Be Who You Are Read online

  Now let us consider your second problem. This we have often analysed. When you think of a rose, you refer to your perception of it and also to your personal way of conceiving it. As you say, you know that such and such a rose has such and such a scent, and its petals are soft to the touch, that it belongs to such and such a botanical species, that it can be made use of in such and such a way; all this is part of the knowledge accumulated by yourself and by men in general, and you superimpose all this on the impression of the rose when you say: “I see a rose”. But the real being of the rose, you never see. If you wish to know the rose, it is enough to be yourself. Because our essence and the essence of the rose are the same, since in reality only one essence exists. When you are established in your essence, you communicate with the essence of every separate thing.

  Could you speak to us of this inner springing forth which one may observe when truly listening to oneself?

  We habitually stop this springing forth by our impatience. What we should do, is be open to it, without striving to handle it, to treat it as the first step of a deductive line of thought, because by doing so we destroy any possibility of real understanding. The quality, the taste, the fullness of this springing forth depend on the purity of our attitude. It may happen that it arises and that it directs us towards something which our ego refuses. In this case we immediately erase it. Sometimes it comes to us later on, and we must show great patience to give it time to ripen.

  If we thus get into the habit of observing our daily upsurges, we will become more and more ready to receive the final one. Once we fully realize that non-dual realization cannot be dealt with by the mind because it is beyond the mind, there arises a supreme springing forth which is different from the others. It is simply caused by the elimination of all false identifications, which directs us to the essential part of our being and leaves us in a state which no analysis can reach, because we then no longer exist in a subject-object relationship. It does happen that we know such moments, but our inclination is to by-pass them, since the ego tries to grasp them and turn them into an object of enjoyment, thus warping the experience, transforming it into a caricature. The very desire to prolong this experience causes it to vanish.

  Could you speak to us about intuition?

  The meaning of the word intuition is direct vision, an immediate grasping of an object known by the subject. Intuition therefore belongs to the realm of duality. Sadhana develops intuition, deepening it more and more. All indications given on the attitude of listening are also true of intuition.

  When thought comes to an end and one finds oneself in the very midst of oneself, can one and should one remain in such a state?

  Are you able to put this question to yourself when you are the state? When you are there, you are there and that is all there is to it.

  One thing however is important. That is, to recognize in this experience, that we are open to the Self and not on a mental plane.

  Here is something which strikes me as being rather significant, and it happens every day, one does one thing while thinking about another. For instance I often happen to put my keys down somewhere, and the next moment I can’t remember where they are, because I was thinking of something else and I was not really present. Is this not a very ordinary example showing that most of the time we are not present to ourselves?

  Yes it is. We are always somewhere else, living ahead or behind in time, we long for the future or we regret the past. We are never really here. This flight in time is of great significance. If we turn away from the present, or rather if the present is so often unable to hold our attention, it is because we conceive of it as being a known and registered reality, therefore devoid of interest, or as a disappointing one. Just so long as we have not understood that true bliss is not in objects, but in us, we continue to place our hope in the future and keep racing ahead. We thus live in a state of imbalance, bent upon, and striving endlessly towards, the future.

  What we must come to understand is that awareness in the present is the only true starting point and that this starting point is at the same time the point of arrival.

  2

  Vedanta is a direct path; its starting point is the deliberate rejection of the subject-object duality which is the framework of all our usual activities (metaphysical speculation included). This path enables us to reach fullness and ultimate bliss without the support of objects. Travelling along this path is an entirely upstream journey implying the complete rejection of all our usual mental activities. Even in their highest form.

  He who has understood the entire futility of any search for perfect bliss in the world of duality, can undertake the slow return journey which will bring him back from the exterior to the discovery of his own transcendental reality. The world of names and forms is the result of mental activity. Ignorance (Avidya) begins at the very moment when the ego takes names and forms to be separate realities.

  It is by the suppression of this ignorance, in other words by attaining knowledge, that all these energies hitherto pointing towards the exterior are brought back, are reversed and leave the world of becoming, thus returning to the unity of being. This reintegration is a spontaneous and necessary result of knowledge. Such a result can only be brought about in the total absence of any effort, by the simple virtue of discernment.

  As long as the ego is not intimately and thoroughly convinced of the impossibility of finding happiness in objects, it does not turn towards the non-objective unknown. I repeat “the non-objective unknown”, because no quality can be attributed to the Self without it being treated as an object of knowledge.

  How can this liberating availability be reached?

  I will come back to the necessity of understanding the very nature of desire, because it is important.

