Hence the totality of all these differences, experienced by the unwise, exists only in the mind’s perception. All the mind’s perceptions have their root in the perception of the difference between the Self and the non-Self.
This is the persuasion ‘I am this body’, which is the root-cause of the tree of samsara. And since this persuasion is declared to be ignorance, all differences are the outcome of ignorance.
The mind, which is named ‘the soul’, itself creates and perceives these differences through ignorance. There are no differences in the state of deep sleep. And in the supreme state there are no differences, specifically the difference between God and the soul and all the rest.
For this reason all the pairs and the triads are unreal. They are non-existent in the natural state of the Self, and the one that dwells in that state, the supreme state, is unaffected by them.
The pairs are exemplified in the next two verses.
The Master declares that all these [listed items], and any similar entities, are [unreal] like dreams because their root-cause is the ego sense: the difference of inside and outside, birth and death, the totality and the units, the creation and the
dissolution of the world, darkness and light, the Self and the not-Self, bondage and deliverance, knowledge and ignorance, the soul and God, free will and fate, pleasure and pain, bad and good qualities, and merit and sin.
These are pairs of opposites called dvandvas. The triads (triputis) are discussed next.
The knower, the objects of his knowledge, which are non-Self, and his knowledge of objects, and everything else that similarly comprises these three factors are said to be unreal, like dreams, because they are the outcome of ignorance.The world is found on scrutiny to consist of these pairs and triads. The first pair to be dealt with is that of the soul and God.
The two, namely those named ‘the soul’ and ‘God’, which are created and projected on the real Self by ignorance, are not different from each other. This difference is perceived during the prevalence of ignorance, due to the identification with a form that is assumed to be real.
Apart from the limitation imposed by the form, the two are the same. This is explained next.
Maya is the body [or attribute] of God. Ignorance is that of the soul. Maya is subject to that Supreme One. But the soul is subject to ignorance.
Maya and ignorance are mentioned in the sacred lore in order to account for the difference between the soul and God. This difference, being rooted in the ignorance, is unreal, but it is [regarded as] real from the standpoint of worldly activity.
This is the explanation of diversity, also called duality. This will appear as real as long as the cause, this ignorance, prevails.
Duality will continue to appear to be real, so long as this quality of being a ‘soul’ does not cease by right awareness [of the Self]. For this reason, this difference will appear as real, just like all other differences here.
The unreality of the three – namely the world, God and the soul – is taught as a single indivisible truth. It is not possible to use one half of a hen for cooking and the other half for laying eggs.
The analogy is to impress the truth taught here that the three mentioned are real or unreal as one whole, and not separately. So the teaching of their unreality cannot be accepted in regard to one, and rejected for the other two. This will become clear later.
For the one who regards himself as the owner or dweller in the body, as being a ‘soul’, the real Self himself becomes God. Such a one should practise devotion to Him for the sake of deliverance.
This need for devotion exists even for an advaitin, a believer in non-difference, as is shown below.
Such a one who knows the truth of non-difference by the intellect alone, but is unable to achieve experience of the true nature of the real Self, must strive to attain deliverance by devotion and self-surrender to God.
There are two paths prescribed, because of a difference in qualifications. This is explained next.
Only two paths are laid down for the aspirant to deliverance: for the valiant, the quest of one’s own Self, and for the fearful, self-surrender to God. In these two all the paths are included.
A great many paths are known and followed, but all come under these two. The valiant one has been already described. The other is the one who is afraid of samsara, but is unable to take to the quest taught by Bhagavan as being the direct path. On this direct path all preconceived notions are dropped, as will be seen later. Self-surrender is the final step in the practice of devotion to God, which is the only other alternative to the direct path.
This two-fold path has been taught by the most holy one, Ramana, thus: ‘Either seek the root of the ego-sense [the ‘I’ that rises within the body] or surrender that ego-sense to God to have it destroyed [by His grace].’
The advaitin who looks down upon devotion as inferior is next censured.
That foolish man, who, considering himself as an advaitin, but not being valiant enough [to take to the quest as taught by Bhagavan] and who looks down upon devotion as inferior, lives in vain, without devotion to God. He is a man with a tainted mind.
The devotee is next shown to be better off than the rest of men.
In this samsara the devotee is like a pot let down into a well with a rope tied to it. The man without devotion is like a pot fallen into the well, without a rope being tied to it.
