Chapter 9 – The Self-realized State
Perception Is a Reflection in Consciousness
1. Now (after Self-realization), the smell has become that which smells; the hearing has become that which hears;
2. The breeze has become the fan; the head has become the flowers that decorate it;
3. The tongue has become the lusciousness of the juice; the lotus has become the sun and bloomed forth; the Chakor bird (which supposedly waits for the rays of the moon) has itself become the moon;
4. The flowers have become the bee which sucks honey from them; the young woman has become the male who enjoys her female charms; the sleeper has become the bed on which he enjoys his sleep.
5. Just as a piece of gold is moulded into a lovely ornament, so the seeing itself has been transformed into the phenomenal manifestation.
6. Thus the one who enjoys and that which is enjoyed are the enjoying; the one who perceives and that which is perceived are the seeing. The enjoying and the seeing are aspects of the unicity in its objectification.
This chapter’s verses reveal the core of non-dualism. The sage makes it clear the phenomenal manifestation as such is nothing but the objective expression of the subject that is the noumenon. The individual perceiver or knower as an entity just does not figure in this objective expression (objectivization) of the Absolute subject except as the psycho-physical apparatus or mechanism through which sentience operates. The perceiver as the individual ego or entity arises only because consciousness becomes identified with each such apparatus. All there is is the phenomenal manifestation and the functioning therein; such functioning is the noumenal aspect wherein the subject-object duality is absent and only true seeing prevails, because there is no judgment, no interpretation, no reaction there is no who to be affected.
It is necessary always to bear in mind and this happens natu-. rally and spontaneously after Self-realization that objects as such can have no existence other than as their appearance and their interpretation. In other words, phenomena are only what is seen or otherwise sensorially perceived (heard, smelt, felt, tasted), so what is perceived is actually only the perceiver or a reflection of the perceiver. Each sentient being is the origin of what is perceived by another, each object being only as the other’s object, liked or disliked,. loved or hated. All perception as such is only a reflection in consciousness, a pure mirrorization, and the supposed entity is nothing but a tabula rasa, a phenomenal ‘reagent apparatus ‘ with certain characteristic reactions. The appearance in consciousness is pure mirrorization and any reactive interpretation is only on the part of this pseudo-entity, which is actually only an apparatus. So in the state of Self-realization which the sage describes, all perception remains as pure mirrorization without any reactive interpretation .
The Self-realized Person Lives Non-volitionally
7. The sevanti flower (a spreading flower) expands into a thousand petals, but it spreads within itself.
8. Similarly, even when new and ever-fresh experiences are noticed in the life of a Self-realized person, they are not experienced by him as volitional experiences, because he lives in the non-volitional way.
The various events that take place in what we call life do not exist other than as movements in consciousness. The essential difference between the ordinary person and the Self-realized one (although of course, strictly speaking, there is no ‘one ‘ as such) is that the ordinary person reacts to all sorts of events, decides which ones are pleasant and which are not pleasant, and strives in future to grasp the pleasant ones and avoid the unpleasant ones. Although jnaneshwar here speaks of a ‘Self-realized person, ‘ it is only because it is an unavoidable way of speaking; the two terms are self-contradictory in the sense that a person does not remain a person after Self-realization. The ‘Self-realized personâ lives non-volitionally having realized the nature of all events as mere appearances in consciousness, he lives in the present and accepts events as they occur. In contrast, the ordinary person reacts, decides, strives, etc. The Self-realized person also knows that the pastand the ‘future ‘ themselves do not exist, because they are nothing more than a suppositional, theoretical apparatus useful only in dualistic living, with which he now has nothing to do. Most important of all is the realization of the absurdity of a ‘me, ‘ a mere objectivization, having a supposed will by which ‘it ‘ can exercise a personal, independent ‘choice. ‘ Realization of the absurdity of independent choice by an illusory ‘me ‘ naturally results in two further realizations. First, it is this ‘volition, ‘ the exercise of a supposed choice and decision, which is the cause of the supposed bondage. Second, the abandoning of this volition (which is identical to the abandonment of the supposed ‘me ‘) means liberation or Self-realization. After the abandoning of the ‘me, ‘ what remains is the noumenal ‘I ‘ without any trace of objectivity. ‘I ‘ functions noumenally as seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, feeling, thinking, but and this is the significant point there is no objective seeer, hearer, tasteer, smeller, feeler or thinker.
