End Of Knowledge

Tag: ramana maharshi

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt.44

    Read Part 43 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge
    Ashtavakra said:
    18:87 – Blessed is the wise one who stands alone, who is attached to nothing, who is without any possession, who moves freely and at pleasure, who is free from the pairs of opposites, and whose doubts have been rent asunder.

    Once you get enlightened, you should give away all your possession, leave your home and wander about aimlessly.    

    Actually, I’m just kidding.  If your doubts have “been rent asunder (removed),” meaning you’ve realized that you’re the self that “stands alone” (exists independently) and is attached to nothing (not affected by the body-mind or external circumstances), it doesn’t matter how your body-mind lives. 

    This verse highlights the monastic bias of the author.  Being a monk is suitable for some, while living like a normal person is suitable for others.  Either way is fine depending on the temperament of the person.  This verse should be understood in that context. 

    18:88 – Glorious is the wise one who is devoid of the feelings of “mine,” to whom earth, a stone and gold are all the same, the knots of whose heart have been rent asunder, and who has been purged of rajas and tamas.

    As in verse 67 above, such a person would indeed be glorious.  But to the one with non-dual vision to whom “earth, a stone and gold are all the same,” wouldn’t the presence of rajas*, tamas* or the feeling of “mine” in the mind be the same as their absence? Yes. This understanding is key because as I’ve pointed out, the mind will always retain some sense of “mine” because it’s essential to functioning in everyday life (despite being ultimately unreal).  And as the Bhagavad Gita (a key Vedanta text) points out in verse 14:23 , rajas and tamas will always be present in the mind to some degree.  But they are never present in you, the self.      

    *See Bhagavad Gita Chapter 14 for a more detailed description of rajas and tamas.  For now, in this context, rajas is desire, agitation and activity.  And tamas is dullness, inertia and ignorance. 

    18:89 – Who is there to stand in comparison with the liberated soul who has no desire whatsoever at heart, who is contented and indifferent to everything?

    Possibly no one because it’s unlikely that such person exists, unless by “liberated soul” the author is referring directly to the self, which is always free from desire, malcontent and care. 

    If he’s referring directly to the self, there’s nothing for it to stand in comparison to because the self is non-dual and comparison is only possible between two different things.  If the author is referring to an enlightened person, I’d argue that comparison between the enlightened and the unenlightened isn’t productive because the point of enlightenment is to see that you’re not a person.  And by extension, to be free from the pain of comparing yourself to other people and trying to be different, rather than just accepting yourself as the perfect, limitless reality that you are.   

    18:90 – Who but the desireless one knows not though knowing, sees not though seeing, and speaks not though speaking?

    In other words, who but the self knows not though knowing etc.?  No one, because there’s nothing but the self. 

    18:91 – Whether they be a mendicant or a king, the one who is unattached and whose view of things has been freed from the sense of good and evil excels.

    Your body-mind can be a beggar with nothing or a king with everything.  But this doesn’t matter when your vision (understanding) has been freed from the sense of good and evil (duality). 

    Read Part 43 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge

     

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt. 43

    Read Part 42 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge
    Ashtavakra said: 
    18:82 – The desireless one neither praises the peaceful nor blames the wicked.  Contented and same in happiness and misery, they find nothing to be done.

    On the relative level of everyday life, peacefulness is certainly worthy of praise and wickedness is deserving of blame.  But the “desireless one” (one with self-knowledge) knows that ultimately peace and wickedness belong to the illusory body-mind alone.  As such, who is there to really praise or blame for such things?  Only the self exists and seeing as its actionless and free of all qualities, it can’t be praised or blamed for anything

    18:83 – This wise one neither abhors birth and death nor wishes to perceive the self.  Free from joy and sorrow, they are neither dead nor alive.

    The wise one doesn’t abhor birth and death because birth and death only apply to the body-mind, not the self.  Because the wise one is the self, not the body-mind, they’re neither dead nor alive.  They’re free from joy and sorrow because joy and sorrow pertain to the mind alone.  And they don’t wish to perceive the self for two reasons: 1) they know the self isn’t an object of experience available for perception and 2) they know they can’t perceive the self because they are the self.       

    18:84 – Free from expectation and attachment to family, free from the desire for objects and free from concern for body, the wise one shines. 

    Taken literally, this verse is potentially problematic.  How so?  Because it could give the impression that the standard of enlightenment is to have a mind completely free of expectation, attachment to family, desire for objects and bodily concern.  It isn’t.  Rather, it’s to know you’re the self.  And as the self, you have no expectation, attachment to family, desire for objects or concern for the body—even if the mind does. 

    To put it differently, it makes no sense to say, “I’m not the body-mind, I’m the self…and the proof that I’m the self is the behavior of the body-mind.”  Because how can the condition of the body-mind validate or invalidate your status as the self if 1) You’re always the self no matter what and 2) If the illusory body-mind has no association with the self or effect on the self whatsoever? 

