunging in. This is really the essence of Hridaya Vidya, the mystic discipline that leads to the central seat of the Purusha, the Spirit in man.

Verse 30.

कूपे यथा गाढजले तथाऽन्त-
निमज्ज्य बुद्धया शितया नितान्तम् ।
प्राणं च वाचं च नियम्य चिन्वन्
विन्देनिजाहङकृतिमूलरूपम् ॥

As in a well of water deep, Dive deep with Reason cleaving sharp. With speech, mind and breath restrained, Exploring thus mayest thou discover the real source of ego-self.

Just as one forgets all other thoughts and keeps aside all other cares, and holding breath and speech gets into the well and plunges deep to find the lost article; even so one has to forget for the moment all his responsibilities and cares and take a deep plunge into the deeper truth of himself holding calm his breath and mind which would otherwise dissipate his energy and divide his interests. Thus he gets into a movement of plunge that deepening and deepening with a vigilant and discerning eye develops into a supreme awareness.

The methods hitherto suggested are all some sort of search with the mind and indeed they yield results of their own: and the earnestness of the search determines the measure of success. But in this verse the method called ’Plunge’ is suggested, and this is the real test of earnestness. For an earnest whole-hearted attempt involves the gathering up of all one’s divided interests and dissipated energy into a concentrated effort of the whole man, of his being in all its entirety. It is not a partial attempt by the mind or by means of controlling the life-breath.

Here restraint of breath and speech are suggested as a means and an accompanying condition of the ‘Plunge’. Restraint of speech suggests a mind equipped for the attempt with preliminary calm. Restraint of breath also is spoken of here both as a means and as a necessary condition. It is easy to see that it naturally accompanies a serious attempt of this kind. but how is it a means ? The discipline of regulating the breath has a value to life-breath, as it clears away to a certain extent the impurities that are the heritage of a life that is divided in its interest. Besides, the discipline of regulating the breath, pranayama, gives a certain purity to life in the body and thereby helps the mind to have control over itself by getting clear of the arrogating advances of life upon it. An impure and weak mind is a slave of life which is ever out for the satisfaction of appetite—hunger and thirst—and is full of desire for enjoyment of sensual objects. The sadhana by which prana is purified goes a long way to purify and elevate the mind.

[It must be noted that what is enjoined here is the adoption of any means, that will enable one to take a determined dive to find the Real in the deep. Though the Maharshi’s attitude to Sadhana may be summed up in one word nistha leading to or realised in prapatti, he has no predilection to any of the stereotyped yogas, for instance the Jnanayoga of neti (not this) or the Bhaktiyoga with its eight limbs of Shravana, Kirtana etc, or the Rajayoga that aims solely at the mind becoming entranced into a state undisturbed by the world.]

Then Vichara or quest is described as a quest for the self by the calm collected and deepening mind.

Verse 31.

मौनेन मज्जन्मनसा स्वमूल-
चर्चेव सत्यात्मविचारणं स्यात् ।
एषोऽहमेतन्न मम स्वरूप-
मिति प्रमा सत्यविचारणाङ्गम् ॥

The mind through calm in deep plunge enquires. That alone is real quest for the self. "This I am not ’mine is not this’. Ideas such help forward the quest.

When the mind becomes calm, free from all thoughts other than the single thought of the Self and begins to search for it in silence, then alone real quest for the Self vicara may be said to begin. Shastraic discussions and intellectual discrimination leading to the conviction “I am the Self, the seer, am never the seen, this body is not I or mine” are indeed a help to the quest, but not the quest itself. As they can be of help, they are not to be despised.

[There is a time-worn view in scholastic circles that Shastraic knowledge in this life or in a previous one is a condition of competency adhikara for Brahmavidya, knowledge of Brahman. This view receives no support here].

When as the result of the fading of the ego, the apparent self on the surface, one gets liberated from the bonds of ignorance, the Real T, the self as the basic consciousness and support of the individual in which the ego has its play, comes up to the surface. This ’I’ is not the ego, but an unceasing flash of the Supreme I-consciousness, of the Supreme Itself.

Verse 32.

गवेषणात्प्राप्य हृदन्तरं तत्
पतेदहन्ता परिभुग्नशीर्षा ।
अथाहमन्यत्स्फुरति प्रकृष्टं
नाहङकृतिस्तत्परमेव पूर्णम् ॥

Get at the Heart within by search. The ego bows its head and falls. Then flashes forth another. ’I’, not the ego that, but the Self, Supreme, Perfect.