All Experiencing Is Impersonal
9-10. Therefore senses, according to their nature, may run towards objects which satisfy them, but almost simultaneously there is the realization that the experience is not different from what he (the Self-realized person) himself is just as when the sight meets the mirror, almost simultaneously there is the realization that the image therein is not different from the face.
Jnaneshwar describes what happens when the sense organs of a Self-realized person experience sensory objects. For all practical purposes in the eyes of a beholder, there is no apparent difference between an ordinary person and a Self-realized one in their experience of the usual sense objects, but there is a fundamental difference in their respective attitudes.
While speaking of an experience, the obvious inclination is to regard it as an event in itself, but no experience has any existence as such, because what is known as an experience is nothing but the effect of reacting to an outside stimulus. Such a reaction is then stored in memory as pleasant or unpleasant. The point is that an experience is never factual but only conceptual. The ultimate question about any experience, pleasant or unpleasant, must be: Who (or what) is it that experiences? The answer must inevitably be ‘me. An experience and a can never be separate. Note that it is not ‘I ‘ who undergoes an experience but a, being always a subject, can never undergo any kind of experience. It is always a ‘me, an object who experiences, whoever that ‘me ‘ may be. If someone says, ‘I have had an experience, ‘ it only gives an indication of the identification of ‘I ‘ (what-I-am) with ‘me, ‘ an identification of subjectivity with objectivity which is precisely what bondage is. What-we-are cannot experience anything because it is non-objective, whereas it is the object that is open to experiences. Identifying with that which has an experience is what the ordinary person does; being the experience is what the Self-realised person does.
In other words, the experience of pleasure or pain is part of the total functioning, and therefore is wholly impersonal and non-objective. When he was suffering from cancer, Nisargadatta Maharaj said, I am the cancer. It is only when the experiencing is interpreted through the dualistic process of subject/object relationship, as an experiencer experiencing an experience in the duration of time, that the experiencing loses its impersonal, intemporal element of functioning as such and assumes the duality of objectivization. This point is illustrated through several examples in the following verses.
In-seeing Happens in the Self-realized Person
11. If you try to lift up a wave, all you will lift is water.
12. Three different kinds of gold ornaments may have three different shapes and three different names, which may have three different genders (as in the Marathi language), but all three are really the same basic material, i.e., gold.
13-14. You will have three different sensorial experiences of touch, sight and taste, but the object will still be camphor. Even though different senses may experience camphor in different ways, the essential element is its fragrance. Similarly, whatever the experiences, all of them happen only in consciousness.
15-16. Therefore the moment the senses, like hearing, go forth to meet their respective objects, like sounds (words), in the Self-realized state the experience is realized for what it is, a manifestation in consciousness. How then can the subject/object relationship be established?
Jnaneshwar here describes in-seeing, the real or true seeing, which happens in the Self-realized state. After Self-realization, phenomena are seen as nothing but the noumenon. All seeing becomes noumenal seeing, that is to say, things are seen not phenomenally in objective relationship as our objects but non-objectively as ourselves. In other words, such seeing is like seeing ourselves in the mirror of consciousness. When Nisargadatta Maharaj was very ill with cancer and in great pain, he said, I AM the pain.
The Jnani Witnesses Himself Being Lived
17. The seedlings of sugarcane do not look like sugarcane, but they are pregnant with juice. The full moon is full of its brilliance which thereafter does not wane.
18. The moonlight falls also on the moon; the rain falls on the sea. But the moon and the sea are not affected thereby. This is the way the senses of the Self-realized man meet sense objects.