    So figure out that you’re the self.  Then let the body-mind do what it’s going to do, whether that be taking care of a family or looking after its own health because ignoring family or health is no sign of enlightenment.  On the issue of health, I’ve often wondered if great teachers like Ramana Maharshi and Swami Chinmayananda (whose bodies succumbed to cancer and heart disease, respectively) could have continued their work longer if they’d paid more attention to the condition of their bodies. 

    Of course, this shouldn’t be viewed as criticism of either teacher, especially not coming from someone who, at times, has shown great neglect for his own health.  But I think it bears mentioning in order to illustrate the point that matters of the illusory world don’t disappear at the dawn of self-knowledge.  Relative matters continue to apply on the level of the relative world even though they don’t apply to the self at all.      

    18:85 – Contentment ever dwells in the heart of the wise one who lives on whatever happens to come to him, and who wanders about at pleasure, resting wherever he is when the sun sets.

    This verse describes a very extreme lifestyle that isn’t necessary or suitable for everyone.  After all, numerous verses in the text clearly state that the one with self-knowledge can live however they please, seeing as they understand they aren’t the body-mind. 

    All the same, this verse correctly points out that living simply and accepting what comes to you in life generally leads to contentment—relatively speaking. 

    18:86 – Reposing on the foundation of their own being, and completely transcending birth and rebirth, the great-souled person does not care whether their body dies or is born.

    “Reposing on the knowledge of their own being” means to dwell in the knowledge, “I am the self.”  Because the self is eternal and unchanging, it’s of no consequence whether the body dies or is reborn again. 

    Read Part 42 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt.41

    Read Part 40 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge
    Ashtavakra said: 
    18:72 – Where is the bondage or liberation, joy or sorrow for one who shines as the infinite and does not perceive relative existence?

    There’s no bondage because the self is free, always has been free and always will be free.  For the same reason, there’s no liberation.  And there’s no joy and sorrow because they’re emotions that belong to the mind alone, never the infinite self. 

    One who knows that they’re the self continues to perceive (experience) relative existence (the world) but they no longer believe in its reality.  They know that the world is merely an insubstantial illusion.   

    18:73 – Only the illusion of the world prevails. The reality of the world vanishes with the knowledge of the self. The wise one lives without the feeling of “I-ness”, and “mine-ness”, and attachment.

    Here, my previous point is reinforced: while the “illusion of the world prevails”—meaning it continues to be experienced—the “reality of the world vanishes with the knowledge of the self.” 

    The mind of the wise one will continue to have notions of “I” and “mine”—otherwise how would they function in the world?—but since this sense of “I-ness” and “mine-ness” is merely part of the illusory world, it’s inconsequential. 

    18:74 – To the wise one who perceives the self as imperishable and free from grief, where is knowledge, where is the universe? Where is the feeling “I am the body” or “the body is mine”?

    The wise one recognizes that nothing but the self exists.  That means the universe—and by extension any knowledge that pertains to it—is illusory.  This includes feelings of “I am the body” and “the body is mine.” 

    Even though the universe is illusory, knowledge pertaining to it (such as physics, biology etc.) still has relative value.  So continue to study and apply whatever interests you in the world, just understand it won’t give you any answers regarding your absolute nature.      

    18:75 – No sooner does the one of dull intellect give up such practices as mind control, than he becomes a prey to desires and fancies.

    This is a critique of the idea that enlightenment is achieved by eradicating desires through control of the mind.  It highlights the fatal flaw of this practice:  As soon as there is a momentary lapse in control, the mind once again falls prey to desires and fantasies.  The one who can’t see this is the “one of dull intellect.”    

    Yes, deliberately working to reduce desire in the mind is a helpful practice that leads to increased peace of mind.  But since unceasing, constant control of the mind is impossible, the practice of mind control is unsuitable for giving permanent freedom from desire.  Permanent freedom from desire, therefore, is only possible by understanding that desire belongs to the mind alone and not you, the desireless self.    

    18:76 – Even hearing the truth, those of dull intellect do not give up their delusion. Through suppression they appear devoid of mental activity—but a craving for sense-objects still lurks within them. 

    This verse is essentially saying the same thing as the one above except this time, instead of referring to internal control of the mind, it’s talking about external control of the body.  It’s saying that you can restrain your body from acting on certain desires but restraint doesn’t get rid of the desire itself. 

    For instance, you can restrain your hand from reaching for that extra helping of navratan korma at the buffet but that doesn’t mean the desire for it in your mind goes away.  Yes, in that moment you’ve achieved a modicum of self-control, but since the root of the problem (the desire itself) hasn’t gone away, your victory will only last until the next desire springs up. 

    Does this mean you should live like a pig, doing whatever you want saying, “Permanent control is useless so why bother?” No!  Control of the mind is essential to the process of self-inquiry, seeing as it’s needed to purify (focus) the mind and ready it for contemplation.  But it must be understood that control of the mind isn’t the direct cause of enlightenment.   