  Any desire is a search for perfect bliss. This perfect bliss is part of the nature of the Self, therefore all desire is a desire for the Self. Seeking bliss in objects is part of our egotistical make-up. It is because I believe myself to be a distinct being among other distinct beings that I am compelled to search for bliss and the fullness of being by seizing and possessing other beings. Thus we are urged towards a hunt for happiness which is the tragedy of egotistical life. We have taken the first step to freedom when we understand that objects do not contain bliss. The second step is the analysis of the nature of the object, in other words, the recognition that the world of objects, unable as it is to give us bliss, is a purely mental production. This discovery should produce a stilling of the mind, and therefore realization.

  The importance and the significance of the stilling of all mental activity must be thoroughly understood; it entails the vanishing of everything which ordinary men call real, that is to say, the world of objects (of which our body and our mind are part). The vanishing of this world of duality and multiplicity alone allows us to discover the reality which is one.

  Question

  Is consciousness subject to evolution?

  Answer

  This notion of evolution is one of the most characteristic errors of modern thought.

  The error of evolution (or progressivism) is the foremost error of materialism. It is the belief that more can come out of less, that better can be produced by worse. Evolution, in the strict meaning of the word, is only an unfolding, a passing from what is implicit to that which is explicit, from what is not manifested to that which is manifested. It produces nothing. It r produces, let alone creates. We cannot rely on it in our search for salvation or liberation. Liberation is not a problem of evolution, for no evolution can lead to liberation, which is the result of discernment only.

  We are not concerned with evolving, but we should endlessly put the question “Who am I?” to ourselves. By directing our thinking, not towards objects, but towards its own root, one finally discovers the fundamental principle of being. Man possesses, deep within himself, the essence of all wisdom. He may know it or not, but truth is within him and nowhere else.

  3

  Knowledg
e without object, which is the theme of these talks, is a non-dual experience; it can be obtained neither by an accumulation of information, nor by any discipline or ascetic practice. In plain language, it is the fact of being aware.

  We are completely unaware of our true nature because we constantly identify ourselves with our body, our emotions and our thoughts, thus losing sight of our unchanging centre which is pure consciousness. When we return to our true nature, our thoughts and perceptions no longer appear as modifications of a single substance, they come into being and subside like waves of the ocean.

  We have already seen how important it is for us to understand what it is that we are really seeking when we pursue the satisfaction of a desire.

  We must therefore begin with the analysis of desire. “What do I want?” Can my desire be gratified by the possession of objects? Objects, are they what I seek? Do they contain what I seek? Let us observe what happens when a desire is satisfied. We see that the gratification of a desire is nothing but its death and that therefore, when we are in search of bliss, we really are pursuing nothing but the death of desire. This proves that our ultimate desire is “non-desire”. But “non-desire” appears to our normal consciousness as being blankness. And yet it is in this “blankness” that we must try to probe with open eyes, so as to discover its true nature. In fact, this nothingness is experienced by everybody in infinitesimal gaps which occur between thoughts, each time one desire dies, giving place to the next.

  If from time to time we experience moments of stillness and deep attention turned towards these gaps of nothingness, little by little the emptiness will reveal itself as being full, and finally as supreme plenitude. One should adopt this attitude as often and as clearly as possible, thereby allowing it to be more penetrating and effective. With this in view, one should be available, ceaselessly questioning oneself, calmly observing one’s own behaviour without passion.

  A new and non-objective outlook may then progressively prevail on us and we may come to understand that we are not the ego. We may then, with a complete and new awareness, taste the unexpected flavour of those moments of non-desire which will be revealed as being plenitude, silence, and peace. This flavour which is only fleeting at first will become more constant and vigorous until that time when it will appear as a reality which carries us, enfolds us, and is our very substance. The bliss which is then experienced is entirely different from what we usually call happiness. For at this level of consciousness, one cannot even say “I am happy”, since a consciousness which establishes a distinction between a subject and an attribute would be a dual consciousness. We are now speaking of “the Peace of God which passeth all understanding” (St Paul).

  We have mentioned watchfulness and availability. It must be understood that these must be perfect in their quality. The quality and the purity of attention which result are the essential conditions of success.

  The exercise of this pure attention implies the complete elimination of all elements from the past, thus allowing the authentic purity of the present to be completely grasped. We must forget everything and wait, yet wait for nothing. This entails a state of complete receptivity which seizes and is open to the complete, eternal and perfect newness of each moment.

  It is also important that the body should be in a state of perfect relaxation, as the slightest attraction or repulsion results in tensions which impede the purity of attention.

  Question

  How can I free myself from fear?

  Answer

  All fear is the inevitable ransom of separateness. As long as we cling to the illusion of being a separate ego, we cannot eliminate fear. The only radical remedy for fear is the realization which restores us to non-dual, global consciousness.