The seedlings of sugarcane do not yearn to grow into sugarcane; they are already pregnant with the juice. And the full moon, already full of radiance, does not hanker after more. Rain falling as water into the sea does not satisfy any desire on the part of the sea for more water. The moon has all the brilliance it needs or wants, and the sea has all the water it needs or desires. Therefore when moonlight falls on the moon or more water is fed into the sea, the moon and the sea are indifferent. This is the way, says Jnaneshwar, the sense organs of the jnani meet sense objects. The jnani is indifferent. He does not hanker after more pleasures nor does he refuse whatever comes his way as sense objects. Wanting something positively or not wanting something negatively are both aspects of volition. In the case of the jnani there is no volition, either positive or negative. The absence of volition comports the absence of identification with any separate entity, because such identification is the very basis of volition. If there is no separate entity, who or what will choose, want something and strive for it? In other words, the Jnani has apperceived the fact that all interrelated opposites such as likes and dislikes, love and hate are conceptual and are the cause of the conceptual bondage; this apperceiving itself is liberation from the concept of bondage. Such apperceiving is the state of non-being, non-identity. The identified person gets involved; the non-identified person watches the show as a witness.
In the case of the Jnani, he responds or rather, his sensorial apparatus responds to an external stimulus without the intervention, intermediation or interposing of the mind. This significant point is generally not adequately understood. Such response includes physical activity but excludes mental intervention. When Nisargadatta Maharaj was once asked what he would do in certain circumstances, his answer came out like a shot: I don ‘t know. The visitor was rather disconcerted and probably thought Maharaj was evading the question. Others present laughed a bit diffidently. But Maharaj could not have been more sincere or more serious. The obvious point of the answer was that, since there was no identification with any entity, whatever happened would be a spontaneous reaction, a noumenal response to a particular set of circumstances prevailing at that moment. In circumstances which might seem similar to an ordinary person, the Jnani ‘s reaction on two different occasions might well be exactly opposite. As Maharaj used to say, there is no logic, reason or sentimental affectivity where the actions of a Jnani are concerned, for the simple reason that they are not the actions of any individual entity. And then Maharaj would further explain, to the utter confusion of many of the visitors, that events will take their noumenal course, consistent or inconsistent, irrespective of whether the concerned person is a Jnani or not! The point refers to the presence of volition, purpose or intention in the case of an ordinary individual, and to their total absence in the case of the Jnani. An event will take place or not take place. The Jnani is not concerned, but the ordinary individual will feel gratified or frustrated according to whether the event satisfies his purpose and intention or not. This is how the bondage comes in because of the unnecessary psychic intervention by way of intention or volition. Ramana Maharshi was once asked whether only the important events were predestined. The Maharshi ‘s answer was: ‘Everything. ‘
The apperception of the Jnani includes the understanding that volition is a psychic activity which has no real basis at all, because individuals who are supposed to have choice of decision and action in fact do not live their lives at all. They are merely dreamed figures in the phenomenal fantasy that is living. Therefore we are not separate, independent entities who ‘live ‘ but are merely characters who are ‘being lived ‘ in this living dream. Having apprehended this very clearly, the Jnani lives his life ‘like a dry leaf in the breeze. ‘ He lets himself be lived or rather, he merely witnesses himself being lived.
All Doing Is Part of the Functioning of Totality
19. Therefore the Jnani may utter whatever comes to his lips, but his samadbi is never broken.
It can only be the psychosomatic apparatus that talks, and the Jnani has long since given up his identity with that apparatus. The Jnani has complete apprehension of the fact there is no individual doing anything, whether it is writing or talking. All seeing, talking or any other ‘doing ‘ is part of the functioning, a noumenal aspect of the objectivization that this manifested universe is. It is in light of the absence of any me doing the talking that the sage says the Jnani may appear to utter whatever comes to his lips, but his samadbi is never broken. It is in this sense, too, that the Chinese masters have said the Buddha preached for nearly fifty years, but not a single word passed his lips; likewise, a Jnani may walk a thousand miles without moving a step outside his own house! ‘Doing ‘ of all kinds is functioning of the prajna, and it could operate through or by means of any phenomenal object, any sentient being or any psychosomatic apparatus. Identification with the object is bondage and disidentification is liberation.
All Phenomena Are Projections of T
20. Whatever acts the Jnani may seem to be doing do not affect him, for he does not associate or identify himself with the doing.
21. Although the sensorial apparatus may seem to be going outward and coming in contact with the sense objects, the apparatus really has no significance at all.
22. The sun may extend its thousands of arms (rays) to embrace darkness, but the darkness is not found; all it finds is itself.
