Sunday 7 October 2018

When Bhagavan says that we must look within, what does he mean by ‘within’?

Last month a friend wrote me an email in which he asked me to clarify certain aspects of Bhagavan’s teachings, including what he means by ‘within’ when he says that we must look within, and whether the source of the individual self can be within that same individual self, so this article is adapted from the reply I wrote to him.

Everything other than ourself (including not only our body and breath but also all our thoughts, feelings, emotions, perceptions, memories, beliefs, desires and so on) is external to ourself, so what is ‘inside’ or ‘within’ is only ourself. When we attend to anything other than ourself we are looking away from ourself, so we need to turn back 180 degrees, so to speak, to look at ourself alone. This is what Bhagavan means by turning within or looking inside.

There are not two selves, a real Self and an individual self, because we ourself are one. However, so long as we experience ourself as Kevin, Michael or any other person, we are not experiencing ourself as we actually are. What you refer as ‘the Self’ is ourself as we actually are, which is pure self-awareness, ‘I am’, uncontaminated by even the least awareness of anything else, but when we are aware of ourself as if we were a person, that mixed and contaminated self-awareness, ‘I am this person’, is what is called ego, which is what you refer to as the ‘individual me’ or ‘individual self’.

What you refer as ‘the Self’ is what Bhagavan generally refers to as ātma-svarūpa, which literally means the ‘own form’ or real natural of oneself, or just as svarūpa, meaning one’s own real nature. Our real nature is ourself as we actually are, whereas ego is ourself as we seem to be. These are not two different things, just as a rope and the snake it seems to be are not two different things.

The rope is not a snake, but the snake is nothing other than a rope. Likewise, our real nature is not ego, but ego is nothing other than our real nature.

If we see an illusory snake, how to see what it actually is? All we need do is to look at it very carefully, because if we look at it carefully enough we will see that it is just a rope. Likewise, if we look at ourself, this ego, carefully enough we will see that we are just pure self-awareness, uncontaminated by even the least awareness of anything else.

When we look at what seems to be a snake, what we are actually looking at is only a rope, even though it continues to look like a snake until we look at it carefully enough to see what it actually is. Likewise, when we look at ourself, who now seem to be this ego, what we are actually looking at is only our own real nature (ātma-svarūpa), even though we continue to seem to be ego until we look at ourself carefully enough to see what we actually are.

What is the source of the illusory snake? It is only the rope. And where is it? It is inside the snake, metaphorically speaking. Therefore if we look deep inside the snake, we will see its source, the rope.

Likewise, what is the source of ego? It is only our real nature. And where is it? It is inside ego, metaphorically speaking. Therefore if we look deep inside ego, we will see its source, our real nature.

Our real nature is pure self-awareness, which is what we always experience as ‘I am’. Ego is the adjunct-mixed self-awareness ‘I am this body’ or ‘I am this person’. Within this adjunct-mixed self-awareness, ‘I am this body’, is pure self-awareness, ‘I am’. All we need do is remove all adjuncts, because what will then remain is only this pure self-awareness, ‘I am’. It is so simple.

How can we remove all adjuncts? As ego we attach ourself to these adjuncts (everything that makes up whatever person we currently seem to be) by projecting them in our awareness (just as we do in a dream), so to remove them we must try to be aware of ourself alone. This is why Bhagavan said that attention is the key. By attending to anything other than ourself we rise as ego, and by attending to ourself alone this ego will dissolve and cease to exist, and what will then remain is only pure self-awareness, our real nature.

As Bhagavan says in verse 16 of Upadēśa Undiyār:
வெளிவிட யங்களை விட்டு மனந்தன்
னொளியுரு வோர்தலே யுந்தீபற
      வுண்மை யுணர்ச்சியா முந்தீபற.

veḷiviḍa yaṅgaḷai viṭṭu maṉantaṉ
ṉoḷiyuru vōrdalē yundīpaṟa
      vuṇmai yuṇarcciyā mundīpaṟa
.

பதச்சேதம்: வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு மனம் தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தலே உண்மை உணர்ச்சி ஆம்.