When by search one somehow gets the Heart, the ego-self at once drops, falls into abysmal depths as it were, never to return to the surface in its habitual manner of looking at itself and the world and other beings in it as separate existences. Does this mean that the ego-self is lost for ever? No, the ego is lost, but only to make way for its original, the Real Self, to come up to the surface by either using the regenerate ego-self as an instrument or by transforming it to a true reflection so as to make its presence felt on the surface, the effect of which is an experience, a feeling in the ego-self that it is one with its deeper and Real Self and that it is this deeper being that has assumed the form of the apparent self in the phenomenal existence. Hence it is stated that it is not the ego but the Supreme itself param eva vastu that flashes forth as the incessant ’l’, after the dropping of the ego into the all devouring silence of the Self.

[The incessant flashing of the supreme ’I’ is mentioned as suddha ahambhava sphurti (vide, com. on the I verse. cf. Ramana Gita ch II)].

Then we have it stated that the real nature of the conduct in life of a Jeevanmukta, one liberated alive is incomprehensible to the external mind which can not get out of its rules of conduct.

Verse 33.

अहङकृति यो लसति ग्रसित्वा
कि तस्य कार्य परिशिष्टमस्ति।
किचिद्विजानाति स नात्मनोऽन्यत्
तस्य स्थिति भावयितुं क्षमः कः॥

What remains there for him to do who swallows the ego and shineth forth? Separate from the Self, there is nought to him. His condition to conceive, who is there so bold?

A jeevan-mukta is he, who, liberated from the ego-grip, not merely ceases to be in the egoistic consciousness, but is firmly rooted in the deeper truth of himself, poised in the consciousness of the Real, the Self. Therefore ’What is there for him to do?’ from the egoistic standpoint? For, the purpose of the ego is fulfilled in the development of the deeper consciousness of the Self which is free to dissolve it ụtterly or to retain it as a transformed instrument for purposes of its own, for using it in a manner quite in consonance with the laws of the deeper Spirit known to the Real, the Self, ever free and eternal, the Divine. Hence we have it that the mukta the liberated ’swallows the ego and shines forth.’ It is not an utter loss of the ego-self. It is taken alive, so to speak, for use by the deeper Truth, the real and the divine Self. As the mukta realises his identity with his deeper truth, he is said to swallow the ego and shine forth. He realises that what is the self in him is the Brahman, the Divine. Though he sees the different appearances in the One Infinite he sees them as not different from the Self of which he is deeply aware by an inner intimacy. The ego is there, feels the presence, power and pressure of its own deeper self and is moved to act as guided by the Light behind. Hence it is said “There is nought to him separate from the self’. Such a condition is indeed inconceivable to the mind with its gaze turned to the external.

The manifestation of higher powers and the change that comes upon the embodiment of the jivan-mukta have been mentioned in the Ramana Gita. (Vide Introduction.)

Weakness of understanding gives rise to long discussions.

Verse 34.

आह स्फुटं तत्त्वमसीति वेद-
स्तथाऽप्यसंप्राप्य परात्मनिष्ठाम् ।
भूयो विचारो मतिदुर्बलत्वं
तत्सर्वदा स्वात्मतया हि भाति ।।

’That Thou art, the scripture asserts clear. Yet missing the poise in supreme Self, Recurring discussion is but weakness of thought. Luminous is That always, as one’s own self.

The truth behind the ego-self is Brahman denoted by the word "That’. That Brahman which is beyond all that you comprehend is the Real Self in you, the Acharya in addressing the disciple, the human soul, appeals to the ego-consciousness to trace its origin to the Brahman which is already there seated in the Heart as the Real Self of the individual. An unregenerate being with a weak understanding, not having the stern courage to give up his pre-occupations and make a bold venture to discern and realise the Truth in the deep and tranquil Self, raises questions and multiplies discussions. The Self is always there, aware of itself, and aware of the play of the ego, but the ego-self spins around itself a world of discussions that screen from it its own deeper truth. The moment it relaxes this effort and falls into silence it feels the presence of the Truth the ’Self’ that is ever luminous. Hence the state of bondage lies in the fact that the ego is not awakened to the presence of an eternal Self which is its own deeper truth. The ceaseless thought-movement forms a cover over the ego-self and hence is an obstruction to true awakening.

The next verse gives encouragement to the apparent Self to find out its original self and calls upon it to dismiss the nightmare of ignorance and realise the truth that what it has to know is already one with it and is not different from it.

Verse 35.

न वेम्यहं मामुत वेम्यहं मा-
मिति प्रवादो मनुजस्य हास्यः।
दृग्दृश्यभेदात्किमयं द्विधात्मा
स्वात्मकतायां हि धियां न भेदाः॥

The statements ’I know not’ ‘no I do’, Discussions such ridicule invite. Is there a two-fold self, seeing and seen? The Self is one. That is the experience of all.