(The seeker is the sought and the sought is the seeker.)
23. If a man wakes up and stretches his arms out to embrace the woman in his dream, all he finds is himself.
24. Similarly, the sense organs of a Jnani may go out towards their objects, but all they find is an absence of both the experiencer and that which is experienced. What then will be found?
25. If the moon went about collecting moonlight, who would collect what? (There is no difference between the moon and its light.) Merely thinking about something (either something in the past or in the future) is futile, because the object about which there is thinking simply does not exist.
The Jnani is aware that all perceptible objects are mere concepts in consciousness and as such have no real existence at all. Such awareness includes not only the other things but also that physical and psychic apparatus which considers itself the perceiver. This understanding is synonymous with the apperception that in all phenomena the noumenon is immanent, and the phenomenal manifestation is the objectivization of the noumenon. Therefore the Jnani is fully conscious of the fact that all the innumerable phenomena are his own projections (as I). The Jnani sees himself in all phenomena, and there is no room for any discrimination between the self and the other He has stopped conceptualizing and remains in his true state, which was always there.
Yogic Achievements Are Empty without Apperception
26. In this Self-realized state of the Jnani, the eight-fold Yoga has no place, and it seems as lusterless as the moon in daytime.
Nisargadatta Maharaj always brought out the limitations of Yoga and yogic powers and achievements. The Yogi may have mastered all aspects of Yoga, ‘ he would say, ‘and may avoid death every time he faces it and may remain in samadbi most of the time and live for two thousand years. But then what? His point was that Yoga and all its achievements are at the level of conceptualization in space-time and are of no spiritual value in the absence of apperception of what-we-are. A case in point is that of the well-known Hatha Yogi Changadeva, a contemporary of jnaneshwar. Changadeva was renowned for his yogic powers and had a vast following. Having heard about the Self-realized young Jnaneshwar, he came riding on the back of a tiger to meet him. At that time Jnaneshwar was sitting on a parapet, sunning himself along with his two brothers, Nivrittinath (his Guru) and Sopan, and his sister Muktabai. Perhaps according to the mysterious working of nature, the wall took off in mid-air and landed some distance away so as to meet Changadeva and bis party half-way. When Changadeva saw the inanimate flying wall, he realized the limitation of his Yogic powers and the need for spiritual instruction. He at once fell at Jnaneshwar ‘s feet and entreated acceptance as a disciple. A compact set of sixty-five verses constitutes the instruction which Changadeva received; this work is known as Changadeva-pasashti. (Pasashti means a set of sixty-five)
The Jnani Knows He Does Not Direct His Actions/Reactions
27. In that state of the Jnani, the volitional attitude is only apparent all actions actually take place spontaneously.
28. The place of duality is gradually taken over by non-duality, and objective relationship gives way to non-objective relationship.
29. In the process of the normal working of the senses, the subject/ object relationship does not exist.
So long as the body exists, the senses carry on with their normal working according to their inherent nature: the eyes will perceive, the ears will hear, the tongue will taste, the nose will smell, the touch will feel. But the Jnani is not present in such actions as the pseudo-subject supposedly directing the actions and reactions. In the case of the Jnani, the divided mind is healed into wholeness and there is only observe-zfg: he has full apprehension that every perceptible thing, including the body, is a product of the mind, and therefore the observer and the observed can have no existence apart from each other. In such observing, which is witnessing, there is neither the ‘self ‘ nor the ‘other, ‘ no one to hate or to love. All there is is objectivization as a whole: the functioning of the manifestation by means of the m illi ons of mechanisms known as sentient beings.
The Jnani Does Not Exercise Desire or Discrimination
30. When a man walks from one corner of the house to another, the path becomes the house, and the objective is reached even if he does not walk.
31. Whatever a Jnani does is not done with any specific purpose, therefore it means nothing to him whether he does it or not or whether something comes of it or not.
32. In that state, neither remembering nor forgetting has any place; both are irrelevant as far as the Jnani is concerned.