Padacchēdam (word-separation): veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu maṉam taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdalē uṇmai uṇarcci ām.

அன்வயம்: மனம் வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தலே உண்மை உணர்ச்சி ஆம்.

Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): maṉam veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdalē uṇmai uṇarcci ām.

English translation: Leaving aside external viṣayas [phenomena], the mind knowing its own form of light is alone real awareness [true knowledge or knowledge of reality].
‘வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு’ (veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu), ‘leaving aside external viṣayas [phenomena]’, means ceasing to attend to anything other than ourself, and ‘மனம் தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தல்’ (maṉam taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdal), ‘mind knowing [or investigating] its own form of light’, means mind attending only to its own fundamental self-awareness. Just giving up attending to external phenomena is not sufficient, because we do so whenever we fall asleep, so what is required is just that we attend only to ourself, that is, to our own fundamental self-awareness, because if we do so we will thereby give up attending to anything else.

Since our fundamental self-awareness, ‘I am’, is what now seems to be ego, the false awareness that is aware not only of itself but also of other things, in order to attend to our own fundamental self-awareness all we need do is attend keenly to ego, because when we seem to be attending to ego, what we are actually attending to is only ourself.

When we mistake a rope to be a snake, what we are actually seeing is just a rope, but with the added belief ‘this is a snake’. This added belief is like the adjuncts that we as ego mistake to be ourself. This added believe can be removed only by our looking at the snake carefully enough to see that it is actually just a rope. Likewise, all the adjuncts that we as ego mistake to be ourself can be removed only by our looking at ourself, this ego, carefully enough to see that we are actually just pure self-awareness.

Our aim is to experience and just be the pure self-awareness that we actually are, but in order to do so we must investigate ego. Since we now experience ourself as ego, we cannot attend to ourself except as ego, just as when we see a rope as a snake we cannot look at it except as a snake. However, by looking at the snake, we see that it is actually just a rope, and thereafter we can never again mistake it to be a snake. Likewise, by keenly attending to ego, we see that we are actually just pure self-awareness, and thereafter we can never again mistake ourself to be ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’.

Therefore when Bhagavan says that we should look within, what he means is that we should look only at ourself, this ego (the subject who perceives all objects, the one who is aware of everything else), because when we look at ourself keenly enough we will see that what we actually are is not the ego that we seemed to be but only pure self-awareness.

622 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   601 – 622 of 622
anadi-ananta said...

Noob,
your assumption is correct:
Without the mind perception of anything or any world cannot occur.

Noob said...

Moreover, all our desires and dislikes are only possible when the mind is "feeding" the consciousness. trying to curb them with the mind (engaging the thought process) is the same as a criminal will start an investigation into his own acts.

Noob said...

As for the comments like "Krishna's comments seem useful: "do your duty" which indicates some relevance",
In my opinion ( of course pretty much negligible) this was said so that we could finish our life cycle without much fear and worry, if I am a husband, I have to protect fearlessly my family, if there is an earthquake I have to save my family, even sacrificing my life, if there is an armed burglar, Ill put my chest against the barrel. If I am a boss and I have to fire a cheating worker, I must do it.

anadi-ananta said...

Noob,
what else but the mind will curb our desires and dislikes ?
Do you think Ishwara or the self will do it for you ?

Noob said...

Josef,
If we accept that this mind and this world are like a dream,
then everything related to the mind, including all the thoughts, all the actions of the body have been already predetermined and WILL run its course.
In the same way as in my dream it looks as if I have the complete control of my actions but upon waking up I realize that this was a dream. Even though in my dream there was no one but me, all those people that I talked to, all that food that I ate, all the buildings that I saw, were nothing but my consciousness (they were so to speak inside my mind), during this dream it looked as if they were separate from me, objects, with which my mind was interacting. The mind can give an illusion that we can change the dream while we are dreaming, but is there anyone who succeeded? Upon waking up I realize that there was nothing I could do in my dream. Isn't a desire just a thought of which "I" becomes aware of?
Therefore the best is just to remain calm, the dream will end anyway. Creating a fruitless task in such a dream to change what thoughts "I" is aware of by engaging in a thought process (utilizing the mind as means to do so) will just multiply the thoughts, in my opinion.

anadi-ananta said...

