#The Collected Works of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

straycode · 8 years ago

Text

Who am I?

An English translation of Nan Yar?

By Sri Sadhu Om INTRODUCTION

In the years 1901 to 1902, when Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi was living in Virupaksha cave on the Holy Hill Arunachala, a devotee by name Sri M. Sivaprakasam Pillai was attracted to Him and approached Him with a number of questions. Sri Bhagavan, who was at that time talking very little, not because of an vow but because He had no inclination to talk, answered most of his questions by writing either in the sand, on a plate or on scraps of paper. The teachings which Sri Sivaprakasam Pillai thus received were first published in 1923 in question and answer form under the title Nan Yar? (Who am I?). Soon afterwards, Sri Bhagavan Himself rearranged and rewrote these questions and answers in an essay form, thus making Nan Yar? into a connected and coherent exposition.

In addition to the question and answer version containing twenty-eight questions, which is nowadays published as a separate booklet, there is another version containing only fourteen questions, which is printed in Sri Ramana Vijayam (a Tamil biography of Sri Bhagavan), and an english translation of which is given in Self-Realisation. However, it is only the essay version of this work that is included in Sri Ramana Nutrirattu (the Tamil collected worked of Sri Ramana), and since this version was prepared by Sri Bhagavan Himself, it is to be considered as the principal, authentic and authoritative version.

The essay version was based largely upon the version containing twenty-eight questions and answers, but while preparing it Sri Bhagavan newly wrote and added some portions (such as the whole of the first paragraph), omitted other portions (such as the answers to questions 4 and 5, the first sentence of the answer to question 6, parts of the answer to question 20, and so on) and modified, expanded and improved other portions (such as the answer to question 27). However, most of the sentences He did not change at all, but simply rearranged the ideas and connected them in a more logical and coherent order.

The first question asked by Sri Sivaprakasam Pillai was, “Nan Yar?” (Who am I?), to which Bhagavan replied, “Arive nan”, which means “Knowledge alone is I”, the Tamil word “arivu” being approximately equivalent to the Sanscrit word “jnana” or the english word “knowledge”. Sivaprakasam Pillai then asked, “What is the nature of (this) knowledge?”, and Sri Bhagavan answered, “Arivin swarupam sat-chit-anandam” (The 2 nature of this knowledge is existence-consciousness-bliss). Except these two answers, the whole of the second paragraph was not part of the replies actually given by Sri Bhagavan. Therefore, when the manuscript of this work was first brought to Him by Sri Manikkam Pillai, the disciple of Sri Sivaprakasam Pillai, He asked with wonder, “I did not give this portion, how did it find place here?”1 “When Sivaprakasam Pillai was copying Bhagavan`s answers in his notebook, he added this portion thinking it would help him to understand that first answer more clearly”, explained Manikkam Pillai. “Oh yes, he was already familiar with the scriptural teaching ‘neti, neti’, and for that reason he would have thought so”, remarked Sri Bhagavan. Later, while preparing the essay version, Sri Bhagavan did not, however, omit this added portion, but simply marked His own answers in bold type.

Among all the prose works of Sri Bhagavan, Nan Yar? holds a place of undisputed and unequalled prominence. Indeed, it may be regarded as the very corner-stone of Sri Bhagavan`s teachings, for within these twenty brief paragraphs all His basic teachings are summarized in a clear and undiluted fashion. Therefore, on account of the importance of this work, for which we owe a great debt of gratitude to Sri Sivaprakasam Pillai 2. An English translation is given here.

While preparing this translation, an attempt has been made to make it as precise and as faithful to the original Tamil as possible, even if at times this had to be at the expense of an elegant style of English. The division of the text into paragraphs and sentences, and the order of the sentences, corresponds exactly to the original, and as far as possible the structure of each sentence is of the same form as that in the original. All the portions which are printed in bold in the original are also in bold in this translation, while other key sentences which are not in bold in Tamil have here been printed in italics. In the whole of the original text, only one word is within brackets, namely, in the fourth paragraph, the word “shines” (prakasikkum) after the word “Self appears”. All other portions which are within brackets in this translation have been included either to indicate the exact Tamil or Sanskrit word used in the original, or to make the meaning of the text more clear, or to complete the sense of a sentence which, when literally translated, does not form a complete or distinctly intelligible sentence in English. The footnotes have similarly been added in the translation and none of them are in the original. While translating, all the other existing translations of this work have also been closely compared in order that none of their good points (such as appropriate words, formations of sentences, and so on) should be missed in this translation.

TEXT Since all living beings (jivas) desire to be happy always, without any misery, since in everyone supreme love (parama priyam) exist only for oneself, and since happiness alone is the cause of love, in order to obtain that happiness, which is one’s very nature and which is experienced daily in deep sleep, where there is no mind, it is necessary for one to know oneself. For that, enquiry (jnana vichara) in the form “Who am I?” alone is the principal means (mukhya sadhana).

Who am I? The gross body, which is composed of the seven dhatus (chyle, blood, flesh, fat, marrow, bone and semen), is not “I”. The five sense organs (jnanendriyas), namely the ears, skin, eyes, tongue and nose, which individually and respectively know the five sense-knowledges (vishayas), namely sound, touch, sight, taste and smell, are not “I”. The five organs of action (karmendriyas), namely the mouth, legs, hands, anus, and genitals, the functions of which are (respectively) speaking, walking, giving, excreting and enjoying, are not “I”. The five vital airs such as prana, which perform the five vital functions such as respiration, are not “I”. Even the mind, which thinks, is not “I”. Even the ignorance (of deep sleep), in which only the latent tendencies towards sense-knowledges (vishaya-vasanas) remain and which is devoid of all sense knowledges and all actions, is not “I”. After negating as “not I, not I” all that is mentioned above, the knowledge which remains alone, itself is “I”. The nature of (this) knowledge is existence-consciousness-bliss (satchit-ananda).

If the mind, which is the cause (and base) of all knowledge (all objective knowledge) and all action, subsides, the perception of the world (jagat-drishti) will cease. Just as the knowledge of the rope, which is the base, will not be obtained unless the knowledge of the snake, the superimposition, goes, so the realization of the Self (swarupa-darsanam), which is the base, will not be obtained unless the perception of the world (jagat-drishti), which is a superimposition, ceases.