What is called the state of Self-realisation implies that there are states in which the Self is not realised; it is in a state of ignorance that one says "I do not know myself or ’I know myself’. This statement provokes a smile because the Self is always the knower and is never the known; and one should do away with the idea that he can at any time see the Self just as with his mind he sees objects as separate from and other than himself. Seeing the Self is no mental apprehension, but is a true awakening, a deepened awareness of one’s own Self which is the real source of the ego that is ignorance, cut off from its root.

Irrespective of differences in condition, place and time, the self in each individual continues to be the same, i.e., is always the seer and never the seen, and expresses itself to the ego-consciousness in the form of personal identity.

Therefore the suggestion in this verse is that the surface self must help itself and the dim light in it is enough to start with and that it makes way for the larger and deeper consciousness of the Real Self. This is the spirit of the scriptural statements:

"By the Self, one must uplift the Self.”

"By the Self, one must attain the Self.”

"Knowledge (imperfect) is the means of knowledge (Perfect).’

If it is a fact that my Real Self is already there, why then is it not attained independent of effort?

Verse 36.

हृत्प्राप्य सद्धाम निजस्वरूपे
स्वभावसिद्धेऽनुपलभ्य निष्ठाम् ।
मायाविलासः सदसत्सरूप-
विरूपनानकमुखप्रवादाः॥

Unsettled in the Heart, in one’s own being, The unmade abode of the Real, To wrangle ’Real or unreal ‘formed or formless’ ‘many or one’ —All this verbal fight is but Maya’s play.

Such a self, so close to me, so intimately related to me as my very Reality is indeed a fact; and yet it is not within my actual experience. Why? Myself, what is called the ego having come out of the centre, the Heart, am involved in doubts as to the real character of myself and the world about me. My forgetfulness or ignorance of the Truth, and my weakness are not my creations, for the Self is said to be ever luminous. Then what is it that has brought about this condition of mine?

It is ‘Maya’s play.’ And what is Maya ?

It is the illusion-causing power of the Shakti of the Lord of All (tirodhana, vide Introduction) which throws a veil avarana over the subjective being, and keeps it from the light, and also throws out a volume of energy from its own creative force, which is scattered and diffused and formed into objective existence viksepa in which the consciousness is absorbed.

Self attainment is the Supreme Siddhi, the highest perfection.

Verse 37.

सिद्धस्य वित्तिः सत एव सिद्धिः
स्वप्नोपमानाः खलु सिद्धयोऽन्याः।
स्वप्नः प्रबुद्धस्य कथं नु सत्यः
सति स्थितः किं पुनरेति मायाम् ॥

Attainment of the Real, that alone is Siddhi true. Other achievements are like dreams, impermanent. Can dreams be to the wakened real ? Who is stable in Truth can such relapse into Maya?

The fruit of all human effort is realised in Self-attainment. That is true success, real perfection, supreme achievement parama siddhi. The liberated, mukta, is a perfected being, a great siddha; for, there is no further attempt to be made by him who has realised his truth, the Real Self that is present in all states of consciousness and hence permanent. It is the state immutable and eternal. All other achievements, powers siddhis, higher manifestations of power and light, not suited to conditions of life on earth, are great things indeed and are wonders to the ordinary human mind. But they are manifestations of sakti and in themselves do not represent the Real eternal state of the Self. They may appear and disappear under certain conditions. But under all conditions and in all states, the Real Self is present and immutable. Hence Self-attainment is the highest achievement. Other Siddhis are likened to dreams because they do not endure in all states or conditions. It must be borne in mind that the supreme importance of Self-attainment is stressed here for correcting popular misconceptions about Siddhis, or powers, and the craving of the human mind for ‘miracles that are supposed to be achieved by various means[^104]

[^104]: जन्ममन्त्रौषधितपस्समाधिजाः सिद्धयः. At the same time it must not be overlooked that Shri Maharshi removes another popular misconception, that the jnanin, the man of Self-realisation is opposed to all siddhis and discards them as incidental to the lower paths or Sadhanas adopted by Sadhakas who are not yet fit for the supreme path of knowledge jnana. That the real Siddhis or higher manifestations of power and light are always within the reach of the jnanin, that they cannot be achieved by mere human effort, and that it is the jnanin the jivan-mukta alone that is competent for such wonderful developments are stated in unmistakable terms in the Ramana Gita and other sayings of Shri Maharshi (vide Introduction page 40).

The meditation ’He I am’ is of some help as long as one feels that he is the body.

