68. Intellect Cafe

This is a compilation of short Facebook posts written over the last few years.

We have to come to terms with the fact that thought is just another aspect of our being. Only certain spiritual paths deal with thoughts and achieving intellectual clarity. But spirituality by itself does not mean intellectual clarity. I may be a simpleton and still be spiritual, and a wonderful human being. Lack of intellectual clarity does not necessarily make me non-spiritual or make me any less. Nor does intellectual proficiency guarantee any spiritual insights. Therefore there is no need to assert oneself when intellect is not sharp enough. Otherwise things will get twisted out so bad, that it may be quite troublesome to straighten them up!
________________________________________________

Jnana yoga is not about finding answers as such. It is about channelizing all the erratic questioning into one fundamental question, directing the scattered energy into one intense '?'. Answers given by the teachers, if any, on a variety of things, are only to plug the holes in your intellect through which energy is dissipating, through which you are slipping away.
________________________________________________

When water is heated in a vessel, if the vessel is not big enough, water may spill over and douse the very fire that heated it up, instead of the fire evaporating the water in the vessel. Just so, when one enquires into the fundamental questions of life, if the intellect is not robust enough, the content of your mind (read and heard) will spill over haphazardly, and douse the fire of enquiry ("Ah I know, I am the Self!"), instead of the fire of enquiry evaporating the mind leading to the direct revelation of the Truth.
________________________________________________

When probing into fundamental questions of life, logic eventually hits a dead-end, or becomes circular, or goes into an infinite regression. Most people coolly declare "Logic is limited" and carry on with their life. The prisoner comes to the prison walls, and casually walks away. How many refuse to ignore the wall? How many find the walls daunting and suffocating?
________________________________________________

Intellectual clarity includes the intimate and painful knowing of intellect's limits, and therefore an encounter with what is beyond. Without it clarity is still pending.
________________________________________________

________________________________________________

"Intellect is limited" – if one is to make this statement, the limitation must be a living reality to him. Otherwise it is a case of fox and the sour grapes... or of deception where one tries to look wise by repeating someone else's words as their own... or of a messed up intellect trying to find an exit from a discussion to save itself from humiliation.
________________________________________________

"Jnana yogi learns to use the intellect the way a drunkard uses a lamp post – for support rather than illumination. He does not seek a PhD to validate the knowledge he has amassed. Instead, he understands that the intellect is an instrument of analysis, not perception. To perceive, another faculty is required" (Sadhguru)
________________________________________________

"Me and the world" continues because our attention and energies are always split. Jnana marga is to pay absolute attention to the 'I' through '?'. Bhakti marga is to pay absolute attention to That through ❤. Either way the drama ends.

62. Nirdhara — If you are Sure you are Dead

Our entire schooling system has trained human mind to come to an answer as quickly as possible. Only the one who gets to the answer the quickest is appreciated and rewarded. Slower ones are always neglected.

The repercussions of this are enormous. Human intellect is now always in a hurry to conclude. The mind has been deeply programmed with the reward-penalty system administered during schooling. Now he thinks that the more quickly he concludes, the smarter he is — a self-conferred reward.

So now he concludes about every bit of life that comes his way, including himself, with reprehensible urgency, and as a result, all possibilities of further enquiry are eliminated. He knows what he is, what others are, what happiness is, what a relationship is, what life is, what death is, what spirituality is, what God is... you name it and he knows what it is (words from books, or some lame logic). So smart!

This kind of arriving at a conclusion as quickly as possible is suitable and needed in analytical and executive fields of life, where an outcome, a decision has to come about as quickly as possible. But having idiotically extended this pattern to all aspects of life, not at all stopping for a moment to reflect deeply upon fundamentals of his life, including 'What am I? What am I seeking in life?', is rampaging his life, and he is not even noticing it? His intellect has turned so impotent that it cannot think about anything or anybody without strongly concluding about them; he cannot hold onto a certain fundamental question and inquire deeply into it for two minutes straight. He has forgotten what it is like to be aflame and alive with '?'.

In Samskrita one of the words for Conclusion is निर्धार (Nirdhara), and the word is very interesting. Nir-dhara can mean 'holding on thoroughly' and it can also mean 'devoid of flow'. Concluding in analytical and executive areas of life would refer to the former meaning, and it is very much needed. But concluding about life itself would refer to the latter meaning, and you would become stagnant, dead, numb to life - 'Ah big deal, I know what it is'; 'Oh I know all about him'; 'You know who I am?'



While the religious ones today are dead sure about everything (even God's name, address, family members etc.), the Vedic Rishis boldly declared "We do not know".

If you are sure, you are dead!

59. From Nothing to Something to No-Thing

You may have the notion that you are an individual first, and that only as a consequence you developed the idea of 'mine'. This is because 'me' is assumed to be a certain concrete entity, whereas 'mine' is merely a process — an act of assertion and defense. So one unconsciously favors the notion that the concrete entity 'I' came into being first, and then 'I' developed the impulse of defending some other entity as 'mine'. But look into this keenly.

If 'I' am entity X, calling a distinct entity Y as 'mine', what about X? Is X also mine? We are necessitated to say 'Yes', because if X is not mine, if I am not mine, then how can I assert anything else as mine? But if X is mine, then how is X any different from Y? That which is mine is intuitively understood as something apart from me. If X is mine, how can it be 'me' at the same time?

We can posit many things here and write a philosophical paper to argue that X is both me and mine. But nevertheless, something seems off. We do sense that at the very core, it cannot be that 'I' defend a distinct 'mine'; at some point 'I' and 'mine' have to converge. But this does not seem to work out coherently if we start with a concrete 'I' into which 'mine' eventually converges. So, can it be the other way round? Can it be that 'mine' is first into which 'I' converges? Can it be that at the core there is no concrete entity at all?

What does this mean? This means that at the very core, the very impulse of defense IS 'me'.  A claim 'mine' of nothing IS 'me'. The very resistance IS the individual—the 'original sin', the first error, a defense of nothing, a dummy claim, a resistance towards existence for the sake of nothing, upon which accrues all the paraphernalia, giving rise to a complex personality. The great show that is put up upon this nothing makes it look like there is indeed something very precious at the core ('soul' and the like), and the individual accrues more and more protective layers upon it (including 'spiritual' layers), and becomes more and more defensive in a vicious manner, resisting the rest of the existence, and becoming increasingly constipated.

But this very hardening cracks it one day, giving a glimpse of the idiocy of the whole affair. A longing to end the drama, a force to counter the stagnant fortress, rises, not resting until the whole structure is dissolved.

Defending nothing comes into being some-thing

And dissolving that something remains the Being that is No-Thing

50. The Imaginary Plight of Light

<< Previous - I am Miserable Because...

