Day by Day with Bhagavan
21-12-45
This is Bhagavan’s Jayanti (65th birthday). The crowd
of devotees is greater than usual, many of them having come
from distant parts. There were the usual decorations, music,
feast and feeding of the poor. In the afternoon a number of
prayers and verses in honour of Bhagavan specially composed
for the occasion were read out. A message sent by Swami
Sivananda (of Rishikesh) was also read out.
23-12-45 Afternoon
Mons. Georges Le Bot, Private Secretary to the Governor
of Pondicherry, and Chief of Cabinet of the French Government
there, came to Bhagavan. He could not easily squat down on
the floor and so Bhagavan asked us to give him a seat. We
placed for him a chair opposite to Bhagavan. He had brought
with him his request written in French. After expressing his
greetings to Bhagavan through some interpreters who came
with him and who spoke Tamil, he produced his French writing.
Our Balaram Reddi tried to interpret the same to Bhagavan.
73
But he found it rather difficult, as the French was rather highflown.
So we sent for Mr. Osborne (whose wife and three
children have been living for nearly five years here and who
himself returned from Siam about a month back) and he came
and explained the gist as follows: “I know little. I am even less.
But I know what I am speaking about. I am not asking for words,
explanations or arguments, but for active help by Maharshi’s
spiritual influence. I did some sadhana and attained to a stage
where the ego was near being annihilated. I wanted the ego to
be annihilated. But at the same time I wanted to be there to see it
being killed. This looked like having contradictory desires. I pray
Maharshi may do something by his influence, in which I fully
believe, to enable me to reach the final stage and kill the ego. I do
not want mere arguments or explanations addressed to the mind,
but real help. Will Maharshi please do this for me?”
He had also written out another question: “I have been
having for my motto ‘Liberate yourself’. Is that all right or
would Maharshi suggest any other motto or ideal for me?”
Bhagavan kept silent for a few minutes, all the while
however steadily looking at the visitor. After a few minutes the
visitor said, “I feel that I am not now in a state in which I can
readily receive any influence which Maharshi may be pleased
to send. After some time, I shall come again when I am in that
state of exaltation in which I may be able to assimilate his
influence or spiritual help.” He added, “May I have a little
conversation with this interpreter (Mr. Osborne) and come here
some other time?” Bhagavan said, “Yes, you can certainly go
and have some talk.” They both went out. The Sarvadhikari
gave the visitor some fruits and coffee and he took leave
expressing his desire to come here some other time. After the
visitor left the hall, Bhagavan said, “He seems to have read
about all this and to have done some sadhana. He is certainly
no novice.” Someone suggested that the books in French, in
our library, on Bhagavan’s teachings might be shown to the
74
visitor. They were accordingly taken out and shown to him while
he was still with the Sarvadhikari, having coffee. He looked at
them and said he had read them all.
Mr. Subramania Iyer (Assistant Director of Public
Health Madras, who has been coming to Bhagavan for some
years now) brought an album, containing 41 photos (taken
by Dr. T.N. Krishnaswami on 25-11-45) of Bhagavan at
Skandasramam and presented it to the Asramam. Bhagavan
looked at the pictures, which were all good, except one or
two spoiled slightly by the sunlight.
24-12-45 Morning
Bhagavan asked Mr. T.P. Ramachandra Aiyar to read out
a letter written by Mr. Subramania Iyer (Dindigul), a brother of
our Viswanatha Brahmachari. It gave an account of the grand
way in which Bhagavan’s Jayanti was celebrated at Tiruchuzhi
on the 21st instant. Mr. Subramania Iyer was writing a letter to
Mr. S. Doraiswamy Iyer, giving an account of the conversation
between Georges Le Bot and Bhagavan. It was read out in the
hall for the benefit of all assembled. I also read out the account
of the same happening recorded in this diary.
A visitor asked if he could do both pranayama and
dhyana. Bhagavan said, “One is a help to the other. Whether
one need do pranayama depends on one’s pakva or fitness.”
Evening
After parayana, Mr. Osborne said that before Mons.
Georges Le Bot left, he said the following: “I had the
experience described by me, twice, first by my own efforts,
and the second time under the silent influence of a French
philosopher now dead, who held my wrist and brought me to
the same stage without any effort on my part. Both times I
kept approaching the breaking point in waves but shrank back.
75
It was because of the second experience that I decided that
Maharshi could again bring me to that point.”
To the visitor who pursued the question about
pranayama, Bhagavan said, “The aim is to make the mind
one-pointed. For that pranayama is a help, a means. Not only
for dhyana but in every case where we have to make the mind
one-pointed, it may be even for a purely secular or material
purpose, it is good to make pranayama and then start the other
work. The mind and prana are the same, having the same
source. If one is controlled, the other is also controlled at the
same time. If one is able to make the mind one-pointed without
the help of pranayama, he need not bother about pranayama.
But one who cannot at once control the mind, may control
the breath and that will lead to control of the mind. It is
something like pulling a horse by the reins and making it go
in one direction.”
Bhagavan asked Mr. Osborne if Mons. Le Bot had
mentioned the name of the French philosopher who had helped
him to attain the experience referred to by him. Mr. Osborne
could not give the name, but said the philosopher, now dead,
seems to have been one trained in and following the ancient
Greek philosophy. Bhagavan remarked, “It could not be
Guenon, as that philosopher is said to be dead.”
Bhagavan continued, “He says he has ‘Liberate Yourself’
for his motto. But why should there be any motto? Liberation
is our very nature. We are that. The very fact that we wish for
liberation shows that freedom from all bondage is our real
nature. That has not got to be freshly acquired. All that is
necessary is to get rid of the false notion that we are bound.
When we achieve that, there will be no desire or thought of any
sort. So long as one desires liberation, so long, you may take it,
one is in bondage.” He also said, “People are afraid that when
ego or mind is killed, the result may be a mere blank and not
happiness. What really happens is that the thinker, the object of
76
thought and thinking, all merge in the one Source, which is
Consciousness and Bliss itself, and thus that state is neither
inert nor blank. I don’t understand why people should be afraid
of that state in which all thoughts cease to exist and the mind is
killed. They are every day experiencing that state in sleep. There
is no mind or thought in sleep. Yet when one rises from sleep
one says, ‘I slept happily’. Sleep is so dear to everyone that no
one, prince or beggar, can do without it. And when one wants
to sleep, nothing however high in the range of all the worldly
enjoyments can tempt him from much desired sleep. A king
wants to go to sleep, let us say. His queen, dear to him above all
other things, comes then and disturbs him. But even her, he
then brushes aside and prefers to go to sleep. That is an
indication of the supreme happiness that is to be had in that
state where all thoughts cease. If one is not afraid of going to
sleep, I don’t see why one should be afraid of killing the mind
or ego by sadhana.” Bhagavan also quoted during the above
discourse the Tamil stanza (quoted already in this diary) which
ends by saying that so long as the cloud of ego hides the moon
of jnana, the lily of the Self will not bloom.
25-12-45 Afternoon
When I went into the hall to take permission from
Bhagavan to go round the hill. Mr.N. Pisharoti, our
compounder, was reading out some verses recently composed
by him in Malayalam.
Mr. Chinta Dikshitulu’s Telugu composition Ramana
Gopala was read out in the hall. It was greatly enjoyed by all.
Bhagavan also appreciated it and thought it worthwhile being
read out to all. It was done accordingly.
26-12-45 Afternoon
Pointing to Mr. Venkatachalam, (father of the girl Souris
who visited Bhagavan a few years ago for the first time and wrote
77
an account of her experiences in the form of a letter to a friend in
the Telugu journal Bharati) Bhagavan said, “He came this
morning. I at once asked Dr. Srinivasa Rao also to come and
stand by Mr.Venkatachalam and showed them both to all so that
none should afterwards mistake the one for the other. They are
so much alike. The resemblance was even greater two or three
years ago.” A book has recently been received by Bhagavan in
which Mr.Venkatachalam’s letters to Mr.C. Dikshitulu during
one year (1938 or 1939?) are published. The portions relating to
Bhagavan in those letters were read out by Mr. Venkatachalam
in the hall.