Verse 38.

सोऽहंविचारो वपुरात्मभावे
साहाय्यकारी परमार्गणस्य।
स्वात्मैक्यसिद्धौ स पुननिरर्थो
यथा नरत्वप्रमितिर्नरस्य।

To those who think that the body is Self, the meditation ’I am He’ is help indeed in the supreme search. Futile is that in the realised state of the Self, needless as man’s statement ’I am man’.

So long as one is engrossed in the physical body or in the subtle being of life and mind, it does him some good to hold that ’I’, the human self, am ’He’, the Supreme Being. This meditation ’I am He’ so’ham involves the negation of the bodily idea and thus is helpful to some extent as an antedote. But no one in the realised state says ’I am He, the Brahman’. To do so is futile and provokes laughter. No man need say “I am man’. To says so will not make a man of any being which is not man. Only when a doubt arises whether one is or is not a man is the statement pertinent that he is a man, and no bird or beast. Even then to say that he is a man does not create or confer the man-nature, but is simply an assertion of fact or a reminder. Therefore the so’ham meditation (’I am He’) is of some help to remove the wrong idea that I am this body or mind.

Shri Maharshi always accepts and appreciates the Upanishadic statements such as ’Brahman is Consciousness’ ’Brahman I am’ "That thou art This self is Brahman’. ’He I am’. But he holds that these are utterances of revealed Truth and therefore are valid. Neither vocal utterance nor mental repetition of these words can be real upasana, or sadhana, the discipline that builds up an inner life leading to the realisation of the ultimate Truth signified by these sacred utterances.

Then the parable of the lost tenth man, Dasama drishtanta is quoted to affirm the truth of Advaita, non-duality.

Verse 39.

द्वैतं विचारे परमार्थबोधे
त्वद्वैतमित्येष न साधुवादः।
गवेषणात्प्राग्दशमे विनष्टे
पश्चाच्च लब्धे दशमत्वमेकम् ॥

“In the wakening, non-duality (Advaita) is the Truth. Prior to it duality (Dvaita) is true. To reason thus is to reason wrong. For truth is truth, whether known or not. Uncounted in the parable the tenth man was. Was he then lost and was the number nine ?

Whether one is aware of the Truth or not, it remains the Truth. The One without a second, advaita is the ultimate truth even before it is manifest to me. To say that the truth is dvaita in my state of ignorance and advaita in a state of realisation is not valid. For, the state of ignorance that gives me a sense of duality affects only me—the egoistic consciousness, but does not affect the Truth. The truth is lost to me but is not lost to itself. I have to discover it and not to create it. At best, after discovering it I can relate it to my consiousness, the ego-self (what is called the surface being), as long as ’I’, the ego persists or is allowed to have its play in keeping with the truth of the deeper being. But this is no creation of a previously non-existent Advaita or non-dual state of the Self. By the external being it may be considered as a gain, but this gain is no addition to or alteration in the Truth itself.

This is the parable of the lost tenth man, which is quoted to describe the discovery of the truth of advaita.

Ten men got into the river and crossed it. On reaching the other side and counting only nine, the counter missed the tenth. At last he found that the tenth man thought lost was none other than the counter himself whom he forgot to count.

Only the renouncing of the ego-sense that I do the work destroys the effects of karma (and this is called Karma nasha). The abandoning of work itself is not Karma-nasha.

Verse 40.

करोमि कर्मेति नरो विजानन्
बाध्यो भवेत्कर्मफलं च भोक्तुम् ।
विचारधूता हृदि कर्त ता चेत्
कर्मत्रयं नश्यति सैव मुक्तिः॥

He is bound to reap the fruit Who is fixed in the I-do-thought, The sense of doer lost by the search in the Heart, Triple karma dies—and that is Release.

That man is surely affected by his works who is possessed by the ego-idea that he is an independent being separate from others and the world and the Lord. And this idea of the ego is of course a mistaken notion. For, whatever it is in man that does the work, it does not really belong to him. His body, and his life are parts of the world, and his mind too, whatever philosophic view one may take of it, is not himself, or at least is something that is ever in movement, which is not the persisting himself. And whatever work is done, is done by a part in ourselves of the universal energy that ultimately belongs to something other than what I call myself now. One should realise the truth that the real impulse for work and the energy needed for it come from a source other than the ego-self. Therefore whoever seeks to discover who it is that is the worker in him giving the sanction for work or even actually doing the work, reaches the Heart, the centre of the purusa, the Spirit in him.

