Ramana Maharshi’s Nan Yar ?  Who Am I ? [continued]

[14] Is it possible for residual impressions of objects that come from beginningless Time, as it were, to be resolved, and for one to remain as the pure Self.

The above is so far only the question, pretty much a repeated one, perhaps included to preface Maharshi’s expedient & compassionate 2^nd response on a lower order, a more specific level. And yet Ramana again declines to frame this particular discussion at quite the level of the question, one of near-hopelessness, extending over longstanding Time. Instead the Maharshi up-level’s the discussion by not making the content of his response match this content of the question. Instead the Maharshi addresses, as the content of his response, the fact & character of the question. Instead of what the questioner’s concern was exactly about, Ramana cuts closer to the root by addressing the question’s character as being a Doubt or vikalpa, specifically an “is it possible ?” genre of Doubt.

Without yielding to Doubt "Is it possible, or not ?", one should persistently hold on to the meditation on the Self. Even if a great sinner, one should not worry "Oh! I am a sinner, how can I be saved?" One should completely renounce the Thought  "I am a sinner"; & concentrate keenly on meditation on the Self; then, one would surely succeed.

 

The Maharshi addresses the “is it possible ?” doubt or vikalpa, as such, & in that every other kind of Doubt, advising no yielding to such negative self-indulgence & instead, proceeding with Inquiry. Maharshi includes Doubts about ones worthiness, as inadequate or a “sinner”. More binding & persistent Doubts & mis-identification of this sort may warrant deliberate examination & renunciation if necessary. Finally ameliorating all kinds of Doubt, the great Sage encourages & assures success for those who put the instruction into practice in a “keenly concentrated & renounced, worry-free” manner.

There are not  2  Minds – one good & the other evil;  the Mind is only one.

It is the residual impressions that are of  2  kinds – auspicious & in-auspicious.

Maharshi’s 1^st point, the Unity of one’s Self is the hallmark of maximum Non-Duality, even when compassionate, expedient teaching is phrased in terms of the unreal Mind just in order to match the receptivity of the questioner. Non-Dual Liberation results from Non-Dual practice. Ramana emphasizes the dissolving of separation rather the rigid hardening of separation that a seeker might fashion, by taking literally, explanations in terms or higher & lower Self, higher & lower Mind, & so on. As much as Ego is not to be mistaken for the Non-Dual Self, & the Self is not to be taken to be an Ego, the same words “I” & “self” are commonly & ambiguously applied to each. Apparent ambiguity can be turned into sound advice by ceasing to separate off some lower “self” or Mind, conceived as separate from the Non-Dual Self.

By Inquiry into the reality & nature of Ego, if such existed, the correct inward direction is taken. We thus however by-pass the Ego-I-Thought, swirling it with the Inquiry-stirring-stick into the Ego-death funeral pyre. We by-pass the Ego by going back the way we came, because Ego is the first Concept, the source & reference for derivative Concepts. Continuing thus in the correct inward, subjective direction, the true “I”, the Non-Dual Self is found to be all that remains.

                

Like self  & “I” where the seeker can flip the ambiguity to good advantage, similar ambiguity is also characteristic of the questioner’s term “beginningless Time.” Maya is also often said to be beginningless much as the term unborn can also be seen to be ambiguous.  What is called “I” is truly the one Self.  What is beginningless can be also be the Eternal, & such consideration of Time, for instance, can initially be useful for the seeker. When understanding Time to be unreal, then that Time, like Maya can alternatively be deemed beginningless in that it never began. Likewise the seeker self-identified by a single Birth in Time can be told that he is Unborn as in Eternal. In the  opposite direction alternatively, Ego too can be said to be unborn it that it never began. Having thoroughly discovered that the Ego Thought is “unborn” in that latter sense of never existing, we find that by “I” we really meant the Non-Dual Self all along. Not 2 selves, just one Self that was dualistically misunderstood. The Self is truly Unborn, forever Real, Non-Dual without a Time–bound beginning.