    Here’s a traditional example to illustrate the point:  a pot, while necessary to the process of cooking, isn’t the direct cause of cooking—only fire (heat) is.  In the same way, mind control, while necessary for the process of self-inquiry isn’t the direct cause of enlightenment—only knowledge is.  In other words, you control (purify) your mind enough to be able to grasp the knowledge, “I am the self.” 

    Read Part 40 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt.40

    Read Part 39 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge
    ASHTAVAKRA SAID:
    18:67 – Glorious is one free from all desires, who is the embodiment of the bliss which is their nature, and who is spontaneously absorbed in the unconditioned self.

    Such a person would indeed be glorious.  But no one who’s truly enlightened would ever claim to be such a person.  Why? Because they know that as the self, they’re never a person. 

    No one can actually be absorbed in the self because everyone—whether they know it or not—already is the self, the same way that a clay pot can’t be absorbed into clay because it’s already clay.      

    18:68 – In short, the great-souled one who has realized the truth is free from the desire for enjoyment and liberation and is devoid of all attachment at all times and in all places.

    The great-souled one (self-realized person) is free from the desire for enjoyment—even if their mind isn’t—because the self is free from the mind, the seat of desire.  They don’t seek liberation because they know that they were never bound in the first place.  They have no attachment because the self is always unattached, even when the mind is.     

    18:69 – What remains to be done by one who is pure consciousness?  They have renounced phenomenal existence which is merely name (and form). 

    What remains to be done when you know you’re pure consciousness and not the doer, the body-mind?  Nothing.  Does that mean the body-mind will do nothing? No.  But the self, pure consciousness, never acts. 

    18:70 – The pure one knows for certain that this universe is the product of illusion and that nothing exists. The imperceptible self is revealed to them and they naturally enjoy peace. 

    The universe doesn’t actually exist because it’s an illusion, the same way that water doesn’t actually exist in a desert mirage.  You experience the universe, yes, but it’s really just consciousness-existence being mistaken for something it’s not (the world), similar to the way that light reflecting off of sand is mistaken for water.  

    The self is never literally revealed to you because, as the verse points out, it’s imperceptible.  That means it can’t be an object of your experience.  It’s only ‘revealed’ to you through the understanding, “I am the self” which, ironically, is an object of your experience.     

    18:71 – Rule of conduct, dispassion, renunciation and restraint of the senses—what are these to one who is of the nature of pure effulgence and who does not perceive any objective reality?

    You continue to perceive objective reality (the world) when you get enlightened but you no longer believe that it’s real.  Because conduct, dispassion etc. are parts of the unreal world that have no effect on the self whatsoever, then what value can they truly have?

    Read Part 39 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge

     

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt.39

    Read Part 38 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge
    Ashtavakra said: 
    18:62 – The deluded one often shows aversion for his possessions. But there is neither attraction nor aversion for one whom attachment to the body has vanished.

    The “one whom attachment to the body has vanished” is the wise one with self-knowledge who no longer identifies with the body (and by extension, the mind).  They only identify with the self and as such, attraction and aversion—which only pertain to the body-mind—no longer apply to them. 

    Calling the unenlightened “deluded”—while true—is a bit uncharitable insofar as no one causes their own self-ignorance.  Everyone is simply born into it through no fault of their own. 

    18:63 – The mind of the deluded one is always attached to thinking and not thinking.  But the one who abides in the self does not think even when thinking of the thinkable. 

    “The one abides in the self” doesn’t think, even when the mind is thinking because they know they’re not the mind—they’re the self, ever-free of thought.  But the “deluded one” (one without self-knowledge) is always attached to thinking and not-thinking because they’re still identified with the mind.    

    18:64 – The wise one who has no motive in all his actions, who moves like a child and is pure, has no attachment even to the work that is being done by him.

    The wise one, as the self, has no motives although their mind most likely does.  Whether they move like a child or not is irrelevant because they aren’t the body-mind. As the self they have no attachment to work (action) because the self is free of both action and attachment. 

    18:65 – Blessed indeed is that knower of self, who has transcended the mind, and who, even though seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, or eating, is the same under all conditions.

    You “transcend” the mind by knowing that as the self, you’re never affected by the mind.  Then you understand that you’re always the changeless self regardless of what’s appearing in the mind, be it seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating or anything else. 

    18:66 – Where is samsara, where is appearance (of the world)?  Where is achievement or the striving to achieve for one with steadfast knowledge who is unchanging and all-pervasive like space? 

    Only the self exists.  When this known, the reality of the world and the suffering it causes (samsara) are negated.  Achievement and the striving to achieve are also negated, seeing as they’re part and parcel of the unreal world.      

    “The one with steadfast knowledge” is “unchanging and all-pervasive like space” because they know directly and without a doubt, “I am the changeless, all-pervasive self.”

    Space is a great metaphor for the self because it’s everywhere, indivisible and unaffected by the objects that appear in it. But really speaking, it’s more accurate to say that space is unchanging and all-pervasive like the self, and not the other way around because space is an illusion that depends on the self for its seeming existence.   

    Read Part 38 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge