NON-DUALITY
I have been meditating for 27 years, but lately (the past couple months) I have been practicing Self Inquiry 2 hours daily as my 'co-main' practice along with a lot of japa (10,000 repetitions a day for several months now), which is repeating God's name over and over (which I have done for many years). For me Self-Inquiry has been the most powerful practice to date of all that I have done the past 27 years on the path. It is not easy, but it gets right to the heart of Self Realization which is... your own true Self! Instead of meditating on an object, you 'rest', 'abide' or 'hold onto' the Subject (the meditator) which is You! Who are you? Where does this since of "I' come from? Following the "I" to the source, the answer arises not as a concept, but as "Self-Realization".
It's not that science, philosophy or quantum mechanics proves the mystical spirit and nondual ultimate reality, it's a matter of who is it right now that is aware of that idea.
The knower IS the Knowledge
=========SCIENTIFIC METHOD Applied to Meditation and Spiritual Experiences============
3 strands to all knowledge to verify
If you want to know if God exists, if a dog exists or the square root of -1 exists.
(eye of mind) Square root -1, (eye of flesh) a dog, (eye of spirit) God?
1) First, there is an injunction or experiment—“if you want to know this, do this.” Activity. if you want to know if the moons of Jupiter are real, you need to look through a telescope; if you want to know if the Pythagorean Theorem is real, you need to learn geometry; if you want to know if God is real, you need to sit on a meditation cushion or take up some other spiritual practice.
2) Second, there is a collection of data, an experience, an apprehension or illumination (evidence, empirical evidence)—actually seeing the moons for yourself; or actually experiencing a state of satori, kensho, enlightenment, etc. Get data, experience or illumination of God (after 4 years). Universal Love, bliss, awareness, ground.
3) Third, (check it to make sure) there is a verification of the data with experts, a “community of the adequate”, who can tell you whether or not your observations were real or just a flight of fancy. Must be capable of being rejected to be called Science (is it falsifiable). Teacher, lineage, community of peers. This is my experience, this is what is happening, is this real.
The knower IS the Knowledge
=========SCIENTIFIC METHOD Applied to Meditation and Spiritual Experiences============
3 strands to all knowledge to verify
If you want to know if God exists, if a dog exists or the square root of -1 exists.
(eye of mind) Square root -1, (eye of flesh) a dog, (eye of spirit) God?
1) First, there is an injunction or experiment—“if you want to know this, do this.” Activity. if you want to know if the moons of Jupiter are real, you need to look through a telescope; if you want to know if the Pythagorean Theorem is real, you need to learn geometry; if you want to know if God is real, you need to sit on a meditation cushion or take up some other spiritual practice.
2) Second, there is a collection of data, an experience, an apprehension or illumination (evidence, empirical evidence)—actually seeing the moons for yourself; or actually experiencing a state of satori, kensho, enlightenment, etc. Get data, experience or illumination of God (after 4 years). Universal Love, bliss, awareness, ground.
3) Third, (check it to make sure) there is a verification of the data with experts, a “community of the adequate”, who can tell you whether or not your observations were real or just a flight of fancy. Must be capable of being rejected to be called Science (is it falsifiable). Teacher, lineage, community of peers. This is my experience, this is what is happening, is this real.
Self Inquiry Instructions in Ramana Maharshi's Own Words (from the Booklet "Who Am I?"
A. What is the path of inquiry for understanding the nature of the mind? That which rises as ‘I’ in this body is the mind. If one inquires as to where in the body the thought ‘I’ rises first, one would discover that it rises in the heart. That is the place of the mind’s origin. Even if one thinks constantly ‘I’ ‘I’, one will be led to that place. Of all the thoughts that arise in the mind, the ‘I’ thought is the first. It is only after the rise of this that the other thoughts arise. It is after the appearance of the first personal pronoun that the second and third personal pronouns appear; without the first personal pronoun there will not be the second and third.
B. How will the mind become quiescent? By the inquiry ‘Who am I?’. The thought ‘who am I?’ will destroy all other thoughts, and like the stick used for stirring the burning pyre, it will itself in the end get destroyed. Then, there will arise Self-realization.
C. What is the means for constantly holding on to the thought ‘Who am I?’ When other thoughts arise, one should not pursue them, but should inquire: ‘To whom do they arise?’ It does not matter how many thoughts arise. As each thought arises, one should inquire with diligence, “To whom has this thought arisen?”. The answer that would emerge would be “To me”. Thereupon if one inquires “Who am I?”, the mind will go back to its source; and the thought that arose will become quiescent. With repeated practice in this manner, the mind will develop the skill to stay in its source. When the mind that is subtle goes out through the brain and the senseorgans, the gross names and forms appear; when it stays in the heart, the names and forms disappear. Not letting the mind go out, but retaining it in the Heart is what is called “inwardness” (antarmukha). Letting the mind go out of the Heart is known as “externalisation” (bahir-mukha). Thus, when the mind stays in the Heart, the ‘I’ which is the source of all thoughts will go, and the Self which ever exists will shine. Whatever one does, one should do without the egoity “I”. If one acts in that way, all will appear as of the nature of Siva (God).
