What do you think of saving the environment ?
It was Gandhiji who remarked that the planet has enough to take care of everyone's needs but not everyone's greed. We should temper our demands on the environment and natural resources. Even the Indian Constitution (Clause G, Article 51 A) says that 'It shall be the duty of every Indian citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures.' My doctoral dissertation and subsequent work has dealt on the environment. Many non-profit organizations have done an excellent job of educating people on the dangers posed with this indiscriminate consumption of natural resources. But from a philosophy view, we have to look at the main culprit : ourselves.
It is, of course, noble to help the environment and stop the buildup of weapons. But what about the fundamental issue which causes anger, hatred, bigotry, casteism, violence and separatism which plagues this society and the world in general ? Are we spending a lot of time in a movement which focuses on the peripheral issues and ignoring the culprit -ourselves ?
The truth of the statement and the solution is found, not in modern technology, but in upanishads. Often, aesthetic values of a beautiful universe confer certain pleasurable moulds in the mind. If anything happens to destroy these values, a sense of frustration at our failure to hang on to them overcomes us. Sure of our competence to prevent such destruction, we form an organization and try to prevent this with a determination. This consuming passion to set the world right without setting ourselves right is anger. What causes hatred, anger, a consuming passion ? The base emotion is fear. Whenever there is the thought of an other, there is fear. So long as the ego exists, duality exists. When the ego arises, the sense of separateness arises and this generates the fear which drives us to protect ourselves from the other. However, soon it is recognized that the self can not be separated from the society, and universe in general.
The solution in creating a peaceful world, in an environment conducive to everyone lies not only in education but within ourselves. Unless we give up the false idea of an independent self, and begin to see the creation as an indivisible whole, we are circling the solution without ever coming close to the center. The first criteria is to be non-violent, in words, thoughts and action, to others, because there is really no other than ourselves. It is our duty to show kindness in all directions, to everyone, insentinent or sentinent, not because we except rewards but because it is our nature.
Whether one has education, so as to earn wealth, knowledge, or not, the only goal in our lives should be to liberate our souls from the realm of matter. In reality, our souls are already liberated, only the idea and association with the unreal makes us bound to samsara. All ignorance are based on false identification, of which the worst is the 'I am the body' thought. To liberate ourselves, we must work very hard on ourselves, controlling the tendency of the mind to focus outward on the world and its pleasures. Instead of allowing more karmas to accumulate, which only keeps the jiva imprisoned, we must give up our evil tendencies, replace it with good habits and then transcend them also to cross the realm of prakriti and identify with the purusa.
Obviously, we advocate a path of renunciation, to practice non-attachment to the world by strict limitation of possessions. We should recognize that we own nothing, and nothing can be taken with us when the gross body no longer breathes.
All this philanthropy we do has a purpose, but we should never forget the goal. Our constant attempt to do one thing only, that is to know who we really are, to know the atman. This is the cure for all human suffering. But how many of us are adequately earnest to seek the atman alone? We are continually diverted and distracted by what we call 'helping the world.' Where is the world? And who are we? This is what we should be looking in to. Are we, at any moment, not the atman ? If so, at any instant, is there any difference in essence between the person being helped and the helper ? If there is no difference, how can fruits be expected for any action ? Our job is simply to do our duty without ever having the thought of compensation.
The past is not ours any more; the present slips from our grasp; and the future is uncertain. We come alone into the world and leave alone. In spite of this, attachment grows and we cultivate bonds. This is the great illusion. Just like the water on the lotus, many of us are unstable and jump from attachments to attachments. It is better to live like the lotus in the water at the marsh. The surface may seem murky, emotions may seem to rule, but beneath this outer appearance deep down lies an unchanging source of infinite calmness, peace and bliss. Herein lies the secret of existence. Our goal should be to abide in this infinite source, atman.
This does not mean that the work done by the organizations have no purpose. It does a lot of good, but we should control ourselves in placing our demands on the environment. One should not mistake advaita vedanta to mean that we should remain unmoved by pain. This is from 'Talks with Ramana Maharshi.'
D : But we see pain in the world..Are we to call it a dream and remain unmoved by his pain ?
M : Till you reach the state of jnana and thus wake out of this maya, you must do social service by relieving the suffering whenever you see it. But even then you must do it, as we are told, without ahamkara i.e without the sense of "I am the doer.' but feeling 'I am the Lord's tool.' Similarly one must not be conceited, 'I am helping a man below me ...' All such service too is for the Self, not for anybody else. You are not helping anybody else, but only yourSelf.