Noob,
"Therefore the best is just to remain calm, the dream will end anyway. Creating a fruitless task in such a dream to change what thoughts "I" is aware of by engaging in a thought process (utilizing the mind as means to do so) will just multiply the thoughts, in my opinion."
Yes, but just to become able to remain calm one first or at least simultaneously must weaken one's desires, likes and dislikes. And that one cannot do without using the mind's power and will. What does it matter when also thoughts are thus multiplied ? Why worry or mind about the gossip of thoughts and illusions which one must anyway sacrifice for getting ahead on the path together with desires, likes and dislikes ?
(of course just my opinion).

Noob said...

Josef,
If it was predetermined that "I" becomes aware of the thoughts "my mind must be purified" or "I have to do yoga", or "I must eat vegan food" it will happen anyway.The question remains what "I" becomes aware of when the mind is no more.

Sanjay Lohia said...

To know the truth about Bhagavan, we have to change our perspective

We think that Bhagavan’s story began when he had the fear of death as a boy of 16. For us, it is from this point that the entire interesting story starts. But from Bhagavan’s point of view, this is the point when his entire story came to an end. At the age of 16, the ego that appeared as Venkataraman was devoured forever, and everything else – his body, the world – was also devoured along with his ego.

However, because our ego is still seeing from outside, we say that Bhagavan’s story continued for another 54 years as a jivanmukta. This is true from our perspective, but from Bhagavan’s perspective, this is not true. So we have to change our perspective. To know the truth about Bhagavan, we have to know the truth about ourself.

Edited extract from the video: 2018-06-02 Sri Ramana Center, Houston - discussion with Michael James on Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 17 (1:34)

anadi-ananta said...

Your remaining question is easy to answer: after extinction of the mind 'I' becomes itself but relieved/released/rid of any adjuncts. Then the 'I' is absolutely ident with supreme brahman or self.

Noob said...

Josef,
This is for us to find out. For now, "I" seems to be content with watching the endless row of changing dreams. However, the seed has been sown as we are now fiercely debating about these topics on this blog. I personally think the moment of "death" is of the utmost importance, it is when "I" has a chance to be aware of nothing but "I". Until then, in my opinion, it is better to remain calm and "do the duties" fearlessly, always trying to be aware of nothing but "I" and awaiting the moment.

anadi-ananta said...

Noob,
as you say we must find out that. I however prefer to stay alive because I already had almost the 'chance to be aware of nothing but "I".' - (impending of immediate death 40 years ago) - and to use my remaining "lifetime" for making me suited for experiencing essential insights/understanding. 40 years ago one could not find even the slightest trace of "spiritual maturity". Instead then I only went off in search of the experience of "exciting adventures".:-)

Sanjay Lohia said...

Bhagavan: ocean of nectar, full of love and one with all

A friend: If we follow this path of self-enquiry, the path of trying to destroy ego, don’t we run the risk of becoming aloof, withdrawn and uncompassionate?

Michael: The people we are bad are people with strong egos. They have strong desires and attachments. They care only for themselves, and they will even exploit others. They feel ‘only my happiness matters; I don’t care about anyone else’. However, if we start practising self-investigation, our desires and attachments start reducing. Our mind starts becoming more and more purified. So this way our ego is weakened or attenuated, and consequently we see less difference between ourself and others.

So we cannot bear to see the suffering of others. We suffer by seeing others suffer. So the more we practise self-investigation, the purer our mind will become - the more caring, kind and compassionate we will become. Inwardly we will become more detached, but outwardly we will grow in love and compassion for others.

Bhagavan was so kind and compassionate even to the hornets when his thigh brushed against their nest. He felt extreme remorse for an act which was not intentional. He let the hornets sting his thigh until they were fully satisfied. Since Bhagavan is that pure self-awareness shining in the heart of all, he saw himself in those hornets. He felt as those hornets felt.