27-12-45 Morning
Bhagavan was reading an account written by Nagamma
to her brother on Bhagavan’s visit to Skandasramam on 25-11-
45. Bhagavan had read only a little when I suggested it might
be read out, so that all might hear it. Accordingly it was read by
Nagamma and translated by Mr. Venkatachalam. We all
appreciated it.
Night
It was reported to Bhagavan that Echamma was seriously
ill for three days and unconscious for two days. Bhagavan said,
‘@lTlúTô @lT¥ «Úd¡\ÕiÓ, @lT¥úV Li|
ê¥iÓ BÚk§ÓYô’ (‘She used to be like that now and then.
She would remain like that, closing eyes’). From these words I
imagined that Bhagavan meant she would recover.
28-12-45 Morning
It seems Echammal passed away at about 2-30 a.m. and
the matter was reported to Bhagavan only about 8 a.m. in the
hall. The talk naturally was about Echammal and how from
1907 she persevered in offering food to Bhagavan without any
break. Bhagavan also remembered three other persons who fed
78
him when he was under the iluppai tree in the Big Temple. One
was Dasi Rajambal who, it seems, took a vow that she would
not eat before feeding Bhagavan and was feeding him for about
two months until he moved away to Gurumoortham. It seems
she continued to send food even to Gurumoortham for a day or
two. But Bhagavan asked her to discontinue it. It seems this
lady died only recently. Bhagavan mentioned also Meenakshi
Ammal, a Kammala woman, and said, “She was like a rakshasi.
She would daily go round the hill and then come and cook and
bring food to me. After some time she began assuming control
over everybody including Palaniswami. If others brought food,
etc., she would give some to me and whatever remained she
used to take away with her.” (Bhagavan said, in the afternoon,
“Our Nagappa’s mother Ratnamma also used to bring food in
those days”). Of food supplied regularly, LhP} (Kattalai) as
Bhagavan put it, he said, “You don’t know what trouble all
such regular supply involves. Those who make it expect some
control over you. It also creates some aham in them. Everyone
of them expects you to take something. One would say ‘@¥úV,
Du ûLVôúX ùLôgNm ûYV¥’ (‘I say, serve something
with your own hand’), and then each would serve something.
The quantity would become too great. Any number of people
bring any number of things, and at all times, and you must take
them. Sometimes we used to mix up all things received, milk,
food, porridge, etc., and drink it if the resulting mixture was a
liquid. ‘Swami-hood’ is very difficult. You cannot realise it. I
am speaking from fifty years’ experience. After such experience
in Gurumoortham I wanted to avoid it by not remaining in any
one place.”
Afternoon
Santhamma came and reported to Bhagavan that Echamma
passed away peacefully and people did not even know when
exactly life departed and that though she was unconscious for
79
nearly two days, when she had a little consciousness at one time
during these two days, the one question she asked was, “Has
food been sent to Bhagavan?” (Later I learnt from Nagamma
that this was not quite correct. It seems that somebody, to test
whether Echamma’s mind was clear and not wandering, asked
the question “Has food been sent to Bhagavan today?” and
Echammal at once showed recognition). Her body was cremated.
I thereupon asked Bhagavan, “It is said in the case of such people
they should not be cremated, but buried”. Bhagavan replied, “It
seems she herself had mentioned that her body should be cremated
and that her bones alone should be taken and buried in her village.”
I also asked Bhagavan what he meant by his statement last night
that “she would often remain with closed eyes”. He explained,
“She practised concentrating on the head centre and would be in
a trance-like state for even two or three days with breath fully
controlled. I told her it was only laya and one should not be
satisfied with it, but must get out of it and beyond it.”
One Mr. Joshi, introduced by our Chaganlal Yogi, put the
following questions and Bhagavan gave the following answers:
Question 1: When I think ‘Who am I?’, the answer comes
‘I am not this mortal body but I am chaitanya, atma, or
paramatma.’ And suddenly another question arises — ‘Why
has atma come into maya?’ or in other words ‘Why has God
created this world?’
Answer: To enquire ‘Who am I?’ really means trying to
find out the source of the ego or the ‘I’ thought. You are not to
think of other thoughts, such as ‘I am not this body, etc.’ Seeking
the source of ‘I’ serves as a means of getting rid of all other
thoughts. We should not give scope to other thoughts, such as
you mention, but must keep the attention fixed on finding out
the source of the ‘I’ thought, by asking (as each thought arises)
to whom the thought arises and if the answer is ‘I get the thought’
by asking further who is this ‘I’ and whence its source?
80
Question 2: Is atma a subject of sakshatkara?
Answer: The atma is as it is. It is sakshat always. There
are not two atmas, one to know and one to be known. To
know it is to be it. It is not a state where one is conscious of
anything else. It is consciousness itself.
Question 3: I do not understand the meaning of “brahma
satyam jagat mithya (Brahman is real, the world is unreal)”.
Does this world have real existence or not? Does the jnani
not see the world or does he see it in a different form?
Answer: Let the world bother about its reality or
falsehood. Find out first about your own reality. Then all things
will become clear. What do you care how the jnani sees the
world? You realise yourself and then you will understand. The
jnani sees that the world of names and forms does not limit
the Self, and that the Self is beyond them.
Question 4: “I do not know how to worship. So kindly
show me the way to worship.”
Answer: Is there a ‘worshipper’ and a ‘worshipped’? Find
out the ‘I’, the worshipper; that is the best way. Always the
seer must be traced.
29-12-45 Morning
Mr. Viswanatha Brahmachari brought a Tamil translation of
Mr. C. Dikshitulu’s Ramana Gopala and Bhagavan perused it.
Night
Mr. P.C. Desai introduced Mr. P.C. Dewanji (Retd.
Sub-Judge) who was returning from Trivandrum, where
he had presided over a section of the Philosophical
Conference. Mr. Dewanji asked Bhagavan, “What is the
easiest way to attain one-pointedness of mind?” Bhagavan
said, “The best way is to see the source of the mind. See if
81
there is such a thing as the mind. It is only if there is a mind
that the question of making it one-pointed will arise. When
you investigate by turning inwards, you find there is no such
thing as the mind.”
Then Mr. P.C. Desai quoted Bhagavan’s Upadesa Sara in
Sanskrit to the effect, “When you investigate the nature of mind
continuously or without break, you find there is no such thing as
the mind. This is the straight path for all.” The visitor again asked,
“It is said in our scriptures that God it is that creates, sustains and
destroys all and that He is immanent in all. If so and if God does
everything and if all that we do is according to God’s niyati (law),
and had already been planned in the Cosmic Consciousness. is
there individual personality and any responsibility for it?”
Bhagavan: Of course, there is. The same scriptures have
laid down rules as to what men should or should not do. If man is
not responsible, then why should those rules have been laid down?
You talk of God’s niyati and things happening according to it. If
you ask God why this creation and all, He would tell you it is
according to your karma again. If you believe in God and His
niyati working out everything, completely surrender yourself to
Him and there will be no responsibility for you. Otherwise find
out your real nature and thus attain freedom.
Mr. Sundaresa Iyer brought two copies of ‘LkRo
@à駒 (Kandar Anubhuti) to Bhagavan and said they were
sent by Dasi Rajambal’s son (Shanmuga Sundaram, teacher
in a school here) who had published for free distribution 500
copies of the book in honour of his mother’s memory.
Bhagavan again said in this connection, “Though she was a
young woman and born in that caste, she took a vow that she
would not take her meal before giving me food.”
30-12-45
Ramana Gopala has been translated into Tamil and the
final copy was read out in the hall this morning.
82
Afternoon
A devotee brought and gave to Bhagavan a cutting from
The Bombay Chronicle in which an account was given of
how Ramana Jayanti was celebrated this year at Matunga,
Bombay, by the Ramana Satchidananda Sangh and how one
Vijayaraghava Bhagavatar of Mannargudi and his party
performed an excellent kalakshepam on Bhagavan and his
life and teachings. The cutting was read out in the hall for
the benefit of all. It said that a harikatha was held on Ramana.
Bhagavan said, “Harikatha on Ramana is a misnomer.
Kalakshepam would have been more appropriate.”
Tilak Sastri wanted to know from Bhagavan about
Echammal, so that he could send an article to the press about
her. Bhagavan said, “You may write what you like. Vijayam
and other books contain a reference to her.” Bhagavan said,
“Our Venkatakrishniah’s mother also seems to have passed away
the same night. I find it in today’s Telugu paper Zamin Ryot.”
