Be Who You Are Read online

  We may be awakened to this research by each and every event of our life in the exact measure in which we are capable of understanding them and of grasping their inner truth.

  Seen from this point of view, one can well understand the Stoics, according to whom events are in themselves indifferent, neither good nor evil. What is good or evil is the use we put them to according to the depth of our understanding. Our search therefore is never the result of blind chance. It is that of our capacity for truth. That is why it is often said in the East that the man who is ripe for his guru finds him, and the man who does not find him is not a victim of bad luck or of fate, but only of his lack of maturity.

  All spiritual masters condemn violence. But up to what point is it possible to be non-violent? Are there not cases when the spiritual man himself can resort to violent behaviour?

  All acts of violence are in principle born from egotistical states. An egoless man is therefore, in principle, non-violent. But non-violence should not be turned into a sort of taboo. There are certain definite cases where the use of force, of compulsion, even violence, is imperative. In such cases the egoless man will make use of such force and may apparently act with violence. But it goes without saying that this will be a mere appearance since his action is completely devoid of desire or fear. This outlook allowed Krishna to urge Arjuna to fight and do his duty as a Kshatriya.

  It should be thoroughly understood that authentic non-violence has nothing in common with cowardice or passivity. But in the same way that a man who is compelled to suffer from force is not necessarily nonviolent, it is not because one employs force that one can rightly be called violent. The right question is this: “Is non-violent employment of force conceivable?” I answer “Yes”. But qualify this by saying that it is very unusual, in fact exceptional.

  The non-egotistic man, from his very nature, neutralizes violence and spreads around himself the peace which is within him. However, he may be led – I repeat very exceptionally – to employ force, his motivation being pure, that is non-egotistic. The man who has been through the experience sees that his neighbour is wrong because his vision of being is fragmented. At the same time, he sees in his neighbour a part of the One. That is why his own global and unitive vision enables him to help and enlighten the other towards a possible integration with total unity.

  What is the difference between the state of Samadhi and realization?

  Roughly speaking the difference might be expressed as follows, There is a state of consciousness of the Self which can be reached by a technique of relaxation of the mind. In such a case, the state of consciousness of the Self is what is usually called ecstasy or Samadhi. The drawback of such a state is that it may be both acquired and lost. As soon as the conditioning which in the first place caused the mind to relax ceases, one emerges from ecstasy and returns to the state of things which preceded it. Everybody knows the story which the Maharshi liked to tell, concerning a celebrated yogi who, being thirsty, sent his disciple to fill a jug in the Ganges. While waiting for his disciple, the yogi falls into Samadhi. During this time, the disciple goes to fetch the water, returns and sits down respectfully, waiting for his master to ask him for the drink, but the Samadhi persists. The disciple grows old and dies, two generations go by, and at last the master emerges from his Samadhi. As soon as he returns to the consciousness of manifestation. the first cry he utters is: “I’m thirsty”.

  This man had for many years been is a state of consciousness of the Self, but his state was conditioned by a voluntary technique of the stopping of the mind. Now every technique produces a conditioning; and no technique can produce a permanent conditioning because an absolute state of being cannot be a product. The Samadhi therefore had to come to an end and the yogi return to his former condition.

  But that state of consciousness of the Self which is realization is something different. This state is not really a state, it is a return to the natural original order (Sahaja). This return is not reached by any conditioning. It comes about with the discrimination between the real and the unreal, with the elimination of the unreal.

  This process of elimination is conducted as follows: one observes that one is in a world of impermanency, that one is immersed in the becoming process. The fundamental desire of the me being for perfect, that is permanent, joy, the first thing we do is to seek out an object, or a state of things which is likely to give us such joy. Sooner or later we come to acknowledge our failure. Such a failure if it does not lead to nihilistic despair can induce a turning back on oneself which may lead to the discovery of the Self. Such an experience of permanency, following on discrimination, does not take us out of one state to put us into another, it reinstates us in our original perspective, our vision. In such a vision, impermanency is neither conjured away nor veiled, but seen in its true light as an expression of the permanency of the Self. At this level, any opposition between being and becoming, permanency and impermanency, unity of the Self and multiplicity of objects ceases to be.

  Meister Eckhart uses an image to describe such a state. He says it is like “the hinge which is motionless whilst the door turns”.

  9

  Our talk today may cause reminiscences to occur. By this I mean that, as a result of our present reactions, certain moments of availability will appear in the course of the next few days, inciting us to dwell upon processes which we may have worked on before. Such moments will not be organised recurrences. Here there will be no discipline, or exercising of the will, but spontaneous moments when our approach will be more intimate. For in the course of these talks we may use words and expressions whose essence must be sought out, so that the whole of our being may be struck in its depth. Otherwise nothing would be left to us except purely intellectual accumulation which would only strengthen the ego. As long as the spiritual essence is not sufficiently decanted, perturbations, confusions and images (Samskara) may occur.