What is called mind (manam) is a wondrous power existing in the Self (atmaswarupam). It projects all thoughts. If we set aside all thoughts and see, there will be no such things as mind remaining separate; therefore, thought itself is the nature (or form) of the mind. Other than thoughts, there is no such thing as the world. In deep sleep there are no thoughts, (and hence) there is no world; in waking and dream there are thoughts, (and hence) there is the world also. Just as the spider spins out the thread from within itself and again withdraws it into itself, so the mind projects the world from within itself and again absorbs it into itself. When the mind comes out (rises) from the Self, the world appears. Therefore, when the world appears, Self will not appear; and when Self appears (shines), the world will not appear. If one goes on scrutinizing the nature of the mind, it will finally be found that “oneself” alone is (what is now mistaken to be) the mind. What is (here) called “oneself” (tan) is verily Self (atma-swarupam). The mind can exist only by always depending upon something gross (that is, only by always identifying a gross name-and-form, a body, as “I”); by itself it cannot stand. It is the mind alone that is called the subtle body (sukshma sarira) or soul (jiva).

That which rises in this body as “I” (“I am this body”) is the mind. If one enquires “In which place in the body does the thought ‘I’ rise first?”, it will be known to be in the heart (hridayam) 3. That is the source (literally, birth-place) of the mind. Even if one incessantly thinks “I, I”, it will lead to that place (our true state, Self). Of all the thoughts that rise in the mind, the thought “I” (the feeling “I am the body”) is the first thought. It is only after the rising of this that all other thoughts rise. It is only after the rising of the first person (the subject, “I”, whose form is the feeling “I am this body” or “I am so-and-so”) that the second and third persons (the objects, “you”, “he”, “she”, “it”, “this”, “that”, and so on) appear; without the first person, the second and third persons will not exist. The mind will subside only by means of the enquiry “Who am I?”. The thought “Who am I?” (which is but a means for turning our attention Selfwards), destroying all other thoughts, will itself finally be destroyed like the stick used for stirring the funeral pyre. If other thoughts rise (thereby indicating that Self-attention is lost), one should, without attempting to complete them, enquire “To whom did they rise?”. What does it matter however many thoughts rise? (The means to set aside thought-attention and regain Self-attention is as follows: ) At the very moment that each though rises, if one vigilantly enquires “To whom did this rise?”, it will be known “To me”. If one then enquires “Who am I?”, the mind (our power of attention) will turn back (from the thought) to its source (Self); (then, since no one is there to attend to it) the thought which had risen will also subside. By repeatedly practising thus, the power of the mind to abide in its source increases. When the mind (the attention), which is subtle, goes out through the brain and sense-organs (which are gross), the names-and-forms (the objects of the world), which are gross, appear; when it abides in the heart (its source, Self), the names-and-forms disappear. Keeping the mind in the heart (through the above-described means of fixing our attention in Self), not allowing it to go out, alone is called “Selfwardness” (ahamkham) or “introversion” (antarmukham). Allowing it to go out from the heart alone is called “extroversion” (bahirmukham). When the mind thus abides in the heart, the “I” (the thought “I”, the ego), which is the root of all thoughts, having vanished, the ever-existing Self alone will shine. The place (or state) where even the slightest trace of the thought “I” does not exist, alone is Self (swarupam). That alone is called silence (maunam). To be still (summa iruppadu) in this manner alone is called “seeing through (the eye of) knowledge” (jnana-drishti). To be still is to make the mind subside in Self (through Sef-attention). Other than this, knowing the thoughts of others, knowing the three times (past, present and future), knowing events in distant places – all these can nerver be jnana-drishti.

What really exists is Self (atma-swarupam) alone. The world, soul and God are superimpositions in It like the silver in the mother-of-pearl; these three appear simultaneously and disappear simultaneously. Self itself is the world; Self itself is “I” (the soul); Self itself is God; all is the Supreme Self (siva-swarupam).

To make the mind subside, there is no adequate means other than enquiry (vichara). If controlled by other means, the mind will remain as if subsided, but will rise again. Even by breath-control (pranayama) the mind will subside; however, the mind will remain subsided only so long as the breath (prana) remains subsided, and when the prana comes out the mind will also come out and wander under the sway of tendencies (vasanas). The source of the mind and of the prana is one and the same. Thought itself is the nature of the mind. The thought “I” is indeed the first thought of the mind; that itself is the ego (ahamkara). From where the ego originates, from there alone the breath also rises. Therefore, when the mind subsides the prana will also subside, and when the prana subsides the mind will also subside. But in deep sleep (sushupti), although the mind subsides, the prana does not subside. It is arranged thus by God`s plan for the protection of the body and so that others may not mistake the body to be dead. When the mind subsides in the waking state and in Self-absorption (samadhi), the prana subsides. The prana is the gross form of the mind. Till the time of death, the mind keeps the prana in the body, and when the body dies, the mind forcibly carries away the prana. Therefore, pranayama is a mere aid for controlling the mind, but will not bring about the destruction of the mind (mano-nasa).4

Just like the pranayama, meditation upon a form of God (murti-dhyana), repetition of sacred words (mantra-japa) and regulation of diet (ahara-niyama) are mere aids for controlling the mind (but will never by themselves bring about its destruction). Through murti-dhyana and through mantra-japa, the mind gains one-pointedness (ekagram). Just as when a chain is given to an elephant to hold in its trunk, which is always wandering (here and there trying to catch hold of things), that elephant will go along holding only the chain instead of trying to catch any other thing, so also when the mind, which is always wandering, is trained to hold on to any one name or form (of God), it will only cling to that. Because the mind branches out into innumerable thoughts, each thought becomes very weak. As thoughts subside more and more, one-pointedness is gained, and for the mind which has thereby gained strength, Self-enquiry (atma-vichara) will easily be attained.5 Through mita sattvika ahara-niyama6, which is the best of all regulations, the sattvic quality of the mind, having been increased, becomes and aid to Self-enquiry.