  Just as the ego cannot avoid fear, a global unity of consciousness cannot encounter it.

  How can one answer the question “Who am I?”, as recommended by Ramana Maharshi?

  The consciousness of being the “I am” is the basis of consciousness. When we think “I am” and only that, without any qualification, we are pure consciousness without object, the timeless background, the reality which underlies the three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep. But the moment we say: “I am tired, I am clever, I am a Knight of the Bath. . .” We risk falling into false identifications.

  Nothing is jeopardised so long as we say “I am this, I am that” for we understand this to mean the adding of a qualification to the subject. The Fall of Man takes place when consciousness slips into the attribute, thus furthering a loss of the subject as the consciousness of the Self is lost. Such is the fall into multiplicity.

  The method of the “Who am I?” advised by the Maharshi is an involutive technique of return to the pure “I am”. When I say “Who am I?” and establish my consciousness in a state of empty availability, I make it possible for this consciousness to return to the pure subject. I prevent my consciousness from being attached to any qualification whatsoever, thus putting it in a state of helplessness which enables it to turn back on itself and return to its original purity.

  This thought “Who am I?” has a particular virtue because it is a state of questioning which places the mind face to face with the void. If one has enough honesty and earnestness not to add anything to this void (and on this condition only), the reality of the “I am” must appear.

  Does your method of approach imply an active or a passive attitude?

  In order to be understood, I am going to give you an example that you already know, because I can find none better.

  Certain painters, when they wish to compose the subject of a picture, assemble objects according to their aesthetic sense or their passing fancy, taking one of them as a centre around which they harmonise all the others. Other artists, on the contrary, set aside any idea of a centre. They observe the outline of objects, the way they catch the light, the parts that are shaded, the relationship of space to space, so that no one object is more prominent than any other in the final arrangement, to such an extent that the presence of each object seems to eliminate that of the others. An ensemble is thus obtained, which has neither centre nor outline, and whose presence loses itself in void. It might be said that all authentic works of art have the property of eliminating themselves (as objects), giving place to the Ultimate Reality.

  This example shows you that there are two ways of approaching a problem. The first symbolised by the picture with a central object, which one might call “intellectually seizing”. In order to grasp a reality, one builds it round a centre by which it may be seized. This method is very useful where the relative world of objects is concerned, but it is entirely ineffective where approach to realization is sought for.

  The second method, symbolized by the centre-less picture, can barely be called a method, because it is a methodless method, the “path which may not be named” that Lao-Tze speaks of. If we want to carry it out, we must do as the painter, that is to say, consider all objects and their relationship to each other without striving to find a centre, or to organize them in order to grasp them. It is this letting go of any “grasping” which makes for the efficiency of this method. One has given up any idea of seizing, of taking, of understanding the object, and precisely because of this, the object reveals itself in its infinite truth.

  Reality is infinite, thus unseizable. We cannot take hold of it. We can only allow ourselves to be seized.

  Is it possible to come to a knowledge of reality by a really deep study of the object?

  We said the other day that name and form do not exhaust reality. Name and form do make up the object as an object, but one should not fall into the usual mistake of believing that the object is reality, and that the knowledge of the objects is the knowledge of the whole.

  When Linnaeus drew up his botanical classification, he discussed it with Goethe who remarked: “You have all the elements (objects) in your hand, unfortunately, the spirit which is the link between everything is missing.” What Goethe calls the “spirit”, is
the reality which underlies name and form, which our usual scientific knowledge completely disregards.

  True knowledge, instead of endeavouring to seize names and forms by defining them as clearly as possible, eliminates and dissolves them. This negative process, apparently nihilistic, leads not to a grasping of reality, but to its revelation as a total unity.

  4

  Let us return to the subject of “Knowledge without object”.

  At first this expression might cause a certain uneasiness. How can one know anything which has nothing to do with objectivity? And yet we are constantly established in a non-dual state which we do not perceive. This background is the real link between all things, but through ignorance and mechanical thinking we have taken on the habit of using our intelligence in relation to objects.

  If non-objective reality is to be reached, a certain number of obstacles must be eliminated. One must first establish peace in oneself.

  Our body, closely knit to our thoughts, is practically always in a state of self-defence or tension, because our thoughts always turn to accumulation and possession. This habit has frozen us into certain moulds, certain clichés which prevent us from delving deeply into ourselves, thus helping us to discern the authentic perspective of reality.

  The need to accumulate which is bred into the ego, warps this perspective, leading us to believe that a certain amount of knowledge and certain exercises may help us to reach a state of permanent peace. This belief is ignorance: being at all times established in this peace, there is no need for us to reach it, our true nature is peace. Nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. The only thing that is required of us is an awareness of the truth of ourselves.