Light energy comes through a bulb. Due to witnessing the bulb as an individual entity (which is also a form of energy), the light-energy also gets identified as "light from this bulb". Else there is no identity to it - there is one ocean of energy. You cannot point at the light and say "this light" or "that light". There is really no division in energy (strictly speaking there is - there are packets/quanta of energy - but let us not be so rigorous - this is for the sake of an analogy). The division created in energy by saying "light from this/that bulb" is only apparent and not real. The division is due to witnessing only a part of the ocean at a time, and not recognizing that it is one whole - universe.

Similarly, the identification of consciousness as "mind from this/that body" is apparent and not real. There aren't different consciousnesses just as there aren't different energy. It is one continuum, one existence.

Therefore we have to get out of this ignorance of "this individual light" - because there is no such thing. "Light from the bulb" is not an individual; similarly "me from this brain" is not an individual - it is an unceasing flow of consciousness. It can never be pinpointed as "this". All such pinpointing is wrong (avidya - ignorance). If you say "I am the body" it is as good as the light from the bulb saying "I am this bulb" and creating an imaginary plight. Light can witness the bulb from which it is coming, but it is never the bulb. Furthermore, energy does not go out of existence, it always is; similarly, consciousness never goes out of existence, it always is. Sorry... I always am.

Therefore keenly and diligently focus on this light - the sense of 'me' - and know yourself as the undivided ocean of light, rather than as a petty bulb. And roar, 'I am That'

"I am waiting peace that passeth understanding, which is neither joy nor sorrow, but something above them both…. Now I am nearing that peace, the eternal silence. I preached the theory (of Vedanta) so long but Oh joy! I am realizing it now. Yes, I am. ‘I am free.’ Alone, alone, I am the one without a second.’" (Swami Vivekananda - 1902 May 15 - few days prior to Mahasamadhi)

48. The Dwarf And The Giant

<< Previous - सम्यक् सरति इति संसारः

Imagine a dwarf stuck in a huge maze, without a floor layout displayed anywhere and no one to ask. And suppose he has to go from the point A to B. How will he go? Trial and error. He will roam and roam to find the way. But then he cannot easily trace back the path. So, to get a good picture of the maze, and draw a map himself, it may take days. But let us add one more complication - what if the maze is dynamic and changes its layout every day? Will he ever be able to get the knowledge of the layout of this maze? This is the tedious way of learning using the intellect. Learning is very cumbersome and moves forward at snail's pace.

This is what happens to most of the people. We are mostly mental-dwarfs. Very often we find ourselves mixed up in the situations. We are not on top of it. We seem to take steps with trial and error without knowing fully about the consequences. This way we somehow drag on saying that we are learning by experience. Even in our discussions, we can see that we cannot see beyond two or three ideas of the topic. And our arguments end up becoming a mess most of the times, leading to no conclusion.

On the other hand, what if you have a giant within the maze who is much taller than the walls of the maze? He gets a glance of the whole maze at once. It doesn't matter even if the maze is dynamically changing. At any given time, he knows what is where.

Now this is what spiritual masters are. They are mental-giants. Practice of Self-enquiry (or any other method of meditation) is something that makes you rise above the normal planes of the mind. Suddenly you will know that you have a bigger picture. You no more feel as if you are entangled in a maze even if you are standing right in the middle of it. Because you start growing into a mental-giant. The whole of maze (or at least a bigger portion of it) is visible to you with a single glance. In this case, how much time does it require for you to learn about the maze? Just a moment! It is instantaneous and spontaneous. This is the way of the wise.

Now compare this with the dwarf's tedious way of living. The dwarf is running here and there the whole day in the maze learning only an infinitesimal bit of the whole thing! But the dwarf may say that he is very active and he is saving the world by being so. He may also blame the giant wise person, who is seemingly inactive, of being lazy. But what is the fact? The wise person does exactly what is needed as he has a clear picture of the maze. He may walk only ten steps and reach the destination. Whereas the dwarf walks thousands to steps moving to and fro in the maze and still may not reach the destination. This is the paradox between action and inaction described in the Gita. Action may turn out to be inactive (non-productive), and non-action may prove to be highly active inherently.

The dwarf initially criticizes the giant, saying that he is very lazy. But the giant only smiles at the poor dwarf. The dwarf, although utterly confused about the maze, doesn't want to accept that and wants to prove that being active is the highest ideal of life. He believes and wants to prove that he will find his way out by running around thus. So, he runs and runs and runs endlessly in the maze. But how long will the poor dwarf run about? One day or the other he will have to get tired of it and surrender to the giant to get himself elevated as well. Then he sees the whole maze at once and exclaims, 'Oh why did not I do this simple thing earlier?!'

This post is inspired by the following Q&A with Ramana Maharshi.

Q: Why don't spiritual masters go around, give talks, and help people?

Ramana Maharshi: You seem to have already decided what is meant by 'help'. Do you think going around and physically helping people is the only help? A Jnani's help cannot be fathomed. It works without your knowledge.

47. सम्यक् सरति इति संसारः

<< Previous - Turning A Blind Eye

If you look at a whirlpool in a flowing river, it appears as though it is an object by itself. But it is just a modification of the water molecules of the river. It is not separate from the river. Water is constantly entering and leaving the vortex. But since the flux is in equilibrium (rate of inflow ~ rate of outflow), the shape of the vortex is maintained for a short period of time, and this makes it appear as though an independent object. In case of the water vortex, we can clearly notice this fact as the formation and dissolution of vortex occurs within the matter of few seconds. But we do not notice that the exact same thing is happening with our own body for the reason that it happens very slowly, over many years.

Every cell in your own body has a limited lifespan. They are born, they sustain for a preprogrammed time and then they die. Every 10 years or so, the cells in the body get completely replaced. Not a single cell that you had a few years ago exists now in your body. Atoms are entering our body and atoms are leaving our body, although at a much slower rate as compared to the water vortex. Cells are in constant flux. But since the flux is in equilibrium (rate of inflow ~ rate of outflow), a shape (body) is maintained for some period of time, and this makes it appear as though an independent object. There is no difference between the water vortex and our body in this sense. If we record a body's growth over several years in a video tape, and then watch it in fast-forward mode, it would look exactly like the water vortex.

Patanjali mentions this in one of the sutras - परिणाम एकत्वात् वस्तुतत्त्वम् (4.14).

An object is but an equilibrium in a flux. Everything that we call as objects, including our body, are all equilibriums within constant flux (of space-time-energy). Nothing remains as it is, there is constant flow. And that is the world. सम्यक् सरति इति संसारः - That which flows incessantly is the world.

Now, I am not much interested in the objects. I am more interested in this body which I am calling as 'me'. If everything has changed in my body in the last few years, if not a single cell has remained, how is it that I still feel continuity? How is it I am still the same person?