[By blessing others and wishing well for others, in reality, we are wishing good for ourselves since there is nothing other than your Self - Swami Vivekananda].
We can talk forever about a green earth, a loving peaceful community, countries without racism, hatred or jealousy, but how many of us can simply be peaceful, happy and loving in an ever-changing prakriti by identifying with the purusa ? The peace movement must begin in our own hearts. Then, and only then, can it spread and have a lasting effect. For peace to blossom in our heart, let us surrender our egos at the lotus feet of Ishvara and realize the atman abiding in us all.
Talks with Ramana, page 82.
'Some people think that one must begin practicising with the dualistic idea. They say there is God; the man must worship and meditate; ultimately the jiva merges into God. Others say that the Supreme being and jiva are always apart and never merge into each other. Howsoever it may be at the end, let us not trouble ourselves about it now. All are agreed that the jiva IS. Let the man find out the jiva i.e Self. Then there will be time to find out if the Self should merge in the Supreme, is a part thereof, or remains different from it. Let us not forestall the conclusion. Keep an open mind, dive withing and find out the Self. The truth will itself dawn on you. Why should you determine beforehand if the finality is unity absolute or qualified, or duality ? There is no meaning in it. The ascertainment is now made by logic and by intellect. The intellect derives light from the Self. How can the reflected and the partial light of the intellect envisage the whole and the original Light ? The intellect cannot reach the Self and how can it ascertain its nature ?'
Advaita recognizes a distinction between mind and the nature of mind: mind is made up of thoughts, its nature is the source of these thoughts, i.e., pure consciousness and awareness. A purified mind is a mirror which reflects the Atman.
Advaita is not properly understood since there are two levels : the paramarthika, viewpoint from Atman/Brahman, and the vyaavaharika, viewpoint where duality exists and is on a sensory scale. Some books like Astavakra gita, ribhu gita exclusively talks from the paramarthika view, where there is no creation (ajata vada), no sadhaka (seeker), no liberation. Everything that exists is the Self, pure consciousness, Atman, Brahman, whatever name you want to put on it. It is beyond names and forms. At this level, there is no free will, no destiny, no sorrows, no joys, no pains or pleasures. A jnani always resides in this 'state,' often referred to as sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi. He participates in normal day to day activities, but is always established in Brahman. It looks like he acts, but He does not act. There is no karma, since there is no karta (doer).
However, until this level is reached, one is caught in the web of duality. So, there is free will, destiny, Ishvara, various jivas, liberation etc. at the vyaavaharika level. Several advaita books talk at this level, and extensively provide guidelines on how to remove the avidya (ignorance). What causes this ignorance ? Inherent vaasanaas (samskaras). Once the ignorance that 'I am the body, mind, thoughts..' is removed, then the jiva recognizes its identity with Brahman and realizes its true nature. While from the paramarthika position it is true that 'all of us are enlightened,' we can truly say that by nature, in essence, we are all Brahman, yet most are oblivious of the fact. This is like being in a dream and having nightmares only to dismiss them as unreal after waking up. But, so long as one has avidya, i.e., a slight tinge of duality., one has to strictly follow dharma.
There are two kinds of dharma : saamaanya dharma and vishesha dharma. The first is applicable to everyone, but the latter is applied for all Hindus, depending on the varna and the station in life.
What is sAmAnya dharma? Manu himself has clarified this by saying:
ahi.nsA satyamasteyaM shauchamindriyanigrahaH | etaM sAmAsikaM dharma chAturvarN ye.abravInmanuH ||
(The dharmas common to all, as declared by Manu, are abstinence from injury, truthfulness, non-stealth, purity and restraint of senses.
Until all the vasanas (samskaras) are extinguished, there is an endless cycle of samsara. It is unadvisable to completely refrain from all activities, so good desires (liberation, worship etc) replace the other desires. Slowly, these good desires make the mind pure ripe for realization
Krishna affirms in 18.61 that Ishvara (God) controls all beings, and in 18.62 he asks Arjuna to, in effect, exercise his free will and seek the refuge of the God with all his heart (tameva sharaNaM gachchha sarvabhaavena). Again in 18.63, Krishna gives Arjuna a choice of what he can do and asks him to ponder over what Krishna has said in full (vimR^ishhyaitadasheshheNa). Krishna tells Arjuna to do whatever he likes (yathechchhasi tathaa kuru).