R.Narayana Iyer asked Bhagavan if Echammal was
conscious to the last. Though people (including myself) had
told Bhagavan that Echammal was unconscious for the last
two days of her existence, not having been able to recognise
those around her, Bhagavan said in reply, “Yes, She was. She
remained as in samadhi and passed away. It is even said they
did not know when exactly life expired.” Mysore Ramachandra
Rao added, “The corpse did not look like a corpse at all. It
looked very much as she used to look here.”
31-12-45 Morning
Mr. Chinta Dikshitulu is here. Bhagavan said, “We were
talking of Chinta Dikshitulu yesterday. He is here now.” Later
another gentleman arrived. A Muslim from the Punjab, he
was born blind, but has learnt Arabic, Persian, Urdu and
English and knows by heart the whole of the Quran. It seems
83
he heard of Bhagavan from some friend, who also translated
to him in Urdu the English book Who am I? and thereupon he
decided he should go and visit Bhagavan. Accordingly he has
come all the way from the Punjab, all alone. Somebody
suggested to him here that he should hear some other works
of Bhagavan. He replied, “No. It is not necessary. That one
book is enough.”
1946
2-1-46 Afternoon
Mr. Joshi has submitted what Bhagavan calls a question
paper, and Bhagavan answers the same.
First about the jnani’s doing work, without the mind: “You
imagine one cannot do work if the mind is killed. Why do you
suppose that it is the mind alone that can make one do work.
There may be other causes which can also produce activity.
Look at this clock, for instance. It is working without a mind.
Again suppose we say the jnani has a mind. His mind is very
different from the ordinary man’s mind. He is like the man
who is hearing a story told with his mind all on some distant
object. The mind rid of vasanas, though doing work, is not
doing work. On the other hand, if the mind is full of vasanas, it
is doing work even if the body is not active or moving.”
Question 2: Is soham the same as ‘Who am I?’
Answer: Aham alone is common to them. One is soham.
The other is koham. They are different. Why should we go on
saying soham? One must find out the real ‘I’. In the question
‘Who am I?’, by ‘I’ is meant the ego. Trying to trace it and find
its source, we see it has no separate existence but merges in the
real ‘I’.
84
Question 3: I find surrender is easier. I want to adopt
that path.
Answer: By whatever path you go, you will have to lose
yourself in the One. Surrender is complete only when you
reach the stage ‘Thou art all’ and ‘Thy will be done’.
The state is not different from jnana. In soham there is
dvaita. In surrender there is advaita. In the Reality there is neither
dvaita nor advaita, but That which is, is. Surrender appears easy
because people imagine that, once they say with their lips ‘I
surrender’ and put their burdens on their Lord, they can be free
and do what they like. But the fact is that you can have no likes
or dislikes after your surrender and that your will should become
completely non-existent, the Lord’s Will taking its place. Such
death of the ego is nothing different from jnana. So by whatever
path you may go, you must come to jnana or oneness.
Question 4: How am I to deal with my passions? Am I to
check them or satisfy them? If I follow Bhagavan’s method
and ask, ‘To whom are these passions?’ they do not seem to
die but grow stronger.
Answer: That only shows you are not going about my
method properly. The right way is to find out the root of all
passions, the source whence they proceed, and get rid of that.
If you check the passions, they may get suppressed for the
moment, but will appear again. If you satisfy them, they will
be satisfied only for the moment and will again crave
satisfaction. Satisfying desires and thereby trying to root them
out is like trying to quench fire by pouring kerosene oil over it.
The only way is to find the root of desire and thus remove it.
Another visitor asked Bhagavan, “If I try to make the
‘Who am I?’ enquiry, I fall into sleep. What should I do?”
Bhagavan: Persist in the enquiry throughout your waking
hours. That would be quite enough. If you keep on making
85
the enquiry till you fall asleep, the enquiry will go on during
sleep also. Take up the enquiry again as soon as you wake up.
Another visitor asked Bhagavan if it was not necessary
that the varnasrama differences should go if the nation was
to progress.
Bhagavan: How can one say whether it is necessary or
not necessary? I never say anything on such subjects. People
often come and ask me for my opinion on varnasrama. If I say
anything they will at once go and publish in the papers, ‘So and
so also is of such and such an opinion.’ The same scriptures
which have laid down varnasrama dharma have also
proclaimed the oneness of all life and abheda buddhi as the
only reality. Is it possible for anyone to teach a higher truth
than the Unity or Oneness of all life? There is no need for anyone
to start reforming the country or the nation before reforming
himself. Each man’s first duty is to realise his true nature. If
after doing it, he feels like reforming the country or nation, by
all means let him take up such reform. Ram Tirtha advertised,
‘Wanted reformers — but reformers who will reform themselves
first.’ No two persons in the world can be alike or can act alike.
External differences are bound to persist, however hard we may
try to obliterate them. The attempts of so-called social reformers,
to do away with such classes or divisions as varnasrama has
created, have not succeeded, but have only created new divisions
and added a few more castes or classes to the already existing
ones, such as the Brahmo-Samajists and the Arya-Samajists.
The only solution is for each man to realise his true nature.
Another visitor said, “Jnanis generally retire from active
life and do not engage in any worldly activity.”
Bhagavan: They may or may not. Some, even after
realising, carry on trade or business or rule over a kingdom.
Some retire into forests and abstain from all acts except those
absolutely necessary to keep life in the body. So, we cannot
say all jnanis give up activity and retire from life.
86
Visitor: I want to know if Bhagavan can give concrete
examples, like the butcher Dharmavyadha mentioned in our
books, of jnanis now living and doing their ordinary daily
work in life.
Bhagavan did not answer.
Visitor: Is renunciation necessary for Self-realisation?
Bhagavan: Renunciation and realisation are the same.
They are different aspects of the same state. Giving up the
non-self is renunciation. Inhering in the Self is jnana or Selfrealisation.
One is the negative and the other the positive
aspect of the same, single truth. Bhakti, jnana, yoga — are
different names for Self-realisation or mukti which is our
real nature. These appear as the means first. They eventually
are the goal. So long as there is conscious effort required on
our part to keep up bhakti, yoga, dhyana, etc., they are the
means. When they go on without any effort on our part, we
have attained the goal. There is no realisation to be achieved.
The real is ever as it is. What we have done is, we have
realised the unreal, i.e., taken for real the unreal. We have to
give up that. That is all that is wanted.
Visitor: How has the unreal come? Can the unreal spring
from the real?
Bhagavan: See if it has sprung. There is no such thing
as the unreal, from another standpoint. The Self alone exists.
When you try to trace the ego, based on which alone the world
and all exist, you find the ego does not exist at all and so also
all this creation.
3-1-46 Afternoon
When I entered the hall Bhagavan was already answering
a question which, I gathered, was to the effect “Is the theory of
evolution true?” and Bhagavan said, “The trouble with all of us
is that we want to know the past, what we were, and also what
87
we will be in the future. We know nothing about the past or the
future. We do know the present and that we exist now. Both
yesterday and tomorrow are only with reference to today. Yesterday
was called ‘today’ in its time, and tomorrow will be called ‘today’
by us tomorrow. Today is ever present. What is ever present is pure
existence. It has no past or future. Why not try and find out the real
nature of the present and ever-present existence?”
Another visitor asked, “The present is said to be due
to past karma. Can we transcend the past karma by our
free will now?”
Bhagavan: See what the present is, as I told you. Then
you will understand what is affected by or has a past or a
future and also what is ever-present and always free, unaffected
by the past or future or by any past karma.
Another visitor asked, “Can one person create an urge
for anything in another. Can a Guru transform a disciple as if
by magic?”
Bhagavan: What is your idea of a Guru? You think of
him in human shape as a body of certain dimensions, colours,
etc. A disciple after enlightenment told his Guru, “I now realise
you lived in my innermost heart as the one reality in all my
countless births and have now come before me in human shape
and lifted this veil of ignorance. What can I do for you in
return for such great kindness?” And the Guru said, “You need
not do anything. It is enough if you remain as you are in your
real state” This is the truth about the Guru.
Mr. Joshi put five questions. I give below the questions
and Bhagavan’s answers.
Question 1: Should I go on asking ‘Who am I?’ without
answering? Who asks whom? Which bhavana (attitude)
should be in the mind at the time of enquiry? What is ‘I’ the
Self or the ego?
88
Answer: In the enquiry ‘Who am I?’, ‘I’ is the ego. The
question really means, what is the source or origin of this
ego? You need not have any bhavana in the mind. All that is
required is, you must give up the bhavana that you are the
body, of such and such a description, with such and such a
name, etc. There is no need to have a bhavana about your real
nature. It exists as it always does; it is real and no bhavana.
Question 2: I cannot be always engaged in this enquiry,
for I have got other work to do, and when I do such work I
forget this quest.
Answer: When you do other work, do you cease to exist?
You always exist, do you not?
Question 3: Without the sense of doership — the sense
‘I am doing’ — work cannot be done.
Answer: It can be done. Work without attachment. Work
will go on even better than when you worked with the sense
that you were the doer.
Question 4: I don’t understand what work I should do
and what not.
Answer: Don’t bother. What is destined as work to be
done by you in this life will be done by you, whether you
like it or not.
Question 5: Why should I try to realise? I will emerge
from this state, as I wake up from a dream. We do not make
an attempt to get out of a dream during sleep.
Answer: In a dream, you have no inkling that it is a dream
and so you don’t have the duty of trying to get out of it by your
effort. But in this life you have some intuition, by your sleep
experience, by reading and hearing, that this life is something
like a dream, and hence the duty is cast on you to make an
effort and get out of it. However, who wants you to realise the
89
Self, if you don’t want it? If you prefer to be in the dream, stay
as you are.
With reference to question 4, Mrs. P. C. Desai quoting
the Bhagavad Gita asked Bhagavan, “If (as Arjuna was told)
there is a certain work destined to be done by each and we
shall eventually do it however much we do not wish to do it
or refuse to do it, is there any free will?”
Bhagavan said, “It is true that the work meant to be
done by us will be done by us. But it is open to us to be free
from the joys or pains, pleasant or unpleasant consequences
of the work, by not identifying ourselves with the body or
that which does the work. If you realise your true nature
and know that it is not you that does any work, you will be
unaffected by the consequences of whatever work the body
may be engaged in according to destiny or past karma or
divine plan, however you may call it. You are always free
and there is no limitation of that freedom.”
4-1-46 Morning
Among the letters etc., received was a small pamphlet
called Divine Grace Through Total Self-Surrender by Mr. D.C.
Desai. Bhagavan read out to us a few extracts from it, viz., the
following quotation from Paul Brunton: “I remain perfectly
calm and fully aware of who I am and what is occurring. Self
still exists, but it is a changed, radiant Self. Something that is
far superior to my unimportant personality rises into
consciousness and becomes me. I am in the midst of an ocean
of blazing light. I sit in the lap of holy bliss”; and also the
following: “Divine grace is a manifestation of the cosmic freewill
in operation. It can alter the course of events in a
mysterious manner through its own unknown laws, which are
superior to all natural laws, and can modify the latter by
interaction. It is the most powerful force in the universe.”
90
“It descends and acts, only when it is invoked by total
self-surrender. It acts from within, because God resides in the
heart of all beings. Its whisper can be heard only in a mind
purified by self-surrender and prayer.”
Paul Brunton describes its nature as follows: “Rationalists
laugh at it and atheists scorn it, but it exists. It is a descent of
God into the soul’s zone of awareness. It is a visitation of
force unexpected and unpredictable. It is a voice spoken out
of cosmic silence . . . . . . . . . . It is cosmic will which can
perform authentic miracles under its own laws.”
Afternoon
Dr. Syed read out to Bhagavan a Sufi story from this
month’s Vision whose moral is that there must be implicit,
unquestioning faith in and obedience to the Master’s direction.
When all others would not obey Muhammad Ghazni’s
command to destroy a precious gem of his, one servant
unhesitatingly destroyed it and, when taken to task for it by
the others, said, “Nothing is more precious to me than my
master’s command.” I was reminded by this of the following
incident in Ramanuja’s life and so related it to Dr. Syed and
others. It seems God Ranganatha was being taken out in
procession in Srirangam and Ramanuja called out to a disciple
to come out and see the procession. The disciple was boiling
Ramanuja’s milk and would not come out however often he
was called, and later explained to his Master, “Ranganatha is
your Master and he is important to you. You alone are
important to me and I couldn’t leave off your service, i.e.,
boiling milk for you, to go and see Ranganatha.”
With reference to Bhagavan’s answer to Mrs. Desai’s
question on the evening of 3-1-46, I asked him, “Are only
important events in a man’s life, such as his main occupation
or profession, predetermined, or are trifling acts in his life,
91
such as taking a cup of water or moving from one place in the
room to another, also predetermined?”
Bhagavan: Yes, everything is predetermined.
I: Then what responsibility, what free will has man?
Bhagavan: What for then does the body come into
existence?
It is designed for doing the various things marked out
for execution in this life. The whole programme is chalked
out. ‘@Y]u± JWÔÜm @ûNVôÕ’ (Not an atom moves
except by His Will) expresses the same truth, whether you
say @Y]u± @ûNVôÕ (Does not move except by His
Will) or LoUªu± @ûNVôÕ (Does not move except by
karma). As for freedom for man, he is always free not to
identify himself with the body and not to be affected by the
pleasures or pains consequent on the body’s activities.
5-1-46 Afternoon
When I entered the hall Bhagavan was answering some
question saying, “There is no difference between dream and
the waking state except that the dream is short and the waking
long. Both are the result of the mind. Because the waking state
is long, we imagine that it is our real state. But, as a matter of
fact, our real state is what is sometimes called turiya or the
fourth state which is always as it is and knows nothing of the
three avasthas, viz., waking, dream or sleep. Because we call
these three avasthas we call the fourth state also turiya
avastha. But it is not an avastha, but the real and natural state
of the Self. When this is realised, we know it is not a turiya or
fourth state, for a fourth state is only relative, but turiyatita,
the transcendent state called the fourth state.”
A visitor asked Bhagavan, “Priests prescribe various
rituals and pujas and people are told that unless they properly
92
observe these with fasts, feasts, etc., sin will accrue, and so
on. Is there any necessity to observe such rituals and
ceremonial worship?”
Bhagavan: Yes. All such worship is also necessary. It may
not be necessary for you. But that does not mean it is necessary
for nobody and is no good at all. What is necessary for the infant
class pupil is not necessary for the graduate. But even the graduate
has to make use of the very alphabet he learnt in the infant class.
He knows the full use and significance of the alphabet now.
The same visitor asked, “I do Omkara puja. I say ‘Om
Ram’. Is that good?”
Bhagavan: Yes. Any puja is good. ‘Om Ram’ or any other
name will do. The point is to keep away all other thoughts
except the one thought of Om or Ram or God. All mantra or
japa helps that. He who does the japa of Ram, for example,
becomes Rama-maya. The worshipper becomes in course of
time the worshipped. It is only then that he will know the full
meaning of the Omkar which he was repeating.
Our real nature is mukti. But we are imagining we are
bound and are making various strenuous attempts to become
free, while we are all the while free. This will be understood
only when we reach that stage. We will be surprised that we
were frantically trying to attain something which we have
always been and are. An illustration will make this clear. A
man goes to sleep in this hall. He dreams he has gone on a
world tour, is roaming over hill and dale, forest and country,
desert and sea, across various continents and after many years
of weary and strenuous travel, returns to this country, reaches
Tiruvannamalai, enters the Asramam and walks into the hall.
Just at that moment he wakes up and finds he has not moved an
inch but was sleeping where he lay down. He has not returned
after great effort to this hall, but is and always has been in the
hall. It is exactly like that. If it is asked, why being free we
93
imagine we are bound, I answer, “Why being in the hall did
you imagine you were on a world adventure, crossing hill and
dale, desert and sea? It is all mind or maya.”
Another visitor, who said that he was from Sri Aurobindo’s
Ashram, asked Bhagavan: “But we see pain in the world. A
man is hungry. It is a physical reality. It is very real to him. Are
we to call it a dream and remain unmoved by his pain?”