Nisargadatta Maharaj was once asked how he spent his time. He replied with a laugh that he had no such thing as ‘time ‘ which he could spend. He explained that the only way he could dispose of objective ‘time ‘ was by understanding that phenomenally time is an extension of our appearance; it is not anything separate or apart from us but is merely an aspect of our ego. ‘In fact, ‘ he said, ‘I AM time. ‘ He further explained that time was the duration in which each appearance remains until it disappears, therefore what he does with time is to live it: eat when he is hungry; sleep when he is sleepy; read when he feels like reading; walk about in the room when he feels like walking. There is no particular purpose in or desire for doing anything. Time becomes bondage when conceptualizing goes on and memories of the conceptual past keep crowding in along with hopes and desires for the conceptual future. Conceptualizing means, in effect, discrimination or preference wanting something or not wanting something and is exercised by the pseudo-entity or the ego. Apperception of the Truth means instant disidentification with the pseudo-entity, and thereafter the Jnani lives in a sort of airy hollowness, totally free from any desires, discrimination or preference.
Spiritual Practice and Liberation Are Not Related as Cause and Effect
33. For the Jnani, whatever action he does is his discipline, and his unrestricted way of life is his samadhi.
Nisargadatta Maharaj was very clear and specific in his views regarding the question of disciplinary practices, including meditation: such practices should not be eschewed in principle, otherwise a totally undisciplined life might be expected to lead to enlightenment! Adi he wanted to make clear was that such disciplinary practices (of whatever nature, however unselfish or difficult) and the desired liberation are not related as cause and effect. It is not as if you drop a coin in the slot and the machine sends out a slab of chocolate. In other words, all that the disciplinary practices can do is purify the psyche and create a condition favourable for the mysterious and spontaneous to happen. The most essential element is a very clear apprehension of what-we-are. Maharaj said repeatedly, ‘Understanding is all. ‘ By understanding, he did not mean merely intellectual comprehension but apperception as such a clear, brilliant light of apprehension in which there is not the slightest touch of objectivity, not even a lurking doubt of a ‘who ‘ or ‘what. ‘ Logical intellectual analysis has no part in this apperception.
The hazard of any kind of disciplinary practice is that the means and the end are likely to get utterly confused. Some seekers might end up in frustration when they find that long years of such practice have brought them nothing, whereas others might go along the pathless path and reach the destination (which is no destination) almost effortlessly. Some might fall by the wayside, having mistaken some puerile, spiritual ‘powers ‘ for the ultimate goal.
That astonishing little book, Ashtavakra Samhita (or Gita), one of the few books to which Ramana Maharshi occasionally referred, contains three very significant verses in regard to this point:
a. You do not belong to the Brahmana or any other caste, or to any particular ashrama (the four stages of life for a Hindu). You are not perceptible to the senses. Unattached, formless and the witness to everything that is what you are. Be happy.
b. You are the one see-er of everything; the noumenon is the only subject and the entire universe is its objectification. Verily, this alone is your bondage, that you see yourself, not as the subject, but as something other: a pseudosubject of other objects.
c. You are that which is unattached, actionless, self-effulgent and without blemish. This indeed is your bondage that you practice meditation.
The inherent weakness in any form of meditation is that meditation necessarily implies activity of a dichotomized mind, the operation of which must obviously be in duration. Moreover, the methods and techniques of almost all spiritual discipline practices are necessarily based on the existence of a separate entity who could take a covert or overt pride in the intensity and duration of the meditation or other practices. In other words, the very bases of disciplinary practice volition and duration are incongruous with the insight into intemporality. Liberation is truly liberation from the bondage of duration, which is the prime cause of identification with a phenomenal entity. This is the reason Jnaneshwar says the Jnani ‘s unrestricted way of life is itself his samadhi: he does not avoid or hide from the phenomenal world, but he has ceased to be the pseudo-see-er or pseudo-speaker while his eyes and lips (and other sense organs) carry on with their normal functions.