The food, which at one point is identified as different from me, becomes me after I eat it, and what I identify as me now, ceases to be me after I excrete it out of the body. But the sense of 'I' does not modify or break anywhere. This is actually a surprising thing which should generate curiosity. What I pointed at ten years back when I said 'me' doesn't exist now at all. I am only pointing at a vortex, a shape. Therefore, the body-vortex which is being pointed at cannot be me. I am the one that is pointing at the body. Body-vortex is never the same, but I am always the same. Something has remained as it is, something that identifies itself as 'me'. What is it and where is it then? What am I and where am I then?

43. I Die and My Soul Leaves My Body!

<< Previous - Where Am I?

This statement should perhaps get a Nobel prize for dumbness. It can be heard in many supposed-to-be-spiritual discussions. I die, I am ended. But somehow 'mine' still remains! It is still my soul that leaves the body!

This statement demonstrates to what extent "taking for granted" can go. It is such a common statement made by all of us so many times in our lives, but never trying to understand what is it that we are uttering, never trying to stop and look if we are making any sense or not.

So, there are three entities - I, soul and the body. So, my soul is also not me, it is only mine. I die, but the soul is supposed to survive my death! Ah! Then what is it that died? Body? No, it is still there, lying like a piece of wood. Oh, I get it. How about, 'I Am'  = Body + Soul? Ok. Then that means 'I Am' awareness must come only after the soul and body come together. That means soul is also a dumb thing like the body. Soul doesn't know that it is. It does not have 'I Am' awareness. It is just a dumb piece of light, like how they show in the movies. Does that look satisfactory from any angle? No, no, the soul must have awareness, otherwise how can it be soul? It has to be the source of awareness.

So, are there two 'I's? My 'I' and my soul's 'I'? Am I two? No, I am only one. There are no two 'I Am's. Awareness is not a cake to have pieces. Then, it is not my soul. It is me. Then 'I die' is not at all valid. I continue to be.

Now, the word 'soul' has not explained anything. It is just a name. Another word for 'me'. Same is the case with the word 'Self'. It is just another word for 'me'. You will see this in advertisements "God is your inner Self. Find your inner Self"! How many selves am I made of? Am I like the ring roads of Bangalore city "Outer Ring road-Inner ring road"?

Do I need books to tell me details about 'Self'/'me'? Oh, so I have to read books to understand what I am? A dead book, which cannot read itself, which does not even know that it exists, will give me knowledge about my Self? Great. "Book may be dead, but it was written by living people". Hmm, so what did the first living person do? He must not have had any books to read. Books came first, or realization came first?

Then why should I read them? For reference. To glance now and then. To see the records of experiences of others and compare them with mine. "I don't have any experience". Then I have become a tape-recorder. May be someday I will get fed up with my rewind-replay business and I will realize that books cannot tell me what I am. That is why I have to read books. To finally come back to square one - ask 'Who Am I? Where Am I?' to myself. To hook myself onto "?". To Enquire.

42. Where Am I?

<< Previous - Reconciling Jnana and Bhakti

Jnana Yoga only takes up questions that are happily ignored although they are right in front of us, or it analyzes the dumb answers given to certain questions that have been taken for granted. There are several, and we will look at them one by one in the coming posts. This post deals with one of them.

The feeling of awareness is always whole. There is nothing like '1/2 I Am' or '0.1 I Am'. This existence 'I Am' is always whole. Now the question is this. Where within my body is this feeling arising? If I say it is the brain as a whole, then, when a part of the brain is cut out, then the 'I Am' awareness should reduce proportionally. This is absurd. So, I will have to ask - where exactly in the brain is this feeling arising? I want to pin point my Self, my being. Is it arising in one of the billions of neural networks? So, am I just a mesh of 100-200 neurons? Is that my source being?

If I am a combination of several neurons, then what is the difference between storing an 'apple' in a neural network and storing 'me'? Evidently I access all other information. So, does it mean that one neural network is accessing all others? Now that looks ridiculous. It is equivalent to saying that 'I Am' is a 100 line computer program which is programmed to access/manage billion other programs! Fantastic but foolish!

Also, if I am a neural network in the brain, then I must have certainly pointed out myself as being there. But no, I point towards the chest to say 'I Am'. I never point towards the head when I say 'I Am'.

So, then, am I the heart? I mean the organ heart? But that organ looks very dumb! It is just a 4-stroke pump. I am that?! No, no, I wish not! This pump cannot possibly be accessing and managing all the information in the brain!

Then where the hell am I? I am not able to pin point my Self! Sigh, I hope that a scientist will one day be able to pin point 'awareness' in the body. Wait, What? I need another person to tell me where I am? This is absolutely outrageous. 'I' is not able to pinpoint its own location! All the intellectual arguments above is only to prove that intellect cannot give any answer. Now this has become an enquiry. A sense of "?" about its own source. Generate this "?" (related to 'Where Am I') when you say 'I Am'. This is another "?" that can grow strong over time.

Where Am I?

FYI - Along with 'Who Am I', this is another powerful enquiry that was suggested by Ramana Maharshi to seekers.

41. Reconciling Jnana and Bhakti - "?" Giving Way To "♥"

<< Previous - "?" - The Essence of Enquiry

Did you grow food? Meaning did you teach earth on how to grow grains, fruits and vegetables? Or did you just use them after they grew 'somehow'?

Did you put any effort to create your body in anyway? Or did you just use it after it got formed 'somehow'?

Did you create hunger? Or did you just respond to the feeling of hunger which came up 'somehow'?

Did you create the urge to eat? Or did you just respond to this urge which is present 'somehow'?

Did you design the stomach and the digestive system on how to digest food and produce energy? Or are you just using this energy from digestion which is happening 'somehow'?

Did you teach the cells in your body on how to use this energy? Or are you just performing some work through the limbs from this energy which is utilized 'somehow'?

Did you create the urge to use your limbs to perform some work? Or are you just flowing with this urge which is present 'somehow'?

Elaborating the last question: suppose you got up and walked a few steps now. Did you create that urge and intention to walk? Or did you just flow with an urge which came up 'somehow'?

Did you manufacture the feelings of love, anger etc? Or did you just flow with them after they came up in you 'somehow'?

Did you anytime decide that you will bring up a particular thought and think about it? Or did you always just flow with a thought after it came up 'somehow'?

Even if you supposedly decided to think/do something, did you decide to decide a particular thought/action? Or did you just flow with a decision that came up 'somehow'?

When someone wished you "Hi", did you respond with a "Hi", or did you just flow with an urge from within which asked you to say "Hi"? When you say "I am bored", do you mean that you generated the boredom and felt it? Did you decide "I will now feel boredom" or did you somehow feel it? When you were happy, angry, restless, jealous etc., did you create those feelings or did you somehow feel them?