So there is no contradiction between being kind and compassionate and following this path. If we are practising this path, the less we will like to cause harm to or hurt others. We will not be able to even see anyone hurt.

We will become indifferent to things for ourselves. Bhagavan had no desires and attachments, but when people used to come and tell him about their calamities – their husband or child has passed away – sometimes Bhagavan listening to such stories would shed tears. He is just like a mirror, so he felt all that other people felt.

Edited extract from the video: 2018-06-02 Sri Ramana Center, Houston - discussion with Michael James on Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 17 (1:34)

Reflections: Bhagavan’s life should melt even a person with a heart of stone. If it does not, we have not understood the greatness of Bhagavan. He is the pure-awareness shining in the heart of all from Vishnu down to a small ant or hornet. He feels our pain as we feel it, so he is ever ready to remove all our suffering. Bhagavan is another name for pure love and infinite compassion. We saw an inkling of such love and compassion while he was in his body.





Sanjay Lohia said...

Once we start following Bhagavan’s path of self-investigation, we start losing interest in all organised religions

In the comment section of Michael’s latest video, I wrote the following:

Sanjay: Deepawali is a Hindu festival. The friend who asked this question is a Hindu from India, and Michael is supposedly a Christian from the UK. Imagine a Hindu asking a Christian to explain the significance of their own Hindu festival. I am also a Hindu from India, but I have no shame in admitting that Michael knows more about the Hindu culture and Hindu way of life than I know about it.

Michael is more Indian, more Hindu, than most of the Hindus. He has totally soaked himself in the Hindu culture. We are fortunate to have him amongst us. He is explaining to us that which we should have already known but unfortunately, do not know or do not know enough.

In reply to this comment, Beejum wrote as follows:

Beejum: Sanjay Lohia *m James has never ever claimed to be a Christian nor for that matter any other religion

I have replied to him as follows:

Sanjay: Beejum Ittahb, yes, Michael is (or was) a Christian by birth; however, of late, I think, he is more Hindu than a Christian. This is how I see, but he may have a different opinion on this matter. However, even to say that he is more Hindu than a Christian is not correct because once we start following Bhagavan’s path of self-investigation, we start losing interest in all organised religions. It is because religions are the creation of our mind, but we are trying to transcend our mind by turning within. However, from another perspective, we are trying to follow the essence of all religions. Bhagavan explains this in verse 10 of Upadesa Undiyar:

Being [by] subsiding in the place from which one rose: that is karma and bhakti; that is yoga and jñāna.




Sanjay Lohia said...

In continuation of my conversation with Beejum:

Beejum gave his views in response to my reply to him. The following is what I have written in response to his reply:

Sanjay: Beejum Ittahb, as you say, like Buddha, a young Michael (in his 20s) left the comforts of his home and natural surroundings and went out in search of truth. This adventure finally brought him to Tiruvannamalai. He has said that he was just generally dissatisfied with things and so he wanted to find the real meaning to life. Yes, Christianity didn’t have the answers to his doubts and dilemmas; otherwise, why would he move out to find the real purpose of life?

I also sometimes wonder how a person can know so much. His knowledge and understanding of Bhagavan’s teachings are mind-boggling. He is a man in love – his only love being Bhagavan’s teaching. Bhagavan teaches us: Being [by] subsiding in the place from which one rose: that is karma and bhakti; that is yoga and jñāna.

What is this ‘one’ which rises? It is our ego. So our real birth is this arising of ego and its death will be our real death. Bhagavan is not concerned about our physical birth or death because these are all part of our dream. He is only concerned about the dreamer, namely ego. His entire teachings are centred on the need to investigate ego and to see that it does not exist. If this ego is destroyed, everything else will be destroyed along with it.

anadi-ananta said...