B. How will the mind become quiescent? By the inquiry ‘Who am I?’. The thought ‘who am I?’ will destroy all other thoughts, and like the stick used for stirring the burning pyre, it will itself in the end get destroyed. Then, there will arise Self-realization.
C. What is the means for constantly holding on to the thought ‘Who am I?’ When other thoughts arise, one should not pursue them, but should inquire: ‘To whom do they arise?’ It does not matter how many thoughts arise. As each thought arises, one should inquire with diligence, “To whom has this thought arisen?”. The answer that would emerge would be “To me”. Thereupon if one inquires “Who am I?”, the mind will go back to its source; and the thought that arose will become quiescent. With repeated practice in this manner, the mind will develop the skill to stay in its source. When the mind that is subtle goes out through the brain and the senseorgans, the gross names and forms appear; when it stays in the heart, the names and forms disappear. Not letting the mind go out, but retaining it in the Heart is what is called “inwardness” (antarmukha). Letting the mind go out of the Heart is known as “externalisation” (bahir-mukha). Thus, when the mind stays in the Heart, the ‘I’ which is the source of all thoughts will go, and the Self which ever exists will shine. Whatever one does, one should do without the egoity “I”. If one acts in that way, all will appear as of the nature of Siva (God).
Self (What we really are according the Ramana Maharshi)
tāṉ taṉādu iyal yādu eṉa terihil, piṉ aṉādi aṉanta akhaṇḍa sattu cit āṉandam.
Translates as:
If one knows what the nature of oneself is, then [what will be experienced is] beginningless, endless [or infinite] and undivided sat-cit-ānanda [being-consciousness-bliss].
(sat) means being, existing, existent, real, true or actual, and as a noun it means that which actually exists (namely ‘what is’ or ‘what exists’).
(cit), which is both a verb that means to perceive, see, notice, observe, attend to, know, experience or be aware or conscious of, and a noun that means awareness, consciousness or knowledge, but in this context it means pure consciousness in the sense of that which is aware of nothing other than itself. In other words, cit is the awareness that we have of ourself, who are sat, so it is our pure self-awareness, which is our real nature and hence nothing other than ourself. Thus we are both sat, which is what actually exists, and cit, which is the awareness that sat has of itself
(ānanda), which means happiness, joy or bliss. When we are aware of ourself alone — that is, when we experience nothing but pure sat-cit — we will be perfectly peaceful and happy, because happiness (ānanda) is our real nature. If we do not experience ourself as infinite happiness, that is because we are experiencing ourself as something other than the pure sat-cit that we actually are, so unhappiness is an illusion caused by the mixing of external objects ("not-self") with our pure self-awareness, ‘I am’. Therefore in order to experience ourself as infinite happiness, all we need do is to experience ourself as we really are, which we can do only by trying to be aware of ourself alone, in complete isolation from all objects (objects are anything physical/sensory, emotional, and mental).
Note: This description of ourself as sat-cit-ānanda is the closest we can get to describing or conceiving our real nature in positive terms. However even these terms are not quite adequate, because we generally think of existence, awareness and happiness as relative terms, each having its own opposite, namely non-existence, non-awareness and unhappiness, but in this context existence (sat), awareness (cit) and happiness (ānanda) are not used in a relative sense. Each of these terms denotes what is absolute and therefore beyond the duality of having any negative counterpart, so sat means absolute existence, which is devoid of the duality of existing or not existing, cit means absolute awareness, which is devoid of the duality of being aware or not being aware, and ānanda means absolute happiness, which is devoid of the duality of being happy or not being happy. Therefore since our mind can conceive anything only in relative terms, it cannot adequately conceive what is meant by sat-cit-ānanda in such an absolute sense.
Hence any further elucidation of the meaning of sat-cit-ānanda can only be in negative terms — that is, in terms of what it is not. Therefore each of the three adjectives that Bhagavan uses in this verse to clarify the nature of sat-cit-ānanda are negative in form.
(anādi), which means what has no (ādi) or beginning. Our real nature is beginningless because it exists independent of time, which is just an illusion that is experienced only by our ego and that therefore arises with it and disappears whenever it subsides, as for example in sleep.