         

Generally, to consider the Inquiry along 2 forks as if investigating “2 selves” would not be effective. But at the crux of Illusion, where the Self is mistaken for Ego, discrimination between the real Identity & the mis-identification is in order. Here that distinction is made when the Maharshi employs the terms auspicious & in-auspicious, words which have fallen into near-archaic disuse in our language. But auspicious, portended from the reading the flight of birds, does linguistically point to a name for the Absolute, Shiva, much as our word God is a cognate of good.  Like other classical terms, such as being the harbinger of good portend, the auspices derive from ancient divination tone in much “divine” terminology. Supplication-prayer & Divination-prophecy were generally intertwined in the roots of religion. Men turned to God to advocate for, or peer into their Future. Of the same vintage, that which brings Bliss is that which is a blessing.

With the context here being the Bliss of Liberation, Maharshi addressing a Non-Dual Shaivite, South Indian environment describes residual impressions as auspicious or non-auspicious, to deliberately invoke that highest connotation of the word Shiva. As Ramana elaborates in the next selection, “good ” or the lack of it, that is “bad ”, does not so much characterize purity versus darkness of the soul, but rather what is effective & conducive to Bliss & Happiness, versus Ignorance which is not.

The Western concern regarding “evil in the World,” the baffling puzzle called Theodicy, is often redirected by Ramana by his questioning the reality of the World. Thoughts that make up the Mind derive from “impressions” or samskaras, mental “whirlpools” or vrittis, deep seated desires of “imagination” or sankalpas, mentioned “doubts” or vikalpas, “tendencies” or vasanas, in-auspicious karma or gunas, & other terms used expediently for detailed instruction.

When the Mind is under the influence of  auspicious impressions, it is called good;

& when it is under the influence of in-auspicious impressions it is regarded as evil.

Returning the responsibility to our own wrong thinking, our Ignorance, the Maharshi indirectly assures the practitioner that one, perfect True Nature, the Self, is not modified, never evil. Only distorted projections of Mind constitute its in-auspicious quality. Specifically, an auspicious condition of Mind is the goal of the Maharshi’s more expedient teaching at this point, so that Inquiry can effectively proceed to discover no Mind, no individual, no World, good or evil. There is no need to question God, blame the good, or puzzle over Theodicy or God’s “mysterious ways.” Better & more direct is it to turn the searchlight inward & first attend to in-auspicious impressions in the Mind, unreal as it is. Rather than Theodicy, it is the culprit Mind that is to be traced & liberated in Self-Realization.

The in-auspicious tendencies are fed & fostered by a worldly turning of the Mind toward futile & falsely believed sources of Happiness in the imagined, objective World. Body-identity that dualistically fractures one’s vision into self & others, some to whom to be attached, others to strive against, is a yet denser & more gross level, of in-auspicious mis-conception, as the Maharshi describes.

The Mind should not be allowed to wander towards Worldly objects &

what concerns other people. However bad (ignorant) other people may be,

one should bear no hatred for them. Both desire & hatred should be eschewed.

Craving & Aversion, Desire & Hate, Expectation & Fear in regard to other people & other objects of the World are Ego-created concepts that in turn bolster & support the Ego-ignorance. Even idle curiosity about that which “is none of your business” is to be “eschewed ”, another near-archaic term characteristic of the British Empire at the turn of the 19^th century. Indicating a refined Discrimination, such quality vocabulary survived longer out in the 3^rd World colonies like India where even older textbooks & dictionaries prevailed. Ramana continues with a few similar expedient pieces of advice, from out of any number of such practical expressions of true understanding. He advises helping others, & more fundamentally, being genuinely & deeply humble, & behaving with humility. Humility is inherent in Ego-loss, as perfectly exemplified by the Maharshi’s own manner & his all-embracing care of all who came to him.