Once the source of the ego-self is thus realised actions cease to bind the jiva, for he knows that it is something else that does the work. Egoistic actions are forbidden, for they form a bondage to the doer. The bonds of the triple Karma are cut asunder the moment the ego ceases to be the doer by giving up its false and wrong claim.

[The triple Karma:1. The collective fruits sancita of past actions enjoyed, persist in the present as vasanas tendencies. 2. prarabdha is the effect experienced in the present of past actions. 3. agami is future action for which the seed is sown in the present through desires brought about by the force of the whole past.]

Thus the triple Karma binds the ego-self, which does not realise the Self which is the Real doer. Hence the instruction that the ego-self must realise the Self in the deep to shake off the shackles of Karma.

The Real Self that is the Ultimate truth is beyond the relatives of bondage and freedom to which the ego-self is subject.

Verse 41.

बद्धत्वभावे सति मोक्षचिन्ता
बन्धस्तु कस्येति विचारणेन ।
सिद्धे स्वयं स्वात्मनि नित्यमुक्ते
क्व बन्धचिन्ता क्व च मोक्षचिन्ता॥

Thought of liberation is bound with sense of bond. Attempt to know whose is the bond Leads to the unborn Self, one’s own, eternally free. Where then can arise thoughts of freedom and bond?

He gets a sense of release who has a sense of bondage. It is the ego-self that is bound and tries to get liberated. The moment the ego enters into a quest for the Self, bondage loosens and the Real Self is attained which is eternally free and with reference to which there can arise no question of bondage or freedom. What is bound and feels the bondage has been already discussed. It is enough here to reiterate that bondage refers to the ego-self, called the jiva, the living being or the soul-formation in the subtle stuff of life and mind, with the apparent or surface consciousness cid-abhasa. But this is impermanent; it is for its dissolution, mergence or transformation into deeper or radical consciousness of the Self, the Real, that special means and methods and yogic disciplines are enjoined in the Shastras, in the works of men competent to speak on the subject.

We come to the last verse of the shastra. Real Mukti liberation, is different from the three-fold Release and it is essentially the dissolution of the ego.

Verse 42.

रूपिण्यरूपिण्युभयात्मिका च
मुक्तिस्त्रिरूपेति विदो वदन्ति ।
इदं त्रयं या विविनक्त्यहन्धी-
स्तस्याः प्रणाशः परमार्थमुक्तिः॥

’In Release form is not’, ’Form is really there in release.’ ’Formless and formful both it is’. Thus the wise declare. Discriminating the threefold Release, the ego broods Loss of that is Release Real.

Three kinds of liberation are spoken of by the wise. Some hold, like Badari, that the liberated soul has no form, no embodiment of any kind. Some, like Jaimini, maintain that the soul in release has a body of its own. But Badarayana asserts that both are possible, that the soul can have a form of its own or can dispense with it.

Now Bhagawan Maharshi states that true liberation (Mukti) lies in none of these states, and that it consists in the loss of the ego that broods over the subject of the possible post-release states of the liberated soul. What is the suggestion here? Surely, a man, liberated or bound, must necessarily be in one of the three states viz., with body, with no body, or with capacity for both. Is it denied that these states are facts? Besides, the verse says that these views are held by the wise, that is, by men who are competent to opine. Moreover Shri Maharshi elsewhere states (vide Ramana Gita).

“The jivan-mukta becomes intangible .... invisible .... He becomes a mere consciousness... freely moves about..."

And in this verse if he asserts that true liberation is none of these states, he must mean that these are states of development coming upon the jivan-mukta, the liberated one, alive on earth or departed from it. These developments, the capacity to assume or dispense with a form at will or to become a mere centre of consciousness, one with the Supreme, refer to the dynamic condition of the human soul, in whatever stuff it may be embodied, physical and vital or purely mental and psychic, or spiritual, or still finer and diviner substance.

Mukti then is an inner experience that is the Realisation of the Self. The state of Realisation of the Self is the same whether here on earth or there in the next, in embodied existence on the earth-plane or in other supra-physical spheres of existence[^105]

[^105]: मुक्तिरेकविधैव स्यात्.

There are no distinctions of kind in mukti or Release which consists in the ego getting devoured by the Real, the Self giving itself wholly to the Supreme the Divine being. Whatever development takes place in virtue of the relentless tapas of the Real Self does not take away from or add to this radical liberation. It must be borne in mind that this is not a special effort, but is a normal state of the supreme Consciousness which by its nature is concentrated power, sahajam tapah. (Vide Ramana Gita and Introduction). There may be manifestations powerful and sublime, wonderful indeed to our common mind, but they do not affect the normality of the supreme state of the mukta, one in Consciousness with the Ultimate Truth, the Divine Being, called in this Shastra the Real Self to stress its significance and relation to the ego-self, the jiva.