Bhagavan: From the point of view of jnana or the reality,
the pain you speak of is certainly a dream, as is the world of
which the pain is an infinitesimal part. In the dream also you
yourself feel hunger. You see others suffering hunger. You feed
yourself and, moved by pity, feed the others that you find suffering
from hunger. So long as the dream lasted, all those pains were
quite as real as you now think the pain you see in the world to be.
It was only when you woke up that you discovered that the pain
in the dream was unreal. You might have eaten to the full and
gone to sleep. You dream that you work hard and long in the hot
sun all day, are tired and hungry and want to eat a lot. Then you
get up and find your stomach is full and you have not stirred out
of your bed. But all this is not to say that while you are in the
dream you can act as if the pain you feel there is not real. The
hunger in the dream has to be assuaged by the food in the dream.
The fellow beings you found in the dream so hungry had to be
provided with food in that dream. You can never mix up the two
states, the dream and the waking state. Till you reach the state of
jnana and thus wake out of this maya, you must do social service
by relieving suffering whenever you see it. But even then you
must do it, as we are told, without ahamkara, i.e., without the
sense “I am the doer,” but feeling, “I am the Lord’s tool.” Similarly
one must not be conceited, “I am helping a man below me. He
needs help. I am in a position to help. I am superior and he
inferior.” But you must help the man as a means of worshipping
God in that man. All such service too is for the Self, not for
anybody else. You are not helping anybody else, but only yourself.
94
Mr. T.P. Ramachandra Aiyar said in this connection,
“There is the classic example of Abraham Lincoln, who helped
a pig to get out of a ditch and in the process had himself and
his clothes dirtied. When questioned why he took so much
trouble, he replied, ‘I did it to put an end not so much to the
pig’s trouble, as to my own pain in seeing the poor thing
struggle to get out of the ditch’.”
Mr. Joshi asked: I am a householder. I have dependants
and obstacles in the way of my spiritual progress. What should
I do?
Bhagavan: See whether those dependants and obstacles
are outside you, whether they exist without you.
Joshi: I am a beginner. How should I start?
Bhagavan: Where are you now? Where is the goal? What
is the distance to be covered? The Self is not somewhere far
away to be reached. You are always that. You have only to
give up your habit, a long-standing one, of identifying yourself
with the non-self. All effort is only for that. By turning the
mind outwards, you have been seeing the world, the non-Self.
If you turn it inwards you will see the Self.
After this discourse, Lokamma began singing a Tamil
song. Bhagavan at once said: “Mother used to sing this song
very often. This repeats the very same thing we have been
talking about now.” Thereupon I asked Bhagavan who the
author of the song was.
He said, “Avudai Ammal. She has composed a great many
songs. They are very popular in those parts (Madura and other
nearby districts). Some of them have been published. Still so
many remain unpublished. They have been handed down
orally from generation to generation, mostly through women,
who learn them by heart, hearing them from others and singing
them along with those who already know them.” I learnt now
95
that Bhagavan’s mother was illiterate. Bhagavan told me that,
in spite of it, she had learnt by heart a great many songs. The
song and its meaning are given below:
TpX®
Nf£Rô ]kRUôn Rô²ÚkÕm U\kRYoúTôp
FlT¥Øu ²ÚkR Ru]úU—A A — (Nf£)
@àTpX®
@t×RÁ Rt×RÀ Rt×RÀ ùRu²Pj§p
@fNØ\ BPªp~úV—A A— (Nf£)
NWQm
1. U]ÑiúPô U\kR±V Y×ÑiúPô ©\k§\dL
UXØiúPô ¨oUXj§úX
N¬ùT¬Ñ £ßÑiúPô _ô§YoQ U§ÛiúPô
Nô·ùVu] Nô·V ØiúPô
¨û\kRÑL NôLWj§p ¨xL[m NL[ùUu]
@t×RÁ Rt×R ªÕúY—A A— (Nf£)
2. Yôn§\dL BPتp~ ùU[]Ne LpTªp~
YkR§p~ úTô]Õ ªp~
A§VkRm SÓܪp~ ú_ô§ùVuß úTÚªp~
DTô§«p~ Fu²Pj§úX
Tô§ùVußm À§ùVußm DTô§YkR ùNôlT]ª(Õ)
@t×RÁ Rt×R ªÕúY—A A— (Nf£)
3. Dh×\m× DVWm¸r RN§dÏm éWQUôn
I°Vô¡ ùY°Vô¡úV
¨tÏQ ¨WôRWUôn ¨û\Yôn DTNôkRØUôn
©WgOô] L]Uô¡úV
@bVô ]kRUôn @LmTRX· VôojRØUôn
@TúWôb ÑLUô¡úV—A A— (Nf£)
How did the Self that ever is
Awareness — bliss,
How did It till now behave
As if It had forgotten this?
96
Wonder of wonders, beyond understanding
Is your strange fear,
My Swan, my dear,
Your fear of me!
Mind learning, knowing and forgetting,
Body begotten, begetting and then dying,
Whence these impurities in Purity?
Bigness, smallness, class, rank, sight and seer —
Why these darkling waves in the full deep sea of bliss?
No need for speech or vow of silence;
No coming or going; no beginning, end or middle.
Nor light nor sound; no quality.
No separateness and hence no fear.
Oh wonder of wonders, the things that seem
In a dream!
In and out, high and low, and all the ten directions
Lost in light illimitably vast,
Unbroken, unsupported, full and calm,
Pure Awareness, Bliss immutable,
The once-remote, long — longed — for goal
Now here, joy, joy!
6-1-46 Morning
Mr. Lakshmana Sarma (known as ‘Who’) has come.
Bhagavan was looking into a note-book in which Mr. Sarma
had written out an English translation of his Vedanta Saram
(Sanskrit). I was curious to know what this Vedanta Saram
deals with and so was asking Mr. Sarma’s son Kameswaran
about it. Bhagavan heard this and turning to me said, “This
is the same as Maha Yoga.”
There was some talk about Sarma’s birthday and Bhagavan
said, “He says he is born always or daily” and referred to the
eleventh stanza in the supplement to Ulladu Narpadu in Tamil
which has been translated into English under the title Reality in
97
Forty Verses. For looking up this song he picked up ‘èt±WhÓ’
(Collected Works in Tamil) from the revolving shelf by his side
and before putting it back, detected that moths had been at work
on the cover. He remarked, “We have not been studying these
books. So these insects have been digesting them.”
Afternoon
Mr. L. Sarma came and sat next to me. This morning he
could not recognise me, though I was only about three feet from
him. So I was advising him to undergo an operation for his
cataract. He said that he had been able to retard the development
of this disease and that, if he could do so in the future also, he
would rather manage for the rest of his life with partial eyesight
than risk an operation. Then I told him it all depended on what
further lease of life he had and in this connection I asked what
the reading of his horoscope in this matter was. Thus we talked
about astrology and I asked Bhagavan for his view on astrology.
He said, “It is all right (@Õ N¬Rôu). Why not? If one accepts
the theory of karma, one will have to accept the theory of astrology
and horoscope also.” After this, Sarma, Dr. Syed, G. Subba Rao
and myself talked about the science of astrology and whether
there was any use or sense in knowing our future and so on; and
then Mr. Subba Rao told us that in the books on astrology it is
clearly laid down that what is destined to happen according to
the horoscope may be modified to some extent by propitiatory
pujas etc. Mr. S. Rao went on to say how the mere dust of the
feet of men like Bhagavan, how a look from them, can burn away
all our sins etc. At this I asked, “I have also come across some of
these writings which extol the virtues of sat sang. I should like to
know whether these writings are to be understood as literally
true and whether there is not some exaggeration in them.” Mr. S.
Rao said they were literally true, but that one must have faith.
And I asked him why, if that were so, those who were responsible
for those texts about sat sang did not add the proviso themselves
98
but left it to commentators like Mr. S. Rao to add it. Thus a number
of us wrangled for a few minutes; but Bhagavan kept silent
studiously, as usual on such occasions. Then we too became silent.
Once before I had put the question to Bhagavan himself, with
reference to the five stanzas on sat sang in the Supplement to the
Reality in Forty Verses and Bhagavan only said then,
“@ùRu]úUô, Sôu BÚkRûR @lT¥úV Rôu
Fݧú]u;” meaning, “I have translated the verses as I found
them (in Sanskrit). Don’t ask me!”