  Words without the spirit that enforces them, are like residues which encumber the body undergoing fermentations. Once the disciple has understood the spirit of the word, he can peel the fruit and make use of it as he sees fit. We understand the true nature of an object when we see that it has no objective reality as such and is part of the nature of the subject. Such an understanding causes a progressive involution of that energy which had so far been invested outwardly in the object, and furthers the occurrence of eminently creative silences.

  Question

  Would you please outline for us the different stages of Sadhana, and explain what is the realization of the Supreme, according to Advaita?

  Answer

  Our establishment in our true nature is reached by a complete elimination of the world of objects.

  Such authentic elimination can only be conducted in the following way. First of all, with the help of a teacher, one must understand that objects have no intrinsic reality and are nothing but projections of desire. This truth, when it is completely assimilated, produces a falling back of desire upon itself. That is to say, all the energy invested in the world of objects is now in a state of balance, of abeyance, of rest. This turning back upon itself of desire produces a stopping of the mind, and consequently an arising of the consciousness of the Self. This experience of the Supreme, discovered to be the very heart of our being, is the essence of realization. From then on, and always with the help of a teacher, the establishment in that state will be permanent.

  As we have often said, this is not a passing state, but a permanent establishment in our true nature. It is a state of being which we only seem to have left, and which consequently we do not need to reach. The disciple then finds in the Self complete joy and no longer searches for it in objects which have no independent existence. Such is Advaita.

  What is it that gives birth to desire which is the cause of pain?

  It is our blindness as to our true nature which urges us to desire and this desire in its turn urges us to action. If we are to be free of desire, we must turn towards the unknown, i.e. “
the subject which can never be an object”. By doing so, we change the course of energy, which returns to a state of equilibrium, placing us in our original nature. We then rediscover the knowledge of our true nature.

  As we can see, the path to the Self is completely the opposite of our ordinary analytical and objective knowledge by which objects are examined and submitted to our scrutiny. In passing we may note that even this ordinary knowledge is only objective when we no longer endeavour to grasp and seize. Emptiness, rest and relaxation further a state which allows truth to arise.

  Thus it may be seen that any search, if it is to be fruitful, always requires the same fundamental attitude of deep, humble, choice-free listening. To return to the path of realization: having once known the experience, established as we are in the solitude of our absolute and non-dual nature, we can never again be subject to delusion. With the death of desire comes the vanishing of pain, since pain is nothing but a lack or a limitation.

  Why are we not conscious of reality in the state of deep sleep, during the interval between two thoughts, or during a fainting fit?

  We do in fact experience reality in these three states. But such an experience only leaves an impression of nothingness to our ordinary consciousness, because the state of consciousness which is then experienced is a purely objectless and formless one. Such a state of consciousness cannot be inserted into the framework of objective consciousness (which is with object and form) and it thus leaves an impression of blankness and void.

  During the interval between two thoughts, is one conscious of a duration of time which might be prolonged?

  The interval between two thoughts gives an impression of an extremely short stretch of time, but in reality, it is an experience of being beyond time. There is therefore no question of prolonging it. This question, like the one before it, comes from confusing the continuity of the eternal present with the discontinuous succession of phenomena.

  How can we, with our minds as a starting point, realise our true nature?

  By coming to realize that the subject-object, the thought-object of thought distinction, is not justified. Thought and the subject are of the same substance, the same reality. If we turn our attention towards the unknown, thought-objects are fused into substance-consciousness and the state of pure objectless consciousness may be realized.

  Nowadays, much is said in psychotherapy of restructuration. What is your opinion of it?

  The non-structured state is a state of decay and absence of co-ordination between the elements of the psyche. It is an essentially negative state. In order to be effective, a therapy must make use of the individual fancy of the subject and allow him to complement the existing negative elements in himself with other positive elements which he otherwise lacks. As you can see, this is not an analytical process, but a psycho-synthesis. A real restructuration can only occur when what is supremely positive (and which at the beginning is only an unknown something beyond the positive-negative duality) is visualised. If one proceeds in any other way, only a fragmentary and egotistical construction is obtained, and the person is still a prisoner of the vicious circle of his problems. But from the global point of view, there is no problem.

  I was present at one of your talks in Turin when you spoke of attention without tension. May I ask you for a few practical hints on this subject?