Although tendencies towards sense-objects (vishaya-vasanas), which have been recurring down the ages, rise in countless number like the waves of the ocean, they will all perish as Self-attention (swarupa-dhyana) becomes more and more intense. Without giving room even to the doubting thought, “Is it possible to destroy all these tendencies (vasanas) and to remain as Self alone?”, one should persistently cling fast to Self-attention. However great a sinner one may be, if, not lamenting “Oh, I am a sinner! How can I attain salvation?” but completely giving up even the thought that one is a sinner, one is steadfast in Self-attention, one will surely be saved 7.

As long as there are tendencies towards sense-objects (vishaya-vasanas) in the mind, so long the enquiry “Who am I?” is necessary. As and when thoughts rise, one should annihilate all of them through enquiry then and there in their very place of origin. Not attending to what-is-other (anya, that is, to any second or third person object) is non-attachment (vairagya) or desirelessness (nirasa); not leaving Self is knowledge (jnana). In truth, these two (desirelessness and knowledge) are one and the same. Just as a pearl-diver, tying a stone to his waist, dives into the sea and takes the pearl lying at the bottom, so everyone, diving deep within himself with non-attachment (vairagya), can attain the pearl of Self. If one resorts uninterruptedly to Self-remembrance (swarupa-smaranai, that is, remembrance of or attention to the mere feeling “I”) until one attains Self, that alone will be sufficient. As long as there are enemies within the fort, they will continue to come out. If one continues to cut all of them as and when they come, the fort will fall into our hands.

God and Guru are in truth not different. Just as the prey that has fallen into the jaws of a tiger cannot escape, so those who have come under the glance of the Guru`s Grace will surely be saved and will never be forsaken; yet, one should follow without fail the path shown by the Guru.

Remaining firmly in Self-abidance (atma-nistha), without giving even the least room to the rising of any thought other than the thought of Self (atmachintanai) 8, is surrendering oneself to God. However much burden we throw on God, He bears all of it. Since the one Supreme Ruling Power (parameswara sakti) is performing all activities, why should we, instead of yielding ourself to it, constantly think, “I should act in this way; I shoul act in that way”? When we know the train is bearing all the burdens, why should we who travel in it, instead of placing even our small luggage in it and being happily at ease, suffer by bearing it (our luggage) on our own head?

What is called happiness (sukham) is but the nature of Self; happiness and Self are not different. Self-happiness (atma-sukham) alone exists; that alone is real. There is no happiness at all in even a single one of the things of the world. We think we derive happiness from them on account of our wrong discrimination (aviveka). When the mind comes out, it experiences misery (duhkam). In truth, whenever our thoughts (desires) are fulfilled, the mind, turning back to its source (Self), experiences Self-happiness alone. Similarly, during the time of sleep, Self-absorption (samadhi) and swoon, and when the things that we like are obtained and when evil befalls the things that we dislike, the mind becomes introverted and experiences Self-happiness alone. In this way the mind wanders without rest, going out leaving the Self, and (then again) returning within. Under the tree, the shade is delightful. Outside, the sun`s heat is scorching. A person who is wandering outside reaches the shade and is cooled. After a while he starts out, but, unable to bear the scorching of the heat, comes again under the tree. In this ways, he is engaged in going from the shade into the hot sunshine, and coming back from the hot sunshine into the shade. He who acts in this manner is a person lacking discrimination (aviveki). But a person of discrimination (viveki) will never leave the shade. Similarly, the mind of the Sage (jnani) never leaves Brahman (that is, Self). But the mind of the ignorant one (ajnani) is such that wandering in the world it suffer, and turning back to Brahman for a while enjoys happiness. What is called the world is nothing but thought. When the world disappears, that is, when there is no thought, the mind experiences bliss (ananda); when the world appears, it experiences misery.

Just as in the mere presence of the sun, which rises without desire (ichcha), intention (sankalpa) or effort (yatnam), the sun-stone (the magnifying lens) emits fire, the lotus blossoms, water evaporates and people begin, perform and stop their work, and just as in front of a magnet the needle moves, so it is through the mere influence of the presence of God, who is without intention (sankalpa), that the souls (jivas), who are governed by the three divine functions (muttozhil) or five divine functions (panchakrityas)9, perform and stop their activities in accordance with their respective karmas (that is, in accordance not only with their prarabdha karma or destiny, but also with their purva karma-vasanas or former tendencies towards action). Nevertheless, He (God) is not one who has intention (sankalpa). Not even a single action (karma) will affect (literally, touch) Him. That is like the actions in the world not affecting the sun, and like the good and bad qualities of the other four elements (namely earth, water, air and fire) not affecting the all-pervading space (the fifth element).

Since it is said in all the scriptures that in order to attain liberation (mukti) one should control 10 the mind, after coming to know that mind-control (mano-nigraha) alone is the final decision (injunction) of the scriptures, to read the scriptures unlimitedly is fruitless. In order to control the mind, it is necessary to enquire who one is, (then) how, instead (of enquiring thus within oneself) to enquire (and know who one is) in the scriptures? One should know oneself through one`s own eye of knowledge (jnana-kan). For Rama to know himself to be Rama, is a mirror necessary? “Oneself”11 is within the five sheaths (pancha kosas); whereas the scriptures are outside them. Therefore, enquiring in the scriptures about oneself, who is to be enquired into (attended to) setting aside even the five sheaths, is futile. Enquiring “Who am I that am in bondage?” and knowing one`s real nature (swarupam) alone is liberation (mukti). Always keeping the mind (the attention) fixed in Self (in the feeling “I”) alone is called “Self-enquiry” (atma-vichara); whereas meditation (dhyana) is thinking oneself to be the Absolute (brahman), which is existence-consciousness-bliss (sat-chit-ananda). All that one has learnt will at one time have to be forgotten.

Just as is fruitless for one to scrutinize the garbage which is to be collectively thrown away, so it is fruitless for one who is to know himself to count the number and scrutinize the properties of the tattvas (the principles that constitute the world, soul and God) which are veiling oneself, instead of collectively casting all of them aside 12. One should consider the universe (one`s whole life in this world) to be like a dream.