Therefore to brood over the possible states of the liberated soul is not at all a means of liberation which lies in the loss of the ego itself.

Therefore, this Shastra once again in conclusion reiterates that the ego that is engaged in these discussions must withdraw from them and plunge itself into the Deep Self and that, that alone is real Release.

Verse 43.

सद्दर्शनं द्राविडवाङनिबद्धं
महर्षिणा श्रीरमणेन शुद्धम्।
प्रबन्धमुत्कृष्टममर्त्यवाण्या
मनूद्य वासिष्ठमुनिर्व्यतानीत् ॥

In the Tamil tongue, the great Seer Ramana Delivered Sat-darshan, the treatise pure. Of this poem sublime, Vasishtha, the sage. Has given this version in the language of the Gods.

Verse 44.

सत्तत्त्वसारं सरलं दधाना
मुमुक्षुलोकाय मुदं ददाना।
अमानुषश्रीरमणीयवाणी-
मयूखभित्तिर्मुनिवाग्विभाति ॥

Thus shines forth the muni’s speech. The essence of truth it gives you with ease. Delight it gives to piners for release. For the rays of the trans-human words of Ramana great, Functioning as the wall reflecting, Thus shines the muni’s voice.

Ulladu Narpadu (Tamil)

பகவான் ஸ்ரீ ரமண மஹரிஷிகள் அருளிய உள்ளது நாற்பது மங்கலம் வெண்பா உள்ளதல துள்ளவுணர் வுள்ளதோ வுள்ளபொரு ஹள்ளலற வுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளதா-லுள்ளமெனு முள்ளபொரு ளுள்ளலெவ னுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளபடி புள்ளதே யுள்ள லுணர். மரணபய மிக்குளவம் மக்களர ணாக மரணபவ மில்லா மகேசன் -சரணமே சார்வர்தஞ் சார்வொடுதாஞ் சாவுற்றார் சாவெண்ணஞ் பார்வரோ சாவா தவர். பத்தர்சனத்தின் மூல கிரந்த மிது. 370 உள்ளது நாற்பது நூல் 1. நாமுலகங் காண்டலா னானாவாஞ் சத்தியுள வோர்முதலை யொப்ப லொருதலையே-நாமவுருச் சித்திரமும் பார்ப்பானுஞ் சேர்படமு மாரொளியு மத்தனையுந் தானா மவன். 2. மும்முதலை யெம்மதமு முற்கொள்ளு மோர்முதலே மும்முதலாய் நிற்குமென்று மும்முதலு-மும்முதலே யென்னலகங் கார மிருக்குமட்டே யான்கெட்டுத் தன்னிலையி னிற்ற றலை. 3. உலகுமெய் பொய்த் தோற்ற முலகறிவா மன்றென் றுலகுசுக மன்றென் றுரைத்தெ-னுலகுவிட்டுத் தன்னையோர்ந் தொன்றிரண்டு தானற்று நானற்ற வந்நிலையெல் லார்க்குமொப் பாம். 4. உருவந்தா னாயி னுலகுபர மற்றா முருவந்தா னன்றே லுவற்றி-னுருவத்தைக் கண்ணுறுதல் யாவனெவன் கண்ணலாற் காட்சியுண்டோ கண்ணதுதா னந்தமிலாக் கண். 5. உடல்பஞ்ச கோச வுருவதனா லைந்து முடலென்னுஞ் சொல்லி லொடுங்குமுடலன்றி யுண்டோ வுலக முடல்விட் டுலகத்தைக் கண்டா ருளரோ கழறு. 6. உலகைம் புலன்க ளுருவேறன் றவ்வைம் புலனைம் பொறிக்குப் புலனாமுலகைமன மொன்றைம் பொறிவாயா லோர்ந்திடுத லோர்ந்திடுத லான்மனத்தை யன்றியுல குண்டோ வறை. 