Flowing with the decisions that somehow flash, flowing with the urge of actions and thoughts that somehow surface, flowing with the feelings that somehow arise, using the energy that is somehow being produced by digestion and somehow being utilized by the cells, responding to hunger and the urge to eat which are somehow present, and finally eating the food that is somehow grown, I say "I live". Surrounded by an army of 'somehow', I still proclaim that "I do everything, I am the doer". Evidently, this is also a thought that is somehow coming up which I am simply flowing with. Now I wonder, "If everything is happening somehow, then what is it that I am doing, if at all I am doing something?" And then I notice, this thought too is somehow coming up. I did not intend to generate it. It somehow came up and I am just flowing with it. This has to be the logical end, where I somehow wonder how everything is being done somehow!

But now, the logical me is fed up; because logic is seeing that logic itself is not manufactured by me! I somehow used logic after it somehow came up! Sigh! So, it is now saying "There has to be something that is managing all these activities which you have blindly and dumbly labeled as 'somehow'". I cannot help but feel a strong attraction towards this 'something' that is managing all these 'somehow', in summary everything. "?" is giving way to "♥". Logic is giving way to devotion, enquiry is giving way to surrender.

I cannot help but feel like a piece of ice floating on the gigantic ocean. An ice piece, which, from one perspective (of seeing the whole) is verily the ocean itself; and seen from another perspective (of seeing as an individual piece), is fully being controlled by the ocean. Ocean is one whole. The ice-piece identifying itself as a small part separate from the ocean is also the ocean, the waves which are tossing the ice piece up and down is also the ocean, and the rest of the ocean is also the ocean. There is nothing but the ocean.

Ice piece says "I went up, I went down", whereas it is only flowing with the turbulent waves. I say I have free will, I fight, win-lose, laugh-weep, I create so much fuss, I say I do not surrender to anything! Whereas this is all only flowing with the turbulent part of ocean! It is not the ice-piece that is doing it, but it is only the ocean that is making it do it!

Then the ice-piece says "I feel peaceful, serene", whereas it is only floating on the calm part of the ocean. Free from turbulence, it now starts seeing the vastness of the ocean and helplessly admires the ocean. I never created peace or serenity, but simply felt it when it somehow came along. Then I somehow start seeing the hand of a higher power and the vastness of it. As a result, helplessly I begin to admire this higher power. Again, it is not the ice-piece that is doing it, but it is only the ocean that is making it do it!

Then finally, as the ice-piece begins to melt, it begins to identify itself with the ocean. I understand that what I was calling as 'I' till now was just a form in that ocean, like a piece of ice, whereas the real 'I', the only 'I' is the ocean alone. Ocean is one whole, the only 'I'. Ice piece was never different from the ocean, I was never different from That. The 'I' sense (ego) of the ice-piece was a drama, temporary and existed only as long as the form of ice existed. And now when I understand this, I see that my notion 'Ocean controlled me' was wrong! I was verily the ocean, my separation from it only being a play.

Now the ice-piece, not yet melted fully, enjoys this play. Knowing very well its oneness with the ocean, it enjoys to act as if it is separate from it, and then says "I am ocean's servant, I surrender to the ocean". Knowing very well that it IS the ocean, it says for fun "Ocean controls me, ocean takes care of me".

But did surrender happen only in this last stage? Not at all. Whether I create fuss and say 'I do not surrender', whether I pray 'Give me this give me that', whether I simply admire the ocean, or whether I start identifying myself with the ocean and melt in it, all of these activities were only controlled by the ocean. Thus, surrender always is. There is nothing left to surrender. I can only understand that I have already surrendered! Surrender cannot be "done", it simply and always is. I have to only realize that I have already surrendered. Oops! That realization is also the wish of the ocean! Damn it! Is there nothing that I can do then? What is it that I can do as the ice piece? I can just be. Yes! This is the only thing I can do - 'Be'! As 'I Am', aware. Nothing can make me void of this!

Seeker - "Are only prominent things predetermined, or even trivial things like walking from here to there?"

Ramana Maharshi - "Even trivial things"

Jnana Yoga perspective	Bhakti Yoga perspective	And the Deluded
Seeing the whole ocean as one	Seeing the ice piece as different from the ocean knowing very well that it is one	Believing that the ice piece is entirely different from the ocean
I am the Ocean	I am an insignificant Ice Piece	I am a significant Ice Piece
I am everything	I am nothing	I am something
I am infinite	I am infinitesimal	I am finite
I have the ultimate free will	I have absolutely no free will	I have free will
I know everything	I know nothing	I know something
I am completely free	I am a puppet in your hands	I am somewhat free
I am all powerful	I have no power	I have some power
I am the master, I am the servant	I am the servant of the ocean	I want to be the master of everything apart from me
Aham Brahmasmi	Oh Lord, I am a particle of dust on your feet	I am a manager of a company

Both "I am nothing" and "I am everything" are fine. But all the problem is because of "I am something".

40. "?" - The Essence of Enquiry

<< Previous - Why we fail to practice

Although devotional expressions such as singing are normally associated with Bhakti Yoga, actual Bhakti Yoga is only about a sense of love and surrender, an inexplicable deep feeling of "♥" and is not necessarily the gross expression of it. Similarly, although intellectual analysis is usually associated with Jnana Yoga, actual Jnana Yoga is only about a sense of enquiry, an inexplicable deep feeling of "?" and is not necessarily its gross expression. Jnana Yoga can be represented with a "?" and Bhakti Yoga with a ♥. Both of these seem to be equally fundamental in us. In this post we shall focus on "?".

What does a plain "?" invoke in you? A sense of curiosity, wonder, enquiry. It is inexplicable but you can feel it. An underlying yet unmistakable current of inquisitiveness, which can be aptly symbolized as '?', and the ensuing urge to quench it, is one of our foremost defining features. Indeed, the root of the Saṁskr̥ta term manuṣya (human) is 'mana', which means 'to know'. To be human is to be a seeker, someone who wants to know. Deep within us there is a dissatisfaction because there is a constantly bugging "?" about the world, about life and finally but most importantly about ourselves. If we ignore this core longing of ours to quench the "?", and occupy ourselves solely with the affairs of the world, then it means that we are choosing not to be human.

Although a clear-cut question is not always formed, the feeling of "?" cannot be denied. Most of the times we are unsure as to what this "?" relates to, but it is certainly there. Sometimes this feeling comes to the surface and manifests as "What is the meaning of life, what am I doing here?" etc, but may not stay for long. Again it goes back to the depths and stays as a mysterious feeling of "?". The very reason for the feeling of a strange thrill in us when we hear the word "Adhyatma, Jnana Yoga", the very reason why there is an inbuilt attraction in us towards spirituality, is due to a hope that spirituality can nullify this enigmatic "?" by providing satisfactory answers, and get rid of the discontentment within us. All our efforts, material or spiritual, is only an attempt to rid ourselves of this ghost "?".