  This attention without tension is an extremely important factor for discrimination. On the psychological plane, we must cease intervening. At one and the same time, we must be receptive and active, free of the past, free of the future, listening only to ourselves and to he who teaches us. On the physical plane, one should come to a state where our muscles are devoid of attraction, devoid of repulsion.

  We can easily notice how we are constantly on the defensive towards our surroundings and this state is a cause of disturbance, even physiologically. Both repulsions and attractions, with their trail of greed, trigger off impatience which creates a type of tension in our body. This state of constant strain often changes us into pitiful jerky puppets, subject to ridiculous tics. We should become aware of this state with a serene clear-sightedness absolutely free of guilt, merit or even any wish to change. Only then can that decisive reaction occur which may help us to break through our usual framework. One should thoroughly understand that fundamentally the body is nothing but idea. It is nothing but a bundle of ideas. These are crystallized, set and solidified by repetition and stagnation. The regeneration of the body may be obtained by a therapy which should employ the contrary process, establishing a discriminating attention which will dissolve and destroy all our set patterns. After all, the body is nothing but a collection of mental habits: the mind alone has produced them and the mind alone can destroy them by the reverse process. Such a process will allow us to acquire a regenerated, purified body.

  I would like to make a few remarks about awareness. When we put ourselves in a state of attention without tension, a whole new range of sensations appears, each one with its own innumerable peculiarities. As a starting point, one should select that part of the body which, compared to all the others, appears to be most fluid, and light. Then one should intensify this fluidity as much as possible by widening it, and extending it slowly, progressively, patiently. This process leads to a general sensation of lightness in the body. In the end, we arrive at a feeling where there is no distinction between the body and the surrounding atmosphere. Essentially, this is a visualization, a creation of images which one seeks to make more and more subtle, light, unshaped, tending towards vacuity.

  Very deeply embedded tension requires long and patient work at intense visualization, free from any striving, or any hurry, before it can be eliminated. One should evoke as many varied sensations, sounds, colours, scents and tastes as possible. Any sensation which is evoked and maintained in its state of original purity, i.e. independent of any association, of any memory, and above all of any appreciation, always produces a deep letting go. The greatest advantage of this method is that we arrive at a state of availability which favours discernment. For one should never forget that the impersonal experience occurs beyond any mental or physical framework. If we take a liking to such methods, we shall linger in a world of analysis and duality in which the mind indulges and takes pleasure.

  What do you mean by mental activity? Does not the English word “mind”, as is usually employed to translate the Sanskrit word “Manas”, have a wider meaning than the French word “mental”?

  Strictly speaking, in French, the word “mental” is a made-up word which is frequently used in Hindu circles as the equivalent of mind and Manas. One resorts to this word because the French language has no exact equivalent. I therefore employ the word “mental” to signify in a general way thought, imagination, will, reasoning, sensations, perception, and emotions. All this constitutes the ego, with its feeling of separate existence and identification with the mind-body.

  The word “mental” is often used to indicate the domain which has been explored by western psychologists and which is often expressed by the word “psyche”, so as to avoid metaphysical and religious inferences suggested by the word “soul”.

  You often talk of the orchestration of energies. By this word do you mean something akin to tantric methods?

  Not at all. Tantric methods are voluntary disciplines whereas the orchestration of energies is in fact a letting go of the will. In our body there are networks of subtle energy which are revealed to consciousness when one has reached a vacant state. Such perceptions have hitherto been hindered by the presence of obstacles caused by strain and congestion. The Hindus use the word Prana to indicate vital breath or subtle energy.

  Vital energy has several different aspects which correspond to the different functional modifications of Prana. Among these aspects, one may mention:

  Prana: breathing

  Apana: excretion

  Samana: digestion

  Vyana: circulation

  In ordinary man the energies unfold only according to
a horizontal and descending pattern. Tantric techniques strive to change them into ascending movements, but these methods, instead of resulting in an establishment in the Self, in a real state of equilibrium, do nothing but accumulate these energies at a higher level where they are stored. Sooner or later a leakage may cause a collapse. This tantric search aims at a higher state on a physical plane, whereas Advaita by the method of discernment causes a reinstatement of the natural equilibrium of energies (Sahaja). As long as the true nature of the object is not understood, energy cannot be kept in a state of equilibrium. Desire is always turned towards objects, thus giving birth to the cosmic process which can only come to an end with the understanding that bliss does not reside in objects.

  When one is established in the background, how can one be simultaneously aware of oneself and of the object, since one cannot be simultaneously aware of several objects?

  The Self is like a light whose rays are our mind and consequently the world. Beings and objects, under the most varied, the most heterogeneous aspects, are nothing but the fragmentation of the one and the same All, like the sparks thrown out by a fire or the web of a spider.