7. உலகறிவு மொன்றா யுதித்தொடுங்கு மேனு முலகறிவு தன்னா லொளிரு-முலகறிவு தோன்றிமறை தற்கிடனாய்த் தோன்றிமறை யாதொளிரும் பூன்றமா மஃதே பொருள். 8. எப்பெயரிட் டெவ்வுருவி லேத்தினுமார் பேருருவி லப்பொருளைக் காண்வழிய தாயினுமம்-மெய்ப்பொருளி னுண்மையிற்ற னுண்மையினை யோர்ந்தொடுங்கி யொன் [றுதலே யுண்மையிற் காண லுணர். உள்ளது நாற்பது 371 9. இரட்டைகண் முப்புடிக ளென்றுமொன்று பற்றி யிருப்பவா மவ்வொன்றே தென்றுகருத்தினுட் கண்டாற் கழலுமவை கண்டவ ரேயுண்மை கண்டார் கலங்காரே காண். 10. அறியாமை விட்டறிவின் றாமறிவு விட்டவ் வறியாமை யின்றாகு மந்த-வறிவு மறியா மையுமார்க்கென் றம்முதலாந் தன்னை யறியு மறிவே யறிவு. 11. அறிவுறுந் தன்னை யறியா தயலை யறிவ தறியாமையன்றி-யறிவோ வறிவயற் காதாரத் தன்னை யறிய வறிவறி யாமை யறும். 12. அறிவறி யாமையு மற்றதறி வாமே யறியும் துண்மையறி வாகா-தறிதற் கறிவித்தற் கன்னியமின் றாயவிர்வ தாற்றா னறிவாகும் பாழன் றறி. 13. ஞனமாந் தானேமெய் நானாவா ஞானமஞ் ஞானமாம் பொய்யாமஞ் ஞானமுமே-ஞானமாந் தன்னையன்றி யின்றணிக டாம்பலவும் பொய்மெய்யாம் பொன்னையன்றி யுண்டோ புகல் . 14. தன்மையுண்டேன் முன்னிலைப் டர்க்கைக டாமுளவாந் தன்மையி னுண்மையைத் தானாய்ந்து-தன்மையறின் முன்னிலைப் டர்க்கை முடிவுற்றொன் றாயொளிருந் தன்மையே தன்னிலைமை தான். 15. நிகழ்வினைப் பற்றி யிறப்பெதிர்வு நிற்ப நிகழ்கா லவையு நிகழ்வே நிகழ்வொன்றே யின்றுண்மை தேரா திறப்பெதிர்வு தேரவுன லொன்றின்றி யெண்ண வுனல் . 16. நாமன்றி நாளேது நாடேது நாடுங்கா னாமுடம்பே னாணாட்டு ணாம்படுவ-நாமுடம்போ நாமின்றன் றென்றுமொன்று நாடிங்கங் கெங்குமொன்றா னாமுண்டு நாணாடி னாம். 372 உள்ளது நாற்பது 17. உடனானே தன்னை யுணரார்க் குணர்ந்தார்க் குடலளவே நான்ற னுணரார்க்-குடலுள்ளே தன்னுணர்ந்தார்க் கெல்லையறத் தானொளிரு நானிதுவே யின்னவர்தம் பேதமென வெண். 18. உலகுண்மை யாகு முணர்வில்லார்க் குள்ளார்க் குலகளவா முண்மை யுணரார்க்குலகினுக் காதார மாயுருவற் றாருமுணர்ந் தாருண்மை யீதாகும் பேதமிவர்க் கெண். 19. விதிமதி மூல விவேக மிலார்க்கே விதிமதி வெல்லும் விவாதம் விதிமதிகட் கோர்முதலாந் தன்னை யுணர்ந்தா ரவைதணந்தார் சார்வரோ பின்னுமவை சாற்று. 20. காணுந் தனைவிட்டுத் தான்கடவு ளைக்காணல் காணு மனோமயமாங் காட்சிதனைக்காணுமவன் றான்கடவுள் கண்டானாந் தன்முதலைக் தான் முதல் போய்த் தான்கடவு ளன்றியில தால். காண 21. தன்னைத்தான் றலைவன் றனைக்காண (னைத்தான் லென்னும்பன் னூலுண்மை யென்னையெனின் றன் காணலெவன் றானொன்றாற் காணவொணா தேற்றலைவற் காணலெவ னூணாதல் காண். 22. மதிக்கொளி தந்தம் மதிக்கு ளொளிரு மதியினை யுள்ளே மடக்கிப் பதியிற் பதித்திடுத லன்றிப் பதியை மதியான் மதித்திடுத லெங்ஙன் மதி. 23. நானென்றித் தேக நவிலா துறக்கத்து நானின்றென் றாரு நவில்வதிலைநானொன் றெழுந்தபி னெல்லா மெழுமிந்த நானெங் கெழுமென்று நுண்மதியா லெண். 