All that one gives to others one gives to one's Self. If this truth is understood, who will not give to others ?  When one's Self arises, all arises; when one's Self becomes quiet, all becomes quiet. To the extent we behave with Humility, to that extent there will result good.

[15]       How long should Inquiry be practiced?

As long as there are impressions of Objects in the Mind, so long the Inquiry "Who am I?" is required. As Thoughts arise they should be destroyed then & there in the very place of their origin, through Inquiry. If one resorts to contemplation of the Self un-intermittently, until the Self is gained, that alone would do. As long as there are enemies within the fortress, they will continue to sally forth. If they are destroyed as they emerge, the fortress will fall into our hands.

The questioner appears anxious to get the “burdensome” Inquiry over with, to free up more time again for the vain pursuit of worldly Happiness, the creation of suffering & the promise of future suffering. Perhaps he may also be eager to test other spiritual “techniques” now & then, just to see if he can go “higher” than the Liberation that Ramana’s teaching indicates. Maharshi’s clear responses may be more all-inclusive than some such questioners would be ready to understand. This would be one of the countless reasons for seeking & securing the in-person assistance of a qualified Guru, like the Maharshi, if return to this instruction is needed.

While appearing to be only a technique, Self-Inquiry seamlessly merges into Self-Realization itself. Unending & timeless “fascination with the Self” mentioned in the Maharshi’s childhood Enlightenment story below is a good illustration of Self-Inquiry gone aright. As the only Reality & repository of all Wisdom & Happiness, where could one find a better focus for the Mind until there is no Mind? When is it a good time for unreality, ignorance, & suffering? No time, or time to halt Inquiry until Self-Realization.

The questioner appears anxious to get the “burdensome” Inquiry over with, to free up more time again for the vain pursuit of worldly Happiness, the creation of suffering & the promise of future suffering. Perhaps he may also be eager to test other spiritual “techniques” now & then, just to see if he can go “higher” than the Liberation that Ramana’s teaching indicates. Maharshi’s clear responses may be more all-inclusive than some such questioners would be ready to understand. This would be one of the countless reasons for seeking & securing the in-person assistance of a qualified Guru, like the Maharshi, if return to this instruction is needed.

While appearing to be only a technique, Self-Inquiry seamlessly merges into Self-Realization itself. Unending & timeless “fascination with the Self” mentioned in the Maharshi’s childhood Enlightenment story below is a good illustration of Self-Inquiry gone aright. As the only Reality & repository of all Wisdom & Happiness, where could one find a better focus for the Mind until there is no Mind? When is it a good time for unreality, ignorance, & suffering? No time, or time to halt Inquiry until Self-Realization.

A humorous side point is evident in Ramona’s analogy where wayward Thoughts are compared to colonial occupying soldiers exiting a besieged fort which stand in for the imagination of the Mind. In the USA, children were exposed to heroic cowboys-&-indians tales where “we” are identified with the occupying soldiers within the fort fending off the attacking “Indians” (native Americans).

But the true Indians, seeking to overthrow colonial oppression are the heroes in the Maharshi’s Analogy, those “outside” the fort. British citizens similarly grow up with Rudyard Kipling & other such tales of colonial soldiers in forts with the Indians outside being the peoples of India. The Maharshi’s indigenous-population childhood placed his imaginary viewpoint outside the fort of British colonials. This is fortunate for the Analogy because in his comparison, to be free & “outside” the imagining Mind is the goal. Then as stray Thoughts or soldiers escape, they too are to be destroyed by Inquiry.

Ramana Maharshi’s Nan Yar ?  Who Am I ? [continued]

                                               

[9]   What is the path of Inquiry for understanding the nature of the Mind?

That which rises as “I” is the Mind. If one inquires as to where the thought  “I”  rises 1^st, the place of the Mind's origin. Even if one thinks constantly “I – I”, one will be led to that place. Of all the Thoughts that arise in the Mind, the “I” Thought is the 1^st.