Advaita vedanta is based on dharma, sense-control, dispassion. To even learn vedanta, one should practice dharma without expectation of fruits, have dispassion, practice self-control, cultivate detachment and conquer the six internal enemies. No advaita teacher, worth his salt, would teach the ajata vada with glib sentences like 'Everything is spontatenous, there is no free will, no destiny, no free will etc.' The danger is that one might cut off the path of liberation prematurely. If people hear the glib words "you are already enlightened" they could fall into nihilism having not having really penetrated and understood advaita. Another danger is that emptiness becomes a rationalization for indulging endlessly in our desires, our habits and proclaiming. "Hey, I'm already enlightened; everything's perfect; there's nothing to do, no need for effort, so forget spiritual practice!"
That why we see people saying advaita says the world is unreal so it does not matter whether I practice dharma or not, while advaita vedanta says that the world is Brahman, and it is only unreal when the world is unreal only when held to be separate from Brahman. No doubt, Brahman is beyond dharma and adharma. But that mere intellectual understanding of this is widely different from the experience. Purity of mind can be obtained only by sense control and meditation. This is from Talks with Ramana Maharshi (page 476).
The visitor said: "One must satiate with the fulfilment of desires before they are renounced.".
Sri Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi smiled and cut in:
Fire might as well be put out by pouring spirit over the flames. (All laugh). The more the desires are fulfilled, the deeper grows the samskara. They must become weaker before they cease to assert themselves. That weakness is brought about by restraining oneself and not by losing oneself in desires. Every time you attempt satisfaction of a desire the knowledge comes that it is better to desist. Repeated reminders of this kind will in due course weaken the desires.
Please also see the essay on eradicating vasanas at thoughts.
By making the mind pure, the ego is destroyed. Reminds me of a conversation I had with a monk.
M: The ego is killed. Unlike other killings which happen due to hatred, this is due to Love.
Q: To put it out of misery ?
M : Actually, by respecting its misery.
In all this sadhana, one should include devotion. Without adequate devotion, eradication of vasanas is bound to fail, says the jivanmuktiviveka. This devotion may be to Ishvara or Guru, since in reality everything is only the Self. Even if there is duality maintained between Ishvara and the jiva, the jiva can attain Brahmaloka and is ever freed from the samsaric cycle. This path is called gradual liberation (krama-mukti). Of course, for those established in nirguna Brahman, there is sadya-mukti. But, in essence, the goal of Bhakti and jnana marga are one and the same.
There lived a pandit who was very well versed in scriptures. He used to travel around the country giving lectures. However, one day, he couldn't find a bus, and decided to walk to the next town (10 miles). Thus, he looked for a porter to carry his luggage. Finally, he found one. The porter knew the pandit's name and said it was a honor that he was carrying such a great person's luggage. The pandit enquired how the porter knew about him. The porter remarked, 'Last year you gave a lecture in our town entitled 'God is in every thing.' I could not afford to attend it, but I couldn't have understood it anyway.' The pandit agreed, 'Yes, but the concept I talked out was nothing new. It is already mentioned in .... but it may have been too difficult for you to understand.'
The porter was quiet and both walked along for a couple of more miles. They were passing through a forest when suddenly a tiger came before them. The porter dropped the luggage, knelt before the tiger and said, 'O Lord. This is a famous pandita who is doing a great good for our community by talking about God. If you are hungry, please eat me.' The tiger looked into the eyes of the porter and went its way.
The pandit was shocked and enquired with the porter, but the porter was reluctant to answer. Finally, he said, 'Last year, after the lecture, I used to think about the statement 'God is in everything.' Since I used to worship Shiva, I used to think this was nonsense. How can Shiva be in tree, stones etc ? But the educated people said you were a very intelligent person. So, I figured you must be telling the truth. So, whenever I used to lift luggage or see a person, I used to remind myself that all this is Shiva. Then, one day, something inexplainable changed and suddenly I saw everything was indeed Shiva. That thought has since never left me. When the tiger appeared before us, I saw Lord Shiva in the tiger and thought He had come to take me unto Himself.'
The pandit fell at the feet of the porter and said, 'I have read so many menus and commented upon them, but inwardly I had been starving. You just read one line in the menu but ate all the food.'