The first ever feeling that even a new born baby shows is clearly a "?" on its face. More than anything, it is in absolute wonder, about everything in the world that it is perceiving. This feeling is as fundamental as the feeling of love. If you go near the baby, it looks at you and it feels a "?", it hears you talking and it feels a "?", it feels some sensation on its skin and it feels a "?". Words and sentences are not yet formed in its mind, but a sense of wonder i.e. a "?" cannot be denied. The baby is perhaps filled with "?!?!???!??!" (imagine that!) and probably that is why it cries, out of frustration, unable to bear the onslaught of "?" and unable to satisfy this sense of wonder and enquiry. The closest sentence expressing the baby's mind is perhaps "What the hell is going on?! Where am I and what am I doing here?". We only postpone this enquiry by giving mother's comfort and milk to the baby. The baby enjoys the company of the mother and, for the time being, postpones this inescapable "?" within it.

As the baby grows older, it directs this "?" at everything it sees around it. The feeling of "?" starts manifesting as questions "What is this? Why is that?". And as adults, we continue this habit of directing "?" at external things. Discovery channel shows some documentary on galaxies and we watch it with a big wonder, i.e. a "?" on our face. A spiritual preacher talks about Samadhi, and there is a big wonder, a "?" on our face.

This way, all of us wonder about something or the other and we see a feeling of strange "?" and curiosity sprouting. But there is a bigger wonder to wonder about - what is it that feels "?"? What is the entity that wonders? How and where is this "?" sprouting? Now this is a loop - wonderer wondering about the 'wonderer' and 'wondering'. I generate a "?" towards the originator of the feeling of "?". This is the only meaningful and logical end of "?". Otherwise, I will continue to wonder about things, one after another. Now I wonder about atoms, then I wonder about space, then I wonder about Prana and so on and so forth. There is no end to "?" if we go this way. So far, there is no record of anyone who has found peace and fulfillment of knowledge this way. This type of wondering and intellectual argumentation is far from Jnana Yoga and will lead nowhere. But it is perhaps necessary only to show the enquirer that this is not Jnana Yoga. So, for the sake of formality, this step, where the seeker realizes that arguments do not lead to any goal, is also made part of Jnana Yoga. The seeker adamantly rides a donkey for a long time only to finally proclaim that it is not a horse!

In several stories and real life situations, we see that a boy born in a rich family does not know the value of money. He lavishly spends money for all sorts of things, and does not enquire about the value of money which buys him everything else. He takes money for granted. We are no different from such a boy. Just because we are aware and have the capability to question, we are lavishly using it to enquire anything and everything around us. We are not trying to enquire about the enquirer that is enquiring everything else. Awareness is always taken for granted.

So, running behind questions, one after another, is endless. The only possible end is to wonder about the entity which is capable of wondering, i.e. itself. Whether it leads to self-realization or not, whether it will be blissful or not, is irrelevant. How can I be without knowing myself? I must know myself, I have to understand this entity which is capable of enquiring. No matter how much I postpone, eventually I will necessary have to question about my own existence. No matter how many questions I ask about everything else, eventually I will necessarily have to question about the questioner. Self-enquiry is an inevitability, how can I be without knowing what I am?

Jnana Yoga is only about this feeling of "?" directed towards itself. The otherwise unending chain of questioning will only end when the questioner is questioned, when the enquirer is enquired, analyzer is analyzed and the wonderer is wondered about. And that is Self-Enquiry, manifested as "What Am I?" or "Who Am I?". The words are not important at all, only the feeling of "?" directed towards the source of "?" is vital. Although forming of words help in the beginning, enquiry finally moves towards wordlessness. It is just a "?" piercing itself. There is no involvement by intellect whatsoever. Enquiry is evidently beyond intellect.

The galaxies or atoms never wondered about themselves. It is only you that is doing it. So, clearly, the ability to question is far more mysterious than the objects being questioned. Questions will pop-up one after another and trying to answer them one by one is an unintelligent way of handling things. "?" is the common factor of all questions. So, we must enquire and know the source of "?" and dissolve the very essence of questioning. Certainly, this has to be the ultimate knowledge, where all questions are wiped out and there is no more a "?" within.

Self-enquiry is not about analyzing the mind. The usual notion when people ask the question "Do you know yourself?" is "Do you know the habits and behavior of your mind?". Here "knowing about yourself" means knowing the pattern in which his mind is working. But it is not at all "knowing about oneself". If I analyze my house, I haven't analyzed anything about me. If I analyze my body, I haven't analyzed anything about me. If I analyze my mind, I still haven't analyzed anything about me. I can say I have analyzed me, only if I analyze the source of analysis itself i.e. the analyzer. There is no more a Triputi. Seer-seen-seeing, Analyzer-analyzed-analyzing all three become one. This is the only viable end. There is no end as long as analyzer is not analyzed, no matter how many other things are analyzed.

This is why AI (Artificial Intelligence) cannot be produced. You cannot make a computer that is aware. If a computer is aware, that means a part of source code should be able to compile itself, which is absurd. Compiler is always different from the code being compiled. If I have a piece of code that analyzes some data, then I should make another piece of code that will analyze this first piece of code, and yet another that will analyze the second piece and so on. This way, "analyzer-analyzed" can never become one piece of code.

But surprisingly I am already that. This entity "I" is one whole piece, that is capable of compiling itself, and thus be aware. I knows I. The single word "I" denotes this wonderful thing which is impossible to develop for us. "I" am already this impossible-to-develop thing. So, instead of banging my head to create AI, why not enquire and know myself? "I Am" is an impossible thing, the biggest wonder. So, what has to be achieved has already been achieved. I have nothing more left to do. I am already that impossible. The wonderer is the biggest wonder. And that must be sought with thousand times more curiosity rather than going after some dead galaxy.

The sense of intense "?" will gulp all other thoughts as if they are insects. Have you seen any wavering in your mind when you are deeply curious about something? When I seek the source of "?", which is verily me, with keen curiosity, mind gets trampled under this enquiry. By wondering about this, curiosity can be watered little by little, no matter where you are and what your body is doing. I effortfully wonder in the beginning and when the current grows stronger, it will draw me in effortlessly. I will no more have to try anything special to calm down the mind.

Self-enquiry is not about the sentence "Who Am I?" or "What Am I?" and is all about the "?" in that sentence. Repetition of "Who Am I?" like a japa is of no value and meaning. It would be just like saying "Where is the Pen, Where is the Pen?" without actually intending to search for it.