Except that waking is long and dream is short 13, there is no difference (between the two). To the extent to which all the events which happen in waking appear to be real, to that same extent even the events which happen in dream appear at that time to be real. In dream, the mind assumes another body. In both waking and dream, thoughts and names-and-forms (objects) come into existence simultaneously (and hence there is no difference between these two states).

There are not two minds, a good mind and a bad mind. The mind is only one. Tendencies (vasanas) alone are of two kinds, auspicious (subha) and inauspicious (asubha). When the mind is under the influence of auspicious tendencies it is called a good mind, and when it is under the influence of inauspicious tendencies, a bad mind. However bad others may appear to be, one should not dislike them. Likes and dislikes are both to be disliked. One should not allow the mind to dwell much upon worldly matters. As far as possible, one should not interfere in the affairs of others. All that one gives to others, one gives only to oneself. If this truth is known, who indeed will not give to others?

If oneself (the ego) rises, all will rise; if oneself subsides, all will subside. To the extent to which we behave humbly, to that extent (and that extent only) will good result. If one can remain controlling the mind (keeping the mind subsided), one can live anywhere.

1 Since the nature of Sri Bhagavan is to avoid using the obscure terminology of the scriptures (sastras) and thereby confusing the reader, He would not have liked to mention all the scriptural classifications of the non-Self given in this portion.

2 The reader may be interested to hear the following incident, which indicates that this sincere and whole-hearted disciple attained the goal for which he so earnestly sought. When, in 1948, a telegram was brought to Sri Bhagavan conveying the news of the passing away of Sri Sivraprakasam Pillai, He remarked, “Sivaprakasam sivaprakasamanar”, which means “Sivraprakasam has become Sivaprakasam, the light of Siva!”

3 As a general rule, whenever Sri Bhagavan uses the word “place” (idam), He is refering to our true state, Self, rather than to a place limited by time and space. This is confirmed in the next paragraph of this work, where He says, “The place (idam) where even the slightest trace of the thought “I” does not exist, alone is Self (swarupam)”. Therefore, when He says in this sentence, “If one enquires ‘In which place in the body….”, what He in fact expects us to do is to enquire “From what?”, in which case the answer will not be a place in the body, but only “we”, Self, the truly existing Thing (refer to pages 109 to 110 of The Path of Sri Ramana, Part One). Hence, as Sri Bhagavan Himself often explained, the true import of the word “heart” (hridayam) is not a limited place in the body, but only the unlimited Self (refer to Upadesa Manjari, chapter two, answer to question 9). However, since the mind or ego can rise only by identifying a body as “I”, a place for its rising can also be pointed out in the body, “two digits to the right from the centre of the chest”, though of course such a place can never be the absolute reality.

4 Since the mind is able to carry away the prana forcibly at the time of death, we have to understand that the prana is less powerful than the mind. That is why Sri Bhagavan says that pranayama is merely an aid for controlling the mind, but that it cannot bring about the destruction of the mind. If, on the other hand, the mind is controlled (made to subside) through Self-enquiry (atma-vichara) and right knowledge (jnana), that alone will be sufficient, and we need not then bother about controlling the prana.

5 The reader may here refer to pages 73-76 (of The Path of Sri Ramana, Part One), where it is explained precisely in which manner the practice of japa and dhyana may be an aid, making it easy to attain Self-abidance, which is Self-enquiry. In this context, we would also do well to remember the following instruction of Sri Bhagavan: “One should not use the name (or form) of God mechanically and superficially, without the feeling of devotion (bhakti). To use the name of God, one must call upon Him with yearning and unreservedly surrender to Him.” (Maharshi`s Gospel, Book One, chapter four).

6 Mita sattvika ahara-niyama means regulating one`s diet by taking only moderate quantities of food (mita ahara) and by strictly avoiding non-sattvic foods, that is, all non-vegetarian foods such as eggs, fish and meat, all intoxicants such as alcohol and tobacco, excessively pungent, sour and salty tastes, excess of onions and garlics, and so on. Furthermore, the Sanskrit word “ahara” means “that which is taken in”, so in a broader sense ahara-niyama means not only regulation of diet, but also regulation of all that is taken in by the mind through the five senses.

7 The Tamil Word used here is “uruppaduvam”, which in an ordinary sense means “will be properly shaped”, “will be reformed” or “will succeed in one`s endeavour”, but in a deeper sense means “will attain Self” (uru = Self or swarupa; paduvam = will attain or will be establish in).

8 “The thought of Self” (atma-chintanai) means only Self-attention. Though Sri Bhagavan here uses the word “thought” (chintanai) to denote Self-attention, it is to be understood that Self-attention is not a mental activity. Attending to Self is nothing but abiding as Self, and hence it is not a “doing” but “being”, that is, it is not a mental activity but our natural state of mere existence. Refer to the first benedictory verse of Ulladu Narpadu (quoted on page 94 of The Path of Sri Ramana, Part One), in which Sri Bhagavan has revealed that the correct way to “think of” (meditate upon) Self is to abide in Self as Self.

9 According to the different classifications given in scriptures, the divine functions are said to be three, namely creation (srishti), sustenance (sthiri) and destruction (samhara), or five, namely these three plus veiling (tirodhana) and Grace (anugraha).

10 The Tamil Word used here by Sri Bhagavan for “control” is “adakku”, which literally means “make subside” or “make cease from activity”. Such control (adakkam) or subsidence (odukkam) may be either temporary (mano-laya or temporary subsidence of mind) or permanent (mano-nasa or complete destruction of the mind), as said by Sri Bhagavan in verse 13 of Upadesa Undhiyar. In this context, however, the word “control” (adakku) means only “destroy”, for Sri Bhagavan has revealed in verse 40 of Ulladu Narpadu that destruction of the ego (or mind) alone is liberation.

11 In this context, the Word “oneself” (tan) denotes the ego, which identifies the five sheaths as “I” and “my place”, rather than Self, which is beyond all limitations such as “in” and “out”. Just as Rama does not need a mirror in order to know that the body called “Rama” is himself, since the feeling “I am Rama, this body” is within that body, so we do not need scriptures to know that we exist, since the feeling of our existence is not within the scriptures but only within the five sheaths, which are now felt to be “I”. Therefore, in order to know who we are, we must attend not to the scriptures, which are outside the five sheaths, but only to the feeling “I”, which is within the five sheaths. Moreover, since the five sheaths are veiling our true nature, even they are to be set aside (left unattended to) when we thus enquire into (attend to) ourself.