First, scriptural book knowledge is not extremely important and is, in fact, useless without experiential wisdom (the last line of the story). Secondly, detachment, and discrimination should be carried out irrespective of the activities being performed (the pandit insults the porter but the porter is quiet). Finally, of course, the critical point is that the mind should always see divinity in everything at all times. Thus, meditation is not a 2 hour process but a continuous process aided by those 2 hours in silence.
This does not mean all book knowledge is useless. The scriptural knowledge should be supplemented by experience.
Talks with Ramana, page 343 (3rd edition)
Maharshi : Why do you want to know of Brahman apart from yourself ? The scripture says "You are that" The Self is intimate to you and you can not indeed be without the Self. Realise it. That is the Realisation of Brahman also.
Disciple : But I am unable to do it. I am too weak to realise my Self.
Maharshi : In that case surrender yourself unreservedly and the Higher power will reveal Itself.
Disciple : What is unconditional surrender ?
Maharshi : If one surrenders oneself there will be no one to ask questions or to be thought of. Either the thoughts are eliminated by holding on to the root thought 'I' or one surrenders oneself unconditionally to the Higher power. These are the only two ways for Realisation. **
Disciple : What is self-surrender ?
Maharshi : It is the same as self-control; control is effected by removal of samskaras which imply the functioning of the ego. The ego submits only when it recognises the Higher Power. Such recognition is surrender, or submission is self-control. Otherwise the ego remains stuck up like the image carved on a tower, making a pretence by its strained look and posture that is supporting the tower on its shoulders. The ego cannot exist without the Power but thinks it acts of its own accord.
D : How can the rebellious mind be brought under control ?
M : Either seek its source so that it may disappear or surrender that it may be struck down.
D: But the mind always slips away from our control.
M : Be it so. Do not think of it. When you recollect yourself bring it back and turn it inward. That is enough. No one succeeds without effort. Mind control is not one's birthright. The successful few owe their success to their perseverance.
A passenger in a train keeps his load on the head by his own folly. Let him put it down : he will find the load reaches the destination all the same. Similarly, let us not pose as the doers, but resign ourselves to the guiding power
** Page 515.
Surrender to Him and abide by His will whether he appears or vanishes; await His pleasure. If you ask Him to do as YOU please, it is not surrender but command to Him. You can not have Him obey you and yet think you have surrendered. He knows what is best and when to do it. Leave everything entirely to Him. His is the burden; you have no longer any cares. All your cares are His. Such is surrender. This is BHAKTI. Or, enquire to whom these questions arise. Dive deep in the Heart and remain as the Self. One of these two ways is open to the aspirant.
If sharangati means complete surrender, it is ever possible for the ego to *completely* surrender to anything without any questions ? If done, shouldn't it be perceived that the the Surrender to Supreme is the same as Surrender to the Self. How can the duality of 'Thou' and 'I' arise in complete surrender ? Either everything is for the 'Thou' OR for the 'I'.
A person who truly surrenders is a jnani and vice-versa. The Lord says 'Established in Me, he carries out his duty indifferent to pain and pleasure.' A jnani does his/her duty established in the Self (Atman). This mind fails to see any difference between these states.
By seeking the source of the ego, the root of duality is severed and the ego disappears, as if it was never there in the first place. The ego also disappears by surrendering it to Ishvara unconditionally, in which case, it is often wondered, what is being surrendered ? Nothing, since there was no ego ever ! Jnana is inevitable whether it is through surrender to Ishvara or through atma vichara.
By atma vichara, one is able to see the universe without choice or judgement. What happens then? Nothing, except that you are what you were before you were born: everything
The reason why saints are buried and not burnt is that because they have already been burned by the fire of knowledge and there is no need to burn something burnt already (this is the reason given in the upanishhad).
Further, in some traditions, before taking sanyas, funeral ceremonies are conducted which signifies that the body/caste/color.. are all dead for him. The person taking sanyas lies down on the wood for sometime and then he lits the funeral pyre himself.
The jiiva-Ishvara unity (aikya) concept is misunderstood by even scholars of dvaita. Advaitins do not affirm the aikya at the vyaavahaarika level. After all, Ishvara is the Lord of the world, the controller of all. How can an individual soul be the same as Ishvara? It is foolish to think , "God and I are the same, so I am the Lord of the world and I will do whatever I please". What is meant by jiiva-Ishvara aikya is that the essential nature of both is Brahman. It means jiiva and Ishvara with all their upaadhis (limiting factors) removed are the same.