7-1-46 Morning
Mr. Mahatani asked Bhagavan, “It is said in Advaita
Bodha Deepika, that the Supreme Self identifying itself with
the mind appears changeful. How can the mind coming from
maya which itself comes from the Self be able to alter or
change the changeless Self?” Bhagavan answered, “There is
in reality no change, no creation. But for those who ask, ‘How
has this creation come about?’ the above explanation is given.”
Afternoon
Mr. Ramachandra Rao of Bangalore read before Bhagavan
his Canarese work just being prepared called The Ramana I have
known. After he had finished reading, I asked him when he first
came to Bhagavan and he said, ‘1918’. I then asked him if he was
narrating all his experiences since then and if he was doing so with
the help of any notes or memoranda. He replied he was writing of
all that had happened since 1918, and that only from memory. I
was wondering at such memory. Bhagavan said, “Nayana
(Kavyakantha Ganapathi Muni) would remember and give you
the hour and date for every incident at which he was present.”
Night
Mr. G.L. Sarma seems to have prepared a manuscript on
Gita Saram. Bhagavan asked Mr. Balaram Reddi to read it out.
99
As it was said in that, “Only when there is complete devotion,
the Lord will respond and take complete charge of the devotee,”
Mr. P. Bannerji (who has recently come after a stay at
Aurobindo’s) asked Bhagavan, “Is it a condition precedent for
the Lord showing grace that one must be completely devoted?
Would not the Lord naturally in his grace be kind towards all
his children whether they are devoted or not?”
Bhagavan: How can one help being devoted? Everyone
loves himself. That is experience. If the Self were not his
dearest object, would one love it? The Self or Lord is not
somewhere else but is inside each of us and in loving oneself,
one loves only the Self.
The visitor could not understand how this was an answer
to his question. I explained, “Bhagavan has told us more than
once, ‘The Lord’s grace is always flowing. There is no time at
which it is not flowing, and no person towards whom it is not
flowing. But only those can receive it who have developed the
capacity. Devotion is a condition precedent, not for the flowing
of grace from the Lord, but for your being able to receive and
assimilate the grace which is there always flowing’.”
In this connection Dr. Syed quoted the verse in Bhagavad
Gita which says that the Lord is the friend of all, the sinner
and the saint alike, but that he is specially in the heart of those
who cherish him and that such people are dear to Him.
8-1-46 Afternoon
Mr. Mahtani again asked Bhagavan about his question
(found recorded under 7-1-46). Bhagavan replied, “The very
sentence you quote says that mind is a superimposition, that it
has no reality but is like the appearance of the snake in the rope.
The text also says the Supreme Self, when identified with the
mind, appears changeful. To the seer, the ego, the Self seems
changeful. But the Self is the same ever, unchanging and
unchangeable. It is like this: There is a screen. On that screen
100
first appears the figure of a king. He sits on a throne. Then before
him in that same screen a play begins with various figures and
objects and the king on the screen watches the play on the same
screen. The seer and the seen are mere shadows on the screen,
which is the only reality supporting these pictures. In the world
also, the seer and the seen together constitute the mind and the
mind is supported by, or based on, the Self.”
9-1-46 Afternoon
Mr. P. Bannerji asked Bhagavan, ‘What is the difference
between jivanmukti and videhamukti?
Bhagavan: There is no difference. For those who ask, it is
said, ‘A jnani with body is a jivanmukta and he attains videhamukti
when he drops off this body.’ But this difference is only for the
onlooker, not for the jnani. His state is the same before and after
the body is dropped. We think of the jnani as a human form or as
being in that form. But the jnani knows he is the Self, the one
reality which is both inside and outside, and which is not bound
by any form or shape. There is a verse in the Bhagavata (and
here Bhagavan quoted the Tamil verse) which says, “Just as a
man who is drunk is not conscious whether his upper cloth is on
his body or has slipped away from it, the jnani is hardly conscious
of his body, and it makes no difference to him whether the body
remains or has dropped off.”
Mr. P.B. asked, “What is the difference between a devotee
and a disciple? A friend here told me I should not call myself
a disciple of Bhagavan and that I can only be a devotee.”
Bhagavan: If we worship an object or person then we
are devotees. If we have a Guru then we are disciples.
I added that his friend must have told him so, for the
reason that Bhagavan takes no disciples, i.e., formally initiates
none, and so it may be misleading if any one says, ‘I am
Bhagavan’s disciple.’
101
P.B.: But what if I accept his teaching and regard myself
as his disciple because I try to follow his teaching?
I replied, “Of course you may do that, as Ekalavya learnt
archery from an image of Drona.”
Bhagavan then added, “After all, as in the above case
everything comes from within. First the man feels that he is
bound, in the bondage of samsara, that he is weak and miserable
and that unless he leans upon and gets help from God who is
all-powerful and can save him, he cannot get out of bondage
and misery. Thus he makes bhakti to Ishwara. When this bhakti
develops and the intensity of his devotion is so great that he
forgets his entire self and becomes Iswaramaya and complete
surrender has been achieved, God takes human shape and comes
as Guru and teaches the devotee that there is but one Self and
that That is within him. Then the devotee attains jnana by
realizing the Self within him and then he understands that the
Ishwara or Lord whom he worshipped and had bhakti for, the
Guru who came in human shape, and the Self are all the same.”
Mr. P.B.’s first question led Bhagavan to speak further
about realisation and he said, “There are no stages in
realisation or mukti. There are no degrees of jnana. So that
there cannot be one stage of jnana with the body and another
stage when the body is dropped. The jnani knows he is the
Self and that nothing, neither his body nor anything else exists,
but the Self. To such one what difference could the presence
or absence of body make?
“It is false to speak of Realisation. What is there to realise?
The real is as it is, ever. How to real-ise it? All that is required
is this. We have real-ised the unreal, i.e., regarded as real what
is unreal. We have to give up this attitude. That is all that is
required for us to attain jnana. We are not creating anything
new or achieving something which we did not have before.
The illustration given in books is this. We dig a well and create
a huge pit. The akasa in the pit or well has not been created by
102
us. We have just removed the earth which was filling the akasa
there. The akasa was there then and is also there now. Similarly
we have simply to throw out all the age-long samskaras which
are inside us, and when all of them have been given up, the Self
will shine, alone.” He also said, “Mukti, jnana, dhyana is our
real nature. They are other names for the Self”.
10-1-46 Afternoon
Bhagavan was perusing some verses in Tamil (Li¦Ls)
composed by Mr. Venkatesa Sastrigal. He and his wife
(Salammal) had been staying in the Asramam. But about a
fortnight back they moved to Adiyannamalai and settled down
there. When I and T. P. Ramachandra Aiyar and some others
went round the hill on the 1st January, Mr. Sastriar and his wife
met us on the road and took us to their house and there we had
these verses read out to us. I mentioned, therefore, that the verses
were not new to us. Thereupon Mr. Sastriar said the verses stood
at 27 then and were now 108. A few days back Mr. Venkatrama
Aiyar brought news to Bhagavan that Sastriar and his wife
intended coming here on Thursday. After Bhagavan heard it, he
said in connection with some letter which had arrived here for
Sastriar, “It seems they are coming here on Thursday. Whether
they will stay here or whether intend to go back we don’t know.”
When Sastriar came to the hall, I told him about Bhagavan’s
remarks and added, “I mention this to you as I too don’t like
your having shifted there.” Bhagavan said, “They came and said
they were going to Adi Annamalai and live there. I did not say
anything. Why should we interfere? They want to live free, without
being under any restraint or regulations as in the Asramam. They
must have peace of mind, wherever they may be.”
Speaking of Adiyannamalai, where Mr. Venkatesa
Sastrigal was staying, Bhagavan said, “It is a good place. I used
to stay there occasionally. Once on a giri-pradakshina we were
caught in the rain and we stayed the whole night in the temple
there. It was then I heard the Sama Veda chant.”
103
11-1-46 Afternoon
A young man from Colombo asked Bhagavan,
“J. Krishnamurti teaches the method of effortless and choiceless
awareness as distinct from that of deliberate concentration.
Would Sri Bhagavan be pleased to explain how best to practise
meditation and what form the object of meditation should take?”