Illusion seems to arise as if from a “source” which is Consciousness, the Absolute Self, the only true “I”. This apparently arising Illusion is the false I-Thought which seems to arise as the 1^st Thought. This illusion is falsely attributed to the only place or Source anything could, in imagination, come from. None of that arising really happens, however, & since pure Consciousness produces no change or new entity, this Consciousness cannot really be such a Source. But since it seems to be, tracing the Illusion to its supposed “Source” points straight back “in” to Consciousness anyway. This is somewhat like the only case where 2 “wrongs”, Ego & its supposed “Source”, “makes a right” or at least points in the “right” direction to Consciousness, the only possible Source of anything.

When the illusory Mind turns in on itself, seeking its own source, as the arising “place” of the I-Thought, then Mind is thus focused in what is just the right non–objective direction.  Finding no I-Thought or its place of arising, the Mind “skids on through, as if through thin ice” into the depths of Consciousness itself. Ramana states elsewhere that the Mind thus loses its form, illusory though it is. Consciousness, that is Existence-Consciousness-Bliss, remains alone as ever it was & ever it will be.

It is only after the rise of this (I-Thought) that the other Thoughts arise. It is after the appearance of the 1^st  personal pronoun (" I ") that the 2^nd & 3^rd personal pronouns (you  &  it, she, he) appear; without the 1^st personal pronoun there will not be the 2^nd and 3^rd.
                                               

I   ==>     you   ==>     he, she, it

[10]   How will the Mind become quiet?
 By the Inquiry “Who am I?” the Thought “Who am I?” will destroy all other Thoughts,

 & like the stick used for stirring the burning funeral pyre, it will itself in the end get destroyed. Then, there will arise Self-Realization.

Nothing need be added to above, though it is slightly interesting to speculate about the “the stick used for stirring the burning pyre” analogy. For clarity sake, of course, the fire indicated is a cremation funeral pyre & Ramana may have intentionally hinted at a formal parallel between the very different events. Physical death of the Body followed by that pyre or fire is also unreal & yet bears resemblance to so-called Ego-death, glorious release of suffering for all time & absorption into Bliss. The Analogy seems to answer the unquoted question: is not “Who am I?” Inquiry itself a Thought? Comparing Thoughts in general to fire-wood sticks, the Inquiry is compared to a wooden stick used to stir the consuming fire. This last stick ultimately becomes fuel itself when tossed in upon doing its job.  No concern need be harbored for use of such an “Inquiry-Thought.”

         

Teaching in the Maharshi tradition states that one does better to attend to & release Thought concepts that cause suffering, bondage, & ignorance first, before worrying whether one should harness Thought for spiritual practice. To invert this priority & decline spiritual practice illustrates a similar maxim. Everything we think, say, & do can either deepen our Inquiry & hasten our Liberation. Or choosing otherwise, all those slow down our Release accordingly. We need have no concern or quibbling about the Thought quality of the “Who am I?” Inquiry question, which is but a funeral pyre stick for Ego-elimination. Since that Thought too is consumed by our seeing & knowing Ego to be non-existent, who would there be to bound by any Thought?

[Parenthetically, like the doubt: “is Inquiry a binding Thought?”, we might imagine a follow-up doubt regarding the possibility of relinquishing Thoughts which seem to arise spontaneously as if inevitably bubbling-up in a Sea of Consciousness. Thoughts of people, things, & events “far away” vanish effortlessly, often never to return. Thoughts of people, things, & events all “near-by” but distant in Time also vanish effortlessly, often never to return. Thoughts of people, things, & events based upon our Past interests also vanish effortlessly whenever those interests slip away. Many Thoughts then do vanish readily. In fact when interest: self-definition, ascertaining what is Real, & supposed sources of Happiness are all replaced by seeking & finding Reality, the Self, & Happiness “within”, then Thoughts based on the former misconceptions also vanish. Since Reality, the Self, & Happiness are beyond Thought, no new basis for Thought appears. More directly, Maharshi advised doubting the Doubter which again becomes Self-Inquiry.]