12 From the opinion of Sri Bhagavan expressed in this sentence, the reader can now understand why it was said in the first footnote of the introduction [page 2, footnote 1], “…He would not have liked to mention all the scriptural classifications of the non-Self (the tattvas which are veiling our true nature) given in this portion”.

13 Though Sri Bhagavan says that waking is long and dream is short, He reveals the actual truth in verse 560 of Guru Vachaka Kovai, where He says: “The answer ‘Waking is long and dream is short’ was given as a mere (formal) reply to the questioner. (In truth, however, no such difference exists, because, since time itself is a mental conception,) the conception of differences in time (such as “long” and “short”) appears to be true only because of the deceitful play of maya, the mind.”

0 notes

shinymoonbird · 3 years ago

Photo

sriramanamaharshi.org - photo-galleries

ॐ Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Arunachala Ramanaya ॐ

Arunachala Ramana

Amritanatha Yati fez a seguinte pergunta escrita num papel, num verso Malaiala:

“ Quem é este Ramana na gruta de Arunachala, que é conhecido como o tesouro da compaixão? Ele é Hari [Vishnu] Shivaguru [Subrahmanya], Yativara [Shiva] ou Vararuchi [o principal erudito da corte do rei Vikramaditya]? Estou desejoso de conhecer a mahima [grandeza] do Guru. ”

Bhagavan, ao dar a resposta, escreveu-a na mesma métrica Malaiala, no mesmo papel. Uma tradução é fornecida abaixo para o benefício dos devotos. A resposta fala por si mesma.

“Nos recessos dos Corações em forma de lótus de todos, começando com Vishnu, brilha como puro intelecto (Consciência Absoluta), o Paramatman, que é o mesmo que Arunachala Ramana. Quando a mente se derrete de amor por Ele, e atinge o recesso mais íntimo do Coração onde Ele habita como o amado, o olho subtil do intelecto puro se abre e Ele se revela como Consciência Pura. ”

Fonte: The Collected Works of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi, pág. 143

https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Ramana-Maharshi-Collected-Works.pdf

🕉️

Um artigo sobre este assunto, de David Godman:

Who Were You, Ramana? https://www.davidgodman.org/who-were-you-ramana/

🕉️

#Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi #Arunachala #Amritanatha Yati #who were you ramana #The Collected Works of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi #David Godman #Arunacalaramana paramatman #arunachalaramanam #arunachalaramana paramatman

3 notes · View notes

shinymoonbird · 3 years ago

Photo

Sri Vidya Havan - Sri Ramanasrama

Sri Vidya Havan is an elaborate worship of the Divine Mother as enjoined in the sacred scriptures. The priests offer oblations in fire concluding with Purna Ahuti symbolic of total self-offering.

The Divine Mother

Hindu scriptures say that the Divine effulgence of the Supreme Lord Shiva manifested in a cosmic female Form to confront and destroy very powerful demons promoting unrighteousness in the universe. Sages were overwhelmed with gratitude at the compassionate intervention by the Divine Mother. They composed liturgies on Her glory and established procedures for the proper worship of the Divine Mother.

Sri Ramana Maharshi and the Divine Mother

Sri Ramana Maharshi composed a verse in Tamil which states the warning given by the Divine Mother to wicked people. In “the collected works of Sri Ramana Maharshi” under the heading “The glory of Arunachala” the Divine Mother is quoted by the Maharshi as giving the following stern warning to wicked people:

Devi said:

‘This is always the abode of pious devotees. Those who do evil to others here will, after suffering ills, be destroyed. Wicked persons will be completely bereft of their powers to do evil here in the twinkling of an eye. Do not fall into the burning fire of the anger of Lord Arunachala who has assumed the form of a hill of fire.’

Sri Ramana Maharshi’s interest in Meru Prasthara Chakra

We find the following in a book written by Sadhu Arunachala (Major Chadwick):

“Bhagavan was deeply interested in the construction of the Shrine built over his Mother’s tomb. He attended every function in connection with it, placing his hands in blessing on the various objects that were to be enclosed in the walls. At night, when no one was about he would walk round and round the construction consecrating it. That he should take such a demonstrative part in anything has a very deep significance. It was extremely rare and has been doubted by many, but I myself was an eye-witness to these things and can vouch for their truth.

He took a personal interest in the cutting of the Sri Chakra Meru in granite which was installed in the completed temple and is regularly worshipped. This is about one and a half feet square and proportionately high. At the time of the Kumbhabhishekam, on the penultimate night before the sacred water was poured over the images, he personally superintended the installation in the inner shrine. It was an extremely hot night and with three charcoal retorts for melting the cement adding to the heat, it must have been intolerable inside the airless cave of the inner shrine, but for about an hour and a half Bhagavan sat there telling the workmen what to do.

On the last night of the function he went in procession, opening the doors of the new Hall and temple and passing straight up into the Inner Shrine, where he stood for some five minutes with both hands laid on the Sri Chakra in blessing. I happened that night to be at his side the whole time; this was unusual as I deliberately avoided taking prominent part in such things, preferring to watch from the back. Strangely, something made me keep by him on this occasion and on account of this I was able to understand his deep interest in the Temple and especially in the Sri Chakra. It was because of this knowledge that I was instrumental after Bhagavan’s passing, in persuading the Ashram authorities to institute the Sri Chakra Poojas six times a month. The explanation for this unusual action on Bhagavan’s part may be found in the necessity that Siva must be always accompanied by Shakti. The world would stop otherwise. On the only occasion when such a Pooja was performed shortly after the dedication of the Temple during the life of Bhagavan, he refused to go for his evening meal but insisted on remaining a witness of it until the end. When someone remarked how magnificent it had been and it would be a good thing if such Poojas could be performed regularly, “Yes,” replied Bhagavan, “but who will take the trouble?” The trouble is being taken now and it undoubtedly has the blessings of Bhagavan.