However, this jiiva-Ishvara aikya also applies between two jiiva-s in the vyavaharika satya. For example, i have certain qualifications and job, while my friend is illiterate and cannot do my job. Thus, though on a body-mind level, we are acting different roles (donning different veshas), we are not different since the essential nature of us is Brahman. So long as we associate each other with names and forms, and think that the jivas are different from Atman, we are different. This difference is unreal since in essence (when the upaadhis are removed) we are all the same.
There is no falling from Brahmaloka. In Shankara's commentary on Brahma-sutra-bhashya 4.3.9, the opponent says 'The upanishads shows that the aspirant who goes along the path of Ishvara does not return [to the physical world] and quotes the Ch. U. as "those going by the path never return to the cycle of birth and deaths." and gives a couple of more quotes from the upanishads.' Shankara agrees and says in 4.3.10 that 'On the final dissolution of the world of the conditioned Brahman, they and the lord of that world, attain the unconditioned Brahman which is higher than the Conditioned Brahman. and so on...'
For example in vedanta paribhasa, VIII, it is mentioned that when the minds are brought under control by the meditation on Saguna, Nirguna directly manifests Itself. Whatever may be the case, there is no rebirth in this physical world after attaining Brahmaloka (Shankara also emphasises this in his bhashya on the brahma suutra, especially in the last verse (isn't it 4.4.22 ?). Besides the brahma sutra bhashya, in the vedanta paribhasa, VII, it is mentioned that one who attains Brahmaloka stays there for many years, and attains moksa with Hiranyagarbha, the diety of Brahmaloka, at the cosmic dissolution.
There is no issue of "falling" and moksha is inevitable in the long run, after attaining Brahmaloka. Do you have a reference where it is explicity mentioned that a person attaining Brahmaloka *has a chance of falling down from grace and has return to the mortal physical plane. [There are many such instances in Saiva Siddhanta philosophy, but I am interested in Vedanta.] No question about that. Concur completely. As Anandagiri in his gloss on Shankara's commentary of Bhagavad gita says 'The knowledge of the Saguna Brahman is the doorway to the knowledge of the Nirguna.'
Further, Madhusudana Sarasvati, in his introduction to the commentary of Bhagavad Gita, says that reciting Hari's name and keeping Him in thought, word and deed is superior to even actions done with detachment and surrender. Since eventual moksa is automatic in Brahmaloka (according to Madhusudana Sarasvati), therefore sharangati to Hari is a supreme path.
Prevents only moksa as defined by advaita. If mukti is freedom from rebirths, therefore Krama-mukti is mukti, nevertheless. I, of course, agree with you that Ishvara is only in the realm of maya. Despite, being in the realm of maya, attachment to Ishvara *cannot be compared* with the attachment to senses. The first leads to mukti, and the second only keeps one in the samsara.
Further, even if there is only a partial surrender to Ishvara, the aspirant has a chance of attaining future rebirths which would be helpful to the attainment of jnana. No sadhana, whether it be to Ishvara or Nirguna, is ever lost ! All 'sadhana' in catering to the needs of the physical body/mind and senses is completely lost !
If we examine our ego, then we understand that we are attached to several gross unreal things like the body and mind leading to the catering of the senses. By doing so, we lose the purpose of life.
Detachment is mental renunciation and being unperturbed by the ups and downs of life. Your question of whether meditation alone will do this is relevant. The answer is 'yes' if meditation is abiding in the Self (Atman) and not identifying yourself with unreal entities. IF you define meditation as sitting in a corner for a hour a day, the answer is 'no.' Meditation, of this sort, is essential but not enough. One has to cultivate discrimination between the real and unreal. Of course, meditation will help you cultivate this discrimination. Therefore, if you offer me a choice between removal of ignorance or provision of wealth/health, my choice would be obvious, immediate and final.
Our dualistic mind will perceive successes/failures due to a set of preconcieved notions or imprints [called samskaras] but we have a choice of either following the thought or ignoraing it. This ignoring cannot happen overnite, of course but if there is earnestness, the rest will follow. All you need is a will to liberate, a sense of urgency like a fish out of water.
How to cultivate this detachment ? You can either choose karma or bhakti yoga. In the first case, you can perform all works *without expectation of results* and in the other case, you can perform all works *in the spirit of sacrifice to Ishvara*. Rather it should be coupled, desireless activity is impossible. So, it is better to perform works and dedicate it to Ishvara.