(ananta), which means what has no (anta), end or limit, so it means both endless and limitless or infinite. Our real nature is endless and limitless not only in time but also in space and any other dimension, so it is both eternal (or rather timeless) and infinite in every respect. Since we are infinite, nothing other than ourself (whose nature is pure sat-cit-ānanda) can exist, because if anything else did exist, our existence would thereby be limited and hence not the one infinite whole. Therefore, since nothing other than our infinite self can actually exist, whatever else seems to exist is an illusion, and so long as we experience the seeming existence of any other thing, we are not experiencing ourself as the infinite sat-cit-ānanda that we actually are.
(akhaṇḍa), which means what is not (khaṇḍa), broken or divided. Just as our real nature has no external limits, it also has no internal limits, so it cannot be divided in any way. Any division within ourself would require the existence of something other than ourself to divide us, so since we are infinite and since nothing else therefore exists, there is nothing that could ever divide us in any way, and hence we are not only undivided but also indivisible.
Since we are beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda, nothing other than ourself actually exists, so we are empty or void only in the sense that we are devoid of anything other than ourself, but being devoid of anything else means that we are full of ourself — that is, full of beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda, which is all that actually exists. There is therefore no need or reason for us to fear the loss of our ego, because what we will then experience will not only be full of what is real and devoid of what is unreal, but will also be full of infinite happiness and devoid of even the slightest trace of unhappiness or misery.
tāṉ taṉādu iyal yādu eṉa terihil, piṉ aṉādi aṉanta akhaṇḍa sattu cit āṉandam.
Translates as:
If one knows what the nature of oneself is, then [what will be experienced is] beginningless, endless [or infinite] and undivided sat-cit-ānanda [being-consciousness-bliss].
(sat) means being, existing, existent, real, true or actual, and as a noun it means that which actually exists (namely ‘what is’ or ‘what exists’).
(cit), which is both a verb that means to perceive, see, notice, observe, attend to, know, experience or be aware or conscious of, and a noun that means awareness, consciousness or knowledge, but in this context it means pure consciousness in the sense of that which is aware of nothing other than itself. In other words, cit is the awareness that we have of ourself, who are sat, so it is our pure self-awareness, which is our real nature and hence nothing other than ourself. Thus we are both sat, which is what actually exists, and cit, which is the awareness that sat has of itself
(ānanda), which means happiness, joy or bliss. When we are aware of ourself alone — that is, when we experience nothing but pure sat-cit — we will be perfectly peaceful and happy, because happiness (ānanda) is our real nature. If we do not experience ourself as infinite happiness, that is because we are experiencing ourself as something other than the pure sat-cit that we actually are, so unhappiness is an illusion caused by the mixing of external objects ("not-self") with our pure self-awareness, ‘I am’. Therefore in order to experience ourself as infinite happiness, all we need do is to experience ourself as we really are, which we can do only by trying to be aware of ourself alone, in complete isolation from all objects (objects are anything physical/sensory, emotional, and mental).
Note: This description of ourself as sat-cit-ānanda is the closest we can get to describing or conceiving our real nature in positive terms. However even these terms are not quite adequate, because we generally think of existence, awareness and happiness as relative terms, each having its own opposite, namely non-existence, non-awareness and unhappiness, but in this context existence (sat), awareness (cit) and happiness (ānanda) are not used in a relative sense. Each of these terms denotes what is absolute and therefore beyond the duality of having any negative counterpart, so sat means absolute existence, which is devoid of the duality of existing or not existing, cit means absolute awareness, which is devoid of the duality of being aware or not being aware, and ānanda means absolute happiness, which is devoid of the duality of being happy or not being happy. Therefore since our mind can conceive anything only in relative terms, it cannot adequately conceive what is meant by sat-cit-ānanda in such an absolute sense.
Hence any further elucidation of the meaning of sat-cit-ānanda can only be in negative terms — that is, in terms of what it is not. Therefore each of the three adjectives that Bhagavan uses in this verse to clarify the nature of sat-cit-ānanda are negative in form.
(anādi), which means what has no (ādi) or beginning. Our real nature is beginningless because it exists independent of time, which is just an illusion that is experienced only by our ego and that therefore arises with it and disappears whenever it subsides, as for example in sleep.
(ananta), which means what has no (anta), end or limit, so it means both endless and limitless or infinite. Our real nature is endless and limitless not only in time but also in space and any other dimension, so it is both eternal (or rather timeless) and infinite in every respect. Since we are infinite, nothing other than ourself (whose nature is pure sat-cit-ānanda) can exist, because if anything else did exist, our existence would thereby be limited and hence not the one infinite whole. Therefore, since nothing other than our infinite self can actually exist, whatever else seems to exist is an illusion, and so long as we experience the seeming existence of any other thing, we are not experiencing ourself as the infinite sat-cit-ānanda that we actually are.