I do not think that anyone who has written about Bhagavan and the Ashram has remarked on the extraordinary fact that here we have a Temple dedicated by a Jnani; there cannot be very many such, and there must be some very deep meaning in it. A great many devotees who come to the Ashram have only time for the Samadhi where Bhagavan was interred. I do not pretend myself to understand why he did it or what will be the consequences, but it is certain that having been consecrated in this way it must for ever be a very sacred spot and from it spiritual power must radiate all over India.”

Sri Ramana Maharshi inspires sacred hymns in praise of the Divine Mother

Sri T. K. Sundaresa Iyer a devotee and a long term associate of Sri Ramana Maharshi writes in “At the Feet of Bhagavan”:

“Devotees of Sri Bhagavan are aware only of his famous ‘Upadesa Saram’ and a few isolated verses as His contributions to the ‘Language of the Gods’ (Sanskrit). So it is necessary to place on record His contribution to the famous ‘Uma Sahasram’ — thousand verses on Uma, the Divine Mother sung by His great disciple, the learned Sri Kavyakanta Ganapati Muni. This story shows the Maharshi as the joint author of this composition.

Sri Bhagavan was then living in the Pachaiamman Temple, the abode of Maragathambal, on the north eastern slopes of Sri Arunachalam. In those days the Maharshi would sit and sleep in a hammock slung between two stone pillars and be rocked as a darling child by His loving pupils.

Sri Kavyakanta had composed 700 stanzas on Uma in some thirty different meters, and had announced to his devotees in various parts of the country that this poem would be dedicated on a certain Friday in the Shrine of Sri Uma in the great Temple of Sri Arunachaleswara. Over a hundred persons gathered at the Pachaiamman Temple so as to be present on the occasion. Now these Sanskrit verses were not a mere intellectual display by Sri Kavyakanta, great as he was in Sanskrit composition. Proof of his great intellectual capacity may be had from the very fact that in the presence of the heads of the UdipiMaths he composed extempore in a single hour the hundred verses of the ‘Ghantaa sataka,’ giving the cream of the teaching of the three main schools of Hindu Philosophy.

His ‘Uma Sahasram’ is different from other compositions in that it is pasyanti vak, i.e. revealed by the Divine Mother in Her own words to one who is adept in the Kundalini Yoga.

At about 8 p.m. on the evening before the dedication day, after supper, Sri Maharshi asked Sri Kavyakanta whether the dedication would have to be postponed to some other Friday, as 300 verses were still to be composed to complete the thousand. But Sri Kavyakanta assured Bhagavan that he would complete the poem immediately.

The scene that followed can hardly be believed by one who did not actually witness it. Sri Maharshi sat silent and in deep meditation like the silent Lord Dakshinamurthy. The eager disciples watched in tense admiration the sweet flow of divine music in Sanskrit verse as it came from the lips of the great and magnetic personality of Sri Kavyakanta. He stood there delivering the verses in an unbroken stream while disciples eagerly gathered the words and wrote them down. Oh, for the ecstasy of it all! Life is indeed blessed if only to experience those divine moments.

The ‘Sahasram’ was finished in several meters Madalekha, Pramanika, Upajati Aryagiti, etc. For a while the disciples present enjoyed the deep ecstasy of the silence pervading the atmosphere, as Sri Kavyakanta concluded with the normal type of colophone. Then Sri Bhagavan opened His eyes and asked, “Nayana, has all that I said been taken down?” From Sri Ganapati Muni came the ready and grateful response, “Bhagavan, all that Bhagavan inspired in me has been taken down!”

It is thus clear that Sri Bhagavan inspired the final 300 verses of the ‘Uma Sahasram’ through the lips of Sri Kavyakanta, without speaking a word, as usually understood, or rather in the silence characteristic of the Silent Sage of Arunachala. It is noteworthy that whereas Sri Kavyakanta revised the first 700 verses of this monumental work some six times, he did not revise any of the last 300. This being Sri Bhagavan’s own utterance, there was no need to “polish them.” These 300 verses are to be considered as Sri Bhagavan’s unique contribution to Sanskrit poetry.”

Source: Sri Ramanasramam

#Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi #Sri Vidya Havan #Meru Prasthara Chakra #Sri Chakra #Divine Mother #Uma Sahasram

7 notes · View notes

shinymoonbird · 3 years ago

Photo

Standing, middle row, second from left: Muruganar. Standing behind Ramana with uncrossed arms: Polur Ranga Rao. Standing in back, 3rd from left, in front of edge of window: Ramakrishna Swami. Furthest right: Mastan. Immediately to Ramana's right (our left): B.V. Narasimha Swami, with pencil and paper. Circa 1929. (Saranagathi - October.2014, pg.8)

ॐ

Some Early Devotees of Ramana Maharshi

The Path of Self-Knowledge

Chapter 10 of the biography “Ramana Maharshi And The Path Of Self-Knowledge“ written by Arthur Osborne.

AN ANONYMOUS DEVOTEE

A visitor came to Virupaksha, and although he stayed only five days he so obviously had the Grace of Sri Bhagavan that Narasimhaswami, who was collecting material for the biography, Self-Realization, on which a great part of the present work is based, made a point of noting his name and address.

There was an elation, a serenity about him, and the radiant eyes of Sri Bhagavan shone on him. Each day he composed a Tamil song in praise of Sri Bhagavan so ecstatic, so spontaneous, so overflowing with joy and devotion, that among all the songs composed, these are of the few that have continued to be sung.

Later Narasimhaswami visited Satyamangalam, the town he had named, to collect more particulars about him, but no such person was known there. It has been pointed out that the name means ‘Abode of Blessedness’ and suggested that the visitor may have been an emissary from some hidden ‘Abode of Blessedness’ come to pay homage to the Sadguru of the age.

One of his songs hails Sri Bhagavan as ‘Ramana Sadguru’. Once when it was being sung Sri Bhagavan himself joined in. The devotee who was singing it laughed and said, “This is the first time I have heard anyone singing his own praise.”

Sri Bhagavan replied, “Why limit Ramana to these six feet? Ramana is universal.”

One of the five songs is so instinct with the joys of dawn and awakening that one can well believe it may have celebrated the true dawn for him who composed it:

Dawn is rising on the Hill, Sweet Ramana, come! Lord Arunachala, come!

