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.