24. சடவுடனா னென்னாது சச்சித் துதியா துடலளவா நானொன் றுதிக்கு-மிடையிலிது சிச்சடக்கி ரந்திபந்தஞ் சீவனுட்ப மெய்யகந்தை யிச்சமு சாரமன மெண். உள்ளது நாற்பது 373 25. உருப்பற்றி யுண்டா முருப்பற்றி நிற்கு முருப்பற்றி யுண்டுமிக வோங்குமுருவிட் டுருப்பற்றுந் தேடினா லோட்டம் பிடிக்கு முருவற்ற பேயகந்தை யோர். 26. அகந்தை யுண் டாயி னனைத்துமுண் டாகு மகந்தையின் றேலின் றனைத்து-மகந்தையே யாவுமா மாதலால் யாதிதென்று நாடலே யோவுதல் யாவுமென வோர். 27. நானுதியா துள்ளநிலை நாமதுவா யுள்ள நிலை நானுதிக்குந் தானமதை நாடாம-னானுதியாத் தன்னிழப்பைச் சார்வதெவன் சாராமற் றானதுவாந் தன்னிலையி னிற்பதெவன் சாற்று. 28. எழும்பு மகந்தை யெழுமிடத்தை நீரில் விழுந்த பொருள்காண வேண்டி-முழுகுதல்போற் கூர்ந்தமதி யாற்பேச்சு மூச்சடக்கிக் கொண்டுள்ளே யாழ்ந்தறிய வேண்டு மறி. 29. நானென்று வாயா னவிலாதுள் ளாழ்மனத்தா னானென்றெங் குந்துமென நாடுதலே-ஞானநெறி யாமன்றி யன்றிதுநா னாமதுவென் றுன்னறுணை யாமதுவி சாரமா மா ? 30. நானா ரெனமனமுண் ணாடியுள நண்ணவே நானா மவன்றலை நாணமுறநானானாத் தோன்றுமொன்று தானாகத் தோன்றினுநா னன்று பொருள் பூன்றமது தானாம் பொருள். 31. தன்னை யழித்தெழுந்த தன்மயா னந்தருக் கென்னை யுளதொன் றியற்றுதற்குத்தன்னையலா தன்னிய மொன்று மறியா ரவர் நிலைமை யின்னதென் றுன்ன லெவன். 32. அது நீயென் றம்மறைக ளார்த்திடவுந் தன்னை யெதுவென்று தான்றேர்ந் திராஅ-தது நா னிதுவன்றென் றெண்ணலுர னின்மையினா லென்று மதுவேதா னாயமர்வ தால். 374 உள்ளது நாற்பது 33. 34. 35. 36. என்னைய றியேனா னென்னை யறிந்தேனா னென்ன னகைப்புக் கிடனாகு-மென்னை தனைவிடய மாக்கவிருதானுண்டோ வொன்றா யனைவரனு பூதியுண்மை யால். என்று மெவர்க்கு மியல்பா யுளபொருளை யொன்று முளத்து ளுணர்ந்து நிலைநின்றிடா துண்டின் றுருவருவென் றொன்றிரண் டன்றென்றே சண்டையிடன் மாயைச் சழக்கு. சித்தமா யுள்பொருளைத் தேர்ந்திருத்தல் சித்திபிற சித்தியெலாஞ் சொப்பனமார், சித்திகளே-நித்திரைவிட் டோர்ந்தா லவைமெய்யோ வுண்மைநிலை நின்றுபொய்ம்மை தீர்ந்தார் தியங்குவரோ தேர். நாமுடலென் றெண்ணினல நாமதுவென்றெண்ணுமது நாமதுவா நிற்பதற்கு நற்றுணையே-யாமென்று நாமதுவென் றெண்ணுவதே னான்மனித னென்றெணுமோ நாமதுவா நிற்குமத னால். சாதகத்தி லேதுவிதஞ் சாத்தியத்தி லத்துவித மோதுகின்ற வாதமது முண்மையல-வாதரவாய்த் தான்றேடுங் காலுந் தனையடைந்த காலத்துந் தான்றசம னன்றியார் தான். வினைமுதனா மாயின் விளைபயன் றுய்ப்போம் வினைமுதலா ரென்று வினவித்-தனையறியக் கர்த்தத் துவம்போய்க் கருமமூன் றுங்கழலு நித்தமா முத்தி நிலை. பத்தனா னென்னுமட்டே பந்தமுத்தி சிந்தனைகள் பத்தனா ரென்றுதன்னைப் பார்க்குங்காற்-சித்தமாய் நித்தமுத்தன் றானிற்க நிற்காதேற் பந்தசிந்தை முத்திசிந்தை முன்னிற்கு மோ. உருவ மருவ முருவருவ மூன்றா முறுமுத்தி யென்னி லுரைப்ப-னுருவ மருவ முருவருவ மாயு மகந்தை யுருவழிதன் முத்தி யுணர். 37. 38. 39. 40. உள்ளது நாற்பது முற்றிற்று.