In the bush the koel sings, Dear Master, Ramana, come! Lord of Knowledge, come!

The conch blows, the stars are dim. Sweet Ramana, come! Lord God of Gods, come!

The cocks crow, the birds chirp, It is already time, come! The night has fled, come!

The trumpets blow, the drums beat Gold-bright Ramana, come! Knowledge Awake, come!

The crows caw, it is morn, Snake-decked Lord, come! [1] Blue-throated Lord, come! [1]

Ignorance is fled, the lotuses [2] open, Wise Lord Ramana, come! Crown of the Vedas, come!

Unstained by qualities, Lord of Liberation, Gracious Ramana, come! Lord Peace, come!

Sage and Lord, One with Being-Knowledge-Bliss, Lord dancing in joy, [3] come!

Love on the summit of Knowledge, Past pleasure, past pain, come! Blissful Silence, come!

Footnote: [1] An epithet of Siva. [2] This implies also ‘the hearts’. [3] An epithet of Siva.

Bhagavan Ramana Painting by Kumar Artist

ॐ

#Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi #B.V. Narasimha Swami #Abode of Blessedness #song #stories of Ramana Maharshi's devotees #Kumar artist

8 notes · View notes

shinymoonbird · 7 years ago

Quote

Is there any way of adoring the Supreme which is all, except by abiding firmly as That!

The Collected Works of Sri Ramana Maharshi (pdf) - Invocation

#Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi #Collected Works #Invocation #Supreme Reality #undivided reality

4 notes · View notes

shinymoonbird · 5 years ago

Photo

https://www.davidgodman.org/bhagavans-deposition-on-arunachala/

A 1949 view of the path to Skandashram on the eastern slopes of Arunachala. Near the top of the photo is the clump of trees around Skandashram.

☀

In the late 1930s Bhagavan made a legal deposition on behalf of the Arunachaleswara Temple which was fighting to retain control over a portion of Arunachala. In his submission Bhagavan spoke about his own relationship with the hill and provided evidence of the historical sanctity of the mountain.

☀

Bhagavan’s Deposition on Arunachala - I

Until the 1930s the eastern slope of the mountain of Arunachala was administered by the Arunachaleswara Temple in Tiruvannamalai. Prior to 1934, its right to do so had been accepted by everyone on and around the hill. From time immemorial the temple authorities had maintained the tanks and temples on the mountain, put out any fires that broke out, and arranged for all the forest produce to be sold in an orderly manner. The unquestioned authority that the temple authorities had wielded over this area had arisen because of the local tradition that the hill was Siva Himself manifesting in the form of a lingam. Since the belief was widespread and largely unchallenged, the local people felt that it was natural and correct that the main temple in Tiruvannamalai should administer all affairs pertaining to the hill.

This traditional arrangement was challenged by the Government of India in 1934. In May that year the Government issued a notification in the district gazette which stated that the whole of Arunachala was a reserve forest and was thus the property of the Government of India. The temple authorities challenged the Government’s order in court, maintaining that the temple was the legitimate owner of 1,750 acres on the eastern side of the hill. This area included all the tanks and temples on the slope of the mountain that begins at the back of the Arunachaleswara Temple.

One of the temple trustees approached Bhagavan and requested him to give evidence to the court that would support the Arunachaleswara Temple’s claim to the land. Bhagavan agreed and in 1938 lawyers for the plaintiff and the defendant came to the ashram to hear his evidence and to cross-examine him on it. Bhagavan’s initial evidence took the form of a written deposition. A small part of this deposition was recorded in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 492. The full text is given below.

I came to Tiruvannamalai in the year 1896 and lived on the hill from 1899 to 1922. In that year this ashram was started, and since then I have been living here [at Sri Ramanashram]. From the time I first lived on the hill, all the hill areas have been in the possession of the Devasthanam [the Arunachaleswara Temple authorities]. The ashram on the hill where I used to live was started in 1902. The building which is there now was completed in the year 1916. This particular ashram was built with the permission and kindness of the Devasthanam. [The permission was oral, for no written Government order or permission was ever received]. From the year 1899 until a date a few years after I left Skandashram, the front side [the eastern slope] of the hill was never in the possession of the Government.

Having given his views on the ownership of the hill, Bhagavan then cited a few examples of how well the temple authorities had administered the hill during the period when he had been living on it.

[Many years ago] a man called Saraswathy Swami lived on the hill. That Swami advertised that he intended to perform a ceremonial worship of an image of Lord Subramania [on the hill]. The Devasthanam objected and stopped it. In an official notice they said that the hill itself is linga swarupa [God in the form of a lingam] and that to perform worship of another deity on it, and to celebrate a festival there, was against the tradition of the sastras. On another occasion, when my mother attained [samadhi], they raised a precautionary objection that her samadhi should not be on the hill. They feared that we might build her samadhi on the hill itself. On this occasion also their objection was that the hill was Iswara swarupa [God’s own physical form].

In those days the Devasthanam authorities gave out orders that the wood cutters should not cut the trees on the hill. Every year during the time I was on the hill the Devasthanam gave licences to various people to cut the grass and to collect the other forest products. Whenever there was a fire on the hill, it was put out at the expense of the Devasthanam. On one occasion when we happened to cut some of the cacti that were causing an inconvenience to the ashram, and then burned them, the Devasthanam objected, saying that we should not have a fire in that place. All these incidents took place on the eastern slope. This eastern slope has fixed boundaries.

Bhagavan then went on the describe why the hill was sacred and why, in his opinion, the temple authorities should be allowed to administer it.

There is an aitikya [tradition] that this hill is linga swarupa, that is to say, that this hill itself is God. This aitikya is not to be found anywhere else. That is the cause of the glory of this place. The tradition of this place is that this hill is the form of God and that in its real nature it is full of light. Every year the Deepam festival celebrates the real nature of the mountain as light itself. Authority for this is found in the Vedas, the Puranas and in the stotras [poems] of devotees. Because this tradition maintains that this hill is Siva swarupa, the practice of giri pradakshina, walking clockwise around the mountain as an act of reverence or worship, has arisen. I also have faith in giri pradakshina and have had experience of it.