Therefore, all I have to do is ceaselessly generate a "?" towards the originator of the feeling of "?", and wait for the answer to present itself.

36. Part 3 - The Self-Enquiry

<< Previous - Part 2 - The Grinding

The 3 paragraphs below explain the 3 aspects of the picture 'I Am that I Am' which is shown on the sidebar.

Whenever we utter a word, say ‘book’, we point at something (a book) that is supposedly apart from us. In the same way, when I say ‘hands’, or ‘legs’ I point at something. It may even be ‘my’ hands and legs, but nevertheless I am able to point at it like an object. So, a sound (say ‘book’) which otherwise does not have any meaning, is associated with an object and given a meaning. The name ‘book’ is merely a sound, meaning for ‘book’ is being given by me. This way we point at all objects around us and associate a sound with it. So, we have name-form at this level.

But what am I pointing at when I say ‘mind’? I am not pointing at anything as in the above scenario. Instead, when I say ‘mind’ I point at that which is saying ‘mind’. So, there is only a name, but no form associated. Here, the name (mind) is pointing at itself, and the name itself has virtually become the form.

Finally what is it that I am pointing at when I say ‘I Am’? Mind? Ok. Accepted that mind says ‘I Am’. But is mind pointing at itself when it says ‘I Am’? Are ‘mind’ and ‘I’ the same? But ‘I’ is only a sound and belongs to a language. So, if I do not make that sound in my mind, do I cease to exist? Don’t I still feel my existence as always? Mind becomes non-existent when there are no thoughts (as in deep sleep), but do I become non-existent?

If we argue that ‘I Am’ is only a thought, then it means that I cease to exist everyday when I go to sleep. But then how is there continuity between before and after sleep? Who is it that remembers and feels good about sleep? Who was observing the thoughtless state?

Suppose I do not know any language. That means I cannot say ‘I Am’ in the mind in any language. But isn’t the meaning of ‘I Am’ still available? Am I not aware of my self even then? That feeling is termed as ‘I-I’ by Ramana Maharshi. This is the first hand experience of everyone, independent of languages, independent of sense perceptions. It is the only absolute experience. All other relative sensual experiences are based on this absolute awareness of ‘I-I’.

What is so great about it? I feel ‘I-I’ even now. Yes and No. We are aware of the existence, but there is a twist – existence as something. Sun says ‘I Am [the solar system]’. I say ‘I Am [the body]’. The term in the bracket is somehow there, even without being said. Only awareness can say ‘I Am’ and only awareness can say ‘This and That’. But the problem is that awareness mixes both and says ‘I Am this’. And the aim is to become just ‘I Am’ from ‘I Am this’ or ‘I Am that’. And that is Self-realization. Easy, isn’t it?

That is why it is said: Self is already realized, Self-Realization is getting rid of the notion that I am not Self-Realized. There are no two selfs – one that exists, and another that becomes aware of it. It is one. I am helplessly aware, I cannot do anything about it. Then what is the problem? Problem is that instead of being what I am, I am constantly holding onto ‘this’ or ‘that’ which change. As soon as I slip into sleep, I create and catch hold of another body in the dream. As soon as I die, I create and catch hold of a subtle body (similar to dream) and continue to live with it. A strong dementia that says ‘I Am something’. Awareness can neither be born nor can it die, but objects under the light of awareness keep changing.

The purpose of self-enquiry is to turn the blazing light of sun on himself, instead of focusing the light on some planet. Aim is to completely remove ‘this’/‘that’ and be just ‘I Am’.

To do that, first of all there cannot be thousands of planets revolving around the Sun chaotically. Because then the Sun helplessly starts looking at them and goes back to the same dementia ‘I Am solar system’. So, first of all the solar system should become peaceful with as less planets as possible. All the breathing/meditation techniques are meant only to do this – to reduce the thoughts to the minimum and keep the mind peaceful while awake. Without first calming down the mind, perhaps self-enquiry is a far-fetched idea. Because awareness will be continuously focusing on some thought and each thought will have the notion ‘I Am the body’ inbuilt in it. Once the mind is calm, by following regulation of Raja Yoga, then enquiry may be practiced.

Sit, lie down or be however you are, absolutely no problem. Close your eyes and then say ‘I Am’ (in any language) in the mind repeatedly like a mental Japa. Please read all the below points very carefully.

• Each time, before you say ‘I Am’, the decision to say ‘I Am’ is made first. Carefully observe - Where is this decision being taken? (Attention on Source)
• Each time you say ‘I Am’, focus on the meaning of this phrase, do not say mechanically. And while doing so, carefully observe - What is this phrase ‘I Am’ pointing at? (Attention on Target)
• Each time you say ‘I Am’, you can clearly see that you are watching it being said, just like how you watch others speak something. Carefully observe the observer (Attention on the process)

Do not go into a rhythm “I Am…I Am…I Am”. We are not after 1008 mahajapa of ‘I Am’!! In these cases Japa will keep happening mechanically and mind will start thinking something else. Instead do it arrhythmic “I Am……I Am………..I Am”. In fact, if the above three points are followed, it is automatically arrhythmic. Although we are saying ‘I Am’, our focus is not at all on the word ‘I Am’. We are only focusing on from where it comes, what it points at, and who is observing it. That becomes real Japa.

With this Japa, you are constantly trying to push the focus onto the source, the true You. No other japa can replace ‘I Am’ (Aham in Samskrita). Because with any other word, all three points (source, target and process) cannot be covered at once. Only in the case of ‘I Am’ japa, all the three direct at the same – Self.

Even if this Japa is done ONCE correctly, there will be a hint of uncovering. Do it whenever you feel like and wherever you are – office, bus-stop or bedroom. Do it for few minutes and several times a day. Do not worry if the mind is restless. Same as how mind is sometimes restless naturally, it is also calm sometimes naturally. So make the best use of the times when mind becomes calm on its own. Initially that may be just few minutes a day. If we suddenly feel calm in between work, or while travelling in a bus, then that is when enquiry has to happen. That is enough to begin with. But usually we do not make use of that because we think practice should be done only sitting in Padmasana in front of a photo. No, that is totally secondary. Self-Enquiry can be done anywhere, anytime, however you are sitting. The only necessity for enquiry is You, not the equipments, posture or the room. This is Self-Enquiry, not room-enquiry or asana-enquiry. So, begin with the few minutes of the day when you are calm, catch hold of this thread and as days pass by the enquiry will slowly spread itself in your routine. Practicing the regulation of Raja Yoga/Hatha Yoga (food regulation, breath regulation etc) will greatly aid the enquiry by promoting calmness of mind.