[11]       What is the means for constantly holding on to the Thought: “Who am I?”

When other Thoughts arise, one should not pursue them, but should Inquire:

“To whom do they arise?”  It does not matter how many Thoughts arise. As each Thought arises, one should inquire with diligence,  "To whom has this Thought arisen?" The answer that would emerge would be "To me." Thereupon if one inquires  "Who am I?", the Mind will go  back to its Source; & the Thought that arose will become quiet.

This is a straightforward & potent remedy for Thoughts that distract Inquiry. Inversely viewed, if an excess of such intruding Thoughts be the concern, Inquiry also serves as a preliminary tool to root them out. Binding concepts are never really hidden. If we Inquire & find them intruding, this only brings them all the more into the “light of day” so to speak. The Inquiry thus secondarily serves as “bait” or “excavation” to draw out false concepts that intrude. In this sense, intruding Thoughts can be made the object of what Systems-engineers might call “recursive iteration” or a “feedback loop.”

Self-Inquiry occurs “only 1 time” as in “for real” in the sense of Time-less-ness.

 Upon “Thought” arising, Maharshi advised the expedient “feedback loop” that turns the Thought back to Inquiry by asking “For whom is this thought ? For Me. “Who am I ?”

                                                  

This loop can be repeated to whatever extent necessary.

In this model, the final round combines the “1 single Inquiry” to result in the following:

With repeated practice in this manner, Mind will develop the skill to stay in its source.

When the Mind that is subtle goes out through the Brain & the Sense-Organs, the gross Names & Forms appear; when it stays inwardly directed, the Names & Forms disappear. Not letting the Mind go out, but retaining "inwardness", the “I”  which is the source of all Thoughts, will vanish, & the Self which ever exists will shine.

Again, Logic arrows depict reminders of this instruction in “notes”:

                   Outward-Mind  ==>  Name / Form – supported  “I”   =  Ego

                      n – Ego  ==>  n – Outward-Mind  ==>  Self-alone

Whatever one does, one should do without the Egoity "I".

If one acts in that way, all will appear as of the nature of the Absolute Reality.

Thus Maharshi follows with expedient practical advice for anyone in the process of their spiritual practice. Starting with the Ego-less action free of the I-am-the-Doer identification, is to be free of karma. This is Karma Yoga.

[12]    Are there no other means for making the Mind quiet ?  

Other than Inquiry, there are no adequate means. If through other means  control of the Mind it is sought,the Mind will appear to be controlled, but will again go forth. Therefore,  the exercise of breath-control (for instance) is only an aid

for rendering the Mind quiet (manonigraha); it will not destroy the Mind (manonasa).

The Illusion of the World in which one suffers identified with a Body & a Mind hinges upon the false-I Ego-notion. Seeking the source of that Ego-notion, finding it absent, reveals the ever-present, timeless, Non-Dual Self. This is the essence of Self-Inquiry taught by the Maharshi. Any other spiritual practice, whether of preparatory use or not, must ultimately pass through this same “portal to Liberation.” But nothing stands in our way from entry into that same “portal” directly. Some will say that the path of Self-Inquiry is “too steep, too high” for many. But the Maharshi’s direct instruction & the practice that he encouraged is no more complicated or difficult than any “preliminary” practice, & is most likely less complicated. Delay therefore seems to have little point, but in any case, however the path is initiated & whatever the later meandering, spiritual practice passes through this final stage of Self-Inquiry anyway.

The Mind will always be wandering. Just as when a chain is given to an Elephant to hold in its trunk, it will go along grasping the chain & nothing else; so also when the Mind is occupied with a Name or Form it will grasp that alone.