Let us take Isha upanishhad verse 1. It is such a beautiful verse. Once a disciple of Shirdi Sai baba wanted to write a commentary on it but try as much as he can, he couldn't. Shirdi asked him to visit a collector's house and look at the servant woman there. The person thought 'how can an uneducated servant woman teach me ?' But he went there. He heard the women totally enraptured singing about an orange sari, with its beautiful borders, and design. He peeped and looked at the women but she was wearing rags, not even a sari. Out of pity, he bought her a cheap orange sari. She wore it for a day, but two days later she was wearing rags again. The person went and asked her why she wasn't wearing the sari. She said 'But I am wearing an orange sari with beautiful borders..' She had completely lost the individuality that this is better, this is bad. She taught him the crux of Isha upanishhad 1 that the wealth is not ours. Nothing is ours. the verse says : tyaktena bhuJNjithaaH : enjoy everything in life with tyaga (renunciation of 'this is mine.'). Everything that moves is God's.
There was once a monk who was very famous, and used to teach Zen. One day a young girl in the village accused him of fathering her child. The girl's parents gave him the child and lot of his followers left in disgust. The monk said 'Is that so?'. He raised the child with care for a year. Somehow, the girl became pregnant again and this time she told the truth and said both of her children were fathered by the local fisherman. The girl's parents profusely apologized to the monk and asked for the child. The monk while giving back the child said 'Is that so?'.
What are feet ? Feet is foundation on which we are built. Therefore, when we touch someone's feet we are bowing to their foundation i.e their Self. When I touch the feet of any sanyas, I say 'give me vaigraya.' But how is vaigraya cultivated ? Shankara says 'By meditating on the Self, vaigraya is gained.' But vaigraya is not given. By washing our feet before entering a temple, we ask that the (ego) dust on our feet may be washed away. Vaigraya is left when the dust is removed. What do the two feet signify ? Gods and Goddesses, in general, have several hands, several heads but only two feet. Two feet signifies 'Tvam' and 'tat'. By surrendering to the feet, we realize tat tvam asi because there is no difference between the two feet. May Lord Shiva-Shakti pull us to Him so that we lose our "individuality" and become one with That.
Aperson is alive as long as the "soul" is in the body. But who is the Lord of the chariot ? Atman/Self.
[Katha upanishhad.h]
aatmaana.N rathitaM viddhi shariira.N rathameva tu . buddhiM tu saarathiM viddhi manaH pragrahameva cha .. 1.3.3..
Know the Self as the lord of the chariot and the body as the the chariot, know the intellect as the charioteer and the mind as the reigns. i.e As long as the lord of the chariot, Self, "exists" in the body, one is "alive."
The Atman, being detached from the chariot, the charioteer and the horses, does not need the journey.
yastvaviGYaanavaanbhavatyayuktena manasaa sadaa . tasyendriyaaNyavashyaani dushhTaashvaa iva saaratheH .. 1.3.5..
yastvaviGYaanavaanbhavatyamanaskaH sadaa.ashuchiH . na sa tatpadamaapnoti sa.nsaaraM chaadhigachchhati .. 1.3.7..
One who is without knowledge, [for him] the senses are like wild horses that don't obey the driver of the chariot (1.3.5) and being without knowledge and unmindful does not reach the goal but wanders in samsara (1.3.7). Higher than sense objects is the mind, higher than that is the faculty of knowledge and higher than that is the self, and higher than that is the Unmanifest and higher than that is the purusha, who is the highest goal of the journey. He is the SELF in all existences and is seen by the seers of perfect understanding (1.3.9-12).
Who says there is a journey ? Only who thinks he is a finite individual with certain likes and dislikes thinks he is journeying. What exactly is the journey or the sadhana ? It is only the journey from who we think we are (a body-mind complex) to who we really are. There is a journey if we think we are the body-mind, but there is no journey if you already *know* you are the Atman. That is, one has to be careful at what level one is talking in. In the vyavahaara level, the senses have to be controlled and restraint placed on the senses to reach a "goal" but there is no difference between the seeker and the sought in the ultimate sense.