(akhaṇḍa), which means what is not (khaṇḍa), broken or divided. Just as our real nature has no external limits, it also has no internal limits, so it cannot be divided in any way. Any division within ourself would require the existence of something other than ourself to divide us, so since we are infinite and since nothing else therefore exists, there is nothing that could ever divide us in any way, and hence we are not only undivided but also indivisible.
Since we are beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda, nothing other than ourself actually exists, so we are empty or void only in the sense that we are devoid of anything other than ourself, but being devoid of anything else means that we are full of ourself — that is, full of beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda, which is all that actually exists. There is therefore no need or reason for us to fear the loss of our ego, because what we will then experience will not only be full of what is real and devoid of what is unreal, but will also be full of infinite happiness and devoid of even the slightest trace of unhappiness or misery.
I-thought
The aim and purpose of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra) is to find out what this ‘I’ or ‘self’ actually is. We are always aware of ourself, but our self-awareness is now confused, because it seems (in the view of ourself as this ego) to be mixed with awareness of our body and other things.
What is called the ‘ego’, ‘thought called I’ or ‘I-thought’ is what we now experience ourself to be, namely this ‘I’ that rises in waking and dream, grasping a body as itself and thereby experiencing itself as ‘I am this body, this person called Bryant, Susan [or whatever]’. This is not our self-awareness in its original pristine form, but in a mixed and distorted form. However, it is still the same fundamental self-awareness.
When we see a rope as a snake, it is still the same rope, and has not undergone any change. Only our perception of it is wrong. Likewise, when we see ourself as this finite ego, we are still the same infinite self-awareness, and we have not undergone any change, but as this ego our perception of ourself is wrong.
In order to see the rope as it is, all we need to do is to look very carefully at what now seems to be a snake, because when we look at it carefully enough, we will see that it is not actually a snake but only a rope. What we were seeing all along was just a rope, but we simply mistook it to be a snake. Likewise, in order to see or be aware of ourself as we actually are, all we need to do is to look very carefully at ourself, who now seem to be this ego or ‘I’-thought, because when we look at ourself carefully enough, we will see that we are not actually this finite ego (a limited body-mixed self-awareness) but only pure and infinite self-awareness.
"The ego functions as the knot between the Self which is Pure Consciousness and the physical body which is inert and insentient. The ego is therefore called the chit-jada-granthi. In your investigation into the source of aham-vritti, you take the essential chit aspect of the ego; and for this reason the enquiry must lead to the realization of the pure consciousness of the Self."
-Ramana Maharshi’s Gospel: 2002 edition, p. 89
Grasping form the formless phantom-ego comes into existence; grasping form it stands; grasping and feeding on form it grows abundantly; leaving form, it grasps form. If it seeks, it will take flight.
[because it has no form of its own, and hence it cannot seem to exist without grasping the forms of other things as itself and as its food or sustenance]
Investigate.
The aim and purpose of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra) is to find out what this ‘I’ or ‘self’ actually is. We are always aware of ourself, but our self-awareness is now confused, because it seems (in the view of ourself as this ego) to be mixed with awareness of our body and other things.
What is called the ‘ego’, ‘thought called I’ or ‘I-thought’ is what we now experience ourself to be, namely this ‘I’ that rises in waking and dream, grasping a body as itself and thereby experiencing itself as ‘I am this body, this person called Bryant, Susan [or whatever]’. This is not our self-awareness in its original pristine form, but in a mixed and distorted form. However, it is still the same fundamental self-awareness.
When we see a rope as a snake, it is still the same rope, and has not undergone any change. Only our perception of it is wrong. Likewise, when we see ourself as this finite ego, we are still the same infinite self-awareness, and we have not undergone any change, but as this ego our perception of ourself is wrong.
In order to see the rope as it is, all we need to do is to look very carefully at what now seems to be a snake, because when we look at it carefully enough, we will see that it is not actually a snake but only a rope. What we were seeing all along was just a rope, but we simply mistook it to be a snake. Likewise, in order to see or be aware of ourself as we actually are, all we need to do is to look very carefully at ourself, who now seem to be this ego or ‘I’-thought, because when we look at ourself carefully enough, we will see that we are not actually this finite ego (a limited body-mixed self-awareness) but only pure and infinite self-awareness.
"The ego functions as the knot between the Self which is Pure Consciousness and the physical body which is inert and insentient. The ego is therefore called the chit-jada-granthi. In your investigation into the source of aham-vritti, you take the essential chit aspect of the ego; and for this reason the enquiry must lead to the realization of the pure consciousness of the Self."
-Ramana Maharshi’s Gospel: 2002 edition, p. 89
Grasping form the formless phantom-ego comes into existence; grasping form it stands; grasping and feeding on form it grows abundantly; leaving form, it grasps form. If it seeks, it will take flight.
[because it has no form of its own, and hence it cannot seem to exist without grasping the forms of other things as itself and as its food or sustenance]
Investigate.