Sanjay,
you say "His entire teachings are centred on the need to investigate ego and to see that it does not exist. If this ego is destroyed, everything else will be destroyed along with it."
Will this ego ever have understanding that it would be in its own best interest and benefit to get annihilated ?
It seems this ego will ever refuse its assistance to get destroyed. Can we expect the ego to accept happily its death sentence ?
So it will never give its consent to its own destruction. What will we lose when we wait for its agreement and willingness to die ?
It should be clear that the ego has no business to be here at all.

Roger said...

Hi Josef:
you talk about the ego, tell stories about the ego. This is the ego talking about the ego.

Why don't you find some way of putting attention inward all the time as much as is possible?


How many hours per day do you meditate?

Roger said...

sanjay says: yes, Michael is (or was) a Christian by birth; however, of late, I think, he is more Hindu than a Christian. ...

Michael James corrupts Bhagavan's legacy by mixing it with Christianity.
MJ's emphasizes belief just as Christianity does. MJ emphasizes his rigid scriptural authority rather than direct experience.
There are numerous blogs such as "What should we believe? Why should be believe what Bhagavan taught us?"

Bhagavan's real teaching is about direct experience, not belief. Where did Bhagavan ever insist that people believe a certain way?

Roger said...

Hi Josef,
A quote by Bhagavan from "Conscious Immortality":
All lectures and books do little good and are of use only for beginners, to point out on the way. The real service is done in meditation. One sitting still and silent -- as mentioned in the poem by the Tamil saint Tayumanavar -- can influence a whole country. The force of meditation is infinitely more powerful than speech or writings. One who sits in silence meditating on the Self, will draw a whole lot of people to him without his going out to anyone.

Even books like the Bhagavad Gita, Light on the Path, must be given up to find the Self by looking within. Even the Gita says "meditate upon the self". It does not say, "Meditate upon the book, the Gita".


And a favorite quote from Lahiri Mahasaya from Yogananda's bio:
Solve all your problems through meditation. Exchange unprofitable religious speculations for actual God-contact. Clear your mind of dogmatic theological debris; let in the fresh, healing waters of direct perception. Attune yourself to the active inner Guidance. the Divine Voice has the answer to every dilemma of life. Through man's ingenuity for getting himself into trouble appears to be endless, the Infinite Succor is no less resourceful.

Noob said...

Some times we are taking friendly fire....

anadi-ananta said...

Hi Roger,
your explanations are a perfect example of how one could misinterpret Michael's writings.
I dislike saying it, but deliberate misinterpretation of Michael's articles is rather a mentally disturbed intention which does not promote a beneficial understanding of Bhagavan's teaching.
However your recommendation namely putting attention inward all the time or as much as possible is certainly a good one.
Regarding the number of hours of meditation may I report to you that I try to be self-attentive whole the day. Meditation in a sitting position I do not observe regularly.
But in some - perhaps too wide - intervals I feel that this poor practice is not sufficient and then I put in periods of intense and intensive looking inside.

Roger said...

Hi Josef,
You say that MJ's articles are the only truth and that to see anything different is a "mentally disturbed intention".
Or saying it differently: to challenge MJ's viewpoint is automatically a deliberate misinterpretation.
Even to consider a different perspective than what is officially approved by Michael James is "mentally disturbed".

Josef, you have the disease of "guru-itis". An inflammatory ego disease where one engages in conflict with the world proclaiming that "my guru has the only right way".

There can never be any single teaching which is the "only way" for all people for all time.
To claim that one has the "only way" (as Michael James does) is an egoic mental disturbance.

anadi-ananta said...

Roger,
again you show your disease of repeating your "only way" mantra.
Neither I nor Michael ever claimed that MJ's articles are the only truth or to have the "only truth" or "only way".
Different perspectives/viewpoints were categorically repudiated by MJ only when they rock the very foundations of Bhagavan's teachings.
Roger, you seem to be a hopeless case...
Take a step sideways, take a deep breath ...and all is okay. For heaven's sake do not persist in your dreadful and deadly monotony ! For what I had to emphatically criticize you was only your unparalleled repeated deliberate misinterpretation.

«Oldest ‹Older   601 – 622 of 622   Newer› Newest»