It must not be overlooked that both deliberate doing and deliberate not-doing constitute volition, therefore deliberately meditating and deliberately not meditating are both volitional. The key words in Nisargadatta Maharaj ‘s teaching were ‘apperception ‘ and ‘spontaneity. ‘ (Maharaj, of course, used Marathi words.) Whatever the action, spontaneously followed deep apprehension is direct action, noumenal action without any intervening of the mind. The ostensible purpose of all meditation is the cessation of thinking or conceptualizing, and this can never be ‘achieved ‘ by an ‘entity. ‘ A deep understanding of the truth could easily lead to a spontaneous ‘fasting ‘ of the mind (as opposed to deliberate meditating or not meditating), whereby thinking or conceptualizing would cease by itself, as a clock ceases working when the winding ends. With apperception, conceptualizing will lapse or vacate itself or just vanish, whereas any deliberate effort to stop conceptualizing will only strengthen its hold.
This particular topic could not be better concluded than in the words of Ramana Maharshi:
All that is needed is to give up thinking of objects other than the self. Meditation is not so much thinking of the self as giving up thinking of the nonself. ..
The more you get fixed in the self, the more easily will other thoughts drop off by themselves. The mind is nothing but a bundle of thoughts, and the me-thought is the root of all of them. When you see who this ‘me ‘ is and whence it proceeds, all thoughts get merged in the Self.
Regulation of life, such as getting up at a fixed hour, bathing, doing mantra, japa, observing rituals, etc., all this is for people who do not feel drawn to Selfinquiry or are not capable of it. But for those who can practice this method, all rules and discipline are unnecessary.
Separation between Devotee and God Has Never Been Real
34. In this state the devotee and God become one, the path becomes the destination, and the entire universe becomes a quiet and secluded spot.
The distinctive characteristic of the devotee is nothing other than an experience of godliness, and with the merging of the devotee and God, the peace of such experience gets doubled. Indeed, that unadulterated, pure peace as distinct from the interrelated experiences of happiness and unhappiness is the substance of the devotee ‘s experience; that supreme awareness of which there is no awareness cannot possibly be anything other than the God whom the devotee seeks. In that experience comes the realization that the sought is not different from the seeker, that the seeker is the sought. In that experience there is no ‘self ‘ and no ‘other, ‘ because they are merely the mechanism subject and object through which the dualistic manifestation occurs. In the devotee ‘s experience the dualis-tic phenomenon is not operative and conceptualizing is totally absent.
The point made here is that separation between the devotee and his God has never been real what seems like transcendence noumenally is actually immanence phenomenally. It is essential to remember that the ‘norm ‘ is not separation but integration, although our conditioning makes us think otherwise. When this conditioning is overcome, as in the case of a realized being, the excessively outward and positive factors are counterbalanced by an intensive inward negation of the pseudo-entity1, resulting in the equilibrium of yoga-bhoomika that is our noumenal state, our normal state. In this state all conceptual separation between the self and the other, devotee and God, here and there and all other interdependent opposites totally disappears.
One Cannot Exist without the Other
35. In this kind of non-dualistic devotion, there is no separation between God and the devotee, because they can quite easily take over each other ‘s roles. And wherever a person (in that Self-realized state) establishes himself, that becomes the seat of divine splendour.
36. That state is beyond the operation of space and time and beyond all duality. In that immanence of the Absolute, all relativity is lost and there is no difference between God and his temple.
37. In that state where there is no separate existence of God as such, how can there be any question of any ‘connection ‘ or relationship between God, Goddess and the temple, or between God and the devotee? How then can one even think of separation between one another in this multifaced manifestation?
These verses point out that in the Self-realized state, a sage does not differentiate between duality and non-duality. He does not accept them as different but simply as two aspects of the same thing
the noumenal is the subjective aspect and the phenomenal is the objective aspect. In other words, even in a split-second duration a kshana there cannot be any object existing by itself apart from its subject. In temporality the object is merely an appearance in the consciousness of its subject, and intemporally there cannot be any concepts at all. In no way can the identity of the noumenon and its phenomena be sundered: noumenon is immanent in all phenomena while at the same time transcending them. This-which-we-are, the noumenon, while transcending that-which-we-appear-to-be, is immanent therein; the identity of Shiva and Shakti is absolute, and their separation as such is entirely notional. It is in this indefectible identity
our absolute totality that one realizes with firm conviction that ‘one ‘ could not possible exist as an autonomous individual apart from the ‘other. ‘ And it is in this conviction that the concepts of bondage and liberation stand naked in their illusory shame.