The meaning is that the devotee is destined to be rescued from samsara by God’s grace, but not so those who have no devotion.
The path of devotion is dealt with next.
Those who are endowed with the diabolic temperament cannot have the right kind of devotion. Hence the good one should take hold of the divine temperament for practising devotion to God.
The power of God, well-known in the world as grace, has three forms: God, the Supreme Being; the Holy Guru; and the real Self in the supreme state.
These three are thus declared to be one. Devotion to God leads to the finding of the Guru, who is God Himself. Devotion to the Guru leads on to right awareness of the Self, which is none other than God.
This Grace [of God] is merely the fact that He Himself is present in the Heart as the real Self. Grace is the very nature of that supreme one, and without grace He can have no existence.
That grace of God is ever wide-awake; there is never a time when that grace is absent. But so long as man’s ego-sense is alive, he needs effort on his part.
That grace of God will not desert any one; she will [surely] lead all to deliverance. Some will be delivered soon; others after a long time.
The devotee may think, ‘I am practising devotion to God by my own efforts, but this is not true, because it is God who pursues the deluded soul, who wanders blindly in the forest of samsara, and takes hold of him [by His grace].
It is next shown that God’s grace is immeasurable.
The extent of God’s grace is so much, He gives Himself to devotees: for when, by His grace, the ego is destroyed, the aspirant obtains the state of not being different from Him.
This is one of the sayings of Bhagavan.
God is that kind of magnetic mountain which draws the souls to Himself, makes them motionless and consumes them [like food] and ever after safeguards them in the supreme state, endless bliss, which is His own state.
This truth is set forth in the 6th and 11th verses of one of Bhagavan’s hymns to Sri Arunachala, Arunachala Dasakam.
All souls are destined to reach this goal by divine grace. This is described in the next verses, whose theme is taken from the eighth verse of Bhagavan’s Arunachala Ashtakam.
As the river, born from the rains of the clouds that rise from the sea, returns to its source, the sea, and as the bird, wandering a long time in the sky, obtains rest by returning to [its home on] earth, so the soul, which has originated in the supreme one, after wandering in this samsara for an immense period of time, returns in the reverse direction and rejoins that supreme one, from where it originated.
Devotion is taught as being of two kinds, according to the degree of ripeness of the devotee; in the beginning it is devotion like that of the baby monkey, and afterwards devotion like that of the kitten.
The baby monkey keeps hold of its mother by its own effort, whereas the kitten makes no effort, but relies entirely on the mother cat. The unripe devotee is like the former and the ripe one is like the latter; the former has his egoism rampant; the egoism of the latter is greatly subdued, and hence he is the recipient of more abundant grace, and reaches the goal much sooner.
After practising devotion like that of the baby monkey through a great many lives, in the end, when his egoism is greatly reduced, he practises devotion like the kitten.
The devotion that is like the kitten’s is the same as taking refuge at the feet of God and surrendering to Him. This devotion, becoming further purified by the refinement of the mind, becomes equal to right awareness in course of time.
There is the saying of the most holy one that real surrender is that which is made by he who knows the truth of himself by the quest of the Self.
Self-surrender is real and effective to the extent that the ego-sense is attenuated. Hence, so long as the ego survives, self-surrender is imperfect and incomplete. It becomes complete and fruitful only when the ego dies once for all, never to revive.
Devotion is also of two kinds: one with a sense of separateness and the other with a sense of non-difference. The former is prescribed for the unrefined; the latter is excellent for the well-refined ones.
The sense of difference detracts from the quality of devotion. He who is convinced that differences are not true is alone capable of the real surrender of himself; hence his devotion is superior. But, as is shown next, devotion with a sense of difference is not to be despised.
If one, considering Him, who is only the Self, as other than oneself, worships Him in a form and by a name, then in course of time, through the clarification of his intellect, he surely reaches the supreme state. There is no doubt about this.
Ascribing a form and a name to God is unavoidable for those who, being unable to take to the direct path, nevertheless want deliverance and wish to worship God to win His grace.
The ignorance and narrowness of those followers of religions that condemn the use of images in divine worship was well exposed by Bhagavan in a talk with some Muslims, which is reported in Maha Yoga and in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi. The gist of Bhagavan’s reply to the Muslims was that one who thinks himself to be a form, a mortal body – while really being really formless and nameless – has no right to raise this question. During the state of ignorance it is permissible for a sincere devotee to regard God as having a form and a name, and to use images or symbols to facilitate worship. There is another saying of Bhagavan, which is given in the next verse.
This is the persuasion ‘I am this body’, which is the root-cause of the tree of samsara. And since this persuasion is declared to be ignorance, all differences are the outcome of ignorance.
The mind, which is named ‘the soul’, itself creates and perceives these differences through ignorance. There are no differences in the state of deep sleep. And in the supreme state there are no differences, specifically the difference between God and the soul and all the rest.
For this reason all the pairs and the triads are unreal. They are non-existent in the natural state of the Self, and the one that dwells in that state, the supreme state, is unaffected by them.
The pairs are exemplified in the next two verses.
The Master declares that all these [listed items], and any similar entities, are [unreal] like dreams because their root-cause is the ego sense: the difference of inside and outside, birth and death, the totality and the units, the creation and the
dissolution of the world, darkness and light, the Self and the not-Self, bondage and deliverance, knowledge and ignorance, the soul and God, free will and fate, pleasure and pain, bad and good qualities, and merit and sin.
These are pairs of opposites called dvandvas. The triads (triputis) are discussed next.
The knower, the objects of his knowledge, which are non-Self, and his knowledge of objects, and everything else that similarly comprises these three factors are said to be unreal, like dreams, because they are the outcome of ignorance.The world is found on scrutiny to consist of these pairs and triads. The first pair to be dealt with is that of the soul and God.
The two, namely those named ‘the soul’ and ‘God’, which are created and projected on the real Self by ignorance, are not different from each other. This difference is perceived during the prevalence of ignorance, due to the identification with a form that is assumed to be real.
Apart from the limitation imposed by the form, the two are the same. This is explained next.
Maya is the body [or attribute] of God. Ignorance is that of the soul. Maya is subject to that Supreme One. But the soul is subject to ignorance.
Maya and ignorance are mentioned in the sacred lore in order to account for the difference between the soul and God. This difference, being rooted in the ignorance, is unreal, but it is [regarded as] real from the standpoint of worldly activity.
This is the explanation of diversity, also called duality. This will appear as real as long as the cause, this ignorance, prevails.
Duality will continue to appear to be real, so long as this quality of being a ‘soul’ does not cease by right awareness [of the Self]. For this reason, this difference will appear as real, just like all other differences here.
The unreality of the three – namely the world, God and the soul – is taught as a single indivisible truth. It is not possible to use one half of a hen for cooking and the other half for laying eggs.
The analogy is to impress the truth taught here that the three mentioned are real or unreal as one whole, and not separately. So the teaching of their unreality cannot be accepted in regard to one, and rejected for the other two. This will become clear later.
For the one who regards himself as the owner or dweller in the body, as being a ‘soul’, the real Self himself becomes God. Such a one should practise devotion to Him for the sake of deliverance.
This need for devotion exists even for an advaitin, a believer in non-difference, as is shown below.
Such a one who knows the truth of non-difference by the intellect alone, but is unable to achieve experience of the true nature of the real Self, must strive to attain deliverance by devotion and self-surrender to God.
There are two paths prescribed, because of a difference in qualifications. This is explained next.
Only two paths are laid down for the aspirant to deliverance: for the valiant, the quest of one’s own Self, and for the fearful, self-surrender to God. In these two all the paths are included.
A great many paths are known and followed, but all come under these two. The valiant one has been already described. The other is the one who is afraid of samsara, but is unable to take to the quest taught by Bhagavan as being the direct path. On this direct path all preconceived notions are dropped, as will be seen later. Self-surrender is the final step in the practice of devotion to God, which is the only other alternative to the direct path.
This two-fold path has been taught by the most holy one, Ramana, thus: ‘Either seek the root of the ego-sense [the ‘I’ that rises within the body] or surrender that ego-sense to God to have it destroyed [by His grace].’
The advaitin who looks down upon devotion as inferior is next censured.
That foolish man, who, considering himself as an advaitin, but not being valiant enough [to take to the quest as taught by Bhagavan] and who looks down upon devotion as inferior, lives in vain, without devotion to God. He is a man with a tainted mind.
The devotee is next shown to be better off than the rest of men.
In this samsara the devotee is like a pot let down into a well with a rope tied to it. The man without devotion is like a pot fallen into the well, without a rope being tied to it.
The meaning is that the devotee is destined to be rescued from samsara by God’s grace, but not so those who have no devotion.
The path of devotion is dealt with next.