Bhagavan: Effortless and choiceless awareness is our real
nature. If we can attain it or be in that state, it is all right. But
one cannot reach it without effort, the effort of deliberate
meditation. All the age-long vasanas carry the mind outward
and turn it to external objects. All such thoughts have to be
given up and the mind turned inward. For that, effort is necessary
for most people. Of course everybody, every book says, “ÑmUô
BÚ” i.e., “Be quiet or still”. But it is not easy. That is why all
this effort is necessary. Even if we find one who has at once
achieved the mauna or Supreme state indicated by “ÑmUô BÚ”,
you may take it that the effort necessary has already been
finished in a previous life. So that, effortless and choiceless
awareness is reached only after deliberate meditation. That
meditation can take any form which appeals to you best. See
what helps you to keep away all other thoughts and adopt that
method for your meditation.
In this connection Bhagavan quoted verses 5 and 52 from
“DPp ùTônÙ\Ü” and 36 from “TôVl ×-” of Saint
Thayumanavar. Their gist is as follows. “Bliss will follow if
you are still. But however much you may tell your mind about
this truth, the mind will not keep quiet. It is the mind that
won’t keep quiet. It is the mind which tells the mind, ‘Be
quiet and you will attain bliss’. Though all the scriptures have
said it, though we hear about it every day from the great ones,
and though even our Guru says it, we never are quiet, but
stray into the world of maya and sense objects. That is why
conscious, deliberate effort or meditation is required to attain
that mauna state or the state of being quiet.”
104
Another young man from Colombo asked Bhagavan,
“How are the three states of consciousness inferior in degree
of reality to the fourth? What is the actual relation between
these three states and the fourth?”
Bhagavan: There is only one state, that of consciousness or
awareness or existence. The three states of waking, dream and
sleep cannot be real. They simply come and go. The real will
always exist. The ‘I’ or existence that alone persists in all the
three states is real. The other three are not real and so it is not
possible to say they have such and such a degree of reality. We
may roughly put it like this. Existence or consciousness is the
only reality. Consciousness plus waking, we call waking.
Consciousness plus sleep, we call sleep. Consciousness plus
dream, we call dream. Consciousness is the screen on which all
the pictures come and go. The screen is real, the pictures are
mere shadows on it. Because by long habit we have been regarding
these three states as real, we call the state of mere awareness or
consciousness as the fourth. There is however no fourth state,
but only one state. In this connection Bhagavan quoted verse
386 from ‘TWôTWd Li¦’ of Thayumanavar and said this
so-called fourth state is described as waking sleep or sleep in
waking — meaning asleep to the world and awake in the Self.
Mr. O. P. Ramaswami Reddiar (the Congress leader)
asked Bhagavan, “But why should these three states come
and go on the real state or the screen of the Self?”
Bhagavan: Who puts this question? Does the Self say
these states come and go? It is the seer who says these states
come and go. The seer and the seen together constitute the
mind. See if there is such a thing as the mind. Then, the mind
merges in the Self, and there is neither the seer nor the seen.
So the real answer to your question is, “Do they come and
go? They neither come nor go.” The Self alone remains as it
ever is. The three states owe their existence to ‘@®NôW’ (non-
105
enquiry) and enquiry puts an end to them. However much
one may explain, the fact will not become clear until one
attains Self-realisation and wonders how he was blind to the
self-evident and only existence so long.
Another visitor asked Bhagavan, “What is the difference
between the mind and the Self?”
Bhagavan: There is no difference. The mind turned inwards
is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world.
The cotton made into various clothes, we call by various names.
The gold made into various ornaments, we call by various names.
But all the clothes are cotton and all the ornaments gold. The one
is real, the many are mere names and forms.
But the mind does not exist apart from the Self, i.e., it
has no independent existence. The Self exists without the
mind, never the mind without the Self.
18-1-46 Morning
This is ûR éNm (Thai Poosam) day. That led me to ask
why Ramalinga Swami’s memory was celebrated on that day,
whether he shook off his mortal coil on Thai Poosam.
Bhagavan could not say. I also wanted to know if Bhagavan
knew anything authentic as to how exactly Ramalinga Swami
ended his life on earth. Bhagavan said nothing about this either.
Afternoon
In the English abridgement of Srimad Bhagavatam I found
it said that Prithu let his body be dissolved into the several
elements of which it was composed. As this sounds very much
like what is generally reported of Ramalinga Swami, (viz., that
he got into a room and locked himself up and that, when after
some days the room was broken open, it was found empty), I
asked Bhagavan whether ‘realised’ men could make their bodies
disappear thus. He said, “The books tell us that some saints
106
went away with their bodies to heaven, riding on elephants,
etc., sent specially to take them. They also speak of saints
disappearing as light or flame, as akasa or ether, and as stone
lingam. But it must be remembered that all this is only in the
view of the onlooker. The jnani does not think he is the body.
He does not even see the body. He sees only the Self in the
body. If the body is not there, but only the Self, the question of
its disappearing in any form does not arise.” In this connection
Bhagavan again quoted the Tamil verse from Bhagavatam
already referred to in the entry under 9-1-46; and at this time
he made us take out both the Sanskrit verse and the Tamil verse
from the books, I give below the two verses:
Nôt±V ÏQØ UôdûLÙ U]Øk
Rô]X ùYuTûR ÙQokRôt
úTôt±V YôdûL ÙP²Úl TÕÜm
úTôYÕ U\k§Pô Wô¡
úVt\Rm ×VúUt ß¡pL¯ YÕÜ
ªÚlTÕm ùYiQû\ TÚ¡
Uôt\Ú URj§ ]±k§Pô ùRôÝÏ
UdL}l úTôÛYo UôúRô.
deham cha nasvaram avasthitam utthitam va
siddho no pasyati yatodhyagamat svarupam
daivadapetam uta daiva vasad upetam
vaso yatha parikrtam madira madandhah.
(22, Hamsa Gita: The Bhagavata, Ch. XI)
(The meaning of this stanza is given on page 113).
Bhagavan added, “There is a certain school of thinkers who
would not call anyone a jnani whose body is left behind at death.
It is impossible to conceive of a jnani attaching such importance
to the body. But there is such a school — the Siddha School. In
Pondicherry they have a Society.” Soon after this a boy of about
seventeen years from Pondicherry came and asked Bhagavan,
107
“After hearing the pranava sound, what is the stage beyond it
that one should reach?” Bhagavan said, “Who is it that hears the
pranava or talks of the stage beyond? See and find out, and then
all will be clear. What is pranava, and what is that stage beyond
hearing pranava of which you speak? Where is it? About all
those things we don’t know. But you are. So find out first about
your self, the seer, and then all will be known.”
The boy again asked, “I wish to know what is the way
to mukti.”
Bhagavan: That is all right. But what is mukti? Where is
that and where are you? What is the distance between the two,
so that we can speak of a path? First find out about yourself
and where you are and then see if these questions arise.
Night
The talk turned to various recipes suggested by various
people about kaya kalpa. Bhagavan mentioned a few kalpas
based on camphor, a hundred year old neem tree, etc., and said,
“Who would care to take such trouble over this body? As
explained in books, the greatest malady we have is the body,
the TY úSôn (the disease of birth), and if one takes medicines
to strengthen it and prolong its life, it is like a man taking
medicine to strengthen and perpetuate his disease. As the body
is a burden we bear, we should on the other hand feel like the
coolie engaged to carry a load, anxiously looking forward to
arrival at the destination when he can throw off his burden.”
19-1-46 Morning
Bhagavan told me that my question about Thai Poosam
and Ramalinga Swami was answered in today’s Bharata Devi,
which says that the Swami entered into the room for his end
on Thai Poosam day. Mr. Viswanatha Aiyar read out the long
article which compared the Swami to Mahatma Gandhi and
quoted largely from his Arutpa.
108
Afternoon
Yesterday I suggested to Bhagavan that he might make a
Tamil translation of the Sanskrit verse from Chap. XI of the
Bhagavata, as he felt that the Tamil verse did not closely follow
the Sanskrit original. So, today seeing Muruganar in the hall
and talking to him about it, he casually composed the following
stanza without paper or pencil in his hand.