In this understanding, the ‘one ‘ who prays to God without any identity as a separate human being and without expectation of any benefit from God is not different from the ‘one ‘ who does not consider himself as being separate from God, because in both cases the scourge of the ego is wholly absent. In both cases the saint and the sage absence of the ‘me-concept ‘ leaves only the presence of all there is, ‘what-lS. ‘ From this point of view, Nisargadatta Maharaj said that initially, it is the phenomena and nothing else that seem ‘real ‘; with the glimmer of spiritual knowledge, phenomena are realized as being ‘illusory, ‘ because the noumenon transcends the appearance of phenomena; finally, when the spark of knowledge develops into the blaze of Self-realization, the understanding is firmly established that phenomena are illusory and yet real, because there cannot be a shadow without a substance. There is realization of the fact that the noumenon, while transcending phenomena, is nevertheless immanent in the phenomena, and therefore the subject and the object, the noumenal and the phenomenal, are seen as not separate.
Sentient Beings Are the Mechanism for Life ‘s Drama
38. Even in this state, if there happens to arise the desire to enjoy the relationship of the Guru and the disciple or master and servant, consciousness establishes such relationship between two appropriate sentient beings.
39. In this relationship of love, it is consciousness that creates and enjoys the various affective manifestations in the form of love and ecstasy.
40. And in all these forms of manifestation, there is nothing other than consciousness. (All are movements in consciousness, cognized and experienced by consciousness through or by means of the relevant phenomena.)
41. Why should all these manifestations not be considered noumenal in nature, just as out of one vast mass of rock is carved the temple and the god as well as the devotees?
Any curiosity about the effect of enlightenment on the supposed individual ignores two basic facts. First, ‘enlightenment ‘ corn-ports the utter disappearance of any entity as such; second, what may appear to be experiences of divine love, universal brotherhood or physical or psychic ecstasy are all affective, phenomenal manifestations which are movements in consciousness. Therefore while seen in the limited framework of the individual entity, these experiences may appear to be transformations in the nature or character of the individual concerned, they are essentially movements in consciousness. The phenomena concerned (the sentient beings) are merely the media through which consciousness cognizes these movements, the actors through whom life ‘s drama is acted.
In the Enlightened State, Action/Non-action Are Non-volitional
42. When a man observes silence, it makes no difference whether he is dumb or can speak. Similarly, whether it is in the form of God or a devotee, what is present is consciousness.
43. When an image of God is devised with consecrated rice and is thereafter worshipped with other consecrated rice, it is only consecrated rice, whether as God or as the material of worship.
44. If the flame is not asked to sheath itself with light, will it remain without light?
45. If the moon is not asked to cover itself with brightness, will it remain with its natural brightness or without it?
46. Heat is natural in fire. Where is the question of giving or not giving heat to the fire?
47. Does the ‘Shiva-ness ‘ of Shiva depend upon whether he is worshipped or not?
48. In that state (of Self-realization), worshipping and not wor-shipping, action and noil-action lose their separateness and opposition.
49. It is for this reason that the state of enlightenment is beyond words.
50. The description of this state attempted in the Upanishads from the dualistic viewpoint could therefore be construed as a criticism or slander but is in reality a worshipful homage, because it all ends with a humble confession of helplessness in the words ‘neti-neti ‘ (not this, not that). In either case,
therefore, whether it is considered as slander or worship, that
state is totally unaffected.
Nisargadatta Maharaj was very clear on this point. Quite a few visitors felt enormously confused about Maharaj ‘s ways. He was supposed to be a Jnani and yet he had ritual prayers held in his abode three times a day. He smoked his bidis (country-made cigarettes), ate whatever was placed before him, vegetarian or non-vegetarian, and generally seemed to live like any ordinary person. What is more, when some visitor asked him what should be done to put Maharaj ‘s teaching into practice in daily life, Maharaj would ask him to establish himself firmly in the identity of his true nature and then do whatever he wished to do. What Maharaj meant, and what he expected the visitor to apprehend, was that in the state of apperception which is enlightenment, volition and choice of action are totally absent: ‘…worshipping and not-worshipping, action and non-action lose their separateness and opposition. ‘ Whatever action or non-action takes place is non-volitional action, and the living becomes noumenal living.