Those who are endowed with the diabolic temperament cannot have the right kind of devotion. Hence the good one should take hold of the divine temperament for practising devotion to God.
The power of God, well-known in the world as grace, has three forms: God, the Supreme Being; the Holy Guru; and the real Self in the supreme state.
These three are thus declared to be one. Devotion to God leads to the finding of the Guru, who is God Himself. Devotion to the Guru leads on to right awareness of the Self, which is none other than God.
This Grace [of God] is merely the fact that He Himself is present in the Heart as the real Self. Grace is the very nature of that supreme one, and without grace He can have no existence.
That grace of God is ever wide-awake; there is never a time when that grace is absent. But so long as man’s ego-sense is alive, he needs effort on his part.
That grace of God will not desert any one; she will [surely] lead all to deliverance. Some will be delivered soon; others after a long time.
The devotee may think, ‘I am practising devotion to God by my own efforts, but this is not true, because it is God who pursues the deluded soul, who wanders blindly in the forest of samsara, and takes hold of him [by His grace].
It is next shown that God’s grace is immeasurable.
The extent of God’s grace is so much, He gives Himself to devotees: for when, by His grace, the ego is destroyed, the aspirant obtains the state of not being different from Him.
This is one of the sayings of Bhagavan.
God is that kind of magnetic mountain which draws the souls to Himself, makes them motionless and consumes them [like food] and ever after safeguards them in the supreme state, endless bliss, which is His own state.
This truth is set forth in the 6th and 11th verses of one of Bhagavan’s hymns to Sri Arunachala, Arunachala Dasakam.
All souls are destined to reach this goal by divine grace. This is described in the next verses, whose theme is taken from the eighth verse of Bhagavan’s Arunachala Ashtakam.
As the river, born from the rains of the clouds that rise from the sea, returns to its source, the sea, and as the bird, wandering a long time in the sky, obtains rest by returning to [its home on] earth, so the soul, which has originated in the supreme one, after wandering in this samsara for an immense period of time, returns in the reverse direction and rejoins that supreme one, from where it originated.
Devotion is taught as being of two kinds, according to the degree of ripeness of the devotee; in the beginning it is devotion like that of the baby monkey, and afterwards devotion like that of the kitten.
The baby monkey keeps hold of its mother by its own effort, whereas the kitten makes no effort, but relies entirely on the mother cat. The unripe devotee is like the former and the ripe one is like the latter; the former has his egoism rampant; the egoism of the latter is greatly subdued, and hence he is the recipient of more abundant grace, and reaches the goal much sooner.
After practising devotion like that of the baby monkey through a great many lives, in the end, when his egoism is greatly reduced, he practises devotion like the kitten.
The devotion that is like the kitten’s is the same as taking refuge at the feet of God and surrendering to Him. This devotion, becoming further purified by the refinement of the mind, becomes equal to right awareness in course of time.
There is the saying of the most holy one that real surrender is that which is made by he who knows the truth of himself by the quest of the Self.
Self-surrender is real and effective to the extent that the ego-sense is attenuated. Hence, so long as the ego survives, self-surrender is imperfect and incomplete. It becomes complete and fruitful only when the ego dies once for all, never to revive.
Devotion is also of two kinds: one with a sense of separateness and the other with a sense of non-difference. The former is prescribed for the unrefined; the latter is excellent for the well-refined ones.
The sense of difference detracts from the quality of devotion. He who is convinced that differences are not true is alone capable of the real surrender of himself; hence his devotion is superior. But, as is shown next, devotion with a sense of difference is not to be despised.
If one, considering Him, who is only the Self, as other than oneself, worships Him in a form and by a name, then in course of time, through the clarification of his intellect, he surely reaches the supreme state. There is no doubt about this.
Ascribing a form and a name to God is unavoidable for those who, being unable to take to the direct path, nevertheless want deliverance and wish to worship God to win His grace.
The ignorance and narrowness of those followers of religions that condemn the use of images in divine worship was well exposed by Bhagavan in a talk with some Muslims, which is reported in Maha Yoga and in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi. The gist of Bhagavan’s reply to the Muslims was that one who thinks himself to be a form, a mortal body – while really being really formless and nameless – has no right to raise this question. During the state of ignorance it is permissible for a sincere devotee to regard God as having a form and a name, and to use images or symbols to facilitate worship. There is another saying of Bhagavan, which is given in the next verse.
Comments
Post a Comment