The above useful Elephant-analogy is not the particular one the Maharshi offered, but we acknowledge it here & go on to illustrate the Maharshi’s current Elephant-analogy. There are of course other Elephant-analogies as well, such as: the Blind Men interpreting the same Elephant differently, according to their Perception; or the Elephant that awakens when a Lion or Tiger enters its Dream, just as the Seeker awakens when the Guru appears in this Waking-dream; or the Elephant, once free of its cruel master, proceeds to thoroughly stomp the fallen tyrant to make its escape permanent, referring to thorough escape from Concepts & ultimately the entire Ego-Mind.

Shortly after the close of the 19^th Century, instruction imparted in rural India could assume some characteristic acquaintance with the care of elephants & such Analogies. The Maharshi would similarly take such things to be commonly known. On the one hand, tethering a baby Elephant with a small chain would suffice to later restrain a full grown Elephant that never tested again the relative strength of its bondage.

Similarly on the other hand, as Maharshi alludes to transport of an Elephant, perhaps using the same or similar chain given to an Elephant accustomed to holding one by his trunk. With that leading small chain he could literally “be led around by his nose.” A string of Elephants could even be given just the tail of the elephant in front & one chain held by the trunk of the lead Elephant could direct the whole group. The size & strength of an Elephant contrasts all the more sharply with the small token chain which is no real Bondage at all. There remains the Elephant’s fascination with grasping something or other in its trunk, like a child with a toy in hand, a cow chewing its cud, or a person chewing gum. Ramana would actually use “sweet grass” offered to a cow to symbolize leading the Mind in the way such grass could lead the cow. So too does the Mind “trained” by Illusion reaches for & grasp onto Forms of Objects in the World & their Names which are the Concepts by which we identify & characterize each Object.

And so on other occasions when asked about mantra–practice, the Maharshi will use a that similar analogy for the Mind being lead by a mantra or any object of meditation away from Objects, Name, & Form, in the World. Thus like a mantra utilized, a cow offered “sweet grass” can be lead away to a pleasing “pasture” as in Meditation.

When the Mind expands in the form of countless Thoughts, each Thought becomes weak; but as Thoughts get resolved the Mind becomes one-pointed & strong; for such a Mind Self-Inquiry will become easy.

The analogy of an Ocean of Consciousness, of Brahman, of the Guru’s Grace, & so on, are commonly used in Non-Dual Advaita Vedanta. Sometimes the substance of the Ocean of God is compared to Consciousness as the nature of God. Sometimes individuals as rivers run into & end in the Ocean indicated. Maybe most often is the Ocean analogy, another one that also mentions waves. Each wave can stand for an impression, a vritti or wave of the Mind, or else be taken to stand for an individual jiva, or as a Thought as used by whoever the prior question may have been quoting. As if perhaps, so as not to lend even that much Reality to a Thought, the Maharshi seems not to use that specific Ocean-Wave analogy so much. Perhaps the Wave analogy relieves the meditator of too much self-responsibility. It’s as if the “Thought-waves” were external, objective, mechanical phenomena, rising & falling automatically. In any case, it was the Questioner that introduced the Analogy, & Ramana did not return to it in his response.

Ramana Maharshi’s Nan Yar ?  Who Am I ? [continued]

Just as the spider emits out the thread of his web (Maya) & again withdraws it into itself. Likewise the Mind projects the World out of itself & again resolves it into itself.  When the Mind comes out of the Self, the World appears. Therefore, when the World appears to be real, the Self does not appear; & when the Self shines, the World does not appear.

 

When one persistently inquires into the nature of  the Mind, the Mind will end, leaving the Self remaining. What is referred to as the Self, is the Atman (non-different from Brahman). The Mind always exists only in dependence on something gross; it cannot stay alone. It is the Mind that is called the subtle body or the soul (jiva).

 The Maharshi sometimes used the Analogy of the Caterpillar not stepping off one leaf until secure on the next. Ego-Mind is the source of derivative Concepts, but in turn is supported by some of these same Concepts. If “caught” with no support it “falls away.”  Releasing such Concepts thus promotes the result of Liberation.