Anyone who has truly apprehended it is impossible for him to live independently according to his own sweet pleasure would naturally cease having any intentions. When he is convinced that living is a sort of dreaming in which he has no control over his actions, all tensions cease and a sense of total freedom takes over, so he is prepared to accept whatever comes his way as proper and right in the totality of the living that this dream-life is. The point is that the apperception of life as a dream makes abundantly clear the lack of autonomy or independence so far as the individual is concerned; this makes it clear what one is not , which in turn brings about the knowledge of what one is. Such knowledge is, of course, conceptual; that state itself is what we are, and therefore it is beyond conceiving. As Nisargadatta Maharaj repeatedly said, there cannot be any purposeful intention in the absence of a ‘me ‘; in the absence of purposeful intentions, there cannot be conceptualization; in the absence of conceptualization, there cannot be any volitional action or non-action; in the absence of volitional action or non-action, whatever happens or occurs is noumenal action or noumenal living, and so the circle is complete.
God Is Not an Object
51. Wherever the Jnani places his foot is his pilgrimage, and if he does go on a pilgrimage, it is as if he has not moved at all.
52. It is no wonder, therefore, that for the Jnani-Bhakta, it makes no difference whether he stays in one place or moves about from place to place.
53-54. Since the Jnani sees no difference between the noumenon and the phenomena, whatever he sees is the form of Shiva, and thus he enjoys the privilege of having seen Shiva. On the other hand, if he does see the form of Shiva (on a visit to the temple), it is not as if he has seen anything out of the ordinary, because there is no difference between Shiva and the Jnani.
Apart from the obvious on the surface of what is said, Jnaneshwar seems to convey the deeper message that God is not an object. An idol or an object may be a symbol suggesting the presence of God, and the presence of God means the absence of the presence of a ‘me ‘ (when considered as separate from a ‘you ‘ or the ‘other ‘). The Jnani-Bhakta has apperceived in all phenomena that immanence which is the God-head, the divine nature, the divine love.
Tribute to the Guru
55-56. If a ball slips from ones fingers, it hits the ground and by itself rises again. The non-volitional living of the Jnani will be appreciated by one who has seen the play of the ball being bounced with a plank of wood.
57-59. This devotion is of a nature where no disciplinary practices are necessary and even knowledge has no relevance. This kind of devotion has no beginning and no end and is complete in itself. Can any simile of any kind about temporal happiness be applied to this type of devotion? This kind of devotion is a natural and spontaneous state in which both Yogic practice and knowledge find their eternal rest (have no relevance).
60. This state has negated not only the duality of phenomenality and non-phenomenality but all other interrelated concepts and dualities of name and form.
61. The conceptual duality of Shiva and Shakti has also been negated, and their duality has merged in this state.
62. All objects and all words have merged in this state and conceptualization has also ceased.
63. Oh, my Lord Gum, what a state you have brought me into, in which I am the giver and I am the taker; I am both the giving and the taking.
64. The wonder of it all is that you have awakened one who was never asleep and put one to sleep who was never awake.
65. You and I are not different, yet out of your love and affection you call me your own. Since I have no existence apart from
you (like a wave has no existence apart from the sea), this demonstration of duality within the unicity is your unique achievement.
66. You do not take anything from anyone else and you do not give anything to anyone else yet inexplicably you enjoy the relationship of Guru and disciple.
67. You are the fullness of potential and yet you are hollow and light enough (like a boat) to carry your disciple to liberation (in this sea of phenomenal suffering). It is only one who has totally surrendered to you who can understand this curious fact.
68. You have given me my share of your unicity and yet your unicity has not been at all affected, and so you have been the object of worship of all the Shastras (Hindu scriptures).
69. Indeed, my beloved Guru, only he is very dear to you who, having given up all difference between the self and the other, becomes your close relation.
In the spirit of this incomparably lovely obeisance byjnaneshwar to his Guru, I would immerse myself with the utmost reverence and humility in obeisance to my Guru, Varama Poojya Nisargadatta Maharaj, whose grace guided me in preparing this English rendering of
Anubhavamrita.
|