At death the physical and subtle bodies fall away. Let us look at some shruti and smriti passages (all verses are from memory, so please excuse me for errors). Chandogya 6.8.6 'Man departs, speech enters into manas, manas into prana, prana into tejas, ...' Shankara in the Brahma suutra bhashya (BSB) deals with this in great detail. It is in 4.2.1-5 (I think). As he says, speech herein means all the nine Indriyas. So the question arises 'Does the sense organ when it enters into Manas, dissolve in its functional activity or does in its very essence ? The answer is that only the functional activity (vritti), not the Indriyam that perishes. Shankara says, 'vaag-vR^itti manasi sampadyate'. Thus Shankara says that the functional activity of Manas dissolves in Prana. Only the function of Manas comes to rest in prana in one who falls asleep etc (Katha upan.). When it is mentioned in Chandogya that prana merges into heat (tejas), it enters not into heat, but into the adhyaksha (i.e the overseer). Who is the overseer of the body and organs ? Jeeva, as Shankara points out. Shankara quickly points out that the jeeva in this occassion is defined as Self (Atman) endowed with upadhis.
For those who might protest that jeeva is not mentioned in Chandogya passage, Shankara quotes from Brihad. 4.3.38 etc. The soul with the Indriyas, manas and prana further needs a vehicle (I think Shankara uses the word, aachraya) of material nature. This basis is called, suukshman sariira (subtle body). Shankara usually says in BSB that it is deha-viijaani bhuuta-suukshmaaNi "the elements which form the seed of the body.' In order to attain a future body, the soul must take with it this seed of the body, not just tejas alone because as Brihad. 4.4.5/6 says that 'The soul is nature of the five elements,' and the Smriti passages like Manu agree. The subtle body is extensively described by Shankara in 4.2.6-11 and also on the third chapter. As Shankara points out, the subtle body departs through the viens (for the "unrealized") and has the extension (tanutvam) and also transparency (svachchhatvam), which is the reason why people standing around a soon-to-be corpse don't see it leaving. The bodily warmth also proceeds from it (Shankara, quote from chandogya upan.), and the subtle body is not injured when the corpse is burned. The soul (jeeva) is accompanied with the subtle body, the latter exists as long as samsara exists.
Until the jeeva gains perfect knowledge, the subtle body is never destroyed. As Shankara clearly says, the rebirth takes place as based on this subtle body. What is the difference between a samsaric one and a jnani ? Shankara again says 'The ignorant passes with the subtle body to new embodiment, the knower passes on a special path to immortality.' Subtle body is a material vehicle, as required, without which there is no "going." Shankara also emphasises this. As he says, 'This subtle body formed out of heat etc...as it the bearer of organs etc., continues to exist until the entrance, until liberation from samsara, as that liberation follows upon perfect knowledge. Samsara continues for a person with a subtle body with persons 'attaining a mother's womb, another becomes a plant, as deemed by knowledge and deeds.'
Bondage has its ground only in false knowledge and can be "loosened" only by perfect knowledge that there are no differences. The "jeeva" goes through the series of lives *only* because the it thinks it is *different* from Atman/Brahman by identifying with one of the upadhis. This point is brought out in later verses of Katha upanishhad (which is how this discussion started in the first place), in which Yama says, 'As long as one see differences, the samsaric cycle continues.' Katha 2.1.10-11 ( I think). That is, the whole cycle is due to the fact we see differences at some level. That's why Advaita is called non-dualism and not monistic since it eliminates differences at all levels. Please refer to Shankara's BSB especially the IV.1 and IV.2. There is another book which is an good introduction called 'The goal and the way,' by Swami Satprakashnanda. Not that the journey of the soul is critically important for a person who wants to realize the seeker and the sought are the same (Brahman) here and now.
When so much emphasis in Vedanta is placed on liberation and freedom from rebirths, to say that you were never born (from an atman level) can not be understood by many people. For them, the journey of the subtle body is described in great detail. How it leaves the body, how it stays in svargaloka etc, and how it re-enters the body etc. That's why Shankara describes all this in his BSB and in his commentaries on upanishhad-s. But wait, in upadeshasahasri, when a disciple asks how he can be freed from rebirths, Shankara counters 'What makes you think you were born ? Atman never reincarnates.' Clearly, Shankara is talking to two classes to disciples. It is generally expected that the disciple who is concerned with knowing the journey of soul etc. will eventually devote all the energies to the "realization" of the Self, and nothing else. i.e., the disciple will "seek" the Self exclusively. The same goes for "creation" theories. Usually people are not satisfied by the straight forward approach taken by the mANDUkya upanishhad and instead want complicated theories.'
D : Is there any necessity to observe rituals and ceremonial worship ?
M : Yes. All such worship is also necessary. It may not be necessary for you. But that does not mean it is necessary for nobody and is no good at all. What is necessary for the infant class pupil is not necessary for the graduate. But even the graduate has to make use of the very alphabet he learnt in the infant class. He knows the full use and significance of the alphabet now.