Rà¨~ «XúR N¬d¡à ªÚd¡àm
®{«öt ᥠ®X¡Ó Uô«àm
R{V± £jRu øàQo ¡u±Xu
×{Õ¡ -{dLs ùY±«]u úTôXúY.
(An English translation of this stanza is given on page 113).
Night
Bhagavan wants to improve the Tamil rendering and
bring it nearer the original Sanskrit. He discussed some
alterations with Muruganar, and told me that I was not to regard
the above stanza as final.
20-1-46 Morning
Mr. Balaram Reddi asked Bhagavan about the Sanskrit verse
whose translation is found in the supplement to Reality in Forty
Verses beginning ‘úRLeLP ¨LoNPm’ and Bhagavan explained
how he used the word Abhavam and Kavyakantha preferred
Abhedam. Bhagavan further told us that this verse seeks to
establish in two ways the proposition that the body is not ‘I’.
First, by saying that the body is jada (inert) and never is able to
feel or say ‘I’, and secondly by saying that when we have no
body, i.e., even when we have no consciousness of body, ‘I’ exists.
The talk about this verse began under the following circumstances.
It seems one Bernard Duval of Morocco was here for about fifteen
days some eight years ago. He recently wrote to Major A.W.
Chadwick (who has been living in the Asramam for ten years
now) that when he was a prisoner during this war, he learnt
109
Sanskrit and even translated Bhagavan’s Upadesa Saram into
English, that later he had lost all those papers, and that he would
like all Sanskrit works of Bhagavan to be sent to him. In
connection with this request of Mr. Duval, Balaram was finding
out what were all the works composed by Bhagavan in Sanskrit,
and Bhagavan seems to have told Balaram that the above verse
was also composed by him.
Mr. Viswanatha Aiyar’s mother came and told Bhagavan,
“Nagamma has written an account in Telugu of what took place
in our Asramam at the goshala on Mattu Pongal day. It is very
good.” Bhagavan said, “Is it so? Her brother has asked her to
write accounts of what takes place here. Is she here?” Thereupon
we asked Nagamma to read it out and she did so. Bhagavan asked
V’s mother if she had read Ramana Gopala. She said, “I have
read only the Tamil rendering made by my son and want to hear
the Telugu original.” Thereupon we asked Nagamma to read out
the Telugu and it was done.
One Mr. Gokul Bhai D. Bhatt, a Public Accountant of
Bombay, composed a few verses on Bhagavan and read them
out in the hall. At my request he also translated them for the
benefit of all assembled in the hall. One Mr. Govindaramaiya, P.
W. Inspector from Chittoor, took Bhagavan’s permission and read
out Sage Angirasa’s Gurupadaka. It seems he was advised to do
so by one Subramania Sastri, a very aged jnani, past eighty years,
belonging to Conjeevaram originally, whom he met recently at
Ambattur.
This morning, before returning to the hall at about 10
a.m., Bhagavan gave darshan, near the cowshed, to one Mr.
Ramaswami Iyengar who, it seems, has been having a
Ramanasramam at Kumbakonam for several years, who is
now aged and infirm, and who has come with great trouble to
see Bhagavan after many years, during which the Sarvadhikari
had denied him access to Bhagavan for various alleged
110
misdeeds on his part. The poor man had to remain in his car
which was brought to the cowshed and Bhagavan, on his way
to the hall, stood a few minutes near the car and gave darshan
to his old disciple. The disciple just wept and said nothing.
Bhagavan gave him one of his well-known gracious looks.
Afternoon
I was very late in going to the hall. But before going for
his evening stroll Bhagavan himself was pleased to ask me,
“You have not seen the final form into which we have cast
that stanza?” and showed me the following.
Rà¨~ «XRôp Re¡à ùU¯àm
®{«ö XÓjÕ ®Ój§Ó úUàm
×{Õ¡ -àdLs ùY±dÏÚ P{lúTôt
\{ÙQo £jRu \àÜQo ¡Xú].
(An English translation of this stanza is given on page 113.)
Night
I understood F¯àm in the first line as rising into the air or
sky and so asked Bhagavan how it was appropriate; but he
explained that it only meant ‘moving’. He also told me, “We
have it concisely in the Sanskrit. But in the Sita Rama Anjaneya
Samvadam it is given in great detail and elaborately.” This remark
was due to the fact that yesterday, when Bhagavan could not find
in the Tamil Bhagavatam anything corresponding to the Sanskrit
verse, G. Subba Rao said that he remembered the same thing
occurring in the Telugu Sita Rama Anjaneya Samvadam. Today
the book was produced and the relevant portion was shown to
Bhagavan. Balaram Reddi told me that Sita Rama Anjaneya
Samvadam is to the Telugus what Kaivalyam is to the Tamilians.
When Kunjuswami arrived in the hall, Bhagavan asked
him whether Ramaswami Iyengar of Kumbakonam had left
and what he intended to do. K. said that R. intended to stay
for a month or two at Palakottu till he recovered his health
and that the others alone would go back the following day.
21-1-46
Gokul Bhai read out the Gujarati Ramana Gita Chapter
XI and then the Gujarati Upadesa Saram. Mr. P.C. Desai asked
Bhagavan, “In verse 14, they have translated the second line
of the Sanskrit verse as ‘If the mind is continuously fixed on
meditation of the Self, etc.’ Is that all right, seeing that neither
‘continuously’ nor ‘Self’ is found in the original?”
Bhagavan: Eka chintana involves continuous thought.
If no other thought is to come, the one thought has to be
continuous. What is meant by the verse is as follows: The
previous verses have said that for controlling the mind breathcontrol
or pranayama may be helpful. This verse says that
the mind so brought under control or to the state of laya should
not be allowed to be in mere laya or a state like sleep, but that
it should be directed towards eka chintana or one thought,
whether that one thought is of the Self, the ishta devata or a
mantram. What the one thought may be will depend on each
man’s pakva or fitness. The verse leaves it as one thought.
Mr. Desai wanted to know if in the next edition verse 14
in the Gujarati should be corrected or if it might stand as now.
Bhagavan said nothing. He had said enough on the subject. (I
concluded that there could be no harm in introducing
‘continuous’ in the second line, but there was no justification
for bringing in ‘thought or Self’ as all that Bhagavan said in
the original was that the mind brought to laya should be made
to occupy itself with eka chintana, one thought).
Night
When Bhagavan was still engaged in making the Tamil
Stanza recorded under 20-1-46, Mr. Balaram Reddi requested
him to compose one in Telugu as well. So Bhagavan made one
and discussed some alternatives with Balaram. I again asked
Bhagavan about the meaning of the first line in the Tamil stanza,
“There seems to be no point in saying ‘whether the body remains
in a place or moves about, it is impermanent.’” Thereupon, he
told me that the first line is not to be read as though the whole of
it was one sentence and that the first sentence stops with half the
line. I give below a literal translation for the correct understanding
of the stanza:
“The body is impermanent (not real). Whether it is at rest
or moves about and whether by reason of prarabdha it clings
to him or falls off from him, the Self-realised siddha is not
aware of it, even as the drunken man blinded by intoxication is
unaware whether his cloth is on his body or not.”
22-1-46
Early in the morning, immediately after parayana,
Bhagavan gave Balaram the Telugu stanza and asked for his
suggestions for improving it. Balaram replied, “What
suggestions are there for me to make?” Bhagavan said, “I
don’t know. I must ask people like you,” and put the verse in
the revolving shelf.
23-1-46 Night
Dr. Srinivasa Rao asked whether in Stanza 10 of the
Supplement to Reality in Forty Verses Bhagavan does not teach
us to affirm soham. Bhagavan explained it as follows:
It is said the whole Vedanta can be compressed into the
four words, deham, naham, koham, soham. This stanza says the
same. In the first two lines, it is explained why deham is naham,
i.e., why the body is not ‘I’ or na aham. The next two lines say,
‘If one enquires ko aham, i.e., Who am I, i.e., if one enquires
whence this ‘I’ springs and realises it, then in the heart of such a
one the omnipresent God Arunachala will shine as ‘I’, as sa aham
or soham: i.e., he will know ‘That I am,’ i.e., ‘That is “I”.’
(Continued ...)
(My humble salutations to the lotus feet of Bhagavan Sree Ramana Maharshi
and also gratitude to great philosophers and others for the collection)
0 comments:
Post a Comment