While practicing Self-Enquiry, all the discussions of the previous post may come in handy. For e.g. as soon as we begin enquiring mind says “Oh Self-Realization is possible only for few blessed people”. So, enquiry related arguments are equally important to get rid of these notions and constantly keep the focus on enquiry. Pushing the batter back to the centre-spot is equally necessary along with rotating the grinding stone. Ramana Maharshi’s teachings provide a comprehensive set of arguments for satisfying the mind’s endless weaknesses, queries, doubts and wrong notions (only some of them were presented in this blog till now). When mind is thus satisfactorily shut-up again and again, one day it stops arguing, leaving Self-Enquiry undisturbed.

“What is it that I want? Self-Realization. Who is yearning? Me. What for? My Self. How can there be two Selfs? There can’t be. So, if it is only one Self, then what is it that I am searching for? Am I already not my Self?”

35. Part 2 - The Grinding

<< Previous - Part 1 - The Self-Dementia

Now, what is the solution for this dementia? What should the Sun do to know the truth? What should I do to know the truth? Several paths are preached. But eventually all have to culminate into one - Self-Enquiry, which is emphasized with utter simplicity by Ramana Maharshi.

In my childhood, I used to see my mother grinding rice using a heavy grinding stone using her own hands. In one hand she would be rotating the stone and in another hand she would be skillfully pushing the crushed rice paste again and again back into the center, because as the stone crushes the batter, most of it gets squeezed out. If not pushed back again, it will remain on the edges without being subject to further crushing. This way rotating the stone alone will not produce the smooth batter, the repeated act of pushing the squeezed-out portion is equally necessary. It has to be skillfully done because a small error would make the hand itself get crushed.

Similarly, Self-Enquiry is like the stone that crushes the wrong notions and wrong knowledge. But as we do this, so many wrong notions escape our attention and squeeze themselves out from the pressure spot. If unnoticed, they will remain happily stagnated on the edges without being crushed. They have to be repeatedly pushed back to the center so that they get crushed fully in the end. Contemplations subsidiary to the main enquiry are equally necessary, and they have to be repeatedly carried out, because notions do not change overnight. So, both the meanings of the word ‘grinding’ matches our purpose here 1) Crushing 2) Instill by persistent repetition. At the same time it has to be done skillfully, i.e. with sharp logic and reasoning. Else the contemplation may again lead to wrong notions and narrow-mindedness.

When I read Ramana, more than the explanation of Self-Enquiry, I saw that he corrects so many of the deep rooted wrong notions that we have about Self-Realization. And when they are gone, or even weakened, enquiry should become spontaneous. It is these wrong notions that block the most obvious question ‘Who Am I’ from springing up within me. It is these wrong notions that has made me act like a sheep instead of knowing that I am a Lion. This dementia is very strong. And hence, contemplation also has to be intense, regular and continuous if at all the dementia has to be eradicated. Along with the practice of actual Self-Enquiry, which we will see in the next post, contemplation to crush all the associated wrong notions greatly aids the enquiry. So we will see them first.

The biggest notion that has to be pounded repeatedly is – “I will attain something with Self-Realization”. I will not attain anything. I already am. But I am assigning the existence of ‘I’ to a very limited part of the dream, called a body. The Sun is assigning his existence to a very limited existence of the planets. So, the only thing to be done is to find out what I mean by ‘I’. This idea “I will not attain anything with realization, there is nothing to be attained” has to be intensely contemplated upon, with the reasoning that if something is attainable, then it can be lost as well. Such a temporary state cannot become the final goal. So, this cannot be something attainable. It should always be, here and now. But I may be ignoring what I am, like the Sun.

Somewhat related to the above is “I will become something after Self-Realization”. I will not become anything. I am already what I am. In fact it is now that I have virtually become a limited something – the body. So, in the real sense realization is un-becoming, un-becoming something limited. The original state always is, we cannot become what we already are. We only un-become what we are not. And that too is virtual, self-imposed, like the Sun’s self-imposed becoming.

“There will be light everywhere and I will hear OM Kara”. Hmm. This one is quite funny. Do you have to see light for you to be yourself? Do you have to hear OM Kara for you to be yourself? What do we want? Self-Realization or Light-Realization? If I am seeing light, that means I am still separate from light. Seer, seeing and seen still exist. How is this any better than seeing sunlight or tube-light? The seer should be realized, not some light or sound. All these are unnecessary attractions and distractions. So, let us not run after some dumb light or sound. Always remember the goal – (your) Self, and not any object ‘seen’ or ‘heard’ by the Self (you). If some light is indeed seen, then the question has to be “How is it that I am seeing? What Am I?”

“Self-Realization is very difficult. Krishna himself told in the Gita”. The same Krishna has told that it is ‘Susukham’, utterly easy, in the 9^th chapter. It is up to us which one we will hold on to. Negative mind only tries to find excuses, and ignores the inspirations. A positive mind only looks for boosts, and ignores negative statements. But in fact, Krishna never said directly that it is difficult. He says “Out of many, only few will try, and out of that few who try, again a very few will reach the goal”. Well, this is normal. It is up to us to decide whether we will yield and be a drop-out or persevere and be a winner. Moreover, you just look around you. How many are into spirituality? A very small percentage of the world’s population, isn’t it? And among the ones who are into spirituality, how many do you think are into genuine spirituality and how many into hocus-pocus spirituality? That answers your doubt! You are already among the very very few who are into genuine spirituality without any unnecessary distractions. That means, statistically speaking as per Krishna’s words, there is a very high scope for you and me! J

This one is a little subtle – “I feel very calm. Mind becomes so quiet and there are no thoughts”. Very good. But it is not over yet. Who is it that is witnessing calmness? The object of perception has become very subtle – blankness, silence. But the seer is still not realized. Instead the seer is occupied looking at the blankness and silence. The truth is beyond sound and silence. But since we cannot call it as sound, we attribute silence to it. The truth is beyond light and darkness. But since we cannot call it as darkness, we attribute light to it. The truth is beyond knowledge and ignorance. But since we cannot call it as ignorance, we associate knowledge with it. The truth is beyond freedom and bondage. But since we cannot call it as bondage, we attribute freedom to it. But all the while, the truth is beyond all dualities. And what is that truth? Something hidden in the skies? Absolutely not. It is the closest to you, nearest to you, dearest to you. It is YOU, Awareness.

“Aham Brahmasmi – I will realize that I am omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent”. If we analyze carefully, all these words are meaningless. Because first of all, is there really an ‘everywhere’? Dream explanation will help us understand this better. In my sleep, I create the dream, and actually I am the whole dream. So, I myself first create ‘everywhere’ and then I say ‘I am everywhere, I am omnipresent’. Why all this circus? In fact the ‘everywhere’ is within me. So, “I am everywhere” is the wrong way of saying it. Same is the case with omniscient and omnipotent. The truth is simply is, it is neither here, nor there. I simply am, neither here, nor there. Here-there are within me.