When everything belongs to God, what is there to be renounced ? Most of us are like foolish bankers. A rich man deposits a lot of money in the bank and the banker thinks he/she owns the money ! And when the banker realizes that only the rich person has the money and not him, he/she is called a renunciate !! What have they renounced ? Only the false idea 'This is mine.'
As you know, it is the state in which the distinction between the seer and the seen disappears. Ramakrishna -- Suppose the husband of a young girl has come to his father-in-law's house and is seated in the drawing-room with other young men of his age. The girl and her friends are looking at them through the window. Her friends do not know her husband and ask her, pointing to one young man, `Is that your husband?' `No,' she answers, smiling. They point to another young man and ask if he is her husband. Again she answers no. They repeat the question, referring to a third, and she gives the same answer. At last they point to her husband and ask, `Is he the one?' She says neither yes nor no, but only smiles and keeps quiet. Her friends realise that he is her husband. One becomes silent on realising the true nature of Brahman.
A child is lost (separated) from its mother in a crowded county fair. The policeman shows the child a woman and asks 'Is this your Mother ?' The child cries and says 'Neti, Neti (no,no)' Then the policeman takes the child to another woman and asks the same question. The child wails louder and says 'No, No.' This goes on for sometime, and the child is short of tears, the throat is dry from crying. Finally, the policeman points to a woman who is the child's mother and asks 'Is this your mother ?' The child can not say anything, not even a muffled 'Ma', but just embraces Mother. There is no thought of I, only the thought of Mata.
savikalpa progresses to nirvikalpa and then to sahaja nirvikalpa. The 'Talks with Ramana Maharshi' has a table explaining the differences between these states. Look at it this way, one purifies the mind and stays in the natural state of nirvikalpa. Due to the inherent vaasanaa-s of the mind, the person does not stay in that state and "comes out of it" Till all vaasanaa-s are destroyed, sahaja nirvikalpa is not "attained." The first can be compared to a bucket lowered in a well and then pulled out while the latter is like the river running into the sea. After the river and sea has been mixed, they can not be separated. Please don't carry the analogies too far and say that there is no bucket, well, river, sea etc only the Self. A really advanced disciple only needs to hear the mahavakyas to lose all the perceived avidya. This is mentioned often in scriptures and RM. But we have all heard the mahavakyas many times, right ? The best instruction is in silence, but few are qualified to understand the silence. Instructions depend on the "maturity" of the student, not on the teacher. After all, if there is enough faith in the Guru/God, then theories etc. are not needed. But, as Shankara says, the normal mind can not cultivate enough faith unless it has been convinced. Otherwise, one may believe in a God for some time, and then "lose" faith. To lose the dehatma buddhi (I am the body/mind) is the toughest thing.
Sleep is due to two things : tiredness of the body and/or mind. The body requires approx. 4-6 hours of sleep, preferably between 10 pm-4 am. Anything more is not good. To control sleep, normally satvic food is advised (very less chilies, onions etc) and a diet primarly based on rice/wheat/milk. However, we should sleep and eat the required amounts (Bhagavad gita) in moderation. But, you must be doing all this unlike 'modern' people. So, the question arises, whether sleep is due to the mind. If the mind is tired, it will sleep.
It could be sleep is just overtaking you in spite of all attempts. In that case, just before you think you are going to sleep, meditate on a mantra and repeat it continously. You may fall asleep but the mantra is continuing in your sleep and when you wake up, your *first* thought will be the mantra, so continue with it. Slowly, you will conquer sleep. Then, you will realize that you require less than 3-4 hours of sleep per day. See Gandhi etc.
Ramana Maharshi talks about this also in 'Day by Day with Bhagavan.' Here is a short abstract from it, (page 241-2)
'Sleep is always mentioned in books as the first obstacle to samadhi and various methods are presecribed for overcoming it according to the stage of teh evolution of the person cocnerned. First, one is enjoined to give up all distraction by the world and its objects or by sleep. But then it is said, for instance in the Gita, that one need not give up sleep....One should not sleep at all during the daytime and even during the night sleep from about 10-2. But another method is prescribed is not to worry about it at all..Simply remain fixed in the Self or in meditation every moment of the waking life and take up meditation again when you wake and that will be enough. Then, even during sleep the same current of thought or meditation is working ....A good way to reduce the amount of sleep os to take sattvic food and that in moderation..'