There is no sastra to separate the hill from the temple. The inseparability of the hill and the temple can be observed during Kartikai Deepam when the festival [of kindling the light] is conducted simultaneously in the temple and on the summit of the hill. Further proof of the tradition that the hill is the form of God can be found in the bi-annual festivals in which the image of Arunachaleswara in the temple performs pradakshina of the hill.

In the account in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi Bhagavan is reported to have also said:

‘Siva always remains in three forms: 1) as parabrahman; 2) as linga (here as the hill); and 3) as siddha.’

The third category refers to Siva in the form of Arunagiri Yogi whom Bhagavan said resides on the north slope of the hill. Although this quotation summarises views that Bhagavan had expressed on other occasions, there is no record of this remark in the court transcript.

The bare eastern slope of Arunachala around 1980. The trees midway up the photo on the left are the ones at Skandashram. The gopuram in the centre, near the bottom of the photo, is the entrance to Guhai Namasivaya Temple.

Bhagavan continued:

In accordance with the tradition that the hill is Iswara swarupa, the Devasthanam performs abhishekam to the top of the hill in the same way that it would do to a lingam. For the last ten to twelve years the cauldron that contains the Deepam light on the top of the hill is carried to the summit every year during the festival. Prior to this, for many, many years, the cauldron was left there throughout the year.

I am a devotee of Arunachaleswara. I have composed a poem in Tamil which says that the Arunachala hill is Iswara swarupa.

The Government’s lawyer objected to Bhagavan introducing this poem as evidence, but the objection was overruled. It seems that no one recorded the original Tamil verse. It now only exists in the following English translation:

Lord Arunachala appeared out of the hill and at the request of Brahma and Vishnu merged back in the hill. Simultaneously he manifested as the lingam at the bottom of the hill. The hill continues to represent the Lord.

A similar idea, which may be derived from this verse, can be found in the account in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi:

‘Siva originally appeared as a column of light. On being prayed to, the light disappeared into the hill and manifested as [a] lingam. Both are Siva.’

After Bhagavan had submitted his verse, the case was adjourned for five days. On its resumption, Bhagavan added a few extra comments on the traditions and mythology of the hill.

Even after this [the time when Siva appeared to Brahma and Vishnu in the form of Light] Ishan [Iswara] appeared to Devi in the form of Light before disappearing graciously into the form of the hill.

There are many ancient tirthams [sacred tanks] that exist on the hill. Among them the Mulaipal Tirtham and the Pada Tirtham, are important. There is a tradition that these tirthams were created by Siva and Parvati for the sake of Guhai Namasivaya.

The Government’s lawyer then began his cross-examination of Bhagavan, questioning him in detail on some of the statements he had made. Only Bhagavan’s answers are recorded in the court transcript. I have separated the text into paragraphs in such a way that I hope each paragraph constitutes a different answer. I leave the reader to infer what the questions might have been.

I lived in Virupaksha Cave for sixteen years. I lived in Skandashram for six years. I have stayed at this place [Sri Ramanashram] since 1922.

I constructed a building at Virupaksha Cave. No written permission was obtained from anyone for the construction of the building.

Skandashram was started in 1902. The building was completed in the year 1916. Even after that date some construction work was carried on.

At first it [Skandashram] began as a tirtham. Later it developed into a place of residence. Before Skandashram came into existence, moisture was found in another location nearby. Its source was in a rock that was twenty yards away. This tirtham is now located between Skandashram and Virupaksha Cave. It was only later that the Skandashram tirtham came into being.

Because it [Skandashram] was built by a person called Kandan who lived in the ashram, by his own hands, it became known as Skandashram. That tirtham [I just spoke about] is attached to that ashram.

No order was received from anyone for building this ashram [Skandashram]. Because I was staying there, no one objected. On the contrary, they approved of it.

During the time I lived on the hill, no written order was ever obtained from anyone to make living facilities. Nor was any order obtained when repairs were carried out in some of these places.

They were not done on my authority; others did them as their own work. I did not tell them to build, nor did I prevent them. In this manner Skandashram, Virupaksha Cave and Sri Ramanasramam came into being. The other ashrams on the hill also came into existence in this way. No written orders were received for their construction.

I knew about the notice issued to Saraswathy Swami by the Devasthanam. But I do not remember the year in which it happened. I heard that the notice had been given.

During the period I was on the hill, a vel [spear] and a statue were in the temple [of Subramania]. They [the Devasthanam] did not object to the statue being kept in that place; their objection was to popularising it through public celebrations.

There are places to stay both at Virupaksha Cave and Guhai Namasivaya Temple. It is not known whether they contain the samadhis [of the two saints who founded them]. In Guhai Namasivaya there is a lingam. In Virupaksha Cave there is an altar. In Guhai Namasivaya puja and abhishekam are done to the lingam. At the altar in Virupaksha Cave, only puja is done. It is the popular belief that both of these places are samadhis.

The time when Virupaksha Deva and Guhai Namasivaya attained samadhi may be around 300 or 400 years ago. I do not know when the buildings were first started in those places.

It is stated in the Upanishads and in the Skanda, Linga and Siva Puranas that this hill is Iswara swarupa.

I cannot say without referring to the books in which Upanishad and in which place it is stated so.

There was a jadai swami [a swami with long matted locks] who used to live on the hill. He died there. His body was brought down to the foot of the hill and interred. The same thing happened to Palaniswami. A samadhi cannot be made on the hill for anyone who dies there. They can only be burned after bringing them to the foot of the hill. Once a person died near Seven Springs [two thirds of the way up the mountain]. His samadhi was also made at the foot of the hill.

Jadai Swami attained samadhi about four of five years ago. The others attained samadhi after 1901 and before 1920.

I had no thought of having my mother’s samadhi on the hill. I did not tell anyone that the samadhi should be made on the hill.

I have omitted several of Bhagavan’s answers. Some of them merely repeat what he said earlier while others pertain not to Arunachala but to rather mundane matters of ashram administration.

~ David Godman

☀ ☀ ☀ Continues in “Bhagavan’s Deposition on Arunachala - II”

The path from Skandashram to Ramanasramam before it was reforested in the 1990s.

☀

11 notes · View notes