This way there are umpteen of them which come in the later stages – “I will become divine”, “I will become immortal”, “I will become a great spiritual saint, all will respect me”, “I will get special powers” etc. But the funny part is in all of these the ‘I’ again means the body. So, the enquirer is back at square one! The enquiry has stopped and the enquirer has again gone back to the notion ‘I am a body’, thereby creating a sense of separation from the rest of the dream. What is the use how great I become in my own dream? I may even become a superman flying around, but still I am stuck in the dream. Flying in the dream is as useless as walking in it. Prison is a prison, whether made of iron or diamonds.

The only thing to do is to relentlessly push all these escaped notions back to the hotspot – the original enquiry – “I will become great? Ok. Fine. But what is this I?”

Next post - The Self-Enquiry

34. Part 1 - The Self-Dementia

<< Previous - Vivekananda's Involution Theory

And we are back to business...

Whatever path is followed, eventually it has to culminate in Self-enquiry. That is certain. And this is told because of some simple common sense. The name given by the seers to the goal is Self-Realization, Atma-Sakshatkara. And our own Self, which we say we do not feel now (Weird! Who is saying it then?), should be findable only with a search, an enquiry. How can meditating on an object possibly let us see our Self? My mind may even merge with that object and attain Samadhi, but what is the use? Still I have not found out what I am. I am still separate from that object. There is still the question – what makes me perceive that object? What is the meaning of Awareness? What Am I?

Similarly, how can repeating a mantra possibly let us see our Self? How can regulating breathing possibly let us see our Self? They are all practices meant to calm the mind down, no doubt, but they have to be let go off eventually. They cannot show the end. The vehicle cannot go inside the building. Finally we have to walk and search. And at that stage nothing is required for it, no tool, except our own search, an enquiry. The Sun, does not require torchlight to search and realize himself!

Ah, why is this stupid Self-enquiry so difficult? Why don’t I feel anything special in the question ‘What Am I?’?

The sun is helplessly projecting out light rays. He is luminous, helplessly. He is brilliant, helplessly. And because of light, he gives meaning to ‘seeing’, helplessly. Light rays reflect back from some objects around him. And then he sees those objects around him, helplessly. He sees them continuously, for millions of years. He then thinks that the planets’ existence is his existence. “If all planets vanish, I will vanish” the Sun thinks “If all planets vanish, I am dead”. He effectively makes the solar system his body. The mighty sun, millions of time bigger than the puny planets, now thinks that his existence is that of few planets around him. The self-luminous majestic Sun, now thinks that his existence will cease to be if there is no planet to be seen around him. He is now afraid of that blankness. Because he strongly believes that the planets are the origin of light and seeing is possible only because of the planets. He wants some planet or the other to be around him. He wants something to hold onto and make that his existence (body). He is uncomfortable of the idea that he can be without a solar system. He thinks that is his annihilation. He is now afraid to be all by himself, because he doesn’t even think that it is possible. According to the Sun, ‘No planets’ = ‘No light’ = ‘No seeing’ = ‘Horrible Blankness and Darkness’ = ‘The End’ = ‘My death’. The focus, thus, upturns. The subject of seeing (Sun) thinks that objects of seeing are a must for seeing and its existence. He now believes that seeing is possible because of the planets, not because of himself. So, at any cost, he is ready to protect the planets. He cries if some planet is lost, and jumps in joy when a new planet is formed. The roaring lion, thus, becomes a meowing cat.

Now, I leave the job of convincing the truth to this stupid Sun to you. You try to decide what to tell this funny Sun, on how to realize his true identity. You tell him that he can very well exist without the planets; Seeing is because of him, not because of the objects seen; Light is from him, not the planets; He is self-luminous, he is so big and majestic, ever brilliant, giving light to everything.

The Sun, probably now bored of seeing the planets (I mean, bored of life, bored of ups and downs), carefully listens to you, and says “So wonderful! Sun-realization! Ah, so powerful I will become. Hmm.. Please guide me. How can achieve that state?”

You – “Arre idiot, what do you want to achieve? You are already that. You ARE the Sun. So, Sun-realization is nothing new for you. But you are ignoring that and acting funny. You just be. That is all.”

Sun – “Oh Ok” (what is this guy speaking? I am the Sun? I should just be? Am I not 'being' now? Must be a crackpot…)

This is the closet analogy we can think of for Self-Realization. It will not explain everything, of course nothing can, but will only make us think. If we apply the same argument for Self-Realization, the discussions will be slightly different, some of which we have already seen in some of the earlier posts.

I exist, helplessly. And more importantly, I am aware, helplessly. Because of the awareness, I give meaning to all sense perceptions, helplessly. I perceive objects with my awareness, helplessly. Slowly, objects start winning all my attention, including a body to be called my own. I do not see anything special in my own Awareness. I start taking ‘Awareness’ for granted. “What is so special about it?” I think, but ironically all the time using only that to know the entire world around me. The objects perceived because of the awareness start becoming near and dear, but not the source of awareness. Body and other objects start defining me. Without them I am pathetic. Without them, I think, I do not exist. How can I exist without an object (body) to be aware of? How can I exist as pure awareness without any object of perception? Impossible! I decide that my awareness is because of the functioning of the body (Sun – seeing is because of the planets reflection, not my light), not other way round! And if that object ceases to function, then I am dead.. Boo hoo… I die… because there won’t be anything to be aware of, and hence there cannot be awareness. And if there is no awareness, that means I die. (Sun – if all planets vanish, then it will be total darkness and nothing to see. No seeing = I die). I shall protect this body with utmost care. It is everything. I shall love it the most. It is my existence, the cause for my awareness, without which I become extinct.

Same as earlier, please convince me otherwise. I leave the job to you. I will only give a basic argument below, from Ramana Maharshi.

Was I extinct as I am arguing when I lost awareness of this body in dream sleep and deep sleep? Wasn’t I happily living with another body in dream? I am jumping from one object of awareness to another, but all the time the same me is aware. Source is the same, only the solar system changed. And in deep sleep? Didn’t I still exist without anything to hold on to? Was I miserable as I thought? No! I was so blissful! Sleep is so wonderful! That means, me, as the source of awareness, is a wonderful state, I love it!

Perhaps, the picture will now make me think in the right direction. “I Am This”, “I Am That” is all wrong. “This, That” are all objects made evident only because of my awareness. “I Am I Am” is the only meaningful sentence. Yes, “I Am I Am” – I am the subject, and I am the object. I am aware of my own existence. Existence, not of any object/body/thought, but simple existence that is aware of itself. I am aware of my Self. Existence-Awareness is one whole – Sat-Chit and the result is pure bliss – Ananda. Because I am complete, perfect, content. I do not need anything for me to be. I AM, always.

I Am That I Am

- Continued